conservativehome--2020-01-10--Shaun Bailey: We need tougher sentences to protect the LGBTQ+ community

Shaun Bailey is a member of the London Assembly and the Conservative candidate for Mayor of London .
In the past four years , there has been a disturbing rise in homophobic hate crime in London .
As someone who has experienced racial hate both on the streets and online , I stand in total solidarity with the LGBTQ+ community , many of whom suffer horrible and unacceptable abuse .
The Government and the Law Commission are currently looking at reforming hate crime laws .
As part of that , something must be done , and so I urge people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sentences to protect the LGBTQ+ community .
Political leaders at all levels of Government need to grasp the scale of this problem , which has increased by 51 per cent since 2016 .
In the short term , I would like to see our Government make homophobic hate crime an aggravated crime in line with racial and religious hate crime .
This would ensure harsher sentences and could be achieved as part of the sentencing reforms .
We can not afford to ignore this issue as LGBTQ+ hate crime is growing at a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of hate crime .
In the past 12 months alone , 2,835 recorded incidences of homophobic hate crime were reported to the authorities in London .
Yet research by Stonewall , a charity set up to represent and protect the LGBTQ+ community , suggests that 81 per cent of people who experience LGBTQ+ hate crime do not report it to the police .
I fear that what has been reported is only the tip of the iceberg .
It is completely unacceptable that in a city that prides itself on being as open @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hate crimes could have occurred over the last year – five times the reported figure .
Yet tougher sentencing alone will not protect the LGBTQ+ community .
We must address the spread of the vile ideology driving this disgusting form of hate .
We need to target the platforms that allow bigoted ideas to circulate .
To do this , we must also hold social media platforms to account .
We must demand that such ideas are not allowed to spread and to do so we must put pressure on the social media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ users spreading it .
No single community should ever feel singled out , victimised , or punished , and we must not stand idly by as this form of abuse continues to increase .
So please join me , sign my petition , and help put pressure on our Government to take the necessary steps to protect our brothers and sisters .
United we can stand together in total solidarity with the LGBTQ+ community .
In our battle to retake City Hall , I have a crime plan will ensure that criminals on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not victims .
I will fight for London ’ s values of openness and acceptance .
Not a single Londoner should feel unsafe for being themselves .
Join Shaun in calling for tougher sentences to protect the LGBTQ+ community by singing his petition .

Shaun Bailey is a member of the London Assembly and the Conservative candidate for Mayor of London.
In the past four years, there has been a disturbing rise in homophobic hate crime in London. As someone who has experienced racial hate both on the streets and online, I stand in total solidarity with the LGBTQ+ community, many of whom suffer horrible and unacceptable abuse.
The Government and the Law Commission are currently looking at reforming hate crime laws. As part of that, something must be done, and so I urge people to join me in calling for tougher sentences to protect the LGBTQ+ community. Political leaders at all levels of Government need to grasp the scale of this problem, which has increased by 51 per cent since 2016.
In the short term, I would like to see our Government make homophobic hate crime an aggravated crime in line with racial and religious hate crime. This would ensure harsher sentences and could be achieved as part of the sentencing reforms.
We cannot afford to ignore this issue as LGBTQ+ hate crime is growing at a faster rate than almost all other types of hate crime. In the past 12 months alone, 2,835 recorded incidences of homophobic hate crime were reported to the authorities in London. Yet research by Stonewall, a charity set up to represent and protect the LGBTQ+ community, suggests that 81 per cent of people who experience LGBTQ+ hate crime do not report it to the police.
I fear that what has been reported is only the tip of the iceberg. It is completely unacceptable that in a city that prides itself on being as open and tolerant as London, 13,974 homophobic hate crimes could have occurred over the last year – five times the reported figure.
Yet tougher sentencing alone will not protect the LGBTQ+ community. We must address the spread of the vile ideology driving this disgusting form of hate. We need to target the platforms that allow bigoted ideas to circulate. To do this, we must also hold social media platforms to account. We must demand that such ideas are not allowed to spread and to do so we must put pressure on the social media companies to remove abusive content and the users spreading it.
No single community should ever feel singled out, victimised, or punished, and we must not stand idly by as this form of abuse continues to increase. So please join me, sign my petition, and help put pressure on our Government to take the necessary steps to protect our brothers and sisters. United we can stand together in total solidarity with the LGBTQ+ community.
In our battle to retake City Hall, I have a crime plan will ensure that criminals on and offline are put under pressure, not victims. I will fight for London’s values of openness and acceptance.
Not a single Londoner should feel unsafe for being themselves.
Join Shaun in calling for tougher sentences to protect the LGBTQ+ community by singing his petition.


conservativehome--2020-01-10--Will Big Ben chime to mark the moment we leave the EU?

47 years ago we were just recovering from all the celebrations .
The first week of 1973 saw the “ Fanfare for Europe ” after the UK joined the European Economic Community on January 1st .
A concert took place in York Minister given by the Great Universal Stores Footwear Band .
The V & A put on a display of bronze age wind instruments that had been dug up from a Danish bog .
A special European edition of Opportunity Knocks was broadcast on the TV .
Not everything went smoothly .
An idea to borrow the Bayeux Tapestry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ London was abandoned as it was felt Saxons and Normans fighting was unsuitable .
The French refused to lend the Mona Lisa on the grounds that the British Museum had refused to let them borrow the Rosetta Stone .
But still , there were “ demonstrations of continental cookery in gas and electricity showrooms ” across the land .
Lord Goodman took charge .
He was assisted by Lord Mancroft who told The Times : “ A few local authorities have refused to take part .
But we found a much greater number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have accepted that Britsh entry is going to happen and are prepared to join us and do their best.
” But what of the celebrations for Brexit ?
There will be the commemorative 50p coin we have been waiting for .
The cross-party campaign group , Leave Means Leave , is organising a celebration party in Parliament Square on 31st January from 9pm which will finish just after we leave the European Union at 11pm .
Nigel Farage will be there and the Brexiteer comedian , Dominic Frisby .
There will be music @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Mayor of London giving consent for the event to take place .
Yet how will the revellers know that it is 11pm ?
Mark Francois , the Conservative MP for Rayleigh and Wickford , feels the signal should be from the obvious source at which historic moments are marked .
He has tabled an Early Day Motion which has attracted 55 signatures .
Last month he wrote for this site : “ With the Elizabeth Tower currently undergoing a period of renovation , Big Ben has been silenced to protect the hearing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nevertheless , the iconic bell does still ring for moments of national significance , such as New Year ’ s Eve and , quite rightly , for Remembrance Sunday too.
” Yesterday , in the debate on the Third Reading of the European Union ( Withdrawal Agreement ) Bill .
Francois added : “ Under the Bill , and specifically under article 50 , we will leave the European Union at 11 pm GMT on 31 January .
As we leave at a precise specified time , those who wish to celebrate will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mark the occasion .
It seems inconceivable to me and many colleagues that that clock should not be the most iconic timepiece in the world , Big Ben .
Will my right hon .
Friend make representations to the House of Commons Commission , whose decision it is , that Big Ben should bong for Brexit ?
” Steve Barclay , the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union , replied : “ My right hon .
Friend will know that my opposite number often talked of a clock ticking .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the House authorities , but I am sure they will have heard the representations he makes .
This is an important moment in our national story , and I am sure they will want to reflect that in the appropriate way.
” While John Bercow was hostile to the proposal , his successor , Sir Lindsay Hoyle , is more open-minded – saying it is a matter of whether “ the House wishes it to be so.
” The maintenance and repair work to the clock mechanism , and repairs and improvements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Big Ben is not due to resume regular operations until next year .
Kate McCann of Sky News tweets that “ if cost is the concern Francois ’ willing to take a big hammer up there and bong it himself.
” Symbolism matters .
Whatever view one holds of Brexit , few can dispute it is of historic significance .
No very convincing objection to allowing the chimes has been put forward .
One Tory MP I spoke to felt the Government might be reluctant to “ rub the Remainer ’ s noses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most consensual figure on this issue .
He was one of 28 Eurosceptic Tory MPs who voted against Theresa May ’ s deal three times .
At the time , Brexiteers were told that holding out for anything better was unrealistic .
Yet Francois and his fellow “ Spartans ” have been vindicated .
All the same , it might have been prudent for the bongs to have a less combative champion .
“ The Speaker has indicated that this is a matter for Members of the House of Commons .
The House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision of the House on this matter .
In the absence of any such decision , the Commission ’ s position on the sounding of Big Ben remains unchanged.
” A supposed impasse arises as the Government says it is for Parliament to decide – then Parliament then says a vote of MPs is required .
But that needs the Government to provide MPs with the chance for a vote .
Boris Johnson is understood to be personally supportive .
But that is not enough .
We should let the MPs resolve the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ free vote .
In future years though , for me , the important anniversary will be June 23rd , the date of the referendum in 2016 .
An incredibly exciting time .
I will always think of it as Independence Day .
But it is 11pm on January 31st that sees the start of a new chapter in Our Island Story .
It is reasonable to recognise it as such .
Let the bells ring out .

47 years ago we were just recovering from all the celebrations. The first week of 1973 saw the “Fanfare for Europe” after the UK joined the European Economic Community on January 1st. A concert took place in York Minister given by the Great Universal Stores Footwear Band. The V&A put on a display of bronze age wind instruments that had been dug up from a Danish bog. A special European edition of Opportunity Knocks was broadcast on the TV.
Not everything went smoothly. An idea to borrow the Bayeux Tapestry from the French and display it in London was abandoned as it was felt Saxons and Normans fighting was unsuitable. The French refused to lend the Mona Lisa on the grounds that the British Museum had refused to let them borrow the Rosetta Stone.
But still, there were “demonstrations of continental cookery in gas and electricity showrooms” across the land. Lord Goodman took charge. He was assisted by Lord Mancroft who told The Times:
“A few local authorities have refused to take part. But we found a much greater number who, while not very enthusiastic, have accepted that Britsh entry is going to happen and are prepared to join us and do their best.”
Heady days.
But what of the celebrations for Brexit?
There will be the commemorative 50p coin we have been waiting for.
The cross-party campaign group, Leave Means Leave, is organising a celebration party in Parliament Square on 31st January from 9pm which will finish just after we leave the European Union at 11pm. Nigel Farage will be there and the Brexiteer comedian, Dominic Frisby. There will be music and fireworks. This is subject to the Mayor of London giving consent for the event to take place.
Yet how will the revellers know that it is 11pm? Mark Francois, the Conservative MP for Rayleigh and Wickford, feels the signal should be from the obvious source at which historic moments are marked. He has tabled an Early Day Motion which has attracted 55 signatures.
Last month he wrote for this site:
“With the Elizabeth Tower currently undergoing a period of renovation, Big Ben has been silenced to protect the hearing of those working on the project. Nevertheless, the iconic bell does still ring for moments of national significance, such as New Year’s Eve and, quite rightly, for Remembrance Sunday too.”
Yesterday, in the debate on the Third Reading of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill. Francois added:
“Under the Bill, and specifically under article 50, we will leave the European Union at 11 pm GMT on 31 January. As we leave at a precise specified time, those who wish to celebrate will need to look to a clock to mark the occasion. It seems inconceivable to me and many colleagues that that clock should not be the most iconic timepiece in the world, Big Ben. Will my right hon. Friend make representations to the House of Commons Commission, whose decision it is, that Big Ben should bong for Brexit?”
Steve Barclay, the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, replied:
“My right hon. Friend will know that my opposite number often talked of a clock ticking. He will also know that that decision is for the House authorities, but I am sure they will have heard the representations he makes. This is an important moment in our national story, and I am sure they will want to reflect that in the appropriate way.”
While John Bercow was hostile to the proposal, his successor, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, is more open-minded – saying it is a matter of whether “the House wishes it to be so.” The maintenance and repair work to the clock mechanism, and repairs and improvements to the clock tower building, mean Big Ben is not due to resume regular operations until next year.
Kate McCann of Sky News tweets that “if cost is the concern Francois’ willing to take a big hammer up there and bong it himself.”
Symbolism matters. Whatever view one holds of Brexit, few can dispute it is of historic significance. No very convincing objection to allowing the chimes has been put forward. One Tory MP I spoke to felt the Government might be reluctant to “rub the Remainer’s noses in it.”
Francois is not the most consensual figure on this issue. He was one of 28 Eurosceptic Tory MPs who voted against Theresa May’s deal three times. At the time, Brexiteers were told that holding out for anything better was unrealistic. Yet Francois and his fellow “Spartans” have been vindicated. All the same, it might have been prudent for the bongs to have a less combative champion.
A House of Commons spokesman tells me:
“The Speaker has indicated that this is a matter for Members of the House of Commons. The House of Commons Commission will respond to any decision of the House on this matter. In the absence of any such decision, the Commission’s position on the sounding of Big Ben remains unchanged.”
A supposed impasse arises as the Government says it is for Parliament to decide – then Parliament then says a vote of MPs is required. But that needs the Government to provide MPs with the chance for a vote. Boris Johnson is understood to be personally supportive. But that is not enough. We should let the MPs resolve the matter. It could always be a free vote.
In future years though, for me, the important anniversary will be June 23rd, the date of the referendum in 2016. An incredibly exciting time. I will always think of it as Independence Day. But it is 11pm on January 31st that sees the start of a new chapter in Our Island Story. It is reasonable to recognise it as such.
Let the bells ring out.


conservativehome--2020-01-11--Smith’s plan for Northern Ireland undercuts the Government on veterans and Brexit

The aftershocks of last month ’ s general election continue to make themselves felt , and the latest is that Northern Ireland will this afternoon see the restoration of devolved government at Stormont .
Julian Smith and Simon Coveney have both urged the local parties to endorse a newly-published deal titled ‘ New Decade , New Approach ’ , which aims to try and resolve the disputes which have seen the Province go without a local legislature for almost three years .
If you had to summarise the package you could do worse than this : “ DUP overcompensated with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in any form ” .
In essence the Government has offered a big financial bung to try and help the Democratic Unionists sell what is effectively a climb-down on the prospect of Irish language legislation .
Whilst there won ’ t technically be a stand-alone act – and the DUP will now try and convince everyone that this technicality was the crucial point , for some reason – there will be a commissioner and other official organs to promote , and police , the use of the language .
It will also gain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up the problem , writing of “ unionist concerns that a language commission will generate endless demands , impose costly legal obligations on public bodies and promote divisive policies around signage aimed at eroding Northern Ireland ’ s sense of being part of the UK.
” They need only look at Wales , where the use of language requirements in things like public sector recruitment has effectively created nationalist fiefdoms .
Given that the DUP ’ s base has already torpedoed one previous deal , it is not yet certain that Arlene Foster @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be able to make this stick , no matter how desperate they are for Stormont ’ s return now they have lost their leverage at Westminster .
But the deal is not just problematic from the perspective of an Ulster Unionist .
It also , as Patrick Maguire has noted , cuts across two important elements of the Government ’ s strategy .
A pledge to swiftly implement various legacy proposals , for example , completely undercuts Johnny Mercer on the subject of historical prosecutions of ex-servicemen .
Another pledge to ensure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” to the British internal market , on the other hand , is if anything even more problematic .
The Prime Minister only recently , and controversially , abandoned his previous commitment to keeping the Province fully-aligned to the mainland .
If that remains the case , the only way businesses based in Ulster could simultaneously have frictionless access to the British market is through a high-alignment Brexit , i.e .
exactly the sort of ‘ UK-wide backstop ’ that Theresa May tried , in vain , to sell to Boris Johnson .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the ‘ New Decade , New Approach ’ plan for its wider strategy ?
Or is it the product of a silo in the Northern Irish Office ?
A long-standing concern amongst Unionists is that the NIO is , fundamentally , not on their side .
More than one has put to me that there is no British counterpart to the Dublin , which is viewed as being a solid partisan for nationalism .
The form of today ’ s announcement – a joint statement with the Irish Government , despite the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Province – will no more assuage these concerns than the content .
They also cite the Department ’ s extraordinary willingness to allow part of the United Kingdom to go for several years without proper democratic oversight rather than grasping the nettle of introducing direct rule , even temporarily .
Polley writes of “ relief ” at the prospect of even a flawed Stormont deal , but much of that relief stems from the fact that both James Brokenshire and Karen Bradley preferred to leave crucial decisions unmade than shoulder the responsibility @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regularly exploited provisions intended for emergencies to circumvent Commons scrutiny even of the minimal legislation she did pass .
Smith ’ s deal might have got Stormont back on its feet , at least for a little while .
But its governance provisions are weak , and its implications for broader policy troubling .
If the Government is serious about the Union with Northern Ireland – and at the minute that is an ‘ if ’ – then Johnson will need fresh thinking and a much bolder , more pro-active approach to supporting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Secretary of State prepared to challenge , rather than champion , the institutional attitudes of the NIO would be a good place to start .

The aftershocks of last month’s general election continue to make themselves felt, and the latest is that Northern Ireland will this afternoon see the restoration of devolved government at Stormont.
Julian Smith and Simon Coveney have both urged the local parties to endorse a newly-published deal titled ‘New Decade, New Approach’, which aims to try and resolve the disputes which have seen the Province go without a local legislature for almost three years.
If you had to summarise the package you could do worse than this: “DUP overcompensated with pork as price for legitimising Irish Language in any form”. In essence the Government has offered a big financial bung to try and help the Democratic Unionists sell what is effectively a climb-down on the prospect of Irish language legislation.
Whilst there won’t technically be a stand-alone act – and the DUP will now try and convince everyone that this technicality was the crucial point, for some reason – there will be a commissioner and other official organs to promote, and police, the use of the language. It will also gain official status.
Owen Polley neatly sums up the problem, writing of “unionist concerns that a language commission will generate endless demands, impose costly legal obligations on public bodies and promote divisive policies around signage aimed at eroding Northern Ireland’s sense of being part of the UK.” They need only look at Wales, where the use of language requirements in things like public sector recruitment has effectively created nationalist fiefdoms.
Given that the DUP’s base has already torpedoed one previous deal, it is not yet certain that Arlene Foster and the rest of the party leadership will be able to make this stick, no matter how desperate they are for Stormont’s return now they have lost their leverage at Westminster.
But the deal is not just problematic from the perspective of an Ulster Unionist. It also, as Patrick Maguire has noted, cuts across two important elements of the Government’s strategy. A pledge to swiftly implement various legacy proposals, for example, completely undercuts Johnny Mercer on the subject of historical prosecutions of ex-servicemen.
Another pledge to ensure Northern Irish businesses have “unfettered access” to the British internal market, on the other hand, is if anything even more problematic. The Prime Minister only recently, and controversially, abandoned his previous commitment to keeping the Province fully-aligned to the mainland. If that remains the case, the only way businesses based in Ulster could simultaneously have frictionless access to the British market is through a high-alignment Brexit, i.e. exactly the sort of ‘UK-wide backstop’ that Theresa May tried, in vain, to sell to Boris Johnson.
(Of course, a cynic might argue that such a high-alignment Brexit is probably the easiest one to sort out if your overriding political priority is getting a deal without extending the transition period…)
Has the Cabinet really grasped the implications of the ‘New Decade, New Approach’ plan for its wider strategy? Or is it the product of a silo in the Northern Irish Office?
A long-standing concern amongst Unionists is that the NIO is, fundamentally, not on their side. More than one has put to me that there is no British counterpart to the Dublin, which is viewed as being a solid partisan for nationalism. The form of today’s announcement – a joint statement with the Irish Government, despite the latter having no formal role in governing the Province – will no more assuage these concerns than the content.
They also cite the Department’s extraordinary willingness to allow part of the United Kingdom to go for several years without proper democratic oversight rather than grasping the nettle of introducing direct rule, even temporarily. Polley writes of “relief” at the prospect of even a flawed Stormont deal, but much of that relief stems from the fact that both James Brokenshire and Karen Bradley preferred to leave crucial decisions unmade than shoulder the responsibility for making them. Bradley in particular regularly exploited provisions intended for emergencies to circumvent Commons scrutiny even of the minimal legislation she did pass.
Smith’s deal might have got Stormont back on its feet, at least for a little while. But its governance provisions are weak, and its implications for broader policy troubling. If the Government is serious about the Union with Northern Ireland – and at the minute that is an ‘if’ – then Johnson will need fresh thinking and a much bolder, more pro-active approach to supporting British interests in the Province. A Secretary of State prepared to challenge, rather than champion, the institutional attitudes of the NIO would be a good place to start.


conservativehome--2020-01-12--WATCH: Thornberry – Labour Brexit policy in election was “disastrous”

# Marr : Was it a mistake to say Labour is a Remain party ?
Labour leadership candidate Emily Thornberry @ @ @ @ @ for us to go into a general election in those circumstances ” https : //t.co/iy0Jg3h3m7 @

#Marr: Was it a mistake to say Labour is a Remain party?
Labour leadership candidate Emily Thornberry says “It was disastrous for us to go into a general election in those circumstances”https://t.co/iy0Jg3h3m7 pic.twitter.com/s245zTQvZ1
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) January 12, 2020


conservativehome--2020-01-12--WATCH: Marr asks Lewis when Russian interference report will be published

# Marr : When is the Russian interference report going to be published ?
Security minister Brandon Lewis says it @ @ @ @ @ due course ” , after new select committee chair is in place https : //t.co/0XxfQfs8HA @

#Marr: When is the Russian interference report going to be published?
Security minister Brandon Lewis says it will come out “in due course”, after new select committee chair is in place https://t.co/0XxfQfs8HA pic.twitter.com/FEoVbRu8mk
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) January 12, 2020


conservativehome--2020-01-12--WATCH: Lewis – Part of the Brexit campaign “had racism at its core”

“ They used it…to divide our communities and divide our country ” @ labourlewis says part of the Brexit campaign @ @ @ @ @ core ” , and “ for anyone to say there wasn ’ t an element @ @ @ @ @ project , you ’ re basically wrong ” .
# Ridge pic.twitter.com/xCxdo52WmU

“They used it…to divide our communities and divide our country”@labourlewis says part of the Brexit campaign “had racism at its core”, and “for anyone to say there wasn’t an element of racism in the Brexit project, you’re basically wrong”. #Ridge pic.twitter.com/xCxdo52WmU
— Sophy Ridge on Sunday (@RidgeOnSunday) January 12, 2020


conservativehome--2020-01-12--WATCH: Long-Bailey promises to abolish House of Lords

“ That ’ s right , I do want to abolish the House of Lords ” says Labour leadership candidate @ @ @ @ @

“That’s right, I do want to abolish the House of Lords” says Labour leadership candidate Rebecca Long-Bailey. #Ridge
Follow live reaction here: https://t.co/4Y1f5VJ3Wh pic.twitter.com/Sh4k0ciQjd
— Sophy Ridge on Sunday (@RidgeOnSunday) January 12, 2020


conservativehome--2020-01-12--How to help hold those new Red Wall seats.  Introducing the Midlands and Middlesbrough masterclass.

Imagine yourself as a new Conservative MP for a Red Wall seat – one previously regarded as safely Labour .
There are few or no Tory councillors .
There is no local Association worth the name .
You weren ’ t a target seat last month and had no special help from CCHQ .
You didn ’ t expect to win .
Now you are on your own .
The Whips , James Cleverly and company are telling you to be in your constituency as often as possible – campaigning .
How and with whom ?
What do you do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until Monday morning ?
( P.S : we ’ re assuming the necessary time and space to take some time off from politics during this period for the good of your mental health . )
Part of the answer lies in utilising the expertise of your predecessors – that ’ s to say , the Conservative MPs who won Labour seats in the North and Midlands in 2017 .
Consider their majorities in that year and last month .
• 2017 majority : 663 ( 49 per cent of the vote ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ they had a personal vote last month , and didn ’ t just gain from the pro-Tory swing .
Bradley and Rowley have both written about the 2019 election and their local experience on this site .
Bradley ’ s piece emphasised values .
Rowley ’ s did too .
He also wrote as follows : “ There is no secret magic formula for holding a seat like this ; no grand ‘ House of Cards ’ plan which makes Labour seats blue .
But there is a certain place where you can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Be interested .
Properly support your community .
And most of all roll your sleeves up .
That red wall has tumbled because people want to get things done .
So , get going.
” He emphasised focusing on limited but deliverable local priorities ; holding meetings in different places – “ not necessarily because there were burning local issues but often just to give people the opportunity to chat ” and staying in touch .
( Hughes wrote yesterday on this site about moving CCHQ northwards . )
The Whips and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Five in ; arrange for them to hold a series of workshops for new Red Wall seat Conservative MPs ; produce a handbook – or something like it , and ensure that there ’ s plenty of follow-up .
CCHQ already provides incumbency support , and all new MPs have had induction .
But that is not quite the same thing .
If a Tory MP feels that he or she needs advice or help , they are more likely to confide in a colleague , who they mix with in committees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to CCHQ , which can feel a bit remote .
Mark Spencer himself has built up his Sherwood majority from three figures in 2010 .
So the Chief Whip would presumably get the point .
Both Cleverly and Boris Johnson himself have operated in London – the opposite of Red Wall territory but , nonetheless , natural Labour territory .
It would be no use telling these new MPs to go back to their seats and campaign while leaving them to sink or swim on their own .

Imagine yourself as a new Conservative MP for a Red Wall seat – one previously regarded as safely Labour. There are few or no Tory councillors. There is no local Association worth the name. You weren’t a target seat last month and had no special help from CCHQ. You didn’t expect to win. Now you are on your own.
The Whips, James Cleverly and company are telling you to be in your constituency as often as possible – campaigning. How and with whom? What do you do from the Thursday evening – probably – until Monday morning? (P.S: we’re assuming the necessary time and space to take some time off from politics during this period for the good of your mental health.)
Part of the answer lies in utilising the expertise of your predecessors – that’s to say, the Conservative MPs who won Labour seats in the North and Midlands in 2017.
Consider their majorities in that year and last month.
Jack Bretherton: Stoke-on-Trent South
2017 majority: 663 (49 per cent of the vote).
2019 majority: 11,271 (62 per cent).
Swing: 13 per cent.
Ben Bradley, Mansfield
2017 majority: 1057 (47 per cent).
2019 majority: 16,306 (64 per cent).
Swing: 15 per cent.
Simon Clarke, Middlesbrough and South-East Cleveland
2017 majority: 1020 (50 per cent).
2019 majority: 11,626 (59 per cent).
Swing: 11 per cent.
Eddie Hughes, Walsall North
2017 majority: 2601 (50 per cent).
2019 majority: 11,969 (64 per cent).
Swing: 13 per cent.
Lee Rowley, North East Derbyshire
2017: 2861 (49 per cent).
2019: 12,876 (59 per cent).
Swing: 10 per cent.
It’s reasonable to assume that they had a personal vote last month, and didn’t just gain from the pro-Tory swing.
Bradley and Rowley have both written about the 2019 election and their local experience on this site. Bradley’s piece emphasised values. Rowley’s did too. He also wrote as follows:
“There is no secret magic formula for holding a seat like this; no grand ‘House of Cards’ plan which makes Labour seats blue. But there is a certain place where you can start. Turn up. Get involved. Be interested. Properly support your community. And most of all roll your sleeves up. That red wall has tumbled because people want to get things done. So, get going.”
He emphasised focusing on limited but deliverable local priorities; holding meetings in different places – “not necessarily because there were burning local issues but often just to give people the opportunity to chat” and staying in touch. (Hughes wrote yesterday on this site about moving CCHQ northwards.)
The Whips and Cleverly and company should call this Gang of Five in; arrange for them to hold a series of workshops for new Red Wall seat Conservative MPs; produce a handbook – or something like it, and ensure that there’s plenty of follow-up.
CCHQ already provides incumbency support, and all new MPs have had induction. But that is not quite the same thing. If a Tory MP feels that he or she needs advice or help, they are more likely to confide in a colleague, who they mix with in committees or in the lobby, than go to CCHQ, which can feel a bit remote.
Mark Spencer himself has built up his Sherwood majority from three figures in 2010. So the Chief Whip would presumably get the point. Both Cleverly and Boris Johnson himself have operated in London – the opposite of Red Wall territory but, nonetheless, natural Labour territory.
It would be no use telling these new MPs to go back to their seats and campaign while leaving them to sink or swim on their own.


conservativehome--2020-01-13--Scruton and the Tories. “A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country.”

A popular image of a philosopher is a solitary man in an ivory tower hunched up in the pose of Rodin ’ s thinker .
Were it true , Roger Scruton would not have been a philosopher – titan polymath that he was : academic , barrister , rider to hounds , farmer , novelist , composer of operas , pianist , wine critic , and much else…including , of course , philosopher .
And journalist .
For Scruton had an activist temperament , of which we offer two examples , drawn from our own experience .
The first involves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ set up a new section within it called “ Thinker ’ s Corner “ .
The aim was to provide a platform for Tory intellectuals and an opportunity for new writers .
It failed comprehensively .
This was as much the fault of the Editor as that of Scruton , if not much more so .
The second was a reworking of an older idea .
Scruton was one of the original founders of the Conservative Philosophy Group , one of the symptoms of the Thatcher revival of the 1970s and 1980s .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ his aim was to recreate that ethos , he did not succeed .
It was not well attended by Tory MPs .
One might conclude that Scruton was ineffective as an actor rather than a thinker .
This would be mistaken .
For his energy got results in what was Czechoslovakia , where he set up an underground university to offer education for those expelled from the state system – and more broadly to teach them in the western academic tradition .
Thirty years on from the Velvet Revolution , he was awarded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This work was heroic .
ConservativeHome wrote that Scruton deserved a peerage ( though we also said later that “ doubtless he would not accept one unless it were hereditary ” ) .
We were delighted when he was knighted , describing the honour as “ a knighthood for the movement ” .
This was an attempt to capture his sense of commitment .
Which brings us to the Conservative Party and Scruton himself .
He never quite gave up on it – treating it with the derisive affection that one reserves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this site , he was supportive of it while always remaining independent , recognising that , for all its many faults , it remains the only practicable vehicle for the realisation of conservative ideas .
His interest was not reciprocated .
This leads us to ask why it has engaged so little , over so many years , with the small but lively domestic network of Conservative intellectuals .
Margaret Thatcher was the exception that proves the rule .
It is impossible to imagine John Major turning up to one of the meetings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We can only think of one Tory leader who would have done so with enthusiasm : Iain Duncan Smith .
One answer is that the Conservatives remain , over 40 years on from the Thatcher experiment , “ the Stupid Party ” at heart – suspicious of ideas and those familiar with them .
( Even when those concerned are reacting against bad ones , which was part of what Scruton did . )
Those intellectuals with whom it comes to terms are invariably practising politicians , such as David Willetts , Oliver @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Danny Kruger .
Another is that to the Cameron leadership – the most successful electorally since Thatcher ’ s , at least until Boris Johnson came along – Scruton was an embarrassment , with his commitment to fox hunting , opposition to multiculturalism as Editor of the Salisbury Review , hostility to same-sex marriage ( later rescinded ) and general dispostion to take ideas seriously .
That knighthood took a very long time to come .
At least two Cabinet Ministers claim credit for it , and it may be worth adding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Philosophy , Scruton ’ s magnificently balanced book about ecology and the environment , helped to inspire his work at Defra .
He is a bit of an exception to the rule that we are writing about .
At any rate , Scruton had come in from the cold by the time of his knighthood – having been appointed to an advisory post on housing .
The Cameron Government had eventually recognised his value .
Our readers will be familiar with what happened next .
Scruton was fired as Chairman of the Government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Beautiful ” Commission after a New Statesman interview before eventually being reinstated .
We thought that he had shown a lack of comradely discipline by giving the interview at all ( though noting from the start that his words had been twisted ) .
The Commission has published an interim report .
Its final one will be part of Scruton ’ s legacy .
The purpose of the report is “ to tackle the challenge of poor-quality design and build of homes and places , across the country and help ensure as we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so with popular consent ” .
ConservativeHome looks forward to the publication of the final version .
And to the Johnson leadership engaging more actively with Tory intellectuals than its predecessors have done .
Whether it will do so or not is open to question .
Johnson has an interest in ideas – consider The Dream of Rome – but dislikes being bound by them : he sees politics as a practical business .
Dominic Cummings has ideas of his own .
We close by looking back on that list of names we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Butler , Paul Johnson , Ruth Lea and Charles Moore , as well as Scruton himself .
Others whose talents might be utilised by this new Government include : Noel Malcolm , Sheila Lawlor , Michael Clarke , Philippa Stroud , Niall Ferguson , Patrick Minford , Andrew Roberts , David Goodhart , Richard Ekins .
There is also a fledgling network of Conservative academics – the furthering of which has been slowed by the recent chaos at the top of the Party .
Scruton would have approved .
He would also have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tory Party alone that under-recognised what he had to offer .
It is safe to say that his views been less blue , and less colourfully expressed , his academic career would have been more successful .
Then again , there was a part of Scruton that seemed to relish confrontation .
His fighting spirit was very like his father ’ s – a lifelong socialist of a very English kind still remembered , in High Wycombe where Scruton himself was raised , for helping to save the Rye , a park near @ @ @ @ @ @ @ development during the 1960s .
Jack Scruton was agent for a petition of protest presented to a joint committee of the Commons and Lords .
Roger Scruton himself , though a practising Anglican , may not have been a Christian – not throughout his adult life as a Conservative , at any rate .
But he would ruefully have recognised the force of the verse : “ a prophet is not without honour , but in his own country , and among his own kin , and in his own house ” – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in his case , not without honours .
We mourn his passing .

A popular image of a philosopher is a solitary man in an ivory tower hunched up in the pose of Rodin’s thinker. Were it true, Roger Scruton would not have been a philosopher – titan polymath that he was: academic, barrister, rider to hounds, farmer, novelist, composer of operas, pianist, wine critic, and much else…including, of course, philosopher. And journalist.
For Scruton had an activist temperament, of which we offer two examples, drawn from our own experience. The first involves this site. In 2013, he set up a new section within it called “Thinker’s Corner“. The aim was to provide a platform for Tory intellectuals and an opportunity for new writers. It failed comprehensively. This was as much the fault of the Editor as that of Scruton, if not much more so.
The second was a reworking of an older idea. Scruton was one of the original founders of the Conservative Philosophy Group, one of the symptoms of the Thatcher revival of the 1970s and 1980s. He revived it more recently. If his aim was to recreate that ethos, he did not succeed. It was not well attended by Tory MPs. One might conclude that Scruton was ineffective as an actor rather than a thinker. This would be mistaken.
For his energy got results in what was Czechoslovakia, where he set up an underground university to offer education for those expelled from the state system – and more broadly to teach them in the western academic tradition. Thirty years on from the Velvet Revolution, he was awarded the country’s highest civilian honour. This work was heroic.
ConservativeHome wrote that Scruton deserved a peerage (though we also said later that “doubtless he would not accept one unless it were hereditary”). We were delighted when he was knighted, describing the honour as “a knighthood for the movement”. This was an attempt to capture his sense of commitment. Which brings us to the Conservative Party and Scruton himself.
He never quite gave up on it – treating it with the derisive affection that one reserves for some impossibly errant relative. Like this site, he was supportive of it while always remaining independent, recognising that, for all its many faults, it remains the only practicable vehicle for the realisation of conservative ideas. His interest was not reciprocated.
This leads us to ask why it has engaged so little, over so many years, with the small but lively domestic network of Conservative intellectuals. Margaret Thatcher was the exception that proves the rule. It is impossible to imagine John Major turning up to one of the meetings of the original Conservative Philosophy Group. We can only think of one Tory leader who would have done so with enthusiasm: Iain Duncan Smith.
One answer is that the Conservatives remain, over 40 years on from the Thatcher experiment, “the Stupid Party” at heart – suspicious of ideas and those familiar with them. (Even when those concerned are reacting against bad ones, which was part of what Scruton did.) Those intellectuals with whom it comes to terms are invariably practising politicians, such as David Willetts, Oliver Letwin, Jesse Norman, Chris Skidmore and Danny Kruger.
Another is that to the Cameron leadership – the most successful electorally since Thatcher’s, at least until Boris Johnson came along – Scruton was an embarrassment, with his commitment to fox hunting, opposition to multiculturalism as Editor of the Salisbury Review, hostility to same-sex marriage (later rescinded) and general dispostion to take ideas seriously.
That knighthood took a very long time to come. At least two Cabinet Ministers claim credit for it, and it may be worth adding that Michael Gove has said that Green Philosophy, Scruton’s magnificently balanced book about ecology and the environment, helped to inspire his work at Defra. He is a bit of an exception to the rule that we are writing about.
At any rate, Scruton had come in from the cold by the time of his knighthood – having been appointed to an advisory post on housing. The Cameron Government had eventually recognised his value. Our readers will be familiar with what happened next. Scruton was fired as Chairman of the Government’s “Building Better, Building Beautiful” Commission after a New Statesman interview before eventually being reinstated.
We thought that he had shown a lack of comradely discipline by giving the interview at all (though noting from the start that his words had been twisted). The Commission has published an interim report. Its final one will be part of Scruton’s legacy. The purpose of the report is “to tackle the challenge of poor-quality design and build of homes and places, across the country and help ensure as we build for the future, we do so with popular consent”.
ConservativeHome looks forward to the publication of the final version. And to the Johnson leadership engaging more actively with Tory intellectuals than its predecessors have done. Whether it will do so or not is open to question. Johnson has an interest in ideas – consider The Dream of Rome – but dislikes being bound by them: he sees politics as a practical business. Dominic Cummings has ideas of his own.
We close by looking back on that list of names we suggested for peerages in 2015: Eamonn Butler, Paul Johnson, Ruth Lea and Charles Moore, as well as Scruton himself. Others whose talents might be utilised by this new Government include: Noel Malcolm, Sheila Lawlor, Michael Clarke, Philippa Stroud, Niall Ferguson, Patrick Minford, Andrew Roberts, David Goodhart, Richard Ekins.
There is also a fledgling network of Conservative academics – the furthering of which has been slowed by the recent chaos at the top of the Party. Scruton would have approved. He would also have known that it wasn’t the Tory Party alone that under-recognised what he had to offer. It is safe to say that his views been less blue, and less colourfully expressed, his academic career would have been more successful.
Then again, there was a part of Scruton that seemed to relish confrontation. His fighting spirit was very like his father’s – a lifelong socialist of a very English kind still remembered, in High Wycombe where Scruton himself was raised, for helping to save the Rye, a park near the centre of the town, from development during the 1960s. Jack Scruton was agent for a petition of protest presented to a joint committee of the Commons and Lords.
Roger Scruton himself, though a practising Anglican, may not have been a Christian – not throughout his adult life as a Conservative, at any rate. But he would ruefully have recognised the force of the verse: “a prophet is not without honour, but in his own country , and among his own kin, and in his own house” – even if that prophet dies, as in his case, not without honours. We mourn his passing.


conservativehome--2020-01-13--Job vacancy: ConservativeHome seeks a Deputy Editor

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

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


conservativehome--2020-01-13--Neil O’Brien: R & D. We invest disproportionately in the first at the expense of the second. Here’s

Neil O’Brien: R & D. We invest disproportionately in the first at the expense of the second. Here’s how to improve.

Consider your smartphone .
In one sense , a triumph of free market innovation .
In another , a product of the US military-industrial complex .
As the left-wing economist Marianna Mazzacato points out , many technologies in your phone were developed by the US government for military use .
The GPS you use to navigate to the chippy was developed to land nukes accurately on Soviet military targets .
The internet we use to look at cat gifs was originally ARPANET , intended to make military communications resilient to nuclear attack .
Around the year 2000 , the US @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to develop a voice-activated assistant for the military .
The technology was later commercialised and sold to Apple .
There are several lessons from the iPhone story : the role government can play in research by “ pulling through ” new technologies and commissioning things .
The non-linear nature of research and the unpredictable way new technologies multiply one another .
I ’ m mentioning this now because government is thinking big about science , research and innovation .
Dominic Cummings now-famous blogpost seeking : “ Data scientists and software developers , PhDs… @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with odd skills ” made people notice it , but the Prime Minister ’ s intent has been pretty clear : the biggest new spending commitment announced during the election was to invest an extra £3.2 billion a year in on Research and Development ( R & D ) by 2023 .
Boris Johnson is right to increase investment in R & D : we ’ ve slid from being a leading investor in research to somewhere at the back of the pack .
Looking at public and private investment as a share @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 2015 we plummeted down the OECD league table , from the 3rd heaviest investor to the 23rd .
Relatively poor countries like Slovenia and the Czech Republic now invest more of their national income in science .
China substantially more .
Leading innovators like Israel , Korea and Switzerland are racing away , investing twice as much as us .
We spend just under 1.7 per cent GDP on R & D , and the Government ’ s goal is to get us up to the OECD average , around 2.4 per @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increasingly recognised the central role of innovation in driving economic growth .
Indeed , in 2018 Paul Romer won the economics Nobel Prize for his work on this point .
Government investment in R & D stimulates private sector investment : as we saw with the iPhone , innovations created for one reason by government can be repurposed by businesses .
More researchers means a bigger pool of talent for firms to draw on .
So the Prime Minister is quite right to invest more .
But we also need to change the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are two big problems that stop government investment having the beneficial effect it should .
Problem one : the Government ’ s spending is concentrated in the so called “ golden triangle ” of Oxford , Cambridge and London , rather than helping to “ level up ” poorer places where it might have more impact .
Problem two : UK government spending is weighted towards early stage , foundational research , rather than close-to-market development work ( More “ R ” than “ D ” as it were ) .
For decades @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Britain get commercialised elsewhere .
But part of the problem is that we ’ re investing in a way that means they get the benefit of our research : of the money government spends on R & D in Britain 13 per cent goes on later phase development .
In the US it ’ s 45 per cent , and in China 56 per cent .
These two problems are linked .
“ Pure ” research tends be focussed on top universities in the golden triangle , rather than in firms themselves .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s own investment in research is much more balanced across the country than the government ’ s .
In London , for every pound of R & D investment by government and universities , the private sector invests just over a pound .
In the West Midlands the ratio is quite different : businesses are investing five pounds for every government pound .
In 2017 , the South East and London accounted for a third of all private business investment in R & D , and the midlands and north also accounted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ East and London got 39 per cent of government and university investment , while the north and midlands got just 28 per cent .
This imbalance is driven by the core science budget : the Research Councils ( which fund projects ) and Quality Related “ QR ” funding , which universities allocate .
Of these core funding streams , a government analysis suggests nearly half ( 46 per cent ) of grants in England have been going to just three cities : Oxford , Cambridge and London .
As Professor Wilsdon of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Select Committee inquiry : “ there are observable trends towards greater concentration over the last 20 years.
” The graph of the top of this piece shows that per head , the big winners from the core science budget were London , the South East and Scotland , the three richest parts of the UK , where constraints on growth like housing costs and congestion bite hardest .
The graph also shows that when government spends in ways that are more joined up with industry , there ’ s a more even spread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does things like giving research grants to start up firms ) sees places like the North East , South West and East Midlands doing relatively better .
But this sort of spend is currently just a small part of the budget .
What to do about our two problems ?
First , scale up existing funding channels that are more commercially focussed and better spread .
Make sure a good proportion of the extra money goes to bodies like Innovate UK and things like SMART grants to start up firms .
Second , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demand , which the US is so good at .
Do what the Connell Review implied , and create a ringfenced budget to procure innovative products , as the US does .
I ’ ve met firms who have used the US SBIR scheme and it has transformed their prospects to be able to say they have a contract with the US government .
Third , do more to build up research centres which genuinely bridge academia and industry .
Richard Jones widely-discussed paper is right to say we should try to build @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Advanced Manufacturing Centre in Sheffield and the Warwick Manufacturing Group .
More mission-oriented centres like the Faraday Institution might be part of this .
Government should review which of the “ Catapult ” centres are worth building on or not .
Fourth , we need to rethink university funding and incentives .
Far more of universities ’ research budgets should reflect their industrial work .
For example , last year about three per cent of Oxford ’ s grants from Research England funded work with industry .
Things like the Higher Education Innovation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , should be a much larger share of their funding .
Professional esteem and rankings should change too .
One business-minded Vice Chancellor of a northern university lamented to me that his work to spin out new businesses and attract investment was given no value compared to the Research Excellence Framework rankings .
I could go on .
There ’ s loads we can do to make research investment more effective .
It ’ s great to have a dynamic new government that ’ s interested in and investing in research .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can create all kinds of opportunities for people right across the country .

Neil O’Brien is MP for Harborough
Consider your smartphone. In one sense, a triumph of free market innovation. In another, a product of the US military-industrial complex.
As the left-wing economist Marianna Mazzacato points out, many technologies in your phone were developed by the US government for military use. The GPS you use to navigate to the chippy was developed to land nukes accurately on Soviet military targets. The internet we use to look at cat gifs was originally ARPANET, intended to make military communications resilient to nuclear attack.
Around the year 2000, the US Defence Advanced Projects Authority invested in research to develop a voice-activated assistant for the military. The technology was later commercialised and sold to Apple.
There are several lessons from the iPhone story: the role government can play in research by “pulling through” new technologies and commissioning things. The non-linear nature of research and the unpredictable way new technologies multiply one another.
I’m mentioning this now because government is thinking big about science, research and innovation.
Dominic Cummings now-famous blogpost seeking: “Data scientists and software developers, PhDs… in maths or physics… Weirdos and misfits with odd skills” made people notice it, but the Prime Minister’s intent has been pretty clear: the biggest new spending commitment announced during the election was to invest an extra £3.2 billion a year in on Research and Development (R&D) by 2023.
Boris Johnson is right to increase investment in R&D: we’ve slid from being a leading investor in research to somewhere at the back of the pack. Looking at public and private investment as a share of GDP, between the early 1980s and 2015 we plummeted down the OECD league table, from the 3rd heaviest investor to the 23rd.
Relatively poor countries like Slovenia and the Czech Republic now invest more of their national income in science. China substantially more. Leading innovators like Israel, Korea and Switzerland are racing away, investing twice as much as us. We spend just under 1.7 per cent GDP on R&D, and the Government’s goal is to get us up to the OECD average, around 2.4 per cent.
This matters because economists have increasingly recognised the central role of innovation in driving economic growth. Indeed, in 2018 Paul Romer won the economics Nobel Prize for his work on this point.
Government investment in R&D stimulates private sector investment: as we saw with the iPhone, innovations created for one reason by government can be repurposed by businesses. More researchers means a bigger pool of talent for firms to draw on. So the Prime Minister is quite right to invest more.
But we also need to change the way that the Government invests. There are two big problems that stop government investment having the beneficial effect it should.
Problem one: the Government’s spending is concentrated in the so called “golden triangle” of Oxford, Cambridge and London, rather than helping to “level up” poorer places where it might have more impact.
Problem two: UK government spending is weighted towards early stage, foundational research, rather than close-to-market development work (More “R” than “D” as it were). For decades politicians have lamented how breakthroughs made in Britain get commercialised elsewhere. But part of the problem is that we’re investing in a way that means they get the benefit of our research: of the money government spends on R&D in Britain 13 per cent goes on later phase development. In the US it’s 45 per cent, and in China 56 per cent.
These two problems are linked. “Pure” research tends be focussed on top universities in the golden triangle, rather than in firms themselves. That’s why the private sector’s own investment in research is much more balanced across the country than the government’s.
In London, for every pound of R&D investment by government and universities, the private sector invests just over a pound. In the West Midlands the ratio is quite different: businesses are investing five pounds for every government pound.
In 2017, the South East and London accounted for a third of all private business investment in R&D, and the midlands and north also accounted for a third. But the South East and London got 39 per cent of government and university investment, while the north and midlands got just 28 per cent.
This imbalance is driven by the core science budget: the Research Councils (which fund projects) and Quality Related “QR” funding, which universities allocate.
Of these core funding streams, a government analysis suggests nearly half (46 per cent) of grants in England have been going to just three cities: Oxford, Cambridge and London. As Professor Wilsdon of the University of Sheffield told a recent Select Committee inquiry: “there are observable trends towards greater concentration over the last 20 years.”
The graph of the top of this piece shows that per head, the big winners from the core science budget were London, the South East and Scotland, the three richest parts of the UK, where constraints on growth like housing costs and congestion bite hardest.
The graph also shows that when government spends in ways that are more joined up with industry, there’s a more even spread. Funding through Innovate UK (which does things like giving research grants to start up firms) sees places like the North East, South West and East Midlands doing relatively better. But this sort of spend is currently just a small part of the budget.
What to do about our two problems?
First, scale up existing funding channels that are more commercially focussed and better spread. Make sure a good proportion of the extra money goes to bodies like Innovate UK and things like SMART grants to start up firms.
Second, develop new channels that help pull through demand, which the US is so good at. Do what the Connell Review implied, and create a ringfenced budget to procure innovative products, as the US does. I’ve met firms who have used the US SBIR scheme and it has transformed their prospects to be able to say they have a contract with the US government.
Third, do more to build up research centres which genuinely bridge academia and industry. Richard Jones widely-discussed paper is right to say we should try to build on the success of places like the Advanced Manufacturing Centre in Sheffield and the Warwick Manufacturing Group. More mission-oriented centres like the Faraday Institution might be part of this. Government should review which of the “Catapult” centres are worth building on or not.
Fourth, we need to rethink university funding and incentives. Far more of universities’ research budgets should reflect their industrial work. For example, last year about three per cent of Oxford’s grants from Research England funded work with industry. Things like the Higher Education Innovation Fund, which supports work with business, should be a much larger share of their funding. Professional esteem and rankings should change too. One business-minded Vice Chancellor of a northern university lamented to me that his work to spin out new businesses and attract investment was given no value compared to the Research Excellence Framework rankings.
I could go on. There’s loads we can do to make research investment more effective. It’s great to have a dynamic new government that’s interested in and investing in research. If we play our cards right, we can create all kinds of opportunities for people right across the country.


conservativehome--2020-01-13--Meirion Jenkins: Spending by Birmingham City Council is out of control

Cllr Meirion Jenkins is the Shadow Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources on Birmingham City Council .
In January last year , I wrote for ConHome about how badly Birmingham was run by its Labour administration and how much taxpayers ’ money was being wasted .
A year on , we see no sign that our Conservative Group ’ s concerns about a growing lack of accountability , secrecy , and a ‘ dictatorship ’ style of management by the Council Leader and his Cabinet are being assuaged .
There is a big problem in Birmingham City Council with transparency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seeks to keep far too much information secret from both councillors and the public but , even where information is eventually disclosed , it is often disclosed late or in a form intended to minimise scrutiny .
Contracts are renewed when they should be subject to scrutiny and re-tender .
Decisions which are said to be urgent ( and therefore sidestep the normal checks and balances ) , often are only urgent , if indeed they truly are urgent , because of crass inefficiency on the part of the administration .
The hard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with some notable exceptions ) are just not good enough to run a city of Birmingham ’ s complexity .
This means that officers find it easy to keep the upper hand , albeit one might counter that Labour ’ s political leaders are sometimes accused of standing behind officers to deflect responsibility .
For example , the company that provided home to school transport for Birmingham children with special needs went bankrupt .
The whole contract had been very badly managed for years with numerous costs overruns and hastily organised extensions .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ times since 2009 without a proper re-procuring process .
At various times , members raised serious concerns in the finance scrutiny committee but were largely ignored .
A report on the whole fiasco was due to come to the Audit Committee in the autumn but was removed from the agenda because of “ purdah ” .
Purdah is there to protect taxpayers ’ money from being used to influence voting intention .
It does not exist to shut down debate by committee members , slow down vitally important pieces of work on protecting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not there to save the administration from embarrassment !
With the Cabinet already having been told of safeguarding and vehicle compliance concerns and the company ’ s unsustainable finances , one can only speculate as to what further horrors may come out when Labour eventually publishes this report .
Audit Committee members are routinely denied access to documents and information and Labour chairs of the Audit Committee seem reluctant to challenge their own administration .
Having served on the audit committee most of the time since 2012 , I am reaching the point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the committee , for fear that the Conservative presence gives a “ stamp of legitimacy ” to Labour ’ s conduct .
We have already declined the opportunity to take the role of Deputy Chairman .
On the other hand , were it not for the Conservative Group , at least trying to allow some sunlight to shine on Labour ’ s conduct , goodness knows how little of Labour ’ s mistakes and inefficiency would ever be known to the taxpaying public ?
With preparations for the Commonwealth Games now in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see worrying signs of Birmingham Labour ’ s well-known inability to manage money and contracts .
Most of the funding is being provided by central government , with Birmingham taxpayers meeting about 25 per cent of the main cost and also being responsible for the construction of the athletes ’ village .
Having devised a convoluted financing arrangement ( reminding me of the administrator hospital sketch in Python ’ s Life of Brian ) , which even the Leader couldn ’ t properly explain in the Scrutiny Committee , we have already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relocation of a National Express bus depot for the athlete ’ s village was budgeted to cost £2 million .
In the last few days , the Labour administration has rushed through an ‘ emergency ’ decision between Christmas and the New Year ( therefore no scrutiny/call-in possible , or even a cabinet meeting ) to spend £15.5m – approximately an eight times overspend .
Labour in Birmingham is devotedly anti motorist – despite constantly saying that they support Birmingham motor trade workers .
With no referendum ( as was the case elsewhere @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their manifesto ) , Labour is implementing a charge for motorists who drive into the city .
Described as a ‘ clean air zone ’ , it makes several poor choices .
The Conservative plan for green infrastructure ( which was in our manifesto ) , would have delivered 25 per cent – 30 per cent cleaner air without relying upon a taxation based behavioural change and / or the associated damage to Birmingham ’ s economy .
The cost of the Conservative plan would have been met from the same grant that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s own report acknowledges that their plan will hit the least well off the most , being those residents who can not afford to replace their car with a newer compliant model .
This policy side-stepped democracy for fear of the voters ’ wise judgement .
( Remind you of anything ? )
If the way that Labour runs Birmingham is anything to go by , then truly thank goodness we won the general election .
Had Labour won , I have no doubt that the patterns of behaviour that we see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ template for the way that our country would be run .

Cllr Meirion Jenkins is the Shadow Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources on Birmingham City Council.
In January last year, I wrote for ConHome about how badly Birmingham was run by its Labour administration and how much taxpayers’ money was being wasted. A year on, we see no sign that our Conservative Group’s concerns about a growing lack of accountability, secrecy, and a ‘dictatorship’ style of management by the Council Leader and his Cabinet are being assuaged.
There is a big problem in Birmingham City Council with transparency; the current Labour administration not only seeks to keep far too much information secret from both councillors and the public but, even where information is eventually disclosed, it is often disclosed late or in a form intended to minimise scrutiny. Contracts are renewed when they should be subject to scrutiny and re-tender. Decisions which are said to be urgent (and therefore sidestep the normal checks and balances), often are only urgent, if indeed they truly are urgent, because of crass inefficiency on the part of the administration.
The hard truth is that the Labour Cabinet (with some notable exceptions) are just not good enough to run a city of Birmingham’s complexity. This means that officers find it easy to keep the upper hand, albeit one might counter that Labour’s political leaders are sometimes accused of standing behind officers to deflect responsibility.
For example, the company that provided home to school transport for Birmingham children with special needs went bankrupt. The whole contract had been very badly managed for years with numerous costs overruns and hastily organised extensions. This particular contract had been extended seven times since 2009 without a proper re-procuring process. At various times, members raised serious concerns in the finance scrutiny committee but were largely ignored.
A report on the whole fiasco was due to come to the Audit Committee in the autumn but was removed from the agenda because of “purdah”. Purdah is there to protect taxpayers’ money from being used to influence voting intention. It does not exist to shut down debate by committee members, slow down vitally important pieces of work on protecting vulnerable citizens, and it certainly is not there to save the administration from embarrassment! With the Cabinet already having been told of safeguarding and vehicle compliance concerns and the company’s unsustainable finances, one can only speculate as to what further horrors may come out when Labour eventually publishes this report.
Audit Committee members are routinely denied access to documents and information and Labour chairs of the Audit Committee seem reluctant to challenge their own administration. Having served on the audit committee most of the time since 2012, I am reaching the point of wondering whether we should withdraw entirely from the committee, for fear that the Conservative presence gives a “stamp of legitimacy” to Labour’s conduct. We have already declined the opportunity to take the role of Deputy Chairman. On the other hand, were it not for the Conservative Group, at least trying to allow some sunlight to shine on Labour’s conduct, goodness knows how little of Labour’s mistakes and inefficiency would ever be known to the taxpaying public?
With preparations for the Commonwealth Games now in full swing, we are already beginning to see worrying signs of Birmingham Labour’s well-known inability to manage money and contracts. Most of the funding is being provided by central government, with Birmingham taxpayers meeting about 25 per cent of the main cost and also being responsible for the construction of the athletes’ village. Having devised a convoluted financing arrangement (reminding me of the administrator hospital sketch in Python’s Life of Brian), which even the Leader couldn’t properly explain in the Scrutiny Committee, we have already seen a massive budget error. The relocation of a National Express bus depot for the athlete’s village was budgeted to cost £2 million. In the last few days, the Labour administration has rushed through an ‘emergency’ decision between Christmas and the New Year (therefore no scrutiny/call-in possible, or even a cabinet meeting) to spend £15.5m – approximately an eight times overspend.
Labour in Birmingham is devotedly anti motorist – despite constantly saying that they support Birmingham motor trade workers. With no referendum (as was the case elsewhere and despite no clear policy statement in their manifesto), Labour is implementing a charge for motorists who drive into the city. Described as a ‘clean air zone’, it makes several poor choices. The Conservative plan for green infrastructure (which was in our manifesto), would have delivered 25 per cent – 30 per cent cleaner air without relying upon a taxation based behavioural change and / or the associated damage to Birmingham’s economy. The cost of the Conservative plan would have been met from the same grant that Labour is wasting on cameras. Labour’s own report acknowledges that their plan will hit the least well off the most, being those residents who cannot afford to replace their car with a newer compliant model. This policy side-stepped democracy for fear of the voters’ wise judgement. (Remind you of anything?)
If the way that Labour runs Birmingham is anything to go by, then truly thank goodness we won the general election. Had Labour won, I have no doubt that the patterns of behaviour that we see in Birmingham, would have become a template for the way that our country would be run.


conservativehome--2020-01-13--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the Tees Valley Local Enterprise

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

Seven years ago , the TaxPayers ’ Alliance reported that “ in the last year , five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories ” .
Since then , the figures have varied , and some Conservative members or supporters have been selected to fill important posts .
Nonetheless , it remains the case that , since it took office in 2010 , our Party has punched beneath its weight when it comes to public appointments .
One of the reasons seems to be that Tories simply don ’ t apply in the same number as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , every week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies , so that qualified Conservatives might be aware of the opportunities presented .
“ This is an exciting time for the National Infrastructure Commission .
The NIC was created in 2015 and became an Executive Agency of HM Treasury in 2017 .
After the successful publication of the National Infrastructure Assessment in July 2018 , the NIC is now looking to the future .
A new strategy is in development , to take us to the next National @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support and drive this growth we are seeking to appoint one new Non-Executive Member to our Oversight Board .
The role of the National Infrastructure Commission ’ s Oversight Board is to ensure that the NIC is managed and governed appropriately , operates within its financial and operational delegation limits and has effective governance arrangements in place.
” “ Parliament ’ s Information Authority is seeking to recruit a Non-Executive Director to join them for meetings related to the Parliamentary Estate , our building information and data , and the Restoration and Renewal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ successful candidate would attend up to 15 meetings per year , including quarterly Authority meetings , additional Authority meetings related to the programme or associated work and to join other associated discussions as required .
The 15 days to include all preparatory work for those meetings.
” “ The Greater Lincolnshire LEP works with the public , private and voluntary sectors to drive sustainable economic growth .
We help our businesses increase productivity and innovation , create new employment opportunities , and develop infrastructure solutions that support this .
We are the voice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the economic interests of the area are properly represented .
We believe that Greater Lincolnshire is alive with opportunities and a truly great place to live , work and do business and is emerging as the intelligent choice for investors.
” Time : Around four days per month .
“ CITB is the statutory skills body for the construction industry in Great Britain and its purpose is to make better provision for the training and maintenance of skills in the industry .
CITB raises around £200m annually via a training levy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Government to ensure national construction skills needs are met .
CITB seeks to create the culture and conditions that will deliver new ways of working , embracing new technologies , creating a demand in construction for more skills , new skills and higher level skills .
CITB aspires to be at the forefront of effective commissioning and grant practice and is undertaking a high-profile transformational reform programme in order to achieve this.
” “ The Chair will be responsible for the proper running of the Homes England Board .
They will guide and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ providing confident , clear and consistent leadership .
They will also lead the Agency ’ s relationship with the Secretary of State for Housing , Communities and Local Government , who they will meet on a regular basis .
The Chair will act as an ambassador for the Board and for Homes England , helping to build and develop collaborative strategic partnerships that support and promote Homes England ’ s core mission .
The successful candidate will influence and network with key decision makers and stakeholders and explain how the organisation is transforming… @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per week .
“ The Tees Valley Combined Authority and Local Enterprise Partnership ( LEP ) are looking to recruit a new LEP Chair and new LEP members from the private sector to deliver our ambitious economic plans .
The Combined Authority and LEP strive to ensure an equal and diverse membership , and through this latest round of appointments , have committed to achieve 50 % female representation on the LEP board in 2020 .
Due to the current LEP Chair coming to the end of his term , we are looking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has a strong private sector background , experience of building effective organisations and has the motivation to fully commit to and represent the LEP on a local and national scale .
”

Seven years ago, the TaxPayers’ Alliance reported that “in the last year, five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories”.
Since then, the figures have varied, and some Conservative members or supporters have been selected to fill important posts.
Nonetheless, it remains the case that, since it took office in 2010, our Party has punched beneath its weight when it comes to public appointments. One of the reasons seems to be that Tories simply don’t apply in the same number as Labour supporters.
To help remedy this, every week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies, so that qualified Conservatives might be aware of the opportunities presented.
– – – – – – – – – –
National Infrastructure Commission – Non-Executive Member
“This is an exciting time for the National Infrastructure Commission. The NIC was created in 2015 and became an Executive Agency of HM Treasury in 2017. After the successful publication of the National Infrastructure Assessment in July 2018, the NIC is now looking to the future. A new strategy is in development, to take us to the next National Infrastructure Assessment in 2023, and to support and drive this growth we are seeking to appoint one new Non-Executive Member to our Oversight Board. The role of the National Infrastructure Commission’s Oversight Board is to ensure that the NIC is managed and governed appropriately, operates within its financial and operational delegation limits and has effective governance arrangements in place.”
Time: 1-2 days per quarter.
Remuneration: Expenses.
Closes: 17 January
– – – – – – – – – –
Information Authority – Non-Executive Director
“Parliament’s Information Authority is seeking to recruit a Non-Executive Director to join them for meetings related to the Parliamentary Estate, our building information and data, and the Restoration and Renewal programme. It is expected that the successful candidate would attend up to 15 meetings per year, including quarterly Authority meetings, additional Authority meetings related to the programme or associated work and to join other associated discussions as required. The 15 days to include all preparatory work for those meetings.”
Time: Up to 15 meetings a year.
Remuneration: £9,000 per annum plus reasonable travel expenses.
Closes: 19 January
– – – – – – – – – –
Greater Lincolnshire Local Enterprise Partnership – Chair
“The Greater Lincolnshire LEP works with the public, private and voluntary sectors to drive sustainable economic growth. We help our businesses increase productivity and innovation, create new employment opportunities, and develop infrastructure solutions that support this. We are the voice of the local business community, ensuring that the economic interests of the area are properly represented. We believe that Greater Lincolnshire is alive with opportunities and a truly great place to live, work and do business and is emerging as the intelligent choice for investors.”
Time: Around four days per month.
Remuneration: None.
Closes: 20 January
– – – – – – – – – –
Construction Industry Training Board – Board Trustee
“CITB is the statutory skills body for the construction industry in Great Britain and its purpose is to make better provision for the training and maintenance of skills in the industry. CITB raises around £200m annually via a training levy, and works closely with employers and the Government to ensure national construction skills needs are met. CITB seeks to create the culture and conditions that will deliver new ways of working, embracing new technologies, creating a demand in construction for more skills, new skills and higher level skills. CITB aspires to be at the forefront of effective commissioning and grant practice and is undertaking a high-profile transformational reform programme in order to achieve this.”
Time: Around 16 hours per month.
Remuneration: Expenses.
Closes: 28 January
– – – – – – – – – –
Homes England – Chair
“The Chair will be responsible for the proper running of the Homes England Board. They will guide and influence the Agency at a strategic level providing confident, clear and consistent leadership. They will also lead the Agency’s relationship with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, who they will meet on a regular basis. The Chair will act as an ambassador for the Board and for Homes England, helping to build and develop collaborative strategic partnerships that support and promote Homes England’s core mission. The successful candidate will influence and network with key decision makers and stakeholders and explain how the organisation is transforming…”
Time: Up to two days per week.
Remuneration: £95,000 per annum.
Closes: 31 January
– – – – – – – – – –
Tees Valley Local Enterprise Partnership – Chair
“The Tees Valley Combined Authority and Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) are looking to recruit a new LEP Chair and new LEP members from the private sector to deliver our ambitious economic plans. The Combined Authority and LEP strive to ensure an equal and diverse membership, and through this latest round of appointments, have committed to achieve 50% female representation on the LEP board in 2020. Due to the current LEP Chair coming to the end of his term, we are looking to appoint a new LEP Chair who has a strong private sector background, experience of building effective organisations and has the motivation to fully commit to and represent the LEP on a local and national scale.”
Time: 6-8 days per month.
Remuneration: Travel and subsistence expenses.
Closes: 29 February