Category: Northern/Central England

  • Louise Haigh – 2022 Speech on Doncaster Sheffield Airport

    Louise Haigh – 2022 Speech on Doncaster Sheffield Airport

    The speech made by Louise Haigh, the Shadow Transport Secretary, in the House of Commons on 24 October 2022.

    I like the Minister very much and I wish her well in her ministerial duties, but she is not the aviation Minister; the Secretary of State should be here to answer this urgent question. A critical regional airport is days away from closure and she cannot be bothered to turn up. What message does it send to the people of South Yorkshire, 125,000 of whom signed a petition to keep the airport open, that she will not attend the Chamber and cannot even attend meetings with South Yorkshire MPs and leaders to discuss how we can protect Doncaster Sheffield airport? The Government have repeatedly refused to meet the Mayor of South Yorkshire and other regional leaders to discuss what options are open. It is truly a slap in the face to the hundreds of people whose jobs currently hang in the balance.

    When the right hon. Member for South West Norfolk (Elizabeth Truss)—the Prime Minister for the next few hours at least—came to Yorkshire, she gave a commitment on behalf of the Government to protect Doncaster Sheffield airport. That commitment must outlast her Government, not least because this airport is of strategic significance: it has one of the longest runways in Britain, it is the base for the National Police Air Service, and it is a home to national coastguard operations.

    Thanks to the leadership of the Mayor of South Yorkshire, credible investors have been identified, but it is obvious that the Peel Group never had any intention of negotiating in good faith, so it is not an option for Doncaster Council or the Mayor to purchase shares in the airport, given that the Peel Group is refusing to sell. It is willing to let the airport close, to let infrastructure be degraded and to remove any chance of its being reopened in future.

    The case for action from the Government is crystal clear. The use of emergency powers under the Civil Contingencies Act is the only possible measure to keep the airport running. Potential investors have made it clear that the Secretary of State’s refusal to use those powers is creating far greater uncertainty and instability, and is making purchase at any point in future even more unlikely. Can the Minister outline precisely why the Secretary of State has refused to consider the use of the Act? That decision is political, so it is beholden on her to explain to the people of South Yorkshire why she refuses to use it. If she continues to refuse, will the Minister lay out what powers exist anywhere else that could keep the airport running?

    As we await the third Prime Minister in seven weeks, there is less than a week left to save the airport. If the Government do not take the action that the people of South Yorkshire desperately need them to take, the people will conclude that this is final proof that the Tories’ levelling-up agenda is dead.

    Katherine Fletcher

    The message to the people of South Yorkshire is that they have an incredibly strong local champion in my hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley (Nick Fletcher), who has been working tirelessly to make it happen from day one. The previous aviation Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Robert Courts), who is present, has already met the combined authority. The hon. Lady asks where the power lies; it lies with the Labour mayoral combined authority—the local council. [Interruption.] Well, let me address the Civil Contingencies Act: it was introduced by the Blair Government. When the Minister brought it to the House, it was envisioned that it would be used in only the most serious circumstances and

    “would be used rarely, if ever”.—[Official Report, 19 January 2004; Vol. 416, c. 1109.]

    No Government have used it in 18 years. The Opposition—[Interruption.] The Labour party bringing in a law that was not serious; that would astonish me! What you are doing is trying to find a piece of politicking, instead of sitting down—[Interruption.] Sorry, it is my first go, Madam Deputy Speaker. You are—[Hon. Members: “You’re doing it again!”] The hon. Lady will forgive me, as it is my first go. [Interruption.] What we need is for the Peel Group to sit down with the commercial people, and that is what it promised to do when it sat down with the aviation Minister on 19 October.

  • Katherine Fletcher – 2022 Statement on Doncaster Sheffield Airport

    Katherine Fletcher – 2022 Statement on Doncaster Sheffield Airport

    The statement made by Katherine Fletcher, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Department for Transport, in the House of Commons on 24 October 2022.

    Following the strategic review of the airport announced in July this year, the Government are incredibly disappointed that Peel Group has taken the difficult decision to announce the potential closure of Doncaster Sheffield airport. While it was a commercial decision made by the owners of the airport, I fully appreciate the impact it has had not only on passengers who use the airport, including the constituents represented by many hon. Members in the South Yorkshire region, but on those businesses, organisations and people who work at the airport and within the supply chain.

    As I know from growing up underneath the flightpath of Manchester airport, regional airports are key in serving our local communities, supporting thousands of jobs in the regions and acting as a key gateway to international opportunities. That is why during the pandemic the Government supported airports through schemes such as the airport and ground operations support scheme, through which Doncaster Sheffield airport was able to access grant funding.

    I need to be clear that, while the UK Government support airports, they do not own or operate them. However, devolved Administrations, local and combined authorities are frequently shareholders in airports that serve their communities, as is the case with Manchester Airports Group, Birmingham airport, London Luton airport and, most recently, Teesside International. The UK aviation market operates predominantly in the private sector. Airports invest in their infrastructure to attract airlines and passengers. We will continue to support all parties to seek a commercial or local solution.

    Since the announcement by Peel Group on the airport’s future on 13 July, the Government have been actively working with local stakeholders to encourage a future for aviation at the site. My hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley (Nick Fletcher) and the Department for Transport have met Peel, and I understand that the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority and Doncaster Council have been working during the review to explore options for a locally led solution. The local authorities have now written to Peel Group to pass on the details of those who are interested in potential options to invest in the airport, and I understand that Peel has begun to engage with those parties.

    The aviation Minister, Baroness Vere, met Peel on 19 October and strongly encouraged it to look seriously at any commercial interest. She has also been proactively encouraging Peel Group to strongly consider the local and combined authorities’ offers of bridging support if it requires extra time to take forward any discussions with investors.

    The Government remain engaged and we look forward to seeing further progress. The House has today highlighted the importance of Doncaster, and I will convey the strength of feeling among Members present to Baroness Vere as she continues her work. I call on Peel Group to continue to work with stakeholders to find a commercial solution or to minimise the impact of its review of the airport.

    Stephanie Peacock

    Doncaster Sheffield airport is an important regional economic asset with thousands of jobs dependent on it. Despite Peel Group’s announcement of its closure, local leaders have made every effort to work with the group and press the Government to secure the airport’s future. The South Yorkshire Mayor made Peel Group an offer of public money to keep the airport running, and local leaders have helped to find three potential investors who are seriously interested in keeping the airport operational, but those efforts have met resistance at every turn. Having already run the airport down, Peel Group is still refusing to confirm whether it is willing to suspend its closure, or whether it is even in a position to sell Doncaster Sheffield Airport Ltd.

    Meanwhile, the Secretary of State, who could not even be bothered to turn up today, will not engage with interested parties and is refusing to invoke powers such as those in the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 to protect the airport. She refused three times on the Floor of the House to meet local leaders and is yet to respond to a petition signed by more than 125,000 people, despite assurances from the outgoing Prime Minister that the Secretary of State would address the issue “immediately” and “protect the airport”. Actions speak louder than words. Having created a climate of uncertainty, neither Peel Group nor the Government are using the powers and influence they have to explore every option to ensure the airport’s future. That is not good enough—for workers, for businesses, or for all of us who rely on the emergency services stationed at the airport.

    I thank Doncaster Council, the South Yorkshire Mayor, my right hon. Friends the Members for Doncaster Central (Dame Rosie Winterton) and for Doncaster North (Edward Miliband), and my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Heeley (Louise Haigh). Local leaders want the Government to work with us rather than taking a hands-off approach. Potential investors in the airport need certainty in the next 24 hours. It is imperative that Ministers step up, take action and use their powers to do everything they can to save Doncaster Sheffield airport.

    Katherine Fletcher

    The hon. Lady speaks with passion and partisanship in not mentioning my hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley (Nick Fletcher). I think she is a little late to the party; even a cursory glance at my hon. Friend’s social media feed will show that he is on day 105 of his campaign to save Doncaster airport. He has met a series of different parties, and it is slightly beneath the hon. Lady not to recognise his efforts to protect his local community.

    Baroness Vere, the aviation Minister, met Peel on 19 October, and it assures her that it is open to meeting potential investors. The Secretary of State has met Peel twice. The implication that we are not doing everything to find a solution for regional airports, which we recognise are incredibly important, is not correct.

    I am sure that the Civil Contingencies Act will come up in other questions, so let me allude to it briefly. The Civil Contingencies Act is for absolute emergencies only. Even one of the operators at the airport has written to the Prime Minister to explain that it can still find contingency efforts elsewhere, so the threshold for the last Labour Government’s legislation has nowhere near been met.

  • Tim Farron – 2022 Comments on Government’s Emergency Statement

    Tim Farron – 2022 Comments on Government’s Emergency Statement

    The comments made by Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat MP for Westmorland and Lonsdale, on 17 October 2022.

    Let’s be clear: this emergency statement is not in response to an external crisis, a war, a pandemic or global energy prices – it’s in response to the ongoing crisis in the Conservative Government.

    It also speaks volume about the Conservatives’ total disregard for rural communities like ours in Cumbria, that one of the only things that hasn’t been axed from the mini budget is the cut in stamp duty – a measure which will fuel excessive second home ownership and the Airbnb boom that is turning our communities into ghost towns and ejecting local families.

    This chaos cannot be allowed to go on for any longer – it’s time for a General Election.

  • Eddie Izzard – 2022 Comments on Standing for Labour in Sheffield Central

    Eddie Izzard – 2022 Comments on Standing for Labour in Sheffield Central

    The comments made by Eddie Izzard on Twitter on 11 October 2022.

    Labour ideals of fairness and equality have been at the core of my life. I’m standing to be the next Labour MP for Sheffield Central to support the city that has supported me.

    Please join me, in taking on this great challenge.

    eddieizzard.uk/

    For Sheffield. For Labour.

  • Greg Clark – 2022 Comments on Levelling Up the East Midlands

    Greg Clark – 2022 Comments on Levelling Up the East Midlands

    The comments made by Greg Clark, the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Communities and Housing on 30 August 2022.

    The East Midlands is renowned for its economic dynamism and it has the potential to lead the Britain’s economy of the future. For a long time I have believed that the East Midlands should have the powers and devolved budgets that other areas in Britain have been benefitting from and I am thrilled to be able to bring that about in Derby, Derbyshire, Nottingham and Nottinghamshire.

    I am impressed by the way councils in the region have come together to agree the first deal of this kind in the country, which will benefit residents in all of the great cities, towns and villages across the area of Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire.

    Taking decisions out of Whitehall and putting them back in the hands of local people is foundational to levelling up and this deal does that.

  • Iain Duncan Smith – 2002 Speech to the West Midlands Institute of Directors

    Iain Duncan Smith – 2002 Speech to the West Midlands Institute of Directors

    The speech made by Iain Duncan Smith, the then Leader of the Opposition, at Villa Park on 16 May 2002.

    Speaking as I am in Aston Villa territory, I am conscious that some of you will have viewed the recent play-off success of Birmingham City with mixed emotions.

    What I found heart-warming were the headlines plastered all over the newspapers: ‘Blues on the way up’.

    Even West Brom have got in on the act. Not only have they won automatic promotion this season, their supporters topped the BBC’s recent ‘Test the Nation’ IQ quiz.

    At an average of 138, their score was thirty points higher than the English national average.

    Figures were unavailable for politicians and I resist the temptation to speculate.

    Having three sides in the Premiership will provide a multi-million pound boost to the local economy. It is also another sign of this area’s predominance.

    Birmingham is the 12th largest wealth-producing district in Europe. It is a great commercial city, vital not just to the West Midlands but to the whole UK economy.

    And the West Midlands Institute of Directors has an extremely important position.

    I welcome your long-standing efforts to advance the argument for competitive enterprise as the essential building block of lasting prosperity.

    The IoD has a motto: ‘enterprise with integrity’.

    Britain badly needs a Government that practices what you preach.

    When politicians talk about integrity, you probably start counting the spoons.

    But it cannot be right for a Cabinet Minister to be given red carpet treatment when he has lied on national television.

    And it cannot be right that the same Minister misleads Parliament and then refuses even to apologise for it.

    There are few enough opportunities for the public through their MPs to hold the Government accountable in the first place.

    Whatever our political disagreements, if the Government of the day isn’t straight and seen to be so, it is public confidence in our democracy and business confidence that will suffer.

    Integrity matters. And so does an understanding of enterprise.

    This Government talks relentlessly about ‘enterprise’.

    The title of the Budget Red Book was ‘Investing in an enterprising, fairer Britain’.

    ‘Enterprise and fairness’ is one of the Chancellor’s favourite phrases. But what exactly does Labour mean by ‘enterprise’?

    As far as I can see, they mean companies. The private sector. Business, commerce and industry.

    For me enterprise is a much broader concept. It is a culture, a way of doing things. It is about thinking creatively in order to make better products or deliver better services.

    As Bob Michaelson said, what you have in this region is the spirit that created the industrial revolution. This is the spirit of enterprise, and it was no different when it was about 19th century technology than today, when it is about the hi-tech industries of computing and telecommunications.

    Yes, enterprise is about making profits, but it is also about making peoples’ lives better. It should be as much a feature of the public sector as it is of the private sector.

    It’s just as much about building new ways of delivering better public services as it is about building new structures for business.

    This is the real difference between Conservatives and Labour today.

    We are prepared to be enterprising. We are prepared to think differently and creatively to make peoples’ lives better.

    This means holding our hands up and recognising that Britain does not have a monopoly on good ideas in the delivery of public services.

    On the contrary, in the research we have undertaken so far in our policy review, we have found that many other countries have better methods for delivering core public services, particularly healthcare.

    Germany has no national waiting lists.

    Denmark gives people a legal right to treatment within four weeks of seeing their GP.

    Stockholm gives patients the choice of doctor and the hospital they go to. No one can do that in the UK without going private.

    Of course, if Britain could boast similar achievements, we might be justified in ignoring the record of other countries and simply carrying on with what we’ve got, without meaningful reform.

    But the reality is that the quality of the service the public actually receives has deteriorated.

    The NHS has more managers than beds.

    Accident and Emergency waits have grown longer.

    The number of operations is at a standstill.

    We are now confronted with a two-tier Health Service where record numbers of people – a quarter of a million last year – are paying for their own operations, not through insurance but out of their own pockets.

    And all despite this Government increasing NHS spending by nearly a third in real terms.

    Any businessman or woman would question the underlying soundness of an enterprise that produced these sorts of returns on that scale of investment since Labour came to power.

    If you had experienced no appreciable rise in output, and a marked decline in customer satisfaction you would surely look at the underlying approach of your business before committing more investment?

    And if there was clear evidence that your overseas competitors were getting better results, you would surely swallow your pride and have a look at how they did things in other countries.

    Sadly, the Government has done none of these things.

    The result is as depressing as it is unoriginal: a return to tax and spend.

    The Chancellor has embarked on a great experiment to prove that the only thing lacking in the NHS is money.

    And yet we already know that this isn’t true. The evidence is on our own doorstep.

    Taxes will increase by around £8 billion pounds next year with no hint of any real change in the way the Health Service is run.

    Over the next five years Gordon Brown plans to bring average UK health spending into line with what Wales and Northern Ireland spend now. This is the same as France, more than Denmark and Sweden and slightly less than Germany.

    But the treatment of patients is nowhere near as good. Indeed, in Wales and Northern Ireland waiting lists are worse than in England.

    The Chancellor’s only recipe is to spend more generously and police more rigorously the centralised NHS we already have.

    In contrast, Conservatives are prepared to take the genuinely enterprising approach, opening our minds to alternative ideas for reform, looking abroad at examples of where other countries and other systems produce better results.

    The key is to push power down and to place more trust in the people on the frontline.

    If we are to renew the promise of an NHS that delivers the best quality of care to people regardless of their ability to pay, need should be determined by patients working with doctors, not by politicians and civil servants.

    That means decentralising power and making the Health Service genuinely accountable.

    Creating modern public services is a priority for the people who rely on them – particularly the most vulnerable in our society – but it should be a priority for business as well.

    It is certainly a priority for the Institute of Directors. In your Budget submission, the IoD made a range of arguments about the Government’s record on health with which I would strongly concur. In particular, you highlight the galling inconsistency of the Government’s decision to raise employers’ National Insurance.

    As your Budget submission says:

    “Both the Prime Minister and Chancellor have criticised European social insurance schemes for health, on the grounds that they would impose significant extra costs on business. They have then proceeded to introduce an extra tax on business – of just under 0.5% of GDP per annum – in order to pump money into the state run NHS.”

    On countless occasions in the Commons in the months leading up to the Budget, senior Labour Ministers taunted us for even daring to look at other health systems on the continent. They told us that most European health systems relied on some form of social insurance which was ‘a tax on jobs’.

    So what is the £4bn tax on employers’ National Insurance if it isn’t a tax on jobs? Moreover, it is a tax on wealth creation. It says a great deal about what the Government really thinks about enterprise.

    Most importantly, this is the price you pay for a Government that refuses even to countenance other ways of delivering public services.

    That is why genuine health reform is ultimately so important for business, because only fundamental reform offers a way out of the endless cycle where businesses are taxed more to pay more for sclerotic public services.

    And it is an endless cycle.

    This Budget was not the first time Labour have increased taxes on business. They’ve done it every single year since 1997 without fail, it’s just that previously they did it by stealth.

    Almost as soon as Tony Blair first got into office, his Government introduced a £5bn windfall tax on the utility companies, undermining massive investment programmes for some of the most vital infrastructure in the country.

    In their first year, Labour also introduced the tax which Bob Michaelson referred to, the £5bn abolition of dividend credits on pension funds.

    Bob is not alone in criticising this particular tax change. There is currently an Early Day Motion circulating in Parliament criticising the pension stealth tax, stating that it has cut the dividend income on dockers’ pension funds by 33 per cent. The signatories include: Peter Kilfoyle, Jeremy Corbyn and Dennis Skinner.

    Clearly, MPs of all persuasions recognise the harm that this measure has caused.

    As the last Parliament got into full swing, fuel duty soared to record levels, hitting businesses just as hard as everyday motorists.

    Contractors were hit with IR35; National Insurance was levied on benefits-in-kind, and the Climate Change Levy provided extra costs at the worst possible time for energy-intensive industry.

    But it’s not just taxation.

    A recent IoD survey in the West Midlands found red tape to be the greatest obstacle to enterprise in the region.

    The Government’s own ‘Red tape Czar’ shares this view. The Financial Times recently carried an article by David Arculus, the new chairman of the Better Regulation Task Force. He warns of Whitehall ‘drowning companies in a sea of red tape’.

    He recounts his experience of asking one Government department if it could consider giving advice on employment regulation to employers. Incredibly, the department replied that ‘it could not possibly know everything there was to know about employment regulations’.

    But as Mr Arculus says, ‘this is exactly what the government expects of employers’.

    What I find so staggering about this article is that, after five years of Tony Blair saying he would cut red tape, the Government’s own agency for dealing with the problem is absolutely damning in its assessment of Labour’s achievements.

    Quite simply, since May 1997, you have been subject to an unprecedented tide of both red tape and taxation. In that period, business has been burdened with £11bn of new taxes and regulations every single year. Struggling manufacturers, new hi-tech start-ups, care homes for the vulnerable; small, medium and large businesses; they have all been hit.

    Nothing more starkly highlights this Government’s complete failure to understand the nature of enterprise than this unremitting burden on the freedom of business to create wealth.

    As Conservatives we remain committed to free enterprise, where the burdens on business are minimised instead of ramped up at every opportunity.

    But we also know that we have to get the other fundamentals right: sound infrastructure, reliable transport, stable monetary policy and an education system that gives our people the skills to meet the challenges of today’s competitive workplace.

    On all these areas we are making progress in developing policy as part of the review I set up on becoming leader.

    On education, Damian Green has started to reveal our plans for addressing the failings of our worst schools by offering greater opportunities for vocational training.

    On the pressing issue of health reform, we are visiting other countries to see how they provide better services.

    Michael Howard has confirmed our support for an independent Bank of England.

    And I want to reaffirm our commitment to keeping the Pound.

    The Prime Minister has hinted at a referendum on the single currency next year. I gather this afternoon he sent Stephen Byers to brief journalists that he would start the referendum process this autumn. When that news broke the Prime Minster panicked and denied all knowledge. What a way to run a Government, more spin becomes more chaos.

    At a time when everyone is concerned about the state of their schools and hospitals, when we feel threatened by the rise in violent crime, he should focus on these issues and stop playing games over the Euro.

    If the Prime Minister wants Britain to adopt the single currency, he should say so and name a date for the people to decide.

    We will campaign vigorously for a ‘no’ vote because replacing the Pound means giving control of British interest rates, taxes, and public spending to politicians and bureaucrats in Brussels and Frankfurt.

    It would cost us in higher unemployment and lower living standards, and it would mean boom and bust for the British economy and businesses.

    It also means British people giving away control over politicians. Now, people can kick us out if they don’t like us. Inside the euro, it wouldn’t matter how people voted.

    These are the arguments that I believe will prevail.

    We can then get back to the urgent task of making this country fit for the century we are living in.

    The bottom line is that we are opening our minds to new ways of doing things in order to make peoples’ lives better.

    All Labour have done is opened your wallets.

    Britain deserves better.

    It is the business of the Conservative Party to make sure it gets it.

  • Mark Webster – 2022 Statement on Behaviour of PC Amelia Shearer

    Mark Webster – 2022 Statement on Behaviour of PC Amelia Shearer

    The statement made by Mark Webster, the Chief Constable of Cleveland Police, on 25 August 2022.

    Officers must adhere to the highest standards of behaviour and exemplify our values, whether on or off duty. The actions of this officer [Amelia Shearer] are incompatible with my expectations for those who serve in Cleveland and out of keeping with their role, which other officers uphold with pride and integrity.

    Cleveland police’s department of standards and ethics prepare evidence for misconduct hearings. Evidence is heard and a determination made by a panel chaired by an independent, legally qualified chair.

    The misconduct process is in place to protect our standards and ensure public confidence in policing so we are concerned by the outcome determined at yesterday’s hearing. We are now considering the legal options available to us.

  • Andy Burnham – 2022 Comments on Manchester Buses Coming Under Public Control

    Andy Burnham – 2022 Comments on Manchester Buses Coming Under Public Control

    The comments made by Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Manchester, on 17 August 2022.

    The introduction of lower, simpler fares across our bus network signifies the biggest shake-up of our bus system in close to 40 years and comes at a critical time.

    Hundreds of thousands of households across Greater Manchester are deeply worried about money, with fears of even higher bills just around the corner.

    As the most used form of public transport, with around 2.5million trips every week across the city-region, introducing lower fares for bus passengers is the best way we can help the most people with the cost of travel right now.

    Coupled with the extension of Our Pass, which provides free travel for 16 – 18-year-olds, we are taking steps to make an immediate and tangible difference to people’s lives by putting money back into their pockets.

    While this is the right thing to do, we cannot at this point guarantee that this new fare structure will be permanent. It will be reviewed annually. But the more that people use the buses, the more likely it is that we will be able to sustain it.

  • Michael Howard – 2004 Speech to the North East Business Awards in Sedgefield

    Michael Howard – 2004 Speech to the North East Business Awards in Sedgefield

    The speech made by Michael Howard, the then Leader of the Opposition, at the North East Business Awards held in Sedgefield on 20 May 2004.

    Steve, thank you for that kind introduction.

    I am very flattered to be asked to speak to you here tonight.

    These business awards are among the most prestigious in the country. I want to take this opportunity to congratulate Steve Brown, The Journal and The Evening Gazette for organising such a spectacular event.

    May I also take this opportunity to congratulate Durham County Cricket Club for producing the great wicket taker Steve Harmeson, Middlesbrough, for winning the Carling Cup, Sunderland for coming so close to promotion, the Newcastle Falcons for winning the Powergen cup and Newcastle United for winning a place in the UEFA cup – and as a Liverpool fan I’m bound to add that it is the UEFA cup and not the Champions League.

    I am very proud to be standing here before all of you, and not just because of your sporting success.

    I’m proud to be here to celebrate your business success as well.

    Proud and full of admiration.

    Admiration because it’s the people in this room who create the jobs in this part of the country; the people in this room who generate the wealth that pays for our public services; and the people in this room who open up the opportunities that make the North East such a vibrant place to do business.

    Tonight I’m in Tony Blair’s constituency.

    That’s a great honour.

    The Prime Minister is coming to this hotel at the weekend and the security is already tight.

    I was lucky to get in.

    After he hears what I have to say, I may be even luckier to get out.

    Before coming here, I read a speech Tony Blair gave at the Teesside awards in 1996, before he became Prime Minister.

    He told the audience that night that what had happened in the North East in the thirteen years since he had become a Member of Parliament in 1983 was “one of the unspoken miracles of economic development, really anywhere in Europe”.

    He went on to say that the North East “has been regenerated to a degree that I think, certainly, those twelve or thirteen years ago, when I first became a Member of Parliament for Sedgefield, [I] would have found it difficult to believe”.

    It’s good to see that some times politicians are prepared to give credit where it’s due.

    The North East faced huge problems in the 1970s and early 1980s. It had relied too much on heavy industries that had failed to remain competitive. And not enough had been done to prepare for the challenges of the global economy.

    But thanks to the efforts of the people of the North East, including many of you in this room tonight, the North East did perform an economic miracle. From the domination of the local economy by coal, ship building and engineering, we now have a more diverse economy, with successful world-class companies in financial services, software development, chemicals and genetics, as well as a huge range of other businesses.

    The Conservative government of the day helped significantly not only by giving direct regional assistance, but by lowering taxes, curbing the power of the trade unions and making Britain as a whole much more competitive.

    That Government helped establish the framework which allowed people here to seize new opportunities. In a sense, that is the role of politicians. We have long moved on from the idea that we can pick winners or micro-manage every last dot and comma. What we do best is to set the right overall conditions and then, as far as possible, get out of the way and let you get on with it.

    The North East has a dynamic economic and cultural heritage. It’s a place which has seen the birth of countless inventions from the humble matchstick to Stephenson’s Rocket. An area from where Captain Cook sailed to discover Australia and from where Newcastle’s Jonny Wilkinson flew to defeat them.

    At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the North East has fresh challenges ahead. We cannot, in a global economy in the twenty-first century, afford to be complacent. And it is up to us, the politicians, to ensure that we put in place the right policies and the right framework to help you compete.

    Let me, then, tonight, tell you the approach a Conservative government would take if we win the next election.

    First, the economy.

    Tony Blair praised the achievements of the last Conservative government here in the North East. So let me return the compliment to him – and his Chancellor Gordon Brown – for the decision to give the Bank of England independence. It was a necessary further step to provide macro-economic stability for the British economy and it has certainly proved its worth.

    Nevertheless, while I do believe that is a significant achievement, I also believe that that success has to some extent concealed the damage that is being done by over-taxing and over-regulating the British economy.

    Over the last few months, as part of a concerted campaign to listen to and hear the views of business, I have talked to all the major business organisations such as the British Chambers of Commerce, the Institute of Directors and the CBI, and I have talked to business groups in Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Bristol, Edinburgh, Glasgow and many other of the country’s major cities.

    Over and over again, I’ve received one message loud and clear.

    The job of running a business in Britain is getting tougher – much, much tougher.

    I know that this is a message you want to get through to Tony Blair. Sadly, at the end of last year, North East business leaders were excluded from Labour’s Big Conversation with the Prime Minister.

    But The Journal carried your message, which is echoed by your colleagues all over the country: the Federation of Small Business wanted to tackle him on “the increasing burden of red tape on small businesses and the spiralling numbers of attacks on shopkeepers”. The CBI wanted to tackle him on “over-regulation, heavy taxation and all things which are gradually eroding our position in the market place”.

    I share those concerns.

    The burden of regulation on business is, in my view, approaching crisis point. It is eroding the ability of business in the North East to compete. The costs involved can mean the difference between winning an order and losing it.

    Labour are now bringing in 15 new regulations every single working day – 50 per cent more than when we were in office. The British Chambers of Commerce say that regulation has so far cost £30 billion and is a “millstone” round the necks of British business.

    Taxes on business are a cost on your business as well – a very big cost. The tax burden on business has grown substantially in the last seven years. It is estimated that the cumulative amount of additional tax paid by business since Labour came in amounts to some £54 billion.

    And most independent commentators now predict that taxes are likely to rise again if Labour win a third election. That’s the view, among others, of the IMF, the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the ITEM Club.

    We’ve done our own calculations on how much Labour’s Third Term Tax Rises would cost. To cover the black hole in the Government’s borrowing they will have to bring in tax rises equivalent to £900 a year for somebody on average earnings.

    That will make our economy even less competitive. We have already slipped eleven places in the world competitiveness league, from fourth to fifteenth, since Labour came to office. We cannot afford to fall further.

    There is another concern. In just over five years, the number of public sector jobs has risen by more than 500,000. Yet last year, jobs in the private sector fell – by 130,000. In manufacturing, as Larry Elliot pointed out in The Guardian this week, more than 750,000 jobs have been lost under Gordon Brown. Under Kenneth Clarke, 200,000 jobs were created in the sector.

    This mismatch is unsustainable. How can we possibly continue to afford a public sector which is growing, when the private sector, which pays for it, is shrinking?

    So what is the Conservative solution? It’s all very well to criticise. But what would we actually do that is different?

    Let me tell you. We have a three-fold approach. We need to reduce regulation. We need to get a grip on public spending. We need to cut back on waste.

    First, regulation. On day one a Conservative Government will freeze civil service recruitment, which is currently running at 511 new officials a week. That alone will mean fewer officials to dream up regulations. But that is only the start.

    We will ensure that the total regulatory burden imposed by government falls each year. We will introduce sunset clauses in new regulation. And like America, we will exempt small firms from a whole raft of regulation.

    A Conservative government will ensure that, over the medium term, while public spending will continue to grow, it will grow less quickly than the economy as a whole. That is the only way to avoid Labour’s Third Term Tax Rises and over time to reduce the burden of taxation.

    Low tax economies are the most successful economies. They create more jobs, they attract more investment and they generate the resources to pay for the public services we all use.

    Third, we will cut back on waste. We’ve appointed David James, the trouble shooter brought in by the Government to sort out the Dome, to highlight where the Government is wasting money – and how the Conservatives can cut it out. He is supported by 45 advisers from the world of business, who are giving their time and expertise to help us tackle this problem. He’s already identified £20 billion worth of waste, and he’s only looked at three Government departments so far!

    If you’ve got examples of pointless red tape or extravagant Government waste, please get in touch. I’d very much like to hear from you – just write to me at the House of Commons.

    Of course, not all the burdens on business I have talked about come from Britain. The single most expensive regulation for British business in the last few years has been the Working Time Directive. According to some calculations, it has cost business more than £10 billion – so far. Even the French government now acknowledges it has been a brake on their economy.

    More than 40% of new regulations start in Brussels. Regulations such as the chemicals directive which could harm so many businesses in Teesside.

    Be in no doubt – if Europe were to adopt the proposed European Constitution that burden will go on rising.

    The Constitution, for example, incorporates the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The rights under the Charter are loosely drafted. They include the right to strike, the right to so-called social protection, and the right for workers to have information and consultation within business.

    It will be up to the European Court exactly what these rights mean in practice. And if past experience is anything to go by, they will lead to yet more burdens on business – burdens British politicians would be powerless to stop.

    The European Union has achieved a great deal. Together we have created a single market of 450 million people. We have brought into the European family eight countries that just two decades ago lived under the yoke of Soviet oppression.

    But that should not blind us to the fact that the EU is failing to face up to the realities of the twenty first century.

    If the Constitution is passed, it will mean business as usual for Europe – greater centralisation, more regulation and less flexibility. It is the exact opposite of what Europe really needs. Far from solving problems it will create yet more.

    Conservatives have an alternative vision for Europe – a positive vision. It’s one we’re promoting in the run up to the European elections on June 10th, and I am delighted that two of our candidates for the North East, Jeremy Middleton and Martin Callanan, who is already serving you as an MEP, are here with us tonight.

    Just like Newcastle United and Middlesbrough, I am delighted to be in Europe.

    Just like Newcastle and Boro, the Conservatives want Britain to do the best we can in Europe. We want Europe’s member states to have room to breathe. If some countries want to integrate more closely then that is fine – as long as they do not force countries who do not want to, to follow them. Our policy is simple. Live and let live. That is a modern and mature approach – one which will allow Europe to succeed in the twenty first century.

    Just as we don’t think a European Constitution is the answer to Europe’s problems, we don’t think a North East Assembly is the solution to the region’s difficulties.

    Some of the leading voices for North East business, such as the CBI’s Steve Rankin and the Chamber of Commerce’s George Cowcher, are somewhat sceptical as well, and that The Journal to date remains to be completely convinced.

    They are right to be sceptical. When any Government comes calling with an idea for a new political quango, you should run a mile. You should certainly treat their cost estimates like that of the proverbial builder’s. Whatever they say it will cost, double it, treble it, quadruple it. That’s what’s happened with every other Assembly introduced by Labour.

    The fact is that a North East Assembly would have no additional money and no new powers. It would be an expensive talking shop for 25 politicians. And it would remove decision-making further away from the people who matter.

    Council tax has already risen enormously here in the North East. In Sedgefield, you have the highest council tax in the country. In fact, Tony Blair pays a higher council tax on his Band D property in Labour-controlled Sedgefield than he does on his Band H property – 10 Downing Street – in Conservative-controlled Westminster.

    You are paying enough in the North East for local government. You don’t need to pay even more for a North East Assembly.

    Many of you, like me, may have spent time in America. A love of enterprise is at the centre of American society and I admire many aspects of American life.

    In America, they talk about the American Dream. They talk about the ability of someone born in a log cabin to make it to the White House. As it happens, in America this is the exception, not the rule.

    In Britain it actually does happen. There are countless examples of people from humble beginnings who make it to the top: who live the British Dream.

    In Darlington, a self-taught engine-wright named George Stephenson came to call on an energetic quaker financier called Edward Pease one day in 1821 and persuaded him to use locomotives, not horses, on the Stockton to Darlington railway. The rest is history, and Stephenson went from a poor cottage in Wylam with a clay floor and no plaster to achieve great wealth and fame.

    More recently of course, Sir John Hall made himself a fortune and used it to help his team back into the top flight of English football.

    I have no doubt that there are many in this room on their way to great achievements of their own.

    So we should talk about the British Dream. We should embrace it. We should celebrate it. I want everyone to live the British Dream.

    The North East is full of talented and creative people. We could and should be doing so much better.

    We need a government that does less, but does it better.

    That provides a framework in which people can do the best for themselves and their families.

    That allows them to keep more of the money they work so hard to earn.

    And that does not constantly interfere and regulate and get in the way.

    That is the challenge we set ourselves.

    It is a challenge I shall strive to meet.

    And I shall never lose sight of the hugely important part you play in helping us to achieve these goals, by ensuring that our economy thrives.

    You are absolutely vital.

    No government I lead will ever forget that.

    So tonight I look forward to seeing some fantastic companies winning awards and to seeing the presentations that celebrate your achievements.

    Tonight is your night, and I am very grateful that you have asked me to be with you on this great occasion.

    Thank you.

  • Steve Barclay – 2022 Comments on Trip to Warwickshire Health Facilities

    Steve Barclay – 2022 Comments on Trip to Warwickshire Health Facilities

    The comments made by Steve Barclay, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, on 5 August 2022.

    With the backlogs due to COVID it is vital that we innovate to speed up diagnosis and treatment. So it was great to see the state of the art new diagnostic centre in Nuneaton, which opens in 10 days time, and to discuss with local GPs how this will also help them deliver improved patient care.

    Diagnostic one-stop shops, like the George Eliot Hospital, are right at the heart of local communities and are helping to speed up access to X-rays, lung function tests, ultrasound and endoscopy. By bringing under one roof cardiac and respiratory diagnosis with access to pathology investigations, it will allow patients to attend once rather than need repeat visits. It is also good for staff retention and progression to have these new facilities with state of the art equipment.

    This, combined with other innovations in the region like remote monitoring at Manor Park Surgery are supporting the NHS on the biggest catch up programme in history.