Archive for: Political Database

On the opening day of their annual party conference (28 September), the Government issued its initial response to the New Towns Taskforce alongside the publication of the Taskforce’s final report.

The Report sets out a comprehensive series of recommendations on how to plan and deliver new settlements of 10,000 homes or more. Central to this is the identification of twelve potential new town sites, selected through existing evidence, a call for submissions, and assessment against clear criteria. Each of these new towns has been recommended by the Taskforce for its potential to deliver on the following objectives: whether sites can unlock or support economic growth, accelerate housing delivery, provide housing for strong communities and contribute to transforming the way that large settlements are delivered.

In its response, the Government endorsed all twelve sites. Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook described them as ‘particularly promising as sites that might make significant contributions to unlocking economic growth and accelerating housing delivery’. Of these, three (Tempsford in Bedfordshire, Leeds South Bank, and Crews Hill in north London) were singled out as extra promising for driving growth and accelerating housing delivery. The Government pledged to ‘get the spades in the ground’ on these within the lifetime of this Parliament. Final decisions, however, remain contingent on a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), due in Spring 2026, which will evaluate the environmental impacts of new town development. Alongside this, the Government has broadly committed to exploring the Taskforce’s recommendations through a set of formal processes.

As ever, the real test will be delivery. The Government’s response is arguably subdued on one of the Taskforce’s central points: the need for sustained consensus-building and public participation in both shaping and governing new communities. Without clear, national-level commitments to high standards in placemaking and delivery at the outset, the ambitions outlined risk slipping into aspirational rhetoric rather than actionable policy. On finance, the tone is equally cautious, while funding is promised in principle, detail is deferred.

Meanwhile, organisations such as the Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) have welcomed both the Taskforce’s report and the Government’s ambition, but stress that success depends on more than hitting housing targets. As the CIH argues, new towns must ‘go beyond housing numbers to create sustainable, inclusive communities with appropriate services, transport, green spaces and a strong commitment to social and affordable homes’.

The last month brought the annual rendition of party conferences and it wouldn’t be controversial to say that health took a back seat this year, in the wake of wide-spread political discourse on immigration, free speech and the war in the Middle East. This state of play is an indictment of how Reform UK, a party with five seats in Parliament, have been able to warp the political and media landscape in their interests; keeping the ball in their court as they lead some polls by over ten points.

This absence of health in political commentary can be encapsulated by Shadow Secretary of State for Health Stuart Andrew’s speech to the Conservative Party Conference. Andrew offered little in regard to policy alternatives but used his speech to hold a debate with four interested members in the health space, including a former swimmer, a former minister, a GP, and a think tank chief executive. The panel spoke on technological innovation, prevention, primary care prioritisation and social care reform respectively. Interestingly, the first three causes are positions championed by the Government in the 10-Year Health Plan, occupying all three of the symbolic shifts. Andrew also affirmed that the Conservatives were prepared to agree and work to form cross-party solutions with Labour, with his vision of a patient-centred and innovation-harnessing health service. In this sense, Andrew, at least from this speech and the content of his panel, would struggle to differentiate himself from a junior minister at the Department of Health and Social Care.

A more interesting insight from the Conference was a fringe event titled Realising the Potential of Life Sciences: How can the UK compete. As a member of the panel, Shaun Grady, Chair of AstraZeneca UK, took aim at the UK’s life sciences landscape, in particular, its aversion to the adoption of innovation. He said that the NICE threshold budget was out-dated and appalling, and other competitors both in Europe and across the world offer a better environment and incentives for innovative investment. Grady’s comments come amid a row between the Department of Health and Social Care and big pharma over drug prices. Recently, MSD, an American pharmaceuticals company, scrapped its investment in a £1bn expansion in London, citing that the UK government had undervalued life sciences investment for too long. With Lord Vallance, Science Minister, calling for ‘necessary’ price increases, and now reports confirming that Ministers are preparing increases, it seems like the big business may have got its way. No doubt Wes Streeting will be committed, especially given the constrained state of public finances, to not be held to ransom.

Elsewhere, in September, the Liberal Democrats passed a policy motion titled ‘Getting Emergency Care Back on Track’ which calls on the Government to end corridor care by the end of the parliament, fix the social care system, tackle staff shortages, and guarantee safer emergency services through more qualified clinicians and mental health crisis services. For the Liberal Democrats, social care is a dominant issue, with Helen Morgan, Health Spokesperson, saying that the Casey Commission being published in 2028 is far too late, an absence of leadership, and is the most important issue she would raise to the Prime Minister.

In Zack Polanski’s speech at the Green Party’s conference he promised to protect the NHS. Besides this, health featured little at their conference, with the only potential explanation for solving the NHS being found in a wealth tax to help fund better care. Critics, including the Labour Government, would argue that this would just be supplementing the status quo that has put the NHS into disarray in many areas of the UK. Further substance to their ‘eco-populist’ health ambitions will have to be seen. Reform UK, the leading party in the polls, have been laser-focused on issues away from health. In a similar capacity to the Greens, there are promises to fix the health service, with little policy substance to back it up from the conference. Nigel Farage has almost become synonymous with privatising the NHS; where this has gone from, in cases, a mere rumour to now being peddled by Labour ministers on social media and the Prime Minister in PMQs. Reform have tried to shut this down previously, including in a social media post released in April; but it would be no surprise to see this line repeated in the coming months ahead of the upcoming Senedd and Holyrood elections, in hopes to deter voters from Reform and the slippery slope that a change in the funding model could create.

At the Labour Party conference, Wes Streeting pushed this exact line again, warning against an insurance-based system and condemning the ‘post-truth’ politics and ‘con artist’ antics that are pushed by the right of politics and Farage. He also warned against Reform’s immigration stance which could see NHS workers deported even after decades of service. Rather, voters should vote for the successes of the current administration in line with the three shifts, ones that Streeting has unambiguously heralded; whether that is through AI innovation, which can be seen in recent announcements on breast cancer screening and smart glasses, or the extra emphasis and resourcing of community primary care services to drive prevention and early treatment.

With the 10-Year Health Plan growing more distant, emphasis has turned to delivery, and just last week, Streeting appointed a new special adviser, Matthew Hood OBE, to assist on this in the department’s delivery unit. The last month also saw a host of new announcements, including procurement shifting from ‘cost-first’ to ‘patient-first’, the publication of NHS trust league tables, GP appointments to be opened up to all hours of the day, and the announcement of NHS Online by the Prime Minister. The aim is to begin the action set out in the Plan and its three shifts, and deliver clear improvements. In this case, an overachievement in productivity to 2.7% is a strong sign for Streeting. Success in the health sector could be a potential saving grace for the Labour party, acting as a key vehicle in leveraging the success of a Labour Government in the upcoming devolved elections.

Elsewhere, Streeting took aim at the British Medical Association (BMA) again, who have resisted reforms and pay offers. He sharply warned that clinging to conservatism could turn the NHS into a ‘museum’. Earlier in September, Streeting spoke at a meeting of the BMA asking for them to take an ‘olive branch’ and form a ‘partnership’ to save the NHS. Streeting has got a difficult task of juggling two seemingly competing forces, expansive innovation and a constrained workforce, and currently, accounting for both in the maximum seems unlikely. Inevitably, social care sits on the margins in the political space, but the announcement of a fair pay agreement, backed by £500m investment, could prove pivotal in solving workforce tensions and has been welcomed as a positive step forward by the sector. However, with a final report expected from the Casey Commission in 2028, it does not seem that social care will move at the speed and certainty that Streeting has commanded the health service to do so.

With political focus and attention elsewhere and opposition to his policy plans few and far between, the party conference season highlighted how Streeting has a clear mandate to deliver. His success in turning around the ‘broken’ NHS and social care system could be crucial to Labour’s future in Government. But, as some might argue, it may also be an opportunity for Streeting to prove himself to be a formidable replacement for the struggling Starmer.

Written by Aidan Stansbury and Billy Barham, Vuelio Political Team. 

The Liberal Democrat Conference saw no halt in Sir Ed Davey’s relentless bombardment of the right wing of politics. In fact, it reinvigorated his arguments, as he pushed against what he described as Trumpian-style politics infiltrating, by proxy, across the Atlantic.

In his closing speech, Davey did not hesitate to call out the US president, challenging him on the flight of medical researchers from the US, and his claims regarding autism in children caused by paracetamol. Further, Spokesperson for Foreign Affairs Callum Miller’s speech was dominated with anti-Trump rhetoric, accusing the UK of bending over backwards for the US. Davey also used the conference to further take aim at Elon Musk, lengthening their public dispute from X to the shores of Bournemouth. The party has called for criminal charges against Musk for the language used at the Unite the Kingdom march a few weeks ago. The anti-Trump notion was reiterated by Sir Nick Clegg, who confirmed he would not be returning to politics after leaving Meta as President of Global Affairs earlier this year. In a fringe event on Big Tech, AI and Political Conflict, the former Deputy Prime Minister did not hold back on his criticisms of the ‘special relationship’, branding the UK’s dependence on the US as embarrassing and increasingly ‘cringey’. He warned that the UK would soon have to choose between the US and the EU to protect its values and sovereignty.

It would be hard to argue that Nigel Farage, Reform UK Leader, was not a contending protagonist of the conference, absorbing the closing speech titled ‘Don’t let Trump’s America become Farage’s Britain’. The Liberal Democrats have worked to jointly connect the attitudes of Donald Trump and his ‘number one cheerleader’ Nigel Farage, accusing him of being anti-democratic and anti-patriotic, with little interest in advancing the UK. Given that Reform UK only has five seats in Parliament, it is clear the party is looking to the future, guided by opinion polls, where Reform UK could sweep up country-wide disillusionment with the current establishment. Davey’s ploy here is to challenge the UK’s cosying up to the US administration, both through Labour’s desire ‘to do everything to appease Trump’ and Reform UK’s Trumpian political ambitions. To supplement this argument, Liberal Democrats gave out toy lego characters of Farage named ‘Plastic Patriotic’, complete with a MAGA hat and a boot for the Farage figure to lick. Davey has said the Liberal Democrats have a moral obligation to tackle Reform UK and are unwilling to back down to the bullies on the right, positioning the party as a centrist ‘pro-business’ alternative.

In regard to the incumbent Government, the Liberal Democrats’ rhetoric has become
increasingly critical. Davey, in his closing speech, argued that the Government was testing the patience of voters, lurching from one crisis to another. The Government, he said, was hurting pensioners, carers, and farmers across the UK. He implied that the damage to public trust was irreparable, suggesting that the decisions of voters would now be between the Liberal Democrats or Reform UK. A bold move to completely disassociate the established parties, looking to capitalise on shifting opinion polls and public disillusionment.

The former minister for schools David Laws and the Liberal Democrat Spokesperson (Education, Children and Families) Munira Wilson both questioned the Government’s political strategy. They claimed that caution and a lack of strategic vision had meant that the Government’s stuttering start to power was focused on minimal evolution rather than revolution. They believed the public could feel this tension and that it was the party’s duty to present an optimistic vision of the future to challenge the right.

Further, a key theme across the conference was the shared belief in the importance of community and that locally-led solutions were critical to deep rooted political issues and as a vehicle for systemic change. Baroness Pinnock, Liberal Democrat Lords Spokesperson for Housing, Communities and Local Government went further, directing criticism towards the Government’s stance on devolution. She argued that the Government’s interpretation of devolution is fundamentally flawed and lacked key democratic principles, warning against the assumption that devolution will automatically lead to a more prosperous future on a local and national level. Separately, Angus MacDonald criticised the Government direction on energy and the just transition, arguing that it had alienated the rural economy and had been done to the public rather than with them.

Fundamentally, the Liberal Democrat conference showed a key signal that the party is willing to stand up and fight off the right of politics; whether that is tackling the Conservatives in a hope to outmuscle them at the next election, or, more prominently, warn potential voters away from the perceived dangerous Trumpian ambitions of Nigel Farage. In doing so, the Liberal Democrats aim to offer an optimistic future for the UK, one which they believe Labour is unable to provide.

For more on UK politics, sign up to our Point of Order newsletter.