Not in my name

Did anyone else hear about the Rally against Debt last Saturday? It seems about 350 people demonstrated in support of Government cuts and that it would be immoral to leave the debt to future generations.

It believed in substantial spending cuts sooner rather than later to avoid seeing more taxes going on debt interest, not paying for services.

Protesters held placards bearing messages including "Drowning in debt", "No more EU bailouts" and "Stop spending money you don't have".

Some of the crazies on this ‘demo’ included known Conservative activist, Matthew Sinclair, who attended under the banner of the Taxpayer's Alliance and said the cuts are essential:

"The country's facing a choice. It's facing a choice between racking up more and more debt and spending decades with taxpayers' burden and with the economy dragged down by that incredible debt. Or we start to take action to cut spending, to deliver better value and to start to rebuild our economic fortunes."

Other notable right-wingers attending included UKIP MEP Nigel Farage, who said: "We want to make it clear that not a penny more of British taxpayers' money should be spent on Euro bail-outs...and we regard giving £40m a day to Brussels for our membership of this union is giving us bad value for money. So from that little lot you get a fairly big shopping list of real, good, sensible cuts that could be made and we could perhaps keep a few more local libraries open."

With so few people attending you would have thought they would have been too embarrassed to call it a rally, wouldn’t you? But no, these are die-hard Tories we are talking about and they wanted to show those who attended the TUC demonstration earlier this year (yes, the one with half a million protesters) that there was an alternative voice.

Now let me get this right – this band of nutters think a fiasco in London can stand alongside one of the greatest demonstrations against government policy since the time of the Poll Tax resistance. Could I just remind them they were outnumbered on a ration of 1:1428!!!!

If this is the best the Tories can do then we have nothing to worry about. Unfortunately, they are usually far better organised and far more capable of causing bedlam to our society.

As we speak, hundreds of welfare to work staff are facing redundancy as they wait to hear if they will have a job for the next five years. Many won’t and will be forced to become clients of the new Work Programme themselves. Throughout, the government have been notable only by their silence and Chris Grayling, the architect of this demise has failed to answer accusations that he has watched whilst Rome burns.
The new Work programme will operate with fewer staff, yet will be expected to achieve better results than its predecessor, Flexible New Deal. As one writer recently said:

“… the delivery model is basically the same for A4e except we are being told to push the customers harder and not allow being on programme to become the easy option.”

But this isn’t just an A4e problem, it is across the entire sector and the government have failed to invest correctly, resulting in a programme that will be unable to achieve any better result than those before it, and at a cost of substantial redundancies for those who have been working in the sector for many years.

This lack of investment and strategic ineptitude was further exposed last week when the Department for Work and Pensions abandoned plans to introduce a system to automate the processing of all benefit claims. The DWP said that the system would still require "human intervention". In other words, they hadn’t thought it through, spent a fortune trying to get it to work and then found it wasn’t suitable.

The same disaster is set to hit the NHS as Citizen Dave continues his plans to “reform” the service. Unfortunately, some of those nasty discontents in the Lib Dems seem likely to put a spanner in the works and slow down or stop any of his plans. This won’t be enough to stop Citizen Dave – he is a man on a mission, even though the British Medical Association and some Labour MPs have expressed concern that the plans will allow private health firms to get a stronger foothold in the NHS.

The critics argue that the bill will allow competition law to be applied to the health service and lead to a much greater involvement, which in turn could undermine local NHS hospitals. The BMA has even likened it to the privatisation of utility industries.

But Citizen Dave, like the 350 who attended the “rally” in London last week refuse to listen to reason – they are Tories after all. Their venom is constantly being spat out and regurgitated by the media. Take the fact that the national media bothered to report the rally in the first place. It is another significant coup for the right because it tries to show how they represent the views of the majority.

Well, I refuse to have my name associated with the tragedy happening to the welfare to work sector. I do not wish to see changes to the NHS so that the private sector can cream off millions of pounds in profit.

When the Tories destroy our society, let the message be clear – they are not doing it in my name.

A case of being laughable

Now here’s something to laugh at - David Cameron and Nick Clegg were together at an event yesterday to launch a government drive on youth unemployment.

The prime minister and his deputy will announce a £60m package to boost work prospects and vocational education.

They will commit in their appearance in London to tackle "structural barriers" to young people starting a career.

The launch comes a year after Mr Clegg and Mr Cameron walked into Downing Street together.

The government said it would provide funding for 250,000 more apprenticeships over the next four years and 100,000 work placements over the next two years.

More than 100 large companies and tens of thousands of small businesses had pledged to offer work experience places, ministers added.

Mr Cameron said: "It's time to reverse the trend of rising youth unemployment that has held back our country for far too long and help our young people get the jobs on which their future - and ours - depends.

"But government can't act alone. We need employers who are prepared to give young people a go.

"So I'm delighted that over 100 large companies and tens of thousands of small and medium sized enterprises have already responded to our call for work experience placements so that tens of thousands of young people can take those vital first steps in experiencing the world of work."

Mr Clegg said: "We all have a responsibility - government, business, charities, education providers - to work together to find a solution."

But TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said the proposals failed to match the guarantees given by the now cut Future Jobs Fund.

"The best thing the government could do is stop their deep rapid spending cuts that are running the whole economy into the ground, with the young as the worst victims,"

How absolutely true, but come on Brendan, surely you can do better than that? Almost a quarter of young people are without work and despite their best efforts the government have not been able to reverse the trend. Work experience is all very well, but it isn’t paid employment and it isn’t permanent. Moreover, the government are pitching their money on the private sector being wiling and able to pick up the tab of employing all these young people, but with inflation likely to rise to 5% over the coming year, industry is going to be hard-pushed to be competitive anyway – and that’s without the additional staff numbers coming from youth.

Citizen Dave and Tricky Nicky need to get their acts together and recognise there is a very real problem affecting an entire generation and it will not go away unless the government are prepared to invest in programmes that can help young people secure permanent and sustainable employment. Half-hearted measures that pay lip service to the needs of the young are an embarrassment and need to be treated with total scorn. These measures will do nothing to address the number of young people unemployed and it will give little to allay the fears of those set to leave school in June.

What baffles me is how few people see the lack of care Citizen Dave and Tricky Nicky have for the people of this country. Dave is the worst kind of Tory – a Thatcherite with a PR face. On face value he looks squeaky clean, but when you aren’t looking he’ll rip your heart out and laugh as he’s doing it. As for Clegg, he is just a puppet following his master’s will, but make no mistake, he knows what he is doing and, even worse, he agrees with Tory policy.

Which way for Labour?

Anyone who has read my comments on here will know I am no fan of Citizen Dave or the Tories but, in fairness it has to be conceded they fought the borough elections well and the resul reflects some disturbing realities for Labour. The biggest of these is that Miliband and the party hierarchy are not getting the message across that Labour offer a real and effective alternative to the 'cut and burn' approach of the Tories.

Secondly, although electors should vote on local issues, we know they use it to endorse, or protest aganst a sitting government. Since last May, Citizen Dave has presented a slick and statesmanlike behaviour as prime minister. Compare this with the meagre attempts by Ed Miliband and there is further cause for concern. No wonder Labour didn't sweep away many vulernable Tory councils.

Nor was last night's substantial vote against AV good for Labour. The party has historically opposed PR and its recent conversion to AV came as a shock to many die-hard lefties. Miliband hung his colours on the "Yes" campaign and with a vote of 2 to 1 against, it brings a further dent to his leadership.

Labour now need to reflect on these results and question why they are not in control in Scotland or Wales. They also need to look at the role of Andy Burnham as campaign manager - a job he handled with anonymity and without passion. Similarly, the autopsy should question the leadership style of Ed Miliband. His "I want to appear as unfazed and likable" approach isn't working and it obviously isn't convincing the electorate.

The Lib Dems are in disarray and it will take them months, perhaps years to recoup after their recent defeats. This isn't the case with the Tories and labour will need to work swiftly if they want to be seen as a credible opposition force.

Why the Coalition is safe - A response to Sunny Hundal

Over the last couple of weeks we have started to see signs that all is not well in the Coalition between the Lib Dems and the Tories – or is it? Nick Clegg says he is angry with David Cameron and the Tories over the issue of social mobility and Chris Huhne has been blowing off steam about the way his Tory friends in the “No to AV” campaign have lied about the referendum.

Even the media have been caught by this apparent ‘new’ hostility between the partners and led Jackie Ashley at the Guardian and Tim Montgomerie at ConHome to speculate there may be an early election. According to Sunny Hundal over at ‘Liberal Conspiracy’ this is highly unlikely but it could have other consequences.

In Hundal's analysis the honeymoon is over and a degree of Coalition trust has been broken. They’ve also called each other ‘liars’ at the highest level – so the bar has been set higher. Also he argues the Tory betrayal over electoral reform may push more die-hard Libdems into the arms of Labour if they keep that promise in their manifesto.

But there isn’t going to be an election and this apparent war between the Lib Dems and the Tories is an entirely cosmetic exercise to make us ‘see’ there are differences between the two parties. Why? Because in case we have all missed it there are local government elections on May 5th and the Lib Dems are scared stiff they are going to get massacred.

This scares the pants off Clegg but doesn’t really affect Citizen Dave because he is hoping the Lib Dems loss could be his gain – and if he can show on May 7th that his party has held its own then it will silence a number of critics. Is this price the Lib Dems will have to pay for lying down with a snake, sooner or later you get bitten.

On top of this the Tories may have signed a Coalition Agreement, but they will still try and wreck anything they don’t like with complete shamelessness. So far this has included education and local cuts. In the future this is also likely to include the NHS (where they will press ahead and ignore the Lib Dems), the environment (despite Chris Huhne’s best efforts) and of course electoral reform.

But have no fear because all these splits will not be enough to break the coalition and on May 7th we can expect Clegg and Cameron to walk hand in hand back into the Cabinet Room to plan more anti-working class measures.

Sunny Hundal believes the Coalition will become “paralysed by civil war.”, he is wrong. Once the AV referendum and the local council elections are over the supposed rifts will suddenly heal and we will once again see the two parties united.

It is easy to see why. The Lib Dems are nothing more than the left wing of the Tory party. They sit comfortably on the same benches and can fairly comfortably nod in agreement over most policies. Essentially there is very little to pick and choose between them. This is the very reason why they must be annihilated on May 5th.
Working people have the chance to voice their full opposition to both the Lib Dems and Tory policies by voting conclusively for Labour candidates. In some wards the incumbent has been an independent, but look carefully at their voting record and in most cases you will see a Tory in disguise. It is time to push them aside and built a firm and effective opposition to this Tory led government. If Labour can dominate local elections this year and the County elections next then it could substantially slow down Tory cuts to local services.

We have a wonderful opportunity to stop this government in its tracks – I hope we use the chance wisely.

A future on the dole?

Ahead of the IMF and World Bank meetings in Washington DC a week ago, a flurry of workshops, seminars and conferences took place, bringing together governments, unions, employers, economists, campaigners and NGOs. IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn, possible contender for the French Presidency, argued that inequality and joblessness led to social unrest of the sort seen in the Middle East and North Africa, and that “growth beset by social tensions is not conducive to economic and financial stability”. He acknowledged that ”unemployment is at record levels” and ”in too many countries, inequality is at record highs.” And without naming names, he said that ”fiscal tightening can lower growth in the short term, and this can even increase long-term unemployment, turning a cyclical into a structural problem.”

He therefore set out a social democratic manifesto not commonly associated with the IMF. Starting off by quoting Keynes on the need for jobs and equality, he concluded:

“We need policies to reduce inequality, and to ensure a fairer distribution of opportunities and resources. Strong social safety nets combined with progressive taxation can dampen market-driven inequality. Investment in health and education is critical. Collective bargaining rights are important, especially in an environment of stagnating real wages. Social partnership is a useful framework, as it allows both the growth gains and adjustment pains to be shared fairly.”

His remarks came in a debate on The Global Jobs Crisis: Sustaining the Recovery through Employment and Equitable Growth, hosted by the Brookings Institution of Washington and moderated by Kemal Dervis. ITUC General Secretary Sharan Burrow also spoke, with comments from Stephen Pursey of the ILO and Nobel Prize economist George Akerlof.

Of course, only a cynic would suggest that DSK was speaking to a French audience, or question how his views could be squared with IMF involvement in forced austerity measures across Europe….

Having said this, Britain, and Citizen Dave in particular, need to look at how they will resolve the currently record breaking levels of unemployment. Work Programme will not be enough and if this government is going to offer any hope to the jobless it will need to think of new measures to tackle the problem.

That is what they should do … but I’m not holding my breath.

No way to treat people

Yesterday, the Daily Express and Daily Mail argued the country was full of cheating, scrounging sick people.

The Express screamed: “Blitz on Britain’s benefits madness”, contrasting those on “sickness handouts” with “hard working taxpayers”.

Tory MP Philip Davies joined the outcry, saying:

“People are sick to the back teeth of being taken for a ride by people sponging and scrounging and abusing the system.”

While the Mail shouted:

“Scandal of 80,000 on sickness benefits for minor ailments… including diarrhoea.”
To accompany arguments that “drug addicts” have been allowed to claim, they included a picture of someone snorting white powder through a rolled up note.

The papers go on to list “blisters”, “headaches”, “depression”, and “problems with scholastic skills” as evidence that there are hundreds of thousands of people living the good life at “taxpayers” expense who have nothing really wrong with them.

For a moment, let’s forget the fact that only the first ailment a person lists on their claim form is taken into account in these figures. Let’s ignore the fact that someone with “nail disorders” might also have cancer or kidney failure. Let’s ignore the fact that someone classified under “drug abuse” might also suffer from schizophrenia or multiple sclerosis.

Once upon a time (under Labour) the government took substance misuse seriously and recognized just how much of a growing problem it had become. There was a recognition that many users and abusers wanted to work, but because of the chaoitic lifestyle they lead, they were unable to find a job.

The right wing Tory press would have us believe that addicts are making a daily lifestyle choice. No – they may have made a choice when they first took the drug, but now they are addicted that has long gone out the window. Now it is the heroin, cocaine, amphetamines or barbiturates that control them. Reducing addiction to calling those affected ‘scroungers’ is not only unhelpful, it is actually unhelpful and can push those affected away from treatment and possible recovery. But there again, a working class girl coming off drugs and holding down a regular job doesn#t sell newspapers does it?

And what about “headaches?” Cluster headaches (also referred to as “suicide headaches”) are thought to be one of the worst pains known to man, not something to be confused with a hangover.

I could go on, but I’m sure you’re beginning to see why these horrible articles, fuelled by “statements” today from Chris Grayling, minister for Work and Pensions and Citizen Dave, the people’s toff, only serve to turn a sensitive, delicate subject into a form of attack. They aim to pitch one condition against another whilst asking those more fortunate to view those who are unwell with mistrust and contempt.

Perhaps there is a legitimate debate to be had over which conditions “hard working tax-payers” are willing to support. There is certainly some validity in the claim that many sick or disabled people would love help and support to find a job. Remember the Labour-inspired Pathways to Work or New Deal for Disabled People? They were designed for just this purpose, but the government scrapped these programmes and left the staff running them on the dole.

Hopefully, no reader of this blog agrees that this is the way in which to conduct this debate? Allowing politicians and media to whip up hate and prejudice against a particular group of society is something we should all be ashamed of.

A fly in the soup for the Royal wedding

I am so fed up with all this hype about the Royal wedding – as if I care that two rich ‘state spongers’ are going to get hitched. Don’t get me wrong, this isn’t ant anti-marriage rant, I am all in favour of it and would love to see the law extended to include the lesbian and gay community. But is it really necessary to have a William and “what’s her name” mug, or tea plate? Everywhere I go I am accosted by reminders that later this month the happy couple will be wed. Of course they are happy – look at the income they have going into the house. He has his salary of £37,170 from the RAF and on top of that, he also receives an income established on the death of his mother and he also has further money coming in from his father’s Duchy income. All in all, he’s not short of a bob or two and a far cry from the £22,000 salary Daddy was paying Kate Middleton before she quit the family firm last month. So, news that a peace camp in Parliament Square cannot legally be moved and will probably remain throughout this elitist spree made my spirits soar this morning. Apparently, the prime minister, the home secretary and the mayor of London have all vowed the ramshackle tented peace encampment yards from Westminster Abbey in Parliament Square will not become a backdrop to the perfect royal wedding tableau in on 29 April. Unfortunately for Citizen Dave, the people’s toff, despite numerous legal attempts, no one – from No 10 down – has been able to come up with any legal power to move campaigners from the pavement between the Houses of Parliament and the abbey, where Prince William and Kate Middleton will marry. Much to my glee, Tory politicians are venting their fury at Scotland Yard, piling the pressure on senior officers to do something. The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, is understood to have made it clear in private to the Metropolitan police that he does not want anything – not a tin of paint, a placard or a tent flap – to spoil the wedding day. Of course not, Boris is facing re-election and the last thing he wants is some nasty, scruffy left-winger spoiling his roadshow. David Cameron told the Commons he could not understand why demonstrators were being allowed to sleep in the square. Ummm – bit of news for you Dave, we live in a democracy and peaceful protest is a legitimate tactic the common people (you know, those oiks you keep trying to put down) employ when they are opposed to something parliamentarians (with their £65,000+ salaries) do. It seems Dave stressed at prime minister's question time he wanted the peace camp removed before the wedding. Dream on Dave – can’t go and won’t go. So desperate are this bunch of right-wing hoodlums that they are even prepared to rewrite the law to suit their own ends. The home secretary, Theresa May, has created an amendment to the police reform and social responsibility bill, which outlaws the erection in Parliament Square of "any tent, or any other structure that is designed, or adapted... for the purpose of facilitating sleeping or staying in". The legislation is about to enter its second reading in the House of Lords and will not be law in time for the big day. I suppose Citizen Dave follows the same mentality as Queen Victoria, who is reputed to said “Take it away lest it offend my eye”. As an aside, why does Theresa May always dress in the same sort of clothes as Princess Leiea from Star Wars – is this a secret Hollywood fetish we are uncovering here? Anyway, I digress - at Scotland Yard, there have been high-level meetings to scour legislation and identify a clause that would give police the power to act. Given the level of political pressure, there have been conversations about the possibility of using emergency powers but, after a meeting at the Yard this week, it was concluded that there was nothing the Met could do. A senior police source told the press: "They are putting us under huge pressure, but … They made the laws and to date there doesn't seem to be one we can act on. If there was we would have done it by now." Hopes had been resting on attempts by the Greater London Authority and Westminster council to remove the inhabitants of the camp, their 14 tents, placards, montage pictures of war victims and two home-made police boxes, by taking action through the courts. But most protesters have permission to stay on the Parliament Square pavement under a clause in the Serious and Organised Crime Act 2005. There is a small chance the GLA – which is responsible for the grass on Parliament Square – might be able to move two tents pitched on a patch of lawn at the edge of the square next week if an appeal by peace campaigners Brian Haw and Barbara Tucker fails in the high court. However, all Haw and Tucker need do is move their tents three feet on to the pavement. Westminster council – which is responsible for the pavement – has more chance of success by arguing in the high court that the peace encampment is an obstruction under the Highways Act. You might remember Westminster council. They are the same body that made providing hot food from a soup kitchen for those who are forced to sleep rough illegal. Meanwhile, some inhabitants of the camp – which was first settled 10 years ago when veteran peacenik Brian Haw pitched his tent on the grass of Parliament Square – are making what they see as a generous gesture in a spirit of compromise. One protester, Maria Gallastegui, has written to Buckingham Palace offering to cover up her placards for the day. Much to her surprise, she received a reply – delivered to her police box. One of the toffee nosed elite employed as emissaries for the Prince of Wales wrote how the Royals "appreciated" her offer and "careful note has been taken on the points you make". For their part, Citizen Dave, Theresa “Princess Leiea” May and “Biffer” Johnson seem unlikely to accept the olive branch. Let us all hope their efforts fail and the camp will somehow find its way into the Royal wedding album.

Welfare to work "fat cats" thrive whilst many face redundancy

I am getting a bit sick of the “fat cats” in the welfare to work sector taking huge salaries whilst so many of their frontline staff face redundancy as a result of recent bidding announcements for Work programme. Take the case of Emma Harrison, the head of A4e.

The woman appointed by David Cameron to help troubled families get off benefits and into work has a joint income with her husband estimated at more than £1.4m after building a business empire based on lucrative "welfare to work" contracts with government.

A4e's latest accounts show that Harrison, who lives with her husband in Thornbridge Hall, a 12th-century stately home in the heart of the Peak District, has an 85.5% shareholding in the Sheffield-based company. She receives a salary of £365,000 a year. On top of this, last year she and her husband received an additional £462,000 from A4e for the company's use of her home for conferences and administrative work. From what I hear this ‘administrative’ work includes inviting staff members over to her place for a cuppa. I guess this is to show the oiks how the rich live. After all, one really must keep the working class in their place.

Her husband received an additional £626,856 for the lease of another property to A4e. Nice for some – I guess money breeds money.

Last December Cameron offered Harrison a role championing government efforts to help troubled families get back on their feet. "Emma and others will be helping to pioneer a new way of doing things: less bureaucratic, less impersonal, more human, more effective," the prime minister said. "Above all, treating the whole family as a unit, not just a collection of individuals.

What does Emma know about hardship, other than the fact she was born in Jaywick, now recorded as being the most deprived town in the UK? I’ll bet Emma didn’t see too much if it when she was growing up.. Indeed, she openly admits that as a child she moved to Sheffield and lived in a ‘big’ house. From details of her life, I doubt she ever experienced hardship, or living off welfare benefits.

Today she heads up a company reputedly worth £100 million.

All this at a time when A4e have placed all their staff on redundancy notice, though admittedly a proportion of them will be re-employed (albeit on lower salaries) as a result of the company winning in five areas in the UK.

It emerged last week another major player in the welfare to work industry, Serco, which has won two more contracts, had awarded its top executives bumper pay packets. Chris Hyman, Serco's chief executive, enjoyed an 18% rise to £1.86m, while Andrew Jennings, the finance director, received an increase of 7% to £948,295. The company's diverse range of contracts includes running several prisons, London's bicycle hire scheme and the Docklands Light Railway.

Serco have yet to publicise the extent of any redundancies within their organisation, but logically it is unlikely they will be able to maintain the same level of staffing. Large sections of the country were served by Serco employees and with the ending of Flexible New Deal on 1st June we can anticipate many of them will be consigned to the dole queues.

Working Links, one of the successful contractors of the new work programme, is from today sending redundancy letters to almost 600 of its 2,000 workforce, with the threat that more could follow if staff numbers for the new contracts are lower than existing levels. Meanwhile, their managing director, Breege Burke enjoys a handsome salary of over £220, 000 a year

The news about the Harrisons, Burke, Hyman and Jennings’ ' income will fuel a growing row over the extent to which the private sector is set to benefit increasingly from Citizen Dave, the people’s toff’s determination to widen its role in the provision of public services.

In a recently published report for the government, Will Hutton called for a fair pay code to be extended into the public services industry. He also called for details on justification of an executive's annual salary to be published and for more employees to become involved in companies' remuneration committees. The report, which is being considered at the highest levels of government, said remuneration "must be brought back into the context of the pay of the rest of the workforce through the disclosure of the ratio of top to median pay".

It seems the “fat cats” in the sector never read that part of the report.

Union leaders have described the salaries earned by private entrepreneurs whose businesses were taking on government contracts as "obscene". They said private firms were queuing up to reap massive rewards from plans to open up the National Health Service to "any willing provider".

Once again, it’s another example of how Citizen Dave looks after the rich whilst the rest of us scrabble around for any spare pickings as pushes us day by day to become an “alright for some” society.

Mother's fighting for their kids

Who said mothers can’t be a formidable force? A group of women are using Mother's Day to take their campaign against cuts to Sure Start Children's Centres to Downing Street. Five mothers and their toddlers from local campaigns across England will take a 50,000-name petition against cuts and closures of the centres and give it to Citizen Dave, the people’s toff.

In recent research by the Daycare Trust, it was suggested up to 86% of centres are facing budget cuts and that up to 250 may close in 2011. Ministers responded to this view by arguing there wasn’t enough money to retain the centres.

So much for the Tories protecting frontline services!

According to the Tory view, they want to refocus the centres to help more disadvantaged families with health visitors picking up some of their early intervention work. As a result, Sure Start Children's Centres will be cut in some places because the grant which funds them was cut by 11% in the emergency budget, and again in the comprehensive spending review by almost the same percentage. Then the government removed the protection from the Sure Start budget. This has left them vulnerable as councils sought to make up losses to their central government grants overall.

As local authorities have set out their plans to reduce budgets, local campaigns have sprung up from parents anxious about losing services and the support offered to them and their children. Campaign groups travelling to London later today will include mothers from Lambeth, Hampshire, Manchester, Camden, Stoke, Hammersmith and Fulham, Kirklees and Derby.

They intend to sing nursery rhymes and do some face painting after handing their petition in to Number 10. Organiser of the Mother's Day event Louise King said:

"On the day the nation's thoughts turn to mothers and the job they do, we wanted to highlight the devastating impact that these cuts are having on mums and kids everywhere. Sure Start Children's Centres are a great leveller in our society. Kids from all walks of life mix and learn together. Parents can further their education and gain vital support. Take them away or force them to make cutbacks, and we'll see the next generation really suffer."

Sharon Hodgson, the Shadow children's minister will be joining the mothers in Downing Street on Sunday. In a previous statement, she has called for the government to reinstate the ringfence to the Sure Start budget and argued she knew of some centres that were seeing their budgets reduced from £450,000 to £19,000 a year but still being called Children's Centres.

This blog wishes them every success and hopes they all have a wonderful Mother’s Day.