Centre Write Archives - Page 5 of 74

Henry Weston: It is time to stop the over-politicisation of the office of Attorney General

By Sam LampierCentre Write, Law & Justice, Politics

Over the last three years, Conservative ministers have embraced the line that ‘lefty lawyers’ frustrate government policy, with Suella Braverman arguing that they have undermined the judicial system. In fact, identifying the true threat to the independence of the legal system will require some humble introspection, and a recognition that recent Attorney Generals have been too political.

The fundamental role of the UK Law Officers, the Attorney General and the Solicitor General, is to act as legal advisors to the government. They are at once politicians and independent guardians of the law. However, Braverman’s overtly political approach to her time as Attorney General has demonstrated the need for reform that will safeguard the essential legal commitment of the Law Officers.

There has for some time been a consensus amongst leading lawyers and academics that the Attorney General must strike a “balance” between the “legal and political aspects” of their work.

Maintaining the political element of this balance is important. A politically attuned Law Officer is better prepared to grapple with the issues facing his ministerial colleagues. Further, an apolitical, independent lawyer might struggle to maintain as high a level of authority amongst the Cabinet as is currently the case. The importance of the Attorney General’s presence among the Cabinet is best highlighted by the disaster of 1956, when lack of legal consultation prior to military action in Suez led to the resignation of the then Prime Minister, Anthony Eden.

However, recent Attorney Generals have increasingly embraced the political, to the expense of the legal. Geoffrey Cox, Attorney General between 2018 and 2020, positioned himself at the centre of party-politics, giving a speech introducing the Prime Minister at the Conservative Party Conference in 2019, conducting Brexit negotiations himself and defending the then Prime Minister Boris Johnson with a furious Commons performance during debates on the prorogation of parliament. Cox believed that he had a “perfect right in cabinet to comment on all matters of policy and to participate in the fashioning of policy of the government.” That this change in tack was dramatic is demonstrated by a warning from Dominic Grieve, Attorney General of just four years earlier, that it would be “a very dangerous thing” if the Attorney General was “pontificating in cabinet.”

Despite this, Cox did offer politically inconvenient legal advice to the Government, indicating that he maintained some regard for the legal commitment of his office. His advice on the legal implications of the Northern Irish ‘backstop’ contributed to Theresa May’s failure to win the Commons’ approval for her deal, with Cox’s legal advice cited by opposing MPs. Indeed, this advice was perceived as intransigence by the government, as revealed by a No 10 briefing that Cox was “not a team player.” This briefing itself indicates that the perceived role of the Attorney General had developed into something more party political.

The slide towards the political was accelerated by Braverman, who regarded the “political thread that runs through this role” as “vitally important.” This change was demonstrated by her desire to employ a special adviser during her tenure as Attorney General; an over-politicisation of the office.

Braverman’s unapologetic commitment to politician first, lawyer second, was most evident in her rhetoric. When the journalist Robert Peston suggested that the Government’s legislation threatened to break the law, Braverman responded that “this is your Remainiac make-believe.” Braverman was doing little to distinguish her comments from the stock party-political line of any Cabinet minister. Indeed, her public defence of Dominic Cummings’ alleged breach of COVID-19 lockdown guidelines undermined the independence of her office, whilst her partisan defence of the Internal Market Bill provoked accusations from lawyers that she was disregarding the rule of law. What Robert Buckland had described as the “grave danger” of Law Officers prepared to “adapt their advice to reflect the political priorities of their ministerial colleagues” appeared to have become the reality.

Sadly, it is likely that Braverman’s more political approach is here to stay. Past Attorney Generals have very rarely been “politically ambitious.” However, future Attorney General appointments are more likely than before to be young and ambitious political wannabes. The number of barristers in the Commons has fallen, from around 15% of MPs between 1951 and 1974 to 5% in recent years. Indeed, the proportion of MPs with any legal at all background has fallen steadily. Consequently, the pool of MPs to choose from for the position of Attorney General is getting smaller. Moreover, the prospect of a reformed House of Lords is likely to prevent an experienced barrister in that House becoming Attorney General, as Lord Goldsmith did in 2001. If Attorney Generals continue to be chosen from amongst MPs, there will be a lack of experienced lawyers among them, meaning the position will go to ambitious politicians instead.

However, this is not unavoidable. Since the 1997 Law Officers Act, the role of the Solicitor General and Attorney General have become practically indistinguishable, but this need not be the case. One of them ought to be codified as an apolitical legal advisor, distinguishing the role of the Solicitor General from the Attorney General. The former should be an apolitical legal expert, while the latter a political official who procures legal advice.

The recent appointment of Victoria Prentis, who may block Home Office plans for deportations to Rwanda on legal grounds, hints at a return to the conventional approach to the office of Attorney General. However, the promise of reduced controversy in the immediate future should not deter pre-emptive reform.

In 2007, controversy regarding Lord Goldsmith’s alleged doubts about the legality of the Iraq War, which did not appear in his published advice, prompted the Constitutional Affairs Committee to recommend that the Attorney General should “not be a party-political appointment, and should not, as a matter of course, attend Cabinet.” These calls for reform fell on deaf ears. Over a decade later, Braverman’s tenure has provided a reminder of the need to reform, and an opportunity to rectify our mistakes.

Henry Weston is undergoing work experience at Bright Blue. Views expressed in this article are those of the author, and not necessarily those of Bright Blue. [Image: NoName_13]

You might also like...

Centre Write Politics

William Morris: A new programme of National Service would help tackle our mental health epidemic

Centre Write Education Politics Towns & Devolution Welfare

Annabelle Walker: Childcare needs more than just demand side reform

Archive podcast Centre Write Politics Towns & Devolution

The Rt Hon Sir Robert Buckland MP: The Rwanda scheme needs to be fairer, or we risk alienating voters

October 19, 2023

William Morris: A new programme of National Service would help tackle our mental health epidemic

By Sam LampierCentre Write, Health & Social Care, Politics

There is no escaping the continuing apocalyptic diagnoses about the state of young people’s mental health in this country. The news cycle regularly informs us about new record levels of one symptom of poor mental health or another: whether it be loneliness, anxiety or even suicidal thoughts. To help alleviate it, the UK Government should reintroduce a programme of National Service.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, young people under 30 were constantly more lonely, more anxious, more stressed and were 10% more likely to report poor mental health as compared to the over-60s. Consequently, in 2019, just under a quarter of young people have self-harmed. Indeed, the leading cause of death for those under the age of 35 is suicide. This mental health epidemic points to a generation who are in crisis, struggling to find their identity and purpose in life, and, most importantly, are lonely.

It is important to alleviate the symptoms of loneliness at the start of adulthood so that those widespread feelings do not snowball into something worse, such as anxiety or depression. It is clear that loneliness increases the risk associated with those poor mental health symptoms. If young people do not have the community and the mechanisms to ensure positive mental health, then the crisis will only worsen.

To help provide young people with that lacking sense of community and duty, the Government ought to reintroduce a programme of National Service.

A 2022 academic study detailed that there are three key ways to end loneliness: expense, accessibility and structure. Many young people find it hard to participate in socialising if money and distance are a barrier and if an activity is unstructured, as it can often appear to lack purpose. A National Service Scheme which ran every summer for those between the ages of 18-22 would provide solutions to each of those three key issues, creating a generation that stands ready to face the challenges and demands of the twenty-first century.

While in one sense we may nowadays be more connected more than ever, it is often through the internet, which gives a false sense of intimacy and friendship. Young people are now spending over double the amount of time on the internet compared to the outside. Working and adventuring with others should instead be with real bonds, with real people, in the real world. Within a National Service programme, not only would fraternity and community inevitably be fostered, but those bonds would help to create a more positive and interconnected generation helping to alleviate anxiety and social exclusion. Friendships in the real world are far more valuable than those online.

Indeed, a key job of government is to provide opportunities for young people, whether it be in schools or otherwise. Not only would a National Service programme provide career and skills opportunities, if appropriately structured, but personal development too. Given that 65% of 15-year-olds worry about their future career, National Service could assist in refining employment and financial skills which all too often do not get taught in schools.

Thus, through a new National Service, young people would experience new opportunities, but could also improve both their mental and physical health. Those who are active and participate in regular exercise are three times more happy than those who are not regularly active. The good habits of exercise benefit far more than just the body, and those could be facilitated by the programme.

There have been attempts to re-invent the spirit of National Service before, such as through the National Citizen Service scheme set up by the 2010-2016 Cameron Government. Yet it has failed to garner uptake, at only 13% of those eligible, despite a target of 45%. A better scheme could work on an opt-out basis, as suggested in a report by the think-tank Onward, so the opportunity is the default for young people. With such a large group participating, not only could those who have felt loneliness have the opportunity to meet others, but a great experiment of social mixing would take place, helping break down the class and social barriers present in the UK society.

It would be a formative experience at the start of adulthood, providing friends and new skills to tackle anxiety and loneliness. National Service would break down barriers, bring young people together, give them new friends and new skills and, hopefully, help put the worries and anxiety that foster our mental health epidemic to rest.

William Morris is undergoing work experience at Bright Blue. Views expressed in this article are those of the author, and not those of Bright Blue. [Image: Maël Balland]

You might also like...

Centre Write Politics

William Morris: A new programme of National Service would help tackle our mental health epidemic

Centre Write Education Politics Towns & Devolution Welfare

Annabelle Walker: Childcare needs more than just demand side reform

Archive podcast Centre Write Politics Towns & Devolution

The Rt Hon Sir Robert Buckland MP: The Rwanda scheme needs to be fairer, or we risk alienating voters

October 18, 2023

Bartek Staniszewski: Public attitudes towards the plight of and policies for younger people

By Robert HansardBartlomiej Staniszewski, Centre Write, Economy & Finance, Politics

Introduction

Younger people in this country are disillusioned with the Conservative Government. Only 1% of 18-24-year-olds in the UK intend to vote for the Conservatives in the next election, according to a recent YouGov poll.

There has been much debate about whether this collapse in support for centre-right politics among younger adults in Britain is largely because of material or cultural reasons; whether the economic circumstances of younger adults – squeezed living standards and expensive housing – are more to blame for their turn away from the Conservative Party, or whether diverging cultural values are.

This polling seeks to answer those questions and provides a snapshot into the current public attitudes concerning how younger people are and should be supported by government.

Methodology

Polling was undertaken by YouGov and conducted between the 28th and the 29th of September 2023. It consisted of a nationally representative sample of 2,098 Great British (GB) adults.

The sample was derived using an online interview administered to members of the YouGov Plc GB panel of 185,000+ individuals who have agreed to take part in surveys. An email was sent to panellists selected at random from the base sample, inviting them to take part in the survey and providing a link to the survey. The responding sample was weighted to the profile of the sample definition, which, in this instance, consists of all GB adults, to provide a representative reporting sample.

The polling did not define what a young person was. Nor do we, but we assume that it could mean anyone up to the age of 40.

The current situation

As seen in Chart 1 below, a clear majority of the GB public believe that the economic prospects of younger people are harder (“Much harder” and “Somewhat harder” together) than those of younger people 10 years ago (56%), 20 years ago (60%) and 30 years ago (58%).

Chart 1. Views of GB public on whether younger people today have it economically easier or harder in comparison to younger people of 10, 20 and 30 years ago

Base: 2,098 GB adults

In contrast, only a small minority of all respondents think that younger people today have it easier (“Much easier” and “Somewhat easier” together) when it comes to economic prospects than young people at any point within the last 30 years. Only 11% of respondents think that the younger people of today have it easier than the younger people of 10 years ago; 18% think that in comparison to the younger people of 20 years ago; and 22% think that in comparison to the younger people of 30 years ago.

There is some notable differentiation by voting history in the 2016 EU referendum. At least 68% of Remain voters think that the younger people of today have it worse in terms of economic prospects than younger people at any point within the last 30 years; the same can be said for only 47% of Leave voters.

Interestingly, there is broad agreement across all age groups as to the current economic prospects of young people relative to previous generations. For example, 50% of 18-24-year-olds said that the younger people of today have it harder than the younger people of 10 years ago; and the same was said by 52% of over 65-year-olds. Ultimately, a majority of all ages of the GB public say that the younger people of today have it worse in terms of economic prospects than the younger people of several decades ago.

Current priorities

As can be seen in Chart 2 below, a majority of the GB public (53%) think that inflation and the cost of living is one of the top three most important issues facing young people of Britain at this time. This is even more pronounced among 18-49-year-olds, 58% of whom are of that view.

Chart 2. Views of GB public on the top three most important issues facing young people in Britain at this time

Base: 2,098 GB adults

The next issues that were ranked as among the top three most important for the young people of today by the GB public include housing (41%), the environment and climate change (31%), the economy (26%) and education (25%).

Again, there was broad agreement among all age groups as to the priorities of young people. For no question was there massive divergence between the answers of different age cohorts; there was only a divergence of 18 percentage points on the topic of inflation and the cost of living, where a majority (61%) of 18-24 year olds pointed to this as one of the top three most important issues for young people today, as compared to a plurality (43%) of over 65 year olds.

In general, the most notable divergence in attitudes was, again, between Leave and Remain voters. In particular, the environment and climate change was chosen as a top three issue for young people in Britain by 46% of Remain voters, but only 23% of Leave voters. Similar disparities occurred in connection to crime (12% vs 23%), immigration & asylum (4% vs 21%) and Britain leaving the EU (21% vs 5%).

The view that housing is one of the top issues facing young people in Britain today was also consistently reflected in our next question, which asked the GB public about the top three policy proposals that would appeal to younger voters. As can be seen in Chart 3 below, the most popular answer, by a significant margin (65%), for a policy proposal that would appeal most to younger voters was making homes cheaper for first-time buyers. Indeed, this was the only policy proposal chosen by a majority of people as one of the top three policy proposals that would appeal to younger voters.

Chart 3: Views of GB public on the policy proposals that would most appeal to younger voters

Base: 2,098 GB adults

The other popular policy proposals to appeal to younger voters included lowering university tuition fees (41%), more ambitious policies on combatting climate change (33%), lowering taxes on working people (29%) and new controls on energy bills to bring down costs (24%).

As before, there was no significant divergence between age groups; while 63% of 18-24-year-olds considered making homes cheaper for first-time buyers a top three policy proposal to appeal to younger voters, 69% of over 65-year-olds were of the same view. The only policy proposal on which divergence between age groups did occur was introducing stricter controls on immigration; while 20% of over 65-year-olds considered it a top three policy proposal to appeal to younger voters, a mere 3% of 18-24-year-olds thought the same.

We also tested what the GB public thought would be the least appealing policy priorities for younger voters. This is shown in Chart 4 below. It is worth highlighting that the data here again shows that the GB public tend to think that economic policies will be most appealing to younger voters, whereas cultural policies will be the least appealing to younger voters.

Chart 4: Views of GB public on the policy proposals that would least appeal to younger voters

Base: 2,098 GB adults

The three least popular policy priorities to appeal to younger voters among the GB public were “Measures to limit critical teaching of British history in schools” (45%), “Reducing access to women-only spaces for transgender people” (39%) and “Introducing stricter controls on immigration” (37%).

Again, divergence between age groups on this question was limited. While a large plurality (45%) of 18-24-year-olds considered “Measures to limit critical teaching of British history in schools” unappealing to younger voters, 41% of over 65-year-olds thought the same. However, significant disparity dud again occur on the question of stricter controls immigration, whereby a majority (52%) of 18-24-year-olds considered it an unappealing policy for young people, as contrasted to only 26% of over 65-year-olds.

Considering that the GB public thinks that economic, rather than cultural, policy proposals will be most appealing to younger voters, we tested what the GB public considers to be most likely to improve the financial situation of young people. This is shown in Chart 5 below.

Chart 5: Views of GB public on the policy proposals that would best improve the financial situation of young people

Base: 2,098 GB adults.

A plurality of the GB public think increasing the minimum wage is one of the two best policy proposals from the ones provided for improving the financial situation of young people (38%).

However, unlike with previous questions, there was limited consensus on what policy proposals would improve the financial situation of young people in this country. The next five most popular proposals were all chosen by between 20% and 33% of the GB public.

The biggest disparity between younger and older GB respondents, and indeed between different socio-demographic groups of respondents in general, occurred regarding the proposal to increase the number of apprenticeships available. While a plurality of over 65-year-olds (41%) deemed this to be one of the two best proposals for improving the financial situation of young people in the country, only 11% of 18-24-year-olds agreed.

Perceptions of the Conservative Government

As seen in Chart 6 below, when asked to think about different generations, a plurality of the GB public (31%) said that the Conservative Party looks out for the interests of baby boomers the most.

It should be noted that we defined the ‘Greatest Generation’ as people born roughly before 1945, Baby boomers as people born roughly between 1945 and 1964, Generation X as people born roughly between 1965 and 1979, Millennials as people born roughly between 1980 and 1995 and Generation Z as people born roughly between 1996 and 2015.

Chart 6: Views of the GB public on who the Conservative Party looks out for the interests of most

Base: 2,098 GB adults

Seventeen percent of the GB public – the second most popular response – claimed that the Conservative Party looks out for the interests of no generation the most.

This question aroused the greatest divergence between different age groups of the GB public. While a clear plurality of both 18-24-year-olds (38%) and 25-49-year-olds (39%) thought that the Conservative Party looks out for the interests of baby boomers the most, only 17% of over 65-year-olds and 28% of 50-64-year-olds said the same. Indeed, for over 65-year-olds, the most popular responses to this question were “Don’t know” (29%) and “None of these” (27%).

We also asked the GB public which generation they felt was least served by the Conservative Party. This is illustrated in Chart 7 below. A plurality (32%) of the GB public answered “Generation Z.” The second most popular answer was “I don’t know,” with a minority of 24% of responses, followed by “Millennials” (12%). The GB public clearly feel the Conservative Party is less responsive to younger generations.

Chart 7: Views on who the Conservative Party looks out for the interests of least.

Base: 2,098 GB adults.

Indeed, of people aged 18-24, a majority (58%) felt that the Conservative Party looks out for the interests of Generation Z the least. For 25-49-year-olds, a plurality of 21% of believe that the Conservative Party looks out for the interests of millennials least.

While a plurality of over 65-year-olds (28%) did not know which generation the Conservative Party looks out for least, their second most popular response to the question of who the Conservative Party looks out for the interests of least was “Baby boomers” (20%), demonstrating general dissatisfaction with the Conservative Party among all generations.

Conclusion

A lot has happened over the last few decades to warrant pessimism among today’s young people. While some Remain voters may point towards Brexit being a reason for this pessimism, one theme can be weaved throughout all of the above questions: housing. Real house prices and the price-to-income ratio of UK homes have both increased significantly over the last 30 years. Housing is seen as one of the top priorities for this country’s young people, while making homes cheaper for first-time buyers was the strong preference of the GB public for how best to appeal to younger voters.

Of course, other problems also shine through: the cost of living crisis chief amongst them. Worries about inflation, energy costs and costs associated with education and the family remain very strong.

But most interesting is probably what does not shine through: cultural policies. The GB public, both young and old, were in agreement that the way to appeal to younger voters is not through politics that concerns itself with sexual identity or the legacy of the British Empire, but rather with economic realities.

Finally, once again are we reminded of the extent to which there is a strong view that the Conservative Government has failed younger people. Equating 18-24-year-olds with Generation Z, this age bracket was also the only age bracket where a majority said that the Conservative Party looks out for their interests the least. And while all generations felt like the Conservatives failed them specifically, nowhere was this sentiment as powerful as it was amongst the youngest adults.

Bartek Staniszewski is a senior researcher at Bright Blue.

Notes:

We are grateful to YouGov for advising on and carrying out the survey.

October 2, 2023

Annabelle Walker: Childcare needs more than just demand side reform

By Sam LampierCentre Write, Education, Health & Social Care, Politics, Towns & Devolution, Welfare

The childcare crisis in the United Kingdom is more than just a pressing social issue; it’s a ticking time bomb with profound economic repercussions. The UK’s broken childcare system is an epidemic that has significant negative impacts on UK economic productivity and exacerbates the gender pay gap. Whilst initial progress has been made to address the crisis, specifically increasing demand for childcare, more needs to be done to address shortfalls in supply.

The astronomical cost of childcare has forced one in four UK parents to quit their jobs or drop out of education. This issue is highly gendered, with women predominantly bearing the brunt of unpaid domestic labour and childcare responsibilities. Consequently, women face a widening gender pay gap amid the relentless cost of living crisis. Bridging the gender gap could generate an extra £150 billion in GDP by 2025, with childcare provision playing a crucial role in unlocking this potential.

Additionally, investment in early childhood education (ECE) yields significant long-term socioeconomic benefits. Indeed, children who receive high-quality ECE are 14% more likely to be employed as adults, earn higher annual incomes, and can indirectly lower the likelihood of individuals engaging in criminal activities. Advancements in social mobility caused by ECE clearly highlight the need for a fully-functioning childcare system.

Earlier this year, the UK government announced a £4 billion childcare reform package in response to the childcare crisis. The reforms included various initiatives such as the Extended Early Years Free Entitlement program, which grants children under three 15 hours of weekly free childcare, increasing to 30 hours per week by 2025. Additionally, the Government are attempting to incentivise new childminders with a £600 sign-up bonus to bolster recruitment in the childcare industry.

Whilst these reforms are a step in the right direction, they largely fail to address the rapidly declining supply of childcare providers. It is imperative that the Government address this issue, as focusing solely on increasing demand for free childcare will create a chasm between expectations and capacity.

According to a nationwide survey by the Early Years Alliance, a substantial portion of childcare providers plan to offer only a limited number of places under the Government’s scheme for free childcare and charge privately for the rest. Eighty-three percent of providers expect an increase in demand under the new scheme, yet 60% will not be increasing the number of places they offer. This highlights the scheme’s fundamental flaw: demand is increasing, yet supply is not.

Supply is decreasing. There is a critical shortage of qualified childminders, with the number of registered childminders in England declining by 11% in just one year – falling to their lowest number since 2012. Ofsted data shows this results in a loss of more than 20,000 childcare places per annum.

The number of staff employed by voluntary organisations and school-based nurseries is also declining. Childcare professionals are not accepting children eligible for government-funded care due to insufficient government payment. The only childcare providers to increase staffing between 2019 to 2022 were private nurseries, raising serious concerns regarding the perpetuation of socioeconomic disadvantage, given the benefits of ECE.

Ultimately, the financial viability of running a childcare business, coupled with low pay, increasing workloads and the cost of living crisis, is driving professionals away from the sector. Experts, such as Neil Leitch from Early Years Alliance, worry that government efforts to attract new childminders, such as sign-up bonuses, are unlikely to stem the exodus of existing professionals, and risk de-professionalising the workforce.

To successfully tackle the childcare crisis, it is vital to increase the number of childminders and the capacity of existing providers. Expanding the workforce is the only way to bridge the supply-demand gap, increasing childcare provider participation in the Government’s currently ineffective childcare scheme.

Boosting the workforce can be achieved in two ways.

Firstly, recruitment of qualified childcare providers. Promoting early childcare careers to graduates via accessible Teach First style training programmes directly increases the size of the workforce. Germany’s ECEC training programme provides paid employment alongside the equivalent of a bachelor’s degree in vocational training for childcare. Hugely successful, the initiative attracts more applicants than places, highlighting the effectiveness of training programmes in recruitment. These programmes simultaneously increase the quality of ECE. Childcare providers with graduate and Level 3 qualified staff are shown to score highly on quality measures including learning, literacy, and language, and tend to be the most highly graded childcare settings.

The second way to increase the workforce is by incentivising qualified workers to stay in the industry. To retain existing professionals, the Government should increase funding to match the increasing costs of providing childcare services. Currently, the Government pay professionals less than two-thirds of the estimated cost of the provision of free childcare.

Furthermore, the Government must provide employees with professional development opportunities. Multiple countries have implemented effective strategies that retain qualified workers within the childcare sector. Slovenia’s early childcare system promotes preschool teachers to various titles, which correlates with pay rises. Promotion is based on years of experience, performance at work and engagement in additional professional development activities. Staff who are engaged, feel valued and can fulfil career ambitions are more likely to remain within their sector. The UK government should investigate implementing a similar model to decrease the mass departure from the UK’s childcare industry.

Therefore, childcare reforms must target the growth of childcare suppliers. Only by increasing the supply of childminders and the capacity of existing providers can the UK fully resolve the childcare crisis, unlocking the untapped economic potential of parents who currently have no choice but to stay at home.

Annabelle Walking is currently doing work experience at Bright Blue. Views expressed in this article are those of the author, not necessarily those of Bright Blue. [Image: Arron Burden]

You might also like...

Centre Write Politics

William Morris: A new programme of National Service would help tackle our mental health epidemic

Centre Write Education Politics Towns & Devolution Welfare

Annabelle Walker: Childcare needs more than just demand side reform

Archive podcast Centre Write Politics Towns & Devolution

The Rt Hon Sir Robert Buckland MP: The Rwanda scheme needs to be fairer, or we risk alienating voters

September 18, 2023

The Rt Hon Sir Robert Buckland MP: The Rwanda scheme needs to be fairer, or we risk alienating voters

By Sam LampierArchive podcast, Centre Write, Health & Social Care, Politics, Towns & Devolution

Since its very inception, the principle of fairness has been the very foundation of the justice system in this country. Indeed, something cannot be fair if it is not just, and vice-versa. The United Kingdom has continued to champion justice ever since, with a strong emphasis on freedom and the rights of the individual being upheld by due process. We have a long and proud legacy on this, from trial by jury and habeas corpus, through to the Police and Criminal Evidence Act and our leadership in drafting the European Convention on Human Rights.

It would be a travesty if such an admirable record were undermined by a knee-jerk response to a complex and sensitive issue. Without more work, the current Rwanda scheme threatens to erode the very sense of fairness that underpins so much of the British state and its functions, and, crucially, any policy that offends the innate British instinct of justice and due process will alienate voters and lose us the argument.

It is obvious that we must address the Channel crossings and dismantle the business model of the unscrupulous criminal gangs that profit from desperation and misery. Indeed, the perils of making the Channel crossing mean there is a humanitarian imperative that this Government’s approach is the correct one. The Government is right to challenge its critics to come up with other solutions, instead of a deafening silence.

It is also important to acknowledge that, when dealing with such a dangerous and desperate problem, we have to be firm to be fair. This means retaining the use of third countries as a last resort, but going back and looking at what can be done before their use to ensure we discharge our duties to vulnerable people while putting an end to their exploitation by a network of smugglers and criminals.

The latest report from the think tank, Bright Blue, can be looked to for inspiration for the path we need to take. The use of humanitarian visas should be restored with safe routes subject to a quota. These policies would command popular support, too, resonating with the all-important public spirit of fairness and compassion.

It is vital we tackle this vexed and very human issue, but that can only be done with an approach that the public can get behind and that accords with proper due process and can withstand proper scrutiny. We simply have to move beyond facile arguments about the ECHR and “leftie lawyers” and start looking at solutions that pass both moral and political tests.

The Rt Hon Sir Robert Buckland MP is the former Justice Secretary. Views expressed in this article are those of the author, not necessarily those of Bright Blue. [Image: Gov.uk]

You might also like...

Centre Write Politics

William Morris: A new programme of National Service would help tackle our mental health epidemic

Centre Write Education Politics Towns & Devolution Welfare

Annabelle Walker: Childcare needs more than just demand side reform

Archive podcast Centre Write Politics Towns & Devolution

The Rt Hon Sir Robert Buckland MP: The Rwanda scheme needs to be fairer, or we risk alienating voters

September 8, 2023

Finn O’Hare: The Government can’t keep leaving sports on the bench

By Sam LampierCentre Write, Health & Social Care, Politics, Towns & Devolution

With one in six deaths in the UK being associated with physical inactivity it seems incredulous that tackling something as manageable as inactivity crisis has not been made more of a priority. Despite the government claiming that their policy on sport has been “to get more people in sport” for more than a decade, it is impossible to deem such policies a date – the UK is 20% less active than in the 1960s and projected to be 35% less active by 2030. The statistics lays bare the scale of the task ahead in reversing this worrying trend.

It is indisputable that those who are active in their childhood are more likely to remain active as they grow older, demonstrating why prioritising youth participation in sport is fundamental to tackling the inactivity crisis. The importance of prioritising youth sport cannot be overstated, with increased physical activity associated with widespread benefits on an individual’s mental and physical health, reducing the risk of dementia by up to 30%, cardiovascular disease by up to 35% and all-cause mortality by 33%.

The impacts of increased inactivity amongst children are becoming clear, with the rate of obesity amongst children in the UK rising steadily over the last 15 years, regardless of how vocal the government has been in pledging to tackle the nation’s health and obesity since the pandemic – the 2023 government report concluded that 37.7% of year six age children obese or overweight, up significantly from 31.6% in 2006.

It is clear that young people are not physically active enough, with just 47% of children meeting the UK Chief Medical Officers’ guidelines of taking part in an average of 60 minutes or more of sport and physical activity a day. Given that the majority of the nation’s children are not active enough, it can hardly be a surprise that tackling child obesity rates has proven so difficult. It is imperative that more be done to instil the importance of living an active and healthy lifestyle from a young age through the promotion of sport amongst young children and in schools, a mentality which should carry through to adulthood after being instilled early on. The evidence is clear that those who are active in their childhood are significantly more likely to remain activity for the duration of their life, and vice versa. The current generation of children is collectively unhealthy, a trend which if continued over time will only increase future pressure on an already struggling NHS, for whom physical inactivity is estimated as costing £0.9bn a year. With waiting lists already reaching record highs of 7.5 million in 2023, the importance of acting upon something as controllable as inactivity.

While the causes of obesity are complex and multifactorial, it is driven by an imbalance in energy intake and energy expenditure. Given that physical activity is the most modifiable factor of energy expenditure and is responsible for roughly 25% of total energy expenditure, it clearly has significant power to impact the energy balance equation and in turn one’s likelihood of becoming obese.

Furthermore, beyond the physical health benefits, the endorphins released by your body in response to exercise interact with receptors in your brain and have been proven to help ward off feelings of anxiety and depression, reduce stress, boost self-esteem and improve sleep. When we live in a time where 18% of 7 to 16-year-olds have a probable mental disorder, and mental health crisis care services are underfunded and understaffed, increasing activity has the potential to reduce strain on the NHS across multiple departments, as well as having multifaceted benefits on both children and society as a whole.

An increase in sports participation would also likely have benefits for educational attainment – higher cardiorespiratory fitness is associated with higher brain function, improvements in cognitive control of working memory and levels of concentration, and consequently with higher results in tests, demonstrating the potential for the positive impact physical activity can have on an individual’s education. This further highlights the importance of investing in youth sport and the scope for improvements on an individual’s quality of life through an amalgamation of the aforementioned factors.

While the need for action appears to have been recognised at least to an extent by the government, which has implemented investment plans, such as the ongoing PE and sport premium funding established as a legacy to the 2012 Olympics, and the pledge in March 2014 of £150m a year for primary schools’ sport funding guaranteed until 2020. And yet, 10 years on from their implementation, 4,000 hours of PE were lost at state schools over the past year, part of a wider trend of decline since the 2012 Olympics over which period there has been a 12% drop in school hours dedicated to sport – the plans can only be considered as a failure. This negative trend has been described as “a matter of immediate national concern” by the Youth Sport Trust and should serve as the impetus for change, as it is irrefutable that the current plans are not working, and action needs to be taken to halt and reverse the decline – failure to do so is likely to have long term impacts on both the NHS and on individuals in terms of their physical health, mental health and educational attainment.

With this in mind, in tackle the inactivity crisis facing Britain it is clear that the government needs to do more to boost sport participation and activity levels amongst children, Increasing accessibility to all sports to all children. An acknowledgement of the far-reaching potential sport has to benefit an individual’s wellbeing academically, physically and mentally is a necessity to avoid at all costs allowing PE provision to decline as a result of core subjects being given additional time, a needless and dangerous scenario which 38% of teachers have said they felt is the case. Greater provision of compulsory sport in school hours, as well as the funding and resources to increase accessibility of after-school sports clubs is an absolute necessity.

While attempts have been made to show an interest in children’s sport the issue lies in the government directly contradicting itself with the advice and the policy they are issuing – while recommending children should take part in at least seven hours of sport a week, they are simultaneously stating in their own school sport and activity action plan that they intend to provide support for teachers and schools to deliver just two hours of high-quality PE a week. The need for a new approach and commitment to making physical activity a priority not just through words, but by implementing policies and funding to ensure children can readily access the levels of physical activity they are recommending is unquestionable.

Without a radical and committed new plan, the UK faces falling further into an inactivity and obesity ‘epidemic’, a major concern given it already ranks fourth in Europe for having the most overweight and obese adults at present.

Finn O’Hare is currently doing work experience at Bright Blue. Views expressed in this article are those of the author, not necessarily those of Bright Blue. [Image: Jeffrey F Lin]

You might also like...

Centre Write Politics

William Morris: A new programme of National Service would help tackle our mental health epidemic

Centre Write Education Politics Towns & Devolution Welfare

Annabelle Walker: Childcare needs more than just demand side reform

Archive podcast Centre Write Politics Towns & Devolution

The Rt Hon Sir Robert Buckland MP: The Rwanda scheme needs to be fairer, or we risk alienating voters

September 4, 2023

Matte Sandroshvili: Create streets for pedestrians to tackle air pollution

By Sam LampierCentre Write, Energy & Environment, Towns & Devolution, Transport

In the heart of one of the world’s most iconic cities, a silent but deadly challenge looms large. Ninety-nine percent of London exceeds the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) recommended pollution particle limits. This causes 4,000 deaths a year in the capital which has the greatest percentage of deaths attributable to air pollution in England. It is clear we must do more to tackle air pollution and changing the layout of the streets is one proven, yet underappreciated, way to do it.

Existing measures, such as the Mayor of London’s Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ), Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTN) and protected bike lanes have helped but are not enough to bring down air pollution. ULEZ works by charging drivers of non-compliant vehicles £12.50 per day. LTNs close off certain side roads and introduce bollards and planters to reduce traffic. Finally, the Mayor has implemented some protected bike lanes. However, London has 13,600 kilometres of road but only 160 kilometres of protected bike paths. This number needs to be increased to get people out of cars and onto bikes – thus reducing air pollution.

Overall, however, whilst policies such ULEZ, LTNs and protected bike lanes have yielded results, with pollution levels 21% lower than they would have been without the measures, the problem persists. At the start of 2023, air pollution in London reached the pinnacle of the UK government’s DAQI (Daily Air Quality Index) and this was London’s worst rating since 2017. Clearly, more needs to be done.

One potential solution is hidden beneath us: the street. Street design is an underappreciated field which has economic, social and environmental impacts – the way we design our streets dictates the way we interact with the world around us. If we design our streets for private cars, we will use private cars and here lies the problem in countless cities around the world: our cities are designed for cars, not people.

This issue is especially prevalent in the USA, where New York has been setting an impressive example. In most of America it is almost impossible to get around without a car with 92% of households owning a car. However, New York still manages to maintain a better traffic and emission level than London, how is this so?

New York has implemented a method of street design which prioritises the pedestrian and the cyclist over the motorist. These were started by the then Traffic Commissioner Janette Sadik Khan, who is responsible for making the pedestrianised Times Square we know today. She changed the streets by making protected bicycle lanes, wider pavements, narrower roads, fewer lanes and more pedestrian crossings.

These reforms combined with greater public transport provision drove people away from cars and towards cycling, walking and using public transport. This has led to New York City having the lowest percentage of car ownership in America, at 45%, and fewer cars than London with only two million cars compared to London’s 2.6 million cars. This reduction in car ownership is key to bringing down air pollution as in both New York and London road vehicles are the biggest contributor to road pollution and even a change as easy cycling or walking one day a week can make a major difference by dropping each persons’ carbon footprint by 0.5 tonnes a year.

There is plenty that London can take from New York’s improvements. First, it can introduce more protected bike lanes. Protected bike lanes help those who do not cycle as they do not feel safe; they separate the bikes from the cars and prevent any crashes. As previously mentioned, there are already some protected bike lanes in London and these have been successful with the 2015 implementation leading to an increase of up to 50% of cyclists on certain paths.

Secondly, London needs to widen its pavements and narrow its road lanes. The average lane width in London is 12 feet – this is too wide and allows cars to feel safe travelling at high speeds whilst reducing the space for pedestrians and cyclists. If lanes are narrowed to ten feet, as they have been in New York, the benefits will be two-fold. First, this reduces the speed of cars and thus also reduces emissions by preventing brash accelerating and decelerating, which is a key cause of car emissions. Secondly, ten-foot lanes free up between four to six feet on the road which can be used to implement a new bike lane or more pedestrian crossings which reduces emissions by allowing more people to cycle or walk rather than drive.

Overall, whilst street design is a relatively unknown field it can have a major impact on London’s emissions by reducing the number of Londoners driving and increasing the number who cycle, walk or take public transport.

Matte Sandroshvili is currently doing work experience at Bright Blue. Views expressed in this article are those of the author, not necessarily those of Bright Blue. [Image: Tamara Menzi]

You might also like...

Centre Write Politics

William Morris: A new programme of National Service would help tackle our mental health epidemic

Centre Write Education Politics Towns & Devolution Welfare

Annabelle Walker: Childcare needs more than just demand side reform

Archive podcast Centre Write Politics Towns & Devolution

The Rt Hon Sir Robert Buckland MP: The Rwanda scheme needs to be fairer, or we risk alienating voters

August 29, 2023

Cormac Evans: To boost workers rights you need to cut corporation tax

By Sam LampierCentre Write, Economy & Finance, Politics

Workers’ rights in the UK are in dire need of improvement. According to a report from the ITUC, the International Trade Union Congress, the UK is rated as a “regular violator of workers’ rights,” with frequent denials of the right to strike as a significant contributor. However the solution to this might lie in an unlikely place – corporate tax policy. Using tax incentives to get firms to boost employee rights and benefits could improve the UK’s workers’ rights and revitalise British productivity.

Following the introduction of the Government’s Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill, it is still the case that many of the employee benefits offered in the EU are not available for UK workers, with even more at risk of being lost as part of the Government’s sunsetting of EU laws. The sunsetting risks UK workers losing their rights to holiday pay, maternity leave and protection against insolvency.

Indeed, many of the UK’s workers’ rights provisions fall significantly short of their European counterparts, such as Austria, Norway and Germany, with the UK only guaranteeing £96 per week for 28 weeks as Statutory Sick Pay – the minimum legal level of sick pay. Compared to nations like Germany, which provide employees with 100% of their salary for 6 weeks, and 70% thereafter, this is not good enough. Yet workers’ rights improvements do not seem to be on the horizon.

But, given the current Treasury deficit, less costly methods are required to get workers to return to work by ensuring improved working conditions.

Presently, corporation tax in the UK is 25%, rising from 19% as of the 2023 financial year, meaning that it is the lowest rate in the G7, even with the 6% rise. The 25% rate is intended to be a “temporary measure,” with plans to eventually return to a headline rate of 19%. If this increased rate is made permanent, there will be greater scope for implementing tax reform. This means that corporation tax can still be leveraged to encourage UK-based firms to improve working conditions.

The Government ought to explore implementing a sliding scale of corporation tax that allows businesses to receive incremental rate reductions from the existing 25% rate down to 19%, provided they provide employees with greater benefits and workers’ protections – thus making the UK a more attractive place to work and prevent a post-Brexit brain drain.

Alternatively, the government could drop the rate down to as low as 15%, in line with the ‘global minimum’ of 15% for big businesses, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) minimum tax rate on corporate income.

This builds on the ideas that the Social Market Foundation presented in 2019 in their comment, Corporate tax proposals should be dependent on businesses doing the right thing. However, this policy would apply to all sectors, instead of the corporation tax cuts being handed out only to the low-income sectors, to incentivise that workers’ rights improvements take place across the board.

Indeed, according to research conducted by KPMG, there is significant empirical evidence to suggest that “effective tax burden does have a direct impact on FDI (Foreign Direct Investment).” This proposed approach would allow increased incentives for investment in the UK to help the UK move away from having consistently weak investment and, simultaneously boosting workers productivity due to the improvements in workers rights. Moreover, improvements in workers’ rights closely correlate with improvements in their productivity; with British productivity being the lowest in the G7 the benefits from these improvements would have profound impacts on the British economy.

A change in approach to workers’ rights is needed. However, the solution does not come from ripping up EU laws. The plans outlined in this article present a progressive solution to relegate the unproductive British worker to a thing of the past. The Government ought to act now and give the economy the push it needs and boost workers rights with a single stone.

Cormac Evans is currently doing work experience at Bright Blue. Views expressed in this article are those of the author, not necessarily those of Bright Blue. [Image: Kai Pilger]

You might also like...

Centre Write Politics

William Morris: A new programme of National Service would help tackle our mental health epidemic

Centre Write Education Politics Towns & Devolution Welfare

Annabelle Walker: Childcare needs more than just demand side reform

Archive podcast Centre Write Politics Towns & Devolution

The Rt Hon Sir Robert Buckland MP: The Rwanda scheme needs to be fairer, or we risk alienating voters

August 14, 2023

Nathan Stone: Does Japan hold the key to fixing the UK’s housing crisis?

By Sam LampierCentre Write, Economy & Finance, Housing & Homelessness, Politics, Towns & Devolution

If you aspire to one day own your own home, or for people you love to share in that ambition, Britain’s backlog of 4.3 million homes should concern you.

Homeownership is increasingly out of reach for many aspiring families. The current system is blatantly not working. This is unsustainable.

We urgently need to improve our system. To do so, we ought to look around the world for inspiration. To this end, the answers to the UK’s woes may lie in Japan.

The central challenge in building more homes lies in the structural shortcomings of the UK planning system. The key issue is its discretionary nature: planning permission is issued at the discretion of planning officers or locally elected councillors on a case-by-case basis. In theory, this allows local officials to weigh a plan not just against the aims of the Government’s National Planning Policy Framework, but also against any contextual ‘material considerations’ unique to the local area.

In reality, this system ensures a dichotomy between political gains and long-term planning objectives. Political support and voter appeasement are prioritised over well-conceived urban planning. Homeowners frequently agitate against nearby developments that they regard as a possible danger to the value of their homes. With homeowners constituting 63% of households, and only 37% supporting new housing in their area, there is a political incentive to listen to them.

What is needed is a more predictable, rules-based system that eliminates political considerations, like Japan’s. There, land within a local authority is divided into thirteen different zones, each allowing multiple uses. These range from exclusively low-rise residential zones to exclusively industrial zones.

Each zone has clearly defined regulations covering permitted uses and building codes. Land use is categorised on a scale of intensity, with the lowest intensity use being residential buildings, and the highest intensity use being industrial premises. Schemes legally must be granted planning permission if they comply with the national zoning code, meaning that low-rise residential buildings are permitted almost everywhere.

A consequence of Britain’s system is that development schemes are approved on a case-by-case basis. Public consultation on every individual development proposal is inexorably built into the system, as planning permission being granted solely at the discretion of local councillors necessitates each proposal being assessed individually. Not only does this have the potential to massively slow or even gridlock the system, but it creates an element of uncertainty that significantly influences the business model of developers.

This uncertainty centres on the fact that, in the UK system, there is no guarantee of planning permission. This creates an unstable and scarce supply of sites for development. Developers respond to this by ‘land-banking’ to create a pipeline of sites they know they can work on. Many potential development sites have been granted planning permission but no development takes place, as developers are forced to bank sites to ensure they always have land upon which they can operate, even if planning permissions dry up.

In contrast, the Japanese system front-loads public consultation. Land use consultations set the medium-term plan for urban growth: the zoning for the area is specified, and building specifications and appearance are determined. Residents get a say on this but have no further say on individual proposals once the local plan is approved. There are no further avenues through which development can be prevented from this point onwards.

The Japanese system therefore negates the need for land-banking, by providing assurances and certainty that the UK system cannot.

Removing discretionary approval and consulting the public earlier in the process means that developers are guaranteed planning permission on land before they purchase it, providing they meet the zonal criteria. Consequently, there is always a steady surplus of opportunities for development, rendering land-banking redundant. As a result, land is immediately developed instead of hoarded, work starts on a greater number of sites, and the number of new homes increases.

Certainty enables more houses to be built in Japan than in the UK. 174,000 houses started construction in the UK in 2022-23, whereas 404,000 houses started construction over the same period in Japan. As a result of this, while mean rents in London are upwards of £2,000, average rents in Tokyo are about £1,300.

If we want to see sustained increases in housebuilding, policymakers should take note of the simplicity, predictability and certainty of Japanese Land Use Zones. The Japanese experience should be an inspiration for the UK.

Nathan Stone is currently doing work experience at Bright Blue. Views expressed in this article are those of the author, not necessarily those of Bright Blue. [Image: Su San Lee]

You might also like...

Centre Write Politics

William Morris: A new programme of National Service would help tackle our mental health epidemic

Centre Write Education Politics Towns & Devolution Welfare

Annabelle Walker: Childcare needs more than just demand side reform

Archive podcast Centre Write Politics Towns & Devolution

The Rt Hon Sir Robert Buckland MP: The Rwanda scheme needs to be fairer, or we risk alienating voters

August 14, 2023

Taylor Ross: The decline of funding in the adult social care sector

By Sam LampierCentre Write, Health & Social Care, Politics

The number of people in the UK aged 65 years or over increased from 9.2 million in 2011 to over 11 million in 2021, and the proportion of people aged 65 years and over rose from 16.4% to 18.6% within the same timeframe. Almost two million of those adults now request additional support in the form of adult social care. The UK is sleepwalking into a crisis – the need for publicly-funded social care for older adults has now become more pressing than it has ever been.

The lack of a national budget for social care has been a major contributor to the decline in access to care for older adults across the country. In September 2021, the Government announced they would use £5.4 billion of revenue from the Health and Social Care Levy to reform adult social care, but, just a year later, the Levy was cancelled to reverse the rise in National Insurance contributions from businesses and employees. However, as a result, the extra funds for adult social care were lost, and the sector continues to suffer.

Without the Health and Social Care Levy, publicly-funded social care is only available through local government tax revenue, putting increased pressure on local government finances. This forces local governments to spend less on social care and ultimately leads to a fragmented social care system, with some areas across the country better off than others.

This is particularly important for poorer adults who are in need of social care. For, while those with assets over £23,250 are required to fund their social care themselves anyway, those with assets between £14,250 and £23,250 can receive partial funding from the local government and those with assets under £14,250 ought to be able to receive fully-funded care. However, due to the fragmented quality of the sector, those with lower assets may only have access to insufficiently-resourced care and have to resort to funding some of it themselves regardless.

The lack of funding for adult social care also puts more strain on the NHS, as those who are not receiving adequate care are more likely to seek hospital treatment. In 2021/22, the social care sector saw 165,000 vacancies — the highest number of vacancies the sector has ever experienced.

At the same time, the quality of adult social care has been declining for years and is now sorely insufficient. According to a report by the Nuffield Trust, although the number of older people receiving state-funded long-term support has decreased by 10% since 2015/16, the number of adults over the age of 65 has risen by 8% since 2015. Indeed, between 2015 and 2020, 120,000 more people requested social care support, but 14,000 fewer people received it.

The decline in the number of people receiving social care can be linked to staffing shortages. As a result of cuts to social care workforce funding, there has been a 52% increase in vacancies in the social care sector from 2021 to 2022, as staff are leaving the sector for better wages.

Previous governments recognised the need for reform in the social care sector by commissioning the Dilnot Report to review social care in the UK and introducing the Health and Social Care Levy, which both sought to put a cap on lifetime care costs, in turn protecting people from spiralling care costs and providing more certainty around the costs of care. However, the former was not followed up on, and the latter was cancelled, making their attempts to fix the sector unsuccessful. The adult social care sector needs significant reforms to prevent it from collapsing. Without reform, it will become unsustainable.

Taylor Ross is a Research Assistant at Bright Blue. Views expressed in this article are those of the author, not necessarily those of Bright Blue. [Image: Dominik Lange]

You might also like...

Centre Write Politics

Centre Write

You might also like...

You might also like...

You might also like...

You might also like...

You might also like...

You might also like...

You might also like...

You might also like...

You might also like...

Sign up here to receive news and bulletins

Contact us