The pandemic has regularly pitched the economy and health on different sides of the policy response. This is a false choice.
The sad truth is that many local Labour councils and local bureaucracies don’t want it: they’re scared of it.
It accounts for a larger share of output and a much larger share of productivity growth in poorer regions of the UK
I believe so – but nonetheless, the balance of risks, driven by economic and political trends, has definitely shifted.
The Government can’t deliver levelling up without more supply-side change, localism and public service reform.
Lidington writes that “the UK has the potential to be world-leading in areas such as fintech, life sciences, artificial intelligence and genetic modification”.
The Prime Minister listened supportively, but jiggled his right knee up and down in a manner suggestive of unbearable mental tension.
Perhaps the simplest way of putting it is: it’s all about economic credibility, stupid. Because come 2024, it certainly will be.
The most important question today isn’t whether the Government’s plan is right or wrong, but how decisions should be made about it.
It’s one thing to endure them to prevent people dying, and for a relatively short period of time; quite another because we might return to this situation.
If first dose efficacy proves strong, the Prime Minister will have to break with those who fail to think about the marginal costs and benefits of shutdowns.
The best way of thinking about it isn’t to fix one’s gaze on direct subsidies, but to look wider – at our failure to turn British ideas into British prosperity.
We need to pace ourselves. We don’t want to go for a big bang reopening only to trigger a new wave and be forced backwards.
I’m delighted to have been asked to help set up the new Taskforce for Innovation and Growth through Regulatory Reform.
The Union needs a cultural case to walk in step with the material one – Project Love, not Project Fear. Which means looking to the future.