Archive for: Political Services

The Head of Public Affairs at the law firm BDB Pitmans, Stuart Thomson, offers his suggestions on how to best use the additional time we have when working from home, to further our personal development.

The time that we now all have working from home can be used productively. We have the ‘day job’ to be getting on with, but we should think about personal development as well. And what better way than reading a book or two!

Working from home can be quite challenging and there is a real danger of simply being sat staring at a screen all day. So, one way that you could choose to bring a bit of useful variety into your set-up is to put some time aside each day to read.

While I am sure that you have a stack of fiction books to get through, there are some really useful non-fiction titles out there for your personal development as well. This applies across the whole of the communications profession but I’ll stick to public affairs!

So, here are a few thoughts that I’ve had about some useful public affairs reading:

• The systems and processes – books on political processes can often be really quite dull and technical. However, take a look at Besly and Goldsmith’s ‘How Parliament Works’ for a good guide to the Westminster parliament. The Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly both have good online guides.
• Campaigns and strategies – I can’t rate the materials freely available on the Government Communications Service highly enough. There is everything from evaluation to digital communications and the OASIS framework for campaign planning.
• How To Guides – there aren’t many ‘how to’ guides available covering public affairs. The most comprehensive ones are probably Lionel Zetter’s ‘The Art of Political Persuasion’ and my own ‘Public Affairs in Practice’. Both cover everything from the basics of what public affairs is through to effective engagement and political processes. While ‘Public Affairs in Practice’ is mainly UK and Brussels based, Zetter has an international dimension. If you are interested in how public affairs is done in different countries around the world then my ‘Public Affairs: A Global Perspective’ would be a good starting point.
• Best practice – it is always useful to take a look at the CIPR and PRCA They both have great resources, guides and case studies as well. I’d also suggest taking a look at the training options they have. Both are working on more online courses for obvious reasons, but they have some already available.
• Others – there are also some more general communications books that really help with public affairs. I’d point to Measure What Matters, which gets you thinking about KPIs, Good Strategy / Bad Strategy, with some constructive thoughts that I found useful when starting off with new campaigns, and Words The Work, which helped me to focus even more on every word I write.

If it’s helpful, I have added the books, as well as a few others, to an Amazon page.

It would be great to hear ideas from others about what books they have found useful and maybe why as well. There are no end of really good books available but personal recommendations are always worth just that little bit more.

You’ll have to forgive me a little cross-selling as well but you may also find my regular (and free!) blog useful as well: www.stuartthomson.co.uk.

I look forward to hearing what I should be adding to my book list. Happy reading!

Former Business Minister and Tesco director Baroness Neville-Rolfe writes: ‘Supermarkets are on the frontline in crises such as this one with their unique knowledge of the supply chain, a vast employee base of all ages and skilled operational mangers’.

The importance of establishing the facts clearly, the unintended effect of the counter measures adopted, and the sheer unpredictability of events are themes that recur in all crises. The point is to overcome these problems. I speak as a former supermarket executive at Tesco and civil servant at No 10, and now as a peer and former Government Minister.

You might be surprised how impressive the exchanges have been in the House of Lords on the virus. Gnarled politicians and former ministers who lived through the 1987 crash, BSE, 9/11, SARS and the financial crisis; Bishops reminding us of the plight of the vulnerable and of prisoners; distinguished doctors; and pillars of the voluntary and education sectors. All have contributed positively and wisely.

Supermarkets are on the front line in crises such as this one with their unique knowledge of the supply chain, a vast employee base of all ages and skilled operational mangers. They have to deal with panic buying – a gut instinct in the absence of facts. My four-year-old granddaughter was yesterday piling up her toy food under the kitchen table because she had heard we ‘have to stockpile’.

The fact is that there is enough food for everyone during the current crisis although home demand will be higher because people will eat at home more. And cupboards can only take so much spaghetti and loo paper! The Competition and Markets Authority need to help by indicating that the enforcement of competition law will be temporarily relaxed to make it easier for supermarkets and food businesses to act in concert for the public benefit. Also keeping prices down in all circumstances is not always wise; the laws of supply and demand are still true.

Supermarkets rely on the news networks to keep customers informed, because when information is scarce, they are inundated with queries. The Government’s daily press conferences are a wise step forward. However awful things might seem, there is a need to ‘stay cheerful’. The free to air broadcasters are a lifeline in times of crisis providing repeats of Foyle’s War and Sunday services now the churches have closed.

Pandemics start in a small way so there is a tendency to delay radical action for too long. I remember that in the foot and mouth (FMD) crisis of the early 2000s the country was shut down too late. Later, the wider impact of shutting footpaths did vast damage to the tourist industry, an economic impact significantly larger than the damage FMD caused to the meat sector.

In the terrifying circumstances of a pandemic, we have to rely on scientific advice. However, like economists, scientists can be wrong, so it is wise to draw on a range of expertise. In the BSE crisis some scientists published a paper speculating that deaths might amount to 100,000. The figure to date is below 200.

What can we do now? The Government is overwhelmed with suggestions. Today I have one demand which would do more than anything else to ease current strains. Get on top of testing so actions and behaviour can be informed by the facts. We must find a way of testing more people for the virus so those infected can be isolated and those not infected can contribute their skills.

Also, we must accelerate and make widely available the new test for anti-bodies. This will ensure that vital workers can get back to work quickly. In Taiwan, in Singapore and one brave Italian town this emphasis on Test, Test, Test has slowed the pandemic significantly.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe is a former Treasury & BEIS Minister and a Conservative peer. She is a former Director of Tesco.

Vuelio’s Sam Webber assesses the latest Government response to the Coronavirus pandemic, including a new fiscal stimulus and school closures.

The Coronavirus pandemic has now affected every aspect of Government and public life in a way that this country has not experienced since the Second World War.

The Chancellor’s comprehensive Budget, announced last week, has already had to be updated and overhauled with a far more generous package of measures to safeguard businesses and families. After pressure from MPs representing tourist destinations and from key cultural institutions like small attractions, pubs and restaurants that are set to be particularly affected, the Chancellor increased measures offered to this sector: ‘I announced last week that for businesses in the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors, with a rateable value of less than £51,000, they will pay no business rates this year.

‘Today, I can go further and provide those businesses with an additional cash grant of up to £25,000 per business – to help bridge through this period. Additionally, I also am today extending the business rates holiday to all businesses in those sectors, irrespective of their rateable value.

‘That means every single shop, pub, theatre, music venue, restaurant – and any other business in the retail, hospitality or leisure sector – will pay no business rates whatsoever for 12 months, and if they have a rateable value of less than £51,000, they can now get a cash grant as well.

‘I also announced last week that we would be providing £3,000 cash grants to the 700,000 of our smallest businesses. In light of the new circumstances, and to support their cash flow, today I can increase those grants to £10,000.’

Hinting at additional measures for other sectors of the economy he added:

‘Some sectors are facing particularly acute challenges. In the coming days, my colleague the Secretary of State for Transport and I will discuss a potential support package for specifically airlines and airports.’

For those affected by COVID-19 who will lose income and not be able to pay their monthly mortgage, the Chancellor also offered support: ‘Following discussions with industry today, I can announce that for those in difficulty due to coronavirus, mortgage lenders will offer at least a three month mortgage holiday – so that people will not have to pay a penny towards their mortgage while they get back on their feet.’

While he was immediately criticised because this statement offered nothing to those in rented accommodation, they have now been offered additional protections too.

Robert Jenrick, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government said: ‘The Government is clear – no renter who has lost income due to coronavirus will be forced out of their home, nor will any landlord face unmanageable debts.’

His detailed statement includes a promise that: ‘Emergency legislation will be taken forward as an urgent priority so that landlords will not be able to start proceedings to evict tenants for at least a three-month period. As a result of these measures, no renters in private or social accommodation needs to be concerned about the threat of eviction.’

An announcement from Education Secretary Gavin Williamson on Wednesday also confirmed what many parents had been expecting: ‘After schools shut their gates on Friday afternoon, they will remain closed until further notice except for children of key workers and vulnerable children, as part of the country’s ongoing response to coronavirus.’

While this has serious implications for those studying for exams that will now not be taking place in the usual way, the Government is clear it will do whatever is necessary to ensure no students are adversely affected by these challenging conditions.

Finally, the Government has set up a new structure of four implementation committees focusing on health, public sector preparedness, economy and international response to deal with the crisis.

• Healthcare: chaired by the Health Secretary to focus on the preparedness of the NHS, notably ensuring capacity in the critical care system for those worst affected
• General Public Sector: chaired by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to look at preparedness across the rest of the public and critical national infrastructure, excluding the NHS
• Economic and Business: chaired by the Chancellor, with the Business Secretary as deputy chair, to consider economic and business impact and response, including supply chain resilience. It will also coordinate roundtables with key sectors to be chaired by relevant Secretaries of State
• International: chaired by the Foreign Secretary, to consider our international response to the crisis through the G7, G20 and other mechanisms, including like-minded groups, and the UK five-point plan

This shows that as well as relying heavily on the advice from his Chief Medical Officer and Chief Scientific Adviser, the Prime Minister is receiving support from his Cabinet colleagues Matt Hancock, Michael Gove, Rishi Sunak, Alok Sharma and Dominic Raab and all their respective teams of civil servants to feed into the UK’s holistic approach to defeating this virus.

As Rishi Sunak said this week: ’I want to reassure every British citizen, this Government will give you all the tools you need to get through this.’

Scottish National Party MP Hannah Bardell writes following her House of Commons debate on lesbian, bisexual and trans women’s health inequalities.

I came out literally as I was being elected, initially to myself, then later to my family and friends and publicly sometime after that, and that was challenging. It is fair to say that the impact on my mental health was profound.

For me, and for many other people coming out later in life, there is an element of regret and, in fact, mourning for a life not lived as my authentic self and it is hard to describe what that feels like. I try very hard to look forward – to make the most of what is in front of me, not to look back and have regrets that I was not living my life as my true self. There are many reasons why people come out later in life, and there is also much research around the profound impact that that has on people’s mental and physical health.

Coming out as lesbian, gay or bisexual can be a very different experience from coming out as trans. I cannot imagine how incredibly difficult that is, particularly in the current climate. We owe it to our trans and non-binary citizens to support them and ensure that discussion around changes in legislation or any matters relating to their lives and healthcare is conducted in a respectful and decent way.

We know the LGBT community, including lesbian, bi and trans women, experience significant health inequalities and specific barriers to services and support, and are sadly at a higher risk of experiencing common mental health problems than the general population.

The Science and Technology Committee report states that there is ’emerging evidence demonstrates that lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT+) people experience significant health inequalities across their lifespan, often starting at a young age.’

Stonewall Scotland’s survey of LGBT people in Scotland found that half had experienced depression in the past year, including seven in 10 trans people, and that more than half of trans people have thought of taking their own life in the past year.

Stonewall Scotland’s survey of LGBT people in Scotland found that:

• Half of LGBT people (49 per cent) have experienced depression in the last year, including seven in ten trans people (72 per cent).
• More than half of trans people (52 per cent) have thought of taking their own life in the last year.
• One in six LGBT people (16 per cent) have deliberately harmed themselves in the last year.
• One in four LGBT people (24 per cent) have witnessed discriminatory or negative remarks against LGBT people by healthcare staff.
• One in eight LGBT people (13 per cent) have received unequal treatment from healthcare staff because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
• Almost two in five trans people (37 per cent) have avoided healthcare treatment for fear of discrimination.
• One in four LGBT people (27 per cent) have experienced healthcare staff having a lack of understanding of specific lesbian, gay and bi health needs.
• Nearly three in five trans people (59 per cent) have experienced healthcare staff having a lack of understanding of specific trans health needs.

I understand that some of these matters are very technical. They are challenging and they require a level of expertise. That is why education, open discussion and proper resourcing in Scotland and across the UK is absolutely vital. We know how incredibly hard staff in the NHS work in all countries and parts of the UK. We salute them. However, the studies show that there is a bit more work to be done.

In 2013, a study in the USA said, unsurprisingly, that legalising gay marriage might improve health and reduce healthcare costs. Another similar study last year found that legalising equal marriage could improve the mental health of same-sex couples. Wow — what a revelation! You can marry the person you love and live the life you want as the person you are, and it might actually make you happy and reduce the burden on the healthcare system.

We know that legislative change does not in itself necessarily change culture or fix the problem, but it is an important step.

The specific health needs of disabled people who are also LGBT are often overlooked by healthcare professionals. According to Stonewall, which has produced some compelling briefings on the subject, disabled people in the LGBT community can be left with a lack of trust in their healthcare providers. Multiple needs are often not taken into account, which affects some of the most vulnerable people. LGBT people are not necessarily open about their sexual orientation and/or gender identity when seeking medical help, because of a fear of unfair treatment and invasive questioning.

Stonewall goes on to talk specifically about issues around PIP assessments and it has said that one in five non-binary people and LGBT disabled people have experienced discrimination. Similarly, one in five black, Asian and minority ethnic LGBT people, including 24% of Asian LGBT people, have experienced it.

There is still a long way to go and debates such as this one are part of the picture of making sure that good and proper healthcare is available for everybody in the LGBT community. We as MPs must do everything we can to make sure that no one suffers from poor mental or physical health just because of their gender, sexuality or gender identity.

We are all equal. At the end of the day, we are all human.

 

Hannah Bardell is a member of the SNP’s Shadow Foreign Affairs and International Development teams and the MP for Livingston.

This blog post is part of a cross-party series on Vuelio’s political blog Point of Order, which publishes insight and opinion to help public affairs, policy and comms professionals stay ahead of political change and connect with those who campaign on the issues they care about. To find out more or contribute, get in touch with Vuelio Politics.

The first Budget for 16 months will be delivered on Wednesday 11 March by Chancellor Rishi Sunak, who has only been in the post for three weeks. Sunak’s appointment swiftly followed the resignation from Government of Sajid Javid in the recent reshuffle, when he chose to walk away rather than sign up to a new joint Number 10 and Number 11 Downing Street team, which would have involved firing his team of advisers.

With a previous Budget set for November 2019 cancelled due to the parliamentary hiatus over Brexit and the subsequent General Election, this Budget, as well as being delivered by a newly appointed Chancellor, is also set to be dominated by the COVID-19 Coronavirus outbreak, which is predicted to escalate into a global pandemic.

Civil Service World reported that the Chancellor was ‘being forced to rewrite next week’s Budget to take account of the likely economic effect of the Covid-19 outbreak.’ This is expected to include additional cash for the NHS and other public services. It might also include a tax holiday for businesses that will be widely affected by any economic downturn due to the virus.

Travel and commuting restrictions, reduced imports from overseas, including the far east where the virus originated, and a self-exclusion plan that might have to come into force, would all have a significant effect on the UK economy and the Treasury is being asked to step up and make guarantees to businesses and citizens.

The Budget is also expected to formalise the Conservative manifesto pledge to raise the threshold at which people start paying National Insurance Contributions (NICs) by more than 10% to £9,500. If confirmed at this rate, a typical employee will save around £104 in 2020/21, while self-employed individuals, who pay a lower rate, will have £78 cut from their bill, according to Government figures.

A key aim of this Government’s mission is to ‘level up’ spending across Britain and to reduce regional disparity through increased spending and better infrastructure, not least in the former Labour heartland seats that the Conservatives won in 2019 and now seek to retain at the next election.

One likely way to find extra cash is to scrap Entrepreneurs’ relief. This tax relief brought in by Labour in 2008 and subsequently extended by George Osborne, allows business owners when they sell their company to pay capital gains tax at a reduced rate of 10% rather than the usual rate of 20%, which applies to gains up to £10m.

The Sun reports that this could have serious effects on SMEs including retailers selling a shop for £150,000 who would lose £15,000 if the plans go ahead. The proposal is apparently unpopular with some backbench MPs and The Sun quotes national chairman of the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) Mike Cherry, who said: ‘Scrapping entrepreneurs’ relief would destroy the retirements of thousands of business owners. The Conservative manifesto committed this Government to reviewing and reforming this incentive, not scrapping it entirely. The Conservatives should keep their promises – it’s a question of trust.’

The FSB spokesperson suggests a compromise: ‘Keep the relief for the first £1m of a business sale and scale it back at the top end. Doing so would save the Treasury more than £1bn and maintain a vital incentive which encourages entrepreneurs to start up, hire and invest.’

In a dig at the authors of the likely policy to scrap the relief entirely he adds: ‘A lot of entrepreneurs see their business as their retirement plan. They don’t have the gold-plated pensions enjoyed by Treasury civil servants.’

Mike Cherry also said that small business confidence has already suffered a slump over the past 18 months and this proposal risks making a bad situation worse for small businesses, and risks losing them to other more welcoming tax jurisdictions.

The Financial Times reports (£) that Sunak could use the Budget to end the freeze on fuel duty which has been in place since 2010 or at least start by removing the £2.4bn subsidy for ‘red diesel’. This is used by off-road vehicles and machinery and would demonstrate that the Treasury is prepared to use the tax system to encourage a move away from fossil fuels.

A Daily Telegraph pre-Budget analysis predicts that ‘Changes to tax, pensions, housing and social care’ are all set to be included. It also speculates that additional funding for adult social care could be included as well as measures to increase the roll out of high-speed broadband and reduce single-use plastics.

Changes to pension contributions have been suggested as an idea alongside a wealth or ‘mansion tax’, but it is understood that Rishi Sunak took these proposals off the table when he became Chancellor. A scheme to cut the cost of buying a home for key workers and first-time buyers would perhaps prove more popular nationally to ensure that renters can buy a home in their area at a reduced rate.

As with many across the country and especially public affairs professionals, we will watch with interest on Wednesday as with previous Budgets, to see if this newbie Chancellor has a rabbit to pull out of his hat in terms of a key announcement that will get everyone talking and, unlike the pasty tax or caravan tax of the George Osborne era, won’t unravel as soon as the journalists and financial experts crunch the numbers in detail.

**
The Vuelio Political team will be summarising the Budget and stakeholder reaction to all of the key announcements and measures.

Sign up to receive your complimentary copy of The Budget Summary and Reaction.

**

Yesterday was a historic day for the climate campaigners.

The Court of Appeal has taken the climate emergency into account and made it a key part of its decision to stop the expansion of Heathrow.

The Government now has a choice: they can continue with business as usual, appealing the Court of Appeal decision and continuing to push for infrastructure that will ultimately stop them reaching their climate targets; or they could use this as a wake-up call and start legislating for climate action now.

Achieving net-zero involves cutting emissions across all sectors to almost zero and offsetting the remaining emissions by planting forests and investing in carbon capture technology.

This is a daunting task and the sooner we start the better chance we have of avoiding widespread environmental chaos that will define the lives of future generations.

We are living through a climate emergency.

Yesterday’s decision, against the expansion of Heathrow Airport, is a victory.

Now is the time to be cutting our emissions, not adding infrastructure that will cause them to skyrocket.

It is a victory for the thousands of local campaigners who have spent years protesting the expansion. It shows communities, across the country, that people power can make the difference. The Liberal Democrats has been backing these campaigns from the very beginning, supporting grassroots action to make today’s decision possible.

For far too long the Government has been committed to Heathrow expansion, with no consideration of the impact on our carbon footprint and the local environment.

This Government’s own target – to reach a net zero by 2050 – is not compatible with airport expansion. Whether that be expansion of Heathrow Airport or Bristol.

Flying long haul, in 2020, requires fossil fuels. As a result, flying always comes with a carbon cost. Research into cleaner fuels is important and yet green alternatives will not be replacing oil-based aviation fuel anytime soon.

Flying is a positive part of life in a globalised world, but we have an obligation to not to expand an industry that is contributing to the climate crisis.

And it is because of this that my party opposes airport expansion.

If Boris Johnson makes the wrong choice now, he may well have to lie down in front of the bulldozers and the wider impact on our climate will be catastrophic.

I will be urging the Government to respect the Court of Appeal decision and to use this moment as a turning point, investing in substantive climate action now.

We can help – The Liberal Democrats are the only party to have a detailed plan to reach net zero, including a sector by sector roadmap.

This decision was a landmark victory for climate campaigners. For the sake of future generations, let’s make tomorrow an even better one.

Wera Hobhouse is the Liberal Democrat Spokesperson for the Climate Emergency, Energy and the Environment & MP for Bath.

This blog post is part of a cross-party series on Vuelio’s political blog Point of Order, which publishes insight and opinion to help public affairs, policy and comms professionals stay ahead of political change and connect with those who campaign on the issues they care about. To find out more or contribute, get in touch with Vuelio Politics.

 

We are – finally – recognising that there is no such thing as throwing something ‘away’ on our poor choked planet. Every bit of waste has to go somewhere.

Globally, most of the eight billion tonnes of plastic produced since the 1950s is still in existence – in our drinking water, our soils, our animals and our air. Even in our beer.

Last year in the UK, a group of supermarkets and other stores announced with much fanfare that within the next seven years they are planning to cut out non-recyclable plastic packaging.

That is seven more years of producing something that won’t ever disappear, but this was far more positive than the Government proclaiming that it will ban unnecessary single-use plastic by 2042.

There’s a crucial point to make about both the voluntary ban and the Government announcement: ‘recyclable’ doesn’t mean an object is going to be recycled and who defines what is and isn’t ‘necessary’?

Our plastics recycling facilities are already groaning with over-supply of recyclables from the impact of the Chinese decision to stop importing most plastic waste for recycling there.

At the consumer end, households are struggling with a hugely variety of different schemes with different rules: if you move house there’s a good chance you’ll have to learn a new system. Live in a flat in Wandsworth and you are expected to put your recycling into a large single-use plastic bag. Really?

How much better if an unnecessary item isn’t produced at all. That more than 40 per cent of the plastic produced goes into single-use packaging is shocking, even before you consider the fact that the world total is more than 300 million tonnes each year.

After massive public pressure, the Government is supposed to be introducing a bottle deposit scheme, for plastic and other bottles, although we’re still waiting for actual action, and there’s always going to be significant numbers that escape the net.

Pub and café chains are rushing to promise to get rid of plastic straws, and there’s now some decent discounts on coffee in some places if you bring your own cup. Some are also calling for a ban on single-use sachets – sauce, vinegar, sugar etc.

I will happily applaud all of this, but huge amounts of parliamentary time could be taken up passing limited, fiddly legislation that has to define and restrict specific categories of table condiments, or focus on plastic straws or stirrers, a tiny fraction of our plastics pollution.

The logical way to approach this is to start at the other end. Let’s begin with a ban on all single-use plastic – that would cover everything you could think of and then some – single-use cups, sandwich wrappers and those really annoying almost unopenable hard plastic frames around toothbrushes.

Then you could make exceptions for items that are actually necessary – wrappings to keep medical equipment sterile, maybe some packaging for meat products, wherever a genuine case of need could be made.

This could be a model for further action. The plastics pollution crisis is just one of the ways in which we are butting up against the limits of this fragile planet.

Ensuring that resources are used only sparingly, and well, is a model that we need in all aspects of our economy.

Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Natalie Bennett) was leader of the Green Party of England and Wales from 2012 to 2016.

This blog post is part of a cross-party series on Vuelio’s political blog Point of Order, which publishes insight and opinion to help public affairs, policy and comms professionals stay ahead of political change and connect with those who campaign on the issues they care about. To find out more or contribute, get in touch with Vuelio Politics.

Investing in the UK’s transport infrastructure to reduce regional economic disparities across the country is a key Government priority now we have formally left the European Union, and are negotiating our future trading relationship with the bloc before the end of 2020.

In the 2019 General Election, the Conservatives pledged to build the Northern Powerhouse Rail programme and well as invest £29bn in strategic roads, including £1bn to boost the UK’s electric car charging network.

The Government postponed a decision to approve or scrap the High Speed 2 rail project, instead waiting for the Oakervee Review to report its findings into the project.

The Prime Minister has been under pressure from both sides on this issue of a new high-speed railway from London to Birmingham and then onward to the North East, Scotland and the North West. While initial budgets in 2015 costed the project at £55 billion, leaked information from the as yet unpublished Oakervee Review report suggests this cost has risen to more than £107 billion.

One inescapable fact of the 2019 election is Labour’s red wall of heartland seats falling to the Conservatives. Across the Midlands, the North of England, North Wales and the North East, the Prime Minister is only too aware he has a brief honeymoon period to repay the trust placed in him by lifelong Labour voters, many of whom voted Conservative for the first time.

Among the new intake of Conservative MPs, several have spoken out against the HS2 project including Simon Jupp, the MP for East Devon, who has become a member of the Transport Select Committee and intends to highlight the need for investment in the South West: ‘I can’t back HS2 when the main and branch railway lines in Devon simply are not fit for purpose’.

Richard Holden, the MP for North West Durham has said his preference is to reconnect his area with the rail network, and not to prioritise HS2 or further rail infrastructure in London or the South East: ‘Consett and the surrounding area is one of the largest population centres in England without a rail line, despite having four rail lines there as recently as the 1960s. I will be campaigning for a feasibility study to reconnect our area to the growth centres of the North East’.

These MPs will note the Government’s promise to open up as many branch rail lines as possible following closures in the 1960s, though the cost of this is likely to be significant.

Whether or not the Northern vote was actually in favour of ‘Getting Brexit done’, the Conservative Government has a chance to deliver for these northern communities or face handing these seats back to Labour in 2024 if the Opposition’s fortunes are reversed under their new leader, who will be announced on 4 April.

A video released by the Conservatives showing a northern working-class voter meeting Boris Johnson and speaking about some of the reasons why he voted Tory for the first time has been widely viewed on social media. The PM says every time he meets newly elected Conservative MPs, he tells them: ‘This is on loan, this is conditional. We have to repay the trust of the electorate’.

Andy Street, the West Midlands Mayor, is hailed by Conservatives as a modern Conservative municipal leader and was managing director of John Lewis from 2007 to 2016 before winning the West Midlands Mayoralty in 2017 by a wafer-thin majority of 3,776 votes out of over 523,000 cast.

He will be heavily banking on the first stage of HS2 getting the green light and a formal decision by Cabinet and the PM is expected to be made within weeks. Street is not just constrained by HS2 though and has recently pledged a joined up approach to passenger transport across his Birmingham and the Black Country.  Andy Street incidentally faces a tough re-election battle on 7 May when his Labour opponent, announced yesterday, will be former Cabinet Minister and Birmingham MP Liam Byrne.

Further examples of how this Government intends to improve regional transport include Transport Secretary Grant Shapps’ recent decision to strip Northern Rail of its franchise after a catalogue of delays and cancellations in recent years when he said: ‘People across the north deserve better, their communities deserve better and I am determined to achieve that.’

The move means that services will be operated by an arms-length Government-owned company.

This follows the January announcement by the Government that it would intervene to save the UK regional airline Flybe by postponing a payment of Air Passenger Duty, rumoured to be £100 million. The main reason behind the intervention is thought to be that the airline connects remote parts of the UK including in Scotland, Northern Ireland and the South West, as well as the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands.

These recent decisions certainly show that the Government is prepared to think outside of the London and South East mindset that can often overshadow infrastructure decisions and also show that the Prime Minister recognises he needs to deliver on his promises to voters in the North and midlands. He knows he needs to improve their lives for the better and fast. Making sure the trains run on time would surely be a welcome start.

When senior doctors started to reduce their working hours in significant numbers, in response to changes in tax paid on their pensions, what would otherwise be a niche and complicated pensions issue, suddenly became a general election focus with the Prime Minister wading in, promising to fix it. 
 
New lower thresholds (unadjusted for inflation since 2014) when public sector workers start to pay tax on their pension contributions have seen higher earners across the public sector receiving staggering tax bills. As a result of having crossed either their annual or lifetime allowances, doctors are reducing their hours, or simply retiring, impacting on the NHS’s readiness to respond to annual winter pressures, forcing the Government to intervene.  
 
While the Government has found a temporary sticking plaster on this issue with a view to finding a longer-term solution for clinicians, the same problem extends right across the public sector, not least to policing.  
 
With 21,000 fewer officers and 600 police stations closed since 2010, policing has been hammered in recent years. We’re already seeing record numbers voluntarily leaving policing. So if the Government is to have any hope of delivering its uplift in policing numbers without chronic growing pains, it needs to hold onto every last bit of experience and leadership it can. 
 
The Superintendent ranks and above are likely to breach the annual allowance if an officer has more than 20 years’ service, due to the structuring of police pensions in the last 10 years of an officers’ service, which is unique to Police pensions. Senior Superintendents and all ranks above, will breach the annual allowance by ordinary pension growth alone, without there even being any pay rises.  
 
Superintendent, Chief Superintendent, Assistant Chief Constable, Deputy Chief Constable and Chief Constable ranks have the potential to routinely breach the allowance, with some senior officers unbelievably receiving yearly tax bills that are greater than their annual salary. 
 
In a letter to the Chair of the Police Pensions Scheme Advisory Board sent just in the last few days, the Policing Minister argues that while he is open to reform of pensions in policing, their case ‘does not demonstrate evidence of recruitment and retention problems and a resulting impact on operational service delivery.’ 
 
Unlike doctors, police officers cannot reduce their hours or withdraw their service to mitigate the impact of such tax bills, so it is much harder to demonstrate the impact on the public, and I suspect the Minister fully understands that. 
 
Research undertaken by the National Police Chiefs Council shows that applications for Chief Officer jobs are reducing, as is the tenure served in those roles. My own force, West Yorkshire Police, had just one applicant apply on the previous two occasions they needed to fill the post of Chief Constable and Northumbria Police has recently had to open recruitment three times to recruit a Chief Constable. 
 
While there will be a variety of reasons for this, the Police Superintendents’ Association conducted a survey in 2018 that revealed that almost four in ten of their members said pension issues were increasing their intention to leave, with 56% of respondents attributing this specifically to the annual allowance. 
 
The Treasury is conducting a review in to this issue with a view to shaping the next Budget on 11 March, so I have asked the Policing Minister to look specially at how these perverse tax disincentives can be reformed, not least because it would seem Police Forces themselves are paying these tax bills for individuals, who are reimbursed by the Home Office, who are reimbursed by the Treasury, in order to square-off contributions to HMRC. 
 
In order to pay the money back in the long term, officers are realistically having to hand significant chucks of their pensions back upon retirement, in order to settle all the accumulated Annual Allowance taxes. There must be a better way of structuring police pensions to avoid this financial merry-go-round, by simply giving senior police officers parity with the solutions offered to NHS consultants.  
 
Police pensions need to be much clearer for both officers themselves and the public purse, but more importantly ensuring that we do not haemorrhage experience and leadership within policing at a time when we can least afford it. 
 
Holly Lynch is the Labour MP for Halifax.  
 
This blog post is part of a cross-party series on Vuelio’s political blog Point of Order which publishes insight and opinion to help public affairs, policy and comms professionals stay ahead of political change and connect with those who campaign on the issues they care about. To find out more or contribute, get in touch with Vuelio Politics. 

Bernie Sanders is surging, and not just in the opinion polls. Audience interest in the Vermont Senator has exploded in the last few weeks, amid controversies involving fellow candidate Senator Elizabeth Warren and former Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

An endorsement by internet personality Joe Rogan has further boosted Sanders according to a new index developed by Vuelio’s sister brand, audience intelligence company Pulsar.

As the Iowa Caucus approaches on 3 February, Sanders has been driving not only the largest volume of conversations on social media over the past few weeks (13 – 26 January, 2.6m posts mentioned Sanders; more than those of the next two candidates combined – Warren and Joe Biden, both at 1.2m) but the conversation relating to Sanders is also displaying the highest velocity (a measure of how much conversation each candidate is able to create within a given hour).

‘Our index shows Sanders riding a big wave of buzz, which is consistent with movements in the polls and prediction markets’, said Marc Geffen, VP of Research and US Strategy at Pulsar. ‘In the last two weeks, the endorsement from Joe Rogan and provocative comments from Hillary Clinton have clearly activated the Sanders audience, driving both high velocity and relatively low volatility compared to the other candidates. These factors signal that the buzz around Sanders can grow at an extremely fast clip and sustain’.

Hillary Clinton failed to confirm if she would endorse Sanders if he went on to win the Democratic nomination and added: ‘Nobody likes him, nobody wants to work with him, he got nothing done. He was a career politician’.

She has been criticised for reopening a divide within the Democratic party that arguably led to her being defeated as the party’s first female Presidential candidate, which paved the way for the election of President Trump.

Pulsar’s virality model – traditionally used by Pulsar to measure consumer trends, as well as film and gaming releases – takes into account five different factors, including: how much buzz has a candidate generated in the most recent period; how much momentum has this candidate recently acquired; how much buzz can this candidate drive in a given hour; whether the conversation about this candidate is stable and consistent, or highly variable; and to what extent is the buzz about this candidate maintaining high volumes over time.

In terms of total volumes, both Warren and Sanders saw a huge growth on the eve of the 14 January CNN Debate and the ensuing controversy about Sanders’ alleged remarks.

‘We observe an interesting pattern in that, over the full period we’ve been measuring, the buzz around Sanders and Warren seem to move in tandem. More than any other pair of candidates, these two seem tethered to one another in the public’s eye’, said Geffen.

Sanders however, has managed to sustain those volumes further during the second half of January both in terms of virality and interest in search data, thanks also in part to the ‘endorsement’ from Internet personality Joe Rogan, and his strong performance in polls that have put him ahead of former Vice President Joe Biden in Iowa.

While Elizabeth Warren has also had her fair share of attention, receiving endorsements from both the New York Times and the Des Moines Register (a leading Iowa daily), it has not translated into a comparable social buzz, with Biden overtaking her in terms of raw volumes over the last week.

Audience interest in other candidates has also shifted. Amy Klobuchar, boosted by a New York Times endorsement (jointly with Warren), has overtaken Buttigieg in terms of virality. However, interest in her appears less consistent or ‘streaky’, dependent on big buzz moments that do not necessarily sustain interest. ‘Steadier’ candidates such as Andrew Yang on the other hand, have been able to drive very consistent virality week on week, remaining in the top five by volume of social buzz.

Pulsar is the leading AI-powered audience intelligence platform. Combining conversational and behavioural signals from the world’s leading digital destinations, Pulsar helps brands understand their audiences better and create messages that matter to them.