Category: Speeches

Therese Coffey – 2023 Speech on the 25 Year Environment Plan

The speech made by Therese Coffey, the Environment Secretary, at the Mappin Pavilion at ZSL on 19 July 2023.

Well, I should say thank you very much, first of all, Matthew for allowing us to be here. I’m also very grateful to the Prime Minister. I think people try and say that the Prime Minister is not interested in nature, far from it. He’s very interested in our environment. I remember when I was first in Defra as an environment minister and he was in local government, we worked together on the litter strategy, we talked about how these sorts of things affect people’s lives, about how they respect their local environment, and extending that, of course, through his support for all our things like the development of the Local Nature Recovery Strategies, as well as representing one of our most rural constituencies in the country. I think it’s critical to remind ourselves of what he did say in Egypt last year, when he talked about tackling climate – that you can only tackle climate if you also help restore nature.

So I want to assure everybody here, that this is very much still the government’s environmental improvement plan, and that we continue to go from strength to strength I believe in that regard. If I think back just over six months ago, back in chilly January, it was sunny, the sun came out to greet us at the inspiring Camley Street Natural Park in the heart of London, just down the road as I launched that plan. Here we are today in the middle of one of the most splendid parts of our capital of our country. And as Matthew has pointed out, this isn’t just a place to come and see. It’s a place that is constantly thinking about nature around the world. And that is why the extent of what Defra does – in partnership here in the United Kingdom, across Europe and indeed around the world – is really important for our global future.

Defra is at the heart of what we are trying to do and I think what is really important, it’s our Defra family, but also today, here we’ve got a really wide range of people, people who care about birds, people who are dealing with farms, people who are looking after other aspects of wildlife. And they all are part of this tapestry, this picture, this plan to make sure that we as a Conservative government leave the environment in a better state than we inherited it. I’ve been Member of Parliament for thirteen years now and this is my second time in Defra. I’ve said this before, but my years as a member of parliament for Suffolk Coastal felt like the perfect apprenticeship for being a Defra minister, because the part of the world that I’m blessed to represent is rightly famous for its farming, and for its precious habitats on land and offshore. My love for coastal and blue habitats is something that continues to grow. And coming back into parliament, I’m really keen to push all the work that we’re doing with the blue planet fund and indeed what we can do domestically.

I think we’ve shown that in a number of ways already, by designating formally our first three highly protected marine areas which is going to be good for the conservation of fish but it’s also great for what we can do in terms of protecting a precious environment. That’s where we see the interplay between nature, our seagrass, protection of seahorses, marine conservation zones, and how that all helps in protecting our planet. Anyone who knows me knows that I’m mad for mangroves, but sadly we just simply cannot have any in this country. But I’m happy to support them around the world. Indeed, one of the things that I’ve been particularly working on recently is and what more we can do to stimulate our salt marsh, which is our version of mangroves. And I hope that we can continue to develop that. Since 2016, I guess I got my first taste. Within a month, I think I was off to the CITES conference in Johannesburg, and then going to Kruger seeing the different things of what we were doing in terms of that element. This is also an important element of how the Environmental Improvement Plan must play a part in preserving nature, but also working with people and communities in order to make sure that they work together. That’s been the beauty of it.

We need to go even further in how our Environmental Land Management Schemes are working together, working with local communities working with our farmers, who I call the original Friends of the Earth, in order to make sure that we have that interplay. You can see that here in the UK, but also it’s absolutely critical in what we do in many of our international programmes. So tackling illegal wildlife trade around the world was one of my priorities then and making progress on clean air. Using precious finite natural resources more sustainably and designing waste out of our systems, tackling flooding and so much more. Of course, we set out our vision on the 25 Year Environment Plan for that plan for a quarter century, and we are publishing the last of our progress report specifically on that plan today. Now in one of my first speeches as Environment Secretary, I said, I was determined that nature would no longer be the Cinderella of the story any longer in terms of our broader elements and what we’re trying to do to save our planet, because it’s never been clearer that we do rely on nature for everything – for our economic prosperity, our food security, and wellbeing. And nature is at the core of our communities which is why we are committed to leaving it in a better state. I think it’s fair to say when I came into the department, it felt like I had a tough hand and people might remember I was told when I would walk in, you’re going to break the law on Monday by not having these targets ready. It’s great to see Dame Glenys here, by the way. But nevertheless, it was a department that was really fighting hard to deliver multiple elements of what we were trying to do to improve the environment, as well as those legal deadlines. But we had those legal deadlines and we met the one for the Environmental Improvement Plan, thanks to the three massive pieces of legislation that we introduced in the years after Brexit.

These were the Agriculture Act, the Fisheries Act, and of course, the absolutely world leading Environment Act. But we should all rightly be proud of what the United Kingdom has delivered in the last six months since we published our Environmental Improvement Plan, working closely with many of you as our delivery partners, and I know that you want to do more, and I want you to do more. I want us to do that in a collaborative way. But also look at what we’ve achieved since over perhaps a decade. If I think that plastic packaging recycling is up by nearly twenty percentage points in a decade, annual sales of single use plastic carrier bags down by 1.62 billion since 2016. That’s a reduction of 77% and counting, with more bans on the most littered single use items coming later this year. And on air quality, we should also recognise we’ve seen real improvements, including a 73% fall in sulphur dioxide emissions since 2010 and our new plan sets out the next phase of action right across pollutants. We’ve enhanced over ten thousand miles of rivers in the last seven years with much loved species like seals returning to our estuaries. There’s less cadmium and mercury in the water environment. Phosphorus is down 80% and ammonia by 85% in our rivers, compared to 1990 when water companies were privatised. The biggest environmental infrastructure investment from the water sector ever will now help us target action for protected nature sites as part of the new Plan for Water, which is designed to make polluters pay to sort out their mess, and have the clean and plentiful water that we need for people, for farmers and wildlife alike. That’s why we’ve created and restored over a quarter of a million hectares of priority habitats since 2010. That’s an area the size of Dorset, and 28% of the UK now designated as protected areas.

But even beyond protected sites, we’re investing £268 million to create and restore habitats in the last financial year. We’ve also made a positive boost for nature mandatory for all new developments as we build homes across the country. Now in the last planting season alone, we’ve put well over three thousand hectares under canopy. That’s a new record and I understand it is about four million new trees, up 40% on the previous year. We will also extend the public forest estate providing even more woodland and it’s great to see William Worsley here today as well.

So a few weeks ago, I was delighted to announce the new £25 million Species Survival Fund to support thousands more wonderful species, water voles, lapwings all the like by creating connecting and restoring habitats like grasslands, woodlands and wetlands, and the 48 local authorities are being funded to work closely with local communities, landowners and experts and those recovery strategies will map out the areas where our efforts can achieve the greatest impact. Already our schemes supported more than 450 species backed by a five fold increase to £10 million a year for Natural England’s dedicated programme. So with our new duty on public authorities to help conserve and enhance biodiversity, for the first time nature is now absolutely embedded in the heart of decisions that government will take. That is there for the long haul and it is guided by the Environmental principles that we have set out.

As I say, this is thinking about what we’re doing at home but of course our role is around the world as well. So whether it’s our world renowned Darwin Programmes that have been supporting species and communities, pangolins, snow leopards, St. Helena’s rare Cloud Forest, to some of the most important seabird colonies in the world on Gulf Island. We’ve been doing that across 140 countries since 1992. And our £100 million Biodiverse Landscapes Funds is working on some of the world’s most important biomes from the Lower Mekong to the mighty Kavango Zambezi where five countries are working together across the River Basin. We created over one hundred marine protected areas in the last decade and taking us to 178 MPAs, covering 40% of English waters. And I’ve already mentioned the three new highly protected marine areas. Alongside the brilliant blue belts that protect an area of ocean greater than India over the UK overseas territories, from the South Sandwich Islands to Tristan da Cunha. We’re pouring that expertise and experience into the Blue Planet Fund, including support for the vast trans boundary collaboration, protecting over 500 square kilometres of the eastern tropical Pacific. That first made headlines in Glasgow at COP26. That was thanks to a historic collaboration between Colombia, Ecuador, Panama and Costa Rica.

And having led the UK delegation to the conference in Montreal, where our brilliant UK team helped to get a new global nature agreement over the line, we continue to co-lead. And that is a critical way of making sure that this isn’t just about the north, telling the global south how to protect nature when they’ve got a lot more of it than we have. This is about supporting the global ambitions of coalition committed to making sure we secure the action and the finance needed to bring it to life, to bring it to life around the world. Whether that was our global summit at Lancaster house, the very kind reception undertaken by the King at Buckingham Palace. Engagement with the financial sector, we had various receptions at Number 10 and in the city, and launching with our French friends, a new initiative on high integrity, biodiversity credit markets in the recent summit that President Macron hosted. Frankly, I challenge you to find a comparable country anywhere in the world that has done as much as we have domestically and internationally.

One of the things that I’m really clear on is that we need to make sure that we continue that activity. Of course, other people’s minds might turn to the election next year, but we’ve got to keep our eye on the prize and what we can do for the long term. That is why our 25 Year Environmental Plan that we’ve updated is absolutely critical to that. As I said, we talked about biodiversity net gain, that should be in place by November, so that every development puts 10% back more into nature.

Now, one of the things that Defra ministers have been doing a lot of very recently is not necessarily going to zoos, or some of the other activities. But actually we’ve been going around the country to our agriculture shows. And while Trudy, Rebecca and I have just had a little bit of a treat, seeing mummy sloth with a little baby sloth. Or indeed seeing the Sumatran tigers and our other ministers, Lord Benyon and Minister Spencer are undertaking parliamentary activity so they’re mad jealous of our experience. But we have been going around the country and speaking to farmers, because I’m very conscious that the change of the transition that we are seeing with Environmental Land Management schemes is a big one. And it needs to succeed. And of course, farmers will listen to other farmers. That’s why it’s great. Three of our ministers are farmers, and the other two of us we represent very rural constituencies. We know these communities, we know the decisions that they’re considering.

That is why it’s important that we continue to listen to the people who look after 70% of our land in this country, and why we work with them to make it work. Because if we don’t then nature will lose out and we cannot afford for that to happen. Going to Groundswell it used to be like the Woodstock or the Glastonbury of farming, it’s now gone very mainstream, but that’s great because we want what we do to be mainstream, and we will want to bring more farmers with us as we go. I can assure you will like Countryside Stewardship Plus when we put out the details later this year, and a further round of landscape recovery as well as more grants and partnerships, getting cutting edge kit out of labs and into the fields where farmers can really put it to the test.

But their bottom line will always be about producing food. It’s critical that the health and welfare of the animals they tender is top notch and also for the natural environment on which they depend, as well as us too. We will continue. we are undertaking all the work necessary to bring in our due diligence obligations on forest risk commodities, protecting global forests, we will publish the map and the framework about our 30 by 30 commitment. And we will continue to say more about what we’re going to do to restore our vital blue habitats. I’ve already said that I’m passionate about aspects of this, I’m going to do G20 next week in India, in Chennai, and will continue to promote this as being absolutely critical. And I think I’ve got the treat of going to the world’s second largest mangrove forest. I can’t tell you how excited I am. But we need to keep that journey going and that’s why we’ll go to UNGA, we will go to COP28, we’re getting the global environment assembly, we’re seeing the launch next month as well of the fund to accompany the CBD. And we will continue to not just think about the world but to deliver our Environmental Improvement Plan, to deliver the plan for water, and we will not let up on those who harm our environments, who pollute. And we’re relentless in driving improved performance from water companies. Because I expect this better, the public expects better.

While there are many other things I could list, and I’m sure Matthew will give me a list of the things that I haven’t mentioned, one of the things I’m also want to stress is that I will ensure we invest properly in science, and research and evidence that is absolutely vital, to make sure that we continue to understand the measures that we do and the impact that they have. This isn’t about trying to fiddle around with the numbers. This is about making sure future generations have an environment, thinking of our climate changing right around us. Forty plus degrees only 100 miles away in France, while we’ve got rain in July. But nevertheless, it’s why we have to adapt. It’s why we have to be agile. It’s why nature itself adapts. And that’s why we need to continue to make sure we have our focus on this precious Earth. This precious planet. And it’s great we’ve got precious people here who are going to help us deliver. Thank you very much.

July 26, 2023
Jeremy Quin – 2023 Speech on Skills, Efficiency and Technology in the Civil Service

The speech made by Jeremy Quin, the Minister for the Cabinet Office, at Old Queen Street in Westminster, London on 19 July 2023.

I am pleased to announce that a total of £4.4 billion savings were delivered by the central government functions in the financial year 2021/22. These are split between audited cashable (£3.4 billion) and non-cashable (£1 billion). The Cabinet Office has now published this on GOV.UK.

This wasn’t a one-off event. In the year prior to that, the central government Function Teams also delivered £3.4 billion worth of audited savings. This means around £8bn of cashable and non-cashable savings were delivered in the last 2 years. We have achieved this by thinking differently and driving success.

The components of these savings vary year in year out – this year for example over £1 billion of savings were delivered by identifying and correcting fraudulently claimed Universal Credit (UC). This is an area post our establishment of the Public Sector Fraud Authority which is likely to grow further.

I am delighted that to take this work further the Treasury are releasing today a Government Efficiency Framework, ensuring consistent reporting of efficiencies across the whole of Government and reporting processes to track delivery and drive continuous improvement.

Another step along the remorseless but critical path of delivering improved productivity across the civil service.

Our modernisation work is not limited to the services delivered by central government.

UK’s public bodies which play a vital role in delivery but whose independence of action can risk them becoming divorced from a culture of continuing improvement are subject to reviews and improvement.

To date, 71 of the initial 125 public body reviews have been launched covering over 90% of ALB expenditure.

Most of the largest ALBs will be reviewed in the next 18 months, benefitting from experienced teams and the active support of ALB boards: completed reviews have recommended actions to improve governance, capability and use of resources to deliver the best possible value for the taxpayer.

REFORMING PROCUREMENT

As a Government we provide services. We spend, across the Public Sector, £300bn annually on procurement, and we deliver enhancements to our national infrastructure.

After a substantial effort we are now within weeks of the Procurement Bill clearing both houses. In a rare example of Government adopting the refreshing motto of “Keep it Simple Stupid” it cuts down the 350 different procurement regulations founded on EU Procurement, to create one simple rulebook.

It will help set the framework of an ever more outcomes-based approach to procurement so that we can buy goods and services: don’t tell the market exactly how to build a bridge, engage with them on how we can best cross the water. You may be amazed by what you discover.

STRONGER PROJECT MANAGEMENT FOR BETTER SERVICES

On which subject we know that better infrastructure delivers better productivity.

Over the last two years the government’s major projects portfolio has doubled in size to oversee nearly 250 programmes, with a whole life cost of nearly £800bn.

Bringing more projects into the central portfolio has created better central oversight and investment, enabling more transparency and closer scrutiny. 89% of those projects now have a green or amber delivery confidence, up from 64% in 2020.

So, this rigorous focus on efficiency, on improving procurement and better project management is delivering the foundation to improve our productivity and enhance our public services.

When Francis introduced the functions it amounted to a revolutionary step – the Victorian departmental silo model being complimented by a lattice of cross-departmental experts with which most in the commercial sector will be familiar. 12 years on they continue to flourish, they continue to deliver and the GEF will make their job easier and their results even more transparent.

BUILDING A MODERN CIVIL SERVICE: PLACES, PEOPLE, PROCESS AND PROGRAMME ASSESSMENT

Functions delivering is but one aspect of the Declaration to which we as ministers and civil servants are committed.

To continue the process of reform we need to be open to the views and experiences of those outside the public sector who recognise the extraordinary opportunities it provides and want to add their talents to the many we employ.

We need to ensure that they are supported in a modern workplace environment making the most of the myriad opportunities of data and AI.

And we need to help them to focus their time and their energy on what works.

First on People.

For too long, policy making and the leadership of the Civil Service has been too London-centric. That’s why we committed to relocating 22,000 Civil Service roles out of London by 2030.

This year we have crossed a major milestone having relocated over 12,000 roles outside of London and the South East…

That is more than half of our total commitment in just the first three years of the programme and more than 75% of our ambition to relocate 15,000 roles by 2025.

We’re also well on our way to the target of 50% UK based SCS outside London, with 30% now based outside the capital.

We’ve launched multiple departmental second headquarters including Cabinet Office’s second headquarters in Glasgow. The Cabinet Office is not alone in looking to Scotland – nearly 20% of the roles moved out of London have been relocated to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, with additional government hubs in Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast.

We have also launched a major policy campus in Sheffield, creating the largest centre of policy making outside London.

The benefits of this to levelling up, to VFM and to strengthening our Union are important, obvious and are rightly regularly praised.

I want however to be selfish – I see the benefits in simple terms – the opportunity it provides to recruit brilliant civil servants – many of whom I have met in Scotland and Wales, the North and South West into our teams.

I believe we will find further scope to enhance Places for Growth – including by focussing on our Arms Length bodies.

But we need to do more beyond PfG to broaden our base of talent.

Above all we need to be an employer that welcomes new blood at every stage of someone’s career.

Just 1 in 5 new entrants to the Senior Civil Service are currently external. I want to ensure that every potential recruit who wants to bring their expertise to bear in the public interest can feel able to apply to do so. And I want us to be able to harness that talent where we know it will add value.

That’s why last year we cemented a much stronger requirement for all Senior Civil Service roles to be advertised externally, a move recommended by Policy Exchange.

It’s no longer possible to hold an internal recruitment competition for a senior civil servant role without explicit Ministerial approval.

Whilst this change is already making a difference, we can and should do more.

It is not enough simply to advertise a job externally..

Currently, the ‘street to seat’ recruitment process can take as long as 80 days, if not longer and that’s before vetting…

If we are fishing in a competitive pool for talent, trying to persuade those with much to give to turn their back on other opportunities and follow the rewarding path of public service, we need to get real about how we perform as recruiters.

We must ensure that every aspect of civil service recruitment, from how we advertise, to how we recognise external expertise, to how we select and onboard recruits, supports good candidates.

So, we are asking departments and professions to trial alternative recruitment approaches.

They will experiment with running recruitment campaigns with simplified job adverts, ridding them of Whitehall speak…

And they will speed up recruitment, with a focus on cutting the bureaucracy that puts off or times out brilliant candidates…

And to help speed up onboarding, we are improving our vetting system. UK Security Vetting are recruiting new staff and improving processes and systems to bring KPIs up to the levels we need to see. We are determined to deliver a radical overhaul of policy, process and systems.

EMBRACING DIGITAL AND AI

Growing our talent pool is great but our civil servants need the tools to finish the job. A revolution is underway in digital and AI and our civil servants must be part of it: taxpayers will, rightly, demand the same ease of access to services and support that will become second nature in the private sector.

We need to be better at utilising the digital talent we already have within the Civil Service and in stressing its importance.

This September, our government-wide initiative ‘One Big Thing’ will be launched:. The focus for 2023 is data-upskilling. It will engage every single civil servant – that’s half a million training days on data this autumn. This shows our determination to build knowledge and deliver.

Over the next two years we are rolling out two new digital platforms to enable us to understand, develop and utilise the skills of our workforce and help staff move more easily between departments.

The Government Skills Campus will provide a single platform across Government with better access to the learning civil servants need. It will use skills data to intelligently drive the right content to learners and provide the skills data needed to inform workforce planning.

Another new platform will then enable all civil servants to move from one department to another – at pace and without friction. Not only will this save money – approximately £100m over the next 5 years – it means it will be easier to move the people with the right skills and experience to the right roles in government. Placing colleagues in more satisfying roles and gleaning the benefits of targeted experience.

Digital and data innovations like these are the defining tools of the 21st Century but they can only be effective when senior leaders understand them. I am delighted that we are on track to exceed our ambition for 50% of Fast Stream hires for 2023 to have a STEM subject background. But we cannot wait decades as they progress….

Through the Digital Excellence Programme we will be equipping government leaders with these skills, starting with 3,000 senior leaders this year.

We can offer digital technicians the most extraordinary opportunities to put their talents to the test in delivering solutions which matter to people day in day out. I know how competitive that talent pool is but what better way to invest in your staff than to give them the opportunity of taking on some of the most fascinating challenges.

To enhance our secondment programme we are developing a specific Digital Secondments pilot with our digital team in the Central Digital and Data Office.

I know that there are people from the best tech firms in the country who believe in public service…

Who want to help with the biggest challenges facing society today…

So we will create a pathway for them to join the civil service through a secondment and empower them to drive real tangible change….

DRIVING IMPROVEMENTS IN DIGITAL PROCESS

We must attract and retain the best in digital talent so that we can harness the power of digital, data and technology in order to deliver most efficiently and effectively for the public.

Our groundbreaking Roadmap for Digital and Data, encompasses 21 ambitious commitments to be achieved by 2025.

Among these commitments, we have pledged to elevate 50 of the government’s top services to a “Great” standard and we are introducing One Login, a vital new system that will allow citizens to access all central Government services effortlessly using a single account.

We need to ensure that GOV.UK, with over 1m visits a day and over 29bn page views since 2012 provides a service equal what we would expect to see in the public service.

That’s why we’ve established a team to lead on digital service transformation across government. This team identified the opportunities, blockers and support to improve services.

That’s also why 32 organisations in government have adopted the same pay framework to drive recruitment and retention of digital professionals, saving taxpayer money by reducing reliance on contractors and managed services.

Recent months have seen huge developments in Artificial Intelligence technology, presenting, if developed appropriately, clear opportunities for government. Our ambition is to use AI confidently and responsibly, where it matters most, to improve public services and boost productivity.

Our central team of digital and technology experts is creating a practical framework to put this technology to work across the civil service, solving problems of privacy, ethics and security, and bringing insights and best practice from industry.

I am excited to announce that following last year’s pilot the incubator for Automation and Innovation, known as i.AI, will become a permanent civil service team focussed on some of our most important and intractable challenges.

And right at the heart of government, the Number 10 Innovation Fellowships program is bringing in AI experts from industry and academia to help solve problems in public service delivery using AI and automation.

We are already creating a Data Marketplace to break down barriers to sharing data inside government. But we also know the potential for government data to drive value and innovation in the economy. Therefore, as recommended by the Vallance review, our ambition is to make the marketplace available to third parties outside government, such as businesses and researchers. By 2025 our aim is to do just that.

We will launch and scale a cross government digital apprenticeship programme to support recruitment and development of 500 new DDaT professionals this financial year.

STRONGER ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC PROGRAMMES

It’s an old adage that the only mistake you can make is by not learning from it…

That is why since the Declaration on Government Reform we established the Evaluation Task Force to improve Government programme evaluation: to better inform decisions on whether programmes should be continued, expanded, modified or stopped.

I learned, to my exasperation as Minister for Defence procurement, that while I was desperately securing cash to back brilliant innovative ideas, without rigorous Ministerial testing others could quietly languish long after it became apparent they weren’t fit for purpose.

In innovation a failure is when the project is allowed to continue when all hope is lost – fail fast, reinvest.

The same must be true of policy.

We need evaluation baked in from the outset in everything we do.

Yes this can identify where policy, whisper it not, doesn’t deliver. It can happen. Where it does, let’s act not hide. A productive public sector is not one which is too shy to accept that not everything works. In the commercial world it’s known, recognised, embraced. We need to lose our hang ups.

But we can and must learn from our successes

The DLUHC supporting families evaluation showed not only the impact of the policy in reducing adult and juvenile custodial sentences, but was robust enough to know that for every pound we spent on the programme, it delivered £2.28 of economic benefits and £1.52 of financial benefits.

The Task Force has provided advice on 211 evaluations across government, covering £115bn of spending.

On the basis that only idiots learn from their own mistakes, the wise from other peoples’….

I am delighted to announce that the Evaluation Task Force is launching the Evaluation Registry, which will provide, for the first time, a single online focus for evaluations across government.

The Evaluation Registry has been built from the ground-up to be best-in-class in driving evidence based policy making. When it launches, it will be one of the biggest stores of information on social policy evaluations in the world, containing over 2000 evaluations from the outset.

It will be available to all government departments this year and in the future supported by funds worth over £50m for evaluations to generate new evidence in critical areas of policy making.

CONCLUSION: BRILLIANT PUBLIC SERVICE

So let’s get back to our fictional Sir Arnold.

Were he to return to our screens today he would I hope be disquieted by the notion that a new recruit may start their career, progress their career and end their career as a Permanent Secretary without necessarily ever working within 10 miles of Peter Jones.

What’s more, talent is not only arriving directly into the upper echelons of the SCS, it’s being actively pursued and welcomed.

We are embracing the opportunities of digital and AI and what that will mean for making us more efficient and improving the services we deliver.

July 26, 2023
Alex Chalk – 2023 Speech at the Lord Mayor of London’s Dinner for HM Judges

The speech made by Alex Chalk, the Secretary of State for Justice, at the Mansion House in London on 18 July 2023.

My Lord Mayor, Lady Mayoress, my Lord Chief Justice, members of His Majesty’s judiciary, ladies and gentlemen.

Thank you, Lord Chief Justice for your kind words. It is of course a special honour to be speaking to you as Lord Chancellor. But can we all please spare a thought for at least three of your number here who led me at the Bar and are now feeling really, really old…

So much has happened for all of us in the last decade. In 2013, I was at the Bar at 6KBW College Hill. It was a different time entirely; as a busy practitioner I confess I didn’t always pore over every dissenting Court of Appeal judgment; unaccountably, I find them absolutely compelling today.

And it was in 2013 that I was selected as the Conservative candidate for Cheltenham. It wasn’t going terribly well. Door after door was opened by people who said they knew who I was, but added that although I was better than my brother, they weren’t going to vote for David Miliband either. When I fed that back to HQ they came up with what they assured me was a brilliant plan. They would send down the then-Mayor of London to boost my profile. Even then, I was aware that this could be a high-risk strategy.

I thank Lord Burnett for his speech.

The Lord Chief Justice has shown himself ready to serve in so many ways. He attended a Commonwealth conference in 2022. On the second night the hosts announced that the judges would be called to dance by rank, starting with Chief Justices, and starting with England & Wales.

My source tells me that Lord Burnett did not hesitate to get to his feet, to the delight of the hundreds watching on. His Private Secretary still has the footage available in, I am told, clear contravention of a judicial order. There will be an auction at the end of the evening.

Few in peacetime have been tested as Lord Burnett was. He showed leadership to help keep the courts open during Covid, in a judgement that was vindicated. He has promoted transparency, in particular broadcasting of sentencing remarks in the Crown Court. He has increased engagement with the public and students. And he has championed modernisation, digitisation, diversity and recruitment.

MPs and peers of all parties hold him in the highest regard. Parliament, his profession and indeed the nation owe him a debt of gratitude and wish him well for whatever comes next.

I want also to thank those of you who sat during the pandemic.

You did so despite the fact that many of you, I’m sure, will have come under pressure from concerned friends and family not to come into court, not to put yourselves at risk. ‘Why you?’ they will have said; to which the only answer was that fate put you there, at that unique moment of jeopardy for our justice system and yours was the task to do.

Thank you for all you did. Covid has a long tail when it comes to the courts, and plainly there are still significant pressures as the system heals – from family law (public and private) to the employment tribunal. But let us remember that those pressures would have been immeasurably greater without your efforts.

I want to turn to some other points, and I’m pleased to say that No.10 were so delighted that I was attending this event that they even helped me draft this part of speech. So, turning to our five priorities…

I recently visited Japan for the G7 Justice Ministers Conference. It was immediately clear just how strong the relationship is between the UK and Japan, and the importance that is attached by that country and indeed the ASEAN countries (from Malaysia to Singapore) to our playing our part in the Indo-Pacific.

Now, that importance isn’t wholly or even mainly underpinned by the strong and growing military and industrial alliance through our collaboration with Japan on the Global Combat Air Programme – important though that is. Instead, absolutely at the heart of our offer to the Indo-Pacific and indeed to the world is our strong legal capabilities and tradition of upholding the rule of law – as demonstrated by Japan’s enthusiasm to single out the UK to sign a memorandum of cooperation on law and justice, including on our legal sectors.

Because it is well understood internationally that our country has historically contributed a great deal, perhaps more than any other, to the development of private international law through the Hague Conventions, with their network of jurisdiction and mutual enforcement arrangements. It is also acknowledged that the UK has the biggest legal sector in Europe, second only worldwide to the United States, a sector that continues to thrive.

And our international counterparts recognise that our common law system enjoys an endless potential for modernisation to respond to the latest trends, technologies and dispute flashpoints. The common law is ancient, yes, and yet relentlessly contemporary.

Against that backdrop, we will of course assert this advantage, we will press for strengthened cooperation and exchange in legal services. That will help grow our economy and generate extraordinary opportunities for young people from this jurisdiction to go as far as their talents will take them – promoting the social mobility agenda which brought me into politics. Thank you to the judiciary, the Bar Council and the Law Society for what you are doing to support this endeavour.

But in truth it’s about more than that. Despite the undoubted commercial opportunities, we will prioritise this agenda because every time we advance a PIL agreement, every time we improve access to a foreign legal market, every time we secure that exchange event between lawyers we strengthen the international rules-based order. In the Indo-Pacific and in the wider world, we must recognise that the argument for the rule of law is far from settled. That part of the world, as well as being the crucible of global economic growth over the coming decades, is also the crucible of competing visions. It is in some ways the epicentre of a global contest. And in that contest, free societies have to demonstrate that the rule of law matters – and ultimately it makes societies safer, and citizens freer and better off.

So we will continue to speak up for the rule of law. We will make clear in the context of Russia’s unlawful full-scale invasion of Ukraine that might is not always right, that the international rules-based order counts for something, and that there are consequences for those who violate recognised borders.

And we are putting resources behind our words. Quite apart from being the second largest provider of military support to Ukraine after the US, we have delivered war crimes investigation training to Ukrainian police on behalf of the ICC, we have provided training for Ukrainian judges led, by Sir Howard Morrison KC, and allocated additional funding to support ICC investigations.

But as well as advocating the rule of law abroad, we must show focus and vigilance to maintain it here at home. Although deep-rooted in our society, it must never be taken for granted. It requires care and effort to keep it in good health – particularly in an era of social media and disinformation which throws up new, dystopian misinformed challenges.

So, the starting-point is to make the case for why it matters – to bring it to life in terms that are accessible to all. In my swearing-in speech I stated that the rule of law, independence of the judiciary and access to justice aren’t quaint, obscure notions to pay lip-service to – but the essential building blocks of a safe, fair and prosperous society – as relevant today as in any year of the modern era.

And what access to justice and independence of the judiciary mean in practice is walking out of court as an advocate or litigant having lost, and knowing deep down that despite your disappointment you have been heard by judges of formidable intellect and unimpeachable integrity. And you have had a full and fair hearing. That is inestimably precious.

So what must we do to nurture it?

Well, in the first place, show respect to its key custodians. The Government is pleased to have been able to accept in full the PRB pay recommendations, including the Senior Salaries Review Body recommendation. In doing so, the Government is sending I hope a clear message about its deep regard for the judiciary, and the value attached to the essential work that you do.

Second, I believe very strongly that we must invest in the infrastructure of the courts estate. The physical condition of the buildings that discharge justice matters. It is difficult to uphold the dignity and authority of the law, important by the way to promote the small matter of compliance with court orders, when there is a bucket catching drips in the corner of the room.

It is equally difficult as a practitioner to feel proud of the profession you have worked hard to join as you open your case to the jury in Isleworth (as I did in the past) and know that all anyone is thinking about is the overwhelming smell of damp in the carpets. (Those have been replaced by the way).

Poor maintenance impacts capacity of course – but it also corrodes morale. And we need that morale, not least to unwind the pressures Covid created. It is only by sustaining and growing pride in the justice system and pride in the legal profession that we will continue to retain the practitioners we need and attract the brightest and the best to join. Every improvement in infrastructure sends out a ripple of confidence, through robing rooms, chambers and into university lecture theatres; and it enhances the overall attractiveness of the profession. Notwithstanding the £185m spent on court maintenance in the last two years, and the extra £38m in the last financial year for redecorations and deep cleans, we can go further. It’s a point I raised on my first day in office. I have prioritised it since, and I look forward to being able to say a little more in due course.

Third, we must be vigilant in clamping down on those who would misuse our courts, absorbing capacity with bogus lawsuits cynically designed to intimidate journalists and campaigners, and stifle freedom of speech. So I am pleased that we have acted through amendments to the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill to create an early dismissal process in respect of spurious SLAPPS which are connected to financial fraud and corruption – the overwhelming majority of actions.

Fourth, we should take every opportunity to promote access to justice. And let me say that legal aid plays an important role in delivering that. So I am pleased that we have published our response to the Legal Aid Means Test Review, which when fully implemented will lead to over six million more people falling within the scope of legal aid.

All this we do and more. As a junior minister in the department, I devised ELSA (Early Legal Support and Advice) as the umbrella term for a suite of proposals to improve access to justice. Politics is the art of the possible, and we won’t get everything done overnight. But I will give it my all.

Fifth, we must abandon for good the outdated complacency that assumes all those who rise to positions of responsibility in our country are experts (or at least experienced) in the inner workings of our constitution. We should dismiss what has come to feel like a conspiracy of romantic hopes that through their education and wider upbringing people somehow acquire osmotically an understanding of the balance of our constitution, the conventions that secure it and – yes – the boundaries.

And yet, this is something that as a society we devote little or no effort to. Despite the fact that new legal practitioners receive ethics training as part of their preparation for practice, for those entering public life there is no such guidance or investment at all. There should be.

And so, with a general election due in the next 18 months, preparations should be made to ensure that Members of the next Parliament and the people they work alongside, are given the assistance and information they require. As the President of the Supreme Court noted earlier this month, and I agree, maintaining the rule of law is a joint responsibility of Parliament and the courts. Far from being a contest for power between the two, we have a shared commitment and we should support each other in delivering it.

And in that spirit we must work together to support the parliamentarians of the future. Precisely how that support is framed will be a matter for discussion and careful thought. But it shouldn’t be put off.

Finally this. I know there are real pressures in the system. I have referred to them already. I know that despite the Magistrates’ Court snapping back fast, the caseload in the Crown Court is high.

That is in part a function of the fact that we didn’t abandon jury trials, even when some suggested we should. That was manifestly the right decision. Because jury trials remain the lamp of our liberties, and the ultimate guarantors of fair trials which enjoy the public’s confidence. But we have to recognise that this had a consequence, and the sheer volume now is at least in part the price we pay for principle.

We will do all we can to help. We have removed the cap on sitting days for two years in a row, ensuring the Crown Court can sit at maximum capacity. We have passed the PCSC Act so that remote hearings can continue, where appropriate. 24 Nightingale courtrooms have been extended beyond March 2023 to provide additional capacity. We expect criminal legal aid spending will increase by approximately £141m per year in a steady state.

We are recruiting up to 1,000 judges across jurisdictions. And we have raised the statutory mandatory retirement age to 75 for judicial office holders, estimated to retain an additional 400 judges and tribunal members.

But I am acutely conscious that it is you and the practitioners that you see in your courts and tribunals that will do more than anyone else to bear down on these volumes, and do so in a way that delivers justice.

So I want to thank you for what you have done, but all that you will do. It is not easy I realise.

We use the adjective ‘world-beating’ sparingly these days. But excessive diffidence is to be avoided too. It is entirely reasonable to point out that we have a judiciary that rightly enjoys enormous respect globally – and not just for the quality of its dance moves. In terms of sheer intellectual horsepower and fundamental fairness it stands out.

And it is underpinned by unswerving professionalism. To serve in our courts, as judge or practitioner, is to follow a vocation – to know that you are part of something extraordinarily precious, something far more important than any one of us. And it means all of us, whether judge, practitioner or Lord Chancellor are united by a common desire to serve, and leave the system of justice in our country stronger for our having been here. That is what you might call, my ‘overriding objective’.

Thank you for your attention. Let me close by offering a toast to our hosts – to the Lord Mayor and Lady Mayoress.

Thank you.

July 26, 2023
Lucy Frazer – 2023 Speech at the Onward Think Tank

The speech made by Lucy Frazer, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, on 19 July 2023.

Thank you Onward for hosting today’s event

It’s an event dedicated to young people.

I’d like to start by thanking those organisations in the room that spend their time supporting young people.

Groups like The National Youth Agency and UK Youth, working with colleagues right across the sector to support the youth workforce.

The National Citizen Service Trust, our DCMS Youth ALB.

The Back Youth Alliance putting young people’s voices at the heart of their vision.

The Youth Endowment Fund, the Youth Futures Foundation and the George Williams College, helping shape an evidence-based approach to working with young people.

What I want to focus on today is why it is so important that we invest in maximising the potential of young people across the country.

And I wanted to start with a story.

It’s a story about maximising that potential.

A story about a remarkable woman.

Called Yetta Frazer.

Who was my grandmother.

She had the most enormous amount of self belief, determination and focus.

And became the first female barrister in Leicester.

She would remind me, every time I saw her of a quote from Robert Browning.

“A man’s reach should exceed his grasp or what’s a heaven for”.

This was translated as.

Life is full of opportunities.

Think big,

Be ambitious,

Believe in yourself.

I was lucky to have her.

Because she instilled those values in me.

They are essential core conservative values.

Everybody has potential.

Everybody can fulfil it.

They may need a step on the way. And if they need it, or want it, we will give it to them.

They may not, and if they don’t, and can do it on their own, we won’t stand in the way of. success or tell them what they should be doing or how they should be doing it.

We will support all young people to maximise their potential.

And that’s what I want to talk to you about.

The potential of everyone across our country.

And how we help them fulfil it.

And I want to start with what we have already done.

Because we have invested heavily in supporting young people across government.

And we have done it in a conservative way.

That is, thoughtful consideration of how and where money ought to be spent.

Based on evidence about what makes the most difference.

So there is DfE funding for education. The highest on record.

Including free school meals and the holiday activity and food programme.

Home Office funding for the youth endowment fund on programmes which prevent children being exploited and getting involved in serious violence.

MoJ funding on youth justice, to support every council to catch and prevent youth offending earlier than ever.

DWP funding for the kickstart scheme which provided a vital leg up in the world of work for young people who needed it,

As well as their boosted Youth Hubs and Youth Employability coaches who help address barriers to employment.

DHSC help, including mental health support teams in schools and increasing access to community health services.

DLUHC funding local authorities to level up opportunities and preventing significant risks for young people such as youth homelessness.

And here in DCMS, we have been leading from the front, with the National Youth Guarantee.

A landmark programme backed by over half a billion in funding, to broaden the horizons of young people right across the country.

And we are already seeing results.

Over £100 million of the Youth Investment Fund has gone out of the door, giving thousands more young people access to opportunities in their community.

Supporting young people is not the job of one department.

It is the job of every government department.

And today I want to focus on what we are doing in DCMS and what more we can do.

Because I want to ensure that every young person has more opportunities than their parents.

And I’m going to explain it in three short ways, which I think will be familiar to all of you.

Everywhere in the country people should have

Someone to talk to,

Something to do,

Somewhere to go.

Turning first to “someone to talk to”.

As I said, I was lucky.

I had supportive parents and a trailblazing role model of a grandmother.

And I know millions of people across the country are just as lucky as me.

Others find supportive individuals on their journey.

Some people find teachers.

My grandfather was a headmaster and I remember a few years after I had been elected as an MP, I received an email out of the blue from one of his former pupils,

This former pupil, now an adult, wrote to me and said:

“Your grandfather was one of the most inspirational people in my entire life”.

” Although he was a scientist, he recognised in me a youthful artist and did everything he could to set me on the path and with the aims that have shaped my career.

” He had a huge part in shaping who I have become.

” My career has been as a costume designer in film and theatre.

” Dr Hyman Frazer joins Harold Pinter, Ridley Scott, and Franco Zeffirelli in having had a major influence in my development as an artist and a person.

” But in fact your grandfather was the first of those influencers”

So some young people find some support themselves outside of the family.

But some young people have no-one.

And that’s why we need mentors and role models.

They could be youth workers,

Guide leaders, sports team coaches, music teachers.

They could be trusted adults found in youth centres.

I know some of you are directly training and providing mentors.

At DCMS, we too are already providing some funding individually – through our bursaries for youth workers, with our Million Hours Fund.

Through NCS we are supporting the One Million Mentors scheme and working with the Youth Endowment Fund, providing mentors to help young people in Leicester at risk of exclusion to stay in school.

I want every young person to have a rock of some kind, someone they can turn to, if they don’t already have that.

And we will set out in due course how we can grow the work we are doing to achieve that.

Second, turning to “Something to do.”

Young people need something to belong to.

Something constructive on which to spend their time and feel part of.

That is why we have delivered improvements to over 3,300 grassroots football facilities up and down the UK, and a third of our target of 3,000 renovated tennis courts.

Earlier this month, we announced school holiday activities in antisocial behaviour hotspot areas, with more to come.

We’ve also announced a number of initiatives to support young people on their career paths, like our Discover Creative Careers programme.

Through the National Youth Guarantee, we have created multiple opportunities for young people to join scouts, guides, and take part in the Duke of Edinburgh award scheme.

Thousands of young people have signed up to the new NCS programme which provides more activities which give young people real skills, teach them resilience and build their confidence.

We will continue to build on the National Youth Guarantee and explore other opportunities for young people, with more ways to build their confidence, resilience, employment and life skills.

And finally “somewhere to go”.

We have already announced the first 43 organisations across the country to receive Youth Investment Fund grants,

Which we will be continuing to roll out to level up areas and increase the number of young people accessing those spaces.

We also want to look further at which places are ones we can develop to support young people which may include looking at the use of our schools and community buildings more broadly.

Our policies are and will be evidence-based.

As everyone in this room, who works so hard in such an important sector, knows these types of support change lives.

Put those on the wrong path, onto the right one.

And for others unlock opportunities to enrich the lives of every young person.

Turning to the evidence, I have no doubt that you all know. that mentoring can have a significant impact on the development, of social emotional skills, reduces the risk of entering into the justice system and adds months of academic progress.

In fact, the Youth Endowment Foundation estimates that mentoring can reduce youth violence by 21%.

And the value of sport, uniform groups and youth employment is more than just doing the activity.

It is the sense of belonging and the new social network that is gained.

The evidence shows that these pro-social connections and feelings of belonging are key to social mobility.

Robert Putnam summarises the evidence like this:

‘The influence of peers …has been shown on teens’ academic achievement, educational aspirations, college going, misbehaviour, drug use, truancy, and depression … High standards and aspirations tend to be contagious – as do low standards and aspirations.’

Raj Chetty’s landmark study on social mobility found that social connection with those of different income and race, and membership of clubs and societies were 2 of the top 5 drivers of social mobility.

We want to create positive experiences for young people, and something they can belong to, a sports team, a youth group, a summer programme.

That’s why all the work you are doing is so vital to our young people’s future.

And we will continue to develop policy to expand these young people’s horizons in this way.

Someone to talk to, something to do, somewhere to go.

These should not just be the preserve of the kids of pushy parents or tiger moms, but available to every young person everywhere.

I’d like to end with a thought. It’s a positive thought.

Often it is said we don’t understand people if we haven’t had their experience.

You can’t help someone in poverty or without work, someone who has been in the justice system, unless you too know what that feels like.

But if that means that those who have had a positive experience cannot bring that to the table to improve the lives of others.

I profoundly disagree.

To know what it is like to be supported.

To have experienced that sense of belonging.

To have learnt from the values of those you trust, and seen first hand the importance of passing those to others.

To truly understand these positives can be powerful and valuable.

We should believe in all young people, and want for them, at least what we have had for ourselves.

If we don’t believe in young people and what they can achieve. Nor will they.

I believe in levelling up. Not levelling down.

And believe that we can give our young people a better life and more opportunities than we had ourselves.

I believe we can achieve this together.

As Yetta would have said otherwise ‘what’s a heaven for’.

That’s what today is about.

Supporting young people is not just the preserve of Government, we all have a role to play.

That includes the youth sector, local authorities, schools, parents, and the private sector.

So I want to hear from all of you, and I want us to work together to deliver even more for young people in the coming months.

July 26, 2023
Robert Jenrick – 2023 Statement on the Illegal Migration Bill

The statement made by Robert Jenrick, the Minister for Immigration, in the House of Commons on 17 July 2023.

This House sent back to the House of Lords its 20 amendments to the Bill, many of which simply drove a coach and horses through the fabric of the legislation. We brought forward reasonable amendments where it was sensible to do so and it is disappointing, to say the least, the some of those have been rejected. I welcome the fact that the 20 issues that we debated last week have now been whittled down to nine, but the issue now before us is whether the clearly expressed views of this House, the elected Chamber—not just in the votes last week, but throughout the earlier passage of the Bill—should prevail.

We believe that inaction is not an option, that we must stop the boats and that the Bill is a key part of our plan to do just that. The message and the means must be absolutely clear and unambiguous: if people come to the UK illegally, they will not be able to stay here. Instead, they will be detained and returned to their home country or removed to a safe third country. There is simply no point in passing legislation that does not deliver a credible deterrent or provide the means to back it up with effective and swift enforcement powers.

We cannot accept amendments that provide for exceptions, qualifications and loopholes that would simply perpetuate the current cycle of delays and endless late and repeated legal challenges to removal. I listened carefully to the debate in the other place, but no new arguments were forthcoming and certainly no credible alternatives were provided.

Sir William Cash (Stone) (Con)

I thoroughly endorse what my right hon. Friend says. This is a matter of extreme national interest, as is reflected in the votes of constituents throughout the country. They feel very strongly about these matters. Does he not agree that it is time for their lordships to take note of the fact that the British people want this legislation to go through? They want progress, given the extreme difficulties this is presenting to the British people.

Robert Jenrick

I strongly endorse my hon. Friend’s comments. This is an issue of the highest importance to the people we serve in this place. Of course there is a legitimate role for the other place in scrutinising legislation, but now is the time to move forward and pass this law to enable us to stop the boats.

Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)

I wonder whether my right hon. Friend has noted the remarks of Lord Clarke, who is not a particularly vicious right-wing creature. He said this Bill is entirely necessary and that we have to get on with it.

I also wonder whether my right hon. Friend has looked at today’s remarks by Lord Heseltine.

Lord Clarke and Lord Heseltine seem to have come up with a sensible option. We should go ahead with this Bill. We have to have much better European co-operation and, really, we have to build a wall around Europe. [Interruption.] And we have to do much more—this is what the Opposition might like—in terms of a Marshall plan to try to remove the conditions of sheer misery that cause people to want to leave these countries in the first place.

Robert Jenrick

I read the remarks of the noble Lord Clarke, and I entirely agree with his point, which is that, having listened to the totality of the debate in the House of Lords, he had not heard a single credible alternative to the Government’s plan. For that reason alone, it is important to support the Government.

I also agree with Lord Clarke’s broader point that this policy should not be the totality of our response to this challenge. Deterrence is an essential part of the plan, but we also need to work closely with our partners in Europe and further upstream. One initiative that the Prime Minister, the Home Secretary and I have sought to pursue in recent months is to ensure that the United Kingdom is a strategic partner to each and every country that shares our determination to tackle this issue, from Turkey and Tunisia to France and Belgium.

Sir Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford Green) (Con)

I completely agree with my right hon. Friend. I believe that the Bill should go through, as we have to do something about the deaths in the channel, which is an important moral purpose.

I bring my right hon. Friend back to Lord Randall’s amendment on modern slavery. We agree quite a lot on this issue, and the Government have said that they will do stuff in guidance, so Lord Randall has taken the words spoken by my right hon. Friend at the Dispatch Box and put them on the face of the Bill—this amendment does exactly what my right hon. Friend promised the Government would do in guidance. The Government have not issued the guidance in detail, which is why the amendment was made. Why would we vote against the amendment today when my right hon. Friend’s words and prescriptions are now on the face of the Bill?

Robert Jenrick

First, the Lords amendment on modern slavery goes further by making the scheme, as we see it, much more difficult to establish. There are a number of reasons but, in particular, we think the complexity of the issue requires it to be provided for in statutory guidance rather than on the face of the Bill, in line with my assurances made on the Floor of the House. One of those assurances is particularly challenging to put in statutory guidance—where an incident has taken place in the United Kingdom, rather than an individual being trafficked here—and that is the point Lord Randall helpfully tried to bring forward.

We are clear that the process I have set out should be set out in statutory guidance, because the wording of the amendment is open to abuse by those looking to exploit loopholes. Those arriving in small boats would seek to argue that they have been trafficked into the UK and that the 30-day grace period should apply to them, on the basis that they qualify as soon as they reach UK territorial waters. The proposed provision is, for that reason, operationally impossible and serves only to create another loophole that would render the swift removal we seek impossible or impractical. The statutory guidance can better describe and qualify this commitment, by making it clear that the exploitation must have occurred once the person had spent a period of time within the UK and not immediately they get off the small boat in Kent. For that reason, we consider it better to place this on a statutory footing as guidance rather than putting it in the Bill.

Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)

The Democratic Unionist party is concerned about the trafficking of children and young people. My question is a simple one. We see economic migrants who are fit and healthy but none the less make that journey, and we see those who have had to leave their country because they have been persecuted, discriminated against or been subjected to brutal violence, or because their family members have been murdered. My party and I want to be assured that those who flee persecution have protection within this law, because we do not see that they do.

Robert Jenrick

We believe that they do, because at the heart of this scheme is the principle that if an individual comes to the UK illegally on a small boat, they will be removed back home if it is safe to do that—if they are going to a safe home country such as Albania. In determining that the country is safe, for example, as in the case of Albania, we would have sought specific assurances from it, if required. Alternatively, they will be removed to a safe third country, such as Rwanda, where, again we would have sought sufficient assurances that an individual would be well-treated there. As the hon. Gentleman can see in the courts at the moment, those assurances will be tested. So it is not the intention of the UK Government to expose any genuine victim of persecution to difficulties by removing them either back home and, in the process, enabling their refoulement, or to a country in which they would be unsafe. We want to establish a significant deterrent to stop people coming here in the first place, bearing in mind that the overwhelming majority of the individuals we are talking about who would be caught by the Bill were already in a place of safety. They were in France, which is clearly a safe country that has a fully functioning asylum system.

Caroline Lucas (Brighton, Pavilion) (Green)

Let me take the right hon. Gentleman back to the criticism he was making of the other place, because if the elected House is about to break international law, it is entirely fitting that the other place should try to prevent that from happening. The Minister has stood at the Dispatch Box telling us that this Bill is about deterrence, whereas the Home Office’s own impact assessment has said:

“The Bill is a novel and untested scheme, and it is therefore uncertain what level of deterrence impact it will have.”

As a raft of children’s charities have pointed out, once routine child detention was ended in 2011 there was no proportional increase in children claiming asylum. So will he come clean and accept that this Bill absolutely will have the effect, even if it does not have the intention, of meaning that people trying to escape persecution will not be able to come here, because there are not sufficient safe and legal routes?

Robert Jenrick

I am not sure exactly what the hon. Lady’s question was. If it was about access to safe and legal routes, let me be clear, as I have in numerous debates on this topic, that since 2015 the UK has welcomed more than 500,000 individuals here—it is nearer to 550,000 now—for humanitarian purposes. That is a very large number. The last statistics I saw showed that we were behind only the United States, Canada and Sweden on our global United Nations-managed safe and legal routes, and we were one of the world’s biggest countries for resettlement schemes. That is a very proud record. The greatest inhibitor today to the UK doing more on safe and legal routes is the number of people coming across the channel illegally on small boats, taking up capacity in our asylum and immigration system. She knows that only too well, because we have discussed on a number of occasions one of the most concerning symptoms of this issue, which is unaccompanied children who are having to stay in a Home Office-procured hotel near to her constituency because local authorities do not have capacity to flow those individuals into safe and loving foster care as quickly as we would wish. That issue is exactly emblematic of the problem that we are trying to fix. If we can stop the small boats, we can do more, as a country, and be an even greater force for good in the world.

Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)

Will the Minister set out how my constituent will be protected? He is Albanian and has been subjected to modern slavery by gangs from Albania. He has three bullet holes in his body and, if he returns, perhaps those gangs will give him more. How will he be protected?

Robert Jenrick

The existing arrangement that we have secured with Albania—incidentally, Albania is a signatory to the European convention against trafficking — enables us to safely return somebody home to Albania, with specific assurances to prevent them being retrafficked to the United Kingdom and to enable them to be supported appropriately upon arrival.

On the broader issue of modern slavery, the Bill makes a number of important protections when we establish the scheme. If they are party to a law enforcement investigation, their removal from the country will be stayed. We have said that we will bring forward statutory guidance, giving them a 30-day period, allied to the period set out in ECAT, to come forward and work with law enforcement, which is extendable if that enforcement activity goes on for some time. We would then only remove that person either back home to a safe country, such as Albania, or to a country, such as Rwanda, where we have put in place appropriate procedures to ensure that that Government, in turn, looks after them.

I point the hon. Lady to the judgment in the Court of Appeal that made some criticisms of the Government’s approach, but did not say that the arrangements in Rwanda with respect to modern slaves were inappropriate; it supported the Government in that regard. We will clearly put in place appropriate procedures to ensure that victims, such as the one she refers to, are properly supported.

Tom Hunt (Ipswich) (Con)

Many opponents of the Bill seem to support uncapped safe and legal routes. The reality of that would be that potentially over 1 million people could get the ability to come here. Does the Minister agree that those proposing that should be open and honest about it, and explain what the dramatic consequences would be for public services and community cohesion in this country?

Robert Jenrick

I completely agree. Anyone who feels that this country has sufficient resource to welcome significant further numbers of individuals at the present time, should look at the inbox of the Minister for Immigration. It is full of emails and letters from members of the public, local authorities and Members of Parliament, on both sides of the House, complaining that they do not want to see further dispersal accommodation and worrying about GP surgery appointments, pressure on local public services and further hotels. I understand all those concerns, which is why we need an honest debate about the issue.

That is why, at the heart of the Bill, there is not only a tough deterrent position for new illegal entrants, but a consultation on safe and legal routes, where we specifically ask local authorities, “What is your true capacity?” If we bring forward further safe and legal routes, they will be rooted in capacity in local authorities, so that those individuals are not destined to be in hotels for months or years, but go straight to housing and support in local authorities. That must be the right way for us to live up to our international obligations, rather than the present situation that, all too often, is performative here, and then there are major problems down the road.

Let me reply to issues other than modern slavery in the amendments before us. On the issue of detention, we believe that a necessary part of the scheme, provided for in the Bill, is that there are strong powers. Where those subject to removal are not detained, the prospects of being able to effect removal are significantly reduced, given the likelihood of a person absconding, especially towards the end of the process.

We have made changes to the provision for pregnant women, which I am pleased have been accepted by the Lords, and unaccompanied children, but it is necessary for the powers to cover family groups, as to do otherwise would introduce a gaping hole in the scheme, as adult migrants and the most disgusting people smugglers would seek to profit from migrants and look to co-opt unaccompanied children to bogus family groups to avoid detention. That not only prevents the removal of the adults, but presents a very real safeguarding risk to children.

On unaccompanied children, we stand by the amendments agreed by the House last week. They provided a clear differentiation between the arrangements for the detention of adults and those for the detention of unaccompanied children. The amendments agreed by this House provide for judicial oversight after eight days’ detention where that detention is for the purpose of removal.

On the standards of accommodation, I have been clear that unaccompanied children, including those whose age is disputed, will be detained only in age-appropriate accommodation, and that existing secondary legislation—the Detention Centre Rules 2001—sets out important principles governing the standards of such accommodation.

Last week, some Members asked whether unaccompanied children would also receive age-appropriate care while in detention. The answer to that is an emphatic yes. The operating standards for immigration removal centres contain provisions around the treatment of children, including requirements on the education and play facilities that must be provided for children.

Vicky Ford (Chelmsford) (Con)

I thank my right hon. Friend for making it clear that, if there is any doubt about the age of an unaccompanied child, they will be treated as a child. I also thank him for saying that, if a child is detained, it will be in an age-appropriate centre. However, on the issue of what is age-appropriate, I will just say that I have looked at the operating standards to which he referred. It is an 82-page document. It has no mention of unaccompanied children. It talks about who looks after the locks and hinges and where the tools and the ladders are to be stored, but there is nothing about how we keep these children happy, healthy and safe from harm. I point him instead to the guidance for children’s care homes and ask him gently if we could update the rules on detention centres to make sure that they look more like the rules we have for safeguarding children in care homes.

Robert Jenrick

My right hon. Friend makes a number of important points. The guidance is very detailed, but I am sure that it would benefit from updating. Therefore, the points that she has made and that other right hon. and hon. Members have made in the past will be noted by Home Office officials. As we operationalise this policy, we will be careful to take those into consideration. We are all united in our belief that those young people who are in our care need to be treated appropriately.

Let me turn now to the Lords amendment on modern slavery—I hope that I have answered the comments of my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith). This seeks to enshrine in the Bill some of the assurances that I provided in my remarks last week in respect of people who are exploited in the UK. However, for the reason that I have just described, we think that that is better done through statutory guidance. In fact, it would be impractical, if not impossible, to do it through the Bill.

Sir Iain Duncan Smith

The point that my right hon. Friend made earlier is that, somehow, those people will be able to get into the UK and make a false claim. However, the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 already provides for that, so anyone found to have made a false claim will be disqualified, and disqualified quite quickly. The critical thing is to prosecute the traffickers. That way, we can stop them trafficking more people on the boats. My worry is that this provision will put off many people from giving evidence and co-operating with the police for fear that they may still be overridden and sent abroad while they are doing it and then be picked up by the traffickers. Does he give any credence to the fear that this may end up reducing the number of prosecutions of traffickers as a result?

Robert Jenrick

I understand my right hon. Friend’s position, and it is right that he is vocalising it, but we do not believe that what he says is likely. The provision that we have made in the statutory guidance that I have announced will give an individual 30 days from the positive reasonable grounds decision to confirm that they will co-operate with an investigation in relation to their exploitation. That should give them a period of time to recover, to come forward and to work with law-enforcement. That is a period of time aligned with the provisions of ECAT, so we rely on the decision of the drafters of ECAT to choose 30 days rather than another, potentially longer, period. That is an extendable period, so where a person continues to co-operate with such an investigation, they will continue to be entitled to the support and the protections of the national referral mechanism for a longer period.

Sir Iain Duncan Smith

I just want to make it clear that under the new regulations, the Secretary of State can still feasibly decide that, even if someone is co-operating, they do not need to remain in the UK for that. That is the critical bit: they live under the fear that they can be moved somewhere else to give that evidence. Does the Minister not agree that that will put a lot of people off giving evidence?

Robert Jenrick

I hope that that is not borne out. It is worth remembering that we will not remove anyone to a country in which they would be endangered. We would be removing that person either back to their home country, if we consider it safe to do so, usually because the country is an ECAT signatory and has provisions in place, or to a safe third country such as Rwanda, where once again we will have put in place significant provisions to support the individual. I hope that that provides those individuals with the confidence to come forward and work with law enforcement to bring the traffickers to book.

Vicky Ford

I am particularly interested in the arrival of unaccompanied children in this country, because obviously the Minister has tightened up the eight-day period for them on exit. I believe that he just agreed with me that the standards for age-appropriate accommodation in detention centres need to be updated to look more like those for children’s homes. Is he prepared to concede that no unaccompanied child should be put in such a detention centre until that update of the rules has been undertaken?

Robert Jenrick

I understand the point that my right hon. Friend makes, but I am not sure that that is necessary, because the Detention Centre Rules 2001 are very explicit in the high standards expected. They set the overall standard, and underlying them will no doubt be further guidance and support for individuals who are working within the system. If there is work to be done on the latter point, we should do that and take account of her views and those of others who are expert in this field, but the Detention Centre Rules are very explicit in setting high overarching standards for this form of accommodation. That is exactly what we would seek to live up to; in fact, it would be unlawful if the Government did not.

Vicky Ford

In a children’s home, we would expect there to be the right to access a social worker and advocacy, and for the child to have the care that they particularly need. We would expect Ofsted to oversee that, not prison inspectors.

Robert Jenrick

I am grateful for those points. Social workers will clearly be at the heart of all this work, as they are today. Every setting in which young people are housed by the Home Office, whether it be an unaccompanied asylum-seeking children hotel, which we mentioned earlier, or another facility, has a strong contingent of qualified social workers who support those young people. I am certain that social workers will be at the heart of developing the policy and then, in time, operationalising it.

Their lordships have attempted but failed to smooth the rough edges of their wrecking amendments on legal proceedings, but we need be in no doubt that they are still wrecking amendments. They would tie every removal up in knots and never-ending legal proceedings. It is still the case that Lords amendment 1B would incorporate the various conventions listed in the amendment into our domestic law. An amendment shoehorned into the Bill is not the right place to make such a significant constitutional change. It is therefore right that we continue to reject it.

Stuart C. McDonald (Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East) (SNP)

Will the Minister give way?

Robert Jenrick

I will not, because I need to close my remarks; this is a short debate.

Lords amendment 9B continues to undermine a core component of the Bill: that asylum and relevant human rights claims are declared inadmissible. The Lords amendment would simply encourage illegal migrants to game the system and drag things out for as long as possible, in the hope that they would become eligible for asylum here.

Lords amendment 23B brings us back to the issue of the removal of LGBT people to certain countries. The Government are a strong defender of LGBT rights across the globe. There is no question of sending a national of one of the countries listed in the amendment back to their home country if they fear persecution based on their sexuality. The Bill is equally clear that if an LGBT person were to be issued with a removal notice to a country where they fear persecution on such grounds, or indeed on any other grounds, they could make a serious harm suspensive claim and they would not be removed—

Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP)

Will the Minister give way?

Robert Jenrick

I will not, because I need to bring my remarks to a close now. They would not be removed until that claim and any appeal had been determined. As I said previously, the concerns underpinning the amendments are misplaced and the protections needed are already in the Bill.

On safe and legal routes, Lords amendment 102B brings us to the question of when new such routes come into operation. The amendment again seeks to enshrine a date in the Bill itself. I have now said at the Dispatch Box on two occasions that we aim to implement any proposed new routes as soon as is practical, and in any event by the end of 2024. I have made that commitment on behalf of the Government and, that being the case, there is simply no need for the amendment. We should not delay the enactment of this Bill over such a non-issue.

Lords amendment 103B, tabled by the Opposition, relates to the National Crime Agency. Again, it is a non-issue and the amendment is either performative or born out of ignorance and a lack of grasp of the detail. The NCA’s functions already cover tackling organised immigration crime, and men and women in that service work day in, day out to do just that. There is no need to change the statute underlying the organisation.

Finally, we have Lords amendment 107B, which was put forward by the Archbishop of Canterbury. This country’s proud record of providing a safe haven for more than half a million people since 2015 is the greatest evidence that we need that the UK is already taking a leading international role in tackling the refugee crisis. This Government are working tirelessly with international and domestic partners to tackle human trafficking, and continue to support overseas programmes. We will work with international partners and bring forward proposals for additional safe and legal routes where necessary.

However well-intentioned, this amendment remains unnecessary. As I said to his grace the Archbishop, if the Church wishes to play a further role in resettlement, it could join our community sponsorship scheme—an ongoing and global safe and legal route that, as far as I am aware, the Church of England is not currently engaged with.

This elected House voted to give the Bill a Second and Third Reading. Last Tuesday, it voted no fewer than 17 times in succession to reject the Lords amendments and an 18th time to endorse the Government’s amendments in lieu relating to the detention of unaccompanied children. It is time for the clear view of the elected House to prevail. I invite all right hon. and hon. Members to stand with the Government in upholding the will of the democratically elected Commons, to support the Government motions and to get on with securing our borders and stopping the boats.

July 26, 2023
Peter Bottomley – 2023 Speech on Higher Education

The speech made by Sir Peter Bottomley, the Father of the House, in the Commons on 17 July 2023.

I thank the Secretary of State. Those of us with long memories know that we either ration places by number or we give people choice. If she is giving people the choice of being able to discriminate between the courses and universities on offer, I congratulate her, as I do especially on the lifetime learning and the degree apprenticeship expansion, which has already happened, with more to come.

However, can I also speak up for those who either got fourth-class degrees or failed to take a degree at all, including two of the three Governors of the Bank of England who went to King’s and who came out without a degree? Rabi Tagore left university, and many other poets, painters, teachers or ministers of religion—whether rabbis, imams or ministers in the Christian Church—do not show up highly on the earnings scale, but they might show up highly in their contributions to society. Can my right hon. Friend please make sure that she does not let an algorithm rate colleges, courses or universities?

Gillian Keegan

I thank my hon. Friend for his remarks, and I very much agree that this is about choice—the lifelong loan entitlement, degree apprenticeships and all of the other choices—and about people understanding that there are many different routes to success in life. We have asked the Office for Students to look at earnings, because I realise that is difficult and that some jobs will not earn people more. However, for his information, five years after graduating from some courses, people are earning less than £18,000. That is less than the minimum wage, and it is not acceptable.

July 26, 2023
Bridget Phillipson – 2023 Speech on Higher Education

The speech made by Bridget Phillipson, the Shadow Secretary of State for Education, in the House of Commons on 17 July 2023.

I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement.

Today’s statement tells us several stories about this Government. It tells a story about their priorities: why universities, and why now? It tells a story about their analysis: what they think is wrong and what they think is not. It tells a story about their competence: why these changes, when their own regulator has used a different approach for so long? It tells a story about their prejudice, about why they continue to reinforce a binary choice for young people: either academic or vocational, university or apprenticeship. Above all, it tells a story about values—about the choice to put caps on the aspirations and ambitions of our young people; about Ministers for whom opportunity is for their children, but not for other people’s children; about a Government whose only big idea for our world-leading universities is to put up fresh barriers to opportunity, anxious to keep young people in their place. It tells you everything you need to know about the Tories that this is their priority for our young people.

This is the Tories’ priority when we are in the middle of an urgent crisis in this country; when families are struggling to make ends meet; when patients are facing the biggest waiting lists in NHS history; when children are going to school in buildings that Ministers themselves acknowledge are “very likely” to collapse; and when a spiral of low productivity, low growth, and low wages under the Tories is holding Britain back. It is because the Prime Minister is weak and he is in hock to his Back Benchers that we are not seeing action on those important priorities. Instead, after more than 13 years in power, the Government have shown what they really think of our universities, which are famous across the world, are core to so many of our regional economies and were essential to our pandemic response: that they are not a public good, but a political battleground.

The Government’s concept of a successful university course, based on earnings, is not just narrow but limiting. I ask the Secretary of State briefly to consider the case of the right hon. Member for Richmond (Yorks) (Rishi Sunak). The Prime Minister has a degree in politics from one of our leading universities, yet his Government lost control of almost 50 councils this year, he was the second choice of his own party, and now he is on track to fail to deliver on the pledges he set himself publicly. Does the Secretary of State believe that the Prime Minister’s degree was in any sense a high-value course?

Let us be clear what today’s announcement is really about. Many of our most successful newer universities—the fruits of the determination of successive Governments, Labour and Conservative, to spread opportunity in this country—often draw more students from their local communities. Many of those areas are far from London, far from existing concentrations of graduate jobs. Many of those students come from backgrounds where few in their family, if any, will have had the chance to go to university. Many of those young people benefit from extra support when they arrive at university to ensure they succeed. We on the Labour Benches welcome the success of those universities in widening participation and welcoming more young people into higher education, yet today, the Secretary of State is telling those young people—including those excited to be finishing their studies this year—that this Government believe their hard work counts for nothing. Can the Secretary of State be absolutely clear with the House, and tell us which of those universities’ courses she considers to be of low value?

The Secretary of State is keen to trumpet her party’s record on apprenticeships, but let me set out what this Government’s record really is. Since 2015-16, apprenticeship starts among under-19s have dropped by 41%, and apprentice achievements in that age group are down by 57%. Since the Secretary of State entered this place, the number of young people achieving an apprenticeship at any level has more than halved, failing a generation of young people desperate to take on an apprenticeship.

Lastly and most importantly, the values that this Government have set out today are clear: the Conservatives are saying to England’s young people that opportunity is not for them and that choice is not for them. The bizarre irony of a Conservative Government seeking to restrict freedom and restrict choices seems entirely lost on them. Labour will shatter the class ceiling. We will ensure that young people believe that opportunity is for them. Labour is the party of opportunity, aspiration and freedom. Let us be clear, too, that young people want to go to university not merely to get on financially, but for the chance to join the pursuit of learning, to explore ideas and undertake research that benefits us all. That chance and that opportunity matter too. Our children deserve better. They deserve a Government whose most important mission will be to break down the barriers to opportunity and to build a country where background is no barrier. They deserve a Labour Government.

Gillian Keegan

As usual, the hon. Lady has more words than actions. None of those actions was put in place either in Wales, where Labour is running the education system, or in the UK when it was running it in England. We have always made the deliberate choice of quality over quantity, and this is a story of a consistent drive for quality, whether that is through my right hon. Friend the Schools Minister having driven up school standards, so that we are the best in the west for reading and fourth best in the world, or through childcare, revolutionising the apprenticeship system—none of that existed before we put it in place—and technical education and higher education.

I was an other people’s child: I was that kid who left school at 16, who went to a failing comprehensive school in Knowsley. I relied on the business, and the college and the university that I went to. I did not know their brand images and I knew absolutely nobody who had ever been there. I put my trust in that company, and luckily it did me very well. Not all universities and not all courses have the trusted brand image of Oxford and Cambridge, which I think is where the hon. Lady went, along with my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. I have worked with many leaders all over the world in my many years in business, and the Prime Minister is a world-class leader.

On apprenticeships, it is a case of quality always over quantity. What we found, and this is why I introduced the quality standards, is that, yes, the numbers were higher, but many of the people did not realise they were on an apprenticeship, many of the apprenticeships lasted less than 12 months and for many of them there was zero off-the-job training. They were apprenticeships in name only, which is what the Labour party will be when it comes to standards for education.

July 26, 2023
Gillian Keegan – 2023 Statement on Higher Education

The statement made by Gillian Keegan, the Secretary of State for Education, in the House of Commons on 17 July 2023.

With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to announce the publication of the Government’s higher education reform consultation response. This country is one of the best in the world for studying in higher education, boasting four of the world’s top 10 universities. For most, higher education is a sound investment, with graduates expected to earn on average £100,000 more over their lifetime than those who do not go to university.

However, there are still pockets of higher education provision where the promise that university education will be worthwhile does not hold true and where an unacceptable number of students do not finish their studies or find a good job after graduating. That cannot continue. It is not fair to taxpayers who subsidise that education, but most of all it is not fair to those students who are being sold a promise of a better tomorrow, only to be disappointed and end up paying far into the future for a degree that did not offer them good value.

We want to make sure that students are charged a fair price for their studies and that a university education offers a good return. Our reforms are aimed at achieving that objective. That is why the Government launched the consultation in 2022, to seek views on policies based on recommendations made by Sir Philip Augar and his independent panel. The consultation ended in May 2022, and the Department for Education has been considering the responses received. I am now able to set out the programme of reforms that we are taking forward.

I believe that the traditional degree continues to hold great value, but it is not the only higher education pathway. Over the past 13 years, we have made substantial reforms to ensure that the traditional route is not the only pathway to a good career. Higher technical qualifications massively enhance students’ skills and career prospects, and deserve parity of esteem with undergraduate degrees. We have seen a growth in degree-level apprenticeships, with over 188,000 students enrolling since their introduction in 2014. I have asked the Office for Students to establish a £40 million competitive degree apprenticeships fund to drive forward capacity-building projects to broaden access to degree apprenticeships over the next two years.

That drive to encourage skills is why we are also investing up to £115 million to help providers deliver higher technical education. In March, we set out detailed information on how the lifelong learning entitlement will transform the way in which individuals can undertake post-18 education, and we continue to support that transformation through the Lifelong Learning (Higher Education Fee Limits) Bill, which is currently passing through the other place. We anticipate that that funding, coupled with the introduction of the LLE from 2025, will help to incentivise the take-up of higher technical education, filling vital skills gaps across the country.

Each of those reforms has had one simple premise: that we are educating people with the skills that will enable them to have a long and fulfilling career. I believe that we should have the same expectation for higher education: it should prepare students for life by giving them the right skills and knowledge to get well-paid jobs. With the advent of the LLE, it is neither fair nor right for students to use potentially three quarters of their lifelong loan entitlement for a university degree that does not offer them good returns. That would constrain their future ability to learn, earn and retrain. We must shrink the parts of the sector that do not deliver value, and ensure that students and taxpayers are getting value for money given their considerable investment.

Data shows that there were 66 providers from which fewer than 60% of graduates progressed to high-skilled employment or further study fifteen months after graduating. That is not acceptable. I will therefore issue statutory guidance to the OfS setting out that it should impose recruitment limits on provision that does not meet its rigorous quality requirements for positive student outcomes, to help to constrain the size and growth of courses that do not deliver for students. We will also ask the OfS to consider how it can incorporate graduate earnings into its quality regime. We recognise that many factors can influence graduate earnings, but students have a right to expect that their investment in higher education will improve their career prospects, and we should rightly scrutinise courses that appear to offer limited added value to students on the metric that matters most to many.

We will work with the OfS to consider franchising arrangements in the sector. All organisations that deliver higher education must be held to robust standards. I am concerned about some indications that franchising is acting as a potential route for low quality to seep into the higher education system, and I am absolutely clear that lead providers have a responsibility to ensure that franchised provision is of the same quality as directly delivered provision. If we find examples of undesirable practices, we will not hesitate to act further on franchising.

As I have said, we will ensure that students are charged a fair price for their studies. That is why we are also reducing to £5,760 the fees for classroom-based foundation year courses such as business studies and social sciences, in line with the highest standard funding rate for access to HE diplomas. Recently we have seen an explosion in the growth of many such courses, but limited evidence that they are in the best interests of students. We are not reducing the fee limits for high-cost, strategically important subjects such as veterinary sciences and medicine, but we want to ensure that foundation years are not used to add to the bottom line of institutions at the expense of those who study them. We will continue to monitor closely the growth of foundation year provision, and we will not hesitate to introduce further restrictions or reductions. I want providers to consider whether those courses add value for students, and to phase out that provision in favour of a broad range of tertiary options with the advent of the LLE.

Our aim is that everyone who wants to benefit from higher education has the opportunity to do so. That is why we will not proceed at this time with a minimum requirement of academic attainment to access student finance—although we will keep that option under review. I am confident that the sector will respond with the ambition and focused collaboration required to deliver this package of reforms. I extend my wholehearted thanks to those in the sector for their responses to the consultation.

This package of reforms represents the next step in tackling low-quality higher education, but it will not be the last step. The Government will not shy away from further action if required, and will consider all levers available to us if these quality reforms do not result in the improvements we seek. Our higher education system is admired across many countries, and these measures will ensure that it continues to be. I commend this statement to the House.

July 26, 2023
Nigel Farage – 2023 Comments on the Resignation of Alison Rose

The comments made by Nigel Farage on Twitter on 26 July 2023.

Dame Alison Rose has gone. Others must follow.

I hope that this serves as a warning to the banking industry.

We need both cultural and legal changes to a system that has unfairly shut down many thousands of innocent people.

I will do my best to be their voice.

July 26, 2023
Alison Rose – 2023 Statement on Standing Down as Natwest Group Chief Executive

The statement made by Alison Rose following her resignation as the Chief Executive of the Natwest Group on 26 July 2023.

I remain immensely proud of the progress the bank has made in supporting people, families and business across the UK, and building the foundations for sustainable growth. My NatWest colleagues are central to that success, and so I would like to personally thank them for all that they have done.

July 26, 2023