UKPOL.CO.UK

Blog

  • Lucy Frazer – 2020 Statement on Wellingborough Prison

    Lucy Frazer – 2020 Statement on Wellingborough Prison

    The statement made by Lucy Frazer, the Minister of State at the Minister of Justice, in the House of Commons on 6 October 2020.

    Today I can announce that, following a rigorous and robust evaluation process, G4S has been successful in its bid to provide prison operator services at the new build resettlement prison at Wellingborough.

    I can also today announce that following public consultation in 2019 and a meeting of local community representatives in February 2020, the new prison will be named “HMP Five Wells”. This was the most popular submission from members of the public and reflects the five historic wells that surround the town, and also appear on Wellingborough’s coat of arms. I am grateful for the public’s submissions to name their new prison and I am proud that HMP Five Wells will provide a significant boost to the local economy by creating hundreds of long-term jobs, support our commitment to a role for the private sector in operating custodial services, and improve rehabilitation and security in the prison estate.

    The contract for the operation of HMP Five Wells follows the first mini competition launched in July 2019 under the prison operator services framework. Four of the six framework operators (G4S Care and Custody Services UK Ltd, Serco Ltd, Sodexo Ltd and a new entrant, Management and Training Corporation Works Ltd) bid as part of the competition.

    Bidders were required to submit proposals that addressed specific requirements in relation to our aspirations for the new resettlement prison and set how they would deliver all aspects of the custodial service from arrival to resettlement ensuring this is safe, decent and secure. Bidders also set out how the prison would be mobilised and resourced effectively, how they would provide effective property and facilities management, and demonstrated financial robustness.

    As the successful bidder, G4S demonstrated its capability to deliver a high quality, value-for-money service which will ensure that the prison is safe, decent, secure, rehabilitative and fit for modern times. All bidders should be proud of their submissions.

    HMPPS did not bid in the competition but provided a public sector benchmark against which bids were rigorously assessed. If bids had not met our expectations in terms of quality and cost, HMPPS would manage the new prison itself.

    It is important to recognise that the operator competition for the operation of HMP Five Wells was about driving quality and value across the system, which we have shown can be done through a balanced approach to custodial services provision, which includes a mix of public, voluntary and private sector involvement.​
    The result of the operator competition for HMP Five Wells, with strong bids from all bidders, bodes well for the next competition we will run for the new prison at Glen Parva in 2021 and potentially further competitions for new prisons and existing private prisons as their contracts expire over the course of the next five years.

    It is another crucial milestone in this Government’s commitment to delivering around 3,500 modern places ​at HMP Five Wells, the new prison at Glen Parva, and via a new houseblock at HMP Stocken. This is on top of the 10,000 additional prison places being created by investing up to £2.5 billion to reform the prison estate, improve standards of decency across the estate, and reduce reoffending.

  • Alok Sharma – 2020 Statement on Renewable Energy

    Alok Sharma – 2020 Statement on Renewable Energy

    The statement made by Alok Sharma, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, in the House of Commons on 6 October 2020.

    Today, the Prime Minister announced new investment of £160 million to support offshore wind, and a new level of ambition for the next round of the renewable contracts for difference energy auction.

    This funding will support major new port-side manufacturing hubs, so that the UK can host the factories making the next generation of offshore wind equipment.

    The Government also confirmed a boost to their previous target to deliver up to 30GW of offshore wind to delivering 40GW by 2030.

    The Government also announced a new ambition for 1GW of the new 40GW by 2030 target to come from floating offshore wind—a brand new technology allowing windfarms to be built further out to sea in deeper waters, boosting capacity even further. This will put the UK at the forefront of the next generation of clean energy.

    Together with planned stringent requirements on supporting UK manufacturers in Government-backed renewables projects, these measures will help the industry to reach its target of 60% of offshore wind farm content coming from the UK, helping to also boost lower carbon supply chains.

    To help deliver these ambitious targets and accelerate the country’s progress towards net zero emissions by 2050, the Government have confirmed that the next round of the renewable energy auction will open in late 2021 and aim to deliver up to twice the capacity of last year’s successful round—potentially providing enough clean energy for up to 10 million homes.

    Today’s announcement marks the latest stage of the Government’s support for renewable energy and acceleration of the transition to net zero. The Prime Minister has set out new plans to build back better and build back greener by making the UK the world leader in clean wind energy—creating jobs, reducing carbon emissions and boosting exports.

  • Sarah Olney – 2020 Speech on Policing in South-West London

    Sarah Olney – 2020 Speech on Policing in South-West London

    The speech made by Sarah Olney, the Liberal Democrat MP for Richmond Park, in the House of Commons on 7 October 2020.

    I am grateful for the opportunity to debate this important issue on the Floor of the House. I want to start by paying tribute to our fantastic police officers in the south west command unit, who continue to provide exceptional service to local residents and who have gone above and beyond to keep our communities safe during lockdown. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Commander Sally Benatar for her years of service and wish her well in the future. I welcome Lis Chapple, the new lead of the south west command unit, and look forward to a productive working relationship with her.

    Within the four boroughs that make up the south west command unit of the Metropolitan police, we have three of the four safest boroughs in London, including Richmond and Kingston, which I represent. The relative safety of our streets is, of course, something that local residents value highly and is part of what makes south-west London such an attractive and popular place to live, work and study. Those three relatively safe suburban boroughs, however, share the command unit with Wandsworth, with all the complexities and additional demands on policing that an inner-city borough represents. The resources of the south west command unit are therefore frequently skewed towards one borough, with implications for the remainder.

    I want to state clearly that I support the Met’s goals of targeting violence reduction and that I absolutely want to see it putting all the resources needed towards saving young lives. The recent, tragic case of Archie Beston in my constituency has highlighted how quickly and unpredictably violence can occur, the devastating impact it has on those who are left behind and the importance of a rapid police response. My heart goes out to Archie’s family and friends, and I pray that the sentencing of the perpetrators later this month will help them to feel that justice has been done.

    I remain concerned that, with scarce resources being targeted towards the most serious crimes, we lack sufficient officers to provide the kind of everyday policing that is so necessary to keeping our streets safe. I have written to the Mayor to share my concerns, and he has responded with information about the various measures that he has taken to increase police resources across the capital. He was unable to reassure me that we might see a future boost to police numbers in Richmond and Kingston because of the impact of the coronavirus on local authority budgets. That is not, of course, a problem confined to the capital, but in London, a shortfall in funding will mean that our police budget has to be cut. The Mayor’s estimate is that, unless the deficit can be addressed, our policing budget will be cut by £109.3 million over the next two years. This means even scarcer resources being targeted, by necessity, at the most serious crimes, leaving comparatively safer boroughs, such as those in the south-west, with even fewer resources for everyday policing.

    In addition to the impact on funding, it is important to consider what impact the coronavirus has had on demand for policing. It will not have escaped the Minister’s notice that footfall in central London has dropped ​dramatically since March, and has not yet recovered, and the considerable resources that were once dedicated to policing the shops and leisure outlets of central London are not required in the same numbers that they once were. By contrast, footfall in suburban areas such as south-west London has increased considerably. During lockdown, in common with many other areas across London and the country as a whole, south-west London saw a big increase in antisocial behaviour.

    On Richmond Green, Barnes Riverside, and Canbury Gardens in Kingston, crowds gathered to play loud music, get drunk and—most distressingly to local residents —private gardens were used when no public toilets were available. Large crowds attracted drug dealers and drug use, and those were only the most noticeable changes. Local police report an increase in cases of domestic violence, and incidents involving mental health issues. Crime, antisocial behaviour and other incidents requiring a police presence have shifted from our city centres to our suburbs. A policing demand profile that prioritises city centres may not be an appropriate template in future, and I urge the Home Office to work with the Metropolitan police and the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime to review how resources are allocated.

    I wish to speak about how the absence of a physical police presence affects communities. Although we are far from unique in having this issue, the rise in antisocial behaviour that we experienced in Richmond and Kingston over the summer has made residents extremely anxious about their safety. Public drunkenness is extremely intimidating for everybody, but especially for lone females and the elderly. It is frightening to imagine that there is nobody to protect someone confronted by an unpredictable and aggressive individual. The same is true for drug dealing and drug taking. It takes only one incident to make people feel afraid of walking in their own streets and neighbourhoods, and that can have an incredibly repressive effect on people’s lives.

    For young people, the threat of being mugged in our boroughs is real. I applaud some of the community initiatives that have sprung up to help young people protect themselves and their belongings, especially the excellent Mothers Against Muggings initiative in my constituency. Young people should not be made to feel they are responsible if they become victims of a crime, and neither should they have to curb their educational, sporting or social activities because of a fear of going out. A police presence, or at least the knowledge that the police are nearby, can go a long way towards helping people go about their lives with confidence. We can also deter crimes from being committed. That is not just better for those who avoid becoming victims of crime, with all the mental and physical anguish that results from that; it is good for those who are deterred from committing an act that may burden them with a criminal record.

    These are anxious times everywhere, and it is not surprising that people are more concerned than usual about their safety, or that police should have had more demands on their time than before the pandemic. However, the feeling that the community is not being well served by the police has, in parts of my constituency, reached a point at which some residents are canvassing support for a privately funded police force to patrol specific areas. I wish to state publicly and clearly that I am completely opposed to any such initiative. Everybody ​has the right to safety and justice, regardless of their background or income, and it should not be reserved specifically for those who can pay for it. I am deeply concerned about the implications of the interests of customers of a private police force being enforced against those who have not paid for it. Will the Minister join me in opposing such initiatives, and reinforce the Government’s commitment to provide sufficient resources to maintain the safety of our streets?

    If people do not live in fear of going out into their communities, they are more likely to engage with people of different backgrounds, to provide support to their neighbours, to shop in local shops, and to contribute to a safer, friendlier neighbourhood that is the best possible deterrent to crime and antisocial behaviour. Will the Government make a commitment to neighbourhood policing as the best way of building strong communities that prevent crime and support all their residents? Will they review policing demand profiles in response to the pandemic, and—above all—will they ensure that policing authorities across the country, and especially in London and the four boroughs of the south-west, have the resources they need to police effectively everywhere?

  • Marco Longhi – 2020 Speech on Conveyancing Standards

    Marco Longhi – 2020 Speech on Conveyancing Standards

    The speech made by Marco Longhi, the Conservative MP for Dudley North, in the House of Commons on 7 October 2020.

    I beg to move,

    That leave be given to bring in a Bill to establish minimum standards regarding searches and assessments of risk for solicitors and licensed conveyancers acting on behalf of purchasers of residential properties; and for connected purposes.

    The main aim of this Bill is to help protect people who wish to buy a house—sometimes their first home—from being exposed to risks that currently are not sufficiently visible or understood at the point of purchase. The Bill does not propose radical changes to the conveyancing process; nor, indeed, does it propose changes to the development control system, although some may argue that that might be desirable to further de-risk the process for homebuyers.

    I will set out two examples to illustrate the types of difficulties faced by homebuyers. Both are real cases of people who have been let down by a system that has not kept pace with an industry that has become increasingly cut-throat. The system does not offer enough consumer protections for people who are about to make possibly the single most important investment of their lives, while the transaction itself is mired in documents and legal complexities that are rarely fully understood.

    My first example is of a developer who purchases land and applies for planning permission, which is granted subject to conditions. Those conditions are wide ranging and set out requirements of the developer in order for them to receive final planning certification at the end of the development. One such condition may be that soil sampling is undertaken to establish whether any contamination is present; another may be that properties must not be occupied until planning conditions have been fully satisfied.

    That developer set up a limited company for the sole purpose of the development and started marketing the site almost immediately. Some properties were sold off-plan; some were sold when the buildings were largely complete. When the final plot was sold, the developer immediately liquidated the company. That means the legal entity that sold the properties no longer existed.

    It became apparent immediately that a significant number of planning conditions had not been met: no soil sampling, no preventing of owners from occupying, and no top coating of road services or pavements to bring them up to council adoptable standards. Drainage was not connected properly, and the new homeowners had a huge list of unfinished works and complaints about poor standards of work.

    At that point, the homeowners turned to the council for help, in the expectation that it would have the ability, as a local regulatory body, somehow to fix things. It transpired that any regulatory liabilities relating to the properties transferred to the property owners at point of sale, and that if the council chose to enforce breaches of planning, it would have to pursue the new homeowners.

    It is important to note that the current system places no requirements on local planning authorities to pursue developers to evidence compliance with planning conditions. The expectation is that a developer will want final ​planning certification, but that is all it is: an expectation. What if a developer does not care about obtaining the certification? Their objective is to build, sell and maximise profit. So here we are; we have just purchased a property in good faith following the advice of the conveyancing solicitor—who, by the way, was recommended by the developer—and the property does not have planning permission. Certification costs could be extremely significant, and we have no recourse to the developer because they no longer exist as a legal entity.

    My second example is probably more widespread than my first, and I suspect that similar examples may be present in several MPs’ casework folders. Imagine we are very keen to buy a property. At the point of purchase, our solicitor handling the conveyancing might highlight the fact that there is a contract for maintenance of green spaces on the estate—grass cutting, hedge trimming and so on—as well as that those areas do not belong to any of the properties and the cost is about £100 per year. Do we still want to buy the property? Of course we do. That is not a lot of money in the grand scheme of things, and if it means securing the property of our dreams, of course we will pay it.

    What is not discussed with sufficient clarity at the point of conveyance, if at all, is that the small print of the maintenance contract will state that contract owners can increase the price as and when they wish, and there is virtually no recourse within the contract for poor workmanship or lack of clarity. The fee of £100 per year may soon become £500 per year, and the grass cutting may be once a year instead of once a month. These areas remain unadopted by local councils—something that I find a little too convenient. How would you feel, Mr Speaker, if you paid an even higher ​council tax for services you did not receive, compared with a neighbour around the corner who pays less and gets more?

    Usually, when a service is not rendered, one may choose not to pay. That cannot happen here, because these contracts state that a charge will be placed against the property, so it cannot be sold without payment. Furthermore, homeowners cannot complain to anybody, because an unresponsive contractor is virtually unaccountable and has plenty of legal cover, while homeowners are usually bounced around from contractor to subcontractor to developer in a never-ending merry-go-round.

    Those two scenarios are real. The same thing has happened in Dudley and to other people from the Black Country whom I have met. People find themselves financially exposed. The system is being gamed by unscrupulous developers and contractors, because it is not transparent enough to shine a light on the potential risks to people when they are buying a property. People might feel that the very fact that a solicitor is handling the conveyance means that they are sufficiently protected. They employ a solicitor not just to carry out due diligence for them, but to highlight any potential downsides. That is not happening with enough robustness, and that is why I propose the Bill.

  • Stephen Barclay – 2020 Statement on Freeports

    Stephen Barclay – 2020 Statement on Freeports

    The statement made by Stephen Barclay, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, in the House of Commons on 7 October 2020.

    On 7 October, the Government responded to the recently closed public consultation on freeports.

    A freeport is a place to carry out business inside a country’s land border but where different customs rules apply. A firm can import goods into a freeport without paying tariffs, process them into a final good and then either pay a tariff on goods sold into the domestic market, or export the final goods without paying UK tariffs. They also allow goods to be temporarily stored without paying duties. Countries around the world have successfully used freeports to drive investment and prosperity.

    The creation of freeports across the UK will be a cornerstone of the Government’s plan to level up opportunity across the country. Freeports will be national hubs for trade, innovation and commerce, regenerating communities across the UK. They can attract new businesses, spreading jobs, investment and opportunity to towns and cities up and down the country.

    Our published response confirms our intent to deliver freeports and sets out how our proposals will be achieved. At the centre of our new freeports policy is an ambitious new customs model which will improve upon both the UK’s existing customs facilitations and the freeports the UK previously had. Our model also introduces a package of tax incentives for businesses to invest in freeports to level up some of our most deprived communities. We are introducing new measures to speed up planning processes to accelerate development in and around freeports and new initiatives to encourage innovators to generate new ideas to create additional economic growth and jobs.

    Freeports will be selected through a fair, transparent and competitive process, and will be expected to collaborate closely with key partners across the public and private sectors.​

    We want all the nations of the UK to share in the benefits of freeports. As such, we are working constructively and collaboratively with the devolved administrations to seek to establish at least one freeport in each nation of the UK.

    The “Freeports Response to the Consultation” CP302 has been laid in Parliament. Copies are available in the Vote Office and Printed Paper Office, and also at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/freeports-consultation.

  • Grant Shapps – 2020 Statement on the Global Travel Taskforce

    Grant Shapps – 2020 Statement on the Global Travel Taskforce

    The statement made by Grant Shapps, the Secretary of State for Transport, in the House of Commons on 7 October 2020.

    I committed to keep the House updated on proposals for testing international arrivals to safely reduce the 14-day self-isolation period in my statement on 7 September; this statement provides an update on next steps.

    The introduction of travel corridors in July was a major step forward in safely re-starting international travel whilst retaining the Government’s ability to act quickly if public health was at risk, with international passenger numbers handled at UK airports up by around 400% between June and July to 3.1 million passengers.

    However, many of our major markets remain or have become high risk, and therefore are not eligible for our travel corridor list. A potential solution that has been widely debated is the use of testing to reduce or replace the need for self-isolation.

    As I made clear in my statement to the House on 7 September, based on scientific evidence, the Government do not support the use of a single test on arrival as an alternative to self-isolation. However, a combination of self-isolation and testing is promising.

    Since then, my Department and the Department of Health and Social Care have been working extensively with clinicians, health experts and the private testing sector on the practicalities of such a regime. My ministerial colleagues and I have agreed that a regime, based on a single test, provided by the private sector and at the cost of the passenger after a period of self-isolation, could achieve our objectives.

    The next step is to further develop how this approach could be implemented. Therefore, I am pleased to announce that, at the request of the Prime Minister, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and I are standing up the global travel taskforce.

    The overall aim of the taskforce will be to consider what steps the Government can take, both domestically and on the international stage, to enable the safe and sustainable recovery of international travel. To do this, the taskforce will work at pace to consider:​

    How a testing regime for international arrivals could be implemented to boost safe travel to and from the UK;

    What steps we can take to facilitate business and tourist travel on a bilateral and global basis, through innovative testing models and other non-testing means; and

    More broadly, what steps we can take to increase consumer confidence and reduce the barriers to a safe and sustainable recovery of international travel.

    The taskforce will further consider what day that testing should be taken on, informed by public health analysis of when this would be effective, but taking into account economic and other factors, as well as finalising a delivery plan. However, testing is not the only solution and so the taskforce will also consider steps to support the recovery of international travel more broadly, including non-testing based interventions.

    Facilitating safe international travel is not a task that can be undertaken by the Government alone, so this taskforce will operate in collaboration with the transport industry, the tourism and local business sectors and the ​private testing sector. It will also engage with partners from governments across the globe, including on the development of bilateral testing pilots.

    Each country has understandably implemented its own measures, but these are confusing and complex for the consumer and for operators, so we will show global leadership by developing a framework for international travel to provide that global consistency, while protecting public health.

    The taskforce will be chaired by myself and the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. It will include collaboration between officials from Departments across Government, and will liaise with the travel sector in order to work on the operationalisation of testing approaches designed to safely reduce self-isolation.

    The taskforce will operate at pace for a time limited period, and will formally report back to the Prime Minister no later than early November. I will update the House on its conclusions and outputs. I have published terms of reference alongside this statement on gov.uk and will place a copy in the Libraries of both Houses.

  • Andrew Stephenson – 2020 Statement on HS2

    Andrew Stephenson – 2020 Statement on HS2

    The statement made by Andrew Stephenson, the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, in the House of Commons on 7 October 2020.

    I have today published new information on the development of the western leg of HS2 phase 2b, running between Crewe and Manchester with a link to the west coast main line. This includes:

    A Government consultation on four proposed changes to the design;

    A response to western leg changes included in the 2019 design refinement consultation;

    A route-wide update, which sets out how the route has developed, including changes in response to feedback from affected communities; and

    Updated safeguarding directions for the western leg.

    The Government have accepted the findings in the review by Douglas Oakervee that phase 2b should be delivered in smaller sections with legislation brought forward as it is ready. Therefore, HS2 Ltd has taken forward work to develop legislation for the western leg of HS2 phase 2b.​

    The Government have also accepted the Oakervee recommendation that plans for HS2 and other major schemes need to be brought together in an integrated rail plan (IRP) for the north and midlands.

    The IRP will set out the form, scope and phasing of the phase 2b route, across the western and eastern legs, and the Government will therefore consider responses to this consultation alongside the IRP outcomes. If the IRP favours any major changes, further redesign will need to take place. This consultation seeks to ensure that unnecessary delay is avoided in the event that the IRP does not support change.

    Work on HS2 phase 1 from London to Birmingham is already well under way at over 250 active sites, stimulating the economy and providing jobs through the approximately £10 billion worth of contracts already announced, two thirds of which will go to small and medium sized enterprises.

    Legislation for phase 2a, from Birmingham to Crewe, is currently being considered by Parliament.

    The proposals I am putting forward today are the next step in developing the design and legislation for the western leg of phase 2b, following the 2019 design refinement consultation. Phase 2b of HS2 is key to delivering Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR) and the consultation includes proposals to integrate the designs at a series of “touchpoints”, which are pieces of infrastructure to enable future connections between NPR and HS2. These proposals have been developed in partnership with Transport for the North and will reduce the amount of infrastructure required to deliver NPR in the future.

    This consultation deals with four technical refinements to the western leg of phase 2b: a new Crewe connection, which would also support the vision for a Crewe hub; changes to the already proposed rolling stock depot at Crewe; expansions to the stations at Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Airport; and a newly proposed facility for stabling rolling stock at Annandale in Scotland.

    Changes at Manchester Piccadilly to facilitate Metrolink and Manchester Airport High Speed station are subject to the agreement of local funding contributions. We continue to collaborate positively with Greater Manchester Combined Authority, Manchester Airports Group and other Greater Manchester delivery partners on this matter. Greater Manchester partners have confirmed that they are prepared to prioritise the funding of the local proposals for Metrolink underground at Piccadilly in future funding rounds. This will form part of the shared programme between DfT and Greater Manchester in implementing the Manchester HS2 growth strategy. In the 2020 Budget, the Government made £4.2 billion of funding available to eight city regions for intra-city transport initiatives over the period 2022-23 to 2026-27.

    In addition to today’s consultation, I am publishing my response to the proposed western leg changes included in the June 2019 phase 2b design refinement consultation. The Government have decided to proceed with these changes subject to the outcome of the IRP.

    I have also published a route-wide update which sets out wider developments to the route. The safeguarding directions for the phase 2b western leg route have also been updated to reflect the project’s updated land requirements.​
    Engagement with affected communities is at the heart of our plans for HS2 and it is our commitment to ensure we listen to those affected by these proposals. Restrictions put in place in response to the covid-19 pandemic mean that we will not be able to hold local information events in the same way that we usually would as part of our formal consultation process. HS2 Ltd will deliver information events via digital platforms instead. These digital events will allow those affected the same opportunities to understand what refinements are being proposed and to ask any questions that they may have to our representatives. Where owners of land or property are newly affected by the proposals, they will be contacted directly by HS2 Ltd to arrange online or telephone appointments.

    Copies of the consultation Command Paper and safeguarding directions will be placed in the House of Commons and House of Lords Libraries.

  • Graham Stuart – 2020 Comments on UK Export Finance

    Graham Stuart – 2020 Comments on UK Export Finance

    The comments made by Graham Stuart, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Department of International Trade, on 7 October 2020.

    As well as negotiating new free trade agreements and removing trade barriers, we are able to offer export finance support that can unlock the potential of the UK sup-ply chain. UKEF helps overseas buyers access the financial support they need to procure from the UK. This helps UK companies win more business on the world stage.

    UKEF’s huge increase in capacity can be a real game-changer for the prospects of UK exporters, and will be vital to thousands of suppliers across the country.

  • David Duguid – 2020 Comments on Global Trade

    David Duguid – 2020 Comments on Global Trade

    The comments made by David Duguid, the Minister for Scotland, on 7 October 2020.

    The UK Government is committed to supporting Scottish businesses to trade globally.

    We encourage businesses to work with our world-leading credit agency, UKEF, and take advantage of export finance support to bolster their exports worldwide and strengthen their position on the global stage.

    Through the Trade Hub in Edinburgh, businesses will be able to utilise UKEF, as well as the UK Government’s global networks, expertise and influence.

    Scottish produce is world famous and will benefit from new global trade opportunities once the EU transition period ends. UKEF has the potential to provide a real boost to exporters in Scotland, and every corner of the UK.

  • Liz Truss – 2020 Comments on Government Procurement Agreement

    Liz Truss – 2020 Comments on Government Procurement Agreement

    The comments made by Liz Truss, the Secretary of State for International Trade, on 7 October 2020.

    Today’s announcement will provide British businesses with the certainty they need to continue bidding for £1.3 trillion worth of government procurement contracts overseas, which will ultimately help deliver the growth and jobs we need to recover from the economic challenges of coronavirus.

    It is another significant step towards re-establishing Britain as a major force in global trade and a truly independent trading nation.