Reduced working week for healthcare staff

Implementation of Agenda for Change recommendations

NHS Agenda for Change staff – including nurses, midwives, paramedics, allied health professionals, porters and others – will see a reduction of 30 minutes in their working week from 1st April this year.

The move follows a recommendation from a working group set up to implement a previous commitment to cut the number of working hours as part of the 2023/24 pay deal. It is one of a number of measures to modernise the NHS Scotland Agenda for Change system and has been agreed with trade unions.

If, due to service pressures, safe staffing or wellbeing issues, it is not possible for a staff member to receive their 30 minute reduction they will be recompensed accordingly, until such times as the reduction can be accommodated.

Other measures agreed include:

  • a consistent approach to Protected Learning Time across all NHS Scotland Boards, and
  • a defined process for undertaking a review of Band 5 nursing roles with any Band 5 nurse able to self-apply for a review of their role if they believe they meet the criteria. 

The changes will support NHS Scotland workforce recruitment, sustainability and retention.

Health Secretary Neil Gray said: “Our Agenda for Change system recognises the value, dedication and hard work of our staff and makes NHS Scotland an employer of choice. 

“We expect NHS Boards to work in partnership with trade unions and staff to reduce the working week. This presents an opportunity to modernise how staff are rostered and work, ensuring that NHS Scotland is a leader in flexible and family friendly working practices.

“I am grateful to both Trade Union and Employer representatives for working in partnership with us to develop these reforms to help modernise our service.”

Tidal turbine from Shetland goes on display at the National Museum of Scotland

The blade from a pioneering tidal turbine, previously used in the Bluemull Sound in Shetland, has gone on display in the National Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh.

The community owned Nova 30 tidal turbine paved the way for the development of the world’s first offshore tidal farm. It was produced by Nova Innovation who donated the blade to the National Collection.

The Nova 30 was the first tidal turbine to be largely funded by the community and created enough renewable energy to power critical infrastructure on Shetland’s Cullivoe Pier, an amount equivalent to powering 30 homes. The bright blue blade is over two meters long and was one of three attached to a huge underwater structure in the Bluemull Sound. 

This prototype was trialed for two years and provided invaluable learning into the design, offshore operations and commercial viability of tidal turbines. In 2016 the turbine was replaced with the world’s first offshore tidal array and began supplying electricity to the national grid.

The blade has now gone on display in Energise, on the top floor of the National Museum of Scotland. This gallery explores the sources, generation and distribution of energy in Scotland over the last 200 years.  

Scotland is a key European hub for testing and demonstrating marine power technologies, and as part of the UK is Europe’s leading generator of marine power. This rich source of clean, renewable energy is a critical contributor to international efforts to reach net zero carbon emissions.  

Ellie Swinbank, Senior Curator of Technology at National Museums Scotland, said: “The turbine blade is a strong example of Scottish engineering and energy, highlighting our position as world-leaders in tidal energy.

“I am thrilled to see it go on display at the National Museum of Scotland, thanks to the generosity of Nova Innovation. I hope the exhibit helps to raise awareness of the importance of sustainable energy technologies, inspiring the engineers and innovators of the future.” 

Simon Forrest, CEO of Nova Innovation, said: “We are delighted that one of the blades from Nova’s very first tidal turbine is taking pride of place at the National Museum of Scotland.

“It is an appropriate way to celebrate Scottish innovation and engineering in our efforts to combat climate change.  Our blades have been capturing the clean predictable energy of our tides since 2014, powering homes and businesses across Shetland.” 

£1.8 billion benefits through public sector productivity drive

  • New plans for public sector productivity will deliver up to £1.8 billion worth of benefits by 2029. 
  • Marks first step in plan to boost productivity, which the OBR say could save up to £20 billion a year by returning to pre-pandemic levels.  
  • Plan will free up thousands of police officer hours spent on admin, to instead help tackle crime, and expand the violence reduction unit model, stopping tens of thousands of violent offences

The Chancellor has today outlined plans to deliver up to £1.8 billion worth of benefits by 2029 by improving public sector productivity, including releasing police time for more frontline work. 

The Chancellor is promoting public sector productivity as an alternative to accepting an ever-increasing bill for public services as the government sticks to its plan to move on from the high spending and high tax approach that was necessary to get the UK through the shocks of Covid and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

A new focus is needed on the long-term decisions required to strengthen the economy and give people the opportunity to build a wealthier, more secure life for themselves and their family. 

Covering frontline services, the plan is designed to help public servants get back to doing what is most important: teaching our children, keeping us safe and treating us when we’re sick. 

Chancellor of the Exchequer Jeremy Hunt said: “We shouldn’t fall into the trap of thinking more spending buys us better public services. There is too much waste in the system and we want public servants to get back to doing what matters most: teaching our children, keeping us safe and treating us when we’re sick. 

“That’s why our plan is about reaping the rewards of productivity, from faster access to MRIs for patients to hundreds of thousands of police hours freed up to attend burglaries or incidents of domestic abuse.” 

According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, returning to levels of productivity pre-pandemic could save £20 billion a year. This will help manage the size of the state in the long term, whilst maintaining public service quality and delivering savings for taxpayers.  

Today’s announcement marks the first step towards delivering these savings. Over 130,000 patients a year, including those waiting for cancer results, will receive their test results sooner as a result of over one hundred MRI scanners in England being upgraded with Artificial Intelligence designed to recognise patterns in scans through machine learning which will cut scan times by over a third.  

The government also plans to repeat the success of Violence Reduction Units which together with the Grip hot spot policing programme are estimated to have prevented 3,220 hospital admissions from violent injury and stopped 136,000 violent offences since 2019. We are committing £75 million over 3-years to expand the Violence Reduction Unit model across England and Wales, supporting a prevention first approach to serious violence.  

Plans are also underway to deliver on the Police Productivity Review which found that up to 38 million hours of officer time could be saved every year. If just a fraction of this time, 500,000 officer hours, was saved then police officers in England could attend an additional 250,000 incidents of domestic abuse or over 300,000 burglaries. 

To help get these police officers back to these frontline tasks, over £230 million will fund the rollout of time-saving technology including funding automated redaction of personal information such as name badges in shoplifting incidents, irrelevant faces from body worn cameras and number plates from video evidence.  

Interviewing witnesses and victims via video call to improve speed of service; piloting the use of drones as first responders in some police incidents like traffic accidents, to feed information back to first responders on the seriousness of the incident and the resource required; and using AI to triage 101 calls to get members of the public the right support faster.  

Today’s plan represents a total £800 million investment by 2029 to deliver £1.8 billion worth of productivity benefits.

This includes: 

  • Saving up to 55,000 hours a year of administrative time in the justice system through digitising jury bundles, new software to streamline parole decisions and provide probation officers with more robust data on whether offenders are safe to release. £170 million will be invested into the justice system to support this. 
  • Reducing Local Authority overspends on children’s social care places across England by making 200 additional child social care places available and reducing local government reliance on costly emergency places for children. £165m of funding will be used to create the additional places to help tackle last year’s overspend of £670 million. 
  • Saving £100m for the public purse by reducing fraud thanks to expanding the use of AI across government to make it easier to spot and catch fraudsters, funded by £34m. 
  • Accelerating delivery of DWP’s existing programme to modernise DWP services and move away from paper-based communications. This will be funded through a £17m commitment. 
  • Cutting the time it takes for planning officers to process applications by 30% through a new AI pilot. 
  • Ensuring more children with additional needs get the support they need to thrive through a £105m to fund an additional wave of 15 special free schools. 

Councillors agree next stage of addressing housing emergency

CITY councillors have approved an action plan as they work towards tackling the severe shortage of suitable housing in the capital.

Following the unanimous decision to declare a housing emergency on Thursday 2 November, the Housing, Homelessness and Fair Work Committee agreed a report on Tuesday (27 February) which sets out actions to respond to the crisis.

The actions are based on wide engagement with our partner organisations and Councillors, including 14 engagement workshops which helped identify key priorities.

The measures outlined in the Housing Emergency Action Plan are expected to reduce the number of households in Edinburgh without settled accommodation.

They include:

  • Reviewing the Allocation Policy for Council Homes to ensure it continues to enable fair access to housing, including consideration of protected characteristics, such as gender.
  • Improve the standard of repairs and repairs response for Council housing.
  • Ensure all relevant and appropriate partners are included and supported to resolve the housing emergency.
  • Improve the relationship between housing officer and tenant, ensuring local housing staff are visible in their localities and available to meet tenants where and when this is required.

It comes as the Council agreed to introduce a 7% rent rise for tenants over 10 years at the Full Council meeting on Thursday 22 February. In an effort to tackle the city’s housing crisis, the increase could raise around £2bn.

Around 80% of tenants in Edinburgh receive assistance with their rent in the form of housing benefits or Universal Credit. The council intends to extend its Tenant Hardship Fund to support households who aren’t entitled to this support to access funding if they struggle to afford an increase in rent.

Housing, Homelessness and Fair Work Convener Jane Meagher said:It’s so important that we take drastic action to protect the most vulnerable people in our city before it’s too late. The ongoing cost-of-living crisis has led to a demand for temporary accommodation in Edinburgh which far outstrips supply.

“Having a safe, comfortable home is a basic human right so we’re determined to do everything within our means to put an end to this housing emergency.

“The measures outlined in the Action Plan, along with the 7% rent rise which will allow us to repair, upgrade, and retrofit housing and to build and buy much needed social and affordable housing, go a long way in tackling the crisis. However, the reality is that we can only act within the financial limitations of being the lowest funded local authority in Scotland.

“We need a concerted and co-ordinated response, and my thanks go to our partners who have shown support from the day we declared the housing emergency.  It gives me great confidence that we can work together to improve the situation, but we can’t do it alone.

“We need more support from the Scottish Government to end the crisis once and for all. Their decision to slash nearly £200m from the affordable housing budget comes at a time when we need vital funding now more than ever. I won’t stop fighting for fairer funding.”

What is the UK Budget?

Why do we need one?

When are decisions made?

And why is so much of the jargon cricket-based?

We are less than a week away from the Budget – a special day for the House of Commons, and one of incredible significance for the UK as a whole (writes Fraser of Allander Institute’s João Sousa).

In a speech expected to last around 60 minutes, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Jeremy Hunt, will lay out plans for taxation and spending over the coming years, introduce some immediate tax measures and provide an update on the economic and fiscal forecasts he received from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR).

But though important, it can also be a confusing event for those not deeply involved in the process – even those meant to scrutinise it! A former Leader of the Opposition once remarked in his response about the Chancellor’s statement “that quite obviously no Member of this House, apart from any financial genius who may be here, can fully grasp” it.

But what we can do is demystify it and provide some historical context. So join us on this tour through the weird history of how it has come to be the way it is.

A statement to the House of Commons – but it wasn’t always like that

The Budget Statement – or historically called the Financial Statement – was originally made to the Committee of Ways and Means, a committee similar to the Committee of the Whole House (which still exists) concerned with financial matters, and in which all members could sit. This is why the Budget was originally chaired by the Chairman of Ways and Means, one of the most senior Deputy Speakers, rather than the Speaker of the House.

In 1967, the Committee of Ways and Means was abolished as part of a series of reforms to modernise the operation of the House under the Commons’ Leadership of Richard Crossman. Unfortunately, the modernisation didn’t extend to the existing the inherently sexist name of Chairman of Ways and Means – Dame Eleanor Laing (the current post holder) continues to be referred to as Chairman in official proceedings. Maybe it’s time we finally ditched it.

The Chairman of Ways and Means continues to chair the Budget debate to this day, which can look odd to the casual observer. The reply is also not by the corresponding shadow cabinet member, as one would expect, but by the Leader of the Opposition – a custom dating back to the 1938 Budget, which seems to have arisen from the fact that the Ministers of the Crown Act 1937 defined the role and duties of the Leader of the Opposition, as well as granting them a cabinet minister-equivalent salary.

The development of specific roles in the shadow cabinet happened significantly later (during the 1950s with the advent of television), by which point the convention had already been established.

The Budget has become more powerful and concentrated over time

The Committee on Ways and Means formally allowed for any member to raise proposals for taxation and spending, which would not be the case in a sitting of the House – during which the Government has control of the agenda, or “business” in the jargon.

In practice, however, this almost never happened. As party discipline grew over time and stronger governments backed by a Commons majority became the norm, the Government’s majority served to eliminate that possibility.

When the Committee was abolished in 1967, all responsibilities for fiscal policy decisions were transferred wholesale to the Chancellor of the Exchequer – but in practice that had already happened.

The Budget is now a three-part statement: it encompasses economic forecasts, taxation proposals and spending plans. It wasn’t always like that. The financial statement itself was originally concerned principally with tax powers.

Spending plans were a consideration of course, as they determined the balance that the Chancellor wanted to strike, but they were (and still are formally) voted separately as part of the Estimates process.

It was only in 1993 that Ken Clarke formally merged the presentation of plans for tax and spend as part of the move to an Autumn Budget – although really the Government had been using the Budget for many decades to pre-announce and revise spending plans when presenting the Budget.

Economic forecasting has contributed to fiscal events being more frequent – which is not necessarily great

What about economic forecasts? They are a more recent addition to the Government’s business, certainly in the level of detail that they exist today, and are to some extent a by-product of the need to more accurately forecast the public finances of a more complex economy.

But it was the 1970s inflationary shocks that really caused economic forecasting to become front and centre of the Chancellor’s statements to the Commons. It was also felt that an annual update was too infrequent given the rapidly evolving situation, and therefore that it would be appropriate for the Treasury to publish forecasts twice a year from a macroeconomic model that it was to build in order to project economic conditions.

Many of the provisions contained in Schedule 5 of the Industry Act 1975 would strike a current observer as peculiar or even downright ridiculous – for example, the need to require explicitly that “[t]he model shall be maintained on a computer” – but the twice yearly publication specified in that has subsequently been enshrined into the Budget Responsibility and National Audit Act 2011, which governs the operations of the OBR and its relationship with the Treasury.

For many years, the Budget was by far and away the largest fiscal event of the year, and for all intents and purposes, the only one worthy of that name. The Autumn/Summer/Spring Statement (timings have fluctuated over the years) was merely a statement of updated economic and fiscal forecasts – the only recent example of which was Philip Hammond’s 2019 Spring Statement, which did not even have a command paper alongside it.

The bloat in the “secondary” fiscal event started in 1998, with the introduction of the Pre-Budget Report. It was billed as setting out “the direction of Government policy and further measures that are under consideration in the run up to the 1999 Budget”, but it became another decision-making point in its own right. This approach has continued ever since, even if the name has changed, save for that singular 2019 Spring Statement.

This development evolved as a series of historical accidents – the need for more frequent forecasts, and an attempt to lay out the direction of travel for government policy – but has been seized by successive Chancellors as an opportunity to “make the weather” and generate headlines. But many experts – and we agree with them – would argue that having than one budget-like event a year is not a great thing, encouraging tinkering and zig-zagging policy rather than the stability that is often needed.

It is often argued as a reason for having more of these events that economic conditions can and do require at times rapid response – take the Covid-19 pandemic for example. That was such a rapidly evolving situation that it necessitated what the OBR called “twelve ‘mini-Budgets’ through the course of the year” during 2020-21. But emergency situations have always called for emergency statements to the House – something that already happened before the requirement for multiple events a year (take 1961 or 1966, for example). It’s the insistence on having them when it isn’t required that creates unwelcome uncertain.

Why do we even need a Budget every year?

In its current state, the operation of the UK’s public finances requires a number of resolutions to be passed in each financial year. The main reason is to allow the collection of income tax, which is brought into place by statutory instrument each year and must be renewed.

The Finance Bill also generally takes forward changes announced at the Budget, but that can take a while to pass through Parliament. In the meantime, the Government can collect taxes at newly announced rates by using the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act 1968.

This is why you’ll hear the Deputy Speaker mention this rather obscure act of parliament and the Budget resolutions just before calling the Chancellor to make their statement.

Could we have a Budget less than once a year? It would be possible, though some changes would have to be made. In practical terms, however, a year is quite a natural length for planning and monitoring expenditure and tax receipts – and there is often enough movement in the economy for it to be worthwhile and convenient to make decisions at such an interval.

How does the forecasting process work, and when are decisions made?

As per the Memorandum of Understanding between the OBR, Treasury and other government departments, the Chancellor has to give the OBR 10 weeks’ notice to produce a forecast in normal circumstances. The letter of the requirement was fulfilled in this case – though arguably not the spirit, as notice was given on 27 December. So the effective notice period was more like 8 and half to 9 weeks.

In a welcome move, the OBR has in recent times published the timetable for the forecast process. This has increased transparency, though it still requires some interpretation. The forecast timetable can broadly be divided into two periods: pre- and post-measures.

Pre-measures rounds (in this case, 1 and 2) refer to the incorporation of underlying data, both economic and administrative. For example, the OBR will have taken on new GDP figures and inflation data, as well as tax receipts and spending figures from government departments.

The last pre-measures round closed on 14 February, and so market determinants – including, importantly, interest rates and market expectations about the Bank of England’s behaviour in the coming months – will have been closed around a week before (6 or 7 February). They are now fixed and will not have been updated since then, despite the fact that there will have inevitably been movements.

This is a normal process in the OBR’s forecast, for two reasons. One is that the fiscal forecast needs to be conducted by departments and scrutinised by the OBR, and that takes around a week in early rounds.

But there is also a significant amount of time for the Chancellor to make decisions about policy measures on a stable base. Jeremy Hunt has been keen to extend the length of the decision-making period, and that has meant the OBR is now closing the forecast period about a week earlier.

Rounds 3 and 4 will have given the Chancellor the opportunity to notify the OBR of all major policy measures. These rounds allow the OBR to model any large impacts of major policies on the economy (also known as indirect or second-round effects). This forecast is then returned to the Treasury. Round 4 was returned on Wednesday (28th February), and all major decisions have now been taken.

This means any supposed agonising by Jeremy Hunt over whether to abolish ‘non-dom’ tax status in the coming days is purely pitch-rolling: a PR exercise to guide people through a supposed decision-making process that in fact has already happened.

All major decisions (i.e. over £1bn) are now closed. The final scorecard will be delivered to the OBR on Friday, 1 March. All numbers will then be closed for good, subject to any errors being found, and the OBR will spend the weekend writing their Economic and Fiscal Outlook. Likewise, the Treasury will be writing the speech for the Chancellor and the Red Book that comes out on Wednesday.

Of course, this won’t avoid many news articles over the weekend about the Chancellor still having to make tough decisions, and poring over the numbers to make it all add up. But if you’re reading this, you’ll know how to spot when a reporter is being fed lines directly from 11 Downing Street.

Speaking of which, what exactly is the scorecard?

Much like pitch-rolling, the scorecard is a term borrowed from cricket and in the Treasury’s parlance, it refers to the detailed list of measures taken by the Chancellor since the last fiscal event. It is essentially a very large spreadsheet, with often hundreds of rows detailed the movement in each tax and spending stream from each measure. It was originally called the tally, and it has been present in one form or another in every Budget document going back to the 1870s.

The table does quite resemble a cricket scorecard, and the metaphor has stuck. But it also resembles many other large tables, so why cricket?

It’s probably not unrelated to it being historically a past-time of the upper classes and very popular with Parliamentarians, reflecting the make-up and cultural references of those historically in the Treasury and Parliament.

There are a few different versions of the scorecard – table 4.1 in the Red Book is the one that Westminster insiders are most familiar with already, which is also called the ‘presentational’ scorecard. This is the ‘themed’-version, and measures are quite often grouped together. For most people, that is already more than enough.

But for the purists, the OBR publishes supplementary table 3.11, which is a version of the ‘analytical’ scorecard – which just means it has all the detail on revenue and spending stream.

The OBR’s version is also much more transparent, including a section labelled ‘non-scorecard’ measures – meaning decisions that the Government has taken and probably should have included in their presentation, but has decided not to. This used to be a large number, but has been heavily cut back – in large part because the OBR started publishing it.

Look out for more analysis from Fraser of Allander next week

Students reclaim Edinburgh University building demanding divestment from Israeli war crimes

On 26th February, a coalition of student groups, including the Edinburgh University Justice for Palestine Society (EUJPS), the Staff-Student Solidarity Network (SSSN), Edinburgh University Kehillah, Youth in Resistance, and Vegans for Animal Liberation and Ethical Revolution in Edinburgh (VALERIE) reclaimed the Gordon Aikman Lecture Theatre.

The protesters have called for a complete and immediate divestment from all companies complicit in Israeli war crimes.

The students’ demands to university management are as follows:

  • Recognition of and explicit condemnation of Israel’s continuing acts of genocide, which includes the destruction of all of Gaza’s universities and the targeted erasure of its entire educational infrastructure.
  • Reduction of police presence on campus surrounding our demonstrations and empty naming of our protests as “threatening”.
  • The removal of the IHRA definition of antisemitism that inhibits any criticism of Israel in its conflation of anti-Zionism to antisemitism. 
  • Severing all research ties with Leonardo and Anyvision, the latter responsible for operating the facial recognition surveillance system of Palestinians in the West Bank, essential for the perpetuation of Israel’s apartheid and illegal settler-colonial violence.
  • Finally, and most importantly, the complete and immediate divestment from those companies previously mentioned, in line with the continuing campaign from the Justice for Palestine Society

The investments amount to £39 million each year, including Blackrock (£30.5 million), Amazon (£3.6 million), Booking.com (£2.6 million) and Albermarle (£2.2 million), the latter involved in the production of white phosphorus to be used in weaponry.

White phosphorus  is illegal under international law and there is photo evidence of it being used on Gaza. Investment in this would break Edinburgh’s own policy of sustainable investment.

Furthermore, the University also maintains research collaborations with Leonardo, a company that produces laser systems used for fighter jets; and, of disturbing significace, with AnyVision, an Israeli startup that built and operates the facial recognition system resposible for the ceaseless surveillance and subjugation of Palestinians in the West Bank, integral in maintaining the Israeli apartheid and illegal settler-colonial violence.

Over the last 5 months, unprecedented Israeli attacks have killed over 38,000 people and injured more than 70,000 people in Gaza (Figures from EUROMED monitor).

A statement from the protesters states: “we have occupied Gordon Aikman lecture theatre to make it clear to the University’s management that we will maintain the pressure until our demands of divestment are met“.

This action follows months of weekly demonstrations held on the Edinburgh University campus, where large crowds of students have gathered to protest the attacks on Gaza and  demand Edinburgh’s divestment from Israeli arms.

A petition from the Justice for Palestine Society has also reached over 1800 signatures calling for divestment across the student body.

The statement continues: “The occupation of Gordon Aikman lecture theatre is not an action we take lightly, however the urgency of the situation in Gaza and the university’s continued silence regarding the genocide and our demands has compelled us to take this escalated action.”

General statement on the reclamation of the Gordon Aikman Lecture Theatre

We, students at the University of Edinburgh, have for months been protesting our university’s direct complicity in the ongoing genocide in Gaza, demanding the divestment from companies that have been profiting from Israeli apartheid for years and that are presently complicit in genocide.

Shamefully, our university has struggled to even acknowledge the magnitude of the unfolding genocide whilst repeatedly avoiding or dismissing our demands concerning divestment.

As students representing Edinburgh University Justice for Palestine Society (EUJPS), the Staff-Student Solidarity Network (SSSN), Edinburgh University Kehillah, Youth in Resistance, and Vegans for Animal Liberation and Ethical Revolution in Edinburgh (VALERIE), we have occupied Gordon Aikman Lecture Theatre to make it clear to the University’s management that we will maintain the pressure until our demands of divestment are met, the details of which are below.

We also want to continue to raise awareness around campus among fellow students and staff, emphasising that university activity cannot operate business as usual when our tuition fees are funding genocide. In lieu of the latter we will also be hosting various educational events and teach-ins.

The occupation of Gordon Aikman Lecture Theatre is not an action we take lightly, however the urgency of the situation in Gaza and the university’s continued silence regarding the genocide and our demands has compelled us to take this escalated action.

Furthermore, in light of the recent ruling in the International Court of Justice and in compliance with the Genocide Convention, the University has an obligation to divest immediately and completely from all funds with ties to apartheid Israel. As long as divestment does not occur, the University is contravening Article III , para. (e) of the Genocide Convention, which prohibits complicity in genocide.

Currently the University of Edinburgh invests over £39 million each year in companies complicit in Israel’s genocide and its longstanding apartheid; namely, Blackrock (£30.5 million), Amazon (£3.6 million), Booking.com (£2.6 million) and Albermarle (£2.2million), the latter involved in the production of white phosphorus to be used in weaponry which is illegal under international law and is proven to be used on Gaza and breaks the University’s own policy of sustainable investment.

When Russia began its invasion of Ukraine two years ago, this University was quick to withdraw all its stocks in Russian companies and was proud to have done so, we call upon those same people to divest once more from the aforementioned companies.

Furthermore, the University also maintains research collaborations with Leonardo, a company that produces laser systems used for fighter jets; and, of disturbing significance, with AnyVision, an Israeli startup that built and operates the facial recognition system responsible for the ceaseless surveillance and subjugation of Palestinians in the West Bank, integral in maintaining the Israeli apartheid and illegal settler-colonial violence.

We continue to demand:

    Recognition of and explicit condemnation of Israel’s continuing acts of genocide, which includes the destruction of all of Gaza’s universities and the targeted erasure of its entire educational infrastructure.

    Reduction of police presence on campus surrounding our demonstrations and empty naming of our protests as “threatening”.

    The removal of the IHRA definition of antisemitism that inhibits any criticism of Israel in its conflation of anti-Zionism to antisemitism.

    Severing all collaborative research ties with Leonardo and AnyVision, the University’s work with the later directly contributing to the surveillance and categorisation  

    Finally, and most importantly, the complete and immediate divestment from those companies previously mentioned, in line with the continuing campaign from the Justice for Palestine Society.

This is a time of urgency that the University needs to react to.

Reckon with this colonial institution.

Gym Group reveals it’s ‘Power Pair’ workout  

●      Research* reveals that 79% of us believe we would be more motivated in the gym if we had a ‘gym buddy’ giving us a push to hit our fitness goals

●      Not only are we more motivated when working out with a partner, but studies suggest it can strengthen the relationships of those who we choose to exercise with too

●      The Gym Group’s Master Trainer and expert fitness team have curated a workout specifically designed to help pairs get the most out of their gym session – whether in a couple or the best of friends – this exercise plan will help any duo reap the benefits of working out with a partner 

New research by nationwide low-cost gym chain, The Gym Group, has revealed that 79% of gym goers believe they’d be more motivated when hitting the gym if they had a ‘gym buddy’ pushing them to achieve their goals

Studies also suggest that exercising with a romantic partner can have the added benefit of contributing to long and happy relationships. 

To help inspire more ‘gym duos’, the nationwide gym chain has devised a ‘Power Pair’ circuit session of exercises. This workout is specifically designed to build motivation and enjoyment in the gym while working out together. 

From friendly competition and encouragement, to simply sharing the load, working out with a partner can have great benefits in staying consistent with exercise.

To support gym-goers to reap the mental and physical health benefits of ‘pairing up’ with a gym buddy, The Gym Group offers all members on its premium Ultimate membership thebenefit of bringing a friend to their gym for free, four times a month.  

Hitting the gym with a buddy can provide a sense of belonging and can boost your confidence to try something new together. This could be as simple as a new form of exercise or training for a bigger challenge like HYROX – the fastest growing fitness trend that can be taken on by pairs to share the experience. 

To provide gym partners with workout inspiration, The Gym Group’s Master Trainer, Jenni Tardiff and team have curated a simple but effective workout, guaranteed to bring the power to their relationship.

Jenni Tardiff, Master Trainer, The Gym Group commented: “Overall the power of working out with someone lies in the accountability, motivation, intensity, and social support it provides.

“Whether you’re trying to smash your fitness goals, stay consistent with your workouts, or simply enjoy the journey of health and wellness, having a workout partner by your side can truly enhance the experience and lead to greater success and more enjoyment.” 

TheGymGroup’s ‘Power Pair’ workout

The “You Go, I Go” (YGIG) workout is a training method where two partners take turns performing exercises with minimal rest in between. One partner completes a set of exercises while the other rests, and then they switch roles. This method maximises efficiency and intensity while providing support and motivation from your partner. 

Warm Up 
Warm-up on any cardio machine for 5mins and perform some mobility drills and dynamic stretches

Circuit 
Repeat the Ski (or row), sled, box jump burpees and push ups for 3 rounds so total distance is 3km on the Ski (or rower)

●      Ski-erg or Rowing machine 

What

○      30-40 secs hard effort, partner rests then swap

○      Complete 1km distance as fast as you can between you.

How

○      Stand facing the Ski-Erg machine with feet hip-width apart.

○      Grasp the handles with an overhand grip and arms extended in front of you.

○      Engage your core and lower back muscle and maintain a slight bend in your knees.

○      Hinge from your hips while simultaneously pulling the handles down towards your hips.

○      Keep a smooth and controlled motion, mimicking the movement of skiing.

○      Allow the handles to return to the starting position with control.

○      Adjust the settings on the machine as needed to suit your fitness level and goals. 

●      Sled Push 

What

○      Push the sled to the bottom of the track and your partner pushes it back up x 8 (4 lengths each)

How

○      Load the sled with an appropriate weight, keeping it challenging but manageable. Your partner can sit on the sled for added weight or a ride 😊

○      Drive through your legs, pushing the sled using short, powerful steps.

○       Keep your arms extended or you can do close grip with bent arms, maintain a strong grip on the handles throughout the movement.

○       Engage your core muscles and keep your back straight as you push the sled forward.

○       Partner pushes the sled back up.

Burpee Box jump or Burpee Step ups 

What

○      Perform either exercise for 20 reps. 

How

○      Begin in a standing position facing a box that is a challenging but safe height for you both.

○      Perform a burpee by squatting down, placing your hands on the floor, and jumping or stepping your feet back and bring chest to the floor.

○      Jump both feet forward toward the box, landing with your feet flat on the ground. Or you can step in toward the box.

○      Powerfully jump onto the box, using your arms for momentum and landing softly with both feet. Option to step up onto the box.

○      Ensure that your entire foot lands securely on the box, and keep your knees bent.

○      Step back down from the box. 

○      Partner performs burpee and box jump. 

○      Each partner performs 1 burpee and jump alternating until you have done 20 in total (10 each).

Partner Push-Ups

What

○      Aim to perform 10 push-ups each.

How 

○      Get into a push-up position facing each other, with enough distance between you for your arms to extend fully. Option to lower knees to thefloor.

○      Perform a push-up while your partner holds a plank position on their toes or knees.

○      Switch positions after each rep.

With off-peak memberships from £13.99 and expert fitness trainers, high-spec kit and 24/7 access, The Gym Group has 233 locations across theUK – over 50% of the population lives within a 15 minute drive of a gym – find your closest gym here

Magnificent Seven: Honours shared out evenly at UK Car of the Year Awards 2024

  •  Shortlist for UK Car of the Year 2024 announced – seven cars from 45 contenders
  •  Electric vehicles dominate with five category wins
  •  Fisker triumphant for the first time at UK Car of the Year Awards
  •  Overall winner to be announced on 8 March 2024

Electric vehicles have led the way after the first round of voting at the UK Car of the Year Awards 2024, with five of the seven winners powered by batteries.

No manufacturer picked up more than one accolade, with each of the seven awards being claimed by a different company.

For Fisker, it was a first UK Car of the Year Award, after its Ocean came out on top in the Medium Crossover class. Another all-new electric model claimed the Small Crossover prize when Volvo’s EX30 triumphed over the competition. The third of three crossover categories at the Awards went to Kia, whose EV9 was named the best Large Crossover.

Away from EVs there were UK Car of the Year Award wins in 2024 for more familiar models, with the Renault Clio voted the top Small Car, while the sought-after Performance Car category was given to the Honda Civic Type R.

Completing the set of winners were two companies who have previously won the overall UK Car of the Year Award. BMW – which won the inaugural title in 2014 and then triumphed again in 2015 – claimed the Executive Car category with the i5. Finally, Hyundai, whose IONIQ 5 was named UK Car of the Year 2022, claimed the Family Car prize for the IONIQ 6.

Celebrating 10 years in 2024, the UK Car of the Year Awards now has the biggest and best ever judging panel, comprising 30 motoring journalists based all over the UK. The group selected their winning cars in categories ranging from Small Car, to Medium Crossover, to Performance Car.

The top model in each of the segments has now qualified for the next stage – the category of UK Car of the Year 2024, which will be revealed on 8 March 2024.

The UK Car of the Year Awards is run in association with heycar, which has sponsored the awards since January 2022.

Karen Hilton, CEO at heycar, commented: “Another year with an excellent range of models, from a variety of manufacturers, winning at the UK Car of the Year Awards and getting the recognition they deserve.

“It’s especially great to see so many electric vehicles take the win! heycar is very pleased to be sponsoring the UK Car of the Year Awards for another year. Congratulations to all of the category winners!”

Full list of UK Car of the Year Awards 2024 category winners:

Small Car – Renault Clio
Family Car – Hyundai IONIQ 6
Small Crossover – Volvo EX30
Medium Crossover – Fisker Ocean
Large Crossover – Kia EV9
Executive Car – BMW i5
Performance Car – Honda Civic Type R

For more information about the UK Car of the Year Awards, go to ukcoty.co.uk or follow @ukcaroftheyear_ on Instagram or @UKCOTY on Twitter.

Report shows lack of strategic direction in the private rented sector is fuelling Scotland’s housing crisis

THE lack of a strategic, evidence based approach to the private rented sector (PRS) by the Scottish Government is impacting the effectiveness of the sector to assist with Scotland’s housing crisis. This is one of the key findings in the latest Rapid Rehousing Transition Plan (RRTP) report by the Chartered Institute of Housing Scotland (CIH Scotland) and Fife Council.

The sector report urges the Scottish Government to show leadership in ensuring all elements of Scotland’s housing market work together, effectively, to tackle the housing crisis. It calls on government to set a clear evidence based vision for the PRS, highlighting the vital role the PRS plays in addressing Scotland’s housing needs.

The Scottish Government’s latest homelessness statistics covering the period April to September 2023 show a continuing increase in homelessness levels with a 10 per cent increase in the number of open cases and an eight per cent increase in the number of households in temporary accommodation compared to the same period in the previous year.

Underlining the findings of the report Gavin Smith, chair of CIH Scotland said: “The private rented sector is a vital part of our housing infrastructure and has the potential to alleviate homelessness in Scotland.

“However, we’re currently seeing Scotland’s PRS contract, with 68 per cent of local authorities who took part in this research reporting an increase of private landlords leaving the market in their area and 47 per cent concerned about increasing levels of homelessness from the PRS.

“The reduction in supply, further amplifies the issue of demand with record levels of people living in temporary accommodation and building figures dropping. This report calls on the Scottish Government to acknowledge the PRS as a systemic part of Scotland’s housing infrastructure and implement an evidence and strategic based approach to its legislation and policy making in this area.”

The report highlights that the percentage of homeless households being housed in a private rented tenancy has steadily decreased each year since 2021.

Homes for Good – Scotland’s first social enterprise letting agency – are committed to creating secure quality homes for tenants and enabling landlords to successfully manage their investments.  

Joey Lawrie, head of lettings and tenancy support at Homes for Good sets out why it is so important not just to provide a tenancy but to create beautiful spaces where tenants can feel at home.

“We deal with all types of people at Homes for Good, with the aim of providing safe, secure homes. In a recent survey, all the tenants we spoke with expressed that they felt safe and secure in their tenancy.

“This is mainly because we provide a supportive, open service working with tenants to resolve any issues that arise. We know from speaking with tenants that many people’s experience of the PRS is one of uncertainty.

“At Homes for Good, we know that doesn’t have to be the case and support the findings of the report, advocating for a plan to enable all of the private rented sector to be an effective part of Scotland’s housing solution.”

The report is the fourth and final in a series examining local authority approaches to tackling homelessness through Rapid Rehousing Transition Plans (RRTPs) first introduced at the end of 2018.

It follows the publication at the end of 2023 of the third report, which analysed the affordability of the PRS for local housing allowance recipients in Scotland and found 92 per cent of private rent was not affordable.

Additional reports in the series made the case for continuing to provide dedicated funding to tackle homelessness through RRTPs for the next five years and provided a monitoring framework for local authorities.

The report can be viewed in full: Rapid Rehousing Transition Plans: Improving access to the private rented sector 

Surprise performance takes place at Scotland’s National Wallace Monument for Marie Curie’s Day of Reflection

  • Musical performances hosted across the UK to count down to Day of Reflection –
  • Marie Curie’s Day of Reflection will take place on Sunday 3 March –
  • Bereaved families will gather at Pollok Park on the Day of Reflection –

The public was treated to a surprise choir performance against the backdrop of the National Wallace Monument in Stirling yesterday to mark Marie Curie’s Day of Reflection this weekend. A day which will bring people together to remember those who died during the pandemic, and to show support to those who were bereaved.

On-lookers were stopped in their tracks during the poignant performance by local choir group, the Gospel Touch Choir, who sang a series of songs associated with loss and grief, urging people to take a moment to pause and reflect. 

The surprise performance in Abbey Craig, Stirling is one of several to take place this week across the UK ahead of the Day of Reflection. Organised by the UK’s leading end of life charity, Marie Curie will lead the nation in the fourth annual Day of Reflection this Sunday 3rd March, where people are being urged to pause again at midday and observe a minute’s silence.

In a recent poll, 50% of UK adults experienced the bereavement of a close friend, family member or acquaintance during the pandemic[1]. Almost half of which said they are still very much coming to terms with their grief (47%)[2]. Over half (51) of respondents who experienced a bereavement during the pandemic agree[3]  that bringing the nation together to remember the people who died, and show support to those who were bereaved, will help with their grief. 

During the first wave of the pandemic, Marie Curie scaled up its bereavement support in response to the increased need it saw across the UK. The charity cares for people with any illness they are likely to die from. This includes dementia, motor neurone disease and advanced cancer, and its hospice and hospice care at home staff cared for people with Covid-19.

Matthew Reed, Chief Executive, Marie Curie said: “With our fourth Day of Reflection just days away, Marie Curie is urging the nation to take a moment to remember all the people who died during the pandemic and to show support for those who are bereaved.

“New data has confirmed what we are seeing on the ground. The pandemic endures in the minds of people who were bereaved, and huge swathes of the public are still grieving. Please show your support for them this Sunday, and if you need help with your grief, know that Marie Curie is here for you and ready to talk.”

Marie Curie has published a range of resources to support individuals and organisations wanting to observe the day, including:  

  • An events map at dayofreflection.org.uk to find local events and register your own   
  • A downloadable petal to share the name of someone you’re remembering on social media, tagging @mariecurieuk 
  • Bereavement support for anyone who needs it, available from the charity’s free support line (0800 090 2309)
  • A special radio programme Sound Not Silence, hosted by Gaby Roslin, which will focus on the importance of music in grief and will be available to all radio stations on Sunday 3 March and at  dayofreflection.org.uk following the midday silence.

On the Day of Reflection, bereaved families will gather at Pollok Park at the I Remember Monuments at 11.45am. After the minute’s silence, there will be poetry readings and a piper. Everyone is welcome.

The anniversary of the first UK lockdown, March 23, marked the inaugural Day of Reflection in 2021. This year it moves to the new date of March 3, in line with the UK Commission on Covid Commemoration’s recommendation. The day is held each year to remember the people who died during the pandemic, and to show support for those who were bereaved.