Category: Speeches

  • Volodymyr Zelenskyy – 2022 Speech on Independence Day in Ukraine

    Volodymyr Zelenskyy – 2022 Speech on Independence Day in Ukraine

    The speech made by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the President of Ukraine, on 24 August 2022.

    The free people of independent Ukraine!

    And that says it all. Just four words, but how much is behind them today. On the 182nd day of the full-scale war. How many symbols and meanings, feats and losses, joy and pain are in these words. And mainly how much truth is in them. Our truth. Truth about our present, with which it is impossible to argue, as it is impossible not to see and not to admit. We are the free people of independent Ukraine. After six months of the attempts to destroy us, we are the free people of independent Ukraine. And this is the truth about our future. The free people of independent Ukraine.

    Six months ago, Russia declared war against us. On February 24, the entire Ukraine heard explosions and gunshots. And on August 24, it wasn’t supposed to hear the words “Happy Independence Day”. On February 24, we were told: you have no chance. On August 24, we say: Happy Independence Day, Ukraine!

    During these six months, we changed history, changed the world and changed ourselves. Now we know for sure who is really our brother and friend, and who is not even a casual acquaintance. Who did not lose his name and reputation, and who worried for the terrorists to save face. Who doesn’t really need us, and where the door is really open for us. We understood who is who. And the whole world learned who Ukrainians are. What Ukraine is. No one will say about it anymore: it is somewhere over there, near Russia.

    We started to respect ourselves. We understood that despite any help and support, no one but us will fight for our independence. And we united.

    We didn’t have HIMARS yet, but we had people willing to stop tanks with their bare hands. They were not ready to close the sky for us, but we had people willing to cover their native land with themselves.

    The Ukrainian people and their courage inspired the whole world. They gave humanity a new hope that justice has not completely left our cynical world. And it is still not force that wins in it, but truth. Not money, but values. Not oil, but people.

    Yesterday the world was not united. COVID-19 clearly showed: it’s every man for himself. Ukraine has changed this in six months. All world history textbooks will have a section “Times when Ukraine united the world”. When democracy grew teeth again. When tyranny receives an answer in the language it understands.

    Someone said: Europe is no longer a player. Weak, disunited, passive, sleepy. Ukraine invigorated the whole continent. Europe takes to the squares. Europe introduces tough sanctions. Europe unanimously recognizes that Ukraine is a future member of the European Union.

    Big business realized that money still smells. With blood, cinder, death. Corporations and brands are leaving the Russian market, and people have become more important than potential losses.

    Never before in the world has public opinion had such an influence on politicians. Today, people dictate trends and rules of behavior to the authorities. Being indifferent, inactive and slow is a shame. Being indecisive and too cautious is a shame. Speaking sluggishly, vaguely and too diplomatically is a shame. Not supporting Ukraine is a shame. And saying about fatigue from Ukraine is a shame. This is a very comfortable position: fatigue is a cover to close your eyes. And today we hear from world leaders and ordinary citizens: we will be with you until the end, until your victory.

    Dear people!

    We always paid tribute to all the fighters for independence, called this day the main holiday, and the blue-yellow flag – a shrine, put our hands to our hearts while singing the national anthem, and proudly said “Glory to Ukraine!” and “Glory to Heroes!”. On February 24, we had to prove our words with deeds.

    On this day, the second all-Ukrainian referendum actually took place. Again – the main question. Again – a decisive choice. But this time it was necessary to say “yes” to independence not in the ballot, but in the soul and conscience. Go not to the precinct, but to the military commissariat departments, the territorial defense units, the volunteer movement, the information troops or simply work steadily and conscientiously in your place, at full strength, for a common goal.

    We all changed. Someone was born again. As a person, individual, citizen, patriot, simply as a Ukrainian. And this, of course, is good news. Someone disappeared. Did not perish, did not die, but dissolved. As a person, individual, citizen, as a Ukrainian. And this is actually not bad news either. We will not hinder each other anymore.

    We made a choice. For some, it is Mariupol. For some – Monaco. But we know who the majority is. And we finally became truly one. A new nation that emerged on February 24 at 4 am. Not born, but reborn. A nation that didn’t cry, didn’t scream, didn’t get scared. Didn’t run away. Didn’t give up. Didn’t forget.

    This flag will be everywhere it should be by right. Both in Donbas and in Crimea. The enemy thought we would greet him with flowers and champagne. Instead, he received wreaths and Molotov cocktails. He was waiting for an ovation, but hears “claps”.

    The occupier believed that in a few days he would be on parade in our capital’s downtown. Today, you can see this “parade” on Khreshchatyk. The proof that enemy equipment can appear in the center of Kyiv only in such form. Burnt, wrecked and destroyed.

    It doesn’t matter to us what kind of army you have, what matters to us is our land. We will fight for it until the end.

    We are holding on for six months. It is difficult for us, but we clenched our fists fighting for our fate. Every new day is a new reason not to give up. Because, having gone through so much, we have no right not to reach the end. What is the end of the war for us? We used to say: peace. Now we say: victory.

    We will not seek an understanding with the terrorists. Although we understand the Russian language that you came to defend. And killed thousands of people you came to liberate.

    And Johnson, who speaks English, is much more understandable and close to us than murderers, rapists and looters who did it in Russian.

    And we don’t sit down at the negotiating table because of fear, with a gun pointed at our head. For us, the most terrible iron is not missiles, aircraft and tanks, but shackles. Not trenches, but fetters.

    And we will put our hands up only once – when we will celebrate our victory. The whole of Ukraine. Because we do not trade our lands and our people. For us, Ukraine is all of Ukraine. All 25 regions, without any concessions or compromises. We do not know these words, they were destroyed by missiles on February 24.

    Donbas is Ukraine. And we will return it, whatever the path may be. Crimea is Ukraine. And we will return it. Whatever the path may be. You don’t want your soldiers to die? Free our lands. You don’t want your mothers to cry? Free our lands. These are our simple and clear terms.

    The free people of independent Ukraine!

    We are facing this day in different places. Someone is in trenches and dugouts, in tanks and IFVs, at sea and in the air. Fighting for independence on the frontline. Someone is on the road, in cars, trucks and trains. Fighting for independence by delivering what is necessary to those on the frontline. And someone is on a smartphone or on a computer. Also fighting for independence by raising funds so that those on the road have something to bring to those on the frontline.

    We are facing this day in different circumstances, conditions and even in different time zones, but with one goal – preservation of independence and victory of Ukraine!

    We united.

    Happy Independence Day of Ukraine!

    Glory to Ukraine!

  • Volodymyr Zelenskyy – 2022 Statement on the Situation in Ukraine (24/08/2022) – 182 days

    Volodymyr Zelenskyy – 2022 Statement on the Situation in Ukraine (24/08/2022) – 182 days

    The statement made by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the President of Ukraine, on 24 August 2022.

    Ukrainians!

    All our defenders!

    Today was a useful day for Ukraine, very meaningful. A day that showed how strong our state has become, and this is not the limit yet. We are doing everything so that the strength of Ukraine, the opportunities of Ukraine, the freedom of Ukraine only increase.

    Today we celebrate the day of our flag, and it happens at a time when we are fighting against the most dreadful threat to our statehood and at the same time when we have achieved the greatest national unity. That is why we endured. Because we united and united the world around true values.

    Our national flag has become a global symbol of courage. A symbol of all who value a free life. Where there is blue and yellow, there is no and will be no tyranny. Where there is blue and yellow, there are no and will not be savages.

    Our flag is everywhere – from the frontline, where our warriors beat the enemy, to capitals on all continents, and it means one thing everywhere – humanity.

    I am grateful to everyone who defends true values. I am grateful to everyone who helps Ukraine. I am grateful to everyone who, since February 24, has chosen the path of struggle for what makes life real: for freedom, for independence.

    Very soon we will celebrate our main national holiday – our independence. Already tomorrow. We have planned many activities – something that will emphasize the path we have covered. Covered together – Ukrainians in Ukraine, throughout our territory – free and temporarily occupied, because our people are fighting everywhere. Ukrainians abroad – all those who helped, all those who spread the truth about Ukraine, all those who urged to fight for Ukraine.

    No occupier feels safe on our land. All collaborators know that they have no future. And we all do not just believe – we see that our state has a perspective.

    And for tomorrow, I have planned to award people who have contributed to our strength. These are people from different areas of life. Our warriors, all those who help warriors. Communication officers, railwaymen, rescuers, media workers, those who inform our people, who work in the national marathon “United News”. These are utility workers, electricians, drivers, volunteers, officials, athletes, artists – those artists who are known on the frontline, whom the army is grateful to, those who preserve and restore the positive emotions of our warriors.

    I asked various ministries, regional administrations, the Armed Forces of Ukraine, media representatives to submit their proposals on who deserves awards on Independence Day. It is up to you to decide. And tomorrow the awards will be given to those who really deserve them.

    Now I am near the office of the Crimea Platform, near the building that symbolizes that we care about every part of Ukraine, about every part of our people – the great Ukrainian people. Crimea is an integral part of our state, Crimea is Ukraine. Crimea is an integral part of our people. And we will certainly come to our cities in Crimea, to our people in Crimea and return to them the freedom that belongs to them by right, as well as to all our other people.

    That is why we have organized a special format – the Crimean format, the Crimea Platform. We held the inaugural summit last summer and today we have already held the second one. I am grateful to all participants of the summit – 40 leaders, almost 60 states and international organizations. European leaders, leaders of the G7, leaders of the countries of Africa, Asia, Latin America. This is not just a meeting, not just a discussion. The Crimea Platform became a global forum that united the leaders of the free world. This is a community of people who help restore peace and legality for Crimea, for the Black Sea region, for all of Europe.

    And the fact that we are holding the summit for the second time right now, with the expansion of the representation, is a clear response of the world to Russian aggression. Clear support for our sovereignty and territorial integrity within internationally recognized borders. Russian aggression began in Crimea, and its finale will be in Crimea as well.

    In Kyiv, on Constitution Square, the Walk of the Brave was opened today – a place to honor the personal strength of those people who did not fail after February 24, who were not afraid, who did not retreat under the pressure of tyranny. Who helped us fight against Russian aggression and is still helping us. And the first name that we presented on the Walk of the Brave is the name of Andrzej Duda, the President of Poland. He was in Kyiv today, participating in the Crimea Platform. And for not a single day during these six months has he lost strength in supporting Ukraine. I am grateful to him!

    I definitely want to address our Kharkiv and all Kharkiv residents separately today. You are heroic people, a heroic city. A proud city. A city with a sense of self-respect. A city that knows how to defend itself. A city whose people know how to unite. A neat city. A city that always impresses everyone who comes and sees how Kharkiv residents take care of their streets and yards even when they are under the brutal pressure of Russian terrorists.

    Today is Kharkiv Day. Now our Kharkiv is not willing to celebrate. Yes, Kharkiv experienced a lot of injustice and cruelty. But Kharkiv will never be a city of black scorched windows and ruined districts. Kharkiv will never submit to this evil, which has nothing but artillery and missiles.

    We will definitely liberate the entire Kharkiv region. We will find a way to guarantee security to our Kharkiv. And we will do everything to restore the city. I promise!

    Fellow Ukrainians!

    Tomorrow is an important day for all of us. And that is why this day, unfortunately, is also important for our enemy. We must be aware that tomorrow hideous Russian provocations and brutal strikes are possible.

    The Armed Forces of Ukraine, our intelligence, special services will do everything to protect people – as much as possible. And we will certainly respond to any manifestation of Russian terror.

    But please follow the safety rules strictly tomorrow. Please observe the curfew. Pay attention to the air sirens. Pay attention to official announcements. And remember: we must all achieve victory together.

    Eternal glory to all who fight for Ukraine!

    Glory to Ukraine!

  • Volodymyr Zelenskyy – 2022 Speech at the Opening of the Second Crimea Platform Summit

    Volodymyr Zelenskyy – 2022 Speech at the Opening of the Second Crimea Platform Summit

    The speech made by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the President of Ukraine, on 23 August 2022.

    Ladies and Gentlemen!

    Dear participants and guests of the Crimea Platform, present here and there, not far from us, and we feel it!

    Dear citizens of Ukraine from Crimea and in Crimea.

    I know you are watching and hearing us today. It is very important for us. It is very important for me. For society, for each and every one of us. I know that Crimea stands with Ukraine and is waiting for us to return. I want you all to know, we will definitely be back. When we return and correct everything that the occupiers did on our Ukrainian peninsula.

    What has come to Crimea and the entire Black Sea region along with Russian aggression and Russian weapons? Catastrophic environmental threats, unprecedented destruction of Crimea’s nature, destruction of social life, economic decline, destruction of monuments, militarism. And when the Russian fleet, which is based in the occupied Crimea, blocked our ports in the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, it provoked a global food crisis and the crisis of the rights of people – Crimeans, our wonderful citizens, citizens of our unitary state of Ukraine.

    But – in spite of everything, in spite of any threats – Ukraine is strong enough and capable enough to see a perspective for the Ukrainian Crimea.

    I have the honor to announce the start of the Second Summit of the Crimea Platform.

    In a year, we managed to significantly expand the capabilities of the Crimea Platform, Minister Kuleba mentioned that. Last year, 46 foreign countries and international organizations participated in the summit. This year the figure is almost 60. I am grateful to everyone. Much more state leaders – 40 presidents and prime ministers, including the leaders of the G7. I am grateful to all of you for understanding how important such actions are now – your support, our joint actions and our joint work.

    This year, representatives of two more continents – Africa and South America – have joined, and this demonstrates that there is no boundary in the world that the truth about the Russian war against Ukraine and our people would not overcome.

    Of course, it is obvious whom we have to fight. The presence of obvious security risks dictates that the summit takes place in online mode. But international practice has already proven that such a regime can be absolutely effective for politics, diplomacy, and most importantly, for the protection of freedom.

    And especially now I want to thank one of the leaders who is with us here in Kyiv today – Andrzej Duda, the President of Poland and a true friend of all Ukrainians. Andrzej, your presence next to me, next to the people of Ukraine, once again confirms the extremely close ties and historical understanding that exist between Ukrainians and Poles. Thank you!

    Ladies and Gentlemen!

    When I speak to our citizens, I often use the honorific address: all our defenders. In fact, today, addressing you, honorable leaders, honorable ministers, I can use the same words and with a related meaning: all defenders of the international legal order!

    This is why we are here today, this is why the Crimea Platform was established and has been working for a year already.

    We are restoring the power of international law, and it is thanks to this that we will return the Ukrainian flag to our land of Crimea, it is thanks to this that we will bring freedom to Ukrainian citizens in Crimea and certainly restore justice for all those who suffered from repression and abuse by the Russian occupiers.

    But to win, we must not forget the path that led to the current situation.

    The degradation of Russia began with the seizure of Crimea. It started with terror against the Crimean Tatar people, the indigenous people of Crimea. With repression on religious grounds, which probably became the largest religious persecution in Europe in the XXI century, against the Crimean Muslim community.

    There was also the expulsion from occupied Crimea of all ordinary people who said that Crimea is Ukraine, who were not afraid to defend Ukrainian culture and Ukrainian freedom in Crimea. Murders and torture – we saw it all – humiliation and looting – the occupiers committed all this in Crimea and continue to commit all this since the first weeks after its shameful capture. And then they spread these crimes to Donbas, to other countries, in particular to Syria, to African countries, where Russian banditry under the cover of Russian special services is now seen.

    Mass terror after February 24 became the logical completion of the degradation of this state, which not so long ago was invited to the table with the G7 and which now competes for supremacy with the most brutal regimes of the past, responsible for genocides, wars of aggression and deportations.

    We are grateful that many people in the world did not keep silent about all this, many people constantly resisted – helped us, fought. But at the same time, many remained silent – and it is true – tried not to notice what was happening in Crimea. And this, in my opinion, became one of the key reasons for everything that is happening now in Ukraine and in the world.

    It is important to remember that there was resistance on the peninsula. There were and are people, we know, who are not silent, who defend freedom and simply defend normal life in Crimea. They are oppressed. But we see them, we know about them, we are grateful to them.

    I recently received a letter from one of the qırımlılar, Nariman Celâl. Unfortunately, he is now behind bars. The occupiers imprisoned him on a completely false charge, for fighting for the homeland, for taking part in the first summit of the Crimea Platform, which took place last year. Last year, he left the already occupied Crimea to tell the participants of the summit what is really happening on the peninsula and what it all will lead to. And nine days after his return to Crimea, the occupiers deprived him of his freedom. For the fact that he was simply a free man. This was Russia’s response.

    In his letter, Mr. Celâl wrote: “It began with Crimea, and it will end with Crimea.” And it really will. I believe in it. In order to overcome terror, to return predictability and security to our region, Europe and the whole world, we need to win the fight against Russian aggression, and therefore we need to free Crimea from occupation. It will end where it began.

    And this will be an effective resuscitation of the international legal order.

    But this is not just a political and legal task for the world. This is about a specific land, about specific people living in Crimea. About cities, about culture, about specific landmarks. About hopes of specific living people. About the fact that someone invested his life in Crimea, and after the arrival of Russia, was forced to leave it and seek refuge in other lands, or fear that something of his own would be taken away: a house, land, work, any business… And he was forced to limit himself. Or lose everything when it was taken.

    Russia stole a part of life even from those in Crimea who were lucky enough not to become a victim of repression. It was impossible to imagine such a thing, but the occupation turned Crimea – which is a paradise for all of us – into a depressed and dependent region. Into a region of high fences, barbed wire and lawlessness. Into a zone of environmental disaster and a military bridgehead for aggression and the spread of grief.

    Since February 24, 750 different cruise missiles have been launched from the occupied Crimea at our cities and communities. Imagine – 750 in six months! They destroyed at least hundreds of civilian objects: schools, universities, ordinary residential buildings, hospitals.

    And that is why Ukraine’s restoration of control over the Crimean peninsula will be a historic anti-war step in Europe.

    This will restore security and provide justice, this will reintegrate Crimea into the modern world, and this will allow each of us – participants of the Crimea Platform – to tell our children, our relatives and friends that they can be proud of us precisely as peacekeepers.

    And I want to emphasize: for Ukraine, Crimea is not just some territory, not a chip in the geopolitical game, as for a terrorist state. For Ukraine, Crimea is a part of our people, our society. A community of people to whom we will guarantee freedom and restore modernity.

    Crimea was and is Ukraine, and after deoccupation, along with our entire state, it will become part of the European Union. I am sure of that. The passport of a citizen of Ukraine will also be the passport of the European Union. These are colossal opportunities for all our people living in Crimea.

    The roads of Crimea will be the roads of the entire European continent, the ports of Crimea will be the ports of all of Europe. Only Ukraine can connect Simferopol with Berlin, and Yalta with Naples.

    Only Ukraine is concerned about the real security of Crimea. That is, a normal supply of clean water, normal disposal of garbage, effective rules for waste and sewage management.

    Only Ukraine can build a modern irrigation system in Crimea and integrate Crimean agricultural production and the entire business sector into the colossal European market.

    Only our state will provide Crimea with a modern and affordable medical system, a modern and affordable educational system, and a modern digital system of public services.

    Ukraine will remove the barbed wire that blocks the path of ordinary people to the best locations, and the illegal fences that have torn the coast of our beautiful Crimea. Free access to beaches, real protection of protected areas, historical sites – this will be provided only by Ukraine, not by someone who came to capture, steal and humiliate people.

    It is Ukraine that will restore the system of sanatoria and rehabilitation centers in Crimea – professional institutions that will be able to host hundreds of thousands of people annually. Millions of tourists. Children and adults, civilians and veterans, our citizens and foreigners – everyone whom the precious nature of Crimea helps. And millions of tourists – at least of the middle class – can come to Crimea stably only thanks to Ukraine.

    There will never be repressions under the Ukrainian authorities in Crimea, and everyone knows that. The lack of freedom or moral suffocation that Russia brought in 2014. And even more so, Ukraine will never ignore the social needs of pensioners or anyone else in Crimea. Ukraine will never tell people: “There is no money, but hold on”, because we respect people, and even this year, already in the bloody times of a full-scale war, we indexed pensions for all our pensioners.

    Ladies and Gentlemen!

    I think you felt from my words that we have a very elaborated view of how to restore our Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea after the expulsion of the Russian invaders. That is why we are adding two more directions to the work of the Crimea Platform: economic and legislative directions.

    We have a strategy for the restoration of Crimea – today it will be presented as part of the economic panel.

    And we are creating a legislative foundation for Crimea – after deoccupation, as well as for all those for whom Crimea is much more than even home.

    We adopted the Law “On Indigenous Peoples”, which protected the rights of the Crimean Tatar people and Mejlis, Karaites and Krymchaks. We are developing the Crimean Tatar language. A law was passed on the protection of political prisoners – all those who suffered from the repressions of the occupiers. And these are just some examples. We are not going to stop there – there is still a lot of work to do.

    This year, the Crimea Platform will be continued in the autumn – in Croatia – with a parliamentary summit. No longer online, with the presence of parliamentary delegations of the world. We use all the power of democracies to protect our state and the international legal order.

    And, returning to the letter of Nariman Celâl, who was imprisoned by the occupiers, I want to read a few more important words: “Thanks to the change in the agenda on the world stage, in Europe and in Ukraine itself due to the aggression of the Russian Federation, the members of the Crimea Platform have a more determined attitude focused on the implementation of specific measures.”

    The person who was sent to jail by the occupiers only for defending the truth and participating in last year’s Crimea Platform hopes for specific measures from all of us – participants of the summit. And we all must not deceive this hope. We all have to be strong and effective.

    Thank you for your attention!

    I am grateful to each and every one for participating in our second summit, to everyone present on this platform.

    Glory to Ukraine!

  • Volodymyr Zelenskyy – 2022 Statement on the Situation in Ukraine (23/08/2022) – 181 days

    Volodymyr Zelenskyy – 2022 Statement on the Situation in Ukraine (23/08/2022) – 181 days

    The speech made by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the President of Ukraine, on 23 August 2022.

    Good health to you, fellow Ukrainians!

    A report on the activity during the day.

    I took part in the work of a special forum of veterans. And announced changes in state policy regarding the veteran community – we must create more opportunities for veterans. Without such changes, without this reform, it is simply impossible.

    Veterans of the war for independence of Ukraine have become one of the most significant and respected groups in our society. With their specificity, with their needs, with their expectations, which must be responded to so that veterans can contribute not only to the defense of our state on the frontline, but also to the post-war development of Ukraine.

    And not only the state must react, but also business, which is very important, employers, education.

    We will create such a system of veteran policy and services for veterans, opportunities for their transition from military affairs to civilian life, which will be on a par with the strongest similar systems in the world. You can cite the example of the Israeli model, as well as the American one.

    But our goal is for the Ukrainian experience of veteran policy to eventually become a new example for others in the world to follow.

    I held a large meeting with representatives of the defense and security sector. Zaluzhny, Monastyrskyi, Danilov, Budanov and others were present. The key issues are, of course, the situation on the frontline, the security situation in big cities, as well as specific security measures due to the holidays and important political events this week – meetings, negotiations.

    We are already fully prepared for the second summit of the Crimea Platform. This year’s summit will be even more powerful than last year, in terms of both the number of participants and the topics of discussion. We are significantly expanding the format of the Crimea Platform – tomorrow we will announce all the details.

    And today the new diplomatic and security format “Kyiv Initiative” was founded. Ukraine’s European neighbors are already participating in its work. These are Poland, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia and the Baltic states. We will gradually involve other countries. In the “Kyiv Initiative” format, the work takes place at the level of foreign policy advisors to the heads of state. From the Ukrainian side, these are Andriy Sybiha and Andriy Yermak. And this format will allow us to strengthen cooperation in the region and joint protection of our interests, primarily security. This is a very promising line of our work in the Euro-Atlantic direction.

    Today there is good infrastructural news – the railway branch connecting Ukraine and Moldova has been upgraded and launched. Moreover, we did it both on our territory and on the territory of Moldova – our “Ukrzaliznytsia” did it, well done. This route has been closed for almost 25 years, and now it is working for Ukraine again. This is an important transport direction. And the average volume of cargo per year can be about 10 million tons. I am grateful to our partners from Moldova.

    Search operations at the site of the occupiers’ attack on a residential building in Kharkiv have ended. The building was destroyed by Russian shelling last Wednesday. Only today we managed to get the bodies of all the dead from under the rubble. This Russian strike alone claimed the lives of 19 people. One strike. And savages have not stopped such strikes at different parts of our country for 180 days.

    The total number of various cruise missiles that Russia has used against us is approaching 3,500. It is simply impossible to count the strikes of Russian artillery – there are too many of them, they are too intense. And at the same time, the terrorist state does not stop playing around with international structures and once again has the audacity to convene the UN Security Council to discuss its own provocations, its own terror at the Zaporizhzhia NPP…

    I am grateful to all European politicians who do not forget that the eighth sanctions package against Russia is needed. The longer the interval between sanctions packages is, the greater Russia’s audacity is. And I am grateful to all our friends, all friends of freedom in different countries of the world, who promote the need to recognize the objective reality and legally define Russia as a terrorist state. This decision will come sooner or later, and the only question is how many more lives Russia will manage to take away before the retaliatory strikes from the international community become truly tangible for those responsible for this terror.

    And, dear Ukrainians, especially these days, when we celebrate the day of our flag and the day of our independence, if you are somewhere abroad, please remind about Ukraine there, be there with the Ukrainian flag and spread the truth about the crimes of the occupiers.

    Let’s all stick together, no matter where we, Ukrainians, are!

    Glory to all who protect the state!

    Gratitude to everyone who fights for Ukraine!

    Glory to Ukraine!

  • Peter Ainsworth – 2002 Speech to Conservative Spring Forum

    Peter Ainsworth – 2002 Speech to Conservative Spring Forum

    The speech made by Peter Ainsworth at Conservative Spring Forum on 23 March 2002, launching the Conservative Rural Action Group.

    Welcome to the launch of this unashamedly ambitious project whose aim is to reconnect people who live and work in the countryside with the people who take decisions about their future.

    This initiative is a response to the deep sense of frustration and anger which people feel about the way their hopes, their problems, their efforts and aspirations have been ignored, thwarted and trampled by a Government that doesn’t understand the countryside and doesn’t care either.

    Everywhere we go, we meet people who feel a profound sense of alienation from Government, Westminster, Whitehall and Brussels.

    Everywhere we go, we find that the bonds of trust which should exist between a Government and rural people have been broken. The bonds of trust must be rebuilt.

    Without them, the process of restoring the countryside, working in partnership to create a vital, living rural economy, cannot even begin.

    We want to see rural communities united in hope, rather than insecurity; rural activities encouraged rather than scorned; rural values protected rather than regulated out of existence.

    Yesterday, the Government published its submission to the Lessons Learned Inquiry on FMD.

    It is an object lesson in arrogance, larded with complacency, peppered with evasion and served up with dollops of whitewash…

    …..If we have learned one thing from Foot and Mouth it is that what happens to farming matters to the whole rural economy and to each and every one of us.

    CRAG is born out of a need. We want to be a campaigning organisation;

    We want it to build a network of members throughout the UK;

    We want it to support our councillors and politicians at home and in
    Europe fighting for the things that matter to the countryside:

    – Farming;

    – Local services – like the police, transport and housing;

    – Local democracy;

    – And protecting greenfields and the landscape which helps give
    us identity as a nation.

    I want it to feed in policy ideas and feed out our commitment to making change for the better.

    Your participation will be essential.

    I pay tribute to the work of Sheila Gunn who has done so much to develop the idea of CRAG. I pay tribute to the work of the Conservative Countryside Forum over the years and in particular to Nigel Finch and his executive committee who have done a very great deal to promote the interests of the countryside within the Party. We value the work they have done and want it to continue as part of CRAG. I am delighted that both the Forum and the Countryside Council, led by John Peake have given their support to the creation of this new umbrella organisation. I am delighted, too that distinguished artist and conservationist David Shepherd has expressed strong support and is willing to get involved.

    CRAG will be broadly based, as interested in tackling rural poverty as in supporting traditional country sports. It will be run professionally; it will be have its own board and chief executive; it will work closely with our Front Bench team and yet have an independent voice.

    I am only too aware that there are already a host of organisations out there claiming to speak for rural Britain.

    CRAG will have a crucial difference. It will be more than a voice.

    Lobby groups are just that; they can lobby, but in the end decisions are taken by Governments. Lobby groups have about as much chance of forming a government as Liberal Democrats.

    CRAG will be affiliated to the Conservative Party, and we have every intention of forming the next Government.

    By joining CRAG, people will be able to say, “Yes, the countryside matters to me”, but they will be able to add, “Yes, I’m willing to work with a Party that believes in rural Britain, and wants to win elections to make life better for rural communities and the landscape we cherish.

  • Jonathan Evans – 2002 Speech to Conservative Spring Forum

    Jonathan Evans – 2002 Speech to Conservative Spring Forum

    The speech made by Jonathan Evans to Conservative Spring Forum on 23 March 2022.

    This afternoon we are going to discuss the international situation. There is no more important issue. It touches the future, indeed the very survival, of our nation.

    War against Terror

    Since last autumn, the world scene has darkened. The stakes have risen. The choice between good and evil has become starkly clearer.

    The horror of September 11th, the liberation of Afghanistan, the menacing threat from Iraq – these events have brought into sharp focus the challenges we face. Challenges underlined by further terrorist murders this week in Israel, Peru, Spain and Italy.

    It is a poisonous cocktail. Ruthlessly organised, fanatically motivated terrorists, keen to inflict mass bloodshed on innocent citizens. Rogue states developing weapons of mass destruction, who regard the West as their enemy, and see these terror networks as useful tools.

    Faced with these massive threats, some shy away. Others fumble for excuses.

    I believe President Bush is right to fight this war against terrorism. And it is vital that the battle is won.

    Dividing Lines in Europe

    In the European Parliament – where our team works for Britain, day after day – we are putting the case for united European support of our American allies.

    We are arguing for strong defences, for NATO rather than a European army, for taking a stand for what we all know to be right.

    Whatever Mr Blair says, his Labour Party in Europe is fighting a very different battle.

    In Europe, Labour’s priority is not a Europe of nation states backing the America – but the familiar narrow agenda of building continental socialism.

    That’s why Labour always vote for new burdens on business, for rigid labour markets, for harmonised taxes – and for changes in Europe’s rules that would weaken our right to sometimes simply say no.

    And the LibDems are no better: in fact, they are even worse. They want a European federation – a United States of Europe – and they want it now.

    Crossing the Floor

    A couple of weeks ago, something rather unusual and very important happened.

    Labour’s longest-serving MEP walked away from his party, crossed the floor and joined us. Richard Balfe, London’s Labour representative in Europe for 20 years, became our 36th Conservative MEP – the first switch of a serving parliamentarian to the Conservative Party in a quarter of a century.

    Why? Because he had had enough of the cronyism and control-freakery of New Labour – and was disgusted by the arrogance and deceit of Tony Blair.

    And Richard wanted to be part of our Party – an open, tolerant Party – a Party prepared to reflect and to be humble – a Party which wants to have a serious debate about the future of our public services and the big challenges facing the country.

    Delivering for Britain

    In joining us, Richard has become part of what is increasingly recognised as a powerful cohesive and effective Conservative team. A team united in positively representing Britain’s interests in Europe, rather than representing Europe’s interests in Britain.

    My commitment as European leader is that we will regularly punch above our weight in a parliament where British Conservatives are now the second largest party grouping.

    That means identifying what really matters to people and pushing those issues hard.

    And we have achieved real success.

    Our MEPs have been the champions of British business over new environmental and employment laws.

    We have been at the forefront in promoting the consumer’s right to cheaper car prices.

    We have led the attack on the failure of France to obey the law over the import of British beef, and for the liberalisation of France’s energy market.

    And on Zimbabwe, my colleague Geoffrey Van Orden has relentlessly led the pressure for EU sanctions against Mugabe.

    Earlier this year, against massive resistance from Whitehall and New Labour, the European Parliament set up the first and only public inquiry into last year’s foot and mouth disaster.

    This was a direct initiative of Robert Sturdy and taken forward with other British colleagues, including Agriculture spokesman Neil Parish. We won the support of every group in Europe for this inquiry, except of course Labour and their Socialist allies.

    As a result of our efforts, Nick Brown next week faces his first public questioning about the Government’s handling of a scandal which crippled not just British farming, but also thousands of rural businesses.

    Turning the Tide

    Our mission is to pose the right choices in Europe, and to get the right results for Britain. It is not easy work – especially as Europe’s governments have been dominated by socialists for far too long.

    Slowly but surely, we are beginning to turn the tide. Last weekend, Portugal threw out the left, and returned our centre-right allies to power. In Italy, in Austria, in Denmark, other socialist governments have already fallen.

    Soon, France and Germany will decide whether to stick with socialism or to set the people free.

    Across Europe, a new mood is dawning. A new generation is tired of the sterile uniformity of the left. Younger people in Europe like the market, want more freedom, and relish the chance to take control of their own lives.

    In Britain too, I think we have reached a turning-point. The gloss is coming off New Labour. The defeat of Tony Blair is no longer unimaginable.

    The mood of our conference is clear.

    We want to honestly engage with people over the issues that really matter to them. That is the only route to the Conservative Party again fully winning the trust and confidence of Britain.

  • David Davis – 2002 Speech to Conservative Spring Forum

    David Davis – 2002 Speech to Conservative Spring Forum

    The speech made by David Davis to Conservative Spring Forum on 23 March 2002.

    I am sure that I will speaking on everyone’s behalf when I say that it would be wrong to start this conference without first sending our thoughts and best wishes to Margaret Thatcher who has been ill in the last few weeks.

    But I know what she will say: she will tell us to get on with it, and that is precisely what we have been doing.

    These last six months we have come a long way under Iain Duncan Smith’s leadership.

    Think of the challenges we faced back in September.

    Another devastating Election defeat still fresh in our memories.

    People were talking of the end of Conservatism.

    Well they’ve had to change their tune because, thanks to you, we’ve spent the last six months rebuilding ourselves as a political force.

    People are finding that we’re a different kind of Opposition.

    A party that is united and disciplined.

    A party with clear priorities.

    A party that is serious about tackling the real problems of our country.
    Providing opposition based on principle and integrity – qualities utterly unknown in the world of New Labour.

    But qualities no-one exemplifies better than our leader, Iain Duncan Smith.

    And six months on, what has happened to Labour?

    Remember, this is a Party that in 1997 promised to combine the straightforwardness of John Prescott and the subtlety of Peter Mandelson with the honesty of Mo Mowlam.

    Instead it’s brought us the subtlety of John Prescott, the straightforwardness of Peter Mandelson and the honesty of Stephen Byers.

    Confronted with failure they resort to the only thing they know how to do, the only things left they believe in. They spin and lie and manipulate.

    And when this doesn’t work either, they spin and lie some more.

    want to know what’s going to be in the Sunday papers.’

    These are the kind of people we are dealing with.

    And New Labour are in no position to improve our public services.

    When the Home Secretary himself says the muggers rule the streets of our cities and the police can’t cope, what is Tony Blair’s priority – bogging Parliament down in a two-year campaign to ban hunting?

    A typical Blair master plan, if ever there was one.

    Sending the law enforcers in pursuit of the law-abiding in our countryside, while thugs and criminals swagger untouched in our cities.

    Mme C, no government with priorities like these can ever solve the problems of Britain.

    And who is bringing them to book? Not the Liberal Democrats.

    Six months ago they launched a campaign to be the ‘real’ opposition.

    But let’s look for a moment at what this ‘real’ opposition actually does.

    As law and order collapses on the streets they vote to decriminalise hard drugs.

    Their International Development spokesperson put out a press release about how she’d visited dying children in a hospice that hadn’t yet been built.

    Their Party Leader criticises the Government for re-nationalising Railtrack weeks after supporting that same action.

    And for rank hypocrisy, dishonesty and lack of seriousness you have to go a long way to beat the Liberal Democrats.

    And I promise you this: we will go as far as it takes. For every lie they tell about us, we’ll tell the truth about them.

    But it isn’t enough just to expose the Liberals and draw attention to Labour’s failure.

    We have to show we are different.

    That we are everything that Labour is not.

    Well, here are some differences for starters.

    We have principles, New Labour don’t.

    We trust people, they don’t

    We want to extend freedom and choice, they want the opposite.

    They don’t understand that you can’t have improvement without innovation and that you can’t have innovation without difference.

    If you won’t allow one foot to move in front of the other you end up standing still while others catch up and pass you by.

    That is what has happened to Britain these last five years.

    Our hard-won competitive edge over other European countries is being squandered as Gordon Brown piles on tax after tax, regulation after regulation

    And what do we have to show for it?

    Better hospitals than the French?

    Better trains than the Swiss?

    Better training than the Germans?

    If only.

    Last week – did you hear about it? – the Prime Minister relaunched New Labour.

    He’d been stung by one of his own MPs who asked him in Parliament what his philosophy actually was.

    You must have seen that – it was the end, I’m sorry to have to tell you, of that unfortunate MP’s political career.

    But for Tony Blair, it was one of his Women’s Institute moments – you know when his jaw drops, the little beads of sweat appear, he is utterly lost for words and the Alistair Campbell’s autocue won’t help him.

    The great Tony Blair – inventor of New Labour – couldn’t reply.

    He didn’t know what his political philosophy actually was.

    Well, Mme C., if the captain on the bridge has no compass, what hope for those of us on the boat deck when icebergs loom.

    So we had a relaunch. The pamphlets were written; the posters were printed; the press were primed; the Prime Minister’s motorcade purred into action.

    And what did Tony Blair say?

    He said that we are now entering the New Labour’s ‘third phase’.

    Well, that’s it then. Bet that’ll get the trains running on time.

    Before it was the third way. Now it’s the third phase.

    Sadly, if it’s from this Government, the only certainty is that it will be third rate.

    Let me come to the crux of the matter.

    Our public services – how Labour have failed them and how we must put them right.

    You often hear Labour talk about two tier systems. A two tier NHS, two tier schooling.

    About how unfair they are.

    But Labour are creating a two tier Britain.

    One Britain consists of those people who, when our public services fail them, are lucky enough to be able to take avoiding action.

    They can do what thousands more people are now having to do – pay for their operation out of their life savings.

    But did you ever think you’d have to use your life savings to save your life?

    They can mortgage up and move house to be in the catchment area of a decent school.

    They can give up on public transport and drive their car.

    But where does that leave the other Britain?

    Where does it leave the pensioner who has worked hard all life long for little money, and who hasn’t got the cash he needs for a hip operation?

    Where does it leave the mother who desperately wants a good education for her children, but is stuck in an area where the schools are a disaster area?

    Where does it leave the family that has been burgled three times in a year and seen their once-decent neighbourhood taken over by drug dealers?
    They are the people in Labour’s second tier Britain.

    These are the people that Labour take for granted.

    The people that Labour leave without hope.

    Labour’s forgotten people.

    Because under Labour, those who lose most are those who can least afford to lose at all.

    For our national health service, our schools, our criminal justice system – the very institutions that were created to provide security for the most vulnerable in our society – have become the major source of insecurity in their lives.

    The people that bear the brunt of the failures of our health service are the elderly, people with disabilities, and the chronically sick.

    So when we say we want to reform the NHS, to make it improve standards of healthcare, these are the people who we have in mind.

    Because these are the people that will benefit most.

    The same is true in education.

    The people who send their children to failing schools don’t do so because they are not interested in their children’s education.

    Of course they are. They care desperately about their children’s future. But they have no choice. No alternative.

    These are the children who are being left behind by New Labour.

    And these are the people that we have in mind when we say that we will restore discipline and standards to our weakest schools.

    When Labour hit drivers with heavy charges and rack up taxes on petrol, who are the people that suffer most?

    Not people whose costs are reimbursed by a large employer. Not people who earn enough not to notice the costs.

    It’s people who live and work in rural areas, for whom driving a car is not a matter of choice but of necessity and whose incomes are already low.

    It’s young mothers in cities who have to rely on a car if they are to combine holding down a job and dropping off young children at school or nursery.

    These are the people for whom an extra £5 a day in tax or congestion charges means £5 less to spend, not on luxuries, but on essentials.

    These are the people that we will have in mind when we set our policies.

    Labour talk about fairness.

    For them it’s just an abstraction.

    Today’s sound bite. Tomorrow’s discarded promise.

    When it comes to delivering fairness to real people they look the other way.

    So it falls to us to make the real difference. At our best the Conservative Party have always reached the parts of our society that Labour never could.

    Think of council house sales, popular share ownership and private pensions. Tory policies based on Tory principles.

    As we develop the policies on which we will fight the next election, the question that I will keep asking of every policy is this:

    What will this do for the most vulnerable?

    Will it make their lives better?

    Some people might think these unusual questions for a Conservative to ask.

    Some people might regard a focus on the most vulnerable as – dare I say it? – left-wing.

    They couldn’t be more wrong.

    And the truth is that these questions of how policies make life better for the most vulnerable have always been Conservative questions, however much our opponents claim the opposite.

    We have always been the party of opportunity, and where does opportunity mean most but to those who find themselves in vulnerable circumstances? Those who have no choice, no opportunity.

    So these are not left wing questions, or left-wing problems but the natural, the historic, province of Conservatives.

    We are, after all, the Party of Shaftesbury and of Disraeli.

    Shaftesbury dedicated much of his life to ending the ill-treatment of mentally ill people as social outcasts. He championed low cost housing for the urban poor and gave 300,000 desperately poor children a start in life by giving them an education.

    Shaftesbury was a contemporary of Disraeli; that great Conservative Prime Minister who founded the One Nation tradition.

    Over the years, the One Nation tradition sometimes became associated with a blurred vision, a soft focus and a preference for compromise.

    The ends may have been clear, but the means lacked bite.

    Modern Conservatism is about a 21st Century One Nation approach so that we don’t just talk about problems – we solve them.

    More responsibility, more choice, more accountability, these are what drive success This is the new Tory idealism.

    And the answers to the problems our nation faces are more likely to be supplied by the policies of the right than the left.

    In America recently black parents formed a national alliance and held a four day conference to agitate for more school choice in the inner cities. For more right wing policies to help the most needy parts of their nation.

    They knew what works.

    Giving choices back to people.

    Giving power to communities.

    Giving help to the vulnerable.

    Above all, making life better for real people – the very theme of this conference.

    Mme C. over the next few weeks tens of thousands of people will be taking our message of practical idealism directly to the people in the local elections.

    We may not be in Government, but all over the country, every day Conservative councils are making life better in a thousand practical ways.
    We should let those Councillors know how much we appreciate their work.

    But we want more of them.

    Look at Conservative councils and you see modern Conservatism in action.

    One of the caricatures we’ve allowed Labour to pin on us is the notion that we’re only on the side of the prosperous.

    Complete rubbish.

    Conservative councils, like the Conservative Party, serve not the few or the many, but ALL the community.

    Much of the focus of our councils is in making life better for our most vulnerable citizens.

    Whether it is in housing the homeless, caring for the elderly, or finding loving homes for neglected children – the work of our councils is more concerned with helping the most vulnerable in our society than any other activity.

    Indeed all too often it falls to us to pick up the pieces where Labour in Whitehall has worsened the plight of our most vulnerable citizens.

    When our streets become violent and threatening because of the failure of Labour’s crime policies, our councils have had to step in with uniformed wardens and with CCTV schemes to add some kind of security to our streets.

    When Labour so over-regulate care homes for the elderly that they put them out of business, it is the social services departments of our councils that have to step in and provide care at home for people who have nowhere else to go.

    When Labour drive thousands of teachers demoralised from the profession, it is our councils who have to fill the gaps and try to shore up our children’s education.

    Mme C, when we prepare our programme for government, we will not make the disastrous mistake that has destroyed all Labour’s ideas in power.

    To try to control everything from the centre.

    Our Ministers will not try to be the desk sergeant of every police station, the headteacher of every school or the manager of every hospital.

    In fact we will do the opposite.

    Arm public servants with the power to do their jobs properly and arm the public they serve with the power to make sure they do just that.

    We must build institutions that work at the level of natural communities.

    No wonder our NHS is failing when it is run from Whitehall by a Secretary of State interested only in national headlines.

    That’s not what patients or doctors or local communities want.

    They want an NHS responsive to the needs of patients and their families.

    They want their local hospitals to be integral parts of their local communities.

    People don’t want their local schools to be branch offices of the Department for Education.

    They want them to be local institutions of individual character – reflecting and shaping the characters of their communities. People want heads to be given a free rein to build schools that communities can be proud of.

    People want their say in their own communities, not be coerced into artificial agglomerations to suit the mania this Government has for top-down control.

    And let’s be clear, this is not an archaic vision of a lost age.

    Ask anyone who works at the leading edge of technology today, and they will tell you that the days of top-down control that are now past.

    All over the world communities are springing up on the grounds of common interests. They do so spontaneously, rather than in response to central plans.

    It’s becoming less and less possible to serve the public by bossing them around.

    Real communities are the future, not the past.

    In fact, the Government’s whole approach is looking increasingly like the remnant of the century that is gone, rather than the politics of the century that is to come.

    Conservatives believe in working with the grain of society. We believe in natural communities not artificial creations. And above all we believe that the most effective approach to Government is to trust the people.

    There’s nothing more threatening for New Labour than to come face to face with real people.

    When things go wrong, as they do more and more, when people complain, their reaction is not to put it right, but to round on the messenger.

    In the last few weeks they have sacked, and trashed the reputations of civil servants who had the temerity to stand up to them and their spin doctors.

    And did you see the way in which the whole weight of the Government smear machine was turned on a woman in her 90s, whose family dared complain about her treatment?

    They gave out to the press intimate medical details about a young lad who had the guts to say what millions of other people know: the NHS is not working.

    The message is clear. Anyone who dares criticise Tony Blair will be bullied and intimidated as a warning to others.

    They are now entering an excuse-free zone. It is time we took them on.

    When I was a new MP back in 1997, I saw an old university friend across members’ lobby in the House of Commons. He’d just been made a minister in Margaret Thatcher’s government. He was clearly in dreadful hurry

    He was rushing on his way to somewhere with a papers tucked under one arm and red box under the other.

    As he went past me, I said ‘Slow down Michael, Rome wasn’t built in a day.’ Without breaking stride he said, ‘Maybe not, but then Margaret Thatcher wasn’t the foreman on that job.’

    It was our good fortune that she was the foreman on our job.

    She drove through the reforms that took us from being the sick man of Europe to become the world’s fourth largest economy. The world ceased to pity us and once more started to admire us. Because of the foundations she laid, millions more people got the chance to own their own homes and share the fruits of the country’s success.

    Today we face a new set of challenges, perhaps even more complex than the ones we faced 20 years ago. And we are lucky to have our new foreman in Iain Duncan Smith. I am delighted to be his ‘hod carrier’.

    The Conservative Party now has a new mission: to treat our sick more quickly; to make our streets and homes safer; to stretch the minds of our children further.

    Freedom and choice are Conservative values, but the benefits they bring are universal.

    That is our task. To turn ‘making life better’ from a slogan into a reality for everyone in Britain.

  • Graham Stuart – 2022 Comments on UK calls for the End of Cluster Munitions

    Graham Stuart – 2022 Comments on UK calls for the End of Cluster Munitions

    The comments made by Graham Stuart, the Foreign Office Minister, on 30 August 2022.

    Too many innocent civilians have lost their lives to these weapons of war. Under our Presidency, the UK has driven forward work to eliminate them altogether.

    Every step taken under this Convention, makes the world a safer place – but too many states still refuse to give up cluster munitions. We will continue to speak out against these murderous weapons – as we did in March when we condemned their use in the illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine.

    We did so on behalf of the parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions. Since the Convention was founded 14 years ago, 110 State Parties have ratified it, 13 States have signed up to its objectives but not yet ratified, and 35 states have cleared their stockpiles of cluster munitions.

  • Liam Fox – 2002 Speech to Conservative Spring Forum

    Liam Fox – 2002 Speech to Conservative Spring Forum

    The speech made by Liam Fox, the then Shadow Secretary of State for Health, at Conservative Spring Forum on 23 March 2002.

    Hardly a day goes by without further evidence coming to light indicating that, under Labour, the NHS is failing. Dirty hospitals with high infection rates for patients. Cancelled operations leading to rising waiting lists. A care home crisis resulting in bed blocking, with frustration for patients and demoralization for medical staff.

    Yet, despite this bleak picture under a Labour government that promised so much, the public remains ambivalent about the NHS. At the same time as rising intellectual criticism about the quality of the service, there remains a strong emotional attachment to the institution itself. There is therefore both a demand for change but a suspicion that change may threaten the aspects most prized by the public, such as a service free at the point of use for those who need it.

    Complicating the picture is the fact that some of the harshest criticism of the NHS comes from those who were previously its fiercest defenders. Often, the combination of their own unhappy experiences and an increased awareness of better healthcare overseas has persuaded them that the NHS is not the only model capable of producing the quality and security of access they seek.

    It has been a serious handicap in the health debate in the UK that the terms “healthcare” and “the NHS” have for too long been politically synonymous. Only recently have events conspired to promote change, for example a Labour Government being forced to have British patients treated on the continent because of the explicit failures of the NHS. This backdrop provides a rare opportunity to open up a better quality discourse. That debate needs to begin with a clear understanding about the origins of a peculiarly British approach.

    The National Health Service was a product of the 1940s – that is of a collectivist era. Central planning was high fashion, as was the notion that state control was the best way to achieve change. This is unsurprising. The War had seen a massive increase in state regulation, which had been tolerated in the interests of victory. Austerity and rationing were necessary and accepted concepts.

    Now, 60 years later, we find ourselves in an era of affluence which the founding fathers of the NHS would not recognize. In 2002, austerity is no longer fashionable or necessary. Yet much of the British public have been willing to tolerate just such austerity in the field of healthcare. It is almost as if inadequate provision has been accepted as a classic case of Britain “muddling through”, with the Dunkirk spirit its guiding force.

    Increasingly, the patience of patients is wearing thin. There is a growing demand for the standard of healthcare befitting the World’s fourth richest country. We are no longer a nation emerging from the ravages of a War that almost drove us to extinction. It is no longer acceptable for the public to be constrained within an NHS that does most things quite well most of the time. What is needed, and increasingly demanded, is a system that does many more things very well all the time.

    Politically, Labour has been the party most wedded to the politics of the 1940s. But even they have been forced to abandon most of their discredited ideological positions from that era.

    On the economic front, they have retreated before reality. They no longer have Cabinet Ministers whose sole responsibility is Food or Prices. The major nationalizations have been overturned. Trades union reforms and labour market liberalization have brought prosperity and individual emancipation in the economic sphere.

    In the social sphere, however, individuals are still much more at the mercy of the state. Labour fought tooth and nail against Margaret Thatcher giving council house tenants the right to buy their own homes. In education, too many children pay the price for Labour’s obsessive centralisation, while in health, Labour deny people the right to choice and diversity taken for granted in so many other countries.

    Labour supporters cling to the NHS like a comfort blanket, because, in every other facet of policy, they feel that the Labour Party has abandoned its roots. The NHS is the last remaining manifestation of the Attlee government, of the era when Labour believed they had all the answers. But the NHS was never even the Utopia Labour like to portray. Within a few years, they were retreating from their New Jerusalem, with charges for spectacles and prescriptions, thus creating the service which Tony Blair describes as “largely” free at the point of use.

    The NHS, as an institution and not merely as the expression of a set of ideals, has thus acquired a totemic identity in the eyes of Labour politicians which has little to do with healthcare. Its continued existence in its present form owes more to the complex psychological needs of a Labour Party which is no longer a socialist party in a world where socialism no longer has a place.

    The NHS has now become the fig leaf for New Labour’s vapid core. Indeed, it is just about the only thing that allows Labour activists to live with their consciences, their Party having thrown virtually every other Labour nostrum over the side of HMS Blair in search of the rhetoric to please the focus groups. Politically, the NHS is now the ventilator on the Labour Party’s own life-support machine.

    And the joint victims in this tragedy are the patients, denied the care they need, and the medical professionals, unable to provide what they have been trained to do. The NHS, under Labour’s model, pursues equality of access at the expense of excellence, and seems almost to accept mediocrity as a manifestation of social values dating from “the golden collectivist era” of the post-War world.

    So, the first problem which Labour are landed with is that the NHS is over-centralized and over-politicized.

    For Bevan, this maxim was in full accord with the ethos of the day, and entirely deliberate. He thought it vital that he should be able to hear the crash of every bedpan from his office in Whitehall. This was why he rejected the proposal from the original Beveridge Report that the existing system of mixed healthcare provision should be retained, and instead nationalised virtually the entire system overnight.

    Successive Labour Health Secretaries have followed the script for the NHS which Bevan wrote in 1948, all determined to run the Health Service from behind their Whitehall desks.

    And, despite its focus group-friendly lexicon, New Labour’s grip on the healthcare system has been similarly vice-like. Time and again, they have brought clinical and political considerations into direct conflict. Ministers have swept aside concepts of clinical priority in favour of their own insatiable PR agenda. Professional freedom is suffocated, and ethics take a back-seat, as clinicians and managers are pressurised into making the political health of the Government, rather than the health of their patients, their main consideration.

    Examples of what this means for the patient are legion. There can be no clearer illustration than Labour’s hugely discredited waiting list initiative.

    This policy has been roundly condemned in most quarters for encouraging clinical distortion, as a result of which patients with more serious conditions actually wait longer while simple, less urgent cases are dealt with more quickly to bring numbers down. It has been pointed out, quite rightly, that this abandonment of the principle of treatment being undertaken on the basis of need has undermined the entire ethical and moral principles which the NHS was supposed to embody.

    It is entirely consistent with the narcissistic nature of New Labour that they are more concerned with how things appear than how they really are.

    Waiting lists are controlled by restricting the numbers of patients who get to see their Consultant (it is only then that their official waiting time starts). Thus there is a huge rise in the waiting list for the waiting list. Patients are still waiting in pain and fear in increasing numbers. But Ministers can claim to have met their targets.

    Systematic and widespread fiddling of the figures takes place. Consultant to consultant referrals are not counted. Patients who refuse a specific date or refuse to answer letters become “administratively” removed irrespective of their real problems.

    Only recently, a GP friend told me that he had just returned from holiday only to find that his daughter had been taken off a waiting list because, while they were away, the health authority sent a letter saying, “If you don’t write back within seven days, your name will be taken off the list.” Now she has to go back to the end of the queue. What sort of system is that?

    In another hospital, the maxillofacial surgeons were forced to add patients to the waiting list and give a date of 23 December for treatment, knowing that no patient would volunteer to go in for facial surgery so close to Christmas. Those patients were therefore taken off the waiting list.

    In March last year, the British Medical Association described the situation where ‘Artificial targets imposed on an overstretched service cannot be met without resorting to ingenious massaging of the figures. It does not fool, nor does it help, patients’.

    But it is the reaction of the Blair Government to exposure by the National Audit Office of fiddled waiting list figures that is most instructive.

    As you would expect, the Prime Minister tried to understate the issue, telling the House of Commons that:

    “It is important to put this matter in perspective. Over a period of four to five years, 6,000 people were misallocated on the lists.”–[Official Report, 19 December 2001; Vol. 377, c. 281.]

    Only 6,000! They are not mere statistics; they are real people, sick people. This outrage is, in my view, one of the greatest stains on this Government’s record and it is a direct result of the mindset of New Labour.

    One of the hallmarks of Labour’s stewardship of the NHS has been their clear intent to ensure that as many party political poodles as possible are in positions of NHS authority. Against the entire ethos of public service, Labour have ensured that appointments are made not on the basis of what individuals can bring to the administration of health care, but the loyalty they will bring to their party political masters.

    When Dame Rennie Fritchie was confronted with the evidence, she concluded that there were, indeed, an unacceptably high proportion of appointments made to Labour Party supporters. In the wake of this, the so-called Independent Appointments Commission was introduced. What difference has this made? In response to recent Parliamentary Questions, the Government has revealed that the proportion of Labour Party appointees has actually increased! In fact, this is little wonder. Although the Appointments Commission itself is supposedly independent, it is appointed by the Secretary of State.

    When Labour came to power in 1997, they promised to put more money into the health service by cutting administration. In practice, quite the reverse has happened. We now have the situation where, for the first time in the NHS, the number of administrators is actually greater than the number of beds. We have the absurd situation of having 1.15 administrators for every NHS. Under Labour the number of beds has fallen by 16,000 and the number of administrators has increased by 27,000.

    This problem is made worse by the fact that the increase in administration has largely been accounted for by people whose role is to make the system still more centralised. In other words, we have reached a position in which the NHS as a whole is over-bureaucratised, but individual Trusts might well be under-managed. The main reason for this is the constant interference, in the form of Ministerial circulars, and the resulting obsession with targets in the system.

    Under New Labour, if it moves it must have a target. The predictable result of this has been the emergence of target-orientated behaviour amongst hospital managers, whose job primarily is to meet centrally-set targets, irrespective of what this means for the running of their hospitals or the impact on the patients.

    We have seen the ridiculous situation where patients have been kept in ambulances outside Accident and Emergency Departments because their waiting time does not officially begin until they are clocked in to the A and E Department itself. This enables hospitals to meet their Accident and Emergency waiting time targets. But it makes no difference to the patients themselves. Likewise, when hospital trolleys have their wheels taken off, they technically become a bed – so, by the most bizarre manipulation of their own equipment, hospitals are again able to reach the Government’s targets with no benefit whatsoever to the patients.

    Perhaps most distressing of all is the concept of redesignation of parts of hospitals. Outsiders simply cannot comprehend that corridors could be redesignated as wards, with the result that, technically, patients are not waiting in corridors. Such cynical and essentially dishonest behaviour brings shame on those who have demeaned their own professional status by doing such things and denies patients the level of care and dignity they have a right to expect.

    There can be few organisations that will rival the NHS for sheer ability to waste resources. Almost unbelievably, the Head of Controls Assurance at the NHS, Stewart Emslie, identified £9 billion of waste in the NHS in 2001 – almost 20% of the entire budget. Amongst the items of waste that he mentioned were £2 billion as a result of bed blocking, between £1-3 billion of fraud and theft, over £1 billion wasted by hospital acquired infections, £300-600 million on medication errors, £300-600 million on wasteful prescribing, £400 million on clinical negligence and £100 million on avoidable management costs.

    It is inconceivable that any Chief Executive Officer of a major company would be able to hang on to his job, given such gross and unacceptable diversion of vital resources. Yet this is a system into which, with characteristic failure to understand the root problems, Labour is simply proposing to pour further huge sums of taxpayers’ money.

    The Prime Minister told us on the BBC’s recent NHS Day that more taxpayer’s money will have to be pumped into the Health Service. He is ignoring all the evidence if he believes that this alone will be the answer to the system’s problems. Labour has already spent considerably more in real terms, but to no effect.

    A Surrey consultant, Peter Williamson, recently told Hospital Doctor:

    ‘The Government claims it is putting great sums of money into the system – but this money is seldom seen by the people inside the service’.

    Experts at the King’s Fund have highlighted how the Government’s extra funding has had little impact on activity levels. They said:

    ‘The implication is that any reduction in the waiting list in the last three years has been achieved not through treating extra patients, but through fewer people being placed on to the waiting list each year. The figures show that there has been a fall in the rate of increase in NHS activity, despite a large increase in funding for the NHS.’

    Things are so bad that, despite a 30% increase in real terms in the level of health spending over the last three years, there was actually a fall last year in the level of NHS activity.

    We do not need to look far to see that spending alone is not the answer. Wales and Northern Ireland are already above the Institute of Fiscal Studies target of 8.9% GDP and Scotland is above the Government target of 8%.

    Yet in all parts of the UK the health service is failing, even in Northern Ireland, where spending is commensurate with France. Although Wales and Northern Ireland have higher spending than England, they also have longer waiting lists.

    From a significantly higher baseline, expenditure in Scotland is rising, but things are still getting worse. For example, over the period from 1999 to 2001, there has been a marked increase in the number of people waiting for treatment, patients are waiting longer for treatment and fewer patients are being seen. And over the last year, the number and rate of nurse vacancies has also risen.

    Despite higher spending in Scotland, a third more people die of heart disease and 40% more people die of lung cancer. It is clear from across the UK that the problems of the NHS monolith cannot be solved by simply throwing in more taxpayer’s money.

    “No more for the NHS until it gets better” the Chancellor told the Sun. Did we miss something? What event has occurred to justify the billions extra about to be spent? For, rest assured, billions more will be spent while mere tinkering goes on.

    Despite endless upheaval, very little will change in the NHS. The New Labour oxymoron of “earned autonomy” means “you can do what you want but only if it’s what we tell you”. The latest legislation gives many new powers to Whitehall to control activity in the NHS. For example, the Secretary of State will set all the budgets of the new Primary Care Trusts, and can withhold funds if they fail to meet his performance criteria.

    Talk of commissioning powers and the emergence of strategic health authorities makes many wonder if Labour are simply recreating the internal market they abolished in 1997, having wasted five years and countless amounts of money in the meantime.

    Labour’s relationship with the private sector is equally dysfunctional. They have alternated between support for a monopoly provider, a full partnership and a short-term expedient. The position, of course, depends on the audience, not the analysis. What is clear, however, is that the policy will have nothing to do with choice.

    Of all the failings in Labour’s approach to health, perhaps the greatest is their failure to understand the value of individual choice.

    From the moment a patient first experiences symptoms, their route through the healthcare system will be plotted by someone else, taking no account of any preferences he or she might have. And at all stages along that route, the patient will be within a system which is State-owned and State-run.

    The fundamental and inevitable failings of such a centralised and politicised State monopoly system manifest themselves from the very outset.

    The patient’s first point of contact is with their GP. They have little, if any, choice over who this is, they will belong to a “list” and the Government will regulate and restrict the number of GPs in any one area.

    If their condition warrants it, the GP refers the patient to a consultant. Needless to say, they don’t have any choice over which hospital the consultant works at, let alone that consultant’s identity. Their time of treatment will be dictated to them, and with increasing frequency may be cancelled. If they fail to observe all the rules set they will go to the back of the queue.

    What century is this? Why is it that the consumerist culture is entirely absent from our State healthcare system? The assumption seems to be that patients exist to service the system, rather than vice versa.

    Without giving greater control to individual patients over their own medical and surgical treatment, there will never be a liberation from the unacceptable position of the State holding the whip hand.

    As in so many other areas, the problems faced by our public services can be traced back directly to the very ethos of New Labour. Like the Clinton Administration, its project is about coming to government and staying in government, not about what to do when it is in Government. Policy consequently is replaced by endless reports and reviews. It is little wonder that a senior United States official was quoted recently as saying that Tony Blair seems more concerned about finessing a problem than dealing with it. How very perceptive.

    Any given problem is exacerbated by the fact that the Government has no core beliefs at all. One minute they will call for a monopoly NHS, another a public/private partnership or even full-blown private sector involvement. What they say depends entirely on the audience.

    This is a Government of intellectual incoherence, inconsistency and incompetence, in which the Prime Minister becomes ever more detached. And in doing so, he appears to grow increasingly contemptuous of his party – it seems to exist only to glorify the cult of his personality, spawning a Ministerial culture of blame, spin and re-announcement. When things go wrong, they are happy to blame the professionals, their predecessors in government, the Third Way – anyone but themselves. If that fails, they set new targets, shift deadlines and commission new reports. They stand for nothing, but will say anything.

    The public have instinctively trusted Labour on health, but their hopes are being, and will continue to be, shattered. The NHS is not delivering what it should. Despite a huge increase in resources, the NHS actually saw the number of patients treated last year fall. Waiting lists are rising. The crisis in care homes threatens to turn care in the community to neglect in the community. The number of cancelled operations is soaring. Hospital acquired infections are at record levels. Morale continues to plummet in the caring professions.

    Labour’s response is to pour in more taxpayer’s money and tinker at the edges of the NHS. Sadly, they will not succeed. The NHS is a collectivist model in a consumerist world. It is over-centralised. It is over-politicised. It is over-bureaucratised, yet under-managed. It is obsessed with targets, but failing to meet clinical need. It is wasteful; and spending and outcomes have increasingly become disconnected. Only the dedication of its staff keeps it afloat. Labour will fail because they will not accept these things.

    Without a historic depoliticisation and decentralisation, coupled with increased choice for patients, Britain will be consigned to second-rate healthcare.

    A solution will require a Conservative prescription. Tony Blair was right on one thing ” Britain deserves better”. Five years on, it is clear that this cannot come from Labour.

    I once likened the approach of the NHS to asking Dickensian peasants to queue up for their gruel, and to say thank you because there was nothing else on offer. Like Oliver Twist patients want more. It is what they deserve. But not just more of the same.

  • Eric Pickles – 2002 Speech to Conservative Spring Forum

    Eric Pickles – 2002 Speech to Conservative Spring Forum

    The speech made by Eric Pickles to Conservative Spring Forum on 24 March 2002.

    Stephen Byers is a misunderstood man.

    Some think that stands for whatever is perceived to be fashionable in left wing politics, that he has betrayed his Marxist past. This is to misunderstand the man completely. I have known him a good many years and I can say he is utterly consistent in his devotion to Marxism.

    Of course it is not Karl Marx his principles are based on. It is Groucho Marx.

    Specifically Groucho’s attitude to ethics: ‘These are my principles. If you don’t like them I’ve got some others.’

    That is why Mr Byers can move from 80’s rabble-rouser, to 90’s smoothy-moderniser, from millennium-man advocate of the third way, to pronouncing the death of the third way, with the ease and the speed that the Department of Transport change their press officers.
    As Secretary of State, if your idea of long term planning is to survive the censure motion after next, it is little wonder that the Government’s transport policy is so directionless.

    I was recently asked what enthusiasm I had for the Government’s ten-year transport plan. I replied that I was so enthusiastic I was seriously thinking of ways I could enter year three onwards for the Whitbread prize for fiction.

    Labour had the opportunity to consolidate the gains made from the privatisation of Railtrack under the Conservatives. We reversed the long-standing decline in passenger numbers, investment poured in and our railways had a better safety record. Instead Byers blew it with a botched renationalisation. That will cost the travelling public dear.

    Remember a third of the promised railway investment is meant to come from private sector funding. It is frankly ridiculous for the Government to argue that that the private sector investment has not been affected following their decision to confiscate a company from its legal owners.

    Any lingering doubts remaining over future relations between private finance and Government were dispelled by the letter to the Chancellor written by over twenty top fund managers saying that Labour’s handling of Railtrack has damaged relations between the Government and the City, increased the cost to the taxpayer of public private partnerships and discouraged people from saving.

    In other words on every length of road, stretch of track, new hospital or school building – anything that needs private finance there will be a Byers premium. We will all pay more to get less

    Anybody who cares about our Railways will tell you what we need to do to make life better: get Railtrack out of administration, stop dithering over the approval of rail franchise renewal, because if you don’t there will be no new trains after 2004. Do that and we can deal with the number one problem facing our railways a lack of capacity to meet any significant increase in demand.

    Transport is full of acronyms: SPV’s, Infroco’s, NATS and, of course, PPP. Rarely does the acronym meet the reality. This is true with the PPP for the Tube. Forget Public-Private Partnership, in London PPP stands for Poor Prospects for Passengers.

    Poor prospects of seeing a new train in ten years. There are only 12 new trains in service on Tube by 2008.

    Poor prospects for projects due to start ten years into the thirty year project, with the Government offering no stability for funding.
    Poor prospects for the taxpayer: despite promises we still don’t know whether the PPP is value for money, and we still don’t know when things go wrong who will pick up the tab.

    Poor prospects for overcrowding: the PPP will make no significant improvement.

    If over Easter you decide to visit London and decide to join Londoners on a sweaty, smelly overstuffed tube carriage, ten years from now were you to repeat the journey chances are it will be the same. Chances are it is likely to be the same carriage; the only difference will be the carriage will be ten years older.

    We will inherit a terrible mess on the London Underground. To make life better we will seek to develop a series of quality contracts with Transport for London on: punctuality, reliability, cleanliness and safety (personal and public). We will ensure a no strike agreement operates on the tube. The closing down of the network has no place in the resolving of industrial and sometimes petty disputes in modern Britain.

    We are now rapidly approaching an important milestone to judge this Labour Government, laid down by no less a person than the gentle and serene Deputy Prime Minister.

    After the 1997 general election, John Prescott said, ‘I will have failed if in five years time there are not … far fewer journeys by car. It’s a tall order but I urge you to hold me to it.’

    Since 1997 traffic on all roads has consistently increased. Estimated traffic levels rose by 3% between the fourth quarter of 2000 and the same quarter of 2001 alone – according to official DTLR figures.

    We will be looking for volunteers to break this news to Mr Prescott. A fast car and an ability to duck will be an asset

    Labour and their “me too” lackeys the Liberal Democrats see the car driver as the enemy. Someone to be despised pilloried and above all taxed.

    Fuel tax is still the highest in Europe. At the last count the average UK retail price of diesel was over 20 pence per litre more expensive than any other EU country. It is worth re-emphasising that the pre-tax price of both fuels was among the cheapest in Europe, but the total amount of tax per litre was the highest of these countries

    New taxes are introduced on company cars, but ministerial cars are of course exempt. Nothing must disturb the air conditioned splendour of the New Labour elite, free from the care of the day to day bustle the rest of us face.

    Recently in a debate, I asked a Minister when was the last time he travelled on the tube during peak time and whether he enjoyed it? The question was so unexpected in its impertinence that I got the shocked response that he ” could not remember.” That would be a sad admission from any Minister, but from the Minister of Transport it was shameful.

    Much needed relief roads lie abandoned. Motorways that would take traffic away from chocked towns are neglected. The number of miles of motorway opened each year has significantly declined under the Labour Government. In 1997, the last year Conservatives were in government, Britain’s motorway network increased by 42.3 miles. In 2001, it increased by a paltry 6.1 miles.

    Talk to any of New Labour’s advocates of congestion charging after a few polite pleasantries about inter-model shift from car to public transport and they go onto the real agenda. For the truth is this: if there was even a modest shift away from the car towards buses or trains, our public transport system could not cope. There is not sufficient capacity.

    No, what Labour’s transport gurus want is a reduction of journeys, principally by people on low incomes. According to them poor people can’t have cars.

    To make life better on our roads there needs to be a bigger dose of reality and recognition that the car and the lorry are a help, and not a hindrance, to an integrated transport policy. Indeed they are vital to many people in rural areas, many elderly, disabled and parents with young children.

    Over the coming months we will look at getting the best out of our road space. At getting the best out of better lane management, better repair management, better use of technology. We will look at innovative ways of providing public transport with some of the flexibility that private transport has.

    We understand that people will not leave their car at home until personal safety is improve on buses and trains, pupils will not return to school transport until better supervision and safety provided.

    Above all we understand that we have to integrate our transport policy into the way people live their life, rather than how some cloistered transport boffin thinks they should. Our policy will be firmly grounded in reality, with a determination to repair the damage inflicted by Byers and to make our transport system better.