conservativehome--2020-10-20--Pressure rises on Ministers to publish assessments of the impact of lockdowns, restrictions – and Co

Pressure rises on Ministers to publish assessments of the impact of lockdowns, restrictions – and Covid itself

Last week , ConservativeHome called for the Government to broaden and deepen the national conversation about Covid-19 – or at least try to as best it can .
It is essential to see the disease in the round by understanding the consequences of lockdowns , restrictions and the virus itself on both lives and livelihoods .
For livelihoods , read what ’ s usually called the economy , a dry term , but is actually a human story of lost jobs , lower living standards , higher poverty , damaged schooling and vulnerable sectors , including hospitality and retail .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ than Covid-related ones .
In other words , cancelled operations and fewer treatments , as well as ( for example ) worse heart disease , cancer , mental health and domestic abuse outcomes .
This is why we urged the Goverment to publish – • A regular Treasury report that calculates the economic cost of the lockdown .
• A rolling Department of Health assessment of the human cost of the shutdown .
• The creation of an economic counterweight to SAGE .
We also suggested that some think-tanks have the capacity to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ urged this course during the spring , and is far from alone in having done so .
On which point , congratulations to the Daily Mail , which today publishes a four-page investigation into health outcomes .
It finds – • 25,000 more people died at home during pandemic , since they didn ’ t go to hospital as it continued .
• There is set to be a 20 per cent rise in cancer patient deaths because of treatment backlogs .
• Organ transplant operations fell by two thirds while waiting list @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for children were cancelled .
It ’ s worth pointing out that some of these outcomes will have been a consequence of Covid-19 itself rather than restrictions – for example , people not going to A & E departments in order to reduce the risk of catching the virus .
The line Matt Hancock took yesterday in the Commons is that suppressing the virus is integral to better health outcomes , because the more NHS resources the virus demands the fewer there will be for other conditions .
But a question that obviously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s strategy , which is dependent at present on big lockdowns , is the best means of protecting the NHS .
It ’ s worth noting that a Department of Health analysis has said that “ in the long-term , the health impacts of the two month lockdown and lockdown-induced recession are greater than those of the direct Covid-19 deaths ” .
The Mail is not alone in trying to get its readers to look at the Coronavirus in a more full context .
Yesterday , the Daily Telegraph reported that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 90 per cent drop in hospital admissions .
The Times last Friday urged the Government to be “ more transparent about the economic and health costs – the same day that we took much the same view .
And a wide range of Conservative MPs are increasingly calling for the kind of action we have outlined .
Theresa May has called for more formal economic advice .
Steve Baker , writing on this site yesterday , urged Ministers to publish “ serious analysis of the costs of the options they face ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take this course , and thus indicate that the Government might change its strategy , while it is doubling down on the present one .
In political terms , that ’ s what our report yesterday about new LAMP and lateral flow tests signified .
Number Ten believes that these can deliver where track and trace has not ( though it is not abandoning the latter ) .
So it is trying to persuade Tory backbenchers not to abandon the testing strategy , and transfer their support either to lockdowns and a permanent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a more voluntarist approach .
We shall see whether this push pays off – and if this planned massive scaling-up of new tests works .
ConservativeHome ’ s understanding is that the Treasury hasn ’ t ruled out a big report on economic costs .
However , Government sources pointed out that much of the required data is already available ( i.e : unemployment figures ) , and that it would be hard to disentangle the effects of restrictions from those of the virus more widely .
We also detect a concern about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : on the one hand , the Treasury has an interest in alerting voters to the scale of the economic challenge , but none in alarming them .

Last week, ConservativeHome called for the Government to broaden and deepen the national conversation about Covid-19 – or at least try to as best it can.
It is essential to see the disease in the round by understanding the consequences of lockdowns, restrictions and the virus itself on both lives and livelihoods.
For livelihoods, read what’s usually called the economy, a dry term, but is actually a human story of lost jobs, lower living standards, higher poverty, damaged schooling and vulnerable sectors, including hospitality and retail.
For lives, read healthcare outcomes other than Covid-related ones. In other words, cancelled operations and fewer treatments, as well as (for example) worse heart disease, cancer, mental health and domestic abuse outcomes.
This is why we urged the Goverment to publish –
A regular Treasury report that calculates the economic cost of the lockdown.
A rolling Department of Health assessment of the human cost of the shutdown.
The creation of an economic counterweight to SAGE.
We also suggested that some think-tanks have the capacity to issue comprehensive reports.
This site originally urged this course during the spring, and is far from alone in having done so. On which point, congratulations to the Daily Mail, which today publishes a four-page investigation into health outcomes. It finds –
25,000 more people died at home during pandemic, since they didn’t go to hospital as it continued.
There is set to be a 20 per cent rise in cancer patient deaths because of treatment backlogs.
Organ transplant operations fell by two thirds while waiting list deaths doubled. More than 50,000 operations for children were cancelled.
It’s worth pointing out that some of these outcomes will have been a consequence of Covid-19 itself rather than restrictions – for example, people not going to A & E departments in order to reduce the risk of catching the virus.
The line Matt Hancock took yesterday in the Commons is that suppressing the virus is integral to better health outcomes, because the more NHS resources the virus demands the fewer there will be for other conditions.
But a question that obviously follows is whether or not the Government’s strategy, which is dependent at present on big lockdowns, is the best means of protecting the NHS.
It’s worth noting that a Department of Health analysis has said that “in the long-term, the health impacts of the two month lockdown and lockdown-induced recession are greater than those of the direct Covid-19 deaths”.
The Mail is not alone in trying to get its readers to look at the Coronavirus in a more full context. Yesterday, the Daily Telegraph reported that the ‘Protect the NHS’ message led to 90 per cent drop in hospital admissions.
The Times last Friday urged the Government to be “more transparent about the economic and health costs – the same day that we took much the same view.
And a wide range of Conservative MPs are increasingly calling for the kind of action we have outlined. Theresa May has called for more formal economic advice. Steve Baker, writing on this site yesterday, urged Ministers to publish “serious analysis of the costs of the options they face”.
Downing Street will be reluctant to take this course, and thus indicate that the Government might change its strategy, while it is doubling down on the present one.
In political terms, that’s what our report yesterday about new LAMP and lateral flow tests signified. Number Ten believes that these can deliver where track and trace has not (though it is not abandoning the latter).
So it is trying to persuade Tory backbenchers not to abandon the testing strategy, and transfer their support either to lockdowns and a permanent suppression plan, or to loosening and a more voluntarist approach.
We shall see whether this push pays off – and if this planned massive scaling-up of new tests works. ConservativeHome’s understanding is that the Treasury hasn’t ruled out a big report on economic costs.
However, Government sources pointed out that much of the required data is already available (i.e: unemployment figures), and that it would be hard to disentangle the effects of restrictions from those of the virus more widely.
We also detect a concern about the consequences of publishing bad economic news: on the one hand, the Treasury has an interest in alerting voters to the scale of the economic challenge, but none in alarming them.


conservativehome--2020-10-20--Radical: Gender ideology has penetrated our institutions – and now it’s the census that’s under thre

Radical: Gender ideology has penetrated our institutions – and now it’s the census that’s under threat

Rebecca Lowe is the former director of FREER , and a former assistant editor of ConservativeHome .
She is co-founder of Radical .
She and Victoria Hewson , her co-founder , alternate authorship of this column on trans , sex and gender issues .
If you thought self-ID was off the table , now the Gender Recognition Act battle has been won , you ’ d better think again .
Gender ideology has penetrated our institutions so deeply that , even without self-identification becoming a matter of law , the insidious idea that one ’ s sex is a solely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy and practice , almost unnoticed .
Yet the damaging effects of this will be far-reaching , and one of the most worrying examples regards the case of the upcoming census .
Regular readers will know we believe that adults should be free to present themselves however they want ( as long as this doesn ’ t harm others ) , and that such behaviour shouldn ’ t prevent anyone from being afforded equal respect .
But this doesn ’ t equate to believing that the way someone presents themselves determines their biological @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mandated into accepting that to be the case !
Indeed , the activists pressing for such mandates endanger many people .
We ’ ve charted the risks faced by vulnerable children , pressured into taking life-changing experimental drugs ; the risks natal women face when forced to shared their single-sex spaces ; and the risks we all face from attacks on societal commitment to truth .
National data collection is also under threat .
And without trustworthy societal data , horrible problems go unnoticed , policy solutions go untested , and nobody is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ field that ’ s been heavily occupied by gender-identity activists is national statistics — in particular , they ’ ve targeted the censuses that are due to take place , soon .
The UK authorities in charge of censuses are the ONS in England and Wales , National Records of Scotland ( NRS ) , and the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency ( NISRA ) .
For the upcoming English , Welsh , and Northern Irish censuses in March 2021 , and the Scottish census that ’ s been postponed to March @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the wording of the compulsory-to-answer “ sex question ” will continue to offer only the standard answers “ male ” and “ female ” .
Controversially , however , accompanying guidance will advise respondents to answer based on their self-declared gender identity .
This has raised serious concerns among social scientists and statisticians .
In a letter to The Sunday Times , more than 80 academics noted that the guidance “ will effectively transform the sex question into one about gender identity ” , and highlighted their concern that “ this will undermine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
In an excellent Woman ’ s Place webinar on Sunday , one panellist summed up the situation : “ How has this happened when everyone who knows about it , disagrees with it ?
” .
Informed by the webinar , and our wider reading , including an important new paper by Dr Jane Clare Jones , here are some answers : 1 ) UCL ’ s Professor Alice Sullivan describes how the census has “ collected data on sex since its inception in 1801 .
As a fundamental demographic variable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ male and female citizens is of vital importance to the planning and delivery of public services .
Sex is a protected characteristic under the 2010 Equality Act , therefore data on sex is clearly necessary for equalities monitoring ” .
Yet , the aforementioned guidance will conflate the provable scientific concept of sex with the contested subjective concept of gender identity .
This will make it unclear what ’ s being measured ( violating the most basic principle of questionnaire design ) , and render the resulting data unreliable .
Now , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respondents who ’ ll answer the question with anything other than their biological sex will be very low , and that , therefore , this is relatively unimportant .
But , aside from the principle of the matter , this neglects how most research using census data drills down deep , comparing findings relating to different variables and subgroups in different ways , making accuracy essential at all levels .
Of course the census covers sensitive matters , but regarding none of its other questions is it indicated that the respondent is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but that they can instead choose to provide a response that makes them feel better , or that they wish were true .
UK census authorities have an obligation to maintain public trust in national statistical data .
This poor guidance puts them in danger of losing their long-held ability to monitor differences between the sexes , and provide foundations for evidence-based policy .
2 ) Until recently , the census “ sex question ” was thought self-explanatory .
In 2011 , however , guidance was provided advising transsexual and transgender people to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This wasn ’ t subject to consultation , but , according to the ONS , was done “ at the request of the LGBT community ” .
This doesn ’ t mean , however , that self-identified sex should be accepted as a necessary feature of the census .
Professor Sullivan describes how : “ it is not clear how data quality was affected [ by the 2011 guidance ] , but it is likely that few respondents consulted the guidance .
The shift to a “ digital-first ” census in 2021 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much more visible and accessible , compared to the 2011 census ( which was predominantly paper based , with separate online guidance ) .
It is also likely the number of respondents who might seek to answer the sex question in terms of their gender identity will be higher in 2021 .
Taken together , these factors introduce the potential for significant discontinuity with the 2011 and previous censuses ” .
Moreover , the 2021 census ( in England and Wales , and Scotland ) is in further danger of undermining the pursuit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ introduction of a voluntary question specifically pertaining to gender identity .
This means respondents will first be asked their sex ( but told to answer on the basis of their gender identity ) , and then asked about their gender identity ( by reference to sex ! )
.
Given increasing interest in gender identity , especially among young people , and the lack of reliable data on the number of UK trans people , there ’ s value to this question .
However , that ’ s only if gender identity can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these terms helps nobody , not least trans people , who we ’ re regularly informed are at risk of missing out on screening for medical conditions relating to their natal sex .
Yet , gender-identity activists continue to press this dangerous and confusing conflation .
3 ) The conflation of biological sex and gender identity — an astonishing failure of the census authorities — is but one example of the powerful institutional capture achieved by activists .
Analysis by MBM tracks how the NSR was in regular and close correspondence with Stonewall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s output on the topic of the sex question betrays , through the use of tell-tale words and phrases , an uncritical absorption of post-modernist gender ideology .
4 ) It can not be overstated how important the census is , not only to good public policy formation , but to good data collection and analysis , in general .
A panellist on the Woman ’ s Place webinar referred to the census as “ the mothership ” .
And anyone who ’ s ever done any research on any policy matter will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data ; its methodological approach is , for everyone from academics to pollsters , a lodestar for survey design and so much more .
Risking its standards , therefore , is tantamount to destroying a foundation post of our society .
5 ) The good news , however , is that it ’ s not too late — yet — to save the census !
If you care about public policy , and believe that national statistics should be protected from gender ideology , then you ’ d better complain now .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of time before the upcoming censuses to write to one or all of the following : the ONS , NRS , NISRA , your local MP , and the equalities minister , Liz Truss .

Rebecca Lowe is the former director of FREER, and a former assistant editor of ConservativeHome. She is co-founder of Radical. She and Victoria Hewson, her co-founder, alternate authorship of this column on trans, sex and gender issues.
If you thought self-ID was off the table, now the Gender Recognition Act battle has been won, you’d better think again. Gender ideology has penetrated our institutions so deeply that, even without self-identification becoming a matter of law, the insidious idea that one’s sex is a solely matter of personal demand is seeping into policy and practice, almost unnoticed. Yet the damaging effects of this will be far-reaching, and one of the most worrying examples regards the case of the upcoming census.
Regular readers will know we believe that adults should be free to present themselves however they want (as long as this doesn’t harm others), and that such behaviour shouldn’t prevent anyone from being afforded equal respect. But this doesn’t equate to believing that the way someone presents themselves determines their biological sex — or that anyone should be mandated into accepting that to be the case!
Indeed, the activists pressing for such mandates endanger many people. We’ve charted the risks faced by vulnerable children, pressured into taking life-changing experimental drugs; the risks natal women face when forced to shared their single-sex spaces; and the risks we all face from attacks on societal commitment to truth.
National data collection is also under threat. And without trustworthy societal data, horrible problems go unnoticed, policy solutions go untested, and nobody is held to account. Sadly, one field that’s been heavily occupied by gender-identity activists is national statistics — in particular, they’ve targeted the censuses that are due to take place, soon.
The UK authorities in charge of censuses are the ONS in England and Wales, National Records of Scotland (NRS), and the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA). For the upcoming English, Welsh, and Northern Irish censuses in March 2021, and the Scottish census that’s been postponed to March 2022, they’ve confirmed that the wording of the compulsory-to-answer “sex question” will continue to offer only the standard answers “male” and “female”. Controversially, however, accompanying guidance will advise respondents to answer based on their self-declared gender identity.
This has raised serious concerns among social scientists and statisticians. In a letter to The Sunday Times, more than 80 academics noted that the guidance “will effectively transform the sex question into one about gender identity”, and highlighted their concern that “this will undermine data reliability on a key demographic variable”.
In an excellent Woman’s Place webinar on Sunday, one panellist summed up the situation: “How has this happened when everyone who knows about it, disagrees with it?”. Informed by the webinar, and our wider reading, including an important new paper by Dr Jane Clare Jones, here are some answers:
1) UCL’s Professor Alice Sullivan describes how the census has “collected data on sex since its inception in 1801. As a fundamental demographic variable, robust data on the number of male and female citizens is of vital importance to the planning and delivery of public services. Sex is a protected characteristic under the 2010 Equality Act, therefore data on sex is clearly necessary for equalities monitoring”.
Yet, the aforementioned guidance will conflate the provable scientific concept of sex with the contested subjective concept of gender identity. This will make it unclear what’s being measured (violating the most basic principle of questionnaire design), and render the resulting data unreliable.
Now, it could be argued that the number of respondents who’ll answer the question with anything other than their biological sex will be very low, and that, therefore, this is relatively unimportant. But, aside from the principle of the matter, this neglects how most research using census data drills down deep, comparing findings relating to different variables and subgroups in different ways, making accuracy essential at all levels.
Of course the census covers sensitive matters, but regarding none of its other questions is it indicated that the respondent is not expected to give a truthful answer, but that they can instead choose to provide a response that makes them feel better, or that they wish were true.
UK census authorities have an obligation to maintain public trust in national statistical data. This poor guidance puts them in danger of losing their long-held ability to monitor differences between the sexes, and provide foundations for evidence-based policy.
2) Until recently, the census “sex question” was thought self-explanatory. In 2011, however, guidance was provided advising transsexual and transgender people to respond based on their self-declared gender identity. This wasn’t subject to consultation, but, according to the ONS, was done “at the request of the LGBT community”. This doesn’t mean, however, that self-identified sex should be accepted as a necessary feature of the census. Professor Sullivan describes how:
“it is not clear how data quality was affected [by the 2011 guidance], but it is likely that few respondents consulted the guidance. The shift to a “digital-first” census in 2021 means that any proposed guidance will be much more visible and accessible, compared to the 2011 census (which was predominantly paper based, with separate online guidance). It is also likely the number of respondents who might seek to answer the sex question in terms of their gender identity will be higher in 2021. Taken together, these factors introduce the potential for significant discontinuity with the 2011 and previous censuses”.
Moreover, the 2021 census (in England and Wales, and Scotland) is in further danger of undermining the pursuit of good data collection, with the introduction of a voluntary question specifically pertaining to gender identity. This means respondents will first be asked their sex (but told to answer on the basis of their gender identity), and then asked about their gender identity (by reference to sex!).
Given increasing interest in gender identity, especially among young people, and the lack of reliable data on the number of UK trans people, there’s value to this question. However, that’s only if gender identity can be understood separately from sex: conflating these terms helps nobody, not least trans people, who we’re regularly informed are at risk of missing out on screening for medical conditions relating to their natal sex. Yet, gender-identity activists continue to press this dangerous and confusing conflation.
3) The conflation of biological sex and gender identity — an astonishing failure of the census authorities — is but one example of the powerful institutional capture achieved by activists. Analysis by MBM tracks how the NSR was in regular and close correspondence with Stonewall. And much of the ONS’s output on the topic of the sex question betrays, through the use of tell-tale words and phrases, an uncritical absorption of post-modernist gender ideology.
4) It cannot be overstated how important the census is, not only to good public policy formation, but to good data collection and analysis, in general. A panellist on the Woman’s Place webinar referred to the census as “the mothership”. And anyone who’s ever done any research on any policy matter will be familiar with the use of census data; its methodological approach is, for everyone from academics to pollsters, a lodestar for survey design and so much more. Risking its standards, therefore, is tantamount to destroying a foundation post of our society.
5) The good news, however, is that it’s not too late — yet — to save the census! If you care about public policy, and believe that national statistics should be protected from gender ideology, then you’d better complain now. You’ve still got a small amount of time before the upcoming censuses to write to one or all of the following: the ONS, NRS, NISRA, your local MP, and the equalities minister, Liz Truss.


conservativehome--2020-10-20--Jane Hunt: We can have new homes in Loughborough without making our town less beautiful

Jane Hunt is the MP for Loughborough .
Since I started campaigning for the Party 36 years ago , planning policy has been a recurring concern on the doorstep .
This has only become more acute in recent times , as we have seen large-scale development in rural areas putting pressure on local communities and the services they rely on .
I , therefore , welcome the renewed discussion about calculating housing need in the Government ’ s consultation , Changes to the Current Planning System , which closed last week .
I responded to this consultation on behalf of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proposed method and I hope that these points are given due consideration .
Of course , this consultation feeds in to the wider discussion about how we can make the planning system simpler , more competitive , and , crucially , ensure that we are meeting the needs of our local areas and communities .
It supports the Government ’ s second consultation , Planning for the Future , which closes at the end of October .
This is the White Paper I would now like to focus on as , to my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and provides an opportunity for us to look again at how we can support our high streets and town centres .
For decades , our high streets have been largely ignored or taken for granted : first , with the movement towards out of town shopping centres and , then , with the shift towards online shopping .
What we have seen most recently with the global pandemic , however , is that there is a need for communities that work , and town centres are integral to that mechanism .
I , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Instruments which sought to : reform the use class order ; permit for building upwards of two storeys ; and regenerate brownfield land .
All of these changes will support the renewal of our high streets , giving boarded up stores a new lease on life .
However , we can and need to go further , and the second White Paper sets out proposals for a new planning process with more democracy taking place at the plan-making stage .
The local plan will effectively become the tender document of local people , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like and asking for bids .
It will set out the parameters of what is needed , and it will be up to developers to put forward proposals to meet that need and those parameters .
This , linked with a 30 month time frame to produce a local plan , will transform the current set up of delay , repetition of action , and the inevitable outcome of piecemeal development which is lacking in what the man in the street would refer to as an actual plan , and which often carries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the unwarranted detriment of the local planners whose expertise are not recognised by the current setup .
Under the new system , local residents , along with the expertise at their local planning authority , will be able to determine what they want for their community and , more importantly , what will work .
This will lead to a local plan that is coherent and more defined to meet local need , so developers can understand what the requirements are .
If this is also linked to the dropping of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ developers will be encouraged to focus their build-out energy on the areas where local people want to build .
The White Paper , rightly , places a strong emphasis on building beautiful and creating beautiful spaces , which is vital to any town centre , not only in terms of creating a destination , but also in creating a special , perhaps unique , environment where people come to visit to see the spectacle and experience the atmosphere , as well as to shop .
In particular , while we should be removing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 1960s when many towns were being developed , it is important that we protect our older historical buildings wherever we can .
For example , Loughborough has dozens of Art Deco buildings and these should be maintained and preserved for future generations .
As well as being beautiful , town centres need to be compact and flexible spaces to provide areas for markets , events and entertaining , as well as traditional shopping .
Take a look at a satellite photo of any town in the UK and you will see large @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Legacy buildings such as these were built when most shops were in town centres and there was no ‘ just in time ’ delivery so storage was needed .
These stores take up huge areas of our towns and are , sadly , often empty due to the change in shopping habits .
This creates disparity in towns and creates a larger town centre footprint than is now necessary meaning visitors have further distances to walk to get to shops and facilities spread out by the historical footprint , rather than current @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their way .
Of course , an anchor store or two is helpful , but it is the independent local shops and markets with their unique offerings which will attract people to visit , in addition to useful facilities such as barbers / hairdressers , nail bars , butchers and banks .
Move away from the satellite photo and stand on the high street itself looking up , and you will find many buildings with empty space above shops .
Again , through renewal , converting these into places for people to live @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the shops below .
This can be further facilitated by bringing more people into town centres to work and study , and I am supportive of the proposals in the consultation to “ ensure decisions on the locations of new public buildings – such as government office and further education colleges – support renewal and regeneration of town centres ” .
This will help support local shops and facilities in the daytime , and , if it is combined with measures to develop the twilight economy , in the evening as well .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ beauty of a city , and the brownfield and derelict donut we often see around them can bring the whole city down – the centre as well as the suburbs .
For decades , this land has been seen as ideal for commercial development , but now is the time to designate this land for residential use .
This would allow commuters to live much closer to their place of work , reducing their carbon footprint on transport , which will be further reduced by the proposals in this White Paper for all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ .
Victorian and Edwardian warehousing should be renovated and turned into accommodation , rather than torn down .
But I do not think we should be afraid to build housing , particularly bungalows and extra care housing for the elderly and disabled , close to the centre of towns and cities so that the residents have easier access to shops , utilities , and entertainment .
If brownfield land in cities is used more for accommodation , then fewer dwellings will also need to be built on greenfield sites .
I wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ start of the year which can be found here .
In conclusion , the future is brighter for our town centres , should the proposals in the White Paper be adopted .
As long as the emphasis remains on formulating a local plan determined by local residents , along with the expertise of their local planners , in a shorter timescale , then there will be more public confidence that the system will provide what the local community wants , when it wants it .

Jane Hunt is the MP for Loughborough.
Since I started campaigning for the Party 36 years ago, planning policy has been a recurring concern on the doorstep. This has only become more acute in recent times, as we have seen large-scale development in rural areas putting pressure on local communities and the services they rely on.
I, therefore, welcome the renewed discussion about calculating housing need in the Government’s consultation, Changes to the Current Planning System, which closed last week. I responded to this consultation on behalf of my constituents with my thoughts on the proposed method and I hope that these points are given due consideration.
Of course, this consultation feeds in to the wider discussion about how we can make the planning system simpler, more competitive, and, crucially, ensure that we are meeting the needs of our local areas and communities. It supports the Government’s second consultation, Planning for the Future, which closes at the end of October. This is the White Paper I would now like to focus on as, to my mind, it has many positive aspects and provides an opportunity for us to look again at how we can support our high streets and town centres.
For decades, our high streets have been largely ignored or taken for granted: first, with the movement towards out of town shopping centres and, then, with the shift towards online shopping. What we have seen most recently with the global pandemic, however, is that there is a need for communities that work, and town centres are integral to that mechanism.
I, therefore, welcomed the three planning Statutory Instruments which sought to: reform the use class order; permit for building upwards of two storeys; and regenerate brownfield land. All of these changes will support the renewal of our high streets, giving boarded up stores a new lease on life.
However, we can and need to go further, and the second White Paper sets out proposals for a new planning process with more democracy taking place at the plan-making stage. The local plan will effectively become the tender document of local people, instructing the market on what they would like and asking for bids. It will set out the parameters of what is needed, and it will be up to developers to put forward proposals to meet that need and those parameters. This, linked with a 30 month time frame to produce a local plan, will transform the current set up of delay, repetition of action, and the inevitable outcome of piecemeal development which is lacking in what the man in the street would refer to as an actual plan, and which often carries with it local criticism of the result to the unwarranted detriment of the local planners whose expertise are not recognised by the current setup.
Under the new system, local residents, along with the expertise at their local planning authority, will be able to determine what they want for their community and, more importantly, what will work. This will lead to a local plan that is coherent and more defined to meet local need, so developers can understand what the requirements are. If this is also linked to the dropping of the five year land supply rule, then developers will be encouraged to focus their build-out energy on the areas where local people want to build.
The White Paper, rightly, places a strong emphasis on building beautiful and creating beautiful spaces, which is vital to any town centre, not only in terms of creating a destination, but also in creating a special, perhaps unique, environment where people come to visit to see the spectacle and experience the atmosphere, as well as to shop. In particular, while we should be removing and re-developing the concrete monstrosities erected in the 1960s when many towns were being developed, it is important that we protect our older historical buildings wherever we can. For example, Loughborough has dozens of Art Deco buildings and these should be maintained and preserved for future generations.
As well as being beautiful, town centres need to be compact and flexible spaces to provide areas for markets, events and entertaining, as well as traditional shopping. Take a look at a satellite photo of any town in the UK and you will see large buildings that used to house major stores. Legacy buildings such as these were built when most shops were in town centres and there was no ‘just in time’ delivery so storage was needed. These stores take up huge areas of our towns and are, sadly, often empty due to the change in shopping habits. This creates disparity in towns and creates a larger town centre footprint than is now necessary meaning visitors have further distances to walk to get to shops and facilities spread out by the historical footprint, rather than current need, often passing blank space on their way. Of course, an anchor store or two is helpful, but it is the independent local shops and markets with their unique offerings which will attract people to visit, in addition to useful facilities such as barbers / hairdressers, nail bars, butchers and banks.
Move away from the satellite photo and stand on the high street itself looking up, and you will find many buildings with empty space above shops. Again, through renewal, converting these into places for people to live creates an immediately available customer base for the shops below. This can be further facilitated by bringing more people into town centres to work and study, and I am supportive of the proposals in the consultation to “ensure decisions on the locations of new public buildings – such as government office and further education colleges – support renewal and regeneration of town centres”. This will help support local shops and facilities in the daytime, and, if it is combined with measures to develop the twilight economy, in the evening as well.
Brownfield sites also detract from the overall beauty of a city, and the brownfield and derelict donut we often see around them can bring the whole city down – the centre as well as the suburbs. For decades, this land has been seen as ideal for commercial development, but now is the time to designate this land for residential use. This would allow commuters to live much closer to their place of work, reducing their carbon footprint on transport, which will be further reduced by the proposals in this White Paper for all new homes being ‘zero carbon ready’. Victorian and Edwardian warehousing should be renovated and turned into accommodation, rather than torn down. But I do not think we should be afraid to build housing, particularly bungalows and extra care housing for the elderly and disabled, close to the centre of towns and cities so that the residents have easier access to shops, utilities, and entertainment. If brownfield land in cities is used more for accommodation, then fewer dwellings will also need to be built on greenfield sites. I wrote a paper along these lines at the start of the year which can be found here.
In conclusion, the future is brighter for our town centres, should the proposals in the White Paper be adopted. As long as the emphasis remains on formulating a local plan determined by local residents, along with the expertise of their local planners, in a shorter timescale, then there will be more public confidence that the system will provide what the local community wants, when it wants it.


conservativehome--2020-10-21--Alex Morton: How Sunak can save £30 billion a year

Alex Morton Head of Policy at the CPS and a former Number Ten Policy Unit Member .
Today , the Office for National Statistics will announce the provisional figures of Government borrowing for the first six months for 2020/21 .
They will be truly dire .
We know because borrowing in the first five months alone were bigger than the previous annual total , and by August this year the national debt was larger than the UK economy , rising by over 10 per cent from 2019/20 ’ s total .
Putting aside the ongoing – and crucial – debate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is clear even on the most optimistic forecasts , and with the best decisions , the UK will end the pandemic with a serious debt and deficit problem .
Even assuming higher borrowing for years , something must give .
For that reason , the Centre for Policy Studies today publishes the paper Saving £30 billion : Nine Simple Steps , which discusses , on rough but plausible estimates , nine savings to cut £30 billion a year from the Government ’ s spending without jeopardising frontline services , or asking the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the middle of a Spending Review , and we believe that now is the time for proposals to stop the threat of tax rises which will both hit growth and hard-pressed workers , companies and families .
None of the savings would impact frontline delivery and none of them ask for MPs to vote through what would be political suicide .
Despite the arguments made that austerity means no further reduction in spend is possible , we find significant potential savings across a wide range of areas , none of which impact frontline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are thus about making the state more efficient .
• We analyse the number of Government administrative staff versus the private sector and find initial convergence but significant disparities in reductions in recent years , with the private sector slimming down this group more effectively .
We therefore propose benchmarking Government administrative staff totals to the private sector and reducing these in the public sector once a post-Covid recovery gets underway .
• To abolish some quangos and to bring all quangos under the control of a relevant department .
Each department should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , marketing , and other administrative functions for all quangos it oversees .
This should also make bureaucracies more accountable and improve public sector productivity .
• Pushing toward greater use of back office function sharing in local government , as occurs between Westminster and Kensington & Chelsea .
There is no need for 350 councils to have distinct IT or press or procurement teams .
The Housing and Local Government Department should publish data on the administrative costs for each council to push forward action .
This should enable many of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rows .
• Improving e-procurement and data sharing , noting that other countries such as South Korea or Estonia have significantly improved productivity and reduced costs through this route , and agreeing with critics of the existing Government procurement systems .
• Since the state owns land and property worth a staggering £1 trillion , we call for an inventory of all non-operational land followed by a sale and leaseback model across all this non-operational land , rather than past Spending Review ’ s top down land targets for each department .
Just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ £1.4 billion while boosting growth , and Covid-19 has changed office work patterns , so this should raise serious sums .
The second group of savings are about ensuring that the state does not give excessively to one or other group , and create a state focused on the core tasks of government .
We propose : • Replacing the triple lock with a dual lock , which still gives pensioners the best of inflation or wage growth , and removing the tax anomaly of the Winter Fuel Payment and just treating as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sell and replace high-value council properties when they fall vacant with a less expensive nearby equivalent .
It is deeply unfair there are million-pound council properties in many parts of London and this is not what making sure people have a roof over their heads is about .
This doesn ’ t even mean anyone has to move – just no more new expensive tenancies .
• Roll child benefit into the child tax credit system with a further taper that reduces the top 10 per cent or so of households ( essentially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to bring them into line with a single high earner household ) .
• Cut overseas aid to 0.5 per cent , still placing the UK in the top 10 donor countries and moving on from 2005 when this target was set at 0.7 per cent at a time when India and even China were legitimate UK aid recipients , not emerging economic superpowers .
It would be both immoral and politically toxic to make the other savings while protecting a budget overseas that has nearly doubled in recent years .
Taken together @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the deficit to an acceptable level .
They involve some hard decisions and confrontation of vested interests , but not impossible ones , and all should pass through the Commons , even in its new rebellious state .
The alternative , ever higher borrowing , or even worse , ever higher taxes , is unthinkable if we are to achieve what the CPS believes the number one priority post-pandemic must be – restoring sustained economic growth .
We call on the Government to investigate and takes forward these ideas as part of the @ @ @ @

Alex Morton Head of Policy at the CPS and a former Number Ten Policy Unit Member.
Today, the Office for National Statistics will announce the provisional figures of Government borrowing for the first six months for 2020/21. They will be truly dire. We know because borrowing in the first five months alone were bigger than the previous annual total, and by August this year the national debt was larger than the UK economy, rising by over 10 per cent from 2019/20’s total.
Putting aside the ongoing – and crucial – debate about the nature of lockdown restrictions, it is clear even on the most optimistic forecasts, and with the best decisions, the UK will end the pandemic with a serious debt and deficit problem. Even assuming higher borrowing for years, something must give.
For that reason, the Centre for Policy Studies today publishes the paper Saving £30 billion: Nine Simple Steps, which discusses, on rough but plausible estimates, nine savings to cut £30 billion a year from the Government’s spending without jeopardising frontline services, or asking the politically impossible.
The Government is in the middle of a Spending Review, and we believe that now is the time for proposals to stop the threat of tax rises which will both hit growth and hard-pressed workers, companies and families. None of the savings would impact frontline delivery and none of them ask for MPs to vote through what would be political suicide.
Government efficiency
Despite the arguments made that austerity means no further reduction in spend is possible, we find significant potential savings across a wide range of areas, none of which impact frontline delivery. The first group of savings are thus about making the state more efficient.
We analyse the number of Government administrative staff versus the private sector and find initial convergence but significant disparities in reductions in recent years, with the private sector slimming down this group more effectively. We therefore propose benchmarking Government administrative staff totals to the private sector and reducing these in the public sector once a post-Covid recovery gets underway.
We also propose –
To abolish some quangos and to bring all quangos under the control of a relevant department. Each department should create a single body to manage HR, marketing, and other administrative functions for all quangos it oversees. This should also make bureaucracies more accountable and improve public sector productivity.
Pushing toward greater use of back office function sharing in local government, as occurs between Westminster and Kensington & Chelsea. There is no need for 350 councils to have distinct IT or press or procurement teams. The Housing and Local Government Department should publish data on the administrative costs for each council to push forward action. This should enable many of the savings around unitarisation without the massive political rows.
Improving e-procurement and data sharing, noting that other countries such as South Korea or Estonia have significantly improved productivity and reduced costs through this route, and agreeing with critics of the existing Government procurement systems.
Since the state owns land and property worth a staggering £1 trillion, we call for an inventory of all non-operational land followed by a sale and leaseback model across all this non-operational land, rather than past Spending Review’s top down land targets for each department. Just selling off the Network Rail arches gained £1.4 billion while boosting growth, and Covid-19 has changed office work patterns, so this should raise serious sums.
Ensuring a fair state
The second group of savings are about ensuring that the state does not give excessively to one or other group, and create a state focused on the core tasks of government. We propose:
Replacing the triple lock with a dual lock, which still gives pensioners the best of inflation or wage growth, and removing the tax anomaly of the Winter Fuel Payment and just treating as taxable income like other benefits.
Sell and replace high-value council properties when they fall vacant with a less expensive nearby equivalent. It is deeply unfair there are million-pound council properties in many parts of London and this is not what making sure people have a roof over their heads is about. This doesn’t even mean anyone has to move – just no more new expensive tenancies.
Roll child benefit into the child tax credit system with a further taper that reduces the top 10 per cent or so of households (essentially capturing those with two fairly high earners to bring them into line with a single high earner household).
Cut overseas aid to 0.5 per cent, still placing the UK in the top 10 donor countries and moving on from 2005 when this target was set at 0.7 per cent at a time when India and even China were legitimate UK aid recipients, not emerging economic superpowers. It would be both immoral and politically toxic to make the other savings while protecting a budget overseas that has nearly doubled in recent years.
Taken together, these savings would help bring down the deficit to an acceptable level. They involve some hard decisions and confrontation of vested interests, but not impossible ones, and all should pass through the Commons, even in its new rebellious state. The alternative, ever higher borrowing, or even worse, ever higher taxes, is unthinkable if we are to achieve what the CPS believes the number one priority post-pandemic must be – restoring sustained economic growth. We call on the Government to investigate and takes forward these ideas as part of the Spending Review process.


conservativehome--2020-10-21--Matthew Elliott: Please apply to invest in Britain’s future and win £10,000

Coming from the world of think-tanks and campaign groups , I have a strong interest in the policy ecosystem that surrounds political parties .
Ahead of Tony Blair ’ s victory in 1997 , think-tanks such as Demos and the Institute for Public Policy Research were established .
And in the 2000s , a plethora of think-tanks ( Centre for Social Justice/Policy Exchange ) , campaign groups ( Business for Sterling/Countryside Alliance ) and websites ( ConservativeHome/Guido Fawkes ) were launched and play an influential role in political discourse .
As well as playing a role in two successful referendum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I helped set up the TaxPayers ’ Alliance ( 2004 ) , Big Brother Watch ( 2009 ) , Million Jobs ( 2012 ) , Business for Britain ( 2013 ) and BrexitCentral ( 2016 ) , so policy entrepreneurship is one of my passions .
And even though my focus is now more in the private sector , I still enjoy helping and mentoring new policy entrepreneurs who are setting up the next generation of campaign groups and think-tanks .
At the beginning of my career , I was helped by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who sadly passed away at the end of July .
I was 25 when we launched the TaxPayers ’ Alliance .
I didn ’ t know any potential financial supporters , so I wrote to the signatories of a Business for Sterling advertisement with my ‘ Strategy Plan ’ .
I thought , if they like BfS , there ’ s a good chance they ’ ll like the TPA .
Stuart was one of the people who very generously sent a contribution which , along with some other donations , gave us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three months , giving me the confidence to leave my position as a researcher to the Conservative MEP ( now Lord ) Timothy Kirkhope , and go full-time with the TPA .
Seventeen years later , I now find myself in a different position .
My most recent project – the news website BrexitCentral – sent out its 1,085th and final daily email bulletin to the tens of thousands of subscribers we had accrued on February 1 , the day after the UK formally left the European Union .
Alongside those essential morning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Isaby and his team , we had published more than 2000 articles by over 500 authors , including the current Prime Minister and many of his Cabinet , not to mention Erin O ’ Toole , the man who was elected leader of the Canadian Conservative Party over the summer .
We are now in the final stages of winding up the company – a task which has been somewhat delayed by babies and Covid-19 – so , along with Georgiana Bristol , who worked tirelessly behind the scenes to keep the show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the issue of what to do with the last remaining funds .
When we were discussing the matter , I thought about the support that Stuart Wheeler and other donors had given me as we launched the TPA , and we decided that it would be very fitting to use those remaining funds to support the young policy and campaigning entrepreneurs of today – people with the ideas that will tackle the policy challenges of the coming years .
We have two cheques for £10,000 , and we would like to hear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with an exciting idea or contribution to policy debate .
It could be : • A campaign group or think-tank you have set up , or are hoping to set up ; • A book proposal that you want to take a sabbatical from your current job to research and draft ; • A think-tank report you want to take time off from your current position to write ; • A website or podcast you want to establish , or a short film you wish to make .
That is not an exhaustive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ideas , the more innovative and entrepreneurial the better .
And because Brexit was supported by people from across the political spectrum , we are open to proposals from all policy positions .
To stress , we are not looking for proposals relating to Brexit or Britain ’ s future relationship with the European Union – we are looking for submissions on any issue , policy or subject that you feel passionate about .
Entries should be emailed to policyentrepreneurs @ brexitcentral.com by midnight on Sunday 8th November 2020 and should cover ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A4 ) an outline of your plan an dhow you hope to execute it .
All submissions will then be sifted and judged by a panel comprising Jonathan and I , plus Kate Andrews , Peter Cruddas , Helena Morrissey , Jon Moynihan and Mark Wallace .
And the two winners will be announced by the end of November .
Since I became active in politics , the barriers to entry for policy entrepreneurship have been massively reduced thanks to the Internet .
When I interned at the European Foundation whilst at university @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mall , it had copies of its European Journal and European Digest professionally printed , which were then posted to subscribers and the opinion formers in Westminster , Whitehall and Fleet Street that it was trying to influence .
It sent press releases out by fax , business was conducted on the telephone or by post , and all these costs were before the general overheads and payroll costs that also needed to be covered .
Fast forward twenty years , and the cost of campaigning has fallen significantly .
From setting up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ broadcasting ideas and opinions to the world is so much cheaper .
But there are still financial barriers , so I hope that this small project will help two policy entrepreneurs of the future , just as Stuart Wheeler helped me with the creation of the TaxPayers ’ Alliance all those years ago .
I look forward to reading your entries and announcing the recipients later this year .
This article was originally published on ConservativeHome on Monday October 19 , and we are re-publishing it during each weekday this week in order @ @ @ @ @

Matthew Elliott was Editor-at-Large of BrexitCentral
Coming from the world of think-tanks and campaign groups, I have a strong interest in the policy ecosystem that surrounds political parties.
Ahead of Tony Blair’s victory in 1997, think-tanks such as Demos and the Institute for Public Policy Research were established. And in the 2000s,a plethora of think-tanks (Centre for Social Justice/Policy Exchange), campaign groups (Business for Sterling/Countryside Alliance) and websites (ConservativeHome/Guido Fawkes) were launched and play an influential role in political discourse.
As well as playing a role in two successful referendum campaigns (NOtoAV and Vote Leave), I helped set up the TaxPayers’ Alliance (2004), Big Brother Watch (2009), Million Jobs (2012), Business for Britain (2013) and BrexitCentral (2016), so policy entrepreneurship is one of my passions. And even though my focus is now more in the private sector, I still enjoy helping and mentoring new policy entrepreneurs who are setting up the next generation of campaign groups and think-tanks.
At the beginning of my career, I was helped by the entrepreneur and philanthropist Stuart Wheeler, who sadly passed away at the end of July. I was 25 when we launched the TaxPayers’Alliance. I didn’t know any potential financial supporters, so I wrote to the signatories of a Business for Sterling advertisement with my ‘Strategy Plan’.
I thought, if they like BfS, there’s a good chance they’ll like the TPA. Stuart was one of the people who very generously sent a contribution which, along with some other donations, gave us the resources to cover my salary for three months, giving me the confidence to leave my position as a researcher to the Conservative MEP (now Lord) Timothy Kirkhope, and go full-time with the TPA.
Seventeen years later, I now find myself in a different position. My most recent project – the news website BrexitCentral – sent out its 1,085th and final daily email bulletin to the tens of thousands of subscribers we had accrued on February 1, the day after the UK formally left the European Union.
Alongside those essential morning emails put together by the indefatigable Jonathan Isaby and his team, we had published more than 2000 articles by over 500 authors, including the current Prime Minister and many of his Cabinet, not to mention Erin O’Toole, the man who was elected leader of the Canadian Conservative Party over the summer.
We are now in the final stages of winding up the company – a task which has been somewhat delayed by babies and Covid-19 – so, along with Georgiana Bristol, who worked tirelessly behind the scenes to keep the show on the road, we are left with the issue of what to do with the last remaining funds.
When we were discussing the matter, I thought about the support that Stuart Wheeler and other donors had given me as we launched the TPA, and we decided that it would be very fitting to use those remaining funds to support the young policy and campaigning entrepreneurs of today – people with the ideas that will tackle the policy challenges of the coming years.
We have two cheques for £10,000, and we would like to hear from people under the age of 35 with an exciting idea or contribution to policy debate. It could be:
A campaign group or think-tank you have set up, or are hoping to set up;
A book proposal that you want to take a sabbatical from your current job to research and draft;
A think-tank report you want to take time off from your current position to write;
A website or podcast you want to establish, or a short film you wish to make.
That is not an exhaustive list – we are interested in all ideas, the more innovative and entrepreneurial the better. And because Brexit was supported by people from across the political spectrum, we are open to proposals from all policy positions.
To stress, we are not looking for proposals relating to Brexit or Britain’s future relationship with the European Union – we are looking for submissions on any issue, policy or subject that you feel passionate about.
Entries should be emailed to policyentrepreneurs@brexitcentral.com by midnight on Sunday 8th November 2020 and should cover (on no more than two sides of A4) an outline of your plan an dhow you hope to execute it. All submissions will then be sifted and judged by a panel comprising Jonathan and I, plus Kate Andrews, Peter Cruddas, Helena Morrissey, Jon Moynihan and Mark Wallace. And the two winners will be announced by the end of November.
Since I became active in politics, the barriers to entry for policy entrepreneurship have been massively reduced thanks to the Internet. When I interned at the European Foundation whilst at university, it had an office in Pall Mall, it had copies of its European Journal and European Digest professionally printed, which were then posted to subscribers and the opinion formers in Westminster, Whitehall and Fleet Street that it was trying to influence. It sent press releases out by fax, business was conducted on the telephone or by post, and all these costs were before the general overheads and payroll costs that also needed to be covered.
Fast forward twenty years, and the cost of campaigning has fallen significantly. From setting up a website to using social media, broadcasting ideas and opinions to the world is so much cheaper. But there are still financial barriers, so I hope that this small project will help two policy entrepreneurs of the future, just as Stuart Wheeler helped me with the creation of the TaxPayers’ Alliance all those years ago.
I look forward to reading your entries and announcing the recipients later this year.
This article was originally published on ConservativeHome on Monday October 19, and we are re-publishing it during each weekday this week in order to advertise this project.


conservativehome--2020-10-21--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the BBC – 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 role has six broad elements : setting the strategic direction of the organisation and delivering against a robust business plan ; raising the awareness and profile of the Commissioner and the Office of the SBC ; providing strong leadership to your staff ; overseeing investigations into complaints and publishing outcomes ; leading the Prompt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ensure it plays a more significant role in driving improved payment practices ; and performing the role of Accounting Officer for the organisation… The successful candidate will demonstrate in their application all of the following : strategic outcome-focussed leadership and delivery ; targeted partner engagement to raise the profile of organisation ; outstanding communication , interpersonal and influencing skills ; encouraging staff to excel in the delivery of corporate objectives ; driving a culture of innovation and continuous improvement ; and evidence-based decision making.
” “ Help us make a better future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ areas .
The Chair has the following leadership responsibilities : effective , cooperative and inclusive leadership of the Board that will provide sound strategic direction .
This includes enabling a high standard of discussion ; helping to steer the Coal Authority by collaborative working across Government ; and ensuring that systems are in place to provide Board members and the Executive team with the support they need to carry out their roles ; Working with the Board to ensure that they and the Executive team have an appropriate and diverse range of skills @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and counsel to the Executive team while holding them to account and providing constructive challenge on the delivery of the Coal Authority Business Plan ; and maintaining clear and effective channels of communication with internal and external stakeholders and acting as an ambassador for the Coal Authority.
” “ Formed in 2009 , and a BEIS Non-departmental Public Body ( NDPB ) since 2012 , the RPC ’ s role is to provide Government with external , independent scrutiny of proposed new regulatory and deregulatory measures .
It assesses the quality of evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their regulatory proposals , and by doing so , helps ensure that the Government produces better regulatory outcomes for businesses , civil society , charities and other non-government organisations .
The RPC is accountable to Parliament through the BEIS Permanent Secretary and to the BEIS Secretary of State and through the Department ’ s Principal Accounting Officer in respect of its use of public funds… To lead a committee of independent members , who provide robust and objective advice to government , parliament , and the wider public regarding the quality of evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to legislation that impact or regulate businesses.
” “ This is an exciting time to join the Department for Transport .
We are responsible for the transport network that helps the UK ’ s businesses and gets people and goods travelling around the country .
We plan and invest in transport infrastructure to keep the UK on the move .
We work across all modes of transport – roads , rail , aviation , maritime – to improve journeys , boost economic growth , work towards a low carbon future and build a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Non-Executive Director to join the Department ’ s Board .
The successful candidate , through their membership of the Board , will provide challenge and support to a wide variety of management and operational issues and contribute to the effective strategic and operational leadership of the Department.
” “ You will be independent of the Ministry of Defence operational activities and have the ability to apply intellectual rigour in support of the Ministry of Defence ’ s ( MOD ) Chief Scientific Advisor ( CSA ) .
Membership of Defence Science Expert @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and exciting opportunity to contribute to UK-led Defence Science and Technology .
DSEC is the MOD key source of independent advice on non-nuclear science , technology , engineering , analysis and mathematics issues .
It is an Expert Committee reporting to the MOD CSA and supporting the derivation and delivery of the Department ’ s Science and Technology Strategy .
DSEC comprises an Independent Chair supported by up to 10 Independent Members drawn from senior academic and industrial communities .
All are specialists in a branch of science , engineering , technology , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and security and have proven ability in working on Boards or Committees .
Senior MOD officials , including CSA , keep the Committee abreast of developments in MOD and facilitate contacts within MOD.
” “ The role of the Chair is to lead and direct the work of the Cafcass Board ( including its various sub-committees ) , the purpose of which is to ensure probity in the conduct of Cafcass ’ affairs , and that Cafcass ’ policies and its strategic vision are compatible with those of the Secretary of State .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ establishing and taking forward the strategic aims and objectives of Cafcass consistent with its overall strategic direction and within the policy and resources framework determined by the Secretary of State ; ensuring that the responsible minister is kept informed of any changes or risks that are likely to impact on the strategic direction of Cafcass or on the attainability of its targets , and determining the steps needed to deal with such changes or risks ; ensuring that any statutory or administrative requirements for the use of public funds are complied with ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of its statutory authority and any delegated authority agreed with the Department , and in accordance with any other conditions relating to the use of public funds… ” Department for Business , Energy and Industrial Strategy – Director of Labour Market Enforcement “ The Secretary of State is seeking to appoint four Independent Members to the CCW Board .
The primary role of CCW ’ s Independent Board Members is to contribute to the good governance of the organisation by bringing wide experience and critical detachment to the work of the Board .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ an area of CCW ’ s strategic work or its campaigns and work closely with members of the Executive Team and employees in this area .
Examples of lead areas include engagement and communication , vulnerable consumers and improving water regulation for consumers .
The Essential Criteria section later in this document includes the ‘ additional expertise ’ that CCW is looking for from successful candidates to enhance and complement the Board ’ s existing strengths .
CCW ’ s Code of Governance sets out more details on the operation of the Board @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the role of Board Members.
” “ The Chair will provide strong and effective leadership of the Commission in the fulfilment of its remit .
The Chair of CHM has to lead an expert science advisory committee whose principal tasks are to advise the Licensing Authority ( the UK Health Ministers ) and its executive arm , the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency ( MHRA ) , on matters relating to human medicinal products including the licensing of medicines that are safe , efficacious and of good quality .
The Chair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ information and present it authoritatively to ministers as required .
They have to be able to master a very wide range of medical and pharmacological issues , many of which would be out of any one practitioner ’ s area of expertise , and chair to consensus a commission which comprises a range of eminent medical experts and some lay members.
” Remuneration : Up to £500 per meeting “ We are looking for an outstanding individual with demonstrable leadership skills and a passion for the media and public broadcasting , to represent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maintain the Corporation ’ s independence .
As per the BBC Royal Charter , the Chair of the BBC Board must be appointed by Order in Council following a fair and open competition .
The Governance Code , including the public appointment principles , must be followed in making the appointment .
The Commissioner for Public Appointments will ensure that the appointment is made in accordance with the Governance Code .
Candidates should be aware that the preferred candidate for the post of Chair will be required to appear before a Parliamentary Select @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3-4 days per week ( Chair ) / Up to 2 days per week .
“ The Secretary of State is seeking to appoint four Independent Members to the CCW Board .
The primary role of CCW ’ s Independent Board Members is to contribute to the good governance of the organisation by bringing wide experience and critical detachment to the work of the Board .
Board Members take a lead role in an area of CCW ’ s strategic work or its campaigns and work closely with members of the Executive Team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of lead areas include engagement and communication , vulnerable consumers and improving water regulation for consumers .
The Essential Criteria section later in this document includes the ‘ additional expertise ’ that CCW is looking for from successful candidates to enhance and complement the Board ’ s existing strengths .
CCW ’ s Code of Governance sets out more details on the operation of the Board and its Committees and includes more detail on the role of Board Members.
” “ The Prime Minister ’ s Council for Science and Technology ( CST @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advisory body on science and technology issues .
It reports directly to the Prime Minister on matters of science and technology that cut across the responsibilities of government departments .
It is co-chaired by the Government Chief Scientific Adviser and an independent appointee .
The SARS-CoV-2 ( Covid-19 ) pandemic has highlighted the importance of science and technology in facing a challenge of such epic proportions , and in building a robust , sustainable , and equitable recovery plan for the UK , post Covid .
The Government is seeking to appoint a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Science and Technology .
The Government will appoint an Independent Co-Chair who will share responsibility for chairing the Council with the Government Chief Scientific Adviser ( GCSA ) .
” “ The Insolvency Service is an Executive Agency of the Department for Business , Energy and Industrial Strategy , responsible for helping to deliver economic confidence by supporting those in financial distress , tackling financial wrongdoing and maximising returns to creditors .
It employs around 1,700 staff operating from 22 locations across Great Britain .
We are seeking to appoint a new Chair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the organisation as it takes forward its programme of transformation , delivers key Government commitments , and continues its record of strong performance against the backdrop of an uncertain economy following the Covid-19 pandemic… Headed by the non-executive Chair , the Board currently comprises a mix of Executive and Non-Executive Directors .
The Board is collectively responsible for the oversight of the operation of the Insolvency Service , with particular emphasis on its strategic direction , management controls , and corporate governance .
”

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.
– – – – – – – – – –
Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy – Small Business Commissioner
“The role has six broad elements: setting the strategic direction of the organisation and delivering against a robust business plan; raising the awareness and profile of the Commissioner and the Office of the SBC; providing strong leadership to your staff; overseeing investigations into complaints and publishing outcomes; leading the Prompt Payment Code compliance and supporting Code reforms to ensure it plays a more significant role in driving improved payment practices; and performing the role of Accounting Officer for the organisation… The successful candidate will demonstrate in their application all of the following: strategic outcome-focussed leadership and delivery; targeted partner engagement to raise the profile of organisation; outstanding communication, interpersonal and influencing skills; encouraging staff to excel in the delivery of corporate objectives; driving a culture of innovation and continuous improvement; and evidence-based decision making.”
Time: Full-time.
Remuneration: £120,000 per annum.
Closes: 25 October
– – – – – – – – – –
Coal Authority – Chair
“Help us make a better future for people and the environment in mining areas. The Chair has the following leadership responsibilities: effective, cooperative and inclusive leadership of the Board that will provide sound strategic direction. This includes enabling a high standard of discussion; helping to steer the Coal Authority by collaborative working across Government; and ensuring that systems are in place to provide Board members and the Executive team with the support they need to carry out their roles;
Working with the Board to ensure that they and the Executive team have an appropriate and diverse range of skills, experience and outlook; offering support and counsel to the Executive team while holding them to account and providing constructive challenge on the delivery of the Coal Authority Business Plan; and maintaining clear and effective channels of communication with internal and external stakeholders and acting as an ambassador for the Coal Authority.”
Time: Five days per month.
Remuneration: £27,050 per annum, plus expenses.
Closes: 25 October
– – – – – – – – – –
Regulatory Policy Committee – Chair
“Formed in 2009, and a BEIS Non-departmental Public Body (NDPB) since 2012, the RPC’s role is to provide Government with external, independent scrutiny of proposed new regulatory and deregulatory measures. It assesses the quality of evidence and analysis used by departments to inform their regulatory proposals, and by doing so, helps ensure that the Government produces better regulatory outcomes for businesses, civil society, charities and other non-government organisations. The RPC is accountable to Parliament through the BEIS Permanent Secretary and to the BEIS Secretary of State and through the Department’s Principal Accounting Officer in respect of its use of public funds… To lead a committee of independent members, who provide robust and objective advice to government, parliament, and the wider public regarding the quality of evidence and analysis supporting decisions on proposed changes to legislation that impact or regulate businesses.”
Time: Two days per week.
Remuneration: £500 per diem.
Closes: 25 October
– – – – – – – – – –
Department for Transport – Non-Executive Director
“This is an exciting time to join the Department for Transport. We are responsible for the transport network that helps the UK’s businesses and gets people and goods travelling around the country. We plan and invest in transport infrastructure to keep the UK on the move. We work across all modes of transport – roads, rail, aviation, maritime – to improve journeys, boost economic growth, work towards a low carbon future and build a One Nation Britain. We are seeking a Non-Executive Director to join the Department’s Board. The successful candidate, through their membership of the Board, will provide challenge and support to a wide variety of management and operational issues and contribute to the effective strategic and operational leadership of the Department.”
Time: 15 days per annum.
Remuneration: £15,000 per annum.
Closes: 01 November
– – – – – – – – – –
Defence Science Expert Committee – Chair
“You will be independent of the Ministry of Defence operational activities and have the ability to apply intellectual rigour in support of the Ministry of Defence’s (MOD) Chief Scientific Advisor (CSA). Membership of Defence Science Expert Committee (DSEC) is an important and exciting opportunity to contribute to UK-led Defence Science and Technology. DSEC is the MOD key source of independent advice on non-nuclear science, technology, engineering, analysis and mathematics issues. It is an Expert Committee reporting to the MOD CSA and supporting the derivation and delivery of the Department’s Science and Technology Strategy. DSEC comprises an Independent Chair supported by up to 10 Independent Members drawn from senior academic and industrial communities. All are specialists in a branch of science, engineering, technology, humanities or medicine of relevance to defence and security and have proven ability in working on Boards or Committees. Senior MOD officials, including CSA, keep the Committee abreast of developments in MOD and facilitate contacts within MOD.”
Time: 20-25 days per annum.
Remuneration: £465 per diem, plus allowances.
Closes: 02 November
– – – – – – – – – –
Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service – Chair
“The role of the Chair is to lead and direct the work of the Cafcass Board (including its various sub-committees), the purpose of which is to ensure probity in the conduct of Cafcass’ affairs, and that Cafcass’ policies and its strategic vision are compatible with those of the Secretary of State. The Board is specifically responsible for: establishing and taking forward the strategic aims and objectives of Cafcass consistent with its overall strategic direction and within the policy and resources framework determined by the Secretary of State; ensuring that the responsible minister is kept informed of any changes or risks that are likely to impact on the strategic direction of Cafcass or on the attainability of its targets, and determining the steps needed to deal with such changes or risks; ensuring that any statutory or administrative requirements for the use of public funds are complied with; that the Board operates within the limits of its statutory authority and any delegated authority agreed with the Department, and in accordance with any other conditions relating to the use of public funds…”
Time: 80 days per annum.
Remuneration: £400 per diem.
Closes: 03 November
– – – – – – – – – –
Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy – Director of Labour Market Enforcement
“The Secretary of State is seeking to appoint four Independent Members to the CCW Board. The primary role of CCW’s Independent Board Members is to contribute to the good governance of the organisation by bringing wide experience and critical detachment to the work of the Board. Board Members take a lead role in an area of CCW’s strategic work or its campaigns and work closely with members of the Executive Team and employees in this area. Examples of lead areas include engagement and communication, vulnerable consumers and improving water regulation for consumers. The Essential Criteria section later in this document includes the ‘additional expertise’ that CCW is looking for from successful candidates to enhance and complement the Board’s existing strengths. CCW’s Code of Governance sets out more details on the operation of the Board and its Committees and includes more detail on the role of Board Members.”
Time: 1-2 days per week.
Remuneration: £100,000 – £130,000 per annum (FTE).
Closes: 08 November
– – – – – – – – – –
Commission on Human Medicines – Chair
“The Chair will provide strong and effective leadership of the Commission in the fulfilment of its remit. The Chair of CHM has to lead an expert science advisory committee whose principal tasks are to advise the Licensing Authority (the UK Health Ministers) and its executive arm, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), on matters relating to human medicinal products including the licensing of medicines that are safe, efficacious and of good quality. The Chair needs to be able to synthesize complex information and present it authoritatively to ministers as required. They have to be able to master a very wide range of medical and pharmacological issues, many of which would be out of any one practitioner’s area of expertise, and chair to consensus a commission which comprises a range of eminent medical experts and some lay members.”
Time: Approx. 33 days per annum.
Remuneration: Up to £500 per meeting
Closes: 10 November
– – – – – – – – – –
British Broadcasting Corporation – Chair/Member for England
“We are looking for an outstanding individual with demonstrable leadership skills and a passion for the media and public broadcasting, to represent the public interest in the BBC and maintain the Corporation’s independence. As per the BBC Royal Charter, the Chair of the BBC Board must be appointed by Order in Council following a fair and open competition. The Governance Code, including the public appointment principles, must be followed in making the appointment. The Commissioner for Public Appointments will ensure that the appointment is made in accordance with the Governance Code. Candidates should be aware that the preferred candidate for the post of Chair will be required to appear before a Parliamentary Select Committee prior to appointment.”
Time: 3-4 days per week (Chair) / Up to 2 days per week.
Remuneration: £160,000 (Chair) / £33,000 per annum, +£5,000 for committee chairs, reasonable expenses (Member)
Closes: 11 November
– – – – – – – – – –
Consumer Council for Water – Independent Board Members
“The Secretary of State is seeking to appoint four Independent Members to the CCW Board. The primary role of CCW’s Independent Board Members is to contribute to the good governance of the organisation by bringing wide experience and critical detachment to the work of the Board. Board Members take a lead role in an area of CCW’s strategic work or its campaigns and work closely with members of the Executive Team and employees in this area. Examples of lead areas include engagement and communication, vulnerable consumers and improving water regulation for consumers. The Essential Criteria section later in this document includes the ‘additional expertise’ that CCW is looking for from successful candidates to enhance and complement the Board’s existing strengths. CCW’s Code of Governance sets out more details on the operation of the Board and its Committees and includes more detail on the role of Board Members.”
Time: Three days per month.
Remuneration: £11,718 per annum.
Closes: 16 November
– – – – – – – – – –
Prime Minister’s Council for Science and Technology – Co-Chair
“The Prime Minister’s Council for Science and Technology (CST) is the Government’s top-level advisory body on science and technology issues. It reports directly to the Prime Minister on matters of science and technology that cut across the responsibilities of government departments. It is co-chaired by the Government Chief Scientific Adviser and an independent appointee. The SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) pandemic has highlighted the importance of science and technology in facing a challenge of such epic proportions, and in building a robust, sustainable, and equitable recovery plan for the UK, post Covid. The Government is seeking to appoint a new Independent Co-Chair for the Council for Science and Technology. The Government will appoint an Independent Co-Chair who will share responsibility for chairing the Council with the Government Chief Scientific Adviser (GCSA).”
Time: 2-3 days per month.
Remuneration: None.
Closes: 22 November
– – – – – – – – – –
Insolvency Service – Chair
“The Insolvency Service is an Executive Agency of the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, responsible for helping to deliver economic confidence by supporting those in financial distress, tackling financial wrongdoing and maximising returns to creditors. It employs around 1,700 staff operating from 22 locations across Great Britain. We are seeking to appoint a new Chair of the Insolvency Service Board to lead the organisation as it takes forward its programme of transformation, delivers key Government commitments, and continues its record of strong performance against the backdrop of an uncertain economy following the Covid-19 pandemic… Headed by the non-executive Chair, the Board currently comprises a mix of Executive and Non-Executive Directors. The Board is collectively responsible for the oversight of the operation of the Insolvency Service, with particular emphasis on its strategic direction, management controls, and corporate governance.”
Time: 20 days per annum.
Remuneration: £18,000.
Closes: 22 November