Sunak is a Tory!!

Will Hutton is probably correct in describing Rishi Sunak as "highly intelligent and economically literate", but whether he has "acute sensitive political antennae" is certainly more debatable (Rishi Sunak has given us wartime finance fit for wartime economic conditions, 22.03.20).  After all, his budget, whilst offering a limited Keynsian approach, did nothing to end the exploitation of renters paying ludicrous amounts for their accommodation, or to make the wealthy pay more, or even to reduce the tax gap of around £35bn caused by tax avoidance and evasion. Similarly his first response to deal with the economic effects of coronavirus was typically Tory, offering unconditional loans to companies without any thought of modifying their future policies on carbon emissions and tax payment. His antennae appear to have missed the political danger of giving preferential treatment to companies rather than their employees!

 As Hutton acknowledges, it took the "crisis of confidence in the financial markets and intense lobbying" from all sides, and the Bank of England raising £200bn through quantitative easing, before a "sceptical" Sunak committed to pay 80% of wages. If Starmer became his deputy in a national government, he would be making a huge mistake, linking Labour with failure to deal with the health crisis when the majority of blame lies with the Tories` unnecessary and deliberate austerity measures, and Johnson`s inability to lead!

Conditions for state bailouts and government loans

With the government last week missing a wonderful opportunity to improve business practice by failing to add any sensible conditions to the loan packages for struggling companies, it is imperative now that all industry bailouts come with strict rules about future behaviour (No 10 told time is running out for airline industry, 23/03/20). Whether government assistance takes the form of grants, loans or part-nationalisation, it should be done with strict stipulations about company policies on pay and bonuses, tax, and green targets on reducing carbon emissions. How ludicrous would it be for taxpayers to bail out airline companies which use tax avoidance schemes, insist on ridiculous dividend payments whilst simultaneously claiming the proximity of bankruptcy, and have unreasonable pay ratios?

       The bigger the bail-out, the greater the stake in the company government should take. It`s an opportunity to end both the short-termism which has contributed so much to the lack of investment and poor productivity in the business sector, and the tax avoidance practised by so many companies which has denied the Treasury of billions. It is also a chance for the government to put its money where its mouth is, and start  imposing green targets on all British businesses!

Unregulated examinations

The fact that some schools in the UK are "investigating the use of unregulated examinations" to get round the government`s cancellation of all GCSE and A-levels this summer highlights once again the need for reform (Schools look into unregulated tests to circumvent exams ban, 21/03/20). Private schools are generally believed to be using these exams, which are ludicrously "not subject" to the same Ofqual regulations as A-levels, to "bolster their results", especially as the number of A*/A grades for Pre-Us is significantly higher than awarded for conventional exams, and as the test papers are mostly set and marked by teachers in the independent sector. As if these privately educated pupils don`t have enough advantages already! Presumably the state schools in question see the ban as a chance to play the system too?

        If Williamson has any bottle, he needs to insist on the cancellation of all examinations being taken in the UK this year, on the grounds of both health and fairness. Whilst he`s at it, he should insist the only qualifications for entry into all state-funded UK universities are either the properly regulated BTEC exams or newly reformed A-levels!

Second homes and key workers!

With the royal family ignoring rules about moving to second homes during the crisis, it seems other parts of the government`s guidance aren`t applicable to them either (Queen and family observe self-isolation, 26/03/20). Shouldn`t the "skeleton staff" attending only to the Queen and her husband at Windsor be allowed to work from home, or have the Page of the Backstairs and footman suddenly been designated as key workers?

Instructions about staying at home are, as Sajid David says, "rules that we should all obey to stop people dying" (Stay at home - this is an emergency, PM warns in TV address to nation, 24/03/20). Indeed, a government announcement states that "essential travel does not include visits to second homes" and that people "should remain in their primary residence", so presumably all plans for the queen to attempt to boost the morale of the nation with a televised address have been scrapped? With she and her husband having decamped to their second, possibly third, home, in Windsor, and their eldest son retreating  for the foreseeable future to his fourth, possibly fifth, home, in Scotland, tuning into her speech would be like listening to Johnson speaking to us from his lounger in Mustique (Steve Bell`s If, 19/03/20)! 

       Rather than epitomise the idiom about "one rule for the rich", it would be far better if the royals opened up some of their many properties for use by the NHS!

With the Queen "liaising with the government on the timing" of her speech to the nation, questions have to be asked about its "morale-boosting" qualities (Queen prepares for morale-boosting address to nation, 23/03/20). Will such a speech really raise spirits at a time when the population is being ordered to say at home, and not visit second homes or campsites? Everyone will know full well that she and her husband have left their first home preferring to reside in their second, possibly third, home, in Windsor, whilst her first son has retreated "for the foreseeable future" to his fourth, possibly fifth, home, in Scotland. 

        A televised address will most certainly emphasise the truth  about there being one rule for the rich, but its uplifting effect on the nation`s morale is debatable. Far better to open up the many unoccupied houses the royal family own for use by the NHS!

Guardian letter on Tory budget

Les Summers suggests that "few will understand" that Sunak's budget was merely "repairing the damage to the  British economy and social wellbeing" caused by 10 years of Tory austerity (Letters, 13/03/20). I think most people will soon realise that it will take far more than one budget adopting a limited Keynesian approach to restore society to its pre-austerity situation. With rents still too high, the lower-paid no better off, rich individuals and corporations neither contributing more nor having their tax avoidance methods checked, and social services struggling to survive,  the message is clear. Little has changed. 

    No one should be fooled: any  one believing that this  budget proves Johnson's government is pursuing  so- called "one nation Conservatism" should study the evidence!