I admit I'm baffled by the story in The Times today that Javid is looking at the academy school model for NHS trusts. They already have more autonomy than academies do.
And NHS trusts are far bigger financially than the biggest academy trusts. Making them any bigger by allowing successful ones to run other trusts in a chain would surely create a "too big to fail" moral hazard?
Obviously it's very early stage and maybe someone briefed it out because they're desperate for any other news. But it's hardly "red meat" - it's a very wonkish policy suggestion that most people wouldn't understand.
Also there's a already a process (called special administration) for handing NHS trusts to new providers if they're underperforming or failing financially. As I say I'm baffled.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
While the Tory leadership saga continues - there are huge systemic national problems that any future PM is going to have to face. The rapid increase in poverty being one of the worst.
Thought I'd do a thread on the Joseph Rowntree report on poverty published yesterday....
Benefit caps and freezes have started to bite hard. Well over half of universal credit recipients are now in poverty.
This is particularly hitting people living by themselves, single parents and families with three or more children. The impact of the two-child benefits cap is brutal and cruel.
Would be grateful for twitter's help with some tentative market research....
*If* I were to start a paid for substack in the New Year which of the following options would be of most interest (appreciating most people will have no interest...)
1) a low cost weekly newsletter (say £3 a month) that had one longer piece on policy/politics and some nibs highlighting some other interesting things I'd spotted.
2) a more freewheeling blogging approach - say two pieces a week on average about a wider variety of things - policy/politics/culture/books etc... for say £5 a month.
It is not and has never been true that Boris Johnson is somehow outside normal politics. He is unusually charismatic and has high name recognition but he's still a politician and seen as one. He's deeply unpopular now but he has never been a popular PM.
Every other PM since Thatcher - including Major, Brown, and May - who are deeply conventional politicians - all had a period as PM when they were more popular than Boris has ever been while in No 10.
This really emphasises the point - Johnson at the end of the 2019 campaign was less well liked than Corbyn at the end of the 2017 campaign.
Not only is the latest episode of Succession brilliant but is also named after one of my very favourite US politics books "What It Takes" by Richard Ben Cramer about the 1988 election.
Tom's description of a private conference of Republicans as a "safe space where you don't have to pretend to like Hamilton" is just perfect.
Also if Matthew Macfayden doesn't win all the awards for his portrayal of Tom in this season there is no justice.
So many tweets that Johnson's speech yesterday was a deliberate "dead cat" act yesterday to distract from something or another. It's just not how politics works you can't control narratives like that, you don't know what the press will choose to run with.
(Even assuming he wasn't just being typically incompetent and buffoonish. Which he was.) Surely the Paterson thing should have made people realise politicians don't self-immolate deliberately to distract from other things?
The only genuine dead cats are daft opposition attacks - like the drunk Gibraltar MPs the other week.