8th parliamentary term Alex MAYER

. – This report covers European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) funding for 2021-2027, looking at creating employment and social inclusion linked to 11 specific objectives. What foresight! What a difference from the state of affairs in Britain where we do not have the faintest idea what is going to happen at the end of this week. ESF funding currently makes a real difference in my region, with the Luton Aspire Project providing mentoring to get young people into work, supporting carers in Leigh on Sea and training the next generation of farm managers in East Anglia. However, organisations have been left completely in the dark about replacements for European funding programmes after Brexit. The Government have promised to replace the GBP 447 million of European funding that the East of England receives with a new ‘Shared Prosperity Fund’. However, they have completely failed to give details as to how the fund will actually work. We need clarity. The Shared Prosperity Fund needs more than a snazzy name.

If we don’t want to have more plastic than fish in our seas in the next few decades, we need to act now.
Every year across Europe, 150 000 tonnes of plastic are dumped into the sea, which is why I am pleased to vote for this important new legislation to say no to single-use plastics and stop this pollution.
This is about moving away from a throwaway culture. So it becomes unthinkable to use plastic cutlery, plates or straws just once and then chuck them into the bin.
I am also pleased that this is EU wide action. After all, a plastic bottle discarded on the beach at Clacton can wash up on the shores of continental Europe and vice—versa. The big challenges of our time require cross border co-operation.

. ‒ The Investment Protection Agreement between the EU and Singapore will benefit only those who have already benefited the most from globalisation. It will create new privileges for multinationals in 16 EU Member States, and fail to remove the privileges that already exist in the other 12. Because it provides special justice to foreign investors, it directly attacks the fundamental principle that we should all be equal before the law, no matter how rich or poor.
And there is no economic argument to support it. The Commission has never been able to demonstrate any link between investment court systems (ICS) or investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) and investment flows – because there isn’t one. Another way is possible. The argument that you need ICS to eradicate ISDS is completely disingenuous. I fundamentally object to any kind of privileged justice for multinationals and so I voted against this unworthy agreement.