conservativehome--2020-11-13--The media coverage of Symonds reeks of sexism

Over the last few days , newspapers have paid a great deal of attention to Carrie Symonds , the fiancé of Boris Johnson and former Director of Communications for the Conservative Party .
It is reported that she , along with Munira Mirza , Director of the Number 10 Policy Unit , and Allegra Stratton , the new face of Number 10 press briefings , objected to Johnson ’ s plans to make Lee Cain his chief of staff , and ultimately caused Cain ’ s subsequent resignation .
Many see this as evidence that Symonds has too much power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is now the de facto Prime Minister .
The intricacies of what happened with Cain at Number 10 still aren ’ t completely clear .
But whatever the case , it was no excuse for the avalanche of sexism that has been directed at Symonds and the other women reportedly involved in Cain ’ s departure .
Take some of the words that have been printed about Symonds .
Papers claim she is called a ” princess ” and “ dubbed the ‘ Duchess of Downing Street ’ ” .
Would anyone – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Philip May , Denis Thatcher , or the male partner of any female politician as a “ prince ” or a “ Duke ” ?
I think we all know the answer .
In another example of sexism , newspapers claim that Symonds teamed up with Mirza and Stratton to see off Cain .
One headline reads “ How ‘ Carrie ’ s Crew ’ saw off the ‘ Brexit Boys ” about the trio , as though they were 10-year-olds telling tales on Cain to a teacher .
Aside from this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most important figures in the Government , it reflects a depressing tendency to group women together , as if they think the same .
Perhaps Mirza , Stratton and Symonds all objected to Cain for their own individual reasons .
Why relate it back to their gender ?
Critics of Symonds will say their main objection is not that she is a woman , but that she has interfered too much in political decisions .
However , it begs questions about what this “ interference ” means .
It is not unrealistic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Prime Ministers ’ partners might offer opinions , with varying levels of zealousness , on their other half ’ s work ( even if that is running the country ) .
And leaders have to decide how much they want to listen to the advice .
Symonds is not just any political partner , either ; her experience as former Director of Communications for the Conservative Party , and as one of the most prominent campaigners in last year ’ s elections , puts her in a unique position in terms of political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the point .
The point is the level of vitriol directed at Symonds .
It is all the more pertinent in the same week Kate Bingham , Head of the Government ’ s vaccine task force , found herself receiving equally harsh treatment , albeit because of a £670,000 PR bill .
Whatever one ’ s view on the PR view , it does seem to me that women in these positions sign up to an astronomical level of scrutiny .
As one paper wrote about Bingham “ She is obviously very talented @ @ @ @ @ @ @ straight to the point , but has frustrated a lot of people at the department ” , which I also can not imagine being said about a man .
In short , we think we have come a long way in fighting sexism , and in many ways we have .
But there are still things that people say and do , sometimes without even noticing , that reveal just how unfamiliar many are with the idea of women occupying political spaces and roles – even in 2020 .
Referring to Symonds as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ start , unfortunately .

Over the last few days, newspapers have paid a great deal of attention to Carrie Symonds, the fiancé of Boris Johnson and former Director of Communications for the Conservative Party.
It is reported that she, along with Munira Mirza, Director of the Number 10 Policy Unit, and Allegra Stratton, the new face of Number 10 press briefings, objected to Johnson’s plans to make Lee Cain his chief of staff, and ultimately caused Cain’s subsequent resignation. Many see this as evidence that Symonds has too much power, and have even joked that she is now the de facto Prime Minister.
The intricacies of what happened with Cain at Number 10 still aren’t completely clear. But whatever the case, it was no excuse for the avalanche of sexism that has been directed at Symonds and the other women reportedly involved in Cain’s departure.
Take some of the words that have been printed about Symonds. Papers claim she is called a ”princess” and “dubbed the ‘Duchess of Downing Street’”. Would anyone – in any context – have ever referred to Philip May, Denis Thatcher, or the male partner of any female politician as a “prince” or a “Duke”? I think we all know the answer.
In another example of sexism, newspapers claim that Symonds teamed up with Mirza and Stratton to see off Cain. One headline reads “How ‘Carrie’s Crew’ saw off the ‘Brexit Boys” about the trio, as though they were 10-year-olds telling tales on Cain to a teacher.
Aside from this being an infantilising description of some of the most important figures in the Government, it reflects a depressing tendency to group women together, as if they think the same. Perhaps Mirza, Stratton and Symonds all objected to Cain for their own individual reasons. Why relate it back to their gender?
Critics of Symonds will say their main objection is not that she is a woman, but that she has interfered too much in political decisions. However, it begs questions about what this “interference” means. It is not unrealistic, for example, to assume that Prime Ministers’ partners might offer opinions, with varying levels of zealousness, on their other half’s work (even if that is running the country). And leaders have to decide how much they want to listen to the advice.
Symonds is not just any political partner, either; her experience as former Director of Communications for the Conservative Party, and as one of the most prominent campaigners in last year’s elections, puts her in a unique position in terms of political insight.
But that’s not the point. The point is the level of vitriol directed at Symonds. It is all the more pertinent in the same week Kate Bingham, Head of the Government’s vaccine task force, found herself receiving equally harsh treatment, albeit because of a £670,000 PR bill. Whatever one’s view on the PR view, it does seem to me that women in these positions sign up to an astronomical level of scrutiny.
As one paper wrote about Bingham “She is obviously very talented, she speaks her mind and gets straight to the point, but has frustrated a lot of people at the department”, which I also cannot imagine being said about a man.
In short, we think we have come a long way in fighting sexism, and in many ways we have. But there are still things that people say and do, sometimes without even noticing, that reveal just how unfamiliar many are with the idea of women occupying political spaces and roles – even in 2020. Referring to Symonds as a “princess” is just the start, unfortunately.


conservativehome--2020-11-13--WATCH: The launch of Lord Ashcroft’s new biography of Rishi Sunak – Going for Broke

If you want to buy a copy of Going for Broke , please open this link and follow the instructions @

If you want to buy a copy of Going for Broke, please open this link and follow the instructions.


conservativehome--2020-11-14--Repealing the Fixed-term Parliaments Act: an arcane but important battle Johnson must win

Yesterday morning , when Dominic Cumming ’ s departure was imminent but had not yet suddenly happened , we worried about what it might mean for the future course of the Government : “ But this site fears that if ( or when ) Cummings goes , and other Vote Leavers go with him , the winning Tory march into the north and midlands that he has done so much to craft will fade , and the Conservatives will drift back towards their southern comfort zone , more by habit than on purpose.
” Certainly the tone of the media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is an opportunity for Boris Johnson to ‘ reset ’ , and that there will be a shift in focus towards a less ‘ adversarial ’ approach .
Cummings ’ focus on deep issues such as the structure of the state also seems unlikely to continue under the new order of things .
And what of the constitutional agenda ?
This was already in flux – back in July , we reported that the original plan for a comprehensive Constitution , Democracy and Rights Commission from the manifesto had been shelved .
Will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ watering down of the Prime Minister ’ s ambitions to overhaul the Supreme Court , or the Fixed-term Parliaments Act ?
The last will make an interesting test case .
The FTPA is dear to the hearts of a noisy but electorally insignificant caucus of constitutional progressives .
If the new-look Downing Street is unwilling to tough it out against such opposition then it augurs very badly indeed for the rest of the Conservative programme .
Although the issue has been driven completely off the radar by the pandemic , all the signs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been intending to take a robust approach to repealing the FTPA , with the ultimate ambition being not just to iron out kinks in the legislation but to restore , as much as possible , the status quo ante of Prime Ministerial discretion rooted in the Royal Prerogative .
Of course , one lesson from Cummings is that it is possible – and may indeed be wiser – to practise radicalism without shouting about it .
On one level a comprehensive repeal of this sort can actually be spun as a tidying-up exercise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blog notes : “ Repealing the Act will be a tidying-up exercise removing ineffective legislation , not a major constitutional change .
It will merely bring the de jure situation back into alignment with the de facto .
Supporters of fixed-term parliaments may regret the Act ’ s demise .
But in truth , it has proved largely toothless , containing the means by which it could readily be circumvented.
” The Government ’ s response to the report by the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee ( PACAC ) can be read @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the shortcomings of the legislation , the MPs ( led by Will Wragg , a Conservative ) come out quite strongly against restoring to the Prime Minister the discretionary power to call elections .
The official reply is a four paragraph letter thanking the Committee for highlighting the issues and letting them know that : “ Announcements about the Government ’ s policy intentions will be made in due course.
” All this suggests – and various sources back this up – that the plan is to revive that discretionary power , rather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ formally , if not always effectively , in the hands of the House .
That will be a battle deliberately sought .
Beyond the question of whether or not to restore these powers to the Prime Minister is the question of how this is done .
The least controversial way would simply be to set the power to dissolve Parliament ( subject to a five-year maximum ) in the Prime Minister ’ s hands via a fresh statute .
But another way would be to try and revive the original prerogative power – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indeed what the authors of the Government ’ s strategy hoped to do .
Such an approach opens two cans of worms a statute-led strategy does not .
First , it means technically re-creating the monarch ’ s discretionary role in dissolution .
Second , it forces the question of whether or not the Royal Prerogative can actually be revived .
Each would be welcomed by sections of the conservative constitutional movement , certainly – but does that mean the Government will pick these extra battles ?
On the one hand , such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keeping with a new , less ‘ adversarial ’ overall approach to governing .
But on the other , there are surely few areas where the opposition is more adrift from the electorate .
The handful of potential Tory voters who might forsake the Party because it angers progressive constitutional scholars must , if they exist at all , count those scholars as personal friends .
And so we – and the parliamentary joint committee being set up to review the FTPA – await the Government ’ s promised repeal bill with bated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indicator of how much fight this Government still has in it .

Yesterday morning, when Dominic Cumming’s departure was imminent but had not yet suddenly happened, we worried about what it might mean for the future course of the Government:
“But this site fears that if (or when) Cummings goes, and other Vote Leavers go with him, the winning Tory march into the north and midlands that he has done so much to craft will fade, and the Conservatives will drift back towards their southern comfort zone, more by habit than on purpose.”
Certainly the tone of the media coverage surrounding the move is that it is an opportunity for Boris Johnson to ‘reset’, and that there will be a shift in focus towards a less ‘adversarial’ approach. Cummings’ focus on deep issues such as the structure of the state also seems unlikely to continue under the new order of things.
And what of the constitutional agenda? This was already in flux – back in July, we reported that the original plan for a comprehensive Constitution, Democracy and Rights Commission from the manifesto had been shelved. Will this shift away from confrontation see a watering down of the Prime Minister’s ambitions to overhaul the Supreme Court, or the Fixed-term Parliaments Act?
The last will make an interesting test case. The FTPA is dear to the hearts of a noisy but electorally insignificant caucus of constitutional progressives. If the new-look Downing Street is unwilling to tough it out against such opposition then it augurs very badly indeed for the rest of the Conservative programme.
Although the issue has been driven completely off the radar by the pandemic, all the signs were that to date the Government has been intending to take a robust approach to repealing the FTPA, with the ultimate ambition being not just to iron out kinks in the legislation but to restore, as much as possible, the status quo ante of Prime Ministerial discretion rooted in the Royal Prerogative.
Of course, one lesson from Cummings is that it is possible – and may indeed be wiser – to practise radicalism without shouting about it. On one level a comprehensive repeal of this sort can actually be spun as a tidying-up exercise. As this piece on the LSE blog notes:
“Repealing the Act will be a tidying-up exercise removing ineffective legislation, not a major constitutional change. It will merely bring the de jure situation back into alignment with the de facto. Supporters of fixed-term parliaments may regret the Act’s demise. But in truth, it has proved largely toothless, containing the means by which it could readily be circumvented.”
The Government’s response to the report by the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (PACAC) can be read in a similar vein. Whilst noting the shortcomings of the legislation, the MPs (led by Will Wragg, a Conservative) come out quite strongly against restoring to the Prime Minister the discretionary power to call elections. The official reply is a four paragraph letter thanking the Committee for highlighting the issues and letting them know that: “Announcements about the Government’s policy intentions will be made in due course.”
All this suggests – and various sources back this up – that the plan is to revive that discretionary power, rather than adopting a measure to leave it formally, if not always effectively, in the hands of the House. That will be a battle deliberately sought.
Beyond the question of whether or not to restore these powers to the Prime Minister is the question of how this is done. The least controversial way would simply be to set the power to dissolve Parliament (subject to a five-year maximum) in the Prime Minister’s hands via a fresh statute. But another way would be to try and revive the original prerogative power – and there were signals that this was indeed what the authors of the Government’s strategy hoped to do.
Such an approach opens two cans of worms a statute-led strategy does not. First, it means technically re-creating the monarch’s discretionary role in dissolution. Second, it forces the question of whether or not the Royal Prerogative can actually be revived. Each would be welcomed by sections of the conservative constitutional movement, certainly – but does that mean the Government will pick these extra battles?
(Those interested in this second point can get a useful overview of the debate from Section 4 of the above-linked PACAC report. The two schools are essentially that statute law either somehow destroys the prerogative power, which cannot therefore be revived, or either displaces or channels it, with the original ‘raw’ power flowing back into the space created by repeal.)
On the one hand, such a maximalist approach may not be in keeping with a new, less ‘adversarial’ overall approach to governing. But on the other, there are surely few areas where the opposition is more adrift from the electorate. The handful of potential Tory voters who might forsake the Party because it angers progressive constitutional scholars must, if they exist at all, count those scholars as personal friends.
And so we – and the parliamentary joint committee being set up to review the FTPA – await the Government’s promised repeal bill with bated breath. It will be a useful indicator of how much fight this Government still has in it.


conservativehome--2020-11-14--The fullest account yet written of Sunak the rising star

Going For Broke : The Rise of Rishi Sunak by Michael Ashcroft In February , Boris Johnson made him Chancellor of the Exchequer , and nine months later the first biography of him has appeared .
Here is the fullest account yet written of Rishi Sunak the rising star .
Tories will read the story of his ascent to high office with enormous pleasure , for it amounts to a vindication of the United Kingdom , and of the Conservative Party .
Sunak , born in Southampton General Hospital on 12th May 1980 , is descended on both sides from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ East Africa and from there to Britain in search of a better life not so much for themselves as for their children .
Usually one member of the family would go on ahead , and the others would follow later .
In 1966 , Michael Ashcroft relates , Sraksha Berry rented a room in Leicester , found a job as a bookkeeper and a year later was able to send for her husband , Raghubir , and their three children , including their daughter , Usha , who in 1972 graduated in pharmacology @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Inland Revenue , where his many years of service were at length recognised by the award of the MBE .
Meanwhile Yashvir Sunak arrived from Kenya in 1966 , joining his elder brother , who had got a place at Liverpool University to study electrical engineering .
The boys ’ parents arrived in Britain a few years later .
Yashvir read medicine at Liverpool , graduating in 1974 , and was introduced by family friends to Usha .
They were married in Leicester in 1977 and settled in Southampton , where he worked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pharmacy .
They are remembered with great affection by their neighbours in Spindlewood Close , the leafy suburban cul-de-sac where they bought a modern brick house with six bedrooms and a double garage .
The Sunaks attached enormous importance to the education of their children .
The local state primary school would not do : as one of the neighbours says , it was “ dire ” .
They sent Rishi , their eldest boy , to a local fee-paying school , Oakmount , and after that had closed , to Stroud @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pupils for King Edward VI , an independent school in the middle of Southampton .
Olly Case , who went to Stroud and later taught there , said of Rishi : Rishi was made Captain of Cricket and Head Boy .
He was very bright , but would never have dreamed of using his intelligence to humiliate the less gifted .
He got on well with everyone .
His parents decided to aim higher than King Edward VI .
They wished to send him to Winchester College , one of the great schools @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exam , and had he gone to a prep school such as Ashdown House , which specialised in preparing its most gifted pupils for that tough competition ( in 1977 it won three awards – one to Winchester and two , including the present Prime Minister ’ s scholarship , to Eton ) , he too would probably have won an award .
He fell short , but his parents tightened their belts , his father took on an extra job , and they sent him to Winchester anyhow , where he thrived @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or head boy , though he was not a good enough cricketer to get into the First Eleven .
He talks with enormous enthusiasm about Winchester , as noted in the ConHome profile of him published in February Sunak does not suffer from the compulsive desire of many members of the Establishment to conceal or at least downplay any privileges they may have enjoyed in early life .
He went on to Lincoln College , Oxford , took a First in PPE and became a leading light in the Oxford University Investment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Indian restaurant in Southampton , where the proprietor said of him : Similar reports have been made at every stage of his career .
From Oxford he joined Goldman Sachs , which took only four per cent of those who applied , and after three years as an analyst he decided to do an MBA at Stanford , funded by a Fulbright Scholarship .
He went on to work for various very successful hedge funds , before obtaining before the 2015 general election the safe seat of Richmond in North Yorkshire , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know , informing himself about all sorts of matters , such as agriculture , about which previously he knew nothing .
At Westminster , his high ability was soon spotted by good judges such as Oliver Dowden and Sajid Javid .
During the Conservative leadership contest of last summer , Dowden , Sunak and Robert Jenrick issued , at a well-chosen moment , a joint declaration of support for Johnson .
All three of them are now in the Cabinet .
Javid , whom Johnson made Chancellor , requested and was given Sunak @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a good impression on the Tory high command that during the general election at the end of 2019 , he was asked to stand in for Johnson during two of the television debates , and acquitted himself well .
In February of this year , when Javid refused , as a condition of remaining Chancellor , the loss of his team of advisers , Johnson replaced him with Sunak .
How has Sunak risen so swiftly and become so popular ?
The almost unbelievable speed with which he grasps things , the indefatigable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ flawless execution ” of any given task , and the imperturbable resourcefulness with which since March he has doled out the vast sums needed to avert economic collapse , though all highly impressive , do not constitute a sufficient explanation .
There is something else .
While studying at Stanford , he met , on the same course , Akshata Murthy , to whom he is now married .
When she was one year old , her father , Narayana , founded a softwear company , Infosys , which in due course @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ashcroft recounts how Narayana and his wife Sudha , who served for 20 years as CEO of Infosys , handled the change in their circumstances : At the end of the book , Ashcroft lists some of the ways in which Sunak has been described by people who dealt with him : Where does this behaviour come from ?
It must have been inculcated by Sunak ’ s parents , and before them by their parents .
They arrived in England almost penniless , but with a rich store of moral capital .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ with their Hinduism .
There are fleeting references to their faith : The admirable rapidity with which this account has been produced meant there was no time to look into Sunak ’ s Hinduism .
We learn that he does not drink alcohol , but he says this is because he does not like the taste or the effect of it .
During the pandemic , his advisers became worried that he was not eating : Sunak ’ s brilliant career shows a society whose institutions are open to talent : Winchester , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Party in Yorkshire and Westminster all welcomed him with open arms , perceiving what an asset he would be .
But another attraction of this country is its high regard for privacy .
We do not seek to make windows into men ’ s souls .
In the privacy of one ’ s own home or place of worship , one may practice whatever religion one may have brought with one to the UK .
I nevertheless hope that just as Max Weber wrote The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us The Hindu Ethic and the Spirit of Conservatism .
What next for Sunak ?
He will in a few months ’ time have the opportunity radically to recast the tax system , so that we do not find we have been have been bankrupted by the pandemic .
He will need to raise more revenue while stimulating the entrepreneurship which he so admires , and doing so in the areas adjacent to Richmond which have been neglected for so long .
William Hague , his predecessor in that seat , is given @ @ @ @ @ @ @ book :

Going For Broke: The Rise of Rishi Sunak by Michael Ashcroft
In February, Boris Johnson made him Chancellor of the Exchequer, and nine months later the first biography of him has appeared. Here is the fullest account yet written of Rishi Sunak the rising star.
Tories will read the story of his ascent to high office with enormous pleasure, for it amounts to a vindication of the United Kingdom, and of the Conservative Party.
Sunak, born in Southampton General Hospital on 12th May 1980, is descended on both sides from Hindu Punjabis who moved from India to East Africa and from there to Britain in search of a better life not so much for themselves as for their children.
Usually one member of the family would go on ahead, and the others would follow later. In 1966, Michael Ashcroft relates,
“The future Chancellor’s grandmother sold all her wedding jewellery to buy her a one-way ticket, leaving her husband and children behind in Tanzania in the hope – by no means certain – that they would be able to join her later.”
Sraksha Berry rented a room in Leicester, found a job as a bookkeeper and a year later was able to send for her husband, Raghubir, and their three children, including their daughter, Usha, who in 1972 graduated in pharmacology from Aston University.
Raghubir joined the Inland Revenue, where his many years of service were at length recognised by the award of the MBE.
Meanwhile Yashvir Sunak arrived from Kenya in 1966, joining his elder brother, who had got a place at Liverpool University to study electrical engineering.
The boys’ parents arrived in Britain a few years later. Yashvir read medicine at Liverpool, graduating in 1974, and was introduced by family friends to Usha.
They were married in Leicester in 1977 and settled in Southampton, where he worked as a family doctor and she ran a pharmacy. They are remembered with great affection by their neighbours in Spindlewood Close, the leafy suburban cul-de-sac where they bought a modern brick house with six bedrooms and a double garage.
The Sunaks attached enormous importance to the education of their children. The local state primary school would not do: as one of the neighbours says, it was “dire”.
They sent Rishi, their eldest boy, to a local fee-paying school, Oakmount, and after that had closed, to Stroud, a prep school which prepared its pupils for King Edward VI, an independent school in the middle of Southampton.
Olly Case, who went to Stroud and later taught there, said of Rishi:
“He was someone that was talked about; the teachers would say, ‘He’s going to be a Prime Minister.'”
Rishi was made Captain of Cricket and Head Boy. He was very bright, but would never have dreamed of using his intelligence to humiliate the less gifted. He got on well with everyone.
His parents decided to aim higher than King Edward VI. They wished to send him to Winchester College, one of the great schools of England.
Rishi sat the scholarship exam, and had he gone to a prep school such as Ashdown House, which specialised in preparing its most gifted pupils for that tough competition (in 1977 it won three awards – one to Winchester and two, including the present Prime Minister’s scholarship, to Eton), he too would probably have won an award.
He fell short, but his parents tightened their belts, his father took on an extra job, and they sent him to Winchester anyhow, where he thrived, and was made Senior Commoner Prefect, or head boy, though he was not a good enough cricketer to get into the First Eleven.
He talks with enormous enthusiasm about Winchester, as noted in the ConHome profile of him published in February
Sunak does not suffer from the compulsive desire of many members of the Establishment to conceal or at least downplay any privileges they may have enjoyed in early life.
He went on to Lincoln College, Oxford, took a First in PPE and became a leading light in the Oxford University Investment Society. He also worked at an Indian restaurant in Southampton, where the proprietor said of him:
“He was charming with every single person – it was not just customers but every other member of staff that liked him.”
Similar reports have been made at every stage of his career. From Oxford he joined Goldman Sachs, which took only four per cent of those who applied, and after three years as an analyst he decided to do an MBA at Stanford, funded by a Fulbright Scholarship.
He went on to work for various very successful hedge funds, before obtaining before the 2015 general election the safe seat of Richmond in North Yorkshire, which he took enormous trouble to get to know, informing himself about all sorts of matters, such as agriculture, about which previously he knew nothing.
At Westminster, his high ability was soon spotted by good judges such as Oliver Dowden and Sajid Javid. During the Conservative leadership contest of last summer, Dowden, Sunak and Robert Jenrick issued, at a well-chosen moment, a joint declaration of support for Johnson.
All three of them are now in the Cabinet. Javid, whom Johnson made Chancellor, requested and was given Sunak as Chief Secretary.
Sunak made such a good impression on the Tory high command that during the general election at the end of 2019, he was asked to stand in for Johnson during two of the television debates, and acquitted himself well.
In February of this year, when Javid refused, as a condition of remaining Chancellor, the loss of his team of advisers, Johnson replaced him with Sunak.
How has Sunak risen so swiftly and become so popular? The almost unbelievable speed with which he grasps things, the indefatigable industry with which he sets about the “flawless execution” of any given task, and the imperturbable resourcefulness with which since March he has doled out the vast sums needed to avert economic collapse, though all highly impressive, do not constitute a sufficient explanation.
There is something else. While studying at Stanford, he met, on the same course, Akshata Murthy, to whom he is now married. When she was one year old, her father, Narayana, founded a softwear company, Infosys, which in due course was to make him a billionaire.
Ashcroft recounts how Narayana and his wife Sudha, who served for 20 years as CEO of Infosys, handled the change in their circumstances:
“As the couple became richer, they went to great lengths to keep their children grounded. Narayana has said that his lifestyle ‘continues to be simple’ and that when he returns home from work every night, he still cleans his own lavatory. “‘We have a caste system in India where the so-called lowest class…is a set of people who clean the toilets,’ he has explained. ‘My father believed that the caste system is a wrong one and therefore he made all of us clean our toilets…and that habit has continued, and I want my children to do that. And the best way to make them do it is if you did it yourself.'”
At the end of the book, Ashcroft lists some of the ways in which Sunak has been described by people who dealt with him:
“authentic, humble, approachable, gentle, modest, friendly, empathetic, thoughtful, respectful, sensitive, a listener. These are not the kind of words you hear about politicians every day, to put it at its most charitable. They help to explain not only his success but the lack of resentment it seems to have inspired in the ruthlessly competitive precincts of Westminster.”
Where does this behaviour come from? It must have been inculcated by Sunak’s parents, and before them by their parents. They arrived in England almost penniless, but with a rich store of moral capital.
And this must have something to do with their Hinduism. There are fleeting references to their faith:
“His grandmother’s funeral was a traditional Hindu affair, involving a colourful procession that blocked traffic in that part of Southampton. It was very well attended, on account of the role Suhag’s late husband had played setting up the Vedic Society Hindu temple in Southampton.”
The admirable rapidity with which this account has been produced meant there was no time to look into Sunak’s Hinduism. We learn that he does not drink alcohol, but he says this is because he does not like the taste or the effect of it.
During the pandemic, his advisers became worried that he was not eating:
“‘The day before he announced the furlough scheme, one of our economic advisers put a sandwich on his desk and said, “You must eat,” because he just wasn’t eating,’ says a Treasury source. ‘He was looking thin and faint.’ Another adviser says, ‘He has to be told almost every day to eat. Otherwise he’ll just work and work.’ An insider later revealed that Sunak sometimes goes without food deliberately, fasting on selected days from sunrise to sunset – not for religious reasons, but to ‘re-set after the weekend’.”
Sunak’s brilliant career shows a society whose institutions are open to talent: Winchester, Oxford, the City and the Conservative Party in Yorkshire and Westminster all welcomed him with open arms, perceiving what an asset he would be.
But another attraction of this country is its high regard for privacy. We do not seek to make windows into men’s souls. In the privacy of one’s own home or place of worship, one may practice whatever religion one may have brought with one to the UK.
I nevertheless hope that just as Max Weber wrote The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, some scholar will in due course offer us The Hindu Ethic and the Spirit of Conservatism.
What next for Sunak? He will in a few months’ time have the opportunity radically to recast the tax system, so that we do not find we have been have been bankrupted by the pandemic.
He will need to raise more revenue while stimulating the entrepreneurship which he so admires, and doing so in the areas adjacent to Richmond which have been neglected for so long.
William Hague, his predecessor in that seat, is given the last words about Sunak in this book:


conservativehome--2020-11-15--WATCH: “We’re seeing how hard it is” – Spielman on the challenges for schools in implementing Covid

WATCH: “We’re seeing how hard it is” – Spielman on the challenges for schools in implementing Covid guidance

WATCH : “ We ’ re seeing how hard it is ” – Spielman on the challenges for schools in @ @ @

Amanda Spielman, Ofsted's chief inspector, says schools are having to interpret government advice whilst giving themselves enough flexibility#Ridge
Read more here 👉 https://t.co/RSHjSHLiip pic.twitter.com/VxafUM8Swt
— Sophy Ridge on Sunday & The Take (@RidgeOnSunday) November 15, 2020


conservativehome--2020-11-15--WATCH: Ashworth – Social media companies “have a lot further to go” to combat vaccine misinformation

Shadow Health Secretary Jon Ashworth says `` asking questions about the vaccine is entirely legitimate '' , but adds there @ @ @ @ @ that is spread , conspiracy theories '' on social media which are eroding trust # @ @ @ @ @ https : //t.co/RSHjSHLiip pic.twitter.com/Wop2URi4ri

Shadow Health Secretary Jon Ashworth says "asking questions about the vaccine is entirely legitimate", but adds there are "poison, garbage that is spread, conspiracy theories" on social media which are eroding trust#Ridge
Read more here 👉 https://t.co/RSHjSHLiip pic.twitter.com/Wop2URi4ri
— Sophy Ridge on Sunday & The Take (@RidgeOnSunday) November 15, 2020


conservativehome--2020-11-15--WATCH: “There will need to be, undoubtedly, some sort of restrictions from December 2 for a little w

WATCH: “There will need to be, undoubtedly, some sort of restrictions from December 2 for a little while”, says Eustice

`` There will need to be , undoubtedly , some sort of restrictions from 2 December for a little while @ @ @ @ @ the national lockdown ends , some rules will have to stay in place – but @ @ @ @ @ '' to say what they will be.
# Ridgehttps : //t.co/RSHjSHLiip pic.twitter.com/quEYnO4W3L

"There will need to be, undoubtedly, some sort of restrictions from 2 December for a little while"
George Eustice says when the national lockdown ends, some rules will have to stay in place – but it's "too early" to say what they will be.#Ridgehttps://t.co/RSHjSHLiip pic.twitter.com/quEYnO4W3L
— Sophy Ridge on Sunday & The Take (@RidgeOnSunday) November 15, 2020


conservativehome--2020-11-15--WATCH: Second and third vaccine could be here “in the next coming weeks”, predicts Imperial College

WATCH: Second and third vaccine could be here “in the next coming weeks”, predicts Imperial College vaccine expert

`` We need to remind people that it 's not all over until enough people have received a vaccine '' @ @ @ @ @ Vaccine Programme Professor Robin Shattock says he believes `` the biggest danger '' is that @ @ @ @ @ things seriously '' # Ridge pic.twitter.com/WF4YYgONot

"We need to remind people that it's not all over until enough people have received a vaccine"
The Head of Imperial College Vaccine Programme Professor Robin Shattock says he believes "the biggest danger" is that people may "stop taking things seriously"#Ridge pic.twitter.com/WF4YYgONot
— Sophy Ridge on Sunday & The Take (@RidgeOnSunday) November 15, 2020


conservativehome--2020-11-15--WATCH: This is “not the right time at all” for a Scottish independence referendum – Brown’s verdict

Gordon Brown : Holding an independence referendum in Scotland during a pandemic and a recession `` is not the right @ @ @ @ @ indyref2 https : //t.co/EBmW5MoB9C pic.twitter.com/zA3ccs6cqu

Gordon Brown: Holding an independence referendum in Scotland during a pandemic and a recession "is not the right time at all"#indyref2 https://t.co/EBmW5MoB9C pic.twitter.com/zA3ccs6cqu
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) November 15, 2020


conservativehome--2020-11-15--WATCH: Eustice – Cummings’ departure does not change the UK’s approach to Brexit trade talks

Dominic Cummings ' departure does not change our approach to the EU-UK trade talks says Environment Secretary George Eustice # @ @ @ @ @ //t.co/D4Lc0FDSbC pic.twitter.com/qLc4jkGXFH

Dominic Cummings' departure does not change our approach to the EU-UK trade talks says Environment Secretary George Eustice#Marr #Brexit https://t.co/D4Lc0FDSbC pic.twitter.com/qLc4jkGXFH
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) November 15, 2020


conservativehome--2020-11-15--WATCH: “We could have a normal winter next year”, says BioNTech founder

# Marr : Will society be back to normal by spring 2021 ?
BioNTech founder Prof Uğur Şahin : `` @ @ @ @ @ winter next year '' if a high vaccination rate is achieved by autumn

#Marr: Will society be back to normal by spring 2021?
BioNTech founder Prof Uğur Şahin: "We can have a normal winter next year" if a high vaccination rate is achieved by autumn
Covid-19 https://t.co/yuuSb1O1wa pic.twitter.com/4ho76VHX0x
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) November 15, 2020


conservativehome--2020-11-15--Please register for tomorrow’s joint Policy Exchange and ConservativeHome event on One Nation after

Please register for tomorrow’s joint Policy Exchange and ConservativeHome event on One Nation after Covid

The Editor of this site will tomorrow chair a joint Policy Exchange/ConservativeHome event on : One Nation conservatism : what @ @ @ @ @ Covid-19 ?
The five panellists are : • First Minister of Northern Ireland and Leader @ @ @ @ @ .
• Senior Adviser to Douglas Ross , Leader of the Scottish Conservatives , and @ @ @ @ @ former Political Secretary to the Prime Minister and MP for Devizes .
The event will @ @ @ @ @ noon tomorrow , Monday November 16 .
You are welcome to register for it via @ @ @ @

The Editor of this site will today chair a joint Policy Exchange/ConservativeHome event on: One Nation conservatism: what does it look like after Covid-19? The five panellists are:
Isaac Levido: 2019 General Election Conservative Campaign Director.
2019 General Election Conservative Campaign Director. Arlene Foster: First Minister of Northern Ireland and Leader of the Democratic Unionist Party.
First Minister of Northern Ireland and Leader of the Democratic Unionist Party. Kirstene Hair: Senior Adviser to Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservatives, and former MP for Angus
Senior Adviser to Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservatives, and former MP for Angus Danny Kruger: former Political Secretary to the Prime Minister and MP for Devizes.
former Political Secretary to the Prime Minister and MP for Devizes. Jane Stevenson: MP for Wolverhampton North East.
The event will take place via Zoom at noon today, Monday November 16. You are welcome to register for it via this link here.


conservativehome--2020-11-16--Jonathan Gullis: The blight of Covid gives us new reason to cut back school holidays

Jonathan Gullis is MP for Stoke-on-Trent North , and a member of the Education Select Committee .
He was previously a secondary school teacher .
The Government has rightly decided to extend free school meals for the holidays , and give hard-pressed families reassurance that their kids will be fed this winter .
But at a time when many kids are falling behind due to the pandemic and many families are struggling , we should go further .
It is time to cut school holidays , to give disadvantaged students time to catch up with their peers after long gaps @ @ @ @ @ @ @ further ease the pressure on family finances .
We could cut two weeks from the long summer break , and even shave a few days off at Christmas and Easter , to help children reclaim their futures .
As a former teacher , I know the problems that long holidays create for poorer families .
Holiday learning loss contributes to widening attainment gaps between economically advantaged and disadvantaged students .
Evidence gathered during the lockdown in April shows that pupils were doing on average two and a half hours of school work per @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eligibility for free school meals a shocking gap can be observed .
Around a quarter of pupils eligible for free school meals spent on average no time or under an hour on schooling compared with 18 per cent of those students not eligible .
The same survey found that roughly a fifth of free school meal pupils had no access to a computer at home , compared to seven per cent for other students .
Another survey found that some pupils could return to school having made only 70 per cent progress compared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only 50 per cent in maths .
Another factor contributing to the attainment gap is the home environment , and specifically the involvement ( or lack of ) parents in a child ’ s educational development .
Disadvantaged parents are less likely to support children because they may be in work , or lack the money to pay for tutoring , learning software or homework clubs .
These combined factors contribute to disadvantaged children falling behind their peers during long holiday breaks .
Studies have found that only after seven weeks of teaching @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the level of education they achieved prior to the summer .
And that ’ s before the impact on family finances .
The average cost of holiday childcare in the UK is £133 per week .
Between 2003 and 2015 , nursery costs increased by 77 per cent while earnings have remained roughly the same .
It is estimated that the loss of free school meals adds between £30 and £40 per week to parents ’ outgoings during school holidays .
There is also evidence that long school holidays cause an increase in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that food bank use accelerates significantly among families during the long summer holidays as they struggle to feed their children every day .
Every year , three million children are at risk of going hungry over the summer period every year .
Long periods out of school also have a knock on effect on children ’ s physical health .
Evidence shows that children from more disadvantaged backgrounds suffered a greater loss of fitness following the summer holidays .
The poorest quarter of kids see a drop in their fitness levels 18 times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the summer .
There is wide variation the length of school holidays around the world .
In some parts of Asia , including high performing countries like South Korea and Japan , students are only on summer holiday for four weeks , whereas in Italy and Portugal pupils are typically out of school for up to 13 weeks .
A number of academics have made the case for shorter summer holidays , including Professor Tina Hascher of the University of Bern , who has argued that four weeks of summer holiday should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and parents are able to enjoy a degree of respite whilst mitigating the effects of the summer slide in learning .
When I was a teacher , I recognised the value of the summer break .
It is an important time for students to rest and recover after a long academic year .
But , I also know from experience the difficulty some students face when they start the year in September after a long summer of losing academic ground .
Lockdown has taught us the difficulties that come with long stints away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , health suffering , families struggling financially and a widening attainment gap between well off and disadvantaged students .
This is why I am proposing that the Government introduce a shorter summer break of four weeks from Summer 2021 , and consider reducing other holidays , including the upcoming Christmas break .
These new weeks of learning should be used for structured activities and education in the term-time either side .
We can not change the past .
The time that has been lost has been lost .
But we can make up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ length of school holidays will help close this attainment gap , while reducing the burden on working families .

Jonathan Gullis is MP for Stoke-on-Trent North, and a member of the Education Select Committee. He was previously a secondary school teacher.
The Government has rightly decided to extend free school meals for the holidays, and give hard-pressed families reassurance that their kids will be fed this winter. But at a time when many kids are falling behind due to the pandemic and many families are struggling, we should go further.
It is time to cut school holidays, to give disadvantaged students time to catch up with their peers after long gaps in learning due to covid and to further ease the pressure on family finances. We could cut two weeks from the long summer break, and even shave a few days off at Christmas and Easter, to help children reclaim their futures.
As a former teacher, I know the problems that long holidays create for poorer families. Holiday learning loss contributes to widening attainment gaps between economically advantaged and disadvantaged students. Evidence gathered during the lockdown in April shows that pupils were doing on average two and a half hours of school work per day.
When broken down based on eligibility for free school meals a shocking gap can be observed. Around a quarter of pupils eligible for free school meals spent on average no time or under an hour on schooling compared with 18 per cent of those students not eligible.
The same survey found that roughly a fifth of free school meal pupils had no access to a computer at home, compared to seven per cent for other students. Another survey found that some pupils could return to school having made only 70 per cent progress compared to a normal year in reading and only 50 per cent in maths.
Another factor contributing to the attainment gap is the home environment, and specifically the involvement (or lack of) parents in a child’s educational development. Disadvantaged parents are less likely to support children because they may be in work, or lack the money to pay for tutoring, learning software or homework clubs.
These combined factors contribute to disadvantaged children falling behind their peers during long holiday breaks. Studies have found that only after seven weeks of teaching in the autumn do some children exceed the level of education they achieved prior to the summer.
And that’s before the impact on family finances. The average cost of holiday childcare in the UK is £133 per week. Between 2003 and 2015, nursery costs increased by 77 per cent while earnings have remained roughly the same. It is estimated that the loss of free school meals adds between £30 and £40 per week to parents’ outgoings during school holidays.
There is also evidence that long school holidays cause an increase in child poverty. Evidence from charities suggests that food bank use accelerates significantly among families during the long summer holidays as they struggle to feed their children every day. Every year, three million children are at risk of going hungry over the summer period every year.
Long periods out of school also have a knock on effect on children’s physical health. Evidence shows that children from more disadvantaged backgrounds suffered a greater loss of fitness following the summer holidays. The poorest quarter of kids see a drop in their fitness levels 18 times greater than the wealthiest 25 per cent over the summer.
There is wide variation the length of school holidays around the world. In some parts of Asia, including high performing countries like South Korea and Japan, students are only on summer holiday for four weeks, whereas in Italy and Portugal pupils are typically out of school for up to 13 weeks.
A number of academics have made the case for shorter summer holidays, including Professor Tina Hascher of the University of Bern, who has argued that four weeks of summer holiday should be enough to ensure pupils, teachers and parents are able to enjoy a degree of respite whilst mitigating the effects of the summer slide in learning.
When I was a teacher, I recognised the value of the summer break. It is an important time for students to rest and recover after a long academic year. But, I also know from experience the difficulty some students face when they start the year in September after a long summer of losing academic ground.
Lockdown has taught us the difficulties that come with long stints away from the classroom, with learning suffering, health suffering, families struggling financially and a widening attainment gap between well off and disadvantaged students.
This is why I am proposing that the Government introduce a shorter summer break of four weeks from Summer 2021, and consider reducing other holidays, including the upcoming Christmas break. These new weeks of learning should be used for structured activities and education in the term-time either side.
We cannot change the past. The time that has been lost has been lost. But we can make up for that lost time. Reducing the length of school holidays will help close this attainment gap, while reducing the burden on working families.


conservativehome--2020-11-16--Philippa Stroud: The Legatum Prosperity Index. The UK is in a strong position, but there are the fir

Philippa Stroud: The Legatum Prosperity Index. The UK is in a strong position, but there are the first signs of deterioration.

Baroness Philippa Stroud is CEO of the Legatum Institute .
The UK is facing two major challenges .
The ongoing pandemic , and national efforts to contain it , are impacting not just our health but also our jobs , our children ’ s education , and our relationships with each other and with the state .
At the same time , we are approaching the end of the Brexit transition period and will soon be re-defining our place in the world and re-establishing our relationships with other countries outside of the European Union .
There are clear challenges for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opportunities to grasp .
The choices we make now will create the foundations and form the character of the nation we will be in the future ; we need to decide carefully .
The good news is that the 2020 Legatum Prosperity Index shows the UK is in a strong position to emerge more prosperous from this time .
Prior to the pandemic , the UK was the 13th most prosperous country in the world .
On average , the British public enjoyed among the best living conditions globally , with access to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and our economy was one of the most dynamic and enterprising in the world .
However , the last few years have seen the first signs of the deterioration of our prosperity , showing we must not take it for granted .
This is not an irreversible trend , but it is a warning signal .
We must beware the trap of falling into a mindset of an overdeveloped society , vulnerable to entitlement and complacency .
If we lose sight of our values and heritage , if we sacrifice innovation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ desire to avoid change and risk , we will create a window through which the hard-won prosperity of our forebears will evaporate .
The Prosperity Index reminds us of the multi-dimensional nature of true prosperity .
Implicit in the Index is the danger of prioritising only one aspect above others , and at a time of crisis shows us what we need to protect .
Prosperous nations build healthy institutions , strong economies , and strong social wellbeing simultaneously .
They do not trade freedom or the economy off against health or education @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s institutional , economic , and social resilience .
One of the most deeply felt effects has been the change in how we interact with others – family , friends , neighbours , colleagues , and strangers .
Over the last 10 years , the strength of personal and family relationships in the UK has deteriorated , and the strength of wider social networks has increased less than in other nations .
In addition , public confidence in national government is among the lowest levels seen across the world .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – levels of public confidence have fluctuated significantly over the last 15 years – but is perhaps a result of the testing times we have been through over the last few years , including the Brexit referendum and a number of general elections and leadership changes .
While our governance systems are still relatively strong , the UK has also experienced a decline in government effectiveness – of the 20 countries currently ranked highest for this , the UK has deteriorated most since 2017 .
This is deeply worrying , as good governance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crucial to guide the UK through the pandemic and create a more prosperous society in the future .
As we go through this moment of change , we need to take a holistic approach to protecting prosperity .
We need to protect the public from the harms of Covid , but also from the harms of restrictions .
We need to suppress the virus without suppressing our freedoms or the potential for economic growth .
The UK ’ s current Covid response may be saving lives from the virus itself but it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of other ways .
The cost of lockdown is high , in terms of deaths from cancer , heart disease and other illnesses , mental health challenges , loneliness , reduced economic growth , financial struggles , and educational decline , and it is being paid by the most vulnerable in society .
China was the first country to be impacted by Covid , and its response framed the context for the UK and much of the rest of the world .
Its approach was one that moved to restrict the freedoms of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ engine .
Such actions are consistent with China ’ s ranking of 90th in the Index for governance and 159th for personal freedom but they are not the actions that build prosperity , they are ones that weaken it .
As a democratic nation built on the principles of good governance and personal freedom , the UK needs to be finding ways through this crisis that speak to the power and strength of who we are and the values of our democracy .
This is a time for mature citizenry , a moment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people , and for people to respond by taking responsibility for their actions .
Decisions should be made in a transparent way , sharing the evidence and explaining the rationale .
The public needs to be let into the decision-making process as much as possible , through reliable , accurate and timely information .
We should be trusted to understand the conflicting demands placed on leaders and to reflect sensibly on the likely consequences of different approaches , not just presented with a few selected indicators .
This moment , as we battle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to an end , is an opportunity to re-establish a clear , bold vision for the country ’ s future and its character .
For developed nations like the UK there are no well-worn paths for the journey ahead – we need to create them .
But the Prosperity Index shows us what we need to protect and develop in order to build well for the future .
We must work together to continue building an inclusive society , with a strong social contract that protects the fundamental liberties and security of every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue developing an open economy , that harnesses ideas and talent to create sustainable pathways out of poverty .
And we must all play our part to continue creating an enabling environment , so the contributions of each person can increase the quality of life and standard of living for everyone .
Although the world has changed , how prosperity is generated and perpetuated in a nation has not .
The UK has overcome significant challenges in the past , and by working together and focusing on the core principles that build prosperity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can do it again .

Baroness Philippa Stroud is CEO of the Legatum Institute.
The UK is facing two major challenges. The ongoing pandemic, and national efforts to contain it, are impacting not just our health but also our jobs, our children’s education, and our relationships with each other and with the state. At the same time, we are approaching the end of the Brexit transition period and will soon be re-defining our place in the world and re-establishing our relationships with other countries outside of the European Union.
There are clear challenges for the UK to overcome, but also opportunities to grasp. The choices we make now will create the foundations and form the character of the nation we will be in the future; we need to decide carefully.
The good news is that the 2020 Legatum Prosperity Index shows the UK is in a strong position to emerge more prosperous from this time. Prior to the pandemic, the UK was the 13th most prosperous country in the world. On average, the British public enjoyed among the best living conditions globally, with access to quality healthcare and world-leading higher education institutions, and our economy was one of the most dynamic and enterprising in the world.
However, the last few years have seen the first signs of the deterioration of our prosperity, showing we must not take it for granted. This is not an irreversible trend, but it is a warning signal.
We must beware the trap of falling into a mindset of an overdeveloped society, vulnerable to entitlement and complacency. If we lose sight of our values and heritage, if we sacrifice innovation, purpose, and meaning out of a desire to avoid change and risk, we will create a window through which the hard-won prosperity of our forebears will evaporate.
The Prosperity Index reminds us of the multi-dimensional nature of true prosperity. Implicit in the Index is the danger of prioritising only one aspect above others, and at a time of crisis shows us what we need to protect.
Prosperous nations build healthy institutions, strong economies, and strong social wellbeing simultaneously. They do not trade freedom or the economy off against health or education.
The pandemic is testing the UK’s institutional, economic, and social resilience. One of the most deeply felt effects has been the change in how we interact with others – family, friends, neighbours, colleagues, and strangers. Over the last 10 years, the strength of personal and family relationships in the UK has deteriorated, and the strength of wider social networks has increased less than in other nations.
In addition, public confidence in national government is among the lowest levels seen across the world. This is not a reflection on any individual administration – levels of public confidence have fluctuated significantly over the last 15 years – but is perhaps a result of the testing times we have been through over the last few years, including the Brexit referendum and a number of general elections and leadership changes.
While our governance systems are still relatively strong, the UK has also experienced a decline in government effectiveness – of the 20 countries currently ranked highest for this, the UK has deteriorated most since 2017. This is deeply worrying, as good governance and decisive and effective leadership will be crucial to guide the UK through the pandemic and create a more prosperous society in the future.
As we go through this moment of change, we need to take a holistic approach to protecting prosperity. We need to protect the public from the harms of Covid, but also from the harms of restrictions. We need to suppress the virus without suppressing our freedoms or the potential for economic growth.
The UK’s current Covid response may be saving lives from the virus itself but it is putting them at risk in a variety of other ways. The cost of lockdown is high, in terms of deaths from cancer, heart disease and other illnesses, mental health challenges, loneliness, reduced economic growth, financial struggles, and educational decline, and it is being paid by the most vulnerable in society.
China was the first country to be impacted by Covid, and its response framed the context for the UK and much of the rest of the world. Its approach was one that moved to restrict the freedoms of its people and lock down its economic engine. Such actions are consistent with China’s ranking of 90th in the Index for governance and 159th for personal freedom but they are not the actions that build prosperity, they are ones that weaken it.
As a democratic nation built on the principles of good governance and personal freedom, the UK needs to be finding ways through this crisis that speak to the power and strength of who we are and the values of our democracy.
This is a time for mature citizenry, a moment for the UK Government to trust its people, and for people to respond by taking responsibility for their actions. Decisions should be made in a transparent way, sharing the evidence and explaining the rationale.
The public needs to be let into the decision-making process as much as possible, through reliable, accurate and timely information. We should be trusted to understand the conflicting demands placed on leaders and to reflect sensibly on the likely consequences of different approaches, not just presented with a few selected indicators.
This moment, as we battle with Covid and the transition period comes to an end, is an opportunity to re-establish a clear, bold vision for the country’s future and its character. For developed nations like the UK there are no well-worn paths for the journey ahead – we need to create them. But the Prosperity Index shows us what we need to protect and develop in order to build well for the future.
We must work together to continue building an inclusive society, with a strong social contract that protects the fundamental liberties and security of every individual. We must innovate together to continue developing an open economy, that harnesses ideas and talent to create sustainable pathways out of poverty. And we must all play our part to continue creating an enabling environment, so the contributions of each person can increase the quality of life and standard of living for everyone.
Although the world has changed, how prosperity is generated and perpetuated in a nation has not. The UK has overcome significant challenges in the past, and by working together and focusing on the core principles that build prosperity, we can be confident that we can do it again.


conservativehome--2020-11-16--Why Cummings’ departure creates new problems for Johnson’s Brexit strategy

There is no substantial connection between the current EU trade talks and Dominic Cummings ’ recent work .
The former special adviser was increasingly preoccupied with the Government ’ s “ moonshot ” plans for new Covid-19 tests .
His friends say that he was leading in building an entirely new system from scratch , because the NHS test and trace scheme has not delivered the results that Ministers had hoped for , particularly on tracing and self-isolation .
Instead , the main players on the Government side have been David Frost , the Prime Minister ’ s EU adviser @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adviser – and an old Cummings hand from the Vote Leave EU referendum campaign of 2016 .
Nonetheless , the departure of Boris Johnson ’ s Chief Adviser complicates the calculation about what will follow when the talks conclude .
If there is a deal , the political context within the Conservative Parliamentary Party is likely to be be continuing confusion and suspicion about the Government ’ s so-called “ reset ” .
On the one hand , there was no love lost between many Tory MPs and Cummings , and most of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him go .
On the other , the mass of bewildering rumour , briefing and speculation about the reset has had the effect , however temporarily , of turning the Prime Minister into a blank sheet of paper on which others are writing their hopes and fears .
This can only have the effect of making the European Research Group and other Brexiteering enthusiasts on the backbenches even more suspicious of any deal than they would have been already .
And Eurosceptics are a distrustful lot .
The new Centre for Brexit Policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flawed , and it follows from this point of view that any trade deal which flows from it is in the same condition .
Our sense is that pro-Brexit MPs haven ’ t united around this position , but the Centre ’ s luminaries include Iain Duncan Smith and Owen Paterson , so it will have a voice and influence among them .
Martin Howe is also involved and set out his view recently on this site .
And if there isn ’ t a deal , the Prime Minister will find himself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his recent distance from the present negotiation , was fundamental to the Government ’ s political strategy on Brexit before last year ’ s election .
The prorogation gambit might well not have happened without him .
It failed , because it was struck down by the Supreme Court , but also succeeded , because it helped to persuade voters that Johnson was serious about leaving .
The Prime Minister will be in a lonely place in the event of No Deal .
Most Party members will doubtless back him emphatically if it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – though , we suspect , a smaller proportion .
At Ministerial and Cabinet level , the percentage is likely to be even smaller .
Michael Gove ’ s previous role at DEFRA , where he was focused on the potential Calais-related bottleneck , will have left him nervous of No Deal , as will his present experience at the Cabinet Office dealing with Covid-19 – and what is has shown up about the creakiness and dysfunctionality of much of the British state .
The Treasury and the Business department will also hope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Scottish dimension .
The Scottish Party needs Johnson to deliver on fish , but its leading lights also want a deal .
Yesterday , Frost tweeted that “ we are working to get a deal , but the only one that ’ s possible is one that is compatible with our sovereignty and takes back control of our laws , our trade , and our waters .
That has been our consistent position from the start and I will not be changing it.
” That use of the first person singular suggests a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cummings ’ departure hasn ’ t softened the negotiating position .
As for the talks themselves , we have always thought that a deal is more likely than not , and that seems to be where most business opinion too – doubtless on the intutive ground that if an agreement has been reached once with the EU on Brexit , then it can be reached twice .
And it is true that state aid , fishing and the so-called level playing field don ’ t have the raw political sensitivities of the Withdrawal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ None the less , some of the most informed reporting at present suggests that the two sides of the negotiating table are “ miles apart ” on fishing , closer on state aid – and at loggerheads over regulatory and other alignment .
So : if No Deal happens , it will come as shock to much of institutional Britain , and Johnson will face problems within the Government , particularly at Cabinet level .
And if there is a deal , the path is uncertain .
On the UK side , legislation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be contained would need to pass through both Houses of Parliament before the end of the year .
In theory , Labour and the opposition parties ought to prefer any deal to No Deal .
Practice might be another matter .
On the EU side , a so-called “ mixed ” agreement could take several years to ratify – assuming that this happens in such circumstances .
The EU could provisionally apply a treaty but only after the European Parliament and Council have voted on it .
And finally : there is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a mass of blanks where issues are unresolved .
It apparently runs “ to some 600 pages , including annexes ” .
There ’ s a discontinuity between the scrutiny that such a text would need and the time available to probe it – with an unofficial deadline of the end of next week for talks to conclude .

There is no substantial connection between the current EU trade talks and Dominic Cummings’ recent work. The former special adviser was increasingly preoccupied with the Government’s “moonshot” plans for new Covid-19 tests. His friends say that he was leading in building an entirely new system from scratch, because the NHS test and trace scheme has not delivered the results that Ministers had hoped for, particularly on tracing and self-isolation.
Instead, the main players on the Government side have been David Frost, the Prime Minister’s EU adviser, and Oliver Lewis, his Brexit adviser – and an old Cummings hand from the Vote Leave EU referendum campaign of 2016.
Nonetheless, the departure of Boris Johnson’s Chief Adviser complicates the calculation about what will follow when the talks conclude.
If there is a deal, the political context within the Conservative Parliamentary Party is likely to be be continuing confusion and suspicion about the Government’s so-called “reset”.
On the one hand, there was no love lost between many Tory MPs and Cummings, and most of them will have been glad to see him go. On the other, the mass of bewildering rumour, briefing and speculation about the reset has had the effect, however temporarily, of turning the Prime Minister into a blank sheet of paper on which others are writing their hopes and fears.
This can only have the effect of making the European Research Group and other Brexiteering enthusiasts on the backbenches even more suspicious of any deal than they would have been already. And Eurosceptics are a distrustful lot.
The new Centre for Brexit Policy argues that the Withdrawal Agreement is fatally flawed, and it follows from this point of view that any trade deal which flows from it is in the same condition. Our sense is that pro-Brexit MPs haven’t united around this position, but the Centre’s luminaries include Iain Duncan Smith and Owen Paterson, so it will have a voice and influence among them. Martin Howe is also involved and set out his view recently on this site.
And if there isn’t a deal, the Prime Minister will find himself without the adviser who, for all his recent distance from the present negotiation, was fundamental to the Government’s political strategy on Brexit before last year’s election.
The prorogation gambit might well not have happened without him. It failed, because it was struck down by the Supreme Court, but also succeeded, because it helped to persuade voters that Johnson was serious about leaving.
The Prime Minister will be in a lonely place in the event of No Deal. Most Party members will doubtless back him emphatically if it happens. So will many Conservative MPs – though, we suspect, a smaller proportion.
At Ministerial and Cabinet level, the percentage is likely to be even smaller. Michael Gove’s previous role at DEFRA, where he was focused on the potential Calais-related bottleneck, will have left him nervous of No Deal, as will his present experience at the Cabinet Office dealing with Covid-19 – and what is has shown up about the creakiness and dysfunctionality of much of the British state. The Treasury and the Business department will also hope for agreement.
Then there is the Scottish dimension. The Scottish Party needs Johnson to deliver on fish, but its leading lights also want a deal.
Yesterday, Frost tweeted that “we are working to get a deal, but the only one that’s possible is one that is compatible with our sovereignty and takes back control of our laws, our trade, and our waters. That has been our consistent position from the start and I will not be changing it.”
That use of the first person singular suggests a message to nervous pro-Brexit Tories: that Cummings’ departure hasn’t softened the negotiating position.
As for the talks themselves, we have always thought that a deal is more likely than not, and that seems to be where most business opinion too – doubtless on the intutive ground that if an agreement has been reached once with the EU on Brexit, then it can be reached twice. And it is true that state aid, fishing and the so-called level playing field don’t have the raw political sensitivities of the Withdrawal Agreement-stage matter of the UK-Ireland border.
None the less, some of the most informed reporting at present suggests that the two sides of the negotiating table are “miles apart” on fishing, closer on state aid – and at loggerheads over regulatory and other alignment.
So: if No Deal happens, it will come as shock to much of institutional Britain, and Johnson will face problems within the Government, particularly at Cabinet level.
And if there is a deal, the path is uncertain.
On the UK side, legislation to implement the treaty in which it would be contained would need to pass through both Houses of Parliament before the end of the year. In theory, Labour and the opposition parties ought to prefer any deal to No Deal. Practice might be another matter.
On the EU side, a so-called “mixed” agreement could take several years to ratify – assuming that this happens in such circumstances. The EU could provisionally apply a treaty but only after the European Parliament and Council have voted on it.
And finally: there is a draft treaty in the making – with a mass of blanks where issues are unresolved. It apparently runs “to some 600 pages, including annexes”. There’s a discontinuity between the scrutiny that such a text would need and the time available to probe it – with an unofficial deadline of the end of next week for talks to conclude.


conservativehome--2020-11-16--Please register for today’s joint Policy Exchange and ConservativeHome event on One Nation after Cov

Please register for today’s joint Policy Exchange and ConservativeHome event on One Nation after Covid

The Editor of this site will today chair a joint Policy Exchange/ConservativeHome event on : One Nation conservatism : what @ @ @ @ @ Covid-19 ?
The five panellists are : • First Minister of Northern Ireland and Leader @ @ @ @ @ .
• Senior Adviser to Douglas Ross , Leader of the Scottish Conservatives , and @ @ @ @ @ former Political Secretary to the Prime Minister and MP for Devizes .
The event will @ @ @ @ @ noon today , Monday November 16 .
You are welcome to register for it via @ @ @ @


conservativehome--2020-11-16--Neil O’Brien: The plans we must make now to ensure that our ship doesn’t hit the rocks

I ’ ve been thinking about endurance .
HMS Endurance specifically .
It was a little ship the Royal Navy used to send down to the South Atlantic .
A friend used to serve on it , and I ’ m haunted by his description of life out on a tiny ship in some of the world ’ s roughest seas : the vast winds that endlessly circle Antarctica , with no land anywhere to slow them ; the huge waves down in Drake Passage , with the green water coming over the bow and even hitting the bridge ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be broken by the sheer power of the ocean .
A bit after he was on it , the ship nearly sank following an accident .
It filled up with freezing water , and with all power lost , amid a gathering storm , it started drifting towards the rocks .
The crew spent 24 hours fighting for their lives : bailing out the ship by hand , and eventually escaped from a gathering hurricane in the nick of time .
While the story of how they survived is an inspiring one – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made that led to the accident in the first place is an informative one .
As so often with disasters , the warnings were all there : the wrong sort of ship ; no proper maintenance ; too many key staff absent ; major problems with the culture… As with so many disasters , in retrospect the warning signs were all there .
One of the great arts in politics is to see the problems and the big choices coming , so that you can solve them before the ship starts sinking .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ year where we make some very big choices that will define the coming years .
And I what I really want is readers ’ views on what the big choices are .
But let me start with my own mental list for later next year .
Let ’ s assume for a moment that we have come out of the other side of Coronavirus and Brexit .
It ’ s 2021 , the vaccine is rolling out , the virus is dying out , the economy is recovering .
Still a long way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what will happen then ?
I think there are four really big choices : First , the big fiscal choice .
At present the focus is rightly on helping support the economy until we get into sustained recovery .
But it seems likely there will be some kind of structural deficit afterwards , because the economy will be behind where we hoped it would be .
We won ’ t know how big or small the deficit will be for quite a while .
It may be small enough that we can take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we can ’ t .
So we may face some big choices on ( a ) how fast to try to close any gap , and ( b ) what mix of tax and spending decisions to use to fix it .
The second choice is our plan for growth .
Western countries have had a rough decade , and some economists worry about “ secular stagnation ” .
How do we get the economy moving faster ?
How can the tax system better support investment and innovation ?
How can we change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to better support business growth ?
How attract more inward investment in higher skill , higher tech , higher wage industries ?
Third , we face big choices about the future of the UK .
The Scottish Parliament elections on 6 May may herald a dramatic new phase in the debate .
The bookies ( though they ’ ve been wrong before ) give the SNP a 95 per cent chance of being the largest party and a 66 per cent chance of an outright majority , either of which they would use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ referendum .
The breakup of Britain would lead to a decade or more of catastrophic paralysis .
Years of arguments over currencies , pensions , debts , mortgages and state assets .
Officials working to unpick hundreds of years worth of stitching .
All parts of the UK would suffer economically , and it would make the Brexit rows of 2016-2019 look like a walk in the park .
Yet even with the virus raging , the SNP are preparing to go into overdrive to force a second referendum .
An equally strong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
How do we fight it ?
The fourth big choice is about the levelling up agenda : and how far and how fast we can go .
The lead times on getting things done can be daunting .
For example : in 2014/15 we decided to phase out rubbish “ pacer ” trains in the north .
But last won ’ t leave service in the north until next month .
We need policies which will genuinely help poorer places catch up , but also need to show significant progress by 2024 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other things .
Decisions to take about the future of devolution and local government in England , with a White Paper out in the spring .
There ’ s a second year of tough decisions to take on school exams .
The Welsh government has already cancelled next year ’ s exams .
Assuming we can still hold them in England , there are unavoidable choices on how to mark them .
Given the disruption to schooling , mock results will likely be worse , but not evenly so across different types of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has affected state and private schools very differently .
So how do universities assess potential ?
And should we measure pupils against each other with the same distribution of grades as earlier years ?
Or maintain comparison with previous years , which would likely see grades drop across the board ?
There ’ s a long-expected decision to take on universities .
Do we keep the current system ?
Or build up technical education , and try to reduce the number of students on low value university courses which lead to low earnings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ At the start of November next year , the UK will host the UN Climate Change Conference in Glasgow .
There are big choices to make about how and how fast to pursue decarbonisation at home , and lots of questions about what the UK should be pushing for at the conference .
MPs voted for net zero , but massive questions about how to do it remain open .
Are we aiming for heat for people ’ s homes to come from electricity in future , or by pumping hydrogen through the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more vehicles will be electric , what mix of ( and how much ) electricity production are we aiming for ?
Then there ’ s big questions in foreign and security policy .
The Integrated Review is due out , which ( sensibly ) combines the questions of our future defence and security spending with questions of economic security – given a world where we face ruthless technology competition , not least from China .
But there are other big security questions : France is suffering a wave of brutal Islamist terror attacks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do to pre-empt such atrocities here ?
The Prime Minister and President-Elect Joe Biden have both floated new ways to get the world ’ s democracies working together , including those like India and Japan that are outside NATO .
Can something new be brought together ?
These are just my starters for ten – so readers , it ’ s over to you .
What are the biggest choices ?
What are the problems that we have to get ahead of to keep this ship afloat ?

Neil O’Brien is MP for Harborough.
I’ve been thinking about endurance. HMS Endurance specifically. It was a little ship the Royal Navy used to send down to the South Atlantic.
A friend used to serve on it, and I’m haunted by his description of life out on a tiny ship in some of the world’s roughest seas: the vast winds that endlessly circle Antarctica, with no land anywhere to slow them; the huge waves down in Drake Passage, with the green water coming over the bow and even hitting the bridge; and of wondering whether the ship would be broken by the sheer power of the ocean.
A bit after he was on it, the ship nearly sank following an accident. It filled up with freezing water, and with all power lost, amid a gathering storm, it started drifting towards the rocks. The crew spent 24 hours fighting for their lives: bailing out the ship by hand, and eventually escaped from a gathering hurricane in the nick of time. While the story of how they survived is an inspiring one – the account of the mistakes that were made that led to the accident in the first place is an informative one.
As so often with disasters, the warnings were all there: the wrong sort of ship; no proper maintenance; too many key staff absent; major problems with the culture…
As with so many disasters, in retrospect the warning signs were all there.
One of the great arts in politics is to see the problems and the big choices coming, so that you can solve them before the ship starts sinking. 2021 is shaping up to be a year where we make some very big choices that will define the coming years.
And I what I really want is readers’ views on what the big choices are. But let me start with my own mental list for later next year.
Let’s assume for a moment that we have come out of the other side of Coronavirus and Brexit. It’s 2021, the vaccine is rolling out, the virus is dying out, the economy is recovering. Still a long way to go, I know. But what will happen then? I think there are four really big choices:
First, the big fiscal choice. At present the focus is rightly on helping support the economy until we get into sustained recovery. But it seems likely there will be some kind of structural deficit afterwards, because the economy will be behind where we hoped it would be. We won’t know how big or small the deficit will be for quite a while. It may be small enough that we can take some time. Or so big that we can’t. So we may face some big choices on (a) how fast to try to close any gap, and (b) what mix of tax and spending decisions to use to fix it.
The second choice is our plan for growth. Western countries have had a rough decade, and some economists worry about “secular stagnation”. How do we get the economy moving faster? How can the tax system better support investment and innovation? How can we change the composition of government spending on research to better support business growth? How attract more inward investment in higher skill, higher tech, higher wage industries?
Third, we face big choices about the future of the UK. The Scottish Parliament elections on 6 May may herald a dramatic new phase in the debate. The bookies (though they’ve been wrong before) give the SNP a 95 per cent chance of being the largest party and a 66 per cent chance of an outright majority, either of which they would use to rev up their demands for another referendum. The breakup of Britain would lead to a decade or more of catastrophic paralysis. Years of arguments over currencies, pensions, debts, mortgages and state assets. Officials working to unpick hundreds of years worth of stitching. All parts of the UK would suffer economically, and it would make the Brexit rows of 2016-2019 look like a walk in the park. Yet even with the virus raging, the SNP are preparing to go into overdrive to force a second referendum. An equally strong campaign will be needed to fight back. How do we fight it?
The fourth big choice is about the levelling up agenda: and how far and how fast we can go. The lead times on getting things done can be daunting. For example: in 2014/15 we decided to phase out rubbish “pacer” trains in the north. But last won’t leave service in the north until next month. We need policies which will genuinely help poorer places catch up, but also need to show significant progress by 2024.
Then there’s all the other things.
Decisions to take about the future of devolution and local government in England, with a White Paper out in the spring.
There’s a second year of tough decisions to take on school exams. The Welsh government has already cancelled next year’s exams. Assuming we can still hold them in England, there are unavoidable choices on how to mark them. Given the disruption to schooling, mock results will likely be worse, but not evenly so across different types of schools – for example, the crisis has affected state and private schools very differently. So how do universities assess potential? And should we measure pupils against each other with the same distribution of grades as earlier years? Or maintain comparison with previous years, which would likely see grades drop across the board?
There’s a long-expected decision to take on universities. Do we keep the current system? Or build up technical education, and try to reduce the number of students on low value university courses which lead to low earnings while consuming lots of taxpayer subsidy?
At the start of November next year, the UK will host the UN Climate Change Conference in Glasgow. There are big choices to make about how and how fast to pursue decarbonisation at home, and lots of questions about what the UK should be pushing for at the conference.
MPs voted for net zero, but massive questions about how to do it remain open. Are we aiming for heat for people’s homes to come from electricity in future, or by pumping hydrogen through the current gas grid? If more and more vehicles will be electric, what mix of (and how much) electricity production are we aiming for?
Then there’s big questions in foreign and security policy. The Integrated Review is due out, which (sensibly) combines the questions of our future defence and security spending with questions of economic security – given a world where we face ruthless technology competition, not least from China.
But there are other big security questions: France is suffering a wave of brutal Islamist terror attacks – is there more we need to do to pre-empt such atrocities here? The Prime Minister and President-Elect Joe Biden have both floated new ways to get the world’s democracies working together, including those like India and Japan that are outside NATO. Can something new be brought together?
These are just my starters for ten – so readers, it’s over to you. What are the biggest choices? What are the problems that we have to get ahead of to keep this ship afloat?