The Housing and Planning Bill making its way through parliament has the clear ambition of increasing the supply of homes in our country. However to meet rising demand, and the government's necessarily ambitious housing targets, we are going to have to be even more radical...
Productivity improvements are crucial to the UK's economic competitiveness and to improving workers' living standards. As Paul Krugman, the Nobel prize-winning economist, says: "Productivity isn't everything, but in the long run it is almost everything."
Why then, I started to ask myself, is George Osborne so hell-bent on cutting tax credits for working people? Every report has concluded that even with the increase in minimum wage and tax-free allowance, families will still be worse off.
The Government may have numbers on their side, having won a very slim majority at the last election, but we have people power on our side and the desperate actions by Tories show that this is something that they - and we - will never underestimate.
This last year there has been much to celebrate, such as the government's partial conversion to the cause and the breakthrough for the Living Wage in parts of the retail sector. The fight is far from over, our objective has not been reached. Many employers, earning big profits, continue to refuse to share fair rewards with their employees, and the smoke and mirrors of the government's phoney Living Wage, only makes it easier for them to hide.
The Chancellor's flawed and ill-thought out cuts to tax credits were put on ice by the House of Lords this week. Now he has to bring new proposals forward. There are 3.3million families, 5,300 of them in my constituency, worrying about what he will do.
Sadly, all George Osborne has to do is tie the cut to tax credits to the Autumn Statement and they will go through the House of Lords unamended. If he can get it through the House of Commons first...
PMQs today made it pretty clear: Corbyn is starting to employ that headmaster stare. Today, it went from a rather stern warning look to a full-on, narrow-eyed, flashing-gazed glare at the Tory front bench who promptly erupted from muffled laughter to full-on cheers, accompanied by the classic chanting of "Ooooh", which reminded me all too strongly of schooldays seated in front of a well-intentioned but sadly incompetent supply teacher.
Just a day after the government announced their 'rapid review' into the powers of the upper chamber, the full extent of opposition to our unreformed House of Lords has been revealed.
We often hear the government talking about for incentives for people to work, that work should pay. This proposal seemed to me and others to be a punishment on those honest families who are doing their very best to provide for their families...
For the past week the story of Chancellor George Osborne and his attempt to rein in the tax credit system has filled the comment pages. To some, Osbor...
So what did we learn from the three and a half hours of debate? Firstly, that the House of Lords can be relevant when there is a national debate about topical political issues that directly impact on the public. Secondly, that despite his ability to put Labour in a difficult place George Osborne can get big issues spectacularly wrong.
Both Houses of Parliament exist to serve the people of the UK, yet it fell to the unelected peers, rather than the MPs who are directly accountable to their constituents, to stand up for people whose work helps the entire country to operate and succeed.
I hope that I do not sound pious, but I think that this is about honouring our word - the Prime Minister's word - that work must always pay. It is surely about respect for those who strive to do everything we ask of them, and now find themselves punished for doing what is right. It is about trust between Parliament and the people we serve.
It had been 100 years since the House of Lords voted against a fiscal policy backed by the Commons; that record has now been broken. Last night, the Lords voted in favour of workers, voting to delay the government's tax credits reforms until the chancellor comes up with an alternative strategy for supporting the lowest paid for at least the next three years.
Ultimately, I'm just happy that lower income workers and single parents won't receive a particularly callous Christmas card. I'm happy that folks at the lower end of the income scale won't have to struggle further in 2016. It is a shame, however, that we couldn't achieve these goals democratically and that instead we have to rely on an outdated and undemocratic institution that has no place in modern democracy.