conservativehome--2020-06-01--Howard Flight: In my judgement, the economy is on track for a relatively short V-shaped recession.

Lord Flight is Chairman of Flight & Partners Recovery Fund , and is a former Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury .
We are in the middle of the sort of economic recession for which Keynes prescribed large Government deficit – spending support .
It was a pity that Keynes was misinterpreted in the 1950 ’ s and 1960 ’ s .
Right now , the UK economy needs all the business and financial support which Government can organise and provide .
It is fortunate that interest rates are virtually zero and , in some cases , negative .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ channel enough economic stimulant , quickly enough , to turn around the economy .
In my judgement Andy Haldane , the eminent Bank of England economist , has it right .
The economy is on track for a relatively short V-shaped recession .
Spending has already picked up by more than even the Bank of England expected .
Haldane also expects that little long-term damage will be done to the economy .
This is supported by the Government ’ s important decision to extend the Self-Employed Bail Out Scheme ( SEISS ) for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , at a cost of £8 billion .
Keeping the self-employed portion of the UK economy afloat is fundamental to economic recovery .
The major strength of the UK economy has been the size and spread of its self-employed and SME sectors – comprising some six million SMEs .
In an economic storm , practically , SMEs and the self-employed are more difficult to support than a few dozen large businesses .
The Chancellor has thrown all he can at the small company and self-employed sectors .
The main vehicle for the SME @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme ( CBILS ) .
At the time of writing approximately £1.5bn has been lent to small businesses via CBILS .
This , however , represents barely more than 6,000 loans , in contrast to Germany where the banks have already lent out seven times the amount .
The problem with CBILS was that , initially , banks participating thought they were obliged to assess whether the businesses requesting loans were eligible for a normal , non-virus , loan .
This resulted in companies needing life or death support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paperwork .
They were then often offered regular loans including taking a director ’ s home as collateral , which was not the Government ’ s intention .
The larger banks ’ justification for this has been EU State AID rules .
Although Britain has left the EU , it transpires that we are bound by the State Aid rules until the end of the transition period .
This needs changing speedily .
The State Aid rules apply to all loans under CBILS .
This appears to have been prescribed in small print @ @ @ @ @ @ @ denied knowledge of this .
Subsequently , Rishi Sunak has changed the scheme so that banks can lend without first attempting a standard loan deal .
CBILS has also had an equally negative problem .
While many Governments are guaranteeing 100 per cent of such loans the UK has been guaranteeing only 80 per cent .
Increasing the Government guarantee to 100 per cent has been resisted by the Treasury , again on the grounds of not breaching EU State Aid rules , although Government guarantees are now going up to 100 per @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the issue is rescuing our economy it is ridiculous to argue that appropriate economic measures can be stopped by EU State Aid rules .
The Future Fund has also had a damaging technical constraint on qualification .
Where a company has Enterprise Investment Scheme or Venture Capital Trust investors , this is not tax compatible with required Futures Fund and Convertible Loan Note investment , which would disqualify EIS/VCT investors ’ tax relief .
What is now needed is a faster sequential lifting of the lockdown package of constraints , both to accelerate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ give us a stronger hand to negotiate Brexit .
The Business Secretary has the tools to preside over our economic revival , and his department must become a leading one .
It , too , needs to slash regulations that prevent businesses from getting loans .
We also have the opportunity to carry out a revolutionary shift to a pro-business administration with an export led economy on the back of a weak Sterling .
Here there is an argument for establishing a national export fund .
“ Stay at home .
Protect the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to change to “ Get back to work .
Protect the economy .
Save livelihoods.
” Our response to Covid-19 should now become more targeted , becayse the risks to millions of people who are younger is very small .
Companies have complained about the lack of guidance where the outlook is becoming clearer .
I expect a major advance in the lifting of lockdown for the retail sector in June and , if all goes wel , l much of the lockdown will be lifted by the end of July .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Government to boost the economy on a sustained basis .
The most effective are likely to be increasing the annual ( company ) investment allowance ; reducing stamp duty on houses ; rolling furlough arrangements into Universal Credit , providing incentives to work .
Equally important is to repeal regulations in the way of recovery – i.e : we have amongst the highest childcare costs because of our staff ratio laws .
Infrastructure investment should be brought forward .
Finally , EIS and VCT should be made tax compatible where companies have @ @ @ @ @ @

Lord Flight is Chairman of Flight & Partners Recovery Fund, and is a former Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury.
We are in the middle of the sort of economic recession for which Keynes prescribed large Government deficit – spending support. It was a pity that Keynes was misinterpreted in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Right now, the UK economy needs all the business and financial support which Government can organise and provide. It is fortunate that interest rates are virtually zero and, in some cases, negative. The question is as to whether Government can channel enough economic stimulant, quickly enough, to turn around the economy.
In my judgement Andy Haldane, the eminent Bank of England economist, has it right. The economy is on track for a relatively short V-shaped recession. Spending has already picked up by more than even the Bank of England expected.
Haldane also expects that little long-term damage will be done to the economy. This is supported by the Government’s important decision to extend the Self-Employed Bail Out Scheme (SEISS) for the self-employed by a further three months, at a cost of £8 billion.
Keeping the self-employed portion of the UK economy afloat is fundamental to economic recovery. The major strength of the UK economy has been the size and spread of its self-employed and SME sectors – comprising some six million SMEs.
In an economic storm, practically, SMEs and the self-employed are more difficult to support than a few dozen large businesses. The Chancellor has thrown all he can at the small company and self-employed sectors. The main vehicle for the SME sector has been guaranteed loans via the Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme (CBILS). At the time of writing approximately £1.5bn has been lent to small businesses via CBILS. This, however, represents barely more than 6,000 loans, in contrast to Germany where the banks have already lent out seven times the amount.
The problem with CBILS was that, initially, banks participating thought they were obliged to assess whether the businesses requesting loans were eligible for a normal, non-virus, loan. This resulted in companies needing life or death support being tied down with lengthy requests for paperwork. They were then often offered regular loans including taking a director’s home as collateral, which was not the Government’s intention.
The larger banks’ justification for this has been EU State AID rules. Although Britain has left the EU, it transpires that we are bound by the State Aid rules until the end of the transition period. This needs changing speedily. The State Aid rules apply to all loans under CBILS. This appears to have been prescribed in small print by the Treasury, although it have denied knowledge of this. Subsequently, Rishi Sunak has changed the scheme so that banks can lend without first attempting a standard loan deal.
CBILS has also had an equally negative problem. While many Governments are guaranteeing 100 per cent of such loans the UK has been guaranteeing only 80 per cent. Increasing the Government guarantee to 100 per cent has been resisted by the Treasury, again on the grounds of not breaching EU State Aid rules, although Government guarantees are now going up to 100 per cent. In a situation in which the issue is rescuing our economy it is ridiculous to argue that appropriate economic measures can be stopped by EU State Aid rules.
The Future Fund has also had a damaging technical constraint on qualification. Where a company has Enterprise Investment Scheme or Venture Capital Trust investors, this is not tax compatible with required Futures Fund and Convertible Loan Note investment, which would disqualify EIS/VCT investors’ tax relief.
What is now needed is a faster sequential lifting of the lockdown package of constraints, both to accelerate the recovery of our economy and to give us a stronger hand to negotiate Brexit. The Business Secretary has the tools to preside over our economic revival, and his department must become a leading one.
It, too, needs to slash regulations that prevent businesses from getting loans. We also have the opportunity to carry out a revolutionary shift to a pro-business administration with an export led economy on the back of a weak Sterling. Here there is an argument for establishing a national export fund.
“Stay at home. Protect the NHS. Saves lives” now needs to change to “Get back to work. Protect the economy. Save livelihoods.” Our response to Covid-19 should now become more targeted, becayse the risks to millions of people who are younger is very small. Companies have complained about the lack of guidance where the outlook is becoming clearer.
I expect a major advance in the lifting of lockdown for the retail sector in June and, if all goes wel,l much of the lockdown will be lifted by the end of July. There is a range of business measures open to Government to boost the economy on a sustained basis.
The most effective are likely to be increasing the annual (company) investment allowance; reducing stamp duty on houses; rolling furlough arrangements into Universal Credit, providing incentives to work.
Equally important is to repeal regulations in the way of recovery – i.e: we have amongst the highest childcare costs because of our staff ratio laws. Infrastructure investment should be brought forward. Finally, EIS and VCT should be made tax compatible where companies have Future Fund or CBILS investment.


conservativehome--2020-06-01--China 1) Our survey. 85 per cent of Party members support the Government’s Hong Kong passport rights

China 1) Our survey. 85 per cent of Party members support the Government’s Hong Kong passport rights extension plan.

Not only has the Government offered extended visa rights to 350,000 British National ( Overseas ) passport holders in Hong Kong – opening up “ a pathway to future citizenship ” … …But the Home Office has said that this pledge will apply to anyone eligible to apply for a BNO passport currently living in Hong Kong , of which there are estimated to be about 2.9 million people .
Now , some figures .
Annual gross migration to March last year was about 640,000 .
Were all those 350,000 Hong Kong BNO passport holders to arrive at once , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gross migration , were the 640,000 figure to remain roughly constant , of the best part of 50 per cent .
And an increase on the net figure of 240,000 of over a hundred per cent .
And that ’ s before one throws another 2.9 million people into the mix .
So given the sensitivity of the public to mass immigration – the second biggest factor in the 2016 EU referendum , according to Lord Ashcroft ’ s wake-of-poll mass survey – what ’ s the explanation for our Party member survey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all , Conservative activists favour lower migration .
And Tory MPs have a history of rebellion on easing migration from Hong Kong .
Eighty or so voted against a citizenship extension in 1990 .
Is the answer that those 350,000 are very unlikely indeed to come here in a single year ?
Or that they would probably have other places to go to too , such as Taiwan ( and so there ’ s no parallel with the Ugandan Asians ) ?
Or that most of them are judged unlikely to come at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ previous 1990 generation ?
Could it be instead that the Hong Kongers are seen as “ our people ” – hard-working ; family-orientated ?
Do they think the move is a counter-thrust against China ?
Is immigration declining in salience as an issue among Party members , mirroring the same movement among voters post-EU referendum ?
Is their stance becoming more liberal ?
There is simply no way of knowing without futher survey questions or evidence from elsewhere .
Whatever else may be going on , one fact is surely incontrovertible : these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hong Kong and immigration .
For example , the Commons is yet even to debate the Government ’ s proposal , let alone consider a Bill .

Not only has the Government offered extended visa rights to 350,000 British National (Overseas) passport holders in Hong Kong – opening up “a pathway to future citizenship”…
…But the Home Office has said that this pledge will apply to anyone eligible to apply for a BNO passport currently living in Hong Kong, of which there are estimated to be about 2.9 million people.
Now, some figures. Annual gross migration to March last year was about 640,000. Were all those 350,000 Hong Kong BNO passport holders to arrive at once, that would represent a rise in annual gross migration, were the 640,000 figure to remain roughly constant, of the best part of 50 per cent. And an increase on the net figure of 240,000 of over a hundred per cent. And that’s before one throws another 2.9 million people into the mix.
So given the sensitivity of the public to mass immigration – the second biggest factor in the 2016 EU referendum, according to Lord Ashcroft’s wake-of-poll mass survey – what’s the explanation for our Party member survey panel’s return above? After all, Conservative activists favour lower migration. And Tory MPs have a history of rebellion on easing migration from Hong Kong. Eighty or so voted against a citizenship extension in 1990.
Is the answer that those 350,000 are very unlikely indeed to come here in a single year? Or that they would probably have other places to go to too, such as Taiwan (and so there’s no parallel with the Ugandan Asians)?
Or that most of them are judged unlikely to come at all, mirroring the behaviour of the previous 1990 generation? Could it be instead that the Hong Kongers are seen as “our people” – hard-working; family-orientated?
Do they think the move is a counter-thrust against China? Is immigration declining in salience as an issue among Party members, mirroring the same movement among voters post-EU referendum? Is their stance becoming more liberal? There is simply no way of knowing without futher survey questions or evidence from elsewhere.
Whatever else may be going on, one fact is surely incontrovertible: these are early days for public debate over Hong Kong and immigration. For example, the Commons is yet even to debate the Government’s proposal, let alone consider a Bill.


conservativehome--2020-06-01--China 3) Why the stand-off over Hong Kong and the coming clash over Huawei matters

Below this article , we print one by Neil O ’ Brien who , in his two previous columns for this site ( see here and here ) , has described why China now poses a major strategic problem for Britain .
Above it , we carry one by Tom Tugehdhat who , like our columnist , is a senior member of the recently-formed China Research Group .
In it , he sets out potential solutions .
And at the top of the site today , we report on what ConservativeHome ’ s panel of Party members have to say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Hong Kongers .
The site itself has been circumspect in offering a view about British-Chinese relations , because although China is a security threat , it is not the only one to the UK , nor necessarily the most immediate .
For there is also the external problem posed by Russia , which is capable of sparking a war in Eastern Europe , perhaps by accident and , as the Salisbury poisonings showed us , is also willing to strike her .
Then there is the internal challenge from Islamist extremism which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the IRA , “ hasnt ’ gone away , you know ” .
The Manchester Arena bombing is little more than three years old .
None the less , the “ golden decade ” of Anglo-Chinese relations that George Osborne promised in 2015 now looks like more of an ice age .
There are two immediate flashpoints .
First , Hong Kong .
The Government ’ s offer of residency and work rights extensions to Hong Kongers looks like a piece of counter-play .
If you menace freedom in Hong Kong , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – including its brightest and best .
And you will be left with nothing worth governing .
That ’ s our reading of what Ministers are up to .
Second , Huawei .
It appears that there will be no return to the status quo ante on the Chinese company post-Covid ( whenever that may be ) .
Both these issues are highly topical and the Hong Kong row was raging last week .
We carried pieces about it by Tom Tugendhat and Bob Seely .
The Anglo-Chinese relationship is more important than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cummings and lockdown .
In recognition of that fact , we will re-run Tugedhat ’ s latest article for us for each day this week .
And there will be more about China on the site over the next few days .
On Friday , we hope to write more about those three different security threats , and how the UK should respond .

Below this article, we print one by Neil O’Brien who, in his two previous columns for this site (see here and here), has described why China now poses a major strategic problem for Britain.
Above it, we carry one by Tom Tugehdhat who, like our columnist, is a senior member of the recently-formed China Research Group. In it, he sets out potential solutions.
And at the top of the site today, we report on what ConservativeHome’s panel of Party members have to say about the Government’s migration offer to Hong Kongers.
The site itself has been circumspect in offering a view about British-Chinese relations, because although China is a security threat, it is not the only one to the UK, nor necessarily the most immediate.
For there is also the external problem posed by Russia, which is capable of sparking a war in Eastern Europe, perhaps by accident and, as the Salisbury poisonings showed us, is also willing to strike her.
Then there is the internal challenge from Islamist extremism which, as Gerry Adams once said of the IRA, “hasnt’ gone away, you know”. The Manchester Arena bombing is little more than three years old.
None the less, the “golden decade” of Anglo-Chinese relations that George Osborne promised in 2015 now looks like more of an ice age. There are two immediate flashpoints.
First, Hong Kong. The Government’s offer of residency and work rights extensions to Hong Kongers looks like a piece of counter-play.
If you menace freedom in Hong Kong, we will open our doors to its citizens – including its brightest and best. And you will be left with nothing worth governing. That’s our reading of what Ministers are up to.
Second, Huawei. It appears that there will be no return to the status quo ante on the Chinese company post-Covid (whenever that may be).
Both these issues are highly topical and the Hong Kong row was raging last week. We carried pieces about it by Tom Tugendhat and Bob Seely.
The Anglo-Chinese relationship is more important than, say, the row over Dominic Cummings and lockdown. In recognition of that fact, we will re-run Tugedhat’s latest article for us for each day this week.
And there will be more about China on the site over the next few days. On Friday, we hope to write more about those three different security threats, and how the UK should respond.


conservativehome--2020-06-01--Neil O’Brien: Higher and technical eduation. The universities should reform themselves. Or have refo

Neil O’Brien: Higher and technical eduation. The universities should reform themselves. Or have reform forced on them.

Before coronavirus , universities were tottering on the edge of change .
Evidence had emerged that a large proportion of degrees aren ’ t a good investment for taxpayers or students .
The Augar Review had officially recognised the problem of low value Higher Education ( HE ) , and called attention to the huge imbalance in funding between universities and technical education .
A ruling by the Office for National Statistics means the subsidy element of student loans has to be properly accounted for from this year on , scoring against the government ’ s deficit .
No more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ things .
With lucrative foreign students gone , many universities are in financial trouble .
So controls on student numbers have , rightly , been reintroduced , at universities ’ own request , to allow the system to be stabilised .
Many universities have finally started to provide online learning , an approach which made pitifully little progress before now .
But universities still want to charge the full fees , leading to resistance from students .
Youth unemployment is rising .
Jobs , apprenticeships and work placements are disrupted .
The Government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help .
But it ’ s also massively in debt , with a big structural deficit to fix .
The stars are aligning for a landmark reform : on one hand , boosting funding for youth job schemes , and putting rocket boosters under plans to build a prestigious , German-style technical education system .
And on the other , paying for it by cutting back poor-value degree courses which waste taxpayers ’ money , but don ’ t actually increase opportunities for students .
Before we continue , let me wind back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Between the end of the Chatterley ban , and the Beatles first LP .
That was the year of the Robbins Report , which said university places “ should be available to all who were qualified for them by ability and attainment , ” and triggered rapid university expansion .
Participation in HE rose exponentially : from 3.4 per cent in 1950 , to 8.4 per cent in 1970 , 19.3 per cent in 1990 and 33 per cent in 2000 .
In September 1999 , Tony Blair set a target to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we reached in 2018 .
But somewhere along the way we lost sight of the Robbins principle – which wasn ’ t “ more students ” , but places for those who can benefit .
Robbins spent a long time pondering economic and academic evidence about how many could benefit .
He considered a wide range of different types of education and training .
But under the 50 per cent target , the only rule has been more , more , more .
You can go to university now without a GCSE in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Firsts awarded has risen four-fold since the mid-1990s : universities are competing for students by debasing standards .
The creation of the Longitudinal Educational Outcomes dataset – initiated by David Willetts – has challenged this .
It gives us data on how much graduates of particular courses at different universities earn .
It lets us look at value-added too : how graduates ’ earnings compare to people with similar backgrounds and A level results .
It shows us that while university is on average good for those attending – there are many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
Either their earnings are lower than comparable people , or improve so little that it ’ s not worth the big upfront cost .
The most recent Institute for Fiscal Studies analysis found that , viewed from the point of view of the student , their degree isn ’ t worth it for around 10 per cent of women , and a quarter of men .
This is extraordinary , given they are receiving big taxpayer subsidies .
Viewed from the point of view of the taxpayer , the taxpayer makes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around 40 per cent of men and half of women.
” Summing together the effect for society as a whole ( the gains to students and taxpayers ) “ total returns will be negative for around 30 per cent of both men and women.
” In other words , nearly a third of students degrees are not worth it economically .
The variation by degree and institution is even more dramatic .
The taxpayer makes huge losses subsidising creative arts courses – only four and a half percent represent a positive investment .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ earn enough to justify taxpayers ’ investment .
The taxpayer makes a loss on the majority of students in sociology , psychology , communications , and languages .
Many would be better off doing something else .
Median graduate annual earnings five years after graduation were £25,900 , compared to £27,240 for Level 4 apprentices five years after completion .
If we looked at , say , the bottom quarter of graduates , the case for them doing something else is even stronger .
Yes , for many students , going to university @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To study a beautiful poem has a value .
We don ’ t expect the theology graduate who becomes a priest or a nun to earn a packet .
Yes , we should explicitly make losses on some courses for the same reasons we subsidise public art and the like .
But let ’ s not be so snobby that we think there ’ s no satisfaction or intrinsic value from technical study .
No sense of accomplishment for an apprentice building a jet engine , or a house .
For a country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lofty thoughts are not enough to justify such huge numbers of students doing things that don ’ t help them economically , given that ’ s what many themselves want .
Half of young people go down the technical route – more in blue wall seats .
They are less well funded .
While no neat comparison is possible , the Augar Review noted that in 2017-18 , over £8 billion was committed to support 1.2 million UK undergraduates in England , and only £2.3 billion to support 2.2 million full and part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s roughly £6,600 vs £1,050 each .
Further education participation has fallen from 4.8 million to 3.6 million since 2010 .
Key higher technical qualifications ( HNDs/HNCs ) are down by over two-thirds since 2010/11 .
Universities have become less diverse too .
Part-time higher education has fallen by 53 % since 2010/11 .
We have to rebalance the system from higher to technical education , and put those middle options back in .
Gavin Williamson has talked about “ stronger alignment of the courses delivered with the economic and societal needs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right , but to get there we need to recognise the limits of market forces .
Students choose their course aged 17 .
What it will do to their earnings at age 50 isn ’ t front of mind .
With lots of public subsidy sloshing around , universities ’ incentives are to put on lots of cheap arts courses , charge full fees , and use the money to cross-subsidise other things .
They get the benefit , and the taxpayer the cost .
Ministers need to step in to protect taxpayers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( I was one author ) looked at ways to reshape funding .
Ministers could impose a floor on prior attainment like a minimum A level score .
They could directly cut back numbers on poor value courses .
Personally , I ’ m drawn to the idea of a deals-based approach .
Highly subsidised universities would propose to government how they will reduce their cost to the taxpayer .
That could mean reducing numbers on some courses , or making them cheaper with shorter degrees , or and doing more online .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t produce a plan , the sanction would be direct number controls .
We ’ d use the savings to fight youth unemployment , and fund technical education properly .
How does that sound ?

Neil O’Brien is MP for Harborough.
Before coronavirus, universities were tottering on the edge of change. Evidence had emerged that a large proportion of degrees aren’t a good investment for taxpayers or students. The Augar Review had officially recognised the problem of low value Higher Education (HE), and called attention to the huge imbalance in funding between universities and technical education.
A ruling by the Office for National Statistics means the subsidy element of student loans has to be properly accounted for from this year on, scoring against the government’s deficit. No more PFI-style funny money.
Coronavirus has accelerated things. With lucrative foreign students gone, many universities are in financial trouble. So controls on student numbers have, rightly, been reintroduced, at universities’ own request, to allow the system to be stabilised.
Many universities have finally started to provide online learning, an approach which made pitifully little progress before now. But universities still want to charge the full fees, leading to resistance from students.
Youth unemployment is rising. Jobs, apprenticeships and work placements are disrupted. The Government needs to move fast with schemes to help. But it’s also massively in debt, with a big structural deficit to fix.
The stars are aligning for a landmark reform: on one hand, boosting funding for youth job schemes, and putting rocket boosters under plans to build a prestigious, German-style technical education system. And on the other, paying for it by cutting back poor-value degree courses which waste taxpayers’ money, but don’t actually increase opportunities for students.
Before we continue, let me wind back a bit. Back to 1963. Between the end of the Chatterley ban, and the Beatles first LP.
That was the year of the Robbins Report, which said university places “should be available to all who were qualified for them by ability and attainment,” and triggered rapid university expansion.
Participation in HE rose exponentially: from 3.4 per cent in 1950, to 8.4 per cent in 1970, 19.3 per cent in 1990 and 33 per cent in 2000. In September 1999, Tony Blair set a target to get to 50% per cent, which we reached in 2018.
But somewhere along the way we lost sight of the Robbins principle – which wasn’t “more students”, but places for those who can benefit.
Robbins spent a long time pondering economic and academic evidence about how many could benefit. He considered a wide range of different types of education and training.
But under the 50 per cent target, the only rule has been more, more, more. You can go to university now without a GCSE in English and Maths, but the proportion of Firsts awarded has risen four-fold since the mid-1990s: universities are competing for students by debasing standards.
The creation of the Longitudinal Educational Outcomes dataset – initiated by David Willetts – has challenged this. It gives us data on how much graduates of particular courses at different universities earn. It lets us look at value-added too: how graduates’ earnings compare to people with similar backgrounds and A level results.
It shows us that while university is on average good for those attending – there are many for whom it’s not worth it. Either their earnings are lower than comparable people, or improve so little that it’s not worth the big upfront cost.
The most recent Institute for Fiscal Studies analysis found that, viewed from the point of view of the student, their degree isn’t worth it for around 10 per cent of women, and a quarter of men. This is extraordinary, given they are receiving big taxpayer subsidies.
Viewed from the point of view of the taxpayer, the taxpayer makes “a loss on the degrees of around 40 per cent of men and half of women.” Summing together the effect for society as a whole (the gains to students and taxpayers) “total returns will be negative for around 30 per cent of both men and women.” In other words, nearly a third of students degrees are not worth it economically.
The variation by degree and institution is even more dramatic. The taxpayer makes huge losses subsidising creative arts courses – only four and a half percent represent a positive investment.
Only 30 per cent of English students earn enough to justify taxpayers’ investment. The taxpayer makes a loss on the majority of students in sociology, psychology, communications, and languages. Many would be better off doing something else.
Median graduate annual earnings five years after graduation were £25,900, compared to £27,240 for Level 4 apprentices five years after completion. If we looked at, say, the bottom quarter of graduates, the case for them doing something else is even stronger.
Yes, for many students, going to university will have a value in itself. To study a beautiful poem has a value. We don’t expect the theology graduate who becomes a priest or a nun to earn a packet. Yes, we should explicitly make losses on some courses for the same reasons we subsidise public art and the like.
But let’s not be so snobby that we think there’s no satisfaction or intrinsic value from technical study. No sense of accomplishment for an apprentice building a jet engine, or a house.
For a country like Britain, deep in debt, lofty thoughts are not enough to justify such huge numbers of students doing things that don’t help them economically, given that’s what many themselves want. Half of young people go down the technical route – more in blue wall seats. They are less well funded.
While no neat comparison is possible, the Augar Review noted that in 2017-18, over £8 billion was committed to support 1.2 million UK undergraduates in England, and only £2.3 billion to support 2.2 million full and part time (FE) students.
That’s roughly £6,600 vs £1,050 each. Further education participation has fallen from 4.8 million to 3.6 million since 2010. Key higher technical qualifications (HNDs/HNCs) are down by over two-thirds since 2010/11. Universities have become less diverse too. Part-time higher education has fallen by 53% since 2010/11.
We have to rebalance the system from higher to technical education, and put those middle options back in. Gavin Williamson has talked about “stronger alignment of the courses delivered with the economic and societal needs of the nation.”
That’s right, but to get there we need to recognise the limits of market forces. Students choose their course aged 17. What it will do to their earnings at age 50 isn’t front of mind. With lots of public subsidy sloshing around, universities’ incentives are to put on lots of cheap arts courses, charge full fees, and use the money to cross-subsidise other things.
They get the benefit, and the taxpayer the cost. Ministers need to step in to protect taxpayers. A report last year for Onward (I was one author) looked at ways to reshape funding. Ministers could impose a floor on prior attainment like a minimum A level score. They could directly cut back numbers on poor value courses.
Personally, I’m drawn to the idea of a deals-based approach. Highly subsidised universities would propose to government how they will reduce their cost to the taxpayer. That could mean reducing numbers on some courses, or making them cheaper with shorter degrees, or and doing more online. Or a mix.
If they don’t produce a plan, the sanction would be direct number controls. We’d use the savings to fight youth unemployment, and fund technical education properly. How does that sound?


conservativehome--2020-06-01--Join us for our first ever ConservativeHome Live online event with Matt Ridley

I ’ m very pleased to announce a new venture for our site : ConservativeHome Live , a series of online events in which our readers will get the chance to hear from and put their questions to a range of the leading thinkers , politicians , campaigners and writers in the Conservative movement .
In our first event we will be joined by Matt Ridley – best-selling science writer , prominent Leave campaigner , Conservative peer , newspaper columnist and author of the forthcoming new book How Innovation Works .
I ’ ll be interviewing Matt , and putting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 8pm on Wednesday 10th June , via Zoom , the online video chat service .
We ’ ll be discussing a variety of essential topics , including : Do politicians really understand science ?
What has the pandemic revealed about how our national and international institutions work ( or don ’ t work ) ?
What place is there for freedom in a time of lockdown ?
How can Boris Johnson ensure the UK , outside the EU , is best-placed to encourage the innovation and entrepreneurial creativity that will be necessary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back to growth ?
I ’ m sure that our audience will have many questions of their own , too .
We ’ re excited to be exploring new ways to provide new insights and experiences for ConservativeHome readers , and I hope you ’ ll join us for our very first live broadcast .
As well as being a new medium for our readers , these events are also a way to help to support us as a company .
We provide Britain ’ s leading independent centre right source of news @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over two million readers a year .
Frankly , like every other media business our traditional revenues have been hurt by the pandemic and the lockdown , and new events help to support the valuable service that our writers provide .
I want these events to be as widely and easily accessible as possible , which is why we ’ ve set a ticket price of just £2.50 for the chance to tune in to hear Matt Ridley ’ s thoughts and put your questions to him .
To book your ticket today @ @ @ @ @

I’m very pleased to announce a new venture for our site: ConservativeHome Live, a series of online events in which our readers will get the chance to hear from and put their questions to a range of the leading thinkers, politicians, campaigners and writers in the Conservative movement.
In our first event we will be joined by Matt Ridley – best-selling science writer, prominent Leave campaigner, Conservative peer, newspaper columnist and author of the forthcoming new book How Innovation Works.
I’ll be interviewing Matt, and putting your questions to him, from 7pm to 8pm on Wednesday 10th June, via Zoom, the online video chat service.
We’ll be discussing a variety of essential topics, including: Do politicians really understand science? What has the pandemic revealed about how our national and international institutions work (or don’t work)? What place is there for freedom in a time of lockdown? How can Boris Johnson ensure the UK, outside the EU, is best-placed to encourage the innovation and entrepreneurial creativity that will be necessary to get us out of quarantine and back to growth? I’m sure that our audience will have many questions of their own, too.
We’re excited to be exploring new ways to provide new insights and experiences for ConservativeHome readers, and I hope you’ll join us for our very first live broadcast.
As well as being a new medium for our readers, these events are also a way to help to support us as a company. We provide Britain’s leading independent centre right source of news and analysis, for free, to over two million readers a year. Frankly, like every other media business our traditional revenues have been hurt by the pandemic and the lockdown, and new events help to support the valuable service that our writers provide. I want these events to be as widely and easily accessible as possible, which is why we’ve set a ticket price of just £2.50 for the chance to tune in to hear Matt Ridley’s thoughts and put your questions to him.
To book your ticket today, please click here.
Our first ConservativeHome Live event is kindly supported by Thorncliffe.


Coronavirus Count

Total number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 274,762 ( Up from 272,826 ) .
Total number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths : 38,489 ( Up from 38,376 ) .
Daily number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 1,936 ( Down from 2,445 ) .
Daily number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths : 113 ( Down from 215 ) .
From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
DAILY NUMBER OF COVID-19 ASSOCIATED DEATHS BY DATE REPORTED From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk to the UK has been raised to high ” – From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
OUR PLAN TO REBUILD : THE UK GOVERNMENT ’ S COVID-19 RECOVERY STRATEGY See here .
New as of Monday May 11 .
GUIDANCE : FURTHER BUSINESSES AND PREMISES TO CLOSE See here .
Published on Monday March 23 .
HOW EVERYONE CAN HELP STOP THE CORONAVIRUS ( SOCIAL DISTANCING ) See here .
Republished on Monday March 23 .
STAY AT HOME @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SELF-DISTANCING ) See here .
Republished on Monday March 23 .
See here .
Published on Monday March 23 .
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE FOR WORKERS ON WHAT AND HOW THEY CAN CLAIM See here .
Published on Friday March 20 .
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE FOR LANDLORDS , TENANTS AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES NEW See here .
Published on Saturday March 28 .
HOW TO AVOID CATCHING OR SPREADING CORONAVIRUS • Wash your hands with soap and water often – do this for at least 20 seconds .
• Always wash your hands when you get home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sanitiser gel if soap and water are not available .
• Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve ( not your hands ) when you cough or sneeze .
• Put used tissues in the bin straight away and wash your hands afterwards .
• Try to avoid close contact with people who are unwell .
The symptoms of coronavirus are : However , these symptoms do not necessarily mean you have the illness .
The symptoms are similar to other illnesses that are much more common , such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has an online coronavirus service that can tell you if you need medical help and advise you what to do .
Use this service if : • You think you might have coronavirus .
• In the last 14 days you ’ ve been to a country or area with a high risk of coronavirus – see the coronavirus advice for travellers .
• You ’ ve been in close contact with someone with coronavirus .
• In Scotland call your GP or NHS 24 on 111 out of hours .
• In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your area ) or 0845 46 47 .
• Do not go to a GP surgery , pharmacy or hospital .
• What the coronavirus is , how it ’ s spread and how to avoid catching it – Government NHS website overview .
• Stay at home advice and how to manage self-isolation .
( All information taken from Government sources .
Updated as of 6.00 on Monday June 1 . )

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


conservativehome--2020-06-01--David Bittlestone: My ambition to provide the extra housing that Woking needs

Cllr David Bittlestone is the Leader of Woking Borough Council .
Since 2007 , Conservatives have held a majority on Woking Borough Council .
That is , until May last year , when we lost one seat in the local elections – and one Conservative crossed the floor to join the Lib Dems .
So for the last year , I have run a minority administration with 14 Conservatives ( one of which couldn ’ t vote as she was Mayor ) , 10 Lib Dems , three Labour , and three independents .
Woking operates the strong leader model @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Portfolio Holders .
I initially offered the Lib Dems a couple of seats on the Executive which they declined .
The independents forced a vote of no confidence in me as Leader in July which was agreed at Full Council and I offered my resignation if the opposition parties agreed to take control – which they declined .
In September I won a vote of confidence and continued as Leader .
Generally , no overall control means nothing gets agreed and the minority administration just gets voted down at full council .
However @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Council Chamber at Woking and we have managed to continue with our ambitious plans for the town and for our residents .
These started in 2010 with the purchase of our secondary shopping centre and a ten million pound investment in the public realm around it , which attracted a range of new restaurants and completely transformed the centre of Woking .
I know there is now a lot of negative press about councils investing in their shopping centres but if we hadn ’ t done that investment my guess is that Woking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state .
We are now nearing the end of our second , much larger , transformation of the centre of Woking .
The £540 million pound “ place-shaping ” of the town includes three tower blocks rising to a maximum height of 34 storeys and including over 400 flats , an Hilton four-star hotel with a sky bar and restaurant at the top of it , plus a new 50,000 sq ft M & S and additional family attractions .
In 2012 the Council decided to concentrate its house building in the town @ @ @ @ @ @ @ My own personal ambition has always been around housing .
It sits very uncomfortably with me that whilst we are one of the richest countries in the world , we have 70,000 families living in temporary accommodation .
For the last 22 years on the council I have tried to address this issue .
We have had some amazing successes including 223 new social homes delivered as part of a PFI initiative .
We have housed 60 Syrian families over the past five years .
The Council now has its own arms-length housing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rents from 50-60 per cent of market price up to full price .
To all these tenants we have introduced our Earn Your Deposit Scheme .
If you are a good tenant , if you look after your property , pay your rent on time , and are not antisocial , we will give you money each year towards a deposit .
For someone renting a two bedroom home they will receive £2,400 per year towards a deposit up to a maximum of £80,000 .
This is our way of giving back some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to own their own home .
Last month the Council agreed , with cross-party support , our most ambitious housing project to date , which is the regeneration of Sheerwater – an Estate built in the 1950s to rehouse families who lost their homes in London during the war .
The exciting part of this project for me has been that we promised to provide the community infrastructure before we built the new homes and we have already started the new Leisure Centre , swimming pool and sports facilities , all of which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the new 1,100 homes have been built .
Everyone accepts that infrastructure is the key .
Delivering it can be very challenging .
Last year central government offered us £95 million as part of a HIF bid of £115 million to widen the railway bridge that is the major congestion point in the town .
This infrastructure improvement will not only make a major improvement to the road network , but will also unlock the potential to increase the capacity at Woking Railway Station by over 40 per cent and will enable the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Brownfield development sites in the town centre .
Looking forward to the elections next year : we have a great collection of young enthusiastic candidates .
We have a very strong message about our town and our future , and I believe we have a real chance to ” Take Back Control ” of the Council .
I am standing down this year .
It ’ s been an incredible journey over the last 22 years .

Cllr David Bittlestone is the Leader of Woking Borough Council.
Since 2007, Conservatives have held a majority on Woking Borough Council. That is, until May last year, when we lost one seat in the local elections – and one Conservative crossed the floor to join the Lib Dems. So for the last year, I have run a minority administration with 14 Conservatives (one of which couldn’t vote as she was Mayor), 10 Lib Dems, three Labour, and three independents. Woking operates the strong leader model with an executive made up of five Portfolio Holders. I initially offered the Lib Dems a couple of seats on the Executive which they declined. The independents forced a vote of no confidence in me as Leader in July which was agreed at Full Council and I offered my resignation if the opposition parties agreed to take control – which they declined. In September I won a vote of confidence and continued as Leader.
Generally, no overall control means nothing gets agreed and the minority administration just gets voted down at full council. However, common sense still exists in the Council Chamber at Woking and we have managed to continue with our ambitious plans for the town and for our residents. These started in 2010 with the purchase of our secondary shopping centre and a ten million pound investment in the public realm around it, which attracted a range of new restaurants and completely transformed the centre of Woking.
I know there is now a lot of negative press about councils investing in their shopping centres but if we hadn’t done that investment my guess is that Woking would now be in a very poor state. We are now nearing the end of our second, much larger, transformation of the centre of Woking. The £540 million pound “place-shaping” of the town includes three tower blocks rising to a maximum height of 34 storeys and including over 400 flats, an Hilton four-star hotel with a sky bar and restaurant at the top of it, plus a new 50,000 sq ft M&S and additional family attractions. In 2012 the Council decided to concentrate its house building in the town centre to protect the green belt.
My own personal ambition has always been around housing. It sits very uncomfortably with me that whilst we are one of the richest countries in the world, we have 70,000 families living in temporary accommodation. For the last 22 years on the council I have tried to address this issue. We have had some amazing successes including 223 new social homes delivered as part of a PFI initiative. We have housed 60 Syrian families over the past five years.
The Council now has its own arms-length housing company which has over 750 homes offering rents from 50-60 per cent of market price up to full price. To all these tenants we have introduced our Earn Your Deposit Scheme. If you are a good tenant, if you look after your property, pay your rent on time, and are not antisocial, we will give you money each year towards a deposit. For someone renting a two bedroom home they will receive £2,400 per year towards a deposit up to a maximum of £80,000. This is our way of giving back some hope to those people who still aspire to own their own home.
Last month the Council agreed, with cross-party support, our most ambitious housing project to date, which is the regeneration of Sheerwater – an Estate built in the 1950s to rehouse families who lost their homes in London during the war. The exciting part of this project for me has been that we promised to provide the community infrastructure before we built the new homes and we have already started the new Leisure Centre, swimming pool and sports facilities, all of which will be completed before the first of the new 1,100 homes have been built.
Everyone accepts that infrastructure is the key. Delivering it can be very challenging. Last year central government offered us £95 million as part of a HIF bid of £115 million to widen the railway bridge that is the major congestion point in the town. This infrastructure improvement will not only make a major improvement to the road network, but will also unlock the potential to increase the capacity at Woking Railway Station by over 40 per cent and will enable the development of an additional 4,500 plus homes on Brownfield development sites in the town centre.
Looking forward to the elections next year: we have a great collection of young enthusiastic candidates. We have a very strong message about our town and our future, and I believe we have a real chance to ”Take Back Control” of the Council.
I am standing down this year. It’s been an incredible journey over the last 22 years.


conservativehome--2020-06-01--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the Pensions Ombudsman – and more

Eight years ago , the TaxPayers ’ Alliance reported that “ in the last year , five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories ” .
It currently reports that almost half of avowedly political appointees last year owed their allegiance to Labour Party , compared to less than a third for the Conservatives .
Despite the selection of some Party members or supporters to fill important posts , over time , the Conservatives have punched beneath their weight when it comes to public appointments .
One of the reasons seems to be that Tories simply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number as Labour supporters .
To help remedy this , each week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies , so that qualified Conservatives can be aware of the opportunities presented .
“ The Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration provides independent scrutiny of the UK ’ s border and immigration functions , providing security , confidence and assurance as to their effectiveness and efficiency .
They report annually to the Home Secretary and their reports are placed before Parliament .
Leading a team of approximately 30 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the UK ’ s approach to the Border , Immigration and Citizenship System .
Candidates will have experience of working successfully at a senior level , ideally within a regulation or enforcement arena .
Whatever your background , you will appreciate the importance and opportunity that this role presents .
Excellent communication skills , decisiveness , independence and unquestionable integrity will be essential.
” “ The Imperial War Museum ( IWM ) was founded in 1917 to record the story of the Great War .
Its remit was subsequently extended to cover the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the world ’ s leading authority on conflict and its impact focusing on Britain , its former Empire and the Commonwealth , from the First World War to the present .
The IWM is a single institution with a single purpose , fulfilled in different ways at its different branches , both physical and virtual .
In addition to its headquarters building , IWM London , in Southwark , the Museum ’ s branches comprise the Churchill War Rooms and HMS Belfast in London , IWM Duxford in Cambridgeshire , and IWM @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is housed in a stunning building by Daniel Libeskind .
The IWM has traditionally had a Trustee on its Board from each of the three branches of the armed forces , and is currently recruiting for two Trustees to represent the RAF and Navy branches.
” Time : Up to one day per month .
“ Both Non-Executive Board Members roles will exercise their role through influence and advice , supporting as well as challenging the executive , and covering such issues as : support , guidance and challenge on the progress and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ single departmental plan ) ; performance ( including agreeing key performance indicators ) , operational issues ( including the operational and delivery implications of policy proposals ) , adherence to relevant standards ( e.g .
commercial , digital ) , and on the effective management of the department ; [ and ] the recruitment , appraisal and suitable succession planning of senior executives , as appropriate within the principles set out by the Civil Service Commission.
” Her Majesty ’ s Inspectorate of Prisons – Her Majesty ’ s Chief Inspector of Prisons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ successful candidate will have a proven ability to act with integrity and independence from Government , and deliver the services under the Inspectorate ’ s scrutiny .
The Inspectorate ’ s methodology focuses on outcomes for those detained within the custodial estate , and encourages establishments to seek improvement in those outcomes where required .
In addition to its annual inspection programme , the Inspectorate has , since 2019 , introduced Independent Reviews of Progress , which will assess progress made by a prison in implementing previous recommendations in up to 20 prisons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be expected to use their expertise to innovate and evolve the inspection approach to further strengthen the work and impact of the Inspectorate.
” “ The Pensions Ombudsman ( TPO ) investigates and determines complaints and disputes about the way that occupational and personal pension schemes are run .
The Pension Protection Fund Ombudsman considers decisions made by the Pension Protection Fund ( PPF ) Board under the PPF ’ s internal procedures and decides on appeals against decisions by the Department for Work and Pensions ( DWP ) Financial Assistance Scheme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ separately in legislation , they are held by one post holder .
Throughout this document the term ‘ PO ’ will therefore cover both roles .
TPO provides an accessible service for dealing with pensions complaints .
Determinations are final and binding on all parties , subject only to appeal in the High Court on a point of law .
Services are provided free of charge .
”

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.
– – – – – – – – – –
Home Office – Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration
“The Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration provides independent scrutiny of the UK’s border and immigration functions, providing security, confidence and assurance as to their effectiveness and efficiency. They report annually to the Home Secretary and their reports are placed before Parliament. Leading a team of approximately 30 staff you will strive to continually improve the UK’s approach to the Border, Immigration and Citizenship System. Candidates will have experience of working successfully at a senior level, ideally within a regulation or enforcement arena. Whatever your background, you will appreciate the importance and opportunity that this role presents. Excellent communication skills, decisiveness, independence and unquestionable integrity will be essential.”
Time: Full-time.
Remuneration: £130,000
Closes: 06 June
– – – – – – – – – –
Imperial War Museum – RAF Trustee and Navy Trustee
“The Imperial War Museum (IWM) was founded in 1917 to record the story of the Great War. Its remit was subsequently extended to cover the Second World War and today, IWM is the world’s leading authority on conflict and its impact focusing on Britain, its former Empire and the Commonwealth, from the First World War to the present. The IWM is a single institution with a single purpose, fulfilled in different ways at its different branches, both physical and virtual. In addition to its headquarters building, IWM London, in Southwark, the Museum’s branches comprise the Churchill War Rooms and HMS Belfast in London, IWM Duxford in Cambridgeshire, and IWM North in Trafford, Greater Manchester which is housed in a stunning building by Daniel Libeskind. The IWM has traditionally had a Trustee on its Board from each of the three branches of the armed forces, and is currently recruiting for two Trustees to represent the RAF and Navy branches.”
Time: Up to one day per month.
Remuneration: Expenses reasonably incurred.
Closes: 12 June
– – – – – – – – – –
Department for International Trade – Lead Non-Executive Board Member/Non-Executive Board Member
“Both Non-Executive Board Members roles will exercise their role through influence and advice, supporting as well as challenging the executive, and covering such issues as: support, guidance and challenge on the progress and implementation of the Departments Strategy (the single departmental plan); performance (including agreeing key performance indicators), operational issues (including the operational and delivery implications of policy proposals), adherence to relevant standards (e.g. commercial, digital), and on the effective management of the department; [and] the recruitment, appraisal and suitable succession planning of senior executives, as appropriate within the principles set out by the Civil Service Commission.”
Time: Approx. 15-20 days per annum.
Remuneration: £20,000/£15,000 per annum.
Closes: 14 June
– – – – – – – – – –
Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons – Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Prisons
“Reporting directly to Ministers, the successful candidate will have a proven ability to act with integrity and independence from Government, and deliver the services under the Inspectorate’s scrutiny. The Inspectorate’s methodology focuses on outcomes for those detained within the custodial estate, and encourages establishments to seek improvement in those outcomes where required. In addition to its annual inspection programme, the Inspectorate has, since 2019, introduced Independent Reviews of Progress, which will assess progress made by a prison in implementing previous recommendations in up to 20 prisons a year. The next Chief Inspector will be expected to use their expertise to innovate and evolve the inspection approach to further strengthen the work and impact of the Inspectorate.”
Time: Full-time.
Remuneration: £135,000 per annum.
Closes: 15 June
– – – – – – – – – –
The Pensions Ombudsman – Chair
“The Pensions Ombudsman (TPO) investigates and determines complaints and disputes about the way that occupational and personal pension schemes are run. The Pension Protection Fund Ombudsman considers decisions made by the Pension Protection Fund (PPF) Board under the PPF’s internal procedures and decides on appeals against decisions by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) Financial Assistance Scheme. Although the roles are provided for separately in legislation, they are held by one post holder. Throughout this document the term ‘PO’ will therefore cover both roles. TPO provides an accessible service for dealing with pensions complaints. Determinations are final and binding on all parties, subject only to appeal in the High Court on a point of law. Services are provided free of charge.”
Time: Min. 30 days per annum.
Remuneration: £20,000 per annum.
Closes: 19 June


conservativehome--2020-06-01--WATCH: Hancock. The contact-tracing system “is successful”.

Chief Nursing Officer Ruth May @ CNOEngland explains how to use a home testing kit for coronavirus .
This is @ @ @ @ @ you can get tested for coronavirus .
Find out more here : https : //t.co/0G9LPXVhiP @

Chief Nursing Officer Ruth May @CNOEngland explains how to use a home testing kit for coronavirus.
This is just one of the ways you can get tested for coronavirus.
Find out more here: https://t.co/0G9LPXVhiP pic.twitter.com/P7P9UbyUNT
— UK Prime Minister (@10DowningStreet) June 1, 2020


conservativehome--2020-06-01--The second wave is treated as inevitable. But Europe suggests otherwise.

One of the biggest claims the public has been told throughout the Coronavirus crisis is that a second wave of the disease is inevitable – and coming soon .
This has been at the forefront of the Government ’ s warnings ; repeatedly people have instructed to do their duty and stay indoors , as this is the only way to prevent another peak from happening .
Now that it ’ s summer and lockdown has been eased , there ’ s growing nervousness that it will arrive .
One paper writes : “ Easing social distancing without a proper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ isolating will lead to a second wave of coronavirus ” .
Clearly without imposing a lockdown , death and infection rates would have risen and we would be looking at an even more alarming government graph than the ones we ’ ve currently seen .
But the question remains of whether – with Covid-19 levels reducing – there will be another big peak .
The Government is working on this assumption , planning for the worst-case scenario .
But herein lies the problem : it is an assumption , and no one ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there ’ s no second peak ?
Seeing as this expectation has directed so much of our strategy , as well as being used to ensure compliance in the population , it must be worth asking “ are you sure ?
” to ministers at the very least .
Sars and Mers never had second waves , yet this one is taken as indisputable fact .
Where there has been scepticism , it has not received much airing .
Some were vocal early on in the crisis , but their ideas were not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Professor Isaac Ben-Israel , the Head of the Security Studies programme at Tel Aviv University said that Covid-19 peaks at 40 days before rapidly declining and ultimately vanishing after 70 days .
That same month , French academic Professor Didier Raoult suggested the virus had a “ bell curve ” formation , and went so far as to call the second wave a “ fantasy that was invented from the Spanish flu ” .
While these scientists may be very wrong – and if so , their advice might be catastrophic to follow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what ’ s happening in Europe , where Covid-19 cases have been decreasing , in relation to their words .
France , Denmark and others have eased lockdown well in advance of the UK , and there are no indications of a second wave yet .
Yes there have been outbreaks , but nothing like the soaring rates we are so used to seeing on government charts .
Switzerland , for instance , which reopened schools and restaurants on May 11 has not seen a peak since lockdown measures eased , nor has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Germany ’ s chief virologists , has even declared it a possibility that the country will “ get through without a second wave.
” Some will say that what has stopped a second wave is these countries ’ sophisticated solutions to the crisis .
South Korea , for example , has had spikes in Covid-19 infections , which it controlled through its track and trace programme ; Singapore , too , had an outbreak , which it stopped through forced isolation , and China used localised lockdowns .
There ’ s no doubt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it also may be the case that the virus has a natural decline that we don ’ t truly understand yet , attributing everything to interventions .
One hypothesis that ’ s particularly interesting is that warm weather appears to have an impact on the Coronavirus .
Drosten has said that it ’ s “ relatively clear that there is a certain temperature effect .
It probably arises from being together in closed rooms in winter ” , and others have suggested it ’ s seasonal , as other endemic coronaviruses that cause @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Based on this , there are a huge number of questions for the Government and its advisers , as to whether the UK is following the right approach .
Many of these may be unanswerable , incidentally , but they would simply help us to think about Covid-19 more critically .
Currently , we are focussed on the short-term , in favour of the most cautious approaches .
But the timeline on which we look upon Covid-19 will grow , and so with it our attitudes around what ’ s best .
For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second wave – but it ’ s coming in winter ?
It might make people see the current restrictions in a different light , wanting to make the most out of summer for work and socialising .
We might regret doing our lockdown in March and April if we need another at a later date ; what if it turns out that our economy can only handle one ?
It feels almost blasphemous to ask this , but the nature of a “ second wave ” changes the context through which we see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ note , what if the virus mutates by the time we get a second wave of Covid-19 ?
It is all the more pertinent if we are to get a winter wave , in which most illnesses come back a lot harsher .
Perhaps this would increase support for the controversial concept of “ herd immunity ” – if people were fearful that the virus will mutate , as per Spanish flu – with people hedging their bets on getting antibodies now .
There are many other questions to be asked ; if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ third and fourth and so on ?
Do countries face different likelihoods of a second wave – based on individual differences ( climate , anything else ) ?
Is the second wave even coming at all , as some have argued ?
All of these discussion points change the landscape of the Coronavirus .
In writing this , one does not proclaim to be an oracle , nor doubt the second wave ; who knows , maybe it ’ ll be here in the next few days .
But the point is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this crisis .
One suspects part of the reason people get vexed with the media at daily briefings is not so much their political prejudices , but scientific ones .
They tend to support what looks like the most cautious approach now – early lockdown , worrying about the second wave – namely because it seems the moral angle .
But caution could bring its own dangers in years to come ( economic damage , a virulent second wave with no antibodies ) .
Coronavirus is going to be here with us for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a vaccine , the certainty of a second wave can not be taken as gospel .

One of the biggest claims the public has been told throughout the Coronavirus crisis is that a second wave of the disease is inevitable – and coming soon. This has been at the forefront of the Government’s warnings; repeatedly people have instructed to do their duty and stay indoors, as this is the only way to prevent another peak from happening.
Now that it’s summer and lockdown has been eased, there’s growing nervousness that it will arrive. One paper writes: “Easing social distancing without a proper programme of testing, contact tracing and isolating will lead to a second wave of coronavirus”.
Clearly without imposing a lockdown, death and infection rates would have risen and we would be looking at an even more alarming government graph than the ones we’ve currently seen. But the question remains of whether – with Covid-19 levels reducing – there will be another big peak.
The Government is working on this assumption, planning for the worst-case scenario. But herein lies the problem: it is an assumption, and no one ever poses the alternative scenario: what if there’s no second peak?
Seeing as this expectation has directed so much of our strategy, as well as being used to ensure compliance in the population, it must be worth asking “are you sure?” to ministers at the very least. Sars and Mers never had second waves, yet this one is taken as indisputable fact.
Where there has been scepticism, it has not received much airing. Some were vocal early on in the crisis, but their ideas were not taken much further. In April, Professor Isaac Ben-Israel, the Head of the Security Studies programme at Tel Aviv University said that Covid-19 peaks at 40 days before rapidly declining and ultimately vanishing after 70 days. That same month, French academic Professor Didier Raoult suggested the virus had a “bell curve” formation, and went so far as to call the second wave a “fantasy that was invented from the Spanish flu”.
While these scientists may be very wrong – and if so, their advice might be catastrophic to follow – it’s worth looking at what’s happening in Europe, where Covid-19 cases have been decreasing, in relation to their words. France, Denmark and others have eased lockdown well in advance of the UK, and there are no indications of a second wave yet.
Yes there have been outbreaks, but nothing like the soaring rates we are so used to seeing on government charts. Switzerland, for instance, which reopened schools and restaurants on May 11 has not seen a peak since lockdown measures eased, nor has Denmark. Christian Drosten, one of Germany’s chief virologists, has even declared it a possibility that the country will “get through without a second wave.”
Some will say that what has stopped a second wave is these countries’ sophisticated solutions to the crisis. South Korea, for example, has had spikes in Covid-19 infections, which it controlled through its track and trace programme; Singapore, too, had an outbreak, which it stopped through forced isolation, and China used localised lockdowns. There’s no doubt that these interventions were effective, but it also may be the case that the virus has a natural decline that we don’t truly understand yet, attributing everything to interventions.
One hypothesis that’s particularly interesting is that warm weather appears to have an impact on the Coronavirus. Drosten has said that it’s “relatively clear that there is a certain temperature effect. It probably arises from being together in closed rooms in winter”, and others have suggested it’s seasonal, as other endemic coronaviruses that cause common colds are high in winter. Based on this, there are a huge number of questions for the Government and its advisers, as to whether the UK is following the right approach.
Many of these may be unanswerable, incidentally, but they would simply help us to think about Covid-19 more critically. Currently, we are focussed on the short-term, in favour of the most cautious approaches. But the timeline on which we look upon Covid-19 will grow, and so with it our attitudes around what’s best.
For instance, what if there is a second wave – but it’s coming in winter? It might make people see the current restrictions in a different light, wanting to make the most out of summer for work and socialising. We might regret doing our lockdown in March and April if we need another at a later date; what if it turns out that our economy can only handle one? It feels almost blasphemous to ask this, but the nature of a “second wave” changes the context through which we see the Covid-19 crisis.
On a bleaker note, what if the virus mutates by the time we get a second wave of Covid-19? It is all the more pertinent if we are to get a winter wave, in which most illnesses come back a lot harsher. Perhaps this would increase support for the controversial concept of “herd immunity” – if people were fearful that the virus will mutate, as per Spanish flu – with people hedging their bets on getting antibodies now.
There are many other questions to be asked; if a second wave, why not a third and fourth and so on? Do countries face different likelihoods of a second wave – based on individual differences (climate, anything else)? Is the second wave even coming at all, as some have argued? All of these discussion points change the landscape of the Coronavirus.
In writing this, one does not proclaim to be an oracle, nor doubt the second wave; who knows, maybe it’ll be here in the next few days. But the point is that we shouldn’t assume things in this crisis. One suspects part of the reason people get vexed with the media at daily briefings is not so much their political prejudices, but scientific ones. They tend to support what looks like the most cautious approach now – early lockdown, worrying about the second wave – namely because it seems the moral angle.
But caution could bring its own dangers in years to come (economic damage, a virulent second wave with no antibodies). Coronavirus is going to be here with us for a long time, and faced without a vaccine, the certainty of a second wave cannot be taken as gospel.


conservativehome--2020-06-02--Our panel. There is rising support for a faster exit from lockdown.

Among our panel , there is erosion of support for the speed at which the lockdown is being eased , and an accumulation of backing for a faster pace .
The corresponding figures in last month ’ s special lockdown survery were nine – 55 – 33 .
So the proportion backing the Government has fallen to almost exactly half the panel .
Similarly , seven per cent back a strict shutdown along the lines of the one that has been lifted ; 46 per cent support the Government ’ s South Korea-type test and trace policy , and 44 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lockdown that stresses voluntary-style social distancing ” .
Last month , those figures were 10 – 54 – 33 .
Mind you , it could now be argued that , with further lockdown restrictions due to be lifted , the Government ’ s policy now contains elements of Sweden as well as South Korea in the mix .
Finally in this section , 36 per cent of the panel agrees that the “ sacrifices that younger and healthier people are being called to make on behalf of older and vulnerable ones are disproportionate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interests of the latter at the expense of the former ” .
Fifty-nine per cent disagree .
Last month , those figures were 36 per cent and 55 per cent – so not much change there .
Overall , the panel is reflecting how people are behaving .
With the NHS apparently out of danger , and daily cases in decline , the fear factor is clearly falling – at least , if one ’ s measure is how people are behaving rather than what they tell pollsters .

Among our panel, there is erosion of support for the speed at which the lockdown is being eased, and an accumulation of backing for a faster pace.
The corresponding figures in last month’s special lockdown survery were nine – 55 – 33. So the proportion backing the Government has fallen to almost exactly half the panel.
Similarly, seven per cent back a strict shutdown along the lines of the one that has been lifted; 46 per cent support the Government’s South Korea-type test and trace policy, and 44 per cent “a less restrictive Swedish-style lockdown that stresses voluntary-style social distancing”.
Last month, those figures were 10 – 54 – 33. Mind you, it could now be argued that, with further lockdown restrictions due to be lifted, the Government’s policy now contains elements of Sweden as well as South Korea in the mix.
Finally in this section, 36 per cent of the panel agrees that the “sacrifices that younger and healthier people are being called to make on behalf of older and vulnerable ones are disproportionate, and Government policy is stressing the interests of the latter at the expense of the former”. Fifty-nine per cent disagree.
Last month, those figures were 36 per cent and 55 per cent – so not much change there. Overall, the panel is reflecting how people are behaving. With the NHS apparently out of danger, and daily cases in decline, the fear factor is clearly falling – at least, if one’s measure is how people are behaving rather than what they tell pollsters.


conservativehome--2020-06-02--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the Pensions Ombudsman – and more


conservativehome--2020-06-02--Trump’s brutal response to the riots puts him closer to the people than his liberal opponents

Donald Trump is a quintessentially American figure .
He speaks for millions of people and has democratic legitimacy : he won an election .
It would be an error to brush these points aside when reacting to the President ’ s comments on the riots .
His manners may , as ever , leave something to be desired .
There is often something repulsive in his tone , as when he tweeted of the protesters outside the White House : In an earlier tweet he used the expression “ when the looting starts , the shooting starts ” , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a century to Walter Headley , chief of police in Miami , who in 1967 declared : This harsh doctrine divided opinion in 1967 , and divides opinion now .
But if one declares that only brutes and racists believe in shooting looters , one commits a political blunder .
During the 2011 London riots , I found myself discussing how to regain control of the streets with one of the kindest and gentlest people I know , a man of immigrant descent , a devout member of the Roman Catholic Church and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He replied that anyone on the streets should be shot .
“ But what if they only went out to buy a pint of milk ?
” I objected .
“ I don ’ t care , ” he said .
“ They shouldn ’ t be on the streets.
” The riots terrified him , so he called for stern measures , regardless of the injustices these would entail .
It is generally noticeable that the nearer a riot gets to someone ’ s house , the more authoritarian he or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In another tweet , which included a swipe at Joe Biden , his rival in this year ’ s presidential election , Trump demanded : In any difficulty , Trump looks around for someone else to blame , and makes unsubstantiated allegations against them .
The great denouncer of fake news himself disseminates fake news to his 81 million Twitter followers .
It is easy to become so angered by his behaviour that one overlooks his cunning .
He wants his opponents to fly into a rage and hurl moral condemnations at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ condemning him , they will imply that anyone who voted for him is a disgrace to humanity .
That is the trap into which Hillary Clinton plunged when she said “ you could put half of Trump ’ s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables ” , went on to describe them as “ racist , sexist , homophobic , xenophobic , islamaphobic—you name it ” , and added that “ thankfully they are not America ” .
Fatal words .
Who is she to decide who is an American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the liberals a bunch of hypocrites who have no interest in their fellow citizens , but wish to use their superior morality as a club with which to beat their compatriots into submission .
Trump begins , in these circumstances , to look attractive .
He too is looked down upon by these grand and prosy liberals .
He too knows what it is like to be scorned for being fat and never having read the right books , or indeed any books .
Herbert Butterfield identified , in The Whig Interpretation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ historians to see the history of England as a glorious progress towards ever greater freedom .
Someone should write a similar essay on the liberal interpretation of American history , in which everything that does not form part of a glorious progress towards ever greater liberalism is treated as an anomaly which somehow does not count .
One of the odd things about this interpretation is that the liberals are at the same time anxious to emphasise all the shameful aspects of American history , including the horror of slavery , and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Civil War to ensure that liberated African Americans enjoyed equal rights with poor white southerners .
This looks like , indeed is , a grave inconsistency .
But through every exploration of this perplexing history runs a guiding thread .
In the eyes of the liberal historians , their moral superiority , their right to judge , remains self-evident .
No one can write , say , a Confederate history of the United States , a lament for the lost code of the Virginia gentleman , without being driven out of decent society @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ineffable earnestness , is whether the Confederate statues should be torn down .
Yet Washington , Jefferson , Madison and Monroe were all from Virginia , and without them the United States would not exist .
One of the pleasures of writing a volume of brief lives of all the American presidents , published in March , was reading about these remarkable men .
The election in 1828 of Andrew Jackson , a born fighter who represented the ruthless and brutish strain in American life , was the first of many revenges taken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ society did not approve , but who had what it took to win a raucous , vacuous and demeaning presidential campaign .
Trump is the most recent of these vengeful outsiders .
He came as a dreadful shock to the liberals , who had studied neither his predecessors in American history , nor the state of mind of his supporters .
In From the Other Shore , Alexander Herzen examined the failure of the European revolutions of 1848 , and gave this account of the 18th-century origins of liberalism : “ The thought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the thought of equality , flashed like an electric spark through the best minds of the last century .
In a bookish , theoretical way , men realised the injustice of the times , and tried to redress it , bookishly .
This tardy repentance on the part of the minority was called liberalism .
In a genuine desire to reward the people for thousands of years of humiliation , they declared it sovereign , demanded that every peasant should become a political person…abandon his work , that is , his daily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
To the question of daily bread liberalism did not give much serious thought .
It is too romantic to trouble itself with such gross requirements .
It was easier for liberalism to invent the people than to study it.
” Something like this has happened in the United States .
American liberals have a fervent belief in equality , and will do everything they can for the American people short of spending any time with them , when it might become possible to ascertain what the people actually want .
The liberals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ name of the people , a morality which has the unfortunate effect of cutting them off from the people .
Trump with his brutal intuitions fills the resulting gap .
Nobody knows what will happen in the presidential election on Tuesday 3rd November .
But it is rather extraordinary that after making such a hash of his response to the Coronavirus , Trump is still in with a chance of a second term .
Andrew Gimson is the author of Gimson ’ s Presidents .

Donald Trump is a quintessentially American figure. He speaks for millions of people and has democratic legitimacy: he won an election.
It would be an error to brush these points aside when reacting to the President’s comments on the riots. His manners may, as ever, leave something to be desired.
There is often something repulsive in his tone, as when he tweeted of the protesters outside the White House:
“Nobody came close to breaching the fence. If they had they would have been greeted with the most vicious dogs, and most ominous weapons, I have ever seen. That’s when people would have been really badly hurt, at least. Many Secret Service agents just waiting for action.”
In an earlier tweet he used the expression “when the looting starts, the shooting starts”, a phrase which could be traced back half a century to Walter Headley, chief of police in Miami, who in 1967 declared:
“There is only one way to handle looters and arsonists during a riot and that is to shoot them on sight. I’ve let the word filter down: When the looting starts the shooting starts.“
This harsh doctrine divided opinion in 1967, and divides opinion now. But if one declares that only brutes and racists believe in shooting looters, one commits a political blunder.
During the 2011 London riots, I found myself discussing how to regain control of the streets with one of the kindest and gentlest people I know, a man of immigrant descent, a devout member of the Roman Catholic Church and a firm supporter of the Labour Party.
He replied that anyone on the streets should be shot.
“But what if they only went out to buy a pint of milk?” I objected.
“I don’t care,” he said. “They shouldn’t be on the streets.”
The riots terrified him, so he called for stern measures, regardless of the injustices these would entail.
It is generally noticeable that the nearer a riot gets to someone’s house, the more authoritarian he or she becomes.
The President understands this. In another tweet, which included a swipe at Joe Biden, his rival in this year’s presidential election, Trump demanded:
“Get tough Democrat Mayors and Governors. These people are ANARCHISTS. Call in our National Guard NOW. The World is watching and laughing at you and Sleepy Joe. Is this what America wants? NO!!!”
In any difficulty, Trump looks around for someone else to blame, and makes unsubstantiated allegations against them. The great denouncer of fake news himself disseminates fake news to his 81 million Twitter followers.
It is easy to become so angered by his behaviour that one overlooks his cunning. He wants his opponents to fly into a rage and hurl moral condemnations at him, for he calculates that while condemning him, they will imply that anyone who voted for him is a disgrace to humanity.
That is the trap into which Hillary Clinton plunged when she said “you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables”, went on to describe them as “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, islamaphobic—you name it”, and added that “thankfully they are not America”.
Fatal words. Who is she to decide who is an American and who is not? People see in the liberals a bunch of hypocrites who have no interest in their fellow citizens, but wish to use their superior morality as a club with which to beat their compatriots into submission.
Trump begins, in these circumstances, to look attractive. He too is looked down upon by these grand and prosy liberals. He too knows what it is like to be scorned for being fat and never having read the right books, or indeed any books.
Herbert Butterfield identified, in The Whig Interpretation of History, the tendency of Whig historians to see the history of England as a glorious progress towards ever greater freedom.
Someone should write a similar essay on the liberal interpretation of American history, in which everything that does not form part of a glorious progress towards ever greater liberalism is treated as an anomaly which somehow does not count.
One of the odd things about this interpretation is that the liberals are at the same time anxious to emphasise all the shameful aspects of American history, including the horror of slavery, and the failure for a hundred years after the Civil War to ensure that liberated African Americans enjoyed equal rights with poor white southerners.
This looks like, indeed is, a grave inconsistency. But through every exploration of this perplexing history runs a guiding thread. In the eyes of the liberal historians, their moral superiority, their right to judge, remains self-evident.
No one can write, say, a Confederate history of the United States, a lament for the lost code of the Virginia gentleman, without being driven out of decent society. The only question, debated with ineffable earnestness, is whether the Confederate statues should be torn down.
Yet Washington, Jefferson, Madison and Monroe were all from Virginia, and without them the United States would not exist. One of the pleasures of writing a volume of brief lives of all the American presidents, published in March, was reading about these remarkable men.
The election in 1828 of Andrew Jackson, a born fighter who represented the ruthless and brutish strain in American life, was the first of many revenges taken by outsiders, men of whom polite society did not approve, but who had what it took to win a raucous, vacuous and demeaning presidential campaign.
Trump is the most recent of these vengeful outsiders. He came as a dreadful shock to the liberals, who had studied neither his predecessors in American history, nor the state of mind of his supporters.
In From the Other Shore, Alexander Herzen examined the failure of the European revolutions of 1848, and gave this account of the 18th-century origins of liberalism:
“The thought of the injustice of the social order, the thought of equality, flashed like an electric spark through the best minds of the last century. In a bookish, theoretical way, men realised the injustice of the times, and tried to redress it, bookishly. This tardy repentance on the part of the minority was called liberalism. In a genuine desire to reward the people for thousands of years of humiliation, they declared it sovereign, demanded that every peasant should become a political person…abandon his work, that is, his daily bread, and…concern himself with general matters. To the question of daily bread liberalism did not give much serious thought. It is too romantic to trouble itself with such gross requirements. It was easier for liberalism to invent the people than to study it.”
Something like this has happened in the United States. American liberals have a fervent belief in equality, and will do everything they can for the American people short of spending any time with them, when it might become possible to ascertain what the people actually want.
The liberals seem to have espoused, in the name of the people, a morality which has the unfortunate effect of cutting them off from the people. Trump with his brutal intuitions fills the resulting gap.
Nobody knows what will happen in the presidential election on Tuesday 3rd November. But it is rather extraordinary that after making such a hash of his response to the Coronavirus, Trump is still in with a chance of a second term.
Andrew Gimson is the author of Gimson’s Presidents.


conservativehome--2020-06-02--The Moggcast: “Our relationship with China is currently very much in the hands of the Chinese”

The Moggcast : “ Our relationship with China is currently very much in the hands of the Chinese ”

You can also listen and subscribe to the Moggcast on iTunes , through our YouTube channel , or through the RSS feed here , as well as on Spotify, Alexa and via numerous leading podcast services.


conservativehome--2020-06-02--Join us for our first ever ConservativeHome Live online event with Matt Ridley


Coronavirus Count

Total number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 276,332 ( Up from 274,762 ) .
Total number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths : 39,045 ( Up from 38,489 ) .
Daily number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 1,570 ( Down from 1,936 ) .
Daily number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths : 111 ( Down from 113 ) .
From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
DAILY NUMBER OF COVID-19 ASSOCIATED DEATHS BY DATE REPORTED From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk to the UK has been raised to high ” – From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
OUR PLAN TO REBUILD : THE UK GOVERNMENT ’ S COVID-19 RECOVERY STRATEGY See here .
New as of Monday May 11 .
See here .
New as of Tuesday June 2 .
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE ON SHIELDING AND PROTECTING PEOPLE WHO ARE CLINICALLY EXTREMELY VULNERABLE FROM COVID-19 See here .
New as of Tuesday June 2 .
See here .
New as of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ LANDLORDS , TENANTS AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES NEW See here .
Published on Saturday March 28 .
HOW TO AVOID CATCHING OR SPREADING CORONAVIRUS • Wash your hands with soap and water often – do this for at least 20 seconds .
• Always wash your hands when you get home or into work .
• Use hand sanitiser gel if soap and water are not available .
• Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve ( not your hands ) when you cough or sneeze .
• Put used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wash your hands afterwards .
• Try to avoid close contact with people who are unwell .
The symptoms of coronavirus are : However , these symptoms do not necessarily mean you have the illness .
The symptoms are similar to other illnesses that are much more common , such as cold and flu .
NHS 111 has an online coronavirus service that can tell you if you need medical help and advise you what to do .
Use this service if : • You think you might have coronavirus .
• In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been to a country or area with a high risk of coronavirus – see the coronavirus advice for travellers .
• You ’ ve been in close contact with someone with coronavirus .
• In Scotland call your GP or NHS 24 on 111 out of hours .
• In Wales call 111 ( if available in your area ) or 0845 46 47 .
• Do not go to a GP surgery , pharmacy or hospital .
• What the coronavirus is , how it ’ s spread and how to avoid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
• Stay at home advice and how to manage self-isolation .
( All information taken from Government sources .
Updated as of 7.00 on Tuesday June 2 . )