Spendy Sunak: The ASI responds to Budget 2021

In response to Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s 2021 Budget, the Adam Smith Institute’s Head of Programmes Daniel Pryor said:

This high-tax, big-spending budget is largely bankrupt of inspired policy. 

The Conservatives seem to be out of new ideas, instead sticking to the tired old ‘tax and spend’ playbook. Where they see a problem, they reach for your wallet. Housing crisis? Tax developers while watering down planning reform. Social care? Hike up taxes and ignore the red tape. 

The Chancellor says he wants a more innovative, high productivity economy but is increasing corporate tax rates that will discourage investment. He says that he wants work to pay but is increasing National Insurance. The new fiscal rules at least signal some interest in controlling public spending, though are conveniently the same metrics the Government is already on track to meet.

There are welcome reforms to tackle increases in the cost of living and working, including on the Universal Credit taper rate, reductions in duties on alcohol, and business rates reform. All of these will help the worst off in society and the hardest hit industries following the pandemic. At the same time, we’ll need cheaper pints to cope with the rest of our eye watering tax burden.

Notes to editors:  

For further comments or to arrange an interview, contact John Macdonald, john@adamsmith.org | 07584778207.

The Adam Smith Institute is a free market, neoliberal think tank based in London. It advocates classically liberal public policies to create a richer, freer world.

Global minimum tax could cost Britain billions

Minimum global corporate tax will undermine sovereignty and key Government policies

• £7 billion annual tax revenue could be lost because of global minimum tax

• Super-deduction and free ports incompatible with global minimum tax

• Corporate tax most damaging to entrepreneurship, productivity & economic growth

Conservative MPs are raising concerns that the proposed global minimum tax will undermine national sovereignty and economic growth.

It comes as a new report from the Adam Smith Institute finds that the minimum tax could cost £7 billion in lost tax revenues because of the relocation of companies. The report also spotlights the risk of the proposals being rejected by the United States Congress, resulting in an uneven global playing field.

Chancellor Rishi Sunnak will deliver the budget tomorrow and President Joe Biden will push the minimum tax at the G20 in Rome on the weekend.

The ASI has also said that the proposals are incompatible with key UK Government policies, including the super-deduction, free ports and the patent box.

The new report, Draining Our Pockets: How the global tax cartel could cost Britons billions, analyses the OECD’s Pillar One and Pillar Two proposed tax treaties that 136 countries have agreed to negotiate: 

• Pillar One would create a new tax on profits above 10% for companies with an annual revenue of over €20 billion, thus changing the recipient country for some of the taxes on profits of the world’s largest multinational companies.

• Pillar Two would introduce a global minimum tax of 15% on multinational companies with annual revenues of over €750 million, to avoid jurisdictions competing with lower taxes.

The minimum tax is meant to prevent a ‘race to the bottom’ in tax rates. But, according to the report, tax revenues have risen along with falling corporation tax rates in recent decades. In the UK revenues from corporation tax increased even as the rate was decreased from 30% in 2000 to 19% in 2017. 

Corporate taxes, economic analysis has consistently found, are the most damaging major tax to economic growth because they significantly reduce investment and entrepreneurial activity. The minimum tax, according to the ASI report, would undermine national sovereignty by locking the UK into a model of corporate taxes and reduce future policy flexibility

The report recommends, if the proposals are not to be abandoned entirely, a series of changes to the tax design:

1. Set the global minimum effective tax rate in proportion to the current global average effective tax rate, and at a lower rate, such as 10% rather then 15%;

2. Permit full expensing of capital in the global minimum tax rate to enable ‘super-deduction’ and freeports;

3. Calculate the minimum tax at an entity level (‘global blending’ in OECD-speak) rather than at each jurisdiction; and

4. Expand the definition of an excluded fund to cover all regulated entities such as private equity funds, insurance company funds, and unregulated (private) funds;

Greg Smith MP for Buckingham:

“The concept of a minimum level of taxation is absurd.  The United Kingdom must have total flexibility and sovereignty over taxation.  To lock ourselves into global minimums will end up a race to the bottom, hampering competitiveness, enterprise and growth.”

Andrew Bridgen MP for North West Leicestershire:

“While the Government’s proposals are well-intended, without adoption of the Adam Smith Institute’s sensible recommendations, the proposals as they stand would risk damaging the U.K. economy and further rewarding jurisdictions which are not implementing the measures. 

“This is unfortunately the same situation as the proposals for the U.K. to move to zero carbon. As Conservatives we should always appreciate that unfortunately we have to live in the world as it really is, not how we would like it to be.” 

Julian Morris, report author, says:

“Corporation taxes reduce investment, innovation and economic growth. Sunak understands this, which is why he introduced the super-deduction. But the global minimum tax would limit Britain’s flexibility to maintain such deductions and lower corporate tax rates.

“It would put Britain—and the world—onto a path of lower growth from which it would be difficult to escape.”

Matthew Lesh, Head of Research at the Adam Smith Institute:

“The global minimum tax could not only cost the Treasury billions, it would be incompatible with key Government policies such as the super-deduction and free ports. The lowering of corporate tax over the last decade has driven investment, entrepreneurial activity and economic growth. It’s crazy to give up the freedom to decide your own economic destiny. Brexit was meant to be about taking back control not sacrificing our tax-setting powers to Paris and Washington.  

-ENDS- 

Notes to editors:  

For further comments or to arrange an interview, contact John Macdonald, john@adamsmith.org | 07584778207.

The Adam Smith Institute is a free market, neoliberal think tank based in London. It advocates classically liberal public policies to create a richer, freer world.

Send kids to tiny schools, says think-tank

Microschools vital to help disadvantaged pupils catch-up on lost education

• ‘Microschools’ could play a key role in mitigating the damage caused to school pupils by the COVID-19 pandemic

• Cumbersome regulations and funding disparities that make it practically impossible to set up microschools in the UK should be reexamined

• The UK must embrace innovation in education if it is to boost attainment for disadvantaged students

• Competition and choice are key to driving up educational standards —  but only the rich currently have school choice

A new report from the Adam Smith Institute (ASI) calls on the Government to embrace microschools to help disadvantaged students catch up on missed Covid-19 learning and increase choice in education.

Report author Sophie Sandor argues that microschools or ‘pandemic pods’— set up by parents and educators to serve around 3 to 12 students—were valuable for students and parents in many countries including the UK during the pandemic. They served those who couldn’t afford tutoring or private schools during the pandemic. 

The new report, School’s Out, argues that microschools would give students and parents more choice, explore a diverse array of education techniques and increase competition to boost quality across the sector. 

Parents across the world, including in the UK, have begun to homeschool in recent years. This reflects not just improvements in communications technology but also dissatisfaction with the poor quality state education. Many parents who homeschool or are dissatisfied by state schools would value the option of microschools, which could offer high quality professional teaching, small class sizes and a focus on core academic subjects.

However, microschools are held back by cumbersome regulations and a funding system that limits parental choice. There is no regulatory ‘halfway house’ between homeschooling and large independent schools, meaning anyone wishing to set up a microschool faces the extremely difficult task of dealing with red tape and satisfying Ofsted.

The report recommends cutting red tape on would-be microschool providers and developing a schools sandbox: modelled on the Financial Conduct Authority's regulatory sandbox, to allow entrepreneurs to experiment with a diverse array of new arrangements for schooling.

It also calls for issuing parents with a voucher for education, redeemable at any school: state, traditional private school, or new options like microschools. The voucher would be equal to the average per-pupil cost of supplying a state education and would give low-cost microschools the chance to compete with state schools on a level playing field.

Rachael Ammari, the Founder of Hove Micro-School, which was established in September 2020:

"Mainstream schools no longer suit many children’s needs and home schooling can be overwhelming or simply impractical for families. Micorschools bridge the gap by providing expert tuition adapted to each child, in smaller class sizes and a more comfortable learning environment while providing a wide range of activities. Hove Micro-School demonstrates that it is possible to build a new type of school that really puts children’s learning first."

Hannah Titley of Golden Circle Tuition Ltd. said:

“The ‘one size fits all’ approach of mainstream school doesn’t meet the needs of every child. Microschools offer a personalised, competitive, and flexible education which enables children to learn more creatively and at their own pace. Parents have reported that their children feel less anxious, more inspired, and are learning more in small groups at home.”

Sophie Sandor, report author and education activist said:

“The COVID-19-related school closures which kept children out of school for the best part of a year have done untold damage to children's education and in particular those who require school the most to enhance their chances of succeeding in life. This has not only abetted the pre-existing issues in the state education system, but put a spotlight on how government regulation thwarts common-sense responses by the education sector to unexpected events.”

Matthew Lesh, head of research at the Adam Smith Institute said:

“For far too long mediocre state schools have let down our most disadvantaged. Microschools have the ability to inject meaningful innovation and competition into the schools sector — boosting standards for those who have been left behind. All we need to do is get the state out of the way and give parents and students much greater choice.” 

-ENDS- 

Notes to editors:  

For further comments or to arrange an interview, contact John Macdonald, john@adamsmith.org | 07584778207.

The Adam Smith Institute is a free market, neoliberal think tank based in London. It advocates classically liberal public policies to create a richer, freer world.

ASI welcomes New Zealand trade deal

The Adam Smith Institute has welcomed the New Zealand trade deal.  The ASI’s Head of External Affairs Morgan Schondelmeier said:

“This exhaustive trade deal will deliver huge benefits for British and Kiwi consumers and producers. We will be able to access their high quality produce including wine, lamb and honey at lower prices while New Zealanders will get more British spirits, cars and clothing. 

“This also presents a welcome opportunity for more Brits and New Zealanders to live and work across both countries, allowing for more possibilities and a more flexible labour market. It’s also welcome that UK professional qualifications like those for architects and lawyers will be recognised in New Zealand, allowing for businesses to better operate across borders. 

“This is another great step forward for Global Britain, as an independent trading nation and opens the door for more comprehensive trade deals with our other allies.”

Notes to editors: 

• ASI and CT Group polling has found that:

  • 61% of Brits want to trade more with New Zealand and just 3% want less trade, with majority support across every UK region

  • 69% of Brits believe that New Zealand has high standards of food safety and animal welfare, with majority support across every UK region

  • The strongest support for more trade with New Zealand comes from Conservative voters (77%) and Leave voters (72%) but there is also a majority among Remainers (58%) and Labour (54%) and Lib Dem (62%).

• We have also found that: 

  • 63% of Brits back a free trade deal with freer movement with New Zealand, 8% oppose,  

  • 69% of Brits support mutual recognition of qualifications of doctors, nurses and teachers, 8% oppose

• For further comments or to arrange an interview, contact our press line, john@adamsmith.org | 07584667326

• The Adam Smith Institute is a free market, neoliberal think tank based in London. It advocates classically liberal public policies to create a richer, freer world.

Boris' Blustering - ASI Responds to PM's Conservative Party Conference Speech

Commenting on Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s final speech at Conservative Party Conference 2021, Adam Smith Institute Head of Research Matthew Lesh says:

“Boris’ rhetoric was bombastic but vacuous and economically illiterate. This was an agenda for levelling down to a centrally-planned, high-tax, low-productivity economy. Boris is hamstringing the labour market, raising taxes on a fragile recovery and shying away from meaningful planning reform.

“Hiking the minimum wage risks locking the most vulnerable out of a job while increasing inflationary pressures. 

“Shortages and rising prices simply cannot be blustered away with rhetoric about migrants. It’s reprehensible and wrong to claim that migrants make us poorer. There is no evidence that immigration lowers living standards for native workers. This dogwhistle shows that this Government doesn’t care about pursuing evidence-based policies. We can both control migration and allow migrants to fill skill gaps. 

“‘Levelling up’ so far consists of little more than listing regions and their local produce. Boris throws out impressive-sounding economic terms like ‘pareto improvements’ to hide the fact that he lacks policies to drive growth.”

Notes to editors: 

For further comments or to arrange an interview, contact our press line, john@adamsmith.org | 07584667326

The Adam Smith Institute is a free market, neoliberal think tank based in London. It advocates classically liberal public policies to create a richer, freer world.

ASI responds to Keir Starmer's Labour Conference Speech

Today Opposition Leader Keir Starmer made his first live speech at a Labour Party conference in Brighton. In response Daniel Pryor, Head of Programmes at the Adam Smith Institute, said:

“Keir Starmer’s conference speech marks the end of the Corbynista fire and brimstone era and a return to a Labour Party that wants to be electable. It’s welcome that Labour appears to be returning to an accomodation with the market economy: an acceptance that our prosperity comes from innovation not state dictats. It is particularly welcome that Labour is positioning themselves as the party of lower taxes on workers compared to the Tories — Boris should take note. 

But Labour is still a long way from offering a serious policy response to many key issues facing Brits.

The speech was a missed opportunity to outmaneuver the Tories and offer credible solutions to the issues facing young people. There was little real content on addressing the housing crisis, strengthening civil liberties, or drug policy reform. There was also a continued reliance on more spending and more government being the main solution to pressing problems—from climate change to healthcare.”

Notes to editors: 

For further comments or to arrange an interview, contact our press line, john@adamsmith.org | 07584667326

The Adam Smith Institute is a free market, neoliberal think tank based in London. It advocates classically liberal public policies to create a richer, freer world.

1.6m More Tory Votes By Building Homes & Levelling Up

A new poll from C|T Local, Sir Lynton Crosby’s real estate advisory business, and the Adam Smith Institute, finds that Conservatives could achieve majority-securing electoral boost by building more homes

• 1.6 million vote boost for Conservatives building more homes in a way that levels up, securing the 2019 majority at the next general election

• 75% of those who would like to purchase a home in the next 5 years say they cannot afford to or are unsure if they can

• 71% would back housebuilding if local residents had the power to agree when they were confident it would benefit their community 

• 52% back higher national targets for house building, 18% disagree

• 60% back a ‘zoning system’ with ‘Protection,’ ‘Renewal,’ and ‘Growth’ categories, 10% oppose

• 52% support building more homes if it will reduce wealth inequality between older people and younger people

Members of Parliament (MPs) from across England and planning reform advocates have backed new research which shows how to fix the housing crisis with popular local support.

"Housebuilding is a key driver of levelling up. It’s not just about building more homes, it’s about building for sustainable local economic growth,” said Ben Everitt MP for Milton Keynes North and Chair of the APPG for Housing Market & Housing Delivery. “Houses are the hardest, slowest and most expensive part of the recipe for success, but having the right homes in the right place, at the right time will be fundamental to delivering levelling up. It’s too important to not get right."

The polling and analysis, outlined in Build Me Up, Level Up: Popular homebuilding while boosting local communities from C|T Local and the Adam Smith Institute (ASI), presents a roadmap for how to restart the stalled planning reform process by linking it closely to rejuvenating local communities.

• 67% back housebuilding if it would bring benefits to their family 

• 68% back housebuilding if it meant local services would see an improvement

• 64% back housebuilding if it would help protect their local high street

• 64% back housebuilding if it led to people living closer to better paying jobs, reducing income inequality and boosting wages

• 62% back housebuilding if it meant greater investment in local health and education services

“This powerful research demonstrates that we won’t be able to build the houses that Britain needs unless we ensure that communities benefit,” said Mark Jenkinson MP for Workington, “It starts with using new housing developments to invest in community-wide infrastructure like roads, public transport, broadband, hospitals, and schools. Turning development into a win-win for locals.”

The research indicates that the Conservatives have the most to gain from housebuilding, or to lose if they fail. 

• The Conservatives could get a 5 percentage point boost at the ballot box, the equivalent of 1.6 million people switching their vote, if they commit to building 2 million new homes. 

• If Labour made a similar housing commitment, they would receive a 4 point bounce, and there would be a 3 point decline for the Conservatives.

"Housing reform is absolutely essential if Britain's long-held dream of a property-owning democracy is going to succeed, and this research by the Adam Smith Institute shows it can, providing it's done the right way,” said John Penrose MP (Weston-super-Mare). “There are plenty of people who will support building more local homes if it helps their friends and family afford to live where they want, and if local residents control where they're built and how they look."

The research also found that it is possible to win over many ‘Nimbys’ — Not In My Back Yard opponents of local house building — by delivering local benefits from development. Nimbys can be persuaded to support more building in their area if the homebuilding leads to:

• more investment in local services;

• more young people to move out of their parents’ homes;

• more people living and working in the community;

• a reduction of the overall cost of housing in the area; and

• a reduction of the cost of rents in the area.

C|T Local and the ASI find strong support for a range of initiatives to tackle the housing crisis, including:

• 60% support a ‘zoning system’ proposed in the Government’s Planning for the Future white paper; 

• 52% support for the ‘Infrastructure Levy’ replacing affordable housing requirements

• 58% support reducing red tape to help smaller and medium-sized builders

• 75% support building on brownfield (former industrial) sites  

• 63% support allowing villages to build new homes nearby, if they choose

• 58% support automatic permission for converting offices and 48% support converting high street shops

• 58% back automatic permission for mansard extensions, just 22% disagree

• 48% support ‘street votes’, just 22% disagree

Other key findings include:

• 52% have an incorrect understanding of what the Green Belt, 14% cannot say what it is at all

• 54% of those who feel their area has improved in recent years support more homebuilding in their local community

• The polling shows that Nimbys are louder, but less electorally impactful than politicians believe. They are more likely to attend town halls and send a letter / email to their local councillor, but Yimbys are more likely to vote for a party that will build more homes locally, and they outnumber Nimby’s by more than two-to-one

C|T Local Managing Director, Gavin Stollar said:

“This research is the most explicit roadmap ever produced for both Government and the real estate sector. The public tell us how they can be persuaded to come on the (house building) journey but also, crucially, why that journey is so important and fascinatingly, why it is in all political parties' interest to deliver. Communities across the UK are there to be convinced, the question now is, are developers prepared to listen and respond and are the Government prepared to legislate to ‘get it done’?”

ASI Head of Research Matthew Lesh said:

“The future of the Conservative Party may very well depend on building enough homes. Just like Thatcher’s Right to Buy revolution created a generation of Tory voters, a big building revolution from Boris could expand the property owning democracy, a stake in society, and a grounding in place to another generation. This would be wildly electorally popular, not only among those locked out of a home, but also existing homeowners if combined with direct benefits to existing communities.”

Chair of the London Assembly Andrew Boff said:

“This important research highlights that new housing can be electorally attractive if developers demonstrate that local communities will benefit too.”

PricedOut director Anya Martin said:

"People know that our decades of failure to build enough homes have led to worsening affordability, and are fed up. Far from a nation of NIMBYs, many people actively support building more in their area. But our broken planning system privileges the tiny minority of vocal anti-housing voices, at the expense of those who need and want homes. “

Just Build Homes founder and former adviser to Boris Johnson, Alex Crowley said:

“There’s been majority support for building more homes for years. But our planning system excludes these voices and works only for the minority of existing homeowners who want to pull up the ladder behind them. This research shows there are rich electoral gains for politicians – Conservatives in particular – who position themselves on the side of renters who aspire to own. Who’s going to grab that opportunity?”

YIMBY Alliance’s John Myers said:

“It is unsurprising that giving people control and incentives makes them much more enthusiastic about building more. It is high time for the housing ministry to innovate, not least by learning from other countries and from history.”

Former Head of Housing at Policy Exchange and Senior Fellow at the ASI Ben Southwood said: 

“The British public are not anti housing, but they do have concerns about developments that they do not control, that do not benefit local people, and that harm the character of their neighbourhoods. This is why there is strong support for ‘street votes’, which would give them control and any upside, allowing sustainable and walkable development in the places with the toughest housing shortages.”

Create Streets Fellow Samuel Hughes says:

“The British public is sometimes caricatured as hostile to any new development. This research reveals a far more nuanced picture: people are open to building that complements existing character, and to building that they control and benefit from. This is shown in the overwhelming support for street votes and mansard extensions, a groundbreaking result of huge policy significance.”

Notes to editors: 

• The Adam Smith Institute is a free market, neoliberal think tank based in London. It advocates classically liberal public policies to create a richer, freer world. 

  • For further comments or to arrange an interview, contact our press line,  john@adamsmith.org | 07584778207

• C|T Local is a corporate transactional and project advisory consultancy across real estate, property development and infrastructure. We advise on and understand how local, regional and national government operates and interconnects with the elected and public officials, customers, stakeholders, the media and the public.

  • For further comments or to arrange an interview, contact our press line, local@ctgroup.com | 020 7318 5770

2.1 Million Vulnerable Unvaccinated

Raft of measures proposed to protect human life and liberty as Covid-19 becomes endemic

• 50,000+ UK lives saved in the most recent wave of cases thanks to a “vaccine dividend”

• UK has fallen behind France in the vaccine race

• Stalled progress and lack of children vaccinated means developed nations like Italy, Ireland, Canada, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Spain, Portugal and Malta and more are stealing a march on vaccination and a return to normal life 

• 2.1 million vulnerable (“Phase I”) individuals still entirely unvaccinated and 600,000 yet to have their second dose

• 10.4 million adults remain entirely unvaccinated

• If unvaccinated rate stays the same this could result in 148,000 hospital admissions and 39,600 deaths from Covid alone

• Rising Covid case numbers disrupt other care, resulting in longer term but preventable chronic disease, mental health challenges and missed cancers 

A new paper from the Adam Smith Institute calls for an urgent need to redouble vaccine efforts — as hospitals are alarmed by rising Covid cases and Government advisors discussing a new  ‘firebreak’ lockdown. 

Rising case numbers, because of lack of boosters, puts pressure on hospitals resulting in long term chronic disease, mental health and cancers missed will result in thousands suffering long-term. This is already being seen in Labour-run Wales with the North Wales Betsi Cadwaladr Health Board announcing that it was restricting access to hospitals in the region, SNP-run Scotland where two boards are warning of significant pressures, and will soon be seen similarly in England where the Conservative UK Government has responsibility for the health service.

The ASI wants the UK to adapt to a world where Covid cases are a fact of life but mitigatable for most by increasing vaccination rates and embracing booster jabs while rejecting another damaging lockdown and other restrictions on personal liberty like ‘vaccine passports’.

Extending vaccinations

The ASI are proposing to redouble efforts to vaccinate the millions in the “Phase 1” vulnerable group who have missed their second appointment or who are completely unvaccinated, with mobile vaccinations units and home visits — protecting those most likely to be hospitalised or die. They also offer a range of other campaign enhancements including offering booster shots to all adults, purchasing updated vaccines for the Delta variant and investing in advance-orders of promising next-generation vaccine technologies. This, they say, is necessary to help prevent a surge in cases over the coming months leading to demands for further lockdowns.

They also want to see the Government adopt a ‘mix-and-match’ strategy to vaccination and ensure the regulatory system is capable of quickly and safely approving new and updated vaccines. Children aged over 12 should also be offered a vaccine, with parental/guardian consent and without coercion or implied restrictions, the authors say. The entire population should be offered a flu shot to limit winter pressures on the NHS. They would also like pharmacies and private doctors to be able to purchase and offer vaccines.

Looking forward, there is a call to publish a detailed roadmap including delivery schedule of vaccines over the coming years.

Taking every step possible

The ASI would like the Government to invest more extensively and publicly in emerging treatments against Covid-19. The UK has orders of monoclonal antibody therapy Ronapreve, however has not ordered any Sotrovimab, despite GSK being a London-headquartered firm. By contrast, the European Union has ordered 220,000 doses of Sotrovimab. 

The ASI also points to the need to secure advance orders of antiviral treatments such as Pfizer’s PF-07321332/Ritonavir and ensure orders of other emerging drugs such as fluvoxamine. 

They would also like to see encouragement of ventilation in public and private spaces and the continuation of al fresco dining to help reduce the spread of the virus; along with encouragement of masks with respirators, such as N95, KN95, FFP3, and FFP2, for those most vulnerable from the virus.

Protecting liberties

The paper, Life with Covid: Boosting Vaccines, Injecting Resilience and Protecting Liberty, rejects further lockdowns or state-mandated ‘vaccine passports’ as a serious infringement on liberty. 

They are also calling for the ‘Coronavirus Act’ to be scrapped and the ‘traffic light’ travel restrictions to be simplified — removing all requirements for ‘Green’ countries, reducing requirements for ‘Amber’ countries, while tightening a more focused ‘Red’ list to essential travel only to protect against future variants. 

The Rt Hon Andrew Mitchell said:

“ASI have produced a thoughtful and stimulating paper which should be read by all those who care about how our country returns to normal and respects the civil liberties of us all“

ASI Senior Fellow and report co-author, James Lawson, said:

“Vaccines are our best weapon to win the war against Covid and return to normality. Our top priority should be to vaccinate the millions of “Phase 1” vulnerable who are receptive to receiving vaccines but have yet to get jabbed. As existing protection wanes over time, we also urgently need to offer boosters to those already vaccinated, especially in more vulnerable groups. We can strengthen and improve the vaccination campaign, helping to develop much greater societal resilience against Covid and other illnesses. Lastly, we must learn to live with the virus - restoring the personal liberties we have lost, ending the Coronavirus Act, and rejecting state-sanctioned discrimination through vaccine passports. It would be a tragedy to permit COVID to cause enduring erosion of our personal freedoms. It would be a tragedy to win the war but lose the peace through the enduring erosion of our freedoms.”  

ASI Head of Research and report co-author, Matthew Lesh, said:

“Covid is here to stay but the era of locking down and restricting liberties must come to an end. While Matt Hancock might have been distracted by his own issues to sort out the Pingdemic and get the vaccination rate up, the same cannot be said of Sajid Javid who is now months into the job. The Government has taken their eyes off the ball when it comes to boosters, procuring new treatments and next-generation vaccine technology. It’s incumbent upon our political leaders to take every step they can to avoid demands for new restrictions.”

Notes to editors: 

For further comments or to arrange an interview, contact our press line, john@adamsmith.org | 07584667326

• The Adam Smith Institute is a free market, neoliberal think tank based in London. It advocates classically liberal public policies to create a richer, freer world.

• The report ‘Life with Covid: Boosting Vaccines, Injecting Resilience and Protecting Liberty’ will be live on the Adam Smith Institute website from Sunday 12th September AT 22:00 and is available here in advance.

NEW POLL: Brits back freer movement with New Zealand

• 63% of Brits back a free trade deal with freer movement with New Zealand, 8% oppose

• 69% of Brits support mutual recognition of qualifications of doctors, nurses and teachers, 8% oppose

A new poll from the Adam Smith Institute and C|T Group RSR confirms that Brits are eager to strike a trade deal with New Zealand which includes freer movement and mutual recognition of qualifications. 

The UK is currently negotiating a trade agreement with New Zealand, which is expected to be the second from-scratch-deal since Brexit. The first deal, with Australia, including a commitment to expanding youth mobility and recognising qualifications.

Sixty-three percent of Brits polled said that they support the UK agreeing a free trade deal with New Zealand, that will lead to more opportunities for Brits to move to New Zealand, and New Zealanders to move to Britain while only 8% opposed and 21% neither support nor oppose.

There is sixty percent or more support for freer movement across all major political parties, including Labour (60%), and Conservatives (73%) and Remainers (63%) and Leavers (74%). There is also majority support across all regions. 

Even more, 69% of Brits support a free trade deal that recognises qualifications of trained professionals from New Zealand. With such an arrangement, nurse Jenny McGee from New Zealand, who helped save Boris Johnson’s life, wouldn’t have to retrain as a medical professional after moving to the UK. Again, this is reflected across all regions and political parties. 

An earlier poll from C|T Group RSR and the ASI found that 61% of Brits back more trade with New Zealand, with just 3% wanting less trade. That poll also found that 69% believe that New Zealand has very high or fairly high food and animal rights standards, just 3% thought New Zealand has low standards.

This Ancestry visa allows individuals in the Commonwealth with a single British-born grandparent, largely benefiting white people in Australia, New Zealand and Canada. This restricts access for those of the first nations, Maori, and aboriginal peoples.

The Adam Smith Institute’s Deputy Director and member of the UK Government’s Strategic Trade Advisory Group Matthew Kilcoyne said:

“It's time for Priti Patel to walk away from the Home Office’s long standing opposition to freer movement with our antipodean cousins. A trade deal with New Zealand that includes freer movement would right an historical wrong, that benefits citizens mainly of one ethnic group while excluding Maori citizens, and back the British public's desire to see freer movement as part of any FTA. 

Michael Turner Head of Research (Director) at C|T Group RSR and a Fellow of the ASI, said:

“The strength of support is overwhelming. This polling clearly shows that the UK is outward-looking, eager to grab the opportunities offered by Brexit, and create a more open and prosperous society”

Notes to editors: 

For further comments or to arrange an interview, contact our press line, info@adamsmith.org | 07584778207

• The Adam Smith Institute is a free market, neoliberal think tank based in London. It advocates classically liberal public policies to create a richer, freer world.

• The ASI is part of an international alliance of think tanks and advocacy groups who back free movement of goods, capital and people with a job or study offer between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.

• The full polling tables can be downloaded here.

Pension Triple Lock Suspension: welcome but not enough

In response to the announcement of the Government’s triple lock suspension, Adam Smith Institute’s Head of External Affairs Morgan Schondelmeier said:

“The Government’s suspension of the triple lock is welcome — but it doesn’t go nearly far enough. The pension triple lock should be scrapped entirely.

“This morning came the stick, and now the Government dangles the measliest of carrots to the working people of this country by acknowledging that a pension hike of near 8% is unfair and unsustainable. What was at first a welcome relief to pensioner poverty is now an entitlement for a generation that has already taken more from the state than they put in.

“Working age people have seen their incomes stall over the last decade while pensioners have gotten an unfair boost averaging around 3.0% per year. Taking from the working young in a ponzi scheme to support the rich must come to an end.”

Notes to editors: 

For further comments or to arrange an interview, contact our press line, john@adamsmith.org | 07584667326

The Adam Smith Institute is a free market, neoliberal think tank based in London. It advocates classically liberal public policies to create a richer, freer world.