Tag: government

Fraser of Allander: Why do we have a Spending Review and what can expect on Wednesday?

It’s less than a week until the Spending Review announcement, and rumours abound about what departments will get in funding and how it ties in with the Government’s priorities (write Fraser of Allander Institue’s João Sousa) .

But how did we get to this system in which departments depend on settlements with the Treasury as part of a broad review of what the government spends its money on? Does it work? How has history influenced it? And what can we expect from next week?

We have today published a paper looking at all this in detail – but here’s a shorter version of the history and a preview for Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ statement.

The Treasury has long been at the centre, and that has not always been great

The system that preceded post-Second World War changes to spending planning and control was set up by William Ewart Gladstone’s Treasury, and had a strong focus on ensuring that expenditure was kept on a tight leash. Parsimony with public funds, annual control of cash and using taxation to balance the needs on public spending were the driving forces of the Treasury, and remained so until the 1950s.

By then, however, Parliament had come to largely ignore its previously central role in setting public spending envelopes. Successive governments had made control of public spending a matter of confidence, and even large changes largely went through on the nod. The Plowden Committee in 1961 proposed a more collective way of deciding on public spending, and its recommendations were largely accepted.

This became the Public Expenditure Survey (PES), which intended to devolve responsibility for planning to departments and to think about what was needed rather than what the envelope as a whole would be. The intention was to limit the Treasury’s influence, which in large part it did.

The 1970s crises bring the Treasury back into the driving seat

But although the PES was well intentioned, it had implementation and incentive problems.

On the implementation side, it was extremely complicated. It required controlling the volume of public services provision, which is as difficult as it sounds. But the lack of constraint on overall spending was its biggest downfall. Although it was meant to reflect economic conditions in the medium-term, there was no mechanism for doing so.

The system was stressed to breaking point during the mid-1970s inflation crisis. The focus on volumes meant that the Government was expected to find additional funds to inflation-proof programmes, but that became impossible with inflation running well above 20% and market participants jittery about sterling and the Government’s finances. From 1976-77 onwards, hard cash limits were introduced, much to the chagrin of many in Harold Wilson’s Cabinet. 1 Horse Guards Road was back in charge of spending.

Cash limits were extremely successful in combating unabated growth in public spending, although of course that came at the expense of being able to deliver all that the Government might have liked to do. The PES formally stayed in place until Gordon Brown’s time in Number 11, but it was for all intents and purposes no longer the tool it had been.

We’re still living with the 1970s spending control architecture

Cash limits are essentially the basis on which Gordon Brown’s Spending Review framework for departmental expenditure limits (DEL) would stand. Since their introduction and success, they have been the way Chancellor after Chancellor has found to push back against demands from departments, and they work in a remarkably simple way. The risk of future demands on spending, particularly for ongoing programmes and costs, is transferred to departments, which then have to trade them off against other pressures that might arise.

Of course, in many cases spending ministers end up in a stalemate with the Chancellor, and end up appealing to the Cabinet or Number 10. But the system is designed for stooshies of this kind – imposing a high bar on ministers to get additional spending, and therefore maintain Treasury control over most areas of spending.

Spending Reviews are big Whitehall events, but they decide less than might appear at first

Since the first spending review in 1998, these have been all-consuming affairs for departments of the UK Government. But they are only a way of divvying up an envelope that’s already been decided: the Chancellor sets it out at the previous fiscal event, and then it’s very much a zero-sum game.

But does this work as a way of controlling expenditure? In a formal sense, yes. There haven’t really been any significant breaches of the control totals, apart from the retrospective Excess Votes due to the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2019-20.

On the other hand, one might ask to what extent these limits really are as hard as they seem at first, and therefore to what extent they actually constrain public spending. Even if we exclude the 2019 and 2020 Spending Reviews, for which spending took place during the pandemic and obviously required time-sensitive increases in spending, there is evidence that the Government has topped up budgets significantly during spending review periods.

Chart 1 shows the annual increases in limits set to departments in nominal (i.e. in cash) terms. This is what spending reviews should be good at: passing on the risk to departments by setting cash budgets, which mean that each area needs to then manage competing demands within a set limit.

Instead, what we see is that apart from the austerity years – in which cuts actually exceeded plans – spending growth has been consistently higher than that projected in each spending review. The gap has grown over time, with spending in the SR 2015 period more than three times that planned by George Osborne, largely as a result of Philip Hammond’s looser policy. Growth in the SR 2021 period has also been twice as fast as Rishi Sunak intended as Chancellor, even with him eventually stepping into Number 10.

Chart 1: Nominal annual increases in departmental expenditure limits in each SR period

Source: HM Treasury, OBR, FAI analysis

This consistent pattern of top-ups and policy between spending reviews is not really surprising. In some sense, it merely reflects the fact that the spending review process – for all the work it generates in Whitehall – is not actually a major macroeconomic event. That place is taken by Budgets and Summer/Autumn/Fiscal Statements (Winter has so far been avoided in the title, presumably to avoid headlines writing themselves in the case of bad news), in which the Chancellor does actually have to balance tax, spending and borrowing in line with political, economic and market conditions. All that is absent from a spending review.

What about real-terms spending?

When the PES was introduced, it was meant to be a solution to the excessive control exercised by the Treasury, which created a barrier to expansion based on population demands for additional government provision of goods and services. In particular, the planning system was changed to be on the basis of volumes rather than prices; the Government would decide what it needed to do in terms of quantities, and would then provide funding for any inflation effects.

This is largely what caused the loss of control over spending in the 1970s, resulting in the imposition of cash limits. Of course, what this actually meant was that if inflation was below forecast, departments would be able to increase spending within that envelope and provide more goods and services. But if it were higher than forecast, then departments would have to live within their limits and cut provision. Essentially, the inflation risk was outsourced to departments.

Chart 2: Real-terms planned and actual spending by departments during each SR period

Source: HM Treasury, OBR, FAI analysis

In fact, that is largely the pattern that we see since the 1998 CSR. Chart 3 shows this in more detail, breaking down the difference between planned and actual real-terms spending into an inflation effect and the provision of additional funding by the government in periods after the spending review. Note that the inflation effect is positive when inflation is lower than forecast – that is, lower inflation frees up funding for higher increases in real-terms government spending.

Chart 3: Breakdown of difference between planned and actual real-terms increases in spending during SR periods

Source: HM Treasury, OBR, FAI calculations

In the period after the 1998 and 2000 spending reviews, inflation was significantly lower than forecast, which allowed the UK Government to increase spending considerably above what it had planned originally. But even then it also engaged in significant top-ups during the SR period, meaning that the pattern of not sticking to the announced limits has been a feature of the system since its introduction.

The austerity years also show that the Osborne Treasury used lower than predicted inflation to slash spending more aggressively, essentially offsetting any loosening that could have come from that inflation surprise. It also cut aggressively the totals for 2015-16 after the SR 2013.

The Hammond loosening is very evident in this chart as well, bringing annual growth in spending to 2.3 percentage points above Osborne’s plans from 2015. And finally, the return of the inflation erosion of the purchasing of departmental budgets is clear from the SR 2021 bars. Jeremy Hunt increased totals in his budgets, but not by enough to mitigate the inflation effect: spending fell by 0.7% a year in real terms, compared to the already significantly tight 0.1% fall pencilled in by Rishi Sunak.

What can we expect next week?

As we’ve outlined above, the envelope for the 2025 Spending Review has been set since March. There may be some small movements either way, but ultimately it will be very close to what the Chancellor included in her plans at the Spring Statement and the OBR scored in its Economic and Fiscal Outlook.

We’ll focus on RDEL, which is day-to-day spending and therefore the most crucial allocation for public service delivery in the short-run. Table 1 shows just how uneven the profile is for growth in spending: slower in 2026-27 already, and down to only 1% a year from 2027-28 onwards.

Table 1: RDEL allocations from the Spring Statement 2025 and Main Estimates 2025-26

 2024-252025-262026-272027-282028-29
RDEL (£bn)487.5514.8535.5551.6567.7
Assumed RDEL excluding international aid (£bn)476.5502.6529.0544.9560.8
Real-terms growth2.9%2.3%1.0%1.0%
Real-terms growth excluding international aid2.8%3.5%0.9%1.0%

Source: HM Treasury, OBR, FAI analysis

The totals in the Spring Statement already had the shift from international aid to defence spending, which when we put it all together actually leaves slightly more room for manoeuvre in the first year of the Spending Review on the resource side for all other departments than might seem at first.

But that is very much short-lived. And with the health service, schools and defence likely to be boosted in real terms, it leaves a very difficult settlement for the final years of the Spending Review.

Chart 4 illustrates a plausible scenario in which the English NHS sees an increase of 3.6% a year in real terms, with schools and defence also seeing around a 2% boost a year. None of these are historically large, but even this mild scenario would leave unprotected departments having to cut spending significantly, by 1% a year in real terms. This would fall disproportionately on 2027-28 and 2028-29, as there is a significant boost in the first year. It might mean 2.5% to 3.5% cuts a year in real terms in two consecutive years.

In this scenario, the Scottish Government’s block grant would mechanically move similarly to the overall envelope. This is because many of the changes to unprotected departments lead to Barnett consequentials, but so do the larger boosts to health and education, which offsets those changes.

Chart 4: Illustrative RDEL scenario for the Spending Review based on announced policy and total envelope

Source: FAI analysis

It is of course for the Chancellor and the UK Government to decide on the path of public spending – and it might well choose different paths for spending. But chart 5 is not an implausible extrapolation of the figures that are already in the OBR forecasts and which guide the Spending Review totals.

And it does not look like a particularly deliverable plan. It promises a sort of ‘mañana austerity’, with strong growth in spending for another year while continuing to promise to cut spending at pretty heroic rates in a few years’ time. In fact, it’s almost a perfect reverse image of what then-OBR Chairman Robert Chote termed George Osborne’s spending ‘rollercoaster.’ Maybe we’re just on a different section of the ride.

Chart 5: Implied annual real-term growth rates from the illustrative RDEL scenario for the Spending Review

Source: FAI analysis

But as chart 3 showed, spending reviews are far from the only time at which fiscal policy is announced. A cynic might suspect that the Chancellor knows this and is planning on finding a way of not having to deliver those planned cuts in 2027-28 and 2028-29 – perhaps by hoping for economic growth to bail her out, or raising taxes significantly at a coming budget. Either way, she’ll want to avoid trade-offs on public services that are hard to stomach.

But that seems to be for another day, may even another year. Augustinian fiscal policy is alive and well.

Safety in Schools

Important information for Edinburgh’s parents,carers and pupils

The EIS has responded to the Deputy First Minister’s announcement that Secondary school pupils aged 12 and over will be required to wear face coverings in school communal areas from the 31st of August.

EIS General Secretary Larry Flanagan said: “The EIS welcomes this decision by the Scottish Government today, which reflects the updated advice from the World Health Organisation recommending face coverings for those aged 12 and over, where 1m distancing cannot be maintained. Schools are busy places with a large number of adults and young adults moving around.

“The use of face coverings in these circumstances is a sensible and appropriate step to reduce the risk of COVID-19 spreading through school communities.

Mr Flanagan added: “While we welcome the announcement, the EIS believes that effective physical distancing between pupils is the best means of reducing the risk of COVID-19 spread in schools.

“This is an area where the guidance from the Scottish Government currently lacks specificity; there needs to be a much sharper focus on ensuring social distancing in schools to protect pupils, staff and the wider community. Smaller class sizes to ensure appropriate physical distancing of pupils are essential.”

He concluded, “Across all sectors, smaller classes would be a huge boost, also, to the educational recovery of those pupils most disadvantaged by the impact of lockdown. The Scottish Government, indeed, all political parties within the Scottish Parliament, should prioritise the expenditure required for the extra teachers needed to help our pupils.”

Face covering u-turn shows Ministers must listen to workers

In England, the GMB union has welcomed Education Secretary Gavin Williamson’s U-turn on face coverings in schools.

GMB, the union for school staff, says the Government’s u-turn on face coverings shows Ministers must learn to listen to workers.

Karen Leonard, GMB National Officer, said: “GMB wrote to the Education Secretary back in mid-July challenging the Government’s position on face coverings in school during the pandemic.

“Schools know social distancing will be extremely difficult and large ‘bubbles’ present a covid-19 risk. All we wanted was for staff who felt the need to wear a mask not to be actively discouraged from doing so.

“The Government appears to be ignoring the science in order to avoid a political hit. Now they’ve performed yet another u-turn.

“It’s time Ministers learned to listen to the concerns of the school staff who will be instrumental in keeping our schools safe and, importantly, open.”

Vulnerable people risk going hungry without urgent government action, warns Which?

Which? is calling for urgent action from the UK government and the devolved administrations after hearing reports from more than a thousand people, including those who are at very high-risk or vulnerable and unable to access the food and basic supplies they desperately need amid the coronavirus pandemic.

While measures have been introduced by governments and supermarkets that are designed to help high-risk and vulnerable people, more than six weeks into lockdown the consumer champion continues to hear from people who are struggling to book supermarket delivery slots, are unable to find the help they need locally and in some cases find themselves forced to risk their health to get supplies.

Millions of individuals have been identified by the governments around the UK as extremely vulnerable and in the very high-risk group, but Which? is hearing that some are missing out on the provision they need through no fault of their own.

Others who are vulnerable, or have been asked to ‘self-isolate’ because they are elderly, pregnant or suffer from medical conditions that could cause severe illness if they were to contract Covid-19, are even more likely to have fallen through the cracks.

Which? found a range of issues among the huge number of reports received. As well as very high-risk people who are shielding and struggling to get deliveries or being forced to visit stores despite being advised to stay at home, others have been unable to navigate complex, confusing and often overwhelmed government and supermarket helplines or other support systems.

Some of these vulnerable customers told Which? that they are having to stay up into the early hours of the morning in an attempt to book supermarket delivery slots, while others are left relying on the kindness of neighbours.

Gillian Medlar and her husband are both on the very high-risk or extremely vulnerable list as she has Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and he has lymphoma.

They haven’t been able to get a supermarket delivery slot, and described them as “gold dust”. They’ve been forced to rely on a neighbour, but want to limit how much they are asking of her.

The problem also affects carers, who cannot leave the house but are not in the high-risk category themselves so also have to rely on getting delivery slots.

Melvin, whose son is in the highest risk category, has received letters advising him to shield for three months. The whole household is shielding but they have not been recognised as extremely vulnerable by the supermarkets’ websites as the online accounts are in Melvin’s name and not his son’s.

Carers of vulnerable people can go out for groceries but this may not always be possible if they also need to self-isolate themselves.

Geoff Wilson, 86, described feeling like he and the 96-year-old lady he is a full time carer for were “the forgotten ones”. They aren’t eligible to register as extremely vulnerable, and have been unable to get a home delivery from anywhere.

Supermarkets say they have been overwhelmed by demand. While many have gone to great lengths to increase their capacity, without a more coordinated effort from government and better access to other forms of provision in local areas, deliveries will continue to fall short of what’s needed to make sure that every vulnerable person is able to access food and basic supplies without leaving their home.

We have also heard from people who are vulnerable and need help, regardless of their Covid-19 risk. One disabled and housebound individual told Which? she felt she had “completely fallen off the radar for pretty much all of the supposed support measures. Unable to get the delivery slots she relied on, she described being ‘trapped with no deliveries for three of the past four weeks”.

Governments in England, Scotland and Wales have provided the supermarkets with edited lists of those that fall in the extremely vulnerable category and have requested support with getting food. Part of this support is the offer of priority delivery slots by supermarkets.

Supermarkets began by cross-referencing the lists received against existing registered customers and offering priority delivery slots to them. Some supermarkets have also helped people on the government list who aren’t existing customers .

However, Which? has also heard from extremely vulnerable people who despite receiving a letter from the government letting them know that they qualify for priority supermarket delivery slots, have then been left in the dark for weeks on end about what they need to do.

There have been issues identifying the most vulnerable people and in some cases they have to identify themselves but there has been a lack of clarity and no central point of contact in order to find the best solution for each individual or area – which may not always be supermarket delivery but instead community based solutions from either smaller independent shops or volunteers.

Amanda Kontzle told Which? that her father is over 70 and having stem cell cancer treatment. He has been contacted by the government to reassure him that he is on the list of very high-risk people, but has been unable to get a delivery slot with any supermarket despite registering as a customer.

Amanda said: “I’m absolutely disgusted at how he has been treated during this crisis so far.”

Which? believes that the UK’s four governments must step up efforts to ensure that no one who is vulnerable has fallen through the cracks and is struggling to access basic supplies.

Better coordination between governments, local authorities, the food industry and local charities is also urgently needed for those who are vulnerable but not in the highest risk group, so that they understand how to easily access the support they need, whether that is through their local supermarket or community based provision.

Many of the people who have contacted Which? say they feel have been let down by the supermarkets because they are unable to get delivery slots – but there are limits to supermarkets’ ability to address some of the issues experienced by vulnerable consumers without additional government support.

The governments across the UK must now urgently coordinate their approach to make sure that no vulnerable person has to navigate confusing, long-winded and complicated systems in order to access food during the pandemic lockdown.

Sue Davies, Head of Consumer Protection and Food Policy at Which?, said: “Based on the huge number of reports we’re seeing from vulnerable people struggling to get access to basic food and supplies, it’s clear that the current system is not working for those who need it the most.

“Without easily accessible and clearer information for these people, and stronger coordination between the UK’s central and devolved governments, the food industry, local authorities and local charities, there is a risk that many will go hungry during this pandemic.”

BRITAIN CLOSES DOWN

Pubs, restaurants, theatres, gyms and leisre centres have been ordered to close ‘as soon as possible’ by Prime Minister Boris Johnson. The UK is shutting down – and social life as we know it is changing forever.

PRIME MINISTER BORIS JOHNSON’s STATEMENT IN FULL

Good afternoon and thank you for coming again,

Today I am joined by the Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak and Jennie Harries deputy chief medical officer.

Yesterday I set out the ambition of this government to turn the tide against coronavirus within 3 months. And I want to repeat that determination today.

We are going to do it with testing. We are going to do it with new medicines, and with new digital technology that will help us to see the disease as it is transmitted, and thereby, by eliminating it, to stamp it out.

And above all, now we are going to defeat this disease with a huge national effort to slow the spread by reducing unnecessary social contact.

And I want to thank everyone for following the guidance we issued on Monday:

to stay at home for 7 days if you think you have the symptoms,

for 14 days if anyone in your household has either of the symptoms – a new continuous cough or a high temperature.

To avoid pubs, bars, clubs and restaurants.

To work from home if at all possible.

Keep washing your hands.

I know it has been tough.

I know it has been inconvenient.

But these actions that we’re all taking together are already helping to take the strain off our NHS.

Bit by bit, day by day, by your actions, your restraint and your sacrifice, we are putting this country in a better and stronger position, where we will be able to save literally thousands of lives, of people of all ages, people who don’t deserve to die now.

People whose lives can, must, and will be saved.

And as we take these actions together and as we make these sacrifices, we can see the impact on the real economy.

Already, fantastic British companies, already under huge strain, big and small.

Workers who are finding that their jobs are under threat or are going, through no fault of their own. And to all of them, we in government say: We will stand by you.

And I say that to companies, remember our joint objective: to beat this virus. And we will do everything in our power to help.

And in just a minute, Rishi is going to explain how we are going to help workers of all kinds to get through this crisis,

Supporting you directly in a way that Government has never been done before, in addition to the package we have already set out for business.

And of course these measures are intended to be temporary and of course I am confident that, in time, the UK economy is going to bounce back.

Of course it is.

But I must be absolutely clear with you: the speed of that eventual recovery depends entirely on our ability, our collective ability, to get on top of the virus now.

And that means we have to take the next steps, on scientific advice and following our plan, we are strengthening the measures announced on Monday which you will remember.

And of course people have already made a huge effort to comply with those measures for avoiding unnecessary social contact.

But we need now to push down further on that curve of transmission between us.

And so following agreement between all the formations of the United Kingdom, all the devolved administrations, we are collectively telling, telling cafes, pubs, bars, restaurants to close tonight as soon as they reasonably can, and not to open tomorrow.

Though to be clear, they can continue to provide take-out services.

We’re also telling nightclubs, theatres, cinemas, gyms and leisure centres to close on the same timescale.

Now, these are places where people come together, and indeed the whole purpose of these businesses is to bring people together. But the sad things is that today for now, at least physically, we need to keep people apart.

And I want to stress that we will review the situation each month, to see if we can relax any of these measures.

And listening to what I have just said, some people may of course be tempted to go out tonight. But please don’t.

You may think you are invincible, but there is no guarantee you will get mild symptoms, and you can still be a carrier of the disease and pass it on to others

So that’s why, as far as possible, we want you to stay at home, that’s how we can protect our NHS and save lives.

To repeat, I know how difficult this is, how it seems to go against the freedom-loving instincts of the British people. And I also know much, right now, workers and business deserve the financial reassurance we are giving them.

But we will get through this.

We will get through it together, and we will beat this virus.

And to ram that point home: the more effectively we follow the advice that we are given, the faster this country will stage both a medical and an economic recovery in full.

SCOTLAND’S FIRST MINISTER ALSO ADDRESSED THE NATION:

In recent days, we’ve been asked to make changes to our lives that would have been unimaginable a few weeks ago.

COVID-19 is the biggest challenge of our lifetimes.

The number of cases is set to rise sharply.

We must do all we can to slow it down and save lives.

So I want to talk to you directly about what we can all do to help – and offer some words of reassurance in what I know is an anxious time.

All of us must act now to slow the spread of the virus.

Washing our hands regularly is important.

But we must also reduce the number of people we meet and come into contact with.

That means staying at home if you or anyone in your house has a high temperature or a new and persistent cough.

For all of us, it means working from home if possible; avoiding public transport and not socialising in groups.

We’ve also asked people to stay away from crowded places like pubs, restaurants and cinemas.

But I can confirm that, in light of advice this afternoon from our scientists and the Chief Medical Officer that there must be strict compliance for that to be effective. I am now asking restaurants, cafes, pubs, gyms and cinemas to close.

I know how difficult this is.

But it is vital to reduce our risk of getting the virus.

And to reduce the risk of infecting those who are most vulnerable of becoming seriously ill or dying.

In short, it will save lives.

It also gives our NHS the best chance of coping.

We’ve put the NHS on an emergency footing.

We’re taking steps to increase the capacity of our hospitals and intensive care wards.

But those who work in our health and social care services will be tested like never before.

Most of us have friends and family working in the NHS – my own sister and sister-in-law are among them.

The debt of gratitude we owe all of them is enormous.

COVID-19 is a health emergency.

But the steps we take to deal with it are causing disruption in our economy too.

Alongside your concern about the virus, many of you are deeply worried about your jobs and income.

The Scottish Government will do all we can to support you.

As government, we are asking you to take unprecedented steps.

So the level of support we provide to you must be unprecedented in return.

Finally, a crisis like this will have an impact on wellbeing and mental health.

To older people – we are asking you to stay away from your grandkids, from the people you love. That’s hard. But it is for your protection – so you can stay around to see them grow up.

To children – I know this is a strange time. You’re away from school, and won’t be able to spend as much time with friends. The adults around you are probably feeling a bit anxious too. So help them. Follow their advice. Study and do your homework. But don’t forget to have fun. And wash your hands.

And let’s all look out for each other.

At times of crisis, we need each other more, yet we’re being told to stay apart.

But we can still communicate and offer comfort.

Modern technology is sometimes a curse – it can now be a lifeline.

Phone or skype loved ones. Text neighbours or drop a note through their door to see if they need help. Maybe even write a letter to your grandparents.

Support your local business if you can.

But please, do not panic buy. There’s plenty to go round if we all act responsibly.

We are entering stormy waters, and I can’t tell you yet when we will reach dry land.

I can promise you that as your First Minister, I will do my utmost to lead us safely through.

But I need your help.

I need you to follow health advice.

And I need you to look out for those around you.

There’s no doubt that difficult days do lie ahead.

But I close on a note of hope and belief.

This crisis is reminding us just how fragile our world is.

But it is also reminding us what really matters – health, love, solidarity.

With compassion and kindness – and with the dedication and expertise of our NHS – we can and we will get through this.

Thank you, for all you are doing to help.

Chief Medical Officer Dr Catherine Calderwood said: “COVID-19 is the biggest challenge of our lifetimes, and with the number of cases set to rise sharply we must do all we can to slow it down and save lives.

“As well as continuing to wash hands more regularly and self-isolating if you or anyone in your house has any symptoms, we must also limit the number of people we come into contact with.

“That is why, in light of updated advice, we are now asking restaurants, cafes, pubs, gyms and cinemas to close. I know how difficult this is, but it is vital in reducing the spread of the virus.

“Most people have been following advice and guidance and we thank them for that. But these measures are being introduced to ensure that everyone follows the guidance which will, ultimately, save lives.”

In an unprecedented move, the government is to pay 80% of wages for employees unable to work due to the coronavirus pandemic, up to £2,500 a month, the chancellor has announced. 

The magic money tree is being tested like never before.

 

PM surprises young journalists at special ‘children’s lobby’

The Prime Minister Boris Johnson hosts a Children’s Lobby

Aspiring journalists got the chance to grill the Prime Minister after he surprised them during a special ‘children’s lobby’ earlier this week.

Boris Johnson joined the mini press conference as 13 schoolchildren, aged nine to 14, were quizzing his deputy press secretary Lucia Hodgson in No10 Downing Street. Continue reading PM surprises young journalists at special ‘children’s lobby’

People in poverty must not pay the price for Brexit, say charities

poverty family JRF

A coalition of charities have urged the Government to take urgent steps to protect people and places in poverty from the financial consequences of Brexit, including no-deal. Continue reading People in poverty must not pay the price for Brexit, say charities

Cairncross Review: a level playing field for UK journalism?

  • Online platforms should have a ‘news quality obligation’ to improve trust in news they host, overseen by a regulator
  • Government should explore direct funding for local news and new tax reliefs to support public interest journalism
  • A new Institute for Public Interest News should focus on the future of local and regional press and oversee a new innovation fund

The Cairncross Review into the future of the UK news industry has delivered its final report, with recommendations on how to safeguard the future sustainability of the UK press. Continue reading Cairncross Review: a level playing field for UK journalism?

Local democracy report embarrasses Scotland, says Wightman

Scottish ministers must respond to an embarrassing report that claims that Scotland is the ‘least locally democratic country in Europe’ by devolving new powers to councils, says a Green MSP.

Andy Wightman, the Scottish Greens’ local government spokesperson, says his party supports the Common Weal report’s recommendation for a new tier of councils in Scotland, insisting that two, and in many cases three tiers, are typical in other European countries.

Mr Wightman, a Green MSP for Lothian, said: “This report (see below) adds to the wealth of evidence highlighting the poor state of local democracy in Scotland. Its findings are welcome and while many will perceive its recommendation to create another tier of local democracy in Scotland to be radical, having just a single tier of councils goes against the norm across much of Europe.

“Scotland’s status as the ‘least locally democratic country in Europe’ is not one to be proud of, in fact it’s embarrassing. Ministers at Holyrood can however revive local democracy by devolving more powers to councils and require them to include local communities in decision making.

“Local government needs substantial and far-reaching reform to make it more local and more democratic and we’ll continue to honour our manifesto commitment to challenge ministers on their slow progress.”

Development Councils