conservativehome--2020-11-18--Corbyn’s re-admission to the Labour Party shows the limits of Starmer’s power to change it

For people used to the absolute monarchy ( ‘ moderated by regicide ) that is the Conservative Party , watching Labour much more feudal arrangements can be very odd .
Less than a month ago , Sir Keir Starmer was being fêted for taking decisive action against Jeremy Corbyn after the latter reacted to the Equality and Human Rights Commission ’ s investigation into anti-Semitism by once again downplaying the whole issue .
The message was clear : Labour had changed .
Yet today ’ s papers are full of reports of a fresh bout of Opposition infighting after the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to lift Corbyn ’ s suspension from party membership with only the mildest of sanctions .
Starmer ’ s defenders can make two points .
First , he has refused to restore the whip to Corbyn – although there is a quite arcane row over whether this is in fact him undoing an automatic restoration of the whip following the NEC ’ s decision .
Second , and related , is that whilst the whip is in his gift has leader he doesn ’ t control the NEC , which remains well-stocked with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ smell a rat .
Whilst the NEC panel is out of the leader ’ s hands , the decision on when to hear a case is usually determined by the General Secretary , whom Starmer appoints .
There was no reason Corbyn ’ s case needed to be heard so quickly , and Paul Waugh reports that his successor is now under fire for not waiting so all outstanding cases could be heard under the new , independent procedures ordered by the ECHR .
Instead , Starmer is accused in some quarters of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which the latter would accept sanction in exchange for being quietly re-admitted .
If so , it has blown up in his face .
This incomplete rehabilitation and second snub of their idol will be far more aggravating than simply leaving him in limbo would have been .

For people used to the absolute monarchy (‘moderated by regicide) that is the Conservative Party, watching Labour much more feudal arrangements can be very odd.
Less than a month ago, Sir Keir Starmer was being fêted for taking decisive action against Jeremy Corbyn after the latter reacted to the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s investigation into anti-Semitism by once again downplaying the whole issue. The message was clear: Labour had changed.
Yet today’s papers are full of reports of a fresh bout of Opposition infighting after the National Executive Committee (NEC) voted to lift Corbyn’s suspension from party membership with only the mildest of sanctions.
Starmer’s defenders can make two points. First, he has refused to restore the whip to Corbyn – although there is a quite arcane row over whether this is in fact him undoing an automatic restoration of the whip following the NEC’s decision. Second, and related, is that whilst the whip is in his gift has leader he doesn’t control the NEC, which remains well-stocked with Corbyn loyalists.
But his critics apparently smell a rat. Whilst the NEC panel is out of the leader’s hands, the decision on when to hear a case is usually determined by the General Secretary, whom Starmer appoints. There was no reason Corbyn’s case needed to be heard so quickly, and Paul Waugh reports that his successor is now under fire for not waiting so all outstanding cases could be heard under the new, independent procedures ordered by the ECHR.
Instead, Starmer is accused in some quarters of having struck a deal with Corbyn in which the latter would accept sanction in exchange for being quietly re-admitted. If so, it has blown up in his face. This incomplete rehabilitation and second snub of their idol will be far more aggravating than simply leaving him in limbo would have been.


conservativehome--2020-11-18--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Further Education Adviser – 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 .
“ As the independent regulator of public appointments made by ministers in the UK and Welsh governments , the Commissioner ’ s statutory functions are set out in the Public Appointments Order in Council 2019 .
The Order in Council also sets out those bodies and posts that are within the Commissioner ’ s regulatory remit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is to provide independent assurance that public appointments are made in accordance with the Governance Code for Public Appointments , including the Principles of Public Appointments .
The new Commissioner will need to work closely with a number of stakeholders including ( but not limited to ) UK and Welsh Government Ministers , Chairs of public bodies , senior officials/accounting officers in departments and officials in the Cabinet Office ’ s Public Appointments Policy team.
” “ The Prime Minister ’ s Council for Science and Technology ( CST ) is the Government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and technology issues .
It reports directly to the Prime Minister on matters of science and technology that cut across the responsibilities of government departments .
It is co-chaired by the Government Chief Scientific Adviser and an independent appointee .
The SARS-CoV-2 ( Covid-19 ) pandemic has highlighted the importance of science and technology in facing a challenge of such epic proportions , and in building a robust , sustainable , and equitable recovery plan for the UK , post Covid .
The Government is seeking to appoint a new Independent Co-Chair for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Government will appoint an Independent Co-Chair who will share responsibility for chairing the Council with the Government Chief Scientific Adviser ( GCSA ) .
” “ The Insolvency Service is an Executive Agency of the Department for Business , Energy and Industrial Strategy , responsible for helping to deliver economic confidence by supporting those in financial distress , tackling financial wrongdoing and maximising returns to creditors .
It employs around 1,700 staff operating from 22 locations across Great Britain .
We are seeking to appoint a new Chair of the Insolvency Service @ @ @ @ @ @ @ takes forward its programme of transformation , delivers key Government commitments , and continues its record of strong performance against the backdrop of an uncertain economy following the Covid-19 pandemic… Headed by the non-executive Chair , the Board currently comprises a mix of Executive and Non-Executive Directors .
The Board is collectively responsible for the oversight of the operation of the Insolvency Service , with particular emphasis on its strategic direction , management controls , and corporate governance.
” “ The Chair will provide strong and effective leadership of the Commission in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of CHM has to lead an expert science advisory committee whose principal tasks are to advise the Licensing Authority ( the UK Health Ministers ) and its executive arm , the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency ( MHRA ) , on matters relating to human medicinal products including the licensing of medicines that are safe , efficacious and of good quality .
The Chair needs to be able to synthesize complex information and present it authoritatively to ministers as required .
They have to be able to master a very wide range @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of which would be out of any one practitioner ’ s area of expertise , and chair to consensus a commission which comprises a range of eminent medical experts and some lay members.
” Remuneration : Up to £500 per meeting “ We are seeking to appoint a new Chair of the Royal Mint Advisory Committee , who will play a central role in the committee ’ s task of recommending designs for United Kingdom coins , official medals , seals and decorations .
The new chair will be responsible for leading numismatic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closely with Government departments , the Royal Household and the Royal Mint .
This role will involve leading all aspects of new and innovative ways of commemorating events , individuals and symbology of national significance in numismatic form .
The chair of the RMAC will lead and guide meetings of the committee , reaching consensus on various design proposals and ultimately advise HM Treasury , other government departments and the Crown on artistic excellence in design .
The RMAC chair is responsible for leading the committee in an ethical manner , acting impartially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delivery.. ” 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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.
” “ The Steering Board ’ s role is to : advise on external drivers , strategic direction and development of targets , within @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s objectives , BEIS and wider Government objectives ; bring an external perspective to provide a strategic challenge on the business and corporate plans and review and endorse the annual report and accounts for submission by the Accounting Officer ; advise on and provide independent assessment of performance , including process of setting of targets and performance against them ; advise on major business developments which imply a significant change in the Agency ’ s role or activities and on its exposure to and management of risk ; and to advocate and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ awareness of the work of the UK Space Agency with stakeholders and partners.
” “ As an FE Adviser , you will work as part of a team with the FE Commissioner , Deputy FE Commissioners and other Advisers .
FE Advisers are generally either finance or curriculum and quality specialists and we are looking for candidates from both backgrounds to help grow our team .
In this exciting and demanding role you will support colleges through carrying out Diagnostic Assessments , designed to help them to improve the quality of education for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the quality of leadership and reduce the risk of interventions… You will work as an integrated part of the Department for Education ( DfE ) ’ s overall approach to intervention , within the context of the ESFA case management approach .
As such you will work closely with teams within ESFA , as well as the wider DfE and Ofsted.
” Time : Up to 200 days per annum .
“ The Panel Chair will provide strategic direction and oversight for the Agricultural Advisory Panel for Wales .
Developing and maintaining a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ members of the Welsh agricultural sector is a crucial part of the Chair ’ s role .
The Panel Chair need not be an expert in the field of agriculture , he or she must have senior level experience in the private , public or voluntary sector .
The Panel Chair will have the following strategic leadership responsibilities : lead the formulation of the Panel ’ s strategy and business plans , monitoring in-year performance and examining change proposals with rigour to maintain delivery ; ensure issues are brought forward in a timely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Panel ’ s decisions are informed and fair , taking proper account of guidance provided by the Welsh Ministers and Welsh Government officials… ” “ 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 .

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.
– – – – – – – – – –
Commissioner for Public Appointments
“As the independent regulator of public appointments made by ministers in the UK and Welsh governments, the Commissioner’s statutory functions are set out in the Public Appointments Order in Council 2019. The Order in Council also sets out those bodies and posts that are within the Commissioner’s regulatory remit. The Commissioner’s primary role is to provide independent assurance that public appointments are made in accordance with the Governance Code for Public Appointments, including the Principles of Public Appointments. The new Commissioner will need to work closely with a number of stakeholders including (but not limited to) UK and Welsh Government Ministers, Chairs of public bodies, senior officials/accounting officers in departments and officials in the Cabinet Office’s Public Appointments Policy team.”
Time: 2 days per week on average.
Remuneration: £56,000 per annum.
Closes: 22 November
– – – – – – – – – –
Prime Minister’s Council for Science and Technology – Co-Chair
“The Prime Minister’s Council for Science and Technology (CST) is the Government’s top-level advisory body on science and technology issues. It reports directly to the Prime Minister on matters of science and technology that cut across the responsibilities of government departments. It is co-chaired by the Government Chief Scientific Adviser and an independent appointee. The SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) pandemic has highlighted the importance of science and technology in facing a challenge of such epic proportions, and in building a robust, sustainable, and equitable recovery plan for the UK, post Covid. The Government is seeking to appoint a new Independent Co-Chair for the Council for Science and Technology. The Government will appoint an Independent Co-Chair who will share responsibility for chairing the Council with the Government Chief Scientific Adviser (GCSA).”
Time: 2-3 days per month.
Remuneration: None.
Closes: 22 November
– – – – – – – – – –
Insolvency Service – Chair
“The Insolvency Service is an Executive Agency of the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, responsible for helping to deliver economic confidence by supporting those in financial distress, tackling financial wrongdoing and maximising returns to creditors. It employs around 1,700 staff operating from 22 locations across Great Britain. We are seeking to appoint a new Chair of the Insolvency Service Board to lead the organisation as it takes forward its programme of transformation, delivers key Government commitments, and continues its record of strong performance against the backdrop of an uncertain economy following the Covid-19 pandemic… Headed by the non-executive Chair, the Board currently comprises a mix of Executive and Non-Executive Directors. The Board is collectively responsible for the oversight of the operation of the Insolvency Service, with particular emphasis on its strategic direction, management controls, and corporate governance.”
Time: 20 days per annum.
Remuneration: £18,000.
Closes: 22 November
– – – – – – – – – –
Commission on Human Medicines – Chair
“The Chair will provide strong and effective leadership of the Commission in the fulfilment of its remit. The Chair of CHM has to lead an expert science advisory committee whose principal tasks are to advise the Licensing Authority (the UK Health Ministers) and its executive arm, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), on matters relating to human medicinal products including the licensing of medicines that are safe, efficacious and of good quality. The Chair needs to be able to synthesize complex information and present it authoritatively to ministers as required. They have to be able to master a very wide range of medical and pharmacological issues, many of which would be out of any one practitioner’s area of expertise, and chair to consensus a commission which comprises a range of eminent medical experts and some lay members.”
Time: Approx. 33 days per annum.
Remuneration: Up to £500 per meeting
Closes: 23 November
– – – – – – – – – –
Royal Mint Advisory Committee – Chair
“We are seeking to appoint a new Chair of the Royal Mint Advisory Committee, who will play a central role in the committee’s task of recommending designs for United Kingdom coins, official medals, seals and decorations. The new chair will be responsible for leading numismatic design in the United Kingdom, collaborating closely with Government departments, the Royal Household and the Royal Mint. This role will involve leading all aspects of new and innovative ways of commemorating events, individuals and symbology of national significance in numismatic form. The chair of the RMAC will lead and guide meetings of the committee, reaching consensus on various design proposals and ultimately advise HM Treasury, other government departments and the Crown on artistic excellence in design. The RMAC chair is responsible for leading the committee in an ethical manner, acting impartially, ensuring effective governance and excellence in delivery..”
Time: Six meetings per annum.
Remuneration: None.
Closes: 27 November
– – – – – – – – – –
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: 29 November
– – – – – – – – – –
UK Space Agency – Non-Executive Members/Audit Chair
“The Steering Board’s role is to: advise on external drivers, strategic direction and development of targets, within the framework of the UK Space Agency’s objectives, BEIS and wider Government objectives; bring an external perspective to provide a strategic challenge on the business and corporate plans and review and endorse the annual report and accounts for submission by the Accounting Officer; advise on and provide independent assessment of performance, including process of setting of targets and performance against them; advise on major business developments which imply a significant change in the Agency’s role or activities and on its exposure to and management of risk; and to advocate and advise in relation to the promotion and awareness of the work of the UK Space Agency with stakeholders and partners.”
Time: 20/22 days per annum.
Remuneration: £8,000/10,000 per annum honorarium.
Closes: 29 November
– – – – – – – – – –
Further Education Commissioner’s Team – Adviser
“As an FE Adviser, you will work as part of a team with the FE Commissioner, Deputy FE Commissioners and other Advisers. FE Advisers are generally either finance or curriculum and quality specialists and we are looking for candidates from both backgrounds to help grow our team. In this exciting and demanding role you will support colleges through carrying out Diagnostic Assessments, designed to help them to improve the quality of education for learners, strengthen financial resilience, improve the quality of leadership and reduce the risk of interventions… You will work as an integrated part of the Department for Education (DfE)’s overall approach to intervention, within the context of the ESFA case management approach. As such you will work closely with teams within ESFA, as well as the wider DfE and Ofsted.”
Time: Up to 200 days per annum.
Remuneration: £600 per diem.
Closes: 02 December
– – – – – – – – – –
Agricultural Advisory Panel (Wales) – Chair
“The Panel Chair will provide strategic direction and oversight for the Agricultural Advisory Panel for Wales. Developing and maintaining a close relationship with the Minister and key members of the Welsh agricultural sector is a crucial part of the Chair’s role. The Panel Chair need not be an expert in the field of agriculture, he or she must have senior level experience in the private, public or voluntary sector. The Panel Chair will have the following strategic leadership responsibilities: lead the formulation of the Panel’s strategy and business plans, monitoring in-year performance and examining change proposals with rigour to maintain delivery; ensure issues are brought forward in a timely manner for effective resolution; ensure that the Panel’s decisions are informed and fair, taking proper account of guidance provided by the Welsh Ministers and Welsh Government officials…”
Time: Minimum 12 days per annum.
Remuneration: £300 per diem plus reasonable expenses.
Closes: 04 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: 08 December


conservativehome--2020-11-18--If anyone can make this new Conservative policy role work well, it’s O’Brien

This site must shamelessly celebrate good news for its contributors .
And the promotion of Neil O ’ Brien is good news all round .
Our columnist is to head up a new Conservative Party Policy Board , as part of the shake-up that follows Dominic Cummings ’ departure from Downing Street , though the appointment would have been made in any event .
We stress that it will be a Party board to distinguish it both from David Cameron ’ s Downing Street Policy Board and Boris Johnson ’ s own Downing Street Policy Unit .
Keep up at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Prime Minister ’ s Policy Unit is headed by Munira Mirza , profiled recently on this site by Andrew Gimson , long-time Johnson aide , cultural conservative , and author of a well-argued piece for us defending Johnson ’ s renowned Daily Telegraph article about the burka .
The Unit is traditionally staffed by a mix of SpAds and civil servants , and is a long-time feature of Number Ten .
The best head of it under a Conservative Government to date has been John Redwood , who served under Margaret Thatcher @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Board came and went .
It was , according to who you listen to , either a productive attempt to involve Tory MPs more in policy-making , or else a hamster wheel to keep them busy and prevent them from making trouble elsewhere .
Jo Johnson chaired both it and Cameron ’ s Policy Unit , acting as a kind of door through which policy ideas passed from the first to the second .
At any rate , that Board is now a dead parrot , or rather hamster wheel , and this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ re told .
Rather , the new Policy Board will be a Party Board : O ’ Brien has also now become a Party Vice-Chairman , as is sometimes the way in these affairs .
It may have committees involving Conservative MPs , but the details are apparently “ in gestation ” .
All in all , the whole business has the smack about it of a rushed attempt by Number Ten to placate an unhappy Parliamentary Party before the details have been worked out .
How , too , will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
But if anyone can make sense of it all , O ’ Brien is the man .
As a working politician , he understands politicians .
As a policy wonk , he understands wonks .
And as a former SpAd , he understands what might work politically and what won ’ t .
O ’ Brien is a Huddersfield man , gloriously described by Yorkshire News as “ a previously obscure MP whom even political obsessives would have struggled to identify ” .
His form is MP for Harborough out of Treasury @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Business for Sterling .
His best-known production while at Policy Exchange was Northern Lights – a paper about the Tory challenge outside its south-east comfort zone .
It holds the key to his appointment , which is clearly meant to signal to Conservative MPs that Johnson is not about to give up on the Red Wall… …Though O ’ Brien has also been a thorough nuisance to the Government recently , exploding its proposed housing policy by means of his ConHome column , which he used ruthlessly to project the consequences for shire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tory backbenchers have risen in revolt , led by Theresa May , and the powers-that-be clearly decided that the Harborough MP must be shut up , and quickly .
It ’ s a bit of mystery why our columnist has not been promoted previously , since both the form and his talents suggest a Minister in the making .
So where does he fit politically ?
O ’ Brien is also involved with Onward , and a small group of politicos which has met occasionally to pursue the quest for a Holy Grail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exist .
Namely , to reconcile Red Wall conservatism to Notting Hill conservatism .
Other knights at this Round Table have included Nick Timothy and Rupert Harrison , George Osborne ’ s main adviser at the Treasury under the Coalition .
A study of his columns finds , inter alia , that O ’ Brien thinks that the University sector has grown too big , that vocational education is under-prized , and that the Tories can ’ t back off culture wars – interesting one , that .
He has also been instrumental @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these pullulating research groups – the China Research Group , which takes a hawkish position on the eastern power .
He is also a defender of lockdowns .
O ’ Brien must now steer his way through the reefs and rocks of Downing Street , the Parliamentary Party and , in particular , the 1922 Committee , which had its own policy group structure in place for the last election .
He is set to be the recipient of a hundred policy bouquets and a thousand policy thoughts from his colleagues .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As we say , no-one is better positioned to know which flowers to plump and primp in a vase , and which to crush to pieces in his fist – while smiling sweetly at the giver , and assuring him that they smell delightful .

This site must shamelessly celebrate good news for its contributors. And the promotion of Neil O’Brien is good news all round.
Our columnist is to head up a new Conservative Party Policy Board, as part of the shake-up that follows Dominic Cummings’ departure from Downing Street, though the appointment would have been made in any event.
We stress that it will be a Party board to distinguish it both from David Cameron’s Downing Street Policy Board and Boris Johnson’s own Downing Street Policy Unit. Keep up at the back there, will you?
The Prime Minister’s Policy Unit is headed by Munira Mirza, profiled recently on this site by Andrew Gimson, long-time Johnson aide, cultural conservative, and author of a well-argued piece for us defending Johnson’s renowned Daily Telegraph article about the burka.
The Unit is traditionally staffed by a mix of SpAds and civil servants, and is a long-time feature of Number Ten. The best head of it under a Conservative Government to date has been John Redwood, who served under Margaret Thatcher.
By contrast, Cameron’s Board came and went. It was, according to who you listen to, either a productive attempt to involve Tory MPs more in policy-making, or else a hamster wheel to keep them busy and prevent them from making trouble elsewhere.
Jo Johnson chaired both it and Cameron’s Policy Unit, acting as a kind of door through which policy ideas passed from the first to the second. At any rate, that Board is now a dead parrot, or rather hamster wheel, and this one won’t replace it, we’re told.
Rather, the new Policy Board will be a Party Board: O’Brien has also now become a Party Vice-Chairman, as is sometimes the way in these affairs.
It may have committees involving Conservative MPs, but the details are apparently “in gestation”. All in all, the whole business has the smack about it of a rushed attempt by Number Ten to placate an unhappy Parliamentary Party before the details have been worked out.
How, too, will it fit with Mirza’s unit? But if anyone can make sense of it all, O’Brien is the man. As a working politician, he understands politicians. As a policy wonk, he understands wonks. And as a former SpAd, he understands what might work politically and what won’t.
O’Brien is a Huddersfield man, gloriously described by Yorkshire News as “a previously obscure MP whom even political obsessives would have struggled to identify”.
His form is MP for Harborough out of Treasury SpAd out of Policy Exchange out of Business for Sterling. His best-known production while at Policy Exchange was Northern Lights – a paper about the Tory challenge outside its south-east comfort zone.
It holds the key to his appointment, which is clearly meant to signal to Conservative MPs that Johnson is not about to give up on the Red Wall…
…Though O’Brien has also been a thorough nuisance to the Government recently, exploding its proposed housing policy by means of his ConHome column, which he used ruthlessly to project the consequences for shire seats of the proposed housing algorithm.
Tory backbenchers have risen in revolt, led by Theresa May, and the powers-that-be clearly decided that the Harborough MP must be shut up, and quickly.
It’s a bit of mystery why our columnist has not been promoted previously, since both the form and his talents suggest a Minister in the making.
So where does he fit politically? O’Brien is also involved with Onward, and a small group of politicos which has met occasionally to pursue the quest for a Holy Grail which Rachel Wolf believes doesn’t exist.
Namely, to reconcile Red Wall conservatism to Notting Hill conservatism. Other knights at this Round Table have included Nick Timothy and Rupert Harrison, George Osborne’s main adviser at the Treasury under the Coalition.
A study of his columns finds, inter alia, that O’Brien thinks that the University sector has grown too big, that vocational education is under-prized, and that the Tories can’t back off culture wars – interesting one, that.
He has also been instrumental in the formation of yet another of these pullulating research groups – the China Research Group, which takes a hawkish position on the eastern power. He is also a defender of lockdowns.
O’Brien must now steer his way through the reefs and rocks of Downing Street, the Parliamentary Party and, in particular, the 1922 Committee, which had its own policy group structure in place for the last election.
He is set to be the recipient of a hundred policy bouquets and a thousand policy thoughts from his colleagues. We wish him well in this endeavour.
As we say, no-one is better positioned to know which flowers to plump and primp in a vase, and which to crush to pieces in his fist – while smiling sweetly at the giver, and assuring him that they smell delightful.


conservativehome--2020-11-18--Robert Halfon: Who’s up for a Southern Research Group?

Is it really true , as has been suggested over the past few days , that Conservatives can only appeal to either blue-collar voters or the professional classes – but not both ?
Those who know me will not doubt my commitment that the Conservative Party should be the party for workers ; indeed , I ’ ve written that about the Workers Party many times on this website .
But , my passion for the Workers Party does not mean that we can not , nor should not , appeal to the public in cities , as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Pudseys .
It seems to me there is confusion about so-called metropolitan views .
Of course , there is left-of-centre “ wokeist metropolitanism ” – a school of thought that is unlikely to ever vote Conservative , whatever policies the Government come up with .
But , protecting the NHS , cutting taxes for lower earners , freezing fuel duty , boosting skills and apprenticeships , helping small businesses , offering affordable housing ( such as the £12.2 billion investment announced recently by Robert Jenrick ) and Help to Buy schemes are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the ‘ anywheres ’ divide , as noted by David Goodhart .
Even measures on environmental issues , for example , can have widespread appeal , so long as they are not balanced on the backs of the poor ( such as ever-increasing energy bills due to “ green ” taxes ) and are focused on a cleaner , greener Britain ( including cleaning up our beaches , tackling litter and safeguarding our forests and countryside ) .
Those who are more sceptical about Brexit might be a bit more optimistic if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ once we ’ re out of the transition period and we control our own VAT rates .
Similarly , Overseas Aid .
At a time when our public services at home are financially strained , spending huge amounts on international development is extremely frustrating to many voters .
However , it could be made more palatable if taxpayers money was used to fund thousands of British apprentices to work overseas in developing countries , or even to support our armed forces in some of their peacekeeping roles .
It is dangerous if we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one group of citizens or class over another .
If the Conservatives are truly the One Nation Party , the Government needs to find political fusion .
Whilst , thanks to Boris Johnson , the Conservatives have a solid majority , to be diminished as we are in the great cities like London is neither healthy nor desirable for our party in the long run .
Yes , absolutely a Workers Party…but a Workers Party that represents young professionals as much as white van men and women .
Please don ’ t forget @ @ @ @ @ @ @ either I don ’ t think a day goes by when I don ’ t read the words “ Red Wall ” in a national newspaper .
Don ’ t get me wrong , I am as delighted as any Conservative by how we won so many seats in the North .
All the more extraordinary given the long-standing Labour MPs that were deposed .
I would , of course , prefer it if the media wrote about the “ Blue Wall ” rather than red .
But , my point is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the media classes should not forget the Southern side of the ‘ blue wall ’ either .
The politicos and the press seem to be under the illusion that the South is paved with gold ; that there are no road , rail and infrastructure issues ; that every pothole is magically filled , and that no one lives in poverty .
What about the deprivation and lower educational attainment in the Southern New Towns , coastal communities , inner cities , rural coldspots ?
The Centre for Education and Youth ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Attainment , poverty and rural schools ’ , found that in areas designated as “ countryside living ” – a vast proportion of the South West – the correlation between the proportion of pupils on Free School Meals and their attainment 8 scores was 0.58 – the highest of all types of local authority area .
In other words , “ rural schools have particular difficulty breaking the link between poverty and low pupil attainment ” .
Seaside village Jaywick , in Essex , was named the most deprived area overall for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2019 .
We also know , from the Social Market Foundation ’ s 2019 research , Falling off a cliff , that average employee annual pay in coastal communities was about £4,700 lower than in the rest of Britain in 2018 .
These areas also saw “ much weaker economic growth since the financial crisis than other parts of the country ” which will demand urgent Government attention as we emerge from the Covid-19 pandemic .
Does the South not feature in policy making ?
Perhaps if there was a Southern side-of-the-wall Research @ @ @ @ @ @ @ invited to breakfast at Number 10 and policy meetings with Ministers .
Anyone for another MP Whatsapp group ?
Perhaps we have enough already .
As I wrote in the first section of this article , we must be careful not to ‘ politic ’ or govern in silos .
We should not Balkanise the Tory Party .
Conservatives must genuinely be a One Nation party for all our country – not just parts of it .
Given the name of this website , I suspect many readers are fully in favour of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parent decides .
Although personally I think a child is better off at school – not just for daily education , activities , wellbeing and socialisation with other pupils , I also believe in a free society by which we support parents ’ decisions about educating their child .
Clearly , many parents who teach their children at home give them a wonderful education .
However , this is not always the case across the board .
The Department for Education has a duty to ensure that every child has a proper education @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because the child is learning from home .
There should be a national register or regular inspections to ensure that these pupils are getting the education they need for their futures .
Perhaps , each home educated child could be linked to a nearby school for this purpose .
These are all matters that my Education Select Committee is considering as we begin an inquiry into home education .
Rightly , schools are held accountable for the learning and environment they provide , whether that be through Ofsted , local councils , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Education ( DfE ) .
So , too , must there be transparency and accountability for parents providing an education to their children at home .
The DfE should have a national register of all home educated children and gather data to assess levels of attainment .
In a recent report on home education , the Local Government Association stated : Whilst many parents educate their home educated children to the best of their ability , and with much success , there are too many children falling through the cracks .
It is @ @ @ @ @ @

Political fusion
Is it really true, as has been suggested over the past few days, that Conservatives can only appeal to either blue-collar voters or the professional classes – but not both?
Those who know me will not doubt my commitment that the Conservative Party should be the party for workers; indeed, I’ve written that about the Workers Party many times on this website.
But, my passion for the Workers Party does not mean that we cannot, nor should not, appeal to the public in cities, as well as towns – the Putneys as well as the Pudseys.
It seems to me there is confusion about so-called metropolitan views. Of course, there is left-of-centre “wokeist metropolitanism” – a school of thought that is unlikely to ever vote Conservative, whatever policies the Government come up with.
But, protecting the NHS, cutting taxes for lower earners, freezing fuel duty, boosting skills and apprenticeships, helping small businesses, offering affordable housing (such as the £12.2 billion investment announced recently by Robert Jenrick) and Help to Buy schemes are policies that transcend the ‘somewheres’ and the ‘anywheres’ divide, as noted by David Goodhart.
Even measures on environmental issues, for example, can have widespread appeal, so long as they are not balanced on the backs of the poor (such as ever-increasing energy bills due to “green” taxes) and are focused on a cleaner, greener Britain (including cleaning up our beaches, tackling litter and safeguarding our forests and countryside). Those who are more sceptical about Brexit might be a bit more optimistic if they could see the reduction in VAT once we’re out of the transition period and we control our own VAT rates.
Similarly, Overseas Aid. At a time when our public services at home are financially strained, spending huge amounts on international development is extremely frustrating to many voters. However, it could be made more palatable if taxpayers money was used to fund thousands of British apprentices to work overseas in developing countries, or even to support our armed forces in some of their peacekeeping roles.
It is dangerous if we are perceived to be identifying solely with one group of citizens or class over another. If the Conservatives are truly the One Nation Party, the Government needs to find political fusion. Whilst, thanks to Boris Johnson, the Conservatives have a solid majority, to be diminished as we are in the great cities like London is neither healthy nor desirable for our party in the long run. Yes, absolutely a Workers Party…but a Workers Party that represents young professionals as much as white van men and women.
Please don’t forget the Southern side of the Blue Wall either
I don’t think a day goes by when I don’t read the words “Red Wall” in a national newspaper. Don’t get me wrong, I am as delighted as any Conservative by how we won so many seats in the North. All the more extraordinary given the long-standing Labour MPs that were deposed. I would, of course, prefer it if the media wrote about the “Blue Wall” rather than red.
But, my point is a different one. Both the Government and the media classes should not forget the Southern side of the ‘blue wall’ either. The politicos and the press seem to be under the illusion that the South is paved with gold; that there are no road, rail and infrastructure issues; that every pothole is magically filled, and that no one lives in poverty.
What about the deprivation and lower educational attainment in the Southern New Towns, coastal communities, inner cities, rural coldspots?
The Centre for Education and Youth’s 2019 report, ‘Breaking the Link? Attainment, poverty and rural schools’, found that in areas designated as “countryside living” – a vast proportion of the South West – the correlation between the proportion of pupils on Free School Meals and their attainment 8 scores was 0.58 – the highest of all types of local authority area. In other words, “rural schools have particular difficulty breaking the link between poverty and low pupil attainment”.
Seaside village Jaywick, in Essex, was named the most deprived area overall for the third time in a row in 2019. We also know, from the Social Market Foundation’s 2019 research, Falling off a cliff, that average employee annual pay in coastal communities was about £4,700 lower than in the rest of Britain in 2018. These areas also saw “much weaker economic growth since the financial crisis than other parts of the country” which will demand urgent Government attention as we emerge from the Covid-19 pandemic.
Does the South not feature in policy making? Perhaps if there was a Southern side-of-the-wall Research Group, then these MPs might be invited to breakfast at Number 10 and policy meetings with Ministers. Anyone for another MP Whatsapp group? Perhaps we have enough already.
As I wrote in the first section of this article, we must be careful not to ‘politic’ or govern in silos. We should not Balkanise the Tory Party. Conservatives must genuinely be a One Nation party for all our country – not just parts of it.
Home education
Given the name of this website, I suspect many readers are fully in favour of home education if that is what a parent decides. Although personally I think a child is better off at school – not just for daily education, activities, wellbeing and socialisation with other pupils, I also believe in a free society by which we support parents’ decisions about educating their child. Clearly, many parents who teach their children at home give them a wonderful education. However, this is not always the case across the board.
The Department for Education has a duty to ensure that every child has a proper education – that doesn’t stop just because the child is learning from home. There should be a national register or regular inspections to ensure that these pupils are getting the education they need for their futures. Perhaps, each home educated child could be linked to a nearby school for this purpose. These are all matters that my Education Select Committee is considering as we begin an inquiry into home education.
Rightly, schools are held accountable for the learning and environment they provide, whether that be through Ofsted, local councils, the regional school commissioners or the Department for Education (DfE). So, too, must there be transparency and accountability for parents providing an education to their children at home. The DfE should have a national register of all home educated children and gather data to assess levels of attainment.
In a recent report on home education, the Local Government Association stated:
“Using evidence provided by councils, school leaders and parents, the LGA estimates that in 2018/19, 282,000 children in England may have missed out on formal full-time education – around 2 per cent of the school age population – but this figure could be as high as 1.14 million depending on how ‘formal’ and ‘full-time’ is defined…. gaps in the coordination of policies and guidance around pupil registration, attendance, admissions, exclusions and non-school education is allowing children to slip through the net, with children with additional vulnerabilities – such as social, behavioural, medical or mental health needs – most at risk of doing so.”
Whilst many parents educate their home educated children to the best of their ability, and with much success, there are too many children falling through the cracks. It is right that there are changes.


conservativehome--2020-11-18--Rakhia Ismail: I was a Labour Councillor in Islington for nine years. Here’s why I’ve joined the Con

Rakhia Ismail: I was a Labour Councillor in Islington for nine years. Here’s why I’ve joined the Conservatives.

I was a Labour Councillor for nine years and the Mayor of Islington for one year .
Now I ’ ve joined the Conservatives .
It ’ s time more people knew why .
Let ’ s start at the beginning .
I was born in Somalia , a country plagued by violence and lawlessness , a country so dangerous that I needed to escape .
I arrived in London as a refugee looking for a safer , better life .
I fell in love with this city straight away .
I fell in love with the people , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in doing the right thing , and working hard .
Trust me when I say it ’ s a completely different life to the one I escaped .
I managed to go to university and become the first hijab-wearing Somali councillor and Mayor in the UK .
So I wanted to use my experience to give back to my adopted home .
I wanted to use my experience to help Londoners with the problems they face .
That ’ s why I joined the Labour Party .
That ’ s why I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s why I was honoured to be elected Mayor of Islington , which was great news for both the Somali community and Muslim community .
After all , my experience means I understand London ’ s problems .
My attachment to this country means I care deeply about the issues Londoners face .
But my race meant Labour only ever saw me as the black candidate , one there to tick a box .
This may upset some people in Labour .
Sadly , I ’ ve learned that the truth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some MPs in Parliament , to some members who aren ’ t as kind and gentle as they claim to be .
The fact is I was made to feel like a token candidate , someone picked not for my principles and values and long-standing community activism , but for the colour of my skin .
Someone who was supposed to be seen and not heard .
And that ’ s not Rakhia Ismail .
When I spoke out about knife crime , Labour weren ’ t interested .
When I spoke out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turned a blind eye .
When I tried to represent Londoners on the issues they care about , Labour essentially told me to know my place .
These weren ’ t just one-off incidents .
They happened all the time .
In 2019 , I was invited to Labour ’ s first National Women ’ s Conference .
The invitation they sent listed my address as ‘ Somalia ’ .
This can ’ t have been an accident , given I ’ d never listed my address as Somalia .
It was an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had been picked to prove Labour ’ s diversity but had turned out to have a mind of her own with vision and courage .
And while the Labour Party are very quick to accuse others of racism , they ’ re much slower to see it in their own ranks .
Islamophobia is rife in Labour .
As the UK ’ s first hijab-wearing Mayor , I wanted to organise a celebration for Eid in 2019 ; Labour bigwigs managed to cancel it , crushing the hopes of thousands of young British @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a party that virtue signals on issues such as race but in reality , take no action to address inequalities .
I ’ m not someone who believes in just doing what she ’ s told .
Would you stay quiet when Londoners are worried about their safety ?
Would you ignore the countless times that some elected Labour representatives discriminated against a woman of colour ?
I thought I had joined the party of fairness and equality .
But I realised I ’ d joined a party that thought discrimination was okay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing it .
It was around this time , when I was Labour Mayor of Islington and increasingly unhappy , that I started to hear things about Shaun Bailey .
It ’ s no secret that Labour voters are fed up with Sadiq Khan , a Mayor with big responsibilities and absolutely no intention of living up to them .
But not many Labour voters were talking about Shaun – at least not back then .
So I made it my business to find out .
And I discovered that , like me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Born in a council house , raised by a single mum , he went through periods of homelessness and unemployment .
He didn ’ t arrive in politics from a thinktank or PR firm .
He spent twenty years as a youth worker , helping young people get out of crime and into work .
Shaun is different to any politician I ’ ve seen .
He doesn ’ t read from a script .
He doesn ’ t play political games .
He ’ s stared down discrimination .
He ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the challenges we face .
And , as I ’ ve learned , he would never silence anyone trying to do their job .
The more I heard about Shaun and the more I heard him speak , the more inspired I became .
Shaun is everything that Sadiq Khan is not .
Where Sadiq just cares about politics , Shaun cares about people and the issues that matter to Londoners .
Where Sadiq Khan just cares about his next press release , Shaun cares about getting things done .
I realised that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Shaun .
I didn ’ t support Sadiq during selections to be the London mayoral candidate and there ’ s absolutely no chance I could support him this time .
I was discriminated against by some elected Labour officials .
I couldn ’ t speak out about the issues that matter to my residents .
And I was excited at the idea of Shaun becoming Mayor .
He has the same vision , passion , compassion , and commitment to London that I have .
That ’ s why I quit the Labour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I am so thrilled to team up with Shaun .
And over the next few months , we ’ re going to work together and give Londoners the bold vision that this city deserves .
I am an optimistic and forward-looking person .
And I can see Shaun is the one to restore hope and faith for all Londoners , the one to deliver a safer , fairer , more affordable city .
Which is exactly what Londoners care about — and exactly what my voters care about .
I am counting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help elect Shaun Bailey , the Mayor that London deserves .

Cllr Rakhia Ismail represents Holloway Ward on Islington Council.
I was a Labour Councillor for nine years and the Mayor of Islington for one year. Now I’ve joined the Conservatives. It’s time more people knew why.
Let’s start at the beginning. I was born in Somalia, a country plagued by violence and lawlessness, a country so dangerous that I needed to escape. I arrived in London as a refugee looking for a safer, better life.
I fell in love with this city straight away. I fell in love with the people, the surroundings, the belief in fair play, in doing the right thing, and working hard. Trust me when I say it’s a completely different life to the one I escaped. I managed to go to university and become the first hijab-wearing Somali councillor and Mayor in the UK.
So I wanted to use my experience to give back to my adopted home. I wanted to use my experience to help Londoners with the problems they face. That’s why I joined the Labour Party. That’s why I stood for my local council. And that’s why I was honoured to be elected Mayor of Islington, which was great news for both the Somali community and Muslim community.
After all, my experience means I understand London’s problems. My attachment to this country means I care deeply about the issues Londoners face. But my race meant Labour only ever saw me as the black candidate, one there to tick a box.
This may upset some people in Labour. Sadly, I’ve learned that the truth often upsets people in Labour — from some MPs in Parliament, to some members who aren’t as kind and gentle as they claim to be. The fact is I was made to feel like a token candidate, someone picked not for my principles and values and long-standing community activism, but for the colour of my skin. Someone who was supposed to be seen and not heard. And that’s not Rakhia Ismail.
When I spoke out about knife crime, Labour weren’t interested. When I spoke out about discrimination in the party, Labour turned a blind eye. When I tried to represent Londoners on the issues they care about, Labour essentially told me to know my place.
These weren’t just one-off incidents. They happened all the time. In 2019, I was invited to Labour’s first National Women’s Conference. The invitation they sent listed my address as ‘Somalia’. This can’t have been an accident, given I’d never listed my address as Somalia. It was an attack on a woman of colour who had been picked to prove Labour’s diversity but had turned out to have a mind of her own with vision and courage.
And while the Labour Party are very quick to accuse others of racism, they’re much slower to see it in their own ranks. Islamophobia is rife in Labour. As the UK’s first hijab-wearing Mayor, I wanted to organise a celebration for Eid in 2019; Labour bigwigs managed to cancel it, crushing the hopes of thousands of young British Muslims in Islington. I was fighting a party that virtue signals on issues such as race but in reality, take no action to address inequalities.
I’m not someone who believes in just doing what she’s told. Would you stay quiet when Londoners are worried about their safety? Would you ignore the countless times that some elected Labour representatives discriminated against a woman of colour? I thought I had joined the party of fairness and equality. But I realised I’d joined a party that thought discrimination was okay as long as they were the ones doing it.
It was around this time, when I was Labour Mayor of Islington and increasingly unhappy, that I started to hear things about Shaun Bailey. It’s no secret that Labour voters are fed up with Sadiq Khan, a Mayor with big responsibilities and absolutely no intention of living up to them. But not many Labour voters were talking about Shaun – at least not back then.
So I made it my business to find out. And I discovered that, like me, Shaun had a tough early life. Born in a council house, raised by a single mum, he went through periods of homelessness and unemployment. He didn’t arrive in politics from a thinktank or PR firm. He spent twenty years as a youth worker, helping young people get out of crime and into work.
Shaun is different to any politician I’ve seen. He doesn’t read from a script. He doesn’t play political games. He’s stared down discrimination. He’s not afraid to speak out about the challenges we face. And, as I’ve learned, he would never silence anyone trying to do their job.
The more I heard about Shaun and the more I heard him speak, the more inspired I became. Shaun is everything that Sadiq Khan is not. Where Sadiq just cares about politics, Shaun cares about people and the issues that matter to Londoners. Where Sadiq Khan just cares about his next press release, Shaun cares about getting things done.
I realised that I had no choice but to back Shaun. I didn’t support Sadiq during selections to be the London mayoral candidate and there’s absolutely no chance I could support him this time. I was discriminated against by some elected Labour officials. I couldn’t speak out about the issues that matter to my residents. And I was excited at the idea of Shaun becoming Mayor. He has the same vision, passion, compassion, and commitment to London that I have.
That’s why I quit the Labour Party for good and joined the Conservatives. I am so thrilled to team up with Shaun. And over the next few months, we’re going to work together and give Londoners the bold vision that this city deserves.
I am an optimistic and forward-looking person. And I can see Shaun is the one to restore hope and faith for all Londoners, the one to deliver a safer, fairer, more affordable city. Which is exactly what Londoners care about — and exactly what my voters care about. I am counting on you to campaign with us and help elect Shaun Bailey, the Mayor that London deserves.


conservativehome--2020-11-18--The proposed foreign aid cut. Many Tories are against it. But Sunak has limited options as he tries

The proposed foreign aid cut. Many Tories are against it. But Sunak has limited options as he tries to salvage the economy.

Given the Coronavirus crisis is estimated to have cost the UK £210 billion and counting , the Government is under enormous pressure to explain how it will pay its debt back .
One of the ways Rishi Sunak is reportedly planning to do this is by cutting foreign aid , which he is expected to announce in a spending review next week .
Currently , the UK spends 0.7 per cent of gross national income on foreign aid , a target that is recommended by the United Nations and was written into law when David Cameron was in office .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ this down to 0.5 per cent .
The Prime Minister ’ s official spokesman said of the idea : “ we are looking at how the aid budget is spent , ensuring it serves the UK ’ s priorities and represents value for money .
It is legitimate to consider where savings can be made when the public finances are under huge strain.
” Several prominent Conservatives have opposed the move .
Tobias Ellwood , Tory chairman of the Commons defence committee , said : “ The damage would be we are retreating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time when we should be doing exactly the opposite.
” Jeremy Hunt and Bob Neill are also against it , as is Dominic Raab , the Foreign Secretary , apparently , who previously dismissed reports it would be cut as “ tittle tattle ” .
Cameron ’ s disapproval has been made known in several newspapers .
One concern is that a reduction would harm international relations .
Andrew Mitchell , former international development secretary , said : “ It would be an extraordinary decision at the very point at which Britain is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the G7 , with a new administration in the White House which will strongly champion the international system ” , and Anthony Mangnall , the Tory MP for Totnes , echoed these concerns .
Others point out the moral case for keeping foreign aid as it is , given that the pandemic is when the world ’ s poorest people need help the most .
Even before the cut was suggested , the Government was due to spend less than its anticipated £15.8 billion this year , due to a contraction in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sums on the flawed contact tracing app , PPE , and other Covid projects , some might call foreign aid a drop in the ocean .
And yet , others will say the cut is necessary at a time of intense national need .
Given the Conservatives won last year ’ s election with a manifesto based on “ levelling up ” the UK , by way of domestic investment and infrastructure , the Government no doubt believes voters want this to be reflected when the Chancellor plans the economic recovery .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cent , it ’ s also worth remembering that the UK will still be one of the biggest global contributors to foreign aid .
In 2019 and 2018 , it was one of only five countries to hit the UN ’ s 0.7 per cent aid target ( level with Denmark , but below Luxembourg , Norway and Sweden ) , and there ’ s an argument that other countries need to increase their spending .
New Zealand , Canada , Japan and the USA have not reached 0.5 per cent , never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is understood that Boris Johnson wants this to be a time-limited measure , with a return to 0.7 per cent .
In the interim , the UK can make a sizeable difference is by helping to facilitate the global supply of vaccines .
Either way , this is just the beginning of Sunak having to make some incredibly unpopular decisions about how to salvage the economy .
Having become one of the most popular politicians in a staggeringly short period of time , he is now going to deliver policies that elicit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Help Out .
There is no painless way out of this .
The next few months are going to be testing for the Chancellor to say the least .

Given the Coronavirus crisis is estimated to have cost the UK £210 billion and counting, the Government is under enormous pressure to explain how it will pay its debt back. One of the ways Rishi Sunak is reportedly planning to do this is by cutting foreign aid, which he is expected to announce in a spending review next week.
Currently, the UK spends 0.7 per cent of gross national income on foreign aid, a target that is recommended by the United Nations and was written into law when David Cameron was in office. But the Chancellor apparently wants to bring this down to 0.5 per cent. The Prime Minister’s official spokesman said of the idea: “we are looking at how the aid budget is spent, ensuring it serves the UK’s priorities and represents value for money. It is legitimate to consider where savings can be made when the public finances are under huge strain.”
Several prominent Conservatives have opposed the move. Tobias Ellwood, Tory chairman of the Commons defence committee, said: “The damage would be we are retreating from the global stage at the very time when we should be doing exactly the opposite.” Jeremy Hunt and Bob Neill are also against it, as is Dominic Raab, the Foreign Secretary, apparently, who previously dismissed reports it would be cut as “tittle tattle”. Cameron’s disapproval has been made known in several newspapers.
One concern is that a reduction would harm international relations. Andrew Mitchell, former international development secretary, said: “It would be an extraordinary decision at the very point at which Britain is about to take over the chairmanship of the G7, with a new administration in the White House which will strongly champion the international system”, and Anthony Mangnall, the Tory MP for Totnes, echoed these concerns.
Others point out the moral case for keeping foreign aid as it is, given that the pandemic is when the world’s poorest people need help the most. Even before the cut was suggested, the Government was due to spend less than its anticipated £15.8 billion this year, due to a contraction in the economy. When Conservatives have spent tremendous sums on the flawed contact tracing app, PPE, and other Covid projects, some might call foreign aid a drop in the ocean.
And yet, others will say the cut is necessary at a time of intense national need. Given the Conservatives won last year’s election with a manifesto based on “levelling up” the UK, by way of domestic investment and infrastructure, the Government no doubt believes voters want this to be reflected when the Chancellor plans the economic recovery.
If there is a cut to 0.5 per cent, it’s also worth remembering that the UK will still be one of the biggest global contributors to foreign aid. In 2019 and 2018, it was one of only five countries to hit the UN’s 0.7 per cent aid target (level with Denmark, but below Luxembourg, Norway and Sweden), and there’s an argument that other countries need to increase their spending. New Zealand, Canada, Japan and the USA have not reached 0.5 per cent, never mind 0.7 per cent.
Furthermore, it is understood that Boris Johnson wants this to be a time-limited measure, with a return to 0.7 per cent. In the interim, the UK can make a sizeable difference is by helping to facilitate the global supply of vaccines.
Either way, this is just the beginning of Sunak having to make some incredibly unpopular decisions about how to salvage the economy. Having become one of the most popular politicians in a staggeringly short period of time, he is now going to deliver policies that elicit completely the opposite response to Eat Out to Help Out. There is no painless way out of this. The next few months are going to be testing for the Chancellor to say the least.


conservativehome--2020-11-18--Andrew Gimson’s PMQs sketch: The Commons has lost its power to hold the absent Johnson to account

Today ’ s PMQs was about as much use as a game of cricket where the batsman does not actually have to stand at the crease and face the bowling .
There was no danger the Prime Minister would lose his wicket or get hit .
Boris Johnson was not there .
He appeared instead on a screen , and announced that in order to comply with the rules for dealing with the pandemic he is holding “ virtual meetings ” and performing “ virtual duties ” .
An indispensable quality of the Commons is that it is dangerous .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ hide .
Within a second or two , he or she can suffer grievous embarrassment , by failing to make a proper case for whatever the Government is doing .
No vote has yet been lost , but already the House has been lost .
The minister ’ s enemies are laughing and jeering , the minister ’ s friends have fallen silent and look glum .
It is bad enough to have a Chamber that is almost empty .
Already in these circumstances it is far harder to see the ebb and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s chances of holding the Government to account are diminished .
There is no live audience of backbenchers to see how the Prime Minister is performing , to register and magnify his triumphs and disasters , to applaud or to stab him in the back .
And this makes the whole ritual pointless for the spectators too , including those watching on television .
The drama is fled , and now we have lost the PM too .
Even under normal circumstances , the PM may succeed for a time in making @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of dead bats to every delivery .
But when the Chamber is full for PMQs such an approach can seldom be sustained for long .
The Government ’ s supporters demand something to cheer , and so do the Opposition benches .
A heckle , a joke , a fleeting intervention puts the PM on the spot , lights up the Chamber , prompts hundreds of conversations between the close-packed MPs and makes the reputation of whoever intervened .
Sir Keir Starmer did his best with Johnson ’ s observation earlier this week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
According to Sir Keir , “ Devolution is one of the proudest achievements of the last Labour Government.
” Johnson retorted that devolution is unquestionably a disaster when it means the SNP constantly campaigning for the break up of the United Kingdom .
In a later answer , the Prime Minister spoke at such length about the proposal of the SNP , immediately after independence , to make “ a massive surrender of power straight back to Brussels ” , that the Speaker , Sir Lindsay Hoyle , cut him off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was impossible to go on listening to this stuff .
The ability of the Commons to hold the Government to account has been dreadfully diminished by the pandemic , and will remain diminished until the Chamber is once more full .

Today’s PMQs was about as much use as a game of cricket where the batsman does not actually have to stand at the crease and face the bowling.
There was no danger the Prime Minister would lose his wicket or get hit.
Boris Johnson was not there. He appeared instead on a screen, and announced that in order to comply with the rules for dealing with the pandemic he is holding “virtual meetings” and performing “virtual duties”.
An indispensable quality of the Commons is that it is dangerous. There is nowhere for the minister to hide.
Within a second or two, he or she can suffer grievous embarrassment, by failing to make a proper case for whatever the Government is doing.
No vote has yet been lost, but already the House has been lost. The minister’s enemies are laughing and jeering, the minister’s friends have fallen silent and look glum.
It is bad enough to have a Chamber that is almost empty. Already in these circumstances it is far harder to see the ebb and flow of opinion.
Already the Opposition’s chances of holding the Government to account are diminished. There is no live audience of backbenchers to see how the Prime Minister is performing, to register and magnify his triumphs and disasters, to applaud or to stab him in the back.
And this makes the whole ritual pointless for the spectators too, including those watching on television. The drama is fled, and now we have lost the PM too.
Even under normal circumstances, the PM may succeed for a time in making things dull, by playing the deadest of dead bats to every delivery.
But when the Chamber is full for PMQs such an approach can seldom be sustained for long. The Government’s supporters demand something to cheer, and so do the Opposition benches.
A heckle, a joke, a fleeting intervention puts the PM on the spot, lights up the Chamber, prompts hundreds of conversations between the close-packed MPs and makes the reputation of whoever intervened.
Sir Keir Starmer did his best with Johnson’s observation earlier this week that devolution has been “a disaster”. According to Sir Keir, “Devolution is one of the proudest achievements of the last Labour Government.”
Johnson retorted that devolution is unquestionably a disaster when it means the SNP constantly campaigning for the break up of the United Kingdom.
In a later answer, the Prime Minister spoke at such length about the proposal of the SNP, immediately after independence, to make “a massive surrender of power straight back to Brussels”, that the Speaker, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, cut him off.
The Speaker was right. It was impossible to go on listening to this stuff. The ability of the Commons to hold the Government to account has been dreadfully diminished by the pandemic, and will remain diminished until the Chamber is once more full.


conservativehome--2020-11-19--Aveek Bhattacharya: It’s time for critics of “low-quality” degrees to put up or shut up

Aveek Bhattacharya is Chief Economist at the Social Market Foundation , a non-partisan think-tank Does English higher education have a problem with “ low quality degrees ” ?
The Government certainly thinks so .
In July Michelle Donelan , the Universities Minister , suggested that young people had been “ taken advantage of ” by purveyors of ineffectual courses , and last year ’ s Conservative manifesto explicitly pledged to tackle the issue .
Such a project faces two problems , however .
First , claims of university underperformance are based on narrow and limited measures of the benefits of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we accept that low-quality courses are out there , developing the tools to identify them would involve substantial costs and regulatory burdens .
The idea that many universities are failing their students appears to come primarily from data on graduate earnings .
For example , a 2019 release from the Department of Education said on one in ten courses , 75 per cent of students were earning less than £25,000 five years after completion .
Yet it is just not enough to evaluate university courses solely on the financial gains they generate for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ charges of philistinism and neglecting knowledge for knowledge ’ s sake , the amount of money a person makes is a simply an imperfect guide to their social and economic contribution .
The logic of this assessment produces perverse conclusions : measured on an earnings basis , institutions and courses producing highly paid bankers are many multiples better than those producing nurses and teachers .
It is also questionable how fair it is to judge universities on the basis of graduate wages that are shaped a host of factors beyond their control : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shifting consumption patterns , the business cycle , and international trade flows , to name a few .
Graduates tend to stay close to the town where they studied : if there is a downturn in a local industry to pushes down earnings , why should that count against the nearby university ?
In fact , at present the Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework ( TEF ) , the main official measure of higher education quality , does not make use of earnings data at all .
It focuses instead on graduate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ student satisfaction .
However , the future of the TEF is unclear .
The 2020 iteration was suspended .
An independent review , which is believed to have recommended substantial changes , was due to have been published in summer 2019 but has still not emerged .
The data sources underpinning much of the TEF are also being replaced or reviewed .
So the Government needs a new way of evaluating universities , and in particular of identifying supposedly low-quality degrees .
If ministers recognise that focusing on graduates ’ economic outcomes is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more holistic measure that accounts for the full social value of a degree , such as the proportion of graduates who work in public services or areas of skills shortage .
Measurement might also include non-economic benefits , such as life satisfaction , health and community participation .
Universities UK , an industry body , is in the process of developing just such a measure .
As with earnings , though , it is unclear how much responsibility universities should bear for such outcomes .
In which case , the natural question is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the thing everybody agrees they are there to do : help their students learn .
We don ’ t , for the most part , judge how well a school is doing by asking what students do when they leave .
We look at their exam results ( adjusting for differences in students ’ background and attainment ) and send inspectors to visit the school to assess its teaching .
Unlike schools , we can not compare university degrees in terms of student results because institutions set their own assessments , reflecting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not , to use a well-worn example , assume that top marks from Oxford University reflect the same level of achievement as top marks from Oxford Brookes .
The Quality Assurance Agency , which is nominally responsible for safeguarding standards , does little to ensure comparability because it does not assess teaching directly , but rather checks institutions ’ own quality management processes .
Though university departments invite external examiners to assess their programmes against subject benchmarks , this process has been criticised as too informal and lacking ‘ teeth ’ .
To @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shared exam questions , or a centrally-pooled , institution-blind marking system for at least some assessments .
That would be a major departure from the status quo , though .
so alternatively we could introduce a separate standardised test , in the way that the OECD ’ s PISA programme compares school students from different countries with different exam systems .
In fact , the OECD has floated the idea of a higher education equivalent to PISA , but the UK opted not to participate in 2015 .
At the time , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own measure of ‘ learning gain ’ , but the idea appears to have been dropped .
How about a university equivalent of Ofsted ( perhaps a more hands-on QAA ) , directly inspecting universities and examining how teaching operates first-hand ?
The idea has been mooted , and indeed FE colleges already are regularly inspected by Ofsted .
From 1992 to 2001 , universities faced Teaching Quality Assessments , closer to the inspection model with outside academic assessors carrying out site visits and interviews .
However , the process was deeply resented @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , expensive and unnecessary .
Proper quality assessment , though , can ’ t be done on the cheap .
The Government spends £130 million a year inspecting schools .
The last TEF cost around £3 million .
If the Government really believes low quality degrees are such a pressing problem , it should invest more in the processes necessary to identify them .
That would come at a cost to taxpayers and divert more of academics ’ time and energy away from teaching and research .
Alternatively , the Government may need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
A sensible national conversation about the quality of degrees needs a proper system of assessment .
That won ’ t be simple or cheap , but it can be done if the will is there .
Time for critics of “ low-quality ” degrees to put up or shut up .
This article draws on the Social Market Foundation ’ s briefing paper , ‘ Elusive quality : how should we evaluate higher education ?
‘ , published today .

Aveek Bhattacharya is Chief Economist at the Social Market Foundation, a non-partisan think-tank
Does English higher education have a problem with “low quality degrees”? The Government certainly thinks so. In July Michelle Donelan, the Universities Minister, suggested that young people had been “taken advantage of” by purveyors of ineffectual courses, and last year’s Conservative manifesto explicitly pledged to tackle the issue.
Such a project faces two problems, however. First, claims of university underperformance are based on narrow and limited measures of the benefits of a degree. Second, even if we accept that low-quality courses are out there, developing the tools to identify them would involve substantial costs and regulatory burdens.
The idea that many universities are failing their students appears to come primarily from data on graduate earnings. For example, a 2019 release from the Department of Education said on one in ten courses, 75 per cent of students were earning less than £25,000 five years after completion.
Yet it is just not enough to evaluate university courses solely on the financial gains they generate for students. Even without even getting into charges of philistinism and neglecting knowledge for knowledge’s sake, the amount of money a person makes is a simply an imperfect guide to their social and economic contribution. The logic of this assessment produces perverse conclusions: measured on an earnings basis, institutions and courses producing highly paid bankers are many multiples better than those producing nurses and teachers.
It is also questionable how fair it is to judge universities on the basis of graduate wages that are shaped a host of factors beyond their control: macroeconomic policy, labour market regulation, shifting consumption patterns, the business cycle, and international trade flows, to name a few. Graduates tend to stay close to the town where they studied: if there is a downturn in a local industry to pushes down earnings, why should that count against the nearby university?
In fact, at present the Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework (TEF), the main official measure of higher education quality, does not make use of earnings data at all. It focuses instead on graduate employment, drop-out rates, and self-reported student satisfaction.
However, the future of the TEF is unclear. The 2020 iteration was suspended. An independent review, which is believed to have recommended substantial changes, was due to have been published in summer 2019 but has still not emerged. The data sources underpinning much of the TEF are also being replaced or reviewed.
So the Government needs a new way of evaluating universities, and in particular of identifying supposedly low-quality degrees. If ministers recognise that focusing on graduates’ economic outcomes is too narrow, they could adopt a more holistic measure that accounts for the full social value of a degree, such as the proportion of graduates who work in public services or areas of skills shortage. Measurement might also include non-economic benefits, such as life satisfaction, health and community participation. Universities UK, an industry body, is in the process of developing just such a measure.
As with earnings, though, it is unclear how much responsibility universities should bear for such outcomes. In which case, the natural question is why we don’t judge universities on the thing everybody agrees they are there to do: help their students learn. We don’t, for the most part, judge how well a school is doing by asking what students do when they leave. We look at their exam results (adjusting for differences in students’ background and attainment) and send inspectors to visit the school to assess its teaching.
Unlike schools, we cannot compare university degrees in terms of student results because institutions set their own assessments, reflecting often very different courses. We cannot, to use a well-worn example, assume that top marks from Oxford University reflect the same level of achievement as top marks from Oxford Brookes.
The Quality Assurance Agency, which is nominally responsible for safeguarding standards, does little to ensure comparability because it does not assess teaching directly, but rather checks institutions’ own quality management processes. Though university departments invite external examiners to assess their programmes against subject benchmarks, this process has been criticised as too informal and lacking ‘teeth’.
To increase comparability, we could have some shared exam questions, or a centrally-pooled, institution-blind marking system for at least some assessments. That would be a major departure from the status quo, though. so alternatively we could introduce a separate standardised test, in the way that the OECD’s PISA programme compares school students from different countries with different exam systems. In fact, the OECD has floated the idea of a higher education equivalent to PISA, but the UK opted not to participate in 2015. At the time, the Government claimed to be working on its own measure of ‘learning gain’, but the idea appears to have been dropped.
How about a university equivalent of Ofsted (perhaps a more hands-on QAA), directly inspecting universities and examining how teaching operates first-hand? The idea has been mooted, and indeed FE colleges already are regularly inspected by Ofsted. From 1992 to 2001, universities faced Teaching Quality Assessments, closer to the inspection model with outside academic assessors carrying out site visits and interviews.
However, the process was deeply resented by much of the sector as intrusive, expensive and unnecessary.
Proper quality assessment, though, can’t be done on the cheap. The Government spends £130 million a year inspecting schools. The last TEF cost around £3 million. If the Government really believes low quality degrees are such a pressing problem, it should invest more in the processes necessary to identify them. That would come at a cost to taxpayers and divert more of academics’ time and energy away from teaching and research. Alternatively, the Government may need to just trust universities a bit more.
A sensible national conversation about the quality of degrees needs a proper system of assessment. That won’t be simple or cheap, but it can be done if the will is there. Time for critics of “low-quality” degrees to put up or shut up.
This article draws on the Social Market Foundation’s briefing paper, ‘Elusive quality: how should we evaluate higher education?‘, published today.


conservativehome--2020-11-19--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Further Education Adviser – and more


conservativehome--2020-11-19--The wind of Biden’s change is blowing through Johnson’s Government

One exotic claim floating around Westminster is that Dominic Cummings was fired to please Joe Biden .
And that Boris Johnson will now scramble to fix an EU trade deal at any cost , since the President-to-be is hostile to Brexit in general and No Deal in particular .
This site believes that the Prime Minister wants an agreement in any event , and that one has always been likely .
But that the possibility of No Deal is under-priced , and that while the mercurial Johnson ’ s head is for an agreement with our European neighbour , his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open seas .
We also suspect that the only Cummings that Biden has heard of is “ Candy ” Cummings , the baseball player credited with the invention of the curveball .
Nonetheless , it is true that the prospective return of the Democrats to the White House has sent ripples through the set-up in Downing Street .
And while it is unlikely that Cummings ’ departure was crafted to appease Team Biden , it really does seem that the American result , plus the prospective arrival of vaccines , encouraged Johnson to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Part of getting ready for it was finding a proper Chief of Staff .
Hence the chain of events that led to Cummings leaving .
We offer two pieces of evidence for the blowing of a Biden wind – one rather tentatively , one less so .
The first is the defence settlement sketched in today ’ s papers .
The second is the Prime Minister ’ s speech on the environment .
On defence , Johnson will be keen to remind the Democrats that , while Biden is electorally engaged with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and thus of the EU – backing for them has the capacity to cut two ways .
Biden has a history of engagement with another such animal : NATO .
Which European country has the potential both to project military power and a history of supporting American leadership ?
France has the first but not the second , Germany the second but not the first .
Only Britain ticks both boxes .
And bang on cue , the Prime Minister has overcome Rishi Sunak ’ s institutional Treasury resistance , and thrashed out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the first time , the money comes first , the plan afterwards : the Integrated Review of Security , Defence , Development and Foreign Policy will be settled early next year .
But this time round , there seems to be enough on the table to at least shore up the position .
We have yet see what the Chancellor wants in terms of the plugging notorious black hole in the Ministry of Defence , but Cummings ’ aspirations for procurement reform are unmet .
One can see a legacy for him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and an overall win for Ben Wallace from the overall settlement : he wanted four-year funding and has got it .
Nonetheless , it may be that the driver of the decision was Johnson ’ s eagerness to prove to Biden that Britain remains America ’ s number one ally in Europe – “ despite Brexit ” .
There is a hint of that in claims that “ the Prime Minister will restore the Royal Navy to Europe ’ s most powerful maritime force with largest military investment in 30 years ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ConHome that a blue water commitment means preparedness to stand militarily with America against China .
But if there is doubt about whether the American result has influenced Downing Street ’ s defence decisions , there can be none about its connection to Johnson ’ s speech yesterday on the environment .
Donald Trump took America out of the Paris Agreement , America actually left the day after the poll…and Biden wants it to go back in again .
The green speech was held up before the departure of Cain and Dominic Cummings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to go .
That decision will have had less to do with Carrie Symonds than with Team Biden – and the Prime Minister ’ s desire to stress that he is no Trump mini-me .
Furthermore , the UK hosts the UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties ( COP26 ) in Glasgow next year .
Scotland ’ s Holyrood elections take place before both it and the earlier G7 summit in Britain during the summer – for Britain has its presidency next year .
Summits mean sherpas , suits , speeches , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of World Leaders Looking Statesmanlike .
The Prime Minister will need a bit of that if the Conservatives are bashed about next year ’ s local elections south of the border and , more particularly , in the Scottish ones north of it .
There is a big push from Number Ten to stress that the green thing is all about the spiky , hard business of jobs in the Red Wall – or Blue Wall , as Tories like to call it now – and not the fluffy , softer instinct to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is marching in step with most Conservative backbenchers .
For although the zero emissions target for 2030 can only mean higher prices for some consumers , more demand on the poor old taxpayer , and a squeeze on business , even pro-Leave Tories are up for the enterprise : see today ’ s piece on this site , for example , by Ben Houchen , the Brexiteering Mayor in traditionally Labour Teesside .
Johnson ’ s argument is that green technologies are the wave of the future , eveyone else is piling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come down – so subsidies now will be outstripped by profits later .
Whatever your take may be , we are struck by the absence of organised protest so far from firms and consumers – and Tory MPs are riding the green bandwagon .
“ Are you blind to the winds of change ?
” Elton John sings in Have Mercy On The Criminal – so deploying Bernie Taupin ’ s worst-ever mixed metaphor .
Or should that be best ?
Whichever it is , the Prime Minister is not – and there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Powell ’ s disgusting advice to Christopher Meyer , which we are are too prudish to print .
* For the record : we believe that the American election is a done deal , and that Trump ’ s claim that isn ’ t it , when it comes down to it , showbiz – no more , no less .
Nonetheless , our inner anarchist delights at the dream of the President somehow turning it all round , and watching the Prime Minister frantically straining to unscramble his green omelette .
*Oh @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the latter that “ we want you to get up the arse of the White House and stay there ” .

One exotic claim floating around Westminster is that Dominic Cummings was fired to please Joe Biden. And that Boris Johnson will now scramble to fix an EU trade deal at any cost, since the President-to-be is hostile to Brexit in general and No Deal in particular.
This site believes that the Prime Minister wants an agreement in any event, and that one has always been likely. But that the possibility of No Deal is under-priced, and that while the mercurial Johnson’s head is for an agreement with our European neighbour, his heart is for a dash to the open seas.
We also suspect that the only Cummings that Biden has heard of is “Candy” Cummings, the baseball player credited with the invention of the curveball. Nonetheless, it is true that the prospective return of the Democrats to the White House has sent ripples through the set-up in Downing Street.
And while it is unlikely that Cummings’ departure was crafted to appease Team Biden, it really does seem that the American result, plus the prospective arrival of vaccines, encouraged Johnson to lift up his eyes to the future. Part of getting ready for it was finding a proper Chief of Staff. Hence the chain of events that led to Cummings leaving.
We offer two pieces of evidence for the blowing of a Biden wind – one rather tentatively, one less so. The first is the defence settlement sketched in today’s papers. The second is the Prime Minister’s speech on the environment.
On defence, Johnson will be keen to remind the Democrats that, while Biden is electorally engaged with Ireland and supportive of international institutions – and thus of the EU – backing for them has the capacity to cut two ways. Biden has a history of engagement with another such animal: NATO.
Which European country has the potential both to project military power and a history of supporting American leadership? France has the first but not the second, Germany the second but not the first. Only Britain ticks both boxes.
And bang on cue, the Prime Minister has overcome Rishi Sunak’s institutional Treasury resistance, and thrashed out a four-year £16.5 defence settlement. Not for the first time, the money comes first, the plan afterwards: the Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy will be settled early next year.
But this time round, there seems to be enough on the table to at least shore up the position. We have yet see what the Chancellor wants in terms of the plugging notorious black hole in the Ministry of Defence, but Cummings’ aspirations for procurement reform are unmet.
One can see a legacy for him in reports of a new cyberforce, and an overall win for Ben Wallace from the overall settlement: he wanted four-year funding and has got it. Nonetheless, it may be that the driver of the decision was Johnson’s eagerness to prove to Biden that Britain remains America’s number one ally in Europe – “despite Brexit”.
There is a hint of that in claims that “the Prime Minister will restore the Royal Navy to Europe’s most powerful maritime force with largest military investment in 30 years”. One defence buff has been stressing to ConHome that a blue water commitment means preparedness to stand militarily with America against China.
But if there is doubt about whether the American result has influenced Downing Street’s defence decisions, there can be none about its connection to Johnson’s speech yesterday on the environment. Donald Trump took America out of the Paris Agreement, America actually left the day after the poll…and Biden wants it to go back in again.
The green speech was held up before the departure of Cain and Dominic Cummings, but has now been judged good to go. That decision will have had less to do with Carrie Symonds than with Team Biden – and the Prime Minister’s desire to stress that he is no Trump mini-me.
Furthermore, the UK hosts the UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) in Glasgow next year. Scotland’s Holyrood elections take place before both it and the earlier G7 summit in Britain during the summer – for Britain has its presidency next year.
Summits mean sherpas, suits, speeches, statements – and pictures for the cameras of World Leaders Looking Statesmanlike. The Prime Minister will need a bit of that if the Conservatives are bashed about next year’s local elections south of the border and, more particularly, in the Scottish ones north of it.
There is a big push from Number Ten to stress that the green thing is all about the spiky, hard business of jobs in the Red Wall – or Blue Wall, as Tories like to call it now – and not the fluffy, softer instinct to save the planet. For once, it is marching in step with most Conservative backbenchers.
For although the zero emissions target for 2030 can only mean higher prices for some consumers, more demand on the poor old taxpayer, and a squeeze on business, even pro-Leave Tories are up for the enterprise: see today’s piece on this site, for example, by Ben Houchen, the Brexiteering Mayor in traditionally Labour Teesside.
Johnson’s argument is that green technologies are the wave of the future, eveyone else is piling in, and that their costs will come down – so subsidies now will be outstripped by profits later. Whatever your take may be, we are struck by the absence of organised protest so far from firms and consumers – and Tory MPs are riding the green bandwagon.
“Are you blind to the winds of change?” Elton John sings in Have Mercy On The Criminal – so deploying Bernie Taupin’s worst-ever mixed metaphor. Or should that be best? Whichever it is, the Prime Minister is not – and there is a faint echo here of Jonathan Powell’s disgusting advice to Christopher Meyer, which we are are too prudish to print.*
For the record: we believe that the American election is a done deal, and that Trump’s claim that isn’t it, when it comes down to it, showbiz – no more, no less. Nonetheless, our inner anarchist delights at the dream of the President somehow turning it all round, and watching the Prime Minister frantically straining to unscramble his green omelette.
*Oh, alright then: the former told the latter that “we want you to get up the arse of the White House and stay there”.