conservativehome--2020-02-21--John Bald: My law of education – the more that is written down, the less is actually done

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 .
Back to work with Amanda Richardson ’ s talk on Special Needs and Disabilities to the Conservative Education Society last Monday .
Good to see Stephen James , founder of Conservative Friends of Education there too , and pleased that he found Amanda ’ s talk “ brilliant ” .
The new minister for SEND – probably Children and Families Minister , Vicky Ford – will no doubt find it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to meet her .
Amanda ’ s talk was focused on three questions : what does excellence in SEND look like , why haven ’ t we got it , and how do we move towards it ?
Her key point was the need to move from the “ macro ” analysis of the last Select Committee report , to the “ micro ” , which involves getting the right blend of support to individual children .
She endorsed the need for more money , which she wanted to go straight to headteachers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on their pupils , but was also concerned about what she saw as a “ chronic lack of specialist expertise ” .
School co-ordinators were overwhelmed with paperwork , to the detriment of developing and applying their teaching skills , and most actual teaching was provided by assistants , some of whom were excellent , while many others lacked training and skills .
Another obstacle was too much emphasis on physical access to facilities , and too little on the teaching that enabled children , especially those with neurological conditions such as cerebral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Children in this position might be physically included , but mentally deprived , lonely and anxious .
Part of the solution , she argued , could be to found a local register of expertise and resources , and to ensure that everyone with a skill to contribute – local authorities , pupil referral units , special schools and charities – was able to do so .
It could be more economic , for example , to send a child to an independent or charitable special school , than for an authority to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Early identification , to gain maximum benefit from plasticity of the young brain , close co-operation with parents , and attention to detail at all stages , are essential , and a long way from what we have at present .
A parent complained that money allocated for her child ’ s individual teaching was spent instead on providing an assistant to work with a group , and that the headteacher had told her , “ I ’ m the head , and I ’ m saying what is going to happen.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ problems the government has had in ensuring that pupil premium money is spent for its intended purpose and not , for example , on paying the salaries of senior managers , or the expenses of a multi-academy trust .
There is almost a law to be applied here – what is not ring-fenced will be mis-spent .
I raised the increasing incidence of what psychologists term “ Pathological Demand Avoidance ” , in which a pupil either gives up , refusing to do anything at all , or else complies , with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had seen rare cases in the past , but it is becoming a lot more frequent , and a source of serious worry , as it is virtually impossible to teach such pupils in a class .
Amanda agreed that this was a growing and intractable problem , and probably the result of needs not being met at an early stage , so that children became more and more frustrated .
The school she had led for many years , The Pace Centre , had just received its sixth consecutive outstanding report from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to detail from the earliest stages in its work with children with cerebral palsy .
The gap between such excellence and where we are could scarcely be greater , and Robert Halfon ’ s sense of shame at the plight of families with SEND is fully justified – seeing their children suffer in this way , and being required by law to send them to a school that they know is not meeting their needs , makes a whole family unhappy , and often leads to additional expense for services such as speech @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plans , but not provided .
The paperwork mountain has been with us since the Warnock report of 1979 , and conforms to what I will call Bald ’ s law of education – the more that is written down , the less that is actually done .
To reverse this , SENCOs need to lose their role of clerk and become once again the school ’ s lead practitioner , with the skills to train others to work to the highest possible standard with the pupils they are actually working with , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the best ways of meeting them .
LA advisers and those inspectors who see “ inclusion ” as no more than physical presence in the class , without evidence of intellectual progress , have their careers invested in the idea , and are unlikely to change their ways .
Their employers in local authorities and teacher education are no more competent to run this area of education than any other .

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.
Back to work with Amanda Richardson’s talk on Special Needs and Disabilities to the Conservative Education Society last Monday. Good to see Stephen James, founder of Conservative Friends of Education there too, and pleased that he found Amanda’s talk “brilliant”. The new minister for SEND – probably Children and Families Minister, Vicky Ford – will no doubt find it brilliant too, and would do well to meet her.
Amanda’s talk was focused on three questions: what does excellence in SEND look like, why haven’t we got it, and how do we move towards it? Her key point was the need to move from the “macro” analysis of the last Select Committee report, to the “micro”, which involves getting the right blend of support to individual children. She endorsed the need for more money, which she wanted to go straight to headteachers so that they could spend it directly on their pupils, but was also concerned about what she saw as a “chronic lack of specialist expertise”. School co-ordinators were overwhelmed with paperwork, to the detriment of developing and applying their teaching skills, and most actual teaching was provided by assistants, some of whom were excellent, while many others lacked training and skills. Another obstacle was too much emphasis on physical access to facilities, and too little on the teaching that enabled children, especially those with neurological conditions such as cerebral palsy, to learn and make progress. Children in this position might be physically included, but mentally deprived, lonely and anxious.
Part of the solution, she argued, could be to found a local register of expertise and resources, and to ensure that everyone with a skill to contribute – local authorities, pupil referral units, special schools and charities – was able to do so. It could be more economic, for example, to send a child to an independent or charitable special school, than for an authority to build and operate one of their own. Early identification, to gain maximum benefit from plasticity of the young brain, close co-operation with parents, and attention to detail at all stages, are essential, and a long way from what we have at present.
A parent complained that money allocated for her child’s individual teaching was spent instead on providing an assistant to work with a group, and that the headteacher had told her, “I’m the head, and I’m saying what is going to happen.” This is a reflection of the problems the government has had in ensuring that pupil premium money is spent for its intended purpose and not, for example, on paying the salaries of senior managers, or the expenses of a multi-academy trust. There is almost a law to be applied here – what is not ring-fenced will be mis-spent.
I raised the increasing incidence of what psychologists term “Pathological Demand Avoidance”, in which a pupil either gives up, refusing to do anything at all, or else complies, with a subsequent furious reaction at home. I had seen rare cases in the past, but it is becoming a lot more frequent, and a source of serious worry, as it is virtually impossible to teach such pupils in a class. Amanda agreed that this was a growing and intractable problem, and probably the result of needs not being met at an early stage, so that children became more and more frustrated. The school she had led for many years, The Pace Centre, had just received its sixth consecutive outstanding report from Ofsted, precisely because of its attention to detail from the earliest stages in its work with children with cerebral palsy.
The gap between such excellence and where we are could scarcely be greater, and Robert Halfon’s sense of shame at the plight of families with SEND is fully justified – seeing their children suffer in this way, and being required by law to send them to a school that they know is not meeting their needs, makes a whole family unhappy, and often leads to additional expense for services such as speech therapy that are included in individual education plans, but not provided.
The paperwork mountain has been with us since the Warnock report of 1979, and conforms to what I will call Bald’s law of education – the more that is written down, the less that is actually done.
To reverse this, SENCOs need to lose their role of clerk and become once again the school’s lead practitioner, with the skills to train others to work to the highest possible standard with the pupils they are actually working with, in full knowledge of their needs and of the best ways of meeting them. LA advisers and those inspectors who see “inclusion” as no more than physical presence in the class, without evidence of intellectual progress, have their careers invested in the idea, and are unlikely to change their ways. Their employers in local authorities and teacher education are no more competent to run this area of education than any other.


conservativehome--2020-02-21--Council by-election result from yesterday and forthcoming contests

Conservatives 689 ( 49.0 per cent , -0.1 on 2019 ) Labour 279 ( 19.9 per cent , -31.0 ) @ @ @ @ @ per cent , +18.4 ) Independent 90 ( 6.4 per cent , +6.4 ) Independent @ @ @ @ @ , +6.3 )

Middlesbrough – Coulby Newham
Conservatives 689 (49.0 per cent, -0.1 on 2019) Labour 279 (19.9 per cent, -31.0) Lib Dems 259 (18.4 per cent, +18.4) Independent 90 (6.4 per cent, +6.4) Independent 88 (6.3 per cent, +6.3)
Conservatives hold
Forthcoming contests
February 27th
Blaby – Millfield (Labour held)
Cambridgeshire – Duxford (Conservative held)
Cheshire East – Crewe South (Labour held)
Hillingdon – Hillingdon East (Conservative held)
Manchester – Clayton and Openshaw (Labour held)
South Cambridgeshire – Whittlesford (Conservative held)
Wrexham – Gwersyllt North (Independent held)
March 10th
Wiltshire – Till and Wylye Valley (Conservative held)
March 12th
Highland – Eilean a’ Cheò (Independent held)
Stratford-on-Avon – Welford-on-Avon (Lib Dem held)
South Somerset – Parrett Ward (Lib Dem held)
March 19th


conservativehome--2020-02-22--Is the Home Office still unfit for purpose?

The female Home Secretary fell out with her Permanent Secretary – and the latter eventually left the Department .
We refer not to Priti Patel and Philip Rutnam , but to Theresa May and Helen Ghosh , who at one time held the position .
The latter reportedly found the former “ difficult to get with ” .
May herself was on her fourth Permanent Secretary by the end of her record-breaking spell at the Home Office .
The capacity to make changes , plus her Stakhanovite work ethic , not to mention a team of committed Special Advisers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long .
For the department has a way of getting through Ministers .
Of the last ten Home Secretaries , three have resigned in post : Charles Clarke , David Blunkett and Amber Rudd .
A fourth , Jacqui Smith , left saying that she survived more “ by luck than by any kind of development of skills .
I think we should have been better trained .
I think there should have been more induction ” .
It may seem at first glance that Home Secretaries have less to do than when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all , prisons was hived off under Labour to the then newly-created Ministry of Justice .
This would be a mis-reading of developments .
There was no Islamist or neo-nazi terror on any significant scale when Howard was Home Secretary .
Immigration was less extensive .
Judicial Review was not the instrument that it is today .
And Britain was still a member of the European Union .
Patel must thus implement a new migration system at the same time as ensuring that none of the many skeletons in the department ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She can not necessarily rely on the information provided to her by the civil service invariably being accurate .
It was this that did for Rudd over Windrush .
By the time she left the Home Office in 2018 , Downing Street was a weak operator – damaged by the failed election gambit during the previous year .
Today , it is a strong one : the reshuffle suggested that Dominic Cummings is as well-placed as…Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill were during May ’ s heydey .
So Patel has pressure on her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Sajid Javid , did not .
That is no bad thing .
But regardless of the rights and wrongs of who said what to whom over Extinction Rebellion , deportations or any other subject , one point is clear .
Which is that senior civil servants , or their allies , can ’ t be allowed to run amok publicly – using The Times yet again as their vehicle of choice .
As journalists , we cheer whenever details of rows reach the media .
As Conservatives ( and indeed as citizens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do .
If Sir Philip or his friends have a complaint about the Home Secretary , it should be pursued through the official channels , not splashed all over the papers .
If Number Ten doesn ’ t get a grip on this furore – David Normington , a former Home Office Permanent Secretary , has now joined the fray – it threatens to drag on into the Sunday papers , and thus onward into the start of next week .
If his successor can ’ t quieten his allies , he should @ @ @ @ @ @

The female Home Secretary fell out with her Permanent Secretary – and the latter eventually left the Department.
We refer not to Priti Patel and Philip Rutnam, but to Theresa May and Helen Ghosh, who at one time held the position. The latter reportedly found the former “difficult to get with”.
May herself was on her fourth Permanent Secretary by the end of her record-breaking spell at the Home Office. The capacity to make changes, plus her Stakhanovite work ethic, not to mention a team of committed Special Advisers, helps to explain why she lasted so long.
For the department has a way of getting through Ministers. Of the last ten Home Secretaries, three have resigned in post: Charles Clarke, David Blunkett and Amber Rudd. A fourth, Jacqui Smith, left saying that she survived more “by luck than by any kind of development of skills. I think we should have been better trained. I think there should have been more induction”.
It may seem at first glance that Home Secretaries have less to do than when Michael Howard held the post. After all, prisons was hived off under Labour to the then newly-created Ministry of Justice. This would be a mis-reading of developments.
There was no Islamist or neo-nazi terror on any significant scale when Howard was Home Secretary. Immigration was less extensive. Judicial Review was not the instrument that it is today.
And Britain was still a member of the European Union.
Patel must thus implement a new migration system at the same time as ensuring that none of the many skeletons in the department’s cupboard leap out to bite her.
She cannot necessarily rely on the information provided to her by the civil service invariably being accurate. It was this that did for Rudd over Windrush. By the time she left the Home Office in 2018, Downing Street was a weak operator – damaged by the failed election gambit during the previous year. Today, it is a strong one: the reshuffle suggested that Dominic Cummings is as well-placed as…Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill were during May’s heydey.
So Patel has pressure on her to deliver that her predecessor under May, Sajid Javid, did not. That is no bad thing. But regardless of the rights and wrongs of who said what to whom over Extinction Rebellion, deportations or any other subject, one point is clear.
Which is that senior civil servants, or their allies, can’t be allowed to run amok publicly – using The Times yet again as their vehicle of choice. As journalists, we cheer whenever details of rows reach the media. As Conservatives (and indeed as citizens), we boo, or should do. If Sir Philip or his friends have a complaint about the Home Secretary, it should be pursued through the official channels, not splashed all over the papers.
If Number Ten doesn’t get a grip on this furore – David Normington, a former Home Office Permanent Secretary, has now joined the fray – it threatens to drag on into the Sunday papers, and thus onward into the start of next week. If his successor can’t quieten his allies, he should be given the Ghosh treatment.


conservativehome--2020-02-22--How Trump made himself the champion of America’s Christian evangelicals

Trump and the Puritans by James Roberts and Martyn Whittock This book explains how , to the incomprehension and dismay of American liberals , Donald Trump was elected President by attracting the support of American Puritans .
Those of us who watch the politics of America from afar sometimes make the error of imagining that country to be similar to the European democracies , only bigger and more modern .
This assumption can be nourished by reading the best of the American press .
Here one finds a sophisticated liberalism in harmony with European liberalism : a community of like-minded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thrill to the same causes and are joined rather than divided by the Atlantic .
But America is in some respects astonishingly old-fashioned .
That is one reason why I love going there .
They take history more seriously than we do , and believe it is worth shedding blood for what you believe in – a truth from which the liberal mind recoils .
And they take religion more seriously than we do .
The authors of this work remind us that about 70 per cent of American adults identify as being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adult population , a quarter describe themselves as “ evangelicals ” .
Of those evangelicals , 81 per cent voted for Trump in 2016 , and most of them have stuck with him since .
The term “ evangelical ” is open to the objection that it is imprecise , but as James Roberts and Martyn Whittock observe : In England , Puritanism failed , and was seen to have failed , by 1660 .
In New England , where The Mayflower landed with the first wave of Puritan settlers in 1620 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about 21,000 Puritans took place between 1629 and 1642 , Puritanism succeeded .
The most famous manifesto for American Puritanism was uttered by John Winthrop , from Groton in Suffolk , who had been educated at Trinity College , Cambridge , and in 1630 led the “ Winthrop fleet ” of 700 colonists sailing in 11 ships from England to New England : “ We shall find that the God of Israel is among us , when ten of us shall be able to resist a thousand of our enemies ; when He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that men shall say of succeeding plantations , ‘ may the Lord make it like that of New England.
’ For we must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill .
The eyes of all people are upon us .
So that if we shall deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken , and so cause Him to withdraw His present help from us , we shall be made a story and a by-word through the world .
We shall open the mouths of enemies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ God… ” The authors of this book give a convincing and dispassionate account of American Puritanism , but do not quote Winthrop at such length : I have done so in order to remind myself and others of the moral seriousness of these early Puritans .
The book does include the most remembered words in the above passage , “ city upon a hill ” , spoken by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount , and in more recent times by Presidents John F Kennedy and Ronald Reagan , who clearly wished @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may say – to show that they were acting within the Winthrop tradition .
There were echoes of Winthrop , these authors maintain , in Trump ’ s speech in Pensacola , Florida , in November 2018 , when he declared that “ pioneers and visionaries raised up gleaming cities by the sea ” .
The standard liberal retort to this line of argument is that Trump is too sleazy , pagan and disreputable to be a convincing champion for American evangelicals .
Moral condemnation of the President supplants any attempt to understand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on moral or indeed spiritual grounds , to vote for him .
This book acts as an antidote to such intellectual laziness .
It traces the survival of American Puritanism from the 17th century to the present day , and shows how Trump made himself the champion of evangelicals who see everything they hold dear threatened by an aggressive liberal secularism which treats them with contempt .
The evangelicals found themselves dismissed by Hillary Clinton as “ deplorables ” , a badge they were happy to adopt .
They found their traditional understanding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numerous , and more persistent , than British Conservatives who suffered the same insult at the hands of David Cameron : “ After the passing into law of what Hillary and her supporters in the US and elsewhere called ‘ marriage equality ’ – a term that many ‘ deplorables ’ regarded as a form of Newspeak – President Barack Obama ordered that the White House be bathed in the colours of the rainbow .
In the eyes of many this was a tender act of solidarity .
After centuries of the darkening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America had taken a step towards a new era of equality , perhaps the most important one since the Supreme Court ’ s Roe v , Wade ruling in 1973 , which affirmed a woman ’ s right to abortion .
“ In the eyes of the “ deplorables ” , however , the rainbow White House was a transparent act of liberal-secular passive aggression .
Under the guise of inclusiveness , the government was excluding the huge section of traditionally Christian Americans who believed that marriage was , by definition and nature @ @ @ @ @ @ @ man and one woman.
” The early Puritans , founding their New Jerusalem in New England , were convinced they were God ’ s chosen people , entitled to dispossess and exterminate the Native Americans .
This belief in a providential mission was articulated on a larger scale by the journalist John L O ’ Sullivan , who wrote in 1845 , while urging the annexation of Texas , of “ our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions ” .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seize by force in 1846-48 vast territories from Mexico , stretching westwards all the way to California , with the southern border extended to the Rio Grande .
Abraham Lincoln , newly elected to the House of Representatives , opposed the Mexican War , and failed as a result to win re-election .
Trump , if he had been around , would have been all in favour of it .
His anti-Mexican rhetoric is not an invention of the last few years , but has deep roots in American history .
His calls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ border play to the fear of evangelical Americans that the nation their forefathers built is in danger of being overwhelmed .
In 1960 , Protestant voters narrowly failed to avert the election of the first Roman Catholic President , JFK .
In the course of that decade , these Protestants came , these authors observe , to see secularisation “ as a bigger threat to their understanding of Christian values than that posed by Catholicism ” .
By 1980 , Pastor Jerry Falwell could declare , in the forward to a book entitled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ready to Lead , “ Americans have literally stood by and watched as godless , spineless leaders have brought our nation floundering to the brink of death ” .
The evangelical Right had become a major force in politics .
George W. Bush owed his election in 2000 , and re-election in 2004 , in part to the skill with which he appealed to this constituency .
Trump is adept , on issues like abortion , Israel and gun control , at appealing to evangelicals , convincingly portrayed here as the inheritors of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sure belief in their own righteousness , of the early Puritan settlers .
If Trump can appoint enough Supreme Court judges who oppose abortion , he can turn back the tide of secularisation .
Compared to that great goal , his own character defects seem unimportant to many evangelicals .
Like Cyrus , the King of Persia who in the Book of Isaiah is found liberating the Jews at God ’ s behest , Trump is seen by some evangelicals as a man who is doing God ’ s work .
Liberals will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that thought .
But revulsion precludes comprehension of how Trump has profiled himself as the defender of evangelicals who feel , as these authors put it , that “ in a world of liberal identity politics they have been denied an identity that they themselves would recognise ” .
The 400th anniversary of the arrival of the Pilgrim Fathers ( as they became known ) on The Mayflower falls in November this year , just after the presidential election , so one of the first duties of the victor will be to join @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to decide how to react to criticism by Native Americans .
To anyone who wants to understand Trump , and how he became the champion of America ’ s embattled evangelicals , this scrupulous though not elegant book may be warmly recommended .

Trump and the Puritans by James Roberts and Martyn Whittock
This book explains how, to the incomprehension and dismay of American liberals, Donald Trump was elected President by attracting the support of American Puritans.
Those of us who watch the politics of America from afar sometimes make the error of imagining that country to be similar to the European democracies, only bigger and more modern.
This assumption can be nourished by reading the best of the American press. Here one finds a sophisticated liberalism in harmony with European liberalism: a community of like-minded progressives who love the same writers, thrill to the same causes and are joined rather than divided by the Atlantic.
But America is in some respects astonishingly old-fashioned. That is one reason why I love going there. They take history more seriously than we do, and believe it is worth shedding blood for what you believe in – a truth from which the liberal mind recoils.
And they take religion more seriously than we do. The authors of this work remind us that about 70 per cent of American adults identify as being Christian, and that of the total adult population, a quarter describe themselves as “evangelicals”.
Of those evangelicals, 81 per cent voted for Trump in 2016, and most of them have stuck with him since. The term “evangelical” is open to the objection that it is imprecise, but as James Roberts and Martyn Whittock observe:
“While the meaning of this term may be open to interpretation, those who use it in the USA as an identifier generally subscribe to a broad raft of beliefs: acceptance of the Bible as the inspired ‘word of God’ (which often has a fundamentalist and literal interpretation of the scriptures); traditional concepts of marriage, family and gender; and traditional attitudes towards the practice of sexuality, almost always involving classifying homosexual practice as sinful, with acceptable (heterosexual) sexual relations being reserved for within marriage. This is a collection of beliefs that would have been both recognised and accepted by most seventeenth-century Puritan believers.”
In England, Puritanism failed, and was seen to have failed, by 1660. In New England, where The Mayflower landed with the first wave of Puritan settlers in 1620, and the “Great Migration” of about 21,000 Puritans took place between 1629 and 1642, Puritanism succeeded.
The most famous manifesto for American Puritanism was uttered by John Winthrop, from Groton in Suffolk, who had been educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, and in 1630 led the “Winthrop fleet” of 700 colonists sailing in 11 ships from England to New England:
“We shall find that the God of Israel is among us, when ten of us shall be able to resist a thousand of our enemies; when He shall make us a praise and glory that men shall say of succeeding plantations, ‘may the Lord make it like that of New England.’ For we must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill. The eyes of all people are upon us. So that if we shall deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken, and so cause Him to withdraw His present help from us, we shall be made a story and a by-word through the world. We shall open the mouths of enemies to speak evil of the ways of God…”
The authors of this book give a convincing and dispassionate account of American Puritanism, but do not quote Winthrop at such length: I have done so in order to remind myself and others of the moral seriousness of these early Puritans.
The book does include the most remembered words in the above passage, “city upon a hill”, spoken by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount, and in more recent times by Presidents John F Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, who clearly wished – with a certain effrontery, some may say – to show that they were acting within the Winthrop tradition.
There were echoes of Winthrop, these authors maintain, in Trump’s speech in Pensacola, Florida, in November 2018, when he declared that “pioneers and visionaries raised up gleaming cities by the sea”.
The standard liberal retort to this line of argument is that Trump is too sleazy, pagan and disreputable to be a convincing champion for American evangelicals.
Moral condemnation of the President supplants any attempt to understand why Christians do quite often decide, on moral or indeed spiritual grounds, to vote for him.
This book acts as an antidote to such intellectual laziness. It traces the survival of American Puritanism from the 17th century to the present day, and shows how Trump made himself the champion of evangelicals who see everything they hold dear threatened by an aggressive liberal secularism which treats them with contempt.
The evangelicals found themselves dismissed by Hillary Clinton as “deplorables”, a badge they were happy to adopt. They found their traditional understanding of marriage mocked, and were more numerous, and more persistent, than British Conservatives who suffered the same insult at the hands of David Cameron:
“After the passing into law of what Hillary and her supporters in the US and elsewhere called ‘marriage equality’ – a term that many ‘deplorables’ regarded as a form of Newspeak – President Barack Obama ordered that the White House be bathed in the colours of the rainbow. In the eyes of many this was a tender act of solidarity. After centuries of the darkening of marriage through prejudice and exclusion, America had taken a step towards a new era of equality, perhaps the most important one since the Supreme Court’s Roe v, Wade ruling in 1973, which affirmed a woman’s right to abortion. “In the eyes of the “deplorables”, however, the rainbow White House was a transparent act of liberal-secular passive aggression. Under the guise of inclusiveness, the government was excluding the huge section of traditionally Christian Americans who believed that marriage was, by definition and nature, an institution that joined together one man and one woman.”
The early Puritans, founding their New Jerusalem in New England, were convinced they were God’s chosen people, entitled to dispossess and exterminate the Native Americans.
This belief in a providential mission was articulated on a larger scale by the journalist John L O’Sullivan, who wrote in 1845, while urging the annexation of Texas, of “our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions”.
The United States had the divine right to seize by force in 1846-48 vast territories from Mexico, stretching westwards all the way to California, with the southern border extended to the Rio Grande.
Abraham Lincoln, newly elected to the House of Representatives, opposed the Mexican War, and failed as a result to win re-election. Trump, if he had been around, would have been all in favour of it.
His anti-Mexican rhetoric is not an invention of the last few years, but has deep roots in American history. His calls to build a wall along the southern border play to the fear of evangelical Americans that the nation their forefathers built is in danger of being overwhelmed.
In 1960, Protestant voters narrowly failed to avert the election of the first Roman Catholic President, JFK. In the course of that decade, these Protestants came, these authors observe, to see secularisation “as a bigger threat to their understanding of Christian values than that posed by Catholicism”.
By 1980, Pastor Jerry Falwell could declare, in the forward to a book entitled The New Right: We’re Ready to Lead , “Americans have literally stood by and watched as godless, spineless leaders have brought our nation floundering to the brink of death”.
The evangelical Right had become a major force in politics. George W. Bush owed his election in 2000, and re-election in 2004, in part to the skill with which he appealed to this constituency.
Trump is adept, on issues like abortion, Israel and gun control, at appealing to evangelicals, convincingly portrayed here as the inheritors of the suspicion of central authority, and sure belief in their own righteousness, of the early Puritan settlers.
If Trump can appoint enough Supreme Court judges who oppose abortion, he can turn back the tide of secularisation. Compared to that great goal, his own character defects seem unimportant to many evangelicals.
Like Cyrus, the King of Persia who in the Book of Isaiah is found liberating the Jews at God’s behest, Trump is seen by some evangelicals as a man who is doing God’s work.
Liberals will throw up their hands in disgust at that thought. But revulsion precludes comprehension of how Trump has profiled himself as the defender of evangelicals who feel, as these authors put it, that “in a world of liberal identity politics they have been denied an identity that they themselves would recognise”.
The 400th anniversary of the arrival of the Pilgrim Fathers (as they became known) on The Mayflower falls in November this year, just after the presidential election, so one of the first duties of the victor will be to join in the celebrations of that event, and to decide how to react to criticism by Native Americans.
To anyone who wants to understand Trump, and how he became the champion of America’s embattled evangelicals, this scrupulous though not elegant book may be warmly recommended.


conservativehome--2020-02-23--WATCH: “Where is the Prime Minister this week?”

“ Where is the Prime Minister this week ?
” With widespread flooding , @ SophyRidgeSky asks Environment Secretary George @ @ @ @ @ ’ t visited affected areas or been seen in public for 9 days.
# Ridge @

“Where is the Prime Minister this week?”
With widespread flooding, @SophyRidgeSky asks Environment Secretary George Eustice why @BorisJohnson hasn’t visited affected areas or been seen in public for 9 days.#Ridge pic.twitter.com/Br6kVvxaIg
— Sophy Ridge on Sunday (@RidgeOnSunday) February 23, 2020


conservativehome--2020-02-23--WATCH: Abbott – “Becky stood by the members’ choice.”

Rebecca Long Bailey backer Diane Abbott referencing Keir Starmer & Lisa Nandy stepping down from front bench positions over Corbyn @ @ @ @ @ https : //t.co/KaIjbtHA5m

Rebecca Long Bailey backer Diane Abbott referencing Keir Starmer & Lisa Nandy stepping down from front bench positions over Corbyn’s leadership #Ridge https://t.co/KaIjbtHA5m
— Sophy Ridge (@SophyRidgeSky) February 23, 2020


conservativehome--2020-02-23--WATCH: Sturgeon says she’s not ready to quit

Is Nicola Sturgeon planning to stay on as SNP leader and First Minister of Scotland ?
# Marr https : @ @

Is Nicola Sturgeon planning to stay on as SNP leader and First Minister of Scotland?#Marr https://t.co/Da66VVPNci pic.twitter.com/fI9i2HzylV
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) February 23, 2020


conservativehome--2020-02-23--WATCH: The “worst decision a British PM has made” – Davis

Boris Johnson ’ s decision over Huawei ’ s role in UK 5G network could be viewed by historians as @ @ @ @ @ British PM has made ” says former Brexit Secretary David Davis # Marr https : @ @

Boris Johnson’s decision over Huawei’s role in UK 5G network could be viewed by historians as the “worst decision a British PM has made” says former Brexit Secretary David Davis#Marr https://t.co/DJ2AMwR5BV pic.twitter.com/5fHvMNl6BI
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) February 23, 2020


conservativehome--2020-02-23--Why Johnson hasn’t visited flood victims

This may become Britain ’ s wettest February for 30 years .
Storms Ciara and Dennis have come and gone , and more foul weather may follow .
The Environment Agency issued 90 flood warnings and 153 alerts yesterday .
Parts of central England , Wales and the North have been severely affected , and the worst of the weather may spread .
Amidst these battering storms , where is the Prime Minister ?
Therein lies a tale .
Boris Johnson spent most of last week at Chevening .
( Not Chequers , please note . )
He didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the floods ’ victims .
It is claimed in the Sunday Times today – ever a useful source of information about Camp Johnson – that he has asked for shorter memos : “ no more than four pages , or he ’ s never going to read it .
Two pages is preferable ” .
A Whitehall claims that the Prime Minister is running “ government by ADHD ” .
It seems to us that the very opposite is true .
Johnson ’ s decision to stick it out at Chevening is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that also features the boycott of The Today programme and Good Morning Britain , the row with Kay Burley , and the to-and-fro about moving some lobby meetings .
To put it at its starkest , Downing Street is telling a big slice of the media to get stuffed .
Not so long ago , it would put the Prime Minister , whoever he or she might have been at the time , front of house – more and more .
Flood visits offer a classic example .
Pre-election , Johnson visited flood-stricken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : he was asked to apologise and heckled by locals .
Or at least that ’ s the part of his trip which the media highlighted .
But that was before the following month ’ s general election and the new Conservative majority of 80 .
So no more .
In essence , Number Ten wants to get government back to the tone of the pre-Blair era – when the Prime Minister was seen less and other Ministers did more .
It argues that George Eustice , who has been out and about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
His department leads on floods ( at least when it ’ s raining ) .
He ’ s very experienced in his field .
If any policy changes are needed , they are unlikely to miss his eye .
And he should have his day in the sun , so not to speak , and the opportunity to apply a little balm and comfort .
There may also be an element of Johnson seeking to avoid the downbeat – remember his slowness to return to Britain during the London riots of 2011 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision-driver .
The media doesn ’ t like not setting the terms of coverage , and is fighting back .
Hence the cry of “ Where ’ s Boris ?
” And articles like this one last week by the political Editor of the Daily Mail .
To which Downing Street ’ s response has been : tough .
Its take is that much of the media is a bit of a busted flush .
The run-up to the election and the campaign itself featured a mass of stories critical of Johnson and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ floor of a Leeds hospital , claims that the Prime Minister hid in a cupboard , groping allegations from his past , and goodness knows what besides .
None of it stopped Johnson from winning the election by a near-landslide , and Number Ten concentrating on getting its message out on YouTube and Facebook , as this site has reported before .
So to say that this is government by Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder is simply wrong .
Hyperactivity and Johnson don ’ t really belong in the same sentence .
This government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is just a bit too early to be sure – but it is certainly not leaping , contorting itself or straining when the media asks it to jump .
The policy won ’ t be sustainable in electoral conditions , and so won ’ t carry on indefinitely .
And it may yet be that the Prime Minister changes his mind and sends for his wellies .
But for the moment , he can see the media off .
“ Where ’ s Boris Johnson ?
” Jeremy Corbyn tweeted forlornly yesterday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ victims .
To which George Osborne ’ s reply was : “ In Downing Street – where you put him ” .

This may become Britain’s wettest February for 30 years. Storms Ciara and Dennis have come and gone, and more foul weather may follow. The Environment Agency issued 90 flood warnings and 153 alerts yesterday. Parts of central England, Wales and the North have been severely affected, and the worst of the weather may spread.
Amidst these battering storms, where is the Prime Minister? Therein lies a tale.
Boris Johnson spent most of last week at Chevening. (Not Chequers, please note.) He didn’t leave it to visit weather-beaten areas and the floods’ victims. It is claimed in the Sunday Times today – ever a useful source of information about Camp Johnson – that he has asked for shorter memos: “no more than four pages, or he’s never going to read it. Two pages is preferable”. A Whitehall claims that the Prime Minister is running “government by ADHD”.
It seems to us that the very opposite is true.
Johnson’s decision to stick it out at Chevening is part of a bigger picture – one that also features the boycott of The Today programme and Good Morning Britain, the row with Kay Burley, and the to-and-fro about moving some lobby meetings. To put it at its starkest, Downing Street is telling a big slice of the media to get stuffed.
Not so long ago, it would put the Prime Minister, whoever he or she might have been at the time, front of house – more and more. Flood visits offer a classic example. Pre-election, Johnson visited flood-stricken south Yorkshire, where the inevitable followed: he was asked to apologise and heckled by locals. Or at least that’s the part of his trip which the media highlighted. But that was before the following month’s general election and the new Conservative majority of 80. So no more.
In essence, Number Ten wants to get government back to the tone of the pre-Blair era – when the Prime Minister was seen less and other Ministers did more. It argues that George Eustice, who has been out and about, is a perfectly good visiting Minister. His department leads on floods (at least when it’s raining). He’s very experienced in his field. If any policy changes are needed, they are unlikely to miss his eye. And he should have his day in the sun, so not to speak, and the opportunity to apply a little balm and comfort.
There may also be an element of Johnson seeking to avoid the downbeat – remember his slowness to return to Britain during the London riots of 2011 – but it is not the main decision-driver.
The media doesn’t like not setting the terms of coverage, and is fighting back. Hence the cry of “Where’s Boris?” And articles like this one last week by the political Editor of the Daily Mail.
To which Downing Street’s response has been: tough. Its take is that much of the media is a bit of a busted flush. The run-up to the election and the campaign itself featured a mass of stories critical of Johnson and the Conservatives: the boy on the floor of a Leeds hospital, claims that the Prime Minister hid in a cupboard, groping allegations from his past, and goodness knows what besides.
None of it stopped Johnson from winning the election by a near-landslide, and Number Ten concentrating on getting its message out on YouTube and Facebook, as this site has reported before.
So to say that this is government by Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder is simply wrong. Hyperactivity and Johnson don’t really belong in the same sentence. This government may well not be strategic – though it is just a bit too early to be sure – but it is certainly not leaping, contorting itself or straining when the media asks it to jump.
The policy won’t be sustainable in electoral conditions, and so won’t carry on indefinitely. And it may yet be that the Prime Minister changes his mind and sends for his wellies. But for the moment, he can see the media off. “Where’s Boris Johnson?” Jeremy Corbyn tweeted forlornly yesterday, after his own visit to flood victims. To which George Osborne’s reply was: “In Downing Street – where you put him”.


conservativehome--2020-02-24--“If you go ‘transgender rights are our big thing’, you are going to lose that culture war”

Over in the United States , in the competiton for the Democrats ’ presidential candidate nomination , Bernie Sanders has suggested that illegal immigrants should have the same rights to welfare as American citizens .
“ All of our people – when I say all I also mean the undocumented in this country – all of our people are entitled to basic human rights , ” he told a campaign rally .
This is part of what he calls “ rethinking America ” .
Sanders thus offers a context in which to mull how the Ango-American Left is ceasing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Thus opening up the space for Boris Johnson to win his “ stonking majority ” last December .
Tony Blair set the scene in Britain by spurning transitional controls on migration from Eastern Europe in the wake of enlargement .
This was a significant factor in swelling the long-term rejection of Labour by a huge swathe of the working class .
The New Labour years paved the way for the rise of UKIP and the EU referendum .
Lord Ashcroft ’ s research suggests that immigration was the second-biggest factor in driving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And Labour ’ s reluctance to abandon freedom of movement had an impact four years later .
The Tory lead among CDE voters last year was bigger than among ABC ones .
Neil O ’ Brien correctly writes on this site today that the Conservatives are endangered in the medium-term by their lack of support among younger voters , city dwellers , public sector workers and ethnic minorities .
However , Labour is lost in the short-term , and for longer too , if its support outside Scotland is restricted to those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not enough of them to build a durable majority .
The party ’ s majorities in some urban seats can be awesome , but the likes of Bristol West and its neighbours , Oxford East , Cambridge , Reading East , the Luton seats and Norwich South are like red islands amidst a blue sea .
And Labour ’ s main leadership election candidates seem set on digging themselves deeper into working class trouble as the ballot opens .
All three – including Keir Starmer , the likely winner – back restoring freedom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggested that this may be impractical ) .
The next election is a long away away , but the policy will be an albatross round Starmer ’ s neck for the next four years ( if he wins and doesn ’ t resile from it ) .
Tony Blair is Labour ’ s past rather than its future , and his experiment has left a sour taste , at least in the mouth of those crucial voters in Red Wall seats .
But he is right to argue that the party has no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so narrow a part of the population – a gallery that Starmer , Long-Bailey and Nandy are playing to .
His nose for the needs of the day is as acute as ever , and it is significant that he has alighted on transgender campaigners and his party ’ s future .
“ If you go , ‘ Transgender rights are our big thing , ’ and the right say , ‘ Immigration control is our big thing , ’ you are going to lose that [ culture ] war , so you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the things you want to do , ” he said recently .
It comes as Nandy seeks to untie herself from self-inflicted knots over trans – explaining that she signed a pledge card demanding the expulsion of “ bigoted ” party members despite taking “ pause for thought ” first .
She went on to complain about pledge cards in general , saying that “ with hindsight , if we could have all signed a pledge card at the beginning to say that we wouldn ’ t sign pledge cards ” .
Nandy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ However , it is a statement of the obvious to say that if you don ’ t want to sign a pledge card…just don ’ t sign a pledge card .
It ’ s as simple as that .
This Conservative site might be expected to rejoice at the prospect of the main opposition party setting itself on becoming unelectable if it possibly can .
On the contrary , we want Britain to have a proper opposition – not one set on sending out Ken Livingstone-style search parties for ever-more-hard-to-find favoured and fashionable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pattern for Labour by welding left-wing economics with a right-wing security policy – or at least a deeply patriotic one .
The party wobbled about during the 1970s and 1980s , but a certain norm of outlook and approach ultimately reasserted itself – until Blair and Gordon Brown quietly tore up the migration consensus and went for growth .
One wonders what Attlee would have made of the shift in his party , and that taking place within the Left throughout much of the Anglosphere , and elsewhere .
At any rate , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to wind down the pace of government if he wants to – and himself advance an immigration policy that is deeply ambiguous .

Over in the United States, in the competiton for the Democrats’ presidential candidate nomination, Bernie Sanders has suggested that illegal immigrants should have the same rights to welfare as American citizens.
“All of our people – when I say all I also mean the undocumented in this country – all of our people are entitled to basic human rights,” he told a campaign rally. This is part of what he calls “rethinking America”.
Sanders thus offers a context in which to mull how the Ango-American Left is ceasing to be the movement of the working class. Thus opening up the space for Boris Johnson to win his “stonking majority” last December.
Tony Blair set the scene in Britain by spurning transitional controls on migration from Eastern Europe in the wake of enlargement.
This was a significant factor in swelling the long-term rejection of Labour by a huge swathe of the working class. The New Labour years paved the way for the rise of UKIP and the EU referendum.
Lord Ashcroft’s research suggests that immigration was the second-biggest factor in driving Leave voters to back quitting the EU.
And Labour’s reluctance to abandon freedom of movement had an impact four years later. The Tory lead among CDE voters last year was bigger than among ABC ones.
Neil O’Brien correctly writes on this site today that the Conservatives are endangered in the medium-term by their lack of support among younger voters, city dwellers, public sector workers and ethnic minorities.
However, Labour is lost in the short-term, and for longer too, if its support outside Scotland is restricted to those parts of the population. There are not enough of them to build a durable majority.
The party’s majorities in some urban seats can be awesome, but the likes of Bristol West and its neighbours, Oxford East, Cambridge, Reading East, the Luton seats and Norwich South are like red islands amidst a blue sea.
And Labour’s main leadership election candidates seem set on digging themselves deeper into working class trouble as the ballot opens.
All three – including Keir Starmer, the likely winner – back restoring freedom of movement (though Rebecca Long-Bailey has suggested that this may be impractical).
The next election is a long away away, but the policy will be an albatross round Starmer’s neck for the next four years (if he wins and doesn’t resile from it).
Tony Blair is Labour’s past rather than its future, and his experiment has left a sour taste, at least in the mouth of those crucial voters in Red Wall seats.
But he is right to argue that the party has no electoral future if it remains rooted in so narrow a part of the population – a gallery that Starmer, Long-Bailey and Nandy are playing to.
His nose for the needs of the day is as acute as ever, and it is significant that he has alighted on transgender campaigners and his party’s future.
“If you go, ‘Transgender rights are our big thing,’ and the right say, ‘Immigration control is our big thing,’ you are going to lose that [culture] war, so you are not going to advance any of the things you want to do,” he said recently.
It comes as Nandy seeks to untie herself from self-inflicted knots over trans – explaining that she signed a pledge card demanding the expulsion of “bigoted” party members despite taking “pause for thought” first.
She went on to complain about pledge cards in general, saying that “with hindsight, if we could have all signed a pledge card at the beginning to say that we wouldn’t sign pledge cards”.
Nandy may not have been entirely serious. However, it is a statement of the obvious to say that if you don’t want to sign a pledge card…just don’t sign a pledge card. It’s as simple as that.
This Conservative site might be expected to rejoice at the prospect of the main opposition party setting itself on becoming unelectable if it possibly can.
On the contrary, we want Britain to have a proper opposition – not one set on sending out Ken Livingstone-style search parties for ever-more-hard-to-find favoured and fashionable minorites.
Clement Attlee set the post-war pattern for Labour by welding left-wing economics with a right-wing security policy – or at least a deeply patriotic one.
The party wobbled about during the 1970s and 1980s, but a certain norm of outlook and approach ultimately reasserted itself – until Blair and Gordon Brown quietly tore up the migration consensus and went for growth.
One wonders what Attlee would have made of the shift in his party, and that taking place within the Left throughout much of the Anglosphere, and elsewhere.
At any rate, Labour is leaving space for Boris Johnson to wind down the pace of government if he wants to – and himself advance an immigration policy that is deeply ambiguous.


conservativehome--2020-02-24--Neil O’Brien: How the Conservatives can do better with younger voters. And remain a compassionate pa

Neil O’Brien: How the Conservatives can do better with younger voters. And remain a compassionate party.

We need to be tough on Corbynism , and tough on the causes of Corbynism .
After crushing Labour last year , it might be tempting to rest on our laurels .
But we need to act now to keep the extreme left locked out of Number 10 in the long term .
This piece is about two ways we can do that .
First , doing better among young people .
Second , making sure we remain trusted as a compassionate party .
Both are about uniting the country post Brexit .
Let ’ s start with younger people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Johnson raised our share of the vote across the board .
But we made bigger gains among older people than young .
Despite the improvement compared to 2017 , last year we still got just 19 per cent of the vote among 18 to 24 year olds , while Labour got 62 per cent .
Contrast that with 1979 and 1983 when got 42 per cent of the vote among 18-24 year olds .
That was nearly the same share we got among the over 55s those years ( 47 per cent ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are always more left-wing .
But the gap in voting behaviour between young and old became way bigger in 2017 than it had been before , and that massive gap was still there in 2019 .
While today ’ s younger voters are likely to become more conservative as they get older , we are starting from a much lower base .
So if we don ’ t fix those cracks in the foundations , we risk our 2019 triumph crumbling away over time .
There are multiple factors causing young people to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proportion of younger voters who are not white ( 20 per cent among under 34s , compared to five per cent of those over 60 ) ; the liberalising effects of the expansion of Higher Education ( three per cent going to uni during the 1950s , and 50 per cent now ) ; and housing costs going up ( from 10 per cent of renters ’ income during the 1970s to a third now , while twice as many are renting ) .
Other factors include tuition fees ; the Financial Crash @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social liberalism .
What ’ s clear is that we need to make some big changes to do better among younger voters .
That means for starters , that the forthcoming spending review has to have something to offer them .
Our new Chancellor , Rishi Sunak , is one of the smartest people I have met .
But if we don ’ t want debt to grow relative to the economy , he inherits no room to go on a spending spree .
So where can he find the money to help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remaining stock of local authority housing .
Transferring it to not-for-profit housing associations would allow them to borrow against rents , unlocking £27 billion for housing .
That would let us build a huge amount of housing for younger working people who don ’ t get council housing .
It could include cheap rented accommodation to build up a deposit , and homes for discounted sale .
Another place to look is our universities .
We now know that there ’ s a large group of young people for whom going won ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for them or the taxpayer .
That ’ s true for between a fifth and a quarter of those who currently go .
Frankly , many are being mis-sold a degree .
For example , the average creative arts graduate isn ’ t earning enough even ten years after leaving university to pay back any of their loan .
We are doing young people no favours by loading them up with debts in return for such degrees .
They also cost the taxpayer a large amount in written-off loans .
Clamping down on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to either cut the cost of going to university in half , or free up money to invest in top flight technical education and higher apprenticeships .
That would also help “ Level up ” places where more young people go down technical routes .
The other part of combatting the causes of Corbynism is making sure we tackle the big social challenges .
I ’ ve spent a long time arguing for a focus on people who are not at the bottom , but are “ just about managing ” .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will only keep voting for us if they feel we have a plan to deal with people who are , well , “ not managing at all ” : people in poverty .
People want to know we are doing the right thing .
And people who are just about managing are also the most directly exposed to social breakdown .
That means going further to tackle things like rough sleeping .
It has gone up since 2010 .
And that is only partly because we have funded more outreach services and so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ true that there are a larger number of EU nationals sleeping rough .
And it was deeply unhelpful that EU law banned efforts to return rough sleepers to their home countries .
When I did outreach work with street homeless , I met people who wanted to get home after things in London had not worked out .
But there are also large numbers of British people sleeping rough – and shamefully , six per cent of them are formerly of our own armed forces .
In my time working with rough sleepers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t face going into a shelter because they ’ d had a bad experience in one .
That ’ s why the pilots of “ Housing First ” are important .
In Housing First , people are housed first and then have their problems worked on .
The Rough Sleeping Initiative also seems to be working in areas where it is operating .
But we now need to put rocket boosters under both these schemes .
Take another challenge : food banks .
They exist in pretty much every country in Europe , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Restos du Couer ” while Germany has “ Tafel ” ( Food Tables ) .
How can we drive down the number of people in Britain who need to use them ?
The main network of food banks , the Trussell Trust , suggests reducing delays at the start of Universal Credit claims so people don ’ t struggle while waiting for their benefits .
Currently claimants can opt to get an advance loan to reduce the wait for money .
We could make this the default , though such loans can still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ later .
Alternatively , we could make UC payments work more like the old system : with an upfront payment , paid every two weeks , and the housing benefit element direct to landlords as standard .
There would be a cost to upfront payments : as much as £1-2 billion nationally .
So we should experiment by trying it in some areas , and seeing what difference it makes to foodbank use and other social problems .
If it works , we should do it nationally .
More broadly , the new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ framework for tackling poverty : an approach that tackles the underlying causes , with clear goals to drive down rough sleeping , drive up school standards , drive down worklessness and so on .
Our Prime Minister studied the classics , and will recall how triumphant Roman generals would have an Auriga on hand to remind them that “ you too are mortal ” , and generally keep them down to earth .
He has produced a historic triumph in the general election .
Now is the time , when he is strong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the party .
The time to put his compassionate instincts into action , and build a united country .

Neil O’Brien is MP for Harborough.
We need to be tough on Corbynism, and tough on the causes of Corbynism. After crushing Labour last year, it might be tempting to rest on our laurels. But we need to act now to keep the extreme left locked out of Number 10 in the long term. This piece is about two ways we can do that.
First, doing better among young people. Second, making sure we remain trusted as a compassionate party.
Both are about uniting the country post Brexit. Let’s start with younger people.
In the last election, Boris Johnson raised our share of the vote across the board.
But we made bigger gains among older people than young. Despite the improvement compared to 2017, last year we still got just 19 per cent of the vote among 18 to 24 year olds, while Labour got 62 per cent. Contrast that with 1979 and 1983 when got 42 per cent of the vote among 18-24 year olds. That was nearly the same share we got among the over 55s those years (47 per cent).
It is true that younger people are always more left-wing. But the gap in voting behaviour between young and old became way bigger in 2017 than it had been before, and that massive gap was still there in 2019.
While today’s younger voters are likely to become more conservative as they get older, we are starting from a much lower base. So if we don’t fix those cracks in the foundations, we risk our 2019 triumph crumbling away over time.
There are multiple factors causing young people to shift left, including: the larger proportion of younger voters who are not white (20 per cent among under 34s, compared to five per cent of those over 60); the liberalising effects of the expansion of Higher Education (three per cent going to uni during the 1950s, and 50 per cent now); and housing costs going up (from 10 per cent of renters’ income during the 1970s to a third now, while twice as many are renting). Other factors include tuition fees; the Financial Crash; Brexit, and the rise of social liberalism.
What’s clear is that we need to make some big changes to do better among younger voters. That means for starters, that the forthcoming spending review has to have something to offer them. Our new Chancellor, Rishi Sunak, is one of the smartest people I have met. But if we don’t want debt to grow relative to the economy, he inherits no room to go on a spending spree.
So where can he find the money to help young people?
One asset is the remaining stock of local authority housing. Transferring it to not-for-profit housing associations would allow them to borrow against rents, unlocking £27 billion for housing. That would let us build a huge amount of housing for younger working people who don’t get council housing. It could include cheap rented accommodation to build up a deposit, and homes for discounted sale.
Another place to look is our universities. We now know that there’s a large group of young people for whom going won’t be worth it financially, either for them or the taxpayer.
That’s true for between a fifth and a quarter of those who currently go. Frankly, many are being mis-sold a degree.
For example, the average creative arts graduate isn’t earning enough even ten years after leaving university to pay back any of their loan. We are doing young people no favours by loading them up with debts in return for such degrees.
They also cost the taxpayer a large amount in written-off loans. Clamping down on low value courses could save enough money to either cut the cost of going to university in half, or free up money to invest in top flight technical education and higher apprenticeships. That would also help “Level up” places where more young people go down technical routes.
The other part of combatting the causes of Corbynism is making sure we tackle the big social challenges.
I’ve spent a long time arguing for a focus on people who are not at the bottom, but are “just about managing”. But reasonable, middle of the road people will only keep voting for us if they feel we have a plan to deal with people who are, well, “not managing at all”: people in poverty.
People want to know we are doing the right thing. And people who are just about managing are also the most directly exposed to social breakdown. That means going further to tackle things like rough sleeping. It has gone up since 2010. And that is only partly because we have funded more outreach services and so identified more rough sleepers.
It is true that there are a larger number of EU nationals sleeping rough. And it was deeply unhelpful that EU law banned efforts to return rough sleepers to their home countries. When I did outreach work with street homeless, I met people who wanted to get home after things in London had not worked out.
But there are also large numbers of British people sleeping rough – and shamefully, six per cent of them are formerly of our own armed forces.
In my time working with rough sleepers, I met many who couldn’t face going into a shelter because they’d had a bad experience in one. That’s why the pilots of “Housing First” are important. In Housing First, people are housed first and then have their problems worked on. The Rough Sleeping Initiative also seems to be working in areas where it is operating. But we now need to put rocket boosters under both these schemes.
Take another challenge: food banks. They exist in pretty much every country in Europe, even the richest. France has “Restos du Couer” while Germany has “Tafel” (Food Tables).
How can we drive down the number of people in Britain who need to use them? The main network of food banks, the Trussell Trust, suggests reducing delays at the start of Universal Credit claims so people don’t struggle while waiting for their benefits.
Currently claimants can opt to get an advance loan to reduce the wait for money. We could make this the default, though such loans can still lead to problems paying back the money later. Alternatively, we could make UC payments work more like the old system: with an upfront payment, paid every two weeks, and the housing benefit element direct to landlords as standard.
There would be a cost to upfront payments: as much as £1-2 billion nationally. So we should experiment by trying it in some areas, and seeing what difference it makes to foodbank use and other social problems. If it works, we should do it nationally.
More broadly, the new government should set out a clear new framework for tackling poverty: an approach that tackles the underlying causes, with clear goals to drive down rough sleeping, drive up school standards, drive down worklessness and so on.
Our Prime Minister studied the classics, and will recall how triumphant Roman generals would have an Auriga on hand to remind them that “you too are mortal”, and generally keep them down to earth. He has produced a historic triumph in the general election. Now is the time, when he is strong, to secure the long term future of the party. The time to put his compassionate instincts into action, and build a united country.


conservativehome--2020-02-24--Jonathon Seed: My mission to make Wiltshire and Swindon safe

Jonathon Seed is the Conservative candidate for Police & Crime Commissioner Candidate for Wiltshire & Swindon .
All police forces in England and Wales have their local policing policies and budgets overseen by a Police and Crime Commissioner ( PCC ) elected by local people .
The law states that the PCC is responsible for the totality of policing in their Force area .
It is a political role for an experienced local politician , who has strategic vision and experience of leading strong teams and managing multi million pound budgets .
It ’ s not for the faint hearted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to deliver precisely what the people of Wiltshire and Swindon are telling me that they want to see from their police .
My aim is to deliver visible , effective , and robust policing in Wiltshire and Swindon .
I want to make this area a place where criminals fear being caught because of the reputation our police officers and staff have at fighting crime .
Policing in Wiltshire is not failing , indeed Her Majesty ’ s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services ( HMICFRS ) rate it as “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a safe place to live .
So what is the problem ?
Quite simply it stems from residents constantly telling me that they do not feel safe and that they rarely see a police officer .
Elected and voluntary local community leaders are telling me that the local liaison with their local police has failed and that local people are not being listened to by their police force .
This is not a problem of failed policing , it is a problem of poor communication and a lack of police visibility , both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if elected .
According to HMICFRS , Wiltshire Police is well managed .
In my view what is missing is a committed , confident , and robust strategy to achieve what the electorate want , which is exactly why we have elected PCCs .
I have listened to residents , partners , and other interested parties , and I am determined to deliver much greater police visibility .
This will be over and above the additional officers being funded by central government , through a combination of increasing police numbers and dedicating officers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ listened to residents ’ concerns about police response to crimes such as domestic burglary .
Currently the view is that there is little or no follow up by local police to burglary and the clear up rate is less than 7 % .
In my opinion this is utterly unacceptable and I intend to ensure that all residents who have their home invaded by criminals are not just issued with a crime reference number .
They deserve at the very least to have a follow up telephone call and in most circumstances a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ priority and I will expect the Chief Constable to implement changes within weeks of me being elected .
As a PCC I want to give residents confidence and bring back pride in our local police force .
Residents in Wiltshire and Swindon are policed by one of the lowest funded forces in the country .
Per head of population we are grossly underfunded , despite Wiltshire now being one of the end delivery centres for county lines drug dealers , as well as having above average knife crime issues for its county profile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ improving the funding of our police force to give the Chief Constable the tools to deal with these scourges on our society .
I am already working with MPs and lobbying Ministers to try to level up the funding per head of population .
It takes a Conservative PCC to gain trust and to achieve the political access to Government Ministers .
However , being a PCC is not just about policing ; it is also about our justice system and especially victims .
I want victims to feel reassured that the criminals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dealt with appropriately and that they can resume their lives in safety .
Wiltshire Police has made a great start with the introduction of Restorative Justice , which brings those harmed by crime and the offender responsible together to try and repair the harm and move forward .
Clearly this will not work in all cases but it is particularly important with first time young offenders to give them a chance of being steered away from a life of crime , which a conviction or caution may precipitate .
I believe that some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can take that chance and turn away from crime – leaving the police to concentrate on prolific offenders and hardened criminals .
So there is a great deal to be done as a PCC .
Conservative PCCs are currently responsible for the majority of the best performing forces and I intend to be part of that inspirational leadership trend .
It is a wide reaching role with great scope for improving the lives of our citizens .
I am now fighting an extensive campaign to win the election in May and look forward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ places where residents take pride in the visible , effective , and robust policing provided by officers and staff , and above all FEEL safe .

Jonathon Seed is the Conservative candidate for Police & Crime Commissioner Candidate for Wiltshire & Swindon.
All police forces in England and Wales have their local policing policies and budgets overseen by a Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) elected by local people. The law states that the PCC is responsible for the totality of policing in their Force area. It is a political role for an experienced local politician, who has strategic vision and experience of leading strong teams and managing multi million pound budgets. It’s not for the faint hearted and, if elected, I intend to deliver precisely what the people of Wiltshire and Swindon are telling me that they want to see from their police.
My aim is to deliver visible, effective, and robust policing in Wiltshire and Swindon. I want to make this area a place where criminals fear being caught because of the reputation our police officers and staff have at fighting crime.
Policing in Wiltshire is not failing, indeed Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) rate it as “good”, and statistically Wiltshire is a safe place to live. So what is the problem? Quite simply it stems from residents constantly telling me that they do not feel safe and that they rarely see a police officer. Elected and voluntary local community leaders are telling me that the local liaison with their local police has failed and that local people are not being listened to by their police force. This is not a problem of failed policing, it is a problem of poor communication and a lack of police visibility, both of which I will address as priorities if elected.
According to HMICFRS, Wiltshire Police is well managed. In my view what is missing is a committed, confident, and robust strategy to achieve what the electorate want, which is exactly why we have elected PCCs. I have listened to residents, partners, and other interested parties, and I am determined to deliver much greater police visibility. This will be over and above the additional officers being funded by central government, through a combination of increasing police numbers and dedicating officers to community policing.
I have also listened to residents’ concerns about police response to crimes such as domestic burglary. Currently the view is that there is little or no follow up by local police to burglary and the clear up rate is less than 7%. In my opinion this is utterly unacceptable and I intend to ensure that all residents who have their home invaded by criminals are not just issued with a crime reference number. They deserve at the very least to have a follow up telephone call and in most circumstances a follow up visit. This is a priority and I will expect the Chief Constable to implement changes within weeks of me being elected. As a PCC I want to give residents confidence and bring back pride in our local police force.
Residents in Wiltshire and Swindon are policed by one of the lowest funded forces in the country. Per head of population we are grossly underfunded, despite Wiltshire now being one of the end delivery centres for county lines drug dealers, as well as having above average knife crime issues for its county profile. As PCC, I will prioritise improving the funding of our police force to give the Chief Constable the tools to deal with these scourges on our society. I am already working with MPs and lobbying Ministers to try to level up the funding per head of population. It takes a Conservative PCC to gain trust and to achieve the political access to Government Ministers.
However, being a PCC is not just about policing; it is also about our justice system and especially victims. I want victims to feel reassured that the criminals who came into their lives are being dealt with appropriately and that they can resume their lives in safety. Wiltshire Police has made a great start with the introduction of Restorative Justice, which brings those harmed by crime and the offender responsible together to try and repair the harm and move forward.
Clearly this will not work in all cases but it is particularly important with first time young offenders to give them a chance of being steered away from a life of crime, which a conviction or caution may precipitate. I believe that some people who are given a second chance can take that chance and turn away from crime – leaving the police to concentrate on prolific offenders and hardened criminals.
So there is a great deal to be done as a PCC. Conservative PCCs are currently responsible for the majority of the best performing forces and I intend to be part of that inspirational leadership trend. It is a wide reaching role with great scope for improving the lives of our citizens. I am now fighting an extensive campaign to win the election in May and look forward to ensuring that Wiltshire and Swindon are places where residents take pride in the visible, effective, and robust policing provided by officers and staff, and above all FEEL safe.


conservativehome--2020-02-24--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the Office for Budget Responsibil

Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the Office for Budget Responsibility – and more

Eight years ago , the TaxPayers ’ Alliance reported that “ in the last year , five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories ” .
It currently reports that almost half of avowedly political appointees last year owed their allegiance to Labour Party , compared to less than a third for the Conservatives .
Despite the selection of some Party members or supporters to fill important posts , over time , the Conservatives have punched beneath their weight when it comes to public appointments .
One of the reasons seems to be that Tories simply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number as Labour supporters .
To help remedy this , each week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies , so that qualified Conservatives can be aware of the opportunities presented .
“ The Secretary of State , working closely with the Chair of the Environment Agency , is seeking to appoint four new members to the Board of the Environment Agency to boost resilience and replace outgoing members .
The Secretary of State wants to attract high-calibre and forward-thinking applicants from diverse backgrounds .
Applicants will need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out a full range of non-executive responsibilities and have relevant skills , knowledge and expertise .
Board members have the opportunity to shape the strategic vision of the Environment Agency and think in different ways putting net zero , climate adaptation and innovative finance at the heart of its ambitions.
” “ The Tees Valley Combined Authority and Local Enterprise Partnership ( LEP ) are looking to recruit a new LEP Chair and new LEP members from the private sector to deliver our ambitious economic plans .
The Combined Authority and LEP strive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and through this latest round of appointments , have committed to achieve 50 % female representation on the LEP board in 2020 .
Due to the current LEP Chair coming to the end of his term , we are looking to appoint a new LEP Chair who has a strong private sector background , experience of building effective organisations and has the motivation to fully commit to and represent the LEP on a local and national scale.
” “ The Solent LEP is seeking to recruit a Chair who is an influential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and passion to act as a champion for the area ’ s economic success .
The Chair requires sufficient standing to be able to convene the local business community and public sector stakeholders , while having the insight to oversee the development of an economic strategy and the relationship skills to work effectively with government .
We want you to have a voice , make a difference and give something back to the region .
The Chair must come from the private sector ( Individuals can only be classed as private sector if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Public Sector Classifications guide which can be viewed on the Office for National Statistics website ) .
” Time : Minimum one day per week on average .
“ As Chair of the STRB , you will be responsible for providing strategic leadership and direction to the STRB in fulfilling its functions as a public body ; and for delivering high quality recommendations in response to the matters that have been referred to the STRB by the Secretary of State .
You will do this by leading the work of the STRB in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matters that have been referred to it ; where necessary challenging existing assumptions ; making effective use of the skills and expertise of the other members of the STRB ; and providing effective challenge to the evidence and representations that are submitted to the STRB by the wide range of consultees… ” “ The Office of the Children ’ s Commissioner is a dynamic and creative place to work .
It is a small organisation , but it has a loud voice and is highly respected .
The Children ’ s Commissioner ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and challenge to the Children ’ s Commissioner in the exercise of her statutory functions .
The Commissioner is now inviting applications from exceptional individuals , with a wide breadth of experience , to join this Board , which meets quarterly in London .
Candidates need not have previous experience of working with children but should demonstrate an interest in policy issues affecting children , particularly the most vulnerable , and be interested in the role of the Commissioner and able to offer a different perspective on her work.
” “ We are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with substantial experience of leading complex , delivery focused organisations , to support the Home Secretary in the realisation of her ambitious agenda .
Non-Executive Directors provide a key role in diversifying and strengthening the strategic and operational leadership of the Home Office .
They complement the skills and experience of Government Ministers and officials by bringing constructive challenge and advice to the Department ’ s work through a fresh , independent , and external perspective .
You will work closely with ministers and officials to support the delivery of a portfolio of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Robert Chote will be stepping down as Chair of the BRC later this year , after 10 years in post .
We are seeking a successor with deep expertise in economic and fiscal analysis who can lead the BRC and provide intellectual leadership to the OBR ’ s staff .
This is a high profile and influential role , requiring outstanding communication skills and integrity .
Candidates must command broad respect for their objectivity in dealing with issues of political sensitivity .
Appointments to the BRC are for a five-year term .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the end of the term and members can serve a maximum of two terms .
This post can be undertaken on either a part or full-time basis.
” “ The Office for Nuclear Regulation ( ONR ) is a Public Corporation responsible for the regulation of nuclear safety and security across the UK .
Its vision is to be an exemplary regulator that inspires respect , trust and confidence .
ONR is sponsored by the Department for Work and Pensions ( DWP ) who have principal responsibility for governance , finance and its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Safety .
The Department for Business , Energy and Industrial Strategy ( BEIS ) is accountable for the UK civil nuclear regulatory framework and policies and for appointing a Security Non-Executive Director ( NED ) to the ONR Board.
” “ This is an opportunity to take on an intellectually demanding role at the heart of international financial services , leading a sizeable and complex organisation .
There is a requirement for strong leadership in a challenging environment to undertake a critically important role .
Under Andrew Bailey , the FCA has formulated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organisation for the next phase of its development : a data strategy and enhanced analytical skills to rapidly identify harm across an exceptionally broad range of firms of all sizes exploiting fast-moving changes in technology and distribution to target consumers ; enhance employee capabilities and processes to act swiftly on the harms identified ; [ and ] and with a regulatory framework which is appropriate following the completion of EU withdrawal , and which takes advantage of the opportunities for better and more efficient regulation brought by technology and behavioural science .
”

Eight years ago, the TaxPayers’ Alliance reported that “in the last year, five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories”.
It currently reports that almost half of avowedly political appointees last year owed their allegiance to Labour Party, compared to less than a third for the Conservatives.
Despite the selection of some Party members or supporters to fill important posts, over time, the Conservatives have punched beneath their weight when it comes to public appointments. One of the reasons seems to be that Tories simply don’t apply in the same number as Labour supporters.
To help remedy this, each week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies, so that qualified Conservatives can be aware of the opportunities presented.
– – – – – – – – – –
Environment Agency – Board Member
“The Secretary of State, working closely with the Chair of the Environment Agency, is seeking to appoint four new members to the Board of the Environment Agency to boost resilience and replace outgoing members. The Secretary of State wants to attract high-calibre and forward-thinking applicants from diverse backgrounds. Applicants will need to demonstrate they are able to carry out a full range of non-executive responsibilities and have relevant skills, knowledge and expertise. Board members have the opportunity to shape the strategic vision of the Environment Agency and think in different ways putting net zero, climate adaptation and innovative finance at the heart of its ambitions.”
Time: Four days per month.
Remuneration: £350 per diem, reasonable expenses.
Closes: 25 February
– – – – – – – – – –
Tees Valley Local Enterprise Partnership – Chair
“The Tees Valley Combined Authority and Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) are looking to recruit a new LEP Chair and new LEP members from the private sector to deliver our ambitious economic plans. The Combined Authority and LEP strive to ensure an equal and diverse membership, and through this latest round of appointments, have committed to achieve 50% female representation on the LEP board in 2020. Due to the current LEP Chair coming to the end of his term, we are looking to appoint a new LEP Chair who has a strong private sector background, experience of building effective organisations and has the motivation to fully commit to and represent the LEP on a local and national scale.”
Time: 6-8 days per month.
Remuneration: Travel and subsistence expenses.
Closes: 29 February
– – – – – – – – – –
Solent Local Enterprise Partnership – Chair
“The Solent LEP is seeking to recruit a Chair who is an influential local leader and who can bring energy and passion to act as a champion for the area’s economic success. The Chair requires sufficient standing to be able to convene the local business community and public sector stakeholders, while having the insight to oversee the development of an economic strategy and the relationship skills to work effectively with government. We want you to have a voice, make a difference and give something back to the region. The Chair must come from the private sector (Individuals can only be classed as private sector if their organisations do not appear on the Public Sector Classifications guide which can be viewed on the Office for National Statistics website).”
Time: Minimum one day per week on average.
Remuneration: ‘Reasonable expenses’.
Closes: 29 February
– – – – – – – – – –
School Teachers’ Review Body – Chair
“As Chair of the STRB, you will be responsible for providing strategic leadership and direction to the STRB in fulfilling its functions as a public body; and for delivering high quality recommendations in response to the matters that have been referred to the STRB by the Secretary of State. You will do this by leading the work of the STRB in a way that deals comprehensively with the matters that have been referred to it; where necessary challenging existing assumptions; making effective use of the skills and expertise of the other members of the STRB; and providing effective challenge to the evidence and representations that are submitted to the STRB by the wide range of consultees…”
Time: Approx. 30 days per annum.
Remuneration: £350 per diem.
Closes: 01 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Children’s Commissioner’s Office – Advisory Board Member
“The Office of the Children’s Commissioner is a dynamic and creative place to work. It is a small organisation, but it has a loud voice and is highly respected. The Children’s Commissioner’s Advisory Board exists to provide advice and challenge to the Children’s Commissioner in the exercise of her statutory functions. The Commissioner is now inviting applications from exceptional individuals, with a wide breadth of experience, to join this Board, which meets quarterly in London. Candidates need not have previous experience of working with children but should demonstrate an interest in policy issues affecting children, particularly the most vulnerable, and be interested in the role of the Commissioner and able to offer a different perspective on her work.”
Time: 3-4 meetings per year.
Remuneration: Reasonable expenses.
Closes: 03 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Home Office – Non-Executive Directors
“We are seeking high-calibre Non-Executive Directors (NEDs) with substantial experience of leading complex, delivery focused organisations, to support the Home Secretary in the realisation of her ambitious agenda. Non-Executive Directors provide a key role in diversifying and strengthening the strategic and operational leadership of the Home Office. They complement the skills and experience of Government Ministers and officials by bringing constructive challenge and advice to the Department’s work through a fresh, independent, and external perspective. You will work closely with ministers and officials to support the delivery of a portfolio of priorities linked to key departmental commitments.”
Time: “3 years”.
Remuneration: £15,000.
Closes: 08 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Office for Budget Responsibility – Chair
“Robert Chote will be stepping down as Chair of the BRC later this year, after 10 years in post. We are seeking a successor with deep expertise in economic and fiscal analysis who can lead the BRC and provide intellectual leadership to the OBR’s staff. This is a high profile and influential role, requiring outstanding communication skills and integrity. Candidates must command broad respect for their objectivity in dealing with issues of political sensitivity. Appointments to the BRC are for a five-year term. There is the possibility of reappointment at the end of the term and members can serve a maximum of two terms. This post can be undertaken on either a part or full-time basis.”
Time: Full- or part-time.
Remuneration: £158,762 per annum (FTE).
Closes: 19 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Office for Nuclear Regulation – Security Non-Executive Director
“The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) is a Public Corporation responsible for the regulation of nuclear safety and security across the UK. Its vision is to be an exemplary regulator that inspires respect, trust and confidence. ONR is sponsored by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) who have principal responsibility for governance, finance and its performance in relation to conventional Health and Safety. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) is accountable for the UK civil nuclear regulatory framework and policies and for appointing a Security Non-Executive Director (NED) to the ONR Board.”
Time: Approx. 30 days per annum.
Remuneration: £15,000 plus expenses.
Closes: 22 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Financial Conduct Authority – Chief Executive
“This is an opportunity to take on an intellectually demanding role at the heart of international financial services, leading a sizeable and complex organisation. There is a requirement for strong leadership in a challenging environment to undertake a critically important role. Under Andrew Bailey, the FCA has formulated a transformation programme, to equip the organisation for the next phase of its development: a data strategy and enhanced analytical skills to rapidly identify harm across an exceptionally broad range of firms of all sizes exploiting fast-moving changes in technology and distribution to target consumers; enhance employee capabilities and processes to act swiftly on the harms identified; [and] and with a regulatory framework which is appropriate following the completion of EU withdrawal, and which takes advantage of the opportunities for better and more efficient regulation brought by technology and behavioural science.”
Time: Full-time.
Remuneration: Competitive.
Closes: 27 March


conservativehome--2020-02-24--The first members of the 2019 intake are given Government posts

There were 107 new Conservative MPs elected on December 12th .
They can be forgiven if they are yet to fully master the navigation and protocol of Parliament and the Government Departments in and around Whitehall .
Yet several of them have already been appointed Parliamentary Private Secretaries following the recent reshuffle of Ministerial posts .
Some regard the role of PPS as thankless .
It is unpaid .
Yet it does prohibit voting against or publicly criticising the Government .
As the Ministerial Code puts it , they are expected to “ avoid associating themselves with recommendations critical of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But in private they are expected to pass on the criticism of their colleagues as well as seeking to placate such critics .
It is something of an apprenticeship .
They are subordinate , sometimes termed “ bag carriers ” , but they are in the room , seeing how the process works .
John Bercow mocked the role when in 2013 he told Gavin Williamson , then David Cameron ’ s PPS : “ Can I just say to the Prime Minister ’ s PPS , his role is to nod his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to fetch and carry notes – no noise required.
” But now Williamson is the Education Secretary .
Where is Bercow ?
Several new appointees over the weekend are women .
That reflects assurances that Boris Johnson is keen to “ set the foundations ” for a gender-balanced Cabinet in the future .
The last time an official list of PPS appointments was published was last June , when Theresa May was Prime Minister .
At that stage , there were 34 of them .
I ’ m told an update will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is one for a Secretary of State and another for the general Ministerial team .
• Natalie Elphicke , the MP for Dover and Deal , is the PPS to the Ministers of Housing , Communities and Local Government [ pictured ] .
• Fay Jones , the MP for Brecon and Radnorshire , is the PPS to the Ministerial team at the Department for Environment , Food and Rural Affairs .
• Angela Richardson , the MP for Guildford , is the PPS to Ministers at the Department for Education .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stoke on Trent Central , is the PPS to Ministers at the Department for Business , Energy & Industrial Strategy .
• Jane Hunt , the MP for Loughborough , is the PPS to Ministers at the Cabinet Office .
• Sarah Atherton , the MP for Wrexham , is the PPS at the Wales Office .
Harry Cole , in the Mail on Sunday , reports that 14 new PPSs have been chosen , all women .
So presumably more names will emerge… In December it was announced that Trudy Harrison , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as the Prime Minister ’ s PPS .

There were 107 new Conservative MPs elected on December 12th. They can be forgiven if they are yet to fully master the navigation and protocol of Parliament and the Government Departments in and around Whitehall. Yet several of them have already been appointed Parliamentary Private Secretaries following the recent reshuffle of Ministerial posts.
Some regard the role of PPS as thankless. It is unpaid. Yet it does prohibit voting against or publicly criticising the Government. As the Ministerial Code puts it, they are expected to “avoid associating themselves with recommendations critical of or embarrassing to the government”. But in private they are expected to pass on the criticism of their colleagues as well as seeking to placate such critics. It is something of an apprenticeship. They are subordinate, sometimes termed “bag carriers”, but they are in the room, seeing how the process works.
John Bercow mocked the role when in 2013 he told Gavin Williamson, then David Cameron’s PPS:
“Can I just say to the Prime Minister’s PPS, his role is to nod his head in the appropriate places, and to fetch and carry notes – no noise required.”
But now Williamson is the Education Secretary. Where is Bercow?
Several new appointees over the weekend are women. That reflects assurances that Boris Johnson is keen to “set the foundations” for a gender-balanced Cabinet in the future. The last time an official list of PPS appointments was published was last June, when Theresa May was Prime Minister. At that stage, there were 34 of them. I’m told an update will be published in due course. Usually, there is one for a Secretary of State and another for the general Ministerial team.
Recent announcements include:
Harry Cole, in the Mail on Sunday, reports that 14 new PPSs have been chosen, all women. So presumably more names will emerge…
In December it was announced that Trudy Harrison, the MP for Copeland, was appointed as the Prime Minister’s PPS.
UPDATE
A man has been appointed
Jack Brereton, the MP for Stoke-on-Trent South, is the PPS to the Defence Secretary.
UPDATE