POLICY 1: INEQUALITY
15th January, 2019
As part of WTT’s ‘weekly discussions’ series, the disparities within the housing industry acted as the first point of discussion. With homelessness across the UK doubling between 2010 and 2018, housing has remained a pressing issue of contention. The discussion featured an investigation of the crisis on behalf of our team, to which was followed by a discussion of possible solutions on behalf of our attendees. A key solution that stood out was the revaluation of the council tax base, which the central government has failed to do – this revaluation could mean that homes that have increased in value, which were previously undertaxed would serve to dismantle the inherent inequalities driven by the wealthy.
POLICY DISCUSSION 2: EFFECTIVENESS OF PRIVATE DONATIONS IN NATURAL DISASTERS
23rd January, 2019
As part of the second discussion of WTT’s ‘weekly discussions’ series, our members tackled the issue of private donations in light of the 2019 Australian bushfires. After our team had dissected the crisis, our membership had debated the nature of news coverage and how the media industry has either aided or hampered the portrayal of certain crises. The Eurocentric portrayal of the media and the lack of coverage given to issues such as the Sudan floods and Yemen’s humanitarian crisis led to a conclusion that demanded greater diversity and inclusion.
POLICY DISCUSSION 3: BREXIT
29th January, 2019
In light of the UK’s departure from the European Union on the 31st of January 2019, our discussion had tackled the nature of UK-EU relations after Brexit and their impact on existing policies, as well as the proposal of potential new ones. This also included a nod to Britain’s focus on foreign policy, and the scaling up of its diplomatic footprint, largely in relation to its potential pivot towards Africa.
POLICY DISCUSSION 4: UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE
7th February, 2019
This discussion saw our membership tackling the feasibility of a universal healthcare system and what it would potentially look like in the future. The discussion first approached the shortcomings of existing healthcare systems around the world. This was followed by a debate on how crucial a universal healthcare system truly is, and the key disparities posed by universal and private healthcare. This was ultimately concluded with a debate regarding the feasibility of such a system, and the potential costs to the tax payer, honing in on its advantages and disadvantages.
SPEAKER SERIES: A VISIT FROM VISHAL WILDE
26th February, 2019
As part of our esteemed ‘Speaker Series’, WTT was honoured to host an approved parliamentary candidate for the Liberal Democrats, a generalist from the Civil Service fast stream, and a project manager from the Valuation Office Agency. Wilde provided key insight into kick-starting a career within policy, as well as providing policy-writing advice for both think tanks and non-governmental institutions.
POLICY DISCUSSION 5: HONG KONG CONFLICTS AND THEIR IMPACT ON EMERGING MARKETS
4th March, 2019
This discussion featured a collaboration with Warwick Emerging Markets Society, a society that provides unique insight into the development of economics, politics and finance in emerging countries. The discussion presented key issues such as the erosion of Hong Kong’s legal system and the potential damage this had posed to the business climate and other interlinked markets.
SPEAKER SERIES: A VISIT FROM DANIEL PRYOR
9th March, 2019
For the final discussion of the year, WTT welcomed the Head of Programmes of the Adam Smith Institute, one of the UK’s most prestigious Think Tanks, Daniel Pryor! Pryor’s discussion focused on the regulation of sex work, acting as a springboard for his wider commentary on the necessities of basic income. Pryor provided a valuable sense of insight into potential solutions such as a Universal Working Income and Improving Universal Credit.
Questions to ponder in relation to the discussion:
Would you still work if you had a basic income? Why / why not?
Should people be allowed to spend welfare payments on anything they want?
Who should set the level of a basic income – politicians or economists?