conservativehome--2020-09-30--Andrew Gimson’s PMQs sketch: The Speaker is furious and the Prime Minister refuses to put his arms r

Andrew Gimson’s PMQs sketch: The Speaker is furious and the Prime Minister refuses to put his arms round Starmer

There was an ominous note in the Speaker ’ s voice as he delivered a short statement before PMQs .
Sir Lindsay Hoyle was clear and self-controlled , but sounded as if he was almost choking with anger .
He is furious with the Government for evading proper parliamentary scrutiny of the Coronavirus regulations , and condemned its resort to secondary legislation as “ totally unsatisfactory ” and showing “ total disregard for the House ” .
So although he was unable to accept the Brady amendment , the Commons clerks having warned him that this could lead to “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law actually is , he does expect “ the Government to remedy a situation I regard as completely unsatisfactory ” .
Sir Lindsay indicated that if remedial action is not taken , he will make the Government ’ s life hell , by giving “ very sympathetic consideration ” to applications for Urgent Questions and Emergency Debates .
This did not sound like an empty threat .
Boris Johnson came on .
His attitude was rather different .
He seized the first chance he could find to accuse Sir Keir Starmer of trying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Now is the time , the Prime Minister declared , “ for the nation to come together ” .
He repeated several times that “ if we all pull together ” we can surmount the crisis .
“ We ’ re going to continue to put our arms round the people of this country , ” he said – a creepy phrase which he has used on numerous occasions , and repeated more than once today .
But he is not going to put his arms round Sir Keir .
He instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unreliable , and is detracting from the national togetherness which is required .
Johnson sounds as if he does not believe in the idea of Her Majesty ’ s Most Loyal Opposition .
He talks as if any criticism is disloyal .
This is not the way to retain the confidence of the House of Commons .
In particular , it is not the way to retain the confidence of Conservatives such as Sir Graham Brady , a parliamentarian of longer and deeper experience than himself .
The Prime Minister is capable of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this quality more often in the House , would store up less trouble for himself .

There was an ominous note in the Speaker’s voice as he delivered a short statement before PMQs. Sir Lindsay Hoyle was clear and self-controlled, but sounded as if he was almost choking with anger.
He is furious with the Government for evading proper parliamentary scrutiny of the Coronavirus regulations, and condemned its resort to secondary legislation as “totally unsatisfactory” and showing “total disregard for the House”.
So although he was unable to accept the Brady amendment, the Commons clerks having warned him that this could lead to “lack of clarity” about what the law actually is, he does expect “the Government to remedy a situation I regard as completely unsatisfactory”.
Sir Lindsay indicated that if remedial action is not taken, he will make the Government’s life hell, by giving “very sympathetic consideration” to applications for Urgent Questions and Emergency Debates. This did not sound like an empty threat.
Boris Johnson came on. His attitude was rather different. He seized the first chance he could find to accuse Sir Keir Starmer of trying “to snipe from the sidelines”.
Now is the time, the Prime Minister declared, “for the nation to come together”. He repeated several times that “if we all pull together” we can surmount the crisis.
“We’re going to continue to put our arms round the people of this country,” he said – a creepy phrase which he has used on numerous occasions, and repeated more than once today.
But he is not going to put his arms round Sir Keir. He instead wishes to indicate that Sir Keir is unreliable, and is detracting from the national togetherness which is required.
Johnson sounds as if he does not believe in the idea of Her Majesty’s Most Loyal Opposition. He talks as if any criticism is disloyal. This is not the way to retain the confidence of the House of Commons.
In particular, it is not the way to retain the confidence of Conservatives such as Sir Graham Brady, a parliamentarian of longer and deeper experience than himself.
The Prime Minister is capable of magnanimity, and if only he displayed this quality more often in the House, would store up less trouble for himself.


conservativehome--2020-09-30--Johnson should not try to abolish the distinction between academic and technical education

The Prime Minister ’ s announcement of what the papers are calling a ‘ radical shake-up ’ of higher and further education marks a return to the spotlight for the subject .
Having been one of the central reform programmes of the Coalition , education has slipped down the agenda under David Cameron ’ s successors .
We noted at the time that the issue had ‘ lost momentum ’ under Theresa May , and in December it received just a single page in the Conservative Manifesto .
The spur for this latest tranche of reforms is the prospect of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a result of losing their jobs during the pandemic .
As the Telegraph reports : “ a new “ lifetime skills guarantee ” offers a fully-funded college course to people over 18 in England without an A-level or equivalent.
” Boris Johnson also intends to make student loans more flexible , to allow people to space out their studies if they choose to do so , promised the right to four years ’ of loans , and pledged to make it as easy to get loans for further education as higher education .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ by a a £2.5bn boost to England ’ s National Skills Fund , which was already announced .
All of these aims are laudable enough .
But can they be delivered ?
Several newspapers have noted this morning that this is a task to which previous governments , with much less on their plates , have previously addressed themselves with little success .
One journalist I spoke to recently said interest in FE is so low that a single article on the subject was getting him invitations to panels and conferences for almost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some moves to try and combat negative perceptions of technical education .
Perhaps most significantly , this month saw the launch of the new T Levels , a set of post-GCSE courses which aim to replace the current alphabet soup of vocational qualifications with a more coherent and intelligible certificate with clear pathways to employment .
( These got no mention in the 2019 Manifesto ) .
We might also expect to see future proposals based on the Augar Review , which proposed some popular headline measures such as cutting tuition fees alongside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overall student loan book is repaid and – this will appeal to ministers – increase the Government ’ s “ very limited control over the substantial taxpayer investment in higher education.
” However , one part of the Prime Minister ’ s statement is somewhat concerning : “ But if we are going to reform our post-18 education , we must go much further .
We ’ ve got to end the pointless , nonsensical gulf that has been fixed for generations – more than 100 years – between the so-called academic and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s absurd to talk about skills in this limited way… So now is the time to end this bogus distinction between FE and HE.
” Bridging the gap in prestige and investment between higher and further education is a worthwhile – indeed , essential – political project .
But trying to obfuscate the fact that they are different things is not .
It was the pursuit of this short-cut to parity of esteem that led to polytechnics rebranding as ‘ universities ’ , which helped create the bloated sector that ministers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Public attitudes towards academic and technical education won ’ t change in response to a centrally-mandated rebranding , any more than they did last time .
The rush to badge everything a ‘ university ’ , like the campaign for comprehensive schools before it , did not bridge the gulf between good and bad institutions – it just made it harder for some people ( but seldom employers or middle-class parents ) to distinguish between the two .
If the Prime Minister really wants to be the man who finally wins technical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s heart , he must prepare for the long and difficult task of changing public attitudes towards it as a distinct discipline , on its own terms .
Trying to borrow the feathers of academic learning will not work .

The Prime Minister’s announcement of what the papers are calling a ‘radical shake-up’ of higher and further education marks a return to the spotlight for the subject.
Having been one of the central reform programmes of the Coalition, education has slipped down the agenda under David Cameron’s successors. We noted at the time that the issue had ‘lost momentum’ under Theresa May, and in December it received just a single page in the Conservative Manifesto.
The spur for this latest tranche of reforms is the prospect of lots of people needing to re-skill as a result of losing their jobs during the pandemic. As the Telegraph reports: “a new “lifetime skills guarantee” offers a fully-funded college course to people over 18 in England without an A-level or equivalent.”
Boris Johnson also intends to make student loans more flexible, to allow people to space out their studies if they choose to do so, promised the right to four years’ of loans, and pledged to make it as easy to get loans for further education as higher education. All of these pledges will be underwritten by a a £2.5bn boost to England’s National Skills Fund, which was already announced.
All of these aims are laudable enough. But can they be delivered? Several newspapers have noted this morning that this is a task to which previous governments, with much less on their plates, have previously addressed themselves with little success. One journalist I spoke to recently said interest in FE is so low that a single article on the subject was getting him invitations to panels and conferences for almost a year.
Ministers have already made some moves to try and combat negative perceptions of technical education. Perhaps most significantly, this month saw the launch of the new T Levels, a set of post-GCSE courses which aim to replace the current alphabet soup of vocational qualifications with a more coherent and intelligible certificate with clear pathways to employment. (These got no mention in the 2019 Manifesto).
We might also expect to see future proposals based on the Augar Review, which proposed some popular headline measures such as cutting tuition fees alongside reforms to make sure more of the overall student loan book is repaid and – this will appeal to ministers – increase the Government’s “very limited control over the substantial taxpayer investment in higher education.”
However, one part of the Prime Minister’s statement is somewhat concerning:
“But if we are going to reform our post-18 education, we must go much further. We’ve got to end the pointless, nonsensical gulf that has been fixed for generations – more than 100 years – between the so-called academic and the so-called practical varieties of education. It’s absurd to talk about skills in this limited way… So now is the time to end this bogus distinction between FE and HE.”
Bridging the gap in prestige and investment between higher and further education is a worthwhile – indeed, essential – political project. But trying to obfuscate the fact that they are different things is not. It was the pursuit of this short-cut to parity of esteem that led to polytechnics rebranding as ‘universities’, which helped create the bloated sector that ministers and students alike are struggling with today.
Public attitudes towards academic and technical education won’t change in response to a centrally-mandated rebranding, any more than they did last time. The rush to badge everything a ‘university’, like the campaign for comprehensive schools before it, did not bridge the gulf between good and bad institutions – it just made it harder for some people (but seldom employers or middle-class parents) to distinguish between the two.
If the Prime Minister really wants to be the man who finally wins technical education a place in the nation’s heart, he must prepare for the long and difficult task of changing public attitudes towards it as a distinct discipline, on its own terms. Trying to borrow the feathers of academic learning will not work.


conservativehome--2020-10-01--Ascension Island: a leak that tells us more about the inside of the Home Office than government poli

Ascension Island: a leak that tells us more about the inside of the Home Office than government policy

What have we learned from the recent rash of stories about Priti Patel ’ s decision to investigate setting up migration and asylum processing facilities on some of the UK ’ s more remote Atlantic possessions , St Helena and Ascension Island ?
On the face of it , not all that much .
Australia ’ s immigration system has loomed large in the British imagination for ages , and apart from the totemic ‘ points-based immigration system ’ one of the central planks of that system is offshore processing – in Australia ’ s case on the Manus Islands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state of Nauru .
From the Government ’ s perspective , such a system has its advantages .
It makes it harder for people in the system ( or especially , who have been rejected ) to slip the net and disappear into the population .
It might perhaps also avoid complications that arise from trying to turn people away who have actually made it to British soil .
And it is also , apparently , pretty popular with the public .
Even better , from the perspective of trying to find ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the culture war , the plan has outraged all the right people .
One doubts ministers will be too upset at headlines of the Opposition accusing them of being too tough on immigration .
Another reason we haven ’ t learned much is that this isn ’ t going to be official policy .
The Ascension Island plan , like the more outlandish stuff about ‘ wave machines ’ , was only ever a suggestion being explored , rather than a concrete proposal .
Even without objections in principle , those particular toeholds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ away to be practical ( although the Daily Mail reports that nearer-hand offshore options , including some of the British Islands or even disused ferries and oil rigs , were also considered ) .
It is almost inevitable that any ‘ blue-sky ’ thinking session is going to produce ideas that are impractical , embarrassing , or both .
Indeed , if it doesn ’ t then people probably haven ’ t been getting into the spirit of the exercise .
What we have learned , therefore , is that someone in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stuff to the press .
One can just about imagine the Overseas Territories proposal being leaked by someone trying to look tough on immigration , but the presence of the rest suggests it wasn ’ t someone with Patel ’ s best interests at heart .
This won ’ t do anything to improve the already fraught relationship between the Government and its officials .

What have we learned from the recent rash of stories about Priti Patel’s decision to investigate setting up migration and asylum processing facilities on some of the UK’s more remote Atlantic possessions, St Helena and Ascension Island?
On the face of it, not all that much. Australia’s immigration system has loomed large in the British imagination for ages, and apart from the totemic ‘points-based immigration system’ one of the central planks of that system is offshore processing – in Australia’s case on the Manus Islands in Papua New Guinea and the tiny state of Nauru.
From the Government’s perspective, such a system has its advantages. It makes it harder for people in the system (or especially, who have been rejected) to slip the net and disappear into the population. It might perhaps also avoid complications that arise from trying to turn people away who have actually made it to British soil. And it is also, apparently, pretty popular with the public.
Even better, from the perspective of trying to find ‘wedge issues’ on which to fight the culture war, the plan has outraged all the right people. One doubts ministers will be too upset at headlines of the Opposition accusing them of being too tough on immigration.
Another reason we haven’t learned much is that this isn’t going to be official policy. The Ascension Island plan, like the more outlandish stuff about ‘wave machines’, was only ever a suggestion being explored, rather than a concrete proposal. Even without objections in principle, those particular toeholds of the Empire are likely too far away to be practical (although the Daily Mail reports that nearer-hand offshore options, including some of the British Islands or even disused ferries and oil rigs, were also considered).
It is almost inevitable that any ‘blue-sky’ thinking session is going to produce ideas that are impractical, embarrassing, or both. Indeed, if it doesn’t then people probably haven’t been getting into the spirit of the exercise. What we have learned, therefore, is that someone in the Home Office has decided to leak this stuff to the press.
One can just about imagine the Overseas Territories proposal being leaked by someone trying to look tough on immigration, but the presence of the rest suggests it wasn’t someone with Patel’s best interests at heart. This won’t do anything to improve the already fraught relationship between the Government and its officials.


conservativehome--2020-10-01--Henry Hill: Beneath its rosy poll ratings, time is catching up with the Scottish Government

The Scottish Government currently presents one of the most baffling – and for unionists , deeply frustrating – contradictions in British politics .
On the one hand , the SNP are defying in gravity .
After 13 years in office – long enough to see off New Labour – they are still streets ahead in the polls , on course for a comfortable victory at next year ’ s Holyrood elections .
Even better ( or worse ) , after years of waiting for a post-Brexit surge that never arrived the cause of their hearts , breaking up the UK @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a polling lead , the proposal lifted by the perception that Nicola Sturgeon has had a good pandemic and the anticipated unpopularity of Boris Johnson .
Whatever your opinion of the Nationalists or their project , this sort of longevity really is a remarkable achievement .
Their administration is defying political gravity .
Yet it also really , really isn ’ t .
Look up from the polls for a moment and the accumulated baggage of thirteen years in office – and longer still of eerie , phalanx-like internal discipline – are clearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ both assailed on multiple external fronts and wracked by deepening internal divisions .
Just this week , for example , the row over the ongoing inquiry into the Scottish Government ’ s botched investigation into allegations against Alex Salmond took another poisonous turn when the Holyrood committee conducting it claimed that its work was being deliberately obstructed by the administration .
Oliver Mundell , a Tory MSP , was ejected from the Scottish Parliament after accusing the First Minister of ‘ lying ’ when she offered to give any investigation her full support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opposition MSPs .
The SNP were criticised for stacking the committee chairs with Nationalists , but even Linda Fabiani , the convenor , has gone on record as saying that she and her colleagues have been “ completely frustrated ” .
Today ’ s Guardian reports that MSPs have now appealed to the courts to try and break the deadlock .
The extremely tight senior leadership of the SNP , which was an asset to its command-and-control culture when things were good , now makes it difficult to deflect problems away from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s husband and Chief Executive of the SNP , is now in the spotlight .
Not only is he central to allegations that the SNP are obstructing the Holyrood probe , but he now faces claims that he tried to pressure the police to investigate Salmond .
Murrell himself is now firefighting on multiple fronts : not only is he in the sights of the other parties , but the anti-Sturgeon faction inside the Party is calling for his head .
A move by grassroots activists to try to unseat him may be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ internal divisions – which Stephen Daisley plots onto the two axes of Salmondite/Sturgeonista ( on the practicalities of independence ) and Woke/Sensible ( on things like gender recognition ) are heating up .
This surfeit of distractions perhaps helps to explain why it looks as if the SNP might be starting to lose their grip on the domestic agenda .
An FoI request by the Tories has found Nationalist supporters very critical of the Party ’ s controversial Hate Crime Bill .
One of Scotland ’ s richest businessmen ( and second referendum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Government to park the question of independence until the pandemic has passed , which will exacerbate tensions with the Salmondite ‘ fundamentalist ’ wing .
More seriously , a long-awaited report into the release of patients infected with Covid-19 into Scottish care homes – another issue in which the question of what Sturgeon knew and when is at the fore – has been delayed , again .
The abominable treatment of students at Scottish universities , which have seen thousands of young people essentially confined to quarters , is another story which might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bullet-proof reputation .
The First Minister has defended the restrictions as “ common sense ” , but she has now been moved to apologise .
Sturgeon is also coming under strong pressure to publish the scientific advice behind her lockdown decisions by local government leaders in Aberdeen , which was forced back into lockdown earlier , who are incensed at her apparent refusal to order the same for Glasgow ( where her constituency is ) despite apparently higher levels of Covid-19 transmission .
All of which makes it easy to see why the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strategy of simply refusing another referendum ( even if they need to put more work into justifying it ) .
With such strains on the SNP , and no obvious successor to Sturgeon of remotely the same calibre ( and new electoral difficulties for the obvious contender ) , it might be that the question can be put off until time finally catches up with the Nationalists .
But the Tories ’ own recent history should temper any optimism about that .
One need only recall the way that Theresa May ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shedding a Cabinet minister a month , without the Conservative falling below 40 per cent in the polls to see how coalitions built around existential questions can prop up political vehicles which might fall to pieces in other circumstances .

The Scottish Government currently presents one of the most baffling – and for unionists, deeply frustrating – contradictions in British politics.
On the one hand, the SNP are defying in gravity. After 13 years in office – long enough to see off New Labour – they are still streets ahead in the polls, on course for a comfortable victory at next year’s Holyrood elections.
Even better (or worse), after years of waiting for a post-Brexit surge that never arrived the cause of their hearts, breaking up the UK, has finally managed to claw out a polling lead, the proposal lifted by the perception that Nicola Sturgeon has had a good pandemic and the anticipated unpopularity of Boris Johnson.
Whatever your opinion of the Nationalists or their project, this sort of longevity really is a remarkable achievement. Their administration is defying political gravity.
Yet it also really, really isn’t. Look up from the polls for a moment and the accumulated baggage of thirteen years in office – and longer still of eerie, phalanx-like internal discipline – are clearly taking their toll. The SNP is both assailed on multiple external fronts and wracked by deepening internal divisions.
Just this week, for example, the row over the ongoing inquiry into the Scottish Government’s botched investigation into allegations against Alex Salmond took another poisonous turn when the Holyrood committee conducting it claimed that its work was being deliberately obstructed by the administration. Oliver Mundell, a Tory MSP, was ejected from the Scottish Parliament after accusing the First Minister of ‘lying’ when she offered to give any investigation her full support.
Nor is this discontent confined to opposition MSPs. The SNP were criticised for stacking the committee chairs with Nationalists, but even Linda Fabiani, the convenor, has gone on record as saying that she and her colleagues have been “completely frustrated”. Today’s Guardian reports that MSPs have now appealed to the courts to try and break the deadlock.
The extremely tight senior leadership of the SNP, which was an asset to its command-and-control culture when things were good, now makes it difficult to deflect problems away from the top. Peter Murrell, Sturgeon’s husband and Chief Executive of the SNP, is now in the spotlight. Not only is he central to allegations that the SNP are obstructing the Holyrood probe, but he now faces claims that he tried to pressure the police to investigate Salmond.
Murrell himself is now firefighting on multiple fronts: not only is he in the sights of the other parties, but the anti-Sturgeon faction inside the Party is calling for his head. A move by grassroots activists to try to unseat him may be on the cards. The Nationalists’ internal divisions – which Stephen Daisley plots onto the two axes of Salmondite/Sturgeonista (on the practicalities of independence) and Woke/Sensible (on things like gender recognition) are heating up.
This surfeit of distractions perhaps helps to explain why it looks as if the SNP might be starting to lose their grip on the domestic agenda. An FoI request by the Tories has found Nationalist supporters very critical of the Party’s controversial Hate Crime Bill. One of Scotland’s richest businessmen (and second referendum supporter) has called on the Scottish Government to park the question of independence until the pandemic has passed, which will exacerbate tensions with the Salmondite ‘fundamentalist’ wing.
More seriously, a long-awaited report into the release of patients infected with Covid-19 into Scottish care homes – another issue in which the question of what Sturgeon knew and when is at the fore – has been delayed, again.
The abominable treatment of students at Scottish universities, which have seen thousands of young people essentially confined to quarters, is another story which might finally cut through the Nationalists’ seemingly bullet-proof reputation. The First Minister has defended the restrictions as “common sense”, but she has now been moved to apologise. Sturgeon is also coming under strong pressure to publish the scientific advice behind her lockdown decisions by local government leaders in Aberdeen, which was forced back into lockdown earlier, who are incensed at her apparent refusal to order the same for Glasgow (where her constituency is) despite apparently higher levels of Covid-19 transmission.
All of which makes it easy to see why the Government might be tempted by its stated strategy of simply refusing another referendum (even if they need to put more work into justifying it). With such strains on the SNP, and no obvious successor to Sturgeon of remotely the same calibre (and new electoral difficulties for the obvious contender), it might be that the question can be put off until time finally catches up with the Nationalists.
But the Tories’ own recent history should temper any optimism about that. One need only recall the way that Theresa May’s Government managed to lurch on, sometimes shedding a Cabinet minister a month, without the Conservative falling below 40 per cent in the polls to see how coalitions built around existential questions can prop up political vehicles which might fall to pieces in other circumstances.


conservativehome--2020-10-01--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the East West Railway Company – a

Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the East West Railway Company – and more

Eight years ago , the TaxPayers ’ Alliance reported that “ in the last year , five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories ” .
It currently reports that almost half of avowedly political appointees last year owed their allegiance to Labour Party , compared to less than a third for the Conservatives .
Despite the selection of some Party members or supporters to fill important posts , over time , the Conservatives have punched beneath their weight when it comes to public appointments .
One of the reasons seems to be that Tories simply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number as Labour supporters .
To help remedy this , each week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies , so that qualified Conservatives can be aware of the opportunities presented .
“ The Independent Office for Police Conduct ( IOPC ) investigates the most serious and sensitive incidents and allegations involving the police in England and Wales .
It also oversees the police complaints system , and sets the standards by which the police handle complaints .
The IOPC carries out hundreds of investigations into incidents and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These include investigations into : deaths or serious injuries during or following police custody ; police shootings ; allegations of use of excessive force .
The IOPC is seeking up to six non-executive board members , including one Senior Independent Director .
The responsibilities of the non-executive members will include ensuring robust governance and financial management of the organisation ; setting and promoting the strategic aims and values of the IOPC ; providing support , advice and constructive challenge to the Director General in the carrying out of his/her functions ; and monitoring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the efficient and effective running of the IOPC.
” “ ACOBA provides independent advice on applications submitted under the Business Appointment Rules from former ministers , senior civil servants and other Crown servants .
In doing so it advises on the conditions that should apply to new appointments or employment after individuals have left Crown service .
It plays a vital role in ensuring that the Business Appointment Rules are implemented fairly , sensibly and transparently… Members will : play a full and active part in ACOBA ’ s work , engaging in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by email ) ; taking account of the relevant factors and information ; and challenge where necessary the information or recommendations presented ; support the wider aims of the Chair in relation to policy and procedure ; attend and contribute to between 3 and 5 ACOBA meetings per year ( in London or virtually ) , and occasional attendance at casework related meetings arranged where necessary ; ensure the confidentiality of individual applications and associated discussions , whilst operating within the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and Data Protection Act @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Annual Report.
” “ As we approach life outside of the EU , Seafish will play a pivotal role in navigating the UK seafood industry through this once-in-a-life-time opportunity .
As a non-departmental public body Seafish supports our ambitious vision for sustainably managed seas while securing a profitable future for all sectors of the seafood industry .
The effective care and management of waters in our exclusive economic zone ( EEZ ) , and the precious resources within it , is critical to ensuring our fishing and seafood industry grows sustainably to meet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ period of great change , the successful candidate will provide vision and strong strategic leadership to Seafish , working collaboratively with a wide range of stakeholders and partners.
” “ Looking for a new and exhilarating challenge leading a visionary UK based infrastructure delivery organisation ?
Excited by the thought of positively challenging industry norms and inspiring a team to surpass customer expectations ?
Then look no further than the opportunity to chair the Board of the East West Railway Company – a company at the forefront of the changing landscape of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rail link with services connecting Oxford , Milton Keynes , Bedford and Cambridge and places in between .
The East West Railway Company ( EWR Co ) was set up as a company in 2017 , and constituted as an arms-length body of the Department for Transport in September 2018 .
It was created to drive forward the delivery of the East West Rail project – a new direct line , providing much-needed East West connectivity to unlock the economic potential of the Oxford Cambridge Arc – supporting new jobs and communities , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ congestion and travel costs for residents and commuters.
” “ 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 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 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .
”

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.
– – – – – – – – – –
Independent Committee on Police Conduct – Members
“The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) investigates the most serious and sensitive incidents and allegations involving the police in England and Wales. It also oversees the police complaints system, and sets the standards by which the police handle complaints. The IOPC carries out hundreds of investigations into incidents and allegations involving the police each year. These include investigations into: deaths or serious injuries during or following police custody; police shootings; allegations of use of excessive force. The IOPC is seeking up to six non-executive board members, including one Senior Independent Director. The responsibilities of the non-executive members will include ensuring robust governance and financial management of the organisation; setting and promoting the strategic aims and values of the IOPC; providing support, advice and constructive challenge to the Director General in the carrying out of his/her functions; and monitoring and reviewing organisational performance and contributing to the efficient and effective running of the IOPC.”
Time: 18-24 days per annum.
Remuneration: £350 per diem.
Closes: 05 October
– – – – – – – – – –
Advisory Committee on Business Appointments – Members
“ACOBA provides independent advice on applications submitted under the Business Appointment Rules from former ministers, senior civil servants and other Crown servants. In doing so it advises on the conditions that should apply to new appointments or employment after individuals have left Crown service. It plays a vital role in ensuring that the Business Appointment Rules are implemented fairly, sensibly and transparently… Members will: play a full and active part in ACOBA’s work, engaging in the collective consideration of applications (usually by email); taking account of the relevant factors and information; and challenge where necessary the information or recommendations presented; support the wider aims of the Chair in relation to policy and procedure; attend and contribute to between 3 and 5 ACOBA meetings per year (in London or virtually), and occasional attendance at casework related meetings arranged where necessary; ensure the confidentiality of individual applications and associated discussions, whilst operating within the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and Data Protection Act 2018; [and] agree an Annual Report.”
Time: 1-2 days per month.
Remuneration: £3,000 per annum, plus expenses.
Closes: 09 October
– – – – – – – – – –
Sea Fish Industry Authority – Chair
“As we approach life outside of the EU, Seafish will play a pivotal role in navigating the UK seafood industry through this once-in-a-life-time opportunity. As a non-departmental public body Seafish supports our ambitious vision for sustainably managed seas while securing a profitable future for all sectors of the seafood industry. The effective care and management of waters in our exclusive economic zone (EEZ), and the precious resources within it, is critical to ensuring our fishing and seafood industry grows sustainably to meet the demands of consumers. Given this period of great change, the successful candidate will provide vision and strong strategic leadership to Seafish, working collaboratively with a wide range of stakeholders and partners.”
Time: 30 days per annum.
Remuneration: £18,000 per annum, plus expenses.
Closes: 16 October
– – – – – – – – – –
East West Railway Company – Chair
“Looking for a new and exhilarating challenge leading a visionary UK based infrastructure delivery organisation? Excited by the thought of positively challenging industry norms and inspiring a team to surpass customer expectations? Then look no further than the opportunity to chair the Board of the East West Railway Company – a company at the forefront of the changing landscape of the rail industry, delivering a multi-billion pound rail link with services connecting Oxford, Milton Keynes, Bedford and Cambridge and places in between. The East West Railway Company (EWR Co) was set up as a company in 2017, and constituted as an arms-length body of the Department for Transport in September 2018. It was created to drive forward the delivery of the East West Rail project – a new direct line, providing much-needed East West connectivity to unlock the economic potential of the Oxford Cambridge Arc – supporting new jobs and communities, as well as reducing journey times, congestion and travel costs for residents and commuters.”
Time: 2 days per week.
Remuneration: £75,000 per annum.
Closes: 19 October
– – – – – – – – – –
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


conservativehome--2020-10-01--Our monthly survey finds that support for a Sweden-style Covid-19 policy is up from about a third of

Our monthly survey finds that support for a Sweden-style Covid-19 policy is up from about a third of Party activists to almost half

We last asked our members ’ panel about Coronavirus strategy in May , putting to them the three main policy options open to the Government .
These are : track-and-trace ( Ministers ’ preferred one ) ; state-regulated lockdowns ( currently widespread because track-and-trace isn ’ t doing the necessary job , at least yet ) , and voluntary social distancing .
Back then , just over half of the respondents backed track-and-trace ( 53 per cent ) , roughly a third voluntary social distancing ( 31 per cent ) and just over one in ten state-regulated lockdowns ( 13 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been followed in Europe by Germany , the second is being pursued by Sweden , and the third – if we stick to Europe for examples – is that of , say , France and almost everywhere else .
Our survey today finds a significant shift .
The proportion backing a track-and-trace-led policy has fallen from over half to about two in five ( 38 per cent ) .
That opting for lockdowns has comes down slightly to under one in ten ( from 13 per cent to eleven per cent ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Meanwhile , the cohort supporting a strategy that stresses voluntary social distancing now hovers just below half ( 49 per cent ) – having risen , as we say , from 31 per cent .
The two main factors accounting for the change will be frustration with Government policy and delivery , and the support for a Swedish-type option in the papers that Party members read , notably the Daily Telegraph .
This shift is mirrored in the replies to the survey ’ s question about the speed at which lockdowns and restrictions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10 per cent wanted it lifted more slowly and 38 per cent faster , while 50 per cent said that the Government was proceeding in the right speed and way .
Now , those proportions are 14 per cent , 52 per cent and 29 per cent .
So half of our respondents now believe the Government should be lifting lockdowns faster , not that it ’ s operating in the right way and at the right speed .
So Boris Johnson will enter the Conservative Party Conference with support among Party members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , if our survey is anything to go by .
This decline in confidence echoes that seen in polls of the public as a whole , though support for the Government is obviously higher , and reflects the fall in the Prime Minister ’ s own rating that our recent surveys have found .

We last asked our members’ panel about Coronavirus strategy in May, putting to them the three main policy options open to the Government.
These are: track-and-trace (Ministers’ preferred one); state-regulated lockdowns (currently widespread because track-and-trace isn’t doing the necessary job, at least yet), and voluntary social distancing.
Back then, just over half of the respondents backed track-and-trace (53 per cent), roughly a third voluntary social distancing (31 per cent) and just over one in ten state-regulated lockdowns (13 per cent).
The first approach has been followed in Europe by Germany, the second is being pursued by Sweden, and the third – if we stick to Europe for examples – is that of, say, France and almost everywhere else.
(These are simplifications – so for example, Germany had a national shutdown earlier this year – but they do sum up the broad choices available to Ministers.)
Our survey today finds a significant shift. The proportion backing a track-and-trace-led policy has fallen from over half to about two in five (38 per cent).
That opting for lockdowns has comes down slightly to under one in ten (from 13 per cent to eleven per cent). That looks like a floor.
Meanwhile, the cohort supporting a strategy that stresses voluntary social distancing now hovers just below half (49 per cent) – having risen, as we say, from 31 per cent.
The two main factors accounting for the change will be frustration with Government policy and delivery, and the support for a Swedish-type option in the papers that Party members read, notably the Daily Telegraph.
This shift is mirrored in the replies to the survey’s question about the speed at which lockdowns and restrictions should be lifted.
In June, 10 per cent wanted it lifted more slowly and 38 per cent faster, while 50 per cent said that the Government was proceeding in the right speed and way.
Now, those proportions are 14 per cent, 52 per cent and 29 per cent. So half of our respondents now believe the Government should be lifting lockdowns faster, not that it’s operating in the right way and at the right speed.
So Boris Johnson will enter the Conservative Party Conference with support among Party members for his Covid-19 policy having deteriorated sharply, if our survey is anything to go by.
This decline in confidence echoes that seen in polls of the public as a whole, though support for the Government is obviously higher, and reflects the fall in the Prime Minister’s own rating that our recent surveys have found.


conservativehome--2020-10-01--Jacob Rees-Mogg joins our conference fringe line-up – register now for the Moggcast LIVE

I ’ m very pleased to announce a very special new addition to our Party Conference online fringe programme : @ @ @ @ @ us for a live episode of the Moggcast .
Paul Goodman , ConservativeHome ’ s @ @ @ @ @ Jacob in front of a live audience from 7pm-8pm on Tuesday 6th October , the @ @ @ @ @ Party Conference .
This event will take place over Zoom , like our monthly ConservativeHome @ @ @ @ @ ll be exploring the Leader of the House ’ s view on the coronavirus pandemic @ @ @ @ @ future of the Government – plus , of course , asking him questions put forward @ @ @ @ @ to the generosity of our sponsor , Thorncliffe , this event is free to view @ @ @ @ @ .
Just click here to register with Zoom for your free ticket .
This takes @ @ @ @ @ 19 events , featuring over 70 speakers – do take a look at the full @ @ @ @ @ ve enclosed a few other highlights below :

I’m very pleased to announce a very special new addition to our Party Conference online fringe programme: Jacob Rees-Mogg will be joining us for a live episode of the Moggcast.
Paul Goodman, ConservativeHome’s Editor, will be interviewing Jacob in front of a live audience from 7pm-8pm on Tuesday 6th October, the final day of the Conservative Party Conference. This event will take place over Zoom, like our monthly ConservativeHome Live series.
We’ll be exploring the Leader of the House’s view on the coronavirus pandemic, Brexit, and the future of the Government – plus, of course, asking him questions put forward by the audience.
Thanks to the generosity of our sponsor, Thorncliffe, this event is free to view, and open to all. Just click here to register with Zoom for your free ticket.
This takes our full fringe programme to 19 events, featuring over 70 speakers – do take a look at the full listings here.
I’ve enclosed a few other highlights below:


conservativehome--2020-10-01--The seven Conservative MPs who voted against renewing the Coronavirus Act

These MPs can ’ t have been satisfied with the compromise reached between the Government and Graham Brady over future @ @ @ @ @ Act ’ s provisions .
They include some of the most committed Brexiteers in the @ @ @ @ @ operate at a certain distance from the European Research Group : Bone and Hollobone especially @ @ @ @ @ earlier this week that “ I certainly hold up the Swedish model as an alternative @ @ @ @ @ is not alone in thinking so among this band of backbenchers .

They were –
Peter Bone.
Philip Davies.
Philip Hollobone.
Esther McVey.
Desmond Swayne.
Charles Walker.
William Wragg.
These MPs can’t have been satisfied with the compromise reached between the Government and Graham Brady over future votes on any changes to Act’s provisions.
They include some of the most committed Brexiteers in the Parliamentary, some of whom operate at a certain distance from the European Research Group: Bone and Hollobone especially.
Swayne told the Commons earlier this week that “I certainly hold up the Swedish model as an alternative”, and clearly he is not alone in thinking so among this band of backbenchers.


conservativehome--2020-10-01--Stephen Booth: To reach a best in class trade deal with New Zealand and Australia, we need to libera

Stephen Booth: To reach a best in class trade deal with New Zealand and Australia, we need to liberalise on agriculture

Stephen Booth is Head of the Britain in the World Project at Policy Exchange .
While the Brexit negotiations with the European Union have grabbed the headlines , the Department for International Trade has been quietly working away at the UK ’ s trading relationships with non-EU countries .
Much of the work to date has been relatively uncontentious and therefore largely passes under the political radar .
In part , this is because the trade deals concluded to date have focused on securing and maintaining existing market access provided for by EU trade agreements , the UK ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end of the Brexit transition period on January 1 .
For example , the recent successful conclusion of UK trade negotiations with Japan built upon an existing EU-Japan agreement .
While the UK and Japan were able to go further in some important areas , such as digital services and visas for business travel , the EU-Japan deal provided the template for much of the agreement on goods and tariffs .
However , the UK is also prioritising its negotiations with the United States , Australia and New Zealand .
A trade agreement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic prize , but the negotiations with Australia and New Zealand are nonetheless strategically important .
They are not only essential stepping stones towards the UK ’ s medium-term objective of joining the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership ( CPTPP ) – a trade bloc of 11 countries around the Pacific rim and the third largest in the world .
They are also like-minded countries with which the UK can hope to influence others .
The negotiations with Australia and New Zealand should be simpler than those with the US but all three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UK to break new ground .
As a consequence , trade policy is likely to move up the political agenda as the Government seeks to manage the competing interests an independent UK trade policy inevitably needs to reconcile .
For example , last week , the House of Lords amended the Agriculture Bill to stipulate that any agricultural imports must “ match or exceed ” the UK ’ s own welfare and production standards .
The amendment is supported by industry-led and celebrity-backed campaigns , urging MPs to “ save our standards ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ return to the Commons later this month .
Of course , maintaining and promoting high standards is a legitimate aim and an important objective for UK policy .
However , as we leave the EU ’ s regulatory system , we need to balance these objectives against the way the world outside the EU operates in practice .
Not only might trade partners accuse the UK of using standards as a cloak for protectionism .
As the National Food Strategy ’ s recent report argued , we can not realistically expect to unilaterally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same time as we are seeking trade agreements with them .
The crux of the trade negotiations with both Australia and New Zealand is likely to be the extent to which the UK is prepared to liberalise on agriculture in return for a high-quality agreement on trade in services , data and investment .
The UK should use these negotiations to push for the best in class FTA on these issues , going further than the commitments contained in the CPTPP because , ultimately , if the UK joins the CPTPP , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Australia and New Zealand are both supportive of the UK ’ s bid to join and , like the UK , view the bilateral negotiations as important staging posts .
60 per cent of UK exports to Australia are already in services sectors and this could be boosted further by reducing barriers to professional and business services , such as the mutual recognition of qualifications , opening up procurement markets and liberalising visa regimes for business people .
Both Australia and New Zealand have requirements on inward investment that are higher than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the OECD average .
The UK will be looking to reduce some of these requirements in order to ease firms ’ ability to invest in those economies as a base for exports into the Asia-Pacific region .
In return , both countries expect the UK to offer greater market access for their agriculture exports .
Both countries traditionally seek complete tariff elimination in their FTAs .
This is unrealistic , given that the UK is largely maintaining the EU ’ s tariffs on agriculture products .
Nevertheless , the UK will have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Japanese experience of negotiating with Australia and on its accession to the CPTPP could serve as a model .
Japan , which had a highly protected agricultural sector , has undergone tariff liberalisation as part of those agreements , but in some of the most sensitive sectors tariffs have been maintained and reductions have been phased in over 10 , 15 and even 20 years .
The issue of standards ought to be less contentious with these markets .
The RSPCA notes that New Zealand ’ s farm standards “ have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nevertheless , it is worth noting that Australia and New Zealand take a different approach to the EU when it comes to standards .
Both joined the US in its complaint against the EU ’ s ban on hormone-treated beef .
George Brandis , Australia ’ s High Commissioner to the UK , said recently that “ the intellectual argument for free trade in some quarters of the British political establishment is an argument that still needs to be fought and won.
” It is true that the UK has much to learn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ both countries on trade policy .
Both have undertaken radical programmes of unilateral trade liberalisation ( Australia from the 1970s and New Zealand from the 1980s ) .
Both countries have also liberalised further via networks of trade agreements .
Australia ’ s FTAs with Chile , China , Malaysia , Singapore , Thailand and the US provide for duty-free and quota-free access for all their goods into the Australian market .
As a result , both countries have successfully combined the diversification of their exports while delivering benefits to consumers by lowering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , both countries have used the moral and political capital earned from unilateral reforms to place themselves at the forefront of global initiatives to promote free trade .
New Zealand is a founding member of the Digital Economy Partnership Agreement ( DEPA ) , together with like-minded Chile and Singapore , which is at the cutting-edge of innovation in digital trade .
It was with these countries that New Zealand initiated the process that ultimately led to the CPTPP .
Meanwhile , Australia is the joint leader of the 23-party negotiations on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trade Organisation .
If the UK wishes to be at the forefront of the argument for global free trade , this is the sort of company it should be keeping .

Stephen Booth is Head of the Britain in the World Project at Policy Exchange.
While the Brexit negotiations with the European Union have grabbed the headlines, the Department for International Trade has been quietly working away at the UK’s trading relationships with non-EU countries. Much of the work to date has been relatively uncontentious and therefore largely passes under the political radar.
In part, this is because the trade deals concluded to date have focused on securing and maintaining existing market access provided for by EU trade agreements, the UK’s access to which falls away at the end of the Brexit transition period on January 1. For example, the recent successful conclusion of UK trade negotiations with Japan built upon an existing EU-Japan agreement. While the UK and Japan were able to go further in some important areas, such as digital services and visas for business travel, the EU-Japan deal provided the template for much of the agreement on goods and tariffs.
However, the UK is also prioritising its negotiations with the United States, Australia and New Zealand. A trade agreement with the US presents the bigger immediate economic prize, but the negotiations with Australia and New Zealand are nonetheless strategically important. They are not only essential stepping stones towards the UK’s medium-term objective of joining the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) – a trade bloc of 11 countries around the Pacific rim and the third largest in the world. They are also like-minded countries with which the UK can hope to influence others.
The negotiations with Australia and New Zealand should be simpler than those with the US but all three negotiations are truly novel, requiring the UK to break new ground. As a consequence, trade policy is likely to move up the political agenda as the Government seeks to manage the competing interests an independent UK trade policy inevitably needs to reconcile.
For example, last week, the House of Lords amended the Agriculture Bill to stipulate that any agricultural imports must “match or exceed” the UK’s own welfare and production standards. The amendment is supported by industry-led and celebrity-backed campaigns, urging MPs to “save our standards”, and the Bill is expected to return to the Commons later this month.
Of course, maintaining and promoting high standards is a legitimate aim and an important objective for UK policy. However, as we leave the EU’s regulatory system, we need to balance these objectives against the way the world outside the EU operates in practice. Not only might trade partners accuse the UK of using standards as a cloak for protectionism. As the National Food Strategy’s recent report argued, we cannot realistically expect to unilaterally force our standards on others at the same time as we are seeking trade agreements with them.
The crux of the trade negotiations with both Australia and New Zealand is likely to be the extent to which the UK is prepared to liberalise on agriculture in return for a high-quality agreement on trade in services, data and investment. The UK should use these negotiations to push for the best in class FTA on these issues, going further than the commitments contained in the CPTPP because, ultimately, if the UK joins the CPTPP, it will have access to these benefits anyway. Australia and New Zealand are both supportive of the UK’s bid to join and, like the UK, view the bilateral negotiations as important staging posts.
60 per cent of UK exports to Australia are already in services sectors and this could be boosted further by reducing barriers to professional and business services, such as the mutual recognition of qualifications, opening up procurement markets and liberalising visa regimes for business people. Both Australia and New Zealand have requirements on inward investment that are higher than the UK’s and higher than the OECD average. The UK will be looking to reduce some of these requirements in order to ease firms’ ability to invest in those economies as a base for exports into the Asia-Pacific region.
In return, both countries expect the UK to offer greater market access for their agriculture exports. Both countries traditionally seek complete tariff elimination in their FTAs. This is unrealistic, given that the UK is largely maintaining the EU’s tariffs on agriculture products. Nevertheless, the UK will have to be prepared to offer tariff reductions.
The Japanese experience of negotiating with Australia and on its accession to the CPTPP could serve as a model. Japan, which had a highly protected agricultural sector, has undergone tariff liberalisation as part of those agreements, but in some of the most sensitive sectors tariffs have been maintained and reductions have been phased in over 10, 15 and even 20 years.
The issue of standards ought to be less contentious with these markets. The RSPCA notes that New Zealand’s farm standards “have been judged higher than the UK”. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that Australia and New Zealand take a different approach to the EU when it comes to standards. Both joined the US in its complaint against the EU’s ban on hormone-treated beef.
George Brandis, Australia’s High Commissioner to the UK, said recently that “the intellectual argument for free trade in some quarters of the British political establishment is an argument that still needs to be fought and won.” It is true that the UK has much to learn and much to gain from cooperating with both countries on trade policy.
Both have undertaken radical programmes of unilateral trade liberalisation (Australia from the 1970s and New Zealand from the 1980s). Both countries have also liberalised further via networks of trade agreements. Australia’s FTAs with Chile, China, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and the US provide for duty-free and quota-free access for all their goods into the Australian market.
As a result, both countries have successfully combined the diversification of their exports while delivering benefits to consumers by lowering tariffs on imports. Just as importantly, both countries have used the moral and political capital earned from unilateral reforms to place themselves at the forefront of global initiatives to promote free trade.
New Zealand is a founding member of the Digital Economy Partnership Agreement (DEPA), together with like-minded Chile and Singapore, which is at the cutting-edge of innovation in digital trade. It was with these countries that New Zealand initiated the process that ultimately led to the CPTPP. Meanwhile, Australia is the joint leader of the 23-party negotiations on the Trade in Services Agreement at the World Trade Organisation.
If the UK wishes to be at the forefront of the argument for global free trade, this is the sort of company it should be keeping.


conservativehome--2020-10-01--Judy Terry: The danger to the Government in next year’s local elections from angry voters

Judy Terry is a marketing professional and a former local councillor in Suffolk .
We are just eight months away from the next local elections , scheduled for 6th May , 2021 , including County and district councils , 13 directly elected mayors , and 40 Police and Crime Commissioners ( PCC ) – deferred from 2020 .
For obvious reasons , as campaigning starts , activists can not knock on doors , but conversations with voters in front gardens and on the street , with friends in socially distanced pubs , indicate some sympathy for the Government having to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , frustration is growing over the Prime Minister ’ s absence , a perceived lack of leadership , and confused messaging .
As Brexit deadlines approach , interest in the outcome is also growing , with most feeling the challenges are self-inflicted .
The Government should not have signed the agreement taking us out of the EU in January if it had reservations about its future implementation .
So , which national , not local , issues will determine the outcome next year ?
There are two groups of first time voters , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the balance .
Firstly , EU citizens living in England who are permitted to vote in local elections from 2021 .
They are important contributors to our economy , and services , often doing unpopular jobs in agriculture , the NHS , care , factories and hospitality .
Inevitably ‘ testy ’ , successful Brexit negotiations are critical to our economic future at this most difficult of times .
The Conservatives will pay a heavy price at the ballot box for failing to salvage a healthy working relationship with the EU : new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ additional paperwork delaying imports and exports , or threatening trade agreements with other countries , including the US , would penalise our economic recovery .
Lorry parks are already in place around Kent , where illegal immigration across the Channel is having a major impact on coastal towns ; detention camps are now being established in former Army bases .
Secondly , thousands of teenagers , whose lives and career ambitions were turned upside down following the exams debacle , will also be eligible to vote for the first time.Their equally frustrated parents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually vote .
If schools close again , there will inevitably be calls for next year ’ s exams to be deferred , causing yet more chaos , adding to parental and students ’ anger .
However , it is the reaction to Covid which is likely to have the most significant impact on voting intentions .
Westminster seems unaware that many lifelong Conservatives – let alone ‘ borrowed ’ voters – are dismayed by Government indecision .
It doesn ’ t help that some Ministers over-promise and under-deliver , with Test & @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the number of cases escalate , and now the 10pm curfew on pubs and restaurants , adding yet more pressure to the economy , increasing unemployment .
Protecting the elderly and vulnerable , and those who look after them in care homes , is another key issue for families – and local authorities .
The Chancellor ’ s latest injection of over half a billion funding to support the sector is welcome , especially when reports indicate that hospitals may eject elderly patients into care homes – again – if more beds are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ months .
Wouldn ’ t a better solution be to set up convalescent wards for them ?
Or utilise the temporary Nightingale hospitals ?
With billions of pounds poured into the Covid crisis , and public borrowing at unprecedented levels , ensuring that taxpayers ’ billions provide value for money is crucial , and those organisations which have returned Government funding should be commended , but the National Audit Office is investigating fraud in relation to the furlough scheme .
It is reportedly also addressing how multi-million pound Covid-related contracts are awarded , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ competitive tender process designed to ensure standards as well as capability .
Another voter concern is Westminster ’ s current cronyism in public appointments , when some appointees don ’ t necessarily have the knowledge or experience to take on important high profile roles paying huge salaries .
There is a need to ensure a more open – independently monitored – process , attracting a broader network of appropriately qualified individuals who can be held to account and be seen to deliver on their brief .
Despite Covid pressures , it is also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the two major public inquiries , examining the Manchester Arena bombings and Grenfell fire , currently under way ; initial revelations have already identified a number of significant questions for the public sector , which will have to be addressed sooner rather than later .
In particular , Grenfell was a disaster in a Conservative-run council area but there are repercussions across the country for 186,000 flats in high rise blocks , whose owners face massive bills for replacing cladding , and other protective measures .
They purchased their flats in good faith @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the lack of Building Control and developers ’ shoddy construction , now destroying their finances , leaving them unable to sell and move on with their lives .
Re-cladding is estimated to cost around £6 billion ; so far the Government has committed just £1 billion , excluding Scotland and Wales .
In the meantime , Covid continues to bring further challenges .
To the fury and confusion of many , both in Parliament and beyond the M25 , the Government appears to think it has the right to dictate , hectoring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ showing respect .
It doesn ’ t help to cause panic amongst people , who should be allowed to use their common sense , based on facts , not whims .
The current lack of strategy – and an endgame – undermines trust , and £10,000 fines ( which are unlikely to be paid ) are not the solution if people fail to self-isolate ; no action was taken when a Government advisor allegedly travelled hundreds of miles whilst infected , damaging public confidence .
In the confusion , it is easy to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , not a dictatorship .
Thankfully , the 1922 Committee is on the case , rightly demanding Parliamentary oversight of emergency legislation .
This is crucial as , according to the latest scientific advice , we can expect at least a further six months in some form of ‘ quarantine ’ .
Government must improve its communication , avoiding bluster with ‘ world beating ’ , ‘ moonshot ’ and ‘ oven ready ’ phrases , which may win a media headline but only patronise the public .
It should also work to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compliance across all UK nations .
It is time to be constructive about the future – or pay the price .
The electorate can be unforgiving , so next year ’ s local elections will set the tone for the rest of this Government ’ s term in office .

Judy Terry is a marketing professional and a former local councillor in Suffolk.
We are just eight months away from the next local elections, scheduled for 6th May, 2021, including County and district councils, 13 directly elected mayors, and 40 Police and Crime Commissioners (PCC) – deferred from 2020.
For obvious reasons, as campaigning starts, activists cannot knock on doors, but conversations with voters in front gardens and on the street, with friends in socially distanced pubs, indicate some sympathy for the Government having to deal with the Covid crisis. However, frustration is growing over the Prime Minister’s absence, a perceived lack of leadership, and confused messaging.
As Brexit deadlines approach, interest in the outcome is also growing, with most feeling the challenges are self-inflicted. The Government should not have signed the agreement taking us out of the EU in January if it had reservations about its future implementation.
So, which national, not local, issues will determine the outcome next year? There are two groups of first time voters, who may set the tone and tip the balance.
Firstly, EU citizens living in England who are permitted to vote in local elections from 2021. They are important contributors to our economy, and services, often doing unpopular jobs in agriculture, the NHS, care, factories and hospitality.
Inevitably ‘testy’, successful Brexit negotiations are critical to our economic future at this most difficult of times. The Conservatives will pay a heavy price at the ballot box for failing to salvage a healthy working relationship with the EU: new tariffs, customs checks and reams of additional paperwork delaying imports and exports, or threatening trade agreements with other countries, including the US, would penalise our economic recovery. Lorry parks are already in place around Kent, where illegal immigration across the Channel is having a major impact on coastal towns; detention camps are now being established in former Army bases.
Secondly, thousands of teenagers, whose lives and career ambitions were turned upside down following the exams debacle, will also be eligible to vote for the first time.Their equally frustrated parents will ensure they are registered – and actually vote. If schools close again, there will inevitably be calls for next year’s exams to be deferred, causing yet more chaos, adding to parental and students’ anger.
However, it is the reaction to Covid which is likely to have the most significant impact on voting intentions. Westminster seems unaware that many lifelong Conservatives – let alone ‘borrowed’ voters – are dismayed by Government indecision. It doesn’t help that some Ministers over-promise and under-deliver, with Test & Trace failing to meet its targets whilst the number of cases escalate, and now the 10pm curfew on pubs and restaurants, adding yet more pressure to the economy, increasing unemployment.
Protecting the elderly and vulnerable, and those who look after them in care homes, is another key issue for families – and local authorities. The Chancellor’s latest injection of over half a billion funding to support the sector is welcome, especially when reports indicate that hospitals may eject elderly patients into care homes – again – if more beds are needed for Covid patients in the coming months. Wouldn’t a better solution be to set up convalescent wards for them? Or utilise the temporary Nightingale hospitals?
With billions of pounds poured into the Covid crisis, and public borrowing at unprecedented levels, ensuring that taxpayers’ billions provide value for money is crucial, and those organisations which have returned Government funding should be commended, but the National Audit Office is investigating fraud in relation to the furlough scheme. It is reportedly also addressing how multi-million pound Covid-related contracts are awarded, not always in compliance with the usual competitive tender process designed to ensure standards as well as capability.
Another voter concern is Westminster’s current cronyism in public appointments, when some appointees don’t necessarily have the knowledge or experience to take on important high profile roles paying huge salaries. There is a need to ensure a more open – independently monitored – process, attracting a broader network of appropriately qualified individuals who can be held to account and be seen to deliver on their brief.
Despite Covid pressures, it is also critical that Government doesn’t ignore the two major public inquiries, examining the Manchester Arena bombings and Grenfell fire, currently under way; initial revelations have already identified a number of significant questions for the public sector, which will have to be addressed sooner rather than later.
In particular, Grenfell was a disaster in a Conservative-run council area but there are repercussions across the country for 186,000 flats in high rise blocks, whose owners face massive bills for replacing cladding, and other protective measures. They purchased their flats in good faith, and should not be held responsible for the lack of Building Control and developers’ shoddy construction, now destroying their finances, leaving them unable to sell and move on with their lives. Re-cladding is estimated to cost around £6 billion; so far the Government has committed just £1 billion, excluding Scotland and Wales.
In the meantime, Covid continues to bring further challenges. To the fury and confusion of many, both in Parliament and beyond the M25, the Government appears to think it has the right to dictate, hectoring and threatening, instead of empathising and showing respect. It doesn’t help to cause panic amongst people, who should be allowed to use their common sense, based on facts, not whims. The current lack of strategy – and an endgame – undermines trust, and £10,000 fines (which are unlikely to be paid) are not the solution if people fail to self-isolate; no action was taken when a Government advisor allegedly travelled hundreds of miles whilst infected, damaging public confidence.
In the confusion, it is easy to forget that the UK is a democracy, not a dictatorship. Thankfully, the 1922 Committee is on the case, rightly demanding Parliamentary oversight of emergency legislation. This is crucial as, according to the latest scientific advice, we can expect at least a further six months in some form of ‘quarantine’.
Government must improve its communication, avoiding bluster with ‘world beating’, ‘moonshot’ and ‘oven ready’ phrases, which may win a media headline but only patronise the public. It should also work to co-ordinate policies, to simplify understanding and compliance across all UK nations.
It is time to be constructive about the future – or pay the price. The electorate can be unforgiving, so next year’s local elections will set the tone for the rest of this Government’s term in office.


conservativehome--2020-10-02--What will Trump’s illness mean for the US election?

It wouldn ’ t be 2020 if the US election hadn ’ t managed to pack at least one more twist before American voters go to the polls next month .
Thus , Donald Trump has been diagnosed with Covid-19 .
With scarcely 30 days to go , this puts the Republicans in a tricky spot .
As this morning ’ s Daily Mail points out , they still have time to replace the President as their nominee should they choose to do so .
But with Trump unlikely to withdraw voluntarily , a wait to see whether or not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down quite quickly .
And as a 74-year-old , the President is amongst those at greater risk of serious complications .
In the event that a replacement is needed , the obvious candidate is Mike Pence , the Vice-President , who is also the man who could constitutionally assume Trump ’ s powers under the 25th Amendment in the event that the latter were truly incapacitated .
Pence is a much more conventional Republican politician than his boss , which may help to win over voters specifically put off by Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the new voters the GOP picked up in 2016 .
Even if Trump makes a full recovery , his convalescence will take him away from the front line of the campaign and likely require the re-arranging or even the cancellation of the remaining debates ( although judging by the first one , this may be no great loss to American democracy ) .
Some of the President ’ s opponents are worried that such personal hardship might win him a sympathy vote .
It might , but as Matt Singh has pointed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ move the dial for Boris Johnson and the Prime Minister is , even his critics must concede , a more naturally sympathetic figure than his opposite number in Washington .
Over the four years of his presidency , Trump has failed to turn his conventional-wisdom-defying victory into a stable new electoral coalition for the Republicans .
Even then , the benefits of incumbency and US economic performance would likely have carried him to a second term if it had not been for his gross mismanagement of the pandemic ( something worth bearing in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a ‘ fascist ’ : there is few crisie better suited to exploitation by actual Fascists than a pandemic ) .
So this latest news will likely serve to focus minds even more on the looming question of what a post-Trump Republican Party looks like .
At least as long as it doesn ’ t distract them from the one cause which still unites them : nominating a new Supreme Court justice .

It wouldn’t be 2020 if the US election hadn’t managed to pack at least one more twist before American voters go to the polls next month. Thus, Donald Trump has been diagnosed with Covid-19. With scarcely 30 days to go, this puts the Republicans in a tricky spot.
As this morning’s Daily Mail points out, they still have time to replace the President as their nominee should they choose to do so. But with Trump unlikely to withdraw voluntarily, a wait to see whether or not he recovers could start running that clock down quite quickly. And as a 74-year-old, the President is amongst those at greater risk of serious complications.
In the event that a replacement is needed, the obvious candidate is Mike Pence, the Vice-President, who is also the man who could constitutionally assume Trump’s powers under the 25th Amendment in the event that the latter were truly incapacitated. Pence is a much more conventional Republican politician than his boss, which may help to win over voters specifically put off by Trump’s persona but could also undermine is cut-through to the new voters the GOP picked up in 2016.
Even if Trump makes a full recovery, his convalescence will take him away from the front line of the campaign and likely require the re-arranging or even the cancellation of the remaining debates (although judging by the first one, this may be no great loss to American democracy).
Some of the President’s opponents are worried that such personal hardship might win him a sympathy vote. It might, but as Matt Singh has pointed out, it didn’t really move the dial for Boris Johnson and the Prime Minister is, even his critics must concede, a more naturally sympathetic figure than his opposite number in Washington.
Over the four years of his presidency, Trump has failed to turn his conventional-wisdom-defying victory into a stable new electoral coalition for the Republicans. Even then, the benefits of incumbency and US economic performance would likely have carried him to a second term if it had not been for his gross mismanagement of the pandemic (something worth bearing in mind before trying to claim he’s a ‘fascist’: there is few crisie better suited to exploitation by actual Fascists than a pandemic).
So this latest news will likely serve to focus minds even more on the looming question of what a post-Trump Republican Party looks like. At least as long as it doesn’t distract them from the one cause which still unites them: nominating a new Supreme Court justice.


conservativehome--2020-10-02--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chair of the East West Railway Company – a


conservativehome--2020-10-02--Our survey. Under one in three Party members think Johnson is dealing well with the Coronavirus as P

Our survey. Under one in three Party members think Johnson is dealing well with the Coronavirus as Prime Minister.

We ’ ve been asking this question for the last seven months in the monthly survey .
And this is the seventh time in a row that it has fallen .
For the record , the percentage believing that he has dealt with Covid-19 well have been as follows since March : 92 per cent , 84 per cent , 72 per cent , 64 per cent , 59 per cent , 48 per cent – and now 28 per cent .
So only between a third and a quarter of Party activist members of our panel believe that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and the best part of two in three think he ’ s handling it badly .
The percentage thinking that the Government has handled the virus well is slightly higher at 32 per cent , but the difference is so small as to be minimal .
First , this dire rating will be the product of a mix of factors : weariness with restrictions , exasperation with what seem to be bewildering and unpredictable rules , and a sense that the Government has no agreed plan .
Second , the Prime Minister @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to yo-yo .
We sometimes write when a politician scores well in the surveys that what goes up must sooner or later come down .
But the reverse often applies too .
Third , this is almost exactly the same panel that gave Johnson a 93 per cent approval rating in the wake of last year ’ s general election – and a 92 per cent positive rating on this question last March , as we have seen .
Talking of what ’ s going up – or rather staying up – 83 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s plans .
His scores for the last three months have been 82 per cent and 81 per cent , and have never dropped below 71 per cent .
These are bleak ratings for Johnson as the virtual Conservative Party Conference prepares to open tomorrow .

We’ve been asking this question for the last seven months in the monthly survey. And this is the seventh time in a row that it has fallen.
For the record, the percentage believing that he has dealt with Covid-19 well have been as follows since March: 92 per cent, 84 per cent, 72 per cent, 64 per cent, 59 per cent, 48 per cent – and now 28 per cent.
So only between a third and a quarter of Party activist members of our panel believe that the Prime Minister is handling the crisis well, and the best part of two in three think he’s handling it badly.
The percentage thinking that the Government has handled the virus well is slightly higher at 32 per cent, but the difference is so small as to be minimal.
Three quick points.
First, this dire rating will be the product of a mix of factors: weariness with restrictions, exasperation with what seem to be bewildering and unpredictable rules, and a sense that the Government has no agreed plan.
Second, the Prime Minister’s survey scores were always likely to yo-yo. We sometimes write when a politician scores well in the surveys that what goes up must sooner or later come down. But the reverse often applies too.
Third, this is almost exactly the same panel that gave Johnson a 93 per cent approval rating in the wake of last year’s general election – and a 92 per cent positive rating on this question last March, as we have seen.
Talking of what’s going up – or rather staying up – 83 per cent of respondents back Rishi Sunak’s plans. His scores for the last three months have been 82 per cent and 81 per cent, and have never dropped below 71 per cent.
These are bleak ratings for Johnson as the virtual Conservative Party Conference prepares to open tomorrow.


conservativehome--2020-10-02--Iain Dale: Covid-19. There is no good reason why the arts sector should get a billion pound bailout

Iain Dale: Covid-19. There is no good reason why the arts sector should get a billion pound bailout while coach operators do not

Iain Dale presents the evening show on LBC Radio and the For the Many podcast with Jacqui Smith .
Like most of you ( I hope ) I was absolutely appalled by the US Presidential debate on Wednesday .
I stayed up to watch it , last I have done for virtually every debate of this kind since I saw Ronald Reagan whip Jimmy Carter ’ s sorry ass in 1980 .
I suppose that I knew what was about to happen but , even so , to see it actually unfurl in front of my eyes was a real @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worst , flailing around in all directions and socking it to Joe Biden from start to finish .
He ignored all the rules of the debate and reduced the moderator , Chris Wallace from Fox News , to a jabbering wreck .
All Biden had to do in response was be vaguely coherent and look statesmanlike .
He failed on both counts .
He was like a rabbit in the headlights , barely able to get a sentence out without stuttering .
He repeatedly said ‘ here ’ s the deal ’ without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He lost his cool too often , and insulted Trump in the same childish way that Trump insulted him .
They both made our own political leaders look like giants in comparison .
Even Boris Johnson at his blustering worst couldn ’ t have been as bad as either of these two embarrassments to their nation .
And to think that there are two more of these debates to come .
Watching them will be like rubbernecking a train crash – one for the whole of America .
The understandable tension that exists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and reopening the economy has been stark this week .
Whatever decisions the Government takes are bound to be wrong for either side of the extremes of this debate .
Taking the ‘ right decision at the right time ’ is proving to be impossible .
Everyone hailed the Eat Out to Help Out Scheme : it certainly did wonders for the restaurant industry , and probably saved some businesses from going under .
But there ’ s also little doubt that it gave people a false sense that everything was about to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Coronavirus will be with us for many , many months to come .
Normality – whatever that is – will not return until a mass vaccinisation programme is launched , and that won ’ t be until well into 2021 .
Until then , everyone will have to adapt the best they can .
For some sectors , it will be easier than others .
The wedding industry , together with events and exhibitions , get a lot of publicity for the understandable woes they ’ re going through , but there are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t get any publicity at all , but are suffering just as badly .
I ’ ve taken up the cause of coach operators , who are going through some incredibly tough times , especially the smaller , often family-owned businesses .
These are perfectly good and viable companies yet , through no fault of their own they are now living on a financial precipice .
These are the companies I hope that the Government will find an innovative way of helping .
Banks can not be relied on to come to their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that taxpayer subsidies can not go on for ever , there is no reason that the arts and culture sectors should get a £1.5 billion bailout , when others are getting the sweet sum of diddly squat .
After a couple of weeks of stories speculating about the Prime Minister ’ s health , motivation , finances and mojo , it ’ s been good to see him re-enter the fray this week , and actually looking and acingt the part .
Bluster will always be part of Johnson ’ s armoury , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s appropriate to deploy it and when not .
In Prime Minister ’ s Questions this week , he decided to reduce it to Defcon 4 , which was the right thing to do .
His statement to the Commons and press conference were at least part way to rediscovering the Boris of old .
Now that the stories have started about the timing of his eventual departure from the job , it will be difficult to stop them .
The crucial factor here is whether he actually enjoys the job , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it would be .
In any normal era , winning an 80 seat majority would mean you had a cast-iron right to fight the next election .
( Of course , in 1987 Margaret Thatcher won a 100 seat majority and was out on her ear only three and a half years later . )
Contrary to what some people are writing , Conservative MPs may be a bit whingey and whiny at the moment , but they know that there would be no appetite to turf out a Prime Minister who won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ months ago .
No , if Johnson decides to depart early , it will his decision and his decision alone .
The historical precedents suggest that his is unlikely to occur .
With the exception of Harold Wilson , no Prime Minister in the last century has left office voluntarily .
And before you cite Macmillan and Eden at me , both were forced to resign because of ill health .
Blair was forced out by Brown , long before he really wanted to go , too .
Tomorrow I am speaking ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) at the Cheltenham Literature Festival .
The audience will be socially distanced and I ’ m not even sure I ’ m allowed to do a conventional book signing afterwards .
Strange times .

Iain Dale presents the evening show on LBC Radio and the For the Many podcast with Jacqui Smith.
Like most of you (I hope) I was absolutely appalled by the US Presidential debate on Wednesday. I stayed up to watch it, last I have done for virtually every debate of this kind since I saw Ronald Reagan whip Jimmy Carter’s sorry ass in 1980.
I suppose that I knew what was about to happen but, even so, to see it actually unfurl in front of my eyes was a real shock.
Trump was at his bombastic worst, flailing around in all directions and socking it to Joe Biden from start to finish. He ignored all the rules of the debate and reduced the moderator, Chris Wallace from Fox News, to a jabbering wreck.
All Biden had to do in response was be vaguely coherent and look statesmanlike. He failed on both counts. He was like a rabbit in the headlights, barely able to get a sentence out without stuttering. He repeatedly said ‘here’s the deal’ without actually explaining what the deal was. He lost his cool too often, and insulted Trump in the same childish way that Trump insulted him.
They both made our own political leaders look like giants in comparison. Even Boris Johnson at his blustering worst couldn’t have been as bad as either of these two embarrassments to their nation. And to think that there are two more of these debates to come. Watching them will be like rubbernecking a train crash – one for the whole of America.
– – – – – – – – – –
The understandable tension that exists between protecting the nation’s health and reopening the economy has been stark this week.
Whatever decisions the Government takes are bound to be wrong for either side of the extremes of this debate. Taking the ‘right decision at the right time’ is proving to be impossible.
Everyone hailed the Eat Out to Help Out Scheme: it certainly did wonders for the restaurant industry, and probably saved some businesses from going under.
But there’s also little doubt that it gave people a false sense that everything was about to return to normal. Not so. Coronavirus will be with us for many, many months to come. Normality – whatever that is – will not return until a mass vaccinisation programme is launched, and that won’t be until well into 2021.
Until then, everyone will have to adapt the best they can. For some sectors, it will be easier than others. The wedding industry, together with events and exhibitions, get a lot of publicity for the understandable woes they’re going through, but there are plenty of other sectors which don’t get any publicity at all, but are suffering just as badly.
I’ve taken up the cause of coach operators, who are going through some incredibly tough times, especially the smaller, often family-owned businesses. These are perfectly good and viable companies yet, through no fault of their own they are now living on a financial precipice.
These are the companies I hope that the Government will find an innovative way of helping. Banks cannot be relied on to come to their rescue and, while I fully accept that taxpayer subsidies cannot go on for ever, there is no reason that the arts and culture sectors should get a £1.5 billion bailout, when others are getting the sweet sum of diddly squat.
– – – – – – – – – –
After a couple of weeks of stories speculating about the Prime Minister’s health, motivation, finances and mojo, it’s been good to see him re-enter the fray this week, and actually looking and acingt the part.
Bluster will always be part of Johnson’s armoury, but he has to learn when it’s appropriate to deploy it and when not. In Prime Minister’s Questions this week, he decided to reduce it to Defcon 4, which was the right thing to do.
His statement to the Commons and press conference were at least part way to rediscovering the Boris of old. Now that the stories have started about the timing of his eventual departure from the job, it will be difficult to stop them.
The crucial factor here is whether he actually enjoys the job, and whether it is what he thought it would be. In any normal era, winning an 80 seat majority would mean you had a cast-iron right to fight the next election. (Of course, in 1987 Margaret Thatcher won a 100 seat majority and was out on her ear only three and a half years later.)
Contrary to what some people are writing, Conservative MPs may be a bit whingey and whiny at the moment, but they know that there would be no appetite to turf out a Prime Minister who won an election only nine and a half months ago.
No, if Johnson decides to depart early, it will his decision and his decision alone. The historical precedents suggest that his is unlikely to occur. With the exception of Harold Wilson, no Prime Minister in the last century has left office voluntarily. And before you cite Macmillan and Eden at me, both were forced to resign because of ill health. Blair was forced out by Brown, long before he really wanted to go, too.
– – – – – – – – – –
Tomorrow I am speaking (in person, rather than via Zoom) at the Cheltenham Literature Festival. The audience will be socially distanced and I’m not even sure I’m allowed to do a conventional book signing afterwards. Strange times.