Author: admin

  • HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Private sector appointments aid modernising of the Royal Mint [March 2000]

    HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Private sector appointments aid modernising of the Royal Mint [March 2000]

    The press release issued by HM Treasury on 30 March 2000.

    A new shareholder panel of private sector managers and analysts, and the appointment of two new non-executive directors will bring greater private sector expertise into the running of the Royal Mint, Economic Secretary, Melanie Johnson, said today.

    Welcoming the announcement, Miss Johnson said:

    “These appointments are a key element in our programme of reform for the Royal Mint.

    “The new shareholder panel will inject greater private sector expertise into the Mint and provide a more rigorous shareholder discipline. The appointment of two new non-executive directors will enhance the commercial expertise on the Mint’s Board.

    “I am delighted to announce that John Dean, Hugh Beevor and Stephen Dawson have all agreed to become members of the new Royal Mint shareholder panel, and that Jan Smith and David Stark have agreed to become Royal Mint non-executive directors.

    “We are very fortunate that five such high quality individuals have agreed to work with us in taking forward our programme of reform at the Royal Mint.

    “The shareholder panel is an important innovation in the Government’s approach to managing public sector assets. We will be reviewing its operation after two years in part to see what lessons can be learned for other bodies in the public sector.”

    Shareholder Panel

    John Dean of Warburg Dillon Read – an investment analyst experienced in the smaller engineering companies sector. He was again ranked first in the 1999 Reuters survey of UK smaller engineering companies analysts. As part of his experience in the City, Mr Dean has considerable regional experience having worked as an engineering firms analyst in the traditional manufacturing areas of the North East and the West Midlands.

    Hugh Beevor, formerly of Blue Circle Industries PLC has extensive experience of managing the relationship between a parent company and its subsidiaries. He was a main board director at Blue Circle with responsibility for 12 building materials companies. He is currently a governor of the Institute of Development Studies.

    Stephen Dawson of ECI Ventures Ltd is managing director of a successful venture capital company, with over 20 years experience of investing in growth companies and turnarounds.

    Non-Executive Directors

    Jan Smith, formerly of the RAC, First Direct and Mazda Cars (UK) Ltd, now with her own consultancy has extensive business experience and a particular expertise in marketing. Her track record includes responsibility for the marketing launch of First Direct and the rebranding of the RAC where she was a member of the executive operating committee.

    David Stark – formerly of Tomkins PLC and now of Chairman of Glentay Ltd served on the Board of Tomkins for 11 years. He is a qualified engineer and at Tomkins was responsible for 29 of the group’s companies, including all their European engineering companies and associated worldwide distribution companies. He is a member of the Competition Commission.

  • HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : UK urges progress for the World´s poorest countries [April 2000]

    HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : UK urges progress for the World´s poorest countries [April 2000]

    The press release issued by HM Treasury on 4 April 2000.

    Proposals to ensure that progress is made in getting debt relief to the world’s poorest countries were outlined today by the Chancellor Gordon Brown and International Development Secretary Clare Short.

    At a seminar at Downing Street this morning, UK Ministers told representatives of NGOs and religious faiths that they had written to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank suggesting that a Heavily Indebted Poor Countries – HIPC Review and Implementation Group is established.

    It is proposed that the Group be a joint World Bank/IMF body that provides co- ordinated focus to the initiative, ensures HIPC is implemented consistently, identifies and deals with any reasons for delay and provides a single point of contact for shareholders, aid donors and NGOs.

    The Chancellor said:

    “We want to see faster progress on getting debt relief to the poorest countries. We place great emphasis on countries coming forward at the earliest possible opportunity to receive interim debt relief because this is the money they need to spend on improving primary health care, providing primary education and basic sanitation.

    “We believe that the speedy, effective implementation of HIPC will be an acid test of the international financial institutions’ ability to help the poorest countries.”

    Clare Short said:

    “The agreement that debt relief and IMF programmes were focused on poverty was an enormous gain. We must find a way to ensure that this is driven forward.”

  • Stephen Timms – 2000 Speech at the Economist’s Electronic Business Conference

    Stephen Timms – 2000 Speech at the Economist’s Electronic Business Conference

    The speech made by Stephen Timms, the then Financial Secretary to the Treasury, on 4 April 2000.

    “The benefits and challenges of e-commerce”

    Introduction

    Thank you for inviting me to join you this morning.

    We are on the threshold of a new era for business. Across the country people are talking of the impact of Business to Consumer – or ‘B2C’ – e-commerce. But the growth of Business to Business – or B2B – e-commerce has the potential to be even more explosive and pervasive. I have seen US estimates suggesting B2B turnover on the net could amount to 4 trillion dollars in America alone by 2003, compared with less than 400 billion dollars of online sales to customers.

    That is a staggering amount of trade – with potentially staggering implications for our economies and our consumers, as well as business itself.

    So I am delighted to be able to join many of the world’s B2B experts here this morning.

    Budget aims

    Let me begin by putting our hopes for electronic commerce and the knowledge economy in the context of the Government’s wider aims.

    After the UK election in 1997, our first economic objective was stability. The Budget two weeks ago confirmed that in a remarkable way that has now been achieved. We are delivering a platform of stability and steady growth, with inflation low and the public finances under control.

    More people are now in work than ever before: unemployment is at its lowest for 20 years; youth unemployment is at its lowest for 25 years and there are one million vacancies on offer across all the regions of the UK.

    Inflation in Britain has also now been lower for longer than at any time for over 30 years. And today British inflation is lower than in any of our major competitors in the European Union.

    And we are also investing now a bigger share of our national wealth than our largest competitor countries in the European Union, and a bigger share even than in the US.

    The state of the public finances is sound as well.

    So things are in good shape as a consequence of the prudent measures the Chancellor has taken.

    But we have always said that our prudence is for a purpose.

    And the Budget took the next steps towards that purpose, of building a modern and decent Britain, towards the four ambitions that we set ourselves last November:

    • our prosperity ambition: that we should be bridging the productivity gap with our competitors;
    • the full employment ambition: that we should achieve employment opportunity for all, and a higher proportion of people actually in jobs than we have had before;
    • the education ambition: that for the first time at least half of our school leavers should go on to university by the end of the decade;
    • our antipoverty ambition: that we should halve the number of children living in poverty by 2010, on the way to the Prime Minister’s ambition of eradicating child poverty altogether within 20 years.

    Four ambitions which I think are now attainable and which encapsulate our commitment to a modern and decent Britain. Our best route for achieving this modern and decent Britain – for an enterprising society which is also a fair society – is success in the knowledge economy.

    First Tuesday report

    A few weeks ago, John Browning, a cofounder of First Tuesday – the global B2B start- up market and meeting place for entrepreneurs – gave an intriguing evidence to the House of Lords e-commerce sub-committee on the future of e-commerce in Europe. This evidence he gave was based on an e-mail survey of their members on what they wanted national and European governments to do.

    The overwhelming view was that government has a very limited role – that it does most good where it treads lightest. Well, that is our view too.

    The Internet and e-commerce world is moving at speeds difficult for anyone to keep up with. As Tony Blair says, the wind of economic change has never blown through our economies with such force as it is doing today.

    We know the market sets the pace of that change. And it always will do.

    But our role as a Government is an important one still. Not to dictate. Not to attempt to control. But to help to enable and to empower every business and individual to win from the changes, and to extend the new opportunities to all.

    That is why we have set ourselves two parallel targets to these challenges.

    First, to make the UK the best place in the world to trade electronically by 2002.

    And second, to aim for universal access by 2005.

    Those two goals are complementary. Making sure everyone has access to the Internet will both improve our competitiveness and reduce social exclusion. A very clear example of enterprise and fairness working together.

    And we are working very hard indeed in a number of areas to achieve these goals.

    Back to John Browning’s evidence to the Lords Committee: his statement consisted of a number of lessons First Tuesday had learnt in the course of their rapid growth. I want to spend a little time examining these lessons and what they mean for governments and for e-businesses as well.

    Lesson 1: Europeans are passionate entrepreneurs

    The first lesson learned by First Tuesday was that Europeans are passionate entrepreneurs. And, to quote him, ‘contrary to conventional pessimism, they are neither defeatist nor risk averse.’

    That, I think, is clear enough from the number of European companies we have here today.

    It is also clear from the signs that the technology gap between Europe and the US is narrowing. In some areas, of course, Europe already leads.

    The first wave of the Internet came through PCs. But the next wave will come through broadband mobile and digital television.

    In both, the United Kingdom in particular ­ and Europe more generally ­ have a pretty impressive lead.

    Last month we launched the world’s first auction for third generation mobile telephone spectrum. Thirteen bidders from all round the world have been taking part and all have put in significant bids to play a role in the future market.

    Third generation mobile will give businesses the Internet on the move. Everything we now get from our PCs, digital cameras and good old voice telephones – all on our mobile phones, our PDAs, our laptops and palmtops, and a host of new devices now emerging from the research labs.

    Digital TV – interactive TV ­ is also taking off. It’s only just begun. But some forecasters suggest that as much as 75 per cent of UK households will have DTV by 2008.

    Both of these – digital TV and third generation mobile – are technologies where the UK is a world leader.

    And both are creating extraordinary opportunities for new businesses in both B2C and B2B e-commerce, new applications, new services and new jobs.

    That is why we’re seeing venture capitalists, technology and telecoms companies, and individual entrepreneurs so active today in the UK, confirming our position as the single most popular destination for inward investment into Europe.

    European enthusiasm for the new economy was out for all to see as well at the Lisbon Summit on European economic reform two weeks ago. There, the Heads of Government of our European States set a new strategic goal for the next decade – to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge based economy in the world.

    That is a huge change. And it is the beginning of a process with tremendous implications and opportunities for our economies and our workforces.

    Lesson 2: Scale is critical to entrepreneurial success

    The second lesson First Tuesday drew was that scale is critical to entrepreneurial success.

    As they said, only by expanding quickly can companies grasp the available opportunities.

    But companies can only expand to the extent that there is the sufficient size and sophistication of markets and the quality of skills base needed to be successful.

    You cannot build a knowledge driven economy without a knowledge driven society.

    So we have to make sure that the opportunities of the new technologies are shared by every business and every worker.

    That is why the Budget two weeks ago introduced a special tax reduction to encourage a million small companies to get on line. For the next three years any small business buying computers, or investing in e-commerce and new information technology, will be able immediately to write off against tax the full 100 per cent of the cost in the year of purchase.

    We are also legislating for other tax cuts – a 100 pounds tax cut for electronic filing of tax and vat returns, and a further 50 pounds tax cut for electronic filing for those paying the working families tax credit.

    And side by side with these incentives, the new Small Business Service – opening its doors this month – will offer consultancy, advice and planning to help small businesses get on line and become e-companies.

    Of course, while getting United Kingdom on line is vital, the big prize will come when we create a single European market for electronic commerce – a single market of 375 million people and potentially 100 million more.

    Lesson 3: Speed is just as critical

    That brings me to the third lesson from First Tuesday’s evidence that speed is just as critical as scale. ‘…because the Internet is evolving so fast, and because first-mover advantage is so powerful, Internet companies have to move very, very fast.’

    A key priority for governments must be to ensure the right dynamic market framework is in place to cope with this speed of change.

    At the Lisbon Summit, European Heads of Government recognised that the speed of technological change requires new and more flexible regulatory approaches in the future.

    That is why they called on the European Council along with the European Parliament, where appropriate, to adopt as rapidly as possible, this year, pending legislation on the legal framework for ecommerce, on copyright and related rights, on e-money, on distance selling of financial services, on jurisdiction and on the dualuse export control regime.

    We have already agreed a directive on electronic signatures that introduces their legal recognition throughout the EU and sets voluntary standards for certificate providers.

    These further steps will take Europe quickly into the new digital age, boosting consumer confidence and making it far easier for a business based in one country to sell on-line in the fourteen others.

    In the UK, we are currently also reviewing every barrier to competition in the emerging e-commerce market and seeking to remove them.

    In every area we are asking what we can do to enhance competition and opportunity:

    The new Competition Act makes our competition authority independent and for the first time prohibits all anti-competitive practices.

    We are driving competition further and faster into the leadingedge communication markets, to bring prices down and give consumers more choice.

    In the last few weeks we’ve seen four different companies offering new, unmetered Internet packages.

    As the new tariffs come into effect, it will almost certainly mean that for the average Internet user at home and in business, the UK will be cheaper than anywhere else in Europe.

    We are working as well on the legal framework.

    Our electronic communications bill will allow us to update decades, indeed centuries, of legislation that refer to paper and post.

    And we are helping employees in UK high growth Internet companies by tackling the issue of employer’s National Insurance Contributions on share options. I have been asked by the Chancellor to conduct a consultation on a technical solution to the tax treatment of share options in unapproved schemes, and I’m moving quickly to fulfil his request, and, I hope, to resolve quickly the serious technical problem that currently exists.

    Lesson 4: Governments themselves are slow in using the technology

    The fourth lesson First Tuesday learned from its European survey was that governments themselves generally are slow in using the technology.

    Businesses represented here and individuals are responding to the new technologies and the new challenges. And Government has to do the same.

    Last week, Tony Blair proposed a challenging target for Government – to offer all services online by 2005.

    We need to transform relationships between government and citizen by delivering services on-line. And we need to do it quickly.

    We also need to transform policy-making by managing government online.

    The first step is to develop a clear strategy. So Andrew Smith, my colleague as Chief Secretary to the Treasury, and Patricia Hewitt, as our e-minister, are heading a crosscutting spending review to look at all aspects of Government and e-commerce.

    Our strategy for e-government will be shaped by our view of the new technologies. Yesterday, Ian McCartney, the Minister responsible for e-government, launched our Government’s e-government strategy.

    We want businesses and people to be able to access government anywhere and anytime.

    From a computer. A mobile device. A TV. A kiosk in a post office or a shopping centre.

    So the challenge to us is to make government-content, and government services, available across all our networks – wired and wireless – to all the devices.

    It’s exactly the same challenge that content-providers in the private sector are facing. Financial services information providers, for example, now integrating content, and delivering it real-time to market analysts and retail investors alike on the trading screen, the television screen and the mobile phone.

    But we also have to re-engineer government on the inside. Like every major global company, we have to move from vertical silos to horizontal processes. We have to move from inputs to outcomes. And we have to use ICT to enable all that to happen.

    Like everybody else, we have to contend with legacy systems. E-mail systems that don’t talk to each other. Different data standards.

    In the next few weeks, however, we will be publishing a single set of standards for inter-operability across government. We’re following the lead of business by adopting open, I/P based standards for all government systems. Making the browser the key interface for access and manipulation of all information. Adopting XML as the cornerstone for government data inter-operability and integration. And working with the global Govtalk consortium to create the infrastructure we need for implementation.

    Conclusion

    We are optimistic our British knowledge economy can match the best:

    With individuals alive to the opportunities, and businesses sufficiently ambitious, we can rise to the challenge – making Britain and Europe the best place in the world for e-commerce.

    Thank you for the contribution you are making ­ let’s work together to make this a success for all our people.

  • Andrew Smith – 2000 Speech to the IPPR New Economy Launch Event

    Andrew Smith – 2000 Speech to the IPPR New Economy Launch Event

    The speech made by Andrew Smith, the then Chief Secretary to the Treasury, in London on 4 April 2000.

    THE FUTURE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE AGREEMENTS

    Introduction

    Thank you for that kind introduction, and to Matthew Taylor and the IPPR for inviting me to speak today. I want first to set out our ideas about setting PSAs , and then I want to briefly cover how all this fits in with our ambition of modern, high-performing public services combining innovation and excellence.

    As many of you know, PSAs are a unique innovation. Colleagues from other countries in Europe and across the world are intrigued and, sometimes, frightened by our radical approach. Never before has a British Government set out so clearly the aim, objectives, resources, performance targets, and operations targets for every major government Department in one public document. Neither has any government publically committed itself to reporting annually against those targets.

    The 1998 Comprehensive Spending Review PSAs were a revolution in this respect. And for our departments, I think they were something of a revelation too. PSAs challenged them for the first time to think about what were the outcomes they really wanted in each policy area. They also challenged departments to think about how their success might best be measured. But most importantly they challenged them to commit publically to delivering the improvements we have targeted within the resources allocated to them in the CSR. Through the PSAs, the Government made clear that it was investing for reform. Reform for better public services and a step change in the way they were delivered.

    Not everyone sees it that way of course. PSAs have come in for their fair share of suspicion and criticism. According to Simon Jenkins in the Times, Gordon Brown and I sit at the heart of a “vast cobweb” of targets. In fact, according to Mr Jenkins, I am building a structure like Stalin’s Gosplan! Mr Jenkins even accuses my officials of being “music-loving, theatre-going liberals”. Those of you who have dealings with the Treasury will judge whether that’s and accurate description.

    The radical nature of PSAs, and their immediate impact on Departments inevitably led to some shortcomings in the new system the first time round. As John Garrett pointed out in the Guardian, our emphasis on the serious issue of sickness absence in the public sector looks unbalanced when we didn’t have comparable measures in other areas of people management. And some of our targets are simply not very good, because we were new to the business: setting targets to achieve 100% prompt payment of invoices looks good, but will often be unachievable for very sound reasons, if an invoice needs to be investigated.

    So the current spending review, is a big opportunity to improve the PSAs and learn from experience – both positive and negative – as we take them forward.

    Setting the SR2000 PSAs

    We are doing that in a number of ways.

    First we are focussing even harder on the things that really matter. PSAs are all about priorities. Openness and accountability about priorities should not be allowed to be fudged by too great a mass of targets.

    Second, we are making sure part of this focussing process involves separating out the key overall goals (the “what”), from targets for Departmental processes and operations (the “how”).

    Third, we are working harder than ever before on ensuring we target the right measures of success. Determining what it is you want to achieve is the first crucial step. But picking the right measure to avoid unwanted distortions in the system, is as important.

    Finally, we are sharpening up our targets, making them as transparent as possible. We should be clear in every case about what the terms of the targets mean, when we are committing to deliver the target, and how it will be measured.

    The way we are conducting the review means that we are tackling all of these issues head on.

    In the past few months, I have had a series of meetings with Ministerial colleagues to nail down their highest priorities. Everyone is determined to show Parliament and the public the things that really matter to us. Whereas some Departments had more than thirty policy targets after the CSR, most Whitehall Departments will have no more than ten high level PSA targets after SR2000.

    I am also making PSAs even clearer by ensuring they are short and sharp, containing only the aim, objectives, and top few political priority targets. New supporting documents, Service Delivery Agreements, will describe how these priorities will be delivered, and the management and operational changes Departments will be introducing to facilitate this.

    On measures, departments have been working together with the Treasury to ensure the measures to support the next round of targets are the best possible in the light of evidence. And in another first, the Treasury is leading work with other Departments, the National Audit Office, and the Audit Commission, to agree the basics about what makes for good performance measurement in Government.

    Delivering the new PSAs So that’s how we’re ensuring the targets are the most specific, measurable, outcome-focussed targets they could possibly be.

    We also want to make sure the right support and structures are in place to allow Departments to deliver public services fit for the 21st Century. I want to briefly examine three reforms here.

    First, we are determined to break down artificial barriers in policy-making and delivery, using the PSA process to make Departments jointly responsible for delivering some key policy objectives. It is important to get this right as government increasingly has to organise horizontally, with joint work across departments to deal with challenges which don’t organise themselves conveniently in line with the traditional vertical departmental silos. For this Spending Review we have launched fifteen cross-cutting studies of problems that cross Departmental boundaries.

    With subjects as diverse as crime reduction, new gateways to care for the elderly and conflict prevention in sub-Saharan Africa the studies have pulled together expertise from outside and inside Government to propose targets for cross-Departmental working. In some cases they will result in further full cross-cutting PSAs.

    Second, Departments are now more than ever drawing on outside expertise to raise their productivity and to produce the step change in our public services that we all want to see. This Government wants to listen and learn from the best practice available. The mantra is “what matters is what works”.

    This is why I am committed to the work of the Public Services Productivity Panel, which I chair. The Panel brings together high level experience of the public sector and the outside perspective of the private sector. It brings together people with deep knowledge of the public sector, such as Andrew Foster of the Audit Commission, and Sheila Masters with her NHS experience, and leaders from business like John Makinson from Pearson’s and John Dowdy from McKinsey.

    The Panel is an excellent resource for all Departments to draw upon. Each Panel member is assigned to detailed projects, supported by Departmental and Treasury staff. And some Panel members are also supported by their own company staff. This openness and joint working encourages innovative approaches, and puts an emphasis on the practical steps that will help us do things better.

    Already good examples of the fruits of this approach have been published. John Makinson wrote an excellent report with the big Government office networks on incentivising good team performance. Andrew Foster has highlighted both good practice and bad in customer service in the big DETR driving agencies, so that we challenge poor performance as well as praising the good.

    The reports are only a means to an end. And that end is delivering real changes in the effectiveness and customer focus of our public services. John Makinson’s report represents a bold and radical new approach to pay in the public sector. His proposals have the potential to lever up productivity in the Inland Revenue, Customs and Excise, Benefits Agency and Employment Service. Work is underway to implement new pay systems based on team incentives from 2001. These will deliver real improvements to taxpayers and users of services as well allowing staff to share in the benefits of better performance.

    The Makinson report is only one element of the Government’s strategy to empower public servants. For too long, public services have been allowed to stagnate because public servants have been undervalued, and have not been listened to. So the Government third reform is to turn this around, encouraging innovation by front-line staff and by local managers, and celebrating the success of our most outstanding managers and teams, as beacons to others in their sector.

    The reforms to the Civil Service inspired by the Prime Minister and being led by Sir Richard Wilson, offer the prospect of transforming our Civil Service – retaining the elements so prized abroad, such as its probity and professionalism, but encouraging more adventurous thinking, greater diversity, and a stronger sense of good management.

    Local autonomy versus central direction

    I want to touch on the important issue raised by Matthew [Taylor] an issue all major programmes of reform in any institution must face and tackle: that is, to what extent should the centre direct and impose change, and to what extent should local agents be allowed the flexibility to find their own strategies for delivery, shaped to local context and taking advantage of the available expertise.

    Some criticism of the Government’s modernisation programme has centred on the perception that it inevitably involves highly inflexible directives from the centre. I do not accept this, and would argue instead that Public Service Agreements and our programme of reform offer an important opportunity to local service deliverers to shape their own strategies within the framework we have set.

    We believe that local government and local services are a crucial source of good ideas about improving service delivery, and the vast majority of public servants take pride in the standard of service they deliver. We are determined to learn from good practice at local level, and to tackle unacceptable variations in performance where they exist.

    Only last week, I hosted a seminar at the Treasury bringing together experts from inside and outside Government to see how we might best raise the performance of the less good units to that of the best.

    The real challenge for the Government is not debating an artificial tension between local autonomy and central direction but in making sure that good practice from some of our most outstanding public services is successfully shared.

    This is not to say however, that there are not issues of balance which we need to work on. But I see this as a dynamic process. Different combinations of direction and autonomy will be appropriate for different services and between different units within services. This is a matter which I will be discussing with colleagues, particularly as we make progress on their Service Delivery Agreements, which will state clearly for the first time how they intend to cascade their high level commitment to local agents.

    Conclusion

    To conclude, I believe PSAs have been something of a revolution. Departments have recognised the real benefits for their own management of clear priorities and targets, and we will see further steps forward in the quality and clarity of the PSAs which come out of this spending review.

    But like the Productivity Panel, PSAs should not be about elegantly drafted glossy documents: they must be about driving change on the ground that the public can see. The Government has set out its vision. In PSAs we have published a ground-breaking set of commitments. In our modernisation and investment programme, we are giving public sector employees the tools to do the job. That has raised public expectations. So now they have to see the change we have promised.

    Thank you.

  • Gordon Brown – 2000 Speech to the British Chamber of Commerce National Conference

    Gordon Brown – 2000 Speech to the British Chamber of Commerce National Conference

    The speech made by Gordon Brown, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 5 April 2000.

    I am delighted to join you today at the National Conference of the British Chambers of Commerce. Let me start by paying tribute to the work you do, the contribution you make, and the service you as local and regional Chambers of Commerce give in every part of the country.

    Local Chambers of Commerce are not only voices for business and industry in every one of our country’s regions but you also represent the best of British values- our shared belief in hard work, in enterprise, in looking outwards to the world, and you speak up in particular for the hundreds of thousands of medium and small businesses of Britain that are the backbone of our economy.

    And it is because I share your ambition, a theme of this conference, that Britain has the best competitive environment for business in the years ahead, that I want to discuss with you today the challenges ahead – how we equip ourselves to meet and master ever more fierce global competition and ever faster change – and the prize for our country – a Britain which with opportunity open to all is enterprising and fair, a Britain where – with higher productivity from all – there is prosperity for all.

    Now our first two years as a government demanded that we establish the only sound platform for an enterprise culture in a global economy – economic stability.

    In a global marketplace with its increased insecurities and indeed often volatility and instability national economic stability is at a premium, the precondition for all we can achieve, and no nation can secure the high levels of sustainable investment it needs without both monetary and fiscal stability together.

    And it was to avoid the historic British problem – the violence of the repeated boom and bust cycles of the past – that we established the new monetary framework based on consistent rules – the symmetrical inflation target; settled well understood procedures – Bank independence; and openness and transparency. And side by side with it and as important, a new fiscal discipline with, again, clear and consistent rules – the golden rule for public spending; well understood procedures – our fiscal responsibility legislation; and a new openness and transparency.

    I saw – as you saw – what damage inconsistent and ever changing rules, short- termist and politicised decision making procedures and a lack of openness did most recently in the late eighties and early nineties – the one million jobs lost in manufacturing, the one million businesses that went under, the two million jobs in total that disappeared.

    I saw how difficult it was for businesses to plan ahead and make investments for the long term.

    And I never want to return to those days when interest rates were above 10 per cent for four years nor do you or I want ever to rerun that day in 1992 when interest rates were 10 per cent when we started work, 12 per cent by 11 am, and by 3pm set to be 15 per cent.

    So stability matters to me as it does to you. High inflation and instability hurts businesses as it hurts savers, those like the elderly on fixed and low incomes, and I understand what you understand, that a disciplined and prudent framework of stability is the indispensable foundation for economic success.

    Already we are seeing the rewards of creating Bank of England independence and tough fiscal rules.

    For the third year running inflation is in line with our target and inflation is at historically low levels. I can tell you that our target of 2.5 per cent will be met this year, next year and the year after that and our forecast is that the economy will grow steadily – by between 2.75 and 3.25 per cent this year, with growth forecast to be 2.25 – 2.75 per cent next year and the year after.

    Long term interest rates – once 2 per cent or more above Germany’s – are now at the level of Germany’s, showing that people have confidence in a low inflation future for Britain, a platform from which businesses can now plan for the longer term with greater confidence.

    But everybody knows it is not simply monetary stability that matters, but also fiscal stability.

    And having imposed new fiscal disciplines we have cut borrowing by £40 billion in our first three years. And we are on course to meet our two strict fiscal rules.

    It is because we sought to learn from the political mistakes of the last forty years that this government will maintain its prudent and tough approach. The figures I announced in the Budget mean that we will meet our fiscal rules over the cycle. Indeed that we will meet our fiscal rules even in the most cautious case, on the most cautious assumptions, including the most cautious view of trend growth at 2.25 per cent.

    And as I announced in the Budget, I have decided to lock in a greater fiscal tightening next year and the year after than we promised in last year’s Budget and Pre-Budget Report.

    We are therefore able to repay debt – last year 3 billion pounds, this year 12 billion pounds, next year 6 billion pounds, and the year after that 5 billion pounds.

    And it is from this platform of monetary and fiscal discipline that you have been able to create 100,000 more small businesses employing people, from 1.2 million to 1.3 million, and create in total 800,000 more jobs, with last year 6 billion pounds more in business investment and 13 billion pounds more inward investment into the United Kingdom.

    I can say that as a government we are determined to continue to back your efforts by maintaining our disciplined approach: in particular we must all be determined not to make the old British mistake of paying ourselves too much today at the cost of higher interest rates and fewer jobs tomorrow.

    Now I understand your worries about the Euro – Sterling exchange rate and the pound’s strength in relation to the weak euro and I welcome the positive response of manufacturing which has increased productivity by more than 5 per cent over the past year.

    By making investment allowances for business permanent, by introducing new allowances for any small and medium company adapting to new information technology by inaugurating this month a new R&D tax credit worth 150 million pounds, and by creating a one billion pound regional venture capital investment fund, this month’s Budget has sought to build upon Britain’s stability and Britain’s low corporation tax rates to support manufacturers and exporters. But the policies which I am sometimes asked by some to follow to bring the exchange rate down would risk the very outcome all of you want to avoid – a return to boom and bust.

    Indeed I can tell you I am determined to avoid a repeat of the economic instability caused by the succession of ever-changing money targets as we saw in the early 1980s and the dual exchange rate and inflation targets of the late 1980s and early 1990s – when the then government chose in succession £M3, M1, then M0, then when this failed shadowing the Deutschmark, then the Exchange Rate Mechanism, as the economy moved from boom to bust.

    The objective of British monetary policy today is clear and unambiguous – to meet a symmetric inflation target with inflation outcomes below target viewed just as seriously as outcomes above target. And it is this consistent long-term approach which is the foundation for stability and steady growth.

    There are some who criticise the Bank of England and say inflation can only be controlled at the cost of growth and jobs. And there are of course those who say we should grow by ignoring inflation. But far from choking off recovery, pre-emptive action has allowed us both to meet our inflation target and sustain growth. And because this is what I want us to continue to do, we will support our monetary authorities in the difficult decisions they have to take to ensure that we meet the inflation target and sustain high and stable levels of growth and employment.

    Employment opportunity for all

    So building on this platform, I believe Britain can now set a new economic ambition, indeed an economic mission, for the next decade: a faster rise in productivity than our main competitors, as we close the productivity gap.

    And for that to happen there is a second precondition – reinvigorating the work ethic in every community of our country.

    For too long too many people had become accustomed to not working and to a benefits system that failed to make work pay and led to the ‘why work’ syndrome at a cost to the work ethic. For too long historic British virtues – hard work and self improvement – had been drowned out. For too long opportunities in our economy had become detached from responsibilities to take them up.

    Now, because we expect everyone who can work to go to work and not sit at home on benefits, we are matching opportunity with responsibility. And with the help of your members who are signed up to the New Deal, youth unemployment is down 70 per cent and long term unemployment down 50 per cent. In the mid eighties as many as 500,000 young people were out of work. In 1997 the figure was 200,000. Now that we have reduced that figure to 50,000 we have a long way to go but already there are more people in work than ever before and unemployment is at its lowest for 20 years.

    As I said in the Budget, we will extend the opportunities and the obligations of the New Deal to the long term adult unemployed. And with one million vacancies in every region of the economy our agenda demanding responsibility in return for the extension of opportunity will intensify in the years to come.

    As we implement the report of Lord Grabiner QC, create new opportunities for the long term unemployed to work, take action to visit, telephone and coach long term unemployed men and women back into the jobs on offer and introduce tougher sanctions and penalties .

    Productivity

    And with stability, the renewed importance we attach to work is the precondition for the next stage of our agenda – to bridge the productivity gap with our competitors by opening enterprise to all.

    We have some of the greatest companies, some world class sectors, some global champions in whom we do and should take pride. But let us face facts. We have not enough of them and over the last 50 years, productivity growth in Britain has been just over two and a half per cent a year, compared to between three and a half per cent and four per cent among our main European competitors.

    I believe that when we look at changes in Britain’s relative economic position over the last century, one of the causes is that there has not been enough competition, dynamism and entrepreneurship in many areas of our economy – and over decades politicians and governments must take our share of the blame. We have to set aside the old sterile battles that posed enterprise against fairness, public against private, management against workforces and deprived us of the national economic purpose we need.

    Today we know that in a global economy greater competition at home is the key to greater competitiveness abroad. We know that it is the openness of the economy not its closed nature that is the driving force in productivity growth. And we know that it is the global reach of business, not protectionism, that is the key to dynamism and growth.

    Global competition challenges us to innovate, to be better managers, to perform more competitively on the world stage.

    So today I want to set out the next stage of our productivity push for the British economy -encouraging more competition, more innovation, more flexibility and more long term investment, sometimes by government getting out of the way.

    Sometimes by government positively improving the competitive environment.

    And meeting the productivity challenge – bridging the gap with our competitors – must be the priority over the next few years.

    Only with rising productivity can we meet people’s long-term expectations for rising standards of living without causing inflation or unemployment.

    There are of course those urging us to slow the pace of change or even to pause or turn back. But we cannot and must not slow the pace of economic reform.

    Increasingly every good and every service will be exposed to ever more fierce and relentless global competition.

    So we must work to remove all barriers to productivity in the economy – with a shared national effort to raise our game.

    I want us not only to give more people the chance to turn their ideas into profitable businesses but to be able to say to business in every part of the country this government will be on your side if you’re starting up, growing, hiring, investing, innovating, exporting, going public. At every stage, in every way, on your side as you move up the ladder of opportunity.

    In the last year we consulted widely with business and we set out in the Pre-Budget Report measures for radical reform in our capital labour and product markets to expand investment and productivity.

    Your views have helped shape policy to raise investment and productivity across the UK.

    The British Chamber of Commerce:

    • asked for permanent capital allowances – that give greater certainty to businesses wanting to plan ahead and invest;
    • proposed capital gains tax reform – removing the barriers to long term investment;
    • suggested improvements in corporate venturing tax incentive – helping the large companies that invest in the development of the small;
    • called for special help for small businesses as they invested for the future.

    The CBI joined you in calling for new permanent capital allowances, reform of capital gains tax and welcomed the introduction of our new R&D tax credit. They also proposed new incentives for employee share ownership – to help small firms recruit and retain the best people.

    The Federation of Small Business proposed new incentives to help small firms seize the opportunities of e-commerce and the Internet.

    And in the Budget we took positive action in every one of these areas.

    And we took action too on transport. Immediate new investment of 280 million pounds in transport, 250 million of it to a ring fenced fund for improving roads and public transport. And more important our 10 year plan to be published this summer which will set out our strategy for modernising transport infrastructure – building on our understanding that instead of the public sector fighting the private sector, public and private sectors can work together in the national interest.

    Let me explain my pro-business reforms – first capital gains tax reform. When we came into government and cut the long term rate of capital gains tax for business assets held for ten years or more, capital gains had been fixed at 40 per cent for almost ten years.

    Indeed the last government aligned the rate of capital gains tax with the top rate of tax.

    You could have excused me for leaving capital gains tax rates as they were. But I decided that an enterprise economy needed new and better rewards for enterprise.

    And so in the face of many other priorities – including the public services – I decided to devote substantial funds to radically cutting capital gains tax.

    From tomorrow the new capital gains rates for business assets are being cut from 40 per cent to 35 per cent after one year; to 30 per cent after two years; to 20 per cent after three years; and so while for a decade capital gains have been taxed at 40 per cent or above, for investments of four years or more they will now be taxed at 10 per cent.

    Having made these decisions I also looked at what I could do to recognize the importance of investors in small and medium sized businesses, and help business angels and I have redefined the help we will give to reward risk.

    Today business investors who own between 5 per cent and 25 per cent of a new and growing business do not benefit from the 10p rate. From tomorrow their rate will be 10 per cent for all investments above 5 per cent held for four or more years.

    I also wanted to recognize the importance we attach to the growing numbers of Britain’s unquoted companies. So for them all investments held for four years will benefit from the 10 per cent rate.

    So stage by stage we are removing the tax barriers to enterprise and creating in Britain the best tax environment for business investment.

    To encourage long term investment, the main rate of corporation tax cut has been cut from 33p to 30p, the lowest rate in the history of UK corporation tax, the lowest of all major industrialised countries.

    We have cut small business corporation tax from 23p to 20p and introduced a new starting rate of tax for small companies of 10p in the pound. Every company making profits of up to 50,000 pounds will benefit.

    Our new Enterprise Management Incentive scheme is tailor made for the new hi-tech companies. To motivate, recruit and reward Britain’s real risk takers, high tech firms recruiting essential personnel will be able to offer share option incentives of 100,000 pounds for up to 15 employees.

    We are consulting on a set of proposals to resolve the treatment of employer national insurance in share options.

    All of us recognised that innovation is the key to the future success of the new enterprise economy.

    Because it is well understood that two thirds of growth is the result of innovation we decided on special new incentives to encourage and reward the inventor and the innovator.

    Not only therefore have we allocated 150 million pounds to our new research and development tax credit, supporting nearly a quarter of new investment in small and medium-sized business research and development, but we are honouring the spirit of British invention, facilitating the exploitation of invention and encouraging the commercialisation of invention:

    • an extra £1.4 billion in basic scientific research;
    • from our University Challenge Fund seedcorn finance to commercialise inventions;
    • to transfer technology from the science lab to the marketplace, new Institutes of Enterprise in every region;
    • a new tax incentive to help the large companies sponsor the development of the small.

    I want to make Britain the best environment for e-commerce and catch up with America as swiftly as possible. You asked us to help e-commerce develop in small and medium sized businesses.

    We are introducing 100 per cent allowances for the next three years for any small business buying computers, or investing in e-commerce and new information technology.

    And to promote the use of the Internet we will legislate for other tax cuts – a 100 pounds tax cut for electronic filing of tax and VAT returns, and a further 50 pounds tax cut for electronic filing for those paying the Working Families Tax Credit.

    And of course the new Small Business Service – acting as a voice for small business at the heart of government; simplifying and improving government support for small businesses; and helping small businesses deal with regulation and ensuring small businesses’ interests are properly considered.

    So we are introducing measures to promote investment, enterprise, and innovation.

    The challenge for business is to take advantage of the new platform of stability and use these incentives to innovate, grow and expand – which will be particularly helpful to manufacturing and the regions.

    The challenge for government is to build on these reforms.

    Our productivity push will be stepped up in the coming year. So we will build on the measures we have already introduced with further reforms and incentives for the modernisation of our capital, product and labour markets, measures we will pursue in our constructive approach to Europe as well as in Britain. These will be set out in detail in this November’s Pre-Budget Report.

    First competition policy.

    Having made the Competition Authority independent and having accepted the main Cruickshank recommendations on banking we will now examine how we can further promote the best competitive environment.

    For the professions, the Office of Fair Trading has now set out a detailed remit to examine how best to ensure that the rules of professional bodies do not unnecessarily restrict or distort competition.

    I can report today that the remit is to look at:

    • rules which restrict entry to certain professions and legal restrictions on the ability of individuals who do not have specified qualifications from offering certain services;
    • rules on the conduct of regulated professionals such as restrictions or prohibitions on advertising or price competition;
    • and legal requirements which require third parties to use qualified professionals for certain transactions.

    For the regulatory system, the government will now consider how to scrutinize regulatory bodies and review existing and proposed regulations to ensure that they are promoting – not impeding – new entrants and competitive forces.

    For the planning system, we are not only introducing a series of changes in planning guidelines that will, for the first time, facilitate the formation of hi-tech clusters – helping to foster dynamic new businesses – but we are now ready to examine further necessary improvements.

    For the utilities, we will for the first time explicitly require the regulators to promote competition, so that we can continue to get the best deal for domestic and business consumers.

    And so we can ensure new entrants get the best deal and that small business is not pushed around by vested interests, the Office of Fair Trading is being given new investigative resources and trust-busting weapons, including the power to impose fines of up to 30 per cent of turnover.

    Second greater flexibility and adaptability in the labour market.

    Because we recognise that people will have to change jobs more often, that skills are at a premium, that reform has been needed from the 1980s onwards to create more flexibility, we will introduce further reforms to make our labour markets more dynamic and raise standards in education.

    Having put new grants for books equipment and staff directly in the hands of head teachers, David Blunkett has indicated that there will be new tests and targets for 12-14 year olds, and new measures to deal with failing schools.

    And to back up our extension of Educational Maintenance Allowances we now will encourage more young people from 14 to gain work experience and launch a staying on campaign.

    We are investing in new opportunities for small business employees to benefit from learning direct.

    Work permits will allow key workers in it areas to be employed in our country.

    And to make labour markets work better by giving employees more share in success, the all employee shareholding scheme -coming in this week – will offer the best incentives for employee shareholding we have seen.

    While our capital markets are among the best in the world. We must ensure there are no barriers to competition and innovation, that there are no closed circles, that there are no unnecessary constraints restricting investment decisions, and that investors have every opportunity and encouragement to back dynamic small and growing companies.

    Our proposed regional venture capital investment funds were unveiled this week by the head of the Small Business Service.

    Institutional investors have a vital role to play, controlling around 45 per cent of quoted equity investments. That is why I have asked Mr Paul Myners to head a review of institutional investment.

    I can report today that he will look at:

    • whether regulatory provisions have unintended effects on investment decision-making;
    • how pension funds make their investment decisions, and the role of professional advisers;
    • how institutional investors’ results and charges are reported;
    • and the incentive effects of the methods used to assess fund performance.

    He will report back to me in time for the next Budget.

    In sum, making for a Britain open to competition, and at the leading edge of change.

    Finally, we must work together in the months ahead to tackle the cultural barriers to enterprise.

    I want young people in every area of the country to see that enterprise is genuinely open to all.

    And I feel strongly that all of us have a role to play in building this new enterprise culture in every community.

    I am very pleased to see the British Chambers of Commerce forming a unique partnership with the CBI and Institute of Directors for the National Enterprise Campaign to be launched on 11 May.

    The business ambassadors ready to go into our schools, colleges and communities – 250 ambassadors initially and a target of 1000 by the end of 2001 – will become role models for a new generation of entrepreneurs.

    And the new nationwide campaign will build on the steps business and government are already taking to boost enterprise skills from school to adulthood:

    Let me tell you that we aim to double the number of pupils benefiting from enterprise courses in our schools;

    by improving the national network which introduces schools to businesses we will link all 30,000 schools to the world of business;

    and by ensuring pupils and teachers are given the opportunity for work experience and placements – with already six hundred thousand 14 to 16 year olds benefiting from work experience and thirty thousand teachers in work placement – we are now working with business and the world of education to build on this, improving the quality of placements and experience.

    New businesses need advice and mentoring. So working with the Prince’s Trust and others, we are building a national network of mentors to help businesses starting in the poorest areas. And we are offering new management scholarships – aimed specifically at entrepreneurs from high unemployment areas.

    And Stephen Byers and I will host a major UK-US conference later this year which will bring together leading US and UK entrepreneurs and representatives of leading companies and capital providers to look at further ways we can develop a more entrepreneurial and enterprise focussed economy in the UK.

    Stage by stage we are moving from the Britain where enterprise was often seen as a closed circle for the few, to a Britain where enterprise will be open to all.

    Opening enterprise to all means locking in the economic stability we are building and creating the most aggressively pro-competition policy in the world.

    Opening enterprise to all means being on the side of business as you grow, invest, and seek equity and it means – from school lessons in commerce to new encouragement for the over 50s – opening up every area in the country to enterprise, in some areas replacing the old dependency culture with a new enterprise culture.

    Conclusion

    So let me conclude.

    Now with the lowest corporate tax rates for businesses ever, the lowest ever capital gains tax rates for long term investors, the lowest basic income tax rate – at 22 pence – for 70 years, I believe we are making Britain the place for companies to start, to invest, to grow and to expand.

    But only with higher productivity, more enterprise and greater innovation can we meet all the challenges ahead.

    My vision is of a Britain where there is not stop go and boom bust but economic stability; a Britain which is business-friendly, and where there is enterprise, opportunity for all; a Britain which rewards the innovator and risk-taker and encourages a new generation of entrepreneurs, a Britain which because opportunity is open to all is enterprising and fair.

    And I believe we can achieve most by working not in isolation from each other but government, business leaders, and local communities working together, setting aside the old conflict, mobilising the great British qualities, our belief in hard work, enterprise creativity and fair play, and being open and outward looking to Europe and the world….the best and surest route to prosperity for all.

  • Andrew Smith – 2000 Speech to the IPPR Seminar

    Andrew Smith – 2000 Speech to the IPPR Seminar

    The speech made by Andrew Smith, the then Chief Secretary to the Treasury, on 5 April 2000.

    Introduction

    John has illustrated how PPPs are the cornerstone of our modernisation programme, and with some key examples shown how PPPs can make real difference to Britain’s public services. I want to demonstrate the scale of the benefits that PPPs are bringing, and how these benefits flow from the reforms we have made since the election. And I want to set out our vision to build on this success, extending and deepening the partnership concept to embrace new areas and different ways of doing business.

    The scale of the PPP programme

    Already public private partnerships are present in every area of the public sector and across the country.

    Since May 1997, at our last estimate we had signed contracts for over 200 projects, leveraging in capital investment of over 12 billion pounds.

    Compare this with less than 4 billion pounds of contracts signed during the whole of the last Parliament.

    Our frontline services have been the main beneficiaries.

    In the NHS, since we reformed PFI, three waves of major projects totalling 35 major hospitals have been agreed – that’s over £3 billion of extra investment. This represents the largest investment in new hospital facilities since the NHS was established.

    In the schools sector, eighteen individual schools projects and twenty three grouped projects, covering 520 schools, are underway.

    But this is just the start. Over the next three years we expect to sign contracts for projects with an estimated capital value of over £20 billion. This will include £8 billion to modernise the tube; more than 60 new education projects, 25 new health projects and 12 other new transport projects.

    Getting better value for money

    Central to our approach is to use PPPs only where they provide better value compared to public sector investment. Partnerships enable the public sector to benefit from commercial dynamism, innovation and project management and planning skills, harnessed through the introduction of private sector investors who contribute their own capital, skills and experience. In short, getting the private sector in to do what they usually do best, using the disciplines, incentives and expertise they have developed in the course of their normal everyday business. This allows Government to concentrate on what we usually do best – enforcing standards and protecting the public interest.

    Better value for money means that, within the resources available, we can deliver more essential services and to a higher standard than would otherwise have been the case. As John says, on average privately-financed projects are delivering savings of 17% compared to public sector alternatives – this represents savings of £2 billion on a £12 billion programme, equivalent to 25 new hospitals or 130 new schools.

    The Government’s reforms

    What makes a PPP programme of this scale possible, delivering the benefits I have described, are the reforms that we have made since the election. These reforms are designed to:

    • deliver significantly improved public services, and
    • to share the benefits of PPPs fairly between all stakeholders – this includes customers, taxpayers and employees at every level of the organisation.

    We started by reforming the Private Finance Initiative.

    To improve the flow of PFI deals, and provide better value for taxpayers we:

    • ended the previous Government’s insistence on universal testing which had caused only frustration and delay;
    • we took the decision to prioritise PFI schemes;
    • and we introduced standardised contracts into PFI deals.
    • we have also ensured that ownership of PFI assets will revert to the public sector at the end of the contract.
    • and unlike the last Government, we use PFI where it offers best value for money – not to move public sector investment off balance sheet.

    To ensure a fair deal for staff, we have provided for better consultation on PPP proposals, announced plans to protect staff pension entitlements, and have ended the requirement for staff providing services such as cleaning, caretaking and catering to have to transfer automatically to the private sector. We do this, because unlike the last Government we recognise that staff are partners in PPPs, and that the future success of the partnership relies on their dedication and commitment.

    And to ensure that PFI projects do bring demonstrable benefits to customers and those who rely on the services provided, we have designed contracts with the focus on outputs and performance. Private sector partners are clearer about what is expected of them and the implications if they fail to deliver.

    What is particularly encouraging is the way that private sector parties have responded to these reforms we have put in place. Construction companies are prepared to take on new risks – becoming investors in infrastructure, as well as merely providers of the asset. And a new industry in facilities management – providing the long term maintenance of assets – has been created to manage more effectively risks which fell to the public sector under conventional procurement. Increasingly, private sector providers are able to supply whole life costing for new assets, giving Government greater assurance that it is securing value for money.

    And the public sector has responded positively too. Privately-financed projects are acting as value benchmarks against which wholly public sector providers can be compared. As a result, the public sector is having to raise its game, both in the way it contracts for, and in the way it organises and manages capital projects.

    The Way Forward

    These changes in just the last few years point to the further potential of PPPs, as both the public and private sectors deepen and widen our experience of partnerships, to improve standards across the board and deliver the quality of public services that Britain deserves.

    On 15 March, I launched a document which for the first time set out the Government’s approach to the full range of partnerships between public and private sectors and which in the last chapter points to new forms of partnership which we need to develop. The same principles and themes underpin them all.

    But to make these partnerships work requires public and private sectors to continue develop new forms of relationships and work together in new and innovative ways.

    It requires Government to identify the opportunities for harnessing private sector disciplines. And private sector to adapt and organise to make its contribution as effectively as possible.

    One example, is the Wider Markets initiative which is helping to release the latent potential of public sector assets. This includes physical assets – land, premises and equipment, and intangibles such as intellectual property.

    Examples of PPPs in this area include the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency – transferring technology developed for the military into the civil sector, such as technology for producing flat loudspeakers and speech recognition.

    Another example is the increasing use of private sector individuals and parties in the development and implementation of policy.

    This can introduce new thinking and relevant experience into resolving policy problems and the modernisation of Government.

    But it requires public sector to be open to new ideas and new ways of working; and the private sector to be prepared to challenge traditional assumptions and also widen its horizons.

    Partnerships UK, which we expect to launch shortly to help Government develop and implement PPPs, could itself be seen as an example of this type of partnership.

    Conclusion

    Our vision is see the partnership concept extended. We have already seen what partnerships can achieve through the private finance initiative, as public and private sectors are finding new ways of working together to deliver better public services – for the benefit of customers, local communities, employees and taxpayers. The challenge John and I are setting today, to both public and private sectors, is to build on this success. To develop new and innovative forms of partnerships, so that together public and private sectors can be partners in the modernisation of Britain.

  • HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Andrew Smith announces leader of Review of Central Government Audit [April 2000]

    HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Andrew Smith announces leader of Review of Central Government Audit [April 2000]

    The press release issued by HM Treasury on 20 April 2000.

    Lord Colin Sharman has been appointed to lead a review into the arrangements for audit and accountability for central government, Chief Secretary to the Treasury Andrew Smith MP, announced today.

    The review will cover the modernising Government agenda, audit/valuation of performance measures, the implications of devolution, the wider European context, with particular reference to European Directives affecting audit arrangements, possible models from other countries, and the relationship with other audit and regulatory bodies.

    Andrew Smith confirmed the appointment in response to a written Parliamentary Question from Barbara Follett MP today. Commenting he said:

    “I am pleased to confirm therefore that Lord Sharman, a former senior partner at KPMG International, has been appointed to lead the review.

    “This is a great opportunity for Parliament and Government to work together to make sure transparency and accountability go hand in hand with the modernising Government agenda.

    “I look forward to seeing the results of the review later this year.”

  • HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Top businessman to spearhead creation of new working age agency [April 2000]

    HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Top businessman to spearhead creation of new working age agency [April 2000]

    The press release issued by HM Treasury on 27 April 2000.

    Work on the design of the new working age agency is to be led by Richard Lapthorne, the chairman of Nycomed Amersham and former vice chairman of British Aerospace, the Government announced today.

    The new agency, which will draw together the Employment Service and the parts of the Benefits Agency which support people of working age, will deliver a single, integrated service to benefit claimants of working age and to employers. It will be established as soon as possible in 2001.

    Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Andrew Smith said:

    “I am delighted that Richard will lead this work. His track record of managing complex organisational change in the private sector will be invaluable in getting the agency off to a good start.”

    Secretary of State for Education and Employment, David Blunkett said:

    “I welcome the appointment of Richard Lapthorne. He will be a key player in the success of the new agency and in ensuring that it has a clear work focus, both helping people to find jobs and in providing a responsive service to employers.”

    Secretary of State for Social Security, Alistair Darling said:

    “We’re building a brand new agency that will be more than the sum parts of the benefits Agency and the Employment Service. It will draw on the best experience of both the public and private sectors to provide a far more focussed service to its customers.”

    Richard Lapthorne will head the project team which will design and develop the agency. Based in the Treasury, the team will include civil servants from the Department of Social Security and the Department for Education and Employment.

    Its work will be overseen by a project board which will include Andrew Smith, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, David Blunkett, Secretary of State for Education and Employment and Alistair Darling, Secretary of State for Social Security.

    The Chief Executive of the new agency will be recruited by open competition later in this year.

  • HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Appointment of Christopher Allsopp to Monetary Policy Committee [May 2000]

    HISTORIC PRESS RELEASE : Appointment of Christopher Allsopp to Monetary Policy Committee [May 2000]

    The press release issued by HM Treasury on 4 May 2000.

    Christopher Allsopp has been appointed to the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC), the Chancellor Gordon Brown announced today. He will take up his membership of the MPC on 1 June. Mr Allsopp will replace Professor Charles Goodhart whose three-year term as a member of the MPC expires on 31 May.

    Mr Allsopp is currently a Reader in Economic Policy and Fellow in Economics at New College, Oxford. A specialist in international macroeconomics, Mr Allsopp’s previous experience includes work at the OECD in Paris and 3 years as Adviser at the Bank of England as well as consultancy appointments with overseas Governments and many other UK and international organisations.

    Mr Allsopp is currently a member of the Bank’s Court of Directors. As required by the Bank of England Act 1998, he will resign his membership of the Court before taking up his position on the MPC.

    Gordon Brown said:

    “I am delighted that Christopher Allsopp has agreed to join the Monetary Policy Committee. His long and distinguished academic career will enable him to make an invaluable contribution to the work of the MPC.

    “I am very grateful to Charles Goodhart for his outstanding contribution to the Committee’s work over the last three years, and wish him well.”

    CURRICULUM VITAE

    Christopher John Allsopp MA, B.Phil. (Econ)

    Personal Details

    Date of Birth: 6 April 1941.  Married with 3 children.

    Address:   New College, Oxford, OX1 3BN.

    Education

    Exhibitioner, Balliol College, Oxford University, 1960-65.

    Student of Nuffield College, Oxford, 1965-66.

    BA/MA Natural Science (Physics), Oxford, 1963.

    B.Phil. (Economics), Oxford 1966.

    Present Positions

    Fellow in Economics, New College, Oxford, 1967 –

    Lecturer 1967 – , then Reader in Economic Policy, Oxford University.

    Member of the Court of Directors, Bank of England, 1997 –

    Director, Oxford Economic Forecasting

    Editor, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 1985 –

    Main Previous Appointments/Activities

    Full-time

    HM Treasury, Economic Assistant, 1966-67.

    Head of Economic Prospects Division, OECD, Economics and Statistics Department, Paris, 1973-1974 and Editor, OECD Economic Outlook (on leave from New College and Oxford University).

    Adviser, Bank of England 1980-83.  (On leave from New College and Oxford University).

    Part-time and Consultancy

    Consultant, HM Treasury, 1967-70.

    Consultant to the OECD, working on problems of price stability and employment in the medium term, 1975-77.  (Including background studies and drafting input for, McCracken et al.

    ?Towards Full Employment and Price Stability?.  OECD 1976 (The ?McCracken Report).

    Chairman, St James? Group (Economist/EIU Economic Forecasting Group), 1977-81.

    Founder member of group set up to launch the Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 1983 founding Editor. 1985 to present.

    Consultant, World Bank and commission for the Restructuring of the Economic Systems, Beijing, China, January 1988.  (With Sir Alec Cairncross).

    Independent Consultant for the Swedish International Development Agency and the Government of the Republic of Zambia, 1988-89.  (Working on Exchange Rate Policy and Stabilisation in Zambia).

    Consultant, OECD, Manpower and Social Affairs Department, Paris, 1989-90.

    Economic Adviser to the Minister of Planning, Government of Poland, 1990-91.  (Coordinator of project financed by the Joint Assistance Committee for Easter Europe of the UK Overseas Development Administration (the ?Know-how Fund?))

    Ford Foundation: Member of research project on Financial Reform in China, 1991.

    Delegate, International Symposium: Financial Reform in China, Hainan Island, China, Dec 1991.

    (Conference sponsored by CRES/World Bank/UNDP).

    Delegate, International Symposium on China’s Financial Reform and the banking System, Dalian, China, 1993 June.

    Adviser on International Prospects and Strategy: HD International, 1988-94; Mercury Asset Management, 1995-96: Norwich Union Investment Management, 1996 – present.

    |Publications

    The following is a selective list of Mr Allsopp’s important recent work.

    ?Monetary and Fiscal Policy in the 1980s?, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol 1, No.1, 1985.

    ?The International Debt Crisis (with V R Joshi), Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol 2, No.1, 1986.

    ?Exchange Rate Economics? (with A Crystal), Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol 5, No.3, 1989.

    ?UK Fiscal Policy: Responsible or Irresponsible??, John Deutsch Institute of Public Policy, Kingston, Ontario, 1990.

    ?The Balance of Payments and International Economic Integration (with T Jenkinson and T O?Shaughnessy), Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol 6 No.3, 1990.

    ?Monetary Policy and Monetary Reform in China?, International Conference on Macroeconomic Management, Dalian, China; published, World Bank, 1994.

    ?Macroeconomic Reform and Control in China?, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 1995.

    ?Fiscal Policy and EMU? (with D Vines), National Institute Economic Review, 1996, 4.

    ?Monetary and Fiscal Stabilisation of Demand Shocks within Europe? (with G Davies, W McKibbon, D Vines).  In, C Deissenberg, R F Owen, D Ulph, (eds), European Economic Integration, Blackwells, special supplement to the Review of International Economics, 5(4), 55-56, 1997.

    ?Economics of Transition in East and Central Europe?.  (With H Kierskovsky).  Oxford Review of Economic Policy Vol 13.2, 1997.

    ?European Unemployment and EMU? Employment Policy Institute, 1997, Nov.

    ?Macroeconomic Policy after EMU? (with D Vines).  Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol 14, No.3, Autumn 1998 pp 1-23.

    ?Real Interest Rates?.  (With A Glyn) Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol 15, No.2.  Summer 1999 pp 1-16.

  • Gordon Brown – 2000 Speech at the James Meade Memorial Lecture

    Gordon Brown – 2000 Speech at the James Meade Memorial Lecture

    The speech made by Gordon Brown, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, at the London School of Economics on 8 May 2000.

    Tonight I want to set out our economic and social goals for our country, to detail the long-term strategy we are pursuing to implement them and – as we complete our third year in Government – to review the progress we are making and the next steps – in the coming spending review and beyond – that we intend to take.

    To achieve our objectives in a new economy that simultaneously offers greater opportunity and yet threatens greater insecurity, we require a fresh understanding of the rights and responsibilities of the citizen and the reach and role of Government.

    For only with a credible and radical view of citizenship as responsible citizenship, and a new view of the state as the enabling state can we fulfill our historic mission as a Government: building a Britain where there is security and opportunity, not just for the privileged few but for all.

    Such objectives were, in my view, at the centre of James Meade’s work which we honour with this lecture this evening . His life’s work was to show that in a modern economy efficiency and equality, far from being incompatible, were necessary allies. To achieve these, he sought a modern and fair relationship between individuals, markets and Government. Like us, he wanted to achieve high growth without inflation; he led the way in seeing full employment as efficient and fair; and he saw the best – not just the most basic – public services especially in health and education as the key to security and equal opportunity for all .

    The precondition – of high employment, higher living standards and strong public services – is economic stability. And it is by building on a platform of stability and by meeting our national economic goals that we can realise security and equal opportunity not just for those born to privilege but for all:

    our prosperity goal – in place of our historic under-performance against other countries, a faster rise in productivity than our competitors, as we close the productivity gap;

    our full employment goal – in contrast to years of high unemployment, that we have employment opportunity for all, a higher percentage of people in work than ever before;

    our education goal – instead of lagging behind other countries and suffering huge disparities in our educational attainments, we ensure educational opportunity for all. Aiming for 50 per cent of people going into higher education for the first time in our history, and as close as possible to 100 per cent of young people with computer skills;

    our anti-poverty goal – in contrast to the rise in inequality and poverty seen over recent decades, that we ensure every child has the best start in life as we halve child poverty in ten years and end it within twenty;

    and in addition, the public services goal. Instead of our inheritance, inadequate public services which failed to guarantee opportunity or security for all, we invest for the future in strong public services there when people need them.

    Not only the scale of our ambitions for the coming decade but Britain’s legacy of economic under-performance, social division and rising inequality required us in 1997 to reject the short-term, quick fix in favour of a consistent, long-term strategy. So we have never pretended that Britain’s problems could be solved overnight, or that they could be resolved without the need for tough decisions.

    Indeed, we will not waiver and must remain single-minded in focussing on our long-term challenges: whether it is reforming labour, capital and product markets to bridge the productivity gap or modernising delivery of public services to achieve our health, education, and anti-poverty gaols

    The last few decades teach us to reject the short-termism of flawed quick fixes – policy lurches in face of short-term difficulties – rather than taking the tough decisions to achieve our long-term economic and social aims. It is not by populist quick fixes or gesture politics but by maintaining stability and seeing through long-term modernisation and principled reforms that we will achieve our goals for full employment, prosperity and social justice.

    And we recognise most of all – and this is my theme tonight – that our goals cannot be achieved by the old methods of old left or old right.

    Indeed, fundamentally, they require a new, modern understanding of the duties of citizenship and the role and limits of Government.

    We reject the old left command and control view of Government which mistakenly equated public ownership and a public bureaucracy with the public interest, argued that full employment could be achieved simply by old-style demand management, and suggests that the only answer to poverty is compensating the poor for their situation rather than tackling the underlying causes.

    This old and misguided view of the state – irrelevant for a global economy – was accompanied by a failure to place sufficient emphasis on personal responsibility. I believe instead that our determination to combat social and economic injustice should be matched, not by insisting on rights without responsibilities, but by asserting the responsibility of the individual.

    So an out-of-date view of the relationship between individual and state led in the 80’s to the right-wing attack on collective provision: their exclusive reliance on markets , their rejection as evil of any kind of state intervention, and the crude dogma of a self-interested individualism which denied there was such a thing as a society.

    For the right, the best Government is the least Government. Yet abandoning established responsibilities of Government – saying that there is nothing Government can do – did not improve our productivity performance, but instead led to more people out of work and a cycle of poor skills, worklessness and deprivation.

    That has been the legacy of absentee Government and it was to, step by step, tackle these problems of economic inefficiency and social injustice that a new Government was needed and given a mandate in 1997.

    That was – and remains – our task, a strong economy and a fairer society, but to do so we require a better understanding of the duties of citizenship and the role and limits of Government.

    I believe that as advocates of economic and social renewal, we should reclaim both the ethic of personal responsibility as we stress obligations as well as opportunities, and affirm the ethic of fairness, as we root out economic injustice.

    Take our goal of full employment. We know it cannot be achieved by the old right ways – of leaving it wholly to market forces – nor by the old left methods – simply by pulling the macroeconomic levers without tackling underlying structural weaknesses, not least the need for rights and responsibilities in the labour market

    And just as we support, in the New Deal, new opportunities for employment but new obligations to seize them, so too elsewhere we support responsibilities accompanying rights:

    new opportunities for already an extra 100,000 higher education students, but in our new system of student finance new obligations to contribute when earnings are higher;
    new help for mothers – a £300 pound maternity grant in the year their babies are born, but a new responsibility that health checks for the baby are met;
    new help for teenagers – with educational maintenance allowances available in return for staying on at school and seeking higher qualifications;
    new help for adult learning, a break from the old system of levies or simply doing nothing, with an Individual Learning Account for initially I million adults to which Government contributes but the individual contributes too.
    And with the growth of personal responsibility, we seek the growth of corporate responsibility too:

    new opportunities in the financial service industries but in return a new requirement from financial services companies for openness and transparency;
    for the environment, new incentives for heavy energy users matched by a responsibility, in the climate change levy, to deliver environmental improvements;
    and in the global economy, a new responsibility on Governments to be transparent, to be accountable and to agree a dialogue and partnership with the private sector – and in return greater responsibilities on the private sector to contribute to crisis prevention and crisis resolution.

    So whether it be individual or corporate responsibility, our call is for a responsible citizenship.

    And we understand what the right fails to acknowledge, that there is a public interest in growth, employment, fairness and the best public services, but understand too that this public interest can best be advanced not by allowing the public sector to become a vested interest, but often by the public sector ceasing to be controller or owner and becoming partner, catalyst, sponsor, coordinator. Action that empowers rather than directs.

    So our call is not for big Government but better Government, what we might call an enabling state.

    And underlying all this is our understanding of the changed world in which we live – a period of great technological advance and opportunity, but also a period of unprecedented restructuring and insecurity – and the reform this necessitates in the relationships between individuals, markets, and Government.

    More than ever, we need to help equip people to cope with the insecurities that ever faster change brings.

    More than ever, we need to remove the old barriers and let everyone move ahead.

    In the new economy where capital and companies are mobile, we must ensure that we offer the right environment and help for business to succeed in every part of Britain, and ensure that we have the right competitive environment, the key to competitiveness abroad.

    So in the new economy, the role for Government is neither to obstruct change nor to passively abdicate responsibility for managing the consequences of change that affect working people, but instead equip people and companies to meet and master change.

    So it is on this basis – an enabling Government encouraging responsible citizenship in pursuit of opportunity and security for all – that we will continue to take the tough long term decisions on the side of Britain’s hard-working majority – in the spending review, in drawing up the next election manifesto and beyond.

    First, stability

    The first objective national Governments must have, in a global marketplace, is to maximise economic stability. We have learnt that monetary and fiscal stability is a necessary pre-condition for national economic success. For in a global economy, funds will flow to those countries whose policies inspire confidence. And investors punish mistakes more quickly and more severely than in the past.

    Both the old Keynesian fine-tuning, and the rigid application of fixed monetary targets, were policies designed for sheltered national economies and based on apparently stable and predictable relationships which have now broken down in our modern, liberalised and global capital markets.

    So our policy has been to set for a global economy a new long-term framework for monetary and fiscal policy that can command new confidence. Its essence is that long-term, open and transparent decision-making procedures which command credibility provide a better route to stability than fixed monetary or exchange rate rules.

    That is why, when we came into power in Britain in May 1997, we put in place a radically different monetary framework based on imposing consistent rules – the symmetrical inflation target; settled and well understood procedures – with Bank of England independence; and openness and transparency.

    Side by side with this and as important, a radically improved fiscal discipline with, again, clear and consistent rules – the golden rule for public spending; well understood procedures – our fiscal responsibility legislation; and here, too, a new openness and transparency.

    Already we are seeing the rewards of creating Bank of England independence and new fiscal rules.

    And it is because we sought to learn from the political mistakes of the last forty years that this Government will maintain its prudent and tough approach. So we must all be determined not to make the old British mistake of paying ourselves too much today at the cost of higher interest rates and fewer jobs tomorrow.

    I understand the great difficulties that the current fall in the euro is causing for British industry, particularly in manufacturing.

    Such a euro-sterling exchange rate cannot be justified by any view of long-term economic fundamentals. But manufacturers who have suffered from the old boom and bust – and the short-term policy lurches which all too often went wrong – would also reject a return to the short- term quick fix which would put at risk the long-term stability which is the foundation for steady growth, investment and job creation.

    Raising our productivity

    Stability is a necessary pre-condition to deliver our objectives for growth and employment, but it is not sufficient. An economy cannot fly on only one wing. Supply side or microeconomic reform is also essential to raising our productivity.

    Some people argue that Governments working with business cannot improve the productivity levels of the economy. I reject this pessimistic view. Of course it is businesses that create wealth, and managers and workforces that create jobs and higher output, but Governments must ensure that the environment within which wealth is created is one that favours competition, not monopoly or vested interests, and that the economy has properly functioning labour, capital and product markets.

    And fifty years of economic history from 1945 – marred by a succession of sterile and self-defeating conflicts between state and market, managements and workforces, public and private sectors – taught us the need for national economic purpose , for an end to short-termism and the need for all – industry, the financial community, and Government – to take a long term view:

    industry, by investing for the long term;
    the financial community, by refusing to resort to the short-termism and stop-go attitudes which have bedevilled us since the war;
    and Government, by not only ensuring lasting stability but taking seriously its responsibilities to remove the barriers to productivity and growth.

    So while 30 years ago, Governments responded to the productivity challenge with top-down plans, and tax incentives and grants primarily for physical investment, today it is a more complex role for Government – the encouragement of competition, the modernisation of capital and labour markets, and the encouragement of innovation and an enterprise culture open to all, so that British industry-manufacturing and services can close our productivity gap and deliver higher profits, investment employment and growth

    First, we are removing the tax barriers to enterprise and creating in Britain the best tax environment for business investment – we have cut small companies? tax from 23p to 20p, introduced a new 10p rate of corporation tax for small companies, and radical reforms to capital gains tax. While for a decade capital gains have been taxed at 40 per cent or above, they will now be taxed at 10 per cent for investments of four years or more .

    Second, new incentives to encourage and reward the inventor and the innovator – we are investing an extra £1.4 billion in basic scientific research, and have put in place a new R&D tax credit; our University Challenge Fund is providing finance to commercialise inventions; and to transfer technology from the science lab to the marketplace, we have new Institutes of Enterprise.

    And these measures are of special importance to manufacturing, which will secure the biggest benefit from permanent capital allowances, the new R&D tax credit, the 100 per cent allowance for introducing new technology; and the regional funds and the doubling of modern apprenticeships.

    Third, because we recognise the sharpest spur to innovation, efficiency and improvement is competition, we are removing the barriers to competition. We have rewritten this country’s out-dated framework of competition law. We have given the Office of Fair Trading new powers and new money to police anti-competitive practices which damage businesses and consumers alike. And now we will be consulting on the next stage, withdrawing ministers from the decision process on merger cases.

    Our productivity push will be stepped up in the coming year. We will build on the measures we have already introduced with further reforms and incentives for the modernisation of our capital markets, product markets and labour markets. These will be set out in detail in this November’s Pre-Budget Report.

    We are examining how we can further promote the best competitive environment for industry and consumers alike.

    For the professions, the Office of Fair Trading is now working through a detailed remit to examine how best to ensure that the rules of professional bodies do not unnecessarily restrict or distort competition.

    For banking, having accepted the main Cruickshank recommendations, we will legislate to ensure the UK payments system is open to new competition.

    In our capital markets, we must ensure there are no barriers to competition and innovation, that there are no unnecessary constraints restricting investment decisions, and that investors have every opportunity and encouragement to back dynamic small and growing companies in manufacturing and services in all our regions.

    Not city and industry working against each other, nor the old battles between private and public sector but city industry and Government together playing their part in promoting industrial growth.

    That is why, following the Cruickshank Report, I have asked Mr Paul Myners to head a review of institutional investment to cover all these issues. Institutional investors have a vital role to play, controlling around 45 per cent of quoted equity investments and Mr Myners will report back to me in time for action in the next budget.

    In this way we are removing the old barriers of under-investment and neglect that for too long have held our regions back. Working with the new Regional Development Agencies and the Small Business Service, our aim is balanced economic development across all the regions and nations of the United Kingdom – a modern regional policy supporting local innovation, more investment and improved infrastructure.

    Having launched a network of regional venture capital investment funds – with a target of one billion pounds – John Prescott and I will, in the Comprehensive Spending Review, announce further measures to strengthen the work of the Regional Development Agencies.

    I want Britain to be a world leader in enterprise – and by moving from a Britain where enterprise was confined to a closed circle of the few to a Britain where enterprise is open to all, I want, as this week we launch the National Enterprise Campaign, the opportunities and benefits of enterprise to be shared by all regions and all people. I believe Government, business leaders, and local communities can now work together to achieve this aim.

    Employment

    When the Government came to power in 1997, we put the restoration of the work ethic at the centre of our social and economic policy, our aim, for the next decade, employment opportunity for all with a higher proportion of people in employment than ever before.

    To help achieve this, we are building a new and modernised welfare state, one that in addition to its traditional and necessary function of giving security to those who cannot work, promotes work, makes work pay and gives people the skills they need to get better jobs.

    In the last 20 years, unemployment has been the primary cause of poverty in Britain today.

    Simply compensating people for their poverty through benefits is not enough, the task must be to deal with the causes of poverty. And the best form of welfare is work. So we have put in place a long-term strategy to help those sections of the population excluded for too long:

    the young unemployed;
    the long term unemployed;
    lone parents;
    and the disabled who can work.

    Already over 400,000 young people have joined the New Deal and almost 200,000 have found jobs – the vast majority sustained jobs. A further 120,000 have gained valuable experience on New Deal options. And over 70,000 employers have signed up to the New Deal. Since the election, long-term youth unemployment has halved.

    And because we have succeeded in this Parliament in removing the old barriers to employing the young, from April next year we will extend the opportunities and the obligations of the New Deal to the long-term adult unemployed – with four options of work, work-based training, work experience including in the voluntary sector, and self-employment. But no fifth option, no staying at home on benefit doing nothing.

    The relationship we are forging between rights and responsibilities is firmly rooted in both economic opportunity and individual responsibility.

    Instead of being left to draw benefit at a Social Security office, the unemployed who are able to work will sign up to seek work, with the long -term unemployed offered the help of a personal employment adviser.

    In Britain, unlike any other comparable countries, unemployment among lone parents is over 50 per cent. Starting nationally from next April, lone parents with children over five will attend work-focused interviews to find out about the new choices on offer: the choice to train for work with a new cash payment of £15 a week on top of benefits for training; the choice of a few hours work a week, with the first £20 of earnings allowed with no reduction in benefit; the choice of part-time work with a guaranteed £155 for 16 hours of work, or the choice of full-time work on a guaranteed £214 a week; and on every rung of this ladder of opportunity there will be help with child care.

    Our aim is to create a ladder of opportunity with Government on the side of working people as they seek and find jobs, and in many cases consider self employment and starting a business. And to sustain our goal of full employment, Government needs to ensure work pays.

    When this Government came to power, with no minimum wage in place and the tax and benefits system unreformed, many of those without work faced an unemployment trap, where work paid less than benefits, and the low-paid in work faced a poverty trap which meant that they faced marginal tax and benefit rates of 80, 90 or even over 100 per cent.

    To tackle this, we needed to combine a sensible and prudent minimum wage with a generous and fair system of in-work support.

    And all the measures we have introduced – the 10p tax rate, the 22p basic rate, reform of National Insurance, the children’s tax credit and the most important innovation, the Working Families Tax Credit, are the building blocks of this strategy.

    Already, over 1 million people are receiving the Working Families Tax Credit which means that every working family with someone working full-time is guaranteed a minimum income of over 200 pounds a week today, and £214 a week from April next year.

    And as a result of all these measures, the family on half average earnings will be £2,600 a year better off in real terms in 2001 compared to 1997 – a rise in living standards of 20 per cent this year alone – the biggest improvement in living standards for a generation.

    So while the old tax system simply set a personal allowance that failed to ensure that work paid, and also made thousands pay tax even as they claimed benefits, we are putting in place a new more progressive system that encourages and rewards work.

    Instead of a tax system that has rates from 40 per cent to 0 per cent, we now have a tax and benefits system with rates from 40 per cent to 10 per cent and then to as low as -200 per cent at earnings of around £60 a week – for every £ people earn, up to £2 paid in WFTC.

    Our next step is to extend the principle of the WFTC. Of course, barriers to work across the workforce are different for different groups- for families with children, those without children, older workers and single people.

    From 2003, we will introduce an employment tax credit, paid through the wage packet, available to households without children as well as households with children.

    As a first step, we began this April with an employment credit with a minimum income guarantee for over 50’s returning to work.

    Full employment is not just about the right to work, but, where there are jobs, the responsibility and the requirement to work. So, as we extend opportunities to those who are out of work, we will extend the responsibility to take up the work on offer. The informal or hidden economy is now draining billions of pounds in fraudulent benefit claims and unpaid taxes.

    This loss of revenues, this incidence of fraud, this waste of resources, cannot be allowed to continue and especially when there are jobs that benefit claimants could take. That is why we are implementing the report of Lord Grabiner QC. I can confirm we will legislate to tackle benefit fraud and we will take powers in the Finance Bill for a new statutory offence of fraudulent tax evasion. This will enable the Inland Revenue to prosecute in the Magistrates? Court those who evade their responsibilities.

    Education

    New opportunities matched by responsibilities are also at the heart of our education policy too. By the end of the coming decade, our goal is not the old 10 per cent of the Sixties, or 20 per cent of the Eighties, but more than 50 per cent of young people entering higher education.

    In addition to the investment in higher standards in schools colleges and universities, let me emphasise that we make equal opportunity count by the creation for lifelong learning of Individual Learning Accounts and the University for Industry and the extension of educational maintenance allowances of up to 40 pounds a week in our highest unemployment communities. Higher rates of staying on in education are our aim and in return for young people pursuing higher qualifications, we provide new cash support. Once again the enabling state. In schools, encouraging and rewarding effort.

    Child poverty

    Our goal is that every child has the best possible start in life – ending child poverty in twenty years and halving it in ten years.

    And it is because the scale of the injustice over the last 20 years was so great that we have already taken action to lift 1.2 million children out of poverty and are investing in a new Sure Start programme to give the youngest children in the poorest areas a far better start in life.

    In the Child Poverty Action Group lecture next week, I will set out new measures to fight the war against child poverty, showing how we plan to tackle social injustice and extend opportunity in new ways.

    First, we recognise the war against child poverty cannot be won by Government and parents alone. It depends on engaging the voluntary community and charitable sector and in both our Sure Start programmes and the Children’s Fund we will devolve power from the national and local Government to community-based organisations

    And second, we match new opportunities with new responsibilities – new help for mothers when their babies are born, but a new responsibility that vital health checks for children are undertaken.

    Pensioners

    Just as we have a long-term strategy to tackle child poverty and have made a start, so too pensioner poverty. As a result of the measures introduced since 1997, we will be spending £6.5 billion more over the Parliament supporting pensioners. We are spending more than we would have spent if we had simply restored the earnings link. And we are spending it in a fairer way – helping the poorest most.

    As I said in the Budget, based on forecast rates of inflation, we expect the basic state pension rise in April 2001 to be over 2 pounds for single pensioners and over 3 pounds for couples.

    All pensioners benefit from the new winter fuel allowance – raised to £150 for the coming winter – and measures like free TV licenses for the over 75’s and the new minimum income guarantee have helped the poorest pensioners the most.

    So our first priority was to tackle pensioner poverty. And, taking these measures together, I million pensioners will be up to £20 a week better off since 1997.

    The next stage is to ensure that pensioners are not penalised for their thrift, and therefore to do more for pensioners with modest occupational pensions and small savings.

    And later in the year, Alistair Darling will be consulting on a measure for the next Parliament – the new pensioners credit. This will do more for those with modest occupational pensions and savings who should not be penalised for having worked hard all their lives and saved for their retirement.

    Spending review

    In all these initiatives to meet our productivity, employment, education and anti-poverty goals, our approach is driven by a desire to match opportunity and security and it is underpinned by reform

    This approach is at the heart of this year’s spending review as we build public services that make people more secure, something that is even more important in today’s world of rapid economic uncertainty and change.

    In the last spending review, we recognised that to achieve these objectives both the role of Government and the management of spending and investment has to change, as we broke from the annual cycle that was short-termist and wasteful. In this review we extend these reforms, further matching new investment with further modernisation.

    With our focus on results, we are breaking down the old incrementalism that concentrated on inputs and not results.

    With our commitment to cross cutting reviews and decisions to target public spending on our priority policy areas, we are breaking down the crude departmentalism that led to duplication and waste.

    With the doubling of public investment, we are breaking from the old focus on consumption alone, as instead we seek to equip Britain for the future.

    And with our public private partnerships extended, we are ending the old public private split.

    This prudent approach is for a purpose to ensure that department by department, we implement our commitment to extending opportunity for all, investing in our future and creating a fairer Britain.

    Already we have shown our commitment to the NHS with the largest ever sustained increase in NHS funding and the intensive review of the NHS which the Prime Minister is leading .

    I am convinced that with tough decisions, we can also meet our priorities not just in health but in our other key priorities including additional money for education, criminal justice, transport and tackling social exclusion, in return for reform.

    Conclusion

    So we are determined to stay the course of reform and modernisation to achieve these ends.

    The way forward is through an enabling Government which encourages responsible citizenship and aims for security and equal opportunities for all – the key to lasting change in our country and a stronger fairer Britain.