tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/michael-gove-10209/articlesmichael gove – The Conversation2024-03-15T17:34:40Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2242852024-03-15T17:34:40Z2024-03-15T17:34:40ZLevelling up is not working as promised – our research shows why<p>The UK parliament has heard findings that <a href="https://theconversation.com/levelling-up-four-problems-with-boris-johnsons-flagship-project-176386">levelling up</a> – arguably the Conservatives’ flagship policy agenda – is beset by critical delays. In a report published on March 15, the <a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5804/cmselect/cmpubacc/424/report.html">public accounts committee</a>, parliament’s expenditure watchdog, has said that, as of September 2023, local authorities had spent only £1.24 billion of the £10.47 billion the government promised to tackle regional inequality across the UK. </p>
<p>Crucially, the committee has found that the government has nothing in place to measure this policy’s impact in the long term. In other words, as has been pointed out, there is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/15/no-compelling-examples-of-what-levelling-up-has-delivered-watchdog-finds">“no compelling evidence”</a> that levelling up has achieved anything.</p>
<p>The levelling up agenda was launched in the Conservative party’s 2019 manifesto to highlight – and overcome – the economic plight of the UK’s former industrial heartlands, particularly in the north and the Midlands. The subsequent <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/62e7a429d3bf7f75af0923f3/Executive_Summary.pdf">white paper</a> published by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) in 2022 said the economic prize was potentially enormous: “If underperforming places were levelled up towards the UK average, unlocking their potential, this could boost aggregate UK GDP by tens of billions of pounds each year.” </p>
<p>The disconnect between this prosperity-led rhetoric on local authority funding and the reality could not be starker. Since 2010-11, local authorities have experienced a <a href="https://www.local.gov.uk/about/news/funding-gap-growing-councils-firmly-eye-inflationary-storm#:%7E:text=Councils%20are%20facing%20an%20%E2%80%9Cinflationary,spending%20power%20since%202010%2F11.">27% real-terms cut</a> in core spending power due to reduced central government funding. <a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/local-authority-section-114-notices">Eight of the 317 English local authorities</a> have effectively declared bankruptcy since 2018. </p>
<p>Our <a href="https://www.cipfa.org/cipfa-thinks/insight/addressing-regional-inequalities">research</a> compares how local authorities in England and <a href="https://theconversation.com/other-countries-have-made-progress-in-levelling-up-heres-how-the-uks-plan-compares-176405">other countries</a> are addressing regional socioeconomic inequality. We have found that English councils are struggling to invest for the long term, because of a lack of ongoing funding and insufficient staff. </p>
<h2>Where local government income comes from</h2>
<p>Compared to many other countries, local authorities in England have fewer powers to raise revenue. In <a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/local-government-funding-england">2019-20</a> council tax was the biggest source of local authority income (52%), followed by business rates (27%) and government grants (22%). </p>
<p>These government grants include the <a href="https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/which-areas-have-benefited-from-the-levelling-up-fund/">£4.8 billion levelling up fund </a>, designed to invest in local infrastructure that has, as the white paper put it, “a visible impact on people and their communities and will support economic recovery”. </p>
<p>They also include the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-shared-prosperity-fund-prospectus/uk-shared-prosperity-fund-prospectus">UK shared prosperity fund</a> and <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/towns-fund">the towns fund</a> (which consists of <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/town-deals-full-list-of-101-offers">town deals</a> and the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/future-high-streets-fund">future high streets fund</a>, and is accessible to local authorities in England only).</p>
<p>A first challenge to note is that since Brexit, local authorities no longer have access to European Union (EU) funds. The central government funding that has replaced it is less generous. <a href="https://www.ippr.org/articles/the-shared-prosperity-fund-what-can-we-learn-from-government-s-plan-to-replace-eu-funds">Analysis</a> by the Institute for Public Policy Research suggests that the UK Shared Prosperity fund represents a 43% drop in funding compared with EU economic development money for UK nations and regions.</p>
<p>Further, local authorities also now have to compete against each other to access crucial funding. The levelling up fund might be delivered at a local level but funding is not guaranteed. </p>
<p>Councils have to <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-levelling-up-bidding-process-wastes-time-and-money-heres-how-to-improve-it-198638">bid</a> to competitive funding pots. Only a handful of bids are successful, when scored against nationally designed success criteria.</p>
<p>What’s more, this competitive model is predicated on short-term, project-based funding pots. Our research shows, however, that for local authorities to best respond to the needs of their constituents, they need long-term funding. We found that in the US, Cleveland’s flagship city project is based on a 20 to 30-year timetable. </p>
<p>Leipzig, meanwhile, has benefited from consistent long-term funding from the German government and the EU. It took 15 years of high levels of funding for unemployment to start declining in Leipzig and a further 15 years to reduce it further closer to the national average. Leipzig’s council’s <a href="https://www.jrf.org.uk/how-do-cities-lead-an-inclusive-growth-agenda">long-term approach</a> to planning and designing housing stock and shopping areas has improved local retail options and access to jobs for residents.</p>
<p>By contrast, challenges created by the <a href="https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/buildings/6bn-meridian-water-project-delivery-under-review-13-02-2023/">impact of inflation and rising interest rates</a> have forced Enfield council, in England, to scale back its 20-year, £6 billion regeneration project, Meridian Water. This is despite the project’s aim to create 10,000 homes and 6,000 jobs paid at least at the London living wage. </p>
<h2>How political change affects local government funding</h2>
<p>In England, local authorities often struggle to deliver their visions for economic development because of the sheer frequency of institutional change at regional level across electoral cycles. </p>
<p>In 2010, the incoming coalition government <a href="https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN05842/SN05842.pdf">abolished</a> the regional development agencies Labour had instituted in 1997. In 2011, these were <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2010-to-2015-government-policy-local-enterprise-partnerships-leps-and-enterprise-zones/2010-to-2015-government-policy-local-enterprise-partnerships-leps-and-enterprise-zones">replaced</a> with local enterprise partnerships, which, in turn, <a href="https://www.lgcplus.com/politics/devolution-and-economic-growth/government-will-end-support-for-leps-04-08-2023/">were scrapped</a> by Rishi Sunak’s government in 2023.</p>
<p>Additionally, the DLUHC <a href="https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/43820/documents/217384/default/">has changed the rules</a> midway through the bid process. Thus 55 councils spent an average of £30,000 bidding in round two for funds they could not win because a rule change meant that those which had been successful in round one were no longer eligible to bid again. Roughly £1.6 million was squandered through this lack of transparency.</p>
<p>We have also found that English councils suffer from a lack of consistent, expert staffing. Compared to the international cities we have studied, they are not able to properly monitor and evaluate their efforts. </p>
<p>In South Yorkshire, for example, although stakeholders recognise the importance of monitoring and evaluation, short-term and insufficient funding has meant mechanisms to do so have not been built in from the start of levelling up projects.</p>
<p>In January 2024, the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/simplifying-the-funding-landscape-for-local-authorities/simplifying-the-funding-landscape-for-local-authorities">DLUHC began a pilot programme</a> to test how the government could distribute funding to local authorities in a simplified, streamlined way, in order to give them greater spending flexibility. </p>
<p>Establishing a single funding pot across government departments for local authorities would indeed enable them to better respond to local needs, in the long term. </p>
<p>Councils know the strengths their local areas have and the challenges they face. They need the financial and organisational resources to meet them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/224285/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Abigail Taylor received funding for this work from CIPFA and from the University of Birmingham. Abigail acknowledges Jeffrey Matsu, Chief Economist at CIPFA as a co-author of the research underpinning this article.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anne Green received funding for this work from CIPFA and from the University of Birmingham. Anne acknowledges Jeffrey Matsu, Chief Economist at CIPFA, as a co-author of the research underpinning this article.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Hannes Read received funding for this work from CIPFA and from the University of Birmingham. Hannes acknowledges Jeffrey Matsu, Chief Economist at CIPFA as a co-author of the research underpinning this article.</span></em></p>English councils have neither the ongoing funding or the staffing needed to effectively deliver on the government’s economic development promises.Abigail Taylor, Research Fellow, City-Region Economic Development Institute (City-REDI), University of BirminghamAnne Green, Professor of Regional Economic Development, University of BirminghamHannes Read, Policy and Data Analyst, University of BirminghamLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2259262024-03-15T16:00:43Z2024-03-15T16:00:43ZMichael Gove’s extremism definition: four things about his announcement that make no sense<p>The UK government has <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68556914">unveiled its new definition of extremism</a>, but has raised more questions than it has answered in the process.</p>
<p>Extremism is now defined as “the promotion or advancement of an ideology based on violence, hatred or intolerance” that aims to “negate or destroy the fundamental rights and freedoms of others” or “undermine, overturn or replace the UK’s system of liberal parliamentary democracy and democratic rights”. The definition also makes reference to those who “intentionally create a permissive environment for others to achieve” these aims.</p>
<p>Far from being <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/new-extremism-definition-unveiled-despite-concerns-it-could-vilify-the-wrong-people-13094090">“more precise”</a>, as promised, the early signs are that this new definition will prove to be as contentious and controversial as its predecessor. There are many things that don’t make sense about the government’s announcement. Here are just a few.</p>
<h2>1. It’s a response to protests, but has nothing to do with them</h2>
<p>Prior to the unveiling, Michael Gove, the communities secretary, said the new definition was <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/new-extremism-definition-unveiled-despite-concerns-it-could-vilify-the-wrong-people-13094090">a specific response</a> “to the increase in the amount of antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred that we’ve seen on our streets” since October 7 last year. The prime minister, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/01/extremists-trying-to-tear-us-apart-says-rishi-sunak-in-impromptu-no-10-speech">Rishi Sunak</a>, spoke about a “shocking increase in extremist disruption and criminality” and the the need for a tougher approach. Others speculated about the <a href="https://inatimeofdeceit.substack.com/p/reflections-on-the-uk-government">potential criminality</a> of engaging in certain chants at protests.</p>
<p>The new definition, however, doesn’t relate to any of this. Instead, as <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/new-extremism-definition-unveiled-despite-concerns-it-could-vilify-the-wrong-people-13094090">Gove told Sky News</a>, the new definition will solely be used by government departments and officials to ensure they are not inadvertently providing a platform, funding or legitimacy to those it believes to be “extremist”. More than anything else, he went on, the new definition is “about making sure that government uses its powers and its money in a wise way”. So the new definition has nothing to do with what we were told it did.</p>
<h2>2. It isn’t a law but confers great power</h2>
<p>Something notable about the new definition is that it is non-statutory. It is not a law and will not lead to any changes in existing criminal law. Nor will it afford any new powers to help with the policing of protests – or indeed anything else.</p>
<p>This state of affairs doesn’t just mean the definition fails to add value in a legal sense, it is also troubling from a democratic perspective. Jonathan Hall KC, the government’s independent reviewer of state threat legislation, has said the new definition means that decisions about which groups are labelled extremist will now be made by <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/14/ministers-and-officials-to-be-banned-from-contact-with-groups-labelled-extremist">“ministerial decree”</a> alone. No safeguards are in place to prevent ministers and there is no appeal process for anyone who feels they’ve been wrongly labelled an extremist. </p>
<p>The process of labelling extremists therefore has the very real potential to be politicised and weaponised. In essence, the government will be able to use the new definition to cancel those it sees fit to, irrespective of whether they happen to be actual extremists or whether the government just wants to silence their criticisms. That local authorities, public bodies, and others are likely to follow the government’s lead, the potential for the new definition to be misused should not be overlooked.</p>
<h2>3. It both isn’t and might be central to counter-terrorism law</h2>
<p>In all of the furore surrounding the unveiling of the new definition, any reference to Prevent – the government’s counter-extremism strategy – has been conspicuous by its absence. This is strange given that the government’s old definition of extremism is integral to the Prevent strategy. The old definition is part of counter-terrorism law and provides the legal basis on which specific authorities are required to help <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65e5a5bd3f69457ff1035fe2/14.258_HO_Prevent+Duty+Guidance_v5d_Final_Web_1_.pdf">prevent the risk</a> of people becoming vulnerable to terrorism and the ideologies that inform it.</p>
<p>That there has been no reference made to Prevent or any attempt to explain what the relationship between the strategy and the new definition might be is therefore somewhat bizarre. We don’t know whether the new definition is designed to replace the old definition or whether we will now have two different definitions, each operating in its own sphere of influence. While common sense would suggest it would be the former, the very specific remit of the new definition explained by Gove would seem to suggest the latter.</p>
<h2>4. Organisations don’t know if they’re being labelled</h2>
<p>The government’s old definition of extremism was regularly and routinely criticised as being used to disproportionately <a href="https://www.identitypapers.org.uk/article/id/401/">target Muslims and their communities</a>. Many thought it <a href="https://www.newstatesman.com/thestaggers/2022/05/prevent-is-islamophobic-by-design-not-accident">Islamophobic</a>. The new definition therefore afforded an opportunity for the government to make the case that this was not just about Muslims but about all forms of extremism irrespective of who might be involved.</p>
<p>Failing to heed the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, when <a href="https://www.itv.com/news/2024-03-13/sunaks-extremism-definition-risks-further-division-says-justin-welby">he warned the new definition</a> risks “disproportionately targeting Muslim communities” the government appears to have stoked rather allay fears. This was evident in how a number of Muslim organisations were named in <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13158335/Muslim-Council-Britain-Palestine-Action-government-crackdown.html">leaks to the media</a> prior to unveiling and by Gove, who used parliamentary privilege to name them in a speech to MPs. This included the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB), Cage International and Mend (Muslim Engagement and Development). Others such as the Friends of Al-Aqsa, Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) and 5Pillars have also been mentioned.</p>
<p>Both MAB and Mend have already <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/14/gove-says-three-muslim-led-groups-and-two-far-right-to-be-assessed-for-extremism#:%7E:text=Gove%20faces%20legal%20action%20threats%20after%20suggesting%20Muslim%20groups%20are%20extremist,-Community%20secretary's%20new&text=Michael%20Gove%20is%20facing%20threats,a%20new%20definition%20of%20extremism.">challenged Gove to repeat the allegations</a> outside of parliament so they can pursue legal proceedings against him. The MCB says it has already taken advice from lawyers.</p>
<p>The government has also made reference to extreme-right groups, such as Patriotic Alternative, they are wildly different from the community-focused Muslim organisations they are being equated with. </p>
<p>All in all, the evidence suggests that, aside from the definition itself, very little else has changed.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/225926/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chris Allen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Gove and Rishi Sunak trailed the change as a response to Gaza protests – but this definition has nothing to do with them.Chris Allen, Associate Professor, School of Criminology, University of LeicesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2061342023-06-28T15:26:10Z2023-06-28T15:26:10ZWhy so many people have had enough of experts – and how to win back trust<p>When senior British politician Michael Gove announced in 2016 that the public had <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/3be49734-29cb-11e6-83e4-abc22d5d108c">“had enough of experts”</a> in the lead up to the Brexit vote, it highlighted a growing trend for questioning the authority and power of experts. </p>
<p>Only last month, the home secretary, Suella Braverman, took to the stage at the National Conservatism conference to rail against <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/15/suella-braverman-rails-against-experts-and-elites-in-partisan-speech">“experts and elites”</a>. Such comments form part of <a href="https://www.wiley.com/en-gb/The+Crisis+of+Expertise-p-9780745665771">a broader pattern</a> where experts and their authority have faced significant challenges and threats from various economic, political, social and cultural sources. </p>
<p>An expert is conceptualised as someone with knowledge accrued in an accredited fashion, who then operates with a high degree of independence as a result of that knowledge and skill. Their power and influence has traditionally played an important role in society – but this authority is increasingly being questioned from many sides. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GGgiGtJk7MA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>At the beginning of the pandemic, there was potential for a restoration of trust in expert authority. <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-on-coronavirus-16-march-2020">Politicians</a> and <a href="https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020">international bodies</a> talked about the importance of using expertise as the most viable path to navigate the COVID crisis. The public also <a href="https://www.ukri.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/UKRI-271020-COVID-19-Trust-Tracker.pdf">sought more communication</a> from scientific experts. </p>
<p>Even leaders such as <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/01/donald-trump-rejects-expertise/579808/">Donald Trump</a> and <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/09/24/brexit-latest-news-supreme-court-ruling-boris-johnson-prorogue/">Boris Johnson</a>, who had previously questioned the credibility of experts, appeared alongside medical professionals during press conferences to reassure the public.</p>
<p>But as the pandemic progressed, the authority of experts declined – with a few noteworthy exceptions such as <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/06/26/coronavirus-pandemic-global-response-devi-sridhar-review/">New Zealand, South Korea and Senegal</a>, which maintained their reliance on expertise to guide their decision-making processes. </p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110734911">My new book</a>, co-authored with <a href="https://profiles.cardiff.ac.uk/staff/reedm">Michael Reed</a>, identifies three broad explanations for this decline which we call delegitimation, demystification and decomposition.</p>
<h2>Delegitimation</h2>
<p>One way the authority of experts diminishes is when societal institutions and structures that have traditionally supported them – such as governments, media and business – themselves face criticism, in particular from populist political movements.</p>
<p>Technology-driven advancements such as social media have accelerated this trend. Social media democratises communication and provides global platforms for those who want to question established societal structures and institutions. </p>
<p>This in turn can lead to these organisations turning on their expert advisors, in addition to populist groups using alternative platforms to directly express their scepticism of experts.</p>
<p>There were examples of this trend during the pandemic. Figures such as <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/06/politics/fauci-coronavirus-us-response/index.html">Trump</a> and then Brazilian president <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/23/brazils-jair-bolsonaro-says-coronavirus-crisis-is-a-media-trick">Jair Bolsonaro</a> openly challenged and dismissed experts. Trump’s position changed as COVID was not quickly “solved”.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A man with orange face and hair stands behind a podium with a microphone raising his index finger with a doubtful expression." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/533198/original/file-20230621-18-c1l04e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/533198/original/file-20230621-18-c1l04e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533198/original/file-20230621-18-c1l04e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533198/original/file-20230621-18-c1l04e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533198/original/file-20230621-18-c1l04e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533198/original/file-20230621-18-c1l04e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533198/original/file-20230621-18-c1l04e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Donald Trump initially stood alongside scientific experts during the pandemic before using Twitter to dismiss them.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/wilkesbarre-pa-august-2-2018-president-1148319797">Wilkes-Barre/PA/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The spread of online disinformation and misinformation amplified the decline of expert authority. This led to the emergence of “<a href="https://theconversation.com/britains-descent-into-culture-wars-has-been-rapid-but-it-neednt-be-terminal-182885">culture wars</a>” centred around virus control, including mask wearing.</p>
<h2>2. Demystification</h2>
<p>When people learn more about experts, in terms of who they are, what they do and who they serve, their power can again diminish. Individual experts are increasingly being watched and criticised as they become more closely associated with institutions such as government, corporations and banks. As a result, the lines are increasingly blurred between independent experts and organisational agendas.</p>
<p>The UK government used the country’s leading medical experts such as <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/people/christopher-whitty">Chris Whitty</a> and <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/people/patrick-vallance">Patrick Vallance</a> to support its political rhetoric during the pandemic. They stood beside the prime minister at press conferences, but were often scapegoated for government decisions that were more <a href="https://harpercollins.co.uk/products/failures-of-state-the-inside-story-of-britains-battle-with-coronavirus-jonathan-calvertgeorge-arbuthnott?variant=39528280391758">politically motivated</a> than based on medical expertise. </p>
<p>Giving evidence at the COVID inquiry, Whitty <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65989350">warned</a> that threats to independent experts could undermine responses to disasters in the future:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We should be very firm in saying that society very much appreciates the work of these people [experts and scientists], who put in considerable amounts of time … We, society, need to ensure scientists know their service is valued.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>3. Decomposition</h2>
<p>Finally, the authority of experts is also declining because there are now <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jpo/article-abstract/5/3/248/5151287">more occupations claiming expert status</a>, including management occupations such as human resource management, marketing and project management. While this can democratise expertise, it can also challenge the primacy of the traditional accredited sectors such as law, medicine and accountancy.</p>
<p>The pandemic has highlighted the fragmentation of expert occupations. Many different groups were involved in tackling the crisis, with multiple ideas being debated in public. This led to people questioning expert authority, as they saw different experts giving contrasting advice on issues such as mask use, herd immunity and vaccine efficacy.</p>
<h2>Rethinking how experts interact</h2>
<p>So, how can experts maintain their authority and power in a world where people are increasingly sceptical of them? We argue the authority and power of expertise can be maintained by rethinking how experts interact with governments and the public.</p>
<p>Traditionally, experts have had autonomy to control their work, but this has led to a lack of trust. In future, experts will need to be more transparent and accountable to the public. </p>
<p>Instead of the traditional, top-down view of expert authority, we can imagine a more reflexive, dynamic and contested form of expert power that is open to other standards. This would broaden decision-making processes to wider audiences, and involve a continual public dialogue between experts and non-experts. </p>
<p>At the same time, experts will need to work more closely with governments and other bodies to ensure their expertise is taken into account.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/politicians-love-to-appeal-to-common-sense-but-does-it-trump-expertise-206453">Politicians love to appeal to common sense – but does it trump expertise?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>None of this will be easy. It requires experts to engage with a broader range of people, some of whom they may have had little previous concern with. It may involve persuading others of their expertise, rather than assuming it as a given. And the power dynamics between experts and other people may alter, meaning there is greater potential for experts to be co-opted to other agendas.</p>
<p>Ultimately, whether we have really “had enough of experts” is questionable. But how these experts secure their power, and convince others of their authority, requires a rethink.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/206134/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Cara Reed has previously received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council. She is a member of the Labour Party.</span></em></p>Our research highlights three key reasons for declining trust in experts, and how to regain their authority in future.Cara Reed, Senior Lecturer in Organisation Studies at Cardiff Business School, Cardiff UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1962422022-12-08T17:11:07Z2022-12-08T17:11:07ZCumbria coal mine: empty promises of carbon capture tech have excused digging up more fossil fuel for decades<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499795/original/file-20221208-13117-uu5no9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C5472%2C3645&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/coal-mining-miner-man-hands-background-773326039">Small smiles/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The idea that a technology called carbon capture and storage (CCS) could catch molecules of CO₂ as they emerge from the chimneys of power stations and factories has been around for more than two decades. Michael Gove, the secretary of state responsible for “levelling up” the UK’s regions, recently <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1122625/22-12-07_Whitehaven_-_Decision_Letter_and_IR.pdf">justified</a> his approval of the UK’s first new coal mine in 30 years with “increased use of CCS”. There’s only one problem: CCS won’t cancel out Woodhouse Colliery’s emissions, which are estimated at <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/letter-deep-coal-mining-in-the-uk/">400,000 tonnes a year</a>, because it barely exists.</p>
<p>The UK government first started talking about <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/James-Dooley-2/publication/233920504_Modeling_Carbon_Capture_and_Disposal_Technologies_in_Energy_and_Economic_Models/links/09e4150d35cb5a38f3000000/Modeling-Carbon-Capture-and-Disposal-Technologies-in-Energy-and-Economic-Models.pdf">CCS</a> in the late 1990s,
when it was looking to meet and exceed its commitment to cut emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. </p>
<p>The fact that developing countries like China and India were planning to burn coal for decades made the UK consider starting a CCS industry as its “gift to the world”, in the words of one senior lobbyist I interviewed for <a href="https://idric.org/project/mip-4-3-the-politics-of-industrial-decarbonisation-policy/">research</a> into industrial decarbonisation.</p>
<p>It’s obvious why oil and gas companies like the idea of CCS. Fossil fuel firms can keep extracting and selling their product (coking coal for the steel industry in the case of the new mine in Cumbria, north-west England, almost all of which is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/07/what-is-the-cumbrian-coalmine-and-why-does-it-matter-woodhouse-colliery">expected to be exported</a>) and mopping up the climate-wrecking emissions is someone else’s responsibility. Politicians have been more circumspect. Some have chafed at the enormous upfront cost of developing and installing CCS and sinking taxpayers’ money into a potential white elephant.</p>
<p>Over the last 20 years in the UK, the future potential of CCS has been used to justify <a href="https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/commons/lib/research/key_issues/key-issues-carbon-capture-and-storage.pdf">prolonging coal power</a>, making hydrogen fuel from the <a href="https://www.northerngasnetworks.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/H21-Executive-Summary-Interactive-PDF-July-2016-V2.pdf">potent greenhouse gas methane</a> and building <a href="https://www.newscientist.com/article/2310917-net-zero-the-uk-is-building-its-last-big-gas-power-plant/#:%7E:text=One%20is%20Keadby%203%2C%20a,world%27s%20first%20hydrogen%20power%20station">more gas-fired power stations</a>.</p>
<p>Advocates of a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/geo-engineering-research-the-government-s-view/uk-governments-view-on-greenhouse-gas-removal-technologies-and-solar-radiation-management">greenhouse gas removal industry</a> which would scrub excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere now envisage a vast network of pipes and ships transporting captured CO₂ to storage facilities. One group known as the <a href="https://coalitionfornegativeemissions.org/">Coalition for Negative Emissions</a>, composed of energy firms and airlines among other companies, sees the potential in CCS to allow societies to “decarbonise while ensuring continued economic progress”. It also <a href="https://coalitionfornegativeemissions.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/The-Case-for-Negative-Emissions-Coalition-for-Negative-Emissions-report-FINAL.pdf">points out</a>, (fairly, in my opinion) that “the enabling infrastructure [has] significant scale-up times [and] this acceleration needs to start today”.</p>
<p>Amid all these breathless position papers and adverts, it can be easy to forget that pilot programmes for CCS have been plagued by <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/eab9f078-71ae-11e4-9048-00144feabdc0#axzz3L8Z1fKlp">cost-overruns</a> and <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/saskpower-abandons-carbon-capture-at-boundary-dam-4-and-5-1.4739107">operational failures</a>. CCS is still many years away from <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-oil-industrys-pivot-to-carbon-capture-and-storage-while-it-keeps-on-drilling-isnt-a-climate-change-solution-171791?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Imagine%20016&utm_content=Imagine%20016+CID_a71ef059d31714b91256ddaf5fc92913&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=a%20license%20to%20keep%20polluting">making a dent</a> in humanity’s emissions, even if everything goes much more smoothly than it has – repeatedly - in the past.</p>
<p>To use the possible commercial existence of CCS some time in the future as a reason to wave through a high-carbon development now, as Gove has done, is a good example of what some fellow academics have called “<a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac0749">mitigation deterrence</a>”.</p>
<p>Meaning, efforts at mitigating climate change (by reducing the amount of carbon spewed into the atmosphere) are deterred by the real or imagined existence of future technologies that might work. It’s the equivalent of smoking more and more cigarettes each day and gambling that a cure for cancer will exist by the time you need it.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Imagine weekly climate newsletter" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong><em>Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?</em></strong>
<br><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeTop">Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead.</a> Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeBottom">Join the 10,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.</a></em></p>
<hr><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/196242/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marc Hudson receives funding from the Industrial Decarbonisation Research and Innovation Centre</span></em></p>Here’s what I’ve learned from researching the history of UK climate policy.Marc Hudson, Visiting Fellow, SPRU, University of Sussex Business School, University of SussexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1947812022-11-28T14:59:15Z2022-11-28T14:59:15ZUniversal free school meals would make a huge difference to the cost-of-living crisis – here’s how<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/496716/original/file-20221122-15-vr6rbq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=17%2C8%2C5734%2C3819&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/pleasant-woman-giving-lunch-school-girl-605927558">Africa Studio/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The UK government’s recent <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/autumn-statement-2022-documents">autumn statement</a> set out several measures to help people with rapidly rising prices. These including increased benefit payments and an extension to the energy price cap, although at a less generous rate than currently guaranteed.</p>
<p><a href="https://foodfoundation.org.uk/publication/superpowers-free-school-meals-evidence-pack">Campaigners</a> will have been disappointed, though, at the lack of any announcement on another measure that could help many people with the cost of living crisis: an extension of entitlement to free school meals in England. </p>
<p>All children in reception, year one and year two in state schools in England are currently entitled to a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/universal-infant-free-school-meals-uifsm-2022-to-2023">free school meal</a> at lunchtime on weekdays in term time. For children in year three and above in England, only those whose <a href="https://www.gov.uk/apply-free-school-meals">parents receive benefit payments</a> are eligible. For those on universal credit, household earnings must be less than £7,400 per year. In the academic year 2021-22, <a href="https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/school-pupils-and-their-characteristics">23% of schoolchildren</a> at state schools were eligible for free school meals.</p>
<p>Extending free school meals to all primary and secondary school children with parents on universal credit would <a href="https://foodfoundation.org.uk/sites/default/files/2022-11/FSM%20Evidence%20Pack_0.pdf">cost around £477 million</a> a year. Providing them for all primary and secondary school children would require £1.8 billion a year. This is far less than the <a href="https://ifs.org.uk/articles/response-energy-price-guarantee">£100 billion estimated cost</a> for the first year of the energy price guarantee.</p>
<p>There is support for extending free school meals among government ministers. Levelling up secretary Michael Gove confirmed his support <a href="https://foodfoundation.org.uk/press-release/michael-gove-backs-extended-access-free-school-meals">for access to free school meals</a> to children of parents on universal credit, also saying that “in an ideal world” all children in primary school would have free school meals. The absence of this policy from the autumn statement was arguably a missed opportunity.</p>
<h2>Reaching families in need</h2>
<p>Extended means-tested or universal free school meals would put money back in the pockets of parents who are either currently purchasing school meals or preparing packed lunches. It would save households of two parents and two children <a href="https://doi.org/10.5526/misoc-2022-003">£37 per month on average</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Children in uniform eating lunch" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/496723/original/file-20221122-26-gjet9c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/496723/original/file-20221122-26-gjet9c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/496723/original/file-20221122-26-gjet9c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/496723/original/file-20221122-26-gjet9c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/496723/original/file-20221122-26-gjet9c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/496723/original/file-20221122-26-gjet9c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/496723/original/file-20221122-26-gjet9c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Free school meals save money for struggling families.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/schoolchildren-sitting-table-eating-cooked-lunch-284502557">Monkey Business Images/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Charity the Child Poverty Action Group has estimated that, under the current rules, <a href="https://cpag.org.uk/news-blogs/news-listings/800000-children-poverty-not-getting-free-school-meals">800,000 children</a> are living in poverty who are not eligible for free school meals. This figure is likely to rise, both because living costs continue to increase and because the earnings threshold for free school meals has <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/education/2022/nov/10/children-not-eligible-for-free-school-meals-going-hungry-say-teachers">not risen with inflation</a>. This means that working parents receiving pay rises may see their earnings increase above the threshold, even as the purchasing power of their salary decreases. </p>
<p>The threshold for free school meals means that a family with two children and earnings of £7,401 per year would not receive free school meals <a href="https://policyinpractice.co.uk/free-school-meals-should-be-extended-to-all-households-on-universal-credit/">worth £900 per year</a> – but they would if they earned a pound less. A “cliff edge” like this creates both hardship and a disincentive to increase household earnings. </p>
<p>Indeed this problem was part of why universal credit was created in the first place, as it is gradually reduced as earnings increase to avoid such a cliff edge. So the free school meals threshold undermines the effectiveness of universal credit.</p>
<h2>Helping the NHS</h2>
<p>What’s more, a major stated objective of the autumn statement was to “protect vital public services”. In practice this primarily meant increased spending on NHS care. However, extended means-tested or universal free school meals would also protect the NHS by helping to tackle tackling obesity. </p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubecp.2022.100016">My research</a> with colleagues at the University of Essex has shown that the national universal infant free school meal scheme increased the proportion of children deemed a “healthy weight” and reduced schoolchildren’s body mass index (BMI) throughout the reception year at school.</p>
<p>We have also found that when local authorities provide universal free school meals throughout primary school, both children in reception and year six have <a href="https://doi.org/10.5526/misoc-2022-003">reduced obesity</a>. The impacts are largest for children in year six who have received universal free school meals since they started primary school. </p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdab028">Research in Sweden</a> has shown that children exposed to universal free school meals throughout primary school had higher educational attainment, better health, and earned 3% more over their lifetimes. </p>
<p>Obesity cost the NHS an estimated <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/health-matters-obesity-and-the-food-environment/health-matters-obesity-and-the-food-environment--2">£6 billion in 2014-15</a>. This is projected to rise to £9.7 billion by 2050. So tackling <a href="https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/34319/1/cmo-special-report-childhood-obesity-october-2019%20%28redacted%29.pdf">childhood obesity</a> is vital. </p>
<p>Jeremy Hunt’s autumn statement gave the intention to bring economic growth by “investing in the UK’s people”. Universal or even extended free school meals would have been just such an investment.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/194781/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Angus Holford received funding for this work from the Nuffield Foundation (<a href="http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org">www.nuffieldfoundation.org</a>) and from MiSoC, the ESRC-funded Research Centre on Micro Social Change (ES/S012486/1). The views expressed are Angus Holford's and not those of the Nuffield Foundation or the Economic and Social Research Council. This work uses data from the National Child Measurement Programme, supplied by NHS Digital. The use of NHS Digital statistical data in this work does not imply the endorsement or quality assurance of NHS Digital in relation to the interpretation or analysis of the statistical data. Angus Holford is a member of the Labour Party but is writing in a personal capacity.</span></em></p>Widening access to free school meals would be an investment in England’s children.Angus Holford, Senior Research Fellow in the Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of EssexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1767392022-03-09T16:11:05Z2022-03-09T16:11:05ZHow grammar is taught in England should change<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/449260/original/file-20220301-13-2blbzy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C5946%2C3214&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/kids-writing-notes-classroom-535799062">goodluz/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The teaching of grammar – the ways that words are combined to make sentences – can be controversial. It often leads to debates about “correct English”, and can result in people being judged if their use of language deviates from this “correct” form.</p>
<p>Language is constantly changing, and this change makes it much more difficult to have straightforward ideas about what is “correct” and “incorrect”. Whether a person communicates in the most appropriate way for their audience is what matters. </p>
<p>England’s current national curriculum, implemented since 2014, introduced lots more grammar teaching to primary schools. It states that “Pupils should develop the stamina and skills to write at length, with accurate spelling and punctuation. They should be taught the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-primary-curriculum">correct use of grammar</a>”. Learning the technical terms of grammar is seen as a key component in writing well.</p>
<p>Children aged six to seven must be taught not only to write appropriate sentences but also are expected to learn the meaning of grammatical terms, such as <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/topics/zbkcvk7/articles/z97r2nb">statement</a>, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/topics/zrqqtfr/articles/z8strwx">command</a> and <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/topics/zrqqtfr/articles/z3dbg82">tense</a>. They are required to recognise words and phrases that are described by these terms. </p>
<p>My <a href="https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10144257/">new research</a>, conducted with colleagues, investigated whether this new approach to teaching grammar to help writing has been effective. We found that it was not effective to improve six and seven-year-old children’s narrative writing – joining <a href="https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3315">previous research</a> that has failed to find a positive impact of a range of ways of teaching grammar to improve writing. These findings indicate that the UK government needs to look again at the teaching of grammar in schools. </p>
<h2>In the classroom</h2>
<p>Our research was the first of its kind worldwide to examine how the writing of pupils in year two (aged six to seven) might benefit from grammar teaching. About 1,700 primary school children and 70 teachers across 70 schools took part in our study. </p>
<p>We split the teachers and their classes into two groups. One carried on with lessons as normal. The other group used a <a href="http://englicious.org">new set of resources</a> for teaching grammar which linked the grammar teaching more closely with the pupils’ practising of writing. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Children raising hands while teacher shows book" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/449517/original/file-20220302-27-pitd9k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/449517/original/file-20220302-27-pitd9k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/449517/original/file-20220302-27-pitd9k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/449517/original/file-20220302-27-pitd9k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/449517/original/file-20220302-27-pitd9k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/449517/original/file-20220302-27-pitd9k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/449517/original/file-20220302-27-pitd9k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The research was conducted with year two teachers and pupils.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/elementary-pupils-wearing-uniform-raise-hands-1451264690">Monkey Business Images/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Both sets of pupils took writing tests at the beginning of the study and at the end, after 10 weeks of grammar lessons. These tests included a narrative writing test, where they were given a topic, asked to briefly plan a piece of writing then write for about 20 minutes. </p>
<p>The children also took a sentence generation test, where they were given two word prompts which they had to use to generate as many new sentences that contained the words as they could. Our research also included surveys, interviews and observations of teachers’ lessons.</p>
<p>The resources of England’s most recent grammar intervention – called Englicious – use modern linguistics to teach grammar in a fun, hands-on way. For example, pupils can manipulate words, phrases and sentences on a digital whiteboard.</p>
<p>In general, the teachers thought that Englicious was a very good approach which helped them to deliver the national curriculum programmes of study for grammar, and helped with their grammar teaching. However, the test results of the experimental trial did not find an improvement in the pupils’ narrative writing as a result of the grammar intervention. On the other hand, there was a positive effect shown in the sentence generation test, and although the result was not statistically significant it can be seen as encouraging.</p>
<p>At any rate, the lack of impact of grammar teaching on pupils’ writing raises questions about the extensive grammar specifications that are part of England’s national curriculum. </p>
<h2>Focus on grammar</h2>
<p>We know, thanks to the records kept by one of the expert advisers to former Education Secretary Michael Gove, that decisions about England’s current national curriculum were made that <a href="https://www.bera.ac.uk/bera-in-the-news/background-to-michael-goves-response-to-the-report-of-the-expert-panel-for-the-national-curriculum-review-in-england">did not fit</a> with research evidence about curriculum, teaching and assessment. For example, the expert panel advising on the curriculum argued that oral language was as important as reading and writing and should be given the same attention in the programmes of study. It was <a href="https://www.tes.com/magazine/archived/why-spoken-language-key-accessing-curriculum">not given</a> this attention in <a href="https://journals.lwbooks.co.uk/FORUM/vol-57-issue-1/article-6228">the curriculum</a>. </p>
<p>The extensive grammar requirements in the national curriculum, including their link with a particular view of correct English – defined as “standard English” in the national curriculum – represents an unacceptably ideological influence on the curriculum. </p>
<p>There are a <a href="https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/berj.3315">range of ways</a> of teaching writing that do have a positive impact. These include teaching that focuses on the processes of writing such as doing more than one draft of a piece of writing; teaching writing strategies such as doing an outline plan before starting writing; and using computers to support drafting of writing.</p>
<p>As a result of the findings from our research, and the findings from previous research on grammar and writing, we conclude that a review of the requirements for grammar in England’s national curriculum is needed. The national curriculum needs to reflect robust evidence on what works much more closely. Until such a review is undertaken, children in England are unlikely to be receiving the optimal teaching of writing that they deserve.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/176739/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dominic Wyse received funding from the Nuffield Foundation for the Grammar and Writing research. He also currently receives funding from The Helen Hamlyn Trust and The Leverhulme Trust. He has also just started work on an independent commission on primary assessment funded by the National Education Union. </span></em></p>Our research found that focused grammar teaching didn’t improve children’s writing.Dominic Wyse, Professor of Education, UCLLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1763862022-02-04T11:50:33Z2022-02-04T11:50:33ZLevelling up: four problems with Boris Johnson’s flagship project<p>The UK government has revealed its <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1052046/Executive_Summary.pdf">plan</a> to level up the country – a white paper setting out policies to tackle inequality between places.</p>
<p>The plan comes at a defining moment. It’s widely seen as the key to holding on to the <a href="https://theconversation.com/hartlepool-by-election-inside-the-new-northern-conservatism-160393">constituencies</a> that delivered victory to the Conservatives in the last election. But to succeed, it has to work in practice. All the signs in this respect point to failure. The plan is neither ambitious enough nor coherent enough to work.</p>
<h2>The plan digested</h2>
<p>To understand what the government is trying to do, we need to understand how it is setting out the problem. It identifies <a href="https://www.bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk/research/research-projects/wealth-economy-social-and-natural-capital/">six “capitals”</a>: physical capital (e.g. infrastructure and housing), human capital (e.g. skills and health), intangible capital (e.g. ideas and innovations), financial capital (e.g. business finance), social capital (e.g. community and trust), and institutional capital (e.g. local leadership). The places that have an abundance of these are in a virtuous circle, where the different capitals reinforce one another. Places that are struggling are in downward spirals. The idea is to increase the UK’s stock of these capitals and, crucially, to begin to close the gap between the best and worst performing areas by <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/levelling-up-plan-for-longer-happier-lives-by-2030-t6kxx79xk">2030</a>.</p>
<p>The proposed solutions are organised into four areas. </p>
<p>There are policies that aim to grow the private sector to boost productivity, pay, jobs and living standards. Policies here include <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/13/low-taxes-and-levelling-up-the-great-freeport-experiment-comes-to-teesside">freeports</a>, redistribution of R&D investment and transport improvements. </p>
<p>Next, policies to spread opportunities and improve public services, including 55 “education investment areas” and measures to improve skills. Improving health through changes to school meals and a new <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2021-11-16/debates/83AAB386-45EA-4E28-AC4A-99B5FCED9C47/TobaccoControlPlan">tobacco control</a> plan are also part of this area.</p>
<p>Third, there are policies to restore a sense of community and local pride, including 20 <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/20-town-and-city-centres-in-england-transformed-through-ambitious-regeneration-projects">town regeneration projects</a>, along with a range of smaller projects, such as new football pitches and out-of-school activities. There are also attempts to redistribute housing investment outside of London and create minimum standards for rented homes. </p>
<p>Finally, there are policies to empower local leaders and communities, spreading devolution by negotiating <a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/devolution-county-deals">county devolution deals</a> led by county “governors”, and to deepen existing English devolution.</p>
<p>But while many of these aims are laudable, the plan is ultimately flawed – in four important ways. </p>
<h2>Problem 1: big problem, small solutions</h2>
<p>On the plus side, the levelling up policy is grounded in a thorough base of research on spatial inequality in the UK. There is a good understanding of the scale and nature of the challenge ahead. However, this is not matched by the scale of investment or the proposed solutions. Missing are a clear set of mechanisms that break the vicious cycles in places that are lacking in the “six capitals”.</p>
<h2>Problem 2: where are the local strategies?</h2>
<p>This policy is huge. The sheer range of policies shows that the government has realised that levelling up has to be truly cross-sector if it is to work.</p>
<p>However, this is not a cross-sector strategy for each place but a disjointed and centrally designed package. The policies target lots of issues but do not coherently target individual places. The “six capitals” and “four policy areas” may offer a coherent system of thought for those at the centre but they sit alongside an incoherent collection of policies. And it’s the latter that really matter to a town or city that feels left behind.</p>
<p>This kind of work has to be done at the local level because places face different challenges and have different growth potential. <a href="https://lipsit.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Levelling-up-Report-update-May-2021.pdf">Our research shows</a>, for example, that matching the supply and demand of skills at a high level is crucial for turning around failing local economies. But this only works if a local place uses a strategy that takes account of both the structure of the economy (skills demand) and the system of education and training (skills supply). Without this, our research shows that places resort to focusing on job numbers rather than quality and productivity – and risk being pulled into a low-productivity, low-skills equilibrium.</p>
<h2>Problem 3: London is still in control</h2>
<p>The UK is the most centralised political economy in the OECD. One of the biggest problems is that levelling up is, in essence, another <a href="https://lipsit.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/FINAL-Levelling-up-Report-digital.pdf">centrally designed programme of interventions</a>, some of which will be delivered by local government. The devolution plans are welcome but ultimately, levelling up is going to happen from Whitehall. In fact, devolution and reforms to local government are just one of the 12 listed missions that make up the levelling up agenda (and incidentally the twelfth). This mission should have been the central theme through which everything else would be delivered. And it needs to happen first rather than being drawn out for another decade.</p>
<h2>Problem 4: some plans will makes things worse</h2>
<p>The existing system for distributing money is highly complex and the plan is to simplify it – which is a positive step. However, it still entails the centre striking deals with local areas and funding projects through competitive bidding. This approach is highly inefficient, and is disliked by those in local government. The places best positioned to bid and make deals are not necessarily the places that need levelling up, so inequality could be aggravated. Instead, money should be allocated through a stable funding formula that prioritises places that are most in need.</p>
<p>Ultimately, <a href="https://lipsit.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/FINAL-Levelling-up-Report-digital.pdf">our research</a> shows that what’s needed are reforms to how local areas and regions are funded, governed, and organised to provide a more solid structure on which to build.</p>
<p>Otherwise levelling up is likely to lead to a scatter gun approach. Small improvements will be made here and there that do not connect together into a virtuous cycle of transformational change. It’s doubtful that this will make enough people feel that their local area has really improved – and it is on this feeling that the government’s future electoral hopes hang.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/176386/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The research underpinning this paper has been conducted by the LIPSIT project, which is funded by the ESRC.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nigel Driffield receives funding from ESRC </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nigel Gilbert receives funding from ESRC, NERC and the Volkswagen Foundation. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Simon Collinson receives funding from Research England, the ESRC and AHRC. All sit within the UKRI.</span></em></p>A white paper that is central to the government’s mission – but lacks coherence.Jack Newman, Research Associate, Bennett Institute for Public Policy, University of CambridgeNigel Driffield, Professor of international business, Warwick Business School, University of WarwickNigel Gilbert, Professor of Sociology, University of SurreySimon Collinson, Deputy Pro-Vice Chancellor and Professor of International Business, University of BirminghamLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1762912022-02-03T16:05:52Z2022-02-03T16:05:52ZWill extra mayors level up left-behind regions? What the evidence tells us<p>Adding more mayors to English regions is central to the UK government’s “levelling up” plan. From <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-speech-at-manchester-science-and-industry-museum">day one</a>, part of the vision has been to expand mayoral devolution – giving more powers to regional combined authorities, rather than just being ruled by Whitehall. </p>
<p>Greater Manchester, the West Midlands and a handful of other areas have had mayors for some time, but the levelling up white paper <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-unveils-levelling-up-plan-that-will-transform-uk">promises</a> that every English area that wants “London-style” powers and a mayor will be able to get one. This will involve establishing a combined authority of willing local councils, who agree on a devolution deal and then elect a mayor.</p>
<p>The government aim is to level up the nation’s “left behind” regions by 2030. On this timeline, the first to move to a new mayoral model will have eight years to complete their levelling up missions – the same time frame as those places that received devolution under the 2014 <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/chancellor-we-need-a-northern-powerhouse">“Northern Powerhouse” strategy</a>. </p>
<p>With that in mind, now is a good time to take stock of what mayoral models have actually been able to achieve over the last eight years, and learn from their mistakes. </p>
<h2>Slow burn</h2>
<p>The first thing to acknowledge is that progress will not be immediate. The first devolution deals were agreed in 2014 and 2015, and the first slate of metro mayors were elected in 2017. On this trajectory, it seems unlikely that all nine new mayors will be ready to sit by 2023, and some elections would also take place in 2024. This would give the new mayors six years to deliver levelling up, not eight.</p>
<p>Success requires a level of institution building. Combined authorities must be created from a standing start, and this takes time. Offices must be established, and staff must be recruited. Some gaps can be papered over by borrowing staff from local authorities, but a smooth-running machine can take a few years to get going. Beginning the process of devolution also doesn’t mean that it’s a done deal, and the north east famously <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/08/north-east-england-devolution-deal-off-the-table-sajid-javid">had its devolution deal withdrawn</a> after local partners failed to agree on the form it would take. </p>
<p>Once the combined authority is created, there is still the small matter of electing a mayor, and we have seen how it took the 2017 crop of metro mayors several years to find their feet, get to grips with their powers and start truly pressing forward. At its most extreme, the mayor of the Sheffield City Region, Dan Jarvis, spent <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-58626488">two years working without a salary</a> whilst the details of the devolution deal were fleshed out.</p>
<p>Even then, life as a metro mayor is not all smooth sailing. Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham is the mayoral poster boy, and has made notable headway in some aspects of transport policy, including active travel and the creation of a publicly owned bus model. But equally, he has had bruising defeats on <a href="https://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/news/blow-for-gmsf-as-stockport-quits/">his proposed Greater Manchester spatial strategy</a> and plans to establish a <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-59893092">clean air zone</a>. </p>
<p>The new intake of mayors won’t be exempt from challenges like this, and with the emphasis shifting to counties with more rural areas, we can expect debates about housing in the green belt to intensify. There is no guarantee a mayor will soothe open wounds and the new mayors will have to balance the need to deliver against housing targets with local authorities and councillors who may not be as enthusiastic to see new houses built in their area. Indeed it is this opposition which is widely viewed as causing the demise of the government’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/11/ministers-to-ditch-overhaul-of-planning-laws-after-criticism">proposed planning reforms</a> late last year. </p>
<h2>Mayor who?</h2>
<p>Proponents of the mayoral model would argue that a single democratically-elected leader provides a figurehead with legitimacy and accountability. This, the argument goes, means they can stand up for their area, it is no coincidence that many existing metro mayors are former MPs who campaigned on being able to unlock doors in Westminster.</p>
<p>In practice, even amid a growing field, only Burnham could be described as a mayoral A-lister, and this relies heavily on his previous name recognition as a government minister. That few other mayors can hope to attain the same fame might be a blessing in disguise for the government, given that Burnham uses his profile to be a persistent thorn in national government’s side.</p>
<p>Overall, early evidence suggests that the push towards mayoral governance has been largely successful. The mayors suffer few high-profile detractors, <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/e724ec26-fdd7-4d40-8aa4-da3690f4cc6d">they are popular with their public</a>, and the 2017 intake <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/08/labours-victories-show-importance-of-localism-and-positive-vision">largely did well at the ballot box</a> in the 2021 local elections. </p>
<p>Ultimately, and though it’s easy to see why “more of the same” is a simple tonic to offer, we should not lose sight of the fact the city-regional mayoralties are complex organisations that have taken time to set up. An eight-year deadline is not as long as it appears. Come 2030, many areas will find themselves not levelled up, but still climbing the stairs.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/176291/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alex Nurse does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>More city region mayors are part of the government’s plan to level up, but the short timeline could hinder their success.Alex Nurse, Lecturer in Planning, University of LiverpoolLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1762822022-02-02T16:47:59Z2022-02-02T16:47:59ZLevelling up: ‘this won’t tackle inequality without Treasury buy-in’ – expert Q&A<p><em>More than two years after its landslide election victory, the UK government has <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60216307">finally unveiled</a> its <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/levelling-up-government-to-publish-12-missions-in-blueprint-for-spreading-opportunity-across-the-uk-12530256">white paper</a> for narrowing the gap between the richest and poorest parts of the country.</em> </p>
<p><em>The levelling up secretary, Michael Gove, has told the Commons that his upcoming Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill is to be based around 12 interrelated missions. These include increasing healthy life expectancy everywhere by five years by 2035; increasing pay, productivity and employment everywhere by 2030; a big push for reducing crime, focusing on the most disadvantaged areas; and offering mayors and far-reaching devolution powers to any region that wants it.</em> </p>
<p><em>There are plans to eliminate illiteracy and innumeracy by refocusing education spending towards the poorest areas, as well as policies to improve transport, home ownership, broadband and research and development. The government has also confirmed that Wolverhampton and Sheffield will be the first two areas of 20 to receive money from a £1.5 billion brownfield fund to help drive regeneration in former industrial areas.</em> </p>
<p><em>So what does all this add up to? We asked finance and economy specialist Steve Schifferes to react.</em></p>
<p><strong>How did we get to this point?</strong></p>
<p>UK governments have been struggling on how to address regional economic disparities with limited success for the past 100 years. In the 1930s, the government designated for extra assistance some “special areas” – including Tyneside, south Wales and Scotland, which had been blighted by mass unemployment. </p>
<p>While regional disparities diminished during the economic boom in the 1950s, they returned with the de-industrialisation that came to a head under Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s. </p>
<p>In the next 40 years, both Conservative and Labour governments introduced a number of schemes to tackle this issue but with only limited impact. These included <a href="https://www.centreforcities.org/blog/enterprise-zones-the-forgotten-legacy-of-lady-thatcher/">enterprise zones</a> with tax benefits to encourage inward investment – which led to Nissan moving to Sunderland in 1984, Toyota to Derby in 1992 and LG Corporation to south Wales in 1996. </p>
<p>In the New Labour era, <a href="https://journals.openedition.org/osb/1143">regional development agencies</a> were created to plan and promote regional economic growth. These were replaced by the <a href="https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN07159/SN07159.pdf">2010 coalition government</a> by local enterprise partnerships and a Regional Growth Fund. These continued under Theresa May, who <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/statement-from-the-new-prime-minister-theresa-may">defined her purpose</a> as “making Britain a country that works for everyone” focusing on the those who were “just managing”. </p>
<p><strong>What do you make of the new strategy?</strong></p>
<p>What’s striking is the tremendous variation in scope of its key objectives. You have huge and very welcome ambitions such as reducing the gap in healthy life expectancy, boosting productivity and reducing crime in the poorest areas. But it’s not quite clear how these will be realised, and having goals for 2030 or 2035 are too far in the future to hold this government to account. </p>
<p>But at the same time, some of the 12 missions are much more limited, such as 200,000 more people completing high-quality skills training in England each year. I question how this list was drawn up and whether some departments have different approaches to others – I don’t get a sense of a coherent central strategy. </p>
<p>Some ambitions are very vague, such as increasing people’s “pride of place”. That’s difficult to measure and it’s hard to know what success would look like. And other measures, such as long-term investment in <a href="http://www.civilexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Good-Place-Report-Final.pdf">social</a> as well as physical infrastructure, have been left out.</p>
<p>Another issue is that this strategy is all about disparities between regions, not within them. But <a href="https://ifs.org.uk/publications/14969">the disparities</a> between the richest and poorest within big cities such as Glasgow or London are bigger than those between the richest and poorest regions. </p>
<p>In other words, this strategy doesn’t look much at income inequality, which is <a href="https://www.health.org.uk/publications/build-back-fairer-the-covid-19-marmot-review">the key</a> to tackling inequalities in health and education. Helping <a href="https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/uk-poverty-2022">poor people</a> who, faced with cuts in universal credit, are struggling to afford good food, childcare or access to early years education, will be crucial to improving their families’ life chances. This is why it is important to prioritise reducing income inequalities within regions too.</p>
<p><strong>Will more devolution help levelling up?</strong></p>
<p>The government is certainly putting a big emphasis on the value of devolving more powers to new regional units of local government. Yet its thinking seems unclear because it is letting every area decide exactly what new powers – if any – it wants. Also, the government isn’t proposing any extra money to restore the years of cuts to local government spending, or any extra powers for local authorities to raise or borrow more money themselves. </p>
<p>The Treasury is also keeping control of any new funding streams, which will be doled out on a discretionary basis. This is a curious way of devolving more power. There are <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2022/feb/02/levelling-up-funding-inequality-exposed-by-guardian-research">already fears</a> that this will become about patronage, with the government prioritising its constituencies in the traditional “red wall” seats in the north of England that it won in 2019. </p>
<p><strong>Are Labour right about the lack of money?</strong></p>
<p>It certainly appears that way. The government, particularly the Treasury, has refused to commit any extra money for levelling up, apart from that already announced in the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043688/Budget_AB2021_Print.pdf">2021 spending review</a>, which sets government spending for the next three years from this coming April.</p>
<p>When asked about money on the <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qj9z">BBC Radio 4 Today programme</a>, Michael Gove quoted The Rolling Stones song, You Can’t Always Get What You Want. It sounded like an acknowledgement of the limits of his ambition. And yet, as government levelling up advisor Andy Haldane <a href="https://www.centreforcities.org/levelling-up/">pointed out</a> after looking into Germany’s attempts to bring up the east after reunification, even after a huge long-term project involving more than £1 trillion over three decades, the gap is still proving <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/eastern-germany-still-lags-three-decades-after-reunification-study/a-47769117">difficult to shift</a>. </p>
<p>The lack of Treasury buy-in also makes me wonder about whether Gove has enough clout to succeed. His department is traditionally not a powerful one, and it needs to persuade other departments to make fundamental policy shifts to fulfil his brief, which could be challenging. For example, will spending on public health and prevention – a key to improving healthy life expectancy – be substantially increased at a time when the health secretary’s main priority is arguably resolving problems in acute care?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/176282/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Steve Schifferes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The levelling up secretary has unveiled some very big ambitions, but there are still more questions than answers.Steve Schifferes, Honorary Research Fellow, City Political Economy Research Centre; Professor of Financial Journalism, 2009-2017, City, University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1692162021-10-06T15:12:01Z2021-10-06T15:12:01ZFive things we learned about levelling up from the Conservative party conference<p>Every political party relies on slogans to sell their policies and justify their decisions. Most vanish instantly into the void, but some are more special. These are the slogans that hold the others together. They are designed to sell not just a policy, but a whole programme for government. These are the “mantras”.</p>
<p>By now it is generally agreed that part of the UK’s current Conservative government electoral successes can be attributed to its promise to “level up” the nation. By now, the term has been used to the point of cliché. But at their annual conference in Manchester, the Conservatives had appeared to be about to add some meaningful detail to their strategy. Did they succeed?</p>
<p>In a decade of Conservatives mantras, we have heard “the big society”, “balance the books”, “long-term economic plan”, “strong and stable”, “get Brexit done”, and “build back better”. Much like these other mantras, “levelling up” is an attempt to communicate a whole policy agenda in a short phrase, while <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1467-923X.13010">appealing to</a> as many people as possible. </p>
<p>However, “levelling up” is proving to be a real problem for the government, because they find it so difficult to define and yet so important to deliver. This problem has been a central undercurrent at this year’s conference. Here are five things we’ve learned.</p>
<p><strong>1. Some progress but the definition remains ambiguous</strong></p>
<p>At the conference, we heard from both Michael Gove and Neil O'Brien, both recently installed at the Department for Levelling Up, Housing, and Communities. They sang from the same hymn sheet with a four-part definition of levelling up: (1) “empower local leaders and communities”; (2) “raise living standards, especially where they are lower” by “growing the private sector”; (3) “spread opportunity” and “improve public services, especially where they are weaker”; (4) “give people the resources necessary to enhance the pride they feel in the place they live”.</p>
<p>While this takes us closer to an accepted definition of levelling up, it has really only organised the various ambiguities into four groups. What does it mean, for example, to “raise living standards”? Is this about poverty, health, wages, housing, neighbourhoods, crime or something else? That remains unclear. </p>
<p><strong>2. The struggle over the definition is about departmental spending</strong></p>
<p>In a fringe meeting at the conference, Conservative peer David Willetts explained how the meaning of levelling up may ultimately be decided at the Treasury. Ahead of the spending review, all the different departments of government are jostling for resources. All of them are framing their pitch in relation to “levelling up” in order to secure money from the Treasury. This means that every minister is trying to stretch “levelling up” in their own direction. This, in turn, suggests that the upcoming spending review may be as important as the long-anticipated <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-to-publish-levelling-up-white-paper">levelling up white paper</a>. The two may well appear in the same week.</p>
<p><strong>3. Some form of devolution or local government reorganisation is likely to be involved</strong></p>
<p>Gove’s speech re-emphasised the importance of local pride and local leadership in the levelling up agenda, making it clear that local delivery would be key. Conservative mayor of the West Midlands, Andy Street, declared his optimism that more powers and resources were on their way to local leaders. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://lipsit.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/FINAL-Levelling-up-Report-digital.pdf">project report</a> I have produced with colleagues, launched at the conference, outlined how the current problems in local and regional government will prevent the delivery of levelling up. There remain big questions about whether “strengthening local leadership” will resolve these. The way that funding is distributed needs to be addressed, as does the way devolution is delivered in a <a href="https://www.ippr.org/blog/the-devolution-parliament">piecemeal deal-based way</a>, often actually increasing geographical inequalities.</p>
<p><strong>4. Money is going to be tight</strong></p>
<p>Among the members of the Conservative party who attended the conference, one of the most common themes was taxation. There are big worries that levelling up will mean further tax increases. This is going down like a lead balloon on the doorstep in Conservative heartlands. </p>
<p>Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s speech justified some tax and spending increases, but more forcefully spoke of “fiscal responsibility”, calling back to the austerity of the George Osborne era. He argued that “the public finances must be put back on a sustainable footing”. This does not seem to be opening up space for <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/aug/15/the-cost-of-boris-johnsons-levelling-up-2tn-says-uk-thinktank">the vast spending</a> that levelling up may require.</p>
<p><strong>5. No Conservative is in a rush to explain how levelling up should be measured</strong></p>
<p>The ambiguities of levelling up are most problematic in the absence of any discernible measures of success. There are so many different ways to measure “living standards” that it will be very difficult for anyone to hold the government to account. It’s still possible that these measures will appear in time, but despite framing this as the levelling up conference, the party of government continues to avoid scrutiny. Without an understanding of how success should be measured, we will have to take the government’s word for it.</p>
<p>Overall, very little has changed in Boris Johnson’s rhetoric on levelling up since <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-prime-ministers-levelling-up-speech-15-july-2021">his speech in July</a>. It is still about tackling geographical inequalities. And Johnson continues to hold on to the idea that deprived places can all be brought up to the level of prosperous places without any major redistributions of wealth. Though this seems far-fetched, we will await answers in the forthcoming spending review and levelling up white paper.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/169216/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jack Newman is a Research Fellow at the University of Surrey, working on the LIPSIT project, which is funded by the ESRC.</span></em></p>Boris Johnson’s party were aiming to show what they actually mean by this ubiquitous mantra. Was it a success?Jack Newman, Research Fellow, Department of Sociology, University of SurreyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1488362020-11-12T11:11:03Z2020-11-12T11:11:03ZTime to ditch the Dominic Cummings technocratic, mechanical vision of government<p>If crises bring with them new opportunities to think afresh, then the combined impact of Brexit and COVID has been to focus attention on the capacity and structure of the British state. This rethinking is increasingly framed in terms <a href="https://www.governsmarter.org/#:%7E:text=The%20Commission%20for%20Smart%20Government%20is%20an%20independent,consider%20how%20to%20make%20public%20administration%20more%20effective.">of “smart government”</a>. Dominic Cummings, the prime minister’s <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54925322">now departing</a> chief adviser, has been at the centre of a drive to <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/smartergov">“harness the power of data and technology”</a> at every turn. Technology has a role to play in modern government, but what Cummings seems intent on fashioning appears something closer to a populist technocracy based on a belief in algorithmic governance.</p>
<p>Our argument is simply that this logic, and these ideas, <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/s41293-020-00148-2">should be dropped</a>. Indeed, a succession of recent failures and fiascoes has only underlined the paucity of the intellectual thinking behind this agenda as well as its lack of emotional intelligence.</p>
<p>Cummings appears to see British government as defined by institutionalised failure and dysfunctionality – nothing more, nothing less. What’s needed is strong “flexible, adaptive and empirical” leadership and the mastery of technology in order to control uncertainty. More than just “reform” is needed – only “transformative reform” will do. Cummings has described this in <a href="https://dominiccummings.com/2014/10/">his blog</a> in the following terms:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Most of our politics is still conducted with the morality and the language of the simple primitive hunter-gatherer tribe … Our ‘chimp politics’ has an evolutionary logic: our powerful evolved instinct to conform to a group view is a flip-side of our evolved in-group solidarity and hostility to out-groups … This partly explains the persistent popularity of collectivist policies … and why ‘groupthink’ is a recurring disaster.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Cummings has sat at the centre of a powerful hub-and-spoke model of governance that promotes a strident data-driven model of technocratic depoliticised governance. For every problem there is, in his worldview, a metric. For every social challenge, there is an algorithm. Data and technology are, as might be expected, the twin pillars of this (latest) revolution in government which, in turn, creates a need to recruit a new technological elite.</p>
<p>In July, Michael Gove delivered a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-privilege-of-public-service-given-as-the-ditchley-annual-lecture">lecture</a> in which he <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/s41293-020-00148-2?wt_mc=Internal.Event.1.SEM.ArticleAuthorOnlineFirst&utm_source=ArticleAuthorOnlineFirst&utm_medium=email&utm_content=AA_en_06082018&ArticleAuthorOnlineFirst_20201019">enthused about these ideas</a>. Gove said he wants more government decision makers “to feel comfortable discussing the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/monte-carlo-method">Monte Carlo method</a> or Bayesian statistics”. This is the scientisation of politics; the belief in a pure, structured, depoliticised, technocratic and highly mechanical view of decision-making. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KJDvMwBd-_M?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Michael Gove’s Ditchley lecture.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>His view offers a glimpse of a rather unattractive model of hybrid populist technocracy that is devoid of emotional content and lacking political understanding. It deifies a rather pure model of brutal governing efficiency that is more nightmare than vision. It is a form of sacrificial statecraft because it sacrifices any understanding of <a href="https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bup/eas/2020/00000002/00000001/art00003">why feelings so often trump facts</a> in politics.</p>
<h2>When algorithms go wrong</h2>
<p>The blatant failure of algorithmic governance during the A-levels and GCSE fiasco of August 2020 is a prime example of where all this goes wrong. Computers are good at crunching big data, but their digits and dashes will at some point be translated into a real-world impact on someone’s life. To pretend that algorithms provide a somehow neutral, technical or depoliticised way of taking difficult decisions is torpedoed by the wealth of evidence on embedded biases and how these tend to mirror preexisting structural inequalities. Prime Minister Boris Johnson blamed a <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-53923279">“mutant algorithm”</a> for the exams crisis. There is no sign that the broader lesson has been learned. </p>
<p>The government’s <a href="https://www.building.co.uk/communities/the-governments-algorithm-for-homes-may-be-its-next-a-level-style-fiasco/5107924.article">“algorithm for homes”</a> could be its next policy fiasco. Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick’s newly announced plans to build more homes propose replacing the current method for determining housing need by introducing an algorithm which will determine targets for every English region based on relative affordability and the extent of development in those areas. Sounds great until you dig into the data and discover that instead of “levelling-up” the new algorithm will <a href="https://lichfields.uk/blog/2020/august/17/levelling-up-what-does-the-new-standard-method-mean-for-yorkshire-and-the-humber?west-mids">continue to concentrate growth in wealthier regions</a>.</p>
<p>Technology, evidence and big data may well have a role to play in informing government policy, but let’s not pretend that it offers simple answers to complex problems. </p>
<p>We must also recognise that this is all part of a pattern of centralisation around Johnson – and to a large extent around Cummings. <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/04/mission-control-dominic-cummings-nasa-mission-control-mistakes-space">From the Nasa-style mission control “hub” in 70 Whitehall</a> complete with floor-to-ceiling screens, real-time data and rolling news coverage, through to the decision to centralise government communications and hold Whitehouse-style televised daily press briefings. A new machine is being built almost by stealth. </p>
<p>And the metaphor of a machine is really quite apt. As a more centralised, presidential and technology-driven “hub” takes shape, then, so the capacity of local MPs or regional leaders to question the system declines.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, it’s not surprising that public officials have been left unable to understand the rules of the game. Where they used to be expected to keep their heads down, gain experience and expertise and remain politically neutral, <a href="https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/019926967X.001.0001/acprof-9780199269679-chapter-1">times appear to be changing</a>. When problems occur, it is officials that are sacrificed and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/28/crisis-boris-johnson-blame-purge-civil-servants">several permanent secretaries</a> have decided this is a game they don’t want to play. Political office-holders are landing top public roles, which <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/sep/20/dido-harding-appointment-corrupting-our-constitution-lord-falconer">raises serious concerns</a>. Mary “Dido” Harding’s appointment to lead the new National Institute for Health Protection, for example, is not only questionable because she sits as a Tory backbench peer but also because her performance leading NHS track and trace has been less than impressive – certainly not “world class”. Even the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2020/aug/18/uk-coronavirus-live-gavin-williamson-criticised-over-exam-results-u-turn">health secretary’s defence</a> of her appointment was far from convincing.</p>
<p>But maybe that’s the problem. The UK has, as <a href="https://consoc.org.uk/publications/good-chaps-no-more-safeguarding-the-constitution-in-stressful-times-by-andrew-blick-and-peter-hennessy/">Peter Hennessy has eloquently warned</a>, a constitution that relies on the “good chaps theory of government”. That structure now looks incredibly vulnerable when faced with a prime minister and key advisers who reject the rules, lack self-restraint and engage in <a href="https://academic.oup.com/pa/article/73/Supplement_1/225/5910271?guestAccessKey=2a907e1c-69a0-4e39-8a0d-0d575bee4974">populist posturing</a>. The result is sacrificial statecraft wrapped around a naive vision of populist technology. <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/s41293-020-00148-2">Ditch it now</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/148836/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Blunkett is affiliated with a number of organisations - please see the Lords Register for full disclosure. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew Flinders does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Politics cannot be separated from emotion, as the past few months have clearly shown.Matthew Flinders, Founding Director of the Sir Bernard Crick Centre for the Public Understanding of Politics, University of SheffieldDavid Blunkett, Professor of Politics in Practice, University of SheffieldLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1264732019-11-11T15:39:04Z2019-11-11T15:39:04ZWill drug prices rise following a UK-US trade deal?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300852/original/file-20191108-194637-h8smwu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">h</span> </figcaption></figure><blockquote>
<p>It doesn’t matter who’s in the White House or what they ask for, there is no way in any deal that we will see drug prices rise or put the NHS anywhere near the table.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Michael Gove, Conservative politician, November 5 2019</strong></p>
<p>Michael Gove’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/nov/05/general-election-news-latest-corbyn-brexit-speech-gove-says-labours-claim-uk-us-trade-deal-cost-cost-nhs-500m-per-week-nonsense-live-news?page=with:block-5dc148e18f08e9e197c3969f#block-5dc148e18f08e9e197c3969f">denials</a> that the NHS or UK drug prices will be part of any negotiation lacks credibility, given the recent and clearly stated <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/CEA-Rx-White-Paper-Final2.pdf">US policy objectives</a> (which are to ensure other countries pay higher prices for US drugs in future trade deals), the fact the US has included drug prices in other trade deals with <a href="https://pharmaphorum.com/views-analysis-market-access/secret-us-uk-talks-on-drug-pricing-revealed/">Canada, Mexico and South Korea</a> and that a former trade negotiator for US president Donald Trump said that he <a href="https://pharmaphorum.com/views-analysis-market-access/secret-us-uk-talks-on-drug-pricing-revealed/">doesn’t understand</a> what the UK’s prime minister meant when he said that the NHS was not on the table earlier this year. </p>
<p>Whatever denials might be made in a general election campaign about whether the NHS or drug prices have been put “on the table” in past or future discussions, any attempts to weaken how the NHS assesses new drugs or removes the rebates currently being paid to the NHS as part of the pharmaceutical price regulation scheme would have a serious impact on the health of NHS patients. </p>
<h2>Quite clear</h2>
<p>There have been reports of <a href="https://pharmaphorum.com/views-analysis-market-access/secret-us-uk-talks-on-drug-pricing-revealed/">six meetings between UK and US trade officials</a> where the NHS and the prices of US drugs that the NHS buys have been discussed. The agenda and minutes of these meetings are not publicly available so the details of these discussions remain unknown. However, US objectives in any trade negotiation are quite clearly set out in a report from a <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea">body appointed by the White House</a>.</p>
<p>The report from the Council of Economic Advisers outlines how US drug companies will reduce domestic prices in return for the administration ensuring they can sell their drugs to foreign countries at higher undiscounted prices in any future trade deals. The <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/CEA-Rx-White-Paper-Final2.pdf">summary of the report</a> is quite clear:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Foreign governments are able to set drug prices below those that prevail in the United States and erode the returns to innovation manufacturers might otherwise see from selling in their markets … The two goals of reducing American prices and stimulating innovation are consistent, but can be achieved through a combined strategy that corrects government policies that hinder price-competition at home, while at the same time limiting free-riding abroad.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Indeed, the chair of this committee, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomas_J._Philipson">Tomas Philipson</a> has been a long-time <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomasphilipson/2016/09/06/eu-vs-us-cancer-care-you-get-what-you-pay-for/#3b526d6a6ba5">critic</a> of single-payer collectively funded healthcare systems, such as the NHS, and has been a <a href="https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/pdf/10.1377/hlthaff.26.3.696">vocal critic</a> of the way the UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), makes decisions about the use of new drugs and considers confidential discounts offered by manufacturers to make them affordable to the NHS. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300859/original/file-20191108-194675-1hsvccf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300859/original/file-20191108-194675-1hsvccf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=335&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300859/original/file-20191108-194675-1hsvccf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=335&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300859/original/file-20191108-194675-1hsvccf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=335&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300859/original/file-20191108-194675-1hsvccf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300859/original/file-20191108-194675-1hsvccf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300859/original/file-20191108-194675-1hsvccf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The NHS receives rebates under the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/drug-prescription-treatment-medication-pharmaceutical-medicament-769176202">Bukhta Yurii/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Huge impact</h2>
<p>The estimate of extra costs the NHS will have to find following any deal that would provide US manufacturers with wider access to the NHS at undiscounted prices is uncertain. But <a href="https://www.york.ac.uk/che/research/teehta/health-opportunity-costs/re-estimating-health-opportunity-costs/">evidence suggests</a> that every £100m that the NHS must find could have been used to avoid over 500 deaths and save more than 2,300 years of life, mainly in cancer, circulatory, respiratory and gastrointestinal diseases. Also, we would expect to see large impacts on quality-of-life outcomes in mental health, and respiratory and neurological diseases.</p>
<p>Instead of prices, a deal might focus instead on restricting how NICE evaluates new drugs and considers confidential discounts to make them affordable for the NHS. Or it might remove the rebates that are currently paid at a national level to control the growth in the UK drugs bill. </p>
<p>Some have estimated that a deal that matched the US stated objectives could mean spending an extra £400m on drugs each week – a truly catastrophic outcome for NHS patients. Yet even if the impact was more modest and removed only the rebates paid as part of the pharmaceutical price regulation scheme, the impact would still be significant. </p>
<p>In 2018, rebates of £614m were paid under this scheme and £215m has already been paid <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pprs-aggregate-net-sales-and-payment-information-february-2019">in the first quarter of 2019</a>. Any deal that removes these rebates is <a href="https://www.york.ac.uk/che/research/teehta/thresholds/">likely to lead to</a> between 3,000 and 4,400 additional deaths, the loss of between 14,000 and 20,000 years of life and between 47,000 and 67,000 quality-adjusted life years (a measure of health that captures the impact on length and quality of life) each year.</p>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>Michael Gove’s statement that drug prices are not on the table in a post-Brexit UK-US trade deal is very probably false.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Checking the Facts is a series by The Conversation in which experts review claims made on the 2019 general election campaign trail. If you have any claims for an expert to check, you can:
email checkingthefacts@theconversation.com
tweet us <a href="https://twitter.com/ConversationUK">@ConversationUK</a> with #checkingthefacts
DM us on Instagram <a href="https://www.instagram.com/theconversationdotcom/">@theconversationdotcom</a></em></p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/300096/original/file-20191104-88414-1yh2yvf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/the-daily-newsletter-2?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKGE2019&utm_content=GEBannerB">Click here to subscribe to our newsletter if you believe this election should be all about the facts.</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/126473/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Karl Claxton receives funding from Department of Health and Social care, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Medical Research Council. He is affiliated with Labour Party. </span></em></p>Michael Gove claims that drug prices are not on the negotiating table.Karl Claxton, Professor of Economics, University of YorkLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1256032019-10-22T12:36:52Z2019-10-22T12:36:52ZMichael Gove’s grammar: former education minister is gonna rue the day he used Nonstandard English<p>Tensions are running high. The battle for Brexit is reaching its climax. The need for government ministers to sound decisive and determined is tantamount. So why does government minister Michael Gove suddenly sound like he’s <a href="https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1184796948617781248">speaking in someone else’s voice</a>?</p>
<p>In a recent interview with BBC Politics Live, the host Andrew Neil asked Michael Gove what the government would do if Labour succeeded in getting a referendum amendment attached to the deal. Gove’s answer was short and blunt: “That ain’t gonna happen … There ain’t gonna be no second referendum.” </p>
<p>Gove’s answer used two grammatical constructions of <a href="https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-nonstandard-english-1691438">Nonstandard English</a> (any structured variety of English which differs from <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/003368828101200201">Standard English</a>): “ain’t” (instead of Standard English “isn’t”) and a construction referred to as a double negative (or as an instance of multiple negation, or <a href="https://www.jbe-platform.com/content/journals/10.1075/eww.38.2.02pal">negative concord</a>). Double negatives use two negative elements in a sentence instead of one (compare: “There ain’t gonna be no second referendum” with “There isn’t going to be a second referendum”). </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1184796948617781248"}"></div></p>
<p>These constructions are regularly and systematically used in <a href="https://www.lexico.com/en/explore/standard-and-non-standard-dialects">Nonstandard dialects</a> (that is to say, <a href="https://www.tes.com/news/talkin-proper-standard-english-snobbery-schools">there are grammatical rules</a> about when and where they can be used in the varieties that use them – they aren’t just “mistakes”). But they never appear in Standard English – the variety of English that most closely describes how Gove would normally speak.</p>
<h2>Going a bit ‘street’</h2>
<p>So why does Gove use them? Nonstandard negative constructions are most often found in the speech of people with working-class backgrounds, so their <a href="http://all-about-linguistics.group.shef.ac.uk/branches-of-linguistics/sociolinguistics/research-in-sociolinguistics/jenny-cheshire/">use is often linked</a> to the social characteristics associated with working-class people. Depending on who you are (and what you think about working-class people), rightly or wrongly, this can include characteristics such as “straight-talking” and “resilient”. </p>
<p>We also know that repetition in English can be associated with emphasis. So the use of two negative elements, instead of one, might also help to intensify the strength of what is being communicated. </p>
<p>In this way, Gove’s use of nonstandard negative constructions might communicate his attempt to portray himself as “straight-talking” and “resilient”. It also aims to stress his commitment to what he is saying – to emphasise his belief that there will be no second referendum. Of course, whether or not we read that in his message depends upon what we believe about Gove and precisely what we, as individuals, infer when we hear instances of nonstandard negation.</p>
<p>The fact that Gove doesn’t normally speak like this contributes to how we interpret what he’s saying. So, we might understand that he’s trying to sound “tough” but we might read this as disingenuous or fake, because he doesn’t sound like himself.</p>
<h2>Keeping up standards</h2>
<p>What has all of this got to do with the National Curriculum? Well, in 2014, a new National Curriculum in English in England was introduced. It was designed and launched by Gove as education minister. The new National Curriculum for English placed increased emphasis on the importance of children using Standard English – not just in writing, but also “in a range of formal and informal contexts of speech”. </p>
<p>While everyone expects Standard English to be the norm in writing, it is not the norm in speech for the majority of English children (or, indeed, adults). Many of us use the nonstandard features of our local dialect all of the time when we are speaking, but we often interchange them with features of Standard English.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/298106/original/file-20191022-28088-1lzvpv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/298106/original/file-20191022-28088-1lzvpv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/298106/original/file-20191022-28088-1lzvpv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/298106/original/file-20191022-28088-1lzvpv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/298106/original/file-20191022-28088-1lzvpv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/298106/original/file-20191022-28088-1lzvpv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/298106/original/file-20191022-28088-1lzvpv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The National Curriculum discourages all use of Nonstandard English.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Undrey via Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In many cases, this is not because we don’t know how to speak in Standard English, but because using our local variety signals the many positive associations we have to our local area. It can also help us to communicate more nuanced messages about the content of what we say – that we are being “emphatic”, “determined” or “tough” when we use an instance of nonstandard negation. </p>
<p>In this way, nonstandard grammatical items can be very useful because they allow us to communicate our feelings or stances concisely. Saying: “I ain’t done nothing” is a quick way to say: “I haven’t done anything, I’m strongly telling you this, and I don’t agree with what you have said.” How people use Nonstandard English in this way shows us how useful it can be. </p>
<p>Gove’s <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-english-programmes-of-study">National Curriculum</a> policy suggests that Nonstandard English is never useful because Standard English “<a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/244216/English_Glossary.pdf">covers most registers</a>”. This has led to criticisms that schools are teaching grammar as <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02671522.2011.637640">inflexible and fixed</a>: there are right and wrong ways to use language – and Standard English is always the right way. But as Gove himself has shown, sometimes Nonstandard English can be <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/saying-no-to-gizit-is-plain-prejudice-8488358.html">the right way to speak</a> – it communicates a message quickly, efficiently and directly, and it does so better than a Standard English “equivalent” might.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1181455629237530626"}"></div></p>
<p>This doesn’t mean that Nonstandard English is appropriate in formal writing (or that we shouldn’t be teaching children to write in Standard English) but it does suggest that attempts to remove Nonstandard English from speech will not necessarily result in more efficient, interesting and effective communication. </p>
<p>In this way, Gove’s use of nonstandard negative constructions in speech not only exposes the flexibility of grammatical variation and its rich social meaning potentials, it also exposes the flaws in his National Curriculum policy. In two small statements about Brexit, Gove has been hoisted by his own petard.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/125603/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Emma Moore receives funding from the British Academy. She is a British Academy Mid-Career Fellow. </span></em></p>The former journalist raised eyebrows recently when he lapsed into Nonstandard English which is frowned upon in his National Curriculum.Emma Moore, Professor of Sociolinguistics, University of SheffieldLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1192492019-06-21T14:45:02Z2019-06-21T14:45:02ZSurvey suggests wider public would have preferred Boris Johnson against Michael Gove in Conservative leadership contest<p>Those eligible to vote in the Conservative leadership contest consist of Conservative MPs and party members. They represent a tiny percentage of the British electorate. This fact has attracted criticism of the present contest given that it involves choosing a new prime minister. But how would the rest of the country vote if the electorate had a say in this contest?</p>
<p>We can answer this question by looking at our survey of voters in Britain commissioned from Deltapoll which was carried out just before and after the European elections. This panel survey, which involves interviewing the same people twice, is part of a project to study the Brexit process. The sample is just over 2,500 people, which is more than twice as many as a standard opinion poll.</p>
<p>We found that, while Conservative MPs chose <a href="https://theconversation.com/boris-johnson-and-jeremy-hunt-will-compete-to-become-the-uks-next-prime-minister-but-could-either-win-an-election-119204">Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt</a> as their two finalists, the wider public might have preferred Michael Gove to take Hunt’s place. This will do little to help heal the wounds of Gove supporters, who have accused MPs backing Johnson of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/20/jeremy-hunt-and-boris-johnson-are-final-two-in-tory-leadership-race">skulduggery</a>. They believe some “lent” Hunt their votes to prevent Gove from making it through to the next round.</p>
<h2>Last-minute adjustment</h2>
<p>Just as our survey was going into the field, Theresa May announced that she was <a href="https://theconversation.com/theresa-may-resigns-as-british-prime-minister-heres-where-it-all-went-wrong-117763">stepping down</a> as party leader and prime minister. So, at the last minute, we included the following question in the survey: If Theresa May is no longer leader, which of the following people do you think would make the best leader of the Conservative Party?</p>
<p><strong>Support for Conservative leadership candidates in the British electorate</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/280714/original/file-20190621-61775-1nzmtfx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/280714/original/file-20190621-61775-1nzmtfx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/280714/original/file-20190621-61775-1nzmtfx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280714/original/file-20190621-61775-1nzmtfx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280714/original/file-20190621-61775-1nzmtfx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280714/original/file-20190621-61775-1nzmtfx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280714/original/file-20190621-61775-1nzmtfx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280714/original/file-20190621-61775-1nzmtfx.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Gove beats Hunt among the wider public.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Paul Whiteley</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We had to guess the names of the contenders at the time and, fortunately, got it right with the exception of <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/rory-stewart-45775">Rory Stewart</a>. He appears in the “someone else” category in the figure.</p>
<p>We have already seen that in the various rounds of voting by Conservative MPs Johnson is the clear favourite to win – and this turns out to be true among the voters as well. But, for second place, they marginally preferred Gove. He was just ahead of Hunt in popularity, and so setting aside the “someone else” category, voters in general would like to have seen these two in the final contest.</p>
<h2>Breaking it down by party</h2>
<p>It is interesting to see how different party supporters would vote if they had been able to participate in the contest.</p>
<p><strong>Support for Conservative leadership candidates by partisanship</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/280715/original/file-20190621-61775-1nquxxr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/280715/original/file-20190621-61775-1nquxxr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/280715/original/file-20190621-61775-1nquxxr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=460&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280715/original/file-20190621-61775-1nquxxr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=460&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280715/original/file-20190621-61775-1nquxxr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=460&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280715/original/file-20190621-61775-1nquxxr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=578&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280715/original/file-20190621-61775-1nquxxr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=578&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280715/original/file-20190621-61775-1nquxxr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=578&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Floating voters and Brexit Party backers.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Paul Whiteley</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There are some interesting findings about how partisanship relates to candidate preference. For example, voters who identify with the Brexit party prefer Johnson even more than the Conservative identifiers. They also opt for hardline Brexiteer Dominic Raab in second place.</p>
<p>Conservative identifiers, on the other hand, put Gove in second place instead of Raab – and significantly ahead of Hunt.</p>
<p>Labour and Liberal Democrat identifiers, and those who don’t identify with a party all prefer a generic “someone else” candidate – which reflects the fact that most of them do not like any Tory politicians.</p>
<p>The crucial group for the new Conservative leader to win over is voters who have no party identification at all. This is because they are more likely to switch their vote in an election given that partisanship acts as a barrier to voters changing their minds. If the new leader is to rebuild Conservative support then he needs to appeal to this group. It appears that they prefer Johnson by a margin of more than two to one over their second preference, which is <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/sajid-javid-10092">Sajid Javid</a>. But they like Hunt more than Gove. The final outcome in the two horse race is likely to be more acceptable to them than to Conservative identifiers who like Gove more than Hunt.</p>
<p>That said, it is important to note that the “No Party” identifiers are the group most likely to want a generic “someone else” candidate, suggesting that they may not be that impressed by the current line-up of leadership hopefuls. While Johnson may be the most likely to win them over, he will nonetheless have a hard task doing so, since they really appear to want an alternative – even if it is not clear who that would be.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/119249/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Whiteley receives funding from the British Academy and the Economic and Social Research Council </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Harold D Clarke receives funding from the National Science Foundation (US)</span></em></p>Accusations of skullduggery abound, and these findings won’t help matters.Paul Whiteley, Professor, Department of Government, University of EssexHarold D Clarke, Ashbel Smith Professor, University of Texas at DallasLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1192042019-06-20T18:47:22Z2019-06-20T18:47:22ZBoris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt will compete to become the UK’s next prime minister – but could either win an election?<p>The final two contenders for the leadership of the Conservative Party, and therefore the UK, are now known. Boris Johnson will go up against Jeremy Hunt in a vote to be held among the Conservative Party’s 160,000 members.</p>
<p>In a final round of voting among Conservative MPs, Johnson again came first by a long margin, taking 162. Hunt took 77, beating Michael Gove by just two votes. </p>
<p>Although the candidates have at times tried to focus on other issues, it has been Brexit that has dominated the debate. There has been a surge in support for Leavers like Johnson, while Remainers like <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/04/25/jeremy-hunt-remainer-now-believes-brexit-have-heard-one/">Hunt</a> haven’t fared as well as they might have expected.</p>
<p>This is an important choice for both the Conservative Party and the UK as a whole, yet it seems that many Conservative MPs and party members are putting their own desires first and foremost, giving little consideration to the longer-term impact on their country and their party. The membership is known to be far more positive about Brexit than the rest of the country and considerably more enthusiastic about leaving without a deal than regular voters.</p>
<p>At times it has seemed as though Conservative parliamentarians have prioritised keeping the party together over the need to consider what the country actually wants or needs. Of course, there is no clear indication of what this is, but the recent <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/european-elections-6507">European elections</a> suggest that a hardline stance is not popular with a significant part of the electorate.</p>
<h2>The long game</h2>
<p>Johnson has been the front runner for the entirety of the competition, constantly receiving significantly more support than his competitors – so much so that there have been claims of his supporters <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/26f8bfe6-932a-11e9-aea1-2b1d33ac3271">tactically voting</a> to weed out the competition. It is not all that difficult to see why Johnson might be appealing to so many within the Conservative Party. He has name recognition and, depending on who his audience is, has been the most vocal about getting out of the EU as soon as possible. Members are increasingly eager for Brexit and the party feels deeply threatened by the electoral potential of Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party. Johnson’s hardline position has therefore made him popular.</p>
<p>Johnson’s leadership ambitions have been clear for many years now and he waged a guerilla war against Theresa May and her deal, <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/09/27/boris-johnson-plan-better-brexit/">undermining</a> her at every possible opportunity. Hunt, too, has clearly had his eye on the leadership for some time, but has played a different game, remaining loyal to the prime minister. His more moderate approach to Brexit, being prepared to extend the Article 50 period if there is the chance of making a new deal, likely contributed to his popularity with more moderate MPs.</p>
<p>The bitter rivalry between Johnson and Gove may have also contributed to a choice between the two, as the two of them going head-to-head for the leadership could have been <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-48690973">messy</a>. This possibility will now be avoided and Johnson is the firm favourite to win the Conservative leadership. </p>
<h2>Appeasing the party</h2>
<p>The European issue and nullifying the Brexit Party threat will only get the party so far in the polls, however. It’s all somewhat reminiscent of the 2016 referendum. David Cameron <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/25/cameron-brexit-bet-drama-night-ripped-britain-apart-ukip-eu-referendum">gambled</a> on the vote as a way to resolve his party’s internal division over Europe, but the plan backfired spectacularly. The installation of Johnson as prime minister could have similar results. </p>
<p>While the results of the European election in May showed high levels of support for a hard Brexit through support for the Brexit Party, the high levels of support for parties such as the Liberal Democrats and the Greens also showed that there is also a lot of opposition to this among the wider public beyond the Conservative Party grassroots. It’s hard to see Johnson’s stance appealing to such voters, but at the same time it is hard to see Hunt’s more moderate stance winning over the membership, many of whom want Brexit as soon as possible at any cost. </p>
<p>Candidates such as Rory Stewart would potentially have been <a href="https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2019/05/rory-stewart-has-said-what-many-conservative-moderates-are-thinking-about">more appealing</a> to a greater range of potential voters, but his penchant for nuance and long explanations in an age of soundbites did him a disservice. </p>
<h2>Preaching to the choir</h2>
<p>However, while neither Johnson or Hunt necessarily appeal to a large section of the electorate, it is doubtful that Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party can appeal to it either – especially without a clearer, more drastic policy stance on Europe. A large portion of the British electorate will therefore be left effectively unrepresented by the two main parties.</p>
<p>This will likely be magnified if Johnson wins. While their politics are poles apart, there are some key similarities, at least superficially, between Johnson and Corbyn. Both have controversial pasts that can easily be brought up by opponents to try and discredit them, both have been ambiguous on certain policy details and both have strong, unwavering core support groups for whom these issues don’t matter.</p>
<p>This last similarity is perhaps the most significant going forward, especially if Johnson were to win the leadership contest, as this would leave UK politics in an curious position, one where the leaders of the two main parties appease their core supporters, but failing to connect with the average, floating voter whose support will be crucial in the next general election, whenever that may be.</p>
<p>As UK politics continues to fracture, both of the two main parties are failing to offer leadership that can bring things back together and the result may be a surge in support for alternative parties, much like in the <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48403131">European elections</a>. While it should be noted that, historically, people <a href="https://theconversation.com/back-in-business-but-are-the-liberal-democrats-back-for-good-117997">tend to vote differently</a> in general elections than they would in other elections, these are not ordinary times.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/119204/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chris Stafford does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Conservative members will now vote on which of the two candidates will become their party leader – and the prime minister.Chris Stafford, Doctoral Researcher, University of NottinghamLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1187882019-06-13T13:22:07Z2019-06-13T13:22:07ZConservative leadership election: what happens now?<p>The race to succeed Theresa May as Conservative leader and prime minister is in full swing. Brexit is the key issue, but the Tories’ selection rules are also a major factor shaping the contest.</p>
<p>Leadership candidates required eight nominations from fellow Conservative MPs to enter the contest and ten managed to pass the threshold. These ranged from Brexiteers – Boris Johnson, Dominic Raab, Andrea Leadsom and Esther McVey -– through to erstwhile Remainers – Jeremy Hunt, Sajid Javid, Matt Hancock, Rory Stewart and Mark Harper. Michael Gove now occupies an in-between position.</p>
<p>A two-stage system is used to choose the leader. First, MPs whittle the number of candidates down to two in a series of secret ballots. In the first ballot, candidates failing to secure the support of at least 5% of the party’s 313 MPs were eliminated, with the rest proceeding to the second round.</p>
<p>This process knocked out Harper, Leadsom and McVey, leaving seven candidates in the running.</p>
<p>Johnson came out way ahead of the field with 114 votes. Hunt took 43, Gove 37, Raab 27 and Javid 23. Hancock also made it through with 20 votes and Stewart makes up the seven with 19 votes.</p>
<p>In the second round on June 18, candidates must win at least 10% to proceed. Further ballots can be held on June 19 and 20 and one candidate will be eliminated each time until two remain.</p>
<h2>Taking it to the party</h2>
<p>In the second stage, the final two candidates seek the votes of about 150,000 grassroots party members in a postal ballot. They will engage in a series of hustings and the winner will be announced in late July.</p>
<p>Crucially, the distribution of opinion among MPs and the membership on Brexit differs. Party members are strongly pro-Brexit – a poll last month found that 66% <a href="https://theconversation.com/boris-johnson-supporters-want-no-deal-brexit-and-less-talk-of-climate-change-new-survey-of-party-members-reveals-118633">favour a no-deal Brexit</a>. Conservative MPs are more divided, with half supporting no deal in parliament’s indicative votes in March, but others – including some leadership candidates – strongly opposed. The fact that the members have the final say is expected to help any Brexiteer who reaches the all-member ballot.</p>
<h2>Who is the favourite to win?</h2>
<p>The favourite for the contest is Johnson, the former foreign secretary and London mayor, who resigned from the cabinet over May’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-brexit-plan-that-could-bring-down-the-british-government-explained-99607">Chequers plan</a> in 2018. He was backed by more than one-third of Tory MPs in the first ballot, far ahead of his rivals. A majority of these backers are Leavers but he has also been supported by many Remainers who believe only a Brexiteer will be acceptable to the wider party.</p>
<p>Johnson’s main rival among Leavers is Raab, who also resigned from the cabinet over Brexit. But Raab finished a long way behind in the first ballot and lost out on the backing of the European Research Group (ERG) of eurosceptic Tory MPs, which includes <a href="https://theconversation.com/jacob-rees-mogg-start-taking-this-backbench-joke-seriously-97195">Jacob Rees-Mogg</a>. Most leading ERG figures are supporting Johnson after he promised he would take Britain out of the EU in October, with or without a deal. Johnson would expect to attract supporters from the other Brexiteer candidates, Leadsom and McVey, who have now been eliminated, as well as Raab’s supporters if he fails to progress in the next ballot.</p>
<p>Johnson has many detractors among Conservative MPs, some of whom see him as untrustworthy and unreliable. But their dilemma is that they currently lack a candidate who could defeat him among the membership, given that he now looks assured of finishing the parliamentary ballots in the top two. A <a href="https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/oy4q6y1tfj/Results_190516_ConservativePartyMembers_formatted_2w.pdf">YouGov poll</a> last month of Tory grassroots members found that Johnson led all of the Remainers. In head-to-heads, he would beat Javid 66% to 34%, Hunt 67% to 33%, Hancock 74% to 26% and Stewart 75% to 25%.</p>
<p>Some Remainers rallied behind Gove, a leading figure in the campaign to Leave the EU, but reinvented as a staunch defender of May’s Brexit deal. However, Johnson led Gove 66% to 34% and the environment secretary has since been rocked by revelations about his past use of cocaine. Since then, some Remainer MPs appear to have shifted towards Hunt.</p>
<p>Yet it is difficult to see what Hunt’s appeal to the grassroots would be. He is a competent performer at the top of government, but does not currently possess any obvious electoral appeal. Despite saying that he would be prepared to leave the EU without a deal, his focus is on renegotiating the current deal – which might not be possible given the EU’s resistance. He would be painted by Brexiteers as continuity May. Despite finishing second in the first parliamentary ballot, Hunt’s tally of 43 votes was probably below expectations.</p>
<p>Javid is lagging behind Hunt in the race, but he might be better placed to give Johnson a run for his money. Javid has an attractive <a href="https://theconversation.com/sajid-javid-the-son-of-a-pakistani-bus-driver-who-became-britains-home-secretary-95884">back story</a>, as the high-achieving son of an immigrant bus driver. He has taken a tougher line on Brexit than other Remainers, indicating he does not want another extension to Article 50. He would start as the underdog against Johnson but hope to overhaul him in the campaign for members’ votes, perhaps aided by some slip-ups by the frontrunner. </p>
<p>But to get there, he will have to come through the middle in the later parliamentary ballots to overtake Hunt to finish in the top two. The contest looks like Johnson’s to lose.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/118788/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Quinn does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The speed is about to pick up as the field narrows.Tom Quinn, Senior Lecturer, Department of Government, University of EssexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1185592019-06-13T10:48:42Z2019-06-13T10:48:42ZBeyond Brexit, these are the issues Conservative leadership candidates should be debating<p>The Conservative leadership contest is entering its most intense phase. Potential leaders are being whittled down by their parliamentary colleagues before the party’s roughly 160,000 members vote on which of the final two will get the top job in British politics. </p>
<p>It’s inevitable that one topic has come to dominate the discussion in the contest. Much of the focus will be on the candidates’ plans (or lack of plans) for Brexit. That is somewhat inevitable, given this is the most prominent issue in British politics and the fact that Theresa May’s departure is largely due to her inability to find a Brexit <a href="https://theconversation.com/theres-no-brexit-plan-b-this-is-still-plan-may-110140">“plan B”</a> after the House of Commons rejected her deal.</p>
<p>Each contender is promoting a different Brexit vision in their campaign. But the EU says the deal on the table cannot be renegotiated. And if many of the candidates are to be believed, the UK is ready to leave without a deal on October 31. So there appears to be little scope for a change of course.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the next Conservative leader does not have to call a general election until 2022. Of course an election can be forced by a vote of no confidence, but 2022 must be the focal point for this campaign.</p>
<p>Given that the next leader has the potential to lead the country for the best part of the next three years, focusing solely on an issue which most candidates say should be resolved in little over the next three months seems short sighted. The successful candidate should have strong positions on other issues too, and these should be clearly outlined in the campaign. Here are some of the topics we need to see covered. </p>
<h2>Austerity</h2>
<p>It has been eight months since May declared that “<a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-45733098/theresa-may-people-need-to-know-austerity-is-over">austerity is over</a>” (though the chancellor Phillip Hammond has been more cautious, saying only that austerity is coming to an end). Such austerity-driven policies are continuing to hit families, as a recent <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jun/03/philip-hammond-accused-of-being-blind-to-scale-of-uk-poverty">UN report</a> demonstrated, when it claimed 14m people in the UK live in poverty and 1.5m are destitute.</p>
<p>Even if the government is correct in dismissing the report, it makes stark reading and has been used to decry the current government’s economic policies, which the report defined as “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/22/un-report-compares-tory-welfare-reforms-to-creation-of-workhouses">punitive, mean-spirited and often callous</a>”.</p>
<p>The failures of the government’s austerity agenda is a key issue that the Conservatives’ political opponents, not least Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, have highlighted.</p>
<p>If an election is held off until 2022, it’s likely that the economy, rather than Brexit, will be the determining factor of any party’s success. There have been some tentative moves in this direction, with candidates promising to increase <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/nickmorrison/2019/06/10/school-funding-is-unlikely-touchstone-in-race-to-succeed-may/#53e44cfc337f">spending on schools</a>. But, as yet, these have not been fully costed. They’re still a long way from forming the basis of a meaningful macro-economic strategy. </p>
<h2>The lack of a parliamentary majority</h2>
<p>A more immediate problem for the incoming leader is that of the current parliamentary arithmetic. This election will not change that. Currently the Conservative Party has <a href="https://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/mps/current-state-of-the-parties/">313 MPs</a> in the House of Commons – 12 seats short of an overall majority (as convention ensures that the speaker only votes if there is a tied vote), and nine seats short of an effective majority (as Sinn Féin MPs do not take their seats or vote). It relies on the support of the DUP’s 10 MPs to win votes.</p>
<p>While this problem is important in any Brexit vote, it affects the government’s ability to pass all other legislation too. The current parliament has been in session for almost two years (typically it is in session only for a year) and is due to rise <a href="https://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs/house-of-commons-faqs/business-faq-page/recess-dates/">this summer</a>. One of the first jobs the new leader (and PM) will be tasked with is to present and pass a Queen’s speech – which outlines the legislative agenda of the government for the parliamentary session (and must therefore extend beyond Brexit). Failing to get parliamentary support for this is akin to losing a vote of no confidence and would lead to the fall of the government. </p>
<p>Linked to this is the question of what to do about Northern Ireland, which has been without a devolved assembly since <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/northern-ireland-talks-latest-power-sharing-deal-stormont-sinn-fein-dup-a8893096.html">January 2017</a>. Agreeing any future confidence-and-supply agreement with the DUP is likely to raise questions about restoring some form of power sharing in Northern Ireland. Any potential new deal is likely to be more heavily scrutinised than in 2017, by both the Conservative and DUP’s political opponents. </p>
<h2>Saving the party</h2>
<p>As well as being prime minister, the leader will have to work to unite the Conservative Party. The party’s divisions run deeper than Brexit. The question of Islamophobia is still prevalent (something some of Boris Johnson’s <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=boris+johnson+muslim+comments&oq=boris+johnson+muslim+comments&aqs=chrome..69i57.6339j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8">comments</a> will do little to diffuse). The party is also suffering a declining membership. Its remaining membership base is ageing too, raising concerns about the future sustainability of the party. Just as May’s path to the leadership has been used to explain her unpreparedness for – and failures to engage within – the 2017 general election, the next leader needs to demonstrate broader appeal across the country. </p>
<p>Brexit might be the most important issue but other factors matter immensely. One of the critiques of May following the 2017 general election was that she didn’t have any practice at engaging members of the public during her leadership campaign. Failure to explore and debate these issues could lead to ad-hoc or ill thought-out policies.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/118559/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christopher Kirkland does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Brexit will inevitably dominate this campaign, but the next prime minister also needs positions on austerity, party unity and how to actually survive in parliament.Christopher Kirkland, Lecturer in Politics, York St John UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1186332019-06-11T21:30:48Z2019-06-11T21:30:48ZBoris Johnson supporters want no-deal Brexit and less talk of climate change – new survey of party members reveals<p>By the end of July the UK will have a new prime minister. They will be chosen not by the electorate but by a group of around 160,000 members of the Conservative Party. This selectorate gets to choose between the two candidates who finish first and second in a <a href="https://theconversation.com/theresa-mays-brexit-crisis-how-to-oust-a-tory-leader-99704">series of votes</a> held among Conservative MPs.</p>
<p>There has, perhaps not surprisingly, been a degree of <a href="https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17696002.nicola-sturgeon-brands-conservative-leadership-contest-a-horror-show/">disquiet</a> expressed about this situation. Members of political parties are, generally speaking, more zealous than members of the public. Some argue that it might be better to leave the choice of the country’s PM up to MPs. They, at least, have a direct mandate from voters. And, since governments in parliamentary systems must retain the confidence of the legislature in order to stay in office, allowing MPs to choose would at least guarantee a chain of democratic accountability from executive to electorate. That is bypassed completely when party members alone make the decision.</p>
<p>Such concerns are surely all the more pressing because, as our research has already shown, grassroots Conservatives can hardly be said to be representative of the country as a whole, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48395211">either demographically or ideologically</a>. There are far more men among them than there are women; most of them live in the southern half of the country; they are generally pretty well-off; they are relatively old (although not quite as ancient as often suggested); they are very, very white; and they are also significantly more right wing than the average voter – whether we’re talking about their economic or social attitudes.</p>
<p>Our new analysis, however, using data from a recent survey of <a href="https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/oy4q6y1tfj/Results_190516_ConservativePartyMembers_formatted_2w.pdf">Conservative Party members</a> that was kindly provided to us by <a href="https://twitter.com/chriscurtis94">Chris Curtis of YouGov</a>, reveals something that is possibly even more worrying for critics of the process. The party members who support the clear front runner, Boris Johnson, are even more ideologically unrepresentative of British voters than are the bulk of their counterparts.</p>
<p>Indeed, compared to the kind of members drawn to the two contenders who, currently seem to stand the <a href="https://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2019/06/leadership-election-candidate-support-numbers-hunt-27-johnson-19-raab-13-gove-12-javid-10.html">best chance</a> of grabbing the crucial runner up spot – the environment secretary, Michael Gove, and the foreign secretary, Jeremy Hunt – Johnson’s supporters look anything but moderate.</p>
<p>While only around a quarter of the wider British public support leaving the EU without a Brexit deal, an amazing 85% of Johnson’s supporters within the party are keen on a <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-do-conservative-party-leadership-hopefuls-keep-piling-on-to-the-no-deal-brexit-bandwagon-117922">no-deal departure</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278935/original/file-20190611-32361-1r0epp8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278935/original/file-20190611-32361-1r0epp8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278935/original/file-20190611-32361-1r0epp8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278935/original/file-20190611-32361-1r0epp8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278935/original/file-20190611-32361-1r0epp8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278935/original/file-20190611-32361-1r0epp8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278935/original/file-20190611-32361-1r0epp8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278935/original/file-20190611-32361-1r0epp8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Can’t wait for that no-deal feeling.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/oy4q6y1tfj/Results_190516_ConservativePartyMembers_formatted_2w.pdf">YouGov</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Some two thirds (66%) of the nearly 900 Conservative rank-and-file members who responded to the survey said the UK should leave without a deal, so Johnson supporters are extreme even by that standard. “Only” 37% of Hunt supporters would be happy with a no-deal Brexit.</p>
<p>Even Gove supporters are less enthusiastic about no-deal than Johnson supporters. Their man was a leading figure in the Leave campaign but only 52% of them want to leave without a deal.</p>
<h2>Right-wing base</h2>
<p>It’s clear that, when it comes to the 39% of the Conservative grassroots who are in Johnson’s camp, what the party’s critics would no doubt label their extremism isn’t just confined to Brexit.</p>
<p>Asked to locate themselves ideologically, some 42% of members overall said they were on the right – not just of British politics, but of the Conservative Party itself, making Gove’s supporters (39% of whom said the same) about average. Just 15% of Hunt’s grassroots supporters (who make up just 8% of the membership overall) located themselves in that space.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278934/original/file-20190611-32321-kgtat7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278934/original/file-20190611-32321-kgtat7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278934/original/file-20190611-32321-kgtat7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278934/original/file-20190611-32321-kgtat7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278934/original/file-20190611-32321-kgtat7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278934/original/file-20190611-32321-kgtat7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278934/original/file-20190611-32321-kgtat7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278934/original/file-20190611-32321-kgtat7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Party members assess where they sit on the left/right spectrum.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/oy4q6y1tfj/Results_190516_ConservativePartyMembers_formatted_2w.pdf">YouGov</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Johnson’s supporters had no such problem: well over half of them (56%) said they belonged on the right wing of their party, with about the same proportion (58%) of them styling themselves as “fairly or very right wing”.</p>
<p>The impression that Johnson’s supporters are very much a sub-set of a sub-set is only reinforced when we dig into the specifics.</p>
<p>For instance, Tory members in general are more inclined than the general public to want to cut tax and spending, so it comes as no surprise that 34% of them supported that option – one that only around a fifth of voters right now would go for. But those members backing Johnson, 40% of whom supported cuts, were twice as enthusiastic about them as those backing Gove (20.5%) and Hunt (22%). This may well solve the mystery of why Johnson’s only big domestic policy so far has been his promise to cut taxes – the front runner is mobilising his base.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1138398946378825729"}"></div></p>
<p>Johnson’s base is also relatively socially-conservative. A majority (although, at 59%, hardly an overwhelming majority) of Tory members think that David Cameron’s government was right to allow same sex marriage. Those supporting Gove – who has always been seen as socially-liberal and will be seen as even more so after recent revelations <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/cocaine-cannabis-and-opium-which-politicians-have-used-drugs-and-what-did-they-take-11737521">about his cocaine use</a> – are slightly more likely (at 63%) than most members to agree. Supporters of Johnson and Hunt are slightly less likely (at 54% and 55%) to do so.</p>
<p>However, it’s probably climate change where we see the most striking attitudinal differences between those who support Johnson and those who support the others. Rather worryingly for those who regard the issue as a priority, one in five Tory rank-and-file members would like to see less emphasis on climate change. But that rises to one in four among Johnson supporters. Just under one in ten Gove supporters feels the same way, and just over one in ten Hunt supporters. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278936/original/file-20190611-32361-1r4ibgd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278936/original/file-20190611-32361-1r4ibgd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278936/original/file-20190611-32361-1r4ibgd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278936/original/file-20190611-32361-1r4ibgd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278936/original/file-20190611-32361-1r4ibgd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278936/original/file-20190611-32361-1r4ibgd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278936/original/file-20190611-32361-1r4ibgd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278936/original/file-20190611-32361-1r4ibgd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A worrying finding about climate change.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/oy4q6y1tfj/Results_190516_ConservativePartyMembers_formatted_2w.pdf">YouGov</a>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why the difference?</h2>
<p>Why that might be – and why Johnson’s supporters seem to be so generally right wing as well as so keen on a no-deal Brexit – can perhaps be explained, not by demographics (supporters of all three candidates actually look pretty similar in that respect), but by looking at when the members who responded to the survey said they’d joined the party.</p>
<p>Nearly half (44.5%) of all the members surveyed said they’d become party members sometime after the 2016 referendum. Hunt’s backers, 41% of whom had done the same, are therefore about average. In contrast, only a third (34%) of Gove’s grassroots backers joined the party after the referendum. That suggests he draws a slightly bigger proportion of his support from those who have stuck by the party through thick and thin. Over half of those rank-and-file Tory members who are backing Johnson, however, joined the party after the EU referendum three years ago.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278937/original/file-20190611-32317-10uyl28.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278937/original/file-20190611-32317-10uyl28.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/278937/original/file-20190611-32317-10uyl28.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278937/original/file-20190611-32317-10uyl28.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278937/original/file-20190611-32317-10uyl28.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278937/original/file-20190611-32317-10uyl28.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278937/original/file-20190611-32317-10uyl28.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/278937/original/file-20190611-32317-10uyl28.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Signs of a UKIP influx?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/oy4q6y1tfj/Results_190516_ConservativePartyMembers_formatted_2w.pdf">YouGov</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We can only guess as to how many of Johnson’s supporters were former UKIP sympathisers switching to the Tories; but it certainly seems possible. And, who knows, given that one doesn’t have to renounce one’s membership of the Conservative Party to become a <a href="https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/uk-independence-party/nigel-farage/news/103876/long-read-inside-meteoric">registered supporter of the Brexit Party</a>, perhaps some of them hold a candle for Nigel Farage as well as Johnson.</p>
<p>Whether the country will be as pleased as they will be if Johnson does end up making it all the way to Number 10, however, remains to be seen.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/118633/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tim Bale has previously received a grant from the ESRC to study Conservative Party (and other party) members.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span> Paul Webb has previously received a grant from the ESRC to study Conservative Party (and other party) members.</span></em></p>Party members who support the former London mayor’s leadership bid describe themselves as very right wing, even by Conservative standards.Tim Bale, Professor of Politics, Queen Mary University of LondonPaul Webb, Professor of Politics, University of SussexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1182192019-06-10T13:06:40Z2019-06-10T13:06:40ZIs anyone asking who young Conservatives want as their leader? It’s probably not Boris Johnson<p>This is the race the Conservative Party didn’t want. A contest set for spills with few apparent thrills for a party, an electorate and a country fatigued by the sheer boredom of the Brexit nightmare.</p>
<p>Would-be successors to Theresa May didn’t even wait for the official starter’s gun on June 10 before they were crowding the paddock, preening, panting and pacing. First to arrive was Boris Johnson, who has been preparing largely by following the Hamilton line <a href="https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1063569-hamilton">“talk less, smile more”</a> – not easy for the Bullingdon boy. Despite a fancy launch video, Johnson was slow to get out of the starting blocks thanks to the threat (now gone) of a <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/boris-johnson-trial-court-case-brexit-bus-latest-update-a8942826.html">court appearance</a>.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1135463459045466112"}"></div></p>
<p>Others have filled the void: Dominic Raab sounding more than vaguely <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/jan/24/tory-mp-dominic-raab-feminists">misogynistic</a>, and Esther McVey playing the populist card but dropping a clanging dud, with <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/30/parents-know-best-esther-mcvey-faces-tory-backlash-over-lgbt-lessons">parental advice</a> on teaching children about same-sex relationships.</p>
<p>But beyond the candidate launches, (and already the withdrawals from the likes of James Cleverly and Kit Malthouse) all we’ve heard so far is the reaction of Toryshire. The heartland parents and grandparents – those who haven’t already been lost to the seductive lure of <a href="https://theconversation.com/nigel-farage-triumphs-survey-reveals-what-drove-voters-to-the-brexit-party-in-the-european-elections-117865">the Brexit Party</a> – have been having their say across the <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1137461/BBC-Question-Time-Brexit-news-Boris-Johnson-Conservative-Party-leader">nation’s media</a>, and have been placing their bets.</p>
<p>But what is missing so far from the debate are the voices of young Conservatives. Until recently a dying breed, party members under the age of 25 have become increasingly vocal in recent years. Certainly at my university they’re a strong, spirited and active group. I tapped into the current crop – and their national network of student friends, constituency colleagues and recent graduates to see which way they feel the wind is blowing as the 11 runners and riders jostle for their vote.</p>
<p>One political adviser told me:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The mood is dire among MPs and staff alike. Utterly depressing, it’s a total deadlock and it’s hard to really see a way out. Everyone agrees May had to go but not because they think anyone else could necessarily do a better job. It’s a shame Liz Truss isn’t running. Both she and Penny Mordaunt are very popular among my younger friends. Rory Stewart is also discussed a lot.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The adviser noted one particularly striking difference between older and younger party members. He said that while elderly members love Johnson, “almost all young Tories seem to dislike him or at least recognise he’d be bad news or at least risky”.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24815/dominic_raab/esher_and_walton">Raab</a>, a former Brexit minister, seems to have his detractors among the young insiders, and Michael Gove is no favourite either – being described by several who spoke to me as “odd”. One person who is rated highly in the Westminster Tory village is hard Brexiter and former leader of the House Andrea Leadsom – not least for her work as Leader of the House on <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/17/mps-anti-bullying-rules-will-cover-speaker-leadsom-suggests">bullying culture</a> in parliament.</p>
<p>One Midlands Young Conservative chairman summed up the view of a number of his colleagues, wishing that hardline Brexiter Steve Baker could have the job. “He’s not a consensus politician – he is a conviction politician. He’s so very principled; he voted against the withdrawal agreement in all three presentations of the bill.”</p>
<p>This differentiates Baker from many of his rivals as he’s seen to be less opportunistic than Johnson and less expedient than Raab. But with hours to the final deadline, he doesn’t seem to be running. </p>
<p>It appears that the idea of a “clean Brexit” is thriving in the Leave-leaning Tory heartlands among young members, even if it has little traction around Westminster, where those who are sceptical of leaving the EU without a deal, such as Jeremy Hunt, Matthew Hancock and Sajid Javid, all have their supporters.</p>
<p>In university towns, the message is a little different. Some students seem to view Stewart as a viable compromise candidate and more in touch with what was described to me as: “The thinking Tory.” He is seen as part of the next generation of leaders with the right blend of charisma and intelligence to carry both the party and the country – much more the cosmopolitan than Baker, whose appeal appears to dwell more among the bar room politicians of the Conservative heartlands.</p>
<p>Both Johnson and Raab have their supporters (Gove only drew one vote from the dozens of Young Tories I’ve spoken to and engaged with on social media – and that was before <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/09/behind-the-story-of-michael-gove-cocaine-use">he admitted to using cocaine in the past</a>) but the front runners are not duplicating that excitement among young Conservative party members who will soon be electing their new leader and almost certainly the country’s next prime minister. “Boris is a chancer”, summed up one student: “A bit like Trump, this is all about him, not the country or the party. And as for Gove, we already know he has the capability to stab his friends in the back.”</p>
<p>In 2018, parliament recorded Conservative Party membership as 124,000 with 83% aged 45 and above. The base figure is now higher (not least through an influx of Purple ex-UKIP Tories), but many of those, largely older voters, could be lost to the Brexit Party. Young Tories have regrouped through initiatives such as <a href="https://twitter.com/blue_beyond_">Blue Beyond</a> and are making their voices heard louder and more eloquently than for a generation. It’s surprising that candidates aren’t courting them more.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/118219/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Shanahan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The party does have younger members, but their voices are not being heard as the leadership contest gets underway.Mark Shanahan, Associate Professor and Head of Department for Politics & IR, University of ReadingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1088462018-12-14T16:02:18Z2018-12-14T16:02:18ZThe road to Brexit: how euroscepticism tore the Conservative Party apart from within<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250668/original/file-20181214-185240-15ersr2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">PA/Stefan Rousseau</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Theresa May has survived a vote of no confidence in her leadership but to quote the prime minister: “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/video/2017/may/22/nothings-changed-may-claims-as-she-announces-social-care-u-turn-video">Nothing has changed</a>.” The Conservative Party remains just as divided as it was before. While divisions over Europe have been very prominent recently, they have been a thorn in the side of the party leadership for many years now. That said, looking at the situation today it’s hard to imagine how these rival ideologies have managed to coexist within the same party for so long.</p>
<p>While there has always been some hostility in the party towards the European project, the nature of this hostility has evolved over time. In the 1975 referendum on EEC membership the party was largely in favour of remaining. Even Margaret Thatcher wore a very colourful, very European <a href="https://i2-prod.birminghammail.co.uk/incoming/article11505552.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/thatcher-jumper.png">jumper</a> to express her support of continued membership. Of course, Thatcher’s views on the European project would change over time as institutions themselves changed and evolved. This inevitably had a significant impact on the party’s future ideology.</p>
<p>However, arguably the key turning point came on September 16 1992 – otherwise known as Black Wednesday. This was when the government of John Major had to withdraw the pound from the Exchange Rate Mechanism. The crisis made the party deeply unpopular with the electorate and had a profound effect on how its MPs viewed the European Union. Many turned sour on the UK’s membership, which changed the nature of the party’s divide over Europe. What was once a debate about the ins and outs of Britain’s place in Europe became a polarisation between soft and hard euroscepticism.</p>
<h2>Rise of the eurosceptics</h2>
<p>While some europhiles remained, their numbers started to dwindle over time. Older MPs were replaced by fresher and younger MPs, most of whom were, at the very least, sceptical of the EU – and many of whom were in fact very hostile. This group was growing restless during the Conservatives’ long period in opposition under New Labour and looked back to the glory days under Thatcher for the solution to reclaiming Number 10. Euroscepticism became a key theme to <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jcms.12205">emulate</a>.</p>
<p>The UK’s continued membership of the EU became an increasingly salient issue, not least because some voters started to oppose the free movement of people that came as part of the package. New right-wing party UKIP capitalised on <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jcms.12208">negativity towards European immigration</a> to become a real electoral threat to the Conservatives. </p>
<p>The 2016 referendum was the then leader David Cameron’s attempt to stave off this UKIP threat. Like many in the political class, he believed that people would vote to remain in the EU and that the debate that haunted his party would be put to bed once and for all. However, after years of lukewarm support for Europe and a lack of engagement with the public hostility, pro-European MPs struggled during the short campaign period to convince enough voters that the UK’s membership of the European Union was actually a good thing.</p>
<p>With the victory of the Leave campaign in 2016, figures who were once on the periphery of their party were suddenly catapulted into to the forefront. They have positioned themselves as the guardians of the “will of the people” ever since.</p>
<h2>Irreconcilable differences?</h2>
<p>The big question is: where does the party go from here? Although May is safe from another leadership challenge for the next year, those who voted against her are still insisting that she should take the hint and <a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/reesmogg-hails-pms-confidence-vote-terrible-as-mps-react-a4016016.html">resign</a>. The vote has not unified the party – nor has it really stabilised anything.</p>
<p>As things stand, reconciliation between the warring factions seems unlikely, so they will have to try to coexist for a while longer, although this will probably prove difficult given that the malcontents can, and likely will, continue to stir up trouble for the prime minister.</p>
<p>Given that they failed to oust their leader through the official mechanisms, the likes of Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg may have to refocus their efforts and put pressure on her to simply resign instead. This is something that May <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46547832">has claimed</a> she will do before the next general election, but it is unlikely her opponents will be willing to wait for this to occur naturally. Their most likely tactic will be to oppose and undermine May’s Brexit withdrawal agreement regardless of what, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46569699">if any</a>, amendments the prime minister can secure. The almost inevitable failure to get the agreement through parliament, they may hope, will make May’s position untenable.</p>
<p>Failing that, there is always the option of trying to <a href="https://theconversation.com/theresa-may-survives-confidence-vote-but-her-brexit-deal-is-still-in-deep-trouble-108728">orchestrate</a> a vote of no confidence in the government, thus forcing a general election. But while many key figures have regularly put self-interest before their party, it seems unlikely that they would want to side with rival parties to bring about such a vote, especially when these other parties may very well fare much better in the election than their own.</p>
<p>May’s struggles are not over – and her credibility may never recover. But voters dislike divided parties and, if the different factions continue to pull further apart, it may not be just their leader whose days in office are numbered.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/108846/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chris Stafford does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Looking back, it’s a wonder the party is still together after years of arguing about this issue.Chris Stafford, Doctoral Researcher, University of NottinghamLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1087042018-12-12T15:57:06Z2018-12-12T15:57:06ZConservative confidence vote: who are the potential leadership challengers?<p>Prime minister Theresa May’s position as leader of the Conservative Party is at its most <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36788782">vulnerable</a> since she took over the role in July 2016. Her MPs are voting on whether to oust her as leader, following anger over <a href="https://theconversation.com/brexit-vote-postponed-what-parliament-must-do-now-to-fix-theresa-mays-mess-108518">her decision to postpone</a> the parliamentary vote on her Brexit deal.</p>
<p>Should she lose this confidence vote, a leadership contest would be triggered. She would not be able to stand in that contest, so it’s worth considering which of her colleagues might put themselves forward for the top job. These are the main runners an riders:</p>
<h2>Boris Johnson</h2>
<p>Boris Johnson is perhaps the best known and most colourful of those who’d like to compete for the leadership. He was twice elected <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/may/02/london08.london">mayor of London</a> (holding office between 2008 and 2016) and has built up a high profile over the years as a media personality and then as an MP. </p>
<p>Significantly, he is the darling of the Conservative grassroots and has a broad public popularity that most other Conservatives can’t hope to replicate thanks to his eccentric image. However, he has also built up a significant level of opposition among MPs within his party who view him as untrustworthy, disloyal and lazy. And since it is they who will first choose leadership candidates, his chances look less good than they might first appear. Some MPs have even threatened to <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1015331/boris-johnson-12-mps-resign-conservative-party-leader-brexit-eu-chequers">resign the party whip</a> if he ever becomes leader. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250247/original/file-20181212-110253-2l0rwk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250247/original/file-20181212-110253-2l0rwk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250247/original/file-20181212-110253-2l0rwk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250247/original/file-20181212-110253-2l0rwk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250247/original/file-20181212-110253-2l0rwk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250247/original/file-20181212-110253-2l0rwk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250247/original/file-20181212-110253-2l0rwk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Johnson has been running for the leadership for some time …</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Johnson is a divisive figure and has been accused of <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/02/21/boris-johnson-eu-brexit-supports_n_9286400.html?guce_referrer_us=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20vc2VhcmNoP3E9Ym9yaXMram9obnNvbiticmV4aXQrcHNvdGlvbisyMDE2JnFzPW4mZm9ybT1RQlJFJnNwPS0xJnBxPWJvcmlzK2pvaG5zb24rYnJleGl0K3Bzb3RpJnNjPTAtMjYmc2s9JmN2aWQ9NTkyQ0Y1RDdGMjExNEUyMDk4RjZGMThCM0Y1RTE4NjQ&guce_referrer_cs=c5rHieg25Tgu_AEXrOJgPg&guccounter=2">changing his mind</a> about Brexit to further his own political ambitions. He failed miserably in his efforts to succeed David Cameron in 2016, and although May appointed him as her foreign secretary, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-44771278/boris-johnson-resigns-as-foreign-secretary">his resignation over her Chequers deal</a> suggested that he was never a loyal ally and that he ultimately retained a desire for the party leadership. </p>
<h2>Dominic Raab</h2>
<p>Dominic Raab succeeded David Davis as Brexit secretary in July 2018, but his tenure proved to be short-lived. By November he, too, had <a href="http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2018/11/15/raab-resigns-the-shabby-end-of-a-pitiful-career">resigned</a> due to his opposition to May’s final proposed deal for Brexit.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250240/original/file-20181212-110231-jf68r7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250240/original/file-20181212-110231-jf68r7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250240/original/file-20181212-110231-jf68r7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250240/original/file-20181212-110231-jf68r7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250240/original/file-20181212-110231-jf68r7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250240/original/file-20181212-110231-jf68r7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250240/original/file-20181212-110231-jf68r7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Raab quit the cabinet over May’s Brexit deal.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>While his resignation failed to prompt the prime minister’s departure – as may have originally been hoped – Raab’s apparently principled position won him some kudos from Conservative eurosceptic backbenchers. Relatively youthful and less well known than some of his leadership rivals, this could be both a strength and a weakness. He has fewer enemies and represents a fresh start, but he is also more of an unknown quantity. Wavering MPs may be unwilling to trust him with their support as a result. </p>
<h2>Amber Rudd</h2>
<p>Amber Rudd is seen as the great hope of Conservative Remainers. She raised her profile and gained credit for her prominent role in the televised Brexit debates during the summer of 2016. She also played a high-profile role during the 2017 general election campaign, and is largely seen as a May loyalist, who was recently brought back into the Cabinet after exiting as home secretary following the <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/windrush-52562">Windrush scandal</a>. She has spoken out in support of a <a href="https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/amber-rudd-brexit-second-referendum-no-deal-peston/">second referendum</a> to approve any final deal. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250244/original/file-20181212-110256-j3d35i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250244/original/file-20181212-110256-j3d35i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250244/original/file-20181212-110256-j3d35i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250244/original/file-20181212-110256-j3d35i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250244/original/file-20181212-110256-j3d35i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=603&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250244/original/file-20181212-110256-j3d35i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=603&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250244/original/file-20181212-110256-j3d35i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=603&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Rudd is back in the cabinet after a spell on the backbenches.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Rudd’s explicitly pro-European views make Conservative eurosceptics hostile towards her. Although Remainers form a minority of Conservative MPs, Rudd could offer the prospect of delivering a calming and pragmatic soft Brexit option, which could win some support from across the parliamentary party. However, the <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4586756/Is-Home-Secretary-Amber-Rudd-lose-seat.html">vulnerability</a> of her own marginal parliamentary seat would make hear a risky leadership option if a general election was held in the near future. </p>
<h2>David Davis</h2>
<p>Davis can certainly be classed as being at the “veteran” stage of his political career, but with this brings significant experience. An MP for over 30 years, a former leadership candidate in 2005, and having served in the government of John Major in the 1990s, Davis also has longstanding eurosceptic credentials and became the first Brexit secretary in May’s government. His supporters would see him a safe pair of hands.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250242/original/file-20181212-110237-1r927ej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250242/original/file-20181212-110237-1r927ej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250242/original/file-20181212-110237-1r927ej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250242/original/file-20181212-110237-1r927ej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250242/original/file-20181212-110237-1r927ej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250242/original/file-20181212-110237-1r927ej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250242/original/file-20181212-110237-1r927ej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Davis was a key figure in the Leave movement but didn’t stick around in government.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>However, his resignation from Cabinet in the summer was seen as disloyal by some and there have been negative comments about his <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/juncker-says-weak-negotiator-davis-is-jeopardising-brexit-talks-2ksg8bdjn">poor negotiating skills</a> when dealing with the EU.</p>
<h2>Michael Gove</h2>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250245/original/file-20181212-110237-z0szd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250245/original/file-20181212-110237-z0szd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250245/original/file-20181212-110237-z0szd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250245/original/file-20181212-110237-z0szd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250245/original/file-20181212-110237-z0szd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250245/original/file-20181212-110237-z0szd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250245/original/file-20181212-110237-z0szd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Another chance for Gove?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Michael Gove was originally a close ally of David Cameron and his Notting Hill set, and played a key role in getting the Conservative Party modernised prior to its return to power in 2010. He was a radical and reforming education secretary but his relationship with Cameron cooled when he was sidelined to the role of chief whip in 2014, and it further deteriorated when he took on a prominent role in the Leave campaign in 2016. The two men are <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/741812/michael-gove-regrets-mistakes-leadership-conservative-party-david-cameron">reported</a> to have never spoken since. </p>
<p>Gove also reversed his initial support for Johnson’s leadership bid in 2016 and then instead unsuccessfully put himself forward for the role. Although reappointed to cabinet in 2017, such manoeuvrings gained him a reputation of being treacherous and disloyal, and this may count against him should a leadership vacancy arise. He has stuck with May as environment secretary but turned down the job of Brexit secretary when Raab resigned.</p>
<h2>Sajid Javid</h2>
<p>Sajid Javid is a rising star within the Conservative Party and appears to encapsulate many of its key beliefs. He is a self-made man, born into a poor immigrant family, who rose through the social ranks to forge a successful career in banking before entering into politics. </p>
<p>An MP for less than ten years and appointed to the cabinet by Cameron in 2014, he has held a number of senior ministerial roles since, and currently occupies one of the great offices of state as <a href="https://theconversation.com/sajid-javid-the-son-of-a-pakistani-bus-driver-who-became-britains-home-secretary-95884">home secretary</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250267/original/file-20181212-110243-a6kjfc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/250267/original/file-20181212-110243-a6kjfc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250267/original/file-20181212-110243-a6kjfc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250267/original/file-20181212-110243-a6kjfc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250267/original/file-20181212-110243-a6kjfc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250267/original/file-20181212-110243-a6kjfc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/250267/original/file-20181212-110243-a6kjfc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Javid is a rising star.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>He was a sceptical Remainer but has endorsed Brexit since. Britain has never had a BME prime minister and his Pakistani descent could help his party broaden its appeal among voters. The Conservatives have, in recent elections, struggled to win support within the BME community. </p>
<h2>Jeremy Hunt</h2>
<p>Hunt can be seen as a leadership dark horse and is currently one of the great survivors of British politics. He has endured numerous reshuffles and leadership changes to remain as one of the few continuously serving members of the Conservative cabinet since 2010. Although he campaigned for remain in 2016, he has loyally argued the Brexit case since and was rewarded earlier in 2018 when May <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44774702">promoted</a> him to foreign secretary after a long term as health secretary.</p>
<p>This new role has given him some firsthand insight into the Brexit process and its international diplomatic implications. Given this background and his apparent capacity for political survival at a senior level, he may have the potential to draw support from both wings of the party’s MPs.</p>
<h2>Wild cards</h2>
<p>These would appear to be the main contenders to succeed May, although outsider bets from the party’s eurosceptic wing such as Esther McVey and Penny Mordaunt have also been touted as having the potential and ambition to emerge from a crowded field. What is clear is that unlike May’s unchallenged accession in 2016, the next party leader is not an obvious choice.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/108704/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ben Williams is a member of the National Education Union, Amnesty International, an Associate of the Higher Education Academy, and also a member of the Labour Party. </span></em></p>The PM is in a tight spot, but can anyone else lead the nation into Brexit?Ben Williams, Tutor in Politics and Political Theory, University of SalfordLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1071152018-11-16T16:53:01Z2018-11-16T16:53:01ZTheresa May’s Brexit deal: here’s how the factions want to rewrite it<p>After a week of high drama, even by the usual standards of Brexit, we find ourselves with something of a conundrum. On the one hand, no one in parliament seems to like the text of the <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/draft_withdrawal_agreement_0.pdf">Withdrawal Agreement</a> that Theresa May has brought back from her negotiations. On the other, the prime minister remains determined to ensure its ratification and implementation.</p>
<p>The criticism has come from all directions, something that partly explains the current situation.</p>
<p>For those who want to have a more emphatically clean break with the EU, such as Jacob Rees-Mogg, the agreement contains much to cause concern. Most prominently, there are the backstop <a href="https://theconversation.com/brexit-draft-withdrawal-agreement-experts-react-107027#NorthernIreland">arrangements on Northern Ireland</a>, which will come into effect if a new agreement cannot be signed by the UK and EU by the end of the transition period in December 2020. That backstop now involves maintaining both customs and regulatory alignment for the entire UK and it can only be removed by the mutual agreement of both parties – meaning the EU has a veto on ending it.</p>
<p>But there are other elements, including the suggestion that this customs aspect of the backstop would form the basis of the future relationship, potentially restricting the capacity of the UK to conclude new trade deals with other countries, one of the flagship benefits that Brexiters have been selling in recent months.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/brexit-draft-withdrawal-agreement-experts-react-107027">Brexit draft withdrawal agreement – experts react</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Emerging factions</h2>
<p>For those who want a close relationship with the EU, the Withdrawal Agreement looks problematic for its lack of commitment to close economic integration and its ambivalence about the status of EU citizens in the EU and UK citizens in the EU.</p>
<p>The recent emergence of the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/30/norway-for-now-no-deal-brexit-mps">“Norway for now” group</a>, including the MPs Nick Boles and Michael Gove, further complicates matters. They are looking for language that allows for a temporary membership of the European Economic Area (EEA), despite the EU’s (and Norway’s) professed doubts about the possibility, given the disruption to the EEA it would cause.</p>
<p>In short, everyone is seeing what they don’t like in the text and want it changed.</p>
<p>Crucially, however, not one of these different opinions commands any more support in parliament than May’s own position. Each group is pulling in different directions, making it impossible to satisfy everyone by any change.</p>
<p>Remember too that the EU <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46228454">has indicated</a> that it will not be open to renegotiation around the edges of this text – so the only likely route to getting back around the table will be due to a much more major shift in UK priorities, such as a fundamentally different future relationship.</p>
<p>As a result, May’s compromise has perhaps more stability than might be immediately apparent. The prime minister has neither the desire nor really the capacity to find a new agreement with the EU, even before the time constraints of Article 50 and the March 29 2019 deadline for the UK’s withdrawal are taken into account.</p>
<h2>May’s way or the highway</h2>
<p>Of course, this situation is partly by May’s design – holding off finalising the text until now left as little opportunity as possible for opponents to mobilise and plot, so she can sell it as “this deal or no deal”.</p>
<p>We’ll find out soon enough if this gambit can work. Already, it is clear that May has done little to try and placate the critics within her own party, instead carving her own way through the negotiations and not opening up the process to contributions from colleagues.</p>
<p>It is in this context that politicians who campaigned for Leave, such as Gove or Andrea Leadsom, have chosen to remain in cabinet despite their clear doubts about the Withdrawal Agreement. Better, they argue, to be on the inside trying to shape May’s decisions, than on the outside, free to speak out but also excluded from the corridors of power.</p>
<p>Again, the success or failure of this will become clear before long, as the ratification process begins.</p>
<p>What we do know is that the Withdrawal Agreement is primarily a document about the past – about ending the UK’s membership of the EU. The accompanying <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/756378/14_November_Outline_Political_Declaration_on_the_Future_Relationship.pdf">political declaration</a> says relatively little about the future relationship with the EU, which will be negotiated once the UK has left. For those who stay in cabinet, that might be the real moment for exerting their power and influence and changing the course of this process.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/107115/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Simon Usherwood receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council, as Deputy Director of the "UK in a Changing Europe" programme. He sits on the academic advisory board of Modern Europe. The views expressed in this article do not reflect those of the research councils.</span></em></p>And why it’s not enough to be against the Withdrawal Agreement.Simon Usherwood, Reader in Politics, University of SurreyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/999162018-07-17T09:27:19Z2018-07-17T09:27:19ZUK under dangerous pressure to lower its sustainability commitments<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/227787/original/file-20180716-44103-t7ij31.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/aerial-view-green-farmland-countryside-226980499?src=Xzl6ieznLnbXjqK6T3AF5g-1-21">Stefano Garau/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It’s not surprising that the government’s recent <a href="https://theconversation.com/britains-brexit-plan-revealed-experts-react-99862">white paper</a> was controversial. “<a href="http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_control.html">Taking back control</a>” of UK regulation was one of the main objectives of the Leave campaign. But the white paper suggests that the UK will maintain the EU’s approach to a huge range of environmental, consumer protection and food safety regulation, by maintaining a “common rule book” with the EU for trade in goods.</p>
<p>Or does it? <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/725288/The_future_relationship_between_the_United_Kingdom_and_the_European_Union.pdf">According to the government</a>, this “common rule book” only applies to rules that must be checked at the border. It isn’t obvious which rules apply. Speaking to the Environmental Audit Committee, the environment secretary, Michael Gove, recently <a href="https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/4df40b59-f1d4-4fe8-aa61-49f66c072fab">concluded</a> that while the UK will share food and animal and plant health regulation, it will go its own way on many issues, including “the way in which our food is grown”. </p>
<p>His comment seems to deny that much of EU agrifood regulation deals precisely with the process by which food is grown. This includes what <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/pesticides/sustainable_use_pesticides_en">pesticides</a> can be used, and in what quantities, prohibitions on the use of <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/food/safety/chemical_safety/meat_hormones_en">hormones</a> in farm animals, and so on.</p>
<p>The white paper suggests some areas where the UK and EU could recognise that their regulation is “equivalent”, including organic labels. While this may seem like a technical distinction, in fact it is quite a central debate between the EU (which says the UK must follow its approach exactly) and the UK (which has argued that as long as its outcomes are equivalent, it should be able to go its own way). </p>
<p>So what on first glance seems like broad regulatory harmonisation is, upon further inspection, unclear in terms of its scope and coverage. The UK is clearly trying to maintain some wiggle room.</p>
<h2>Other environmental regulation</h2>
<p>In terms of non-goods related environmental legislation, such as rules for air pollution, species protection and habitat preservation, the white paper does not call for a common rulebook. Instead the UK government states that it won’t lower standards, and also commits to uphold international standards and agreements.</p>
<p>This may sound inspiring, but in fact such commitments, known as “non-regression” clauses, are included in most EU free trade agreements – and have been <a href="http://s2bnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/discussion-paper-on-tsd_web.pdf">widely</a> <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23802014.2016.1294032">criticised</a> for doing precisely nothing.</p>
<p>The government’s white paper states that its EU trade relationship will most closely approximate an “association agreement”. These vary widely – but by means of contrast, the EU-Ukraine <a href="https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/november/tradoc_155103.pdf">DCFTA</a> agreement, sometimes held up as a potential model for the UK-EU relationship, also contains commitments to harmonise with a broad range of environmental regulation. These don’t just include those that are related to trade in goods, <a href="https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/november/tradoc_155103.pdf">but also</a> air quality, climate change, public participation in environmental decision making, and environmental impact assessment.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/227788/original/file-20180716-44073-16qnxyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/227788/original/file-20180716-44073-16qnxyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/227788/original/file-20180716-44073-16qnxyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/227788/original/file-20180716-44073-16qnxyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/227788/original/file-20180716-44073-16qnxyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/227788/original/file-20180716-44073-16qnxyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/227788/original/file-20180716-44073-16qnxyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Polluted London.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/greenwich-london-january-2017-heavy-pollution-589592426?src=fQFSm6WppjwVT9p4Q3a1Cw-1-1">Adam Cowell/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A green watchdog</h2>
<p>Of course, it’s fine for the UK to go its own way on environmental legislation, as long as it is able to maintain – or even improve, as Gove has suggested – EU levels of protection. And the UK government, at least initially, will adopt EU environmental laws, in the process of “transposing” them into domestic law. But this process is far from automatic, as the UK must replace the many monitoring and enforcement functions that the EU currently undertakes.</p>
<p>There are ongoing consultations about how to replace these functions with a UK “<a href="https://consult.defra.gov.uk/eu/environmental-principles-and-governance/">environmental watchdog</a>”. But fines for noncompliance, something that the EU employs, seem to be off the table in the discussion of options for the UK’s environmental watchdog. This raises concerns about whether the UK will have an equivalent ability to uphold environmental rules.</p>
<p>Also, EU environmental principles, unlike the legislation, will not be “transposed” through the Withdrawal Bill. Upcoming environmental legislation is meant to address this deficit with a general statement of environmental principles and their interpretation and application. But it’s possible that these commitments may be “lighter” than those provided in the EU – simply requiring that the UK government consider them rather than requiring all legislation to be based on them.</p>
<h2>Caught between the EU and the US</h2>
<p>The <a href="http://www.precautionaryprinciple.eu/">precautionary principle</a> is a good example to consider. It justifies a conservative approach to assessing risk on the basis that there may not yet be enough conclusive scientific evidence to establish environmental harm. The precautionary principle forms the basis of a number of EU bans or restrictions on US products. Donald Trump’s <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-britain/trump-blasts-uk-pm-mays-brexit-plan-says-it-puts-trade-deal-in-doubt-idUSKBN1K130C">disparaging comments</a> about the prospects for a UK-US trade deal under the white paper model reflect the US administration’s position that the UK should move toward its approach to regulatory approvals in areas such as GMOs, food additives, chemical washes for meats (including the infamous <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43899603">“chlorinated chicken”</a>), which it describes as “science-based”. </p>
<p>Furthering this concern, the white paper confirms that the UK will pursue membership of the CPTPP trade agreement, a signed, but not-yet ratified, trade agreement between Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. However, the CPTPP’s “regulatory coherence” chapter arguably goes against the EU’s “precautionary” approach in this area.</p>
<p>So what can we expect of the UK’s sustainability in the future? A lot seems to hang on trusting Gove’s assertion that the UK would only ever want to raise its standards. The UK is facing external pressures from the US, <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chequers-plan-for-eu-goods-rules-out-indian-trade-deal-v2vgcmt5m">India</a> and other countries to relax consumer protection standards. On top of this, there is a strong domestic lobby, led now by <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/ee9c34ac-86af-11e8-9199-c2a4754b5a0e">David Davis</a>, the former Brexit secretary, arguing that the UK should not dampen its international competitiveness with pesky EU environmental standards. </p>
<p>The recent rebellion on the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/jul/16/brexit-mays-plan-dead-say-tory-remainers-and-leavers-jointly-ahead-of-key-votes-politics-live">Customs Bill</a> does not undermine the UK’s commitment to a “common rule book” with the EU. But in light of international pressures, as well as the prospect of weakening UK environmental monitoring and enforcement, Gove’s promises form a pretty shaky foundation for UK environmental standards.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99916/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Emily Lydgate does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Despite promises, it’s hard to deny that the UK’s standards on agriculture, air pollution, and climate change are under threat.Emily Lydgate, Senior Lecturer in Environmental Law, University of SussexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/997042018-07-10T13:23:48Z2018-07-10T13:23:48ZHow to oust a Tory leader: the rules explained<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/441547/original/file-20220119-25-vsu0xe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=75%2C58%2C5484%2C3642&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/uk_parliament/48935612592/">Flickr/UK Parliament</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Conservatives adopted their current system for electing and ejecting leaders in 1998. The party previously gave its MPs the exclusive right to choose leaders but after grassroots anger at the scandals and failures of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/leadership/lead95.shtml">John Major’s government</a> in the 1990s, there were demands for democratisation. The new Tory opposition leader, William Hague, established a <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/115223.stm">system</a> whereby both party activists and MPs would have their say in selecting the leader.</p>
<p>A new procedure enabling confidence votes in sitting leaders was also established. Previously, Conservative MPs who wanted to remove a sitting leader had to organise a direct leadership challenge, as <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/20/newsid_4318000/4318718.stm">Michael Heseltine</a> did in relation to Margaret Thatcher in 1990. The new system would split the processes of removing the old leader and choosing a new one. Leaders would no longer be formally “challenged” by rivals.</p>
<p>For the most part, leaders leave their posts after election defeats or when they have been pressured to resign (a few leave because of ill health and some die in post). On other occasions, a leader may wish to stay on but face pressure to go. In these circumstances, Conservative leaders may find themselves facing a confidence vote. The party’s rules decree that only MPs can call and participate in confidence votes, the rationale being that they are the people who work with the leader on a daily basis and must retain confidence in him or her for the party to function in parliament.</p>
<h2>The confidence vote</h2>
<p>A confidence vote is triggered when at least 15% of Conservative MPs request one by writing to the chairman of the party’s backbench <a href="https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/10/1922-committee-how-tories-men-grey-suits-wield-power">1922 committee</a>. So with 316 Conservative MPs in parliament, it would take 48 letters to activate a confidence vote. The names of those writing letters are kept confidential. The chairman of the 1922 committee, currently Graham Brady, monitors the numbers of letters received but does not provide a running tally, as that could be hugely destabilising. Letters can remain on file indefinitely, although they may be withdrawn by those who sent them.</p>
<p>When the 15% threshold has been reached, the chairman of the 1922 committee announces that fact and sets out a timetable for a confidence vote, which would be expected to take place quickly. A secret ballot of Conservative MPs is then organised, with the option to express confidence or no confidence in the leader. The rules stipulate that the leader needs to win a simple majority of those MPs voting to win the ballot. If he or she does so, then the party cannot hold another confidence vote for a year, which offers some protection to the leader.</p>
<p>If the leader loses the vote, he or she is compelled to resign and is not permitted to contest the subsequent leadership election to choose a successor. The mechanism has been used once before, in 2003, when Tory MPs voted to remove Iain Duncan Smith as leader by 90 votes to 75.</p>
<p>There are doubts whether a leader who won a very narrow majority in a confidence vote could carry on – after all, it would be known that almost half of his/her MPs had no confidence in their leader. One way around this problem would be for the numbers of those voting not to be made public –- the rules refer to the chairman of the 1922 committee “declaring the result of a ballot” but do not specifically state that numbers must be released. However, such a move could prove contentious.</p>
<h2>Leadership contest</h2>
<p>If the leader is removed in a confidence vote or resigns of their own volition, a full leadership contest takes place. Candidates must be Conservative MPs and be publicly proposed and seconded by two other MPs. If only one candidate is forthcoming, as was the case in 2003 after Michael Howard came forward, that candidate becomes leader without the need for a vote.</p>
<p>If three or more candidates are nominated, then a series of secret ballots takes place. Each MP can vote for one candidate and once the votes have been counted, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. Candidates can voluntarily withdraw from the contest. </p>
<p>The process continues until only two candidates are left. Their names will then go forward to a postal ballot of the party’s estimated 100,000 individual members. If only two candidates entered the contest at the start, the parliamentary ballots are not required and the contest moves straight to the postal-ballot stage. </p>
<p>A candidate does not need to win a particular percentage of MPs’ votes, but just to finish in the top two. In theory, one candidate could win 75% of MPs’ votes in the final parliamentary ballot and the runner-up could win 15%, with the third candidate taking 10%, but the top two would still go through to the membership ballot.</p>
<h2>Taking it to members</h2>
<p>A series of hustings are organised in the country and there are likely to be televised debates too. To win the leadership, a candidate requires a simple majority of votes cast in the all-member ballot. As there are only two candidates, that is guaranteed to happen.</p>
<p>The parliamentary ballots can be completed quickly, usually within a week depending on the number of candidates. The all-member ballot takes longer, as ballots must be printed, posted to the members, hustings arranged and time set aside for ballots to be returned. In the leadership contests of 2001 and 2005, this stage of the process took about two months.</p>
<p>This delay is often held up as a disincentive to have leadership contests unless they are unavoidable. A governing party in particular can hardly afford to be out of action for that long. In practice, there are ways around the problem. <a href="https://theconversation.com/britains-next-pm-theresa-may-sank-rival-by-painting-a-more-convincing-portrait-of-leadership-47229">Andrea Leadsom’s withdrawal</a> after finishing runner-up in the final parliamentary ballot in 2016 reflected the fact she was a long way behind Theresa May. Leadsom’s authority among MPs would have been damaged given her low support, even if she had won the membership ballot. The contest was therefore completed within a week.</p>
<p>The Conservatives’ leadership rules represent an attempt to square the need for leaders to enjoy the confidence of their MPs with contemporary demands for activist participation. The rules are sometimes criticised for allowing one group of actors – activists – to choose a leader and another group – MPs – to remove leaders. However, after two decades in existence, the party has found ways of making the rules work in practice.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99704/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Quinn does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Everything you need to know about Conservative leadership contests.Tom Quinn, Senior Lecturer, Department of Government, University of EssexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/902772018-01-19T13:54:14Z2018-01-19T13:54:14ZIn Britain’s battle over school curriculum, Celtic nations have got it right<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202421/original/file-20180118-158531-c7wnhr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">"Peidiwch â cholli!"</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/intelligent-group-young-school-children-all-211281496?src=AhWqYCLhV1i-L0lhbntpNA-1-29">ESB Professional</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/apr/15/margaret-thatcher-education-legacy-gove">national curriculum</a> introduced by Margaret Thatcher’s governments in the 1980s was a seminal development in UK education history. Applying to England, Northern Ireland and Wales (but not Scotland, which has a tradition of educational independence), the move was highly controversial. </p>
<p>With too much content and little flexibility on what could be taught, it was a teacher-proof curriculum that was widely decried by education experts as badly thought out and damaging to young people. Such criticisms seemed borne out, as it was reviewed and revised <a href="http://cee.lse.ac.uk/ceedps/ceedp57.pdf">throughout the 1990s</a>. </p>
<p>By the new millennium, new curricular forms were emerging – first in <a href="http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2004/11/20178/45862">Scotland</a> and <a href="https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/incoming/education-reform-in-northern-ireland-28034497.html">Northern Ireland</a> in 2004 (education in Northern Ireland and Wales had been devolved). These moved away from specifying in detail what content to teach, shifting towards giving schools and teachers more autonomy. </p>
<p>England appeared to be heading in the same direction under New Labour following a major review of the national curriculum in <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6332537.stm">2007-08</a>. But after the coalition government was elected in 2010, these reforms were ditched <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-28989714">in favour of</a> a more traditional fact-based approach. </p>
<p>Wales, on the other hand, has followed the other Celtic nations. It <a href="http://gov.wales/topics/educationandskills/schoolshome/curriculuminwales/curriculum-for-wales-curriculum-for-life/?lang=en">announced</a> its own new curriculum in 2015.</p>
<h2>Curriculum wars</h2>
<p>The new Celtic curricula have been widely <a href="http://www.education.uct.ac.za/sites/default/files/image_tool/images/104/scenarios.pdf">attacked</a>. Critics claim they downgrade knowledge – effectively dumbing down learning – and overemphasise skills, particularly those required for the workplace. </p>
<p>They are often derided as “progressive”, apparently a pejorative term – and arguably an inaccurate description in any case. They blur the boundaries between subjects, say critics, and devalue knowledge from academic disciplines in favour of everyday knowledge. </p>
<p>While such criticisms invariably contain some truth, they are not helping improve British education. They have created unhelpful dichotomies of traditional versus progressive, knowledge versus skills, and the teacher as a “sage on the stage” versus the teacher as a “guide on the side”. A good, balanced education should attend to all these dimensions.</p>
<p>The new Celtic curricula are grounded in specific purposes of education, which provide a clear starting point for schools to develop a curriculum. In Scotland these are articulated as attributes and capabilities, <a href="https://education.gov.scot/scottish-education-system/policy-for-scottish-education/policy-drivers/cfe-(building-from-the-statement-appendix-incl-btc1-5)/What%20is%20Curriculum%20for%20Excellence?">set out</a> under four headings: successful learners, responsible citizens, effective contributors and confident individuals. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202423/original/file-20180118-158525-1pkojpb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202423/original/file-20180118-158525-1pkojpb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202423/original/file-20180118-158525-1pkojpb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=359&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202423/original/file-20180118-158525-1pkojpb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=359&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202423/original/file-20180118-158525-1pkojpb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=359&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202423/original/file-20180118-158525-1pkojpb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202423/original/file-20180118-158525-1pkojpb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202423/original/file-20180118-158525-1pkojpb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Scotland’s reforms.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Northern Ireland <a href="http://ccea.org.uk/curriculum/overview/aim_and_objectives">has three overall</a> learning objectives, developing young people as: individuals, contributors to society, and contributors to the economy and environment. </p>
<p>Statements of purpose like these describe what an educated young person should look like at the end of a stage of education. They should allow schools to choose suitable content themselves; and teach it in ways that enable children to develop the knowledge and skills necessary for successful lives – as critically engaged citizens with successful careers. </p>
<p>I believe that this is greatly preferable to a curriculum apparently devoid of purposes and framed primarily around content decided by national policymakers. </p>
<p>English schools, though in many cases they will teach similar things to their Celtic counterparts, face overcrowded syllabuses which leave insufficient time to focus on teaching for understanding. Schools potentially start their curriculum development with questions of what to teach without necessarily asking why teach it. </p>
<p>Critics do have a point when they say the progressive Celtic curricula lack attention to knowledge, but I think this is largely a problem with implementation – particularly in Scotland. As the OECD’s Andreas Schleicher stated on BBC News in December 2016, Scotland needs to move from an intended curriculum to an implemented curriculum. </p>
<p>Historically, progressive approaches to education placed a high value on knowledge. Indeed the father of progressive education, the American philosopher John Dewey, <a href="https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Dewey/Dewey_1907/Dewey_1907c.html">emphasised</a> the importance of engaging with the accumulated wisdom of mankind. </p>
<h2>Could do better</h2>
<p>How then to explain Scotland’s <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1893/11356">implementation problem</a>? A decade after the launch of the Curriculum for Excellence, Scottish education <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-nicola-sturgeon-put-her-biggest-hitter-in-charge-of-scottish-education-63965">has been</a> undergoing a substantial review and has become a weak flank for the government’s opponents. </p>
<p>I would argue that the non-progressive elements of this curriculum have contributed to schools’ struggles to bring the vision to life – above all framing the curriculum as detailed learning outcomes. </p>
<p>These hundreds of statements arrayed into hierarchical levels are a throwback to England’s original National Curriculum, which simplistically saw learning as a neat linear progress to be measured at every stage, not a messy and emergent developmental process that varies between individuals. </p>
<p>Learning outcomes have been associated with a tendency for schools to track their performance against <a href="http://cedefop.europa.eu/files/3054_en.pdf">predetermined statements</a>. They can make teachers risk-averse and inclined towards a bureaucratic tick-box approach to the curriculum. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202424/original/file-20180118-158531-zkhlhs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202424/original/file-20180118-158531-zkhlhs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202424/original/file-20180118-158531-zkhlhs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202424/original/file-20180118-158531-zkhlhs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202424/original/file-20180118-158531-zkhlhs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202424/original/file-20180118-158531-zkhlhs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202424/original/file-20180118-158531-zkhlhs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202424/original/file-20180118-158531-zkhlhs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Learning difficulties.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/asian-students-exam-studying-hard-worrying-660002209">Klattisak Lamchan</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>So it’s really interesting to see the latest iteration of this sort of curriculum emerging in Wales. The developers of the <a href="http://learning.gov.wales/resources/improvementareas/curriculum/?lang=en">Curriculum for Wales</a> seem cognisant of the problems afflicting these curricula elsewhere. </p>
<p>Development materials emphasise the importance of clearly identifying and making sense of educational purposes. They stress that knowledge – as well as skills – need to be prominent in teachers’ thinking as they enact the curriculum. </p>
<p>Yet they recognise that traditional subjects are only one way of articulating this knowledge. Though knowledge shouldn’t be handed down as if to Moses on tablets of stone, subjects are still seen as a useful means of dividing the curricular cake. They can sit alongside more integrated approaches such as having learning themes that cut across subjects or offering hybrid subjects such as social studies. </p>
<p>Some critics <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-38855531">have suggested</a> there are problems with implementing this new system, too, but it’s far too early to make judgements. The system doesn’t have to be fully operational until 2021. </p>
<p>Crucially, teachers are to be involved in all stages of developing the curriculum. They’re being given a vital role in making sense of the curriculum’s purposes, as well as the mechanisms and processes that support this. It will be a question of first getting the curriculum right, then thinking about how accountability processes can be best developed. Judging schools by narrow measures of attainment will not be the order of the day. </p>
<p>The report launching a Curriculum for Wales was called <a href="http://gov.wales/docs/dcells/publications/150225-successful-futures-en.pdf">Successful Futures</a>. Hopefully this will turn out to be prescient.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/90277/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Priestley's work has been informed by previous grants from ESRC and the Scottish government, but nothing current. He is a member of the Welsh Government Curriculum and Assessment Group, an advisory committee that meets three times per year. He is also a member of two Scottish government advisory committees - the Curriculum and Assessment Board and the Leaders Forum.
</span></em></p>Should the teacher be a sage on the stage or a guide on the side? Neither, it seems.Mark Priestley, Director of the Stirling Network for Curriculum Studies, University of StirlingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.