conservativehome--2020-03-12--Ben Roback: How coronavirus could derail Trump’s economy-focused campaign

Ben Roback is Head of Trade and International Policy at Cicero Group .
At rallies and in campaign speeches , Donald Trump proudly boasts of the American economy ’ s roaring performance since he took office .
He has a point – proven in the chart below .
Whilst supporters of Barack Obama will quickly observe the economic recovery was greater under America ’ s 44th president than 45th , a 43 per cent increase in the Dow is a commendable achievement .
For that reason , it comes as no surprise that the president has tweeted 347 times including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 128 times including “ stock market ” , since he took office .
Analysts and political commentators take a mixed view of the President ’ s bullishness .
Yahoo Finance ’ s ‘ Trumponomics ’ report card currently stands at a B+ .
Three years into his presidency , Forbes gave Trump ’ s economic performance a mixed review based on 2.9 per cent GDP growth in 2018 and 2.3 per cent in 2019 – describing the impact of the Trump tax cut as a “ one-year sugar rush ” .
Whilst proof @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nevertheless fell short of the six per cent annual growth rate the President forecast in December 2017 with tax reform victory within reach .
A re-election campaign thrown off by coronavirus With an economy kicking firmly back into gear and Democrats squabbling with one another , Trump and his re-election campaign team will have been growing in confidence about the prospects for four more years in office .
But when your legacy – and therefore your campaign for re-election – is based on economic performance more than anything else , what happens when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wagon ?
For that reason , he faces a coronavirus-shaped challenge for political as well as public health reasons .
Wall Street ’ s nerves give the White House grave cause for concern .
Amid huge selloffs , US stocks plunged all week and on Monday and an automatic 15-minute pause in trading was triggered to inject a moment of calm into market volatility .
The S & P 500 , the Dow , and Nasdaq continue to suffer as the flight to safety persists .
The same can be said for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CAC 40 in France , the German Dax and the FTSE MIB in Italy .
All this has the potential to challenge Trump ’ s central electoral question to the nation – are you better off now than you were when I took office ?
The White House ’ s approach to coronavirus mitigation has been deeply questionable , seemingly motivated by political gain and not the health of the general public .
The President ’ s primary objective has been to downplay its potential impact .
Amidst increasing political and economic alarm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Control and Prevention ( CDC ) in Atlanta to tour the facility and outline his administration ’ s approach to handling what has now been classed as a pandemic by the World Health Organisation .
Given the potential scale of the health crisis the President could have on his hands , it seemed a curious time to be wearing a “ KEEP AMERICA GREAT ” campaign hat .
The substance of his statement was no easier to comprehend : “ As of the time I left the plane with you , we had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least what was on a very fine network known as Fox News .
And you love it .
But that ’ s what I happened to be watching .
And how was the show last night ?
Did it get good ratings , by the way ?
” It was in stark contrast to the calm and measured press conference the Prime Minister gave in Downing Street on Monday , flanked by the erudite pairing of Chris Whitty , the Chief Medical Officer , and Sir Patrick Vallance , the Chief Scientific Adviser @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on business as usual , the President is leading by example having held six public rallies in the last month .
But an evolving health crisis will almost certainly slow that schedule down , let alone looking ahead to November and considering how it could impact voter turnout .
A new poll revealed more than 9 in 10 Americans have seen , read or heard something about coronavirus .
This has already become one of the top news events of the last decade in terms of Americans ’ familiarity .
Dr Brian Monahan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Capitol Hill staffers that he expects 70-150 million people in the US to contract the coronavirus , according to press reports .
For context , that is roughly one third of country .
The White House and US Government must therefore get a tighter grip of coronavirus and treat it as a public health crisis , not a campaign platform .
There is no denying that the response to coronavirus will be viewed through a political lens .
After all , a government ’ s first responsibility is to keep its citizens safe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lose sight of the potential political impact on the 2020 election – polling proves the American people are acutely tuned into the Government ’ s response .

Ben Roback is Head of Trade and International Policy at Cicero Group.
At rallies and in campaign speeches, Donald Trump proudly boasts of the American economy’s roaring performance since he took office.
He has a point. Whilst supporters of Barack Obama will quickly observe the economic recovery was greater under America’s 44th president than 45th, a 43 per cent increase in the Dow is a commendable achievement.
For that reason, it comes as no surprise that the president has tweeted 347 times including the word “economy”, and 128 times including “stock market”, since he took office.
Analysts and political commentators take a mixed view of the President’s bullishness. Yahoo Finance’s ‘Trumponomics’ report card currently stands at a B+. Three years into his presidency, Forbes gave Trump’s economic performance a mixed review based on 2.9 per cent GDP growth in 2018 and 2.3 per cent in 2019 – describing the impact of the Trump tax cut as a “one-year sugar rush”.
Whilst proof of a resurgent economy, the numbers nevertheless fell short of the six per cent annual growth rate the President forecast in December 2017 with tax reform victory within reach.
A re-election campaign thrown off by coronavirus
With an economy kicking firmly back into gear and Democrats squabbling with one another, Trump and his re-election campaign team will have been growing in confidence about the prospects for four more years in office. But when your legacy – and therefore your campaign for re-election – is based on economic performance more than anything else, what happens when the wheels start to come off the wagon? For that reason, he faces a coronavirus-shaped challenge for political as well as public health reasons.
Wall Street’s nerves give the White House grave cause for concern. Amid huge selloffs, US stocks plunged all week and on Monday and an automatic 15-minute pause in trading was triggered to inject a moment of calm into market volatility. The S&P 500, the Dow, and Nasdaq continue to suffer as the flight to safety persists. The same can be said for the FTSE 100, FTSE 250, the CAC 40 in France, the German Dax and the FTSE MIB in Italy.
All this has the potential to challenge Trump’s central electoral question to the nation: are you better off now than you were when I took office?
The White House’s approach to coronavirus mitigation has been deeply questionable, seemingly motivated by political gain and not the health of the general public. The President’s primary objective has been to downplay its potential impact. Amidst increasing political and economic alarm, he visited the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta to tour the facility and outline his administration’s approach to handling what has now been classed as a pandemic by the World Health Organisation.
Given the potential scale of the health crisis the President could have on his hands, it seemed a curious time to be wearing a “KEEP AMERICA GREAT” campaign hat. The substance of his statement was no easier to comprehend:
“As of the time I left the plane with you, we had 240 cases. That’s at least what was on a very fine network known as Fox News. And you love it. But that’s what I happened to be watching. And how was the show last night? Did it get good ratings, by the way?”
It was in stark contrast to the calm and measured press conference the Prime Minister gave in Downing Street on Monday, flanked by the erudite pairing of Chris Whitty, the Chief Medical Officer, and Sir Patrick Vallance, the Chief Scientific Adviser.
If the objective is to carry on business as usual, the President is leading by example, having held six public rallies in the last month. But an evolving health crisis will almost certainly slow that schedule down, let alone looking ahead to November and considering how it could impact voter turnout.
A new poll revealed more than 9 in 10 Americans have seen, read or heard something about coronavirus. This has already become one of the top news events of the last decade in terms of Americans’ familiarity. Dr Brian Monahan, Congress’ in-house doctor, told Capitol Hill staffers that he expects 70-150 million people in the US to contract the coronavirus, according to press reports. For context, that is roughly one third of country.
The White House and US Government must therefore get a tighter grip of coronavirus and treat it as a public health crisis, not a campaign platform.
There is no denying that the response to coronavirus will be viewed through a political lens. After all, a government’s first responsibility is to keep its citizens safe. The White House must therefore not lose sight of the potential political impact on the 2020 election – polling proves the American people are acutely tuned into the Government’s response.


conservativehome--2020-03-12--Henry Hill: Davies pivots in a devosceptic direction as he ‘relaunches’ his leadership

Davies turns new page in his leadership with devosceptic pivot Last week , I wrote about the apparent tension in the Welsh Conservatives between the long-term strategy of their Assembly group , which has been geared towards an alliance with Plaid Cymru , and their increasingly devosceptic electorate .
I have written about this dilemma previously , but the Tories declined to confront it during their most recent leadership election and appeared to miss a golden opportunity to woo voters tempted away from Labour by UKIP .
I then warned that this could leave their flank open to challenge from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Abolish the Assembly ( ‘ ATA ’ ) .
This week , it appeared that this may finally becoming to pass .
As ATA activists welcomed members to the Welsh Conservative conference , Paul Davies gave a speech which some commentators are describing as “ effectively a relaunch of his leadership ” .
Of course , this does not extend to actually opposing the Assembly .
ITV report the leader of the Welsh Tory AMs as saying that “ It isn ’ t devolution that has failed Wales – it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ formulation that basically renders devolution itself un-falsifiable by experience .
But it does strike a more sceptical tone , with an emphasis on freezing the Welsh Government ’ s budget , opposing a bid to double the size of the Assembly ( at the same time as rebranding it a ‘ parliament ’ ) , and taking what is described as a ‘ populist ’ tone on the cost of politics .
This may well be effective in persuading devosceptic Conservative voters to stick with the Party next May , but it would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Plaid Cymru and leave the Tories with a longer , less insider-y route to power in Cardiff Bay .
This could potentially be a significant inflection point , marking the moment when ATA started exerting the sort of pull on the Tories in Wales that UKIP did nationally .
Yes , at the moment the counter-devolutionaries are a rag-tag group with little to no representation – but so too were UKIP when their activists first started appearing outside Conservative conferences .
But whilst ITV have given the speech a full write-up , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the politics page of Wales Online – which counts at least one prominent nationalist on its reporting staff – is a dig at the Tories for employing family members .
If devoscepticism is really Davies ’ chosen path , he will have to try and carve a space for it in the Welsh media .
The Daily Telegraph reports that Michael Gove has written to the Electoral Commission to warn them against indulging the Scottish Nationalists ’ demands that new work be done on an independence referendum .
He apparently claims that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ re-testing ’ of the 2014 question in order to persuade their increasingly fractious activists that a poll is imminent , and tells the quango that doing so would be a waste both of time and public money .
For what it ’ s worth , unionists should almost certainly insist on a new question in the event of a second referendum .
David Cameron ceded the separatists the ‘ Yes ’ label as part of his policy of conceding lots in order to make the outcome definitive ( ho ho ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ should reference what is to be gained ( “ an independent country ” ) and lost ( “ leave the United Kingdom ” ) .
In other news , the Prime Minister has apparently appointed Luke Graham , the former MP for Ochil & South Perthshire , as a Downing Street adviser on matters relating to the Union .
The divisions within the SNP over the question of a second referendum are growing increasingly public .
Just this week Ian Blackford , the Party ’ s leader at Westminster , has publicly rebuked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stage a referendum without legal authorisation from Westminster in the event of a separatist ( SNP plus Green ) majority in Holyrood after the 2021 elections .
Nor is this their only problem .
Aileen Campbell , the Communities and Local Government Secretary , has this week become the second Scottish Government minister to announce her intention to step down from Holyrood .
She follows Mike Russel , one of the SNP ’ s better-known MSPs and their current Brexit Secretary .
Some outlets are speculating that up to seven Nationalist MSPs may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Freeman , the embattled Health Secretary .
Any that hold individual , geographic constituency seats ( as opposed to list ones ) will trigger selection battles which could offer fresh chances for the Party ’ s various factions to fight for control of it .
I noted a couple of weeks ago how this is already happening in Edinburgh Central , Ruth Davidson ’ s constituency , which is witnessing a high-profile showdown between Joanna Cherry MP and Angus Robinson , the SNP ’ s former Westminster leader .
On top of all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Alex Salmond ’ s trial .
The Guardian have done a useful overview of how it will be reported , and here are some links to a few of the stories so far .
Are ministers using infrastructure to carve for Westminster a bigger role in the Union ?
One feature of this week ’ s Budget worth noting is that Rishi Sunak has apparently ensured that Scotland , Wales , and Northern Ireland will most strongly feel the benefits of key ‘ levelling up ’ policies , especially those relating to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Maciver , a sometime contributor to this site and no committed partisan of the Party , has noted , this move highlights the huge potential there is for unionism to regain ground in Scotland and elsewhere if it starts to use Westminster ’ s powers and money more intelligently – especially now it is taking back control of those funds which were previously laundered through Brussels before coming back to the British regions with the EU flag on them .
Meanwhile the Government ’ s thinking on a land link between Scotland and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alister Jack saying that the Prime Minister now favours a tunnel between Portpatrick and Larne rather than the previous idea of a ‘ Boris Bridge ’ .
In a recent piece I struck quite a sceptical line on this project , writing that : “ The bridge to Northern Ireland – which will almost certainly never get built – serves as an eye-catching statement of his commitment to a Union he unabashedly shafted to “ get Brexit done ” .
” But Paul Masterton , another recently-unemployed Scottish Conservative MP , has noted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assuming they don ’ t actually try and build it ) .
Could the Government be using the idea of ‘ Carson ’ s Causeway ’ to create political space for less grandiose schemes , and secure public acceptance from potential opponents of Westminster making direct investments in the devolved nations ?
Not to be bought off with a figment of a tunnel , the Democratic Unionists have denounced the Budget as a “ false dawn ” for Northern Ireland and continue to savage the Prime Minister over the Withdrawal Agreement .

Davies turns new page in his leadership with devosceptic pivot
Last week, I wrote about the apparent tension in the Welsh Conservatives between the long-term strategy of their Assembly group, which has been geared towards an alliance with Plaid Cymru, and their increasingly devosceptic electorate.
I have written about this dilemma previously, but the Tories declined to confront it during their most recent leadership election and appeared to miss a golden opportunity to woo voters tempted away from Labour by UKIP. I then warned that this could leave their flank open to challenge from a more explicitly unionist party, such as Abolish the Assembly (‘ATA’).
This week, it appeared that this may finally becoming to pass. As ATA activists welcomed members to the Welsh Conservative conference, Paul Davies gave a speech which some commentators are describing as “effectively a relaunch of his leadership”.
Of course, this does not extend to actually opposing the Assembly. ITV report the leader of the Welsh Tory AMs as saying that “It isn’t devolution that has failed Wales – it’s two decades of Labour”, a formulation that basically renders devolution itself un-falsifiable by experience.
But it does strike a more sceptical tone, with an emphasis on freezing the Welsh Government’s budget, opposing a bid to double the size of the Assembly (at the same time as rebranding it a ‘parliament’), and taking what is described as a ‘populist’ tone on the cost of politics. This may well be effective in persuading devosceptic Conservative voters to stick with the Party next May, but it would almost certainly rule out any arrangement with Plaid Cymru and leave the Tories with a longer, less insider-y route to power in Cardiff Bay.
This could potentially be a significant inflection point, marking the moment when ATA started exerting the sort of pull on the Tories in Wales that UKIP did nationally. Yes, at the moment the counter-devolutionaries are a rag-tag group with little to no representation – but so too were UKIP when their activists first started appearing outside Conservative conferences.
But whilst ITV have given the speech a full write-up, the only related story which currently appears on the politics page of Wales Online – which counts at least one prominent nationalist on its reporting staff – is a dig at the Tories for employing family members. If devoscepticism is really Davies’ chosen path, he will have to try and carve a space for it in the Welsh media.
Gove warns elections watchdog against ‘wasting time’ on SNP demands…
The Daily Telegraph reports that Michael Gove has written to the Electoral Commission to warn them against indulging the Scottish Nationalists’ demands that new work be done on an independence referendum.
He apparently claims that the SNP leadership are trying to trigger a ‘re-testing’ of the 2014 question in order to persuade their increasingly fractious activists that a poll is imminent, and tells the quango that doing so would be a waste both of time and public money.
For what it’s worth, unionists should almost certainly insist on a new question in the event of a second referendum. David Cameron ceded the separatists the ‘Yes’ label as part of his policy of conceding lots in order to make the outcome definitive (ho ho). At the least, the next question should reference what is to be gained (“an independent country”) and lost (“leave the United Kingdom”).
In other news, the Prime Minister has apparently appointed Luke Graham, the former MP for Ochil & South Perthshire, as a Downing Street adviser on matters relating to the Union.
…as Nationalists continue to run into trouble
The divisions within the SNP over the question of a second referendum are growing increasingly public. Just this week Ian Blackford, the Party’s leader at Westminster, has publicly rebuked colleagues suggesting that the Scottish Government could stage a referendum without legal authorisation from Westminster in the event of a separatist (SNP plus Green) majority in Holyrood after the 2021 elections.
Nor is this their only problem. Aileen Campbell, the Communities and Local Government Secretary, has this week become the second Scottish Government minister to announce her intention to step down from Holyrood. She follows Mike Russel, one of the SNP’s better-known MSPs and their current Brexit Secretary. Some outlets are speculating that up to seven Nationalist MSPs may be set to quit, including Jeane Freeman, the embattled Health Secretary.
Any that hold individual, geographic constituency seats (as opposed to list ones) will trigger selection battles which could offer fresh chances for the Party’s various factions to fight for control of it. I noted a couple of weeks ago how this is already happening in Edinburgh Central, Ruth Davidson’s constituency, which is witnessing a high-profile showdown between Joanna Cherry MP and Angus Robinson, the SNP’s former Westminster leader.
On top of all that, of course, there’s Alex Salmond’s trial. The Guardian have done a useful overview of how it will be reported, and here are some links to a few of the stories so far.
Are ministers using infrastructure to carve for Westminster a bigger role in the Union?
One feature of this week’s Budget worth noting is that Rishi Sunak has apparently ensured that Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland will most strongly feel the benefits of key ‘levelling up’ policies, especially those relating to broadband and mobile coverage.
As Andy Maciver, a sometime contributor to this site and no committed partisan of the Party, has noted, this move highlights the huge potential there is for unionism to regain ground in Scotland and elsewhere if it starts to use Westminster’s powers and money more intelligently – especially now it is taking back control of those funds which were previously laundered through Brussels before coming back to the British regions with the EU flag on them.
Meanwhile the Government’s thinking on a land link between Scotland and Northern Ireland has reportedly evolved, with Alister Jack saying that the Prime Minister now favours a tunnel between Portpatrick and Larne rather than the previous idea of a ‘Boris Bridge’.
In a recent piece I struck quite a sceptical line on this project, writing that:
“The bridge to Northern Ireland – which will almost certainly never get built – serves as an eye-catching statement of his commitment to a Union he unabashedly shafted to “get Brexit done”.”
But Paul Masterton, another recently-unemployed Scottish Conservative MP, has noted another possible use for the idea (assuming they don’t actually try and build it). Could the Government be using the idea of ‘Carson’s Causeway’ to create political space for less grandiose schemes, and secure public acceptance from potential opponents of Westminster making direct investments in the devolved nations?
I find it interesting that a lot of the ‘money could be spent better on other things’ responses which reject this seem to at the same time accept the premise of direct investment by UK Government in infrastructure in Scotland and other devolved areas. Not a daft kite to fly… — Paul Masterton (@pmasterton1985) March 6, 2020
Not to be bought off with a figment of a tunnel, the Democratic Unionists have denounced the Budget as a “false dawn” for Northern Ireland and continue to savage the Prime Minister over the Withdrawal Agreement.


conservativehome--2020-03-12--Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chief Executive of the British Council – a

Calling Conservatives: New public appointments announced. Chief Executive of the British Council – and more

Eight years ago , the TaxPayers ’ Alliance reported that “ in the last year , five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories ” .
It currently reports that almost half of avowedly political appointees last year owed their allegiance to Labour Party , compared to less than a third for the Conservatives .
Despite the selection of some Party members or supporters to fill important posts , over time , the Conservatives have punched beneath their weight when it comes to public appointments .
One of the reasons seems to be that Tories simply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number as Labour supporters .
To help remedy this , each week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies , so that qualified Conservatives can be aware of the opportunities presented .
“ Robert Chote will be stepping down as Chair of the BRC later this year , after 10 years in post .
We are seeking a successor with deep expertise in economic and fiscal analysis who can lead the BRC and provide intellectual leadership to the OBR ’ s staff .
This is a high profile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ skills and integrity .
Candidates must command broad respect for their objectivity in dealing with issues of political sensitivity .
Appointments to the BRC are for a five-year term .
There is the possibility of reappointment at the end of the term and members can serve a maximum of two terms .
This post can be undertaken on either a part or full-time basis.
” “ The Office for Nuclear Regulation ( ONR ) is a Public Corporation responsible for the regulation of nuclear safety and security across the UK .
Its vision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inspires respect , trust and confidence .
ONR is sponsored by the Department for Work and Pensions ( DWP ) who have principal responsibility for governance , finance and its performance in relation to conventional Health and Safety .
The Department for Business , Energy and Industrial Strategy ( BEIS ) is accountable for the UK civil nuclear regulatory framework and policies and for appointing a Security Non-Executive Director ( NED ) to the ONR Board.
” “ As we enter the Fourth Industrial Revolution , a wave of technological innovation is creating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transforming the way things are made and the way we live .
From AI-powered legal services to autonomous ships , new products , services and business models are emerging which don ’ t fit with existing regulatory systems .
In its White Paper on Regulation for the Fourth Industrial Revolution , the Government committed to establishing a Regulatory Horizons Council ( RHC ) to identify the implications of technological innovation with high potential benefit for the UK economy and society and advise the government on regulatory reform needed to support its rapid and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opportunity to take on an intellectually demanding role at the heart of international financial services , leading a sizeable and complex organisation .
There is a requirement for strong leadership in a challenging environment to undertake a critically important role .
Under Andrew Bailey , the FCA has formulated a transformation programme , to equip the organisation for the next phase of its development : a data strategy and enhanced analytical skills to rapidly identify harm across an exceptionally broad range of firms of all sizes exploiting fast-moving changes in technology and distribution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and processes to act swiftly on the harms identified ; [ and ] and with a regulatory framework which is appropriate following the completion of EU withdrawal , and which takes advantage of the opportunities for better and more efficient regulation brought by technology and behavioural science.
” “ The Chief Executive will assume office at a time of unprecedented external change .
The political landscape in Europe and around the globe is altering with increasing pace and less predictability .
The British Council is also in constant transformation to deliver within funding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and customer-facing world .
The aims and goals of the British Council are more necessary than ever .
Delivering them in the complex world of 2020 is more difficult than at any time since 1945 .
The resulting demands on the Chief Executive in terms of vision , agility , ability to simplify and lead with clarity and purpose are substantial .
The Chief Executive will be instrumental in redefining both ‘ soft power ’ and ‘ cultural relations ’ at this pivotal moment and will help define the place of the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a ‘ disrupted ’ and uncertain geopolitical world.
” Remuneration : Up to £150k per annum plus bonus to 8 per cent and Civil Service Pension “ The Coast to Capital Strategic Board comprises private sector and local authority Members , setting a vision for and overseeing delivery of economic prosperity for all in the Coast to Capital area , including through Government funding of projects through the Local Growth Fund .
They are accountable to the LEP Board and for the proper governance of the LEP .
Coast to Capital is seeking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the C2C area to help lead the region and meet the ambitious vision set out in its strategic plan .
Currently chaired by Tim Wates , who will be stepping down in July 2020 , the Board brings together a diverse mix of regional business leaders alongside senior politicians and leaders from Universities and Further Education .
”

Eight years ago, the TaxPayers’ Alliance reported that “in the last year, five times more Labour people were appointed to public bodies than Tories”.
Despite the selection of some Party members or supporters to fill important posts, over time, the Conservatives have punched beneath their weight when it comes to public appointments. One of the reasons seems to be that Tories simply don’t apply in the same number as Labour supporters.
To help remedy this, each week we put up links to some of the main public appointments vacancies, so that qualified Conservatives can be aware of the opportunities presented.
– – – – – – – – – –
Office for Budget Responsibility – Chair
“Robert Chote will be stepping down as Chair of the BRC later this year, after 10 years in post. We are seeking a successor with deep expertise in economic and fiscal analysis who can lead the BRC and provide intellectual leadership to the OBR’s staff. This is a high profile and influential role, requiring outstanding communication skills and integrity. Candidates must command broad respect for their objectivity in dealing with issues of political sensitivity. Appointments to the BRC are for a five-year term. There is the possibility of reappointment at the end of the term and members can serve a maximum of two terms. This post can be undertaken on either a part or full-time basis.”
Time: Full- or part-time.
Remuneration: £158,762 per annum (FTE).
Closes: 19 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Office for Nuclear Regulation – Security Non-Executive Director
“The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) is a Public Corporation responsible for the regulation of nuclear safety and security across the UK. Its vision is to be an exemplary regulator that inspires respect, trust and confidence. ONR is sponsored by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) who have principal responsibility for governance, finance and its performance in relation to conventional Health and Safety. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) is accountable for the UK civil nuclear regulatory framework and policies and for appointing a Security Non-Executive Director (NED) to the ONR Board.”
Time: Approx. 30 days per annum.
Remuneration: £15,000 plus expenses.
Closes: 22 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Regulatory Horizons Panel – Member
“As we enter the Fourth Industrial Revolution, a wave of technological innovation is creating new industries, disrupting existing ones and transforming the way things are made and the way we live. From AI-powered legal services to autonomous ships, new products, services and business models are emerging which don’t fit with existing regulatory systems. In its White Paper on Regulation for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the Government committed to establishing a Regulatory Horizons Council (RHC) to identify the implications of technological innovation with high potential benefit for the UK economy and society and advise the government on regulatory reform needed to support its rapid and safe introduction.”
Time: 1-2 days per month.
Remuneration: £380 per diem.
Closes: 23 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Financial Conduct Authority – Chief Executive
“This is an opportunity to take on an intellectually demanding role at the heart of international financial services, leading a sizeable and complex organisation. There is a requirement for strong leadership in a challenging environment to undertake a critically important role. Under Andrew Bailey, the FCA has formulated a transformation programme, to equip the organisation for the next phase of its development: a data strategy and enhanced analytical skills to rapidly identify harm across an exceptionally broad range of firms of all sizes exploiting fast-moving changes in technology and distribution to target consumers; enhance employee capabilities and processes to act swiftly on the harms identified; [and] and with a regulatory framework which is appropriate following the completion of EU withdrawal, and which takes advantage of the opportunities for better and more efficient regulation brought by technology and behavioural science.”
Time: Full-time.
Remuneration: Competitive.
Closes: 27 March
– – – – – – – – – –
British Council – Chief Executive
“The Chief Executive will assume office at a time of unprecedented external change. The political landscape in Europe and around the globe is altering with increasing pace and less predictability. The British Council is also in constant transformation to deliver within funding constraints in a demanding, more client and customer-facing world. The aims and goals of the British Council are more necessary than ever. Delivering them in the complex world of 2020 is more difficult than at any time since 1945. The resulting demands on the Chief Executive in terms of vision, agility, ability to simplify and lead with clarity and purpose are substantial. The Chief Executive will be instrumental in redefining both ‘soft power’ and ‘cultural relations’ at this pivotal moment and will help define the place of the United Kingdom, for the better, in a ‘disrupted’ and uncertain geopolitical world.”
Time: Full-time.
Remuneration: Up to £150k per annum plus bonus to 8 per cent and Civil Service Pension
Closes: 27 March
– – – – – – – – – –
Coast to Capital Local Enterprise Partnership (C2C LEP) – Chair
“The Coast to Capital Strategic Board comprises private sector and local authority Members, setting a vision for and overseeing delivery of economic prosperity for all in the Coast to Capital area, including through Government funding of projects through the Local Growth Fund. They are accountable to the LEP Board and for the proper governance of the LEP. Coast to Capital is seeking an influential and persuasive senior business figure from the C2C area to help lead the region and meet the ambitious vision set out in its strategic plan. Currently chaired by Tim Wates, who will be stepping down in July 2020, the Board brings together a diverse mix of regional business leaders alongside senior politicians and leaders from Universities and Further Education.”
Time: Four days per month, three-year term.
Remuneration: £20,000 per annum.
Closes: 30 March


conservativehome--2020-03-12--Budget 1) This was less a Conservative Budget than “the People’s Budget”. From a Vote Leave Governme

Budget 1) This was less a Conservative Budget than “the People’s Budget”. From a Vote Leave Government – not the usual Tory one.

The main economic doctrines of Thatcherism were roughly as follows .
The state should be rolled back .
Don ’ t spend more than you can afford .
Seek to balance the Budget .
Borrowing is deferred taxation .
The private sector drives growth and government doesn ’ t : indeed , it tends to gets in the way .
Successive governments have been unapplying these ideas for some time – though the Coalition ’ s programme of deficit reduction was straight out of the Thatcher handbag , as was its decision to cut the top rate of income tax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we call the period when Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill ruled the roost , saw a deliberate public break from the Thatcher legacy .
In her first Conservative Party conference speech , the former Prime Minister lauded “ the good that Government can do ” .
Timothy was sufficiently favoured by Team Johnson to be allowed a crack at two Parliamentary selections last year .
Indeed , there is a sense in which Dominic Cummings is Timothy in disguise , with his enthusiasm for the state ’ s role in science policy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rishi Sunak presented today ’ s Budget with verve , aplomb and some shrewdly-made judgements : for example , by seeking to pluck feathers from Entrepreneurs ’ Relief without killing the goose .
But our sense is that this was not a Budget drawn up by the Chancellor .
Rather , it was masterminded jointly in Downing Street , to which the top of the Treasury , in the form of Sunak , has been yoked – following the resignation of Sajid Javid .
And it marks a wider and deeper Tory break @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time round in the main financial statement of a Government with a near-landslide majority .
David Cameron and George Osborne wanted to get state spending as a share of GDP down to 35 per cent .
Boris Johnson and Sunak are settling for nearer 40 per cent .
Not so long ago , the former Chancellor aimed to achieve a Budget surplus .
Now , his successor looks to run a deficit of some two to three per cent of GDP .
Such are the consequences of what Sunak himself lauded as “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years ” .
He was shy of spelling out what this implies for borrowing and tax .
On the former , he avoided spelling out the figures other than in percentage terms .
No wonder , since the actual sums give pause for thought .
It was £38 billion in 2018 .
The Office of Budget Responsibility says that the Chancellor plans it to hit £67 billion in 2021-22 before declining to £58 billion by the end of this Parliament .
On tax rises , that implies a tax burden of about 35 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ period : the Institute for Fiscal Studies will doubtless have more details tomorrow .
Now Thatcherism was sometimes applied more in the breach than the observance – including by the former Prime Minister herself – and rules are there to be broken if circumstances so dictate .
There is a case for believing that they do today .
We have solemnly quoted a series of Budget figures .
But forecasts are almost never right at the best of times , and we may be set for the worst of them .
The Chancellor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be “ temporary ” , and strictly speaking he was doubtless correct .
But temporary is as temporary does , and Sunak knows no more or less than we do what the combination of the virus , downturn , market volatility , corporate debt , the condition of the banks , China ’ s debts , Italy ’ s condition , the Eurozone ’ s torpid handling of the crisis and America ’ s haphazard one will bring .
It could be that the coronavirus will require an even bigger bailout fund @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chancellor announced today .
And that the illness will stretch out the weird post-crash economic world , with its rock-bottom interest rates and persistent spectre of deflation , than would otherwise have been the case .
In such circumstances , the Government ’ s fiscal rules would matter less than Javid , who clearly sees himself as their guardian , is currently making out .
In any event , such rules chop and change all the time , as this entertaining history by Harry Phibbs confirms , and are impossible to take too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Sunak ’ s exercise in Boosterism with a capital B won ’ t be enough to see the economy through what is surely set to be recession – if one accepts that the Government is as right to borrow more now as it would have wrong to borrow more in 2010 , because the structural deficit has been brought under control .
But a central point here , at least for ConservativeHome , is not just what the Chancellor did today , but why he did it .
And we confess to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s quite the right word , that now drives that yoked Number Ten/Number Eleven team – and the Johnson instinct for Bridges and Circuses that helps to form it .
Sunak didn ’ t try to explain away his whopping planned increase in state spending yesterday .
Instead , he embraced it as a point of pride .
“ An average growth rate in real terms of 2.8 per cent – twice as fast as the economy , ” he told the Commons .
In this vision of things , government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with billions on broadband , rail and “ strategic roads ” ; raised spending on public services , with even bigger NHS totals ; more money for science , with £800 million going on Cummings ’ Arpa-style project , and not so much greenery as to frighten the horses .
Much of all this is for the noble purpose of “ levelling-up ” – changing “ the whole mindset of Government ” , as the Chancellor put it yesterday .
But one does not have to be an economic minimalist to point out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ getting all this wrong , through Wilson ’ s white hot heat and Heath ’ s U-turned state to Brown ’ s debt .
If Government spending can drive growth , why is Jeremy Corbyn wrong ?
Why not vote for a Marxist Labour Party and have done with it ?
Johnson and Sunak have a plausible answer : because we ’ re not in hoc to a hateful ideology ; are more pragmatic ; more business-friendly ; more sensible ; better – at least as politicians .
ConservativeHome expected that the Budget @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that the Chancellor would therefore announce that , for nearly everything else , tomorrow must be another day .
We underestimated the ambition , sweep and ruthlessness of this Government .
It is light on the structural reform that must come with higher spending – one of the reasons why we distrust the approach that Sunak set out .
There is no apparent intent to deal with social care , the pensions bill , NHS efficiency – the challenges posed by an ageing population .
No Ken Clarke-style , Ken Baker-type public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doubt an intense political focus , a long memory for slights and disloyalty , a contempt for much of the media – and a revolutionary mindset .
“ A People ’ s Budget from a People ’ s Government , ” the Chancellor perorated .
There you have it .
Not a Thatcherite one from a Conservative one – or even a plan that is recognisably Tory at all , at least by the standard of recent years .
The voice was the voice of Sunak , but the hands were those of @ @ @

The main economic doctrines of Thatcherism were roughly as follows. The state should be rolled back. Don’t spend more than you can afford. Seek to balance the Budget. Borrowing is deferred taxation. The private sector drives growth and government doesn’t: indeed, it tends to gets in the way.
Successive governments have been unapplying these ideas for some time – though the Coalition’s programme of deficit reduction was straight out of the Thatcher handbag, as was its decision to cut the top rate of income tax.
Theresa May Mark One, as we call the period when Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill ruled the roost, saw a deliberate public break from the Thatcher legacy. In her first Conservative Party conference speech, the former Prime Minister lauded “the good that Government can do”.
Timothy was sufficiently favoured by Team Johnson to be allowed a crack at two Parliamentary selections last year. Indeed, there is a sense in which Dominic Cummings is Timothy in disguise, with his enthusiasm for the state’s role in science policy, and his indifference to its size.
Rishi Sunak presented today’s Budget with verve, aplomb and some shrewdly-made judgements: for example, by seeking to pluck feathers from Entrepreneurs’ Relief without killing the goose. But our sense is that this was not a Budget drawn up by the Chancellor.
Rather, it was masterminded jointly in Downing Street, to which the top of the Treasury, in the form of Sunak, has been yoked – following the resignation of Sajid Javid. And it marks a wider and deeper Tory break from the Thatcher legacy, enshrined this time round in the main financial statement of a Government with a near-landslide majority.
David Cameron and George Osborne wanted to get state spending as a share of GDP down to 35 per cent. Boris Johnson and Sunak are settling for nearer 40 per cent. Not so long ago, the former Chancellor aimed to achieve a Budget surplus. Now, his successor looks to run a deficit of some two to three per cent of GDP.
Such are the consequences of what Sunak himself lauded as “the largest sustained fiscal boost for 30 years”. He was shy of spelling out what this implies for borrowing and tax. On the former, he avoided spelling out the figures other than in percentage terms. No wonder, since the actual sums give pause for thought.
It was £38 billion in 2018. The Office of Budget Responsibility says that the Chancellor plans it to hit £67 billion in 2021-22 before declining to £58 billion by the end of this Parliament. On tax rises, that implies a tax burden of about 35 per cent of GDP over the same period: the Institute for Fiscal Studies will doubtless have more details tomorrow.
Now Thatcherism was sometimes applied more in the breach than the observance – including by the former Prime Minister herself – and rules are there to be broken if circumstances so dictate. There is a case for believing that they do today.
We have solemnly quoted a series of Budget figures. But forecasts are almost never right at the best of times, and we may be set for the worst of them. The Chancellor said that the effect of the Coronavirus will be “temporary”, and strictly speaking he was doubtless correct.
But temporary is as temporary does, and Sunak knows no more or less than we do what the combination of the virus, downturn, market volatility, corporate debt, the condition of the banks, China’s debts, Italy’s condition, the Eurozone’s torpid handling of the crisis and America’s haphazard one will bring.
It could be that the coronavirus will require an even bigger bailout fund than the £30 billion package that the Chancellor announced today. And that the illness will stretch out the weird post-crash economic world, with its rock-bottom interest rates and persistent spectre of deflation, than would otherwise have been the case.
In such circumstances, the Government’s fiscal rules would matter less than Javid, who clearly sees himself as their guardian, is currently making out. In any event, such rules chop and change all the time, as this entertaining history by Harry Phibbs confirms, and are impossible to take too seriously.
So it could even be that Sunak’s exercise in Boosterism with a capital B won’t be enough to see the economy through what is surely set to be recession – if one accepts that the Government is as right to borrow more now as it would have wrong to borrow more in 2010, because the structural deficit has been brought under control.
But a central point here, at least for ConservativeHome, is not just what the Chancellor did today, but why he did it. And we confess to being resistant to the philosophy, if that’s quite the right word, that now drives that yoked Number Ten/Number Eleven team – and the Johnson instinct for Bridges and Circuses that helps to form it.
Sunak didn’t try to explain away his whopping planned increase in state spending yesterday. Instead, he embraced it as a point of pride. “An average growth rate in real terms of 2.8 per cent – twice as fast as the economy,” he told the Commons.
In this vision of things, government can drive growth – building infrastructure, with billions on broadband, rail and “strategic roads”; raised spending on public services, with even bigger NHS totals; more money for science, with £800 million going on Cummings’ Arpa-style project, and not so much greenery as to frighten the horses.
Much of all this is for the noble purpose of “levelling-up” – changing “the whole mindset of Government”, as the Chancellor put it yesterday. But one does not have to be an economic minimalist to point out that Britain has a long history of getting all this wrong, through Wilson’s white hot heat and Heath’s U-turned state to Brown’s debt.
If Government spending can drive growth, why is Jeremy Corbyn wrong? Why not vote for a Marxist Labour Party and have done with it? Johnson and Sunak have a plausible answer: because we’re not in hoc to a hateful ideology; are more pragmatic; more business-friendly; more sensible; better – at least as politicians.
ConservativeHome expected that the Budget would tackle the Coronavirus crisis head-on, and that the Chancellor would therefore announce that, for nearly everything else, tomorrow must be another day. We underestimated the ambition, sweep and ruthlessness of this Government.
It is light on the structural reform that must come with higher spending – one of the reasons why we distrust the approach that Sunak set out. There is no apparent intent to deal with social care, the pensions bill, NHS efficiency – the challenges posed by an ageing population. No Ken Clarke-style, Ken Baker-type public service overhaul.
But there is beyond doubt an intense political focus, a long memory for slights and disloyalty, a contempt for much of the media – and a revolutionary mindset.
“A People’s Budget from a People’s Government,” the Chancellor perorated. There you have it. Not a Thatcherite one from a Conservative one – or even a plan that is recognisably Tory at all, at least by the standard of recent years. The voice was the voice of Sunak, but the hands were those of Vote Leave.


Coronavirus Count

Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
• And from Northern Ireland here .
Number of people tested in the UK : 27,476 .
Number of people tested positive who have since died : six .
From Public Health England ’ s webpage Total UK cases COVID-19 Cases Update .
The above are figures for England .
“ The risk to the UK has been raised to high ” – from the Government ’ s webpage Number of coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) cases and risk in the UK .
HOW TO AVOID CATCHING OR @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .
The symptoms of coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not necessarily mean you have the illness .
The symptoms 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 our coronavirus advice for travellers • You ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .
• 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 1 .
Stay indoors and avoid contact with other people if you ’ ve travelled to the UK from the following places , even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • Anywhere in Italy on or after 9 March .
• Specific areas in northern Italy in the last 14 days .
• Iran in the last 14 days .
• Hubei province in China in the last 14 days .
• Daegu , Cheongdo or Gyeongsan in South Korea in the last 14 days .
Stay indoors and avoid contact with other people if you ’ ve travelled to the UK from the following places in the last 14 days and have a cough , high temperature or shortness of breath , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • Italy ( outside specific areas in northern Italy ) before 9 March .
• South Korea outside of Daegu , Cheongdo and Gyeongsan .
Updated as of 7am on Thursday March 12 .

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--2020-03-12--Garvan Walshe: The virus shows the decline of Western democratic culture. Rebuilding it will take ha

Garvan Walshe: The virus shows the decline of Western democratic culture. Rebuilding it will take hard work.

Garvan Walshe is a former national and international security policy adviser to the Conservative Party .
He runs TRD Policy .
ConHome readers will remember the grammar schools row of 2007 .
David Willetts had persuaded the Conservatives to oppose new grammar schools , on the grounds that they were bad for social mobility .
Many Tory members and MPs disagreed , however .
I remember heated arguments at the Conservative Research Department , where I then worked , and getting incensed when told that “ evidence-based policy ” meant that a Conservative government should abandon its long-held principle of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In the grammar schools case , the evidence indeed was that they reduced social mobility – according to a definition created and popularised by opponents of grammar schools .
The first response is to criticise the definition , and say it concealed matters of value behind matters of fact .
Social mobility can be thought of in two ways .
If it is derived by measuring the average collective attainment of children from different social backgrounds , then grammar schools work against it .
If , instead , it is derived by considering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to academic selection , can get an education they would not otherwise have been able to afford , grammar schools boost social mobility .
Neither of these claims are actually pure fact ( like the speed of light in a vacuum being 299,792,458 metres per second ) or pure value ( adultery is morally wrong ) .
They ’ re conditional propositions : if you define social mobility in this way , grammar schools are bad for it ; if you define it in the other way , they ’ re good for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are like these , but seldom presented as such , because a policy ’ s advocates understandably prefer clarity over complexity .
This use of social science to reach firm policy conclusions , and shut down further debate by appealing to the authority of the “ evidence ” , as though political life were a form of mathematics , perhaps had its golden age between the collapse of the Soviet Union and 2016 .
Its exhaustion was evident in the Remain and Hillary Clinton campaigns .
Clear messaging , it turned out , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on social scientific facts to be effective .
Vote Leave and Trump and also – very relevantly for the coronavirus – both Matteo Salvini and the Five Star movement in Italy understood how to defeat the tactic of presenting policy conclusions as evidence-based .
Expose the sleight of hand , pump out clarity of your own and play to emotions .
This is what Michael Gove was doing when he said the British people have had enough of experts .
Raising the tempo and heightening emotions , while disregarding evidence as tainted , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Witness the speed with which edited footage of the Prime Minister which purports to have him say the coronavirus should be taken on the chin , whereas the full clip has him making the opposite point .
Salvini , unsurprisingly began by blaming “ migrants ” , and is now demanding the entirety of Europe subject itself to Italian-style lockdown measures .
In reality , Italy ’ s outbreak occurred because there was insufficient testing and isolation in the early stages of the epidemic .
Social distancing measures were applied in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Hospitals in the prosperous north of the country , where the outbreak is concentrated , are now under extreme pressure .
This contrasts sharply with South Korea ’ s high tech testing-focused strategy that stresses focused intervention , the use of technology to understand people ’ s movements and therefore trace potential infection routes , as well as aggressive testing .
Early reports suggested Italy ’ s numbers were due to similarly high testing levels .
This turns out to have been false .
Italy has the same ( low ) testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ benefited from higher readiness because of their exposure to several epidemics originating in China , including SARS and bird flu , and so it was able to plan a modern response .
Public health not being my expertise , it is better for me to focus on the politics .
What ’ s been effective is South Korea ’ s approach to communication ( as exemplified by this briefing to the foreign media ) , which is calm , sober , serious and detailed .
It is designed to build up the trust @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open society .
Unlike “ evidence-based ” arguments from authority , the South Korean approach explains not only the results , but how they were arrived at .
And unlike Salvini , it is not looking to gain attention for itself by attributing blame ( and though Beijing deserves blame , now is not the time to pin it on them ) .
The contrast with Trump , who ’ s putting his own supporters in danger by minimising the risk , couldn ’ t be starker .
This should give us pause @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of facts in political debate but of empiricism .
An epidemic sits at the boundary between the physical science of the virus and the social science of the epidemics .
Social science doesn ’ t produce the “ results ” that physical sciences can , only pieces of evidence that have to be assessed in the round .
How we assess evidence and governments communicate their assessment – in a way that both builds and deserves public confidence – is a matter of culture .
Aided by social media that prioritises the quantity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ empiricism of our political culture has been declining sharply .
News programme producers prefer famous commentators to those who know what they ’ re talking about ( but who nobody ’ s heard of ) .
Headline writers want attention , so they spread panic .
It applies to politicians and communications directors across the entire spectrum .
Centrist Matteo Renzi immediately echoed Salvini ’ s call for a Europe-wide shutdown .
Rory Stewart has got himself into the headlines by calling for the same in the UK .
This is part of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ getting your message out , and winning , and if mistrust needs to be stirred up in this process so be it .
This a much bigger deal than this epidemic .
It affects our whole political culture in Western democracies .
Politicians and their advisers need to understand that this isn ’ t House of Cards ; people can die because of this culture .
Journalists need to think before accepting Twitter narratives , which encourage polarisation , as the only sort of politics .
But most people are firmly pragmatic and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters : being a citizen isn ’ t like buying washing powder .
Take steps to inform yourself properly about the decisions you want your elected representatives to make .
That ’ s going to take work .
You ’ ll have to read stuff you ’ ll find boring , concentrate it and understand perspectives you ’ re uncomfortable with .
From the time Berlusconi was first elected , Italians thought the answers were easy , now they ’ re learning they are not .
It ’ s a warning the rest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is hard work .
This epidemic will give us an idea of whether we ’ re up to it .

Garvan Walshe is a former national and international security policy adviser to the Conservative Party. He runs TRD Policy.
ConHome readers will remember the grammar schools row of 2007. David Willetts had persuaded the Conservatives to oppose new grammar schools, on the grounds that they were bad for social mobility. Many Tory members and MPs disagreed, however. I remember heated arguments at the Conservative Research Department, where I then worked, and getting incensed when told that “evidence-based policy” meant that a Conservative government should abandon its long-held principle of being in favour of academic selection.
In the grammar schools case, the evidence indeed was that they reduced social mobility – according to a definition created and popularised by opponents of grammar schools. The first response is to criticise the definition, and say it concealed matters of value behind matters of fact. Social mobility can be thought of in two ways. If it is derived by measuring the average collective attainment of children from different social backgrounds, then grammar schools work against it. If, instead, it is derived by considering the attainment of pupils who, thanks to academic selection, can get an education they would not otherwise have been able to afford, grammar schools boost social mobility.
Neither of these claims are actually pure fact (like the speed of light in a vacuum being 299,792,458 metres per second) or pure value (adultery is morally wrong). They’re conditional propositions: if you define social mobility in this way, grammar schools are bad for it; if you define it in the other way, they’re good for it. Most claims in public debate are like these, but seldom presented as such, because a policy’s advocates understandably prefer clarity over complexity.
This use of social science to reach firm policy conclusions, and shut down further debate by appealing to the authority of the “evidence”, as though political life were a form of mathematics, perhaps had its golden age between the collapse of the Soviet Union and 2016. Its exhaustion was evident in the Remain and Hillary Clinton campaigns. Clear messaging, it turned out, does’t need to be based on social scientific facts to be effective.
Vote Leave and Trump and also – very relevantly for the coronavirus – both Matteo Salvini and the Five Star movement in Italy understood how to defeat the tactic of presenting policy conclusions as evidence-based. Expose the sleight of hand, pump out clarity of your own and play to emotions. This is what Michael Gove was doing when he said the British people have had enough of experts.
Raising the tempo and heightening emotions, while disregarding evidence as tainted, is now mainstream across the political spectrum. Witness the speed with which edited footage of the Prime Minister which purports to have him say the coronavirus should be taken on the chin, whereas the full clip has him making the opposite point.
Salvini, unsurprisingly began by blaming “migrants”, and is now demanding the entirety of Europe subject itself to Italian-style lockdown measures. In reality, Italy’s outbreak occurred because there was insufficient testing and isolation in the early stages of the epidemic. Social distancing measures were applied in a manner that was both draconian and haphazard. Hospitals in the prosperous north of the country, where the outbreak is concentrated, are now under extreme pressure.
This contrasts sharply with South Korea’s high tech testing-focused strategy that stresses focused intervention, the use of technology to understand people’s movements and therefore trace potential infection routes, as well as aggressive testing. Early reports suggested Italy’s numbers were due to similarly high testing levels. This turns out to have been false. Italy has the same (low) testing level as the UK. Seoul also benefited from higher readiness because of their exposure to several epidemics originating in China, including SARS and bird flu, and so it was able to plan a modern response. Public health not being my expertise, it is better for me to focus on the politics. What’s been effective is South Korea’s approach to communication (as exemplified by this briefing to the foreign media), which is calm, sober, serious and detailed. It is designed to build up the trust necessary to limit an epidemic in an open society.
Unlike “evidence-based” arguments from authority, the South Korean approach explains not only the results, but how they were arrived at. And unlike Salvini, it is not looking to gain attention for itself by attributing blame (and though Beijing deserves blame, now is not the time to pin it on them). The contrast with Trump, who’s putting his own supporters in danger by minimising the risk, couldn’t be starker.
This should give us pause for thought about the importance not specifically of facts in political debate but of empiricism. An epidemic sits at the boundary between the physical science of the virus and the social science of the epidemics. Social science doesn’t produce the “results” that physical sciences can, only pieces of evidence that have to be assessed in the round.
How we assess evidence and governments communicate their assessment – in a way that both builds and deserves public confidence – is a matter of culture. Aided by social media that prioritises the quantity of engagement over its quality, the empiricism of our political culture has been declining sharply. News programme producers prefer famous commentators to those who know what they’re talking about (but who nobody’s heard of). Headline writers want attention, so they spread panic. It applies to politicians and communications directors across the entire spectrum. Centrist Matteo Renzi immediately echoed Salvini’s call for a Europe-wide shutdown. Rory Stewart has got himself into the headlines by calling for the same in the UK. This is part of our comms-dominated political culture: focus on getting your message out, and winning, and if mistrust needs to be stirred up in this process so be it.
This a much bigger deal than this epidemic. It affects our whole political culture in Western democracies.
Politicians and their advisers need to understand that this isn’t House of Cards; people can die because of this culture.
Journalists need to think before accepting Twitter narratives, which encourage polarisation, as the only sort of politics. But most people are firmly pragmatic and middle of the road.
Finally, voters: being a citizen isn’t like buying washing powder. Take steps to inform yourself properly about the decisions you want your elected representatives to make. That’s going to take work. You’ll have to read stuff you’ll find boring, concentrate it and understand perspectives you’re uncomfortable with.
From the time Berlusconi was first elected, Italians thought the answers were easy, now they’re learning they are not. It’s a warning the rest of us need to heed. Democracy is hard work. This epidemic will give us an idea of whether we’re up to it.


conservativehome--2020-03-12--Anne Crampton: In Hart, spending by the Lib Dems is out of control

Cllr Anne Crampton is the Leader of the Conservative Group on Hart District Council .
Hart is a small District Council in the North East of Hampshire .
We have a Conservative MP and a Conservative-controlled County Council .
Yet the District has an administration of a coalition between the Liberal Democrats and a group that advertises itself as a local independent party called Community Campaign Hart ( CCH ) .
Some of our residents tell us that they vote Conservative in General Elections but not in local elections .
Some believe that the Council is Conservative-controlled and some do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The reality is that of the 33 councillors in Hart , 11 are Conservative , 11 CCH , 10 are Liberal Democrats , and one is an anti-development independent .
It is their mentality of “ development anywhere except in our wards ” that has led to the success of CCH in recent years .
Indeed their latest campaign is to build up to 10,000 houses in a very rural part of Hart which ironically will extend to the very borders of CCH areas .
It is this scheme for a “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in their downfall and is very much the focus of our campaign leading up to the May elections .
We need to retain the five seats we have and would need to win all six of the remaining seats to have a small majority .
However , even with the undoubted uplift from the Conservative success in the general election in December , and Brexit uncertainty behind us , winning these extra seats is a major task for at least this year .
It ’ s not as though this administration has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as the previous administration , even though they have been in control for almost three years .
They blame the County Council and the Government for their lack of progress , the prospect of difficult financial times ahead , and the delays to the Local Plan .
They blame us for the resulting developer-led development of Hart .
We achieved regulation 18 consultation when we were in control which is a long way into the process .
Financially , they have produced a balanced budget with the revenue from our investment , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hart has seen an unsupportable increase in staff with more to come .
Some new members of staff are due to the collapse of contracts , some to pursue their commercialisation agenda and for the climate change agenda which we support .
We can not support , however , the £500,000 put aside to develop the “ Garden Community ” development .
This project called “ Shapley Heath garden village ” could see 10,000 houses in open countryside , joining up the urban areas of Fleet and Hook via Hartley Wintney .
All @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for by developers so will inevitably be developer-led and it is contrary to the Conservative policy of “ brownfield development first ” .
The Coalition has broken promises .
A motion was put to Council by CCH a year ago , requiring Council to review parking charges .
We are still waiting in spite of our many attempts to raise this and it has yet again been kicked into the long grass .
When we regain control of Hart , we will save our countryside by stopping the “ garden village ” project @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and officer resources , which could be better spent revitalizing our deteriorating High Streets .
We would embark upon an early review of our local plan .
We have enough houses with permissions , not to need more houses until later in the plan period .
We would do the parking charge review and provide an hour of free parking which would boost businesses locally .
We would develop our climate change strategy .
This administration has achieved nothing in the five months that the climate change working group has been meeting – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to say that the portfolio-holder ’ s claim that building 10,000 houses more than we need “ contributes to our climate change agenda ” shows a woeful lack of understanding of the issues facing us .
Each house built contributes 50 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere .
To offset that a forest of some 244.7 square miles would have to be planted .
We would work with the police and crime commissioner to tackle crime , both rural and urban .
Our newly selected candidate , Donna Jones , has already been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and if elected , together , we will tackle the issues that affect our residents .
We would invest in additional Community Safety Police Officers , strengthen the Community Safety team , and increase community engagement to tackle increasing anti-social behavior and local crime .
We would work with our County Councillors to tackle the scourge of potholes blighting our roads .
Health and Wellbeing of our residents is of prime importance to us .
We have a community hospital that is under threat .
The Clinical Commissioning Group here wants to create @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of health care facilities located on one site .
We tried to provide extra car parking spaces for the extra staff in one of our nearby car parks but were defeated by the opposition .
We would provide the parking needed to help our community hospital thrive .
Hart has beautiful green spaces .
We have plans that would protect and enhance them and make them more accessible and inviting.We have the ideas , plans , and ability , to make a real difference to the community in this part of Hampshire .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of years , considered one of the best places to live in England .
Our vision is to keep it that way .

Cllr Anne Crampton is the Leader of the Conservative Group on Hart District Council.
Hart is a small District Council in the North East of Hampshire. We have a Conservative MP and a Conservative-controlled County Council. Yet the District has an administration of a coalition between the Liberal Democrats and a group that advertises itself as a local independent party called Community Campaign Hart (CCH). Some of our residents tell us that they vote Conservative in General Elections but not in local elections. Some believe that the Council is Conservative-controlled and some do not vote in local elections at all.
The reality is that of the 33 councillors in Hart, 11 are Conservative, 11 CCH, 10 are Liberal Democrats, and one is an anti-development independent. It is their mentality of “development anywhere except in our wards” that has led to the success of CCH in recent years. Indeed their latest campaign is to build up to 10,000 houses in a very rural part of Hart which ironically will extend to the very borders of CCH areas.
It is this scheme for a “garden village” that may well result in their downfall and is very much the focus of our campaign leading up to the May elections. We need to retain the five seats we have and would need to win all six of the remaining seats to have a small majority. However, even with the undoubted uplift from the Conservative success in the general election in December, and Brexit uncertainty behind us, winning these extra seats is a major task for at least this year. It’s not as though this administration has been a great success.
They blame us, as the previous administration, even though they have been in control for almost three years. They blame the County Council and the Government for their lack of progress, the prospect of difficult financial times ahead, and the delays to the Local Plan. They blame us for the resulting developer-led development of Hart. We achieved regulation 18 consultation when we were in control which is a long way into the process.
Financially, they have produced a balanced budget with the revenue from our investment, though are spending money like water. Hart has seen an unsupportable increase in staff with more to come. Some new members of staff are due to the collapse of contracts, some to pursue their commercialisation agenda and for the climate change agenda which we support. We cannot support, however, the £500,000 put aside to develop the “Garden Community” development. This project called “Shapley Heath garden village” could see 10,000 houses in open countryside, joining up the urban areas of Fleet and Hook via Hartley Wintney. All baseline studies will be commissioned and paid for by developers so will inevitably be developer-led and it is contrary to the Conservative policy of “brownfield development first”.
The Coalition has broken promises. A motion was put to Council by CCH a year ago, requiring Council to review parking charges. We are still waiting in spite of our many attempts to raise this and it has yet again been kicked into the long grass. When we regain control of Hart, we will save our countryside by stopping the “garden village” project. This will save the Council money and officer resources, which could be better spent revitalizing our deteriorating High Streets. We would embark upon an early review of our local plan. We have enough houses with permissions, not to need more houses until later in the plan period. We would do the parking charge review and provide an hour of free parking which would boost businesses locally.
We would develop our climate change strategy. This administration has achieved nothing in the five months that the climate change working group has been meeting – and that is disappointing. I have to say that the portfolio-holder’s claim that building 10,000 houses more than we need “contributes to our climate change agenda” shows a woeful lack of understanding of the issues facing us. Each house built contributes 50 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere. To offset that a forest of some 244.7 square miles would have to be planted.
We would work with the police and crime commissioner to tackle crime, both rural and urban. Our newly selected candidate, Donna Jones, has already been in touch to offer her support, and if elected, together, we will tackle the issues that affect our residents. We would invest in additional Community Safety Police Officers, strengthen the Community Safety team, and increase community engagement to tackle increasing anti-social behavior and local crime. We would work with our County Councillors to tackle the scourge of potholes blighting our roads. Health and Wellbeing of our residents is of prime importance to us.
We have a community hospital that is under threat. The Clinical Commissioning Group here wants to create a hub to provide a large range of health care facilities located on one site. We tried to provide extra car parking spaces for the extra staff in one of our nearby car parks but were defeated by the opposition. We would provide the parking needed to help our community hospital thrive.
Hart has beautiful green spaces. We have plans that would protect and enhance them and make them more accessible and inviting.We have the ideas, plans, and ability, to make a real difference to the community in this part of Hampshire. Hart has been, for a number of years, considered one of the best places to live in England. Our vision is to keep it that way.