Is the UK addicted to cheap foreign labour?
Sir Keir Starmer thinks so.
Is it dog-whistle politics, as some Labour supporters believe,
or is he simply being realistic about what our economy needs?
We'll talk to Labour live.
Also tonight.
In an exclusive interview for Newsnight the Russian Ambassador
appears to admit their troops may have committed war crimes
in Ukraine.
I can imagine that something is happening of course, this is war.
And a fresh round of rail strikes threatens
further disruption at Christmas.
RMT Chief Mick Lynch is with us.
We ask how this long-running dispute ends.
Good evening.
How to fill the job vacancies in the UK right now -
all 1.2 million of them?
The staff shortages are causing real problems for many businesses
and they're hindering growth.
Today the Labour leader set out his policy on immigration,
telling business leaders at the CBI - who want more workers
from abroad to fill the gaps - that immigration isn't the answer.
Sir Keir believes the country is addicted to cheap foreign workers
and we have to 'wean ourselves' off them - his turn of phrase.
But some question whether the sums on jobs add up.
Take one area - health and social care: right now according to the OBR
there are 212,000 vacancies including 50,000 nurses.
But get this - there are also 600,000 people
missing from the workforce.
5 million are on out-of- work benefits, 400,000 more people
have become econmically inactive since the pandemic.
If the taps to foreign workers are closed, how to get British
employees back to work?
In a moment we'll talk to Labour's Shadow Immigration
Minister Stephen Kinnock.
First here's our Economics Editor Ben Chu.
An ostensibly uncompromising message from the Labour
leader to business today.
Our common goal must be to help the British economy
off its immigration dependency.
To start investing more in training workers who are already here.
But is Labour's stance on immigration
an economically sound one?
Business leaders tend to agree with Labour that the UK needs to do
more to train up its domestic workforce, to fill gaps in the jobs
market and create higher paying work in the medium and longer term.
Yet they also point out that the UK economy has a very particular labour
shortage problem now.
We have upped pay rates, we have done all of that.
And there is no problem there, that is good.
But we just generally cannot find the staff.
If you can't find the staff, you have to cut down
on the hours that you're open.
Or in our case, we have to halt any expansion plans.
The domestic workers are not really there.
Choose the sectors that you know are short of labour
and give the sectors say 50,000, 75,000.
Issue three year working visas.
Otherwise you will not grow the economy.
The waiting lists in the NHS will start to increase.
We won't be able to expand.
UK plc will suffer.
There are currently 1.22 million vacancies in the UK labour market,
close to a record high.
And businesses insist it is simply unrealistic to imagine that these
can all be filled with domestic workers, especially as the workforce
has fallen by around 600,000 in the wake of the pandemic due
to rising ill-health and many older workers taking early retirement.
Where are those workforce vacancies?
Are they amongst skilled or unskilled workers?
Some of them are in higher skilled areas such as science
and information technology.
Yet there are also many vacancies in lower skilled areas such
as retail and hospitality.
However, this migration expert says the consequences of moving away
from a liberal immigration regime for individual firms should not be
conflated with the consequences for the overall economy.
After the end of free movement we have a lot of businesses that
are quite reliant on EU workers and for them it will be disruptive
and quite difficult to make the transition to a completely
different business model where they don't have those workers.
What is interesting is if you look at the level of the overall economy,
the research we have suggests the impacts are not actually
going to be that big.
So while it is disruptive for individual employers,
the overall impact on things like GDP per capita,
prosperity of people in the UK, is not expected to be very large.
Is the risk that Labour's immigration policy makes economic
sense in the medium and long-term, but that it ducks the
immediate term problem?
Namely that the UK needs a lot more workers now and that
without immigration, realistically, we are not going
to be able to fulfil those needs.
This idea that both the Labour Party and the Conservative Party are just,
let's just pay more money and let's make it difficult on visas
and everything else, it's not going to cut it.
Because people's lives are being affected by this now.
If we do not fill those jobs then organisations,
supply chains may break down and organisations may
take their business to other places.
We want to make sure we keep business in Britain
and we want to make sure we keep the best jobs here.
In fact, while Keir Starmer in his speech today ruled out
a return to free movement of labour from Europe, he did not rule out
allowing more immigration to fill gaps in the labour
market more generally.
Either skilled or unskilled gaps.
Indeed, his points based system could in theory allow it.
Nor was there any mention of caps in the overall annual net migration.
And this, as we pointed out last week on Newsnight,
is in the context of the Office for Budget Responsibility
increasing its annual net migration estimates from around 120,000 a year
in March, to more than 200,000 a year now, an increase of 84,000.
Something the OBR says will help the UK labour market
fill gaps and grow more than it otherwise would.
This reflects that the post Brexit immigration system has in fact
already been loosened up in recent years.
The issue for some businesses is that they say they need
more even than this if they are to thrive.
What about the politics of this?
Nick Watt's here.
Keir Starmer today touched on three themes making clear if we have a
Labour government it would be yes to ending the low-wage economy and no
to free movement and yes to making Brexit work. To break those down on
ending the low-wage economy no surprise that a libre of the Labour
Party would say that for the Ed Miliband as leader of the Labour
Party said pretty much the same. This time a carrot and stick
approach, businesses would be allowed to have some if not all the
migrants they need through a points-based system Australian
style. But those businesses would need to repay what they get from the
government by massively improving upskilling the training of the
workforce. The big difference from the Ed Miliband era is that we are
out of the EU and Keir Starmer has made clear that there will be no
return to free movement under the Labour Party and all that is part of
his great mission that he spoke of at the Labour conference, making
Brexit work. On that he is trying to show that he believes there can be
virtues in Brexit. So if you don't have that labour coming from the EU,
mainly from eastern Europe willing to work for relatively lower wages
than UK businesses will have to do a better job in improving the skills
of the workforce here in the UK. But Keir Starmer is also sending a big
signalled that he will not reverse Brexit and neither will he try to
water down the fundamentals of Brexit. He is deeply scarred by the
memories of the 2019 election when the perception was that he is a
shadow Brexit secretary wanted to overturn Brexit and they need to
make clear to the voters that they will not be doing that. As one
Shadow Cabinet member said to me if we agree to free movement we will
never win back the red ball. One senior Labour figure, a strong
pro-European, welcomed the announcement on upskilling the
workforce and are resigned to the version of Brexit that we have.
version of Brexit that we have. It was a much higher Brexit than we
needed. We will have to find a way to work through this mess and we are
left with a situation where we will have to ensure that where there is a
labour shortage and need particularly for instance in Health
and Social Care Board that as well as providing training and support to
those in our own country to get them into those sectors where there is a
gap, we will have to address that. Some of the language that we had
today has a lump sum in the labour movement. That talk of winning the
country away from immigration. This is what's on your server from the
Observer had to say. There's this thing about the framing which gives
this impression, weaning ourselves off immigration that it is a bad
thing and I think that risks playing into some quite negative perceptions
of immigration. This idea that immigration is always bad because it
is people stealing your jobs, people taking up housing and using schools
and hospitals and not paying for them in the picture is far more
complex and actually evidence suggests that immigrants often pay
in more to the state to tax than they take out because they tend to
be working age.
Let's speak to Stephen Cilic from Labour. If I need staff what do I
do, come to you as the Labour government or the immigration
advisory committee? We will have a points-based immigration system
enabling businesses to bring in labour where they need to but to
provide a clear plan for how they are going to invest in training and
upskilling and technology and machinery that will actually drive
productivity and wages up. So we end up with a high growth and high
productivity economy. Of course immigration plays its role but does
not become the crutch for businesses to lean on, it is much more solid
platform of home-grown talent and immigration working together to
deliver those outcomes. As a hotel owner all I have to do is show you
some kind of plan and then I kept my cheap foreign labour again? The
dialogue that we want to have will be industry by industry with trade
unions, businesses and devolved administrations. Who is going to
enforce this plan that I've given you's the Migration Advisory
Committee need to be much more part of the overall economy. Are they
going to enforce the plan? They would be the convenience that would
ensure we have the discussions with the key people we need to discuss
with so we do not set up a I'm not talking about numbers, I'm asking, I
want cheap foreign labour because I have got gaps now and I give you my
plan for training British workers and then I just crack on because no
one is enforcing my plan? You still have to comply with the points-based
system so as a sponsor employer. I've got my foreign workers, but I'm
not really doing anything to train a British workers or pay them more? If
you want to be a sponsor employer you need a licence to do so so under
the terms of our system which is going out to review and consultation
with employers and trade unions about how this would work in
practice, but you would need to in order to get the license to operate,
to be a sponsor employer, you need a clear workforce plan. I can give you
that plan but I do not have to deliver it if it is not enforced?
When you need to license to have that and without the plant you do
not get the licence. It is easy to provide a plan? But the assessment
is in your plan are you making clear what your long-term vision is for
the future of the workforce in your industry, yes or no and if not that
is what the conversation stops. But it is not about cracking the whip
but making the economy work and getting all those people who are not
even active in the economy now because the Conservatives have let
the health system further into crisis, with so many people who
could be more active and working and that is just one area where we need
to skilled people up and have a workforce plan for the NHS. Some
Labour supporters would say that this is you trying to sound tough on
immigration and they believe that you are pandering to the right and
that the funds them. Keir Starmer is looking like a Tory plant said one
and another said hugely disappointing racist rhetoric for
Keir Starmer and labour, it is not immigrants driving down wages but
greed do you accept that? I do not accept any of that because what Keir
Starmer set up to date was a pro-business and pro-working policy.
If we want to ensure that our home-grown talent has the best
possible opportunity in upskilling, recruitment and training, the best
possible equipment, if we want an economy that works for working
people of course we need an immigration system that is not
undermining that objective. So I could not think of a more Labour
policy than the policy Keir Starmer set out today. You are telling
business that you can have immigration and telling the voters
who want lower immigration that we are going to give you lower
immigration? It has to be one of the other. Were telling the British
people we want an immigration system that feeds into the overall aim of
having an economy that is growing and is high wage and high skill. And
in the short-term net migration will go up? We have to balance the short
needs and for example we have 7 million people waiting for
appointments in the NHS so clearly we are not going to turn off the
taps to vital public services. There is a short-term balance yes we need
to achieve objectives we need to address the crisis. But we need the
long-term plan.
Wild orgy reluctant to say that net migration will go up? -- why do seem
reluctant to say that net migration will go up? It is logical, if
British business is going to have to train British workers, that is going
to take some time, and in the meantime you are letting British
business bring in foreign workers, so logically net migration is going
to go up in the short term. So you accept that? We have to ensure that
migration goes up where it is really needed, where there is a short-term
need. If a sector, industrial public service is going to fall over
because they do not have that short-term input of trained, skilled
people coming in, then of course we are not going to allow that to
happen as a Labour government, but what we need is a quid pro quo so we
are not just having that quick fix which becomes the long term reality,
we need to balance the two, short-term and long-term. RMT
members striking twice before Christmas, twice in January,
everyone hopes a deal is struck to prevent those strikes go ahead. My
question to you, does Labour support those strikers on those dates? We
absolutely support the RMT's right to go on strike. It is absolutely
dreadful that the Government has failed to come to the negotiating
table. My understanding is they pulled the plug at the last moment
today, that is not the right way for the Government to behave, they
should be getting dialogue and getting this solved. Nobody wants to
go on strike, it is a last resort, and Labour supports the RMT's right
to do so.
Merry Christmas from the RMT.
We'll talk to Mick Lynch about the latest escalation in his
rail union's strikes this winter.
The World Health Organization has warned that the lives of millions
will be under threat in Ukraine this winter with temperatures
predicted to plummet as low as minus 20C in some areas.
Russian forces have been accused of damaging half of the country's
energy infrastructure already -
10 million are currently without power.
Speaking to Newsnight, the Russian Ambassador to the UK
appeared to admit Russian troops
have committed war crimes in Ukraine,
but he denied targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure.
More from him in a few minutes.
First, our diplomatic editor, Mark Urban,
has been examining how much faith we can put in what Russia says.
There is a big problem for Ukrainian and Western diplomats who wonder how
to restart talks that might end this war,
and that's the trust deficit caused by the serial dishonesty
of so many leading Russian officials.
TRANSLATION: If it depends on us, the Russian Federation,
there will be no war, we don't want a war.
And as Russian troops were brought thousands of kilometres
to the borders of Ukraine, Russia's diplomats tried to deceive
us about the nature of the military exercises they were carrying out
- for example, in Belarus - and what would happen to
those troops when the drills ended on the 20th of February.
Normally, after the exercises, troops that has been
brought to some place, they are getting back, absolutely.
As I have said, exercises will finish by the 20th of February,
and I do believe that they will come back.
So the invasion went ahead despite various assurances that it wouldn't,
and all of the diplomacy in the final weeks
before that was revealed as a sham.
President Macron and Chancellor Scholz were just bit players
in a deception plan if we were to believe
Putin's former spokesman.
I think a couple of months ago Vladimir Putin stopped telling
the truth about this specific issue of Ukraine, because the decision had
been made about the preparation for the military liberation of Ukraine.
And once the ill-fated drive on Kyiv had been turned back
by the Ukrainian defenders and Russian casualties piled up,
there were assurances it was all going fine.
TRANSLATION: Dear comrades,
I want to say that the special military operation
is proceeding strictly in line with the timetable,
according to plan.
All the tasks set are being successfully resolved.
Later that same month,
Russia abandoned its advance on the Ukrainian capital,
leaving behind many of its dead and evidence of atrocities.
And just as elements of the operation were abandoned,
so planks of diplomacy were thrown aside.
Having gone to war in part to thwart Nato expansion,
President Putin had triggered Finland and Sweden's application
to join the alliance, so he had to suggest it didn't matter.
TRANSLATION: As for the Nato expansion, including through
the inclusion of new members of the alliance, Finland and Sweden,
I want to inform you, dear colleagues,
that Russia has no problem with their states, it hasn't.
And on and on it has gone - assurances that there would be no
general mobilisation forgotten once Russia's losses required it,
and early claims that the war was purely defensive laid bare
when sham referenda were conducted
in occupied Ukrainian districts,
leading to their annexation in September.
TRANSLATION: I want the Kyiv authorities
and their true handlers in the West to hear me now,
and I want everyone to remember this.
The people living in Luhansk, Donetsk, in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia
have become our citizens forever.
Now Ukrainian troops have retaken Kherson,
it's little wonder that Ukrainians should argue they are better off
getting their lands back by force rather than diplomacy.
But there are those who argue that just as Putin and Lavrov's
truth bending was used to disguise the invasion plans, so it might be
deployed when expedient to justify withdrawal and spin away defeat.
I went to the Russian Embassy in London earlier
to meet the Russian Ambassador to the UK.
In a sometimes tense exchange, Andrey Kelin
conceded that momentum was with Ukrainian forces.
First, I asked him if the conflict for the Russians
was going according to President Putin's plans.
It's difficult for me to say because I do not know the plan.
And of course, in every big event, plans might be changing.
But as far as I understand,
the goals of the operation are, they are being pursued.
We have now a more stabilised situation over the year,
and actually, well, things look that we have a certain stability
in this situation right now. And by stability, what do you mean?
By stability that there are no serious moves that, well,
I will say counterattack that has been promised by Ukrainians,
that is not a success in different fronts in the East and in the South.
Of course, we do not have serious movement on the line of front.
You may ask me, of course, about that we have left Kherson.
That is true, for purely military reasons, because it is indefensible,
the place on the right side of Dnipro,
it is not defendable at that moment, unfortunately.
So our troops are now regrouping.
And what I am saying is I do not envisage that in the coming weeks
or days we will have serious events on the ground.
When you look at President Putin's objectives,
when Russian troops went into Ukraine this year
to make Nato weaker, he's failed.
To warn Russia's neighbors or near neighbours not to join Nato
or attempt to join the EU - he's failed.
The attempt to take over Kyiv - he's failed.
The attempt to take over Kyiv region - he's failed.
Kherson, the only place Russian troops did manage to occupy
for a period of time where billboards in the city
stated that Kherson would be Russian forever - failed.
It's time for Russia to leave Ukraine, isn't it?
No, I don't think so.
I don't think, I don't believe it will ever happen.
I don't believe that we tried to achieve gaining Kyiv,
it's not possible.
There's a 3 million of population of itself and very strong region.
That was not the goal, of course. It looked like it was the goal.
No, it was not the goal, it was just a military reason,
because when you are coming into one place from three different regions,
you are just reaching forces, and that is all.
And I've spoken to many Ukrainians since February 24th,
civilians, many, many of them, and some speak Russian,
and they grew up in Ukraine speaking Russian,
and they respected Russia
and in some cases called Russians their brothers.
And now they despise Russia.
They have told me time and time again they don't want to be
liberated by Russia.
We are not trying to liberate Ukraine.
We don't have a problem with Ukrainian people.
We have a problem with Ukrainian nationalist government.
If you don't have a problem with Ukrainian people...
Let me finish, then.
No, no, do not interrupt me.
Don't interrupt me, sir.
You put me questions, I provide you answers
or is a different...
If you don't have a problem with Ukrainian people,
why are you killing so many of them?
We do not kill, we do not target civilians.
We do not kill Ukrainian people.
We have a problem, big problem with nationalistic government
in Ukraine, which has now decided to fight against Russia very much
encouraged by the United States and other native countries,
as well as London, I will say.
Every time Russia withdraws from an area,
the UN finds fresh evidence of war crimes committed.
Do you accept that Russian troops have committed
war crimes in Ukraine?
Well, if you will look in yesterday and the day before yesterday,
so what is happening in Kherson, you will see that Russians
are being sticked by sticky tape to the lampposts, numerous of them,
they have been put into coffins.
And I will remind you yesterday's evidence,
when it was cold-blooded murder,
execution of the Russian prisoners by Ukrainians,
it has been filmed and it is widely distributed.
So it happens during the war.
Do you accept the Russian troops have committed war crimes?
Well, this is the war,
and we nail all the evidences of Ukrainian committed war crimes.
Well, I think that the other side is doing the same.
So, yes, you do accept that Russian troops have committed
war crimes in Ukraine?
I haven't seen it, I haven't seen this evidences,
because there are lots of speaking about it.
We are taking materials about war crimes committed by Ukrainians.
Can I give you some evidence from the United Nations?
A UN commission last month said that war crimes had been committed
in Ukraine and that Russian forces were responsible for the vast
majority of human rights violations at the start of the invasion.
I can remind you, Amnesty International,
that has also delivered a lot of facts on Ukrainian forces,
committed war crimes.
You deflect, Mr Ambassador, every time I give you some evidence.
Where is the evidence? From the United Nations commission.
It has the majority of it. Sorry?
The evidence that you said to me, it has the majority of it.
I can give you some examples.
This is what the United Nations commission says
were committed by Russian troops.
Summary executions in Bucha.
In Kharkiv, two witnesses reported Russian soldiers
beating and shooting dead a person who they dragged off a bus
that was transporting people to the Russian Federation.
In Kyiv, two Russian soldiers went into a house,
raped a 22-year-old woman several times.
Is it a discussion...? I haven't finished.
Committed acts of sexual violence on her husband and forced the couple
to have sexual intercourse in their presence.
Then one of the soldiers forced their four-year-old daughter
to perform oral sex on him, which is rape.
That's some of the evidence.
You can find this type of evidence or this type
of files or whatever it is in the internet about anything.
This is the UN commission, it's not the internet.
This is not a discussion, if you'd like to have a serious
discussion on the subject of what is happening in Ukraine,
it is not about a single situation here or there.
If you like to discuss politics or the serious picture,
I will be interested.
If not, then please, you will continue reading
the materials that are in your newspapers.
Right, so you don't believe Russian troops
have done any of those things?
I can imagine that something is happening,
of course, this is war.
And that's unacceptable, isn't it, if Russian soldiers
are going into women's houses and raping them?
For us, it is not acceptable that if Ukrainian soldiers are sticking
with the tapes to the lamppost normal people and putting them
into the coffins or killing them or humiliating them,
neither accepted it to us.
You know that Ukrainians say, in that instance,
it was about self-defence.
Does President Putin want a way out of this conflict?
Any conflict, any war, is ended at the table of negotiations.
Is there any kind of informal negotiating going on?
No.
So at what point would you get to that?
Informal negotiations are not going on because Kyiv
is very stubborn on it.
Kyiv has an illusion that it can win this war.
It is pure illusion.
It is not possible.
But Kyiv cannot reject having weapons and money from the west.
So this is a problem, they have taken a law
which is forbidding to Ukrainian president to negotiate.
But they don't need to negotiate yet because the momentum
is with them, isn't it?
The momentum?
Yes, I do think that at the moment momentum is with them.
We do not deny.
We can enter into negotiations
because we were thinking that in April we were close
to achieving a result.
Unfortunately, Kyiv decided differently and it
continued a path of war.
Right.
But if you left Ukraine, the war would be over.
No.
It would.
I am afraid not.
Mr Ambassador, thank you very much for your time today.
Thank you for talking to Newsnight.
Working class people need a pay rise.
So says the boss of the RMT union, Mick Lynch.
Today he announced an escalation of strike action -
two 48-hour strikes before Christmas and two in early January.
We'll speak live to him in a moment.
Nick's back with us.
What's the Government saying tonight?
Well we will hear from Mick Lynch in a second but in government there is
disappointed that just days before the new Transport Secretary is due
to meet the RMT general secretary we had this announcement today and
government are saying of course negotiators are with Network Rail
and train operating companies but they say the Mick Lynch is making
the accusation that the government is interfering in as negotiations
and holding them up. So here is Mark Harper on Thursday in government.
They say also the deal is closer than it has never been so why not go
ahead and allow the meetings take place in a more friendly atmosphere.
And they are saying Mark Harper and the new rail minister Huw Merriman
are very different to the previous ministers, Grant Shapps was not keen
to meet trade union leaders and Anne-Marie Trevelyan who was briefly
Transport Secretary was more open to that but there was a hostile Liz
Truss Downing Street that did not help. That is the current view in
government and they are saying that there are no stroppy comment pieces
by ministers about the RMT and the unions so why not respond in kind.
Mr Lynch is here. You have been negotiating for many months and this
is your third Transport Secretary that you have not yet met this guy
and yet unites the strikes today. Last Friday we were seriously
negotiating with the Rail Delivery Group and they said they cannot make
an offer. On Saturday the set we will make an offer at two o'clock on
Monday and at five past one on Monday they phoned me and said we
cannot make you an offer is were not allowed to make it. We have been
stopped and the only people that can stop that going ahead is the
Secretary of State. If that is true then what is going on? The Secretary
of State in writing is responsible for industrial relations and the
industrial mandate and they were stopped from doing that and the only
person who could stop them doing that is the Secretary of State. He
told me face to face and on the telephone on a one-to-one called the
offer will be made and had to ring back and say I'm sorry I'm not
allowed to make the offer. So to work out what is going on. I will
meet Mr Harper on Thursday and talent that we are disappointed and
that he holds the key to the dispute. In the meantime you have
chosen dates to go on strike at a time of year that is so important to
many people. And you have chosen those dates. We cancel the strike
action for the funeral of the Queen and Poppy Day and we've not been on
strike for almost two months. Why those days? Dispute has got to be
kept alive and we believe that the Secretary of State has the talks.
For two years people were not able to see their family and this is a
time when travel is happening all over the country and people hoping
to be together. The dates that we selected a the Christmas period,
strike action finishes on the 17th and there is a whole week for people
to make their arrangements before Christmas Day. So they should be
grateful? I did not say that, the dates that we have chosen avoid the
Christmas period and everyone should be able to travel. If the train
operating companies can run a service because do not forget they
are incapable of doing that when there is no industrial action which
has not been in existence for the past two months in these talks are
produced nothing. The British Beer and Pub Association say this is
devastating news for the industry as pubs around the country rely on a
busy Christmas period to pull them through a very difficult winter.
They hope to make the most of festive gatherings for the first
time in three years. The weeks of the strikes at the busiest. UK
hospitality, this will deal a hammer blow to hard-pressed hospitality
businesses. They need to take this up with the government because it is
intent on pursuing this industrial action. They do not want a
settlement to dispute and I cannot understand why they scuppered that
and will not allow Network Rail or the train operating companies to
make an offer. Everyone in the industry knows how to resolve the
dispute and it is just Shapps, Mark Harper and Anne-Marie Trevelyan who
have stopped this and just sat on their hands making bellicose
statements about the unions. You have had eight strikes so far and
they have all failed because you're still doing it. They have not failed
because they have not implemented their plans to cut thousands of jobs
amid the changes to terms and conditions that we campaign against.
Neither have you received a pay rise for your members. Exactly so we need
a solution and there is a three party deal to be done and the
government has to put themselves in a place where they create the right
environment and show goodwill and be facilitators rather than an obstacle
to the settlement. Are you still asking for a 7%? We never put a
figure on what we are prepared to negotiate, the companies want
changes and we want job security and a suitable pay rise and when we get
an offer whether consideration will put that to our members in a
referendum and they will decide whether they support the proposals.
You are still asking for members on £20,000, £30,000, £80,000? Were
asking for a settlement across the industry. Some members are on 18000
and most on less than 32,000 in this dispute. There are some higher and
lower paid people just as there are now in the studio. They all deserve
a pay rise because they are all struggling with the cost of living
crisis. We did ask the real delivery group, the government and Network
Rail to join us tonight and no one was available. I wonder why! If you
strikes do not need deal is the further escalation on the cards? We
have a mandate for the next six months and were seeking a settlement
by attending these meetings personally, senior officers
attending and we are in negotiations with Network Rail on Friday. I do
not know if the rail operators will bring us back but if there is a deal
to be done we will be there trying to hammer it out. Stephen Cilic said
earlier we support the right of the MMT to strike. Is that enough from
the Labour Party? They need to sort out their values, whether they are
on the side of the working people who are struggling. What he said it
was ambivalent, he says he supports the right to strike but not the
issues at stake. He said he will support nurses and educators but the
only people getting pay rises are those like the Liverpool dockers.
They did not support them and had not support have not said that they
support railway workers issues. They have to identify with the struggles
of working people to get their votes in the future. Thank you for talking
to us.
So let's take a look at some of the front pages...
The front page of the Daily Mail about the strikes, Christmas chaos.
The Times newspaper, a big rise in gambling addictions and the Guardian
newspaper, poverty forcing sick people to keep going to work.
people to keep going to work. And that incredible win for Saudi Arabia
today at the World Cup. Absolutely astonishing, beating Argentina who
are ranked something like 48 places above them. Before we go Saudi
Arabia as I said pulling off one of the biggest shocks in World Cup
history today and we will put together some more shocks, just for
you!
#
Every loser wins.
Armstrong! Northern Ireland have scored through Gerry Armstrong!