conservativehome--2020-04-25--Unblocking the loans scheme traffic jam

Unblocking the loans scheme traffic jam

Traffic blocks a road .
Drivers shout , honk horns , gesticulate .
The road is the Government ’ s Coronavirus Business Interruption Loans Scheme .
The drivers are Ministers , the banks and businesses .
Ministers alternately blame the banks for not moving and claim that the road will soon be cleared – because the banks really are moving , just not quite fast enough yet .
The banks blame the Government , arguing that they are on the hook not only for 20 per cent of the loan , but 100 per cent of the default ; that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the British Business Bank require them to be cautious , and that piled on top of this requirement is a restrictive EU regulation ( though there is argument about whether the Government is misreading it ) .
And business people are less concerned with who ’ s to blame than with not going broke .
All they know is that the road is blocked and that they can ’ t get where they want to go .
Which is why a motley coalition of Andrew Bailey , the Governor of the Bank of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and others , including ConservativeHome , have called for the Government to up the proportion of the loan that it guarantees from 80 per cent to 100 per cent .
But what is counting most is pressure from Tory MPs .
One told this site yesterday that “ the Chancellor has had repeated bollockings ” from backbenchers .
Monday sees Commons consideration of the Finance Bill .
The stage is set for public pressure on Ministers .
One has to feel for Rishi Sunak .
He can point out to his colleagues that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for stonking sums as a result of extraordinary measures – the £300 billion package that he announced in was effectively the second of three Budgets since mid-March .
He will be mindful that , one day , a vaccine will have been found for the virus ; or the population will have acquired herd immunity , or a track-and-trace scheme of South Korean intensity will have worked , and the country will return to normal , whatever that may then look like .
At which point , if he ’ s still in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will have to meet the bills run up during the crisis , and that the Government may not be able to , as we hope will be the case , tax-cut-and-deregulate-and-borrow its way back to growth .
And so mid 1970s-style spending cuts , plus big tax rises , will duly kick in .
So the Chancellor would add , as he repeatedly has , that the Government can not save every firm and every job – adding that some 16,000 businesses have had their loans approved under the scheme and a little @ @ @ @ @ @ @ All done in almost no time at all by civil servants and others working flat out .
Sunak will not want to be seen to cave in to the pressure on him and his Ministerial colleagues .
But he has little alternative given the political landscape but to take our advice – which was if one can ’ t untangle one ’ s way out of a Gordian knot one should simply slice through it .
Or rather , to follow the picture sketched above , if one can ’ t unblock the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ build a relief road .
This seems to be what the Chancellor will do .
There ’ s already a specific Coranavirus Business Large Business Interruption Loans Scheme , which like the main version has undergone revisions .
( He has barred banks under the main scheme for asking for homes and savings as collateral , and sought to prevent them from steering companies towards standard business loans instead – an illustration of the problems that have dogged it . )
So watch out for some variant specifically designed for small businesses , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and less expensive than simply throwing the doors of the present scheme wide open .
The moral of the story is that the longer the lockdown goes on in its present form , the longer the economy can ’ t move normally , like a man experiencing the trauma of cardiac arrest .
And Doctor Sunak will have to pour in more and more public money in what are essentially forms of emergency surgery .
No wonder the institutional Treasury view is to want Britain out of shutdown as fast as possible .

Traffic blocks a road. Drivers shout, honk horns, gesticulate. The road is the Government’s Coronavirus Business Interruption Loans Scheme. The drivers are Ministers, the banks and businesses.
Ministers alternately blame the banks for not moving and claim that the road will soon be cleared – because the banks really are moving, just not quite fast enough yet.
Many bailiff help services says that banks blame the Government, arguing that they are on the hook not only for 20 per cent of the loan, but 100 per cent of the default; that the criteria set for the scheme by the British Business Bank require them to be cautious, and that piled on top of this requirement is a restrictive EU regulation (though there is argument about whether the Government is misreading it).
And business people are less concerned with who’s to blame than with not going broke. All they know is that the road is blocked and that they can’t get where they want to go.
Which is why a motley coalition of Andrew Bailey, the Governor of the Bank of England; Ed Miliband; George Osborne and others, including ConservativeHome, have called for the Government to up the proportion of the loan that it guarantees from 80 per cent to 100 per cent.
But what is counting most is pressure from Tory MPs. One told this site yesterday that “the Chancellor has had repeated bollockings” from backbenchers. Monday sees Commons consideration of the Finance Bill. The stage is set for public pressure on Ministers.
One has to feel for Rishi Sunak. He can point out to his colleagues that the taxpayer is already on the hook for stonking sums as a result of extraordinary measures – the £300 billion package that he announced in was effectively the second of three Budgets since mid-March.
He will be mindful that, one day, a vaccine will have been found for the virus; or the population will have acquired herd immunity, or a track-and-trace scheme of South Korean intensity will have worked, and the country will return to normal, whatever that may then look like.
At which point, if he’s still in place, he and his Treasury team will have to meet the bills run up during the crisis, and that the Government may not be able to, as we hope will be the case, tax-cut-and-deregulate-and-borrow its way back to growth. And so mid 1970s-style spending cuts, plus big tax rises, will duly kick in.
So the Chancellor would add, as he repeatedly has, that the Government cannot save every firm and every job – adding that some 16,000 businesses have had their loans approved under the scheme and a little over £2 billion has been lent. All done in almost no time at all by civil servants and others working flat out.
Sunak will not want to be seen to cave in to the pressure on him and his Ministerial colleagues. But he has little alternative given the political landscape but to take our advice – which was if one can’t untangle one’s way out of a Gordian knot one should simply slice through it.
Or rather, to follow the picture sketched above, if one can’t unblock the highway, the best alternative is to build a relief road.
This seems to be what the Chancellor will do. There’s already a specific Coranavirus Business Large Business Interruption Loans Scheme, which like the main version has undergone revisions. (He has barred banks under the main scheme for asking for homes and savings as collateral, and sought to prevent them from steering companies towards standard business loans instead – an illustration of the problems that have dogged it.)
So watch out for some variant specifically designed for small businesses, which Sunak will hope is both effective and less expensive than simply throwing the doors of the present scheme wide open.
The moral of the story is that the longer the lockdown goes on in its present form, the longer the economy can’t move normally, like a man experiencing the trauma of cardiac arrest.
And Doctor Sunak will have to pour in more and more public money in what are essentially forms of emergency surgery. No wonder the institutional Treasury view is to want Britain out of shutdown as fast as possible.


Coronavirus Count

UK cumulative total of lab-confirmed cases : 143,464 ( Up from 138,078 ) .
UK cumulative total of COVID-19 associated UK deaths in hospital : 19,506 ( Up from 18,738 ) .
Latest daily number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 5,386 ( Up from 4,583 ) .
Latest daily number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths in hospital : 684 ( Up from 616 ) .
From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
DAILY NUMBER OF COVID-19 ASSOCIATED DEATHS IN HOSPITAL From the Government ’ s website Number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the UK .
ConHome note April 14 : Public Health England has changed its presentation of the data to make it clear that the UK cumulative and daily totals of cases are of lab-confirmed figures , and that the cumulative and daily totals of deaths exclude those outside hospitals ( i.e : in care homes ) .
It has also separated out its graph info for cases and deaths .
We will reproduce the daily figures rather than cumulative ones .
“ The risk to the UK has been raised to high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
GOVERNMENT RULES ON STAYING AT HOME AND AWAY FROM OTHERS See here .
Published on Monday March 23 .
GUIDANCE : FURTHER BUSINESSES AND PREMISES TO CLOSE See here .
Published on Monday March 23 .
HOW EVERYONE CAN HELP STOP THE CORONAVIRUS ( SOCIAL DISTANCING ) See here .
Republished on Monday March 23 .
STAY AT HOME IF YOU THINK YOU HAVE CORONAVIRUS ( SELF-DISTANCING ) See here .
Republished on Monday March 23 .
See here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE FOR WORKERS ON WHAT AND HOW THEY CAN CLAIM See here .
Published on Friday March 20 .
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE FOR LANDLORDS , TENANTS AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES NEW See here .
Published on Saturday March 28 .
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE ON WHAT THE CORONAVIRUS BILL WILL DO See here .
Published on Wednesday March 18 HOW TO AVOID CATCHING OR SPREADING CORONAVIRUS • Wash your hands with soap and water often – do this for at least 20 seconds .
• Always wash your hands when you get home or into work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ soap and water are not available .
• Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve ( not your hands ) when you cough or sneeze .
• Put used tissues in the bin straight away and wash your hands afterwards .
• Try to avoid close contact with people who are unwell .
The symptoms of coronavirus are : However , these symptoms do not necessarily mean you have the illness .
The symptoms are similar to other illnesses that are much more common , such as cold and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus service that can tell you if you need medical help and advise you what to do .
Use this service if : • You think you might have coronavirus .
• In the last 14 days you ’ ve been to a country or area with a high risk of coronavirus – see the coronavirus advice for travellers .
• You ’ ve been in close contact with someone with coronavirus .
• In Scotland call your GP or NHS 24 on 111 out of hours .
• In Wales call 111 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or 0845 46 47 .
• Do not go to a GP surgery , pharmacy or hospital .
• What the coronavirus is , how it ’ s spread and how to avoid catching it – Government NHS website overview .
• Stay at home advice and how to manage self-isolation .
( All information taken from Government sources .
Updated as of 18.30 on Friday April 24th . )

HEADLINE FACTS
Total number of lab-confirmed UK cases: 292,950 (Up from 291,409).
Total number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths: 41,481 (Up from 41,279).
Daily number of lab-confirmed UK cases: 1,541 (Up from 1,266).
Daily number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths: 202 (Up from 151).
England total cases: 156,410 (Up from 156,018 ).
England total deaths: 37,069 (Up from 36,883).
England death rate: 279.4 (Was 278.7).
Scotland total cases: 15,709 (Up from 15,682).
Scotland total deaths: 2,439 (Up from 2,434).
Scotland death rate: 288.9 (Was 288.4).
Wales total cases: 14,658 (Up from 14,581).
Wales total deaths: 1,435 (Up from 1,425).
Wales death rate: 467.0 (Was 464.6)
Northern Ireland total cases: 4,838 (Up from 4,822)
Northern Ireland total deaths: 538 (Up from 537).
Northern Ireland death rate: 257.1 (Was 256.3).
From the Government’s website Number of coronavirus (COVID-19) cases and risk in the UK.
DAILY NUMBER OF COVID-19 ASSOCIATED DEATHS BY DATE REPORTED
DAILY NUMBER OF LAB-CONFIRMED ENGLAND CASES
From the Government’s website Number of coronavirus (COVID-19) cases and risk in the UK.
– – –
RISK
“The risk to the UK has been raised to high” –
From the Government’s website Number of coronavirus (COVID-19) cases and risk in the UK.
– – –
NHS VOLUNTEER RESPONDER FORM
See here
(The Government’s scheme to recruit 250,000 volunteers.)
– – –
OUR PLAN TO REBUILD: THE UK GOVERNMENT’S COVID-19 RECOVERY STRATEGY
See here. New as of Monday May 11.
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE ON THE LOCKDOWN.
See here. New as of Tuesday June 2.
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE ON SHIELDING AND PROTECTING PEOPLE WHO ARE CLINICALLY EXTREMELY VULNERABLE FROM COVID-19
See here. New as of Tuesday June 2.
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE ON SOCIAL DISTANCING
See here. New as of Tuesday June 2.
GOVERNMENT WEBSITE: GENERAL ADVICE
See here.
GOVERNMENT WEBSITE: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS. WHAT YOU CAN DO AND CAN’T DO
See here.
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE FOR LANDLORDS, TENANTS AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES NEW
See here. Published on Saturday March 28.
– – –
HOW TO AVOID CATCHING OR SPREADING CORONAVIRUS
Wash your hands with soap and water often – do this for at least 20 seconds .
Always wash your hands when you get home or into work .
Use hand sanitiser gel if soap and water are not available .
Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve (not your hands) when you cough or sneeze .
Put used tissues in the bin straight away and wash your hands afterwards .
Try to avoid close contact with people who are unwell.
SYMPTOMS
The symptoms of coronavirus are:
A cough.
A high temperature.
Shortness of breath.
However, these symptoms do not necessarily mean you have the illness.
The symptoms are similar to other illnesses that are much more common, such as cold and flu.
USING 111
NHS 111 has an online coronavirus service that can tell you if you need medical help and advise you what to do.
Use this service if:
You think you might have coronavirus.
In the last 14 days you’ve been to a country or area with a high risk of coronavirus – see the coronavirus advice for travellers.
You’ve been in close contact with someone with coronavirus.
In Scotland call your GP or NHS 24 on 111 out of hours.
In Wales call 111 (if available in your area) or 0845 46 47.
In Northern Ireland call 111.
Do not go to a GP surgery, pharmacy or hospital.
FURTHER LINKS TO GOVERNMENT ADVICE
– – –
(All information taken from Government sources.
Updated as of 19.00 on Friday June 12.)


conservativehome--2020-04-25--David Gauke: The Government’s lockdown message has been almost too effective – rather than not enoug

David Gauke: The Government’s lockdown message has been almost too effective – rather than not enough

David Gauke is a former Justice Secretary , and was an independent candidate in South-West Hertfordshire at the recent general election .
Two weeks ago , I made the case on this site that it was too early for the Government to set out its ‘ exit strategy ’ from the lockdown , despite growing demands from the media and the Opposition .
I gave two reasons why the Government was right to resist the calls .
First , any strategy should be based on emerging evidence and it was better to leave any decisions as to such a strategy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second argument was that talking about the exit strategy might muddy the waters .
At that point , the clear priority was to maintain social distancing , especially in the middle of a sunny Easter weekend .
I still think that this case was right .
Maintaining the message discipline of “ Stay Home Save Lives Protect the NHS ” was , and remains , the priority .
But I am beginning to worry that there may come a time when there will be a need for a more nuanced message – but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to hear it .
The compliant response to the Government ’ s social distancing instructions has contributed significantly to slowing the spread of Covid-19 .
Indeed , many people have gone further than the Government has asked .
The number of children going to school is much smaller than the number entitled to schooling because they fall within an exception .
“ Work from home if you can ” has been interpreted by many as “ work only if you can work from home ” .
Public support for the restrictions has remained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be supported .
Unlike other countries , there is no evidence of a mass movement calling for restoring people ’ s freedoms .
Even when a minority of police officers have very obviously over-stepped the mark , the public have shrugged with indifference or even cheered them on .
The belief that the love of liberty is our defining national trait looks like a romantic delusion .
The British people are worried .
They are concerned that they may die or that a loved one might die .
Every day , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ learn of thousands seriously ill. For even the Prime Minister , it was touch and go .
And , yes , for many it is a period of acute economic insecurity and discomfort , cooped up in flats .
But for others , it is an extended holiday of Netflix and Zoom chats and appreciating the April sun from the garden .
The message that it is our patriotic duty to stay at home is reaching a receptive audience .
Of course , this can not go on for ever .
The lockdown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time .
The Government now faces the toughest of choices .
We could suppress the virus almost to elimination and then , as and when we have small outbreaks , quickly identify them and lockdown those who have been infected .
We will have to maintain the lockdown for a time yet , and we will need the ability to test and contact trace with great efficiency .
Alternatively , we could maintain social distancing , but start to allow more and more of society to return to some degree of normality .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and some comfort may be taken from reports that the peak of infections may have pre-dated the lockdown .
The fear will be that any relaxation leads to a second peak , followed by a second lockdown that will be impossible to relax .
The Government will be blamed for taking a decision that directly results in the deaths of thousands ; the economy takes an even greater hit .
I am sympathetic to those who want to relax the restrictions sooner rather than later .
A full suppression strategy would have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it would result in an impoverishment that would blight this country for a generation .
But I do foresee a problem with any relaxation , however controlled and cautious .
Identifying which restriction you are going to loosen – whether by sector , geography or age – is one thing ; successfully implementing it will be another .
This brings me back to my earlier point .
Such has been the success of the instruction to “ Stay at Home ” , getting people to leave their home will be very difficult .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ All the evidence points to the fact that a young child is not at severe risk from Covid-19 ; nor does there appear to be much evidence of the virus being transmitted from children to adults .
It is also clear that the closure of primary schools has a very detrimental impact on the economy and the education of children , especially from those with disadvantaged backgrounds .
The case on epidemiological , economic and humanitarian grounds for re-opening primary schools is strong .
And yet , were tbe Government to announce that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the next few weeks , I fear that this would not happen in the way intended .
It is worth remembering that the closure of schools was somewhat forced on the Government because large numbers of teachers and pupils stopped going to school .
Could we be confident that an order to re-open primary schools would , in reality , be implemented ?
The reaction to Emmanuel Macron ’ s decision to re-open French schools suggests not .
Any strategy to relax restrictions on the lockdown will have to be devised on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public resistance to doing anything other than “ stay at home ” .
This is testament to the success of the current communication strategy , but it does make it harder for us to step away from the current situation in a measured and orderly way .
How to address this ?
First , Matt Hancock has made it clear that test , track and trace will be a large part of the next stage .
Putting aside the epidemiological arguments , a comprehensive testing strategy will need to be part of any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , let us return to primary schools .
If the decision is to re-open primary schools , we need to reassure teachers that we will be able to identify quickly evidence of teachers being infected .
By testing , we pick this up early .
Our testing strategy has to be integrated with our exit strategy and our communications strategy .
What might this mean in practice ?
I would suggest a large , randomised programme of testing of primary school teachers .
We will quickly know if teachers are at risk .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ any other sector where the restrictions are loosened .
My second point is that we are prepared to react ; we are willing to fail fast .
If testing shows that infection rates increase noticeably where we have relaxed restrictions , we reverse those relaxations quickly .
And we say that is what we will do all along so that there is no ‘ gotcha ’ moment when there is a U-turn but an honest acceptance that this is the prudent way to move forward .
The time is fast approaching when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the next step will involve .
Its main concern has been that the lockdown might not hold , but it can not ignore the risk that it holds too well .
Any strategy to loosen the lockdown will need to convince an anxious public that the Government is not taking a reckless gamble with the health of our citizens .
Integrating our approach to testing with the loosening of restrictions will be essential .

David Gauke is a former Justice Secretary, and was an independent candidate in South-West Hertfordshire at the recent general election.
Two weeks ago, I made the case on this site that it was too early for the Government to set out its ‘exit strategy’ from the lockdown, despite growing demands from the media and the Opposition.
I gave two reasons why the Government was right to resist the calls. First, any strategy should be based on emerging evidence and it was better to leave any decisions as to such a strategy until the evidence was clearer.
The second argument was that talking about the exit strategy might muddy the waters. At that point, the clear priority was to maintain social distancing, especially in the middle of a sunny Easter weekend.
I still think that this case was right. Maintaining the message discipline of “Stay Home Save Lives Protect the NHS” was, and remains, the priority.
But I am beginning to worry that there may come a time when there will be a need for a more nuanced message – but the public won’t be willing to hear it.
The compliant response to the Government’s social distancing instructions has contributed significantly to slowing the spread of Covid-19. Indeed, many people have gone further than the Government has asked. The number of children going to school is much smaller than the number entitled to schooling because they fall within an exception. “Work from home if you can” has been interpreted by many as “work only if you can work from home”.
Public support for the restrictions has remained strong, with evidence that tougher messages would be supported. Unlike other countries, there is no evidence of a mass movement calling for restoring people’s freedoms. Even when a minority of police officers have very obviously over-stepped the mark, the public have shrugged with indifference or even cheered them on. The belief that the love of liberty is our defining national trait looks like a romantic delusion.
The British people are worried. They are concerned that they may die or that a loved one might die. Every day, they hear of hundreds more deaths, they learn of thousands seriously ill. For even the Prime Minister, it was touch and go.
And, yes, for many it is a period of acute economic insecurity and discomfort, cooped up in flats. But for others, it is an extended holiday of Netflix and Zoom chats and appreciating the April sun from the garden. The message that it is our patriotic duty to stay at home is reaching a receptive audience.
Of course, this cannot go on for ever. The lockdown was necessary and it has given us time. The Government now faces the toughest of choices.
We could suppress the virus almost to elimination and then, as and when we have small outbreaks, quickly identify them and lockdown those who have been infected. We will have to maintain the lockdown for a time yet, and we will need the ability to test and contact trace with great efficiency.
Alternatively, we could maintain social distancing, but start to allow more and more of society to return to some degree of normality. This would reduce the economic pain, and some comfort may be taken from reports that the peak of infections may have pre-dated the lockdown.
The fear will be that any relaxation leads to a second peak, followed by a second lockdown that will be impossible to relax. The Government will be blamed for taking a decision that directly results in the deaths of thousands; the economy takes an even greater hit.
I am sympathetic to those who want to relax the restrictions sooner rather than later. A full suppression strategy would have to last at least a year and that it would result in an impoverishment that would blight this country for a generation.
But I do foresee a problem with any relaxation, however controlled and cautious. Identifying which restriction you are going to loosen – whether by sector, geography or age – is one thing; successfully implementing it will be another. This brings me back to my earlier point. Such has been the success of the instruction to “Stay at Home”, getting people to leave their home will be very difficult.
Let me give a specific example. All the evidence points to the fact that a young child is not at severe risk from Covid-19; nor does there appear to be much evidence of the virus being transmitted from children to adults. It is also clear that the closure of primary schools has a very detrimental impact on the economy and the education of children, especially from those with disadvantaged backgrounds. The case on epidemiological, economic and humanitarian grounds for re-opening primary schools is strong.
And yet, were tbe Government to announce that primary schools are to re-open primary schools in the next few weeks, I fear that this would not happen in the way intended. It is worth remembering that the closure of schools was somewhat forced on the Government because large numbers of teachers and pupils stopped going to school. Could we be confident that an order to re-open primary schools would, in reality, be implemented? The reaction to Emmanuel Macron’s decision to re-open French schools suggests not.
Any strategy to relax restrictions on the lockdown will have to be devised on the basis that there will be considerable public resistance to doing anything other than “stay at home”. This is testament to the success of the current communication strategy, but it does make it harder for us to step away from the current situation in a measured and orderly way.
How to address this? First, Matt Hancock has made it clear that test, track and trace will be a large part of the next stage. Putting aside the epidemiological arguments, a comprehensive testing strategy will need to be part of any strategy to reassure the public.
Again, let us return to primary schools. If the decision is to re-open primary schools, we need to reassure teachers that we will be able to identify quickly evidence of teachers being infected. By testing, we pick this up early. Our testing strategy has to be integrated with our exit strategy and our communications strategy.
What might this mean in practice? I would suggest a large, randomised programme of testing of primary school teachers. We will quickly know if teachers are at risk. The same approach should be taken with any other sector where the restrictions are loosened.
My second point is that we are prepared to react; we are willing to fail fast. If testing shows that infection rates increase noticeably where we have relaxed restrictions, we reverse those relaxations quickly. And we say that is what we will do all along so that there is no ‘gotcha’ moment when there is a U-turn but an honest acceptance that this is the prudent way to move forward.
The time is fast approaching when the Government will have to set out what the next step will involve. Its main concern has been that the lockdown might not hold, but it cannot ignore the risk that it holds too well. Any strategy to loosen the lockdown will need to convince an anxious public that the Government is not taking a reckless gamble with the health of our citizens. Integrating our approach to testing with the loosening of restrictions will be essential.


conservativehome--2020-04-26--WATCH: “It’s incredibly important that the Government takes us with it on this journey” – Reeves

# Marr : Is the government treating the British public like children ?
Shadow Cabinet Office Minister Rachel Reeves : @ @ @ @ @ we `` communicate with them , treat them like grown-ups '' and explain to them @ @ @ @ @ '' # Marr https : //t.co/WhRfiYdqIm pic.twitter.com/flQPVhAIl1

#Marr: Is the government treating the British public like children?
Shadow Cabinet Office Minister Rachel Reeves: It’s important that we "communicate with them, treat them like grown-ups" and explain to them "where we go next"#Marr https://t.co/WhRfiYdqIm pic.twitter.com/flQPVhAIl1
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) April 26, 2020


conservativehome--2020-04-26--WATCH: Davey says that offshore business shouldn’t get virus tax relief help

Acting leader of the Liberal Democrats , @ EdwardJDavey , says it would be `` totally wrong '' for companies @ @ @ @ @ receive support for # coronavirus financial relief.
# Ridge : https : //t.co/47EzyI9agK pic.twitter.com/zYFhhrxHqe

Acting leader of the Liberal Democrats, @EdwardJDavey, says it would be "totally wrong" for companies registered in tax havens to receive support for #coronavirus financial relief.#Ridge: https://t.co/47EzyI9agK pic.twitter.com/zYFhhrxHqe
— Sophy Ridge on Sunday (@RidgeOnSunday) April 26, 2020


conservativehome--2020-04-26--WATCH: “The public need to see light at the end of the tunnel” – Burnham

Manchester Mayor @ AndyBurnhamGM says the government is `` right to be cautious '' about lifting the # coronavirus lockdown @ @ @ @ @ 'need to see the light at the end of the tunnel'.
# Ridge : https @ @ @

Manchester Mayor @AndyBurnhamGM says the government is "right to be cautious" about lifting the #coronavirus lockdown, but says the public 'need to see the light at the end of the tunnel'.#Ridge: https://t.co/47EzyI9agK pic.twitter.com/87CuD0x6nx
— Sophy Ridge on Sunday (@RidgeOnSunday) April 26, 2020


conservativehome--2020-04-26--WATCH: Raab confirms that Johnson will be back at work on Monday “full-time, properly, at the helm”

`` I 've spoken to him every day this week .
`` @ DominicRaab says Prime Minister @ BorisJohnson has @ @ @ @ @ that 's been going on '' and is `` looking forward to getting back '' @ @ @ @ @ Ridge : https : //t.co/47EzyI9agK pic.twitter.com/YIsYJzin8e

"I've spoken to him every day this week."@DominicRaab says Prime Minister @BorisJohnson has been "abreast of everything that's been going on" and is "looking forward to getting back" to work on Monday.#Ridge: https://t.co/47EzyI9agK pic.twitter.com/YIsYJzin8e
— Sophy Ridge on Sunday (@RidgeOnSunday) April 26, 2020


conservativehome--2020-04-26--Imagine a Cabinet Minister claiming that the Government is “guided by the economics”

ConservativeHome makes one prediction only about the inevitable Coronavirus inquiry .
It will recommend that the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies becomes the Advisory Group for Emergencies – widening its membership to include , for example , economists .
SAGE will become AGE – in effect , if not formally .
The inquiry will advise that AGE ’ s minutes are made public .
Ditto its recommendations .
Ditto its membership .
This is at once both absolutely right and counter-productive , because such changes will have classic law-of-unintended-consequences results .
One is that any minutes published , like Cabinet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much at all .
Another is that any recommendations will be so broadly couched as to be almost meaningless – to watch the backs of those who offer them .
Another is that some of the present advisers , and others , will decide that the game ’ s not worth the candle .
It ’ s not hard to understand why .
Once the media has the names , it can dig a bit , find out which companies those on the committee advise , and for what remuneration , and tease @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Scientists , like business people , aren ’ t used to public scrutiny in the way that politicians are .
They can ’ t suddenly be sacked by the voters , in the way that Ministers effectively can , and so have less incentive to watch their words .
Consider , for example , Neil Ferguson of Imperial College offering a rough figure of up to 20,000 virus-related deaths .
No Minister would have chanced his statistical arm in that way .
But if in one way the Government ’ s scientific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respect they are like them .
They too inhabit their own eco-system .
There is a Science Village , just as there is a Westminster Village ( also lived in by journalists , civil servants , lobbyists etc ) .
The inhabitants of the Science Village will know which members moved to which universities when ; who beat who to get whatever grant ; whose forecasts turned out to be wide of the mark ; who peer-reviewed whom ; who ’ s in bed with which drugs company ( and is paid roughly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with who ’ s spouse , and so on .
Sunlight may be the best disinfectant but few of the scientists concerned will want to bask in it .
Some will quietly chuck it all in .
Those who stay will proceed sedulously .
Whether the quality of the advice becomes better , worse or much the same will remain to be seen .
This brings us to some of AGE ’ s would-be new members – the economists .
Imagine for a moment that Dominic Raab , or Matt Hancock , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at one of those daily briefings flanked by someone called the Chief Economic Adviser ( the Treasury has one ) or the Chief Statistical Officer ( there is a National Statistician ) .
Then suppose that any or all of these said that the Government will be “ guided by the economics ” or “ guided at all stages by the economic evidence ” .
Everyone would scratch their heads – not least economists , who understand that there is no such thing as “ the economics ” , only a mass of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote as early as March 11 , when the lockdown wasn ’ t even a gleam in the Prime Minister ’ s eye , there is no such thing as “ the science ” either , at least in this case .
Only different scientific views .
These will have been represented in SAGE as well as elsewhere before it has come to its conclusions .
So why have Ministers suggested otherwise ?
Because “ the science ” gives them cover in a way that “ the economics ” would not .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the public .
It somehow conjures up a collage of Einstein ’ s dreamy eyes , optical telescopes , Stephen Hawking ’ s voice , pulsating microbes and squiggly equations .
In short , images of objectivity , dispassion and omnipotence .
But the decision to ease a lockdown , say , because a model predicts an outcome is not a scientific one .
It can only be a political decision , made by lay people that we elect , not by scientists that we don ’ t – as Graham Brady also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ event , infallibility is out of the question .
This is because any such model will depend on the behaviour of human beings , and this is variable .
( Consider the way in which school attendance has come in lower than Ministers expected . )
And scientists will disagree anyway , as we have seen .
The future of SAGE , the fallacy of “ the science ” , the condition of the lockdown : all this is relevant as Boris Johnson prepares to return to work tomorrow .
Some claim that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scientific advisers : that the former couldn ’ t ease the shutdown after next week ’ s Bank Holiday if the latter didn ’ t consent , for example .
We believe that this is true only up to a point .
No politicians of any party will ultimately allow advisers of any kind to screw up their electoral prospects .
And as we have seen part of the point of praying in aid “ the science ” is precisely to protect these .
Which is why we expect the Prime Minister to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lockdown in roughly mid-May .
He will hope to relax it enough to give the economy some relief ; not so much as to unleash a second wave that would drown the NHS ; enough to keep ahead of public opinion as the shutdown frays at the edges .
And not so much as to leave the Government shipwrecked with a punctured economy , a failing NHS , further lockdown attempts that don ’ t work and plummetting poll ratings .
The scientific advisers will find some form of squaring such a lift @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them ? )
Though there are some ominous rumblings today .
To finish where we started , the eventual inquiry will see politicians blame policy errors on the scientists , saying that “ we followed advice at all times ” ; and the scientists blame them on the politicians , saying that “ we only ever offered options : advisers advise and Ministers decide ” .
That overhaul of the whole advice system will follow .
Some of the criticism will be fair enough ; some will be the wisdom of hindsight ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s how it goes .
P.S : the self-wounding hysterics about Dominic Cummings from embittered Remainiac losers will have no impact on anything whatsoever .

ConservativeHome makes one prediction only about the inevitable Coronavirus inquiry. It will recommend that the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies becomes the Advisory Group for Emergencies – widening its membership to include, for example, economists. SAGE will become AGE – in effect, if not formally.
The inquiry will advise that AGE’s minutes are made public. Ditto its recommendations. Ditto its membership. This is at once both absolutely right and counter-productive, because such changes will have classic law-of-unintended-consequences results.
One is that any minutes published, like Cabinet minutes, will tell the reader nothing much at all. Another is that any recommendations will be so broadly couched as to be almost meaningless – to watch the backs of those who offer them.
Another is that some of the present advisers, and others, will decide that the game’s not worth the candle. It’s not hard to understand why. Once the media has the names, it can dig a bit, find out which companies those on the committee advise, and for what remuneration, and tease out real and apparent conflicts of interest.
Scientists, like business people, aren’t used to public scrutiny in the way that politicians are. They can’t suddenly be sacked by the voters, in the way that Ministers effectively can, and so have less incentive to watch their words. Consider, for example, Neil Ferguson of Imperial College offering a rough figure of up to 20,000 virus-related deaths.
No Minister would have chanced his statistical arm in that way. But if in one way the Government’s scientific advisers are unlike politicians, in another respect they are like them. They too inhabit their own eco-system. There is a Science Village, just as there is a Westminster Village (also lived in by journalists, civil servants, lobbyists etc).
The inhabitants of the Science Village will know which members moved to which universities when; who beat who to get whatever grant; whose forecasts turned out to be wide of the mark; who peer-reviewed whom; who’s in bed with which drugs company (and is paid roughly how much), who ran off with whose spouse, and so on.
Sunlight may be the best disinfectant but few of the scientists concerned will want to bask in it. Some will quietly chuck it all in. Those who stay will proceed sedulously. Whether the quality of the advice becomes better, worse or much the same will remain to be seen. This brings us to some of AGE’s would-be new members – the economists.
Imagine for a moment that Dominic Raab, or Matt Hancock, or Boris Johnson for that matter, appeared at one of those daily briefings flanked by someone called the Chief Economic Adviser (the Treasury has one) or the Chief Statistical Officer (there is a National Statistician).
Then suppose that any or all of these said that the Government will be “guided by the economics” or “guided at all stages by the economic evidence”. Everyone would scratch their heads – not least economists, who understand that there is no such thing as “the economics”, only a mass of different economic views.
As this site wrote as early as March 11, when the lockdown wasn’t even a gleam in the Prime Minister’s eye, there is no such thing as “the science” either, at least in this case. Only different scientific views. These will have been represented in SAGE as well as elsewhere before it has come to its conclusions.
So why have Ministers suggested otherwise? Because “the science” gives them cover in a way that “the economics” would not. “Science” has a talismanic power with the public. It somehow conjures up a collage of Einstein’s dreamy eyes, optical telescopes, Stephen Hawking’s voice, pulsating microbes and squiggly equations.
In short, images of objectivity, dispassion and omnipotence. But the decision to ease a lockdown, say, because a model predicts an outcome is not a scientific one. It can only be a political decision, made by lay people that we elect, not by scientists that we don’t – as Graham Brady also points out this morning.
In any event, infallibility is out of the question. This is because any such model will depend on the behaviour of human beings, and this is variable. (Consider the way in which school attendance has come in lower than Ministers expected.) And scientists will disagree anyway, as we have seen.
The future of SAGE, the fallacy of “the science”, the condition of the lockdown: all this is relevant as Boris Johnson prepares to return to work tomorrow. Some claim that Ministers are now the prisoners of their scientific advisers: that the former couldn’t ease the shutdown after next week’s Bank Holiday if the latter didn’t consent, for example.
We believe that this is true only up to a point. No politicians of any party will ultimately allow advisers of any kind to screw up their electoral prospects. And as we have seen part of the point of praying in aid “the science” is precisely to protect these.
Which is why we expect the Prime Minister to experiment with a suck-it-and-see easing of the lockdown in roughly mid-May. He will hope to relax it enough to give the economy some relief; not so much as to unleash a second wave that would drown the NHS; enough to keep ahead of public opinion as the shutdown frays at the edges.
And not so much as to leave the Government shipwrecked with a punctured economy, a failing NHS, further lockdown attempts that don’t work and plummetting poll ratings. The scientific advisers will find some form of squaring such a lift with the five tests. (Remember them?) Though there are some ominous rumblings today.
To finish where we started, the eventual inquiry will see politicians blame policy errors on the scientists, saying that “we followed advice at all times”; and the scientists blame them on the politicians, saying that “we only ever offered options: advisers advise and Ministers decide”.
That overhaul of the whole advice system will follow. Some of the criticism will be fair enough; some will be the wisdom of hindsight; some will be clever dickety. That’s how it goes. P.S: the self-wounding hysterics about Dominic Cummings from embittered Remainiac losers will have no impact on anything whatsoever.


Coronavirus Count

UK cumulative total of lab-confirmed cases : 148,377 ( Up from 143,464 ) .
UK cumulative total of COVID-19 associated UK deaths in hospital : 20,319 ( Up from 19,506 ) .
Latest daily number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 4,913 ( Down from 5,386 ) .
Latest daily number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths in hospital 813 ( Up from 684 ) .
From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
DAILY NUMBER OF COVID-19 ASSOCIATED DEATHS IN HOSPITAL From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the UK .
ConHome note April 14 : Public Health England has changed its presentation of the data to make it clear that the UK cumulative and daily totals of cases are of lab-confirmed figures , and that the cumulative and daily totals of deaths exclude those outside hospitals ( i.e : in care homes ) .
It has also separated out its graph info for cases and deaths .
We will reproduce the daily figures rather than cumulative ones .
“ The risk to the UK has been raised to high ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
GOVERNMENT RULES ON STAYING AT HOME AND AWAY FROM OTHERS See here .
Published on Monday March 23 .
GUIDANCE : FURTHER BUSINESSES AND PREMISES TO CLOSE See here .
Published on Monday March 23 .
HOW EVERYONE CAN HELP STOP THE CORONAVIRUS ( SOCIAL DISTANCING ) See here .
Republished on Monday March 23 .
STAY AT HOME IF YOU THINK YOU HAVE CORONAVIRUS ( SELF-DISTANCING ) See here .
Republished on Monday March 23 .
See here .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ GUIDANCE FOR WORKERS ON WHAT AND HOW THEY CAN CLAIM See here .
Published on Friday March 20 .
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE FOR LANDLORDS , TENANTS AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES NEW See here .
Published on Saturday March 28 .
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE ON WHAT THE CORONAVIRUS BILL WILL DO See here .
Published on Wednesday March 18 HOW TO AVOID CATCHING OR SPREADING CORONAVIRUS • Wash your hands with soap and water often – do this for at least 20 seconds .
• Always wash your hands when you get home or into work .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and water are not available .
• Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve ( not your hands ) when you cough or sneeze .
• Put used tissues in the bin straight away and wash your hands afterwards .
• Try to avoid close contact with people who are unwell .
The symptoms of coronavirus are : However , these symptoms do not necessarily mean you have the illness .
The symptoms are similar to other illnesses that are much more common , such as cold and flu @ @ @ @ @ @ @ service that can tell you if you need medical help and advise you what to do .
Use this service if : • You think you might have coronavirus .
• In the last 14 days you ’ ve been to a country or area with a high risk of coronavirus – see the coronavirus advice for travellers .
• You ’ ve been in close contact with someone with coronavirus .
• In Scotland call your GP or NHS 24 on 111 out of hours .
• In Wales call 111 ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 0845 46 47 .
• Do not go to a GP surgery , pharmacy or hospital .
• What the coronavirus is , how it ’ s spread and how to avoid catching it – Government NHS website overview .
• Stay at home advice and how to manage self-isolation .
( All information taken from Government sources .
Updated as of 7.00 on Sunday April 26th . )


conservativehome--2020-04-26--WATCH: Welcome to the next stage of the Government’s strategy. Raab trails “the new normal”.

The UK will be `` moving to a new normal… social distancing measures , applying them in different contexts , @ @ @ @ @ us for some time '' after the lockdown is relaxed says First Secretary of State @ @ @ @ @ : //t.co/ue8i3RvgB2 pic.twitter.com/BFLge6tnnV

The UK will be "moving to a new normal… social distancing measures, applying them in different contexts, is going to be with us for some time" after the lockdown is relaxed says First Secretary of State Dominic Raab
#Marr https://t.co/ue8i3RvgB2 pic.twitter.com/BFLge6tnnV
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) April 26, 2020


conservativehome--2020-04-26--WATCH: Sturgeon says that she can’t say when shielding in Scotland will stop

# Marr : When can people see their parents and grandparents ?
SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon : `` It would @ @ @ @ @ to give a date .
`` I don ’ t yet have the information that @ @ @ @ @ I can say that with certainty '' https : //t.co/klsykP5sIh pic.twitter.com/DCxHaMCGBZ

#Marr: When can people see their parents and grandparents?
SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon: "It would be irresponsible for me" to give a date. "I don’t yet have the information that gives me the confidence that I can say that with certainty"
https://t.co/klsykP5sIh pic.twitter.com/DCxHaMCGBZ
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) April 26, 2020


conservativehome--2020-04-27--The Prime Minister could not conceal the fact that an easing of the shutdown is coming soon

It ’ s hard to grasp that Boris Johnson has been Prime Minister for just “ nine changes of the watery star ” – to bung in a Shakespeare reference that he would undoubtedly pick up .
His near-landslide election win in December gave him real authority .
His death-facing experience in intensive care forced him to lead by example – suffering alongside those that he has been tasked to lead during this crisis .
So he now has a certain moral authority too , at least when it comes to dealing with the Coronavirus , And if he has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not three like Margaret Thatcher , he has led a change greater even hers , by taking Britain out of the EU and thus delivering Brexit .
Which underpins how much the Government has missed him .
There is more to Johnson now than the usual vivid language we heard this morning , with its image of the British people fighting back against a mugger virus .
Listening to him was like being jolted awake after snoozing off .
Not that he said all that much .
Or rather , he tried very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ balancing the need to keep the lockdown going , to protect the NHS , with the need to get the economy going , to help it and all the rest of us .
Johnson was not going to announce an easing-off of the lockdown today .
But for all his art , unwillingness to let a Coronavirus second wave drown the NHS , refusal to say “ when ” a lockdown relaxation might happen , reference to the five tests and cunning feint at drawing in Keir Starmer , he could not conceal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Government will say “ in the coming days ” , he said .
The papers are stuffed with details of the relaxation plan , some of them convincing , and the lockdown is fraying at the edges a little .
ConservativeHome believed that the Prime Minister would announce some easing after next week ’ s May Bank Holiday .
Our reading of his statement this morning is that he wants to get on with it before then .
Oh , and a mention in dispatches for Dominic Raab .
We ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ announce a relaxation plan .
He chose instead to help oversee the drawing-up of one , avoided grandstanding and strove not to act as a de facto Prime Minister .
That shows a level head .

It’s hard to grasp that Boris Johnson has been Prime Minister for just “nine changes of the watery star” – to bung in a Shakespeare reference that he would undoubtedly pick up.
His near-landslide election win in December gave him real authority. His death-facing experience in intensive care forced him to lead by example – suffering alongside those that he has been tasked to lead during this crisis. So he now has a certain moral authority too, at least when it comes to dealing with the Coronavirus,
And if he has won only one election to date, not three like Margaret Thatcher, he has led a change greater even hers, by taking Britain out of the EU and thus delivering Brexit.
Which underpins how much the Government has missed him. There is more to Johnson now than the usual vivid language we heard this morning, with its image of the British people fighting back against a mugger virus. Listening to him was like being jolted awake after snoozing off.
Not that he said all that much. Or rather, he tried very hard not to say too much – balancing the need to keep the lockdown going, to protect the NHS, with the need to get the economy going, to help it and all the rest of us.
Johnson was not going to announce an easing-off of the lockdown today. But for all his art, unwillingness to let a Coronavirus second wave drown the NHS, refusal to say “when” a lockdown relaxation might happen, reference to the five tests and cunning feint at drawing in Keir Starmer, he could not conceal the fact that easing is coming soon.
The Government will say “in the coming days”, he said. The papers are stuffed with details of the relaxation plan, some of them convincing, and the lockdown is fraying at the edges a little.
ConservativeHome believed that the Prime Minister would announce some easing after next week’s May Bank Holiday. Our reading of his statement this morning is that he wants to get on with it before then.
Oh, and a mention in dispatches for Dominic Raab. We’ve have been happy for him to announce a relaxation plan. He chose instead to help oversee the drawing-up of one, avoided grandstanding and strove not to act as a de facto Prime Minister. That shows a level head.


conservativehome--2020-04-27--Damian Hinds: Government has overtaken the private sector as the harshest debt collector

Damian Hinds is a former Education Secretary , and is MP for East Hampshire .
As we fuel our economy in response to the global Coronavirus pandemic , there will be much public policy focus on the size of the national debt in the months ahead .
But for many people across the UK , a more tangible and immediate source of anxiety will be the burden of debt already hanging over them and their families .
Coronavirus has profound implications for household debt .
We know that three quarters of people seeking debt advice do so due to an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ job loss or illness .
Yet low levels of financial resilience make those in the sectors threatened by lockdown even more vulnerable .
Workers in the retail , hospitality and service sectors hit hardest take home £170 a week less than the average worker and are 25 per cent more likely to have no savings to fall back on .
Of those unable to be furloughed , many will fall into ( or indeed further into ) arrears as they borrow money to soften the financial blow of the crisis .
The Government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and should be commended for its rapid expansion of the social safety net .
Seven billion pounds has been injected into the welfare system .
Breathing space has been delivered in the form of mortgage holidays and tax relief , Meanwhile , debt repayments in Universal Credit have been paused until July .
Additional forbearance measures announced last week by the Financial Conduct Authority will undoubtedly help people through the uncertainties of the period .
But problem debt existed well before the onset of the pandemic .
There must be a longer-term solution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lapsed .
And as the Centre for Social Justice show in an important new report , Collecting Dust : A Path Forward for Government Debt Collection , problem debt has mutated over the past decade .
We must adapt our policy response accordingly .
I was a co-sponsor of the High Cost Credit Bill and supported the cross-party payday charter that followed it in 2013 .
This called for measures requiring the then £7.5 billion payday loan and home credit sector to treat consumers more fairly and stop high-cost lenders from taking advantage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Government ( and FCA ) responded to this with tougher rules that have been successful in clamping down on exploitative practices .
Although high-cost borrowing no doubt remains an issue , today we are seeing far fewer people caught in the recurring payday loan trap as a result .
But what we are seeing , as illustrated compellingly by the CSJ , is that a much larger number ( and indeed higher proportion ) of problems reported to charities and support services are now in relation to debts owed to government authorities , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loans .
I have been impressed by the improvements made to debt collection in much of the commercial sector , where it is now commonplace to see vulnerability and financial circumstances taken into account .
Regrettably , these advances have not yet been mirrored by debt collectors in the public arena .
There is a missed opportunity here .
A pragmatic and sensible approach to debt collection can actually improve the rate of recovery , on the basis this may need more time and appropriate adjustment along the way .
Indeed , £82 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies who provide support for debtors and set affordable repayment plans , which require fewer interventions and are less likely to default .
One of the CSJ ’ s findings strikes me as particularly concerning : it is councils who are the nation ’ s largest commissioner of bailiffs , on whom local government remains reliant to collect debt .
Meanwhile , the rules governing council debt collection mean that families struggling to pay the bills have their debts rapidly inflated by further fees and charges .
There is more for central government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bring debt collection practices up to par .
Tragically , too often the current approach can actually worsen the initial debt issue rather than offer a sustainable path forward .
This must change – for the impact of problem debt can be devastating .
In my constituency surgeries , and during my time both as Education Secretary and Employment Minister , I witnessed first-hand the immense strain it places on individuals and whole families .
The stress felt by parents which filters down to their children and hinders learning .
The damage done @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The way it can be both cause and consequence of alcohol and other substance abuse .
The evidence leaves no doubt : problem debt is one of the key pathways to poverty , and it blocks pathways out .
As we respond to the unique challenges of COVID-19 , we should be conscious of the £13.5 billion mound of personal debt owed to the government , ensuring that people in already challenging circumstances are supported while money owed is recovered appropriately .
Usefully , the CSJ ’ s proposal to overhaul public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Management Bill offers both an ambitious and credible path forward .
The Bill in question would bring practices in line with the private sector , repeal the laws which allow small debts to be escalated punitively and counter-productively , and establish a new contract of fairness between the debtor and the creditor ( who remains , we should always remember , the taxpayer ) .
Learning from the experiences of the private sector , these reforms would both save the taxpayer money and help transform the lives of those gripped by debt .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ million people currently over-indebted is sadly likely to grow .
As we come together to get through this difficult time , the Government should seek to offer people a route out of problem debt as part of its noble mission to spread opportunity and level up the UK .

Damian Hinds is a former Education Secretary, and is MP for East Hampshire.
As we fuel our economy in response to the global Coronavirus pandemic, there will be much public policy focus on the size of the national debt in the months ahead. But for many people across the UK, a more tangible and immediate source of anxiety will be the burden of debt already hanging over them and their families.
Coronavirus has profound implications for household debt. We know that three quarters of people seeking debt advice do so due to an income shock, usually caused by a job loss or illness. Yet low levels of financial resilience make those in the sectors threatened by lockdown even more vulnerable.
Workers in the retail, hospitality and service sectors hit hardest take home £170 a week less than the average worker and are 25 per cent more likely to have no savings to fall back on. Of those unable to be furloughed, many will fall into (or indeed further into) arrears as they borrow money to soften the financial blow of the crisis.
The Government is clearly aware of these risks, and should be commended for its rapid expansion of the social safety net. Seven billion pounds has been injected into the welfare system. Breathing space has been delivered in the form of mortgage holidays and tax relief, Meanwhile, debt repayments in Universal Credit have been paused until July. Additional forbearance measures announced last week by the Financial Conduct Authority will undoubtedly help people through the uncertainties of the period.
But problem debt existed well before the onset of the pandemic. There must be a longer-term solution ready for when these temporary measures have lapsed. And as the Centre for Social Justice show in an important new report, Collecting Dust: A Path Forward for Government Debt Collection, problem debt has mutated over the past decade. We must adapt our policy response accordingly.
I was a co-sponsor of the High Cost Credit Bill and supported the cross-party payday charter that followed it in 2013. This called for measures requiring the then £7.5 billion payday loan and home credit sector to treat consumers more fairly and stop high-cost lenders from taking advantage of those in financial trouble.
The Government (and FCA) responded to this with tougher rules that have been successful in clamping down on exploitative practices. Although high-cost borrowing no doubt remains an issue, today we are seeing far fewer people caught in the recurring payday loan trap as a result.
But what we are seeing, as illustrated compellingly by the CSJ, is that a much larger number (and indeed higher proportion) of problems reported to charities and support services are now in relation to debts owed to government authorities, rather than for consumer credit cards or loans.
I have been impressed by the improvements made to debt collection in much of the commercial sector, where it is now commonplace to see vulnerability and financial circumstances taken into account. Regrettably, these advances have not yet been mirrored by debt collectors in the public arena.
There is a missed opportunity here. A pragmatic and sensible approach to debt collection can actually improve the rate of recovery, on the basis this may need more time and appropriate adjustment along the way. Indeed, £82 million is saved annually by consumer credit companies who provide support for debtors and set affordable repayment plans, which require fewer interventions and are less likely to default.
One of the CSJ’s findings strikes me as particularly concerning: it is councils who are the nation’s largest commissioner of bailiffs, on whom local government remains reliant to collect debt. Meanwhile, the rules governing council debt collection mean that families struggling to pay the bills have their debts rapidly inflated by further fees and charges. There is more for central government departments across Whitehall to be doing to bring debt collection practices up to par. Tragically, too often the current approach can actually worsen the initial debt issue rather than offer a sustainable path forward.
This must change – for the impact of problem debt can be devastating. In my constituency surgeries, and during my time both as Education Secretary and Employment Minister, I witnessed first-hand the immense strain it places on individuals and whole families. The stress felt by parents which filters down to their children and hinders learning. The damage done to relationships, and to employment prospects. The way it can be both cause and consequence of alcohol and other substance abuse. The evidence leaves no doubt: problem debt is one of the key pathways to poverty, and it blocks pathways out.
As we respond to the unique challenges of COVID-19, we should be conscious of the £13.5 billion mound of personal debt owed to the government, ensuring that people in already challenging circumstances are supported while money owed is recovered appropriately.
Usefully, the CSJ’s proposal to overhaul public sector debt collection through a Government Debt Management Bill offers both an ambitious and credible path forward. The Bill in question would bring practices in line with the private sector, repeal the laws which allow small debts to be escalated punitively and counter-productively, and establish a new contract of fairness between the debtor and the creditor (who remains, we should always remember, the taxpayer).
Learning from the experiences of the private sector, these reforms would both save the taxpayer money and help transform the lives of those gripped by debt. In the months to come the nine million people currently over-indebted is sadly likely to grow. As we come together to get through this difficult time, the Government should seek to offer people a route out of problem debt as part of its noble mission to spread opportunity and level up the UK.


The Scapecock

The Book of Leviticus describes the scapegoat ritual .
The high priest lays his hands on the head of a live goat , and confesses “ over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel…and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness .
And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited ” .
Is this also a description of the fate awaiting Matt Hancock , who has set a goal of delivering 100,000 swab tests by Friday ?
We will be brief about his chances @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yesterday ’ s press conference that the last daily figure is 29,058 tests .
So the total must be upped by the best part of 70,000 a day if the Health Secretary is to meet his target .
It would be an understatement to describe that as a bit of a stretch .
And this site detects no confidence in Government that it will be hit .
But expect a vertiginious rise in tests over the next few days none the less .
In simple terms , Hancock is now taking the tests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the people to go to the tests .
Until last week , only certain categories of people , such as NHS staff and social care workers , were eligible , and they had to travel to regional testing centres .
The Health Secretary has widened eligibility to include other essential workers ; set up mobile testing centres ; organised home testing ; brought in the private sector and the army .
A new phone system crashed ; is now steadier .
So we shall see .
Thinking about delivery takes us to policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that 100,000 figure come from ?
Government sources insist that it was an “ internal target ” that was simply made external .
Why ?
The question draws one back into the tangled story of the Government , testing and tracing .
As Charlotte Gill wrote on this site last week , Ministers and advisers have been through at least three iterations of policy .
First came a period of testing and tracing , lasting until roughly the end of March .
Then it was wound down : to cut a very long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seen testing as no longer effective once the virus could no longer be contained .
That was the second stage .
It caused a media clamour .
Hancock knocked it stone cold dead on April 2 by announcing the target at the Government ’ s daily press conference – in a deeply personalised terms after his own return from illness .
“ I ’ m determined we ’ ll get there , ” he declared .
Some of his colleagues believe that he thus gained a tactical win but set himself up for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ missing of the target later this week , complete with the inevitable media and Opposition calls for him to “ consider his position ” .
But these criticisms must be seen in context .
For it is impossible to separate the politics of the tests from the politics of the virus more widely – in particular , the lockdown .
The Health Secretary is seen as the leading champion in Cabinet of keeping it going , just as Rishi Sunak is viewed as the leading proponent of winding it down .
The truth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this site has resisted commissioning one of its series of boxing illustrations showing the two going at each other hammer and tongs .
Hancock is an economist , who cut his teeth at the Bank of England .
So he appreciates what the shutdown is doing to lives and livelihoods .
And Sunak is a politician , who knows that if the NHS collapses the Government will too .
The two men are basically representing the interests of their departments within the quad of Dominic Raab , Michael Gove plus both of them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ absence , has been leading the Government ’ s response to the virus .
The Health Secretary is advancing and defending his department ’ s position .
Which leads us to the broader question of Hancock ’ s position within the Government .
Downing Street has a long collective memory – enough , certainly , to remember that the Health Secretary stood for the leadership last year .
Former rivals of Boris Johnson with own ambitions have their cards marked within institutional Number Ten .
January ’ s Cabinet promotions were based on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told , “ competence ” .
In practice , this has looked a lot like Ministers getting on with whatever Number Ten wants without asking too many questions .
Hancock is just a bit more fizzy , and now more senior , than most of the newcomers .
We haven ’ t found the hostility to him from Downing Street that some have claimed .
However , we detect a coolness about the tests target .
“ He ’ s not always the most collegiate person to work with , ” grumbled one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ champing at the bit to relax the lockdown , has a different take .
“ Even those who don ’ t like him should admire the energy and dedication he ’ s thrown at fighting the virus.
” One observer within the machine argues that the mere announcement of the target put a rocket under delivery of the tests that otherwise would never have been launched .
“ It ’ s a bit like the 1960s and America or Russia declaring that they ’ ll put a man on the moon in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Saying that you ’ ll do so means that you have to strain every sinew to try .
So even if Matt misses his target , he ’ ll have delivered a mass of tests that would otherwise never have been delivered.
” The truth is that Hancock is exposed in any event – even if you believe that the third stage of Government policy , the shift to a South Korean-style track and test approach , has come late .
Each NHS worker without a protective gown ; every social care worker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all shifts in policy , whether made in Downing Street or not ; each day that passes with the country still in lockdown , with the Department of Health making the case for caution ; every slow Turkish PPE consignment – all are heaped on his head .
Which isn ’ t to say that he won ’ t have made mistakes including , on our calculation of the timetable , relying for too long on Public Health England and the NHS to deliver core targets and policies .
But that will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and , in the meantime , the Health Secretary may take comfort from polling showing growing media unpopularity – as a press feeling the pinch of falling sales hammers desperately on his door .
Not to mention relief at achieving his main goal to date : the non-collapse of the NHS .
So Boris Johnson is unlikely to lay his manly hands on Hancock ’ s head , confess over him all the iniquities of the Government , and despatch the ScapeCock with a kick in the backside into the wilderness of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too much about the inside story of government and the virus for that .
One wouldn ’ t want to wake up and find it spashed all over the papers .
In any event , how many energetic Ministers are there ?
All the same , the urge to find a scapegoat is dug deep into the irrational wellsprings of human psychology .
Someone must take the blame .
Someone must be punished .
In one sense , Hancock is unlike the goat , of course .
It didn ’ t volunteer .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the job he does because he stepped up to do it .
A point of which he will be grimly aware .

The Book of Leviticus describes the scapegoat ritual. The high priest lays his hands on the head of a live goat, and confesses “over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel…and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness. And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited”.
Is this also a description of the fate awaiting Matt Hancock, who has set a goal of delivering 100,000 swab tests by Friday?
We will be brief about his chances of succeeding. George Eustice announced at yesterday’s press conference that the last daily figure is 29,058 tests. So the total must be upped by the best part of 70,000 a day if the Health Secretary is to meet his target.
It would be an understatement to describe that as a bit of a stretch. And this site detects no confidence in Government that it will be hit. But expect a vertiginious rise in tests over the next few days none the less.
In simple terms, Hancock is now taking the tests to the people rather than rely on the people to go to the tests. Until last week, only certain categories of people, such as NHS staff and social care workers, were eligible, and they had to travel to regional testing centres.
The Health Secretary has widened eligibility to include other essential workers; set up mobile testing centres; organised home testing; brought in the private sector and the army. A new phone system crashed; is now steadier.
So we shall see. Thinking about delivery takes us to policy – and the politics. Where did that 100,000 figure come from? Government sources insist that it was an “internal target” that was simply made external. Why? The question draws one back into the tangled story of the Government, testing and tracing.
As Charlotte Gill wrote on this site last week, Ministers and advisers have been through at least three iterations of policy.
First came a period of testing and tracing, lasting until roughly the end of March. Then it was wound down: to cut a very long story short, key advisers had always seen testing as no longer effective once the virus could no longer be contained. That was the second stage. It caused a media clamour.
Hancock knocked it stone cold dead on April 2 by announcing the target at the Government’s daily press conference – in a deeply personalised terms after his own return from illness. “I’m determined we’ll get there,” he declared.
Some of his colleagues believe that he thus gained a tactical win but set himself up for a strategic loss – namely, the missing of the target later this week, complete with the inevitable media and Opposition calls for him to “consider his position”.
But these criticisms must be seen in context. For it is impossible to separate the politics of the tests from the politics of the virus more widely – in particular, the lockdown.
The Health Secretary is seen as the leading champion in Cabinet of keeping it going, just as Rishi Sunak is viewed as the leading proponent of winding it down. The truth is more subtle, which is why this site has resisted commissioning one of its series of boxing illustrations showing the two going at each other hammer and tongs.
Hancock is an economist, who cut his teeth at the Bank of England. So he appreciates what the shutdown is doing to lives and livelihoods. And Sunak is a politician, who knows that if the NHS collapses the Government will too.
The two men are basically representing the interests of their departments within the quad of Dominic Raab, Michael Gove plus both of them which, in Boris Johnson’s absence, has been leading the Government’s response to the virus. The Health Secretary is advancing and defending his department’s position.
Which leads us to the broader question of Hancock’s position within the Government. Downing Street has a long collective memory – enough, certainly, to remember that the Health Secretary stood for the leadership last year.
Former rivals of Boris Johnson with own ambitions have their cards marked within institutional Number Ten. January’s Cabinet promotions were based on loyalty, non-leaking and, we were told, “competence”. In practice, this has looked a lot like Ministers getting on with whatever Number Ten wants without asking too many questions.
Hancock is just a bit more fizzy, and now more senior, than most of the newcomers. We haven’t found the hostility to him from Downing Street that some have claimed. However, we detect a coolness about the tests target.
“He’s not always the most collegiate person to work with,” grumbled one Minister. But another, who is champing at the bit to relax the lockdown, has a different take. “Even those who don’t like him should admire the energy and dedication he’s thrown at fighting the virus.”
One observer within the machine argues that the mere announcement of the target put a rocket under delivery of the tests that otherwise would never have been launched.
“It’s a bit like the 1960s and America or Russia declaring that they’ll put a man on the moon in a decade,” he said. “Saying that you’ll do so means that you have to strain every sinew to try. So even if Matt misses his target, he’ll have delivered a mass of tests that would otherwise never have been delivered.”
The truth is that Hancock is exposed in any event – even if you believe that the third stage of Government policy, the shift to a South Korean-style track and test approach, has come late.
Each NHS worker without a protective gown; every social care worker who hasn’t been tested; all shifts in policy, whether made in Downing Street or not; each day that passes with the country still in lockdown, with the Department of Health making the case for caution; every slow Turkish PPE consignment – all are heaped on his head.
Which isn’t to say that he won’t have made mistakes including, on our calculation of the timetable, relying for too long on Public Health England and the NHS to deliver core targets and policies.
But that will be up to the inevitable inquiry to decide and, in the meantime, the Health Secretary may take comfort from polling showing growing media unpopularity – as a press feeling the pinch of falling sales hammers desperately on his door. Not to mention relief at achieving his main goal to date: the non-collapse of the NHS.
So Boris Johnson is unlikely to lay his manly hands on Hancock’s head, confess over him all the iniquities of the Government, and despatch the ScapeCock with a kick in the backside into the wilderness of the backbenches. The Health Secretary knows rather too much about the inside story of government and the virus for that. One wouldn’t want to wake up and find it spashed all over the papers. In any event, how many energetic Ministers are there?
All the same, the urge to find a scapegoat is dug deep into the irrational wellsprings of human psychology. Someone must take the blame. Someone must be punished. In one sense, Hancock is unlike the goat, of course. It didn’t volunteer. The Health Secretary has. He does the job he does because he stepped up to do it. A point of which he will be grimly aware.


Coronavirus Count

UK cumulative total of lab-confirmed cases : 152,840 ( Up from 148,377 ) .
UK cumulative total of COVID-19 associated UK deaths in hospital : 20,732 ( Up from 20,319 ) .
Latest daily number of lab-confirmed UK cases : 4,463 ( Down from 4,913 ) .
Latest daily number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths in hospital : 413 ( Down from 813 ) .
From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
DAILY NUMBER OF COVID-19 ASSOCIATED DEATHS IN HOSPITAL From the Government ’ s website Number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the UK .
“ The risk to the UK has been raised to high ” – From the Government ’ s website Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
GOVERNMENT RULES ON STAYING AT HOME AND AWAY FROM OTHERS See here .
Published on Monday March 23 .
GUIDANCE : FURTHER BUSINESSES AND PREMISES TO CLOSE See here .
Published on Monday March 23 .
HOW EVERYONE CAN HELP STOP THE CORONAVIRUS ( SOCIAL DISTANCING ) See here .
Republished on Monday March 23 .
STAY @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CORONAVIRUS ( SELF-DISTANCING ) See here .
Republished on Monday March 23 .
See here .
Published on Monday March 23 .
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE FOR WORKERS ON WHAT AND HOW THEY CAN CLAIM See here .
Published on Friday March 20 .
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE FOR LANDLORDS , TENANTS AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES NEW See here .
Published on Saturday March 28 .
GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE ON WHAT THE CORONAVIRUS BILL WILL DO See here .
Published on Wednesday March 18 HOW TO AVOID CATCHING OR SPREADING CORONAVIRUS • Wash your hands with soap and water @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 20 seconds .
• Always wash your hands when you get home or into work .
• Use hand sanitiser gel if soap and water are not available .
• Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue or your sleeve ( not your hands ) when you cough or sneeze .
• Put used tissues in the bin straight away and wash your hands afterwards .
• Try to avoid close contact with people who are unwell .
The symptoms of coronavirus are : However , these symptoms do not necessarily mean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are similar to other illnesses that are much more common , such as cold and flu .
NHS 111 has an online coronavirus service that can tell you if you need medical help and advise you what to do .
Use this service if : • You think you might have coronavirus .
• In the last 14 days you ’ ve been to a country or area with a high risk of coronavirus – see the coronavirus advice for travellers .
• You ’ ve been in close contact with someone with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ GP or NHS 24 on 111 out of hours .
• In Wales call 111 ( if available in your area ) or 0845 46 47 .
• Do not go to a GP surgery , pharmacy or hospital .
• What the coronavirus is , how it ’ s spread and how to avoid catching it – Government NHS website overview .
• Stay at home advice and how to manage self-isolation .
( All information taken from Government sources .
Updated as of 7.00 on Monday April 27th . )


conservativehome--2020-04-27--Richard Holden: Labour has socially distanced from voters in my seat – and others in the north and m

Richard Holden: Labour has socially distanced from voters in my seat – and others in the north and midlands. Starmer won’t change that.

Self-isolation and social distancing are new concepts that we ’ ve all got used to – at least for the time being .
Both were clearly at the forefront of the minds of the Labour Party members when they delivered Keir Starmer the leadership of the Labour Party .
A role that the experienced Queen ’ s Counsel fulfilled more than adequately in the courtroom-esque quiet of the locked-down Parliament last week against the Government ’ s number two .
Starmer is the first knight to be Leader of the Opposition since Sir Alec Douglas-Home in 1964 , a position @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Co-incidentally , that ’ s almost the same length of time Jeremy Corbyn held the leadership for before the coup against him in 2016 .
Labour ’ s anti-Corbyn wing must be hoping that history doesn ’ t repeat itself to either precedent .
Time will tell if “ Don ’ t Leave , Organise ” is a minor irritant or a new Momentum .
Knights seem to be in fashion at present , with Sir Keir not the only one leading an opposition party ; he joins Sir Edward Davey , currently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrat MPs .
But back to the matter at hand : self-isolation and social distancing .
A couple of months ago , I wrote that choosing for Starmer would be a reactionary choice , an order of ‘ tediously woke ’ comfort food for Labour ’ s upper-middle class London membership after Corbyn .
He certainly isn ’ t the choice of leader that you ’ d make to try and appeal anew to the traditional – even tribal – Labour voter across the North of England who finally broke with the party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vanguard of Labour ’ s reactionary Remain wing , Starmer is the metropolitan Europhile ’ s dream candidate .
He was elected because he shares the views of the membership who elected him – a membership that has self-isolated itself from a vast mass of Labour ’ s traditional electorate ; a membership that it would seem doesn ’ t care , let alone understand , what it needs to change in order to win back the North .
The impression I ’ ve been getting since 2017 from London Labour members is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – particularly over the issue of anti-semitism .
His lack of action had become indefensible .
It must have been difficult to defend him in conversation over supper with Caroline and Seb , in a brasserie nestled somewhere amongst those inner North London postcodes .
Starmer is exactly who you want to be your party leader in order to avoid your right-on pals from socially distancing from you .
If you ’ re a wealthy Londoner , he ’ s just like you .
He represents Holborn & St Pancras ( his seat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; a barrister schooled in Surrey .
A bencher at Middle Temple , social uber-liberal , who worked internationally on human rights cases .
Starmer ’ s election by those who wanted ‘ one of us ’ provides the Conservative Party with a golden opportunity to cement the gains of 2019 , and keep Labour pinned down where it feels at home – in its new heartlands of central London , the middle of major cities and the University towns .
Once we move beyond Coronavirus , and we will , there will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his team and the party .
But we can not move away from the course of which we set in ‘ levelling up ’ and repaying the trust the electorate placed in us .
In choosing Starmer , Labour have doubled down on the mistake Conservatives made in 1997 , thinking it was a high watermark for ‘ the other lot ’ and things would ‘ return to normal.
’ Astonishingly , the party has failed to lean from its rnear annihilation in Scotland in 2015 , and the ‘ dead cat bounce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reversed two years later .
Labour have not learnt that once support has gone , if you don ’ t change fast , it doesn ’ t come back .
It wasn ’ t the socialism per se that was the primary reason people turned away from Labour in the North – the electorate could see Labour ’ s policies were unaffordable and often contradictory – it was much more basic than that .
It was the self-isolation of Labour ’ s London elite who had social distanced to such an extent that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a conversation on the same level with people who ’ d voted Labour for generations .
Following Ed Miliband , ( MP for Doncaster , who lives in Dartmouth Park , NW5 ) , Islington North ’ s very own Jeremy Corbyn , and now Starmer ( remarkably , Miliband ’ s actual MP ) – Labour have now chosen three Leaders in a row who live , literally , within a couple of tube stops of each other .
It ’ s clear where Labour ’ s heartlands now is , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cottage in which I typed today ’ s dispatch .
Nor is it even spiritually in the former mines , Methodism and manufacturing industries of County Durham and the North .
Labour ’ s heart is now in the self-styled trendy bits of the metropolis .
If we Conservatives stick to the plan , that ’ s exactly where Sir Keir and his self-isolated socially distanced comrades will remain .

Richard Holden is MP for North West Durham.
Self-isolation and social distancing are new concepts that we’ve all got used to – at least for the time being. Both were clearly at the forefront of the minds of the Labour Party members when they delivered Keir Starmer the leadership of the Labour Party. A role that the experienced Queen’s Counsel fulfilled more than adequately in the courtroom-esque quiet of the locked-down Parliament last week against the Government’s number two.
Starmer is the first knight to be Leader of the Opposition since Sir Alec Douglas-Home in 1964, a position Sir Alec held for 10 months. Co-incidentally, that’s almost the same length of time Jeremy Corbyn held the leadership for before the coup against him in 2016.
Labour’s anti-Corbyn wing must be hoping that history doesn’t repeat itself to either precedent. Time will tell if “Don’t Leave, Organise” is a minor irritant or a new Momentum. Knights seem to be in fashion at present, with Sir Keir not the only one leading an opposition party; he joins Sir Edward Davey, currently acting Co-Leader of the remaining 11 Liberal Democrat MPs.
But back to the matter at hand: self-isolation and social distancing. A couple of months ago, I wrote that choosing for Starmer would be a reactionary choice, an order of ‘tediously woke’ comfort food for Labour’s upper-middle class London membership after Corbyn.
He certainly isn’t the choice of leader that you’d make to try and appeal anew to the traditional – even tribal – Labour voter across the North of England who finally broke with the party at the last election. At the vanguard of Labour’s reactionary Remain wing, Starmer is the metropolitan Europhile’s dream candidate.
He was elected because he shares the views of the membership who elected him – a membership that has self-isolated itself from a vast mass of Labour’s traditional electorate; a membership that it would seem doesn’t care, let alone understand, what it needs to change in order to win back the North.
The impression I’ve been getting since 2017 from London Labour members is that Corbyn had become increasingly socially toxic – particularly over the issue of anti-semitism. His lack of action had become indefensible. It must have been difficult to defend him in conversation over supper with Caroline and Seb, in a brasserie nestled somewhere amongst those inner North London postcodes.
Starmer is exactly who you want to be your party leader in order to avoid your right-on pals from socially distancing from you. If you’re a wealthy Londoner, he’s just like you. He represents Holborn & St Pancras (his seat neighbours are Corbyn and Emily Thornberry); a barrister schooled in Surrey. A bencher at Middle Temple, social uber-liberal, who worked internationally on human rights cases.
Starmer’s election by those who wanted ‘one of us’ provides the Conservative Party with a golden opportunity to cement the gains of 2019, and keep Labour pinned down where it feels at home – in its new heartlands of central London, the middle of major cities and the University towns. Once we move beyond Coronavirus, and we will, there will be big choices for Boris Johnson, his team and the party. But we cannot move away from the course of which we set in ‘levelling up’ and repaying the trust the electorate placed in us.
In choosing Starmer, Labour have doubled down on the mistake Conservatives made in 1997, thinking it was a high watermark for ‘the other lot’ and things would ‘return to normal.’ Astonishingly, the party has failed to lean from its rnear annihilation in Scotland in 2015, and the ‘dead cat bounce’ of 2017, which was swiftly reversed two years later.
Labour have not learnt that once support has gone, if you don’t change fast, it doesn’t come back. It wasn’t the socialism per se that was the primary reason people turned away from Labour in the North – the electorate could see Labour’s policies were unaffordable and often contradictory – it was much more basic than that. It was the self-isolation of Labour’s London elite who had social distanced to such an extent that they cannot any longer even have a conversation on the same level with people who’d voted Labour for generations.
Following Ed Miliband, (MP for Doncaster, who lives in Dartmouth Park, NW5), Islington North’s very own Jeremy Corbyn, and now Starmer (remarkably, Miliband’s actual MP) – Labour have now chosen three Leaders in a row who live, literally, within a couple of tube stops of each other.
It’s clear where Labour’s heartlands now is, and it’s no-where near the terraced cottage in which I typed today’s dispatch. Nor is it even spiritually in the former mines, Methodism and manufacturing industries of County Durham and the North. Labour’s heart is now in the self-styled trendy bits of the metropolis. If we Conservatives stick to the plan, that’s exactly where Sir Keir and his self-isolated socially distanced comrades will remain.