conservativehome--2020-03-09--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chief Executive of the British Council – a

Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chief Executive of the British Council – and more

Eight years ago , the TaxPayers ’ Alliance reported that “ in the last year , five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories ” .
It currently reports that almost half of avowedly political appointees last year owed their allegiance to Labour Party , compared to less than a third for the Conservatives .
Despite the selection of some Party members or supporters to fill important posts , over time , the Conservatives have punched beneath their weight when it comes to public appointments .
One of the reasons seems to be that Tories simply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number as Labour supporters .
To help remedy this , each week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies , so that qualified Conservatives can be aware of the opportunities presented .
“ Robert Chote will be stepping down as Chair of the BRC later this year , after 10 years in post .
We are seeking a successor with deep expertise in economic and fiscal analysis who can lead the BRC and provide intellectual leadership to the OBR ’ s staff .
This is a high profile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ skills and integrity .
Candidates must command broad respect for their objectivity in dealing with issues of political sensitivity .
Appointments to the BRC are for a five-year term .
There is the possibility of reappointment at the end of the term and members can serve a maximum of two terms .
This post can be undertaken on either a part or full-time basis.
” “ The Office for Nuclear Regulation ( ONR ) is a Public Corporation responsible for the regulation of nuclear safety and security across the UK .
Its vision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inspires respect , trust and confidence .
ONR is sponsored by the Department for Work and Pensions ( DWP ) who have principal responsibility for governance , finance and its performance in relation to conventional Health and Safety .
The Department for Business , Energy and Industrial Strategy ( BEIS ) is accountable for the UK civil nuclear regulatory framework and policies and for appointing a Security Non-Executive Director ( NED ) to the ONR Board.
” “ As we enter the Fourth Industrial Revolution , a wave of technological innovation is creating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transforming the way things are made and the way we live .
From AI-powered legal services to autonomous ships , new products , services and business models are emerging which don ’ t fit with existing regulatory systems .
In its White Paper on Regulation for the Fourth Industrial Revolution , the Government committed to establishing a Regulatory Horizons Council ( RHC ) to identify the implications of technological innovation with high potential benefit for the UK economy and society and advise the government on regulatory reform needed to support its rapid and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opportunity to take on an intellectually demanding role at the heart of international financial services , leading a sizeable and complex organisation .
There is a requirement for strong leadership in a challenging environment to undertake a critically important role .
Under Andrew Bailey , the FCA has formulated a transformation programme , to equip the organisation for the next phase of its development : a data strategy and enhanced analytical skills to rapidly identify harm across an exceptionally broad range of firms of all sizes exploiting fast-moving changes in technology and distribution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and processes to act swiftly on the harms identified ; [ and ] and with a regulatory framework which is appropriate following the completion of EU withdrawal , and which takes advantage of the opportunities for better and more efficient regulation brought by technology and behavioural science.
” “ The Chief Executive will assume office at a time of unprecedented external change .
The political landscape in Europe and around the globe is altering with increasing pace and less predictability .
The British Council is also in constant transformation to deliver within funding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and customer-facing world .
The aims and goals of the British Council are more necessary than ever .
Delivering them in the complex world of 2020 is more difficult than at any time since 1945 .
The resulting demands on the Chief Executive in terms of vision , agility , ability to simplify and lead with clarity and purpose are substantial .
The Chief Executive will be instrumental in redefining both ‘ soft power ’ and ‘ cultural relations ’ at this pivotal moment and will help define the place of the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a ‘ disrupted ’ and uncertain geopolitical world.
” Remuneration : Up to £150k per annum plus bonus to 8 per cent and Civil Service Pension “ The Coast to Capital Strategic Board comprises private sector and local authority Members , setting a vision for and overseeing delivery of economic prosperity for all in the Coast to Capital area , including through Government funding of projects through the Local Growth Fund .
They are accountable to the LEP Board and for the proper governance of the LEP .
Coast to Capital is seeking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the C2C area to help lead the region and meet the ambitious vision set out in its strategic plan .
Currently chaired by Tim Wates , who will be stepping down in July 2020 , the Board brings together a diverse mix of regional business leaders alongside senior politicians and leaders from Universities and Further Education .
”

Eight years ago, the TaxPayers’ Alliance reported that “in the last year, five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories”.
Despite the selection of some Party members or supporters to fill important posts, over time, the Conservatives have punched beneath their weight when it comes to public appointments. One of the reasons seems to be that Tories simply don’t apply in the same number as Labour supporters.
To help remedy this, each week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies, so that qualified Conservatives can be aware of the opportunities presented.
– – – – – – – – – –
Office for Budget Responsibility – Chair
“Robert Chote will be stepping down as Chair of the BRC later this year, after 10 years in post. We are seeking a successor with deep expertise in economic and fiscal analysis who can lead the BRC and provide intellectual leadership to the OBR’s staff. This is a high profile and influential role, requiring outstanding communication skills and integrity. Candidates must command broad respect for their objectivity in dealing with issues of political sensitivity. Appointments to the BRC are for a five-year term. There is the possibility of reappointment at the end of the term and members can serve a maximum of two terms. This post can be undertaken on either a part or full-time basis.”
Time: Full- or part-time.
Remuneration: £158,762 per annum (FTE).
Closes: 19 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Office for Nuclear Regulation – Security Non-Executive Director
“The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) is a Public Corporation responsible for the regulation of nuclear safety and security across the UK. Its vision is to be an exemplary regulator that inspires respect, trust and confidence. ONR is sponsored by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) who have principal responsibility for governance, finance and its performance in relation to conventional Health and Safety. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) is accountable for the UK civil nuclear regulatory framework and policies and for appointing a Security Non-Executive Director (NED) to the ONR Board.”
Time: Approx. 30 days per annum.
Remuneration: £15,000 plus expenses.
Closes: 22 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Regulatory Horizons Panel – Member
“As we enter the Fourth Industrial Revolution, a wave of technological innovation is creating new industries, disrupting existing ones and transforming the way things are made and the way we live. From AI-powered legal services to autonomous ships, new products, services and business models are emerging which don’t fit with existing regulatory systems. In its White Paper on Regulation for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the Government committed to establishing a Regulatory Horizons Council (RHC) to identify the implications of technological innovation with high potential benefit for the UK economy and society and advise the government on regulatory reform needed to support its rapid and safe introduction.”
Time: 1-2 days per month.
Remuneration: £380 per diem.
Closes: 23 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Financial Conduct Authority – Chief Executive
“This is an opportunity to take on an intellectually demanding role at the heart of international financial services, leading a sizeable and complex organisation. There is a requirement for strong leadership in a challenging environment to undertake a critically important role. Under Andrew Bailey, the FCA has formulated a transformation programme, to equip the organisation for the next phase of its development: a data strategy and enhanced analytical skills to rapidly identify harm across an exceptionally broad range of firms of all sizes exploiting fast-moving changes in technology and distribution to target consumers; enhance employee capabilities and processes to act swiftly on the harms identified; [and] and with a regulatory framework which is appropriate following the completion of EU withdrawal, and which takes advantage of the opportunities for better and more efficient regulation brought by technology and behavioural science.”
Time: Full-time.
Remuneration: Competitive.
Closes: 27 March
– – – – – – – – – –
British Council – Chief Executive
“The Chief Executive will assume office at a time of unprecedented external change. The political landscape in Europe and around the globe is altering with increasing pace and less predictability. The British Council is also in constant transformation to deliver within funding constraints in a demanding, more client and customer-facing world. The aims and goals of the British Council are more necessary than ever. Delivering them in the complex world of 2020 is more difficult than at any time since 1945. The resulting demands on the Chief Executive in terms of vision, agility, ability to simplify and lead with clarity and purpose are substantial. The Chief Executive will be instrumental in redefining both ‘soft power’ and ‘cultural relations’ at this pivotal moment and will help define the place of the United Kingdom, for the better, in a ‘disrupted’ and uncertain geopolitical world.”
Time: Full-time.
Remuneration: Up to £150k per annum plus bonus to 8 per cent and Civil Service Pension
Closes: 27 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Coast to Capital Local Enterprise Partnership (C2C LEP) – Chair
“The Coast to Capital Strategic Board comprises private sector and local authority Members, setting a vision for and overseeing delivery of economic prosperity for all in the Coast to Capital area, including through Government funding of projects through the Local Growth Fund. They are accountable to the LEP Board and for the proper governance of the LEP. Coast to Capital is seeking an influential and persuasive senior business figure from the C2C area to help lead the region and meet the ambitious vision set out in its strategic plan. Currently chaired by Tim Wates, who will be stepping down in July 2020, the Board brings together a diverse mix of regional business leaders alongside senior politicians and leaders from Universities and Further Education.”
Time: Four days per month, three-year term.
Remuneration: £20,000 per annum.
Closes: 30 March


conservativehome--2020-03-09--Labour are fools to pick a fight with Phillips

With their disastrous election result in 2019 , even more dire leadership contest and continued in-fighting , it would be difficult for Labour to look any more ridiculous .
But this morning they have done it .
The party has decided to suspend Trevor Phillips , former Head of Britain ’ s Equality watchdog , accusing him of Islamophobia .
Never mind that Phillips has been a lifelong anti-racism campaigner , nor that he publicised the term ‘ Islamophobia ’ – having published a report on it in 1997 and successfully lobbied for Tony Blair to protect Muslims from incitement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Labour Party in the most authoritarian of ways .
There was , for starters , the timing .
Phillips was sent a draft sheet of five charges put together by party members that were mostly taken from 2016 – and out in the public domain .
Had they been so offensive , one might assume that he would have been suspended much earlier .
Why did they sit on them for so long ?
Then there was the obtuse manner in which some of his previous remarks had been read into , such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Year ” at the Tory Party Conference .
It was clearly a satirical comment about his dismay in receiving the award , which has also been handed to Barack Obama , and not – as made out – a slight against Muslims .
Only someone looking to find offence would remove the context from this , but these are the times we are in… Some of Phillips ’ comments focus on more sensitive areas .
In his 2016 essay “ Race and Faith : The Deafening Silence ” he highlighted that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as seen in Rotherham ) were from Pakistani-Muslim backgrounds , for which he has received backlash .
Understandably members of this community are concerned about how these events are reported and commentators must be careful .
But the sensitivity has gone so far as to mean all discussion is cancelled .
Similarly , Sarah Champion , Labour MP for Rotherham , was forced to resign from the Shadow Cabinet for bringing up this difficult area .
Today Phillips says “ surely honest journalism , unburdened by fear of causing offence , should be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his approach , which is why his critics find him too brazen at times having become accustomed to the politically correct climate of Britain .
The truth is that many of his comments are no more controversial than those found in books such as Amy Chua ’ s Political Tribes and other non-fiction titles on identity , which seek to analyse political , ethnic and religious interactions in our society , with a focus on integration .
Were this literature put out into the public mainstream one suspects , too , that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the worst quotes being used to silence authors , no matter how nuanced their perspectives .
Labour ’ s main tactic over the last few years has been closing down any political dissent through extreme tactics , such as suspension , and the Islamophobia accusation has been an effective strategy to get rid of Phillips .
None of this is to downplay the issue of anti-Muslim prejudice in our society , which is widespread and dismissed all too often .
But Labour are moving to an All-Party Parliamentary Group ( APPG ) definition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being vague , covering “ expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness ” .
Some insist these need definitions of their own .
Critics say that Islamophobia has generally become too broad as term and can conflate religion with race .
In liberal Western societies , of course , the ability to criticise the former is a central component of free speech .
Khalid Mahmood , the MP for Birmingham Perry Barr , believes Labour are ultimately using the APPG definition of Islamophobia “ weed out ‘ difficult ’ voices ” , and Phillips @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accusations have been mounted against him to deflect from Labour ’ s own allegations of anti-semitism .
These are being handled by the Equality and Human Rights Commission , where he formerly worked .
Whatever the case may be , one suspects that Phillips will not be as devastated by today ’ s events as some might assume ; that the incident , in fact , promotes his brand in many ways .
Phillips ’ whole raison d ’ etre , after all , has always been fighting against the majority on a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ correctness being his more recent interest battle .
Just two weeks earlier he was at the launch of Toby Young ’ s Free Speech Union , during which he denounced the UK ’ s censorious attitude to free speech , which formed the basis of his 2017 documentary “ Has Political Correctness Gone Mad ?
” The programme hypothesised that fear of offence was stifling legitimate debate and had helped to kill off the Left .
Labour are about to prove him right all along .

With their disastrous election result in 2019, even more dire leadership contest and continued in-fighting, it would be difficult for Labour to look any more ridiculous.
But this morning they have done it. The party has decided to suspend Trevor Phillips, former Head of Britain’s Equality watchdog, accusing him of Islamophobia.
Never mind that Phillips has been a lifelong anti-racism campaigner, nor that he publicised the term ‘Islamophobia’ – having published a report on it in 1997 and successfully lobbied for Tony Blair to protect Muslims from incitement – he has been discarded by a Labour Party in the most authoritarian of ways.
There was, for starters, the timing. Phillips was sent a draft sheet of five charges put together by party members that were mostly taken from 2016 – and out in the public domain. Had they been so offensive, one might assume that he would have been suspended much earlier. Why did they sit on them for so long?
Then there was the obtuse manner in which some of his previous remarks had been read into, such as his joke about being “Islamophobe of the Year” at the Tory Party Conference. It was clearly a satirical comment about his dismay in receiving the award, which has also been handed to Barack Obama, and not – as made out – a slight against Muslims. Only someone looking to find offence would remove the context from this, but these are the times we are in…
Some of Phillips’ comments focus on more sensitive areas. In his 2016 essay “Race and Faith: The Deafening Silence” he highlighted that many men involved in grooming gangs (as seen in Rotherham) were from Pakistani-Muslim backgrounds, for which he has received backlash. Understandably members of this community are concerned about how these events are reported and commentators must be careful. But the sensitivity has gone so far as to mean all discussion is cancelled. Similarly, Sarah Champion, Labour MP for Rotherham, was forced to resign from the Shadow Cabinet for bringing up this difficult area.
Today Phillips says “surely honest journalism, unburdened by fear of causing offence, should be beyond contention?” This sentence underlines his approach, which is why his critics find him too brazen at times having become accustomed to the politically correct climate of Britain. The truth is that many of his comments are no more controversial than those found in books such as Amy Chua’s Political Tribes and other non-fiction titles on identity, which seek to analyse political, ethnic and religious interactions in our society, with a focus on integration. Were this literature put out into the public mainstream one suspects, too, that it would be stripped of context, with the worst quotes being used to silence authors, no matter how nuanced their perspectives.
Labour’s main tactic over the last few years has been closing down any political dissent through extreme tactics, such as suspension, and the Islamophobia accusation has been an effective strategy to get rid of Phillips.
None of this is to downplay the issue of anti-Muslim prejudice in our society, which is widespread and dismissed all too often. But Labour are moving to an All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) definition of Islamophobia that has been accused of being vague, covering “expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness”. Some insist these need definitions of their own.
Critics say that Islamophobia has generally become too broad as term and can conflate religion with race. In liberal Western societies, of course, the ability to criticise the former is a central component of free speech.
Khalid Mahmood, the MP for Birmingham Perry Barr, believes Labour are ultimately using the APPG definition of Islamophobia “weed out ‘difficult’ voices”, and Phillips echoes his comments – convinced that the accusations have been mounted against him to deflect from Labour’s own allegations of anti-semitism. These are being handled by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, where he formerly worked.
Whatever the case may be, one suspects that Phillips will not be as devastated by today’s events as some might assume; that the incident, in fact, promotes his brand in many ways. Phillips’ whole raison d’etre, after all, has always been fighting against the majority on a wealth of difficult issues, with political correctness being his more recent interest battle. Just two weeks earlier he was at the launch of Toby Young’s Free Speech Union, during which he denounced the UK’s censorious attitude to free speech, which formed the basis of his 2017 documentary “Has Political Correctness Gone Mad?” The programme hypothesised that fear of offence was stifling legitimate debate and had helped to kill off the Left. Labour are about to prove him right all along.


conservativehome--2020-03-10--Andy Street: Jobs are what will help us level up the economy

Andy Street is Mayor of the West Midlands , and is a former Managing Director of John Lewis .
There has been much talk of “ levelling up ” the economy since the new Government swept into power – a commitment to repay areas that lent their vote to the Conservatives by ensuring investment reaches out across the UK .
How will that levelling up be measured ?
In investment ?
In major infrastructure schemes ?
I know how local people will ultimately measure that investment – in local jobs .
Here in the West Midlands we are working to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supporting innovative sectors that can thrive , is producing remarkable results in creating new opportunities for our workforce .
In tandem , significant investment in infrastructure and housing is providing economic impetus and a framework to improve skills .
By working to a connected plan , we are delivering measurable results – and record employment figures .
The West Midlands endured a torrid economic time for decades .
A sense of neglect was in part caused by a lack of quality employment opportunities for local people .
During my years as MD of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which was often exacerbated by the inability of the region ’ s mainly Labour-led councils to work together for a common goal .
As a proud Brummie , I couldn ’ t stand back and see that happen to my home .
That ’ s why in 2011 I became Chairman of Birmingham and Solihull LEP – to boost our economic performance , encourage a more collaborative approach to driving growth and ultimately create more jobs .
I have always had total confidence in our region ’ s ability to do better .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ UK ’ s economy changed in the second half of the 20th Century , I knew that we had the people , imagination and ambition to change course in the 21st .
It was that belief in the potential of the West Midlands that drove me to stand to be Mayor .
And from the start , I knew that fostering economic growth to unleash that potential meant one thing – jobs .
What ’ s more , that meant real jobs growth , not just for the Second City but for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ boroughs of Birmingham , Coventry , Dudley , Sandwell , Solihull , Walsall and Wolverhampton .
However , driving growth in employment is also about building the skills to create a productive and innovative workforce .
A skilled workforce is a guarantor of quality jobs , bringing better pay , increased competitiveness and higher productivity .
With so many ambitious projects underway here we have set up construction gateways and training hubs which enable local people to benefit from the renaissance that is transforming their region .
That means that local people not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our new homes , railways , metro lines and business parks – they become skilled workers too .
Our pioneering Apprenticeship Levy scheme – which allows us to redirect the unspent levy funds of big companies to support apprentices at small firms – is providing a long-term conveyor belt of ambitious , skilled workers .
The millions we are investing in our transport network drives employment too .
There is firm academic research that shows that a poorly connected city underperforms in terms of productivity and employment , so addressing the historical reliance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conurbation .
It ’ s simple really : a world-class transit system makes it easier for our work force to access opportunity where new jobs are being created , while also opening up previously isolated areas for investment .
A classic example of this is the Metro line currently being built which will finally connect Dudley to the wider region ’ s transport network for the first time in decades .
Elsewhere in the Black Country , plans to reopen long-closed railway stations will give residents a direct line to the jobs being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also key to jobs – and our surge in housebuilding is transforming communities by turning former industrial sites from derelict eyesores into places where families want to live and businesses want to invest .
All of this has been supported by Government investment allowing us to build our transport network , reclaim old brownfield sites and build new homes at twice the rate seen elsewhere .
The resultant jobs are there to be seen , with a dramatic improvement in our employment rate which , after decades of decline , is now less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rate .
That ’ s because in the three years I have been mayor the West Midlands has seen 97,000 new jobs created .
Our employment rate is at a record high .
Importantly , more of these new jobs have been created outside of Birmingham than inside .
The West Midlands is made up of many proud and distinct communities , and our current success is down to genuine teamwork between them .
However , we have our own “ levelling up ” challenge to ensure it ’ s not just central @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are seeing , and the spread of new jobs across the region shows this can be done .
Now , we need to retain the economic confidence we are building .
We are hoping for a boost from the Chancellor in the budget , that will ensure further investment in all the schemes that we can show are delivering jobs .
When I first stood for the role of Mayor , I knew it was ultimately about delivering employment for local people .
As we start delivering on our promise to “ level @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remember that its success will ultimately be measured not by the amount of rail track we lay or roads we build , but on how many jobs we create .

Andy Street is Mayor of the West Midlands, and is a former Managing Director of John Lewis.
There has been much talk of “levelling up” the economy since the new Government swept into power – a commitment to repay areas that lent their vote to the Conservatives by ensuring investment reaches out across the UK.
How will that levelling up be measured? In investment? In major infrastructure schemes? I know how local people will ultimately measure that investment – in local jobs. Here in the West Midlands we are working to a plan which, by identifying and supporting innovative sectors that can thrive, is producing remarkable results in creating new opportunities for our workforce. In tandem, significant investment in infrastructure and housing is providing economic impetus and a framework to improve skills.
By working to a connected plan, we are delivering measurable results – and record employment figures.
The West Midlands endured a torrid economic time for decades. A sense of neglect was in part caused by a lack of quality employment opportunities for local people.
During my years as MD of John Lewis I witnessed this decline, which was often exacerbated by the inability of the region’s mainly Labour-led councils to work together for a common goal. As a proud Brummie, I couldn’t stand back and see that happen to my home.
That’s why in 2011 I became Chairman of Birmingham and Solihull LEP – to boost our economic performance, encourage a more collaborative approach to driving growth and ultimately create more jobs.
I have always had total confidence in our region’s ability to do better. While we endured steep decline as the UK’s economy changed in the second half of the 20th Century, I knew that we had the people, imagination and ambition to change course in the 21st.
It was that belief in the potential of the West Midlands that drove me to stand to be Mayor. And from the start, I knew that fostering economic growth to unleash that potential meant one thing – jobs.
What’s more, that meant real jobs growth, not just for the Second City but for the whole region, across all our constituent boroughs of Birmingham, Coventry, Dudley, Sandwell, Solihull, Walsall and Wolverhampton.
However, driving growth in employment is also about building the skills to create a productive and innovative workforce.
A skilled workforce is a guarantor of quality jobs, bringing better pay, increased competitiveness and higher productivity.
With so many ambitious projects underway here we have set up construction gateways and training hubs which enable local people to benefit from the renaissance that is transforming their region. That means that local people not only get the jobs that are building our new homes, railways, metro lines and business parks – they become skilled workers too.
Our pioneering Apprenticeship Levy scheme – which allows us to redirect the unspent levy funds of big companies to support apprentices at small firms – is providing a long-term conveyor belt of ambitious, skilled workers.
The millions we are investing in our transport network drives employment too. There is firm academic research that shows that a poorly connected city underperforms in terms of productivity and employment, so addressing the historical reliance on buses is key for all the conurbation.
It’s simple really: a world-class transit system makes it easier for our work force to access opportunity where new jobs are being created, while also opening up previously isolated areas for investment.
A classic example of this is the Metro line currently being built which will finally connect Dudley to the wider region’s transport network for the first time in decades. Elsewhere in the Black Country, plans to reopen long-closed railway stations will give residents a direct line to the jobs being created across the conurbation.
Housing is also key to jobs – and our surge in housebuilding is transforming communities by turning former industrial sites from derelict eyesores into places where families want to live and businesses want to invest.
All of this has been supported by Government investment allowing us to build our transport network, reclaim old brownfield sites and build new homes at twice the rate seen elsewhere.
The resultant jobs are there to be seen, with a dramatic improvement in our employment rate which, after decades of decline, is now less than 1 per cent behind the national rate. That’s because in the three years I have been mayor the West Midlands has seen 97,000 new jobs created. Our employment rate is at a record high.
Importantly, more of these new jobs have been created outside of Birmingham than inside. The West Midlands is made up of many proud and distinct communities, and our current success is down to genuine teamwork between them.
However, we have our own “levelling up” challenge to ensure it’s not just central Birmingham that benefits from the growth we are seeing, and the spread of new jobs across the region shows this can be done.
Now, we need to retain the economic confidence we are building. We are hoping for a boost from the Chancellor in the budget, that will ensure further investment in all the schemes that we can show are delivering jobs.
When I first stood for the role of Mayor, I knew it was ultimately about delivering employment for local people. As we start delivering on our promise to “level up” the UK, we must remember that its success will ultimately be measured not by the amount of rail track we lay or roads we build, but on how many jobs we create.


conservativehome--2020-03-10--The Budget we want will have to wait

The Budget we want will have to wait

The first Budget of a Parliament sometimes seeks to align the economic and politic cycles by raising taxes and cutting spending ( strictly speaking , the rate of spending ) .
Nasty stuff first ; nice stuff later – when there ’ s a general election around the corner .
The hard choices that the new Government makes help to demonstrate its priorities .
Rishi Sunak ’ s package tomorrow was never going to be like that – and will be even less like it now .
For four main reasons .
First , because Boris Johnson ’ s natural @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or “ boosterism ” , as he has called it – and this preference was duly reflected in the recent Conservative Manifesto ’ s headline pledges .
Second , because the exigencies of Brexit require a neutral Budget at least , if not an expansionary one .
Third , because of the Coronavirus .
And finally because of the pervasive fear of a credit crunch , which was out and about in any event , but which the spread of the virus has accentuated .
As it happens , the current spending picture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looked fairly constrained .
Hence the Prime Minister ’ s call in Cabinet last month for departmental spending restraint even if it means “ slaughtering sacred cows ” .
Planned increases were due to be concentrated on those headline pledges : 50,000 more nurses ; 20,000 more police ; “ millions more invested each week on science , schools , apprenticeships and infrastructure ” ; a new immigration system .
Johnson and Sajid Javid were at odds over the implementation of the fiscal rules .
The Coronavirus has decisively swung the argument the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least for the time being .
( That ’ s rotten timing for Javid , who ’ s clearly seeking to take a stand as the rules ’ guardian . )
Rishi Sunak is committed both to help businesses survive its impact and people to work from home .
Neither he , this site nor anyone else knows how much assistance firms will require , nor how many workers will self-isolate or for how long .
Fiscal rules are not designed for circumstances like these and must effectively be waived for as long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ payment of VAT , payroll taxes and corporate tax ; using the Employment Allowance for a National Insurance holiday ; compensating firms with high statutory sick pay bills – all this and more is on the cards for firms , and will cost .
Extending sick pay , paying it earlier , easing the conditions under which Universal Credit is receieved – these schemes and others will be available to those who must work from home .
We ’ re sceptical about whether a VAT cut would have much impact on consumer spending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come .
And of course NHS spending in particular will be under no restraint .
Anything the service asks for it will get .
On that point about a credit crunch , expect to see the Government underwriting Funding-for-Lending type schemes , as in the aftermath of the financial crisis .
To put it very crudely , Johnson and Sunak will printing more money – lots of it .
It may be that Dominic Cummings is searching , as we write , to link the freedoms of Brexit to tackling the virus , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that govern scientific research , and looking for room for manoeuvre .
More broadly , it ’ s clear that the Budget will contain a symbolic tax cut .
The tampon tax will first have VAT removed from it and then be abolished altogether .
If Sunak is looking for other measures , he could do worse than take tips from his new colleague , Anthony Browne .
The latter has punted cutting VAT on domestic electricity on this site .
The Chancellor could take the idea up now .
Browne also floated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doubtless have to wait .
Elsewhere , those tough choices that help to demonstrate what a new Government is all about may have to wait for another day .
A mansion tax , reductions in tax relief on pension contributions for higher earners , VAT on fuel : all have been mooted ; all are unlikely , though Sunak may go for a consultation on pensions and signal a VAT fuel rise in due course .
Instead , expect to hear plenty about levelling-up and improving productivity outside the Greater South East .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ centre-right about whether that implies moving people to jobs ( broadly speaking , in cities ) or seeking to move jobs to people ( in towns ) .
Whichever view you take , the Government should aim to improve transport links ( which it will : see its manifesto commitments on roads and reversing some of the Beeching rail closures ) and ease planning restraints ( which it may or may not do : there has been briefing to that effect , but backbench resistance would be considerable ) .
Sam Bowman and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this productivity debate , and the Chancellor could do a lot worse than take up the latter ’ s call on this site for making the Annual Investment Allowance unlimited .
See also our columnist Neil O ’ Brien ’ s recent research into the balance of spending between London and elsewhere .
The Government has signalled support for that , too .
Many will yearn for a Budget that is altogether different .
Some would like a radical tax-cutting package , which slashes income tax rates , corporation tax , inheritance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , like us , believe that any such plan would have to march in step with spending restraint .
Which would mean reducing , inter alia , the third or so that goes on healthcare , pensions , and social care .
Lawsonian tax cuts go hand-in-hand with Thatcherite public reform .
Others still puzzle about what plans Johnson has , if any , to “ level up ” people as well as places .
That means not only the “ just about managing ” , but also those who aren ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the severely indebted , the substance-and-alcohol dependent , those struggling with mental health .
This is a subject to which we will return .
But for the moment , much of all this will have to wait .
The inference of yesterday ’ s Prime Ministerial press conference was that an Italy-style shutdown is on its way here in Britain .
Other countries are likely to follow .
The interplay between the coronavirus , the recent oil price fall , the banks , corporate debt and America ’ s response to the illness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capacity to be an economic 9/11 .
So Sunak has his hands full – and more than .
He must square up tomorrow to biggest challenge that a Chancellor has faced since the financial crash .
For him , it is the worst of times : he must help to provide reassurance , action and leadership .
Strangely , it is therefore also the best of times .
He is elevated from the grubby plane of normal partisan politics to the dizzying heights of negotiating a national social emergency .
That has an @ @ @ @ @ @ @

The first Budget of a Parliament sometimes seeks to align the economic and politic cycles by raising taxes and cutting spending (strictly speaking, the rate of spending). Nasty stuff first; nice stuff later – when there’s a general election around the corner. The hard choices that the new Government makes help to demonstrate its priorities.
Rishi Sunak’s package tomorrow was never going to be like that – and will be even less like it now. For four main reasons.
First, because Boris Johnson’s natural inclination is for Bridges and Circuses – or “boosterism”, as he has called it – and this preference was duly reflected in the recent Conservative Manifesto’s headline pledges.
Second, because the exigencies of Brexit require a neutral Budget at least, if not an expansionary one.
Third, because of the Coronavirus.
And finally because of the pervasive fear of a credit crunch, which was out and about in any event, but which the spread of the virus has accentuated.
As it happens, the current spending picture, though not capital spending, has looked fairly constrained. Hence the Prime Minister’s call in Cabinet last month for departmental spending restraint even if it means “slaughtering sacred cows”.
Planned increases were due to be concentrated on those headline pledges: 50,000 more nurses; 20,000 more police; “millions more invested each week on science, schools, apprenticeships and infrastructure”; a new immigration system. Johnson and Sajid Javid were at odds over the implementation of the fiscal rules.
The Coronavirus has decisively swung the argument the Prime Minister’s way, at least for the time being. (That’s rotten timing for Javid, who’s clearly seeking to take a stand as the rules’ guardian.)
Rishi Sunak is committed both to help businesses survive its impact and people to work from home. Neither he, this site nor anyone else knows how much assistance firms will require, nor how many workers will self-isolate or for how long. Fiscal rules are not designed for circumstances like these and must effectively be waived for as long as the crisis lasts.
Delaying the payment of VAT, payroll taxes and corporate tax; using the Employment Allowance for a National Insurance holiday; compensating firms with high statutory sick pay bills – all this and more is on the cards for firms, and will cost.
Extending sick pay, paying it earlier, easing the conditions under which Universal Credit is receieved – these schemes and others will be available to those who must work from home. We’re sceptical about whether a VAT cut would have much impact on consumer spending in the circumstances that are set to come.
And of course NHS spending in particular will be under no restraint. Anything the service asks for it will get.
On that point about a credit crunch, expect to see the Government underwriting Funding-for-Lending type schemes, as in the aftermath of the financial crisis. To put it very crudely, Johnson and Sunak will printing more money – lots of it.
It may be that Dominic Cummings is searching, as we write, to link the freedoms of Brexit to tackling the virus, by scrutinising the EU rules and restrictions that govern scientific research, and looking for room for manoeuvre.
More broadly, it’s clear that the Budget will contain a symbolic tax cut. The tampon tax will first have VAT removed from it and then be abolished altogether. If Sunak is looking for other measures, he could do worse than take tips from his new colleague, Anthony Browne. The latter has punted cutting VAT on domestic electricity on this site. The Chancellor could take the idea up now. Browne also floated restoring duty free. That one will doubtless have to wait.
Elsewhere, those tough choices that help to demonstrate what a new Government is all about may have to wait for another day. A mansion tax, reductions in tax relief on pension contributions for higher earners, VAT on fuel: all have been mooted; all are unlikely, though Sunak may go for a consultation on pensions and signal a VAT fuel rise in due course.
Instead, expect to hear plenty about levelling-up and improving productivity outside the Greater South East. There is a lively debate on the centre-right about whether that implies moving people to jobs (broadly speaking, in cities) or seeking to move jobs to people (in towns).
Whichever view you take, the Government should aim to improve transport links (which it will: see its manifesto commitments on roads and reversing some of the Beeching rail closures) and ease planning restraints (which it may or may not do: there has been briefing to that effect, but backbench resistance would be considerable).
Sam Bowman and Stian Westlake have been at the forefront of this productivity debate, and the Chancellor could do a lot worse than take up the latter’s call on this site for making the Annual Investment Allowance unlimited. See also our columnist Neil O’Brien’s recent research into the balance of spending between London and elsewhere. The Government has signalled support for that, too.
Many will yearn for a Budget that is altogether different. Some would like a radical tax-cutting package, which slashes income tax rates, corporation tax, inheritance tax and capital gains tax.
Others, like us, believe that any such plan would have to march in step with spending restraint. Which would mean reducing, inter alia, the third or so that goes on healthcare, pensions, and social care. Lawsonian tax cuts go hand-in-hand with Thatcherite public reform.
Others still puzzle about what plans Johnson has, if any, to “level up” people as well as places. That means not only the “just about managing”, but also those who aren’t managing at all: rough sleeps, the severely indebted, the substance-and-alcohol dependent, those struggling with mental health. This is a subject to which we will return.
But for the moment, much of all this will have to wait. The inference of yesterday’s Prime Ministerial press conference was that an Italy-style shutdown is on its way here in Britain. Other countries are likely to follow. The interplay between the coronavirus, the recent oil price fall, the banks, corporate debt and America’s response to the illness bode badly. The Coronavirus has the capacity to be an economic 9/11.
So Sunak has his hands full – and more than. He must square up tomorrow to biggest challenge that a Chancellor has faced since the financial crash. For him, it is the worst of times: he must help to provide reassurance, action and leadership. Strangely, it is therefore also the best of times. He is elevated from the grubby plane of normal partisan politics to the dizzying heights of negotiating a national social emergency. That has an upside as well as a downside.


Coronavirus Count

From the Government ’ s webpage Coronavirus ( COVID-19 : latest information and advice . )
• And from Northern Ireland here .
Number of people tested in the UK : 24,960 .
Number of people tested positive who have since died : three .
“ The UK Chief Medical Officers have raised the risk to the public from low to moderate ” – from the Government ’ s NHS website overview .
HOW TO AVOID CATCHING OR SPREADING CORONAVIRUS • Wash your hands with soap and water often – do this for at least 20 seconds .
• Always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or into work .
• Use hand sanitiser gel if soap and water are not available .
• Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve ( not your hands ) when you cough or sneeze .
• Put used tissues in the bin straight away and wash your hands afterwards .
• Try to avoid close contact with people who are unwell .
The symptoms of coronavirus are : However , these symptoms do not necessarily mean you have the illness .
The symptoms are similar to other illnesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as cold and flu .
NHS 111 has an online coronavirus service that can tell you if you need medical help and advise you what to do .
Use this service if : • You think you might have coronavirus • In the last 14 days you ’ ve been to a country or area with a high risk of coronavirus – see our coronavirus advice for travellers • You ’ ve been in close contact with someone with coronavirus • In Scotland call your GP or NHS 24 on 111 out of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( if available in your area ) or 0845 46 47 .
• Do not go to a GP surgery , pharmacy or hospital .
• What the coronavirus is , how it ’ s spread and how to avoid catching it – Government NHS website overview 1 ) Stay indoors and avoid contact with other people if you ’ ve travelled to the UK from the following places in the last 14 days , even if you do not have symptoms : Stay indoors and avoid contact with other people if you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the following places , even if you do not have symptoms : Stay indoors and avoid contact with other people if you ’ ve travelled to the UK from the following places in the last 14 days and have a cough , high temperature or shortness of breath , even if your symptoms are mild : • South Korea outside of the special care zones .

HEADLINE FACTS
Total number of lab-confirmed UK cases: 292,950 (Up from 291,409).
Total number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths: 41,481 (Up from 41,279).
Daily number of lab-confirmed UK cases: 1,541 (Up from 1,266).
Daily number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths: 202 (Up from 151).
England total cases: 156,410 (Up from 156,018 ).
England total deaths: 37,069 (Up from 36,883).
England death rate: 279.4 (Was 278.7).
Scotland total cases: 15,709 (Up from 15,682).
Scotland total deaths: 2,439 (Up from 2,434).
Scotland death rate: 288.9 (Was 288.4).
Wales total cases: 14,658 (Up from 14,581).
Wales total deaths: 1,435 (Up from 1,425).
Wales death rate: 467.0 (Was 464.6)
Northern Ireland total cases: 4,838 (Up from 4,822)
Northern Ireland total deaths: 538 (Up from 537).
Northern Ireland death rate: 257.1 (Was 256.3).
From the Government’s website Number of coronavirus (COVID-19) cases and risk in the UK.
DAILY NUMBER OF COVID-19 ASSOCIATED DEATHS BY DATE REPORTED
DAILY NUMBER OF LAB-CONFIRMED ENGLAND CASES
From the Government’s website Number of coronavirus (COVID-19) cases and risk in the UK.
– – –
RISK
“The risk to the UK has been raised to high” –
From the Government’s website Number of coronavirus (COVID-19) cases and risk in the UK.
– – –
NHS VOLUNTEER RESPONDER FORM
See here
(The Government’s scheme to recruit 250,000 volunteers.)
– – –
OUR PLAN TO REBUILD: THE UK GOVERNMENT’S COVID-19 RECOVERY STRATEGY
See here. New as of Monday May 11.
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE ON THE LOCKDOWN.
See here. New as of Tuesday June 2.
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE ON SHIELDING AND PROTECTING PEOPLE WHO ARE CLINICALLY EXTREMELY VULNERABLE FROM COVID-19
See here. New as of Tuesday June 2.
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE ON SOCIAL DISTANCING
See here. New as of Tuesday June 2.
GOVERNMENT WEBSITE: GENERAL ADVICE
See here.
GOVERNMENT WEBSITE: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS. WHAT YOU CAN DO AND CAN’T DO
See here.
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE FOR LANDLORDS, TENANTS AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES NEW
See here. Published on Saturday March 28.
– – –
HOW TO AVOID CATCHING OR SPREADING CORONAVIRUS
Wash your hands with soap and water often – do this for at least 20 seconds .
Always wash your hands when you get home or into work .
Use hand sanitiser gel if soap and water are not available .
Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve (not your hands) when you cough or sneeze .
Put used tissues in the bin straight away and wash your hands afterwards .
Try to avoid close contact with people who are unwell.
SYMPTOMS
The symptoms of coronavirus are:
A cough.
A high temperature.
Shortness of breath.
However, these symptoms do not necessarily mean you have the illness.
The symptoms are similar to other illnesses that are much more common, such as cold and flu.
USING 111
NHS 111 has an online coronavirus service that can tell you if you need medical help and advise you what to do.
Use this service if:
You think you might have coronavirus.
In the last 14 days you’ve been to a country or area with a high risk of coronavirus – see the coronavirus advice for travellers.
You’ve been in close contact with someone with coronavirus.
In Scotland call your GP or NHS 24 on 111 out of hours.
In Wales call 111 (if available in your area) or 0845 46 47.
In Northern Ireland call 111.
Do not go to a GP surgery, pharmacy or hospital.
FURTHER LINKS TO GOVERNMENT ADVICE
– – –
(All information taken from Government sources.
Updated as of 19.00 on Friday June 12.)


conservativehome--2020-03-10--Victoria Hewson: The law on gender and trans rights is confused and confusing – the Government must

Victoria Hewson: The law on gender and trans rights is confused and confusing – the Government must bring clarity

Victoria Hewson is a solicitor and co-founder of Radical , a campaign for truth and freedom in the gender recognition debate .
She and Rebecca Lowe , her co-founder , alternate authorship of this column on trans , sex and gender issues .
The culture wars over sex and gender are increasingly being played out in the courts .
The judge in Maya Forstater ’ s recent employment tribunal found her belief that sex is immutable to be unworthy of protection in a democratic society .
Harry Miller won a judicial review against the College of Policing over action taken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ material on social media .
Kate Scottow was found guilty of an offence for “ caus [ ing ] annoyance , inconvenience and anxiety ” during a sustained Twitter squabble with a serial litigant transwoman .
And another judicial review has just begun , into the treatment of children by the NHS Gender Identity Development Service ( GIDs ) — brought by a nurse , a parent , and a former patient .
This growing legal focus stems from developments in UK legislation and case law , alongside the impact of activist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( ECJ ) and the European Court of Human Rights ( ECHR ) .
The 2004 Gender Recognition Act ( GRA ) allows trans people ( on having proven they have gender dysphoria , and having lived as their ‘ acquired sex ’ for two years ) to obtain certificates entitling them to be treated as belonging to that sex for ( almost ) all legal purposes .
This Act was passed after the ECHR found in the 2002 case of Goodwin v UK ( ‘ Goodwin ’ ) that the UK was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then-standard term for trans people ) to a private life , under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights .
This violation was manifested by the UK ’ s failure to afford full legal recognition of these people ’ s new gender ( or sex , or even sexual identity — as the judgment uses all three terms , pretty much interchangeably ) .
The ECHR acknowledged that its decision went against its own recent case law , but decided it should proceed with a “ dynamic and evolutive approach ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ v S and Cornwall County Council ( ‘ Cornwall ’ ) , the ECJ decided that discrimination against a person on the grounds of gender reassignment was already prohibited , thanks to a directive covering discrimination on the grounds of sex .
The UK government was therefore required to introduce a regulation providing protection along these lines — despite the fact that the relevant directive actually referred to sex , rather than gender reassignment or gender identity .
( Indeed , it was then considered necessary to update the directive itself ! )
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ court , the Advocate General acknowledged the potential controversy ahead : The consequences of both these cases have been far-reaching .
The law is now confused and confusing — and the interaction between the GRA and the Equality Act ( 2010 ) is particularly complicated .
Try working out this explanation from the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission ( EHRC ) : Moreover , there are circumstances in which it ’ s permitted to discriminate between ( natal ) women and transwomen ( including those holding GRCs ) — when deemed necessary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( regarding safety or welfare , for instance ) .
Confusion over this has been exploited by activists , who sometimes misstate the law to suggest that excluding trans people from single-sex spaces is already illegal .
In Goodwin , the ECHR uncritically used expressions like ‘ brain sex ’ , which would surely provoke derision — not least from feminists and medical professionals — today .
And , surely , the drafters of the legal instruments the judges interpreted in these cases could not have expected the outcomes that arose .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t — and weren ’ t really in a position to — undertake analyses of their decisions ’ policy implications .
But such is the elevated and entrenched position of both human rights and EU law that Parliament could do little but introduce , and maintain , legislation bringing the UK into compliance with the findings of the European courts .
Now , amidst widespread confusion , and following variation across recent judgments in the UK courts , it ’ s time our Government stepped up .
Trans rights activists had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Cornwall ; conservatives , feminists , and society at large have much ground to make up .
The GRA ’ s obscure wording , and the complex and all-encompassing provisions of the Equality Act , together with public authorities ’ uncritical acceptance of trans activists ’ claims , have led to worrying developments .
These include current English and Scottish proposals to remove the need for medical diagnosis and proof of living in one ’ s “ acquired gender ” when obtaining legal recognition of having changed sex .
This would result @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the effective loss of single-sex spaces , amongst other consequences .
We have also seen startling increases in life-changing medical interventions on young people .
But recent case law has shown that this movement is now starting to collapse under its own contradictions .
Perhaps the UK government was right in 2002 , when it disputed that scientific research and societal change had led to “ wide acceptance and consensus on transsexual issues ” .
And perhaps the judges were wrong when they pronounced that there were “ no significant factors of public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ Christine Goodwin ] in obtaining legal recognition of her gender reassignment ” .
In light of large sections of the Labour Party demanding that anyone denying that TWAW ( ‘ transwomen are women ’ ) must be censured , it should also be remembered that it was the perceived movement of other countries that gave the ECHR the grounds to override the UK ’ s ‘ margin of appreciation ’ to determine the matter ourselves .
We must not be swept along again without open debate and widespread understanding of the possible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this also demonstrates the need to consider carefully both the role of judges , and the boundaries of human rights laws .
In the cases outlined here , activist judges were able to make laws that have had serious societal consequences .
In seeking to protect the rights of trans people , judges have set in train a series of legal and cultural developments that threaten the privacy and the safety of women and children .
As the current government looks into taking back control from judges , these cases provide a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judges ’ decisions have profound political impact on highly contestable issues .
*This ‘ irrelevance ’ may come as news to ConservativeHome readers .

Victoria Hewson is a solicitor and co-founder of Radical, a campaign for truth and freedom in the gender recognition debate. She and Rebecca Lowe, her co-founder, alternate authorship of this column on trans, sex and gender issues.
The culture wars over sex and gender are increasingly being played out in the courts. The judge in Maya Forstater’s recent employment tribunal found her belief that sex is immutable to be unworthy of protection in a democratic society. Harry Miller won a judicial review against the College of Policing over action taken against him for sharing ‘gender critical’ material on social media. Kate Scottow was found guilty of an offence for “caus[ing] annoyance, inconvenience and anxiety” during a sustained Twitter squabble with a serial litigant transwoman. And another judicial review has just begun, into the treatment of children by the NHS Gender Identity Development Service (GIDs) — brought by a nurse, a parent, and a former patient.
This growing legal focus stems from developments in UK legislation and case law, alongside the impact of activist judgments by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
The 2004 Gender Recognition Act (GRA) allows trans people (on having proven they have gender dysphoria, and having lived as their ‘acquired sex’ for two years) to obtain certificates entitling them to be treated as belonging to that sex for (almost) all legal purposes.
This Act was passed after the ECHR found in the 2002 case of Goodwin v UK (‘Goodwin’) that the UK was violating the rights of transsexuals (the then-standard term for trans people) to a private life, under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
This violation was manifested by the UK’s failure to afford full legal recognition of these people’s new gender (or sex, or even sexual identity — as the judgment uses all three terms, pretty much interchangeably). The ECHR acknowledged that its decision went against its own recent case law, but decided it should proceed with a “dynamic and evolutive approach”.
In the 1996 case, P v S and Cornwall County Council (‘Cornwall’), the ECJ decided that discrimination against a person on the grounds of gender reassignment was already prohibited, thanks to a directive covering discrimination on the grounds of sex.
The UK government was therefore required to introduce a regulation providing protection along these lines — despite the fact that the relevant directive actually referred to sex, rather than gender reassignment or gender identity. (Indeed, it was then considered necessary to update the directive itself!). In his influential advice to the court, the Advocate General acknowledged the potential controversy ahead:
“I am well aware that I am asking the Court to make a `courageous’ decision [but] what is at stake is a universal fundamental value, indelibly etched in modern legal traditions and in the constitutions of the more advanced countries: the irrelevance of a person’s sex with regard to the rules regulating relations in society.” *
The consequences of both these cases have been far-reaching. The law is now confused and confusing — and the interaction between the GRA and the Equality Act (2010) is particularly complicated. Try working out this explanation from the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC):
‘Under the [Equality ] Act, the protection from gender reassignment discrimination applies to all trans people who are proposing to go, are undergoing or have undergone (part of) a process of gender reassignment. At the same time, a trans person is protected from sex discrimination on the basis of their legal sex. This means that a trans woman who does not hold a GRC and is therefore legally male would be treated as male for the purposes of the sex discrimination provisions, and a trans woman with a GRC would be treated as female. The sex discrimination exceptions in the Equality Act therefore apply differently to a trans person with a GRC or without a GRC.’
Moreover, there are circumstances in which it’s permitted to discriminate between (natal) women and transwomen (including those holding GRCs) — when deemed necessary and proportionate to achieving a legitimate aim (regarding safety or welfare, for instance). Confusion over this has been exploited by activists, who sometimes misstate the law to suggest that excluding trans people from single-sex spaces is already illegal.
In Goodwin, the ECHR uncritically used expressions like ‘brain sex’, which would surely provoke derision — not least from feminists and medical professionals — today. And, surely, the drafters of the legal instruments the judges interpreted in these cases could not have expected the outcomes that arose.
We can certainly see that the judges themselves didn’t — and weren’t really in a position to — undertake analyses of their decisions’ policy implications. But such is the elevated and entrenched position of both human rights and EU law that Parliament could do little but introduce, and maintain, legislation bringing the UK into compliance with the findings of the European courts.
Now, amidst widespread confusion, and following variation across recent judgments in the UK courts, it’s time our Government stepped up. Trans rights activists had a head start with judgments like Goodwin and Cornwall; conservatives, feminists, and society at large have much ground to make up. The GRA’s obscure wording, and the complex and all-encompassing provisions of the Equality Act, together with public authorities’ uncritical acceptance of trans activists’ claims, have led to worrying developments.
These include current English and Scottish proposals to remove the need for medical diagnosis and proof of living in one’s “acquired gender” when obtaining legal recognition of having changed sex. This would result in so-called ‘self-ID’, and the effective loss of single-sex spaces, amongst other consequences. We have also seen startling increases in life-changing medical interventions on young people.
But recent case law has shown that this movement is now starting to collapse under its own contradictions. Perhaps the UK government was right in 2002, when it disputed that scientific research and societal change had led to “wide acceptance and consensus on transsexual issues”. And perhaps the judges were wrong when they pronounced that there were “no significant factors of public interest to weigh against the interests of [Christine Goodwin] in obtaining legal recognition of her gender reassignment”.
In light of large sections of the Labour Party demanding that anyone denying that TWAW (‘transwomen are women’) must be censured, it should also be remembered that it was the perceived movement of other countries that gave the ECHR the grounds to override the UK’s ‘margin of appreciation’ to determine the matter ourselves. We must not be swept along again without open debate and widespread understanding of the possible implications of further legal changes.
All of this also demonstrates the need to consider carefully both the role of judges, and the boundaries of human rights laws. In the cases outlined here, activist judges were able to make laws that have had serious societal consequences. In seeking to protect the rights of trans people, judges have set in train a series of legal and cultural developments that threaten the privacy and the safety of women and children. As the current government looks into taking back control from judges, these cases provide a stark illustration of what can happen when judges’ decisions have profound political impact on highly contestable issues.
*This ‘irrelevance’ may come as news to ConservativeHome readers.


conservativehome--2020-03-10--James Friend: Our belief in small government will help us win again in Mole Valley

Cllr James Friend is the Leader of the Conservative Group on Mole Valley Council When you picture Mole Valley , you immediately think of fields , market towns , commuting , and hefty Conservative majorities .
Sadly , the last one of those isn ’ t true .
When it comes to local elections – half our Surrey County divisions are not represented by Conservatives and , at District , it ’ s four years since we last had a clear majority – with 22 of the 41 wards today represented by Liberals and 8 Independents .
The eleven Conservative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Group Leadership again in May 2019 is half the number I previously enjoyed when leader up to May 2016 .
With a third of the wards up for election , to understand what happened is the start of understanding what is needed to regain council leadership this year .
Mole Valley voted remain and it ’ s easy to point at national politics ; but that ’ s only part of the story .
In parallel , council decisions seemed to diverge from the views of local people on the doorstep .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to keep in touch via newsletters , effective use of social and local media , or regular survey canvassing to make sure we were basing policies on what really matters to our residents .
Getting it right in 2020 We have constantly and positively worked on each root cause and we have built from the General Election success to reconnect our messages from Westminster to County to District representatives .
Residents want to see a single joined-up approach to tackling our local challenges .
The foundation of our campaign is having the best @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enthused , and truly motivated by the calibre , experience , and determination of the local people who have come forward to stand for us .
We ’ ve focused on survey canvassing to build real information .
It ’ s told us our policies are there or thereabouts spot on .
The Liberal administration set out two key priorities in an Emergency Council Meeting last June and then promptly failed to do anything about either of them .
Their leader pledged to scrap the Executive model and return to a full committee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ great input from Conservative councillor , Rory Love , it ’ s not even clear that the majority of the Liberals now support such a change which could slow decision making and deter many talented local people from standing for election with the prospect of two or three nights a week in the council chamber .
The second priority was rightly to focus on the climate emergency .
Without any idea of actions to take locally , they firstly refused Conservative demands to understand the starting position and then floundered with lots of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ simply been the implementation of plans that were in place before they took power .
By contrast , Mole Valley Conservatives have set out ten clear actions we can take locally to mean that across the district as a whole we capture more carbon from the environment than we put into it .
The challenge is to harness modern efficient technology and to change behaviour in every household .
Previously the threat of an incinerator being built in a local village led residents to deliver one of the country ’ s highest recycling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do it again .
The Liberals vision for a new Local Plan sees swathes of Greenbelt land sacrificed for development .
Our plan would be infrastructure led – development focused where transport and health services already exist or are enabled by the plan ; based on innovation – making the most of new building techniques and materials to create homes above existing buildings and environmentally sustainable reducing , reusing and recycling devel , oped land .
Any changes to the Greenbelt would only be through Neighbourhood Plans .
Robert Jenrick , Secretary of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Government , put it perfectly recently , when talking about another local district – “ Local communities wishing to preserve the greenbelt sustainably must meet local housing needs through gentle density , through re-imaging town centres , and through aggressively redeveloping brownfield land.
” Absolutely spot on .
Whilst the Local Plan dominates , the Conservative team recognises the importance of keeping Local Government small .
The Liberals have thrown £1m of taxpayer money , around 20 per cent of the Council Tax receipts , at new hobby projects with no defined benefits @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inflation busting council tax increase .
We understand this money belongs in the pockets of residents and is better spent by them in our local shops and businesses .
Who will win out ?
To regain the leadership , with support from Independent Councillors , we need to win two more seats in May .
That means consistently getting across to voters our simple messages of : With help from friends at CCHQ , we have grouped these themes around “ Helping our Future Generations ” .
But we need your help too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between now and May 7th .
If you want to see the back of Liberal administration in Mole Valley then please get in touch and volunteer to work for our great candidates .
Any time you can give , really would be appreciated .

Cllr James Friend is the Leader of the Conservative Group on Mole Valley Council
When you picture Mole Valley, you immediately think of fields, market towns, commuting, and hefty Conservative majorities. Sadly, the last one of those isn’t true. When it comes to local elections – half our Surrey County divisions are not represented by Conservatives and, at District, it’s four years since we last had a clear majority – with 22 of the 41 wards today represented by Liberals and 8 Independents.
The eleven Conservative councillors I inherited when I took up the Group Leadership again in May 2019 is half the number I previously enjoyed when leader up to May 2016.
With a third of the wards up for election, to understand what happened is the start of understanding what is needed to regain council leadership this year.
Mole Valley voted remain and it’s easy to point at national politics; but that’s only part of the story. In parallel, council decisions seemed to diverge from the views of local people on the doorstep. We must be honest that we failed to keep in touch via newsletters, effective use of social and local media, or regular survey canvassing to make sure we were basing policies on what really matters to our residents.
Getting it right in 2020
We have constantly and positively worked on each root cause and we have built from the General Election success to reconnect our messages from Westminster to County to District representatives. Residents want to see a single joined-up approach to tackling our local challenges.
The foundation of our campaign is having the best candidates. I have been delighted, enthused, and truly motivated by the calibre, experience, and determination of the local people who have come forward to stand for us.
We’ve focused on survey canvassing to build real information. It’s told us our policies are there or thereabouts spot on.
Focusing on what matters
The Liberal administration set out two key priorities in an Emergency Council Meeting last June and then promptly failed to do anything about either of them. Their leader pledged to scrap the Executive model and return to a full committee system. After peer reviews, including great input from Conservative councillor, Rory Love, it’s not even clear that the majority of the Liberals now support such a change which could slow decision making and deter many talented local people from standing for election with the prospect of two or three nights a week in the council chamber.
The second priority was rightly to focus on the climate emergency. Without any idea of actions to take locally, they firstly refused Conservative demands to understand the starting position and then floundered with lots of talking. The key changes recently have simply been the implementation of plans that were in place before they took power.
By contrast, Mole Valley Conservatives have set out ten clear actions we can take locally to mean that across the district as a whole we capture more carbon from the environment than we put into it. The challenge is to harness modern efficient technology and to change behaviour in every household. Previously the threat of an incinerator being built in a local village led residents to deliver one of the country’s highest recycling rates. Local residents are ready to do it again.
The Liberals vision for a new Local Plan sees swathes of Greenbelt land sacrificed for development. Our plan would be infrastructure led – development focused where transport and health services already exist or are enabled by the plan; based on innovation – making the most of new building techniques and materials to create homes above existing buildings and environmentally sustainable reducing, reusing and recycling devel,oped land. Any changes to the Greenbelt would only be through Neighbourhood Plans.
Robert Jenrick, Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, put it perfectly recently, when talking about another local district – “Local communities wishing to preserve the greenbelt sustainably must meet local housing needs through gentle density, through re-imaging town centres, and through aggressively redeveloping brownfield land.” Absolutely spot on.
Whilst the Local Plan dominates, the Conservative team recognises the importance of keeping Local Government small. The Liberals have thrown £1m of taxpayer money, around 20 per cent of the Council Tax receipts, at new hobby projects with no defined benefits for the coming year – alongside an inflation busting council tax increase. We understand this money belongs in the pockets of residents and is better spent by them in our local shops and businesses.
Who will win out?
To regain the leadership, with support from Independent Councillors, we need to win two more seats in May. That means consistently getting across to voters our simple messages of:
Saving the Greenbelt,
Innovating to tackle Climate Change,
Keeping the Council small.
With help from friends at CCHQ, we have grouped these themes around “Helping our Future Generations”. But we need your help too – help to get out the vote between now and May 7th. If you want to see the back of Liberal administration in Mole Valley then please get in touch and volunteer to work for our great candidates. Any time you can give, really would be appreciated.


conservativehome--2020-03-10--WATCH: Hancock on the Coronavirus. GPs should be contacted remotely rather than at surgeries

To tackle coronavirus we are taking a digital first approach – so wherever possible people can access primary care and @ @ @ @ @ digital means pic.twitter.com/hNAA3jmgnf

To tackle coronavirus we are taking a digital first approach – so wherever possible people can access primary care and outpatient appointments through phones and digital means pic.twitter.com/hNAA3jmgnf
— Matt Hancock (@MattHancock) March 10, 2020


conservativehome--2020-03-10--Gareth Lyon: Democratising Conservative policy – an open source revolution is underway

Cllr Gareth Lyon is a councillor in Rushmoor and the Chairman of the Aldershot and North Hants Conservative Association .
When the Prime Minister refers to this as The People ’ s Government he is usually referring to its resolve to deliver on the big policy goals which were drummed home so effectively during the election – Brexit , health , policing etc .
There is however another equally true justification for the claim .
Fifty seven per cent of the commitments in the Conservative Party Manifesto in 2019 had their origin in Conservative Policy Forum responses .
This means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the people – they were from the people too .
In Aldershot , we have seen how the forum can both give us an insight into the concerns of new supporters and keep us true to the values of our existing Conservative Party members .
Aldershot CPF was one of the first to be set up and remains one of the best attended in the country .
We have submitted policy responses over the years on subjects from the Alternative Voting system to Zero Carbon goals .
Having been involved in nearly all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first-hand how providing forums such as these gives people confidence that ours is a party which listens and takes their views seriously .
Our local party has experienced a massive surge in membership recently – nearly doubling in size .
A major reason for that is that we are consciously positioning ourselves as both a caring community party – and a party which , after listening to our community , is prepared to act .
The success we have felt in terms of local membership and electoral success is a reflection of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ factors contribute to the success of our party nationally .
Giving people a chance to have their say on our policy goals is a major part of this .
Not only that but by opening up our policy development process our party is actually producing better policy as a consequence .
Readers of ConservativeHome do not need reminding that brilliant and original ideas abound amongst our membership – some of them are featured here every day .
But as well as coming up with ideas , the collective wisdom of members and supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ improving , fine tuning and stress testing ideas too .
As believers in the free market we should not be surprised by the fact that tens of thousands of individuals can constitute a great and wise invisible hand , providing far more perspectives and information points than any wise and benevolent central institution ever could .
As I ’ ve mentioned , the forum is already helping us as a party to benefit from this process to a great extent – but we could and should go even further .
The potential for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goes much further than most people have so far realised .
The forum should set up permanent subject groups in areas of policy which matter to our members – not just health , policing and the environment ( important though all of these are ) , but ultimately in every area which interests members – justice , defence , tax , transport , education , business being some of the most eagerly discussed policy areas in my association .
Members and supporters would appreciate the opportunity to engage with these policy areas on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ group of similarly enthusiastic Conservatives throughout the country .
There is also more that could be done to foster the mechanics of policy discussion – to help sometimes small local groups of policy enthusiasts to engage more with their neighbouring constituencies , to provide training , advice and support on how policy discussion groups can best be facilitated and to reward and acclaim the great work which these groups are doing .
Most importantly we can do far more online to allow more organic interactions between policy enthusiasts amongst our membership and supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the case for particular policies , and then to test them out , try to win support and to adapt them in response to feedback from peers .
Such an approach would allow us to tap into what has been one of the main drivers of success in open source development – the acclaim and recognition ( particularly amongst one ’ s peers ) , which is so often lacking in our party ’ s approach to its volunteers .
The picture on the ground here in Aldershot , and nationally , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to tap into the enthusiasm , ideas and goodwill of a huge proportion of the electorate .
By opening up our policy development even further we stand a brilliant chance of retaining and building on that support – and developing much better policy too !

Cllr Gareth Lyon is a councillor in Rushmoor and the Chairman of the Aldershot and North Hants Conservative Association.
When the Prime Minister refers to this as The People’s Government he is usually referring to its resolve to deliver on the big policy goals which were drummed home so effectively during the election – Brexit, health, policing etc. There is however another equally true justification for the claim.
Fifty seven per cent of the commitments in the Conservative Party Manifesto in 2019 had their origin in Conservative Policy Forum responses. This means that not only were our policies for the people – they were from the people too.
In Aldershot, we have seen how the forum can both give us an insight into the concerns of new supporters and keep us true to the values of our existing Conservative Party members.
Aldershot CPF was one of the first to be set up and remains one of the best attended in the country. We have submitted policy responses over the years on subjects from the Alternative Voting system to Zero Carbon goals. Having been involved in nearly all of these discussions, I have seen first-hand how providing forums such as these gives people confidence that ours is a party which listens and takes their views seriously.
Our local party has experienced a massive surge in membership recently – nearly doubling in size. A major reason for that is that we are consciously positioning ourselves as both a caring community party – and a party which, after listening to our community, is prepared to act. The success we have felt in terms of local membership and electoral success is a reflection of this. I would also argue that similar factors contribute to the success of our party nationally.
Giving people a chance to have their say on our policy goals is a major part of this. Not only that but by opening up our policy development process our party is actually producing better policy as a consequence.
Readers of ConservativeHome do not need reminding that brilliant and original ideas abound amongst our membership – some of them are featured here every day.
But as well as coming up with ideas, the collective wisdom of members and supporters is often a very effective means of improving, fine tuning and stress testing ideas too. As believers in the free market we should not be surprised by the fact that tens of thousands of individuals can constitute a great and wise invisible hand, providing far more perspectives and information points than any wise and benevolent central institution ever could.
As I’ve mentioned, the forum is already helping us as a party to benefit from this process to a great extent – but we could and should go even further.
The potential for open sourced and genuinely democratised policy development goes much further than most people have so far realised. The forum should set up permanent subject groups in areas of policy which matter to our members – not just health, policing and the environment (important though all of these are), but ultimately in every area which interests members – justice, defence, tax, transport, education, business being some of the most eagerly discussed policy areas in my association.
Members and supporters would appreciate the opportunity to engage with these policy areas on an ongoing basis as part of a group of similarly enthusiastic Conservatives throughout the country.
There is also more that could be done to foster the mechanics of policy discussion – to help sometimes small local groups of policy enthusiasts to engage more with their neighbouring constituencies, to provide training, advice and support on how policy discussion groups can best be facilitated and to reward and acclaim the great work which these groups are doing.
Most importantly we can do far more online to allow more organic interactions between policy enthusiasts amongst our membership and supporters. Providing tools for people to make the case for particular policies, and then to test them out, try to win support and to adapt them in response to feedback from peers. Such an approach would allow us to tap into what has been one of the main drivers of success in open source development – the acclaim and recognition (particularly amongst one’s peers), which is so often lacking in our party’s approach to its volunteers.
The picture on the ground here in Aldershot, and nationally, is clear – we have a unique opportunity to tap into the enthusiasm, ideas and goodwill of a huge proportion of the electorate. By opening up our policy development even further we stand a brilliant chance of retaining and building on that support – and developing much better policy too!


conservativehome--2020-03-12--WATCH: Hunt breaks ranks on the virus. He says evidence suggests that moving swiftly on large-scale

WATCH: Hunt breaks ranks on the virus. He says evidence suggests that moving swiftly on large-scale social distancing is essential.

Former Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt says “ we ’ ve got four weeks ” to make sure we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ as Italy with the Covid-19 coronavirus .
https : //t.co/9jEPGiIDaY

'I’m surprised we’re not moving sooner'.
Former Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt says “we’ve got four weeks” to make sure we’re not in the same position as Italy with the Covid-19 coronavirus. https://t.co/9jEPGiIDaY
— Channel 4 News (@Channel4News) March 12, 2020


conservativehome--2020-03-12--The revolt over Huawei is bigger than it looks. It spells trouble for the Prime Minister over securi

The revolt over Huawei is bigger than it looks. It spells trouble for the Prime Minister over security defence and veterans

With the news dominated by the coronavirus , Rishi Sunak ’ s budget and the Prince Harry leak , one significant story ended up buried this week – even though it has huge implications for Britain ’ s future .
As many will know , the Tories have been battling it out for months over whether to allow Huawei , the Chinese technology company , to control the country ’ s 5G networks .
The project was given the go ahead earlier this year , but on Tuesday , 38 MPs staged one of the biggest rebellions yet against its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Huawei ’ s participation in Britain ’ s networks by the start of 2023 .
The rebels include former cabinet ministers Sir Iain Duncan Smith , Liam Fox , David Davis , Esther McVey and two select committee chairman ; Tom Tugendhat and Tobias Ellwood , Chair of the Defence Select Committee , who said : “ the Government should be on warning… that this House believes that we need to wean ourselves off Huawei.
” With Johnson ’ s “ stonking majority ” in December , it was easy to believe that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happen in 2020 .
But they are a massive wake-up call as to how serious the Huawei issue is – and it seems fractures are only going to get worse .
The Conservatives have always known that allowing Chinese technology providers to build Britain ’ s networks would be controversial , hence the amount of provisions they have made each step of the way to convince parliament that this is what we need .
Some of this has been done by way of legal assurances .
For instance , the contract was signed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of Britain ’ s most sensitive security areas .
And , anticipating the revolt , the Government claimed there would be a new bill to address concerns around how long Huawei can manage our networks .
None of this stopped Tuesday ’ s events , however , and MPs have called it merely a “ first showing ” in the war against Huawei .
Culture Minister Matt Warman responded that the rebel warnings had been heard “ loud and clear ” .
“ Loud ” is certainly what we can expect much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ future attempts to push a bill through .
What ’ s most interesting about the Huawei fight is that it exposes how much matters of defence and security can throw into jeopardy the Tories ’ majority , not least because the substantial numbers of backbenchers with military backgrounds ( Duncan Smith , Davis and Ellwood , for instance ) .
If the government does not address their objections sensibly , it is not immune to defeat .
The events have also highlighted potential problems for trade agreements , with some MPs worried that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as Canada , America , Australia and New Zealand ( all of which have banned Huawei and condemned the UK ’ s decision to use the technology ) .
Duncan Smith complained “ [ w ] e have no friends out there any more on [ the Huawei ] issue , and he is probably right .
The worst international outcome , of course , is the impact of Huawei on the UK ’ s “ special relationship ” with America .
Trump consistently told Boris Johnson not to move ahead with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when he ignored this advice .
Can the damage be undone with a new bill ?
One suspects not ; that Trump will punish us for what he perceives as a monumental betrayal .
This battle will continue to play out , though may not get the coverage it fully deserves – as coronavirus absorbs the nation ’ s attention .
The matter is one of utmost importance , however , as to our future safety and economic performance .
It will exacerbate Tory tensions and showcase any weaknesses in the UK ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we had to use Huawei in the first place ) .
But the Tories will plough on , perhaps having invested too much physical and political capital to step back , and take stock of the situation .
As Paul Goodman put it in his January article , it is difficult to know whether Huawei is good for the country ; “ [ w ] e don ’ t have the technical knowledge – and doubt whether the politicians who sound off on the matter one way or the other do so either @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incredibly hard to imagine what this technology is going to look like , and when I have asked others I have only got vague responses about “ the internet of things ” and “ driverless cars ” – the latter of which begs the deeper question of whether humanity needs all of this .
At the very least , given the increasing dominance of China on the world stage , as well as its terrible treatment of Uighur Muslims , we can not simply go blind into the Huawei issue .
Troublemaking Tories @ @ @ @ @

With the news dominated by the coronavirus, Rishi Sunak’s budget and the Prince Harry leak, one significant story ended up buried this week – even though it has huge implications for Britain’s future.
As many will know, the Tories have been battling it out for months over whether to allow Huawei, the Chinese technology company, to control the country’s 5G networks.
The project was given the go ahead earlier this year, but on Tuesday, 38 MPs staged one of the biggest rebellions yet against its roll-out – backing an amendment to end Huawei’s participation in Britain’s networks by the start of 2023.
The rebels include former cabinet ministers Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Liam Fox, David Davis, Esther McVey and two select committee chairman; Tom Tugendhat and Tobias Ellwood, Chair of the Defence Select Committee, who said: “the Government should be on warning… that this House believes that we need to wean ourselves off Huawei.”
With Johnson’s “stonking majority” in December, it was easy to believe that these sort of tensions couldn’t happen in 2020. But they are a massive wake-up call as to how serious the Huawei issue is – and it seems fractures are only going to get worse.
The Conservatives have always known that allowing Chinese technology providers to build Britain’s networks would be controversial, hence the amount of provisions they have made each step of the way to convince parliament that this is what we need.
Some of this has been done by way of legal assurances. For instance, the contract was signed off on the condition that Huawei kept out of Britain’s most sensitive security areas. And, anticipating the revolt, the Government claimed there would be a new bill to address concerns around how long Huawei can manage our networks.
None of this stopped Tuesday’s events, however, and MPs have called it merely a “first showing” in the war against Huawei. Culture Minister Matt Warman responded that the rebel warnings had been heard “loud and clear”. “Loud” is certainly what we can expect much more of, as there will be future attempts to push a bill through.
What’s most interesting about the Huawei fight is that it exposes how much matters of defence and security can throw into jeopardy the Tories’ majority, not least because the substantial numbers of backbenchers with military backgrounds (Duncan Smith, Davis and Ellwood, for instance). If the government does not address their objections sensibly, it is not immune to defeat.
The events have also highlighted potential problems for trade agreements, with some MPs worried that Huawei has isolated us from major allies such as Canada, America, Australia and New Zealand (all of which have banned Huawei and condemned the UK’s decision to use the technology). Duncan Smith complained “[w]e have no friends out there any more on [the Huawei] issue, and he is probably right.
The worst international outcome, of course, is the impact of Huawei on the UK’s “special relationship” with America. Trump consistently told Boris Johnson not to move ahead with the contract, and was apparently apoplectic when he ignored this advice. Can the damage be undone with a new bill? One suspects not; that Trump will punish us for what he perceives as a monumental betrayal.
This battle will continue to play out, though may not get the coverage it fully deserves – as coronavirus absorbs the nation’s attention. The matter is one of utmost importance, however, as to our future safety and economic performance. It will exacerbate Tory tensions and showcase any weaknesses in the UK’s knowledge around technology (hence why we had to use Huawei in the first place). But the Tories will plough on, perhaps having invested too much physical and political capital to step back, and take stock of the situation.
As Paul Goodman put it in his January article, it is difficult to know whether Huawei is good for the country; “[w]e don’t have the technical knowledge – and doubt whether the politicians who sound off on the matter one way or the other do so either”. Personally, I find it incredibly hard to imagine what this technology is going to look like, and when I have asked others I have only got vague responses about “the internet of things” and “driverless cars” – the latter of which begs the deeper question of whether humanity needs all of this.
At the very least, given the increasing dominance of China on the world stage, as well as its terrible treatment of Uighur Muslims, we cannot simply go blind into the Huawei issue. Troublemaking Tories are no bad thing.