Politics-First-September-2014

SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2014 

POLITICS 

FIRST 

JON CRAIG: EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW 

PHILIP HAMMOND ON THE NEW DYNAMICS OF THE WORLD 

SADIQ KHAN CONSIDERS SENTENCING AND REHABILITATION 

VINCE CABLE ON UK TRADE WITH THE WORLD 

MICHAEL FALLON ON GOVERNMENT’S DUTY TO DEFENCE 

THERESA MAY LOOKS AT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND ABUSE 

LUCIANA BERGER ON ENDING THE MENTAL HEALTH STIGMA 

VOLUME 4 / ISSUE 18 £3.99 

www.politicsfirst.org.uk 

ACHIEVING HIGH 

ATTAINMENT 

IN SCHOOLS 

INSIDE: 

DAVID CAMERON 

NICK CLEGG 

ED MILIBAND 

NICKY MORGAN, TRISTRAM HUNT, 

DAVID WARD AND 

MARGARET JONES 

INTERVIEW: PAUL BURSTOW

GovKnow Events 

3rd Annual Procurement Conference 

9th October 2014 

‘By creating a more integrated procurement 

function at the heart of government, we will harness 

the government’s unique buying power to deliver 

maximum value for the taxpayer’ – Chloe Smith MP, 

Former Minister, Cabinet Office – GovKnow’s 2nd Annual 

Procurement Conference, 10th September 2013 

3rd Annual Children and Young People’s 

Conference 

28th October 2014 

‘On all fronts, on adoption, fostering, on children’s 

homes and child protection, wherever children are 

facing danger or disadvantage, we’re sweeping away 

the barriers standing in the way of them having the best 

start in life’ - Edward Timpson MP, Parliamentary Under 

Secretary of State, Department for Education – GovKnow’s 

2nd Annual Children and Young People’s Conference, 

11th September 2013 

For more information call 0845 647 7000 

or visit www.govknow.com 

Government Knowledge events presents a 

number of high level conferences and briefings 

covering a wide range of topics relevant to the 

public, private and third sectors. These unique 

events provide the opportunity to engage, 

interact, debate and network with your peers 

and colleagues from across the sectors. 

Our events will provide you with access to the 

highest level speakers, including key policy 

makers and drivers to ensure your views are 

represented in forthcoming policy decisions 

relevant to your work. Our events draw from 

a range of speakers, unrivalled in quality and 

range, from UK and foreign ministers, senior 

civil servants, academics and other experts in 

their respective fields. 

3rd Annual Social Justice Conference 

4th November 2014 

‘We recognised that a new approach was needed 

– one founded on early intervention to prevent 

problems from arising in the first place, alongside 

tackling the root causes of disadvantage to 

make a meaningful difference to people’s lives... 

Delivering social justice offers a way forward’ 

– Rt Hon Iain Duncan Smith MP, Secretary of State for 

Work and Pensions, Department for Work and Pensions 

– GovKnow’s 2nd Annual Social Justice Conference, 

30th October 2013 

3rd Annual Mental Health Conference 

4th December 2014 

‘For far too long, physical health has been 

prioritised over mental health’ – Norman Lamb MP, 

Mental Health Minister, Department of Health – Liberal 

Democrat Voice, 13th May 2013 

Book by 30.06.14 to receive £100 off your next booking when using promo code GKPF2014 

e: info@govknow.com 

t: 0845 647 7000 

w: www.govknow.com 

@govknow 

6 EXCLUSIVE 

INTERVIEW: JON CRAIG 

Jon Craig talks to Marcus 

Papadopoulos about what 

this year’s autumn party 

conference season means 

for the Conservative, Labour 

and Liberal Democrat parties, 

which party will be the most 

confident going into the 

conference season and how 

David Cameron, Ed Miliband 

and Nick Clegg will use their 

respective conferences to 

appeal to the British electorate 

Publisher & Editor: 

Marcus Papadopoulos 

Editorial Advisor: 

Keith Richmond 


16 LEADERS 

David Cameron, Nick Clegg 

and Ed Miliband lay down 

their visions for Britain 

34 COLUMNS 

Paul Routledge assesses the 

impact of UKIP in traditional 

Labour-supporting areas, 

while John Coulter argues 

that the Irish factor may be 

crucial to UK politics in 2015 

36 CORRIDORS 

Philip Hammond discusses 

how Britain will meet its 

Editorial Board: 

Esther McVey 

Lionel Zetter 

Paul Routledge 

John Bretherton 

Harold Atcherley 

Terry Ashton 

Michael Pownall 

Commercial Director: 

JonathonWellings 

Production Consultant: 

Gemma Pritchard 

Features Assistant: 

Alex Donald 

Finance Director: 

Senel Mehmet 

challenges in the world 

Michael Fallon argues that 

the British armed forces are 

receiving the funds they 

require to remain a worldclass 

fighting force 

Theresa May on tackling 

domestic violence and abuse 

Vince Cable looks at British 

trade and the emerging 

economies 

Sadiq Khan explores 

sentencing and rehabilitation 

Editorial and Subscriptions: 

Tel: 0797 237 4529 

Advertising: 

Tel: 020 3179 1186 

Published by: 

First Publishing Limited 

Kemp House 

152 City Road London 

EC1V 2NX 

editor@firstpublishing.org 


© First Publishing Limited 

ISSN 2046-4258 

Company number: 7965752 

The views expressed in Politics First are not necessarily those of First Publishing Limited and its directors. 

140 SPOTLIGHT: 

ACHIEVING HIGH 

ATTAINMENT IN 

SCHOOLS 

Nicky Morgan, Tristram Hunt, 

David Ward and Margaret 

Jones 

148 INTERVIEW: 

Paul Burstow 

194 DIARY PAGE: 

Nigel Nelson 

Working together with: 

Printed in the UK by 

The Magazine Printing Company 

using only paper from FSC/PEFC suppliers 

www.magprint.co.uk 

September/October 2014 Politics First 3 

C O N T E N T S

JUNE 2014 



JIM MURPHY: EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW 

ESTHER McVEY ON PRIVATE SECTOR JOB CREATION 

ANGELA SMITH ARGUES IN DEFENCE OF THE HUNTING ACT 

ADRIAN SANDERS LOOKS AT SUSTAINABLE RAILWAYS 

JOHN MacGREGOR ASSESSES THE OPTION OF SHALE GAS 

JOHN KREBS ON FUNDING AND SKILLS FOR BRITISH SCIENCE 

LOUISE ELLMAN DISCUSSES AIRPORT EXPANSION 

INTERVIEW: HILARY BENN 

APRIL 2014 



CAROLINE LUCAS: EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW 

CHRIS GRAYLING ON STOPPING CRIMINALS FROM REOFFENDING 

GREGORY BARKER SETS OUT THE RENEWABLES ROADMAP 

ROBERT HALFON DISCUSSES UK-BRAZIL TRADE 

JOHN THURSO ON CHANGING THE BANKING CULTURE 

HELEN GRANT DETAILS WORLD WAR ONE CENTENARY PLANS 

ANTHONY YOUNG ASSESSES THE STATE OF APPRENTICESHIPS 

INTERVIEW: LORD JOHN MacGREGOR 

Z etter’s 

ONLINE 

Who is Who in UK Polics 

Sample Zetter’s data on this month’s Politics First contributors... 

Polical 

Rt Hon David Cameron 

biographical 

(Con) 

and contact 

Prime Minister, First Lord of the Treasury & Minister for the Civil Service 

58-60 High Street 

Tel: 020 7219 3475 email: camerond@parliament.uk 

Witney 

database 

Majority: 22,740 

covering all of the 

UK's legislators 

Rt Hon Nick Clegg (Lib Dem) 


• Comprehensive 

Rt Hon Ed Miliband (Lab) 

• Leader of User the Opposition- friendly 

Constituency: Doncaster North 


• Affordable 

Constituency office: 

Constituency: Witney 

Oxfordshire 

OX28 6HJ 

First Elected: June 2001 Tel: 01993 702 302 

DoB: 9/10/1966 Place of Birth: London 

@David_Cameron 


Deputy Prime Minister & Lord President of the Council 

85 Nethergreen Road 

Tel: 020 7219 5090 email: cleggn@parliament.uk 

Sheffield 

Constituency: Sheffield, Hallam 

South Yorkshire 

S11 7EH 

First Elected: May 2005 Tel: 01142 309 002 

DoB: 7/1/1967 Place of Birth: Chalfont St. Giles, Bucks 

@Nick_Clegg 


Doncaster Labour Party 

Tel: 020 7219 4778 email: milibande@parliament.uk 

North Bridge Road 

Doncaster 

DN5 9AA 


Date of Birth: 24/12/1969 Place of Birth: London 

@Ed_Miliband 

Rt Hon Philip Hammond (Con) 


ZOL can Secretary be integrated of State for Foreign with and AIMediaComms’ Commonwealth Affairswell-established Vuelio 55 portal Cherry Orchard - 

which Tel: has 020 several 7219 4055 hundred email: philip.hammond.mp@parliament.uk 

exisng subscribers. In combinaon, the Staines applicaon 

Constituency: Runnymede and Weybridge 

Surrey 

offers the most comprehensive stakeholder engagement plaorm available. 


TW18 2DQ 


Date of Birth: 4/12/1955 Place of Birth: Epping, Essex 

POLITICS 

F I R S T 

A travelling circus of politicians, journalists, lobbyists, delegates and international observers, 

armed with umbrellas, notepads and pens, descending on cities up and down the UK can only 

mean one thing...it is the autumn party conference season! But this year’s conference season 

is no ordinary one; it is the last before the 2015 general election – an election that is expected 

to be one of the most tantalising since the 1992 contest between John Major, Neil Kinnock 

and Paddy Ashdown. 

So it is my great pleasure to welcome you to the conference edition of Politics First! Inside, 

you will find articles from David Cameron, Nick Clegg, Ed Miliband, members of the Cabinet 

and Shadow Cabinet together with backbench politicians from both the House of Commons 

and House of Lords. The topics discussed in the articles cover important and, indeed, in 

some cases, critically important, challenges facing Britain both at home and abroad. So, from 

the economy to the NHS to transport to Iraq and Syria to immigration – and there are many 

more. 

In the Leaders section, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband set out their visions for Britain and offer a 

blueprint as to how they intend to achieve their objectives. 

With education so critical to sustaining the UK economy’s recovery, and enabling Britain to successfully compete 

against the world’s emerging economies, the Spotlight of the edition is on raising attainment in schools. Nicky Morgan, 

Tristram Hunt, David Ward and Margaret Jones explain how pupils can be given the opportunity to fully achieve their 

potential and, in doing so, lay a foundation for obtaining successful jobs in their adult years. 

Jon Craig, Sky News’ Chief Political Correspondent, gives us an exclusive interview in which he discusses what to look 

out for during the party conferences and what could constitute the biggest dangers for the leadership of the three parties 

during their respective stay in Manchester, Birmingham and Glasgow. 

Philip Hammond highlights the critical challenges to British foreign policy and how the UK should and must approach 

these, while Theresa May discusses the options of how to tackle domestic violence and abuse. Vince Cable looks at how 

Britain should increase its trade with the emerging markets, and Liam Fox outlines a new approach to the contentious 

issue of immigration. 

There are, of course, many other thought-provoking articles and interviews in the edition which have been tailored 

to captivate the attention and imagination of the reader, including one on the reflections of a veteran of the Malaysian 

campaign during World War Two who was forced to help build the infamous Burma Railway. 

I would like to take this opportunity to wish you a successful time in Manchester, Birmingham and Glasgow, and I hope 

you enjoy reading this special edition of Politics First. 

SUBSCRIPTIONS: 

Dr Marcus Papadopoulos, Publisher/Editor 

Be first to get Politics First with guaranteed delivery on the day of publication. Why 

not treat a friend with a gift subscription to keep them up-to-date with key issues of 

the day. 

W E L C O M E 

Yes, I would like to subscribe to Politics First for only £20 per annum 

Your details 

Title Forename Surname 

Address 

Postcode 

POLITICS 

FIRST 

POLITICS 

FIRST 

Sample information taken from Zetter’s Online (ZOL) and Zetter’s Political 

Companion (ZPC). 

0208 364 0009 

Single Issue of ZPC - £20 (inc. p&p) 

Yearly Subscription of ZPC (Four Issues) - £65 (inc. p&p) 

Zetter’s Online - Prices vary, please contact us for details. 

info@zeerspolical.com 

Zetter’s Political Services Ltd, 6 Radcliffe Road, London N21 2SE 

T: 020 8364 0009 

www.zeersonline.com 

E: info@zetterspolitical.com 

@ZettersOnline 

Phone 

Email 


Mobile 

THE NHS ONE YEAR ON: 

PROGRESS? 

LORD HOWE, ANDY BURNHAM, STEPHEN 

DORRELL, ANDREW GEORGE, SARAH 

WOLLASTON, NORMAN TEBBIT, BRITISH 

MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AND 

ROYAL COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS 

HIGHER EDUCATION: THE 

KEY TO KEEPING BRITAIN 

AHEAD IN THE GLOBAL RACE 

DAVID WILLETTS, LIAM BYRNE, 

ADRIAN BAILEY, TIM FARRON AND 

CAROLINE DINENAGE 

Cheques should be made payable to First Publishing Ltd and sent to: Politics First, First Publishing Limited, Kemp 

House, 152 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX 

September/October 2014 Politics First 5

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW: 

JON 

CRAIG 

On your marks, get set, go... 

because Sky’s the limit! 

Jon Craig, Sky News’ Chief Political Correspondent, talks with 

Marcus Papadopoulos about what will be happening during the last 

autumn party conference season before the 2015 general election 

One of the main events on the 

UK political calendar is the 

autumn party conference 

season when the three main 

parties, together with journalists, lobbyists 

and international observers, descend 

on towns and cities across the country. 

This year, Manchester, Birmingham 

and Glasgow are playing host to the Labour, 

Conservative and Liberal Democrat 

parties, respectively. 

However, this year’s conference season 

is no ordinary one. It is the last before 

the 2015 general election – an 

election which is set to be one of the 

most intriguing that Britain has experienced 

in a long while. 

Feelings of uncertainty in regard to the 

forthcoming general election plague the 

three parties going into the conference 

season but, at the same time, all three 

believe that there is reason for optimism 

as David Cameron, Ed Miliband and 

Nick Clegg have begun to cite policies 

and events which they consider will be 

vote winners for the British electorate. 

On May 7, 2015, the British 

electorate, having shown signs of voter 

apathy and a disinterest in the three 

parties for a number of years now, will 

be asked to cast their votes on who they 

want to see govern the country. And the 

foundation for the Conservatives, Labour 

and the Liberal Democrats appealing to 

a weary electorate will be set during this 

year’s conference season. 

So, what can the electorate expect to 

see during the conferences? To discuss 

that critically important question, enter 

Jon Craig - Sky News’ Chief Political 

Correspondent. 

Jon Craig is one of the most experienced 

broadcasters and print journalists 

on the circuit, having been a political 

correspondent for 32 years, working 

on titles such as the Daily Express and 

The Sunday Times and presenting on 

BBC London. As this author frequently 

remarks: “When there’s a story knocking 

about, Jon Craig is sure to be about!” 

In an exclusive interview, Jon assesses 

the last conference season before the 

general election. He discusses the parties’ 

standings going into their respective conferences, 

the dangers to David Cameron, 

Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg and what 

the electorate can expect to hear resonating 

from Manchester, Birmingham and 

Glasgow. 

6 Politics First September/October 2014 

www.politicsfirst.org.uk

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW: JON CRAIG 


Q What does this autumn party conference 

season mean for the Conservative, 

Labour and Liberal Democrat parties? 

A This is it! The countdown starts here! 

This conference season is the launchpad 

for the general election campaign for all 

three parties, with only a few months to 

polling day on May 7, 2015. 

So, this autumn’s conferences are the last 

chance for each party to bask in a week’s 

wall-to-wall coverage on television, radio, 

newspapers and online and sell their policies, 

their party leader and their leading 

personalities to an ever-more-sceptical 

electorate. 

Ever more sceptical because more voters 

are turning to smaller parties like UKIP 

and the Greens or not bothering to vote. 

Turnouts are down and the three main 

parties fear that as well as defecting to 

another party, many disillusioned voters 

will simply stay at home and not bother 

to vote. 

That is why the party conferences are so 

important. And none more so than the 

final ones before a general election. There 

is no room for mistakes, indiscipline from 

disgruntled ex-ministers or backbenchers, 

or ministers or shadow ministers 

going off-message. 

Discipline, focus and stick to the message: 

that is the order of the day from the 

parties’ high command. As a result, the 

conferences will be strictly controlled 

and stage managed – they hope! – with 

malcontents gagged – they hope! 

Q Which party will be the most confident 

going into the conference season? 

A Labour has maintained a modest lead 

over the Conservatives in the opinion 

polls throughout the summer, ranging 

from a couple of points to five points, 

depending on which pollster takes your 

fancy. 

But do not let that fool you into thinking 

Ed Miliband’s party is confident of 

victory next year. Labour MPs have the 

jitters, worried by Mr Miliband’s poor 

personal ratings, equally poor ratings 

on the economy and a belief that if their 

party is to win next year, the opinion poll 

lead needs to be much bigger. 

The Liberal Democrats, distraught at 

their dismal poll ratings and collapse in 

support since they have been in coalition, 

fear a wipe-out next year and, at best, are 

hoping to hold on to around half of the 

56 seats they hold now. 

Despite being behind in the polls, it is 

the Tory high command which is probably 

the most confident, especially after 

the huge morale boost of a comfortable 

victory over UKIP in the Newark byelection 

this June. 

Tory strategists, led by George Osborne, 

believe Labour’s opinion poll lead is 

soft and that the Coalition’s economic 

policy is starting to work. Their worry, 

of course, is will the voters thank them 

for it? 

“ 

This conference 

season is the 

launchpad for the 

general election 

campaign 

“ 

David Cameron trounces Ed Miliband 

every week in Prime Minister’s Questions, 

Tory MPs believe, and will do so again 

in television election debates. They are 

confident that voters do not want “Red 

Ed” as PM and that their Aussie election 

strategist Lynton Crosby will ensure a 

disciplined campaign, focusing only on 

the key issues and those which favour the 

Conservatives. 

Q How will David Cameron, Ed Miliband 

and Nick Clegg use their respective 

conferences to appeal to the British 

electorate? 

A For David Cameron, the Tory conference 

and the election campaign that 

follows it is all about trying to persuade 

voters to give the Conservatives an overall 

Commons majority in 2015 so they do 

not have to govern in coalition with the 

Liberal Democrats. A tall order! 

So, we can expect to see plenty of Liberal 

Democrat bashing, as well as an emphasis 

on those policies that the Tories have had 

to ditch because they have been in coalition, 

such as tougher trade union laws, a 

human rights crackdown and declaring 

war on Brussels. 

He has also got to woo back all the voters 

who deserted the Conservatives for 

UKIP in the local and European elections 

this May. How does he do that? Some 

Tory MPs fear that trying to outdo UKIP 

will backfire. 

Ed Miliband has to convince voters – 

and, indeed, plenty in his own party - that 

he is a Prime Minister in waiting and not 

another loser like Michael Foot or Neil 

Kinnock. He also has a big job to do to 

persuade voters that he is not “weird” or 

“geeky”, as some polls have suggested he 

is seen by many voters. 

He needs more eye-catching policies like 

his energy prize freeze, which was initially 

dismissed as a gimmick by the Tories 

and then threw them into a panic when 

they realised it was popular with voters. 

His supporters claim he is at his best 

when taking on the big vested interests, 

though some Labour MPs caution that he 

must not appear to be too anti-business. 

Above all, Mr Miliband has to persuade 

voters to imagine him and his wife Justine 

standing on the steps of 10 Downing 

Street on May 8 next year. In 1992, Labour 

had an opinion poll lead over John 

Major’s Conservatives, but it slipped away 

at the end of the election campaign and 

Neil Kinnock could not convince voters 

he was Prime Minister material. 

Nick Clegg has to persuade voters 

that the Liberal Democrats have made 

a difference and had a positive impact 

in government since 2010. He needs to 

claim the credit for some of the Coalition’s 

more popular measures which were 

originally Liberal Democrat proposals, 

like the £10,000 income tax threshold, 

which George Osborne now shamelessly 

claims the credit for. 

He needs to rediscover the sort of elec- 

trifying form he showed in the “I agree 

with Nick” television debates in 2010. 

His critics claim no-one agrees with Nick 

anymore because of his broken promises. 

So, he has to persuade those disillusioned 

voters not to drift back to Labour. And 

he needs to boast proudly about how the 

Liberal Democrats have curbed some 

of the Tories’ more extreme policies in 

government. 

Q What will be the buzzwords emanating 

from Manchester Central, The ICC 

Birmingham and the Scottish Exhibition 

and Conference Centre? 

A Ed Miliband’s big slogan is “One Nation 

Labour”. No more “New Labour” or 

even a return to Old Labour. The aim is 

to persuade voters that Labour would 

govern for the whole country and not just 

the working-class, middle-class or any 

other class. 

Look out for many 

more left-leaning 

pledges from Nick 

“ 

Clegg 

“ 

I am sure we will also hear plenty from 

Labour in Manchester about “the same 

old Tories” and “tax cuts for millionaires”. 

Despite his July reshuffle, we will 

hear more, too, about David Cameron’s 

“women problem”. 

The Labour leader likes to talk about 

“the squeezed middle” when describing 

the effect of Coalition economic policies. 

That is not his own phrase. It was first 

coined by his fellow Yorkshire MP and 

ally John Healey. 

The point of those buzzwords is to 

convince wavering voters that the Conservatives’ 

policies benefit only a limited 

numbers of voters. Labour’s argument is 

that the Tories look after the rich, their 

policies hit people on middle incomes 







and women are worse off because of Coalition 

policies on tax, benefits and jobs. 

The Conservatives will hit back by 

concentrating their attacks on Labour on 

the “failed” economic policies or the two 

Eds, Miliband and Balls. We will hear a 

lot about the role of the two Eds under 

Gordon Brown “when they were in the 

Treasury”. David Cameron never misses 

an opportunity to taunt Ed Balls during 

Prime Minister’s Questions. 

Two slogans sum up the Tory economic 

approach: the mantra we also hear in 

PMQs, recited by Tory backbenchers in 

PMQs, about the “long-term economic 

plan” delivering for Britain. 

But the Tories’ favourite jibe at the two 

Eds on the economy, much used by Mr 

Cameron and Mr Osborne, is: “Why give 

the keys back to the people who crashed 

the car?” 

Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats 

will talk a lot about “making a difference 

in government”. 

The Liberal Democrats are unashamedly 

pro-European, too, so we can expect 

the Liberal Democrat leader to attack 

the Euro-scepticism of the Conservatives 

as “frankly ludiicrous”, a phrase he uses 

a lot. And in the first of his television 

debates against Nigel Farage this year, Mr 

Clegg dubbed UKIP “the party of ginsoaked 

retired colonels”. 

Q Can the electorate expect to hear 

policy pledges from the three leaders? 

A The energy price freeze pledge was 

the big news in Ed Miliband’s conference 

speech last year. He and his team will be 

hoping to come up with a headline grabber 

that is equally dramatic this year. 

Being the final party conferences before 

the election, we can expect more policy 

pledges than usual this year. Party leaders, 

of course, are notorious for stealing 

the best party conference announcements 

from the speeches of Cabinet ministers or 

Shadow Cabinet members. 

So, for example, we might see a major 

policy pledge on tax policy being stolen 

from Ed Balls by Ed Miliband for the 

leader’s speech. Cue more friction between 

the two Eds! 

Labour’s national policy forum, meeting 

in Milton Keynes this July, more or less 

signed off the party’s manifesto. New 

proposals include a vague promise of taking 

some rail franchises back into public 

ownership. 

Labour is even more vague, though, on 

its policy on Europe and immigration. 

We can expect Ed Miliband to attempt 

to sharpen up the message on both in 

Manchester. 

Many Conservative 

MPs are gloomy 

about their 

“ 

party’s 

prospects, while 

many Labour MPs 

are pessimistic 

about their 

chances of being in 

government 

“ 

David Cameron’s speech will be full 

of what a Conservative-only government 

would do if it won the 2015 election. 

There will be a lot of pledges on Europe, 

despite his pledge when he became leader 

in 2005 to stop “banging on about Europe”. 

These days, he is a prisoner of the 

Tory Right and UKIP, to the dismay of 

pro-European Conservatives. 

But he will argue that the only party 

that which can deliver a referendum on 

whether Britain should stay in or leave 

the European Union is the Conservatives. 

Nick Clegg’s rabbit out of the hat in his 

2013 conference speech was free school 

meals in primary schools, which has hit 

problems in its introduction. My hunch is 

that David Cameron will hand his Deputy 

Prime Minister another bone to toss to 

his party faithful this year to keep the 

Coalition intact until next May. 

Look out for many more left-leaning 

pledges from Nick Clegg, too, to try 

to hold on to Liberal Democrat voters 

tempted to vote Labour next year and to 

leave the door open to a Liberal-Labour 

coalition. 

Q What will be the main challenges to 

David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick 

Clegg during the conferences? 

A Dissent and troublemakers rocking 

the boat so close to a general election are 

the two big dangers for all three party 

leaders. 

For Ed Miliband, the rump of disaffected 

Blairites can still potentially cause 

trouble, pining in public for his brother 

David to rescue the party, branding him 

“weird” and unelectable and harking 

back to the glory days of New Labour and 

Tony Blair. 

Unlike most Labour leaders, Ed’s enemies 

are on the Right, not the Left. Peter 

Mandelson, Charles Clarke and other 

former Blair Cabinet members are the 

main dangers. 

Ed’s other problem is to keep Len Mc- 

Cluskey out of the headlines. The Unite 

leader, “Red Len”, signed up to the Labour 

manifesto at the party’s national policy 

forum in Milton Keynes this July, so he 

is under orders from allies close to the 

Labour leadership to behave. But will he? 

For David Cameron, the main dissent 

will come from bruised and angry exministers 

shuffled out of the Government 

this July. Who can forget the menacing 

sight of the two hard men of the Tory 

Right, sacked and snubbed, Owen Paterson 

and Liam Fox, standing at the Bar of 

the House during the first PMQs after the 

reshuffle, arms folded and staring directly 

at David Cameron in a threatening pose. 

Both will be the darlings of the fringe. 

And since most Tory activists share the 

pair’s Right-wing Euro-sceptic views, they 

will be greeted with adulation as they 

exact their bitter revenge. 

Then there is cuddly old Ken Clarke, 

coming at the Prime Minister from the 

Left and championing the pro-Europe 

cause, backed now by another sacked 

minister, former Attorney General Dominic 

Grieve, who lost his job because he 

was out of step with the Tory leadership 

on human rights. 

Nick Clegg’s dissenters are those Liberal 

Democrat activists who want an end to 

the Coalition now, before it is too late and 

the party is wiped out at the election. 

The good news for the Liberal Democrat 

leader, however, is that most of his MPs 

are broadly supportive and the poisonous 

influence of Lord Oakeshott – whose 

botched coup has destroyed the leadership 

prospects of his one-time friend 

Vince Cable – will not cause trouble in 

Glasgow. 

Q How will UKIP seek to respond to 

what will be happening in Manchester, 

Birmingham and Glasgow? 

A Nigel Farage is retaliating to the 

three main parties by holding the UKIP 

conference at Doncaster Racecourse 

in Ed Miliband’s constituency. He will 

triumphantly parade his new MEPs and 

ridicule the main parties in his usual 

amusing fashion, no doubt, and be back 

in the headlines after a three-month lull. 

But has UKIP peaked? Will those who 

voted for the party in the local and 

European elections this May stay loyal or 

return to Labour or the Conservatives? 

Nigel Farage has to regain the UKIP 

momentum from earlier this year. After 

the exhilaration of May, UKIP has had a 

quiet summer and the Tories have picked 

a former UKIP leader in Thanet South, 

the Parliamentary seat that Nigel Farage 

has had his eye on for some time. 

But he will argue, in response to the 

Tories’ drift to the Right, that if you want 

an anti-EU party, vote for the real thing, 

not the Conservatives. 

Q Do you have any predictions for the 

outcome of the 2015 general election? 

A Next year is shaping up to be a 

cliffhanger election like 1992. Right 

now, David Cameron would gladly take 

John Major’s majority of 21, although 

the following five years saw his majority 

disappear in a spate of by-election defeats 

and his party plunged into civil war over 

Europe. 

With the polls so close, and the Conservatives 

confident of closing the gap 

on Labour, it is entirely possible that the 

Tories could win the largest number of 

votes but Labour could have more seats. 

It is also likely that UKIP will inflict more 

damage on the Tories in marginal seats 

than on Labour. And polls by that wise 

old sage Lord Ashcroft put Labour ahead 

of the Conservatives in marginal seats. 

The leader who 

loses in May 2015 

will be dumped by 

“ 

a 

ruthless party pretty 

swiftly 

“ 

Some Tory MPs suspect David Cameron 

would secretly prefer another Coalition 

with the Liberal Democrats than a small 

Tory majority and having to rely on what 

Ken Clarke calls the “headbangers” of the 

Right on his back benches. 

Many Conservative MPs are gloomy 

about their party’s prospects, while many 

Labour MPs are pessimistic about their 

chances of being in government. 

The Liberal Democrats will lose seats, 

but even with 30 or so they could still be 

in Coalition with Labour or the Conservatives. 

The stakes could not be higher. The 

leader who loses in May 2015 will be 

dumped by a ruthless party pretty swiftly. 

That is why the 2014 party conferences 

are so important. 

Jon Craig 

Born on 9 August 1957, in Eastham, 

Cheshire; 

Attended Prestbury Church of England 

Primary School and The King’s School, 

Wetherby High School and Tadcaster 

Grammar School; 

Studied at the University of 

Southampton, graduating with an LLB; 

Following graduation, became President 

of the Student Union of the University of 

Southampton; 

In 1982, became Parliamentary 

Correspondent for Thompson Regional 

Newspapers; 

From 1986 to 1989, served as Political 

Reporter and then The Home Affairs 

Correspondent for The Sunday Times; 

From 1989 to 1992, served as Political 

Correspondent for the Today newspaper; 

In 1992, joined the Daily Express; 

In 1998, joined the Sunday Express as 

its Political Editor; 

In 2001, joined BBC London; 

In 2003, joined Sky News, becoming its 

Chief Political Correspondent in 2006. 





ADVERTORIAL 

Do animals 

matter? 

Nick von Westenholz, CEO 

How do you view the Food Security challenge we currently 

face? What can we do to safeguard our food 

supply in response to increasing global demand? 

Our ability, as a planet, to feed ourselves presents one of 

the overwhelming challenges of the 21st Century. Global 

population is estimated to grow to 9bn by 2050 (it currently 

sits at a little over 7bn), and that will happen against 

the backdrop of a changing climate that will make it more 

difficult to produce food in many regions of the world. 

The upshot is that Europe will be a comparatively benign 

place to produce food, so we need to reverse the current 

trend of downsizing our own agricultural productivity and 

expecting the developing world to provide food for us. 

That’s an approach that will prove potentially catastrophic 

both for our own domestic food security, as well as for 

the prospects of millions of people in many of the poorer 

parts of the world. 

Of course, sustainability in this context is crucial – we 

must produce enough food to feed ourselves without 

damaging the environment which we’ll continue to depend 

on for future production. So harnessing technological 

innovation in food production will be key. 

To this end, government has an important role in ensuring 

that R&D is appropriately funded and focused so 

that innovation makes out into the field where it can be 

taken up by farmers and growers – something the UK 

government’s current Agri-Tech Strategy must prioritise. 

However, it’s not just about ensuring the R&D pipeline is 

properly funded and structured - it must be accompanied 

by a regulatory system that doesn’t stifle innovation by 

preventing farmers from having access to the tools they 

need. The UK government must challenge the current 

approach being taken by European regulators and policymakers 

on issues such as pesticides and GMOs, which 

demonstrates an over-emphasis on precaution that fails 

to recognise the vital role these technologies can play in 

feeding the world. 

Government must also ensure there is balanced debate 

around the role of technology in food production across 

the board, which considers benefit alongside risk, and 

emphasises the safeguards that are in place to minimise 

adverse impacts on the environment and public health. 

What is the CPA and what does it do? 

We are the trade association for pesticide manufacturers 

in the UK, with members ranging from multinationals with 

UK based R&D and manufacturing capacity, to smaller 

suppliers in the garden and amenity sectors. 

Our main role is representing and promoting the industry, 

educating and informing the public and policymakers 

of the benefits the industry and its products provide. We 

work to ensure pesticides, known professionally in agriculture 

as crop protection products, are used responsibly 

and safely and we provide the public with information on 

how they are regulated. We are not just UK focused, but 

also keep track of developments in Europe, as pesticide 

legislation falls under EU law. 

What are the key challenges facing UK farmers? 

There’s no doubt that UK farmers are facing a tipping 

point. The tools they need to protect yields and play their 

part in feeding a growing global population are being 

relentlessly taken away from them. It’s right that products 

such as pesticides are regulated to ensure they’re safe 

for use, but we’re now subject to a system which has 

become paralysed by its obsession with precaution over 

innovation, and which seems to be oblivious to the hugely 

important role crop protection products play in food production. 

We take our responsibility to wildlife and the environment 

very seriously. Our products are designed to be 

used in a modern, professional and sustainable farming 

system that optimises productivity while minimising 

environmental impact. Despite this, we continue to see 

misleading campaigns against pesticides on grounds of 

health or biodiversity which ignore the reality about their 

impact, which are founded on scaremongering and which 

present a very serious obstacle to food security. 

Every second we lose an area of global farmland the 

size of a football field while two more people are added 

to the world’s population. That should be a signal to 

European policy-makers to foster innovation in agriculture 

so that our farmers can increase their productivity 

sustainably – sadly I fear it’s one that is being ignored. 

We run the risk that it will only be when food prices in the 

UK and across the globe reach unaffordable levels that 

policy-makers accept the nature of the challenge. If we’re 

not careful we will have undermined our own productive 

capability by then, through disincentivising R&D and 

dismantling agricultural capacity, so that we simply won’t 

be able to respond. This is why it is crucial that farmers, 

industry, politicians and the public in the UK make the 

case to European policy-makers to ensure food and farming 

policy is based on sound science, fosters innovation 

and protects our farmers’ competitiveness. At our Annual 

Convention in May we heard MPs from across the political 

spectrum agree that the next UK government should 

work to boost agricultural productivity by taking a mature 

approach to issues of hazard and risk. We look forward 

to working with them in the next Parliament to make that 

happen and to support a productive and sustainable 

agriculture. 

Are there 

votes in 

animal 

welfare? 

Photo: © Emma Telford 

The League Against Cruel Sports will present a series of 

fringe events at each of the Party Conferences this year 

to debate the challenges facing animal welfare with a 

wide variety of high profile politicians and celebrities. 

Entrance is free and all fringe events are outside of secure 

zone and open to the public. Refreshments served. 

Visit us at stand 28 at the Labour Party 

Conference and stand A12 at the 

Liberal Democrat Conference 

(inside the secure zone) 

23 September, 8.00pm 

LABOUR PARTY CONFERENCE 

The Radisson Blu, Manchester 

SPEAKERS INCLUDE: 

Maria Eagle MP, Shadow Secretary of State 

for DEFRA n Peter Egan, actor n Joe Duckworth 

of the League Against Cruel Sports 

29 September, 3.00pm 

CONSERVATIVE PARTY CONFERENCE 

The Crowne Plaza, Birmingham 


Dominic Raab MP n Neil Parish MP 

n Anne Main MP n Joe Duckworth of the 

League Against Cruel Sports n Lorraine Platt, 

founder of Blue Fox n Peter Egan, actor 

7 October, 1pm 

LIBERAL DEMOCRAT 

PARTY CONFERENCE 

The Crowne Plaza, Glasgow 


Baroness Parminter n Joe Duckworth 

of the League Against Cruel Sports 

n Liberal Democrat MP TBC. 

01483 524 250 info@league.org.uk www.league.org.uk 

Photo: © Martin Hicks 

/LeagueAgainstCruelSports @LeagueACS 

Registered Charity No. 1095234

PARTY LEADERS: 

Securing Britain’s 

future for all 

Britons 

Prime Minister 

David Cameron 

In 2010, when Conservatives met 

in Birmingham for our first party 

conference in Government, we said 

we would give Britain a brand new 

start. 

We said we would reduce the deficit; 

cut people’s taxes; cut crime; open 

brilliant new schools; and cap benefits. 

All those things, and more, we have 

done. The job is not completed – but 

we are on our way. 

And the world is looking on as 

Britain’s economy establishes itself as 

the fastest growing in the West. 

But this conference is not about 

patting ourselves on the back; it is 

about setting out to the British people 

why we need to finish the job we have 

started. 

Ahead of that critical election next 

year, here are four major reasons why 

people should back the Conservatives. 

There is no such 

thing as 

“ 

government 

money, 

only taxpayers’ 

money 

“ 

The world is 

“ 

looking 

on as Britain’s 

economy establishes 

itself as the 

fastest growing in 

the West 

“ 

As we meet this year in Birmingham, 

1.8 million more people are going 

to work than in 2010; 400,000 more 

businesses are doing a day’s trade; 

800,000 more children are taking 

their lessons at a good or outstanding 

school; and 26 million workers are 

spending money – their own hardearned 

money – that otherwise would 

have been taken in taxes. 

First, we are the team with a longterm 

plan – a plan that is working. 

By cutting the deficit, cutting taxes, 

creating jobs, reducing immigration, 

capping welfare and delivering the 

best schools and skills, we are securing 

Britain’s future. 

You can see it around us in 

Birmingham – in hundreds of new 

businesses, thousands of new 

apprenticeships, multi-million-pound 

road and rail upgrades, and billionpound 

investment in the city’s car 

manufacturing. 

That proves we are leading a recovery 

for all of Britain. 

But we are not there yet – not by 

a long way. We will only reach that 

better, brighter tomorrow if we stick to 

the plan today. 

The second message is about the 

values which underpin our long-term 

plan. Those are not just Conservative 

values; they are British values, too. 

We believe that the best route out 

of poverty is work; that it is wrong to 

burden our children with debts that we 

should have paid ourselves; that work 

should always pay; that fairness is as 

much about what you put in as what 

you get out; that there is no such thing 

as government money, only taxpayers’ 

money; and, crucially, as I put it on the 

steps of Downing Street in 2010, that 

those who can, should, and those who 

cannot, we will always help. 

So, if you are ill, we will look after 

you; if you are elderly, we will look out 

for you; if you are out of work, we will 

do everything we can to help you find 

a job and reach your potential. That 

is the Conservative way, and it is the 

British way, as well. 

The third message is this: we cannot 

let Labour anywhere near the nation’s 

finances again. 

P.T.O 




Modern infrastructure is key 

to Britain’s future 

ADVERTORIAL 

John Horgan, Group Managing Director of Europe, Middle East and 

India at URS, speaks to Marcus Papadopoulos about the economic 

impact of infrastructure 

Four years ago, they left us with 

one of the biggest deficits in the 

West and the deepest recession in our 

peacetime history. 

Today, they are threatening to do it 

all over again, with more spending, 

more borrowing, more taxes and more 

debt – more than our children could 

ever hope to be able to pay. 

Our fourth message is about the 

future, because the Conservative 

Party did not come into government 

just to fix things, or to improve our 

position on league tables or graphs. 

We came in to build a better, 

brighter future – not just for one part 

of the country but for every single 

region, every single town, every single 

family. 

So, at this conference, we need 

to clearly spell out our ambition for 

Britain: that we do not just want more 

jobs – we want full employment; 

The Conservative 

Party did not come 

into government 

“ 

just 

to fix things 

“ 

we do not just want to get the 

deficit down – we want to get rid 

of it altogether and run a budget 

surplus; and we do not just want more 

apprenticeships – we want every 

school leaver who does not choose 

university to learn and earn as an 

apprentice. 

That is what a brighter future looks 

like: an education system where state 

is indistinguishable from private; 

a welfare system which is a lifeline 

not a way of life; an infrastructure 

system fit for modern Britain, with 

superfast broadband, high-speed rail 

and improved roads; an immigration 

system that puts Britain first; and a 

society where those who work hard – 

wherever they come from, whatever 

their starting point – really can get on 

in life. 

We can get there. Just think what 

we have already achieved – both 

in the shadow of Labour’s Great 

Recession and within the constraints 

of Coalition. 

If we keep taking the difficult 

decisions, if we stick to our long-term 

plan, then with the determination 

of the British people and with the 

incredible work of Conservative 

activists, we really will be able to 

finish the job. 

Q: In today’s digitally connected world, 

why is investment in infrastructure still 

so important? 

Improved connectivity, combined with a 

growing population, has amplified rather 

than diminished the need for physical 

infrastructure. As countries compete in an 

increasingly globalised world, the quality 

of ports, roads, railways and airports can 

be decisive in determining success. If 

commerce provides the heart of a healthy 

economy, then infrastructure serves as its 

arteries. 

It is well recognised that investment in 

infrastructure, such as improved transport 

links or increased energy generation 

capacity, is strongly linked to economic 

growth. Every £1 billion invested in 

infrastructure will typically lift the UK’s 

GDP by around £1.3 billion, according 

to a report for the Civil Engineering 

Contractors Association. Few other forms 

of investment can unlock so substantial a 

return. Projects we are involved in, such 

as Crossrail, HS2 and London Gateway 

Port, provide a compelling argument for 

the economic impact of infrastructure due 

to the jobs and contribution they bring to 

GDP. 

Of course, growth arises not just from 

new transport links but from the people 

and places those links connect. Industrial 

regeneration and housing need to be 

joined up with infrastructure development 

from the outset, so that the economy can 

move forward as a whole. 

Q: How can cross-party backing for 

infrastructure projects be achieved? 

The UK’s major political parties all 

recognise the need for urgent investment 

in infrastructure, though they often differ 

in their approach. As a result, it is all 

too easy for a much needed project to 

become a political football, with protracted 

delays being the inevitable result. 

A logical step is to depoliticise 

infrastructure planning so that decisions 

are made in the long-term interests of 

the nation, rather than for short-term 

political gain. A more strategic approach 

to infrastructure planning that extends 

well beyond the five-year electoral cycle 

is crucial. Sir John Armitt has called for 

an independent National Infrastructure 

Commission to identify the UK’s longterm 

infrastructure needs and monitor 

plans developed by government to meet 

them. We support the establishment of 

an apolitical, independently funded body 

to assess national infrastructure needs 

and plan for the future. An integrated 

approach to all modes of transport is 

essential for meeting future capacity 

demands. 

Q: How does the UK ensure 

sustainable funding for infrastructure 

projects? 

More than £375 billion is required 

to finance the projects set out in the 

UK’s planned infrastructure pipeline, 

so government funding alone will not 

be sufficient. Foreign investment will 

be vital, alongside funding from the 

domestic private sector. To succeed, UK 

infrastructure projects must therefore 

match the appetite for financial risk and 

reward among those target investors. 

Ministers have already shown 

themselves open to adopting innovative 

financing measures on projects, such as 

the Mersey Gateway funding package 

underwritten earlier this year with a 

government guarantee. 

Innovative overseas financing 

techniques should also be considered. 

While the UK has pioneered public-private 

partnerships, the US has blazed trails in 

regional infrastructure funding models, 

including municipal bonds and projectspecific 

taxes voted through by the local 

electorate. These novel approaches to 

finance could play a role in turning the 

UK’s ambitious infrastructure plans into 

reality. 

Q: How does the UK’s engineering 

skills shortage affect infrastructure 

delivery? 

Skilled engineers are essential to delivery 

but the industry is struggling to recruit 

both graduates and experienced staff, and 

many experienced professionals are now 

nearing retirement. Decades of stop-start 

investment in infrastructure have led to 

the current skills shortage. Technical 

expertise cannot be turned on and off like 

a tap. In a globalised industry, expertise 

migrates to those countries offering stable 

and rewarding career prospects. 

Apprenticeships help address the skills 

shortage, offering an alternative route to 

graduate entry. We are a member of the 

Technician Apprenticeship Consortium 

(TAC), a cross-industry group examining 

ways to help companies recruit and train 

apprentices more easily, and run our own 

apprenticeship scheme highly tailored to 

the engineering design industry. 

A longer-term approach to planning 

national infrastructure would provide 

project continuity and sustained demand 

for technical expertise. 

Q: What can be done to build public 

support for major infrastructure 

projects? 

The human dimension is often 

overlooked, but achieving public buyin 

when planning major infrastructure 

is essential. Truly transformational 

infrastructure projects bring disruption 

and change. Winning public support 

by conveying the socio-economic and 

societal benefits that will be delivered is 

vital. National infrastructure strategy must 

map onto the needs of local communities 

and stakeholders. 

The challenge is to meet the needs of the 

majority without the cost to the minority 

being too high. 





ADVERTORIAL 

“The Hyde Group is an award winning provider 

of genuinely affordable housing – making a 

significant contribution to meeting the country’s 

housing needs and improving people’s quality of 

life. As one of the largest housing associations 

in England, we own or manage around 50,000 

homes in London and the South East.” 

Service with a smile in Hyde’s 

customer service centre 

Hyde residents outside their home 

As these regions face the biggest housing challenge for 50 

years, Hyde is determined to play a significant role in helping 

to meet the demand for quality affordable homes. Our social 

purpose is to provide homes for people who otherwise would 

struggle to afford them by offering a range of options, from 

affordable rent to low cost home ownership. Each year we 

invest three times the value of our surplus in our development 

programme and over the last five years we have delivered 

around 4,500 new homes through a mix of social and affordable 

rent, shared ownership and outright sale. 

Our social purpose is our licence to operate; it distinguishes 

us from other developers. However, with Government capital 

funding diminishing, as part of efforts to reduce the UK’s 

deficit, we have to be more inventive in the ways we finance 

our new homes. We can only develop affordable homes if we 

generate surpluses from commercial activity, which delivers 

a range of new homes in different markets. The profits from 

the sale of these homes will make a significant financial 

contribution to our ability to fulfil this social purpose. Over the 

next five years we plan to build a further 5,015 homes – 3,400 

of which will be affordable, 600 for private market rent and 

1,000 for outright sale. 

We continue to build homes when 

many other providers are not 

We have a skilled team of people, brimming with ideas, and 

a management team and Board that are passionate about 

growth. They are ambitious to position Hyde to take advantage 

of emerging opportunities, by working more progressively with 

both public and private sector partners. 

But we will not lose sight of our social purpose. We are proud 

to operate with a business head and a social heart. Several 

of our large scale regeneration schemes, such as those in 

Bermondsey, Packington (Islington) and Stonebridge in Brent 

have won awards and transformed formerly troubled estates 

into thriving communities. 

Helping residents to get online 

Young residents enjoying summer holiday programme 

Through our social investment team, Hyde Plus, we help 

residents fulfil their potential. In the last year alone we provided 

advice and support to 3,740 residents; secured a total of £3.2m 

in benefit entitlements and additional income for residents, 

many of whom are affected by Welfare Reform Changes. 

In addition, we have helped 36 households to downsize, 

ensuring our residents live in a home they can afford, while 

releasing 40 spare bedrooms. What is more we helped more 

than 1,400 residents with employment and training advice and 

opportunities. 

That’s how Hyde makes a lasting difference. 



IT PAYS £71.4 BILLION, TO BE PRECISE. 

That’s the current value of the creative industries to the UK economy. 

Read our new Creative Industries Strategy and 

find out more at thecreativeindustries.co.uk 

Image Credit: Karmarama. Source: See www.thecreativeindustries.co.uk 

Raising awareness 

of bowel cancer 

Supporting Cancer Research UK and local hospices 

Bowel cancer, also known as colorectal 

cancer, cer, is the 3rd most common type of 

cancer cer 

Bowel 

in cancer, 

men also known 

and as colorectal 

women, cancer, is the 3rd most 

and common 

is 

the 2n 

type of cancer in men and women, and is the 2nd most common cause 

of cancer death. 

most common cause of cancer death. 

It is one of the most treatable of cancers with early diagnosis. 

t is one 

Each year, of 

more the 

than 41,000 most 

people treatable 

are diagnosed with bowel 

of cancers 

cancer and 43 people die from the disease each day. 

Research indicates that 9 out of 10 bowel cancers detected early can be 

with early diagnosis. Each year, more tha 

successfully treated. 

41,000 Survival 

people rates have doubled 

are over 

diagnosed the last 30 years and are 

with 

bowe 

continuing to improve due to increased awareness, earlier diagnosis, 

cancer cer 

improved 

and treatments, 

43 and 

people screening. 

die from the 

disea 

Regular bowel cancer screening has been shown to reduce the 

each day. Research indicates that 9 out 

risk of dying from bowel cancer by 16%. 

The NHS Bowel Cancer Screening offers routine screening to those aged 

0 bowel 

50 - 74 in Scotland cancers 

and 60 - 69 in detected 

the rest of the UK. 

early can be 

For more information contact your Helpline: Scotland - 0800 012 1833 

successfully cessfully treated. Survival rates have 

England - 0800 707 6060 Wales - 0800 294 3370 NI - 0800 015 2514 

doubled over the last 30 years continuing 

o improve due to increased awareness, 

earlier er diagnosis, improved treatments, 

020 8968 4340 

and screening. 

pdaisleytrust@aol.com 

Regular bowel cancer scr 

has been shown to reduce risk of dyi 

Reg charity 1103457 - The Paul Daisley Trust was set up in 2003 after the untimely death 

of Paul Daisley MP and is run entirely by volunteers 

rom bowel cancer by 16%. The NHS Bo

ADVERTORIAL 


A billion passenger journeys are made our 

rail and bus services every year. 

We’re part of the fabric of the 

communities we serve. 

We take people to work, to school, 

to visit family and friends, and then home 

again after a night out. 

We’re proud of our strong commitment 

to protecting the environment. 

And we’re the first transport company 

to receive all three Carbon Trust 

Standards for achievements in carbon, 

water and waste reduction. 


Robin Fieth 

CEO Building Societies Association 

Diversity is 

vital in financial 

services and 

it’s equally vital 

in housing. 

You only need to spend a short time watching 

daytime TV or flick through a newspaper to be 

reminded of an undeniable truth - Britain is a 

nation of unrepentant property lovers. 

Yet as a result of decades of failing 

to build, whether you rent or buy, 

housing is an increasingly scarce 

resource. 

The economist Kate Barker wrote 

her seminal report on the problem 

over a decade ago and since then, 

despite two Governments and 

three political parties all claiming 

that housing is a key priority, this 

situation has only got worse. 

But before we get too negative 

about the UK’s housing market, 

let’s take stock of how much it has 

changed and developed over the 

last 100 years. 

In 1914, aside from facing one of 

the bloodiest conflicts this country 

has ever seen, three quarters of 

UK households rented. By 1970 

51% of households owned their 

own home and from here on it has 

been the dominant tenure. 

Part of this rise in homeownership 

was down to the fact after the 

end of the Second World War 

we rebuilt and then kept on 

building thousands of homes. 

This mass production of property 

made owning a home relatively 

affordable in relation to wages. 

In England alone in 1968 we built 

352,540 properties - 203,000 

from private builders, 143,680 

Local Authorities and 5,540 from 

Housing Associations. 

By contrast last year we built 

109,640 properties in England, 

87,000 from private builders, 

21,670 from Housing Associations 

and 840 from Local Authorities. 

While there may be much to 

criticise the quality and type of 

properties built in the 50s, 60s 

and 70s, you can’t knock it from a 

productivity point of view. So how 

do we get back to that? 

Diversity is vital in financial 

services and it’s equally vital in 

housing. Along with freeing up 

more land and cutting red tape, 

we need to encourage and make it 

much easier for different types of 

builders and buildings. 

These include: boosting the self 

build sector; alternative affordable 

leaseholds like Community Land 

Trusts; Buildoffsite construction 

whereby buildings can be up and 

ready within a week; properties 

specifically built for rent, not to 

mention making shared ownership 

more attractive. 

Over the last 35 years the 

UK’s housing market has been 

boosted by stoking demand 

through the plentiful availability of 

credit. We now need to stoke the 

supply of housing and that will 

take strong political leadership to 

ensure housing is a key priority. 

Which ever party is in power, the 

Housing Minister needs to be a 

full cabinet post. 

The provision of adequate shelter 

is as essential to our nation’s 

prosperity as health, education 

and defence and it’s vital that 

housing has a strong voice in 

Government. If we want to ensure 

that the provision of housing over 

the next 100 years supports and 

grows with the country rather 

than holds it back, then now is 

the time for the Governments of 

today and tomorrow literally to 

build a better future.

KEEPING UK BROADCASTING 

ON TOP OF THE WORLD 

Who said that? 

(and when, and why?) 

THE IMPORTANCE OF FREEVIEW FOR VIEWERS AND THE TV SECTOR 

JONATHAN 

THOMPSON IS 

CHIEF EXECUTIVE 

OF DIGITAL UK, 

THE COMPANY 

WHICH MANAGES 

AND SUPPORTS 

DIGITAL 

TERRESTRIAL 

TELEVISION 

(DTT) IN THE UK 

It’s sometimes easy to forget just how good 

UK television is. Whether it’s Doctor Who or 

Downton Abbey, world-class journalism or 

sensational sports coverage, the dawning 

of a fully digital age has given us both 

quality and quantity, blockbuster shows 

and specialist channels for every interest. 

The UK television sector is booming, 

exporting programmes around the world 

and boosting our credentials as a global 

leader in the creative industries. Latest 

figures show our TV revenues grew again 

last year to a record-breaking £13 billion, 

supporting tens of thousands of jobs 

across the UK. 

Many factors contribute to this success. 

One critical ingredient is the choice of ways 

to watch, whether via a satellite dish, cable 

or aerial. At the heart of this competitive 

market is digital terrestrial television (DTT), 

commonly known as Freeview, which 

ensures virtually every home can enjoy 

an array of quality programmes without 


a monthly subscription. Freeview is able 

to keep pay TV providers such as Sky 

and Virgin on their toes and ensures that 

balanced national and regional news 

coverage and other public service television 

is available to everyone. 

The switch to digital TV made Freeview 

available everywhere but was just the 

start of transforming UK television. The 

explosion in demand for tablets and 

smartphones is revolutionising how 

we communicate and consume media 

content. This in turn has triggered a 

surge in demand for UHF spectrum – the 

airwaves - to boost capacity for mobile 

services, particularly video content. 

Switchover saw a big chunk of airwaves 

released for 4G mobile broadband, now 

being steadily rolled out across the UK. 

However, policy momentum is already 

gathering behind another big handover 

of frequencies in the early 2020s, or 

possibly sooner. 

Digital UK and the main UK broadcasters 

believe any future change in the use of 

the airwaves must continue to allow for a 

strong, free-to-air TV service, with the same 

coverage and line-up of channels people 

enjoy today. With the support of Ofcom, 

government and MPs, we want to ensure 

that any future change is properly planned. 

Viewers should not lose out, either financially 

or in terms of their channel line-up. 

We see a strong future for services such 

as Freeview. While phones and tablets 

offer great flexibility, all the signs are that 

the traditional television set will remain the 

preferred way to watch programmes for 

the foreseeable future and DTT continues 

to be the most popular platform, with 44 

per cent of all TV viewing. Mobile devices 

look set to continue offering the perfect 

complementary viewing experience, ideal 

for shorter content and watching catch-up 

services such as BBC iPlayer on the move. 

It’s easy to take the simple things for 

granted. Millions of families across the 

UK will continue to rely on TV through an 

aerial not only for entertainment but also 

as their means of staying in touch with the 

world around them. This is why keeping 

the Freeview platform strong, and allowing 

it to continue to evolve and develop, is so 

important to the health of the UK TV sector 

and to consumers across the country. By 

ensuring sufficient airwaves are available 

for broadcasting, we will keep our TV on 

top of the world. 

• FREEVIEW IS AVAILABLE TO 98.5% OF UK HOMES 

• DTT GENERATES £80BN FOR THE UK ECONOMY 

OVER A TEN-YEAR PERIOD 

• 92M FREEVIEW TVS AND BOXES HAVE BEEN 

SOLD 

• 95% OF THE MOST-WATCHED PROGRAMMES 

ARE AVAILABLE FREE VIA AN AERIAL 

• 45% OF FREEVIEW TVS SOLD IN THE FIRST 

QUARTER OF 2014 WERE SMART TVS, OFFERING 

ACCESS TO CATCH-UP TV AS WELL AS LIVE 

CONTENT. 


The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations is a vast treasury of wisdom and wit 

spanning the centuries—a browser’s paradise of over 20,000 quotations, 

comprehensively indexed for ready reference. 

Since the first edition was published in 1941, it has remained unrivalled 

in its coverage of quotations past and present. 2014 sees the 

publication of the eighth edition. 

Drawing on Oxford’s unrivalled dictionary research programme and 

unique language monitoring, over 700 new quotations have been added, 

ranging from the words of St Joan of Arc and Coco Chanel to Albrecht 

Dürer and Thomas Jefferson. Two hundred authors make their 

ODQ debut this time round. 

Now hear this! 

As a brand-new feature, the Oxford Reference Quotations website now contains 

links to dozens of recordings of the quotations spoken by the 

authors themselves. 

Jack Dee ‘You’re not surfing. 

You’re not. You’re sitting in 

your bedroom typing.’ 

“Every home 

should have 

a copy.’’ 

Sunday 

Telegraph 


1 

Coco Chanel 

‘A woman can be overdressed, 

never over-elegant.’ 

1168 pages 

hardback 

978-0-19-966870-0 

September 2014 

£30.00 


Policy 

Knowledge 

• 

With a focus on creating an environment 

where key issues can be examined and 

explored, Policy Knowledge brings together 

key policy makers, shapers and stakeholders 

involved in public policy to debate and 

discuss key issues. 

Each Policy Knowledge briefing ensures 

that there are ample opportunities to interact 

and discuss the issues of the day with the 

speakers and your peers from across the 

public, private and third sectors. 

Book by 30.06.14 to receive £100 off your next booking, 

when using promo code PKPF2014 

Policy Knowledge’s 

Upcoming briefings 

Improving the Sexual Health of the 

Nation 

– 1st October 2014 Central London 

• Health and Well-Being Boards: The 

Future of Healthcare Commissioning 

– 7th October 2014 Central Manchester 

• Supporting Young People Not in 

Education, Employment and Training 

to Boost Youth Employment 

– 7th October 2014 Central London 

• Increasing Employability in Scotland - 

Taking Tailored Approaches to Support 

People into Work 

– 8th October 2014 Central Edinburgh 

• The Future of Rural Scotland 

– 9th October 2014 Central Inverness 

• Tackling Obesity in Scotland 

– 9th October 2014 Central Edinburgh 

• Improving Outcomes for Looked After 

Children and Care Leavers 

– 15th October 2014 Central London 

• Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) 

and Commissioning Support Units (CSUs) 


• Creating Thriving Sporting Communities 

in Wales 

– 21st October 2014 Central Cardiff 

• Local Government under a Labour 

Administration 

– 22nd October 2014, Central London 

• Building Britain’s Low Carbon Future 

– 23rd October 2014, Central London 

• Creating an Efficient Health Service 

and Improving Patient Outcomes 

through Technology 


• The Future of Dentistry and Oral Health 

in England 

– 29th October 2014, Central London 

For more information visit www.policy-knowledge.com 

or call 0845 647 7000 

e: info@policy-knowledge.com 

t: 0845 647 7000 

w: www.policy-knowledge.com 

@policyknowledge 

policy 

knowledge

A fair private 

rented sector 

for all 

National Landlords Association - One Voice 

1.5 million 

landlords 

4 million 

homes 

£989 billion 

investment 

1 in 5 

households 

now rent 

The private-rented sector is changing. One in five households now rent their home from one of the 

1.5 million private landlords in the UK. The vast majority of landlords are ordinary hardworking people, 

who are trying to supplement their squeezed incomes, make a living or fund their retirement. 

An entire industry of builders, lenders, and 

investors are reliant on private landlords, who have 

invested approximately £1 trillion in property. 

The NLA exists to represent private landlords’ 

legitimate interests and helps to maintain a 

private-rented sector in which people choose 

to both live and work. 

We campaign on behalf of members, whilst 

providing them with ongoing support and 

training. We try to strike a balance to provide 

stability for landlords, tenants, and investors 

alike. We recognise problems in the sector 

where they exist and find solutions where 

we can, including strongly supporting the 

identification and prosecution of criminals. 

The result is four million homes provided, 

maintained against a backdrop of undersupply, 

and increased investment which 

helps drive up living standards. 

We want to work with politicians of all parties 

to ensure the private rented sector is fair for 

all those who depend on it. 

Landlord 

Services 

Campaigning 

Membership 

Total 

landlord 

support 

Events 

Training 

Accreditation 

47,000 Members and Associates 

200,000 Properties of various types and sizes 

managed by NLA Members 

300 Landlord meetings organised 

throughout the UK in a year 

38,000 Calls successfully dealt with by our 

Telephone Advice Line each year 

15,000 Landlords participate in NLA 

campaign activities. 



To find out more and to discuss the 

work of the NLA: 

Visit: www.landlords.org.uk 

Call: 020 7840 8938 

We www.politicsfirst.org.uk can help you in your dealings with the private rented sector 



A proud record of 

delivery in 

government 

Building a better 

Britain that works 

for everyone 


Deputy Prime Minister 

Nick Clegg 

Leader of the Opposition 

Ed Miliband 

The next General Election will be a 

chance not only to reflect on our 

achievements but also further set 

out our distinctive liberal vision 

for the country. 

When we look back, it is vital that we 

remember the challenges we faced in 

2010: our banks in crisis; our economy on 

its knees; crisis meetings in Brussels; and 

rioters on Europe’s streets. 

Yet, today, Britain goes from strength 

to strength. We are the fastest growing 

economy in the G7, more people are in 

work than ever before and GDP has risen 

above pre-crash levels. 

We put our country before our party, we 

put our national interests before our own 

interests and there would be no recovery 

without the Liberal Democrats. 

The rescue succeeded because of us and 

it is something every party member should 

be extremely proud of. 

So, we must not let our critics rewrite 

history. We went into government for 

good, decent, honourable reasons and no 

one should be allowed to take this away 

from us. 

We should also be proud that Liberal 

Democrats in Government have delivered 

an economic recovery that is not only 

robust but fair. 

In coalition, we have cut taxes for 26 

million for ordinary workers and taken 

three million people on the lowest wages 

out of tax altogether. We have helped 

business create 1.7 million new jobs, 

delivered the biggest cash rise in the state 

pension worth an extra £650-a-year and 

provided every child in infant school with a 

free school meal. 

We have also created 1.8 million 

apprenticeships, supported disadvantaged 

children through the £2.5 billion Pupil 

Premium, scrapped ID cards and passed 

the Equal Marriage Act. 

But, as we move from rescue to 

renewal, we must again shape the choices 

we offer voters at the next General 

Election and set out our distinct vision of a 

liberal Britain. 

It is our duty to build on our principles 

of fairness, freedom and trust in people, 

and offer British people the hope for a 

different, better and liberal future. 

We believe that nobody in our country 

should be left behind and economic 

recovery must go hand-in-hand with 

measures which create opportunities for 

everyone. 

It is those core beliefs that spur 

thousands of Liberal Democrats up and 

down Britain to go out in the rain, knock on 

doors and deliver leaflets day in day out. 

And it is why over the coming months 

we will commit only to policies which 

speak to a stronger economy, fairer society 

and offer opportunities for everyone. 

Those include balancing the budget 

by 2018 so future generations will not 

be forced like the Coalition to clean up 

the mess left by irresponsible former 

governments. 

We will ringfence the entire education 

budget - from cradle to college - so that 

no student is ever left behind again. And 

we will reward the unsung carers who look 

after sick friends and relatives, and who 

contribute so much to our society. 

Only the Liberal Democrats can be 

trusted to rebuild the economy in a fair 

way - a way that lets every person fulfil his 

or her potential. 

Labour, as we know, simply cannot 

be trusted on the economy. Ed Miliband 

in Number 10 would drag the country 

backwards, borrow too much, spend too 

much and risk our hard-fought recovery. 

It is not in the Tories’ DNA to treat 

people fairly – it is just not who they are. 

A single-party Conservative Party would 

back the better off, let employers fire staff 

without cause and allow schools to run for 

profit. 

We knew we would pay a price for 

working with the Conservatives. We knew 

we would have to do controversial things 

to clean up Labour’s mess. 

We knew we would lose the support 

of the people who had only ever voted 

for us to stick two fingers up to the other 

two. But, the Liberal Democrats can go 

into next year’s General Election with our 

heads high and campaign proudly on our 

record of delivery and the promise to build 

a stronger and fairer Britain. 

We fought for the policies which our 

country needs and we have laid strong 

foundations for the future. Our task now is 

to redouble our efforts and build a stronger 

economy and fairer society that offers 

opportunity for everyone. 

That can only be delivered with Liberal 

Democrats in Government. 

As we meet in Manchester for 

the Labour Party Conference, 

the big question in politics is 

whether we choose a new direction, 

one which means we can genuinely 

say that Britain works for all and not 

just a few at the top. 

Across the country, most people 

are treading water, working harder 

– and harder just to stay afloat – 

and are also less secure about their 

future. 

Earlier this year, I met a man 

in Nottingham, struggling with 

insecurity in his job. 

Every day at 5am, he would ring his 

agency to find out if there was work 

for him – more often than not there 

was none. 

Sadly, he is not an isolated case. 

The number of zero-hours contracts 

is now well above one million, there 

are five million low paid people in the 

UK and, shockingly, for the first time 

on record, most of the people who 

are in poverty in Britain today are 

people in work, not out of work. 

The fact that that is happening 

in 21st century Britain, the fourth 

richest country in the world, is 

something that should shame us all. 

While most people have been 

making huge sacrifices, David 

Cameron has stood up for a 

privileged few. He has given a tax 

cut to millionaires – while everyone 

else has to pay more – and refused 

to introduce a mansion tax to pay for 

the reintroduction of a starting 10 

pence tax band. 

The next Labour government 

will analyse every pound spent 

by government through our zerobased 

review and we will balance 

the books and get the national debt 

falling as soon as possible in the next 

Parliament. 

But our ambitions for Britain must 

be much more than paying down the 

debt. 

Labour has a plan to build a Britain 

that works for ordinary people, 

turning decisively away from a Tory 

government that works only for the 

privileged few. 

If elected Prime Minister, my 

government would create an 

economy which rewards hard work 

not just wealth, privilege and power. 

That would include writing a new 

chapter against insecurity at work 

and low pay. 

A Labour government would set 

a clear target for increasing the 

minimum wage for each Parliament, 

so that we raise it closer to average 

earnings. 

We would also ensure that people 

who are working regular hours, for 

month after month, are entitled to 

a regular contract, not a zero hours 

contract. 

A Labour government would 

improve the NHS, not run it down 

and privatise it. 

We will repeal the NHS Bill 

and introduce a guaranteed GP 

consultation within 48 hours, rather 

than forcing them to wait for weeks. 

By committing to build 200,000 

homes a year by the end of the next 

Parliament, we will ensure that our 

country offers a better future for all 

our children - not accepting that the 

next generation will do worse than 

the last without the opportunity of a 

home of their own. 

As we gather in Manchester, that 

is the new direction we offer for a 

better Britain. 





COLUMNS: 

PAUL ROUTLEDGE 

Man with the Mirror 

Emerald Check 

The Irish could decide who 

walks into Number 10 in 2015 

COLUMNS: 

JOHN COULTER 

With an eye to a media spoiler, 

Nigel Farage called his party 

conference the weekend 

before the Tories gather for theirs. And 

with typical swagger, he stages it in 

Labour-loyalist south Yorkshire. 

Doncaster racecourse, where publicsector 

Unison held its annual race day 

only weeks earlier, isn’t the obvious 

setting for a Ukip jamboree. But he’s a 

natural gambler, and his bet is cannier 

than it might look. 

Having made big inroads into the Tory 

vote, Farage believes Labour support is 

“soft”, even where it is most entrenched. 

And it doesn’t come more dug in than 

former coalmining country, where so 

many carpet-bagging Labour MPs found 

a secure electoral base – including Ed 

Miliband in Doncaster North. 

The figures speak for themselves. In 

the May local elections, Ukip blasted 

a hole in Labour’s long-standing 

hegemony in Rotherham, winning ten 

seats – seven from Labour - on the 

borough council. They are now the 

official opposition, and have their sights 

on the Westminster constituency. 

Okay, Rotherham is a special case. 

Labour was not exactly the flavour of 

the month. Former MP Denis MacShane 

quit and was jailed for expenses fraud. 

A leading councillor resigned to become 

Police Commissioner for south Yorkshire, 

and the ensuing by-election in which his 

wife was the candidate, was foolishly 

delayed, allowing Ukip to claim its first 

scalp last year. 

But that political misfortune can’t 

explain Farage’s success and near-wins 

elsewhere. Ukip picked up three seats 

in Sheffield, two in Wakefield, eight in 

North-East Lincolnshire, and one each 

in Bradford, Hull and Doncaster. Set 

Not so secure for 

Labour up North 

alongside Labour’s tally of 786 seats and 

control of most big authorities across 

the region, that doesn’t look particularly 

impressive. 

Drill down into the figures, however, 

and a different picture emerges. Even 

where it didn’t win, Ukip piled up votes 

in marginal constituencies that Labour 

has to win if Ed Miliband is ever to get 

his feet under the Cabinet table. In three 

wards of working-class Keighley, they 

scored over 3,000, and ousted a longstanding 

Labour trade unionist. 

“ 

Ukip piled up votes in 

marginal 

constituencies that 

Labour has to win 

In Doncaster’s old pit villages like 

Armthorpe, Conisborough/Denaby and 

Hatfield, Farage’s candidates regularly 

clocked up a thousand or more votes. 

It was the same in the former mining 

communities of Wakefield. 

So maybe nifty Nigel’s choice of 

Doncaster wasn’t quite so quixotic after 

all. Ukip may not yet be in a position to 

win in these “old Labour” constituencies, 

but they still represent a danger to some 

senior Shadow Cabinet members. Ukip 

polled over 4,000 votes in Ed Balls’s 

Morley and Outwood. His majority in 

2010 was only 1,101 

If they can do that in Yorkshire, where 

they traditionally weighed Labour votes 

rather than counting them, they can do it 

anywhere. And they have, in Sunderland, 

for instance, and Great Yarmouth. A big 

“ 

vote for Ukip is not necessarily a boon 

for Labour, whatever the psephologists 

claim. 

As Tam Dalyell might say about 

the rise and rise of Ukip’s workingclass 

appeal : “Why?” John Healey, 

former TUC official and Labour MP for 

Wentworth and Dearne, said voters on 

the doorstep told him they wanted to 

give both major parties “a good kicking.” 

That’s too simple an explanation. 

Traditional Labour voters already 

give the Tories a good kicking by not 

supporting them, in droves. Switching 

to Ukip is a genuinely new political 

direction, and I suspect the main reason 

is immigration. 

Working-class people feel more 

threatened by the influx of Polish and 

other east Europeans than the electorate 

of middle-class constituencies. They 

have taken many of the few jobs that 

have come to de-industrialised parts 

of the North and Midlands, and Ukip’s 

hard-line hostility to migration falls on 

receptive ears. 

It’s possible that “Faragemania” has, 

like Cleggmania, the seeds of its own 

destruction, and will fail similarly. But 

who’s taking chances? Election supremo 

Douglas Alexander warns members 

that: “Support for Ukip shows a clear 

disengagement with mainstream 

politics, and we as a party have to 

understand that and respond to it.” 

Miliband promises a worker-friendly 

manifesto, including curbs on “the 

abuse of migrant labour” by banning 

recruitment agencies that only hire 

foreign workers and “pressing for 

stronger controls in Europe.” 

Rather late in the day, he has finally 

deciphered the political writing on the 

wall. 

The Irish are coming! Never mind 

the outcome of this September’s 

Scottish independence 

referendum; it will be the Northern 

Ireland MPs who could decide the next 

Westminster Government in the likely 

event of a hung parliament. 

If the Liberal Democrats turn in 

another European poll-style meltdown, 

Tory David Cameron will be seeking 

another coalition partner if he wishes 

to retain the Downing Street keys. 

Cameron is also facing a potential 

electoral threat from Nigel Farage’s 

UKIP. If UKIP can hold its European 

vote, the Farage movement could 

seriously damage the number of 

Tory MPs returned to the Commons, 

triggering the hung parliament 

bargaining race. 

That has resulted in Cameron 

politically snuggling up to the 

Democratic Unionists who have eight 

MPs, with a Conservative/DUP coalition 

as one possible outcome. That would 

be electoral paradise for the DUP, 

guaranteeing its position as the lead 

Unionist party in Northern Ireland and, 

effectively, sounding the death knell for 

the once mighty Ulster Unionists. 

But what could kill this DUP dream 

would be a Cameron/Farage poll pact 

resulting in around 20 UKIP MPs and a 

Tory/UKIP coalition. 

All that assumes Ed Miliband’s 

Labour will not benefit from another 

UKIP mauling of the Tory vote. What 

if “Red Ed” can woo enough Labour 

voters back from UKIP to put him in the 

driving seat for a Number 10 coalition? 

The chances of a Labour/DUP 

Government are virtually impossible 

given Labour’s traditional sympathy for 

a united Ireland. 

Miliband may be able to call on the 

moderate nationalist Social Democratic 

and Labour Party’s three MPs along 

with Independent MP and ex-UUP Lady 

Sylvia Hermon and East Belfast Alliance 

MP Naomi Long – assuming the 

SDLP does not face another electoral 

drubbing at the hands of Sinn Fein. 

The one-time apologist for the 

Provisional IRA terror campaign has 

rebranded itself as a democratic 

republican movement, more akin to 

the now defunct Irish Independence 

Party and Irish Nationalist Party. 

In the Irish Republic, under the 

guiding hand of party president 

Gerry Adams, Sinn Fein has steadily 

increased its share of MPs in the Dublin 

Parliament so that after the next 

Dail election, Sinn Fein may well be a 

minority coalition partner with either 

Fine Gael or Fianna Fail, eclipsing Irish 

Labour’s current partner status. 

“ 

A 

Conservative/DUP 

coalition is 

one possible 

outcome 

“ 

As Sinn Fein is part of the 

power-sharing Stormont Executive, 

republicans could be commemorating 

the centenary of the failed Easter 

Rising in 2016 in government in both 

Irish jurisdictions. 

However, Sinn Fein – unlike the 

Scottish and Welsh nationalists – 

operates an abstentionist policy of not 

taking its Westminster seats because of 

the royal oath. 

Sinn Fein presently has five MPs, 

but has its sights set on the three SDLP 

seats and possibly one of the DUP 

seats. 

But to have any impact on a future 

Westminster Government, Sinn Fein 

would have to address its historic 

‘boogie man’ – the oath of allegiance. 

That is a crisis which has bedevilled 

Sinn Fein since its formation in 1905. 

In the 1918 General Election, in the 

immediate aftermath of the Great 

War, Sinn Fein won 73 of the 105 Irish 

Commons seats when Ireland was still 

one nation under the British Empire. 

Over the decades, the party has 

realised the folly of abstentionism and 

has successfully abandoned this policy 

in relation to the Dail and Stormont. 

After 1918, abstentionism relegated 

Sinn Fein to fringe status. 

It was not until the 1981 republican 

hunger strikes, which saw 10 IRA and 

INLA inmates starve themselves to 

death in the Maze prison, that Sinn 

Fein again grasped the power of the 

ballot box. 

If Sinn Fein was to follow the Dail 

and Stormont example and abandon 

abstentionism at Westminster, the 

party could form a Celtic Front with 

Scottish and Welsh nationalists – 

enough MPs to hand Miliband those 

coveted Number 10 keys in any hung 

parliament. 

One of the chief architects of the 

Sinn Fein ‘peace’ agenda – former IRA 

commander and current Stormont 

Deputy First Minister Martin 

McGuinness – is already laying the 

foundations for such an historic move 

by republicans. McGuinness has 

already met the Queen and attended a 

royal banquet. 

Sinn Fein will demand major 

concessions from the British 

Establishment in return for those vital 

Commons votes, especially if Scotland 

opts for independence. 

Only two outcomes will derail this 

Sinn Fein bandwagon – Nigel Farage 

becoming Deputy Prime Minister, 

or the miracle of a Liberal Democrat 

revival. 

Dr John Coulter is a political columnist with the Irish 

Daily Star 





CORRIDORS: 

A Britain ready to face the 

new global challenges 

Philip Hammond, 

Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs 

and MP for Runnymede and Weybridge 

“It is absolutely vital 

that Britain remains an 

outward-facing nation” 

ADVERTORIAL 

The UN ‘buffer zone’ that 

cuts through the Republic 

of Cyprus. Refugees and 

displaced persons have 

been prevented from 

returning to their homes 

for 40 years by Turkey’s 

army of occupation 

The scale and breadth of recent crises – the rise of the barbaric 

Islamist terrorist organisation ISIL in Syria and Iraq, the rapid 

spread of the Ebola virus in Africa, the hostilities between Israel 

and Hamas, and Russia’s aggression in Eastern Europe – demonstrate 

the range and diversity of the challenges we face in the early 21st 

Century. 

The relative certainties of the Cold War and its immediate aftermath 

have given way to an era in which challenges to our national security, 

our prosperity, our interests and our values can come from across the 

globe. In an increasingly interconnected world, where instability in one 

part of the globe can rapidly be transmitted to another, it is absolutely 

vital that Britain remains an outward-facing nation, ever more 

engaged around the world in order to protect our security, enhance our 

prosperity, project our values and protect our citizens and our interests. 

Since 2010, this Government has reversed the strategic shrinkage 

in our diplomatic footprint that was one of the hallmarks of Labour’s 

foreign policy. My predecessor, William Hague, boosted Britain’s 

presence overseas, opening new diplomatic posts across Africa, Asia 

and Latin America. With more than 250 new positions opened up in key 

posts overseas, and more to follow, we are demonstrating that the UK is 

determined to grow its diplomatic profile. 

Our embassies, high commissions and consulates are promoting 

British trade and exports with an energy, ambition and success that 

would have been unrecognisable just five years ago. And we are 

growing the diplomatic skills, language skills and the deep cultural and 

political knowledge of other nations that helps both to pursue Britain’s 

economic interests and advance our political interests. 

Those skills and capabilities are vital because foreign policy has to 

be about more than reacting to current crises. And it is the growing 

strength and depth of our diplomatic network that allows us both to 

respond effectively to today’s challenges, and to remain focused on our 

long-term plan for Britain’s security and prosperity. 

The attempt by the brutal and barbaric terrorist organisation, ISIL, 

to create an extremist caliphate in the heart of Iraq and Syria is not 

only a threat to the region; if it is allowed to take root, this organisation 

will seek to target us here in Britain, too. That is why, in addition to 

providing urgent humanitarian assistance to the hundreds of thousands 

of people displaced in Iraq, we are working with our international 

partners, and with the Iraqi Government, to promote an inclusive, 

sovereign and democratic Iraq that can push back ISIL’s advances. 

Meanwhile, in Eastern Europe, the UK has been at the forefront of 

European Union measures to impose sanctions on Russia in response to 

its illegal annexation of Crimea and its destabilisation of eastern Ukraine. 

We remain firmly committed to Ukraine’s sovereignty, independence 

and territorial integrity and we welcome international efforts to address 

the humanitarian situation in the Russian separatist held areas. But 

we will not allow Russia to exploit a humanitarian crisis to gain military 

advantage in the area. 

While we seek to deal with those crises, as well as playing our part 

in the containment of Ebola and ending hostilities between Israel and 

Hamas, we remain firmly focused upon advancing Britain’s national 

interest elsewhere. Nowhere, in the coming year, will that be more 

important than in Europe. Building on our impressive record of ending 

Britain’s obligation to bail-out Eurozone members, keeping Britain 

out of the fiscal compact, securing protections on Banking Union and 

reforming fisheries policy, we need to argue more powerfully than ever 

for genuine and widespread reform. 

With the Conservatives remaining the only party that can and 

will give the British people their say on EU membership in an in/out 

referendum, we will be making the case for a more competitive, flexible 

and accountable EU, putting in the hard work now that will prepare the 

way for a successful renegotiation of new settlement in the EU after the 

General Election, ahead of the referendum in 2017. 

The years ahead look like being a turbulent period in global affairs. 

That is all the more reason for Britain to maintain our global role, 

increase our engagement, strengthen our defences and enhance our 

diplomatic presence. That is the way to ensure both our security and 

our prosperity in the years ahead. 

Cyprus: a lesson in hypocrisy 

Leaders of the USA, the UK and other EU member states were quick to condemn what they 

referred to as a ‘land grab’ by Russia of the territory of Crimea. These leaders have continually 

stated that Russia’s annexation will never be recognised and have applied sanctions on Russia. 

However, it is precisely the same states and the same leaders that continue to turn a blind eye 

to Turkey’s illegal land grab and 40 year-long occupation of the northern area of Cyprus. 

Forty years ago, in July and August 

1974, more than 35,000 Turkish 

troops illegally invaded Cyprus. 

Thousands of Greek Cypriots 

were murdered, tortured, raped 

or ‘disappeared’. 200,000 Greek 

Cypriots were ethnically cleansed 

from their homes and replaced with 

more than 300,000 illegal immigrants 

from Turkey in a deliberate and 

cynical policy of ethnic engineering. 

This was followed by the catastrophic 

devastation of the European cultural 

heritage of Cyprus through the 

destruction of hundreds of churches 

and cemeteries by Turkey, 

an aspiring EU member state. 

Invasion, occupation and violation 

of territorial integrity are precisely 

what the West criticises Russia of 

committing in Ukraine. 

In order to avoid taking a 

hypocritical stance one would expect 

full support from these Western 

leaders for Greek Cypriot positions 

on Cyprus. However, we believe they 

have chosen to prefer hypocrisy. 

Rather than condemn the 

continuing occupation of the 

northern area of Cyprus they 

continue to pressure the authorities 

of the Republic of Cyprus, a full 

UN member state since 1960 and 

EU member state since 2004, to 

accept a political settlement that 

will legitimise this illegal state of 

affairs and condone Turkey. Such 

a settlement, which will effectively 

create the legal partition of Cyprus 

along ethnic lines, is disguised as a 

‘bizonal bicommunal federation’. 

But what is this ‘bizonal 

bicommunal’ creature? Where else 

in the world can one be found? 

The answer is nowhere. Anyone 

The time has come to search 

for a settlement in Cyprus that 

respects basic human rights and 

international law – something that 

no bizonal bicommunal solution 

can ever achieve 

who has studied the current 

proposals and predecessor plans 

such as the 2004 Annan plan will 

see that the plan is to create two 

ethnically separate zones, one 

Greek one Turkish, joined within a 

loose federation, which does not 

respect property ownership rights 

on either side of the artificial divide 

and which creates apartheid. 

Unsurprisingly this model has not 

been followed elsewhere. 

Artificial divides on racial grounds 

within multicultural states are 

abhorrent especially in the 21st 

century and within the EU. With the 

carving up of an existing EU member 

state along ethnic and religious lines, 

such a settlement sets a dangerous 

precedent for the EU. 

In any event we cannot 

understand how creating legalised 

borders can be said to be a way 

of unifying a country. Calling this 

a federation is an exercise in 

semantics. It is legalised partition 

and nothing more. 

The time has come to search 

for a settlement in Cyprus that 

respects basic human rights and 

international law; something that 

no bizonal bicommunal solution 

can ever achieve. Without genuine 

respect for fundamental freedoms, 

we cannot see how any Cyprus 

settlement can be made to work. 

www.lobbyforcyprus.org 

@lobbyforcyprus 

admin@lobbyforcyprus.org 

Lobby for Cyprus is a non-party-political 

organisation with the aim of reuniting Cyprus 



CORRIDORS: 

Assessing the new world 

Richard Ottaway, 

Chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee and 

MP for Croydon South 

“ The UK is at the 

forefront of the need for 

EU reform” 

Today’s world is completely different from the one we 

had 50 or even 20 years ago. It is globalised, multipolar 

and increasingly interconnected. News circulates faster 

and targets a wider public. Twitter and Facebook disseminate 

information and facilitate networking. The UK’s security no 

longer depends on its diplomacy and defence capabilities solely. 

Factors such as terrorism, cyber-security, the global economy 

and dependency on natural resources also play an important 

role. 

The growing influence of jihadist extremism is one of the 

biggest challenges for the world’s stability. The Syrian war 

and the Iraqi situation are not just regional conflicts. They are 

global issues. The increasing sway of ISIS not only threatens to 

challenge the regional status quo, but is a concern for the UK. 

According to the Government’s estimates, around 400 British 

citizens are currently fighting in Syria and Iraq. 

Frustrated British Muslims are lured into jihad by social media 

and other networks. They are flying to the Middle East and 

fighting alongside ISIS or al-Qaeda. Some of them will soon 

realise that warfare is not as glorious and heroic as they think it 

will be. Others will get proper training and try to export jihad to 

other countries. 

The conflicts in Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Nigeria, Libya and Mali 

pose real threats to UK security. The Government’s strategy is to 

support regional powers in combating Islamism and terrorism in 

their respective countries. “These problems will come back and 

hit us at home if we do not”, warned David Cameron. 

The Government aims to relieve humanitarian crises, help 


local authorities to cope with unsustainable levels of population 

growth and, finally, prevent the spread of jihadist terrorism in 

the UK. 

The situation in Ukraine, which demonstrates that old 

conflicts can suddenly re-emerge, is another pressing issue. 

The annexation of Crimea, followed by bloody clashes in 

eastern Ukraine, were a wake-up call for Europe and the US. 

The conflict has confirmed NATO’s crucial role in guaranteeing 

global security. Russian imperialism has resurfaced, proving that 

Moscow has never reconciled itself with the fall of the USSR and 

the loss of influence over its neighbours. 

From the outset, the UK, together with Eastern European 

countries, has been pressing to impose far-reaching European 

Union sanctions on Russia. London has also been pushing hard 

on reducing the EU’s dependency on Russian gas. The tragic 

downing of the Malaysian aircraft with 298 people on-board 

could be a turning point in the matter. Russia must enable a full 

and independent investigation of the crash, reign in the proseparatists 

rebels and establish a proper long-term relationship 

with Ukraine and the EU. If it fails to do so, Europe and the West 

will undoubtedly reassess its links with Moscow. 

The UK is at the forefront of the need for EU reform. The 

European elections showed a high level of discontent with the 

direction the EU is heading in. The EU cannot continue with 

business as usual - it has to change. The EU has to carry on with 

what it does best - deepening the single market and widening it 

outside Europe. 

So far, the EU has given UK companies unrestricted access to 

a market of 500 million of the wealthiest people in the world. 

That translates into 13 per cent of British jobs dependent on the 

EU and half of our exports worth £211 billion. There is more to 

come. The single market, if completed in services, digital and 

energy, could increase the UK national income by 7 per cent. If 

we widened that to include the US, it could increase the British 

GDP by up to £10 billion a year. 

However, at the same time, the EU has to get rid of red tape 

that encumbers companies and citizens. The UK supports the 

EU free movement of people, but will not accept benefit tourism 

and illegal immigration. 

In the past, the UK has been successful in shaping key 

EU polices such as single market, global free trade, liberal 

economics, competition enforcement and EU enlargement. The 

Conservative team, if it wins next year’s general election, has 

every chance to fulfil its promise to change the European project 

for the better. 


Last chance to get your nominations in! 

We welcome you to take part in The Public Affairs Awards 2014. 

The Public Affairs Awards will take place at Thames Room, Park Plaza, 

Riverbank on 9th December 2014. This is our inaugural awards – and 

we believe they could not be better timed. 

Politics is becoming interesting again. With a Scottish referendum, a 

general election and the possibility of an in/out referendum on the EU, 

the next few years will be an eventful and exciting time for your industry. 

Which is why it's time to start recognising and rewarding the hard and 

innovative work you and your colleagues across the industry are doing. 

We are delighted to announce that 

Jon Craig, Chief Political Correspondent 

of Sky News, will be compering the 

awards night. 

Get your nominations in before the end 

of September. 

For further details call 0845 647 9000 or email 

info@thepublicaffairsawards.com 

THE 

PUBLIC AFFAIRS 

AWARDS 2014 

Supported by

ADVERTORIAL 

Looking after the mental 

health of military veterans 

Recent figures indicate that 

there has been an increase in the 

number of ex-military personnel 

seeking help for mental health 

problems. Whilst there are a wide 

range of organisations offering 

support to veterans, it is the NHS 

which provides evidence-based 

psychological treatment and works 

with the veterans with the most 

complex needs. 

Since 2011, the North West of 

England has had a dedicated NHS 

psychological therapies service, 

hosted by Pennine Care NHS 

Foundation Trust. 

The North West investment in 

the service recognises that whilst 

approximately 11% of the UK 

population lives in the North 

West, the region provides almost 

25% of the army infantry, a group 

which the research indicates are 

at increased risk of developing 

mental health problems. 

Over 60% of the referrals to the 

service (which average 45 per 

month) are from non-health routes 

such as self-referrals, voluntary 

sector, Ministry of Defence, and 

criminal justice referrals. 

The service meets the Armed 

Forces Community Covenant 

commitment that ”For those 

with concerns about their mental 

health, where symptoms may 

not present for some time after 

leaving service, they should be 

able to access services with health 

professionals who have 

an understanding of Armed 

Forces culture.” 

Immediate family members of 

ex-military personnel can access 

treatment, which includes couples/ 

family therapy, and there are 

robust safeguarding procedures in 

place in recognition of the impact 

that a veterans mental health issue 

can have on those around them. 

“There is a lot of misinformation 

about military-related mental 

health and it’s treatment, and an 

increasingly confusing provider 

landscape, but it is dedicated NHS 

services like this one that can help 

veteran’s find what they need” 

says Dr Alan Barrett, Clinical 

Psychologist and Clinical Lead for 

the Military Veterans’ Service. 

The service’s success is due to 

its specialist nature, having a 

deep understanding of veterans, 

their needs and experiences. The 

commitment of the clinicians, 

the diversity of evidencebased 

treatments on offer and 

effective partnership working 

with a range of other services 

and agencies has allowed the 

service to achieve good clinical 

outcomes. This is evidenced in 

the independent evaluation 

of the service, undertaken by 

the Personal Social Services 

Research Unit at the University of 

Manchester who concluded that 

the service demonstrated “good 

engagement and beneficial 

outcomes for military veterans 

at a cost which is defensible.” 

“It is 

dedicated 

NHS services 

like this one 

that can help 

veteran’s 

find what 

they need.” 

Alan Barrett, Principal Clinical Psychologist 

© Crown copyright 

Dr Alan Barrett said “Veterans 

can be a hard to reach group who 

often display an understandable 

degree of ambivalence about 

asking for help, and may choose 

unhelpful methods to cope. We 

ask that veterans make their 

military experience known to 

their health care providers and 

ask that services take time to 

appreciate the needs of their 

veteran clients.” 

For more 

information visit: 

www.penninecare.nhs.uk/ 

your-services/militaryveterans-service

CORRIDORS: 

UK defence is fighting fit 

Michael Fallon, 

Secretary of State for Defence and MP for Sevenoaks 

“The flagship of the 

Royal Navy and the most 

powerful ship ever built 

in Britain” 

TRAKKER 

The ultimate guaranteed 

delivery service. 

Defence of the realm is this country’s number one priority. 

It underpins both our security and our prosperity. And no 

praise can be high enough for the men and women of our 

Armed Forces who put their lives on the line to protect us from 

harm. 

Since becoming Defence Secretary, I have had the privilege 

of seeing their outstanding work first-hand. On my first visit to 

Helmand and Kandahar, I paid tribute to the achievements and 

sacrifice of our troops over the past 12 years. They have improved 

life for ordinary Afghans and helped train a strong Afghan force 

– now numbering almost 350,000 – capable of taking charge of 

its own security. Above all, they have deprived the terrorists of 

a safe haven to launch attacks on British streets.But the chilling 

barbarity of ISIL fanatics, as well as Russian aggression in Ukraine 

and Crimea, remind us that we continue to live in a dangerous and 

unpredictable world. 

This Government is doing everything it can to guarantee 

our national and international security. Firstly, we are working 

alongside our Allies to tackle those threats head on. In Iraq, we are 

working closely with the Iraqi Government and our allies to deliver 

humanitarian aid, track down ISIL militants and stop the extremist 

advance. Recently, I was in Cyprus to meet those brave RAF pilots 

and crews who are helping to save lives. 

In Eastern Europe, we are providing vital reassurance to our 

NATO allies including by sending four RAF Typhoon fighters to 

Lithuania to patrol Baltic airspace. From this September, a full 

battle group of 1,300 troops and over 300 armoured vehicles 

including tanks will begin taking part in large-scale exercises in 

Poland. 


Secondly, we are making sure that NATO remains the 

cornerstone of our defence – united, resolute and ready to meet 

future threats. We have just held the first NATO summit on UK 

soil since the end of the Cold War. It was the largest international 

political gathering ever hosted in this country and offered us a 

unique opportunity to: galvanise the Alliance; speed up its decisionmaking 

powers; make better use of our joint capabilities; and 

reverse the decline in NATO defence spending and bolster our 

Transatlantic bond. 

Thirdly, we are making sure our Armed Forces are fighting fit. We 

have placed defence on a strong and sustainable financial footing 

for the first time in a generation. With the biggest Defence budget 

in the EU and the second largest in NATO, our commitment to 

investing to keep Britain safe is clear. 

Over the next ten years, £164 billion will be spent on providing 

our soldiers, sailors and airmen with the best equipment money can 

buy. 

At sea, the UK can look forward to the unprecedented flexibility 

provided by the Queen Elizabeth Class Carrier – the flagship of the 

Royal Navy and the most powerful ship ever built in Britain. And 

that capability will be complemented by Type 26 Global Combat 

Ships, six Type 45 destroyers and MARS tankers. 

Beneath the oceans, seven Astute hunter killer submarines 

– employing technology as complex as the space shuttle – will 

safeguard our interests while Strategic Successor Submarines will 

maintain our continuous at sea deterrent for decades to come. 

In the air, we will be welcoming the Lightning II, the most 

advanced combat jet in the world that will launch from our 

Carrier. And the RAF will also benefit from upgraded multi-role 

Typhoon fighter planes and a modern strategic and tactical airlift 

fleet including the C17, Voyager, and Atlas A400M. We will deploy 

upgraded Chinook and Merlin helicopter fleets, new multi-role 

Wildcat helicopters and Unmanned and Remotely Piloted Aircraft 

Systems. 

Back on terra firma, we are spending more than £13 billion on 

land equipment including tanks and other armoured vehicles. 

Our investment programme also reflects the threats of 

tomorrow. That is why we are making sure we have the 

sophisticated systems vital to countering cyber operations – 

including a £800 million surveillance package recently announced 

by the Prime Minister. 

With the last of the redundancies announced earlier this year, 

servicemen and women can now feel more secure about their 

future. With new investment coming through, Regulars and 

Reserves will be better accommodated, better paid and better 

integrated than ever before. 


Iveco S.p.A. Defence Vehicles 

I-39100 Bolzano - via Volta, 6 

+390471905111- dvdbzcom@iveco.com 

Iveco Defence Vehicles UK 

Iveco House, Station Road - Watford 

WD17 1SR Hertfordshire +44 1923259728 

Iveco DV’s range of Multirole Vehicles, Tactical and Logistic Trucks 

and Armoured Fighting Vehicles covers the full spectrum of on- and 

off-road military requirements. Together, they represent a considered, 

comprehensive and effective response to the needs of the 

military customer. Iveco recognises that such needs can evolve 

rapidly as they respond to the operational environment, doctrinal 

changes and altered threat. We therefore seek to identify or anticipate 

at an early stage how requirements are likely to develop, and 

shape our development accordingly. 

The 8 x 8 Protected Trakker, now in service with four NATO armies, 

demonstrates the results of this process well: from a COTS chassis 

Iveco has developed an adaptable logistic vehicle with class 

leading protection and mobility, capable of fulfilling support and 

resupply tasks right up to the front line.

Getting the RAF view 

to where it matters 

The RAF FF gathers evidence from regular and reserve personnel, 

(including single personnel) and their close family members on issues 

causing them concern. 

The Federation is funded by the RAF but is independent of the chain of 

command and seeks to represent these views to infl uence policy and bring 

about changes for the better. 

The RAF FF also provides a signposting service; maintains a 

comprehensive website; produces Envoy, its quarterly magazine and uses 

social media to promote its work and gather further evidence. 

The RAF FF engages at high level through: 

Regular briefi ngs with Ministers 

Evidence to the HCDC 

Annual formal evidence to the AFPRB 

The Service Complaints Commissioner 

The Welsh Assembly 

The RAF Senior Leadership Team 

The RAF FF is contributing to: 

The Armed Forces Covenant 

The New Employment Model 

Reserves 2020 Welfare Policy 

To follow RAF FF activity: 

register at www.raf-ff.org.uk 

to receive Envoy and 

eBULLETIN 

facebook.com/RAFFamFed 

twitter.com/RAF_FF 

www.raf-ff.org.uk 

01780 781650 

enquiries@raf-ff.org.uk 

John Tubman, Group Defence Director for Europe, Middle East 

and India at URS, speaks to Marcus Papadopoulos about 

the UK defence industry 

Q How will the UK’s defence needs 

change over the next decade? 

Naturally the UK must maintain the ability 

to protect its own national security, but as 

a nation with global interests it must do 

so in cooperation with allies and partners. 

Rather than a safer world, today the UK 

faces an ever widening spectrum of threats. 

Hybrid warfare has emerged, where conflicts 

are fought on digital and economic fronts, 

through proxies and by covert special forces. 

Amid this uncertainty, the UK must maintain 

a balanced, flexible and agile capability to 

react to threats both at home and overseas. 

It must also harden its defences in new 

ways, strengthening the physical protection 

and operational resilience of critical national 

infrastructure. This may mean rethinking the 

design and operation of facilities to contain 

the impact of terrorist attacks and mitigate 

natural disasters. 

Q Does the UK have the required 

defence capabilities for a changing 

global geopolitical landscape? 

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) is currently 

pursuing an ambitious equipment 

programme, having brought its plans 

in line with resources over the past two 

years. But budgets are tight, as Ministers 

have conceded, and there are still some 

acknowledged capability gaps. There are 


challenges maintaining adequate personnel 

levels, especially in specialised areas. 

The compatibility of equipment and 

interconnection of logistics with other 

NATO forces is another issue. Agreed 

standards and shared protocols can cut 

costs and increase effectiveness in the field. 

Pooling of expertise can also help ensure 

the lessons of recent conflicts are more 

widely learned. 

Q What role can industry play in 

supporting the UK’s defence needs? 

Defence is no longer a matter exclusively 

for the military establishment or the 

Government’s National Security Council. 

Civilian involvement is on the rise, from 

greater reliance on Reserve Forces to 

closer relationships with industry. 

The private sector is providing support 

and services in vital areas, including close 

to the front line. Industry can support a 

more flexible approach to provisioning 

through better intelligence gathering, 

producing supplies in short order at times 

of need rather than stockpiling. 

Today, defence typically draws on private 

sector innovation and is increasingly 

engaged in outsourcing. Both the Defence 

Infrastructure Organisation (DIO) and 

Defence Equipment & Support (DE&S) 

have turned to industry to aid delivery. 

The savings and efficiencies generated are 

likely to help meet future budget constraints. 

Increasingly, private sector contracts for 

military services will mirror the international 

cooperation of NATO. Global companies 

bring vital international expertise that is 

transferrable to the UK, as well as the 

required scale and innovation. 

Q What benefits does the defence 

industry bring to the UK? 

The economic benefits of the defence 

industry are insufficiently appreciated. 

It adds around £23bn to the UK economy 

and directly employs 162,000 people and 

almost as many indirectly. Defence exports 

are worth around £9bn per annum. 

The impact on regions where defence work 

is concentrated can be much greater, 

especially if opportunities for other 

employment are limited. There is also 

scope for increased engagement with young 

people from disadvantaged backgrounds 

through apprenticeships and training. 

Q Why is defence a priority 

for Government? 

The provision of defence and security 

is the first responsibility of Government, 

without which no country can develop and 

prosper, economically, socially or politically. 

Government must balance many priorities, 

but defence spending has been repeatedly 

cut. Reduced budgets necessitate private 

sector engagement. Industry can deliver 

value for money through competition, 

economies of scale and by bringing 

best practice and innovation to bear. 

Q What do you hope for in the 

2015 Strategic Defence and 

Security Review (SDSR)? 

A fresh assessment of threats to the 

UK’s vital interests is essential. Given the 

current geopolitical landscape, maintaining 

current budgetary commitments is prudent 

provided wider economic circumstances 

permit. A full threat assessment should 

identify the evolving risks to critical national 

infrastructure and establish a programme 

to increase protection. We would welcome 

increased opportunities for industry to help 

cut costs, releasing more resources for the 

front line. We would also like to see improved 

conditions and incentives for reservists, 

who must balance military duties with 

career commitments. 

ADVERTORIAL 

In association with URS 


CORRIDORS: 

Safeguarding the duty to defence 

John Woodcock, 

a member of the Defence Select Committee 

and MP for Barrow and Furness 

“The case for the nuclear 

deterrent no longer being 

necessary is weakening by 

the day” 

over the next decades may be very different to those of past years, 

but they are no less vital. 

One of the first tasks of whoever forms the next government after 

May 2015 will be to face up to those needs – they will have just a 

matter of months to shape the 2015 Strategic Defence and Security 

Review (SDSR). Like its predecessor, published in October 2010 and 

which is already looking dangerously outdated, the review will not 

only be shaped by the threats Britain faces but by the incredibly tight 

financial environment in which the armed forces will continue to need 

to operate. 

Our message to the 

Government must be: 

DEAL WITH THE PLIGHT 

OF FORCES WIDOWS 

JUSTICE FOR 

F O R C ES W ID O W S 

ADVERTORIAL 

Major General 

John Moore-Bick CBE DL 

General Secretary of the Forces Pension Society 

No one could argue that the world is not a more unstable and 

dangerous place than it was the last time the three main 

parties gathered for their respective conferences. 

One year ago, we looked on in horror at the chaos and bloodshed 

in Syria, still shell-shocked by the fiasco of the prime minister so 

mishandling parliamentary opinion that he was unable to command 

a majority for limited strikes against Bashar al-Assad’s war machine, 

which had deployed chemical weapons against its own people. One 

year on, the conflict in Syria drags on, with a death toll approaching 

200,000. 

But now we must add ISIS to that nihilistic violence, a force 

dedicated to destabilising states throughout the Middle East and 

engaging in religious cleansing to achieve their ends. ISIS is an 

evolution of the al Qaeda threat, but one that will require a different 

response. And on top of that, there is the on-going crisis in Ukraine - a 

conflict at times between proxies of Russia and the government of 

Ukraine, but increasingly a direct confrontation on Europe’s doorstep. 

There are those who will argue that none of those current crises 

represent an existential threat to the UK. They would be very wrong. 

The fact that the ISIS murderer of James Foley was almost certainly 

British demonstrates that this is not a movement whose reach does 

not extend to Britain; nor can it possibly be claimed that a conflict on 

the borders of the European Union is somehow not one in which the 

UK is invested. But even if we were to accept that premise, what the 

past twelve months has shown is that attempts to read crystal balls 

on future threats and insecurities is a fool’s errand. Our defence needs 


But while pursuing savings, the next SDSR must avoid the traps 

fallen into by the incoming government in 2010, racing after false 

economies. That is a period that will always be remembered, nonetoo-fondly, 

for the aircraft carrier without any aeroplanes and the 

astoundingly over-optimistic targets for replacing regular soldiers 

with reservists. It is increasingly clear that the defence strategy of the 

past four years has seen a reduction in capabilities far greater than 

that necessitated by the Treasury-imposed cuts. Nor is it clear that the 

smaller armed forces we see today are necessarily better equipped 

to deal with new threats, such as cyber-terrorism or the radically 

different non-state threats of the sort ISIS represents. 

Alongside the SDSR, a major decision which will face every MP 

elected next May, whether in government or not, will be on the 

renewal of Britain’s continuous-at-sea nuclear deterrent, a key plank 

of Britain’s defence. 

In a world as unstable as this, with new threats emerging from the 

blue, the case for the nuclear deterrent no longer being necessary is 

weakening by the day. The decision on renewing Trident requires us to 

make a judgement on the likely nature of the threats to the UK in the 

2040s and 2050s. 

It is hard to see how any government which places defence as 

its first duty could make a judgement that a unilateral gesture of 

disarmament in the current global situation would serve that duty. It 

is welcome, therefore, that both major parties are committed to the 

retention of a minimum credible deterrent, a decision that must come 

alongside a significant stepping up of efforts to achieve multilateral 

disarmament and the achievement of the Global Zero goal on nuclear 

warheads signed up to under the previous Labour government. 

The first duty of government is defence, but it also has duties 

towards securing global stability and disarmament. 


AND RECEIVE A 

VOTE OF THANKS 

Four years ago, before the 2010 General election, we were 

close to securing a change in the rules that would have 

allowed all Forces Widows to retain their Armed Forces 

pensions if they remarried or cohabited. 

Then along came the new Government, trumpeting the 

introduction of the Armed Forces Covenant; a commitment 

to ensuring that those who serve their country would not be 

disadvantaged for doing so. 

And yet four years and four Ministers later (Andrew 

Robathan, Mark Francoise, Anna Soubry and now Julian 

Brazier) we have still not succeeded in persuading the 

Government to abolish this archaic and repressive rule. 

If you would like to read the arguments in favour of changing 

the rules, and why the Government’s objections don’t stand up, 

visit www.forcespensionsociety.org.uk 

The Forces Pension Society, 68 South Lambeth Rd, Vauxhall, London SW8 1RL 020 7582 0469 

That’s why, with the weight of the whole Military 

Community pulling together, we must give a mighty push to 

spur this Government into action. If we don’t, we could still be 

running this campaign in another four years’ time. 

Our message to Government is very simple: stop the suffering 

of our widows; don’t force them to choose between love or 

loss of pension. 

Act before the Election and you’ll receive our vote of 

thanks. It’s simple. The new pension scheme AFPS 15 begins 

in April. Time the rule change to coincide with that and 

we’ll know if the Government has listened before we cast our 

votes in May. 

IT’S TIME TO ACT, PRIME MINISTER 

A member of 

Cobseo 

The Confederation 

of Service Charities

CORRIDORS: 

No place for domestic 

abuse in British society 

Theresa May, 

Secretary of State for the Home Department and MP for 

Maidenhead 

Every year, beatings, rapes and crippling emotional attacks 

take place behind closed doors. Those attacks inflict immense 

suffering. They shatter lives. And sometimes that abuse ends 

in tragic deaths. 

In 2013, 77 women were killed by their partner or ex-partner. 

More than a million suffered physical or psychological abuse. And 

behind those statistics is appalling misery, hurt and trauma. 

Domestic abuse is a serious crime that I am determined we 

confront. It is important we recognise that the abuse does not 

always involve violence. Controlling behaviour and emotional 

abuse can be harder to spot but can have a devastating impact 

nonetheless. 

That is why this August I announced a public consultation on 

whether we need a specific offence in order to tackle emotional and 

psychological abuse. We have already expanded the Government 

definition of domestic abuse to capture non-violent behaviour. Now 

I want to look at whether we need to strengthen the law. 

I want to ensure we hear the views of victims and experts to 

understand how we can offer the best possible protection. We 

want police and lawyers to see domestic abuse that stops short of 

violence as criminal. And it is important that the courts can consider 

ongoing patterns of behaviour when weighing up sentences. 

We believe that introducing a single offence could help police see 

domestic abuse as the horrific crime it is, provide greater protection 

for victims and bring more perpetrators to justice. 

Tackling domestic abuse is a priority for this Government. And 

already, we have done more on this than any previous government. 

Earlier this year, “Clare’s Law” – a law I have championed since 

becoming Home Secretary – came into force, giving everyone, 


“Tackling domestic 

abuse is a priority for this 

Government” 

man or woman, the right to ask the police whether their partner 

has a violent past. It was named after 36-year-old Clare Wood who 

was murdered in 2009 by her former partner, who had a history of 

violence against women. That information could have saved Clare’s 

life. 

Now that Clare’s Law has been introduced, I hope more women 

and men will be able to make informed decisions about their future, 

and be better able to protect themselves and their children. 

We have also introduced Domestic Violence Protection Orders 

which allow the police to put protective measures in place for 

victims, and ban a perpetrator from making contact with a victim 

for up to 28 days after an incident. In addition to that, our Police 

Innovation Fund has provided £1.4 million for body-worn cameras 

to help officers gather evidence at the scene of an incident. 

We have ring-fenced nearly £40 million to fund local services 

and specialist helplines. As a result, more rape support centres 

have been set up. And our highly successful “This is Abuse” 

campaign teaches teenagers that abuse is not always physical, and 

encourages them to re-think their understanding of consent within 

relationships. 

Alongside government action, we must change society’s 

attitudes to domestic abuse. Last year, I commissioned HMIC 

to look at the police response to domestic abuse because I was 

concerned it was not good enough. Its report earlier this year made 

for depressing reading. The report found that in too many cases 

domestic violence was being treated as a “second-class crime”. 

That is not acceptable. I am absolutely clear that I want the police 

to do more to tackle domestic abuse. 

So, I am chairing a national oversight group to ensure HMIC’s 

recommendations are implemented. And each force will publish 

a strategy outlining how it will tackle domestic abuse in its region. 

Of course, as HMIC identified, there are many good examples of 

officers who work incredibly hard to protect victims. A number of 

forces have written to me setting out immediate action they have 

taken. 

When perpetrators are caught, I want to see more being 

brought to justice. I am pleased that figures released by the 

Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) this July showed that domestic 

violence referrals from the police rose to the highest level since 

CPS recording began. Three- quarters of people prosecuted for 

domestic abuse offences were convicted. 

But, we must make sure we build on all that work. Every attack 

is an outrage, and must be stopped. We need to send out a strong 

message that domestic abuse has absolutely no place in our 

society. And as Home Secretary, I am working hard to ensure that is 

what we achieve. 


THE POLICING FRINGE 

returns to the 2014 party conferences... 

Join the debate on the future of policing at this year’s party conferences 

Steve White 

Chair, Police Federation of England and Wales 

Sir Hugh Orde 

President, Association of Chief Police Officers 

Irene Curtis 

President, Police Superintendents’ Association of England and Wales 

Chair • Mark Williams-Thomas , TV Presenter and Criminologist 

#policefringe 

will be joined by: 

LABOUR PARTY • 23 September, 17.45 - 19.00 

Lancaster Suite, The Midland Hotel • MANCHESTER 

Rt Hon Yvette Cooper MP, Shadow Home Secretary (invited) 

Jack Dromey MP, Shadow Policing Minister 

CONSERVATIVE PARTY • 30 September, 17.30 - 19.00 

Hall 8A, the ICC • BIRMINGHAM 

James Brokenshire MP, Immigration Minister, Home Office 

LIBERAL DEMOCRATS • 6 October, 18.15 - 19.15 

Castle Suite I, Crowne Plaza • GLASGOW 

Rt Hon Norman Baker MP, Minister of State for Crime Prevention

CORRIDORS: 

Britain must act more decisively to 

prevent violence against women 

Seema Malhotra, 

Shadow Minister for Preventing Violence Against Women 

and Girls and MP for Feltham and Heston 

The level of violence against women in Britain and across 

the world is shocking. And it is increasingly acknowledged 

that too little is being done to prevent those crimes, 

support the victims when they occur and bring the perpetrators 

to justice. 

In recent months, a series of scandals have exposed even 

further the scale and extent of violence against women and 

girls. Operation Yew Tree, Rochdale and Rotherham continue 

to shock with the scale of what they have uncovered in our 

communities – often vile abuse behind closed doors that the 

authorities felt uncomfortable about intervening in. Last year 

alone, 12.9 million incidents of domestic violence were recorded 

against women, while approximately 750,000 children will have 

witnessed violence in their own home. That is not a problem; it 

is a crisis. 

That is why the Labour Party has made tackling violence 

against women and girls a priority. In the Shadow Home Office 

brief, it sits alongside policing, immigration and national 

security as a key tenet of the department’s work. For Yvette 

Cooper to have a dedicated Shadow Minister for Preventing 

Violence Against Women and Girls as part of her team elevates 

that as an issue – it gives it a new level of political importance. 

And we believe that if we are serious about seeing a renewed 

focus on a national strategy that can bring about the step 

change we need to tackle the problem, political leadership will 

be key. 

“Prevention is a key 

aspect of the overarching 

approach to violence 

against women” 

Earlier this summer, the Shadow Home Secretary announced 

that in our first Queen’s Speech, Labour would be seeking to 

bring in new measures to tackle violence against women. This 

year we have also been consulting on plans for an independent 

Commissioner for Domestic and Sexual Violence, a strong 

voice for victims working in partnership with the Victims 

Commissioner and Children’s Commissioner. Their work will be 

vital - advising on policy, cross-Government working and gaps in 

the services available to victims. 

In the last few years, we have seen a drop in prosecutions and 

convictions for rape, child sex offences and domestic violence, 

even though the number of offences being reported to the 

police have gone up. 

At Conference this year, we are also updating activists on the 

emerging outcomes of Labour’s Women’s Safety Commission 

which has been led by Vera Baird QC and Diana Holland. 

Reaching out to women across the country, the Commission 

has heard stories of women’s day-to-day concerns about safety 

in the home, in the workplace and on the streets. Alongside 

that, the Commission is also looking at how the criminal justice 

system is working – particularly the way victims of domestic and 

sexual violence are made to feel. We have heard a lot about a 

“culture of disbelief” amongst police forces. We need to address 

that, as well as the sense that many women have expressed to 

me that the system works better for perpetrators than victims. 

We need to close the injustice gap and change the system so 

it is seen as fair and transparent. We need to see minimum 

standards in the way the police operate and the way the criminal 

justice system responds to victims, and better training for all 

those who work with women who have experienced incredible 

trauma. 

Prevention is a key aspect of the overarching approach to 

violence against women; and this must begin with education. 

The recent revelation about the rise in the number of rapes 

reported in schools is also a stark reminder about how we need 

to intervene to support young children with better sex and 

relationship education. 

That will make a huge difference for young boys and girls 

growing up in a complex world – to understand from a young 

age about why we need a zero tolerance to violence in 

relationships and the importance of respect and sexual consent. 

Too often than not, I have met women who are too frightened 

to report their abuse, or are struggling to leave their abuser. We 

need to step up our response to tackling domestic and sexual 

violence in all its forms. The statistics demand it, the harrowing 

stories from victims demand it, and we as society must demand 

it. 

Hepatitis C 

is curable and could 

be eliminated in 15 years 

Hepatitis C is a major cause of rising liver disease, one of the 5 big 

killers in the UK. 

It is scandalous that only 3% of people with hepatitis C receive 

treatment. Deaths from the disease are continuing to rise. 

Hepatitis C affects some of the most marginalised groups in society 

making it a major health inequalities issue. 

The Government 

can make a difference 

Prevent: Train the healthcare workforce in hepatitis C prevention 

messages and improve data collection on hepatitis C. 

Test: Incentivise the early testing and diagnosis of hepatitis C in primary 

and secondary care. 

Treat: Allow rapid introduction of effective new treatments, and ensure 

care pathways are in place. 

Campaigning together to eliminate hepatitis C in 15 years 



Blenheim is a charity that provides support services for drug and alcohol users, families and carers. 

We believe in people’s capacity to change. Registered charity no. 293959 www.blenheimcdp.org.uk

CORRIDORS: 

Ensuring adequate retirement 

income for all 

Steve Webb, 

Minister for Pensions and MP for Thornbury and Yate 

“Let us not forget the 

groundbreaking pension 

freedoms we introduced” 

ECO 

We have made the unthinkable a reality; people across the 

country are now interested in pensions. 

Perhaps that overstates this great renaissance a little 

– but it is fair to say that pensions have increasingly taken centre 

stage in UK politics, and people are sitting up and taking notice 

more than ever before. 

More importantly, we are finally reversing the longstanding 

trend of falling pension saving. As we look towards the end of 

this Parliament, I can confidently say that we will leave Britain’s 

pensions in a far better - and far fairer - state than we found them. 

One of the first elements of our reform programme – and one of 

which I am most proud - was to protect the income of all pensioners 

with the triple lock guarantee. That is a Liberal Democrat manifesto 

commitment which we have delivered on in Government. 

Because we have introduced a system in which the rate rises by 

the highest of growth in earnings, prices or 2.5 per cent, this year 

the basic State Pension is forecast to be a higher share of average 

earnings than at any time since 1992. 

But we have not stopped there. From 2016 onwards, a much 

more ambitious overhaul of the state pension system will come 

into effect, giving people a simpler, fairer system and a strong 

foundation on which to build their own savings. 

The new State Pension – to start in April 2016 – will provide 

clarity about what individuals can expect from the state as well as 

benefiting many women, self-employed people and the low-paid. 

We are setting the full level of the state pension above basic 

means-tested support. That should give people greater confidence 

that saving into a private pension is worthwhile. But our landmark 

state pension reforms have not taken place in a vacuum – they are 

part of a much wider-ranging programme of change. 


The roll-out of automatic enrolment continues at pace - almost 

four million people have now been automatically enrolled into 

a workplace pension with all large employers on board. We are 

expecting to enrol around six million more people in the next 

parliament. 

Of course, those new savers need to be able to save with 

confidence, and this is why we will bring in a cap on charges on 

default funds in defined contribution pension schemes. That will do 

even more to ensure fairness and good value. And let us not forget 

the groundbreaking pension freedoms we introduced in the last 

Budget. 

As a Liberal, I believe people should have the power to make 

their own decisions about how they spend their money – money 

that they have earned and saved over their working lives. Ending 

the effective requirement to purchase an annuity is a massive game 

changer and there are already signs that people are now more 

willing to save for a pension as a result. 

We need to ensure those big decisions for people about how best 

to use their savings are supported with clear, impartial guidance 

- and we will, with our free ‘guidance guarantee’ which will be 

available from April 2015, giving people the help and support they 

need to take advantage of the new freedoms. 

We have much to be proud about. But I am not spending the 

coming months resting on my laurels and regarding contentedly 

the good work we have accomplished. 

We have just started the new Pension Schemes Bill’s passage 

through Parliament. The bill is crucial – not only will it make the 

Budget freedoms a reality; it will also bring about new types of 

workplace pensions. 

Defined Ambition schemes, which the bill will enable, will give 

businesses and workers new options to share risk, rather than 

seeing all the uncertainty of pensions being loaded onto the 

shoulders of workers. 

The bill also creates the opportunity for collective pension 

schemes, where through the pooling of risks, we can deliver less 

volatiles outcomes for savers as well as better value for money 

Those types of schemes work well around the world, and we think 

British workers should have them as an option. 

And in the next parliament, the Liberal Democrats would go 

even further. We would guarantee the triple lock in law so that 

people in future can be confidant that they will get a fair rise in their 

state pension every year. 

Our reforms represent some of the biggest changes in the world 

of pensions in over half a century. Over time, they will create a 

fairer society so that people in Britain can look forward to a better 

retirement. 


The award winning South Yorkshire ECO Stars Fleet 

Recognition Scheme provides a “Win,Win” scheme for 

local authorities looking to tackle their Air Quality issues 

and fleet operators wanting to improve their operational 

and environmental performance. 

Along with other Councils in the UK and the EU, the authorities 

in South Yorkshire have tough air quality targets to meet. South 

Yorkshire’s issues relate to nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and fine 

particles, eg PM10, a significant proportion of which have been 

attributed to the volume of diesel engined vehicles operating 

on its roads. The South Yorkshire authorities led by Barnsley 

Metropolitan Council are pursuing a range of measures to 

improve air quality, among them the ECO Stars Fleet Recognition 

Scheme. With collaborative working and introduction of voluntary 

measures, the scheme allows the councils to reach out to fleet 

operators, promising significant improvements. 

South Yorkshire ECO Stars is currently funded through a 

combination of EU, Local Sustainable Transport Funding (LSTF) 

and Barnsley Public Health and encourages fleet operators of 

all sizes to improve efficiency, reduce fuel consumption and 

emissions, which all helps improve local transport related air 

quality. And most importantly to operators, it’s free to join. 

When joining, members have their vehicles and overall fleet 

rated by industry experts to assess their current performance, 

both operational and environmental, and achieve an ECO Stars 

rating of between 1 and 5. A bespoke “Road Map” is then 

produced containing tailor-made guidance to help improve the 

efficiency of their fleet. 

ECO Stars was launched in South Yorkshire in 2009 and now has 

76 members including logistics giants DHL, 3663 and Malcolm 

Logistics; bus and coach operators such as Stagecoach and 

First, supermarkets Asda and Sainsbury’s and a whole host of 

other nationally recognised companies. The scheme has since 

expanded and is now being run by local authorities across the 

UK in York, Edinburgh, Falkirk, Mid Devon, Nottinghamshire, 

Thurrock, Dundee, North Lanarkshire, Warrington and Sefton. 

ECO Stars is also part of the EU’s Intelligent Energy Europe 

programme. The initiative has been replicated in a further seven 

case study areas, in five other EU countries. Around 400 transport 

businesses have been audited and advised for free, helping them 

improve the energy efficiency of the equivalent of 40,000 vehicles. 

Such is its success that it is likely to continue developing, even if no 

longer supported by European funds. 

“ECO Stars is a brilliant example of the public and private 

sector working together to bring about genuine and 

sustained improvements in both working practices and 

the environment. It’s a scheme that we can be rightly very 

proud of in South Yorkshire.” Dan Jarvis, MP for Barnsley 

Central, speaking on the 5th anniversary of ECO Stars. 

Pictured (left) alongside Barnsley Councillor, Roy Miller (right) 

and representatives of Clipper Logistics and Airmaster– South 

Yorkshire ECO Stars 1st and 75th members. 

ECO Stars National Scheme Manager Ann Beddoes from Barnsley 

Metropolitan Council said, “With almost 300 members across 

the UK, ECO Stars has proved to be an effective tool for local 

authorities to communicate with operators of commercial vehicle 

fleets. I would encourage other local authorities to considering 

running the scheme.” 

For more information, contact Ann Beddoes at Barnsley Metropolitan Council on 01226 772632 

The ECO Stars scheme is managed by specialist transport consultants, Transport & Travel Research Ltd. 

Visit www.ttr-ltd.com for more information.

CORRIDORS: 

Intensifying trade with the 

world’s emerging economies 

Vince Cable, 

Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills 

and MP for Twickenham 

The rise of the emerging economies has become 

increasingly apparent for the best part of three decades, 

evidenced by a diverging pattern of growth, with 

developed countries’ economies averaging annual growth of 

around 2 per cent per annum and emerging economies closer to 

6 per cent. 

China is, on plausible measures, the world’s largest economy 

and India the fourth largest after China, the United States, and 

Japan. I wrote 20 years ago about those contrasting countries, 

speculating that, in the long run, the Indian democratic model 

could have more resilience – but, for the moment, China is 

clearly the more dominant of the two economically. 

Its share of world exports has risen from 1.3 per cent in 1990 

to 10.5 per cent in 2013. In 2012, it consumed more than 40 per 

cent of all refined metals globally. 

Although its economic growth has tailed off, relative to the 

period before the global financial crisis, it remains robustly 

healthy – forecast to be 7.5 per cent this year. In India’s case, 

growth is predicted to be 5.4 per cent – far stronger than the 

eurozone, but well below its potential. 

It is right to highlight the enormous business opportunities in 

China and India – as well as in major countries such as Turkey, 

Mexico, Brazil, Nigeria, Korea, and Indonesia. It may be that 

the main growth economies in future are elsewhere. Africa is 

currently the most rapidly growing continent. 

The clearest trend in global trade is a shift away from Western 

hegemony, but there is a major change too in the technology 

behind trade – the inexorable growth of online trade – with 

“We badly need export 

growth to rebalance the 

economy” 

consumers around the world increasingly bypassing traditional 

distribution channels. 

The UK’s export performance has been disappointing and we 

badly need export growth to rebalance the economy. To this 

end, we have increased the budget for UK trade and investment, 

and refocused its efforts on enhanced support for mid-sized 

companies, creating a stronger overseas business support 

network, and allocating greater resource to emerging markets, 

including Africa and Latin America. 

UK Export Finance, meanwhile, has provided over £12 billion 

to support exporters since 2010. We have reintroduced help for 

exporters of consumer and light-manufactured goods, as well 

as raw materials, and launched new products providing trade 

finance and credit insurance solutions for small business. I am 

putting through legislation to widen UKEF powers – including 

help for exporting supply chains and complex contracting 

chains. 

The results give some encouragement. UK goods exports to 

China were up 18 per cent in 2013, and 13 per cent to India. UK 

business has won £10.4 billion of contracts since 2011 through 

UKTI’s high value opportunities programme. Over the past year, 

all told, UKTI has helped 40,000 firms to export and to secure 

£21.7 billion of new business. 

Nevertheless, the Government’s target of doubling UK export 

values to £1 trillion by 2020 remains challenging. We know, for 

instance, that up to 150,000 small and medium companies could 

export on a sustainable, continuous basis. And just a third of 

small businesses have any kind of digital presence. 

Internationally, the UK is, in fact, ahead of the game regarding 

online trade – but we must exploit that early advantage. Hence 

the measures we have already put in place. We are spending £1 

billion to extend broadband infrastructure to 95 per cent of the 

UK. 

More generally, we are determined that business fulfils its 

export potential in overseas markets where we currently lag 

well behind Germany in the proportion of companies engaged 

in exports. We are expanding and diversifying business lending 

through the British Business Bank. The GREAT campaign 

continues to enhance the UK brand globally. And, on the 

diplomatic side, we remain a leading proponent of expansive 

trade deals and of open markets. 

Economic recovery is underway. If it is to be sustained it has 

to be export focused. Growth support is available. I call on UK 

business to increase its risk appetite and explore the overseas 

opportunities with which UKTI can help them. 

A progressive, multi-faceted, service industry directly employing many 

hundreds of thousands of qualified people. 

An industry that is increasingly driven by training and technology and 

where IT skills are essential. 

An industry on which our growth, wealth creation and people depend. 

Our Manifesto: 

● MPs must give positive, public recognition; and support the road 

haulage industry’s drive to recruit, invest and develop. 

● Government must provide targeted, evidence-based support where 

the industry says it is needed. 

We have recently seen and welcome: 

● The sensible increase in HGV speed limits. 

● The smooth introduction of the HGV road user levy. 

● The fuel duty freeze. 

We now look for: 

Take a new view 

of road haulage 

● Focussed funding for HGV vocational licence acquisition. 

● Re-invigoration of Government action to ensure the provision of 

adequate, secure truck parking. 

● Better roads. They are our workplace - as shops, offices and factories 

are for others. 

For more information, engage with the Road Haulage Association - 

providers of representation, advice, training, auditing and networking 

for the UK haulage and logistics industry. 

www.rha.uk.net 

j.semple@rha.uk.net 



CORRIDORS: 

A modern transport system 

capable of supporting the UK economy 

Patrick McLoughlin, 

Secretary of State for Transport and MP for Derbyshire Dales 

“£38 billion to 

improve Britain’s rail 

infrastructure” 

But the truth is that we could and should be doing even 

better. The UK has had chronically under-invested infrastructure 

for decades – well behind other leading global economies – and 

the impact of this has been considerable. 

The most obvious effect has been the increasing congestion 

on our roads. But that lack of investment has also held back the 

wider economy. By one estimate, growth was on average 5 per 

cent lower in each year between 2000 and 2010 as a result. 

I 

am sure that many of Politics First’s readers will have seen 

the compelling documentaries earlier this summer telling 

the story of Crossrail’s construction. If you did see the 

programmes, you could not fail to have been amazed by the 

precision engineering skills that manoeuvred a Tunnel Boring 

Machine as long as 14 London buses through a gap just inches 

above a busy tube line. 

It is possible, however, that fewer people’s holiday reading 

will have included the Public Accounts Committee’s equally 

fascinating report on Crossrail that was published this July. The 

report confirmed that the Crossrail project is not just an example 

of world-class engineering; according to the PAC, it is also “on 

course to deliver value for money to the taxpayer”. 

Those project management skills are probably most 

impressively on display when it comes to moving all the material 

that is needed to build the new stations through London’s busy 

streets to the cramped building sites at the core of the route. 

Take, for instance, the new Bond Street station worksite on 

Davies Street. There is very little room for storage on a site just 

35 metres by 70 metres in size. So, on a typical day, that means 

35 deliveries, in precise order, on time, every time or work 

literally has to stop. 

As I travel across the country, businesses - from construction 

to car manufacturing - tell me that they increasingly rely on ultraefficient 

delivery networks. It has been estimated that logistics 

like those are saving UK companies over £6 billion a year. That 

means cheaper goods for consumers and it makes our exports 

more competitive. It also means the success of our economy 

increasingly relies on regular, reliable and affordable transport. 

That is why as part of our long-term economic plan we 

are making a record investment to improve Britain’s vital 

transport infrastructure. That includes: £38 billion to improve 

and run Britain’s rail infrastructure, including the rebuilding 

of Birmingham New Street and, as part of a £400 million 

electrification programme for the north-west, faster more 

frequent connections between Glasgow and Manchester 

Airport; £24 billion for Britain’s strategic road network, that will 

see annual investment triple to over £3 billion a year by 2021 

and, over the coming years, we will build a 240 mile long smart 

motorway corridor stretching from Cheshire to Kent; providing 

over £10 billion to councils to maintain local roads, with a £7 

million investment through the local pinch point fund to cut 

congestion in Birmingham city centre; and building the first new 

north-south railway line for a generation, High Speed 2, in just 

three years time. 

Alongside that record investment, we are also determined 

to help hardworking families by reducing the cost of essential 

transport. That is why we have slashed fuel duty, frozen train 

fares for the first time in a decade and will be cutting the cost of 

getting a driving licence. 

We also want that investment to support the growth of worldclass 

manufacturing and engineering in Britain. We already are 

seeing signs of potential skills shortages in some areas such as 

technical civil engineering roles and in signalling. 

That is why improving and expanding our transport 

infrastructure is not just an investment in ports, airports, roads 

and rail. It is an investment in the long-terms skills base of the 

country; for example, the new High Speed Rail College will 

equip a generation of engineers with the skills needed to build 

the 51,000km of High Speed Rail that are planned here and 

elsewhere around the world. 

We are backing Britain’s long-term growth with a 

record investment to ensure this country has the transport 

infrastructure we need. It will help create jobs, boost the 

economy of towns and cities across Britain and equip the next 

generation of engineers with the skills British firms need to 

compete on the global stage. 



CORRIDORS: 

Time for major reform 

Mary Creagh, 

Shadow Secretary of State for Transport 

and MP for Wakefield 

“Labour will put the 

passenger front and 

centre of everything we 

do” 

DOUBLE 

WHAMMY. 

Britain’s transport system has long led the world. The train, 

the bicycle and the jet engine were all invented here. 

Transport continues to play a full role in the UK’s national 

economic life. 

It can help us to build new towns and cities, regenerate older 

areas and create jobs and growth. A modern transport system 

which drives growth must be accessible, low-carbon and 

integrated. 

Labour will earn our way out of the cost-of-living crisis by 

building an economy that works for working people. In transport, 

that means using our transport infrastructure to drive jobs and 

growth, while keeping costs down for hardworking families. 

A Labour Government’s investment in our road and rail 

infrastructure will be long-term and strategic. The current 

Government proposed to cut £3.9 billion of investment in 

strategic roads and £1.2 billion in road maintenance budgets in 

2010, leading to delays and cancellations of major road projects 

and contributing to the pothole epidemic. Labour will tackle 

the poor maintenance of some of our roads, which impacts on 

commuters and businesses, with a fix-it-first strategy to get our 

roads up to scratch. 

The next Government must make a decision on airport expansion 

in the south-east. Good aviation links are vital to Britain’s 

competitiveness and future economic success. However, we must 

remember the contribution of aviation to the carbon emissions 

that cause climate change and the impact of aircraft noise on 

communities living near airports and under flight paths. 

High Speed Two also has the power to transform the economic 

geography of our country. It will cut congestion on the railways, 

better connect our cities and help to rebalance the economy 


and create new skilled jobs and apprenticeships in every nation 

and region of the UK. But more work must be done to link HS2 

with future rail investment, especially in the north, to ensure the 

maximum benefits for the whole country from the project. The 

costs of HS2 are significant, and there can be no blank cheque for 

this or any other infrastructure project, but the benefits will be 

great. 

Labour’s ambitious plan for the railways will deliver a fair deal 

for both passengers and taxpayers. We will create a single 

guiding mind for the railways in order to plan investment and 

services. For the first time, a new overarching body will bring 

together Network Rail with a new representative passenger 

rail organisation and will contract routes, coordinate services, 

oversee stations, fares and ticketing, plan new rolling stock, 

support skills in the rail industry and ensure customer satisfaction. 

The next Labour Government will learn from the failures of the 

existing franchising process and put in place a system that is fit for 

purpose. 

We will learn the lessons of East Coast and legislate to allow 

a public sector operator to bid against private train operators 

on a genuinely level playing field. Drawing on our cooperative 

principles, we will increase passenger and employee involvement 

in rail services, giving users more of a say. 

We will devolve decisions over the running of regional and local 

services, including to Scotland and Wales, so that communities 

can bring together different modes of transport into a single 

network. Those reforms will bring our Victorian rail network 

into the 21st century, delivering efficiencies to invest in rail 

infrastructure and to ease the pressure on farepayers. 

Affordable and accessible public transport is vital to support 

economic growth. This Government’s cuts to local bus services 

are making it harder for people to get to work, school and town 

centres and are holding back economic activity. Labour will give 

communities more control over their bus fares and services by 

making it easier for local authorities to move to Quality Contracts. 

Cycling is a healthy, cheap and convenient way for people to get 

to work, school or leisure. We will support cycling by encouraging 

transport planners to consider cycling and walking when 

designing new road schemes and a HGV cycle safety charter to 

help cut cycling deaths and serious injuries caused by lorries. 

The Tories’ time in government will be remembered for soaring 

fares, fewer bus services, botched rail franchises and delays, 

infighting and incompetence on HS2. 

Labour will put the passenger front and centre of everything 

we do, stand up to vested interests and create low carbon, green 

transport networks that help communities to grow and prosper. 


We’ve dealt a couple of knockout blows in our 

fight against the high-speed rail project HS2. 

Firstly, we learnt our legal case concerning the 

Government’s non-compliance with important 

legislation designed to protect the environment 

has been accepted by the Aarhus Convention 

Compliance Committee. This Committee, 

based in Switzerland, is part of the 

United Nations and is charged with 

ensuring countries, including the UK, 

maintain adequate environmental laws. 

www.hs2actionalliance.org 

Secondly, we won the right to present our petition 

to the Select Committee looking at Phase 1 of 

HS2, despite HS2 Ltd’s crude and anti-democratic 

attempt to stifle proper and full debate on important 

environmental issues and compensation. 

It’s the closing rounds that matter and we are going 

for a knockout. HS2’s dismal economic 

and environmental performance is 

winning us more supporters every day. 

The Government can’t stand up to 

common sense – our Sunday punch!

Big change starts 

with small steps, 

but we must remember 

to keep climbing. 

The only way to keep patients at the heart of the care they 

receive is to consistently review their experiences and use 

them to improve health and social care services for all. 

300,000 more 

incidences where 

patients reported 

that they ‘always’ had 

confidence and trust 

in their nurses in 2013, 

compared to 2011* 

Continuous 

reflection & 

improvement 

The positive action taken as a result of the Francis 

Report is the first step on the ladder to a better 

functioning, patient-centred, health and social 

care service, but the ladder is long - and we 

must remember to keep climbing. 

Picker Institute Europe is a charity which: 

Influences policy and practice so that 

health and social care systems are 

always structured around the needs and 

preferences of patients and service users 

Develops tools and services to ensure 

all experiences of care are used to 

improve quality 

In 2013, there were 

around 100,000 more 

incidences of patients 

‘always’ getting 

answers they could 

understand from their 

doctor compared to the 

previous year* 

Improved care 

Empowers people working in 

health and social care to improve 

experiences by measuring, 

understanding and acting 

upon; staff, patient and 

service user experience 

Engage and empower 

professionals to act 

on findings 

Use appropriate 

mechanisms to collect 

and communicate data 

Go to page 47 to find out 

more about the Picker Institute’s 

views on patient and staff 

experience by reading the 

interview with our Chief Executive, 

Dr Andrew McCulloch 

Optik ® 

Inside. 

Enable a better 

understanding of all 

experiences of care 

Inspire a culture of 

care where patients 

are the priority 

Francis Report 

* Based on there being over 10 million elective inpatient admissions during 2012-13. 

Results taken from the CQC National Inpatient Survey 2011, 2012 & 2013. 

www.pickereurope.org 

Meet the pioneer of notebook technology, perfected through years 

of research. At the core of every Black n’ Red notebook is our bright 

white, high-definition 90gsm Optik ® technology, designed to keep 

your work in crisp, clear condition. Smart hardware you can rely on. 

Discover a smarter generation of notebook at www.blacknred.com

CORRIDORS: 

Achieving efficiency 

across government 

Jon Ashworth, 

Shadow Cabinet Office Minister 

and MP for Leicester South 

“Labour’s Zero-Based 

Review is taking a 

long-term perspective” 

After four years in government, the Prime Minister and 

the Chancellor are not only set to break their promise to 

eliminate the deficit and balance the books by next year, 

but borrowing is now expected to be almost £190 billion more 

than planned. 

Despite the Government’s boast to the contrary, a major 

part of the problem has been waste and inefficiency across 

government. 

Ministers, such as Francis Maude at the Cabinet Office, like to 

talk about “efficiency savings” and slap themselves on the back 

when re-announcing misleading and unofficial savings figures 

every year, but the truth is that the level of overspending and 

waste under this government has been staggering. 

Since 2010, billions of pounds have been spent on a bigger 

benefits bill, over £3 billion has been wasted on David Cameron’s 

unnecessary re-organisation of the NHS, and over £40 million of 

taxpayers’ money has already been written off as a result of the 

failed Universal Credit programme. And the list goes on. 

Across the public sector, we have also seen thousands of staff 

made redundant, but then replaced with expensive temporary 

staff. 

The Government’s approach has seen over 4,000 NHS staff 

being laid off and then rehired, many on six-figure salaries. 

Ironically, the Cabinet Office has been one of the worst 

offenders, spending over £30 million on sacking staff between 

2010 and 2013, but then spending another £30 million on 

plugging capability gaps with temporary and agency staff. 


Francis Maude, the Minister responsible for efficiency across 

government, has made much of his controls on expenditure on 

consultants in Whitehall. 

But the latest annual accounts from the Cabinet Office show 

that there was a massive increase last year in spending on 

expensive consultants at his own department - from £5 million 

to nearly £24 million. That is an increase of over 360 per cent. 

You could not make it up. 

There have been too many instances of short-term budget 

decisions like that which are costing more in the long-run. 

To give just two further examples: we have had the decision to 

withdraw the A14 upgrade in 2010 because it was “unaffordable” 

at £1.3 billion, and then the revival of the same project in 2013 at 

a cost of £1.5 billion; and then the decision to close 14 prisons, 

creating a shortage of capacity, only for the Government to then 

commission new ‘Titan’ prison projects. 

In contrast to that short-term approach, Labour’s Zero-Based 

Review of public expenditure is taking a long-term perspective, 

looking at what we need to do to get maximum value for every 

pound of taxpayers’ money, provide a fairer society and rise to 

the challenge of delivering a recovery that it built to last. 

The review, led by Labour’s Treasury team, is guided by five 

key principles: Firstly, we will use public money more efficiently 

and seek efficiencies in every area of spending. 

Secondly, we will use all departmental budgets to strengthen 

the economy – supporting growth, job creation and innovation. 

Thirdly, we will ensure greater fairness in the impact of 

spending and will prioritise expenditure which prevents future 

problems. 

Fourthly, the quality and experience of public services must 

improve at the same time as increasing efficiency. 

And lastly, we will strengthen accountability and transparency 

across government – with clear efficiency incentives for 

departments in Whitehall. 

As Ed Balls and Chris Leslie have said, that process will require 

iron discipline, cross- departmental co-operation and long-term 

thinking. Labour is committed to that approach and to getting 

the current budget into surplus and the national debt falling as 

soon as possible in the next Parliament. 

There is no doubt that that will demand a hard-headed 

approach and a review of every item of government 

expenditure. But that is the only way we can get the job done 

and ensure efficiency across government. 


OUR SURVEY SAYS… 

OVER TWO THIRDS OF TEACHERS WORRY THEY 

WON’T HAVE ENOUGH INCOME AFTER RETIREMENT * 

The current environment of change and uncertainty is 

creating an increasing need for school staff of all ages to find 

out more about their occupational pension scheme benefits 

and give due consideration to their future financial plans. 

In our recent survey: 

} 67% of teachers worry they won’t have enough income 

to live comfortably after retirement, but also don’t know 

exactly what income they really need. 

} Despite these concerns, a quarter of teachers aren’t making 

any additional savings to boost their retirement income. 

} Over two thirds accept they have a limited knowledge 

and understanding of their current pension scheme. 

Follow us: 

Wesleyan provide workplace presentations that are 

designed to provide staff with a good understanding of 

the key features and benefits of their occupational pension 

scheme, and include a Q&A opportunity. 

Let Wesleyan alleviate any of these concerns. Our visits 

to schools are FREE and we can provide our sessions to fit 

with school timetables and staff availability, but typically 

provide a one hour presentation plus a Q&A session during 

INSET days, or staff meetings. 

Wesleyan. Providing specialist advice for teachers. 

Contact us today, quoting 60898 

• teachers@wesleyan.co.uk 

• www.wesleyan.co.uk/appointment 

• 0800 980 3413 

* Wesleyan Professionals Survey - March 2014 from over 108 respondents 

Advice is provided by Wesleyan Financial Services Ltd. ‘WESLEYAN’ is a trading name of the Wesleyan Group of companies. Wesleyan Financial Services Ltd 

(Registered in England and Wales No. 1651212) is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and is wholly owned by Wesleyan Assurance 

Society. Wesleyan Assurance Society is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential 

Regulation Authority. Incorporated in England and Wales by Private Act of Parliament (No. ZC145). Registered Office: Colmore Circus, Birmingham B4 6AR. 

Telephone calls may be recorded for monitoring and training purposes. 

WFT-AD-111-07/14

CORRIDORS: 

Efficiency in government: 

join up the dots, please 

Sir Andrew Stunell, 

MP for Hazel Grove 

“The foot-soldiers simply 

rolled their eyes and 

carried on as usual” 

PROSPECTS FOR SCIENCE 

With 50,000 members in science, technology and engineering, 

Prospect is well placed to speak up for its members – specialists who work 

across government and industry. 

As part of a national campaign, we’ve argued the case for the creation of a 

minister-led commission to work to increase the percentage of 

women in STEM careers from 13% today to 30% by 2020. 

The search for efficiency in government has been a 

matter of fierce debate since the days of Ancient Rome. 

According to a contemporary account, the Roman Army 

was in almost constant organisational turmoil as reviews and 

reconfigurations succeeded and overlapped each other. 

Apparently, the foot-soldiers simply rolled their eyes and 

carried on as usual. More recently, it was famously said of the 

Ministry of Defence that “everyone knows half the money is 

wasted; we just don’t know which half”. 

Acute pressure to improve efficiency, economy and 

effectiveness extends throughout the public sector. The NHS, 

for instance, is committed to 3 per cent efficiency savings each 

year at the same time as improving its reach and effectiveness. 

That is a challenge because inherent in every large organisation 

is complexity, and with this comes uncertainty and data 

overload that makes good decision-making frustratingly 

difficult. Of course, every manager (and Minister) knows that 

you need a fresh initiative if you want to shorten response times 

and improve outcomes. The problem is that seldom has one 

initiative run its course before the next starts. Indeed, initiatives 

can come in such a deluge that, like the Roman Army, the footsoldiers 

simply roll their eyes. 

Unlike the private sector, public services do not have the 

ready-made metric of “are we making money?” to guide 

them towards efficient use of resources in order to produce 

measurable outcomes. The alternative of ‘targets’ for 

performance has produced mixed results. It turns out that 

people are actually very skilful at demonstrating that they have 

met their targets. The problem is that they have not proved 

quite so good at ‘using their common-sense’, which leads to 

them being set even more targets, and so on ad infinitum. And 

because those are large and complex organisations, perverse 

outcomes are routine. Almost never are the full consequences 

of a target worked through to see what the “whole system cost” 

is likely to be. 

One example is the impact of public sector procurement. 

Surely, when the public sector spends billions on A4 paper 

and toner cartridges, there are huge discounts to be had by 

bulk buying? Cue a new target. And when local councils (and 

central government departments and agencies) are often the 

biggest employers and the biggest spenders locally, does it not 

make sense for them to buy locally and thus develop their local 

economy? Cue another target. 

The only problem is that those two targets conflict. Public 

sector buying-power is enormous, and councils, for instance, 

can obtain big discounts from suppliers when their orders are 

pooled. The supplier will be big, too, or they cannot manage 

the contract. Typically, they are national companies, if not 

international, with a global supply chain. Their procurement, in 

turn, is most unlikely to be from the local area so the councils’ 

highly efficient spend will, in fact, all go elsewhere - in big 

dollops, to big firms. Alas, so much for investing in the local 

economy or supporting SMEs. 

Worse than that, government departments and local 

authorities are very big clients: they need very big suppliers, 

and they need it to be kept simple. So they may overlook the 

extraordinary high unit price for widgets because, overall, the 

contract represents (and I quote) “good value for money”. The 

fact that the widgets (which turn out to be in unexpectedly 

high demand) cost twice the price charged by the little widgetman 

on the local industrial estate is irrelevant. Irrelevant, that 

is, unless you have just submitted your Council Tax Benefit 

application, having been made redundant by the widget-man 

because he lost the contract for being too small, even though 

his widgets were cheaper. 

So, my message is a practical one: when we talk about 

making government ‘more efficient’, we need to make sure 

that we do not just mean “cheapest first cost”, or “headline 

savings”. It is not efficient unless it is taking account of “best 

outcomes, whole system costs”. We should aim to maximise the 

beneficial impact of all public sector activity: service delivery, 

procurement, and economic outcomes. And then, carry that big 

picture into individual service level planning and delivery. 

That does not need more slogans or more ideology; just a 

bit more time and effort to join up the dots, and maybe, just 

maybe, fewer targets? 

Prospect has published a charter for women in science, technology, engineering and maths. It aims to: 

l Promote the economic and business benefits of a more diverse STEM workforce 

l Pilot science and engineering apprenticeship programmes for disadvantaged young women and 

provide a sustainable funding model for higher-level STEM apprenticeships 

l Commit to greater longevity and stability of STEM funding to reduce short-termism 

l Prioritise action to remove barriers to part-time working in STEM occupations 

l Target science and engineering-based companies to enhance board level representation of women 

l Create a Cabinet level science minister with specific responsibilities to increase the representation 

of women at all levels of the STEM workforce. 

Prospect organises regular STEM seminars and events, most recently at the Royal Aeronautical 

Society for a seminar on Women in STEM. Speakers included Meg Munn MP, Lord Mayor of London, 

Fiona Woolf, Professor John Perkins and Fiona Jackson of EDF Energy. 

For more information about Prospect’s campaign work go to: www.prospect.org.uk/select_an_industry/science 





CORRIDORS: 

Liberty, equality and the community: 

the core values of Liberal Democrats 

Tim Farron, 

President of the Liberal Democrat Party 

and MP for Westmorland and Lonsdale 

“The Liberal Democrats 

have always been the 

party of resilience” 

Does the health of a teacher 

impact on students’ learning? 

Anecdotally, teachers and unions recognise 

the story of chronic exhaustion among staff 

coupled with the fear of underperforming 

and its potential impact on their students’ 

learning. 

ADVERTORIAL 

similar to strains within the teaching profession. 

Three quarters of NHS Trusts who implemented 

workplace guidelines, to reduce long-term sickness 

absence and to promote physical and mental health, 

resulted in healthier, more productive staff with better 

patient outcomes. 

Conference season is upon us once again and this 

means the last Autumn Conference before the 2015 

General Election. This is an exciting time for the Liberal 

Democrats and this year’s Conference will play a critical role in 

determining the policies and priorities which will be at the heart 

of our 2015 manifesto. It is our chance to set out our stall before. 

Unlike the other main parties, what happens at our 

Conference really makes a difference as our policy is decided 

by our members. Their experience and understanding helps to 

ensure we have the very best policies which matter to ordinary 

people. No proposal can become Liberal Democrat policy until 

Conference has voted for it and our members can put forward 

their own proposals, which carry the same influence as ideas 

from our Ministers and MPs. 

After a Summer of announcements - our promise to close 

the gender pay gap, our commitment to a carers’ bonus, 

our proposed changes to the spare room subsidy and the 

introduction of the regional growth fund to help local 

communities and businesses, to name but a few - we are raring 

to go. We are ready to debate our pre-manifesto at Conference 

and excited to present our Election manifesto. 

As Party President, I sit on the Party’s Federal Conference 

Committee and have been involved with the staging of 

Conference, helping to provide a steer on organisational issues, 

the agenda, speeches and Q&A sessions. The Committee have 

been working hard to make this a Conference to remember, 

from the speeches which will be made, to the venue and the 

fringe events we will be hosting. Conference will be an incredibly 

busy time for all involved but an incredibly exciting time, too. I 

am excited for what lies ahead and excited to go into the next 

Election with a set of really positive policies. 

Not only will Conference be a time for the Party to get 

together and vote on the pre-manifesto; it will also be a chance 

for the Liberal Democrats to celebrate our achievements and 

our record of delivery so far. Whether that is the 26 million 

people who will be receiving a £800 tax cut and the 3 million 

poorest workers who will be lifted out of paying income tax 

altogether or the fact we have helped businesses create 

more than a million jobs and created a record 1.8 million 

apprenticeships. 

On top of that, the Liberal Democrats have introduced the 

£2.5 billion pupil premium to help those children who need it 

the most and have established the triple lock pension. We have 

given the poorest two-year olds and all three and four year-olds 

15 hours of free childcare a week and we have introduced equal 

marriage for all couples. 

When we formed the Coalition back in 2010, the economy 

was on its knees and we were in the midst of a banking crisis. 

Now, going into the 2015 Election, we have come out the other 

side with the UK economy back to pre-crash levels. As we move 

from rescue to renewal, the Liberal Democrats are determined 

to make our economy even stronger and our society fairer – so 

that every single person benefits from the recovery and has the 

opportunity to get on in their lives. 

While I am incredibly proud of all that we have achieved, 

especially as a junior coalition partner, the upcoming seven 

months will be tough. We know that, but the Liberal Democrats 

have always been the party of resilience; we have always 

worked hard and fought for what matters. 

The last four years have not been easy and we have had to 

make some tough decisions but we have stood true to what we 

believe in - a fair, free and open society with liberty, equality and 

the community at its heart. It is those values which we will be 

celebrating at Conference, that will be at the heart of our polices 

and which we will whole-heartedly embrace as we approach 

next May. 

Now, Teacher Support Network is calling for further 

research to establish a causal link between teacher 

health and wellbeing and the thing ministers and 

many school leaders care about above all else – 

education standards and examination results. 

The charity, which provides counselling and practical 

support for teachers and staff in FE and HE, received 

26,000 calls to its 24-hour helpline last year, many 

of which were related to problems over work and 

stress. The Chief Inspector of Schools in England, 

Sir Michael Wilshaw, recently reported that the 

problem of teacher ‘burnout’ is widespread. The 

result is a wasteful loss of talent, with around seven 

in 10 teachers saying they have considered leaving 

the profession because of workload and exhaustion. 

Earlier this year, Teacher Support Network 

commissioned a review of present research into the 

relationships between teacher health and student 

outcomes. The report by The Work Foundation, a 

research group from Lancaster University, found 

there is compelling evidence that a healthier 

workforce can lead to important savings for 

organisations across various sectors through 

increased productivity and reduced staff absences. 

Dame Carol Black’s 2008 report calculated this could 

save the Government more than £60 billion. 

The teaching profession could learn from the health 

sector where extensive research has established a 

clear link between staff health and patient 

outcomes. Studies showed that despite a 

physically healthy workforce, NHS staff had high 

levels of sickness absence, a quarter of which was 

attributed to stress, depression and anxiety. Factors 

that led to this included the physically and 

psychologically demanding nature of NHS work, 

A recent report from Estyn, the schools 

inspectorate in Wales, revealed that high levels of 

teacher absence affected education standards. It 

found that supply staff struggle to establish effective 

relationships with pupils, resulting in worse 

behaviour and poorer quality of lessons. An 

important 2007 study found a correlation between 

increased staff wellbeing and SATs results, while 

another showed that having a good teacher 

impacted positively on exam results. However, 

further research is needed to prove this message to 

decision-makers. 

Julian Stanley, Chief Executive of Teacher Support 

Network, said: “For those of us who work in schools, 

it seems blindingly obvious that pupils taught by 

teachers who are stressed and frequently sick will 

perform less well than those who aren’t. 

“Our review of evidence shows that further research 

into the relationship between teacher wellbeing and 

pupil outcomes could reveal whole new ways to 

improve education in the UK, but we need your 

help. Whether you work in Westminster or 

elsewhere, please go to the website 

www.teachersupport.info to read the review and 

find out how you can help to make this imperative 

research happen.” 



CORRIDORS: 

Assessing the option of 

shale gas 

Tessa Munt, 

MP for Wells 

“ Fracking is a waterhungry 

process which 

uses vast quantities of a 

precious resource” 

This May, the Government announced plans to encourage 

investment in the UK’s energy infrastructure and 

opened the bidding for new Petroleum Exploration and 

Development Licences to cover half the country, and all of 

Somerset. 

That came as no surprise, as David Cameron is on record as 

stating his intention to “go all out for shale”. However, I think 

we should err on the side of caution. I am concerned about 

fracking for several reasons. 

I believe we should be moving away from – not increasing 

– our use of fossil fuels, which contribute to global warming. 

Investing in solar, tidal and offshore wind works – in the first 

quarter of 2014, 25 per cent of the country’s energy needs were 

met from renewable sources. Designing every new home, 

office, farm and factory, and upgrading existing buildings to 

the highest possible ‘green’ specification, would focus on much 

greater energy efficiency. 

When we build, each roof tile should be an energy-making 

cell. Energy efficiency standards should rise, encouraging even 

more energy-saving innovation for every aspect of our lives. Let 

us make sure all our rubbish can be, and is, recycled and re-used. 

It is possible. It just needs political will. 

I am not convinced by claims that fracking will bring 

American-style reductions in our energy bills. The glut of 

methane which means cheap energy for American homes and 

businesses is the unwanted leftovers from the gas extraction 

process by petrochemical companies who are seeking butane, 

ethane and propane. It is easy to see the attraction of selling a 

spare by-product for a few cents, rather than burning it off on 


site. We will be fracking for methane, a different proposition 

altogether. There are simply not the number of petrochemical 

plants across the south of England to change the maths for the 

UK fracking proposition, so we will be singing to a different 

financial tune. 

We do not know the long-term effects on the land. Fracking 

itself is not new, but I am told that the methods intended under 

the Government’s plans for shale gas exploration under licence 

are. In my part of the world, the countryside is criss-crossed 

with an intricate and balanced system of rivers and rhynes 

(man-made ditches) and we are utterly dependent on the water 

to irrigate pasture which, in turn, leads to the production of 

superb local butter, cheese, beef and the apples so critical to 

Somerset’s famous ciders. That carefully balanced environment 

has been maintained for centuries by the monks, farmers and 

smallholders working across and around the Isles of Avalon. 

And it is not just Somerset; Scotland’s beef, whisky and 

raspberries, Kentish hops, Lincolnshire’s vegetables, vineyards 

in the South East, East Anglian grain and many other products 

depend on the quality of our soils and water. Areas dependent 

on tourism - the Lake District, West Country, Norfolk Broads, 

our spa towns and coastal resorts - are totally dependent on the 

integrity of our water. Pollution would be disastrous. We cannot 

risk all in the dash for gas. 

Fracking is a water-hungry process which uses vast 

quantities of what is, after all, a precious resource. And no 

one has explained what and where the enormous volumes of 

contaminated water which result from the fracking process will 

be stored. We should not accept that as a minor administrative 

problem which we do not need to worry about now. We have 

had similar reassurances for 60 years about the safe storage of 

nuclear waste but no solution yet, just occasional beach closures 

when radioactive leaks are discovered. 

The argument that tighter rules will apply to Areas of 

Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB’s) and National Parks where 

drilling will only be allowed under “exceptional circumstances 

and in the public interest” are ludicrous. If AONB’s and National 

Parks need ‘protection’, then this is a tacit admission of 

potentially serious environmental and visual risks to the process. 

What possible “exceptional circumstances” and exactly what 

“public interest” could justify fracking in those areas? 

Even if our coalition partners are intent on fracking across 

the English countryside, we should consider all the risks and 

answer public concerns. The way things are, without significant 

public pressure and a consequent change of heart from David 

Cameron, he will be pushing hard to ease the way for a risky 

process. 


unlocking 

Britain’s 

Potential 

www.cuadrillaresources.com

CORRIDORS: 

CORRIDORS: 

Labour is ready to deliver 

on sentencing 

Sadiq Khan, 

Shadow Secretary of State for Justice and MP for Tooting 

“Ministers are presiding 

over a system that is not 

punishing criminals” 

Young people: stand up 

and be counted 

Sophy Ridge, 

Political Correspondent, Sky News 

“Sky News is launching a 

new campaign - Stand Up 

Be Counted” 

is often more effective - leading to victims having more confidence - and is 

cheaper. Prison is not the only option. 

I am a fan of the Sentencing Council and the way it responds to the everchanging 

landscape as new crimes emerge, and new sentences are needed. I 

like the way how members are open in consulting widely on the factors which 

should be taken into consideration by judges when handing down sentences. 

Their methodical way of working through the most important types of 

offences means there is a regular review of sentences, into which the public, 

victims and campaign groups can feed in their views. 

That carelessness is a dangerous fallacy. One hundred and one 

years ago, it was a sunny day in early summer when a red haired 

woman from a comfortable, middle-class background flung herself 

under the King’s horse at the Epsom Derby. Four days later, Emily 

Dickinson died of her injuries. 

There are no YouTube videos of that moment, and no Vines or 

virals. It is hard to imagine in 2014, with just 39 per cent of young 

women bothering to turn up at the ballot box, someone being 

passionate enough about their right to vote that they are willing to 

die for it. 

Public confidence in our justice system is crucial. Without it, the system 

crumbles. People need to be confident that those guilty of crimes are 

being caught, prosecuted, convicted and sentenced. 

If public confidence is eroded, then people will not want to come forward 

and report crimes. Without victims and witnesses prepared to come forward, 

there can be no catching and prosecuting the guilty. Criminals will go scot free. 

A life of crime will be seen to have no consequences. That would be a disaster 

for wider public safety. 

So, confidence is crucial, but it is also delicate and not to be taken for 

granted. Just one bad experience can do untold damage to confidence. 

People seeing witnesses on the receiving end of a horrific cross-examination 

by a prosecution barrister might be put off coming forward. Or reports of 

victims who do not have their complaints taken seriously by the authorities 

will lead others to question whether it is worth reporting crimes. That is not an 

exhaustive list but some of the examples people tell me about. 

That is why much more needs to be done to support victims and witnesses 

of crime. Too often, they are treated as an afterthought. That has to end, 

which is why Labour has committed to bring in a Victims’ Law, putting in 

legislation the standards which victims and witnesses should expect of our 

criminal justice system. 

But one area where we need to maintain public confidence is in sentencing. 

People need to be assured that the punishment fits the crime. They want to 

know that the guilty will pay the price for their crime. But there is a lot of public 

confusion about sentencing. For many people, sentencing equates to prison, 

but that is not always the case. Low level crimes and first time offences can 

often result in non-custodial sentences such as community sentences. That 

One thing is for certain, victims of crime want to know that the right 

sentence is being given to their perpetrator. It is still shocking how many 

serious and violent crimes get warnings and are disposed of outside the 

normal criminal justice process. Data has revealed how time and again those 

guilty of rape and violent crimes get away with a slap on the wrists, and 

how perpetrators of domestic violence are dealt with through community 

resolutions. But that is justice on the cheap. It cheapens the experience of 

victims, leaving many to wonder why they bothered reporting the crime. 

This Government have had over four years to get to grips with the growing 

problem but seem incapable of doing anything about it. 

Furthermore, over the last four years, prisons have steadily worsened. 

Recent months have seen warnings from many people about a growing crisis, 

including from the usually reserved Chief Inspector of Prisons. As a result of 

increased overcrowding and shortages of staff, violence is on the rise and 

prisoners are languishing in their cells. Ministers are presiding over a system 

that is not punishing and reforming criminals, putting public safety at risk 

down the line. 

It is going to be left to whoever wins the next election to pick up the pieces. 

Labour has ambitions for putting rehabilitation at the heart of prisons, 

incentivising governors to put on the education and training courses as their 

performance will be judged by how well offenders are rehabilitated. We will 

bring in expertise from outside by establishing prison boards, working with 

local authorities, probation, police and the health service. The status quo is not 

acceptable. 

Only by making prisons punish and reform criminals will we be delivering 

on the aims of sentencing. By not reforming criminals, the true aims of 

sentencing are being let down. 

That is a slap in the face of victims and is cocking a snook at justice. We are 

determined to act, and Labour has the values, ideas and policies in place to 

deliver a justice system that properly punishes and reforms criminals, thereby 

strengthening public confidence in sentencing. 

There is a crisis in politics. No, I am not talking about UKIP 

defections, the Lib Dems’ polling figures or even David 

Cameron’s hairline. 

This is something far bigger than that: thousands of young 

people are simply switching off from democracy. 

If that sounds alarmist, then just look at the figures. Back in 1964 

(just 50 years ago), 76.4 per cent of 18-24 year olds voted. At the 

last election, in 2010, that number had fallen to just 44 per cent, 

according to Ipsos Mori. For young women, the figure was at 39 

per cent. It is easy to write that off as young people simply being 

apathetic about politics. I prefer to say there is a crisis in democracy 

itself. 

It is true that Westminster is not exactly in vogue at the moment. 

Scars from the expenses scandal and the Iraq War run deep, and 

trust in politicians is low. At the same time, though, young people 

are still politically engaged. Just look at the number of people who 

sent bricks, blood and even faeces to a UKIP free post address. It 

may not be mature but it does show people have an opinion. 

The Scottish referendum is another good example of a political 

issue that resonates and has had huge cut through on social 

media. The spoof Twitter account Angry Salmond - Sultan of 

#SexySocialism - has more than 10,000 followers. When the No 

campaign produced a misjudged, patronising advert aimed at 

women voters, Twitter exploded. Dozens of spoof images and 

videos of the woman in her kitchen were created and shared, with 

captions such as “Ma Fridge Magnets Said Vote No”. 

But while the under 25s may be politically switched on, for them 

democracy is a given. It is something that has always existed; it is 

impossible to imagine anything different. 

It is no secret that the history of democracy is full of the blood 

of campaigners and the sweat of determined politicians. But now 

that we have universal suffrage, why worry if voting figures drop? 

It is tempting to relax in the assumption that democracy has 

been achieved, and whoever gets into power will make little 

difference. 

The real question, however, is whether we can have a true 

democracy when one segment of society is far less likely to vote 

than another. 

Less young people are choosing to vote when compared to their 

older equivalents - it is not an enforced discrepancy. But whatever 

the cause, the impact is the same. Why should politicians treat all 

people equally when they are far more likely to get votes from the 

over 60s than the under 25s? If you were an MP fighting a close 

battle in a marginal constituency, which type of voters would you 

be most likely to reach out to? 

It is not difficult to see the impact of that in policy terms. 

Is it any wonder that the Coalition Government has vowed to 

protect pensioner benefits (from free bus passes to TV licenses) 

when every other age group has shouldered cuts? 

Or that the Conservatives are actively considering ending housing 

benefits for the under 25s? 

In my view, it is imperative that young people do not take 

democracy for granted. 

That is why Sky News is launching a new campaign - Stand Up 

Be Counted. It is a dynamic digital platform designed to amplify 

the voices of young people before the General Election. The idea is 

for 16 to 25 year olds to post videos, comments and articles on the 

issues affecting them and share them across social media. 

If you are a young person who thinks politicians should pay equal 

attention to people whether they are 20 or 60, get involved at 

standup.news.sky.com or using the Twitter hash tag #StandUp . 





CORRIDORS: 

A fair deal for mental health 

Norman Lamb, 

Minister of State at the Department of Health 

and MP for North Norfolk 

“I have championed the 

idea of ‘parity of esteem’” 

Ending the stigma surrounding 

mental health 

Luciana Berger, 

Shadow Minister for Public Health 

and MP for Liverpool Wavertree 

CORRIDORS: 

“We need a bigger and 

bolder response” 

Rectifying the profound injustice of the institutional bias 

against mental health has been one of my highest priorities 

as Health Minister – as it was for Paul Burstow. Given that at 

least one in four people will experience a mental health problem 

at some point in their lives, making sure they get the support they 

need to live independent and fulfilled lives is essential in delivering 

a stronger economy and a fairer society. 

It is simply not fair or acceptable that someone with a physical 

illness can get better care than someone with a mental health 

problem. I have championed the idea of ‘parity of esteem’ so 

that mental health is treated as seriously as physical health. We 

gave NHS England clear direction on achieving parity of esteem - 

equality for mental health - through the first ever NHS Mandate in 

2012, setting out specific objectives. The Care Quality Commission 

(CQC) is now inspecting mental health services against new, 

tougher care standards to ensure patients are being given the level 

of care we expect and that they deserve. 

One of the clearest disparities between mental and physical 

health has been in the care and support people can access in a 

mental health crisis. When someone is experiencing a mental 

health crisis, it is essential that they are able to access the help 

they need – and quickly. But all too often that is simply not the 

case. We have launched a Crisis Care Concordat, agreed between 

over 20 organisations including the Association of Chief Police 

Officers, setting out clear standards for the first time in respect of 

the care people should expect in a mental health crisis – whichever 

organisation they come into contact with. Our street triage pilot 

schemes which see police forces and health services working side 

by side have already meant a decrease in the number of people 

detained inappropriately in a police cell. The Concordat makes clear 

that the numbers of people who end up in a police cell because of a 

mental health crisis should halve during 2014/15. 

I am also determined to improve the care and support provided 

to children and young people experiencing a mental health crisis. 

Effective support for young people with mental health problems 

is incredibly important in giving people the best possible start in 

life. But the current system is horribly fragmented between the 

different tiers of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services 

(CAMHS). What is more, the transition point from CAMHS to adult 

mental health services at 18 creates an incredibly damaging cliffedge 

at what is already one of the most stressful points in the life of 

a young person. I have launched an expert taskforce to look at how 

we can make sure every child with mental health problems gets the 

high quality support they need. 

I have asked the taskforce to look at the Australian “Headspace” 

model, which links up mental health services with sexual health, 

relationships, and employment advice. Crucially, young people 

can access the services themselves, confidentially, without the 

daunting hurdle of having to visit their GP. There are many local 

services of a similar sort run by third sector organisations across 

England. 

As a Liberal Democrat, I want to go even further in making sure 

that mental health gets a fair deal – which I believe is crucial if we 

are to build a fairer society. I want to see much more effective cooperation 

between mental health services and local employment 

services, so that people with mental health problems are able to 

access the support they need to help them back into employment, 

which can so often bring its own benefits for those with mental 

health conditions. On dementia, too, we need to build on the 

momentum created by Britain’s chairmanship of the G8 in 2013 

to encourage research – not just into a possible “disease altering” 

treatment, but also into better care. 

Throughout my career as an MP, one of my highest priorities 

has been campaigning for better mental health services. I believe 

the changes I have set out could transform the lives of millions of 

people across the country, giving them the chance to live the life 

they choose, and helping build a fairer society. 

Mental illness will touch us all at some point in our lives. One 

quarter of us experience a mental health problem every 

year so the chances are if we do not ourselves experience 

mental illness, someone we know will. 

Yet, too often it remains a taboo subject in our society, one that 

people sweep under the carpet or avoid entirely. Nearly nine out 

of ten people who experience mental illness say they face stigma 

and discrimination as a result. That can be even worse than the 

symptoms themselves and can mean that people are reluctant to 

come forward to get the help that they need. With less than a third 

of people with mental health problems receiving any treatment at 

all, Ed Miliband was right to say that it is “the biggest unaddressed 

health challenge of our age”. 

However, there are welcome signs that the status of mental health 

in our society is starting to shift. Since the Time to Change campaign 

started in October 2007, it has reached millions of people across 

England and has begun to improve public attitudes towards people 

with mental health problems. Back in 2012, Ed Miliband became 

the first Leader of the Opposition to make a speech focused solely 

on mental health, arguing that we cannot be One Nation if people 

with mental illness are marginalised. And that same year, it was 

Labour votes in the House of Lords that forced the Government 

to write “parity of esteem” between mental health and physical 

health services into law. Those are encouraging steps in the right 

direction. Yet, rhetoric is one thing, reality is another and under this 

Government the two do not match up. On David Cameron’s watch, 

mental health funding has gone down for the first time in a decade. 

Mental health services have been cut by 20 per cent more than other 

services and Mental Health Trusts have lost £250 million of their 

funding since 2012. In their first year, new NHS bodies and Clinical 

Commissioning Groups only spent, on average, 10 per cent of their 

annual budgets on mental health, despite mental illness accounting 

for 23 per cent of the national burden of disease. 

Funding cuts alone would be bad enough, but at a time when 

demand for mental health services has shot up, the impact has been 

devastating. Under this Government, we have seen the number of 

specialist mental health doctors and nurses drop, bed shortages, 

vulnerable people having to travel hundreds of miles to get the 

treatment they need, and very ill children being detained in police 

cells because there is nowhere else for them to go. 

People are waiting so long for psychological therapies that their 

conditions are becoming much more serious. The Improving Access 

to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) programme, introduced by the 

last Labour Government, made talking therapies available to more 

people than ever before. Yet this Government has failed to prioritise 

extending access to treatment to meet the demand and the system 

is struggling to cope. An alarming 84% per cent of GPs responding to 

a recent survey said they were forced to prescribe medication to their 

patients because their local IAPT service could not help them. 

Good mental health starts in our workplaces, our schools and 

our communities which is why Labour’s Mental Health Taskforce 

is focusing on the best approach to improving our nation’s mental 

health across society. 

But how can we expect to achieve a shift in how our society views 

mental health if the Government is not showing the leadership which 

we need? We need a bigger and bolder response which is why Labour 

is putting mental health at the heart of our vision for an integrated 

health and social care system. 

Rather than watching from the sidelines, it is the Government’s 

responsibility to ensure the right services are in place to meet the 

needs of our most vulnerable people. At a time when mental health 

is receiving much needed attention, Ministers must stamp out the 

stigma once and for all. They must guarantee that anyone who is 

ill, regardless of whether that be with a physical or mental illness, 

diabetes or depression, anxiety or asthma, receives the help and 

support that they need. 





CORRIDORS: 

Taking welfare reform 

forward 

Iain Duncan Smith, 

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 

and MP for Chingford and Woodford Green 

“Experts are now 

recognising the role 

that welfare reform has 

played” 

The complexities of welfare reform 

Dame Anne Begg, 

MP for Aberdeen South and Chair of the Work 

and Pensions Select Committee 

CORRIDORS: 

“I have always thought of 

UC as the Holy Grail of 

welfare reform” 

Over the last four years, few issues have been as hotly 

contested as the reform of welfare. Little wonder, given 

that this Government has embarked on the most significant 

programme of reform for a generation, transforming the way 

the state supports those in need. A change that is not just about 

Britain’s benefit and pensions systems but, more than this, has at 

its heart a change in the culture of welfare, both in Government and 

beyond it. 

Our mission was to renew the incentive to work and remove the 

barriers in people’s way in doing so, transforming the lives of those 

locked out of the labour market for too long. 

Every single change we have made – from the introduction 

of the benefit cap to the reform of sickness benefits – has been 

underpinned by the firm belief that Britain will only be great again if 

all in our society are part of our nation’s prosperity. 

In its simplest articulation, our programme of reform has been 

about getting Britain back to work; giving people previously left 

to languish out of work the skills and the incentive to take the jobs 

being created in our growing economy. 

None of that has been easy. When we entered office, we 

inherited an economy at breaking point - welfare bills out of control 

and high levels of worklessness. 

Now we have employment at record levels, private sector 

employment up over 2 million since the election, and an 

unemployment rate that ranks amongst the lowest in Europe. 

In addition to that, the proportion of the population that is 

inactive – those who are neither in work nor looking for work – has 

never been lower. 

Economic inactivity is too often a forgotten part of the labour 

market, but it is one which can greatly affect the health and wealth 

of the nation. Inactivity not only blights individuals’ prospects, but 

has a negative impact on the economy and society at large. 

I have long believed that the strength of our labour market would 

both drive Britain’s economic recovery, and increase as a result. 

This Government created the conditions for growth, and gave 

businesses the freedom and confidence to create jobs. And at the 

same time, we drove a programme of welfare reform where every 

change was designed to get Britain back to work. 

As well as a sign that the economy is getting back on track after 

Labour’s great recession, the strength of Britain’s labour market 

is the surest indicator of how successful our welfare reforms have 

been in getting Britain working - and changing attitudes in workless 

households. 

It is welcome to see so many experts now recognising the role 

that welfare reform has played. 

Whereas under Labour over half of the rise in employment 

was accounted for by foreign nationals, we have reversed that 

damaging trend and over the last four years nearly 70 per cent of 

the rise in employment has been made up of UK nationals. 

As the economy improves, this is where the real effect of our 

reforms is felt: British people re-engaging with the workforce 

and regaining the opportunity to access the jobs being created - 

ensuring everyone who is able to can play a part and realise their 

potential. 

As we look towards the next election, we must ensure that what 

we do next is underpinned by the same logic. Certainly, that is what 

the Chancellor meant when he talked about a commitment to fight 

for Full Employment in Britain, as part of our long-term economic 

plan. 

It is my belief that a future Conservative Government should 

consider that to be, perhaps, the most vital aim: with help and 

support, everyone contributing and realising their potential. 

The gains will be enormous when we complete all our changes. 

Cultural reform - of society and of government - in a way that 

restores effectiveness in public spending and personal responsibility 

in our welfare system. 

Through Universal Credit being rolled out now in a safe and 

controlled manner, we will ensure that work always pays and is 

seen to pay, and that people have the right support available to get 

them back on track. 

And in government spending, making the money follow the 

outcome, so that it is no longer possible to fiddle around with 

quality programmes or not see them through. 

There are three things which you need to remember about 

Welfare Reform. 

Firstly, it is fiendishly complicated. People lead 

complicated lives so designing a welfare system which gets the 

most money to those most in need is never simple. It might be 

more coherent, or more easily understood, or have fewer cliff 

edges but it will never be simple to achieve. 

Secondly, there are always unintended consequences. No 

matter how well planned a new benefit is, there will be things 

which simply cannot be foreseen or people will not behave in 

the way expected. 

And thirdly, welfare reform takes a long time to implement - 

even if the IT works from the start! Transitional arrangements 

can take a long time to work through the system even with the 

migration of existing claimants on to the new benefit. It can take 

even longer if the new benefit only applies to new applicants. 

That causes less upset but is one of the reasons why the existing 

UK system has become even more complicated. It can also be 

very expensive to implement if you want to make sure that noone 

loses out in the short-term. 

So, it is a “brave” government which undertakes some welfare 

reform, perhaps reforming one or two benefits, in the course of 

a single Parliament. Where that leaves a government which is 

attempting to overhaul almost the whole welfare system in the 

same timescale... I leave for you to judge! 

To have introduced Universal Credit (UC) to replace six 

different working age benefits would have been a tall order in 

itself. I have always thought of UC as the Holy Grail of welfare 

reform. If the torturous roll out of UC continues, then it would 

appear that, like the Holy Grail, no one has yet found the 

answer. But the government was not content with just that 

reform. 

There were also major changes to Housing Benefit. I would 

like to think it was not the government’s intention to cause fear 

and alarm to large numbers of disabled people when it told 

them that their homes were now deemed too big for them, 

even when they had been specially adapted. But those are the 

consequences of the government’s actions in introducing the so 

called “Bedroom Tax”. 

The previous government had introduced the Employment 

and Support Allowance (ESA) as a new out of work benefit 

for those with disabilities or health issues. Before it had been 

properly evaluated, the Coalition government speeded up the 

timetable for the migration of existing claimants to the new 

benefit. It is one thing to decide what benefit a new claimant 

should receive; it is quite a different matter to say to someone 

already on the existing benefit that they do not qualify for 

the new one. Given the capacity problems of assessing over 

two million for the new benefit, plus all the reassessments 

required, it was always going to be difficult to come up with an 

assessment process which everyone thought was fair. 

And now the government is discovering some of the same 

problems have arisen with the replacement of Disability Living 

Allowance (DLA) with the Personal Independence Payment 

(PIP). I pointed out in a debate as far back as October 2012 

that the Department for Work and Pensions’ original timetable 

for the implementation of ESA and PIP would require around 

100,000 assessments every month! So, the migration from DLA 

to PIP was delayed but, even so, huge backlogs have developed. 

So what is the future for welfare? Well, the first thing the 

government needs to be honest about is the enormity of the 

task they have embarked upon. There is no point in pretending 

everything is on target when there are thousands of individual 

testimonies of delays and poor treatment which show that this 

is not the case. 

There is no point pretending that the roll out of Universal 

Credit is proceeding apace when less than 7,000 people in total 

have entered the system. Seven thousand down, only seven 

million plus to go! 

When you have bitten off more than you can chew, you 

simply cannot keep stuffing your mouth. The government needs 

to admit that delivering all the changes it has introduced will not 

happen in the timescale the DWP claims, if they happen at all. 

Just remember that welfare reform is fiendishly complicated, 

has unintended consequences and takes a long, long time to 

deliver. 





CORRIDORS: 

The Science and Technology Select 

Committee: a special committee 

Andrew Miller, 

MP for Ellesmere Port and Neston and Chair of the Science 

and Technology Select Committee 

The quick explanation of the role of the Science and 

Technology Select Committee is that the Committee 

exists to scrutinise the Government, like every other 

select committee. A longer explanation would presume 

you knew that and wanted to know what makes the select 

committee special. 

Unlike the other departmental select committees, Science 

and Technology does not have a single, large Government 

department, like Health or Education, to scrutinise. Our claim 

to being a departmental committee is that we scrutinise the 

work of the Government Office for Science (GO-Science) that 

resides within the Department for Business, Innovation and 

Skills. As GO-Science provides advice for Government as a 

whole in science matters, the Committee has the opportunity 

to examine what use the Government, as a whole, makes of 

its science advice and to make recommendations on related 

policies. 

What makes Science and Technology special is that, 

unlike other departmental select committees, it cuts 

across departments and often picks up issues which do not, 

themselves, fit neatly into a departmental straightjacket. So, 

our recent inquiry into social media data could have been 

picked up by any one of three departments or the Cabinet 

Office. 

Some consider the role of the Committee to be a 

champion for science in Parliament. That would be wrong; 

the Committee’s focus has to be politicians holding the 

Government to account. It is not the role of the Committee to 

ensure that every government policy follows what the science 

says. For one thing, it is not always easy to see what the 

science says; for another, it is not always the right thing to do. 


“Science and technology 

cuts across departments” 

Science is value neutral. It explains the world as far as that 

is possible in human terms and is not always sympathetic 

to human needs or concerns. Neither do we live in an 

absolutely rational society where all it needs is for evidence 

to be presented after which everyone has a Damascene 

moment of clarity and accepts that judgement. That is why 

we have politicians and Ministers; to give a human face to the 

decisions made and to apply human judgement about what 

the right thing to do might be. 

As Chair of the Committee, I do not want to see that 

the Minister has looked at the science and then slavishly 

implemented what it says, for better or worse. I want to 

see that the Minister has seriously looked at the scientific 

evidence or advice and has then made a rational decision in 

the light of that. 

A good example of that was the recent decision by Theresa 

May to look at whether khat should be a controlled substance. 

She indicated that she had looked at the scientific evidence 

and advice, did not challenge it, but outlined other factors 

that, in her judgement, overrode the scientific ones. 

The role of the Committee here, if it had decided to 

consider that issue, would have been to ensure that the 

Minister had taken, and understood, the evidence and then 

made a good judgement call in the light of that evidence. 

Obviously, as a Committee, we might agree or disagree on the 

politics even if we agree on the science. 

Another benefit of the Science and Technology Committee 

having a focus on science is that the same Committee 

undertakes the consideration of science issues across the 

whole of Government. 

In this Parliament (that is since the 2010 General Election), 

the Committee has published twenty-nine reports on a variety 

of issues, since it was formed after the 2010 General Election 

and received responses from eleven different Government 

departments. 

The Committee has been able to follow how science 

advice has been sought and provided across all of those 

departments, witness good and bad practice and comment on 

this in an informed way. It is important that the framework 

for scientific advice is consistent and that it meets the policy 

needs of the Government. 

Science in Government is not for the needs of science; it 

is for the needs of the country. We exist to ensure that the 

framework for the provision of science advice is working 

and, at worst, that Ministers are, at least, aware of what the 

science says prior to them making policy. 


RELEVANT MARINE SCIENCE 

Crowded coastal waters have many competing 

demands from industry, recreation and conservation. 

Evaluating and balancing the potential benefits and 

negative impacts have become a pressing problem 

for decision makers. PML’s marine socio-economics 

group provide information and analysis that support 

decisions across a wide range of sectors including 

marine planning, ecosystem service valuation and 

sustainability, offshore renewables, fisheries, and 

marine conservation. PML’s remote sensing group, 

one of the largest of its kind in the world, provides a 

wide-scale perspective, informing the selection of 

marine protected areas in UK seas and farther afield. 

The satellite data it processes has wide application, 

e.g. for aquaculture and bathing beaches for the early 

detection of harmful algal blooms. Long-time series of 

data collected via the Western Channel Observatory 

(www.westernchannelobservatory.org.uk) feed into 

understanding how our seas are being altered 

through global change and are of relevance to 

partners, including the Met Office. 

Linking the diverse interests of PML’s marine science 

research is its marine environmental modelling group 

- one of the largest in Europe - which uses existing 

models to help untangle the complexity that is the 

marine environment, and also develops models to 

refine and increase detail of predictions across a 

range of ecosystem functions and effects. 

Understanding marine species, communities and 

habitats and how they function from the seabed to the 

surface and from seashore to continental slope is 

fundamental to PML research. 

Whilst the beneficial potential of the marine environment 

seems endless, marine organisms can have a 

down-side too, as they may negatively impact 

marine-based industries. PML is investigating, with 

shipping companies and the renewables sector, the 

problem of fouling organisms and how they might 

be prevented from becoming established. The 

effectiveness of ballast water treatment systems is 

also an area in which PML can offer its services. 

PML is a potent force in the here and now, but always 

has an eye to the future. PML continues to seek 

science and industry partnerships and encourage 

international collaborations, welcoming around 26 

visiting researchers from around the world each 

month and supporting the ‘next generation’ of marine 

scientists through postgraduate and other hosted 

studentships. 

MARINE SCIENCE FOR 

A CHANGING WORLD 

Plymouth Marine Laboratory (PML) is a world-class marine science research 

organization which aims to increase understanding of the challenges facing 

today’s ocean and provides solutions to marine-based issues of international 

societal concern. PML enjoys a global reputation for the quality of its 

research, as demonstrated by being rated amongst the top oceanographic 

research institutes in the world. Scientific excellence is the key to PML’s 

success, whilst relevant and timely outputs to support policy formulation and 

industrial applications are equally essential to the PML ethos. Core to PML’s 

achievements is its ability to create project-specific research groups from its 

multidisciplinary team of scientists so ensuring a creative and efficient 

interdisciplinary approach to solving challenges. This is enhanced through 

PML’s extensive network of partners worldwide, resulting in PML often 

leading, or being a partner of choice, in many large national and international 

research projects. 

For further information please visit www.pml.ac.uk or follow us on Twitter @PlymouthMarine and LinkedIn 

https://www.linkedin.com/company/plymouth-marine-laboratory-&-pml-applications-ltd.

s throws 

nt’s 

reforms 

—12 

CORRIDORS: 

Assisted Dying: a House United, 

a House Divided 

Baroness Dianne Hayter, 

Shadow Cabinet Office Minister 

Safety 

Management 

“Everyone agreed the 

House of Lords was the 

right forum for such a 

debate” 

reducing the misery 

of insecure hours 

The Bill itself is in many ways clear and simple. When two doctors 

both sign that someone has less than six months to live, and is of 

good, sound mind with a settled determination to end their life 

themselves (after counselling of all the options), and that the person 

wants access to the appropriate medicine to self-administer, then 

a doctor may prescribe it. And, if and when the patient decides it is 

time to use it, provided still of sound mind and firm determination, 

then the doctor may return with the drug for the patient to take at 

that time. 

Feature 

Beyond zero-hours: 

—27 

April 2014 

www.britsafe.org 

juggling, health 

shouldn’t be dropped 

Opinion 

In our day-to-day 

—14 

scrapping CDM ACOP 

in face of opposition 

News 

HSE U-turns on 

—05 

greater risk of type 2 

diabetes, finds study 

News 

Shift workers at 

answer our most pressing needs. 

—04 

There are, of course, questions about whether six months is the 

correct time, how sure doctors can be about diagnoses, whether 

there are sufficient safeguards to ensure any vulnerable patient is not 

encouraged to go for this option – all matters which will be aired in 

Committee. 

Nanotechnology could undermine 

Under the 

microscope 

—18 

our certainties about risk, but 

Working for 

a sea change 

News 

Boss bann 

How the fishing industry is striving 

to give crews a better safety net 

—24 

directors 

corpora 

News 

Self employed legal 

exemption: removal 

of risk-based clause 

labelled ‘frightening’ 

—05 

convi 

—07 

News 

New work health 

Safety 

Management 

March 2014 


Warning! 

Cutting edge news, 

comment, features. 

Safety Management 

For the risks that matter most. 

The start of 

the thaw 

Subscribe today 

Subscription £60 per year for 

11 issues (non-members). 

The European Commission’s proposed 

climate change targets show that goal 

setting is fundamentally credible 

—32 

Feature 

The Corporate 

Manslaughter Act: 

a slow start – so 

where now? 

—30 

Opinion 

The blame game: 

corporate leadership 

failure in the Quebec 

oil train tragedy 

—12 

News 

Two months worth 

FI bills hit the £1m 

ringing sixl 

to £2.6m 

As our lives 

are increasingly 

played out online, 

cyberbullying enters 

the workplace 

—24 

#TheWeb 

OfBullying 

Safety 

Management 

July 2014 


ment 

Sa 

M 

May 

www 

service to help the 

million long-term sick 

—05 

News 

HSE chair warns of 

injury increase during 

economic recovery 

—07 

Opinion 

The justice of bigger 

fines for bigger 

companies 

—12 

Feature 

A 

major ten hour debate on helping those in their final months 

of life to have the correct medicine to take their own lives 

when the pain becomes unbearable took place in the House 

of Lords this July. It was memorable for the number of speakers - 130 

- but also for the wisdom, passion and concern that every member 

brought to the proceedings. 

It was clear that everyone agreed the House of Lords was the right 

forum for such a debate, as it brought together eminent lawyers, 

retired judges, ethicists, academics, doctors, nurses, social workers, 

disabled members, bishops, former Ministers, prosecutors, Lord 

Chancellors, police officers and, amongst those voices and beyond, 

personal experiences of a loved one dying. The House united in its 

serious consideration of the issues, but also demonstrated the value 

of an unelected House able to draw to the centre of national debate 

a breadth and depth of experience which elected MPs could never 

match. One Peer (Lord Ali) went as far as saying that it would be “a 

dereliction of duty” not to speak, though that might have been “the 

easy option”. 

During the debate, the House, inevitably, was divided - not by 

votes but by members’ views on the Bill. Those divisions were not by 

party or by background. Whilst the former Archbishop of Canterbury 

supported, serving Bishops opposed. Disabled members spoke 

on both sides, as did Conservatives, Labour and Cross-Benchers. 

Catholics – not represented in the Lords by their clergy – were more 

united in opposition, while eminent lawyers, former Lord Chancellors 

and medics were on both sides. 


But the major change is to the legal status of any person aiding 

someone else to commit suicide (which is not, itself, a crime, only 

abetting is). At present, if someone (other than a medic) has helped, 

and on compassionate grounds, they are unlikely to be prosecuted, 

but they would be interviewed and liable to be charged. 

Anyone medically trained has no such possible dispensation from 

prosecution, whether helping a spouse or a patient. So, a family 

member taking a loved one to Switzerland to commit suicide 

or helping with an overdose probably would not be prosecuted 

(provided they were not a doctor) but they could not be sure of this 

until after a police investigation following the death. 

Safety 

Management 

For supporters of the Bill, like myself, that is unsatisfactory. Both 

the dying and their loved-ones need certainty before the event and, 

above all, access to the correct amount of the correct drug to ensure 

the outcome is not botched. It must still be administered by the 

dying patient, but they would be allowed to have family or friends 

with them at the time if they so wanted. 

As many people said in the debate, and as even more wrote in to 

say, it is not death they fear, but the manner of dying. I only support 

the Bill for those who are terminally ill and if is to relieve the agony 

which too many people experience or witness. We have made 

childbirth – our coming into the world – less painful (for our mothers 

rather than ourselves) so I cannot understand why our going from 

the world should not also be made less painful, and in a setting of our 

choice. 

September 2014 



Safety 

Management 

April 2013 


Safety 

Management 

June 2014 


ar power: 

il’s bargain? 

News 

HSE warned to clamp 

down on carcinogens 

to avoid an increasing 

cancer burden 

04 

Bernadette Ségol, 

ETUC: health and 

safety is not a luxury 

—16 

from the Fukushima disaster, 

tand with new nuclear in the UK? 

orst option? 

The health and safety 

world examines the past 

and looks to the future 

on the HSWA’s birthday. 

—13 

News 

European health and safety 

strategy labelled ‘too weak, 

too late’ by critics 

—04 

For details go to: 

www.britsafe.org/store/subscriptions 

Safety Management magazine is for everyone 

who needs to stay informed about the latest 

debates on risk as well as the latest news, 

legislation and best practice in the field. 

News 

One year on from 

Rana Plaza: coalition 

of investors tell 

retailers to pay up 

—05 

Feature 

The ergonomics 

of PPE: one size 

does not fit all 

—24 

Feature 

With high depression 

rates, farming is not a 

walk in the country 

—16 

Opinion 

We need openness 

in the CPS decision 

making process 

News 

Magistrates to be given 

unlimited sentencing powers 

in safety cases 

—05 

Redesigning 

CDM 

What does the diverse construction 

industry think of the proposals? 

—21 

Opinion 

Fee for intervention: 

HSE needs to pay 

attention to a year 

of disquiet 

—12 

Safety 

Management 

Opinion 

A lasting impact: how do 

we ensure we really learn 

from accidents? 

—10 

August 2014 


Feature 

What can enlightened 

organisations do 

to ensure MSDs 

continue to fall? 

—16 

Separate 

ways 

hold for 

For more information contact us: 

T +44 (0)20 8741 1231 

E ask@britsafe.org 


/britishsafetycouncil 

@britsafe 

/company/british-safety-council 

News 

Fines for breaching 

safety regulations up 

60% in lower courts 

—04 

British Safety Council (Company Limited by Guarantee). 

Registered in England and Wales No. 4618713 at 70 

Chancellors Road, London, W6 9RS. Registered Charity 

No. 1097271 and OSCR No. SC037998 

MPO144 

T 

the 

of sou 

An overview of the l 

on work-related noise 

—20 

News 

HSE review 

universal pra 

labels FFI 

—06 

Airp 

now 

Why air 

environ 

—24 

Ne 

Ne 

in 

r

CORRIDORS: 

Clinicians and patients at the 

forefront of the NHS 

Lord Howe, 

Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Quality 

“The terrible failings of 

Mid-Staffs taught us what 

happens when a culture of 

secrecy takes hold” 

The NHS remains the single institution that makes us most 

proud to be British, more than the royal family or the armed 

forces. 

We are proud of it for the values that it espouses, as a 

comprehensive health service that is, and will remain, free at the 

point of use for all our citizens. It is not perfect and the challenges 

it faces are immense - the rising health needs of an ageing 

population, and the increasing cost of drugs and more complex 

treatments mean that demand on the service is rising. To make 

sure the NHS is there to care for future generations, it needs to 

adapt to meet those challenges. 

One year on from the reforms there has been impressive 

progress. Today, instead of top-heavy layers of administration, 

doctors and nurses are designing pathways of care that are right for 

their patients. Those are the people who understand the services 

that local communities really need and how best they can be 

delivered. 

The reforms have stripped out £1.5 billion annually from the cost 

of NHS administration and re-directed this money to the frontline, 

where it benefits patients most. There are now 15,500 more 

clinical staff working in the NHS than in 2010 and 19,600 fewer 

administrative staff and managers. The benefits for patients are 

clear. Waiting times are low and stable and we have the lowest ever 

levels of hospital infections. 

This winter, the NHS met the A&E standard for the quarter and 

the year. That is what matters most to patients - getting the best 

quality care. Today, patients have a choice about where they go 

for treatment and can choose how they want to access services, 

according to what suits them. But they cannot do that without 

good information. Knowledge is power, and we are determined 

to make the NHS the most transparent healthcare system in the 

world, reflected in policies like the Friends and Family Test. 

That gives patients the chance to have their say about whether 

they would recommend the care they received in their local 

hospital to the people they care about. And that, in turn, helps 

identify poor performance and encourages staff to make changes. 

And more widely, across the NHS, organisations are now being 

held to account for the quality of the service they commission or 

provide. 

We have moved away from top-down controls - something 

that doctors and nurses told us got in the way of caring for their 

patients - and are replacing them with a culture of accountability, 

transparency and improvement. 

The terrible failings of Mid-Staffs taught us what happens when 

a culture of secrecy takes hold. We responded to the Francis report, 

introducing new inspections and a duty of candour for Trusts, 

driving hospitals to raise their game, recruiting extra nurses and 

addressing how they handle patient complaints. 

We brought in a tougher, expert-led inspection regime so the 

NHS is more open and upfront about mistakes and on the record 

about the steps it is taking to improve patient care. Meanwhile, 

Healthwatch has been established as the independent national and 

local voice for patients and the public, with a direct influence on 

how services are configured. 

It has been a busy year but there is still a great deal more to do 

and I am determined not to let up. Our clear focus is what is best for 

patients; whether this is care provided by the local NHS hospital, or 

a private provider, such as the Horder Centre delivering excellent 

orthopaedic and physiotherapy to patients from their sites across 

the southeast; or a charity, like Marie Curie Cancer Care, providing 

superb palliative care for cancer sufferers. 

Some would roll back patient choice but this attitude betrays 

a lack of trust in the people who use the NHS, the people whom 

the NHS is for. The reforms have put power where it should be: in 

the hands of clinicians and patients. Patients today are seeing that 

drive up standards; patients tomorrow will enjoy world class care 

from our NHS, true to the values on which it was founded. 

bEat CanCER 

SoonER. 

2 in 4 people survive cancer today. 

Help us make it 3 in 4. 

Cancer survival rates have doubled in the 

last 40 years. But there is still a lot to do. 

More than one in three people will get 

cancer in their lifetime. You can help us 

beat cancer sooner by: 

• Renewing efforts to promote the earlier 

diagnosis of cancer 

• Ensuring all people with cancer can access the 

best surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy 

• Setting an aspiration for a tobacco-free society 

• Continuing to support the UK’s world-leading 

cancer research infrastructure 

Do you want 

to know about: 

• Our ambitious new vision for 

accelerating progress? 

• Local and national cancer statistics? 

• Cancer Research UK in your community? 

• Our policy and parliamentary work? 

We receive 

no Government 

funding for 

our research. 

Contact us: 

jamie.white@cancer.org.uk 

020 3469 8524 @CR_UK 

cruk.org 

scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org 

cruk.org/localstats 

Registered charity in England and Wales (1089464), 

Scotland (SC041666) and the Isle of Man (1103). 

Photo: shutterstock.com 



CORRIDORS: 

The NHS is approaching 

a fork in the road 

Andy Burnham, 

Shadow Secretary of State for Health and MP for Leigh 

“The Opposition is 

leading the wider debate 

about the future of health 

and care” 

such as knee, hip and cataract operations - leaving thousands of older 

people struggling to cope. 

The NHS in 2014 is demoralised, degraded and confused. As the 

dust settles on the biggest-ever reorganisation, the damage it has 

done is becoming clear. The last two years have been two lost 

years of drift when the NHS needed clarity. During the battle over the 

Government’s proposed reorganisation, there were claims and counterclaims 

about what it would all mean. But two years later, it is clear that 

the NHS has never been in a more dangerous position - and the evidence 

for this is the relentless pressure on A&E. 

The specific warnings Labour made ahead of the reorganisation have 

come to pass. Firstly, we said it would lead to a loss of focus on finance 

and a waste of NHS resources. An outrageous £3 billion and counting has 

been siphoned out of the front-line to pay for back-office restructuring - 

£1.4 billion of it on redundancies alone. 

Just as we warned, four thousand people have been sacked and 

rehired. That is simply not justifiable when almost one in three NHS 

trusts in England are predicting an end-of-year deficit. David Cameron 

promised he would not cut the NHS but that is precisely what is 

happening across the country as trusts now struggle to balance the 

books. 

Secondly, Labour warned that the reorganisation would result in a 

postcode lottery. A recent poll of GPs found that seven out of ten believe 

that rationing of care has increased since the reorganisation. 

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has warned that 

patients are no longer receiving the drugs they are entitled to and has 

even taken the unusual step of urging them to speak up. New arbitrary, 

cost-based restrictions have been introduced on essential treatments 


Thirdly, we warned that rhetoric about putting GPs in charge 

was a smokescreen and the Act was a Trojan horse for competition 

and privatisation. Last year, for the first time ever, the Competition 

Commission intervened in the NHS to block collaboration between two 

hospitals looking to improve services. Competition lawyers, not GPs, 

are now the real decision-makers. The truth is that this competition 

regime is a barrier to the service changes that the NHS needs to meet the 

financial challenge. If we are to relieve the intense pressure on A&E, and 

rise to the financial challenge, it is precisely that kind of collaboration that 

the NHS needs. 

The NHS has been laid low by the debilitating effects of 

reorganisation, has been distracted from front-line challenges and is now 

unable to make the changes it needs to make. It is a service on the wrong 

path, a fast-track to fragmentation and marketisation. 

The evidence of all that can been seen in the sustained pressure on 

A&E – the barometer of the NHS. Hospital A&Es have now missed the 

Government’s own A&E target for the last 43 weeks running. That is 

unprecedented in living NHS memory – the pressure is not abating. 

The reorganisation contributed very directly to the A&E crisis. Three 

years ago, the College of Emergency Medicine were warning about a 

growing recruitment crisis in A&E but felt like “John the Baptist crying in 

the wilderness” as Ministers were obsessing on their structural reform. 

As we approach the end of this Parliament, the Opposition is leading 

the wider debate about the future of health and care. By endorsing full 

integration of the NHS and social care, Labour has opened up an enticing 

possibility: a single service for the whole person, meeting all of their 

needs – physical, mental and social. With “whole person care”, we can 

start where people and their families want to be – in their own homes – 

and build out from there. 

The NHS is approaching a fork in the road. It either continues 

to embrace marketisation and fragmentation, with all the threats 

that entails, or it goes in the opposite direction and becomes more 

collaborative and integrated, so it can meet the challenges of the 21st 

century. 

The next election will decide which path it takes, and the decision will 

have irreversible consequences. 


“I have huge respect for our 

doctors and nurses…” David Cameron 

That’s wonderful Prime Minister, but what about all the 

other NHS staff? 

More than 1.3 million people work in the NHS and a significant majority of 

them are not doctors or nurses. 

Lazy politicians and the media insult the other professionals who work across 

scores of roles delivering the best patient-centred care. 

So, what phrase best describes the staff who TOGETHER deliver a worldleading 

service? 

Health Care Professionals 

#healthcarepro 

The Society and College of Radiographers 

www.sor.org

ADVERTORIAL 

WINNERS AND 

LOSERS FROM HEALTH 

& SOCIAL CARE 

INTEGRATION 

Orthoptics is a little known speciality which helps 

countless people see better each year. Rowena 

McNamara and Anita McCallum from the British & 

Irish Orthoptic Society report, two years on, on the 

impact of the H&SC Act 2012. 

What is the British and Irish Orthoptic Society (BIOS)? 

BIOS is a professional body and (in the UK) a trade 

union, representing members at national and local levels. 

Orthoptics is one of the Allied Health Professions, and 

orthoptists are members of the eye care team (alongside 

others like ophthalmologists, optometrists, opticians and 

ophthalmic nurses). They work in the NHS managing a 

range of problems, mainly affecting the way the eyes move 

(such as squint and eye muscle palsies) and the eyes see 

(such as lazy eye and double vision). This might involve 

prescribing eye patching and eye exercises or referring 

for special spectacle lenses or for eye surgery. They use 

equipment to measure sight in premature babies and the 

size of the squint for the pre- operative surgery plan. Some 

orthoptists may also detect rare cancers of the eye and 

save lives as a result. 

Orthoptists are recognised as experts in assessing vision 

in children and adults with learning difficulties or stroke. 

They have a lead role in ensuring that the national vision 

screening of 4-5 year olds is carried out effectively. They 

work in hospitals community clinics and schools across 

age ranges – including babies who need visual assessment 

to the elderly with macular degeneration. They can 

transform lives and prevent bed blocking in hospitals: “I 

was admitted to hospital with double vision and dizziness. 

I had prisms fitted to my glasses which enabled me to go 

home instead of staying another day in hospital.” 

What has been the impact of the Health and Social Care 

Act 2012? 

Aside from the larger number of organisations and 

people to navigate round, the BIOS has found that health 

professionals who are greater in number, better organised 

and funded and, unsurprisingly, usually from the private 

www.orthoptics.org.uk 

sector, have begun to dominate eye health care planning. 

Emerging Local Eye Health Networks (LEHN) providing 

advice to GPs who are commissioning health services 

for their local populations, are in the main, chaired by 

Optometrists. They may be running the very groups, 

supposedly independent, which are giving advice which 

directly benefit them through the contracts awarded. A 

conflict of interest question is raised here. 

What’s wrong with this approach? 

Now, many high volume, routine health procedures have 

benefited from this private provider approach; for example, 

hip and knee surgery, where the area is clearly scoped 

out and uncomplicated cases seen. In eye health, there 

are a range of conditions varying in complexity – some 

can be seen in the community and but others need close 

supervision and regular treatment for several years under 

hospital care. 

Aside from questions of conflict of interest, there are also 

practical issues of lack of connectivity with hospital-based, 

high street optometrist and GP-based information. And we 

may end up just losing services as someone who runs high 

street optometry services may not understand the breadth 

of interventions currently available in secondary settings. 

What’s the solution? 

A more inclusive approach is encouraged with private 

and public sector eye health practitioners all involved 

with planning of services in primary and secondary care 

settings. Without this and everyone given share of voice, 

patients could end up losing services and private health 

care providers could dominate the marketplace to the 

detriment of those wanting independent advice and 

treatment appropriate for their condition. 

Karen O’Donoghue 

CDI President and Chief Executive 

of the Via Partnership 

Launched in April 2013, the Career 

Development Institute (CDI) is 

the successful, new UK-wide 

professional body for the career 

development sector. Our members 

are careers teachers, careers 

advisers and coaches and career 

managers working in the public, 

private and voluntary sectors. 

Strong, effective career 

development services have 

the power to raise individual 

aspiration, positively impact on 

social mobility by challenging 

stereotypes and provide a pool 

of talent – individuals who have 

considered their future, the skills 

they need and are motivated 

to work. Experience of work, 

exposure to employers and 

personalised guidance are some 

of the key ingredients to achieving 

social and economic prosperity. 

Vision for the 

Careers Sector 

Workforce 

The CDI has set out our 

commitment and enthusiasm for 

all age provision for those who 

need it. We are recognised as a 

powerhouse for innovation and 

professional excellence. Our 

vision is to develop a workforce 

that operates effectively in 

partnership, in a variety of 

settings and always working 

collaboratively to support our 

clients in a way that meets their 

and the economy’s needs. 

Our actions to achieve the vision 

centres on two key elements: 

• A Career Development Sector 

Progression Pathway 

• An effective and well 

regarded national (ie UK 

wide) Register of Career 

Development Professionals 

1. CAREER DEVELOPMENT 

SECTOR PROGRESSION 

PATHWAY 

Our sector is a thriving 

and healthy mix of career 

development practitioners. Our 

members provide activities and 

services which help to motivate 

and empower individuals to 

make effective transitions in 

learning and work at all ages. 

Working with leading providers 

of accreditation and learning, 

we are building a clear and 

transparent Progression Pathway 

for the sector that identifies not 

only relevant qualifications but 

also describes the competences 

and behaviours that are 

expected, spanning levels 

of operation throughout the 

sector, from trainee to registered 

practitioner to management. 

We believe that such a pathway 

is one of the hallmarks of a 

profession, bringing clarity 

for the practitioner, assured 

opportunities for development 

and the ability to work towards 

recognised standards. 

2. THE NATIONAL 

REGISTER FOR CAREER 

DEVELOPMENT 

PROFESSIONALS 

Our work in establishing and 

promoting a public register 

will be the driving force in 

professionalising the sector. Our 

aim here is to achieve a broad 

based Register that celebrates 

and kite marks a clear standard 

for differentiated practice at Level 

6 (graduate) and above. 

Our actions in broadening the 

range of qualifications that give 

entry to the Register will ensure 

a unifying framework for practice 

and offer transparency and open 

access for the market place. This 

will identify the standard to look for 

help to determine where specialist 

expertise is essential and where 

flexible skill sets can be deployed. 

Our overarching goal is to quality 

assure the professional practice 

of our sector in a meaningful 

way - differentiating only on 

methodology not on standards. 

We see these two main strands 

delivering our aim. The Career 

Progression Pathway will be 

completed and promoted through 

our website www.thecdi.net 

early in 2015. The National 

Register of Career Development 

Professionals can be accessed 

through our website and will 

also be available as an on-line 

directory later this year.

CORRIDORS: 

Tackling the sustainability 

challenge in eye health 

Lord Colin Low, 

a Crossbench Peer 

In June 2014, NHS England published a Call to Action aimed at 

improving eye health and reducing sight loss. That is a welcome 

recognition of the importance of eye health and the major 

challenges the NHS faces in delivering comprehensive and cost 

effective services. The challenges are well known, and principally 

take the form of increasing demand for services arising from a 

growing elderly population with deteriorating eye health, major 

health inequalities with a strong link between social exclusion and 

preventable sight loss, and a highly constrained financial outlook. 

The specific objective of the “Call to Action” is to explore how 

primary care services can promote prevention and early detection. 

It seeks to stimulate debate on how a more preventative approach, 

early accurate detection by primary care services and effective 

management in the community could tackle health inequalities, 

improve outcomes and reduce unnecessary hospital appointments. 

It is, of course, extremely important to explore ways of doing 

“more for less”. We must look carefully at how eye care services 

can be reconfigured and, where it makes sense, moved out into the 

community. However, it is unrealistic to suggest that finding new 

ways of working will enable the NHS to meet rising demand now and 

in the future. 

Missing from the “Call to Action” is a recognition of the impact of 

new treatments for macular degeneration and diabetic retinopathy. 

Assessed as cost effective by NICE, those have become available in 

the last five or so years and are saving the sight of tens of thousands 

of people who would previously have gone blind. They are, however, 

creating major pressures on eye care budgets and it is unrealistic to 

expect that these can be met without additional funding. 

The case for finding the money is very strong. As the “Call to 


“Eye care services are 

extremely complex” 

Action” notes, partial sight and blindness currently cost the nation 

in the region of £22 billion a year. That is accounted for in terms of 

direct health care costs (including the cost of falls due to poor sight), 

indirect costs (such as lost productivity) and the burden of illness. 

With half of all sight loss being avoidable through early detection, 

diagnosis and treatment, the case for spending more to save sight is 

a powerful one. 

Service reconfiguration and additional investment are two 

vital elements in tackling the “sustainability challenge” facing 

eye health. The third is national leadership. Eye care services are 

extremely complex, straddling primary, secondary, community and 

social care and involving a mix of NHS and private providers. Also, 

commissioning is split across NHS England, clinical commissioning 

groups and local authorities, which further complicates matters. 

Without clear leadership, there is a very real danger of fragmentation 

and unacceptable variation in service quality across the country. 

One element of the national leadership can be provided by the 

recently formed Clinical Council for Eye Health Commissioning. 

That brings together the main professional bodies and patient 

groups with the objective of providing sound advice to NHS England 

on commissioning issues. However, in addition there is a clear 

need for a National Clinical Director (NCD) working inside NHS 

England. There are over 20 NCD’s in post and they play a key role in 

driving transformation, promoting a balanced approach to service 

improvement and working to “maximise coherent system change”. 

That is particularly important in eye health where divergent interests 

have, at times, resulted in an inconsistent approach to service 

improvement. 

In a recent response to a Parliamentary question, Earl Howe made 

clear that decisions about NCD appointment would be made by NHS 

England “guided by the objectives set for it in the Mandate and a 

desire to provide clinical leadership across a broad range of fronts, 

focusing more on people and patient pathways rather than individual 

conditions.” It is hard to think of an area within the NHS that better 

fits that focus on people and patient pathways than eye health. 

Without a strong clear voice inside NHS England and without 

the Department of Health speaking up for eye health, patients will 

continue to lose out. We will continue to see unacceptable variation 

in the quality and accessibility of services across England. Service 

reconfiguration and additional investment will help, but if the 

“sustainability challenge” is to be effectively addressed the sector 

must have a National Clinical Director. 


Take a trip through Eye Society 

… and help reduce avoidable sight loss 

Visit RNIB at the party conferences and immerse yourself in 

“Eye Society”. Our exhibition stand highlights the challenges 

faced by patients who are told they are losing their sight. 

Almost two million people in the UK are 

living with sight loss and this figure is 

predicted to double by 2050. 

Over the last decade, many new 

treatments have been developed, saving 

the sight of thousands of people who 

would previously have gone blind. This 

is enormously welcome and a great 

step forward. However, these advances, 

coupled with an ageing population, are 

placing huge strains on eye departments 

and causing delays to patient care. 

Action is urgently needed to ensure 

patients can access the timely diagnosis 

and treatment which could save 

their sight. 

Some eye clinics have Eye Clinic Liaison 

Officers (ECLOs) providing vital post 

diagnosis support which also frees up 

clinicians’ time to focus on treating 

patients. But far too many eye clinics 

don’t have an ECLO. 

Visit us in the conference exhibition 

hall and take a trip through “Eye 

Society” and find out how you can 

support our new campaign to increase 

the number of ECLOs available to help 

people losing their sight. 

Alternatively, please contact us at 

campaign@rnib.org.uk for further 

details. 

Registered charity numbers 226227, 

SC039316, 1109 

Designed as an old fashioned 

automaton, our three-tiered 

stand is packed with working 

models that bring to life the 

patient journey from diagnosis 

to treatment.

CORRIDORS: 

Lessons learnt from the UK floods 

Maria Eagle, 

Shadow Secretary of State for Environment, Food 

and Rural Affairs and MP for Garston and Halewood 

“What I saw from the 

Government was utter 

incompetence” 

Government must address the 

burning issue of biomass fuel 

John Dye, 

President of the Timber Packaging & Pallet Confederation 

(TIMCON) 

CORRIDORS: 

“Our main concern is 

Government subsidies for 

biomass fuel” 

This winter, the UK saw an exceptional period of storms, 

culminating in serious coastal damage and widespread, 

persistent flooding. 

Over the months that followed, I met many individuals in 

Somerset and across the south-west who saw their homes and 

businesses ruined by floodwater. The emergency services and 

the staff at the Environment Agency deserve our praise, but 

what I saw from the Government was utter incompetence. 

The Government’s response to the winter floods was slow 

and chaotic, and despite all the meetings of Cobra - the 

Government’s emergency committee - it was far from clear 

what all the talking had achieved for all those still facing flooded 

homes and farmland. It is inexcusable that it took so long to 

get the pumps, boats and sandbags to communities which 

desperately needed help. 

Yet, despite David Cameron’s promise this February to spend 

whatever was needed to help get communities back on their 

feet, the reality for farmers, fisherman and businesses is that 

this money is not actually being delivered. 

When Parliament broke for this summer’s recess, the Prime 

Minister had paid out just £403,000 to Somerset farmers from 

the original £10 million pledged, and only £2,320 had been paid 

out to just one fisherman in the south-west. Clearly, the Prime 

Minister has gone from “money’s no object” to “out of sight, out 

of mind”. 

But just as the winter floods exposed the Government’s 

inability to respond to a serious crisis, it also revealed something 

deeply worrying: a clear admission from the Tories that they just 

do not get the increasing threat of climate change. 

I am clear that climate change is a serious threat to our 

national security. The destruction we saw this year and the 

misery it brought to thousands across the country can only serve 

as a reminder of that. 

The until recently Environment Secretary, Owen Paterson, 

was a climate change denier who could not even be bothered 

to be briefed by the chief scientist at the Met Office or even his 

own departmental science adviser. 

It was his job to protect us from the floods and future floods 

but, instead, he chose to ignore the science and we are now 

paying the price. 

We simply cannot continue to make policy based on the view 

that extreme weather events come around every hundred years 

or so. The Met Office, the Committee on Climate Change and 

the overwhelming majority of scientific evidence all tell us that 

extreme weather events are increasing in intensity as well as 

frequency. 

It is the failure to get to grips with the increasing threat of 

climate change and the Government’s short-term approach to 

flood defence funding that will lead to a significant increase in 

the number of households at risk of flooding. 

The Labour Party is clear that we will have to re-prioritise longterm 

preventative spending in flood risk management, including 

investment in the maintenance of flood defences, which is every 

bit as important as building new schemes. 

That is why Ed Miliband announced that the next Labour 

Government will establish an independent National 

Infrastructure Commission to identify the UK’s long-term 

infrastructure needs, including flood defences, and hold 

Government to account for meeting them. 

I hope that Liz Truss, the new Secretary of State, will end this 

Government’s prejudice-based policy-making and put flood 

protection back as a core Defra priority. 

The timber pallets and packaging sector is one of the 

cornerstones of the UK economy. Almost all traded 

goods are protected and moved by those wellestablished 

products, manufactured from a natural, sustainable, 

environmentally friendly material. 

The industry is a significant employer. It sustains 

approximately 8,000 British jobs directly, and a further 30,000 

indirectly. It also benefits the environment because wood 

takes carbon from the atmosphere as it grows, storing it in the 

products we manufacture. 

Since the last Conference season 12 months ago, we have 

been pleased to see the early encouraging signs of what appears 

to be a sustained economic recovery as well as a growth in sales 

of a wide range of goods. An increase in demand for timber 

packaging and pallets - the essential items needed to move 

those products - has naturally followed as a result. 

That progress has boosted the packaging and pallets 

business, but also created a challenge for our industry, as the 

upswing in demand for wood for the construction sector has put 

upwards pressure on prices. That has been compounded by the 

increased requirement for timber by fencing, caused by severe 

storms and flooding early in 2014. 

That, however, is just another one of the many obstacles we 

have always overcome, and which have so often demonstrated 

the resilience of our sector. Our main concern is Government 

subsidies for biomass fuel. They are an environmental and 

economic folly and are distorting the market. 

To be clear from the outset, British forest-based industries 

such as ours began by supporting biomass. The initial 

proposition was solely to use thinnings from trees or marginal 

harvesting. But the introduction of significant subsidies 

dramatically altered that picture; they mean artificially inflated 

demand for biomass will far outstrip supply and there are 

reports that virgin timber is already being purchased by these 

new power generators for burning. 

There are two unwelcome effects of that activity. Firstly, 

the carbon in the wood is released immediately back into the 

atmosphere, when it could have been stored in products for 

years. Secondly, it distorts the market with simulated demand 

- this reduces availability, inflates prices and renders British 

manufacturers less competitive. That, in turn, opens the door 

to alternative materials, particularly plastics, which, once 

again, from an environmental perspective are clearly a far less 

attractive option. 

The timber packaging and pallet industry has been 

working hard, together with colleagues in other UK wood 

industries including panels, fencing and construction, and the 

Confederation of Forest Industries (CONFOR) to communicate 

those issues urgently. And there are an increasing number of 

non-commercial voices also asking the Government to reevaluate 

its policy on biomass as a priority, including journalists, 

academics and environmentalists. 

In a recent interview, Radio 4’s Environmental Analyst Roger 

Harrabin said the Government’s decision to subsidise biomass 

was a “fundamental miscalculation”. Meanwhile, a group of 

prominent US scholars were so concerned they have taken the 

unprecedented step of writing to the Government here in the 

UK to ask for an end to subsidies. 

We were encouraged to hear the results of the Government’s 

analysis on biomass subsidies released this July, which 

confirmed that the current system is not working. It found that 

without rules to ensure good practice, subsidies are increasingly 

likely to encourage the burning of virgin timber. They will 

continue to harm the economy and the environment. Further to 

that, they are a shocking waste of tax payers’ money in a time of 

austerity. 

The timber pallets and packaging industry is a great British 

success story; a resilient sector that keeps trade flowing 

smoothly. In just a few years, and as the result of significant 

investment in UK sawmilling and new plantings in the 

sustainable forests from which we source our raw material, 

we have seen the use of home-grown British timber in pallets 

increase from 35 per cent to around 90 per cent. 

We want it to remain a success so we are very pleased that 

politicians are starting to understand and engage with our 

industry on the vital issue of biomass fuels. We are looking 

forward to working with them in the year ahead to make further 

progress for the benefit of the environment and British business. 





CORRIDORS: 

Time to understand the importance of 

lobbying 

Francis Ingham, 

Director General of the Public Relations Consultants Association 

“It is a vital part of our 

democracy” 

Are Parish Councils a thing of the past? 

Heather Wheeler, 

a member of the Communities and Local Government 

Select Committee and MP for South Derbyshire 

CORRIDORS: 

“Newhall has morphed 

into a lively area” 

Where would the world be without conference season? David 

Cameron might never have found the right moment to 

declare: “Let sunshine win the day”. Tony Blair’s brilliant “I’ve 

not got a reverse gear” might not have garnered as much coverage. 

And Iain Duncan Smith’s “quiet man” might not have been so loudly 

announced. 

So, Conference season is upon us once again - a time when politicians 

and lobbyists mingle in the name of policy, conversation and partnership. 

Conference is a key time for the members of the association I manage, 

the Public Relations Consultants Association - the leading industry body 

for the PR and Public Affairs industry. The absolute professionalism 

and shared goals that underpin those conversations during conference 

give very little indication of the hysteria we have seen around such 

relationships. 

This January, the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning 

and Trade Union Administration Bill made its final journey through 

Parliament. 

The PRCA has repeatedly condemned that omnishambles and spoken 

out about the mistakes in the Act. With its painfully narrow definition of 

lobbying, the planned statutory register will omit the 80 per cent of our 

industry represented by in-house professionals. 

How did we get here? Last summer, Patrick Mercer, MP for Newark, 

was the subject of a Daily Telegraph and BBC Panorama investigation. 

Mercer accepted £4,000 for asking questions in parliament by an 

undercover reporter with a hidden video camera. This April, Mercer 

announced he would resign his seat after the recommendation of the 

Standards committee that he should be suspended from the Commons 

for six months. 

The committee stated that they were “not aware of a case relating to 

a sitting MP which has involved such a sustained and pervasive breach of 

the house’s rules on registration, declaration and paid advocacy”. That 

was in line with how Kathryn Hudson, Parliamentary Commissioner for 

Standards, said that Mercer had inflicted significant reputational damage 

on the house and its members. 

Obviously, that sorry story has been incredibly damaging for politics. 

But, neither that nor any of the other recent “lobbying” scandals have 

involved lobbyists, and the behaviour exhibited by these non-lobbyists 

(in many cases, journalists) is prohibited by the PRCA’s own Code of 

Conduct. 

So, why did lobbyists get so much flack? 

The PRCA has been incredibly vocal in condemning parliamentary 

sleaze and has called for serious reforms. Indeed, our own Code of 

Conduct prevents members employing a sitting peer. That is not against 

the House of Lords’ own rules. 

At the time of writing this article, the Cabinet Office is struggling to find 

anyone to apply for the role of Lobbying Act Registrar. In the meantime, 

we continue to work with our members to deliver the PRCA Public Affairs 

Register and Code of Conduct that has provided full transparency for 

over a decade. 

And the above is, of course, simply Part 1 of the Lobbying Act. Part 

2, the controversial section attempting to regulate the campaigning 

activities of charities, is also a concern for our industry. This August, we 

wrote to the Electoral Commission calling for clarity on ten fundamental 

questions which remain unanswered about the impact that will have on 

PRs. 

Yes, the omnishambles is hydra-headed. It is extremely unlikely that 

the Government believes this Act – with its many troubling heads - is 

necessary. They merely felt they had to do something in the wake of 

problems like Mercer. 

The public affairs industry wants transparency - we currently abide by 

a greater level of transparency than the legislation in question will offer. 

The Act will not stand the test of time. Indeed, Labour has announced it 

would repeal the Act. 

We have some areas of agreement with Labour - in particular, they 

understand that the definition of lobbying is inadequate, the scope is too 

narrow and the information on the register leaves much to be desired. 

However, some of Labour’s language, once again, portrays lobbying 

as a somehow underhand, disruptive process. It is, in fact, a vital part 

of our democracy and needs to be properly understood. We will never 

relent in our mission to uphold the truth on the matter, prove our 

industry’s deep commitment to transparency and correct perceptions. 

Public trust in politicians can be rebuilt, but lobbyists are not the 

problem - nor is the Lobbying Act a solution. 

Parish Councils are an element of local Government that 

could well be facing extinction. But, are they still relevant 

and do they have a useful purpose? I, and the residents of 

South Derbyshire, believe it is the humble Parish Council which 

is the driving force of keeping our constituency the wonderful 

place that it is today. 

Most small villages and the fringes of towns have Parish 

Councils - a long standing arrangement passing on from 

generation to generation. However, not that many people know 

if they have a Parish Council, never mind the positive role that 

the Council and its Councillors play in our societies. 

Parish Councils are elected bodies - standing as the first 

tier of democracy - and are very locally focussed, area-centric 

bodies, which communicate mainly with the local District, City 

or County Council. 

Parish Councillors rarely contact MPs directly as the issues 

they tackle are solved at Local Authority level, but, of course, 

when it is necessary, they do so. 

Parish Councils have responsibilities which affect every 

single resident in their area. They are in charge of maintaining 

war memorials, particularly poignant in this centenary year of 

the First World War; they also have the ability to oversee the 

creation and ongoing maintenance of cemeteries, village halls 

and local recreational areas and grounds - some even have their 

own social housing to manage. 

South Derbyshire is a huge constituency consisting of over 

30 Parish Councils. Our main town is Swadlincote, which has a 

growing urban fringe and where part of the surrounding area is 

the village of Newhall. 

Newhall is a largely residential ex-mining town that is in need 

of some regeneration as it has a few derelict buildings and some 

closed shops. With the help of its residents, things are about to 

change. 

Newhall has a proud community who formed the Friends of 

Newhall Park and which is chaired by the very proactive Barry 

Woods. Over the last 18 months or so, Barry and the Friends of 

Newhall have approached various local firms and people to raise 

money and little by little they have begun the regeneration of 

their beloved town. 

The Park now has picnic benches and, through the group’s 

hard work, achieved QEII status as part of the Queen Elizabeth II 

Fields Challenge to protect our outdoor spaces. 

The group is also in the process of raising enough money to 

create an outdoor gym and play area together with searching 

for other local grants. Furthermore, the group is working on the 

relevant planning applications for other outdoor equipment, 

such as the creation of a skate park. 

From talking to Barry and the group, I learnt that although 

they have District and County Councillors, the residents want 

to represent themselves at a town level; to be in charge of their 

open spaces and protect their heritage, just as they have started 

to do with the park. That is when they approached me for help 

to create their own Parish Council in Newhall. 

As their local Member of Parliament, I have, of course, helped 

them on their way to do that. I was so delighted when I heard 

from them; as having once been a Councillor myself, I know how 

rewarding the role is and how exciting it is to represent the area 

that you live in. 

The people of Newhall want their voices heard, and the 

creation of a Parish Council is the perfect way for them to do 

this. They will be able to make their own vision of the area that 

they live in a reality as well as creating and using local groups, 

such as gardening clubs, to protect, preserve and enjoy their 

green spaces. 

Newhall Park Primary School will be able to help keep the 

War Memorials in the area in good condition whilst teaching the 

local children about our history and the local men and women 

who lost their lives serving their country. 

From an ex-mining town, undergoing the disruption of 

change, Newhall has morphed into a lively area with a bright 

future, all thanks to its hardworking residents. I think that is a 

prime example of how Parish Councils are still very much active 

and useful in our communities, and we should thank our Parish 

Councillors and their hard work to promote and ensure the 

longevity of the humble Parish Council. 





CORRIDORS: 

Laying a solid foundation for the 

housing market 

Brandon Lewis, 

Minister of State for Housing and Planning 

and MP for Great Yarmouth 

Our economy is growing faster than any country in the G7, 

and we are creating more jobs than the rest of Europe 

put together. However, when it comes to increasing 

housing supply, we lag behind our European neighbours. 

That is a not a new problem. Over the last 30 years, successive 

Governments have faced similar challenges. There is, however, a 

clear winner in the competition for the worst solution. That prize 

belongs to Labour. 

Housebuilding began to fall after 1997, and under 

Labour’s supposedly “strategic” planning system, the rate of 

housebuilding plummeted to its lowest peacetime level since 

the 1920s. 

Something had to be done. That is why we immediately 

dismantled the failed top-down planning system and channelled 

new investment into housebuilding. Since then, we have cut the 

deficit to keep interest rates low for homebuyers and introduced 

the Help to Buy scheme so that hard-working families can get 

on the housing ladder. 

The good news is that our approach has worked. At the 

time of writing, our record stands at over 445,000 homes built 

since July 2010, including 200,000 affordable homes, with 

housebuilding at its highest level since 2007. 

The prospects for further progress are also bright. The 

construction sector has been growing for the past 14 months, 

and is hiring new workers at the fastest rate since records began 

17 years ago. 

After months of doom mongering, the critics of Help to Buy 

have largely gone silent, for the simple reason that the scheme 

is fulfilling exactly what it was designed to achieve: providing 

assistance to hard-working families while expanding and 

“This Government has 

made giant strides 

towards fixing the broken 

housing market” 

accelerating the supply of new homes. 

It is no accident that since Help to Buy began, private 

housebuilding has shot up by a third. That is the sharpest annual 

increase for 40 years, and with housebuilders pledging to use 

this momentum to boost output, we can expect the positive 

news to continue. 

So, what next? In the year ahead we will continue to give the 

housing market a boost by helping people purchase new build 

homes, re-starting construction on stalled housing schemes and 

releasing surplus brownfield land for development. 

More homes will be built in every sector of the housing 

market. Our Affordable Housing Programme will deliver 170,000 

new homes by 2015, and a further 165,000 by 2018, with many 

of the homes built with new “offsite construction” techniques, 

where high-quality new homes can be constructed in a day. 

At the same time, we will support the delivery of new homes 

built specifically for private rent through the Build to Rent 

programme. Councils are already building new homes at the 

fastest rate for 23 years, and we will help them consolidate this 

success with £300 million of extra borrowing headroom through 

the Housing Revenue Account. 

Our new Right to Build will enable people who want to build 

their own home to ask their council for a suitable plot of land, 

and we are also funding 10,000 “serviced plots” where work on 

custom or self-built homes can quickly get underway. 

All of those measures will make a contribution to increasing 

the number of homes we build. But my main reason for 

optimism is the pipeline of new projects emerging from the 

reformed planning system. Last year, successful applications 

for major housing schemes were up 23 per cent, and planning 

permissions were granted for 216,000 new homes. 

Those positive signs for future growth rest on the foundation 

of changing option towards new development. The latest British 

Social Attitudes Survey on housebuilding shows that since the 

introduction of our planning reforms, support for new homes 

has risen dramatically, from 28 per cent in 2010 to 47 per cent in 

2013, while opposition to new homes over the same period has 

fallen from 46 per cent to 31 per cent. 

This Government has made giant strides towards fixing the 

broken housing market we inherited in 2010. But I am under 

no illusion - increasing housing supply will remain a long-term 

challenge. 

That is why it is a vital part of our long-term economic plan. 

It is now my job to maintain the pace of progress and give 

communities the support they need to build the homes they 

want. 

ADVERTORIAL 

Building for the present and the future 

Alison Thain, Chief Executive Officer of Thirteen Group, discusses with 

Marcus Papadopoulos the role that her housing organisation is playing in 

the North-East of England 

Q What is the role of Thirteen Group? 

Thirteen Group is a housing organisation based in the North-East of 

England with the purpose of driving out further efficiencies and finding 

better ways of working by sharing expertise and resources for the benefit 

of the communities and tenants where we work. The group is made up 

of the parent company, as well as four landlords and developers and a 

specialist care and support arm. 

Q Why has the group been named “Thirteen”? 

We chose the name “Thirteen Group” because we want to challenge 

preconceptions and the word “thirteen” is a perfect example of that; it is 

only a word but people attach negative connotations to it. So, by never 

prejudicing, the aim of Thirteen Group is to help people think differently 

about their lives and recognise the opportunities available to them. 

Q Can you describe the set aims of Thirteen? 

Firstly, we are a group of landlords and take our responsibilities to our 

tenants very seriously. We have over 32,000 homes with more than one 

in ten of the local population living in our properties. So, being a good 

landlord is our number one priority. Secondly, as a social enterprise, we 

want to ensure that the profits we can generate are used to support the 

social aims of the communities we serve, focussing on the environments where our tenants live and the social wellbeing of 

our tenants. 

Q What do politicians at Westminster need to understand about the housing sector today in Britain? 

The bottom line is that there is a housing crisis in the UK based on a shortage. Experts in the housing sector believe that the 

government should be building a minimum of around 240,000 new homes a year; however only half of this figure is actually 

being met. That is bad for social mobility as young people are unable to get onto the housing ladder and, of course, this puts 

pressure on the rented sector. So, new homes need to be built but homes that people want and can afford. 

Q How do decisions taken at Westminster affect the North-East housing sector? 

There is a big question as to how we define housing markets because, having said that there is a crisis in the housing 

sector, it actually plays out very differently in different parts of the UK. In London and the South-East, there is a different 

kind of pressure on housing markets - namely that there is a desperate need for more homes in order to support the growing 

economies there. However, the government cannot allow London and the South-East to overheat and this therefore requires 

having a stronger emphasis on the regions. Lord Heseltine was very clear on that in his report when he said there have to 

be strong regions and strong housing markets to support the economic ambitions of local areas. 

In housing terms, the UK is a complicated picture because it follows economies. Given that there is such a strong 

economy in London and the South-East, this fact tends to dominate the policies and thinking of central government when 

there actually needs to be more creative thinking about what impact certain policies could have on the other major cities 

in the country. The Bank of England, for example, was concerned by the recent Help to Buy scheme because it feared it 

could lead to the overheating of the London and South-East housing market and, as a consequence, there was a discussion 

over whether the scheme should be scaled back. The Help to Buy scheme has benefited communities in the North-East 

tremendously and Thirteen Group would be very reluctant to see the scheme stopped because of a perception of overheating 

in London and the South-East. We need different policies for different regions and not a ‘one-size-fits-all’ policy. 

Q Why is it important for organisations like Thirteen Group to have a voice in the economic and political debate 

over housing? 

Housing associations are very well placed in their local areas to really understand the local picture. In light of how Thirteen 

Group is embedded in the North-East, we truly understand what the economic drivers are and can contribute a great 

deal to strategic debates. And, as a social enterprise, Thirteen Group re-invests its profits back into communities and 

neighbourhoods, thereby providing an extremely strong message and model. So, we are significant strategic players and 

can utilise our resources – over £1 billion worth of assets – to help support local initiatives such as jobs and training. Further 

to that, Thirteen Group is one of the top ten employers in the North-East in terms of the number of people we employ and the 

fact that we build around 500 new homes a year. 





CORRIDORS: 

Labour’s blueprint to get 

Britain building 

Emma Reynolds, 

Shadow Minister for Housing and MP for Wolverhampton 

North East 

“We need a step-change 

in the scale of house 

building” 

Tweetminster: how social media is 

changing the face of British politics 

Tom Brake 

Deputy Leader of the House of Commons 

and MP for Carshalton and Wallington 

CORRIDORS: 

“I also recently launched a 

new initiative: AskTom” 

Housing will be one of the key issues at next year’s General 

Election, and voters will be presented with a clear choice 

between the record of the Coalition Government and 

Labour’s plans to get Britain building. 

For more and more people, the dream of owning a home of their 

own is further out of reach than ever before. Increasing numbers of 

young people and families are finding themselves renting privately 

and for longer, in a sector that provides little security and, all too 

often, accommodation that is sub-standard. If you are waiting in 

the queue for a social home, then there are 1.6 million families 

ahead of you. 

There is a simple cause for the current situation: we have not 

been building enough houses. That problem did not begin with the 

current government. But, under David Cameron, it is becoming 

far worse. Housebuilding in the past four years is lower than at any 

time in peacetime since the 1920s. We are not even building half 

the number of homes we need. 

The failure to build also has much wider economic costs. The 

Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, has said that the 

housing market is the single biggest threat to economic recovery. 

That is why Labour has committed to getting 200,000 homes 

built a year by 2020 and our housing commission, chaired by Sir 

Michael Lyons, has spent the past year drawing up a roadmap for 

how we can deliver on this commitment in government. 

We are determined to tackle the root causes of the crisis. We 

do not release enough land to build homes on. In some cases, 

that is because it is constrained by the planning system, while in 

other cases it is due to speculative land banking. We have a house 

building industry that has become too reliant on volume house 

builders and lacks competition. 

If homeownership is to be a realistic aspiration for the next 

generation, and if rents are to be affordable, then we need a stepchange 

in the scale of house building. 

That is why Labour has made housing a priority for the next 

Labour Government. Both Ed Miliband and Ed Balls have made 

clear that building more homes is central to building a balanced 

recovery and fairer economy. 

We have also set out plans to release more land. We have been 

clear that we will keep the National Planning Policy Framework 

but will improve it by ensuring that local authorities which want to 

expand but do not have the land, can do so through a right to grow. 

Alongside that, Labour is determined to reform the land market. 

We will bring an end to land-banking by giving local authorities the 

power to say to developers who are sitting on land with planning 

permission to either ‘use it or lose it’. 

We have also set out plans to reform and increase 

competitiveness in the housebuilding industry. Earlier this year, 

Chris Leslie, Labour’s Shadow Chief Secretary, and I announced the 

details of Labour’s “Help to Build” policy specifically designed to 

help SME builders. 

In the Federation of Master Builders’ 2013 House Builder Survey, 

60 per cent of members cited access to finance as a major barrier to 

their ability to increase their output of new homes. 

So, the next Labour Government will provide government 

guarantees for banks lending to SME construction firms in a 

similar way to how the current “Help to Buy” scheme underwrites 

mortgages. 

By themselves, those steps will not be enough. Given the severity 

of the shortage, we will also need some big scale solutions. That is 

why the next Labour government will forge ahead with the next 

generation of New Towns and Garden Cities. 

Further to that, under a Labour Government, three-year 

tenancies will become the default, with predictable rents to stop 

excessive rent increases. We will also ban letting fees on tenants, 

ending a situation where some tenants have to pay as much as 

£500 in unfair fees. 

Under this government, home ownership is at its lowest point 

since 1987. If we carry on as we are, it will fall even further. The only 

way to ensure more people can buy their own home is to build 

more of them. At the next election, Labour will have a fully worked 

out plan to achieve that. 

A 

few years ago, my staff kept telling me that social media 

was the best way to be accessible and to reach out to 

people who MPs find it hard to engage with. After all, 

according to a McKinsey and Company report which came out last 

year, the average Briton spends 60 minutes on social networking 

sites every day, equating to 21 per cent of daily internet usage. 

Optimise Blog, a technology blogging website, suggests that that 

53 per cent of the UK population, around 31 million people, are 

on Facebook, and Tony Wang, current Vice-President of Twitter, 

tweeted last September that there were 15 million active members 

of the microblogging site in the UK. Britain, it seems, is becoming 

more connected. 

Politics has changed a lot since I was first elected by the people of 

Carshalton and Wallington in 1997. During the televised debate for 

the 2010 General Election, 154,342 tweets appeared from 33,095 

different people and, according to social media monitoring service 

Yatterbox, a combined total of nearly one million tweets were 

sent out by me and fellow MPs in 2013. Yet, I was always sceptical 

about its electoral benefit. However, during the local elections this 

May, hundreds of volunteers signed up to help via social media and 

hundreds more told me whether they would back my party locally. 

From personal experience, the more I use social media, the 

more I can see its effect. That is why, if politicians are to represent 

modern Britain, we must take the step into the online world and 

engage with social media. My residents’ e-survey has allowed me 

to target the issues which really matter to my constituents such as 

healthcare, policing and education. 

For politicians, social media provides an opportunity to engage 

with the electorate in ways which would have been impossible 

even a few years ago. Social media can make our politics more 

accessible, more egalitarian, more engaging and more inclusive. It 

is innovative and as politicians we must always look to encourage 

and reward innovation. Last year, during the G8 Summit in 

Northern Ireland, I hosted a Twitter Hunger Summit with major 

international development charities, and following this year’s 

Queen’s Speech, I filmed a 90 second YouTube video about its 

content to try and make politics more accessible. 

It is often mused that young people are not interested in politics 

but this is fundamentally wrong. Demos, a think tank, found that 

84 per cent of 16-17 year olds intend to become voters. According 

to Simon Milner, a Policy Director at Facebook, “the Facebook 

population is more politically engaged than the rest of the 

population and are 43 per cent more likely to vote and, crucially, 57 

per cent more likely to persuade a friend or co-worker to vote.” 

Platforms like Twitter, Facebook and Google+ make it easier for 

our constituents to contact us and have the potential to attract the 

young and disengaged voter. A recent study, conducted by Ipsos 

Mori, a leading market research company in the UK, suggests that 

68 per cent of Twitter users are under the age of 35. Likewise, the 

largest demographic on Facebook is 25-34 years old. That provides 

an opportunity for politicians to engage with their constituents on a 

platform which their constituents feel comfortable with. 

Social media has, without a doubt, made me a better MP. As a 

Member of Parliament, it is my duty to reach out to constituents 

in ways that they use themselves to communicate. Social media 

provides the perfect tool. That is why I have been holding regular 

surgeries on Facebook chat, Twitter and Google+ for several years 

- the first MP to do so. I also recently launched a new initiative: 

AskTom. I asked my constituents if they have any questions which 

they want to ask me and, if they do, to submit them through 

my website. The response was overwhelming. Hundreds of 

constituents got in touch to ask me questions ranging from foreign 

affairs and the environment to education. 

With public opinion of politicians at an all-time low, Westminster 

must evolve and show it can communicate on equal terms with 

increasingly e-connected citizens. If politicians fail to do that, then 

we run the risk of becoming irrelevant. 





CORRIDORS: 

Delivering the correct public pension 

sector scheme 

Kris Hopkins, 

Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Communities 

and Local Government and MP for Keighley 

“Our proposals were 

the culmination of 

a comprehensive 

examination” 

Renewable generation makes up around 15% of the 

UK’s electricity supply. Over half of this comes from a 

combination of wind, wave and tidal power. These sectors 

currently support over 34,000 jobs and have the potential 

to create 70,000 more jobs over the next decade. 

Affordable 

Secure 

The sustainability and affordability of public sector pensions is 

crucial for the long-term health of our public finances. 

When this Government came into power, our assessment was 

that the cost of public service pensions had become unsustainable, and 

with more retiring baby boomers than public sector workers paying into 

pension pots, it was clear that the figures did not add up to offer the best 

value for money to the taxpayer. 

The Government appointed Lord Hutton to review the rising costs of 

public servant pensions, and he recommended a comprehensive and 

long-term structural reform of public service pension schemes. 

The Local Government Pension Scheme was no exception. By 2010, 

the employer costs of the scheme had almost quadrupled in England 

alone and stood at an astonishing £5.7 billion. We were clear we had to 

act. 

The Local Government Pension Scheme was the first public service 

pension scheme to be reformed following Lord Hutton’s analysis. And a 

new programme with benefits based on career average earnings, rather 

than final salary, was successfully introduced in April this year. 

There is still more to be done to make the local government scheme 

more efficient. As a scheme that has £180 billion of investment assets, 

it is vital we strike the right balance between keeping investment fees 

down and maintaining strong investment performance. 

This May, we reached a significant point in that agenda when we 

published a consultation setting out how the scheme could save up 

to £660 million a year by the 89 pension funds working more closely 

together and investing more wisely. 

Our proposals were the culmination of a comprehensive examination 

of the way the scheme was structured. We looked at all available 


evidence and considered a wide range of options. We also relied on 

sector partners including local councillors and union representatives for 

additional analysis and advice. 

That innovative approach was part of the Government’s open policy 

making which encourages commissioning advice from outside Whitehall 

using the Contestable Policy Fund. Independent pensions experts 

Hymans Robertson produced an insightful cost benefit analysis of LGPS 

funds and investment vehicles. That work contributed significantly to the 

development of our proposals. 

The evidence all pointed in the same direction – fund mergers take 

longer to implement and deliver lower savings and reduced investment 

flexibility. So, we decided to focus on common investment vehicles 

which deliver similar scale benefits but without the same level of 

associated costs. 

Common investment vehicles offer a more efficient approach to 

investment by pooling assets and allowing funds to deal with investment 

managers collectively, therefore reducing fees. For alternative 

investments like infrastructure and private equity, the evidence shows 

that savings of up to £240 million a year can be made if just one common 

investment vehicle is used instead of the existing arrangements. 

The analysis also indicated that managing listed assets such as 

bonds and equities through something called passive investment 

management. Passive management is inherently much cheaper as 

it mirrors a market and aims to deliver a return comparable with that 

market’s overall performance. That will cut fees by £230 million a year, 

with a further £190 million saved every year from reduced transaction 

costs. 

Some fund managers may feel that a move to passive management 

means they miss out on potentially higher returns. However, Hymans 

Robertson’s assessment was clear that if existing bonds and equities had 

been invested in that way, there would have been no discernable loss in 

overall investment performance yet management fees would have been 

substantially lower. 

At a time when the taxpayer burden and public finances remain at the 

forefront of our long- term economic plan, the rising cost of investment 

must be given proper consideration. 

While those proposals take another big step towards tackling the rising 

cost of the scheme that we inherited, we have one more area to address: 

the pension fund deficit that remains. That is why we have asked our 

sector partners to develop a shortlist of feasible options for managing 

that pension gap in the most efficient way. 

Yes, the Local Government Pension Scheme has already experienced 

considerable change, but this Government has a clear plan to restore 

the health of the economy and our public finances. There is more we 

must do in the year ahead to ensure the scheme is fair and affordable to 

taxpayers’ and public sector workers alike. 


2% 

Support for wind energy 

accounted for £18 or 

less than 2% of the 

average domestic 

energy bill in 2013 

(DECC) 

Clean 

12million 

tonnes 

CO2 

avoided in 2013 by 

generating clean 

electricity from wind – 

overall C02 emissions 

from the power sector 

fell by 7.5% 

(DECC, DUKES 2014) 

47% 100% 

of UK energy demand Wind energy delivers 

was met by imports in totally clean, home- 

2013, up two-thirds since grown power 

2010. We import over 80% 

of the coal we burn 

(DECC, DUKES 2014) 

Popular 

#1 

Investing in 

renewables 

48% of voters rank 

renewables investment 

as the top priority for UK 

energy security, ahead 

of new nuclear (15%), 

energy efficiency (14%) 

and fracking (13%) 

(ComRes, July 2014) 

If you want to find out more about the energy 

source that provided enough power for 

6.7 million homes last year, please contact 

publicaffairs@RenewableUK.com 

If you want to show your support for wind 

and other renewables please sign up at 

www.actionforrenewables.org

CORRIDORS: 

Helping the poorest to stay warm and 

healthy 

Ed Davey, 

Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change 

and MP for Kingston and Surbiton 

When MPs of all parties voted for the Warm Homes and 

Energy Conservation Act in 2000, there was a real 

belief we would end fuel poverty in a generation. 

Yet, in 2014, we are nowhere near ending fuel poverty. In fact, 

the progress has been lamentably slow. So, what has happened, 

and how has the Coalition addressed the issue? 

After a promising start for the first three years after the 2000 

Act, progress was sharply reversed between 2004 and 2010. 

That was mainly because energy prices began a long period of 

steady rises after 2004. 

Indeed, between 2005 and 2010, we saw faster rises in 

energy prices than we have seen in this Parliament, which 

partly explains why fuel poverty rose when Ed Miliband was 

Energy Secretary but has actually fallen every year since 2010. 

Other reasons for the Coalition’s relative success include energy 

efficiency work since 2010 and our introduction of the Warm 

Home Discount, which targets financial help with energy bills on 

the nation’s two million poorest households. 

However, my predecessor, Chris Huhne, was rightly alarmed 

that fuel poverty had risen so much under Labour. He asked a 

leading expert, Professor John Hills, to analyse exactly what fuel 

poverty was and how we were measuring it, and advise on how 

we could dramatically improve our performance. 

Hills pulled no punches. He found that each year more 

people died of living in cold homes than are killed on the roads. 

He found that the way we were measuring fuel poverty was 

too simplistic: if you spent over 10 per cent of your income on 

energy bills, you were in fuel poverty - even if you were spending 

“Our fuel poverty strategy 

has also linked up with 

the NHS” 

so much because you had several homes or a very big house. 

Indeed, under Labour’s definition, even the Queen supposedly 

could not afford her electricity and gas bill! 

Hills recommended two new measures for fuel poverty. 

Firstly, a “low income, high cost” measure, so we do not end up 

directing policy at helping wealthier people cut their bills. And 

secondly, a measure of the depth of fuel poverty – so future 

policy would be able to consider those who were most fuel poor, 

where their inability to afford to heat their homes might well be 

damaging their health or, indeed, their children’s education. 

After consulting on Hills’ proposals, we largely accepted his 

initial package and have since been developing our ideas to use 

his vastly improved analytical framework. 

Now we are consulting on our draft Fuel Poverty Strategy – 

the first since 2001. Our proposals include tough new targets to 

get as many homes as we can to an energy efficiency ‘C rating’ 

by 2030. By learning from past mistakes, we have included 

Interim targets to ensure future Governments can be held to 

account for progress – so we have targets for an ‘E rating’ by 

2020 and a ‘D rating’ by 2025 for as many homes as practically 

possible. 

That will not be easy - currently only 5 per cent of England’s 

2.3 million fuel poor homes would currently meet a B and C 

standard. Yet, it is right to be ambitious because it is the energy 

bills of the poorest that should worry us the most. And raising 

energy efficiency in the homes of the fuel poor can dramatically 

cut electricity and gas bills. Today, a typical B and F or G rated 

home faces energy bills that can be more than £1,000 higher 

than a B and C rated home. 

Our fuel poverty strategy has also linked up with the NHS. If 

someone is ill because their home is cold and damp, we want 

doctors to be able to solve the problem once and for all by 

prescribing improvements to people’s properties rather than 

just medicine which treats the symptoms but not the causes. 

As fuel poverty is disproportionately in the privately rented 

sector, I have also published important new proposals to help 

tackle fuel poverty for tenants. I have proposed that from 2018, 

landlords will only be able to rent out properties meeting certain 

energy efficiency standards and that tenants have a right to 

request energy efficiency improvements from 2016. 

Above all, our new strategy seeks to link up tackling fuel 

poverty with tackling climate change. We will only seriously 

cut our carbon emissions if we stop the scandal of cold, leaking 

homes. And now, at last, we have the right measurements, the 

right strategy and an approach that reaches across Government, 

especially into health. 

Richard Coackley CBE, UK Energy Development Director 

at URS, speaks to Marcus Papadopoulos about the 

energy challenges facing the UK 

Q Will current plans for energy supply in 

the UK meet future demand? 

The UK faces a combination of energy 

challenges due to the closure of older power 

stations, creating a decline in fossil-fuelled 

capacity, and delays to the development of 

new nuclear plants needed to meet baseline 

demand. In addition, the UK has ambitious, 

legally binding carbon reduction targets that 

necessitate a transformation in the way we 

generate and use energy. 

The world is also in a phase of improving 

economic prospects and market recovery 

typically brings increased demand for energy. 

Rising international demand for fuel will 

drive up prices. As a result, the UK must 

urgently tackle not only the supply of power 

but also its use. Improving energy efficiency, 

particularly among the largest industrial 

consumers of power, could substantially 

ease future capacity requirements. 

Resilience also needs to be improved, to 

cope with interruptions to supply or peaks 

in demand caused by increasingly extreme 

weather events. 

However, the biggest challenge is probably 

the need to plan for the long term while 

continuing to meet short-term demand. 

Q What should policymakers do to 

ensure the lights stay on? 

Energy security is one of the most pressing 

challenges facing Government. Delays to new 

nuclear plants will squeeze the UK’s supply 

margins before the end of 2020, which 

raises the prospect of insufficient capacity 

to meet demand. 

Government must make it commercially 

attractive for companies to bring new 

capacity on stream, without placing an 

unmanageable burden of cost on consumers. 

This requires a careful balancing of 

investment and incentives, given the wide 

range of technologies involved. The UK 

has already witnessed turmoil in the solar 

industry, caused by chopped and changed 

policies. Industry needs greater predictability 

if it is to build the mix of energy supplies 

that will be valid not just this year, but in 

20 years’ time. 

The Government’s success in attracting 

investment from China, Japan and France 

should be applauded. However, given that 

there is division even within particular 

political parties over shale gas, nuclear, 

wind power, solar power and carbon capture, 

it would seem wise to try to insulate energy 

policy from the swings of the electoral 

cycle. There is cross-party support for an 

independent body to oversee transport 

infrastructure, and arguably the same 

approach is even more acutely needed 

for energy. 

Q Which technologies hold most 

promise for the future? 

There is no single solution. Meeting the UK’s 

future needs will require a blend of different 

approaches including new nuclear, a variety 

of renewables, energy storage, shale gas 

and carbon storage. 

Heating accounts for half of the UK’s 

total energy demand and offers significant 

scope for decarbonisation, as well as 

reduced demand on gas and electricity 

grids, through improved insulation and 

small-scale generation. 

At the other end of the scale, new nuclear 

plants hold a lot of promise, not just in 

energy terms but economically. Energy 

supply is a global market and the UK can 

be a world leader in nuclear technology. 

Q Won’t the intermittent nature of 

renewables like solar and wind power 

exacerbate supply problems? 

There is a lot of variability in these supplies 

but some cycles do even out. In the UK, 

solar and wind generation peak in opposite 

seasons, for example. 

The most promising long-term solution is to 

develop new ways to store excess energy 

for later use. Hydroelectric pump storage 

is by far the most widely deployed current 

technology, but other options such as battery 

storage, electrolytic hydrogen production or 

liquid fuel synthesis are under development. 

Q Does the UK possess the skills 

needed to tackle such a wide variety 

of challenges? 

There are areas of excellence across the 

UK, with Sellafield nuclear site a prime 

example. Here, experts from NMP, a URSled 

consortium with AMEC and AREVA, are 

supporting the development of one of the 

most highly skilled nuclear decommissioning 

workforces in the world. 

Energy is a global business and global 

companies bring valuable transferrable 

experience to the UK, helping the country 

compete in an international marketplace. 

For example, URS has provided 

environmental, planning, consulting, 

engineering or construction services for 

virtually every nuclear power plant operating 

in the United States, making it well 

positioned to bring that expertise to bear 

in the UK. 

ADVERTORIAL 

In association with URS 





CORRIDORS: 

The need to develop a credible 

approach to immigration 

Dr Liam Fox, 

MP for North Somerset 

“We need to separate fact 

and fiction” 

How Labour should and must 

approach the 2015 general election 

David Blunkett, 

MP for Sheffield Brightside and Hillsborough 

and a former Home Secretary 

CORRIDORS: 

“The prize is ours for the 

taking” 

Like many western countries, the UK has adverse demographic 

trends, particularly the projected increase in the number of 

retired citizens in relation to the working population. Coupled 

with projected increases in life expectancy, the age dependency 

ratio (number of pensioners per 1,000 people of working age) will 

increase from 300 (which has been a stable average since the 1970s) 

to almost 500 in 2051. 

The amount of money required to meet future pension liabilities 

is frighteningly high, and there is no easy way of finding it. We 

therefore have a problem that will require a range of measures to 

combat it, including encouraging economically beneficial labour 

into the country. The alternative to a viable place in the global 

market is managed decline – not an option we should be willing to 

contemplate. 

However, before we can debate immigration effectively, we 

ought to deal with some of the myths surrounding the subject. One 

of the most common is that immigration is primarily a problem 

relating to the European Union. The figures reveal that that is at 

best a partial truth. From 2005 to 2010, the United Kingdom gained 

525,000 immigrants from the EU – 304,000 from the EU member 

states that joined the union in 2004. Contrast that with the 1.2 

million migrants from outside the EU who remain in Britain from 

the same period, and you will see that EU immigration actually 

makes up less than a third of Britain’s total immigration figure. 

Despite the furore, Eastern Europeans make up barely 18 per cent 

of the total figure. That matters because it reveals that whatever 

the future holds for Britain’s relationship with the EU, we still have 

plenty of control over our borders, and it is up to us to decide who 

we can let in and who we would prefer not to. 

Australia has moved towards a points-based immigration 

system. Previously open to over a hundred different skills, the 

new system homes in on those areas of greatest importance to 

the country. Those include medical, mining, and engineering 

skills. Canada has a similar policy. In 1967, a points system was 

introduced to determine immigrant eligibility with preference given 

to educated French and English speakers of working age, while the 

Immigration Act of 1976 officially made Canada a destination for 

migrants from all countries. 

UK immigration policy needs to be similarly rebalanced so that 

those who come to our country are usefully economically active. 

There is neither the public appetite nor an economic case for 

allowing immigrants to come to the UK who will simply absorb 

our national wealth rather than helping to create it. In short, I 

believe that we need to have what we might call an ‘open and shut’ 

immigration policy. That is, an approach that is open to those who 

are economically active and have the skills our economy requires 

but closed to those who will become dependent on the state or 

who possess skills we do not require for our economic well-being. 

There is no reason why the UK should not adopt a strict points 

system, along the Australian model to deal with the two thirds 

of our immigration which comes from outside the EU. It has the 

merits of clarity and transparency and, I believe, would be seen as 

fair and reasonable by the British people. But let us be very frank, if 

we are going to ensure that those with the necessary skills for the 

high end of our economy are more able to come to the UK, then 

the corollary will be that the numbers of those who come here as 

part of our social or cultural migration will need to be curtailed. 

We have more control over the majority of our immigration 

policy than most people believe. It is time to set out a credible 

narrative which will be equally understood by those who wish to 

come to this country as well as those already here. We will need to 

have policies which match economic need with social and cultural 

balance. 

We need to separate fact and fiction and we need, above all, to 

deal with the subject of immigration in a mature and reasonable 

way, refusing to cede it to the political margins. 

The last party conference before any General Election (when 

they can be predicted) is always febrile and, often, extremely 

tense. We now have, of course, an unusual situation with a 

fixed-term Parliament and therefore a certainty of the date as well 

as the year. 

For the main parties, the policy process is in many ways easier. 

Because we, in the Labour Party, are a democratic party, and 

work both through the policy forum and conference itself, simply 

announcing policies out of the blue can only be achieved with some 

clever footwork and a great deal of behind-the-scenes persuasion. 

That means the key milestones (policy forum last July), this year’s 

conference in Manchester and, of course, the manifesto in the runup 

to the General Election, have to be choreographed very carefully 

to provide continuity and consistency but also to offer something 

fresh (or refreshed) to the electorate. 

The challenge has always been to join up policy. To achieve that, 

extremely good initiatives in their own right form part of a narrative 

which paints the bigger picture of what Labour is offering beyond 

2015 and the kind of country we envisage in the years to come. 

This election is more difficult than most for a number of reasons. 

We have, of course, the aftermaths of the global meltdown and the 

way in which the Conservatives, aided and abetted by the Liberal 

Democrats, have rewritten history to try and pretend that it was 

the Labour Government which was responsible for the subprime 

mortgage collapse in the United States, for the fiasco of Lehmann 

Brothers and the meltdown of banks across Europe! 

Anyone with a brain knows that that is untrue but the 

propaganda has been effective and with two parties against us, 

rather than the usual single governmental party with two main 

opposition parties combating them, the message is harder still to 

get across. 

But there is also the matter of how the Liberal Democrats will 

start to disengage from the Coalition itself, and therefore from the 

Conservative overlords who have led them by a ring in the nose, 

since May 2010. The question being, “when will the gloves be off?” 

Because both Coalition ‘partners’ will at a particular moment in 

time have to present a fully-fledged alternative to the now defunct 

Coalition programme, and whilst each of these parties have been 

throwing up individual policies for ‘after the election’, we have to 

coin a phrase, ‘seen nothing yet’. 

Preparing for that, as well as our own positive programme of 

hope for the future, is not just about tactics but about the way in 

which we deal with policy challenge. For those observing the way 

in which David Cameron and George Osborne have behaved, one 

can see easily that their often raison d’être is to put Labour on the 

defensive, to provide traps into which we might fall, and to use the 

power of government to paint us into a corner – not least in relation 

to further austerity measures and the future of the economy and 

public investment. 

All of that requires a sophisticated and politically mature 

approach. But that is easier said than done. Most of the press 

are vehemently against us and are determined to denigrate Ed 

Miliband and seek to divide the leadership even when people are 

going out of their way to be loyal and supportive. Anything that 

smacks of ‘thinking’ has, over recent months, been presented in 

that light. 

Given that there is no challenge to the leader (unique in recent 

times), it really is time for confidence. Each member of the Shadow 

Cabinet should be able to speak (of course, on message) but with 

the ability to build a profile by writing, broadcasting and speaking 

- saying ‘something’ which captures the imagination whilst not 

committing us to unaffordable wish lists. 

Joined-up thinking is all about ensuring that different policy 

initiatives tell a similar story on economic and social investment, on 

extending participative democracy and on the power of taking on 

vested interests. 

Not negatively in terms of resentment and envy, but, rather, 

unlocking talent, backing entrepreneurship and enterprise and 

speaking for the nation as a whole. 

If we speak as those whom we seek to win over speak, if we feel 

and think like those intelligent voters wise about the enormity of 

globalisation and the barriers to progress yet hopeful of change, 

they and we will be at one. The prize is ours for the taking. 





CORRIDORS: 

Keep bloodsports consigned to 

history...where they belong 

Chris Williamson, 

MP for Derby North 

“Only a Labour 

Government will take 

positive action to address 

ethical issues” 

Conservative government blocked Labour MP Kevin McNamara’s 

Wild Mammals Protection Bill. 

Five years later, Labour swept to a landslide victory in the 

General Election. At last it seemed we had a good chance of 

defeating the Tories’ refusal to budge. 

It is nearly 40 years since I first joined the League Against Cruel 

Sports, and my passion for animal welfare has remained steadfast 

ever since. 

I can vividly remember one of my first actions as a member of the 

League – it was to sign a one million-name petition calling for the 

abolition of hare coursing. Unfortunately, I also remember that the 

campaign was defeated. Not by argument or reason, and certainly 

not by any sense of natural justice. It was defeated because the 

parliamentary chicanery of the bloodsports fraternity blocked its 

path. And that is a frustration that myself and others who share my 

passion have felt repeatedly since then. 

For hare coursing in 1976, read fox hunting in 1992 and badger 

culling in 2013. Of course, there is a fundamental difference 

between the first two and the latter. Hare coursing and fox hunting 

are merciless killing for fun, while the latter has been undertaken 

courtesy of a dubious environmental ticket. Where they do have 

similarities is in their total lack of justification – a point backed in 

the case of badger culling by the overwhelming weight of scientific 

opinion which disputed the validity of the programme. 

Time and again, politics has got in the way of common sense, 

reason and what is fundamentally the right thing to do where 

animal welfare is concerned. 

For most of the period I have referred to, it has been the 

Conservative Party’s entrenched position on bloodsports that made 

it impossible to make serious headway. A ban on hare coursing 

and stag hunting was included in the Labour Party’s manifesto in 

1979 – the same year that I joined the League Against Cruel Sports’ 

national executive. And with the Tories refusing to listen to reason, 

we focused on local authorities and successfully persuaded large 

numbers of councils to ban hunting with dogs on their land. 

But, the frustration continued nationally and, in 1992, the 


The Wild Mammals (Hunting with Dogs) Bill should have been 

passed, but the pro-bloodsports fraternity used every trick in the 

book to filibuster and frustrate the passage of the Bill. 

In 1999, then Home Secretary Jack Straw established an 

unnecessary and unjustified Government inquiry into hunting 

with dogs, chaired by Lord Burns. The committee was asked to 

examine, inter alia, the obvious: is hunting cruel? Meanwhile, the 

killing-fun-brigade carried on with impunity. 

With the 2001 election success under our belts, we were 

determined to ensure the bloodsports fanatics would not frustrate 

civilising legislation yet again. 

In spite of overwhelming public support for the ban, the 

unelected House of Lords tried to prevent the legislation getting 

onto the statute book. 

However, the League and the Parliamentary Labour Party was in 

no mood to allow that tiny minority to use undemocratic tactics to 

hold sway once again. That resulted in the Commons invoking the 

Parliament Act to force the legislation through. 

With so many people struggling to make ends meet on low-paid 

part-time jobs, or without any security on zero hours contracts, it is 

easy to take our eye off the ball on issues like animal welfare. 

But time has shown us two things. Firstly, only a Labour 

Government will take positive action to address ethical issues like 

those I have detailed, even in the face of seemingly more important 

matters. And secondly, those of us who remain passionate in our 

disdain for cruel sports must remain vigilant. 

There has been sufficient evidence of hunt saboteurs being 

subjected to violence and intimidation in recent years to show that 

those who enjoy killing animals will not be easily dissuaded from 

setting aside their despicable pastime. 

Even today, we hear talk of many Conservative MPs favouring a 

repeal of the ban, for no reason more noble than a desire to retain 

favour with Tory voters in rural areas. 

There are not sufficient numbers in Parliament for that to happen 

now, and it is doubtful that will change any time soon as many firsttime 

Tory voters in 2010 have quickly realised that the Britain they 

see developing is very different to the one they were promised. 

But, so long as there is a pro-hunt lobby, we must remain as 

committed to our beliefs now as ever. 


Snares: Cruel, indiscriminate, 

primitive – and legal. 

Despite overwhelming public opposition, the 

UK government and devolved administrations 

continue to expose animals to the torture of 

snaring. The time has come to ban these cruel 

and indiscriminate traps. 

OneKind animal charity is working for a ban on 

snares in all parts of the UK. Please support us by: 

• Ordering campaign postcards asking MPs to 

press for action in England. 

• Contacting OneKind for updates on Scotland, 

Wales and Northern Ireland 

• Reporting snare incidents on the dedicated 

SnareWatch website. 

If you agree that no animal should fall victim 

to the needless cruelty of snaring, please tell 

government NOW. 

10 Queensferry Street 

Edinburgh EH2 4PG 

Tel: 0131 225 6039 

email: info@onekind.org 

www.onekind.org 

Registered Charity No. SC041299 

CRUEL: Any snare can leave a trapped animal 

thirsty, hungry, exposed and terrified. 

INDISCRIMINATE: Dogs, cats, badgers, deer 

and hares are regularly victims of snares. 

PRIMITIVE: Pathologists have repeatedly 

described the widespread suffering caused 

by these ancient traps, originally used in the 

Stone Age. 

For postcards (FREEPOST) and information, please 

contact info@onekind.org or call 0131 225 6039 

www.snarewatch.org

No.1 

in Europe 

The University Business 

Incubator (UBI) Index has 

recently ranked SETsquared 

as the top university 

business incubator in Europe 

and second best globally. 

No.2 Globally 

Bournemouth University: 

Bringing clarity 

to cyber security 

The Bournemouth University Cyber Security Unit (BUCSU) offers a unique approach to 

cyber security. Specialist consultancy and collaborative partnerships are underpinned 

by excellent research and we use this to enhance our education programmes. This fusion 

ensures our portfolio reflects the latest industry and research developments. 

Research 

BUCSU researchers work on cybercrime policing; homeland 

security; information assurance architecture; trust and risk 

management; security design; digital forensics; ethical 

hacking; human factors in security; cyber situational 

awareness and security engineering. 

Education 

Our newest programme is the MSc Cyber Security and Human 

Factors. Starting in January 2015, this industry based MSc, 

combines modular teaching and independent research. It 

has been designed to equip professionals with the skills and 

education required by most digitally enabled organisations. 

Consultancy 

BUCSU works with a Regional Organised Crime Unit and 

one of the UK’s leading suppliers of integrated access control 

systems, among other organisations. Our consultancy 

services enhance and secure organisations through: 

developing working prototypes with built-in security; helping 

protect intellectual property, business processes and data; 

security testing; security awareness training. 

www.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucsu 

“ SETsquared is an outstanding business incubator that 

University 

provides exceptional quality to its client companies and 

Business 

Incubator 

produces growth companies and high economic impact.” 

of 2014 

Dhruv Bhatli, Co-founder and Director of Research at UBI Index 

www.setsquared.co.uk/ubi 

@setsquared 

UBI INDEX 

GLOBAL TOP 25

CORRIDORS: 

Keeping Britain ahead in 

the global race 

Greg Clark, 

Minister for Universities and Science 

and MP for Tunbridge Wells 

“The application rate 

for 18 year olds from 

disadvantaged areas is 

also at a record high” 

Education has 

never been 

so exciting 

ADVERTORIAL 

Those are not just brilliant scientific endeavours in their 

own right – they are putting Britain centre stage, helping our 

businesses to expand and our cities grow. 

I will be attending conference in Birmingham this 

year with my new ministerial hat on, one that combines 

Universities, Science and Cities–and for me, the setting 

could not be more perfect. 

Birmingham, often referred to as the country’s second 

city, is a clear example of how the three portfolios 

intertwine. 

Our scientific institutions have incredible potential - 

and in Birmingham, life sciences is a key asset that had 

potential to grow even further. That was something which 

was identified very early on by the Greater Birmingham and 

Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership as part of their growth 

plan. 

How can we ensure today’s students 

fulfil their potential? By harnessing 

innovative technology that enhances 

their learning experience, says Open 

University Vice-Chancellor Martin Bean. 

At The Open University our students are getting excited by 

an app. We call it OUAnywhere. Launched last year, it 

allows all our undergraduates instant access, via a 

mobile device, to everything they need for their studies. 

Described by one of its tens of thousands of users as ‘simple 

and brilliant’, OUAnywhere makes lugging textbooks and 

notebooks onto the bus or the plane a thing of the past. With 

your phone or your tablet in your hand, your entire course is at 

your fingertips, wherever you happen to be. We’re not the only 

ones who think it’s great – OUAnywhere won not one, but two 

prizes in this year’s Guardian University Awards, for Online 

Learning and for Student Experience. 

As we gather in Birmingham for conference, 

thousands of new students are also travelling to the 

city for Freshers week. 

Their stay at university promises to be an exciting 

time, full of opportunities. Universities are about ideas 

and providing students with the freedom to develop new 

research and techniques. And right here in Birmingham, 

that unique environment has allowed university scientists to 

make incredible advances. 

Researchers here have developed new ways to help 

children with autism learn to speak; they have made 

breakthroughs in the fight against hospital superbug MRSA; 

and they have made crucial progress in the treatment of 

leukaemia and other cancers. 

Just one part of that plan is to support the £24 million 

Institute of Translational Medicine, funded through the City 

Deal. That is a joint project between the Queen Elizabeth 

hospital and the University of Birmingham, and will enable 

pharmaceutical firms to be co-located with scientists and 

academics and create over 2,000 life science jobs. 

In addition, Greater Birmingham & Solihull’s growth deal, 

announced by the Prime Minister this July, will support a 

new Life Sciences Campus on the same site. 

Those projects are good for the university, good for 

science and good for Birmingham - and also good for the 

UK’s life sciences industry which is one of the world leaders 

and key to our position in the global race. 

But that is not just about supporting our institutions – it 

is about supporting our young people, too. Because we can 

only truly succeed in the global race if we fully realise the 

potential that our country has to offer. 

Put simply, we are not going to be competitive as a 

country if those who have the intelligence and ability to go 

to university cannot go. 

I have recently talked about the “opportunity gap” that 

It took months of intensive development to get to the launch of 

the app – digitising all of our undergraduate materials, text and 

multimedia, and optimising them for mobile use. And we are still 

improving it, using analytics that capture student use and 

feedback to provide a better user experience. 

Why did we do it? 

Because we had noticed 

that more and more of 

our students were using 

The Open University’s 

online Virtual Learning 

Environment. If they 

were so keen to work 

online, why not make it 

even easier for them? 

“Innovative technology 

is something that 

today’s students and 

prospective students, 

who have grown up in a 

digital world, expect” 

Innovative technology is something that today’s students and 

prospective students, who have grown up in a digital world, 

expect. 

A survey by the NUS and HEFCE found that 78 per cent of 

students think ICT improves their learning experience, and that 

they want the latest technology to be a fundamental part of that 

experience, not just an add-on. 

This is something that we at The Open University understand 

very well. Since we launched, 45 years ago this month, 

innovation has been in our DNA. It’s not just something we talk 

about, it’s a value that we live. 

Martin Bean, Vice-Chancellor of The Open University 

That’s why we are leading the UK response to the growth of 

massive open online courses (MOOCs), bringing together some 

of the country’s leading universities and cultural organisations to 

create FutureLearn – the UK’s first at-scale provider of free 

courses capable of delivering quality educational experience to 

vast numbers of students around the world. 

But for all the technology and scale, what makes FutureLearn 

special, just like OUAnywhere, is the quality on offer. In the first 

post-course surveys, around 95 per cent of users said they will 

recommend FutureLearn to a friend. As with everything the OU 

does, FutureLearn’s key measure of success will be the quality 

of the overall student experience. 

In all forms of education – online, offline, traditional and 

technological – nothing matters more than the quality of 

teaching. This is why technology in itself is not some kind of 

magic bullet. You can’t turn a bad teacher into a good one 

simply by giving them an iPad. 

But innovative technology twinned with innovative pedagogy is 

a different matter entirely. If we can find new ways to make 

teaching and learning more engaging, more interactive, more 

personal and more rewarding, it won’t just be OUAnywhere 

that’s getting students excited. 



CORRIDORS: 

“We should be making 

the most of the brightest 

and the best, just as our 

competitors are” 

still exists in Britain. There are thousands of young people 

across the country who could benefit from higher education 

and are not getting the chance to fulfil their potential. 

I want everyone who is capable of benefiting from college 

or university to have the chance to do so, just as I did. 

It is strongly in our national interest that we make full 

use of the talent that we have available in Britain - be that 

in sciences, the arts or any one of a wide range of subjects. 

We should be making the most of the brightest and the best, 

just as our competitors are. 

and ability to compete internationally. 

As Lord Robbins said 50 years ago: higher education 

should be available to “all who are qualified by ability and 

attainment to pursue them and who wish to do so”. 

Those words have never been more relevant - and 

they remain this government’s commitment to future 

generations. 

PIONEERING 

NEW MATERIALS 

FOR INDUSTRY 

Industry faces continuous pressure to deliver innovative, high-value 

products while using more efficient, sustainable and cost-effective 

processes. The creation of new functional materials for products and 

processes is fundamental to this necessary step-change in innovation. 

A revolutionary new facility, co-founded by the University of Liverpool and Unilever, will empower 

companies to respond to these challenges and reinvent concepts of advanced manufacturing. 

The Materials Innovation Factory – due to open in 2016 – will provide companies access to an 

unparalleled suite of cutting-edge equipment and expertise, enabling them to create new 

materials and commercial applications that will compete in a global marketplace. 

The facility builds on Liverpool’s world-leading materials chemistry research and sets a new 

paradigm for university-industry collaboration. It will significantly extend the UK research base, 

strengthen its impact and promote economic growth. 

This Government has taken steps towards closing that gap 

by removing the cap of the number of university places so 

that no bright person who wants to study hard needs to be 

turned away. 

Recent statistics have shown that the application rate for 

18 year olds increased to its highest ever level this academic 

year. And more importantly, the application rate for 18 year 

olds from disadvantaged areas is also at a record high. 

That is promising and suggests we are moving towards 

fully realising the potential the country has to offer, but 

we cannot be complacent. Ensuring that higher education 

is open to all is key to the individual development of our 

children but also the development of our national economy 

BENEFITS INCLUDE ACCESS TO: 

• A broad suite of state-of-the-art facilities 

• Private lab space and flexible, specialist workspaces 

• A broad network of connections with both industry 

and academia 

• World-leading research expertise and technologies 

• Professional team to provide on-site technical support 

SERVICES 

• Research (contract/collaborative) 

• Hiring/access to facilities and equipment 

• Bespoke training and upskilling 

• Consultancy 

• Research hotel – private laboratory accommodation 

for the duration of your research programme 



www.liverpool.ac.uk/materials-innovation-factory

Developing excellence 

in STEM education 

building the future 

The National Science Learning Centre, 48 newly 

established school-centred Science Learning 

Partnerships across England and the National 

STEM Centre support schools across the UK 

in the teaching and learning of STEM (science, 

technology, engineering and maths) subjects. 

By helping teachers to provide world class 

teaching in STEM we open doors to the future 

for all young people. 

To achieve this aim, the network provides an exciting, 

innovative and comprehensive programme of high 

quality continuing professional development for 

primary, secondary, post-16 teachers and technicians. 

“The whole experience of the National 

Science Learning Centre and Project 

ENTHUSE has been immensely valuable 

to me and my students, both in terms 

of keeping me up to date with subject 

developments, but also in inspiring them 

about science and where it can take them. 

I am immensely thankful to those 

companies and organisations who, through 

their support, enable this to happen.” 

Joanna Parrott, Science teacher 

University Higher Apprenticeships - 

the best of both worlds! 

For those wishing to embark on a professional career, the choice 

is no longer going to University or going out to work. Higher 

Apprenticeships can include professional and work-based 

University degrees that enable you to graduate 'on the job'. 

Evidence of the network’s impact: 

Impact on pupils: increased enjoyment of, 

and engagement in, science lessons and 

extra-curricular activities; increased knowledge 

of career opportunities in science. 

NfER June 2013: Qualitative evaluation of the 

National Science Learning Centre 

Schools and teachers that engage most with 

the network will see improvements in pupil 

attainment, especially where there is sustained 

activity through more than one teacher and event. 

Department for Education and the Wellcome Trust May 

2010: Evaluation of the Science Learning Centre Network 

Middlesex University has world class 

expertise in professional and workbased 

learning and has now introduced 

a range of University qualifications as 

part of the Government's Higher 

Apprenticeship initiative. 

This includes the following programmes: 

BSc (Hons) Professional Aviation 

Pilot Practice 

BA (Hons) Professional Practice in 

Quantity Surveying and Commercial 

Management 

BA (Hons) Professional Practice in 

Construction Site Management 

For further information: 

There was a statistically significant increase in 

the numbers of pupils achieving grades A*-C 

in GCSE sciences which can be associated with 

teacher training days at the National Science 

Learning Centre. 

National Audit Office November 2010: Educating 

the Next Generation of Scientists 

Teachers saw significant impacts of Science Learning 

Centre CPD on job satisfaction, taking on new 

responsibilities and moving into new areas of work. 

Secondary teachers also saw impacts on promotion. 

Sheffield: CEIR 2012: The Impact of Science Learning 

Centre continuing professional development on 

teachers’ retention and careers 

Recommendations from The Royal Society June 2014: Vision for science and mathematics education 

FdA Professional Practice in 

Construction Operations 

Management 

Higher Diploma Professional Practice 

in Leading and Managing Care 

Services 

www.mdx.ac.uk/wbl 

www.mdx.ac.uk/higherapprenticeships 

apprenticeships@mdx.ac.uk 

or call 0208 411 5555 

• Make subject-specific professional development a core requirement for teachers and technicians and link this 

to career progression 

• Invest over the long term in national infrastructures which provide access to subject-specific professional 

development for all STEM teachers and technicians 

Support the schools in your constituency 

For further information visit: www.sciencelearningcentres.org.uk/supportyourschool 

Project ENTHUSE is a partnership supported by the Wellcome Trust, the Department for Education, AstraZeneca, AstraZeneca 

Science Teaching Trust (renamed Primary Science Teaching Trust in 2013), BAE Systems, BP, General Electric Foundation, 

GlaxoSmithKline, Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Rolls-Royce, Vodafone and Vodafone Group Foundation.

CORRIDORS: 

An aviation network fit to 

serve Britain 

Robert Goodwill, 

Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport 

and MP for Scarborough and Whitby 

“Heathrow handled an 

extra 2.4 million people” 

“It would be a mIssed 

opportunIty If we faIl to 

make best use of stansted” 

andrew Harrison 

Managing Director, London Stansted Airport 

ADVERTORIAL 

As an island nation, airports are crucial to Britain. They 

provide the global links on which businesses rely. They 

handle nearly 40 per cent of our exports and imports by 

value. They support our £130 billion tourism industry. And as 

major employers and business hubs in their own right, they are 

catalysts for growth across the country. So if we want Britain to be 

competitive, it is important that airports can flourish. 

Our airports are now at their busiest since 2008, with 3 per cent 

more people taking flights in 2013 compared to the previous year. 

Passenger numbers rose by more than 10 per cent at London 

City, Leeds/Bradford and Belfast, and by more than 5 per cent at 

Manchester, Edinburgh, and East Midlands. Heathrow handled an 

extra 2.4 million people. And Southend had its busiest year ever. 

We want to see that growth continue, as long as it is in the 

interests of passengers and meets our wider environmental 

commitments. With those objectives in mind, we have modernised 

the regulatory framework for the industry, and set a new structure 

for sustainable airport development through our Aviation Policy 

Framework. We will continue to improve surface access to 

airports through schemes like Crossrail, Thameslink and HS2. 

Those measures are helping airports across Britain to invest 

with confidence; for example, Edinburgh is spending £25 million 

to boost terminal capacity. Stansted is investing £80 million to 

transform its terminal building. And Birmingham is updating its 

runway to handle long-haul flights. 

Despite the growing importance of regional airports, Britain’s 

position as a global aviation hub relies, to a large degree, on the five 

main airports serving London – principally Heathrow, Gatwick, and 

Stansted. Together, the five airports offer direct flights at least once 

a week to over 360 destinations, which makes London the best 

connected city in Europe, and Britain one of the best connected 

countries in the world. 

However, our position as a leading global aviation hub, which is 

so fundamental to our long- term international competitiveness, 

will be threatened if we fail to plan for the future. The two runways 

at Heathrow – our only hub airport – are already full, while 

competitors like Frankfurt, Paris CDG and Amsterdam Schipol all 

have significant runway capacity in which to grow. That is why 

we set up an independent Airports Commission under Sir Howard 

Davies to identify and recommend the best options for developing 

our hub status. The Commission’s interim report, delivered at 

the end of last year, is a big step towards our ultimate goal – a 

long-term aviation plan that will meet Britain’s future capacity and 

connectivity needs. 

But although the aviation capacity debate in the media is 

focused almost entirely on the issue of runways, there are other 

critical parts of the infrastructure which require modernisation - in 

particular, airspace control. That is an area where we are making 

real progress. 

Our airspace is some of the busiest and most complex in the 

world. And while air traffic control operator NATS is now operating 

from two state-of-the-art centres in Hampshire and Ayrshire, the 

airspace design system we use is well out of date. Although it is safe 

and robust, much of the structure was established before 1970, and 

its origins go back to the 1950s when the vast majority of flights 

were propeller-powered. 

So, to achieve greater efficiency and capacity in our airspace 

network, we must embrace the latest technology. To that end, 

the Civil Aviation Authority has been working with the industry on 

a Future Airspace Strategy. That is a flagship programme which 

provides the blueprint for a modern airspace system, overcoming 

not only the particular challenges we face in Britain, but also setting 

the standard for other countries to follow. 

The new strategy will help us manage our airspace far more 

effectively, separating aircraft by time rather than distance, and 

substantially increasing navigational accuracy. Airborne holding 

over London should be significantly reduced, cutting pollution, 

fuel usage and flight times. Longer term, it will be essential for the 

delivery of any new runways or improvements to airport capacity 

without any negative impact on other airports. Indeed, the Airports 

Commission in its interim report stressed the importance of the 

Future Airspace Strategy, particularly in the south east. After 

decades in which we have relied on an ageing infrastructure, we are 

today committed to a modern, fit for purpose, sustainable aviation 

network, with a growing airport sector at its heart. 

London Stansted Airport sits at the heart 

of the London-Cambridge corridor, one 

of the most exciting economic regions 

in the world and home to a rapidly 

expanding cluster of businesses in 

digital and bio-medical science. These 

businesses generate over £160bn for the 

UK economy and with more knowledgebased 

industries moving in, the corridor is 

poised for significant growth. 

To support the international connectivity 

demands of these businesses, Stansted 

has ambitious plans under the new 

ownership of M.A.G. In just 18 months, 

the airport is half way through an £80m 

terminal transformation to improve the 

passenger experience, part of a £260m 

package over the next five years to make 

Stansted the best airport in London. 

Passenger numbers are on the rise too 

and new deals with our airlines will add 

11m extra passengers by 2023. 

Stansted has a bright future with strong 

growth prospects. As the only airport in the 

congested south east with room to grow, 

Aerial shot of Stansted Airport 

it has a key role to play over the next 

decade in meeting increasing demand 

for travel but we need to remember this 

capacity is not infinite. 

We must plan for the future, ensuring 

passengers and businesses have the 

transport infrastructure and connectivity 

to compete and grow – including making 

the most of the infrastructure we have. 

That is why we are currently consulting 

with a wide range of stakeholders on 

a masterplan to shape the future of 

Stansted. We have permission for 35m 

passengers a year but could provide 

additional capacity with low impacts and 

high benefits, supporting the UK’s growth 

ambitions in the most cost effective and 

sustainable way possible. 

In our view it would be wrong to jump to 

the delivery of a new runway as the one 

and only answer to the capacity constraints 

in the south east. The Airports Commission 

made some important recommendations on 

how to make best use of existing capacity 

because whatever scheme is eventually 

adopted, it’s likely to be at least ten years 

away, while demand increases today. 

Stansted has capacity today so making 

the most efficient use of this has to be an 

urgent priority for Government. We must 

make every effort to use this before we ask 

people to give up their homes and expose 

thousands of new residents to aircraft 

noise. In the intervening period there is a 

huge opportunity for Stansted to make a 

significant contribution to meeting UK’s 

connectivity needs. 

This is why we see improvements to the 

rail service to the airport as being an 

immediate priority for the Government. 

The West Anglia Mainline desperately 

needs more track capacity. This would 

make a big difference to passengers and 

airlines. We are encouraging Government 

to bring forward a package of investment 

to improve rail journey times and reliability 

which will ultimately lay the foundations 

for major enhancement over the next 

five years. Improving the rail link not only 

benefits passengers and commuters but 

helps meet the Mayor of London’s vision 

to regenerate the Upper Lea Valley. 

London’s economy is moving east so it 

would be a missed opportunity and poor 

for passengers, business and competition 

if we fail to tackle head-on the critical 

issues of making best use of current 

capacity at Stansted. 



Departures at Terminal 2 : The Queen’s Terminal 

“ The UK’s manufacturing base 

is not near Heathrow. 

So why do I have to fly from there?” 

William Wang, Managing Director of MG Motor UK. 

Her future. 

It’s our destination. 

Great airports for great cities 

www.balancedaviationdebate.com 

Will she be an engineer in Ottawa? A scientist in Addis Ababa? 

An architect doing business in Seoul? 

We have no idea. 

But Heathrow is here to make those possibilities happen. 

We’re here to help the UK win the global race for jobs, growth 

and prosperity. 

Because as Britain’s only hub airport, we’re uniquely able to 

bring the potential of new global markets to the whole of the UK 

– and open up the potential of the UK to the world. 

Visit Heathrow.com/britainsheathrow to find out more about 

our vision for the future. 

Both hers – and the future of Britain. 

#BritainsHeathrow

ADVERTORIAL 

Manufacturing is key to 

rebalancing the UK economy 

Katy Clark, 

a member of the Business, Innovation and Skills 

Select Committee and MP for North Ayrshire and Arran 

CORRIDORS: 

“The UK fails to promote 

its businesses through 

procurement” 

intervene to protect manufacturing, believing the market 

knows best. The last Government’s successful car scrappage 

scheme signified a break with that approach and the current 

Government appears to some degree to have accepted 

the ideological case for an active industrial policy. Policies 

such as the creation of a Green Investment Bank, targeted 

support to key sectors and technologies and the desire to 

use procurement to promote UK manufacturers potentially 

demonstrates greater willingness to intervene to promote 

the national interest. 

One of the striking features of the cost of living crisis 

is the challenges facing those in work. Increasing 

numbers of working people face low pay, insecure 

work and a reduced safety net. In many parts of the country 

there is little sign of a recovery. But while the financial 

crisis of 2008 and the current Government’s policies have 

exacerbated the problems facing working people, many 

of the underlying causes have been ongoing for several 

decades. One such cause is the decline of UK manufacturing. 

Traditionally, manufacturing industries provided better 

paid, more secure forms of work than many service sector 

jobs. They also created a much more even distribution of 

well paid jobs, creating skilled jobs across the UK. In my 

own North Ayrshire and Arran constituency, thousands of 

manufacturing jobs have been destroyed over recent decades 

and very few other opportunities have come in their place. 

It is little wonder that former CBI head Sir Richard Lambert 

described manufacturing as ‘a force for social cohesion’. 

Manufacturing has been declining since the early 1970s, 

when manufacturing output represented over 30 per cent of 

total UK output. It has fallen to around 10 per cent today, well 

behind other European countries such as Italy, Switzerland 

and in particular Germany, where manufacturing accounts for 

roughly a quarter of its total economic output. 

A key reason for that decline is the laissez-faire approach 

of successive Governments who have been reluctant to 


Unfortunately, those small steps fall well short of what 

is required. If we look at manufacturing in Germany, it is 

easy to identify a number of steps which could be taken 

to further manufacturing growth. That includes long-term 

planning, identifying future trends and allocating resources 

accordingly. The Labour Party rightly supports the creation 

of a genuine investment bank to support small and mediumsized 

manufacturing firms. That has been successful not 

only in Germany but in France, too. The Green Investment 

Bank is a good first step, although this has taken too long 

to be put into place and limiting this kind of support to 

green industries leaves many manufacturing firms unable to 

secure competitive loans. More apprenticeships have been 

created but there needs to be renewed focus on quality as 

well as quantity. While Ministers talk of using public-sector 

contracts to boost UK manufacturing, we need action. The 

UK fails to promote its businesses through procurement to 

the same extent as its European neighbours. That level of 

support is the bare minimum this Government should be 

contemplating. 

Another key feature of Germany’s manufacturing success 

is the prominent role of trade unions, both in their traditional 

collective bargaining role but also in helping companies to 

take strategic decisions. Sadly, our current Government 

continues to take a confrontational approach to unions. 

There is no negative link between union activity and labour 

market outcomes. Often, strong unions create more positive 

workplace environments. If the Prime Minister is genuine 

in his commitment to UK manufacturing and ensuring that 

those in work benefit from any recovery, then his attitude to 

trade unions needs to change. 

Last but far from least, we need to reskill our workforce. I 

come from a part of the world which has some of the worst 

“employability”. 

We need to equip our young people, in particular with the 

skills they need to compete, whether in manufacturing, 

science or construction, so that we are able to regenerate our 

communities and genuinely start rebalancing our economy. 


CORRIDORS: 

A government out of touch with 

health and safety 

Jim Cunningham, 

MP for Coventry South 

“I remember men blinded 

from flying machinery” 

and for our children. 

The Government has slashed funding of the Health and Safety 

Executive and drastically reduced workplace inspections. It has 

made it much harder for workers to claim compensation if they are 

injured and actively blocked new initiatives from Europe. 

They have introduced the Social Action, Responsibility and 

Heroism (SARAH) Bill, which seems to be nothing but a glorified 

press release – it is supposed to protect “heroes” from lawsuits, 

but, in fact, does no such thing. It has been widely panned for being 

pointless at best. 

More concerning still is the Government’s policy to exempt many 

self-employed workers from the Health and Safety at Work Act. It is 

a completely unnecessary and poorly thought-through policy that 

will create confusion and uncertainty over what duty of care is due 

in workplaces. 

Those are just a few of the Government’s attacks on health and 

safety that have left experts dumbfounded. 

When I was 15 years old and working in a steel mill, it was 

common to see men suffering from the fatal “steelworkers’ 

disease” of steel dust in the lungs. I remember 

men (without goggles) blinded from flying machinery and splashed 

with corrosive paint stripper; and I remember broken feet as a result 

of dropped metal sheets and lack of safety boots. 

When the London Olympics went ahead without a single workrelated 

fatality – the first in recent history – I saw it as a sign of how 

far we have come and how we now have a level of workplace safety 

that is the envy of the world. 

In the recent debate on the SARAH Bill, I questioned the Justice 

Secretary as to whether there are as many frivolous claims being 

made as he believes, given that it is now much harder to take 

someone to a tribunal. Indeed, workplace compensation claims 

have halved in the last decade. His reply was: “All I can suggest is 

that the hon. Gentleman find a moment or two in his day to watch 

daytime television and see the number of adverts for firms trying 

to attract people who will sue when something has gone wrong— 

“Have you had an accident? Come and launch a case.”“ Is that really 

the evidence-based policy our Government is putting forward? 

Creating a healthy and 

sustainable future 

And yet our Prime Minister has announced that he will “kill off 

the health and safety culture for good”. 

As somebody who has seen and advocated a steady 

improvement in workplace safety throughout my lifetime, I find the 

Prime Minister’s agenda indefensible. 

We hear of the “burden” of our health and safety system and 

the damaging cost of “red-tape” so often that this is almost taken 

for granted in public discussion. That is mystifying to me. The 

Government has held three reviews now into the “burden of our 

health and safety system”. But the reviews all found no evidence 

of excessive regulation nor a compensation culture. Lord Young 

even admitted that: “The problem of the compensation culture 

prevalent in society today is, however, one of perception rather 

than reality”. 

Attacks on health and safety culture are attacks on an easy 

target because of press focus on occasional poor interpretation 

of health and safety legislation. There is insufficient focus on the 

positive consequences of robust health and safety culture for us 

The Government cites the safety of our workplaces as the 

justification for cutting back on health and safety. The Justice 

Secretary spoke recently of “a country where things are safer than 

ever, where our workplaces are less risky than ever and where 

safety standards on our roads are higher than ever”. 

It is disturbing that the Justice Secretary cannot make the 

connection between that and the “health and safety culture” that 

he and the Prime Minister wish to destroy. Many advocates of 

reducing health and safety legislation have little or no experience 

of working life without such legislation and perhaps the naivety of 

their arguments is because they have the luxury of believing it is 

unnecessary. 

If the Government insists on cutting back our health and safety 

regulations, do not be misled into thinking it is because the 

evidence supports that conclusion. It is based on an ideology that 

always favours the employer and holds workers and unions in 

suspicion, that believes employers are benevolent and responsible, 

and that accidents and sickness only happen to the feckless. I 

believe it is repugnant. 

A strong economy needs a safe and healthy workforce to deliver 

profitable business growth and resilience. 

Responsible organisations invest in health and safety training across the entire workforce, including 

directors and managers. Well-trained staff save money, boost productivity and add competitive value. 

Britain’s health and safety system is envied all over the world. We think it’s one of the best. We make 

it our mission to help keep it that way. 

Talk to us about how health and safety training can protect your people, transform your organisation 

and secure your future. 

You can reach the IOSH training team on 

hstraining@iosh.co.uk and 

+44 (0)116 257 3163 

POL2392/040814/PDF 

Institution of Occupational Safety and Health 

www.iosh.co.uk 



CORRIDORS: 

Looking back at Liberal Democrat 

successes in government 

Malcolm Bruce, 

Deputy Leader of the Liberal Democrats and MP for Gordon 

“We pursued and 

succeeded in the biggest 

pensions reform since 

Lloyd George” 

Scotland: a beacon of 

progressive politics 

Jim Sheridan, 

a member of the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee 

and MP for Paisley and Renfrewshire North 

CORRIDORS: 

“The Charleston drum 

became a protest call” 

The Liberal Democrats have been demonised and vilified, 

our leader has been subjected to the most vicious of 

criticism but the fact remains that we have taken some 

tough but necessary decisions and some good ones, and it is 

thanks to our resolution that the Liberal Democrats have played a 

key role in setting the economy on a stable footing. Even though 

it took a while to get there, independent experts say we have the 

strongest expanding economy in the western world. 

Economic recovery and stability were the key requirements 

from both the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives in agreeing 

to create a coalition Government and this was borne out by 

newspaper editorials at the time as well as the broader public 

mood. 

With such a restricting and significant remit for the new 

Government, the resulting Coalition Agreement may have 

surprised many, especially given the distinct Liberal Democrat 

voice throughout with many of our key, radical manifesto policies 

now on a Government’s agenda and with Liberal Democrat 

ministers implementing them. 

The party has been very aware of the dual role it has had to 

play. Just as important as promoting our key policies has been 

the need to negotiate difficult compromises by moderating 

and, even at times, restraining the more stringent and 

unfair or disproportionate cuts and reforms proposed by the 

Conservatives. 

It must be stressed that every difficult decision we as a party 

have taken has been with regard to ensuring the impact will 

be as fair as possible. Therefore with tuition fees, it was the 

Liberal Democrats who secured concessions in the terms of 

the repayment of loans while also determining and promoting 

alternatives for increased opportunities for young people, leading 

to the creation of over 1.5 million apprenticeships. 

Other core manifesto policy successes have been more 

satisfying to promote, particularly our flagship policy on income 

tax reform. By raising the income tax threshold to £10,500, 

we will have seen 3.2 million of the lowest earners taken out of 

income tax altogether and 25 million receiving an £800 tax cut by 

2015 - cutting the income tax bill for the average family by a third. 

It has been important for the Liberal Democrats to represent 

all generations and communities in our society. That is why we 

pursued and succeeded in the biggest pensions reform since 

Lloyd George, restoring the link between state pensions and 

earnings alongside a triple-lock guarantee on pension increases, 

as well as giving pensioners more flexibility and control over their 

pension pots. 

At the other end, before children are even in school, we 

have secured shared parenting rights for parents to divide their 

maternity and paternity leave, as well as providing 15 hours of 

free childcare for three and four year olds. 

Once children reach school age, they can benefit from free 

school meals, ensuring a nutritious and healthy start to their 

education, which has also been boosted thanks to the pupil 

premium that the Liberal Democrats have given to schools 

to assist with disadvantaged pupils in primary and secondary 

schools. 

It was our Scottish Secretary of State who introduced the 

Scotland Act, devolving further powers to Scotland in line with 

the Calman Commission recommendations in order to lay the 

foundations for Scotland to remain a strong part of the UK. That 

was before he oversaw the Edinburgh Agreement which created 

the mechanism for the independence referendum to take place 

at all. 

Internationally, our ministers and MPs have been working to 

eradicate Female Genital Mutilation and protect the rights of 

women and girls in developing countries as well as continuing to 

pursue a legal commitment on 0.7 per cent GNI on international 

development spending. 

We have sought to promote our green values through the 

introduction of the Green Investment Bank and Green Deal as well 

as promoting sustainable energy policies such as the widespread 

building of zero carbon homes. 

There are too many achievements to mention here but by 

protecting civil liberties (removing the state DNA profiling of 

innocent people), improving consumer rights (overseeing the 

Consumer Rights Bill) and extending equality for all (introducing 

equal marriage), the Liberal Democrats have a lot to be proud 

of and have created a genuine platform to seek to form another 

radical, fair and stable Government after 2015. 

Scotland is, I believe, a politically progressive country. We seek 

fairness and justice whilst encouraging entrepreneurship. 

Some of the world’s leading academics, scientists and 

inventors originated from Scotland. Equally so in politics, the 

Labour Party has seen some of its best leaders in Scots, such as Keir 

Hardie, John Smith, Donald Dewar and Gordon Brown, to name a 

few. Today, of course, we have Johann Lamont MSP, potentially the 

first female First Minister in Scotland. 

But that progressive culture goes far beyond the political elite, 

and local people mark the tradition in unique ways. In my own 

constituency, we celebrate Sma’ Shot day, held every year in 

Paisley. The annual procession and family fun day celebrates the 

triumph of workers from Paisley’s famous cotton thread industry, 

when they rose up to protest against unfair deals they had with 

the “corks”. Those manufacturers refused to pay the weavers 

for the Sma’ Shot threads that were bound into the famous 

shawls, arguing that they were unseen in the garment. Weavers 

were forced to pay for them out of their own pocket, but not 

compensated through higher wages. 

The Charleston drum became a protest call, calling on the 

Buddies of Paisley to follow the marchers, and today it calls Paisley 

men, women and children once a year again to celebrate the 

moment when the corks backed down and agreed to pay weavers 

for the thread. 

Sma’ Shot Day is a proud reminder of our history as one of 

the most important towns in the weaving industry, but also as a 

principled group of working people, who stand up for what is right 

and fair. 

Similar events have happened across Scotland throughout 

history and added to a popular tradition of trade unionism, that we 

continue to see today. 

A dark moment of industrial relations in Scotland was marked by 

the recent events at the Grangemouth refinery, where an employer 

was allowed to bully and threaten the workforce into submission, 

exploiting the lack of employment protection legislation which this 

Coalition government has encouraged. Worst still, he was rewarded 

with taxpayers money to do so. As through history, trade unionists 

stood up for their rights, but sadly the odds were stacked against 

them this time. 

Despite the current government’s best efforts, trade union 

membership in Scotland has begun to increase. Around a third of 

Scots belong to a trade union and this figure would be higher if 

workers were allowed to join without fear of retribution from some 

of the more unscrupulous employers. 

But that culture and tradition goes far beyond paid up union 

members. It can be seen in the huge support for the Labour Party 

in Scotland, founded by the unions and continuing to fight for 

working men and women to this day, led by our own leader Johann 

Lamont in Scotland and, despite the actions of some in the press, 

Ed Miliband, who hopefully will be our next Prime Minister in the 

UK. 

Of course, Scotland is not alone in progressive left of centre 

politics. There are many UK colleagues in Westminster who are 

prepared to defend our socialist values and principles, but we need 

more in my view. That is why I fully support my own union, Unite, 

in its policy of concentrating efforts and resources on candidates 

who share the same objectives and aspirations that working people 

have and will reflect their concerns if successfully elected. 

But while our labour tradition is linked to the trade union 

movement, we are failing to bring in the next generation of 

progressive workers. As companies shrink and industries decline, 

there are fewer people on the shop floor, meaning less collective 

bargaining and representation 

There is a lot of work to be done in connecting young people and 

their beliefs once again to the Labour and trade union movement. 

But I am confident that in Scotland, where we have a proud history 

of standing up for what is right and fair, be it in the workplace, our 

communities or on the international scene, our determination to 

succeed will continue to thrive and remain the base of our distinct 

cultural heritage. 

As we often say, the past we inherit, the future we build. 





CORRIDORS: 

Sustaining Britain’s economic recovery 

Andrea Leadsom, 

Economic Secretary to the Treasury 

and MP for South Northamptonshire 

Britain’s economy is beginning its recovery from the 

longest and deepest peacetime recession in history. 

That welcome news is the result of three factors: the 

government’s determination to sort out the public finances, 

monetary policy that has seen historically low interest rates 

and the effort of employers and employees in achieving the 

return of private sector growth. The Government’s Plan A is 

working, and it must surely be clear to all that any return to 

Labour’s borrow more, tax more and spend more policy would 

jeopardise the recovery. 

In the longer-term, Britain’s economic prosperity will only 

be secured by equipping the UK to compete in the global race. 

As Economic Secretary to the Treasury, for me that means 

developing the regulatory and competitive environment for 

financial services to thrive in this country. UK financial services 

are a vital contributor to the British as well as EU economies, 

and they provide an essential function to customers and to 

businesses, themselves the lifeblood of our economy. 

But, for too long, our financial services sector has let us 

down - irresponsible risk taking, mis-selling, even deliberate 

distortion of markets and illegal behaviour. 

The Government is committed to turning that around and 

putting competition and customer choice at the forefront of 

our banking reforms. We are making progress; in the last 12 

months, the new Prudential Regulatory Authority has licensed 

five new banks, and is currently talking to over 20 new 

applicants. By contrast, when Metro Bank got its license in 

2010, it was the first new full banking license in 100 years! 

New competition means more focus on customer service. 

Here, technology will help to drive change and greater 

responsiveness to customer needs. The arrival of cheque 


“The new Prudential 

Regulatory Authority has 

licensed five new banks” 

imaging is exactly the type of positive change we want. It will 

give customers the option of taking a photo of a cheque and 

paying it in using their mobile banking app, and it will speed 

up clearing times from six days to two or less - great news for 

SMEs who rely on cheques; and this will add to the existing 

choice of depositing cheques at bank branches, cash points 

and Post Offices and so on. 

Mobile payments, such as PayM and PINGIT, will take off, 

allowing parents, friends and businesses to easily transfer 

money between themselves. 

For SMEs, the new Business Banking Insight survey, allowing 

them to see which bank offers the best service for them across 

a range of products, and the requirement we are imposing on 

the big banks to share information on SMEs they reject for 

finance so alternative lenders can step in, will improve the 

face of competition and choice in SME banking. 

Building stronger and safer banks which customers can trust 

is a key part of the government’s long-term economic plan. 

Across government, we are bedding in the reforms which 

will enable UK businesses and citizens to compete. We have 

reformed welfare to make work pay. 

Of course, a safety-net is essential, and we will always want 

to support those that need help, but there must also be real 

incentives and fair rewards for those that go out to work. And 

we have to ensure that we have the skills base and education 

that will enable British businesses to compete and create jobs 

for our children and grandchildren. 

Our far-reaching education reforms are creating a new wave 

of schools to ensure that each student has the opportunity 

to reach their potential, and this will be essential if we are to 

remain among the best in the world. 

The government has also taken important steps to help 

those parents that want to return to work to be able to do so. 

Far too often, the cost of childcare forces new parents to stay 

at home, even if they wanted to work. By introducing Tax- 

Free Childcare, we will pay up to £2,000 per child, effectively 

refunding the basic rate of tax and helping those who want to 

work, to be able to. 

In the months that lead to the next General Election, voters 

will be looking to see which party can offer them the security 

we all need, and the prospect of a brighter future for us and 

those we love. 

I have never been more convinced that it is only the 

Conservative Party that offers a well thought out path to the 

future in a globally competitive world. 


F40 SEEKS COMMITMENT TO 

FAIR FUNDING FOR SCHOOLS 

FROM ALL POLITICAL PARTIES 

IVAN OULD, CHAIR OF F40 

(and Lead Member for Children & Young People’s 

Services at Leicestershire County Council) 

“ 

THE FACT THAT 28 (OUT OF 34) 

F40 MEMBER AUTHORITIES 

ARE TO GAIN A TOTAL OF 

“OF 

£210.6M IS VERY WELCOME. 

ADVERTORIAL 

It is seventeen years since the first ‘fair funding for schools’ 

campaign meeting was held in Staffordshire. All those years ago, a 

group of dedicated individuals, who were fed up with the way in 

some schools were funded, met to consider how they could change 

the unfair funding formula. 

From small acorns grow large oak trees, as they say. It wasn’t long 

before the initial eight member authorities expanded as many more 

poorly funded local authorities, of all political persuasions, joined up 

and added their voice to the call for fair funding. 

Despite the injection of new money in to education in the last ten 

years, and the recently introduced changes to the funding system 

which helped to harmonise arrangements between academies and 

maintained schools, the gap between the ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’ 

has widened. 

The previous government introduced an element of additional funding 

for pockets of deprivation, which was very welcome, but our most 

significant break-through came in 2010 with the launch of the Schools’ 

White Paper which acknowledged for the first time the injustice of the 

existing arrangement. It stated: “We want all schools to be funded 

transparently, logically and equitably, in contrast to the opaque, 

anomalous and unfair school funding system which reflects the historic 

circumstances of local authorities rather than the specific needs of 

individual schools and pupils; and leads to similar schools, facing 

similar challenges, receiving very different levels of funding.” 

Then in June 2013, as part his Annual Spending Review, Chancellor 

George Osborne, provided the icing on the cake by announcing 

that “schools spending will be allocated in a fairer way than ever 

before. School funding across the country is not equally distributed 

but distributed on an historical basis with no logical reason. The 

result is that some schools get much more than others in the same 

circumstances. It’s unfair and we’re going to put it right.” 

The group was further encouraged in March this year when the 

government announced that extra funding of £350m will be made 

available in 2015-16 to begin the process of making the allocation 

system fairer. Following a short consultation on the proposal, the 

government decided to increase the extra funding to £390m…and 

confirmed the method of allocation. The fact that 28 (out of 34) f40 

member authorities are to gain a total of £210.6m is very welcome. So 

now we have an acknowledgement that the existing formula is unfair and 

inequitable, and interim additional funding, which we view as a 

down-payment and first step towards a new and fairer allocation system. 

But this is by no means the end of the story. F40 will continue to push 

for the introduction of the promised new national funding formula. 

Whichever political party is successful in next May’s national election, 

we will expect a commitment that this important work will be continued. 

F40 believes that it has been patient and realistic…and that the 

many years of campaigning might finally be about to pay off. I want 

to place on record my own and f40’s thanks to the government, the 

many Members of Parliament that have vigorously argued our case, 

to local councillors and officers, governors and teaching staff and 

parents who have supported the campaign over so many years.

CORRIDORS: 

The power of development 

Jim Murphy, 

Shadow Secretary of State for International Development 

and MP for East Renfrewshire 

“It needs to be 

underpinned by human 

rights” 

Legal Aid and the findings of the 

Low Commission 

Lord Colin Low, 

a Crossbench Peer 

CORRIDORS: 

“There should be 

a Minister with 

responsibility for advice 

and legal support” 

The Department for International Development holds a 

special place in the heart of the Labour Party. After all, 

we set it up, we made it a world leader, and we brought 

about real change – not least through the 2005 Gleneagles 

Agreement to drop the debt and take steps to make poverty 

history. 

We are rightly proud of that record. But progressive 

politics is about constantly fighting to change things for the 

better. I did not get involved in politics to protect Labour 

achievements - and there is never a belated sense of gratitude 

from a public much more interested in what you are going 

to do rather than what you have done. I believe in a politics 

which builds on achievements, to go further. 

When we think of poverty, no access to education, no 

healthcare, modern day slavery, discrimination, conflict and 

corruption we know that these inequalities are wrong, but 

they are more consequence that cause. They are symptoms 

of the real driving force of inequity – a fundamental imbalance 

of power. 

So, my vision for development under Labour is of a DFID of 

renewed drive and purpose, with power at its heart. 

It is often said that there is no shortage of food in the 

world, only that it is unevenly distributed. The same is true of 

power. There is no shortage - it is just that there is too much in 

too few people’s hands. 

I want DFID to address those imbalances of economic, 

social and political power as its defining mission. 

So, we would help fight the imbalance of economic power 

by offering more support for poorer states to develop their tax 

systems. We would help take on the massive deficit of social 

power that keeps millions of the world’s poor from education 

and healthcare by backing innovative schemes to open access 

to all and we would battle the imbalance of political power by 

putting human rights at the centre of development. 

Authoritarian and ‘rights free development’ can leave 

poor and vulnerable people worse off, forced from their land, 

exploited, and exposed to poisoning and pollution. ‘Rights 

respecting development’ can help prevent abuses associated 

with economic development. 

If development is going to be just, inclusive and 

sustainable, it needs to be underpinned by human rights. So, 

Labour are looking at new tough rules for the granting of UK 

aid. 

Under those plans, Governments in receipt of direct UK 

aid would face an annual audit. As well as firm rules on 

transparency and corruption, we would insist on respect for 

human rights. A new unit at the heart of DFID would assess 

states against internationally agreed standards. Governments 

which fail to meet those standards - that break international 

law or breach the UN Charter or globally agreed covenants, 

for example - and show no sign of progression would face 

consequences and, in extreme cases, we would, of course, 

reserve the right to act immediately. Labour is developing a 

system of graduated withdrawal through which transgressors 

would see direct support reduced and eventually suspended if 

respect for human rights is not reinstalled. 

I know that there may be some sensitivities about that 

approach but at the outset I am clear that we will not act 

in a way which hurts those who need our help. We would 

ensure that poor people do not pay twice the price for bad 

governance by looking to keep the support in the country but 

out of governments hands, through working with multilateral 

agencies and NGOs so those in need do not lose out. 

Now, I know those are not all the answers. And I cannot 

pretend that the measures will change the world over 

night. But, they point to a determination to do some things 

differently. 

Development has the power to change and save lives. 

This generation could be the generation that eliminates aid 

dependency for good, lifts a billion people out of poverty and 

prevents half a million people a year from dying on their first 

day. 

But, it is much more than that. Not just big numbers but big 

change. Empowering the powerless. That is what we can do. 

That is what DFID is for. And that is what I will ensure DFID 

delivers. 

With cuts of the order of £100 million a year in legal aid 

for issues of social welfare law, the Low Commission 

was set up by the Legal Action Group, with funding 

from a range of trusts and foundations, to come up with a 

strategy for the future of advice and legal support in this area. 

We were anxious to develop a fresh approach which, through 

measures to reduce the need for advice and legal support in the 

first place, developing more cost-effective approaches to service 

provision and drawing on a wider range of funding sources, 

ensured that people could still meet a lot of their needs through 

a greater emphasis on information and advice, while ensuring 

that there is at least some money available for legal help and 

representation. 

While legal help and representation should be approached in 

an integrated fashion, it seemed clear to us that the advice end 

of the spectrum was going to need to take more of the strain. 

Of course, the advice sector could benefit from some 

rationalisation. There is a general perception that it is 

too fragmented and could benefit from a greater spirit of 

collaboration. 

We would also like to see the national umbrella bodies, such as 

Citizens Advice and AdviceUK, working more closely together 

and sharing their resources and experience more widely. 

AdviceUK told us about a system based on what it calls “systems 

thinking” which can achieve savings of at least 30 per cent and 

sometimes, as in Nottingham, as much as 95 per cent. So, 

although it may seem like a Rolls-Royce service, it can end up 

costing less in the long run. 

Our strategy is to suggest ways of reducing preventable 

demand, simplifying the system and enabling it to work better, 

putting more weight on the advice end of the spectrum and 

suggesting ways in which it could work more efficiently. 

The next UK and Welsh governments should develop national 

strategies for advice and legal support, preferably with all-party 

support, and there should be a Minister with responsibility for 

advice and legal support within the Ministry of Justice with a 

cross-departmental brief for leading the development of the 

strategy. 

Local authorities, or groups of local authorities, should coproduce 

or commission local advice and legal support plans with 

the local not-for-profit sector and commercial advice agencies. 

We estimate that a further £100 million a year is required to 

ensure a basic level of provision of information, advice and legal 

support on social welfare law. 

We are calling on the next UK Government to provide half 

of that by establishing a 10-year National Advice and Legal 

Support Fund for England and Wales of £50 million a year to be 

administered by the Big Lottery Fund. We aim to spread the 

load so that no part of government is asked to bear too great a 

burden. We therefore propose that the fund should be financed 

by the MOJ, the Cabinet Office and the Department for Work 

and Pensions, as the main creator of the need for advice and 

legal support. 

Some 90 per cent of the fund should be used to fund local 

provision in line with local plans, with 10 per cent for national 

initiatives. The Big Lottery Fund should allocate the 90 per cent 

share of the national fund to local authority areas, based on 

indicators of need using joint strategic needs assessments and 

health and well-being strategies. 

Greater use needs to be made of new technology for the 

section of the population which is increasingly digitally literate. 

That will free up resources to enable more face-to-face, in-depth 

and intensive support to be targeted at those most in need. 

In addition to the current range of specialist lines, 

there should be a one-stop national helpline providing a 

comprehensive advice service to the general public and able to 

act as a safety net for those who have nowhere else to go. 

We believe that by investing in a wider range of information 

and advice, with some legal help and representation, many of 

the undesirable consequences of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and 

Punishment of Offenders Act can be avoided and we will actually 

end up saving money. 





CORRIDORS: 

A port of call for the UK economy 

Karen Lumley, 

a member of the Transport Select Committee and MP for Redditch 

“Ports collectively employ 

some 117,000 people” 

and efficient the infrastructure is inside the port gates, the simple fact 

is that if they are not accessible then we as a nation will struggle to 

compete. Constraints on road and rail networks, in particular, can limit 

the size of a port and its economic impact. 

The areas closest to ports are often the most congested, with long 

delays in the final few miles. The UK’s strategic road and rail networks 

must accommodate freight transport. The planning system is central 

to the future development of ports. Local stakeholders must prioritise 

improvements in port access as part of their strategic decisions. But a 

national strategy for ports is also essential to build on local and regional 

initiatives. 

The current economic figures are looking good. The economy 

is above its pre-crisis peak and growing faster than any other 

major advanced economy. Furthermore, the deficit has been 

cut by a third. But to ensure the recovery continues, we must do more 

to rebalance our economy and secure a better future for every part of 

Britain. 

Ports are essential to the economic wellbeing of the UK. Throughout 

history, British sea ports have developed, thrived and changed, 

supporting the free movement of people and the trade in goods and 

commodities which is the basis for our national prosperity. Today, some 

95 per cent of UK cargo movements by tonnage is waterborne and ports 

collectively employ some 117,000 people. 

I recently had the opportunity of visiting the London Gateway port in 

Thurrock, Essex, and was amazed to see the sheer scale of the project. 

The new deep-water port there is able to handle the biggest container 

ships in the world and is one of the most advanced, highly-automated 

ports in the world, currently employing 400 people - this figure is 

expected to rise to 12,000 people when fully developed. That is all thanks 

to inward investment of £1.5 billion from the Dubai-owned company DP 

World. On a recent trade visit to the United Arab Emirates, I was lucky 

enough to meet the company behind the project and hear about their 

plans. That huge investment shows just what potential there is in British 

ports. Unfortunately, port development is being held back by inadequate 

transport infrastructure. 

Ports cannot function effectively if hauliers and logistics firms struggle 

to get goods in and out of them, and, likewise, hauliers and logistics will 

be held back if our ports are not up to scratch. No matter how modern 

We are holding back our ports with unclear and, at times, unfair 

funding arrangements. Government policy on who should pay for 

transport infrastructure relating to ports is clear in principle but confused 

in practice and conceptually flawed. Some ports have contributed 

towards transport schemes to improve access, while others have not. 

The rationale for the differing treatment of different projects is not clear 

and leads the UK to compare unfavourably with some other EU countries 

where infrastructure outside of the dock gates is publicly funded. 

The role of the Department for Transport must be to act as an 

advocate for ports, helping the sector navigate complex arrangements 

for getting transport improvement schemes off the ground. They 

must do more to ensure that Local enterprise partnerships give 

proper consideration to port schemes. They should also be prepared 

to challenge decisions by LEPs and other local bodies where they fail 

to prioritise improvements in port access over other, less strategically 

important schemes. The Government is best placed to assess likely 

long-term developments in global trade and help ensure that the UK has 

appropriate port capacity to take advantage of such trends. Decisions on 

port access projects are likely to have employment implications, both in 

relation to the port itself and the logistics industry. 

The UK’s busiest ports are spread widely throughout the country, from 

Southampton to Clyde to Liverpool to Hartlepool, showing just how 

important they are to rebalancing our economy. The goods they bring in 

and ship out make vast sums of money for our economy, and keep many 

people in work. 

Without bringing our ports to the forefront of our infrastructural 

priorities, allowing them to compete with the likes of Rotterdam, 

Hamburg and Antwerp, we will forever find ourselves held back in our 

import, export and, ultimately, our economic capabilities. 



CORRIDORS: 

Applauding the government’s digital 

revolution 

Caroline Dinenage, 

a member of the Business, Innovation 

and Skills Select Committee and MP for Gosport 

“Fully transferring to 

digital could save the 

country almost £2 billion 

a year” 

Police behind desks? 

Not if we can help it. 

Amazon holds over a quarter of the entertainment market 

while approximately a third of new relationships now 

start online. As suggested in Policy Exchange’s Smaller, 

Better, Faster, Stronger, if properly harnessed, new technology 

can not only improve public services; it can fundamentally alter 

the way in which government operates. 

The internet can make government more open, more efficient 

and more accountable. Proper use of big data can improve 

policy-making in Whitehall and cut out pointless paperwork in 

everyday life. But as the series of calamitous IT projects under 

the previous Government demonstrated, we need to be clear 

in our objectives. And as the technology changes, we need to 

adapt to how we provide public services. There is no sense in 

using new technology to complete old processes; we need to 

continue with and extend the root and branch reform that this 

Government is delivering. 

When Martha Lane Fox started her review of the Government 

website Directgov, she found that a radical overhaul was needed 

to deliver a better service for citizens. Its replacement, GOV.UK, 

last year won the prestigious Design Museum Design of the Year 

Award and serves as a simple but highly effective portal for all 

Government services and information. 

We now need to see complete digitisation – both between 

Government and the individual and within Government 

departments. That does not mean excluding those without 

access to new technology; but making digital options so easy 

and convenient that those who can use them will always choose 

to do so. It also means making sure that as public services move 

online, no one gets left behind as well as putting safety nets in 

place to protect those often older and more vulnerable people 

who do not have access to the internet. 


The digital by default plan, as set out in the Government 

Digital Strategy, is a great start, but there is no reason why 

interactions within and between Government departments 

cannot be exclusively digital – with emails replacing the 

hundreds of thousands of letters that cross the country every 

day. 

The DVLA handles 50 million payments for vehicle tax every 

year, and yet only half of these are carried out online. Processing 

the 100,000 paper vehicle tax payments that come in every day 

costs a huge amount of time and money. A digital transaction 

is around 20 times cheaper than one by telephone, 30 times 

cheaper than a postal transaction and 50 times cheaper than a 

face-to-face transaction. Richard Sargeant in the Cabinet Office 

argues that fully transferring to digital could save the country 

almost £2 billion a year. 

The wealth of data which is now available can also help us 

learn what works and what does not. Across the public sector, 

information on inputs and outputs can be captured and analysed 

like never before. And that allows for personalisation; one of 

the main features of Amazon’s success has been its ability to 

provide personalised recommendations based on knowledge 

of purchase histories and product ratings. Why cannot 

public services also be rated, reviewed, improved and even 

personalised? 

New technologies are not a panacea. As Rohan Silva, the 

Prime Minister’s former special adviser on technology, has 

pointed out, by 2010, the last Government was spending £25 

billion a year on public sector IT – more per person than any 

other country in the world. Yet, the first class price tag delivered 

third class results. 

Small firms were locked out of the procurement process; 

stifling innovation amongst British SMEs and landing 

Government with overpriced contracts. So, we need to be 

smart about how we use new technology and, as we do across 

Government, we need to open up the procurement process to 

small and medium sized firms. 

In her review of government digital activities, Martha Lane 

Fox stated that: “the acid test for Directgov is whether it can 

empower, and make life simpler for citizens and at the same 

time allow government to turn other things off.” That cuts to 

the core of what technology in the provision of public services 

is about: streamlining, updating and even reforming public 

services so that they are more responsive to peoples’ needs and 

more reflective of the times we live in. 

We need to continue the Government’s digital revolution and 

use new technology to deliver public services fit for the 21st 

century. 


Bluelight Managed Mobility from O 2 

is designed to help police forces become 

more productive, efficient and visible. 

It covers everything from choosing 

the best devices, to managing, 

securing and controlling them. 

It equips police with everything 

they need to complete reports 

on the move, get quick and secure 

access to records and speed up 

justice with digital case files. 

More time on the beat. Improved 

efficiencies. Reduced costs. 

01235 433 507 

publicsector@businesso2.co.uk 

http://po.st/O2Bluelight 

Bluelight Managed 

Mobility is available 

via the PSN 

Telefónica UK Limited Registered in England no. 1743099. 

Registered Office 260 Bath Road Slough SL1 4DX

CORRIDORS: 

The moral and financial case for caring 

for deaf people 

Rosie Cooper, 

Vice-Chair of the All-Party Subject Group on Deafness 

and MP for West Lancashire 

“By 2031, there will be 14.1 

million in the UK with 

hearing loss” 

More women in science means more 

money for the UK economy 

Sarah Newton, 

Deputy Chair of the Conservative Party, a member of the 

Science and Technology Select Committee and 

MP for Truro and Falmouth 

CORRIDORS: 

“STEM will account for 

£2 billion of this total 

amount” 

I 

am a Member of Parliament because of my parents’ deafness. 

My father was born deaf and my mother went deaf when she 

was four years of age. 

From the age of four, I have been my parents’ voice and ears. I 

was their advocate and their representative, which has led me to 

representing other people for the past 40 years. 

For all the progress which has been secured when it comes to 

equality for deaf people and those with hearing loss, I fear we 

could actually be starting to go backwards rather than continuing 

the march towards full integration. 

Today, deaf people and those with hearing loss are at the 

mercy of budget cuts and decisions taken by people who lack any 

awareness about the consequences of their decisions, including 

medical professionals. 

There are two current examples which highlight that point. 

North Staffordshire Clinical Commissioning Group is considering 

not providing hearing aids on the NHS and the changes to Access 

to Work support, both of which will have a profound effect on 

millions of people with hearing loss and their families. 

North Staffordshire CCG is considering taking away hearing 

aids for those with mild or moderate hearing loss. Those are 

clinical terms that do not adequately reflect the actual impact of 

deafness and hearing loss on a person’s life. 

People with hearing loss are more likely to experience 

communication difficulties. That can lead to them becoming 

socially isolated and having mental and physical health problems. 

There is also a growing body of evidence linking hearing loss with 

dementia. 

Even people with mild and moderate hearing loss still rely on 

hearing aids to communicate and not to be isolated, to remain in 

work and to effectively manage their own health. 

Since 1994, government has delivered the Access to Work 

scheme, with grants available to provide practical support for 

disabled people to start or remain in employment; for example, 

accessing sign language interpreters. 

Access to Work has been an integral part of tackling barriers to 

work for deaf people and those with hearing loss. Figures show 

that 63 per cent of deaf people are in employment compared to 

75 per cent of the population as a whole. 

The employment rate for people who state ‘difficulty in 

hearing’ as their main health issue is 64 per cent compared to 

77 per cent for people with no health issues. Further to that, 

forty-one per cent of people who retired early said this was due to 

hearing loss. 

As Action on Hearing Loss have reported, changes to Access 

to Work have seen budget limitations imposed and instances of 

Access to Work advisers who do not understand the needs of deaf 

professionals, which, combined, lead to inconsistent assessments 

of need, reduction in flexibility and levels of support leaving deaf 

people and those with hearing loss unable to do their job. 

For me, the human cost of those decisions is too high a price to 

pay. Equally, the economic cost of the decisions actually shows 

how ill-conceived and short-sighted North Staffordshire CCG and 

the government are. 

Each year, the UK economy loses £25 billion in output due to 

deafness and hearing loss. That is based on today’s figures of 

10 million people who are deaf or have hearing loss, of which 3.7 

million are of working age. 

This July, a Commission on Hearing Loss, on which I served, 

published its final report. By 2031, there will be 14.1 million in the 

UK with hearing loss – nearly 20 per cent of the entire population. 

Hearing loss is a growing social and economic problem. 

If we are not going to support deaf people and those with 

hearing loss because it is the right thing to do, then we should do 

it because it is the right financial decision. 

According to the British Deaf Association, for every £1 spent 

on Access to Work the government gets back £1.48. If people are 

not in work, there is no money being recouped, so taken together 

with the cost of welfare payments, increased use of social services 

and greater reliance on health services, it is a very short-sighted 

decision. 

There is a danger that putting a price on quality of life, health 

and wellbeing, independence, dignity and equality for deaf 

people and those with hearing loss will potentially result in costs 

that are greater than the savings. Everyone loses. 

Ask anyone to name five female scientists and most will 

struggle beyond Marie Curie. But why are women in science 

and engineering so hard to find? Many efforts have been 

made to increase the number of girls and women studying science, 

technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) at school - and 

progress is being made. 

But, if we look from education to employment, we find that only 

17 per cent of STEM professors are women and only 13 per cent of 

all STEM jobs are occupied by women. The Society of Biology has 

recently stated that “increasing women’s participation in the whole 

UK labour market could be worth between £15 billion and £23 

billion.” That equates to 1.3-2.0 per cent of the UK’s GDP, and STEM 

will account for £2 billion of this total amount - a significant portion 

and considerable untapped potential. 

We already have a serious shortage of scientists and engineers 

and unless recent progress is accelerated, the UK will not be able 

to meet the requirement for an estimated one million new science, 

engineering and technology professionals by 2020. Currently, 

one in four employers are having difficulty in recruiting suitably 

qualified STEM employees. The Government has acknowledged 

that without recruiting more women into those fields, and crucially 

retaining them, there is a real risk to the UK’s economic long-term 

plan. 

That is not a new issue. The House of Commons Science 

and Technology Committee, of which I am a member, recently 

conducted an inquiry into how the problem could be addressed. I 

was concerned that the positive actions to encourage more girls 

into STEM at school would founder at the next stage. With only 

17 per cent of STEM professors being women, we needed to know 

what more could be done to enable more women to get the top 

university research posts. 

We did not identify any new causes of poor gender diversity 

in STEM - the problems and the solutions have already been 

identified. Many of the problems encountered by women in STEM 

at university or in the workplace are the same for all women trying 

to combine caring with careers. The STEM women in industry I 

have interviewed point to good employment practice within their 

organisations which enable them to get on. 

As other sectors have made real progress, Higher Education 

Institutions (HEIs) need to adopt a cohesive and comprehensive 

plan to deliver best employment practice. Those involved 

in recruitment and promotion processes should undertake 

unconscious bias training. That has proven a successful approach 

in leading organisations where women have been historically 

underrepresented. 

The way STEM careers in HEIs are structured needs review. 

Most postgraduates spend the first few years of their careers in 

various short-term research positions, with transfers between HEIs 

and often forced relocation. That places a strain on family life for 

scientists of both genders. 

HEIs wanting to attract the best talent to their organisations are 

making progress in promoting improved gender balance by their 

signing up to the Athena SWAN Charter. 

That is a national scheme that recognises commitment to 

advancing women’s careers in STEM in higher education and 

research and requires positive action from all levels of the HEI. 

Those agreeing to the principles of the Charter can be nominated 

for awards which act as a kitemark of excellence throughout the 

sector. While that remains a voluntary scheme, there are currently 

114 members who have signed up, and the Equality Challenge Unit 

has identified that organisations and even their working cultures 

are adapting. More women are successfully making the transition 

from postdoctoral researcher to their first academic post. 

That is a step in the right direction and proof that a voluntary 

approach can work. The scientific community has done what it 

always does: recognised a problem, identified what works and 

what does not, and is going where the evidence leads. Those 

funding science and technology research could give a very positive 

nudge by making the award of research funding to HEIs conditional 

on the achievement of an Athena SWAN award. 

The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) already 

requires medical departments to have obtained a Silver Award prior 

to awarding funding. In that, they would be making a significant 

contribution to advancing knowledge and the UK’s long-term 

economic success. 





CORRIDORS: 

The ongoing fight against 

malaria 

Jeremy Lefroy, 

Chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Malaria 

and Neglected Tropical Diseases and MP for Stafford 

“660,000 people are still 

dying every year” 

Why is food a problem? 

Roger Williams, 

a member of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 

Select Committee and MP for Brecon and Radnorshire 

CORRIDORS: 

“Many health NGOs are 

advocating a tax on sugar” 

So much has been achieved in the past decade in the 

fight against malaria. Yet we are now facing our biggest 

challenges. 

An estimated 660,000 people are still dying every year from 

the disease, the vast majority being children under five years 

old in sub-Saharan Africa. The tools which have served us so 

well – insecticide-treated bednets (LLIN) for prevention and 

Artemisinin Combination Therapies (ACTs) for cure – are both 

coming up against resistance by the mosquito and versatile 

malaria parasite. The money required to control and eventually 

eradicate malaria from the planet remains far greater than the 

money available, despite a huge increase in resources since 

2001. 

In visits to Sierra Leone, Liberia and Rwanda this year, I have 

seen at first-hand how the work carried out in tackling malaria 

has improved the lives of millions of people. It is not only the 

deaths which have been prevented – each one a precious son, 

daughter, mother or father – but also the hundreds of millions 

of episodes which have not occurred, enabling people to work 

or go to school when they would not have done otherwise. By 

some estimates, malaria cuts around 1 per cent per annum from 

the Gross Domestic Product of a country in which it is seriously 

endemic. Certainly, some of the excellent economic growth 

seen in many sub-Saharan African countries in recent years can 

be attributed to better control of malaria and other debilitating 

or fatal diseases. 

New drugs are being developed through strong cooperation 

between development agencies, governments, charities and 

the private sector. Vaccines, too, are being tested, the most 

advanced to-date being RTS,S vaccine developed by GSK. Last 

year, with colleagues Richard Bacon MP and John Mann MP, I 

was able to visit two research centres involved in the work. They 

are led by outstanding Tanzanian scientists and their teams who 

work closely with colleagues in the UK, Belgium, Switzerland, 

the US, Norway and elsewhere. It was encouraging to see thatf 

international cooperation at work on a vital project with a strong 

emphasis on training Tanzanians. 

But without a renewed effort in the coming five years, the 

progress that has been made may stall. Deliveries of bednets 

have fallen recently in some countries, despite coverage being 

nowhere near sufficient in the countries where there is the 

greatest risk of being infected. Since a bednet has an effective 

life of perhaps three years, many of those delivered during the 

rapid increase in deliveries in the years until 2010 will already 

need to be replaced. 

The threat of insecticide resistance needs also to be taken 

seriously. Improved nets with a combination of chemicals to 

counter resistance are available but their use is not widespread. 

A huge funding gap remains between what is needed to beat 

malaria and what is available; and this is despite very substantial 

increases in money coming via the Global Fund and directly 

from the US and UK governments. 

There are three major ways in which this gap can be filled: 

official development assistance (ODA) from governments, 

private individuals and companies, and domestic health 

spending by countries in which malaria is endemic. ODA is 

unlikely to rise substantially in traditional donor countries while 

economic growth remains weak – although we must continue 

to make the case, especially to those countries which have not 

yet met the UN target of giving 0.7 per cent of Gross National 

Income as ODA. Private individuals and companies can be 

encouraged to follow the example of the Gates Foundation and 

others who have given very substantially over the years. 

But it is domestic health spending which is the key. The 

governments of most endemic countries in sub-Saharan Africa 

(where by far the greatest disease burden and number of deaths 

occur) have signed pledges such as the Abuja declaration to 

commit 15 per cent of their national budget to health. But few 

have achieved that. 

Their parliaments and people need to hold their governments 

to the pledge. In doing so, they will be able to maintain the 

progress they have made in fighting not only malaria but HIV/ 

AIDS, TB, pneumonia and the other diseases which cause such 

pain and suffering, and which continue to hold their economies 

back from greater growth. 

Until recently, food and eating food were a virtue. Today, 

they are often seen as a vice. 

Hunger was the problem, not food. For some people, 

hunger is still a real issue. But in the developed nations, people 

have never been more neurotic about food. 

Obesity, food intolerance, allergies, food fraud and certain 

food stuffs bad for cardiovascular health and cancer worry 

people. 

So, what is the role for Government in all of that? Should 

Government educate people and point them in the direction of 

a healthy diet or should Government intervene through taxing 

‘dangerous’ food products? 

Most immediately, families on low incomes are often short 

of money to buy essential food, because of difficulties with the 

benefit system or a financial crisis in their lives. Paradoxically, at 

a time when food banks are increasing, we have a real problem 

with obesity, particularly with families on low incomes. 

I think the answer to that is definitely education and not 

taxation. Parenting skills which promote healthy diets for 

growing children are crucial. The message must be that diets 

based on fresh foods cooked at home are good for your pocket 

and your health. 

As young people grow up and become more independent, 

they have to make up their minds on their preferred diets. They 

need continuing advice to help them stay healthy. I believe 

education in secondary schools through the Personal and Social 

Education Provision and the teaching of food preparation and 

cooking skills would be a way to strengthen the initial guidance 

in the primary schools. 

The cost to the National Health Service of diet related 

diseases, such as diabetes, heart disease and strokes, could 

cripple the NHS. According to Public Health England, the 

country is facing a “devastating” type 2 diabetes epidemic and 

10 per cent of the NHS’ budget has already been spent on it. 

Investment in health promotion would pay back, which would 

far outweigh the initial costs. 

While many of the national food and drink manufacturers 

have made strenuous efforts to reduce salt, sugar and saturated 

fats in their products, the process has not gone far enough. 

Many health NGOs are advocating a tax on sugar. I believe 

government should resist that (easy) option and continue to 

work with our food and drink industry to continue their good 

work on reduction of those dangerous nutrients. The exception 

to that is minimum pricing for alcohol, which has the dual 

benefits of cutting down on alcohol consumption and making 

our pubs more viable for sensible drinking. 

Giving detailed government advice on individual diets is 

very difficult as science seems to come up with conflicting 

information, but the general drift is becoming clearer. While a 

good mixed diet is essential to having the important nutrients 

and micro-nutrients, excessive consumption of high fat dairy 

products and processed meats should be cut down to smaller 

portions. 

But, of course, all food production is delivered at the expense 

of national ecosystems. While some forms of agriculture, such 

as eco-agriculture, have lesser impacts on our wildlife, they 

produce less food per acre. So, there is a trade-off between 

maximising food production and maintaining our important 

biodiversity, water and air quality. It is estimated that by 2050, 

the global population will have reached a total of 9.6 billion. 

According to a report produced by the WRI, the UN and the 

World Bank, the world would need 70 per cent more food, as 

measured by calories. So, we need to both produce food for the 

new mouths and ensure that the people on inadequate diets 

around the world have enough healthy food to live full and 

active lives. That will mean judicious use of new technologies 

to produce more food with less inputs and protecting our 

important natural resources. 

However, in the midst of all concerns, the real contribution 

that food makes to our lives should not be forgotten. It is not 

just a means to survival, but more than that. It is an integral part 

of our social and cultural enjoyment of life with our families and 

friends. Food is not just a vice, but is a virtue that can bring real 

value to everyone’s life. 





CORRIDORS: 

Boxing clever for young people 

Charlotte Leslie, 

Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Boxing 

and MP for Bristol North West 

“ Perception is reality” – a truism, if ever there was one, in 

modern politics. In a world of 24 hour media, it matters far 

less what governments and politicians are actually doing 

or actually believe, and far more what they are seen to be doing 

or what the public think they believe. 

A truism it may be, but one that entails major problems for 

reality. If we allow ourselves to become obsessed with the way 

things look, we will forget what is right and wrong, and what 

works and does not work. 

In the world of sport, boxing provides a great example of that. 

On one level, I understand how perceptions of boxing put many 

people off it – instinctively, the sight of two people trying to land 

punches on each other is unappealing to many. 

But to accept that simple and narrow portrayal would be for 

perception to triumph over reality. A trip down to your local 

amateur boxing club will paint a very different picture. The 

young men and women who box there are not characterised by 

violence (though many of them may once have been) – the sport 

that they practise is all about control. Violent boxers do not win. 

And that is not merely about sport for sport’s sake. All sports 

have the capacity to inspire and reach out to people, especially 

the young, but boxing has a unique ability to influence some of 

the most hard to reach kids in the country. Go to boxing clubs 

in North London and you will find examples of those who were 

involved in gangs and the summer riots of 2011 finding their 

salvation in boxing. Other young boxers and coaches will also 


“All sports have the 

capacity to inspire and 

reach out to people” 

talk with pride about how club members whose friends joined 

the riots did not, thanks to the ethos of their boxing club. 

Why is that? Boxing has certainly retained a reputation as a 

gritty, unpretentious sport – boxers are often easier to relate 

to than the preened stars of football, and many successful 

boxers and local club coaches will come from similarly difficult 

backgrounds to budding youngsters. 

For many, the boxing club provides a family-like atmosphere, 

a home and gathering point for those who might otherwise be 

spending their evenings on the streets. It is also an incredibly 

tough sport, requiring hours of dedication to hone the necessary 

skills, and a great means of releasing frustration in a controlled 

way. 

Those are not occasional factors; they are evident in 

every boxing club I have visited. I was lucky enough to have 

exceptionally open-minded and supportive parents, and so 

when I was an angry and frustrated teenager, my mum took me 

boxing. 

I remember well the difference that boxing made to my 

development and the hugely positive impact it had on many of 

my fellow boxers, who did not have such a stable family life and 

risked veering off the straight and narrow into drugs and crime. 

If the reality of boxing is so, then we simply cannot afford 

to allow it to be obscured by prejudiced and inaccurate 

perceptions. The financial and human cost of social breakdown 

to the UK is huge – truancy, anti-social behaviour, long-term 

unemployment, and prison are inordinately expensive. The 

reasons behind those ills are many and complex, and I do not 

claim that boxing is a silver bullet to solve them all, but we can 

scarcely afford to ignore the benefits of sport and boxing in 

playing a role in social recovery. 

Thankfully, perceptions are beginning to change. The success 

of British boxers (including, for the first time, women) at the 

2012 Olympics and this year’s Commonwealth Games has 

brought boxing firmly into the mainstream of the UK’s sporting 

life. 

The All Party Parliamentary Group for Boxing, which I chair, 

will soon publish a report on the benefits of boxing, dispelling 

some of the long held myths and making recommendations to 

the Government and sport authorities on how they can better 

harness the power of boxing in turning around young people’s 

lives. 

Three years on from the appalling riots that swept our cities, 

we now have a great opportunity to utilise boxing to ensure 

that nothing like this happens again. If we look beyond easy 

perceptions and fully grasp reality, the rewards could be huge. 


SCHOOL SWIMMING CHARTER 

Are you taking 

school swimming 

seriously? 

The 2013 National School Swimming Census found that 51% of 

children aged seven to eleven could not swim 25 metres unaided, 

the minimum requirement at Key Stage 2 

The revised national curriculum specifies that all schools must 

provide swimming instruction either in Key Stage 1 or 2 

How you can help 

1 2 

Attend the ASA Parliamentary 

School Swimming Briefing 

• Find out this year’s 2014 School Swimming 

Census results 

• Give your support to the new ASA School 

Swimming Charter 

Hosted by Kate Hoey MP 

Wednesday 29th October, 9am to 11am 

Jubilee Room, House of Commons 

Register your attendance by email to 

Jamie.perry@swimming.org 

Encourage primary schools in your 

area to sign up to the ASA School 

Swimming Charter at 

www.swimming.org/schoolswimming 

Find out more 

Visit: www.swimming.org/schoolswimming 

Request a briefing paper: Email Jamie.perry@swimming.org

CORRIDORS: 

The myths around betting shops 

Philip Davies, 

MP for Shipley and a member of the Culture, Media 

and Sport Select Committee 

“Betting shops are an 

essential part of our local 

communities” 

takeaways per square mile in the most deprived areas. Is money 

spent in pubs and takeaways really better for poorer people 

than spending their money in betting shops? 

The third myth is that the machines in betting shops are 

predominantly used by the poorest people. 

However, the most recent Health Survey showed that 

gambling prevalence was highest in the top quintiles of 

household income, with 6 per cent in the highest income 

quintile playing FOBTs, compared with 4 per cent in the lowest 

quintile. Again, the facts completely contradict the myths. 

In the official Health Survey, it was found that there were only 

two gambling activities which were engaged in more by poorer 

people than richer people – bingo and scratch cards. 

Why is it that there is a focus on betting shops and not on 

the actual two forms of gambling where the poorest people 

are more likely to play than the richest? That is all the more 

pertinent given that with scratch cards a person can start 

playing them when they are 16. 

If you were to believe everything you read in the newspapers, 

you could be forgiven for thinking that betting shops 

deliberately target the poorest in society and that rates of 

problem gambling were going through the roof. 

However, those are among many such myths doing the 

rounds at the moment, and it is important for public policy that 

people are aware of the facts and do not introduce knee-jerk 

reaction measures on the back of myths and lies. 

The first myth is that there has been a massive explosion in 

the number of betting shops in recent years. The number of 

betting offices peaked in the mid-1970s at around about 15,000. 

Today, there are around 8,500 and this figure has been pretty 

stable for the past decade. They have certainly become more 

prominent on the high street rather than on side streets – the 

financial crash allowed bookmakers to afford high street rents 

they previously could not afford - but there has not been an 

increase in the number. 

According to the Gambling Commission, there has also been a 

decline in the number of Fixed Odds Betting Terminals (FOBTs) 

in the last couple of years so there is no great explosion in these, 

either. According to the Gambling Commission, 4 per cent of 

adults played on FOBTs in 2010 and this figure dropped to 3.4 

per cent in 2011/12, and last year most bookmakers reported a 

decline in the money they were making from FOBTs. 

The second myth is that bookmakers are all congregated 

in poorer areas. There are two bookmakers per square mile in 

the most deprived areas which compares with 9 pubs and 11 

I believe the reason is that the concern for many of the 

campaigners is not about who is losing the money; it is about 

who is winning the money. That poorer people are losing much 

more money on scratch cards does not seem to worry people 

because the money is supposedly going to good causes. 

However, with FOBTs, the money is going to big companies 

like William Hill and therefore there is not as much public 

sympathy. 

Actually, if we are concerned about problem gambling, the 

focus should not be on who is making the money; the concern 

should be about who is losing the money. However, none of the 

arguments seem to be around that. 

The fourth myth is that the amount of problem gambling 

is going up. In fact, since FOBTs were introduced, the rate of 

problem gambling in the country has actually gone down – to 

around 0.5 per cent, according to the last survey (down from 0.9 

per cent). If FOBTs were the cause of all problem gambling, one 

would think that problem gambling would have gone through 

the roof since they were introduced, and yet the reverse is true. 

The final myth is that FOBTs are described as the “crack 

cocaine of gambling”. They are only called that by their 

opponents, as oppose to by any sort of independent 

international observer. 

Bookmakers employ many people and finance horseracing 

in the UK. Betting shops are an essential part of our local 

communities. They deserve politicians who make decisions 

based on fact, rather than fiction. 



ADVERTORIAL 

A solution to the problem of 

faith schools 

Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain, 

Chair of the Accord Coalition for Inclusive Education 

The Birmingham schools which were recently criticised 

by Ofsted were not faith schools, but the exposure of 

their failings has caused major questions marks to be 

raised about the role of religion in education. 

If the Birmingham schools had been designated faith 

schools, then many of the practices condemned – such 

as limiting the curriculum to exclude lessons about sex 

education and to avoid the notion of evolution – would have 

been permitted. 

How can practices we find offensive in what are 

designated “community schools” suddenly be acceptable if 

they are labelled “faith schools”? Blinkering the horizons of 

children must be wrong wherever they learn. 

That applies also to the ability of faith schools to 

indoctrinate children in one faith, instead of equipping them 

to enter a multi-faith society and play a positive role within 

it. 

Equally damaging is the social segregation that occurs 

in faith schools and their ability to control admissions on 

grounds of religion. 

It is a legal form of discrimination that would not be 

tolerated in any other state-funded arena - it would be 


“Dividing the children 

also means dividing the 

parents” 

unthinkable to have hospitals with access limited to Jews, 

swimming pools only for Muslims and libraries just for 

Catholics. We would rightly object. 

Moreover, it is taking place in the very institutions which 

we like to think are preparing children for a better, fairer, 

more inclusive society. What sort of message are we giving 

young minds about an ‘us-and-them’ society when we 

separate them at the school gate? 

Dividing the children also means dividing the parents, who 

no longer meet at collection time or at parents’ evenings and 

sports days. Thus, faith schools cut huge swathes through 

society. 

The Accord Coalition for Inclusive Education calls upon all 

political parties to include the following five points in their 

manifesto, leading to legislation on faith in schools. 

Firstly, to work towards ending the anomaly by which 

state-funded schools are legally able to distinguish between 

children on religious grounds in their admissions procedure. 

State discrimination is no longer acceptable. 

Secondly, in the meantime, to bring all state schools in 

line with the system under which Free Schools operate, 

limiting the number of children that can be selected on the 

grounds of their faith to 50 per cent of the annual intake 

(This is not an ideal position but does at least introduce 

an element of consistency and eases the path towards the 

abolition of all religious discrimination in schools). 

Thirdly, to close the legal loophole which currently allows 

schools to refuse to employ teachers on the basis of their 

faith, which is both morally objectionable and educationally 

counter-productive, restricting the range of teachers and 

narrowing the pupils’ perspectives. 

Fourthly, to recognise that the decision to remove the 

duty of Ofsted to inspect how schools promoted community 

cohesion was a mistake and should be re-instated. 

And fifthly, to ensure that all children learn about the full 

range of faiths and belief systems in Britain – not just one 

or none – by adding Religious Education to the National 

Curriculum. 


I WAS TERRIFIED. 

ALL I HEARD 

WAS CANCER. 

BUT THANKS 

TO TEENAGE 

CANCER TRUST, 

I KNEW I WAS 

GOING TO 

BE OK. 

When Charlotte was diagnosed 

with cancer, we were able to give 

her expert care and support as 

she fought for her life. There 

are other young people, just like 

Charlotte, who are terrified right 

now and need our support too. 

As the only UK charity who does 

what we do, we need your help 

to be there for them. 

PLEASE DONATE TODAY 

Text TEENS to 70300 to donate £3 

and The Body Shop will match your 

donation*. You can also make a donation 

online at teenagecancertrust.org/charlotte 

This advert has been donated. *The Body Shop will match all donations up to a total of £20,000. 

The donation will cost £3 plus a text message at the standard rate. Teenage Cancer Trust (Registered 

Charity no: 1062559, SC039757) will receive 100% of every donation. Please ensure you have the bill 

payer’s permission before making this donation. Photo by Ashley Jouhar

ACHIEVING HIGH ATTAINMENT 

“ The UK’s manufacturing 

IN SCHOOLS 

base 

is not near Heathrow. 

So why do I have to fly from there?” 

In the run-up to next year’s general election there will be vital issues beyond the economy helping to 

determine how people will vote. And one such issue will be education. 

Education, so critical to the standing of the UK economy, has experienced controversial reforms under 

the Coalition Government, sparking ongoing heated debates. Proponents of the changes believe 

that 

William 

the British 

Wang, 

schooling 

Managing 

system 

Director 

has been 

of 

reinvigorated 

MG Motor UK. 

and that, once again, there is an emphasis on 

children learning key subjects, such as English and Mathematics. However, opponents of the changes 

argue that confusion has been created in schools with teachers’ and headteachers’ opinions sidelined, 

including their concern over the recruitment of unqualified teachers. 

Politics First has invited Nicky Morgan, Tristram Hunt, David Ward and Margaret Jones to set out their 

respective views on the current standing of the UK’s education system and how children can be enabled 

to reach their full potential in schools and thus achieve high attainment... 

SUPPORTING TEACHERS 

THROUGH POWERFUL 

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 

EDITORIAL ADVERTORIAL 

Nicky Morgan MP 

Secretary of State for 

Education 

Great airports for great cities 

www.balancedaviationdebate.com 


ThThe driving force behind our 

plan for education is simple: we 

must ensure that every parent 

has the confidence to send their son 

or daughter to a good local school 

that they know will unlock their full 

potential. Whatever their chosen path, 

wherever they live and whatever their 

background, we want all young people 

to finish full-time education with the 

knowledge and qualifications they need 

to succeed in modern Britain. 

Our plan has made necessary a rapid 

and ambitious programme of reform. 

The pace at which that has developed 

has not always made life easy, and it 

is a testament to the professionalism, 

dedication and sheer hard work of our 

teachers that we have been able to 

achieve so much in such a short space 

of time. 

This September, pupils across 

England began studying a new national 

curriculum designed to ensure that 

every child learns the core knowledge 

in key subjects that universities and 

employers most value. The new 

curriculum sets higher standards and 

expectations in the basics of reading, 

writing and mathematics. At the same 


When children in our schools receive the most effective teaching, 

they progress faster. Children from disadvantaged backgrounds 

close the gap with their peers and all can experience a 

deeper enjoyment of school. 

While policy has focused on training 35,000 new teachers 

each year, we have overlooked the importance of ongoing support, 

development and training for more than 400,000 teachers 

already in the classroom. 

Launched by teachers in 2012, the Teacher Development 

Trust is the independent national charity for teachers’ professional 

development. Our mission is to improve educational 

outcomes for children by raising the quality of teachers’ professional 

development, raising awareness of its importance and 

building tools to help teachers transform their practice. 

Our recent research found that as many as 13,000 schools 

across the country are struggling to support staff in a sustainable, 

effective way. This is one factor behind levels of teacher 

morale and retention in England, which are very low by international 

comparison. 

A survey of 1,020 school leaders in England revealed that 53.4 

per cent (the equivalent of 13,000 schools) found it harder to 

meet teachers’ development needs in the past twelve months 

because of financial pressures on the school. Some schools 

reported that no budget was available for teachers to access 

external support. 

Accountability measures are also limiting schools’ ability to 

develop teachers and leaders. Almost one in five secondary 

schools felt pressured to complete CPD in response to accountability 

measures such as Ofsted and league tables. 

In addition, the mechanisms for schools to compare and 

quality assure the external input they receive are poor. 67.4 per 

cent of school leaders select new CPD providers from those 

previously used by colleagues, leading to the dominance of 

“big names” that may not always be best suited to a school or 

teacher’s needs. While some are attempting a more systematic 

approach, teachers and school leaders highlighted the need for 

more support in making such decisions. 

These stubborn barriers are hindering teachers’ professional 

development and limiting its impact on student attainment and 

teaching quality. 

The Teacher Development Trust is calling for a system in 

which school leaders can prioritise staff development, teachers 

can engage meaningfully in CPD and every school or college is 

part of a national network of professional learning. 

We are already supporting teachers and school leaders across 

the country to improve their approaches to professional development. 

Our National Teacher Enquiry Network is a partnership 

of schools and colleges developing world class, evidenceinformed 

professional learning, while the GoodCPDGuide, our 

online database of CPD resources, allows teachers to strategically 

find, compare and review external support. 

But further change is required. Our Annual Report 2014, 

released on 30th June at the Houses of Parliament, recommended 

the following changes to policy: 

1. The creation of a national database of leading practice. 

2. Greater support for Teaching School Alliances in brokering 

support and partnerships for schools. 

3. A national communication drive to promote research findings 

around professional learning. 

4. Contributions towards an “incubator” organisation to prepare 

the ground for a new Royal College of Teaching. 

5. Discussions and funding around new professional career 

levels. 

6. Increased confidence and capacity at the Department for 

Education to support system-led improvement in professional 

learning. 

7. Preparations for a future personal entitlement to professional 

learning. 

8. Increased funding for research into effective professional 

development and knowledge-sharing. 

In this way we can remove the barriers to effective and 

sustainable CPD, and unleash the potential of teachers to 

transform their practice and student outcomes for children in 

England. 

For further information on the Teacher Development Trust or to 

download the Annual Report, visit 

www.teacherdevelopmenttrust.org 

Visit the GoodCPDGuide at www.goodcpdguide.come and find 

out more about the National Teacher Enquiry Network at 

http://www.teacherdevelopmenttrust.org/teacher-enquiry-network/ 

Follow the Teacher Development Trust on Twitter 

@TeacherDevTrust

time, by making coding and computer 

science compulsory from age five, it 

will give more young people the skills 

they need to compete in a 21st century 

workforce. 

to make the right choices for them. 

Schools also have an important role to 

play in providing the right environment 

for children to develop their individual 

talents. 

And our reforms are already starting 

to produce results for older pupils. 

Grade inflation is finally under control, 

and more young people are choosing to 

study the subjects that will open doors 

for them in the future. 

That is why I want to do more to 

support schools in ensuring that they 

not only give young people the skills 

and knowledge to succeed, but also the 

space to grow and develop into wellrounded 

adults. 

As Minister for Women and Equalities, 

I am particularly pleased that the 

number of girls taking physics GCSE is at 

a record high, and more young women 

are choosing to study mathematics and 

science at A Level - the goal of our Your 

Life campaign - opening up a world of 

opportunity in increasingly important 

STEM careers. 

At the same time, we have given 

teachers more freedom in the classroom 

– including scrapping 21,000 pages of 

unnecessary guidance over the past 

four years, to free them from timeconsuming 

and bureaucratic paperwork. 

Over the coming months, I intend 

to go even further, and ensure we 

are doing everything we can to help 

teachers concentrate on what they do 

best: teaching and inspiring children to 

achieve. 

But helping young people to succeed 

in modern Britain is about more than 

just the time children spend learning in 

the classroom. 

This Government’s reforms to the 

adoption and care system, the groundbreaking 

improvements we have 

made to special educational needs 

provision, and the increased availability 

of high-quality childcare and early 

years education are designed to give 

every child the best chance at a happy 

and healthy future, and to ensure that 

families have the options they need 

That means more opportunities to 

take part in character-building extracurricular 

activities, and better access 

to high-quality careers advice to help 

young people make informed decisions 

about their future. 

No country can afford to stand 

still when it comes to their education 

system, and we still have much to do. 

But the progress of the past four years 

means that now, more than ever, we 

have cause to be optimistic. 

As today’s young people leave school 

and embark of the next stage of their 

journey, we can be confident that more 

of them will enter adult life with the selfassurance, 

skills and drive to succeed in 

whatever comes next. I cannot wait to 

see what they achieve. 

Tristram Hunt MP 

Shadow Secretary of State 

for Education 

Amid the welter of anniversaries 

celebrated this summer, it is 70 years 

since Rab Butler’s 1944 Education Act 

received its royal assent. And it all began with 

a cat. 

After a night spent at Chequers, Butler was 

summoned to Winston Churchill’s bedroom 

at 10.45am to explain the education bill he 

had begun drafting. 

“I found him in bed, smoking a Corona, 

with a black cat curled up on his feet. He 

began aggressively by claiming that the cat 

did more for the war effort than I did since 

it provided him with a hot water bottle and 

saved fuel and power. Didn’t I agree? I said 

not really, but that it was a very beautiful cat.” 

Churchill gave Butler only one request, 

pertaining to the history curriculum: “Tell the 

children that Wolfe won Quebec.” 

In fact, the 1944 act did much more than 

that. In policy terms, it meant universal 

education to 15, ending the dual system of 

religious and state schools, investing local 

government with much greater responsibility 

for education, and inaugurating the tripartite 

divide between grammar, secondary modern 

and technical schools. 

Yet, whilst few could begrudge 1944’s 

progressive aspirations, the truth is that its 

‘One Nation’ ambition has never fully been 

realised in the post-war epoch. And worse 

than that, generations of English education 

reformers have learned the wrong lessons – 

in both theory and practice. 

First, in theoretical terms, the dream of 

the tripartite system seemed to embed 

something deep within our reform psyche 

which places a primacy on re-organising 

school structures at the expense of improving 

the quality of teaching. That despite all the 

contrary evidence which suggests teaching 

quality makes the biggest difference to our 

children’s learning outcomes. 

Second, in practice, Butler’s act never 

achieved its ambition of providing an 

excellent education system for both 

vocational and academic pupils. Even at their 

height, technical schools failed to cater for 

more than 2 per cent of all English students.

Cambridge assessment 

ConferenCe 2014 

Seventy years on, that is the historic 

wrong that the Labour party is determined 

to right. Because whether it was the 1944 

act itself or a failure of implementation, the 

consequences are still with us: a shocking 

inequality in provision between technical 

and academic education; confusion over 

vocational qualifications; and hopeless levels 

of youth apprenticeships. 

So, as teachers and pupils return for a new 

school year, they should be in little doubt 

that the next general election will present 

a stark choice between the two major 

parties on education. Our new auto-pilot 

education secretary, Nicky Morgan, hopes 

to take education out of the spotlight, whilst 

surreptitiously cementing Michael Gove’s 

most damaging reforms. Another Tory-led 

administration would mean more unqualified 

teachers damaging learning; more money 

diverted away from areas of primary school 

place shortages and into pet free school 

projects; fewer apprenticeships for young 

people; no local oversight or accountability 

of our schools system; and zero strategy for 

young people who want to pursue technical 

and vocational pathways. 

The Labour party, by contrast, wants to 

finish the business of Butler. Alongside our 

ambition to deliver a world class teacher 

in every classroom and revolutionise 

the provision of continued professional 

development, we are committed to working 

with schools, businesses, further education 

colleges and universities to provide an 

education system focused on vocational 

excellence. 

From our plans for rigorous young 

apprenticeships, to requiring maths and 

English to 18, to a new generation of 

Institutes of Technical Education, Labour is 

determined not to repeat the mistakes of 

1944. 

That approach begins with an appreciation 

that the narrow, exam-factory model of 

recent years is delivering neither a fulfilling 

school experience nor what the British 

economy requires. Instead, we must pursue 

Churchill’s demand for “a state of society 

where the advantages and privileges which 

hitherto have been enjoyed only by the few, 

shall be far more widely shared by the man 

and youth of the nation as a whole.” 

In 2015, only the Labour party can deliver 

that. 

David Ward MP 

a member of the Education 

Select Committee 

For many young people from 

deprived backgrounds, life is about 

trying to catch up. Tragically, many 

give up at a young age, believing the 

odds are stacked too much against 

them. We hear so many times that we 

can help children escape their deprived 

backgrounds through high educational 

attainment but the truth is that it is 

through eliminating their deprivation 

that we can best help them realise their 

educational potential. 

By looking at all the correlations 

between non-school variables such as 

ethnicity, religion and gender on the 

one-hand and educational attainment 

on the other, we see it is the degree of a 

child’s affluence/deprivation that stands 

out as the most dominant determinant. 

We all know that school-variables such 

as additional resources and outstanding 

teaching can work magic in terms of 

boosting the life chances of even the 

most disadvantaged child; but we also 

know that the same child would be 

more likely to have a higher level of 

attainment if they had been born in a 

more affluent family. 

It is a fact that many children are 

already at a disadvantage and losing 

ground as they develop in the womb 

and therefore the additional support 

they need cannot begin soon enough. 

The huge advantages which young 

people from even relatively comfortable 

backgrounds have over young people 

from deprived backgrounds gives 

schools serving deprived communities 

too much to do. The young person from 

the deprived community, especially 

if they are lucky enough to be bright 

and have a supportive home-life, may - 

through the commitment of dedicated 

and passionate and skilful school staff - 

do well in life. But far too many will not. 

That was brought home to myself and 

other members of the Education Select 

Committee on a recent visit to a school 

serving a deprived community where 

giving children arriving in the morning 

their first food of the day and changing 

the soiled clothes they arrived in, had to 

take place before teaching could begin. 

Governments, of course, know that 

is true and hence we have Children’s 

Centres, Free School Meals, the Pupil 

Premium and other measures. Those 

are all, unfortunately, necessary 

ameliorative initiatives to make up for 

a degree of inequality that should not 

exist. As the building work progresses, 

we must have our very best builders on 

our most difficult sites. 

We must find a way of incentivising 

our very best teachers and leaders to 

work in our most difficult schools. It 

will be hard to do because such schools 

are demanding and exact a cost on 

their staff. I will leave it to others to 

talk about the building blocks of grade 

inflation, Vocational Education, subject 

content, tuition fees, teacher training, 

parental involvement, the ‘middle tier’, 

governance, 21st century pedagogy, 

school readiness and many other school 

and non-school variables because I do 

not want to dilute my message. Those 

incredibly important factors in raising 

educational attainment are part of the 

construction process of an edifice that 

sits on a foundation of inequality. 

So, my solution to how we ‘create the 

conditions’ for high attainment? A new 

Secretary of State for Education who 

leaves education alone for five years 

whilst he or she commits themselves to 

reducing child poverty – then watch a 

splendid building grow. 

INTERNATIONAL 

EDUCATION 

interpretation 

importance 

impact 

There is no doubt that internationally-focused education is rising up the agenda of 

governments worldwide. But what exactly do we mean by an international education? 

How best can we prepare students for an increasingly interconnected world? 

The seventh Cambridge Assessment Conference will welcome over 140 education experts 

from across the UK and overseas to scrutinise the challenges and opportunities that 

education without borders creates. A must-attend event for professionals involved in the 

shaping and delivery of international education at school and policy levels. 

Confirmed speakers 

isabel nisbet Executive Director, A Level Content Advisory Board 

Jeremy Hodgen Professor of Mathematics Education, King’s College London 

sunny Varkey Founder and Executive Chairman, GEMS Education Group 

david Graddol Director, The English Company 

dr stephen spurr Headmaster, Westminster School 

david Barrs and Jill martin Headteachers, Anglo European School 

marc Tucker President and CEO, National Center on Education and the Economy, USA 

dr karin Zimmer researcher, German Institute for International Educational Research 

15 october 2014 | downing College | Cambridge 



Book your place: www.cambridgeassessment.org.uk/conference2014

Baroness Margaret 

Jones 

Shadow Spokesperson for 

Education in the House of 

Lords 

When the legacy of Michael 

Gove is finally written up, one 

thing will be clear: he failed 

to make the transition from outspoken 

journalist to political leader. 

Never having had experience 

of managing a large, complex 

organisation, nor a background in 

education, he simply did not learn the 

skills necessary to enthuse the people 

who were expected to deliver his 

change agenda on the frontline. 

That is one of the defining differences 

between Labour and the Coalition 

Government. We understand that you 

cannot have world class education 

without world class teachers. 

The surest way to improve our 

children’s attainment is by raising the 

standards of teaching and motivating 

them to demand the best of every pupil. 

Put at its most simple, research 

shows that if we were able to raise 

the performance of the least effective 

teachers, then England would rank in 

the top five education systems in the 

world in reading and mathematics. 

So, rather than denigrating teachers 

and driving the race to the bottom by 

welcoming unqualified teachers into 

schools, Labour would do the opposite. 

We would expect Qualified Teacher 

Status to be the bare minimum for an 

established classroom teacher. 

Then, like any other high status 

profession, we would expect them to 

demonstrate a journey of continuous 

professional development in their 

career. That should include an appetite 

for learning the latest pedagogical and 

technical developments in teaching. 

It should also embrace the sharing of 

best practice with colleagues through 

teacher learning communities. 

We will nurture and facilitate those 

developments - learning from the 

success of the London Challenge 

which transformed London schools 

through an emphasis on openness and 

collaboration. 

The second defining difference 

between Labour and the Coalition is 

that we understand the different routes 

to learning and success. 

Academic excellence and a university 

degree can represent the height of 

achievement and a route out of poverty 

for many young people. 

But, for others, that direction leads to 

an unhappy experience in school and 

a lack of alternative routes to career 

fulfilment. 

So, if we are serious about delivering 

higher levels of attainment for all young 

people, our priority has to be to match 

the status of vocational excellence with 

academic achievement. 

It makes sense for individual young 

people as well as being essential 

for the UK’s future as a high wage, 

hi-tech, high innovation economy. 

Indeed, the evidence shows that those 

European countries with the most 

effective vocational education systems 

also have the lowest levels of youth 

unemployment. 

That is why Labour proposes 

to introduce a new gold standard 

Technical Baccalaureate, on a par 

with the Academic qualifications, and 

underpinned by a requirement for 

all young people to study Maths and 

English to age 18 and undertake an 

extended project. 

Finally, it is crucial that we address 

the educational attainment gap 

between rich and poor children which 

Demos revealed has widened under this 

government. 

The Social Mobility Commission 

has reported that the previous 

government’s ambition to end child 

poverty is now way off target, with two 

million children continuing to live in 

poverty. 

Currently, our research shows that 

two thirds of Councils do not have 

enough quality places for the vulnerable 

two year olds in their area. In parallel, 

our ground-breaking network of Sure 

Start centres is sadly being dismantled, 

with 578 fewer centres than when this 

government came to power. 

That is why a priority of a future 

labour Government will be to tackle the 

link between a child’s background and 

their educational achievement. 

We will start by expanding free, quality 

childcare from 15 hours to 25 hours for 

working parents of 3 and 4 year olds. 

That will be supplemented by access to 

wraparound care from 8am to 6pm at 

their local primary school. 

Through those and other measures, 

we will create an education system in 

which teachers, parents and employers 

have confidence, and where every child 

can flourish and excel. 

Better teaching 

Professor Chris Husbands, 

Director of the Institute 

of Education, University 

of London (IOE), discusses 

the components of 

world-class teacher training 

World-leading practice 

Great teachers aren’t born – they’re made. And we 

know how. The political leaders of high-performing 

education systems recognise this, and they take 

teacher education very seriously. These systems, 

including the oft-cited Singapore and Finland, rely 

on recruiting high-achievers and preparing them 

well through training that is rooted in universities’ 

research expertise. If we are to compete 

internationally on skills, teacher preparation 

matters. We need to benchmark ourselves against 

the best when setting our own teacher education 

policy. 

In our universities we have the research base 

and teacher training infrastructure to match the 

best. At the IOE we want to be at the forefront of 

developing world-class teachers for our schools – 

and we have the credentials: in the 2014 QS World 

University Rankings we take pole position for the 

quality and impact of our research in education; 

Ofsted has rated us as ‘Outstanding’ across the 

board for our Initial Teacher Training. 

A profession, not a craft 

Teaching is a complex, cognitively demanding 

role. We need our teachers to deploy sophisticated 

clinical thinking – to use their judgement to select 

the right teaching strategies, to use assessment 

to measure their impact on pupils’ learning, and 

to modify their practice to make further gains. This 

demands practical and technical skills. But it also 

requires theoretical understanding, so that teachers 

can judge why a particular approach is likely to 

work in a given context, not just simply administer 

it. These – and the development of first-rate 

analytical skills – are taken for granted elements of 

teacher preparation in top-performing jurisdictions. 

A further feature is teachers’ engagement 

with research. This is a core part of teachers’ 

professional identity, and support for it is 

embedded strategically across these systems. As the 

recent review by the British Educational Research 

Association (Research and the Teaching Profession) 

confirms, the most effective teachers routinely 

utilise the lessons from education research to 

continually update their practice and renew their 

professionalism. Every learner deserves teaching 

that is informed by the latest relevant research. 

To make a comparison with another profession: 

medical schools are attached to universities, 

providing medical students with the chance 

to see the relationship between research and 

practice and to learn to understand the nature 

and importance of evidence. This is arguably the 

mark of a professional, and applies throughout a 

professional’s career. 

Making it happen 

All this requires training that joins together 

experiential learning at the ‘chalk face’ with 

insights from academic study and engagement 

with research. This is the ‘clinical model’ of teacher 

training and relies on close working between 

schools and universities. 

Partnership in the delivery of teacher training is, 

in fact, well-established in England. The basics 

are in place. To emulate the best teacher training 

internationally at scale, we need to retain the 

strongest research intensive universities and the 

best schools in teacher education, and strengthen 

and better integrate their respective roles. With 

these objectives in mind, the principle of supporting 

close, sustainable partnership has to be the starting 

point for future reforms to teacher education.

INTERVIEW: PAUL BURSTOW 

Time to earn as you learn: the value of 

teengage apprenticeships 

Paul Burstow, MP for Sutton, Cheam and Worcester Park, explains to Marcus 

Papadopoulos about how apprenticeships are often overlooked as an 

alternative to university 

Q How important are apprenticeships 

today in the UK for people who have 

them? 

Apprenticeships are extremely important 

for the young people and, indeed, 

people of all ages who have them. 

Apprenticeships are becoming increasingly 

recognised as an alternative to university 

as they can and do result in very good 

careers and very good salaries. 

A major benefit of an apprenticeship, 

especially for women, is that you can be 

earning while you are learning, which, of 

course, is not something you can do if you 

are pursuing a degree. 

In addition to that, an apprenticeship 

gets someone through the door, so to 

speak, and, following on from this, it 

will equip the person with life-long skills 

through learning on the job. 

Finally, from a monetary perspective, 

it is evidently clear, through the figures 

available, that the lifetime earnings of 

someone who has had an apprenticeship, 

compared to somebody who has not, 

runs into thousands of pounds, hence an 

apprenticeship is hugely beneficial. 

Q Are you satisfied with the current 

relationship between schools, colleges, 

universities and businesses? 

I believe there is more to be done to 

ensure that education-providers really 

understand what business wants and 

these are, quite simply, the fundamentals 

– punctuality, the basics of literacy and 

numeracy and being an interesting 

employee. So, those attributes will 

often enable a person to obtain an 

apprenticeship. 

Q What are the benefits to a business of 

taking on an apprentice? 

An apprentice is clearly someone who 


is looking to have a long-term career, 

to develop their skills and to invest in 

themselves hence a business is potentially 

obtaining a very good employee. 

Further to that, a business has the 

opportunity to try out an apprentice. In 

short, I would contend that it is a win-win 

situation for any business. 

Of course, the best advocates for 

apprenticeship programmes are 

businesses which are already running 

them. In my constituency, for example, 

there are a number of medium-sized 

businesses running apprenticeship 

programmes and with great success, with 

Smith & Byford Limited being one such 

example of this. 

Q The Coalition Government has 

announced that there are now 1.8 

million more apprenticeships. What is 

your response to that? And would you 

like the government to do more? 

The ambition of the government is to have 

about 2 million apprenticeships by the 

end of this parliament which, if achieved, 

would be a phenomenal figure. 

Apprenticeships have been a major 

feature of this government’s economic 

programme and there has been a dramatic 

increase in the amount of apprenticeships 

available to people of all ages. And I 

very much hope that that expansion 

of apprenticeship programmes can be 

sustained throughout the life of the next 

parliament to ensure that apprenticeships 

are not just something for young people 

but are seen to be a real benefit to people 

looking to change career mid-career and 

even to people in later life. 

Apprenticeships should be a priority 

for the government in the sense that 

government departments should be 

prepared to play their part in running and 

supporting apprenticeships and should be 

a priority for continued funding through 

the National Apprenticeships Service. 

Q What have you been doing in your 

constituency to increase awareness of 

the importance of apprenticeships? 

I visit a lot of local businesses and ask 

them whether they offer apprenticeship 

programmes or whether they have 

considered offering them. If they either 

do not offer them or have not considered 

offering them, I try to persuade the 

business concerned of the benefits of 

having apprentices. 

Also, I help to network businesses, which 

run apprenticeship programmes, in order 

for them to talk to each other about their 

experiences of apprenticeships. 

Finally, I ran an apprenticeship event 

at the Holiday Inn last year in which 

we advertised it to schools and local 

businesses; both students and businesses 

were able to learn about the options 

available to them through the event. 

(Additional material by Nermin Moody) 


Supporting 

tomorrow’s 

professionals 

today 

The CII is the world’s largest professional body for 

insurance and financial services. 

We understand how important it is to harness the 

talent of tomorrow to create a brighter future. 

That’s why we work with employers, schools and 

colleges to promote Apprenticeships. 

discover@cii.co.uk 

cii.co.uk/apprenticeships

ADVERTORIAL 

The need for Westminster to keep its 

sight on eye care 

Professor Carrie MacEwen, President of the Royal College of Ophthalmologists, discusses 

with Marcus Papadopoulos the existing provision in the NHS for eye health care 

Govia is the UK’s busiest rail operator. Over one 

million people use our services every day. 

We operate Southern, Southeastern, which 

includes the country’s only domestic high 

speed service and London Midland, where 

award winning marketing has helped drive 

passenger growth. 

Our commitment 

• Customer focus: we think like a passenger to improve 

our service to customers 

• Operational excellence: we manage complex networks 

every day efficiently and effectively 

• Partnership: we work collaboratively with partners 

such as Network Rail, the Department for Transport 

and Transport for London 

• Decentralisation: we run our rail franchises with 

empowered local managers responsible for delivery 

Govia is the alliance between Go-Ahead and Keolis. 

We combine 16 years of UK rail experience with 

world leading technology. 

1 million 16 years 

passengers every day UK rail experience 

Q Are patients receiving the eye care they 

need from current eye health services 

provided by the NHS? 

The answer to that question is both Yes 

and No. In many ways, the provision for 

eye care is extremely good, especially 

given that in the UK there are less than 

1,500 consultant ophthalmologists. Not 

that long ago, patients were losing their 

sight. Today, state-of-the-art technology, a 

better understanding of diseases, improved 

surgical techniques and new medical 

treatments contribute to saving sight at an 

early stage. Cataract surgery is the most 

common surgical procedure performed 

in the UK with more than 300,000 cases 

carried out last year. That is a life-changing 

operation which improves quality of life 

and reduces risk of falls and depression and 

benefits other clinical and social care areas 

in the NHS. 

We are, however, a victim of our own 

success - the sheer volume of patients 

requiring, and benefiting from eye care, 

means there is a lack of capacity to meet 

the demand. There are now delays for 

follow up appointments that are putting 

patients’ vision at risk. Many patients 

have chronic conditions associated with 

longevity and diseases such as diabetes, 

which inevitably consume time and 

resources. Also, there are groups of people 

who are unable to easily access ophthalmic 

care, such as residents in nursing homes, 

those with mental health issues and in social 

deprivation. 

Overall, one in every ten patients who 

attend hospital as an outpatient will 

be coming to the eye department for 

assessment or treatment. There are 7.5 

million people in the UK who attend the 

outpatient hospital eye service annually and 

750,000 patients who undergo ophthalmic 

surgery. 

The numbers increase relentlessly yearon-year. 

So, I would say that capacity to 

meet the demand is the main weakness in 

provision for eye care in the UK. 


Q How can the capacity issue be 

remedied? 

That is a complex challenge. All health 

professionals involved in eye care services 

already work well together, but more 

integration with communication systems 

that share patient information seamlessly 

are needed; as well as identifying the 

training needs of nurses, optometrists 

and orthoptists and continuing to develop 

ophthalmology-led guidelines, protocols 

and patient pathways. 

We also need data to be collected around 

the impact of inappropriate referrals, 

delayed follow up appointments and 

outcomes of treatment in the eye health 

service sector. 

That knowledge, together with staffing 

the right health professionals in the most 

appropriate locations, would enable us to 

deliver care in a much more efficient and 

cost effective fashion. It will help health 

departments and commissioning bodies 

make the right choices locally and nationally 

and reduce the number of patients who are 

referred unnecessarily to hospitals, freeing 

up valuable resources and funding. 

Q What is the role of The Royal College of 

Ophthalmologists in improving eye care 

services? 

As an independent charity, we pride 

ourselves on providing impartial and 

clinically-based evidence, putting patient 

care and safety at the heart of everything 

we do. 

The College is responsible for setting and 

maintaining standards in our specialty 

through education, training, professional 

examinations and provision of clinical 

guidelines. Consultant ophthalmologists 

have undergone at least 15 years of training 

before being considered for independent 

clinical practice. 

So, ophthalmologists really are at the 

forefront of eye health services because 

of that extensive training and experience. 

They are the experts when it comes to 

developing the most efficient and cost 

effective routes to solve the capacity issue. 

Q What can politicians at Westminster do 

to support the need to increase capacity? 

We need to work directly with politicians to 

ensure that they fully understand the issues 

affecting NHS eye health services and 

what can be done to optimise the current 

resources to meet the needs of patients. 

There is an enormous amount of dedicated 

work that ophthalmologists and other 

health care professionals do already in 

the NHS to deliver excellent patient eye 

care. The demand on UK eye services has 

increased by nearly 30 per cent in the past 6 

years and shows no sign of decreasing. 

We need politicians to take a broader 

view of eye care. I see the Royal College 

of Ophthalmologists as a bridge to all 

providers of eye care across the primarysecondary 

care interface. 

I would ask all political parties to pledge 

support to review eye health services as a 

priority within the NHS in order to optimise 

efficiency, funding and reduce preventable 

blindness. 


INTERVIEW: HP 

Strengthening the UK defence sector 

and strengthening UK security 

Simon Fovargue, Vice President and General Manager, UK Defence, HP, 

explains to Marcus Papadopoulos how HP is enhancing the British military 

Potential for further inward 

investment is huge 

ADVERTORIAL 

David Workman, Director General of the Confederation of Paper Industries, 

tells Keith Richmond why companies are calling for a level playing field on 

carbon pricing, energy taxation and renewable subsidies 

Q How have you seen IT change the 

defence sector over the years and what is 

HP’s view of the future? 

HP has been involved in the UK defence 

sector for over 25 years and we have seen 

three significant changes. Firstly, we saw 

a great deal of commercial off the shelf 

based IT systems, along with the early IT 

outsourcing contracts for logistics and 

personnel during the 1990s. 

Secondly, the Ministry of Defence entered 

the era of ‘Network-Enabled Capability’ 

underpinned by some large outsourcing 

contracts such as ‘The Defence Information 

Infrastructure’. Those contracts provided 

common, enterprise-wide IT from barracks 

to battle space on land and at sea. 

And finally, today we see a move to a more 

user-centric IT environment, incorporating 

as many industry standard components 

as possible, where mobility, information 

exploitation and security are key. That will 

be a more agile and flexible IT environment 

with users able to access information when 

they need it and wherever they need it. In 

HP, we call this the new style of IT. 

Q The British military has long been one of 

the most active armed forces in the world 

but now has to operate under increasing 

financial restrictions. What impact do you 

think that will have on IT? 

The impact will manifest itself in a number 

of areas as the MoD will require new 

approaches in order to provide more 

capability under greater financial restriction. 

A new approach to user specifications 

and a greater use of industry standard 

components will go a long way to address 

that. Tailoring IT capabilities specifically 

for the mission and environment combined 

with a new approach to delivery using more 

agile processes will enable quicker and more 

efficient implementation. 

Q Increasingly, the British military is going 


to have to do more with less and with a 

greater reliance on industry, especially 

where there are skills gaps. How is HP 

going to assist with that? 

HP was an early signatory to the Armed 

Forces’ Covenant and the Corporate 

Covenant. The purpose is to ensure military 

personnel are not disadvantaged in the 

commercial work place and are given extra 

help where needed. 

HP already employs a significant 

number of reservists and veterans, and 

our employment terms and conditions, 

as well as our ways of working, are suited 

to support the aims of the Covenant. We 

also support the MoD reservists’ agenda, 

committing to targets, conducting recruiting 

and briefing sessions, as well as looking to 

sponsor relevant higher education courses 

and places. In recognition of that, the MoD 

recently awarded HP with its Gold Level 

Award under the MoD’s new Employer 

Recognition Scheme. 

Q What role will information play in the 

battlefield of the future? 

Information capability is the new battlefield. 

The huge volume of data, devices, sensors 

and autonomous platforms that collect, 

store, process and transfer thousands 

of terabytes of data every hour on the 

battlefield mean that we can no longer 

rely on humans alone to make sense of it; 

we need technology, such as analytics and 

visualisation. 

The Internet of Things and the 

proliferation of sensors, devices, robots 

and unmanned vehicles create more 

vulnerabilities. That will require significant 

thought and investment in the approach, 

training and capabilities required for 

spectrum warfare not only by the specialists 

and Joint Cyber Unit, but more generally. 

As technology becomes more pervasive, 

every device provides an opportunity for 

a hacker to exploit. More importantly, 

the battle for the future is about making 

information harder to decode. Perhaps we 

are now entering the next Cold War through 

a data obfuscation arms race. 

Q Cyber has been called the “fifth theatre” 

of war. How can HP contribute to that 

critical area of capability? 

A number of government departments 

and IT and defence suppliers have invested 

in cyber capabilities, with the MoD seen 

as one of the leaders in this area across 

government. 

However, cyber defence capabilities are 

costly and increasingly rely on automation 

to handle the millions, if not hundreds of 

billions, of security events that are now 

detected. HP believes there is a need to 

invest not just in network level defences on 

the edge, but also in the means to process, 

manage, disseminate and exploit the data 

that these systems generate in a way that is 

meaningful to the business. 

The answer lies not just in technology 

but also in people and process. HP has the 

capability to advise on appropriate solutions 

whilst drawing on a wide range of specialist 

and small medium enterprises. 


How has the UK’s paper industry coped 

with the economic downturn since 2008? 

After a slump in the production of paper 

and board, in the immediate aftermath 

of the economic crisis, the picture is 

much improved, largely due to the 

commissioning of two new paper mills 

and investment in upgrading a number 

of existing factories, including the 

construction of two large combined heat 

and power plants. Recycling continues 

to grow, with the UK now recycling over 

70% of paper waste; an increasing number 

of mills now use only recovered fibre as 

their raw material. The UK’s first carton 

and paper cup recycling plants have also 

opened recently. But it needs to be borne 

in mind that we only produce about 

one-third of the paper consumed in the 

UK, so the potential for further inward 

investment is huge! 

What issues does the industry face now? 

In a nutshell, international competition, 

particularly from countries with lower 

energy and legislative compliance costs 

than the UK. We have witnessed an 

exceptional increase in regulation and 

legislation over the last decade, and it is 

getting worse. 

Over 2,300 new regulations and 

directives have emerged from Brussels 

over the last five years and the paper 

industry faces the daunting task of 

achieving 130 environmental targets 

by 2050. We are concerned about the 

widening gap in industrial energy costs 

between the UK and other European 

countries, and between Europe and the 

rest of the world. 

The other major issue concerns the cost 

and availability of our basic raw material 

– wood pulp. Increasing global demand 

from traditional wood-based industries, 


together with an alarming increase in 

the use of wood as biomass fuel in power 

production, is putting severe strain on 

the world’s forests. Maintaining a secure, 

consistent and affordable source of fresh 

water could also become an issue in the 

coming years. 

What measures should government 

introduce to enhance the industry’s 

competitiveness? 

We would like to see all political parties 

reiterate their support for energy 

intensive industries, such as paper, in their 

forthcoming manifestos. A radical plan 

is required to reduce the burden of the 

plethora of complex and often overlapping 

legislative measures we face. Specifically, 

we need an early repeal of the carbon 

price floor. 

At the very least, we need a commitment 

to retain and extend the current 

compensation package for EIIs. The 

carbon reduction commitment should be 

scrapped. And we need a level playing field 

on carbon pricing, energy taxation and 

renewable subsidies. 

Anything else? 

We need cost effective measures to 

decarbonise energy supply. It is no good 

setting arbitrary targets for specific 

technologies, together with strike prices, 

which will significantly increase the costs 

of energy. We need an energy mix that 

will produce low cost, secure supplies, 

even if that includes coal. A much more 

robust plan should be put in place for the 

environmentally responsible development 

of shale gas and other unconventional 

sources. Industrial energy efficiency 

targets should be set on the basis of 

each tonne of production and not by 

absolute caps. Much more support for the 

construction and operation of CHP plants 

needs to form a part of any future action 

plan. Carbon reduction targets should 

be accompanied by carbon consumption 

targets. It is pointless to claim success 

in achieving the former, if the latter 

continues to go up. 

Why do you want an Office of Resource 

Management? 

We need a radical overhaul of waste policy 

in the UK, which recognises the important 

role that end-of-life materials play in 

resource security. An Office of Resource 

Management would support a policy 

designed around the concept of a circular 

society and, within this framework, 

we need measures to ensure that no 

recyclable material ends up being used as 

fuel for Energy from Waste plants. 

• The Confederation of Paper Industries 

represents an industry with an aggregate 

annual turnover of £6.5 billion, 25,000 

direct and more than 100,000 indirect 

employees. For further information, call 

01793 889600, email: cpi@paper.org.uk or 

visit www.paper.org.uk 


INTERVIEW: SOCIETY AND COLLEGE OF RADIOGRAPHERS 

Why professional titles are important 

What’s in a job title? Richard Evans, Chief Executive Officer of the Society and 

College of Radiographers, tells Keith Richmond that our health care workforce 

isn’t just about doctors and nurses 

INTERVIEW: CII 

How Britain benefits from professional 

and vocational education 

Daniel Pedley, Public Affairs Manager of the Chartered Insurance Institute, 

explains to Marcus Papadopoulos the importance of professional and vocational 

education to the UK 

Q I thought radiographers were 

specialist doctors? 

Radiographers are allied health 

professionals, one of 12 distinct degree 

qualified professions regulated by the 

Health and Care Professions Council. 

Diagnostic radiographers obtain images 

for diagnosis and to guide clinical 

procedures. Therapeutic radiographers 

deliver doses of radiation to treat disease, 

particularly cancer. 

Q So what is wrong with using the term 

doctors and nurses to describe people 

who work in the NHS? 

There are few phrases more likely to 

irritate and, by implication, undervalue 

and discourage, the majority of people 

who make up the workforce of the 

National Health Service. 

Doctors and nurses are only part of a 

much larger team that includes hundreds 

of roles essential to delivering modern 

health services. The NHS is about team 

working. Nurses and doctors are, of 

course, important; but if politicians and 

civil servants effectively ignore the other 

professions they will become increasingly 

demotivated and disaffected. 

Q Aren’t they being a bit over sensitive? 

Professional qualifications, and the titles 

that define them, matter to the people 

who have worked hard for them. The 

political class is obsessed with titles and 

the status that goes with them, so why 

should the rest of us be any different? It 

is not just the feelings of radiographers 

and other professions that are hurt by lazy 

terminology. 

By not acknowledging the contribution 

health professionals and others make 

affects patient services, too. It is all 

too easy for commissioners and service 

providers to focus on the medical and 


nursing priorities so that opportunities 

for innovative and productive working 

by others are missed. There is evidence 

that this is happening within national 

workforce planning, meaning that 

shortages of essential skills will get worse. 

In a period of severe financial constraint 

it makes sense to ensure we do all we 

can to ensure that decisions on resources 

are balanced and strategic. If changing 

language might help, let’s do it! 

Q This is all a bit politically correct, isn’t 

it? 

Professor John Appleby, Chief Economist 

at The King’s Fund, says there is a clear link 

between NHS staff morale and the quality 

of care provided. Morale is perceived by 

senior hospital managers to be the top 

challenge for their organisation. As well 

as retention of disaffected staff, there are 

concerns about recruitment. Who wants 

to join a profession, or a group of staff, 

who are not properly acknowledged or 

recognised? 

Q Are there instances when a lack of 

recognition of a role can really affect 

services to patients? 

A good example is in emergency 

departments, where diagnostic 

radiographers are an essential part of the 

team. 

The accurate interpretation of the 

x-ray and other images that are needed 

in emergency medicine is obviously 

essential if patients are to be effectively 

and efficiently treated. Research shows 

that health outcomes and service 

efficiency are significantly improved if 

interpretation is provided by a suitably 

qualified professional at the time of the 

examination. 

A radiologist, or suitably trained 

radiographer, producing hot reports is 

good practice available in some, but by 

no means all, emergency departments. It 

is accepted that providing hot reporting 

improves efficiency and leads to better 

clinical outcomes and yet, too often, 

nothing is done about implementation 

because of a lack of support in training 

radiographers to take on the role. 

Other AHPs, such as physiotherapists 

and occupational therapists, can also make 

significant contributions to emergency 

care teams but, like radiographers, are 

often overlooked in service planning and in 

commissioning. 

Q Will changing terminology really help? 

What is really required is for policy makers, 

commissioners and NHS trust boards to 

wake up to the potential that is being 

under-utilised in the non-medical and 

nursing portions of the workforce. 

Everyone should be asking “could we 

be using AHPs more efficiently?” before 

asking the question “do we have sufficient 

doctors and nurses?” Remembering to 

use a more generic term such as health 

care professionals is a small change but 

may help us begin to change a damaging 

culture that undervalues and under utilises 

a key part of our health workforce. 


Q There is an increasing public policy 

focus on vocational education. What do 

you believe the value of professional and 

vocational education is to society and 

the economy? 

As the leading professional body for 

insurance and financial services, the 

Chartered Insurance Institute is well 

positioned to understand the value 

of professional education as well as 

vocational education more widely. There 

are benefits in both economic and social 

terms; it prepares learners with knowledge 

and practical experience of a particular 

subject/discipline, both of which are highly 

prized by employers. As apprenticeships 

develop in more traditional professions, 

such as financial services, that type of 

education will play the role of social 

change agent - opening doors, as well as 

people’s minds, to jobs and sectors which 

might previously have not been available. 

Q What role do professional bodies 

have in that arena? And what 

expertise do bodies like the CII have in 

supporting vocational education and 

apprenticeships? 

Professional bodies play a key role in 

promoting vocational education, in 

particular apprenticeships. Through 

strong, long established links with 

firms and individual members, we are 

able to highlight the benefits that such 

education can bring, and then support 

those wishing to get involved. Myths and 

misunderstandings about apprenticeships 

still exist and so we work to dispel these. 

In doing so, we are able to demonstrate 

what apprenticeships have to offer (to 

employers of all sizes). 

Many professional bodies have long 

histories and therefore experience of 

providing their sectors with what they 

need. The current fashion for employerled 

apprenticeships is a model we 

recognise and are very familiar with. The 


CII’s qualifications are designed, with the 

help of employers, to ensure relevance – 

and firms recognise their value. So, the 

inclusion of professional qualifications 

within insurance apprenticeships is a big 

part of the appeal to employers because 

they already understand it. 

Q Do you believe government 

understands the benefits of engaging 

with professional bodies? 

This government has recognised the 

role that professional bodies play, 

illustrated by their central role in the new 

apprenticeship system. However, there 

is still a little way to go with Whitehall’s 

understanding of the value professional 

bodies can contribute to the skills system. 

We come at no cost to the public purse 

but, through our Royal Charter, have a 

public interest remit that is at the heart 

of everything we do. Future policy should 

draw more on the expertise of professional 

bodies, which would, in turn, negate the 

need for quangos. 

Q Do you agree with the employer-led 

approach to skills development? 

It is right that employers are at the heart 

of the creation of new apprenticeship 

standards and the skills system in general. 

After all, they are at the coalface and 

know what is required. However, the 

focus needs to be on the future as well as 

the present. Professional bodies are able 

to help bring a sector wide view. We are 

also able to engage with those employers 

who have not done so in the past or who 

are willing but unsure about how to go 

about it. It is vital we work towards broad 

representation. 

Q As well as working with firms, does 

the CII work to raise awareness of 

careers in insurance? 

The CII is active in promoting insurance 

careers in schools in order to enthuse the 

next generation of talent. It is vital that 

people realise the breadth of opportunities 

available across insurance and our 

“Discover Risk” initiative, which promotes 

insurance careers to those in education, 

is one way of ensuring this. Good quality 

careers information is vital and it is 

important that everyone plays their part: 

government, employers and sector bodies. 


INTERVIEW: BOURNEMOUTH UNIVERSITY 

Helping us to eat more heathily 

Ensuring a fair education for all 

ADVERTORIAL 

Professor Heather Hartwell, of Bournemouth University, discusses with 

Marcus Papadopoulos an EU-funded project which aims to promote healthy 

eating across Europe 

Brett Wigdortz, Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Teach First, tells 

Keith Richmond about the huge potential for change in our education system 

Q. What is the VeggiEAT project? 

The VeggiEAT project aims to promote 

healthy eating throughout Europe and 

encourage more vegetable consumption 

across the lifespan, focusing on school 

children and the elderly. 

Within Europe, we do not eat enough 

fruit and vegetables and there are a 

multitude of associated health issues. 

There has been a lot of individual 

intervention – five a day for example – but 

this is looking at it from the premise that 

we are all eating out more and so the 

food service industry needs to take more 

responsibility. 

We hope VeggiEAT will eventually inform 

government policy across Europe and put 

the food service industry at the forefront 

of healthy eating interventions – while also 

giving consumers foods they will enjoy. 

Bournemouth University is leading the 

project, working with Aalborg University 

in Denmark and the University of Florence 

alongside industry partners Bonduelle and 

the Institute Paul Bocuse. 

VeggiEAT is funded by the European 

Commission through a Marie-Curie 

Industry and Academia Partnerships 

and Pathways grant and is due to be 

completed in September 2017. 

Q. What research activities are taking 

place? 

VeggiEAT is currently focused on reaching 

schoolchildren and the elderly, in places 

like school canteens and luncheon 

clubs, to see how tastes and vegetable 

consumption change throughout the 

lifespan. We have a number of different 

research projects taking place, focused 

on finding innovative ways to get people 

excited about eating vegetables. 


French company Bonduelle, which 

produces and sells processed vegetables, 

is providing samples for tasting - to see 

whether different characteristics like size, 

sweetness and texture change people’s 

enjoyment of vegetables. 

French food and hospitality training 

academy L’Institut Paul Bocuse will 

develop inventive new recipe ideas 

involving vegetables for consumers across 

Europe to taste and evaluate. 

It is really important that that the work 

carried out in universities is not isolated 

from how industry works - we can suggest 

solutions, but unless they are going to 

work in a real-life context, they are never 

going to be useful. That is one of the 

strengths of this research. 

Q. What do you hope to achieve? 

We are trying to promote a positive 

message around vegetables and look 

at ways to reach large numbers of the 

population. 

It is really about finding innovative ways 

of encouraging food service operators 

to provide new products, which will then 

tempt people into trying something 

different. 

Ultimately, I would like to go into a school 

in Birmingham, for example, and see 

something like sweetcorn mousse on the 

menu, which has been derived from our 

project, and then go to a care home in Italy 

and see that same sweetcorn mousse. 

But also see that people are enjoying 

it – that it is selling well and being eaten 

- because then it is of benefit to industry, 

as well. 

Q. How are you hoping the VeggiEAT 

project will inform and influence 

government policy across Europe? 

The outcomes of the research are 

expected to play a major part in 

contributing to the EU Consumer Policy 

strategy and to the Action Plan on Food 

and Nutrition Policy, by providing good 

evidence-based practice. 

The health promotion message 

historically has been very individual – but 

very few people reach the recommended 

five a day of fruit or vegetables, so it is just 

setting the public out to fail and become 

disenchanted. 

We hope to put food service at the 

forefront of intervention with regard to 

health because you can reach a huge 

section of the population by looking at 

where groups of people eat. It is a much 

better use of government resources than 

trying to reach people individually. 

We also hope the VeggiEAT project will 

bring benefits for European vegetable 

manufacturers, adding essential 

knowledge regarding consumer 

behaviour and so strengthening European 

competitiveness. 

To find out more about VeggiEAT visit: 

www.veggieat.eu 


Q What is Teach First? 

Whilst the last decade has seen major 

improvements in the quality of many 

schools, a significant proportion of young 

people are still being held back. Nearly 

half of all children claiming free school 

meals fail to get a single pass above a 

D grade at GCSE. That is just not good 

enough. Teach First, established in 2002, 

was founded on the belief that it does 

not have to be that way. We train and 

support committed individuals to become 

inspirational classroom leaders in schools 

serving low-income communities across 

England and Wales. 

We have helped raise the status of the 

teaching profession to improve the results 

and performance of schools up and down 

the country. We have built a movement 

of leaders across education, and broader 

society, committed to working with 

others in the sector to try to ensure a fair 

education for all. 

Q What difference have you made over 

the last decade? 

I am most proud of the difference our 

teachers, along with their colleagues, 

are making to pupils every day. Last 

year, independent research showed that 

our teachers are helping to improve 

teenagers’ exam results and increase the 

performance of their schools. 

Our roots lie in London, where we have 

placed more than 3,000 teachers in the 

most disadvantaged areas of the capital 

over the last ten years. We have helped 

play a fundamental part in the capital’s 

incredible transformation from the worst, 

to the country’s best, area for schools. 

Q What changes have you seen? 

When we started Teach First, I was told by 

the careers director at one of the country’s 

top universities that top graduates would 


never choose to teach in schools serving 

disadvantaged communities. Fast-forward 

12 years and teaching in challenging 

schools is now the career choice for many 

of this country’s brightest minds. Teach 

First is ranked 2nd in The Times Top 100 

graduate employers and, since 2003, we’ve 

been able to work with almost 1 million 

young people in over 1,000 schools serving 

the lowest-income communities. 

By 2018 we hope to have a movement of 

10,000 people who will have completed 

our programme. 

Most stay in teaching in low-income 

schools and a third of those are already in 

a middle or senior leadership position, a 

number we expect to grow substantially 

in the years to come. And many are also 

working at the heart of government 

and business to improve education and 

transforming corporate engagement with 

schools in this country. 

That’s huge potential for transformation 

change right across the whole education 

system. 

Q What are the biggest challenges 

facing young people? 

I believe we could be on the edge of a 

truly world class education system. But 

we won’t get there until every young 

person, no matter their background, is 

given a fair chance. The new challenge is 

no longer just in our cities, but in coastal 

towns and rural areas, where few teachers 

are choosing to teach and many poorer 

children are falling behind. As a result, 

only one in three children from lowincome 

backgrounds are achieving the 

basic level of learning needed to start 

school. 

Q How can you address those issues? 

From next year we’ll be extending our 

reach to work with more schools in areas 

like the East of England and coastal 

Yorkshire. We know that if we want to 

close the gap between children from 

different backgrounds, we’ve got to 

start young. I also think there are big 

opportunities to learn from our expertise 

in training new teachers to support the 

wider profession. Beyond their own 

teacher, there’s no one more important 

to a child’s education than their head 

teacher. We already have 13 heads who are 

ambassadors of Teach First and starting 

to have some real success, so I’m really 

excited about the prospect of many more. 

Q But you cannot do it on your own? 

No, the challenges ahead are bigger than 

Teach First! It’s going to need schools, 

government, business and charities to 

work together. We’ve just launched the 

Fair Education Alliance which brings 

together 25 organisations committed to 

ensuring that how much your parents 

earn doesn’t dictate how well you do at 

school and in life. I’d love to see all parties, 

schools and the education community 

unite behind them. 


ADVERTORIAL 

Engineering Britain’s economic 

recovery 

Sir Alan Rudge, President of the ERA Foundation, explains to Marcus 

Papadopoulos the critical importance of engineering to the UK economy 

Q You are known as a strong advocate 

for manufacturing. Does the UK really 

need to stay in manufacturing when the 

service sector is so strong and returning 

to robust health? 

It has been suggested over recent 

decades that the UK is a post-industrial 

economy based on financial and business 

services. But it is time for a reality check. 

Recent ONS data shows that in 2013 

the current account deficit was £71.1 

billion; in 2013 there was a trade deficit 

in goods of £107.8 billion – the worst 

on record, with the largest share of the 

deficit related to finished manufactured 

goods. The UK has been in deficit for 

approximately 17 years now - and the 

deficit is becoming worse. Of course, we 

need a strong financial sector, not least 

to serve UK industry and citizens. But we 

need to return to a balanced economy 

with productive industry and especially 

manufacturing at its heart. The UK’s 

current account continues to be balanced 

by the sale of debt and assets. That 

cannot go on; eventually all the “family 

silver” will have gone unless the trade 

deficit is eliminated. 

There have been some great 

manufacturing success stories in recent 

years, and we should be proud of these. 

Engineering companies such as BAE 

Systems, Rolls Royce, GKN, JCB, JLR and 

others are world beaters. And we retain 

a strong pharmaceutical sector. It is not 

an issue of the quality of our industry – 

it is an issue of quantity; we simply do 

not have enough world beaters with 

manufacturing having been neglected for 

too long. Although manufacturing now 

constitutes only 11 per cent of GDP, down 

from over 25 per cent twenty years ago, 

we are still dependent upon it for half the 

nation’s exports. The UK was the world’s 

fourth largest manufacturing nation as 


recently as 1998, but it is now barely in 

the top ten. There is no disguising the 

damage done by decades of neglect of 

manufacturing by successive government 

administrations. 

Q We are told that the UK has a 

strong research base. How wide 

is the gap between research and 

commercialisation in engineering? 

There is a very big gap and the gap is, 

fundamentally speaking, not a weakness 

in engineering research capability; 

rather, it is about weakness in industry 

and financing between universities and 

applications in industry particularly the 

SME sector. A major concern for SMEs 

is patient finance to allow them to grow. 

In recent reports we have highlighted 

weaknesses of government policies and 

in the availability of finance for SMEs. 

The Government could do more in 

loan guarantees and providing special 

measures to allow SMEs to compete 

for Government contracts. SMEs are 


very important in the economy and 

are the main source of industrial job 

creation; they need to be nurtured and 

encouraged. 

Q Are energy costs as critical for 

retaining manufacturing in the UK as 

you and others claim? 

In 2010, we carried out a survey of top 

industrialists asking them to identify the 

key parameters affecting their businesses. 

One of their principal concerns was the 

cost and security of supply of energy, 

which underpins all industrial activity. If 

the UK is to reverse its fortunes, urgent 

attention needs to be placed on reducing 

energy costs and securing supply. Energy 

production and security policies need 

to be drastically overhauled, with a key 

priority being a significant reduction of 

the green taxes that were introduced 

as part of the 2008 Climate Change 

Act and which have added significantly 

to industry’s fuel bills (with escalating 

increases over the coming years). The 

costs apportioned to environmental taxes 

puts the UK at a disadvantage compared 

with our major trading partners. 17.5 per 

cent of UK energy costs can be attributed 

to Green taxes, compared with 7.3 per 

cent in Germany and 5 per cent in France. 

The UK cannot continue to afford the 

escalating penalties of the 2008 Climate 

Change Act. Without competitive energy 

costs, industrial capacity will move to 

lower cost locations and this has already 

commenced with the loss of major high 

energy using industries. That loss of 

important industries will continue unless 

energy costs become more competitive. 

Q Why do you advocate the 

development of shale as an energy 

source when the Government has 

already invested so heavily in green 

sources of energy, especially wind and 

solar? 

As coal-powered power stations are 

closed and the ageing nuclear stock is 

patched together until an overdue new 

generation of reactors is constructed, 

alternative energy sources must be found. 

Many believe the answer lies with wind 

farms and solar panels, and they have 

certainly received very generous support 

from Government. They are expensive 

to build and run, and would not be 


competitive without high subsidies. More 

critically, they are intermittent generators 

incapable of providing a reliable source 

of base-load energy. There are increasing 

concerns about the reliability of wind 

turbines, which are difficult to service 

when off-shore. 

Shale gas, on the other hand, offers a 

secure and competitively priced supply 

of energy with significantly reduce CO2 

emissions. The location of major shale 

gas reserves is reshaping world politics 

and the associated flow of wealth. As a 

consequence of its shale gas revolution, 

the US has reduced its energy costs by 

40 per cent and is becoming a net energy 

exporter and revitalising its industrial 

base. No longer will middle-eastern oil or 

Russian gas shape geo-politics. 

Surveys have revealed trillions of cubic 

feet of shale gas lying beneath and 

around these islands. With access to 

that, the UK has the potential to secure 

its energy supply, revitalise and sustain 

its industries and thereby reduce the 

trade of goods deficit. Shale will be a 

game changer. We are in a very fortunate 

position, indeed, to have that valuable 

resource beneath our feet. 

Q But is shale safe? There is genuine 

concern about pollution of water. 

For UK industry to compete globally, 

shale gas must be an important part 

of the energy mix. Fracking has been 

unfairly subjected to bad press, including 

accusations that it is responsible for 

public health problems, polluted water 

supplies and significant depletion of 

water resources. There were some early 

problems in the US which have now 

been overcome. In general, many of 

the aspersions have been found to be 

untrue or exaggerated; for example, 

groundwater contamination by fracking 

fluid is possible but very unlikely if proper 

procedures are followed. One can be sure 

that UK regulation will be robust and will 

deliver safe fracking. 

Q Do we really want to have shale 

drilling despoiling this “green and 

pleasant land”? 

A completed fracking site will be no 

larger than a football pitch. With suitable 

ADVERTORIAL 

landscaping and painting of hardware, 

the impact can be minimised. From the 

Purbeck Hills, it is almost impossible to 

see the oil drilling on the shores of Poole 

Harbour because of careful landscaping. 

A shale site will certainly be very much 

less intrusive than a wind farm! Of course, 

we must do all we can to protect the 

environment. But poor nations cannot 

save anything. If we are to save the 

environment, we must first save the 

economy. 

Q Are you optimistic or pessimistic 

about the UK’s energy and industrial 

futures? 

The current huge deficit in the UK’s 

Balance of Trade makes stimulation and 

re-growth of productive industry critical 

to our economic future. Energy costs 

and security of supply are crucial in that 

regard, with significant impact upon 

industry and the nation’s social stability. 

If we do not face up to our perilous 

financial position by reinvigorating 

industry and reducing energy costs, then 

I am pessimistic. But with its shale gas 

deposits, ‘Lucky Britain’ has the potential 

to lower its energy costs, improve energy 

security, revitalise industry and contribute 

directly and indirectly to reducing the 

trade deficit. That is an opportunity that 

must not be missed. If we can seize the 

opportunity, then I will be optimistic. 

Q Finally, can you elaborate on how 

the ERA Foundation works with 

parliamentarians? 

We attend a number of different 

parliamentary committees and helped 

set up one on manufacturing, which is a 

cross-party committee with the aim of 

informing Westminster’s politicians about 

manufacturing. When one considers 

that there are very few people in the 

House of Commons who know about 

manufacturing or industry, it is imperative 

for there to be an education process for 

MPs about industry, what matters to it 

and what its needs are. We are always 

willing to speak to parliamentarians and 

give them the evidence we have gathered 

on the importance of engineering 

and productive industry to the future 

prosperity of the UK and the quality of life 

of its citizens. 


ADVERTORIAL 

Caring for unpaid carers 

Thea Stein, Chief Executive of the Carers Trust, explains to Marcus Papadopoulos 

about the trying circumstances which unpaid carers experience on a daily basis 

Fighting against the scourge of 

malaria in the world 

ADVERTORIAL 

Dr David Reddy, Chief Executive Officer of Medicines for Malaria Venture, tells 

Marcus Papadopoulos about the new drugs which are fighting malaria 

Q How has the role of unpaid family carers 

changed in recent years? 

The role of unpaid family carers, of all ages, 

has become far more complicated and 

pressurised than ever before (and it should 

be remembered that a carer can be a child as 

well as an adult). If I was to sum up the new 

situation for unpaid carers in the UK, I would 

say that as the welfare state contracts, be it 

social care or health care, the need for the 

family to support the person they love and 

want to support becomes all the greater. 

Q What sort of challenges are unpaid 

carers facing? 

The challenges can vary from one unpaid 

carer to another. A carer may have to 

stop working because their loved one 

requires constant care and companionship 

and their employer is either unwilling or 

unable to offer flexible working hours. In 

that situation, the carer’s life changes 

extraordinarily and, consequentially, their 

financial situation changes, too, and they 

can end up in poverty. 

The issue of being a full-time, 24/7 carer 

can be wrought with financial challenges 

and financial difficulties. What I can say 

with certainty is that for the vast majority 

of carers who undertake a significant role 

in caring for a loved one, the role brings 

with it a massive emotional burden, with 

mental health always being compromised; 

for example, through staying awake at 

night out of fear that the loved one will 

commit suicide. Further to that, caring has a 

significant physical health cost; for instance, 

through the constant lifting and handling of 

someone. So, in short, the challenges are 

significant and can vary. 

Q How are young carers and young adult 

carers effected? 

They are effected in a huge way. At Carers 

Trust, we define young carers as being 

between the ages of 5 and 17, and young 


adult carers as being between the ages 

of 18 to 24, and we believe that there 

are approximately 700,000 in the UK. 

That group is becoming more and more 

understood and known both to services 

and to society. Those young people have 

probably lived in a family set-up in which 

they have maintained a significant caring 

role for many years. 

So, we could be talking about an eleven 

year old child who is carrying out all the 

household chores (including the cooking) 

and is looking after their younger brother 

or sister; or we could be talking about a 

child who is looking after a parent who has 

a serious mental illness and is therefore 

worrying about them. 

Young carers often do not have anyone 

to talk to about what they are doing at 

home and often miss days from school, 

which, in turn, has a detrimental effect on 

their education. By the time a young carer 

approaches the age of 18 or 19, they cannot 

even contemplate going off to university 

because they have become conditioned to 

see their life as being at home, caring for 

their loved one. 

Q What is your stance on the legislation 

covering unpaid family carers? 

The Care Act 2014 is absolutely fantastic – it 

gives carers a right to an assessment, it gives 

carers a right to a personalised budget and 

it gives carers a right to breaks. But, we, at 

Carers Trust, question the level of funding 

which is currently available to support those 

rights and whether the budget really will 

allow for them to be implemented. 

Q What role can the NHS play? 

The role is massive. I constantly tell the 

NHS that supporting family carers not only 

makes moral sense but it also makes fiscal 

sense. If people who are being cared for stay 

out of hospital for longer and are on fewer 

medications, then the costs to the NHS will 

dramatically decrease. 

Q How is the Carers Trust contributing to 

all of this? 

In every possible way. We give interviews 

to the media, such as this one. We work at 

a policy level advising the Department of 

Health as a strategic partner, and we work 

with the Department for Education to ensure 

that the measure of relevant frameworks 

are appropriate for carers. We also provide 

services on the internet whereby we 

offer advice to carers on a whole host of 

issues. On top of that, we support and 

facilitate a network of 176 partners across 

the UK which provide local services - from 

respite care to emergency care, to ensure 

that carers receive all necessary support. 

Furthermore, we carry out a lot of work with 

parliamentarians from three main parties. It 

is fair to say that the issue of unpaid carers 

is an issue understood by many but not all 

at Westminster What parliamentarians 

need to understand is that they all have 

unpaid carers in their constituencies. 

Understanding the impact of unpaid carers, 

what they are doing and how the NHS and 

social care services would collapse if they 

stopped, is hugely significant. 


Q What is the role of Medicines for 

Malaria Venture? 

Medicines for Malaria Venture is a leading 

product development partnership in the 

field of anti-malarial drug research and 

development. Its mission is to reduce the 

burden of malaria in disease-endemic 

countries by discovering, developing and 

facilitating delivery of new, effective and 

affordable antimalarial drugs. Its vision is 

a world in which innovative medicines will 

cure and protect the vulnerable and underserved 

populations at risk of malaria, and 

ultimately help to eradicate this terrible 

disease. 

Q What progress has MMV made in 

developing new affordable anti-malarial 

drugs? 

MMV and its partners have delivered 

four new products since foundation in 

1999. One of those, Coartem Dispersible 

(artemether-lumefantrine with Novartis), 

has been specifically tailored to meet the 

needs of young children with malaria, who 

sadly bear the brunt of the malaria burden. 

A second, injectable artesunate (with 

Guilin Pharmaceutical), is a life-saving 

medicine that treats those suffering from 

a severe and often deadly form of malaria. 

Two artemisinin combination therapies 

(ACTs) (Pyramax; pyronaridine-artesunate, 

with Shin Poong, and Eurartesim; 

dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine with 

Sigma Tau) have also been developed. 

Together with previously available ACTs, 

those new additions provide policy-makers 

and doctors with a choice from which 

to select the best medicines for their 

patients. 

In addition to that, with the largest 

portfolio of anti-malarial R&D projects 

ever assembled, of over 65 projects, 

MMV has seven new drugs in clinical 

development addressing unmet medical 

needs in malaria, including critical new 

medicines for children and relapsing 

malaria, and drugs which could support 

the elimination/eradication agenda. 

Q How can that progress be sustained? 

Together with our partners, MMV will 

sustain the progress providing we meet 


our fundraising goals. Our 13 current 

funders are a lifeline and include 

governments, private companies 

and philanthropic foundations. The 

UK Department for International 

Development, for example, has been 

a long-term supporter of MMV. Their 

commitment to malaria elimination/ 

eradication equals ours and their belief 

in MMV’s ability to contribute to the 

eradication agenda drives us from one 

success to the next, taking us closer to 

realising our vision. We strive to sustain 

and grow our funding support. 

Further to that, MMV’s success in 

research and access and product 

management comes not only from its 

internal science and access expertise 

but also from an extensive partnership 

network of over 300 pharmaceutical, 

academic and endemic-country partners 

in 50 countries. Their contribution is 

invaluable. 

Q What new anti-malarials are expected 

over the next decade? And how would 

those target malaria eradication? 

Several new anti-malarials are expected 

to reach the market over the next decade. 

In the short-term, there are two childfriendly 

formulations of the recently 

approved ACTs, Pyramax and Eurartesim 

(mentioned above). We are working with 

partners on a child-friendly formulation 

of a preventive drug regimen to protect 

children in areas of high seasonal malaria 

in the Sahel sub-region of Africa. We are 

also working on the prequalification of 

rectal artesunate, a pre-referral form of 

treatment that has important life-saving 

potential for children threatened by severe 

malaria. 

For the medium and long-term, we are 

developing a first and next-generation, 

single-dose therapy which can cure all 

forms of malaria, provide some protection 

from subsequent infections and block 

its transmission to others. That is an 

ambitious target, yet one that the global 

malaria community believes is critical to 

make eradication feasible. 

A front-runner compound in our portfolio, 

OZ439, has shown great potential as a 

single-dose cure against the blood stage of 

malaria parasites. It is set to enter Phase 

IIB trials with a partner drug in 2014. There 

is also encouraging data to suggest that 

the compound may be efficacious against 

potential artemisinin-resistant strains of 

malaria. 

Tafenoquine, in development with 

GSK, is our lead contender for a radical 

cure of relapsing P. vivax malaria and it, 

too, shows potential as a single-dose 

cure. Tafenoquine has recently received 

Breakthrough designation from the 

US Food and Drug Administration and 

entered Phase III trials in April 2014 and, 

if successful, could become the only 

new drug in 60 years approved to cure 

relapsing malaria. 

Q How can we ensure sustained 

investment into new tools to continue 

the fight against the disease? 

There are conflicting pulls on overseas 

development funding and it is essential 

that we raise awareness about the urgent 

needs of malaria control and eradication 

to governments, companies with a strong 

sense of corporate social responsibility, 

and philanthropists who have a view of 

the future similar to ours. Thankfully, our 

partnership network is self-motivated and 

as keen as MMV to work towards a malaria 

free world. 


INTERVIEW: CUADRILLA 

Drilling for the future 

INTERVIEW: UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON 

Crossing the Valley of Death 

Francis Egan, Chief Executive of Cuadrilla, explains to Marcus Papadopoulos 

why shale gas is a viable option for the United Kingdom 

Don Spalinger, Director of Research & Innovation Services at the University of 

Southampton, explains to Keith Richmond how academia might have discovered 

an ICURe for Britain’s economic ills 

Q Who are Cuadrilla? 

Cuadrilla Resources is a British energy 

exploration company which was formed in 

2007, bringing together experts to explore 

for and recover hydrocarbons (natural gas 

and oil) from so called “unconventional” 

sources; for example, shale rock. 

Currently, our main focus within the UK 

is exploration work within our 1,200km2 

exploration licence area in the Lancashire 

Bowland basin. We also operate a number 

of other exploration licences in Sussex, 

Holland and Poland. 

Earlier this summer, we applied for 

planning permission to drill, hydraulically 

fracture and test the flow of natural gas 

on two proposed shalesites in Lancashire. 

If approved, those are likely to be the first 

tests of shale gas flow rates within the UK. 

Q How does Cuadrilla assess shale gas 

and its possible impact on the UK’s 

energy sector? 

Together with continued investment in 

nuclear and renewable energy sources, 

we believe that shale gas represents the 

best opportunity we have to secure the 

UK’s electricity and heating demands from 

indigenous sources. That would have the 

much needed benefits of reducing reliance 

on imported coal and gas, reducing the 

UK’s carbon emissions while maintaining 

competitiveness and economic growth. 

The British Geological Survey has 

assessed that there is 1,300 trillion cubic 

feet of natural gas contained within the 

shale rock deepunderneath the ground in 

northern England alone. 

If we can extract just 10 per cent of that 

gas, we would meet the UK’s current 

gas demands for more than 40 years. It 

is important to note that that is not just 

about electricity generation - two-thirds 

of the UK’s gas requirements are used for 

heating our homes, firing our cookers and 

fuelling UK industry. 

Q Are there any steps which Cuadrilla 

would like the Government to take in the 

energy sector? 

Within the UK, there is widespread 

political support for shale gas exploration. 


All three main political parties have 

expressed support for a properly regulated 

shale gas industry and a report earlier this 

year by the cross-party House of Lords 

Economic Affairs Committee stated that 

the appraisal and development of the UK’s 

shale gas and oil resources is a national 

priority. 

As the UK shale industry develops, we 

would like to see ongoing political support 

to streamline the regulations which 

companies like Cuadrilla must follow 

before commencing exploratory work. The 

UK’s regulatory environment for oil and 

gas exploration and production is highly 

regarded internationally as one of the 

most stringent in the world. 

However, we agree with the House of 

Lords Economic Affairs Committee that 

there is scope for making the system 

more efficient without compromising its 

effectiveness. 

Q How can the development of a shale 

gas industry benefit the UK? 

There is widespread acceptance that 

the development of a British shale 

gas industry has the potential to bring 

significant capital investment, community 

benefits and employment opportunities 

for local people, as well as for the northwest 

and national economies. 

Local communities will receive £100,000 

for every exploration well site that is 

hydraulically fractured in addition to one 

per cent of revenues from future shale gas 

production. 

That could equate to over £1 billion over 

a 20 to 30 year production timescale in 

Cuadrilla’s Bowland Basin licence area 

alone. 

Tens of thousands of new jobs, across a 

wide range of different professions, could 

also be created. Various studies have 

confirmed that with estimates ranging 

from 25,000 through to 100,000 jobs, 

both in north-west England, where they 

are really needed, and across the whole 

country. 

Shale gas could also make a big 

difference to the UK’s finances. The 

accountancy firm Deloitte predicts that 

tax income from our shrinking North Sea 

oil and gas fields will fall by £7.5 billion 

to £3.7 billion by 2018. The sooner our 

industry gets going with exploring for 

shale gas, the sooner it can provide cash 

to the government through taxes which 

could help the nation pay for vital public 

services, like the National Health Service 

and schools. 

Q What is next for shale gas in the UK? 

It is still relatively early days in this 

country, but the technology has been 

around for more than fifty years. That 

explains why the United States has 

recently seen big reductions in their gas 

prices and carbon emissions. 

We do not know yet if the same thing can 

happen here and more broadly in Europe. 

We need to start drilling a small number 

of exploratory wells to measure how much 

gas can be safely extracted before we can 

say for sure. Drilling and testing the flow 

of gas from those shale wells in a safe and 

responsible way is our immediate focus. 

Watch this space for more news! 


Q What is the role of universities in 

driving economic growth? 

Research and science are at the 

fountainhead of the UK’s growth and 

future prosperity. The UK currently 

spends around 1.7% of GDP on research 

and development, compared to double 

that figure for many other developed 

and developing countries. The UK must 

increase its expenditure on R&D, which 

means government must increase 

the science budget to enable more 

fundamental research that creates new 

knowledge, and increase innovation 

funding to facilitate the conversion of the 

scientific research into technologies that 

create new business opportunities. 

Companies must also increase their 

R&D expenditure to convert those 

opportunities into new products and 

services that will generate economic 

growth. Universities are the primary 

organisations that undertake scientific 

research and collaborate with industry 

to drive the innovation that creates 

products and services. At the University 

of Southampton we are working with 

industry to create new products and 

continually improve the services that drive 

economic growth. 

Q The Valley of Death is often cited as 

the major obstacle to realising value 

from academic research. How do we get 

through the Valley of Death? 

I have spent most of my life taking new 

innovations across the Valley of Death! 

The House of Commons Science and 

Technology Select Committee’s inquiry, 

Bridging the Valley of Death, concluded 

that there were a number of system 

failures to be overcome. 

They reported that research funding 

tends to stop before the idea is 

commercially validated; that most 

researchers are not entrepreneurs; 


that those researchers that want to be 

entrepreneurial lack the skills and support 

to do so; and that companies that spin out 

of universities are seen as high risk and 

struggle to raise the financing to build the 

company. 

Q What can you do about that? 

We are about to embark on a new 

approach that will address most of these 

system failures. In co-operation with 

the SETsquared Partnership of which 

Southampton is a member, the Higher 

Education Funding Council for England, 

and the Technology Strategy Board, we 

are going to pilot a new concept called 

Innovation and Commercialisation of 

University Research. 

ICURe focuses on research activities 

being undertaken in universities which are 

producing results that show commercial 

potential and then quickly go into the 

marketplace and validate that there is a 

market for the products or services that 

utilise the results of that research. We are 

not going to try and turn senior academics 

into entrepreneurs, but rather focus 

on post-doctorate and post-graduate 

researchers who do not see academia 

as their career, but would rather pursue 

the commercialisation of the research 

on which they have been working, 

becoming an entrepreneurial lead for the 

commercialisation. 

Q How does it work? 

ICURe starts by creating a three person 

team, consisting of the entrepreneurial 

lead and the senior academic of the 

research team, along with a business 

mentor from the relevant industrial sector. 

There is a three to six month activity of 

the team undertaking an intense market 

assessment to validate the commercial 

viability of the research results, with the 

entrepreneurial lead talking with over 

100 potential customers. If the product 

or service gains market validation, a start 

up team will begin pulling a business 

plan together. Commercialisation staff 

from SETsquared universities, along with 

SETsquared incubators, will work with 

each team so that they can be fast tracked 

into creating a start-up company. TSB 

will be engaged in the process to provide 

support and guidance as appropriate for 

funding the early stages of the company. 

We believe the ICURe pilot will confirm 

that this approach will dramatically 

improve the efficiency and effectiveness 

of crossing the Valley of Death. 

Q SETsquared incubators are good, 

aren’t they? 

Yes. The 2014 UBI index of university 

business incubators assessed 800 

university incubators, and benchmarked 

the best 300, from 67 countries, and 

SETsquared was ranked second globally 

after Rice University in Houston. The 

SETsquared Partnership consists of the 

universities of Bath, Bristol, Exeter, Surrey, 

and Southampton and, in 10 years, more 

than 1,000 high tech start-ups have been 

supported in their early stages, and £1 

billion of investment has been secured by 

them. 


ADVERTORIAL 

Confronting a major challenge to the 

NHS: hearing loss 

Colin Campbell, Director of Professional Services and NHS at Specsavers 

Hearcare, tells Marcus Papadopoulos about how best to approach age-related 

hearing loss in the UK 

INTERVIEW: HEATHROW AIRPORT 

Making the connection – securing the 

UK’s economic future in the world 

Andrew Macmillan, Director of Strategy at Heathrow Airport, discusses with 

Marcus Papadopoulos how Heathrow can play a bigger role in helping Britain 

win the global race and succeed as a centre for business and trade 

Q What is the economic impact of agerelated 

hearing loss? 

In 2010-11, NHS England spent £450 

million managing hearing problems, a 

figure that will inevitably increase as the 

population ages. There are also longterm 

costs that need to be considered as 

comorbidities begin to develop. 

So, for example, age-related hearing loss 

increases the risk of depression, dementia 

and falls. Treating depression costs the 

NHS more than £520 million a year: £237 

million for hospital care, £230 million for 

antidepressants, £46 million for doctors’ 

time and £9 million for outpatients’ 

appointments. Preventing depression 

by addressing hearing loss, as well as 

other risk factors, will help reduce the 

clinical and economic burden imposed by 

depression. 

Q What do you think are the main 

patient and commissioner benefits of a 

community-based adult hearing service 

and what differences do they make to 

commissioners’ population groups? 

For patients, community-based hearing 

care services provide greater accessibility 

and flexible appointment times. Also, 

importantly, the stigma of wearing 

hearing aids is removed, which is often 

associated with treatment in a medical 

setting. Typically, our patients do not see 

hearing loss as an illness, so treatment 

in a community setting is welcomed. 

Furthermore, with walk-in access to 

unlimited aftercare, patients are more 

likely to adapt to, and continue to use, 

their new hearing aids, rather than 

abandon them out of frustration or a lack 

of access to immediate aftercare. 

Q How has the commissioning of 

community-based hearing services been 

going? 

All areas are performing particularly 

well with high numbers of GPs referring 

patients. Commissioning groups are very 

committed to delivering patient care 

where patients want it and, crucially, 

improving outcomes which are reflected in 

the communications they carry out at both 

GP and patient level. 


We have found that once they have 

information on the nature of age-related 

hearing loss, GPs are open to change to 

improve patient service. GPs recognising 

that age-related hearing loss is a condition 

that will come to us all rather than an 

acute or chronic illness has led them to 

view this as much less contentious than 

many of the other changes happening 

across our NHS – this a condition that is 

best solved outside of the hospital. 

Q What has been challenging? Why do 

you think some CCGs are still reluctant 

to commission community-based 

hearing services? 

This is more difficult to answer as, on the 

face of it, the benefits of communitybased 

hearing care appear hard to ignore. 

Patients prefer a localised non-medical 

service to access hearing services and GPs 

recognise that a non-medical intervention 

which patients can access in a high street 

setting, with unlimited access to aftercare, 

does improve outcomes. 

However, we are aware that in a 

period when one of the most complex 

organisations in the world is undergoing 

the most significant restructure since its 

inception, CCGs have had to prioritise 

other services. It is our job, and the job 

of organisations such as the National 

Community Hearing Association to ensure 

that commissioning adult hearing services 

provides a quick win for CCGs, for GPs and, 

most importantly, for patients and the 

local community. 

Q What four key points would you make 

to commissioners to help them offer the 

best service possible for their population 

groups? 

Firstly, consult with patients and look 

at what the deliverables are for patient 

outcomes. 

Secondly, take a look at the service you 

are providing and ask yourself what is the 

opportunity to meet saving requirements, 

while still driving quality outcomes 

upwards. 

Thirdly, read the Hear and Now report, 

which explores the economic, physical 

and psychological impact of age-related 

hearing loss and challenge yourselves and 

your providers to ensure you are making as 

many savings and efficiencies as possible 

in other areas, as well as audilogy, which 

will ultimately benefit your patients. 

And finally, commissioning age-related 

services in the community is relatively 

simple and a straightforward process 

which can deliver real savings and real 

benefits to the local community. 


Q What is a hub airport and who are 

Heathrow Airport’s competitors? 

A hub airport is a different type of airport. 

What a hub airport does is provide direct 

long-haul connections for the benefit of 

the country where it is based. There are 

only a few such airports around the world. 

For the UK, that hub airport is Heathrow. 

Four out of five long-haul flights in the 

UK arrive at and depart from Heathrow 

Airport. The economics of a hub airport 

allow a direct flight to take place which 

would not have been commercially viable 

otherwise. 

As to who Heathrow’s competitors are, 

these are Schiphol, Charles de Gaulle 

and Frankfurt airports and, to a lesser 

degree, Dubai and Istanbul. Those nations 

understand the value that hosting a 

hub brings for them. You can see the 

competition very clearly in the way the 

Chief Executive Officer of Schiphol airport 

expressed his gratitude to how the UK 

Government has avoided taking a decision 

on airport capacity for so long. That has 

meant more business for his airport, more 

direct international flights from Schiphol 

and thereby more business for the Dutch 

economy. 

Q Why do long-haul flights matter to 

the UK? 

They matter because they provide direct 

connections to those countries in the 

world whose economies are already 

becoming the new global economic 

centres. Economists forecast that 

two-thirds of future global economic 

growth will be in Asia and the Americas 

for the next generation. And the Chinese 

economy will soon be the largest in 

the world. Britain needs to be directly 

connected to those places to thrive. 

Long-haul flights will boost Britain’s trade, 

leading to more investment and more 

tourism which, in turn, will benefit the 

British economy and create jobs. If the UK 


does not increase the capacity for longhaul 

flights, this will have a detrimental 

effect on the British economy. We see this 

now with Chinese firms choosing to set up, 

invest and create jobs in France due to the 

number of direct flights between China 

and Paris. 

For 300 years, Britain has had the world’s 

leading international port or, more 

recently, airport. This year, we will lose 

that crown to Dubai because Heathrow, 

our only hub airport, is full. That is why 

we back the Airports Commission – so 

a positive decision can be made for the 

future of UK PLC. 

Q What would be the impact of 

Heathrow expansion for the UK 

economy? 

We believe that there is at least £100 

billion of value to the UK economy in 

terms of expanding Heathrow. In practical 

terms, that means 120,000 new jobs – jobs 

at the airport, jobs in the local area, and 

jobs up and down the country because 

employment, in various sectors, is created 

through investment and tourism. 

Heathrow is intent on connecting the 

whole country, making sure that the 

benefits are felt across the UK. In fact, 

some of our biggest supporters are in 

Scotland, Northern Ireland and the 

North East where they rely on domestic 

connections to the UK hub to connect to 

long haul markets. 

Q How could Heathrow expansion 

spread growth across the UK? 

Connections to the world, and in particular 

the growing economies in Asia and the 

Americas, drives economic growth and 

jobs in the UK. Given that, it is essential 

that the whole of the UK is linked to the 

hub. That can be through improved rail 

access, such as HS2. It can be through 

air links to connect major British 

airports to Heathrow, such as Liverpool 

and Inverness. Those links are hugely 

important to manufacturing as well as 

service sectors such as tourism. Then there 

is the impacts of work across Heathrow’s 

supply chain and the aerospace and 

aviation sectors. 

Q What advice would you give to the 

three main parties on airport expansion? 

Firstly, that airport expansion is not 

just about a runway; it is about the 

UK’s economic future. It is about future 

generations having the capacity to 

connect Britain to the rest of the world to 

maximise Britain’s economic potential. It 

is about our ambition in the global race. 

And secondly, there is an urgent need 

to act on airport expansion. Britain is 

rapidly being overtaken by other countries 

which understand very clearly that their 

future economic prosperity depends to a 

great extent on increasing their aviation 

links. Finally, that political consensus is 

important. We want to invest £16 billion 

of private money into making Heathrow 

a national asset that the country can be 

proud of. But politicians need to unlock 

that funding by giving investors the 

certainty they need to write the cheques. 


INTERVIEW: MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY 

A degree that costs less to deliver 

INTERVIEW: HS2 ACTION ALLIANCE 

A railway on the road to nowhere 

Dr Darryll Bravenboer, Head of Academic Development at the Institute for Work 

Based Learning, Middlesex University, makes the case to Marcus Papadopoulos 

for learning while you’re earning in the modern world 

Hilary Wharf, director of the pressure group HS2 Action Alliance, argues to 

Marcus Papadopoulos that the proposed new high speed rail route is taking Britain 

down the wrong track 

Q What is the purpose of Middlesex 

University’s Institute for Work Based 

Learning? 

We work with a broad range of employers, 

professional bodies and industry sector 

organisations to develop higher education 

programmes that enable people to gain a 

university degree and other qualifications 

through professional and work-based learning. 

This is based on the simple idea that when 

people work they normally learn at the same 

time and some or all of this learning may be 

at higher education level. Our approach to 

higher education means that this learning 

can count directly towards gaining a degree. 

The programmes we deliver can be at 

undergraduate, postgraduate or doctoral 

level, which can include working with senior 

people such as executives of transnational 

companies, diplomats and other leaders in 

their professional fields. 

Q What have you been doing to develop 

higher apprenticeships? 

Middlesex University was one of only two 

universities to lead government funded 

higher apprenticeship development projects. 

In addition to working with employers and 

sector bodies such as the Construction Industry 

Training Board to develop professional higher 

education programmes for construction 

managers, we have also been busy developing 

programmes for pilots, care managers and 

retail managers. 

We have been working closely with the 

University Vocational Awards Council and the 

National Apprenticeship Service to dispel the 

mistaken idea that higher apprenticeships are 

an alternative to higher education. For some 

time now higher apprenticeships have been 

able to include full university degrees and 

even masters qualifications and the higher 

apprenticeships Middlesex has developed 

are based on university degrees designed 

to integrate knowledge, understanding and 

skills with the professional competence that 

industry requires. 


Q Can you give me a couple of case studies? 

I can pick two I am particularly proud of. We 

have been working with Halifax to enable 

1,000 branch managers and area directors 

to gain undergraduate and postgraduate 

qualifications. The programmes we have 

developed are highly innovative in that they 

are based on university recognition of a 

Halifax in-company workforce development 

programme. By building on the in-company 

programme we have made it clear that 

Halifax are the experts in knowing what their 

employees need to know, understand and 

do. What has been really exciting has been 

how our expertise in developing reflective 

professional practice through supporting 

business-focused projects has changed the 

culture at Halifax so that reflective learning 

and collaboration has become an established 

part of the way Halifax managers operate. 

Q And the other? 

The second example is our work to open up 

opportunities for more people to become 

professional pilots. Being a professional airline 

pilot requires such a high level of knowledge, 

understanding and skill that people normally 

think pilots must be graduate educated. 

However, this has not necessarily been the 

case. The training to gain a Civil Aviation 

Authority licence has not previously been 

recognised for the purposes of gaining a 

degree and nor has the further training that 

pilots must undertake to actually fly specific 

aircraft or work for specific airlines. And 

the cost of raining can be around £100k. By 

developing a degree that fully integrates and 

recognises the required CAA training as well as 

post-licence development in work, Middlesex 

has revolutionised the way that pilots can 

become licensed and qualified at the same 

time. 

Q What steps would you like to see the party 

which forms the next government take in 

work-based learning? 

Changes in higher apprenticeship funding 

to enable equal support for employers 

where they see value in using university 

qualifications is welcome but this is still 

confused by the either/or language used to 

talk about university education and higher 

apprenticeships. I think we need one system 

that can support people who want to engage 

with higher education and I think it would 

make economic sense to actually prioritise, 

in terms of public support, those people who 

sought to gain their qualifications through 

their work. This would reduce the size of the 

student loans book as degrees delivered 

through professional and work-based learning 

cost less to deliver. 


Q Who are you? What is the HS2 Action 

Alliance and what is its aim? 

We are a national group making the 

case against HS2 and pushing for 

proper environmental protection and 

compensation. We are backed by 

thousands of registered supporters 

from across the country and over 100 

community and action groups which are 

affiliates of HS2AA. In many ways it’s the 

Big Society in action. 

Q Why do you think HS2 is a bad deal for 

Britain? 

In simple terms, its economics are dire; 

environmentally it’s highly damaging; and 

it’s an investment in obsolescence. 

It doesn’t make sense for a country as 

small and densely populated as ours, with 

already good connections to London. It’s 

a project with massive costs and unproven 

benefits. 

Q But isn’t HS2 vital for restoring the 

economic performance of our regional 

cities? 

However much government wish it were 

otherwise HS2 isn’t the answer to regional 

development. Instead, it is a line that will 

pull people and economic activity south, 

towards London. 

Academic evidence and the experience 

of other countries which have invested 

heavily in high speed rail show it is 

dominant capital cities which are the 

winners. 

In France, despite its TGV programme, 

some 82% of its top companies (the 

CAC 40) are based in Paris. If you think 

transport connectivity is the magic 

bullet then Doncaster, with its excellent 

connections, should be a beacon of 

prosperity – but sadly it’s not. 


Q Patrick McLoughlin, the Secretary of 

State for Transport, says HS2 is essential 

because Britain’s railways are operating 

at full capacity? 

Again, the government’s view sits uneasily 

with the facts. Long distance services 

on the West Coast main line are far from 

full and Euston is the second least busy 

London terminus. Capacity problems 

on our railways are on short distance 

commuter services – which should be the 

priority for funding. 

Q Surely high speed rail is part of a low 

carbon, environmentally sound future? 

HS2’s environmental credentials are 

negligible. HS2 Ltd predicts only 1% 

of HS2’s passengers will come from air 

and 4% from cars. The rest, 95%, are 

people transferring from less polluting 

conventional trains or making totally new 

journeys. 

Ultra fast trains like HS2 are simply 

not green. The government’s obsession 

with speed means its route devastates 

some of our most sensitive ecological 

sites – ancient woodland, sites of special 

scientific interest, areas of outstanding 

natural beauty and green belt. That feels 

like a lot to lose for such disputed benefits. 

Q If it’s so flawed why is HS2 such a 

government priority? 

Fundamentally HS2 is not a transport 

project or an economic project – it’s a 

political project. 

Politicians believe their electoral fortunes 

in marginal seats in the north-west of 

England and the West Midlands will be 

boosted by HS2 but it is actually unpopular 

in many marginal seats. 

Q How do you know that? 

We commissioned a poll with ComRes, 

which showed that 52% of Britons oppose 

HS2 and 28% say they would be less likely 

to vote Conservative at the next election 

because of the party’s support for HS2. 

And 19% said they would be more likely to 

vote Labour if Labour dropped its support 

for HS2. 

Q But with both main political parties 

publicly committed to the project, and 

with backing from big business, what 

realistic chance is there of it being 

cancelled? 

Every chance. Every independent body 

which has looked at this scheme thinks 

it has major flaws. And we believe that 

common sense can yet prevail. Money in 

the next Parliament will be tight. A project 

that costs a lot but contributes little will be 

vulnerable. 

Over 60% of the current government’s 

planned spending cuts will need to be 

implemented in the next term. In the 

context of making serious cuts it would be 

irresponsible to press ahead with HS2. 


ADVERTORIAL 

Reaching out to society’s vulnerable 

Peter Bailey, Chief Executive Officer of CrossReach, discusses with Marcus 

Papadopoulos how his charity adapts to the ever-changing social care needs of 

society 

Andrew was given a diagnosis of 

advanced, metastatic prostate 

cancer at 62 years of age. Here he 

asks Karen Moore his Clinical 

Nurse Specialist some searching 

questions; 

ADVERTORIAL 

When I was referred to you I had been 

visiting my GP for more than 6 years with 

all of the symptoms listed on a patient 

leaflet you gave me. He never mentioned 

prostate cancer as a possibility. Should 

he have offered me a PSA test back then? 

Q What does CrossReach do? 

CrossReach is part of the Church of Scotland 

and is a charity delivering social care and 

support. We have more than 70 services 

supporting thousands of people of all ages 

and backgrounds across Scotland. 

Q The Scottish Government’s Self-directed 

Support Act commenced this April. What 

has that meant for social care in Scotland? 

Underlying its provisions is the philosophy 

that every person should have choice and 

control over their own life. Society has a 

duty to ensure everyone can participate on 

an equal basis; however, in the past, people 

needing day-to-day support have too often 

had limited power to choose how their 

support is delivered. Limited control means a 

lack of opportunities to make decisions, and 

therefore unequal access to the benefits of 

community. 

The Self-directed Support Act transfers 

power from local authorities and supportproviders 

to individuals. Rather than being 

seen as passive ‘service users’, people can 

demand to be treated as active and powerful 

citizens. 

Q How has CrossReach responded? 

At CrossReach, we welcome that positive 

change. Throughout our 145-year history, 

we have had many opportunities to adapt 

and innovate as the needs and demands 

of society have changed. The Self-directed 

Support Act gives us a fresh impetus to offer 

new services to the communities we work in. 

For the individual, control over the design 

and delivery of support opens up a world of 

possibilities – from simple things like being 

able to choose what time your support worker 

comes to see you, to the freedom to attend 

a community art class or cinema club rather 

than a traditional support service – the power 

to choose enriches our lives. The people we 

work with at CrossReach have found that 


gaining control over the support they receive 

is a liberating, life-changing experience. 

However, the power to choose is only half 

the story. Gaining control, but having limited 

options to exercise that control, is not true 

choice. To make the benefits of choice in 

social care a reality, we need a wide range of 

options to choose from. 

Indeed, new ideas are vital in making choice 

real – more of the same will not satisfy the 

aspirations of people who are directing their 

own support. Organisations like CrossReach – 

as part of the innovative, creative Third Sector 

–therefore have a crucial role to play in the 

success of the Self-directed Support Act and 

social care in general. 

Q So, how will you satisfy people’s 

aspirations? 

In a changing society, we have had to 

innovate to survive. CrossReach, along with 

the sector we work in, has learned to be 

flexible, adaptable, and to respond positively 

to change. From the establishment of the 

Deaconess Hospital in Edinburgh in 1891, 

through to the continued development of our 

creative arts projects for people who have 

dementia today, CrossReach has a heritage of 

innovation. 

Of primary importance is that the Selfdirected 

Support Act benefits the people who 

use it. But it is also a fantastic opportunity for 

support providers like CrossReach, because 

the choice it demands is a fresh spur to be 

creative and innovative in the work we do. 

As support providers in the Third Sector, we 

must continue to be pioneers, not for the sake 

of our own survival but so we can play a part 

in offering the diversity of choice necessary 

for everyone to participate equally in their 

communities. 

Q Does the Third Sector have an influential 

enough voice at national government level? 

Because they commission a lot of our work, 

we are often focused on communicating 

with local rather than national government, 

and our sector tends to invest more energy 

in community relationships than in political 

engagement. That is an area that we, in 

CrossReach, need to develop. 

Our sector must do more to highlight the 

essential work we do, and make politicians 

aware of its enormous benefit to society. We 

work on the frontline with some of society’s 

most vulnerable people – we must ensure 

our experience and expertise has an impact 

on policy-makers so that our work can be as 

effective as possible. 

I think of myself as well educated, I listen 

to Radio4 all the time. I had never heard 

of a PSA test until I had one after passing 

blood in my urine. Why isn’t this test 

better advertised? 

One of the challenges is increasing the 

awareness of Prostate cancer. It is less 

commonly publicised than other cancers 

such as breast cancer which remains high 

profile and has been driven by women’s 

groups for many years. Unfortunately 

prostate cancer is not perceived to be a 

priority in health terms, and with men 

being less proactive and demanding in 

regard to their health care needs than 

women, prostate cancer awareness 

campaigns have suffered. 

Why is Stoke-on-Trent top of the table 

for late presentation of prostate cancer? 

Late diagnosis is a problem. Many years 

ago; when there was no widely available 

evidence to support screening or PSA 

testing, a more cautious approach was 

advocated to GPs. There have been 

attempts to update these messages but 

they remain mixed and subject to 

misinterpretation. In the early days of PSA 

testing, people in other parts of the 

country pushed more heavily for 

screening so attitudes of GPs to PSA were 

set differently. 

While there remains no obligation by 

health care professionals to initiate the 

PSA blood test it remains reliant on 

proactive GP’s and local groups to raise 

awareness and understanding. 

Unfortunately there are still confusion and 

mixed messages about prostate cancer 

and PSA testing. The belief that men live 

and die with the disease rather than die of 

the disease deters GP’s and the general 

public from proactively investigating 

prostate cancer. Prostate cancer was 

known as a condition affecting elderly 

men and although this remains true to a 

point, there are increasing numbers of 

men in their 50’ and 60’s being diagnosed 

with the disease. It is this group of men 

who are more likely to benefit from early 

investigation and treatment. 

‘My GP said he didn’t believe in the 

PSA test. Now I am faced with a 

drastically shortened life expectancy 

than if I had been referred sooner’ 


INTERVIEW: BIRMINGHAM AIRPORT 

Blueprint for the future – the strategic 

importance of Birmingham Airport 

Paul Kehoe, Chief Executive of Birmingham Airport, talks to Marcus 

Papadopoulos about how he sees the future of British aviation and the role that 

the UK’s long-haul airports can play in rebalancing the economy 

Q What is your message to the Airports 

Commission? 

It is great to see that the three big 

party conferences this year are at major 

regional cities: Labour in Manchester, 

the Liberal Democrats in Glasgow and 

the Conservatives in our home city of 

Birmingham. 

That will rightly draw attention to 

the importance of our great cities, and 

their central role in rebalancing the UK 

economy. 

Long-haul airports are central to the 

economies of our great cities, and 

aviation policy needs to reflect that. Lord 

Heseltine’s report No Stone Unturned and 

Lord Adonis’ report Mending the Fractured 

Economy highlight the growing attention 

that issue is receiving. 

Furthermore, the Chancellor’s 

announcements on high-speed rail 

identified the importance of our regional 

cities in the economic recovery. That 

debate is one which we truly welcome. 

Q Are you feeling the recovery? 

We feel like we have been through the 

tough patch. The recession was obviously 

very hard for the whole country, and 

people are still feeling it in their pockets, 

but we are delighted that we are now 

serving more passengers than we were in 

2008, and growing our route network. 

We are also very proud to be central to 

a business community which has, over 

the last year, been home to more foreign 

direct investment projects than any other 

English region. 

That and other successes mean there has 

been a 98 per cent increase in the number 

of jobs in Greater Birmingham and Solihill 

in the last 12 months – again, more than 

any other English region. 


Q What does Birmingham Airport have 

to offer? 

Located right in the centre of the 

country, we offer excellent connectivity 

for our region and beyond. There are 35 

million people living within two hours 

of Birmingham Airport, which is more 

than any other long-haul airport, and this 

includes more than seven million people in 

the radius of Heathrow. 

As we grow our long-haul connectivity, 

we are providing a real choice for those 

who would rather avoid the high prices, 

congested roads and terminals of 

Heathrow and fly to and from an airport 

with some of the best punctuality times in 

the country. 

With HS2, we will be Britain’s most easily 

accessible airport – and just over half an 

hour from London. 

Q You have just extended your runway. 

What has changed for your customers? 

We have just invested £200 million in the 

airport. 

The centre-piece of that is our newly 

extended runway, which has already had 

direct flights from Beijing, to enable us to 

support flights to all global destinations. 

As the Prime Minister announced when he 

visited us this April, that will help to create 

8,000 new jobs at and around Birmingham 

Airport. 

Q What do you see as the future of 

British aviation? 

What the country needs is a network 

of great airports for our great cities. 

We believe that only such a network of 

national long-haul airports will bring about 

the kind of economic activity around our 

country that Britain deserves. 

Q What are your plans for the party 

conferences? 

This year we are working with Transport 

Times at the Labour and Conservative 

conferences to debate how important 

infrastructure is for rebalancing our 

economy. Whilst the Airports Commission 

process has engaged our region and, 

indeed, the whole aviation industry, we 

are keen to ensure that the debate is 

grounded in a proper understanding of 

what our cities need to succeed. 

Ed Miliband has called on cities and 

towns to come together and plan for their 

futures, and David Cameron has called 

for the economy to be rebalanced for a 

nation-wide recovery. For us, that means 

working with our partners in the region, as 

well as with other city regions, to ensure 

we are positioned to lead the country’s 

infrastructure plans for the future. 

Our region is leading the way on 

advanced manufacturing and is the only to 

have a positive balance of trade for China. 

That means we need to ensure that the 

Midlands and beyond is well-connected, 

and best placed to take advantage of 

tourism and investment opportunities 

from around the world. 



INTERVIEW: IOSH 

Why professional titles are important 

Jan Chmiel, Chief Executive of the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health, 

talks to Marcus Papadopoulos about the challenges of creating a healthy and 

sustainable future, 40 years on from the ground-breaking Health and Safety at 

Work Act 

Q Can you outline what the Institution of 

Occupational Safety and Health does? 

IOSH is the Chartered body for health 

and safety professionals and an ILOrecognised 

NGO. We have more than 

44,000 members in over 100 countries. 

Our members work at operational 

and strategic levels in all employment 

sectors and sizes of organisation, helping 

employers and workers to upskill and 

providing practical risk management 

advice. We also provide many free 

resources for employers and start-up 

businesses. 

Q Health and safety can sometimes 

be misunderstood. Are there any 

misconceptions which you would like to 

clarify? 

The biggest misconception to emerge 

in recent years is that health and safety 

is a burden and holds businesses back. 

Nothing could be further from the truth. 

Britain’s health and safety system is 

envied and often copied across the 

world. That is because it is risk-based and 

proportionate, so businesses only need to 

do what is reasonable to control their risk. 

Government review after review has 

endorsed our system as fit for purpose 

and identified that it is not the law that is 

the problem, but people’s misperception 

about what is required. 

Q What are the biggest challenges and 

opportunities ahead? 

In global terms, Britain has a good health 

and safety record and our Health and 

Safety at Work Act has stood the test of 

time. Yet still, in 2012-13, there were 148 

workers killed and 19,707 major injuries 

to employees. Additionally, around 1.1 

million people suffered an illness they 

put down to work and 13,000 died from 

occupational diseases, including cancers. 

Overall, around 27 million working days 

were lost to health and safety failures, 

with all the attendant costs to our 

economy. 

So, we must do far more to upskill people 

to tackle the health challenges, while 

continuing to work to improve safety. For 

health, it is about preventing work-related 

illness, supporting those with health 

conditions stay in (or return to) work and 

actively improving health and wellbeing. 

In our rapidly changing world of work, 

we need greater recognition that good 

health and safety not only saves lives 

but also helps businesses save money, 

boosts productivity and relieves demands 

on the NHS and social security system 

– increasingly crucial given Britain’s 

ageing population, obesity and sedentary 

lifestyles. 

Q What would you like the next 

Government to do? 

Firstly, we would like Government to 

acknowledge the national losses from 

health and safety failure. As well as 

the human toll, it is estimated to cost 

Britain around £13.8 billion per year and 

double if work-related cancer deaths are 

included. And then we need Government 

to showcase businesses which are getting 

it right through strong health and safety 

leadership and competency – savings 

millions of pounds and increasing their 

competitive edge. 

Although Britain has taken some positive 

steps to prevent work-related cancer 

through asbestos awareness, there are 

around 8,000 work-related cancer deaths 

each year and 13,500 new cases. So, we 

would like Government to go further, 

leading the world through new research 

and the first national occupational 

carcinogen exposure database. 

We would also like recognition that 

good engineering and design are at the 

heart of socially responsible business and 

Government. That getting it right saves 

billions (such as the Thames Barrier), while 

getting it wrong leads to death, injury and 

huge financial losses (such as the Piper 

Alpha disaster). 

And Britain needs a well-trained and 

competitive workforce. With growing 

globalisation and trends to extend working 

lives, it is essential that leaders and 

workers are adequately trained to manage 

health and safety risks, ensure positive 

working environments and look ahead. 

Q Do you have any closing thoughts 

about a sustainable future? 

Our global economy means we have long, 

complex and sometimes unregulated 

supply chains that cross national and 

economic boundaries, so it is vital to build 

on Britain’s strong history of corporate 

social responsibility. Government should 

encourage organisations to go beyond 

legal minimums on health and safety 

and reporting for supply chains. That 

way, businesses can contribute more 

to, and benefit more from, sustainable 

communities and economies, providing 

transparency and accountability. 

Britain leads the world in science, 

engineering, health and safety and 

CSR. Harnessed together, I believe that 

can create an absolutely unbeatable 

combination for a healthy and sustainable 

future. IOSH is working hard with others 

to help make that happen. 

Find out more at www.iosh.co.uk 


INTERVIEW: RNIB 

Ending avoidable blindness 

ADVERTORIAL 

Helping revitalise Britain’s high streets 

Fazilet Hadi, Managing Director of RNIB Engagement, talks with Marcus 

Papadopoulos about how the RNIB is playing a major role in highlighting to 

government the urgent need to address sight loss 

Patrick Troy, Chief Executive of the British Parking Association, explains to Keith 

Richmond why the BPA has parked its van on the party conference forecourt 

Q Why should eye care be a priority in the 

NHS? 

Every 15 minutes, somebody in the UK 

starts to lose their sight. Approximately 

two million people are currently living with 

significant sight loss in the UK and this 

figure is predicted to double to four million 

by 2050. Despite those shocking statistics, 

vision does not have a high profile within the 

NHS. 

Eye care has changed so much over the 

past five years. An unprecedented number 

of new treatments have been developed, 

saving the sight of thousands of people 

who would previously have gone blind. 

That is enormously welcome and must be 

celebrated. 

However, despite all those advances, over 

50 per cent of sight loss is avoidable. That 

is why stopping people losing their sight 

unnecessarily is a key priority for RNIB and 

should be a key priority for the NHS. 

Q If half of sight loss is avoidable, why 

are people still losing their sight from 

treatable conditions? 

There are a number of reasons including 

the shocking fact that eye clinics are simply 

too busy to keep up with demand. Long 

acting treatments are many years away 

and demand for services is increasing, 

so something must be done to avert the 

looming capacity crisis. 

Hospital staff are being asked to do ever 

more with the same resources and, despite 

raising alarm bells, they are not being heard. 

Patients are, of course, incredibly grateful 

to the hard working NHS staff who work 

long hours, under intense pressure, in order 

to save their sight. Many patients describe 

the service they receive as “marvellous” and 

“first class”. 

However, they also express concerns about 


cancelled and delayed appointments, 

over-subscribed clinics, long waits to see 

a professional at each appointment and 

rushed consultations. 

Q What needs to be done to prevent those 

problems and stop people going blind 

needlessly? 

An overhaul of eye care services is urgently 

needed to ensure they can meet demand 

now and in the future. NHS England should 

instruct all CCGs to produce local eye care 

commissioning plans by March 2015. Those 

should be co-commissioned with Local Eye 

Health Networks, front line staff working 

in local eye clinics, patients and the public, 

and other stakeholders in each area. Patient 

feedback must inform commissioning 

decisions and providers must adhere to 

national standards and guidelines to reduce 

the postcode lottery for eye care which 

patients currently face. 

Sight Loss Advisers (Eye Clinic Liaison 

Officers) are an obvious solution to the 

capacity problem. ECLOs work closely with 

medical and nursing staff in the eye clinic 

and have the time to dedicate to patients 

following their consultation. They help 

patients understand their condition, its 

treatment and connect them to further 

practical and emotional support, helping 

to integrate health and social care services. 

They also help to free up clinicians’ time 

so they can focus on treating patients. We 

regularly hear that patient do not want to be 

given leaflets as a substitute for high quality 

communication and face-to-face time with a 

professional. At present, over 70 per cent of 

eye clinics in the UK do not have a Sight Loss 

Adviser in place, which is why RNIB is calling 

for all clinics to have access to one. 

All adults newly certified as sight-impaired 

or severely sight-impaired should also 

receive rehabilitation and social care from 

their adult social services department. There 

should be a timely offer of rehabilitation, 

which should be available free of charge and 

independent of an adult’s eligibility for longterm 

care. 

Q What is RNIB doing to ensure people 

have support when they are diagnosed 

with a sight condition? 

RNIB has always been at the forefront of 

supporting people with sight loss as well as 

their families. We campaign to ensure that 

patients have timely access to diagnosis, 

new treatments on the NHS and support 

at the time of sight loss. Those are central 

tenets of our new strategy 

We also provide an advice and support 

service which includes eye health 

information, personalised assessment, 

emotional support, helpline, welfare rights 

and advocacy. 

Q What can politicians do to ensure 

patients have support when they are 

diagnosed with a sight condition? 

We want politicians to support our campaign 

and ensure nobody is facing blindness alone. 

RNIB believes that every eye clinic across 

England should have access to a Sight Loss 

Adviser. Please visit our stand at the party 

conferences and find out how you can help 

people with sight loss in your constituency. 


Q What impact will recent government 

proposals have on the parking 

profession? 

The government has proposed a series 

of changes to the way local authorities 

carry out their parking management and 

enforcement responsibilities. 

These have been driven by a concern 

in the Department for Communities and 

Local Government to ensure that parking 

management plays its role in revitalising 

Britain’s high streets. This is an objective 

that the parking profession takes very 

seriously, and there is some excellent 

best practice up and down the country 

demonstrating how parking can make our 

high streets more attractive. 

Q So what’s the problem? 

Unfortunately, the government’s 

approach has been negative in criticising 

local authorities for using their parking 

management and enforcement 

responsibilities to deter customers from 

high streets, something the parking 

profession rejects. 

The BPA, along with the Association of 

Town & City Management, undertook 

a research exercise two years ago to 

assess the link between parking and the 

high street. There have been subsequent 

studies, too, by London councils and by 

Erasmus University in Rotterdam, as these 

issues apply across the continent, too. 

This research shows that visitors to the 

high street do not consider price to be a 

significant determinant of whether or not 

they make a visit. Most people consider 

accessibility and convenience far more 

important. They also consider safety (both 

personal and of their vehicle) as of higher 

importance than the price of parking. 

This is not to say that price is not 

important and that local authority 


providers should not consider the needs 

of visitors to town and city centres when 

it comes to structuring tariffs in their car 

parks. Indeed, they should take account 

of concerns by motorists of unnecessarily 

high charges. Government proposals 

have been piecemeal. They have focused 

unremittingly on the use of CCTV by 

local authorities for parking enforcement 

purposes, when CCTV can only be used to 

ease congestion and improve road safety. 

One of the areas completely missed by 

government was the importance of CCTV 

in protecting children’s lives outside 

schools by enforcing school clearways, a 

principal driver for the development of 

CCTV by local authorities for use on the 

public highway. 

Q What success has the BPA had in 

lobbying government? 

The BPA, along with a number of other 

organisations, including the Local 

Government Association, has persuaded 

government that there is a case for 

better managing CCTV rather than simply 

banning it. The case has been made 

for limiting the use of CCTV to specific 

purposes linked to easing congestion and 

improving road safety. 

Q Isn’t local authority parking 

enforcement all about raising revenue? 

It can never be about revenue-raising. 

This would be unlawful. Local authorities 

operate under the Traffic Management Act 

2004 which makes it clear that they can 

only use their powers for specific purposes 

relating to the movement of traffic. The 

use of their powers for the generation of 

revenue is unlawful. 

Q What is the BPA position? 

Conscious of the criticism, the BPA 

developed some years ago a model 

contract to be used by local authorities 

when they outsource enforcement to the 

private sector. This ensures the service 

provider is incentivised only in relation 

to achieving compliance with parking 

controls and not in relation to any activity 

which could be associated with revenue 

raising (eg bonuses for enforcement 

officers). 

Q Is everyone on board? 

Unfortunately, as in any profession, there 

are always one or two members who 

let the side down, and there have been 

instances where it would appear local 

authorities have misunderstood their 

powers. In such circumstances they risk 

High Court action (as has happened in 

relation to a North London borough) and/ 

or other legal action, including by the 

District Auditor. 

Q What are you doing at the party 

conferences? 

The BPA wants to promote the parking 

sector as a profession. To get our message 

across to those who make the laws, to help 

them understand that those working in the 

parking sector recognise the importance 

of the motorist and the customer in 

establishing a professional service. 


INTERVIEW: ABDO 

INTERVIEW: ABDO 

Political will and foresight is imperative 

Q So, what is the difference 

between an optometrist and a 

dispensing optician? 

Peter Black, President of ABDO, talks to Marcus Papadopoulos about the 

challenges facing high street opticians and hospital ophthalmology services as 

unprecedented demand from an ageing population pushes the current system 

towards breaking point 

Q What is ABDO? 

The Association of British Dispensing 

Opticians (ABDO) represents the 

interests of dispensing opticians, 

contact lens opticians and low vision 

opticians in the UK. It is the awarding 

body for professional - level 6 and 

level 7 - ophthalmic dispensing 

qualifications in the UK and 

throughout the world. Additionally, 

ABDO is the largest provider of 

statutory Continuing Education and 

Training (CET) to opticians in the UK. 

Q What are your priorities during 

your term as ABDO President? 

When I came to office, my board and 

I identified three areas of immediate 

strategic importance: research, CET 

and promotion of the profession to 

the public. 

Q Why is research important? 

Dispensing opticians, alongside 

optometrists, are in an ideal position 

to help relieve the current pressure 

being experienced in the Hospital Eye 

Service. 

However, changing policy in eye 

healthcare and re-designing services 

are unlikely without a solid evidence 

base. Having only recently become 

a graduate profession, we identified 

research as being important going 

forward and have worked hard to 

begin to turn this round. 

The new ABDO Research Fund has 

just been approved and is already 

supporting the first ever PhD in 

ophthalmic dispensing. We expect to 

have a Masters’ degree programme 

available from 2015 in collaboration 

with Canterbury Christ Church 

University. 

Q What challenges does CET 

present the Association? 

The new system of Continuing 

Education and Training is particularly 

welcome as, by imposing compulsory 

interactive (‘face-to-face’) CET on 

registered opticians, for the first time 

the General Optical Council has made 

a real difference to standards and the 

risks associated with isolated practice 

in the post-Shipman era. 

Our main challenge is to try and 

achieve parity with optometrists 

who obtain an individual CET grant 

of nearly £600, and benefit from a 

centrally administered DOCET fund of 

around half a million pounds, whereas 

my members do not get a penny 

despite having the same obligations. 

Q Why do you feel it is necessary to 

promote your profession? 

Despite ophthalmic opticians 

changing their name to optometrist 

over 25 years ago, few people 

understand the difference between 

an optometrist and a dispensing 

optician, and fewer still realise the 

person dispensing their spectacles 

might be a level 6 qualified registered 

dispensing optician, but might equally 

be an unqualified unregistered 

dispensing assistant. 

The relationship is similar to that 

between a GP and a pharmacist. The 

optometrist checks the health of the 

eyes and measures any prescription 

for glasses. The dispensing optician 

(DO) dispenses that prescription 

– advising on frames and lenses, 

taking the necessary measurements, 

and adjusting the glasses to fit. All 

opticians can give general eye care 

advice, explain eye conditions and 

treatments, and reassure patients. 

We are importantly qualified to 

recognise and refer sight threatening 

eye disease. Many DOs help visually 

impaired patients with low vision aids 

and DOs with further qualifications 

can also prescribe and fit contact 

lenses. 

Q How have you gone about 

promoting the profession? 

We were delighted to be selected 

by ITN to be their eye health 

partner for their news channel www. 

healthcarenews.itn.co.uk which also 

includes primary care, social care, 

dentistry and pharmacy. The short 

films centre on thought leadership, 

innovation and best practice. 

ABDO has concentrated principally 

on regulated dispensing – this is 

dispensing to children and visually 

impaired adults. The star of the show 

is Maisie, a delightful five year old 

with Down’s syndrome who is helping 

us develop our CET programme 

on paediatric dispensing. Find out 

more at http://www.healthcarenews. 

itn.co.uk/Eye%20Health/Best%20 

Practice/141152/ 

Q Politically, what are the big 

issues facing eye health care at the 

moment? 

Unprecedented demand for eye 

care services, and a fundamentally 

unfair GOS contract outside of 

Scotland, propels the current system 

towards breaking point. 

The growing older population, new 

treatments and preventions and rapid 

technological change, means eye 

care is now a major challenge to the 

NHS. Opticians in the UK, although 

willing and able, are currently 

hampered in rising to this challenge 

by a system based on the Opticians 

Act 1989, which is inadequate for 

the purposes of a 21st century eye 

care sector seeking to: prevent poor 

eye health and sight loss; promote 

good eye health and sight; improve 

eye health and care services; 

and facilitate equitable access to 

effective, timely, integrated services 

and support for independent living. 

Q What is wrong with the current 

system? 

The 1980s saw the substantial 

deregulation of the work of 

dispensing opticians and wholesale 

change in the sector. The new 

competitive environment did some 

good – today, the UK is the cheapest 

place for spectacles anywhere in the 

EU. Access to spectacles and clear 

vision to study, work and live is an 

important public health outcome, yet 

even today one million people in the 

UK are functionally sight impaired 

simply because they need glasses. 

Ready-made reading glasses 

brought clear near vision to millions 

of people, but this may have come 

at a cost. The UK has unprecedented 

levels of sight loss, and if things do 

not change, this is set to rise from 

two million to four million by 2050. 

Q If you could change one thing 

about the current system, what 

would this be? 

Political will is needed to embrace 

‘hospitals without walls’, allow 

efficient and cost effective 

commissioning, akin to the Scottish 

system, to engage community 

optometric practices in the provision 

of preventative and timely eye care 

interventions including diagnosis and 

treatment of eye disease, low vision 

services, eye casualty, eye care advice 

and eye health promotion. Only 

then might we make some headway 

in stopping preventable sight loss 

doubling over the next 35 years. At 

the heart of the matter however, is a 

fundamentally unfair GOS contract in 

all areas of the UK except Scotland. 

Currently, optical practices are 

paid around £21 for an optometrist 

to deliver a comprehensive eye 

examination that costs between 

£35 and £60 to deliver. That means 

opticians are entirely dependent on 

the sale of spectacles to subsidise the 

delivery of NHS healthcare – not only 

is this unfair to spectacle wearers who 

are arguably paying over the odds – it 

also means opticians will not willingly 

attract patients who do not wear 

glasses but might still be at risk of 

sight threatening eye disease. 

The current GOS contract means 

opticians cannot compete with 

unregistered sellers, especially online 

retailers, who do not have to provide 

eye care services or live with the 

unfair cross-subsidy of NHS patients. 

According to GfK, optical practices 

are closing at the rate of two per 

week – 500 practices closed between 

2008 and 2013, and the rate is only 

accelerating in 2014. That is reducing 

equitable access to eye health care as 

practices are being lost from deprived 

and rural areas, rather than the high 

streets and shopping malls that have 

plenty of affluent private patients 

capable of subsidising the 70 per cent 

of the population entitled to an NHS 

sight test under General Ophthalmic 

Services. It is time for change! 





ADVERTORIAL 

Supporting science in our schools 

Yvonne Baker, Director of the National Science Learning Centre, explains to 

Marcus Papadopoulos the current state of science teaching in the UK 

It would take only one cross-party 

commitment in Westminster to end 

50 years of dithering on expanding 

airports. We believe it’s time to… 

Q There is a shortage of scientists and 

engineers in the UK, but are there really 

the jobs out there for young people? 

Q How can we ensure teachers, schools 

and colleges continue to access the help 

they need? 

STEM employers across many sectors 

highlight difficulties finding skilled 

staff. All forecasts indicate the need for 

numerical, scientific and technology skills 

will only increase. 

Q The UK’s ranking in science TIMSS and 

PISA has been falling. Is that a reflection 

on the quality of teachers in the UK? 

TIMSS and PISA are important indicators 

of a country’s performance compared to 

others in aspects of science and maths 

education, but certainly do not tell the 

whole story. We cannot ignore them but 

must think about what we can learn and 

act on. 

Ensuring that science teachers have 

access to high impact, subject-specific 

Continuing Professional Development 

(CPD) is crucial, just as for law or medicine. 

Teachers need to keep up-to-date with 

developments in science to retain their 

enthusiasm and inspire their pupils. 

The National Science Learning Centre 

and aptly named Project ENTHUSE work 

with around 3,000 science teachers and 

technicians each year from early years to 

post-16. That is built upon through the 

network of 48 newly established schoolled 

Science Learning Partnerships across 

England, SSERC in Scotland, Techniquest 

in Wales and NILB in Northern Ireland. 

We have independent evidence showing 

teachers who work with us impact 

positively on pupils’ achievement in STEM 

subjects. Importantly, engagement with 

CPD also impacts positively on teachers’ 

job satisfaction and retention, both 

important factors in ensuring a great 

science education for all. 

Q What are the biggest challenges 

for science teaching over the next few 

years? 

Along with attracting, developing and, 

perhaps most importantly, retaining 

talented teachers who can communicate 

the excitement of STEM subjects, I think 

the biggest challenges are breaking down 

some of the stereotypes that persist. 

We need to encourage more girls into 

physics and engineering - there are signs 

for optimism; the University Technical 

Colleges could bring change and the ‘Your 

Life’ campaign is spreading the word that 

STEM careers are for everyone. 

Careers advice needs improvement, 

particularly around informing young 

people and their influencers better about 

work-based as well as university routes, 

and we must recognise the influence 

subject teachers have. 

Though Project ENTHUSE, we 

have introduced a Teacher Industrial 

Partnership Scheme. Teachers spend two 

weeks with a STEM employer, learning 

about the breadth of career opportunities. 

A UK STEM support infrastructure, 

sustained by governments and 

funders, was established in the early 

‘noughties’ in response to concerns 

around STEM skills. That includes the 

National Science Learning Centre, 

National Science Learning Network, 

Science Learning Partnerships, National 

Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of 

Mathematics, National STEM Centre and 

the STEM Ambassadors programme, all of 

which have become significant presences 

in STEM education. 

Ninety-nine per cent of secondary 

schools and 38 per cent of primary schools 

have at least one teacher registered with 

the National STEM Centre eLibrary. The 

National Science Learning Network has 

worked with 99 per cent of secondary 

schools since its creation in 2004. 

Statistics show an on-going increase of 

pupils in England choosing STEM A levels 

or separate sciences at GCSE since these 

programmes were introduced. 

However, risks remain. Changes in school 

accountability, although broadly welcome, 

mean that some schools may be planning 

to reduce the offer to pupils of separate 

sciences at GCSE rather than increase it. 

The newly established Science Learning 

Partnerships need long-term support from 

government and others, in both funding 

and policy, to achieve their full potential. 

The Royal Society highlighted these 

concerns in their recent ‘Vision for 

Science and Mathematics Education’, 

recommending that subject-specific 

CPD should be made a core requirement 

for teachers and technicians, linked to 

career progression. As a nation, we must 

continue to invest in the infrastructures 

which provide high impact support. 

SIGNATORIES: Sir Adrian Montague, 3i Group; Martin Gilbert, Aberdeen Asset Management PLC; Dr Eamonn Butler, Adam Smith Institute; 

Richard Robinson, AECOM; Rupert Soames OBE, Aggreko; David Partridge, Argent (Property Development) Services LLP; Surinder Arora, 

Arora Holdings LTD; Andy Clarke, Asda Stores LTD & Leeds and Partners; George Weston, Associated British Foods PLC; Heather Lishman, 

Association of British Professional Conference Organisers; Chris Crowley, Association of Corporate Travel Executives; David Tonkin, Atkins; 

Tony Pidgley CBE, Berkeley Group; Harold Paisner, Berwin Leighton Paisner LLP; Bob Rothenberg, Blick Rothenberg LLP; Dale Keller, Board 

of Airline Representatives in the UK; Andrew Caplan, Boots UK; Jim McAuslan, British Airline Pilots’ Association; John Longworth, British 

Chambers of Commerce; Ufi Ibrahim, British Hospitality Association; Peter Quantrill, British International Freight Association; Richard Fursland 

CBE, BritishAmerican Business & British-American Business Council; Ross Ballingall, Brookfield Multiplex; Michael Hirst OBE, Business Visits 

and Events Partnership; Hugh Seaborn, Cadogan; Sir George Iacobescu CBE, Canary Wharf Group; Stephen Hubbard, CBRE; Ben Rogers, Centre 

for London; Tim Knox, Centre for Policy Studies; James Rowntree, CH2M HILL; Ron Gourlay, Chelsea Football Club; Stephen Phillips, China- 

Britain Business Council; Maurice Thompson, Citi; Mark Boleat, City of London Corporation; Professor Paul Curran, City University London; 

Des Gunewardena, D & D London; Angus Knowles-Cutler, Deloitte; John Burns, Derwent London; John Allan CBE, Dixons Retail PLC; Chris 

Rumfitt, Edelman; Inderneel Singh, Edwardian Group London; Denise Rossiter, Essex Chambers of Commerce; Richard Banks, European Land 

and Property LTD; Anthony Arter, Eversheds LLP; Kevin Murphy, ExCeL; Mike Cherry, Federation of Small Businesses; Theo de Pencier, Freight 

Transport Association; Sue Brown, FTI Consulting; Hugh Bullock, Gerald Eve LLP; Mike Turner CBE, GKN PLC & Babcock International Group 

PLC; Gordon Clark, Global Blue; Toby Courtauld, Great Portland Estates PLC; Tamara Ingram OBE, Grey Group; Mark Preston, Grosvenor; Paul 

Wait, Guild of Travel Management Companies; Michael Ward, Harrods; Joseph Wan, Harvey Nichols; Sarah Porter, Heart of London Business 

Alliance; Richard Sunderland, Heavenly; Jonathan Scott, Herbert Smith Freehills LLP; Nicholas Cheffings, Hogan Lovells International LLP; 

Nicola Shaw, HS1 Limited; Brian Robertson, HSBC Bank PLC; Michael Spencer, ICAP PLC; Michael Izza, Institute of Chartered Accountants in 

England and Wales; Simon Walker, Institute of Directors; Andrew Murphy, John Lewis Partnership; Guy Grainger, Jones Lang LaSalle; George 

Kessler CBE, Kesslers International; Professor Sir Rick Trainor KBE, King’s College London; Robert Noel, Land Securities Group PLC; Tony 

Langham, Lansons Communications; Simon Hipperson, Lend Lease; Robert Elliott, Linklaters LLP; Sir Winfried Bischoff, Lloyds Banking Group; 

David Joy, London & Continental Railways; Colin Stanbridge, London Chamber of Commerce; Baroness Jo Valentine, London First; Professor 

Malcolm Gillies, London Higher; Mark Reynolds, Mace; John Morgan, Morgan Sindall Group PLC; James Fennell, Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners; 

Steve Holliday, National Grid PLC; Richard Dickinson, New West End Company; Lord Wolfson of Aspley Guise, Next; Sir Andrew Cahn, Nomura 

International PLC; Francis Salway, Open For Business Champions; Adrian Shooter CBE, Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership; Richard 

Everitt, Port of London Authority; Mark Bensted OBE, Powerday PLC; Ray Auvray, Prospects; John Rhodes, Quod; John Spencer, Regus; Graham 

Chipchase, Rexam; Professor Paul Webley, School of Oriental and African Studies; David Sleath, Segro PLC; Paul Kelly, Selfridges; Jon Pike, 

Sinclair Knight Merz; David McAlpine, Sir Robert McAlpine LTD; Sue Rimmer OBE, South Thames College; Philip Gawith, StockWell Group; 

John Synnuck, Swan Housing Association; Michael Tobin, TelecityGroup PLC; Tim Hancock, Terence O’Rourke LTD; Victor Chavez, Thales UK; 

Chris Grigg, The British Land Company PLC; Mike Nichols, The Nichols Group; Rebecca Kane, The O2; Bill Moore CBE, The Portman Estate; 

Daniel Levy, Tottenham Hotspur Football Club; Ric Lewis, Tristan Capital Partners; Ian Coulter, Tughans Solicitors & CBI Northern Ireland; 

Gary Forster, Turley Associates; Vincent Clancy, Turner & Townsend; David Levin, UBM PLC; Professor Michael Arthur, UCL; Basil Scarsella, 

UK Power Networks; Andrew Ridley-Barker, VINCI Construction UK; John Burton OBE, Westfield Group; Sir Martin Sorrell, WPP. 

@LetBritainFly 

letbritainfly.com 

The above named signatories have signed the Let Britain Fly founding statement. A full version is available at www.letbritainfly.com 

Advert published with the kind support of Aberdeen Asset Management, Canary Wharf Group, City of London Corporation, Harrods, Selfridges, 

SEGRO and Radisson Edwardian. 



INTERVIEW: CAMBRIDGE ASSESSMENT 

Time to allow education to breathe 

ADVERTORIAL 

When the name of the game is blame 

Simon Lebus, Chief Executive of Cambridge Assessment, tells Marcus 

Papadopoulos about the overriding need for stability in the education sector 

Irene Curtis, President of the Police Superintendents’ Association of England 

and Wales, reveals to Keith Richmond why it’s time to rethink the blame culture 

and acknowledge the difference between wrongdoing and genuine mistakes 

Q Can you describe the work of Cambridge 

Assessment? 

Established over 150 years ago, Cambridge 

Assessment is the department of the 

University of Cambridge which is responsible 

for owning and operating three exams 

boards and these consist of Oxford 

and Cambridge Royal Society for Arts 

Examinations, Cambridge International 

Exams and Cambridge English Language 

Assessment. 

Q How would you appraise Michael Gove’s 

tenure as Education Secretary? And what 

is your opinion of Tristram Hunt as Shadow 

Education Secretary? 

Through my job, I have been exposed 

to numerous Education Secretaries and, 

of course, one of the most important 

observations to make about Michael 

Gove is that he was Education Secretary 

for a much longer period of time than his 

predecessors hence he did have time to 

understand his brief and introduce some 

wide-ranging changes to education. Clearly, 

under Mr Gove, there was a lot of focus 

on the institutional and organisational 

arrangements around schools as well as a 

focus on examinations - re-evaluating how 

the examination system was operating - 

with the aim being to eventually create a 

more content driven style of qualification 

with an emphasis on leader qualifications. 

So, Mr Gove wanted to restore features to 

the education system which existed some 

ten or twenty years ago. 

As for Tristram Hunt, he has not been in 

the role for very long. However, during the 

time that he has been shadow education 

secretary, he has made numerous 

pronouncements about maintaining 

standards in schools and introducing 

regional standards commissioners together 

with re-introducing AS-Levels. Should Mr 

Hunt become Education Secretary after 

the 2015 general election, I suspect that 

while there may be some changes, Mr 


Gove’s reforms of the last four years will not 

be reversed. And I believe that would be 

prudent as the education sector desperately 

needs stability. 

Q Are there any steps which you would 

like to see the government take in regard 

to GCSEs and A-Levels? 

There is a lot of change in the pipeline with 

most of the syllabuses being revised, such as 

the grading system for GCSEs. I believe it is 

necessary for there to be time and space for 

those changes to take shape as we are now 

in a situation where the entire examinations 

system is in a process of major change from 

now until about 2018. 

Q What advice would you offer to whoever 

forms the government after next year’s 

general election? 

So far as the examinations sector 

specifically is concerned, there has been 

a lot of focus on general qualifications 

and school qualifications and there is still 

a sense that there is much to do about 

skills-based qualifications and employment 

qualifications. Further to that, I can only 

reiterate that the system requires time and 

space to absorb all the changes which have 

occurred over the last four years and to 

recognise that changes in education make 

their impact over a very long period of time 

and hence no one should expect to see the 

full impact of these changes for several years 

yet. 

Q Which areas do you believe the next 

government should focus on? 

In the area of qualifications, there has been 

a lot of talk about obtaining the appropriate 

qualifications in mathematics and thereby 

increasing the competence of young 

people in mathematics. Now, I believe that 

there is a significant amount of work to 

be carried out in that area. Furthermore, 

there should be a focus on the opportunities 

arising for mathematics education out 

of computerisation – computerised 

mathematics should be introduced into the 

curriculum. 

Q And lastly, can you describe how 

Cambridge Assessment works with 

parliamentarians. 

Qualifications is a complex area and there 

are many more qualifications out there than 

people realise – we have approximately 

70 syllabuses for GCSEs and A-Levels. In 

addition to that, there are lots of technical, 

complex questions over comparability 

between subjects. So, we maintain a 

dialogue with politicians at Westminster 

to ensure that they have a good degree of 

understanding and insight of the technical 

challenges concerning how the qualifications 

system operates but also how this interacts 

with education because the reality today 

is that examinations have a huge impact 

on how the act of learning is carried out 

within schools and other institutions and 

it is important that politicians understand 

the nature of this impact - both in terms of 

power and its limitations. Unfortunately, 

there has been a tendency among 

governments to use qualifications as an easy 

lever to administer changes in the education 

system and this can have unintended 

consequences. 


Q What’s driven your concern about a 

blame culture in policing? 

In recent years there has been an increase in 

scrutiny of policing and police actions, which 

I welcome. As a service we should be open, 

transparent and accountable. But within this 

culture officers, including those in senior 

leadership positions, need to be allowed to 

make genuine mistakes without the fear of 

disciplinary action. 

Q Is it really a blame culture, or are officers 

simply not doing their jobs properly? 

In any job, people will make mistakes or get 

things wrong. That’s human nature. More 

importantly, it’s a really important part of 

how people learn and get better at their jobs 

and find ways to improve the way things 

are done. Police officers are drawn from 

the communities they serve and they join 

because they want to serve the public and 

make a difference. They are often called 

upon to deal with situations where there is 

no obvious right or wrong solution and it is 

easy then to criticise what might have been 

said or done at the time. Police officers are 

not superhuman so, of course, on occasion, 

mistakes will be made. But a culture of 

blame where the reaction and response to 

an error is out of all proportion to that error 

helps no one. 

Q Is it an issue in the service? 

The evidence from our members suggests 

it is an issue, and one that is growing. 

There are examples of officers being served 

notices for gross misconduct (where they 

are likely to lose their job) in cases that 

ultimately result in them receiving advice for 

something they said which might have been 

clumsy but certainly wasn’t malicious. We’re 

trying to improve policing, and we’re asking 

officers to do more with less. This means 

we need the senior operational leaders in 

policing, my members in the superintending 

ranks, to think differently, be more creative 

with problem solving, even take risks where 


this is appropriate. So we cannot allow a 

culture to perpetuate where people are 

afraid to do this for fear of the consequences 

if they get something wrong. Those difficult 

decisions, that new way of thinking that 

we need if we are to continue to police 

effectively in a changed landscape, postreform, 

simply will not happen in a climate 

of blame. 

Q Does this mean serious mistakes will go 

unpunished? 

I’m not suggesting backing off from 

disciplinary measures where they are the 

right way to deal with a serious issue. We 

need to differentiate between the occasions 

– which are still, thankfully, few – of corrupt 

behaviour, and genuine errors made in the 

course of carrying out a difficult, demanding 

and sometimes dangerous job. There is no 

place in the police service for the former 

and that is what the disciplinary process is 

rightly in place for. What I am calling for is a 

greater acceptance of the latter and for the 

public and others who scrutinise policing to 

understand the difference and acknowledge 

that, as in all walks of life, mistakes do 

happen from time to time. 

Q Can you have one without the other? 

Yes I believe so, but you need everyone 

to commit to it. The aviation industry has 

achieved this by developing a culture of 

learning rather than blame when something 

goes wrong. 

This encourages pilots to report incidents 

and admit mistakes that might prevent 

a tragedy in the future. We should think 

about what the culture of blame does to an 

officer’s mindset and the way they approach 

the job. I think genuine errors, made with 

the right intentions, should not cause a 

blight on a person’s career or even end that 

career. 

Q How do you want to see this addressed 

in the Home Office review? 

Disciplinary procedures should be for 

wrongdoing, not necessarily for doing the 

wrong thing. It would be great if the review 

could consider how the service can move 

towards a culture of learning, so that officers 

can better serve the public by being given 

space to make mistakes from which they can 

then learn. 


ADVERTORIAL 

I can see clearly what the problem is 

Amazing things are happening 

ADVERTORIAL 

Tony Rucinski, Chief Executive of the Macular Society, explains to Keith 

Richmond his plan to cure – to sort, not just support – half of all the blindness 

in Britain 

Alison Seabrooke, Chief Executive of the Community Development 

Foundation, tells Keith Richmond how you can catalyse community action with 

small sums of money 

Q How are you going to sort blindness? 

Imagine if we could cure over half of all the 

blindness in the UK. Well, we could cure it, 

but we don’t. We choose to focus mainly 

on support instead. My vision is to change 

society by curing half of all sight loss. For 

the first time, this aspiration is real and 

achievable. I am the new Chief Executive 

of the Macular Society, and I am registered 

blind myself through macular dystrophy. 

Broadly speaking, my new role is simply to 

cure half of all the blindness in Britain. 

Q What sort of blindness? 

When you look at something, the sight 

in clear focus is the bit of your vision that 

lands on a tiny 3mm part of the retina at 

the back of your eye called the macula. 

Diseases of the macula account for more 

than half of all sight loss in the developed 

world. In the UK alone 600,000 people 

are living with the most common form, 

age-related macular degeneration and 200 

more are added each day. The Macular 

Society has the largest membership of 

any sight loss organisation, 17,000 so 

far. Our 300 local groups, run by 1,500 

volunteers, help our staff deliver some 

of the most life-changing services on the 

planet. But the best thing we could do 

for our members, for me personally, and 

for hundreds of thousands out there like 

us, is give sight back. All the researchers 

and senior clinicians I talk to tell me that 

only money stands between where we 

are today and the eradication of macular 

disease. Recent advances in genetic 

research, stem cell therapies and implants 

have, for the first time, reached a stage 

where the leading researchers are able 

to express such confidence. But we need 

investment in research. 

Q Aren’t millions of pounds already 

being invested? 

The annual UK investment in eye 

research is around £30 million – that’s 


for all eye conditions. Small and medium 

size charities, like the Macular Society, 

fund around 20% of that. The enormous 

Wellcome Trust funds another 20% and 

the rest is from government-funded 

organisations such as the National 

Institute for Health Research. But the 

NIHR spends only 0.9% of its budget on 

eye research. Compare that with what we 

spend supporting people with AMD. 

Q How much is spent on AMD? 

The NHS spends around £270 million 

a year treating wet AMD (the only 

treatable form). Drug costs are the third 

highest in the NHS. Most people have 

untreatable dry AMD and gradually lose 

their sight. There are huge knock-on costs 

to society in terms of benefit claims, 

the cost of social care and other health 

needs resulting from blindness such as 

depression, falls and burns. The two best 

known sight-loss charities in the UK have 

a turnover of around £120 million and 

£80 million respectively. It may surprise 

you to learn that of the £1 billion they 

will spend on (albeit great) support in the 

next five years, none of this money will 

go towards medical research to develop 

cures. Unbelievably, the Macular Society 

is the only patient organisation in the 

UK funding medical research into AMD. 

Overall we are spending around 10 times 

as much on support as we are spending on 

research. Isn’t it time we addressed such 

an obvious imbalance? 

Q Surely people need the support and 

treatment they are getting. Are you 

calling for less support for blind people? 

No, of course not. If anything, more. But 

we must address the lack of research or 

we will be wasting billions of pounds on 

blindness which could be cured. Official 

figures estimate that we will need to find 

money to support 4 million people with 

sight loss by 2050. But I ask you; would 

you rather just support them, or would you 

rather invest now to reduce that figure by 

more than half? I ask Parliamentarians and 

policy makers to help me do that. You are 

the people who can give me, and hundreds 

of thousands like me, not just support – 

but sight. 


Q Why did you start working with 

communities? 

Like a lot of people who start out helping 

in their community it began when I had 

children. I was a young mum who wanted 

somewhere I could socialise with my children 

so I became involved in a local parent and 

toddler group. We needed better premises 

so I, and other mums in the area, took a 

shared interest in making a run-down 1920s 

village hall fit for purpose. We found out 

about a local grant scheme, I wrote my first 

application, and never looked back! I went 

on to raise funds to build a purpose built 

community facility that today still serves the 

community in Riccall, North Yorkshire. 

Q Do you think it’s important that those 

making decisions about communities 

should follow a similar path? 

No, not necessarily but it is important to 

be realistic and grounded when making 

decisions about investment and support 

for communities. You have to consider how 

communities actually operate out of the 

policy bubble. By that I mean understanding 

how people come together, the triggers for 

community action and paying attention to 

what communities are saying. Only then 

can you craft policy and develop ideas 

that communities will run with. A lot of 

community activity comes out of issues or 

problems in an area and we shouldn’t shy 

away from recognising this. This can bring 

people together and trigger something far 

bigger than solving the issue at hand. 

Q What are the key issues that you think 

the government should be focusing on in 

the run-up to the general election? 

The run-up to any election is a time to really 

look ahead and plan for the future. We must 

remember, however, that communities 

don’t think in four year cycles and, for 

the most part, aren’t interested in pre- or 

post-election promises, they want to see 

positive changes in their community. It is 


more important than ever that deprived 

communities in the country get extra 

support. To tackle worklessness, improve 

local economies and help people take pride 

in where they live, we need to help mobilise 

these hard to reach communities. 

Q How can you reach these deprived 

communities? 

Small grant programmes like Community 

First, which we run for the Office for Civil 

Society, are a good example of how small 

sums of money can have an amazing 

impact and catalyse community action. A 

four year, £30 million grant programme, 

it offers small grants from £250-£2,500 

to community groups in 600 of the most 

deprived wards in the country. In three 

years, we have generated nearly 4 million 

volunteer hours. Communities must match 

what they are given in grants with cash 

raised or volunteer time or support in kind. 

The ripple effect has been huge. So far £16.7 

million worth of grants has generated £70 

million worth of match. We’re really proud to 

have delivered such a successful programme 

and look forward to more government-led 

programmes like this. 

Q Can such small sums really make a 

difference? Surely the groups will need 

more support after the grant has been 

spent? 

We are seeing, time and again, that great 

things happen from small beginnings. We 

funded a community group recently in 

Gloucester who ran a gardening project. 

Just the other day they called to thank us 

for what they saw as their start up grant of 

£2,500. The two young men involved in the 

project credited Community First as being 

the catalyst that turned their lives around. 

They now have enough experience to be 

part of an adult education course and are 

studying for an NVQ to teach woodwork 

which they hope will get them into full time 

employment. They continue to volunteer in 

their community on garden projects. We are 

encouraged by the resilience we see in these 

deprived communities. With a little bit of 

help from the government amazing things 

are happening all over the country. 


ADVERTORIAL 

An integral subject for children and 

young people 

Joe Hayman, Chief Executive of the PSHE Association, tells Marcus 

Papadopoulos about a crucial opportunity to improve the lives of children and 

young people 

NOW IS THE TIME TO BUILD A 

BETTER FUTURE FOR MENTAL 

HEALTH 

Paul Farmer, Chief Executive of Mind, the mental health charity 

Q What is PSHE education? 

PSHE education is Personal, Social, Health 

and Economic education. It is the part of 

the curriculum which helps school pupils 

to develop the skills and attributes which 

best prepare them for the challenges, 

opportunities and responsibilities of life. It 

teaches children how to keep themselves 

healthy and safe, to form strong 

relationships - whether in their personal 

lives or future careers - and gives them the 

employability skills they need to thrive in 

the jobs market. 

PSHE education is a crucially important 

subject, which is why we are calling on 

Parliamentarians to support a Bill to make 

it compulsory in schools. 

Q Why is it so important? 

Today’s school pupils are growing up in 

one of the most diverse countries in the 

world where old certainties like ‘a job for 

life’ no longer exist and in which children 

and young people may expect to live 

longer but not necessarily healthier or 

more financially-secure lives than their 

parents. 

They need not just qualifications but also 

the skills and aptitudes to thrive in a fastchanging 

environment that offers huge 

opportunities but few guarantees. Without 

an education system that acknowledges 

the links between such skills and 

attributes, good health, academic success 

and future employment, our economy and 

our society will suffer and pupils will lose 

out. 

Q What is the evidence? 

There is strong evidence showing the 

potential of PSHE education to have 

an impact not just on pupils’ health 

and wellbeing, but also on their future 

academic and employment success. 


A recent British Medical Journal editorial 

noted that “education and health are 

synergistic… students in better health do 

better academically”, citing countries such 

as Finland, Singapore and Sweden which 

have great academic success and place a 

greater emphasis on pupil health. 

That ‘synergistic’ relationship was 

reinforced when the Chief Medical Officer 

referred to PSHE education as a “bridge 

between education and public health” in 

her most recent annual report. 

A series of reports in recent years have 

also emphasised the importance to pupils’ 

life chances of the skills and attributes 

which PSHE education seeks to develop. 

A 2011 Demos report noted that “soft 

skills” such as communication, teamwork 

and application are as important as 

academic ability in predicting earnings at 

age 30, while the CBI and British Chamber 

of Commerce have just this year called 

for schools to do more to help pupils to 

develop these skills. 

Q How do pupils and parents feel about 

PSHE? 

There Is clear evidence that both children 

and parents want this focus in the 

curriculum to complement and support 

academic learning. YouGov research 

commissioned by the PSHE Association 

this May shows that 90 per cent of parents 

agree that children and young people 

should receive lessons that prepare them 

for life and work alongside academic 

study, while half a million young people 

were involved in making “a curriculum 

which prepares us for life” the UK Youth 

Parliament’s priority campaign in England 

in 2014. 

Q What would you like to see Parliament 

do? 

Parliamentarians from all parties have 

an immediate opportunity to help realise 

the potential of PSHE education. Caroline 

Lucas MP has tabled a Bill to make 

the subject a compulsory part of the 

curriculum. 

MPs from across the political spectrum 

have indicated their support for the 

subject and we are calling for a free vote 

and sufficient Parliamentary time for 

the Bill’s second reading this October. 

That would enable MPs from all sides to 

put their support into action and make 

compulsory PSHE education a reality. 

We know that there is commitment 

across the political spectrum to ensuring 

that schools help children to stay healthy 

and safe and to thrive in their future 

careers. 

PSHE can help to achieve that aim but 

this potential can only be realised when 

the subject is taught by trained teachers 

and given sufficient time in school 

timetables – and that is why we are calling 

on MPs to support Caroline Lucas’ Bill. 

It’s a crucial time for the cause of mental health. The spotlight 

is firmly on us and mental health is being talked about like 

never before. At a policy level we are seeing positive change 

at a pace we haven’t seen for many years, yet growing 

pressures on the NHS and other services mean that many 

people with mental health problems just aren’t getting the 

help they need. It’s difficult to celebrate the positive steps 

that have been taken when 

our infoline and local Minds 

are being inundated with 

people struggling to cope. 

The recent sad news of 

Robin Williams’ death gave 

many people the courage 

to speak out about their 

own mental health problems 

and countless radio stations 

open their phone lines 

and provided a platform 

for frank discussion about 

depression, suicide and 

the daily struggle that some 

of us face. Meanwhile, the 

fierce public backlash when 

some parts of the tabloid 

press reported gratuitous 

detail about his suicide sent 

a clear signal that some 

media outlets are well out of 

step with the public mood. 

Thanks to programmes like 

Time to Change, an antistigma 

campaign that Mind runs with Rethink Mental Illness, 

public attitudes are clearly changing. 

We were also reminded, however, of how far we have yet to 

go. I have lost count of the number of times I was asked how 

such a happy, extroverted man such as Williams, who had a 

great job and a loving family could possibly have struggled 

so much he felt the need to end his life. We still seem unwilling 

to accept that mental health doesn’t discriminate and that 

a person has no more control over depression or bipolar 

disorder than they would a heart condition or a broken leg. 

Mind’s message on the day we learned of Williams’ death 

was that it’s ok to speak out. But many of our supporters, 

angry and frustrated at the current state of mental health 

services, pointed out that speaking out doesn’t necessary 

mean you get the help you need. We know that the NHS 

is under significant pressure but funding for mental health 

services has been cut for three consecutive years, and 

more severely than other parts of the NHS. After years of 

chronic underinvestment, 

there just isn’t any room for 

belt-tightening – the impact 

of these cuts falls squarely 

on patient care, meaning 

longer waits for therapy and 

a crisis care system that 

doesn’t respond with same 

urgency we expect for a 

physical health emergency. 

There isn’t a parliamentary 

candidate in the country for 

whom mental health isn’t 

relevant. We all have mental 

health, just like we all have 

physical health, and in each 

and every constituency 

one in four people will be 

experiencing a mental 

health problem. We need to 

see mental health given the 

same priority as physical 

health and, while the main 

parties all agree and are 

committed to this principle, 

we have yet to see real change on the ground. 

We need to see maximum waiting times like those for 

physical health, such as access to talking therapies within 

28 days. We need to see safe, speedy access to urgent 

care in a crisis and an end to bed shortages and the use 

of police cells for people who are acutely unwell. Ultimately, 

uncomfortable and unrealistic as it may seem in the current 

climate, we need to see investment in mental health services 

to bring them up to a basic standard. 

Whoever forms our next government must take mental health 

seriously and give it the priority it so urgently needs. 


ADVERTORIAL 

Talking about mental illnesses 

INTERVIEW: SOCIETY FOR GENERAL MICROBIOLOGY 

Remedying the surge of new bacteria 

David Pink, Chief Executive of the UK Council for Psychotherapy, discusses 

with Marcus Papadopoulos the need to ensure that mental health provision is a 

high priority at Westminster 

Professor Nigel Brown, President of the Society for General Microbiology, tells 

Marcus Papadopoulos of the urgent need to develop new antibiotics to counter 

ever-increasingly resistant bacteria 

Q What is psychotherapy and what does 

the UK Council for Psychotherapy do? 

Psychotherapy is an established form of 

talking therapy which can help people 

come to terms with how they feel. At 

times of crisis, at times when people 

have suffered a loss, or when people are 

seriously rethinking their direction in 

life, psychotherapy can be an invaluable 

tool. Psychotherapists listen to and work 

with people to help them manage often 

powerful feelings of conflict and torment. 

The UK Council for Psychotherapy 

is the national registration body for 

psychotherapists and psychotherapeutic 

counsellors in the UK. Our mission is 

twofold: to ensure the profession is wellregulated 

and to ensure more people can 

access good quality psychotherapeutic 

support. 

Q Do you think it is time for there 

to be statutory regulation for 

psychotherapists and counsellors? 

UKCP believes in regulation. That is 

what we were set up to do, and have 

continued to do for over 20 years. Under 

the Coalition Government, a governmentapproved 

voluntary registration scheme 

has been established. The thinking here 

is that this is a proportionate response to 

the risks involved. Realistically, it is the 

only form of regulation on the table at 

the present time. We have worked with 

the Professional Standards Authority to 

develop the registration scheme and now 

we need to give it time to see how it works 

in practice. Ultimately, though, it is for 

legislators to decide on legislation. 

Q What are some of the pressing issues 

for the therapy profession at the 

moment? 

They are as follows: improving access 

to good quality psychotherapy services; 

making treatment options available if 


patients do not benefit from current NHS 

therapy services; protecting the public 

from the risks of so-called “gay conversion 

therapy”; and stimulating debate about 

current approaches to mental ill-health 

and wellbeing. 

Q Some people are sceptical about 

whether counselling and psychotherapy 

are effective. Is therapy a modern 

indulgence or a scientific treatment? 

Psychotherapy has long been recognised 

as a highly effective form of treatment. 

Even the NHS’s rationing agency, 

NICE, recommends several types of 

psychotherapy as first-line treatment 

options. Interestingly, given the choice, 

three quarters of patients say they 

prefer talking treatments to medication 

for mental health issues. Of course, we 

need to use all tools at our disposal to 

help people in need. But the idea that 

psychotherapy and counselling should 

not play a part in that mix, or is a modern 

indulgence, is just wrong. We need much 

more research into what works for whom, 

and how. But the evidence is there that 

psychological therapies can help people 

who are in distress. 

Q What is CBT? Is that what you stand 

for? 

CBT stands for Cognitive Behavioural 

Therapy. It is a type of psychotherapy 

which has become very popular in recent 

years. CBT focuses on the here and now, 

and practical ways to help people improve 

their mood. For conditions like anxiety, it 

tends to help people in about 50 per cent 

of cases. CBT is one important type of 

therapy, but not the only one. UKCP has 

a range of practitioners from different 

schools of psychotherapy. 

While we support the advancement 

of all forms of therapy, we remain 

concerned that the focus on CBT means 

other approaches which may suit some 

people better are being overlooked. Many 

patients struggle to access any form of 

therapy on the NHS. And, if CBT does not 

work for them, further support is so rarely 

available. It really is a scandal. 

Q Why do you lobby and engage at 

events such as the party conferences? 

The mental health lobby is gaining in 

voice, and we are a key part of that. 

Historically, mental health has been 

a stigmatised issue, and while that is 

beginning to change, there is still a long 

way to go. Being present at conferences 

is one more way in which we ensure that 

mental health remains at the forefront 

of the minds of our political leaders, and 

helps people become more comfortable 

with discussing the vital issues which we 

all face. 

We are here with our colleagues at the 

British Psychoanalytic Council and the We 

Need to Talk coalition, ensuring mental 

health is not relegated to the margins 

despite constrained financial times. 


Q Can you describe your professional 

background. 

My area of research expertise was bacterial 

genetics, focusing on antimicrobial metals 

including copper, which can be used in 

hospital handles and surfaces to prevent 

infection. Previously, I have worked as 

Director of Science and Technology at the 

Biotechnology and Biological Research 

Council and recently as Vice-Principal at the 

University of Edinburgh. 

Currently, I am President of the Society for 

General Microbiology, the largest learned 

microbiological society in Europe. The 

Society was founded in 1945 with Alexander 

Fleming as its first president. We publish five 

research journals and organise conferences 

to bring together microbiologists from 

across the globe. 

Q How does microbiology impact on our 

daily lives? 

Microbiology is the study of small organisms 

of all descriptions, typically bacteria, viruses 

and fungi. People know the obvious things 

that microbes are involved in, such as the 

making of bread and beer, but what is 

perhaps not so well known is that they have 

a vital role in agriculture. Microorganisms 

help keep the soil healthy, allowing plants 

to grow. Of course, we also know that many 

microbes are capable of causing disease. 

Ebola, caused by a virus, has been in the 

news a lot recently, as has food poisoning 

caused by Campylobacter bacteria that can 

be caught from eating incorrectly cooked 

chicken. 

Q There has been a lot of talk about 

antibiotic resistance in the media. Is it as 

much of a problem as has been suggested? 

We have had effective antibiotics since 

the 1940s, and these are used routinely in 

both medicine and farming to treat disease 

in humans and animals. The problem we 

are facing is that bacteria are becoming 


increasingly resistant to those drugs. Some 

bacteria are fantastically promiscuous 

and share sections of their DNA with their 

neighbours. That sharing is one of the ways 

that antibiotic resistance is able to spread. 

Antibiotic resistances can accumulate, 

leading to organisms that are resistant to 

multiple drugs. 

I could say that my career in antibiotic 

research is defined by gonorrhoea: when 

I started out as a researcher, gonorrhoea 

resistant to penicillin had just documented. 

Now, almost 40 years later, there are strains 

of the disease that are resistant to almost 

every antibiotic we have available. We 

anticipate that the remaining drugs will 

become useless in the next 5-10 years and 

the disease will become untreatable without 

new antibiotics. 

Q What can be done to prevent that 

situation occurring? 

We really have to ensure that we have an 

infrastructure in place to let us discover 

new drugs. In the past 30 years, only 

two new classes of antibiotics have been 

developed. Researchers are working hard to 

find new sources of antibiotics, modifying 

existing drugs to make them more efficient, 

or looking to develop ‘anti-infectives’, 

chemicals synthesised in a laboratory that 

can be used to kill bacteria. 

The Society for General Microbiology is 

bringing together experts from different 

areas of microbiology and working with 

other societies like the Royal Society of 

Chemistry to help form collaborations 

between scientific disciplines. 

It is important that the wider public is 

aware of the issue hence we work with our 

members to take the message to the media, 

to schools and to other public groups. 

Q How much does it cost to bring a new 

drug to market? 

It costs millions of dollars to develop a new 

antibiotic, with most of the costs associated 

with Stage II and Stage III clinical trials. 

One of the major issues facing antibiotic 

development is that the drugs are typically 

used over a short period of time, perhaps 

a week, giving much less return to drug 

companies than long-term, lifestyle drugs 

like statins. 

Q What can parliamentarians do to help 

with the problem of antibiotic resistance? 

Currently, looking for new antibiotics 

happens in SMEs, but these companies 

cannot bear the cost of large-scale clinical 

trials. We need to stimulate the research 

environment and ensure that funding is 

appropriately allocated to the research 

councils, but also to look for tax incentives 

so that companies can benefit from 

undertaking research in this area. In the 

longer-term, if we are faced with a dire 

emergency: we need to investigate how we 

can fast-track potential drugs through the 

later stages of clinical trials. 


ADVERTORIAL 

Politicians must listen more carefully 

to the glass and glazing industry 

Nigel Rees, Group Chief Executive of the Glass and Glazing Federation, tells 

Marcus Papadopoulos about the multiple campaigns his organisation is 

involved in on behalf of the Glass and Glazing Industry 

Q Following the latest DECC statistics on 

the Green Deal and ECO, how does the 

Glass and Glazing Federation (GGF) feel 

about the Government’s drive towards 

increasing energy efficiency in the UK 

building stock? 

The statistics clearly show that the Green 

Deal has done little for the glass and 

glazing industry. The scheme’s slow uptake 

underlines the GGF’s original concerns; it is 

over-complicated, there are already better 

consumer finance deals and the homeowner 

incentives have not worked effectively for 

all measures. For trade, the Government has 

failed to encourage companies to become 

Green Deal Certified Installers due to the cost, 

time and effort that companies incur with no 

guarantee of more work. 

Q In view of that, what would you 

suggest to the Government, or any future 

Government, to help homeowners save on 

fuel bills and make properties more energy 

efficient? 

Whether it is the Green Deal or an alternative 

scheme, the Government must address the 

issue of the energy efficiency of buildings. 

That is not just to help homeowners and 

companies save money but also to help them 

reduce their carbon emissions. Approximately 

80 per cent of domestic properties in the UK 

do not have energy efficient glazing and over 

20 per cent of a property’s heat is lost through 

inferior glazing. 

To make any scheme work, the GGF 

advocates a whole house approach and 

homeowner incentives to encourage 

installation of energy efficient glazing to 

replace pre-2002 double and single glazed 

windows. 

In addition to that, the Government has 

to make qualification for the carrying out of 

energy efficient work easier for bona fide 

companies. It is counter-productive to force 

hardworking companies, mostly SMEs, to 

continually prove themselves at a cost that 

many simply cannot afford. 

Q How is your campaign to Cut the VAT 

on home improvement, maintenance and 

repair work developing? 

The campaign is one we have been working 

on for several years with a coalition of other 

trade bodies and related organisations. 

Earlier this year, we sponsored an 

independent research report conducted by 

Experian. 

The report was launched at a House of 

Commons Reception this March and 

highlighted that a VAT rate reduction on 

housing renovation and repair could boost 

the UK economy by more than £15 billion 

from 2015 to 2020. That reduction could 

also create more than 95,000 jobs and save 

240,000 tonnes of CO2 from thousands of 

homes. 

Running parallel to that campaign, we are 

also urging the Government to reduce the 

VAT on Energy Efficient Glazing to bring it 

into parity with other energy saving products 

that have a 5 per cent VAT rating. 

We will continue to lobby for those changes 

because reducing the VAT has significant 

long- term gains, not only for economic 

growth and job creation, but also for carbon 

reduction, as many contemporary home 

improvements will include the installation of 

energy efficient products. 

Q With regards to the GGF Fire Safety 

Campaign, how important is it for the 

Government to act on the issues around 

Fire Safety in buildings? 

It is vitally important. It makes no sense to 

have a certification for domestic glazing 

yet public buildings such as hospitals and 

schools – where the risk and potential loss 

of life is higher – can currently have fire 

resistant glazing installed by an untrained 

and unqualified installer with no certification. 

We are lobbying Government to introduce 

a compulsory certification scheme for the 

installation of Fire Resistant Glazing. 

Q Which other campaigns are the GGF 

working on for the party conferences and 

the forthcoming 2015 election? 

The Consumer Rights Bill is due to be enacted 

in October 2015 and we are working with 

BIS to ensure it does not adversely affect our 

Members and has no major impact on our 

industry. 

We are also still working with DEFRA to 

find a way to cut the red tape caused by 

the Government transferring ownership 

of private sewers and lateral drains from 

homeowners to private water companies. 

That has caused delays and additional 

costs to homeowners wanting to install 

conservatories in their homes. 

Q Finally, is the GGF looking forward to the 

party conferences and next year’s general 

election? 

The next 12 months should be interesting. 

No matter who is running the country, we 

will ensure the issues affecting the Glass and 

PLAIN PACKAGING 

Does hurt. Doesn’t work. 

Australia introduced plain 

packaging in December 2012. Since 

then the black market has grown 

to record levels, costing Australian 

taxpayers more than AUD$1billion. 

Australia now faces the biggest 

WTO challenge in history. It has not 

cut smoking rates and Australian 

politicians are now calling for the 

law to be repealed. 

Australia - Booming black market 

The UK Should Wait 

“It won’t stop people smoking. 

We know that.” 

Dr James Cant, Head of the British Lung 

Foundation (Scotland) – 2014 

“It is reasonable for other 

countries to wait until the 

evidence has been gathered by 

the piloting of this initiative.” 

Paul Glasziou, Professor of Evidence- 

Based Medicine at Bond University on 

Australia’s Gold Coast, interviewed for 

The Lancet - 2014 

The black market in Australia has reached record levels with new illicit 

‘brands’ outselling major legal brands. Authorities have had to quadruple 

fines for selling illicit tobacco to tackle the problem. 

• Illicit market grown by 12.7% – now representing 13.9% of the entire 

tobacco market (KPMG - 2014) - an 18% increase 

• Seizures have more than doubled from 82 million illegal cigarettes to 200 

million (Australian Customs and Border Protection Service - 2013) 

• 151% increase in the sale of new illegal branded packs. (KPMG - 2014) 

Australia - Taxpayers & the Economy Hit 

The Australian Treasury are now losing AUS$1.1billion to the illicit trade in 

tobacco. Australia is also facing the world’s largest trading dispute via the 

WTO. Small retailers are being undercut by illegal ‘pop-up’ shops selling 

tobacco without any regard to the buyer’s age. 

• AUS$1.1billion of tax revenue lost to the black market (KPMG - 2014) 

• Australia faces the biggest ever WTO challenge from 5 countries (WTO - 

2014) 

• Small shops losing up to AUS$15,000 a week (Roy Morgan Research - 2013) 

Australia - No Cut in Smoking 

Since Australia introduced plain packaging smoking rates have stopped 

falling with some studies even showing a small increase. 

• The quantity of legal tobacco sold actually rose by 59 million cigarettes in 

the first year after plain packaging (KPMG - 2014) 

• No change in smoking prevalence (London Economics - 2013) 

• No evidence of a drop in youth smoking (Ashok Kaul and Michael Wolf, 

University of Zurich - 2014) 

Australia will commence a review of the impact 

of plain packaging legislation at the end of 2014. 

“It would be unwise to push for wider 

implementation of the policy unless 

and until the evidence base itself is 

substantially strengthened.” 

Dr Neil McKeganey, Director of the Drugs Misuse 

Research Centre in Glasgow - 2014 

“Governments that inherit bad policy 

should have the courage to stick to their 

original convictions and review legislation 

that clearly isn’t working.” 

David Leyonhjelm is the Australian Liberal 

Democrats’ Senator-elect for New South Wales - 2014 

Australia’s Gold Coast, interviewed for The Lancet - 2014 

What would it mean for UK black 

market? 

A booming black market in the UK that is already growing faster 

than anywhere else in Europe. 

• Young people are a key target for black market traders with 

almost half of tobacco consumed by 14 -17 year olds already 

illicit (ASH - 2011) 

• Plain packs could cause an increase of over 30% in illicit trade 

(Cebr - 2013) 

What would it mean for the UK 

economy? 

Risk the recovery by costing the Treasury billions, threatening jobs 

and hurting the UK economy. 

• UK is already losing 2.9BN in tax revenue to the illicit trade, and 

Cebr calculate a 27% increase if plain packaging is introduced. 

(HMRC - 2013) 

• 30,000 jobs in small retailers at stake (Cebr - 2013) 

What would it mean for UK smoking 

rates? 

Evidence from Australia shows that plain packaging will not lead 

to a reduction in smoking. 

PROVEN ALTERNATIVES THAT WORK 

Education has been shown to be key in preventing 

children from taking up smoking. In Germany the ‘Be 

Smart Don’t Start’ programme has seen youth smoking 

rates halved in a decade, and amongst 12 - 16 year 

olds rates have fallen by almost two thirds. (Be Smart 

Don’t Start | German School Based Anti Smoking) 



“ 

FEATURES: 

Anglo-Russian relations: the Bear, 

the Lion and the Great Game that 

has been played for over 100 years 

Professor Michael Jabara Carley, 

Department of History, Université de Montréal 

London’s 

Russophobia is 

nothing 

“ 

new 

“ 

FEATURES: 

Are we locked into 

this everlasting 

cycle of hostility? 

“ 

in the 1930s, “Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia?” Conservative 

Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain was sure he could work with 

Adolf Hitler. The Munich agreement in 1938 was his crowning 

achievement, so he thought for a few months, encouraged by the 

bouquets of flowers left at his front door. 

Well, then, thought Iosef Stalin: if Chamberlain can conclude 

the Munich accord, I can do him one better, was the attitude of the 

Soviet leader. That was the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact. Tit 

for tat, it was, but no more successful than British policy had been. 

They are not really fascists, say the US and British governments, 

but there are none so blind as those who will not see. Apply the 

“duck rule”: if they look like fascists, talk like fascists and act like 

fascists, they probably are fascists. 

The February putsch in Kiev led to the reunification of the Crimea 

with Russia. It provoked massacres in Odessa, Mariupol, Donetsk 

and many other places in south-eastern Ukraine, perpetrated by 

the Right Sector and their fascist militias. Let us call a spade, a 

spade. 

Since 1917, Anglo-Soviet and Russian relations have been 

strained or hostile. That makes nearly 100 years, with the 

partial exception, and I emphasise the word partial, of World 

War II. 

Between 1917 and 1920, the British government spent more 

than £100 million on attempting to strangle Soviet Russia at birth. 

British and other Allied troops were sent to Russia and shot at 

Bolsheviks on sight. It turned out to a bad idea. “The complete 

failure of a ridiculous adventure”, opined one French officer. 

In the early 1920s, Liberal Prime Minister David Lloyd George 

tried to change course, pursuing a pragmatic policy toward Moscow 

based on mutually profitable trade relations. The Conservative 

party, driven by its “Die-Hard” wing, was against him and wanted 

a confrontation with the USSR. Russians are not like us, said the 

Tories, referring to them as brutish “Orientals” and arguing that 

their hold on “civilisation” was only “skin deep”. 

British hostility continued during the 1930s, driven by anticommunism. 

“You know the Tories,” said one contemporary 

observer, even as the threat of fascism began to destabilise 

European security. “Who is enemy no. 1” was the big question 

Britain and the USSR were forced together to face a mortal 

common danger during World War II. The enemy of my enemy is 

my ally is a good principle of statecraft but even during World War II 

it was not always easy to apply. After the Soviet victory at Moscow 

in December 1941, senior Foreign Office officials worried that the 

Red Army might defeat Nazi Germany single-handedly. Better for 

us, they said, that there should be a stalemate until we are stronger. 

And Winston Churchill was quick to mistrust the USSR. 

“Barbarians”, he said the Russians were, even as the Red Army 

bore the main weight of the war against Nazi forces. Churchill 

delayed a second front as long as he could. And as Soviet victories 

mounted, so did Churchill’s disquiet. No sooner was there victory in 

Europe than the Anglo-Soviet alliance deteriorated. In May 1945, 

two weeks after Nazi Germany capitulated, the War Office Joint 

Planning Staff produced the top secret “Operation Unthinkable,” a 

contingency plan for war with the USSR. Fighting with Japan was 

not yet over but already the old hostility was re-emerging. It was 

the beginning of the post-1945 Cold War which went on with ups 

and downs for more than forty years. 

After the collapse and dismemberment of the USSR in 1991, 

it should have been bygones be bygones. As long as there was 

a weak and ineffectual leader in the Kremlin (Boris Yeltsin), that 

seemed a reasonable position because, after all, the west and 

NATO could do what they wanted. 

Why NATO you might ask? With the end of the USSR, surely 

it should have disappeared. However, not only did NATO not 

disappear but, contrary to promises made to Moscow, it expanded 

right up to Russia’s western frontiers. 

In 2000, Vladimir Putin became Russian president. He offered 

the west security cooperation and trade and investment. It would 

be profitable for both sides, Putin said, and lead to Russian political 

and economic integration with the rest of Europe. It was a good 

plan and started to work, too. With Germany alone, Russia does 

nearly €76.5 billion in annual trade. Trade with the UK is not as rich 

but, even so, amounts annually to US$13 billion. Does trade serve 

British national interests? Does it provide contracts for British firms 

and employment for British workers? Yes, it does, not to mention 

investment possibilities. 

One power, the United States, looks upon those developments 

with increasing disquiet. Russian integration into Europe might 

lead to a more multi-polar world and Europe could regain some of 

the political independence it lost after World War II. NATO might 

play a less important role and, eventually, be disbanded, for, after 

all, a Russia integrated into Europe would represent no threat at 

all. For the US, that is unacceptable; it means the end of American 

world domination. 

Almost from the beginning of Putin’s presidency, Western 

mainstream media began demonising him. Read back issues of the 

Guardian or Independent, for example, not to mention the British 

yellow press. Putin is the ex-KGB man, with hammers and sickles in 

his eyes. He is slowly morphing into a new Stalin. 

The Ukraine crisis, which erupted this February with the 

overthrow of the democratically elected Ukrainian president Viktor 

Yanukovich, has enhanced the West’s negative perceptions of the 

Russian leader. 

Putin is blamed for the Ukraine mess, a new Hitler he is, but 

everyone knows that the US and European Union were behind the 

putsch. The new regime’s strongest support came from so-called 

“Right Sector” paramilitary forces and the Svoboda party, both of 

which claim spiritual and political descendence from World War II 

Ukrainian fascists. Stepan Bandera, the Nazi collaborator, is their 

greatest forebear. 

Open war broke out after the Lugansk and Donetsk regions 

held referendums and declared independence or a form of strong 

autonomy from Kiev. That fighting is fierce and its outcome is, 

at this writing, uncertain. Then, this July, Malaysian Air flight 17 

crashed near Donetsk. Before any investigation whatsoever, the 

British and US governments indicted Putin and the anti-fascist 

resistance in Novorossiia (south-eastern Ukraine). The British press 

turned completely yellow, and blamed everything on Putin and 

Russia. Headlines were shocking. “Putin’s Killed my Son”, shrieked 

the Daily Mail. 

The Russian general staff released satellite and radar data 

contradicting the unfounded accusations of the US and British 

governments and the Kiev junta. Shortly thereafter, the US began 

to climb down from its accusations against Russia. Damage had, 

nevertheless, been done. The US and Britain are leading the charge 

for renewed Russian isolation and containment. 

Is that a wise policy? Can it be justified, apart from the British 

government’s loyalty to its US “special relationship”? Do the UK 

and EU have an interest or not in good political and economic 

relations with Russia? Clearly they do, as Lloyd George argued long 

ago in similar circumstances. It is a natural relationship, “a perfect 

fit”, says one observer. Why would the British government pursue 

policies contrary to that “perfect fit” and British national interests? 

Of course, London’s Russophobia is nothing new. British hostility 

toward Russia has endured for nearly 100 years or longer if one 

looks back into the nineteenth-century. 

The more things change, the more they stay the same, you 

might think. But are we locked into this everlasting cycle of 

hostility? Is it not time for reflection about British foreign policy 

and British national interests before something irreparable occurs? 

Pragmatism and common sense should not be dirty words even if, 

for nearly 100 years, they have had insufficient influence on British 

policy toward Russia. 

Professor Michael Jabara Carley is the author of Silent Conflict: A 

Hidden History of Early Soviet-Western Relations 





FEATURES: 

FEATURES: 

The Burma-Thailand Railway: 

reflections of a survivor 

Sir Harold Atcherley, 

a veteran of the Malaysian campaign of World War Two 

Feelings of hatred 

are displayed 

“ 

more 

by those who have 

never been directly 

involved 

Putting the public first and not 

shying away from doing so 

Steve White, 

Chairman of the Police Federation of England and Wales 

“ 

“ 

We will not shy away 

from challenging 

poor decisions 

Death from cholera was so quick that, sometimes, men who 

had been out working a day or two before, were themselves 

cremated 24 hours later. 

“ 

Many diseases were the cause of death, but common to all 

were exhaustion through overwork and starvation. Beriberi was 

one of the more lasting diseases, which caused paralysis in the 

limbs. 

One’s feet hung down uselessly from the ankle and we found 

that by tying one end of a length of liana (that cordlike jungle 

plant growing up trees) round our big toes and the other above 

the knee, our feet could be held up to enable us to hobble 

to work, which we were forced to do, unless the Japanese 

recognised that we were incapable of standing up. 

geographic spread of the area of responsibility is equivalent to the 

size of Belgium. While that places immense pressure on all the 

police officers involved, greater still is the potential impact it may 

have on the public. 

When I was stationed out of Bristol 13 years ago as an armed 

response officer, we did not have the potential of having to travel 

100 miles to get to a call out. We used to put out two armed 

response vehicles, a minimum of three double-crewed motorway 

cars, usually several motorbikes and an unmarked car. In a 

relatively short space of time, so much has changed. The officers 

in Tri-Force have a markedly vast area to police with much less 

resources. 

Last year marked the 70th anniversary of the completion of 

the Burma-Thailand Railway. 

Some 100,000 British, Indian and Australian troops 

were captured when Singapore surrendered to the Japanese in 

February 1942. Their loss had been rendered inevitable by the 

British government’s failure to provide essential armaments and 

its widespread ignorance of Japanese preparations for war. 

The building of the Burma-Thailand Railway cost the lives of 

15,000 POWs and 100,000 civilian workers. Of the original 1,700 

who had started work near the Burma-Thailand border at Son 

Kurai, 1,300 were dead by the time the line was completed. By 

the end of the war, I was one of only 200 survivors. 

A typical working day was never less than 14 and often 18 

hours. We worked, ate and slept in huts without roofs under 

incessant monsoon rain for the first few weeks on an inadequate 

ration of rancid rice full of maggots and a small quantity of onion 

stew. Clothing rotted and footwear wore out, so that most of us 

went barefoot. There was a dramatic increase in cases of jungle 

ulcers, caused by cuts from razor sharp bamboo splinters. Those 

ulcers quickly became sceptic and often extended from knee 

to foot with the bone exposed. They could only be treated by 

applying maggots, or scraping them with spoons, to clean out 

the rotting flesh. Many victims did not survive. 

Our main task at Sonkurai was to build a three span timber 

bridge. The only tools we were given were chungkols, pickaxes, 

saws and axes. There were no mechanical aides to help us with 

heavier work, but there were elephants for pulling sections of 

tree trunks down to the saw mill by the river. 

We had to cremate the dead; one lot of bodies being burned 

on several fires and others awaiting their turn nearby - up to 14 

per day. 

Operations, mostly amputations, were performed without 

anaesthetic – we had none, doctors using sharpened table 

knives and a saw borrowed from the Japanese engineers. 

Medical supplies were non-existent and banana leaves being 

used for dressings. 

Should the allies have attempted to regain control of 

South-East Asia by force, the Japanese would have massacred 

all POWs. We were to be taken by truck to the beaches of 

Singapore and machine gunned. 

The dropping of the two atom bombs saved not only the 

lives of all prisoners but hundreds of thousands more, not least 

civilians in Japan, where starvation was rife. 

There were, of course, many civilised men in the Japanese 

army who did whatever they could to help us. Feelings of hatred 

are displayed more by those who have never been directly 

involved, led by politicians and the media. 

There are good and bad people in every country and every 

walk of life. Hatred only damages those who hate, and is too 

often aimed at whole groups or nations. 

When Japanese troops were marched out of Singapore as 

prisoners at the end of the war, one of our soldiers said to his 

friends: “Poor sods; now it’s their turn.” That did not reveal any 

hatred of the Japanese and I found this to be true of the vast 

majority. 

The British ignorance of history and of the world in which we 

live is as strong today as it was a century ago, and one is at a loss 

to know what can be done to change the way in which we are 

governed. I believe the younger generation has the capacity to 

start the process. 

They are far less nationalistic than my generation, and with 

ever faster communication systems at their fingertips, they are 

better equipped to improve the quality of government than any 

previous generation. 

Prisoner of Japan: A Personal War Diary by Sir Harold Atcherley is 

published by Memoirs Publishing 

Collaboration between police forces is often flouted as a 

political solution when it comes to making efficiency savings 

for police forces, but does this really benefit the public or is it 

merely a quick fix to save money? 

I suppose the simple answer to that complex question is that 

it depends on how it is done. Since becoming Chairman of the 

Police Federation of England and Wales in May this year, I have 

been determined to engage with all our membership to ensure 

that I am best placed to represent them in my conversations with 

parliamentarians and other external stakeholders. 

I came to office as Chairman acutely aware that criticism of 

the Police Federation during the past year will not only have 

undermined public and political confidence in our organisation, 

but also the confidence of our members, too. While the internal 

reform programme we are implementing will make strides to 

assist rebuilding trust through being more open, transparent and 

accountable, I recognised the importance of directly engaging with 

the hard-working police officers across England and Wales. 

With that in mind, I am travelling around the country meeting 

officers from different forces, hearing first-hand the challenges and 

pressures they face every day, the impact of increasing demands 

and fewer officers and the innovative solutions they have to deliver 

the very best possible service to their local communities. 

This August, I worked a late shift in Bristol with Tri-Force specialist 

operations where I saw first-hand many things – but specifically 

force collaboration in practice. Avon and Somerset, Gloucestershire 

and Wiltshire police have merged their armed response and roads 

policing operations. That is no small task considering that the 

Those police officers cope admirably and do a remarkable job, 

considering the role is one with tremendous pressure and very little, 

if any, downtime between dealing with one incident and the next. 

Many officers are in the same situation and, despite their continued 

best efforts and those of their chief constables, service levels are 

simply not where they were and, importantly, not where they 

should be. 

With such drastic measures to cuts costs comes greater demand 

and increased pressure. The transition to Tri-Force has not been 

easy, with an uncoordinated approach to the merging of IT and 

radio systems and with such a vast geographical area to cover, 

contact with senior managers is few and far between. I appreciate 

that cuts to the policing budget means chief constables are under 

pressure to make huge savings, but I do question whether this 

sticking plaster solution will prove beneficial for the public in the 

long-term. 

The Police Federation has long called for a holistic review of 

policing and the criminal justice system. Piecemeal reform to 

frontline services may deliver quick savings but the long- term cost 

to the public seems to be ignored by those enforcing the changes. 

As part of the reform of the Police Federation of England and 

Wales, we have adopted a new core purpose. While I have always 

believed we act in the interests of the public as well as the interests 

of our members, this is now enshrined in our new core purpose and 

is a key driver for our organisation. 

That means we will not be quiet if we believe cuts will have 

a detrimental impact to the level and quality of service the 

public receives from their local police; we will not shy away from 

challenging poor decisions and bad policy at a national and local 

level; and we will strive to ensure that our professional world-class 

British police service remains politically independent. In the interest 

of the public, those are attributes I am sure everyone would sign up 

to. 





SIGNAL CRIMES 

Social Reactions to Crime, 

Disorder, and Control 

Image:_Ra_/iStock/Thinkstock 

JUNE 2014 | 224 PAGES 

HARDBACK | 978-0-19-968446-5 | £65.00 

PAPERBACK | 978-0-19-968447-2 | £29.99 

Martin Innes 

How do individuals, communities, and institutions react 

to crime, disorder, and social control events? How do 

such incidents shape the contours of social order and the 

make-up of society? Why do some crimes and disorders 

matter more than others in influencing how we think, 

feel, and act about our security? 

Signal Crimes brings together the key insights and findings 

from a ten-year programme of fieldwork investigating 

the concept of a ‘signal crime’: an incident that changes 

how people think, feel and behave about their safety 

due to it functioning as a signal of the presence of wider 

risks and threats. 

WHAT HAPPENS 

WHEN OUR DRUGS 

STOP WORKING? 

“One of the most eagerly anticipated criminological publications [...] Signal Crimes 

makes a persuasive case for rethinking much of our approach to crime and social order.” 

Professor Tim Newburn, London School of Economics and Political Science 

“It is difficult to capture just how important this work is.” 

Professor Sir Anthony Bottoms, University of Cambridge 

“Nothing short of a new framework for understanding the social meaning of crime and criminal justice.” 

Professor Jonathan Simon, University of California, Berkeley 

Antimicrobials allow doctors and surgeons to perform many 

techniques that we take for granted. However, common infections 

are threatening to become resistant to every available antimicrobial 

drug, jeopardising all advances in modern medicine. Microbiologists 

are working to understand how this resistance develops, how it 

spreads and where we can search for new sources of antimicrobials. 

Making informed decisions about microbiological 

issues is a challenge. Through its many expert 

members, the Society for General Microbiology 

can offer impartial, authoritative information on 

all areas of microbiology. 

“Professor Innes has developed a seminal body of work.” 

Sir Denis O’Connor, formerly Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary, 2008-2012 

Order your copy at www.oup.com/uk/policing 

info@sgm.ac.uk 

020 7685 2400 

www.sgm.ac.uk 

Blackstone’s... Your Partner in Professional Policing 

www.oup.com/uk/policing 

1

Beards and sandals 

gathering, hoping, to 

enter No 10 

Let’s play the word association game. I’ll 

say Liberal Democrat and you say the 

first thing which comes into your head. 

Beards, perhaps. Or sandals. That was the 

old image of the Lib Dems – a well-meaning 

pressure group who dressed all year round as 

if they were going to Stonehenge for summer 

solstice. 

At the 2010 conference four months 

after the party had been propelled into 

government, there were still some sandals 

around, and even a few beards. In 2011, I 

conducted a controlled experiment to see 

how much had changed. I reckoned that if you 

want to know how Lib Dems are feeling, you 

don’t look at their faces but start at their feet. 

So you would have seen me standing at the 

gates of the conference centre in Birmingham 

sizing up footwear like an ageing shoeshine 

boy touting for trade. And as the legs of 

hundreds of delegates passed me by, I spotted 

only one pair of sandals between them! This 

year, in Glasgow, I would be surprised to see 

any. Being in government has given Lib Dem 

delegates a new swagger to their step. 

By 2011, the blokes had thrown off their 

traditional scruffball chic and most looked like 

they had stepped straight out of a Whitehall 

office in their sharp blue suits and shiny black 

shoes – as, indeed, many of them had. Those 

suits may not be quite so well-pressed after 

a few more turns round the Whitehall block. 

The Lib Dems may be down at heel about 

their poll ratings and still do flip-flops on 

policies like the bedroom tax. But it would be 

cobblers to think that they are getting more 

uncomfortable about being in government. 

They will stick a few more stilettos into the 

Tories as the General Election approaches, but 

coalition government still fits the Lib Dems as 

snugly as a pair of slippers. The question for 

Nick Clegg is how to keep it that way because 


Nigel Nelson 

Nelson’s Column 

Keeping an eye on The People 

“ 

it’s going to take a lot of tap dancing. He needs 

to woo Labour without totally kicking David 

Cameron into touch. 

The Lib Dems are 

about to be saved 

by the first-pastthe-post 

they 

detest 

“ 

And in Glasgow, Mr Clegg must persuade 

the party faithful to walk this middle-ground, 

too. So, first, he must convince them there 

is some good news on the horizon as they 

trail UKIP in the polls. Mr Clegg cannot spin 

the local and European election results as 

anything other than the disasters they were, 

yet even on that dismal showing the Lib Dems 

will still return up to 30 MPs to Westminster at 

the General Election. I hope that irony is not 

lost on delegates. The Lib Dems were almost 

wiped out by the proportional representation 

system they champion and now they are 

about to be saved by the first-past-the-post 

they detest. 

Take the way people actually voted along 

with what they are currently telling pollsters 

about their voting intentions and the most 

likely outcome in May next year is a minority 

Labour government. That should be reason 

enough for champagne in the Lib Dem 

conference hotels as that must surely mean 

another coalition. 

Or does it? Nearly every Labour MP I 

have spoken to over the summer is urging 

Ed Miliband not to do any deals with the Lib 

Dems. They see another route to an overall 

majority. Their reasoning is that if Lib Dem 

MPs brought Ed down, he could go to the 

country and win a proper mandate. His 

message would be a repeat of Ted Heath’s 

1974 slogan: “Who governs?” 

It is a strategy of sorts, and it might even 

work. As Politics First went to press, we still 

do not know the outcome of Scotland’s 

referendum. If Alex Salmond is leading a soonto-be 

independent Scotland as you read this, 

then Ed Miliband’s forthcoming premiership 

faces the added pressure of losing 41 Labour 

MPs north of the border in 2016. 

Will that mean another General Election 

only 16 months after the previous one? Or will 

Scottish Labour MPs continue to be MPs but 

without any constituencies to represent? One 

senior Whitehall source even suggested to me 

that next year’s UK General Election might not 

be run in Scotland at all. No one in Whitehall or 

Westminster seems to have any answers. 

Frankly, I don’t believe that. I suspect there 

are constitutionalists in smoke-free rooms 

secretly hammering out a solution over diet 

Coke and sandwiches as I write. 

I put the question directly to the Labour 

leader at his summer party. “What will you do, 

Ed?” “We’ll win the referendum,” he said. 

It’s a strategy. Of sorts. If there’s a No vote, 

then Scotland will hardly get a mention during 

this party conference season. If it’s a Yes, they’ll 

be talking of little else. 


29020645 

Technology brings 

control and convenience 

– and lower costs too 

Ian Peters, Managing Director of British Gas Residential Energy, explains 

why British Gas is investing so much in the latest energy technology 

Every month, I receive an itemised mobile 

phone bill. It tells me how much I owe, 

but also details every call or text message 

sent. You may think that this is nothing 

very remarkable – in fact, the idea of 

receiving an unitemised phone bill may 

seem strange. 

But for people in Britain today, this is 

exactly the sort of energy bill they receive 

– unitemised. Your bill only tells you how 

many units you’ve used, and the amount 

you owe. 

We want to change that. 

We are replacing traditional meters with 

smart meters that communicate directly 

with British Gas’ computer systems. 

We recently installed our 1 millionth 

domestic smart meter – with another 

400,000 in businesses. 

But why does this matter? 9 out of 10 of 

our smart meter customers tell us they are 

taking steps to manage their energy use. 

This is because they can see in real time 

- thanks to the smart display in the home, 

and soon to be their smartphone - how 

much they’re using in pounds and pence. 

They understand their bills, work out when 

energy is being wasted and see where 

their money is going. 

It isn’t about switching things off that you 

want or need. It’s about cutting waste: the 

appliance left on standby, the hot water set 

to run 24 hours a day, or the heating left 

on when the house is empty. 

Smart meters also mean an end to 

people knocking at the door to take 

meter readings – the new meters do this 

automatically and ensure all your bills are 

accurate. No more estimated bills! They 

also allow us to offer ‘time of use’ tariffs, 

which have an off-peak and peak rate 

- a bit like telephone calls. We’re trialing 

these right now, meaning you can run your 

dishwasher or washing machine at cheaper 

times (when there’s less demand, and it’s 

cheaper to supply energy). 

We also want smart meters to be available 

to everyone, regardless of how they pay 

their bill. 

We’re about to start trialing smart 

pre-payment meters, bringing all the 

benefits of smart to these customers, as 

well as enabling them to top up from 

their home or on the move. Eventually 

it will also bring down prices for these 

customers. 

In time, we will also be able to send 

customers fully itemised bills – just like 

your phone bill! 

As well as helping customers understand 

their bills it is important that we put them 

in control of their energy use. Incredibly, 

71% of people are missing some controls 

from their boiler. That’s where products like 

our Hive Active Heating come in. Hive is 

a smart thermostat that lets you switch 

your heating and hot water on and off 

from a smartphone wherever you are in 

the world. You never have to heat an 

empty house again. 

I’m often asked why an energy company 

cares so much about reducing the amount 

of the product that our customers use. The 

answer is simple – I want to win and retain 

business by helping customers use less. 

I can’t pretend that the electricity and gas 

I supply to my customers is any different to 

what my competitors supply. It’s the same. 

We invest in technology so that we’re 

competing on service as well as price. 

Customers want innovative products that 

will help them understand and control their 

energy use. 

Our mission is simple – to be the energy 

company that is the best at putting 

customers in control, making their lives 

convenient and comfortable, and helping 

them to save money. 

Energy technology has the ability to 

do all these things; that’s why we’re so 

committed to it at British Gas. 

“ Our mission is simple 

– to be the energy 

company that is 

the best at putting 

customers in control 

”

WHEN IT 

COMES TO 

PUBLIC SPENDING, 

EVERYONE’S 

WATCHING. 

Taxpayers. The media. Watchdog groups. 

If you’ve ever dealt with government 

financials, you know that all eyes are 

watching. But with MasterCard,® the public 

sector has nothing to worry about. Our cards 

provide you with state-of-the-art security 

controls, from credit limits to purchase 

restrictions by merchant category. Plus, flexible 

approval routings and pre-authorisations from 

our proprietary inControl platform ensure 

compliance and minimize risk of fraud and 

misuse. And with our team of payment 

experts behind you, you can open your 

books with confidence. To learn more, visit 

www.mastercard.co.uk/publicsector or e-mail 

us at ukpublicsector@mastercard.com 

LET THEM. 

Transparency and accountability through 

business intelligence.

Politics-First-September-2014

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?