This evening I joined members of Peckham, Faraday, Peckham Rye and The Lane wards at their annual general meetings.

Branch AGMs are an important annual get-together that chooses the members who will be the ward officers and chooses who will be the representatives on the Constituency General Committee.

For too long as a society we have struggled to talk about mental illness with the same openness as we talk about our physical health. Indeed, it was only in 2012 that MPs spoke out for the first time in a debate in parliament about their own battles with mental health.

But as one in four of us will suffer from this in our lives, we all know someone living with a mental health problem.

That’s why I am supporting the South London Press and London Weekly News Change Is Possible campaign, which is doing vital work to challenge the stigma and taboo surrounding mental health and to raise funds for Lambeth and Southwark Mind’s work in our local community.

Let’s get behind them and help build a society where everybody who is unwell, be it with physical or mental illness, can access the help and support they need.

THE MISSION

The Change Is Possible campaign aims to promote and protect good mental health for everyone in south London, helping to shape a community that makes sure people with experience of mental health problems are treated fairly, positively and with respect.

South London Press, London Weekly News and Lambeth and Southwark Mind are committed to raising awareness about the complex mental health problems that many people in our community face, and working together to expand and improve the range of support available.

They aim to put a stop to the stigma around mental health – at home, at work and at school – and to break down the barriers that prevent people from seeking help.

GET INVOLVED

If you would like to support the Change Is Possible campaign, there are several ways to get involved.

– Share your story. Do you have personal experience of living with mental health problems? Has a friend or family member been affected? Your story could help inspire others to donate towards the campaign.

– Help fundraise. Support the appeal by organising a fundraising event or setting yourself a sponsored challenge. Every penny could be crucial in helping the campaign reach its targets.

– Donate to the campaign. To make a donation to the appeal, you can visit www.givey.com/changeispossible. Alternatively, you can write to Lambeth and Southwark Mind, 4th floor, 336 Brixton Road, London, SW9 7AA.

For more information about getting involved with the campaign, you can contact reporter Jack Dixon on 07973 565078 or email [email protected]

Joined Faraday Councillors, Lorraine Lauder and Samantha Jury-Dada and the local campaign team in Faraday this morning to talk to residents on the Taplow Estate.

Lots of issues raised including housing repairs, loss of heating & hot water and overcrowding.

Tonight at the Rye Hill Tenants & Residents Hall, the residents of Solomon’s Passage got the opportunity to put their concerns directly to senior Wandle staff, including the Chief Executive Tracey Lees and Newman Francis, who is the appointed Independent Resident Advisor.

We discussed a number of ongoing issues and it is clear that some residents still feel worried and anxious about their housing future and communication with Wandle continues to be a problem.

I will continue to work with Wandle and Newman Francis to ensure all Solomon’s Passage residents are clear about their housing future and to make sure their options are fair.

Many thanks to Miriam Facey, Chair of Rye Hill TRA for arranging the use of the Rye Hill TRA Hall for this meeting.

The Joint Committee on Human Rights has today raised further questions about the use of drones for targeted killing, following the Government’s response to its recent Report on the issue.

The Committee welcomes some clarifications of the Government’s position, but is disappointed that the Government has refused to clarify its position in relation to the use of lethal force outside armed conflict on the basis that this is "hypothetical." What law applies to such uses of lethal force is one of the most important questions raised by the Committee’s inquiry and Report, and the Committee expected the Government to make its position clear on this central issue.

The Government’s response provides some clarification in certain areas. It has explained its understanding of the thresholds that need to be met for a threat to considered "imminent" and use of force justified. But uncertainty remains about what the Government considers to be the relevance of when a threatened attack might take place. There are also some important questions about human rights law that remain unanswered.

JCHR Chair Harriet Harman said:

"The Government has stated that it follows "detailed and developed thinking" when applying the law to its use of lethal drone strikes but this has not been fully demonstrated in its response to our report. Greater insight has been provided into the broad approach the Government takes in establishing what terrorist threats merit the use of force. However the Government has chosen not to answer the most important questions raised by our Report concerning its understanding of the legal framework which governs the use of lethal drone strikes outside armed conflict.

"It is simply not good enough for the Government to refuse to answer this on the grounds that it is a hypothetical question, when in the course of our inquiry it stated that it would be prepared to resort to such use of lethal force for counter-terrorism purposes even outside of armed conflict. Parliament is entitled to expect an explanation of the Government’s view of the legal justification for such a use of force before it happens, rather than wait until it does."

Further explanation

Key areas where further explanation is needed:

• Is the Government applying the Laws of War where operations are being carried out in areas outside of armed conflict?
  
  
• What degree of physical power and control over a person who is killed by a drone strike is enough to bring that person within the UK’s jurisdiction so that the right to life in the ECHR applies?
  
  
• Does the Government maintain its position that the use of drones outside of armed conflict must be in accordance with international human rights law?
  
  
• What does the Government consider Article 2 of ECHR to require? Is an "impossibility of capture" test applied?
  
  
• How does the Government ensures that UK support of other states using lethal drone strikes does not contravene international human rights law, protecting UK personnel from future criminal prosecution?
  
  
• What importance does the Government place on the timing of a potential attack when deciding its response?

International consensus

The Government’s response also misinterprets the recommendation of the Committee that the Government should take a lead in developing an international consensus. The Committee did not advocate the development of a special legal regime for the use of drones. Its Report recommended that there should be an international consensus in how existing legal frameworks should be interpreted and applied. In any future response the Government must recognise this and show its determination to lead the international community in achieving this goal.

You can read the Report conclusions and recommendations here

Big responsibility on re-elected leader Jeremy Corbyn. Unite the party and inspire the public that Labour credible Opposition and future Government

The new Prime Minister must get a grip on Brexit

Now, after the June referendum we will be leaving the EU.

The Prime Minister says "Brexit means Brexit" but what does that mean?  Article 50 is the clause in the EU founding charter which lays down the process for leaving.  The government trigger Article 50 and there's then 2 years negotiation before we formally exit.

Most people in Southwark voted to "Remain" and I'm deeply disappointed that we will be leaving the EU But as "Leave" won, the government must ensure that we suffer as little as possible by leaving.

 I'll be pressing the government to protect our economy and our opportunities for the future and tell us what they're up to.

*The government must say when they will be putting the weekly sum of £350m into the NHS they promised as part of a "Brexit dividend".  This was written on their "Leave" campaign bus but we've heard nothing of it since the vote.

*The government must guarantee areas who've been promised EU funds for infrastructure like roads and bridges that they will not lose the money when we leave the EU but they'll get it from our government. 

*they must ensure we stay in the single market so our companies exporting to EU countries don't have to pay tariffs which will make their goods more expensive.

*They must be ready to support industries whose exports are threatened by the 10% tariffs that will go on our goods being sold to the EU.  We must not lose vital investment such as Nissan in the North East, because we've left the EU

*They must tell the many EU nationals who live in this country, some who've lived, worked and brought up their families that they will not be kicked out. 

*on leaving the EU we'll have to negotiate new trade agreements with every country in the world we want to trade with to replace the trade agreements with countries like China and Cambodia, that we have by virtue of our membership of the EU.  All EU trade deals require the countries we trade with to protect minimum human rights standards; to outlaw child labour and forced labour and to protect the right to join trade unions.  When we negotiate new trade deals for ourselves with countries we wish to trade with we must ensure that those human rights clauses are included.  We must not become the weak link in the quest to improve human rights around the world.

*The government must publish every 3 months the increase in the number of civil servants who have been employed on the Brexit negotiations, and their pay bill.  Going it alone outside the EU means that instead of sharing work on treaty negotiations, we'll have to do them ourselves which will involve thousands more civil servants costing hundreds of millions of pounds.  It is likely the £350m a week will go on lawyers and consultants negotiating Brexit rather than our NHS.

*the government must commit to matching rights that employees get in the EU.  Britain's workers can't slip behind on issues like equal pay and maternity rights.

*The PM must take a personal grip on this.  She can't leave it to her warring ministers.

Despite the weather the Livesey Labour team were out meeting local residents talking to them about their concerns. Cllr Richard Livingston and Cllr Michael Situ and I heard a range of concerns from local people including housing and anti-social behaviour.

At Solomon's Passage in Peckham today I met with shared owners, leaseholders and tenants to discuss their ongoing situation with Wandle Housing Association. Residents are still facing uncertainty about their housing future 5 months on from when they were told that they would be losing their homes because of fundamental defects in the blocks which were only built 6 years ago.

There are a number of significant issues that still need to be clarified and resolved and I'll be meeting with the Chair of Wandle Housing Association Richard Raeburn and the Chief Executive Tracey Lees later this week to discuss these issues further.

It is vital that all residents have a fair deal.