Air Traffic Control
Save our skies
Someone once wrote "Campaign in poetry, govern in prose.' Labour in opposition opposed the privatisation of Air Traffic Control with the campaign 'Save our Skies- Don't Privatise!" Why does Labour in government then intend to place 51% of NATS with the private sector?
Before the General Election, the then Shadow Chancellor, Gordon Brown announced that privatisation of National Air Traffic Services (NATS) could not be ruled out. This was in direct response to the black hole in the government's Red Book which would appear without the receipts from the privatisation of NATS already pencilled in by the Conservative Government.
This may not be relevant now over 18 months on, but the government's proposed Public/Private Partnership (PPP) is in part to raise the receipt which can then be invested in other transport needs. It is this preferred option of a PPP which is now subject to public consultation until January31 1999.
Lack of progress
An important backdrop to this whole issue is the history of the new en-route centre commissioned at Swanwick in Hampshire. The timescale for this was hopelessly optimistic from the start and right up to January 1997 we had the then Chief Executive of NATS assuring the Transport Select Committee that Swanwick would be operational by March 1998 - it could now be 2002.
The Select Committee recently concluded that the apparent complacency of the Conservative Government on the lack of progress at Swanwick over a number of years is 'astonishing' They even went so far as to say that consideration should be given to scrapping the software system at NERC (Swanwick) and starting over again.
However, the Swanwick nightmare could be coming to an end now that the government-commissioned DERA audit has reached completion. As the MP for Ayr my first priority is to ensure that the New Scottish Centre at Prestwick goes ahead as part of the two centre strategy.
The last government excelled at time wasting and loss of initiative as it reviewed the two centre strategy; turned a blind eye to the reality of the Swanwick delays and attempted a series of failed stabs at privatisation. No wonder there is a residue of public scepticism that the New Scottish Centre will go ahead under the proposed PPP.
Unwavering commitment
However, the government's commitment to the Prestwick Centre has been unwavering. The Prime Minister himself, in answering my direct question to him in Parliament reaffirmed that " contract negotiations for a new air traffic control centre at Prestwick to replace the existing centre are underway between NATS and Sky Solutions, the preferred bidder".
The Prestwick contract has now been to both NATS and the Civil Aviation Authority Boards and is now back with the government for the final go ahead to being signed. One result of the ongoing delay to the New Scottish Centre is that the original costs have spiralled leading to the airlines questioning their costs.
NATS were never happy with the PFI which they saw as an expensive option but they had to take the whole package presented by the preferred bidder. And the new government went along with it as negotiations were so far advanced. However there is an opportunity to change from PFI further down the line if this is required. All this makes itall the more urgent that the contract is signed as soon as possible.
Safety in the skies
Another strand to the NATS argument is the issue of safety through the pressure of increasing traffic levels. The matter has been taken up by the transport select committee and NATS have given assurances that if demands exceed the present capacity of the system this would result in increased delays not compromised safety standards.
The Unions (PCS and IPMS) agreed that there were no immediate safety concerns but stressed the mounting pressure on Air Traffic Controllers coping with increased traffic on outmoded equipment. However, less optimistic views on safety have been expressed informally to members of the select committee by Air Traffic Controllers.
These are all crucial strands to achieving the main objective which is to provide a safe, high quality air traffic service. The public sector including NATS has suffered a severe curtailment of funds for investment over recent years under the previous government.
Investment required
There is no dispute whatsoever that NATS urgently requires investment of £100 million per annum over the next decade if it is to maintain and improve service quality. At present government does not allow publicly owned companies to borrow commercially as this would be underwritten by the taxpayer. The mechanism for control is the Public Sector Borrowing Requirement (PSBR) This is the reason why the Prestwick Centre, for instance, is to be financed under the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) a preferred means of securing project finance.
The previous government made five abortive attempts to sell the privatisation option. They failed against a background of widespread opposition on such grounds as air safety; threat to jobs and conditions; delays and absence of precedents elsewhere. The proposed PPP has the same questions to answer. It can only increase profit for shareholders by reducing running costs since charges are governed by commercial contracts and international agreements well into the future - and the obvious way to achieve this would be by increasing throughput of traffic with fewer staff.
Labour stood on a manifesto to prioritise resources for hospitals and schools. The outcome of the Comprehensive Spending Review has reflected that and it is therefore undeniable that the Transport Team would welcome the receipt from NATS to enhance their stretched Roads Budget. But the long term future funding of NATS should not be decided on the basis of the government making a short term gain for roads.
Borrowing to invest
We need to put NATS indisputable funding needs into perspective. The present system works on the basis of the Treasury lending money to NATS for investment and NATS recouping it at a profit from the airlines (borrowing to invest according to Gordon Brown's 'Golden Rule').
But the government has an inconsistent and narrow view of the operation of the PSBR, and. in the case of NATS, there is no reason why they could not borrow outside of it. In June 1998,for example, the government announced a £3bn rescue package to a private company to underwrite the Channel Tunnel Rail Link which will not count against the PSBR.
The Transport Select Committee urged consideration of other options already used in other countries as alternatives to PPP. Why has this not been done and why are they not part of the consultation?
The other options include:
Supporting jobs
There is no doubt that the future of Air Traffic Services requires serious consideration of the available options.
My first priority as the MP for Ayr is to ensure that the Scottish Centre goes ahead. It is not only crucial to the future of Air Traffic Services, it is also vital for the future of the Ayrshire economy. At present Prestwick employs 650 people -due to rise by another 200 with the Scottish Centre.
Prestwick also supports many more related jobs and generates approximately £27 million a year for the local economy.*
Labour's manifesto said, "we will ensure that self financing commercial organisations within the public sector are given greater commercial freedom to make the most of new opportunities" The government has ensured continued public confidence in the Post Office by standing firm on this manifesto commitment, keeping the Post Office in the public sector while granting it the greater commercial freedom it needs. What they are doing for the Post Office could also be achieved for NATS.
* The Government accepted Sandra's amendment to the Transport Bill writing the new Scottish Centre into the legislation.
Ayrshire’s First Labour Woman MP: Clarice Marion Shaw (1883–1946)
When I was elected as MP for Ayr in 1997 some of the newspapers referred to me as the first ever Labour woman MP in Ayrshire. That wasn’t true. As I write, there are two, myself in Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock and Katy Clark in North Ayrshire. We also have women MSPs like Cathy Jamieson; Margaret Jamieson and Irene Oldfather. But this is the story of the first ever woman Labour MP in Ayrshire.
Clarice Marion McNab was born at 10 Morton Street, Leith, near Edinburgh, on 22 October 1883, the eldest daughter of Thomas Charles McNab, a wire-cloth weaver, and his wife, Mary Deas Fraser (My husband, Alastair, was also born and brought up in Leith) Her father was a high-profile figure in local politics, including being a director of Leith's co-operative association, and played a large part in moulding Clarice's radical and political beliefs in Labour politics. Clarice combined an interest in education and socialism from an early stage. Inspired by Keir Hardie's published views on religious education, she was a founder member of the Glasgow Socialist Sunday School in the 1890s. After training as a music teacher, at about the age of twenty she began teaching in an elementary school in Leith and became an advocate of the state provision for improved medical and welfare services for schoolchildren. Her election to the Leith school board in April 1922 indicated her ambitions in local government, which were enhanced by her activities in the Women's Labour League—an organisation focusing on the employment and pay of female workers. Her radical approach towards women's rights, which included campaigning for the extension of job opportunities for girls after school, broadened into urging the abolition of children's employment and raising the school leaving age to sixteen. Unlike many of her peers Clarice displayed clear political ambitions. By 1913 she had joined the Labour Party, partly out of support for socialist principles, but also as a route into local politics. In November 1913 she was elected to Leith Town Council, giving her the distinction of being the first Labour woman member of a town council in Scotland. As a councillor she took a personal interest in medical and child welfare issues. In 1916 she was appointed as the Women's Labour League representative to attend meetings of the Scottish Executive Committee of the Labour Party. There she met, worked with, and eventually married in Edinburgh in July 1918, Benjamin Howard Shaw, first Secretary of the Scottish Labour Party. The couple complemented each other in terms of political ideas and tastes, teetotalism, and temperance reform. Both she and Ben Shaw were also closely associated with the Glasgow Socialist Sunday School, of which Clarice was the national president for twenty-five years. The marriage did not produce any children. In 1921 they moved to Troon. She was subsequently a member of Troon Town Council and Ayrshire County Council, and during the next twenty years she fulfilled a number of roles in civic administration, continuing her educational campaign and serving as a JP. She was appointed a member of the Scottish Food Council, the price regulation committee for Scotland, and the 1928 Royal Commission on Educational Endowments in Scotland. Twice—in 1929 and 1931—she unsuccessfully fought Ayr burghs at the general election (more or less the seat I won in 1997) When international tensions began to develop in the 1930s, Clarice initially held to her pacifist principles. She appeared at peace assemblies and in 1935 was one of the key speakers at a women's peace conference in the Keir Hardie Institute. As the fascist threat grew more acute, however, she modified her views. Although she abhorred the many side effects of the Second World War, such as the lowering of educational standards, by 1945 she was demanding total victory and the crushing of German power. Clarice Shaw's activities during the war represented the height of her many achievements. She was chairman of the Scottish Labour Party, a Labour Councillor, and a member of the Scottish Committee of Co-operative, Labour and Trade Union Women, founded—partly by her—in 1934. She had close links with the Scottish Trades Union Congress and the Women's Co-operative Guild in England. When her husband died in October 1942, she committed even more time and energy to the Labour Party.
And here’s what I have been leading up to! At the general election in July 1945 she was rewarded by being selected for and winning the Parliamentary seat of Kilmarnock with a 7537 majority over the only other candidate, the Conservative Lieutenant-Colonel George E. Walker – the first woman Labour MP in Ayrshire. Her services to the Labour Party were recognised by her being chosen as the Secretary of the Scottish Parliamentary Group. Having fulfilled her major ambition to become an MP, Clarice was then struck down by a serious illness shortly afterwards which stopped her ever attending the House of Commons. She continued to deal with her parliamentary correspondence faithfully until she was forced to resign her seat in September 1946. Ben and Clarice Shaw are remembered as one of the most successful and popular partnerships in the Scottish Labour Party. While Ben was shy and introverted, Clarice was a very gifted speaker and orator with the ability to command large audiences, despite her plump and matronly appearance. She was equally adept at handling the affairs of several prestigious governmental committees and commissions. She died on 27 October 1946 at 36 Titchfield Road, Troon, and was buried at Troon. At the by-election which followed a young recently demobbed Willie Ross was elected MP in her place. Now that’s another story altogether!
Source material :Helen Corr; Scottish Labour Leaders 1918-39
Electoral Reform The dangers of Balkanised politics
New Statesman Scotland -
If you're a Tory, should you take your problems to a Tory MP? That's the logic of electoral reform. Sandra Osborne thinks it is bad for democracy
In the debate about electoral reform, the focus has largely been on the issue of proportionality. It is assumed that people will reconnect with politics because representation will more fairly reflect voting. But we should not ignore the importance of the member/constituency link and the value of the tradition that an MP is the elected representative of all the people in his or her constituency.
In the debate about the list system used for the election of some MSPs, we are told that this is all about an extension of democracy - more choice forthe elector. Tories can choose to go to a Tory MSP; Labour supporters to a Labour MSP; nationalists to a nationalist. This analysis is about as robust as the view that the Scottish Parliament has delivered a new politics of consensus, eschewing the "ya! boo!" politics of Westminster. The truth is that we have a Scottish Parliament of entrenched party politics, with the Tories and the SNP, while they form the opposition, empowered by the system to "ya" and "boo" in turn.
I believe that democracy is diminished if we lose the tradition of the duly elected constituency member as the representative of all the electors of that constituency. It is an essential component of our democratic process and places a responsibility and discipline on the elected representative.
Not all things to all people I'm not suggesting that MPs should all become politically neutered so that they can live out some romantic role of being all things to all people.
There is plenty of scope for pursuing a vigorous party political role, but it is totally unprofessional for MPs to take party politics into their role as representative and advocate on behalf of individual constituents. Some people approach their MP on a matter they feel strongly about - foxhunting, abortion, immigration - in the vast majority of cases, the issues are personal to the individual and have nothing whatsoever to do with party affiliation or personal political views.
An important part of an MP's job is to take up people's concerns and advocate on their behalf as their democratically elected representative.That could mean supporting the case of a lifelong Tory voter who has failed to get fair treatment from a Labour controlled local authority. In reality, you are extremely unlikely to know who your constituent votes for, if he or she votes at all.
A democratic tradition The only bias an MP should be allowed is a bias towards those in greatest need and those least able to speak up for themselves. And the only likely area of conflict between an MP's legitimate political role and the role as representative to his or her constituents is if the MP's personal and political prejudices on issues such as race, gender, sexual orientation and religion are publicly known. That kind of public image would undermine the MP's credibility in the eyes of vulnerable constituents who might otherwise have sought sympathetic help or support.
The danger lurking in the "extended choice" argument currently in favour is that we are being asked to abandon a valuable democratic tradition and replace it with an ill-thought-out "Balkanisation" of political representation - Nat constituents go to a Nat representative; Tories to a Tory; Labour to Labour. The logical extension would see Muslims going to a Muslim MP; Catholics to a Catholic; Protestants to a Protestant. When some-one rings my office, my assistant does not ask: "Name, address and political affiliation?"
More important than giving people a choice of party representative to go to is the need to address how we achieve a political representation at Westminster and in the Scottish Parliament that reflects the whole of Scottish society: women and men; ethnic minorities; youth and experience; all social backgrounds. If we could only achieve that, we could greatly enrich politics instead of being encouraged down a separatist road.
I would plead with those who go along with this argument for "extended choice" to think again.
Represent all constituents It isn't just a recipe for inefficiency, waste and duplication. It is dangerous for democracy. I don't think it romantic or idealistic to affirm that it is a strength of our traditional democratic system that our elected representatives are there to represent all their constituents.
Representation and advocacy are among the hardest bits of the job, but there is nothing more satisfying than knowing that you have done your best on someone's behalf.
The Scottish Executive has now turned its attention to local government. It has set up working groups to consider a modernisation that would include electoral reform and Cabinet-style structures.
But the test of any modernisation agenda, whether at local or national level, will be the extent to which it maintains strong and direct links between elected representatives and all of the people they are elected to represent.
Fair enough ... but good enough?
The Pensions Bill was announced in the Queen's Speech as a key part of the government's programme A Future Fair For All. And although it is a Bill that fits the bill in many respects, there is a key area where it is lacking.
It fails to offer a fair future for the thousands of employees of companies which have gone into liquidation with under-funded pension schemes. These now face the prospect of being substantially deprived of the pensions they have paid into all their working lives.
Most people think their occupational pension is safe. After all, the Financial Services Authority, the National Association of Pension Funds and the Office of Pensions Advisory Service all recommend joining a pension scheme.
But as employees of United Engineering Forgings (UEF), Melville Dundas, Dexion, ASW, Kalamazoo, Ravenhead Glass, Blyth & Blyth, Lister Yarns and many more have discovered it is possible to work for 40 years, pay-in to a company pension scheme yet get nothing back, not even your contributions, upon retirement.
The 1995 Pensions Act attempted to direct what should happen to the assets of pension schemes in the case of insolvency. Existing pensioners get their pension in full, indexed against inflation. Employees get what is left, which often amounts to little or nothing. This seemed okay while annuity rates were over 10%, the stock market was booming and many pension funds were in surplus. Since 2000 the stock market has fallen and annuity rates plummeted to under 4%. This has resulted in pension disaster for thousands of employees whose employers have gone bust. Not only were these victims not warned of the risk – they were positively encouraged to rely on company pension schemes.
The government's proposed Pensions Bill will introduce a new Pension Protection Fund which will end the scandal of workers being denied their pensions built up over many years just because their company goes bust.
It will also strengthen pension protection for employees who find themselves transferred to a new employer to ensure firms can't use takeover as an excuse to scrap pension contributions. However that will only ensure a Future Fair for some – not all.
What about retrospective action or compensation for those who have been robbed of their guaranteed pensions. There is a strong case for this. The government has a responsibility because successive governments promoted and encouraged joining private pension schemes and allowed employers to make membership compulsory. There was no requirement to warn members of the dangers.
Tomorrow in Glasgow a Pensions Summit will be held to call for government action.
Dr Ros Altmann will outline her proposals for a compensation scheme. An acknowledged expert on pension issues, she was an academic before working in the city and has been assisting the Number 10 Policy Unit on pensions.
Malcolm Wicks and other Department of Work and Pensions Ministers and officials have been meeting with pension scheme members whose schemes have been, or are being wound up and with MPs to discuss proposed solutions. They have said they will consider any constructive proposals. Ros Altmann will contend at the summit that the government can and should put this situation right. The summit is part of an continuing campaign which will not go away. I hope the government is listening.
Compensation would be a drop in the taxpayers ocean compared to the £14 billion tax relief which goes annually to people contributing to pensions. The cost of compensating those affected would probably only be £100m a year if agreed now and not all of that right away. If this was added to the benefits already in place in the government's Pensions Bill it would go a long way to restoring confidence in the UK pension system as well as putting right an indefensible injustice for these hard working and diligent people. Now that really would constitute “a fairer future for all”.
Iraq Visit
The All Party Foreign Affairs Select Committee, of which Sandra Osborne is a member, went to Iraq as part of their current inquiry into the War on Terror.
They had meetings with President Talibani, Prime Minister Ja’afari, Foreign Minister Zebari, US Ambassador Khalilzad, the Commander of the Multi National Force in Iraq - General Casey, Basra Chief of Police General Hassan Swadh. They also met Religious and Tribal leaders in Basra, representatives of Political Parties, and representatives of Non Governmental Organisations as well as UK Embassy Officials and representatives of the UK Armed Forces.The Committee visited Baghdad, Basra and the Al-Rustimayah Military Training Academy.
The Journey
“We had been warned that the helicopter would descend quickly and steeply to avoid being a target - and it did. It was almost literally with heart in mouth we set foot in Baghdad to see for ourselves what it was like on the ground.
We had travelled to Baghdad from Kuwait in a Hercules jet and then on to the International Zone by helicopter for security reasons. This is where the British Embassy is located.
The Multi National Force in Iraq
The Multi National Force in Iraq is mandated by the UN Security Council resolutions 1511 and 1546 which authorized a multi national force under unified command to take all necessary measures to contribute to the maintenance of security and stability in Iraq. The UN also agreed the handover of sovereignty to the interim Iraqi Government and endorsed the timetable for the political transition to a constitutionally elected Government by 31st December 2005. It also set out the future status of the Multi National Force and its relationship with the Iraqi Government.
The mandate was to be reviewed upon completion of the political process in December 2005 or could be terminated early at the request of the Iraqi Government. On 8th November 2005 the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1637 which extended the mandate of the Multi National Force, at the request of the Iraqi Government, until 31st December 2006. As with the original mandate this extension can be reviewed at the request of the Iraqi Government and can be terminated prior to that date if so requested.
The Multi National Force is made up of 26 countries and is led by US General Casey. The UK retains Divisional Command for the South East provinces and retains a presence in Baghdad. There are now less than 10,000 UK personnel deployed in Iraq.
Calls for the British Government to withdraw our forces have been made in the UK ever since the conclusion of major combat operations on 1st May 2003. The evidence I saw and heard brought me to the clear conclusion that an immediate withdrawal would be both irresponsible and impractical. Very few people I spoke to wanted this and many felt it would lead to a Civil War. There is scope to take troops out of parts of the more stable provinces in the south of the country in the near future and for more withdrawals as the security position allows.
It is entirely different in the Baghdad area. Whatever any of us feel about the decision to go to war I believe it would be morally wrong to leave the Iraqi people in the lurch before they are ready. Withdrawal will be a process based on the level of threat and the capacity of local and national government to oversee the transition from multi national forces to Iraqi forces. This process should relate to events on the ground in Iraq and the judgement of the Iraqi Government and not be an arbitrary timetable set as a knee jerk reaction from abroad.
The elections for the Government of Iraq held last December had a turn out of 75% and were reasonably fair with no evidence of widespread or systematic fraud or abuse. When I met a group of young Iraqi soldiers they were proud to show me the ink on their finger to show they had voted. Attention is now focussed on the formation of the first fully constitutionally mandated long term Government.
The Challenges
There are three main challenges in Iraq: 1. Sectarianism between Shia and Sunni; 2. Terror and insurgency; 3. Services and rebuilding the economy
1. Sectarianism
It is important to get the Sunnis involved in the political process. Now that the election is over all parties are talking about the importance of a government of national unity – a coalition involving Kurds, Shias, Sunnis, and the cross sectarian groups. Of course perceptions of what constitutes a government of national unity vary.
Throughout the visit, I gained the impression that many of the Shias who are in the majority see this as an opportunity to get their own back for years of oppression under Saddam. The issues under discussion include the nature of federalism which could either maintain Iraq as a single country or take it along the road to fragmentation on sectarian lines.
There is also a de-Ba’athification process which in a way is an attempt at reconciliation following the tyranny of Saddam’s Ba’ath Party. A distinction is made between the hierarchy and criminal elements of the party on the one hand and the rank and file former members on the other. In the case of those former rank and file Ba’ath Party members, a path for reintegration is needed for those who ‘had no choice’ but to be members of the party.
2. Terrorism and Insurgency
In many ways the post war effort is mirroring the peace process in Northern Ireland where attempts are being made to move from ‘violence with no politics’ to ‘violence with politics’ and finally on to ‘politics with no violence’. There are elements of the Saddamists who sought to disrupt the recent democratic elections. There is also no question that al Qaeda in Iraq under al-Zarqawi is still seeking to establish Iraq as a centre for violent Islamist revolution.
As a committee we have taken evidence from experts all of whom have suggested that the war in Iraq has served as a recruiting sergeant for insurgents and terrorists. In the Baghdad area suicide bombings, car bombs and, a recent innovation, highly deadly and sophisticated explosive devices which are thought to originate in Iran, are a regular occurrence.
While we were in Baghdad we could hear explosions nearby. The International Zone contains most government buildings as well as UK and US Embassies and is about the size of Glasgow City Centre. Obviously, security is tight. Thousands of Iraqis live
or work there – many entering on a daily basis through checkpoints.
One of the most moving conversations I had was with two Iraqis who work in the British Embassy. They cannot tell family or friends or neighbours where they work and have to vary their route on a daily basis. They told me they had been cheering in the streets on the day Saddam was toppled but now there is widespread disillusionment due to the security situation.
People are constantly in fear of their lives. They only have access to electricity 2 hours a day and their children receive only a few hours of education a day. Everyday they risk their lives going through the check points to work where suicide bombings are frequent.
3. Services and the Economy
The US has spent billions of dollars on reconstruction and there has been massive assistance from the international community. But 20-30% of that is spent on security and the level of corruption is such that there does not appear to be a lot to show for the level of investment.
Efforts are being made to build electricity generating capacity to fix oil infrastructure and to build railways, roads, bridges and airports. About 25% of services have been decentralised to local government including job creation and smaller projects. It is a real bone of contention that the US Government is awarding contracts to US companies rather than local Iraqi ones.
Attempts are being made to involve other countries in a multilateral approach to reconstruction. What can’t be overstated is the importance of the outcome of the current attempts at government formation. The interim government was Shia dominated which has not helped to promote security. If they do not get it right this time and find a way to include the main political factions in government, the Sunnis will feel alienated and terrorist activity will increase. This year is therefore decisive.
An important issue is promotion of the Rule of Law. Resources have been put into building capacity to support the new democracy. Police training has so far had mixed results. The police are extensively infiltrated by militia.
In relation to the army we visited a Military Training Academy for officers where the British Army is providing training but gradually taking a back seat and allowing Iraqis to train their own officers. However, having spoken to trainees, I discovered that they feel the hierarchy still have a Saddamist mentality and fear a British withdrawal would see them revert to type.
This was a point made generally whenever we had the chance to speak to the ordinary Iraqis. I have the strong impression that certain elements of the military and political establishment have no real concept of democracy and look forward to holding the reins of power for their own ends rather than for the good of all the people. A great weight of responsibility lies with those who do want to wield power for the good of all the people of Iraq.
The reality is that the reconstruction process and the building of democratic institutions will take many years in a country where people have been cowed and frightened for so long that many are easily led and manipulated.
Embassy Staff and Service Men and Women
The US Embassy in Baghdad is located in the former Palace of Saddam Hussein - a spectacular and ornate building. We met there with General Casey, Head of Coalition Forces.
The British Ambassador’s residence is reputed to be the former home of one of Saddam’s mistresses but today is an austere cold building located next door to the US Ambassador’s residence which is regularly shelled.
Our visit was primarily concerned with the Foreign Affairs Committee’s investigation into the War on Terror and therefore with the political aspects of the situation in Iraq, but we did receive briefings from the armed forces and met service men and women.
We were only too well aware of the danger they face daily, a danger confirmed with the death of British soldiers taking UK losses to over the 100.
The immense contribution made by British Embassy staff is not often recognised. In Iraq we have our biggest embassy staffing contingent in the Middle East. They serve for a year at a time. By virtue of the fact they cannot bring their families, they have the youngest age profile of all embassies.
Immediately after the war they were situated in the basement of a multi story car park in Baghdad, sleeping in porta-cabins with no facilities. It sums up their spirit that they named this - tongue in cheek - ‘Ocean Cliffs’. Although they are now in better accommodation which is well fortified they still risk their lives daily - as I found out when we travelled to Basra.
Basra
In Basra there is no International Zone and the British Embassy has only a relatively small compound which had been under attack 3 times in the week before we came. Because of this, it was essential that we wore body armour at all times.
We met with officials from the UK Department for International Development (DFID). It is involved in various programmes promoting social and economic cohesion and stability. DFID is working with non governmental organisations to encourage participation. However, there was no civic society under Saddam to build on so they have to start from scratch.
The Political Participation Fund aims to increase opportunities for political representation and participation by all Iraqis, particularly women, poor, marginalised and vulnerable citizens. I had the opportunity to discuss with DFID Civil Servants and Embassy Staff a project they are running to bring fresh water to one of the poorest communities in Basra. This is in an area where the Marsh Arabs who were displaced from their lands after thousands of years of habitation when Saddam drained the marshes now live.
Women’s Rights
It was a great pleasure to meet with the new Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) including a meeting with Dr Rajaa Khuza’l- Hilla, the President of the National Council for Women.
The new constitution has recognised women’s rights in relation to equal opportunities, it prohibits tribal customs that contravene women’s human rights, it makes reference to domestic violence following lobbying by Iraqi women’s groups and it guarantees 25% female representation in Parliament.
However, as in many other countries, Women’s Rights remain a sensitive issue. Reports continue to emerge of abuse of or social stigma attached to victims of rape or resistance to forced marriage. I was told of one example in the Basra area where a woman was recently forced to marry her rapist.
The UK Government is providing funding to support women, including projects in isolated rural areas, which address concerns such as health care, child development, women’s rights, education and economic development.
Back in the UK
Back in the UK, the Foreign Affairs Select Committee will continue to examine the War on Terror but our deliberations will be better informed and more insightful for having been to Iraq and having seen the situation for ourselves.”
More Women MPs-“If not now, when?”
When I was invited to present the Ayr Gold Cup soon after becoming the first ever woman MP for Ayr in 1997, I stood there thanks to a woman called Catherine Taylor who came to Ayr Racecourse almost 100 years earlier. She wasn’t invited to present the Gold Cup. This cinema cashier from the Gorbals came to Ayr in the dead of night in 1913 and burnt the Racecourse grandstand to the ground as part of the Scottish Suffragette Campaign. The damage was £300,000 in today’s money and 5 years later a Bill was passed giving women over 30 the vote and the right to stand for Parliament.
Every advance for women has had to be fought for by women themselves and without sustained pressure and resistance these advances are quickly eroded and lost.
Between 1918 and 1997 only 168 women had been elected to the House of Commons (and 4,000 men). In the 1992 to 1997 Parliament the number of women reached an all time high – 62 out of 659. More than half of them were Labour. But in Scotland only 3 Labour women were elected. Even in the so-called ‘breakthrough’ in 1997 only 9 Labour women were elected in Scotland (102 in the UK - 18%). The advance in 1997 was made thanks to positive action which saw 5 Scottish Constituency Labour Parties selecting from all women shortlists – Ayr, Edinburgh Pentlands, Stirling, Aberdeen South and Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East. In 2001 all five MPs were re-elected.
Following the positive action of All Women Shortlists in Wales, the number of Welsh Labour women MPs has doubled from 4 in 1997 to 8 today. However, there was no more positive action in Scotland and with all women shortlists in abeyance the number of Labour women MPs in Scotland has dropped from nine in 1997 to seven today.
The setting up of the Scottish Parliament saw a high proportion of women elected in both 1999 and 2003 elections – putting Westminster to shame. However, the latest elections have resulted in the Scottish Parliament slipping from fourth to 13th place in world league tables on women in parliament. Women have taken just 43 out of 129 seats in Holyrood, 33.3 per cent, compared with 39.5 per cent in the 2003 elections.
Women make up 50% of the 46 strong Labour Group but only 25% of the 47 SNP members. Labour’s strong showing is thanks to the decision to twin seats back in 1999.
Why do numbers matter? Research has shown that having high numbers of women in the parliament changes the focus of the traditional political agenda and the way politics is carried out.
Niki Kandirikirira, Director of the women’s oganisation Engender, said:
“A reduction in women MSPs brings with it the threat of a reduced focus on issues that concern a large proportion of the population: equal pay, The cost of caring, violence against women and children, and poverty.”
In 2004 the Electoral Commission published research confirming that women candidates are an electoral advantage. The report shows that overall women are as likely to turn out to vote in elections as men, but that they tend to be turned off by male-dominated Westminster politics.
However, this report also demonstrates that the presence of women candidates significantly increases women's turn out and engagement. In seats with a woman candidate, women voters are more likely to turn out than men (a gender gap of four percentage points). Turn out among men is unaffected by the sex of the candidate.
In constituencies with a woman MP, women voters are much more likely to believe that ‘government benefits people like me’.
Women voters are more likely to be motivated to work and campaign for a woman candidate than for a male candidate.
The report recommends that removing the existing barriers to women being selected and standing for elected office is an important priority.
The challenge to the parties is clear – whilst the Labour Party continue to use all-women shortlists in at least half the vacant Labour or winnable seats, the record of the Liberal Democrats, the Conservatives and the SNP on selecting women for winnable seats is poor. You would have to add to that list of shame, Labour in Scotland. In 2005 there was a case for setting aside positive action since the Scottish Westminster boundaries had been redrawn reducing the number of MPs from 72 to 59. Clearly there were more sitting MPs than available seats to fill. However, the same argument was used again in 2007 for the new Local Council Elections. With STV and multi-member wards there would be far fewer Labour Councillors elected and so this was not the right time to bring in quotas for women.
We have recently completed reselection of MPs for the Westminster election. Where Labour MPs are standing down, Glasgow Central has selected sitting MP Mohammad Sarwar’s son and there is an open selection to replace Rosemary McKenna in Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East. We may get a woman candidate in Lib Dem held East Dunbartonshire and we also have a vacancy to fill in Airdrie and Shotts where John Reid is standing down. With no clear mechanism or commitment in place we will be lucky to see the number of Labour women MPs in Scotland stay at the current level. There is no inevitability that progress to equality will continue without struggle and positive action. Once all-women shortlists are taken out of the equation, there is no evidence at all that the party culture has shifted significantly, and as it stands, the legislation allowing all women short lists is time limited with a sunset clause of 2015.
I will always remember the words of the Ayr Labour stalwart, the late Jean Prentice at a hustings meeting back in 1997. After some of the panel prevaricated on how and when to achieve equal representation for women, she put her question in four words: “If not now, when?”
Sandra Osborne MP
Saga Magazine December 2006 "Pensions Justice"
Four years ago I was appalled to learn that one of the local companies in my constituency, United Engineering Forgings, had gone into administration with a possible loss of over 1200 jobs in the UK.
Fortunately the local site was taken over and most of the jobs saved. So imagine my utter disbelief when it became clear a short time later, that the pension fund was grossly underfunded and, even though they had paid into the fund all of their working lives to provide for a secure retirement, the workforce would receive nothing like their expected pension on retirement. In contributing from their wages to the occupational pension fund the employees were following Government advice and indeed in many cases it was part of their employment contract to do so.
Despite the disbelief at what had happened it did not occur to us to begin with that what the company had done was within the law. The UEF workforce were facing, in common with thousands of others, one of the most scandalous injustices in a generation – an injustice that would give rise to a campaign requiring every ounce of energy of those affected and their representatives- a campaign which continues to this day.
As the local MP I set about raising the issue in the Commons and held a debate which was answered by the then Pensions Minister, Ian McCartney. I tabled an Early Day Motion which attracted well over a hundred signatures and the first of numerous Pensions Summits were held in the House of Commons to bring the crisis to the attention of more MPs.
Meanwhile, demonstrations, marches and vigils were held involving those who had lost their pensions and the trade unions who represented them. In the early stages of the campaign it was very difficult to get media coverage even though some of the individual tragedies were heartbreaking. There was a palpable sense of justified anger and distress at a loss that was totally beyond the control of people who had planned for their retirement and deserved the security they had paid towards. It amounted to theft.
There was plenty of sympathy for the plight of the workforce but no one was prepared to accept responsibility and that is the fundamental problem we still face today.
The Government has introduced the Pension Protection Fund to ensure that people are never again put in this position after a lifetime of saving. But that should have been done years earlier in line with European Insolvency Directives and those who lost their pensions in the interim have suffered as a result.
The Government eventually did respond by bringing in the Financial Assistance Scheme but stressed it was in recognition of the difficult circumstances the losses had caused and did not amount to compensation. The FAS is in any case inadequate and does not meet the tests of fairness, efficiency or justice. As it stands many people will receive nothing even though they contributed to their schemes for many years. I have argued that it needs to be looked at again.
I welcome the £2.6 billion of public money the Government has announced to fund the FAS but the time has come to resolve this problem once and for all. The suffering must not be allowed to continue and one of the best ways to restore confidence in pensions would be to restore in total the lost pensions. It is a question of natural justice which I believe has widespread public support.
I fully support Saga’s call for immediate action to accelerate assistance payments to all those affected scheme members over the age of 65. Furthermore, this should be followed by the replacement of the limited scheme with one which makes full restoration to all affected members of their accrued entitlements under their pension schemes.
I have no doubt that justice will eventually prevail for these hard working people and in the meantime the campaign continues.
The Good Economy and the Good Society
The Chamber of Commerce is constantly changing to ensure that it can be the voice of local business in a changing Ayrshire. Part of that change is the growing recognition that the good economy and the good society go together. I want to tell you a bit about the good economic record of this Government which is the basis of building a better society.
From day one we have emphasised the importance of stability in the economy starting with independence for the Bank of England. The UK continues to experience an unprecedented period of growth and stability despite global challenges. Interest rates remain low by historic standards at 5%; mortgage rates have been at their lowest since the 1950s and we have sustained the longest period of low inflation since the 1960s. We have the highest employment levels with 2.5 million more jobs in the economy than 1997.
The recent OECD economic survey ranked the UK first for all measures of economic stability and our GDP per capita in now ranked second in the G7 overtaking Germany and France.
This entrenched macroeconomic stability, coupled with the investment in making business competitive by increasing skills levels and supporting investment in R&D. means that Britain is well placed to take a leading role in the global economy.
However, the reality of globalisation has hit home over the last year at a local, national and international level. People are now more aware than ever about climate change, outsourcing of jobs, migration of labour, security of energy supply, the emerging economies of south and east Asia, international terrorism and the challenge to Make Poverty History.
It is said that all politics is local but if we are to continue to build a successful economy for our own people we must think from a global perspective. For example, if all UK fossil fuel burning stopped tomorrow, in less than 13 months China would have made it up by economic growth. So we must make decisions on measures to tackle climate change with regard to the wider global context.
Although people are more aware than ever about globalisation they still feel they are losing out. Over a million jobs have been lost from the US, Europe and Japan to the emerging economies, whilst enlargement of the EU has brought workers in mainly from Poland. As a result the Government has had to put conditions on the numbers of Romanians and Bulgarians who can work here when they join the European Union. But in the long term protectionism is not the answer. Asia will not be able to compete on the basis of low pay in the long term. That is why India is producing four million graduates a year.
But I do believe in intervention. The forces of globalisation cannot be tackled with a laissez faire approach which leaves people to sink or swim. And we have a long way to go. We have half the business start up rates of the US and a third of our adults still do not have qualifications. So we must continue to invest in education, research and development, and help those who need to adapt to change and equip our young people for the future.
We in Ayrshire have to face this massive change on the back of communities devastated by the decline of heavy industry and mining. We have also lost jobs to low wage countries. Even so we have reason to be optimistic when we look at the development of the Aerospace industry, developments in Higher Education locally and the exciting plans for the Burns Homecoming as part of the tourist strategy.
Violence against women
Sending the right message to society In the debate about whether Mike Tyson should be allowed into the UK the Home Secretary does not appear to have taken account of the most importantissue. It is not just a question of whether he represents a threat to the public as an individual. After all, he'll be under far too much scrutiny toget the chance. The really important issue is that as a public figure convicted of rape he has a particular role. The significance of this was demonstrated by the fact that his management had direct access to the Home Secretary to plead his case.
The powerful images of public figures and the strong messages they send are what sets them apart. It is not a matter of degree - whether Sean Connery has made an ill judged remark, or Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist. Unfortunately both are common place but public figures are symbols for the kind of society we are and provide a channel for the messages we put across. The same can be said of Jack Straw as Home Secretary.
Violence against women - whether physical, mental or sexual is a crime. The fact that this needs to be repeated says it all.
Shameful history It was not so very long ago that the abuse of women was sanctioned in statute and law. A man could beat his wife with a stick as long as it was nothicker than his thumb. It is little over a decade ago that, for the first time, a man in Scotland was taken to court for raping his wife.
The institutions of the state and religion have a long and shameful history of shoring up the ability of men to rule in society and in the home even if they chose to do so by force and this was underpinned by a conspiracy of silence and the communal condemnation and deprecation of any woman who had the audacity to protest.
In some communities there was a kind of ' honour among thieves' - the more upright male members of the community would take in hand those who offended sensitivities too often by conducting their abuse in public but otherwise women were left to make their bed and lie in it.
Of course women are not, and never have been, weak pathetic creatures. They developed mechanisms to cope and sought solace in each other, because they certainly got no help from the state. However, systematic beatings and rapeswere the reality of life for far too many women.So what has changed?
A great deal has changed As a matter of fact a great deal has changed although the rapes and beatings continue. Women no longer just have to take it and abusers are more often condemned. Firstly, change came about by the efforts of women themselves.
The early feminists started the ball rolling by challenging male property rights and fighting for the vote, but in the 1970s there emerged a challengeto male power in the form of violence against women which saw refuges develop all over the country, pressure on the police and the courts to treat domestic violence and rape as serious crimes and legislation on equal rights for women.
Margaret Thatcher eventually told us ' the battle for women's rights has largely been won'. For a while it seemed that the current younger generation of women actually believed it - if they did they were soon to know better.
And all that time the same old messages were churned out -" she deserved it, they enjoy it, its the drink that causes it, the working class is to blame,men can't control their sex drive". Last week I even heard of a male politician of the so called left who said ' If she goes to a hotel room with a guy at two o'clock in the morning what does she expect!' And who said attitudes have changed! But changing attitudes is what its all about.
A vital lifeline During the 1980s Labour Councils started to provide resources for Women's Aid and Rape Crisis groups. Provision was patchy and it was always a struggle ( it still is) but at least there was somewhere women and children could go. The lifeline was vital but in some ways it was even more important that the statement was being made to abusive men - it's not OK . The first signs of public condemnation began. More often the women who were involved in the self help groups were pilloried themselves as men haters but we took that as a sign of success.
When we reached the 1990s there was a major breakthrough - the local authorities , the police, even, dare I say it, the Tory Government , startedto take violence against women up themselves. running public education campaigns and reviewing their policies. The Zero Tolerance campaign challenged unequivocally the myths and stereotypes and clearly made the link between the different forms of abuse - violence against women whetherphysical, mental or sexual was wrong either in the home or outside it.
The virulent opposition to the campaign was another sign of success but this time the institutions of the state were backing it. Both the Labour Government and the Labour led Scottish Executive have prioritised the issue and we have seen real progress albeit there is still a long way to go.
A mainstream issue Yes, violence against women is at last high on the political agenda so much so that it is now called a mainstream issue. It is a very welcome development but it does have one major drawback - all of a sudden everyone is an expert and feels qualified to jump on the bandwagon making ill informed remarks. As I have said earlier, it was ever so, but the dangerous part of it is when the ' powers that be' stop listening to the people who know - the abused women themselves.
I have seen the results of the ill informed comments. When Childline came into existence it brought the whole issue of child sexual abuse to the public attention and as a result the nature and extent of the problem was called into question. It was another case of the truth hurting.
I was at that time involved in a self help group for women who had been sexually abused as children. I can still visualise the tangible pain and distress caused when some big mouth politician, judge or public figure made a stupid comment. What of those women who have never told anyone that they have been raped.
Some women take twenty or thirty years to disclose that they have been raped and seek support. It has taken so long to get a message across that can encourage women surviving in a lonely and painful vacuum to come forward and we must have adequate resources in place to help when they do.
Sending the wrong message But if this is not backed by those in positions of responsibility taking every opportunity to send a message that violence against women is totallyunacceptable it is not only patronising, it is quite literally dangerous.
To use discretion to allow a convicted rapist to come to Scotland when there was an option to refuse entry is not a neutral dispassionate decision - it is to favour the abuse of power over justice for those who have survived abuse. Just as before, it is sanctioning violence against women in the public arena and sending out entirely the wrong message.
Save our skies
Someone once wrote "Campaign in poetry, govern in prose.' Labour in opposition opposed the privatisation of Air Traffic Control with the campaign 'Save our Skies- Don't Privatise!" Why does Labour in government then intend to place 51% of NATS with the private sector?
Before the General Election, the then Shadow Chancellor, Gordon Brown announced that privatisation of National Air Traffic Services (NATS) could not be ruled out. This was in direct response to the black hole in the government's Red Book which would appear without the receipts from the privatisation of NATS already pencilled in by the Conservative Government.
This may not be relevant now over 18 months on, but the government's proposed Public/Private Partnership (PPP) is in part to raise the receipt which can then be invested in other transport needs. It is this preferred option of a PPP which is now subject to public consultation until January31 1999.
Lack of progress
An important backdrop to this whole issue is the history of the new en-route centre commissioned at Swanwick in Hampshire. The timescale for this was hopelessly optimistic from the start and right up to January 1997 we had the then Chief Executive of NATS assuring the Transport Select Committee that Swanwick would be operational by March 1998 - it could now be 2002.
The Select Committee recently concluded that the apparent complacency of the Conservative Government on the lack of progress at Swanwick over a number of years is 'astonishing' They even went so far as to say that consideration should be given to scrapping the software system at NERC (Swanwick) and starting over again.
However, the Swanwick nightmare could be coming to an end now that the government-commissioned DERA audit has reached completion. As the MP for Ayr my first priority is to ensure that the New Scottish Centre at Prestwick goes ahead as part of the two centre strategy.
The last government excelled at time wasting and loss of initiative as it reviewed the two centre strategy; turned a blind eye to the reality of the Swanwick delays and attempted a series of failed stabs at privatisation. No wonder there is a residue of public scepticism that the New Scottish Centre will go ahead under the proposed PPP.
Unwavering commitment
However, the government's commitment to the Prestwick Centre has been unwavering. The Prime Minister himself, in answering my direct question to him in Parliament reaffirmed that " contract negotiations for a new air traffic control centre at Prestwick to replace the existing centre are underway between NATS and Sky Solutions, the preferred bidder".
The Prestwick contract has now been to both NATS and the Civil Aviation Authority Boards and is now back with the government for the final go ahead to being signed. One result of the ongoing delay to the New Scottish Centre is that the original costs have spiralled leading to the airlines questioning their costs.
NATS were never happy with the PFI which they saw as an expensive option but they had to take the whole package presented by the preferred bidder. And the new government went along with it as negotiations were so far advanced. However there is an opportunity to change from PFI further down the line if this is required. All this makes itall the more urgent that the contract is signed as soon as possible.
Safety in the skies
Another strand to the NATS argument is the issue of safety through the pressure of increasing traffic levels. The matter has been taken up by the transport select committee and NATS have given assurances that if demands exceed the present capacity of the system this would result in increased delays not compromised safety standards.
The Unions (PCS and IPMS) agreed that there were no immediate safety concerns but stressed the mounting pressure on Air Traffic Controllers coping with increased traffic on outmoded equipment. However, less optimistic views on safety have been expressed informally to members of the select committee by Air Traffic Controllers.
These are all crucial strands to achieving the main objective which is to provide a safe, high quality air traffic service. The public sector including NATS has suffered a severe curtailment of funds for investment over recent years under the previous government.
Investment required
There is no dispute whatsoever that NATS urgently requires investment of £100 million per annum over the next decade if it is to maintain and improve service quality. At present government does not allow publicly owned companies to borrow commercially as this would be underwritten by the taxpayer. The mechanism for control is the Public Sector Borrowing Requirement (PSBR) This is the reason why the Prestwick Centre, for instance, is to be financed under the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) a preferred means of securing project finance.
The previous government made five abortive attempts to sell the privatisation option. They failed against a background of widespread opposition on such grounds as air safety; threat to jobs and conditions; delays and absence of precedents elsewhere. The proposed PPP has the same questions to answer. It can only increase profit for shareholders by reducing running costs since charges are governed by commercial contracts and international agreements well into the future - and the obvious way to achieve this would be by increasing throughput of traffic with fewer staff.
Labour stood on a manifesto to prioritise resources for hospitals and schools. The outcome of the Comprehensive Spending Review has reflected that and it is therefore undeniable that the Transport Team would welcome the receipt from NATS to enhance their stretched Roads Budget. But the long term future funding of NATS should not be decided on the basis of the government making a short term gain for roads.
Borrowing to invest
We need to put NATS indisputable funding needs into perspective. The present system works on the basis of the Treasury lending money to NATS for investment and NATS recouping it at a profit from the airlines (borrowing to invest according to Gordon Brown's 'Golden Rule').
But the government has an inconsistent and narrow view of the operation of the PSBR, and. in the case of NATS, there is no reason why they could not borrow outside of it. In June 1998,for example, the government announced a £3bn rescue package to a private company to underwrite the Channel Tunnel Rail Link which will not count against the PSBR.
The Transport Select Committee urged consideration of other options already used in other countries as alternatives to PPP. Why has this not been done and why are they not part of the consultation?
The other options include:
- Various Trust models: Nav Canada is a good example of a 'non share capital corporation' which owns, manages, operates, maintains and develops the system financed by debt raised from a syndicate of banks.
- Corporatised models: These are the favoured models elsewhere including Germany, Netherlands and New Zealand. These are government owned and operate as if in the private sector but with 'a sense of social responsibility' (New Zealand model) although they would require a change in the PSBR rules and would be seen as a precedent by other parts of the public sector.
- Chartered Independent Publicly Owned Company (IPOC): The Charter is the means by which the strategic direction of the company is determined. The Government is not the only 'stakeholder' - in the case of NATS these could include the CAA, ATC customers, Ministry of Defence, DETR, the unions - and would involve the charter being renewed periodically through negotiation. There would be no privatisation receipt but borrowing would be outwith the government's PSBR rules.
Supporting jobs
There is no doubt that the future of Air Traffic Services requires serious consideration of the available options.
My first priority as the MP for Ayr is to ensure that the Scottish Centre goes ahead. It is not only crucial to the future of Air Traffic Services, it is also vital for the future of the Ayrshire economy. At present Prestwick employs 650 people -due to rise by another 200 with the Scottish Centre.
Prestwick also supports many more related jobs and generates approximately £27 million a year for the local economy.*
Labour's manifesto said, "we will ensure that self financing commercial organisations within the public sector are given greater commercial freedom to make the most of new opportunities" The government has ensured continued public confidence in the Post Office by standing firm on this manifesto commitment, keeping the Post Office in the public sector while granting it the greater commercial freedom it needs. What they are doing for the Post Office could also be achieved for NATS.
* The Government accepted Sandra's amendment to the Transport Bill writing the new Scottish Centre into the legislation.
Ayrshire’s First Labour Woman MP: Clarice Marion Shaw (1883–1946)
When I was elected as MP for Ayr in 1997 some of the newspapers referred to me as the first ever Labour woman MP in Ayrshire. That wasn’t true. As I write, there are two, myself in Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock and Katy Clark in North Ayrshire. We also have women MSPs like Cathy Jamieson; Margaret Jamieson and Irene Oldfather. But this is the story of the first ever woman Labour MP in Ayrshire.
Clarice Marion McNab was born at 10 Morton Street, Leith, near Edinburgh, on 22 October 1883, the eldest daughter of Thomas Charles McNab, a wire-cloth weaver, and his wife, Mary Deas Fraser (My husband, Alastair, was also born and brought up in Leith) Her father was a high-profile figure in local politics, including being a director of Leith's co-operative association, and played a large part in moulding Clarice's radical and political beliefs in Labour politics. Clarice combined an interest in education and socialism from an early stage. Inspired by Keir Hardie's published views on religious education, she was a founder member of the Glasgow Socialist Sunday School in the 1890s. After training as a music teacher, at about the age of twenty she began teaching in an elementary school in Leith and became an advocate of the state provision for improved medical and welfare services for schoolchildren. Her election to the Leith school board in April 1922 indicated her ambitions in local government, which were enhanced by her activities in the Women's Labour League—an organisation focusing on the employment and pay of female workers. Her radical approach towards women's rights, which included campaigning for the extension of job opportunities for girls after school, broadened into urging the abolition of children's employment and raising the school leaving age to sixteen. Unlike many of her peers Clarice displayed clear political ambitions. By 1913 she had joined the Labour Party, partly out of support for socialist principles, but also as a route into local politics. In November 1913 she was elected to Leith Town Council, giving her the distinction of being the first Labour woman member of a town council in Scotland. As a councillor she took a personal interest in medical and child welfare issues. In 1916 she was appointed as the Women's Labour League representative to attend meetings of the Scottish Executive Committee of the Labour Party. There she met, worked with, and eventually married in Edinburgh in July 1918, Benjamin Howard Shaw, first Secretary of the Scottish Labour Party. The couple complemented each other in terms of political ideas and tastes, teetotalism, and temperance reform. Both she and Ben Shaw were also closely associated with the Glasgow Socialist Sunday School, of which Clarice was the national president for twenty-five years. The marriage did not produce any children. In 1921 they moved to Troon. She was subsequently a member of Troon Town Council and Ayrshire County Council, and during the next twenty years she fulfilled a number of roles in civic administration, continuing her educational campaign and serving as a JP. She was appointed a member of the Scottish Food Council, the price regulation committee for Scotland, and the 1928 Royal Commission on Educational Endowments in Scotland. Twice—in 1929 and 1931—she unsuccessfully fought Ayr burghs at the general election (more or less the seat I won in 1997) When international tensions began to develop in the 1930s, Clarice initially held to her pacifist principles. She appeared at peace assemblies and in 1935 was one of the key speakers at a women's peace conference in the Keir Hardie Institute. As the fascist threat grew more acute, however, she modified her views. Although she abhorred the many side effects of the Second World War, such as the lowering of educational standards, by 1945 she was demanding total victory and the crushing of German power. Clarice Shaw's activities during the war represented the height of her many achievements. She was chairman of the Scottish Labour Party, a Labour Councillor, and a member of the Scottish Committee of Co-operative, Labour and Trade Union Women, founded—partly by her—in 1934. She had close links with the Scottish Trades Union Congress and the Women's Co-operative Guild in England. When her husband died in October 1942, she committed even more time and energy to the Labour Party.
And here’s what I have been leading up to! At the general election in July 1945 she was rewarded by being selected for and winning the Parliamentary seat of Kilmarnock with a 7537 majority over the only other candidate, the Conservative Lieutenant-Colonel George E. Walker – the first woman Labour MP in Ayrshire. Her services to the Labour Party were recognised by her being chosen as the Secretary of the Scottish Parliamentary Group. Having fulfilled her major ambition to become an MP, Clarice was then struck down by a serious illness shortly afterwards which stopped her ever attending the House of Commons. She continued to deal with her parliamentary correspondence faithfully until she was forced to resign her seat in September 1946. Ben and Clarice Shaw are remembered as one of the most successful and popular partnerships in the Scottish Labour Party. While Ben was shy and introverted, Clarice was a very gifted speaker and orator with the ability to command large audiences, despite her plump and matronly appearance. She was equally adept at handling the affairs of several prestigious governmental committees and commissions. She died on 27 October 1946 at 36 Titchfield Road, Troon, and was buried at Troon. At the by-election which followed a young recently demobbed Willie Ross was elected MP in her place. Now that’s another story altogether!
Source material :Helen Corr; Scottish Labour Leaders 1918-39
Electoral Reform The dangers of Balkanised politics
New Statesman Scotland -
If you're a Tory, should you take your problems to a Tory MP? That's the logic of electoral reform. Sandra Osborne thinks it is bad for democracy
In the debate about electoral reform, the focus has largely been on the issue of proportionality. It is assumed that people will reconnect with politics because representation will more fairly reflect voting. But we should not ignore the importance of the member/constituency link and the value of the tradition that an MP is the elected representative of all the people in his or her constituency.
In the debate about the list system used for the election of some MSPs, we are told that this is all about an extension of democracy - more choice forthe elector. Tories can choose to go to a Tory MSP; Labour supporters to a Labour MSP; nationalists to a nationalist. This analysis is about as robust as the view that the Scottish Parliament has delivered a new politics of consensus, eschewing the "ya! boo!" politics of Westminster. The truth is that we have a Scottish Parliament of entrenched party politics, with the Tories and the SNP, while they form the opposition, empowered by the system to "ya" and "boo" in turn.
I believe that democracy is diminished if we lose the tradition of the duly elected constituency member as the representative of all the electors of that constituency. It is an essential component of our democratic process and places a responsibility and discipline on the elected representative.
Not all things to all people I'm not suggesting that MPs should all become politically neutered so that they can live out some romantic role of being all things to all people.
There is plenty of scope for pursuing a vigorous party political role, but it is totally unprofessional for MPs to take party politics into their role as representative and advocate on behalf of individual constituents. Some people approach their MP on a matter they feel strongly about - foxhunting, abortion, immigration - in the vast majority of cases, the issues are personal to the individual and have nothing whatsoever to do with party affiliation or personal political views.
An important part of an MP's job is to take up people's concerns and advocate on their behalf as their democratically elected representative.That could mean supporting the case of a lifelong Tory voter who has failed to get fair treatment from a Labour controlled local authority. In reality, you are extremely unlikely to know who your constituent votes for, if he or she votes at all.
A democratic tradition The only bias an MP should be allowed is a bias towards those in greatest need and those least able to speak up for themselves. And the only likely area of conflict between an MP's legitimate political role and the role as representative to his or her constituents is if the MP's personal and political prejudices on issues such as race, gender, sexual orientation and religion are publicly known. That kind of public image would undermine the MP's credibility in the eyes of vulnerable constituents who might otherwise have sought sympathetic help or support.
The danger lurking in the "extended choice" argument currently in favour is that we are being asked to abandon a valuable democratic tradition and replace it with an ill-thought-out "Balkanisation" of political representation - Nat constituents go to a Nat representative; Tories to a Tory; Labour to Labour. The logical extension would see Muslims going to a Muslim MP; Catholics to a Catholic; Protestants to a Protestant. When some-one rings my office, my assistant does not ask: "Name, address and political affiliation?"
More important than giving people a choice of party representative to go to is the need to address how we achieve a political representation at Westminster and in the Scottish Parliament that reflects the whole of Scottish society: women and men; ethnic minorities; youth and experience; all social backgrounds. If we could only achieve that, we could greatly enrich politics instead of being encouraged down a separatist road.
I would plead with those who go along with this argument for "extended choice" to think again.
Represent all constituents It isn't just a recipe for inefficiency, waste and duplication. It is dangerous for democracy. I don't think it romantic or idealistic to affirm that it is a strength of our traditional democratic system that our elected representatives are there to represent all their constituents.
Representation and advocacy are among the hardest bits of the job, but there is nothing more satisfying than knowing that you have done your best on someone's behalf.
The Scottish Executive has now turned its attention to local government. It has set up working groups to consider a modernisation that would include electoral reform and Cabinet-style structures.
But the test of any modernisation agenda, whether at local or national level, will be the extent to which it maintains strong and direct links between elected representatives and all of the people they are elected to represent.
Fair enough ... but good enough?
The Pensions Bill was announced in the Queen's Speech as a key part of the government's programme A Future Fair For All. And although it is a Bill that fits the bill in many respects, there is a key area where it is lacking.
It fails to offer a fair future for the thousands of employees of companies which have gone into liquidation with under-funded pension schemes. These now face the prospect of being substantially deprived of the pensions they have paid into all their working lives.
Most people think their occupational pension is safe. After all, the Financial Services Authority, the National Association of Pension Funds and the Office of Pensions Advisory Service all recommend joining a pension scheme.
But as employees of United Engineering Forgings (UEF), Melville Dundas, Dexion, ASW, Kalamazoo, Ravenhead Glass, Blyth & Blyth, Lister Yarns and many more have discovered it is possible to work for 40 years, pay-in to a company pension scheme yet get nothing back, not even your contributions, upon retirement.
The 1995 Pensions Act attempted to direct what should happen to the assets of pension schemes in the case of insolvency. Existing pensioners get their pension in full, indexed against inflation. Employees get what is left, which often amounts to little or nothing. This seemed okay while annuity rates were over 10%, the stock market was booming and many pension funds were in surplus. Since 2000 the stock market has fallen and annuity rates plummeted to under 4%. This has resulted in pension disaster for thousands of employees whose employers have gone bust. Not only were these victims not warned of the risk – they were positively encouraged to rely on company pension schemes.
The government's proposed Pensions Bill will introduce a new Pension Protection Fund which will end the scandal of workers being denied their pensions built up over many years just because their company goes bust.
It will also strengthen pension protection for employees who find themselves transferred to a new employer to ensure firms can't use takeover as an excuse to scrap pension contributions. However that will only ensure a Future Fair for some – not all.
What about retrospective action or compensation for those who have been robbed of their guaranteed pensions. There is a strong case for this. The government has a responsibility because successive governments promoted and encouraged joining private pension schemes and allowed employers to make membership compulsory. There was no requirement to warn members of the dangers.
Tomorrow in Glasgow a Pensions Summit will be held to call for government action.
Dr Ros Altmann will outline her proposals for a compensation scheme. An acknowledged expert on pension issues, she was an academic before working in the city and has been assisting the Number 10 Policy Unit on pensions.
Malcolm Wicks and other Department of Work and Pensions Ministers and officials have been meeting with pension scheme members whose schemes have been, or are being wound up and with MPs to discuss proposed solutions. They have said they will consider any constructive proposals. Ros Altmann will contend at the summit that the government can and should put this situation right. The summit is part of an continuing campaign which will not go away. I hope the government is listening.
Compensation would be a drop in the taxpayers ocean compared to the £14 billion tax relief which goes annually to people contributing to pensions. The cost of compensating those affected would probably only be £100m a year if agreed now and not all of that right away. If this was added to the benefits already in place in the government's Pensions Bill it would go a long way to restoring confidence in the UK pension system as well as putting right an indefensible injustice for these hard working and diligent people. Now that really would constitute “a fairer future for all”.
Iraq Visit
The All Party Foreign Affairs Select Committee, of which Sandra Osborne is a member, went to Iraq as part of their current inquiry into the War on Terror.
They had meetings with President Talibani, Prime Minister Ja’afari, Foreign Minister Zebari, US Ambassador Khalilzad, the Commander of the Multi National Force in Iraq - General Casey, Basra Chief of Police General Hassan Swadh. They also met Religious and Tribal leaders in Basra, representatives of Political Parties, and representatives of Non Governmental Organisations as well as UK Embassy Officials and representatives of the UK Armed Forces.The Committee visited Baghdad, Basra and the Al-Rustimayah Military Training Academy.
The Journey
“We had been warned that the helicopter would descend quickly and steeply to avoid being a target - and it did. It was almost literally with heart in mouth we set foot in Baghdad to see for ourselves what it was like on the ground.
We had travelled to Baghdad from Kuwait in a Hercules jet and then on to the International Zone by helicopter for security reasons. This is where the British Embassy is located.
The Multi National Force in Iraq
The Multi National Force in Iraq is mandated by the UN Security Council resolutions 1511 and 1546 which authorized a multi national force under unified command to take all necessary measures to contribute to the maintenance of security and stability in Iraq. The UN also agreed the handover of sovereignty to the interim Iraqi Government and endorsed the timetable for the political transition to a constitutionally elected Government by 31st December 2005. It also set out the future status of the Multi National Force and its relationship with the Iraqi Government.
The mandate was to be reviewed upon completion of the political process in December 2005 or could be terminated early at the request of the Iraqi Government. On 8th November 2005 the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1637 which extended the mandate of the Multi National Force, at the request of the Iraqi Government, until 31st December 2006. As with the original mandate this extension can be reviewed at the request of the Iraqi Government and can be terminated prior to that date if so requested.
The Multi National Force is made up of 26 countries and is led by US General Casey. The UK retains Divisional Command for the South East provinces and retains a presence in Baghdad. There are now less than 10,000 UK personnel deployed in Iraq.
Calls for the British Government to withdraw our forces have been made in the UK ever since the conclusion of major combat operations on 1st May 2003. The evidence I saw and heard brought me to the clear conclusion that an immediate withdrawal would be both irresponsible and impractical. Very few people I spoke to wanted this and many felt it would lead to a Civil War. There is scope to take troops out of parts of the more stable provinces in the south of the country in the near future and for more withdrawals as the security position allows.
It is entirely different in the Baghdad area. Whatever any of us feel about the decision to go to war I believe it would be morally wrong to leave the Iraqi people in the lurch before they are ready. Withdrawal will be a process based on the level of threat and the capacity of local and national government to oversee the transition from multi national forces to Iraqi forces. This process should relate to events on the ground in Iraq and the judgement of the Iraqi Government and not be an arbitrary timetable set as a knee jerk reaction from abroad.
The elections for the Government of Iraq held last December had a turn out of 75% and were reasonably fair with no evidence of widespread or systematic fraud or abuse. When I met a group of young Iraqi soldiers they were proud to show me the ink on their finger to show they had voted. Attention is now focussed on the formation of the first fully constitutionally mandated long term Government.
The Challenges
There are three main challenges in Iraq: 1. Sectarianism between Shia and Sunni; 2. Terror and insurgency; 3. Services and rebuilding the economy
1. Sectarianism
It is important to get the Sunnis involved in the political process. Now that the election is over all parties are talking about the importance of a government of national unity – a coalition involving Kurds, Shias, Sunnis, and the cross sectarian groups. Of course perceptions of what constitutes a government of national unity vary.
Throughout the visit, I gained the impression that many of the Shias who are in the majority see this as an opportunity to get their own back for years of oppression under Saddam. The issues under discussion include the nature of federalism which could either maintain Iraq as a single country or take it along the road to fragmentation on sectarian lines.
There is also a de-Ba’athification process which in a way is an attempt at reconciliation following the tyranny of Saddam’s Ba’ath Party. A distinction is made between the hierarchy and criminal elements of the party on the one hand and the rank and file former members on the other. In the case of those former rank and file Ba’ath Party members, a path for reintegration is needed for those who ‘had no choice’ but to be members of the party.
2. Terrorism and Insurgency
In many ways the post war effort is mirroring the peace process in Northern Ireland where attempts are being made to move from ‘violence with no politics’ to ‘violence with politics’ and finally on to ‘politics with no violence’. There are elements of the Saddamists who sought to disrupt the recent democratic elections. There is also no question that al Qaeda in Iraq under al-Zarqawi is still seeking to establish Iraq as a centre for violent Islamist revolution.
As a committee we have taken evidence from experts all of whom have suggested that the war in Iraq has served as a recruiting sergeant for insurgents and terrorists. In the Baghdad area suicide bombings, car bombs and, a recent innovation, highly deadly and sophisticated explosive devices which are thought to originate in Iran, are a regular occurrence.
While we were in Baghdad we could hear explosions nearby. The International Zone contains most government buildings as well as UK and US Embassies and is about the size of Glasgow City Centre. Obviously, security is tight. Thousands of Iraqis live
or work there – many entering on a daily basis through checkpoints.
One of the most moving conversations I had was with two Iraqis who work in the British Embassy. They cannot tell family or friends or neighbours where they work and have to vary their route on a daily basis. They told me they had been cheering in the streets on the day Saddam was toppled but now there is widespread disillusionment due to the security situation.
People are constantly in fear of their lives. They only have access to electricity 2 hours a day and their children receive only a few hours of education a day. Everyday they risk their lives going through the check points to work where suicide bombings are frequent.
3. Services and the Economy
The US has spent billions of dollars on reconstruction and there has been massive assistance from the international community. But 20-30% of that is spent on security and the level of corruption is such that there does not appear to be a lot to show for the level of investment.
Efforts are being made to build electricity generating capacity to fix oil infrastructure and to build railways, roads, bridges and airports. About 25% of services have been decentralised to local government including job creation and smaller projects. It is a real bone of contention that the US Government is awarding contracts to US companies rather than local Iraqi ones.
Attempts are being made to involve other countries in a multilateral approach to reconstruction. What can’t be overstated is the importance of the outcome of the current attempts at government formation. The interim government was Shia dominated which has not helped to promote security. If they do not get it right this time and find a way to include the main political factions in government, the Sunnis will feel alienated and terrorist activity will increase. This year is therefore decisive.
An important issue is promotion of the Rule of Law. Resources have been put into building capacity to support the new democracy. Police training has so far had mixed results. The police are extensively infiltrated by militia.
In relation to the army we visited a Military Training Academy for officers where the British Army is providing training but gradually taking a back seat and allowing Iraqis to train their own officers. However, having spoken to trainees, I discovered that they feel the hierarchy still have a Saddamist mentality and fear a British withdrawal would see them revert to type.
This was a point made generally whenever we had the chance to speak to the ordinary Iraqis. I have the strong impression that certain elements of the military and political establishment have no real concept of democracy and look forward to holding the reins of power for their own ends rather than for the good of all the people. A great weight of responsibility lies with those who do want to wield power for the good of all the people of Iraq.
The reality is that the reconstruction process and the building of democratic institutions will take many years in a country where people have been cowed and frightened for so long that many are easily led and manipulated.
Embassy Staff and Service Men and Women
The US Embassy in Baghdad is located in the former Palace of Saddam Hussein - a spectacular and ornate building. We met there with General Casey, Head of Coalition Forces.
The British Ambassador’s residence is reputed to be the former home of one of Saddam’s mistresses but today is an austere cold building located next door to the US Ambassador’s residence which is regularly shelled.
Our visit was primarily concerned with the Foreign Affairs Committee’s investigation into the War on Terror and therefore with the political aspects of the situation in Iraq, but we did receive briefings from the armed forces and met service men and women.
We were only too well aware of the danger they face daily, a danger confirmed with the death of British soldiers taking UK losses to over the 100.
The immense contribution made by British Embassy staff is not often recognised. In Iraq we have our biggest embassy staffing contingent in the Middle East. They serve for a year at a time. By virtue of the fact they cannot bring their families, they have the youngest age profile of all embassies.
Immediately after the war they were situated in the basement of a multi story car park in Baghdad, sleeping in porta-cabins with no facilities. It sums up their spirit that they named this - tongue in cheek - ‘Ocean Cliffs’. Although they are now in better accommodation which is well fortified they still risk their lives daily - as I found out when we travelled to Basra.
Basra
In Basra there is no International Zone and the British Embassy has only a relatively small compound which had been under attack 3 times in the week before we came. Because of this, it was essential that we wore body armour at all times.
We met with officials from the UK Department for International Development (DFID). It is involved in various programmes promoting social and economic cohesion and stability. DFID is working with non governmental organisations to encourage participation. However, there was no civic society under Saddam to build on so they have to start from scratch.
The Political Participation Fund aims to increase opportunities for political representation and participation by all Iraqis, particularly women, poor, marginalised and vulnerable citizens. I had the opportunity to discuss with DFID Civil Servants and Embassy Staff a project they are running to bring fresh water to one of the poorest communities in Basra. This is in an area where the Marsh Arabs who were displaced from their lands after thousands of years of habitation when Saddam drained the marshes now live.
Women’s Rights
It was a great pleasure to meet with the new Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) including a meeting with Dr Rajaa Khuza’l- Hilla, the President of the National Council for Women.
The new constitution has recognised women’s rights in relation to equal opportunities, it prohibits tribal customs that contravene women’s human rights, it makes reference to domestic violence following lobbying by Iraqi women’s groups and it guarantees 25% female representation in Parliament.
However, as in many other countries, Women’s Rights remain a sensitive issue. Reports continue to emerge of abuse of or social stigma attached to victims of rape or resistance to forced marriage. I was told of one example in the Basra area where a woman was recently forced to marry her rapist.
The UK Government is providing funding to support women, including projects in isolated rural areas, which address concerns such as health care, child development, women’s rights, education and economic development.
Back in the UK
Back in the UK, the Foreign Affairs Select Committee will continue to examine the War on Terror but our deliberations will be better informed and more insightful for having been to Iraq and having seen the situation for ourselves.”
More Women MPs-“If not now, when?”
When I was invited to present the Ayr Gold Cup soon after becoming the first ever woman MP for Ayr in 1997, I stood there thanks to a woman called Catherine Taylor who came to Ayr Racecourse almost 100 years earlier. She wasn’t invited to present the Gold Cup. This cinema cashier from the Gorbals came to Ayr in the dead of night in 1913 and burnt the Racecourse grandstand to the ground as part of the Scottish Suffragette Campaign. The damage was £300,000 in today’s money and 5 years later a Bill was passed giving women over 30 the vote and the right to stand for Parliament.
Every advance for women has had to be fought for by women themselves and without sustained pressure and resistance these advances are quickly eroded and lost.
Between 1918 and 1997 only 168 women had been elected to the House of Commons (and 4,000 men). In the 1992 to 1997 Parliament the number of women reached an all time high – 62 out of 659. More than half of them were Labour. But in Scotland only 3 Labour women were elected. Even in the so-called ‘breakthrough’ in 1997 only 9 Labour women were elected in Scotland (102 in the UK - 18%). The advance in 1997 was made thanks to positive action which saw 5 Scottish Constituency Labour Parties selecting from all women shortlists – Ayr, Edinburgh Pentlands, Stirling, Aberdeen South and Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East. In 2001 all five MPs were re-elected.
Following the positive action of All Women Shortlists in Wales, the number of Welsh Labour women MPs has doubled from 4 in 1997 to 8 today. However, there was no more positive action in Scotland and with all women shortlists in abeyance the number of Labour women MPs in Scotland has dropped from nine in 1997 to seven today.
The setting up of the Scottish Parliament saw a high proportion of women elected in both 1999 and 2003 elections – putting Westminster to shame. However, the latest elections have resulted in the Scottish Parliament slipping from fourth to 13th place in world league tables on women in parliament. Women have taken just 43 out of 129 seats in Holyrood, 33.3 per cent, compared with 39.5 per cent in the 2003 elections.
Women make up 50% of the 46 strong Labour Group but only 25% of the 47 SNP members. Labour’s strong showing is thanks to the decision to twin seats back in 1999.
Why do numbers matter? Research has shown that having high numbers of women in the parliament changes the focus of the traditional political agenda and the way politics is carried out.
Niki Kandirikirira, Director of the women’s oganisation Engender, said:
“A reduction in women MSPs brings with it the threat of a reduced focus on issues that concern a large proportion of the population: equal pay, The cost of caring, violence against women and children, and poverty.”
In 2004 the Electoral Commission published research confirming that women candidates are an electoral advantage. The report shows that overall women are as likely to turn out to vote in elections as men, but that they tend to be turned off by male-dominated Westminster politics.
However, this report also demonstrates that the presence of women candidates significantly increases women's turn out and engagement. In seats with a woman candidate, women voters are more likely to turn out than men (a gender gap of four percentage points). Turn out among men is unaffected by the sex of the candidate.
In constituencies with a woman MP, women voters are much more likely to believe that ‘government benefits people like me’.
Women voters are more likely to be motivated to work and campaign for a woman candidate than for a male candidate.
The report recommends that removing the existing barriers to women being selected and standing for elected office is an important priority.
The challenge to the parties is clear – whilst the Labour Party continue to use all-women shortlists in at least half the vacant Labour or winnable seats, the record of the Liberal Democrats, the Conservatives and the SNP on selecting women for winnable seats is poor. You would have to add to that list of shame, Labour in Scotland. In 2005 there was a case for setting aside positive action since the Scottish Westminster boundaries had been redrawn reducing the number of MPs from 72 to 59. Clearly there were more sitting MPs than available seats to fill. However, the same argument was used again in 2007 for the new Local Council Elections. With STV and multi-member wards there would be far fewer Labour Councillors elected and so this was not the right time to bring in quotas for women.
We have recently completed reselection of MPs for the Westminster election. Where Labour MPs are standing down, Glasgow Central has selected sitting MP Mohammad Sarwar’s son and there is an open selection to replace Rosemary McKenna in Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East. We may get a woman candidate in Lib Dem held East Dunbartonshire and we also have a vacancy to fill in Airdrie and Shotts where John Reid is standing down. With no clear mechanism or commitment in place we will be lucky to see the number of Labour women MPs in Scotland stay at the current level. There is no inevitability that progress to equality will continue without struggle and positive action. Once all-women shortlists are taken out of the equation, there is no evidence at all that the party culture has shifted significantly, and as it stands, the legislation allowing all women short lists is time limited with a sunset clause of 2015.
I will always remember the words of the Ayr Labour stalwart, the late Jean Prentice at a hustings meeting back in 1997. After some of the panel prevaricated on how and when to achieve equal representation for women, she put her question in four words: “If not now, when?”
Sandra Osborne MP
Saga Magazine December 2006 "Pensions Justice"
Four years ago I was appalled to learn that one of the local companies in my constituency, United Engineering Forgings, had gone into administration with a possible loss of over 1200 jobs in the UK.
Fortunately the local site was taken over and most of the jobs saved. So imagine my utter disbelief when it became clear a short time later, that the pension fund was grossly underfunded and, even though they had paid into the fund all of their working lives to provide for a secure retirement, the workforce would receive nothing like their expected pension on retirement. In contributing from their wages to the occupational pension fund the employees were following Government advice and indeed in many cases it was part of their employment contract to do so.
Despite the disbelief at what had happened it did not occur to us to begin with that what the company had done was within the law. The UEF workforce were facing, in common with thousands of others, one of the most scandalous injustices in a generation – an injustice that would give rise to a campaign requiring every ounce of energy of those affected and their representatives- a campaign which continues to this day.
As the local MP I set about raising the issue in the Commons and held a debate which was answered by the then Pensions Minister, Ian McCartney. I tabled an Early Day Motion which attracted well over a hundred signatures and the first of numerous Pensions Summits were held in the House of Commons to bring the crisis to the attention of more MPs.
Meanwhile, demonstrations, marches and vigils were held involving those who had lost their pensions and the trade unions who represented them. In the early stages of the campaign it was very difficult to get media coverage even though some of the individual tragedies were heartbreaking. There was a palpable sense of justified anger and distress at a loss that was totally beyond the control of people who had planned for their retirement and deserved the security they had paid towards. It amounted to theft.
There was plenty of sympathy for the plight of the workforce but no one was prepared to accept responsibility and that is the fundamental problem we still face today.
The Government has introduced the Pension Protection Fund to ensure that people are never again put in this position after a lifetime of saving. But that should have been done years earlier in line with European Insolvency Directives and those who lost their pensions in the interim have suffered as a result.
The Government eventually did respond by bringing in the Financial Assistance Scheme but stressed it was in recognition of the difficult circumstances the losses had caused and did not amount to compensation. The FAS is in any case inadequate and does not meet the tests of fairness, efficiency or justice. As it stands many people will receive nothing even though they contributed to their schemes for many years. I have argued that it needs to be looked at again.
I welcome the £2.6 billion of public money the Government has announced to fund the FAS but the time has come to resolve this problem once and for all. The suffering must not be allowed to continue and one of the best ways to restore confidence in pensions would be to restore in total the lost pensions. It is a question of natural justice which I believe has widespread public support.
I fully support Saga’s call for immediate action to accelerate assistance payments to all those affected scheme members over the age of 65. Furthermore, this should be followed by the replacement of the limited scheme with one which makes full restoration to all affected members of their accrued entitlements under their pension schemes.
I have no doubt that justice will eventually prevail for these hard working people and in the meantime the campaign continues.
The Good Economy and the Good Society
The Chamber of Commerce is constantly changing to ensure that it can be the voice of local business in a changing Ayrshire. Part of that change is the growing recognition that the good economy and the good society go together. I want to tell you a bit about the good economic record of this Government which is the basis of building a better society.
From day one we have emphasised the importance of stability in the economy starting with independence for the Bank of England. The UK continues to experience an unprecedented period of growth and stability despite global challenges. Interest rates remain low by historic standards at 5%; mortgage rates have been at their lowest since the 1950s and we have sustained the longest period of low inflation since the 1960s. We have the highest employment levels with 2.5 million more jobs in the economy than 1997.
The recent OECD economic survey ranked the UK first for all measures of economic stability and our GDP per capita in now ranked second in the G7 overtaking Germany and France.
This entrenched macroeconomic stability, coupled with the investment in making business competitive by increasing skills levels and supporting investment in R&D. means that Britain is well placed to take a leading role in the global economy.
However, the reality of globalisation has hit home over the last year at a local, national and international level. People are now more aware than ever about climate change, outsourcing of jobs, migration of labour, security of energy supply, the emerging economies of south and east Asia, international terrorism and the challenge to Make Poverty History.
It is said that all politics is local but if we are to continue to build a successful economy for our own people we must think from a global perspective. For example, if all UK fossil fuel burning stopped tomorrow, in less than 13 months China would have made it up by economic growth. So we must make decisions on measures to tackle climate change with regard to the wider global context.
Although people are more aware than ever about globalisation they still feel they are losing out. Over a million jobs have been lost from the US, Europe and Japan to the emerging economies, whilst enlargement of the EU has brought workers in mainly from Poland. As a result the Government has had to put conditions on the numbers of Romanians and Bulgarians who can work here when they join the European Union. But in the long term protectionism is not the answer. Asia will not be able to compete on the basis of low pay in the long term. That is why India is producing four million graduates a year.
But I do believe in intervention. The forces of globalisation cannot be tackled with a laissez faire approach which leaves people to sink or swim. And we have a long way to go. We have half the business start up rates of the US and a third of our adults still do not have qualifications. So we must continue to invest in education, research and development, and help those who need to adapt to change and equip our young people for the future.
We in Ayrshire have to face this massive change on the back of communities devastated by the decline of heavy industry and mining. We have also lost jobs to low wage countries. Even so we have reason to be optimistic when we look at the development of the Aerospace industry, developments in Higher Education locally and the exciting plans for the Burns Homecoming as part of the tourist strategy.
Violence against women
Sending the right message to society In the debate about whether Mike Tyson should be allowed into the UK the Home Secretary does not appear to have taken account of the most importantissue. It is not just a question of whether he represents a threat to the public as an individual. After all, he'll be under far too much scrutiny toget the chance. The really important issue is that as a public figure convicted of rape he has a particular role. The significance of this was demonstrated by the fact that his management had direct access to the Home Secretary to plead his case.
The powerful images of public figures and the strong messages they send are what sets them apart. It is not a matter of degree - whether Sean Connery has made an ill judged remark, or Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist. Unfortunately both are common place but public figures are symbols for the kind of society we are and provide a channel for the messages we put across. The same can be said of Jack Straw as Home Secretary.
Violence against women - whether physical, mental or sexual is a crime. The fact that this needs to be repeated says it all.
Shameful history It was not so very long ago that the abuse of women was sanctioned in statute and law. A man could beat his wife with a stick as long as it was nothicker than his thumb. It is little over a decade ago that, for the first time, a man in Scotland was taken to court for raping his wife.
The institutions of the state and religion have a long and shameful history of shoring up the ability of men to rule in society and in the home even if they chose to do so by force and this was underpinned by a conspiracy of silence and the communal condemnation and deprecation of any woman who had the audacity to protest.
In some communities there was a kind of ' honour among thieves' - the more upright male members of the community would take in hand those who offended sensitivities too often by conducting their abuse in public but otherwise women were left to make their bed and lie in it.
Of course women are not, and never have been, weak pathetic creatures. They developed mechanisms to cope and sought solace in each other, because they certainly got no help from the state. However, systematic beatings and rapeswere the reality of life for far too many women.So what has changed?
A great deal has changed As a matter of fact a great deal has changed although the rapes and beatings continue. Women no longer just have to take it and abusers are more often condemned. Firstly, change came about by the efforts of women themselves.
The early feminists started the ball rolling by challenging male property rights and fighting for the vote, but in the 1970s there emerged a challengeto male power in the form of violence against women which saw refuges develop all over the country, pressure on the police and the courts to treat domestic violence and rape as serious crimes and legislation on equal rights for women.
Margaret Thatcher eventually told us ' the battle for women's rights has largely been won'. For a while it seemed that the current younger generation of women actually believed it - if they did they were soon to know better.
And all that time the same old messages were churned out -" she deserved it, they enjoy it, its the drink that causes it, the working class is to blame,men can't control their sex drive". Last week I even heard of a male politician of the so called left who said ' If she goes to a hotel room with a guy at two o'clock in the morning what does she expect!' And who said attitudes have changed! But changing attitudes is what its all about.
A vital lifeline During the 1980s Labour Councils started to provide resources for Women's Aid and Rape Crisis groups. Provision was patchy and it was always a struggle ( it still is) but at least there was somewhere women and children could go. The lifeline was vital but in some ways it was even more important that the statement was being made to abusive men - it's not OK . The first signs of public condemnation began. More often the women who were involved in the self help groups were pilloried themselves as men haters but we took that as a sign of success.
When we reached the 1990s there was a major breakthrough - the local authorities , the police, even, dare I say it, the Tory Government , startedto take violence against women up themselves. running public education campaigns and reviewing their policies. The Zero Tolerance campaign challenged unequivocally the myths and stereotypes and clearly made the link between the different forms of abuse - violence against women whetherphysical, mental or sexual was wrong either in the home or outside it.
The virulent opposition to the campaign was another sign of success but this time the institutions of the state were backing it. Both the Labour Government and the Labour led Scottish Executive have prioritised the issue and we have seen real progress albeit there is still a long way to go.
A mainstream issue Yes, violence against women is at last high on the political agenda so much so that it is now called a mainstream issue. It is a very welcome development but it does have one major drawback - all of a sudden everyone is an expert and feels qualified to jump on the bandwagon making ill informed remarks. As I have said earlier, it was ever so, but the dangerous part of it is when the ' powers that be' stop listening to the people who know - the abused women themselves.
I have seen the results of the ill informed comments. When Childline came into existence it brought the whole issue of child sexual abuse to the public attention and as a result the nature and extent of the problem was called into question. It was another case of the truth hurting.
I was at that time involved in a self help group for women who had been sexually abused as children. I can still visualise the tangible pain and distress caused when some big mouth politician, judge or public figure made a stupid comment. What of those women who have never told anyone that they have been raped.
Some women take twenty or thirty years to disclose that they have been raped and seek support. It has taken so long to get a message across that can encourage women surviving in a lonely and painful vacuum to come forward and we must have adequate resources in place to help when they do.
Sending the wrong message But if this is not backed by those in positions of responsibility taking every opportunity to send a message that violence against women is totallyunacceptable it is not only patronising, it is quite literally dangerous.
To use discretion to allow a convicted rapist to come to Scotland when there was an option to refuse entry is not a neutral dispassionate decision - it is to favour the abuse of power over justice for those who have survived abuse. Just as before, it is sanctioning violence against women in the public arena and sending out entirely the wrong message.