Those who thought the dark days following the election defeats in 2010 and ’15 were as bad as it gets must be gobsmacked at how wrong they were.

Britain stands on the brink of leaving the EU with a new Prime minister set to negotiate Brexit following the disastrous referendum. It was a referendum that many feel should never have happened and few thought would result in us leaving. The in campaign clearly won the economic argument but failed to successfully respond to some of the outrageous immigration claims made by the out campaign.  Some it seems were completely fooled by claims for example that £350 million would be channelled straight into the NHS, only to see the reality just hours after the votes were counted.

Despite many of the predictions made by the remain campaign being proven; the pound at its lowest point for decades and the property funds being suspended for example, those in favour of leaving assumed these predictions were scare mongering. Cameron quit shortly afterwards in spite of his repeated promises to see it through and several high profile out Tories disappeared quickly too.

This should have given the Labour party  the opportunity to unite and challenge strongly. What followed has left the party in real danger of splitting, which of course would be an absolute disaster.

When Jeremy Corbyn was elected with a massive mandate there was new hope that a change was coming. There was real optimism that a nicer, kinder politics would ensue. In a letter sent to members during her deputy leadership bid, Angela Eagle wrote “I would happily serve under anyone the members choose to be our leader because I respect the wisdom of our members, supporters and affiliates and our party’s process of electing a new leadership team”. She even went so far as to add “talk of coups and remarks about not serving in a shadow cabinet needs to stop”.

Miss Eagle challenged the leadership after a mass exodus from the shadow cabinet. There have been reports for some time that sections of the Labour benches intended to over throw their leader. It is suggested that they intended to challenge him if he lost the Oldham by-election (he didn’t), they then planned a coup if he lost the London Mayoral race (he didn’t) and again if Labour suffered huge losses in local elections (they didn’t). Brexit then was pinned firmly on Corbyn and Hillary Benn started the chain of events by getting himself sacked in the middle of the night. The next day dozens of shadow ministers quit forcing a vote of no confidence which resulted in a massive defeat for the leader. Miss Eagle has since decided to step down from the leadership election, leaving Owen Smith as the sole challenger.

Tom Watson, deputy leader, said in a letter to members when he was chasing the job “I want members and supporters at the heart of an inclusive party.

I will drive culture change through this party from the bottom-up. I want a digital revolution to enhance policy making and improve our campaigns. I want local parties to come up with policy solutions to problems in their own areas. You should have a say in choosing the debates we hold in Westminster on 'opposition days’, for example".

It is claimed that Mr Watson orchestrated the coup to remove Corbyn from the safety of Glastonbury and many of his colleagues have tried to reclaim the party from its members, often being rather rude and derogatory about them and their opinions. Far from nicer, kinder politics the whole fiasco has descended into horrible hate filled slanging matches with neither side willing to back down.

The Labour membership has risen to over 600,000 since the coup began (although it is unclear whether the bulk of those support Corbyn) compared to only around 150,000 members in the Conservative party. What is clear is that many of those 600,000 grass roots members that were promised a say in the future of the party, feel that the political elite have conned them. The party itself actually tried to ban Corbyn from automatically making the ballot for leadership. When that failed the NEC decided to charge those members that originally joined for £3, a fee of £25 to vote in the election. That is not a challenge, it is a mutiny. When the country is crying out for an authentic, decent, fit and proper opposition they have watched a secret ballot fail to stop him defending himself. In spite of the cripplingly inhibitive fee, 180,000 Labour supporters have applied to pay it.  The trade unions appear to still support the leader and he is on the ballot (for now- legal challenge pending) but can he hang on? While the PLP have treated the electorate with utter contempt, it does appear that there are stories of bullying and poor leadership from Corbyn. Surely, in a democratic system we can be proud of, Corbyn must be allowed to defend his leadership. If the MPs are allowed to over-ride the wishes of the members and pick their own leader, there is little point in being a member. Of course, the counter argument to that is that we elect our MPs to make decisions on our behalf. 
What has left the members mystified is the lack of any real evidence to support Corbyns failure. He has undoubtedly increased the membership massively and in recent days the party coffers have swelled as well. He has enjoyed successes in opposition, forcing u-turns on several government policies. He has changed the style of debate in parliament and has refused to throw away his beliefs in the name of achieving power. MP's have lined up to tell us that he can't win an election but all the evidence I have just mentioned above suggests the opposite.
Politicians are expected to present a decent argument and persuade the public to think their way; now is their chance. I had hoped that candidates other than the unimpressive Miss Eagle would decide to stand and that at least one of them was a credible person from the left of the party. Andy Burnham would make an authentic candidate but seems determined to be Mayor of Manchester. Eagle crash landed and while Owen Smith has some interesting ideas and seems relatively charming, I'm still not sure he can get enough votes to oust Corbyn.

Teresa May says she will not rush a general election, suggesting she will wait until 2020. This must be music to the ears of the Labour MPs as going to the country now would be an absolute massacre.

Those men and women we elected as our members of parliament have a responsibility to form a credible argument that can get us elected to government. With Britain now free from the chains that the EU held over employment law and human rights, a Labour government is the only safety net available for many. There are many shared interests that Labour can and should unite on. Obviously, the majority of Labour supporters agree that we cannot be simply a party of protest or principle but it is vital that it does not throw away its principles entirely to gain that power.
The political tricks of parliamentary procedure and the dastardly antics of the NEC will undoubtedly leave a nasty taste in the mouth of many Labour members and supporters. The charge to the left from members is not a coincidence the parliamentary party can ignore. I wrote after the general election defeat that the mood among normal people was shifting. There is real anger at what they see as the establishment, which really means the rich and powerful (MPs included). Whether Jeremy Corbyn wins another victory or not that shift isn't going to stop. Owen Smith does not have the authenticity that a life long rebel and protestor such as Corbyn has, so whichever one wins I see another messy and costly leadership election coming before the general election. I and many others have said it before and will continue to say that one of the main reasons for these problems is the lack of opportunity in the party for normal working class people.
The disharmony within the party has reached such a level that branch meetings have been cancelled amid safety fears and MPs have stopped replying to their constituents, apparently.  UKIP, the Greens, and the Lib Dems must all be terribly excited at the number of potential new members they can target if those 600,000 activists turn their back on the party.

There is now just 10 days to go until the EU referendum decides the fate of the UK with the polls neck and neck, but it is other battles in Europe that are stealing all the headlines for all the wrong reasons.

Today, Russia were given a suspended disqualification from the FIFA European Championships following disgraceful scenes after England’s opening game in the tournament.

Despite facing expulsion from the competition and a 150euro fine, there is little contrition from the Russians. Even their striker, Artem  Dzyuba who plays for Zenit St. Petersburg, accused the British media of having the impression that England supporters are angels who just behave themselves. He added “you have to be objective, there is 50-50 in every conflict. I don’t see that Russia’s fans are the only ones at fault”.

Dzyuba has a point, there were some ugly scenes involving English fans before the game reminiscent of days gone by when so called English fans brought shame on us in the 70’s and 80’s.

 While it appears the incidents involving the English before the game were isolated the reputation of English football is once again being dragged through the mud. More worrying though, is the apparent pride some Russian commentators seem to have in the skills and viciousness of their fans. Violent clashes during Russian domestic games are fairly commonplace and footage of the riots regularly end up on social media sites. In fairness to the Russian football authorities, their Union have expressed regret about the behaviour of their fans, accepting that the suspended expulsion is right however other senior officials are quoted as calling the hooligans “real men”.

One Russian MP, Igor Lebedev said “I don’t see anything terrible about fans fighting, quite the opposite- the guys did well. Keep it up”. He also claimed that the lads had defended the honour of their country. A Russian fan from Moskow, said proudly “this shows who is most important among hooligans”. He went as far as to say that Russian thugs are younger, fitter and more sober than their English counterparts.

Andrei Malosalov, co-founder of the Russian fans union said “now many people are boxers or into martial arts, and Russian hooligans often follow a very healthy way of life, avoiding alcohol which used to be part of the subculture”. Astonishingly he told the BBC that the students have outgrown their masters.

It appears that the Russian’s involved see this mindless violence as a sport. It is not a sport. It is cowardice and stupid and there is no place for it in football stadia or in society. FIFA must adopt a zero tolerance approach, not only expelling Russia (and any other country )but coming down heavily on domestic clubs whose supporters riot. Forcing clubs to play behind closed doors would be a way to ensure safety of the players and would also hit the pockets of the clubs until the regulating bodies take the matter seriously.

It would be wrong to suggest that only Russia are responsible for the terrifying scenes this week, but with the 2018 World Cup being held in Russia it is particularly important that the behaviour is stamped out quickly. If FIFA wants to drag its own reputation out of the gutter following recent corruption charges, it must be much more transparent and responsible when deciding who hosts the tournament and should consider suitability of grounds, facilities, security and fans rather than simply taking account of who can fill the fattest brown envelope. With security in France supposedly being stepped up amid terrorist atrocities around the world, it is extremely alarming that Russian fans were able to take fireworks into the ground for the England game. It would be unwise to level all the criticism at French authorities though as they have limited resources and much of their time and attention was spent dealing with the hooligans. Would those proud violent men who think they defended the honour of their country be as proud if it meant that a bomb was able to pass through security or a machine gun toting maniac entered the packed ground? It is a football tournament for football fans. The fans around the world should be allowed to enjoy the spectacle in peace and safety. Anyone who doesn’t want to watch the football should stay home and anyone found guilty of violence at a match should be banned for life as well as face a spell in prison. We do not want to go back to the bad old days where real supporters are scared to take their kids to games.

"The Tories do not have a track record of prioritising the people of the North"

With only weeks to go until the EU referendum much of the debate still revolves around either the economy or immigration. I wanted to know what the effect would be not only on the country but on me personally as a man living in in Yorkshire. I asked Linda McAvan, MEP for the area whether she thought that a university city such as Sheffield, who’s economy depends largely on our tens of thousands of students,  would be less attractive to foreign students from both inside and outside the EU should we decide to leave.

She says “Visa free travel and the right to live, work and study in another EU country makes studying in the UK significantly easier for EU students.  Students, including UK students, can participate in study abroad programmes like Erasmus, Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs, and Erasmus + all of which receive maintenance to help cover living costs.  Currently, EU students are treated as ‘home students’ meaning they pay the same fees as their UK contemporaries.  Brexit could change the status of EU/ European Economic Area (EEA) students to that of international students. Students from non EU/ EEA countries pay significantly higher to attend university in the UK.   

 EU membership has also provided access to considerable funding streams such as the Horizon 2020 fund which provides the UK with £8.5bn for research and development. Much of this money goes into University research programmes.  Access to such funding assists in the hiring of the best and most skilled academics from across the European Union. This collectively has a substantial impact on the quality of teaching and placement opportunities for students. Better learning opportunities enhance the student experience and contribute to the quality of degree programmes.   

EU students contribute £3.7bn to the UK economy. If fewer EU students started coming to the UK to study due to visa and finance issues such as the rising cost of fees, student numbers will reduce, this will have a knock on consequence on staffing levels as Universities will have less money. Less resources will be put into degrees and universities would have difficulty attracting the best staff to teach courses.  This would leave the UK trying to compete for EU and international students.

It is worth pointing out that in the event of a Brexit the UK could join the EEA just like Norway or Switzerland which would give us access to the EU single market. This however would require the UK to agree to the free movement of people, pay a contribution to the EU budget, and require adherence to EU rules and regulations without consultation or having a seat at the negotiating table”.

My second question was whether the North of England will suffer more than the South in the event of an out vote.

She told me “Economic differences already exist between the North and the South. Tory policies in the 80s and 90’s had a devastating economic impact on areas like South Yorkshire. EU investment through the programmes such as Objective 1&2, the European Regional Development Fund, and European Structural Fund put money back into the region. If Brexit happens, it will do so under a conservative government. The Tories do not have a track record of prioritising the people of the North”.

I asked Linda if she thought immigration was as big an issue as we are led to believe or is the real issue that we don’t have enough hospitals, schools or houses being built making immigrants simply an easy target. She said “The policies of the current government and the previous coalition government did not do enough to support the development of schools, hospitals and houses. The Affordable Housing Bill put forward by the Tories has done nothing to alleviate the housing crisis. In fact, home ownership has fallen in the past 6 years and rents have sky rocketed. Other EU countries have much higher EU migration.  Norway, for example, has higher EU migration than the UK in terms of proportion of their population. Unfortunately, Immigrants are always an easy target but lack of coherent policies from the government is at the root of these issues.

My conclusion from talking to Linda and previously her colleague Richard Corbett, is that locally, the people of cities like Sheffield will undoubtedly be worse off if we leave the EU. There are many cities in the UK that are very similar to Sheffield that would suffer also. I’m convinced that what the two MEPs are telling me is at least credible and almost certainly true. I am yet to hear an argument from the brexiteers that has credibility or evidence.

Only a vote to remain will allow us any certainty and stability.

"The intentions of the right wing Conservative Party are rarely good" says Brexit campaigner.

The EU referendum debate has been relentless but largely inconclusive. There have even been debates about who should be allowed to take part in the debate, one fact which we can probably all draw our own conclusions about.

While the official campaign seems to have been raging for months, on 20^th March I published an interview with Yorkshire & Humber MEP and in supporter, Richard Corbett.

I have been trying since to find somebody willing or able to articulate the argument for leaving the European Union. Matt, a freelance journalist and politics student took up the chalice.

I asked him exactly the same set of questions; I started with the issue of sovereignty, with many claiming that 75% of our laws are passed by in Brussels. Matt conceded that 75% was ambitious but said that the true figure was nearer to 65%(according to business for Britain), depending on whether you are discussing laws impacted by or written by Europe. He admitted the latter figure would be considerably lower. The figure according to Mr Corbett was 13.2%.

Next I asked Matt if the EU was nothing more than an expensive Gentleman’s club, costing the UK taxpayer a fortune. Again, he admitted that the spinning that can be done here is spectacular. He claims that last year we paid £18billion, minus £5 billion that we immediately received back in a rebate. He says the EU then spent a further £4billion here on projects, giving a total cost of £9billion, which he says is still an awful lot. Mr Corbett disputed this, saying that EU membership is worth £3000 per family in Britain.
Some economists are predicting 2 years of uncertainty in the stock markets leading to a potential crash in the event of a Brexit but Matt thinks there will be some sort of crash whether we leave or not. He told me that the uncertainty depends on whether Cameron resigns or not (in the event of an out vote), adding that formalising Brexit will take a while anyway so the uncertainty and crash are inevitable.

Will Brexit mean British football club’s expulsion from the Champion’s League, I asked. Matt thinks that this is ridiculous myth, created by the in campaign. He says that none of the major clubs or any player has corroborated this.

I asked him next if Boris Johnson’s decision to back the out campaign was merely a bid for the Tory leadership. Despite his intention to vote out, he agrees that “Boris is just looking after Boris, not the people of this country”.

When asked if both big and small businesses alike will suffer if we vote to leave he is uncertain, “as there are leaders of business backing both Remain and leave campaigns”. Both sides he says are being extremely hyperbolic. He has no qualms though about the fact that EU will still be more than happy to do business with us though, because we are the sixth biggest economy in the world.

I asked the freelancer, who has featured in the Independent, if the main intention of the Tory out campaigners was to abolish worker’s rights. “The intentions of the right wing Conservative Party are rarely good” he said. ”but that is absolutely no argument to vote to remain. I’m a socialist – and believe in full employment rights and social justice for all, but if your main argument to vote to remain is to oppose the will of the British electorate because you don’t like what they’ve decided then -it sets a really horrible precedent- that is no reason to prop up an undemocratic institution just because you lost an argument. Instead, they should focus on winning the arguments and winning hearts and minds over for additional employment rights and human rights at the national level.

So can we have an open and honest fact based debate on the referendum? The Nottingham University politics student, hopes so, but the moment he said, “it doesn’t look like it. Both of the designated campaigns are being fronted by vacuous political operators who make a living deceiving the public. Hopefully, this will change soon” he dreams.

"Are these people going to be thrown on the scrapheap or is the British Government going to intervene, and maintain steel making in Britain- it's that simple" 

I have recently been reading the unauthorised biography of our prime minister, Call me Dave, written by former Tory party donor Michael Ashcroft and former Sunday Times political editor Isabel Oakeshott. Apart from the well-publicised sticking his willy in a pigs mouth, the book features a great deal on Cameron’s Enid Blightonesque childhood; long summer days by the pool drinking homemade lemonade by the swimming pool with his hooray henry chums. His fabulously well to do parents, busy doing their bit for the local charities and have afternoon cake and tea with the countryside’s elite. Despite suggestions that the book was revenge for Ashcroft not getting a cabinet role from his former friend Cameron, it’s not a complete hatchet job. It hints strongly that several of the most powerful men and women in the country once had a fondness for illegal substances but is rather sympathetic when describing the heart breaking loss of his son, Ivan in 2009. Ashcroft’s description of the numerous late night visits to hospital with his severely disabled son while trying desperately to maintain his grip on leading the party paints a picture of a dedicated father and husband who cares deeply and is eternally grateful to the NHS.

The book talks about Cameron’s brave decision making on tackling drugs following a close family members’ battle with addiction. Indeed, the work tome leaves the reader in little doubt that Dave does care deeply about the things he has been effected by personally. The experiences he has had in his oh so privileged life have certainly left a lasting mark on the man.

The problem with Dave leading our country of course is that the things he hasn’t experienced. He probably has never known anyone personally who has depended on benefits. Nor has he known anyone struggling to find a home, relying on social housing to put a roof over their hungry heads. He probably has never lived next door to someone employed in the steel works.

When he says his government is doing “everything it can” to save thousands of jobs does he really have the same conviction as when he talks of things close to his own heart?

Tata steel who employ around 15,000 people (and supports hundreds more in local communities) announced this week that it intends to sell the business, claiming it is losing up to £1m per day. What really sticks in the throat of people in this country is Cameron’s government’s lack of action. There has been a shadow hanging over these jobs since January when plans to shed jobs was announced, while the Tories have failed repeatedly to take any meaningful action to help the thousands facing joblessness. The company blamed difficult market conditions with many commentators accusing the Chinese of producing cut price (and poor standard) steel, pricing British firms out of the market. The Chinese allow subsidised energy bills to their companies while our government refuse to do the same to support our companies as well as opposing an opportunity to add tariffs to Chinese imports.

Two days ago the Tata board met in Mumbai to try to find a plan to save the Port Talbot plant in Wales. Welsh Labour MP and son of former leader Neil Kinnock, Stephen Kinnock attended the meeting along with community trade union delegates to lobby the owners.

Not a single cabinet minister attended the all-day meeting with business secretary Sajid Javid instead flying to Australia with his daughter and the PM also holidaying.

Despite calls to nationalise the steel works Cameron insisted on his return to work that nationalisation was “not the right answer”.

Opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn said “these are people who have given their lives to that industry. Are they to be thrown on the scrap heap of a multi-national corporation or is the British government going to intervene and maintain steel making in Britain?” adding “it’s a very simple choice”.

The Telegraph today accused the Government of sacrificing the steel industry to curry favour with the Chinese. Already under fire after his failed budget, Chancellor George Osbourne has been accused by unions of failing to understand the crisis. He said in his budget that “we’re going to permanently exempt our energy intensive industries like steel and chemicals from the cost of environmental tariffs so that we can keep their bills down, keep them competitive and keep them here” but unions are questioning whether the industry will survive long enough to benefit from the measures.

Tata have indicated that they might be open to a slightly longer timescale, which ITV correspondent Romilly Weeks said the Government are keen to take the credit for despite “incredibly” Tata saying “that they have had no contact, at this crucial juncture for the British steel industry, with any senior government minister today”.

The cost of losing the industry could cost hundreds of millions of pounds in environmental costs cleaning up the 3 mile site in Port Talbot along with the huge cost of the pension scheme relied upon by thousands of people.

I remember fondly going on holiday to Devon as a child and buying a souvenir pen knife with “Paignton” emblazoned on its case. I recall my pride even that age when I opened the blade to find Made in Sheffield etched into its shaft.

That industry along with that pride that those connected to it share and have given their lives to looks to be on the brink of extinction. While thousands of families face life on the dole, Tory politicians jet off on holiday and refuse to care about a world they simply do not know. They merrily give away an average of almost £3000 to some of the wealthiest in Britain (0.3% of the population) they dismiss hardworking families resigning many of them to the rest of their lives being unemployed.

With local elections just around the corner in May, let’s hope that those who stupidly voted Tory, will think again and vote for politicians that know what matters to the masses rather than the few.

If we leave, there is no going back!

With less than 100 days until the UK goes to the polls in the biggest political event for generations, and not a straight answer in sight from the right wing press I asked MEP Richard Corbett for the ins and outs of the referendum hoping to bust the myths being pedalled.
 

I started by asking Richard about the often made claim by the out campaign that our Parliament isn’t sovereign with some Euro-sceptics claiming that up to 75% of our laws are passed in Brussels.

 

The Yorkshire and Humber MEP says “the independent House of Commons library found that the real proportion is just 13.2% of laws; and these figures include laws that even mention the EU only in passing.

So what about the claim that the European Parliament is nothing more than a gentleman’s club, costing UK tax payers a fortune?

He refuted this claim, stating in fact that the confederation of British industry estimates that EU membership is worth £3000 per month to every family in Britain. A return of £10 for every £1 spent, and the budget is just 1% of GDP.

But will an out vote mean two years of uncertainty, leading to a possible stock market crash? I asked.

Richard told me that while it is impossible to predict whether a Brexit would cause a stock market crash, it will lead to uncertainty in the markets.

I asked Richard, Deputy leader of the European parliamentary Labour party, if was ludicrous of Boris Johnson to say we should vote out to get a better deal. The MEP says if we walk out on our neighbours it would be difficult to see where the good will would come from to get a better deal, indicating that Bo Jo’s out campaign was more linked to a future Tory leadership bid.

I asked Richard if he thought the desire from Tory MPs to leave the EU was based on a desire to abolish worker’s right’s? He accepted that the Tories are split over the issue but believes the right wing leavers in the party are very keen to diminish worker’s rights in the UK and see Brexit as a way to achieve this.

We often hear UKIP leader Nigel Farage refer to the European parliament as undemocratic, but Mr Corbett states on website that the European commission only makes suggestions which have to be passed (or rejected) by elected national Governments and directly elected MEP’s. In any case, he says, Commissioners themselves are accountable to the European Parliament, which elects a President, approves its appointment and can dismiss it by a vote of no confidence.

 

Is this, as many have claimed, a once in lifetime vote, I asked. Yes, Richard says “Which is why it’s so important to make the argument for staying in. if we leave, there is no going back.”

In the event of an out vote from the UK as a whole but Scotland voting to remain, I asked whether the Scot’s should have another independence referendum. “The SNP certainly wants to have another referendum and have recently gone back on their once in a lifetime promise before the referendum last year".

Many people claim they want to leave the EU because of immigration and believe Brexit to be the solution, Corbett points out that there is almost an equal number of Brits in other countries as Europeans in the UK, and those in Britain pay one third more in tax than they take out in benefits and services. He says “freedom of movement isn’t really a problem in terms of numbers or cost to the exchequer. Where there are problems, they are things that our Government could and should deal with, such as agencies only advertising jobs abroad and undercutting wages.”

Of those who come from outside the EU, Richard says “that’s under our own national rules, which we determine, but are far better able to enforce those rules while we remain in the EU because for one thing we maintain our borders in Calais, rather than Dover, which means we can process applicants before they arrive here. If they arrived here and then were found to be ineligible, we would have the often difficult task of deporting them, a problem we currently avoid with our partnership with France.” He also points out that we can use the Dublin regulation, which means we can send some asylum seekers back to the EU country in which they first arrived. A figure he puts at some 12,000 since 2003. He also highlighted the system of cooperation among police and intelligence forces meaning we get information on certain people when they arrive, such as fingerprints and criminal records. It also helps he says “cooperating to fight international gangs of people traffickers.”

For the concerned football fans I asked Richard would Brexit mean the end of Champions League football, meaning top players will snub the premier league. He referred me to West Ham’s vice chair, Karen Brady’s comments when she claimed that exit from the EU would make it harder for English clubs to attract international players while fans would be stung by higher costs when travelling to games on the continent. She said in a letter to football club chairmen that players from the EU can sign for clubs here without the need for a visa or special work permit, making it easier to sign top talent from across Europe to play in our leagues.   She said “losing this unhindered access to European talent would British sides at a disadvantage compared to continental teams.

 

Positive message from Sheffield despite Central Govt.

Sheffield City Council has just adopted a budget that may shed up to 400 jobs after another £50million was stripped from its budget taking the total amount to over £350 million in the last 6 years.

I asked Councillor Ben Curran, Cabinet Member for Finance & Resources about it. “We are now in year 6 of George Osbourne’s 4 year austerity plan”, Councillor Curran said, “There is absolutely a systematic approach to target poorer Norther communities, particularly those with Labour Councils.”

He emphasised the point by saying that there was no business case for moving BIS (department for business innovation and skills) to London, relocating 200 well paid, skilled jobs from the city. “It’s not just about cuts but others decisions too – like moving BIS jobs from Sheffield to London. We need to make people aware of it and build a campaign on it- jobs for Sheffield”.
 

The new round of cuts will undoubtedly mean that even with the best will in the world there will be cuts in services and the very most vulnerable people in the city will be at risk as a result.

I wanted to know if it was all bad news.

“Austerity hurts. We’ve reduced our spending by £350 million since 2010 in the wake of government cuts. But there is some good news. We’ve managed the finances well and are projecting a small surplus at year end.  This enabled us to make a really positive announcement on the Living Wage. It’s an important part of an inclusive economy something that we have a strong record on. We pay our staff the Living Wage and are using our contracts to boost the wages of hundreds of people across Sheffield. Our budget built on that good work. I was proud to announce a Living Wage rate relief that would help employers to pay the proper Living Wage. We know there are a number of employers in the city who want to do the right thing and need a little help. I was amazed that the Greens, Lib Dems and UKIP joined forces to block it. Luckily there are more Labour councillors it passed. It highlights the importance of a Labour administration in the city.”

With the all-out local elections just around the corner I asked Councillor Curran if he thought Labour would be punished for the cuts in the budget and retraction in services or if the people of Sheffield are wise enough to know who is to blame and re-elect a Labour controlled council. He was confident that most people believe Labour are doing their best and is quietly confident that Labour will hold a majority. It has been reported that some local councils will need to move services like bin collections to monthly services to save money but Councillor Curran told me Sheffield will not be doing that saying “we have no plans for bin collection to be made less frequently”.

I asked Mr Curran, councillor for Walkley, if Labour could be credible without a proper plan to tackle immigration. He disagreed with my suggestion stating that lessons were learned after the last election and Labour knows it has to talk about the issues that matter to people. Having chatted over a cup of Yorkshire tea and healthy sized slab of Chocolate cake from a local independent café for over an hour with Councillor Curran, I would urge the people of Sheffield to keep faith with him and the local Labour party. I was reassured by his answers that he will do all he can to ensure Sheffield gets the best deal it can despite the ideological cuts being relentlessly enforced on him and us. I believed him when he said a labour council will do its utmost to protect the vulnerable adults and children of the city.