Why I am standing for IFoA Council

I am running for Council because I want to see an honest and meaningful evaluation of the response to the Covid pandemic. The unprecedented government measures were unquestionably the most significant global event of my lifetime, yet incredibly I have seen no sincere attempt to conduct a critical evaluation of whether they were merited.

Why do I care?

This is not an academic concern. There is every chance that the UK will employ similar measures when another infectious disease outbreak occurs and so we should be proactive in reviewing their appropriateness. I feel strongly about this because it is clear to me that the response measures have materially damaged the economic well-being of the UK.

Consider the following three examples:

The financial woes are compounded by how the money to fund the Covid measures was created, specifically by encumbering significantly more national debt. This must be repaid through taxation. Therefore it is unsurprising the nation is suffering under a high tax burden. Yet this tax strain is so large that it is disincentivising enterprise, choking off the economic growth that is badly needed.

Simply put, the hangover from the Covid response has left the country in a poorer and less productive state.

The steep decline in living standards

The official CPI inflation measure shows the cost of living has increased by ~25% in the period from Jan 2020 to the end of 2024. Any honest observer must recognise that this devaluation of people’s income and savings was primarily due to the vast expansion in the money supply to fund the Covid response.

Let’s be clear what this means: unless an individual’s earnings and investments kept pace with the inflation, they now have less wealth and will live a more impoverished life as a result. In practice the policy measure drove wealth from the poor towards the asset-rich, exacerbating inequalities that had already been created by a decade of artificially low interest rates. This issue understandably vexes left-wing thinkers like Gary Stevenson (author of The Trading Game): they are right to be infuriated by what has occurred.

1

The Covid lockdowns forcibly curtailed the freedom of the British citizens. This action incurred innumerable opportunity costs of all kinds, as people were prevented from pursuing many of the goals they would otherwise have strived to achieve.

Unfortunately it is hard to convey the full extent of these opportunity costs, because we cannot present the alternative universe where these initiatives went ahead. However some insight is possible from the backlog in healthcare treatments, which clearly arose from the decision to prioritise Covid over these other concerns. On this measure alone, it is arguable that the Covid response was self-defeating in protecting the nation’s health.

2

Additional taxation, strangling enterprise and growth

These points are but a sample of the far-reaching adverse consequences of the Covid measures. I could have highlighted others, such as the educational disadvantages suffered by the younger generations. However the above is sufficient to make clear that the Covid response had a strong negative impact on the UK which must call into question whether the unprecedented measures were justifiable.

I want to stress that this terrible legacy was not caused by Covid but by the response to the disease. Moreover, this response was a choice taken by those in authority. In particular the authorities opted to discard the original contingency arrangements for a pandemic in favour of untried measures and all the potential for unforeseen consequences.

3

Understanding why this matters

I appreciate that many people want to forget the dark days of the Covid crisis. However we are all living with the adverse consequences of the decisions taken during that period. I believe passionately that my work is necessary in order to ensure we properly evaluate what occurred and learn the appropriate lessons. I also think that my efforts fit into a larger mission. I suspect that the failure to engage appropriately with the Covid crisis is a symptom of a deeper malaise afflicting the UK. The country has lost its way, forgetting the importance of foundational values it used to cherish and celebrate.

As a clear example of this, consider the phrase “Why not? It’s a free country”. This used to be a common expression in the UK. It arose because Britain was a nation which prized individual liberty, particularly freedom from an overbearing State. This is not to say that the country suffered from anarchy nor to overlook the incidents of State over-reach (the Puritans banned Christmas!). However few other countries can boast a history with the likes of Magna Carta, Habeas Corpus and the Bill of Rights. It is clear to me that the unprecedented level of government intervention during Covid shows that we have lost our appreciation for the importance of individual freedom and I would see us reclaim it.

Please see here for more detail on where I believe the UK's thinking has gone wrong and why my proposed activity could make a difference.

I am not delusional: I fully appreciate that I cannot single-handedly shift the national zeitgeist. However I do think that my efforts can re-focus the conversation around the Covid response and that I can influence the attitude of the IFoA, both of which could nudge some “course correction” in the UK. I genuinely believe this is possible and I hope you will support my efforts to achieve this by voting for me in the summer of 2025.

Innumerable opportunity costs, even impairing health

What needs to be done?

This scenario demands a proper post-evaluation and the foremost question should focus on whether the unprecedented measures were justified. Instead I see no meaningful attempt to engage honestly with this matter, notwithstanding the ongoing inquiry by Baroness Hallett (I will acknowledge that the Scottish Covid inquiry has been asking more probing questions, but even these fall short and I am dismayed by the lack of publicity associated with this inquiry – I invite the reader to ask themselves whether they have even heard of the separate Scottish Covid inquiry).

I am determined to do what I can to refocus the reflections on Covid to question the merits of the unprecedented actions that were taken.

Why does this motivate me to stand for Council?

A very reasonable question!

The answer is that I am seeking a democratic mandate to pursue a number of investigations that will robustly assess key aspects of the Covid response. I have designed these investigations to be “SMART” and I am confident that I can complete them independently with my own skills and resources. However my past activity in raising challenges in this area has shown me that there are three specific limitations undermining my efforts which I can only overcome with a democratic mandate from my actuarial peers. By voting for my manifesto that I deliver these investigations into the Covid response measures, you will empower me in three important ways:

• I can creditably assert that my investigations are worthy of attention because my peers will have deliberately sanctioned this activity.

• My investigations will carry legitimacy because my peers will have endorsed my credentials for carrying out this work.

• My election will give me the authority to demand answers as I raise questions and enable me to persevere in my enquiries until I am satisfied with the response.

You can find details of the investigations I wish to conduct here, including the specific deliverables that I am committing myself to produce and what I hope to achieve with these investigations.

I want to be unequivocal that my primary motivation as I seek election to Council is securing this democratic mandate to pursue these investigations: this work will be my predominant focus if elected and I will prioritise it over any other duties. For the avoidance of doubt, I will look to discharge the normal responsibilities of an IFoA Council member but if any of these duties compromise the investigations I have committed to then I will prioritise the needs of those investigations because that is the basis on which I will have been elected by my actuarial community.