Anthony Browne | The Spectator columnists & writers

Are you ready for the chicken nugget revolution?

On 19 December last year, some chicken nuggets were sold in a restaurant called 1880, in Singapore. This doesn’t sound like a significant turning point in history, but it was. That small plate of chicken nuggets might well have been the start of a major industrial, social and cultural revolution — one the UK needs to prepare for. That Singaporean chicken nugget was the first time in history that meat that did not come from a slaughtered animal had been sold commercially. It was genuine chicken meat, not a substitute, but it had been cultured from cells in a vat called a bioreactor. The cultured chicken meat was approved a few weeks earlier as fit for human consumption by the Singapore Food Agency, the first — and still the only — time a regulatory regime anywhere in the world has authorised for human consumption meat that did not come from animals.

The Budget could be an awkward moment for fiscal conservatives

There is no getting around the fact that these are awkward times for fiscal conservatives, such as myself. It has never been harder to make the case for lower taxes. We have the largest national debt for half a century as we come out of the worst recession for three hundred years, with zero political appetite for public spending cuts. It is essential – for both the Conservative party’s political prospects and the country’s economic prospects – that the UK retain our reputation for sound finance. This is why the Treasury Select Committee have been gathering evidence on the options for tax after coronavirus, with our recommendations to be published tomorrow. One thing is clear: there are no easy options for the Chancellor in his budget this Wednesday.

The EU is stepping up its raid on the City of London

It is not usual for the Governor of the Bank of England to ask permission to make a statement about a completely unrelated issue when giving evidence on inflation to the Treasury Select Committee. So we knew it was serious when Andrew Bailey yesterday told us his concerns about Brussels trying to force banks to relocate their euro clearing from London to the EU. It is not a surprise that the EU wants to do this – France has been pushing for this for years before Brexit, leading to it losing a case to the UK at the European Court of Justice – but what is concerning is the desperate extremes the EU seems prepared to go. It was, Mr Bailey said, bordering on the illegal. According to reports of its discussions with the industry, the EU is thinking either of extraterritorial legislation or using other powers granted for different reasons to force banks to clear their euro denominated derivatives within the geographic boundaries of the EU.

A proportional property tax would be a disaster

Two of the most unpopular taxes in Britain are stamp duty and council tax, property taxes both, seen as economically damaging and unfair. So it is not surprising there is a noisy campaign, gaining widespread coverage, to abolish them both and replace them with a simple 'proportional property tax'. The more your home is worth, the more you pay — what could be fairer and simpler? Although well intentioned, this new property tax is a genuinely bad idea. To be revenue neutral for the Treasury, campaigners estimate it needs to be set at 0.48 per cent of the value of the property per year — so that someone with a £1 million home will pay £4,800 a year in this tax. In other words, you would have to give about 5 per cent of the value of your home to the government every decade.

Britain should now brace itself for a barrage of Brussels red tape

Should we be worried that the UK didn’t get all that it wanted for financial services in the UK-EU Trade deal, as the PM mentioned to the Sunday Telegraph? Financial services are our biggest export industry by some margin, including to the EU, as well as (arguably) our biggest taxpayer, so anything that hampers it could have serious economic repercussions. The EU for its part has said that it will consider in its own time if it will grant ‘equivalence’ to UK financial services, making it easier for UK based institutions to serve customers in the EU, and will only do so if it is in the EU’s interest. The Chancellor, Rishi Sunak, has already unilaterally granted EU equivalence status, providing continuity for EU financial services companies operating here.

Britain is leading the world in the fight against Covid. Seriously

How is Britain doing in the battle against coronavirus? Many have repeatedly declared we have the worst track record of any country, with both the highest death rate in Europe and suffering the highest economic hit. Newspaper headlines have constantly loud-hailed our alleged failings, from the shortage of ventilators to putting ourselves at the back of the vaccine queue by not joining the EU’s programme. The only trouble is that this is just not true. In many ways, the UK’s response to coronavirus is quite literally, dare I say it, world-beating. Clearly there have been many setbacks and hiccups. Clearly there are many lessons to be learned. But just as clearly, we are leading the world in many of the most important ways.

Only France would try to blow up the Brexit talks

That France was the country to throw a grenade threatening to blow up the UK-EU trade talks just as they were about to pass the finish line, does not come as a surprise to seasoned euro-watchers. No other EU member would so brazenly promote its own domestic self-interest at the cost to other EU members such as Germany and Ireland. To the British it has echoes of de Gaulle saying ‘non’, when vetoing the UK’s first attempts to join the Common Market. Many of the EU’s problems and (in my view) the ultimate reason Brexit happened, is down to a fundamental cause that is little remarked on in the UK. France is a wonderful country with wonderful people and culture (as well as landscapes and food and weather) but it has the most brazenly nationalist political culture in Western Europe.

Extinction Rebellion’s plan for eco-oligarchy

It is very rare (although not unprecedented) for law breakers to attempt to be law makers. But Extinction Rebellion is trying to do both, simultaneously. This weekend they are planning to illegally blockade airports and Parliament, reportedly launch cyber-attacks, while pushing a new law to be laid before Parliament when it reopens this week by Caroline Lucas, the sole Green Party MP. It is called the Climate and Ecological Emergency (CEE) Bill. I have huge sympathy for the objectives of Extinction Rebellion – we have an absolute moral duty to pass on a sustainable world to the next generation, and it must be a political priority for which tough decisions need to be made. But I do not agree with their methods. It is not just their law-breaking I oppose, but also their proposed law-making.

A tale of two lockdowns

In all the reporting on the impact of the pandemic on employment, one important factor has gone unnoticed. It is the private sector that is taking the entire hit, with public sector jobs almost untouched. That 25 per cent drop in GDP over the last six months is overwhelmingly contraction of the private sector. Throughout the pandemic I have been talking every day to people in the public and private sector, and there is a complete difference in attitude. It is like two different worlds. Private sector workers are grateful if they still just have a job, aware that so many are losing theirs. Entrepreneurs have been desperately struggling to save businesses they have been building up for decades. They have had to cut back drastically, close down whole businesses, try and reinvent themselves as something else just to keep money coming in.

What Britain should learn from Belgium: history can be reappraised

Is it best to erase history, or reappraise history? We haven’t started taking down statues of royalty in Britain yet, but they have in Belgium: statues of King Leopold II were vandalised across the country last week and taken down. It was no surprise – in the bloody history of colonialism, he was one of the bloodiest rulers. He took personal control of the Congo, effectively enslaved everyone, ruled by sadistic brutality (hand and foot removal were a common punishment), killed about half the population, and extracted great wealth. However, the lesson to learn from Belgium is not statue removal, but what they have done to the enormous monument that King Leopold and his successors built to pay tribute to their colonial endeavours.

The challenge we face coming out of lockdown

The public reaction to the Dominic Cummings saga shows how difficult many people have found the lockdown. It has disrupted the lives of everyone in the country and the education of all schoolchildren, caused an unprecedented recession, soaring unemployment, kept families and lovers apart and led to worrying mental health problems. Tens of thousands have died. Many people were not able to say good-bye to or go to funerals of loved ones. So it is perhaps rather surprising that a poll for the Daily Mail a week ago found that actually many people seem to be liking it. Asked if they were enjoying being at home more, 43 per cent said yes and just 25 per cent said no. More feel better off financially (33 per cent) than worse off (29 per cent).

Don’t panic about how Britain will afford its coronavirus bill

Having a passionate national debate now about specific future tax and spending plans is like having a debate about how to fund the restoration of Notre Dame while it is burning down. It is too early for many reasons, but mainly because we just don’t know yet what the shortfall is. Put the fire out, assess the damage, get estimates for the cost of repairs, and then work out how you will fund it. Our budget discussion is hampered by the fact we don’t know the depth of the recession, how quickly the economy will bounce back, what the national debt will be at the end of it, nor – very importantly – what the annual budget deficit will be. Estimates of the post-pandemic national debt range wildly, and annual borrowing was already predicted to grow from 2.

Corbyn is wrong to say coronavirus proves the need for socialism

Jeremy Corbyn’s claim that the Conservative government’s economic response to the coronavirus package shows that his policies were right proves what an astonishingly poor grasp of economics he has. The economic rescue package has involved a massive increase in spending and borrowing, and also a temporary part nationalisation of people’s wages – both things he has argued for. But the circumstances are totally different and what helps in an unprecedented crisis can be massively damaging if carried out in normal times. In medicine, some life-saving treatments can be life-threatening if inflicted on a healthy patient. If someone’s heart has stopped, it can be right to put electric pads on their chest to give them an electric shock to restart the heart.

Coronavirus panic buyers should calm down

It is a sign of our extraordinary times that the main trade association for shops – the British Retail Consortium – is sending out an urgent message to customers: “buy less”. More specifically, they have urged people not to buy more than they need. The national panic buying and stockpiling has emptied shelves in supermarkets across the country, and has brought out the worst in a few people. One relative said he saw a man clear a supermarket shelf of pasta into his shopping trolley, and an old lady asked if she could just have one packet to eat, and he said no. It makes the blood boil. It has brought out the best in others, with community groups across the country mobilising to help make sure vulnerable people can get food and supplies.

Heidi Allen’s confusing political odyssey

Update: Heidi Allen has announced that she will no longer stand at the next election. This weekend, Anthony Browne wrote about her confusing political odyssey: As I pound the streets of South Cambridgeshire where I am the Conservative candidate, the most common reaction I get from voters is “How did that happen?”. (That, at least, is an edited version to keep things family-friendly for Spectator readers). It is usually accompanied by a liberal dosage of decidedly unparliamentary language and the sort of words that if I repeated would lead to me being accused of inflaming passions in politics. But the passions among the public are already inflamed and the issue is this: voters in South Cambridgeshire overwhelmingly elected a Conservative MP in the 2017 general election, giving her more than 52 per cent of the vote, but they are now represented in parliament by a Liberal Democrat.

Would no-deal Brexit be a disaster? Probably not – and here’s why

How bad would a no-deal Brexit really be? This is now perhaps the most important question in politics, and the one provoking greatest disagreement. The answer will help decide whether parliament allows Brexit to happen, and whether Tory MPs bring down their own government. If they think calamity would follow, patriotic rebels might risk a general election to stop the Tories. But what if it would not be so bad? And is there any way of finding out? Almost everyone accepts it will cause problems, but views range from manageable to ‘national suicide’. It is difficult to predict complex events without historic precedent, but there are other reasons for the divergent views. The first is that there is not a single ‘no deal’, but a whole spectrum.

Who’s afraid of no deal?

My night at the Mansion House climate protest

There we were in the gold embossed classical elegance of the Egyptian Room of Mansion House, all dressed up in black tie, politely listening to the Chancellor’s swan song – his last Mansion House speech – when the kerfuffle started at the back. Women in red dresses started pouring in from the rear doors with men in dinner jackets and bow ties trying unsuccessfully to block their path. The protestors’ shouts grew louder, and eventually drowned out the Chancellor, who sat down. There were no police that I could see, and the light touch Mansion House security were clearly overwhelmed by the numbers. Alarmed at what was happening, and presumably fearing the Chancellor might be attacked, many guests also stood up to try and block the surging protestors from actually reaching him.

Brexit need not tear the Tories apart. Here’s why

The political dysfunction in Parliament seems to be rubbing off on much of our commentariat. Many have concluded that the whole political system is about to undergo an earthquake as seismic and landscape-changing as anything that mere plate tectonics can conjure up. The main political parties will no longer be Labour and Tory, defined by being working class or middle class, big state or little state, socialist or free enterprise. Instead, goes the new thinking, there will be two main parties defined by being anti-Brexit and pro-Brexit (which may or may not be Labour and Conservative). Now it is easy to see why people might start to claim this. There is plenty of cause for concern right now. But it shows a fundamental misunderstanding of voter motivation.

The problem with backing out of Brexit

Are we suffering a national humiliation? There has been a lot of commentary – not least from elements of the Remain-supporting press – about how the UK has become an international laughing stock. Papers in other countries have joined in the chuckling. Recent events have not been good for our reputation for stability and sanity. However, the one thing that the UK could do to destroy what international credibility it has left, is to change its mind on Brexit, and go back to the EU asking whether we can stay after all. Our national humiliation would be complete. We would be the employee who stormed out publicly, insisting to everyone that they could make it on their own, only to beg their employer to take them back.

Why Britain decided to leave the EU – but other countries haven’t

Why us? Why is the UK the first – and only – country to decide to leave the EU? Greenland, Algeria (when it was part of the French empire) and the French Caribbean island of St Barthélemy have all been in the EU and are no more, but the UK is the first full member country to hold a referendum and decide ‘enough’. Why us, and not one of the many other members nursing doubts about the EU? There are many reasons, none of which are to do with us being more inward looking or racist. We are an island, but arguably the most outward looking EU nation. We do have issues with racism, but various studies have concluded we are among the least racist countries in Europe. But being an island does mean we see ourselves apart from the rest of the EU in ways other members don’t (our sockets are different, we drive on the other side, and if there is fog in the Channel we think Europe is cut off).

Why Britain decided to leave the EU – but other countries haven’t | 29 December 2018

A no deal Brexit would be the EU’s fault

I stood next to Jean Claude-Juncker, then president of the European Council and prime minister of Luxembourg, when news flashed up on the TV screens of the astonishing rejection by French voters of the draft European Constitution in their 2005 referendum. He could have responded in so many ways, to try to understand why the voters in traditionally one of Europe’s most Europhile countries emphatically rejected further EU integration. But his immediate response, without drawing breath, was: “They will just have to vote again.” In fact, the French voters weren’t trusted to give the right answer second time around, and so the treaty was pushed through the French parliament instead. Dial forward 13 years, and Juncker is now president of the European Commission, and Britain's government has been trying to agree a Brexit deal with him in the response to the UK’s own referendum.

Why Leave would win next time round

Like everyone nowadays, I can predict everything except the future. But if MPs reject the government’s Withdrawal Agreement (whenever it ends up being put before the Commons), there is one outcome that many are campaigning for: a second referendum. It is particularly supported by Remainers, who see it as the only democratically legitimate way to overturn the result of the first referendum, and so provide an exit from Brexit. From former prime ministers down, the cries for a so-called 'People’s Vote' are becoming deafening. The arguments in favour can be persuasive: we now know (sort of) on what terms we will leave the EU, we know more about Brexit, the public mood is changing: give the people a final say. But Remainers wanting a second referendum – and not all do – should be careful what they wish for.

Why the Norway model wouldn’t work for Britain

In the corridors of Westminster and the salons of some remainers, there is a lot of excited chatter about the “Norway option”. This would involve being a member of the EEA and single market, but not of the EU. Depending on who is pushing, Norway is presented as either a temporary or permanent alternative to Theresa May's troubled deal. But there are problems with this quick fix. The well discussed issue that being in the EEA doesn’t end freedom of movement is one; another is the fact that the Norway option doesn't end EU budget contributions. But more fundamentally, few appreciate just how a regime that (sort of) suits Norway is completely unsuitable for the UK. Norway (and I write as a half-Norwegian and regular visitor) is a remarkable economy but so different from the UK that it cannot serve as a role model.

Breaking up is always hard to do and Brexit is no different

It is difficult to read the daily deluge of headlines on our Brexit negotiations without a creeping sense of despair. We crave certainty but have confusion. We want unity of purpose but have division. The EU has proposed the United Kingdom becomes disunited. Some Remainers have been emboldened to campaign to stop Brexit. The calls for a second referendum to overturn the results of the first are getting daily louder. Britain is isolated in Europe, fearing humiliation — or worse. This is our darkest hour. But actually, we should not despair. Things are not unexpectedly difficult. There was no scenario where the Brexit negotiations would be straightforward. The UK and EU27 have been becoming progressively more integrated over the past four decades.

17 reasons to love Brexit

‘But what are you going to do with the powers?’ the minister asked, while I negotiated devolution of powers to London when Boris was mayor. The government wouldn’t grant powers unless we explained how we would use them. And that is what is missing in the Brexit non-debate. We are ‘taking back control’ — but we haven’t really thought what we will do with that control once we have it. It is true there has been discussion of trade deals, transforming the Common Agricultural Policy and the colour of our passports. But if that was all we could do, even most Brexiteers wouldn’t have considered it worth it. So, what could we do once we Brexit? Well actually, given how extensive EU law is, an awful lot. Some will depend on the deal we have with the EU.

Plan overboard!

The euro crisis has prompted national parliaments across the continent to dump their Euro-federalist baggage It was the political equivalent of Mother Teresa announcing that she had converted to agnosticism. Bart De Wever, the leader of Belgium’s largest political party, was such a Euro-federalist zealot that a year ago he declared he wanted his country to ‘evaporate’ into the beloved EU. But that was so 2010. A few weeks ago he shared a platform with the Czech president, Vaclav Klaus, Europe’s most Eurosceptic head of state, and declared: ‘I am a Eurorealist.’ To walk the walk, De Wever’s party, the N-VA, rejected a Brussels proposal for a new Euro-tax, an act as out of character for Belgian politicians as refusing a Trappist ale.

Britain needs US-style think tanks to counter the Left’s grip on universities

It wasn’t the television studios, or the boss’s office the size of an Olympic swimming pool. It wasn’t the auditorium for 200 people, or the ten-storey-high purpose-built building with a two-storey atrium. It wasn’t the overseas offices in Oman and Beijing, the staff of 400, the oak-panelled corridors, or the oil paintings lining the walls numerous enough to set up an art gallery. It wasn’t the $300 million endowment, or the ability to raise $2.3 million from a single fundraising dinner (with tables going for $75,000 a time). It wasn’t the fact that my meeting with one institute’s president was delayed because a real president — of Panama — had dropped by, squeezed in between a former president of Indonesia and the supreme allied commander of NATO.

Today

Sunday

Thursday

Tuesday

Monday

Wednesday

Saturday

Saturday

Sunday

Saturday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

Sunday

Saturday

Sunday

Thursday

Friday

Saturday

Monday

Thursday

Saturday

Thursday

Tuesday

Friday

Saturday

Thursday

Saturday

Saturday