Treasury Committee report on handling any future pandemic.
- the Govt must produce impact assessments quantifying harms and benefits of each policy choice
- economists, as well as epidemiologists and health experts, should have a seat where social restrictions are decided
At present, we do not have the right machinery of govt to make good decisions. Ministers need multidisciplinary, competitive expert advice, and Parliament must be empowered to do its job. Otherwise, scientists will continue to be dragged into the political domain.
We need a set of checks to prevent Govts from overreaching.
Require proper impact assessments, forcing ministers to engage in a rigorous, cross-departmental exercise, weighing up benefits and harms of each proposed restriction on health, education, economy and personal liberty.
Combined with reforms to the quality of modelling and the structure of expert advice, these protections would dramatically improve the advice given to ministers, the quality of policy, and the functioning of our democracy, which in turn boosts public confidence and compliance
Ministers produce better results when held to account at the despatch box. So too will scientists, when their monopoly on advice comes to an end, and when they are rigorously examined by devil’s advocates.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Data show the UK did not suffer a bigger contraction than the €Z in 2020 (confusion due to different GDP measurement models: a like-for-like was -4,8% instead of -10%) and is better placed to bounce back to pre-pandemic GDP levels in 2021.
By AEP telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/…
The UK economy did not suffer a bigger contraction than the eurozone last year. The narrative, believed by the London media,
never made sense. We now have the data, and we can see more clearly that it never happened. It was a story of apples and oranges.
Confusion over past data is due to measurement models. The ONS deducts a fall in visits to the doctor and reduced classes at school from accrued GDP. Most other countries do not. They calculate extra health spending as a boost to GDP. Hence a giant anomaly.
Draghi ushers in the counter-revolution but he can’t save Italy. Those in EU circles and the bond markets celebrating this insider riconquista should be careful what they wish for — AEP telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/…
Italy has gone through the gears, from a democratic revolt against the € and the country’s pro-EU elites, all the way to the other extreme of a technocrat government under the ultimate Mr Euro, without any election along the way.
The stitch-up has been breath-taking. The appointment of Mario Draghi to navigate the dangerous waters of the next two years is astute but EU circles and bond markets celebrating this insider riconquista should be careful what they wish for.
There is such thing as a strategically important industry.
In other words, not everything can be left to the market: industrial strategy and takeover laws will need to change to make Britain more resilient. telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/3…
The decline of British manufacturing, we had been told for years, don't matter: we are a services economy. But our struggles with procuring protective equipment, testing and even the early obstacles to vaccine production, were all connected to this lack of capacity at home.
Our successes have occurred where the state has worked strategically, in partnership, with scientific institutions and the private sector.
1. it violated the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from abridging free speech. By impeaching Trump for free speech that was protected by the unanimous Supreme Court decision in the case of Brandenburg versus Ohio, the First Amendment was violated.
2. It violated the substantive impeachment criteria in the Constitution, which limits impeachment to “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” It cannot be a high crime or misdemeanor for a president to deliver remarks protected by the Constitution.