UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Speeches

  • Mark Field – 2018 Speech on Disinformation

    Below is the text of the speech made by Mark Field, the Minister of State for Asia and the Pacific at the Foreign & Commonwealth Office, on 14 December 2018.

    Good morning ladies and gentlemen, it is a pleasure to welcome you to Westminster – not just the heart of my Parliamentary Constituency, but also the beating heart of political life here in the United Kingdom.

    Some might say that heart has been having some palpitations of late: I’ll come back to Brexit later.

    Thank you to Alex, Vincenzo and Rytis for the warm welcome and for setting the scene for today’s seminar.

    The Club of Venice has been bringing Government communicators together for more than 30 years.

    Over that time, wave after wave of technological innovation has opened new lines of communication that have transformed how governments talk to their people, and how people access information.

    We have lived through a communications revolution that has brought the people of the world closer together, in a web of online networks, encrypted groups, and bulk data sets; connected to one and other by common interests and common causes; and speaking a new universal language punctuated with ‘likes’, emojis and retweets.

    It has been a revolution that has democratised and accelerated the spread of information.

    It has moved at a pace that has seen our libraries, our newspapers, and our broadcasters challenged as never before.

    In the process, they have found themselves ceding ground, influence and users to unmoderated online chambers of social discourse.

    For those of us in this room with an interest in getting messages across to the public, this revolution has required us to rethink what we do, and how we do it.

    Without doubt it has been a time of unparalleled opportunity.

    It has put politicians just a finger-tap away from putting information directly in the hands of the people we represent.

    The challenge

    Of course it is not just those of us with a keen interest in government, democracy, and society that have been given these new opportunities.

    The same opportunities have also been made available to those who wish to chip away at the truth, at the strength of our democracy, and at the cohesion of our societies.

    They too have learnt to harness new technologies for their own ends. We saw an example of the deliberate, mal-intentioned distortion of facts in the aftermath of the Westminster Bridge terrorist attack last year.

    Genuine images were circulated with misleading commentary, asserting that a woman wearing a hijab was callously ignoring injured victims.

    In fact, she was texting her family to let them know she was safe.

    Disinformation is not a new threat. As far back as 1688, Great Britain’s Privy Council released a proclamation against the spreading of false news.

    Disinformation may be as old as the hills, but the ongoing technological revolution has built a new stage for it; and for those who wish to use it to attack our democracies and our alliances, and to corrode the respect for diversity that binds our societies together.

    Designed to deepen divisions and cast doubt on truth, disinformation uses social media algorithms to identify susceptible targets and amplify false information.

    It seeks an audience looking for confirmation of their worst fears and views, crowding out new voices and distracting from alternative perspectives.

    Governments across Europe have been subjected to disinformation, sown on distant computers, by those intent on fanning discord and division within our societies.

    We have suffered at the hands of certain states that routinely use disinformation as a tool of foreign policy.

    We have seen time and time again how easy it is to spread false or manipulated information to people around the world.

    There are countless examples of how the Kremlin has done this to destabilise its perceived enemies, and disguise its own actions.

    Disinformation accompanied Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea; their destabilisation of Eastern Ukraine; and their response to the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime against innocent civilians.

    And more recently, in the aftermath of the Salisbury attack in March, when we repeatedly asked the Russian Government to account for what had happened, they responded with obfuscation and lies, spewing out dozens of ludicrous so-called explanations.

    Whether in Ukraine, Syria or here in the UK, disinformation is being used to undermine the rules based international system and to attack our liberal democracies.

    Protecting ourselves from it is one of the most pressing international issues of our time.

    As our Prime Minister recently said “The threats we face do not recognise the borders of individual nations or discriminate between them.”

    We want to work with industry, civil society, academia and our international partners to detect, disrupt, expose and refute disinformation.

    This shall continue to be a central part of our cooperation with European partners long after we have left the European Union.

    Responding to disinformation

    Countering hostile state disinformation demands a concerted response on many levels, and the UK is at the forefront of a growing international consensus on the need to take action against it, regardless of source or intent.

    In the UK we are taking a ‘whole of society’ approach to tackling disinformation, drawing on the experience and lessons learned of our Nordic and Baltic partners.

    We shall focus this work around three key objectives:

    First; to deter the use of disinformation by exposing and disrupting those who use it against us.

    Second; to increase transparency and accountability online to make it harder and less rewarding to spread disinformation.

    Third; to make people more resilient to disinformation through education and empowerment.

    To achieve these objectives we are working with tech providers, tech users and academics, to better understand the impact of disinformation, and to improve education and digital literacy programmes. We are also considering regulation.

    Internationally we are investing £100m in countering disinformation. This work includes providing important capacity-building support to independent media. One of the best antidotes to disinformation is a robust, free, vibrant and varied media landscape.

    There is less space for disinformation to take hold where there is trust in a wide and robust national and local media.

    Independent media and investigative journalism have a crucial role to play in challenging disinformation when it occurs, and helping to educate audiences to make them more resilient to disinformation.

    However, journalists need more support from us, because in too many parts of the world their work puts them in great danger.

    Globally, threats to journalists are at the highest level in 10 years.

    Last year, 78 journalists were killed, and over 300 imprisoned for no other reason than doing their job. Speaking in 1949, Sir Winston Churchill said,

    “A free press is the unsleeping guardian of every other right that free men prize”

    Building on our proud history of a vibrant and independent media, our Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt has announced that he will make the promotion of Media Freedom a priority over the coming year.

    We commend the work of our international partners, those of you represented here today, to counter disinformation.

    We want to work with all of you to put this issue at the forefront of international discourse.

    We shall host a major international conference next year to mobilise a global consensus behind the protection of journalists.

    We shall support Media Freedom projects and we shall expand the number of journalists receiving training, including in newsrooms here in the UK.

    Conclusion

    Ladies and gentlemen, faced with these threats to our democracies and our freedoms, we must come together to protect our shared values.

    As our Prime Minister has said, “The fundamental values we share – respect for human dignity, human rights, freedom, democracy and equality – have created common cause to act together in our shared interest.”

    All of you, as communicators, play an important role – not only in shaping the public’s view of what governments do, but also in informing government policy. You are needed now, more than ever.

    Let us come together to combat the threat of disinformation, to build public trust in our democracies and our values, and to strengthen independent media, as the guardians of those values.

    Thank you.

  • Theresa May – 2018 Statement on Brexit

    Below is the text of the statement made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, in the House of Commons on 17 December 2018.

    Mr Speaker, with permission, I would like to make a Statement on last week’s European Council.

    Before turning to Brexit, let me touch on two significant conclusions from the other business of the Council.

    First, we expressed our utmost concern over the escalation we have seen at the Kerch Straits and the Sea of Azov and Russia’s continued violations of international law.

    We agreed to roll-over economic sanctions against Russia and we stand ready to further strengthen our support, in particular, for the affected areas of Ukraine.

    And second, we also agreed to work together on tackling the spread of deliberate, large-scale and systematic disinformation, including as part of hybrid warfare. On this I outlined some of the world-leading work that the UK is doing in this field.

    And I was clear that after we have left the European Union, the UK will continue to work closely with our European partners to uphold the international rules based system and to keep all our people safe.

    And that is why it is right that our Brexit deal includes the deepest security partnership that has ever been agreed with the EU.

    Mr Speaker, at this Council I faithfully and firmly reflected the concerns of this House over the Northern Ireland backstop.

    I explained the assurances we had already agreed with the EU were insufficient for this House – and that we had to go further in showing that we never want to use this backstop and, if it is used, it must be a temporary arrangement.

    Some of the resulting exchanges at this Council were robust.

    But I make no apology for standing up for the interests of this House and the interests of our whole United Kingdom.

    In response, the EU 27 published a series of conclusions.

    They made clear that it is their – and I quote – “firm determination to work speedily on a subsequent agreement that establishes by 31st December 2020 alternative arrangements, so that the backstop will not need to be triggered.”

    The House will forgive me, but I think this bears repeating: “the backstop will not need to be triggered.”

    They underlined that “if the backstop were nevertheless to be triggered, it would apply temporarily.”

    They said that in this event the EU “would use its best endeavours to negotiate and conclude expeditiously a subsequent agreement that would replace the backstop.”

    And they gave a new assurance in relation to the Future Partnership with the UK, to make it even less likely that the backstop would ever be needed by stating that the EU “stands ready to embark on preparations immediately after signature of the Withdrawal Agreement to ensure that negotiations can start as soon as possible after the UK’s withdrawal.”

    Mr Speaker, in these conclusions, in their statements at the Council and in their private meetings with me, my fellow EU leaders could not have been clearer – they do not want to use this backstop. They want to agree the best possible future relationship with us. There is no plot to keep us in the backstop.

    Indeed, President Macron said on Friday – “we can clarify and reassure…the backstop is not our objective, it is not a durable solution and nobody is trying to lock the UK into the backstop.”

    As formal conclusions from a European Council, these commitments have legal status and should be welcomed. They go further than the EU has ever done previously in trying to address the concerns of this House.

    And of course they sit on top of the commitments that we have already negotiated in relation to the backstop: including…

    …ensuring the customs element is UK-wide;

    …that both sides are legally committed to using best endeavours to have our new relationship in place before the end of the Implementation Period;

    …that if the new relationship isn’t ready we can choose to extend the Implementation Period instead of the backstop coming into force;

    …that if the backstop does come in, we can use alternative arrangements, not just the future relationship, to get out of it;

    …that the treaty is clear the backstop can only ever be temporary;

    …and that there is an explicit termination clause.

    But Mr Speaker, I know this House is still deeply uncomfortable about the backstop.

    And I understand that. And I want us to go further still in the reassurances we secure.

    Discussions with my EU partners – including Presidents Tusk, Juncker and others – have shown that further clarification following the Council’s conclusions is in fact possible.

    So discussions are continuing to explore further political and legal assurances.

    We are also looking closely at new ways of empowering the House of Commons to ensure that any provision for a backstop has democratic legitimacy and to enable the House to place its own obligations on the government to ensure that the backstop cannot be in place indefinitely.

    But it is now only just over 14 weeks until the UK leaves the EU. And I know many Members of this House are concerned that we need to take a decision soon.

    My Rt Hon Friend, the Leader of the House, will set out business on Thursday in the usual way.

    But I can confirm today that we intend to return to the Meaningful Vote debate in the week commencing 7th January and hold the vote the following week.

    Mr Speaker, when we have the vote, Members will need to reflect carefully on what is in the best interests of our country.

    I know that there are a range of very strongly held personal views on this issue across the House. And I respect all of them.

    But expressing our personal views is not what we are here to do.

    We asked the British people to take this decision.

    472 current Members of this House voted for the Referendum in June 2015, with just 32 voting against.

    And the British people responded by instructing us to leave the European Union.

    Similarly 438 current Members of this House voted to trigger Article 50, to set the process of our departure in motion, with only 85 of today’s Members voting against.

    Now we must honour our duty to finish the job.

    I know this is not everyone’s perfect deal. It is a compromise.

    But if we let the perfect be the enemy of the good then we risk leaving the EU with no deal.

    Of course we have prepared for no deal, and tomorrow the Cabinet will be discussing the next phase in ensuring we are ready for that scenario.

    But let us not risk the jobs, services and security of the people we serve by turning our backs on an agreement with our neighbours that honours the referendum and provides for a smooth and orderly exit.

    Avoiding no deal is only possible if we can reach an agreement or if we abandon Brexit entirely.

    And as I said in the debate earlier this month – “do not imagine that if we vote this down, a different deal is going to miraculously appear.”

    If you want proof, look at the Conclusions of this Council.

    As President Juncker said: “it is the best deal possible and the only deal possible”

    And any proposal for the future relationship – whether Norway, Canada, or any other variety that has been mentioned – would require agreeing this Withdrawal Agreement.

    The Leader of the Opposition – as well as some others – are trying to pretend they could do otherwise.

    This is a fiction.

    Finally let us not break faith with the British people by trying to stage another referendum.

    Another vote which would do irreparable damage to the integrity of our politics, because it would say to millions who trusted in democracy, that our democracy does not deliver.

    Another vote which would likely leave us no further forward than the last.

    And another vote which would further divide our country at the very moment we should be working to unite it.

    And let us not follow the Leader of the Opposition in thinking about what gives him the best chance of forcing a General Election.

    For at this critical moment in our history, we should be thinking not about our party’s interests, but about the national interest.

    Let us a find a way to come together and work together in the national interest to see this Brexit through.

    Mr Speaker, I will work tirelessly over these new few weeks to fulfil my responsibility as Prime Minister to find a way forwards.

    Over the last two weeks, I have met quite a number of colleagues and I am happy to continue to do so on this important issue so that we can fulfil our responsibilities to the British people.

    So together, we can take back control of our borders, laws and money; while protecting the jobs, the security and the integrity of our precious United Kingdom.

    So together we can move on to finalising the future relationship with the European Union and the trade deals with the rest of the world that can fuel our prosperity for years to come.

    And so together we can get this Brexit done and shift the national focus to our domestic priorities – investing in our NHS, our schools and housing; tackling the injustices that so many still face; and building a country that truly works for everyone.

    For these are the ways in which, together, this House will best serve the interests of the British people.

    And I commend this Statement to the House.

  • Bill Wiggin – 2018 Commons Speech on Brexit

    Below is the text of the speech made by Bill Wiggin, the Conservative MP for North Herefordshire, in the House of Commons on 6 December 2018.

    It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Liverpool, West Derby (Stephen Twigg), and, of course, my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Moor View (Johnny Mercer).

    Let me first commend the Prime Minister’s determination, fortitude and persistence in her negotiations with the European Union and in her repeated statements to the House. I, like many, want to conclude Brexit as swiftly as possible and to fulfil the result of the 2016 referendum, but the withdrawal agreement contains enormous problems. The Northern Ireland protocol provides for an extension of the customs union that would keep the United Kingdom in the customs union and some aspects of the single market. The Attorney General confirmed to the House, both in his statement and in his published legal opinion, that the backstop had no unilateral exit mechanism. That means that leaving the backstop and the customs union could be more difficult than leaving the European Union. The people who voted for Brexit voted for independence, and the backstop prevents us from fully leaving the EU. The current withdrawal agreement therefore does not respect the will of the people to leave the EU.

    If the Government are unwilling or unable to secure a better deal, the default position is trading on World Trade Organisation terms—no deal, or a clean global Brexit, as it should be known. People who say that that would be a disaster—the consensus on the Opposition Benches is that it might be—are, generally speaking, people with whom I disagree, usually because they are wrong. Our exports to countries with which we trade on WTO terms have grown three times faster than our trade with EU countries since the 1990s. We currently ​run a surplus on our trade with our biggest national export market, the United States. By contrast, we run a deficit on our trade with European single market partners. Anyone who is afraid of the WTO should simply look around their home and note the sheer volume of items made in China, America and the rest of the world in order to conclude that the WTO is not quite the demon that Opposition Members make it out to be.

    On Tuesday, the Grieve amendment looked, at first, like it had put power back into the hands of the House of Commons. Although many of my colleagues and constituents tell me that anything for which the House votes will not be legally binding, we have seen this week that the Government cannot ignore Parliament. The purpose of the amendment was to put at risk the clean global Brexit, given that it will not be supported by Parliament, so I worry that extensions to article 50, or a second referendum, could win the support of MPs who do not respect the result of the original people’s vote. They should use this debating opportunity to remind the public that they will not seek to undo the result of the referendum, in exactly the way my right hon. Friend the Member for Mid Sussex (Sir Nicholas Soames) did earlier.

    Voting for the deal itself represents a threat to Brexit, but it also represents a threat to the Government. Ironically, the DUP, which will support the Government in a confidence vote if the deal is lost, would be closest to the hard border that the backstop seeks to prevent. Surely they must have their views respected above all else.

    For our £39 billion, we deserve a proper arrangement with the EU that is mutually beneficial, as well as good value for our taxpayers. I fear that this deal does not open the door to positive trade negotiations. It hangs the threat of the backstop over the heads of our negotiators, which will force them to compromise and concede. Therefore, as it stands, I do not want to support the deal, but I hope that the Prime Minister will take our concerns on board and will act. I hope that she will return to this House with a deal that I and my colleagues can wholeheartedly support.

  • Stephen Twigg – 2018 Commons Speech on Brexit

    Below is the text of the speech made by Stephen Twigg, the Labour MP for Liverpool, West Derby, in the House of Commons on 6 December 2018.

    The city of Liverpool has been hit hard by austerity since 2010, with massive cuts in central Government funding hitting Liverpool City Council and its services and hitting the police service and the fire service, while benefit changes have hit the poorest hardest. Liverpool has also benefited enormously from membership of the European Union. Merseyside had Objective 1 status, which helped to bring significant investment to our communities. It is an outward-looking city, reflected in the heavy vote across the city two years ago to remain in the European Union—58% to 42%.

    However, the divisions that we have discussed today nationally were reflected locally. My constituency saw a much narrower vote—the vote was not conducted by constituency, but my estimate is that it was probably about 52% remain and 48% leave. As we have heard rightly from both sides in this debate, some of the communities that have been hit hardest by poverty and austerity are those that had the highest leave votes. That was certainly the case in my constituency and that reflected many concerns—some about immigration and others about a sense of being left behind.

    Those divisions clearly continue. They are reflected in my inbox, as I am sure they are in those of other Members. I have had constituents urging me in the last three weeks to vote for no deal because that would be better than this deal. Some want a people’s vote. Some people are coming to see me to support the deal, but a very clear majority view from my constituents is that we should reject this deal because it is bad for jobs, bad for rights and bad for living standards.

    I voted remain and I campaigned hard for remain in my constituency, elsewhere in Liverpool, and in other parts of the north-west, but I accepted the result despite my great personal sense of disappointment. I voted in favour of triggering article 50 and I really wanted to see a serious negotiation to deliver on the referendum. I agree very strongly with my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn), who said on the opening day of this debate that

    “history will record the Prime Minister’s red lines to have been an absolutely catastrophic mistake”.—[Official Report, 4 December 2018; Vol. 650, c. 800.]

    It would have been perfectly feasible to take a pragmatic, inclusive and flexible approach and reach out across the Chamber to all parties. The Government’s failure to do that has resulted in a political declaration which is vague and uncertain, and which, crucially, tells us very little about the key issues of frictionless trade. As a result, it is almost certain not only that this deal will be defeated next Tuesday, but that it will defeated by a substantial margin.​
    After that vote, we shall have an historic responsibility and opportunity to forge a new way forward. I have signed both amendment (a), in the name of the Leader of the Opposition, and amendment (i), in the name of my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central. Taken together, they could provide the basis for a way forward: rejecting the disastrous option of no deal, seeking instead a permanent customs union and a strong single market deal, and resolving to pursue every option to prevent no deal from happening.

    It seems to me that there are two potential ways forward after the vote next Tuesday. Either we come together in the House, across party divides, and agree a position that can protect jobs, protect the rights of workers and standards in the environment and for consumers, and protect living standards. I believe we could achieve that with the good will of Government and Parliament working together. Otherwise, there will be no alternative but for us to take this back to the people, either in the form of an early general election or in the form of another referendum—a people’s vote.

    The economic consequences of leaving without a deal could be disastrous. As others have said, they would hit the poorest areas hardest. I look at those areas of Liverpool’s economy, such as the car industry, health and life sciences, universities and the port. Those are the industries that would suffer most if we left without a deal, and regions such as the north-west would be hit hardest by a no deal Brexit. Yes, this deal is not the right deal, but let us come together and deliver the deal that really can protect jobs and rights across our country.

  • Tom Tugendhat – 2018 Commons Speech on Brexit

    Below is the text of the speech made by Tom Tugendhat, the Conservative MP for Tonbridge and Malling, in the House of Commons on 6 December 2018.

    I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this important debate. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Falkirk (John Mc Nally) for his dulcet tones and helping us get through the afternoon.

    We find ourselves here because of a series of events. We must remember that the day after the referendum, the campaigns disappeared. When we got to the leadership competition, many of the competitors disappeared. When we got to the election, sadly many of our seats disappeared, and we found ourselves without a majority. Despite that, we have a Prime Minister who, thank God, has shown fortitude, devotion and duty, when so many others have, sadly, disappeared.

    I have plenty of criticism to make of the way these negotiations have been conducted, and I am sure I am not alone in doing so. I think we started the wrong way round. Rather than negotiating our way down, as it were, from our existing membership, we should have admitted the truth, which is that we have left the European Union—we left when the votes came in—and we should be negotiating our way up towards the relationship we want to see in the long term. Sadly, that is not what happened.

    We find ourselves now looking towards a transition. After 45 years’ membership—about the same time that Elizabeth I was on the throne or the German empire existed—it is hardly surprising that the transition to a new relationship is important. We must use this opportunity to focus on not only what the interim stage looks like, but what the future looks like. That is why I would welcome much more effort going into the future agreement. It is true that the political declaration sets out some aspects of interest, and the backstop supposedly is used as a building block, but we need to see much more than either of those.

    So what are we looking at today? We are looking at a stage. We are looking at—let us be frank—the only deal on the table. We are looking at a temporary, imperfect compromise, and an uncomfortable one at that—one that, were we to ever enter the backstop, splits the four freedoms of goods, capital, services and people.

    The option we have is pretty simple. It is threefold: either we agree with this compromise; or we push for a second referendum, which I think is a terrible idea, as it will simply lead to more uncertainty and more indecision; or we walk away. As I represent a community—I am blessed to represent one of the most beautiful communities in the country—that, sadly, is surrounded by motorways entirely reliant on the port of Dover, there is a danger for us that those motorways will become parking lots, as many hon. Members will have heard me say when I raised this with the Transport Secretary. I am afraid that I cannot go for the referendum and I cannot go for walking away, so I am left really with only one choice. I do not say this with any joy. However, it is not our role to shirk responsibility or to avoid decisions; it is our role to take decisions. When I have excluded the impossible, I am left with only one—and that I have to say with a very heavy heart.

    The backstop is not, however, as final as many have said, and here I quote from Policy Exchange’s work by Professor Verdirame, Sir Stephen Laws and Professor Ekins, about what the best endeavours obligation in the withdrawal agreement puts on the EU. They say:​

    “EU conduct in breach of such an obligation and indefinitely prolonging the application of the Protocol could thus amount to a material breach of the Withdrawal Agreement and the Protocol. Faced with this situation, the UK would be entitled to invoke this material breach as a ground for the suspension or termination of the Withdrawal Agreement and the Protocol.”

    So there is a legal way out, and the legal way out is if the EU does not negotiate with best intent. I am confident that it will, because this is as bad for the EU as it is for us, though, frankly, it is not good for anyone.

    I will end simply with a word about the referendum. It was legitimate. It did not go my way, but democracies do not always reflect the way we choose. When we get through this period, the next few years of this country’s history will be truly glorious. We are on the cusp of massive investment. We have companies sitting on cash and ready to throw it into the economy. We have a huge opportunity before us, and I look forward to our grasping it.

  • Kirsty Blackman – 2018 Commons Speech on Brexit

    Below is the text of the speech made by Kirsty Blackman, the SNP MP for Aberdeen North, in the House of Commons on 10 December 2018.

    I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of the statement, and I thank you, Mr Speaker, for the benefit of your words on how we could proceed.

    The events of the past few hours have highlighted that this is a Government in a total state of collapse. The Prime Minister has been forced to pull tomorrow’s vote in a stunning display of pathetic cowardice. The vote tomorrow night would have shown the will of this House, but this Government are focused on saving the Prime Minister’s job and her party. Instead of doing what is right for these countries, she is abdicating her responsibility.

    The Prime Minister’s deal will make people poorer. It will lead to years of further uncertainty and difficult negotiation, with no guarantee that a trade deal can even be struck. It does not have the support of those on her Back Benches; indeed, it has no support from the majority of those on the Benches across this place, no support from the Scottish Parliament and no support from the Welsh Assembly. Why has it taken the Prime Minister this long to face up to reality? Her deal was dead in the water long before this morning. Last week, it was this deal or no deal. She now needs to be clear with this House about what has changed.

    Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU, but yet again our views are being ignored, as they have been throughout this disastrous and incompetent Brexit process. Back in 2014, Scotland was promised the strength and security of the UK, but the reality has been Westminster collapse and chaos. We were promised an equal partnership, but we have been treated with contempt.

    The Prime Minister has lost the confidence of those on her own Benches, and she has failed to convince this House of her plan for exiting the EU. We simply cannot go on like this. It is clear that the Prime Minister is incapable of taking decisions about the future and that Downing Street cannot negotiate any more—either with the EU or with those on the Tory Back Benches. What the Prime Minister is really scared of is allowing this House to determine the way forward and allowing the public the opportunity to remain in the EU. She knows she has lost, but she is still wasting precious time. We need the Prime Minister to be clear about when the House will vote on this deal.

    This Government and the Prime Minister have failed. It is time they got out of the way. Prime Minister, Members across this House do not want your deal. The EU does not want to renegotiate. Is not the only way to break this deadlock to put it to the people?

  • Jeremy Corbyn – 2018 Commons Speech on Brexit

    Below is the text of the speech made by Jeremy Corbyn, the Leader of the Opposition, in the House of Commons on 10 December 2018.

    I thank the Prime Minister for providing a copy of the statement before we met here this afternoon. We are in an extremely serious and unprecedented situation. The Government have lost control of events and are in complete disarray. It has been evident for weeks that the Prime Minister’s deal does not have the confidence of this House, yet she ploughed on regardless, reiterating “This is the only deal available.” Can she be clear with the House: is she seeking changes to the deal, or mere reassurances? Does she therefore accept the statement from the European Commission at lunchtime, saying that it was the

    “only deal possible. We will not renegotiate—our position has…not changed”?

    Ireland’s Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, has said it is “not possible” to renegotiate the Irish border backstop, stating that it was the Prime Minister’s own red lines that made the backstop necessary. So can the Prime Minister be clear: is she now ready to drop further red lines in order to make progress? Can the Prime Minister confirm that the deal presented to this House is not off the table, but will be re-presented with a few assurances? Bringing back the same botched deal, either next week or in January—and can she be clear on the timing?—will not change its fundamental flaws or the deeply held objections right across this House, which go far wider than the backstop alone.

    This a bad deal for Britain, a bad deal for our economy and a bad deal for our democracy. Our country deserves better than this. The deal damages our economy, and it is not just the Opposition saying that; the Government’s own analysis shows that this deal would make us worse off. If the Prime Minister cannot be clear that she can and will renegotiate the deal, she must make way. If she is going back to Brussels, she needs to build a consensus in this House. Since it appears that business has changed for the next two days, it seems not only possible but necessary that this House debates the negotiating mandate that the Prime Minister takes to Brussels. There is no point at all in this Prime Minister bringing back the same deal again, which is clearly not supported by this House.

    We have endured two years of shambolic negotiations. Red lines have been boldly announced and then cast aside. We are now on our third Brexit Secretary, and it appears that each one of them has been excluded from these vital negotiations. We were promised a precise and substantive document, and we got a vague 26-page wishlist. This Government have become the first Government in British history to be held in contempt of Parliament.

    The Government are in disarray. Uncertainty is building for business. People are in despair at the state of these failed negotiations, and concerned about what it means for their jobs, their livelihoods and their communities. The fault for that lies solely at the door of this shambolic Government. The Prime Minister is trying to buy herself one last chance to save this deal. If she does not take on board the fundamental changes required, she must make way for those who can.

  • Andrew Jones – 2018 Statement on Crossrail

    Below is the text of the statement made by Andrew Jones, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport, in the House of Commons on 10 December 2018.

    The government, the Mayor of London and Transport for London (TfL) have today (10 December 2018) confirmed a financing package to deliver the final stages of the Crossrail project and open the Elizabeth line to passengers.

    Crossrail Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of TfL, announced in August 2018 that the opening of the Elizabeth line through central London would be delayed. Work is ongoing to identify the remaining works required to complete the infrastructure and then commence the extensive testing necessary to ensure the railway opens safely and reliably. Crossrail is a nationally significant infrastructure project which will add up to £42 billion to the UK economy and will transform travel in, to, and across London.

    The government remains committed to the rapid completion of the project, in a way that is fair to UK taxpayers, and that enables London – as the primary beneficiary of Crossrail – to bear the additional costs. Independent reviews into Crossrail Ltd’s assessment of ongoing funding requirements and governance arrangements are being undertaken by KPMG to ensure the right scrutiny and oversight are in place as the project enters its final phase.

    The emerging findings of the KPMG reviews into Crossrail Ltd’s finances indicate the likely range of additional capital cost due to the delayed opening of the central section could be in the region of between £1.6 billion and £2 billion. That includes the £300 million already contributed by the Department for Transport and TfL in July 2018, leaving between £1.3 billion and £1.7 billion to cover the predicted additional costs of the project.

    The government, the Mayor of London and TfL have agreed a financial package to cover this. The Department for Transport will provide a loan of up to £1.3 billion to the Greater London Authority (GLA). The GLA intend to repay this loan via London’s Business Rate Supplement (BRS) and from the Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy (MCIL). The GLA will also provide a £100 million cash contribution, taking its total contribution for this package to £1.4 billion.

    As the final costs of the Crossrail project are yet to be confirmed, a contingency arrangement has also been agreed between TfL and the Department for Transport. The Department for Transport will loan TfL up to £750 million in the event that further finance is required for the project.

    This combined financing deal will replace the need for the £350 million interim financing package announced by the Department for Transport in October 2018.

    The combined total of the financing arrangements outlined above, means that the overall funding envelope for the project is now £17.6 billion.

    Crossrail Ltd appointed Mark Wild as CEO on 19 November 2018. Mark is now conducting an extensive review of the remainder of the programme and will provide clarity in the new year on the opening date of future phases. Crossrail Ltd are working to establish a robust and deliverable schedule to open a safe and reliable railway. This will also provide greater clarity on the level of additional funding required.

    Furthermore, both the Department for Transport and TfL have recommended to the Crossrail Ltd board that they appoint Tony Meggs as Chair. Tony Meggs was previously Chief Executive of the Infrastructure and Projects Authority and Head of government’s Project Delivery Function, following a 30 year career in the private sector leading major projects at global, regional and local levels.

    To further strengthen the Crossrail Ltd Board, the Department for Transport have accepted TfL’s nomination of Nick Raynsford as Deputy Chair. Nick is a former MP and served as Minister for London on two occasions between 1997 and 2003.

  • Matt Hancock – 2018 Speech on Dementia

    Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, on 5 December 2018.

    To get a sense of the challenge that dementia poses, I think about a man who, as a celebrated writer, gave such a clear account of the impact of dementia and stood determined not to let it stop him living his life.

    Sir Terry Pratchett was a best-selling author of some of the most creative fantasy novels. He continued to write despite his diagnosis of dementia and would not let it stop him. In his words:

    It’s possible to live well with dementia. And write best-sellers. Like wot I do.

    There is not yet a cure, and as Terry himself described it:

    There is no clearly plotted pathway to the course of these diseases. Dementia attacks those facets which make us who we are, and it’s a deeply personal attack that defies prediction.

    Today we know much more about the challenge that dementia poses. But what are we doing to meet this challenge?

    What have we achieved since the summit here in London in 2013, 5 years ago? Have we done enough to tackle stigma and raise awareness of this disease? Are we doing the research that will help us develop a treatment? Are we helping people to live well with dementia?

    Today we’re gathered in London again, 5 years on from David Cameron using the UK’s presidency of the G8 summit to turn the spotlight on dementia.

    Here we have a selection of the people who, working together in a common purpose, can bring change in our organisations, our countries and our world. We have eminent scientists, policy makers, innovators, academia, industry, people with dementia and carers, and politicians too. These are just some of the people that we need to bring together.

    Without working across boundaries, without the collaborations and sharing of ideas we would not be able to make progress.

    Today I want to reflect on some of the achievements we’ve made home and abroad. Let us together renew the call for action to defeat dementia.

    In the UK alone, an estimated 850,000 live with dementia, with numbers projected to rise to over 1 million by 2022 and 2 million by 2051.

    225,000 people will develop dementia this year, that’s roughly 1 every 3 minutes. And an estimated 1 in 5 people over the age of 85 have dementia. Furthermore, there are over 45,000 people under the age of 65 living with dementia in the UK.

    Numbers are rising now. As we make progress in tackling the other major killers, then the numbers will rise more so.

    Globally, nearly 50 million people were living with dementia in 2017. Research commissioned by Alzheimer’s Disease International highlights that the global cost of dementia will double by 2030, to $2 trillion.

    I want to talk about what we are doing in 4 areas:

    care and treatment
    early diagnosis
    prevention
    technology

    On care and treatment, we have made significant progress on staff training to help them care for people with dementia better. This year we reached one million NHS staff receiving dementia training since 2013 and around a million social care staff will have learned about dementia.

    And we are investing in dementia research for better care approaches and new treatments. To that end, we are spending £300 million on dementia research between 2015 and 2020.

    Through the Dementia Research Institute, Dementia Platforms UK, and through international efforts such as the Dementia Discovery Fund – which stands at a staggering £250 million so far – we are creating an environment to develop new approaches to tackling dementia.

    On diagnosis, one of our central achievements has been the improvement in the dementia diagnosis rate. Today, over two-thirds of people living with dementia receive a diagnosis, compared with 2 in 5 in 2010 to 2011.

    A timely diagnosis enables an individual and their loved ones to think about the care and support they need. It means they are able to access support and receive treatment quicker.

    But things move on. As the science improves we are now thinking about even earlier diagnosis informed by understanding of ‘biomarkers’ to ensure that novel medicines and treatments stand the best chance of success.

    On prevention, there is growing recognition that brain health is just as important as heart health: dementia isn’t an inevitable consequence of ageing. Around one-third of Alzheimer’s disease cases may be preventable through improving lifestyle, especially in midlife.

    That is why we have now have dementia messages in our NHS health checks. In England everyone between the ages 40 to 74 years who goes for a health check will be given advice on how to reduce their dementia risk.

    In the last 5 years, 7 million people attended a health check. That’s a fantastic opportunity to get the message out.

    Which brings me to the role of technology. Since 2013 we have a deeper understanding of how technology can transform the lives of those with dementia and their carers.

    Launched by the University of Oxford and the Alzheimer’s Society, the ‘GameChanger’ app contains a collection of memory and thinking games that test specific parts of the brain as well as the memory and thinking abilities believed to be affected during the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease.

    A fantastic example of using new technology is the Dementia Education and Learning Through Stimulation 2 (DEALTS) programme, which uses virtual reality to help staff understand the challenges someone living with dementia faces in their everyday lives, from shopping to going to the cinema.

    Or Paro the robotic seal. Paro uses artificial intelligence to learn from its surroundings and interact with people. Soft and cuddly, yes. And studies show its potential as a therapeutic intervention for people with dementia – it has been shown to improve socialisation for people living with dementia.

    In all these areas, there are examples of good progress. It will take time. But there are still things we can do now. We are seeing a change in the way people think, talk and act on dementia.

    The Dementia Friends initiative has been successful in raising awareness. We have over 2.7 million people who have become Dementia Friends, and over 400 communities committing to becoming dementia friendly in the UK.

    Supported by my department, the Alzheimer’s Society co-ordinates the Global Dementia Friends Network, which now has 44 countries developing similar programmes, with nearly 16 million Dementia Friends across all continents.

    In Brighton, the Dementia Action Alliance is partnering with Chess in Schools and Communities to give free chess lessons to older people, helping them keep their minds active while giving them opportunities to socialise.

    Participating in music can help bring people together and stimulate memories – through Singing for the Brain for example.

    Or simple ideas like the Southbank Centre using working poets to run a poetry course for people with dementia and their families.

    Common-sense interventions like these are simple yet effective. And I want to see more of them.

    Change is happening. Today’s event is a way of sharing all this great practice. It’s a way of restating our determination to make even more progress towards that goal of transformed care and support, of vastly improved social awareness and the first treatments by 2025.

    I will work with any nation, any partner who has innovative solutions to defeat dementia. We must not become complacent, we must all keep an open mind to embrace the new opportunities offered by technology and science.

    But let’s not lose sight of the simple message from Sir Terry Pratchett:

    “It’s possible to live well with dementia”.

  • Chris Grayling – 2018 Speech on the Withdrawal Agreement

    Below is the text of the speech made by Chris Grayling, the Secretary of State for Transport, in Birmingham on 5 December 2018.

    Opening remarks

    Good morning everyone.

    It’s a pleasure to be here at Birmingham Airport today (5 December 2018).

    The global gateway to the Midlands…

    Which had a record year in 2017…

    With nearly 13 million passengers travelling on flights to over 150 destinations.

    And which has also just announced a £500 million expansion plan to boost capacity and improve passenger facilities.

    Thriving airports say a lot about the places they’re serving.

    They are tangible evidence of business confidence.

    Of ambition to expand into overseas markets.

    To attract inward investment from other countries.

    And to take advantage of opportunities opening up in the global economy….

    As clearly we see here at Birmingham.

    Global outlook

    Yet this is what our island nation has been doing for centuries.

    We’ve always been an outward-facing country.

    It’s part of our DNA.

    Reaching out to markets abroad.

    Investing in transport links.

    To help us strike trade deals around the world.

    And in the post-Brexit world, we’ll need these strengths more than ever.

    It’s why we are expanding Heathrow.

    Why we’ve given regional airports like Birmingham greater freedom to grow.

    And why we’re prioritising new aviation agreements with other nations to prepare for life outside the European Union.

    Just last week – for example – we signed a deal with the US cementing flights across the Atlantic once we leave the EU.

    The deal secures existing air connections, and sets out ways in which new operators can enter the market in future.

    We have worked closely with airlines in both countries to make sure we get this deal right.

    Then at the weekend we also concluded an agreement with Canada, sorting out the last significant non-EU aviation destination after Brexit.

    But of course, maintaining flights to European markets is critical too.

    Within Europe, both the European Commission and other member states have been clear that arrangements will be put in place for the aviation sector – regardless of the broader agreement.

    This will ensure flights between the UK and EU can continue and that passengers have certainty about travelling.

    Supporting the current deal

    Clearly, these deals are in the national interest.

    We’ve reached a stage in the Brexit journey where acting in the national interest takes precedence over all other considerations.

    That’s why it’s imperative we get behind the Prime Minister’s agreed deal with the European Union now.

    I campaigned for Brexit in 2016, and have not changed my view that it’s the right choice for Britain.

    But I’m also a pragmatist.

    It’s equally important that we remain good friends and neighbours to our EU partners, while also deepening ties around the world.

    I believe that the vast majority of the British population want a mutually beneficial deal with the EU, and a smooth transition.

    That’s precisely what the Prime Minister’s agreement will deliver….

    While also delivering the vast majority of benefits that pro-Brexiteers asked for at the Referendum.

    It will give us full control of our money….

    Of our laws ….

    And our borders – ending the free movement of people.

    While maintaining security.

    And protecting the union of the United Kingdom.

    Transport and the PM’s deal

    We’ll benefit from a free trade area with the EU, while also pursuing trade deals with other countries outside Europe.

    And we have agreed ambitious transport arrangements with the EU.

    Not only will we have a comprehensive Air Transport Agreement….

    Visa-free travel for short-term visits, including tourists and business travellers…

    And co-operation where it makes sense – on aviation security, safety and air traffic management….

    But we’ll also have comparable access for hauliers, buses and coaches travelling between the UK and the rest of Europe.

    Bilateral arrangements will allow cross border rail services to continue – such as between Belfast and Dublin, and through the Channel Tunnel.

    And ships will continue to serve ports here and across the EU, protecting vital imports and exports routes.

    And our thriving tourism industry.

    This is a good deal for business and for jobs.

    The best deal for business and jobs.

    It will help us keep our connections with Europe….

    While providing a springboard to pursue new agreements around the world.

    And it will keep Britain moving.

    That’s why transport industry leaders have come out today in support of the agreement….

    Urging the country to get behind a deal that will provide much needed certainty.

    And that’s why as Transport Secretary, I am strongly in favour as well.

    If I had been offered the current deal before the Referendum in 2016, I would have seen it as an obviously better alternative to the status quo of remaining inside the EU.

    But today, when we know that we will not get an improved deal if this one is rejected, then the decision to back it now is even more clear cut.

    No deal

    Of course, we’ve been working hard to prepare for all eventualities after our exit.

    Including no deal.

    As any responsible government would.

    We are making provision to ease the pressure on Dover and Calais if there are customs hold ups after we leave.

    And we are making sure British motorists have easy access to International Driving Licences if they are needed.

    These are just two of the many transport implications of failing to reach a deal with the EU.

    Implications which we set out in detail for each transport mode earlier this year…

    Along with relevant advice for the public.

    But none of us want them to actually happen.

    No-one wants to sever ties with our European neighbours, and leave on bad terms.

    So now our focus is to get on delivering the broader exit agreement.

    And making progress with our withdrawal plans so we leave the European Union in March, while maintaining good relations.

    Conclusion

    We have an historic opportunity here.

    To take back control of our borders and finances.

    To retain a positive working and free trade relationship with our closest neighbours in the EU….

    With no tariffs, fees, or charges across all sectors.

    And no hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland.

    While keeping the Common Travel Area, ensuring everyday life continues as now.

    This will ensure the smooth movement of transport and people….

    By road, rail, sea and air.

    Continued access to European markets….

    Yet also the freedom to grow globally…

    Providing airports like Birmingham with the momentum to invest for the future.

    I believe the overwhelming majority of the country now want us to get on with Brexit….

    And turn our attention to what comes next.

    That’s what this agreement will do.

    The deal on the table is also the best deal.

    Best for transport.

    Best for business.

    Best for Britain.

    So let’s get behind it.

    Thank you.