Tag: 2011

Below is the text of the speech made by Ed Miliband, the Leader of the Opposition, to the Reading the Riots Conference on 14th December 2011.

It is a privilege to be here today and I want to congratulate the LSE and the Guardian for their work on understanding the causes of the riots.

I talked in my Party Conference speech about how we needed a different set of values by which our country should be run.

Since then, I have been talking about what that means for our economy both today and in the future.

Today, I want to say how I think this argument speaks to the issue of our society and the riots.

My argument is this:

If we are to prevent the riots re-occurring, we must understand the causes and act on them.

In your study, half of those who rioted said they would do it again.

And the vast majority – fully 80% – said they thought it proba bly would happen again.

We owe it to the victims of these terrible events, often the poorest and most vulnerable in our society, to make sure that doesn’t happen.

But that is not the only thing we must do.

The riots have also been a window on deeper issues facing our country.

Indeed, every place I went to in the aftermath of the riots, people would say why did it take a riot for anyone to come and listen to us?

My big fear was that politics, then media would arrive in a flurry and then move on.

I believe there is still a real danger that that is going to happen.

Last Friday I went to Brixton to meet some people who I’d met straight after the riots.

There I heard from was a young man called Steve, and I want to tell you the story.

He told me about growing up on an estate.

About how many said that nothing good had ever come out of his neighbourhood.

He told me about one of his teachers who told him that he would either end up working in a dead end job, or going to prison.

And for a time he believed it, yet he also used to say to himself:

‘What about Ian Wright, the footballer, he came from my area, he went to my school, how did he do it?’

Today, Steve, having been helped by an organisation called XLP dedicated to combating youth violence, having got qualifications, now works with young people on the power of sport to change their lives.

His life has been turned round.

Why do I tell this story?

Because the story of Steve is not the story of someone who rioted.

Even when he felt that he didn’t have any hope.

The vast majority of young people like Steve didn’t riot in the summer

And it is very important to hold onto that.

It tells us, contrary to what David Cameron says, that Britain is not broken.

The vast majority of people have decent values.

That said, a minority rioted, looted and did the wrong thing.

What should our response be to that?

What people told me time after time in communities affected by the riots is that nothing could excuse or justify what happened.

They said we have to punish those who commit wrongdoing. And they’re right.

But they also wanted us to explain.

Now some will give the easy answer: this is criminality pure and simple and it only needs a criminal justice response.

Now it’s right to say that we have a responsibility to ensure we have policing that is able to react quickly to sudden outbreaks of widespread disorder.

It is equally right to say, and I know this has been highlighted in your research, that we also need policing which is rooted in local communities, and that recognises the issue of stop and search.

And all these issues will be looked at by the former commissioner Lord Stevens in his independent review over the next year.

But all this is very different to saying that the answer is only to be found in the criminal justice system.

I was never convinced that the answer was as simple as that, and that is why I pressed for a Commission to look at the causes of the riot.

Its interim report and that of the Reading the Riots project tells us that this will address the deeper causes.

That is one simplistic answer we can reject.

But there is another answer which says that this should be an easy problem for governments to fix. It recommends another programme or a new raft of initiatives – targeted at gangs or families who need help.

Again, there is a place for these kinds of measures like Family Intervention Partnerships.

But when you hear people say those things alone are the answer, I believe we need a bigger response.

More comprehensive, and yes more complex.

I reject the arguments of those who say opportunity doesn’t matter. And I believe it will take a bigger change in Br itain to create the opportunities which our communities need.

And I reject as well the arguments of those who say values don’t matter. I believe that as a country we have got to acknowledge that too often the good values that the vast majority of people hold are not the values being rewarded or encouraged.

First, opportunity.

It was David Cameron who said in 2006 that: “of course not everyone who grows up in a deprived neighbourhood turns to crime….But there are connections between circumstances and behaviour.”

And both your research, and the Riot Communities and Victims Panel, uncovered the importance of young people having hopes and dreams.

Look through the evidence of the Panel and you don’t need to be a rocket scientist or social scientist to see the figures on the background of the young people who rioted: low qualifications, excluded from schools, and two thirds with special educational needs.

Circumstances matter. Opportunity matters.

And when I was talking to those who didn’t riot, who came out to join the clean up, whose shops were affected, who were fearful of their safety. They said the same thing. There must be a better way.

Why do we allow these young people to waste their lives and damage their communities?

Too many people felt they had not much to lose and something to gain from doing what they did.

And what struck me visiting different areas affected was that so often the choice between on the one hand going into the gang, into drugs, doing the wrong thing, and on the other, staying on the right path, can seem very narrow.

I was the first to say at the time of the riots that it was far too simplistic to blame Government cuts.

Nothing can excuse what happened, and we should hold those who did the wrong thing responsible.

But your work shows that it is our responsibility to make sure that young people have more to aspire to than nicking a pair of trainers or a widescreen TV.

If we are to do right by our young people we must take opportunity seriously.

Today’s unemployment figures show a further rise in youth joblessness.

Still more than 1 million young people out of work, out of hope.

And youth joblessness is just the tip of a bigger iceberg. The bit we see most clearly.

Under the surface is a much greater set of problems facing our young people.

For generations parents have able to raise a family in Britain knowing that they could pass onto their children a better future than they had.

I’ve talked about it as the promise of Britain.

Today parents can have no such confidence. From getting on the housing ladder to the kind of job available, to the huge level of impending student debt, our children face a more insecure future than we had, with fewer opportunities and finding it tougher to get on.

No wonder we hear our communities asking for big change.

But opportunity is the not the only thing that matters.

In his recent book on the riots, my Labour colleague David Lammy tells the story of a young constituent of his.

On the night of the riots, he found Blackberry messages pouring in, telling him where to go for the next outbreak of looting.

He had a choice.

The same choice faced by tens of thousands that night.

He passed the information to his parents, who passed it to the authorities.

Like the majority, he decided not to get involved.

And the left should not shy away from it: these were individual ethical decisions.

And if we are to stop the riots happening again, we need to care about how these values are learned.

Families matter.

Many young people didn’t riot because their mums saw it on TV and made sure they were home.

Male role models matter too

Institutions matter.

Schools, churches, mosques, youth clubs, fo otball clubs, and so on.

Would Steve, the young man I talked about at the beginning, have rioted if his life hadn’t taken a different path thanks to the youth group?

Anyone can say they care about values.

The question that politicians need to answer is what are we doing about them.

Clearly we need to support and strengthen families. But I don’t think the answer is the marriage tax break that David Cameron talks about.

Equally it’s not enough simply to say there should be financial support for children even though I believe passionately in the tax credits and benefits system doing so.

The truth is that the challenges facing many parents are changing and as a country we need to catch up

We have an economy where people work two or three jobs and don’t have time to be at home with their kids.

Britain has some of the longest working hours in the world.

If we are serious about parents teaching the right values to their kids, parents need to have time to do it.

We need to build a different economy and one which better reflects the needs of our families.

And when countries like Sweden or Finland have more family friendly working hours, better childcare and higher national income than Britain I challenge anyone to explain why that new economy is not possible in Britain.

It’s because values matter that I am a passionate believer in the importance of Britain having world-class schools.

World class not just in teaching and learning but also teaching about the values we want to see in our young people.

Schools and family life are just two areas where I believe we can strengthen our society’s ability to encourage and reward the right values which the vast majority of us share.

But it shouldn’t stop there. We should be taking every opportunity to demonstrate to our young people that if you work hard and do the right thing the opportunities will be there for you.

It’s true in the benefits system – it’s why I say if you are a good neighbour and contribute to your community you should be rewarded.

And it’s true in the boardroom – which is why I say big payouts can only be justified if they are really in return for jobs created, real business success.

Too often we are guilty as a country of sending a message that something for nothing rewards are OK whilst looking like we don’t care about people who work hard and don’t get enough out of it.

That can’t carry on.

But at the same time as challenging those who don’t take values seriously, I want to challenge anyone who wants to spend their time stigmatising the values of poor communities.

Last Friday, in Brixton, one lady shouted out: ‘what about the MPs who fiddle their expenses’?

Let’s be honest: when people in society see those at the top taking what they can, it has an effect on what people think is right and wrong.

You have bankers selling securities they know are risky, and crashing the global financial system.

You have top executives taking pay rises of 4,000% over the last thirty years.

You have journalists listening to private voicemails, in the hope that they will sell more papers and make more money.

That too is a culture of take what you can.

Everywhere I went after the riots, this was mentioned.

Not just the offences themselves, but the sense that people got away with them.

If we are to take values seriously, we have to take the values of those at the top seriously because it influences the rest of society.

It’s no good the powerful just lecturing the powerless.

And this is where we all need to take responsibility for the culture we inhabit and nurture.

And when you have young people looting shops and trying to excuse it by talking about MPs’ expenses and bankers’ bonuses, it is time to worry abo ut who is setting the standards for society.

The decent majority?

Or an irresponsible minority?

Let me end on this thought:

This is a time of unprecedented challenge.

At times like this, people tend to succumb to pessimism about what is achievable.

Despite the difficulties, we must be optimistic about the power of politics to change things.

The task is this.

To understand that in the last three years we’ve seen a crisis of our major financial institutions, we’ve seen a crisis in our economy, and a crisis of faith in Britain’s major institutions, from politicians to the press, and this crisis of the riots in our cities.

The values of the vast majority are the right values.

The danger is people lose faith in the power of politics to change these things.

The answer cannot be more of the same.

We must rebuild our economy and society in a different way in the future.

With a different set of values.

Where the young person who works hard knows they can get on.

Where every institution of the country promotes the values of something for something, responsibility and looking after each other.

And those at the top set the right and not the wrong example to everyone else.

If we act not only on opportunity but on the values of our country, we can not only prevent another riot, but build the kind of society we want to see.

Below is the text of the speech made by the Leader of the Opposition, Ed Miliband, in June 2011 at the Coin Street Neighbourhood Centre.

Thank you for coming this morning.

The issue I want to talk about today can be summed up in a couple of stories.

While out campaigning during the local elections, not for the first time, I met someone who had been on incapacity benefit for a decade.

He hadn’t been able to work since he was injured doing his job.

It was a real injury, and he was obviously a good man who cared for his children.

But I was convinced that there were other jobs he could do.

And that it’s just not right for the country to be supporting him not to work, when other families on his street are working all hours just to get by.

The other story is about people in a very different world from that man.

The story of Southern Cross care homes – where millions were plundered over the years leaving the business vulnerable, the elderly people in their care at risk and their families feeling betrayed.

Those elderly people were treated simply as commodities.

This story shames our country.

And there is a link between the man on incapacity benefit and those executives at Southern Cross.

What is that link?

That these are people who are just not taking responsibility – and the rest of us are left picking up the pieces.

It’s not about responsibility to the state, or the government, but responsibility to your neighbours, your friends and many others who you may never meet but who are affected by your actions.

For my party, these two stories point to some hard truths about what people think about us and what we must do if we are to win their trust again.

For too many people at the last election, we were seen as the party that represented these two types of people.

Those at the top and the bottom, who were not showing responsibility and were shirking their duties. From bankers who caused the global financial crisis to some of those on benefits who were abusing the system because they could work – but didn’t.

Labour – a party founded by hard working people for hard working people – was seen, however unfairly, as the party of those ripping off our society.

My party must change.

We were intensely relaxed about what happened at the top of society.

I say – no more.

We must create a boardroom culture that rewards wealth creation, not failure.

To those entrepreneurs and business people who generate wealth, create jobs and deserve their top salaries, I’m not just relaxed about you getting rich, I applaud you.

But every time a chief executive gives himself a massive pay rise – more than he deserves or his company can bear – it undermines trust at every level of society.

We cannot and we must not be relaxed about that.

We did too little to ensure responsibility at the bottom.

I say – No more.

We will be a party that rewards contribution, not worklessness.

If you believe in wealth creation and the welfare state like we do, we must acknowledge the only way to protect both of them is through responsibility.

We must be once again the party of the grafters.

And these stories are not just important for Labour. They are important for the country, too.

When I think about the kind of country I want my sons to grow up in, it is a country where they—and millions of their generation—can do better than their parents.

It’s what I call the ‘promise of Britain’ – that the next generation does better than the last.

But what does a better life mean?

Better in terms of jobs, housing and the material things that matter. Of course.

But better for me, and indeed I think all of us, is not just about the material – not just about earning money and owning things.

Because that doesn’t tell us anything about the feel, fabric and character of our country – or about the most important thing in life, which is about our relationships with each other.

That’s what I want to talk about today.

We need to understand the value of responsibility to each other and what it really means.

We need to understand why Labour in government talked about fixing it but didn’t.

Why the Conservative-led government’s approach is woefully inadequate.

And what the way forward is if we are to build a greater sense of responsibility and national mission for our country.

Let me start by talking about why these values of responsibility, of duty to each other, matter.

One of my earliest memories is listening to my father talk about his experiences of Britain during and after the Second World War.

He talked about his life in the Navy—how it brought people together from all backgrounds and walks of life in a common spirit.

He talked of the sense that they all looked out for each other, despite all the things that could have kept them apart.

He remembered most the deep fellowship that helped win the war and build the peace.

When I think about my children, I want them to grow up in a Britain like that.

I want them to understand what makes this country special.

I want them to live in a country where people look after each other, look out for each other, care for each other, where compassion and responsibility to one another are valued.

Tony Blair once said he wanted a country ”where your child in distress is my child, your parent ill and in pain is my parent, your friend unemployed or homeless is my friend; your neighbour my neighbour. That is the true patriotism of a nation.”

This patriotism is all around us. We see it every day.

The unsung heroes who make such a difference to the lives of others.

The people who will give up every Friday night so young people have somewhere to go and something to do.

The volunteers who help out the local hospitals at all hours of day and night.

The young men and women who risk life and limb in the armed forces for our protection.

Care, common-feeling and compassion are all around us.

But let’s be honest. We also look around and see how those ties which bind us together have become frayed.

In my father’s war-time generation, people had a deeply-held feeling of responsibility to others.

Today, the overwhelming majority of people – at every level of society from rich to poor – still play by the rules.

Working hard. Paying taxes. Obeying the law. Caring for others.

Good citizens.

But they feel others are not doing the same. They are having to pay the price for the behaviour of an irresponsible minority.

They feel that while they stick to the rules, others are getting one over on them.

It’s part of the squeeze on the middle.

The services on which they rely are being cut by an austerity government after a global crisis caused by bankers who still get multi-million pound bonuses.

The gap grows every wider between the rewards for those at the top and the squeeze on the living standards of everyone else.

And they still have to pay taxes to fund the bankers and to fund some people on benefits who aren’t bothering to work.

People who act responsibly – people who do their duty – are getting angry. And I understand why.

That irresponsibility is not only unfair on everyone else; it is bad for the economy.

And people feel the consequences of irresponsibility in different parts of their lives.

The rubbish fly-tipped by the roadside.

The throb of loud music, played by the neighbour in the small hours.

The overgrown and litter-strewn front garden.

And every time someone acts with casual indifference to the lives of those around them, it undermines the trust of others and frays the bonds which bind our society together.

We should not demonise people anywhere in society.

I do not accept the Conservative characterisation of those on benefits as being feckless and worthless.

The man was I talking about earlier cared about his children and wanted to bring them up right, but the system neither demanded nor encouraged him to do the right thing.

We have a responsibility to provide people with opportunities to improve their lives and escape poverty.

And we have a responsibility to look after the vulnerable.

But those who can work have a responsibility to take the opportunities available.

The same is true of high earners.

It is vital that we reward and nurture wealth creation.

But too often we see people getting pay and rewards which are not linked to what they have achieved.

This isn’t just unfair – it’s bad for business, jobs and our economy.

Take an example. Rolls Royce is a great British business, world -leading, innovative.

Sir John Rose who recently retired as their Chief Executive was a great British business leader – creating wealth and keeping jobs in this country.

In contrast Fred Goodwin, who ran the Royal bank of Scotland, was at the heart of the irresponsibility which led to the collapse of the banking system.

He helped bring our country’s banks to their knees.

And yet at the time the financial crisis hit, Fred Goodwin was being paid over three times more than Sir John Rose.

What greater evidence could there be of the failure to link pay and performance in our boardrooms.

Back in the 1970s, very high rates of taxation put people off creating greater wealth.

The link between pay and performance was broken.

There can be no going back to that.

But the danger today is that pay and performance have become detached again.

Over the last twelve years Chief Executive pay in Britain’s top companies has quadrupled while share prices have remained flat.

And according to the recent High Pay Commission report, just in the last 10 years, the pay of someone at the top of a company has gone from 69 times the average wage to 145 times.

Things haven’t always been this way.

It is worth recalling that JP Morgan founded his financial company on the idea that the ratio of pay between the highest and lowest paid employee should be no more than 20 to 1.

It isn’t for government to set maximum ratios but we do need change to encourage the responsibility we need.

To carry that out, my party needs to understand where New Labour succeeded and failed.

Those who founded the Labour movement were motivated to do so by the idea that they could achieve more together than as isolated individuals just looking out for themselves.

We continued that tradition in government.

Repairing the fabric of society through investment in schools, hospitals and the police.

But we did not do enough to change the ethic we inherited from the 1980s – ‘the take what you can culture’ of those Conservative governments.

New Labour in office talked about rights and responsibilities.

So, why didn’t we succeed in changing the ethic of our society in the way we wanted?

Because we were not consistent enough in applying these values across our society.

We were too slow to recognise the need for greater responsibility among those on benefits.

And we saw responsibility as only applying to those on benefits, because they were getting something from the state.

That meant the responsibilities of others were ignored – the business executives, the bankers, the Chief Executives.

Just because they – or anyone else – weren’t getting something from the government it doesn’t mean they don’t have responsibilities.

Because the most important responsibility is not to government, it is to each other.

Whether it is not abusing the trust of your neighbour by claiming benefits when you can work….

Or not paying yourself an inflated salary to the detriment of your company, your shareholders or your staff.

So we sent out the wrong message to those at the top of society.

And we all know what happened: the banks acting as if there was no tomorrow and causing the worst financial crisis in a century.

And even after that happened the Confederation of British Industry, the Financial Services Authority and even the Governor of the Bank of England sounded more willing to speak out on top pay than we did.

And we did not do enough either to acknowledge the difficulty in creating a responsible society when there is a huge gap between the rich and everyone else.

When people lead parallel lives, living in the same town but different worlds, we should not be surprised that it’s hard to nurture a sense of responsibility and solidarity.

That is why we have to tackle the new inequality in this country between the top and everyone else.

Now what about the current government and its approach?

On the surface, our responsibility to each other is a big concern of theirs and indeed we hear repeated tirades against people on benefits.

But because of their values—and true intentions— they cannot build the kind of responsibility that I have been talking about.

Just take their current welfare reform bill.

We support their attempts to build on our plans to make those who can work do so.

But their bill will make it harder for people to be responsible.

It undermines childcare support for those seeking work.

It punishes people in work who save, denying them the help they currently get through tax credits.

It cuts help for the most vulnerable, those living in care homes, who receive support to get out and about.

And, it takes away money from those who are dying even though they have contributed to the system all their lives.

None of this will help people show more responsibility. In fact, it does the opposite.

Nor are they ensuring there is the work available for people who are responsible.

And when they talk about the Big Society, and people showing responsibility through volunteering, they don’t seem to get that you can’t volunteer in your local Sure Start centre or library when it has been closed.

You cannot create a good society – or even a big one – simply with pleas for more volunteers.

Finally we will never encourage a sense of responsibility if society is becoming more and more unfair, and more and more divided.

The idea that we’re all in it together under this government is just a cruel joke.

So what are the lessons we should learn to build the kind of society we want to see?

Above all, it is that responsibility and duty to one another must apply across our country.

We cannot lecture people on benefits about responsibility if we do not also address the problem at the top—in the public and private sectors.

It is why it is right that proper action was taken against MPs who defrauded our nation through their expenses.

It is why corporate tax avoidance and evasion are so wrong and need to be tackled relentlessly.

So how do we change things to ensure a better link between top pay and performance?

As other countries require, we need companies to justify and explain what they are doing.

On pay, companies should publish the ratio of the pay of its top earner compared to its average employee.

If it can be justified by performance, they should have nothing to fear.

We need shareholders to better exercise their responsibilities to scrutinise top pay.

And we also need to recognise – as many great companies do—that firms are accountable to their workers as well as their shareholders.

Some companies already understand that having an employee on the committee that decides top pay is the right thing to do.

We should debate whether this requirement should be extended to all firms.

And of course the same should be true in the public sector.

So we need responsibility at the top of society, but we also need it at the bottom.

Again, the principle should be that we reward those who make a contribution.

I strongly believe in a welfare state that looks after those in need, including those suffering from ill health.

That principle of compassion should always be at the heart of what we do.

That is a view shared by people right across this country.

But if we are to improve the British welfare state, we must reform it so it genuinely rewards people who are responsible and contribute, as well as protecting those in need.

One area where people’s sense of fairness is under threat is social housing.

There is a terrible shortage of social housing in this country.

It will be one of the key tests of the next Labour government that we address this issue.

But we also need to do so in a way that commands public support and respect.

Need is and will remain a crucial test of who gets a house.

But across the country, there are examples of how we can also encourage people to display the responsibility that our society needs.

In Manchester, as well as helping the most vulnerable with housing, they give priority to those who are giving something back to their communities – for example, people who volunteer or who work.

They also look to reward people who have been good tenants in the past and who have paid their rent on time and have been good neighbours.

This approach means that rather than looking solely at need, priority is also given to those who contribute – who give something back.

It’s fairer and it also encourages the kind of responsible behaviour which makes our communities stronger.

It is not about punishing people. It is about rewarding people who do the right thing in their communities.

We are looking at all these issues in our policy review – but this is a principle we will seek to apply so that, as far as possible, the benefits that people receive also encourage them to do the right thing.

Let me end on this thought.

What builds a community and a country is a sense of shared responsibility, common endeavour and big national ambitions.

The Tories have no vision for our country.

No sense of national mission.

No vision for how we can deliver on the promise of Britain for the next generation.

We need a culture in our country which marks a real break with the ‘take what you can’ ways of the past.

I know that there is a yearning for that different culture.

A more responsible economy.

A more responsible society.

And a sense of common life that offers meaning and purpose.

That is the mission for our party.

That too should be the mission for our country.

Below is the text of the speech made by Ed Miliband, the Leader of the Opposition, to the TUC Conference on 13th September 2011.

Friends, 10 years ago, Tony Blair came to the TUC.

But he didn’t deliver the speech he came with.

We all know why.

Indeed some of you were there that day in Brighton.

Trying to comprehend what had happened.

United in shock and sorrow with those who feared for their loved ones.

We said at the time, we would never forget.

And we won’t.

So let us today remember all those who died, including the British citizens and the heroic public service workers, the 343 New York City firefighters.

I am proud to come here today as Labour’s leader.

Proud of the relationship between the trade unions and the Labour Party, based on shared values of equality, fairness and social justice.

But most of all, I’m proud to be here because of who you represent:

The hard working men and women of Britain.

The people who look who look after the sick, who teach our children, and who through their hard work create the wealth of this country.

People like the Sodexo dinner ladies I met in Richmond last year.

They told me of their situation:

No sick pay.

Shift patterns changed without any notice.

Having to buy their own uniforms.

We can all imagine the strain that put on them and their families.

Struggling to make ends meet.

Not knowing when they were going to be called to work.

Losing money if they were ill.

This is the story of too many people in Britain today.

And surely these low-paid women had no chance against one of the most powerful companies in the world?

Wrong.

They got together, they sought the help of a union, Unison, and they campaigned for these basic rights.

And friends, thanks to their determination, things have changed.

They won better pay, sick pay, and recognition for their union.

Let us applaud them for what they have achieved and the example they have shown.

I also think of the Vauxhall car workers I met in Ellesmere Port.

During the recession in 2008, their whole plant and the livelihoods of those workers were under threat.

What did they do?

They sat down with the management.

They worked through the problems.

They made some sacrifices.

And by doing that they saved their jobs.

Let us applaud them too for what they achieved.

These two stories show what trade unions can do for the hard working people they represent.

But you won’t hear about this in most discussions of your work.

Too often the spotlight of publicity falls elsewhere.

But I come to this conference as a Labour leader who believes you deserve credit for these stories, the daily work you do.

And what do people say about new democracies around the world?

Even the Tories.

They say the right to join a trade union is vital.

If we say it abroad, we should say it at home too.

These are the reasons why I value the link between the trade union movement and the Labour Party.

It is why I will resist any attempt to break it.

And it explains why I want reforms to the Labour Party to strengthen our movement.

The three million trade union levy payers – working men and women – are a huge asset to our party.

They should never, ever, feel like passive or unwanted members of our movement.

I want them to feel part of it.

Proud of it.

And I want us reaching out to the people who are not members of our party, not even members of the trade unions, to hear their voices too.

That is the way we become a stronger movement.

Of course, there are times when you and I will disagree.

You will speak your mind.

And so will I.

But our link is secure enough, mature enough, to deal with disagreement.

Because the relationship between party and unions is not about romance or nostalgia.

It is about respect and shared values.

It is a relationship in which we listen to each other when we disagree.

And we know that what unites us is greater than what divides us.

OK, by now maybe you’re thinking, hang on, we’ve seen this movie before.

He’s about to get to the bit where he tells us to “modernise or die.”

You’re half right.

I am going to talk about change.

But I’m not just going to talk about how people need to change to suit our economy.

I’m also going to talk about how we change our economy to suit the needs of people.

Because I reject the fatalism and pessimism that can surround the debate about economic change.

Leadership is not simply about telling people to accept change being forced upon them.

It is also about helping people to shape change, and shape their futures.

That is what our movement at its best has always been about.

So today I want to talk about the big choice our country faces over the coming years.

Whether we carry on as we are, or change the way our country works for the hard working men and women you represent.

Let’s face facts.

The British economy isn’t working for millions of people in our country.

Most people’s living standards are squeezed while those at the top see runaway rewards.

In the face of massive competition from countries like China and India, too often the British answer has been to compete on the basis of low pay and low skills.

And too often it leaves workers facing insecure prospects.

My message to you today is not simply about this Government.

Not simply about the immediate economic difficulties we face.

It is something more profound.

We have to challenge many of the assumptions on which economic policy has been based for a generation.

If we don’t, we will fail the next generation.

Financial services are important to Britain and will continue to be so.

But unless we broaden our economic base and tackle irresponsibility of the banks we will be exposed to crisis as we were in 2007.

Jobs must be our priority, and we must ensure they are decent jobs at decent wages and opportunities are extended to all our young people.

We need to reward entrepreneurship and wealth creation.

But if we just shrug our shoulders about inequality, as we have too often in the past, it will hurt not just our society but our economy too.

Changing these assumptions presents huge challenges for all of us.

For the next Labour Government.

For business.

And for the trade union movement.

I want to talk to you today about how we as a country can build that new economy.

That starts with a plan for growth.

We all know there needs to be a Plan B.

We know what the Tories’ Plan A stands for.

Austerity.

We have had nine months of the British economy flat on its back.

Growth close to zero.

Unemployment up.

1 in 5 young people out of work.

And what does George Osborne say?

Britain is a “safe haven”.

Tell that to the thousands of people who lost their jobs last month.

Tell that to the 16,000 businesses that have gone bust in the last four quarters.

Tell that to the millions of British families struggling to make ends meet.

There is no safe haven for them.

The Tories have forgotten the fundamental lesson:

You cannot simply cut your way out of a deficit.

You need to grow your economy as well.

The Government’s policies are hurting.

But they are not working.

And what is the result?

Tens of billions of extra borrowing over the coming years, above what they had predicted.

The evidence is piling up showing how the Tories are wrong to be cutting too far and too fast.

And how they are failing to share the burden of deficit reduction fairly.

Between those who were responsible for creating the crisis.

And those who were not.

A trebling of student fees.

Rising rail fares.

And higher pension contributions.

In government, we worked with trade unions to reform public sector pensions.

We sat down and we negotiated.

It was difficult but we got an agreement.

That shows the way we should reform pensions in this country.

It’s not about change versus no change.

It’s about what kind of change, and how it’s done.

The Tories have set about reform in completely the wrong way.

Even before John Hutton’s report was complete, they announced a 3 per cent surcharge on millions of your members.

It was a typically bad move by a bad government trying to pick a fight.

So I fully understand why millions of decent public sector workers feel angry.

But while negotiations were going on, I do believe it was a mistake for strikes to happen.

I continue to believe that.

But what we need now is meaningful negotiation to prevent further confrontation over the autumn.

Ministers need to show public sector workers – and the people who rely upon those services – that they are serious about finding a way forward.

The Tories claim to be the party of reform.

But their actions risk derailing the vital reform of public sector pensions because many people may now opt out of the system.

That won’t save money.

It will end up costing the taxpayer billions of pounds.

And at the same time as we see millions of hard working families being hit, who is getting a tax cut?

This year they are cutting taxes for the banks.

And now what is George Osborne obsession?

Cutting the 50 pence tax rate.

For the richest 1 per cent of the population.

For people who earn over £150,000 a year.

They have raised VAT.

They have cut tax credits.

And they say that these changes are set in stone, and will not be reversed.

It tells you everything you need to know about this Government that at the same time they are chomping at the bit to cut the 50p tax rate.

And what excuse do they plan to hide behind?

The claim that it doesn’t raise that much money because people avoid paying it.

It is nonsense.

But if that is the best they can do, I’ve got a suggestion:

Mr Osborne, I’ve got a message for you.

If people are avoiding their taxes it’s your job to stop them.

And what do they offer for the other 99 per cent of the population?

Greater insecurity.

Make it easier to sack people.

Reduce protection against unfair dismissal.

This isn’t an accident.

It’s because of their values.

What they believe.

The message is clear.

It’s one rule for those at the top.

Another rule for everyone else.

They say there is no alternative.

But there is.

It is fairer and it makes economic sense.

First, prioritise tax cuts for the hard-working majority, not the super-rich.

Cut VAT now to 17.5 per cent to get the economy moving again.

Second, insist that those who caused the crisis help pay to put it right.

Renew the bankers’ bonus tax and use the money to support enterprise, put the young unemployed back to work, and to build homes.

Third, provide some international leadership.

Because if every country and continent simply focuses on it s own strategy we will never get the growth we need.

And I say to this Government, if you want an export led recovery, you won’t get it from the world engaging in collective austerity.

So these are things Ed Balls and I would be doing to get growth going at home and abroad.

But the challenge we face is even greater.

This is not just another turn of the business cycle.

A successful economic future can only be built on a different set of values.

Hard work.

Long-term commitment.

And responsibility.

A new economy will mean rejecting outdated ideas.

Rejecting the old view that the best government is always less government.

The old view that short term shareholder interests are always in best for Britain’s companies.

And the old view from some on both sides of industry, that employee representation must mean confrontation not cooperation.

A new economy will mean the government, employers, and t he workforce all shouldering new responsibilities.

Government must ensure the rules of the system favour the long term, the patient investment, the responsible business. Because paying our way in the world is going to be tougher than it’s ever been.

The short-term, fast buck, low pay solution.

That won’t win when we are competing with China and India.

And it’s no good government just walking away.

If we’re going to be the very best at the things we are good at – advanced manufacturing, creative industries, business services, pharmaceuticals, renewables – then government has to work in partnership with business.

To understand what technologies and skills we need for the future.

To provide the certainty they need to invest.

To look at what government buys so that innovative companies can grow.

And that includes companies like Bombardier – being sold down the river by this Government.

To make sure good regulation lets companies win new markets.

And to build in every region and nation the universities, the skills, banking services, and the leadership in cities and regions, that will let companies grow and create jobs.

Sometimes government should get out of the way.

Sometimes the way it regulates does hold back small business.

But sometimes government should lead.

And the financial crisis showed that.

The crisis also has significant implications for the way government will operate in the coming years.

We are not going to be able to spend our way to a new economy.

The deficit caused by the banking crisis is not going to be cured easily.

We need economic growth, and we need people to pay their fair share of taxes.

But if we were in government, we would also be making some cuts in spending.

I sometimes hear it said that Labour opposes every cut.

Some people might wish that was true.

But it’s not.

We committed ourselves to halving the deficit over four years.

That would mean cuts.

Like our plans for a 12 per cent cut in the police budget – not the 20 per cent being implemented by this Government.

Like cuts to the road programme.

And yes, reform of some benefits too.

And there are cuts that the Tories will impose that we will not be able to reverse when we return to government.

And getting the deficit down means rooting out waste too.

We all recognise that not every penny that the last Government spent was spent wisely.

All of us know that there is waste in any government.

In this Government too.

I say stop the waste.

Stop the waste of £100 million on creating another tier of politicians with elected police commissioners.

And stop the waste of billion s of pounds on an NHS reorganisation.

A reorganisation that nobody wants and nobody voted for.

So government has to change if we’re to support the new economy.

But so do our businesses.

In Britain, we should reward productive companies, not predators.

So the way our banks work needs to change.

Not just separating the retail and investment divisions, but greater competition too.

If we can strike off rogue doctors and lawyers, the banking industry must be willing to strike off those bankers who do damage to their customers, their institutions and their country.

And we shouldn’t pretend to be neutral about the way different businesses are run.

Between the way Southern Cross ran its business, and how Rolls Royce chooses to run its.

The new economy must mean more firms who invest long-term and pay their employees fairly.

That is why, back in power, we will ensure that every firm that gets a major contract from government provides apprenticeships.

Good employers recognise the need to foster co-operation between managers and workers.

Others need to do this better.

And, let’s face it, some need to make a start.

Business leaders need to explain how their salaries are related to performance.

Over the last 12 years, chief executive salaries in Britain’s top companies have quadrupled while share prices have remained flat.

In some cases these rewards are deserved.

But in others they are because of the closed circle of people that sit on remuneration committees, handing out pay and bonuses.

Frankly it’s not good enough and it has to change.

Some companies already have workers on the committee that decides top pay.

I say, every company should have an employee on their remuneration committee, so the right pay is set and it is justified.

So for me, the demand for change is from government, employers and trade unions.

For you, the trade unions, the challenge of the new economy is this:

To recognize that Britain needs to raise its game if we are to meet the challenges of the future.

And to get private sector employers in the new economy to recognize that you are relevant to that future.

Unions can offer businesses the prospect of better employee relations.

As you did during the recession.

Of course the right to industrial action will be necessary, as a last resort.

But in truth, strikes are always the consequence of failure.

Failure we cannot afford as a nation.

Instead your real role is as partners in the new economy.

But, as you know better than I, just 15 per cent of the private sector workforce are members of trade unions.

You know that you need to change, if that is to change.

That is why so many unions are making huge efforts to engage with the other 85 per cent.

But you know the biggest challenge you face when you try to do this: relevance.

Relevance in how firms grow.

Relevance in how workers get on.

Relevance right across the private sector.

And you know you will never have relevance for many workers in this country if you allow yourselves to be painted as the opponents of change.

No.

In the new economy you can, and must, be the agents of the right kind of change.

You know the new economy that emerges from this crisis must be built on foundations of co-operation, not conflict, in the workplace.

Let me end with this thought.

I know what a tough time many of your members are having at the moment.

Tough times that are also being felt by millions who aren’t your members around this country too.

The economic crisis is casting a long shadow over the hard working families of this country.

The decent men and women, who do the right thing, and who just want their kids and grandkids to hav e better chances than them.

So it feels like quite a dark time.

But the reason I am in politics, the reason I believe in the power of politics, is because these things are not inevitable.

So yes this generation, in one sense, faces a huge set of challenges that come out of the economic crisis.

But in another sense, as we always know, out of crisis comes the chance to think about the kind of economy and society we want to build.

The opportunity to grasp the change we need in this country.

To say, it doesn’t have to be this way.

An opportunity to rewrite the rules.

To build an economy that works for the hardworking majority.

To build a society that restores responsibility from top to bottom.

To build a country that stands up for the next generation, that fulfils the promise of Britain.

And to build the more prosperous, the more just, the more equal, Britain we all want to see.