David Cameron gives a speech at the EU Council building in Brussels on March 6, 2014. Photograph: Getty Images.
Show Hide image

The Tories' opposition to Labour's youth jobs plan shows they are still standing up for the wrong people

Cameron's party can’t and won’t take the action necessary because it can’t admit that for ordinary Britons there is no real recovery.

Today, Labour announced that if the party wins the next election every young person out of work for more than 12 months will be given a paid starter job, and that every adult aged 25 or over claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) for two years or more will be given the same support. A Labour government would work with employers to help fund paid work with training for six months. It would mean paid jobs for more than 50,000 young people nationwide – including the 370 in Barnsley who have been left on the dole for over a year by this government (across Barnsley, long-term youth unemployment is up 106 per cent since January 2011).

But this would also be a tough contract – those who can work will be required to take up the jobs on offer or lose their benefits. A life on benefits will simply not be an option. The Compulsory Jobs Guarantee scheme will be in Labour’s election manifesto and funded for whole of next Parliament through a repeat of Labour’s successful tax on bank bonuses and restricting pensions tax relief for people earning over £150,000 – the top one per cent – to the same rate as basic rate taxpayers. It is absolutely right that those at the very top contribute to delivering a recovery for the many.

In a response obviously written before Labour's announcement, the Tories claim this funding has already been allocated, only to look ridiculous once we published the detail which states clearly that the Compulsory Jobs Guarantee is the only policy which will be funded by the bank bonus tax and the proposed changes to pension tax relief. This will be a central part of Labour’s package to get people in to work and bring down the benefits bill. The cost of long-term youth unemployment is £350m a year. It’s unacceptable that taxpayers face such huge costs to pay for the government’s failure to get young people off benefits and into jobs.

Labour will bring welfare spending under control by moving people from benefits and into work and this will run in parallel with other important initiatives, including a Basic Skills Test to assess every new Jobseeker's Allowance claimant within six weeks of claiming benefits. Anyone who doesn’t have basic English, maths or IT skills will have to take up training or risk losing their benefits.

The Tories can’t and won’t take the action necessary to help us to earn our way out of the cost-of-living crisis. They can’t because they can’t admit that for ordinary Britons there is no real recovery. Having declared that "Plan A" was a success and that the "good news will keep on coming", David Cameron is in denial about the cost-of-living crisis that is engulfing the country - with families on average £1,600 a year worse off since he came to power. Indeed, when it was put to Treasury minister David Gauke on the radio that "the idea had merit", his out-of-touch reply was that the government's "record on unemployment is a good one".  It was British Chambers of Commerce economist David Kern who today in fact said, "Any scheme that helps young people to work is a good scheme."

The government won’t take action because it only stands up for a privileged few. Having delivered a £3bn tax cut for millionaires, the Tories think that the top one per cent of earners not only need that tax cut but that they should get tax relief on pension contributions at more than twice the rate that the average taxpayer does. Moreover, the Tories announced a further £12bn of welfare cuts if re-elected.  This comes from a party that introduced a bedroom tax for the disabled, whilst they continue to bankrolled by donations from the mega-rich and the hedge funds.

Of course, the Tories and the Lib Dems refuse to repeat Labour's successful tax on bank bonuses which raised £3.4bn in 2010. We know that bank bonuses are actually higher this year than last year: bonuses at Barclays are up ten per cent at £2.4bn, they are up eight per cent at Lloyds at £395m, HSBC bonuses are up six per cent at £2.3bn, and the RBS bonus pool this year is £588m. But what is the government doing about it? Ministers are currently busy campaigning in Brussels against an EU cap on bankers’ bonuses.

On the backfoot this week, they tried to question Labour's figures. Yet they still refuse to accept our proposal to let the OBR independently audit our plans. What are they afraid of? That Conservative scaremongering about Labour spending will be exposed as untrue?

Labour will take tough decisions to get the deficit down fairly, while making work pay and spreading opportunities for all, in particular for our young people. As a country we simply cannot afford to be wasting the talents of thousands of young people and leaving them stuck on the dole for years on end. It’s bad for them, it’s bad for our economy and it’s bad for taxpayers who have to pay the bill.

Once again this week highlights the battleground for the next general election.  The Tories (backed by the Lib Dems) will stand up for the top one per cent and will die in a ditch to defend the bankers.  A future Labour government would take real action to restore what Ed Miliband has called "the Promise of Britain" - that we must ensure once again that the next generation have better opportunities, not worse ones, than the last.

Michael Dugher is shadow minister for the Cabinet Office, vice-chair of the Labour Party, and MP for Barnsley East.

Michael Dugher is Labour MP for Barnsley East and the former Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

In focusing on the famous few, we risk doing a disservice to all victims of child sexual abuse

There is a danger that we make it harder, not easier, for victims to come forward in future. 

Back in the 1970s when relations between journalists and police were somewhat different to today a simple ritual would be carried out around the country at various times throughout the week.

Reporters, eager for information for their regional newspaper, would take a trip to the local station and there would be met by a desk sergeant who would helpfully skim through details in the crime Incident Book.

Among the entries about petty thefts, burglaries and road accidents there would occasionally be a reference to an allegation of incest. And at this point the sergeant and journalist might well screw-up their faces, shake their heads and swiftly move on to the next log. The subject was basically taboo, seen as something ‘a bit mucky,’ not what was wanted in a family newspaper.

And that’s really the way things stayed until 1986 when ChildLine was set up by Dame Esther Rantzen in the wake of a BBC programme about child abuse. For the first time children felt able to speak out about being sexually assaulted by the very adults whose role in life was to protect them.

And for the first time the picture became clear about what incest really meant in many cases. It wasn’t simply a low level crime to be swept under the carpet in case it scratched people’s sensitivities. It frequently involved children being abused by members of their close family, repeatedly, over many years.

Slowly but surely as the years rolled on the NSPCC continued to press the message about the prevalence of child sexual abuse, while encouraging victims to come forward. During this time the corrosive effects of this most insidious crime have been painfully detailed by many of those whose lives have been derailed by it. And of course the details of the hundreds of opportunistic sexual assaults committed by Jimmy Savile have been indelibly branded onto the nation’s consciousness.

It’s been a long road - particularly for those who were raped or otherwise abused as children and are now well into their later years - to bring society around to accepting that this is not to be treated as a dark secret that we really don’t want to expose to daylight. Many of those who called our helpline during the early days of the Savile investigation had never told anyone about the traumatic events of their childhoods despite the fact they had reached retirement age.

So, having buried the taboo, we seem to be in danger of giving it the kiss of life with the way some cases of alleged abuse are now being perceived.

It’s quite right that all claims of sexual assault should be investigated, tested and, where there is a case, pursued through the judicial system. No one is above the law, whether a ‘celebrity’ or a lord.

But we seem to have lost a sense of perspective when it comes to these crimes with vast resources being allocated to a handful of cases while many thousands of reported incidents are virtually on hold.

The police should never have to apologise for investigating crimes and following leads. However, if allegations are false or cannot be substantiated they should say so. This would be a strength not a weakness.

It is, of course, difficult that in many of the high-profile cases of recent times the identities of those under investigation have not been officially released by the police but have come to light through other means. Yet we have to deal with the world as it is not as we wish it would be and once names are common knowledge the results of the investigations centring on them should be made public.

When it emerges that someone in the public eye is being investigated for non-recent child abuse it obviously stirs the interest of the media whose appetite can be insatiable. This puts pressure on the police who don’t want to repeat the mistakes of the past by allowing offenders to slip through their hands.  And so there is a danger, as has been seen in recent cases, that officers lack confidence in declaring there is a lack of evidence or the allegations are not true. 

The disproportionate weight of media attention given to say, Sir Edward Heath, as opposed to the Bradford grooming gang sentenced this week, shows there is a danger the pendulum is swinging too far the other way. This threatens the painstaking work invested in ensuring the public and our institutions recognise child abuse as a very real danger. 

Whilst high profile cases have helped the cause there is now a real risk that the all-encompassing focus on them does both victims of abuse and those advocating on their behalf a fundamental disservice.

As the public watches high -profile cases collapsing amidst a media fanfare genuine convictions made across the country week in week out go virtually unannounced. If this trend continues they may start to believe that child sexual abuse isn’t the prolific problem we know it to be.

So, while detectives peer into the mists of time, searching for long lost clues, we have to face the unpalatable possibility that offences being committed today will in turn become historical investigations because there is not the manpower to deal with them right now.

So, now the Goddard Inquiry is in full swing, taking evidence about allegations of child sex crimes involving ‘well known people’ as well as institutional abuse, how do we ensure we don’t fail today’s victims?

If they start to think their stories are going to be diminished by the continuing furore over how some senior public figures have been treated by the police they will stay silent. Therefore we have to continue to encourage them to come forward, to give them the confidence of knowing they will be listened to.

If we don’t we will find ourselves back in those incestuous days where people conspired to say and do nothing to prevent child abuse.

Peter Wanless is Chief Executive of the NSPCC.