conservativehome--2020-01-14--Andy Street: Levelling up for the Midlands and North. Javid must tear up the Treasury rules to make

Andy Street: Levelling up for the Midlands and North. Javid must tear up the Treasury rules to make sure it happens.

Andy Street is Mayor of the West Midlands , and is a former Managing Director of John Lewis .
The phrase ‘ levelling up ’ has become one of the early political buzzwords of the new decade .
Emboldened by its enlarged Commons majority , the Government has committed to invest in ways that ‘ level up ’ the economic fortunes of the regions and communities that feel they have been left behind .
This must be one of the central missions of the Government over the next four years .
The election saw Labour ’ s ‘ Red Wall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Midland and Northern seats where Tory candidates have never expected to win in the past .
Voters who broke the habit of a lifetime to vote Tory expect to see us deliver on promises to ensure that real investment reaches beyond Watford .
With two months to go until the Budget , it is time to put our money where our mouth is .
The key to realising this ambition to spread economic growth to the rest of the UK is the re-wiring of the Treasury that is said to be going on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported that the Treasury is considering changing one of its formal objectives from ensuring strong economic growth ‘ across all regions ’ to ‘ levelling up ’ the rest of the UK with the south-east , partly through new national infrastructure strategy .
This would be achieved through infrastructure investment , a higher minimum wage and a greater focus on skills and vocational education .
I am hugely encouraged that we have a West Midlands man at the centre of this new financial direction in Sajid Javid , whose Bromsgrove constituency shares many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ across the UK .
Announcing the date of the budget in Manchester last week , he promised it would “ set out ambitious plans to unleash Britain ’ s potential , level up across the UK and usher in a decade of renewal ” .
However , this can only happen if we get to grips with Treasury mandarins and their financial rules , which often seem to work against us .
The argument is that , by following rules that focus on the overall national impact of investment , and backing already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ London and the South East .
Known as the ‘ Green Book ’ , these Whitehall rules are said to impose a bias on infrastructure investment towards London , by directing public money to areas where productivity and prosperity are already higher .
In simple parlance , they back a horse that is already winning .
While this approach may have ensured a relatively reliable return on investment in simple fiscal terms , it has also prevented regional investment for decades .
Of course , when it comes to allocating public money , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vital that investment drives tangible growth .
Spending should never be purely for party advantage .
But after years of talk about rebalancing the economy , the time has come for us to look again at the rule book .
It ’ s time to recognise the business case for investment in the Midlands which will allow us to power forward and deliver on our huge potential .
My fellow Metro mayors and I have argued that further devolution of regional powers will inject new confidence into the industrial powerhouses of the Midlands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s time to rip out the Treasury red tape that holds us back in terms of investment .
The West Midlands can provide proof that stepping outside those rigid rules can reap real dividends .
When Phillip Hammond was Chancellor , I pitched an ambitious housing plan that required him to take a more nuanced view of those Whitehall rules than was usually reflected in his spreadsheets .
The result was a £350 million Housing Deal which is enabling us to deliver our ‘ brownfield first ’ approach to house building which is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and easing the pressure on our green fields .
While it may not have sat perfectly within the existing Green Book rules , that decision made absolute business sense .
But ‘ levelling up ’ isn ’ t just about crude fiscal investment – it ’ s about reaching out to those communities who feel that they have missed out on the economic success of other places .
In the West Midlands , we are working hard to ensure that those areas in Coventry , Birmingham and the Black Country that have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they need .
A new era of national investment in infrastructure and skills , supported by rethought Whitehall rules , will help in this much-needed renewal .
However , we must be realistic about what can be achieved and not expect immediate change .
Investment in the regions would , without doubt , enhance productivity , but rewriting the rules means not only rethinking what qualifies an area or project for investment , but what results we should expect .
We in the regions must also accept that it will be up to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money will make the most difference and provide the detailed data to help monitor the success of investment made .
We stand ready to do that and , if our calls for further devolution to the regions are heard , we can use the power of local decision making to grasp the opportunities offered by the Chancellor ’ s ‘ decade of renewal ’ .
We don ’ t want a hand-out : we want to share in the prosperity experienced in the South .
If ‘ levelling up ’ delivers one thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ playing field for the UK ’ s regions .

Andy Street is Mayor of the West Midlands, and is a former Managing Director of John Lewis.
The phrase ‘levelling up’ has become one of the early political buzzwords of the new decade. Emboldened by its enlarged Commons majority, the Government has committed to invest in ways that ‘level up’ the economic fortunes of the regions and communities that feel they have been left behind.
This must be one of the central missions of the Government over the next four years. The election saw Labour’s ‘Red Wall’ crumble, returning Conservative MPs in Midland and Northern seats where Tory candidates have never expected to win in the past.
Voters who broke the habit of a lifetime to vote Tory expect to see us deliver on promises to ensure that real investment reaches beyond Watford. With two months to go until the Budget, it is time to put our money where our mouth is.
The key to realising this ambition to spread economic growth to the rest of the UK is the re-wiring of the Treasury that is said to be going on behind the scenes.
It has been reported that the Treasury is considering changing one of its formal objectives from ensuring strong economic growth ‘across all regions’ to ‘levelling up’ the rest of the UK with the south-east, partly through new national infrastructure strategy.
This would be achieved through infrastructure investment, a higher minimum wage and a greater focus on skills and vocational education.
I am hugely encouraged that we have a West Midlands man at the centre of this new financial direction in Sajid Javid, whose Bromsgrove constituency shares many of the economic challenges faced by communities across the UK.
Announcing the date of the budget in Manchester last week, he promised it would “set out ambitious plans to unleash Britain’s potential, level up across the UK and usher in a decade of renewal”. However, this can only happen if we get to grips with Treasury mandarins and their financial rules, which often seem to work against us.
The argument is that, by following rules that focus on the overall national impact of investment, and backing already successful regions, they risk just backing London and the South East.
Known as the ‘Green Book’, these Whitehall rules are said to impose a bias on infrastructure investment towards London, by directing public money to areas where productivity and prosperity are already higher. In simple parlance, they back a horse that is already winning.
While this approach may have ensured a relatively reliable return on investment in simple fiscal terms, it has also prevented regional investment for decades. Of course, when it comes to allocating public money, rules are important. It’s vital that investment drives tangible growth. Spending should never be purely for party advantage. But after years of talk about rebalancing the economy, the time has come for us to look again at the rule book.
It’s time to recognise the business case for investment in the Midlands which will allow us to power forward and deliver on our huge potential. My fellow Metro mayors and I have argued that further devolution of regional powers will inject new confidence into the industrial powerhouses of the Midlands and the North. Now it’s time to rip out the Treasury red tape that holds us back in terms of investment.
The West Midlands can provide proof that stepping outside those rigid rules can reap real dividends. When Phillip Hammond was Chancellor, I pitched an ambitious housing plan that required him to take a more nuanced view of those Whitehall rules than was usually reflected in his spreadsheets.
The result was a £350 million Housing Deal which is enabling us to deliver our ‘brownfield first’ approach to house building which is critical to providing homes, regenerating communities and easing the pressure on our green fields. While it may not have sat perfectly within the existing Green Book rules, that decision made absolute business sense.
But ‘levelling up’ isn’t just about crude fiscal investment – it’s about reaching out to those communities who feel that they have missed out on the economic success of other places. In the West Midlands, we are working hard to ensure that those areas in Coventry, Birmingham and the Black Country that have been ‘left behind’ receive the support they need.
A new era of national investment in infrastructure and skills, supported by rethought Whitehall rules, will help in this much-needed renewal. However, we must be realistic about what can be achieved and not expect immediate change. Investment in the regions would, without doubt, enhance productivity, but rewriting the rules means not only rethinking what qualifies an area or project for investment, but what results we should expect.
We in the regions must also accept that it will be up to us to identify the areas where public money will make the most difference and provide the detailed data to help monitor the success of investment made. We stand ready to do that and, if our calls for further devolution to the regions are heard, we can use the power of local decision making to grasp the opportunities offered by the Chancellor’s ‘decade of renewal’.
We don’t want a hand-out: we want to share in the prosperity experienced in the South. If ‘levelling up’ delivers one thing, it ought to be a level playing field for the UK’s regions.


conservativehome--2020-01-14--WATCH: Johnson 3) “The British public deserve the best possible technology,” he says of Huawei

“ The British public deserve to have access to the best possible technology ” says PM Boris Johnson on US @ @ @ @ @ ’ t want , as UK prime minister , to put in any infrastructure that @ @ @ @ @ national security ” # BBCBreakfast https : //t.co/4A3CjflbN3 pic.twitter.com/ZiwP1oHip4

“The British public deserve to have access to the best possible technology” says PM Boris Johnson on US Huawei row
“I don’t want, as UK prime minister, to put in any infrastructure that is going to prejudice our national security”#BBCBreakfast https://t.co/4A3CjflbN3 pic.twitter.com/ZiwP1oHip4
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) January 14, 2020


conservativehome--2020-01-14--WATCH: Johnson 2) The people of Iran don’t want “a military conflict between the West and Iran.”

`` Let 's dial this thing down . ''
PM @ borisjohnson tells # BBCBreakfast the people of Iran do @ @ @ @ @ conflict between the west and Iran . ''
More here : https : //t.co/rBgWP1Wpuf pic.twitter.com/SNGxU72XFZ

"Let's dial this thing down."
PM @borisjohnson tells #BBCBreakfast the people of Iran don't want "a military conflict between the west and Iran."
More here: https://t.co/rBgWP1Wpuf pic.twitter.com/SNGxU72XFZ
— BBC Breakfast (@BBCBreakfast) January 14, 2020


conservativehome--2020-01-14--WATCH: Johnson 1) “It’s not for government to step in and save companies that simply run into troubl

WATCH: Johnson 1) “It’s not for government to step in and save companies that simply run into trouble”

“ It ’ s not for government to step in and save companies that simply run into trouble ” Asked @ @ @ @ @ , PM Boris Johnson says “ there are limits commercially to what a government can @ @ @ @ @ : //t.co/4A3CjflbN3 pic.twitter.com/qSWyd3oVy2

“It’s not for government to step in and save companies that simply run into trouble”
Asked about the future of Flybe, PM Boris Johnson says “there are limits commercially to what a government can do”#BBCBreakfast https://t.co/4A3CjflbN3 pic.twitter.com/qSWyd3oVy2
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) January 14, 2020


conservativehome--2020-01-14--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the Tees Valley Local Enterprise

Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the Tees Valley Local Enterprise Partnership – and more

Seven years ago , the TaxPayers ’ Alliance reported that “ in the last year , five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories ” .
Since then , the figures have varied , and some Conservative members or supporters have been selected to fill important posts .
Nonetheless , it remains the case that , since it took office in 2010 , our Party has punched beneath its 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , every week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies , so that qualified Conservatives might be aware of the opportunities presented .
“ This is an exciting time for the National Infrastructure Commission .
The NIC was created in 2015 and became an Executive Agency of HM Treasury in 2017 .
After the successful publication of the National Infrastructure Assessment in July 2018 , the NIC is now looking to the future .
A new strategy is in development , to take us to the next National @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support and drive this growth we are seeking to appoint one new Non-Executive Member to our Oversight Board .
The role of the National Infrastructure Commission ’ s Oversight Board is to ensure that the NIC is managed and governed appropriately , operates within its financial and operational delegation limits and has effective governance arrangements in place.
” “ Parliament ’ s Information Authority is seeking to recruit a Non-Executive Director to join them for meetings related to the Parliamentary Estate , our building information and data , and the Restoration and Renewal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ successful candidate would attend up to 15 meetings per year , including quarterly Authority meetings , additional Authority meetings related to the programme or associated work and to join other associated discussions as required .
The 15 days to include all preparatory work for those meetings.
” “ The Greater Lincolnshire LEP works with the public , private and voluntary sectors to drive sustainable economic growth .
We help our businesses increase productivity and innovation , create new employment opportunities , and develop infrastructure solutions that support this .
We are the voice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the economic interests of the area are properly represented .
We believe that Greater Lincolnshire is alive with opportunities and a truly great place to live , work and do business and is emerging as the intelligent choice for investors.
” Time : Around four days per month .
“ CITB is the statutory skills body for the construction industry in Great Britain and its purpose is to make better provision for the training and maintenance of skills in the industry .
CITB raises around £200m annually via a training levy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Government to ensure national construction skills needs are met .
CITB seeks to create the culture and conditions that will deliver new ways of working , embracing new technologies , creating a demand in construction for more skills , new skills and higher level skills .
CITB aspires to be at the forefront of effective commissioning and grant practice and is undertaking a high-profile transformational reform programme in order to achieve this.
” “ The Chair will be responsible for the proper running of the Homes England Board .
They will guide and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ providing confident , clear and consistent leadership .
They will also lead the Agency ’ s relationship with the Secretary of State for Housing , Communities and Local Government , who they will meet on a regular basis .
The Chair will act as an ambassador for the Board and for Homes England , helping to build and develop collaborative strategic partnerships that support and promote Homes England ’ s core mission .
The successful candidate will influence and network with key decision makers and stakeholders and explain how the organisation is transforming… @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per week .
“ The Tees Valley Combined Authority and Local Enterprise Partnership ( LEP ) are looking to recruit a new LEP Chair and new LEP members from the private sector to deliver our ambitious economic plans .
The Combined Authority and LEP strive to ensure an equal and diverse membership , and through this latest round of appointments , have committed to achieve 50 % female representation on the LEP board in 2020 .
Due to the current LEP Chair coming to the end of his term , we are looking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has a strong private sector background , experience of building effective organisations and has the motivation to fully commit to and represent the LEP on a local and national scale .
”

Seven years ago, the TaxPayers’ Alliance reported that “in the last year, five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories”.
Since then, the figures have varied, and some Conservative members or supporters have been selected to fill important posts.
Nonetheless, it remains the case that, since it took office in 2010, our Party has punched beneath its 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, every week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies, so that qualified Conservatives might be aware of the opportunities presented.
– – – – – – – – – –
National Infrastructure Commission – Non-Executive Member
“This is an exciting time for the National Infrastructure Commission. The NIC was created in 2015 and became an Executive Agency of HM Treasury in 2017. After the successful publication of the National Infrastructure Assessment in July 2018, the NIC is now looking to the future. A new strategy is in development, to take us to the next National Infrastructure Assessment in 2023, and to support and drive this growth we are seeking to appoint one new Non-Executive Member to our Oversight Board. The role of the National Infrastructure Commission’s Oversight Board is to ensure that the NIC is managed and governed appropriately, operates within its financial and operational delegation limits and has effective governance arrangements in place.”
Time: 1-2 days per quarter.
Remuneration: Expenses.
Closes: 17 January
– – – – – – – – – –
Information Authority – Non-Executive Director
“Parliament’s Information Authority is seeking to recruit a Non-Executive Director to join them for meetings related to the Parliamentary Estate, our building information and data, and the Restoration and Renewal programme. It is expected that the successful candidate would attend up to 15 meetings per year, including quarterly Authority meetings, additional Authority meetings related to the programme or associated work and to join other associated discussions as required. The 15 days to include all preparatory work for those meetings.”
Time: Up to 15 meetings a year.
Remuneration: £9,000 per annum plus reasonable travel expenses.
Closes: 19 January
– – – – – – – – – –
Greater Lincolnshire Local Enterprise Partnership – Chair
“The Greater Lincolnshire LEP works with the public, private and voluntary sectors to drive sustainable economic growth. We help our businesses increase productivity and innovation, create new employment opportunities, and develop infrastructure solutions that support this. We are the voice of the local business community, ensuring that the economic interests of the area are properly represented. We believe that Greater Lincolnshire is alive with opportunities and a truly great place to live, work and do business and is emerging as the intelligent choice for investors.”
Time: Around four days per month.
Remuneration: None.
Closes: 20 January
– – – – – – – – – –
Construction Industry Training Board – Board Trustee
“CITB is the statutory skills body for the construction industry in Great Britain and its purpose is to make better provision for the training and maintenance of skills in the industry. CITB raises around £200m annually via a training levy, and works closely with employers and the Government to ensure national construction skills needs are met. CITB seeks to create the culture and conditions that will deliver new ways of working, embracing new technologies, creating a demand in construction for more skills, new skills and higher level skills. CITB aspires to be at the forefront of effective commissioning and grant practice and is undertaking a high-profile transformational reform programme in order to achieve this.”
Time: Around 16 hours per month.
Remuneration: Expenses.
Closes: 28 January
– – – – – – – – – –
Homes England – Chair
“The Chair will be responsible for the proper running of the Homes England Board. They will guide and influence the Agency at a strategic level providing confident, clear and consistent leadership. They will also lead the Agency’s relationship with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, who they will meet on a regular basis. The Chair will act as an ambassador for the Board and for Homes England, helping to build and develop collaborative strategic partnerships that support and promote Homes England’s core mission. The successful candidate will influence and network with key decision makers and stakeholders and explain how the organisation is transforming…”
Time: Up to two days per week.
Remuneration: £95,000 per annum.
Closes: 31 January
– – – – – – – – – –
Tees Valley Local Enterprise Partnership – Chair
“The Tees Valley Combined Authority and Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) are looking to recruit a new LEP Chair and new LEP members from the private sector to deliver our ambitious economic plans. The Combined Authority and LEP strive to ensure an equal and diverse membership, and through this latest round of appointments, have committed to achieve 50% female representation on the LEP board in 2020. Due to the current LEP Chair coming to the end of his term, we are looking to appoint a new LEP Chair who has a strong private sector background, experience of building effective organisations and has the motivation to fully commit to and represent the LEP on a local and national scale.”
Time: 6-8 days per month.
Remuneration: Travel and subsistence expenses.
Closes: 29 February


conservativehome--2020-01-14--How to leave the Royal Family – as working members of it, at any rate

With the possible exception of the first Elizabeth , this second Elizabeth is our most successful monarch – so much so that it is easy to forget that the sovereign hasn ’ t always been popular .
Queen Victoria wasn ’ t , at times .
Edward VIII isn ’ t remembered today with affection .
The reasons for this are unrelated to his marriage to Wallace Simpson , but his decision to abdicate , in order to wed the woman he loved , shook the monarchy .
The Duke of Sussex is sixth in line to the throne , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alone the sovereign , and his circumstances are very different .
But there are obsure echoes of the abdication crisis in his and his wife ’ s desire to reduce their royal duties .
It comes during an arduous period for the Queen herself : 2019 was “ a bumpy year ” .
Prince Philip has retired .
Prince Andrew has suspended his own public work in the wake of the Epstein affair .
What is essentially a holding statement was issued on the Queen ’ s behalf yesterday about the future of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transition ” to “ a more independent life ” , and there are “ complex matters for my family to resolve ” .
If these words reveal little , that is understandable .
For decisions about the future of the Duke and Duchess have wider implications .
The Queen ’ s words are the first draft of an answer to a broader question : “ what should we do about senior members of the Royal Family who want out ?
” This takes us back to where we started .
The monarchy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same , but the second can knock the first off-balance .
Think of the death of Diana , Princess of Wales – and what followed .
So what is at stake is more than the possibility of a senior Royal and his wife going rogue .
The decisions about the Sussexes ’ future must be got right because they will set a wider precedent .
They also take place in the context of the Prince of Wales ’ reported desire to “ slim down ” the Royal Family : in other words @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money that it consumes .
The details of the settlement in this case will indeed be complex , but the principle that underpins it should surely be straightforward – namely , that one can not fudge membership of the working Royal Family .
Either members of the family are performing public duties or they aren ’ t .
If they are , then they should be paid .
If they aren ’ t , then they shouldn ’ t .
It will be claimed that it all isn ’ t quite so simple @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Up to a point , that is true .
For example , what about security ?
It would be wrong to deprive the Duke and Duchess of it altogether .
This will mean that the taxpayer has to stump up .
But even in this case , support should be limited .
Neither the Sussexes , nor some future member of the family who wishes to opt out , should be allowed to run up unlimited bills .
So they will need a security protocol of some kind .
It is being said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have grasped the tax implications of substituting whatever they earn in future for funds from the Duchy of Cornwall .
But if they are to become citizens ordinary in every other way than being titled , and earn in much the same way as everyone else , then they must pay tax like everyone else .
The Queen could help to fund them , as to some extent she does now , from her private income .
But this raises some of the “ complex matters ” to which her statement referred .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that private income , and the Duchy of Lancaster .
Grants from the latter would not be taxpayers ’ money .
But the Duchy is accountable to the taxpayer for its spending : the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster must answer for it in Parliament .
In any case , Duchy money would not be compatible with financial independence .
However , yesterday ’ s statement , as we have seen , refers only to the Sussexes wanting “ a more independent life ” .
And to say that they do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funds does not rule out the possibility of their using some , even after the “ period of transition ” comes to an end ( whenever that may be ) .
Some will argue that this would be for the best , because public money would mean continued control – and that its provision will minimise the likelihood of the Duke and Duchess cutting loose and embarrassing the Queen .
The spectre of an Oprah interview , and more where that might come from , haunts the Royal Household .
Might accusations of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh or the Prince of Wales ?
Prospects of this kind seem to have haunted yesterday ’ s talks .
We hope that nothing of the kind would happen were the Sussexes to lose access to public funds .
But if it did , we believe that the least bad response that any senior royal could make would be to take the ensuing publicity on the chin .
Most people have enough common sense to be able to tell claim from fact .
They would be less forgiving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , on the one hand , that they were leaving their duties behind but that , on the other , they still wanted to draw on on public funds .
The principle we outline – financial independence – seeks to avoid this .
It would have wider application .
Any future working member of the Royal Family who wished to leave what the Duke of Edinburgh calls “ the Firm ” would have a model to draw on .
We wrote earlier that there are obscure echoes of the Abdication crisis in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are just that : obscure .
The plight of the Duke and Duchess may be no less agonising , but the implications are less extensive .
This royal crisis is manageable .
After all , not all members of the Royal Family undertake public work and draw public money .
For example , consider Princess Anne ’ s children , Zara Tindall and Peter Phillips , who don ’ t even possess courtesy titles .
Prince Andrew ’ s children , Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie , have been taken off the sovereign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the future of the Sussexes condenses down to a single , simple point .
When it comes to being a working member of the Royal Family , one can ’ t be half in and half out .

With the possible exception of the first Elizabeth, this second Elizabeth is our most successful monarch – so much so that it is easy to forget that the sovereign hasn’t always been popular. Queen Victoria wasn’t, at times. Edward VIII isn’t remembered today with affection. The reasons for this are unrelated to his marriage to Wallace Simpson, but his decision to abdicate, in order to wed the woman he loved, shook the monarchy.
The Duke of Sussex is sixth in line to the throne, not the heir to it, let alone the sovereign, and his circumstances are very different. But there are obsure echoes of the abdication crisis in his and his wife’s desire to reduce their royal duties. It comes during an arduous period for the Queen herself: 2019 was “a bumpy year”. Prince Philip has retired. Prince Andrew has suspended his own public work in the wake of the Epstein affair.
What is essentially a holding statement was issued on the Queen’s behalf yesterday about the future of the Sussexes. They will now “transition” to “a more independent life”, and there are “complex matters for my family to resolve”. If these words reveal little, that is understandable. For decisions about the future of the Duke and Duchess have wider implications.
The Queen’s words are the first draft of an answer to a broader question: “what should we do about senior members of the Royal Family who want out?” This takes us back to where we started. The monarchy and the Royal Family are not one and the same, but the second can knock the first off-balance. Think of the death of Diana, Princess of Wales – and what followed.
So what is at stake is more than the possibility of a senior Royal and his wife going rogue. The decisions about the Sussexes’ future must be got right because they will set a wider precedent. They also take place in the context of the Prince of Wales’ reported desire to “slim down” the Royal Family: in other words, to cut the amount of public money that it consumes.
The details of the settlement in this case will indeed be complex, but the principle that underpins it should surely be straightforward – namely, that one cannot fudge membership of the working Royal Family. Either members of the family are performing public duties or they aren’t. If they are, then they should be paid. If they aren’t, then they shouldn’t.
It will be claimed that it all isn’t quite so simple, at least in this case. Up to a point, that is true. For example, what about security? It would be wrong to deprive the Duke and Duchess of it altogether. This will mean that the taxpayer has to stump up. But even in this case, support should be limited. Neither the Sussexes, nor some future member of the family who wishes to opt out, should be allowed to run up unlimited bills.
So they will need a security protocol of some kind. It is being said that the Duke and Duchess may not have grasped the tax implications of substituting whatever they earn in future for funds from the Duchy of Cornwall. But if they are to become citizens ordinary in every other way than being titled, and earn in much the same way as everyone else, then they must pay tax like everyone else.
The Queen could help to fund them, as to some extent she does now, from her private income. But this raises some of the “complex matters” to which her statement referred. She is funded by the sovereign grant, that private income, and the Duchy of Lancaster. Grants from the latter would not be taxpayers’ money. But the Duchy is accountable to the taxpayer for its spending: the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster must answer for it in Parliament.
In any case, Duchy money would not be compatible with financial independence. However, yesterday’s statement, as we have seen, refers only to the Sussexes wanting “a more independent life”. And to say that they do not wish to be reliant on public funds does not rule out the possibility of their using some, even after the “period of transition” comes to an end (whenever that may be).
Some will argue that this would be for the best, because public money would mean continued control – and that its provision will minimise the likelihood of the Duke and Duchess cutting loose and embarrassing the Queen. The spectre of an Oprah interview, and more where that might come from, haunts the Royal Household. Might accusations of racism or sexism be flung at the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh or the Prince of Wales?
Prospects of this kind seem to have haunted yesterday’s talks. We hope that nothing of the kind would happen were the Sussexes to lose access to public funds. But if it did, we believe that the least bad response that any senior royal could make would be to take the ensuing publicity on the chin. Most people have enough common sense to be able to tell claim from fact.
They would be less forgiving were the Duke and Duchess to claim, on the one hand, that they were leaving their duties behind but that, on the other, they still wanted to draw on on public funds. The principle we outline – financial independence – seeks to avoid this. It would have wider application. Any future working member of the Royal Family who wished to leave what the Duke of Edinburgh calls “the Firm” would have a model to draw on.
We wrote earlier that there are obscure echoes of the Abdication crisis in the fate of the Sussexes, but they are just that: obscure. The plight of the Duke and Duchess may be no less agonising, but the implications are less extensive. This royal crisis is manageable. After all, not all members of the Royal Family undertake public work and draw public money.
For example, consider Princess Anne’s children, Zara Tindall and Peter Phillips, who don’t even possess courtesy titles. Prince Andrew’s children, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, have been taken off the sovereign grant list. At any rate, the future of the Sussexes condenses down to a single, simple point. When it comes to being a working member of the Royal Family, one can’t be half in and half out.


conservativehome--2020-01-14--Job vacancy: ConservativeHome seeks a Deputy Editor

The UK ’ s most influential Conservative-supporting news and analysis website seeks a new full-time Deputy Editor .
This is a rare opportunity to take on a senior role in a fast-developing outlet at a very exciting time for the site and centre right political journalism .
The ideal candidate will be a skilled writer , with political insight and experience , capable of turning their hand to the varied tasks involved in planning and producing a daily high-quality online publication .
Responsibilities of the role include , but are not limited to : • Writing daily news , opinion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UK politics ; • Commissioning and editing articles from outside contributors ; • Supporting the Editor in planning and producing ConservativeHome content , and maintaining quality and consistency in output ; • Aiding the Editor in the management of a small and experienced team of journalists ; • Fulfilling Duty Editor shifts ( these include the production of a comprehensive round-up of the morning ’ s newspapers and our morning newsletter for 9am , and require an early start ; the Deputy Editor would normally do around two such shifts a week ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Party Conference and providing expert analysis at ConservativeHome events ; • The ability to prioritise and work under pressure .
• Journalistic experience .
You will have written for established print or online outlets , produced a blog for yourself or an organisation , ghost-written newspaper articles for others , or similar .
You know how to develop an argument , and what is and is not a story .
• Drive and initiative .
You are full of ideas for stories and articles , and are able to work independently , reacting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the basis of your own judgement .
We mostly work remotely .
• Political knowledge/experience .
You are excited by political events , have excellent contacts , and are keen to develop further .
Perhaps you have already worked in a Westminster newsroom , campaign team or Parliamentary office .
• Understanding and experience of social media , particularly Twitter .
• Sympathy with the values and aims of ConservativeHome .
Very competitive , dependent on experience and ability .
The role would start as soon as feasibly possible , dependent upon the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ close at 6pm on Monday 20th January , with interviews to take place in London very shortly afterwards .
To apply , please send a one-page cover letter and a CV to development @ conservativehome .
com Links to examples of writing , social media output and broadcast experience are welcome , within reason , to illustrate skills and experience .

The UK’s most influential Conservative-supporting news and analysis website seeks a new full-time Deputy Editor. This is a rare opportunity to take on a senior role in a fast-developing outlet at a very exciting time for the site and centre right political journalism.
The ideal candidate will be a skilled writer, with political insight and experience, capable of turning their hand to the varied tasks involved in planning and producing a daily high-quality online publication.
Responsibilities of the role include, but are not limited to:
Writing daily news, opinion and analysis articles on the subject of UK politics;
Commissioning and editing articles from outside contributors;
Supporting the Editor in planning and producing ConservativeHome content, and maintaining quality and consistency in output;
Aiding the Editor in the management of a small and experienced team of journalists;
Fulfilling Duty Editor shifts (these include the production of a comprehensive round-up of the morning’s newspapers and our morning newsletter for 9am, and require an early start; the Deputy Editor would normally do around two such shifts a week);
Chairing ConservativeHome events at Conservative Party Conference and providing expert analysis at ConservativeHome events;
Representing ConservativeHome in the broadcast media;
Managing social media channels.
Key skills, experience and qualities
Excellent written English.
The ability to prioritise and work under pressure.
Journalistic experience. You will have written for established print or online outlets, produced a blog for yourself or an organisation, ghost-written newspaper articles for others, or similar. You know how to develop an argument, and what is and is not a story.
Drive and initiative. You are full of ideas for stories and articles, and are able to work independently, reacting to events and following editorial instructions on the basis of your own judgement. We mostly work remotely.
Political knowledge/experience. You are excited by political events, have excellent contacts, and are keen to develop further. Perhaps you have already worked in a Westminster newsroom, campaign team or Parliamentary office.
Understanding and experience of social media, particularly Twitter.
Sympathy with the values and aims of ConservativeHome.
Desirable skills, experience and qualities
Experience of using WordPress.
Experience of managing and supporting junior colleagues.
Video editing skills.
Broadcast media and/or podcasting experience.
Salary
Very competitive, dependent on experience and ability.
Start date and interviews
The role would start as soon as feasibly possible, dependent upon the successful candidate’s availability. Applications close at 6pm on Monday 20th January, with interviews to take place in London very shortly afterwards.
Applications
To apply, please send a one-page cover letter and a CV to development@conservativehome. com
Links to examples of writing, social media output and broadcast experience are welcome, within reason, to illustrate skills and experience.


conservativehome--2020-01-14--Matthew Evans: The large public sector in Newport has helped Labour to cling on

Cllr Matthew Evans is Leader of the Conservative Group on Newport Council .
Fighting one election in a year is arduous enough .
But last year I stood in the parliamentary by-election in Newport West and in the General Election .
In the by-election , I managed to keep UKIP a distant third and reduce Labour ’ s majority to under 2,000 , while in the General Election I was heartened to get over 18,000 votes .
But not quite enough .
Labour held on with a majority of 902 .
In Newport East , our candidate , Mark Brown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority to under 2,000 .
So unlike other parts of the country , Newport remains stubbornly socialist .
This was true across the South Wales cities and valleys with only Bridgend changing hands .
This was my tenth election and it is difficult to put a finger on the reasons .
I can ’ t speak for the other cities but we have had a Labour Government in Wales since 1999 and with the exception of a four year period between 2008-12 where I led a coalition with the Lib Dems , Newport @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Welsh Government is unpopular and the decision the break their Manifesto promise to build an M4 relief road has caused enormous anger , while the Council has abandoned the popular two hours free parking we established and introduced charges to parks , increasing resentment .
This year , despite getting the biggest settlement in Wales : a 5.4 per cent increase ; they are consulting on an increase in council tax of almost eight per cent .
This is outrageous .
They sound like double glazing salesmen : just an extra couple of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Leader of the Council we raised council tax by around inflation only , and disagreed with our national stance of no increase , because people expect an increase .
But eight per cent – after a five per cent increase last year .
No way is that justified .
The fact that they delayed the announcement until the day after the General Election makes me even more angry .
They pride themselves on “ openness and transparency ” and yet the three major schemes they are investing millions in , a hotel , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taken behind closed doors with not even confidential Part Two reports .
Then they were announced via press releases .
They once spent over £50,000 on a Democracy Conference while saving £20,000 on closing some public lavatories .
Yet people still vote for them .
I can only assume Newport has a very large public sector employed at the Patent and Statistics Office , the Council , and Welsh Government , and that might have a bearing .
Looking forward , we have full elections in 2022 and have been working hard building @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meet every month .
The current composition of the 50 seat Council is : 31 Labour councillors , 12 Conservatives , fours independents , two Lib Dems , and one Independent Labour .
Naturally our prospects locally will partly depend on what happens nationally .
Things can change rapidly .
I remind younger councillors that before I took a seat from Labour in 1999 we only had one councillor – and nine years later I was Leader of the Council .
And on another positive note , I am absolutely delighted by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we can make a success of it .

Cllr Matthew Evans is Leader of the Conservative Group on Newport Council.
Fighting one election in a year is arduous enough. But last year I stood in the parliamentary by-election in Newport West and in the General Election.
In the by-election, I managed to keep UKIP a distant third and reduce Labour’s majority to under 2,000, while in the General Election I was heartened to get over 18,000 votes. But not quite enough. Labour held on with a majority of 902. In Newport East, our candidate, Mark Brown, managed to reduce Labour’s majority to under 2,000. So unlike other parts of the country, Newport remains stubbornly socialist. This was true across the South Wales cities and valleys with only Bridgend changing hands.
This was my tenth election and it is difficult to put a finger on the reasons. I can’t speak for the other cities but we have had a Labour Government in Wales since 1999 and with the exception of a four year period between 2008-12 where I led a coalition with the Lib Dems, Newport has had a Labour-run Council. The Welsh Government is unpopular and the decision the break their Manifesto promise to build an M4 relief road has caused enormous anger, while the Council has abandoned the popular two hours free parking we established and introduced charges to parks, increasing resentment.
This year, despite getting the biggest settlement in Wales: a 5.4 per cent increase; they are consulting on an increase in council tax of almost eight per cent. This is outrageous. They sound like double glazing salesmen: just an extra couple of pounds a week. When I was Leader of the Council we raised council tax by around inflation only, and disagreed with our national stance of no increase, because people expect an increase. But eight per cent – after a five per cent increase last year. No way is that justified.
The fact that they delayed the announcement until the day after the General Election makes me even more angry. They pride themselves on “openness and transparency” and yet the three major schemes they are investing millions in, a hotel, office block, and market, were taken behind closed doors with not even confidential Part Two reports. Then they were announced via press releases. They once spent over £50,000 on a Democracy Conference while saving £20,000 on closing some public lavatories.
Yet people still vote for them. I can only assume Newport has a very large public sector employed at the Patent and Statistics Office, the Council, and Welsh Government, and that might have a bearing.
Looking forward, we have full elections in 2022 and have been working hard building a base of active candidates. We meet every month.
The current composition of the 50 seat Council is: 31 Labour councillors, 12 Conservatives, fours independents, two Lib Dems, and one Independent Labour.
Naturally our prospects locally will partly depend on what happens nationally. Things can change rapidly. I remind younger councillors that before I took a seat from Labour in 1999 we only had one councillor – and nine years later I was Leader of the Council.
And on another positive note, I am absolutely delighted by the General Election result and I am convinced we can make a success of it.
Onwards and upwards…


conservativehome--2020-01-15--WATCH: Corbyn challenges PM on his plan for social care

“ It ’ s now been almost three years since the government promised a green paper on social care… What @ @ @ @ @ ” asks Jeremy Corbyn “ We do intend to begin with cross-party talks , ” @ @ @ @ @ can do it… I look forward to his support ” # PMQs https : //t.co/ItBqZA0MpZ @

“It’s now been almost three years since the government promised a green paper on social care… What’s the hold-up?” asks Jeremy Corbyn
“We do intend to begin with cross-party talks,” says Boris Johnson
“We can do it… I look forward to his support”#PMQs https://t.co/ItBqZA0MpZ pic.twitter.com/fHOfcrmhYU
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) January 15, 2020


conservativehome--2020-01-15--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the Tees Valley Local Enterprise


conservativehome--2020-01-15--Exclusive. No 10 says CCHQ will move out of Matthew Parker Street – and into the Midlands or North.

Exclusive. No 10 says CCHQ will move out of Matthew Parker Street – and into the Midlands or North. It wants your ideas about a venue.

“ There will be a small office in London but maybe up by King ’ s Cross.
” With these @ @ @ @ @ Number Ten confirmed that it wants CCHQ out of Matthew Parker Street altogether and to @ @ @ @ @ or the Midlands .
But where ?
This is where ConservativeHome ’ s readers come @ @ @ @ @ us that the new venue should be “ somewhere reasonably close to a university with @ @ @ @ @ should get a data team up there ) , good train links , well placed @ @ @ @ @ And it asked for your ideas .
Please offer them below .

“There will be a small office in London but maybe up by King’s Cross.”
With these words a senior source in Number Ten confirmed that it wants CCHQ out of Matthew Parker Street altogether and to move it to the North or the Midlands. But where?
This is where ConservativeHome’s readers come in.
Downing Street told us that the new venue should be “somewhere reasonably close to a university with good maths/physics departments (we should get a data team up there), good train links, well placed in political terms”.
And it asked for your ideas. Please offer them below.


conservativehome--2020-01-15--Job vacancy: ConservativeHome seeks a Deputy Editor


conservativehome--2020-01-15--Robert Halfon: Only the paranoid survive – especially in the world of Conservative politics

Robert Halfon is MP for Harlow , a former Conservative Party Deputy Chairman and President of Conservative Workers and Trade Unionists .
I haven ’ t yet read Dominic Cummings recommended tome , High Output Management by Andrew Grove , the extraordinarily successful , former Chief Executive of Intel .
For one thing , when I tried to order it a few weeks ago , it had mysteriously and temporarily sold out , probably because of a civil servant raid of Amazon .
I did , however , buy another book by Grove entitled , ‘ Only the Paranoid Survive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ temperament , anyway .
The core argument of this book is that , however successful a business or organisation may be , at any time it will face a ‘ Strategic Inflection Point ’ ( SIP ) – a major change or disruptor , that will see a competitor emerge with a new product , that could have huge impact on the viability and profitability on that business .
The SIP could come at any time and is often hard to predict .
It could happen at a time when the company is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the business fails to respond in the right way to the challenge , it ends up being swept away by the tsunami of the new SIP disruptor .
All through the book , there are examples of companies where this has happened , including SIPs facing his own organisation , Intel .
Although Only the Paranoid Survive was written in 1995 , Grove predicted the major disruptor effect of the internet , in terms of software , media and connectivity .
I can think of others .
Remember Blackberry ( I am one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – as I love keyboards ) ?
It used to be one of the most popular mobiles in the world and democratised email through handheld devices .
Yet in just a few years it lost its market share because the management failed to understand the rise of the Apple iPhone and the democratisation of smartphone apps .
By the time it did , it was too late .
Only a few years ago did Blackberry start selling mobiles with Android Apps .
Now , Blackberry is just basically a software security company and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of keypad android phones .
Grove argues that the best way to respond to SIPs is through open debate within the company , initial chaos and then a clear and unbending vision of how to succeed .
He notes that , “ all eggs should be put in one basket ” , rather than trying to do a bit of everything , seeking to please everyone .
He does warn , however , to “ watch the basket ” .
It is also important to listen to those middle-managers and sales force , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as they can often see best what is happening and identify emerging trends .
Interestingly , he notes that data , however important , is not everything .
You need instinct , anecdote , and emotional intelligence , too : “ You have to be able to argue with the data , when your experience and judgement suggest the emergence of force that may be too small to show up in the analysis that has the potential to grow so big as to change the rules your company operate by .
The point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you may very well go against the rational extrapolation of data and rely instead on anecdotal observations and your instincts.
” Why does this book matter ?
The answer lies in what Grove says about fear and complacency : “ Fear can be the opposite of complacency .
Complacency often afflicts precisely those who have been the most successful .
It is often found in companies that have honed the skills that are perfect for the environment .
But when the environment changes , these companies may be the slowest to respond @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may help sharpen the survival instincts.
” I have lost count as to how many Conservatives I have recently met or spoken to ( and I ’ m absolutely NOT including the brilliant , new , Northern MPs who have been elected – quite the opposite ) , who assume that we will be in power for the next ten to fifteen years and that it is all over for the Labour Party .
That worries me .
Not only is this not true psephologically , as recently highlighted by Lewis Baston in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faces major challenges ) , but Conservatives are also not winning younger voters to the cause .
Moreover , the Labour Party , a historical movement , is not going to be steeped in the mire of Corbynism forever .
At some point , they or something else , at an unpredictable moment in time , will represent a strategic inflection point to the Government .
Who is to say that if Labour elect a Corbynista person mark 2 , that individual will still be there in two years time ?
Half a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is why , continuous change and reform , both in Government and in campaigning , is vital , if Conservatives are to withstand a Strategic Inflection Point when it inevitably happens .
The electorate remain volatile .
Party tribal loyalties grow weaker every political day .
Huge voter swings in one direction one time , could become huge voter swings in another way the next .
It is worth reading this book .
As Grove notes – a man who survived Hungarian fascism , Nazism and Communism and arrived in the USA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complacency and can mean continued success .
Only the paranoid survive , especially in the world of Conservative politics .

Robert Halfon is MP for Harlow, a former Conservative Party Deputy Chairman and President of Conservative Workers and Trade Unionists.
I haven’t yet read Dominic Cummings recommended tome, High Output Management by Andrew Grove, the extraordinarily successful, former Chief Executive of Intel. For one thing, when I tried to order it a few weeks ago, it had mysteriously and temporarily sold out, probably because of a civil servant raid of Amazon. I did, however, buy another book by Grove entitled, ‘Only the Paranoid Survive’ – probably better suited to my temperament, anyway.
The core argument of this book is that, however successful a business or organisation may be, at any time it will face a ‘Strategic Inflection Point’ (SIP) – a major change or disruptor, that will see a competitor emerge with a new product, that could have huge impact on the viability and profitability on that business.
The SIP could come at any time and is often hard to predict. It could happen at a time when the company is seen as almost invincible, yet because the business fails to respond in the right way to the challenge, it ends up being swept away by the tsunami of the new SIP disruptor.
All through the book, there are examples of companies where this has happened, including SIPs facing his own organisation, Intel. Although Only the Paranoid Survive was written in 1995, Grove predicted the major disruptor effect of the internet, in terms of software, media and connectivity.
I can think of others. Remember Blackberry (I am one of the few that still have one – as I love keyboards)? It used to be one of the most popular mobiles in the world and democratised email through handheld devices. Yet in just a few years it lost its market share because the management failed to understand the rise of the Apple iPhone and the democratisation of smartphone apps. By the time it did, it was too late. Only a few years ago did Blackberry start selling mobiles with Android Apps. Now, Blackberry is just basically a software security company and contracts out to other companies the making of keypad android phones.
Grove argues that the best way to respond to SIPs is through open debate within the company, initial chaos and then a clear and unbending vision of how to succeed. He notes that, “all eggs should be put in one basket”, rather than trying to do a bit of everything, seeking to please everyone. He does warn, however, to “watch the basket”.
It is also important to listen to those middle-managers and sales force, i.e. those at the coalface, as they can often see best what is happening and identify emerging trends. Interestingly, he notes that data, however important, is not everything. You need instinct, anecdote, and emotional intelligence, too:
“You have to be able to argue with the data, when your experience and judgement suggest the emergence of force that may be too small to show up in the analysis that has the potential to grow so big as to change the rules your company operate by. The point is, when dealing with emerging trends, you may very well go against the rational extrapolation of data and rely instead on anecdotal observations and your instincts.”
Why does this book matter? The answer lies in what Grove says about fear and complacency:
“Fear can be the opposite of complacency. Complacency often afflicts precisely those who have been the most successful. It is often found in companies that have honed the skills that are perfect for the environment. But when the environment changes, these companies may be the slowest to respond properly. A good dose of fear may help sharpen the survival instincts.”
I have lost count as to how many Conservatives I have recently met or spoken to (and I’m absolutely NOT including the brilliant, new, Northern MPs who have been elected – quite the opposite), who assume that we will be in power for the next ten to fifteen years and that it is all over for the Labour Party. That worries me.
Not only is this not true psephologically, as recently highlighted by Lewis Baston in The Critic magazine (the Red Wall faces major challenges), but Conservatives are also not winning younger voters to the cause.
Moreover, the Labour Party, a historical movement, is not going to be steeped in the mire of Corbynism forever. At some point, they or something else, at an unpredictable moment in time, will represent a strategic inflection point to the Government. Who is to say that if Labour elect a Corbynista person mark 2, that individual will still be there in two years time? Half a decade is an eternity in politics.
This is why, continuous change and reform, both in Government and in campaigning, is vital, if Conservatives are to withstand a Strategic Inflection Point when it inevitably happens.
The electorate remain volatile. Party tribal loyalties grow weaker every political day. Huge voter swings in one direction one time, could become huge voter swings in another way the next.
It is worth reading this book. As Grove notes – a man who survived Hungarian fascism, Nazism and Communism and arrived in the USA as a penniless immigrant – fear stops complacency and can mean continued success. Only the paranoid survive, especially in the world of Conservative politics.


conservativehome--2020-01-15--Ian Courts: In Solihull, we are protecting the environment and increasing economic prosperity

Cllr Ian Courts is the Leader of Solihull Council and the Chairman of the Meriden Conservative Association .
Solihull has benefited from stable Conservative leadership for many years , with strong economic growth delivering gross value added above the national average .
This has allowed us to keep Council Tax rates at one of the lowest in the region .
Solihull has also received the accolade as the best place to live , work , invest , and spend leisure time in the region .
We are the home of a number of key regional economic assets , such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the NEC , the JLR Solihull plant , to name just a few , as well as several important business parks and a regionally important shopping centre .
Two thirds of our borough is Green Belt .
When the proposals for HS2 were first announced , Solihull Council developed its own response to maximising the benefit of having the first new HS2 station out of London in the borough .
This will be accomplished by a new economic strategy with the UK Central brand , as well as building a powerful economic zone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 40 mins from London .
The decision to move forward on HS2 needs to be taken .
The economic arguments are powerful enough , but the opportunity to free up so much more capacity on the existing train lines , for both passenger and freight services , must not be missed .
We need this extra capacity , to work with local public transport , if we want to deliver the low-carbon future that we now seek .
Solihull was instrumental in setting up the West Midlands Combined Authority ( WMCA ) in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time was its first chairman amongst a majority of Labour Leaders .
The identity of the West Midlands and strong sense of collaboration was reinforced when Andy Street was elected as the first Mayor in 2017 .
Each of the current Leaders has a portfolio role and I was pleased to take up Environment , Energy , and HS2 .
The question has been asked about whether HS2 is really a good bed-fellow with the other two .
However , Solihull Council and local people have fought hard to mitigate the effect on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the HS2 team has just not made enough of the significant environmental compensation work that they are doing .
In Solihull we have always been clear that economic growth from HS2 , our UK Central programme , and the West Midlands Economic Strategy , is the way to support our services and Inclusive Growth is an integral part of our approach .
Our comprehensive regeneration programme in the north of the borough involved the rebuilding of all its schools , two village centres , and another one in Kingshurst to follow , alongside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this work when the recession , at the end of the last government ’ s tenure , had caused other programmes to close .
A key policy emphasis since I took over as Leader in May has been the need for stronger action on climate change .
We have already cut our carbon emissions by nearly half in ten years and established a Climate Change ( Green ) Prospectus several years ago which addressed a number of themes including Greening the Economy , Energy and Resources , Buildings & Efficiency , Transport , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Education .
However , our ability to combat climate change depends upon the need to work with nature as well as retaining a prosperous market economy .
I commend the excellent work of the Conservative Environment Network in this .
Within a few weeks of taking over the WMCA portfolio , I was able to bring leaders of the seven Mets together on a cross party basis to make a Climate Change Declaration for the West Midlands Combined Authority .
Solihull Council ’ s own Declaration was also cross party and commits the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the borough as a whole by 2041 , in line with the regional target .
Conservatives have a majority of just one on the Council since May , down from 15 a year ago .
Our main opposition is the Green Party , which envisages a very different economic policy and administration to our own .
Apart from our own local elections in May , there will be an election for the post of the West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner .
Andy Street ’ s term of office also expires in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a continuation of his strong leadership in the region .
The recent General Election saw ex-Chamber of Commerce President , Saqib Bhatti elected as Conservative MP for Meriden , to take over from stalwart Dame Caroline Spelman , and the re-election of Julian Knight for the Solihull constituency .
The need for continued Conservative thinking both in Solihull and the West Midlands has never been stronger , to protect and foster sustainable and inclusive economic growth for our borough and the region as a whole , and to support our newly invigorated central @ @ @ @ @ @

Cllr Ian Courts is the Leader of Solihull Council and the Chairman of the Meriden Conservative Association.
Solihull has benefited from stable Conservative leadership for many years, with strong economic growth delivering gross value added above the national average. This has allowed us to keep Council Tax rates at one of the lowest in the region. Solihull has also received the accolade as the best place to live, work, invest, and spend leisure time in the region.
We are the home of a number of key regional economic assets, such as Birmingham Airport, Birmingham International Station, the NEC, the JLR Solihull plant, to name just a few, as well as several important business parks and a regionally important shopping centre. Two thirds of our borough is Green Belt.
When the proposals for HS2 were first announced, Solihull Council developed its own response to maximising the benefit of having the first new HS2 station out of London in the borough. This will be accomplished by a new economic strategy with the UK Central brand, as well as building a powerful economic zone and interconnected transport hub, less than 40 mins from London.
The decision to move forward on HS2 needs to be taken. The economic arguments are powerful enough, but the opportunity to free up so much more capacity on the existing train lines, for both passenger and freight services, must not be missed. We need this extra capacity, to work with local public transport, if we want to deliver the low-carbon future that we now seek.
Solihull was instrumental in setting up the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) in 2015 and our Conservative Leader at the time was its first chairman amongst a majority of Labour Leaders. The identity of the West Midlands and strong sense of collaboration was reinforced when Andy Street was elected as the first Mayor in 2017.
Each of the current Leaders has a portfolio role and I was pleased to take up Environment, Energy, and HS2. The question has been asked about whether HS2 is really a good bed-fellow with the other two. However, Solihull Council and local people have fought hard to mitigate the effect on the environment. In my opinion, the HS2 team has just not made enough of the significant environmental compensation work that they are doing. In Solihull we have always been clear that economic growth from HS2, our UK Central programme, and the West Midlands Economic Strategy, is the way to support our services and Inclusive Growth is an integral part of our approach.
Our comprehensive regeneration programme in the north of the borough involved the rebuilding of all its schools, two village centres, and another one in Kingshurst to follow, alongside housing and social programmes. We continued this work when the recession, at the end of the last government’s tenure, had caused other programmes to close.
A key policy emphasis since I took over as Leader in May has been the need for stronger action on climate change. We have already cut our carbon emissions by nearly half in ten years and established a Climate Change (Green) Prospectus several years ago which addressed a number of themes including Greening the Economy, Energy and Resources, Buildings & Efficiency, Transport, Natural Capital & biodiversity, Communication & Education. However, our ability to combat climate change depends upon the need to work with nature as well as retaining a prosperous market economy. I commend the excellent work of the Conservative Environment Network in this.
Within a few weeks of taking over the WMCA portfolio, I was able to bring leaders of the seven Mets together on a cross party basis to make a Climate Change Declaration for the West Midlands Combined Authority. Solihull Council’s own Declaration was also cross party and commits the Council to net carbon zero by 2030 and the borough as a whole by 2041, in line with the regional target.
Conservatives have a majority of just one on the Council since May, down from 15 a year ago. Our main opposition is the Green Party, which envisages a very different economic policy and administration to our own. Apart from our own local elections in May, there will be an election for the post of the West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner. Andy Street’s term of office also expires in May, and we need to see a continuation of his strong leadership in the region.
The recent General Election saw ex-Chamber of Commerce President, Saqib Bhatti elected as Conservative MP for Meriden, to take over from stalwart Dame Caroline Spelman, and the re-election of Julian Knight for the Solihull constituency. The need for continued Conservative thinking both in Solihull and the West Midlands has never been stronger, to protect and foster sustainable and inclusive economic growth for our borough and the region as a whole, and to support our newly invigorated central government led by Boris Johnson.


conservativehome--2020-01-15--Contest to be held for the Chairmanship of the 1922 Committee

A contest is to take place for the Chairmanship of the 1922 Committee of Conservative backbenchers .
The incumbent , @ @ @ @ @ being challenged by Bill Wiggin .
There is also a contest for two secretaries – @ @ @ @ @ Bob Blackman , Pauline Latham , William Wragg .
The Vice-Chairmen have been elected unopposed @ @ @ @ @ .
The election for the contested positions will take place on Monday from 2pm to @ @

A contest is to take place for the Chairmanship of the 1922 Committee of Conservative backbenchers.
The incumbent, Sir Graham Brady, is being challenged by Bill Wiggin.
There is also a contest for two secretaries – with three candidates standing: Bob Blackman, Pauline Latham, William Wragg. The Vice-Chairmen have been elected unopposed, as has the Treasurer.
These are Cheryl Gillan and Charles Walker, and Geoffrey Clifton-Brown.
The Executive is uncontested, as follows: Bernard Jenkin, Karl McCartney, James Davies, David Morris, Gary Sambrook, Pauline Latham, Sheryll Murray, William Wragg, Mark Pawsey, Jason McCartney.
Davies and Sambrook are members of the new intake of Tory MPs, which will thus be represented on the committee immediately.
Recent contests for the Chairmanship of the 1922 have seenh a candidate from the centre-left of the Parliamentary Party slug it out with a candidate from the centre-right.
Sir Graham was supported by the latter when he defeated Richard Ottoway in 2010. His predecessor, Michael Spicer, followed the same pattern when he beat Gillian Shepherd in 2001.
There is no such difference here. Both Sir Graham and Wiggin are from the centre-right of the Party. Wiggin is Chairman of the 92 Group, which in recent years has acted as an umbrella group for the right.
Both men are Brexiteers, and voted for Theresa May’s version of the Withdrawal Agreement third time round. Neither is a newcomer. Brady entered the Commons in 1997 and Wiggin in 2001.
A snap observation is that the contest shows a weakening of the Party’s centre-left in the wake of its broad support for Remain and a softer Brexit. The election for the contested positions will take place on Monday from 2pm to 5pm.


conservativehome--2020-01-15--Ben Roback: Can Johnson pull off a triumph – and bridge the gap between Trump and the EU on Iran?

Ben Roback is Head of Trade and International Policy at Cicero Group .
How do you solve a problem like Iran ?
You don ’ t , if ‘ you ’ refers to the individual .
As we enter a decade of national sovereignty – America First , Make in India , Belt & Road Initiative – there are still several geopolitical challenges that require global responses .
There is no better example than in the Middle East , where no single nation around the world is capable of unilaterally unwinding centuries of building tension .
Even the Americans found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ building a global coalition around the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action ( JCPOA ) to combat Iranian nuclear expansion .
Since then , Donald Trump has made Iran a central feature of his approach to foreign policy .
At the start of the New Year , this site ’ s Editor asked : ‘ Trump and Iran .
What ’ s the plan ?
’ .
Since then , tensions have both increased and thankfully cooled , but in truth we are no closer to finding an answer .
Go big or go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to foreign policy challenges often appears to be a binary choice : go big or go home .
In April 2017 , Trump ordered the ‘ Mother of all Bombs ’ to be dropped on an ISIS complex in Nangarhar province , Afghanistan .
The political benefit was palpable : 92 ISIS militants were killed , a figure often cited by the president in subsequent rallies and press conferences .
A fortnight ago , the President ordered an airstrike that killed Qasem Soleimani .
Less than ten days later , at a campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chunk of his speech detailing the fallout of the strike , while lambasting Democrats for not fully supporting the military action .
And yet there are countless examples of Trump looking to pull back from costly and often deadly feuds abroad.He took American allies by near total surprise when he abandoned Kurdish forces and withdrew US troops from northeast Syria – a move described by The Economist as a ‘ greenlight for Turkey to go after the Kurds , who bore the brunt of the US-led campaign against ISIS and lost 11,000 fighters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has even gone as far as saying the US ‘ should never have been in Middle East ’ .
It is perhaps lazy to assume that the President ’ s only foreign policy motivation is domestic political benefit , but beyond that the objective is less discernible .
Can a president really be for ‘ bringing our boys home ’ while also dropping bombs and ordering assassinations abroad ?
As Britain plots its proud new place on the world stage , there is much work to be done .
Brexit is often considered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but rarely viewed through a foreign policy prism .
Thought of in terms of Britain ’ s international place , Brexit is kaleidoscopic .
On services regulation , we want the freedom to diverge with the European Union and align ourselves closer to the Americans .
On fishing and farming , we want to be proudly British , breaking free from the shackles of the Common Agricultural Policy and set our own rules for our land and waters .
But what role do we want to play in Iran ?
Elsewhere , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Initiative like Italy , or firmly rebuff it at the insistence of Washington ?
Will we embrace the prospect of the greater Chinese investment associated with allowing Huawei access to the UK ’ s 5G infrastructure network , or will doing so ‘ sour relations with the US ’ ?
Those truly global challenges outscale even Brexit , and pose a more fundamental challenge to Britain ’ s future place on the world stage .
In seeking to answer many of these questions , we may find that we are caught between a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Free Trade Agreement with the United States remains one of the standout jewels in the Brexit crown , and this President could hardly be more enthusiastic about doing a deal with our Prime Minister .
Facing re-election in November , there is a clear and obvious incentive for the White House .
And yet Downing Street , the Foreign Office and the International Trade department must have all the balance , craft and guile of a ballerina in driving our trade negotiations while occasionally standing up to the Americans on foreign policy disagreements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a dilemma that will play out ad infinitum in 2020 and beyond .
This week , we chose to be European , and stood alongside the French and Germans in triggering a dispute mechanism in the Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action in relation to Iran .
Under the mechanism , the Joint Commission ( which is made up of representatives from every signatory ) will have 15 days to review the situation .
The future is uncertain .
Boris Johnson is seeking to be the aforementioned ballerina .
He wants to build @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Washington and Europe .
If the JCPOA is flawed and to be scrapped , it must be replaced by a comparable agreement , he argues .
There is no sign of that being a popular viewpoint in Washington , but the prime minister could have taken a step closer to answering the Editor ’ s question : What ’ s the plan ?
Trump is a man who prides himself on deal making .
If the JCPOA is to be scrapped , he might position himself as the foremost leader to negotiate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his seal of approval or he could recline further from the international stage – go big or go home .
Bridging the divide between Europe and Washington would represent a monumental foreign policy and diplomatic victory for the Prime Minister .
It would plant a proud British flag firmly on the world stage .

Ben Roback is Head of Trade and International Policy at Cicero Group.
How do you solve a problem like Iran? You don’t, if ‘you’ refers to the individual. As we enter a decade of national sovereignty – America First, Make in India, Belt & Road Initiative – there are still several geopolitical challenges that require global responses.
There is no better example than in the Middle East, where no single nation around the world is capable of unilaterally unwinding centuries of building tension. Even the Americans found that out under Barack Obama, in building a global coalition around the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) to combat Iranian nuclear expansion.
Since then, Donald Trump has made Iran a central feature of his approach to foreign policy. At the start of the New Year, this site’s Editor asked: ‘Trump and Iran. What’s the plan?’. Since then, tensions have both increased and thankfully cooled, but in truth we are no closer to finding an answer.
Go big or go home
The President’s knee-jerk reaction to foreign policy challenges often appears to be a binary choice: go big or go home.
In April 2017, Trump ordered the ‘Mother of all Bombs’ to be dropped on an ISIS complex in Nangarhar province, Afghanistan. The political benefit was palpable: 92 ISIS militants were killed, a figure often cited by the president in subsequent rallies and press conferences. A fortnight ago, the President ordered an airstrike that killed Qasem Soleimani. Less than ten days later, at a campaign rally in Wisconsin, he devoted a chunk of his speech detailing the fallout of the strike, while lambasting Democrats for not fully supporting the military action.
And yet there are countless examples of Trump looking to pull back from costly and often deadly feuds abroad.He took American allies by near total surprise when he abandoned Kurdish forces and withdrew US troops from northeast Syria – a move described by The Economist as a ‘greenlight for Turkey to go after the Kurds, who bore the brunt of the US-led campaign against ISIS and lost 11,000 fighters in the process’. The President has even gone as far as saying the US ‘should never have been in Middle East’.
It is perhaps lazy to assume that the President’s only foreign policy motivation is domestic political benefit, but beyond that the objective is less discernible. Can a president really be for ‘bringing our boys home’ while also dropping bombs and ordering assassinations abroad?
Between a rock and a hard place
As Britain plots its proud new place on the world stage, there is much work to be done. Brexit is often considered a political and regulatory challenge and opportunity, but rarely viewed through a foreign policy prism. Thought of in terms of Britain’s international place, Brexit is kaleidoscopic.
On services regulation, we want the freedom to diverge with the European Union and align ourselves closer to the Americans.
On fishing and farming, we want to be proudly British, breaking free from the shackles of the Common Agricultural Policy and set our own rules for our land and waters.
But what role do we want to play in Iran? Elsewhere, will we join the Belt and Road Initiative like Italy, or firmly rebuff it at the insistence of Washington? Will we embrace the prospect of the greater Chinese investment associated with allowing Huawei access to the UK’s 5G infrastructure network, or will doing so ‘sour relations with the US’?
Those truly global challenges outscale even Brexit, and pose a more fundamental challenge to Britain’s future place on the world stage. In seeking to answer many of these questions, we may find that we are caught between a rock and a hard place.
A Free Trade Agreement with the United States remains one of the standout jewels in the Brexit crown, and this President could hardly be more enthusiastic about doing a deal with our Prime Minister. Facing re-election in November, there is a clear and obvious incentive for the White House. And yet Downing Street, the Foreign Office and the International Trade department must have all the balance, craft and guile of a ballerina in driving our trade negotiations while occasionally standing up to the Americans on foreign policy disagreements.
Iran has proven a perfect microcosm of a dilemma that will play out ad infinitum in 2020 and beyond. This week, we chose to be European, and stood alongside the French and Germans in triggering a dispute mechanism in the Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action in relation to Iran. Under the mechanism, the Joint Commission (which is made up of representatives from every signatory) will have 15 days to review the situation. The future is uncertain.
Boris Johnson is seeking to be the aforementioned ballerina. He wants to build a traditional transatlantic bridge between foreign policy in Washington and Europe. If the JCPOA is flawed and to be scrapped, it must be replaced by a comparable agreement, he argues.
There is no sign of that being a popular viewpoint in Washington, but the prime minister could have taken a step closer to answering the Editor’s question: What’s the plan? Trump is a man who prides himself on deal making. If the JCPOA is to be scrapped, he might position himself as the foremost leader to negotiate a new and improved deal signed with his seal of approval or he could recline further from the international stage – go big or go home.
Bridging the divide between Europe and Washington would represent a monumental foreign policy and diplomatic victory for the Prime Minister. It would plant a proud British flag firmly on the world stage.


conservativehome--2020-01-15--Andrew Gimson’s PMQs sketch: Good King Boris triumphs over the doomsters

Good King Boris , a figure touched on here last week , today continued to baffle inquiry by agreeing to almost every supplication made to him .
It seems there is no Member of the House whom he is not prepared to meet , in order to discuss concerns which with royal magnanimity he thanks them for raising and fully shares himself .
Jeremy Corbyn made a valiant attempt , as Leader of the Opposition , to avoid succumbing to this charm offensive .
In a mournful voice , he wondered “ why after almost ten years of Tory government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ King Boris , who was only crowned last July , an elevation confirmed in December in an elaborate and ancient ceremony known as a general election , assured him , “ we will get those waiting lists down ” .
Corbyn raised the sad case of an RAF veteran who had to wait 12 hours on a trolley for treatment .
Good King Boris said Corbyn was right to highlight the case , but “ on the other hand ” , most people have “ a fantastic experience ” of the NHS , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ veteran waited is being rebuilt .
Always look on the bright side of life .
That is the essence of the Prime Minister ’ s message .
But Corbyn continued to look on the gloomy side of life : “ I understand another hospital has been closed to pay for it , ” he said in a melancholy drawl .
If Corbyn were going to be around for longer , he might develop an ability to patronise this ebullient young leader , and to suggest that all this optimism is not reflected in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ departments .
But Corbyn can never bear to stick to one point , and deviated into social care : “ Where ’ s the plan ?
” Good King Boris pretended to believe Corbyn wanted a joint approach to social care , and said that “ with the help and co-operation of the Labour Party ” it would surely be sorted out : “ I look forward to his support.
” Ian Blackford , for the Scottish Nationalists , accused the Prime Minister of being “ a democracy denier ” who is “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ” .
“ Change the record , ” Good King Boris retorted .
He has no time for “ the doubters , the doomsters , the gloomsters ” , as he called them last summer on his triumphal entry into Downing Street .
A great struggle between optimists and pessimists has broken out , and so far the optimists are winning .
Those of us who think of ourselves as Tory pessimists can not help feeling a bit disorientated .

Good King Boris, a figure touched on here last week, today continued to baffle inquiry by agreeing to almost every supplication made to him.
It seems there is no Member of the House whom he is not prepared to meet, in order to discuss concerns which with royal magnanimity he thanks them for raising and fully shares himself.
Jeremy Corbyn made a valiant attempt, as Leader of the Opposition, to avoid succumbing to this charm offensive.
In a mournful voice, he wondered “why after almost ten years of Tory government patients are waiting longer?”
Good King Boris, who was only crowned last July, an elevation confirmed in December in an elaborate and ancient ceremony known as a general election, assured him, “we will get those waiting lists down”.
Corbyn raised the sad case of an RAF veteran who had to wait 12 hours on a trolley for treatment. Good King Boris said Corbyn was right to highlight the case, but “on the other hand”, most people have “a fantastic experience” of the NHS, and the hospital in Leicester where the veteran waited is being rebuilt.
Always look on the bright side of life. That is the essence of the Prime Minister’s message.
But Corbyn continued to look on the gloomy side of life: “I understand another hospital has been closed to pay for it,” he said in a melancholy drawl.
If Corbyn were going to be around for longer, he might develop an ability to patronise this ebullient young leader, and to suggest that all this optimism is not reflected in the nation’s Accident and Emergency departments.
But Corbyn can never bear to stick to one point, and deviated into social care: “Where’s the plan?”
Good King Boris pretended to believe Corbyn wanted a joint approach to social care, and said that “with the help and co-operation of the Labour Party” it would surely be sorted out: “I look forward to his support.”
Ian Blackford, for the Scottish Nationalists, accused the Prime Minister of being “a democracy denier” who is “only interested in his union with Donald Trump”.
“Change the record,” Good King Boris retorted. He has no time for “the doubters, the doomsters, the gloomsters”, as he called them last summer on his triumphal entry into Downing Street.
A great struggle between optimists and pessimists has broken out, and so far the optimists are winning. Those of us who think of ourselves as Tory pessimists cannot help feeling a bit disorientated.


conservativehome--2020-01-15--WATCH: Corbyn challenges the Prime Minister’s plan for social care


conservativehome--2020-01-16--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the Tees Valley Local Enterprise


conservativehome--2020-01-16--Wiggin to challenge Brady for the Chairmanship of the 1922 Committee

A contest is to take place for the Chairmanship of the 1922 Committee of Conservative backbenchers .
The incumbent , Sir Graham Brady , is being challenged by Bill Wiggin .
There is also a contest for two secretaries – with three candidates standing : Bob Blackman , Pauline Latham , William Wragg .
The Vice-Chairmen have been elected unopposed , as has the Treasurer .
These are Cheryl Gillan and Charles Walker , and Geoffrey Clifton-Brown .
The Executive is uncontested , as follows : Bernard Jenkin , Karl McCartney , James Davies , David Morris , Gary Sambrook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ William Wragg , Mark Pawsey , Jason McCartney .
Davies and Sambrook are members of the new intake of Tory MPs , which will thus be represented on the committee immediately .
Recent contests for the Chairmanship of the 1922 have seenh a candidate from the centre-left of the Parliamentary Party slug it out with a candidate from the centre-right .
Sir Graham was supported by the latter when he defeated Richard Ottoway in 2010 .
His predecessor , Michael Spicer , followed the same pattern when he beat Gillian Shepherd in 2001 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Both Sir Graham and Wiggin are from the centre-right of the Party .
Wiggin is Chairman of the 92 Group , which in recent years has acted as an umbrella group for the right .
Both men are Brexiteers , and voted for Theresa May ’ s version of the Withdrawal Agreement third time round .
Neither is a newcomer .
Brady entered the Commons in 1997 and Wiggin in 2001 .
A snap observation is that the contest shows a weakening of the Party ’ s centre-left in the wake of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ softer Brexit .
The election for the contested positions will take place on Monday from 2pm to 5pm .


conservativehome--2020-01-16--Job vacancy: ConservativeHome seeks a Deputy Editor