Category: Speeches

Angela Rayner – 2023 Speech on Security of Government Devices and TikTok

The speech made by Angela Rayner, the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

I welcome the statement and thank the Minister for advance sight of it. But once again the Government are late to the game. In August last year, Parliament closed its TikTok account. As the Minister has just said, in December the US banned TikTok from official devices, and nearly a month ago the European Commission followed suit. On 28 February, however, the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology said that the app was a matter of “personal choice.” She said, “We have no evidence”, and that a ban would be “very forthright”.

What has changed? Two weeks, two Ministers, two completely different policies later, and it is the same pattern over and over again: a Government behind the curve, with sticking-plaster solutions, forced to lurch into a U-turn at the last minute. We need a strong, clear- eyed and consistent approach—one that ensures that we can protect our national security and that puts us in a strong position to engage with states such as China where it is in our interest to do so, in areas such as climate change and trade.

The Minister announced a restriction on official devices to a pre-approved list of third-party apps and a ban on TikTok. How does the ban on TikTok differ from it simply not being on that approved list? Why is the ban limited only to central Government Departments? How will it apply, for example, to devolved Governments or Parliaments? Can the Ministry of Defence, for example, keep its account?

The Minister said that the TikTok ban is based on

“a specific risk with Government devices”.

Can he go a little further on that? What exactly is the specific risk and why does it apply only to official devices in central Government? Will the Minister tell us what advice has been issued to other Ministers, including those who already actively use TikTok? What criteria will be used for the list of pre-approved apps that he has announced today? Which apps will be included and which will not? On what grounds?

Today’s announcement feels like closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. If the Minister was serious about overhauling security at the heart of Government, why was the review limited only to the use of third-party apps on Government devices? Why not carry out a root-and-branch review of the technology used by his colleagues? The reality is that this Government’s track record of upholding security at the heart of Government is appalling, from their chronic use of private emails to the hacking of the phone of the former Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for South West Norfolk (Elizabeth Truss). Will the Minister say whether there were any discussions during this process about Ministers’ use of private messaging, such as WhatsApp, and email? Will he confirm that he will make it a priority to make good on promises to update the guidance on the use of private emails by Ministers, which is now a decade old?

In the Procurement Bill’s Second Reading debate, the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, the hon. Member for Rutland and Melton (Alicia Kearns), described the Government’s approach to tracking down security threats in our supply chain as “relentless whack-a-mole”. She said we needed a more systematic and proactive approach to identifying risks in the UK’s supply chain, especially when it comes to goods and services bought with taxpayers’ money. I agree with her; does the Minister?

If the Minister is truly serious about national security at the heart of Government, why did he vote against Labour’s amendments to the Procurement Bill that would have mandated that suppliers that pose a risk to the UK’s national security must be excluded from being granted taxpayers’ money? The Government have a duty to uphold the highest standards of security at the heart of Government. Today’s announcement is nothing but a temporary fix—a sticking plaster—while gaping holes remain in our national security. We must fix this problem; is the Minister committed to doing so?

Oliver Dowden

The right hon. Lady raised a large number of issues; I will try to address as many as I can and am happy to write to her on any that I do not cover.

First, the Government’s overall approach to national security is set out in the integrated review refresh that was published at the beginning of the week. In respect of China specifically, it sets out a three-pronged approach of protect, align and engage; this element of our activity clearly relates to protect.

The right hon. Lady asked why the decision has taken some time. We have always taken an evidence-based approach. I thought it was appropriate that we gather sufficient evidence and understand the nature of the problem. I did that in November. It is an appropriate way to deal with national security challenges and I will continue to take it.

The right hon. Lady asked about the limited list. We already have an approved list of apps but it does not apply to every Government Department. We are now ensuring that it applies across all Government Departments. I do not believe there is a risk extant at the moment; this is about ensuring that we continue to guard against risk on an ongoing basis.

The ban applies not just to central Government Departments but to all Government agencies, including arm’s length bodies. On the devolved Administrations, I have written to the leaders in Scotland and Wales and the appropriate officials in Northern Ireland.

In respect of Ministers, they receive extensive advice when they take office and are expected to follow that with all the devices they use. In respect of private messaging, we are updating the guidance on non-corporate communications to ensure that we have a consistent approach across Government, but, again, I do not believe that we have serious concerns on that.

Finally, on the right hon. Lady’s slightly overblown rhetorical point about Government taking action, I say gently to her that I have always been willing to take decisive action to protect national security. It is exactly the approach that I took in respect of banning Huawei from our 5G network before many of our allies did so. It is exactly the approach that I took within weeks of taking office in respect of Government surveillance devices on sensitive sites with Chinese technology on them. However, we must proceed with an evidence-based and proportionate approach. That is what will command public confidence and that is the approach that I am taking today.

March 17, 2023
Oliver Dowden – 2023 Statement on Security of Government Devices and TikTok

The statement made by Oliver Dowden, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

As this week’s integrated review refresh demonstrated, the Government are strongly committed to bolstering our national security to meet the challenges of both today and tomorrow. We take the security of Government devices very seriously, and we are constantly working to ensure that those devices remain as safe and secure as possible. As part of that effort, I recently commissioned a review by our cyber-security experts to assess the risks posed by certain third-party apps on Government devices and in particular the installation and use of TikTok. I know that there has been a lot of interest in this issue in the House, so I wanted to take this opportunity to update Members.

The review has concluded and it is clear that there could be a risk around how sensitive Government data is accessed and used by certain platforms. As many colleagues will know, social media apps collect and store huge amounts of user data, including contacts, user content and geolocation data. On Government devices, that data can be sensitive, and so today we are strengthening the security of those devices in two key respects.

First, we are moving to a system where Government devices will only be able to access third-party apps that are on a pre-approved list. This system is already in place across many Departments, and now it will be the rule across Government. Secondly, we are also going to ban the use of TikTok on Government devices. We will do so with immediate effect. This is a precautionary move—we know that there is already limited use of TikTok across Government—but it is also good cyber hygiene.

Given the particular risk around Government devices that may contain sensitive information, it is both prudent and proportionate to restrict the use of certain apps, particularly when it comes to apps where a large amount of data can be stored and accessed. This ban applies to Government corporate devices within ministerial and non-ministerial departments, but it will not extend to personal devices for Government employees or Ministers or the general public. That is because, as I have outlined, this is a proportionate move based on a specific risk with Government devices. However, as is always the case, we advise individuals to practise caution online and to consider each social media platform’s data policies before downloading and using it. Of course, it is the case that Ministers receive regular security briefings and advice on protecting data on their personal devices and on mitigating cyber threats.

We will also be putting in place specific, very limited exemptions for the use of TikTok on Government devices where it is required for operational reasons. Those exemptions will only be granted by security teams on a case-by-case basis, with ministerial clearance provided as appropriate. Overall, this approach aligns with action taken by allies, including the United States, Canada and the EU.

Our security must always come first. Today we are strengthening that security in a prudent and proportionate way, and I commend this statement to the House.

March 17, 2023
Catherine West – 2023 Speech on Saudi Arabia’s Execution of Hussein Abo al-Kheir

The speech made by Catherine West, the Shadow Foreign Office Minister, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

I thank the right hon. Member for Haltemprice and Howden (Mr Davis) for his characteristic defence of these principles in the House and for securing this urgent question.

On behalf of the Labour party, I extend my condolence to the family of Hussein Abo al-Kheir, a Jordanian national who leaves behind eight children. Labour stands unequivocally against the death penalty wherever it is used in the world. The taking of human life as punishment, regardless of the crime, is a gross breach of a person’s human rights.

Mr al-Kheir was arrested in 2014 for alleged drug smuggling; however, because there was no proper trial with a proper defence and he had no legal advice, it is very difficult to know the exact detail of the case. He consistently denied the charges. While he was in custody, he was allegedly so severely beaten and tortured that he lost his eyesight. Moreover, he was denied basic due process and was unable to instruct a lawyer throughout his time in custody. Despite interventions from the Government and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, his execution went ahead on Sunday.

I reiterate the point made earlier: has the UK become less robust on the question of human rights in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia since 2015? Saudi Arabia is a founding member of the Arab League, which is bound by the Arab charter of human rights; what urgent actions are the Government taking to ensure that our partners comply with the Arab League and its human rights charter?

In the run-up to Ramadan, what extra measures are the Government taking to open dialogue with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, so that we can avoid a repeat of last year’s execution of 100 people? In the strategic dialogue with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, will the Minister press for the value of the sanctity of human life, a principle that we in this House all agree on?

Leo Docherty

I join the hon. Lady in vocally opposing the death penalty. That is at the core of all our diplomatic work so we entirely share that view. As she said, we do not know the exact details of this case, so it is not useful to speculate, but we can be sure that we continue to engage through our mission in Riyadh and other multilateral channels.

To answer the hon. Lady’s question directly, we are certainly no less robust than we were previously in our absolute determination to oppose the death penalty around the world, and at bilateral fora as well as multilateral fora. She mentioned the Arab League and the advent of Ramadan; that gives us even more urgency in the representations we make. We will continue to press and engage at the multilateral and bilateral level to oppose this practice.

March 17, 2023
David Davis – 2023 Speech on Saudi Arabia’s Execution of Hussein Abo al-Kheir

The speech made by David Davis, the Conservative MP for Haltemprice and Howden, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

Hussein Abo al-Kheir had been on death row since 2015. He had been tortured into a false confession and always maintained his innocence. When I was told this weekend that his execution was imminent, I urgently wrote to the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary, the junior Minister, Lord Ahmad, the British ambassador to Saudi Arabia and the Saudi ambassador to the UK, calling for intervention to prevent Hussein’s execution—I received no formal reply, although I understand that a letter has arrived in my office since I have been in the Chamber. Hussein was subsequently executed. A response given on Tuesday to questions from the Father of the House appeared to suggest that, despite my representations, only low-level attempts were made to talk to the Saudis over the weekend. In 2015, the Foreign Secretary’s predecessor, Philip Hammond, intervened himself, successfully, to prevent the execution of a Saudi youth activist, and he prevented many more executions by so doing; that intervention saved Ali’s life. I firmly believe that a stronger intervention over the weekend could have saved Hussein’s life and perhaps more to come.

Saudi Arabia continues to be one of the most prolific users of the death penalty, killing more than 130 individuals in 2022. Since 1 March this year, the Kingdom has executed 11 people, including for non-violent drug offences. That goes against Saudi Arabia’s informal moratorium on the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences. Being soft with totalitarian states comes back to bite us, as we know from the Russian example. We must make it clear to our ally that it must abide by international standards of civilised behaviour; doing so might just save the lives of those who remain on death row.

Leo Docherty

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for describing the number of letters he has sent and pointing out that a response has been had. I am pleased that that is the case. I assure him that a range of interventions were made, as I described, at the most senior level by Lord Ahmad. That describes the energy with which he has made these representations, so we can be confident that a great deal of energy was expended in that effort. Of course, we cannot speculate as to the particulars of the case. My right hon. Friend mentioned the apparent spike in cases. Again, it might not be useful to speculate, but it might be that a pre-Ramadan surge of cases is adding to the apparent uptick. I understand that the moratorium relates to drug use rather than drug smuggling, and this case pertained to an allegation of and conviction for smuggling rather than use, which I think is relevant. It is not useful to speculate further on the particulars of this case, but we do make clear our continued opposition to the use of the death penalty, and our close working relationship with the Saudi authorities allows us to do just that in a way that allows us to appeal for clemency.

March 17, 2023
Leo Docherty – 2023 Statement on Saudi Arabia’s Execution of Hussein Abo al-Kheir

The statement made by Leo Docherty, the Foreign Office Minister, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

Saudi Arabia, of course, remains a Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office human rights priority country, in part because of the continued use of the death penalty. It is long-standing UK policy to oppose the death penalty in all circumstances, in all countries, as a matter of principle. The Saudi Government are well aware of the UK’s opposition to the use of the death penalty. The UK Government have consistently raised the issue of the death penalty, including the case of Jordanian national Mr Hussein Abo al-Kheir, with the Saudi authorities. The Minister for the middle east and north Africa and for human rights, Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon, has actively raised concerns about the death penalty and the specific case of Mr al-Kheir with the Saudi authorities on multiple occasions, including doing so with the president of the Saudi Human Rights Commission in December 2022 and when he visited the kingdom in February 2023. Lord Ahmad also raised the case with the Saudi ambassador to the UK, including in November 2022 and in January of this year.

On learning about the imminency of the execution, which took place on Saturday 11 March, Lord Ahmad again spoke to the president of the Saudi HRC, the Saudi vice-Foreign Minister and the Saudi ambassador. Saudi Arabia is committed to an ambitious programme of economic and social reform, through “Vision 2030”, which has already delivered significant change, including increased freedoms and economic opportunity for women. However, the human rights situation is likely to remain a key issue in our engagement for the foreseeable future. We will continue to discuss human rights and the death penalty, including individual cases of concern, with the Saudi authorities.

March 17, 2023
Karen Buck – 2023 Speech on the Health and Disability White Paper

The speech made by Karen Buck, the Labour MP for Westminster North, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

No one will mourn the passing of the work capability assessment; Labour has been calling for reform of that for a long time. It needed to change, because people’s lives do not fit neatly into a binary system of work or no work. However, disabled people and those with serious health issues want and deserve support and reassurance in work and out of it, and what people fear, understandably, is that under the guise of reform their lives will be made harder and vital financial support might disappear.

The devil is always in the detail, so I have a few questions for the Minister. The PIP assessment is designed for a totally different purpose from the WCA; how will he reconcile those completely different systems? What will happen in future to those people who do not currently receive PIP—those on the limited capability for work and work-related activity element of universal credit, and particularly those with short-term and fluctuating conditions? Unless it is the Minister’s intention that some 750,000 people will lose £350 a year, an alternative needs to be in place; what will that alternative be?

Do the Government believe that it is fair that the hundreds of thousands of people with disabilities that prevent them from even engaging in work-related activity should receive less financial support through UC than people who are entitled to PIP, and if so what is the basis for that justification? If the intention is to allow work coaches to use discretion in all such cases, how will we ensure consistent decision making and decision making that is based on a proper understanding of serious health conditions and their impact on daily life? What provision is made within the Department to ensure that capacity for that is in place?

As transparency and openness are so essential in building confidence, will the Minister now publish the report on the operation and effectiveness of sanctions? By publishing the White Paper, the Government have started this debate; the minimum we need now is openness and clarity about how those ideas are intended to work in practice.

Tom Pursglove

May I first welcome what I think is a cautious welcome from the Opposition for the reforms that we are seeking to advance? I think it reflects some of the utterings that we have heard from Labour Members over recent weeks and months about the direction of travel they want, recognising that there will be people for whom work is not appropriate. I repeat the point that, where that is the case, we will not be expecting people to engage with this support, but it is right that that structural impediment to work is removed from the system, that those who want to work are supported in being able to do so, and that we make sure that we have a system that is responsive to that and that also has health as a focus. I hope we can move forward on a cross-party basis on those terms.

On the specific point about PIP, again it is important to recognise that we will look very carefully at whether those individuals who are not currently in receipt of PIP meet the PIP criteria, and we will act accordingly. Also of course, anybody who thinks they may be eligible for PIP is able to apply for it. I would always encourage people who might be eligible for any given benefit to apply for it.

On the point about the health top-up, I can confirm that the award rate for the new UC health element will be at the same level as is currently awarded to those who have LCWRA. I again make the point about the approach that we intend to take: the reform will be carried out on a staged geographical basis, beginning with new claims in 2026-27. Of course, legislative steps will need to be taken to bring this reform to fruition, but there is much to welcome and I hope we can come together. On the point about the legal case, as I said earlier, colleagues elsewhere in the Department are considering next steps and will come forward in due course.

March 17, 2023
Marsha De Cordova – 2023 Speech on the Health and Disability White Paper

The speech made by Marsha De Cordova, the Labour MP for Battersea, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question.

Although we know that most of the proposals set out in the White Paper will not be implemented until the next Parliament, a significant number of ill and disabled people will be impacted. We see the Government using a carrot-and-stick approach, which will leave many sick and disabled people with the stick and the real threat of the ramping up of sanctions, as indicated by the Chancellor during his Budget statement yesterday. Just this week the Information Commissioner’s Office ruled that the Department for Work and Pensions must release “sensitive” research into its sanctions regime following the Work and Pensions Committee report, which found that there is very little evidence that the sanctions work. Instead, it found that they have a significant impact on the health and finances of those who have been sanctioned. There are real consequences to some of the Government’s actions.

Nobody is arguing that scrapping the work capability assessment is not welcome. However, relying solely on the PIP assessment is not the solution, given the current experiences of PIP assessments, which show that they are deeply flawed; the DWP is losing or conceding in four out of five appeals. Moreover, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said yesterday that up to 1 million people currently on incapacity benefits could lose out as a result of scrapping the work capability assessment and relying on using PIP only. Also under the new proposals disabled people will not automatically be in the “no work-related requirements” conditionality group and will now be subject to the decisions of a work coach.

We also did not hear any additional investment in the Access to Work scheme, so can the Minister say how many people will be impacted and what the cost is of these new proposals? It is estimated that 1 million people will lose out. How are the Government intending to mitigate that? Will the PIP assessment framework change or stay as it currently is? Given the poor decision making on so many PIP assessments, what action is being taken to fix the flawed decision-making process and the assessment itself? How will the DWP ensure that the policy proposals do not remove vital protections against sanctions and risk pushing people further into poverty? Finally, when are the Government intending to publish the sensitive research into the sanctions regime?

Tom Pursglove

I am hugely appreciative of the hon. Lady, who always speaks with great passion on these issues. I welcome the cautious welcome from her about the broad thrust of the reform we are trying to deliver, which is to remove the structural disincentive to work. That manifests itself in the many conversations I have with disabled people and their representative groups, when they tell me that many disabled people would like to try to work, but fear doing so and then losing their entitlement if it does not work out. That is not an acceptable situation, and it is right that we change it. I hope that as a House, as we move forward with these reforms, we can come together and deliver something that achieves that objective, which is plainly the right thing to do.

It was before my time in the House, but I well remember debates in previous years about the work capability assessment. It is welcome that we are scrapping the work capability assessment through these reforms. The reforms also offer an opportunity to focus on quality when it comes to the PIP assessment and on making sure that we get the right decisions first time. The hon. Lady will note, for example, that one of the commitments we have made in the White Paper is trying to match specialist assessors with people’s conditions. That is another thing people have regularly been asking for, and we are determined to test that and see what difference it can make. Again, this is all about being responsive to the feedback we have received.

On the issue of sanctions that the hon. Lady mentioned, I know that the legal case she touched on is under consideration by Ministers elsewhere in the Department at the moment. No doubt we will come forward and say more about that in due course, but I want to be clear that it is not my intention or the Department’s intention to force anyone to do something that is not right for them. We are committed to personalised, tailored support that meets individual needs and aspirations. The Secretary of State will talk about that in more detail during the Budget debate later. A lot of that will be voluntary. I would hope that people will want to engage with universal support and will want to engage with Work Well, because this is about trying to help and support people. For people with health conditions, for example, this is a way in which we can work harder and tirelessly with them to help them get better. Work is of course an important determinant of better health outcomes. The White Paper is explicit in saying that we will move forward with this in a way that is appropriate for individuals. For those where work is not appropriate, they will not be expected to do it.

It is also important to set out for the House that there will be transitional cash protection in place. No one who currently has limited capability for work or work-related activity will lose out as they move to the new system. We are specifically protecting those with pregnancy risk or who are undergoing cancer treatment, and we are also keeping a contributory health and disability benefit. Of course, what I really want to do—this is key to all of the work I do in this role—is to work constructively with the hon. Lady and with disabled people and their representative groups to make sure that we get this reform right. This is the biggest welfare reform for over a decade, and we have to get this absolutely right.

March 17, 2023
Tom Pursglove – 2023 Statement on the Health and Disability White Paper

The statement made by Tom Pursglove, the Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

Yesterday, the Secretary of State published “Transforming Support: The Health and Disability White Paper”. This White Paper is a significant milestone, demonstrating the Government’s commitment to ensuring that disabled people and people with health conditions can lead independent lives and fulfil their potential. It sets out an ambitious policy reform package that will transform the health and disability benefits system, and help disabled people and people with health conditions to start, stay in and succeed in work.

We will deliver action in three ways. First, we will transform the future benefits system so that it focuses on what people can do, rather than on what they cannot, including by removing the work capability assessment. In our new system, there will be no need to be found to have limited capability for work or work-related activity in order to receive additional income-related support for a disability or health condition. We will introduce a new universal credit health element that people receiving both personal independence payment and universal credit will be entitled to, which will enable people to try work without the fear of losing their benefits. We will roll this out carefully from 2026-27, and we will ensure that no one currently on universal credit and with limited capability for work or work-related activity will lose out once they move on to the new system.

Secondly, while de-risking work is one side of the coin in supporting disabled people and people with health conditions into work, we know that we also need to provide more employment and health support for this group. The White Paper sets out how we will introduce a new personalised approach to employment support and engagement, with the aim of helping people to reach their potential and live a more independent life. We are investing in additional work coach time and tailored support. The Chancellor also set out yesterday that we will introduce a new programme called universal support, which will provide wraparound support for individuals and employers, as well as additional money to provide more mental health and musculoskeletal treatment for this group.

Finally, we will ensure that people can access the right support at the right time, and have a better overall experience, by testing new initiatives to make it easier to apply for and receive health and disability benefits. I am certain that our White Paper reforms will support more people to reach their full potential and reap the health and wellbeing advantages of work.

March 17, 2023
Rebecca Pow – 2023 Speech at the International Cooperation on Air Pollution

The speech made by Rebecca Pow, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Minister for Environmental Quality and Resilience), in Gothenburg, Sweden on 16 March 2023.

It’s a real pleasure to be here today and an absolute honour to be asked to open this event, which is the first meeting of the Forum for International Cooperation on Air Pollution, here in Gothenburg.

For those of you who do not know me, my name is Rebecca Pow. I’m a Minister of the UK Parliament – my actual constituency is in the west of England, called Taunton Deane. I am the Minister for Environmental Quality and Resilience. Under that – I say to people, I’ve got all the difficult stuff – everything to do with water and flooding, everything to do with waste and recycling. I’m really excited that here in Sweden, we’re going to go on to look at the deposit return scheme that they run for recycling here in Sweden. I’ve got my team up there – we’re going to go and have a look and see how you do it, because we’re probably going to copy it in some shape or form.

I also have under my hat: chemicals and regulation, and of course air quality, which is a huge part of my portfolio. I would say it is a growing area because we’re more and more becoming aware of what we need to do on air. Action on all of the areas I’m responsible for – not just in the UK, but across the globe – are so important because we need to ensure the health of our people, the protection of the environment, and the sustainability of our economies. There is a big link between air pollution and our economies.

This Forum for International Cooperation on Air Pollution – made up of officials, researchers, and international organisations from around the world – is charged with a very great challenge to make sure we get this right on air pollution.

We do know that air pollution continues to be the biggest environmental risk to human health. I was talking to somebody just now; the tricky thing with air of course is you can’t see it. So, it makes it, I think, more difficult to get that message across to the public.

We know that poor air quality disproportionately affects the vulnerable. We know that it causes a range of life-shortening diseases, drives down productivity, and harms the natural environment.

And whilst a lot of actions are being taken to deal with this, we know there is a great deal more to do. Hence, this forum I believe will be so helpful. Through our collaboration and scientific innovation, we have achieved huge successes in driving down emissions over recent decades. But the action that has got us this far simply will not get us where we need to be now and in the future.

If we are to go further, we really do need to be bold by sharing experience and expertise, supporting innovative policymaking, and by working alongside people and the private sector to drive behavioural change. This is how we will achieve what we know is necessary to protect our citizens and our environment from the harmful effects of pollution. We should not let the complexity of the challenge stop us from taking decisive action.

Governments across the world are working hard to clean up the air, to tackle climate change, net zero and restore our biodiversity. The UK is no different. We have a clear commitment and we’re taking ambitious action on each of these global challenges. For instance, we were proud to host COP26 in Glasgow – I expect many of the people here today or joining us on video attended that. All 197 Parties agreed to the Glasgow Climate Pact.

We recently led the way in securing an incredibly stretching package for protecting nature globally – which includes a new international fund to tackle the nature crisis; and an expectation that $30 billion a year of international nature finance will flow into developing countries by 2030.

Our recently published Environmental Improvement Plan is the blueprint to maintain our trajectory and outlines a range of actions, including our two new legal targets for fine particulate matter concentrations. Also, by reducing emissions in our homes by managing domestic burning – so, that’s open fires and log burners. We know that we have got to control these emissions but that’s the difficult one because that’s the one that people are very closely associated with. And also, we’ve got actions supporting farmers to reduce the impact of ammonia emissions from agriculture.

Building on the progress we made during our COP and G7 presidencies, we will continue to display strong global leadership on air quality, climate change and nature. To keep our promises, and deliver to the highest standards, we must work with our partners across the world to maintain momentum.

International co-operation continues to be as important now as it was back in 1979 – you all look a bit young here but 1979, some people will remember that – when the Convention on Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution was signed. This was following acid rain damage right here in Scandinavia during the 1970s and 1980s. I remember seeing those really devastating accounts of the effect of acid rain – and of course, that was air pollution. 32 countries came together then, and they’ve since gone on to achieve a remarkable decline in emissions across the region. It does show what can be done.

This Convention is an example of what we can achieve through our cooperation. Air pollution – as we all know – knows no borders and it’s only by working together that we can address the interlinked threats of pollution, climate change and biodiversity loss. In that vein, it’s important we look beyond the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe region and continue to strengthen collaboration and cooperation with Parties right across the globe. It’s great to have our UN representative here today, who I met earlier.

Our new Forum for International Cooperation on Air Pollution has an important role to play in continuing to support the emissions reductions we know are needed on a global scale.

By exchanging information, mutual learning and enhancing cooperation, I know that we can improve the air we all breathe. This, of course, starts with learning lessons from the past. There is much we can learn from the Air Convention’s action to control and reduce transboundary air pollution over the last 44 years.

This morning’s session on pathways to air pollution action will discuss the building blocks needed for regional cooperation, including some of the challenges and how the Convention overcame them.

This afternoon’s session on ‘no regret’ actions will discuss different measures that countries can implement to improve air quality, even if they don’t necessarily have an expansive monitoring network. By sharing exactly this kind of science and policy expertise internationally, we can help more regions to take the necessary steps to tackle this pollution.

The United Kingdom are incredibly proud to be co-chair of this international forum with Sweden. I think it’s already showing that it’s going to be a great working partnership. I would really like to offer my thanks to our Swedish co-chairs who have been instrumental in the development, design, and delivery of this forum. Thank you very much for that.

I would also like to thank the Task Force, whose engagement and contributions in Bristol in October 2022 helped shape the programme we have lined up today and will continue to play a central role in the forum going forward.

And finally, I’m grateful to all of you for travelling from around the world to be here today but also all of those joining virtually. It’s great that if you can’t get here in person, that you can still be a part of it and I hope those people will still be engaging with the different events going on. It is only with the valued input of all of these people that we will be able to work together to find new solutions that can be implemented across the international community.

With your commitment and engagement, this Forum for International Cooperation will serve to pull together representatives from a very wide and inclusive sphere from right around the world to tackle the challenges of air pollution – potentially on a holistic scale, because this links in to so many parts of our lives. I’m absolutely sure this forum will be a force for good. I can feel it already, so I’m expecting great things. I really look forward to having a report back from my team who are here about how this goes but also what’s going to happen next – because I think that’s the really important thing. So, let’s carry on and push this up the global agenda, together.

Thank you.

March 17, 2023
Tim Farron – 2023 Comments on the Spring Budget Speech

The comments made by Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat MP for Westmorland and Lonsdale, on Facebook on 15 March 2023.

It absolutely beggars belief that the Conservatives’ budget had next to nothing in it to address the NHS crisis in Cumbria and across the country.

People are waiting for hours in A&E, weeks to see a GP, months for cancer treatment, and an eternity for mental health care.

And what did the Chancellor announce to tackle this disastrous situation? Barely a word, barely a penny.

Meanwhile the Conservatives have once again shown they don’t care about our rural communities. There was nothing to support us on the big issues we face whether it’s the crisis in farming or on the scandal of sewage being dumped in our lakes and rivers.

Cumbrians are being taken for granted by this Conservative Government.

March 15, 2023