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. 

As we step into Christmas and the New Year, the Vuelio Political Team have been thinking and writing about the key developments that pervaded UK policy and politics in 2024. Here is our overview…

Treating the NHS

Helen Stott, Policy Researcher

Wes Streeting’s first act as Health Secretary was to make a speech declaring the NHS ‘broken’ and to commission Lord Darzi to conduct an investigation into its current state. Darzi’s review was published a few months later and, perhaps unsurprisingly, he laid the blame for the NHS’s decline squarely at the fault of previous Conservative governments. Darzi claims that although the health service is still suffering the effects of COVID-19, it was severely weakened going into the pandemic as a result of years of underfunding. He was also critical of the reforms introduced by former Health Secretary Andrew Lansley in 2012.

Having diagnosed the problem, the Government is now tasked with delivering the treatment. Prior to the election, Labour made it clear that their plans for the health service would rely on three key shifts; firstly a shift away from hospitals and to delivering more care in community settings such as general practice, local pharmacies, and community mental health services. Moving ‘downstream’ is crucial to Labour’s second goal, which is to shift towards a more ‘preventative’ model. The argument is that as the UK faces an aging population with more complex health needs, the only way to stop health costs from spiralling out of control is to get better at early intervention or even preventing ill health from occurring in the first place. This ties in with the Government’s public health ambitions, and their intentions to introduce stricter regulations on junk food. Finally, the first two goals will be underpinned by a shift towards digital, with an ambition to properly digitise the NHS and create electronic patient records, which will allow for proper coordination between different parts of the health and social care system.

The Government is currently in the process of consulting on their 10 Year Health Plan which is due to be published in spring 2025. There are still big questions about how much extra funding the NHS can expect to receive in order to deliver the plan, and about what the Government’s ambition to create a National Care Service will entail.

Planning reform goes top of the priority list

Ellie Farrow, Junior Policy Researcher

Last week, the Government published an 82-page National Planning Policy Framework report outlining its plan to ‘overhaul planning rules’ in order to fix the so-called housing crisis and enable the building of 1.5 million new homes by the end of the next Parliament. The revised framework reintroduces mandatory targets for councils, prioritises brownfield sites, introduces ‘golden rules’ for development on the green belt, and offers additional funding to local authorities’ to aid this transition.

Following this, the ONS released figures showing that the economy had shrunk in October; notably the figures revealed zero growth in the services sector, with manufacturing and construction declining at a pace of 0.6% and 0.4% respectively. This perhaps comes as no surprise to some who have repeatedly expressed concerns for the labour shortages in the sector, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) has consistently argued that there is a growing gap between the demand for infrastructure development and the available workforce.

In addition to these concerns, under the new plans, councils in England will no longer have the power to contest developments. Instead, planning is to be centralised – or ‘regionalised’ – leading to a disempowerment of local planning offices and committees. These changes, however, came just days before the Government’s much-anticipated English Devolution White Paper. As of this week, the Government has published their English Devolution White Paper which promises to deliver a ‘permanent shift of power away from Whitehall and into the hands of those who know their communities best’. Whether this tallies with centralising planning laws is yet to be seen.

The devolution ‘revolution’

Jennifer Prescott, Political Services Team Lead

In the first week after Labour’s election victory, Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner met with England’s 12 metro mayors to confirm their longstanding intention to expand devolution, promising to ‘deliver the most ambitious programme of devolution this country has ever seen’. The devolution agenda is the first of Labour’s five missions to kickstart economic growth and has been set out in their English Devolution White Paper, published on 16 December. The paper pledges a ‘devolution by default’ approach and outlines its ambition to establish ‘strategic authorities’ (of 500,000 or more residents) covering the whole of the country, meaning that borough and district councils will be abolished. Chair of the District Councils’ Network Sam Chapman-Allen called the move the ‘opposite of devolution, taking powers away from local communities’. Similarly, one council leader in Sussex – an area that has recently submitted an expression of interest in devolved power – called it a ‘death knell for local democracy’. However, the Government’s intention behind the plan to favour larger, combined authorities is to give cities and regions ‘a bigger voice’.

Mayoral strategic authorities will receive consolidated funding pots for housing and planning, transport, skills, and employment support, with the Greater Manchester, Liverpool City Region, North East, South Yorkshire, West Midlands, and West Yorkshire combined authorities being the first. While the Local Government Association welcomes the transfer of powers and money to local leaders, it said it ‘cannot distract from the severe funding pressures that are pushing local services to the brink’. Given the proximity, it’s unclear how pivotal yesterday’s Local Government Finance Settlement will be for the viability of local authorities.

The Government will shortly set out its Devolution Priority Programme aiming to deliver inaugural mayoral elections in May 2026. Discussions have been had with places including Cheshire and Warrington, and Norfolk and Suffolk, and places on the Priority Programme will be confirmed in January.

The post-16 education and skills landscape

Michael Kane, Policy Researcher

A 2023 report by the Education Committee demonstrated the complex nature of the post-16 education and skills landscape – significantly, this simply reiterated the same point that had been made before by the Independent Panel on Technical Education in 2016 and the Wolf Review in 2011. 2024 saw the continuation of this complexity. At the start of the year, then Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was pursuing his plans for an ‘Advanced British Standard’, a plan to, in essence, combine A Levels and T Levels, see every student study ‘some form of maths and English to age 18’, and defund alternative qualifications such as BTECs.

Labour’s election complicated matters: Sunak’s Advanced British Standard was scrapped and derided as unfunded by the Chancellor, and less than month into Government, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson announced a ‘short review of post-16 qualification reforms at level 3 and below’. The culmination of this review in December saw the Government largely renege on the previous Government’s plans for widespread defunding as they announced that 70% of courses previously earmarked for defunding would stay. Considering the importance of getting post-16 qualifications right for addressing ameliorating skills gaps and productivity levels in the UK economy, the Government may choose to buck the trend of complexity and give the education sector certainty in 2025. With this in mind, the Government’s manifesto promise to publish a long-term strategy for post-16 education is one to look out for.

Clean energy by 2030, not 2035

Laura Fitzgerald, Policy Researcher

Labour’s election brought with it promises of change for the UK’s energy landscape. Both in the lead-up to – and post – election, Labour have been vocal in Labour’s ambitions to make the UK a ‘clean energy superpower’ and target of clean power by 2030. This target, five years earlier than their Conservative predecessors, will be no small feat, but one that the Government insists is achievable. Last week saw Labour publish its Clean Power 2030 Action Plan detailing the steps to build a clean energy system, and one that benefits both the consumer and environment alike. It includes reforms to the grid connection and renewable auction processes, and pledges to ‘unlock billions of investment’ a year.

Energy UK’s CEO Dhara Vyas welcomed the changes to accelerate the planning process and enable the development of critical infrastructure, as did Friends of the Earth who said that the plan will be instrumental in creating green jobs, lowering bills and protecting the planet. The plan is not without its sceptics however. The Shadow Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho, who has largely defended the net-zero scepticism of the previous Government, expressed concerns about whether a clean energy system would lower household energy bills. Speaking in an interview with Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, Nick Robinson also shared some public concern that a clean energy system may lead to blackouts with renewable energy sources often subject to some variability. With 2030 just under four years away, both sides can agree that the scale of the task is significant and will require bold action if the clean energy target is to be met.

2025 and beyond

Given the holistic nature of policy, the key developments that pervaded 2024 will likely feed into 2025. With this in mind, if we are to comprehend the issues that may grasp the machinery of Government in 2025, we have to understand – were they were conclusively grasped before?

For regular updates on what is happening in UK politics and public affairs, sign up to our fortnightly Point of Order newsletter, going out every other Thursday.