Publications Archive

Did the United Kingdom’s constitution work as it should have done in the process to leave the European Union? In essence, yes, says Sir Stephen Laws, Senior Fellow at Policy Exchange and a former First Parliamentary Counsel. He says the Government should resist invitations to undertake a programme of comprehensive constitutional reform, but it should be willing to consider limited changes to address weaknesses in our constitutional arrangements exposed by the Brexit process. In the Foreword, Rt Hon Lord Hague of Richmond says this “thoughtful and clear-sighted paper is a welcome warning about the dangers that [a written constitution] would bring, while making a constructive case for some necessary change”.

Why do 1.23 million people lack access to a bank account? What can be done to help the 10 million people who rely on non-standard credit? How can the Government ensure that everybody gets access to debt and financial advice?

This report, by Benjamin Barnard and Jos Henson Gric, shows how innovations in Financial Technology can improve access to banking, credit, insurance and debt advice services. It shows how the Government can encourage the one of the UK’s most innovative sectors to improve the lives of the poorest in society, particularly those on Universal Credit.

Prisons exist to keep the public safe yet in recent years the Ministry of Justice and Her Majesty’s Prisons and Probation Service has shown that they are not capable of properly managing the most dangerous offenders. This paper, by Richard Walton – a former Head of the Metropolitan Police’s Counter Terrorism Command – argues that it is time for the Home Secretary, and the Home Office, to supervise prisons as they did until 2007. The Ministry of Justice as it is currently configured should be abolished, with a new Lord Chancellor’s Department replacing it to work solely on courts and justice policy, at the same time enshrining in law and practice the independence of the judiciary.

The Government should use the opportunity of the stability created by the election result to reform the civil service to make it more democratically accountable and better able to deliver on the mandate of the government of the day. Better decision making, streamlined processes and improved accountability will lead to improved policy making and legislation, more effective delivery and improved public services, benefiting every part of the UK.

The rise of judicial power in the UK in recent years is a striking change in our constitutional arrangements – in how we are governed – a change that threatens good government, parliamentary democracy, and the rule of law. The expansion of judicial power is a function both of Parliament’s decision to confer new powers on courts, most notably by enacting the Human Rights Act 1998, and of the changing ways in which many judges, lawyers and scholars now understand the idea of judicial power. Prof Richard Ekins argues that Parliament is responsible for maintaining the balance of the constitution and should restate limits on judicial power, restoring the political constitution and the common law tradition.

Following an election that was as much about the NHS as it was about Brexit, recruiting more doctors and nurses should be one of the Government’s top priorities, according to new polling conducted for Policy Exchange, which shows that:

42% of voters cited a shortage of doctors and nurses as one of their three biggest concerns for the NHS and 61% want investment in these professionals prioritised by the Conservatives.

Boris Johnson should “seize the moment” and make “quick wins” in a number of key policy areas during his first 100 days to “reform public services and reshape the inner workings of government”, says John Howard, the former Australian Prime Minister in the Foreword to a new Policy Exchange report. The paper offers a blueprint for the new Government to implement some of its key manifesto pledges and other ideas during its first 100 days in office.

Increasing tree cover in the UK is a matter of land use policy.
This simple fact is often forgotten amid a rush to re-forest Britain through multiple schemes and interventions. This seemingly overlooks the fact that silviculture – the art and science of growing trees – is just one subset of land management.
In the last 25 years, several government-backed new forests have been established or proposed, from the mid-1990s National Forest to the most recent ‘Northern Forest’, which is to stretch across the North East and North West of England. Though laudable and important (we propose a project of our own in this report), these schemes alone are not sufficient to address more fundamental barriers to tree planting, many of which are the direct results of public subsidies for a particular model of farming.

Many of the most valued and important frontline public sector workers like police officers, teachers, NHS staff and firefighters are struggling to live in or near the community they serve. They often face acute housing affordability challenges which force them to commute from ever further away, particularly in the rental sector and particularly in London and the South East.

In this report we argue the Key Worker Housing initiative should be revitalised as part of reforms to Affordable Housing policy. The Government should announce a new policy programme to increase the stock of homes available to Key Workers struggling with housing costs and update the Key Worker eligibility criteria.

New YouGov polling carried out for Policy Exchange shows the extent to which women, who have been identified as critical voters at this general election, worry about the impact of social care on their families and careers. As the major parties finalise their manifestoes, the polling shows that:
• One in five (21%) women aged 35-55 have helped care for someone with long-term needs and nearly half (43%) of women in this group, know a close family member who has done this
• 64% are worried about the effect that losing their home and other assets would have on their family If they required care in later life
• 65% feel that the care system is too complicated too understand
• 53% worry about the impact on their career if they were needed to take care of a relative

Universities should be places of open debate, where ideas can be debated freely. Recent events, however, have revealed a chilling effect, with high profile campaigns to sack academics and fewer than four out of ten Leave-supporting students feeling able to share their views in class. Our polling reveals that a solid core of 30% of students are consistently in favour of free speech: this report presents policy recommendations for universities, for government and for civil society to ensure academic freedom can thrive in our universities.

Policy Exchange’s latest paper on lawfare, endorsed by General David Petraeus, sets out new measures on how the next Government must protect our soldiers from the assault of lawfare. The paper recommends that the next government should:

McDonnellomics: How Labour’s economic agenda would transform the UK is the most thorough examination so far of the Shadow Chancellor’s policy approach and inspiration, rooted in a 1970s Bennite socialist political tradition. Based on a wide-ranging analysis of Labour’s published plans, academic papers and interviews, it finds that McDonnellomics would represent the biggest shift in UK economic policy since the advent of Thatcherism. Even after a short period under a Labour government with John McDonnell as Chancellor, the paper concludes, the British economy would be less resistant to shocks, with a more concentrated and volatile tax base, less flexible labour market and lower investor confidence.

Under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, if the government loses a vote of no confidence (VONC), there are 14 days in which either the incumbent government or a new government appointed by the Queen may attempt to win a vote of confidence. Otherwise, the Act requires the dissolution of Parliament and an early election. 

In this new paper for Policy Exchange’s Judicial Power Project, Professor Martin Loughlin of the LSE outlines the failings he perceives in the Supreme Court’s recent prorogation judgment. The paper is framed as the judgment on appeal by an imaginary higher court, which helps to isolate and highlight the Supreme Court’s missteps, central amongst which is its inattention the significance of the Crown in our constitutional scheme and its history. The paper opens with an introduction summarising where and why the Supreme Court went wrong.

In his first speech as Prime Minister on domestic policy, Boris Johnson said that his Government will, “emphasise the need, the duty, to build beautiful homes that people actually want to live in, and being sensitive to local concerns.”

As the Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission enters its second phase – a final report is due by the end of the year – we are publishing this essay collection to provide new and practical ideas for building more beautiful homes and places. The collection brings together thinkers from law, finance, energy and environment, architecture, property, planning and housing.

The parliamentary authorities have taken the view that because the Supreme Court has quashed the prorogation of Parliament, everything else done by the Royal Commission in the morning of 10 September has been quashed as well. Accordingly, both the Speaker of the House of Commons and the Lord Speaker have indicated that Royal Assent for the Restoration and Renewal Bill would need to be signified again. This paper argues that the Speakers have wrongly understood the Supreme Court’s judgment in this respect.

The Supreme Court’s judgment in Miller/Cherry [2019] UKSC 41 holds that Parliamentary sovereignty needs to be judicially protected against the power of the Government to prorogue Parliament. But the Judgment itself undercuts the genuine sovereignty of Parliament by evading a statutory prohibition – art. 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689 – on judicial questioning of proceedings in Parliament.This was wholly unjustified by law.

This paper addresses the question of whether the Supreme Court should rule that the Government’s advice to Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament was unlawful. It argues that the prerogative power to prorogue Parliament is not subject to judicial control. Proroguing Parliament does not flout parliamentary sovereignty; the exercise of the prerogative should be challenged by political action not litigation.

With the rhetoric inside the House of Commons ratcheted up to fever pitch this week, it is hardly surprising that protest outside Parliament became equally as chaotic and disruptive.

The policy of Her Majesty’s Government is to leave on 31 October and not to apply for an extension; the House of Commons does not support this policy, which is the central policy of this Government, but the House has nonetheless held back from formally withdrawing its confidence in the Government

IPSO’s Guidance for Reporting on Islam and Muslims

The Fixed-term Parliaments Act and the next election

Senior parliamentarians have asserted that the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation etc) Act 2019 was enacted to prevent prorogation of Parliament in the autumn. This understanding of the Act’s legal effect was very widely reported. Closer analysis suggests that the true position is otherwise.

A 10-Point Plan for Revival

Unleashing the power of the Union – ideas for new leadership

Unleashing the power of the Union – ideas for new leadership

8 ideas for revitalising UK foreign policy for the post-Brexit age

How a lack of understanding of national power generation threatens our way of life

The balance of power in the Asia-Pacific region is changing. How should the UK respond?