conservativehome--2020-12-17--“Dignity and humanity … not quotas and targets, or equality of outcome.” Truss’s speech on fairness

“Dignity and humanity … not quotas and targets, or equality of outcome.” Truss’s speech on fairness – full text

This is the text of the speech Liz Truss , the International Trade Secretary and Minister for Women and Equalities , gave today .
“ No matter your skin colour , sexuality , religion or anything else , the United Kingdom is one of the best places in the world to live .
The British story has been driven from its earliest days by the desire for liberty , agency , and fairness .
It is the notion that in Britain you will have the opportunity to succeed at whatever you wish to do professionally… …that you can be whoever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you want to dress , …love whoever you wish to love But we must be honest .
Our story is not yet complete .
Our equality journey is not yet finished .
For too many people… particularly in places beyond the South East… opportunity is diminished .
For years , successive governments have either pretended that all opportunity was equal… or failed to come up with proper solutions … paying lip service to a problem that has festered for decades .
It was this government that finally tore down this social taboo when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and toppled the Red Wall … turning it Blue .
We were elected partly on the promise of fixing the scourge of geographici nequality … and ensuring equal opportunity for all .
There are still too many cases where your destination in life is decided by where you started it .
So today , I am outlining a new approach to equality in this country .
This will be founded firmly on Conservative values .
It will be about individual dignity and humanity … not quotas and targets , or equality of outcome @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the Left … captured as they are by identity politics , loud lobby groups and the idea of ‘ lived experience ’ .
It will focus fiercely on fixing geographic inequality … addressing the real problems people face in their everyday lives … using evidence and data .
If you were born in Clacton or Darlington , you have been under-served by successive governments .
No more .
This new approach to equality will run through the DNA of this government .
The moral and practical case for equality For me , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Just as our forebears fought for change , we must fight for change again – challenging what is unfair and unjust today .
It is not right that having a particular surname or accent can sometimes make it harder to get a job .
It is appalling that pregnant women suffer discrimination at work .
Or that women may be encouraged to dress in a certain way to get ahead .
Or that some employers overlook the capabilities of people with disabilities .
It is outrageous in the 21st century that LGBT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As well as being a moral problem , it is shameful we are squandering so much talent .
• If women opened businesses at the same rate as men – we could add £250 billion to the economy… • If people of every ethnic group were fully represented across the labour market , that would mean an extra £24 billion of income a year .
• If businesses were fully accessible for disabled consumers , they could benefit from an estimated £274 billion a year in spending power .
We can ill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recover from Covid and build back better .
Our new approach to equality will be based on the core principles of freedom , choice , opportunity , and individual humanity and dignity .
We will move well beyond the narrow focus of protected characteristics… and deliver real change that benefits people across our United Kingdom .
We will do this in three ways .
First , by delivering fairness through modernisation , increased choice and openness .
Second , by concentrating on data and research , rather than on campaigning and listening to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ third , by taking our biggest and broadest look yet at the challenges we face… including the all too neglected scourge of geographic inequality .
Now is the time to root the equality debate in the real concerns people face… like affording a home… getting to work… going out safely at night… ending discrimination in our offices , factories and shop floors … and improving our schools so every child has a good chance in life .
It is our duty to deliver , because if right-thinking people do not lead the fight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ led by those whose ideas don ’ t work .
The failed ideas of the Left The ideas that have dominated the equality debate have been long in the making .
As a comprehensive school student in Leeds in the 1980s , I was struck by the lip service that was paid to equality by the City Council while children from disadvantaged backgrounds were let down .
While we were taught about racism and sexism , there was too little time spent making sure everyone could read and write .
In this school @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for evidence , as there is no objective view – truth and morality are all relative .
Rather than promote policies that would have been a game-changer for the disenfranchised like better education and business opportunities , there was a preference for symbolic gestures .
Even now , authorities rush to embrace symbols – for example , Birmingham City Council promoting new streets named “ Diversity Grove ” and “ Equality Road ” – as if that counts as real change .
Underlying this is the soft bigotry of low expectations , where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to reach high standards .
This diminishes their individual humanity , dignity and agency .
And it hasn ’ t delivered the progress it promised .
In 1997 , there was a huge celebration of all-women shortlists delivering Blair ’ s babes .
But 23 years later , the Labour Party still hasn ’ t had a female leader .
In the last leadership election , there were four women standing… but the man won .
Again .
In addition , this focus on groups at the expense of individuals has led to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Left turning a blind eye to practices that undermine equality , whether it be failing to defend single-sex spaces , hard fought for by generations of women… enabling and tolerating antisemitism … or the appalling grooming of young girls in towns like Rotherham .
Although time and time again , the Left ’ s ideas have been shown to fail , they still pervade our body politic .
Study after study has shown that unconscious bias training does not improve equality , and in fact can backfire by reinforcing stereotypes and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this week we announced we will no longer be using it in government or civil service .
Whether it ’ s “ affirmative action ” … forced training on “ unconscious bias ” … or lectures on “ lived experience ” … the Left are in thrall to ideas that undermine equality at every turn .
The absurdity was summed up just this week by the Mayor of Paris being fined for employing so many female managers she had breached a quota .
By contrast , the Conservative Party has elected two female @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the highest ever level of ethnic minority representation .
We have done this not by positively discriminating … but by positively empowering people who want to go into politics and opening up our Party to people of all backgrounds .
Because when you choose on the basis of protected characteristics , you end up excluding other people .
Fairness , not favouritism , drives our approach to equality .
Too often , the equality debate has been dominated by a small number of unrepresentative voices , and by those who believe people are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by their individual character .
This school of thought says that if you are not from an ‘ oppressed group ’ then you are not entitled to an opinion… and that this debate is not for you .
Equality is something everybody in the United Kingdom should care about… and something all of us have a stake in .
So , I am calling time on “ pink bus ” feminism , where women are left to fix sexism and campaign for childcare .
Rather than virtue signalling , or campaigning…this government is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transparent society that works for all … and that delivers genuine equality of opportunity .
The work of American academic Iris Bohnet shows that modernising and making organisations more transparent is the best way to tackle inequality .
When things are opaque , it benefits those who know how to game the system .
We know that when companies publish their wage ranges , it leads to more equal starting points for men and women .
We know that automatic promotions based on performance help level up opportunities for women in the workplace… @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely to put themselves forward for promotion .
And we know that evidence-driven recruitment in a clear and open structure is more effective than using informal and ad hoc networks .
On the other hand , techniques like unconscious bias training , quotas and diversity statements … do nothing to make the workplace fundamentally fairer .
By driving reforms that increase competition , boost transparency and improve choice , we can open up opportunities .
This is the approach we will be taking across government .
It is fundamentally important that the role @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who also has another cabinet job , as I do with trade .
This ensures equality is not siloed… but is instead the responsibility of the whole government and all our elected representatives .
For example , the Academies Act 2010 meant good free schools were established across England and more children had the opportunity of a great education… the 1980 Housing Act empowered over two million people to get on the housing ladder…and the independent taxation of women in 1988 gave wives control of their own money .
All of these reforms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over their own lives and making systems more transparent .
For example , we know that students from poorer backgrounds are more likely to achieve better grades than they were predicted… and they lose out in the current university admissions system which is based on predicted grades .
That is why Gavin Williamson is right to base the university admissions system on the actual grades students achieve , making sure that students from lower income backgrounds have a fairer shot at university .
In the workplace , we know that flexible working improves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with other responsibilities .
That is why I will be working with Alok Sharma , the Business Secretary , to enable more flexible working – not just as a necessity amid the Covid crisis but to empower employees .
The best way to reduce unfairness in our society is through opening up opportunities for all .
This is the level playing field we should be talking about .
And we are going to make sure that this level playing field is properly enforced .
That is why I am appointing a new chair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Equality and Human Rights Commission to drive this agenda forward .
I am proud we have Baroness Kishwer Falkner , David Goodhart , Jessica Butcher , Su-Mei Thompson and Lord Ribeiro , all of whom are committed to equality and ready to challenge dangerous groupthink .
Under this new leadership , the EHRC will focus on enforcing fair treatment for all , rather than freelance campaigning .
To make our society more equal , we need the equality debate to be led by facts… not by fashion .
Time and time again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence-free judgements .
The Labour party made the ridiculous claim that “ our country has never been more unequal ” , with even Channel 4 concluding it “ does not stand up to scrutiny ” .
My superb colleague Kemi Badenoch is leading work on the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities , established by the Prime Minister .
We should heed the warning from its chair , Dr Tony Sewell , who wrote last month that they have uncovered “ a perception of racism that is often not supported by evidence ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
We can and must have an equality agenda that is driven by evidence .
Today I am announcing that the Equality Hub will embark on the Government ’ s biggest , broadest and most comprehensive equality data project yet… and it will closely coordinate with the work of CRED .
Over the coming months , we will look across the UK to identify where people are held back and what the biggest barriers are .
We will not limit our fight for fairness to the nine protected characteristics laid out in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , race , and gender reassignment .
While it is true people in these groups suffer discrimination , the focus on protected characteristics has led to a narrowing of the equality debate that overlooks socio-economic status and geographic inequality .
This means some issues – particularly those facing white working-class children – are neglected .
This project will broaden the drive for equality and get to the heart of the barriers people face .
It will report its initial findings in the Summer .
In addition to race , sex , disability and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issues around geography , community and socio-economic background .
It will deliver a new life-path analysis of equality from the perspective of the individual , not groups .
Using longitudinal data sets will help us understand where the real problems lie .
There is a deeper wage gap between London and the regions than between men and women , with an average full-time salary a third higher in the capital than the North East of England .
There are lower employment rates , pay packets and life expectancy across the North than the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agenda must be prosecuted with fierce determination and clarity of purpose up and down the country… not just in London boardrooms and Whitehall offices .
Whether that is making the case for free schools in deprived areas… or using data to help regional businesses attract investment .
We will use the power of evidence to drive reform and give people access to the facts so they can push for change .
We will drive this action from the North of England , where we will be moving the Equality Hub .
And I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also taking on sponsorship of the Social Mobility Commission , to give this agenda real teeth and coherence .
The whole of government will be – and is – totally committed to this agenda .
The Treasury is revising its Green Book so that it judges infrastructure investment fairly across the UK , no longer seeing – for example – faster broadband as a better investment in Surrey than South Lanarkshire .
The Department for Education is going to extra lengths to create academies and free schools outside London .
And in housing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for home ownership across the country .
This is just the start .
There is much more we will be doing to make our country fairer and give people agency over their own lives .
This is not limited to the UK This fight for fairness goes beyond our shores .
Next year , the United Kingdom will use its presidency of the G7 to ramp up its work worldwide with like-minded allies to champion freedom , human rights and the equality of opportunity .
The UK is co-leading the new global Generation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and co-chairing the Equal Rights Coalition .
In that role , we will be holding our International LGBT conference , on the theme of Safe To Be Me .
We are working internationally to bring an end to child marriage… and are supporting international programmes to end the abhorrent practice of Female Genital Mutilation .
We need to make progress across the world and at home… as a fairer world and a fairer Britain go hand in hand .
Taking the right approach to deliver real change At this vital time in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must make sure everyone has a chance to succeed in modern Britain .
That is why we can not waste time on misguided , wrong-headed and ultimately destructive ideas that take agency away from people .
Instead , we will drive an agenda that empowers people and actively challenges discrimination .
We will use evidence to inform policy and drive change .
And we will focus on increasing openness and transparency … fixing the system rather than the results .
Together , we will build back a better society and lead the new @ @ @ @ @

This is the text of the speech Liz Truss, the International Trade Secretary and Minister for Women and Equalities, gave today.
“No matter your skin colour, sexuality, religion or anything else, the United Kingdom is one of the best places in the world to live.
The British story has been driven from its earliest days by the desire for liberty, agency, and fairness.
It is the notion that in Britain you will have the opportunity to succeed at whatever you wish to do professionally…
…that you can be whoever you want to be,
…dress however you want to dress,
…love whoever you wish to love
…and achieve your dreams.
But we must be honest. Our story is not yet complete. Our equality journey is not yet finished.
For too many people… particularly in places beyond the South East… opportunity is diminished.
For years, successive governments have either pretended that all opportunity was equal… or failed to come up with proper solutions … paying lip service to a problem that has festered for decades.
It was this government that finally tore down this social taboo when we were elected to level-up the country and toppled the Red Wall … turning it Blue.
We were elected partly on the promise of fixing the scourge of geographici nequality … and ensuring equal opportunity for all. There are still too many cases where your destination in life is decided by where you started it.
So today, I am outlining a new approach to equality in this country.
This will be founded firmly on Conservative values.
It will be about individual dignity and humanity … not quotas and targets, or equality of outcome.
It will reject the approach taken by the Left … captured as they are by identity politics, loud lobby groups and the idea of ‘lived experience’.
It will focus fiercely on fixing geographic inequality … addressing the real problems people face in their everyday lives … using evidence and data.
If you were born in Clacton or Darlington, you have been under-served by successive governments. No more.
Things must change…and things will change.
This new approach to equality will run through the DNA of this government.
The moral and practical case for equality
For me, it is a moral and practical mission.
Just as our forebears fought for change, we must fight for change again – challenging what is unfair and unjust today.
It is not right that having a particular surname or accent can sometimes make it harder to get a job.
It is appalling that pregnant women suffer discrimination at work. Or that women may be encouraged to dress in a certain way to get ahead.
Or that some employers overlook the capabilities of people with disabilities.
It is outrageous in the 21st century that LGBT people still face harassment in public spaces.
As well as being a moral problem, it is shameful we are squandering so much talent.
If women opened businesses at the same rate as men – we could add £250 billion to the economy…
If people of every ethnic group were fully represented across the labour market, that would mean an extra £24 billion of income a year.
If businesses were fully accessible for disabled consumers, they could benefit from an estimated £274 billion a year in spending power.
We can ill afford to waste this potential as we recover from Covid and build back better.
Equality rooted in Conservative values
Our new approach to equality will be based on the core principles of freedom, choice, opportunity, and individual humanity and dignity.
We will move well beyond the narrow focus of protected characteristics… and deliver real change that benefits people across our United Kingdom.
We will do this in three ways.
First, by delivering fairness through modernisation, increased choice and openness.
Second, by concentrating on data and research, rather than on campaigning and listening to those with the loudest voices.
And third, by taking our biggest and broadest look yet at the challenges we face… including the all too neglected scourge of geographic inequality.
Now is the time to root the equality debate in the real concerns people face… like affording a home… getting to work… going out safely at night… ending discrimination in our offices, factories and shop floors … and improving our schools so every child has a good chance in life.
It is our duty to deliver, because if right-thinking people do not lead the fight for fairness, then it will be led by those whose ideas don’t work.
The failed ideas of the Left
The ideas that have dominated the equality debate have been long in the making.
As a comprehensive school student in Leeds in the 1980s, I was struck by the lip service that was paid to equality by the City Council while children from disadvantaged backgrounds were let down.
While we were taught about racism and sexism, there was too little time spent making sure everyone could read and write.
These ideas have their roots in post-modernist philosophy – pioneered by Foucault – that put societal power structures and labels ahead of individuals and their endeavours.
In this school of thought, there is no space for evidence, as there is no objective view – truth and morality are all relative.
Rather than promote policies that would have been a game-changer for the disenfranchised like better education and business opportunities, there was a preference for symbolic gestures.
Even now, authorities rush to embrace symbols – for example, Birmingham City Council promoting new streets named “Diversity Grove” and “Equality Road” – as if that counts as real change.
Underlying this is the soft bigotry of low expectations, where people from certain backgrounds are not expected to reach high standards.
This diminishes their individual humanity, dignity and agency.
And it hasn’t delivered the progress it promised.
In 1997, there was a huge celebration of all-women shortlists delivering Blair’s babes.
But 23 years later, the Labour Party still hasn’t had a female leader. In the last leadership election, there were four women standing… but the man won. Again.
In addition, this focus on groups at the expense of individuals has led to harmful unintended consequences.
It has led to the Left turning a blind eye to practices that undermine equality, whether it be failing to defend single-sex spaces, hard fought for by generations of women… enabling and tolerating antisemitism … or the appalling grooming of young girls in towns like Rotherham.
Although time and time again, the Left’s ideas have been shown to fail, they still pervade our body politic.
Study after study has shown that unconscious bias training does not improve equality, and in fact can backfire by reinforcing stereotypes and exacerbating biases.
That’s why this week we announced we will no longer be using it in government or civil service.
Whether it’s “affirmative action”… forced training on “unconscious bias”… or lectures on “lived experience”… the Left are in thrall to ideas that undermine equality at every turn.
The absurdity was summed up just this week by the Mayor of Paris being fined for employing so many female managers she had breached a quota.
By contrast, the Conservative Party has elected two female leaders, and has a Cabinet with the highest ever level of ethnic minority representation.
We have done this not by positively discriminating … but by positively empowering people who want to go into politics and opening up our Party to people of all backgrounds.
Because when you choose on the basis of protected characteristics, you end up excluding other people.
1. Fairness, not favouritism
Fairness, not favouritism, drives our approach to equality.
Too often, the equality debate has been dominated by a small number of unrepresentative voices, and by those who believe people are defined by their protected characteristic… and not by their individual character.
This school of thought says that if you are not from an ‘oppressed group’ then you are not entitled to an opinion… and that this debate is not for you.
I wholeheartedly reject this approach.
Equality is something everybody in the United Kingdom should care about… and something all of us have a stake in.
So, I am calling time on “pink bus” feminism, where women are left to fix sexism and campaign for childcare.
Rather than virtue signalling, or campaigning…this government is focused on delivering a fairer and more transparent society that works for all … and that delivers genuine equality of opportunity.
The work of American academic Iris Bohnet shows that modernising and making organisations more transparent is the best way to tackle inequality.
When things are opaque, it benefits those who know how to game the system.
We know that when companies publish their wage ranges, it leads to more equal starting points for men and women.
We know that automatic promotions based on performance help level up opportunities for women in the workplace… overcoming the barriers that make women less likely to put themselves forward for promotion.
And we know that evidence-driven recruitment in a clear and open structure is more effective than using informal and ad hoc networks.
On the other hand, techniques like unconscious bias training, quotas and diversity statements … do nothing to make the workplace fundamentally fairer.
By driving reforms that increase competition, boost transparency and improve choice, we can open up opportunities.
This is the approach we will be taking across government.
It is fundamentally important that the role of equality minister is held by someone who also has another cabinet job, as I do with trade.
This ensures equality is not siloed… but is instead the responsibility of the whole government and all our elected representatives.
For example, the Academies Act 2010 meant good free schools were established across England and more children had the opportunity of a great education… the 1980 Housing Act empowered over two million people to get on the housing ladder…and the independent taxation of women in 1988 gave wives control of their own money.
All of these reforms promoted equality by giving people greater agency over their own lives and making systems more transparent.
For example, we know that students from poorer backgrounds are more likely to achieve better grades than they were predicted… and they lose out in the current university admissions system which is based on predicted grades.
That is why Gavin Williamson is right to base the university admissions system on the actual grades students achieve, making sure that students from lower income backgrounds have a fairer shot at university.
In the workplace, we know that flexible working improves productivity and helps people to combine work with other responsibilities.
That is why I will be working with Alok Sharma, the Business Secretary, to enable more flexible working – not just as a necessity amid the Covid crisis but to empower employees.
The best way to reduce unfairness in our society is through opening up opportunities for all.
This is the level playing field we should be talking about.
And we are going to make sure that this level playing field is properly enforced.
That is why I am appointing a new chair and a wide variety of commissioners to the Equality and Human Rights Commission to drive this agenda forward.
I am proud we have Baroness Kishwer Falkner, David Goodhart, Jessica Butcher, Su-Mei Thompson and Lord Ribeiro, all of whom are committed to equality and ready to challenge dangerous groupthink.
Under this new leadership, the EHRC will focus on enforcing fair treatment for all, rather than freelance campaigning.
2. Facts, not fiction
To make our society more equal, we need the equality debate to be led by facts… not by fashion.
Time and time again, we see politicians making their own evidence-free judgements.
The Labour party made the ridiculous claim that “our country has never been more unequal”, with even Channel 4 concluding it “does not stand up to scrutiny”.
My superb colleague Kemi Badenoch is leading work on the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, established by the Prime Minister.
We should heed the warning from its chair, Dr Tony Sewell, who wrote last month that they have uncovered “a perception of racism that is often not supported by evidence” and that “wrong perceptions sow mistrust”.
We can and must have an equality agenda that is driven by evidence.
Today I am announcing that the Equality Hub will embark on the Government’s biggest, broadest and most comprehensive equality data project yet… and it will closely coordinate with the work of CRED.
Over the coming months, we will look across the UK to identify where people are held back and what the biggest barriers are.
We will not limit our fight for fairness to the nine protected characteristics laid out in the 2010 Equality Act… which include sex, race, and gender reassignment.
While it is true people in these groups suffer discrimination, the focus on protected characteristics has led to a narrowing of the equality debate that overlooks socio-economic status and geographic inequality.
This means some issues – particularly those facing white working-class children – are neglected.
This project will broaden the drive for equality and get to the heart of the barriers people face. It will report its initial findings in the Summer.
In addition to race, sex, disability and religion, it will also look at issues around geography, community and socio-economic background. It will deliver a new life-path analysis of equality from the perspective of the individual, not groups. Using longitudinal data sets will help us understand where the real problems lie.
3. Geographic Inequality
There is a deeper wage gap between London and the regions than between men and women, with an average full-time salary a third higher in the capital than the North East of England.
There are lower employment rates, pay packets and life expectancy across the North than the South.
That is why the equality agenda must be prosecuted with fierce determination and clarity of purpose up and down the country… not just in London boardrooms and Whitehall offices.
Whether that is making the case for free schools in deprived areas… or using data to help regional businesses attract investment.
We will use the power of evidence to drive reform and give people access to the facts so they can push for change.
We will drive this action from the North of England, where we will be moving the Equality Hub.
And I am delighted to announce that we are also taking on sponsorship of the Social Mobility Commission, to give this agenda real teeth and coherence.
The whole of government will be – and is – totally committed to this agenda.
The Treasury is revising its Green Book so that it judges infrastructure investment fairly across the UK, no longer seeing – for example – faster broadband as a better investment in Surrey than South Lanarkshire.
The Department for Education is going to extra lengths to create academies and free schools outside London. And in housing, we are working to increase opportunities for home ownership across the country.
This is just the start. There is much more we will be doing to make our country fairer and give people agency over their own lives.
This is not limited to the UK
This fight for fairness goes beyond our shores.
Next year, the United Kingdom will use its presidency of the G7 to ramp up its work worldwide with like-minded allies to champion freedom, human rights and the equality of opportunity.
The UK is co-leading the new global Generation Equality Action Coalition on Gender Based Violence, and co-chairing the Equal Rights Coalition.
In that role, we will be holding our International LGBT conference, on the theme of Safe To Be Me.
We are working internationally to bring an end to child marriage… and are supporting international programmes to end the abhorrent practice of Female Genital Mutilation.
We need to make progress across the world and at home… as a fairer world and a fairer Britain go hand in hand.
Taking the right approach to deliver real change At this vital time in our country’s history, we must make sure everyone has a chance to succeed in modern Britain.
That is why we cannot waste time on misguided, wrong-headed and ultimately destructive ideas that take agency away from people.
Instead, we will drive an agenda that empowers people and actively challenges discrimination.
We will use evidence to inform policy and drive change.
And we will focus on increasing openness and transparency … fixing the system rather than the results.
Together, we will build back a better society and lead the new fight for fairness.”


conservativehome--2020-12-18--If the Government won’t force the Tory shires to build more houses, perhaps it should bribe them ins

If the Government won’t force the Tory shires to build more houses, perhaps it should bribe them instead

There was something soul-crushingly inevitable about announcement that the Government is going to abandon the algorithm at the heart of its planning reforms .
But how big a setback is it ?
To hear them tell it , not much .
The core overhaul of the planning system – summarised here by London YIMBY – remains in place , including the part where areas are ‘ zoned for growth ’ , a process that will , as Housing Today puts it , “ grant automatic permission for development in certain areas ” .
But ‘ zoning for growth ’ is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the demand is .
It is quite clearly a mechanism for brute-forcing a degree of much-needed development past the “ more homes yes , but not here ” brigade .
Yet following a mutiny by Conservative backbenchers , Robert Jenrick has abandoned the algorithm the Government had been using to decide where such zones should go .
We don ’ t yet know what is going to replace it , but we do know that it will fall much less heavily on leafy , Tory-voting shire seats in the South East – a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ May , whose Maidenhead constituency is now spared the shadow of a few hundred new homes .
The go-to solution for these MPs seems to be more development in urban areas .
But this is clearly parcel-passing , and the problems are various .
In London , where the demand really is , it will likely mean another unpopular application of ‘ zoning for growth ’ to push for densification in the ( also Conservative-voting ) suburbs .
Otherwise it entails , as Bob Seely suggested in a piece for this site , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demand isn ’ t ) in the vague hope that economic regeneration will follow .
Unless you have ‘ simultaneously build more houses and make no dent in the housing shortage ’ on your housing policy bingo card – and given the state of British housing policy , you might – this likely isn ’ t a good idea .
In any event , given the backlash it will likely spark ( Google ‘ garden grabbing ’ for a foretaste of it ) it seems probable that the Government will eventually retreat from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a wholesale surrender of any effort to fix the Southern housing shortage by shifting the focus northwards under the rubric of ‘ levelling up ’ .
If so , that would stand in a long and counter-productive Conservative tradition of trying to solve the problem without aggravating any of the vested interests in the Party ’ s electoral coalition , such as the repeated efforts of Chancellors from George Osborne onwards to solve a supply problem by pumping more demand into the market via schemes such as Help to Buy .
Yes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issues such as excessive credit – which we tackled in the ‘ Homes ’ section of the ConHome Manifesto – are part of it .
But if your goal is to spread genuine property ownership , then jury-rigging mechanisms for getting cut-price assets into the hands of first-time buyers runs into the same problem that Margaret Thatcher ’ s attempt to create a ‘ shareholding democracy ’ did : how do you stop people selling them on at full price ?
Laws restricting the scale of mortgage lending to more old-fashioned levels may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its absurd to pretend that they ’ re an alternative to building more houses .
Addressing the housing shortage – and once again for those at the back , the Southern housing shortage – has to be a strategic priority for the Conservatives .
The current situation is delaying home-ownership , family formation , and otherwise reshaping society in ways antithetical to conservatism .
Not only is this squeezing the Party ’ s position in London , where the Tory vote in many seats has collapsed even since 2010 , but it will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the East of England as more London-based workers trade a longer commute for more affordable housing .
Where Brighton and Canterbury have lead , many more true-blue seats could follow .
But what to do ?
Some of the Conservative-leaning think-tanks have their ideas .
Alex Morton , the head of policy at the Centre for Policy Studies and a housing specialist , is working proposals to make an obligation to build part of planning permissions , to prevent developers banking the land value uplift without doing anything in return .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the right ‘ YIMBY ’ policies could unlock up to five million homes in London alone , and they have elsewhere floated the idea of building ‘ commuter villages ’ near existing railway stations , effectively replicating the ‘ Metroland ’ project which saw swathes of north-west London basically built by the Metropolitan Railway .
But it isn ’ t obvious that London ’ s main commuter lines could take this extra pressure ( at least until High Speed ‘ it ’ s-capacity-really ’ 2 is finished ) , and in any event @ @ @ @ @ @ @ green belt is politically-speaking just a thought experiment .
Policy Exchange also lean towards densification , drawing on the work of the late Sir Roger Scruton ’ s lamentably-named ‘ Building Better , Building Beautiful Commission ’ .
However rather than trying to brute-force development through in the teeth of local opposition , which is what ‘ zoning for growth ’ aimed to do , this agenda aims to win public support both by making sure new developments are attractive ( cue the lamentations of architects ) and by making sure existing homeowners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ propose that we allow streets to hold a vote on whether to let homeowners redevelop their homes .
If a two-thirds majority support it , homeowners would receive planning permission to add floors to their homes and to take up more of their plot area .
The limits on what streets should be able to grant themselves would be those of traditional European cities : five-storey buildings in a terraced format .
Many streets would probably choose to go up to these limits in order to maximise the increase in property values.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gold is a British policymaking tradition – it ’ s how Labour sold doctors on the NHS , after all – and is probably going to be essential if the Government intends to succumb to Tory MPs ’ demands that planning be ‘ locally-led ’ .
The alternative is waiting until Labour get into office and unleash a housing programme drawn up with no regard whatsoever to the interests and preferences of Conservative voters and MPs .
Which , at that point , some might feel they deserve .
Whatever path he chooses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Boris Johnson .
If he wants the new planning system to have had any impact on the situation in the country by the next election , he really needs to have it on the books by the end of 2021 .
Otherwise new applications and so on won ’ t have time to get through .
But if he rushes into a second policy that gets thrown out by MPs , that ’ s very likely to mark the end of any serious efforts at planning reform in this Parliament .
As I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , this country has a very bad habit of endlessly putting off difficult infrastructure decisions .
That the Government is still dithering over expanding Heathrow suggests this hasn ’ t changed .
The Prime Minister ’ s tendency towards procrastination is well-known .
But solving the housing crisis is not just of national but of existential political importance to the Tories in a way our ports , airports , and road network frankly aren ’ t .
Johnson needs to make a decision ; it needs to be the right decision ; and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he isn ’ t prepared to be Britain ’ s house-building Bonaparte , the Prime Minister needs to be clear what Plan B is .

There was something soul-crushingly inevitable about announcement that the Government is going to abandon the algorithm at the heart of its planning reforms. But how big a setback is it?
To hear them tell it, not much. The core overhaul of the planning system – summarised here by London YIMBY – remains in place, including the part where areas are ‘zoned for growth’, a process that will, as Housing Today puts it, “grant automatic permission for development in certain areas”.
But ‘zoning for growth’ is only useful if you do it where the demand is. It is quite clearly a mechanism for brute-forcing a degree of much-needed development past the “more homes yes, but not here” brigade. Yet following a mutiny by Conservative backbenchers, Robert Jenrick has abandoned the algorithm the Government had been using to decide where such zones should go.
We don’t yet know what is going to replace it, but we do know that it will fall much less heavily on leafy, Tory-voting shire seats in the South East – a tactical victory for MPs such as Theresa May, whose Maidenhead constituency is now spared the shadow of a few hundred new homes.
The go-to solution for these MPs seems to be more development in urban areas. But this is clearly parcel-passing, and the problems are various. In London, where the demand really is, it will likely mean another unpopular application of ‘zoning for growth’ to push for densification in the (also Conservative-voting) suburbs. Otherwise it entails, as Bob Seely suggested in a piece for this site, shifting housebuilding targets northwards (where the demand isn’t) in the vague hope that economic regeneration will follow.
Unless you have ‘simultaneously build more houses and make no dent in the housing shortage’ on your housing policy bingo card – and given the state of British housing policy, you might – this likely isn’t a good idea.
In any event, given the backlash it will likely spark (Google ‘garden grabbing’ for a foretaste of it) it seems probable that the Government will eventually retreat from this as well, raising the spectre of a wholesale surrender of any effort to fix the Southern housing shortage by shifting the focus northwards under the rubric of ‘levelling up’.
If so, that would stand in a long and counter-productive Conservative tradition of trying to solve the problem without aggravating any of the vested interests in the Party’s electoral coalition, such as the repeated efforts of Chancellors from George Osborne onwards to solve a supply problem by pumping more demand into the market via schemes such as Help to Buy.
Yes, housing is a complicated problem and issues such as excessive credit – which we tackled in the ‘Homes’ section of the ConHome Manifesto – are part of it. But if your goal is to spread genuine property ownership, then jury-rigging mechanisms for getting cut-price assets into the hands of first-time buyers runs into the same problem that Margaret Thatcher’s attempt to create a ‘shareholding democracy’ did: how do you stop people selling them on at full price? Laws restricting the scale of mortgage lending to more old-fashioned levels may be part of the answer, but its absurd to pretend that they’re an alternative to building more houses.
Addressing the housing shortage – and once again for those at the back, the Southern housing shortage – has to be a strategic priority for the Conservatives. The current situation is delaying home-ownership, family formation, and otherwise reshaping society in ways antithetical to conservatism.
Not only is this squeezing the Party’s position in London, where the Tory vote in many seats has collapsed even since 2010, but it will spread the issue across the South East and the East of England as more London-based workers trade a longer commute for more affordable housing. Where Brighton and Canterbury have lead, many more true-blue seats could follow.
But what to do? Some of the Conservative-leaning think-tanks have their ideas. Alex Morton, the head of policy at the Centre for Policy Studies and a housing specialist, is working proposals to make an obligation to build part of planning permissions, to prevent developers banking the land value uplift without doing anything in return.
A paper for the Adam Smith Institute suggests the right ‘YIMBY’ policies could unlock up to five million homes in London alone, and they have elsewhere floated the idea of building ‘commuter villages’ near existing railway stations, effectively replicating the ‘Metroland’ project which saw swathes of north-west London basically built by the Metropolitan Railway. But it isn’t obvious that London’s main commuter lines could take this extra pressure (at least until High Speed ‘it’s-capacity-really’ 2 is finished), and in any event a proposal that involves building on the green belt is politically-speaking just a thought experiment.
Policy Exchange also lean towards densification, drawing on the work of the late Sir Roger Scruton’s lamentably-named ‘Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission’.
However rather than trying to brute-force development through in the teeth of local opposition, which is what ‘zoning for growth’ aimed to do, this agenda aims to win public support both by making sure new developments are attractive (cue the lamentations of architects) and by making sure existing homeowners profit from new developments:
“They propose that we allow streets to hold a vote on whether to let homeowners redevelop their homes. If a two-thirds majority support it, homeowners would receive planning permission to add floors to their homes and to take up more of their plot area. The limits on what streets should be able to grant themselves would be those of traditional European cities: five-storey buildings in a terraced format. Many streets would probably choose to go up to these limits in order to maximise the increase in property values.”
Stuffing the mouths of vested interests with gold is a British policymaking tradition – it’s how Labour sold doctors on the NHS, after all – and is probably going to be essential if the Government intends to succumb to Tory MPs’ demands that planning be ‘locally-led’. The alternative is waiting until Labour get into office and unleash a housing programme drawn up with no regard whatsoever to the interests and preferences of Conservative voters and MPs. Which, at that point, some might feel they deserve.
Whatever path he chooses, the clock is now ticking for Boris Johnson. If he wants the new planning system to have had any impact on the situation in the country by the next election, he really needs to have it on the books by the end of 2021. Otherwise new applications and so on won’t have time to get through. But if he rushes into a second policy that gets thrown out by MPs, that’s very likely to mark the end of any serious efforts at planning reform in this Parliament.
As I noted recently with regards to green targets, this country has a very bad habit of endlessly putting off difficult infrastructure decisions. That the Government is still dithering over expanding Heathrow suggests this hasn’t changed. The Prime Minister’s tendency towards procrastination is well-known.
But solving the housing crisis is not just of national but of existential political importance to the Tories in a way our ports, airports, and road network frankly aren’t. Johnson needs to make a decision; it needs to be the right decision; and it needs to be soon. If he isn’t prepared to be Britain’s house-building Bonaparte, the Prime Minister needs to be clear what Plan B is.


conservativehome--2020-12-18--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the Pension Agency – 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 .
“ The Pensions Regulator ( TPR ) is the public body that protects workplace pensions in the UK .
TPR works with employers and those running pension schemes so that people can save safely for their retirement .
TPR aims to be a strong , visible regulator that builds people ’ s confidence in pensions .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Department for Work and Pensions ( DWP ) .
It has around 750 staff and is based in Brighton .
TPR works closely with the Financial Conduct Authority , which regulates personal pension schemes , and with other public bodies .
TPR is responsible for : protecting people ’ s savings in workplace pensions ; improving the way that workplace pension schemes are run ; reducing the risk of pension schemes ending up in the Pension Protection Fund ( PPF ) ; making sure employers balance the needs of their defined benefit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ making sure employers enrol their staff into a pension scheme and pay money into it ( known as ‘ automatic enrolment ’ ) .
” “ The Sports Grounds Safety Authority ( SGSA ) was established by statute as an Arms Length Public Body in 2011 taking on the full responsibilities of its predecessor body , The Football Licensing Authority .
The SGSA is the safety regulator for football grounds in England and Wales and the UK Government ’ s independent advisor on sports grounds safety .
The three core functions of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ league and international football grounds in England and Wales to allow them to permit spectators to watch matches and to oversee local authorities in their duties to sports grounds safety and safety certification ; provide strategic support for sports grounds , governing bodies and others , both in the UK and internationally ; set and raise standards globally through developing guidance , particularly the Guide to Safety at Sports Grounds ( Green Guide ) .
” Time : Up to two days per week .
“ Applications are encouraged from all sections of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sport England board is representative of the diverse society it serves .
Sport England is a government-funded Non-Departmental Public Body and National Lottery distributor .
It is responsible for supporting , growing and advocating for grassroots sport and physical activity in England in line with its statutory objectives as set out in its Royal Charter .
Its vision is to ensure that everyone , regardless of their age , background or level of ability feels able to engage in sport and physical activity and it takes its strategic lead from the government ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Future : A New Strategy for an Active Nation .
The Chair will be responsible for overseeing the final stages of implementation of Sport England ’ s current Towards an Active Nation strategy ( 2017-2021 ) , and the final stages of development and roll-out of its new strategy for 2021-2025 , in close collaboration with the Deputy Chair , Chief Executive , and Executive Team.
” Time : Up to 2 days per week .
“ The mission of the Financial Reporting Council ( FRC ) is to promote transparency and integrity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ generating public trust and confidence in UK business and help attract investment in successful companies that provide jobs , create prosperity and generate economic growth .
The FRC sets the UK Corporate Governance & Stewardship Codes which aim to make investors more accountable to their clients and beneficiaries .
The FRC also sets standards for accounting , auditing and actuarial work .
As the UK ’ s independent regulator and Competent Authority for Audit it monitors , and takes action where necessary , to promote the quality of corporate reporting and audit .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ accountants and actuaries.
” “ UK Shared Business Services Ltd ( UK SBS ) is a non-profit making company limited by shares .
It was established in 2007 by the UK Research Councils as part of a drive for greater value for money .
The Company provides HR & Payroll , Finance , Procurement and IT services to its owners the Department for Business , Energy & Industrial Strategy ( BEIS ) , UK Research and Innovation ( UKRI ) and other public sector clients .
It is recognised by the Cabinet Office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forms part of the Shared Service Strategy for Government… This is an exciting , interesting and challenging time for UK SBS ; the newly appointed Chair will provide strong leadership to guide the Company through this transformation , delivering leading-edge shared services to multiple clients at the best value and providing our end-users with the high-quality user experience they have become accustomed to in the digital age.
” “ With rapid progress in the development of new technologies , Highways England are modernising and transforming the strategic road network .
They need to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s commitment to zero carbon and within its committed timescales .
They also need to exploit the full potential of the digital revolution , both in their delivery , and in communications with road users and stakeholders .
That is why HE are now delivering £27.4 billion of investment between 2020 and 2025 to improve the road network ( RIS2 ) .
This is an exciting opportunity to join the Board of an organisation which keeps England moving .
You would be joining Highways England at an exciting time , with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the organisation and ensure its continued success .
This will mean supporting the executive team in developing the organisation to be equipped for the immediate supply chain , technology and workplace transformation Highways England faces.
” Bank of England – External Member of the Financial Policy Committee “ The FPC is responsible for identifying , monitoring and taking action to remove or reduce systemic risks with a view to protecting and enhancing the resilience of the UK financial system .
The FPC also has a secondary objective to support the Government ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recommendation and can direct the Prudential Regulation Authority and the Financial Conduct Authority to take action to address systemic risks to financial stability .
The appointment of external members to the FPC is designed to ensure that the Committee benefits from thinking and expertise in addition to that existing inside the Bank of England , and to provide constructive challenge during the Committee ’ s deliberations .
Each member of the FPC should have expertise in the field of financial services and economics .
External members will be independent – they will not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interests or sectors.
” “ Schools Adjudicators are office holders appointed by the Secretary of State for Education to make decisions about a range of matters relating to publicly funded schools in England .
They are statutory office holders appointed under section 25 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 .
The main function of the Schools Adjudicators is to rule on objections to and referrals about determined school admission arrangements of all state funded schools ; this involves establishing whether or not arrangements conform with the requirements relating to admissions and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what respect they do not conform… There are currently ten Schools Adjudicators , including the Chief Schools Adjudicator .
They are appointed for their ability to act impartially , independently and objectively .
Their role is to look afresh at all cases referred to them and consider each case on its merits in the light of the legislation , the Statutory Guidance for Decision Makers on Statutory Proposals and the School Admissions Code .
”

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.
– – – – – – – – – –
The Pension Agency – Chair
“The Pensions Regulator (TPR) is the public body that protects workplace pensions in the UK. TPR works with employers and those running pension schemes so that people can save safely for their retirement. TPR aims to be a strong, visible regulator that builds people’s confidence in pensions. TPR is a public body sponsored by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). It has around 750 staff and is based in Brighton. TPR works closely with the Financial Conduct Authority, which regulates personal pension schemes, and with other public bodies. TPR is responsible for: protecting people’s savings in workplace pensions; improving the way that workplace pension schemes are run; reducing the risk of pension schemes ending up in the Pension Protection Fund (PPF); making sure employers balance the needs of their defined benefit pension scheme with growing their business; making sure employers enrol their staff into a pension scheme and pay money into it (known as ‘automatic enrolment’).”
Time: Two days per week.
Remuneration: £73,840 per annum.
Closes: 14 December
– – – – – – – – – –
Sports Grounds Safety Authority – Chair
“The Sports Grounds Safety Authority (SGSA) was established by statute as an Arms Length Public Body in 2011 taking on the full responsibilities of its predecessor body, The Football Licensing Authority. The SGSA is the safety regulator for football grounds in England and Wales and the UK Government’s independent advisor on sports grounds safety. The three core functions of the SGSA are: to issues licences to league and international football grounds in England and Wales to allow them to permit spectators to watch matches and to oversee local authorities in their duties to sports grounds safety and safety certification; provide strategic support for sports grounds, governing bodies and others, both in the UK and internationally; set and raise standards globally through developing guidance, particularly the Guide to Safety at Sports Grounds (Green Guide).”
Time: Up to two days per week.
Remuneration: £36,260 per annum, plus expenses.
Closes: 15 December
– – – – – – – – – –
Sport England – Chair
“Applications are encouraged from all sections of the community to help ensure that the Sport England board is representative of the diverse society it serves. Sport England is a government-funded Non-Departmental Public Body and National Lottery distributor. It is responsible for supporting, growing and advocating for grassroots sport and physical activity in England in line with its statutory objectives as set out in its Royal Charter. Its vision is to ensure that everyone, regardless of their age, background or level of ability feels able to engage in sport and physical activity and it takes its strategic lead from the government’s sport and physical activity strategy Sporting Future: A New Strategy for an Active Nation. The Chair will be responsible for overseeing the final stages of implementation of Sport England’s current Towards an Active Nation strategy (2017-2021), and the final stages of development and roll-out of its new strategy for 2021-2025, in close collaboration with the Deputy Chair, Chief Executive, and Executive Team.”
Time: Up to 2 days per week.
Remuneration: £40,000 per annum.
Closes: 21 December
– – – – – – – – – –
Financial Reporting Council – Chair
“The mission of the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) is to promote transparency and integrity in business. These are cornerstones to generating public trust and confidence in UK business and help attract investment in successful companies that provide jobs, create prosperity and generate economic growth. The FRC sets the UK Corporate Governance & Stewardship Codes which aim to make investors more accountable to their clients and beneficiaries. The FRC also sets standards for accounting, auditing and actuarial work. As the UK’s independent regulator and Competent Authority for Audit it monitors, and takes action where necessary, to promote the quality of corporate reporting and audit. It also operates independent enforcement arrangements for accountants and actuaries.”
Time: 1.5 days per week.
Remuneration: £75,000 per annum, plus expenses.
Closes: 03 January
– – – – – – – – – –
UK Shared Business Services Ltd – Chair
“UK Shared Business Services Ltd (UK SBS) is a non-profit making company limited by shares. It was established in 2007 by the UK Research Councils as part of a drive for greater value for money. The Company provides HR & Payroll, Finance, Procurement and IT services to its owners the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS), UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) and other public sector clients. It is recognised by the Cabinet Office as a government shared service provider and forms part of the Shared Service Strategy for Government… This is an exciting, interesting and challenging time for UK SBS; the newly appointed Chair will provide strong leadership to guide the Company through this transformation, delivering leading-edge shared services to multiple clients at the best value and providing our end-users with the high-quality user experience they have become accustomed to in the digital age.”
Time: Max 36 days per annum.
Remuneration: £575 per annum, plus expenses.
Closes: 03 January
– – – – – – – – – –
Highways England – Chair
“With rapid progress in the development of new technologies, Highways England are modernising and transforming the strategic road network. They need to demonstrate that they can meet the government’s commitment to zero carbon and within its committed timescales. They also need to exploit the full potential of the digital revolution, both in their delivery, and in communications with road users and stakeholders. That is why HE are now delivering £27.4 billion of investment between 2020 and 2025 to improve the road network (RIS2). This is an exciting opportunity to join the Board of an organisation which keeps England moving. You would be joining Highways England at an exciting time, with the opportunity to help shape the future of the organisation and ensure its continued success. This will mean supporting the executive team in developing the organisation to be equipped for the immediate supply chain, technology and workplace transformation Highways England faces.”
Time: 24/27 days per annum
Remuneration: £25,000 per annum/plus £3,000 for chairing.
Closes: 08 January
– – – – – – – – – –
Bank of England – External Member of the Financial Policy Committee
“The FPC is responsible for identifying, monitoring and taking action to remove or reduce systemic risks with a view to protecting and enhancing the resilience of the UK financial system. The FPC also has a secondary objective to support the Government’s economic policies.The FPC has wide-ranging powers of recommendation and can direct the Prudential Regulation Authority and the Financial Conduct Authority to take action to address systemic risks to financial stability. The appointment of external members to the FPC is designed to ensure that the Committee benefits from thinking and expertise in addition to that existing inside the Bank of England, and to provide constructive challenge during the Committee’s deliberations. Each member of the FPC should have expertise in the field of financial services and economics. External members will be independent – they will not represent or lobby for individual groups, interests or sectors.”
Time: 23 days per quarter.
Remuneration: £97,200.
Closes: 11 January
– – – – – – – – – –
Department for Education – Schools Adjudicator
“Schools Adjudicators are office holders appointed by the Secretary of State for Education to make decisions about a range of matters relating to publicly funded schools in England. They are statutory office holders appointed under section 25 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998. The main function of the Schools Adjudicators is to rule on objections to and referrals about determined school admission arrangements of all state funded schools; this involves establishing whether or not arrangements conform with the requirements relating to admissions and if they do not conform, in what respect they do not conform… There are currently ten Schools Adjudicators, including the Chief Schools Adjudicator. They are appointed for their ability to act impartially, independently and objectively. Their role is to look afresh at all cases referred to them and consider each case on its merits in the light of the legislation, the Statutory Guidance for Decision Makers on Statutory Proposals and the School Admissions Code.”
Time: Part-time.
Remuneration: £355 per diem/£58 per hour.
Closes: 29 January


conservativehome--2020-12-18--Jenrick, King of Liverpool?

Jenrick, King of Liverpool?

In 2014 , Max Caller was sent as a commissioner into Tower Hamlets .
The council did not regain control of borough until 2017 .
In 2018 , he was appointed to head an investigation into Northamptonshire .
Next year , that county council will be abolished .
Caller has now been sent to Liverpool .
Yesterday , Robert Jenrick announced that Caller has been appointed “ to carry out an inspection of the authority ’ s compliance with its best value duty ” .
The Communities Secretary said in his statement that “ it is a matter of public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ months been conducting an investigation which has resulted in a number of arrests made on suspicion of fraud , bribery , corruption and misconduct in public office ” .
Although “ the council has taken significant steps to improve governance and assurances processes within the council ” , Caller has nonetheless been appointed ” to support the council to continue to strengthen its governance , and deliver services for the people of the city… given the seriousness of the issues identified through the police investigation ” .
“ The matters to be covered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s planning , highways , regeneration and property management functions and the strength of associated audit and governance arrangements ” .
Caller will report his findings to Jenrick by the end of March , at which point the latter will decide whether Liverpool is in breach of that best value duty .
If he concludes that it is , he can then run the council himself ( or rather the bits of it covered by Caller ’ s review ) , or else appoint someone else to do so .
Guess who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that “ you can see the direction of travel ” , and talks of “ a once in a generation opportunity to fix Liverpool ’ s broken political culture ” .
Joe Anderson , the Mayor of Liverpool has stood down after he was arrested in relation to allegations of bribery and witness intimidation linked to building deals in the city .
Anderson has been suspended from the Labour Party , and says that “ I believe time will make it clear that I have no case to answer ” .
He is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ history of the Conservatives and Liverpool has been relatively benign – with the city at the front of the queue to pilot both Dominic Cummings ’ “ moonshoot ” tests and a scheme to reduce self-isolation .
Matt Hancock and Boris Johnson have contrasted the former Mayor ’ s co-operative stance with Andy Burnham ’ s confrontational one in Manchester .
“ In Liverpool , the mayor Joe Anderson and Steve Rotheram both did a great job , ” enthused Hancock last month .
( Rotheram is the Mayor of Liverpool City Region @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hint of divide and rule , replying that the Health Secretary ’ s compliment was like “ a viper showing its teeth to you ” – though its worth pointing out that , with Greg Clark , he once pioneered the very first City Deal .
Less recent history , as our readers will know , is less favourable .
Think the Toxteth riots , Derek Hatton , Hillsborough , The Sun…and Johnson ’ s Spectator editorial ( after which Michael Howard sent Johnson , then a member of his front bench , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claimed that Liverpudians wallow in victimhood .
Johnson didn ’ t write the article himself , though he was Spectator editor at the time .
The Sun had no formal connection to the Conservative Party , but its then editor , Kelvin Mackenzie , was an enthusiastic supporter of Margaret Thatcher .
Then again , there is always Michael Heseltine – author of the famous paper “ It took a riot ” , which championed Government-driven regeneration – a cause he was to spearhead himself as “ Minister for Merseyside ” .
Heseltine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Albert Dock and the creation of the Garden Festival site , is now a freeman of the City of Liverpool .
Indeed , the Conservatives won 80 per cent of the vote in the city within living memory .
“ Did you know the TORIES once ran Liverpool ?
” the Liverpool Echo asked its readers last year .
Its piece quoted David Jeffrey , who has explained on this site that the rot for the Party set in not under Margaret Thatcher , but under Ted Heath , and during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ old Protestant Tory working-class vote died out , and the Liberals mopped up the non-Labour vote , pioneering pavement politics in the city .
During the 1960s , Liverpool had seemed to be on the rise , boasting the Beatles , the beat poets , and two League title wins for both the city ’ s main football teams .
But the traditional economy of the city was more vulnerable than it looked , and the mass unemployment of the 1980s killed any lingering Tory prospects off .
The Party wasn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of seats in Greater Manchester last year .
But go west of Leigh and the electoral map is a mass of red .
The Liverpool effect has gradually seeped out over the rest of Merseyside , with economics taking a back seat to culture .
Sefton Central has some of the highest home-ownership rates in the country…and a Labour majority of over 15,000 .
During the last election campaign , Liverpool fans held up a banner declaring the old Tony Blair and newer Jeremy Corbyn slogan : “ For the many , not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also resistant to Brexit , with a 58 per cent vote for Remain .
And there ’ s no reason to think that , were the city ’ s political culture to change , the Tories would be a beneficiary .
But there is one force against which it may be powerless , Namely , the man who ran Tower Hamlets , presaged Northamptonshire ’ s end , and formerly chaired the Local Government Boundary Commission : Max Caller .

In 2014, Max Caller was sent as a commissioner into Tower Hamlets. The council did not regain control of borough until 2017. In 2018, he was appointed to head an investigation into Northamptonshire. Next year, that county council will be abolished. Caller has now been sent to Liverpool.
Yesterday, Robert Jenrick announced that Caller has been appointed “to carry out an inspection of the authority’s compliance with its best value duty”.
The Communities Secretary said in his statement that “it is a matter of public record that Merseyside Police have for many months been conducting an investigation which has resulted in a number of arrests made on suspicion of fraud, bribery, corruption and misconduct in public office”.
Although “the council has taken significant steps to improve governance and assurances processes within the council”, Caller has nonetheless been appointed ” to support the council to continue to strengthen its governance, and deliver services for the people of the city… given the seriousness of the issues identified through the police investigation”.
“The matters to be covered by the inspection will be the authority’s planning, highways, regeneration and property management functions and the strength of associated audit and governance arrangements”.
Caller will report his findings to Jenrick by the end of March, at which point the latter will decide whether Liverpool is in breach of that best value duty. If he concludes that it is, he can then run the council himself (or rather the bits of it covered by Caller’s review), or else appoint someone else to do so.
Guess who that might be? One source says that “you can see the direction of travel”, and talks of “a once in a generation opportunity to fix Liverpool’s broken political culture”. Joe Anderson, the Mayor of Liverpool has stood down after he was arrested in relation to allegations of bribery and witness intimidation linked to building deals in the city.
Anderson has been suspended from the Labour Party, and says that “I believe time will make it clear that I have no case to answer”. He is currently on police bail.
The recent history of the Conservatives and Liverpool has been relatively benign – with the city at the front of the queue to pilot both Dominic Cummings’ “moonshoot” tests and a scheme to reduce self-isolation. Matt Hancock and Boris Johnson have contrasted the former Mayor’s co-operative stance with Andy Burnham’s confrontational one in Manchester.
“In Liverpool, the mayor Joe Anderson and Steve Rotheram both did a great job,” enthused Hancock last month. (Rotheram is the Mayor of Liverpool City Region.) Anderson was sensitive to any hint of divide and rule, replying that the Health Secretary’s compliment was like “a viper showing its teeth to you” – though its worth pointing out that, with Greg Clark, he once pioneered the very first City Deal.
Less recent history, as our readers will know, is less favourable. Think the Toxteth riots, Derek Hatton, Hillsborough, The Sun…and Johnson’s Spectator editorial (after which Michael Howard sent Johnson, then a member of his front bench, to Liverpool to apologise.)
It claimed that Liverpudians wallow in victimhood. Johnson didn’t write the article himself, though he was Spectator editor at the time. The Sun had no formal connection to the Conservative Party, but its then editor, Kelvin Mackenzie, was an enthusiastic supporter of Margaret Thatcher.
Then again, there is always Michael Heseltine – author of the famous paper “It took a riot”, which championed Government-driven regeneration – a cause he was to spearhead himself as “Minister for Merseyside”. Heseltine, deeply involved in the regeneration of the Albert Dock and the creation of the Garden Festival site, is now a freeman of the City of Liverpool.
Indeed, the Conservatives won 80 per cent of the vote in the city within living memory. “Did you know the TORIES once ran Liverpool?” the Liverpool Echo asked its readers last year.
Its piece quoted David Jeffrey, who has explained on this site that the rot for the Party set in not under Margaret Thatcher, but under Ted Heath, and during the later 1970s. Why? Because the old Protestant Tory working-class vote died out, and the Liberals mopped up the non-Labour vote, pioneering pavement politics in the city.
During the 1960s, Liverpool had seemed to be on the rise, boasting the Beatles, the beat poets, and two League title wins for both the city’s main football teams. But the traditional economy of the city was more vulnerable than it looked, and the mass unemployment of the 1980s killed any lingering Tory prospects off.
The Party wasn’t all that far off winning a majority of seats in Greater Manchester last year. But go west of Leigh and the electoral map is a mass of red.
The Liverpool effect has gradually seeped out over the rest of Merseyside, with economics taking a back seat to culture. Sefton Central has some of the highest home-ownership rates in the country…and a Labour majority of over 15,000. During the last election campaign, Liverpool fans held up a banner declaring the old Tony Blair and newer Jeremy Corbyn slogan: “For the many, not the few”.
The city was also resistant to Brexit, with a 58 per cent vote for Remain. And there’s no reason to think that, were the city’s political culture to change, the Tories would be a beneficiary. But there is one force against which it may be powerless, Namely, the man who ran Tower Hamlets, presaged Northamptonshire’s end, and formerly chaired the Local Government Boundary Commission: Max Caller.


conservativehome--2020-12-18--Iain Dale: Your Brexit trade talks countdown. Fourteen days left until transition ends fully.

Iain Dale presents the evening show on LBC Radio and the For the Many podcast with Jacqui Smith .
As I write my final column of 2020 , the Brexit free trade negotiation is still not done .
Recent indications were that it will be , although their fate stlll seems swing back and forth .
But surely it has to be settled very soon if any deal is to be ratified by January 1st .
I wouldn ’ t put it past the European Parliament to put a last minute spanner in the works , and declare that MEPs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
Let ’ s hope it doesn ’ t get to that .
This week , Liz Truss signed a trade agreement with Mexico , a country we do £7 billion worth of trade with each year .
I ’ m going to be honest , and say that I was rather surprised when she topped the ConHome list of cabinet ministers last month but , when you think about it , she ’ s quietly got on with her job , and done what she ’ s there to do – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now got rollover agreements with most of the G20 countries which the EU already had a trade agreement with .
I remember the days when Remainers said this would be impossible to do .
Well , Truss has proved the opposite.No grandstanding , no fuss , just getting on with it .
When she was appointed , I thought it was a strange one , but she ’ s risen to the challenge and proved herself .
Only six months ago , she was being tipped for the chop in a reshuffle .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be incredibly unfair .
When people prove themselves in a job , it ’ s often a good idea to leave them there – and the next twelve months are going to be absolutely vital in the promotion of Global Britain .
It would be no time for a trade novice .
The announcement on Wednesday of the four nation approach to Covid restrictions over Christmas was a disaster from a communications viewpoint .
To try to pretend , as the Prime Minister did , that the policy and guidelines remained unchanged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government ’ s approach .
When circumstances change – and they have changed since the initial announcement of the Christmas rules on December 2 – it would be wholly reasonable to change approach , even if there might be a political backlash .
Infections are rising in large parts of the country , as are hospital admissions .
Death numbers are rising again , too .
In those circumstances , would surely be reasonable to tighten the guidelines .
Other European countries , such as Germany and the Netherlands have done it .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Johnson appears to think the British public wouldn ’ t swallow it .
All the polling suggests that they would .
There will always be people who ignore anything the Government says and deliberately do the exact opposite , but most people do take notice of what Ministers and scientists say .
We know from the spike that happened after Thanksgiving in the America what happens when families get together .
The virus spreads .
And that ’ s what is undoubtedly going to happen over Christmas .
Would we be having this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it not for this annual holiday ?
No , of course we wouldn ’ t .
In fact , I suspect much more severe measures than Tier Three would be imposed .
So when we get to the middle of January and we ’ re getting 40-50,000 new infections a day , and at the end of that month the death rate climbs to more than a thousand a day , many people will look back and blame the Prime Minister directly for it .
You can explain all you like that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of discipline or adherence to the safety measures but the commentators and scientists will blame one person : Johnson .
I hope he ’ s got a good explanation ready .
Having said all that , it will be interesting to compare infection rates in January in Wales with those of the rest of the UK .
Mark Drakeford has said only two families may meet over Christmas rather than three , and is criminalising anyone caught breaching the limit .
Nicola Sturgeon hasn ’ t gone that far , but she ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one day , with no overnight stay .
Meanwhile , the Prime Minister is saying that just because you can doesn ’ t mean you should , and that we should all enjoy a smaller , shorter Christmas .
In essence , he ’ s trusting the people to do the right thing .
In normal circumstances , that ought to be the right message .
In this case , that message has been undermined , yet again , by a lack of clarity .
It ’ s something I suspect we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As this is my final column of the year , let me conclude by wishing you all a very Happy Christmas – and let ’ s hope that 2021 is a much better year for all of us and the country .

Iain Dale presents the evening show on LBC Radio and the For the Many podcast with Jacqui Smith.
As I write my final column of 2020, the Brexit free trade negotiation is still not done. Recent indications were that it will be, although their fate stlll seems swing back and forth.
But surely it has to be settled very soon if any deal is to be ratified by January 1st. I wouldn’t put it past the European Parliament to put a last minute spanner in the works, and declare that MEPs haven’t had time to scrutinise it. Let’s hope it doesn’t get to that.
– – – – – – – – –
This week, Liz Truss signed a trade agreement with Mexico, a country we do £7 billion worth of trade with each year.
I’m going to be honest, and say that I was rather surprised when she topped the ConHome list of cabinet ministers last month but, when you think about it, she’s quietly got on with her job, and done what she’s there to do – sign trade agreements.
We’ve now got rollover agreements with most of the G20 countries which the EU already had a trade agreement with. I remember the days when Remainers said this would be impossible to do.
Well, Truss has proved the opposite.No grandstanding, no fuss, just getting on with it. When she was appointed, I thought it was a strange one, but she’s risen to the challenge and proved herself.
Only six months ago, she was being tipped for the chop in a reshuffle. If she were ditched now, it would be incredibly unfair. When people prove themselves in a job, it’s often a good idea to leave them there – and the next twelve months are going to be absolutely vital in the promotion of Global Britain. It would be no time for a trade novice.
– – – – – – – – –
The announcement on Wednesday of the four nation approach to Covid restrictions over Christmas was a disaster from a communications viewpoint. To try to pretend, as the Prime Minister did, that the policy and guidelines remained unchanged was ridiculous, and further undermined the government’s approach.
When circumstances change – and they have changed since the initial announcement of the Christmas rules on December 2 – it would be wholly reasonable to change approach, even if there might be a political backlash.
Infections are rising in large parts of the country, as are hospital admissions. Death numbers are rising again, too. In those circumstances, would surely be reasonable to tighten the guidelines. Other European countries, such as Germany and the Netherlands have done it. It’s called leadership.
Boris Johnson appears to think the British public wouldn’t swallow it. All the polling suggests that they would. There will always be people who ignore anything the Government says and deliberately do the exact opposite, but most people do take notice of what Ministers and scientists say.
We know from the spike that happened after Thanksgiving in the America what happens when families get together. The virus spreads. And that’s what is undoubtedly going to happen over Christmas.
Would we be having this five day long super-spreader event, were it not for this annual holiday? No, of course we wouldn’t. In fact, I suspect much more severe measures than Tier Three would be imposed.
So when we get to the middle of January and we’re getting 40-50,000 new infections a day, and at the end of that month the death rate climbs to more than a thousand a day, many people will look back and blame the Prime Minister directly for it.
You can explain all you like that it’s individual people’s lack of discipline or adherence to the safety measures but the commentators and scientists will blame one person: Johnson.
I hope he’s got a good explanation ready. Having said all that, it will be interesting to compare infection rates in January in Wales with those of the rest of the UK. Mark Drakeford has said only two families may meet over Christmas rather than three, and is criminalising anyone caught breaching the limit. Nicola Sturgeon hasn’t gone that far, but she’s advising people only to meet on one day, with no overnight stay.
Meanwhile, the Prime Minister is saying that just because you can doesn’t mean you should, and that we should all enjoy a smaller, shorter Christmas. In essence, he’s trusting the people to do the right thing. In normal circumstances, that ought to be the right message. In this case, that message has been undermined, yet again, by a lack of clarity. It’s something I suspect we’re all going to live to regret.
– – – – – – – – –
As this is my final column of the year, let me conclude by wishing you all a very Happy Christmas – and let’s hope that 2021 is a much better year for all of us and the country.


conservativehome--2020-12-18--John Bald: The use of provocative language to stimulate thinking is a teaching style that has become

John Bald: The use of provocative language to stimulate thinking is a teaching style that has become unfashionable

John Bald is a former Ofsted inspector and has written two books on the history of writing and spelling .
He is Vice-President of the Conservative Education Society .
First the good news – this week ’ s appointment of Ian Bauckham CBE to the chairmanship of Ofqual will replace statistical shackles with professional competence .
Ian is CEO of the Tenax Schools Trust ( Kent and Sussex ) and a highly successful teacher and headteacher , who has been instrumental in the reform of languages teaching and personal education .
He was the first member of the Ofqual board @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its mathematical formula could not be fair , and has recently chaired the DfE expert group on GCSE languages reform , of which I was a member .
He has work to do , and the ability to do it .
Ofqual may yet survive .
Next the bad , in the form of Eton ’ s sacking of English teacher , Will Knowland , which has been upheld on appeal .
The story has been well aired over the last couple of weeks , with the Guardian praising the Head Master – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ separation of the words – for reforming the school , and much of the Left joining in .
Knowland ’ s lecture on YouTube , the Patriarchy Paradox , contains inaccuracies , and can fairly be described as tripe .
A sixth former presenting it might expect it to be “ ripped ” , though a few interesting points , including the use of physical strength to provide protection , might have raised the grade to a C. I found it difficult to sit through but , if you insist , here is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to is the use of “ gross misconduct ” in relation to failure to remove a lecture from a personal website at the “ request ” of the Head Master .
Gross misconduct is as serious a charge as can be laid against a teacher , usually with criminal implications .
No-one has suggested referring this lecture to the police or the Department for Education , and its production as part of a critical thinking course could be thought appropriate , if only by encouraging critical analysis of the lecture itself .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Equality Act is ridiculous – there is nothing in the Act against free speech , and Eton could not be held complicit in a social media posting .
Neither is free speech to be trivialised , as it has been by Professor Priyamvara Gopal , as “ Freeze Peach ” .
We read last week of the kidnapping and execution of the Iranian Ruhollah Zam for its exercise , on the charge of being “ corrupt on earth ” , in itself an extreme version of being politically incorrect .
Simon Henderson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to have sent a pupil home for suggesting that he should be fired instead of Knowland , an offence of “ lèse-majesté ” if ever there was one .
Those of us who are not in his power remain free to criticise .
His attempts at “ modernisation ” are highly questionable in themselves , beginning with the appointments of deputy heads for “ pastoral ” and “ academics ” , an idea borrowed from comprehensive schools , and the source of many errors .
The core structure of Eton , like most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , with the housemaster as the first line of senior management and responsible for all aspects of a pupil ’ s education .
The pastoral/academic divide was originally a way of creating senior posts for the former headteachers of the smaller schools that were brought together to make comprehensives , and its separation of key elements of education into separate compartments has been a major cause of their failure .
The roles of Eton ’ s Lower Master and Head Master brooked no such division .
And , after Henderson ’ s use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might remember that Eton had to remove its new “ academics ” deputy for abusing his position as an examiner , an offence that better fits the description of “ gross misconduct ” than Knowland ’ s lecture .
The use of provocative language to stimulate thinking is one of many teaching styles that has become unfashionable , and Jamie Blackett ’ s “ The Enigma of Kidson ” , a highly successful , if somewhat eccentric history Master , whose pupils included Sir Matthew Pinsent and David Cameron , is a delight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an inspired beak who ignored all the modern rules but put his pupils first ” , and feared he would drive Ofsted inspectors to apoplexy , though , having been one of those ogres , I would more probably have put a 1 in the box and enjoyed writing a cameo on his excellence .
Knowland ’ s teaching – see “ Be an eagle , not a snail ” – is in that tradition , though perhaps without the twinkle that made Kidson ’ s pupils love him .
He has a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be put out in the street before Christmas , and has expressed confidence that he will be “ all right ” .
I expect Henderson will be all right too , which will be Eton ’ s loss .

John Bald is a former Ofsted inspector and has written two books on the history of writing and spelling. He is Vice-President of the Conservative Education Society.
First the good news – this week’s appointment of Ian Bauckham CBE to the chairmanship of Ofqual will replace statistical shackles with professional competence. Ian is CEO of the Tenax Schools Trust (Kent and Sussex) and a highly successful teacher and headteacher, who has been instrumental in the reform of languages teaching and personal education. He was the first member of the Ofqual board to break ranks and point out that its mathematical formula could not be fair, and has recently chaired the DfE expert group on GCSE languages reform, of which I was a member. He has work to do, and the ability to do it. Ofqual may yet survive.
Next the bad, in the form of Eton’s sacking of English teacher, Will Knowland, which has been upheld on appeal. The story has been well aired over the last couple of weeks, with the Guardian praising the Head Master – Eton’s unusual and possibly unique separation of the words – for reforming the school, and much of the Left joining in. Knowland’s lecture on YouTube, the Patriarchy Paradox, contains inaccuracies, and can fairly be described as tripe. A sixth former presenting it might expect it to be “ripped”, though a few interesting points, including the use of physical strength to provide protection, might have raised the grade to a C. I found it difficult to sit through but, if you insist, here is the link.
What I really object to is the use of “gross misconduct” in relation to failure to remove a lecture from a personal website at the “request” of the Head Master. Gross misconduct is as serious a charge as can be laid against a teacher, usually with criminal implications. No-one has suggested referring this lecture to the police or the Department for Education, and its production as part of a critical thinking course could be thought appropriate, if only by encouraging critical analysis of the lecture itself. The reported legal advice that it could breach the Equality Act is ridiculous – there is nothing in the Act against free speech, and Eton could not be held complicit in a social media posting. Neither is free speech to be trivialised, as it has been by Professor Priyamvara Gopal, as “Freeze Peach”. We read last week of the kidnapping and execution of the Iranian Ruhollah Zam for its exercise, on the charge of being “corrupt on earth”, in itself an extreme version of being politically incorrect.
Simon Henderson, the Head Master, was reported to have sent a pupil home for suggesting that he should be fired instead of Knowland, an offence of “lèse-majesté” if ever there was one. Those of us who are not in his power remain free to criticise. His attempts at “modernisation” are highly questionable in themselves, beginning with the appointments of deputy heads for “pastoral” and “academics”, an idea borrowed from comprehensive schools, and the source of many errors. The core structure of Eton, like most public schools, is its house system, with the housemaster as the first line of senior management and responsible for all aspects of a pupil’s education. The pastoral/academic divide was originally a way of creating senior posts for the former headteachers of the smaller schools that were brought together to make comprehensives, and its separation of key elements of education into separate compartments has been a major cause of their failure. The roles of Eton’s Lower Master and Head Master brooked no such division. And, after Henderson’s use of the sledgehammer on Knowland, we might remember that Eton had to remove its new “academics” deputy for abusing his position as an examiner, an offence that better fits the description of “gross misconduct” than Knowland’s lecture.
The use of provocative language to stimulate thinking is one of many teaching styles that has become unfashionable, and Jamie Blackett’s “The Enigma of Kidson”, a highly successful, if somewhat eccentric history Master, whose pupils included Sir Matthew Pinsent and David Cameron, is a delight. Jacob Rees-Mogg described him as “an inspired beak who ignored all the modern rules but put his pupils first”, and feared he would drive Ofsted inspectors to apoplexy, though, having been one of those ogres, I would more probably have put a 1 in the box and enjoyed writing a cameo on his excellence. Knowland’s teaching – see “Be an eagle, not a snail” – is in that tradition, though perhaps without the twinkle that made Kidson’s pupils love him. He has a tuition business, is apparently not to be put out in the street before Christmas, and has expressed confidence that he will be “all right”.
I expect Henderson will be all right too, which will be Eton’s loss.