conservativehome--2020-03-17--“I want to reassure every British citizen.” The Chancellor’s statement. Full text.

The coronavirus pandemic is a public health emergency .
But it is also an economic emergency .
We have never , in peacetime , faced an economic fight like this one .
I know that people are deeply worried .
I know that people ’ s anxiety about the disease itself is matched only by their anxiety about their livelihoods .
Last week , I set out an initial economic response in the Budget .
I promised to do whatever it takes to support our economy through this crisis – and that if the situation changed , I would not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is what I want to begin doing today .
This struggle will not be overcome by a single package of measures , or isolated interventions .
It will be won through a collective national effort .
Every one of us , doing all we can to protect families , neighbours , friends , jobs .
This national effort will be underpinned by government interventions in the economy on a scale unimaginable only a few weeks ago .
This is not a time for ideology and orthodoxy .
This is a time to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I want to reassure every British citizen , this government will give you all the tools you need to get through this .
We will support jobs , we will support incomes , we will support businesses , and we will help you protect your loved ones .
We will do whatever it takes .
In the Budget last week , I set out the first stage of our economic response with a £30 billion package of support for people and businesses .
But I also said in the Budget that as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action .
And as the Prime Minister set out yesterday , we ’ re now approaching the fast growth part of the upwards curve .
He has set out the next stage of our public health response .
So I wanted to update everyone on the next stage of our economic response .
First , the government will stand behind businesses small and large .
I can announce today an unprecedented package of government-backed and guaranteed loans to support businesses to get through this .
Today , I am making available an initial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 15 % of our GDP .
That means any business who needs access to cash to pay their rent , the salaries , suppliers , or purchase stock , will be able to access a government-backed loan , on attractive terms .
And if demand is greater than the initial £330 billion I ’ m making available today , I will go further and provide as much capacity as required .
I said whatever it takes –and I meant it .
That support will be delivered through two main schemes : • to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have today agreed a new lending facility with the Governor of the Bank of England to provide low cost , easily accessible commercial paper • to support lending to small and medium sized businesses , I am extending the new Business Interruption Loan Scheme I announced at the Budget last week , so that rather than loans of £1.2 million , it will now provide loans of up to £5 million , with no interest due for the first six months Both of these schemes will be up and running by the start @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also taking a new legal power in the Covid Bill to offer whatever further financial support I decide is necessary .
Some sectors are facing particularly acute challenges .
In the coming days , my colleague the Secretary of State for Transport and I will discuss a potential support package for specifically airlines and airports .
And yesterday , I asked my Cabinet colleagues to urgently convene meetings over the coming days with business leaders and representatives in the most affected sectors , to identify other specific opportunities to support them and their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I repeat : we will do whatever it takes .
Second , as well as access to finance , businesses need support with their cashflow and fixed costs .
Following the changed medical advice yesterday , there are concerns about the impact on pubs , clubs , theatres and other hospitality , leisure and retail venues .
Let me confirm that , for those businesses which do have a policy that covers pandemics , the government ’ s action is sufficient and will allow businesses to make an insurance claim against their policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t have insurance – so we will go further .
I announced last week that for businesses in the retail , hospitality and leisure sectors , with a rateable value of less than £51,000 , they will pay no business rates this year .
Today , I can go further and provide those businesses with an additional cash grant of up to £25,000 per business – to help bridge through this period .
Additionally , I also am today extending the business rates holiday to all businesses in those sectors , irrespective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every single shop , pub , theatre , music venue , restaurant – and any other business in the retail , hospitality or leisure sector – will pay no business rates whatsoever for 12 months , and if they have a rateable value of less than £51,000 , they can now get a cash grant as well .
I also announced last week that we would be providing £3,000 cash grants to the 700,000 of our smallest businesses .
In light of the new circumstances , and to support their cash flow , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ £10,000 .
Taken together , on top of the unlimited lending capacity I have already announced , this is a package of tax cuts and grants , in this financial year , worth more than £20 billion .
That comes on top of the existing multi-billion-pound package I set out at Budget , which included reimbursing small and medium sized companies for the cost of statutory sick pay .
Local authorities in England will be fully compensated for the costs of these measures , and the devolved administrations will receive at least £3.5 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to provide support to businesses in Scotland , Wales and Northern Ireland .
I repeat again : we will do whatever it takes .
Third , I will strengthen our support for peoples and individuals .
At Budget last week , I committed £1 billion to support the financial security of vulnerable people , through a half billion boost to the welfare system , and a half billion pound Hardship Fund for Local Authorities .
Following discussions with industry today , I can announce that for those in difficulty due to coronavirus , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three month mortgage holiday – so that people will not have to pay a penny towards their mortgage while they get back on their feet .
And in the coming days , I will go much further to support people ’ s financial security .
In particular , I will work with trade unions and business groups to urgently develop new forms of employment support to help protect people ’ s jobs and incomes through this period .
As I said last week , this is first and foremost a public health emergency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that whatever resources the NHS needs , it will get .
Let no one doubt our resolve .
When I said in the Budget that we will do everything we can to keep this country , and our people , healthy and financially secure – I meant it .
The measures I have announced today are part of a comprehensive , coordinated and coherent response to what is a serious and evolving economic situation .
These are only the first steps – I will set out the next stage of our response in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faced an economic fight like this one .
But we are well prepared .
We will get through this .
And we will do whatever it takes .

“Good afternoon everyone.
The coronavirus pandemic is a public health emergency. But it is also an economic emergency. We have never, in peacetime, faced an economic fight like this one.
I know that people are deeply worried. I know that people’s anxiety about the disease itself is matched only by their anxiety about their livelihoods.
Last week, I set out an initial economic response in the Budget.
I promised to do whatever it takes to support our economy through this crisis – and that if the situation changed, I would not hesitate to take further action. That is what I want to begin doing today.
This struggle will not be overcome by a single package of measures, or isolated interventions. It will be won through a collective national effort. Every one of us, doing all we can to protect families, neighbours, friends, jobs.
This national effort will be underpinned by government interventions in the economy on a scale unimaginable only a few weeks ago. This is not a time for ideology and orthodoxy. This is a time to be bold. A time for courage.
I want to reassure every British citizen, this government will give you all the tools you need to get through this.
We will support jobs, we will support incomes, we will support businesses, and we will help you protect your loved ones. We will do whatever it takes.
In the Budget last week, I set out the first stage of our economic response with a £30 billion package of support for people and businesses.
But I also said in the Budget that as the situation evolves, we would take further action.
And as the Prime Minister set out yesterday, we’re now approaching the fast growth part of the upwards curve. He has set out the next stage of our public health response.
So I wanted to update everyone on the next stage of our economic response.
First, the government will stand behind businesses small and large.
I can announce today an unprecedented package of government-backed and guaranteed loans to support businesses to get through this.
Today, I am making available an initial £330 billion of guarantees – equivalent to 15% of our GDP.
That means any business who needs access to cash to pay their rent, the salaries, suppliers, or purchase stock, will be able to access a government-backed loan, on attractive terms.
And if demand is greater than the initial £330 billion I’m making available today, I will go further and provide as much capacity as required.
I said whatever it takes –and I meant it.
That support will be delivered through two main schemes:
to support liquidity amongst larger firms, I have today agreed a new lending facility with the Governor of the Bank of England to provide low cost, easily accessible commercial paper
to support lending to small and medium sized businesses, I am extending the new Business Interruption Loan Scheme I announced at the Budget last week, so that rather than loans of £1.2 million, it will now provide loans of up to £5 million, with no interest due for the first six months
Both of these schemes will be up and running by the start of next week.
And I am also taking a new legal power in the Covid Bill to offer whatever further financial support I decide is necessary.
Some sectors are facing particularly acute challenges. In the coming days, my colleague the Secretary of State for Transport and I will discuss a potential support package for specifically airlines and airports.
And yesterday, I asked my Cabinet colleagues to urgently convene meetings over the coming days with business leaders and representatives in the most affected sectors, to identify other specific opportunities to support them and their industries, including possible regulatory forbearance.
I repeat: we will do whatever it takes.
Second, as well as access to finance, businesses need support with their cashflow and fixed costs.
Following the changed medical advice yesterday, there are concerns about the impact on pubs, clubs, theatres and other hospitality, leisure and retail venues.
Let me confirm that, for those businesses which do have a policy that covers pandemics, the government’s action is sufficient and will allow businesses to make an insurance claim against their policy.
But many of those businesses don’t have insurance – so we will go further.
I announced last week that for businesses in the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors, with a rateable value of less than £51,000, they will pay no business rates this year.
Today, I can go further and provide those businesses with an additional cash grant of up to £25,000 per business – to help bridge through this period.
Additionally, I also am today extending the business rates holiday to all businesses in those sectors, irrespective of their rateable value.
That means every single shop, pub, theatre, music venue, restaurant – and any other business in the retail, hospitality or leisure sector – will pay no business rates whatsoever for 12 months, and if they have a rateable value of less than £51,000, they can now get a cash grant as well.
I also announced last week that we would be providing £3,000 cash grants to the 700,000 of our smallest businesses.
In light of the new circumstances, and to support their cash flow, today I can increase those grants to £10,000.
Taken together, on top of the unlimited lending capacity I have already announced, this is a package of tax cuts and grants, in this financial year, worth more than £20 billion.
That comes on top of the existing multi-billion-pound package I set out at Budget, which included reimbursing small and medium sized companies for the cost of statutory sick pay.
Local authorities in England will be fully compensated for the costs of these measures, and the devolved administrations will receive at least £3.5 billion in additional funding as a result to provide support to businesses in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
I repeat again: we will do whatever it takes.
Third, I will strengthen our support for peoples and individuals.
At Budget last week, I committed £1 billion to support the financial security of vulnerable people, through a half billion boost to the welfare system, and a half billion pound Hardship Fund for Local Authorities.
Following discussions with industry today, I can announce that for those in difficulty due to coronavirus, mortgage lenders will offer at least a three month mortgage holiday – so that people will not have to pay a penny towards their mortgage while they get back on their feet.
And in the coming days, I will go much further to support people’s financial security. In particular, I will work with trade unions and business groups to urgently develop new forms of employment support to help protect people’s jobs and incomes through this period.
As I said last week, this is first and foremost a public health emergency. And I reiterate today our commitment that whatever resources the NHS needs, it will get.
Let no one doubt our resolve. When I said in the Budget that we will do everything we can to keep this country, and our people, healthy and financially secure – I meant it.
The measures I have announced today are part of a comprehensive, coordinated and coherent response to what is a serious and evolving economic situation.
These are only the first steps – I will set out the next stage of our response in the coming days.
We have never faced an economic fight like this one. But we are well prepared. We will get through this. And we will do whatever it takes.
Thank you.”


conservativehome--2020-03-17--The Conservative Party suspends all non-digital campaigning, and directs activists to support the vu

The Conservative Party suspends all non-digital campaigning, and directs activists to support the vulnerable

Further to the postponement of the local elections , and the cancellation of the Tory Spring Forum , the Conservative Party has now suspended all “ face to face ” campaigning , citing its wish to “ keep people safe ” .
The message – sent out by the Conservative Councillors ’ Association this evening – specifies that “ face to face campaigning…includes literature delivery ” , essentially restricting anything other than “ digital communication methods ” .
Instead , Tory councillors and associations are reminded that “ This is a time for looking out for each other , for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Please encourage able supporters to ring around vulnerable or elderly members and check on their health and wellbeing.
” Following yesterday ’ s announcement from the Government , we are formally suspending face to face campaigning , this includes literature delivery .
Public safety has and will always remain our top priority .
You may wish to direct your volunteers and activists towards digital communication methods that will keep people safe .
This is a time for looking out for each other , for our neighbours , friends and family .
Please encourage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elderly members and check on their health and wellbeing .

Further to the postponement of the local elections, and the cancellation of the Tory Spring Forum, the Conservative Party has now suspended all “face to face” campaigning, citing its wish to “keep people safe”.
The message – sent out by the Conservative Councillors’ Association this evening – specifies that “face to face campaigning…includes literature delivery”, essentially restricting anything other than “digital communication methods”.
Instead, Tory councillors and associations are reminded that “This is a time for looking out for each other, for our neighbours, friends and family. Please encourage able supporters to ring around vulnerable or elderly members and check on their health and wellbeing.”
Here’s the full statement:
Campaigning
Following yesterday’s announcement from the Government, we are formally suspending face to face campaigning, this includes literature delivery.
Public safety has and will always remain our top priority.
You may wish to direct your volunteers and activists towards digital communication methods that will keep people safe. This is a time for looking out for each other, for our neighbours, friends and family. Please encourage able supporters to ring around vulnerable or elderly members and check on their health and wellbeing.


conservativehome--2020-03-17--WATCH: Raab – Don’t undertake non-essential travel outside the UK

British nationals advised against non-essential travel globally for 30 days , says Foreign Secretary Dominic Rabbhttps : //t.co/cMIyVhmDHh # COVID19 @

British nationals advised against non-essential travel globally for 30 days, says Foreign Secretary Dominic Rabbhttps://t.co/cMIyVhmDHh #COVID19 pic.twitter.com/DAfa3UBxYo
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) March 17, 2020


conservativehome--2020-03-17--The list of MPs over 70 who have been “strongly advised” against social mixing

Yesterday , in some of the starkest governmental advice yet , the over 70s were told to stay away from the rest of the public , following advice from Public Health England .
Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle explained that this would mean MPs and peers in this age category are also “ strongly advised against ” mixing in the community as from Monday .
The decision to isolate over 70s has already caused a lot of upset ; many people this age and above are fit and healthy , and understandably feel frustrated at the thought of being away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the next few months .
Both former and current politicians have been especially vocal about their resistance to the guidelines .
Yesterday , David Blunkett , 72 , said they would “ consign a particular cohort to misery ” .
Jeremy Corbyn , 70 himself , has refused to say whether he will follow them .
The current Labour Party leader has already accused the government of being “ complacent ” and “ well behind the curve ” in its handling of the coronavirus crisis , so perhaps this is not too surprising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ difficult it is going to be to impose this instruction in a liberal society – particularly when so many people over 70 are such dynamic members of our workforce .
Some of the biggest names in parliament fall into this category .
Just look at the below MPs ConHome has counted , who will be affected by the guidance :

Yesterday, in some of the starkest governmental advice yet, the over 70s were told to stay away from the rest of the public, following advice from Public Health England.
Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle explained that this would mean MPs and peers in this age category are also “strongly advised against” mixing in the community as from Monday.
The decision to isolate over 70s has already caused a lot of upset; many people this age and above are fit and healthy, and understandably feel frustrated at the thought of being away from friends, family and society for the next few months.
Both former and current politicians have been especially vocal about their resistance to the guidelines.
Yesterday, David Blunkett, 72, said they would “consign a particular cohort to misery”.
Jeremy Corbyn, 70 himself, has refused to say whether he will follow them.
The current Labour Party leader has already accused the government of being “complacent” and “well behind the curve” in its handling of the coronavirus crisis, so perhaps this is not too surprising.
But it does point out how difficult it is going to be to impose this instruction in a liberal society – particularly when so many people over 70 are such dynamic members of our workforce.
Some of the biggest names in parliament fall into this category. Just look at the below MPs ConHome has counted, who will be affected by the guidance:


conservativehome--2020-03-17--The Conservative Spring Forum in Harrogate has been cancelled

We haven ’ t seen a statement yet but the cancellation has been confirmed .
The Liberal Democrats had already @ @ @ @ @ and it was only a matter of time until the Party followed suit .
We @ @ @ @ @ Due to the COVID-19 outbreak we have decided to cancel this year ’ s Spring @ @ @ @ @ any inconvenience this may cause but the health and safety of our delegates is our @ @ @ @ @ of your registration fee is available , please contact registration @ conservativespringforum.com for more information.
@

We haven’t seen a statement yet but the cancellation has been confirmed.
The Liberal Democrats had already pulled their own event, and it was only a matter of time until the Party followed suit.
12.05 Update
We now have a statement
“Due to the COVID-19 outbreak we have decided to cancel this year’s Spring Forum. We apologise for any inconvenience this may cause but the health and safety of our delegates is our main concern. A refund of your registration fee is available, please contact registration@conservativespringforum.com for more information.“


conservativehome--2020-03-17--Tony Lodge: A Carbon Border Tax will stop Britain hiding its emissions abroad and protect jobs at ho

Tony Lodge: A Carbon Border Tax will stop Britain hiding its emissions abroad and protect jobs at home

Tony Lodge is a Research Fellow at the Centre for Policy Studies and author of The Great Carbon Swindle – How the UK hides its emissions abroad .
“ Just last week we saw an 18-day run of coal-free days – something we haven ’ t seen since the dawning of the first industrial revolution.
” So said the Government ’ s last energy minister in 2019 , who parroted the claim that Britain was enjoying coal free electricity supplies for the first time since the Marquis of Rockingham was Prime Minister .
Sadly , it wasn ’ t true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
New Centre for Policy Studies research shows the UK was in fact importing coal fired electricity from the Netherlands over this period ( June 2019 ) via undersea cables known as interconnectors .
But why was this significant and what does it mean for wider energy , industry and climate policy ?
Importing electricity and certain carbon intensive raw materials from overseas allows Britain to hide its carbon footprint .
During last June ’ s “ coal free ” fortnight , whilst no domestic coal was used to power the grid Britain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ GWh ) of Dutch coal-fired generation .
The emissions from this generation were ( and are ) consequently offshored into the EU and don ’ t appear on UK statistics .
The same is true in terms of carbon-intensive raw materials such as coal .
The Government is now extremely reluctant to approve new mining projects .
Yet this means that industrial consumers ( such as the steel industry ) are simply importing raw materials or finished goods from overseas , which can involve a significant extra cost in terms of carbon emissions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UK claims to be reducing its greenhouse gas emissions , it is often simply offshoring them , for example by increasing its imports of electricity generated from European coal and gas while using statistical sleight-of-hand to ignore the carbon emissions involved .
This not only hides the real picture in terms of emissions , but discriminates against UK firms which are subject to climate levies that their competitors overseas do not have to pay .
If it is to deliver on its climate change commitments and show transparent global policy leadership , Britain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carbon-intensive imports – including electricity .
Our new paper proposes the introduction of a new carbon border tax , restricted to specific carbon-intensive sectors .
This would provide a far more accurate picture of Britain ’ s true carbon footprint ; deter carbon offshoring ; ensure a level playing field for UK and overseas firms ; and incentivise those overseas suppliers to lower their own carbon costs if supplying goods to the UK market .
It would reduce global carbon emissions , and establish Britain as a policy leader ahead of the COP26 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UK ’ s ageing coal-fired power stations will all be closed by 2025 , there will remain a market in Britain for between five and six million tonnes of industrial coal to supply the domestic steel , cement , brickmaking , chemicals , domestic fuel , horticulture and other sectors .
For example , the steel sector requires high-grade coals to operate blast furnaces at Scunthorpe and Port Talbot .
Despite calls by the Government for new steel-making processes , it is unlikely that the blast furnace technique for raw steel production in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earliest .
If you asked Extinction Rebellion , their answer would be to shut down the industry completely .
Yet if this industry did not exist , we would simply have to import these products from elsewhere ( wind turbines , after all , are largely made from steel ) .
In any event , the Government says it is committed to encouraging and helping maintain a competitive steel industry in the UK as part of its Industrial Strategy .
It is fair to say that Whitehall is not keen on coal : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mines have been repeatedly delayed by the Ministry of Housing , Communities and Local Government , even when they receive local planning approval .
Yet the result is not that we are using less coal , but that we are transporting it over tens of thousands of miles from Russia , the USA , Australia and Colombia .
This represents a significant offshoring of transportation emissions – without even considering issues around environmental or employment standards .
Our paper shows : • Transporting coal from Australia emits 625 per cent more in CO2e @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 73,480 compared to 10,122 CO2e/tonne of coal ) .
• Coal imported from Siberia emits 569 per cent more in CO2e than transporting British mined coal ( 67,738 compared to 10,122 CO2e/tonne of coal ) .
• Transporting coal from the USA emits 235 per cent more in CO2e emissions than British coal ( 33,933 compared with 10,122 CO2e/tonne of coal ) .
The recent Conservative Party manifesto declared that “ free markets , innovation and prosperity can protect the planet ” .
Then our solution is the perfect case study .
Indeed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Britain will continue to hide emissions off balance sheet , encouraging other countries to pollute while claiming virtue .
At the same time , we will damage our own economy via carbon leakage .
Retaining the status quo is in effect protecting and encouraging polluting exporters – a reverse protectionism for polluting industries in other countries , which increases global emissions .
A carbon border tax would expose and reduce carbon intensive imports , encouraging the private sector in the UK to invest in domestic industries and boost growth and skilled jobs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is keen to see investment , such as northern England .
It would also generate significant new revenue streams for central government from the monies raised .
The tax would force exporting states to reduce the carbon intensity of their energy grids ; the higher their use of coal and gas , the higher the levy they face .
This policy would lead to them reducing their emissions , the reshoring of jobs to Britain and increased energy security .
It deserves serious examination .

Tony Lodge is a Research Fellow at the Centre for Policy Studies and author of The Great Carbon Swindle – How the UK hides its emissions abroad.
“Just last week we saw an 18-day run of coal-free days – something we haven’t seen since the dawning of the first industrial revolution.” So said the Government’s last energy minister in 2019, who parroted the claim that Britain was enjoying coal free electricity supplies for the first time since the Marquis of Rockingham was Prime Minister.
Sadly, it wasn’t true – and regrettably was therefore grossly misleading. New Centre for Policy Studies research shows the UK was in fact importing coal fired electricity from the Netherlands over this period (June 2019) via undersea cables known as interconnectors.
But why was this significant and what does it mean for wider energy, industry and climate policy?
Importing electricity and certain carbon intensive raw materials from overseas allows Britain to hide its carbon footprint. During last June’s “coal free” fortnight, whilst no domestic coal was used to power the grid Britain imported an estimated 40.4 gigawatt hours (GWh) of Dutch coal-fired generation. The emissions from this generation were (and are) consequently offshored into the EU and don’t appear on UK statistics.
The same is true in terms of carbon-intensive raw materials such as coal. The Government is now extremely reluctant to approve new mining projects. Yet this means that industrial consumers (such as the steel industry) are simply importing raw materials or finished goods from overseas, which can involve a significant extra cost in terms of carbon emissions.
The consequence is that when the UK claims to be reducing its greenhouse gas emissions, it is often simply offshoring them, for example by increasing its imports of electricity generated from European coal and gas while using statistical sleight-of-hand to ignore the carbon emissions involved. This not only hides the real picture in terms of emissions, but discriminates against UK firms which are subject to climate levies that their competitors overseas do not have to pay.
If it is to deliver on its climate change commitments and show transparent global policy leadership, Britain will need to deal with its most carbon-intensive imports – including electricity. Our new paper proposes the introduction of a new carbon border tax, restricted to specific carbon-intensive sectors.
This would provide a far more accurate picture of Britain’s true carbon footprint; deter carbon offshoring; ensure a level playing field for UK and overseas firms; and incentivise those overseas suppliers to lower their own carbon costs if supplying goods to the UK market. It would reduce global carbon emissions, and establish Britain as a policy leader ahead of the COP26 climate conference in November.
Though the UK’s ageing coal-fired power stations will all be closed by 2025, there will remain a market in Britain for between five and six million tonnes of industrial coal to supply the domestic steel, cement, brickmaking, chemicals, domestic fuel, horticulture and other sectors.
For example, the steel sector requires high-grade coals to operate blast furnaces at Scunthorpe and Port Talbot. Despite calls by the Government for new steel-making processes, it is unlikely that the blast furnace technique for raw steel production in Britain will change before 2040 at the earliest.
If you asked Extinction Rebellion, their answer would be to shut down the industry completely. Yet if this industry did not exist, we would simply have to import these products from elsewhere (wind turbines, after all, are largely made from steel). In any event, the Government says it is committed to encouraging and helping maintain a competitive steel industry in the UK as part of its Industrial Strategy.
It is fair to say that Whitehall is not keen on coal: applications in the UK to develop new mines have been repeatedly delayed by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, even when they receive local planning approval. Yet the result is not that we are using less coal, but that we are transporting it over tens of thousands of miles from Russia, the USA, Australia and Colombia. This represents a significant offshoring of transportation emissions – without even considering issues around environmental or employment standards. Our paper shows:
Transporting coal from Australia emits 625 per cent more in CO2e emissions than transporting British mined coal (73,480 compared to 10,122 CO2e/tonne of coal).
Coal imported from Siberia emits 569 per cent more in CO2e than transporting British mined coal (67,738 compared to 10,122 CO2e/tonne of coal).
Transporting coal from the USA emits 235 per cent more in CO2e emissions than British coal (33,933 compared with 10,122 CO2e/tonne of coal).
The recent Conservative Party manifesto declared that “free markets, innovation and prosperity can protect the planet”. Then our solution is the perfect case study.
Indeed, not addressing carbon intensive imports means that Britain will continue to hide emissions off balance sheet, encouraging other countries to pollute while claiming virtue. At the same time, we will damage our own economy via carbon leakage. Retaining the status quo is in effect protecting and encouraging polluting exporters – a reverse protectionism for polluting industries in other countries, which increases global emissions.
A carbon border tax would expose and reduce carbon intensive imports, encouraging the private sector in the UK to invest in domestic industries and boost growth and skilled jobs in precisely the places where the Government is keen to see investment, such as northern England. It would also generate significant new revenue streams for central government from the monies raised.
The tax would force exporting states to reduce the carbon intensity of their energy grids; the higher their use of coal and gas, the higher the levy they face. This policy would lead to them reducing their emissions, the reshoring of jobs to Britain and increased energy security. It deserves serious examination.


conservativehome--2020-03-18--Is Sunak being dragged in the direction of a Universal Basic Income?

In his column on this site today , Ryan Bourne says that Rishi Sunak ’ s latest package of measures “ has Government mimicking a missing insurance market , with cash payments and low cost loans available such that “ good firms ” remain tied over through this year , with further unspecified support to ensure they maintain employment too ” .
But he then adds “ as the OBR ’ s Sir Charles Bean said yesterday , the longer this runs , the less likely loan , even on favourable terms , can plug firms ’ budget shortfalls without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to turn to taxpayer grants ” .
Our columnist is concerned about the long-term effects of such measures on the economy , as are we , but recognises that it may be necessary for the Government to stand behind it in the last resort .
Which is where ConservativeHome is .
Once the state begins to give grants to employees , rather than lend money to firms with which they can pay them , it enters the realm of Universal Basic Income .
Especially since it would make no sense to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others but not those who work for themselves .
Readers will recall that John McDonnell is a fan of Universal Basic Income , and that Labour ’ s manifesto committed itself to a pilot scheme .
But he far from being the only supporter of the idea .
Can you guess who wrote the following ?
These were listed as : economic efficiency ( “ enabling people to work rather than live off welfare ” ) ; freeing “ millions of poor people from the humiliating inquisitorial activities of the State ” , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be cheaper to administer ” .
We will leave our readers in suspense no longer .
The joint authors of that paragraph were Alan Duncan , only recently retired from the Commons , and Dominic Hobson .
Neither is anyone ’ s idea of a card-carrying member of the Labour Party .
The authors were writing in their book Saturn ’ s Children : how the State devours liberty , prosperity and virtue .
( The cover of one edition boasted the charming illustration by Goya of Saturn in action . )
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end of the 1990s .
Duncan and Hobson go on to pray in aid not only Seebohm Rowntree and William Beveridge , but Sam Brittan , then one of the small band of economists who had originally come out fighting for Margaret Thatcher ’ s ideas , and Milton Friedman , who had “ endorsed the idea , in the shape of a negative income tax ” .
For clarity : this site is not a supporter of a Universal Basic Income or Basic Income or Citizens ’ Income or whatever you want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the simple reason that the taxpayer would have to fund it , including of course the payment of it to the richest people in Britain .
The arguments are essentially the same as those for and against Child Benefit – or the Child Allowance as it should more properly be called .
ConHome has traditionally supported what was this universal payment , but a fully-fledged Basic Income is another thing altogether .
One estimate claims that to fund it , income tax would be required to to go up from 20 , 40 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 68 and 73 per cent .
We can ’ t see the Treasury or the taxpayer putting up with anything like that for a moment .
Voters simply wouldn ’ t understand why the proverbial Dustman was paying taxes to support the proverbial Duke .
But perhaps we should be careful what we don ’ t wish for .
Once government takes up paying grants to people in an economic emergency , which Bourne suggests may have to happen and we believe will have to happen ( indeed , it is already happening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one begins in necessary haste is very hard to repent of at later leisure .
This is one of the ways in which the Coronavirus shutdown , if it indeed lasts for anything like 18 months or longer , has the capacity to transform the Britain we know .
After all , Rishi Sunak said yesterday that he is ready “ in the coming days… [ to ] work with trade unions and business groups to urgently develop new forms of employment support to help protect people ’ s jobs and incomes through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want to start by utilising Universal Credit , but could find himself moving inexorably to some rudimentary Universal Basic Income scheme – just for the duration of this emergency , you understand .
We call one last figure from the right of politics to give evidence for this article : Donald Trump .
The President is currently mulling a scheme to give every American $ 1000 dollars .
That would be a one-off payment , of course .
But the precedent would have been set .
And the United States ’ experience of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s , is only just beginning .

In his column on this site today, Ryan Bourne says that Rishi Sunak’s latest package of measures “has Government mimicking a missing insurance market, with cash payments and the best loans for fair credit available such that “good firms” remain tied over through this year, with further unspecified support to ensure they maintain employment too”.
But he then adds “as the OBR’s Sir Charles Bean said yesterday, the longer this runs, the less likely loan, even on favourable terms, can plug firms’ budget shortfalls without endangering insolvency. So the Government would have to turn to taxpayer grants”.
Our columnist is concerned about the long-term effects of such measures on the economy, as are we, but recognises that it may be necessary for the Government to stand behind it in the last resort. Which is where ConservativeHome is.
Once the state begins to give grants to employees, rather than lend money to firms with which they can pay them, it enters the realm of Universal Basic Income. Especially since it would make no sense to make direct subsistence payments to those employed by others but not those who work for themselves.
Readers will recall that John McDonnell is a fan of Universal Basic Income, and that Labour’s manifesto committed itself to a pilot scheme. But he far from being the only supporter of the idea. Can you guess who wrote the following?
“The introduction of a Basic Income Scheme, or what some people call a Citizen’s Income, would help to achieve that. [Getting people back to work.] If all existing tax allowances and relief social security benefits, student grants and training allowances were scrapped and replaced by a single cash payment to each adult over 16, made without deduction of income tax and paid regardless of economic circumstances, the social security system would achieve three desirable objectives.”
These were listed as: economic efficiency (“enabling people to work rather than live off welfare”); freeing “millions of poor people from the humiliating inquisitorial activities of the State”, and “a Basic Income payment would be cheaper to administer”.
We will leave our readers in suspense no longer. The joint authors of that paragraph were Alan Duncan, only recently retired from the Commons, and Dominic Hobson. Neither is anyone’s idea of a card-carrying member of the Labour Party.
The authors were writing in their book Saturn’s Children: how the State devours liberty, prosperity and virtue. (The cover of one edition boasted the charming illustration by Goya of Saturn in action.) It is a splendid period piece from the end of the 1990s.
Duncan and Hobson go on to pray in aid not only Seebohm Rowntree and William Beveridge, but Sam Brittan, then one of the small band of economists who had originally come out fighting for Margaret Thatcher’s ideas, and Milton Friedman, who had “endorsed the idea, in the shape of a negative income tax”.
For clarity: this site is not a supporter of a Universal Basic Income or Basic Income or Citizens’ Income or whatever you want to call it. This is for the simple reason that the taxpayer would have to fund it, including of course the payment of it to the richest people in Britain.
The arguments are essentially the same as those for and against Child Benefit – or the Child Allowance as it should more properly be called. ConHome has traditionally supported what was this universal payment, but a fully-fledged Basic Income is another thing altogether.
One estimate claims that to fund it, income tax would be required to to go up from 20, 40 and 45 per cent to 48, 68 and 73 per cent. We can’t see the Treasury or the taxpayer putting up with anything like that for a moment. Voters simply wouldn’t understand why the proverbial Dustman was paying taxes to support the proverbial Duke. But perhaps we should be careful what we don’t wish for.
Once government takes up paying grants to people in an economic emergency, which Bourne suggests may have to happen and we believe will have to happen (indeed, it is already happening), it may find that what one begins in necessary haste is very hard to repent of at later leisure. This is one of the ways in which the Coronavirus shutdown, if it indeed lasts for anything like 18 months or longer, has the capacity to transform the Britain we know.
After all, Rishi Sunak said yesterday that he is ready “in the coming days…[to] work with trade unions and business groups to urgently develop new forms of employment support to help protect people’s jobs and incomes through this period”. He may well want to start by utilising Universal Credit, but could find himself moving inexorably to some rudimentary Universal Basic Income scheme – just for the duration of this emergency, you understand.
We call one last figure from the right of politics to give evidence for this article: Donald Trump. The President is currently mulling a scheme to give every American $1000 dollars. That would be a one-off payment, of course. But the precedent would have been set. And the United States’ experience of the virus, like everyone else’s, is only just beginning.


conservativehome--2020-03-18--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of NHS Resolution – and more

Eight years ago , the TaxPayers ’ Alliance reported that “ in the last year , five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories ” .
It currently reports that almost half of avowedly political appointees last year owed their allegiance to Labour Party , compared to less than a third for the Conservatives .
Despite the selection of some Party members or supporters to fill important posts , over time , the Conservatives have punched beneath their weight when it comes to public appointments .
One of the reasons seems to be that Tories simply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number as Labour supporters .
To help remedy this , each week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies , so that qualified Conservatives can be aware of the opportunities presented .
“ Robert Chote will be stepping down as Chair of the BRC later this year , after 10 years in post .
We are seeking a successor with deep expertise in economic and fiscal analysis who can lead the BRC and provide intellectual leadership to the OBR ’ s staff .
This is a high profile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ skills and integrity .
Candidates must command broad respect for their objectivity in dealing with issues of political sensitivity .
Appointments to the BRC are for a five-year term .
There is the possibility of reappointment at the end of the term and members can serve a maximum of two terms .
This post can be undertaken on either a part or full-time basis.
” “ The Office for Nuclear Regulation ( ONR ) is a Public Corporation responsible for the regulation of nuclear safety and security across the UK .
Its vision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inspires respect , trust and confidence .
ONR is sponsored by the Department for Work and Pensions ( DWP ) who have principal responsibility for governance , finance and its performance in relation to conventional Health and Safety .
The Department for Business , Energy and Industrial Strategy ( BEIS ) is accountable for the UK civil nuclear regulatory framework and policies and for appointing a Security Non-Executive Director ( NED ) to the ONR Board.
” “ As we enter the Fourth Industrial Revolution , a wave of technological innovation is creating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transforming the way things are made and the way we live .
From AI-powered legal services to autonomous ships , new products , services and business models are emerging which don ’ t fit with existing regulatory systems .
In its White Paper on Regulation for the Fourth Industrial Revolution , the Government committed to establishing a Regulatory Horizons Council ( RHC ) to identify the implications of technological innovation with high potential benefit for the UK economy and society and advise the government on regulatory reform needed to support its rapid and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opportunity to take on an intellectually demanding role at the heart of international financial services , leading a sizeable and complex organisation .
There is a requirement for strong leadership in a challenging environment to undertake a critically important role .
Under Andrew Bailey , the FCA has formulated a transformation programme , to equip the organisation for the next phase of its development : a data strategy and enhanced analytical skills to rapidly identify harm across an exceptionally broad range of firms of all sizes exploiting fast-moving changes in technology and distribution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and processes to act swiftly on the harms identified ; [ and ] and with a regulatory framework which is appropriate following the completion of EU withdrawal , and which takes advantage of the opportunities for better and more efficient regulation brought by technology and behavioural science.
” “ The Chief Executive will assume office at a time of unprecedented external change .
The political landscape in Europe and around the globe is altering with increasing pace and less predictability .
The British Council is also in constant transformation to deliver within funding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and customer-facing world .
The aims and goals of the British Council are more necessary than ever .
Delivering them in the complex world of 2020 is more difficult than at any time since 1945 .
The resulting demands on the Chief Executive in terms of vision , agility , ability to simplify and lead with clarity and purpose are substantial .
The Chief Executive will be instrumental in redefining both ‘ soft power ’ and ‘ cultural relations ’ at this pivotal moment and will help define the place of the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a ‘ disrupted ’ and uncertain geopolitical world.
” Remuneration : Up to £150k per annum plus bonus to 8 per cent and Civil Service Pension “ The Coast to Capital Strategic Board comprises private sector and local authority Members , setting a vision for and overseeing delivery of economic prosperity for all in the Coast to Capital area , including through Government funding of projects through the Local Growth Fund .
They are accountable to the LEP Board and for the proper governance of the LEP .
Coast to Capital is seeking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the C2C area to help lead the region and meet the ambitious vision set out in its strategic plan .
Currently chaired by Tim Wates , who will be stepping down in July 2020 , the Board brings together a diverse mix of regional business leaders alongside senior politicians and leaders from Universities and Further Education.
” “ The last few years have seen major changes to NHS Resolution ’ s role and standing in the system as a result of both its revised strategy and the new clinical negligence scheme for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and privilege to Chair the organisation through this period of significant change .
Although the course is set for the next few years some of these changes are still at an early stage and need to be embedded , there is now a need to progress the development of our infrastructure to support the enhanced role and the NHS will continue to evolve .
I am sure therefore that the next Chair will also find the role both challenging and rewarding.
” “ The Office of the Complaints Commissioner is headed by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) who is a statutory appointment required under the Financial Services Act 2012 .
This is a senior position and , whilst the appointment is made by the regulators , it is an independent role , subject to approval by HM Treasury .
The current Commissioner carries out his duties through a company limited by guarantee ( Office of the Complaints Commissioner ) from premises based in the City of London .
He is assisted by three staff .
The Commissioner ’ s role is to review independently complaints about the actions or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ financial services regulators , the Financial Conduct Authority , the Prudential Regulation Authority and the Bank of England ( but only in respect of its oversight of the banking clearing houses and payment schemes ) .
” Remuneration : “ Remuneration is on a level with judicial salaries , pro-rated as appropriate .
”

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.
– – – – – – – – – –
Office for Budget Responsibility – Chair
“Robert Chote will be stepping down as Chair of the BRC later this year, after 10 years in post. We are seeking a successor with deep expertise in economic and fiscal analysis who can lead the BRC and provide intellectual leadership to the OBR’s staff. This is a high profile and influential role, requiring outstanding communication skills and integrity. Candidates must command broad respect for their objectivity in dealing with issues of political sensitivity. Appointments to the BRC are for a five-year term. There is the possibility of reappointment at the end of the term and members can serve a maximum of two terms. This post can be undertaken on either a part or full-time basis.”
Time: Full- or part-time.
Remuneration: £158,762 per annum (FTE).
Closes: 19 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Office for Nuclear Regulation – Security Non-Executive Director
“The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) is a Public Corporation responsible for the regulation of nuclear safety and security across the UK. Its vision is to be an exemplary regulator that inspires respect, trust and confidence. ONR is sponsored by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) who have principal responsibility for governance, finance and its performance in relation to conventional Health and Safety. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) is accountable for the UK civil nuclear regulatory framework and policies and for appointing a Security Non-Executive Director (NED) to the ONR Board.”
Time: Approx. 30 days per annum.
Remuneration: £15,000 plus expenses.
Closes: 22 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Regulatory Horizons Panel – Member
“As we enter the Fourth Industrial Revolution, a wave of technological innovation is creating new industries, disrupting existing ones and transforming the way things are made and the way we live. From AI-powered legal services to autonomous ships, new products, services and business models are emerging which don’t fit with existing regulatory systems. In its White Paper on Regulation for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the Government committed to establishing a Regulatory Horizons Council (RHC) to identify the implications of technological innovation with high potential benefit for the UK economy and society and advise the government on regulatory reform needed to support its rapid and safe introduction.”
Time: 1-2 days per month.
Remuneration: £380 per diem.
Closes: 23 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Financial Conduct Authority – Chief Executive
“This is an opportunity to take on an intellectually demanding role at the heart of international financial services, leading a sizeable and complex organisation. There is a requirement for strong leadership in a challenging environment to undertake a critically important role. Under Andrew Bailey, the FCA has formulated a transformation programme, to equip the organisation for the next phase of its development: a data strategy and enhanced analytical skills to rapidly identify harm across an exceptionally broad range of firms of all sizes exploiting fast-moving changes in technology and distribution to target consumers; enhance employee capabilities and processes to act swiftly on the harms identified; [and] and with a regulatory framework which is appropriate following the completion of EU withdrawal, and which takes advantage of the opportunities for better and more efficient regulation brought by technology and behavioural science.”
Time: Full-time.
Remuneration: Competitive.
Closes: 27 March
– – – – – – – – – –
British Council – Chief Executive
“The Chief Executive will assume office at a time of unprecedented external change. The political landscape in Europe and around the globe is altering with increasing pace and less predictability. The British Council is also in constant transformation to deliver within funding constraints in a demanding, more client and customer-facing world. The aims and goals of the British Council are more necessary than ever. Delivering them in the complex world of 2020 is more difficult than at any time since 1945. The resulting demands on the Chief Executive in terms of vision, agility, ability to simplify and lead with clarity and purpose are substantial. The Chief Executive will be instrumental in redefining both ‘soft power’ and ‘cultural relations’ at this pivotal moment and will help define the place of the United Kingdom, for the better, in a ‘disrupted’ and uncertain geopolitical world.”
Time: Full-time.
Remuneration: Up to £150k per annum plus bonus to 8 per cent and Civil Service Pension
Closes: 27 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Coast to Capital Local Enterprise Partnership (C2C LEP) – Chair
“The Coast to Capital Strategic Board comprises private sector and local authority Members, setting a vision for and overseeing delivery of economic prosperity for all in the Coast to Capital area, including through Government funding of projects through the Local Growth Fund. They are accountable to the LEP Board and for the proper governance of the LEP. Coast to Capital is seeking an influential and persuasive senior business figure from the C2C area to help lead the region and meet the ambitious vision set out in its strategic plan. Currently chaired by Tim Wates, who will be stepping down in July 2020, the Board brings together a diverse mix of regional business leaders alongside senior politicians and leaders from Universities and Further Education.”
Time: Four days per month, three-year term.
Remuneration: £20,000 per annum.
Closes: 30 March
– – – – – – – – – –
NHS Resolution – Chair
“The last few years have seen major changes to NHS Resolution’s role and standing in the system as a result of both its revised strategy and the new clinical negligence scheme for GPs. It has been a pleasure and privilege to Chair the organisation through this period of significant change. Although the course is set for the next few years some of these changes are still at an early stage and need to be embedded, there is now a need to progress the development of our infrastructure to support the enhanced role and the NHS will continue to evolve. I am sure therefore that the next Chair will also find the role both challenging and rewarding.”
Time: 2-3 days per week.
Remuneration: £63,000 per annum.
Closes: 06 April
– – – – – – – – – –
HM Treasury – Financial Regulators Complaints Commissioner
“The Office of the Complaints Commissioner is headed by the Financial Regulators Complaints Commissioner (the Commissioner) who is a statutory appointment required under the Financial Services Act 2012. This is a senior position and, whilst the appointment is made by the regulators, it is an independent role, subject to approval by HM Treasury. The current Commissioner carries out his duties through a company limited by guarantee (Office of the Complaints Commissioner) from premises based in the City of London. He is assisted by three staff. The Commissioner’s role is to review independently complaints about the actions or inactions of the UK’s current financial services regulators, the Financial Conduct Authority, the Prudential Regulation Authority and the Bank of England (but only in respect of its oversight of the banking clearing houses and payment schemes).”
Time: Est. three days per week.
Remuneration: “Remuneration is on a level with judicial salaries, pro-rated as appropriate.”
Closes: 13 April


conservativehome--2020-03-18--The Chancellor’s statement. A firm second step – but he must go further to deliver “whatever it take

The Chancellor’s statement. A firm second step – but he must go further to deliver “whatever it takes”.

We called this morning for the Government to stand behind the British economy in a manner unique in modern times – arguably in this country ’ s entire history .
That means working with employers and unions , in a manner not seen for some 50 years , to fund employers and workers directly .
Which will also entail special arrangements for the 15 per cent or so of the latter who are self-employed .
That implies the suspension of mortgages , rents , council tax and household bills ; of business rates across all sectors ; of a bigger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cut at the standard rate , because it makes no sense for the state to be giving with one hand and taking with the other .
Such a package is in our view “ whatever it takes ” : resuscitation for an economic heart seizure .
However , Rishi Sunak does not have the luxury of being able to implement ideals at once .
He must act in real time with imperfect powers : if he announces emergency relief schemes , for example , the infrastructure won ’ t be in place to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the manpower , the computer systems , the phone lines , the publicity .
Our reading of his statement is that the most important section of it is his commitment “ in the coming days… [ to ] work with trade unions and business groups to urgently develop new forms of employment support to help protect people ’ s jobs and incomes through this period ” .
That sounds a lot like further direct help to come in the form of grants .
It was not correct , as the BBC ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Chancellor ’ s latest package consists entirely of loans .
He is extending a business rates holiday .
He is increasing grants to 700,000 of the smallest businesses .
And the Government has persuaded mortgage lenders to offer a three month payment holiday .
Sunak and Boris Johnson also claimed that they have persuaded the insurance industry , which was digging in its heels over making payments , to move – and pay up .
It is significant that the Chancellor also said that there will be “ a new legal power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ further financial support I decide is necessary ” .
That seems to us to pave the way for the kind of Big State Government action that , in these upside-down times , is necessary and urgent on a previously unimaginable scale .
None the less , the biggest bazooka in Sunak ’ s armoury was the more than doubling of his Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme .
This offered loans of up to £1.2 million when he first announced it in the Budget – how long ago that seems now – and he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million .
The Chancellor argues that what firms most need is immediate help with paying rent , salaries and suppliers .
That is surely correct .
The question is whether business , the markets and workers fix their gaze on this loan scheme centrepiece or on the Sunak ’ s evident intent to go further very soon .
If they concentrate their attention on the former , and on the gaps in the Chancellor ’ s statement , this package will fail to reassure .
What about renters , it ’ s being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Business Rates holiday ?
The self-employed ?
Recipients of Universal Credit – designed , remember , partly as a support payment for workers ?
£330 billion of guarantees is a humunguous figure – well over a third of public spending as a whole .
But again a question arises of what that statistic looks like broken down into grants and loans .
It may be irrational for firms or people to gripe about the latter when they are being made available on this sweeping scale .
And it will also be the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very soft .
None the less , Sunak , as he well knows , will be back at the press conference podium and the Commons despatch box in days rather than weeks with new announcements , in the wake of the discussions with employers and unions for which we called today , and which he will now undertake It is weird to write that a package of some third of public spending is no more than a solid second step for the Chancellor , but there it is .
He as , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ on a journey ” .

We called this morning for the Government to stand behind the British economy in a manner unique in modern times – arguably in this country’s entire history.
That means working with employers and unions, in a manner not seen for some 50 years, to fund employers and workers directly. Which will also entail special arrangements for the 15 per cent or so of the latter who are self-employed.
That implies the suspension of mortgages, rents, council tax and household bills; of business rates across all sectors; of a bigger hardship fund, and an income tax cut at the standard rate, because it makes no sense for the state to be giving with one hand and taking with the other.
Such a package is in our view “whatever it takes”: resuscitation for an economic heart seizure.
However, Rishi Sunak does not have the luxury of being able to implement ideals at once. He must act in real time with imperfect powers: if he announces emergency relief schemes, for example, the infrastructure won’t be in place to get them up and running immediatedly; the manpower, the computer systems, the phone lines, the publicity.
Our reading of his statement is that the most important section of it is his commitment “in the coming days…[to] work with trade unions and business groups to urgently develop new forms of employment support to help protect people’s jobs and incomes through this period”.
That sounds a lot like further direct help to come in the form of grants. It was not correct, as the BBC’s initial reporting claimed this evening, that the Chancellor’s latest package consists entirely of loans. He is extending a business rates holiday. He is increasing grants to 700,000 of the smallest businesses.
And the Government has persuaded mortgage lenders to offer a three month payment holiday. Sunak and Boris Johnson also claimed that they have persuaded the insurance industry, which was digging in its heels over making payments, to move – and pay up.
It is significant that the Chancellor also said that there will be “a new legal power in the Covid Bill to offer whatever further financial support I decide is necessary”. That seems to us to pave the way for the kind of Big State Government action that, in these upside-down times, is necessary and urgent on a previously unimaginable scale.
None the less, the biggest bazooka in Sunak’s armoury was the more than doubling of his Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme. This offered loans of up to £1.2 million when he first announced it in the Budget – how long ago that seems now – and he is now upping that figure to £5 million.
The Chancellor argues that what firms most need is immediate help with paying rent, salaries and suppliers. That is surely correct. The question is whether business, the markets and workers fix their gaze on this loan scheme centrepiece or on the Sunak’s evident intent to go further very soon.
If they concentrate their attention on the former, and on the gaps in the Chancellor’s statement, this package will fail to reassure. What about renters, it’s being asked? Or firms not eligible for the Business Rates holiday? The self-employed? Recipients of Universal Credit – designed, remember, partly as a support payment for workers?
£330 billion of guarantees is a humunguous figure – well over a third of public spending as a whole.
But again a question arises of what that statistic looks like broken down into grants and loans. It may be irrational for firms or people to gripe about the latter when they are being made available on this sweeping scale. And it will also be the case that many are bound to be very soft.
None the less, Sunak, as he well knows, will be back at the press conference podium and the Commons despatch box in days rather than weeks with new announcements, in the wake of the discussions with employers and unions for which we called today, and which he will now undertake
It is weird to write that a package of some third of public spending is no more than a solid second step for the Chancellor, but there it is. He as, as Cameroon modernisers used to like to say, “on a journey”.


Coronavirus Count

Total number of cases in the UK : 1,950 ( Up from 1,543 at the last count on this site ) .
From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
Total UK cases COVID-19 Cases Update .
The above are figures for England .
“ The risk to the UK has been raised to high ” – From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
THE GOVERNMENT ’ S NEW ADVICE ON SOCIAL DISTANCING , AND PROTECTING OLDER @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Published on Monday March 16 .
THE GOVERNMENT ’ S GUIDANCE ON WHAT THE CORONAVIRUS BILL WILL DO See here .
Published on Wednesday March 18.. HOW TO AVOID CATCHING OR SPREADING CORONAVIRUS • Wash your hands with soap and water often – do this for at least 20 seconds .
• Always wash your hands when you get home or into work .
• Use hand sanitiser gel if soap and water are not available .
• Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve ( not your hands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • Put used tissues in the bin straight away and wash your hands afterwards .
• Try to avoid close contact with people who are unwell .
The symptoms of coronavirus are : However , these symptoms do not necessarily mean you have the illness .
The symptoms are similar to other illnesses that are much more common , such as cold and flu .
NHS 111 has an online coronavirus service that can tell you if you need medical help and advise you what to do .
Use this service if : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
• In the last 14 days you ’ ve been to a country or area with a high risk of coronavirus – see the coronavirus advice for travellers .
• You ’ ve been in close contact with someone with coronavirus .
• In Scotland call your GP or NHS 24 on 111 out of hours .
• In Wales call 111 ( if available in your area ) or 0845 46 47 .
• Do not go to a GP surgery , pharmacy or hospital .
• What the coronavirus is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how to avoid catching it – Government NHS website overview .
• Stay at home advice and how to manage self-isolation .
All information taken from Government sources .
Update as of 7am on Wednesday March 18th .

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


conservativehome--2020-03-18--Ryan Bourne: The upside-world of virus economics. And why we free marketeers must adapt our usual wa

Ryan Bourne: The upside-world of virus economics. And why we free marketeers must adapt our usual ways of thinking.

Ryan Bourne holds the R Evan Scharf Chair in Public Understanding of Economics at the Cato Institute .
Governments are certainly taking action in the face of a likely coronavirus recession .
Emmanuel Macron has committed the French state to protecting every company from bankruptcy .
Steve Mnuchin , the U.S. Treasury Secretary , has announced that Donald Trump ’ s government willmail cheques to Americans within two weeks .
And Rishi Sunak yesterday unveiled a huge package of UK measures : £330 billion worth of zero-interest loans and loan guarantees for businesses , business rates relief and cash grants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies , £10,000 cash grants to all small businesses , and a three month mortgage holiday for those in distress .
More Government action , so we are told , will come with employment support .
That ’ s on top of £12 billion coronavirus-related spending in last week ’ s budget .
Many will question the specifics of the Treasury ’ s measures .
Is there enough there to tide over restaurants and hotels seeing complete demand collapses ?
Will the offer of loans be enough for manufacturing firms suffering from delayed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unknown ?
If mortgage holders are worthy of support , why not renters ?
And is the existing generosity , eligibility , and administrative capacity of the welfare system broad enough to support households seeing job losses or falling self-employment income in the coming weeks ?
The answer is “ probably not , ” but the Chancellor ’ s assured tone screamed that more was to come .
“ Whatever it takes ” was his message , repeated five times .
If such questions seem weird coming from a free-market economist , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times .
As I outlined yesterday , the upside-down world of coronavirus economics means that employees not engaging in on-site work is , today , largely a virtue , not a sin .
Short-term GDP boosts and pumping up consumption are not desirable given the health consequences .
We don ’ t want “ fiscal stimulus.
” In fact , economic activity will shrink precisely because of the social distancing and containment policies we need to curb the virus .
Our key economic challenge is to avoid this necessary , short-term , pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t want a temporary and partial shutdown of the economy to lead to otherwise viable businesses collapsing , with destructive losses of capital , worker-employer relationships , and resulting unemployment .
Whereas ordinary recessions bring “ creative destruction ” among firms , few would suggest your local Indian restaurants could feasibly have foreseen a global pandemic eliminating months of its business income .
The theoretical aim of policy then should be bridging over what is hopefully a short pause in activity , eliminating near-term distress for households and businesses to allow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the viral tsunami passes .
In this light , Sunak ’ s approach recognises the nature of the business problem .
Big on direct payments and loans , the Chancellor in effect has Government mimicking a missing insurance market , with cash payments and low cost loans available such that “ good firms ” remain tied over through this year , with further unspecified support to ensure they maintain employment too .
The thought process is that most large companies can access credit or investment capital if they have long-term viability .
Given @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more favourable terms may ease the pressure given any credit crunch .
Smaller businesses are more likely to be credit constrained , and such will be the hit to activity in areas such as restaurants and hospitality , big loan repayments short-term may end up making businesses unviable anyway .
Hence the cash grants announced yesterday .
Now , from a free-market perspective , this all throws up some obvious concerns , not least taxpayers being on the hook for large loan losses .
Timing is another worry .
We still talk under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will last a few months .
But if the Imperial College modelling suggesting that coronavirus suppression might require 18 months of containment is correct , then “ bridging ” won ’ t work , despite the Government ’ s best efforts .
As the OBR ’ s Sir Charles Bean said yesterday , the longer this runs , the less likely loan , even on favourable terms , can plug firms ’ budget shortfalls without endangering insolvency .
So the Government would have to turn to taxpayer grants .
But a less palatable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on , the more market activity and the structure of the economy will change , and the less continuing support would be beneficial for any rebound .
Already , understandably , more resources are flowing into the production of ventilators .
Amazon is hiring more staff at higher wages .
If we are holed up for a year or more , our spending habits will change , perhaps irrevocably .
New enterprises will prioritise delivery .
More shops would move to online only .
The nature of firms and teleworking would change , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
At that stage , considering this an economic “ pause , ” aiming to return to where we left off , will just not be infeasible but undesirable .
Of course , we aren ’ t there yet .
But it ’ s worth bearing in mind .
For Sunak yesterday fixated on big fiscal measures , no doubt considering stock market reaction .
But , in fact , governments should also be considering regulatory changes and adjustments to their own spending that might make this period and any future adjustment easier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Robert Jenrick announced that cafes , restaurants and pubs will , from now on , automatically become takeaways and food delivery companies .
Why there was a requirement to obtain permission through planning laws for this already is a mystery .
But this is just the sort of innovative thinking that will give businesses and workers some breathing space , easing future change .
With the crisis pressing , the government should think carefully about other steps that could both ease the immediate challenge and provide new ways of working .
Why not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ childminders ?
Why not ease overtime , agency worker rules and Sunday trading regulations to generate more income opportunities and allow smoothing of supermarket visits ?
Rather than seeking work , why not encourage jobseekers to do helpful tasks on Mechanical Turk ?
The possibilities for innovative thinking are endless .
Then there ’ s the Government itself .
For now , the coronavirus is being treated as an add-on to existing activity , requiring new funding .
As businesses adjust , government as yet is not curbing its own activity by , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if this crisis continues , might it change the Government ’ s outlook ?
If a fall-out from all this is greater remote working , how does that affect the “ levelling up ” agenda ?
Or undermine the business case for HS2 ?
Sunak yesterday was firefighting a crisis and setting out his view of the macroeconomics .
His answers have a clear coherent rationale : protect jobs while mothballing certain activity to contain the virus by providing bridging support to the recovery .
But he must keep one eye on more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ levers to make this less destructive under constant review .

Ryan Bourne holds the R Evan Scharf Chair in Public Understanding of Economics at the Cato Institute.
Governments are certainly taking action in the face of a likely coronavirus recession.
Emmanuel Macron has committed the French state to protecting every company from bankruptcy. Steve Mnuchin, the U.S. Treasury Secretary, has announced that Donald Trump’s government willmail cheques to Americans within two weeks.
And Rishi Sunak yesterday unveiled a huge package of UK measures: £330 billion worth of zero-interest loans and loan guarantees for businesses, business rates relief and cash grants for retail, hospitality, and leisure companies, £10,000 cash grants to all small businesses, and a three month mortgage holiday for those in distress. More Government action, so we are told, will come with employment support. That’s on top of £12 billion coronavirus-related spending in last week’s budget.
Many will question the specifics of the Treasury’s measures. Is there enough there to tide over restaurants and hotels seeing complete demand collapses? Will the offer of loans be enough for manufacturing firms suffering from delayed demand, given the crisis duration is unknown? If mortgage holders are worthy of support, why not renters? And is the existing generosity, eligibility, and administrative capacity of the welfare system broad enough to support households seeing job losses or falling self-employment income in the coming weeks?
The answer is “probably not,” but the Chancellor’s assured tone screamed that more was to come. “Whatever it takes” was his message, repeated five times.
If such questions seem weird coming from a free-market economist, it’s because we are in unprecedented times. As I outlined yesterday, the upside-down world of coronavirus economics means that employees not engaging in on-site work is, today, largely a virtue, not a sin.
Short-term GDP boosts and pumping up consumption are not desirable given the health consequences. We don’t want “fiscal stimulus.” In fact, economic activity will shrink precisely because of the social distancing and containment policies we need to curb the virus.
Our key economic challenge is to avoid this necessary, short-term, pandemic from inducing “economic contagion.” We don’t want a temporary and partial shutdown of the economy to lead to otherwise viable businesses collapsing, with destructive losses of capital, worker-employer relationships, and resulting unemployment. Whereas ordinary recessions bring “creative destruction” among firms, few would suggest your local Indian restaurants could feasibly have foreseen a global pandemic eliminating months of its business income.
The theoretical aim of policy then should be bridging over what is hopefully a short pause in activity, eliminating near-term distress for households and businesses to allow a V- or Nike-tick shaped recovery once the viral tsunami passes.
In this light, Sunak’s approach recognises the nature of the business problem. Big on direct payments and loans, the Chancellor in effect has Government mimicking a missing insurance market, with cash payments and low cost loans available such that “good firms” remain tied over through this year, with further unspecified support to ensure they maintain employment too.
The thought process is that most large companies can access credit or investment capital if they have long-term viability. Given current sentiment though, Government loans on more favourable terms may ease the pressure given any credit crunch. Smaller businesses are more likely to be credit constrained, and such will be the hit to activity in areas such as restaurants and hospitality, big loan repayments short-term may end up making businesses unviable anyway. Hence the cash grants announced yesterday.
Now, from a free-market perspective, this all throws up some obvious concerns, not least taxpayers being on the hook for large loan losses. Timing is another worry. We still talk under the assumption that this pause in activity will last a few months. But if the Imperial College modelling suggesting that coronavirus suppression might require 18 months of containment is correct, then “bridging” won’t work, despite the Government’s best efforts.
As the OBR’s Sir Charles Bean said yesterday, the longer this runs, the less likely loan, even on favourable terms, can plug firms’ budget shortfalls without endangering insolvency. So the Government would have to turn to taxpayer grants. But a less palatable truth is that the longer it goes on, the more market activity and the structure of the economy will change, and the less continuing support would be beneficial for any rebound.
Already, understandably, more resources are flowing into the production of ventilators. Amazon is hiring more staff at higher wages. If we are holed up for a year or more, our spending habits will change, perhaps irrevocably. New enterprises will prioritise delivery. More shops would move to online only. The nature of firms and teleworking would change, and probably our interests and tastes too. At that stage, considering this an economic “pause,” aiming to return to where we left off, will just not be infeasible but undesirable.
Of course, we aren’t there yet. But it’s worth bearing in mind. For Sunak yesterday fixated on big fiscal measures, no doubt considering stock market reaction. But, in fact, governments should also be considering regulatory changes and adjustments to their own spending that might make this period and any future adjustment easier.
Just yesterday, for example, Robert Jenrick announced that cafes, restaurants and pubs will, from now on, automatically become takeaways and food delivery companies. Why there was a requirement to obtain permission through planning laws for this already is a mystery. But this is just the sort of innovative thinking that will give businesses and workers some breathing space, easing future change.
With the crisis pressing, the government should think carefully about other steps that could both ease the immediate challenge and provide new ways of working. Why not relax licensing requirements and child-staff ratios for childminders? Why not ease overtime, agency worker rules and Sunday trading regulations to generate more income opportunities and allow smoothing of supermarket visits? Rather than seeking work, why not encourage jobseekers to do helpful tasks on Mechanical Turk? The possibilities for innovative thinking are endless.
Then there’s the Government itself. For now, the coronavirus is being treated as an add-on to existing activity, requiring new funding. As businesses adjust, government as yet is not curbing its own activity by, say, delaying infrastructure projects. But if this crisis continues, might it change the Government’s outlook? If a fall-out from all this is greater remote working, how does that affect the “levelling up” agenda? Or undermine the business case for HS2?
Sunak yesterday was firefighting a crisis and setting out his view of the macroeconomics. His answers have a clear coherent rationale: protect jobs while mothballing certain activity to contain the virus by providing bridging support to the recovery. But he must keep one eye on more uncomfortable possibilities, and keep other economic levers to make this less destructive under constant review.


conservativehome--2020-03-18--Daniel Hannan: The Coronavirus. Our instincts are likelier to push us into over-reacting than the re

Daniel Hannan: The Coronavirus. Our instincts are likelier to push us into over-reacting than the reverse.

Daniel Hannan is a writer and columnist .
He was a Conservative MEP from 1999 to 2020 , and is now President of the Initiative for Free Trade .
In a crisis , we reach for whatever feels most comforting .
As the Titanic sank , its band leader , Wallace Hartley , played the hymn his father had introduced to the chapel where he had sung as a boy , “ Nearer my God to Thee ” .
More prosaically , a thousand pundits and politicians have responded to the COVID-19 outbreak by saying , in effect , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need to do whatever I happened to be banging on about before ” .
Anti-globalisers say that it proves we are too reliant on international trade .
China hawks say we must ban Huawei .
The GMB rails against the use of private hospital beds .
Jeremy Corbyn blames Boris Johnson .
There was an eco-activist on the radio yesterday saying it proved the urgency of cutting carbon emissions – though I ’ m pretty sure that is already happening .
Anti-Brexiteers demand an extension of the transition period .
People who dislike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ waste a good crisis .
The EU , too , has reverted to its most elemental impulses .
In an extraordinary video clip , the President of the European Commission , Ursula von der Leyen , insisted that the Single Market be preserved while at the same time ( and evidently oblivious to any contradiction ) announcing an export ban on some forms of medical equipment .
We ’ re all in this together ; but only if we ’ re in the EU .
A visibly shaken Aleksandar Vučić , the President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ der Leyen ’ s announcement with a televised statement in which he told his countrymen that China was their true friend .
The EU , he said , having for years set conditions that effectively forced Serbia to bid for European rather than non-European contracts , had now thrown his country over .
Only the Chinese would send medical equipment .
Now it is possible that Vučić , too , is reverting to his primal instincts .
He started out as a hardline nationalist , though he is now a goody-goody EPP member @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I am doing the same , identifying what I see as a clear case of EU hypocrisy but others might see as a justified response .
All human beings suffer from confirmation biases .
There is nothing we can do about our neural wiring ; but we can at least try to identify and allow for the various cognitive glitches that become especially pronounced when there is an elevated stress level .
For example , our instincts are likelier to push us into over-reacting than the reverse .
When the UK government , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a phased and measured way to the outbreak , there was a general demand that it do more .
I was reminded of a line from Harold Nicolson ’ s diary at the height of the 1938 Czech crisis : “ Several people ring me up begging me ‘ to do something ’ .
They have no idea what they want me to do , but they are getting hysterical , and it is some relief to them to bother others on the phone ” .
For phone , these days , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most dangerous sequences in politics goes like this .
“ Something must be done .
Here ’ s something .
Let ’ s do it.
” It leads to all manner of needless and counterproductive decisions .
For example , it is hard to see any medical case for countries banning international travel , as the EU has just done – especially from places with infection rates similar to or less than their own .
Nor can I see much rationale for closing schools and sending children , who seem mercifully to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , into the care of their grandparents .
But , as always in a crisis , people want action – big , visible , dramatic action .
So my guess ( and , I could , as I say , be subject to cognitive bias ) is that governments the world over are doing more rather than less than is strictly demanded by the science .
What of the disease itself ?
Is it likely to be better or worse than the forecasts suggest ?
Obviously , it is impossible to know .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the brilliant Matt , who has made a career out of wisely and successfully debunking scare stories – says that this is the big one , there is plainly a genuine menace .
Still , it is worth noting that the forecasts for both bird ’ flu and swine ’ flu were far too pessimistic .
When I say “ forecasts ” , I mean the predictions of WHO officials , the Chief Medical Officer and the US government – the headlines , naturally , were even more wildly out .
Our pessimism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and cheerful early hominids tended not to have as many surviving offspring as their suspicious kindred , and we carry the gloomy genes of the survivors .
Pessimism has its uses ; but we should be aware of how our instincts can mislead us .
It is at least possible that we will avoid some or most of the predicted catastrophes .
The WHO says the illness has peaked in parts of East Asia , and the Chinese President has visited Wuhan without protective clothing .
We need to think , not just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but about what comes afterwards .
It is inevitable that we will emerge from the crisis poorer , more indebted , with many businesses destroyed and with something close to a wartime command economy .
But how high those costs are is at least partly discretionary .
We – or at least our leaders – can dial them up or down .
It is a hard thing , in politics , to act proportionately when public opinion demands drastic action .
But doing so is the essence of statecraft .

Daniel Hannan is a writer and columnist. He was a Conservative MEP from 1999 to 2020, and is now President of the Initiative for Free Trade.
In a crisis, we reach for whatever feels most comforting. As the Titanic sank, its band leader, Wallace Hartley, played the hymn his father had introduced to the chapel where he had sung as a boy, “Nearer my God to Thee”.
More prosaically, a thousand pundits and politicians have responded to the COVID-19 outbreak by saying, in effect, “This just goes to show that we need to do whatever I happened to be banging on about before”. Anti-globalisers say that it proves we are too reliant on international trade. China hawks say we must ban Huawei. The GMB rails against the use of private hospital beds. Jeremy Corbyn blames Boris Johnson.
There was an eco-activist on the radio yesterday saying it proved the urgency of cutting carbon emissions – though I’m pretty sure that is already happening. Anti-Brexiteers demand an extension of the transition period. People who dislike capitalism argue that we mustn’t waste a good crisis.
The EU, too, has reverted to its most elemental impulses. In an extraordinary video clip, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, insisted that the Single Market be preserved while at the same time (and evidently oblivious to any contradiction) announcing an export ban on some forms of medical equipment. We’re all in this together; but only if we’re in the EU.
A visibly shaken Aleksandar Vučić, the President of Serbia, responded to Ms von der Leyen’s announcement with a televised statement in which he told his countrymen that China was their true friend. The EU, he said, having for years set conditions that effectively forced Serbia to bid for European rather than non-European contracts, had now thrown his country over. Only the Chinese would send medical equipment.
Now it is possible that Vučić, too, is reverting to his primal instincts. He started out as a hardline nationalist, though he is now a goody-goody EPP member. And it is equally possible that I am doing the same, identifying what I see as a clear case of EU hypocrisy but others might see as a justified response. All human beings suffer from confirmation biases.
There is nothing we can do about our neural wiring; but we can at least try to identify and allow for the various cognitive glitches that become especially pronounced when there is an elevated stress level.
For example, our instincts are likelier to push us into over-reacting than the reverse. When the UK government, acting in line with advice, responded in a phased and measured way to the outbreak, there was a general demand that it do more. I was reminded of a line from Harold Nicolson’s diary at the height of the 1938 Czech crisis: “Several people ring me up begging me ‘to do something’. They have no idea what they want me to do, but they are getting hysterical, and it is some relief to them to bother others on the phone”. For phone, these days, read social media.
One of the most dangerous sequences in politics goes like this. “Something must be done. Here’s something. Let’s do it.” It leads to all manner of needless and counterproductive decisions.
For example, it is hard to see any medical case for countries banning international travel, as the EU has just done – especially from places with infection rates similar to or less than their own. Nor can I see much rationale for closing schools and sending children, who seem mercifully to be the least at risk from the disease, into the care of their grandparents. But, as always in a crisis, people want action – big, visible, dramatic action. So my guess (and, I could, as I say, be subject to cognitive bias) is that governments the world over are doing more rather than less than is strictly demanded by the science.
What of the disease itself? Is it likely to be better or worse than the forecasts suggest? Obviously, it is impossible to know. When even my friend Matt Ridley – the brilliant Matt, who has made a career out of wisely and successfully debunking scare stories – says that this is the big one, there is plainly a genuine menace. Still, it is worth noting that the forecasts for both bird ’flu and swine ’flu were far too pessimistic. When I say “forecasts”, I mean the predictions of WHO officials, the Chief Medical Officer and the US government – the headlines, naturally, were even more wildly out.
Our pessimism has a solid evolutionary basis. Trusting and cheerful early hominids tended not to have as many surviving offspring as their suspicious kindred, and we carry the gloomy genes of the survivors. Pessimism has its uses; but we should be aware of how our instincts can mislead us.
It is at least possible that we will avoid some or most of the predicted catastrophes. The WHO says the illness has peaked in parts of East Asia, and the Chinese President has visited Wuhan without protective clothing. We need to think, not just about getting through the coming weeks, but about what comes afterwards.
It is inevitable that we will emerge from the crisis poorer, more indebted, with many businesses destroyed and with something close to a wartime command economy. But how high those costs are is at least partly discretionary. We – or at least our leaders – can dial them up or down. It is a hard thing, in politics, to act proportionately when public opinion demands drastic action. But doing so is the essence of statecraft.