March 2015 Newsletter

portcullisbanner_Copy.2.1.1

Westminster Report

Smith Commission: New powers over Disability Benefits
After last year’s referendum the Smith Commission recommended that significant new powers should be devolved to the Scottish Parliament. At the beginning of last month I wrote for the Edinburgh Evening News about the need to start discussing how we use these new powers, and in particular what we will do about Disability Living Allowance.

Smith CommissionAs part of the current Government’s attempts to cut public spending, DLA is being phased out and replaced with Personal Independence Payment, with the assessment set to ensure thousands of Scots that currently get DLA won’t get PIP. But if we want to stop this from happening, We need to start discussing now what we in Scotland would do differently. Here is our chance to shape our own system. Should it be one completely different, or do we revert to DLA as it was before?

Winding Down
The first ever fixed five year parliament is stumbling to a close. The date for the general election has been known for the last four years, and some people argue that all it has done is lead to the ‘longest ever’ election campaign. The last few weeks will see some pieces of legislation completed, such as the Modern Slavery Bill which is nearly finished its stages in the House of Lords. Several Select Committee reports have been recently published, or are about to be completed, including one from the Public Accounts Committee on the Government’s flagship ‘universal credit’. The Committee remains very critical of the pace and cost of this.

Tax Avoidance
Tax avoidance has been in the headlines following the revelations over HSBC’s Swiss bank and David Cameron’s decision to make the firm’s then Chief Executive a Government Minister in 2011. I told the Huffington Post that ‘The revolving door between David Cameron’s government and HSBC casts new light on this Government’s failure to act over alleged wrongdoing.’

Then a clip of George Osborne from several years ago re-emerged, in which he encourages people to avoid tax. I reacted by saying ‘this shows the Tories really do believe that everyone does it’, referring to the remarks of Tory Treasurer Lord Fink.

Prior to this a series of business people had voiced concerns about the prospect of Labour Government, but I suggested to the Huffington Post that they might not be entirely objective in their analysis, highlighting their connections to the Conservative Party.

Arms exports
Constituents regularly contact me with concern about arms sales to regimes with poor human rights records. The Government claim they don’t permit sales where they have evidence that the weapons in question will be used for internal repression or external aggression. However on 20 January I used Foreign Office Questions in the House of Commons to argue that Ministers should go further. Following a discussion with a constituent, I argued that Minister should use restrictions on arms exports to encourage regimes to respect human rights, even where there is no evidence that the specific arms will be used improperly. You can read my exchange with the Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond here, but I thought this was a good example of how writing to your MP can lead to your views being put directly to senior people in Government. Keep the letters and emails coming!

News in brief
I popped into the Labour Campaign for Mental Health reception to celebrate Time to Talk Day, which highlights the importance of battling mental health stigma.

Mental HealthI’ve also agreed to become an Arthritis Champion. Musculoskeletal conditions like arthritis affect a huge number of people and are a significant cause of disability in the UK. There is much work to do to prevent and cure these conditions, and we need to improve the services available to those living with them now.

Constituency Report

Legal Highs
Legal Highs ShopLast month I was frustrated and concerned to see that yet another ‘legal high’ shop had opened in Edinburgh East. A number have sprung up in the Southside, with the latest appearing on Easter Road. I told the Evening News that ‘These legal dealers are making money while destroying users’ health and causing havoc for local residents.’ The shop assistant who responded appeared to show a blatant disregard for public health and ignores the fact that trade of these substances is impacting residents across the city, as they put up with the impact locally, but also because public services are being stretched dealing with the disruption. Unfortunately banning specific substances is difficult because of the sheer number of new ones becoming available each week – instead the council need to use its planning powers to stop further stores opening up, and investigate banning their use in public spaces, which could act to dent demand. Earlier this month Lincoln became the first place in the UK to do this, and I wrote to council leader Andrew Burns urging him to consider following suit.

Old Royal High School
Old Royal High SchoolAlthough just outside my constituency, a number of people have contacted me worried about the proposed redevelopment of the old Royal High School on Regent Road into a luxury hotel. Initial plans can be found online. No formal planning application has yet been lodged so there is time to make sure that there is a wide debate and information is disseminated. This is an important building for the city and I will keep a close eye on developments and will be speaking to council colleagues about it.

Homebase appeal, petition, and Student Planning Guidance consultation begins
With the Lutton Court statutory appeal just days away, residents have been notified of Unite’s appeal submission to the Scottish Government, following the City of Edinburgh Council’s recent refusal of the application. Residents have now set up a petition calling on Homebase to stay in the Southside. In my objection to the initial application I highlighted how valued the store is locally. If you use the store, sign the petition!

91351206-8ae4-4171-a747-4a2a13b1f867At the same time the Council has begun to consult on both planning and HMO licensing policy in the city. While the schedules and meetings should run together the consultations are officially separate, and details of the HMO consultation are not fully clear at the time of writing. Running from Monday, 16th March until 24 April 2015 the student accomodation planning guidance consultation will be placed on the Council’s Consultation Hub at https://consultationhub.edinburgh.gov.uk/. The process, I am told, should include workshops with groups including the Southside Association and Living Southside but will also the Edinburgh universities, and student housing providers. Watch out for details of a Living Southside meeting all residents are invited to attend to discuss the group’s response.

Potterow
I was also concerned to learn that the Estates Department has only shortlisted student accommodation developers who have bid as part of a sell-off council-owned land at Potterow. Meaning another application for student accommodation is likely to come forward. This will only make it harder to prevent an over-concentration of student accommodation in the area – a key issue these reports have focused on over the past two years or so. Instead of focusing on one off profits, the council should have a longer term outlook and listen to residents who would like to see the land passed to an affordable housing provider so that we can retain the balanced, vibrant community that currently exists in the area.

Cameron House Community Centre
Following the Council agreeing its latest budget, money from the Community Learning and Development budget has been transferred to Heath and Social Care to help with the ‘delayed discharge’ crisis in the NHS. I know a number of constituents were concerned that Cameron House Community Centre might close as a result. I have received assurances that the Council is committed to keeping Cameron House open and is currently looking at ways to maintain the present level of service provision. This is a much-valued community facility – and one which opened less than 10 years ago – and I will be carefully monitoring this situation.

Third Age Computer Fun
Third Age Computer FunLast month I reported the sad news that Third Age Computing Club, which organised computing classes for 50+ communities across Edinburgh East and the central belt, was to be dissolved. However I’m pleased to report that all 12 individual clubs are set to remain open under a new organisation so that classes can continue. The clubs in Edinburgh East that will remain open are in Craigmillar, Restalrig, Tollcross and the Southside. See here for more information.

Dumbiedykes bus
Dumbiedykes BusLast year the council started funding the new Number 60 bus service between Dumbiedykes and the Southside. This is a vital link for many elderly residents who do their shopping on Nicolson Street and Clerk Street, but who struggle to make it up the hill on foot. Unfortunately new figures show the service is only carrying between 25 and 32 passengers per day, meaning it is currently very costly to run. The criteria for assessing supported buses is due to change to take account of issues such as the lonlieness caused by being unable to get about, but it is clear that we need to ensure that the bus has enough passengers. I’m encouraging local residents, and businesses such as the Parliament and Rockstar Games, to get people using the service more often, so it can be maintained for those who really need it. If you live in the area – hop on!

Dates for your diary

  • Wednesday 18 March – Budget DayLive online from 12.30pm
  • Thursday 26 March – Spokes’ Spring Public Meeting: The bicycle in the City Centre, with Lesley Hinds, Council Transport Convenor, and other experts – Augustine United Church, 41 George IV Bridge – 7.30pm (doors at 6.45pm)
  • Monday 30 March – Dissolution of UK Parliament
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Press release: Edinburgh East MP Sheila Gilmore calls on UK Government to secure global arms deal

The UK Government is sending a Minister this week to the UN for crunch talks to secure a deal for a global system of regulation of the arms trade through the Arms Trade Treaty.

The arms trade is global by nature and yet no internationally agreed standards exist to ensure that arms are transferred responsibly.

The global arms trade can lead to horrific human rights abuses and so an international deal is more essential than ever.

Sheila Gilmore has called on UK Government to secure a deal that is legally-binding, transparent and covers all weapons and all types of weapon transfer.

Crucially, the deal must cover existing agreements to transfer weapons and prevent Russia from continuing to sell arms to the Syrian regime. Without this the talks risk being seen as a failure.

Sheila Gilmore MP said:

This is a crucial moment for the international community to stand against human rights abuses and stand up for a global deal to regulate weapons sales.

As the world’s fourth largest arms exporter Britain has a responsibility to ensure we impose tough standards on the sale of our weapons.

The Arms Trade Treaty is inadequate in its current form and so Minister must press for greater transparency and a broader scope so all weapons and all types of weapons transfers are covered. There cannot be loopholes.

There cannot be a lowest common denominator treaty. Without a strong agreement which would prevent Russia from continuing to supply President Assad’s regime, efforts in New York this week would be seen as a failure. Any efforts to protect the legitimate arms trade should not be allowed to perpetuate illegitimate practices.

ENDS

For more information please contact Matt Brennan, Parliamentary Assistant to Sheila Gilmore MP, on 020 7219 7062, 07742 986 513 or matthew.brennan@parliament.uk.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Mail Room: Arms exports

A number of constituents have contacted me in the past about the UK’s arms exports and our arms trade relationships with other nations. I set out my thoughts on this subject in a recent letter to a constituent which you can see below:

Thank you for your recent letter regarding the arms trade.

In your letter you highlight continuing concerns surrounding the UK’s arms export relationship with Bahrain, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. I firmly believe that an effective arms control strategy is vitally important in order to prevent sales of weaponry to regimes with a poor human rights record, into unstable regions and to countries where money would be far better spend on development projects. It is with this in mind that I am happy to inform you that I have already signed EDM 2166, tabled by Caroline Lucas MP. You can view my signature here.

The Committee on Arms Export Controls published a report in April 2011 which called into question the government’s record on the application of the consolidated criteria which set out the basis on which the government assesses licence applications for military goods. The Criteria include consideration of whether the proposed export would:

  • contravene the UK’s international commitments
  • be used for internal repression
  • provoke or prolong armed conflicts or aggravate existing tensions in the destination country
  • be used aggressively against another country
  • adversely affect the national security of the UK or allies
  • be diverted or re-exported under undesirable conditions
  • seriously undermine the economy
  • seriously hamper the sustainable development of the recipient country

The report issued by the committee concluded that:

“while the consolidated criteria appear robust their application seems to be less so. We therefore recommend that the Government ensures that the EU Common Position is rigidly and consistently applied.

This is clearly an alarming statement and one that I hoped the Government would examine seriously. Unfortunately, however, the government’s response read as follows:

“The Government does not accept that there is any evidence that the application of the Consolidated Criteria is in anyway less robust than the EU Common Position.”

You can view the full committee report here.

And the full Government response here.

In light of the above, I have written to the Chair of the committee to request information on how they plan to proceed from here. I will contact you again when I receive a response. Thank you once again for taking the time to write to me on this important issue.

Below is the response the I received back from Sir John Stanley, Chair of the committee:

Letter from Sir John Stanley regarding arms exportsI found this response very disappointing. Sir John fails to engage with the government’s dismissal of the committee’s conclusion, instead stating that they continue to evaluate the government’s actions. I conveyed this in a further letter to my constituent, along with a more positive statement made by Sir John during a debate in October 2011:

I have recently received a letter dated 6 March 2012 from Sir John Stanley MP, Chair of The Committees of Arms Export Controls, regarding your concerns over arms export controls. Please find a copy enclosed.

In my letter I referred to the report that the committee published on April 5 2011, and the Government’s subsequent response. In sections 5 of the committee’s conclusions and recommendations, the report read:

“We further conclude that, while the consolidated criteria appear robust their application seems to be less so. We therefore recommend that the Government ensures that the EU Common Position is rigidly and consistently applied.”

I also noted the Government’s response to this statement which overtly refused to accept any doubt over the appropriate application of the consolidated criteria, and inquired as to the committee’s next action. I particularly focused on whether it would be appropriate for the committee to try and recall the government to continue to pressure them on this issue.

Sir John’s response is disappointing. He does not engage with the Government’s dismissal of the Committee’s conclusion, merely stating that they are continuing to evaluate the Government’s compliance with the Consolidated Criteria. I do note, however, that during a Westminster Hall debate on 20 October 2011, Sir John raised concerns over the Government’s lack of transparency regarding the reasons for its special export relationship with Saudi Arabia:

“I believe that the Government are skating on thin ice in their present policy of the non-revocation of a single arms export licence to Saudi Arabia. I understand the reasons for that policy, but regret that so far the Government have been less than forthcoming—indeed, pretty much non-forthcoming—about the real reasons why they treat Saudi Arabia so differently from those other countries to which I have referred. I am in no doubt about the reasons behind the Government’s policy: there is an intelligence dimension, an oil dimension and a British business interest, all of which are perfectly relevant and legitimate ministerial considerations. I believe, however, that the Government would do better to be open with the House and the Committees about why their policy towards Saudi Arabia is so conspicuously different from that applied to the other countries in question. I hope that Ministers will reflect on that point.”

You can view the debate in full here.

I hope that the Committees on Arms Export Controls continues to act strongly in this area, and I await the publication of its second Report with interest.

As always if you would like to comment further on this issue, you can contact me by email on sheila.gilmore.mp@parliament.uk.

 

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail