|

Save Bishop street, MP Jim tells Commons

JIM Cunningham MP has taken the fight to save Coventry’s Royal Mail sorting office to the floor of the House of Commons.
Speaking during a debate on the Chancellor’s latest Budget, the Coventry South MP expressed ‘concern’ over plans by the Royal Mail to relocate from its Bishop Street base to Northampton.
An estimated 600 jobs could be lost through the move in 2009, according to Communication Workers Union (CWU) officials.
Mr Cunningham (Labour) was one of the early backers of the campaign to save Bishop Street, tabling an Early Day Motion on the issue
He will be among the speakers speaking at a CWU-organised rally in Coventry this Saturday.
Speaking in the Commons last night, Mr Cunningham said: “There is concern in Coventry about the quality of service that can be delivered from Northampton to Coventry, the times of postal deliveries and whether the 600 employees will keep their jobs.
“I do not think that the Royal Mail even has a site earmarked for a sorting office in Northampton.
“Conservative-controlled Coventry city council suddenly flipped its lid today, because it decided to support those Royal Mail workers, whereas it was neutral.”
Mr Cunningham also expressed concern during the debate over Coventry City Council’s changes to the support it offers disabled people who work.
“Coventry city council has withdrawn the £3 a day payment to people who have disabilities and who are doing jobs,” he said.
“That gives people a good idea of what we can expect after the May elections and, more importantly, what might happen if the Conservatives were to return to power.”
Speaking about Gordon Brown’s budget, Mr Cunningham praised moves to strengthen the pension protection scheme.
“I believe that one of the best things that the Government have done is to introduce the pension protection scheme,” said the City MP.
“It is one of the most fundamental things that the Government have done, whereas the previous Government presided over a pensions disaster.”
He added that 120,000 people who lost their pensions because of company insolvency will be able to benefit from the scheme.
And responding to Conservative criticism of the Budget, Mr Cunningham hit back at the Tory record in Government.
“What I remember about the 1980s is the destruction of the manufacturing industry of the west midlands, the three million unemployed, the capping of local government’s capital programmes, schools being left to decay through lack of repairs and the loss of council houses,” he said.

Ends

March 27, 2007
Full remarks of Jim Cunningham MP during budget debate
Mr. Jim Cunningham (Coventry, South) (Lab): I was interested to hear what the right hon. and learned Member for Rushcliffe (Mr. Clarke) had to say. It sounded to me that he wished he was in a position to deliver what the Chancellor is delivering. There is nothing wrong with admiring the Chancellor. In fact, the hon. and learned Gentleman has had his admirers. When he said that he thought the Chancellor was average, could he have been describing himself? He mentioned the Prison Service, for example, and prisons are pretty full, but I remember when Lord Ferris was in Stoke Aldermoor in Coventry—his attitude was “bang them up”. That was the attitude of the ex-Chancellor’s Government and the general attitude to law and order.
Under the stewardship of the previous Government, we certainly remember the lack of policemen, whereas this Government have increased police numbers. We can debate whether they are at the right or wrong levels, but we have increased the numbers of policemen on the streets, just as we have increased the number of wardens and assistant police officers on the streets, particularly in the inner cities.
The right hon. and learned Gentleman mentioned opinion polls. Well, he alleged that this side of the House is obsessed with them, but his new leader is also obsessed by opinion polls and image. Reductions in tax were mentioned, so let me remind the right hon. and learned Gentleman about debates on 17 per cent. VAT on fuel. We had many a debate in the Chamber on a Friday morning about the £10 winter allowance, which the previous Government did not do much to putup. We should also remember the Conservative Government’s record on the pensions link—they actually broke the link. To hear Conservative Members on their high horses tonight, nodding their heads when people talk about restoring the link, is, quite frankly, nothing short of hypocrisy when they were the party that took it away.
Mr. Graham Stuart: Will the hon. Gentleman travel back in time to 1980 when the link was broken? At that time, this country was economically on the floor after years of failed socialism, so the Government were forced into making that cut. Will he at least recognise that Conservatives have for many years been campaigning—I certainly have—to restore the link before 2012?
Mr. Cunningham: What I remember about the 1980s is the destruction of the manufacturing industry of the west midlands, the 3 million unemployed, the capping of local government’s capital programmes, schools being left to decay through lack of repairs and the loss of council houses. The hon. Gentleman should therefore be very careful about who he lectures about the 1980s. It is always worth reminding Conservative Members exactly what happened then. If the hon. Gentleman still wants to talk about the 1980s, let us talk about 15 per cent. interest rates and negative equity.
Even more importantly, when Conservative Members get on their high horses about pensions issues and try to blame the Chancellor for present pensions problems, let me remind them—and particularly the hon. Member for Beverley and Holderness (Mr. Stuart), who brought up the issue of the 1980s—about the mis-selling of pensions. I recall companies such as Rolls-Royce spending a lot of money trying to encourage people to leave SERPS and go into private pension schemes.
Mr. Geoffrey Robinson: Would my hon. Friend care to comment on another aspect of the issue raised by the Opposition: that after they broke the link, they failed to restore it in the following 17 years, whereas the Labour Government are committed to restoring it after nine, not 18, years in office?
Mr. Cunningham: I certainly agree with my hon. Friend about that. When we talk about the mis-selling of pensions and the present crisis, I believe that one of the best things that the Government have done is to introduce the pension protection scheme. It is one of the most fundamental things that the Government have done, whereas the previous Government presided over a pensions disaster. So when we look at what this Government have done for pensions, the pension protection scheme is well worth taking note of, when 120,000 people will be able to benefit from it to the tune of 80 to 90 per cent. of their pensions. Certain companies such as Rover could have been excluded, but they are now going to be included. When people want to talk about who did what in the 80s and 90s and probably into the new century, they should be careful about what they say.
I welcome the fact that we have one of the highest growth rates in Europe, no matter how people try to play with the figures. I also welcome the fact that there are more nurses and doctors now—although we have had difficulties in the health service, the situation is not as diabolical as the right hon. and learned Member for Rushcliffe tried to make out, because we can overcome the present problems. One of the problems in the health service is the change in the way in which finances are administered. We are going from an old culture to a new culture, which is payment by results. That will take time to feed through because we are changing from an old culture, which involved running deficits, to a new culture, where people get paid for what they buy. That is a fundamental difference and it will take time to come through. I welcome the fact that we have more schoolteachers than we have ever had, that they are better paid than they ever were and that we have more new schools. We could go on all night about what the Government have or have not done, and other hon. Members have outlined the Government’s achievements.
I will finish on a local issue in Coventry, where the Royal Mail is to move its sorting offices to Northampton. As the hon. Member for Northampton, South (Mr. Binley) knows, I have nothing against him, but there is concern in Coventry about the quality of service that can be delivered from Northampton to Coventry, the times of postal deliveries and whether the 600 employees will keep their jobs. I do not think that the Royal Mail even has a site earmarked for a sorting office in Northampton. Conservative-controlled Coventry city council suddenly flipped its lid today, because it decided to support those Royal Mail workers, whereas it was neutral.
I shall finish with this thought about what the Conservatives might do if they were to get back into power. Coventry city council has withdrawn the £3 a day payment to people who have disabilities and who are doing jobs. That gives people a good idea of what we can expect after the May elections and, more importantly, what might happen if the Conservatives were to return to power.