Labour has launched a new campaign to ensure that the Coalition government keeps its promise to lift UK overseas aid to 0.7% of GDP by 2013. Click here for more details.
The Con-Dem Coalition as we all know are under increasing pressure to seriously look at the price of fuel. Due to the ever increasing cost of filling the tanks on our vehicles, it's surprising how few parliamentarians have thrown their political weight behind the 'Fair Fuel' campaign? Including, disappointingly for myself Mark. Representing as he does, an area in Edinburgh, which comprises of many constituents relying on benefits, low income jobs and needing any help they can get, in the ever rising tide of high prices and overall living costs, including fuel, Mark finds himself in the majority of MPs who stubbornly have yet to sign up, to a powerful campaign, which intends to send a big message to our government. Supporting Fair Fuel, whether directly or indeed tacitly would demonstrate solidarity with those of his constituents battling against inflation and ever rising fuel costs! This I find puzzling? Mark supports increases in overseas aid, Fair Trade, and champions the cause of our underprivileged constituents in Leith, and yet ignores the Fair Fuel campaign? Perhaps I'm wrong? Is he waiting for the exact moment of truth? March 2nd is that day of Truth. Quentin Wilson, the celebrity face of Fair Fuel, is handing over to the government the first of many petitions (100 000) signatures. Hmmm Mark's doesn't seem to be there? Could local fuel and refining interests be play a part here? Watch this space.
I am certainly very aware of the effect of the sharp increases in fuel (and other) prices on people in Edinburgh North & Leith. That is why Labour was against the rise in VAT to 20%, which we believe should be abolished, particularly as the government finances have been revealed to be better than was originally suggested. Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls puts Labour's view here: http://www.edballs4labour.org/blog/?p=1472
However, the 'Fair Fuel' campaign is calling for a fuel duty stabliser mechanism, which Labour believes has a number of real practical difficulties.
Thank you for your letter, 8 March, in reply to my own: Frustratingly Mark, you've avoided the only real concern that I have here. Your lack of support to the Fair Fuel Campaign? The only question I'm really interested in having answered by yourself is: where do you stand, as regarding the Fair Fuel Campaign? 100 of your colleagues in the HOC have nailed their colours to the mast. I realise Ed Balls says this, or Ed Balls says that. I'm not particularly interested in the collective viewpoint of the entire Labour Party or that of the Socialist movement. As one of your constituents, I'm really feed up with the Con-Dem Coalition, bending over backwards to its chums in the banking world, who continue to live, as before: in their own little protected parallel universe, enjoying bonuses they are not entitled to: As a suggestion to the Chancellor, if he is looking for funds to help plug the Trillion Pound deficit, perhaps as his banking chums are so flush, why not claw back some of the Billions of Tax payers money, they are currently sitting on? Oh no, can't do that. Rather squeeze John & Jane Citizen, because they've got loads of money. The Fair Fuel Campaign represents crumbs off the table so to speak: Something which directly impacts those of us at point of delivery. It's not a huge ask, which can be fudged through loads of complicated calculations & responses. And it would be nice, if a Labour MP such as yourself, could express solidarity with his Constituents. I personally, in my opinion, do not think that is asking for too much.
It's not about 0.7--a 1970s figure. It's about aid effectiveness. Labour needs a development policy not just a chant about an outdated figure which is only for aid propnents not development.
To Sean - I thought I made it clear, but I support what Ed Balls has proposed! And that includes using some of the bank tax to remove the VAT increase on fuel. There is a debate in the Commons this week and you can see how MPs vote then.
To JieSheng - yes, it is certainly more than a figure that is needed - and that's why we are having a policy review on all our international development policies. But sticking to the 0.7% target is important - not just for the UK, but for the international lead it sets.
5 comments:
The Con-Dem Coalition as we all know are under increasing pressure to seriously look at the price of fuel. Due to the ever increasing cost of filling the tanks on our vehicles, it's surprising how few parliamentarians have thrown their political weight behind the 'Fair Fuel' campaign? Including, disappointingly for myself Mark. Representing as he does, an area in Edinburgh, which comprises of many constituents relying on benefits, low income jobs and needing any help they can get, in the ever rising tide of high prices and overall living costs, including fuel, Mark finds himself in the majority of MPs who stubbornly have yet to sign up, to a powerful campaign, which intends to send a big message to our government. Supporting Fair Fuel, whether directly or indeed tacitly would demonstrate solidarity with those of his constituents battling against inflation and ever rising fuel costs! This I find puzzling? Mark supports increases in overseas aid, Fair Trade, and champions the cause of our underprivileged constituents in Leith, and yet ignores the Fair Fuel campaign? Perhaps I'm wrong? Is he waiting for the exact moment of truth? March 2nd is that day of Truth. Quentin Wilson, the celebrity face of Fair Fuel, is handing over to the government the first of many petitions (100 000) signatures. Hmmm Mark's doesn't seem to be there? Could local fuel and refining interests be play a part here? Watch this space.
I am certainly very aware of the effect of the sharp increases in fuel (and other) prices on people in Edinburgh North & Leith. That is why Labour was against the rise in VAT to 20%, which we believe should be abolished, particularly as the government finances have been revealed to be better than was originally suggested. Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls puts Labour's view here: http://www.edballs4labour.org/blog/?p=1472
However, the 'Fair Fuel' campaign is calling for a fuel duty stabliser mechanism, which Labour believes has a number of real practical difficulties.
Thank you for your letter, 8 March, in reply to my own:
Frustratingly Mark, you've avoided the only real concern that I have here. Your lack of support to the Fair Fuel Campaign? The only question I'm really interested in having answered by yourself is: where do you stand, as regarding the Fair Fuel Campaign? 100 of your colleagues in the HOC have nailed their colours to the mast. I realise Ed Balls says this, or Ed Balls says that. I'm not particularly interested in the collective viewpoint of the entire Labour Party or that of the Socialist movement. As one of your constituents, I'm really feed up with the Con-Dem Coalition, bending over backwards to its chums in the banking world, who continue to live, as before: in their own little protected parallel universe, enjoying bonuses they are not entitled to: As a suggestion to the Chancellor, if he is looking for funds to help plug the Trillion Pound deficit, perhaps as his banking chums are so flush, why not claw back some of the Billions of Tax payers money, they are currently sitting on? Oh no, can't do that. Rather squeeze John & Jane Citizen, because they've got loads of money. The Fair Fuel Campaign represents crumbs off the table so to speak: Something which directly impacts those of us at point of delivery. It's not a huge ask, which can be fudged through loads of complicated calculations & responses. And it would be nice, if a Labour MP such as yourself, could express solidarity with his Constituents. I personally, in my opinion, do not think that is asking for too much.
It's not about 0.7--a 1970s figure. It's about aid effectiveness. Labour needs a development policy not just a chant about an outdated figure which is only for aid propnents not development.
http://ipeanddevelopment.wordpress.com/2011/02/27/0-7-0-07-7-the-lure-and-wonder-over-how-much-aid-countries-should-give/
To Sean - I thought I made it clear, but I support what Ed Balls has proposed! And that includes using some of the bank tax to remove the VAT increase on fuel. There is a debate in the Commons this week and you can see how MPs vote then.
To JieSheng - yes, it is certainly more than a figure that is needed - and that's why we are having a policy review on all our international development policies. But sticking to the 0.7% target is important - not just for the UK, but for the international lead it sets.
Post a Comment