A new London Transition Board, co-chaired by the Communities Secretary, Robert Jenrick and the London Mayor will co-ordinate London’s response as it emerges from the lockdown and begins to reopen its economy while controlling the virus.

The programme of work being put in place will be the biggest since the end of the Second World War and will include opportunities for Londoners to be involved in setting priorities and shaping London’s recovery and renewal.

The Board will be made up of senior leaders from across the city and provide strategic direction for the next phase of response and restart, focusing on the key issues which London will face over the coming months, including:

• infection control
• phasing in and out of varying levels of lockdown
• recovery of public services, such as transport

Communities Secretary Rt Hon Robert Jenrick said:

I want to thank all of those across London who have worked in partnership with the government since the start of the pandemic to protect Londoners and keep essential services running. Now we are past the peak it is right that we focus on safely reopening the capital, taking the necessary steps to control the virus. 

Through this new Transition Board, we will carefully build on the extensive planning already underway to get life and business in London – the most dynamic capital city in the world – safely back on track.

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said: 

The COVID-19 pandemic is the most significant public health crisis in living memory. We are not being complacent about the continued threat from coronavirus, but the economic, health and social challenges arising from both the virus itself and from the lockdown are far-reaching, and London’s recovery will be a long and complex road that will take many months, if not years. 

As Mayor, I am committed to securing a better future for Londoners. The city’s recovery from Covid-19 must ensure that nobody is left behind, and no one organisation or sector can tackle these challenges alone. 

The measures announced today plan to bring together local government, civil and civic society, faith organisations, business, unions and Londoners themselves to reshape London as a city that remains open, safe and attractive for Londoners, visitors and investors.

Minister for London, Paul Scully, said: 

As we fire up the UK’s economic engines again, we know that the capital will be pivotal to our national recovery. Supporting London’s extraordinarily diverse and dynamic businesses in getting back to work while keeping Londoners safe is essential. This plan gives us a roadmap for those efforts.” 

Cllr Peter John, the Chair of London Councils, said: 

London local government has made an enormous contribution on behalf of Londoners in response to COVID-19 to date.  We now must be ready to work closely with all of our communities across the capital and with our key partners, including the Mayor, government and others to ensure that we are able to transition safely out of lockdown and pursue London’s economic and social renewal in a way that our city needs.” 

Until the end of the year, the London Transition Board will run in parallel with and complement the establishment of London Recovery Board, chaired and constituted by the Mayor of London and Cllr Peter John, the Chair of London Councils. The Minister for London, Paul Scully, will attend the Recovery Board on behalf of government. 

The London Recovery Board will plan and oversee the capital’s wider economic and social long-term recovery, developing a strategy and plan of action to reshape London to be fairer, more equal, greener and more resilient than it was before the crisis. 

The context for this work is extremely challenging. We have seen a disproportionate impact of coronavirus on different communities who now face acute challenges, with this crisis exposing long-standing inequalities. Our local economies and high streets have been particularly affected, and there are significant pressures on London Councils, the GLA, TfL and others.  

However, it is also an opportunity – to reimagine our city and define our aspirations and priorities for the recovery effort. A city where we build on the fantastic community spirit displayed by Londoners during these toughest of times, to deliver a cleaner, greener and fairer city, and work to create thriving neighbourhoods, with improved wellbeing and access to a strengthened healthcare system.

Long-term Covid-19 recovery planning has been taking place since March. The programme of work put in place will be the biggest since the end of the Second World War, dwarfing the response to the financial crisis and taking years to deliver.  The work will be carried out in partnership with organisations from across sectors and across the city and will include opportunities for Londoners to be involved in setting priorities and shaping London’s recovery and renewal, as equal partners.

• UK and Switzerland call for countries to work together to make sure people can continue sending money to relatives in other countries during coronavirus outbreak
• Such remittances account for more than 5% of GDP in at least 60 developing countries
• World Bank predicts remittances to low and middle income countries will fall by 20% or $110 billion in 2020

The UK and Switzerland today called for greater global collaboration to make sure diaspora communities around the world can continue to send financial support to their families in developing countries.

The joint call highlighted the urgent need for people to be able to continue accessing money transfer services, and for governments to make sure those funds reach those reliant on this support.

Both the UK and Switzerland are also urging countries to support greater access to digital remittance services and to declare remittances an essential financial service. They are also encouraging remittance service providers to reduce costs and fees for people making payments.

Money sent by individuals to family and friends living in low and middle income countries totalled $554bn in 2019 and is a vital lifeline in many developing countries, boosting economic development and lifting people out of poverty.

But coronavirus is already having a big impact, with a drop in the wages of migrant workers and coronavirus restrictions making it more difficult for people to access money transfer services.

The World Bank predicts that remittances to low and middle income countries will fall by 20% in 2020, totalling $110 billion.

A drop of this size would have a severe impact on countries where many people are already facing destitution and even starvation as a result of the huge economic impact of the pandemic. Remittances account for more than 5% of GDP for at least 60 developing countries. Life in lockdown is making it harder to send and receive funds.

International Development Secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan said:

“The coronavirus pandemic means we are all concerned about how our family and friends here and overseas are coping. That’s why we’re making it easier for diaspora communities in the UK and other countries to continue to transfer money to their relatives.

“This will be lifesaving for some families in developing countries where coronavirus is making a lack of food and healthcare, and extreme poverty, even worse. We are helping to prevent fragile economies from facing potential collapse during the pandemic.”

Federal Councillor Ignazio Cassis, head of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs added:

“Remittances are important, but difficult because of COVID-19. So let’s make sure those barriers are removed worldwide! New technologies can help us here.”

Previous UK aid support is already helping to make money transfers easier, by helping 65 million people in the poorest countries access digital financial services so they can receive funds via their mobile phones or online.

UK aid support has also helped to give two million more people access to digital remittance services so they can send and receive money from home.

Today’s call by the UK and Switzerland was backed by partners, including the World Bank, the UN Capital Development Fund, UN Development Programme and the International Organisation for Migration. A number of countries have already joined, including Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Jamaica, Mexico, Nigeria and Pakistan.

The UK Government has made it clear that in the UK people can continue to visit remittance centres should they need to, while observing social distancing and staying safe. Digital money transfer services are also available.

Students will be awarded calculated grades in GCSEs, AS and A levels, the Extended Project Qualification (EPQ) and Advanced Extension Award in maths (AEA) this summer, after exams were cancelled in England this summer to help fight the spread of Coronavirus (COVID-19). Eighty two percent of the 12,623 respondents to our consultation on this summer’s exceptional arrangements agreed with our proposal to adopt the grading process into our regulatory framework this year. We have today, Friday 22 May, published our analysis and key decisions, and updated our information for Heads of Centres.

An important feature of the overall arrangements this summer is the planned additional exam series in the autumn, which will provide an opportunity for students unable to receive a calculated grade, and others who would like the opportunity to improve their grade, to take an exam. Having worked closely with the Department for Education and exam boards, and listened to the views of groups representing students, school and college leaders, we are also setting out for consultation today our proposals on the arrangements for this additional exam series.

Our consultation includes proposals to require exam boards to offer exams in all subjects, and to offer the full suite of papers as are normally offered in other summer exam series. Because of the current uncertainty about when schools and colleges will re-open fully and the public health restrictions that may be in place, we are not consulting on the exact dates when the exams should take place. If possible, we envisage that AS and A level exams should take place in October and GCSE exams in November, with the exact timing to be confirmed by us, having taken advice from government, the exam boards and groups representing schools, colleges, teachers and students.

The extent to which students will have been able to complete any non-exam assessment (NEA) before schools and colleges closed on 20 March will vary by centre and subject. Similarly, how far it will be possible for students to undertake new non-exam assessments in the autumn will also vary. To be fair to students in these circumstances, we want to explore through our consultation views about NEA. Based on our discussions with exam boards and school and college leaders we are proposing that, with the exception of art and design, grades awarded in the autumn should be based only on students’ performance in their exams, with no non-exam assessments. We would welcome feedback on this proposal before we decide on the arrangements for the autumn. The consultation is open until Monday 8 June 2020.

Sally Collier, Chief Regulator, Ofqual, said:

In the unprecedented circumstances we face this summer, these exceptional arrangements are the fairest way of making sure students have the grades they need in time to progress to further study or employment. It is important that students; their parents, carers and teachers; and others who rely on these qualifications, such as universities and employers, have had an opportunity to feed back views. We are also today inviting anyone affected to tell us what they think about our proposals for the additional autumn exam series.

As schools and colleges prepare for the important task of submitting their centre assessment grades and rank order information, I would like to take this opportunity to thank them for their professionalism and support in making these judgements objectively and fairly for their students.

Summer arrangements – consultation decisions

Who should receive a calculated grade

To give students, schools and colleges certainty at the earliest opportunity, we prioritised and published earlier in May our decisions on 2 proposals about who should receive a calculated grade. This confirmed that students in year 10 and below entered for exams this summer could receive calculated grades. Private candidates can also receive calculated grades if the head of the centre which entered them is confident they can submit a centre assessment grade for the student and rank them alongside their other students.

Standardising centre assessment grades

To make sure grades are as fair as possible, exam boards will standardise centre assessment grades using a statistical model which will include the expected national outcomes for this year’s students, the prior attainment of students at each school and college (at cohort, not individual level), and previous results of the school or college.

Because these arrangements have had to be put in place very quickly due to the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, it would have been impossible to provide school and college staff with national training to support them in making standardised judgements. As such, it is highly likely that all centres will see some adjustment, in at least one subject, to their centre assessment grades, however carefully they have made their judgements. Such adjustments are in the interests of fairness to all students because they will ensure, as far as possible, that individual centres have not been too severe or too generous in comparison with other centres.

We set out in our consultation a number of proposals about the standardisation model. In light of the feedback we received, we have decided:

• to adopt the aims we set out for model, with which 89% of respondents agreed
• that the standardisation process will place more weight on a centre’s historical performance in a subject than the submitted centre assessment grades where that will result in students getting the grades that they would most likely have achieved had they been able to complete their assessments in summer 2020
• that because of the risk of unfairness, the model will not seek to reflect any trends in improvement or deterioration in a centre’s outcomes in a subject over previous years (a centre’s trajectory)
• to publish further guidance to support centres in making objective judgements, informed by the published literature on the potential for bias in teachers’ judgements and input from a number of groups with an interest and expertise in equalities. The majority of people who responded (64%) agreed with our proposal not to modify individual centre rank orders to account for possible bias. We believe this would lead to arbitrary changes to the rank orders provided by centres, because it would be impossible to know the degree of any bias in centre assessment grades and rankings

Appealing calculated grades

We are committed to doing all that we can to make sure students are not disadvantaged by these unprecedented circumstances, including allowing for an appeal where appropriate. We asked a number of questions about our proposed arrangements for appeals this summer, noting that the usual process – which pre-supposes exams and marking have taken place – cannot happen simply because there are no exam scripts to review or remark. As a result:

• we have confirmed that a student who had evidence of bias or discrimination would be able to raise this with their centre; an exam board could investigate such evidence as indicating malpractice
• we have also decided that, as now, centres must have a procedure which allows students to request that a review is conducted of the centre’s decision not to appeal to an exam board
• appeals should be allowed where a centre believes it has made an error when submitting its information; or similarly, if the centre believes an exam board made a mistake when calculating, assigning or communicating a grade

We have given serious consideration as to whether a student could challenge their centre assessment grades and position in their centre’s rank order. Responses to our proposals on these issues were mixed and varied by the background of the respondent. For example, the majority of teachers who responded agreed with our proposal that we should not provide for a review or appeal process on the basis of a centre’s judgement; whereas the opposite was true for students, parents and carers. We recognise the strength of feeling amongst students, and have weighed carefully whether such an appeal could work fairly. On balance, we have decided it would not be in the interests of all students or the fairness of the arrangements overall because:

• the appeal would have to be undertaken by someone better placed than the student’s teachers to judge the grade they would likely have received if the exams had taken place – in the unique circumstances of this summer we do not believe there is any such person
• in addition, if an appeal was to be undertaken before the centre assessment grade and rank order information was submitted to the exam boards, the appeal would require students to have access to the information their school or college submitted. Many teacher respondents have told us, and we agree, that the overall reliability of this year’s approach would be compromised if information about centre assessment grades and rank orders was disclosed before being submitted to the exam boards. If one student successfully appealed against their position in the rank order, it would have negative implications for other students who would, in turn, need to be given an opportunity to appeal

We have listened to suggestions about how we could take into account evidence from a centre that it believes shows exceptional circumstances which justify changes in how the standardisation process should apply to its students. Specifically, where a centre can demonstrate that there has been a significant change in the demographic make-up of its 2020 cohort in a subject which indicates students would have performed better than in previous years, and that using the normal standardisation process as set out would disadvantage this year’s students. Proposals to allow this form of appeal may raise problems of either unreliability or unfairness. An appeals mechanism that allowed some centres an unreasonable advantage over others would not be consistent with operating a fair process. However, given the importance of the issue and strength of feeling we are conducting further work to establish if there are reasonable and fair grounds for an appeal of this sort.

We recognise there are concerns that the exceptional arrangements for providing results this summer are less fair than exams, and we have set out how we will address these concerns as far as we can. As many respondents have agreed, these arrangements are fairest in the circumstances and, importantly, will allow most students to progress to the next stage of their lives without further disruption.

Other qualifications

We have published the outcomes of our consultation on vocational, technical and other general qualifications, confirming the exceptional arrangements for awarding these qualifications this summer.

Infographic of the awarding process