Glenis Willmott MEP

We have moved!

2011-11-28T19:04:00.000+01:00

My blog has now been moved to my new website at gleniswillmott.eu/blog. All of my posts have been moved over to the new site.

You should be automatically redirected there in a few seconds. If not, please click here to visit the new blog.

Another step towards ending blacklisting of workers - but there is still much further to go

2011-11-25T14:33:00.000+01:00

To guarantee standards of health and safety, workers need representation. When I drafted the European Parliament's report on Health and Safety in 2007, I found that the presence of health and safety representatives in the workplace lowered the number of occupational accidents and diseases reported, and so any health and safety policy would need to encourage workers' participation.

But in many firms, particularly in sectors such as construction, workers can face discrimination and even dismissal for representing their colleagues in this way. The practice of "blacklisting" - where workers may be refused employment by employers across the whole sector - is a serious problem, despite the fact that it is is illegal in the UK. The result of this is that some people have been unable to work for decades, simply because they have tried to improve the working conditions of their peers.

The issue of blacklisting was brought to me by an East Midlands constituent of mine and by the Blacklist Support Group, who have worked hard to campaign against the illegal practice.

So I am delighted that this week, the European Parliament's Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (EMPL) called for an end to blacklisting of employees through tougher sanctions for offending employers, thanks in large part to the work of Labour MEP Stephen Hughes. The Committee also called for greater protection for those who blow the whistle about health and safety risks in their workplace. The call, agreed on a cross-party basis, forms part of the Committee's report on the EU's Health and Safety Strategy, and is likely to be adopted by the full Parliament next year.

This followed my own earlier attempt to adopt such a call into in the Committee on Environment, Food and Public Health, which also discussed the report on the Health and Safety Strategy. My amendment (no. 22), which similarly called for a change in the law to end blacklisting, was unfortunately unsuccessful - because the ALDE group of MEPs on the Committee, which includes the Liberal Democrats, decided as a group to join with centre-right MEPs and block the amendment. I am pleased that MEPs on the EMPL committee have not done the same.

Once Parliament adopts the report, the onus will be on the European Commission to respond to Parliament's call and bring forward a change in the law. My Labour colleagues and I will keep working to maintain the pressure on the Commission to do this. This week was an important step towards an end to blacklisting, but there we still have much further to go.

Recession depression

2011-11-23T17:04:00.001+01:00

This week an article in the Guardian highlighted the shocking fact that a quarter of all US women are taking anti-depressants or other medications for mental disorders. Unfortunately the picture in Europe is very similar, with the UK and Ireland also dishing out high quantities of anti-depressants, and the rest of Europe following suit.

There are two questions that need to be addressed; whether medication is the best way to deal with mental illness, and why people are feeling increasingly depressed and anxious.

The debate between psychiatry and psychology is an old one; are mental illnesses best treated with medication or with counselling? Obviously each case has to be looked at individually, but in general it does seem that we are moving towards a 'quick-fix' culture of using anti-depressants, when actually the many root causes of depression need to be addressed. These can range from social exclusion, isolation, drug or alcohol use, poverty, grief, physical disease or stress at work. Pharmaceutical companies can make big profits out of anti-depressants, whilst providing counselling and support for somebody going through a difficult phase in their life can be challenging and expensive.

And the problem is getting worse. During these incredibly difficult economic times we have become used to hearing figures being thrown about - GDP falling here, national debt increasing there, interest rates rising everywhere - but much more shocking are the statistics on the human cost of the crisis. In Greece, for example, suicide rates have increased by 40% this year as jobs, wages and pensions are cut. Normal families are finding it difficult to cope under the extreme austerity measures imposed by right wing governments across Europe, and it is no surprise that depression and other mental disorders are on the rise.

This is an issue I'm looking at in the European Parliament and I will be hosting an event in the new year focusing on the effects of the economic crisis on mental health. In the meantime we have to ensure that the economic decisions we make are mindful of the huge implications they can have on people's health and wellbeing.

An emotional meeting with sufferers of SCID

2011-11-22T14:51:00.002+01:00

Last Saturday, I met Jack and Guy along with their parents to talk about Severe Combined Immunodeficiency(SCID. Both Jack, aged 7 and Guy, aged 6, suffered from SCID when they were both around four months old.

When Jack and Guy were born, they were, as far as their parents were concerned, healthy new born babies. But the joy of their new arrivals was brought to an abrupt end, when their children became very ill in a very short period of time.

Both children were diagnosed with SCID and were taken to Great Ormond Street Hospital, where they were treated by Professor Bobby Gaspar, who is a leading expert in the disease, and was also present at the meeting.

Guy was flown by helicopter, and Jack rushed to London in an ambulance. Both parents became very emotional as they described the agony of seeing their baby taken into the care of medical staff, not knowing if they would see them alive again.

Jack’s parents told me how they set off in the car to London, only to get stuck in traffic, as they saw the blue lights of a Leicestershire ambulance approach from behind, knowing that Jack was fighting for his life inside, and that there was nothing they could do to help.

Severe Combined Immunodeficiency affects many children across Europe, and a simple screening test at birth could prevent the pain and anguish children and their parents go through.

The test costs around 3 pounds to carry out, and there will be an initial set up cost of 2 Million pounds. This may seem like a large amount of money during the current financial crisis, but it is an investment that will pay for itself, especially when you consider that it costs thousands of pounds per day to look after a sick child in intensive care.

Jack and Guy’s story was difficult to listen to at times, and when Guy told the meeting that he thought he would die, there wasn’t a dry eye in the room.

I am fully behind the campaign to have all new-born children screened for SCID, and will do all I can to make it happen. Because listening to Jack and Guy’s story, and knowing that their suffering could have been prevented, is enough for me to take action.

Crisis for social democracy

2011-11-21T19:20:00.003+01:00

There are 27 member states in the European Union. Just one – Slovenia – has a majority social democrat government, following the crushing defeat at the weekend of the Spanish Socialists. With Greece’s PASOK government also being replaced in recent weeks by the technocrats of Lucas Papademos, these are sorry days for progressive politics.

Apart from Slovenia, there are 5 others – Austria, Denmark, Finland, Ireland and Luxembourg – where social democrats are members of ruling coalitions. Yet in 1999, 13 out of the then 15 governments in the European Union came from the centre left.

At a time when capitalism – or at least major parts of it – is clearly not giving people what they want; when bankers & financiers continue to take unwarranted bonuses while small businesses and ordinary people are crying out for loans and mortgages, and when economic growth is miniscule if measurable at all, this ought to be the left’s opportunity.

Following World War II, social democracy was the key player in creating more civilised, more egalitarian societies based on a combination of communal services and individual rights. It largely defined what became acceptable in terms of the public provision of health, education, pensions and reasonable working hours.

Yet, after around a century of universal suffrage across the continent, social democracy is getting the thumbs down from millions of people.

So, the crisis of Europe’s economies is also a crisis for the centre-left, and it cannot be solved by better branding or slightly different policy agendas. As I said in my speech to Labour Party Conference in September, we must actually rethink social democracy.

The re-thinking must come from all parts of the Labour movement and beyond; from trade unions, from intellectuals and academics, from practising politicians, from activists, from single interest groups.

But we also need to learn together with socialists and social democrats in France, Spain & Germany, because the answers in a globalised society will be international ones.

People do still aspire to a society based on fairness, on a wider distribution of wealth and income, and on working together to achieve a better world for themselves and their children. It is up to social democrats to meet these aspirations.

The next President must call for an end to the European Parliament's costly "travelling circus" - and so must David Cameron

2011-11-18T16:07:00.000+01:00

This week was another busy week in Strasbourg, Parliament's second seat. Due to a stipulation in the Treaties which govern the European Union, all 736 MEPs and many hundreds of staff members must decamp from Brussels to the Alsatian capital for the Parliament's monthly plenary session.

This "travelling circus" costs the taxpayer nearly £175 million and produces an extra 19,000 tonnes of CO2 per year. At a time when public spending is under pressure across Europe and when urgent international action is needed on climate change, all of this is not just unnecessary, but is potentially also damaging to people and their livelihoods.

The majority agree. Nearly 70% of MEPs who responded to a survey in 2010 thought that all of Parliament's plenary sessions should be held in Brussels, not in Strasbourg. More importantly, nearly 1.3 million Europeans have signed a petition to end these needless costs and allow the Parliament to have a single seat in Brussels.

That is why I have co-signed the Official Seat Pledge, and why I have been calling on many of my colleagues in the Socialist Group and across Parliament to do the same. As various candidates line up to run for the Presidency of the European Parliament, we are calling on them to promise that they will push for a single seat for the Parliament. With the President's support, Parliament will be able to request a change to the Treaties which govern Parliament's official seat.

As I wrote earlier this year, I led an initiative to cut down on the number of Strasbourg trips, by condensing the two September sessions in to a single week. Whilst this would not be an end to the Strasbourg carousel, it would at least reduce the costs and the workloads involved for now (though the decision is currently being challenged in the courts by the French Government).

However, the agreement of all national governments, including the UK's, will be needed to change the Treaties. Unfortunately, the Tory-led Government has flip-flopped on the issue. In May this year, David Cameron supported the One Seat campaign. Yet in September, in a behind-the-scenes deal, he betrayed his own MEPs - not to mention UK taxpayers - and withdrew his support.

Strasbourg is a symbolic and historic city, having been at the centre of conflict in Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is right that we recognise that by having important European institutions in the city, such as the Council of Europe (not part of the EU), the EU's Ombudsman, and perhaps further institutions in the future.

But at such a high economic and environmental cost, a second seat for the European Parliament is not the right way to do this. If we are to put an end to the Parliament's costly to-ing and fro-ing between two cities, David Cameron needs to think again and act in the interests of UK and European citizens - rather than his own.

Unemployment - Ministers must stop the blame game.

2011-11-16T16:08:00.000+01:00

Earlier today, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) released the latest unemployment figures. The statistics show that unemployment has risen to 2.62 million, but more worryingly, the youth unemployment rate has hit the 1 million mark. Overall, this means that unemployment has increased to 8.3%.

In the finest tradition of this Tory led government, the Employment Minister, Chris Grayling blamed someone else for the worst figures in 17 years – This time, it wasn’t the previous Labour government, the weather or a Royal wedding, but the economic crisis in the Eurozone.

It appears that Ministers, in their attempt to spin their way out of these disastrous figures, have forgotten the first rule of economics, that unemployment is a lagging indicator of the economy, and so cannot be blamed on a financial crisis that only started during the summer.

Mr Grayling’s assertion that the Eurozone is to blame is a work of pure fiction. The government’s own statistics show that unemployment was going up before the economic crisis in Europe started, showing a rise from 2.45 million in the three months from March to May, to 2.57 million from June to August.

So once again the government fails to take responsibility for its own actions. The economic crisis in the Eurozone will inevitably have an impact on the UK, but David Cameron and his Ministers need to start taking responsibility for the decisions that they make and stop blaming everyone else for their failing economic policies.

The healthy chocolate doughnut?

2011-11-14T19:27:00.000+01:00

More and more people want to make healthy choices in terms of the food they eat, but when deciding which food should go in the shopping trolley it can get a bit confusing. A certain brand of breakfast cereal might be 'fortified with vitamins and iron' but actually contain around 40% sugar. And a 'low fat' brand of crackers might actually be extremely high in salt. Then, of course, you have the foods that 'boost your immune system' or 'lower your cholesterol', but can these claims be trusted?

That is why MEPs and European governments agreed the Health Claims Regulation, which should ensure that all the claims you see on food are scientifically verified. The European Food Safety Authority is currently assessing the huge amount of claims manufacturers want to use, and have so far found that only around 20% have a sound scientific basis and should be allowed. The rest will soon be illegal, which just goes to show how many unfounded and misleading claims exist on the market.

Another part of the regulation was to ensure that health claims were not used on foods that are, on balance, unhealthy. This involves setting limits on the amount of fat, saturates, sugar and salt that can be in a product bearing a health claim. However, we are still waiting for the European Commission to come forward with these maximum amounts. In the meantime we could have manufacturers marketing a chocolate doughnut as 'healthy' because of the fibre it contains, or vitamins that have been added to it. I have been calling for these maximum limits to be set for years, but in a recent exchange of letters with the Commission it is clear that there is still no concrete date.

In the meantime shoppers should make use of consumer-friendly schemes such as the traffic light system used in many supermarkets which allows you to see how high or low a product is in fat, saturates, salt and sugar at a glance. Unfortunately, for the timebeing, some of these health claims need to be taken with a pinch of salt.

Berlusconi loses his job, but the real tragedy is the thousands of normal Italians losing theirs

2011-11-11T15:45:00.002+01:00

Drama is unfolding across Europe today as Greece swears in a new Prime Minister and Italy awaits Berlusconi's official resignation. The rising Italian interest rate has meant debts have become uncontrollable for the EU's third largest economy, and the Senate today approved the drastic austerity measures demanded by the European Union.

It is an extremely worrying time for ordinary Greek and Italian people who are seeing widespread job losses, rising retirement ages, and diminishing standards of living. Sadly it will be these normal hard-working families who bear the brunt of the 'punishment' right wing governments across Europe want to inflict on Eurozone members with high debts.

Because we have to remember that it's not 'Brussels' trying to entrench austerity across Europe, it's the vast majority of EU countries which are run by right-wing parties, and the large number of right-wing European Commissioners we have. Unfortunately the Social Democrats in the European Parliament are at their lowest ebb ever too. The likes of Angela Merkel, Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron are in power in Europe, and all think that drastic cuts are the answer to the current crisis.

We can see from our own economy that cuts alone do not work - the UK was recovering strongly up until summer 2010 when it ground to a halt as the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition embarked on its austerity programme. What we really need is to focus on growth and long term solutions for the Eurozone, as well as showing some solidarity with our European neighbours. Because it is clear, if the Eurozone fails, our economy will be dragged down with it. And if we don't invest in jobs then unemployment, especially among young people, will continue to rise along with our debts.

One way we could generate some capital to invest in our future would be a financial transaction tax, which would ensure that those responsible for the crisis contribute to clearing up the mess. Bonuses continue to be paid out and large profits continue to be made by the financial sector while the rest of society suffers. Support is growing for a global or EU-wide Robin Hood tax, and George Osborne is becoming an increasingly lone voice in opposing it.

Alongside the financial transaction tax, the European Parliament is also looking at Eurobonds. These would allow Eurozone countries to benefit from cheaper loan rates by spreading the risk across all Eurozone countries, preventing excessive debts such as the ones we are seeing in Italy. And Britain must not stand on the sidelines as we negotiate these measures; we might not be in the Eurozone but it cannot be denied that we are all at risk if Greece or Italy defaults.

The right's answer to the crisis is not working, and we need to make sure the Labour Party and our allies across Europe have a strong voice in fighting for a more prosperous and fair economy.

Parliament calls for new public contracts rules - but that doesn't let the Government off the hook

2011-10-26T14:18:00.001+02:00

As my constituents are only too aware, the Tory-led Government's decision on Thameslink this summer will cost up to 1,400 jobs directly, and many thousands more indirectly in the region.

This major public contract was awarded to the lowest-cost bidder, without taking into account wider social and economic factors.

So yesterday in Strasbourg, I welcomed the European Parliament's call for tougher new rules for public procurement.

When a public contract is awarded, MEPs have said that the lowest price should no longer be the main factor in deciding which bid is successful. Instead, social, economic and environmental benefits should always be considered and standards should be driven up in areas such as quality of employment and sustainability.

Whilst new legislation is desperately needed, this doesn't let the Government off the hook. Even under the current rules, the Government could have chosen to take into account a number of economic and social criteria, rather than opting for the 'lowest-cost only' option.

The Government could also have chosen to start the process again from scratch, with better social and economic criteria. As a Director General of the European Commission confirmed, this would have been permissible under the existing procurement law - but the Government have refused to do so.

MEPs are calling for the European Commission to put new social procurement rules into the legislation it will be bringing forward earlier this year. I am also calling on the Commission to make sure all Governments make full use of these new rules. A repeat of the disastrous Thameslink decision must not be allowed.

Our priority should be jobs - not a referendum that would put jobs at risk

2011-10-25T14:53:00.000+02:00

Once again we have been forced to witness an out-of-touch Conservative Party tearing itself apart over Europe. The government was always going to win the EU referendum vote, and Parliament has made the right decision. But David Cameron has been weakened both at home and abroad, at a time when what we really need is strong leadership.

In the current economic climate, the number one priority of all politicians should be boosting jobs and tackling the grave economic situation we face. A referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union would not generate a single long-term job or do anything to help hard working families who are struggling to make ends meet. In fact, if we seriously considered giving up our place in the most powerful trading bloc in the world, Britain would jeopardise its position as a credible world player and put foreign investment into the UK at risk. And if the Eurosceptics were to win such a referendum, helped by the disproportionately anti-European press, it would be disastrous. Approximately 3.5 million British jobs depend on

Britain

's access to the single market, and if we do not have a voice at the table where the common rules for that market are made, we will end up like Norway, implementing all European laws without having any say on their content.

Over the last few months, whilst the Conservative Party have been indulging in naval-gazing and internal disputes, Labour MEPs have been working hard to pass laws on bankers' bonuses, secure long term reform of the financial services sector, reduce data roaming charges and secure new rights for Brits who fall victim to crime in other EU countries. In order to get these results we actively and positively engage with our colleagues from different countries.

David Cameron needs to be doing the same. The Eurozone crisis is our crisis too - but, having lost credibility with his counterparts, the Prime Minister is not showing the leadership we need. At the last European Summit Nicolas Sarkosy is reported to have told Cameron to stop "interfering". He desperately needs to focus on rebuilding relations with other EU leaders to deliver a stable solution to the Eurozone crisis. Jobs depend on it, and that is what really matters to the British people.

Dog blog for found hounds & merrier terriers

2011-10-24T11:19:00.000+02:00

As UK MEPs we receive a pretty regular postbag on various animal welfare issues. But it’s obviously not just Britain which is a nation of animal lovers. With the majority of MEPs across the 27 Members States recently signing a Written Declaration on the way dogs are treated in the EU, a clear message has been sent to the European Commission to come up with some new policies to address a serious problem.

Historically, there have been huge differences in animal welfare across the countries of Europe. The treatment of animals has, for the most part, been the responsibility of the member state, rather than the EU. In fact, until 1997, under EU law, animals were actually treated as goods rather than live creatures.

It was new EU treaties, however, which changed this. The Amsterdam Treaty of 1997 introduced the concept of animals as “sentient beings”, and the much maligned Treaty of Lisbon actually incorporates this directly as an Article of the Treaty. As a result, it has made it possible to introduce much more legislation about the way we treat animals.

The Written Declaration supported by Parliament calls for compulsory micro-chipping of dogs along with an effective and reliable system of dog registration. This is not only crucial for successful animal health & welfare management, but should also lead to reuniting stray dogs with their owners, help prevent the illegal puppy trade and would allow better prevention of disease through vaccination, thus protecting human public health, as well as the health of our pets.

And through a more considered approach to controlling dog population through systematic neutering and educational strategies and programmes, we can prevent the awful killing of healthy animals, as has taken place in Romania.

Having been one of the early signatories to the Declaration, I’m delighted it has gained such support from Parliament. Dog-lovers everywhere now await some positive proposals from the European Commission.

Why can’t we be like Norway?

2011-10-21T11:18:00.000+02:00

Amidst dire threats of three line whips, potential resignations, and cries of “Britain out,” the Tories will get to debate their favourite topic in Westminster next week. Like moths to a flame, Conservative MPs seem unable to keep away from arguments about Europe, an issue which has been a source of huge divisions amongst right wingers for thirty years.

I have little doubt that, somewhere in the debate, we will hear the hoary old question; “Why can’t we be like Norway?” Able to go their own way, not beholden to the Brussels bureaucrats, not subject to all that red tape, surely Norway is the answer?

Well, because it’s not quite as simple as that.

This week in Brussels, I actually had a meeting with representatives of the Norwegian government (Labour by the way, so maybe the Tories don’t want to be exactly like Norway). They weren’t there to offer me political asylum from the austerity measures of our Coalition government, or indeed to discuss the Nobel Peace prize.

They actually wanted my help in changing two pieces of EU legislation; the tobacco products and audio visual directives.

Their specific concerns need not detain us here. But why would Norway – a country outside the EU – be worried about EU law?

Quite simply because, as a member of the European Economic Area, which has favoured trading status with the EU, Norway has to conform to EU laws.

I’ve heard it referred to as “government by fax.”, though I’m sure there is a modern internet based equivalent. It means receiving new laws in government offices in Oslo without the opportunity, or indeed the power, to influence the content of the laws emanating from Brussels. The European Union goes through its lengthy and considered democratic process involving all 27 member states and their European MPs, leading to the eventual consensus agreement. Meanwhile Norway has no say in any of this but has to do what the law says!

So to the Tory MPs who even now are planning their Commons speeches and preparing for their finest hour, a gentle word of advice. By all means argue that we should be like Norway – but at least recognise that it would mean having to put up with what the EU – without any input from the UK - would demand of us, assuming we wanted to trade with them.

And it would mean representatives of the British Government arranging meetings with French, German, Italian or Latvian MEPs to ask for their help. Perhaps not quite what the “Britain Out” fanatics are after!

Fox on the run highlights lobby activity

2011-10-20T11:39:00.001+02:00

The Liam Fox affair in the UK has once again highlighted lobbying activity and its role in the democratic process.

You’ll generally find lobbyists towards the bottom of the popularity league table, along with the usual suspects such as estate agents, journalists, bankers, . . .and of course politicians.

Like death and taxes, lobbyists will always be with us. So, are they undemocratic propagandists with only the interests of their lords and masters to consider, ready to use any means to get their way, or, as the European Parliament website suggests, do they “provide Parliament with knowledge and specific expertise in numerous economic, social, environmental and scientific areas.”

The only rule seems to be that there are no rules. For every example I’ve come across where lobbying has been partial, obstructive and anti-progressive, there is another, where the lobbying can provide important insights to help effective legislation.

When I was working on new food labelling laws earlier this year, a reputed €1 billion was spent by the food industry opposing new rules for front of pack labelling, for traffic lights and for other improvements all called for by consumer and health groups and clearly demanded by the vast majority of customers.

However, a more recent lobby, by members of the National Farmers Union in the East Midlands, was a useful contribution to the debate about the new proposals for the Common Agricultural Policy, and helped me – a non-farmer – to clarify the issues in my own mind while increasing my awareness of the situation facing a particular group of my constituents.

In the European Parliament, new rules for lobbyists came in earlier this year, and while it remains to be seen how effective the new regime will be in regulating lobbying behaviour, there have been some important improvements. For example, there is now a lobby register, which clarifies who they are, what their interests are, as well as requiring them to provide a limited amount of financial information. Above all, we have established a code of conduct for lobbyists, with access denied to Parliament as well as adverse publicity if the code is broken.

We've taken action here in the European Parliament, and it's time David Cameron finally put forward some proposals for how the UK Parliament regulates lobbyists

Plain packets for cigarettes?

2011-10-14T10:40:00.000+02:00

This week the Australian Senate delayed a vote on standardised packaging for cigarettes after intense pressure from tobacco lobbyists. The EU, too, should be considering proposals on plain packaging but it's the same story; extreme pressure from the pro-tobacco lobby has meant the European Commission has delayed the proposals until April 2012 at the earliest.

This is not acceptable. There is a real appetite to start work on the revision of the Tobacco Products Directive, which regulates how cigarettes and other forms of tobacco can be packaged, and what can be put inside them. I've been working with a huge range of health and consumer groups, including the British Heart Foundation and Cancer Research UK, to promote policies which will actually reduce the amount of tobacco we use in the UK and across Europe. Tobacco is the biggest cause of preventable deaths globally, it kills one in ten people worldwide and half of all smokers will be killed by it. And the damage it causes costs EU countries 100 billion euro a year. We have to get on with changing our laws to help people quit and stop young people from smoking in the first place. That is why today I sent a letter to the President of the European Commission, co-signed by 21 NGOs and charities, major pharmaceutical companies and 27 other MEPs from different political parties all over Europe, to urge for the proposals to be brought forward.

Once MEPs start work I will be fighting to see standardised packaging for tobacco products. The tobacco industry themselves have admitted that the cigarette packet is the last possible place for them to advertise on, and there are some obvious examples of branding being used to make cigarettes look 'milder' or less harmful, or to specifically appeal to young people or women, such as the ultra-feminine Vogue brand. So called 'plain' packaging would not just be a white box, but instead green or brown coloured with a large pictorial health warning, and the brand name in a standard font. They would be no easier for counterfeiters to copy than a current packet.

I'll keep pushing the Commission so that MEPs can start this important work, and in the meantime I wish Australian Health Minister Nicola Roxon every success with her attempts to protect the health of Australian citizens.

Real life 'Lassie dogs' detect epileptic fits

2011-10-12T19:10:00.002+02:00

Today I hosted an event in the European Parliament on epilepsy. As a chair of the Parliament's Health Sub-Committee I chose to focus on this neurological disorder which affects around 1 in 100 people in the UK and across the EU.

Anyone can develop epilepsy at any time in their life but it is most commonly diagnosed in children and people over 65. An epileptic fit is a very frightening experience for the sufferer and there is often no warning of when it will happen. But what we heard today was that specially trained dogs can warn epilepsy sufferers of an upcoming seizure. The dogs can quite literally be life savers.

The danger from an epileptic fit is not actually the condition itself, it is from the environment in which the fit takes place. Patients will often smash their heads against objects or fall down stairs. These dogs can predict an epileptic fit up to an hour before an attack happens, therefore allowing the patient to get to a place of safety. I was surprised to learn that the dogs can also reduce the amount and intensity of the fits - amazing! The benefits to sufferers of epilepsy are vast, however, there are benefits to the NHS too, which saves money and time because the patient doesn’t have to have an ambulance called or make a hospital visit.

We were given this presentation by an expert from Croatia, but the dogs are also specially trained by Epilepsy Action in the UK. I hope today's meeting helped raise awareness across all of Europe for this fantastic practice which can be a real help and comfort to people affected by epilepsy.

Doctors must be able to communicate with their patients

2011-10-06T12:05:00.000+02:00

Yesterday I spoke to BBC Record Europe about possible EU rule changes to ensure doctors are proficient in English before being allowed to practice in the UK. This comes after a small number of very serious incidents, including the case of David Grey, killed by a painkiller overdose prescribed by a German doctor previously refused work due to his poor English skills. Some blamed the current European Professional Qualifications Directive for preventing employers from refusing to let a doctor practice based on their language skills. That simply isn't true, in fact the current Directive states that they must have the language skills necessary to perform their duties in whichever EU country they are working in.

However, it does highlight the need to make the European rules stronger to ensure that these kinds of mistakes can never be made again. Currently it is up to the individual employer to make a judgement on whether a doctor has the necessary language abilities, so we need to look at a more comprehensive system of assessing language skills. The European Commission has published a green paper with ideas to update the Directive, and the European Parliament has also been voting on the ideas. With my Labour MEP colleagues I will be supporting stricter controls on language assessment to make sure all healthcare professionals can communicate effectively with their patients and colleagues.

We will also be calling for a robust alert system so that when a doctor is struck off in one country, they are not allowed to put more lives at risk in another EU country. Whilst we wait for European rules to be improved the NHS needs to be able to communicate and share information effectively about the suitability of doctors. However their ability to do this is one of many things that Andrew Lansley's breaking up of the health service is putting in jeopardy.

Of course we need a balanced approach and any rule changes should not discriminate against highly skilled and much needed healthcare professionals from around the EU, who provide a valuable service to Britain. However, communication with patients is key to the work of any healthcare professional and we need to make sure we are only employing people who can work safely and effectively in the British health service.

Tory Euro MPs declare war on Cameron

2011-10-03T16:18:00.003+02:00

The Tories being split over Europe is not exactly breaking news, but the most recent spat is breaking some new ground. An unholy alliance of Tory and Liberal Democrat Euro MPs is hammering David Cameron over his latest bit of (in) action.

Some months ago the European Parliament overwhelmingly voted to cut back on the amount of time they spent in Strasbourg. The cost of the two seat arrangement, where once a month, the Parliament heads some 220 miles down the road to Strasbourg from its main base in Brussels, and costs in excess of £150m per year.

This hasn't gone down well with the French government for whom Strasbourg has a symbolic significance (though losing the Parliament would cost the local economy too), and has taken the European Parliament to court.

You would have thought that with Cameron's pronouncement on the expense of Strasbourg and promises to reform the EU that he would have sided with the Parliament, but he hasn’t. The date has now passed when the UK Government can object to the French action and so a pretty vitriolic letter has winged its way from the Group of Tory MEPs to Downing Street accusing Cameron of ‘betrayal’.

Liberal Democrat MEPs are also unhappy and are backing the Tories on this issue. This is very uncommon, as Tories and Lib Dems in Europe do not share the cosy relationship that they do in the UK, in fact quite the opposite.

None of this, however, comes as any great surprise to Labour MEPs. After all, Tory Governments have form in this area. Indeed, it was a British Tory PM, John Major who signed up under the Maastricht treaty in 1992 - to having twelve sessions a year in Strasbourg in the first place.

As someone who co-signed the original resolution to restrict the times we upped sticks and moved lock stock and barrel to Strasbourg, I'm disgusted at Cameron’s timidity to do the right thing, but not as surprised as his own MEPs seem to be.

Labour Party provides an alternative in Britain and Europe

2011-09-30T11:57:00.001+02:00

It’s been an interesting week at party conference. As it becomes ever clearer that the British economy is being choked rather than resuscitated by austerity, we in the Labour Party need to provide an alternative. Ed Miliband’s excellent speech on Tuesday clearly outlined that we must focus on growth to survive this crisis, and the Tory-led government’s brutal cuts just aren’t working.

And they’re not working elsewhere in Europe either. When I spoke to conference on Monday as the leader of Labour MEPs, I wanted to make it clear that the deepening financial crisis in the Eurozone is not about a failure of Europe, but a failure of the right wing politicians who currently dominate the European Commission, Council and Parliament. Just as Ed is fighting for an alternative in Britain, we need to work together with our colleagues in the EU to find a solution for all of Europe. It is crucial that we don’t turn our backs on Europe when they need us most, because if the Eurozone fails, we fail.

And the interest in European matters this conference was astounding. Our Europe reception on Monday night was one of the most popular all week, with about 900 people attending and a huge queue outside the door. We also held three fringe events, all of which were packed and it was fantastic to see so many people engage in European issues. Richard Howitt and Claude Moraes used their experience on foreign affairs and migration at our event on the Arab Spring, and Arlene McCarthy and Peter Skinner, our leads on economic affairs, were impressive at our event on financial reform. I took part in our joint event with the GMB union on why austerity is not the answer, Linda McAvan spoke passionately at the Labour Movement for Europe fringe and Mary Honeyball hosted an event on women in power. It was great to have the expertise of Labour MEPs on show.

As we leave conference I’m encouraged to have seen that despite the huge challenges we face, both in Britain and in Europe, the Labour Party is the only party that has hope for the future and a commitment to working together, not apart.

Let's not turn our back on Europe

2011-09-28T16:53:00.003+02:00

On Monday morning I delivered my speech as Labour’s Leader in Europe to Party Conference. With Europe in economic crisis I felt it was important to get a strong message across about how we in Britain work with our European neighbours. Often I’m told that the recent chaos must mean that the EU is somehow broken, that the Eurosceptics were right all along. And those views are increasingly coming from within our own party.

What is clear is that the supposed remedies to the current turmoil are making things worse, not better. This is where the real failure in Europe lies; in the hollow ideology being driven by the European Right. Simply they say we must have less; less investment in the technologies and industries of the future, less opportunities for our young people, less employment and less power for working people.

And it is that ideology which is winning out across the EU, as the Left in Europe is at its lowest ebb since before the Second World War. As recently as 1999 we were in power, or sharing power, in 12 out of the then 15 EU countries. Today, despite Helle Thorning Schmidt's great victory in Denmark earlier this month, that figure is just 8 out of the now 27 Member States. And since the disastrous 2009 elections the Social Democrats in the European Parliament are at their weakest ever.

Part of the explanation for why we are doing so badly may be that the world our grandparents fought for has, in so many ways, been achieved. Free health care, universal education, and systems of social benefits from cradle to grave are established across Europe. The social democratic solutions which transformed the last century were forged amid the rubble of European war. Today we face ruins of a different sort. Once again social democrats must stand together and rise to the new challenges that Europe faces. Ed Miliband is right to say we have to re-found Labour here at home, but that must be within the broader context of all of us re-founding social democracy across Europe.

As Europe faces its greatest challenge since 1945, let's not turn our backs. We must work together with colleagues across the EU, since globally produced problems can only be solved globally. The answers cannot be for Labour in Britain alone, and in this interconnected world Europe must be part of the solution. As always the driving force must be our enduring Labour values; solidarity, social justice, the strongest helping the weak; the same values that drove those rebuilding Europe more than 60 years ago. That is how we will secure the future for generations to come.

Tobacco smoke and discrimination against workers' representatives: new threats to health and safety at work

2011-09-22T11:18:00.000+02:00

One of our most important rights in the workplace is our right to be healthy and safe. Yet each year, 168,000 people in Europe die and a further 300,000 suffer permanent disability from work-related accidents and diseases.

So one of my proudest achievements as an MEP is the report I steered through the European Parliament on the EU's Health and Safety Strategy. I was delighted when this was officially adopted as Parliament's response at the beginning of 2008.

Parliament welcomed the 5-year target to reduce accidents at work by a quarter. But I called for the strategy to go much further than that. We also needed policies and targets to reduce work-related diseases, such as musculo-skeletal disorders, cancer, and mental illness. And we needed to focus on workers who were at risk of work-related health problems or accidents, such as young and ageing workers, migrant workers, and temporary agency workers.

Four years on, Parliament is now debating a review of the EU's Health and Safety Strategy. Progress has certainly been made, but we still need to press the European Commission to do more to track the changes in work-related accidents and illnesses, so that we can be sure we are meeting our targets for 2012. We also need to keep pushing for protection for the most at-risk workers.

The review is also a good time to raise awareness of new threats. I will be putting down an amendment on tobacco smoke at work. Despite all the progress we have made on smoking, we still do not enjoy comprehensive protection from tobacco smoke in the workplace. Tobacco is the biggest cause of preventable illness today, killing 114,000 people a year in the UK and 650,000 people across Europe. With this amendment, we are calling for action to protect our right to smoke-free air at work.

I will also be putting forward an amendment on 'blacklisting' and other forms of discrimination against workers and their representatives. It has been shown that health and safety is improved when workers have proper representation, allowing employees to take part in promoting health and safety at work. But recently, I have heard from people in my constituency and from members of the Blacklist Support Group who have been blacklisted and refused employment for representing their co-workers in this way. I am calling for a change in European law to put a stop to this.

As well as improving our quality of life, better health and safety is good business. It leads to higher performance from employees and lower costs for both the employer and the taxpayer. So neither the economic crisis nor the Government's spending cuts are a reason to forget about health and safety at work: it is now more important than ever.

For 4,000 workers, the Remploy factories are irreplaceable - the Government must genuinely listen to them

2011-09-16T14:58:00.005+02:00

When someone proposes to make thousands of people redundant - and at the same time take away their best chance of finding work - those workers deserve an opportunity to put their own case forward.

So when Liz Sayce's report recommended in June that funding for the 54 Remploy factories across the UK should be cut, leading to their closure, the 4,000 Remploy workers were promised that there would be a full consultation before a decision was taken.

Remploy was founded after the Second World War to provide employment for disabled people, including those returning home from the battlefields. It has decades of expertise in enabling people with disabilities to work and play a full part in society. If the factories are closed, much of that expertise could be lost.

Sadly, this week I have written to Maria Miller, the UK's Minister for Disabled People, to raise my concerns that the promise of full consultation has not been fulfilled.

After the Government organised a series of "regional roadshows" to discuss the proposals, 1,000 employees formally applied to attend - but each session was ultimately limited to just 60 Remploy workers, to be selected by managers. Workers were not allowed to ask their Trade Union representatives to attend with them.

In the East Midlands, where there are Remploy sites at Chesterfield, Derby, Leicester and Worksop, not a single "roadshow" has been organised. Workers may have to travel over 80 miles to get to the nearest event.

Employees are already angry and hurt at the proposals. As a former GMB officer representing Remploy workers, I know that there is a great deal of support available for people at Remploy sites - not all of it purely work-related - which is simply not available elsewhere. When I have visited Remploy, employees have told me that for them, the factories are not just workplaces, but also the centre of their communities and social networks. It is simply not enough just to say that all these people can find 'mainstream' jobs elsewhere.

The Government must make sure it has genuinely listened to the full Remploy workforce. Not only is that the minimum they should be able to expect - but the Government must realise the full extent of what the Remploy factories do for their workers, and what a huge loss their closure would be.

Actions speak louder than words for the UN Summit on Non Communicable Diseases

2011-09-15T14:08:00.000+02:00

Next week the UN will hold a summit on Non Communicable Diseases, which include cancer, heart disease, stroke and diabetes, and which are all on the rise. In preparation of this meeting I have been working on a European Parliament Resolution stating Europe's commitment to tackling these growing problems.

I think everyone can agree that these diseases are devastating lives and families across Europe, and they need to be addressed. I'm glad we're setting a strong and coherent European line for the UN Summit but what's most important is that we act on what we say.

We all know that the rising rate of obesity and poor nutrition across Europe means more and more people are at risk from a whole range of non-communicable diseases (NCDs), so it still amazes me that we failed to go further in promoting healthier diets in the recent food labelling negotiations. Unfortunately some MEPs and European governments decided to listen more to the food and drink industry than to the health experts.

We also know that tobacco is the biggest cause of NCDs, but yet we're still waiting for the European Commission to come forward with proposals on revising the Tobacco Products Directive. If we get this directive right we could make smoking less appealing to young people and drastically cut the numbers dying from entirely preventable cancers and respiratory diseases. Unfortunately it seems that the tobacco industry is so far being successful in stopping decisive action against NCDs.

I will continue to fight for policies that benefit people's health, and I hope the resolution we adopted today will be translated into real action to fight these diseases.

David Cameron's attack on worker's rights is no substitute for a plan for growth and jobs

2011-09-13T16:34:00.000+02:00

EU legislation provides guarantees for employees on their working hours, paid holidays and the right to be consulted, as well as on many other issues.

Last week, the Prime Minister, speaking before a committee of senior MPs, said he was unhappy with these rules. This came just a day after reports that he is seeking to water down proposed new rights for agency workers, which are being brought in as a result of the EU's Agency Workers Directive.

Labour in Europe has fought long and hard to protect people's rights at work. The Agency Workers' Directive is just one example of this: the Directive was adopted in 2008 with strong backing from Labour MEPs and against opposition from the Conservatives. We were disappointed to see the introduction of the new rights delayed until 2011 in the UK.

Once it has been implemented here, the Directive will give agency workers, after 12 weeks of employment, the same employment rights as workers who are recruited directly by their employer. These rights include not only their pay, but also the basic conditions many workers take for granted - such as holiday pay, sick pay or access to facilities and training.

Cameron has chosen to portray all of this as an issue of national sovereignty, saying that labour issues "would be better dealt with at the national level." But in fact this is simply a further attack on workers' rights. The Conservative-led Government believes this is somehow the best way to bring about economic growth - earlier this year, for example, the Chancellor was forced to make a U-turn on his plans to promote growth by reducing maternity and paternity rights for employees of small businesses.

Instead of undermining British employees, the Government urgently needs an economic Plan B to promote growth and jobs in the UK.

A welcome end to the lifetime ban on gay blood donations

2011-09-10T11:41:00.000+02:00

I was really pleased to hear that finally the unfair lifetime ban on gay and bisexual men from donating blood would be lifted in the UK .

New rules will be based on science rather than prejudice. Instead of a lifetime ban there will need to be a 12 month gap between donating blood and a man's last sexual encounter with another man. This is because there is a three month period after infection with HIV when it cannot necessarily be detected in the blood. It is vital that we get more people donating blood, and the last thing we should be doing is needlessly discriminating against people whose blood is perfectly safe.

The rules are still much tighter on homosexual men than there are on heterosexual men, who can donate blood regardless of how many sexual partners they have had or whether or not they use condoms, but this is still a real step in the right direction.

I have been campaigning for the ban to be lifted and recently wrote a question to the European Commission asking about the legality of blanket bans for homosexual men. Their answer revealed that under EU law such bans are illegal as they are discriminatory and illogical, underlining that "sexual behaviour" is not the same thing as "sexual identity". I hope that other EU countries with blanket bans will follow the UK 's lead to end the prejudice, and I will continue to put pressure on the Commission to act if they don't.

Anti-cancer virus brings hope and challenges

2011-09-02T12:02:00.000+02:00

Reports have been coming out this week of successful trials of specific viruses being used to treat cancer. The viruses have been shown to only attack cancerous tumours and to have no effect on healthy cells. One trial, using a form of smallpox vaccine virus, showed promising results on the 23 trial patients, and another trial using the rabies virus on a childhood cancer effectively destroyed the cancerous cells.

Having worked in medical science for many years I'm really excited and encouraged to see these promising results. But our fight against cancer will be long and hard. There are many different types of cancer, and each has to be treated in a different way. Many forms of cancer are rare diseases, including childhood cancers, and even cancer experts don't know much about some of them.

That is why it is important that we revise the current European clinical trials directive to make it easier for clinical trials, such as those using virus therapies, to be carried out. Currently the costs and administration involved in trialling new drugs and treatments means that rarer cancers can often be forgotten about. If we can reduce this burden on researchers then we could be seeing much more of these exciting results. It's also vital that we have the same standard of clinical trials across all 27 members of the EU. That way trials can be carried out cross-border, as sometimes there just aren't enough patients in one country for a clinical trial to be possible. The European Parliament will be looking at adapting the rules soon, and I will be fighting hard to make sure we can treat all types of cancer as effectively as possible.

Healthy children for a healthy future

2011-08-31T15:07:00.002+02:00

Over the last few years campaigns such as Jamie Oliver's School Dinners and television shows such as LazyTown have helped raise awareness of childhood health and obesity, but we still have a long way to go.

Recently a number of studies have proved the vital importance of good nutrition for children. A clear link has been found between a baby's weight at birth and lifelong health, largely dependent on the nutrition and lifestyle of the mother during pregnancy. Another study found that diet during our first few years is crucial in determining how healthy our hearts will be during adult life. And a group of expert researchers has just called on all governments, starting with the critical childhood years, to take tough action on obesity, which is costing us huge amounts in healthcare bills and human lives.

The set of reports, published in the Lancet, found that the most cost-effective measures include putting traffic light labelling on food to allow consumers to quickly identify healthier choices for their families. This is something I fought hard for during the negotiations on new Europe-wide food labelling rules. Unfortunately the power and wealth of the food industry managed to convince Europe's right wing MEPs and governments to vote against my proposals. However I did manage to stop my opponents from banning the use of voluntary traffic light systems which many British retailers already have in place, and was also successful in getting a commitment on tough new measures for transfats, which are a major cause of heart disease.

Another recommendation of the Lancet reports was a tax on junk food. Such measures are already in place in some EU countries, with Denmark boasting the most progressive legislation. This is definitely something we should consider in the UK. The revenue from taxing things with high sugar or saturated fat content could be used to subsidise healthier options such as fresh fruit and vegetables, and make it easier for everyone to provide themselves and their families with decent food.

We all want our children to have the best possible start in life, and a nutritious diet and physical activity is key to that. I will be putting pressure on the British Government and on the UN summit on health this September, as well as continuing to try and improve European legislation to make sure our policies are designed with our children's futures in mind.

Increasing research into rare forms of cancer

2011-07-13T16:07:00.000+02:00

Cancer is a devastating disease and one that, sadly, almost everyone has had first hand experience of. The experience of being diagnosed and treated for cancer is extremely difficult, and can be even more terrifying if you are diagnosed with a rare cancer. Of the 280 types of cancer around 250 are rare forms of the disease, which doctors often know little about. This makes diagnosis and treatment so much harder. Of all the people affected by cancer, up to a third will have a rare cancer.

Because each type of these rare forms of the disease only affects a relatively small amount of people it can be difficult, if not impossible, to try out new drugs or therapies on patients in one country alone. Therefore it is vital that we can easily conduct cross-border clinical trials for treatments of rare cancers. There is already an EU directive in place that should mean that clinical trials meet the same standards and follow the same procedure no matter which member state they are carried out in. However EU governments have implemented the directive in different ways which makes the system confusing and cross-border trials difficult to organise. Also the amount of administration and the costs involved in clinical trials means that less and less are being carried out, especially on drugs that only treat rare types of cancer.

That's why the European Parliament will be revising the legislation next year. To prepare for this I organised the Parliament's official Health Working Group, which I co-chair, to focus on rare cancers. I invited two inspirational young men, Peter from Sheffield who is now 25, and Sam from Newark in my constituency who is just 14, to speak at the event. Both Peter and Sam have survived rare forms of cancer, but were subject to mis-diagnosis and experimentation with drugs and therapies because too little was known about the types of tumours that they had. The problem is especially bad for children, as trials are not often carried out specifically on children, and instead they are given adult drugs based on pure guess work. We need to make sure that it is easier to carry out trials for new treatments of rare cancers, and childhood cancers in particular.

At the event Peter showed a moving video from the website he now works for, jimmyteens.tv, which is a forum for young cancer sufferers to share their experiences creatively. The full version of this touching video telling the story of Alice, who was diagnosed with a rare form of cancer aged 15, can be seen here: http://jimmyteens.tv/2006/11/home-sweet-home/

Greenest government ever?

2011-07-07T11:00:00.000+02:00

This week we faced a huge disappointment in the European Parliament when MEPs rejected plans to commit to more ambitious reductions in CO2. Labour MEPs were fully behind plans to change our target from reducing emissions by 30% instead of 20% by 2020, as were, supposedly, the British government. To our dismay these plans were rejected by just nine votes.

Leading scientists agree that in order to stop a global environmental crisis we need to reduce our emissions by somewhere between 25-40% from 1990 levels. In order to do this Europe needs to be a world leader in driving down emissions, and the Tory-led coalition has pledged to be the greenest government ever. Strange then that it was the vote of 16 Conservative MEPs that stopped our plans to increase the target to 30%. Had they voted with us, and with their government, we would have won the vote.

David Cameron claims to be green, but this vote has shown the hollowness of his party's commitments on environmental policy. As global warming is a problem without borders, most of our environmental policies are made at a European level. The Tories have taken the pressure to act off the European Commission and EU countries, leaving the government's claim to be winning the argument on EU emissions in tatters. It looks like Cameron's commitment to lead the "greenest government ever" can be added to a long list of broken promises.

Crackdown on mobile surfing charges

2011-07-06T18:26:00.001+02:00

There was good news this week that the European Commission is planning to take further action to drive down the cost of using mobile phones.

They’ve made a number of proposals to cut the cost of using mobile phones while abroad in another EU country, including introducing new price caps for using a mobile to access data, such as accessing emails or the internet.

This will be welcome whether you’re in Barcelona on business, on holiday in Helsinki or just travelling through Turin. We’re all still being charged too much for using our phones when abroad.

Already action has been taken to bring down the cost of making calls and sending texts while in another EU country, but with people increasingly using their smart phones to access the internet and online services, it’s high time we addressed this area of activity. It’s clear that many mobile operators are ripping-off off consumers with hugely inflated charges.

Of course the devil will be in the detail and we’ve yet to see the precise proposals from the Commission. These will need to be agreed by the European Parliament and EU governments before they come into force.

And we will need to watch that mobile phone operators don’t try to use these new proposals as an excuse to drive up prices for other services. After all, they have known for some time that if they did not act to end these unfairly high charges then the EU would act to protect consumers.

But it looks like an important step forward, and another clear sign of the tangible benefit of EU membership.

New “austerity rules” won’t do the job

2011-06-28T10:41:00.000+02:00

Last week in the European Parliament, Labour MEPs strongly criticised new proposals for what is called economic governance; rules designed to deal with the present economic crisis, by improving coordination of economic and fiscal policy, particularly in the Eurozone.

Not the kind of stuff to get the pulses racing, I agree. But I’m more concerned about getting Europe’s pulse, if not racing, then at least beating a little more strongly.

There is no doubt we need a new approach, unfortunately the new “austerity” rules will not do the job.

Proposed by an over-cautious European Commission, and supported by governments dominated by conservatives, and the right wing in the European Parliament, the plans are based on short-term thinking, with an emphasis on severely cutting deficits, without building in long term growth. They are the “austerity” answer, and will be imposed across the EU, removing the flexibility for national governments to respond with different policies in the future.

That is why Labour and other progressive forces are arguing for something different.

Quite simply, you can't cut a country's debt without making sure that policies are in place to make sure its economy is growing at the same time. In fact, sustainable long-term growth can actually keep national debts falling as a proportion of GDP, as well as being essential to providing jobs and economic well-being, while maintaining high quality public services.

Already we can see that countries following such reckless austerity policies show some of the lowest growth figures. The UK is doing this as government policy, while countries such as Greece, Ireland and Portugal are forced to follow such programmes as a result of conditions imposed on them from outside. An effective economic package should support rather than undermine growth.

Specifically, investment spending should be treated separately from normal government spending in any rules establishing the level of a country’s debt. Putting money into areas like scientific research, essential infrastructure and the new green economy is essential if we are to get our economies moving again. We should not have to cut these back to meet short term targets. Indeed, cutting such spending in times of recession would actually worsen economic performance.

And the proposed new rules must be fair. It is a cruel joke to say, along David Cameron lines, that we are all in this together, when palpably some of us are “in it” more than others! The austerity measures are already hurting low and middle income people the most and it seems unlikely that any new measures will be any better. Meanwhile, the financial sector, the guilty party in this economic catastrophe, is already back to making huge profits, having been bailed out by the taxpayers of Europe.

In short, if we’re going to have new rules limiting spending, we also need new rules on fairer taxes, such as the bank bonus tax applied by the Labour government in 2010. And other innovative measures, already agreed by the European Parliament, including a financial transaction tax, will need to be developed, if there is to be a solid and sustainable recovery.

Last week, the final votes on the various Reports dealing with these matters were postponed. But we on the progressive left are very clear. We need more effective and more equitable ways of organising our economies and the campaign to achieve these must go on.

How vegetable oil is destroying the rainforest

2011-06-22T17:02:00.001+02:00

We all know that rainforests are some of the most important habitats in the world for a huge range of plants and animals that often can't be found elsewhere. Around a quarter of the world's oxygen is converted from carbon dioxide by plants in rainforests. These places are integral to the culture of many indigenous people, and are home to hundreds of uncontactable tribes. As one of our most precious resources we should all be doing our best to protect these forests.

However the ever increasing use of palm oil in food, cosmetics and biodiesel is posing a real threat to tropical rainforests, in South East Asia particularly. Every day huge swathes of rainforest are cleared to make way for palm oil plantations. On the islands of Borneo and Sumatra, the only place in the world to find Orangutans in the wild, an area of rainforest the size of a football pitch is cut down every twenty seconds.

Demand for palm oil is increasing because it is cheap, and over 70% of it is used in the food we eat, in everything from chocolate to cream cheese. Environmentally minded consumers are already aware of the damaging effects of palm oil, but, at the moment, there is no way for them to tell which products use unsustainable palm oil. That is because manufacturers can simply label palm oil as 'vegetable oil'.

Regular readers of my blog will know that I have been leading on new European legislation on food labelling for all Democratic Socialist MEPs. One of my big campaigns was to have all vegetable oils properly labelled, so consumers can see whether products contain palm oil or not. I was delighted that the European Parliament voted for my amendments, but I had a long hard battle with EU governments who argued the industry line that this labelling would be too difficult.

However this morning representatives of the 27 EU countries agreed to the compromise package including my amendments on vegetable oil. Once this legislation comes into force consumers will be able to put pressure on manufacturers using palm oil to get it from a sustainable source. In the meantime consumers can choose products which already use certified sustainable palm oil.

Public service at its best

2011-06-20T15:52:00.001+02:00

On Friday I saw public service at its very best. I was in Leicester to see how the city coped with newly arrived communities from across the globe, and in particular the Roma community, some of the most recent arrivals.

Like many conurbations, Leicester has dealt with migration from all parts of the world for decades. Since 1945, this city of just over 300,000 people has seen new arrivals from Poland, Ireland, the Caribbean, East Africa, the Indian sub-continent. More recently we have seen asylum seekers and refugees from Somalia and other parts of the world, as well as internal EU migration from Poland and other Eastern European countries, which has included the Roma.

In Leicester, diversity is seen as a strength, yet it is also complex, and ever changing. Each new community poses its own challenges, and a wide range of services, almost entirely in the public sector, are key to ensuring – not just a welcome – but that community cohesion is maintained and enhanced.

On Friday, along with newly elected Mayor Sir Peter Soulsby, I met council officers working in policy, in welfare, in young people’s services, in housing. I saw police officers, health workers and teachers. I talked to community representatives and members of the Leicester Council of Faiths.

The professional expertise was impressive, with a clear commitment to maintaining community cohesion and building relationships between the new arrivals and those who have been here for some time. Above all, I saw people committed to making things work, to make our city a better place for all communities.

In the afternoon. a visit to Babington College gave me a glimpse of what it’s like at the sharp end for one community – the Roma – and for those who work with them.

There is an estimated 1000-1500 members of the Roma community now living in Leicester. They are mostly from Slovakia as well as some from the Czech Republic, Romania and Bulgaria, and as EU citizens are legal migrants. They have a long history of persecution, social exclusion and deprivation, and this experience of officialdom, their lack of a history of education and associated factors have made integration a real issue.

Of the 400 or so Roma children in Leicester schools, many of the secondary age group are at Babington College. It was there that I talked to Roma children, to their teachers and to their parents. There was an invigorating display of Roma dance and music.

It was an exhilarating afternoon. Not just because of the liveliness, and obvious delight shown by the Roma children in their surroundings, but also because it was a testament to the hard work and commitment of the teachers there. They were going the extra mile for these children, not for financial reward but because they thought it was right.

Babington is just one school in Leicester. Leicester is just one city in the Region. Neither are unique, though I think both have things to teach us. Above all, I wish that the British media, so adept at knocking public servants, could have seen what I saw last week.

New Rights for Victims Proposed

2011-06-17T17:32:00.000+02:00

A couple of weeks ago, new European measures to help people who fall victim to crime abroad were proposed. With more and more Brits travelling to other European countries for holidays, long weekends and business trips, it is really important that if you fall victim to a crime whilst out of the country you get adequate support and protection.

For many people who become victims of crime, their dream holiday can turn into a nightmare. According to Eurostat, around 30 million crimes against persons or property are committed every year in the EU, with many more going unreported.

One of these 30 million victims is Robbie Hughes, who was violently attacked in Crete in 2008. Robbie sustained life-threatening injuries and while his mother Maggie tirelessly helped to support him whilst he was still in hospital in Greece, she found there was no real help, support or advice for victims of serious injuries. As a result of the ordeal, Maggie started a campaign "Please Enjoy- Don't Destroy", in order to help give support and advice to families who find themselves in similar situations. Her campaign, supported by the GMB union, has been very influential in helping bring these proposals about, so much so that she was invited to attend the launch of the new rights package in Brussels.

The new proposals, outlined by European Commissioner for Justice Viviane Reding, include minimum standards on the rights, support and protection victims of crime receive. There are special provisions to protect vulnerable victims, such as children, victims of rape and people with disabilities.

The proposals also mean that victims of violence who benefit from restraining orders in their home country can have the same protection measures in place when they move or travel to another EU country.

This is another good example of how the EU can work together to solve cross border problems. People can fall victim to crime anywhere, and we should be able to expect, in the EU at least, to be able to receive help when we most need it. I look forward to the measures coming before the Parliament for scrutinising in the next couple of months.

Newborn screening could save lives

2011-06-15T19:55:00.000+02:00

Today I chaired a meeting which highlighted a condition responsible for the deaths of a significant number of babies across Europe, yet one which can be relatively easily diagnosed and treated.

Severe Combined Immunodeficiency (SCID) is a serious Primary Immunodeficiency that can lead to a child’s death. Babies born with SCID lack white blood cells, meaning their immune system does not protect them against a wide range of viruses, bacteria and fungi.

The awful reality is that children with SCID can die before their first birthday. Yet with the correct diagnosis and treatment, they can lead normal lives.

At the moment the only country which screens for SCID at birth is the United States. Screening for SCID does not take place in EU Member States and babies are dying unnecessarily.

I am therefore calling on the European Commission to bring forward proposals on the issue of Severe Combined Immunodeficiency and the screening of new-born babies.

SCID needs to be seen as a paediatric emergency by all members of the EU, and should be on the list of diseases that babies are routinely screened for.

For many years I worked in the British National Health Service as a medical scientist which is why I'm so keen to have the sorts of discussions we had today. Let’s hope we get some action out of it and bring SCID to a full stop.

To fight cancer we must look at both treatment and prevention

2011-06-07T11:47:00.000+02:00

Last Saturday I took part in the Race for Life in Nottingham to raise money and awareness for Cancer Research UK. Along with 'Team Glenis' and thousands of other women we ran, walked and jogged 5km, contributing to the staggering £362 million raised to date by women taking part in Race for Life events across the country. Cancer is a disease that sadly touches all of us in one way or another, and I was proud to take part in such a positive event dedicated to fighting it.

In much of my work in the European Parliament I aim to help the fight against cancer. Last Tuesday was World No Tobacco Day, and I hosted an event in the Parliament with the Smoke Free Partnership to celebrate the achievements we have made and look to what we still need to do in the future.

Tobacco has caused a global public health crisis. Use of tobacco is the second most common cause of death globally, and accounts for 1 in 10 adult deaths worldwide. Half of all tobacco users will be killed by it, and of course the manufacturers, the tobacco industry know this. Unlike many other challenges we face in public health, every single death from tobacco is preventable.

If we're serious about preventing tobacco related diseases then we need to see that reflected in European legislation. Soon MEPs will have a chance to do that, when we start to revise the Tobacco Products Directive at the end of this year. This will be our chance to make sure that we implement the measures that are most effective at preventing people from taking up smoking, and encouraging smokers to give up, such as standardised packaging and large mandatory pictorial warnings on packs. It's also a chance to stop the use of additives which make tobacco 'smoother', reduce the dryness of cigarettes or mask unpleasant smells. It is precisely these additives which can increase the addiction and appeal of smoking.

Of course we will face heavy lobbying from the tobacco industry and other interested parties when we revise this legislation. However, if we get this legislation right it won't just be the health of individuals that benefits. We will also see reductions in public healthcare spending, as the massive strain caused by preventable respiratory diseases, cancers and cardiovascular disorders lessens. And the economy as a whole could benefit as consumers who would have spent extra cash on cigarettes start buying products from more labour intensive sectors. Tobacco related illnesses are costing the EU over 100 billion Euros a year.

In order to fight cancer we need to do more research into treatments and cures, which is why supporting the work of Cancer Research UK is so important. However, to really be effective in tackling this terrible disease we must also focus on preventing cancer in the first place, and it's time we took some real action to fight the huge numbers of preventable cancers caused by smoking.

Is the EU stopping the government from banning wild animals in circuses?

2011-05-30T18:22:00.000+02:00

Much of the work we do here relates to animal welfare. Whether it's long distance transportation of horses, minimum standards for animals used in medical testing or a ban on the import of seal products, most of the groundings for animal welfare rules are done at European level. However, national governments obviously still have a big role to play in protecting the rights of animals.

Recently the UK Parliament has been debating a ban on the use of wild animals in circuses. Clearly it is cruel and unnecessary to make animals such as elephants, lions and tigers perform in circus shows, and a recent poll showed that nearly 90% of the public would support such a ban.

The Tory-led government, however, doesn't seem to want to stop this outdated practice. Junior environment minister Jim Paice claimed that introducing a ban would not be possible because it would go against the European Services Directive. This is another despicable example of the government blaming Europe for 'stopping' them from doing something, when the truth is they just don't want to do it. The government also claimed there was a legal case against the Austrian government who have already banned wild animals in circuses. When Labour MEPs asked the European Commission whether this was true they replied stating "the Commission is not aware and certainly not involved in any legal proceedings in Austrian national courts trying to lift this ban." Whilst the Commission said that in theory the ban could be against the Services Directive they went on to clearly explain that a ban could "be justified by overriding reasons of public interest. Animal welfare and animal protection are among the reasons that can justify such a restriction."

It is not acceptable for the government to use the EU as a shield for difficult questions they don't want to answer. Currently we're finalising European legislation on food labelling, and I'm calling for mandatory country of origin labelling for meat and fish when used in processed products such as pork in sausages, beef in lasagne, and chicken in premade sandwiches. Shoppers need this information if they want to choose products which use meat that hasn't been transported too far and comes from somewhere with decent animal welfare standards. However the UK government, acting within the European Council, is opposing my plans for labelling meat in processed foods now and is instead trying to delay the process for years, if not decades. I'm sure when asked why such animal welfare measures are not being supported they will blame "Brussels" instead of owning up to their own responsibilities.

It is time for the Tories to engage responsibly with Europe, and I hope that when the wild animal ban is debated in Parliament next week the government will finally admit that there is nothing stopping them from introducing it.

Ken Clarke's comments reveal a dangerous attitude in the Tory Party

2011-05-19T13:43:00.001+02:00

Ken Clarke's comments yesterday feed into a worrying trend in the way the right view victims of sexual abuse. Ken answered the statement "rape is rape", with "no it's not" and proceeded to say there is "serious rape" to which other offences, including date rape, do not belong. He may be known for his blustering style but this is completely unacceptable. Not only is it highly offensive and upsetting to the victims of rape but it also plays into the mindset that some victims of sexual abuse are real victims, and others are just lying or exaggerating. Ken Clarke says that he wants to minimise the distress for a victim when they take their attacker to court. However, if the victim feels they have to prove that their terrible experience really was "serious", it will discourage them from coming forward in the first place. Already 60% of sexual assaults go unreported.

Ken Clarke was not the only Tory politician to make offensive comments about sexual abuse this week. Nadine Dorries, defending her campaign to teach young girls abstinence, said that a strong 'Just Say No' message would mean that less child abuse would take place because currently victims "don't realise that that was a wrong thing to do". The message she is sending out is disgusting. We must not lay any of the blame for child abuse on the child; it is not the child's responsibility to tell their abuser that what they are doing is wrong. Furthermore telling a girl (both Nadine and Ken forget about the many male victims of sexual abuse) that she should 'just say no' will only increase the feelings of guilt and shame that victims already feel.

What we should be doing is protecting and supporting the victims of sexual abuse in every possible way, but this does not seem to come naturally to the Conservatives. Last year the EU passed a new Anti-Trafficking Directive to combat human trafficking, a cross border issue which is best solved at a European level. Several hundred thousand people, including many children, are trafficked in the EU every year and forced into the sex trade. The directive increases penalties for human traffickers, gives better victim support and allows traffickers from abroad to be prosecuted in the UK. However the Tory-Lib Dem government opted out of the directive, saying that there were already enough measures to tackle human trafficking. Only after sustained pressure from charities, NGOs and Labour MEPs did the government finally opt in this March.

The Conservatives need to wake up and deal with the realities of sexual abuse in a sensitive and effective way. What we must not be doing is giving the impression that these crimes are not serious or that the victims can be blamed in some way. When a policeman in Canada told a group of students that "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimised" I was encouraged to see that thousands of women across the world took to the streets to protest. I hope David Cameron was listening because his party needs to change their outdated and dangerous attitude fast.

Do you want to know where the meat you buy comes from?

2011-05-05T14:17:00.000+02:00

Today's story in the Guardian about fish labelling raises some important issues.

I am working closely on the Food Information to Consumers legislation which is currently being negotiated between the European Parliament and EU governments. We start the next round of negotiations next week in Strasbourg, and one of the things I will be fighting extremely hard for is country of origin labelling for all meat, and all meat and fish when used in processed foods. EU rules already mean that consumers have a right to know where the beef and fish they buy comes from, but I want to see that extended to all other meats, including pork, lamb and chicken, as well as country of origin labelling for meat and fish when used in processed foods. Under the current system a company can choose to promote a product such as a chicken sandwich processed in the UK as British, when in fact the chicken comes from Thailand. This is misleading and unacceptable.

Unfortunately the Conservative-led coalition and Tory MEPs did not support my amendments to improve origin labelling for meat in processed foods now and want to delay the measures for another five years. Negotiations will be difficult but I have the support of most of the European Parliament and it's something that I'm not prepared to compromise on. Consumers want to know where meat comes from for a whole range of reasons, including sustainability, animal welfare conditions, and the environmental impact of transporting meat halfway across the world.

Of course, even if we get the European rules right we still have work to do to help environmentally minded consumers make good choices. In terms of fish I think the idea of supermarkets developing a traffic light system for sustainability is an excellent one. The traffic light scheme for nutritional values has proved to be easy to understand and popular, and has been something I have been advocating at European level. For other types of meat consumers need to know how animal welfare standards differ across the world. How many consumers know, for example, that all countries in the EU comply with the same European animal welfare regulations, which are some of the best in the world?

Consumers want to know more about the food they buy, and we have to make sure that policy makers, retailers and producers work together to give useful and transparent information.

Tackling Dirty Fuels

2011-04-12T15:02:00.001+02:00

Extraction of the tar or oil sands in the Canadian province of Alberta has been described as the the biggest environmental crime in history.

And as negotiations towards the new trade agreement between Canada and the European Union continue, many environmental campaigners are lobbying MEPs and the Commission.

At a time when we are trying to dramatically cut our greenhouse gas emissions, I absolutely agree that we should not be encouraging the exploitation of a fuel source which creates a carbon footprint three times greater than other fuel sources during the extraction and refinement phase.

In principle, we in the EU already have legislation in place to protect against possible imports of tars and oil from Canada. The EU's Fuel Quality Directive is designed to reduce the carbon footprint of all transport fuels by 6% by 2020. The responsibility to meet this target is placed on the fuel suppliers, who will not want to add oil from tar sands into their final fuel blend if this makes them miss their emission reduction target - as they would then not be allowed to sell their product on the European market.

However, the small print is crucial, as well as highly technical. The European Commission is in the process of fine-tuning "default values" for conventional and non-conventional fuel sources, to help suppliers identify the most carbon-intensive imports.

Linda McAvan MEP, Labour’s Environment spokesperson in Brussels, has asked the European Commissioner responsible for climate action, Connie Hedegaard, to keep tar sands separate from conventional fuels, therefore reinforcing the EU's commitment to a low carbon future. In response Commissioner Hedegaard gave an encouraging answer, saying that it is the Commission's intention to set different default values for tar sands.

The Commission has not currently come to a final decision on this issue, as it is still subject to an internal Commission review. However, it is clear that keeping tar sands out of the EU would certainly send a message that we in Europe mean business in realising a low carbon future.

Help stop misleading health claims for children

2011-04-01T15:25:00.001+02:00

In February I blogged about stopping a health claim on follow-on formula that says that adding a fatty acid known as DHA to formula milk helps improve babies' eyesight. The European Commission have decided to allow companies to put this on follow-on milk, but independent research has found that the link between synthesised DHA and vision has not yet been proven.

In order to stop the health claim I wrote a resolution which was approved in a close vote in the European Parliament's Environment and Public Health Committee. However, the resolution must now be adopted by a majority of MEPs when we vote next Wednesday. It's set to be extremely tight, with those on the right wing supporting the company's claim and opposing my view.

Many groups and individuals support the resolution, including organisations of paediatricians, midwives, charities including UNICEF, health NGOs, consumer groups, and individual parents and constituents, from all over the EU and beyond.

Health claims must be based on "generally accepted scientific evidence", but there is clearly still a debate within the scientific community over the link between synthesised DHA and eyesight. The claim will not be allowed on infant formula (suitable for 0-6 months) but will be allowed on follow-on formula (6 months+). It is obvious that promoting a follow-on formula with a health claim will have a direct impact on the infant formula of the same brand. In fact, research published by UNICEF UK in 2005 found that mothers do not necessarily understand the difference between infant and follow-on formula, with 60% of mothers claiming they had seen advertising for infant formula milk within the last year, even though this is banned in the UK, and 74% of mothers saying their baby started on follow-on formula between the ages 0-6 months. A health claim could encourage parents to start using follow-on formula earlier than is healthy for their children. F

Furthermore there are no studies which look at the effects of giving babies unsupplemented infant formula from birth and then supplemented follow-on formula from 6 months. As this claim will only be allowed on follow-on formula this is a crucial gap in the research. Before we assert the supposed benefits to parents we should fully investigate all possible effects of this particular additive.

This issue is clearly contentious and whilst the debate is ongoing I do not believe it is morally correct to tell parents, who are naturally anxious to provide the best nutrition possible for their children, that synthesised DHA is good for babies' vision. We should wait to see whether, after further investigation, the weight of the scientific evidence is convincing, and if that time comes then we should consider making DHA an essential ingredient in all formulas, rather than allowing it to be used as a marketing ploy for some more expensive formulas.

If you believe that no parent should be misled, and that no child deserves inferior nutrition in the most crucial stages of their development, please write to you MEPs and urge them to vote for my resolution on Wednesday.

The power of MEPs

2011-03-31T11:38:00.000+02:00

Earlier this week as part of a wider poll, a YouGov Poll included some questions on MEPs and the European Parliament.

Asked "Do you think the European Parliament has too much power, too little power, or about the right amount?"' 67% said the Parliament has too much power. This was highest among Conservative voters (86%) compared with other parties, and amongst older voters compared with younger ones.

This raises several questions, not least how much power the European Parliament actually possesses.

Parliament certainly has more muscle than it had. The much misunderstood Lisbon Treaty makes virtually every new piece of EU legislation a matter of “co-decision” in that it has to have the agreement of Parliament (the directly elected MEPs) and Council of Ministers (the representatives of the 27 member states governments). Before Lisbon, there were certain areas where MEPs had no part in the decision making process.

However, while MEPs have greater powers, they clearly cannot just railroad things through. “Co-decision” means just that. Both Council and Parliament have to agree.

Neither does Europe as a whole have the power to legislate anywhere it chooses. The treaties between the member states lay down which issues are to be agreed across the EU and which should remain the responsibility of individual countries. Education, health, social services provision, local government, and much else are still decided in Westminster, not in Brussels. According to a study by the highly regarded and independent House of Commons Library, between 1997 and 2009, only 6.8% of the UK’s primary legislation and 14.1% of secondary legislation emanated from the EU.

And the Parliament is not a monolithic institution heading in a single direction. Politics ranges across the political spectrum, from left to right, with no one political group having an overall majority. Arguments between Labour and Conservative are at least as great in Brussels and Strasbourg as they are in Westminster.

Ultimately, of course, your view on whether the European Parliament has too much power will depend on what you want to get out of it. In my (now almost entirely digital) postbag, for every letter I get saying Europe should keep out and stop interfering, I will get four or five demanding we take action on Libya, on cross border crime, on blacklisting workers, on animal rights or on holiday homes in Spain! Too much power? Constituents like these would like to give us rather more clout!

The EU's role in Libya

2011-03-23T10:01:00.000+01:00

For the last few weeks the situation in Libya has dominated the news. David Cameron has certainly not been camera shy, and has been seen as playing a leading role in reaching international consensus for a no-fly zone.

However what many people forget is the important role that the EU plays in international talks, and that at the forefront of this is British Labour politician Baroness Cathy Ashton. Cathy is the EU's High Representative for Foreign Affairs, and she has been working round the clock to ensure that we have agreement in the international community, not only with the Western powers but also with the key players in the region, including the Arab League.

It is crucial that the international community acts as a whole to stop the Libyan government from killing its own people. Cathy Ashton, representing all 27 members of the EU, has used her trademark 'quiet diplomacy' to reach important decisions not only on the UN resolution, but also on evacuating EU citizens from Libya. In crises such as these, co-operation with our allies in Europe and elsewhere is vital, and I'm glad we have someone as pragmatic as Cathy to build alliances between people during these difficult times.

Europe and the Citizen

2011-03-22T13:38:00.000+01:00

In a European Union of 27 member states and around 500 million people, it’s often difficult to see how the individual citizen can have an impact.

That’s why MEPs, as the directly elected part of the EU, have an important role to fill.

One way we can do this is to put direct questions to the Commission on behalf of individual constituents, and I do this on a whole host of issues.

Putting a question requires the Commission to respond, and to investigate if required, sometimes with surprising results.

About a year ago, a constituent from Nottinghamshire contacted me about Ryanair and the fact that, though they operate online and take bookings this way, there is no email address on which to contact them direct.

I put this question to the Commission suggesting that this was against EU rules on e-commerce. Commissioner Barnier found that this was the case and has asked the Irish authorities, who are responsible for the enforcement, to take action.

So Ryanair – a major business concern - could be forced to change its communication procedures, all as a result of a single email from a constituent to an MEP.

A fuller account can be found on the “This is Money” financial website.

The battle for better food labelling continues

2011-03-14T10:32:00.000+01:00

This week work on the Food Labelling legislation resumes as the European Parliament's Committee for Environment and Public Health hold their first discussion. However, we already know what the key issues and battles will be.

In the first reading of the proposed legislation I fought hard for more and better information for consumers who want to know what's in the food they buy. I wanted to see the key nutrients; calories, fats, saturated fats, sugar and salt, labelled on the front of the pack. I won that argument, and the Parliament accepted my amendments. The Council, and some MEPs, don't want this information on the front of pack, but is something that I will be staunchly defending.

What we unfortunately lost was a system of colour coding, similar to the traffic light system many retailers in the UK are already using. This system allows consumers to quickly compare similar products, and for people who, for example, want to cut down on the amount of salt they eat, to do so easily. As we were not successful with this in the first reading we can't introduce it now, but I will continue to campaign for traffic light labelling, and will be calling on the European Commission to come forward with new proposals as soon as possible.

Those on the centre right of the Parliament are trying to stop us from using traffic light labelling voluntarily in the UK, which is another thing I will be fighting hard against. They are also trying to weaken the proposals I got through last time on country of origin labelling. I think that for those consumers concerned about animal welfare and the environment it is important to know where the meat you buy comes from, including meat in processed products like sandwiches and ready meals.

The coming months will see big battles and negotiations over these important issues, and I'll keep you updated on my blog.

Single Seat

2011-03-11T15:50:00.000+01:00

This week I led the way within the Socialists & Democrats group in gathering support for a cross-party initiative to condense two Strasbourg sessions into one. I am delighted to say that we were successful in this campaign as on Tuesday a majority of MEPs voted to approve our amendment.

This is not as arcane as it sounds. It is a win for the taxpayer as it will decrease the costs involved in what has become known as the 'Travelling Circus' of MEPs moving between Brussels and Strasbourg for 12 monthly sessions. The amendment will also help decrease the European Parliament's carbon footprint.

As a result of a deal made by Europe’s leaders, including John Major, in 1992, MEPs have to have 12 sessions in Strasbourg a year. Strasbourg as a city holds important historical significance for Europe, having changed hands between France and Germany five times during the years 1870 to 1945. The fact that the city hosts the European Parliament symbolises the important role European integration has played in avoiding war in Europe on the scale seen during the two World Wars of the 20th century. Whilst I understand the historical and political importance of Strasbourg for the European movement, we have to think about the practical implications.

The amendment passed this week will only mean one less trip to Strasbourg a year, however it is part of a broader issue. I am a supporter of having a single seat for the European Parliament, which makes sense for many reasons. Firstly, the European Parliament is the only elected assembly in the world which does not have one sole parliament. Strasbourg itself costs over 200 million Euros a year and produces a large and totally unnecessary carbon footprint. Given the amount of work we do at EU level to combat climate change, this kind of waste is unjustifiable.

Many people agree. Over 1.3 million people have signed an online petition to scrap Strasbourg and a majority of MEPs also share my view on this issue. MEPs, however, are not in a position to abolish Strasbourg as only a unanimous vote by the governments of EU countries could do this. Hopefully this calendar amendment will raise the issue of the single seat and force member states into coming round to the most sensible, cost effective decision to end the travelling circus once and for all.

International Women's Day

2011-03-08T09:38:00.004+01:00

Today is International Women's Day and although things have become better for women at work and in politics, glass ceilings still remain to be shattered.

Studying isn’t for women. That was my introduction to the world of work aged 16. Having started working for the National Coal Board aged 16, I thought myself lucky to have found a boss who gave me time off to take my A-levels. Then I was called to his office.

“Management” had demanded to know what he was thinking giving a girl time off for studying. It was clear: study leave was for men. My path was blocked. My experience would be unrecognisable to women starting out today. So despite the mountains we have yet to climb it's good to know that we’re making progress. But that progress is slow.

Among the political leaders of Europe, just a few are women. Angela Merkel is probably the dominant force in European politics at present. But in a world of men, female politicians inevitably have to fall back on the male style of politics. Margaret Thatcher relied on macho posturing to keep her party in line and it is easy to see similarities in Merkel’s approach. To beat the men, Merkel has to play the man’s game.

Labour’s Cathy Ashton has discovered just how sexist some of Europe’s male politicians can be. She has had some rotten press over her first year as the EU’s foreign policy supremo. Much of the criticism from politicians does come with sexist undertones. Yet through all this she has shown the traits that so many women look for in politicians: tough when she needs to be and more interested in getting the job done.

The problem is that we will only be able to challenge outdated views by normalising the existence of women in political life. Even in the European Parliament, women still have to fight harder to be heard. We need more women to be taking an interest in politics and deciding that they could do the job of a politician as well as anyone. But for many that path looks too daunting.

Labour can be proud of its record in encouraging people from all walks of life to get involved. But still our politicians are perceived as coming from a small elite, who have had little experience outside the macho world of politics. That not only affects how we as a party relate to the public, it is also off-putting for many people outside the bubble.

Looking back to the National Coal Board, what was my reaction to being told to quit the studies and get back to work? My first act was to leave, move on to a new job where I would be valued. But more important than that, I got organised. The 16-year-old who was told to know her place would hardly recognise herself years later, sitting in Shadow Cabinet. Those early experiences are what led me to the trade union movement – and it was the unions that gave me the confidence to speak up and speak out. It’s time the unions took up that challenge again.

Where exactly does the Conservative Party stand on Europe?

2011-03-07T17:47:00.003+01:00

Quoted on the Foreign Office website, Foreign Secretary William Hague makes it clear that the Government intends to be ‘active and activist, positive and energetic’ when it comes to Europe.

The Tory Europe Minister, David Lidington, is even more fulsome in his praise for the EU. In his recent speech in Vienna, he refers to the European Union as, “ . . the truly historic achievement of establishing a model for a community of nations governing relations among themselves according to the rule of law.”

And recently, in an interview with Al Jazeera, even David Cameron made - for him – a very clear statement specifically regarding any referendum on EU membership. Setting the cat amongst the eurosceptic pigeons, Cameron totally rejected the idea of an in/out referendum on EU membership, and said he wanted the UK to remain a full member.

So far, so (relatively) clear. The independent observer would suggest that the Tories are a firmly pro-European party with a commitment to Britain’s membership of the EU.

And yet . . . the Tories continue to keep strange and undesirable company in the European Parliament, preferring to be in a political group, not of the mainstream centre right parties of Merkel and Sarkozy, but made up, in Nick Clegg’s words, of “nutters, anti-Semites, people who deny climate change exists and homophobes."

And their votes, on issues ranging from human trafficking to rights for same-sex couples and the treatment of the victims of the Equitable Life scandal, continue to suggest that the Tory brand is still pretty toxic.

The truth is that – whatever his own real views – Cameron has to play both ends against the middle. Within his own party, the eurosceptic right is strong. He can keep them at bay by pointing to the pro-European demands made upon him by his LibDem Coalition partners. Of course, he then says much the same thing - in reverse - when accused of being anti-European by Clegg and the small number of Tory pro-Europeans.

I blogged last year that the much-vaunted EU Bill going through the Westminster Parliament at the time was much ado about nothing and I’m sure we can look forward to more such non-events as Cameron continues to try to ride his two European horses!

Health claims on baby milk must not be misleading

2011-02-17T13:57:00.000+01:00

This week in Strasbourg I discussed my proposal to stop a misleading health claim on formula milk for babies with my Democratic Socialist colleagues and I'm now writing the resolution which could stop the claim in its tracks.

What I'm worried about is a claim that the European Commission has decided can be displayed on follow-on formulas and foods for babies, saying that adding a fatty acid known as DHA to the formula or food improves the vision of babies. DHA is found naturally in breast milk, and, in breast milk, is known to be important in the development of children's eyes. However, the synthesized DHA which is added to formula milk is different. Formula milk producer Mead Johnson has applied to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) for permission to use the health claim, supporting their cause with evidence they have carried out themselves. Much of the decision making has been made behind closed doors by a specialist committee, and we were recently told that the health claim would be allowed.

However, an independent review of all the available evidence on DHA in formula milk in 2008 found that adding DHA to formula milk "had no proven benefit regarding vision, cognition or physical growth". Furthermore, a recent study found a possible link between being given DHA in formula milk and increased blood pressure later in life. Clearly the scientific basis of the claim needs to be reviewed.

Our children's health is too important to be left in the hands of a multinational company's marketing department. If an ingredient is genuinely found to be beneficial and risk free then it should be an obligatory ingredient in all formula milk, and not be used as a marketing ploy by a specific brand.

In order to reverse the decision the resolution I am drafting must be passed by the European Parliament's Environment and Public Health Committee, and then adopted by a majority of all 736 MEPs. If you agree that we can't take any chances when it comes to children's nutrition then please write to all MEPs in your area urging them to back my resolution.

Working together to prevent cancer

2011-02-04T17:50:00.000+01:00

Today is World Cancer Day. Sadly many of us have been touched by cancer in one way or another, with cancer accounting for a quarter of all deaths in the EU. However up to 40% of cancers are preventable, and we have a lot of work to do in raising awareness of how smoking and drinking, diet and exercise and staying safe in the sun can be factors in the development of the disease.

This Wednesday I hosted an event in the European Parliament to mark World Cancer Day. Although it is the governments of EU countries which have overall responsibility for health policies, we know there is still a vital role for the EU in preventing cancer.

One example would be something I'm doing presently, as the lead for the Socialist and Democrats group on the Food Information proposals. I am fighting for it to be obligatory for food manufacturers to state the amount of calories, salt, sugar, fat and saturated fat their products contain on the front of the pack. Unfortunately I have lost my battle for a mandatory colour coded 'traffic light' scheme for now, but this is something I will continue to campaign for. If we're serious about people making healthier choices then it is crucial we inform people of what's in the food they're buying, because we know that poor nutrition and obesity can be a factor in the development of many cancers.

Later in the year we are expecting to see the revision of the Tobacco Products Directive, which covers maximum amounts of things such as tar and nicotine allowed in cigarettes and other tobacco products. It also regulates the way tobacco companies can present and package their products, including the written health warnings. I am calling for standardised cigarette packages which would have to display a large image warning of the effects of smoking, and the banning of chemicals which make cigarettes 'smoother' or improve the flavour. Smoking is the leading cause of preventable cancers, so the legislation must be more effective at discouraging people to smoke, especially young people.

The EU is a great forum for us to learn from each other, to raise awareness, and to coordinate research. It is important that we work together to reach our shared goal of beating preventable cancers.

Coalition reforms will increase health inequalities

2011-01-28T10:30:00.000+01:00

This week the European Parliament's Environment and Public Health Committee adopted a resolution on reducing health inequalities in the EU, whilst in the UK Conservative-led reforms to healthcare could see these inequalities widen.

Across Europe people in the lowest socio-economic groups can expect to live on average 8 years less than those in the highest socio-economic groups. Unemployed people are especially at risk, and as the coalition cuts kick in more and more people will find themselves in this vulnerable group.

I have put a lot of work into this resolution because we need to send a clear message to all European governments that during these difficult economic times we must keep equal access to quality healthcare as a priority. When amending the report I focused on the need to tackle obesity, tobacco and alcohol harm, all of which affect lower socio-economic groups disproportionately. I also called on governments to invest in employment and housing conditions, which have a huge effect on people's health.

Unfortunately it doesn't look like the British government will be paying much attention to these widespread calls to protect healthcare. Andrew Lansley's reforms of the NHS are absurd. Making GPs into administrators for practices will mean they'll have less time to do what they trained to do, which is treat patients, not fill in ordering forms and file paperwork.

It may make little difference to those who can afford to pay, but for the majority of ordinary people who rely on our NHS these reforms could be devastating. Here in the European Parliament Labour MEPs will continue to put pressure on the UK and all EU governments to remember that healthcare is not something we can afford to cut.

We must continue to fight homophobia in Europe

2011-01-21T11:38:00.000+01:00

In recent years gay rights have come a long way, but we can't become complacent. Roger Helmer's comments on Twitter last weekend show that many on the right of British politics still don't get it. By asking why it's "not OK for a psychiatrist to try to "turn" a consenting homosexual" Mr Helmer was implying that homosexuality is a mental illness or some kind of disease that can be "cured". This is an unfair and damaging stigma that LGBT people have had to deal with for decades, with the World Health Organisation only removing homosexuality from the list of mental disorders in 1990. So when my fellow MEP for the East Midlands made this statement I immediately called on David Cameron to condemn it, or risk showing that the Tories are still the nasty party. However, as shown in last year's interview with the Gay Times, the Prime Minister doesn't seem to care what his MEPs are up to. Roger Helmer and some of his colleagues have voted against numerous measures promoting gay rights in the past.

This all comes at a time when it is crucial that the European Union is firm on upholding LGBT rights. This week in Strasbourg we voted for a tough resolution condemning a proposed law in Lithuania which would make the "promotion of homosexual relations" illegal. The law, similar to Thatcher's Section 28, would mean that people could be fined up to £2,500 for "offences" such as holding hands with someone of the same sex in public, or taking part in a gay pride march. If passed the law would breach the European Convention on Human Rights, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Unsurprisingly it was allies of the Tories in the European Parliament who stood up for Lithuania's freedom to flout the rights of their minorities. The EU was set up in the wake of the mass murder of homosexual men and women, and we have a responsibility to make sure a member of the EU does not abuse the rights of its citizens. As for Mr Helmer, he has a responsibility to represent his many gay constituents, not insult them.

While the government backs down, Labour cracks down on bankers' bonuses

2011-01-11T15:03:00.000+01:00

Unsurprisingly all George Osborne's talk of being tough on bankers' bonuses has turned out to be empty rhetoric, as reported in today's Guardian. It is now clear that the government has little real appetite to tackle the City's risk-taking bonus culture.

However, despite attempts by the government to water it down, new EU legislation is now in place to limit the cash payments that have in the past rewarded bankers for short-term risky investments. These new rules, taken through the European Parliament by Labour's Arlene McCarthy MEP, aren't about bashing bankers. They are about putting long-term interests ahead of short-term risks.

The rules specify that only around a quarter of the bonus can be paid upfront in cash, while the rest must be deferred and will only be paid out if investments perform as expected. In addition banks must establish limits on bonuses in relation to salaries, to help limit the disproportionate role played by bonuses in the financial sector.

The government has talked tough but done little, and it is Labour that has delivered the constructive reforms. While we're in opposition in Westminster, Labour MEPs are still in a position to make fair and practical legislation for the UK.

Belgian Presidency High Level Conference on Health, Nutrition & Obesity

2010-12-09T23:16:00.001+01:00

I spoke this morning to a packed hall at a Belgian Presidency High Level conference on health, nutrition and obesity, alongside Health Commissioner John Dalli.

I informed the conference of the workshop on obesity, which I co-chaired in the European Parliament in November as summarised here.

I also made a plea for action, not rhetoric and spoke about some of the relevant legislation in the European Parliament, including food labelling, pesticides regulation, maximum permitted levels of added sugar in fruit juices, regulation of advertising of junk food to children, and the EU's free fruit and veg in schools scheme, and of course spoke in favour of the traffic light labelling scheme, as we have pioneered in the UK.

I was strongly critical of the role of industry and the amount of resources poured into lobbying to avoid stronger regulation. We heard from Commissioner Dalli that the EU Platform for Action on Diet, Physical Activity and Health, chaired by the Commission (bringing together industry and other civil society stakeholders), had reached a voluntary agreement to reduce salt intake across the EU's 27 Member States by 16% over 4 years.

While this is of course to be enthusiastically welcomed, it is many of these same companies who separately lobby against front of pack labelling, or traffic light labelling, too concerned for their profits.

Finally as discussed here I told the conference that it was perverse that it is cheaper to purchase junk food than it is healthier foods such as fresh fruit and vegetables and that whilst this remained the case, we would all be swimming against the tide in our efforts.

European action on Alzheimer's disease

2010-11-30T16:50:00.002+01:00

This morning saw an important step for the 9.9 million Europeans who suffer from Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, and the people that care for them, as MEPs voted on a new report focusing on these diseases.

Alzheimer's is the main cause of disability amongst the elderly. In today's ageing population this problem is only getting worse, with the worldwide rate of dementia set to double every twenty years. Alzheimer's can be an extremely distressing disease, especially for those closest to the patient who can feel they are slowly losing the person they love. It also tends to be the child or partner of the sufferer who takes on most of the caring responsibility, often giving up their job in order to care for their loved one full time.

Research into dementias is particularly fragmented across Europe, which is why the EU has launched the Joint Programming Initiative for countries to coordinate and share their research more easily. Hopefully the initiative will help researchers build on the promising breakthroughs in discovering the cause of Alzheimer's.

In the European Parliament we are calling for Alzheimer's and other dementias to be declared a European health priority and in this we have even garnered the support of José Mourinho. We have also called on the Commission to add the 'dementia dimension' into plans for future jobs and growth, creating vital jobs in the care sector. Personally I included amendments urging not only for research into new drugs and therapies, but also for funding research into diet and nutrition, which is increasingly being shown to be an important factor in the development of Alzheimer's disease. Tackling this huge problem will not be easy, but I am delighted that we are making some real progress at a European level.

EU migration doesn't have to mean a raw deal for British workers

2010-11-29T17:56:00.002+01:00

Gloria De Piero was right on last week's Question Time; there are ways of protecting British workers from being undercut by cheaper labour from within the EU. Nigel Farage predictably brayed that we have no power over migrants from places like Poland and Latvia coming to the UK and doing a job for less than a British person, but we do.

One of the best parts of being a member of the EU is freedom of movement, a right that many Brits take advantage of, whether it's studying in Berlin, working in Paris or retiring to the Spanish coast. However with this advantage comes problems, and it is clearly unacceptable that workers hired in other EU countries and then sent to the UK can put collective agreements and established terms and conditions at risk.

There is already European legislation which is meant to stop this from happening. The Posted Workers Directive says that companies are allowed to employ their own staff on projects in other EU countries, as long as this is for a limited time and the company abides by local working conditions. However, after a series of controversial decisions by the European Court of Justice the legislation has resulted in companies treating migrant workers as they would be in their home country, and local workers feeling they have been undercut.

We need to revise this legislation to make sure British workers are not excluded and EU workers are not exploited. To do this we need the support of the governments of the Member States, and the support of the Commission, which after consistent pressure from Labour MEPs and our allies looks more and more likely. It is also something Ed Miliband prioritised in his first speech as leader. We need constructive co-operation with Europe to solve problems like this, and UKIP's brand of ignorant Europhobia only hinders British interests in Europe.

Stopping prescription drug adverts

2010-11-25T09:23:00.002+01:00

This week changes to the legislation on prescription medicines that could have seen US-style drug adverts coming in by the back door were blocked by MEPs in Strasbourg. The aim of the changes was to improve the quality and access to information about prescription drugs across Europe, while retaining the ban on direct to consumer advertising, but the result could have been the complete opposite.

If the European Parliament had agreed with the European Commission's original proposals then we could have been seeing "information" about specific drugs in health related publications, which effectively could have meant adverts in magazines like Men's Health and certain sections of newspapers. We could have also seen doctors handing their patients entirely unverified and biased "information" sent to them from pharmaceutical companies. This proposal was backed by the centre-right at committee stage in the Parliament. I was an outspoken critic of this, as were my colleagues in the Socialists and Democrats group. The last thing we want is for our doctors and nurses to be acting as advertising agents for drug companies. Thankfully, minutes before appearing on a BBC debate with me, the centre-right Swedish MEP leading on the legislation changed his mind and left the Tories in the small minority of those supporting the dangerous proposal.

I was extremely disappointed to see this proposed legislation come from the European Commission. It followed over a decade of relentless lobbying from the pharmaceutical industry, keen to introduce something similar in Europe to the television adverts for prescription drugs seen in the USA. The industry pressure also reached some members of the Parliament, but fortunately most MEPs worked closely with consumer and patient groups to change the report from being industry focused to being patient focused. Now this legislation should help provide patients with accurate, reliable and impartial information about the drugs they take, rather than promotional material from pharmaceutical companies looking to increase their sales.

A Euro-nightmare before Christmas for Cameron

2010-11-24T12:04:00.001+01:00

Very interesting news from Strasbourg this week where David Cameron's Euro-nightmare before Christmas just got worse!

Not only is his new political grouping in the EP skating on very thin ice, but on Monday Conservative MEPs presented Cameron with yet another European headache by electing the more Eurosceptic of the three candidates to lead their delegation in the European Parliament. Although I must stress that newly-elected Martin Callanan is not in the same league as his Tory colleagues Roger Helmer and Daniel Hannan, both of whom should really belong to UKIP. In fact, Martin works hard on many issues in the European Parliament's Environment committee and is currently the Rapporteur on a new proposal to limit the amount of CO2 emitted by vans across the whole EU, and has achieved much consensus on his approach. Nevertheless, I suspect he is not a fan of Cameron's about turn on Europe since his election and his failure to implement his opposition rhetoric.

But Cameron's main worry will be for his new ECR (European Conservatives and Reformist) Group in the European Parliament. This is the group that Nick Clegg criticised during one of the leadership debates in May telling the nation how Cameron's MEPs were allied with "nutters, anti-Semites, people who deny climate change exists and homophobes".

Up until now, many such comments had been directed at the ECR leader, Polish MEP Michal Kaminski. Well it now seems that even he finds his own Party (the Polish Law and Justice party) so disgusting that he has resigned stating it has become too right-wing and been taken over by extremists. The Law and Justice Party are the Tories' largest ally in the ECR Group so it will be interesting to follow developments and see whether Kaminski can retain his leadership of the ECR Group.

Panorama on junk food

2010-11-16T16:42:00.002+01:00

Last night's Panaroma programme examining the case for increased taxation on junk food was extremely interesting. Some of the arguments made are certainly worthy of consideration.

I particularly liked the comparison made with tobacco. It was pointed out that taxation on tobacco has indisputably had a major impact on the reduction in the number of smokers. The question was then asked that given the current obesity epidemic we are experiencing and the high numbers of deaths related to obesity, whether it was time to consider adopting a similar approach for junk food.

Of course we must be very careful not to make life more difficult for those on low incomes and push up their weekly food bill, which is why any decision to increase taxes on junk food should not be taken lightly. One suggestion is to use increased taxes on junk food to subsidise the consumption of healthy foods such as fruit and vegetables, which could actually reduce the food bill of those on lower incomes choosing to improve their diet and opt for healthier options.

Tory Health Secretary Andrew Lansley opposes such moves, and given his outrageous decision to bring companies such as McDonalds, PepsiCo, Unilever and others to the heart of government decision-making, this is hardly surprising.

Cameron's relatively pro-European stance to be cautiously welcomed, but his influence remains limited in nature

2010-11-16T10:59:00.000+01:00

One of the striking aspects of David Cameron's tenure as Prime Minister so far is his about turn on the European Union.

Right from the beginning when bidding to become his party's leader in 2005 he was forced to make Eurosceptic noises and a rash promise to withdraw his MEPs from the mainstream centre-right group of European political parties. Without the votes of the Eurosceptic fringe of his party he never would have been elected as Tory leader in the first place.

However, I have been surprised to see that his tough rhetoric in opposition has melted away.

Firstly, his pledges to renegotiate the EU's vital and important social legislation have been conveniently forgotten about.

Secondly, despite his strong rhetoric, presumably for the benefit of his own back-benchers and the Eurosceptic press, he has agreed to a minimum 2.9% increase in the EU budget for next year.

Thirdly, he has enthusiastically championed close defence and military cooperation with our closest EU partners, one of the most sensitive areas of sovereignty for many Tories.

Indeed, one of his first 'European' decisions as Prime Minister was to appoint the moderate David Lidington as his Europe Minister. In my meeting with Mr Lidington soon after his appointment it appeared to me that this was a choice highly influenced by the pro-European Nick Clegg.

Nevertheless, despite the relatively positive approach, it remains to be seen how significant this can be. The problem for David Cameron, and indeed any Conservative Prime Minister is that outside the main centre-right EPP group, his influence and that of his MEPs is somewhat neutered. As a co-legislator, the European Parliament can no longer be dismissed as irrelevant and is now a mature arm of the EU's legislative process. Legislation here is adopted on a consensus basis with deals often hammered out between the EPP and my own group, the centre-left Socialists and Democrats. His MEPs, on the outside of this process, are sadly excluded from such important negotiations. Likewise, despite his attempts in recent weeks to improve relationships with Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy, the pre-summit meetings of EPP centre-right prime ministers excludes David Cameron so despite his shouting to the media, his real influence is also limited and this can be in nobody's interest, least of all Britain's.

So perhaps the real question which remains for David Cameron is this: Will he swallow his pride, confront the hard-right Europhobes in his party and apply for readmission to the mainstream EPP or will he choose to keep both himself and his party in the political wilderness?

Workshop on diet, nutrition and obesity

2010-11-11T14:12:00.001+01:00

Yesterday I co-hosted a European Parliament workshop looking at diet, nutrition and obesity and how the work we do in the European Parliament can impact on this.

We heard from various experts, health and consumer groups about the consequences of poor nutrition, the socio-economic imbalances which result in poor nutrition and ways and mechanisms at our disposal to contribute towards better nutrition and health.

It was a really informative session and while of course there no silver bullet exists, we can ensure the decisions we take help contribute to improved diet and nutrition. Examples include providing clear and useful nutritional information on food and drink, ensuring that any health claims made can be backed up by scientific evidence, reforming the CAP to include promotion of fruit and vegetables and continuing and expanding the EU's fruit and veg scheme for schools.

During the meeting a very good point was made that when it comes to food safety, there is no argument that we should legislate to ensure safety, but when it comes to poor diet and nutrition, which can kill and make ill many more people than unsafe food, there appears to be a reluctance on behalf of many legislators to turn rhetoric into action.

An article on childhood obesity in Europe

2010-11-09T12:12:00.004+01:00

Taken from an article I wrote for The Parliament Magazine

Classified as an epidemic in Europe by the WHO, with around 20% of European children overweight, of which one third are obese, it is time for policy-makers to turn rhetoric into action.

With high prevalence rates in children from poor socio-economic backgrounds, there is clearly a strong correlation between childhood obesity and disadvantaged families. Of course education is key; for health workers, parents and the children themselves. Whilst as MEPs we can encourage Member States to dedicate sufficient resources to education programmes, and to cooperate together to share best practice and exchange ideas, we have no formal powers in this area. Similarly, public health largely remains a national competence, although increasingly, legislation we deal with in the Parliament can and does play an important role.

For example, in order to empower parents to make the right choices for their children, simple and easy-to-understand nutritional information is important. It is difficult to make the right choices if no information is available, or is presented in an unclear or inaccessible format, obscuring comparisons. This is why the ongoing struggle over the new Food Information to Consumers regulation is so important to many of us in the European Parliament who understand this. I was delighted that in our first reading vote last June, my proposals to label key nutrients on the front of pack in an easily comparable format were backed by a majority of MEPs. I was less pleased that my proposal to use the traffic light system to denote low, medium or high levels of salt, sugar and fats was rejected, following a fierce and often misleading campaign from vested interests. This system, simple yet effective, would have enabled at-a-glance comparisons between different foods, helping parents to identify the healthier option for their children.

A similar lobby from vested interests was also at play during the revision of the Television without Frontiers Directive, some years ago, when a proposed amendment to restrict advertising of junk food before 9pm was ferociously opposed. I find it unacceptable that foods with a poor nutritional profile can continue to be advertised to children, be it directly or indirectly and I look forward to the imminent implementation of the Nutrition and Health Claims regulation, adopted by the European Parliament in 2006, which will ensure nutrition claims must be scientifically backed up, and will put in place nutrient profiles, ending the current practice whereby a food with a particularly poor profile in terms of high levels of fats, sugar and salt is allowed to bear a positive health claim which focuses on just one positive aspect, while ignoring the many negatives.

I was also extremely interested to read about developments in Finland, and their planned confectionary tax to help discourage consumption of unhealthy junk food. While I am not necessarily convinced that this is the best way forward, it does highlight an important issue; it is often the food with the poorest nutritional make-up which is cheapest, meaning that parents wishing to provide their children with a balanced, healthy diet find it more expensive to do so. This is perverse and if we are serious about tackling the child obesity epidemic, we must look at ways of reversing this.

Unfortunately there is no silver bullet to help us tackle the scourge of child obesity and whilst the measures I have outlined here may be small steps, nevertheless they do represent progress and I shall continue to campaign on such issues in the future.

Have your say!

2010-11-08T15:49:00.001+01:00

It has been brought to my attention that Social Europe Journal is running an online poll for the most influential left-of-centre European blog and this blog is among one of the 18 nominees - so if you like what you see on my blog please take the time to vote!

Update - Channel 4 FactCheck say Cameron was wrong and fictitious about Labour MEPs' vote

2010-10-28T16:44:00.003+02:00

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-did-labour-meps-vote-for-a-6-rise-in-eu-budget/4755

Time for the Tories to make it clear: do they want real reform or just headlines?

2010-10-28T15:45:00.005+02:00

(As published on Left Foot Forward)

As the government struggles to hit home with its arguments for the biggest cuts in living memory, David Cameron is looking for a diversion to relieve the run of bad headlines.

Cue an EU budget battle.

Today the prime minister is in Brussels for an EU summit – and he’s briefing anyone who’ll listen about his determination to stand up to EU excess.

Conservative politicians and commentators have been desperate to make political capital out of their call for a budget freeze, even if the facts don’t entirely support the story they want to be written.

So this week David Cameron stood up at PMQs to accuse Labour MEPs of backing a European Parliament call for a 5.9 per cent budget increase.

Tory aides must have been so busy writing the press release that they forgot to actually check the detail of the vote.

In fact Labour MEPs voted against the overall call for a budget increase and against a host of outrageous calls to increase spending. But it gets far more interesting than that.

For all their bluster Conservative MEPs failed to table a single amendment to the final budget package that would have resulted in a reduction in spending against 2010 levels. It was left to Labour members to propose cuts of more than €1bn to wasteful agricultural subsidies.

The best the Tories could manage was an amendment proposing a non-binding call for a budget freeze – a piece of political posturing that would, at best, have had no actual impact on the overall figures in the budget and, at worst, could have alienated the very people we need to win around to deliver a better value-for-money EU budget.

It is another example of the Tories’ impossible position on EU affairs. Cameron and Hague support the idea of Britain playing a leading role in the EU but allow themselves to be held hostage by backbenchers and an anti-EU press.

That’s how they ended up exiled from the mainstream in EU politics. The Tories’ decision to quit the same group as Nicolas Sarkozy’s UMP and Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats means that Britain is still the only country to have no voice inside the biggest political group in the European Parliament.

It makes it much harder for those of us in favour of actually achieving proper reform (not just talking about it) to bring other European politicians with us.

It’s time for the Tories to make it clear whether their actions are actually about delivering reform, or just delivering headlines.

Member States back country of origin labelling for meat

2010-10-28T12:37:00.000+02:00

Great news emerging this week from the Council of Ministers where it seems the EU's 27 national governments have reached agreement on mandatory labelling of the country of origin for meat, extending the current provisions for beef to lamb, pork and poultry.

I'm delighted that the Member States have seriously looked at the European Parliament's position, which endorsed the amendments I put forward for mandatory country of origin labelling. While my amendments went further, and included meat used in processed products and other single-ingredient products, as well as dairy products, I am happy that at least they have asked the Commission to come forward with a report on compulsory labelling for these aspects.

This legislation will come back to the European Parliament for second reading in 2011, where I hope MEPs will continue to support my proposals.

The Miami Five

2010-10-25T11:53:00.002+02:00

Last week in Strasbourg I met with Olga Salanueva and Adriana Perez. The women's husbands are two of five Cubans, known in the UK as the Miami Five, arrested and jailed for spying by the US in 1998.

The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions has declared the detention of these five Cubans to be both illegal and arbitrary and Amnesty International has expressed "grave concern" at both the impartiality of the judicial process in the original trial and the denial of US visas to these two wives so they can visit their husbands in jail.

While I am no legal expert as regards the trials and sentences of the Miami Five, I find it inhumane and unacceptable that the United States persistently refuse visas for these two women to see their husbands and will be working in the coming months to put pressure on the US authorities to change this sad state of affairs.

Health and safety at work is no joke

2010-10-18T13:38:00.004+02:00

The successful rescue of 33 miners in Chile should not mask broader issues of health and safety, and I hope that trade unionists and others will use the publicity generated by those events to highlight European Health & Safety Week (25-29 Oct).

Like everyone else, I’ve been enthralled at the whole story coming out of Chile and naturally delighted that the trapped miners have been freed and that they are now re-united with their families.

The rescue operation seems to have been a marvelous example of good planning, sensible co-operation and efficient execution and I congratulate all those involved. The Chilean people will rightly be proud of the men who survived in such extraordinary circumstance, and of those technicians, health professionals and others who have brought about a real “good news” story.

But let’s not forget how close we came to a tragedy; to thirty three families losing a son, a father, a brother.

And let’s not forget that thousands die in mines every year, through inadequate care with a whole raft of health and safety issues.

Nor is this just an issue for the mining industry or for countries thousands of miles away. There were 151 workers fatally injured in Britain last year. The figure continues to fall, as the effects of better health & safety legislation – largely from Europe – has an impact. But this figure is still too high.

That’s why it’s important that we use European Health & Safety Week to focus again on how we can create a safer working environment.

There are many who sneer at the very phrase “health & safety”, and I have lost count of the number of times Conservative MEPs have voted against health & safety measures.

The Chilean rescue must act as a reminder to us all. There is a very thin line between triumph and tragedy, and sensible, effective legislation on people’s working conditions really does save lives without the need for massive rescue operations.

Skid Marks and Vince Cable

2010-10-14T10:44:00.006+02:00

It may simply be a sign of the political times, but I for one cannot fathom how the Liberal Democrats have managed to make such an about turn on so many key issues, so central to their perceived self-identity. Vince Cable may well have remarked in the Commons on Tuesday that "The roads to Westminster are littered with the skid marks of political parties changing direction." But to my mind the only party changing direction has been the Lib Dems. Granted, the Tories are executing cuts of a magnitude far greater than their own rhetoric before May’s general election, but the key difference between them and the Lib Dems is that they are moving to a more comfortable ideological place, whereas the Lib Dems are betraying so many of their core values.

On tuition fees, one of the Lib Dems’ flagship policies for many years, not only will they not abolish tuition fees but it looks like they will be the ones doubling, tripling, even quadrupling this figure, and hiking up the interest rates on the loans taken out to pay for the fees, in what will be a double whammy for any potential students from middle or working class backgrounds.

The possibility of some universities such as Oxford or Cambridge being allowed to charge whatever they like will clearly lead to extremely able, but less well-of students, from poorer backgrounds being effectively denied access to this country’s most prestigious and well-respected universities, opting instead for a less-expensive university, thus creating an elitist, classist system of higher education, doing away with equal opportunity of chances between the haves and have nots. Will this be the primary legacy of the Liberal Democrats?

Meeting Ed

2010-10-07T14:45:00.000+02:00

I'm travelling back to London this afternoon for a meeting with our new Leader Ed Miliband. Following his victory last week, and on the day the outcome of the shadow cabinet vote is announced, it will be interesting to discuss how we can take the party forward and how our MEPs will integrate into the shadow ministers' teams, ensuring coherence and unity between our Westminster and Brussels teams on major policy issues such as development, the environment, climate change, the economic crisis, anti-discrimination legislation, social policy and immigration.

As EPLP leader, I look forward to such cooperation in order to get the message across that Labour needs to be strong and focused not just at the local and national level, but also in the European Parliament where day-in and day-out there are important Labour issues and values to fight for.

A special workshop on Swine Flu

2010-10-06T12:33:00.004+02:00

This morning I participated in a special hearing in the European Parliament on the way that European Union institutions and agencies and other public health authorities handled the H1N1 (swine flu) pandemic of last year.

We heard from the European Commission, representatives of the Swedish and Belgian EU presidencies, the director of the European Centre for Communicable Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), the director of the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) and the director of WHO Europe.

It was important to have the debate on the lessons we can learn in order to better help us prepare for a future, possibly more deadly pandemic. It was never about a witch hunt or conspiracy theories. As citizens and politicians we expect governments to prepare for the worst, and should the worst happen and preparations were found to be wanting the uproar would be deafening.

Nevertheless there are clearly questions to be answered surrounding how decisions are reached and transparency issues. I am pleased that EU agencies publish names and declarations of interest for key experts and advisors, but questions remain about the WHO, which refuses to publish declarations of interest for its experts and advisors, citing privacy concerns. The answer to my question from the current WHO director for Europe, Zsuzsanna Jakab was that this was being reviewed and she would raise my concerns with WHO Director-General Dr Margaret Chan. Questions also remain over the definition of a pandemic, given that the WHO raised the pandemic level to its highest (level 6), which appears to merely be based on geographical spread, rather than taking account of the severity of the virus, and I believe in future it would be important to distinguish between the two.

EPLP Leader speech to Party Conference

2010-09-28T22:44:00.001+02:00

What a weekend!

2010-09-27T20:36:00.004+02:00

It's been a highly emotional weekend here in Manchester with such a heartfelt and well-received farewell speech by Gordon Brown followed by such a close and nail-biting result on Saturday to determine the new Labour Party Leader.

I was delighted by the outcome. After listening to all the candidates who came to Brussels for hustings with the EPLP, I was highly impressed by all of them. But it was Ed Miliband and his vision for our party which stood out for me and which is why I offered him my support in this campaign. I really think he has what it takes to be a great leader of our party and an even better Prime Minister of our country and I'm sure he is well-placed to unite the party and take us forward in a progressive, inclusive direction.

Of course much of the right-wing media and the Conservatives (who were already lining up even before the result was announced) have come out with their usual vitriolic discourse and will do their best to portray him as in hock to the unions or as 'Red Ed', seeking to undermine his authority and legitimacy.

But as he told Andrew Marr yesterday, Ed Miliband is very much his own man and together with the shadow cabinet he will take his own decisions and reach his own conclusions. He has done no deals and made no rash promises in order to get elected, unlike David Cameron who abandoned Conservative influence in Europe by promising to withdraw from the mainstream centre-right alliance of Europe's political parties, all for the vote of the nasty eurosceptic fringe of his party.

Personally, and as a party, we have no apology to make for the trade unions. Today when I addressed Conference I said the Labour Party should stop sidelining the work we do in the European Parliament and treating it like some embarrassing relative. The same is true for the trade unions. The truth is that the trade unions were instrumental in founding the Labour Party and remain integral to our movement. It is only right and proper that individual trade union members are entitled to their say on who becomes the new leader of the labour movement. These people are our nurses, cleaners, teaching assistants, and so many of those on the front line of our public services. The fact that they have voted for Ed Miliband in their droves is as sure a sign as any that Ed really does get it and his campaign has reached and spoken to the ordinary person on the street.

It's also very interesting that Ed has been elected with over 175,000 individual votes, whereas David Cameron was elected with less than 135,000 votes, so any attempts from the Tories to undermine Ed's position should be taken with a large pinch of salt.

I look forward to working with Ed and the new shadow cabinet team immensely for what is shaping up to be an exciting new era in our party's history.

Strasbourg round-up

2010-09-22T17:03:00.002+02:00

In Strasbourg this week two of my Labour colleagues have been instrumental in changing draft legislation for the better.

Firstly, Peter Skinner has helped engineer rules which will put in place a pan-European system of financial supervision, ensuring that where companies operate across EU borders, they will no longer be able to exploit regulatory grey areas between different national regimes. I know both he and Arlene McCarthy have been working for a long time on putting in place a range measures to protect consumers and regulate financial services, to help ensure accountability and responsibility.

Separately Linda McAvan has authored a European Parliament report, amending the European Commission proposal on Pharmacovigilance, in order to make it easier for the side effects and adverse reactions to new drugs to be spotted, and acted upon, more quickly.

There's a general strike in France tomorrow so many British MEPs are leaving this afternoon to avoid being stuck should the country come to a standstill. As a result of the planned strikes there will be no legislative votes taking place tomorrow.

I'll be at Labour Party Conference over the weekend and next week, delivering the EPLP (European Parliamentary Labour Party) leader's speech on Monday morning, speaking at various fringes and welcoming the newly elected Leader of the Labour Party to the EPLP/TULO fringe event on Saturday evening, in what will be one of his or her first appearances.

The fight continues...

2010-09-16T17:16:00.004+02:00

This week in Brussels I called together a group of health and consumer NGOs who are supportive of using multiple colour coding on food so consumers can ascertain and compare at a glance the nutritional content of food. I convened the meeting following the disappointing vote by MEPs in June.

In attendance were representatives from Which?, the British Heart Foundation, the British Medical Association, Cancer Research UK, BEUC (the European consumers' organisation), the European Heart Network, and a German NGO called Foodwatch as well as Nessa Childers, an Irish MEP colleague of mine and representatives from other MEPs' offices.

We had a very fruitful discussion, and the consensus was that we would continue with a joint campaign to promote colour coding, to lobby Member States in the Council and ensure that traffic lights can at the very least continue to be used throughout Europe as part of national schemes in the current draft legislation on food labelling, as exemplified by the UK's own traffic light scheme.

We also agreed to work together with a view to launching a Citizen's Initiative, once the rules are in place, to gather 1 million signatures from EU citizens, to pressure the Commission to come forward with a separate legislative proposal and build up support and visibility for this important issue.

Watch this space...

New article on Progress Online - Will Britain be left behind on women’s rights?

2010-09-14T10:34:00.007+02:00

http://www.progressonline.org.uk/articles/article.asp?a=6727

Will Britain be left behind on women’s rights?

Another week, another example of the Conservative Party refusing to back women's rights in Europe. Conservative MEPs made clear their views on the subject once again this week when they refused to back a raft of proposals on ensuring women benefit from EU policies.

Whether we were targeting action to cut the gender pay gap, focussing on how we can help women from ethnic minorities to better integrate into society, or voting on ways in which we tackle discrimination against older women, the Tories were steadfast in their lack of support.

On the whole these weren't legislative actions that would commit additional funding or tie anyone down in red tape. They were about sending a political signal to the European Commission about what issues MEPs consider to be important.

And in their votes this week it has become clear that for the Conservative Party women's rights isn't one of those issues.

What is particularly worrying is that this seems to be becoming a political narrative for this government's approach in the EU.

Last week the Guardian reported that the Conservative-Lib Dem government was opting out of pan-EU measures to combat human trafficking. It's a prime example of a policy area in which it makes perfect sense for European countries to work together. No wonder human rights groups have been up in arms.

To make matters worse, this isn't even the first time that the new coalition government, only just 100 days old, has chosen to opt out of measures that would protect women from abuse and violence.

European Protection Orders are an idea currently being considered to ensure that women who receive the backing of the courts to protect them from violent attacks have that protection wherever they are in the EU.

The scheme had the backing of the Labour government but in June, quietly and with little media reporting, Justice Minister Ken Clarke reversed the UK position.

One of the interesting things about being in the European Parliament is that you get to see the different politics of the coalition partners close up. The Lib Dems and Conservatives regularly take opposing positions in the Strasbourg hemicycle.

So far, it looks like when it comes to government policy on women's rights, the Conservative position is winning out every time.

Cuts to hit Midlands and North hardest

2010-09-13T10:30:00.003+02:00

I wasn’t surprised to see that the Midlands and the North are likely to be hit harder than the South when the public spending cuts bite.

This was the main finding of recent research carried out on behalf of the BBC The study assesses how England's regions may cope with further public sector cuts and looks at four categories; business, community, people and place. It then ranks the different local authorities according to how well they will do when subjected to the economic shocks caused by spending cuts.

Overall the survey does not predict good times ahead for the East Midlands, with only two local authorities in the top 50 best-placed authorities, while seven are in the bottom 50.

But depicting this as a “north-south divide” story as the BBC does is too simple. It’s not just because the Midlands (whether East or West) is not in the North. It’s because we can see major differences within each Region.

In the East Midlands, for instance, Harborough (14th position overall out of 324 local authorities) is next door to Leicester in 302nd position. Similarly Rutland (53rd) shares a border with Corby (202nd). And even within a more affluent area there will be pockets of more deprived communities.

Surveys like these are blunt instruments at best, but what is clear is that the less well-off, wherever they are to be found, are likely to suffer more than the well-to-do. The idea that “we are all in this together” is an insult.

Strasbourg round-up

2010-09-09T14:56:00.002+02:00

All in all it's been an interesting session here in Strasbourg this week. I voted in favour of a resolution strongly condemning France's recent deportations of Roma people. These were illegal under European law and the adopted resolution will increase the pressure on the Commission to begin legal action.

I was disappointed that new animal testing rules voted through this week didn't go far enough in providing for a clear mechanism whereby alternatives to animal experimentation can be introduced. I think a lot more could have been done, without stopping researchers continuing their vital work.

Additionally I supported resolutions condemning the stoning sentence of Sakineh Mohammadi-Ashtiani in Iran and urging EU governments to step up their response to the humanitarian catastrophe in Pakistan, which sadly has been found lacking.

Why, especially in times of austerity, a pound pooled is more often than not a pound well spent

2010-09-09T13:36:00.002+02:00

As much as I may have disagreed with European Commission President Jose-Manuel Barroso during his State of the Union address on Tuesday, I couldn't help but agree with one particular point he made, which most observers may have missed.

His point was that by 27 Member States pooling money together for joint projects and initiatives, money is saved because a pound pooled goes a lot further than a pound spent nationally.

At a time when budgets are being cut back all over Europe I think this is a point worth repeating. Take research for instance. The EU's FP7 research programme funds research on areas such as cancer, alternatives to animal testing and clean energy. If the same research were to be simultaneously carried out in several individual Member States, that really would be an indefensible duplication and waste of money, particularly in light of the current economic climate.

We can also apply this train of thought to rules on almost any aspect of the internal market, one good example is food labelling, in which I have been closely involved in recent years. One set of rules, rather than 27 different sets, has an overwhelming logic to it, not just in terms of efficient decision-making but also in terms of coherence and simplicity for a company which wants to market its products in more than one Member State.

It might be conceded that decision-making in the European Union can be, to a certain extent, cumbersome and bureaucratic given the need for interpreters, translators, a large administration, and the time and effort required to achieve consensus. I have first-hand experience of this in the European Parliament, but the sheer economies of scale benefits and other benefits gained by cooperating and working together vastly outweigh such inherent disadvantages.

State of the Union

2010-09-07T20:18:00.000+02:00

Today in Strasbourg we were treated to the very first State of the Union address to MEPs by Commission President Jose-Manuel Barroso (former centre-right Portuguese Prime Minister).

In his attempt to mimic the traditional yearly address of the US President to Congress, Mr Barroso, true to form, parroted the right-wing view which would have us believe that deficits should be cut at all costs.

Echoing the approach of the Con Dem government and the right-wing press, Mr Barroso's intervention overly simplified the situation by claiming that "money spent on servicing debt is money that cannot be spent on social good". Clearly, the relationship is not that simple. It is not a zero-sum game. Money invested in the economy creates increased economic activity and helps maintain and create jobs and growth, which in turn reduces the welfare bill and increases tax returns, which not only helps avoid the tragic personal cost of unemployment and failing public services but can also help to reduce public deficits more effectively than the severe austerity measures currently being implemented not only in the UK, but across the whole continent.

I stood up to say as much this morning and told Mr Barroso that drastic cuts are not the way forward and continued investment will help safeguard the recovery and avoid a jobs crisis.

I also made a point about overseas aid budgets, which must be upheld and respected. We cannot renege on our promises and commitments of solidarity to those who are most in need, as some Member States are shamefully doing.

Human Trafficking and the UK opt-out

2010-09-02T09:53:00.002+02:00

Having watched Channel 4’s recent programmes on Britain’s sex traffickers I found this piece in the Guardian very interesting (Labour Condemn’s UK opt-out from EU directive against sex trafficking), detailing Denis MacShane’s criticism of the coalition government’s decision to opt-out of European legislation designed to improve coordination between EU countries. This directive, which is still in the formative stage, proposes steps to make it easier to convict human traffickers and give new rights to victims. On an issue such as human trafficking, which by definition is of a cross-border nature, the rationale for joint action is surely self-evident even to the most ardent of euro-sceptics?

For David Cameron and Nick Clegg’s Liberal Democrats to opt-out from this is both puzzling and disappointing. If indeed the UK already complies with most of the draft directive then exactly where does the problem lie? If it is one of anti-European dogma then it is a sad indictment on the Coalition. If the policy is to sit back and let the other Member States decide the directive and then decide whether to opt in at a later date, Cameron and Clegg would be repeating a time-old British mistake. By standing on the sidelines and then opting in later, it means that the UK has no real say on the final outcome but if (and often when) a decision is made to opt-in, we are forced into a take-it or leave-it situation, with no opportunity to influence the particular measure in line with UK priorities or specificities.

Humanitarian aid and the economic crisis

2010-08-23T16:42:00.003+02:00

I was pleased to hear EU Humanitarian Aid Commissioner Kristalina Georgieva announce a further €30 million of aid for those affected by the devastating floods in Pakistan.

There are those who believe that, given the economic situation in Britain and Europe, we are not in a position to be helping others in need around the world. Whilst we are deeply concerned about the hardships that people are facing at home, and are working hard to bring Britain and Europe out of the financial crisis, we cannot abandon our commitment to humanitarian aid and international development. It is wrong that somebody's chances in life depend on where they are born and in times of serious economic difficulties it is even more important that we keep our commitments to those in need.

After the shocking earthquake in Haiti Nick Griffin complained that we shouldn't be sending aid to "rioting ingrates" whilst Britain faces problems of its own. I condemned these comments immediately. Not only was the situation in Haiti a terrible human tragedy, but also one that happened in one of the poorest countries in the world. That is why of the money Cathy Ashton pledged, at least €200 million is for medium and long term needs.

Meanwhile Labour MEPs are working hard to make sure the financial crisis cannot happen again. Recently my colleague Arlene McCarthy secured an important deal on curbing bankers' bonuses, and the whole of the Socialist Group in the European Parliament have thrown their support behind a Financial Transaction Tax, which would both stabilise financial markets and raise around €200 billion in Europe to help fight poverty and inequality at home and abroad. The EU is a way for us to find international solutions to international problems, which include both humanitarian disasters and the economic crisis.

Time for UKIP MEPs to grow up

2010-07-28T12:00:00.001+02:00

It seems like UKIP MEPs are spending their summer by taking part in a letter writing campaign to their local papers with scare stories about supposed EU plans to require the UK to dissolve dead bodies in acid and tip them down the drain to save on burial space. Nice to know they're enjoying themselves. Unfortunately for them, and they know it all too well, there is absolutely no such plan and indeed the EU doesn't even have the competence to act in this area. It's yet another example of UKIP wasting people's time instead of representing their constituents in a serious manner.

Bird flu - mistakes made, and lessons to be learnt

2010-07-14T17:34:00.000+02:00

Some interesting news from last week's meeting of Health ministers, where they discussed the reaction to the H1N1 (bird flu) pandemic and by all accounts concluded that by acting together the EU's Member States could have negotiated better terms with the pharmaceutical companies, rather than being picked off one by one with some countries even having to agree to accept all civil liabilities relating to the vaccine.

The Health ministers unanimously agreed to ask the Commission to develop a joint purchasing strategy for vaccines in the event of future pandemics and I fully applaud this move, which should help save money for already over-stretched health budgets in the future.

In the autumn, the European Parliament's environment and public health committee will be hosting a hearing on how the H1N1 pandemic was handled by European governments and what lessons can be learned for the future, where we will invite the Commission, the WHO, NGOs and pharmaceutical industry scientists. It promises to be a very interesting event.

Tobacco control

2010-07-14T09:55:00.004+02:00

I spoke today in a debate with Laurette Onkelinx, the Belgian Deputy Prime Minister and also Public Health Minister, who will be leading on health for the new Belgian Presidency of the Council of Ministers over the next 6 months.

Specifically I wanted to know how she would be coordinating Novembers' Conference of the Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on tobacco control and a protocol set to be adopted on illicit trade in tobacco products.

One of the most effective means of reducing tobacco consumption is using taxation to raise prices, but illicit trade undermines this policy, not to mention stimulating organised crime and reducing the public coffers!
What is being proposed is an effective tracking and tracing system on tobacco products so we can see where individual packs have come from, a ban on internet sales which serves no other purpose than to evade taxation, and also it's about time some of those EU Member States who have ridiculously low levels of taxation, agreed to increase the level, as they only serve to undermine other Member States' public health goals.

Hypocrisy from Tories on junk food

2010-07-08T11:02:00.001+02:00

It is absolutely disgraceful that, as reported in the Guardian, (No anti-junk food laws, health secretary promises) the coalition government, in the form of Health Secretary Andrew Lansley, has apparently given guarantees to the food industry that it will not introduce legislation to tackle the problematic issue of junk food and its role in the battle against obesity, contributing to heart disease, type II diabetes, increased risk of cancer, strokes, liver disease and even depression.

He even has the nerve to claim that his hands are tied on regulating because of European rules. I would like to remind Mr Lansley that just a few weeks ago Conservatives in the European Parliament voted against my proposals for a clear easy-to-understand labelling scheme ,which would have seen key ingredients such as sugar, fat and salt labelled on the front of pack with the colours green, amber and red. Not only did Conservatives vote to defeat this, they also voted to remove the possibility for the UK government to come up with its own plans to give consumers easy to understand information about what they are eating. The hypocrisy of it all is breath-taking.

Fortunately, Member States may still take action beyond the new food labelling rules, and indeed in other areas, for reasons of public health, and if Andrew Lansley doesn't think that Britain's obesity crisis is a risk to public health, then I would suggest he is in the wrong job and should reconsider his position. I'm sure there would be an opening for him in a well-known junk food outlet..

A way forward for homeowners in Spain?

2010-07-06T13:31:00.005+02:00

Today in a debate with Spanish PM Zapatero in the European Parliament, I spoke to remind him of the issue of Spanish property abuses, involving many British citizens, who through no fault of their own face the prospect of losing their homes. I previously raised this issue with Mr Zapatero in January and since then I have been in constructive discussions with MEPs and officials from Spain's ruling socialist party and we have put forward the idea of setting up a commission to deal with the issue, which I hope will get the full support of Mr Zapatero.

Good news for Brits on holiday

2010-06-30T12:20:00.002+02:00

As from tomorrow (July 1) the cost of using your mobile phone in another EU country will fall even further and the risk of racking up a bill for thousands of pounds for using e-mails and internet on your phone will also disappear.

The new maximum tariffs will mean that the maximum permitted charge when making a call will be 32p per minute and 12.5p for receiving a call. This latest reduction means that mobile phone roaming charges are now 73% cheaper than 5 years ago.

You phone company will also be obliged to stop your mobile internet connection if you exceed £42.50. This is in direct response to the horror stories of holidaymakers returning home and finding themselves landed with a bill of thousands of pounds, having not realised the true cost of their internet activity. (If you wish to remove this cap you can do so by contacting your mobile operator before you travel).

Euromyths by the dozen

2010-06-30T12:13:00.003+02:00

Never mind the arrival of summer, it was silly season which broke out this weekend with the UK papers gleefully denouncing the EU's supposed ban on selling eggs by the dozen, whipping themselves into a fervor over this despicable attack by barmy Brussels bureaucrats on the traditional British way of selling eggs. The tabloids and the Torygraph were ready to send the valiant David Cameron into battle with his European counterparts to save our 'eggs by the dozen'.

Make no mistake, this was a classic Euromyth and the words 'eggs by the dozen' could have been replaced with any other term, with the story adapted accordingly.

Anyone who follows European issues will know the score. Last time it was the traditional British jug of milk and before it was barmaids' breasts! The familiar voices of disgust are wheeled out such as the Metric Martyrs, Open Europe or the so-called Taxpayers' Alliance, and there is always the odd (in both senses) Tory or UKIP 'rent-a-quote' MEP who is only too happy to add their voice to the outrage, despite having not the faintest idea of the issue at stake.

Of course there was absolutely no truth to the story. I should know as I have been working on this proposal for the best part of two years on behalf of the second largest political group in the European Parliament - although no newspaper saw fit to contact me before publishing their stories, it appears they were only interested in getting their story out. Armed with the facts, I would have only got in the way of their good story!

For the facts (which have fortunately now been published by most of the offending publications) you can check out the rebuttal from the European Parliament here and the Press Association article here.

Supermarket supply chains and workers in the developing world

2010-06-24T13:45:00.001+02:00

Yesterday in the European Parliament, I hosted a major event bringing together supermarkets, NGOs such as Oxfam, Fair Trade organisations, consumers organisations, MEPs, representatives from the Commission and trade unionists, both from Europe and Latin America.

We discussed the impact of supermarket dominance and their supply chains on workers in the developing world and how the abuse of the supermarkets' dominant market position is leading to downward pressure on prices and on workers' conditions and basis human rights.

We heard first-hand from Gilberto Bermudez from the Costa Rican trade union SITRAP of the appalling anti-union practices workers on the banana and pineapple plantations in Costa Rica suffer from, and I think his testimony opened a few eyes in the room.

It really is up to the supermarkets to ensure their suppliers in the developing world are respecting at the very least basic human rights, including, freedom of association, and an appropriate living wage for their workers - otherwise we will have to take action to address the market dominance enjoyed by Europe's largest supermarkets, and consumers also have an important role to play in changing their behaviour.

A mixed bag of food labelling

2010-06-23T13:46:00.001+02:00

Now the dust has settled, last week's plenary vote, as I blogged beforehand might well be described as a mixed bag.

We lost our headline campaign, which was to get mandatory traffic light labelling on processed convenience foods and unfortunately the provision for voluntary national schemes such as the FSA's traffic light scheme was also deleted, with the support of Tory MEPs, which means, somewhat bizarrely, that Tory MEPs voted to reduce their own government's scope to implement its own front of pack labelling scheme, preferring a harmonised EU scheme of percentage GDAs (Guideline Daily Amounts).

Their basis for opposition to my proposals for colour coding appeared to be wholly based on the arguments industry put forward and on industry-supported research.

The first criticism made by Tory MEPs was that the colours were too simplistic so they preferred GDAs. Despite all the information I had sent to them in advance of the vote, they must have failed to spot that the amendments on the table provided for a combination of GDAs and traffic lights - colour-coded GDAs - so rather than simplistic, it actually provided more information than GDAs alone.

The other argument used was that traffic lights would favour diet coca-cola over apple juice on sugar, given the high levels of natural sugars in apple juice and the artificial sweeteners used in diet Coke. If they had bothered to look at my proposal, again they would have seen that fruit juices would not be covered by my amendments.

Colour coding aside, we did win a major (but narrow) victory on mandatory country of origin labelling, with a majority of MEPs voting to ensure honest and transparent food labelling. My amendments as adopted would see food producers obliged to label all meat, poultry, dairy products and other single-ingredient products with the country of origin, and also the meat, poultry and fish contained in processed or multi-ingredient products.

We also secured front of pack labelling for the key nutrients such as calories, salt, sugar and fats and fought off industry-backed attempts reduce consumer protection from misleading advertising of health and nutrition claims.

Left Food Forward article - Cameron plays the statesman in predictable Brussels affair

2010-06-18T17:50:00.001+02:00

http://www.leftfootforward.org/2010/06/cameron-plays-the-statesman-in-predictable-brussels-affair/

Cameron plays the statesman in predictable Brussels affair

Our guest writer is Glenis Willmott MEP, Labour’s leader in the European Parliament.

As ever at these occasions, the choreography was exquisite. David Cameron’s first European summit as British prime minister was always going to be of intense interest to the media. Yet in the end, yesterday’s event looked very much like the many that have gone before it. That’s partly because most of the business is sorted out well in advance of the leaders’ arrival.

But it’s also because that’s what international diplomacy demands – it’s in everyone’s interest to head home looking statesmanlike. Here’s a quote from how Cameron sums up the summit’s conclusions on bank levies and a financial transaction tax:

“We do not want to have some sort of Europe-determined bank levy with a specific use of funds. The text talks about – and I quote – introducing systems of levies and taxes, which actually referred to ensuring fair burden-sharing. That is absolutely the approach that we wanted this to take.”

Look elsewhere and you get a different take though. Colleagues tell me that German TV news last night hailed Angela Merkel for her success at the summit. And what was Merkel’s win? They report how she persuaded a sceptical British Prime Minister to change his position and to sign up in favour of a financial transaction tax. Based on the text, either interpretation could be accurate.

That’s the key to summits: you don’t embarrass world leaders. The detail will be ironed out later by diplomats and ministers when they come to debate each individual dossier, so the real battles are yet to come. What can we learn from the summit? Well, I suspect that we can already discern how Cameron will deal with these events. It’s a system that has served British prime ministers, both Tory and Labour, for many years.

First, identify a threat looming on the horizon. Find a dragon to be slayed by St George: in this case all the talk of the European Commission vetting the budget before it is announced to parliament. Second, mark out your red lines, which you already know are unlikely to be crossed. Then, go to the summit and agree a lengthy document that has already been stripped apart and put back together by teams of diplomats. Ensure that anything contentious is qualified with phrases like “taking account of national budgetary procedures”.

I've got a union background, so I know negotiating tactics when I see them. But what's interesting about this example is the fact that this isn't about winning against the other EU leaders. It's all about getting the upper hand over Britain's band of eurosceptics, the press certainly, but also Cameron’s own back benches. It is clear that the Tory leader wants to calm the fears of our EU neighbours by demonstrating that he is willing to work with them.

But it was telling that of all the leaders at yesterday’s event, Cameron felt closest to the European Commission President José Manuel Barroso. That’s partly because both men are ideologically similar – at least economically. Both want to see the state cut back, with a focus on deregulation and leaving more to open markets.

Crucially though, it’s also because Cameron is no longer a member of a mainstream political family. Having spurned the EPP, Europe’s mainstream centre right grouping, he had no one to meet when other leaders got together with their opposite numbers from sister parties. Instead he had to meet Michal Kaminski, the MEP who leads the political ragbag of parties with which the Conservatives now sit in the European Parliament.

Cameron is still paying for having left the EPP. It means he has to work harder to get his point of view listened to – not in the summit, but in the corridors and backrooms where the real battles are won.

Tense vote

2010-06-16T10:21:00.002+02:00

In just a few hours time MEPs will be voting here in Strasbourg on amendments to the new regulation on food labelling and things are quite tense. The votes are shaping up to be very close on two key point: traffic light labels for sugar, salt and fats and mandatory country of origin labelling so that it is clear where our food comes from.

The industry lobby has been intense and unrelenting throughout - and it has caught the attention of much of the media over the last few days, including the Independent, Daily Mail and BBC with headlines such as "Food firms spend millions in push to kill traffic light labelling" and "Food companies in massive lobby to block colour coded warnings".

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1286804/Food-firms-spend-millions-push-kill-traffic-light-labelling-identify-unhealthy-products.html?ITO=1490

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/news/food-companies-in-massive-lobby-to-block-colourcoded-warnings-2000523.html

First European test for the coalition government's programme

2010-06-10T14:35:00.002+02:00

MEPs will be voting next week in Strasbourg on a new legislative proposal which would see mandatory country of origin labelling on much of the food we eat, including meat, poultry, fish and dairy products, as well as fresh fruit and vegetables. My amendment to do this was already accepted by the EP's environment committee in March and now there will be a full vote of all MEPs next Wednesday.

The Conservatives supported this in March but rumours are now afoot that they will withdraw their support. This would surely fly in the face of their coalition deal with the Lib Dems, which on page 13 specifies "We will introduce honesty in food labelling so that consumers can be confident about where their food comes from and its environmental impact". Well, this must be done through European legislation and their one chance to do this is in the vote next week....

The first of our meetings with the candidates

2010-06-09T18:11:00.002+02:00

Labour MEPs met with David Miliband yesterday who was over in Brussels as part of his campaign for the Labour Party leadership.

We had a positive and constructive meeting, with a good discussion on the role of MEPs in the party's structure and how as a party we can work together, both locally, national and internationally as part of a labour movement and of course David set out his vision for the future of our party.

I am looking forward to having similar discussions with the other candidates in the forthcoming weeks.

Reducing red tape and bureaucracy

2010-06-02T18:29:00.002+02:00

It's a committee week in Brussels this week which is where in-detail scrutiny of legislative proposals occurs.

I have been voting this morning in the Environment committee on an updated directive restricting hazardous substances in electrical and electronic consumer goods. The aim is to get rid of the most harmful substances used such as brominated and chlorinated flame retardants, as well as PVC and the hazardous additives it contains.

We also need to stimulate substitution efforts, to replace substances used in consumer electrical goods with safer ones wherever possible.

This type of work really is the bread and butter here on a daily basis, but nonetheless it needs to be done and these type of rules simply cannot be set nationally - otherwise we would end up with 27 different sets or rules and standards for producers to comply with - so in doing this we are actually reducing red tape and bureaucracy.

Positive meeting with new Europe Minister

2010-06-02T09:26:00.007+02:00

From my facebook page:

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/glenis.willmott

Glenis Willmott Had a meeting with the new Europe Minister yesterday - surprising to see that he wasn't taking the usual eurosceptic line that we hear so much of. I await with interest to see if all of his MEPs will follow suit. For all of the eurosceptic rhetoric in opposition maybe the reality of having to co-operate in Europe in the national interest has finally hit home.

European co-operation to increase organ donations

2010-05-19T17:38:00.002+02:00

Currently in the European Union over 56,000 people are waiting for an organ transplant which could give them a new lease of life. Every day 12 people die waiting. To tackle this tragic problem there are two things we must do: increase the donation rate across Europe, and effectively and safely use those organs that have been donated.

How can we increase donation rates? Firstly it's important just to talk about it and make people aware of the problem. I saw an excellent debate on the BBC's The Big Questions where they revealed 90% of people support the idea of their organs being used to save one or more peoples' lives once they've died, but only around 25% of people are on the organ donor register. Signing up is quick and easy and can be done here.

Of course there's the debate about whether the organ donor register should be opt-in or opt-out, which is something that needs further discussion. But there are all sorts of other factors which mean that organ donation rates vary wildly across Europe, from one of the highest rates in the world in Spain (34 donors per million population), to the dismal rate in Bulgaria (1 donor per million population). Today the European Parliament adopted an action plan for the next 5 years to ensure that those working around organ transplantation communicate across borders and share their experiences of what works and what doesn't when encouraging organ donation.

To make sure that we use all the organ donations available to us, the European Parliament today also adopted a report to standardise safety and quality standards for all organ transplants in the EU. This means those patients who are waiting for a rare match could be paired up with a donor from elsewhere in Europe, safe in the knowledge that the donor and organ were subject to the same safety procedures that they would have been in the UK.

In my role as the Labour MEPs' spokesperson for public health, I've been following this legislation closely and have amended it to make it more flexible for the NHS and other health services to work with. I've also defended the developing practices of paired, pooled and altruistic living donation. Paired and pooled donation is where donors who don't match with their relative in need of a transplant donate to someone in a similar situation, and vice versa. Altruistic donation involves somebody volunteering to give an organ, such as a kidney, to a stranger. Of course giving an organ is a big decision, and financial incentives should never be involved.

This brings me on to another awful problem arising from our lack of organ donations, which is organ trafficking. And the only really effective way to combat this terrible crime is to reduce the demand for illegally obtained organs by increasing donation rates.

This is one of the areas where we can reap real benefits for Britain by working together with our European neighbours and I am hoping that today's decisions in the European Parliament will be a significant step towards solving our severe shortage of organ donations. In the meantime, please consider registering as an organ donor.

The leadership contest

2010-05-19T10:12:00.005+02:00

I attended Labour's NEC (National Executive Committee) today where we took decisions regarding the leadership contest and specifically the timeline.

At such an important stage, where we need to reinvigorate and rejuvenate our party, I believe a longer timetable will allow us as a party to have the debate we need to have and allow the candidates to set out their vision for our party. We have nothing to gain by rushing into electing a new leader.

The longer timeline will also allow as many new members to vote as possible. Since the formation of the Con Dem coalition the party has been overwhelmed by thousands and thousands of new members with over 13,000 joining, many of who have resigned from the Liberal Democrats. I am sure many thousands more will follow, and we have set the deadline at September 8 for new members joining to having voting rights.

It is truly sickening to see Cameron calling his coalition with Clegg a progressive alliance, but we all know that events of recent weeks have meant there is only one clearly progressive force in Britain and that is the Labour Party.

Glenis Willmott MEP

We have moved!

Another step towards ending blacklisting of workers - but there is still much further to go

Recession depression

An emotional meeting with sufferers of SCID

Crisis for social democracy

The next President must call for an end to the European Parliament's costly "travelling circus" - and so must David Cameron

Unemployment - Ministers must stop the blame game.

The healthy chocolate doughnut?

Berlusconi loses his job, but the real tragedy is the thousands of normal Italians losing theirs

Parliament calls for new public contracts rules - but that doesn't let the Government off the hook

Our priority should be jobs - not a referendum that would put jobs at risk

Dog blog for found hounds & merrier terriers

Why can’t we be like Norway?

Fox on the run highlights lobby activity

Plain packets for cigarettes?

Real life 'Lassie dogs' detect epileptic fits

Doctors must be able to communicate with their patients

Tory Euro MPs declare war on Cameron

Labour Party provides an alternative in Britain and Europe

Let's not turn our back on Europe

Tobacco smoke and discrimination against workers' representatives: new threats to health and safety at work

For 4,000 workers, the Remploy factories are irreplaceable - the Government must genuinely listen to them

Actions speak louder than words for the UN Summit on Non Communicable Diseases

David Cameron's attack on worker's rights is no substitute for a plan for growth and jobs

A welcome end to the lifetime ban on gay blood donations

Anti-cancer virus brings hope and challenges

Healthy children for a healthy future

Increasing research into rare forms of cancer

Greenest government ever?

Crackdown on mobile surfing charges

New “austerity rules” won’t do the job

How vegetable oil is destroying the rainforest

Public service at its best

New Rights for Victims Proposed

Newborn screening could save lives

To fight cancer we must look at both treatment and prevention

Is the EU stopping the government from banning wild animals in circuses?

Ken Clarke's comments reveal a dangerous attitude in the Tory Party

Do you want to know where the meat you buy comes from?

Tackling Dirty Fuels

Help stop misleading health claims for children

The power of MEPs

The EU's role in Libya

Europe and the Citizen

The battle for better food labelling continues

Single Seat

International Women's Day

Where exactly does the Conservative Party stand on Europe?

Health claims on baby milk must not be misleading

Working together to prevent cancer

Coalition reforms will increase health inequalities

We must continue to fight homophobia in Europe

While the government backs down, Labour cracks down on bankers' bonuses

Belgian Presidency High Level Conference on Health, Nutrition & Obesity

More political posturing from Cameron on the EU

European action on Alzheimer's disease

EU migration doesn't have to mean a raw deal for British workers

Stopping prescription drug adverts

A Euro-nightmare before Christmas for Cameron

Panorama on junk food

Cameron's relatively pro-European stance to be cautiously welcomed, but his influence remains limited in nature

Workshop on diet, nutrition and obesity

An article on childhood obesity in Europe

Have your say!

Update - Channel 4 FactCheck say Cameron was wrong and fictitious about Labour MEPs' vote

Time for the Tories to make it clear: do they want real reform or just headlines?

Member States back country of origin labelling for meat

The Miami Five

Health and safety at work is no joke

Skid Marks and Vince Cable

Meeting Ed

A special workshop on Swine Flu

EPLP Leader speech to Party Conference

What a weekend!

Strasbourg round-up

The fight continues...

New article on Progress Online - Will Britain be left behind on women’s rights?

Cuts to hit Midlands and North hardest

Strasbourg round-up