Login
The UK recently announced that it will join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), giving British businesses access to the 11 other members of the Indo-Pacific trade bloc and bringing its combined GDP to £11 trillion.
Some commentators have suggested the deal could make up for Brexit. It’s been called “a momentous economic and strategic moment” that “kills off any likelihood that it [the UK] will ever rejoin the EU customs union or single market”. Shanker Singham of think tank the Institute of Economic Affairs has even said: “it’s no exaggeration to say that CPTPP+UK is an equivalent economic power to the EU-28-UK”, comparing it to a trade deal between the UK and EU members.
UK business and trade secretary Kemi Badenoch echoed such sentiments, telling Times Radio:
We’ve left the EU so we need to look at what to do in order to grow the UK economy and not keep talking about a vote from seven years ago.
The problem with this fanfare is that the government’s own economic analysis of the benefits of joining this bloc is underwhelming. There is an estimated gain to the UK of 0.08% of GDP – this is just a 50th of the OBR’s estimate of what Brexit has cost the UK economy to date. Even for those that are sceptical about models and forecasts, that is an enormous difference in magnitude.
Of course, the CPTPP is expected to offer the UK some real gains. It certainly provides significant potential opportunities for some individual exporters. But the estimated gains for Britain overall are very small.
The main reason for this is that, apart from Japan, the major players of the global economy are not in the CPTPP. The US withdrew from the Trans Pacific Partnership (the CPTPP is what the remaining members formed without it). And China started negotiations to join in 2022, but current geopolitics now make its entry highly improbable. India was never involved.
In addition, the UK already has free trade agreements with nine out of the 11 members. The remaining two, Malaysia and Brunei, are controversial due to environmental threats from palm oil production to rainforests and orangutans.
Britain’s existing trade agreements with CPTPP members
And despite the widespread public perception of the Asia-Pacific area as a hub of future growth, the performance and prospects of the CPTPP members are a mixed bag. The largest member, Japan, is arguably in long-term decline, as is Brunei, while just three members (Vietnam, Singapore and New Zealand had average growth in the last decade above 3% annually.
Finally, distance really does matter in trade. All the CPTPP members are thousands of miles from the UK, which explains their relatively small shares in UK trade at present.
While all of these points pour cold water on the suggested gains, there are some potential benefits from the CPTPP agreement, which allows for mutual recognition of certain standards. This includes patents and some relaxation of sanitary and phytosanitary rules on food items.
However, agreements over standards will involve the UK submitting to international CPTPP courts on these issues. This sits uncomfortably with many of the “sovereignty” objections to the European Court of Justice in relation to Brexit (largely from many of those who have extolled the CPTPP). It’s also notable that out of the nine agreements with CPTPP members that existed before the UK signed this deal, all but two are rollovers of previous EU deals.
But a trade deal with the CPTPP is worth more to the UK than separate deals with each member due to requirements around “rules of origin”, which determine the national source of a product. When a product contains inputs from more than one country, a series of separate free trade agreements may not eliminate tariffs. But if all the relevant countries are members of a single free trade agreement, then rules of origin on inputs from other members cease to be a problem (although there might be some issues if some members do not police the requirements properly).
While these benefits should be recognised, we should also acknowledge that the CPTPP is not the ideal agreement for Britain. As stated above, distance really does matter in trade – this is overwhelmingly accepted by modern trade economists.
Research shows that the rate at which trade declines with distance has barely changed over more than a century. This might seem strange because transport costs have fallen over time. But, as transport and communications have improved, firms have outsourced much of their production to complex supply chains that often cross national borders many times, with “just-in-time” supply schedules to keep down the costs of holding large stocks.
This means that, while trade everywhere has grown, there is still a big premium for trading (many times) across borders between contiguous countries. It is exactly this type of trade which benefits most from big comprehensive trade agreements that simplify rules of origin and regulatory paperwork.
This suggests that, while some elements of the the CPTPP offer benefits to the UK, it is unlikely to boost its trade in the way it does between countries around the Pacific Rim. For this sort of boost, the UK really needs to look towards its own neighbours. Of course, this is just the sort of agreement that Badenoch seems reluctant to discuss.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The exhibition Knitwear: Chanel to Westwood is a powerful, evocative display of knitted history at Edinburgh’s Dovecot Studios. Once a unique tapestry studio in Edinburgh’s Old Town, it’s now a welcoming venue for contemporary arts, crafts and design.
The exhibition consists of a vast array of knitted garments from the collection of Cleo and Mark Butterfield, owners of C20 Vintage fashion. Their archive is frequently used and referenced by fashion and costume designers and major brands, as well as loaned out for popular film and TV dramas.
The exhibition takes the audience on a unique journey that transcends obvious representations of knitwear, which might normally be associated with more well-known historical and contemporary examples. This offers an unexpected and more diverse perspective – unlocking a treasure trove of knitted pieces, many of which will be new to audiences.
Starting with an early-1900s knitted petticoat which could have been plucked from the rails of a contemporary fashion store, the exhibition opens with outstanding examples of Chanel (and Chanel-influenced) knitwear from the 1920s. Set chronologically, visitors can enjoy an engaging visual journey from knitted swimwear and Fair Isle jumpers to second world war-era “make do and mend” – highly topical in today’s debates on sustainability.
Following displays of American knitwear, 1950s cocktail glamour and 1960s crochet, the exhibition’s second gallery takes in futuristic approaches by Courrèges and the novelty knitwear of Fiorucci, before dashing from the 1970s to the present day via Biba, Comme des Garçons and Sonia Rykiel.
Here are three exhibits that stood out to me:
A standout piece, and even more so given its Scottish roots, is the stunning 1976 suit by Bill Gibb. The piece features a jacquard-style knit with a myriad of patterns and rich fields of vivid colour.
Gibb’s tunic and knickerbockers, set with a matching knee-length scarf, display the way that knit can express high-fashion luxury through elaborate design and timeless style. This outfit stands apart from other pieces in the exhibition, appearing to be a woven technique at first glance. On closer inspection, the intricate knit techniques become clear.
Gibb, an Aberdeenshire-born designer, worked closely with his then-partner Kaffe Fasset (Dovecot’s next exhibition concerns his work), producing exquisite textiles involving multiple colour combinations and patterns. Although he died aged only 44, Gibbs’s influence on contemporary knitwear and fashion is still acknowledged and admired by designers today, including John Galliano and Giles Deacon.
This is where the exhibition really excels – in the discovery of designers beyond the big brands, and in celebrating visionaries who might easily be forgotten among today’s myriad fast fashion options.
I was drawn to the small display of jumpers by the late Vivienne Westwood that exemplifies the “art in the undone”. This style showcases loose, hand-knitted techniques that are transparent, worn-looking and almost threadbare in appearance, but secured in place by standard ribbed neck trims, waists and cuffs.
You can appreciate the rebelliousness in this knitwear that, like much of Westwood’s work, subverts the rules of fashion. The “undone” look belies their technical accuracy and supreme production. A historically important and poignant example of the Westwood aesthetic and influence, these garments are still as fresh as the day they were produced and must be seen up close to be fully appreciated.
Their inclusion in this exhibition helps to convey how diverse knit techniques can be, and provides a visual celebration of the power of craft in fashion.
The exhibition concludes with a small display titled “Scottish Knitwear Now”, focusing on the work of hand knitwear designer Di Gilpin and her collaboration with the Paris/Glasgow label La Fetiche, directed by April Crichton (former design director for Sonia Rykiel).
Garments consist of a neon pink knitted top, a cream mini-skirt and an oversized cream jumper with bold colour stripes. Every piece is made in an Aran-style handknit – a traditional technique that many people will know from fishermen’s jumpers. These pieces are far from traditional, though, and offer a modern take on a classic knit – a fitting end to the exhibition.
While an interesting connection is made here with contemporary Scottish design and craft, I was left clamouring for more – which can only be a good thing. This hints at possibilities for a future exhibition to celebrate the vast wealth of Scotland’s knitwear design talent and brands, from Johnstons of Elgin and Barrie Knitwear to Green Thomas and Jennifer Kent.
Knitwear: Chanel to Westwood at Dovecot Studios closes March 11 2023
Mal Burkinshaw does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Conspiracy theories aren’t a new thing, and for as long as they’ve been around they’ve ranged from the benign to the absurd. From the six moon landings being faked to the Earth being flat, or our ruling class being lizards, we’ve all probably come across them in one form or another.
Yet, in a surprise twist, the hottest conspiracy theory of 2023 comes from an unlikely corner: town planning. This relates to the idea of “the 15-minute city” and has even gone so far as to be mentioned in UK parliament by an MP who called the idea “an international socialist concept” that will “cost us our personal freedom”.
As town planning academics who have published research on 15-minute cities, we know this is nonsense. But what actually is the 15-minute city? And what’s the fuss about?
The 15-minute city itself is a simple idea. If you live in one, it means that everything you need to go about your daily life – school, doctors, shops and so on – is located no more than a 15-minute walk from your house.
The concept, which originated from the French-Colombian urbanist Carlos Moreno, is the current zeitgeist in planning, and calls for city design that is centred on people and their needs rather than being designed for cars. It gained international attention when the mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, announced her intention to make Paris a 15-minute city following her reelection in 2020, with the plan to enhance neighbourhoods across Paris while ensuring connections between them. The idea flourished in the wake of COVID, when lockdowns and working from home had more of us ditching the car and recognising the need for well-served local neighbourhoods.
Yet this connection to how our towns and cities are changing in the wake of COVID is also probably the reason that 15-minute cities are now a hot-topic in the conspiracy world. Among other things, the charge sheet against 15-minute cities is that they are a “socialist”, or even “Stalinist”, attempt to control the population by actively preventing citizens from straying more than 15 minutes from their homes.
However, the reality is that the 15-minute city does not seek to exclude people or to prevent them from leaving. Instead, the idea is about providing high-quality neighbourhoods so that you don’t have to travel further to get the service. Crucially, this doesn’t mean you’re trapped where you live.
Yes, if travelling by car, the 15-minute city might make the journey to leave the neighbourhood longer as the urban realm and roads shifts from car dominance to a more equal distribution of space for active travel. But this might also mean that other ways of getting about town (walking, wheelchair, cycling, bus or train) might make sense for most journeys, with the car used only when necessary.
It’s fairly easy to see how Moreno’s idea has been perverted here. Within this, it’s also equally easy to trace a line between this and the prevalence of conspiracy theories surrounding COVID and the role of government. In this world, encouraging us to use cars less is seen as a limitation of our freedom rather than an opportunity to live in more vibrant and less polluted neighbourhoods.
The thing is, like so many other conspiracy theories, it gets into trouble when it comes into contact with reality. In many British cities, the reality is that having most services within a 15-minute walk of your house is already closer than you might think – what matters more is the quality and equity of those services.
What’s more, these ideas are popular. Not only have organisations like Sustrans consistently shown that more than two-thirds of people are in favour of these sorts of interventions, they are also endorsed at the ballot box. For example, when some candidates attempted to turn local council elections into a referendum on active travel interventions, they largely failed to get this opposition off the launchpad.
If anything, the 15-minute city envisages even the most urban parts of the country as something quintessentially British: a small market town. Indeed, if harking back to the past is your thing, then the past 50 years of transport planning has done more to damage this British ideal than make it a reality.
In fact, you would imagine that the Conservative MP who raised this conspiracy theory in the House of Commons might regularly get correspondence from the public bemoaning the lack of high-quality services in their neighbourhoods.
After decades of car-dominated culture there is a “gear change” happening in which pedestrian and cyclist experiences do increasingly matter in city planning. There is still a long way to go to make our streets and neighbourhoods places for all, and movements fuelled by conspiracy theory risk slowing these transitions and spreading unjustified fears.
While the 15-minute city has nothing to do with creating ghettos where people will be locked in, fake news like this circulates broadly and quickly, making it crucial for policymakers to convey clear messages about what’s at stake.
Alex Nurse has received funding from EPSRC-funded DecarboN8 to analyse how traffic data can be used to co-design 15-minute cities with local residents, and the local impacts of cycling and walking interventions.
Alessia Calafiore has received funding from the University of Liverpool's Partnership, Recovery and Resilience Fund to analyse walk access to services in Liverpool City Region.
Richard J. Dunning has received funding from EPSRC-funded DecarboN8 to analyse the local impacts of cycling and walking interventions.
The decision to place double rapist Isla Bryson in the segregation unit at Scotland’s Cornton Vale women’s prison, ahead of sentencing, has sparked a political crisis that looks unlikely to abate soon.
Following a backlash, Scotland’s first minister Nicola Sturgeon quickly announced that Bryson would not stay at Cornton Vale. That same day, Bryson was moved to a male wing at His Majesty’s Prison Edinburgh. The Scottish parliament’s justice committee has confirmed that it will scrutinise these events.
The Scottish Prison Service issued its current gender identity and gender reassignment policy in March 2014. This allows prisoners to be accommodated based on self-declared gender identity, subject to a case-by-case assessment.
Work on the policy began in 2007 in close collaboration with Scottish government-funded group Scottish Trans Alliance, whose logo has equal weighting to that of the SPS on the policy document.
Responsibility for decision-making lay with the Scottish Prison Service, whose job was to balance the needs of different groups. That it failed to do so in this case is obvious.
As the service’s own equality impact assessment of the policy, dated 2014, shows, officials did not consult with groups representing women’s interests, nor consider relevant documentary evidence on women. It concluded that women would not be affected by the new policy.
The assessment identified three protected characteristics that could be affected by the policy: age, “gender identity” and sexual orientation. The box for “gender” was however, left blank. It should also be noted that the correct protected characteristics in the Equality Act 2010 are gender reassignment (not gender identity) and sex (not gender).
The later stages of development on the 2014 gender identity and gender reassignment policy coincided with the publication of the Commission on Women Offenders report (The Angiolini report) in 2012. The report captured the complex needs and troubled histories of female offenders, documenting high rates of mental health problems.
It noted specifically that around 80% of those housed at Cornton Vale experience mental health problems. It showed that women prisoners have “higher lifetime incidences of trauma, including severe and repeated physical and sexual victimisation than either male prisoners or women in the general population”.
Over the next decade the Angiolini report shaped Scottish prisons policy. In an address made in May 2015 the first minister acknowledged “recent developments and improvements in the care of women in custody”, citing a staff programme that recognised “many of the women will have experienced trauma and mental ill-health”.
In 2019, the Scottish Prison Service published its new model of custody for women, detailing how a trauma-informed approach would underpin operational practice. It said, “Women who have suffered some type of physical or emotional trauma are often hyper-aware of possible danger,” and “survivors of trauma may find it difficult to trust others.”
The Scottish Prison Service’s strategy for women in custody 2021-25 described the Angiolini report as a “significant catalyst for change”, stating all aspects of care should “take account of their likely experience of trauma and adversities”.
At the same time, officials continued to accommodate transgender prisoners in the female estate. While the Scottish Prison Service has only recently begun to publish statistics on the placement of transgender prisoners, media reports show that offenders placed in the female estate include those convicted of: murder (multiple examples); murder and torture; murder and assaulting a female prison officer; multiple violent offences; voyeurism and sexual assault; and threatening and abusive behaviour.
None of these cases appeared to trouble Scottish ministers. It would take a full-blown political crisis for them to pay attention.
That the Bryson case gained traction is a matter of timing. The story unfolded against the backdrop of the recently passed Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Act, which, controversially, put the principle of self-identification on a statutory basis.
The UK government subsequently issued an order preventing the act from proceeding to royal assent, stating that the act would adversely affect UK-wide equalities legislation. In this context, the Bryson case, which arose directly from a policy based on self-identification, became part of a larger political and constitutional story.
In a bid to stem the tide of criticism being levelled at its handling of the Bryson case, the Scottish government has announced interim rules on housing transgender prisoners. Meanwhile, a longstanding policy review of the management of trans prisoners is nearing completion.
The interim measures are limited, however. They only state that those transgender offenders with convictions of violence against women (including sexual offences) will not be placed in the female estate.
Notwithstanding that most violent or sexual offending goes unreported and few cases are prosecuted in court, the measures appear trauma-blind. Minimal reassurance is provided in respect of women’s psychological safety, dignity and privacy, or to those re-traumatised by male bodies or voices.
The Bryson case reveals a long-standing tension in Scottish prisons policy between gender self-identification principles and trauma-informed care.
For the best part of a decade this contradiction has played out in plain sight, with minimal scrutiny, to the detriment of female offenders. That it has taken the case of a double rapist to bring it to the fore raises serious questions about political priorities as well as the susceptibility of public authorities to lobbying.
Kath Murray does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
To tackle ever-increasing hospital waiting times, the government is reforming the way the NHS provides services. One of these reforms is the expansion of virtual wards. The goal is to treat 50,000 people a month in their homes, using remote monitoring technology.
There are definite advantages to managing patients at home rather than in hospital, not least of which is avoiding infection. At the peak of the pandemic, around 20% of all COVID cases were contracted in hospital. And if you are unlucky enough to contract a bacterial infection in a hospital, it is much more likely to be resistant to antibiotics.
There are other advantages, too. Home is usually quieter and more peaceful than noisy hospitals. And being able to keep to normal sleep patterns and mealtimes in familiar surroundings reduces the risk of being disoriented – which can be a problem for older patients.
There is some evidence that older patients in hospitals quickly lose their mobility because they are often confined to bed and staff are often too busy to help them get up and about. At home, there is more opportunity to move around.
Virtual wards have been around for a while, and there is good evidence that it is an effective strategy for some conditions, such as managing serious episodes of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a group of lung conditions) by community respiratory teams. These specialist nurses and physiotherapists use a combination of self-monitoring of vital signs and in-person or virtual visits to manage many people who would otherwise have been in hospital.
Intravenous antibiotic therapy for serious infections, such as cellulitis (an infection in the deeper layers of the skin), was previously always undertaken in hospital but can often now be done – at least in part – at home. The patient sends photos to show the degree of resolution of the condition to their doctor.
The approach can also be used to shorten hospital stays, allowing patients who would normally be kept in hospital a few more days to be discharged early. They can still have their vital signs monitored at a distance, for example, after a severe chest infection or flare-up of heart failure. The knowledge that their condition is being monitored is reassuring to patients.
The advent of new technologies, particularly video consulting and inexpensive sensors that are easy to use and link to mobile phones, have greatly helped the introduction of remote monitoring. In future, advanced algorithms may be able to take the place of some of the monitoring that doctors would undertake.
However, not all patients or conditions are suitable for virtual wards. To be successful, there need to be people at home to feed, bathe, medicate and comfort the patient.
Many patients’ partners will be elderly and just about managing to look after themselves. Older people may also have difficulty managing new technologies, particularly if they have a degree of cognitive impairment. As a result, enhanced social services are required to support them.
Given the huge shortfall of people in the UK willing to do this kind of work, finding them will be a challenge to service planners. Additionally, virtual wards are not suitable for severely ill patients, and judging which patients are likely to succeed at home is not easy. It is essential failsafe systems are put in place to allow rapid admission to hospital if the patient’s condition deteriorates.
Virtual wards are also not a cheap option. Although the costs of hospital “hotel” services are avoided, the system requires a similar amount – perhaps even more – of senior doctors’ time to interpret vital signs. To do so at a distance requires experience and skill.
If patients do need to be examined, it will often involve the doctor making a time-consuming visit to the patients. Community services are already extremely stretched in the UK with consultations 10% higher and with fewer full-time GPs in place than before the pandemic. New resources will need to be found if 50,000 more patients are to be cared for in the community. And it isn’t clear where the staff will come from given the current shortages across all clinical specialities.
Virtual wards, implemented carefully can bring great benefits to patients, particularly older patients who generally don’t fare well in hospital. It can free up hospital space, but not necessarily doctors’ time. This last observation is the one that will provide the biggest challenge to the service planners. Where will they find skilled staff to manage these additional services?
Brian Mckinstry receives funding from Scottish Government Technology Enabled Care to give advice on remote monitoring. He has received multiple grants over the year for investigating the use of technology in medicine particularly in relation to telemonitoring an remote consulting
FreshRSS