conservativehome--2020-07-06--John Slaughter: How housing for older people can support the recovery effort

John Slaughter is the Director of External Affairs at the Home Builders Federation and Chair of the HBF ’ s Retirement Housebuilders Group It is widely acknowledged that housebuilding will be vital to kickstarting growth and helping the country recover from the impact of coronavirus .
But as we all adjust to the new normal , Minsters should resist taking a business-as-usual approach to building the homes we need .
Instead , when he unveils his fiscal package next month , the Chancellor should put specialist retirement housing at the heart of the effort to get the housing market restarted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the stronger the case gets for helping more older people access specialist retirement housing in the wake of Covid-19 .
During the pandemic , older residents in these developments have been much safer than in wider society .
More specialist retirement properties would therefore help ensure that vulnerable people are better protected against future pandemics .
Crucially , increasing provision of specialist retirement housing would also stimulate transactions throughout the housing market .
Analysis by a former Treasury economist suggests that encouraging more older people to downsize would free up housing for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a garden .
And , through the chain effect running through the housing market , every specialist retirement property sold results in another two to three further transactions in the chain .
More specialist retirement housing would also assist with attempts to fix the social care crisis once and for all .
As people in these properties are less likely to be admitted to hospital and require further care than people in mainstream housing , this type of accommodation can generate fiscal savings to the NHS and social care services of approximately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for these properties is estimated to be at 30,000 dwellings a year , up from around 8,000 currently .
If we could build this number every year for the next 10 years , it would generate additional fiscal savings across the NHS and social services of £1.4bn per year within a decade .
On top of this , it could support the levelling up agenda , creating local jobs and boosting high streets through the spending power of the ‘ grey pound ’ .
The shortage of suitable housing for older people is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the housing market .
Millions of older people want to downsize but struggle to find suitable accommodation .
Other older people are put off from making the move due to a range of financial , sentimental , and practical concerns .
The Chancellor could begin to tackle this bottleneck by making buyers of retirement properties exempt from stamp duty in order to encourage downsizing .
Such an approach would recognise the benefits that result further down the chain , helping older people , young families , and first-time buyers .
Going further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ target of making 10 per cent of all new housing specifically for older people .
With Government targets currently set at delivering 300,000 homes a year by the middle of the next decade , this would mean delivering the objective of 30,000 retirement properties per year .
There are other policy solutions available to exploit the full potential of specialist retirement housing and , with the number of older people in England growing significantly , the time to act is now .
Across the UK , older households are becoming increasingly common .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is immediately evident that the fastest growing household demographic is amongst those over 80 , closely followed by the 65-79 group .
Meanwhile , the younger household demographic is growing slowest .
Despite this , we currently have a housing supply policy geared towards encouraging the building of first-time buyer homes .
Given the issues that young people face around the high cost of housing , this focus is entirely understandable .
But the expected dramatic increase in the number of older households , combined with the benefits outlined , above should give @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thought .
In a speech earlier his year , Chris Pincher , the Housing Minister , acknowledged that “ we need more housing for older people ” .
Six weeks ago , the Government gave the housing market the green light to get moving again .
When he delivers his fiscal package , the Chancellor should take the opportunity to shift gear in the direction that the Housing Minister has suggested .

John Slaughter is the Director of External Affairs at the Home Builders Federation and Chair of the HBF’s Retirement Housebuilders Group
It is widely acknowledged that housebuilding will be vital to kickstarting growth and helping the country recover from the impact of coronavirus. But as we all adjust to the new normal, Minsters should resist taking a business-as-usual approach to building the homes we need. Instead, when he unveils his fiscal package next month, the Chancellor should put specialist retirement housing at the heart of the effort to get the housing market restarted.
The more you examine the evidence, the stronger the case gets for helping more older people access specialist retirement housing in the wake of Covid-19. During the pandemic, older residents in these developments have been much safer than in wider society. More specialist retirement properties would therefore help ensure that vulnerable people are better protected against future pandemics.
Crucially, increasing provision of specialist retirement housing would also stimulate transactions throughout the housing market. Analysis by a former Treasury economist suggests that encouraging more older people to downsize would free up housing for young families looking for a family-sized home with a garden. And, through the chain effect running through the housing market, every specialist retirement property sold results in another two to three further transactions in the chain.
More specialist retirement housing would also assist with attempts to fix the social care crisis once and for all. As people in these properties are less likely to be admitted to hospital and require further care than people in mainstream housing, this type of accommodation can generate fiscal savings to the NHS and social care services of approximately £3,500 per person per year.
Demand for these properties is estimated to be at 30,000 dwellings a year, up from around 8,000 currently. If we could build this number every year for the next 10 years, it would generate additional fiscal savings across the NHS and social services of £1.4bn per year within a decade. On top of this, it could support the levelling up agenda, creating local jobs and boosting high streets through the spending power of the ‘grey pound’.
The shortage of suitable housing for older people is contributing towards a bottleneck at the top of the housing market. Millions of older people want to downsize but struggle to find suitable accommodation. Other older people are put off from making the move due to a range of financial, sentimental, and practical concerns.
The Chancellor could begin to tackle this bottleneck by making buyers of retirement properties exempt from stamp duty in order to encourage downsizing. Such an approach would recognise the benefits that result further down the chain, helping older people, young families, and first-time buyers. Going further, the Government should set a national target of making 10 per cent of all new housing specifically for older people. With Government targets currently set at delivering 300,000 homes a year by the middle of the next decade, this would mean delivering the objective of 30,000 retirement properties per year.
There are other policy solutions available to exploit the full potential of specialist retirement housing and, with the number of older people in England growing significantly, the time to act is now. Across the UK, older households are becoming increasingly common. Looking over the available data, it is immediately evident that the fastest growing household demographic is amongst those over 80, closely followed by the 65-79 group. Meanwhile, the younger household demographic is growing slowest.
Despite this, we currently have a housing supply policy geared towards encouraging the building of first-time buyer homes. Given the issues that young people face around the high cost of housing, this focus is entirely understandable. But the expected dramatic increase in the number of older households, combined with the benefits outlined, above should give the Chancellor and all politicians pause for thought.
In a speech earlier his year, Chris Pincher, the Housing Minister, acknowledged that “we need more housing for older people”. Six weeks ago, the Government gave the housing market the green light to get moving again. When he delivers his fiscal package, the Chancellor should take the opportunity to shift gear in the direction that the Housing Minister has suggested.


conservativehome--2020-07-06--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the College of Policing – and mor

Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the College of Policing – 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 .
“ Non-Executive Directors provide a key role in the strategic and operational leadership of the Northern Ireland Office .
They complement the balance of skills and experience of Government Ministers and officials by bringing independent advice , support , constructive challenge and a fresh external perspective to help shape a department ’ s work .
To @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Northern Ireland Office Departmental Board and to ensure that it can provide expert advice to Ministers on a wide range of issues and challenges , we would particularly welcome applications from people with experience in the business and commercial sector.
” “ IE : UK is a joint industry and government partnership , strategically targeting major infrastructure export opportunities around the world .
It is supported by DIT ’ s network of local staff in 116 markets , with the objective of identifying , pursuing , and delivering major strategic infrastructure projects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of IE : UK is to increase UK infrastructure exports and identify gaps in the UK supply chain for FDI to fill .
The IE : UK Board is co-chaired by DIT ‘ s Minister for Exports and a senior industry leader .
The Industry sector co-Chair will benefit from working closely with the Minister for Exports and leading UK based infrastructure companies to help shape the direction of UK export policy and support within the infrastructure sector.
” “ The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care is looking to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to NHS England .
NHS England leads the National Health Service in England and sets its priorities and direction .
It is responsible for arranging the provision of health services and for more than £150 billion of funds .
The primary role of Non-Executive Directors is , as a team , to lead in developing the strategy for , and overseeing the work of NHS England by participating fully in the work of the board , both in the context of the board meetings themselves , and more widely .
Non-Executive Directors also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ externally , alongside the Chief Executive , the Chair and the wider Executive team.
” “ The Scottish National Investment Bank Act ( ‘ the Act ’ ) received Royal Assent in February 2020 , paving the way to establish the Bank as a public limited company and public body accountable to Scottish Ministers who own and set its strategic missions .
The Act sets out how the Bank should operate in order to meet missions which will be set by Scottish Ministers as the sole-shareholder .
In response to these missions the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Strategy which will help create and shape future markets , spark innovation and tackle socio-economic challenges in Scotland .
Additionally , the Bank will have a key role to play in Scotland ’ s emerging economy post Covid-19.
” Time : Up to 25 days per annum .
“ The TRA as a statutory body would perform an independent function , investigating and recommending to Ministers when to impose trade remedies measures in response to injury caused by unfair trading practices , such as dumping , subsidies , or unforeseen surges in imports @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the TRA ’ s recommendations .
The TRA will also carry out reviews of those existing EU measures transitioned into the UK system to ensure that they are specific to the UK market , in line with WTO rules .
The TRA will also be responsible for providing support and assistance to DIT on trade… The TRA Board sets the strategic direction and priorities of the organisation , monitoring its performance against its objectives and holding the Chief Executive and executive team to account.
” Remuneration : £15,000 per annum ( additional £3,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Risk Committee ) .
“ The chair is responsible for leading and managing the Panel .
They must lead development and implementation of a strategic vision for the Panel and ensure the reviews under their supervision identify improvements safeguarding partners or others should make to better safeguard and promote the welfare of children…Successful applicants will demonstrate the ability to : provide strong strategic leadership ; chair high level meetings ; effectively manage team dynamics and maintain the confidence of others , including child safeguarding professionals , Ministers and the public .
The right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of multi-agency child safeguarding arrangements , policy and frontline delivery.
” “ The Chair of the College of Policing is appointed by the Home Secretary to ensure the long-term success of the College .
Together with the College Board of Directors , the Chair ( who must not have a background in operational policing ) will set the College ’ s strategic direction and aims against budgets and priorities .
They will provide the College Chief Executive and team of Executive Directors with the necessary leadership , support and monitoring that will help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Secretary ’ s goals .
The College plays a critical role in helping to increase the diversity within the police to reflect the communities they serve.
” “ The Secretary of State for International Trade and Minister for Women and Equalities is seeking a strong , strategic leader who will continue to develop the Equality and Human Rights Commission ( EHRC ) and set the Commission ’ s overall direction to reflect its crucial role as an equality body and National Human Rights Institution .
This appointment fulfils the requirement of the Equality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should appoint a Chair to the Commission .
Although the Commission is an independent organisation , the Chair is accountable to the above sponsoring Minister .
You will develop and maintain high-value relationships with Ministers , influential partners , governments at home and abroad , opinion formers , industry and others , demonstrating judgment , integrity and resilience in the face of challenge .
”

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 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.
– – – – – – – – – –
Northern Ireland Office – Non-Executive Director
“Non-Executive Directors provide a key role in the strategic and operational leadership of the Northern Ireland Office. They complement the balance of skills and experience of Government Ministers and officials by bringing independent advice, support, constructive challenge and a fresh external perspective to help shape a department’s work. To complement the existing balance of skills on the Northern Ireland Office Departmental Board and to ensure that it can provide expert advice to Ministers on a wide range of issues and challenges, we would particularly welcome applications from people with experience in the business and commercial sector.”
Time: Approx. 10 days per annum.
Remuneration: £7,500 per annum plus expenses.
Closes: 10 July
– – – – – – – – – –
Infrastructure Exports:UK – Board co-Chair
“IE:UK is a joint industry and government partnership, strategically targeting major infrastructure export opportunities around the world. It is supported by DIT’s network of local staff in 116 markets, with the objective of identifying, pursuing, and delivering major strategic infrastructure projects through a consortium-led approach. The objective of IE:UK is to increase UK infrastructure exports and identify gaps in the UK supply chain for FDI to fill. The IE:UK Board is co-chaired by DIT‘s Minister for Exports and a senior industry leader. The Industry sector co-Chair will benefit from working closely with the Minister for Exports and leading UK based infrastructure companies to help shape the direction of UK export policy and support within the infrastructure sector.”
Time: 3-4 meetings a year.
Remuneration: None.
Closes: 13 July
– – – – – – – – – –
NHS England – Non-Executive Directors
“The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care is looking to make two Non-Executive Director (NED) appointments to NHS England. NHS England leads the National Health Service in England and sets its priorities and direction. It is responsible for arranging the provision of health services and for more than £150 billion of funds. The primary role of Non-Executive Directors is, as a team, to lead in developing the strategy for, and overseeing the work of NHS England by participating fully in the work of the board, both in the context of the board meetings themselves, and more widely. Non-Executive Directors also play a part in representing NHS England externally, alongside the Chief Executive, the Chair and the wider Executive team.”
Time: 2-3 days per month.
Remuneration: £7,883 (£13,137) per annum.
Closes: 16 July
– – – – – – – – – –
Scottish National Investment Bank – Non-Executive Directors
“The Scottish National Investment Bank Act (‘the Act’) received Royal Assent in February 2020, paving the way to establish the Bank as a public limited company and public body accountable to Scottish Ministers who own and set its strategic missions. The Act sets out how the Bank should operate in order to meet missions which will be set by Scottish Ministers as the sole-shareholder. In response to these missions the Bank is required to develop an Investment Strategy which will help create and shape future markets, spark innovation and tackle socio-economic challenges in Scotland. Additionally, the Bank will have a key role to play in Scotland’s emerging economy post Covid-19.”
Time: Up to 25 days per annum.
Remuneration: £21,250 per annum.
Closes: 24 July
– – – – – – – – – –
UK Trade Remedies Authority – Non-Executive Directors
“The TRA as a statutory body would perform an independent function, investigating and recommending to Ministers when to impose trade remedies measures in response to injury caused by unfair trading practices, such as dumping, subsidies, or unforeseen surges in imports. Ministers would decide whether to agree the TRA’s recommendations. The TRA will also carry out reviews of those existing EU measures transitioned into the UK system to ensure that they are specific to the UK market, in line with WTO rules. The TRA will also be responsible for providing support and assistance to DIT on trade… The TRA Board sets the strategic direction and priorities of the organisation, monitoring its performance against its objectives and holding the Chief Executive and executive team to account.”
Time: Approx. 15-20 per annum.
Remuneration: £15,000 per annum (additional £3,000 for the Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee).
Closes: 24 July
– – – – – – – – – –
Child Safeguarding Practice Review Panel – Chair
“The chair is responsible for leading and managing the Panel. They must lead development and implementation of a strategic vision for the Panel and ensure the reviews under their supervision identify improvements safeguarding partners or others should make to better safeguard and promote the welfare of children…Successful applicants will demonstrate the ability to: provide strong strategic leadership; chair high level meetings; effectively manage team dynamics and maintain the confidence of others, including child safeguarding professionals, Ministers and the public. The right candidate will also demonstrate a strong understanding of multi-agency child safeguarding arrangements, policy and frontline delivery.”
Time: 6-8 days per month.
Remuneration: £500 per diem.
Closes: 31 July
– – – – – – – – – –
College of Policing – Chair
“The Chair of the College of Policing is appointed by the Home Secretary to ensure the long-term success of the College. Together with the College Board of Directors, the Chair (who must not have a background in operational policing) will set the College’s strategic direction and aims against budgets and priorities. They will provide the College Chief Executive and team of Executive Directors with the necessary leadership, support and monitoring that will help them to meet the College and Home Secretary’s goals. The College plays a critical role in helping to increase the diversity within the police to reflect the communities they serve.”
Time: 1-2 days per week.
Remuneration: £135,000 pro rata.
Closes: 03 August
– – – – – – – – – –
Equality & Human Rights Commission – Chair
“The Secretary of State for International Trade and Minister for Women and Equalities is seeking a strong, strategic leader who will continue to develop the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and set the Commission’s overall direction to reflect its crucial role as an equality body and National Human Rights Institution. This appointment fulfils the requirement of the Equality Act 2006 that the Secretary of State should appoint a Chair to the Commission. Although the Commission is an independent organisation, the Chair is accountable to the above sponsoring Minister. You will develop and maintain high-value relationships with Ministers, influential partners, governments at home and abroad, opinion formers, industry and others, demonstrating judgment, integrity and resilience in the face of challenge.”
Time: 1-2 days per week.
Remuneration: £500 per diem.
Closes: 03 August


conservativehome--2020-07-06--The arts bailout: a reminder not to underestimate Dowden

In recent weeks , it ’ s fair to say that Oliver Dowden , the Secretary of State for Digital , Culture , Media and Sport , hasn ’ t been particularly popular with the arts sector .
After the industry was badly affected by the Coronavirus crisis and the mass closures of theatres , cinemas and the rest , many accused him of not doing enough .
Indeed , when he announced a five-stage roadmap to help businesses recover , people took this as evidence of a man who ’ s all talk and no action .
“ If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to invest in and save theatre , then you should at least announce that decision as soon as possible ” , posted one individual on Twitter , very much encompassing the general attitude .
With that being said , yesterday the culture secretary forced everyone to reconsider their perceptions of him after he managed to negotiate £1.57 million in funding for the industry .
As The Times put it : “ The phrase ‘ from zero to hero ’ may be overused , but what better words describe Oliver Dowden today ?
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only transform the future of the arts sector , but that of Dowden within the political sphere , who is experiencing his first real arrival on the public stage – the same way Rishi Sunak did when appointed Chancellor .
Dowden ’ s announcement speaks , first , of his ability as a PR man .
Despite the fact that Sunak is announcing a series of measures on Wednesday – including stamp duty scrapped for first-time buyers and an investment in green jobs – the Culture Secretary managed to get his own statement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The announcement is not only impressive in its pledges – which includes £120 million capital infrastructure and for heritage construction projects in England , among others – but the list of illustrious names who ’ ve added their support to it , such as Andrew Lloyd Webber , Sir Simon Rattle and Alex Beard , the Chief Executive of the Royal Opera House .
There ’ s also the fact , of course , that Dowden negotiated such an enormous bailout in the first place .
It indicates that he has great @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s been developing for years , having started out as a specialist adviser and as David Cameron ’ s deputy chief of staff .
Now the political networking is paying off .
Although the package is not perfect – there have been complaints about whether it can support smaller venues and freelancers – it has received an overwhelmingly positive response .
“ It is a real vindication that we have been listened to “ , Kwame Kwei-Armah , artistic director of the Young Vic , told Times Radio ; Sir Nicholas Hytner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Theatre , said it was a better plan than anyone expected .
Throughout the Coronavirus crisis , Dowden has pledged to sort out an investment for the arts – even if no one believed him – so the fact that he has not so much succeeded , but exceeded all expectations , bodes well for his future in the party – though not perhaps for the BBC , which he has previously argued needs an ideological shake-up .
And , as Sunday ’ s news shows , Dowden is a man who means @ @

In recent weeks, it’s fair to say that Oliver Dowden, the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, hasn’t been particularly popular with the arts sector. After the industry was badly affected by the Coronavirus crisis and the mass closures of theatres, cinemas and the rest, many accused him of not doing enough.
Indeed, when he announced a five-stage roadmap to help businesses recover, people took this as evidence of a man who’s all talk and no action. “If you and your government have no desire to invest in and save theatre, then you should at least announce that decision as soon as possible”, posted one individual on Twitter, very much encompassing the general attitude.
With that being said, yesterday the culture secretary forced everyone to reconsider their perceptions of him after he managed to negotiate £1.57 million in funding for the industry. As The Times put it: “The phrase ‘from zero to hero’ may be overused, but what better words describe Oliver Dowden today?” It was an achievement that will not only transform the future of the arts sector, but that of Dowden within the political sphere, who is experiencing his first real arrival on the public stage – the same way Rishi Sunak did when appointed Chancellor.
Dowden’s announcement speaks, first, of his ability as a PR man. Despite the fact that Sunak is announcing a series of measures on Wednesday – including stamp duty scrapped for first-time buyers and an investment in green jobs – the Culture Secretary managed to get his own statement a centre stage slot over the weekend.
The announcement is not only impressive in its pledges – which includes £120 million capital infrastructure and for heritage construction projects in England, among others – but the list of illustrious names who’ve added their support to it, such as Andrew Lloyd Webber, Sir Simon Rattle and Alex Beard, the Chief Executive of the Royal Opera House.
There’s also the fact, of course, that Dowden negotiated such an enormous bailout in the first place. It indicates that he has great influence in Downing Street, which he’s been developing for years, having started out as a specialist adviser and as David Cameron’s deputy chief of staff. Now the political networking is paying off.
Although the package is not perfect – there have been complaints about whether it can support smaller venues and freelancers – it has received an overwhelmingly positive response. “It is a real vindication that we have been listened to“, Kwame Kwei-Armah, artistic director of the Young Vic, told Times Radio; Sir Nicholas Hytner, once Artistic Director of the National Theatre, said it was a better plan than anyone expected.
Throughout the Coronavirus crisis, Dowden has pledged to sort out an investment for the arts – even if no one believed him – so the fact that he has not so much succeeded, but exceeded all expectations, bodes well for his future in the party – though not perhaps for the BBC, which he has previously argued needs an ideological shake-up. And, as Sunday’s news shows, Dowden is a man who means business.


conservativehome--2020-07-07--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the College of Policing – and mor


conservativehome--2020-07-07--Sunak’s statement tomorrow.  How much like the Old Normal can we afford to make the New Normal be –

Sunak’s statement tomorrow.  How much like the Old Normal can we afford to make the New Normal be – or try to?

Sajid Javid didn ’ t have a chance to deliver a Budget .
Rishi Sunak has been in place for less six months after succeeding him , but has already made at least three big financial statements .
Tomorrow he will deliver a fourth .
What should he say ?
The number of those previous announcements is a warning .
No Chancellor can know the future .
But the Treasury ’ s crystal ball is misted over all the way round .
Andy Haldane ’ s claim that the current downturn looks V-shaped may be both right but irrelevant – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ahead .
We don ’ t know what the Coronavirus will do next winter , how many local areas will follow Leicester into locking down , whether the Government ’ s test and trace plan will work and , if it doesn ’ t , whether a national shutdown will be reannounced – and , if so , how many people would observe it .
Until or unless there is a vaccine , or effective treatments can be discovered and marketed , or mass immunity is achieved , Covid-19 will have the capacity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unless the virus simply peters out of its own accord .
So whatever Sunak announces tomorrow could be even more provisional than most schemes of most Chancellors .
And even if one assumes the best , he has a big decision of principle to take .
His big bazooka has fired out well over £300 billion to date , a sum greater than a third of a whole year ’ s worth of public spending .
This was emergency surgery to deal with a economic heart attack , of a type unknown in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unlike the effects of the two world wars with which it is sometimes compared .
There was no voluntary social distancing or compulsory state lockdown after either 1914 or 1939 .
Crisis medical intervention when the patient is flat on his back is one thing ; when he is up and walking , it is quite another , however tottery he may be .
The art of the doctor is then to withdraw as much assistance as possible , with the aim of getting back to normality .
Which takes us to what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like at best .
On this site tomorrow , Ryan Bourne will write his fortnightly economic column , and one of his recent ones set out the concept of the Inefficient Economy .
In it , he painted a Coronavirus-tainted picture of “ middle-seats left free on flights , wide spaces between tables , and extensive cleaning of hairstyling tools ” .
“ Cleaners will disrupt workplaces more often to keep workspaces sanitised , ” he continued .
“ Employees still working from home often , or in office shifts , or unable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inefficiencies .
Then there ’ s staffing difficulties with workers self-isolating when they get symptoms or disruptions to child-care.
” “ If that wasn ’ t enough , the economy will also face a labour market shock .
Jobs will be permanently lost , while others will be created.
” So right at the start of drawing up his plans , the Chancellor faces a question of principle .
How much should he seek to support those for whom the new normal isn ’ t the old one – if at all ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Let ’ s consider a few of them .
First and most obviously , there are those enterprises whose practical workings aren ’ t compatible with social distancing at all – theatres ; marathons ; big stadium events ; rallies ; concerts .
Sunak has already answered this element of the question , committing to £1.5 billion for theatres , galleries and museums .
Our worry about it is practical rather than political : just how big a burden of borrowing will the markets be willing to bear , if he follows suit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Boris Johnson and the Chancellor plans to make , fuelled by tax cuts and spending increases , is workable if the markets are willing to continue to lend money to the Government at rock bottom rates .
But that doesn ’ t guarantee that the growth will come .
Nor that the borrowing will be affordable .
Nonetheless , Sunak will clearly now continue as he means to go on .
That means , second , helping the human victims of social distancing and the shutdown , in the front line of which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or are about to , as the furlough scheme is withdrawn .
In particular , the Chancellor will be thinking of the younger people entering the jobs market for the first time , and those people who have become unemployed very recently .
Hence his plan for 30,000 new traineeships and , we presume , adapting JobCentre Plus and careers services to the new realities .
Dealing with the consequences of mass unemployment , which is likely to return for the first time in a quarter-century , however briefly , must be at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We will return to it later , after dealing briefly with two other sorts of categories of losers .
Into the third , we will cram every form of business and enterprise that must grapple with the effects of the virus – from railways to high streets to the universities to airports .
Our hope is that , in not putting the taxpayer on the hook for everything , the Chancellor will be discerning about the somethings .
For example , the Government has a chance never to let a crisis go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If some universities are no longer financially viable , Ministers will have an opportunity to rebalance post-16 education towards the vocational rather than the academic , along the lines set out in the Augar Review .
Fourth , there is a social justice dimension to Sunak ’ s plans , or should be .
Cutting taxes is always a desirable thing .
But there is no point in reducing stamp duty simply in order to revive Britain ’ s housing market dance – one in which too few younger people are able @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reform in order to open up more room on the ballroom floor .
Then consider the other side of the housing market – those who have no home at all .
What will happen to rough sleepers once the hotels that are accomodating them open up again ?
Tomorrow , Sunak will set new fiscal rules – which he must do , since the old ones are out of date , and he must have new ones to accomodate cutting taxes and borrowing more .
We hope he will concentrate the former on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looking for a national insurance reduction , a longer business rates holiday , and VAT cuts .
Watch the Chancellor ’ s statement carefully for coat-trailing on higher property taxes , in the medium-term , and pensions relief changes .
These are surely coming .
But there we go – assuming that Sunak ’ s plans will have a shelf-life longer than a few months , which as we said right at the start may not be the case .

Sajid Javid didn’t have a chance to deliver a Budget. Rishi Sunak has been in place for less six months after succeeding him, but has already made at least three big financial statements. Tomorrow he will deliver a fourth. What should he say?
The number of those previous announcements is a warning. No Chancellor can know the future. But the Treasury’s crystal ball is misted over all the way round. Andy Haldane’s claim that the current downturn looks V-shaped may be both right but irrelevant – if recovery is upturned by what lies ahead.
We don’t know what the Coronavirus will do next winter, how many local areas will follow Leicester into locking down, whether the Government’s test and trace plan will work and, if it doesn’t, whether a national shutdown will be reannounced – and, if so, how many people would observe it.
Until or unless there is a vaccine, or effective treatments can be discovered and marketed, or mass immunity is achieved, Covid-19 will have the capacity to collapse countrys’ healthcare systems, unless the virus simply peters out of its own accord.
So whatever Sunak announces tomorrow could be even more provisional than most schemes of most Chancellors. And even if one assumes the best, he has a big decision of principle to take. His big bazooka has fired out well over £300 billion to date, a sum greater than a third of a whole year’s worth of public spending.
This was emergency surgery to deal with a economic heart attack, of a type unknown in this country’s history, and unlike the effects of the two world wars with which it is sometimes compared. There was no voluntary social distancing or compulsory state lockdown after either 1914 or 1939.
Crisis medical intervention when the patient is flat on his back is one thing; when he is up and walking, it is quite another, however tottery he may be. The art of the doctor is then to withdraw as much assistance as possible, with the aim of getting back to normality. Which takes us to what the “new normal” will look like at best.
On this site tomorrow, Ryan Bourne will write his fortnightly economic column, and one of his recent ones set out the concept of the Inefficient Economy. In it, he painted a Coronavirus-tainted picture of “middle-seats left free on flights, wide spaces between tables, and extensive cleaning of hairstyling tools”.
“Cleaners will disrupt workplaces more often to keep workspaces sanitised,” he continued. “Employees still working from home often, or in office shifts, or unable to travel internationally, will entrench communication inefficiencies. Then there’s staffing difficulties with workers self-isolating when they get symptoms or disruptions to child-care.”
“If that wasn’t enough, the economy will also face a labour market shock. Jobs will be permanently lost, while others will be created.” So right at the start of drawing up his plans, the Chancellor faces a question of principle. How much should he seek to support those for whom the new normal isn’t the old one – if at all?
There are different categories of losers. Let’s consider a few of them. First and most obviously, there are those enterprises whose practical workings aren’t compatible with social distancing at all – theatres; marathons; big stadium events; rallies; concerts.
Sunak has already answered this element of the question, committing to £1.5 billion for theatres, galleries and museums. Our worry about it is practical rather than political: just how big a burden of borrowing will the markets be willing to bear, if he follows suit elsewhere?
The dash for growth that Boris Johnson and the Chancellor plans to make, fuelled by tax cuts and spending increases, is workable if the markets are willing to continue to lend money to the Government at rock bottom rates. But that doesn’t guarantee that the growth will come. Nor that the borrowing will be affordable.
Nonetheless, Sunak will clearly now continue as he means to go on. That means, second, helping the human victims of social distancing and the shutdown, in the front line of which are those who have lost their jobs or are about to, as the furlough scheme is withdrawn.
In particular, the Chancellor will be thinking of the younger people entering the jobs market for the first time, and those people who have become unemployed very recently. Hence his plan for 30,000 new traineeships and, we presume, adapting JobCentre Plus and careers services to the new realities.
Dealing with the consequences of mass unemployment, which is likely to return for the first time in a quarter-century, however briefly, must be at the heart of Sunak’s package. We will return to it later, after dealing briefly with two other sorts of categories of losers.
Into the third, we will cram every form of business and enterprise that must grapple with the effects of the virus – from railways to high streets to the universities to airports. Our hope is that, in not putting the taxpayer on the hook for everything, the Chancellor will be discerning about the somethings.
For example, the Government has a chance never to let a crisis go to waste with regard to higher education. If some universities are no longer financially viable, Ministers will have an opportunity to rebalance post-16 education towards the vocational rather than the academic, along the lines set out in the Augar Review.
Fourth, there is a social justice dimension to Sunak’s plans, or should be. Cutting taxes is always a desirable thing. But there is no point in reducing stamp duty simply in order to revive Britain’s housing market dance – one in which too few younger people are able to participate.
So we need planning reform in order to open up more room on the ballroom floor. Then consider the other side of the housing market – those who have no home at all. What will happen to rough sleepers once the hotels that are accomodating them open up again?
Tomorrow, Sunak will set new fiscal rules – which he must do, since the old ones are out of date, and he must have new ones to accomodate cutting taxes and borrowing more. We hope he will concentrate the former on business and workers, and will be looking for a national insurance reduction, a longer business rates holiday, and VAT cuts.
Watch the Chancellor’s statement carefully for coat-trailing on higher property taxes, in the medium-term, and pensions relief changes. These are surely coming. But there we go – assuming that Sunak’s plans will have a shelf-life longer than a few months, which as we said right at the start may not be the case.


conservativehome--2020-07-07--Radical: Our top five reads for the summer on gender-related issues

Last week , it was reported that Dominic Cummings had set the special advisers ( SpAds ) some books to read ahead of an “ away day ” .
Dubbed “ spad school ” , by Stephen Swinford , the advisers ’ homework allegedly included reading all 350 pages of Philip Tetlock ’ s Superforecasting , alongside Andrew Grove ’ s ( only slightly shorter ) High Output Management .
Now , whatever your preferred method for predicting the future , it seems unlikely that the reading-list-story trend will stop here .
It ’ s a yearly classic , after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school-leaver preparing for university entry , or a Government minister intending to use time away from Westminster to learn the historical context of your brief , your summer plans probably include some targeted reading .
So , here are our top five Radical reads for the summer .
As regular readers of this column might expect , they ’ re not cheerful page-turners .
But they may well change your life .
1 ) It ’ s a badly kept secret that the Equality Act ( 2010 ) and the Gender Recognition Act @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the best-drafted pieces of legislation .
Discrimination solicitor Audrey Ludwig ’ s deep dive into the former – published just a few days ago on the WPUK site – emphasises its incredible complexity , in a neatly practical manner : she explains how she goes about determining whether someone has faced unlawful discrimination under the Equality Act ’ s purview .
Along the way , Ludwig highlights the lack of “ objective research and analysis ” into the impact the introduction of “ self-ID ” would have on sex discrimination , and related @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to these matters , she reveals , is the role the “ legal comparator ” plays in discrimination cases : self-ID would change “ who and who can not be used as a legal comparator ” , and this would have serious repercussions .
2 ) Employment solicitor Rebecca Bull ’ s recent briefing note for MBM Policy Analysis , Impact of Gender Recognition Reform on Sex Based Rights , sets out the implications of proposed Gender Recognition Act reforms on sex-based rights and protections under the Equality Act .
Like or loathe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a lot to criticise about it ) , it ’ s now woven into the way in which every business and public-sector organisation has to operate .
How services are provided , and how employees are paid and treated at work , are prescribed by the Equality Act .
Where Audrey Ludwig ’ s blog gives a snapshot of how self-ID would affect the way in which the Equality Act works in cases of workplace discrimination , Bull sets out the “ significant concern that single sex service provision on the lines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and severely compromise the rights which women currently have to single sex services ” .
3 ) The NHS recently edited its guidance on puberty blockers as a treatment for transgender children , to remove the claim that suppressing puberty with synthetic hormones is reversible , and to introduce a description of harmful side effects .
Much concern has arisen about the medical path increasingly regularly embarked upon by children who identify as the opposite sex .
And , in professors of medicine , Paul W. Hruz , Lawrence S. Mayer , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and comprehensive account of the use of puberty blockers , and the subsequent hormone therapies and surgeries that many of these children move on to as young adults .
The authors rebut the claim often proffered by medical professionals and advocacy groups that puberty suppression is fully reversible , and highlight a lack of scrutiny of the safety and efficacy of what they consider to be “ experimental medicine ” being practised on vulnerable children .
Anyone who ’ s concerned about the treatments currently being administered to hundreds of UK children who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will find this article useful and troubling in equal measure .
4 ) Published last month , Joanna Williams ’ Civitas report , The Corrosive Impact of Transgender Ideology , is as punchily written and hard-hitting as its title , and her spiked credentials , suggest .
But it ’ s also well researched and argued , with Williams ’ experience as an academic grounding her readable style .
Culminating in five policy recommendations – including the immediate prohibition of the prescription of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to children – this paper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as it comes in at about a third the length of Tetlock ) addresses the “ social impact ” of the “ emergence of the idea of transgender ” .
It also provides a neat summary of a shift in “ progressive ” rights-based activism – away from demands for “ more freedom from the state for people to determine their sex lives unconstrained by the law ’ , and towards demands for “ recognition and protection from the state [ … ] to regulate the behaviour of those outside of the identity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claims and arguments lie beneath all policy recommendations and legal analyses , and the written output of the sex/gender debate is no exception .
Indeed , those of us who write about these matters are often criticised for being too esoteric , and for failing to engage with the real world .
Hopefully , the practical focus of the works listed above will serve to counter that criticism sufficiently , however , for us to be able to end this week ’ s column by recommending some top philosophical writing .
We have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s upcoming book , Material Girls : Why Reality Matters for Feminists , due out in 2021 .
But , until then , check out her recent TLS review of Judith Butler ’ s The Force of Nonviolence , and her 2019 Aristotelian Society talk on sexual orientation as a “ reflexive disposition to be sexually attracted to people of a particular biological Sex or Sexes ” .

Victoria Hewson is a solicitor and Rebecca Lowe is the former director of FREER, and a former assistant editor of ConservativeHome. Together they found Radical, a campaign for truth and freedom in the gender recognition debate.
Last week, it was reported that Dominic Cummings had set the special advisers (SpAds) some books to read ahead of an “away day”. Dubbed “spad school”, by Stephen Swinford, the advisers’ homework allegedly included reading all 350 pages of Philip Tetlock’s Superforecasting, alongside Andrew Grove’s (only slightly shorter) High Output Management.
Now, whatever your preferred method for predicting the future, it seems unlikely that the reading-list-story trend will stop here. It’s a yearly classic, after all. Whether you’re a school-leaver preparing for university entry, or a Government minister intending to use time away from Westminster to learn the historical context of your brief, your summer plans probably include some targeted reading.
So, here are our top five Radical reads for the summer. As regular readers of this column might expect, they’re not cheerful page-turners. But they may well change your life.
1) It’s a badly kept secret that the Equality Act (2010) and the Gender Recognition Act (2004) aren’t exactly the best-drafted pieces of legislation. Discrimination solicitor Audrey Ludwig’s deep dive into the former – published just a few days ago on the WPUK site – emphasises its incredible complexity, in a neatly practical manner: she explains how she goes about determining whether someone has faced unlawful discrimination under the Equality Act’s purview.
Along the way, Ludwig highlights the lack of “objective research and analysis” into the impact the introduction of “self-ID” would have on sex discrimination, and related issues, such as pay. Key to these matters, she reveals, is the role the “legal comparator” plays in discrimination cases: self-ID would change “who and who cannot be used as a legal comparator”, and this would have serious repercussions.
2) Employment solicitor Rebecca Bull’s recent briefing note for MBM Policy Analysis, Impact of Gender Recognition Reform on Sex Based Rights, sets out the implications of proposed Gender Recognition Act reforms on sex-based rights and protections under the Equality Act.
Like or loathe the Equality Act (and there’s a lot to criticise about it), it’s now woven into the way in which every business and public-sector organisation has to operate. How services are provided, and how employees are paid and treated at work, are prescribed by the Equality Act.
Where Audrey Ludwig’s blog gives a snapshot of how self-ID would affect the way in which the Equality Act works in cases of workplace discrimination, Bull sets out the “significant concern that single sex service provision on the lines of natal sex will be rendered unworkable and severely compromise the rights which women currently have to single sex services”.
3) The NHS recently edited its guidance on puberty blockers as a treatment for transgender children, to remove the claim that suppressing puberty with synthetic hormones is reversible, and to introduce a description of harmful side effects.
Much concern has arisen about the medical path increasingly regularly embarked upon by children who identify as the opposite sex. And, in Growing Pains: Problems with Puberty Suppression in Treating Gender Dysphoria, professors of medicine, Paul W. Hruz, Lawrence S. Mayer, and Paul R. McHugh, give a clear and comprehensive account of the use of puberty blockers, and the subsequent hormone therapies and surgeries that many of these children move on to as young adults.
The authors rebut the claim often proffered by medical professionals and advocacy groups that puberty suppression is fully reversible, and highlight a lack of scrutiny of the safety and efficacy of what they consider to be “experimental medicine” being practised on vulnerable children.
Anyone who’s concerned about the treatments currently being administered to hundreds of UK children who’ve been diagnosed with gender dysphoria will find this article useful and troubling in equal measure.
4) Published last month, Joanna Williams’ Civitas report, The Corrosive Impact of Transgender Ideology, is as punchily written and hard-hitting as its title, and her spiked credentials, suggest. But it’s also well researched and argued, with Williams’ experience as an academic grounding her readable style.
Culminating in five policy recommendations – including the immediate prohibition of the prescription of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to children – this paper (or short book, really, as it comes in at about a third the length of Tetlock) addresses the “social impact” of the “emergence of the idea of transgender”.
It also provides a neat summary of a shift in “progressive” rights-based activism – away from demands for “more freedom from the state for people to determine their sex lives unconstrained by the law’, and towards demands for “recognition and protection from the state […] to regulate the behaviour of those outside of the identity group”.
5) Deep philosophical claims and arguments lie beneath all policy recommendations and legal analyses, and the written output of the sex/gender debate is no exception. Indeed, those of us who write about these matters are often criticised for being too esoteric, and for failing to engage with the real world.
Hopefully, the practical focus of the works listed above will serve to counter that criticism sufficiently, however, for us to be able to end this week’s column by recommending some top philosophical writing. We have great hopes for Sussex philosopher Kathleen Stock’s upcoming book, Material Girls: Why Reality Matters for Feminists, due out in 2021.
But, until then, check out her recent TLS review of Judith Butler’s The Force of Nonviolence, and her 2019 Aristotelian Society talk on sexual orientation as a “reflexive disposition to be sexually attracted to people of a particular biological Sex or Sexes”.


conservativehome--2020-07-07--Shaun Bailey: Our Party shouldn’t be afraid of talking about social housing

Shaun Bailey is the MP for West Bromwich West .
I ’ ve been getting used to being quite a novelty .
One of the new Conservative MPs from a traditionally working class , Labour area , and , more pertinently perhaps , one of the few Conservative MPs brought up in Social Housing .
Social housing saved me and my family when we were at our lowest .
My Mum had just survived a torrid , abusive , relationship with my father .
We spent a year living out of our car , sleeping on the sofas of relatives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up next .
My mum ’ s initial experience of social housing was a tough one .
When we were ( finally ) given somewhere to live , after battling the local authority for over a year , the house my Mum was presented with was battered , dirty , and needed serious work to just make it habitable .
My mum did what she ’ d always done ; she knuckled down and she made it liveable .
We eventually moved on and found the home that my Mum has now lived @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discussion around social housing and socially rented homes often gets confused with the debate around affordable homes .
Of course , as a Conservative , I absolutely believe we should ensure that everyone is able to own their home , but the pursuit of our property-owning utopia should not ignore those people who may not be able to ( or want to ) own their home .
For me , and for the communities I represent , social housing is a bedrock .
For me , it provided somewhere safe , somewhere I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ importantly it supported that sense of ‘ Place ’ that is so integral to anyone ’ s identity and stability .
That is why the government is striving to ensure this is re-invigorated , particularly in areas like mine , which have seen their communities disintegrated after years of being overlooked .
There have been some real wins for social housing recently .
Last year , housing associations in England built more than 45,600 affordable homes and added an estimated £2.4 billion to the national economy .
Notwithstanding the clear economic benefits of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ residual benefits of providing a strong foundation for some of the most vulnerable in our communities to be able to go out and expand from , goes without saying .
Giving people a sense of responsibility and belonging allows all the other aspects of community to flourish .
That ’ s how I went from Social Housing to Westminster and how every little boy like me should also be given that chance .
There is however , still more to do : A YouGov Survey published last week by the National Housing Federation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 10 people have said they felt depressed during lockdown , because of a lack of space in their home .
• One in 20 people who said they had a lack of space had also said they had needed medication as a result .
• Nearly 20 per cent of those in cramped conditions hadn ’ t been able to get enough sleep due to lack of space .
Clearly , these are problems that need resolving .
I am excited by the Prime Minister ’ s statement that our recovery will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” – this is key to our future .
It is now incumbent on politicians like me , representing communities like mine , to ensure that social housing is at the heart of our recovery plan and gets the support that ’ s long overdue to resolve these problems , which I am sure many of my constituents can relate to .
Yes , this does mean building more homes , but it also means looking at innovative ways that we can sustain and improve our current social housing stock .
It means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system that provides a bedrock for our most vulnerable , and re-building those communities that have been decimated after years of being overlooked .
This will be done by taking the revolutionary and reformative zeal that we ’ ve seen from this Prime Minister , and if necessary , totally re-inventing and re-thinking the way we provide social housing .
We can start immediately by re-profiling existing commitments to social housing and providing additional tenure and timing flexibility in the current grant programmes .
We need to add additional flexibilities in the current @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ownership and Affordable Homes Programme for an additional year to 2022 , with the same conditions as the current programme prioritising new social and affordable homes built by housing associations .
It could also be made available for bulk-buying homes from developers at a discount to convert to rent , as long as the homes are high quality , the right size , and in the right places .
We should also use the forthcoming Spending Review to double down on our ‘ levelling up ’ plan , by setting out a long-term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ building of a new generation of high quality , beautiful and greener affordable homes for people to rent and buy .
The economic impact of the coronavirus will no doubt hit communities in the north and midlands , hardest .
Therefore , it is important that funding is targeted to support those in greatest need and we should adopt a place-based approach to renewal in cities , towns , and communities across the country .
The communities in my constituency need this renewal and I hope the constituencies with the greatest need will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kind of commitment stimulate long-term investment in modern methods of construction , it will also create jobs , boost productivity and skills .
To do this effectively , it means that the government will need to listen , and then act on the views and concerns of those communities who are directly impacted by social housing , many of them being the communities which lent us their vote in December , giving us the opportunity to form the government they deserve .
We are at the crossroads of an exciting opportunity for social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a long time the government of the day understands the very communities who rely on this vital social service .
I am determined to ensure for survivors and battlers like my mum and the millions of others like her , that Tories are no longer afraid to talk about social housing .

Shaun Bailey is the MP for West Bromwich West.
I’ve been getting used to being quite a novelty. One of the new Conservative MPs from a traditionally working class, Labour area, and, more pertinently perhaps, one of the few Conservative MPs brought up in Social Housing.
Social housing saved me and my family when we were at our lowest. My Mum had just survived a torrid, abusive, relationship with my father. We spent a year living out of our car, sleeping on the sofas of relatives and not knowing where we would end up next.
My mum’s initial experience of social housing was a tough one. When we were (finally) given somewhere to live, after battling the local authority for over a year, the house my Mum was presented with was battered, dirty, and needed serious work to just make it habitable. My mum did what she’d always done; she knuckled down and she made it liveable. We eventually moved on and found the home that my Mum has now lived in for over 20 years.
The discussion around social housing and socially rented homes often gets confused with the debate around affordable homes. Of course, as a Conservative, I absolutely believe we should ensure that everyone is able to own their home, but the pursuit of our property-owning utopia should not ignore those people who may not be able to (or want to) own their home.
For me, and for the communities I represent, social housing is a bedrock.
For me, it provided somewhere safe, somewhere I could thrive and work, and more importantly it supported that sense of ‘Place’ that is so integral to anyone’s identity and stability. That is why the government is striving to ensure this is re-invigorated, particularly in areas like mine, which have seen their communities disintegrated after years of being overlooked.
There have been some real wins for social housing recently. Last year, housing associations in England built more than 45,600 affordable homes and added an estimated £2.4 billion to the national economy. Notwithstanding the clear economic benefits of a strong social housing network, the residual benefits of providing a strong foundation for some of the most vulnerable in our communities to be able to go out and expand from, goes without saying. Giving people a sense of responsibility and belonging allows all the other aspects of community to flourish. That’s how I went from Social Housing to Westminster and how every little boy like me should also be given that chance.
There is however, still more to do:
A YouGov Survey published last week by the National Housing Federation shows that:
More than 1 in 10 people have said they felt depressed during lockdown, because of a lack of space in their home.
One in 20 people who said they had a lack of space had also said they had needed medication as a result.
Nearly 20 per cent of those in cramped conditions hadn’t been able to get enough sleep due to lack of space.
Clearly, these are problems that need resolving.
I am excited by the Prime Minister’s statement that our recovery will involve “Build, Build, Build” – this is key to our future.
It is now incumbent on politicians like me, representing communities like mine, to ensure that social housing is at the heart of our recovery plan and gets the support that’s long overdue to resolve these problems, which I am sure many of my constituents can relate to.
Yes, this does mean building more homes, but it also means looking at innovative ways that we can sustain and improve our current social housing stock. It means ensuring that we have a social housing system that provides a bedrock for our most vulnerable, and re-building those communities that have been decimated after years of being overlooked.
This will be done by taking the revolutionary and reformative zeal that we’ve seen from this Prime Minister, and if necessary, totally re-inventing and re-thinking the way we provide social housing.
We can start immediately by re-profiling existing commitments to social housing and providing additional tenure and timing flexibility in the current grant programmes. We need to add additional flexibilities in the current grant programmes and extend the existing Shared Ownership and Affordable Homes Programme for an additional year to 2022, with the same conditions as the current programme prioritising new social and affordable homes built by housing associations. It could also be made available for bulk-buying homes from developers at a discount to convert to rent, as long as the homes are high quality, the right size, and in the right places.
We should also use the forthcoming Spending Review to double down on our ‘levelling up’ plan, by setting out a long-term investment programme. This will kickstart the building of a new generation of high quality, beautiful and greener affordable homes for people to rent and buy.
The economic impact of the coronavirus will no doubt hit communities in the north and midlands, hardest. Therefore, it is important that funding is targeted to support those in greatest need and we should adopt a place-based approach to renewal in cities, towns, and communities across the country. The communities in my constituency need this renewal and I hope the constituencies with the greatest need will be prioritised.
Not only would this kind of commitment stimulate long-term investment in modern methods of construction, it will also create jobs, boost productivity and skills.
To do this effectively, it means that the government will need to listen, and then act on the views and concerns of those communities who are directly impacted by social housing, many of them being the communities which lent us their vote in December, giving us the opportunity to form the government they deserve.
We are at the crossroads of an exciting opportunity for social housing. For the first time in a long time the government of the day understands the very communities who rely on this vital social service. I am determined to ensure for survivors and battlers like my mum and the millions of others like her, that Tories are no longer afraid to talk about social housing.


conservativehome--2020-07-07--The Conservative Party Conference will take place this year – online

Amanda Milling and Ben Elliott have written to Party members as follows : “ Following discussions with our partners we @ @ @ @ @ Party will host a Virtual Conference and move most of our conference in October online @ @ @ @ @ be working with our partners and suppliers to produce the Virtual Conference and will provide @ @ @ @ @ the full agenda going live in early September .
The Virtual Conference will provide a @ @ @ @ @ share ideas and hear from voices across the Party .
Party Conference is a highlight @ @ @ @ @ we know many people will be disappointed if they can ’ t attend Conference in @ @ @ @ @ we will be able to host some aspects in the physical format , we would @ @ @ @ @ by government guidelines and following the strictest safety guidelines .
Members who have already purchased @ @ @ @ @ will receive an email with instructions in due course .
”

Amanda Milling and Ben Elliott have written to Party members as follows:
“Following discussions with our partners we have decided that the Conservative Party will host a Virtual Conference and move most of our conference in October online.
We are excited to be working with our partners and suppliers to produce the Virtual Conference and will provide further details shortly, with the full agenda going live in early September.
The Virtual Conference will provide a fantastic opportunity for members to share ideas and hear from voices across the Party.
Party Conference is a highlight of the political calendar and we know many people will be disappointed if they can’t attend Conference in person.
Whilst we hope we will be able to host some aspects in the physical format, we would only do so if allowed by government guidelines and following the strictest safety guidelines.
Members who have already purchased passes to attend the Conference will receive an email with instructions in due course.”


conservativehome--2020-07-08--FREE ConservativeHome Live event with Daniel Hannan on the future of freedom

Following our successful inaugural ConservativeHome Live event last month , I am delighted to announce that the second event in @ @ @ @ @ Hannan – author , campaigner and ConservativeHome columnist .
Daniel and I will be discussing @ @ @ @ @ front of a live Zoom audience at 7pm on Wednesday 15th July .
After months @ @ @ @ @ extensions of the state into the market , and amid a rising tide of puritanical @ @ @ @ @ what does the future hold for individual liberty , freedom of expression , and private @ @ @ @ @ reassert the values and principles of a free society ?
.
Thanks to the generosity @ @ @ @ @ , this online event will be completely free to view .
Audience members will have @ @ @ @ @ questions to Daniel as part of what promises to be another lively and fascinating evening @ @ @ @ @ Click here to register for your free tickets .

Following our successful inaugural ConservativeHome Live event last month, I am delighted to announce that the second event in the series will feature Daniel Hannan – author, campaigner and ConservativeHome columnist.
Daniel and I will be discussing The Future of Freedom in front of a live Zoom audience at 7pm on Wednesday 15th July.
After months of lockdown restrictions, unprecedented extensions of the state into the market, and amid a rising tide of puritanical ‘woke’ censorship, what does the future hold for individual liberty, freedom of expression, and private enterprise? How can Conservatives reassert the values and principles of a free society?.
Thanks to the generosity of our sponsor, Thorncliffe, this online event will be completely free to view. Audience members will have the chance to put your questions to Daniel as part of what promises to be another lively and fascinating evening of discussion and debate.
Click here to register for your free tickets.


conservativehome--2020-07-08--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the College of Policing – and mor


conservativehome--2020-07-08--The Conservative Party’s coming virtual conference. Turning a setback into an opportunity.

Though CCHQ insists that attending the annual Party conference in a big city , such as Birmingham or Manchester , is less expensive than some suggest , such venues are undoubtedly more expensive than the seaside ones that preceded them .
So there is an upside to yesterday ’ s inevitable announcement that this year ’ s event will follow Labour and Liberal Democrats in being held online .
Admittedly , watching Boris Johnson via Zoom or Microsoft Teams – or whatever portal CCHQ puts in place and charge members for entering – is no substitute for the live experience @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s closing speech in this way will come this year without travel costs , train bills , buying petrol , purchasing meals and standing people drinks .
And the same goes for the rest of the event .
Many members go for the fringe events and not the platform ones , and this is therefore a good moment to confirm that ConservativeHome will be offering our usual fringe programme – by virtual means , of course .
A tweet from Amanda Milling ’ s confirms that the conference itself will take place in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .

Though CCHQ insists that attending the annual Party conference in a big city, such as Birmingham or Manchester, is less expensive than some suggest, such venues are undoubtedly more expensive than the seaside ones that preceded them.
So there is an upside to yesterday’s inevitable announcement that this year’s event will follow Labour and Liberal Democrats in being held online.
Admittedly, watching Boris Johnson via Zoom or Microsoft Teams – or whatever portal CCHQ puts in place and charge members for entering – is no substitute for the live experience.
But seeing the Prime Minister’s closing speech in this way will come this year without travel costs, train bills, buying petrol, purchasing meals and standing people drinks. And the same goes for the rest of the event.
Many members go for the fringe events and not the platform ones, and this is therefore a good moment to confirm that ConservativeHome will be offering our usual fringe programme – by virtual means, of course. A tweet from Amanda Milling’s confirms that the conference itself will take place in October. More news when we have it.


conservativehome--2020-07-08--Ryan Bourne: Sunak shouldn’t try today to restore pre-virus Britain. It’s gone – and we must now ada

Ryan Bourne: Sunak shouldn’t try today to restore pre-virus Britain. It’s gone – and we must now adapt.

Ryan Bourne holds the R Evan Scharf Chair in Public Understanding of Economics at the Cato Institute .
Rishi Sunak earned plaudits for his dealing with the immediate economic fallout from Covid-19 .
Yet today ’ s summer statement presents a thornier challenge than playing Emergency Santa , dishing out funds to keep businesses alive .
For today requires taking steps to further facilitate the “ normalisation ” of economic life .
Boris Johnson waded into economics last week , arguing ( rather conveniently ) that the Coronavirus highlighted the need for his pre-pandemic “ leveling-up ” agenda .
Exactly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say , HS2 is unclear .
But underpinning the Prime Minister ’ s argument was an assumption that , post-lockdowns , we can get back to focusing on pre-virus priorities – in the Government ’ s case , state-led economic rebalancing .
Similar “ back to our future ” thinking underpins business representations ahead of this statement .
From calls for taxpayer-financed high street spending vouchers , to VAT cuts for hard-hit sectors , the prevailing discourse appears to be “ now the virus is less of a threat , let ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with “ normal ” meaning “ what happened in early March 2020.
” Perhaps it ’ s because I ’ m in the U.S. and so have been to this reopening BBQ before , but I bear bad news : while the UK can expect a relatively sharp bounce-back in things such as retail activity , “ normalisation ” will not and should not mean a return to the economy of March 2020 .
Before a vaccine , consumers will go where they feel safe , businesses from restaurants to cinemas will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certain behaviors ( from the demand shift from restaurants to supermarkets , to the supply shift to working from home ) will partially remain .
That will bring major reallocation costs : businesses will close and lay off workers , while other sectors grow .
It was understandable that the Chancellor , not knowing which businesses would be viable after lockdown , set up a furlough scheme to avoid companies and jobs perishing .
This helped protect important “ job-matching capital ” and “ firm-specific capital ” – i.e .
people doing jobs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important bundles of productive relationships .
But one risk was always that businesses would interpret support not as mere lockdown relief , but a commitment to ensure their survival through the whole pandemic .
Some aspects of the campaign for arts subsidies , rumblings by MPs for ongoing aerospace supply-chain support , and the Resolution Foundation ’ s gimmicky “ high street vouchers ” idea suggest that some now do believe the Government should support sectors , even after full re-openings , precisely because consumers would otherwise continue to reject them , preferring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as many in-person events , or go to fewer restaurants or stores .
This is a very different policy proposition .
Attempting to keep the March 2020 economy preserved as some eternal truth would mean workers and funds not being where businesses and consumers actually value them given today ’ s circumstances , bringing large economic costs beyond the fiscal .
For example , if more professionals now work from home semi-permanently , then tastes will shift from buying lunches within cities to local delis , online , or at supermarkets .
Hence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But as Julian Jessop has said , the purpose of economic policy should not be to protect Pret jobs .
What normalisation should instead mean is the return to a functioning market economy where the rise and fall of businesses depends on their ability to meet our wants and needs in today ’ s circumstances .
Sunak ’ s aim , in other words , should now be “ market-led adaptation to the virus.
” We want businesses to figure out how to serve us in safe , cost-effective ways .
The alternative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our early 2020 preferences – would not only encourage activity worse from a public health risk perspective , but also inevitably subsidise much that would take place anyway .
So Sunak should today reject “ painting by numbers Keynesianism ” that sees industry spending collapses as holes taxpayers should help fill in .
He should snub VAT cuts or vouchers .
If , with the virus still around , people would rather spend money on food to cook at home , Netflix subscriptions , and a hot tub for the back garden over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Lake District , workers and capital should flow accordingly .
Economic activity serves consumers , not vice versa .
That ’ s not to say government can not make this process less painful .
But we need to be clear about the challenge we face : a supply-side shock we hid with relief .
New realities mean workers in the wrong jobs , businesses serving customers in the wrong ways , and capital in the wrong places .
Government policy should focus on removing barriers that gum up businesses , landlords , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get this on the worker side .
He is tapering the furlough scheme gradually to give businesses breathing room , but inevitably those with newly uneconomic business models will make some permanent layoffs .
It ’ s crucial to try to get workers reallocated into new roles quickly to avoid the scarring effects of unemployment .
Direct financial incentives for new hiring , even beyond subsidies for traineeships trailed in the papers , would encourage this .
The reported plans for expansions of jobcentre capabilities are important too to try to speed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to new roles , as would re-training efforts be .
Some U.S. states are rolling back licensing restrictions on people shifting to different jobs too .
With child-care difficult to come by , now would be a good time to review the UK ’ s oppressive childcare regulations , for example .
Yet the Conservatives should do more to facilitate the adaptation of businesses as well .
Repurposing premises to earn consumers ’ confidence often requires upfront investments that the Chancellor should write-off entirely for the basis of tax , through full expensing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should have an eye to business activities too – if more out-of-town activity is demanded , let it bloom .
The case for allowing existing businesses and property owners more flexibility – on how they operate , opening hours , what premises can be used for etc– is overwhelming as well .
With apologies to my Editor , when we are seriously discussing throwing billions at retailers such as John Lewis or Topshop through vouchers , it seems daft to consider it beyond the pale that such retailers open beyond 6pm on a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adjust to what customers want : what barriers exist to entrepreneurs developing drive-through cinemas , for example ?
These are the sorts of supply-side questions that should animate government .
As always with fiscal events , any financial support to industries will be heralded as ‘ good news ’ and absence of it denounced as throwing sectors to the wolves .
But it ’ s time for Sunak to be bold and honest : his task is not to “ normalise ” activity by resuscitating the composition of the March 2020 economy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy that makes us rich by meeting our demands .

Ryan Bourne holds the R Evan Scharf Chair in Public Understanding of Economics at the Cato Institute.
Rishi Sunak earned plaudits for his dealing with the immediate economic fallout from Covid-19. Yet today’s summer statement presents a thornier challenge than playing Emergency Santa, dishing out funds to keep businesses alive. For today requires taking steps to further facilitate the “normalisation” of economic life.
Boris Johnson waded into economics last week, arguing (rather conveniently) that the Coronavirus highlighted the need for his pre-pandemic “leveling-up” agenda. Exactly how Covid-19 proves the need for, say, HS2 is unclear. But underpinning the Prime Minister’s argument was an assumption that, post-lockdowns, we can get back to focusing on pre-virus priorities – in the Government’s case, state-led economic rebalancing.
Similar “back to our future” thinking underpins business representations ahead of this statement. From calls for taxpayer-financed high street spending vouchers, to VAT cuts for hard-hit sectors, the prevailing discourse appears to be “now the virus is less of a threat, let’s incentivise returning to normal activity,” with “normal” meaning “what happened in early March 2020.”
Perhaps it’s because I’m in the U.S. and so have been to this reopening BBQ before, but I bear bad news: while the UK can expect a relatively sharp bounce-back in things such as retail activity, “normalisation” will not and should not mean a return to the economy of March 2020.
Before a vaccine, consumers will go where they feel safe, businesses from restaurants to cinemas will be supply constrained by social distancing, and certain behaviors (from the demand shift from restaurants to supermarkets, to the supply shift to working from home) will partially remain. That will bring major reallocation costs: businesses will close and lay off workers, while other sectors grow.
It was understandable that the Chancellor, not knowing which businesses would be viable after lockdown, set up a furlough scheme to avoid companies and jobs perishing. This helped protect important “job-matching capital” and “firm-specific capital” – i.e. people doing jobs they are good at and firms as important bundles of productive relationships. But one risk was always that businesses would interpret support not as mere lockdown relief, but a commitment to ensure their survival through the whole pandemic.
Some aspects of the campaign for arts subsidies, rumblings by MPs for ongoing aerospace supply-chain support, and the Resolution Foundation’s gimmicky “high street vouchers” idea suggest that some now do believe the Government should support sectors, even after full re-openings, precisely because consumers would otherwise continue to reject them, preferring not to fly as much, attend as many in-person events, or go to fewer restaurants or stores.
This is a very different policy proposition. Attempting to keep the March 2020 economy preserved as some eternal truth would mean workers and funds not being where businesses and consumers actually value them given today’s circumstances, bringing large economic costs beyond the fiscal.
For example, if more professionals now work from home semi-permanently, then tastes will shift from buying lunches within cities to local delis, online, or at supermarkets. Hence why Pret is laying off workers.
But as Julian Jessop has said, the purpose of economic policy should not be to protect Pret jobs. What normalisation should instead mean is the return to a functioning market economy where the rise and fall of businesses depends on their ability to meet our wants and needs in today’s circumstances. Sunak’s aim, in other words, should now be “market-led adaptation to the virus.”
We want businesses to figure out how to serve us in safe, cost-effective ways. The alternative – having the government tilt activity towards our early 2020 preferences – would not only encourage activity worse from a public health risk perspective, but also inevitably subsidise much that would take place anyway.
So Sunak should today reject “painting by numbers Keynesianism” that sees industry spending collapses as holes taxpayers should help fill in. He should snub VAT cuts or vouchers. If, with the virus still around, people would rather spend money on food to cook at home, Netflix subscriptions, and a hot tub for the back garden over restaurants, cinemas, and trips to the Lake District, workers and capital should flow accordingly. Economic activity serves consumers, not vice versa.
That’s not to say government cannot make this process less painful. But we need to be clear about the challenge we face: a supply-side shock we hid with relief. New realities mean workers in the wrong jobs, businesses serving customers in the wrong ways, and capital in the wrong places. Government policy should focus on removing barriers that gum up businesses, landlords, workers and entrepreneurs adjusting.
Sunak appears to get this on the worker side. He is tapering the furlough scheme gradually to give businesses breathing room, but inevitably those with newly uneconomic business models will make some permanent layoffs.
It’s crucial to try to get workers reallocated into new roles quickly to avoid the scarring effects of unemployment. Direct financial incentives for new hiring, even beyond subsidies for traineeships trailed in the papers, would encourage this. The reported plans for expansions of jobcentre capabilities are important too to try to speed up the matching process of unemployed workers to new roles, as would re-training efforts be. Some U.S. states are rolling back licensing restrictions on people shifting to different jobs too. With child-care difficult to come by, now would be a good time to review the UK’s oppressive childcare regulations, for example.
Yet the Conservatives should do more to facilitate the adaptation of businesses as well. Repurposing premises to earn consumers’ confidence often requires upfront investments that the Chancellor should write-off entirely for the basis of tax, through full expensing of investment. The planning law reforms should have an eye to business activities too – if more out-of-town activity is demanded, let it bloom.
The case for allowing existing businesses and property owners more flexibility – on how they operate, opening hours, what premises can be used for etc– is overwhelming as well. With apologies to my Editor, when we are seriously discussing throwing billions at retailers such as John Lewis or Topshop through vouchers, it seems daft to consider it beyond the pale that such retailers open beyond 6pm on a Sunday. Give freedom to businesses to adjust to what customers want: what barriers exist to entrepreneurs developing drive-through cinemas, for example? These are the sorts of supply-side questions that should animate government.
As always with fiscal events, any financial support to industries will be heralded as ‘good news’ and absence of it denounced as throwing sectors to the wolves. But it’s time for Sunak to be bold and honest: his task is not to “normalise” activity by resuscitating the composition of the March 2020 economy, but to “normalise” the market-led economy that makes us rich by meeting our demands.