The Loughborough and Charnwood Liberal Democrats join with the rest of the country in expressing our condolences to Her Majesty the Queen and her family at the passing of His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh. This is the party's leader, Ed Davy's, official statement on behalf of the Liberal Democrats.
Check out what Lib Dems are doing around the country to make their local area better.
Lib Dem Heroes
Our candidate in Loughborough South West, Aidan Reed, discusses the issues the County Council must address.Link
The UK Government, during January 2021, issued a White Paper entitled “Skills for Jobs: Lifelong Learning for Opportunity and Growth” but I have no confidence in the ability of our government to competently manage a topic which is so important for the future of UK residents. Why do I lack confidence in our government?
There are several reasons:
- Our Prime Minister and his ‘Vote Leave’ Government have minimal practical experience of managing or developing scientific research, construction, teaching, medical care, engineering, national health, businesses, economics, data science, technical education, finance, exporting and other essential skills.
- The majority of the Cabinet are career politicians without experience of real-life situations.
- The White Paper refers to “Learning”. We need highly skilled people who can think - not merely learn by rote.
I remember several examples of serious mistakes which were made by previous UK governments because they were not in touch with practical reality.
At the end of World War 2, the UK government wanted to attract large employers such as Ford and English Electric to Liverpool where many youngsters were unemployed. Therefore, it provided large factory premises at attractive rates. It had not considered the availability of suitable recruits. In Stafford, the home of English Electric, most youngsters had grown up with fathers and uncles who worked on factory floors. In Liverpool, few youngsters knew what pliers were for. Training courses, as in Africa, had to commence with basic skills.
During the 1960s, the UK Government introduced a levy/grant system for training of apprentices.
For a few years employers trained more apprentices than they had in previous years. Then the government realised that the fund was seriously overdrawn. They increased the levy and reduced grants. Employers stopped training
Tony Blair encouraged schools to send leavers to university by providing extra funds to schools for sixth forms. Traditionally the brightest 5% of school leavers went to university and apprentices were selected from the next 15% in the suitability spectrum. Many of these became highly competent skilled and experienced employees who could be supervisors and trainers. Suddenly they became unavailable as up to 50% of leavers went to university. The recruits for apprentices were not suitable for traditional apprenticeships.
The availability of highly skilled staff for Supervision and Training was not a problem for most of the 20th century. As skilled technicians aged, they preferred jobs which were less physically demanding. However, the ongoing reduction in the number of suitable apprentices created a lack of suitable supervisors and trainers. Many have been recruited from abroad. Now many of these have been driven home by Brexit.
The Boris Johnson Government is in chaos with its education management. Its argument that vulnerable children would have mental problems if they could not go to school ignored the fact that most of them would suffer even if they went to school because their home conditions and facilities were inadequate. It had failed to deliver its promises to provide adequate internet facilities and to ensure that vulnerable children received food and care. It ignored the difficulty that schools would have in ensuring that teachers and pupils could rescue the situation after being given minimal warning.
The government has failed to deal with the shortage of experienced and trained hospital staff, the large increase in unemployment, students who used to be supported by the Erasmus scheme, lack of re-training for people made redundant, the Brexit departure of EU highly skilled staff and inadequate Covid testing for students and teachers.
Our ancestors protected us and cared for us during two World Wars and the aftermath. We must do the same for our children and future generations. Liberal Democrats must provide the leadership which seems to be lacking elsewhere.
Source information from:
London School of Economics
I am lucky because I and my family have been extremely fortunate to have been born in the twentieth century, to have been born in western Europe, and to have been able to enjoy the economic and other benefits of living in the European Union.
My hope, for most of my life, has been for Europe, North America and like-minded countries to work together for the benefit of the human race and to lead the world in maintaining liberal and democratic standards. The results have not been perfect, but there have been wonderful benefits during the last 40 years - no wars between EU states, increased security by co-operation and shared funding, huge improvements in living standards, free-movement of staff, Erasmus support for students, etc. Now, after the last minute and incomplete Brexit trade deal, it will need a huge effort by the British people to maintain the quality of life provided by our ancestors.
Millions of Europeans (along with many others across the world) died during two world wars and more millions suffered great hardship during the following years. Those of us who were born during the last century benefitted hugely from the magnificent sacrifices of our ancestors and the efforts of those who inspired and built the EU. Surely, we have a moral duty to pass those benefits onto future generations. They should not be frittered away by a selfish and/or incompetent group of politicians. They were elected to serve the people - not just themselves and their outdated beliefs.
We need to elect parliamentarians who have practical experience of managing or developing scientific research, construction, teaching, medical care, engineering, national health, businesses, economics, data science, technical education, finance, exporting and other essential skills. We need a Government Cabinet which is not dominated by incompetent journalists, traditionalists and career politicians who owe their positions to egoistical leaders. Government is much more than the manipulation of words and the wasteful use of taxpayers’ money. It should not expect that it will be rescued by the General Public and the workers and managers of organisations which generate the wealth of the UK and provide the essential services. (Dealing with the effects of a major Trade Deal with only a few days notice of essential actions over Christmas and New Year, or completely re-organising schooling with 24 hours notice, or operating a complex business when necessary decisions have been delayed or reversed).
The residents of the UK are facing many challenges - such as care for an ageing population, education for those who have suffered this century, the possible break-up of the UK, the departure of skilled and essential immigrant and non-immigrant workers, the maintenance of a wonderful health service, etc. However, four massive challenges have to be overcome in order for the others to be dealt with. They are the Coronavirus Pandemic, Brexit & the Economy, Climate Change & Education.
In trying to tackle these challenges the UK electorate will soon see that they have been misled by the members of an incompetent and indecisive government who believe that they have been appointed so that they will be remembered for posterity. They are more likely to be despised because they followed false dogma and caused our country to become a laughingstock. Any Cabinet leading us at this time must include people who have real experience of making responsible and rational decisions. The government repeatedly say that they are “following the science”. Yes, they are - but many weeks after they should have acted to save lives and jobs.
We can see the ongoing self-destruction of the Labour Party and the current destruction of the Conservative Party by Johnson ‘The Ditherer’. This destruction is already in progress according to a new poll which is the first detailed survey of the public’s perception of Johnson’s handling of the recently concluded Brexit talks and the COVID-19 pandemic. More than 22,000 people were surveyed in the Focaldata poll in December and results published by the Sunday Times. The poll found the ruling Conservatives would lose 81 seats, wiping out their 80-seat majority. The Scottish National Party was also predicted to win 57 of the 59 seats in Scotland. Installing Liberal Democrat MPs instead, would bring a responsible stabilising influence in any future government.
Our forebears protected us and cared for us during two World Wars and in the aftermath. We must do the same for our children and future generations. Liberal Democrats can provide the leadership which is lacking elsewhere.
Source information from:
- Imperial College
- The Economist
- London School of Economics
- The Guardian
I hope Loughborough voters have long memories!
A Message form Ian Sharpe, Loughborough Liberal Democrat Candidate December 2019 General Election:
On the 8th of November 2019 the notices for that year’s general election were issued, an election which resulted in the current Johnson government.
I stood in that election and took part in election hustings with the Tory candidate who went on to win. During those hustings the Tory candidate’s promise was “ I will be Loughborough’s representative in Westminster, not Westminster’s representative in Loughborough”, a clear promise to put the people before her own political advantage.
So how has the Government performed and how has our MP stood up for Loughborough?
These are some of the actions of the Johnson government:
- Introduced a "Go without to help out" policy to stop poor children receiving meal vouchers during school holidays.
- Ignored SAGE's recommendation for a two week "circuit breaker", resulting in at least a 1 month lockdown.
- Negotiated, with great fanfare, an international agreement, won a General Election on the strength it and after a few months decided to breach international law by reneging on the deal.
- Prevented a free trade deal with the EU, by putting the interests of the miniscule industry fishing industry ahead of the manufacturing and agriculture industries.
- Over ruled attempts to protect British food standards.
- Put the City of London at risk by not even trying to get an agreement with the EU.
- Appointed two unqualified candidates to vital public roles, because they are wives of Tory MPs.
- Appointed the son of a KGB officer, as well as his own brother, to the House of Lords.
- Allegedly awarded huge PPE contracts to shell companies owned by Tory associates, advisers and donors.
- Allowed a head Special Advisor (SPAD) to break planning and lock down laws, with impunity.
It is no wonder Boris's government is called a Chumocracy, where the rules only apply to the little people.
So how did our Tory MP live up to her promise, to put Loughborough before party loyalty?
She supported Boris in every vote! Against meal vouchers for Loughborough needy children, against Loughborough farmers and against the interests of her constituents.
Loughborough Constituents deserve better.
Tory’s plan to reduce Democracy – ‘Devolution’ White Paper proposes a reduction in representation. The Leicestershire Unitary proposal would:
- Abolish the County elections of May 2021
- Abolish all District and Borough Councils
- Elect massive and remote County wide Unitary Authorities of up to a million people in May 2023.
Liberal Democrats believe that these proposals are fundamentally wrong in every respect. They would mean that all the Councils involved would spend the next two and a half years arguing over and concentrating on, the expensive business of large-scale closure, merger, defining and reapplying for jobs, redundancy and closing down sites. This is the last thing we need when tackling COVID-19 and its economic fall-out should be the number one priority.
The UK already has the lowest ratio of Councils and Cllrs per head of population of any Western European country. Abolishing all District and Borough Councils would make this democratic deficit even worse. Far from representing ‘Devolution’ these plans represent a huge centralising of roles and local responsibilities. District and Borough Councils are rooted in and represent the interests of their local communities in a way which large (in population and geographic area) Unitary Authorities cannot remotely do. Most recently this has been clearly shown during the Covid outbreak when the flexible, local knowledge and expertise of District and Borough Councils has provided the cutting edge of distributing local business support grants, delivering food parcels to the local Shielded population, advising their local retail businesses on social distancing strategies and much else.
Unitary Authorities in compact, geographically small areas with a clear community identity make good sense, as seen in our Cities and in a very small County like Rutland. Huge Unitary Authorities of up to a million people spread across a wide geographic area do not. Smaller Unitary Authorities that reflect actual communities work well across Europe and the USA but the UK Government has so far ruled this out. The financial problems of Local Government have been caused because the Government has cut 40% of their funding. The massive problems of Adult Social Care are a result of successive Governments failing to deal with the problem. The increasing expense and complexity of parts of Local Government is due to the Governments imposition of new and costly tiers, with Police and Crime Commissioners and Directly Elected Mayors.
We call upon the Government to reverse the cuts to the funding of Local Government, withdraw their so- called Devolution plans and consult on an effective form of community based Local Government. Devolution should mean moving power downwards not moving it up to large and remote bodies.
The Old Western golf course Is under threat of development by Leicester City Council. The proposal includes housing, industrial units and traveller pitches. The old golf course is a fantastic green space of around 129 acres of grassland, ponds and even ancient trees and host to all sorts of wildlife including badgers, buzzards, lots of other birds and even great created newts.
It is well used by city and county residents for walking, cycling, jogging, dog walking, as well as footpaths through to local areas and for children to play. During the pandemic footfall has increased and this are has been a great asset for the local communities to use and enjoy the fresh air and wildlife on the edge of the city without having to drive out to the countryside. Many of whom have said it has helped their mental well-being during the lockdown period to be able to get out into open green space.
We want to try and save this green space and protect it for all the communities to enjoy and generations to come. Please help us to do this by signing the petition and objecting at www.consultations.leicester.gov.uk/