conservativehome--2020-05-22--Iain Dale: Hancock’s claim that care homes were wrapped in “a bubble of care” has a hollow ring to i

Iain Dale: Hancock’s claim that care homes were wrapped in “a bubble of care” has a hollow ring to it

Iain Dale presents the evening show on LBC Radio and the For the Many podcast with Jacqui Smith .
One of the main themes of any public inquiry into the Coronavirus crisis will be the dynamic between the politicians and their scientific and medical advisers .
Another will be to what degree health ministers are involved in the guidance and direction given by NHS England and Public Health England .
Convention dictates that the buck stops with the Secretary of State for whatever happens within the different quangos and agencies under his or her department ’ s remit – however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we learned that in March and at the beginning of April hundreds of patients , or maybe even thousands , were transferred from hospitals into care homes without being tested to ascertain whether they were Coronavirus-free .
This , on the face of it , was pure madness .
However , Robert Buckland said on Sky News on Wednesday that there was a choice to be paid – prioritise hospitals or social care .
The hospitals needed the beds , so a directive was issued to clear as many elderly people as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into care homes .
The guidance on how to do this was issued to hospitals and care homes were told to comply – or else .
This guidance was posted on the internal NHS England website , I believe , and was only withdrawn once a row blew up in mid-April .
Radio 4 ’ s File on Four documentary this week made for some horrifying listening , but as well as answer some questions , it also posed many others .
I had wrongly assumed that decisions to push out non-tested patients @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ranking NHS managers , but that was not the case .
It was deliberate policy .
On the programme , Jane Deith quoted an April 2 directive from government urging a national initiative to empty hospital beds and put people who may or may not have been infected with coronavirus back into care homes .
It is also alleged that threats about funding were made to care homes who expressed doubt about accepting such patients .
Politico ’ s London Playbook quotes Susan Mckinney , who runs 14 care homes across the north-east @ @ @ @ @ @ @ little choice but to comply .
“ We had an incident on April 10 where twice we rang the hospital saying “ we can ’ t accept this person back , we need them tested , we need a negative test so we know what we ’ re dealing with , ’ ” she said .
“ They turned up at the door in an ambulance and refused to go away .
There was a sort of stand-off at the door of the home .
The family members turned up , the paramedics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the door and would not go away until we allowed them in .
And all we got was ‘ you ’ re not following the guidelines ’ …We were threatened with the police if we did not let this person in.
” Quite astonishing .
It ’ s one thing to have a policy of clearing out hospital beds , and you can understand why this was required .
It ’ s quite another to then just dump these people in random care homes with no notice and no time to prepare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homes , with a bit of notice , that they needed to provide x number of rooms that could be isolated from the rest of the homes in question , they could have planned accordingly .
But they didn ’ t .
So for the Health Secretary to say , as he did , that care homes were wrapped in a bubble of care right from the beginning of the crisis – well , it has a hollow ring to it , doesn ’ t it ?
So were these patients moved from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the scientists and medical advisers ?
Was it a decision that ministers even knew about ?
Should they have ?
Did anyone actually think about the risks involved ?
These are not questions which can or even should be answered now .
But when they are answered , we ’ re going to learn an awful lot about how decisions are made not just at the heart of government , but in arms length quangos .
And I suspect we ’ re not going to like what we discover .
The sheen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s PMQs , as he struggled to pin Boris Johnson to the wall .
Less forensic , more robot .
He seemed to lack a certain fleetness of foot , something which also bedevilled his predecessor , whose name momentarily escapes me .
To be successful at PMQs .
you have to be able to think on your feet and react to whatever answer your opposite number gives .
If you just plough on with your pre-prepared six questions , you run the risk that you ask a question which has already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happened to Starmer on Wednesday .
Having bested Johnson on their two previous encounters , and won rave reviews from commentators of all hues , it was down to earth with a bump for the Labour leader this week .

Iain Dale presents the evening show on LBC Radio and the For the Many podcast with Jacqui Smith.
One of the main themes of any public inquiry into the Coronavirus crisis will be the dynamic between the politicians and their scientific and medical advisers. Another will be to what degree health ministers are involved in the guidance and direction given by NHS England and Public Health England.
Convention dictates that the buck stops with the Secretary of State for whatever happens within the different quangos and agencies under his or her department’s remit – however unfair that might look.
This week, we learned that in March and at the beginning of April hundreds of patients, or maybe even thousands, were transferred from hospitals into care homes without being tested to ascertain whether they were Coronavirus-free.
This, on the face of it, was pure madness. However, Robert Buckland said on Sky News on Wednesday that there was a choice to be paid – prioritise hospitals or social care. The hospitals needed the beds, so a directive was issued to clear as many elderly people as possible out of hospitals and put them into care homes.
The guidance on how to do this was issued to hospitals and care homes were told to comply – or else. This guidance was posted on the internal NHS England website, I believe, and was only withdrawn once a row blew up in mid-April.
Radio 4’s File on Four documentary this week made for some horrifying listening, but as well as answer some questions, it also posed many others. I had wrongly assumed that decisions to push out non-tested patients into care homes were made by middle ranking NHS managers, but that was not the case. It was deliberate policy.
On the programme, Jane Deith quoted an April 2 directive from government urging a national initiative to empty hospital beds and put people who may or may not have been infected with coronavirus back into care homes. It is also alleged that threats about funding were made to care homes who expressed doubt about accepting such patients.
Politico’s London Playbook quotes Susan Mckinney, who runs 14 care homes across the north-east. She maintains that she was given little choice but to comply.
“We had an incident on April 10 where twice we rang the hospital saying “we can’t accept this person back, we need them tested, we need a negative test so we know what we’re dealing with,’” she said.
“They turned up at the door in an ambulance and refused to go away. There was a sort of stand-off at the door of the home. The family members turned up, the paramedics had the poor resident on a stretcher at the door and would not go away until we allowed them in. And all we got was ‘you’re not following the guidelines’…We were threatened with the police if we did not let this person in.”
Quite astonishing. It’s one thing to have a policy of clearing out hospital beds, and you can understand why this was required. It’s quite another to then just dump these people in random care homes with no notice and no time to prepare.
Had it been said to care homes, with a bit of notice, that they needed to provide x number of rooms that could be isolated from the rest of the homes in question, they could have planned accordingly. But they didn’t.
So for the Health Secretary to say, as he did, that care homes were wrapped in a bubble of care right from the beginning of the crisis – well, it has a hollow ring to it, doesn’t it?
So were these patients moved from hospitals to care homes following a recommendation from the scientists and medical advisers? Was it a decision that ministers even knew about? Should they have? Did anyone actually think about the risks involved?
These are not questions which can or even should be answered now. But when they are answered, we’re going to learn an awful lot about how decisions are made not just at the heart of government, but in arms length quangos. And I suspect we’re not going to like what we discover.
– – – – – – – – – – –
The sheen came off Keir Starmer at this week’s PMQs, as he struggled to pin Boris Johnson to the wall.
Less forensic, more robot. He seemed to lack a certain fleetness of foot, something which also bedevilled his predecessor, whose name momentarily escapes me.
To be successful at PMQs. you have to be able to think on your feet and react to whatever answer your opposite number gives. If you just plough on with your pre-prepared six questions, you run the risk that you ask a question which has already been answered, and that is what happened to Starmer on Wednesday.
Having bested Johnson on their two previous encounters, and won rave reviews from commentators of all hues, it was down to earth with a bump for the Labour leader this week.


conservativehome--2020-05-22--John Bald: This week has seen the cynicism of teaching union leaders exposed

John Bald is a former Ofsted inspector and has written two books on the history of writing and spelling .
He is Vice President of the Conservative Education Society .
Most scoops come from a leak , or from being in the right place at the right time .
The Daily Mail ’ s devastating exposé of the thinking of the National Education Union on arrangements for resisting a return to work was in plain sight on the union ’ s YouTube channel and could more or less be copied out .
Joint General Secretary , Kevin Courtney , said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about putting things on social media saying , This school is putting lives at risk – and we ’ ll be threatening heads with that.
” His colleague Dr Mary Bousted cautioned , “ I am going to trust you to keep what is obviously going to be confidential , confidential .
If we are going to tell you what ’ s going on , we have to trust your sense not to spill the beans – when it is clearly a negotiating position.
” Oops… The NEU ’ s largest predecessor , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a history of closed and secret meetings at which the hard Left could accuse governments and moderate members of whatever came to mind .
At annual conferences they would move to exclude the press .
The tactic was in frequent use at the time of the union ’ s notorious 1995 conference , where intimidation forced David Blunkett – who is blind – to take refuge in a cupboard .
Dr Bousted ’ s contribution to free and frank exchange included reference to “ …reception and Year 1 pupils , who are mucky @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everything , who cry , who wipe their snot on your trousers or on your dress… ” True , children of this age have no concept of social distancing – how can they ?
– some are indeed unhygienic , and there are accidents .
But to describe the whole population of five and six year olds in these terms is unrealistic and an insult to parents .
Teachers ’ postings on social media show that they are honestly , and justifiably , worried about the risks to them and their families of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are not the caricatures invented and insulted by the likes of Katie Hopkins , but hardworking people who are rightly concerned about their and their families ’ health .
Cold War rhetoric “ … no negotiation is negotiation… ” – does not represent these people .
I expected better from Courtney , but congratulations to the Mail .
In the meantime , the hit to education from the pandemic gets worse .
Cancelling exams has led to many secondary pupils simply giving up , and my usually busy schedule of free teaching has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Spanish friend with phrasing and pronunciation in English .
A home tutor told me last week that they had had to call police to take three children into emergency care due to neglect .
One , who had not been able to get out of bed , was taken straight to hospital .
The government ’ s forced relaxation of local authority responsibilities for care – forced , because it is impossible to meet them – shows that the system is , at best , on the verge of collapse .
Holding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a challenge .
As I write , I see that the Mail has an admission from Dr Bousted that she “ gets it wrong sometimes.
” Putting it down to northern bluntness , but returning to the attack with a statement that the Prime Minister should “ reap the whirlwind ” .
The person she should be dealing with is Gavin Williamson , who has not put a foot wrong so far , and has shown himself to be open to constructive discussion to find a way out of the crisis .

John Bald is a former Ofsted inspector and has written two books on the history of writing and spelling. He is Vice President of the Conservative Education Society.
Most scoops come from a leak, or from being in the right place at the right time. The Daily Mail’s devastating exposé of the thinking of the National Education Union on arrangements for resisting a return to work was in plain sight on the union’s YouTube channel and could more or less be copied out.
Joint General Secretary, Kevin Courtney, said, “We’ll be talking about putting things on social media saying, This school is putting lives at risk – and we’ll be threatening heads with that.” His colleague Dr Mary Bousted cautioned, “I am going to trust you to keep what is obviously going to be confidential, confidential. If we are going to tell you what’s going on, we have to trust your sense not to spill the beans – when it is clearly a negotiating position.” Oops…
The NEU’s largest predecessor, the National Union of Teachers, had a history of closed and secret meetings at which the hard Left could accuse governments and moderate members of whatever came to mind. At annual conferences they would move to exclude the press. The tactic was in frequent use at the time of the union’s notorious 1995 conference, where intimidation forced David Blunkett – who is blind – to take refuge in a cupboard.
Dr Bousted’s contribution to free and frank exchange included reference to “…reception and Year 1 pupils, who are mucky, who spread germs, who touch everything, who cry, who wipe their snot on your trousers or on your dress…” True, children of this age have no concept of social distancing – how can they? – some are indeed unhygienic, and there are accidents.
But to describe the whole population of five and six year olds in these terms is unrealistic and an insult to parents. Teachers’ postings on social media show that they are honestly, and justifiably, worried about the risks to them and their families of an unsafe return to work. These are not the caricatures invented and insulted by the likes of Katie Hopkins, but hardworking people who are rightly concerned about their and their families’ health. Cold War rhetoric “… no negotiation is negotiation…” – does not represent these people. I expected better from Courtney, but congratulations to the Mail.
In the meantime, the hit to education from the pandemic gets worse. Cancelling exams has led to many secondary pupils simply giving up, and my usually busy schedule of free teaching has been reduced to helping the pupils of a Spanish friend with phrasing and pronunciation in English. A home tutor told me last week that they had had to call police to take three children into emergency care due to neglect. One, who had not been able to get out of bed, was taken straight to hospital. The government’s forced relaxation of local authority responsibilities for care – forced, because it is impossible to meet them – shows that the system is, at best, on the verge of collapse. Holding out for another ten days will be a challenge.
As I write, I see that the Mail has an admission from Dr Bousted that she “gets it wrong sometimes.” Putting it down to northern bluntness, but returning to the attack with a statement that the Prime Minister should “reap the whirlwind”. The person she should be dealing with is Gavin Williamson, who has not put a foot wrong so far, and has shown himself to be open to constructive discussion to find a way out of the crisis.


conservativehome--2020-05-23--Europe 2.0? How divisions over devolution could stall the Tories’ march on Cardiff

When Daniel Kawczynski , the Member of Parliament for Shrewsbury , appeared to suggest on Twitter thinking again about having a Welsh Assembly , the response from Conservative colleagues was swift .
Both Byron Davies , the Chair of the Welsh Conservatives , and Craig Williams , the Member of Parliament for neighbouring ( but Welsh ) Montgomeryshire , wrote public and critical letters .
Simon Hart , the Welsh Secretary , has reportedly backed them up .
On the surface , this looks like an inconsequential skirmish .
But whilst Kawczynski ’ s concerns about the impact of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” don ’ t play well with the leadership , they have resonated with much of the membership .
One Association has reportedly invited Kawczynski to address them on the subject .
The Chair of another has publicly called for the Parliament to be scrapped .
According to one leading member of a Welsh constituency association , the devolution question is “ a tinder box ready to go off ” .
They point to January ’ s ‘ Welsh Political Barometer ’ poll , which found that more than half of Tory voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a referendum were held .
This grassroots view is not shared further up , at least over the short term .
A senior figure in the Welsh Party told me that this is a perennial point of dispute within the party but that they expect the devosceptics to toe the line in the end .
Nor are the devosceptic MPs , concentrated largely although not exclusively amongst the newly-minted North Walian members , spoiling for a fight .
Nonetheless David TC Davies , now a Welsh minister and something of a poacher-turned-gamekeeper on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keeping tabs on a few MPs including James Davies , Jamie Wallis , and David Jones , the former Welsh Secretary .
Yet circumstances are pushing the issue up the agenda .
The 2019 general election saw a substantial tranche of new Conservative MPs returned for constituencies in North Wales , an area much of which takes a dim view of rule from Cardiff .
Then the Covid-19 crisis has thrust the conduct of the Welsh Government into the spotlight , with MPs fielding furious messages from voters over misplaced shielding letters , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ volunteering scheme , delayed tests , and more .
Nor is this a problem that will necessarily go away even if both sides were minded to let it .
The Welsh Conservatives are already being hurt by their voters ’ antipathy to Cardiff Bay : low turnout in devolved elections – which Christopher Harries pointed out yesterday has yet to top even 50 per cent – disproportionately affects the Tory vote .
Hundreds of thousands of voters who back the Conservatives at Westminster stay at home .
As I have written previously , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choice : to lean in to the status quo and the devophile minority of Welsh voters who pay attention to the Assembly , but at the expense of leaving much of their possible coalition at home .
But what if they don ’ t stay at home ?
Smaller parties are trying to exploit the Tories ’ silence on the question to carve themselves a niche amongst unionist voters .
In Wales these include the remnants of UKIP , scrambling for relevance following our exit from the EU and the rise and fall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Neil Hamilton published an open letter chastising Williams for chastising Kawczynki .
The more serious threat , however , may come from Abolish the Assembly , which has chosen whether on grounds of ideology or euphony not to change its name in line with that institution ’ s new branding .
Earlier this month they secured their first defection of a sitting Tory councillor , and they reportedly have their eyes on several more .
In December they also benefited from the defection of Lee Canning , until that point Deputy Chairman of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their Head of Political Operations .
He apparently intends to fight a ‘ key target seat ’ for the party in 2021 .
Just as importantly , he brings to the table a big Conservative contact book the party previously lacked .
Will any of this be enough to destabilise the Party ’ s campaign for next year ’ s devolved elections ?
It doesn ’ t look like it at the moment .
The Conservatives continue to poll extremely well , even allowing for the still-visible structural gap between their Westminster and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finally be in a position to secure the ‘ right-unionist ’ seats won by UKIP in 2016 .
The minor unionist parties , meanwhile , are still scrapping to establish themselves and have not yet found a charismatic figurehead , although even the relatively sanguine senior Tories expect Abolish to win at least one or two seats in the regional lists .
But there are no grounds for complacency .
The devosceptics themselves are taking their inspiration from the battle to leave the EU , a multi-decade campaign which saw a relatively small @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on a resistant major party and drag the debate their way .
They also anticipate that their pitch to disaffected unionist voters could be super-charged if the Conservatives end up entering into a pact with Plaid in order to displace Labour next year .
That ’ s the state of play today .
But the Welsh elections are a year away – or maybe even further .
In these volatile times , that ’ s plenty of time for the game to change .
And the leadership clearly senses something is afoot : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a speech ‘ relaunching ’ his leadership in March , and even Williams acknowledged that the time for debating the questions Kawczynski raised “ will come later ” .
The membership may hold him to that .

When Daniel Kawczynski, the Member of Parliament for Shrewsbury, appeared to suggest on Twitter thinking again about having a Welsh Assembly, the response from Conservative colleagues was swift.
Both Byron Davies, the Chair of the Welsh Conservatives, and Craig Williams, the Member of Parliament for neighbouring (but Welsh) Montgomeryshire, wrote public and critical letters. Simon Hart, the Welsh Secretary, has reportedly backed them up.
On the surface, this looks like an inconsequential skirmish. But whilst Kawczynski’s concerns about the impact of the now-Parliament on the “cohesion of Britain” don’t play well with the leadership, they have resonated with much of the membership.
One Association has reportedly invited Kawczynski to address them on the subject. The Chair of another has publicly called for the Parliament to be scrapped.
According to one leading member of a Welsh constituency association, the devolution question is “a tinder box ready to go off”. They point to January’s ‘Welsh Political Barometer’ poll, which found that more than half of Tory voters would choose to scrap the Assembly if a referendum were held.
This grassroots view is not shared further up, at least over the short term. A senior figure in the Welsh Party told me that this is a perennial point of dispute within the party but that they expect the devosceptics to toe the line in the end. Nor are the devosceptic MPs, concentrated largely although not exclusively amongst the newly-minted North Walian members, spoiling for a fight.
Nonetheless David TC Davies, now a Welsh minister and something of a poacher-turned-gamekeeper on devolution, and the whips are reportedly keeping tabs on a few MPs including James Davies, Jamie Wallis, and David Jones, the former Welsh Secretary.
Yet circumstances are pushing the issue up the agenda. The 2019 general election saw a substantial tranche of new Conservative MPs returned for constituencies in North Wales, an area much of which takes a dim view of rule from Cardiff. Then the Covid-19 crisis has thrust the conduct of the Welsh Government into the spotlight, with MPs fielding furious messages from voters over misplaced shielding letters, delayed priority food deliveries, a botched volunteering scheme, delayed tests, and more.
Nor is this a problem that will necessarily go away even if both sides were minded to let it. The Welsh Conservatives are already being hurt by their voters’ antipathy to Cardiff Bay: low turnout in devolved elections – which Christopher Harries pointed out yesterday has yet to top even 50 per cent – disproportionately affects the Tory vote. Hundreds of thousands of voters who back the Conservatives at Westminster stay at home.
As I have written previously, this leaves the Party facing a tricky choice: to lean in to the status quo and the devophile minority of Welsh voters who pay attention to the Assembly, but at the expense of leaving much of their possible coalition at home.
But what if they don’t stay at home? Smaller parties are trying to exploit the Tories’ silence on the question to carve themselves a niche amongst unionist voters. In Wales these include the remnants of UKIP, scrambling for relevance following our exit from the EU and the rise and fall of the Brexit Party – just yesterday Neil Hamilton published an open letter chastising Williams for chastising Kawczynki.
The more serious threat, however, may come from Abolish the Assembly, which has chosen whether on grounds of ideology or euphony not to change its name in line with that institution’s new branding. Earlier this month they secured their first defection of a sitting Tory councillor, and they reportedly have their eyes on several more. In December they also benefited from the defection of Lee Canning, until that point Deputy Chairman of the Welsh Conservatives, who has become their Head of Political Operations. He apparently intends to fight a ‘key target seat’ for the party in 2021. Just as importantly, he brings to the table a big Conservative contact book the party previously lacked.
Will any of this be enough to destabilise the Party’s campaign for next year’s devolved elections? It doesn’t look like it at the moment. The Conservatives continue to poll extremely well, even allowing for the still-visible structural gap between their Westminster and Cardiff Bay voting intention, and may finally be in a position to secure the ‘right-unionist’ seats won by UKIP in 2016.
The minor unionist parties, meanwhile, are still scrapping to establish themselves and have not yet found a charismatic figurehead, although even the relatively sanguine senior Tories expect Abolish to win at least one or two seats in the regional lists.
But there are no grounds for complacency. The devosceptics themselves are taking their inspiration from the battle to leave the EU, a multi-decade campaign which saw a relatively small vanguard of dedicated activists gradually exert pressure on a resistant major party and drag the debate their way. They also anticipate that their pitch to disaffected unionist voters could be super-charged if the Conservatives end up entering into a pact with Plaid in order to displace Labour next year.
That’s the state of play today. But the Welsh elections are a year away – or maybe even further. In these volatile times, that’s plenty of time for the game to change.
And the leadership clearly senses something is afoot: Paul Davies struck a devosceptic note in a speech ‘relaunching’ his leadership in March, and even Williams acknowledged that the time for debating the questions Kawczynski raised “will come later”. The membership may hold him to that.


Coronavirus Count

Total number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 254,195 ( Up from 250,908 ) .
Total number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths : 36,393 ( Up from 36,042 ) .
Daily number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 3,287 ( Up from 2,615 ) .
Daily number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths : 351 ( Up from 338 ) .
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 19.00 on Friday May 22nd . )

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--2020-05-23--David Gauke: A localised piloting, regional approach to ending lockdown. It’s what should happen – a

David Gauke: A localised piloting, regional approach to ending lockdown. It’s what should happen – and now it may.

David Gauke is a former Justice Secretary , and was an independent candidate in South-West Hertfordshire at the recent general election .
Easing the lockdown was never going to be straightforward .
The public was broadly united in supporting its introduction ; we are divided on how we escape it .
Our attitudes , shaped by circumstance and temperament , vary greatly .
For some , the current restrictions are an unconscionable constraint on our liberties ; for others , any relaxation is a reckless gamble with the lives of thousands .
A third category is uncertain as to what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rationale for any particular changes .
For my own part , I think the broad strategy of the Government is sensible .
A wholesale abandonment of the lockdown would be reckless and , as Ryan Bourne very persuasively argued on these pages , ineffective in terms of reviving the economy .
It is not the lockdown that is changing people ’ s behaviour ; it is the fear of the virus .
But nor should the Government simply maintain a lockdown which had elements that look to be largely irrelevant in terms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which significantly diminished our prosperity or quality of life .
Unfortunately , a sensible strategy has been undermined by poor execution .
Overstating the scale of the changes in the Thursday papers , rowing back on the Friday , making the announcement on the Sunday but only providing the supporting documentation on the Monday and Tuesday ; it all gave the impression of being haphazard , rushed and improvised at a time when the public want to believe that Ministers have a plan .
In defence of the Government , this stage of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the hardest ( a point I have been making on this website for some weeks ) .
As some activities are released from lockdown and other activities are not , this was always going to look messy , arbitrary and unfair .
But , given that these were the first baby steps away from the lockdown , I would hope and expect that the Government is thinking hard about how it can ensure that future relaxations go more smoothly .
A lot of this is basic communication skills , something that the Government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ message is vital .
That means Ministers must resist offering good news unless they are confident that good news is going to be delivered .
Promising something one day only to withdraw or postpone it the next will only damage credibility .
Now is a time for under-promising and over-delivering .
It is also a time to avoid cutting corners .
Make an announcement when you have got everything in order .
Parliament should not be sidestepped .
Communications really matter here .
Many people are nervous about any kind of return to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the Government has thought this through and is proceeding carefully which , despite appearances , I think it is .
The challenge for the next stages will be how to persuade the public that any relaxation is sensible .
Let us take schools .
The Government plan , to re-open primary schools for Reception and Years 1 and 6 is perfectly reasonable .
The risk to the lives of the children is miniscule ; the risk of wider transmission in the community and to teachers appears to be very low .
Teachers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as to how this would work but their response ( especially that of the NEU ) has been obstructive and irresponsible .
Nonetheless , the Government has got a problem .
For the short and long term good of the children and the economy , it needs to get schools open .
This is not just about the plans for 1 June , but about school re-opening more generally .
The plan announced by the Prime Minister involves all primary school years attending by 22 June , plus time at school for Years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of writing , it is not clear how the Government is going to get there .
In my last column , I suggested that some schools should re-open in advance of 1 June .
For those schools , there would be intensive testing of teachers and more widely in the community in order to pick up very quickly if there was any increase in transmission .
Consequently , teachers and parents would know that if the scientific advice about the risks of re-opening primary schools was wrong , we would know fast enough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ done .
If it turns out as expected and re-opening primary schools does not pose a risk , we can move forward with more confidence elsewhere where testing can not be so targeted .
If , however , we learn that this does cause an increase in the disease , better that we know that in a controlled way early .
Had we done this a few weeks ago , we would be more likely to get all primary schools open on 1 June .
This could be the basis of a compromise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Government in sticking to its current timetable .
However , when it comes to future progress in re-opening schools , a test , learn and adapt approach would make sense .
We should look to pilot as soon as possible some schools going back with all year groups , perhaps with more relaxed rules on social distancing .
If we are serious about a swift return for all primary school pupils , let us start getting the evidence in a controlled way .
There are other areas where we should take a scientific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more stringent than most other countries and restricts public transport to a fraction of its usual capacity .
It is hard to see how hospitality or live entertainment is workable with such a rule in place whilst productivity in construction and manufacturing will be severely damaged .
Maybe we need a two metre rule but maybe we don ’ t .
There is a case for piloting some factories and construction sites to operate a one metre rule .
Again , combine that with intensive testing , see if there is any significant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence to determine whether a general relaxation could be possible .
Localised piloting could be combined with a more general , regionalised approach , as both I and ConservativeHome have suggested .
It is very clear that London is in a different position to the rest of the country .
A full lifting of the lockdown in London would be premature ( how many from across the country would descend upon London ’ s pubs ? )
but , assuming no increase in infections , there is a good case for London to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country in those activities unlikely to result in people travelling to the capital .
Yesterday , the Prime Minister ’ s spokesman left a door open for doing so .
Neither pilots nor regional variations are politically easy , but none of this is going to be easy .
Recognise that different conditions apply in different places .
Advance where we can .
Build up evidence when we need to and demonstrate that we will be led by that evidence .
Less haste , more speed .
Easing the lockdown is going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There have been missteps of late , but it is in all our interests that the Government succeeds .

David Gauke is a former Justice Secretary, and was an independent candidate in South-West Hertfordshire at the recent general election.
Easing the lockdown was never going to be straightforward. The public was broadly united in supporting its introduction; we are divided on how we escape it. Our attitudes, shaped by circumstance and temperament, vary greatly. For some, the current restrictions are an unconscionable constraint on our liberties; for others, any relaxation is a reckless gamble with the lives of thousands. A third category is uncertain as to what is now allowed and confused as to the rationale for any particular changes.
For my own part, I think the broad strategy of the Government is sensible. A wholesale abandonment of the lockdown would be reckless and, as Ryan Bourne very persuasively argued on these pages, ineffective in terms of reviving the economy.
It is not the lockdown that is changing people’s behaviour; it is the fear of the virus. But nor should the Government simply maintain a lockdown which had elements that look to be largely irrelevant in terms of reducing the death toll, but which significantly diminished our prosperity or quality of life.
Unfortunately, a sensible strategy has been undermined by poor execution. Overstating the scale of the changes in the Thursday papers, rowing back on the Friday, making the announcement on the Sunday but only providing the supporting documentation on the Monday and Tuesday; it all gave the impression of being haphazard, rushed and improvised at a time when the public want to believe that Ministers have a plan.
In defence of the Government, this stage of the process was always going to be the hardest (a point I have been making on this website for some weeks). As some activities are released from lockdown and other activities are not, this was always going to look messy, arbitrary and unfair. But, given that these were the first baby steps away from the lockdown, I would hope and expect that the Government is thinking hard about how it can ensure that future relaxations go more smoothly.
A lot of this is basic communication skills, something that the Government is usually good at. Consistency of message is vital. That means Ministers must resist offering good news unless they are confident that good news is going to be delivered. Promising something one day only to withdraw or postpone it the next will only damage credibility. Now is a time for under-promising and over-delivering. It is also a time to avoid cutting corners. Make an announcement when you have got everything in order. Parliament should not be sidestepped.
Communications really matter here. Many people are nervous about any kind of return to normality. They need to be reassured that the Government has thought this through and is proceeding carefully which, despite appearances, I think it is. The challenge for the next stages will be how to persuade the public that any relaxation is sensible.
Let us take schools. The Government plan, to re-open primary schools for Reception and Years 1 and 6 is perfectly reasonable. The risk to the lives of the children is miniscule; the risk of wider transmission in the community and to teachers appears to be very low. Teachers’ union are entitled to seek reassurance as to how this would work but their response (especially that of the NEU) has been obstructive and irresponsible.
Nonetheless, the Government has got a problem. For the short and long term good of the children and the economy, it needs to get schools open. This is not just about the plans for 1 June, but about school re-opening more generally. The plan announced by the Prime Minister involves all primary school years attending by 22 June, plus time at school for Years 10 and 12. At the time of writing, it is not clear how the Government is going to get there.
In my last column, I suggested that some schools should re-open in advance of 1 June. For those schools, there would be intensive testing of teachers and more widely in the community in order to pick up very quickly if there was any increase in transmission. Consequently, teachers and parents would know that if the scientific advice about the risks of re-opening primary schools was wrong, we would know fast enough to change course before much harm was done.
If it turns out as expected and re-opening primary schools does not pose a risk, we can move forward with more confidence elsewhere where testing cannot be so targeted. If, however, we learn that this does cause an increase in the disease, better that we know that in a controlled way early.
Had we done this a few weeks ago, we would be more likely to get all primary schools open on 1 June. This could be the basis of a compromise now, although I would back the Government in sticking to its current timetable.
However, when it comes to future progress in re-opening schools, a test, learn and adapt approach would make sense. We should look to pilot as soon as possible some schools going back with all year groups, perhaps with more relaxed rules on social distancing. If we are serious about a swift return for all primary school pupils, let us start getting the evidence in a controlled way.
There are other areas where we should take a scientific approach. Our two metre rule is more stringent than most other countries and restricts public transport to a fraction of its usual capacity. It is hard to see how hospitality or live entertainment is workable with such a rule in place whilst productivity in construction and manufacturing will be severely damaged.
Maybe we need a two metre rule but maybe we don’t. There is a case for piloting some factories and construction sites to operate a one metre rule. Again, combine that with intensive testing, see if there is any significant difference in infection rates and use that evidence to determine whether a general relaxation could be possible.
Localised piloting could be combined with a more general, regionalised approach, as both I and ConservativeHome have suggested. It is very clear that London is in a different position to the rest of the country. A full lifting of the lockdown in London would be premature (how many from across the country would descend upon London’s pubs?) but, assuming no increase in infections, there is a good case for London to move faster than the rest of the country in those activities unlikely to result in people travelling to the capital. Yesterday, the Prime Minister’s spokesman left a door open for doing so.
Neither pilots nor regional variations are politically easy, but none of this is going to be easy. Recognise that different conditions apply in different places. Advance where we can. Build up evidence when we need to and demonstrate that we will be led by that evidence. Less haste, more speed.
Easing the lockdown is going to require determination, patience and skill. There have been missteps of late, but it is in all our interests that the Government succeeds.


conservativehome--2020-05-23--WATCH: Cummings Doorstepped 2) He references Brexit. “Just remember how well you guys did before.”

Asked if he was going to consider resigning following accusations he broke lockdown rules , Dominic Cummings said `` obviously @ @ @ @ @ `` You guys are probably as right about that as you are about Brexit , @ @ @ @ @ ? ''

Asked if he was going to consider resigning following accusations he broke lockdown rules, Dominic Cummings said "obviously not."
He added "You guys are probably as right about that as you are about Brexit, remember how right you were?"
More: https://t.co/GnNiZQOga6 pic.twitter.com/oSLZwyxy7v
— SkyNews (@SkyNews) May 23, 2020


conservativehome--2020-05-23--WATCH: Cummings Doorstepped 1) He counter-attacks . “It’s a question of doing the right thing. It’s

WATCH: Cummings Doorstepped 1) He counter-attacks . “It’s a question of doing the right thing. It’s not about what you guys think.”

Dominic Cummings has told reporters he `` behaved reasonably and legally '' after it was revealed he travelled 260 miles @ @ @ @ @ lockdown .
He added 'who cares about looking good , it 's about doing the @ @ @ @

Dominic Cummings has told reporters he "behaved reasonably and legally" after it was revealed he travelled 260 miles from London to Durham during lockdown.
He added 'who cares about looking good, it's about doing the right thing.'
More: https://t.co/mjbkhDlaZv pic.twitter.com/IygACtJ4i7
— SkyNews (@SkyNews) May 23, 2020


conservativehome--2020-05-24--WATCH: Cummings 3) Shapps would rather talk about “things that matter to people’s everyday lives” –

WATCH: Cummings 3) Shapps would rather talk about “things that matter to people’s everyday lives” – like his £1 billion plan for the A66

“ I had hoped ” to talk about “ things I ’ m an expert in ” says Transport Secretary @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m sure it ’ s very disappointing not to be able to talk @ @ @ @ @ as you ’ d like on the programme ” # Ridge pic.twitter.com/AnUHMhnmxe

“I had hoped” to talk about “things I’m an expert in” says Transport Secretary @grantshapps @SophyRidgeSky “I’m sure it’s very disappointing not to be able to talk about the A66 as much as you’d like on the programme”#Ridge pic.twitter.com/AnUHMhnmxe
— Sophy Ridge on Sunday (@RidgeOnSunday) May 24, 2020


conservativehome--2020-05-24--WATCH: Cummings 2) Baker says that he should resign

“ I ’ m afraid it hasn ’ t been a success trying to save him ” Conservative MP Steve @ @ @ @ @ ’ s aide Dominic Cummings is “ not indispensible ” , saying “ Dominic should @ @ @ @ @ trouble , he should go , he should go today ” https : //t.co/TqE5ZdUf0F pic.twitter.com/wcUYJp8ZLU

“I’m afraid it hasn’t been a success trying to save him”
Conservative MP Steve Baker says the Prime Minister’s aide Dominic Cummings is “not indispensible”, saying “Dominic should just save us all this trouble, he should go, he should go today”https://t.co/TqE5ZdUf0F pic.twitter.com/wcUYJp8ZLU
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) May 24, 2020


conservativehome--2020-05-24--Cummings 1) At a stroke, the row has weakened the authority of the lockdown

Resignation precedes resurrection – or can do in political terms , at any rate .
Priti Patel was forced to quit in the autumn of 2017 .
She was back in office within eighteen months , appointed to one the great offices of state – Home Secretary .
Amber Rudd ’ s leaving and return was even quicker .
She was out of the Home Office in the spring of 2018 and into Work and Pensions by the autumn – back , like Patel , in Cabinet .
Which helps to explain why we would put a modest bet on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Downing Street in the run-up to the 2024 general election – assuming that there isn ’ t one earlier , and that Johnson himself is still in place .
Not that Cummings shows any sign of going this morning .
Should he ?
The best way of approaching the question is to start with an incontrovertible truth : few come to it with clean hands .
Nearly everyone with an interest in politics has a view about him .
For many of them , it ’ s shaped by a vested interest .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the start .
Cummings is the great , proven British centre-right referendum winner and election strategist of our time .
Which is precisely why the left , the Remainer residue , and Labour are desperate to get him out – and have seized on the tale of his and his family ’ s Coronavirus departure to Durham .
Whether he is as skilled a non-election and non-referendum government supremo is a different matter .
And , by definition , an unproven one , since he has only been in his present post @ @ @ @ @ @ @ place , for fewer than six months .
This site is certainly sceptical of Downing Street ’ s capacity to wield centralised power , with Ministers chosen on the basis of compliance over competence .
On the Covid controversy , the issues are legal , moral , political – and , right at the start , factual .
This is a tale that is still being told .
For example , sightings of Cummings are claimed in Barnard Castle in County Durham on April 12 , 30 miles from the family home , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Durham itself on April 19 , after it .
As far as we can see , Cummings is specifically denying the second claim , but not the first , which perhaps is covered by a general Downing Street statement : “ We will not waste our time answering a stream of false allegations…from campaigning newspapers.
” Maybe Cummings will now achieve the status of Elvis Presley or Lord Lucan , with sightings claimed worldwide .
Then there is the mystery of who Durham Police spoke to in his family , if anyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ family self-isolated in Durham – or even if he had contact with them and others – he has a legal defence for his action .
The guidance of the time sets out the standard procedure for self-isolation , but adds that “ if you are living with children…we are aware that not all these measures will be possible.
” The law itself sets out a list of reasonable excuses for leaving home , and these are not exhaustive .
Might Cummings be able to plead such an excuse ?
Or was there really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for childcare ?
One blog suggests that a court might take into account “ human rights issues ” .
Oh , the irony : Cummings saved by the ECHR !
But in any event , Durham Police say they issued not a charge , but a warning , in line with guidelines .
So much for law .
What about morals ?
Take your pick .
One view is that Cummings and his wife were only doing what any parents would do for their child .
A contrary one is to assert that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ set an example – and must go .
Another is to say that he ’ s guilty , but that sacking would be too harsh a punishment .
Next , politics .
To date , this has largely been a conflict of Right and Leavers versus the Left and Remainers .
The swing voters are Conservative MPs .
Many of them hate Cummings , believing that he hates them ( which isn ’ t quite true , at least in every case . )
None the less , the pro-Brexit majority doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ten touched – not with the transition extension decision looming .
And Keir Starmer ’ s arrival is bolstering internal discipline .
Which may explain why Tory MPs are a dog that hasn ’ t barked .
Their main WhatsApp group was very quiet yesterday , and the backbench one only a little noisier .
If even David Davis isn ’ t out and about in public , the Parliamentary Party can live with Cummings , at least for the moment .
Having said that , ConHome finds opinion within the Government machine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the idea that Cummings might have to resign as absurd .
Another said that while he admired him , “ he really is , literally , a law unto himself – and this macho culture in Downing Street is part of the reason why social distancing wasn ’ t practised early on , and so why both he and Prime Minister fell ill. ” Will the voters see it all that way – that there ’ s “ one law for us and another for them ” ?
Is this an “ ERM @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again , there may never have been an ERM moment at all : what did for the Major Government in the polls and at by-elections was the tax rises that followed Britain ’ s exit from the system .
Political failure in Britain has been defined by events , not advisers .
Gordon Brown was done in not by Gillian Duffy , but the crash .
Theresa May was felled by her failure to deliver Brexit on March 29 last year .
Tony Blair ’ s legacy was shaped by the Iraq War @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never heard of Cummings , and will see the scrap as a beltway row – not remotely as important as facing two weeks ’ quarantine on return from flying off into the sun .
None the less , there is a sting in the tail for the Government .
Maybe Cummingsgate will have vanished from sight long before Starmer limbers up for PMQs on Wednesday week .
However , it will surely leave a mark on public attitudes to lockdown .
Most people won ’ t trawl through the legal documents .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on TV or reading what they write on Twitter .
“ Caring for your wife and child is not a crime , ” Michael Gove , the Government ’ s most eloquent spokesman , tweeted yesterday .
Many will agree – and conclude that if so much , as Ministers suggest , depends on circumstances , nuance , context , and common sense , then they will honour the lockdown more in the breach than the observance .
That would be bad for the rule of law , but not so bad for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy , to use a more formal term .
Fifty-three per cent of Brits are frightened of catching the virus , according to YouGov , a total not far below the peak of 61 per cent .
This fear is doing more to stymie the economy than any shutdown .
Maybe the Cummings affair will succeed in changing public attitudes where the lockdown sceptics are failing .

Resignation precedes resurrection – or can do in political terms, at any rate. Priti Patel was forced to quit in the autumn of 2017. She was back in office within eighteen months, appointed to one the great offices of state – Home Secretary. Amber Rudd’s leaving and return was even quicker. She was out of the Home Office in the spring of 2018 and into Work and Pensions by the autumn – back, like Patel, in Cabinet.
Which helps to explain why we would put a modest bet on Dominic Cummings being with Boris Johnson in Downing Street in the run-up to the 2024 general election – assuming that there isn’t one earlier, and that Johnson himself is still in place.
Not that Cummings shows any sign of going this morning. Should he? The best way of approaching the question is to start with an incontrovertible truth: few come to it with clean hands. Nearly everyone with an interest in politics has a view about him. For many of them, it’s shaped by a vested interest. So let ConservativeHome declare its own take at the start.
Cummings is the great, proven British centre-right referendum winner and election strategist of our time. Which is precisely why the left, the Remainer residue, and Labour are desperate to get him out – and have seized on the tale of his and his family’s Coronavirus departure to Durham.
Whether he is as skilled a non-election and non-referendum government supremo is a different matter. And, by definition, an unproven one, since he has only been in his present post, with a Tory Commons majority in place, for fewer than six months. This site is certainly sceptical of Downing Street’s capacity to wield centralised power, with Ministers chosen on the basis of compliance over competence.
On the Covid controversy, the issues are legal, moral, political – and, right at the start, factual. This is a tale that is still being told. For example, sightings of Cummings are claimed in Barnard Castle in County Durham on April 12, 30 miles from the family home, before his return to London; and in Durham itself on April 19, after it.
As far as we can see, Cummings is specifically denying the second claim, but not the first, which perhaps is covered by a general Downing Street statement: “We will not waste our time answering a stream of false allegations…from campaigning newspapers.” Maybe Cummings will now achieve the status of Elvis Presley or Lord Lucan, with sightings claimed worldwide. Then there is the mystery of who Durham Police spoke to in his family, if anyone.
But assuming that Cummings and his family self-isolated in Durham – or even if he had contact with them and others – he has a legal defence for his action. The guidance of the time sets out the standard procedure for self-isolation, but adds that “if you are living with children…we are aware that not all these measures will be possible.”
The law itself sets out a list of reasonable excuses for leaving home, and these are not exhaustive. Might Cummings be able to plead such an excuse? Or was there really no-one in London to fall back on for childcare? One blog suggests that a court might take into account “human rights issues”. Oh, the irony: Cummings saved by the ECHR! But in any event, Durham Police say they issued not a charge, but a warning, in line with guidelines.
So much for law. What about morals? Take your pick. One view is that Cummings and his wife were only doing what any parents would do for their child. A contrary one is to assert that he should have been especially careful to set an example – and must go. Another is to say that he’s guilty, but that sacking would be too harsh a punishment.
Next, politics. To date, this has largely been a conflict of Right and Leavers versus the Left and Remainers. The swing voters are Conservative MPs. Many of them hate Cummings, believing that he hates them (which isn’t quite true, at least in every case.) None the less, the pro-Brexit majority doesn’t want the Vote Leavers in Number Ten touched – not with the transition extension decision looming.
And Keir Starmer’s arrival is bolstering internal discipline. Which may explain why Tory MPs are a dog that hasn’t barked. Their main WhatsApp group was very quiet yesterday, and the backbench one only a little noisier. If even David Davis isn’t out and about in public, the Parliamentary Party can live with Cummings, at least for the moment.
Having said that, ConHome finds opinion within the Government machine divided. One senior player laughed away the idea that Cummings might have to resign as absurd. Another said that while he admired him, “he really is, literally, a law unto himself – and this macho culture in Downing Street is part of the reason why social distancing wasn’t practised early on, and so why both he and Prime Minister fell ill.”
Will the voters see it all that way – that there’s “one law for us and another for them”? Is this an “ERM moment”? Perhaps. But then again, there may never have been an ERM moment at all: what did for the Major Government in the polls and at by-elections was the tax rises that followed Britain’s exit from the system.
Political failure in Britain has been defined by events, not advisers. Gordon Brown was done in not by Gillian Duffy, but the crash. Theresa May was felled by her failure to deliver Brexit on March 29 last year. Tony Blair’s legacy was shaped by the Iraq War. Remember: lots of voters have never heard of Cummings, and will see the scrap as a beltway row – not remotely as important as facing two weeks’ quarantine on return from flying off into the sun.
None the less, there is a sting in the tail for the Government. Maybe Cummingsgate will have vanished from sight long before Starmer limbers up for PMQs on Wednesday week. However, it will surely leave a mark on public attitudes to lockdown. Most people won’t trawl through the legal documents. But lots will be hearing what Ministers say on TV or reading what they write on Twitter.
“Caring for your wife and child is not a crime,” Michael Gove, the Government’s most eloquent spokesman, tweeted yesterday. Many will agree – and conclude that if so much, as Ministers suggest, depends on circumstances, nuance, context, and common sense, then they will honour the lockdown more in the breach than the observance.
That would be bad for the rule of law, but not so bad for the condition of livelihoods – or the economy, to use a more formal term. Fifty-three per cent of Brits are frightened of catching the virus, according to YouGov, a total not far below the peak of 61 per cent. This fear is doing more to stymie the economy than any shutdown. Maybe the Cummings affair will succeed in changing public attitudes where the lockdown sceptics are failing.


Coronavirus Count

Total number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 257,154 ( Up from 254,195 ) .
Total number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths : 36,675 ( Up from 36,042 ) .
Daily number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 2,959 ( Down from 3,287 ) .
Daily number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths : 282 ( Down from 351 ) .
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 19.00 on Saturday May 23rd . )


conservativehome--2020-05-25--Cummings. The Prime Minister is now gambling on what the ’22 does next.

At the heart of the words “ Protect the NHS ” – themselves at the centre of the Government ’ s three-part slogan when Dominic Cummings and his family drove north to Durham – was an unrebuttable political truth .
Namely , that had the health service collapsed as Italy ’ s did , with TV pictures of sick people “ gasping for air , clutching at their chests and at tubes pumping oxygen into their oxygen-starved lungs ” , Tory MPs would have risen in revolt .
Their e-mail boxes and Facebook pages would have teemed ; Association activists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ friends and families would have been outraged ; WhatsApp Groups would have boiled over .
And Boris Johnson , for all his 80 seat majority and thumping election win less than six months ago , would have been out .
Now turn from fiction to fact .
When the Coronavirus began to bite back in March , the anguished e-mails did indeed begin streaming in , and Conservative MPs were suddenly all over Rishi Sunak .
The Chancellor was forced to follow up his Budget on March 11 with a second major financial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on April 3 – plus a further series of tweaks , adjustments and changes , including furlough extension .
The language in parts of the Treasury about the propensity of Tory MPs to panic as the constituency pressure mounts has to be heard to be believed .
This takes us back to the future of Cummings .
Those e-mails and Facebook pages teemed yesterday ; those activists rung and texted – and so on .
The boiling water may not simmer down over the next few days .
The 1922 Committee ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or not to meet virtually this week .
That fact presents Boris Johnson with a choice .
He can gamble that it won ’ t .
Or that if it does , the discussion it has about his adviser – for one is certain to take place if there is a meeting – is inconclusive , or pulls any punches it might be minded to deliver .
The latter is the most likely course of action if the executive meets : one source on the committee says that “ I ’ ve never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ None the less , punches will certainly be thrown in Cummings ’ direction in such an event .
Three of the 16 MPs who have come out against him are on the executive : Steve Baker , Jason McCartney and William Wragg .
So if it meets , those punches aren ’ t pulled , and the committee formally resolves that Cummings should go , a trial of strength opens up between the Prime Minister and Conservative backbenchers .
Again , Johnson could gamble that , in these circumstances , the executive would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t , he would be in very serious trouble .
Ultimately , a Conservative leader operates with the consent of Tory MPs .
The ’ 22 is a bit like the Canadian mounties : it always gets its man .
Or woman : after all , it eventually did for Theresa May , only a year or so ago .
His choice , therefore , is either to continue to tough it out , in the hope that the ’ 22 doesn ’ t meet and act , or else sack Cummings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do ) , or else…send for Mark Sedwill .
The Cabinet Secretary could authorise an inquiry into whether or not Cummings ’ flight from self-isolation in London broke the Special Advisers ’ Code of Conduct .
Since Cummings had a legal case for what he did , and arguably a moral one , such a probe would be unlikely to recommend dismissal .
We also suspect , given the way the world works , that the top of the civil service is finely attuned to what this Prime Minister wants , for all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s political operation .
At any rate , an inquiry would certainly stave off any push from the ’ 22 .
And Cummings would probably survive it .
But that is not the end of the story .
Ultimately , what counts in the world of interaction between voters and MPs isn ’ t so much law , or even morality , as politics .
And those of this row are problematic for Johnson in one sense and perhaps in another .
Certainly , and as we argued yesterday , it has dealt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lockdown .
If so much depends on circumstances , common sense and context , as Ministers now proclaim , people will draw the obvious conclusion .
We understand that the Government ’ s plans for easing the shutdown , of which more is expected later this week , will rely more on the exercise of personal responsibility .
Under the circumstances , that ’ s just as well .
And arguably , what ’ s at stake is not merely the authority of the lockdown , but the authority of the Government – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ man who has been loaned the trust of Red Wall voters and so many others .
At the emotional heart of the affair is the sense from people that they have missed family funerals ; sweated it out in lockdown with sick children ; not seen parents and friends for weeks – and so on .
If they really conclude that “ it ’ s one law for them , and another us ” – with enemy-of-the-establishment Cummings ironically transformed into an icon of the establishment – the Prime Minister may be irreparably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into polls and event in such a way that Johnson will have no peace until his adviser departs , and maybe not even then .
We are a long way from knowing whether this possibility is real , and the heat of this row , deliberately fanned by the enemies of Brexit , of the Conservatives and of Cummings himself is not the best place to make a judgement .
There are plenty of reasons for the Prime Minister not to order an inquiry .
The ’ 22 is unlikely to demand anything @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and facts , the story may burn itself in the May heat .
Ordering a probe now would look and perhaps be weak .
And it might not reach the conclusion he wants .
Still , there it is .
Either he calls for one or toughs it out .
But remember : a Tory leader is not ultimately master in his own house .

At the heart of the words “Protect the NHS” – themselves at the centre of the Government’s three-part slogan when Dominic Cummings and his family drove north to Durham – was an unrebuttable political truth.
Namely, that had the health service collapsed as Italy’s did, with TV pictures of sick people “gasping for air, clutching at their chests and at tubes pumping oxygen into their oxygen-starved lungs”, Tory MPs would have risen in revolt.
Their e-mail boxes and Facebook pages would have teemed; Association activists would have been ringing and texting; friends and families would have been outraged; WhatsApp Groups would have boiled over.
And Boris Johnson, for all his 80 seat majority and thumping election win less than six months ago, would have been out. Now turn from fiction to fact.
When the Coronavirus began to bite back in March, the anguished e-mails did indeed begin streaming in, and Conservative MPs were suddenly all over Rishi Sunak.
The Chancellor was forced to follow up his Budget on March 11 with a second major financial package on March 19 and a third on April 3 – plus a further series of tweaks, adjustments and changes, including furlough extension.
The language in parts of the Treasury about the propensity of Tory MPs to panic as the constituency pressure mounts has to be heard to be believed.
This takes us back to the future of Cummings. Those e-mails and Facebook pages teemed yesterday; those activists rung and texted – and so on. The boiling water may not simmer down over the next few days.
The 1922 Committee’s executive hasn’t yet decided whether or not to meet virtually this week. That fact presents Boris Johnson with a choice.
He can gamble that it won’t. Or that if it does, the discussion it has about his adviser – for one is certain to take place if there is a meeting – is inconclusive, or pulls any punches it might be minded to deliver.
The latter is the most likely course of action if the executive meets: one source on the committee says that “I’ve never known us resolve anything formally”.
None the less, punches will certainly be thrown in Cummings’ direction in such an event. Three of the 16 MPs who have come out against him are on the executive: Steve Baker, Jason McCartney and William Wragg.
So if it meets, those punches aren’t pulled, and the committee formally resolves that Cummings should go, a trial of strength opens up between the Prime Minister and Conservative backbenchers.
Again, Johnson could gamble that, in these circumstances, the executive would back down. But if it didn’t, he would be in very serious trouble.
Ultimately, a Conservative leader operates with the consent of Tory MPs. The ’22 is a bit like the Canadian mounties: it always gets its man. Or woman: after all, it eventually did for Theresa May, only a year or so ago.
His choice, therefore, is either to continue to tough it out, in the hope that the ’22 doesn’t meet and act, or else sack Cummings (which he surely won’t do), or else…send for Mark Sedwill.
The Cabinet Secretary could authorise an inquiry into whether or not Cummings’ flight from self-isolation in London broke the Special Advisers’ Code of Conduct.
Since Cummings had a legal case for what he did, and arguably a moral one, such a probe would be unlikely to recommend dismissal.
We also suspect, given the way the world works, that the top of the civil service is finely attuned to what this Prime Minister wants, for all the tensions between Sedwill and Johnson’s political operation.
At any rate, an inquiry would certainly stave off any push from the ’22. And Cummings would probably survive it. But that is not the end of the story.
Ultimately, what counts in the world of interaction between voters and MPs isn’t so much law, or even morality, as politics. And those of this row are problematic for Johnson in one sense and perhaps in another.
Certainly, and as we argued yesterday, it has dealt a blow to the authority of the lockdown. If so much depends on circumstances, common sense and context, as Ministers now proclaim, people will draw the obvious conclusion.
We understand that the Government’s plans for easing the shutdown, of which more is expected later this week, will rely more on the exercise of personal responsibility. Under the circumstances, that’s just as well.
And arguably, what’s at stake is not merely the authority of the lockdown, but the authority of the Government – and by extension Johnson himself: the man who has been loaned the trust of Red Wall voters and so many others.
At the emotional heart of the affair is the sense from people that they have missed family funerals; sweated it out in lockdown with sick children; not seen parents and friends for weeks – and so on.
If they really conclude that “it’s one law for them, and another us” – with enemy-of-the-establishment Cummings ironically transformed into an icon of the establishment – the Prime Minister may be irreparably damaged.
This sense will feed through into polls and event in such a way that Johnson will have no peace until his adviser departs, and maybe not even then.
We are a long way from knowing whether this possibility is real, and the heat of this row, deliberately fanned by the enemies of Brexit, of the Conservatives and of Cummings himself is not the best place to make a judgement.
There are plenty of reasons for the Prime Minister not to order an inquiry. The ’22 is unlikely to demand anything. In the absence of further revelations and facts, the story may burn itself in the May heat.
Ordering a probe now would look and perhaps be weak. And it might not reach the conclusion he wants. Still, there it is. Either he calls for one or toughs it out. But remember: a Tory leader is not ultimately master in his own house.


Coronavirus Count

Total number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 259,559 ( Up from 257,154 ) .
Total number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths : 36,793 ( Up from 36,675 ) .
Daily number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 2,409 ( Down from 2,959 ) .
Daily number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths : 118 ( Down from 282 ) .
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 18.30 on Sunday May 24th . )


conservativehome--2020-05-25--Richard Holden: Labour must work with new Red Wall Tory MPs for the common good – or it will be swep

Richard Holden: Labour must work with new Red Wall Tory MPs for the common good – or it will be swept aside

After a century under a Labour County Council and almost as long with Labour MPs , my constituency of North West Durham epitomises what has been described as ‘ left behind Britain ’ .
At the end of the Second World War , Consett had multiple rail connections and , like much of the North East , was dominated by heavy industry .
From the end of the war until the mid-1980s there was a period of industrial decline .
It happened at varying pace , under both Labour and Conservative Governments , with the closure of the steel works @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For decades , local politics has revolved around an historic blame game that continues , in some way at least , to this day .
The closure of the pits happened over decades , culminating in the Miners ’ Strike but , by that point , there were no deep-coal mines left in North West Durham .
The decline of coal had been happening for over 30 years before the strike .
As early as 1951 , the council published the notorious “ County Development Plan 1951 ” which included plans for “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over 100 towns and villages deemed no-longer viable due to the closure of pits .
The steelworks themselves closed in 1980 : lack of modernisation and investment , international competition , union intransigence and the 1967 renationalisation plan ( which excluded Consett ) all had their parts to play .
And , as industry left , so did the infrastructure that supported it .
Consett had multiple rail lines to it in 1950 .
Today there are none , the last going with the steelworks .
This managed decline left my constituency to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no dual carriageway .
Jobs have slowly returned , and the population has grown , although at least half my constituents now commute to the towns and cities of the wider region for work and , despite some efforts , the town centres of Consett , Crook and Willington have never really recovered .
Into this historic mix at the last general election were thrown Brexit , an avowedly class-war style Labour Party , and an optimistic Conservative party .
The resulting collapse of the Labour vote and switch in seats like mine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It was also a vote for something too .
No-one thinks that a large-scale return to traditional heavy industry is possible , or even desirable , but people do want better than what they ’ ve had .
They want their potential and their area ’ s potential to be supported .
Like everyone else , they want more opportunities for their children and themselves , and for their strong communities to thrive .
They seek good , well-paying jobs and the opportunity to create them as well .
Attracting businesses into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it in terms of transport would be a significant catalyst for economic growth , and provide a two-way exchange .
They also want public services to match our growing community .
We ’ ve got lots of brownfield land on the old steelworks site , and more widely too to support growth .
But we ’ ve got to have the infrastructure to support it as well .
Since being elected , I ’ ve pushed hard for my constituency , quite unashamedly .
One of the first things that I campaigned for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an EU regulation that had led to a tax rise hitting one of the largest employers in my constituency , and I delivered it .
Astonishingly , it was something that hadn ’ t even been mentioned in Parliament by my predecessor .
I ’ ve also pushed hard for a new community hospital to replace one that ’ s currently costing over £1.7 million a year in running maintenance and repairs .
Shotley Bridge hospital was mentioned in Parliament three times in ten years by my predecessors ; it ’ s been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last six months .
Labour played on the idea of being ignored by Conservatives .
The more I ’ ve looked , the more it appears that the local Labour MPs were happy to stick to the blame game , rather than doing anything about the broader situation But what ’ s shocked me is that Labour ’ s traditional approach has continued .
Last Wednesday , I submitted an expression of interest for a new public transport scheme to re-connect Consett by fixed-line public transport back to Gateshead , Newcastle and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something that is sorely needed .
I spoke to local councillors about it in advance ( bearing in mind that I have no Conservative councillors in my area ) in Durham Council and in Gateshead .
I even gave my neighbouring local Labour MP to the north the heads up .
Liz Twist told me that she wouldn ’ t come out for or against , but would see how I got on in my feasibility study bid .
I said if she didn ’ t oppose it , I wouldn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supporting it from the off .
But then the traditional Labour politics came in – desperate to stop anything positive , and return to the historic blame game .
Within hours of me raising the need for better public transport as I submitted the proposal , and before I ’ d even done my own social media posts locally , Liz Twist had been out attacking it .
The irony of the entire situation is that my constituents currently sit in traffic jams in her seat trying to get to work – as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Can you imagine the petty party-political small-mindedness of opposing a bid for a feasibility study for a public transport project ?
That , I ’ m afraid , is the Labour way .
If it ’ s not an idea that they can wholly own , they ’ d rather it didn ’ t happen .
If it means working with other parties , they ’ d rather kill it than see progress made .
If it means potentially hundreds of millions of pounds of investment into transformational projects , if it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ d rather see it wither on the vine .
I have a message for the Labour MPs who remain , who saw their majorities slashed .
You are not sitting in Parliament to represent the narrow political interests of the Labour Party based on some bizarre historic grievance politics .
You ’ re there because you were elected by the people .
You ’ ve had decades to do something and so many of you have done very little .
Being an MP isn ’ t an honour bestowed on you from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a crucial role to represent and stand up for your community .
If you ’ re not prepared to work with MPs of other parties , then we ’ re going to work with local people to do everything possible to get you out of the way .
Labour MPs and Labour councillors now will reap the whirlwind of righteous anger from the public they ’ re meant to serve unless they change their old tune of grievance and do so quickly .

Richard Holden is MP for North West Durham.
After a century under a Labour County Council and almost as long with Labour MPs, my constituency of North West Durham epitomises what has been described as ‘left behind Britain’. At the end of the Second World War, Consett had multiple rail connections and, like much of the North East, was dominated by heavy industry.
From the end of the war until the mid-1980s there was a period of industrial decline. It happened at varying pace, under both Labour and Conservative Governments, with the closure of the steel works the seismic end of that era. For decades, local politics has revolved around an historic blame game that continues, in some way at least, to this day.
The closure of the pits happened over decades, culminating in the Miners’ Strike but, by that point, there were no deep-coal mines left in North West Durham. The decline of coal had been happening for over 30 years before the strike.
As early as 1951, the council published the notorious “County Development Plan 1951” which included plans for “D-Villages” – the widescale demolition of over 100 towns and villages deemed no-longer viable due to the closure of pits. The steelworks themselves closed in 1980: lack of modernisation and investment, international competition, union intransigence and the 1967 renationalisation plan (which excluded Consett) all had their parts to play.
And, as industry left, so did the infrastructure that supported it. Consett had multiple rail lines to it in 1950. Today there are none, the last going with the steelworks.
This managed decline left my constituency to this day with no rail service and no dual carriageway. Jobs have slowly returned, and the population has grown, although at least half my constituents now commute to the towns and cities of the wider region for work and, despite some efforts, the town centres of Consett, Crook and Willington have never really recovered.
Into this historic mix at the last general election were thrown Brexit, an avowedly class-war style Labour Party, and an optimistic Conservative party. The resulting collapse of the Labour vote and switch in seats like mine was more than a vote against something. It was also a vote for something too.
No-one thinks that a large-scale return to traditional heavy industry is possible, or even desirable, but people do want better than what they’ve had. They want their potential and their area’s potential to be supported. Like everyone else, they want more opportunities for their children and themselves, and for their strong communities to thrive.
They seek good, well-paying jobs and the opportunity to create them as well. Attracting businesses into the area is essential, and re-connecting it in terms of transport would be a significant catalyst for economic growth, and provide a two-way exchange.
They also want public services to match our growing community. We’ve got lots of brownfield land on the old steelworks site, and more widely too to support growth. But we’ve got to have the infrastructure to support it as well.
Since being elected, I’ve pushed hard for my constituency, quite unashamedly. One of the first things that I campaigned for was the motorhomes tax cut – reversing an EU regulation that had led to a tax rise hitting one of the largest employers in my constituency, and I delivered it.
Astonishingly, it was something that hadn’t even been mentioned in Parliament by my predecessor. I’ve also pushed hard for a new community hospital to replace one that’s currently costing over £1.7 million a year in running maintenance and repairs.
Shotley Bridge hospital was mentioned in Parliament three times in ten years by my predecessors; it’s been mentioned as often by me in the last six months. Labour played on the idea of being ignored by Conservatives. The more I’ve looked, the more it appears that the local Labour MPs were happy to stick to the blame game, rather than doing anything about the broader situation
But what’s shocked me is that Labour’s traditional approach has continued. Last Wednesday, I submitted an expression of interest for a new public transport scheme to re-connect Consett by fixed-line public transport back to Gateshead, Newcastle and the urban centre of the North East – something that is sorely needed.
I spoke to local councillors about it in advance (bearing in mind that I have no Conservative councillors in my area) in Durham Council and in Gateshead. I even gave my neighbouring local Labour MP to the north the heads up. Liz Twist told me that she wouldn’t come out for or against, but would see how I got on in my feasibility study bid. I said if she didn’t oppose it, I wouldn’t have a go at her for not supporting it from the off.
But then the traditional Labour politics came in – desperate to stop anything positive, and return to the historic blame game. Within hours of me raising the need for better public transport as I submitted the proposal, and before I’d even done my own social media posts locally, Liz Twist had been out attacking it. The irony of the entire situation is that my constituents currently sit in traffic jams in her seat trying to get to work – as do many of her own constituents.
Can you imagine the petty party-political small-mindedness of opposing a bid for a feasibility study for a public transport project?
That, I’m afraid, is the Labour way. If it’s not an idea that they can wholly own, they’d rather it didn’t happen. If it means working with other parties, they’d rather kill it than see progress made. If it means potentially hundreds of millions of pounds of investment into transformational projects, if it’s not their idea, then they’d rather see it wither on the vine.
I have a message for the Labour MPs who remain, who saw their majorities slashed. You are not sitting in Parliament to represent the narrow political interests of the Labour Party based on some bizarre historic grievance politics. You’re there because you were elected by the people. You’ve had decades to do something and so many of you have done very little.
Being an MP isn’t an honour bestowed on you from Labour high command; it’s a crucial role to represent and stand up for your community. If you’re not prepared to work with MPs of other parties, then we’re going to work with local people to do everything possible to get you out of the way.
Labour MPs and Labour councillors now will reap the whirlwind of righteous anger from the public they’re meant to serve unless they change their old tune of grievance and do so quickly.