Sunday with Niall Paterson Interview with Debbie Abrahams MP Labour
ANY QUOTES USED MUST BE ATTRIBUTED TO SUNDAY WITH NIALL PATERSON, SKY NEWS
NIALL PATERSON: You might have missed it but Labour had a reshuffle of their own last week and as with the Tories, all the top jobs, well they remained exactly as they were. Jeremy Corbyn did lose a close ally in Chris Williamson, he’d made some suggestions on council tax which clearly weren’t party policy; there was a surprise return to the front bench for Clive Lewis and a promotion for Laura Pidcock who famously said she wouldn’t be friends with a Tory. Labour’s Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary Debbie Abrahams joins me now. Lovely to see you, a very good morning.
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: And to you, Niall.
NP: In the spirit of goodwill to all men and women, I wonder would you be friends with your new opposite number, Esther McVey?
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: At a human level, absolutely but I have to say that in a previous capacity as Minister for Disabled People and Minister for Employment, she left a lot to be desired. She presided over in conjunction with Iain Duncan Smith cuts to disabled people, 300,000 disabled people and she seemed to revel in this and of course the chaotic introduction of Universal Credit, on top of which she said there was no problem with food banks, there has been a 30% increase in her own food banks. She said to me when I was on the Work and Pensions Select Committee that she would be open to a new inquiry around a very punitive sanctions regime and then reneged on that, so all in all – and we mustn’t forget of course my colleague Jon Trickett has highlighted in a letter to the Prime Minister on Friday about her directorship of a company that has been issued with prohibition notices around health and safety issues. I mean this is a responsibility of the Department for Work and Pensions.
NP: Absolutely and we’ll delve in a little bit more detail into that in just a moment but in terms of the language, in this era where we are all being forced to examine the words that we use and the way in which we present ourselves to other people, language and nuance does matter doesn’t it? On the one hand you’ve got Jeremy Corbyn who repudiates violence in all its forms, on the other you’ve got John McDonnell defending comments about Esther McVey being lynched, being a stain on humanity. It doesn’t quite add up.
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: We all need to be responsible for the kind of language that you use, wherever you’re from and …
NP: Do you agree with the comments? They weren’t his comments but he defended them, John McDonnell’s comments about a stain on humanity, comments about violence being used against Esther McVey.
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: It’s not the language that I would use. I think we need to be very careful as I say, that all of us – journalists, politicians, everybody, in terms of the language. We could, and I’m sure you may be moving onto this in terms of the President of the United States and the language that he has also used, publicly and privately. We need to … our leaders and as such we need to show leadership and poor language doesn’t reflect well on any of us.
NP: Why on earth then is Clive Lewis back in the Shadow Cabinet?
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: He was investigated as I understand for some remarks which were said in fun.
NP: In this age of #metoo, what message does it send given what you’ve just said about the comments about Esther McVey? ‘On your knees bitch’ is the phrase that he used and you had the same intake of breath that I had when I first saw it, what message does it send that he is back in the Cabinet?
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: He’s not in the Cabinet and he’s not in the …
NP: Shadow Cabinet.
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: He’s not in the Shadow Cabinet, he’s on the front bench.
NP: He’s back in a ministerial post.
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: Yes, and that is something for Jeremy to decide. We need to be very careful of the language that we use and he has issued a profuse apology around that. Yes, you are right to highlight it, Niall, we all need to be responsible for the type of language that we use and the message that we send.
NP: To the level of the misdemeanour which in essence dictates how high you can rise within the Labour party?
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: As I said, he made an apology.
NP: Can we just move on to your brief then and talk about the benefits cap for the moment? Is it still party policy that that cap on household benefits should be removed?
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: We have said that we will review the benefit cap. We have concerns about it and the impact it is having on families, particularly families with children, so this is something that we have said we would review.
NP: What is wrong with the benefits cap system as it currently stands then?
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: Well we need to be clear in terms of what you are referring to in terms of benefits cap?
NP: The household benefits cap.
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: The household benefits cap as a whole has been reduced even further than it was originally intended which is having a draconian influence and impact on families, potentially moving them into homelessness. This is something that we don’t want to support, certainly the reduction in the benefit cap and we were very clear about that in the Welfare Bill as it was going through the House but we also need to also look at what it means as a whole. So we are saying we’re having a review and …
NP: So you are not in a position to put a cost on it just yet is what you’re saying?
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: Not at the moment but in terms of what this means, this has all been underwritten by the narrative that the government has had about all claimants, all social security claimants being shirkers and …
NP: And in parallel with the changes in Universal Credit.
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: … which is absolutely, which I totally regret and we find this absolutely repugnant so it is the message that it sends again. Policy also sends out messages as well as language.
NP: Can we move to the shifting sands on which is Labour’s Brexit policy? Kier Starmer was speaking to the Fabians yesterday and he said that if the final deal does not confer – his words – the exact same benefits as membership of the single market and customs union, Labour will vote against it. Is that party policy or is he just flying a flag, red or otherwise?
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: I understand that when we come to the third reading this week, if there aren’t the concessions that we have demanded – for example we know there is a human rights deficit in terms of what the government has said and if the government makes no concessions …
NP: He is talking about the final vote on the deal.
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: We have got the report stage first and a number of amendments that we are bringing forward including the EU Charter for Fundamental Rights which, as I say, we have a human rights deficit in relation to this. The government refused that, they refused our amendments that are protecting environment standards, around workers’ right, we cannot have …
NP: I understands that but the single biggest red line for the European Union itself is ensuring that we do not have at the end of this negotiating process the exact same benefits as if we were in the customs union and the single market. Their main point is that we end up with a worse deal, so given that Labour is essentially tying itself to voting against the deal whatever it may be.
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: No, no, let’s be absolutely clear, they are two different things. The Bill that is coming to Parliament for the third reading – let me finish the point Niall – is around do we accept that what the government is saying in terms of what legislation from the EU we’re going to incorporate into the EU. This is a power grab, this is using Henry VIII powers to give powers to the Executive and …
NP: I’m sorry, I am talking specifically about what Sir Kier said yesterday to the Fabians and that is about the vote at the end of this process. The European Union is not going to give us the exact same benefits that we currently have otherwise why would they want anyone to be a member of the European Union? My point is this, if we fast forward to the end of this year it starts to look a little bit like calculated sabotage on the part of the Labour party.
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: No, I totally reject that, Niall, that’s not the case at all. We want to make sure that not only do we have a jobs first and economy first … nobody voted to lose their jobs, to have worse conditions in their jobs. 14,000 people in Oldham have EU contracts and their jobs rely on that and …
NP: But do you specifically think that a deal can be struck with the European Union in which, as we heard from Sir Kier, the exact same benefits are enjoyed as we have with membership of the single market?
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: We will need a lot more than the government …
NP: Do you believe it can be done?
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: I believe that we have an absolute obligation to ensure that that happens and we need to make sure that people like Kier have an input into that process.
NP: So do you think then that a second referendum is a good idea?
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: That is not something that we support. We have said that we want to see a second vote, as you have just raised in terms of a meaningful vote in parliament on the trade deal but we do not extend … this is about looking at the outcomes and we do believe that we can get the same benefits as being in the single market and the customs union. Not a member, not the customs union but we will look at what arrangements can be done. This is about skilful negotiations and we have seen everything to the contrary under this government.
NP: Can we just talk about Carillion for a second? Presumably the Labour party would not want to see a bail out in the same way that there was for the banks.
DEBBIE ABRAHAMS: We have said that we need to be prepared to bring contracts back in-house, to have them under public ownership. It is quite scandalous that six months ago we were awarding contacts – I think Liam Fox gave UK Finance two Carillion contracts at the same time as profit warnings were being announced, this is absolutely scandalous and the government has got a lot of questions to ask. What due diligence was undertaken in terms of the contracts? They have to provide financial viability determination and that seems to have just completely gone out of the window so it’s not a question of just bailing out Virgin, we also seem to be bailing out Carillion, it is absolutely shocking. Thinking about the 20,000 employees at Carillion, they must be very concerned and we believe we had best bring these contracts in-house to protect services and to protect jobs.
NP: Debbie Abrahams, lovely to see you, thanks for joining us.
