All Day All Year by Sisley

If creams are so expensive I have no hope of ever buying them, it makes me nervous. Who wants to fal

£179, 50ml

Launched: 2005
Tested: throughout 2007 and 2008
Stockists: 020 7591 6380.

Ingredients

: Sisley will not provide full disclosure of ingredients saying that “All ingredients are listed on product packaging so it’s (sic) easily obtainable by customers.”

This day cream is aimed at those over the age of 25. The premise is that it provides protection (SPF 8) from UVA and UVB, but not 100% (in fact, 90%). The idea being that 100% protection eventually leaves the skin unable to defend itself. This protection also lasts for eight hours, hence the All Day part of the name. The All Year bit refers to the fact that even in winter our skin needs protecting from sun, wind, pollution.

When I was handed this cream to test, I knew it was expensive (at the time I think it was ‘only’ £150) so I hesitated. If creams are so expensive I have no hope of ever buying them, it makes me nervous. Who wants to fall in love with the unattainable? Unfortunately, this cream is excellent. To really know if it works of course, one would have to do a more scientific test: one half of the face wears it the other doesn’t. What I can tell you is that it made a significant different to the texture and condition of my skin almost immediately, and in secondary testing (on a separate person) the results were visible. I love the fact that you don’t have to worry about sunscreen, you just put this on of a morning but sadly the cost is such that it’s out of the reach of most people, me included. However: highly recommended.

Annalisa Barbieri was in fashion PR for five years before going to the Observer to be fashion assistant. She has worked for the Evening Standard and the Times and was one of the fashion editors on the Independent on Sunday for five years, where she wrote the Dear Annie column. She was fishing correspondent of the Independent from 1997-2004.
Getty
Show Hide image

How Theresa May laid a trap for herself on the immigration target

When Home Secretary, she insisted on keeping foreign students in the figures – causing a headache for herself today.

When Home Secretary, Theresa May insisted that foreign students should continue to be counted in the overall immigration figures. Some cabinet colleagues, including then Business Secretary Vince Cable and Chancellor George Osborne wanted to reverse this. It was economically illiterate. Current ministers, like the Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, Chancellor Philip Hammond and Home Secretary Amber Rudd, also want foreign students exempted from the total.

David Cameron’s government aimed to cut immigration figures – including overseas students in that aim meant trying to limit one of the UK’s crucial financial resources. They are worth £25bn to the UK economy, and their fees make up 14 per cent of total university income. And the impact is not just financial – welcoming foreign students is diplomatically and culturally key to Britain’s reputation and its relationship with the rest of the world too. Even more important now Brexit is on its way.

But they stayed in the figures – a situation that, along with counterproductive visa restrictions also introduced by May’s old department, put a lot of foreign students off studying here. For example, there has been a 44 per cent decrease in the number of Indian students coming to Britain to study in the last five years.

Now May’s stubbornness on the migration figures appears to have caught up with her. The Times has revealed that the Prime Minister is ready to “soften her longstanding opposition to taking foreign students out of immigration totals”. It reports that she will offer to change the way the numbers are calculated.

Why the u-turn? No 10 says the concession is to ensure the Higher and Research Bill, key university legislation, can pass due to a Lords amendment urging the government not to count students as “long-term migrants” for “public policy purposes”.

But it will also be a factor in May’s manifesto pledge (and continuation of Cameron’s promise) to cut immigration to the “tens of thousands”. Until today, ministers had been unclear about whether this would be in the manifesto.

Now her u-turn on student figures is being seized upon by opposition parties as “massaging” the migration figures to meet her target. An accusation for which May only has herself, and her steadfast politicising of immigration, to blame.

Anoosh Chakelian is senior writer at the New Statesman.

0800 7318496