UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Speeches

  • Lord Freud – 2016 Speech on Welfare Reform

    lordfreud

    Below is the text of the statement made by Lord Freud in the House of Lords on 29 February 2016.

    My Lords, the other House has now considered Lords Amendment 1, which was proposed by the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Durham, the noble Baroness, Lady Sherlock, and the noble Earl, Lord Listowel. The intention behind that amendment was to insert a new clause into the Bill, which would have increased the measures on which the Secretary of State was required to report annually to include income-based measures. As I have said previously, that amendment has technical faults and would require redrafting to make it work as noble Lords intend but, moving quickly beyond the technical defects in that amendment, I have repeatedly tried to shine a light on the fundamental flaws of the income-based measure.

    The “poverty plus a pound” approach that results from measures of this kind led to billions of pounds being invested under the previous Government, with little or no transformational impetus in the life chances of young people. It is widely recognised that the low-income measures can give a misleading picture. For example in a recession, when average income falls, poverty can appear to be falling too even if living standards have not improved for those at the bottom.

    I stress again that low-income measures drive the wrong action, as I have sought to explain throughout the passage of the Bill through this House. Such measures simply focus on treating the symptoms of child poverty, whereas the Government are intent on tackling the root causes such as worklessness and educational failure. It is in these areas where we believe that the right action can make the biggest difference to the lives of disadvantaged children, both now and in the future.

    Moving on, it is clear that substantial concerns remain that publication of the statistics on children in low-income families through the Department for Work and Pensions annual HBAI—households below average income—may not continue. This is despite the very clear commitments that the Government have given in both Houses and the protections already in place to safeguard HBAI as a national statistics product.

    As I have said previously, I believe that the only difference on this issue between us is the word “statutory”. Given the doubts and concerns that remain about the continued publication of this low-income data, I am able to say that we have listened, we have heard and we are willing to provide further guarantees. Three of the four income measures—including relative low income, combined low income and material deprivation, and absolute low income—are already routinely published in the HBAI publication.

    Through the government amendment we are putting forward today, we propose to place a statutory duty on the Secretary of State to publish this information annually. This provision will give the data the additional statutory protection that noble Lords sought. The amendment also places a statutory duty on the Secretary of State to publish new data on children living in persistent low-income households annually. The information will be based on a new data source, and the first figures will be published before the end of the 2016-17 financial year.

    However, let me be clear that although we have given full statutory guarantees that this data will be published annually, we will not commit ourselves to laying a report before Parliament on it. This amendment is about providing a further guarantee that information on low income is made available for all to see, every year. Reporting to Parliament on income measures would incentivise government to take the wrong action and would simply continue to incentivise actions, such as direct income transfers, that will not tackle underlying factors.

    We need to move on from this unhelpful approach. Resources are finite and it is crucial that the Government prioritise the actions that will make the biggest difference to children. The evidence is clear that this means tackling worklessness and low educational attainment, as set out clearly in our life-chances measures and approach. Any move to report on these low-income measures would divide government’s efforts and undermine this new life-chances strategy. I firmly believe it would not help to bring about the transformative change that we all wish to see.

    It is worth talking briefly on one technical point in our amendment. Subsection (3) provides for the absolute low-income measure to be rebased in the data publication. This is vital because over time an absolute low-income measure using a 2010-11 baseline, such as that proposed in Lords Amendment 1, would be likely to become increasingly meaningless due to growth in the economy. As a national statistics product, the data publication already has significant statutory protections, guaranteeing that any rebaselining would be carried out by statisticians following best practice and free of any political influence. I reassure colleagues on this point.

    I hope that these proposals will be welcomed in this Chamber. I urge noble Lords not to insist on their amendment and beg to move the Motion on the government amendments in lieu.

  • Dominic Raab – 2016 Speech on Offender Management

    dominicraab

    Below is the text of the speech made by Dominic Raab, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Justice, in the House of Commons on 25 February 2016.

    I would like to provide the House with an update on the progress of our electronic monitoring programme which will introduce new satellite tracking technology to improve the supervision and management of offenders and suspects.

    This is a huge opportunity to reduce reoffending, cut costs for taxpayers and keep the public safe.

    That is why we are committed to delivering a new generation of tags through contracts designed to encourage innovation, deliver an end-to-end system for monitoring offenders and provide for future technological developments.

    With this new technology we can be creative and look at how we can use satellite tags to devise new sentencing options for the courts. We want to use technology to make sure we not only deliver the punishments that society rightly expects but also improve supervision in the community and support offenders to change their lives.

    My colleague Andrew Selous announced to the House on 13 July last year that there had been significant problems with this programme, leading to considerable delays. As a result, we initiated a review into the programme, looking at how to get the programme back on track. This review examined progress made on the programme to date and how best electronic monitoring technology can meet our ambitions for the future, and considered the experience of other jurisdictions around the world who have developed GPS tagging schemes.

    Developing bespoke tags has been challenging and it is now clear that it will be more appropriate to pursue our goals using off-the-shelf technology which is already available. That is why the Ministry of Justice will be terminating our contract to develop a bespoke tagging product with Steatite Limited and will shortly begin a new procurement process for proven tags already on the market.

    This decision will mean we can proceed with wider changes to the way we manage the programme. We will simplify our approach in order to meet the challenges of technical and business integration and continue to drive and monitor delivery from the other suppliers.

    This remains a challenging programme, which we will continue to keep under review.

    As the Prime Minister announced during his speech on prison reform on 8 February, we will begin pilots later this year which will inform how we use GPS tracking technologies to best effect in the future. These pilots will be run in a variety of settings in conjunction with criminal justice partners and will be designed to test how GPS technology is used and how it affects behaviour. The pilots will be independently evaluated and the results will inform policy decisions on the future use of this important tool.

    Furthermore, following the conclusion of the pilot in South London of sobriety tags as part of an Alcohol Abstinence Monitoring Requirement, the Justice Secretary has approved the expansion of the scheme to the whole of London to give courts in the capital the means to tackle the damaging effects of crime committed whilst under the influence of alcohol. An evaluation of sobriety tagging in London will inform our decisions about wider national roll-out.

  • Baroness Anelay – 2016 Speech on Women’s Rights in Afghanistan

    baronessanelay

    Below is the text of the speech made by Baroness Anelay, the Minister of State at the Foreign & Commonwealth Office, in the House of Lords on 25 February 2016.

    Thank you Brita for that kind introduction. Thank you also to Women for Women International, for making this event possible, and for their excellent work to promote women’s rights around the world.

    It is a pleasure to see so many of you here today. We are all people who care passionately about the rights of women in Afghanistan. People who hope, as I do, that the situation for women there will continue to improve.

    I would like to take this opportunity to talk to you today about what has already been achieved for women’s rights in Afghanistan, and what work I believe there is still to be done.

    Human rights are an integral part of the work of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Indeed, as the Foreign Secretary has said, human rights are the day to day work of every British diplomat. The promotion and protection of women’s rights is at the forefront of that work.

    These are rights enshrined in international law. They are vital to ensure stable and prosperous societies. I personally believe in the full participation of women in all aspects of society.

    Afghanistan’s future depends on it: the country cannot expect to fulfil its potential if half the population is excluded.

    Of course the country has seen significant progress on human rights, particularly women’s rights – but the gains it has made are fragile and significant challenges remain.

    These are challenges presented by a fragile security situation, in a country where the Government is fighting to ensure the safety of its entire people. These are also challenges that arise out of a society where traditional tribal values are valued above formal legal structures.

    Across Afghanistan, women continue to suffer disproportionately. Women and women’s groups are more likely to be victims of the insurgency and victims of sexual violence. Women have fewer economic and social opportunities and their access to the justice system is limited, in some cases non-existent.

    The appalling murder last year of Farkhunda Malikzada falsely accused of burning the Koran, highlights the personal risks faced by Afghan women who dare to speak out.

    Of course progress has been made over the last 15 years. The UK Government has helped more than 2.8 million girls enter formal education. The first women officers are being trained in the security forces. There are now more women in the Afghan Parliament than ever before, and more and more women are taking part in elections.

    The country is beginning to recognise the important role women can play in its stability, as well as its economic development.

    For many families, it is now a matter of pure economic necessity for women to have a job. With more women in employment there has been a growing recognition of the value of education, and of the valuable role women can play in public life.

    As many of you know, 2015 was a year of significant change in Afghanistan. The National Unity Government set out its agenda for its ‘Transformation Decade’. The country saw a significant reduction in the international military presence.

    It was also a year that saw the National Unity Government make substantial commitments in the Afghan National Action Plan for Women, Peace and Security.

    In October, senior officials introduced the Self Reliance for Mutual Accountability Framework. It is through this framework that the government of Afghanistan have committed to improve women’s access to justice, to increase their participation in government, and to prepare and implement laws on anti-harassment and the elimination of violence.

    The difficult part for the government now is ensuring that those commitments can be delivered, and that the progress made over the last fifteen years is not lost.

    Despite the low baseline for women’s welfare and livelihoods in Afghanistan, conditions have improved for hundreds of thousands. These gains have been hard won and must be consolidated and built upon.

    While the government of Afghanistan is working to make a difference to the lives of Afghan women, crucial work is also being undertaken by the international community to improve their access to rights.

    Commitments at international conferences are an important first step, but words must be translated into action to create lasting change. Again, making it happen is what matters.

    Real progress can only be made where there is collaboration between the international community and an active and influential civil society that can support brave human rights defenders.

    As Hillary Clinton said, women’s rights are human rights. We need to change social attitudes across the spectrum of society if we are to be successful in our aim to of delivering a better future for the women of Afghanistan. Much of the successful work being done now in Afghanistan is only succeeding by influencing men. Not just in Kabul’s political classes, but at the local level too, in provinces and districts throughout the country.

    2016 will be another significant year in defining the future for women in Afghanistan. Both the follow up to the Oslo Symposium on Women’s Rights and Empowerment in Afghanistan, hosted in Kabul, and the development conference hosted in Brussels in October, will be important milestones. We know the will is there.

    These events will provide opportunities for the international community to send strong messages of support for women’s rights and empowerment in Afghanistan. They will allow for an in-depth exchange of ideas on key women’s rights reforms.

    Most significantly of all, they will provide a platform for the government of Afghanistan to demonstrate their achievements and to explain the challenges they face, but also to be held to account by the international community on the commitments they have made so far. A key part of any post-conflict stabilisation is addressing the needs of those who have experienced sexual and gender-based violence. Not doing so holds back community reconciliation and social and economic development. Tragically, Afghanistan and its people will undoubtedly continue to face challenges from active insurgent groups in 2016. As an international community, we must continue to work together to put a stop to sexual violence in conflict afflicted regions.

    Where it does occur, perpetrators must be held to account. Survivors must receive support from local communities, civil society and governments, so that they have the tools they need to rebuild their lives.

    We hope that 2016 will be a year in which major steps are taken forward on Afghan women’s rights. A year when traditional attitudes are robustly challenged, women are economically and socially empowered, and justice is delivered for all Afghan women.

    Our own experience teaches us that women’s rights take hold when they were forged from within, not imposed from outside. This is why I believe that change in Afghanistan must be internally led, and that all Afghan people have a role to play in helping women to realise their full potential.

    The UK Government remains committed to helping the government of Afghanistan realise its constitutional and international human rights obligations.

    We will continue to support and work with them, together with local and international NGOs, civil society organisations and international partners.

    We aspire to give every woman, in every country, every right that we enjoy ourselves under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Afghanistan is no exception and we look forward to working with you to realise that goal.

  • Greg Hands – 2016 Speech at the London Stock Exchange

    Gregg Hands
    Greg Hands

    Below is the text of the speech made by Greg Hands, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, at the London Stock Exchange on 29 February 2016.

    Good morning – it’s great to be here with you at today’s market opening; thank you, Xavier Rolet for your invitation.

    For those of you who don’t know me, I’m Greg Hands, Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

    I myself used to work at the cutting edge of finance: designing models for financial derivatives, back in the early 1990s. Some of my former derivatives colleagues have now become fintech entrepreneurs themselves.

    So, in me, you find someone absolutely convinced of the boost that technology can give to competitiveness.

    My Ministerial role is largely to manage the UK’s £700-odd billion portfolio of public spending – because a significant part of this government’s long-term plan for securing Britain’s economy is about being sensible on public spending.

    But that is merely one side of the coin; the other is, of course, going for growth.

    I am a big believer that one of the best ways you secure long-term growth is by making yourself home to exciting, fast-growing industries.

    Financial technology firms – Fintechs for short – are precisely one such industry.

    I am delighted that this week, an independent EY report has ranked Britain first amongst the world’s seven leading Fintech hubs, from Silicon Valley to Hong Kong.

    Our ambition is to maintain, and to consolidate, that position.

    Because Fintech is good news; and the economic case for supporting UK Fintechs is nothing if not compelling.

    Britain’s Fintech market generated over £6.5bn in revenue last year. Our Fintechs attract significant global investment, with around £550m in capital invested in 2015. Our Fintech industry employs over 60,000 people. Indeed – and this gives me some pleasure to say – more people work in UK Fintech than in US Fintech, or in Singapore, Hong Kong and Australia Fintech combined.

    And aside from the positive economic effects, Fintech also promotes greater competition in financial services. That means better products, better services, a more efficient market – and, of course, it makes people’s lives easier too.

    In the early days of eBay, you had to send people cheques in the post before they sent you the item you’d won. Now we have Paypal.

    Ten years ago, the Guardian was saying that this new-fangled idea of music on a mobile phone would never catch on. Now every high street bank has mobile banking; Barclays has even developed Pingit to transfer money instantly.

    While firms such as Funding Circle offer Britain’s businesses a smarter way to access alternative sources of finance.

    What we have seen in recent years is a mixture of new market entrants, and established, more traditional companies, both developing Fintechs, and in many cases joining forces to do so.

    I believe there are two ways in which the UK Fintech industry can continue to go from strength to strength.

    The first is great regulation: that is, regulation which, while protecting the customer, helps new technology to start and grow and succeed.

    The second is great collaboration: between Government, regulators, academia, investors, start-up firms, and established businesses.

    There’s lots that the Government, working with partners such as the Financial Conduct Authority has done on the “great regulation” front.

    The FCA’s Project Innovate Innovation Hub do excellent work in helping innovative businesses understand the regulatory framework and apply for authorisation.

    The “regulatory sandbox” – a wonderful piece of jargon there – is helping innovative firms test new ideas at an early stage with real customers.

    And our work on the creation of an open banking standard could revolutionise the way people manage their financial information.

    “Great collaboration” is equally important. And the events which have taken place all over London this week – Fintech Week – have forged some excellent relationships.

    I hope that today’s Fintech Investor Forum brings yet more people together, to throw around ideas, discuss new opportunities, and hopefully create some productive partnerships.

    There is palpable excitement about what Fintech can achieve here in the UK.

    Our ambition is simple: to consolidate our position as the global Fintech hub, and to keep ourselves at the cutting edge of financial innovation.

    It’s win-win: for our businesses, for our consumers, and for our economy.

  • Greg Hands – 2016 Speech on Plans for London

    Gregg Hands

    Below is the text of the speech made by Greg Hands, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, in London on 25 February 2016.

    Good morning – it’s great to be with you today.

    I’m Greg Hands; Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

    A bit about me: I was born in the States – my first political memory being Richard Nixon’s election – but my family moved back to the UK when I was very young.

    After studying history at university, I worked in financial services, in London and New York; was elected Member of Parliament in 2005; became a Whip after the 2010 election; and last year the Prime Minister asked me to become Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

    One of the big aspects of being Chief Secretary is the job of portfolio manager.

    The sums are quite something. 4 trillion pounds of assets and liabilities; over 700 billion pounds of expenditure a year.

    Some people I speak to in the City get quite jealous of those numbers.

    But the big difference, of course, is that making those numbers larger isn’t an indicator of success!

    The Chief Secretary to the Treasury has to rein in public spending, and make sure that taxpayers’ money is spent wisely.

    The caricature of the Treasury is as the department always saying “no, we can’t afford this”.

    That’s not entirely unjustified: we were elected by British voters to eliminate the deficit, and made it clear that this would largely be through fiscal consolidation.

    We set a very clear path at last year’s Autumn Statement and Spending Review; but navigating it over the coming years has its challenges.

    It’s certainly a significant part of my job description to make sure we stick to that path, and that involves being tough; or, being an “economist” in the 19th century definition of the word – i.e. someone who believes in making economies in public spending wherever possible.

    This is compounded by the economic landscape we’re currently experiencing.

    The Chinese slowdown, the fall in oil prices, continued instability in the Middle East – all are economic risks to a greater or lesser extent.

    And because we are an open, trading economy, and rightly so, all these threats will have some sort of impact on us.

    The best way to insulate ourselves from these threats is to get our own house in order.

    So what I have been saying to the civil servants looking after public spending is: “Now is not the time to take our foot off the pedal”.

    Our long-term economic recovery depends on us continuing to seek ways to be more efficient, more effective, smarter in the way we use our resources – and that’s one of the things I’ll be concentrating on over the coming years.

    But there is another part of the narrative. Spending cuts – though necessary – by themselves won’t deliver the economic results we need for long-term economic security.

    It is equally important that we pull out the stops for enabling growth.

    So the sorts of conversations taking place in the Treasury aren’t simply “take this off the shopping list”.

    They will be along the lines of: “How can we do this in the most cost-effective way? Could we be more innovative about how we fund it, or design it? Is there a cheaper way of achieving the same outcome?”

    Because we know that in order to achieve optimum economic growth, government investment is vitally important. The trick is to do it wisely.

    That is why in a large number of areas, we have maintained, and even increased, spending.

    Some of these areas are services which improve our quality of life; the NHS, our life chances; schools, our national security, or our commitment to help the world’s poorest people.

    And some of those are areas which can be real drivers of economic growth in the future – science, research, broadband, housing, regional growth, and infrastructure, to name a few.

    We know that it is businesses – such as the ones you represent – who generate growth in this country. And our programme of spending is directly calibrated to make it easier for you to do that – wherever you are in the UK.

    Because although the Northern Powerhouse is a highly exciting programme for regional rebalancing through growth, the Chancellor is in the same place as I am: you don’t make the weak stronger by making the strong weaker.

    This is the greatest city in the world, and we’ll keep it that way.

    So what are our plans for helping London go from strength to strength? Four things:

    Transport is one of the things my constituents are the most exercised about – rightly so. Inadequate transport is bad for productivity and bad for quality of life.

    At the Spending Review last year, we committed to £11 billion support for London.

    This funding will enable TfL to invest in the network in projects including Crossrail, due for completion in 2018; major underground upgrades, including new trains and increased capacity; 1,700 hybrid-electric buses this year; and new cycle superhighways to open by the end of this year.

    Aside from this, we’ll see HS2 construction beginning next year, with the line from London to Birmingham to be completed in 2027, and extended to Leeds and Manchester by 2033.

    As HS2 is built, places connected to it – for instance, Old Oak Common – will also receive funding for redevelopment.

    And we’ve also pledged £55 million to extend the London Overground to Barking Riverside.

    And of course, one of the most important investments we can make is in our people: making sure that we have world-class skills is at the heart of our long-term plan.

    That’s why we have protected funding for the core adult skills participation budgets in cash terms, at £1.5 billion.

    This will help around 1.7 million learners each year to develop the skills that employers need.

    It is also why we are giving local areas more say in setting up skills systems that are responsive to local economic priorities.

    We will vastly expand further education loans, to help those seeking to move their skills to a new level; and we will also consult on introducing maintenance loans for people who attend specialist, higher-level providers.

    We’re funding five National Colleges and a new network of Institutes of Technology. Given London’s particular strengths in the digital sector, I’m delighted that the National College for Digital Skills – opening this September – will be based in Tottenham.

    And there is our apprenticeship system – which is at the heart of our commitment to a world class skills system.

    By 2020, spending will be double the level of spending in 2010-11 in cash terms.

    We’re also putting control of funding in the hands of the employers through the apprenticeship levy, so that the system delivers the skills they want and need.

    We’re committed to creating 3 million new apprenticeships by 2020, and I am delighted that employers across the capital are playing a key part in this, including in the design and development of new degree apprenticeships.

    It is also vital that our world-class workforce has good places to live.

    Being MP for an area where house prices set new records practically every month, I’m acutely aware of the pressures – particularly when it involves getting onto the property ladder.

    Essentially, we need to build more.

    Our manifesto committed to delivering 200,000 Starter Homes – homes for sale at a 20% discount, available to younger first time buyers, who plan to live in them.

    In the Spending Review, we announced £2.3 billion to help deliver up to 60,000 of these.

    We also committed to developing 135,000 Help to Buy: Shared Ownership homes in London, which will allow more people to buy a share in their home and buy more shares over time, as they can afford to.

    The scheme will be open to all households earning less than £90,000 in London, and will relax and remove previous restrictions, such as local authorities’ rights to set additional eligibility criteria.

    And our London Help to Buy scheme launched last month. The scheme will offer buyers with a 5% deposit on a loan of up to up to 40% of the value of a new build home, interest-free for 5 years.

    Finally, we’re supporting specific developments. The Barking Riverside extension, which I mentioned, a few moments ago, will provide 10,000 new homes.

    And the £97 million we’re providing to support redevelopment at Brent Cross will support 7,500 homes.

    The fourth plank of our strategy for keeping London world-class is to help develop our financial services sector.

    That means opening ourselves up to new and emerging markets – particularly in Asia and the Middle East, which still provide enviable levels of growth.

    It means priding ourselves on exceptional standards of regulation, conduct – and therefore trust.

    It means harnessing new technology, and fostering competition in the market.

    And it means maintaining excellence, not merely in financial markets, but in all the range of associated professional services that come with the territory.

    The hard work we’ve put in since 2010 has meant that London now enjoys the accolade of the world’s most dynamic financial centre, according to the Global Financial Centres Index.

    Maintaining this competitiveness while keeping the highest standards of conduct is a major area of Treasury focus, and one on which my Ministerial colleague Harriett Baldwin is working tirelessly.

    Underpinning all this activity is our core belief that the best way to ensure Britain’s continued prosperity is a thriving private sector, one that adds value and creates jobs and growth.

    It’s fair to say that many of the old consensuses about the economy have disappeared.

    Those of us who believe in things like the free market, and private-sector driven growth, and the benefits of wealth creation, need to continue making that case.

    The very best thing we can do is to prove the naysayers wrong, through our actions as well as through our arguments.

    Time and again throughout history, a dynamic, innovative private sector has proven the biggest spur to increasing our standard of living.

    I look forward to working with you so that this continues over the coming years.

  • Baroness Verma – 2016 Speech on Agenda 2030

    baronessverma

    Below is the text of the speech made by Baroness Verma, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for International Development, at the UN in New York on 23 February 2016.

    Thank you Mr President, I’m delighted to be here to talk to you today.

    Today’s discussion comes at an opportune moment. There are real reasons to be optimistic – 2015 saw agreement of a series of ambitious universal deals – financing, climate and the Global Goals. The UK takes these universal commitments seriously, domestically and internationally and is committed to playing its part to make sure these are achieved.

    Against that optimism, we are faced with so many protracted crises; in Syria, in Yemen, in South Sudan. At their heart are conflict and instability. So it’s clear that if we’re to achieve Agenda 2030, and live up to our promise to leave no one behind, we need to do more to prevent conflict and build, resilient, peaceful societies.

    It is so often the poorest people who are most vulnerable to crises and who are further impoverished when stability and security breaks down. The statistics back this up; conflict-affected states were the most off-track in achieving the MDGs.

    Approximately half of the global poor live in countries affected by conflict and violence. So it’s clear that we can’t look at peace, development and humanitarian issues in isolation. The 3 are inherently interlinked. To fail on one, is to undermine progress on the others.

    The United Kingdom has made it a priority to improve our efforts on these three strands.

    In addition to our commitment to 0.7%, we are one of the few Council Members to believe that the Security Council has a role to play in preventing future conflicts, and not just ending those that are ongoing. That’s why our Secretary of State for Development chaired the Council last November; the first time a Development Minister has done so. It’s also why we co-hosted the London Conference for Syria and the Region earlier this month, where we and others worked hard to better integrate these three issues through the Conference outcomes.

    The UN’s mandate means it operates at the nexus between peace, development and humanitarian. And if we are to succeed, whether in Syria or elsewhere, the UN should be at the centre of our efforts.

    When I talk about integrating humanitarian, peace and development work it of course includes the UN’s work on security, human rights and international law too.

    The Secretary-General’s response to Agenda 2030, the Human Rights Up Front Initiative, the ECOSOC dialogue and yesterday’s meetings, have all firmly acknowledged the need for strong progress by the UN in this area.

    This year, we have a real opportunity to make that progress. The World Humanitarian Summit, the Secretary-General and World Bank’s Migration and Refugees Summits, the ECOSOC dialogue and negotiation of the Quadrennial Comprehensive Policy Review can all help ensure the UN is ready to play this central role.

    I believe there are 3 issues that need to be addressed as part of this process.

    First, the UN needs to manage protracted crises more effectively. The UN’s engagement in peacekeeping and political negotiation in many of the world’s more difficult conflicts is strongly valued. But the UN has to overcome operational and funding silos to be able to achieve lasting political solutions, longer term peacebuilding and development. The humanitarian and development parts of the UN need to work more effectively together.

    Second, the UN needs to act earlier to prevent conflict and to balance a better approach to crises with action to address the underlying causes of fragility and conflict. This means being a smoke alarm as well as a fire extinguisher; and really prioritising conflict prevention as much as resolution. It also means investing in support to help build institutions, improve governance and the rule of law – the golden thread that will support economies to thrive and grow.

    Thirdly, the UN needs a much more variable, flexible footprint, focusing where help is most needed, on the most vulnerable and marginalised including women and girls, and where the UN’s unique legitimacy as a universal body most equips it to make a difference, with the ability to surge to meet a sudden need or respond quickly to an emerging crisis.

    It’s very easy to talk in generalities, so I’d also like to set out some thoughts on what is needed in practical terms. I think it requires change in 3 areas: fully implementing Delivering as One; leadership; and funding.

    Delivering as One has made progress, as I have seen for myself in the countries I’ve visited, but not yet enough. There is strong and growing demand for Delivering as One and it is proving it can enable a more effective UN voice. We need to see its full implementation, by all entities, including the Standard Operating Procedures and the Management and Accountability Framework. We’d also like to explore ways to ensure more coordinated planning, budgeting and risk assessment, between the UN’s development, humanitarian and peacebuilding support.

    Delivering as One goes hand in hand with effective leadership: resident and humanitarian coordinators, often the heads of the UN in country, must be individuals that can deliver strong leadership that responds to both short and longer-term needs. They also require better support from the UN system: clearer authority to draw on all assets of the UN system in support of national priorities, sustained funding through contributions of all entities and more dedicated advisory support, building on the success of the peace and development advisers.

    Let me now turn to my third point; funding. I have already spoken about the need focus on long-term conflict and crisis prevention and bring all the sources of funding onto the same page to ensure the most strategic allocation. There is a need to increase flexibility between allocations to humanitarian, peace and development funds. And there is a need to attract new forms of finance into the system, including potential private sector investment, becomes ever more acute.

    Mr Vice President, through these steps and more, we have the chance to use the links among peace, development and humanitarian issues to our advantage. Instead of instability hampering development, let us build on stability to advance it.

    The real test will be delivery at country level, and improvements to the quality of lives for people on the frontline – so the focus on Delivering as One, strengthening the Resident Coordinator system and underpinning frameworks is absolutely critical. But this will also require working back up the chain to headquarters with effective leadership from the executive and Member States to change procedures and incentives to support joint working, better delivery and better outcomes.

    We have some ideas, but don’t have all the answers – I hope today’s discussions can help us start to formulate some of them.

    Once again, thank you for the opportunity to speak and thank you for listening Mr President and distinguished delegates.

  • Matt Hancock – 2016 Speech on Digital Technology in Wales

    Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General, on 25 February 2016.

    It’s good to be in Newport.

    Though I have to say I’m glad I’m not visiting Wales in a few weeks’ time. If the Rugby World Cup was anything to go by it might be quite painful for an Englishman to visit Wales after 12 March.

    The rugby team’s obviously one centre of Welsh excellence. But later today I’ll be visiting several other local innovation centres, and I’ve already been hugely impressed by what you’ve shown me here at the ONS, which has underlined your commitment to technological modernisation and the honing of talent.

    Seventy-five years ago, Winston Churchill created the Central Statistical Office (CSO) to improve on the coherence and availability of national statistics.

    Plenty has changed since 1941 – not just the year the CSO was brought into this world, but also the first functional British jet, tupperware, velcro and, of course, the slinky.

    But the two challenges Churchill was trying to tackle – coherence and openness – remain the same, even as the world has become more complex and diverse.

    As technology marches on, we have unparalleled opportunities to use data to transform the services we provide and improve how the country is run. It’s more essential today than ever before that government is built on a foundation of high-quality, comprehensive and coherent statistics.

    It’s said that 90% of all the data ever produced in history was generated in the past 2 years. The different kinds of data are also multiplying, from purchasing transactions to sensors, the Internet of Things and social networking sites.

    New open data sets of unprecedented scale and variety are springing up, often in real time. This presents us in government with an opportunity like nothing we’ve ever seen before.

    It’s a revolution we need to grasp with both hands. That means 3 things – it means recognising the potential of the rich national resource that data presents, it means being curious about new ideas and ways of doing absolutely everything, and it means opening ourselves up to the public and towards each other across government. There is massive potential in data, we need the curiosity and openness. Let us take these 3 in turn.

    In the public and private sector, data is fuelling improvements unimaginable a few short years ago. It’s transforming how we travel and shop, the way we go out and the way we interact with each other.

    And it’s changing how we deliver government.

    We can deliver services that are cheaper, faster, more accessible and more secure. Services that respond with targeted solutions to specific problems. Services driven not by Whitehall but by the needs of citizens.

    The potential of data as a national asset

    To do this we must recognise the raw potential of the data at our fingertips.

    Newport has long been a world-leading centre of industry – it was a crucial coal port and a focal point for the South Wales Valleys throughout the industrial era.

    200 years ago this city was a hotbed of the industrial revolution. It is no stranger to leading industry, to innovation and to the tide of technological change.

    Today we live in an entirely different world. Today, instead of coal, data is the most valuable raw material of our age. The way I see it, statistics are its refined product, and this is the refinery.

    And to fulfil the potential of the ONS in the 21st century we still need to be the best and the most imaginative country in the world when it comes to using our resources.

    We’re in the foothills of a data revolution. Data is no longer just a record of something that happened. It’s a mineable commodity from which we can extract value. It’s the unseen infrastructure of the digital economy, as important as any road or railway.

    It’s not just the ONS. In South Wales we have a big data cluster: DVLA, Companies House, ONS and the IPO.

    So there is increasing potential for a South Wales big data cluster and build the ecosystem-public, private and academic that can deliver the capability we need.

    The ONS’ role in harnessing this resource

    To harness our data resources, statistics will be crucial. Statistics are taking on ever greater importance in a world underpinned by increasingly evidence-based decisions. And that goes far beyond working out the odds at Cheltenham.

    The ONS is crucial in the production of the statistics government relies on to make good policy, and its statistics are held in high regard throughout government, business and the wider public.

    The 2021 census is a valuable opportunity to re-assert that reputation and consolidate our data resources.

    When the first census of population took place back in 1801, the population of England and Wales was given as 9 million.

    Our next census will be the largest peacetime operation ever undertaken in the UK. It will be digital-by-default, and we are aiming for the highest online response target of any census in the world, at 75%.

    In the census each decade and the work that you do in Newport and Titchfield each year, you take raw data and turn it into life-changing improvements, everywhere from the classroom to the hospital bed. In doing so you change lives up and down the country.

    So my point is the potential of technology. My second is about our response: curiosity. It’s crucial that we engage with curiosity towards change.

    You’re pioneering the data science agenda, leading analytical professions in building the right infrastructure and developing the specialist skills we need to make the most of the data revolution.

    Through the recently initiated Data Science Learning Academy, you’re spreading that leadership.

    And you’re pushing the agenda across government through programmes like the Data Science Accelerator.

    You’re expanding your horizons beyond government. The Big Data Team’s efforts on web scraping show how we can harness alternative data sources – in this case real-time supermarket data – to deliver more accurate, cost-effective outputs.

    The same spirit of curiosity is at the heart of your innovation lab, which uses state-of-the-art technology to find new data sources and techniques. And it’s why I’ve asked the Open Data Institute to help us connect with the start-ups leading the data field.

    Next I’m visiting the Alacrity Foundation. The ONS’ partnership with this unique organisation is a great example of how we can partner with outside bodies to nurture the brightest and best young talent.

    To succeed and thrive in this new world, where knowledge is so dispersed, we need to be as curious as possible and embrace not just our own ideas, but also those at the cutting edge of the data revolution. And I urge you to be part of that revolution.

    Openness

    That brings me to my third point. I want the spirit of curiosity you’re showing here to be embedded in everything government is doing. The best ideas can come from absolutely anywhere. And that’s why we need to open ourselves up to ideas like never before.

    The opportunities for innovation are a function of how much raw information is out there, and how many people can access and harness that information.

    I’m delighted to see you continuing to open up your website, taking in huge levels of feedback and making your gateway to the public more agile, in a more cost-efficient way. I’m thrilled to see the new website go live.

    It’s part of our radical open data policy: we’ve now published 23,000 datasets, covering £200 billion of public spending.

    And part of being open is being open about the challenges we face. The ONS’ work is going to become even more crucial in the coming years. So it’s imperative that we keep up with how the world is changing.

    Yes, the digital world is a maelstrom right now, but if we work together we can do more than just keep our heads above water – we can ride the waves to unimaginable places.

    Yes, under John Pullinger’s impressive leadership the team will have to be adaptable in its size, shape, and skill-set.

    But I want to underline this message you’ve heard before. Newport is Britain’s home of economic statistics, and that is not a resource we are going to squander. The ONS will stay in Newport.

    And more than that, we’re going to invest to build our long-term capacity here, working with others in the region to create a hub and a centre of excellence for data handling and economic analysis. We’re going to double-down on Newport.

    Of course, the digital world means roles will change, and some old ways of doing things will cease to exist. But we’re committed to working with you in that transition.

    Through the Learning Academy and other initiatives, everyone will have the chance to gain new skills and continue to make a massively valuable contribution.

    Change is a challenge, but also an opportunity – an opportunity for all of us to gain new skills, and for you to re-assert the crucial contribution the ONS makes to our country.

    Your programme of change and Charlie Bean’s review will give the ONS a foundation to plan for the future, and to stay ahead of the curve of digital change with a strong, positive vision.

    As the report highlights, we need an ONS that is less reactive and more proactive; more curious, open and self-critical.

    These are just some of the challenges you’ll face in the years ahead, but I’m confident through the changes you’re making you’ll be more than capable of overcoming them.

    Cabinet Office support and reform package

    We are here to support you as we work together to reform government and unleash human ingenuity at all levels of the public sector.

    Finally let me set out some of the most important projects this change will feed into. One big step we must take across government is to build single, canonical data registers kept up-to-date by one responsible authority and used across government. We don’t need 7 lists of countries of the world. We need 1, and it probably should be maintained by the Foreign Office.

    We are also working together on how we share data within government. We’ll do this while maintaining the appropriate safeguards, but the prize is extremely valuable – more efficient and high-quality statistics, and huge potential for improvements to public services.

    We will shortly bring forward proposals to improve the legal framework around research and statistics, tackling fraud and debt, and improving public services.

    We’ve consulted widely over 2 years of collaboration, to build modern rules to govern the use of data in public services.

    We want to give public authorities much greater clarity about what data can be shared, cutting delays so research with economic and social benefits can be conducted in a timely fashion.

    We will put in place specific safeguards to ensure any information that could be used to identify individuals is protected, enhancing privacy.

    These changes to legislation will not only ensure you have the tools to produce world-class statistics, they will let government feed the most up-to-date and relevant data into policy decisions, helping us deliver reforms from the Troubled Families programme to better targeted fuel poverty payments. They will better equip us to tackle fraud and debt.

    Through them we can enhance social mobility, crime prevention and improve services for the citizens we serve.

    Conclusion

    So, these are times of change. We can – and must – tap into that same spirit in the data revolution. That’s what it will take for us to turn our rich data assets into world-leading innovation.

    If we do this right the prizes are huge, and will change the very fabric of how the country is run.

    Let us tackle these challenges head on and turn them into opportunities. You’ve already shown you’re willing and able to do this. We are backing you to deliver. I can’t wait to see what you come up with next.

    Thank you.

  • James Duddridge – 2016 Speech at UK-Sierra Leone Trade and Investment Forum

    jamesduddridge

    Below is the text of the speech made by James Duddridge, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, at Sheraton Park Lane, Piccadilly in London on 25 February 2016.

    Thank you Atam for your kind introduction. I am delighted to be here.

    I would like to thank Developing Markets Associates, and all the sponsors, for organising this important event.

    I have just had a meeting with Dr Kamara, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Relations. Our governments have worked closely for many years, but particularly so over the last two years to defeat the terrible scourge of Ebola. I was delighted when your country was declared free of the disease in November.

    It is right that we acknowledge the tragic impact of that devastating outbreak on Sierra Leone and its people.

    It is also right that we start to put this terrible episode behind us.

    I remember visiting Sierra Leone in 2013 and it was one of the fastest growing economies in Africa. That was only three years ago. I hope Sierra Leone will return to hyper-growth rates and a thriving business environment.

    This morning I am going to set out why the UK Government sees potential in Sierra Leone, what we believe is needed to realise that potential, and what opportunities we believe this holds for you as investors.

    I lived and worked in Africa for many years. My experience was one of energetic entrepreneurs, burgeoning businesses, a rising middle class, potential and drive in equal measure. Doing business is in Sierra Leoneans’ DNA.

    The UK Government is committed to supporting Sierra Leone’s recovery. We have pledged over £240 million over the next two years to support the President’s plans for recovery.

    This assistance is a part of a wider picture, because we are committed to promoting trade, investment and prosperity right across Africa. I am delighted that Guy Warrington will be going out as our new High Commissioner to Sierra Leone.

    We have created a new Prosperity Fund – worth £1.3 billion – to promote conditions for sustainable and inclusive growth. A significant proportion is earmarked for Africa.

    This Government is also delivering on our commitment to spend 0.7% of Gross National Income on international development, of which Sierra Leone is a beneficiary. I have been working closely with Justine Greening at the Department for International Development, who has visited Sierra Leone a number of times, and my DFID counterpart Nick Hurd.

    However, aid alone will not ensure Sierra Leone’s long term recovery. It needs investment too, and that means an improved business environment.

    The government of Sierra Leone has drafted its plan for post-Ebola recovery. It has identified priorities for recovery over the next two years: health, education, social protection, infrastructure, energy, water, and the development of the private sector. These will all be critical in getting Sierra Leone back onto the path of sustainable development.

    It is encouraging to see that the President and his Ministers recently proposed to include a new Governance pillar in the recovery plan. We support this step towards addressing some of the big challenges around procurement, payroll, and corruption.

    We are working in partnership with the government of Sierra Leone to encourage them to create the business environment that will reassure and attract investors.

    Some UK companies, such as Standard Chartered Bank are already there. They, alongside Herbert Smith Freehills and Prudential, helped Sierra Leone during the Ebola outbreak by producing the Investor Guide for Sierra Leone – a great example of the private sector coming together to help the country on its path to long-term recovery.

    My parliamentary colleague James Cleverly, MP for Braintree and a fellow Essex MP, whose mother was Sierra Leonean, was recently in Sierra Leone. I hope to do more to work with the Sierra Leonean diaspora across the country.

    It’s worth taking a moment here to recognise the country’s enviable natural advantages:

    Its rich mineral deposits.

    Its huge potential in renewable energy, in particular solar and hydro-electric – I should say here that Sierra Leone was one of the first countries on the continent to sign up to the Department for International Development’s Africa Energy Campaign which promotes access to solar powered electricity – which is now much cheaper, more accessible and reliable.

    Its strategic shipping location on the Atlantic seaboard of West Africa, with one of the largest natural harbours in the world.
    Its millions of hectares of forests and fertile agricultural land, and abundant fish stocks.

    Sierra Leone is also well placed to benefit from the huge economic growth we expect to see across the continent. Consumer demand from its emerging middle class is growing and that trend is set to continue as Africa’s population is forecast to double by 2050 [UN Population Data].

    So in conclusion I urge you to listen closely to what you hear today. Sierra Leone has put Ebola behind it. The UK Government is supporting trade and investment, reconstruction and prosperity. Doing more business provides taxation for the government. We should be proud of what we’re doing to help Sierra Leone back to double digit growth rates.

    Sierra Leone has huge potential. Its government has a plan for recovery and has identified its priority sectors. From mining and renewable energy to project management and environmental services.

    Finally, this country’s strong historic ties with Sierra Leone, our long-term friendship, together with the familiarity with English, present UK companies with a unique advantage. I urge you to seize it with both hands.

    Thank you.

  • Andrew Jones – 2016 Speech on Transport and Mental Health

    andrewjones

    Below is the text of the speech made by Andrew Jones, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport, at Cavendish Square in London on 25 February 2016.

    Introduction

    Thank you.

    The relationship between mental health and transport goes deeper than many people realise.

    Last week, Professor Ed Bullmore, Head of Psychiatry at Cambridge University, published an article with the title, ‘Why brains and airports have a lot in common’.

    He said the best way to understand how the different parts of our brain are wired together is by thinking of how airports are connected by flights.

    The different parts of most people’s brains are wired together similarly to how airlines link big airports such as Heathrow or Schiphol.

    While in other people’s brains, though they have no fewer connections, those connections are routed as if they are flights between many smaller airports.

    The difference helps explain some mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.

    Professor Bullmore’s use of transport as a metaphor is a brilliant way of talking about the brain.

    Transport is important for mental health

    Yet we are here today (25 February 2016) because we know that mental health and transport are linked by more than metaphors.

    There’s a real-world connection, too.

    The stats say that 1 in 4 of us will experience a mental health issue this year.

    It might be phobias, anxiety, OCD, depression, panic disorders, dementia or one or more of many other conditions.

    You’ve already heard moving accounts of the experience of living with conditions such as these.

    And about how, so often for people with mental health conditions, good transport can help a full, timely recovery or just make life that bit better.

    Transport offers freedom to visit family, go to the shops, travel to volunteer or to museums, and transport offers the hope that can be found in the chance to study or to work – all the things that make for a normal life.

    So it’s a real pleasure to join you for what is probably the first, and almost certainly the biggest, gathering of transport and mental health advocates ever held in Britain.

    Transport needs to catch up

    And it’s about time we met.

    Because when it comes to serving those with poor mental health, transport has some catching up to do.

    To see how much, look at the progress the transport industry has made in meeting the needs of those with physical ill health.

    Take the bus industry – one of my areas of responsibility.

    Today nearly 90% of buses are equipped to serve physically disabled people, with wheelchair space, priority seats, handrails, and devices to help people get on and off.

    But on mental health, there’s sadly been nothing like that kind of progress.

    Even someone with the best mental health will sometimes find public transport stressful and bewildering.

    Just ask anyone who’s been at Clapham Junction train station during rush hour.

    Or anyone who’s boarded a bus in an unfamiliar town, not quite knowing where to get off or even whether you are travelling on the right bus going in the right direction.

    Or anyone who’s had to dash from one airport terminal to another in time to catch a flight.

    And then there’s the familiar feeling of rising panic whenever the ticket inspector enters the railway carriage, even when you are sure you have a valid ticket.

    No wonder someone who experiences anxiety, panic attacks, memory loss or a host of other possible conditions can feel unable to use public transport.

    I had a lot of sympathy with one person with a mental health condition who said:

    You might afford the bus, but the bus company’s website doesn’t give fares. To find out the fares you have to speak to the bus driver or phone the company. Just thinking about either brings on a panic attack. The dread of getting on the bus with insufficient fare is overwhelming.

    So what are we going to do about problems like these?

    What we must do

    First, we need to recognise that transport’s problem with mental ill health is a symptom of a wider problem.

    Across much of our society and our economy, mental health has not received the same level of attention as physical health.

    It might be because mental health is less visible.

    It might be because people don’t understand mental ill health and how common it really is.

    Or it might be because of the stigma that still lingers around mental health, a stigma that for physical health we long ago dispelled.

    The good news is that things are changing.

    During the coalition government we passed the Health and Social Care Act 2012, to make sure the NHS treats mental and physical health conditions equally.

    And thanks to the work of organisations like those here today, such as the Mental Health Action Group, Mind, and Anxiety UK, that change is gathering pace.

    The BBC, which is covering our Summit today, has just finished its mental health season.

    And last week both the Duchess of Cambridge and First Lady Michelle Obama wrote high-profile articles on the importance of proper treatment for mental ill health.

    So bit by bit, we are breaking down the stigma and misunderstanding around mental health.

    What transport has done already

    But now we need that change to come to the transport sector, too.

    And there are some early signs of encouraging progress.

    First Bus have introduced a Better Journeys Card which is designed to give people a discrete way of alerting the bus driver to any special assistance they may need. The card contains messages such as please help me find a seat, please count out my change with me and, please be patient, I have a hidden disability.

    These cards remind us that, so often, it’s skilled and helpful transport staff who make the biggest difference to passengers.

    So I am pleased that, on the railways, Virgin Trains has been working with the Alzheimer’s Society to deliver specialist training to station staff, which has meant that a number of its stations are increasingly dementia-friendly.

    And many airports have been making progress too.

    Most airports now offer familiarisation visits to those who would benefit from them before they fly.

    Gatwick has said that, so far, 80% of its front-line staff have undergone Dementia Champions and Dementia Friends training, and the airport has introduced its own bespoke NVQ Level 2 Certificate in the Principles of Dementia Care for customer-facing staff.

    Meanwhile, Manchester Airport has recognised how stressful the security search process can be for children with autism. So it has special wrist-bands for children to wear to alert staff that they need a search procedure suited to them.

    These are great examples of the difference that transport operators can make when they think about those with mental health needs.

    Buses Bill

    And the person who said they were worried about boarding the bus without knowing the fare might be pleased to hear that we are going to make a new law.

    As part of our Buses Bill, all bus operators will be required to make data about routes, fares and times open and accessible.

    It will allow app makers to develop products that passengers can use to plan their journeys, and give people the confidence to take the bus.

    Transport industry pledge

    But we need the industry to keep taking action of its own accord, too.

    For one thing, there’s a good commercial case for it.

    If 1 in 4 of us will experience a problem in any given year, and if 1 in 20 of us experience a long-term mental health condition during our lives, then those with mental health conditions constitute the UK’s largest single sector of disabled people, and a transport industry which excludes these people is missing out on millions of potential customers.

    Yet the many transport firms represented here today show there’s a lot of good intent out there.

    The government doesn’t want to impose a one-size-fits-all solution on the transport industry.

    It’s about getting to know your customers and taking action in the most effective way for your sector.

    That’s what I’d like you to think about this afternoon.

    And if you have a good idea, we’ve provided pledge cards that you can fill in to record what you are going to do.

    Conclusion

    So in conclusion, change is coming in transport.

    People want a better service, more attuned to their needs.

    Those with mental health conditions have as much right to travel as anyone else.

    And making the improvements these passengers want needn’t be expensive.

    It’s often just a question of listening, being flexible, and giving staff the right kind of training.

    If we get it right, our transport networks will be better for some of the most vulnerable people in our communities.

    So make your pledges.

    This summit isn’t a one-day-wonder.

    It’s an issue that will keep rising up the agenda.

    And that is what will make life better for us all.

    Thank you.

  • John Hayes – 2016 Speech on Digital Security

    John Hayes

    Below is the text of the speech made by John Hayes, the Minister of State for Security, at the Policy Exchange in London on 25 February 2016.

    The title of my speech this morning is taken from Hegel’s Philosophy of Right.

    It is perhaps his best known, and most contentious, observation: “What is reasonable is real; and what is real is reasonable.”

    The remark is contentious principally because some believe that Hegel was making a normative claim for what is actual: that what is real must be right.

    But of course that is not the case.

    Rather, Hegel, was arguing that ultimately philosophy must be a rational enterprise, concerned with understanding the world as it actually is.

    What was true of Hegel’s philosophy then is equally true of public policy today, particularly in relation to the fundamental issue of security.

    It is all too tempting to view the threat we face as abstract, as theoretical. To believe that we have always faced threats.

    That the threats we now face are essentially the same as those in the past.

    This is all too tempting because – as T.S. Eliot wrote in his four quartets – humankind cannot bear very much reality.

    I want to speak this morning about security and keeping people safe.

    The threat we face now is changing, ferocious and flexible.

    That threat is evolving rapidly.

    Responding to it is a testing challenge.

    That requires us, now more than ever, to review, revise and rejuvenate what we do and how we do it.

    And most of all what we need to do now and to do next.

    The Investigatory Powers Bill, which we published in draft in November, is crucial to these efforts.

    Fundamentally, our approach brings together work at home to build cohesive communities and root out extremism with cooperation and dialogue with nations worldwide.

    Threat

    Success requires realism.

    The terrorist threat we face here in the UK is unprecedented and growing.

    And that’s not only my view.

    Andrew Parker, the Director-General of MI5, has said: “The threat we are facing today is on a scale and at a tempo that I have never seen before in my career.”

    In the 12 months to September last year, our police and security services arrested 315 people for terrorism-related offences.

    That’s an increase of a third on the previous year and from just 121 five years ago.

    And we have stopped at least seven different attempts to attack the UK in the last 18 months alone.

    There have been 16 attacks in Europe over the past two years, most of them inspired or directed by Daesh.

    And the attacks in Paris in November 2015, in which 130 people died, showed what can happen when terrorists are successful.

    The terrorist threat now is not confined to Europe, or even just to the West.

    It is more sophisticated and more widely distributed.

    It could be a marauding terrorist firearms attack, as we saw in Paris.

    It might be an attack on transport, as we saw on the Russian MetroJet flight from Sharm El Sheikh or the attempted attack on the train travelling from Brussels to Paris.

    It could be a co-ordinated attack on a tourist site, as we saw at Sousse in Tunisia, or more recently at Bamako in Mali.

    Or it might be a knife attack, as we saw in Marseilles recently.

    The diversity of the threat, as well as its volume, is a serious challenge to us here, and to our allies around the world.

    The essential change in terrorism is the increasing adaptability of terrorists, and of Daesh in particular.

    It uses new technology, new methods.

    It is adaptable. And it revels in its own depravity.

    It has murdered hundreds of thousands of men, women and children – the vast majority of them practicing Muslims, the very people it claims to speak for.

    It operates in a way we have never seen before.

    We have never seen this number, demographic or range of ages of people travelling to take part in conflict.

    Daesh is responsible, directly or indirectly, for many of the attacks and attempted attacks that I have already mentioned.

    And far from being isolated in Syria and Iraq, its influence is spreading to groups worldwide – in Libya, in West Africa, in Afghanistan and beyond.

    But the other thing is that Daesh is not the only threat we face.

    Al Qaeda and its affiliates continue to pose a very real and very present danger.

    Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula took credit for the attack on the Charlie Hebdo magazine in January last year, in which 12 people died.

    It holds territory in ungoverned spaces in the Middle East.

    The Al-Nusrah Front, its affiliate in Syria, has combined success on the battlefield with an effective online media campaign and a presence on the ground in Syria.

    And AQ-M, its Africa-based affiliate, recently claimed responsibility for the attack on a Radisson hotel in Mali in November, in which 21 guests were killed.

    JTAC, the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre – experts who have access to the latest intelligence – assess that the threat to the UK is SEVERE, that means that an attack in the UK is highly likely.

    And they don’t take that judgment lightly.

    People should be alert, but not alarmed; watchful but absolutely sure of our resolve.

    So the threat is growing.

    More complex.

    And more diverse.

    It is for this reason that we should heed Hegel’s warning – to understand the world as it really is.

    I know there is no complete solution to the problem I describe.

    This is not a project.

    You can’t ascribe a specific timescale to it.

    These are unpalatable truths.

    But if we are to succeed, we need to confront that reality.

    Response

    Which is what this Government has done.

    Facing reality means disrupting terrorist attacks and those who help to support them.

    And we have.

    We have proscribed terrorists groups – 15, including 11 linked to Syria and Iraq.

    We have revoked British citizenship from individuals.

    Since May 2010, we have excluded over 100 hate preachers.

    In 2014, we withdrew or refused a British Passport 24 times under the Royal Prerogative.

    And, last year, we extended Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures, TPIMs, to include relocation powers to allow the police and Security Services to manage the risk from individuals we cannot prosecute or deport.

    Facing reality means being prepared to respond to attacks in the national interest.

    As part of the recent Strategic Defence and Security Review, the SDSR, we have done just that.

    We will continue to invest in capabilities to protect ourselves against terrorist attack.

    We will invest £1.9bn over the next five years in protecting the UK from cyber attack.

    More than double our spending on aviation security around the world.

    An additional 1,900 personnel for the security and intelligence agencies.

    Facing reality means reviewing, in the light of the attacks in Paris last year, our response to a marauding firearms attack by terrorists.

    Those attacks highlighted the challenges any country would face in managing multiple, concurrent incidents.

    But since then, working with other nations, we have pressed for stronger protective security, crisis response and border management, to stop the movement of people and weapons, to increase information sharing, to improve controls on firearms and to enhance aviation security.

    Investigatory Powers Bill

    Facing reality also means ensuring that the police and security services have the legislation they need to keep us safe.

    Powers that are necessary and proportionate.

    Having passed the Counter Terrorism and Security Act last year, we published in November a draft Investigatory Powers Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny.

    Communications and modern technology are at the heart of the threat we face, and so the heart of our response.

    Facing reality means knowing that these days terrorists, paedophiles, serious fraudsters scheme in cyber space.

    The web enables individuals the world over to communicate quickly, easily, often using encryption.

    It works across borders and across jurisdictions, just as the extremists who use it do.

    Difficult to detect and even more difficult to disrupt.

    Of course its global nature makes regulation problematic.

    Crucially, terrorists in Syria and Iraq can use the web to reach out using online communications to direct, enable and inspire individuals the world over to contemplate attempting, at least, murder and violence.

    Communications data matters – that is the who, where, when and how of a communication but not its content.

    It is a vital tool to investigate crime and protect the public.

    It has been used by every major Security Service counter-terrorism investigation over the last year.

    It is used in 95 per cent of serious and organised crime investigations handled by the CPS.

    It might be used to find a missing person, to establish a link between a suspect and a victim.

    It is used to investigate crime, to keep children safe, to check alibis and to tie a suspect to a crime scene.

    When offences such as fraud are committed online, it is sometimes the only possible way of identifying the offenders.

    It has been used in the investigation of many of the most serious and widely reported crimes against children, including the murder of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman, as well as the Oxford and Rochdale child grooming cases.

    Law enforcement capabilities are degrading due to rapid technological change and because more and more communications are taking place online.

    So, while this is important for our counter-terrorism efforts, that is by no means the only reason it is important and it is by no means the only reason why we are bringing forward legislation.

    Bernard Hogan-Howe, Metropolitan Police commissioner, has said that communications data is regularly used to tackle criminals whose activities affect the wider community, such as repeat burglars, robbers, drugs dealers. Put simply, the police need access to this information to keep up with the criminals who bring so much harm to victims and our society.

    But it is important that we appreciate why this legislation is itself important – and in particular how far we have come in ensuring that we have a legal regime that serves the interests of both privacy and security.

    We have provided more information than ever before about some of the most sensitive powers available to the security and intelligence agencies – including the use of bulk personal datasets and the acquisition of bulk communications data to thwart terrorist attacks.

    The draft Bill puts these capabilities on a clear statutory footing and makes them subject to robust, world-leading safeguards.

    The Parliamentary Joint Committee which looked into these matters in such very great detail – and I can see members of that committee in the audience here today – along with two other parliamentary committees who scrutinised the Bill, have made valuable recommendations about how the Bill could be improved and our proposals clarified. We are committed to ensuring the Bill receives maximum scrutiny.

    We remain committed to having new legislation on the statute books by the end of the year – a result of existing legislation falling away on 31 December.

    We will return to Parliament with a revised Bill.

    The draft Bill goes further than the current oversight regime.

    A double lock on ministerial authorisation of intercept warrant means that both judges and ministers will consider the evidence supporting warrants.

    For trust is the golden thread running through the viability of the new legislation.

    Which is why necessity and proportionality are the lodestars of the draft Bill.

    Prevent

    We cannot confront the reality of the threat we face without confronting the poisonous ideologies and extremist messages that underpin it.

    As we have seen time and time again in cases of young people radicalised here in the UK, it is also more insidious than ever.

    It is easy to assume the threat is elsewhere – is there – but in fact the threat is here and the threat is now.

    Daesh’s propaganda combines extreme violence and extremist messages with modern technology, using social media to reach out to young and vulnerable over the whole world.

    From their bedrooms they can access images of murder and brutality, messages of death and destruction.

    The Police Counter-Terrorism Internet Referral Unit is currently removing 100 pieces of Daesh or Syria-related content every day.

    And we have seen the impact that such material can have time and time again.

    To appreciate the impact of Daesh’s propaganda, take the case of a 14-year-old boy who, from his bedroom, plotted an attack on a parade in Melbourne.

    That plot, developed over the internet, sought to behead police officers.

    The child was recruited online by a known Daesh recruiter.

    He himself had reached out in turn online to a 16-year-old girl, who was subsequently found to possess extremist literature, bomb-making instructions and violent imagery.

    Had we not detected that young man’s plot, many would have been killed.

    Cases such as this demonstrate Daesh’s insidious, sinister, seductive appeal; its ability to inspire, as well as to direct, attacks; and the extraordinary difficulty in detecting what they plan.

    Because these two children were not battle-hardened foreign fighters; they were not individuals who had travelled to Syria; they were not career criminals.

    They were young people, in their homes, using the internet – like my children, like so many of our children.

    It is stories like this which make me so determined to counter Daesh and safeguard those at risk of being corrupted by it.

    We cannot afford to ignore what lies behind radicalisation and terrorism.

    We must identify, anticipate and counter the doctrine of our enemies and how it is proselytized.

    Through our Prevent strategy, we have built a unique model of partnership between Government, civil society and industry.

    It supports people who are vulnerable to being drawn into terrorism. And it works with sectors and institutions where there are risks of radicalisation.

    Last year, we supported 130 community projects, reaching over 25,000 participants.

    Over half of these were delivered in schools, aimed at increasing young people’s resilience to terrorist and extremist ideologies.

    Since April 2015 we have engaged in Prevent with over 285 mosques, 200 community organisations, 100 faith organisations, 800 schools and colleges and 40 universities. The Prevent duty, of course, has cemented all of this.

    Nurturing the common good in the national interest.

    Much has also been made of Channel, our voluntary programme to support those at risk of radicalisation. Contrary to what some have alleged, this is, as I said, a voluntary programme.

    And hundreds of people have been provided with support.

    I can tell you today that the vast majority of those who choose to participate in Channel leave with no further concerns about their vulnerability of being drawn into terrorism.

    Channel works.

    Take the teenager reported to the police for considering travelling to Syria. She had a difficult family life – domestic violence; a broken home; isolated, few or no friends.

    She had been subject to a serious assault. And perhaps unsurprisingly, she turned to the internet for religious guidance.

    That so-called guidance led to her supporting Daesh and advocating hatred for non-believers.

    Through Channel, however, she was able to rebuild her relationship with her mother, to address her religious concerns and build her self-esteem and self-confidence.

    Let me be clear.

    Prevent is about radicalisation. Prevent is about safeguarding.

    The most significant of these threats is currently from Islamist terrorist organisations such as Daesh.

    They are trying specifically to incite and recruit people of Muslim background, partly by distorting religion for their own ends.

    Clearly, we need to respond to that.

    We must protect those most at risk of radicalisation. But let me be equally clear – Prevent covers all forms of such activity, whatever its source.

    This is about safeguarding; about protecting the common good.

    Global response

    I said earlier that the threats we faced are global.

    A global threat necessitates a global response.

    It is for that reason that we are playing a leading role in the global coalition of more than 60 countries committed to defeating Daesh.

    The Coalition includes Iraq, partners in the Arab world, European nations and the United States.

    We are working to defeat Daesh on all fronts – not just military, but cutting off its finances, sharing counter-terrorism expertise and working to defeat its poisonous narrative.

    At the heart of our work is the need for a political solution in Syria that brings peace to the country and enables millions of refugees to return home.

    We are working with the UN and international community to bring this about.

    Daesh has a worldwide influence that reaches across states and reaches across borders.

    So our response also needs to be global, not just in the UK, not just in Europe, not just in Syria and Iraq. In particular, Daesh has a footprint in Libya.

    It is important that we continue to support efforts to establish a unified national government there.

    It is only when one is established can begin the difficult work of establishing in turn effective, legitimate governance, restoring stability and tackling the threat posed by Daesh.

    Defeating Daesh’s values

    I spoke at the start about understanding the world as it really is.

    And that, as I have said, means understanding the threat we face.

    It means recognising the changing reality that makes the Investigatory Powers Bill so essential.

    It means ensuring that we deal with the poisonous ideas that underpins Daesh’s appeal.

    That is what drives all we do.

    Not only does that mean keeping the UK safe, dealing with the severe threat.

    It also means ensuring we are winning hearts and minds.

    It means defeating Daesh’s purported values.

    Daesh claims to offer clarity and certainty.

    That we have little or nothing to offer.

    If we are to counter that claim, to succeed, we must be realistic about the challenge we face, and in response have a positive vision of the pluralistic society we value.

    Out of adversity comes an opportunity – for us, for the UK, to provide real leadership and to develop a common response to terrorism that crosses social, cultural and national boundaries.

    Tackling the problem at source means working with communities, through our Prevent strategy, and speaking out against those who would divide us.

    It means working with industry, including with major communications service providers, to ensure we all have the tools we need and that they are fulfilling their responsibilities.

    It means working at home and abroad – in Europe and beyond – to help them respond robustly to the threat.

    As I have said there are those who are set on destroying our values, on radicalising our young people, on killing indiscriminately across the globe.

    Out of adversity comes opportunity – for us, for the UK, to provide real leadership, to grasp that our certainty must outpace our adversaries, our commitment must out match those who want to harm us.

    Sure that our confidence that we will triumph outshines those whose dark dreams and deadly intent we face. Our clear purpose is to keep our people safe from harm.

    In this struggle for the national interest – our determined cause:

    We will be certain.

    We are committed.

    And I am confident.

    Thank you so much.