Author: admin

Below is the text of the speech given by the Prime Minister, David Cameron, at the Lord Mayor’s Banquet Speech in London on 11th November 2013.

My Lord Mayor, My Late Lord Mayor, Your Grace, My Lord Chancellor, Your Excellencies, My Lords, Aldermen, Sheriffs, Chief Commoner, ladies and gentlemen.

Let me start by thanking Lord Mayor Number 685 for a year of great service – to this City and to our country.

And let me congratulate Lord Mayor Number 686 – not only on her appointment but also on the fantastic vision she has just set out.

A vision of diversity and inclusivity that is every bit as vital for our country as it is for the City of London.

In previous years I have set out the principles of a British foreign policy that is outward looking and firmly in our national interest.

In the last year we have stayed true to those principles.

We hosted a G8 which launched negotiations on the biggest bilateral trade deal in history: a deal between the EU and the US that could be worth £10 billion to Britain alone.

We agreed a Lough Erne declaration that should ensure companies pay their taxes, governments are transparent about their income and the world endorses free trade.

We have continued to promote British business abroad – with more foreign direct investment in Britain this year than anywhere else on the planet.

We negotiated a real terms cut in the EU Budget.

And I set out plans for a more competitive and flexible European Union and promised the British people a referendum on the new settlement we reach.

We honoured our promises to the poorest in the world – vaccinating a child against diseases that can kill every 2 seconds.

We continue to help around the world – as we are today in the Philippines where Typhoon Haiyan has wrought such appalling devastation.

Britain is contributing £10 million and HMS Daring, currently deployed near Singapore, will shortly be heading at full speed towards the disaster zone with further support from an RAF C17 which will be a powerful help to the relief operation.

And yes, when it came to the brutal crimes of the Assad regime against its people we stood up for the right values in Syria.

And let’s not pretend that Syria would now be giving up its chemical weapons if we and our allies had looked the other way.

Britain is a country that has always been prepared to stand up for its values.

And today – on Armistice Day – let us join together in paying tribute to all those brave men and women across the generations who have given their lives for our safety and freedom.

For years, Prime Ministers have been coming to this Banquet to talk about the big global challenges facing Britain and the West.

Traditionally these have been about our security and our values.

Today the biggest challenge we face is economic.

It’s about how we ensure a strong, sustained and successful recovery that delivers for everyone in Britain.

And let’s remember that a strong and successful economy is the foundation of our influence when it comes to the foreign and security policy issues we traditionally talk about here.

So it’s this economic challenge I want to talk about tonight.

Of course, Britain has recovered from recessions and financial crashes before.

But this time there is a difference.

In the past, there was an assumption that the West would still emerge as the strongest in the world.

Whether it was the 1930s, or the 1970s, it was clear we were still the ones with the biggest industrial base; still the ones with the ideas, with the scale of market, with the climate for enterprise, the money and the skills to trump them all.

But as the number of university places surges in India, as China creates more patents that any other country in the world and as Brazil becomes the world’s first sustainable biofuels economy, people ask the question, will they be the winners and we be the losers?

I believe we need to say a very firm “no”.

The global economy is not a zero sum game.

If we make the wrong decisions they may well succeed at our expense but there is a clear way forward for us to carve out a place for Britain to be a real success, alongside these new economic powers.

But we should be under no illusion: that success is far from guaranteed.

So how do we succeed?

Well let’s start with what we don’t do.

There are some wrong-headed approaches that we absolutely need to reject.

There’s the view that you can characterise as “stop the world and get off” ignore the interconnectedness of the world economy and pull up the drawbridge.

That’s clearly not the answer.

Then there’s the pretence that the answer is spending and borrowing more on an ever bigger state in an attempt to somehow insulate ourselves from the global competition.

And at the other extreme, there’s embracing globalisation so enthusiastically and unquestioningly that we actually lose sight of our true national interest.

We saw a fair amount of both of those approaches in the previous decade – and we saw what we got in return.

The biggest budget deficit in our peacetime history and mass uncontrolled immigration that put huge pressure on public services and changed communities in a way people didn’t feel comfortable with.

So these wrong-headed ideas, ignoring the international globalised economy, attempting to insulate ourselves against it, or indeed slavishly following it – none of these are the right answer.

So what is?

Engage in some sort of race to the bottom?

Absolutely not.

That completely misunderstands the dynamics of the global economy.

It’s not simply a competition for who can produce the same goods at cheaper prices, it’s about who can produce the new services, the new processes and innovations that can create and sustain the jobs of the future.

And that’s why it’s increasingly high-skilled jobs that are so vital to our success in the global race.

So the right prescription is not to try and imitate developing economies, but to make this country more like Great Britain.

Put simply – to play to our strengths. Take our advantages, invest and add to them.

We have the global language of business.

The time zone where you can trade with Asia in the morning and America in the afternoon.

The City of London, the global home of finance.

Our top universities are amongst the best on the planet.

And inventiveness, innovation and credibility will be key to our success.

We are the country that invented everything from the light bulb to the jet engine, from the tin can to the tank.

You name it, we’ve created it.

And the truth is we’re still at it.

Whether it’s sequencing the genome, isolating grapheme or designing the chips that power not just 9 out of 10 of the smartphones in this room – but all over the world.

We have the scientists and technical expertise that is the envy of the world.

This is Britain. Competitive, pioneering, creative, innovative.

Our success in the global race hinges on playing to these strengths – on taking the country that led the agricultural revolution, the industrial revolution and the market-based revolution of the 80s and equipping it to lead the economic revolution of today.

And as we do so, we should never forget this.

Our institutions, particularly our democracy, property rights, access to markets, the rule of law and equality for all before the law. These things are not incidental to our economic strength – they are absolutely key to it.

They form the golden thread of conditions which allow countries to thrive over the long term.

But to play to our strengths and make a success of our country in the global race, we do have to do some things differently.

We can’t simply try and rebuild the same type of economy that we had before the crash.

We can’t just go back to how things used to be.

We need to build something better.

A vision of a new kind of economy where the benefits of growth are shared by all, north and south alike.

An economy for everyone where the right skills, the right jobs and the right rewards are all there available for people with the right attitude and where all our children and grandchildren can look forward to a better future.

What does all that mean in practice?

I believe it means we need 4 things.

First, an economy with a state we can afford.

Second, an economy where everyone can take part.

Third, an economy that is equipped for the future.

And fourth an economy based on enterprise at home and abroad.

Let me just say a word about each.

First, an economy with a state we can afford.

There are some people who seem to think that the way you reduce the cost of living in this country is for the state to spend more and more taxpayers’ money.

It’s as if somehow you measure the compassion of the government by the amount of other people’s money it can spend.

At a time when family budgets are tight, it is really worth remembering that this spending comes out of the pockets of the same taxpayers whose living standards we want to see improve.

I hope the Archbishop of Canterbury will forgive me for saying – it’s not robbing Peter to pay Paul – but rather robbing Peter to pay Peter.

Let’s be clear.

The single biggest threat to the cost of living in this country is if our budget deficit and debts get out of control again.

If interest rates and mortgage rates start to soar, the increase in cost of living will far outweigh the impact of any increase in government spending or indeed reduction in taxation.

This government is not prepared to let that happen.

We have a plan – and we are carefully implementing that plan.

Already we have cut the deficit by a third. And we are sticking to the task.

But that doesn’t just mean making difficult decisions on public spending.

It also means something more profound.

It means building a leaner, more efficient state.

We need to do more with less.

Not just now, but permanently.

It can be done. Consider these facts.

There are 40 per cent fewer people working in the Department for Education – but over 3,000 more free schools and academies, with more children doing tougher subjects than ever before.

There are 23,000 fewer administrative roles in the NHS – but 5,000 more doctors, with shorter waiting times.

So you can have a leaner, more efficient, more affordable state that actually delivers better results for the taxpayer.

The second thing we need is an economy where everyone can take part.

That’s not what we have today.

Consider this.

64 per cent of children on free school meals don’t get 5 good GCSEs with English and Maths.

Around a quarter of all children leave primary school unable to read and write.

And 4,000 children leave secondary school every year with no GCSEs at all.

That’s why we’re radically changing the education system, overhauling the curriculum, introducing more rigorous apprenticeships, and giving every child the chance to excel.

Not letting people make the most of their talents is not just a tragedy for the individual – it is a tragedy for our country too.

In the same context, inequality is not just wrong – it fundamentally disadvantages our economy.

At the moment, the UK has the lowest ratio in Europe for women in STEM subjects and in engineering, less than 1 in 6 graduates are women.

That’s simply not good enough.

So we’re aiming to double that proportion by 2030.

We simply can’t afford, in the tough competitive world of the 21st century, for our manufacturing industries to miss out on the brightest minds among half of the population.

But an economy for everyone means more than great education.

It also means reforming the welfare system.

Put simply, no country can succeed in the long term if capable people are paid to stay idle and out of work.

We went into the last recession with 4 million people of working age on out of work benefits.

We know the most progressive way to tackle poverty is through work.

And yet for generations, people who could work have been failed by the system and stuck on benefits.

So we’re putting an end to the poverty and wealth traps that have plagued our welfare system for too long.

We’re capping welfare, so that no family is better off on benefits than in work.

And through universal credit, we’re ensuring that for every extra hour you work and every extra job you do – you should always be better off.

I’m also very focused on supporting the voluntary sector to work alongside the state in fighting poverty and building this economy where everyone can take part.

For example, one of the best answers to payday lending is the credit union movement.

As a government we have invested £38 million to double the membership of credit unions, a shining example of the Big Society in action.

Third, we need an economy equipped for the future.

We can’t have an economy for all if people in the parts of the North or in some rural communities are left without the transport links or the superfast broadband they need to take part.

So we are investing in infrastructure that serves the whole country.

£680 million to ensure we have the best superfast broadband in Europe by 2015.

The biggest investment in road since the 1970s.

The biggest rail investment since Victorian times.

With Cross-rail, the biggest construction project anywhere in Europe.

And with High Speed 2, the first new train line running north out of London for 120 years.

So yes, there may be some people who want to try and stop these changes – or at least argue for them to happen somewhere else, away from their back yard.

But, let me tell you this.

Again, this government has a plan for the long term – and we are sticking to the task.

Finally, everyone knows that we need a bigger and more prosperous private sector to generate wealth and pay for the public services we need.

That means we need to support, reward and celebrate enterprise.

That requires a fundamental culture change in our country.

A culture that’s on the side of those who work hard, that values that typically British, entrepreneurial, buccaneering spirit, and that rewards people with the ambition to make things, sell things and create jobs for others up and down the country.

That’s what this government is on a mission to bring about.

We want to make Britain the best place in Europe to start, finance or grow a business.

So we are cutting corporation tax to 20 per cent, the lowest in the G20.

We are saving businesses £1 billion by slashing red tape.

We are backing innovative industries that will revolutionise world markets.

And through our new Challenger Business Initiative we are identifying those sectors where barriers need to be removed to enable new entrants and disruptive business models to develop at pace over the next five years.

But we’re not just putting enterprise at the heart of our economic policy.

We want to make sure it is boosted everywhere. Promoted in schools. Taught in colleges. Celebrated in communities. Recognised properly in the honours system.

And yes, supported abroad.

So we’re making enterprise a fundamental part of our foreign policy too.

Since 2011, almost £1 billion of new export contracts have been secured for the UK’s businesses thanks to support from UK Export Finance.

And I want us to build on that.

The Lord Mayor and I will be leading from the front again in the coming months.

This week I am leading trade visits to India and the Gulf.

And I can announce this evening that in early December I will be leading another delegation to China.

As China’s new leadership sets its direction for the next 10 years, as their country’s star continues to rise in the world, I will take senior British Ministers – as well as business leaders from every sector large and small – to forge a relationship that will benefit both our countries and bring real rewards for our peoples. Opening the way for British companies to benefit from China’s vast and varied markets and preparing the way for a new level of Chinese investment into the UK.

This is a relationship that is for the long term, that matters for Britain and China, and which I look forward to continuing to strengthen in the months and years to come.

And we don’t just need more investment from China.

We want to do more to attract investors from the Gulf too.

So we will introduce a new electronic visa waiver system for short-term visitors from Oman, Qatar and United Arab Emirates making it easier for companies to come here and do business.

This will be up and running in the new year and we will roll it out to Kuwait later next year.

And we’re doing something else to drive up that inward investment.

I am delighted that Alderman and former Lord Mayor Sir Michael Bear has agreed to chair a new Regeneration Investment Organisation as part of UK Trade and Investment.

This will act as a one-stop shop for our major inward investment opportunities – with £100 billion of possible projects on the table.

These projects won’t just mean new jobs in London or the South East – but right across the whole country.

And the first deal is just days away to boost regeneration in places like Liverpool, Salford, Sheffield and Leeds.

A state we can afford.

An economy where everyone can take part.

An economy equipped for the future.

And an economy based on enterprise at home and abroad.

That’s how we build something better.

That’s how we can build an economy for everyone.

And by doing this, we needn’t look at the global race with fear.

But with confidence.

Confident in the belief that Britain can come through stronger.

Confident that with the right decisions now our children can look forward to a better future.

Confident that here in the City of London – the great innovator that has led the way in finance for centuries – we can support a Great Britain whose innovation and creativity can lead the world for generations to come.

Below is the text of the speech made by the Prime Minister, David Cameron, to the CBI on 4th November 2013.

I think this is probably the eighth CBI conference I’ve addressed as leader of a political party or prime minister. And I’m pleased to say that as Prime Minister on this occasion, I can report to you an economy that is growing, and growing well; forecast to grow 3 times faster than Germany this year. An economy that is generating jobs – generating jobs faster than almost any other G7 country; we’ve seen 1.4 million private sector jobs created over the last 3 years.

And to those people who thought that growth in the private sector would never be able to make up for the necessary cuts in the public sector, I can report to you that there are 1 million more people in work, compared with 3 years ago.

We’ve still got a long way to go, but I can report to you that there are 400,000 more businesses operating in Britain; so I think our economy is on track. We’re on our way. We’ve got a lot of work to do but we are on the right track.

And I want to thank all of the business people in this room for the investments you’ve made and the people that you’ve employed. And I also want to thank the CBI for this, which is that there were many people who were arguing that we should abandon Plan A, that we should give up on deficit reduction. But in that argument we had a staunch ally in the CBI and I would like to thank John Cridland, your Director-General, who I think has done a superb job for your organisation and for the British economy. Thank you, John.

John has always been very clear about the CBI agenda. And I’ve been very clear about my agenda; I want to lead a government that is pro-business, pro‑enterprise, pro-growth. And I’ve listened to your agenda, and I’ve tried to respond to every part that I can.

You wanted us to put in place deficit reduction; that was what we did. You wanted more competitive tax rates; we’ve cut the rate of corporation tax down to 20%. We’ve even cut the top rate of tax, although that was politically difficult to deliver. You’ve asked us to prioritise infrastructure; we have prioritised infrastructure, and I’ll say some more about that a bit later on. You wanted us to reform planning, you wanted us to invest in housing; we’ve taken on politically difficult changes to planning, but as a result we’re seeing construction and housing now beginning to grow. It was the right call.

The CBI have also asked me to lead trade missions all over the world. In the last 3 years I’ve taken a trade mission to every single G20 country, apart from Argentina. I’m sure I can get there in the end but I haven’t made it that far just yet; you’re very welcome to join me when I do.

We’re seeing some good results. The UK, in the first 6 months of this year, was the biggest recipient of foreign direct investment anywhere in the world; bigger than Brazil, bigger than America, bigger than China. I think that’s an extraordinary set of figures.

So, we are making progress, but the fundamental challenge that we face, as a country and as an economy, remains the same, which is we need a fundamentally different economic model. We need a more balanced economy. We want to be not so reliant on the South East of England, not to be so reliant on finance. We want a recovery that is for all. We want a more resilient economy. And that remains the huge challenge, and what I want to address in my 15 minutes is the 5 things that I think will make a really big difference in terms of getting that rebalanced, stronger economy that delivers a recovery for all.

Now, the first thing is that we have to continue with Plan A. We have to continue to reduce the deficit. Now that doesn’t just mean cuts, although we have had to cut public spending and we’re going to have to go on making difficult decisions into 2015, into 2016. But it also means something more profound, which is building a state that we can afford and making sure we do some fundamental reform of our public services so that there are long-term affordable.

Two examples of things we’ve done in recent years – again, politically difficult – firstly is the reform of public sector pensions. We’ve cut the long-term cost of public sector pensions by something like 50% over the long term. Also the higher education reforms – again, very difficult but it’s much better as a country, I would argue, to have universities that are based on receiving money from successful students rather than receiving money from taxpayers. So we built a more sustainable model. So that is challenge number one: a state that we can afford and sticking to Plan A, sticking to deficit reduction.

The second thing we’ve got to get right is education. Here’s one, I think, thoroughly depressing figure for you: 64% of children on free school meals don’t get 5 good GCSEs, including English and Maths. Now my concern is in the modern economy – and Mike’s just been talking about how interrelated all our economies now are in this global race. If you don’t get 5 good GCSEs, including English and Maths it is difficult to play a part – a successful part – in a modern industrial economy. So we’ve got to improve on this.

And that’s where the radicalism of this government that you see by breaking up the state monopoly and allowing free schools into education, very strict on the rigor in terms of saying English and Maths are the 2 most important vocational qualifications there are, saying that children should go on taking and retaking English and Maths until they get them. The radicalism is absolutely essential and I hope we’ll have the full, hearty backing of industry and business and commerce in being very radical on education. I sometimes challenge my own children and say, ‘Can you think of a job in the world where you don’t need English and Maths.’ My son said, ‘What about football players?’ I said, ‘Well, even they need to able to count their money, don’t they?’ But it is a fundamental truth – the 2 most important vocational subjects.

So, radical reform on education. And what I want to see is a new norm, so that as people leave school they’re either taking a path doing A‑levels and then to university or they are taking a path that involves a proper apprenticeship and skills training. Now, we’ve seen 1.5 million people start apprenticeships over the last 3 years, but I want to see that built on. And I want to see more of the higher level of apprenticeships that many of the people in this room are now investing in. So that’s the second thing: education. That is to ensure that the people can take part in a modern industrial economy.

The third is welfare reform. To me welfare reform is very much part of our economic plan, because if you don’t reform welfare you have a danger that you have people stuck on welfare year after year and, indeed, sometimes generation after generation. So again, I hope you’ll give the support for the radical welfare reform plans that we have: capping welfare so that no family is better off on benefits than you would be in work. And also, universal credits, as work always pays: for every extra hour you work, every extra job you do, you should always be better off. We get rid of those poverty traps and wealth traps forever.

So I think welfare reform is an absolutely essential part of the economic plan. And to people who say, you know, ‘What are we going to do about the fact that our economy is generating jobs but so many of those jobs are going to people who come and choose to live here from overseas,’ I would argue yes, of course you need immigration controls, of course you need limits on immigration, but a real immigration policy is actually a welfare and education policy. That is how we’ll make sure we fill the vacancies that you are creating with people coming out of British schools, with good qualifications, who can make a real contribution to our economy.

The fourth thing we’ve got to do after welfare is invest in infrastructure. I said earlier, we’ve prioritised infrastructure, so while we’ve made some difficult cuts in current spending, we’ve seen infrastructure investment grow – there is far more we need to do in the years ahead. Now our plans, I now believe, are really ambitious. What you’re going to see is a trebling of expenditure on our roads, a roads programme as big as the one in the 1970s; the investment in railways is now bigger than at any time since Victorian times, a massive programme of electrification and, of course, vital new routes like Crossrail, currently burrowing under London – the biggest construction project anywhere in Europe – and of course, the vital investment in HS2.

Now I’m passionate about this, we need to build new railway lines in our country. We haven’t built a line north of London for 120 years. Now when people challenge me about HS2 I say this: the West Coast mainline is full. Thousands of our fellow countrymen are standing everyday as they come in to Euston or they go into Birmingham. We need to build another West Coast. So the choice for us as a country is, do we build one of the old Victorian style railways or do we build one of these new intercity lines. I believe it’s absolutely right to make this investment. It’s going to unite our country, drive economic growth, make sure our economy shares growth between the North and South, it will link 8 of our 10 biggest cities.

And to people who say, ‘Well is it going to take up too much of the government’s budget?’ Between 2015 and 2020 we’re going to be spending £73 billion on road and railway investments. HS2 is £16 billion of that. But, another way, we’re going to be spending 3 times as much on other projects as we are on HS2. I want to make sure we get every penny and value for money from this HS2 investment. I think it’s fantastic that Sir David Higgins, the man who built the Olympics on time and on budget, is going to be running HS2. One of the first things he’s going to do is make absolutely sure we drive every extra bit of cost out of this that we can so that it comes in under the budget that’s been set. There’s already a £14 billion contingency there, but I know he’ll do a good job and make it affordable for our country.

And to people who say there’s some other cost reduction plan that we could also have, I think that is nonsense. I think Sir David Higgins in charge, budget that we have, contingency we have – this is a good investment for Britain. And people who are against it, in my view, are putting our country’s future at risk, they’re putting the future of the north of England at risk, and we need to have a concerted consensus across business and across politics, that we get behind these large infrastructure projects.

The same applies with nuclear. I’m delighted that this year we’ve come to the agreement about building Hinkley Point C. This is a £14 billion investment. It is thousands of jobs for our country, and more importantly it’s getting Britain back in to the front line of the nuclear industry, where we belong.

So, that is my four: the state we can afford, education and skills, welfare reform and infrastructure. And the fifth is this, which is slightly more esoteric, but nonetheless important. In order to have a rebalanced economy, a more resilient economy, an economy that can succeed in the global race we’re in, we need to have a real culture change in our country in favour of enterprise, in favour of business, in favour of industry.

Now there are some things that the government can do. Obviously we can help encourage entrepreneurship. We’ve set up these start-up loans which are incredibly successful. The New Enterprise Allowance to encourage unemployed people to start up their businesses. We’ve introduced the EIS scheme that people tell me is now probably the most generous tax break for people starting up new businesses, anywhere in the world.

But there’s only a certain amount government can do, and this is what I want to enlist your help for. Earlier on I talked about the agenda items of yours that we had taken up; this is an agenda item of mine that I’d like you to take up. Which is that we need to get more businesses into our schools to inspire young people about enterprise, about small business, about entrepreneurship and about industry itself.

And there’s an excellent organisation called Speakers for Schools, established by that man Robert Peston. You normally see him explaining some complicated economic issue on the BBC. Speakers for Schools gets inspirational speakers into schools to inspire young people. And we have agreed, with your help, to get 1,000 business speakers over the next year into schools to do exactly that. And I’m really delighted the CBI’s going to help me with this; I think it’s a really important agenda for our country.

So, those are the 5 things that I think that can make a difference; the things that will make sure we’re a successful economy in the future. And it’s not some dry business, economic agenda. In the end, I believe this is a deeply progressive agenda. If we have a state that we can’t afford and we keep running big deficits, it’s the poorest in our country who suffer. If we have an education system that is okay for an elite, but is not helping people from challenging circumstances, we let down the poorest in our country. If we don’t reform welfare we have people stuck, generation after generation, in workless households, unable to build a better life for themselves and their families. If we don’t have proper infrastructure we’ll have an economy that is great for the South, but not good enough for the other parts of our country.

So this business agenda, this enterprise agenda – this is, I believe, a deeply, deeply progressive agenda, which is about making sure everyone in our country has the chance to play a part, to participate, to fulfil their aspirations. That is the job that I came into politics to do. That is the job I thoroughly enjoy doing as Prime Minister. We are turning this economy around, we are turning this country around, but it is a long-term plan for success, and a long-term plan for success which we need the support and help of the CBI and all its members. Thank you very much indeed.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS:

Question

You spoke very passionately about our strengths in areas like education and technology, for instance, but isn’t part of our success also about innovating and creating new businesses that might not have existed 10 years ago. One example might be FutureLearn, a company we launched a few weeks ago; it’s now attracted over 150,000 students from 160 countries around the world. Isn’t part of Britain’s competitive advantage our ability to generate new ideas, to innovate new businesses and create markets that never existed 10 or 15 years ago?

Prime Minister

That is absolutely right. If we look at where the jobs growth is going to come from, it will come from small start-up businesses taking people on. Obviously we want big successful companies in Britain, and we should listen very carefully to what they are asking for, and infrastructure investment is a key thing that they often mention to me. But it is the start-up, it is the insurgent, where I think the jobs will come from.

So, we’ve got to make sure that we’re a country that’s very supportive of that. That’s why we’ve introduced entrepreneur visas, so some of the brightest and best can come to our country with their ideas. It’s why we’ve got, in the Enterprise Investment Scheme – the EIS scheme – one of the most generous tax breaks for helping start-up businesses. I think we need to do better, frankly, at linking our universities with catapult centres and other ways of generating ideas out of our universities. It’s a massive national asset we’ve got: some of the best universities anywhere in the world. But we can do even more, I think, on that agenda.

Got to make sure that we address all the stages of a company’s growth. It’s often said in Britain we’re good at the angel start-up investment, but then there can be something of a valley of death, or at least difficult, as you go on, grow, until you get to the – where we are also very good – AIM and other investment markets. We need to look at all of these things, but you’re absolutely right; insurgency, new ideas, innovation: it’ll be those countries that get those things right that really win.

Question

You talk about rebalancing the economy away from overdependence on the South-East, and obviously you started the local enterprise partnerships when you came into government. I just wondered what your scorecard would be for the local enterprise partnerships, and if you could give us your vision for a, sort of, idea scenario for business support?

Prime Minister

I think the local enterprise partnerships are a success. I think they are better than what we had before, and I think the regional development agencies were too bureaucratic, too expensive, they weren’t business-led. So, I’d say the good things about the LEPS – the local enterprise partnerships – is they are business-led, I think that makes a big difference. They’re also relevant to particular areas; the design of LEPs came from the bottom up, rather than the top down. But, my scorecard report would be some excellent, and some less good.

I think one of the ways to test how they’re doing is to look at the enterprise zones. Some of these enterprise zones are going extremely well, and you see major investment, and you see the – the figures are not only – they come off the side, because the new factories are being built, and what have you – other areas slower.

So I think it’s a mixed picture, but I think it’s the right model, and I think the last thing we need now is to fiddle with the model again. I think we need to now get on and deliver these City Deals: Birmingham being a classic case, where I think it’s bringing jobs and investment and houses as well. I’ve got an excellent Cities Minister in Greg Clark, who’s got a whole team around him in the Cabinet Office to deliver these City Deals, and I think they are an important part of the regional growth agenda.

So, I think a mixed picture, but the right model. We now need to just get on with it.

Question

We’re a manufacturing business based in the North-East, and we’re set up as a result of a change in European legislation. We now have 110 people in our business, and we make things. How are you going to ensure – we are seen as a gateway into Europe for many of our clients – how are you going to ensure that the EU debate is a balanced debate that really takes on board things like that, where it’s positive rather than the headlines of The Daily Mail?

Prime Minister

I think the CBI have hugely helped this morning, with a very positive report.

Look, I think the problem with the European debate is, until I came up with this, I think, very bold but correct strategy of saying, ‘Let us renegotiate and then let’s have an in/out referendum,’ so we settle this issue properly in Britain: until that time, I think the trouble is the debate was just slipping away, and, as I put it, consent for our membership of the EU was getting wafer thin. Now we’re giving people a proper choice. Instead of, keep it exactly as it is now, the status quo, or leave altogether.

The Eurozone have got to coordinate their economic policies more. They’ve got to coordinate their tax rates more. They’ve got to have a banking union. And it’s right that they do those things. We shouldn’t stand in their way, but I think it’s perfectly legitimate to say, ‘Right, you, the Eurozone countries, need these changes. Well we – outside the euro, we need some changes too.’ And when we make both those sets of changes, that’s when we should go back to the British people, before the end of 2017, and have that referendum.

And I think it’ll be a much more balanced debate, because we won’t be arguing in/out on the status quo. We’ll be arguing about staying in a reformed European Union, and a better deal for Britain.

Question

How does announcing the green levies review on Prime Minister’s Questions square with the need to provide investors with certainty to invest in technologies that can deliver the UK’s decarbonisation targets?

Prime Minister

Well, first of all, I think we have one of the clearest and most generous sets of incentives for green investment, and this government’s made a huge amount of steps forward. I mean, most recently, the fact that we have agreed, with Électricité de France, the first new nuclear power station in Britain since 1995, I think is massive evidence of that.

But the fact is, if we look at the problems of people paying their energy bills, you know, the 2 elements of the bill that need really looking at are the extent of culpability in the industry, and the charges that are put on people’s bills. I mean, if you analyse the 4 bits to a bill, you know, you’ve got the wholesale costs of energy. Well we’re not in control of that. There’s the cost of distributing that energy to people’s homes – the National Grid and all the rest of it – there may be some changes you can make there. Then you’ve got the green taxes, levies and charges. And then you’ve got, effectively, the profits made in these industries.

And it seems to me it’s those last two that we need to look at. So the right policy tools are: competition, and making sure that it’s a fully competitive market where new companies can come in – insurgents, as we were talking about recently; and the second is to make sure that the green charges, levies and taxes are appropriate. And in my view they got too high, and we need to draw back the costs of them. But I think business completely understands that, and we’ll go on seeing perfectly good levels of investment into the renewable sector, which we’ve already seen under this government.

Question

How do you manage negative backlash against the visa bond policy. And how do you manage the challenges that come with trying to integrate the Islamic finance into the London system, such that the centre of gravity of finance continues to stay in London?

Prime Minister

Well first of all, on the visa bonds, this was an idea that I think the Deputy Prime Minister first proposed, but we’re not proposing to go ahead with it, but – he has lots of good ideas, but this one’s not one we’re going ahead with.

The second issue: Islamic finance. If you look at the history of the City of London, it has always been a fast mover. You know, whether it was the eurobond market, whether it was the insurance market, whether it was being the first offshore renminbi trading centre. We’ve always been fleet of foot, and I think that’s exactly the attitude we should have with Islamic finance. This is a big and growing market in the world. A lot of it has got a lot of expertise, and I want us to be at the cutting edge of this market.

Now, of course, I want to challenge this to go through, as we try and launch this first Islamic bond – the sukuk – which we’ll be doing next year. Lots of challenges to go through, but they are not beyond the wit of man to sort out, so we must get these challenges sorted, and I think it’s a big opportunity, once again, for London to be at the cutting edge of Europe.

Question

I’m flying, and going by train about 20% of the level I was 20 years ago. A lot of what I do now is videoconferencing, collaborating, and I work from home a lot. So shouldn’t we invest more in our communication within the structure rather than some of the old fashioned ways of getting around like rail?

Prime Minister

Well, that’s right – you’re right, I should have mentioned in my speech broadband, which I think is – particularly for people living in rural areas, it is the most important piece of infrastructure investment that we’re engaged in. And the news is quite good. We are not top of the pack in Europe on broadband and broadband speeds but we’re near the top. And the government’s programme will roll this out over 90% of homes in the coming years. And it is pretty robust. It took some time to get through the EU clearance procedures, but it’s now going full guns ahead.

But that said, while of course you need broadband speeds, you also need – a modern economy needs modern infrastructure and it needs goods to be able to move around the country. And I think it’s this idea that, you know, everyone will be home working, no one is going to be travelling, so we don’t need new infrastructure. Just look at how crowded our trains are at the moment. I mean since privatisation, train use has doubled, so passenger numbers are right up but we need capacity.

I think that’s one of the problems we’ve had with HS2 is the early argument, a lot of it was about speed. I make no apology for that. It is important to get from A to B quickly. Have you ever met – is there a businessman here who likes to take the slow train, who likes to go more slowly? Of course not, everyone wants to get places quickly.

But the real argument about HS2 isn’t the speed, it’s capacity. You know, the line is full, we need a new line, and building HS2 will not just make it faster and more capacity to get from London to Birmingham, or London to Leeds, or London to Manchester. It will have enormous knock-on benefits for other destinations. There’ll be more trains that can go, for instance, from London to Blackpool, or London to Shrewsbury.

So, it’s the capacity argument that we really need to make. And we can see that when you look at what happened with HS1 – the Channel Tunnel line – that’s freed up a lot of capacity in the south-east of England, and that’s been hugely beneficial.

So, yes broadband is important, but also road, rail and air transport are all going to be important in the future and, frankly, Britain has not invested enough in the past. We’ve not had enough of a plan. We now have a plan and we should deliver.

Question

How do you react to the CBI’s warning today for all politicians to stop playing politics with big business? It seems to me that the people in this room are telling Labour to stop playing games on energy, but they are equally telling you to stop playing games on Europe. Will you?

Prime Minister

Well, first of all, on infrastructure and on energy, I think the message from this room is absolutely clear. We want a national consensus. We know this investment is important and politicians should stop taking short-term approaches.

On Europe, no one is playing a game. This is one of the most important questions facing our country. Now, it is my judgement that our current consent to remaining inside the EU is paper-thin. We haven’t made the argument enough about why Europe matters, and frankly there are lots of things in the European Union that badly need reform. It is too costly. It is not flexible enough. It doesn’t help with our competitiveness enough. It needs to change.

So the argument I have made is not some short-term tactical ploy. It is a long-term strategic choice for Britain. Let us reform this organisation, let us make changes to how it works, and then put those changes to the British people in a referendum. And what I’ve put forward I believe has the overwhelming support of the British people, in terms of the right choice to take, and it also has strong business backing too. Yes, of course, this organisation and other business organisations will be absolutely crucial when it comes to that choice in 2017 about whether we stay in a reformed European Union or we leave it.

But be in no doubt, in the end you can’t stay in these organisations that give up quite a bit of your national sovereignty – you can’t stay in these organisations unless you take the British people with you. The British people were told about a common market. They were told about an economic area. So much has changed about this organisation and so little consent has been granted, that it’s time to make those arguments, seek that consent, and as Prime Minister of this country that’s exactly what I’ll do.

Can I thank you very much indeed for a really splendid session. I really enjoyed it. Thank you for your questions, and thank you for your reception. Thank you.

Below is the text of the statement made by David Cameron, the Prime Minister, in the House of Commons on 28th October 2013 on the previous week’s European Council meeting.

Mr Speaker, in the last 24 hours the country has been hit by one of the worst storms for many years.

I know the thoughts of the whole House will be with the families and friends of the people we know have lost their lives.

And I am sure the House will join with me in paying tribute to our emergency services and to all those who have been working to clear up the debris and get our transport system moving again.

Let me turn to last week’s European Council.

The key subjects under discussion were business regulation, competitiveness and monetary union.

We also discussed migration policy following the Lampedusa tragedy and the importance of the EU’s Eastern Partnership.

So the background to this Council was the state of the European economy.

There is no doubt that the outlook is better than it has been and particularly here in Britain where Friday’s figures showed the fastest growth for 3 years.

My aim at this Council was to do everything possible to enhance the prospects of a sustained, balanced recovery here in the UK.

We made good progress on 3 areas in particular – cutting red tape, promoting trade and the completion of the single market in digital and services and protecting British interests as the Eurozone integrates further.

Let me briefly say a word about each.

Cutting red tape

First, on cutting red tape, Britain’s Business Task Force produced an excellent report which was endorsed by a hundred European businesses.

I chaired a meeting bringing members of the Business Taskforce together with President Barroso and the leaders of Germany, Sweden, Italy, Poland, Finland, Estonia and the Netherlands.

These countries representing all parts of Europe and all political traditions agreed on the need to make more progress in cutting regulation and helping businesses across Europe to create jobs.

And the strong language adopted by all EU Member States reflects this.

It calls for rapid implementation of REFIT – the Commission’s own bureaucracy-cutting initiative and a proper scorecard to measure exactly how much regulation is being cut.

Deregulation is now part of the EU agenda in a way that it simply hasn’t been before.

Trade and the single market

Second, on trade we welcomed the conclusion of the EU-Canada trade deal.

This new deal could be worth £1.3 billion to the British economy with estimates suggesting British exports to Canada could go up by well over a fifth.

Last week’s agreement also means we can now move the focus onto the EU-US talks which we began at the G8 in Lough Erne.

There were some attempts to link this potential US trade deal with the concerns over US intelligence.

But the Council rejected this idea.

Mr Speaker, turning to the Digital Single Market, once again the commitment was made to complete this by 2015 potentially boosting growth by as much as 4% of the EU’s GDP.

As Britain is a world leader in e-commerce – this is very much in our interests.

We made good progress at the Council on issues like portability of data, e-identification, e-invoicing and payment services and EU-wide copyright regime for the digital age.

But we also agreed not to rush ahead with the data protection directive on an artificial timetable before the disproportionate burdens on small business have been removed.

In terms of the Services Directive we agreed it was time to look at a new sector-by-sector approach rather than just trying to remove all the outstanding barriers to free trade in services in one go.

Defending Britain’s interests as the Eurozone integrates further

Third, on defending Britain’s interests, as I have argued repeatedly, the European Union is changing and the Eurozone needs more integration and co-ordination.

But Britain is not in the Single currency – and we’re not going to be.

So we shouldn’t have to take part in these additional bits of co-ordination – whether they cover economic or social policy.

So while Members of the Eurozone agreed to even more intrusive policy co-ordination -including on social policy I was clear that Britain will not take part.

This is reflected in the Communique which says all changes are voluntary for those countries not in the single currency.

On the tragedy at Lampedusa, we agreed the next stages of the work of Frontex – responsible for trying to stop people coming to the EU in the first place.

But we rejected the idea that there should be additional burden-sharing for so called “frontline states” not least because Britain, France, Germany, Belgium and Sweden received almost 70% of asylum applications recorded in the EU in the last 12 months.

What is most important of all is helping to stop the problems at their source.

The UK will continue to play a leading role in this for example through support for border security in Libya and the focus of our development assistance on helping countries at risk of instability.

And on the Eastern Partnership we agreed that countries which look towards Europe for support – such as Ukraine – should be free to enter into agreement with us while of course continuing to insist on proper standards of governance and justice that such a relationship should entail.

Intelligence agencies

Finally, Mr Speaker, because of the recent controversies there was much discussion about the role of intelligence agencies.

We agreed a statement signed as Heads of Government that said European countries and America should have a relationship based on trust and that damage had been done by recent revelations.

The UK has a very strong, long-standing trust-based relationship with the US – not least as part of the Five Eyes partnership together with Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

We have Parliamentary Scrutiny of our intelligence agencies through the Intelligence and Security Committee – and we have strengthened that oversight.

Our agencies operate under the law.

And their work is overseen by Intelligence Commissioners.

Of course as technology develops and the threats we face evolve, so we need to make sure that the scrutiny and frameworks in place remain strong and effective.

But we have every reason to be proud of our intelligences services and the way in which they are properly constituted in this country. Since 2000, we have seen serious attempts at major acts of terrorism in Britain typically once or twice a year.

And since 9/11, 330 people have been convicted in our courts – here in the UK – of terrorism-related offences.

This year alone, there were major trials related to plots including plans for a 7/7-style attack with rucksack bombs two plots to kill soldiers and a failed attempt to attack an English Defence League march using an array of lethal weapons.

There were guilty pleas in each case.

24 terrorists were convicted and sentenced to more than 260 years in jail.

Our intelligence has also allowed us to warn our EU allies about terrorist plots aimed at their people cyber attacks on their businesses and infrastructure and attempts in their own states to illegally traffick drugs, people, arms and money.

Mr Speaker, our Intelligence Officers serve our country without any public recognition.

Some have given their lives in this service.

And yet their names are not known. And their loved ones must mourn in secret.

We owe them – and every intelligence officer in our country – an enormous debt of gratitude.

These silent heroes and heroines are keeping our country safe.

They deserve our wholehearted support.

And I commend this Statement to the House.

Below is the text of the speech made by the Prime Minister, David Cameron, at an Eid al-Adha reception held at 10, Downing Street in London on 21st October 2013.

So, first of all, Eid Mubarak and a very warm welcome to Number 10, Downing Street, and I hope all of your celebrations over the last week have been successful. It is a warm welcome to Number 10, because it is a good moment to reflect on what Eid means to everyone in this room, but also what occasions like this really mean to us and the things that we should bring out.

And to me, there are really 3 things that matter at an event like tonight. Because the reason we celebrate Eid here in Downing Street – the reason we also celebrate Diwali, we celebrate Hanukkah, we celebrate Easter – we celebrate these great festivals because of course we want to say what a fantastic contribution Muslims make to our country. Of course we want to celebrate everything that the Muslim community here in Britain is and does.

But we’re also celebrating something else, which is the importance of faith in our country. And I’m always struck, when I think about Eid, about the similarities of our religions rather than the differences. As far as I understand it Eid is a commemoration of the event when Abraham was on the point of sacrificing one of his sons, but in the end sacrificed a sheep instead of one of his sons, because you have a compassionate God.

And what’s extraordinary about this story is it’s exactly the same story – give or take – as appears in Genesis about my Christian religion. And it’s the moment when we understand that the Abrahamic religions have so much in common, not just that we believe in a compassionate God, but also we believe that faith is not just something internal or something just between ourselves and our God: it is something that dictates how we should try and act in our lives.

And I think the brilliance and the simplicity of Eid, where you keep a third for the family, a third for relatives and for friends and a third for charity, is such a simple way of teaching people about the importance of generosity, the importance of giving, the importance of charity.

And that’s why I think faith is so important in our countries. Not because people without faith can’t be generous and good citizens; of course they can. But faith is a tremendous help, it’s a tremendous guide. It gives us ways to think about how we put back. So, I think the first thing we celebrate is faith, and the service that faith brings.

I had a fantastic reminder of that this year when I went to a mosque in Manchester and saw you preparing for the Big Iftar. I thought this was a brilliant idea, to invite in the community from all walks of life, all religions or no religions, to come and see what an Iftar is all about. It was a fantastic event, and I think the Big Iftar is an absolutely brilliant idea – to open up your faith, your religion, your community centre, your mosque to others, to let them show what a contribution Islam makes to Britain.

I think the second thing an event like this helps us to do is to make sure we’re doing everything we can as a country to be as welcoming as possible to people of different faiths and different religions. And obviously, we have still great challenges in Britain to make sure we are as open and welcoming and as friendly as we can be.

We still have a huge battle fighting prejudice in our country, and I think perhaps particularly Islamophobia – people telling lies about your religion – is one that we have to face up to particularly strongly in our country. And it’s a time to remember that. It’s also a time to remember that welcoming people to our country of all faiths is something that has to go across every single part of life.

So, if you think about our economy – that’s my number one concern at the moment. How do we get our economy growing? How do we generate jobs? How do we make sure that everyone is included in this recovering economy? In order to do that, obviously we need to improve education and training and welfare, but we also need to think about what can hold people of different religions back.

And one of the things I’m very keen that we do, with the World Islamic Economic Forum coming up in just a few days’ time, is I want Britain to be one of the world centres of Islamic finance. And that should go from the highest and most mightiest financial institution all the way to things like start-up loans that we have introduced and are fantastically successful – we’ve got tens of thousands of young people taking them on and starting up their own businesses.

And tonight I can announce that we will make sure that there is a type of start-up loan that is totally consistent with all the principles of Islamic finance. We must do that for start-up loans, we must do it for student loans, we must do it for enterprise allowances and for all of those things. That’s what a welcoming, tolerant, multi-racial country does.

I think the third thing we should think about on an occasion like this is, after we’ve celebrated the immense contribution of the Muslim community to Britain, after we’ve celebrated what faith brings to our country, after we’ve thought about what more we can do to make people welcome in our own country, is also think, as a country, what we do to help others overseas.

And in that context, I’m proud of the fact that, even in spite of difficult economic times, this country is one of the few countries in the world that has kept its promises on aid and development – meeting that 0.7% target of our gross national income.

Now, a lot of that money goes to some of the most challenged Islamic countries in our world – countries like Afghanistan, still desperately poor and in need of aid and assistance. Countries like Pakistan, where British taxpayers’ money is helping to educate hundreds of thousands of children. Countries like Somalia, broken by decades of civil war and conflict, carefully now being put back together with the assistance of conferences held here in London, British aid money and other interventions and assistance that we have been able to give.

It is something that we can reflect on, I think, proudly as a country, that every 2 seconds a child is vaccinated somewhere in the world because of aid money that British taxpayers have provided. I think that is something that can make us proud, and it is on a night like tonight, when we’re thinking of what we do to help Muslims all over the world, we can be secure in the knowledge that the British Government, on your behalf, fulfils all of those requirements.

One of the most moving meetings I’ve had this year was on the anniversary of Srebrenica, when the Remembering Srebrenica project brought some of the survivors here to Number 10. And they were able to look me in the eye and tell me their stories and how they’d suffered, and I don’t think I’ll ever forget hearing those stories. And it’s a reminder that, while we may think that our priority is the economy – and it is – while we’re very much focused on all the things we need to do in our own country, we have responsibilities around the world.

We have a role we can play around the world, and we should never turn away from genocide, from suffering on that scale. And I pay tribute to all of those who helped to remind us of these terrible slaughters and these terrible events, and make sure we do what we can to stop them happening again.

So, a very warm welcome to Number 10. Tonight is about celebrating the contribution that British Muslims make to our country. It is a huge contribution. It’s one I’m happy to celebrate here, but also to talk about these issues of integration, of how we help Muslims around the world, and also the importance during this time of religious festivals – the importance of our faith, not just for us and our relationship with our maker, but also what we contribute to our country and to our communities. And the Muslim faith is so strong in that, and I have huge respect for everything you do.

Thank you.

Below is the transcript of the interview given by the Prime Minister, David Cameron, on the situation in Syria on 27th August 2013.

Question

Prime Minister, have you made a decision on UK military intervention in Syria and, if so, what’s the case for it?

Prime Minister

Well, no decision has yet been taken. But let’s be clear what is at stake here. Almost a hundred years ago, the whole world came together and said that the use of chemical weapons was morally indefensible and completely wrong. And what we’ve seen in Syria are appalling scenes of death and suffering because of the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime. And I don’t believe we can let that stand.

Now of course, any action we take or others take would have to be legal, would have to be proportionate. It would have to be specifically to deter and degrade the future use of chemical weapons. Let me stress to people: this is not about getting involved in a Middle Eastern war, or changing our stance in Syria, or going further into that conflict. It’s nothing to do with that. It’s about chemical weapons. Their use is wrong and the world shouldn’t stand idly by.

Question

So it’s clear it’s a tactical move possibly. But what do you say to the millions of people who will see this in their front rooms tonight, who will say, “What’s Syria got to do with risking the lives of UK service men and women, and spending millions of pounds in UK taxpayers’ money?”

Prime Minister

Well the question we have to ask ourselves is, if there is no action following this big use of chemical weapons, is it going to be more likely in future that more and more regimes will use chemical weapons? That this regime will use them again and again on a larger scale, and we’ll see more death and more suffering? It must be right to have some rules in our world, and to try to enforce those rules.

Now of course, as Prime Minister, I take my responsibilities about safeguarding our armed services incredibly carefully, incredibly seriously. But the question we need to ask is whether acting or not acting will make the use of chemical weapons more prevalent.

Question

So you’re going to ask your MPs and other MPs, on Thursday, to specifically support military action, are you? And if you lose the vote, does that mean that’s off the table?

Prime Minister

Well, as I’ve said, no decision has yet been taken. Any decision would have to be proportionate, would have to be legal, would have to be about specifically deterring the use of chemical weapons. But I’ve recalled parliament so this issue can be properly debated, so the government can listen to views in parliament. And yes, it is my intention to put forward a motion in parliament so that members of parliament will be able to vote.

Now, obviously this is a developing situation and, as I say, decisions haven’t been taken. But we shouldn’t stand by when we see this massive use of chemical weapons, the appalling levels of suffering, morally reprehensible, something the world came together almost a hundred years ago and said, “These weapons shouldn’t be used”, and they are being used here in Syria. And that is why, in my view, we need to discuss the need to act.

Interviewer

MPs want verification, they want clarification on the endgame, on the legality. What do you say to them? They’re just not convinced at this stage.

Prime Minister

Well of course, I think in parliament is the right place to set out all of the arguments, to deal with all of the questions. But I would say this to people: there is never 100% certainty; there is never one piece, or several pieces of intelligence, that can give you absolutely certainty.

But what we know is, this regime has huge stocks of chemical weapon. We know that they have used them on at least ten occasions prior to this last wide-scale use. We know that they have both the motive and the opportunity, whereas the opposition does not have those things, and the opposition’s chance of having used chemical weapons, in our view, is vanishingly small. We know all these things.

The question now for us is, are we more likely to deter the future use of chemical weapons by acting or not acting? That’s the consideration. But let me say again, I understand people’s concerns about getting involved in wars in the Middle East, getting sucked into the situation in Syria. This is not about wars in the Middle East. This is not even about the Syrian conflict. It is about the use of chemical weapons and making sure, as a world, we deter their use and we deter the appalling scenes that we’ve all seen on our television screens.

Below is the text of the speech made by the Prime Minister, David Cameron, at Siemens in Lincoln on 16th July 2013.

Prime Minister

Thank you. Well, thank you for the welcome and it’s great to be here at Siemens, great to be here in Lincoln. And I think there’s lots of good reasons for being here because what I want to talk about very briefly today is our economy and how I believe our economy is on the mend. I think it’s getting better, I think it’s improving. It’s still early days; it’s still hard work. And one of the reasons it’s getting better is businesses like yours.

I think we all know that in this country we became too reliant on financial services, too reliant on the south of England. We needed to do more to make things again, design things again, export things again and that is exactly what you do here at Siemens. This is a business that exports over 90% of what you do. You’re helping Britain compete and succeed in the global race. And you’re also helping in other important ways in that you are helping train young people.

You take on some 15 apprentices every year but you don’t just do that, you support an engineering school at the university and you’re starting up a UTC – a University Technical College – to help give young people education and training that will give them the ability to work in great businesses like this. So I think it’s a good place to come and visit, to come and hear about what you do, because I think it’s absolutely vital we continue the work of mending our economy.

Now, I’m not going to stand here and say that the job is done or even half-done. I’m not going to say that everything is being fixed, but what I will argue is that we’re making some progress. We said we are going to have to deal with the deficit, which was one of the biggest in the world when we came to office, and we’ve paid down a third of that deficit. We said we needed more jobs in the private sector. Of course, we’ve lost jobs in the public sector – that was inevitable when you have to make cuts – but we created something like 1.3 million jobs in the private sector. We said that we need new small businesses starting up as the engine of growth, and we’ve seen some of the fastest rates of new businesses growing in our country in recent years.

So I think the economy is on the move, it is on the mend, but we have got a long way to go. And we’re only going to keep improving it if, actually, we back people who work hard, who want to do the right thing, and help them get a good place at school, get a good apprenticeship, start their own business and make something of their lives. And that’s what this government should be all about, and that’s what I’m focused on – not anything else, but focused on helping people with their aspirations to get a good job, to make something of their lives and to back businesses like this.

Anyway, I promised no long speech from me so that is it from me. It’s now your questions and my attempt to answer them. And you can ask about anything you like. It doesn’t mean I’ll answer, but I’ll have a go. So who wants to go first? Just put your hand in the air and there are roving microphones.

Question

In the UK we’re an importer of energy. I’m just wondering what the government’s policy is to make sure that we don’t have the lights turned off.

Prime Minister

Well, I think energy security is absolutely vital. It’s one of the tasks of government to make sure we’ve got plentiful supplies of energy and that it’s not too expensive. And we’re going through a big change right now. You know, our old nuclear power stations are running out of time and being switched off. We should become less reliant on coal for environmental and other reasons. So we have to put a lot of investment into our energy industries.

And what we’re seeing is, first of all, we’ve got a good contribution from gas in our country. We’ve still got a lot of reserves of gas in the North Sea and we’ve got pretty secure imports of gas from different parts of the world; we’re not reliant on any one part of the world. We’re not like some countries that get so much of their gas from Russia; we hardly get any of our gas from Russia. So I think we’ve good secure supplies of gas.

We’re going to invest in new nuclear energy. We’ve got Hinkley Point, where a decision I think will be made quite soon and I hope it’ll be a positive one to have a brand new nuclear power station. And I think it’s also important alongside gas, alongside nuclear, to make sure we also invest in some of the renewable technologies. Now they’re not going to be all of the answer, of course not, but I think to make sure we get some of our energy from on and offshore wind and that we look at some of the other technologies – wave and tidal power – I think it’s very sensible for a country like ours.

So what we’ve done, as a government, is actually set out a pretty clear framework. So if you’re an investor into say offshore wind in the North Sea, and we have 70% of Europe’s offshore wind capacity here in the UK, you know that if you build your plant before the end of 2017 you know exactly what you’re going to be paid for the next 20 years.

So Siemens are a big investor in this area. I recently went to the opening of the largest offshore wind farm anywhere in the world, which is called the London Array off the coast of Kent, and we hope that Siemens will go on investing in this technology. It’s not the whole answer but it’s part of the answer.

So a mixture of gas, of nuclear, of renewables I think can make sure we have plentiful supplies of energy. But we’re going to make doubly sure by having something called a capacity payment, so we’re going to introduce a system where we very openly buy a little bit more electricity than we need effectively – a bit more generating capacity than we need – so that we have a buffer, just in case demand rises faster than some people predict. So I’m confident that we’ll solve that problem and make sure we keep the lights on and can supply industry and consumers with plentiful supplies of energy.

Question

On an almost directly-related topic, we’ve been waiting in Siemens with bated breath for the Hull announcement. Kind of would you like to say ‘yes’ today?

Prime Minister

Well, I would love to hear a ‘yes’ today. Look, I think this is a great opportunity, not just for Siemens, I think it’s a great opportunity for Britain. I think if you look at the Humber Estuary you can see that that has an opportunity, if you like, to be a sort of Aberdeen of wind. I mean, you’ve got Aberdeen with the offshore oil industry. I think that Humberside, the Humber Estuary, can be a real hub of investment in industry for the offshore and onshore wind.

So, it’s Siemens’ decision whether they go ahead with this plant in Hull. All I can say is I think the government’s done everything it possibly could in terms of making available finance, in terms of explaining how the energy market is going to work, in terms of giving guarantees against future changes of policy. I’ve even rung up the Chief Executive on one or two occasions, so it’s – in the end it’s a commercial decision for Siemens, a commercial business.

But I think the framework for the energy industries in the UK is probably as clear as anywhere in the world. And you see that from overseas investors who are investing in our nuclear industries, our offshore wind industries, other industries. They say, ‘You’ve set out what the regime is for getting your payments and so it’s now up to us to spend the money.’ So I hope it’ll be a yes and I think we’ll find out maybe today maybe tomorrow.

Question

You’ve talked about energy security. I wonder what your view is on fracking, particularly in the more sensitive areas of the country like Surrey and Dorset.

Prime Minister

Well, I’m in favour of fracking. I think – look, if you look at the big picture, what do we need to do in our country to be a success, right?

We live in a very competitive world. You’ve got the rise of India, the rise of China, these great economies powering ahead. How are we in Britain going to be a success story in the 21st century just like we were in the 20th century? Well, we’re going to be a success story if we play to our strengths, if we invest in great businesses, if we keep up with science and technology, if we invest in our great universities, if we go on inventing things. But as well as that, you’ve got to exploit the new industries and you’ve got to make sure your energy prices aren’t rising ahead of your competitors.

Now, the unconventional gas gained by so-called fracking; if you look at what’s happened in America I think there’s a real lesson for us here in the UK. In America they are now almost self-sufficient in gas. Their gas prices to business are now less than half as much as ours are and the reason for this is they have put a lot of investment into unconventional gas. The figures are actually quite frightening. Europe as a whole has 75% as much unconventional gas as America, so we’ve got less in Europe than America. But whereas they are digging 10,000 wells a year, so far in Europe we’ve dug just 100, so we are way behind.

So I am in favour of fracking. The government is making it easier. We’ve set up an office of unconventional gas. We’re trying to streamline the permissions and the permits that you need. But, of course, there will be sensitivities. We are a relatively crowded island, whereas obviously in, you know, North Dakota in America it’s been easier to dig wells when you’ve got fewer people living on each part of your country, but we should be able to take advantage of this. So, let’s streamline the process; let’s make it possible.

And then of course there will be a public debate locally, but I think one of the ways we can get over this – and I have been making sure we do this – one of the ways we can get over this is if local communities can see the benefit themselves. And so, what we’ve said is for every well dug there should be an immediate £100,000 payment to the local community.

Now, that should be just the start, because of course if you hit unconventional gas supplies and you start to exploit them, that will generate a lot of revenue. And I think the way to get over – some places, obviously, it won’t be appropriate because of the amount of people living there and all the rest of it but, otherwise, I think the way to get over public concern is to say there’ll be real community benefits, and not just benefits going to your local council, but benefits going to your parish, going to your district, going to your – effectively, to yourself, as well. I think if we do that, people will see, ‘Okay, there are downsides of this, there are upsides, but I am going to have a personal investment in it.’ And I think if we do that we can make sure the unconventional gas revolution comes to the UK, and that’ll make us more competitive and give us more secure and cheaper supplies of energy at the same time.

Question

There’s a projection for the NHS over the next six or seven years, that there’s going to be a serious shortfall in the funding. How do you intend to cover that?

Prime Minister

Yeah, very good question; I mean, I think this is a real test for any government, frankly. We got in three years ago with this budget deficit, so what we were spending was much more than what we were getting in taxes – in fact, it was worse than almost anywhere in the world. So, we had to make some cuts. And, actually, as a government, we chose not to cut the NHS. My view was the NHS is too precious; we all rely on it, our families rely on it, so there should be and there will be in this parliament, modest increases in NHS spending.

But frankly, even modest increases in NHS spending aren’t really enough to cope with the pressures on the NHS, because we’re an ageing population, we’re living longer, there are new treatments coming along that are expensive. So, as you say, sir, there is a funding challenge.

How do we meet that? Well, I think the first thing we have to do is try and make sure that we’re spending every penny as wisely as we possibly could, and that’s why one of the things we did in the recent spending announcement is actually we took some NHS money and we gave it to local authorities to spend on social care, to spend it on helping get those people who are blocked in hospital beds, costing the NHS a fortune, who could be better off at home or in a care home properly looked after.

So, I think if we’re more efficient, if we spend the money wisely, I think we can make sure that the NHS deals with the pressures on it. But it’s not going to be easy. And obviously, today you hear the news that we’ve looked into – or the NHS has looked into the 14 hospitals with the highest unexplained death rates, and, you know, I am a big fan of our NHS. I love our NHS. I never want to see any harm come to our NHS but, frankly, we don’t serve our NHS if we cover up wrongdoing and problems. We’ve got to look at those problems, we’ve got to look at any instances of poor levels of care or poor management, and we’ve got to deal with them, and I don’t think the last government did enough of that. I think that they sort of said to the inspectorates, ‘Don’t give us the bad news, I don’t want to know;’ you know, ‘Talk to the hand, the government doesn’t want to hear.’

I do want to know. If there are things going wrong at, say, Stafford Hospital, or things going wrong at any Lincolnshire hospitals, we need to hear about that, we need to send in teams to help turn them around, we need to make sure people get a good service. Now, it will be testing, meeting this funding challenge but, actually, if we spend the money wisely – small, real-terms increases when other public services are taking spending reductions – I think we can deliver a really good NHS.

Question

You mentioned our apprentices, and we are very proud of the apprenticeship programme at Lincoln. Recently, Siemens in Lincoln took part in one of your programmes at the Employer Ownership of Skills programme; we had a very successful pre-employment training programme in Lincoln. I just wonder if you can assure us that you will make sure that red tape and bureaucracy won’t descend upon employers away from the Skills Funding Agency, because there is some indications that that might be going to happen.

Prime Minister

I think this is a real worry. I mean, businesses like yours take on apprentices every year, and that is good for you and it’s good for the country; it’s good for the young people concerned. And there have been something like 1.2 million apprentices taken on since the election; we have put a lot of money apprentices, we’re very keen on the programme. But I think for big businesses like yours, it’s one thing coping with the paperwork and the bureaucracy. For smaller firms, it can be just a no-no; they decide, ‘I don’t want to go near this.’

So, what we’ve done is create a more streamlined system. We have said to big businesses like yours, ‘You don’t have to partner with a training organisation to run these apprenticeships; you can run your own schemes and do it your own way.’ And we have said to small firms, ‘If you haven’t taken on an apprentice before, we’ll give you a bounty – we’ll give you a bonus, for taking on your first apprentices.’ So, I think that bit we can get right.

The bit I’m more concerned about – and it was very interesting talking to some of the apprentices here this morning – is I still don’t think we are getting it right in school, explaining to young people what are the career options. I don’t blame teachers for this, in a way; most teachers, they went to school, they did their A-levels, they went to university. They’re very familiar with that path, but I don’t think we do enough to say to young people that you can get an apprenticeship at 16, you can get a different sort of apprenticeship at 18, there are now higher-level apprenticeships which are the equivalent of a university degree, there are all these earning and learning options aside from the A-level and university option, and I think we need to do better at that. And I think businesses can help us do that by getting into schools and telling young people early on what are the options.

But I think apprentices should be a major growth area for Britain. You know, this is a German company, and I’m not embarrassed to say it: I think the Germans have done apprentices better than the British. There are lots of things the British do better than the Germans, of course – football, cricket, even tennis, now, fortunately – but this is something we can learn from the Germans. They have a fantastically low youth unemployment rate; so do the Dutch. We’re some way behind that. We’re ahead of the Spanish and the Italians and some others, but we can learn more from the Germans when it comes to apprenticeships.

Question

You mentioned about apprentices. What’s being done after the training from your point of view at the moment, and what needs to be done, to ensure the skills stay in the country, within jobs and within business?

Prime Minister

Well, how do we keep the skills in the country once you’ve trained them up? We have got to do more to help businesses. So, you know, if we want to rebalance this economy we don’t want to see less financial services – it’s a good industry, something Britain’s good at – but we want to see more manufacturing, more technology, more aerospace, more in the auto industry.

How do we do that? Well, we’ve got to go through all the things that manufacturing and technology businesses want from the government. Now, I would say there are about three or four things. You want support for apprenticeships because they’re vital for you, so the government’s putting money into apprenticeships. You want support for research and development to develop new products, so we have a tax credit specifically for every pound you spend on research and development. Businesses need competitive and low tax rates, so even at a time of difficult public spending and tax decisions, we have taken the British rate of corporation tax down to 20%, which means that you pay less corporation tax here in Britain than you do in any other G7 or G8 or in fact, I think, G20 country, so we can say to companies like Siemens, ‘Invest more in Britain. Build more in Britain. This is a good place to work.’ Some areas of the country need help more than others, so Enterprise Zones have been another way of encouraging businesses to expand and invest here.

And then I think the last thing that manufacturing businesses need – you’ve got to move product around. It’s not just having access to broadband; you need those physical networks, so we need to invest more in roads, in railways, in port infrastructure, all of which is happening in the UK, again in spite of the cuts. You know, we cut the police by 20% – very difficult decision to make. Actually, I think the police have coped brilliantly with it; they have made themselves more efficient, we haven’t seen a big reduction in police officers. But, as a result, we – as a result of difficult decisions like that, we have been able to spend money on capital – on roads, on railways, on port infrastructure – that will make us more competitive and enable us to win.

So, all those things, and I expect some of the people in your firm could think of some other things we should be doing as well. But I think that would be a good start.

Question

Is the NHS safe in your hands? I mean, clearly we’re going to have some revelations from the Keogh review today; what are you going to do to make things better, and when will it be safe for people to go back to hospital in Lincoln?

Prime Minister

Well, first of all, the NHS is completely safe in this government’s hands. We absolutely believe in it, we have invested in it; whereas we’ve had to cut some other public services, we’ve increased NHS investment every year. We should, at the same time of pointing out the difficult things in our health service, we should point out the success stories. Mixed-sex wards are almost abolished, infection rates in hospitals are now down at record lows, waiting lists and waiting times are in a good and reasonable place.

There’s much to celebrate in our NHS, and I love our NHS and I never want to do it any harm, but we don’t serve our NHS by covering up problems and difficulties, and clearly there are some hospitals with too-high mortality rates. It’s right to investigate them and it’s right also as the Health Secretary’s done today to identify those hospitals where we’re going to put them into special measures, send in help to turn them around, and make sure they go back to providing the very best service.

That’s what’s happening today. It’s right to highlight problems where they are, but they’re being dealt with, and people can know that they have a good National Health Service that they can be proud to use and proud to see improved at the same time.

Question

Prime Minister, in light of the release of the BBC’s Annual Report, do you think it’s right that taxpayers are legally required to pay the licence fee while BBC executives are receiving pay-offs of nearly £1 million?

Prime Minister

Well, I think the BBC has to be very careful with the money that it spends. The BBC is in a unique position because it has the licence fee. I support the licence fee. But going with the licence fee is the responsibility to spend that money wisely, and I think it’s quite clear some of the BBC pay-offs have been too high and there hasn’t been enough rigour in this whole process, as was demonstrated in front of the Select Committee, and they need to be more rigorous in the future.

The BBC has strong public support, but they won’t keep that support unless they spend the money wisely.

Question

It’s a question that must be on everybody’s lips, right, and what sort of message does it send out that the politicians or the MPs are looking at 10% pay rises when we’re seeing cuts in public spending and armed forces? And people like ourselves, you know, that we could only wish for a 10% pay rise. But I’d like your opinion.

Prime Minister

I agree, it is – round of applause for that man. I agree. I don’t think it is appropriate. I mean, what happened in the last parliament, just so we remember, there was the scandal about expenses, and the last government decided to make the body that decides MPs’ pay completely separate and independent from Parliament. So it makes a decision.

But I’ve said very clearly to them, including in my office, you know, you can’t propose a pay increase at the time when public sector workers have been told it’s a 1% pay increase and that’s it. You can’t suggest that. And, secondly, whatever you do, whatever you suggest and whenever you try and implement it, you’ve got to cut the cost of politics rather than increase it.

Now, I think there are costs in politics that we could reduce. There are still excesses in the system. And so I’ve said to that body – and they haven’t made a final decision; this pay rise is not written down in stone, it’s not being implemented, there’s a consultation going on. I’ve said to them, ‘Go away and cut the cost of politics, and don’t introduce a pay rise at the time when people are suffering public sector pay restraint.’ And I think that is the right answer.

So we’ll have to see what they say, but they’ve had a pretty clear message from all three party leaders pretty much saying the same thing to them. And they have got time to think again.

Question

You’ve mentioned the potential Siemens investment for the Humber. You’ve even said an announcement could be expected maybe today, maybe tomorrow, in your words. I’d like you to clarify that. But I’d also ask you as a government, do you think you’ve done enough to attract this company into this country?

Prime Minister

Well, first of all, it’s up to Siemens, their decision and the timing of their decisions. That’s not under my control. What is under my control is to say to Siemens we welcome your investment into the UK, we back your business, we support your apprenticeships, we back you with tax credits, we’ve given you the lowest corporate tax rate you could possibly expect, we’re a big fan of your company and we want you to do more here. It’ll be their decision. We have to be competitive with other countries. But as I said, I think the Humber Estuary is right for that sort of development.

But let’s be clear, you know, Britain has got many strengths when it comes to business and industry, and we need to play to all those strengths. As I said, there’s a lot of excitement in our universities, there are a lot of auto industries investing in this country right now. If you look at the British car industry, I’m proud; I’ve got my Jaguar Land Rover cufflinks on from another visit just like this. You know, we’ve got Jaguar Land Rover booming in Britain, we’ve got Honda, Nissan, Toyota, all expanding in Britain. BMW, one of your German sister companies, making Minis just outside my constituency, which wherever I travel in the world I see these fantastic examples of British design and manufacture running round the streets.

So there’s lots to celebrate in terms of Britain’s industrial future, and this government is absolutely behind backing it every step of the way.

Question

Exporting is second nature to this business, but we know how difficult it is. What’s the government doing to encourage and help new exporters from the UK?

Prime Minister

Very good question. It’s one of my favourite statistics. At the moment, one in five of British small businesses export. And if we could turn that from one in five to one in four, we’d wipe out our trade balance altogether. So this is a big national effort required.

What we have, starting at the very top, I hired the Head of HSBC to come into my government as Trade Minister. He’s worked his socks off for the last two and a half years, and I’m replacing him with the Head of BT, one of the most successful British companies that there is in the last few years. And Ian Livingston’s going to be the new Trade Minister starting after the summer, and we have an organisation, UKTI, whose job it is to go round the country and get small businesses to export by encouraging them, by giving them the knowledge, the confidence, a bit of financial help sometimes. And we should do that.

I also take trade missions all over the world. I think if you look at every G20 country, I’ve taken a trade mission to every one apart from Argentina; for some reason I haven’t yet made it to Argentina, but no guesses there.

So I think a big national effort and, you know, we could do better at this. I don’t think there’s any one silver bullet; I think it’s really about encouraging the smaller businesses. For some of the bigger companies, I think export credits have been an issue, particularly in the difficult years of 2008–2010 when credit dried up, and some people say credit’s still not flowing fast enough now. We have introduced some new products to help ensure people’s exports, particularly in big businesses, and we’ve expanded that. And we need to keep working, making sure we’ve got the right products so the exporters really want to use them.

I think if we do all those things, I think it’s important we use all our international connections and expertise. I think Britain is fortunate in that we’re in the G8, the G20, the European Union, the OECD, NATO, the Commonwealth. You know, we are in all the key networks, and we need to exploit all of our memberships of those networks to get the best for our country. And I think we’ve got to look beyond Europe and recognise the fastest-growing economies in the world are going to be, you know, the Russias, the Indias, the Chinas, Malaysia, Indonesia, those countries, and we’ve got to encourage businesses, yes, export to Europe, but also look further afield and build on Britain’s capabilities there.

Again, while we made cuts, actually, when you look at the Foreign Office and our network of embassies around the world, I’ve asked them to be more efficient. I’ve asked them to cut back on some of the excesses. But I’ve said, ‘Actually, we need to open more embassies, more trade missions, more posts around the world.’ I think we’re one of the only European countries with an embassy in every one of the ASEAN countries in Southeast Asia.

So the network’s there, and I hope Siemens will use it, you know. They may be our embassies, but as far as I’m concerned, British businesses, British-based businesses, should use them as your home when you’re exporting.

Question

I just wanted to ask about a big topic in the news at the moment, which is the involvement of our government and GCHQ in mass data collection. This is obviously a very important issue, because we use a lot more data in this day and age than we ever have before, and I just would like to ask of your views.

Prime Minister

Yes, that is a very important question. It’s one of the – one of the biggest responsibilities of the Prime Minister; I am effectively the Minister for the Intelligence Services. And I think it’s very important to understand what they do, to try and explain to the British public what they do and why it’s so important.

So I think first of all, sort of stand back and look at the threats that we face. You know, we saw what happened in America on 9/11, we saw what happened here, 7/7, we know what threats we can face. Every year since I’ve been Prime Minister, our intelligence services have uncovered and prevented at least one major plot every year that could have been a mass casualty event.

So we are dealing with a very serious issue: our national security. And I think it’s very important that we have well funded security services – GCHQ that deals with communications, MI5, which is the domestic security service, and MI6, which deals with overseas intelligence – that we have them well funded, well organised but, crucially, within the law.

There are acts of parliament that determine what they are allowed to do and what they’re not allowed to do. And they’re overseen by a now much strengthened, intelligence and security committee that sits in parliament, that is headed by Sir Malcolm Rifkind, a former Foreign Secretary, that can examine all the work that they do.

And I’m satisfied that they act within the law. And I’m also satisfied, because this was important in the issues that came up, that they are not using their cooperation with foreign intelligence services to somehow get round the law; they’re not using data garnered from overseas to get round the restrictions that there are in the UK. And I think that’s vitally important. I mean, if you want me to say more I will.

Very simply put, because I think it’s quite reassuring when you hear this, if the police or intelligence service want to know the detail about a bit of communications, i.e. a mobile phone call that Mr A makes to Mr B. If they want to know simply who made the call, where were they, what was the time of the call or who were they calling, that so-called communications data, there is a legal process they have to go through to access that data. So there’s a legal process. But it is very important they can access that. Think of how many murders, rapes, abductions, terrorist investigations, you know… Almost all serious crime, the police will use communications data – the, ‘who called who, when and where?’ – they’ll use that data in the investigation. So it’s very important they have access to that data, all done legally.

That shouldn’t be confused with the content of communications, i.e. what Mr A said to Mr B. Now if the intelligence services want to listen to that they have to have a signed warrant by the Home Secretary. So that’s quite a high bar. So I’m very satisfied, and I’ve simplified it, but I’m very satisfied that garnering information about the data, who called who and when, and garnering information about the content are very strictly controlled in Britain. But do I think it’s important that we have security services, that they can do those things in order to keep us safe? Absolutely I do.

And I see at first hand these very brave people, who never get thanked because we’re not really allowed to know who they all are, working round the clock to keep us safe from very dangerous people who do us harm. So, nothing in the world is ever perfect, but I would argue we have a good system, well run, that we can be proud of in Britain, that helps to keep us safe.

Question

I’m from the Siemens Commercial Academy, which takes students from sixth form straight into full-time employment and funds your degree as well. This year, sadly, we’ve had to drop the degree because of the rise of university fees, which has resulted in the loss of applicants to our scheme. Are you trying to deter young people from going to university and getting a higher degree, a higher education, even given the state of, like, the unemployment in the young?

Prime Minister

That’s a very good question. The answer is: no we are absolutely not trying to deter young people to go to university. And, in fact, recently the numbers of young people applying has actually been increasing rather than falling.

But there is a big issue here which is how do we pay for good universities? It goes back to my argument: if we are going to be a winner in the global race, if we are going to be a success as a country, we’ve got to have good universities with well paid tutors, well stocked libraries, really great technical labs. That costs money. And the only two places you can get it from: you can get it from the taxpayer – but the taxpayer has already got to pay for everything else – or you can ask students to pay. So the decision we took was to say to students that we are going to charge you more in fees for your degree. But what we said, absolutely crucially, is you pay nothing up front. There is no up-front payments, and you only start paying it back when you’re earning over £21,000 a year. So it’s actually only better off students, only successful students that are paying back the money. You don’t start paying back in full until you’re earning £35,000.

So, look, it is a tough decision; it is difficult. But what it means is that our universities can continue to expand, our degree courses will be well funded. They’ll be competitive with other countries around the world, because there’s no point having second-rate degrees and second-rate universities. And I think it’s fair because we’re not asking people to pay back until they are earning a decent wage. But I know it is – it is difficult, but I think the evidence is beginning to show, not only, as I said, that numbers applying are looking good, but also the numbers applying from the most deprived backgrounds have increased. And that’s because we’ve put a lot of effort into bursaries and other packages to encourage people to go to university.

But again, a lot of what I have to do is about making tough decisions that are in the long-term interest of the country. And I think this fits squarely into that. And that’s what you have to do in business. Sometimes you have to make difficult decisions for the future of Siemens, for the future of manufacturing. You have to change things. You have to change processes in order to make sure your business goes on and succeeds in the future.

Can I think you again very much for the warm welcome. Thank you for letting me come and see the amazing work that you do here. Can I congratulate you again on 90% of your business being exports, the massive investment you make in young people and the big investment you make in Lincoln. Thank you very much.

Below is the speech made by the Prime Minister, David Cameron, to the 2013 Business in the Community Awards held on the 2nd July 2013.

It’s a real pleasure to come and celebrate the work of so many of our leading businesses who are helping to make our country a better place.

Business in the Community are the great champions of this cause.

And it’s absolutely right that they should hold this…

…the Oscars of good, responsible business.

If you want to know why responsible business matters, look at our hosts this evening, Marks and Spencer….

….whose Shwopping scheme, brilliantly advocated by Joanna Lumley, has already raised £2.3 million for Oxfam.

Look at Trading for Good – a new free platform launched today to recognise what smaller businesses are doing in their local communities.

Look at innovative CEOs like Steve Holliday helping companies promote their vacancies to the unemployed…

… or Paul Drechsler showing businesses how to support schools.

And look at the growing number of business connectors…

…people seconded from business working for a year in our communities, to make the links between local business and the local organisations that need the most support.

All of them – and all of you here tonight – are proving two things that I believe very passionately.

The first is that business has a key role to play in building a bigger and stronger society.

The second, that responsible business is good business too.

I am a passionate believer in the free enterprise system.

I believe that starting a business, selling a product or service, turning a profit, investing and building…

…these are good and noble things.

They create the wealth and jobs we need.

But business has the capacity to do even more.

Responsible business can be the greatest force for social progress on the planet.

From worklessness to obesity…

…from the break-up of families to the break-down of communities…

…from environmental damage to economic dislocation…

…I simply cannot think of an area of public policy where the creative thinking of business wouldn’t help in delivering a better outcome.

And if we have learnt anything from the last two decades, it is surely this…

…that we can’t solve our social problems simply by government changing laws or passing down edicts from above.

We need business, charities and individuals to work together with government.

Not just government action but social action.

Not just government responsibility but personal and corporate responsibility.

That’s how we change our country for the better.

So yes, the moral case for responsible business is strong.

But just consider for a moment the economic case.

Let me explain.

Businesses want low taxes, and as little regulation and interference from government as possible.

And this is a government that is determined to do everything possible to achieve that.

That’s why we are cutting the red tape…

…and cutting corporation tax to 20%, the lowest of any major economy in the world.

But the truth is that governments don’t just interfere for the sake of it…

…they do so because there are problems in our society that need government spending to pay for them.

So responsible businesses can help.

You can help us to tackle the crime, the family breakdown, the education failure that causes the demand for public spending – and therefore taxes to rise.

And there is something else you can do.

You can make sure that low taxes are actually paid.

Right now taxes are higher than they need to be because the international tax system doesn’t work.

Some individuals and some companies are able to evade their responsibilities and that makes taxes higher for everyone else.

So when I made tackling tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance a priority for the G8 in Northern Ireland last month…

…I wasn’t just doing what is right for good government…

…I was doing what is right for good business too.

Now there is one area where I’d like to make a particular plea for business help tonight…

…and that’s supporting our young people.

In the coming months HRH The Prince of Wales is launching a nationwide campaign…

…with the full support of myself, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg…

…to help young people contribute to their communities through service to others.

From working with groups like the Scouts and Guides who have been leading the way on social action for over a century…

…to new programmes like National Citizen Service…

….the Campaign for Youth Social Action will bring together all the different ways in which young people can give something back to their community.

And it will seek to create a legacy of social action that we can pass down from generation to generation.

National Citizen Service is one of the newest parts of this…

…but it has the potential to be one of the biggest.

You know how it works.

Young people from different backgrounds come together…

…first, for an outdoor challenge that takes them outside their comfort zone and makes them work as teams…

…then living together back in their local area working with local businesses and community leaders to learn new skills…

…and finally making their own mark by planning and delivering a social action project that gives something back to their community.

From the first two years alone, we have 35,000 graduates.

This year we’ll double that.

And over time I want National Citizen Service to become a rite of passage in our country that can give our young people a sense of purpose, optimism and belonging.

But to do that – and to make the Campaign for Youth Social Action a great national project – we will need the help of business.

So I’m delighted that tonight the government is supporting a new award which recognises businesses which support social action for young people…

…and I would ask you all to think about what more you can do.

Because this campaign isn’t about government.

And it isn’t about party politics either.

It’s about how together we help young people understand the value of social responsibility.

It’s about the expectations we set.

The culture we build.

It’s about equipping our young people with the skills and character to work, to contribute, to make our country what it can be.

In short, it’s about our future.

So as the children from Emerald Music School who just performed for us so brilliantly put it: imagine it possible.

And then let’s go and make it so.

Thank you very much for listening.

Congratulations again on all that you are doing to make our country a better place.

And have a great evening.

Below is the text of the speech made in welcome to Teach First representatives during their visit to Downing Street, London, on 8th July 2013.

Well, a very, very warm welcome to Number 10 Downing Street. I am an enormous fan of Teach First, of the whole idea of everything that you do, of the massive achievement that you are bringing to our schools. So it is a real privilege to welcome you here.

When you’re a leader of a political party, or Prime Minister, you do get some amazing days out. And obviously I had a pretty amazing day out yesterday at the tennis. And there are other things you get to go and see: the SAS train in Hereford or you get to go and see some of our most incredible universities. I remember going to one where they were working on the Space Programme and the guy said, ‘This really is rocket science.’

But I remember one of the most inspiring days I’ve had in the seven years that I’ve led a political party, and that was going to spend some time on one of your Teach First training days. And I saw then, in the early days of Teach First, the incredible potential of what you do. And in the spirit of teaching I tried to remember my homework for today’s meeting and I want to give you three statistics.

Statistic number one, which is why we need you so badly, is there are 80,000 children every year on free school meals, but typically only 40 of them get to the very best of our universities. And that is, I think, a standing rebuke to us as a country in terms of social mobility and educational attainment.

The second of the figures I have, which I think shows the incredible potential of what you do, is that Teach First is now not only the biggest graduate recruiter, but it is also the fastest growing. So this to me says that there is an incredible appetite for this brilliant programme, and I think that is hugely welcome.

The third of my statistics is also, I think, quite important, which is that we have quadrupled the number of Teach First graduates over the last three and a half years. So I think when you put those things together you can see a programme that is absolutely needed, a programme that is incredibly popular and a programme that has the full support of the Department of Education, the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister.

And let me just say a few of the things about why I like this programme so much. And the most important thing is the context for all of this, and the day today when we launched the new National Curriculum. The context is very simple. We are in a global race. We have to make sure that our students and our school are as good, as stretched, as talented as those in Shanghai, in Singapore, in Helsinki or wherever. We have to compare ourselves to the best in the world and ask ourselves, ‘How can we be up there with the best?’ And that to me is absolutely what Teach First is about.

I asked, I think all of the Teach First graduates out there the same question, which is, ‘When you went to university did you think you were going to become a teacher?’ And the answer from every single one was the same, ‘No I didn’t. I thought actually that probably wasn’t something I’d do. I was going to be a banker,’ or, ‘I was going to be a lawyer,’ or, worse, ‘I was going to be a politician.’

No-one said they were going to be a teacher and I think what Teach First has done is just inspired some of the best and brightest in our country to consider teaching. I think that is something to really celebrate.

I think the fact that Teach First graduates go into some of our most challenging areas and some of our most challenging schools is also something to celebrate. Because you should judge a country by not how well it does for those who have all the natural advantages, but for those who actually don’t have those advantages, are we engineering an education system that can really give the bright kid from the poor home the best chance to get on? And I think that is something absolutely to celebrate in Teach First.

But I think perhaps the thing I like about it almost the most – and this may sound odd from someone who runs the government, as it were – but one of the things I like about Teach First, is that this isn’t a rolled-out, top-down government initiative; this is a Big Society initiative. This is schools, universities and an incredible voluntary body/social enterprise getting together, seeing a need, seeing a pool of talent and thinking, let’s get this sorted.

A bunch of people who set up Teach First saw the lack of educational attainment of so many in our country and simply said to themselves, ‘It does not have to be this way.’ They set up Teach First, with government-backing and help they’ve grown it massively. But, above all, it’s an initiative that brings together schools, universities and a voluntary body: a group of people who wanted to change our country for the better.

So you have my 100% commitment and support. I think Teach First is an absolutely brilliant idea. I think its expansion is wholly welcome. I think we can learn lessons for other sectors, in terms of getting bright graduates perhaps to go into social work and to other enterprises as well.

So it’s a huge privilege to have you here. I have a very, very simple message, which is please just do more of what you’re doing: much, much, much more, and as you do so, you’ll have the complete backing of this government. Thank you very much indeed.

Below is the text of the press conference given by David Cameron at Downing Street, London, on 17th July 2013.

Prime Minister David Cameron

Good afternoon everybody. I’m delighted to welcome Enrico on his first official visit to London, but he is course an old friend of this country, and he made a great contribution at the G8 in Northern Ireland last month. Britain’s relationship with Italy is one of the closest that we have. We’re proud to serve alongside Italian forces in Afghanistan, and we’re proud of what we achieved together in Libya.

We’ve also shown what we can do when we joined forces in Brussels to get the EU budget into better shape and to support economic growth. And we have a wealth of business ties, as we’ve seen actually in the last few days with the new agreement to pipe gas from BP’s field in Azerbaijan to homes and business in Italy. But we believe that we can have even more impact still, and that is what we’ve been discussing today. We share a strong ambition to do more to turn Europe’s economy around, and to create the new jobs that we need.

Now Britain and Italy face different contexts – Italy is in the Euro, Britain is not, Britain is not going to be. But sorting out the economy is an urgent priority for both of us. So we’re both making hard-won progress to get control of spending, so we can escape the debt crisis that weighs our economies down.

We joined forces in Brussels last month to bring the same control to EU spending, and we agree on the importance of the steps underway to bring financial stability to the eurozone. But we also know a lot more work is needed to reform the EU and to tackle the crisis of competiveness that holds Europe back in this global economic race.

So we’ve agreed to put real political commitment behind the talks to open Europe’s trade with the wider world, especially the EU – US free trade talks, which we launched at Lough Erne last month, which could add £100 billion to Europe’s economy. We’re making common cause to reduce EU burdens that get in the way of businesses growing and creating jobs. I’ve established here in the UK a business task force to identify what rules need to be scrapped and changed, and we’ve agreed to build on this with good strong proposals to take to the next European Council, the October Council, together.

And we’re going to work together to take the G8 trade, tax and transparency agenda into the G20 and beyond so the rules of the world economy actually deliver jobs and growth, both for our economies and the developing world. Now people may not talk about an Anglo-Italian engine in Europe, but what’s clear is how much we share this reforming vision for a more open and competitive European Union.

And Enrico, I was very struck by what you said in your interview with the BBC yesterday about the need for reform in Europe and more flexible Europe that would benefit all of us. That’s at the heart of my approach to the European Union, and it’s what I think will make Europe a powerful economic force in the world again. And I believe it’s essential to win confidence and consent of people at home for this agenda.

So, a warm welcome, a great friend of Britain, but it’s great to have you here as Prime Minister and very much enjoying working with you on all of these issues. Enrico.

Prime Minister Enrico Letta

Thank you David, thank you for your kind welcome, first of all, and thank you also for the leadership you’ve shown in the Lough Erne G8 meeting. I think there we reached important agreements on the fight against tax evasion, tax avoidance, against the fiscal paradise. So I think it was a very important G8.

We reached important agreement on Syria, we discussed on Libya, and in our meeting now we discuss on both topics, I think sharing the same worries and trying to find the same solutions. I repeated what I said in the meeting we had some days ago with Prime Minister Zeidan about Libya. We want to have a stabilisation there, we want to train Libya military forces, but of course we want to have them very much involved in having the correct deadline of the decision that we took in Lough Erne, which was I think the correct timetable and the correct solutions that we took there.

Of course it’s very important also the Anglo-Italian joint activity inside the European Union. First of all, on the future reforms of the European Union. We share the need for a more flexible Europe, and I think a more flexible Europe would be very important for both our countries and will be very important for the European Union, because we need to have a more flexible Union.

We need to have – and I completely share what David just said – and what David said was for in the last European Council – we have to be completely aware of the fact that we need to close the gap between our citizens and the European institution. It’s a gap not only for British citizens; it is also for Italian citizens, and I think we can jointly work on that. It will be necessary, and I really think that the Italian semester in the second half of next year could help to reach agreements and to have some important result on this topic.

I will say, also, that on the single market, we have to work; we have to work jointly, because we share the idea that the single market is really a pillar of the European Union integration, and is the pillar shared by all the 28, of course. We don’t share the same currency, but we share the main pillar of the European Union, that is, the single market.

And I think we have to work together, and we decided to have a joint Anglo‑Italian work on how to foster single market and how to work, for instance, on some issues linked to the fact that the single market is – is no more working in some important fields.

If I look at the financial service system at the European level, if I – for other important issues, we have national champions. But we don’t have European champions. It’s very difficult to overcome the obstacles at the borders, and, of course, we are not competitive towards Chinese, Americans, and so on. So, it’s a very important achievement and we have to work very hardly on that.

And of course, other important issues on which we have to work together: the TTAP, first of all; the trade with the United States. We want to – we support, of course, the work of the European negotiators there, but we want – we ask them to be fast. To go – to work fast is necessary to have solutions, agreements, as soon as possible, because the positive end of the TTAP negotiation process will be a success for the European Union, but a big achievement for the UK and for Italy, too.

And of course, the other main issue is the December European Council. The December European Council will be dedicated on defence. Italy and the UK, we share the idea that the European Union has to be stronger; stronger, and stronger as a global player. This is why we think and we want to have a joint initiative, for instance, on the argument of defence industry. That is a very important topic for the European competitiveness, but also for Italian competitiveness and I think for the UK competitiveness.

So, I will here send a final, very, very warm message: I am here to say that it is an Italian interest – and I think a European interest – that the UK stay on board of the European process. It would be important because without the UK on board European Union will be worse, will be less liberal, will be less innovative, less pro-free market, less pro-single market, less global player in the world. So, this is why we think that we can work together on many issues and it would be very important for UK, for Italy and for the European Union.

Prime Minister David Cameron

Thank you, Enrico; a very powerful and clear statement. We have some questions, I think.

Question

Thank you very much. Prime Minister Letta, can I pick up what you’ve just said? Do you think reform in Europe means reform for all member states, or has the British Prime Minister discussed with you the possibility of a special deal for Britain in future?

And Prime Minister Cameron, if I may: you hired a man who also is paid for by a tobacco firm. Aren’t voters entitled to a clear rather than a legalistic answer? Have you ever discussed the subject of tobacco packaging with Lynton Crosby?

Prime Minister Enrico Letta

My answer is very clear: of course we need, all, reforms, and we need reform of all the European Union for all the countries. For instance, we – the countries sharing the same currency – we need to have a more integrated euro area.

So, I think it will be possible to have a common very near future in which we can have treaty changes for having a more flexible Europe in the interest of the UK, but also in the interest of the countries like Italy and like the euro area countries; we need more integration because we share the same currency. So, we can join our interests and we can have a very positive and common achievement on that.

Question

Insisting on the fact that – UK to remain in the EU should see something more on growth and competitiveness. So, how do you deal with that at – and at the same time, you ask, as you did, to reduce the EU budget?

And another little question for Prime Minister Cameron. In the UK you are giving asylum to a Kazakh dissident, which is Mr Mukhtar Ablyazov; the wife and the daughter of Mr Ablyazov were recently sent back from Italy to Kazakhstan, and this is at the centre of a political scandal in Italy. So, I was wondering if you had the opportunity to talk about this with Prime Minister Letta or not? Thank you.

Prime Minister Enrico Letta

Political stability of course is one of the main issues for us, and I am sure that political stability is absolutely essential for bringing growth. Without political stability, it is impossible to have growth. This is why in my meetings this morning with the financial, the business community, yesterday at Chatham House, and with the others, too, I repeated that my first commitment is for growth, recovery, economic reforms, but without political stability it will be impossible.

So, my work is to boost political stability and of course it will be my first mission also having the reform of politics. I talked to David, also, how important was the fact that the Senate approved some days ago the first constitutional change of this long-term process that we are proposing to our country to arrive at the end of the process to a huge constitutional change. That would be very important and now, of course, I will ask to political parties to my country to continue – to continue on this path because it’s the correct path. The political stability is absolutely necessary; if not, it will be impossible to get recovery.

Prime Minister David Cameron

Thank you. On the issue that you asked me: it’s an on-going legal process, so I can’t comment in any way about an individual case. As to your question about the UK seeking reform of the European Union, I think that’s a very simple issue really.

As we were discussing over our meeting, 18 members of the 28 share the same currency; the others don’t. The single currency is driving a process of change in the European Union, and we need to reform the European Union and make it flexible enough so that members of the single currency can make that currency work effectively and coordinate effectively. And those of us outside the single currency can find a comfortable position within the European Union. That needs change; that needs reform.

And I think what Enrico said today is very significant, that in seeking that reform – in seeking change – that Britain does actually have a positive response from the German Chancellor, the Italian Prime Minister, the Swedish Prime Minister, the Dutch Prime Minister. I think there is growing understanding. Not all of us would agree about every change that is necessary, but there’s growing understanding that change is needed to make this organisation work better for all its members.

Question

Question for the Italian Prime Minister first. Sir, could I also ask you about your comment about wishing the UK to stay on board the European process; how concerned are you about Mr Cameron’s proposals for a referendum here in the UK on whether Britain should remain in the EU and the possibility that Britain might vote to leave the EU?

Mr Cameron, when the weather here is as hot as it is in Italy, probably, and people are drinking a lot more, you’ll recall saying last year, ‘When beer is cheaper than water, it’s just too easy for people to get drunk on cheap alcohol at home before they even set foot in the pub. So, we are going to introduce a new minimum unit price’; why the U-turn on that today? Was that campaign advice from Mr Crosby?

Prime Minister David Cameron

Let me take that question first. We’re introducing today what is effectively a minimum price, because we’re saying it’s going to be illegal to sell alcohol below the rate of duty plus VAT. So supermarkets or shops deeply discounting alcohol will be made illegal. So, that will, I think, be a positive step forward, and the Home Office have made a number of announcements linked to this which I think will – will help.

But, on the issue of – of minimum unit pricing, it’s actually quite a similar situation to the issue of plain paper packaging on cigarettes. There are good arguments for it. The argument has a lot of merits, which I myself have spoken about, but I think there are these two problems. There’s the degree of legal uncertainty; it’s been introduced in Scotland, but it’s still under legal challenge. And there’s also question marks about its – behind it and how well it can work. And so when we have more evidence about how it can work and we’ve got more certainty about the legal issues, I think it’s an idea, as I said, that has merit – that I’ll be happy to consider again.

So, in both these cases, decisions made very much by me as Prime Minister, consulting my Cabinet colleagues, but in the end the buck stops absolutely here. These are both decisions that I have made. I think they’re the right ones because we need the evidence base, we need the legal certainty and then we can move ahead. But, until then, it makes sense not to move ahead. But the package we’ve got I think on alcohol pricing, as I say – banning the sale below VAT plus duty – I think is a good step forward.

Prime Minister Enrico Letta

And, of course, I don’t want to enter in a – in a domestic debate, but I would say when the voters have the opportunity to say their decision about the future of the European Union, it’s always a good thing for Europe. So, I personally have no fear about the referendum. It would be for sure something of positive for – for Europe and for the UK, because – I repeat, no fear on that.

Question

Good afternoon. I have the same question for the President and of course your [inaudible] Prime Minister Cameron. If you found a common ground about enforcement, strength and competitiveness, and if it’s possible to connect this issue to the fight against unemployment problem that is very strong in Europe too?

Prime Minister Enrico Letta

Yes it is, because I think that single market – deepening the single market is one of the main issues for having a more competitive Europe. Single market means having the opportunity to have a higher and big dimension for our – for the size of our companies.

Single market means to boost digital agenda. Single market means also to tackle with the red – the red tape problems and, of course, we have in Italy a lot of problems from bureaucracy. And it’s one of the main issues, to cut bureaucracy and to cut bureaucratic costs.

So yes, is the main issue to boost competitiveness and to have and to fight against the unemployment, the only way is to have growth. Without growth, it’s very difficult to win the fight against the unemployment.

Prime Minister David Cameron

Well, I think you’ve heard it. I mean I often go to European Council meetings and I say there is very strong support for the agenda of completing the single market in energy, in digital, in services. There’s strong support for these competitiveness issues. And there’s strong support for the EU–US trade agendas and other agendas.

And I sometimes think maybe people think that I’m inventing this mythical support. Well, you can see here today the Italian Prime Minister speaking very clearly about the single market, about competitiveness, about jobs, about growth that we’ll get if we make these important structural reforms.

And that is a joint Anglo-Italian agenda, one that we’ve decided from our different political traditions and different starting points we’re going to work together on. We’re going to draw in other allies across the European Union, and we hope to really push this agenda, including at the October and December European Councils.

So it’s been an excellent meeting today. Very warm welcome to have you here, Enrico, and I look forward to working with you in the months ahead.

Prime Minister Enrico Letta

Thank you.