The Cameron Conservative Government: A guide to the policies and challenges by MHP Communications

THE CAMERON CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT A GUIDE TO THE POLICIES AND CHALLENGES MAY 2015

CONTENTS

FOREWORD

WHAT HAPPENED ON 7 MAY 2015?

POLITICS 4 WHERE NEXT FOR LABOUR?

MANAGING PARLIAMENT

ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE

FINANCIAL SERVICES AND THE ECONOMY

FOOD AND FARMING

HEALTH 16 INFRASTRUCTURE 18 MANUFACTURING 20 PROPERTY 22 RETAIL 24 TELECOMS, MEDIA AND TECHNOLOGY

TRANSPORT 28

FOREWORD

Jonathan Lomax Managing Director, Head of MHP Corporate Affairs

Well, that was the ‘post-election chaos period’ that never was. Almost everyone expected the first month after the 2015 election to be a period of political drama, with competing claims being made by different parties as to who was best placed to form the next government. It certainly has been a dramatic period in some ways, with two of the defeated parties, Labour and the Liberal Democrats, facing existential questions and a third party, UKIP, doing its best to prove its detractors correct by tearing itself apart with bickering and infighting. But the composition of the government is crystal clear, with David Cameron free to pursue a Conservative agenda ‘unencumbered’ by coalition partners. In some ways this takes companies and organisations interested in politics and public policy back to a much more straightforward period of single-party rule. However, things are perhaps not as simple as they seem, with the Government’s small majority precariously dependent on the votes of a group of right-wing Conservatives who proved themselves serial rebels in the last Parliament. The referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU, whether it comes in 2017 or earlier, looms on the horizon as an event of such epic consequence that it has the potential to completely derail the rest of the Government’s programme.

In this booklet, some of our external advisers and partners, such as Andrew Cooper from Populus and former Home Secretary Charles Clarke, unpack some of the political ramifications of the 7 May result. The MHP team then explore a range of issues for different aspects of business and the economy, looking at what the Conservatives have said they will do in particular areas, overlaid with views on what may actually be possible. For some organisations, what is contained in these pages will be welcome news – for others, less so. But whatever your views, or the potential impact on your organisation, we hope the content is provocative and inspires you to think about issues in new ways. And if it pricks your interest and you would like to hear more about what the new Government means for you, we would be delighted to hear from you to arrange a conversation.

WHAT HAPPENED ON 7 MAY 2015? Andrew Cooper, founder of Populus

The 2015 general election represents the vanquishing of old-style, boots-on-the-ground community campaigning – Ed Miliband’s ‘five million conversations’ – by Big Data, sophisticated analytics, microtargeting and social media. Commentators criticised the remorselessly dull discipline of the Conservatives’ air-war. They missed entirely the party’s ruthlessly effective precision-targeting using direct mail, Facebook and phone calls. Labour had millions of random conversations. The Conservatives had a few hundred thousand and they were forensically focused. The party went back again and again to the crucial potential switchers, driving home three simple, fundamental points: Cameron v Miliband, core economic credibility and fear of separatist Scottish nationalists pulling the strings. Labour resorted to etching their pledges into a huge tombstone – the biggest ‘jump the shark’ moment yet in a British election. But the pledges were so bland, they added up to nothing, and Labour lacked both a broad narrative and a credible economic argument.

Old wisdoms shattered There is no precedent for a party that is leading on both best leader/potential Prime Minister and on the economy not going on to win the election. The primacy of these factors has now been reaffirmed. The thought of Ed Miliband as Prime Minister was enough to push a lot of wavering voters towards the Conservatives. This was underlined by the prospect of Ed Miliband as Prime Minister, after trailing the Conservatives in both votes and seats in the House of Commons, having to rely on the Scottish Nationalists. Several conventional wisdoms have been shattered by the result. Very few people thought, even six months ago, that the Liberal Democrats really would get only eight per cent of the vote. Almost everyone assumed that the Liberal Democrats’ grass-roots stickiness would save them from disaster. It was hard to find anyone who thought they’d lose – at most – half the 57 MPs they won in 2010. No-one, least of all the Liberal Democrats themselves, would have believed they would be reduced to just eight MPs. Many people also assumed that UKIP would be squeezed much more than they were. At mid-Parliament, few pollsters or commentators were predicting that UKIP support would hold up to the point that they’d win 13 per cent of the vote (10 per cent up on 2010) – and most assumed that Nigel Farage would surely win Thanet South.

When the polls after the Scottish independence referendum showed a swing of more than 20 per cent from Labour to the SNP, few gave it much credence. Even to the end, many doubted that the SNP would really jump from just six MPs to 40 or more, let alone the 56 they ended up with. Almost no one believed that Ed Miliband could possibly do worse than Gordon Brown in 2010. But he did: 232 MPs vs. 258. That would have been impossible but for Scotland. In 2010, Labour had its second-worst vote share since World War I, but in Scotland there was a small swing to the party. In terms of UK vote share, Labour had a one per cent increase on 2010, but the post-referendum surge to the SNP in Scotland changed the UK’s Parliamentary arithmetic. Perhaps the most deep-rooted conventional wisdom of all was that the Conservative Party wouldn’t do better in 2015 than it had in 2010.

So, the 2015 election brought a succession of counter-intuitive, history-making and just downright surprising results. The dullest, most managed election campaign in memory ultimately produced the greatest drama, culminating in the resignations of three party leaders the day after the election. It was also, of course, a serious failure by the opinion polls, all of which produced neck-and-neck results suggesting an inevitably hung Parliament. The pollsters’ autopsy is well under way. They will learn and renew, just as they did after being wrong in 1992. It is much less clear how long Labour will take to come to terms with the underlying reasons for their defeat, whether the Liberal Democrats have the patience and clarity to rebuild once again, and whether the Conservatives will learn the right lessons, not the wrong ones, from their surprising victory.

David Cameron was the first Prime Minister since Lord Salisbury in 1900 to increase his party’s vote share after more than 18 months in office. You have to go deeper into the nineteenth century to find the last time a government gained seats, as well as votes, at its next general election.

POLITICS

Nick Laitner, Managing Director

Job done? After an unlikely and somewhat triumphant Conservative election victory, the party’s top brass are flying high. The scores of disloyal backbenchers who spent most of the last Parliament briefing against the PM have been silenced by the shock of victory. A seamless, on-message reshuffle means that the Government can quickly get down to business. And all talk of a ‘good election to lose’ has been forgotten, joining the detritus of empty champagne bottles and gently deflating blue balloons at CCHQ.

A short honeymoon But there will be trouble ahead. Mark Harper, the new Government Chief Whip, has taken on one of the least enviable roles imaginable – trying to impose order and discipline on a fractious, roiling Conservative Party with a tiny majority. The sparkling fizz of victory will soon be replaced by an unpalatable cocktail that the party will find hard to keep down. Difficult decisions on big spending cuts this autumn will be followed by arguments around ‘English votes for English laws.’ Also on the horizon, of course, are tricky negotiations with the other EU countries on the terms of the UK’s membership. Then, perhaps as early as 2016, there will be a referendum on the new terms, on which the Conservatives will be split. And that is before the Government has to fulfil a range of challenging election pledges that were only ever meant to be negotiating positions for a coalition agreement.

It may not be long before David Cameron’s well-earned political honeymoon descends into chaos and crisis. In one respect, he won’t mind too much. Mr Cameron has said that he will quit before the next General Election. But the ensuing leadership speculation (hello Boris) is unlikely to do much for party unity or competent government over the next five years. Still, the Conservatives can be cheered by an official opposition that is still prostrate, having been knocked cold by a sucker punch from the electorate. With a long list of contenders already positioning for September’s leadership race, the Labour Party will spend the next few months in a state of deep introspection, leavened by occasional outbreaks of infighting.

Battle for Labour’s soul

Labour faces a devilish challenge to reconcile three competing visions for the future of the party. There is already a significant clamour for the party to move towards a more centrist, aspirational approach, in an effort to win back the seats in the south of England and the Midlands that should be the building blocks of any future Labour majority. But the siren voices of the unions and their allies will try to drag the party leftwards, using Scotland as their example of where Labour was “not socialist enough”. And to complicate matters further, others are seeking a shift towards working-class oriented, ‘Blue’ Labour – focusing on immigration and community engagement – to see off the growing UKIP threat in the north of England. The coming months will see nothing less than a battle for the soul of the Labour Party. The new leader will then have to spend the next four and a half years knitting the party back together again while simultaneously developing an electorally attractive proposition and running an effective opposition to the Conservatives. Will any of Liz Kendall, Tristram Hunt, Yvette Cooper or Andy Burnham (in ascending order of traditional socialist orthodoxy) have the political skill to win the argument with both their party and the country as a whole? The future of the Labour Party depends on it.

Much soul-searching also remains ahead for the Liberal Democrats, along with their own – rather more modest – leadership election. ‘Populist’ Tim Farron and ‘centrist’ Norman Lamb may offer very different visions of the future for the party. Whoever wins in July will face a Herculean task to simply make the party relevant again on the national stage.

The SNP But the big question of this Parliament concerns the role of the SNP. Will they be a constructive, mature advocate for distinctive alternative policies? Or an angry mob of spoilers determined to frustrate the Conservatives and the Union at every turn? The deft leadership of Nicola Sturgeon, from her position in the Scottish Parliament, suggests that the Nationalists will play nicely for as long as it suits them. But don’t be surprised if they shift their approach at some point, perhaps using the EU referendum debate to revisit calls for independence. Either way, the 50 SNP Parliamentary ingénues will liven up the House of Commons, adding to the layers of unpredictability that already abound. This is what makes the next five years so fascinating, compelling and – yes – challenging for anyone affected by goings-on at Westminster. Despite the still-surprising certainty which the General Election result has delivered, we know that this will be a Parliament of twists, turns and Rumsfeldian ‘unknowns’. After an election result that shocked almost every politician, pundit and pollster, perhaps Westminster will have to get used to the unexpected.

WHERE NEXT FOR LABOUR?

Charles Clarke, former Home Secretary and senior adviser to MHP

Labour’s disastrous defeat on 7 May has its roots in the party’s failure to get things onto the right track immediately after their 2010 defeat. Between May and October that year, Labour was entirely internally focused. This allowed the incoming Government to get away almost unchallenged with establishing a narrative of Labour’s economic failure. In my opinion the narrative was untrue and took no account of Gordon Brown’s effective leadership at the G20 in securing agreement to a global economic approach that led to recovery rather than deeper depression. However, the narrative was never successfully challenged and it was the core basis of Lynton Crosby’s 2015 Conservative electoral strategy and the main reason for their election victory. In the same way, Labour’s internal focus on choosing a new leader meant that Labour never made any serious effort to discuss openly and clearly why Labour lost in 2010, how it should then be an effective opposition during the new Parliament, and what its electoral strategy for success in 2015 would be. Those important and complicated questions were all subsumed within the parallel over-simplified process of selecting a new leader.

Moreover, the leadership election process itself was seriously flawed in 2010. It permitted the leaderships of some large trade unions to impose their own political agendas on the ballot process. For example, they included propaganda for particular candidates, but not others, in their ballot mailings. One important outcome of the failure to run the leadership election in a more democratic way was the election of Ed Miliband and the defeat of his brother. This choice was another big factor contributing to Labour’s defeat this year.

An agenda for recovery This time, the party needs to do far better in starting to help Labour to recover from the 2015 disaster. The agenda is pretty straightforward and has four elements. First, Labour needs from the outset to engage fully with the agenda which the new Tory Government; is setting from the moment of appointment of a new Cabinet, through its first Queen’s Speech on 27 May, the Emergency Budget and then the early second reading debates on key Bills. Labour must not just be an observer as these things happen. This will not be at all easy, but Labour cannot just wait until the election of a new leader before making its case and communicating it vigorously to the British people.

Second, Labour has to positively promote a process of open discussion, both within the Party and more widely, about the reasons for our defeat and what we have to do now. The agenda for this essential conversation must not be set only by the media groupthink which was so damaging for Labour in the General Election campaign, or to be defined only through the spectrum of the leadership choices on offer. Third, the election for the Labour leadership must be properly conducted between now and September. Important constitutional reforms, proposed by Ed Miliband and approved in March 2014, have to be fully and properly implemented to ensure a fair election. The next leader must not have the burden, which Ed Miliband had to bear, of being seen as the victor of a flawed electoral process. Fourth, Labour has immediately to decide how best to contest the big three elections in 2016: Scotland, Wales and London. These all need urgent priority, starting now and not when a new national leader is elected.

Labour needs to consider its own transformed relationship with the Scottish electorate and develop its own policy programme that can contest the SNP and re-establish a positive relationship with the people of Scotland. The same, less dramatic though no less urgent, is also necessary in relation to the Welsh Assembly elections in 2016. And Labour needs to find a candidate for the London Mayoral election who inspires the electorate with a vision of Labourâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s future which compels attention and support. This is a very tough agenda for Labour, and the whole party will need to commit to it. It will be politically challenging for the whole leadership of the Party. How well Labour tackles these hard questions will offer an important guide to how serious it is about winning its way back to power in 2020.

The most important is Scotland, where Labour has to begin its comeback and achieve a strong performance in the 2016 Scottish Parliament election. That will not be achieved on a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;steady as you goâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; basis.

MANAGING PARLIAMENT

Flora Coleman, Associate Director

Backs have been slapped, drinks toasted and the Ministers are all now appointed. The Conservative Government is in place and has the mandate to deliver its manifesto. But if they are going to effect change, the Government will need to pass legislation.

’92 again?

The Coalition Government had a combined majority of 73 in the House of Commons and could (in theory) rely on a combined total of 325 Conservative and Liberal Democrat Members of the House of Lords. The incoming Government has a majority in the Commons of just 12 MPs and, in the Lords, there are just 224 Conservative Peers out of a total of 779.

Many commentators are comparing the 2015 Parliament to that of 1992-97, when the Conservatives had a slim Commons majority and the party was fractured over Europe. But there are big differences. In 1992, the Conservatives were weary after years of Government. Now, the Conservative Party is revitalised by its dramatic victory.

Number 10 will need to be more conscious of Parliamentary problems, given that just six MPs crossing the floor will result in a Government defeat. The Government’s centre of gravity will shift, from Number 10 to Parliament. The sledgehammer of a strong majority will be replaced by a corkscrew as deals will need to be struck to secure legislation. Such deals could shore up Government support, or secure commitments on particular policies from members of the Liberal Democrats, UUP, DUP, Labour, or even the SNP.

In the 2010-15 Parliament, Government Ministers were able to miss votes and carry on their departmental work. For example, David Cameron voted in just 16 per cent of all divisions. In this Parliament, Ministers will be more tied to the House, giving ample opportunity for MPs to lobby each other and Ministers.

Rise (and rise?) of the Nationalists

The other difference isn’t such good news for the Conservatives. In the 1992 Parliament, the Labour Party held most of the seats in Scotland, and the Conservatives still had 11 Scottish MPs. The Scottish National Party (SNP) now holds all but three of the 59 seats north of the border. Previously, the SNP only engaged in the Scottish Affairs Committee with targeted interventions on legislation, mostly at committee stage. The SNP position is not to vote on matters that don’t impact on Scotland, but their MPs engage occasionally on English matters, arguing that a policy impacts on the overall budget envelope. With a new constitutional settlement being discussed, it is yet known how much they will stray into English-only territory in the next Parliament.

Now the third party in the Commons, the SNP are entitled to greater committee representation, two questions at PMQs, and a huge increase in Short Money, which is the annual payment to Opposition parties to help them carry out their Parliamentary functions. Moreover, the SNP is highly disciplined and well versed in the deal-making of Westminster.

The Upper House

In the Lords, the Government has nowhere near a majority. Only around half the Peers turn out regularly to vote, and even then, they come mainly from the traditional three main Westminster parties. Even if most of the active Crossbenchers vote with the Government, the Conservatives will be defeated by the combined forces of the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats. Previous Conservative Governments upheld the Salisbury Convention, under which the House of Lords does not oppose the second or third reading of any legislation promised in the Government’s election manifesto. The convention was sorely tested under the Coalition Government because the Labour Party argued that the Coalition programme for Government, hammered out after the 2010 Election, did not have the same weight as a party manifesto. It will be a significant victory for the Conservative leadership in the Lords if the Opposition parties respect the Salisbury Convention.

Internal decision making

There is another key element in the Government’s management of Parliament: the Cabinet Committees. With the Coalition and the ConservativeLiberal Democrat “quad” consigned to history, the most important committee in internal government decision making is the Home Affairs Committee, which considers all policy relating to constitutional and political reform and home affairs issues, including migration, health, schools and welfare. In the last Government this was chaired by Nick Clegg, but now it will revert to the Leader of the House, Chris Grayling. The Leader of the House of Commons sits each week at Business Questions and hears the concerns of all MPs, so a key point of Government connectivity with parliamentarians has been restored. This new Parliament is going to be fascinating. Over the next five years (unless the Fixed Term Parliament Act is repealed), key policies will be thrashed out not just behind closed doors in Whitehall, but publically in lengthy sittings of both Houses. And, lest we forget, there are just 1,820 days, or about 824 sitting days of this Government to go, until the next General Election.

In any case, legislative drafting will need to be extremely tight, as there are no time limits on debates in the Lords. And we may yet see House of Lords reform back on the table.

ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE Neil Stockley, Director

At first glance, it looks as if we’re in for more of the same on energy and climate change. The Conservative Party Manifesto promised to “keep the lights on, drive bills down and reduce carbon emissions”. These have been the energy goals of successive Governments for years now. Likewise, the Conservatives want to expand “good value” green energy, new nuclear and gas. They promised to support the Climate Change Act 2008, which sets a legally binding target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 per cent, compared to 1990 levels, by the year 2050. The new Energy and Climate Change Secretary, Amber Rudd – a professed “liberal Tory” who won good reviews as a junior DECC minister – reiterated this stance during the campaign. Ms Rudd has described climate science as “compelling” and has been known to cite Margaret Thatcher as an early advocate of action on climate change. In February, David Cameron joined Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg in signing an agreement, brokered by the Green Alliance, committing them all to work together, across party lines, to agree carbon budgets in accordance with the Act.

The three leaders promised to seek a “fair, strong, legally binding, global climate deal” that limits temperature rises to below 2°C. They also pledged to step up the transition to a competitive, energy efficient low-carbon economy and end the use of coal for power generation that does not use carbon capture and storage (CCS). And the Conservatives went along with their Liberal Democrat coalition partners in passing the Energy Act 2013, which created the framework for far-reaching electricity market reforms. The energy commentator Dieter Helm says that the package has turned DECC into “the micro-manager of the electricity system” and means that “almost every investment in electricity generation [is] determined by the government.” There is no sign that the Conservatives plan to reverse or amend the reforms.

Change is on the way Yet some policy shifts are on the way. The Conservative manifesto stressed that any decarbonisation policies should be cost effective, reflecting the party’s primary concern with GDP growth and international competitiveness. The Government is committed to achieving a further £30 billion in fiscal consolidation over the next two years, including £13 billion from departmental savings, and DECC will likely be one of the departments directly affected.

George Osborne’s Treasury will keep taking a close interest in energy policy. But its influence will be even more powerful than under the Coalition. The Levy Control Framework (LCF), which manages levies to support renewables, is sure to come under fresh scrutiny, which may be bad news for a sector that sees the existing LCF as too tight and seeks greater certainty on the support that will be available beyond 2020. Many Conservative MPs, including the new Energy Minister, Andrea Leadsom, are highly critical of onshore windfarms. Their manifesto included pledges to axe new subsidies for onshore wind and to change planning laws so that local people have the final say on windfarm applications. The Conservatives also said they would not support “additional distorting and expensive power sector targets”. A statutory target for decarbonising the power sector is, therefore, highly unlikely.

Questions remain

The new Government will need to set a date for ending power generation from coal-fired stations that do not have CCS, as Mr Cameron promised. The manifesto also promised to “continue to support the safe development of shale gas” – one energy technology where the Conservatives are more enthusiastic than the other parties. But during the campaign, the Prime Minister promised that there would be “no dash into [shale gas] technology without the safeguards in place”. Amber Rudd has plenty of other big challenges ahead: keeping the Conservatives’ promise to support the North Sea oil and gas sector, which faces further retrenchment and restructuring; making sense of the Government’s energy efficiency policies, especially the Green Deal; delivering the roll out of smart meters, which is in trouble, and, of course, leading the UK negotiating team at the crucial UN climate change summit in Paris this December. One thing is clear: the politics of energy and climate change are going to be anything but boring over the next five years.

All of this leaves some big questions around how the Conservatives will meet their commitments on energy and climate change. For instance, the wind lobby counters that onshore wind is the cheapest readily-available form of green energy, implying that if the Conservatives’ promise is kept, power bills could go up. Likewise, the solar sector says that it is on the verge of being cost-competitive with fossil fuels.

FINANCIAL SERVICES AND ECONOMY Alastair Hill, Senior Account Manager

When it was clear that the Conservatives had won their surprise election victory, the FTSE 100 jumped. The rise quickly petered out, though, perhaps due to a realisation that bigger uncertainties are looming. The Conservative Government’s planned EU referendum could move the markets far more. Much of the legislation governing the sector is developed in Brussels, and the UK is a leading European centre for a number of financial activities, including investment and private banking, hedge funds, private equity, exchange traded derivatives and sovereign wealth funds. According to a recent survey conducted by the Centre for the Study of Financial Innovation (CSFI), three quarters of those who work in the City would choose to stay in the EU. That said, the same survey found that 42% of those surveyed thought the European Commission is “hostile” towards City interests. Analysts are also divided on what leaving the EU would mean, in practice, for the City. Some suggest that if it looked like the UK was going to leave, there would be a negative effect on UK markets, particularly for gilts and equities. Others say that London would retain its position as one of the world’s top financial centres regardless of EU membership.

Either way, the British public will now get a choice about whether to stay in the EU, or leave.

Drawing on the experience of the Scottish referendum, in which business interventions drew heavy criticism from nationalists, companies in the sector face big questions about whether and how they should engage publically in the debate. Banking The debate about the EU aside, the Conservatives’ victory was undoubtedly greeted by a general sigh of relief across the financial services sector. Labour’s manifesto will now be forgotten, and the Conservatives will, on the whole, continue with existing policy settings rather than starting radical new interventions. Banking is a case in point, and bank shares saw some of the biggest gains following the shock result of 7 May. The Government took the opportunity to sell more shares in Lloyds Banking Group, taking the amount returned from the bailed-out bank to the taxpayer up to more than £10billion. The Coalition Government carried out large-scale structural banking reforms, which the incoming Conservative Government will now give the industry time to implement. Populist banker bashing may also begin to wane, and the industry will welcome the appointment of former investment banker, Sajid Javid, as Business Secretary.

On the retail side, the approach will also be one of continuity, with the focus on protecting consumers and ensuring that retail financial products are sold appropriately. Flagship reforms, such as the Current Account Switch Service, which allows consumers to switch their bank account within seven days, were introduced in the last term. The Government will be keen to see new entrants bed down and even more choice offered to consumers. Given that there have been significant improvements in competition already, the focus will be on adjustments to further help new entrants. That is, of course, unless the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) forces the pace of reform. The regulator is due to publish the findings of its investigation into competition in the current account market in Spring 2016, and the recommendations may force the Government to revisit its approach.

Pensions Former Pensions Minister Steve Webb’s ‘quiet revolution’ became the Chancellor’s very public revolution towards the end of the last Parliament. George Osborne’s reforms to annuities, announced in the 2014 Budget, shocked the industry but, broadly speaking, the pensions sector will welcome a Conservative majority government. Labour had threatened to water down a series of reforms, which would have led to more uncertainty.

The Conservative government should provide more continuity on pensions, although Baroness Altmann’s appointment as Pensions Minister may signal a slight departure. The grey vote remains a key constituency for the Conservatives and, combined with her focus on consumer end-benefit, this may lead to intervention. Baroness Altmann has previously said that she wants to force providers to publish charges to improve transparency. One change may be advanced quickly though: the Conservatives commitment to restrict tax relief for high earners to fund an increase of the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million.

Economic outlook Finally, a word on the economic outlook. Before the election, the Conservatives promised laws against tax rises and significant tax cuts, as well as the continuation of protected spending for key departments. These will make it even harder for the Chancellor to meet his new set of fiscal targets. A rate rise would also make debt servicing more challenging. It is likely that, as in the last term, the Chancellor’s numbers will end up moving about considerably and may ultimately not be met. However, in leaving himself little wriggle room, George Osborne is betting that UK growth will continue to pick up speed in the next Parliament, unhindered by any further global shocks. But that is by no means a certainty.

FOOD AND FARMING Pete Digger, Managing Director

During the general election campaign, the parties’ plans for farming and food were given scant consideration by the mainstream media. Where there was any interest, it usually related to calls for tighter food labelling and to impose a fat or sugar tax on “unhealthy” products. Now that the campaign is over, that pressure will remain. But the Conservative Government is unlikely to bow to it. The Conservatives made a clean sweep of seats formerly held by the Liberal Democrats in the South West and elsewhere. They now find themselves as the representatives of farmers in many more parts of the country than they were previously. As a result, the Government will come under pressure to make good on their manifesto commitments and to be seen as the champion of farmers’ interests. If they fail, the Conservatives may lose their newly held seats in 2020.

Of most interest in the short to medium term will be the Conservatives’ pledge to develop a 25 year plan to grow more, buy more, and sell more British food. The farming community and others in the sector will be keen to engage with Government to shape the plan and drive its implementation at a time when the sector has been under pressure.

The Government will be punished at the ballot box in 2020 if it fails to deliver. The political pressures may well give rise to another tension, as the interests of their urban and rural supporters will inevitably diverge over issues such as labelling and transparency. Similarly, the Government’s commitment to establish a Great British Food Unit to trademark and promote British foods will need to be seen to deliver higher volumes of exports. The UK is not alone in seeing a positive future for its food producers fuelled by export growth. It will not be possible for everyone to succeed in this aim. Market dynamics could further be altered by the implementation of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), which many commentators fear will result in significant volumes of food imports into Europe.

Pressures on the Government

More immediately, the Government will come under pressure to ensure greater fairness and transparency in the supply chain. The relationships between farmers, food companies and the supermarkets have come under repeated scrutiny over the years, especially in recent months, particularly in light of volatility in the milk price. Allegations that farmers are the unwitting victims of price wars between the supermarkets have been strongly denied, and a series of inquiries have failed to uncover much evidence to back up these claims. Nevertheless, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has recommended that the powers of the Groceries Code Adjudicator should be strengthened.

The farming community â&#x20AC;&#x201C; and, in time, Liberal Democrats looking to re-establish their presence in rural areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; will be sure to hold the Government to account in protecting the interests of farmers and the rural community at large. This dynamic presents a significant opportunity to companies in the sector to shape their operating environment, as they seek to diversify product ranges and increase their ability to compete in the global export market.

HEALTH

Rachel Rowson Managing Director, Head of MHP Health

After the emotional roller coaster of election night, for some it might be a relief to have Jeremy Hunt restored to Richmond House so that we can pick up where we left off in health before the election campaign started. In many ways the result of the election showed that the country – well, England – was looking for continuity and in health that is exactly what the Prime Minister has provided. Despite the focus that the Labour Party gave to the NHS in their election campaign, none of the parties truly set out a radical new direction for the health service. Beyond a few headline grabbing promises and the profile of the NHS overall, healthcare was fairly irrelevant in terms of party politics at this election. It became clear during the campaign that, with significant amounts of power already having been passed over to Simon Stevens and devolved down through the NHS, the Five Year Forward View would be the central plan for the future health service, regardless of the colour of the incoming government.

How the Conservative Party imprints its vision of the Five Year Forward View in a meaningful way will dominate changes in the NHS during this Parliament. Some are already concerned that this could lead effectively to another significant reorganisation of the health service, with local areas consolidating NHS, public health and social budgets across larger geographical areas, which were divided up through the Health and Social Care Act.

Funding crisis

The main area of controversy, and what is likely to become Jeremy Hunt’s biggest headache, is finding a long-term solution to the NHS funding crisis. At a time of unprecedented budgetary pressure, this will only get worse as the population ages and the cost of healthcare rises. During the election campaign, the Conservative Party pledged to spend at least an additional £8 billion on the NHS by 2020, over and above inflation, but gave no detail about where this money would come from. This pledge might become a spectre that haunts both Jeremy Hunt and the Treasury for the next five years.

And what of the Opposition? The Labour Party will be licking its wounds for months to come following its crushing defeat. The leadership election process threatens to put Labour on the back foot in the short term. Two of the contenders, Andy Burnham and Liz Kendall, have a strong health background. Whoever becomes leader, Labour is sure to exploit any weakness the Government shows in health. Meanwhile, Norman Lamb, the former Health Minister, has thrown his hat in to the ring as a contender in the Liberal Democrat leadership race. If Lamb were to lead the party, and if it can become relevant again, health and mental health in particular would continue to be one of their key issues. The Conservatives may enter a honeymoon period during Labourâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s time of introspection and as the Lib Dems determine if they have a viable future. But a thin Commons majority and a potentially revitalised Opposition in the medium term may put pressure on a Government that still needs to spell out more clearly how they are going to fund NHS pledges, increase access to innovative treatments and meet the challenges of an increasingly ageing and sick population. In a Parliament where the EU referendum and a vocal SNP set of MPs look set to dominate, there is work to be done to ensure health lies at the top of the agenda.

INFRASTRUCTURE Tom Wadsworth, Associate Director

Investment in infrastructure looks likely to be a major priority for the incoming Conservative Government. But ministers face some major decisions – and opportunities – over the next year. With growth back, unemployment down and living standards recovering, the next big economic challenge for the Government is to increase productivity. As the OECD keeps reminding us, Britain’s creaking infrastructure is a major drag on productivity. Yes, that lack of housing, those packed trains, airports and roads, overloaded electricity grid and power stations mean that France is more productive than the UK. The Conservatives are committed to addressing all of these problems: 200,000 ‘starter homes’ are to be built by 2020; HS2 is being taken forward and £38bn spent on the rest of the rail network; £15bn on roads; a new runway at a London airport; £110bn of energy infrastructure. Problem solved, right?

Finding the money It’s not quite that simple. None of this is cheap, and the Government will need to find a fair chunk of change to afford it, even though in many areas the private sector is willing and able to fund some of the necessary investments. The problem is, the Government needs to cut the departmental budgets covering housing, transport and energy by about 30 per cent from 2016 to 2020. This is the only way for the Conservatives to deliver their promise to eliminate the deficit whilst protecting health, education and pensions, and not raising income tax, National Insurance or VAT. This year’s Comprehensive Spending Review will be a tough one for the departments charged with overseeing the renewal of Britain’s infrastructure and putting us on the path to improved productivity.

The Government may well need to lean heavily on the private sector to plug the investment gap. Industries coming forward with novel ways to leverage investment should be welcomed with open arms, and the Government will look to encourage ways for them to invest. Housing has already seen Help to Buy boosting demand. In the energy sector, Contracts for Difference (Cedes) are in place to help give the private sector the certainty it needs to invest. We can expect to see similar sorts of approaches to deliver road and rail investments, which could include the return of PPPs in some form.

Big decisions Here, then, are the big decisions. Before the election, Conservative ministers were already working hard to find ways to package HS2 so that private investors could bring their finance as well as their expertise to the project. That work will continue apace, as the Government heads towards the third reading of the Phase One Bill, finalises plans for Phase Two and investigates what Osborne has dubbed HS3. Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin and his ministers should be kept pretty busy. Growth in housing numbers should be a bit easier to deliver. Homes started in 2014 rose by 10 per cent, but the sheer growth in demand means that new Communities Secretary Greg Clark and his tea, will need to deliver spades in the ground pretty quickly to make a real difference. The new Energy and Climate Change Secretary, Amber Rudd, will be judged on whether she can deliver new nuclear power stations, additional investment in renewables and an increase in the number of gas-fired generation plants. After all, her principal job is, arguably, to keep the lights on and the wheels of industry whirring.

Finally, there’s one major infrastructure investment that the country desperately needs for growth and productivity and for which the private sector is competing to put billions into. Yes, it’s airports. Sir Howard Davies’ Airports Commission report is due this summer, and he’ll recommend that either Heathrow or Gatwick be allowed to build a new runway. So Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin – and Chancellor George Osborne – will have to decide whether to accept the recommendation and press ahead or to disown it. Either way, there will be some furious Conservative backbenchers. The Conservatives’ unexpected majority gives them a great opportunity. If they can harness the private sector’s enthusiasm to invest, by matching it with the right support mechanisms, the Government could turbo-charge the UK’s economic growth. But to do that, ministers need to move quickly. The decisions they make in the next year or so will determine the path of growth and productivity for 2020 and beyond.

MANUFACTURING

James Gurling, Managing Director and Tom Wadsworth, Associate Director

We’re not keen on shouting about our successes in the UK. But slowly and surely, people in the know have become louder and prouder about our manufacturing sector. Jaguar Land Rover exports an ever increasing number of vehicles it makes in Britain to markets across the globe; Airbus in the UK designs and builds the wings that fly large numbers of the world’s planes; Rolls Royce builds and exports the engines that power many of those planes. And umpteen companies, small and large, form the supply chain which allows these companies to succeed. The driver of much of this success has been the Regional Growth Fund (RGF) established in 2010 by the combined might of the Liberal Democrat Dr Vince Cable, as Business Secretary, and Conservative Chancellor George Osborne. Both men wanted to rebalance the economy, spreading prosperity across the UK and recognised the role that manufacturing could play. Initiatives such as the Advance Manufacturing Supply Chain Initiative (AMSCI) and the Technology Strategy Board’s / Innovation UK Catapults (modelled on the famed German Fraunhofers) have also made their mark. UK manufacturers are now harnessing and commercialising the world-beating academic R&D that takes place in the UK, and training thousands of apprentices and graduate engineers for the future.

Thousands of new jobs in the West Midlands, North West and South West and hundreds of thousands more in the UK-based supply chain businesses supporting the major manufacturers are the result.

If the Prime Minister’s stated aspiration for his new Government to be ‘on the side of working people’ is to be more than a soundbite, it will need to build further on the manufacturing revival and extend confidence and permanence throughout the supply chain. Four challenges It now falls to Mr Osborne’s ally, Sajid Javid, the new Business Secretary, to continue the good work. He faces four major challenges. The first is to attract more manufacturers to the UK and help existing ones to grow. Mr Osborne is already on-hand to help with the first, having cut corporation tax to the lowest level across the G20 countries. So expect more employerfriendly policies in future Budgets, further rounds of RGF and AMSCI funding, and continued expansion of the Catapults.

The second is to boost exports. Geography and time zones help make the UK a great place from which to export, but concluding the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) with the US, and an equivalent EU trade deal with China (which David Cameron has previously championed), will be a major priority for the Conservative Government.

The long-term solution is, of course, developing more of our own skilled engineers, and Mr Javid has a smart and able Skills Minister, Nick Boles, to help him do that. The clamour from business around getting young people into STEM subjects will only increase in the coming years. The Government will need to deliver demonstrable actions as well as good intentions in this area.

The new Trade Minister, Francis Maude, and the Foreign Secretary, Philip Hammond, must continue the renaissance of UKTI, which came on leaps and bounds under the Coalition in the minds of many businesses.

Looking to the EU Referendum

Third, to meet the extra demand that increased exports creates, the Government needs to turbo-charge the supply chain. Continuing funding routes like AMSCI will be important, but expect to see further capital allowances for plant investment in future Budgets, and plenty of other reliefs to support the growth of SMEs.

But there’s one small issue that cuts across all of these challenges – Britain’s membership of the EU. David Cameron’s cast-iron promise of an ‘in/out’ referendum will now be delivered. If, by 2017, the Prime Minister has not been able to prove he has received sufficient concessions from Europe, his voice in the coming campaign could be fatally diminished. As the vacuum emerges, manufacturers will increasingly be expected to have a view, one way or another. Sitting the debate out is unlikely to be an option that will repay the sector well.

Finally, the skills gap needs to be plugged. One of the biggest constraints on supply chain growth, and of the major manufacturers, is an inability to get the skilled employees they need. Skilled and trained support from abroad is likely to be the obvious solution, and Mr Javid’s political mettle will be tested as he decides best how to achieve this without going head to head in public with the Home Secretary and (likely future Leadership contender) Theresa May.

PROPERTY

Pete Digger, Managing Director

In the final weeks of the 2015 general election campaign, pledges by both the main parties to help first-time buyers and those who rent suggested that the Thatcherite vision of a property-owning democracy had been revived. The initial responses of commentators on the property sector to the unexpected Conservative victory have, perhaps inevitably, been positive. With no prospect that there will be a ‘mansion tax’, the stalled market for properties worth over £2 million will begin to move again. This is certain to have a ‘trickle down’ impact across the rest of the market. Similarly, Labour’s pledge to cap rent rises will not be going ahead. As a policy that emerged late in the campaign, there was not enough time for the cap to impact either on the rental or buy-to-let market. Still, landlords and investors will breathe a sigh of relief that they are coming into a period of stability, with no big reforms apparently on the horizon.

Direct market interventions brought in by the Coalition Government, such as the ‘help to buy’ scheme and the associated ‘help to buy’ ISA, are set to stay in place, providing a further boon for the residential sector. Foxtons’ share price enjoyed a 10 per cent rally in early morning trading on Friday 8 May, following the news of the Conservative win. It has since fallen back. If everything seems rosy for estate agents, existing home owners and those seeking help to get on the housing ladder, the broader challenges in the UK housing market are as intractable as they ever were.

Housing supply

The fundamental problem remains how to increase housing supply. The Conservative manifesto pledged the construction of 200,000 new ‘starter homes’. The sector is extremely sceptical as to how this will be delivered. The creation of a Brownfield fund has been welcomed and will ease the process in some areas. But there is an inherent challenge when it comes to achieving planning permissions for significant developments in the face of local opposition.

In 2010, the Conservatives set out to succeed where previous Governments had failed, and tried to make widereaching reforms to the planning system. They soon found themselves up against the might of a range of groups rigidly opposed to any change. The coalition of groups that ranged against them included much of the party’s own support base.

There are other possible developments to look out for. One is the future tweaking of the stamp duty regime, though it would likely feature only as a footnote in a future Budget. Another is the much mooted creation of additional council tax bands for the most expensive properties. However, that is certainly not a priority for a Government that wants to keep its support base on side.

David Cameron and George Osborne might wish to be bold and revisit planning reforms. But they would be unlikely to succeed, not least because of the Government’s parallel drive to empower local government through the devolution of power. It is nigh on impossible to see how these conflicting objectives can be resolved.

Overall, the sector can probably conclude that its business as usual. But by 2020, the pressure for fundamental reform and intervention to increase housing supply will be unstoppable.

Any desire to confront the Tory shires over planning reform will be further dented by the major decisions that will be taken on infrastructure – HS2 and airport capacity – which will also meet vociferous local opposition before they can progress.

FOR SALE

SOLD

RETAIL

James Gurling, Managing Director and Kate Jones, Associate Director

The 2015 general election campaign saw an unprecedented number of and media focus on political opinion polls. Each day a new poll emerged that story-starved journalists would offer a new angle to opine on… only to find that each day the polls reported a stalemate. All of them turned out to be completely wrong. During the same period, the retail polls were certainly moving. There was news of further enhancement of the discount retailers, property divestments by Tesco, BHS being sold for £1 and Sainsbury reported its first loss for a decade with a two per cent drop in like-for-like sales. Price deflation, diminishing demand, fierce competition, increased media and public scrutiny and volatile consumer shopping patterns combined to paint a gloomy picture for retailing. In its Election Day edition, Retail Week reported industry expectations of a Labour-led Government. The list of expected new policies – increased corporation tax, abolishing zero hours contracts – added further gloom to the retail vista.

As a result, the election of a Conservative administration offers something of a relief for the retail sector. During the Coalition Government, the Chancellor, George Osborne, did a lot to assist the retail sector He put up income tax thresholds, increased ISA flexibility and reduced alcohol duty rates, thereby putting more cash in the pockets of consumers. And the scrapping of National Insurance contributions for under 24-year-olds has had a disproportionate impact on the retail sector. But most importantly of all, Mr Osborne secured specific business rate discounts worth £1.5 billion for the sector, and promised a fundamental review of the business rate system as a whole. It is here that the Chancellor, ably assisted by the new Business Secretary, Sajid Javid, can be expected to help the sector most. Sorting out business rates so that they boost the economic circumstances of retailers as well as those of the local communities they serve will be no mean achievement. And with clear commitments not to raise taxes such as VAT, the prospects for retailers look positive.

“Full Fat” austerity

But it is not all rosy. If the Coalition brought us ‘austerity light’, the Conservative administration is going to serve up the ‘full fat’ variety. The cash that has been put back in consumers’ pockets may well be a passing phase as new welfare and benefit cuts kick in. Footfall in some parts of the sector – from household appliances to health and beauty – is generally up. But food and drink in particular is struggling as, it seems, consumers turn their backs on supermarkets in favour of continental discount formats. Of course, that change in consumer behaviour is not a new one. In the not-too-distant past, the story was one of shoppers leaving the high street apparently in their droves, preferring to buy all their products in one place, be that out-of-town, at hypermarkets or online. Now it seems the new Government has a dual fight on its hands: driving more support into those ailing high streets, whilst simultaneously mitigating the impact on large format retailers in tough times.

Reputational challenges

Meanwhile, the pesky reputational issues are not likely to go away any time soon. Retailers operate in a world of ever increasing transparency. So, the next spiralling reputational issue is only a product recall, supplier negotiation, or pricing miscalculation away. Today’s consumers are, rightly, quick to find fault, report problems and follow their rights to seek justice, sometimes publicly. As a result, simply following the letter of the law may not be enough. Issues like zero hours contracts, supply chain failure and tax payment are absolutely matters for public debate. And as the next five years of austerity begin to bite, the Government will be more than happy to let retailers deal with the negative consequences for consumers, whilst they put their faith in better economic circumstances for 2020 and the next general election.

TELECOMS, MEDIA AND TECHNOLOGY Neil Stockley, Director and Tas Bhanji, Associate Director

Digital infrastructure will be a priority for the incoming Government, as it is an integral part of the Conservatives’ long-term economic plan. Increasing access to high-speed broadband and mobile coverage were mentioned on several occasions in the Conservative manifesto. The party promised to ensure that 95 per cent of the UK households has access to superfast broadband by the end of 2017. It also promised to subsidise the cost of installing superfast capable satellite services in the very hardest to reach areas. The Conservatives said that they would release more spectrum from public sector use to allow greater private sector access. They have an ambition that ultrafast (100-plus Mbps) broadband should be available to nearly all UK premises as soon as practicable. The manifesto also promised to provide rural Britain with “near universal” superfast broadband by the end of the next Parliament. Part of the funding (£1.7bn) for improving communications infrastructure is to come from “top slicing” the television licence fee.

Continuity

These commitments continue policies developed under the Coalition Government and taken forward under the Broadband Delivery UK programme, a public and private partnership. In the 2015 Budget, for example, George Osborne, set out his ambition to make “ultra-fast” broadband available to “nearly all the homes in the country” and to “look to” raise the Universal Service Obligation (USO) for 5Mbps broadband, as well as subsidising the costs of installing superfast capable satellite services. The Government‘s original target was that 90 per cent of the UK should have access to superfast broadband by early 2016, partly funded by the BBC’s TV Licence Fee. In 2014, the target was raised to 95 per cent. But the last 5 per cent of premises, most of which are rural, have remained a challenge. In any case, the private sector has already made a major commitment to improving broadband performance beyond the current levels.

The manifesto made few new commitments, though it suggests that the Government may continue “top slicing” the BBC licence fee for digital infrastructure to support superfast broadband across the country up until 2020. On mobile coverage, it’s a similar story. The Conservatives have promised to “continue to invest in mobile infrastructure to deliver coverage for voice calls and text messages for the final 0.3–0.4 per cent of UK premises that do not currently have it.” In 2013, the Coalition Government announced a £150 million programme to improve mobile coverage in areas where there is currently none. At the end of last year. Ministers reached a binding deal with four leading mobile networks to improve coverage across the UK, including a guaranteed £5 billion investment programme to improve mobile infrastructure by 2017. The manifesto nodded to the 5G future, with the Conservatives hoping the UK will play a “key role in defining industry standards”.

Opportunities The Conservatives also set out plans to invest £6.9 billion into the UK’s research infrastructure up to 2021, to help fund new equipment, laboratories and research institutes. The incoming Government may also start to build on the initial investment in Big Data. In the 2014 Budget, George Osborne, announced a £42 million investment in the Alan Turing Institute to research and analyse Big Data and algorithms. Research into this area may help the Government develop further its nascent interest in Smart Cities and harness the opportunities that the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has already identified. If the Government is to achieve its targets and ambitions, further investment from the private sector will be needed. The policy stability should reassure investors. But the questions around Britain’s future relationship with Europe will be a key concern over the next two years and, possibly, beyond.

TRANSPORT

Joshua Peck, Managing Director and Flora Coleman, Associate Director

When the Coalition Government took office in 2010, the transport sector held its breath. With austerity dominating the policy agenda, the sector was braced for the deep cuts that it had come to expect from previous lean years. But the Chancellor made the case that investment in infrastructure would be needed to rebuild and rebalance the economy. As a result, the overall package of transport funding was largely protected. Big commitments to delivering the Northern Hub, HS2, rail electrification and road improvements all followed. The sector can now look forward to reassuring continuity. With Patrick McLoughlin remaining as Secretary of State at the Department for Transport (DfT), along with the junior ministers, Robert Goodwill and Claire Perry, the ministerial team can hit the ground running. The new minister, Andrew Jones, was Parliamentary Private Secretary to a previous Transport Secretary, Justine Greening. He also chaired the Northern Electrification Taskforce.

Road and Rail The first challenge is to deliver what the Conservatives promised on road and rail. Mr McLoughlin won plaudits for establishing Highways England earlier this year. He also set out a £15billion programme of investment that would see over 100 major road improvements, 280 extra miles of smart motorway capacity and upgrades of A roads to motorway standard expressways. A £38 billion programme of investment in rail electrification, the Northern Hub, the Thameslink programme and transformed stations in major cities were equally well received. All of this made for a popular package. But it’s also eye-wateringly expensive, especially when you add in the pledge that the Conservatives made in the run-up to the election to freeze rail fares in real terms for the five years of the new Parliament. The Institute of Fiscal Studies estimates that, in order to achieve its deficit reduction targets, the Government will need to reduce non-ringfenced departmental budgets – including Transport – by a total of £30 billion.

The DfT previously made its share of cuts by slashing local authority transport budgets, but there is now little room to go much further.

Transport ministers will have to task civil servants with finding efficiencies that protect projects, even if it means reducing their scope and impact. As a result, projects may be delayed or become much harder to deliver. Ministers will also keep a very close eye on the impact of projects from related bodies as they are delivered. They have learned from the public outcry earlier this year after overcrowding at London Bridge as Network Rail rolls out its fiendishly complicated upgrade programme.

HS2

The second big ticket item in Mr McLoughlin’s in-tray is to press on with HS2 and the remaining section of the line. A lot of outreach by Ministers to affected constituencies has calmed some of the storms of earlier years. The route remains controversial though and, whilst the High Speed Rail Bill is not at risk, the Government will want to keep any ill-feeling to a minimum on such a slim majority.

Airports

Mr McLoughlin’s third big challenge is even thornier. The report of the Davies Commission into runway capacity in the South East is due in June and there are strong opponents to expansion at either Heathrow or Gatwick. Some major obstacles to Heathrow were removed when the electorate rejected Ed Miliband and the former

Liberal Democrat Business Secretary, Vince Cable, lost his Twickenham seat. However, Conservative MP Zac Goldsmith held his Richmond Park seat on an increased majority and London’s Mayor, Boris Johnson, was returned in Uxbridge and South Ruislip. Both are vociferous objectors to Heathrow. Mr Johnson has now said that he wouldn’t cause a by-election if the Government gives Heathrow the go ahead. Mr Goldsmith has said he would, but then also said he wouldn’t stand on a manifesto that did not rule out Heathrow expansion, and then did exactly that. The newly elected MPs in the region haven’t committed as strongly to the issue, and therefore will be watched closely. Even so, Conservative MPs around Gatwick are equally opposed to expansion at their nearest airport. In their manifesto, the Conservatives simply committed themselves to responding to the Commission’s report, thereby giving Mr McLoughlin as much room move as possible over such a thorny issue. With three such big challenges, it’s no surprise that the Prime Minister wanted an experienced team at the Department for Transport. They have their work cut out.

MHP Communications is an award-winning integrated communications consultancy that excels at delivering focused and effective communications strategies and campaigns. Our public affairs team is the biggest in the UK, helping companies to operate and grow in complex political, policy and regulatory environments. Our sector expertise is second to none. MHP is built around a simple proposition: our talented and experienced team of bright people add bottom line value to clients through creative, practical, strategic smart thinking. Bright people, smart thinking, great outcomes.

Inquiries to: Jonathan Lomax Head of Corporate Affairs corporateaffairs@mhpc.com 020 3128 8135 MHP Communications 60 Great Portland Street, London, W1W 7RT www.mhpc.com @mhpc Designed by MHP Design