Infiltrating Westminster: The Atlas Network's Shadowy Grip on UK Politics

Introduction

A tangled web of think tanks, big bucks, and free-market ideology: How the Atlas Network is shaping UK politics, often from the shadows.

The UK political landscape is a complex beast, with players and agendas vying for influence.  But beyond the familiar faces and party platforms, a lesser-known network operates - the Atlas Network.  With its tendrils reaching into think tanks, funding streams, and even the ears of certain politicians, the Atlas Network's influence deserves a closer look.

Who are they?

Founded in 1981 by Antony Fisher, a British oil tycoon with close ties to Margaret Thatcher, the Atlas Network is a global network of libertarian think tanks.  They promote free-market policies, deregulation, limited government intervention, reduced welfare spending, tax cuts for the rich, privatization, and minimal environmental regulations.  While they present themselves as champions of individual liberty, their policies often benefit the wealthy and powerful at the expense of ordinary citizens and the environment.

Who funds them?

The Atlas Network is a well-oiled machine, fueled by generous donations from wealthy individuals, corporations, and even foreign governments.  Some notable names include the Koch brothers, ExxonMobil, the tobacco industry and the Templeton Foundation. This raises concerns about transparency and potential conflicts of interest.

Who do they support?

• While the Atlas Network claims not to endorse specific candidates or parties, their research and lobbying efforts often align with the Conservative Party.  Politicians like Rishi Sunak, Liz Truss, and Priti Patel have received support from Atlas-linked think tanks like the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) and the TaxPayers' Alliance. Conservative MPs like Daniel Hannan and Mark Littlewood have close ties to the Atlas Network, regularly attending their events and echoing their talking points. Former Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab has even been dubbed the "IEA's man in government."

What can be done?

Shining a light on the Atlas Network's activities is crucial.  Here are some ways to increase transparency and accountability:

• Media investigations: Journalists must follow the money and expose the network's funding sources and connections to politicians.
• Campaign finance reform: Stricter regulations on political donations can help prevent undue influence from powerful groups like the Atlas Network.
• Public awareness: Educating the public about the Atlas Network's agenda and its potential impact on policy decisions can spark informed debate and push for greater transparency.
• Calling out poor analysis:  For example, the IEA issued a report that concluded that lockdowns had very little impact.  They got to this conclusion by considering evidence from what, in their view the most valid type of study (so-called difference in difference studies). But by picking only a very particular type of study they ignore the vast majority of the evidence. If you ignore all the data that you don’t like, you tend to get the answer you were looking for in the first place.

Conclusion:

The Atlas Network may operate in the shadows, but its influence on UK politics is undeniable. By demanding transparency, scrutinizing funding, and raising public awareness, we can ensure that the true players in the political arena are no longer shrouded in secrecy. Only then can we have a truly informed and democratic conversation about the future of our nation.

Sources:

• The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/29/rightwing-thinktank-conservative-boris-johnson-brexit-atlas-network
• Desmogblog: https://www.desmog.com/atlas-economic-research-foundation/
• Corporate Watch: https://www.atlasnetwork.org/who-we-are
• National Institutes of Health: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5716244/
• Science Media Centre: https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-an-iea-report-about-covid-19-lockdowns/
• Main body of text in this post - I asked Bard “Write a short article with a catchy headline about which uk politicians the Atlas Networks junktanks support, what the atlas networks agenda is, who funds them and what can be done to make their influence more visible, with the sources identified”.  Bard 3 possible different drafts in response to that request.  I chose the 1^st draft text, added into that some text from the 2^nd or 3^rd drafts (blue coloured font), edited some of its layout, added some of my own text, (given other sources), in red coloured font, and then added the picture.
• Photo by Alina Grubnyak on Unsplash

Raac - too little too late - 4 fundamental questions we don't have answers to - and a timeline of what happened when

Below is a timeline I've put together as concerns the Raac issues.  In creating this it seems to me that, in all the excitement about schools and their lightweight concrete roofing, a couple of fundemental questions haven't been asked.

1)  Is the announced Government funding for the temproary accommodation extra to the existing DfE budget, or will it be diverted from existing budgets?

(Photo source UK Parliament website. Used
under Creative Commons)

2) Why is Schools Minister Nick Gibb covering up the fact that DfE's original, (last Thursday's), guidance said schools would have to pay for temporary accommodation?

3) When Goverment departments issue flannel responses saying something like "We're spending £100 more on this issue" why are'nt they challenged on whether that is an increase in real terms, and against what base are they claiming the increase?

4) Did the last decades enormous increase in the number of Academies reporting to DfE  affect their ability to deal with the Raac issues in a timely and appropriate manner?

TIMELINE FOR SCHOOL'S LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE ISSUES

(see foot of timeline for explanations of abbreviations)

1996 BRE says Raac has a 30 lifespan. 

1999 SCOSS urges Raac inspections. 

2002 BRE highlights pre 1980 Raac's excessive problems. 

2010 The Academies Act 2010 seeks to increase the number of academies which are state schools with a funding agreement with DfE.  So they are no longer maintained by the local authority. Like academies, free schools are governed by non-profit charitable trusts that sign funding agreements with DfE.

In 2009/10 there were 133 Academies.  In 2019/20 there were 9200 (source which cites this government site as its source) .  

Did the creation of all these Academies dilute their/DfE ability to deal with the Raac issue in a timely and appropriate manner?

2017 A three-year inspection programme is launched by the government. Part of its aim was to look at materials such as RAAC in schools. 

2018

July 2018 Kent school ceiling collapse of 1979 installed Raac.

Dec 2018 On structures using Raac DfE & LGA urge “check as a matter of urgency”.

2019

May 2019 SCOSS alert on “significant risk” of failure of Raac. 

2021 DfE published a Raac guide. 

2021/22 Between 2009-10 and 2021-22, DfE capital spending declined 50% in real terms. 

2022

Sept 2022 Cabinet Office issues formal warning: Raac “now life-expired and liable to collapse".

Oct 2022 Education minister Lady Barran chases English councils for responses to the March

Baroness Diana Barran MBE

Raac questionnaire saying it's “of the greatest importance” and that buildings with Raac must be monitored “to ensure they remain safe”. 

Dec 2022 DfE’s annual report warns "There is a risk of collapse of one or more blocks in some schools.” 

2023

May DfE identify that Raac might be present in 572 schools in England, but at this point more than 8,000 schools had not been checked. 

June NAO Report on the condition of school, buildings says "Overall, the condition of the school estate is declining, and there are safety concerns about some types of buildings". 

31/8 DfE emails online guidance to Headteachers and others which includes "We expect you to be able to fund anything that is an additional revenue cost, for example rental costs for emergency or temporary accommodation for education settings ..." 

During Thursday there is a strong reaction against this guidance from Headteachers and unions. Overnight the DfE changes their online guidance so it says Government will now fund temporary accommodation.

1/9 Schools minister Nick Gibb says those who read the guidance "got the wrong end of the stick" and says that the costs of emergency and temporary accommodation would be covered by Government. He fails to mention that DfE changed their guidance, that they U-turned (a welcome one). 

Jonathan Slater

 4/9 On the BBC's Radio 4's AM Today news   programme, Jonathan Slater, (DfE permanent   secretary till August 2020), says DfE were   confident a request to increase funding to   rebuild 200 schools (up from 100) would be   agreed after presenting data showing a “critical   risk to life” if the programme wasn't properly   funded. In the year after he left the DfE   Jonathan was "absolutley amazed" that Rishi   Sunak's Treasury halved the school rebuilding   programme from 100 to 50 a year.

 4/9 The PM, Rishi Sunak refutes Jonathan   Slaters claims and says to broadcasters "One of

 the first things I did as chancellor, in my first   spending review in 2020, was to announce a   new 10-year school re-building programme for   500 schools".

(On Rishi Sunak's refuation of Jonathan Slaters points, note that on 29 June 2020 the Government announced what the Education Secretary described in the House as “a 10-year, multi-wave rebuilding programme for schools,” to replace “poor-condition and ageing school buildings, with modern, energy-efficient designs.” The Education Secretary announced £1 billion in capital funding to be spent on 50 initial projects, with work due to begin in autumn 2021.)

The PM then went onto say "If you look at what we have been doing over the previous decade, that's completely in line with what we have always done."  But between 2009-10 and 2021-22, DfE capital spending declined 50% in real terms. 

4/9 Gillian Keegan, the education secretary, apologises after she was caught complaining to a TV reporter that others with responsibility for school repairs had “sat on their arse” rather than act.  

Who could she be thinking of? 

Points on the timeline above above 

1) Notice how, when political/public opinion heat comes onto a topic, definitions of what is capital or revenue spending change.

2) Notice how in all the "we'll fund it " responses nobody is saying there is extra money. So presumably funding will be deverted from new build/rebuild or improvement or maintenance budgets?

3) Notice how politicians talk about how many millions they'e committed, but don't say, when compared with the past, whether that is an increase or decrease in real terms.

4) Notice how explanations of extra money don't take into account whether the school population is increasing or decreasing (see birth rates note below).

5) Birth rates have a significant effect on how much school capacity is needed. For example in 2021/22 some 9 million state-funded school places were reported, some 5 million primary places and 4 million secondary places. The rate of primary places being added has slowed dramatically, due to the reduction in birth rates between 2012 and 2020. However, the rate of secondary places being added has continued at a steady pace, as the peak in school age population moves into secondary. with around 7% of schools exceeding their capacity by 10 or more pupils. 

Abbreviations

BRE = Building Research Establishment 

DfE = Department for Education

LGA = Local Goverment Association 

NAO = National Audit Office

Raac = reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete - a cheap lightweight alternative to traditional concrete mixes 

SCOSS = Standing Committee on Structural Safety (House of Lords) 

Sources 

- various Telegraph, Independent, Guardian newspaper online articles

- House Of Commons Library "School Buildings and capital funding (England)" research briefing

- NAO Report on the condition of school buildings

Who is responsible for seeking a Judicial Review on whether the UK COVID Inquiry can see Boris Johnson's WhatsApp messages?

A headline from this Sky News post is " COVID inquiry: Government seeks judicial review over order to hand over Boris Johnson WhatsApp messages"

What is interesting is how, in the bulk of the reporting I've seen or heard, the decision to seek such a review is described as being something down to the Cabinet Office.  Strangely absent from the reporting on this subject are the names of the ministers responsible.  So just to clarify, (all info and pictures sourced from wikipedia), those in the management chain - so presumably taking responsibility for this decision - are pictured and listed below.

The Minister for the Cabinet Office is Jeremy Quin, who is paid some £118k p.a

Jeremy reports to Oliver Dowding, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, who is paid some £154k p.a.

Oliver reports to Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, who is paid some £160k p.a.

Rishi Sunak's inaccurate, misleading or unevidenced claims - #FullFact

After all, he's only the Prime Minister of the UK who, on entering Downing Street promised “integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level”

 (Their list only includes politicians Full Fact has contacted in relation to claims we have fact checked since 2022)

Rishi Sunak MP

Made an unevidenced claim that Just Stop Oil ‘bankrolls’ the Labour Party on 1 February 2023

Rishi Sunak MP

Made an incorrect claim about the number of new homes built in the last year on 26 October 2022

It’s not good enough

If you agree, join us in demanding better from our politicians.

Add your name