How has The Times responded to the Government's grotesque denial of the existence of institutional racism? With a call for measures to improve black lives? By speaking truth to the power that delivered that report?
No, of course not.
This is The Times we are talking about: a newspaper so transphobic @GoodLawProject refuses to talk to it on any subject. It has responded with a hatchet job on the country's leading voice for racial equality, @RunnymedeTrust.
That piece takes particular issue with @RunnymedeTrust joining forces with @GoodLawProject to tackle this Government’s cronyism which is bringing international shame to the United Kingdom.
And it quotes a Government adviser - unnamed of course as these people tend to be - asking what the 'Jobs for the Boys' Judicial Review has got to do with tackling racial equality and asserting the answer is "nothing".
Well, here is a list of all the appointees that judicial review challenges. See if you can spot what the anonymous Government adviser and the punching down Times cannot: the racial equality implications of cronyism.
First up, Baroness Dido Harding, a Conservative peer, was appointed Chair of NHS Test and Trace programme on 7 May 2020 and appointed as the Interim Head of the new National Institute for Health Protection on 18 August 2020.
Next up.
Kate Bingham appointed Head of the United Kingdom’s Vaccine Task Force on 16 May 2020.
Then.
Mike Coupe - appointed to the role of Director of Testing at NHS Test and Trace on 29 September 2020.
Those are the three appointments the claim focuses on but my witness statement gives three further examples.
Lord Andrew Feldman, Baron Feldman of Elstree, was appointed as an adviser to Health Minister Lord Bethell
Former political editor of The Sun newspaper, George Pascoe-Watson, appointed as an adviser to health minister Lord Bethell from 9 April to 7 October 2020.
And Baron James O'Shaughnessy - another Tory peer and consultant for Portland Communications - was appointed as an adviser from early in the pandemic until August 2020.
None of these roles were appointed following open competition. But see if you can work out that which The Times and the Government denies. See if you can identify why having white people give jobs to their pals is inimical to racial equality?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Labour caving to some of the richest people in the country - whilst raising the tax burden on employing the low paid - has been described as the "lobbying coup of the decade."
But how bad is it? 🧵
Well, we know that Labour promised to raise £565m per annum from taxing private equity properly. But, after lobbying, agreed only to raise 14% of that or £80m.
But in fact, it's worse that that (or better, if you are amongst that mega rich class).
For a particular type of carried interest Labour actually proposes to *cut* tax rates...
Three reasons why inheritance tax on farmland is a good thing (beyond the obvious - that it will raise money). 🧵
First, farmland being subject to inheritance tax will reduce the value it has as a token to pass wealth down tax free between generations, so that farmland is cheaper and farming more profitable.
Second, farmland being subject to inheritance tax will reduce the number of people who hold it as a token to pass wealth down tax free between generations so it is instead held by people who hold it to farm it so it is more efficiently used.
I see my tweets about the effects of Wes Streeting's ban on puberty blockers on younger trans people have been criticised by the DHSC’s adviser on suicides. 🧵
1. What is undoubtedly true is that Victoria Atkins was warned by her own civil servants about the ban on puberty blockers posing “a high risk of self-harm and suicide” and Wes Streeting followed his predecessor in ignoring that advice.
2. Before publishing my thread (below) we went to the Tavistock and Portman with these numbers for a response. Other journalists went to NHS England for a response. Neither denied the numbers and both declined to comment.
Medically, not much will change. The NHS has not prescribed PBs for years. And now families will travel abroad to collect the drugs they know their children need. Streeting can make it less safe for everyone, and impose huge sacrifices on poorer families, but he cannot stop this.
Politically, I can't recall ever feeling this depressed. When the Tories did this cruel ideological act there was hope, for they would soon be out. Now Streeting is doing worse and it feels like there is none. Personally I am finding it *very* hard to assimilate this.
There are widespread rumours (and some evidence) of more to come and inferentially what Streeting is saying is that he will not engage with the trans community or listen to warnings from civil servants or the NHS and he will not engage with suicide data.
Second, given that the structure of the ban recognises the risks to of cutting off puberty blockers for those already prescribed them by the NHS, what steps have you taken to ensure those prescribed puberty blockers privately can continue to access them?