thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--These People Kept The UK Going Through Covid. Now Their Pay Has Been Frozen

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Public sector workers have expressed anger at the news that more than a million will receive a real-terms pay cut next year.
Chancellor Rishi Sunak on Wednesday announced a pay freeze for the sector but it is understood not to take into account inflation, projected to be 2% next year by the Bank of England.
Advertisement
Those earning less than £24,000 a year, and people in the NHS, are exceptions and will receive a pay rise of at least £250 – but even that amount is not enough to keep their salaries in line with inflation.
Sunak made the announcement as part of his spending review amid a backdrop of appalling economic figures, telling MPs he “cannot justify a significant, across-the-board pay increase for all public sector workers” when private sector wages were falling.
In response, the Trade Unions Congress (TUC) said the announcement was a “kick in the teeth” for workers who “kept the country going” during the pandemic.
After a decade of standstill pay, yet another pay freeze is a kick in the teeth for the key workers in the public sector who kept the country going in this crisis. #SpendingReview — Trades Union Congress (@The_TUC) November 25, 2020
Advertisement
Shadow education secretary Kate Green said the pay freeze was a “kick in the teeth for dedicated early years workers, teachers, teaching assistants and support staff who’ve been working flat out to educate children during Covid”.
“They deserve better,” she added.
We spoke to the public sector workers who have kept the country going throughout the pandemic about how they feel.
The mental health support worker
Nicola Grimley, senior support worker at Leeds City Council Nicola Grimley
Nicola Grimley, 50, from Leeds, specialises in working with older people who have been hit hardest by Covid-19.
For months the vital face-to-face support services she usually runs were forced to take place only over the phone, making her and her colleagues’ jobs significantly more difficult.
Advertisement
She said: “This crisis has had an effect on everyone’s mental health, more so our service users because they do suffer from loneliness, from the anxiety of being alone, and not being able to have those one-to-one meetings has made things a lot harder.
“Sometimes you just can’t gauge how someone is really feeling over the phone – they can tell you one thing but without seeing them you can’t register that properly.
“It’s been hard for the people we support, but staff morale has been rubbish as well to be honest. We’ve all been feeling it, and struggling through this.”
When it comes to pay freezes in the public sector, she said the government needed to differentiate between well-paid civil servants in Whitehall and frontline essential services workers across the country.
She said: “To penalise the people who are trying to keep the councils going – and I don’t mean the people sitting up in the offices that make the decisions, I mean the people on the frontline who are actually carrying those decisions out, they’re the ones who are suffering.
Advertisement
“They’re the ones who are effectively getting a pay cut but still trying to live and support their families without decent wages. I just don’t think that’s fair.
“The government really does need to think again about what parts of the public sector they’re talking about. It shouldn’t be the people who work for the councils, who clean the streets, who empty the bins, who care for the older people, but they’re suffering.”
Earning under £24,000 a year, Grimley is eligible for the meagre pay rise but pointed out that after tax the extra – perhaps as little as £250 a year – would barely amount to an increase even without taking into account inflation. She added that while she would be able to manage her budget as a single household, her main concern was for colleagues with young families who have found it increasingly difficult throughout Covid to keep the bills paid and their children fed through the school holidays.
Having worked for Leeds City Council for more than 26 years, Grimley is no stranger to pay freezes/ She’s seen for herself the devastating impact of austerity.
“II they do that [austerity] again they’re going to lose more and more services,” she said.
“I can see us going back there, and I can see it being another hard time again.”
The firefighter
Jon Wharnsby, firefighter and FBU rep. FBU / People's Creative
Advertisement
Firefighter and Fire Brigades Union rep Jon Wharnsby, who alongside many of his colleagues was seconded to other frontline services during the chaotic first months of the pandemic, said he was “angry, disappointed, but not surprised” by news of the pay freeze.
“It seems to be this government’s first reaction to make the public sector pay for any costs incurred that weren’t their fault. We were made to pay for the banking crisis and have been through pay freeze after pay freeze since 2010,” he said.
“This is slightly more galling because not only did we not cause the pandemic, we were among the first people to try to help protect the public from it.”
While Wharnsby temporarily joined the London Ambulance Service to support their operations, other firefighters were involved in delivering food and medicines, and even retrieving the bodies of suspected Covid victims. Even firefighters who were not seconded still supported efforts to tackle the pandemic, with many fire stations assembling PPE alongside their usual work.
“They [the government] are happy to stand on their doorstep clapping at 8pm on a Thursday or pat us on the back when there’s a major incident,” Wharnsby said.
Advertisement
“But while they’re patting us on the back they’ve got one hand in our pockets stealing our wages. That’s how it feels to firefighters.
“It’s very demoralising. To be honest I’m pretty much incandescent with rage. But I’m not surprised that the people who were asked to step up onto the front line now seem to be the people that are going to be asked to pay for the financial fallout.”
Wharnsby earns above the £24,000 threshold, and so is among the public sector workers who won’t get a pay rise. With two young daughters and his wife also working in the public sector as a teacher, he said his household had already lost an estimated £10,000 in real terms after years of pay freezes.
He said: “It’s a huge amount of money in total and puts an enormous strain on our finances. We’ve had to cut back like all households.
“It’s not affected me as much as some of my colleagues who’ve had to use foodbanks or have been evicted. The cost of living never really goes down – the mortgage never goes down, rent never goes down.
Advertisement
“It is a real strain for a lot of firefighters, to the extent that a lot of us have to take on second jobs which we then get berated for – just to make ends meet in what is an increasingly expensive country to live in.”
Wharnsby also believes that while punishing public sector workers, the freeze will also cause more economic problems as people are unable to spend as much domestically.
Referring to the fact that hundreds of millions of pounds of public money have been spent duriing the crisis to companies with offshore accounts, Wharnsby said: “We’re public sector workers. We live and spend our money in the UK economy. The only people who are really going to suffer from this are families of those workers who are going to have to take another pay freeze, and local businesses who are already strapped.
“We’ve got restaurants closing in record numbers, shops closing, travel agents closing. By putting money into public sector wages, that then gets paid into the public sector economy rather than leaving the country.
“There just seems to be a knee-jerk reaction of: ‘We’ve got a bill to pay – let’s take that from the wages and the pensions of the public sectors.’ It just seems to be what this government does.”
Advertisement
The teaching assistant
Donna Spicer, teaching assistant in Greenwich HuffPost UK
Donna Spicer, 48, has worked as a teaching assistant in Greenwich for 20 years. At £20,000 a year, she is under the threshold of the chancellor’s public sector pay freeze, meaning she will qualify for at least £250 extra next year – but she believes it’s not sufficient.
“It’s not even enough to buy a monthly bus pass or fill your car with petrol to get to work,” she told HuffPost UK. “And the taxman will see a proportion of that.
“It’s an insult and this paltry offer won’t go far enough to cover the austerity cuts we have suffered under the Tories for the last decade.”
She says the last three years have been increasingly difficult. “It’s becoming more of a struggle every month. My bills are covered, but there’s no wiggle room.”
Advertisement
At her school, she has witnessed safety measures being taken against coronavirus becoming increasingly lax and feels like she is putting herself at risk on a daily basis.
“At the beginning, everything was strict. But now staff are being asked to self-isolate so we’re being asked to do cover – when actually we shouldn’t be crossing bubbles.
“Playgrounds are filling up with kids and parents. Everyone’s become very blasé about it, there’s no social distancing going on any longer. It’s definitely not safe.”
Meanwhile, the job is getting tougher and tougher. “You’ve got all this stress and strain on your shoulders. For years we’ve been told we’re ‘only’ teaching assistants and not important.
“Now because the pandemic meant schools had to stay open for vulnerable children and kids of key workers, everyone’s finally realised we’re actually vital to the running of the school.”
Advertisement
The refuse worker
Dave Russell has worked as a bin man in Brighton Hove city council for 18 years. At 60 years of age, he earns £19,000 a year.
Emptying bins isn’t just physically demanding; in a pandemic, it can be dangerous. “Things have become quite scary,” he told HuffPost UK. “Potentially every bin you touch is contaminated so we are putting ourselves at risk.”
The meagre pay rises Dave has received over the last decade means he is barely managing to support his family. “Prices are going up but wages aren’t going up to combat them. By the time you pay the mortgage and council tax, do some shopping and put petrol in the car, you’re almost skint.
“It’s ridiculous that halfway through the month you’re already waiting for the next payday. It never used to be like that, there used to be enough money to go around.”
Dave estimates that in order to make it through the month, he would need a minimum of £100 a week extra. “The thing is that people at the bottom end of the pay scale always seem to cop it in the neck and they don’t receive the big pay rises that the rich are receiving.
Advertisement
“It just doesn’t make any sense to me. If we were given a decent wage, we would be spending more shops and giving back to our local economies. But there just isn’t enough.”
The local government worker
Sarah James, local government worker in the West Midlands HuffPost UK
Sarah James, 40, works for a local authority in the West Midlands, answering phone calls from the public regarding council tax and housing benefit.
Over the course of the year, she has fielded an increasing number of calls from people facing job losses and financial struggles as a result of the pandemic. “The types of calls we get are from people who desperately need help.”
Desperate and frustrated callers can occasionally turn aggressive; for Sarah, it can be a challenge to emotionally process as she takes calls in her bedroom. “Sometimes it’s just a way of venting their frustration at the system, but working from home means my supervisor and colleagues can’t be there to support me.
Advertisement
“It’s the mental strain and isolation that’s been the worst.”
Sarah earns somewhere between £24,000 and £25,000 a year and, as a result, has frustratingly just missed Sunak’s pay freeze threshold by a whisker. “I will just miss out on that,” she told HuffPost UK.
“The chancellor said that over 2.1m workers will benefit but for many of us who are just above the threshold it’s another blow.”
As a single parent, Sarah’s wage is enough to pay the bills and rent – but not much else. “Christmas has been a real cutback over the last couple of years. If I were to lose my job tomorrow, my savings would see me through a couple of weeks and that would be it.”
She says she “angry and frustrated” at the government. “We’ve had 10 years of pay austerity in local government and the public sector, and at the same time we’ve got a government that is handing out millions and millions for dodgy contracts and giving out money to private companies for public services.
“It’s always us public sector workers that have to pick up the burden. The government spoke before about us being the backbone of local communities up and down the country – we just want to be treated like it.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--UK's Daily Coronavirus Death Toll Nears 700 For First Time In More Than Six Months

HuffPost is part of Verizon Media .
We and our partners will store and/or access information on your device through @ @ @ @ @ similar technologies , to display personalised ads and content , for ad and content measurement @ @ @ @ @ development .
Your personal data that may be used • Information about your device and @ @ @ @ @ IP address • Browsing and search activity while using Verizon Media websites and apps Find @ @ @ @ @ use your information in our Privacy Policy and Cookie Policy .
To enable Verizon Media @ @ @ @ @ your personal data select ' I agree ' , or select 'Manage settings ' for @ @ @ @ @ your choices .
You can change your choices at any time by visiting Your Privacy @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The UK’s daily coronavirus death toll has neared 700 for the first time in six months.
On Wednesday, the deaths of 696 people who had tested positive for Covid-19 in the previous 28 days were recorded by the government.
Of these, 604 were recorded in England, 44 in Scotland, 41 in Wales and seven in Northern Ireland.
It marks the highest daily death toll since May 5, when 726 new deaths were reported. It also brings the UK’s total death toll to 56,533 – the fifth highest in the world.
Advertisement
Meanwhile, 18,213 new cases of Covid-19 were recorded on Wednesday.
On Thursday, the government is set to announce which tier of restrictions each area of England will go into when the current lockdown ends on December 2.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Tier 3: The Areas That Could Face The Toughest Covid Rules

When England’s coronavirus lockdown ends on December 2, a revised – and tougher – version of the three-tier system of restrictions will be rolled out, the prime minister announced earlier this week.
This beefed-up tier system will last until the spring, with the level of restrictions in each area reviewed every two weeks.
Advertisement
In a change to rules before England’s second lockdown, ministers have said that decisions on tiers will be primarily based on five key indicators.
These include:
Case detection rates in all age groups
Case detection rates in the over-60s
The rate at which cases are rising or falling
Positivity rate (the number of positive cases detected as a percentage of tests taken)
Pressure on the NHS, including current and projected occupancy
The government is expected to announce on Thursday which areas will be placed into each tier of restrictions.
But analysis of data already available could point to the regions set to go into the strictest rules next week. Here’s what we found.
Advertisement
Number of new coronavirus cases in each region
In the week leading up to November 22, West Yorkshire, the West Midlands and Staffordshire topped the table of areas with the highest rates of coronavirus.
Areas with the highest case rates in the week to 22 November: West Yorkshire (Met County) with 316 cases per 100k West Midlands (Met County) with 311 cases per 100k Staffordshire with 308 cases per 100k City of Bristol with 297 cases per 100k Tyne and Wear (Met County) with 288 cases per 100k East Riding of Yorkshire with 273 cases per 100k Greater Manchester (Met County) with 262 cases per 100k County Durham with 261 cases per 100k Leicestershire with 261 cases per 100k Kent with 261 cases per 100k Lincolnshire with 258 cases per 100k South Yorkshire (Met County) with 231 cases per 100k
Out of the top 12, only Greater Manchester and South Yorkshire had been in tier 3 before the national lockdown.
How are the number of cases changing in each area?
It’s not just the number of cases in each area that will be important when ministers decide levels of restrictions – whether this figure is on the increase or decrease will also be key.
Advertisement
Want to know if the relative number of coronavirus cases in your area are rising or falling? Use the searchable table to find out what’s happening in your local authority.
In the areas with the highest rates of infection, the number of cases is on the decline
Despite having the highest infection rates in the country, all of the regions in the top 12 saw a decline in the infection rate compared to the previous week.
The R rate
Ministers have said that the R rate – otherwise known as the reproduction rate – of the virus will also play a key part in determining the level of restrictions in each area.
Advertisement
Generally, if the R rate is above 1, it means that the epidemic is growing. For example, an R rate of 1.4 would mean that every 10 people with the virus would go on to infect 14 more people.
However, if the R rate is less than 1, the epidemic is shrinking.
Data analysis revealed that the south-east of England had the highest R rate in the country, as of November 20, with a reproduction rate of between 1.1 and 1.3.
Number of coronavirus cases in the over-60s
Another of the five factors ministers will consider when deciding the level of restrictions in each area is the number of Covid-19 cases in people over the age of 60, who are at an elevated risk from the virus.
Advertisement
The table shows the total number of people tested from November 5 to November 11, the latest available data.
According to the latest government data, the national rate of over-60s testing positive was 2%.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Supporters Rally Around Meghan Markle After Duchess Writes About Pregnancy Loss

In addition to Meghan, two other members of the royal family have experienced and spoken about their own pregnancy loss.
Sophie, Countess of Wessex, who is married to Queen Elizabeth’s son Prince Edward, also experienced pregnancy loss in 2001.
“I’m obviously very sad — but it was just not meant to be,” she said at the time, according to the BBC. “But there will be other chances”.
Zara Tindall, the queen’s granddaughter and daughter of Princess Anne, spoke about having a miscarriage in an interview with the Sunday Times in 2016.
“For me, the worst bit was that we had to tell everyone — everyone knew,” the British equestrian said. “I had to go through having the baby because it was so far along. I then had another miscarriage really early on.”
“It was a time when my family came to the fore and I needed them,” Tindall added. “You need to go through a period where you don’t talk about it because it’s too raw, but, as with everything, time’s a great healer.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Diego Maradona Dead: Football Legend Dies Aged 60

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Football legend Diego Maradona has died at the age of 60 following a heart attack on Wednesday, his lawyer said.
The Argentina star, who led his country to World Cup triumph in 1986, had been treated for alcohol dependency following emergency surgery for a blood clot on the brain.
Advertisement
Tributes poured in the charismatic and controversial Maradona, who is considered one of the greatest soccer players of all time.
Reports from Argentina that Diego Armando Maradona has died. By some distance the best player of my generation and arguably the greatest of all time. After a blessed but troubled life, hopefully he’ll finally find some comfort in the hands of God. #RipDiego — Gary Lineker (@GaryLineker) November 25, 2020
The AFA said on Twitter: “The Argentine Football Association, through its president Claudio Tapia, expresses its deepest sorrow for the death of our legend, Diego Armando Maradona. You will always be in our hearts.”
Advertisement
Maradona is widely regarded as one of the greatest footballers of all time and was the inspiration for Argentina’s World Cup success in Mexico in 1986. He also led the country to the final of the 1990 tournament in Italy and managed them in South Africa in 2010.
Maradona’s successes made him a global star and a national hero in Argentina but his career was also blighted by controversies on and off the field.
His ‘Hand of God’’ goal against England in the 1986 quarter-finals, when he pushed the ball into the net with his hand, earned him infamy – although he followed up by scoring the “goal of the century”, a remarkable solo effort, in the same game.
Diego Maradona holds up the World Cup trophy in 1986. EMPICS Sport
His international playing career ended in shame when he failed a drugs test at the 1994 World Cup in the United States and he was notorious for a wayward lifestyle. He was also banned from football in 1991 after testing positive for cocaine while playing for Napoli.
Advertisement
However, he remained a revered figure at the Italian club, where he won two Serie A titles.
He also played for Barcelona, Sevilla, Boca Juniors and Newell’s Old Boys and was most recently manager of Gimnasia y Esgrima in La Plata, Argentina.
As recorded in the recent HBO documentary, Maradona dragged Napoli to win its first Serie A league title after joining the club in 1984 in a world-record fee.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Heavy D, Storage Hunters And Celebrity Big Brother Star, Dies Aged 43

Reality TV star Colin Newell – best known by the nickname Heavy D – has died at the age of 43.
Heavy D first rose to prominence as one of the buyers on the UK version of Storage Wars in 2014, where he earned the nickname “The Boominator”.
He then went on to appear in Celebrity Big Brother in 2016, sharing the house with Saira Khan, Samantha Fox, Grant Bovey and eventual winner Stephen Bear.
Heavy D at the Celebrity Big Brother final in 2016 Jeff Spicer via Getty Images
Advertisement
Reports of his death first began circulating on Wednesday afternoon, after a friend tweeted: “I’m very shocked & saddened to hear of the passing of my friend @HeavyHeavyD.
“U lived ur life the way u wanted to & fuck anyone who didn’t like it! U always brought a smile to my face bro & lifted any room you where in. #RIPHeavyD”
I’m very shocked & saddened to hear of the passing of my friend @HeavyHeavyd 😔 u lived ur life the way u wanted to & fuck anyone who didn’t like it! U always brought a smile to my face bro & lifted any room you where in. ❤❤❤ #RIPHeavyD — Nick Nevern (@NickNevern) November 25, 2020
His agent later confirmed the news to The Sun, telling the newspaper: “Medics are investigating the exact cause of death.
Advertisement
“Colin was an absolute pleasure to work with it. He was a friendly guy who had time for everybody... he will be missed by those who loved him. We ask the public to respect the privacy of the family at this time.”
The reality TV star was also a devoted Arsenal football fan, and regularly appeared on the channel ArsenalFanTV.
They paid their own tribute following the news of his death on Wednesday, writing: “We are shocked to hear the sad news that Heavy D has passed away today. Our condolences go to his family at this very sad time.”
We are shocked to hear the sad news that Heavy D has passed away today. Our condolences go to his family at this very sad time. #RIPHeavyD — AFTV (@AFTVMedia) November 25, 2020


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Baroness Sugg Quits Government After Rishi Sunak Cuts Foreign Aid Budget

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Development minister Baroness Sugg has resigned from the government over Rishi Sunak’s decision to abandon the UK’s commitment to spend 0.7% of national income on overseas aid.
The chancellor announced on Wednesday the commitment would be cut to 0.5% from next year, breaking a Conservative manifesto 2019 commitment.
Advertisement
Boris Johnson promised voters at the election: “We will proudly maintain our commitment to spend 0.7% of GNI on development, and do more to help countries receiving aid become self-sufficient.”
Sugg was minister for overseas territories and sustainable development at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO).
The FCDO was created when Johnson shut the Department for International Development (DfID) and merged it with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
Sunak said sticking to to the 0.7% commitment was “difficult to justify to the British people” during the economic “emergency” caused by the coronavirus pandemic.
Advertisement
But it has been widely criticised by Tory MPs, opposition parities and the aid sector.
In her resignation letter, Sugg said it was “fundamentally wrong” to abandon the 0.7% pledge.
“Cutting UK aid risks undermining your efforts to promote a Global Britain and will diminish our power to influence other nations to do what is right. I cannot support or defend this decision,” she said.
Andrew Mitchell, a former Conservative international development secretary, sad the move would cause “100,000 preventable deaths” mainly among children.
“None of us in this House will be able to look our children in the eye and claim we did not know what we were voting for,” he told MPs.
Conservative Tobias Ellwood, the defence committee chair, claimed China and Russia were likely to extend their “authoritarian influence” as a result of the “vacuum” created by the UK “downgrading” its soft power programmes.
Outside the Commons, the Archbishop of Canterbury attacked the Government for its “shameful and wrong” cuts.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--No-Deal Brexit Would Delay Covid Recovery By A Year, Watchdog Warns

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The recovery from coronavirus would be delayed by a year to summer 2023 if Boris Johnson fails to strike a Brexit trade deal with the EU, the UK’s fiscal watchdog has warned.
The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) painted a bleak picture where a failure to reach a free trade agreement with the EU will “compound” the massive economic impact of Covid, which in 2020 caused the biggest fall in economic output in 300 years (11%).
Advertisement
The prime minister’s team is currently locked in trade negotiations with the EU with just days left to reach a deal as the end of the standstill transition period looms on December 31.
In its economic outlook accompanying chancellor Rishi Sunak’s spending review, the OBR forecast that Brexit alone would cause a 4% long-run hit to output even if Johnson does strike a deal.
But a failure to reach agreement and defaulting to World Trade Organisation (WTO) terms, including tariffs on trade with the EU, would add up to 2% to this, meaning a long-run hit to economic output of up to 6%.
This would “have the effect of delaying the point at which output regains its pre-virus peak by almost a year to the third quarter of 2023”, under the watchdog’s “central” forecast.
Advertisement
The impact of different Brexit scenarios on the economy Office for Budget Responsibility
The introduction of tariffs and other barriers to trade between the UK and EU, would translate to a long-term hike in prices for UK consumers of 1.5% by 2026, caused by the introduction of tariffs and a tanking of the exchange rate.
In the short-term, unemployment will also be 0.9% higher under no deal, peaking at 8.3% in summer next year, while recovering over the medium term.
There will also be a double whammy effect with sectors that have fared okay during the pandemic such as manufacturing and financial services facing the biggest hit from a no-deal Brexit as they are “most exposed to the loss of unfettered access to the EU market”.
How Covid and Brexit impact different sectors Office for Budget Responsibility
Advertisement
The short-term impact of no deal will depend on how prepared the government and businesses are to manage new requirements.
But the watchdog noted that both have been “distracted by the need to deal with the disruption caused by the virus” – taking up personnel and resources while also running down cash reserves and inventories and “making them more vulnerable to shocks”.
As well as the temporary disruption of no deal, defaulting to WTO terms would lead to a “longer-term impact on the productive potential of the UK economy”.
Freight lorries queueing along the M20 in Kent waiting to access the Eurotunnel terminal in Folkestone Gareth Fuller - PA Images via Getty Images
Trade deals with major economies including the US, which are often trumpeted by Brexiteers, will only have a “modest impact” relative to EU membership.
Advertisement
While trade agreements already struck with the likes of Japan “do not provide any benefit relative to being a member of the EU” as they simply replicate existing terms.
The imposition of tariffs would see the UK rake in £6bn more in customs duties every year.
But it would be “more than outweighed” by the £14bn overall reduction in tax revenues from a smaller economy and by 2025-26, overall revenues would fall by £6bn, the OBR said.
The watchdog said: “The uncertainty created by the pandemic is compounded by the presently unresolved nature of the UK’s future trading relationship with the EU after the transition period ends on December 31.
“Our three scenarios all assume that the UK makes an orderly transition to a typical free-trade agreement (FTA).
“This new trading relationship is expected to lead to a long-run loss of output of around 4% compared to remaining in the EU, which was already incorporated into our March forecast.
Advertisement
“But given the continued uncertainty over the outcome of the Brexit negotiations, we also include a scenario in which the UK’s trading relationship defaults to WTO terms on January, with some accompanying short-term disruption. This would further reduce output by 2% initially and 1.5% at the forecast horizon.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--7 Key Takeaways From Rishi Sunak's Spending Review

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Rishi Sunak has unveiled his comprehensive spending review amid what he called the economic “emergency” of the coronavirus pandemic. Here is what the chancellor has revealed.
Covid has devastated the UK economy
The UK has seen the largest fall in output in 300 years, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), underlining the sheer scale of the damage Covid-19 has visited on the economy.
Advertisement
Sunak said the OBR is forecasting the economy will contract by 11.3% this year, and that the country’s finances will not recover to pre-pandemic levels until the last quarter of 2022.
The “economic damage is likely to be lasting” and there will be “long-term scarring”, Sunak said.
“As the restrictions are eased, they [the OBR] expect the economy to start recovering – growing by 5.5% next year, 6.6% in 2022, then 2.3%, 1.7% and 1.8% in the following years,” he said.
“Even with growth returning, our economic output is not expected to return to pre-crisis levels until the fourth quarter of 2022 – and the economic damage is likely to be lasting.”
Debt and joblessness
Sunak also said the UK is forecast to borrow £394bn this year, equivalent to 19% of GDP, as the Treasury committed to the furlough scheme and numerous other spending pledges to help the UK weather the storm.
Advertisement
He told MPs the figure was the “highest recorded level of borrowing in our peacetime history”.
Here's the story from the OBR of the ever rising spending on Covid. Tru;y staggering.
And very late. We should have had these numbers from Treasury or OBR as policies were announced rather than wait til now pic.twitter.com/JbzPD3u1aV — Paul Johnson (@PJTheEconomist) November 25, 2020
It is expected to fall to £164bn next year, £105bn in 2022/23, then remain at around £100bn (4% of GDP).
This leaves the UK in a staggering amount debt and the government facing tough choices in the months and years ahead.
Sunak said: “Underlying debt— after removing the temporary effect of the Bank of England’s asset purchases — is forecast to be 91.9% of GDP this year.”
The OBR also expects unemployment to peak at 7.5% in the second quarter of 2021 to some 2.6 million people, Sunak said.
Advertisement
Pay rises ... and pay freezes
Sunak was accused of a U-turn after the minimum wage will increase by just 2.2% to £8.91 an hour.
The hourly legal minimum wage was due to rise from £8.72 to £9.21 in April, and the TUC said key workers, such as shop staff, had been let down.
Workers on the national minimum wage – not least the two million who are key workers – have been let down by the government’s decision to row back on the full planned rise they were promised.#SpendingReview — Trades Union Congress (@The_TUC) November 25, 2020
The 2.1 million public sector workers who earn below the median wage of £24,000, will be guaranteed a pay rise of at least £250 next year, Sunak.
It was believed the pay freeze would directly affect 1.3m out of 5.5m public sector workers, less than 25% of total.
Advertisement
It later emerged, however, that even some of those could in fact see their pay shrink in real terms, as the rise for lower-paid workers may be “fixed” at a £250 cash rise.
Sunak refused to guarantee wage rises for those on the lowest wages would be pegged to inflation, saying only they would get “at least” £250 extra.
“It would depend on the exact salary that they make,” he said, “but it is a fixed increase of £250.”
Kate Green, shadow education secretary, said the pay freeze was a “kick in the teeth for dedicated early years workers, teachers, teaching assistants and support staff who’ve been working flat out to educate children during Covid”.
Shadow chancellor Anneliese Dodds, meanwhile, said the public sector pay freeze will deliver a “sledgehammer” blow to consumer confidence.
Advertisement
International aid budget slashed
One of the most controversial and widely-trailed elements of the spending review was Sunak’s cut to the international aid budget to 0.5% of GDP.
It breaks the Conservative manifesto pledge of 0.7% and Sunak was very keen to stress the government’s “intention” was to return to 0.7% when the economy picks up.
He told MPs: “During a domestic fiscal emergency, when we need to prioritise our limited resources on jobs and public services, sticking rigidly to spending 0.7% of our national income on overseas aid is difficult to justify to the British people – especially when we’re seeing the highest peacetime levels of borrowing on record.
I deeply regret today’s decision to break our promise to spend 0.7% of GNI on development. Here’s why: pic.twitter.com/Yv9XDhPCNs — David Cameron (@David_Cameron) November 25, 2020
“I have listened with great respect to those who have argued passionately to retain this target. But at a time of unprecedented crisis, government must make tough choices.”
Advertisement
The move is proving to be highly controversial among Tory backbenchers, who say it diminishes the UK on the world stage.
Former Tory prime ministers David Cameron, who said he “deeply regrets” the cut, and Theresa May are reported to have lobbied the Treasury.
NHS spending will rise
Sunak said the government was providing £280bn this year to get the country through the coronavirus crisis.
There will be £3bn more to support the NHS, including £1bn to address treatment backlogs built up while attention was focused on Covid-19 patients
It comes after data released this month revealed the scale of the NHS backlog.
Across England, 139,545 people had waited more than 52 weeks to start treatment as of September this year – the highest number for any calendar month since September 2008.
Advertisement
The data from NHS England also showed 1.72m people had waited more than 18 weeks to start treatment in September.
Local authorities will also have access to an extra £1bn to help them fund social care and address coronavirus pressures next year.
Meanwhile, £15bn will be made available in 2021/22 for the test and trace programme to support “enhanced testing capacity”, which will include regular testing of NHS staff and social care workers.
Another £2.1bn will pay to replenish stocks of personal protective equipment (PPE), though the government is under increasing pressure to explain cash wasted on deals for effectively-useless PPE.
Pledges to ‘level up’ the north
Sunak said a £4bn “levelling up fund” would be targeted at left-behind communities so they could bid for new roads funding, railway station upgrades and other job-creating infrastructure projects.
Advertisement
The chancellor was clear that local buy-in is a core component of ensuring projects are effective and delivered on time. That local support can come from a wide variety of sources including local authorities, mayoral authorities or MPs.
The chancellor said: “Projects must have real impact, they must be delivered within this Parliament, and they must command local support, including from their member of parliament.”
The measure is likely to face claims it risks becoming a “re-election fund” for Tory MPs, however, after the government’s Towns Fund, was branded “not impartial” by the public accounts committee this month.
Others have also pointed out that the £4bn announced for the new fund matched the cut to international aid.
£4 billion cut from aid to the poorest people in the world and funnelled into a 'levelling up' fund to buy Tory marginals. Right. — Aditya Chakrabortty (@chakrabortty) November 25, 2020
Advertisement
A new “UK infrastructure bank” – based in the north of England – to finance major new projects will also be established, Sunak said.
The government will publish a national infrastructure strategy, Sunak said: “To help finance our plans, I can announce we will establish a new UK infrastructure bank.
“Headquartered in the north of England, the bank will work with the private sector to finance major new investment projects across the UK – starting this spring.”
Brexit will be costly
The risk of a no-deal Brexit also continues to loom large, with negotiators still having not struck a deal and the transition period due to end in December.
The OBR said even with a free trade deal with the European Union, there would be a “4% long-run loss of output”.
Advertisement
Shifting on to World Trade Organisation terms would slash GDP by around a further 2% in 2021, the OBR also said.
“The short-term impact is due to various temporary disruptions to cross-border trade,” it said in its analysis.
We have also tested how a ‘no deal’ Brexit affects our central forecast and scenarios. If we left without a deal, GDP would be a further 2% lower in 2021 and 1.5% lower in 2025.#SpendingReview pic.twitter.com/H9whee0SSS — Office for Budget Responsibility (@OBR_UK) November 25, 2020
“These effects abate over the course of the year as the government and businesses become more familiar with the new rules and procedures and find ways to operationalise them.
“However, the longer-term hit to productivity builds slowly to leave output around 1.5% lower than our central forecast after five years.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Christmas Has Split Us Into Two Camps. Here's How To Square Them

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Covid Christmas plan has finally been revealed – and we’re unsure if the nation has felt this divided since Brexit.
Since Boris Johnson set out the government guidelines for Christmas bubbles – allowing three households to mix over a five-day festive period – social media has started to split into two camps: those who’ll be “going home” for Christmas, and those who definitely won’t.
Advertisement
In one group, the slogan “just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should” has been bandied about a lot. Many other people have raised concerns about the mental health implications of a cancelled Christmas for isolated relatives – or themselves – after what has already been a tough year.
People have also pointed out that families who celebrated other religious festivals this year such as Eid, Vaisakhi and Diwali got days or hours notice about having to do so in lockdown – while the Christmas 2020 rules have been announced a full month before Christmas Day itself. That hardly seems fair.
But at the heart of the conversation, when you step back and really listen to people’s individual worries and concerns, there is a common thread.
Whether hanging on to the idea of Christmas as a crucial comfort or worrying about the logistics and risk, most people are making plans with their loved ones top of their mind – and taking judgement out of the conversation might help.
Advertisement
kajakiki via Getty Images
“When you let go of judgement – of others, but also of yourself! – your mental health, and therefore your life is transformed,” psychotherapist Lucy Beresford tells HuffPost UK. “Judgement makes us feel superior but in fact is a sign of our weakness or insecurity. Let go of petty resentments and instead choose love.”
The first step in responding more compassionately this Christmas is listening to the situations of people outside your belief bubble, as you may not know the full picture of precautions they are taking – whether gathering with family or not.
Laura Batchelor, 37, from Huddersfield, has decided she won’t be seeing her in-laws this year as they’re over 70 and vulnerable. But it wasn’t an easy decision to make as she hasn’t been with them since February.
“My boys [aged four and six] are at school and we just can’t take that risk,” she says. “We will celebrate in spring once they are vaccinated.”
Advertisement
Similarly Michelle*, 24, who’s based in London, has decided she won’t be seeing her parents or grandparents – even if that means spending Christmas alone
Michelle’s parents live abroad with vulnerable grandparents, and although she’d technically be allowed to catch a flight, she’s too worried about the risk.
Her partner is also working away over Christmas and she’s an only child, so has no siblings to bubble up with. “I have plenty of lovely offers from friends and other relatives, but I’d hate to think I could take infection to their families who have been so welcoming,” she says.
She is still contemplating accepting an invite and says it’ll depend on whether London is placed into tier 3 in the run-up to Christmas. “The prospect of a Christmas alone is pretty grim,” she adds.
Other people tell HuffPost UK that they will be going home for Christmas but that this doesn’t mean they’re willingly “killing off” their relatives as some on Twitter have suggested.
Advertisement
Darcey Edkins, 20, is currently studying at the University of Warwick, but will be going back to her home in Essex for Christmas, where she lives with her dad.
“The possibility of not returning home for Christmas left me feeling incredibly anxious,” says Edkins, after what’s been a tough semester for students.
She’ll be having two Covid-19 tests before making the journey and only going home if both come back negative.
“My dad is over the age of 60 and therefore is vulnerable. I did not want to take any risks,” she explains. “I know that if I want to see my family at Christmas, I would do whatever it takes to make sure they are safe.”
Others have said they’ll self-isolate as much as possible in the run-up to visiting family, to reduce the risks as much as possible.
Advertisement
Kara Godfrey, 28 and based in London, has been cautious all year anyway, only meeting friends outside and avoiding the pub altogether. She’ll be going home to spend Christmas with her small family of three – her mum and her sister – who have “barely been out during the entire pandemic”.
“The guilt is still there though,” she says. “Despite what I’m doing being allowed by the government, it still feels a rather ridiculous idea that we can have five days ‘off’ from the virus, when we should still be taking precautions and not mingling in large groups.”
As HuffPost’s How Are You Feeling? project, which has invited readers to track their changing emotions through 2020, has shown, we are all individuals with different life, work and health circumstances and wildly varying experiences of this pandemic year, so it’s no wonder our needs and priorities will differ, too.
“Some of us are ‘nesters’ and prefer staying put to recharge our batteries, others need to be out meeting people to recharge theirs,” says Lucy Beresford. “As long as what is being proposed is legal within the tier systems, it’s important to respect the choices of others, whether to stay put or to move around.”
The government has left Brits to assess their “individual risks” regarding socialising at Christmas – meaning many will face a tough dilemma in the coming weeks. If we pick sides and shout about them loudly, it won’t make matters any easier.
Advertisement
“It’s a tense time right now, so compassion for someone else’s preference is going to soothe a lot of situations,” Beresford says.
“Stick to some of the four pillars: don’t take someone else’s different preference to you as an attack on you, don’t make it personal. And also don’t judge, just as you would not wish to be judged.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Michael J Fox Compares Trump To Biff, Back To The Future's Notorious Bully

LOADING ERROR LOADING
“Every worst instinct in mankind has been played on [by Trump], and for me, that’s just anathema,” Michael told the newspaper in a conversation held prior to the US election. “Biff is president!”
Advertisement
The actor also described how he felt about Trump mocking disabled New York Times reporter Serge Kovaleski during his 2016 presidential run.
Kovaleski has arthrogryposis, a condition that affects joint movements, and at the time, Trump quoted the reporter at a rally and jerked his body around erratically. The president later denied that he had committed any wrongdoing.
“When you see your particular group mocked, it’s such a gut punch,” said Michael, who recently announced that he was retiring for a second time due to health concerns.
He spent the majority of the interview explaining how Parkinson’s disease has affected his life. “It’s so senseless and cheap. There’s no way I get up in the morning and mock orange people.”
Advertisement
Michael J Fox at an event last year Roy Rochlin via Getty Images
The Biff-Trump comparison came up frequently when Trump was first running for president.
In a 2015 interview, screenwriter Bob Gale confirmed that when he and Back To The Future director Robert Zemeckis had been drafting ideas for the film’s sequel, they had used Trump as inspiration for Biff.
In the film, the character runs a grandiose casino, lives in a penthouse reminiscent of the Plaza Hotel – which Trump once owned – and has amassed enough political power to trick regular citizens into calling him “America’s greatest living folk hero”.
“We thought about it when we made the movie! Are you kidding?” Bob told The Daily Beast.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Campaigners Urge Home Office To Stop Deportation Flight To Jamaica

Home Office plans to charter a deportation flight to Jamaica before Christmas will put lives at risk as the Covid-19 pandemic rages on, campaigners have warned.
Earlier this month, HuffPost UK revealed that the government would continue its deportation flights during England’s second lockdown, despite a ban on international travel.
Advertisement
Now, it is understood a flight to Jamaica has been scheduled for December 2 – the day lockdown ends.
The Home Office would not say how many people are set to be deported on the flight but a spokesperson insisted they were all “foreign national offenders”.
Under UK law, non-British citizens who are convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to 12 months or more in prison in the UK can be eligible for deportation.
The Home Office makes “no apology for seeking to remove dangerous foreign criminals to keep the public safe”, the spokesperson said.
Advertisement
They added that people being detained for the flight include convicted murderers and rapists. They also listed other serious offences committed by those set to be on the flight, but declined to provide the full list of convictions when asked by HuffPost UK.
Zita Holbourne – co-founder of BARAC UK, a group that campaigns against racism and for migrant rights, said that “those targeted for deportation are branded by government as hardened criminals”.
“But the reality is that some are criminalised by virtue of their immigration status and for others, they have committed lesser offences, [are the] victims of county lines, or have been convicted under the now defunct joint enterprise law,” she said.
The Home Office will argue that the people being removed are "criminals" or "FNOs". The majority will have minor criminal records - in many cases, unjust convictions. They are essentially punished twice for the same crime by being deported AFTER serving their sentences. — Minnie Rahman (@minnierahman) November 24, 2020
Holbourne said many of those on the flight would likely be descendants of the Windrush generation and deportations should be stopped until all 30 recommendations from the Lessons Learned review have been implemented.
Advertisement
“The report found the Home Office to be institutionally ignorant of racism, recommendations include race equality training and teaching the history of colonialism and Black people in Britain,” she said.
“It it is irresponsible to go ahead with deportations without actually learning any lessons. There is a direct link to Britain’s colonial past of people being here in the UK and we believe that all the descendants of Windrush families in the UK should not be treated in this way.”
The Home Office said that none of the people on the flight were eligible for the Windrush Scheme.
Activists also say many of those set to be deported have been in the UK since they were children.
Holbourne added: “This is a double or triple punishment. If you were born in the UK you could serve your time, be punished, be rehabilitated and get on with your lives.”
It’s a thought echoed by the partner of one of the men set to be on the flight, who said it felt like she and their children were also being penalised by the government.
“We’re all going through it – we’re all being punished for it,” the woman – who asked not to be named – explained. The fact that it’s happening at Christmas has made it even harder on their children, she said.
Advertisement
“If it was an English guy who had done the crime, they would do the time, they would come out and they would get on with their lives.
“They’re double-punishing Jamaicans and their families and tearing families apart.”
Campaigners – as well as former shadow home secretary Diane Abbott – have urged the government to put a complete halt to deportations during the coronavirus pandemic.
Very concerned about this deportation flight.
Some have lived here since they were children, many are now fathers themselves.
Due to covid restrictions, they can’t say goodbye to loved ones in person.
I urge @ukhomeoffice to #StopDeportations until the pandemic is over https://t.co/EjUy6ZzFL0 — Diane Abbott MP (@HackneyAbbott) November 24, 2020
“It’s dangerous and wrong that the Home Office is continuing to deport people in the middle of an ongoing pandemic,” said Minnie Rahman, public affairs and campaigns manager for the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants.
“It’s time the Home Office stopped exiling people to countries they don’t remember and suspended all deportations for the duration of the pandemic.
Advertisement
“No-one should have their life put at risk because they don’t have the right piece of paper.”
Meanwhile, Labour MP Abbott added: “These flights contain people who have lived here most of their lives, or who have no connection to Jamaica, or who have had little or no legal advice or representation. The government is in danger of breaking the law once again.”
Concerns have also been raised about the dangers of sending to people to detention centres amid the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic.
During the first lockdown in the spring, hundreds of people being held in immigration removal centres were released in a bid to prevent the spread of the virus, which has killed more than 55,000 people in the UK.
But in recent months, people allowed to leave at the start of the pandemic have been quietly locked up again, despite the health risks.
It emerged last week that detainees at Morton Hall Immigration Removal Centre in Lincolnshire were having to self-isolate after cases of Covid-19 were identified.
Advertisement
“There is also the risk of spreading Covid in Jamaica transporting a whole plane of people who are coming from a region and country hit by a second wave,” Holbourne said.
But it’s not just the threat of infection. “Another aspect of Covid means there is no visiting allowed at detention centres so families cannot even say goodbye.”
This will leave children already losing their parents to deportation even more distraught,” she said.
“The fact they cannot say goodbye, that it is just before Christmas at the end of an already traumatic year in terms of how Covid has impacted our families, communities, work and jobs, education, bereavement, increased caring responsibilities etc… makes this even worse.”
More than 150,000 people have signed a petition started by Holbourne calling for ministers to put an end to charter deportation flights to Jamaica and other Commonwealth countries.
Advertisement
Bella Sankey, director of Detention Action added: “This flight is not safe and many of the forced removals risk being unlawful, just like last time around.
“No wonder the British public are overwhelmingly opposed to our inhumane deportation laws – how can it be right for tens of British children to lose their loving fathers in the run up to Christmas?”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Donald Trump’s Thanksgiving Turkey Pardon Gets Gobbled Up In Hilarious ‘Photoshop Battle’

By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you're agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Former Strictly Contestant Gemma Atkinson Defends 'Confident' Maisie Smith From 'Jealous' Trolls

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Former Strictly Come Dancing contestant Gemma Atkinson has jumped to the defence of Maisie Smith after she was accused of being “arrogant” by some viewers.
Former Hollyoaks star Gemma competed on the 2017 series and was partnered with Maisie’s pro Gorka Marquez, who she is now dating and has a child with.
Advertisement
The 19-year-old EastEnders star has found herself in the bottom two in the last two weeks, with some claiming she’s “over confident”, comments which Gemma has now called out.
Maisie Smith BBC
On her Instagram story, Gemma said: “To the younger generation watching Strictly.
“Never ever dumb down your talent or ability or enthusiasm just to please a load of jealous people on the Internet.
“The most important thing a girl wears is her confidence.”
Gemma Atkinson took part in the 2017 series of Strictly. PA
Advertisement
Maisie has previously spoken about her fear of being thought of as over confident - saying it’s simply her nerves showing.
She told OK! magazine: “People have said they can’t warm to me on Strictly, but I’m so nervous and that can be interpreted as arrogance.
“I’ll either go quiet, or I’ll go over the top to put on a confident front.
“It’s hard to not let it affect you. I do have to genuinely remind myself to just trust myself. And be me.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Rishi Sunak Cuts UK 0.7% Foreign Aid Commitment In His Spending Review

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Rishi Sunak has been told his decision to axe the UK’s commitment to spend 0.7% of national income on overseas development will cause “100,000 preventable deaths”.
The chancellor announced on Wednesday the commitment would be cut to to 0.5% from next year.
His decision has already been criticised by MPs, aid groups and as “shameful and wrong” by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Advertisement
Sunak sad: “During a domestic fiscal emergency, when we need to prioritise our limited resources on jobs and public services, sticking rigidly to spending 0.7% of our national income on overseas aid is difficult to justify to the British people.”
The Conservative 2019 general election manifesto promised: “We will proudly maintain our commitment to spend 0.7% of GNI on development, and do more to help countries receiving aid become self-sufficient.”
Speaking in the Commons as he unveiled his Spending Review, Sunak added: “At a time of unprecedented crisis, government must make tough choices.”
It means aid spending will be £10bn in 2021, roughly £4bn less than would have been the case had the 0.7% commitment been kept.
Advertisement
The chancellor used his speech to announce a new £4 billion “levelling up” fund to finance local infrastructure improvement projects.
Boris Johnson has already closed down the Department for International Development (Dfid) and merged it with the Foreign Office to create the new Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.
Former prime ministers David Cameron, John Major and Tony Blair have all publicly spoke out against the announcement before it was made.
Andrew Mitchell, a former Conservative international development secretary, sad the move would cause “100,000 preventable deaths” mainly among children.
“None of us in this House will be able to look our children in the eye and claim we did not know what we were voting for,” he told MPs.
Advertisement
Jeremy Hunt, the former foreign secretary who lost out to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership contest, warned a cut in aid spending would send the “wrong signal out to the world about our values as a country”.
“We spent a decade wining the argument,” he said. “Even a temporary cut will create an enormous clamour of people who will say we should not go back it.”
The cut in the aid budget - made worse by no set date for restoration - is shameful and wrong. It’s contrary to numerous Government promises and its manifesto.
I join others in urging MPs to reject it for the good of the poorest, and the UK’s own reputation and interest. — Archbishop of Canterbury (@JustinWelby) November 25, 2020
Sarah Champion, the Labour chair of the Commons international development committee, said it was “devastating news for the poorest people in the world”.
British Red Cross chief executive Mike Adamson said he was “urgently seeking assurances” that the cut would be temporary.
Advertisement
“A swift return to our 0.7% commitment in 2022 and beyond is imperative if we are to maintain our reputation and aspiration to be a country that is open, outward-looking and confident on the world stage,” he said.
“Right now, as we face the biggest health emergency of our lifetime, we must reassure our international partners that funding for humanitarian assistance will be protected.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Rishi Sunak Freezes Public Sector Pay For All But NHS Staff And Lowest Paid

LOADING ERROR LOADING
More than a million public sector workers could be set to face a real-terms wage cut after Rishi Sunak unveiled his comprehensive spending review.
The chancellor said public sector pay would be frozen as the UK emerges from the Covid-19 crisis – but claimed there would be an exception for NHS workers and for the 2.1m earning less than £24,000 a year.
Advertisement
It later emerged, however, that even some of those could in fact see their pay shrink in real terms, as the rise for lower-paid workers may be “fixed” at a £250 cash rise.
The chancellor was taken to task by senior Labour MP Yvette Cooper who pointed out even the promised pay increase for some may not keep pace with the 2% inflation the Bank of England was forecasting for the UK.
“We know families are struggling right now [...] so can he guarantee the 2.1m public sector workers he referred to will not see a real terms cut next year?” she asked.
Sunak refused to guarantee wage rises for those on the lowest wages would be pegged to inflation, saying only they would get “at least” £250 extra.
Advertisement
“It would depend on the exact salary that they make,” he said, “but it is a fixed increase of £250.”
It is believed the pay freeze will directly affect 1.3m out of 5.5m public sector workers.
But in the private sector, Sunak said he would increase the national living wage by 2.2% to £8.91 an hour and extend it to anyone over 23, in line with the recommendations of the Low Pay Commission.
The chancellor made the announcement amid a backdrop of appalling economic figures, showing the biggest fall in output in more than 300 years (11.3%) due to the coronavirus crisis.
The government will also spend £280bn to get the UK through the pandemic while Whitehall department spending will increase in real terms by 3.8% next year, he said.
But in the context of the downturn Sunak said he “cannot justify a significant, across-the-board pay increase for all public sector workers” when private sector wages were falling.
Advertisement
He said that in the six months to September, private sector wages fell by nearly 1% compared to the previous year, while over the same period public sector wages rose by nearly 4%.
He claimed that “unlike workers in the private sector, who have lost jobs, been furloughed, seen wages cut, and hours reduced – the public sector has not”.
Sunak said he was responding with a three-point plan:
Giving a pay rise to more than a million nurses, doctors and others working in the NHS in line with pay review body recommendations. Freezing all other public sector pay for a year. But ensuring the 2.1m public sector workers paid below £24,000 get a pay rise of at least £250.
Chancellor Rishi Sunak leaves Downing Street to deliver his spending review to the Commons Henry Nicholls / Reuters
He told the Commons: “In such a difficult context for the private sector – especially for people working in sectors like retail, hospitality, or leisure, I cannot justify a significant, across-the-board pay increase for all public sector workers.
Advertisement
“Instead, we are targeting our resources at those who need it most.
“To protect public sector jobs at this time of crisis, and ensure fairness between the private and public sectors.”
Responding to the spending review statement, shadow chancellor Anneliese Dodds told the Commons: “Earlier this year the chancellor stood on his doorstep and clapped for key workers.
“Today his government institutes a pay freeze for many of them. This takes a sledgehammer to consumer confidence.”
Rishi Sunak is playing divide and rule playing workers off against each other.
Public sector pay freeze will do nothing to help private sector workers.
For the last decade public sector workers have had pay cuts, did that stop pay rises in the private sector? No. Bogus politics — 🌈 Angela Rayner 🌈 (@AngelaRayner) November 25, 2020
Paul Johnson, director of the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank, tweeted: “True that public sector wages have done better than private sector this year. But they had been doing [even] worse for a decade.”
Advertisement
Unpopular to say this but for lowest paid there is already a gap between public and private sector in favour of public sector. It's among the highest skilled that public sector underpays. — Paul Johnson (@PJTheEconomist) November 25, 2020
The Trade Unions Congress said the announcement was a “kick in the teeth” for workers who “kept the country going” during the pandemic.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--The Crown's Gillian Anderson Shares Hilarious 'Ibble Dibble' Behind-The-Scenes Snaps

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The new series of The Crown is obviously jam-packed with drama, but it also manages to deliver on comedy too.
One such moment occurs in the second episode of the new series, which sees Gillian Anderson as Margaret Thatcher struggling to make a good impression on the royal family as she spends the bank holiday with them at Balmoral.
Advertisement
During her stay, the former PM plays the drinking game Ibble Dibble with the royals, which has already proved a favourite among fans of the show.
On Tuesday, Gillian shared some behind-the-scenes snaps from the scene in question, showing that things were every bit as chaotic off-camera as they were on.
Gillian also posted a clip of the cast performing an impromptu rendition of Mr Sandman, all while still adorned with their Ibble Dibble black marks, of course.
Advertisement
For the unitiated, Ibble Dibble sees players attempting to recite a particularly difficult tongue-twister to one another, and if they fail, they’re forced to give themselves a mark on their face, with the aid of a blackened wine cork.
In The Crown creator Peter Morgan’s version of events, it wasn’t getting her words out that Thatcher struggled with, but rather getting in on the fun (as you can see in the clip below):
Responding to this criticism, Emma Corrin – who plays Princess Diana – said recently: “I think for everyone in the The Crown, we always try and remind everyone that the series we are in is fictionalised, to a great extent.
Advertisement
“Obviously it has its roots in reality and in some fact, but Peter Morgan’s scripts are works of fiction.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Brexit Festival: Here’s What Else The £29m Could Have Paid For

LOADING ERROR LOADING
As the world scrabbles to adapt to life in a pandemic, Rishi Sunak has confirmed in his spending review that a cool £29m has been set aside for a so-called Festival of Brexit.
First announced by then-prime minister Theresa May in 2018, the festival – intended to mark Brexit as a moment of “national renewal” and to “celebrate our nation’s diversity and talent” – was given the go-ahead by Boris Johnson last year.
Advertisement
Now temporarily renamed “Festival UK 2022”, organisers of the “once-in-generation celebration” say the project could be “one big act or 10 million tiny acts” and “might last a day or a year”.
The festival has long been a subject of ridicule, with critics claiming it is a massive waste of taxpayers’ money.
Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak poses with a red briefcase outside his office in Downing Street in London, in March Toby Melville / Reuters
Far be it from anyone to detract from the sentiment of celebrating the country’s continued endurance under exceptionally trying circumstances, but there are at least one or two areas we can think of that might benefit from that amount of cash.
Advertisement
Coronavirus vaccinations
Researchers suggest the Oxford vaccine could be relatively cheap to produce, with some reports indicating it could be about £3 per dose.
AstraZeneca said it will not sell it for a profit, so it can be available to all countries.
Pfizer/BioNTech is also making its vaccine available not-for-profit during the pandemic.
According to reports, the Moderna vaccine could cost about 38 US dollars (£28) per dose, and the Pfizer candidate could cost around 20 US dollars (£15).
By this rationale, £29m could buy:
9.6 million doses of the Oxford vaccine (two are required for each vaccination, meaning this would innocculate 4.8million individuals)
1.9 million doses of the Pfizer vaccine (suitable for 950,000 people)
Just over one million doses of the Moderna vaccine (500,000 people)
School meals
The government spends around £20m to provide school meals for a week. Government funding allows £2.30 per meal, a figure which has not increased in several years, despite rising food prices.
So £29m would fund more than 12 million of those meals.
The free school meals policy was introduced for all children from reception through to year two in state schools in England in September 2014 in a bid to improve nutrition and academic standards.
Advertisement
Footballer Marcus Rashford this year drew widespread praise for highlighting the issue of child food poverty and his campaign resulted in the government back-tracking to announce free meals would be provided to disadvantaged children over the Christmas holidays.
The England footballer was also recently awarded an MBE after forcing a government U-turn on free school meal vouchers.
Ventilators
Back in May, during the height of the coronavirus pandemic, the costs for such equipment rocketed, with the market price for one particular mechanical model increasing from £21,700 to £77,100 in a single week.
At the lower end, £29m would buy 1,336 machines.
Full mechanical ventilation, requiring a Covid-19 positive patient to be intubated and for air to be pushed into the lungs, rather than being sucked in by the action of the diaphragm is now considered a last resort, with doctors now using a variety of interventions to help patients breathe, though often in conjunction with a ventilator.
A report by the National Audit Office (NAO) published in September revealed the government had spent £569 million on ventilators since the start of the pandemic in a bid to meet its target of 30,000 extra machines.
Advertisement
Coronavirus funding for local authorities
Local authorities have had to grapple with supporting businesses and the economy during exceptional circumstances this year – not least during central government-enforced lockdowns.
Councils have been at the very forefront of tackling the pandemic, from supplying PPE to care homes to feeding vulnerable families and finding rough sleepers safe accommodation. This has cost them – a lot.
At the same time, they have suffered a huge loss in income from a drop in business rates, parking, nursery fees and council tax as the financial impact of the national lockdown hit the public.
Earlier this year cash-strapped councils warned they would go bankrupt as a result of the pandemic and accused the government of having broken its promise to “do whatever it takes” to support them.
On Tuesday local authorities in Lancashire made a demand of £20m in government funding to cover a three-week period of tier 3 restrictions before the whole of England went into lockdown.
Advertisement
The leaders of all 15 authorities have signed a joint letter to the prime minister’s chief strategic adviser, Sir Ed Lister, outlining “serious concerns” over the “apparent disregard” for an agreement reached in mid-October which secured an extra £30 million to cope with the tier 3 measures.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--The Great British Bake Off Final Ratings Set A HUGE Record For Channel 4

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Warning: This article contains spoilers for this year’s Great British Bake Off final.
Overnight viewing figures for this year’s Great British Bake Off finale have been revealed, and let’s just say, the Channel 4 team definitely has cause for celebration.
At its peak, the Bake Off final pulled in 10.4 million viewers, making it the show’s biggest ever audience on Channel 4.
Advertisement
Spoiler alert!
Last night’s #GBBO final saw Peter named 2020 champion and pulled in the show’s biggest ever audience on Channel 4!!
🍰10.4m peak
🧁Averaged 9.2m viewers/ 39.7% share of audience from 8-9.15pm
🌟Massive 63.5% share of young viewers
More to follow... pic.twitter.com/fMYvXxIVzu — Channel 4 Press (@C4Press) November 25, 2020
This year’s emotional Bake Off conclusion saw competitors Peter Sawkins, Laura Adlington and Dave Friday, sweating it out (literally – it was over 35 degrees in that tent) in a bid to be crowned the winner of the 11th series.
In the end, it was Peter who was given the title, becoming the youngest Bake Off champion ever.
This year's Bake Off top three Channel 4
While many feared the coronavirus pandemic could mean that there would be no series of Bake Off in 2020, this year’s series was filmed over the summer, with the cast and crew forming a support bubble to ensure everything went ahead safely.
Advertisement
It’s expected that when consolidated figures for the finale are revealed, this record will have been beaten again.
The biggest ever audience in Channel 4’s history remains 13.9m, which was for the mini-series A Woman Of Substance in 1985.
The TV premiere of the film Four Weddings And A Funeral on Channel 4 also attracted an audience of 12.4m in 1995.
Bake Off pulled in its biggest ever audience during its final year on BBC One in 2016, when more than 14 million tuned in to watch Candice Brown’s triumph in the famous tent.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Ruth Langsford Clarifies Comments About Reality Stars As Some Suggest She Was Making A Dig At Alison

Ruth Langsford Clarifies Comments About Reality Stars As Some Suggest She Was Making A Dig At Alison Hammond

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Ruth Langsford has clarified comments she made about reality stars becoming TV presenters, after it was suggested that she may have been making a dig at fellow This Morning star Alison Hammond.
Last week, The Mirror published an interview with Ruth in which she said: “[Eamonn and I have] put the work in. We didn’t do a reality show and get an overnight job on the telly. We’ve come up through the ranks.
Advertisement
“Eamonn was only 19 when he started out. And he was doing the teatime news in Belfast during The Troubles.
“It was heavy stuff. And he’s now got an OBE for services to broadcasting.”
Ruth Langsford at the NTAs earlier this year Dave J Hogan via Getty Images
The quotes were published around the same time that it was reported Ruth and husband Eamonn Holmes could be about to lose their regular Friday presenting slot on This Morning, with Alison Hammond and Dermot O’Leary tipped to replace them.
At the time, a number of outlets suggested that Ruth’s “reality show” comment could be a veiled dig at her rumoured replacement, who shot to fame after appearing on Big Brother way back in 2002.
Advertisement
However, Ruth’s representative has now insisted that the daytime presenter was not referring to anyone in particular with her comment.
Alison Hammond Ken McKay/ITV/Shutterstock
Ruth’s spokesperson told the Daily Mail: “The comments from Ruth were made as a general observation in an interview conducted more than six weeks ago, about the industry and different routes into the business.
“Ruth was simply illustrating a point that whereas some presenters launch their careers by being on other TV programmes first, her and Eamonn’s experience and career paths had taken a different and more traditional path.
“This wasn’t directed at anyone in particular – indeed she has always been supportive of a number of her professional colleagues and friends who have taken this route.”
Advertisement
Addressing rumours of a supposed shake-up to This Morning’s presenting line-up, an ITV spokesperson said last week: “We have a stellar presenting lineup on This Morning in Holly & Phillip and Eamonn & Ruth.
“Any additions to this lineup will be announced in due course.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--‘Are You OK?’: Meghan Markle On Miscarriage, Covid And A Divided America

‘Are You OK?’: Meghan Markle On Miscarriage, Covid And A Divided America
Meghan Markle describes having a miscarriage in July while holding baby Archiein a new article for the New York Times. The Duchess also wrote about how this year has “brought so many of us to our breaking points”, describing the devastation of Covid-19 and the deaths of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd that sparked the Black Lives Matter protests.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Kamala Harris Proves She Know How To Roast A Turkey

LOADING ERROR LOADING
If anyone knows how to roast a turkey, it’s the senator who just helped Joe Biden defeat Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election.
A viral video from 2019 is making the rounds this week, showing Vice President-elect Kamala Harris deftly offering off-the-cuff advice on how to roast a Thanksgiving turkey.
Advertisement
Harris casually shared her technique in a 90-second break between filming television interviews, and Washington Post journalist Jonathan Capehart reshared it.
Capehart’s husband Nick had asked about how to brine a turkey, and Harris provided answers:
How much does @KamalaHarris like to cook? She answered my husband's ? about brining a turkey about 1 min before going on @PoliticsNation from Columbia, SC (after I was on). I recorded her response 'cause I don't cook and she was speaking a foreign language. 😂 #kamalacooks pic.twitter.com/IZiQ6iOnTQ — Jonathan Capehart (@CapehartJ) November 26, 2019
First, Harris advises using a brine ― either wet or dry. Simply put, a wet brine is a solution of saltwater you submerge meats in overnight, and a dry brine is a dry salt mixture that you spread on the bird’s skin. Both techniques not only season your bird, but they allow the proteins in the meat to retain moisture.
“If you have time to do a wet brine, that’s fine,” she said. “Do it like, a pot of water, a couple bay leaves, a little sugar, a cup of peppercorns, you can even do a slice of orange, something like that.” (Here’s a similar recipe for a wet brine.)
Advertisement
“But a dry brine is easier,” Harris continued. “Brine for 24 [hours], but 48 hours is best if you have the time. [If you have a fresh turkey, dry brine it with] kosher salt, fresh ground pepper, maybe chop up a little thyme. … Do the salt and pepper all over. Lather that baby up on the outside, in the cavity.”
Then she suggested slathering your bird in seasoned butter ― under the skin and outside it.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Biden's Daily Intel Briefings Show A Stark Contrast To Trump

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President-elect Joe Biden said Tuesday that he will begin receiving the President’s Daily Brief — a return to routine for a country that, for four years, has been run by a president who has refused to listen to intelligence officials.
Biden told reporters that he has been offered a regular intelligence briefing known as the President’s Daily Brief. While he had not received the briefing on Tuesday, he said “we’re going to do it on a regular basis.”
Advertisement
President-elect Joe Biden will be getting presidential daily briefings now.
Office Director of National Intelligence spokesperson: “This afternoon the White House approved ODNI to move forward with providing the PDB as part of the support to the transition.” — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) November 24, 2020
The briefings are a result of General Services Administration head Emily Murphy finally ascertaining Biden’s election victory on Monday. Now GSA can release millions of dollars in transition funds, as well as access to government officials and essential information and briefings.
This week, Biden announced his plan to nominate Avril Haines for the position of director of national intelligence. Haines, who was the deputy director of the CIA and the deputy national security adviser to President Barack Obama, is the first woman in the nation’s history appointed to lead the intelligence community.
“To our intelligence professionals, the work you do — oftentimes under the most austere conditions imaginable — is indispensable,” Haines said in a speech on Tuesday. “It will become even more complex because you will be critical to helping this administration position itself not only against threats such as cyber attacks, terrorism and the proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons; but also those challenges that will define the next generation, from climate change, to pandemics and corruption.”
Advertisement
Avril Haines, National Intelligence Director Nominee: "To our intelligence professionals, the work you do oftentimes times under the most austere conditions imaginable is just indispensable." pic.twitter.com/FaLvOZJzdZ — The Hill (@thehill) November 24, 2020
Trump has apparently gone through most of his presidency without reading the President’s Daily Brief — a stark example of how he has viewed his presidential duties. He almost completely eliminated intelligence briefings from his schedule, rarely gets to the West Wing by noon, and typically spends his morning watching cable news and tweeting.
Trump’s interest in receiving any kind of intelligence briefing steadily declined after his first months in office, dropping to near zero as of August, according to a HuffPost review of his daily schedules. Trump’s high of 4.1 briefings per week in March 2017 dropped to 0.7 per week starting in July 2020, soon after it became public that he had ignored intelligence reports about Russia offering bounties to the Taliban for each American soldier killed in Afghanistan.
Even as experts grew increasingly alarmed about a pandemic threat this January, Trump remained unconcerned, partaking in zero scheduled intelligence briefings before Jan. 6 and only nine the entire month, according to the HuffPost review.
The President’s Daily Brief is based on a package of summaries from around the world prepared early each morning for the president. Taxpayers spend tens of billions of dollars each year so that officials from the intelligence community can provide a daily details report. The briefings are among the few responsibilities a president cannot delegate to others.
Advertisement
Both of Trump’s immediate predecessors received daily briefings in the White House. Republican George W. Bush received his briefings soon after arriving in the Oval Office early each morning. Democrat Barack Obama would load the daily briefing onto his iPad early each morning and would read it before the in-person session later in the day.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Trump's 2018 Turkey Pardon Bizarrely Foreshadowed 2020 Election

LOADING ERROR LOADING
As coincidences go, this one is pretty bird-brained.
Some people who’ve witnessed Donald Trump’s recent unwillingness to concede the election to Joe Biden are seeing parallels to Trump’s 2018 turkey pardon.
Two Thanksgivings ago, the president pardoned a turkey named “Carrots” who had lost “a fair and open election” in the form of a White House poll over which of two turkeys should be spared, according to Snopes.
Advertisement
But while “Carrots” lost the election to “Peas,” Trump claimed the turkey “refused to concede and demanded a recount.”
The president then claimed that even though the recount did not change the vote, he was going to pardon both birds.
FLASHBACK: In 2018, President Trump attacked Carrots the turkey for refusing to concede he had lost the vote on the White House turkey pardon contest.
"This was a fair election... unfortunately, Carrots refused to concede and demanded a recount."
pic.twitter.com/MzcackiDwd — andrew kaczynski🤔 (@KFILE) November 23, 2020
This year, the president chose to grant a full pardon to a 42-pound turkey named “Corn,” and pretty much stuck to the script, according to Reuters.
Advertisement
However, one reporter felt obligated to see if the president was planning to issue any other pardons, mainly to himself.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Historian Asks Where Trump Library Should Be And People Have Ideas


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--White House Reporter Caught On Mic After Bizarre 1-Minute Trump Briefing

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Some White House reporters seemed more baffled than usual on Tuesday after Donald Trump delivered a minute-long press briefing in which he failed to mention that he had finally agreed to transition power to President-elect Joe Biden.
The surprise briefing was Trump’s first in weeks. But instead of offering his concession, Trump boasted about the Dow Jones hitting the “sacred number” of 30,000 ― ignoring his previous claim that a Biden win would prompt a market crash. He then abruptly departed after 64 seconds, ignoring the torrent of questions from reporters about when he might acknowledge his loss.
Advertisement
“Well that was weird as shit,” one reporter is overheard commenting immediately after Trump’s departure.
“That was one of the stranger ones we’ve had,” someone else noted.
Overheard in the briefing room "Well, that was weird as shit." pic.twitter.com/T2iAKwhWU2 — Charlie Spiering (@charliespiering) November 24, 2020
After weeks of attacking the democratic process and launching failed legal challenges to attempt to overturn the election results, Trump agreed on Monday to cooperate with the transition process but said he would never concede.
Key swing states have begun certifying their election results, solidifying Biden’s win as he announces his Cabinet picks and prepares to take office in January.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--The Weeknd Brands Grammys 'Corrupt' After He's Completely Snubbed From Nominations

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Weeknd has branded the Grammys “corrupt” after he was completely snubbed from this year’s nominees, despite a hugely successful year.
In the last year, the Canadian singer’s hit Blinding Lights sat at the top of the UK singles chart for a total of eight weeks, while in the US, the track became the longest-running top 10 hit in history.
Advertisement
Meanwhile, his latest album After Hours was met with positive reviews and reached number one in the US, UK, Canada and Australia.
However, despite all of this, The Weeknd failed to scoop a single nod when the nominees for the upcoming Grammys were announced on Tuesday evening.
The Weeknd Rachel Luna via Getty Images
The snub did not go unnoticed by the man himself, either, who had some choice words for the Recording Academy on Twitter.
Advertisement
“The Grammys remain corrupt,” he wrote, adding: “You owe me, my fans and the industry transparency.”
The Grammys remain corrupt. You owe me, my fans and the industry transparency... — The Weeknd (@theweeknd) November 25, 2020
Although she has not released an album in 2020, Beyoncé received the most Grammy nominations this year, largely due to her visual album Black Is King and the remix of Megan Thee Stallion’s Savage which she was featured on.
Her surprise single Black Parade, released over the summer, also received four nominations, including nods for Record Of The Year and Song Of The Year.
Her nine nominations have also made her the second most-nominated artist in Grammys history, only one behind music producer Quincy Jones.
Beyoncé Gareth Cattermole via Getty Images
Advertisement
Next year’s Grammys will be hosted by talk show host Trevor Noah, taking over from Alicia Keys, who has presented at the previous two ceremonies.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Female Artists Dominate Best Rock Performance Category, Make Grammys History

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Who run the world the Best Rock Performance category at the upcoming Grammys? Girls.
The nominations for next year’s awards were announced on Tuesday, with some artists making history with their sheer volume of nominations (Beyoncé racked up a whopping nine) and others by dominating a category.
For the first time in the awards show’s history, all of the artists nominated in the Best Rock Performance category are either women or a woman-led group.
Advertisement
The nominees this year include Fiona Apple for Shameika, Haim for The Steps, Brittany Howard for Stay High, Phoebe Bridgers for Kyoto, Grace Potter for Daylight, and Big Thief – led by Adrianne Lenker – for Not.
The category — which is an amalgam of previous categories such as Best Solo Rock Vocal Performance, Best Rock Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal, and Best Rock Instrumental Performance — has only been around since 2012, and has so far never been won by a solo female artist.
Brittany Howard’s previous band, Alabama Shakes, won the award for Don’t Wanna Fight in 2016. She’s now been nominated for her solo debut.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--What You Need To Know About The Row Over The UK's Aid Budget

Malala Yousafzai has urged chancellor Rishi Sunak not to cut the overseas aid budget in Wednesday's Spending Review. REUTERS/Simon Dawson and Reuters/Matthew Childs
Malala Yousafzai has joined condemnation of the government for cutting its overseas aid budget in Wednesday’s Spending Review.
The 2014 Nobel Peace Prize winner is the latest figure to speak out against the aid cut, which was announced in chancellor Rishi Sunak’s statement.
Advertisement
The Spending Review set out the government’s plans for the 2020-21 financial year against the backdrop of the coronavirus pandemic.
I am deeply disappointed @BorisJohnson and @RishiSunak that you chose to abandon the UK's 0.7% pledge to aid - when a generation of girls are leaning on that support.
I hope you will think again, find a way to reverse the cuts and protect girls education. — Malala (@Malala) November 25, 2020
Sunak announced that he would cut the UK’s commitment to spend 0.7% of national income on overseas aid down to 0.5% – breaking an election promise the Tories made less than a year ago.
Here’s what you need to know about the row.
What is the UK’s aid budget?
The UK, in line with an international target, had committed to spending 0.7% of its gross national income (GNI) on overseas aid.
Advertisement
About a third of the money goes to multilateral organisations, such as the United Nations, while the remaining (“bilateral”) aid goes directly to programmes in developing countries.
The biggest recipients of the UK’s bilateral aid were Pakistan, Syria, Ethiopia, Nigeria and Afghanistan, according to Full Fact.
About 15% of the aid budget goes into humanitarian aid or crisis relief, with the rest focused on strategic or long-term goals.
The 0.7% target was enshrined in law, as well as in the 2019 Tory election manifesto.
“We will proudly maintain our commitment to spend 0.7% of GNI on development, and do more to help countries receiving aid become self-sufficient,” prime minister Boris Johnson promised last year.
In 2019, the total aid budget was £15.2bn. As a result of the financial impact of the coronavirus pandemic, that amount was expected to shrink in line with the rest of the economy.
Advertisement
In July, foreign secretary Dominic Raab set out a £2.9bn package of cuts for 2020 – but remained committed to the 0.7% target.
So why is it being cut again?
Because of just how much money has been spent on coronavirus. Unveiling his Spending Review in the Commons, Sunak said: “During a domestic fiscal emergency, when we need to prioritise our limited resources on jobs and public services, sticking rigidly to spending 0.7% of our national income on overseas aid is difficult to justify to the British people.”
The drop from 0.7% to 0.5% accounts for more than £4bn.
What’s the controversy?
Critics have argued that during a time when the public purse is under strain, money should be spent domestically rather than overseas.
The PM’s allies say the plan would save the UK billions and help the country get back on its feet after the pandemic.
It follows Johnson’s controversial decision earlier this year to merge the Department for International Development (DFID) with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
Advertisement
But the aid cut had been fiercely opposed by some MPs who say it “will diminish us on the world stage”.
Development and humanitarian agencies have accused the government of trying to “balance the books on the backs of” the world’s poor, who are more in need than ever thanks to the ravages of the virus.
Others, on both sides of the political spectrum, have argued against foreign aid in principle. Some say it is a manifestation of the western “white saviour” complex towards parts of the world that we continue to oppress through unfair trading relationships. Some say it merely provides a “sticking plaster” that “smacks of arrogant neo-colonialism”, or that it does more harm than good in so-called developing countries.
Who supports cutting overseas aid?
The PM’s official spokesperson said Johnson had stressed that “the people of this country should be proud of the support we give around the world”.
“The UK is and will remain one of the biggest contributors of aid of any country,” he said.
“But, as we have said, it is important to look at where savings can be made and to ensure that aid spending is used effectively.”
Advertisement
Downing Street has pointed to the fact that the legislation enshrining the 0.7% target states “there may be circumstances in which the government is not able to meet the 0.7% commitment”.
Communities secretary Robert Jenrick had said it would be “legitimate” to look for savings at a time when the public finances are “huge strain”.
Who opposes it?
In a letter signed by 185 charity leaders including Save The Children, Greenpeace UK, and Unicef UK, Johnson was urged to reconsider “stepping back” from the UK’s international commitments.
“Now is not the time to renege on our promise to spend 0.7% of our gross national income on aid and development,” they said.
“A U-turn on your manifesto commitment to maintain the 0.7% target would signal we are a nation willing to balance its books on the backs of the world’s most marginalised people, many of whom are dealing with the impact of Covid-19 on top of existing hardship.”
Advertisement
On Tuesday, Pakistani human rights activist Malala Yousafzai became the latest figure to speak out against the expected cut.
Former prime ministers David Cameron, John Major and Tony Blair have all publicly spoken out against the expected announcement, as has Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby.
“Cutting our overseas aid is morally wrong and politically unwise. It breaks our word and damages our soft power,” Major told the Times.
“Above all, it will hurt many of the poorest people in the world. I cannot and do not support it.”
Former Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson said it would look “appalling”, especially in light of the bumper £4bn-a-year rise in defence spending announced last week.
Andrew Mitchell, a former Conservative international development secretary, told Johnson last week he should heed the warning by general Mattis, the former US defence secretary, who told Donald Trump: “The more you cut aid, the more I have to spend on ammunition.”
Advertisement
Jeremy Hunt, the former foreign secretary who lost out to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership contest, warned a cut in aid spending would send the “wrong signal out to the world about our values as a country”.
“We spent a decade wining the argument,” he said. “Even a temporary cut will create an enormous clamour of people who will say we should not go back it.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-11-25--Christmas Bubbles: What Scientists Are Saying About Boris Johnson’s Covid Rules

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Top UK scientists say Boris Johnson’s plan to relax coronavirus restrictions at Christmas is “throwing fuel on the Covid fire” and could cause a third wave of the pandemic.
The PM announced on Tuesday, November 24 that three households will be able to mix in a bubble from December 23 to 27.
Advertisement
Johnson said the agreement between his government and devolved administrations meant families would be able to come together across the UK, but added: “The virus doesn’t know it’s Christmas and we must all be careful.”
Reacting to the news, a member of the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) warned last night the planned relaxed restrictions could lead to a third wave of the pandemic.
Professor Andrew Hayward told BBC2’s Newsnight: “Effectively what this will be doing is throwing fuel on the Covid fire.
“I think it will definitely lead to increased transmission. It is likely to lead to a third wave of infection, with hospitals being overrun, and more unnecessary deaths.
Advertisement
“We are still in a country where we have got high levels of infection with Covid, particularly in young people. Bringing them together for hours, let alone days, with elderly relatives, I think, is a recipe for regret for many families.”
Hayward added that with vaccines on the way “we are really in danger of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory on this one”.
Pedestrians wearing face masks walk past Christmas-themed window displays inside Burlington Arcade in central London, on November 23. TOLGA AKMEN via Getty Images
The sentiments were echoed by colleagues in the scientific community. Professor Graham Medley, an expert in infectious disease modelling at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said the move could lead to more people being admitted to hospital and further lockdown measures in the New Year.
The Sage attendee told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “I think we’re in a process now whereby the population’s risk of filling up the NHS is really being passed down to us as individuals.
Advertisement
“For other diseases like flu or hepatitis B, the government doesn’t get involved in helping or determining what our risk is and it is really, I think, for this Christmas up to us as individuals and families to think about what our risks are and how we are going to mitigate them.
“I think it is inevitable that if a lot of people do take that risk, even if it is a small risk, then we will end up with a lot of people in hospital and potentially having to take measures in January to lock down again.”
Prof Medley advised people to isolate before visiting relatives, to consider the amount of time they plan to spend with them, to remain “completely faithful” to any social bubble arrangements and to weigh up the risk of spreading Covid to those who are vulnerable.
But he said, even with mitigations in place, social interactions come with risks that “could play out very badly for some people”.
Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the University of East Anglia, had a slightly more positive take, noting the festivities may be what is needed to “make it through the rest of winter”.
Advertisement
But he still cautioned that the relaxation of restrictions will “almost inevitably” lead to an increase in transmissions.
“The issue is whether that increased risk is tolerable in relation to the benefits. At that time schools will be closed so there would naturally be some downward pressure on transmission,” he said.
“Also if the new tier system is working well and local authorities are placed into a more appropriate tier this time around then there will be a downward pressure on transmission before and after the Christmas break.”
He added: “Providing that the new tier system is better managed than in October any increase in cases could be relatively short lived. After Christmas we will still have to live through a few more months of restrictions at least.
“Christmas whether or not we celebrate the day as a religious festival may be what we need to make it through the rest of winter.”