DOCSLIB.ORG

Policy Recommendations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Policy Recommendations THE KIRKHOPE COMMISSION ON IMMIGRATION BUILDING A FAIR IMMIGRATION SYSTEM September 2004 building a fair immigration system 2 building a fair immigration system CONTENTS Foreword by the Chairman 4 Executive Summary 5 Preamble 7 Encouraging high-skilled economic 10 migration Reinstating border controls and internal 17 reporting Family reunions and chain migration 22 Additional proposals 28 Appendix 1: Membership 32 Appendix 2: Meeting dates 34 Appendix 3: Evidence 35 Appendix 4: Asylum Commission 39 Recommendations 3 building a fair immigration system FOREWORD At the beginning of the year, I was asked by the Shadow Home Secretary, The Rt Hon David Davis by Timothy MP, to continue the work carried out by the Asylum Kirkhope MEP Commission in 2003 (see Appendix 4) by this time looking into Britain’s immigration policy. The members of the Commission are shown in the Appendix and I should like to thank all of them for their valuable contributions. The Commission met on ten occasions in London and took oral and written evidence, as well as carrying out a thorough review of the present situation and the potential action required by an incoming Conservative Government. This report attempts to provide some solutions to the present immigration crisis but it is not a complete overview of UK immigration – there are many books, pamphlets and other contributions that meet this objective. It is a set of recommendations which we believe would, if implemented, assist in improving Britain’s immigration system. I should particularly like to thank Matthew Elliott who has acted as Special Adviser to the Commission. I am also grateful to those who have contributed in other ways to our work. I hope this report will form a significant part of the future immigration policy of the Conservative Party. Timothy Kirkhope MEP September 2004 4 building a fair immigration system EXECUTIVE The Commission recommends the following: SUMMARY Encouraging high-skilled economic migration Recommendation 1 Simplify the current overcomplicated work permit schemes Recommendation 2 Reinstate the higher skills threshold and introduce minimum salary requirement for work permits Recommendation 3 Abolish in-work benefits for immigrant workers Reinstating border controls and internal reporting Recommendation 4 Biometric data, visa type and travel information must be recorded before embarkation to the UK Recommendation 5 Internal reporting to be introduced Recommendation 6 Embarkation controls to be reintroduced Recommendation 7 Zero-tolerance approach to overstaying Family reunions and chain migration Recommendation 8 Minimum income requirements for sponsoring spouses Recommendation 9 Citizenship requirement for sponsoring spouses Recommendation 10 Higher age requirement for sponsoring spouses Recommendation 11 Restriction of right to sponsor parents 5 building a fair immigration system Additional proposals Recommendation 12 A Cabinet-level Minister for Migration and Integration to coordinate policy Recommendation 13 Compulsory medical examination before embarkation to UK Recommendation 14 Language requirement for permanent residency All the recommendations in Building a Fair Immigration System were unanimously agreed to by the Commission with the exception of Recommendation 9, which Philip Barth dissented from. 6 building a fair immigration system PREAMBLE “Britain is full.” This is the view of a growing number of people. Whether or not that assessment is completely fair, Britain is certainly one of the most densely populated countries in the world. It is twice as densely populated as France and three times as densely populated as Spain. Our island nation is not like America in the 1880s, with new frontiers and uninhabited land to settle. Britain is a small island with a large population and immigration to the UK is increasing (see graph below). Density of population has a direct effect on quality of life. More people occupying a finite space can result in greater levels of anti-social behaviour and crime; deteriorating mental and physical health; overcrowded classrooms and expanding waiting lists; traffic jams and over-crowded buses. This overcrowding concerns not only the recipients of public services but also the providers – the front line staff who keep our public services running. Immigration affects some areas more than others, with Greater London and the South East being particularly affected. This effect is most readily seen in the housing shortage, where the Government’s very own projections estimate that two million new homes will be needed by 2021 for immigrants alone (Browne 2002, page 38). Increasing property prices and overcrowding are caused by the growing demand for housing. Insufficient property and increased immigration have both contributed to this. There is also a disproportionate effect on public services in London and the South East, for example, where water companies have voiced their 7 building a fair immigration system concern that the water supply and sewage disposal system cannot meet the growing demand from the Government’s house building programme in the region. With London absorbing a population the size of Leeds every three or four years (Harris 2003, page 25), the metropolis is rapidly becoming a city in severe crisis. Immigration also has a cultural dimension. At low levels, immigrants are easily integrated into communities. But with high levels of immigration, as we have seen in recent years, cultural differences lead to divided communities. Of course, as Michael Howard rightly said in his Burnley Speech in February 2004, “We are a stronger and better country, rich in our cultural diversity, because of the immigrant communities that have settled here.” This is right, but for change to be comfortable, it must be progressive, not radical. Our culture must always develop through well managed integration. Rising immigration has not been matched by a corresponding emphasis on community cohesion. For these reasons, we believe that the unquantified migration of low-skilled, low-paid workers and family members, encouraged by this Labour government, must now stop. The business community may benefit from cheap labour, especially in the short term, but low paid, low-skilled British workers, many of whom are British-born from settled immigrant communities, lose out from fresh immigration. According to migration expert Anthony Browne, who gave evidence to the Commission: “The unskilled are four times as likely to be unemployed as the skilled. Ethnic minorities in Britain are twice as likely to be unemployed as white people, with some communities such as Pakistanis and Bangladeshis suffering unemployment of around 50 per cent.” 8 building a fair immigration system We agree with him. Britain should not need more low-skilled workers when there is a more than adequate supply to meet the requirements of our business community in the combined labour markets of the European Union. UK immigration policy must balance the interests of immigrants, would-be immigrants, the host country and the taxpayer. At present, this policy is disproportionately weighted against Britain’s low- skilled workers. It must be changed – and quickly. Entry clearance applications granted, 1992-2002 1800000 1600000 1400000 1200000 1000000 800000 600000 400000 200000 0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Source: Home Office (November 2003) ‘Control of Immigration: Statistics United Kingdom 2002’ 9 building a fair immigration system ENCOURAGING Immigration policy should be predominately an economic question. The British economy needs HIGH-SKILLED and has always benefited from the work of highly ECONOMIC skilled immigrants. However, it does not need to import low-skilled workers when people from MIGRATION across the 25 member states of the European Union are now freely able to work here. David Blunkett asserted in November 2003 that there was “no obvious limit” on the number of immigrants who could settle in the UK. The Home Secretary believes that large scale immigration of both low and high skilled workers is economically beneficial to the UK. Having looked thoroughly at the economic consequences of immigration the Commission concludes that whereas high-skilled, high-income immigrants should be welcomed, low-skilled, low- wage immigration should be discouraged. This is in line with Chancellor Gordon Brown’s continued emphasis on making Britain a high-skilled, high- productivity economy. Doesn’t Britain have a declining workforce? Supporters of mass low-skilled immigration often assert that Britain has a declining workforce and that the economy needs extra workers of all skill levels. This is patently not true. The Government’s very own Actuary Service predicts that, with zero net immigration, the workforce will grow by 1.2m by 2020, as the data below illustrates. 10 building a fair immigration system UK workforce with zero net immigration (millions) Year 2000 2010 2020 2031 Workforce (millions of people of working age) 36.89 37.39 38.13 36.82 Workforce as % of total population61.7% 62.2% 63.2% 61.2% Source: Government Actuary Service, 2000-based projections, natural change only variant. Britain is not suffering a shortage of low-skilled workers. With over four million people in the UK wanting to find a job, and with freedom of movement within the newly expanded EU, we do not need any more low-skilled immigrants. Isn’t Britain facing a demographic time-bomb? Supporters of mass immigration also assert that Britain faces a demographic time bomb with ever fewer workers having to support ever
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 'Opposition-Craft': an Evaluative Framework for Official Opposition Parties in the United Kingdom Edward Henry Lack Submitte
    ‘Opposition-Craft’: An Evaluative Framework for Official Opposition Parties in the United Kingdom Edward Henry Lack Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of PhD The University of Leeds, School of Politics and International Studies May, 2020 1 Intellectual Property and Publications Statements The candidate confirms that the work submitted is his own and that appropriate credit has been given where reference has been made to the work of others. This copy has been supplied on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. ©2020 The University of Leeds and Edward Henry Lack The right of Edward Henry Lack to be identified as Author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 2 Acknowledgements Page I would like to thank Dr Victoria Honeyman and Dr Timothy Heppell of the School of Politics and International Studies, The University of Leeds, for their support and guidance in the production of this work. I would also like to thank my partner, Dr Ben Ramm and my parents, David and Linden Lack, for their encouragement and belief in my efforts to undertake this project. Finally, I would like to acknowledge those who took part in the research for this PhD thesis: Lord David Steel, Lord David Owen, Lord Chris Smith, Lord Andrew Adonis, Lord David Blunkett and Dame Caroline Spelman. 3 Abstract This thesis offers a distinctive and innovative framework for the study of effective official opposition politics in the United Kingdom.
    [Show full text]
  • Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill: Progress of the Bill
    By Sally Lipscombe, Jacqueline Beard, Police, Crime, Sentencing and Jennifer Brown, Joanna Dawson Courts Bill: Progress of the Bill 2 July 2021 Summary 1 Background to the Bill 2 Public Bill Committee commonslibrary.parliament.uk Number 9273 Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill: Progress of the Bill Contributing Authors Roger Tyres, Road traffic offences, 2.11 Image Credits CCC1 by Badly Drawn Dad. Licensed under CC BY 2.0 / image cropped. Disclaimer The Commons Library does not intend the information in our research publications and briefings to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. We have published it to support the work of MPs. You should not rely upon it as legal or professional advice, or as a substitute for it. We do not accept any liability whatsoever for any errors, omissions or misstatements contained herein. You should consult a suitably qualified professional if you require specific advice or information. Read our briefing ‘Legal help: where to go and how to pay’ for further information about sources of legal advice and help. This information is provided subject to the conditions of the Open Parliament Licence. Feedback Every effort is made to ensure that the information contained in these publicly available briefings is correct at the time of publication. Readers should be aware however that briefings are not necessarily updated to reflect subsequent changes. If you have any comments on our briefings please email [email protected]. Please note that authors are not always able to engage in discussions with members of the public who express opinions about the content of our research, although we will carefully consider and correct any factual errors.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAIRMANS REPORT Paul Mckeever, Simon Reed 24Th
    CHAIRMANS REPORT Paul McKeever, Simon Reed 24th January, 2011 Contents Overview Media Interviews Meetings Attended Speaking Engagements, Open Meetings Other Meetings Attended Police Federation/Sun Newspaper Bravery Awards ___________________________________________________________ OVERVIEW SOS - Save Our Service! In the Chairman’s Report in January 2010 I wrote of a meeting I had with the then Shadow Home Secretary, Chris Grayling, and reported that; ‘He (Chris Grayling) confirmed there would be a two year pay freeze which would coincide with the end of our three year pay deal. Clearly, we cannot comment on our position in relation to any proposed wage freeze a year and a half away from any proposed implementation date as we do not know what the economic conditions will be then.’ You will recall that in the autumn of 2009 David Cameron announced that if he was elected at the General Election he would introduce a two year public sector wage freeze in 2011. At the time he announced the policy, the economy was in deflation and everyone seemed to accept his proposition as a reasonable statement. I didn’t and I have likened it to saying you are going to go sunbathing on 7th July 2012, without knowing what the weather would be like on the day. A history of recessions show that when growth in the economy starts up again inflation almost always follows. At present the Consumer Price Index stands at 3.7% and the Retail Price Index at 4.8%; both are rising. Utilities, such as gas and electricity are rising at double digit rates and to presage what is coming to a shop near you later this year, factory gate inflation; the cost of buying the materials to manufacture the goods we buy is at 11%.
    [Show full text]
  • The London School of Economics and Political Science in the Shadow Of
    The London School of Economics and Political Science In the Shadow of the Prison Gates: An Institutional Analysis of Early Release Policy and Practice in England and Wales, 1960 – 1995 Thomas Charles Guiney A thesis submitted to the Department of Social Policy of the London School of Economics for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, October 2015. Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 99,995 words. 2 Abstract This thesis explores the historical development of early release policy and practice in England and Wales between 1960 - 1995. The evolution of criminal justice as a public policy concern has attracted considerable interest within the literature but this has tended to focus on the role of individuals as key agents of policy change or the ‘big picture’ socio-economic shifts associated with late twentieth-century modernity. Comparatively little attention has been paid to the mediating role of institutions at the intersection between policy and politics.
    [Show full text]
  • Policing Process of Home Office Leaks Inquiry
    House of Commons Home Affairs Committee Policing Process of Home Office Leaks Inquiry Fourth Report of Session 2008–09 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 30 March 2009 HC 157 Published on 16 April 2009 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £13.50 The Home Affairs Committee The Home Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Home Office and its associated public bodies. Current membership Rt Hon Keith Vaz MP (Labour, Leicester East) (Chairman) Tom Brake MP (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington) Ms Karen Buck MP (Labour, Regent’s Park and Kensington North) Mr James Clappison MP (Conservative, Hertsmere) Mrs Ann Cryer MP (Labour, Keighley) David TC Davies MP (Conservative, Monmouth) Mrs Janet Dean MP (Labour, Burton) Patrick Mercer MP (Conservative, Newark) Margaret Moran MP (Labour, Luton South) Gwyn Prosser MP (Labour, Dover) Bob Russell MP (Liberal Democrat, Colchester) Martin Salter MP (Labour, Reading West) Mr Gary Streeter MP (Conservative, South West Devon) Mr David Winnick MP (Labour, Walsall North) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/homeaffairscom.
    [Show full text]
  • MEMO+ New UK Parliament and Government
    May 2010 Minority Ethnic Matters Overview MEMO+ is an occasional series of briefing papers on topics of interest to minority ethnic communities in Scotland. Supported b y It is produced by the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities in partnership with the Black and Ethnic Minority Infrastructure in Scotland , and is supported by the Scottish Government. Briefing: The New UK Parliament and Government General Election Results The elections to the UK Parliament in May 2010 resulted in the Conservative Party having the largest number of seats although no single party has an overall majority. Number of MPs elected in each political party Conservative 306 Labour 258 Liberal Democrat 57 Democratic Unionist Party 8 SNP 6 Sinn Fein 5 Plaid Cymru 3 Social Democratic & Labour Party 3 Alliance Party 1 Green 1 Independent 1 One seat still has to be decided. This is because one of the candidates for Thirsk and Morton died after nominations closed. As a result, no voting took place in that constituency, and a by-election will be held on 27 May. Negotiations between the main parties have resulted in an agreement to form a Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition government, the first such agreement since 1945. The practicalities of this are not yet clear, but the Ministerial team includes MPs from both parties, and some policy compromises have already been announced. 1 MEMO+ The New UK Parliament and Government May 2010 How does the Parliament work? The Speaker The Speaker, who is elected from among their own number by the MPs themselves, chairs proceedings in the House of Commons.
    [Show full text]
  • Jeremy Corbyn's Plan for Uncontrolled And
    JEREMY CORBYN’S PLAN FOR UNCONTROLLED AND UNLIMITED IMMIGRATION Conservative Research Department 14 November 2019 1 CONTENTS A FOREWORD FROM BRANDON LEWIS 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 HISTORICAL TRENDS 5 NET MIGRATION PROJECTIONS 6 METHODOLOGY FOR CREATING PROJECTIONS 7 CORBYN’S IMMIGRATION POLICY: IN HIS TEAM’S OWN WORDS 14 Labour’s official position on immigration is to have uncontrolled and unlimited immigration 14 Corbyn and his top team have been clear that they don’t believe in border controls 15 Jeremy Corbyn and his team have voted in favour of unlimited and uncontrolled immigration 15 Jeremy Corbyn opposes measures to reduce the impact of migration 15 Labour’s record shows that they can’t be trusted on immigration 16 A FOREWORD FROM BRANDON LEWIS 17.4 million people voted to leave the European Union nearly three and a half years ago. I wasn’t one of them. I campaigned to Remain. But, immediately after the vote, I told my constituents – who voted to Leave in swathes – that I am first and foremost a democrat. I believe that it is vital for us all to respect the largest democratic decision that this country has ever made. I wholeheartedly believe that those who voted to Leave – both in my constituency of Great Yarmouth and right across the country – voted for change. And, as an elected politician, it is my duty to recognise that the law-abiding and hardworking majority in this country believe people like me are out of touch with their concerns on immigration. We must fix that and ensure we take back control.
    [Show full text]
  • Inside the Political Market
    Notes Preface and Acknowledgements 1 Priestley, 1968. Reviewing a book on the latest American campaign tech- niques the same year, Labour agent Terry Pitt warned colleagues that politi- cians ‘will be promoted and marketed like the latest model automobile’ (Labour Organiser no. 558, December). 2 Palast, 2002, p. 161–69. 3 Editorial in The Observer, 18th August 1996. 4 The speech was made to the pro-business Institute of Directors, ‘Mandelson: We sold Labour as news product’, The Guardian, 30th April 1998. 5 Hughes and Wintour, 1990; Gould, 1998. 6 Cockett, 1994. Introduction: Inside the Political Market 1 Coates, 1980; Minkin, 1980; Warde, 1982. 2 Hare, 1993; ‘Top Consumer PR Campaigns of All Time’, PR Week 29th March 2002. Of the other politicians featured the Suffragettes and Conservatives (1979) occupied the fifteenth and sixteenth places respec- tively. 3 Gould, 2002; Gould, 1998, p. 81. 4 Abrams and Rose with Hinden, 1960; Gould, 2002. 5 Mandelson and Liddle, 1996, p. 2; see also Wright, 1997. The Blair leader- ship, like most politicians, deny the extent to which they rely on profes- sionals for strategic input and guidance (Mauser, 1989). 6 Interviewed on BBC1 ‘Breakfast with Frost’, 14th January 1996, cited in Blair, 1996, p. 49. Blair regularly returns to this theme: in his 2003 Conference speech he attacked the interpretation of ‘New Labour’ as ‘a clever piece of marketing, good at winning elections, but hollow where the heart should be’ (The Guardian, 1st October 2003). 7 Driver and Martell, 1998, pp. 158–9. 8 Crompton and Lamb, 1986, p. 1. 9 Almond, 1990, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Yvette Cooper, Mp Shadow Home Secretary June 8 2014
    PLEASE NOTE “THE ANDREW MARR SHOW” MUST BE CREDITED IF ANY PART OF THIS TRANSCRIPT IS USED THE ANDREW MARR SHOW INTERVIEW: YVETTE COOPER, MP SHADOW HOME SECRETARY JUNE 8th 2014 ANDREW MARR: And now to the Labour Party. What message should Labour take from the recent European and local elections? Some in the party see UKIP’s success as a big threat and are urging Ed Miliband to send out a tougher message still on immigration. Others are warning him not to become a pale imitation of Nigel Farage. Well the Shadow Home Secretary says that Labour should be ready to talk more about immigration, which is great because that’s exactly what we’re going to do. Yvette Cooper joins me now. Before we get onto immigration, however, I must ask you about the current front page row between Theresa May and Michael Gove. Is this a resigning matter for Theresa May now, do you think? YVETTE COOPER: Well I think it is very serious what’s happened. I think there are three unresolved issues as a result of what’s been a very chaotic government over something so important. There’s the concerns in the schools in Birmingham and how you make sure that children get a balanced education, which Michael Gove has not been addressing. There’s problems in the communities and the Prevent Strategy, which is about preventing extremism, having gaps because of the departments not working together. And there’s also the issue … 1 ANDREW MARR: (over) I want to get into the communities and schools in a moment, but first of all just in terms of the position of the two ministers involved and they’ve been leaking against each other.
    [Show full text]
  • Ministerial Selection and Portfolio Allocation in the Cameron Government
    This is a repository copy of Ministerial selection and portfolio allocation in the Cameron Government. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/82698/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Ministerial Selection and Portfolio Allocation in the Cameron Government Dr Timothy Heppell Associate Professor of British Politics School of Politics and International Studies Introduction: The power to appoint and dismiss is one of the most important powers at the disposal of the UK Prime Minister (Allen and Ward, 2009, p. 238). It is through their powers of patronage that they shape, and reshape through reshuffles, their government. It is this power that gives them political leverage and ensures their dominance over their ministerial and party colleagues. All Prime Ministers ‘wield this instrument with strategic effect’ (Berlinski et al, 2012, p. 2). The rise of the career politician would appear to intensify the significance of this power (King, 1981, pp. 249-85) as ministerial office represents the ‘height of ambition’ for most contemporary parliamentarians (Berlinski et al, 2007, p. 245). Most of them ‘passionately want to be ministers’ and ‘if they are already ministers, they want to be promoted in the ministerial hierarchy’, and above all else ‘they certainly do not want to be demoted or dismisse identifying ministerial suitability does remove a significant proportion of the parliamentary party from consideration. An additional question to ask would be whether certain parliamentarians are unsuited to ministerial office for reasons other than competence. Some will have to be discounted due to the fact that their personal behaviour or political attitudes could make them a liability if a minister.
    [Show full text]
  • Shadow Cabinet St Tom Watson 1 October 2018 Jeremy Corbyn Deputy Leader & Shadow Leader Secretary of State for Digital Culture, Media and Sport
    The Labour Party Shadow Cabinet st Tom Watson 1 October 2018 Jeremy Corbyn Deputy Leader & Shadow Leader Secretary of State for Digital Culture, Media and Sport Rebecca Long-Bailey John McDonnell Diane Abbot Emily Thornberry Jonathan Ashworth Shadow Chancellor Shadow Secretary of State Shadow Secretary of Shadow Home Secretary Shadow Foreign Secretary for Business, Energy and of the Exchequer Industrial Strategy State for Health Angela Rayner Kate Osamor Keir Starmer Richard Burgon Sue Hayman Shadow Secretary of Shadow Secretary of State for Shadow Secretary of Shadow Secretary of Shadow Secretary of State for Environment, Food State for Education International Development State for Exiting the EU State for Justice and Rural Affairs Dawn Butler Cat Smith Baroness Smith Valerie Vaz Jon Trickett Shadow Minister for Shadow Minister for Voter Shadow Leader of Shadow Leader of the Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities Engagement and Youth Affairs the House of Lords House of Commons the Cabinet Office John Healey Margaret Greenwood Andrew Gwynne Peter Dowd Christina Rees Shadow Secretary of Shadow Secretary of State Shadow Secretary of Shadow Chief Secretary Shadow Secretary State for Housing for Work and Pensions State for Communities to the Treasury of State for Wales Andy McDonald Ian Lavery Nick Brown Nia Griffith Shami Chakrabarti Shadow Secretary of Shadow Secretary of Shadow Attorney Party Chair Opposition Chief Whip State for Transport State for Defence General Produced by Barry Gardiner Barbara Keeley Lesley Laird Tony Lloyd www.faithaction.net Shadow Secretary of State Shadow Minister for Mental Shadow Secretary of Shadow Secretary of for International Trade Health and Social Care State for Scotland State for Northern Ireland Source: https://labour.org.uk/people/shadow-cabinet, accessed 01/10/18.
    [Show full text]
  • Inside the Labour Party a Cicero Group Overview
    Inside the Labour party A Cicero Group overview APRIL 2018 1 Foreword The election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour priorities of the party leadership. We profile some of the Party in 2015 was a momentous moment in British most high profile and influential members of the ‘government politics. An unheralded left-wing backbencher for over in waiting’, followed by a focus on the increasingly 30 years, Corbyn suddenly found himself at the helm marginalised Deputy Leader of the party, Tom Watson (p14). of the official opposition in Parliament and the fastest growing party by membership in western Europe. Corbyn’s Affiliated trade unions (p15) are another vital component election signalled the start of a wider transformation in of the Labour Party, as the biggest source of funding the Labour Party. The last two and a half years have and a bedrock of support for Corbyn. In particular, seen a steady rise in the influence of the left over the Len McCluskey and Unite increasingly wield influence party’s major institutions from the Shadow Cabinet to the throughout the structures of the party. One illustration National Executive Committee, National Policy Forum of this is the recent appointment of close McCluskey and Party HQ, not to mention the membership base itself. ally Jennie Formby as General Secretary, heading up Labour HQ (p17). This appointment was challenged by This document is intended to provide an overview of each of Jon Lansman, founder of the grassroots pro-Corbyn the major pillars of the Labour Party, their level of influence movement Momentum, and this may reflect a new fault- over the direction of the party, where they stand on the line emerging on the left between the ‘machine politics’ left-right spectrum within the party, and their degree of of the unions and the ‘movement politics’ of Momentum.
    [Show full text]