UKPOL.CO.UK

Blog

  • Andrea Leadsom – 2014 Speech at Business Banking Insight Survey

    Below is the text of the speech made by Andrea Leadsom, the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, made on 28th May 2014.

    Introduction

    Thank you.

    Well firstly, by way of introduction I am Andrea Leadsom, the new Economic Secretary to the Treasury.

    And – somewhat confusingly – while I’ve taken on the title of Economic Secretary left by Nicky Morgan, who became Financial Secretary. I’ve actually taken on the brief left by Sajid Javid – the former Financial Secretary – when he moved into the Cabinet.

    So I’m now the Minister responsible for issues relating to banking and the financial services.

    And I approach both this portfolio – and this issue before us today – as someone with a very keen interest.

    I’ve spent the last four years on the Treasury Select Committee – following the government’s work closely.

    And before that, I spent the previous twenty five years – prior to becoming an MP – working in the financial sector.

    And if I bring one big passion to this role, if I have one big goal in this role, it’s making sure that our financial system – and our banking system – works in the best possible way for its consumers.

    And I think this survey – which was first commissioned by the Chancellor – can play a key role in making that system work for SMEs.

    Before I go into detail about the survey though, I’d like to spend a little time first – reflecting on exactly why increasing competition is so important, and secondly – providing some context, by explaining how this survey fits into wider government action on the issue.

    Competition in Financial Services

    One of my favourite statistics – and it’s a statistic I’ve been quoting long before I got this job – is that people in the UK are more likely to get a divorce than they are to change bank.

    But the fact that we’re more wedded to our banks than we are to the people we’re wedded to isn’t because we’re all incredibly happy in our banking relationships.

    It’s because of a fundamental lack of competition in the banking system.

    And that lack of competition isn’t limited to individual current accounts, or savings accounts.

    At present, the largest four banks account for over 80% of UK SMEs’ main banking relationships.

    And we believe that such high concentration levels are bad for consumers and bad for businesses.

    So we are absolutely committed to fostering a stronger, more diverse and more competitive banking sector, because greater competition will mean better outcomes for consumers:

    – it will mean more inventive products, tailored to specific customer needs

    – it will mean more competitive products, on interest or charges

    – and it will mean more innovative, convenient forms of customer interaction, in areas such as mobile payments and cheque imaging

    Our action to improve competition

    So what are we doing about it? We’re taking action in a number of areas to make the sector more competitive:

    22 months ago, the Chancellor asked the FSA to conduct a review of barriers to entry and expansion in the banking sector, which resulted in major changes to the capital requirements for new banks, making it easier for them to enter the market and compete

    we introduced legislation in the Banking Reform Bill to create a new payment systems regulator, which will ensure that smaller banks and non-bank providers can get fair access to payments systems, driving innovation and choice for consumers

    and the 7 day switching service is making it much easier for consumers to move their bank accounts, and helping to put an end to banks assuming their account holders will stay with them because it’s too complicated to change

    On top of all that, we’ve made promoting effective competition in the interests of consumers one the FCA’s key objectives.

    And we’ll soon be introducing legislation for a number of new measures in this area, including improving access to SME credit data, which will enhance the ability of challenger banks and alternative finance providers to conduct accurate risk assessments, and make it easier SMEs to seek a loan from another lender.

    We also have proposals to help to match those SMEs that want to secure loans with those challenger banks and alternative finance providers who want to provide them.

    All of which are moves that will make the sector more competitive, and give consumers more choice.

    Transparency in the sector

    Key to improving competition is improving transparency.

    In SME banking, our key change has been the obligation to publish postcode lending data, which is promoting greater competition and enabling smaller lenders – both banks and non-banks – to see where there is unmet demand and pursue new business.

    In particular, it has highlighted the more deprived areas where larger banks are often not willing to lend, and that will enable:

    – challenger banks

    – smaller building societies

    – credit unions and

    – Community Development Finance Institutions

    …to move into these areas, and to offer finance to those customers who are crying out for support to help their business grow.

    Business Banking Insight survey

    So we have identified problems.

    And – more importantly – we are identifying solutions.

    And this new survey – and its findings – will play a key role in helping us to build on that action.

    It is – as many of you will know – the first survey of its kind to look at the performance of Britain’s banking sector, as perceived by Britain’s business people who own and run their companies.

    And it will help to provide an insight into, and a ranking of, the best banking institutions and products and services for Britain’s micro, small and medium sized businesses.

    So, for example, a tech start-up in Edinburgh looking to move to bigger premises will be able to see which bank offers the best loan facilities.

    Or a microbrewery in my constituency of Northamptonshire looking to sell its product in Europe will be able to see which bank offers the best Export Finance facilities.

    The hope is that with that improved knowledge, SMEs will have an improved incentive to switch providers to those banks that are best placed to provide the support and the services they need.

    And not only will it be a great tool for them. It will also allow Britain’s banks to see what their customers really think of their performance, and allow them to target areas for improvement.

    By allowing them to see areas in which their competitors are offering better, smarter, and more popular products. And also areas where their customers aren’t happy with the service they offer.

    And the upshot of all that should be better competition, better products, and – most importantly – a better environment for British businesses to go about their work.

    Conclusion

    So I’m very glad to be here this morning.

    I’m particularly delighted to be launching a survey – as commissioned by the Chancellor – that will genuinely help businesses to vote with their feet on which bank is best for them.

    And I’m very much looking forward to working with all of you to help drive improvement in this area over the next twelve months. And hearing any ideas you might have that could make it even more useful for British businesses.

    But before that, I’ll be very interested to hear about all the findings of the survey. Thank you.

  • Johann Lamont – 2013 Speech to Labour Party Conference

    Below is the text of the speech made by Johann Lamont, the Leader of the Scottish Labour Party, to the 2013 Labour Party conference.

    Conference, I am delighted to be here and honoured to address you as Scottish Labour Leader in these challenging times for people in Scotland and across the UK.

    I am a proud Scot. And it because I am a proud Scot, not despite it, that I want us to stay strong in the United Kingdom.

    That is why I am determined to campaign with every bit of energy I can muster to ensure that on 18 September 2014, the people of Scotland will not just reject separation, but reaffirm their commitment to the United Kingdom.

    Scotland is known for its proud industries – shipbuilding, oil and gas, whisky. But in the last few months you could be forgiven for thinking we have a new boom industry – the creation of historic days.

    It seems the Scottish Government just need to call a press conference for the day to become historic.

    Well I look forward to coming back to conference after the historic day next year when Scotland renews its embrace of the United Kingdom – and makes the politics of narrow nationalism a thing of history.

    There are those who in the next year will want to perpetuate some myths about Scotland and the rest of the UK.

    We are told that somehow Scotland is another place, with different values and concerns. But we know the reality. That across the UK families are worrying about the future.

    About their children’s education, about the care of their elderly loved ones, about whether they will keep their jobs and how to make the world a safer place.

    The nationalists claim that we as Scots are denied our rights, refused our potential, held back by the rest of the UK.

    But the truth is that we Scots were part of shaping the United Kingdom through time. And it is the Labour movement united across the country which shaped it for the better – and will again.

    That is why not only do we play our part in Better Together, the cross party campaign, but with the energy and talent of my deputy Anas Sarwar, we have established United With Labour, making Labour’s own case for staying in the UK and recasting the values that shaped labour’s legacy – that we are stronger together.

    The nationalists’ central deceit is that inequality in Scotland was created in 1707 and can be eradicated by the re-establishment of an independent Scotland.

    They believe that Scotland is, by its nature, more progressive. They create the impression that this debate is somehow Scotland versus the Tories. It is not.

    Scotland does not agree with Alex Salmond – and if we work hard over the next year it will become increasingly clear this is Scotland versus Salmond and Scotland is going to win.

    The struggle in Scotland is between truth and deceit, between a Scottish Government content to sloganize rather the address the real problems in our communities.

    For above all we are fired by the determination that politics is about the real world, that identifies the challenges and creates the solutions that make a difference to people’s lives – and insists that the real world experience of the trade unionist, the agricultural worker, the mum, the carer should shape our politics, our policy and ultimately our lives.

    And that is the test that others fail.

    The Tories tell us things are getting better, in denial about the lives most people live, without security, but with increasing uncertainty, and increasing bills and stress.

    And the Lib Dems, with empty policy offer to demonstrate they care, yet collude with and embrace the argument that this economic crisis is because Labour’s investment in schools, hospitals and our children.

    And as a consequence of that betrayal, they are content to see the most vulnerable bear the brunt of the reckless decisions of a banking system that nearly brought the country to its knees.

    And the nationalists? When they see the policies driven by the coalition – of austerity, of the bedroom tax, what do they say? Do they see the affront to families across the UK? No, they see they see a political opportunity.

    For the Nationalists the misery of the people isn’t a wrong to be corrected – it is a chance to be exploited. For them grievance is not to be addressed it is to be nurtured.

    And that cynicism, that calculation which leaves families suffering now is a price worth paying if it translates into votes next September.

    It is a cynicism which corrodes our politics. It should create in us a revulsion that demands a Labour campaign of truth, passion and hope in the months ahead.

    A cynical SNP that in private questions the affordability of the state pension and in public says what it thinks it needs to say to get over the line.

    And when confronted with the real world:

    With the health refugee to England seeking the cancer drugs not available in Scotland.

    With the person with a free bus pass but no bus.

    With the care worker distressed by their care for an elderly person reduced to less than 15 minutes and with an instruction to ‘task and go’.

    With the student denied a place a college to learn the skills to access the unfulfilled jobs in oil and gas, what do they say?

    They hunt the alibi – Westminster, local government, anyone except themselves.

    Opposition is frustrating and in these tough times unity and focus to secure power will never be at a greater premium.

    But how much more frustrating is it in Scotland when the Government behaves like a reckless opposition, refusing to take responsibility, happy to take the credit and energetic in blaming others. And above all, this truth – content to ensure that all those who could be protected are not helped.

    For that would be to show devolution working. Devolution protecting. And if they allowed devolution to do what it was meant to do, how then they would achieve their own and only real ambition – for Scotland to be separate from the rest of the UK.

    The SNP are fond of saying that Scotland should complete its home rule journey. Pity they didn’t join us on the first two legs of that journey. They stood outside the Constitutional Convention which shaped the Parliament. They wouldn’t be part of the Calman Commission which delivered real change to devolution. Yet they shamelessly rewrite Scotland’s history.

    They deceive because it was the Labour Party which delivered the Scottish Parliament, it was we who started the journey to enhanced powers. And it is the Labour Party who will do so again – the party which delivered home rule for Scotland – who will enhance home rule and defend it. A strong Scotland within a strong United Kingdom.

    So the prize next year is a huge one – to defeat the politics of nationalism.

    Because the politics of identity is not the politics of justice. It wasn’t Scots, or the English or the Welsh or the Irish who fought for women’s votes, it was women and men who believed in justice.

    We didn’t join the fight against Apartheid because we were South African, we joined that battle because it was our duty, whatever our identity, race or gender to fight against injustice.

    And I believe that Scotland is too big a country to hide behind Hadrian’s Wall and not play our part in fighting injustice in all its forms throughout these islands, and through partnership with our friends and neighbours across the world.

    And we will deliver hope and change at home. To the elderly person who needs help, and who wonders what it means when their government trumpets free personal care, but who only sees a carer for a few minutes a day, who gets tucked up in bed by six o’clock because that is all a pressured carer can do, I tell them Labour will deliver hope and Labour will deliver change.

    To the men and women, denied the opportunity to better themselves by this Scottish government, to learn the skills which could lead to a career not just a job, I say Labour will deliver hope and deliver change.

    And to those people in Scotland who do not believe that politics can change lives because they have been fed on a diet of smart slogans not real policies to change lives, I promise to restore integrity to our politics.

    Reality. The truth about how real people live real lives will be at the heart of our politics. We will be honest about what we can do and we cannot do in an era of scarcity.

    But there will be no limit to our vision and our thirst for justice. The limits of today should not limit our vision of a better tomorrow.

    We know in this movement, in all its forms, that when we stand together there is nothing we cannot achieve.

    Division is the greatest bar to our progress.

    But we will stand together. Labour in all its forms, in every corner of the country, to fight the case that the nations on these islands will stand together. That is how we achieve justice at home and abroad.

    Yes, conference. The next year is about defeating the politics of nationalism, a virus that has affected so many nations and done so much harm. An ideology that never achieved anything.

    But it is about more than that. It is about Scotland and all our nations embracing the ideal of the United Kingdom.

    It is about being a beacon to the world about how people can preserve their identity, share their values and live together and bind together to form a stronger community.

    It is about embracing a new United Kingdom. One of justice. One of fairness. One of opportunity.

    And conference, I promise you, I will be back next year to tell you how Scotland will play its part in building a new United Kingdom.

  • Johann Lamont – 2012 Speech to Labour Party Conference

    Below is the text of the speech made by Johann Lamont, the Leader of the Scottish Labour Party, to the Labour Party conference on 2nd October 2012.

    Conference, I have the privilege of addressing you as the first ever Leader of the Scottish Labour Party.

    After what happened in the Scottish parliamentary elections in May of last year we knew we, as the Scottish Labour Party, had to change.

    And I want to thank Ed Miliband and everyone in the Party at Scottish and UK levels for helping turn the desire for change into reality.

    We know we still have a long way to go. But the work has started. And the revival has started as we showed in this May’s elections where the Scottish Labour Party made gains throughout Scotland, and none was more stunning that Gordon Matheson’s victory in Glasgow where we won again, an overall majority in a proportional system and where all but one of our candidates was elected.

    Conference, we need to rebuild Scotland and rebuild Britain.

    And we need to rebuild a Scotland which has a Government which isn’t seeking to protect us from Tory cuts, but an SNP Government which is making them worse.

    When George Osborne cut the budget, Alex Salmond cut it deeper for Scotland’s local authorities. Even when the Scottish budget went up, he cut funding for vital council services, while heaping more responsibility onto local authorities.

    Don’t be fooled by the slogans. Salmond trying to claim more things are free in Scotland as a way of building up resentment with our partners elsewhere in the UK.

    The people of Scotland know that nothing is free. And every day we see more clearly that the costs of Salmond’s slogans are being borne by hard working families struggling to make ends meet, borne by the elderly and vulnerable seeing their care slashed, borne by the student who can’t get a place in further education.

    Now last week, when I pointed out that Scotland’s families are paying for Salmond’s unsustainable tax break for the rich, I was accused of being a Tory.

    I’m not sure if the cap fits with someone who campaigned against Thatcher’s cuts to Scotland in the eighties.

    Not sure the cap fits with someone who campaigned for a Scottish Parliament to protect Scotland from future Tory Governments.

    And I am not sure the cap fits with someone who sees in surgeries, in meetings and in everyday life the consequences of a Tory Government cutting too far and too fast while we have an SNP Government content to amplify the cuts rather than protect people from them.

    It was Alex Salmond who said that Scotland didn’t mind Thatcher’s economic policies. It was Alex Salmond who relied on the Tories to put through four budgets while in Government. It was Alex Salmond who cheered David Cameron into Number 10 because it suited his political argument, in full knowledge of the consequences.

    This SNP Government claims to be a progressive beacon but took George Osborne’s cuts, doubled them and handed them to Scottish councils, impacting on our elderly care, our schools and our chances of growing local economies.

    This SNP Government is making the poor pay for the election bribes that benefit the better off, but won’t tell us this side of the referendum where he will go to find another £3.3 billion of cuts.

    Anyone still want to argue the SNP’s left wing credentials? Let me read you this:

    “It is likely that the Barnett formula, far from starving Scotland to death as is often asserted, is actually fattening us to the point of dangerous obesity. Bizarre as the thought may be, could the UK actually be killing us with kindness?”

    Not the words of Norman Tebbit. Not the words of George Osborne. But Mike Russell, the man Alex Salmond has put in charge of our schools.

    Let me give you another insight into the world of Mike Russell:

    “Put bluntly universality now drags down both the quality of service to those most in need, and the ability of government to provide such services. However, our political parties do not have the courage to address the issue for fear of losing votes.”

    Conference, Scottish Labour is not afraid to be honest with the people of Scotland, and not afraid to expose Alex Salmond and his Tartan Tories who try to wear our clothing while punishing the people they should be protecting.

    The SNP might not have the courage to be straight with the Scottish people but we do.

    What Alex Salmond is doing with Scotland’s finances is the equivalent of putting the gas bill in the drawer. We’ve all done it. Not opened the bill because we feared the consequences. So we stuff it away. And the reminder. And the final notice.

    But we all know, Conference, that never ends well.

    Salmond hopes we won’t ask the tough questions about independence. And he is desperate we don’t ask the tough questions of the here and now. He knows that every Scottish family is bearing the cost of his slogans. We all know that his budget will go bust.

    But he hopes that somehow he can keep the truth from the Scottish people until after the referendum.

    I won’t wait until after the referendum to be honest with the people of Scotland. We need an honest debate now about how we protect the most vulnerable from the cuts.

    Not everyone is going to like the solutions – that is unavoidable. But I will be straight with people now about what is to come, and I will be true to Labour values – that we will not allow those who most need our support to pay the price for populist slogans.

    If we are to ensure that the elderly get the help and support it is our duty to give, then we are going to have to ensure that those who have, give to the have-nots.

    If we are to make sure that the potential of not one of our children is lost, that means that those who have plenty must share for the common good.

    If Scotland stands for anything it is community. And we in Scottish Labour will pull that community together, to stand as one, and reject Alex Salmond’s attempts to divide our society.

    Conference, the Labour Party fights for the poor and the vulnerable. The Labour Party fights for the strong. And together, the Labour Party in every part of the UK will fight to rebuild our nations and rebuild our communities.

  • Norman Lamb – 2013 Speech on Mental Health

    Below is the text of a speech made by the Health Minister, Norman Lamb, to the Royal College of General Practitioners on 10th October 2013.

    Good morning everyone, I would like to thank you for inviting me here today.

    I was greatly encouraged by the positive views on integration that have already been spoken about today.

    I think we are living in a time of great opportunity. For any Western democracy, I believe the stars are aligned to deliver better and more integrated care for people with mental illness.

    Today’s conference covers both integration and mental health – two things which I am incredibly passionate about.

    But from the patient’s point of view, despite the advances in mental health, too many people don’t get access to the care and support they need – they don’t get holistic care.

    And, if we are being honest, there is an institutional bias against mental health within the NHS.

    But we are also here to talk about the potential for integrated care and to focus on that care from the patient’s view point.

    This is not about organisational change but about the model of care which is shaped around the needs of the individual patient, not the needs of the organisation.

    Unfortunately, over the years we have institutionally separated mental health and physical health in the NHS.

    Later today I will be making a speech to colleagues in the department about the importance of mental health.

    I know that poor mental health can start in the workplace – 1 in 4 workers will experience stress, anxiety, depression or another condition during their working life.

    Mental health is the single biggest cause of disability in the UK, bigger than cancer and cardiovascular disease. So it is important for people to feel that they can speak up when they feel like their mental wellbeing is suffering.

    But it is also important to remember today what ramifications someone’s mental health can have on their physical wellbeing.

    A few weeks ago, Rethink released a shocking set of statistics.

    People with serious mental health problems – like schizophrenia – on average die 20 years younger than people with no mental health issues. And more than 30,000 people with severe mental health problems die needlessly every year.

    These statistics make for difficult reading. But they are well-known.

    Those people died because their poor mental wellbeing had a dramatic impact on their physical health. Conditions like heart problems, diabetes and addiction to smoking, physical health problems which were exacerbated by their mental health.

    And last week, new research from Taiwan suggested that people with depression are three times more likely to develop Parkinson’s disease.

    I am pleased to mention here that the Department will shortly be embarking on a major new strand of work on reducing premature mortality. Mental health will form an absolutely integral part of this – and that is crucial. To address these frightening figures, we have to tackle physical co-morbidities and adopt a whole-person approach.

    There are organisations out there doing some incredibly innovative work around improving people’s mental health so their physical health doesn’t suffer.

    In fact, one of them has helped organise this conference.

    The emergency mental health service at South London and Maudsley FT – or the A&E of the Mind as it has been called – where people who come in to A&E with severe mental health issues are seen quickly, diagnosed and discharged – is incredibly innovative.

    I want to see this sort of service replicated elsewhere. I want to see this become the norm, not the exception.

    The health service is very good at treating physical health emergencies.

    The system may be under pressure, but when someone breaks their leg, the health service swings in to action. When someone has a stroke, there are a raft of doctors, nurses and specialists at the scene to deal with them quickly.

    But is this replicated for mental health emergencies? In some areas yes – having a positive impact on wellbeing and lowering the pressure on local services – but often, mental health services are slower to act.

    I’m not the only one who thinks this.

    I’ve heard from many charities and health organisations that crisis care for people with mental health problems is not reliable.

    One example of this is a constituent of mine. A lady who had recently moved to Norfolk, her son had suffered severe mental health problems in his 20s. One day she found ligature marks on his neck, she took him to the local A&E, they both had a half hour discussion with a junior doctor.

    This put that doctor in an invidious position – he had no mental health training up – and then the patient was released, with no mental health specialist being involved in the process.

    The next day, she found him hanged in her own home.

    I found it heart wrenching and shocking to hear that, but I know it is not isolated. This happens too often.

    I was in an A&E Department recently, I was there for some hours looking at some really amazing work in that Department, but out of hours there is no mental health specialist there. Yet we know that a mental health crisis often happen in inconvenient times of the day or night.

    And we are working with a range of organisations to develop a single national Crisis Care Concordat – one national agreement setting out what local areas should provide for people who have a mental health crisis.

    The A&E of the mind is a great way to treat people with mental health issues in a timely fashion, in exactly the same way that physical health emergencies are treated.

    I would like to see more services like the Rapid Assessment, Interface and Discharge – or RAID – in Birmingham. I visited them to hear about the great work that they are doing.

    They offer training and support for City Hospital Birmingham A&E staff for when there is a person attended who has both a physical and mental health emergency – like people who have self-harmed, or people who have alcohol problems and mental health difficulties. We know that many people who have self-harmed turning up at A&E do not get the assessment and referral that they so desperately need. Out of everyone who turns up to A&E, they are the ones who are most prone to taking their own lives.

    In Birmingham, they have managed to provide around the clock care as well as make huge savings. For every £1 spent in the RAID service, it makes £4 worth of savings from dealing with people’s mental health issues before they become a crisis.

    These kind of innovative approaches make it obvious that we need to change the way we think about how we look after people’s mental health.

    And, more to the point, we need to look at how we can improve the way health and mental health services can work together.

    My overarching goal is to make sure that mental health has equal priority with physical health, and that everyone who needs it gets access to the best available treatment.

    It is outlined in the Health and Social Care Act that there needs to be equal importance given to mental health with physical health, and we will be able to hold them to account for the quality of services.

    I am acutely aware that, the whole time we discuss parity of esteem, we need to continually challenge the health system to make certain we can make a reality of this.

    Yet often, the health service provides few interconnecting bridges between the two. And where those bridges are present, sometimes they are rickety, not up to scratch for people to traverse.

    The discussions that are happening today are going to be hugely important in improving and building those bridges, those services.

    I hope that this leads to a ground swell in new evidence and research on building more integrated services across the health service.

    What I also wanted to cover today is how my department is trying to make the health service more integrated – more bridges being built between physical and mental health services.

    We want to forge together new bonds between health and care settings, but also inspire the health service to be creative and think around the issues of integration, much like you will be doing later today.

    This focus on holistic care has, frankly, been lost recently.

    And when it was, it was normally in spite of the system, rather than working with it.

    Now, integration is written throughout primary legislation.

    Now, there is a legal process for encouraging this type of joined-up working.

    There has never been a legal duty on the NHS to specifically promote the integration of services, and the Care Bill will place the same duty on local authorities.

    But an important point on this is giving professionals the power and the freedom to decide for themselves how this should work.

    Although it isn’t enough to point to legislation and say “now go and become integrated”.

    A line of legislation isn’t going to cause in itself an eruption in the creative minds of the health and care service which I mentioned earlier.

    The term ‘silo working’ is often employed to describe the health and care system.

    And when we look at any local health service in the abstract, yes, it is a series of people, working in a series of buildings, often miles apart from one another.

    But that separation isn’t just physical, it is also cultural. Our NHS is a diverse and mixed institution, and each part of that system works differently.

    How do you make those services work together?

    It takes encouragement.

    And there are two parts to this.

    The first part is to show that they need to work like this.

    Because the simple fact is that doing nothing would provide us with a health service that is not value for money and ultimately be sustainable.

    The statistics scream out for action.

    By 2026, 3 million people will have three long-term conditions. There are 1.9 million people with them now.

    Between now and 2030, the number of people over 85 will double.

    And we know that the rate of the England population with a mental health problem increased from 15.5% in 1993 to 17.6% in 2007. An increase of 2.1% might not sound like a lot, but we are talking about over a million more people being affected by a mental health condition.

    The health makeup of our society is changing, and we need to change with it if we’re going to rise to the challenge of an aging population with more complex health needs.

    The second part of the encouragement is about inspiring people to work together.

    And I believe we are leading by example on this.

    My department is working across the health sector – with NHS England, the Local Government Association, Monitor and others – and has set out a vision of how health and care can become better integrated.

    But we will also be working alongside a number of pioneering organisations that have really exciting ideas for integrating health and care.

    We put a call out for bids in May, and the response has been really positive.

    We have had over 100 bids from across the country, across a wide range of services – an overwhelming, and in all honesty, unexpectedly high level of interest.

    It showed to me just how creative and efficient our health and care services can be, shaking off the idea that these services are systemically bureaucratic.

    It also showed me that there is an extraordinary pent up energy out there. People want to do things different, people wanting to work better for their patients.

    These have been whittled down to a shortlist and we will select the very best proposals, sharing their learning right across the country.

    We are not too far off announcing who these trailblazers are going to be, and I am looking forward to the prospect of exciting new approaches to treating both physical and mental health in a holistic way.

    Nor do I want to limit the number of pioneers to those we select within this process. This is about championing exemplars to encourage others everywhere.

    The culture I want to instil in the Department and in NHS England is one of experimentation, to say that you can do things differently if it makes sense, if it is rational and if it offers better care for patients.

    What I consider the most exciting part of our integration work is how we are funding integration across the country.

    Through the Integration Transformation Fund, we are providing £3.8 billion to encourage people to work better together.

    What I want to see is exactly what is in the name of the fund: a transformation.

    It plans to make sure that health and care services work together;

    That organisations act earlier to prevent people reaching crisis point;

    That seven-day services are offered so people can access them when they need to; and

    That care that is centred on individual needs, rather than what is convenient for the system.

    It is ambitious, that’s true. But I want organisations to be ambitious and think what they could do with some of this money.

    What I want to see is the funding used to break through the barrier to integrated health and care, including mental health.

    I want to see plans to improve the care that people receive.

    I want simple, clever and creative ideas that present a way for people to move seamlessly through the health and care system.

    Another example, which I am happy to be able to announce today, is the clinical trial which Kings Health Partners are going to be undertaking into medically unexplained symptoms.

    You will be hearing more about this later today from the team themselves, but it will be taking place in Lambeth and Southwark and will focus on people who experience unexplained symptoms like dizziness, chest pains, headaches and fatigue, which can disrupt people’s day to day lives.

    They will bring a team of physicians, psychiatrists and psychologists together, who will assess and treat people who present with medically unexplained symptoms, backed by £2.5m of funding. This kind of cross-cutting work is incredibly exciting – and important – and I wish them luck in their trial and look forward to hearing about the results.

    So in closing, I want to wish you the best for what I know will be a thoroughly interesting conference.

    One of the great frustrations of this job is that the schedule is so heavy that you can’t stay to listen to the work being presented.

    I think the conversations you will be having today will help end the mind-body dualism of the health service.

    If we want to offer better care for patients and those that use the health service, we need to be able to treat a person holistically.

    In short, we need them to be treated as a person, something much greater than the sum of their parts.

    Thank you.

  • Norman Lamb – 2012 Speech to King's Fund

    Below is the text of a speech made by the Health Minister, Norman Lamb, on 11th September 2012.

    A reshuffle is a strange thing.

    I’ve followed the health reforms pretty closely so I’m relatively up to speed.

    But often, new ministers find themselves in departments where they know only the bare bones of the policy. And they’re expected to turn themselves into experts overnight.

    I’ve been an MP long enough to hear my fair share of new ministers read out speeches in the Commons and clearly have absolutely no idea what they’re talking about. The crueller members of the opposition can sometimes make it a bit of a trial for them.

    But the machinations of government can’t just creak to a halt as the new people find their way around. So new ministers rely on ever-present civil servants to guide them. They rely on ministers who haven’t been reshuffled to keep a hand on the tiller. And they rely on their fellow new ministers to be conscientious, decisive and creative about their own parts of the portfolio.

    In other words, for reshuffles to work, every part of government needs to be supportive of all the other parts.

    The same is true if we want to make people healthier and improve local services.

    The difference, of course, is that poor integration in reshuffles mean ministers looking a bit stupid.

    But in the wider world, it is a lot more important.

    Disjointed care can and does impact on people’s lives in a big way. Whether it’s:

    • The girl with cerebral palsy who has to start using completely different services when she turns 16,
    • The man with bipolar disorder who sees a different community psychiatrist each appointment,
    • Or the elderly lady who dies in a strange hospital because there’s disagreement over who should provide the services to allow her to die in her own home.

    At the moment, those sort of situations are all too common.

    To put a stop to them, all parts of the system have to work together.

    That’s when things really get better. Not just with health and social care, but with other factors that affect health, like housing, work and education.

    One of the reasons I was so eager to be a minister is so I can push that hard.

    The consensus behind integrated care is pretty universal. In government, in think tanks, in patient groups everyone sees it as A Good Thing.

    But that’s not enough. We need to transfer it from the academic papers and into the health & wellbeing boards, hospitals and community centres.

    It takes a lot of political oomph to do that.

    I want to provide that oomph.

    From my first day in my new office, I was asking to talk to the Department of Health’s experts on integration. Reading the latest research.

    And the first thing on my agenda is to arrange a roundtable with the Kings Fund and a wide spread of other groups, to work out a way of translating consensus into results.

    One thing we can be sure of is that there is funding to really get things going.

    As announced in the Care and Support White Paper Caring for our future, over the two years from 2013/14, an extra £300 million will go from the NHS to local authorities to get health and social care services working better together. That’s on top of the £2.7 billion transfer to local authorities that was announced in the 2010 Spending Review.

    And there will be an extra £200 million over the next five years spend on better housing options for older and disabled people.

    On top of that, there is more money for priority services, like January’s one-off £150m to reduce delayed transfers of care.

    That sort of money opens doors. But because of the financial situation that we all know about, that money – and people’s existing budgets – needs to produce results.

    Everyone needs to do their bit to get the most from their money. Delivering better services and better outcomes, in ways relevant to individual areas.

    That’s why I was so pleased to see that the Care and Support White Paper clearly sets out what we are going to do to further integrate services.

    One of the big issues is that ‘integrated care’ itself is a problematic phrase. Understandably, when you’re talking about such a broad concept, there’s a lot of disagreement over what it means.

    So one of our early tasks will be to try to at least agree a working definition – one that allows everyone to be clear about what we’re working towards.

    Then we want to build on some of the projects already underway that touch on issues of integration, like the four community budget pilots that are cutting red tape and reducing duplication in specific areas.

    We will take the lessons from those pilots and share them across the country, so everyone can benefit.

    To gauge our progress, we will also take heed of the Future Forum’s calls to measure people’s experience of how their care is being integrated. We want to explore how best to do that via the outcomes frameworks, so integration is given just as much importance as any other big NHS issue.

    We will use different payment systems to put money in the hands of people who can improve integration. The Year of Care tariffs, for example, which take a long-term view of people with long-term conditions. And we want to see similarly innovative payment systems across the health, care and housing sectors.

    And of course, throughout all this, in the spirit of integration, I want to make it quite clear that expert organisations like the Kings Fund, the Nuffield Trust are central to everything we’re doing.

    We have already accepted the Future Forum’s recommendation following the joint Kings Fund and Nuffield Trust report that far more work is needed to integrate all public services.

    The White Paper said we would work with the NHS Commissioning Board, Monitor, and the Local Government Association to support evidence-based integration across the country.

    And we have set up a new joint unit in DH across health and social care to look specifically at how the recommendations of your report can be taken forward.

    But your input won’t stop there. I want to hear about your suggestions, your criticisms and your research. So every change made specifically to increase the integration of care is itself the product of co-operation and shared endeavour.

    That is also true for publicly funded groups like the NHS Commissioning Board and Monitor. We will work closely with them to make sure we are reading off the same hymn sheet.

    There isn’t enough time to go into all of it, but I’d also like to quickly mention some other measures in the Care and Support White Paper that will help integrate services:

    • Personal health and care budgets, so people can control their own care.

    • And more attention than ever paid to important ‘hand-off’ moments where someone’s care goes through a big transition – like when a terminal illness means someone starts using end-of-life services.

    Those are all steps in the right direction.

    But as I said earlier, for integration to work it can’t just be seen as a health issue, or a social care issue. Everyone has to buy into it and do their bit to make people healthier.

    Health and wellbeing boards

    Health and wellbeing boards will bring previously disparate people together to do just that.

    The NHS, local government and communities themselves. To understand what local needs are and work out how to meet them.

    I’m really delighted that you have all been so open with each other about your experiences of setting up health and wellbeing boards.

    Through events like this, and through the National Learning Network for health and wellbeing boards, you are coming together with your colleagues around the country to share what you’ve learnt.

    But like all ambitious changes, it won’t be easy.  A lot of ways of working will have to change. People will have to move out of their comfort zones and look at what is better for local people, not what is better for their own organisations.

    Because this is about real change, not just meetings and working groups. If health and wellbeing boards are no more than committees then we will have failed.

    The real work of health and wellbeing boards will be outside the boardrooms, with communities, providers, local organisations, voluntary and community groups, GP practices.

    Leaders in all those groups will need to get better at working together. The NHS Leadership Academy, ADASS, LGA and the National Skills Academy will all help by developing skills and supporting individual leaders.

    And the new Social Care Leadership Qualities Framework and Leadership Forum will help as well.

    But in the end, it will come down to individual leaders themselves, and how willing they are to embrace a different way of working.

    I’ve only been a minister for a week. But I’ve already got a clear picture of how grateful everyone in the Department of Health is to groups like the Kings Fund for the support they have given to projects like the National Learning Network for health and wellbeing boards.

    I hope we can continue to work together to build on that.

    So please, tell me about your experiences of how care can be brought together. What works and what doesn’t.

    My roundtable will be one place we can discuss how to progress, but to be sure, this won’t be a here today, gone tomorrow issue.

    I give you my word that I will push integration as hard as I can.

  • Baroness Kramer – 2014 Speech on Passenger Focus Bus Survey Results

    Below is the text of the speech made by Baroness Kramer in London on 25th March 2014.

    Thank you for that introduction.

    It’s a pleasure to be here today.

    And I’d like to congratulate Passenger Focus for delivering this new bus passenger survey.

    As transport stories go, the survey is unlikely to knock high speed rail or airport expansion off the front pages.

    But frankly, the subject it deals with is no less important.

    Buses form the backbone of UK transport, accounting for almost two thirds of public transport journeys.

    They keep people linked with the workplace, and businesses linked with the marketplace.

    For many young, old and disabled people – and those who live in rural areas – their local bus service is the only option to get from A to B.

    So buses keep Britain moving.

    And that’s why it’s crucial that passengers feel they are getting a good service.

    Today’s survey shows that customer satisfaction has improved in most areas.

    Including value for money, punctuality, journey time, and reducing anti-social behaviour.

    Overall satisfaction is 88%, an increase from 84% last year.

    These are very positive results.

    We want local authorities and bus operators to work together to bring about improvements, so it’s encouraging to see partnerships like that between Centro and local operators delivering for passengers.

    I also congratulate Reading Buses for achieving the highest overall satisfaction rating at 94% – an improvement even on last year’s impressive performance.

    These results don’t merely show that most passengers are happy with their bus services.

    They also demonstrate the value of the bus passenger survey in helping operators and local authorities identify passenger concerns, and take action to address them.

    We’ve been through 5 extremely tough years.

    And we’ve all had to tighten our belts – and learn how to deliver more for less.

    But make no mistake, the government is still backing buses.

    We are working with the industry to invest £1 billion a year providing older and disabled people with free off-peak travel.

    We’ve channelled around £350 million into buses through the Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG), and we’re protecting bus spending up to 2015 to 2016.

    We have provided £70 million through the Better Bus Area fund for improvements in 24 local authorities.

    £20 million has been invested to support community transport.

    And £87 million has been spent through the Green Bus Fund to boost environmental performance.

    Where the market can support it, we’re improving competition for bus passengers by implementing the Competition Commission’s recommendations.

    And £15 million of DfT funding is helping roll out smart ticketing technology across England’s bus fleets.

    All of these measures demonstrate our commitment to buses.

    They also illustrate the increasingly pivotal role of local government in delivering our bus strategy.

    As I’ve outlined, substantial funding has been made available.

    From the start of January, some BSOG funding has been paid directly to local authorities.

    This funding has been ringfenced until 2017 to encourage more partnership working between bus operators and local authorities

    Many authorities also received a share of the government’s £600 million Local Sustainable Transport Fund which included bus improvement schemes.

    And they’ve had more money to spend on road maintenance each year of this Parliament compared to the last.

    An important factor in bus punctuality.

    All these measures give communities more control over how money is spent.

    I do appreciate that with budgets under pressure, authorities have to make difficult choices about where they spend their money.

    But it’s absolutely paramount that they make the most of what’s available, to secure the best services and the best value for bus passengers.

    To help with this, we published guidance last October on procuring local bus services and other types of road passenger transport.

    While councils all over the country continue to innovate, I believe there is scope for further improvement.

    Particularly if authorities share best practice.

    We should always be seeking to improve what we do and learn from others.

    The Japanese have a word for it: “Kaizen” – or continuous improvement.

    That’s why the DfT is continuing to work on strategies to deliver better bus services cost effectively – including through community transport.

    And I urge local authorities to do the same.

    Making public transport accessible to everyone in the community is something that’s close to my heart.

    That’s why the concessionary fares scheme is so important.

    Feeling lonely and isolated can affect everyone.

    But the loss of friends and family, or losing mobility can make older and disabled people particularly vulnerable.

    For many, their local bus service is more than simply a mode of transport.

    It’s a lifeline.

    It connects them with essential services.

    But what’s just as important is that it gets them out of the house, and gives them confidence and a sense of independence.

    So I’m keen for the bus industry to invest in technologies which can help them.

    Many blind and partially sighted people find audio and visual announcements vital for travel.

    However, they don’t come cheap – particularly for smaller, local bus operators.

    The cost can rise to millions of pounds a year.

    So following an industry roundtable on transport accessibility, and discussions with Guide Dogs for the Blind and the RNIB, I am encouraging operators to work with manufacturers of audio/visual technology to gauge the potential for simpler and more affordable systems for buses.

    I want them to think creatively about what can be achieved.

    And I’m also looking into the possibility of research initiatives involving small businesses and academic institutions to encourage further innovation.

    But it’s not just about money and technology.

    What’s just as important is the attitude and awareness of staff – which has such a bearing on passengers’ confidence and willingness to travel.

    The DfT is currently reviewing the exemption of bus drivers from the mandatory EU disability awareness training requirement on passenger rights. This review will conclude at the end of this month.

    We want to establish if drivers are receiving adequate training under the current voluntary arrangement.

    I have also sought feedback from disability groups and charities.

    If the results show that progress is not being made on disability awareness training, we will examine options and propose a plan of action.

    So in summary, the evidence from the survey is encouraging.

    Bus companies are increasingly focused on the passenger experience.

    Many of them are working in partnership with local authorities.

    And passengers are responding positively.

    I’d like to thank everyone in the industry for their efforts.

    But make no mistake, the need for efficient, reliable, affordable, clean bus services is only going to rise.

    Britain’s population is growing, getting older, and travelling more.

    So absorbing the growth in demand while continuing to increase passenger satisfaction will therefore provide an enduring challenge to the industry.

    But it’s a challenge I’m sure it will meet.

    Particularly with the help of the bus passenger survey.

    Thanks to Passenger Focus, we know more today about bus passengers and their needs than we have ever known.

    And that means we’re well placed to attract more passengers back onto buses,

    Which in turn will give the bus industry a vital boost,

    While reducing road congestion,

    And cutting harmful traffic emissions.

    So I look forward to working with you over the next year, and to building on the achievements of 2013.

    Thank you.

  • Baroness Kramer – 2014 Speech on the British Transport Police

    Below is the text of the speech made by Baroness Kramer to the British Transport Police Federation annual conference on 5th March 2014.

    I’d like to begin by thanking George Lewis, Chairman, BTPF for his kind words this morning.

    The Federation plays an extremely important role. You are the independent voice of your members. And you represent their dedication, professionalism and expertise in everything you do.

    I would also like to echo your tribute to Chief Constable Andy Trotter. He has a fantastic track record as a leader in the British Transport Police. As Deputy Chief Constable he reassured the nation following the July 7th terror attacks and of course he played an absolutely vital role in ensuring the London 2012 Olympic Games went so well.

    I would like to take this opportunity to wish him all the very best for the future.

    Last night’s bravery awards demonstrated the courage and heroism of those who serve in the force and I would like to congratulate everyone who won an award.

    As a board member for Transport for London I saw first-hand how important the BTP are for keeping the capital safe and I was delighted to be invited to speak to you today because whether it is hunting cable thieves, tackling anti-social behaviour or preventing terrorism, each and every day of the year, the public know that when they need help most, you will be there.

    So I’d also like to take this opportunity to say something that perhaps isn’t said often enough: thank you for everything you do.

    Britain’s railways are a success story. They carry more passengers today than at any time since the Second World War and they are among the safest in Europe.

    But over the coming years we must meet two major challenges in order to be successful in the future.

    The first is that we all need to continue to deliver better value for money for the taxpayer and the farepayer.

    By 2010, the operating costs of our railways were amongst the most expensive in Europe. After housing and heating, the cost of travel is the next most significant bill most households face. And, if they are going to get to work on time, it is just not something people can easily cut back on.

    So we need to keep finding ways to improve services and save customers money.

    The second challenge is overcrowding.

    Passenger numbers have increased over recent years but infrastructure investment simply didn’t keep pace.

    Investment in the country’s infrastructure was lower than in 1998 in every year to 2011. That’s left more people standing up for their journey and crowding on to platforms.

    Looking ahead, passenger numbers are expected to grow by 14% more over the next five years. Rail freight is predicted to grow by 30% over a similar period.

    So unless we invest now, we risk grinding to a halt.

    That’s why between 2014 and 2019, Network Rail will spend over £38 billion running and expanding our railway. Just to take a couple of examples, that will see:

    – 24 trains an hour on Thameslink through central London

    – the return of non-stop services between Manchester and Liverpool.

    – and it will mean the closure of 500 more level crossings.

    We are also building the first new north – south railway for a hundred years.

    High Speed 2 will cut journey times between our major cities and it will unlock much needed capacity for much needed commuter and freight services.

    The first phase alone is expected to support about 40,000 jobs – including employing 9,000 directly on the railway. Overall, HS2 will return over £2 worth of benefit for every £1 invested.

    I hope the Federation can continue to be an influential voice welcoming HS2. As you point out Mr Chairman, we are making a substantial investment in HS2. And like any valuable investment we need to ensure it is protected appropriately.

    Construction of Phase One is due to start in 2017 so we have a little time yet to consider how best to do so. We expect lead contractors to be initially responsible for their own security and trespass risk at each site. We will also expect them to implement appropriate control measures involving all interested parties.

    I have said that Britain’s railways are a success story and what is absolutely clear is the British Transport Police are right at the heart of that achievement.

    Passenger numbers are up but overall crime levels have fallen for nine consecutive years. That’s why – day and night, young and old – today people are generally feeling safer on our railways and disruption to services as a result of police activity has also fallen over recent years.

    Those impressive achievements are underpinned by the unique foundations of the force and the specialist skills and knowledge of its officers.

    First, there is your unrivalled commitment to innovation.

    You embrace new technology that helps officers get to where they are needed more quickly and be even more visible for the public. For example, one of the problems people used to feel was being worried that if they saw anti-social behaviour in their carriage and rang the police they’d risk becoming a victim themselves.

    So you launched a text messaging service last year that has made it much easier for passenger to report anti-social behaviour without drawing attention to themselves on the train.

    Last month I visited Ebury Bridge where I saw for myself how you are using cutting edge technology to keep the railways safe, bring criminals to justice and save lives. I will continue to encourage Train Operating Companies to invest in high quality CCTV, ensuring that, working together, you are able to maximise the potential benefit for passengers and staff.

    Second, the BTP have specialist skills that are essential for keeping the railways moving.

    Skills that have cut the time it takes to clear non-suspicious and unexplained fatality incidents to an average of just 74 minutes. Saving passengers time, train operators money and supporting the country’s economy.

    The British Transport Police also has a critical counter terrorism role. In 2011 we took the sensible and pragmatic step to provide the BTP with an armed capability. That has enhanced the safety of the public and the security of the railways. Last year you raised the important point that we needed to ensure that armed BTP officers were on the same footing as those in other forces. I am very pleased to say that, subject to Parliamentary approval, I can confirm this will be in place by the summer.

    I would also like to honour the work you do preventing suicides on the network.

    Every life lost is a tragedy.

    I was in the cab with the driver returning from Crewe last week and we heard the news that someone had taken their life on the tracks just one train in front of us. In that moment, it was clearer than ever before for me what a traumatic experience it is for everyone involved. The work you do, through supporting initiatives like the ‘We’re in Your Corner’ campaign, is so very, very important. I want to do all that I can to help support any campaign that you and the industry want to take that will help prevent lives being lost.

    And, finally, your partnership with the industry means you have a unique commercial perspective. That strong relationship has enabled you to embrace change, reduce costs and improve value for money. The move to the new divisional structure is just the latest example of the BTP’s ability to continue to adapt and improve.

    A change that will see more officers and keep more eyes on the frontline, protecting the public, where they belong.

    Mr Chairman, your speech referred to the Scottish Government’s desire to incorporate the British Transport Police into a Scottish Police force.

    As you know there will be a referendum taking place in Scotland later this year. And the possible break-up of the BTP is one of the important and far reaching implications for the welfare of our citizens. We believe Scotland benefits from national networks that are unconstrained by international borders.

    A single united country preserves key national institutions that we all too easily take for granted. Institutions like the British Transport Police and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, who have served the people of our whole country well for many years.

    Put simply, we are better together.

    Britain’s railways are safer and more secure than they ever have been. The BTP play an essential role in keeping Britain on track.

    The Tour de France, Commonwealth Games, Ryder Cup and Rugby World Cup will mean the eyes of the world are once again on us over the coming years and millions of visitors will rely on our railways and on the BTP.

    Over the coming years we will be making a record investment in improving and expanding Britain’s railways and you will be vital to ensuring that investment is a success.

    I look forward to working with you to make that happen.

    Thank you.

  • Baroness Kramer – 2013 Speech on Low Carbon Vehicles

    Below is the text of the speech made by Baroness Kramer on the 23rd October 2013 at an ‘e-car club’ event.

    Thank you Charlie, and good morning ladies and gentlemen.

    It’s a great pleasure to be here in my new capacity as Minister of State for Transport.

    I might be new to the department, but my interest in transport goes back a long way.

    I ran a business advising on infrastructure finance in central and eastern Europe.

    I was on the board of Transport for London.

    And I was Liberal Democrat Shadow Transport Secretary – under the leadership of Sir Menzies Campbell.

    But despite this experience, I had never travelled in a pure electric car before today (23 October 2013).

    I must say I was hugely impressed.

    So impressed, in fact, that I’m trying to persuade E-Car to let me drive one.

    The environmental case for going electric is widely understood, but I wasn’t expecting the vehicles to be as sophisticated and refined as they are – both in their design and in the quality of their ride.

    Clearly the products are right.

    And sales are growing.

    But over the next few years, we have to make them even more commercially attractive to potential customers.

    So it’s inspiring to see a business like E-Car Club, which was only set up a couple of years ago, doing so much to promote ultra low emission vehicles.

    While government is providing significant funding to develop the technology, expand the infrastructure, and reduce the cost of electric vehicles to buyers, ultimately building the market requires initiative and entrepreneurial flair at a local level.

    And that’s precisely what E-Car Club and HARCA are doing here.

    This type of collaboration, between the car club, local authority and community association will be instrumental in growing the market and changing the way we travel.

    Pay-as-you-go car clubs don’t just help us improve air quality, reduce traffic noise and cut carbon.

    They also give Londoners more choice about the journeys they take.

    Reduce the cost of transport to individuals and businesses.

    And promote more efficient use of cars.

    We are absolutely committed as a government to speeding up the development of electric and other ultra low carbon vehicles – and supporting the growing market.

    As some of you may be aware, last month we published our ultra low emission vehicle strategy – called ‘Driving the future today’.

    Taking on board the views of stakeholders, it sets out a structured plan to transform sales of ultra low emission vehicles. Our long-term vision is for all cars and vans on our roads to be ultra low emission vehicles by 2050.

    We will continue to support the early market, through:

    – plug in grants which currently reduce the upfront cost by up to £5000 per car or £8000 per van

    – tax concessions

    – and grants for installing charging infrastructure

    We are also working to install more publicly accessible chargers in key locations like car parks at train stations and rapid chargers at motorway services.

    We have an unwavering, long term commitment to decarbonising road transport.

    Not just to tackle climate change.

    But also to make the UK a global leader in green vehicle technologies and engineering.

    The government’s focus will remain consistent and technologically neutral.

    And we welcome any innovative thinking that helps us achieve that goal.

    We will work to resolve any market failures or barriers to growth.

    In Europe we will continue to negotiate on the basis that regulations on reducing CO₂ from cars are ambitious but realistic.

    And we will keep on listening to industry and ensure that its concerns are taken on board when formulating policy.

    The industry’s role is crucial – and will be even more crucial in the future as our investment in green vehicles grows.

    In the 2013 Spending Round, the Chancellor announced that £500 million would be made available to develop the ULEV market between 2015 and 2020.

    This is a world leading commitment that gives certainty to the market.

    But we need the industry to help us deploy it in the most beneficial way.

    So we will shortly be launching a call for evidence to draw in a wide range of ideas to help us design the next phase of our ULEV programme.

    This is your opportunity to tell us how we can best support sustainable market growth in this sector.

    How best we can help UK technology businesses.

    And how best these changes can boost economic growth.

    We will retain incentives to help motorists with the upfront cost of buying ULEVs.

    And of course we will continue to invest to get the necessary infrastructure in place.

    I think we all appreciate that the decarbonisation of road transport presents us with a once in a lifetime opportunity.

    Like you, I am determined that we seize that opportunity.

    And I look forward to working with you in the months and years ahead to do just that.

    Thank you.

  • Timothy Kirkhope – 2010 Speech on Europe

    Below is the text of the speech made by Timothy Kirkhope on 18th March 2010.

    The General Election is going to be about trust.

    Who can be trusted to drive forward Britain’s economic recovery – the party responsible for the crisis, or the party which, when last in office, left Britain with its strongest economy for over two generations?

    Who can be trusted to reform our public services – the party which has simply thrown money, so-called “targets”, and ever increasing bureaucracy at our hospitals, our schools, and our police forces, or the party which believes in reforming the public sector by encouraging public choice and empowering local professionals?

    Who can be trusted to defend our national security – the party which has let our armed forces down in not providing the means they needed to defend our interests in action overseas, or the party which will always respect their needs and value their commitment to the safety of our nation.

    And so it is with Europe. The public needs a government which can be trusted to promote Britain’s national interests in the European Union by advancing its ideas clearly and firmly, and engaging constructively with our fellow members to develop the kind of Europe the public wants: a European Union which can earn their respect and merit their confidence.

    The fact is that during the 13 years of this government, public support for our membership of the European Union has fallen, it is lower now then when they took office. That is a sad indictment of their record in Europe. For all the sound-bites and soft words, the Government hasn’t delivered in Europe and the public knows it.

    The Government simply hasn’t offered clear or consistent leadership:

    – To the British public they pledged to defend the British rebate and to get reform in Europe, whilst in Brussels they sacrificed part of the rebate in return for the offer of a ‘review’ of the CAP – a very expensive review.

    – In Brussels time and again they have bent over backwards to accommodate the demands of other members to prove they are ‘good Europeans’, whilst indulging in macho posturing in the British media, puffing up the strength of their negotiating positions and the importance of their so-called ‘red lines’.

    – They agreed enthusiastically to sign up to the Lisbon Treaty but, rather than have the courage of his supposed convictions, the British Prime Minister invented excuses so he could arrive late in order to miss the official signing ceremony, and then he told us it didn’t really matter as the Treaty was just a tidying up exercise and that most of the substantial changes didn’t really apply to us anyway.

    – And, in the ultimate betrayal, the Government told the British people they would have a chance to vote in a referendum on the Constitution and then, when such referendums proved difficult to win, they agreed with the other member states to re-package the Constitution as the Lisbon Treaty to avoid the need for a vote. They had the power and opportunity to call a referendum and by failing to honour their promise on the pretext of a shabby re-branding exercise, a precious opportunity was lost forever when the treaty was finally ratified.

    No wonder the public no longer trusts Labour on Europe. And nor do our European allies. They can see through a government which tries to be euro-sceptic in the Sun newspaper but is predominantly euro-federalist in Brussels.

    What Britain now needs is to earn the respect of our European partners by engaging constructively in the debate with a consistent approach. Under a Conservative Government, our partners may not always like what we have to say but at least they will always be able to trust what we say.

    We do not propose to re-launch yet another tedious institutional debate. Europe has wasted enough time on institutional wrangling over recent years. Instead we want Europe to focus on the real issues that matter to people. We will nonetheless put in place certain safeguards for the future and pursue measures to mitigate the worst aspects of the Lisbon Treaty.

    At home,

    – we will make all future treaty changes which include any transfer of powers to the European Union subject to a referendum.

    – We will ensure that none of the so-called ‘ratchet’ clauses in the Treaty which could result in the abolition of vetoes and the transfer of powers could be invoked without parliamentary approval.

    – And we share the view of the German Federal Constitutional Court that any delegation of powers to the European Union must be in accordance with constitutions of the sovereign member states from which it derives its authority to act and that, as a consequence, the rights of domestic democratic institutions must be respected. So we will enact a Sovereignty Bill so that this principle can be upheld in the context of our own constitutional arrangements.

    In Europe,

    – we will seek a full opt-out from the Charter of Fundamental Rights – which strayed far beyond a simple statement of core rights and became a wish-list for many different special interests.

    – We will defend the integrity and independence of our Criminal Justice System through an additional protocol.

    – And we will assert the principle of subsidiarity in key areas of social and employment legislation we believe are damaging to the British economy.

    During the course of the life-time of the next government, there will be sufficient opportunities to realize these objectives: minor treaties are enacted for enlargements, changes to the size of the European Parliament, and so forth which could all be used as vehicles for the some of the amendments we seek.

    But beyond this package, an incoming Conservative government will have an ambitious programme for European reform.

    The European Union has an important part to play in supporting economic recovery. The European Commission has just published its Agenda 2020 initiative for driving forward the European economy. There is much in this we would support. We want to develop the internal market further, remove remaining barriers to trade.

    Europe is a vital player in reaching a sensible and balanced package of measures in managing the challenge of climate change.

    Within the Union itself over the next few years key policies will be subject to scrutiny and must be reformed: a new budget in the medium-term framework from 2014 has to be agreed, as will policies on agriculture, regional policy, research, and fisheries. There is a lot at stake.

    It is because we want to reinforce this drive for reform that  last year we launched our European Conservatives and Reformists Group in the European Parliament. We seek to build:

    – a Europe which respects the rights of its member states and the diversity of its peoples;

    – a Europe which is committed to government with a light touch where the burdens of taxation and regulation are minimised;

    – a Europe which is firm in its support for the transatlantic alliance.

    We want a more open and transparent European Union which acts only where it can add value in a proportionate and effective way.

    We may not be one of the two biggest groups in the European Parliament. But even the biggest of the seven groups in the Parliament only has about one third of its members. Everything has to be negotiated – every vote, every report, every appointment. We are playing our full part in these negotiations. Indeed now that we are free to articulate our vision for Europe and offer our proposals for reform with clarity and vigour, we are able maximise our impact on the Parliament’s work.

    It is simply not the case that ‘influence’ is dependent on being part of a big group.

    Let me give an example from just last week. The Socialist Group called for all US nuclear missiles to be removed from Europe – regardless of any political, military or strategic arguments. And its Labour members? Well, they split three ways!  The majority were opposed to the Socialist Group amendment but they were powerless to stop it. Powerless – so much for all their talk about ‘influence’. On a question of such importance they were left on the sidelines, most of them quietly abstaining in the hope no-one would notice.

    Being part of a big group is not a free ticket to influence. As everyone who really understands the European Parliament appreciates, you influence decisions by the strength and consistency of your message, by having a seat at the table, and by building networks of influence. So let me ask three key questions:

    – Where are Labour in the Parliament’s governing body, the Conference of Presidents? They are never there. As Deputy Leader of our Group I frequently represent it at the Conference.

    – Where are Labour in the crucial meetings of rapporteurs and shadow rapporteurs, the people responsible for drafting reports? Labour are only there if they are lucky. Conservative members, as the biggest delegation in our new group, are present more often than not.

    – How strong is the influence of Labour members with the Commission? After being dragged along by their Socialist allies in a doomed attempt to unseat the President of Commission, Mr Barroso – an initiative which failed largely thanks to the decisive votes of our Group – they are not regarded as natural partners of the new Commission either. We, on the other hand, are well connected to the Commission at the most senior levels.

    Our opponents, in the face of this reality, have tried with increasing desperation to smear our members and you heard more of that tonight – despite the all the evidence – by distorting and twisting comments, often comments they themselves know cannot be substantiated.

    For example, in a recent Labour leaflet attacking the ECR, the text consists largely of accusations covered by the phrase ‘it is said that’, or ‘allegedly’, or ‘reportedly’ – a word used no less than 14 times!

    But endlessly re-cycling a Labour Party press release does not make for a coherent or credible response.

    And, more worryingly, it is damaging our relationships with some of our partners particularly in the newer Member States

    By all means attack us for our beliefs, for our policies, or for our objectives. But such smears should have no part to play in our politics.

    It seems that Labour, in their increasing desperation, have resorted to such tactics.

    Frankly, it is pathetic – even tragic.

    Ladies and Gentlemen, the priorities for an incoming Conservative Government are to minimise any possible damage arising from the Lisbon Treaty and to work with our partners in driving forward a credible reform agenda:

    – We need a European Union which delivers where the British people and indeed all the peoples of Europe expect it to act: in building a dynamic economy, in dealing with climate change, and in promoting global trade;

    – a European Union which embraces reform of key policy areas such as agriculture and fisheries.

    – a European Union which delivers value for money, respecting the rights of its member states.

    It is an ambitious agenda but success is vitally important in the interests of the British people and indeed of the whole of Europe.

  • Timothy Kirkhope – 2010 Speech to the 1922 Committee

    Below is the text of the speech made by Timothy Kirkhope, the then Leader of the Conservative MEPs in the European Parliament, to the 1922 Committee on 13th January 2010.

    Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak to the 1922 committee again in my capacity as leader of our MEPs.

    I want to pay tribute to their hard work and express to you my happiness that we again won the European elections in June when we had the largest number of MEPs elected.

    I also want to thank both William Hague and Mark Francois for all their help and advice they have given me personally and for their support for our activities in pressing the Conservative cause in Brussels.

    New group

    Sir Michael, let me say a few words about our new group: the European Conservatives and Reformists which was successfully formed in July last year and which now holds a pivotal position in the Parliament and the negotiations and discussions with the European Commission & Council.

    We were told that to leave the EPP-ED alliance would lead to a loss of influence in the European Parliament and that we would become a marginal and irrelevant small group on the fringes of the Parliament.

    The Labour Party is still pushing this line but the evidence shows that this is completely the reverse of the truth.

    Combining the votes of the ECR, EPP and Liberal groups (many of whose members are liberal as in the classical sense – not like our UK liberals here) we have a clear majority to outvote the left. The EPP knows this and on key issues it has turned to us and asked for support: the re-election of José-Manuel Barroso as President of the Commission was an example of how we used our votes to good effect. Mr Barroso did not get our votes too easily though. He came to our Group first, before any other group, to explain his policies and took very searching questions. Then we supported him. Similarly we have worked with others on the centre right to prevent the efforts of the left to get the parliament involved in domestic Italian politics, we defeated measures to add additional burdens of further employment legislation, and on a number of occasions in votes we have made the difference between progress and reform, and backward steps towards socialism and federalism.

    Paradoxically, being the largest delegation in the ECR our influence with the EPP is actually greater now than if we had stayed inside.

    And we hold a vital committee chairmanship: Malcolm Harbour presides over the Internal Market Committee. Under the old alliance we chaired the Agriculture Committee with Neil Parish who hopefully will be joining you shortly.

    We have a blend of experience and new blood that gives us a powerful voice in key committees – from past Committee Chairmen such as Struan Stevenson who leads on fisheries, and Giles Chichester with Industry and Energy, to new members now dramatically making their mark such as Kay Swinburne and Vicky Ford on economic affairs where they have particular expertise. The quality and hard work of our delegation has an important impact on the Parliament. This matters as Parliament is no longer the talking shop it was in 1979; you will know that it is now a full co-legislator alongside the Council. So it is vital we have a strong voice promoting Conservative ideas and defending British interests.

    With the realistic prospect of a Conservative government in a few weeks time, this is more important than ever and a new government working with our new group will get even better results for Britain and Europe. Over the next few years key policies come up for review: a new budget in the medium-term framework from 2014 has to be agreed, and also new reform packages for agriculture, regional policy, research, and the discredited common fisheries policy. There is a lot at stake.

    One party

    Sir Michael, we strongly support the ‘one party’ vision of David Cameron – whether we are Conservative representatives in Westminster, Edinburgh, Leeds or Brussels, we are one party. We have a shared responsibility for the Conservative ‘brand’ – to enhance its reputation and credibility at all levels of government.

    To this end we maintain regular contact with the party to share information and develop policy. Our delegation was involved in the preparation of the party’s response to the deeply disappointing result of the Irish referendum and the subsequent ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.

    Given that the government had shamelessly betrayed its public pledge to hold a referendum on the treaty, we agree that our energies must be devoted to initiatives in areas where we can still make a difference and move on. Although, as you know, two of our members felt the need to withdraw from the frontbench, the delegation as a whole is steadfastly behind David Cameron’s European policy.

    We are working closely with the shadow front bench teams – over the next few weeks, for example, we will receive in Brussels visits from the Home Office, business, and international development teams. It is vital that the party speaks with one voice here in Westminster, in – we hope – the European Council and Council of Ministers shortly, and in the European Parliament.

    Expenses & lobbying

    One area where we are working hard to reinforce the Party’s message is in pursuing the highest standards in public life. Both our institutions have had, to say the least, difficulties over recent years. We are trying to fix them. Our delegation has now introduced rigorous but practical new policies for recording online our expenses and as of 1st January contacts with lobbyists.

    We know that in truth the vast majority of our elected members in both places have always demonstrated integrity and probity but the public now needs the reassurance that only full transparency can deliver. We have taken decisive steps to ensure that this expectation is met.

    At the start of a critical year for our country, we look forward to working closely with you as we campaign for the election of a Conservative Government. We will do our best to help you and our PPCs to obtain a resounding victory. And beyond that, we look forward to playing our full part in working with the new Government in delivering for Britain in Europe.