Blog

Below is the text of the speech made by David Cameron, the Prime Minister, at a PM Direct event held by Saga in Brighton on 24th March 2014.

Thank you very much. Thank you, thank you. Great – great to be here. No long introduction from me because I really want to spend this time answering your questions. Let me just make 2 points; about the budget and the thinking behind it.

The first is this: you can tell a lot about a society by how much it enables people to live in dignity and security in their old age. Now, I am not claiming that we have solved all the problems of helping pensioners in our country, but this government, while making difficult long term decisions about our economy and our future, has tried to help pensioners live out their lives in dignity and security.

We protected the basic state pension with the triple lock, so it always goes up by earnings, prices, or 2.5%: whichever is the highest. That’s had a real impact over the last few years. We protected those pensioner benefits, a promise that we’ve kept in terms of the Winter Fuel Allowance, the free TV licences, the bus passes and suchlike. That is important.

Then you’ve got these moves in the budget which will help pensioners to use their savings better. And so you’ve got the abolition of the 10p rate on savings income up to £5,000; you’ve got the pensioner bonds. The pensioner bonds are very important because a lot of pensioners say to me, “Look, I’ve worked hard, I’ve put some money aside, but because interest rates are so low I don’t really get any income from my savings.” These pensioner bonds will help pensioners to do that; there’s £10 billion worth of them available, but there’s a limit of how much any one person can take. And so it’s a good way of helping pensioners have that dignity and security.

So that’s the first thing I wanted to say. The second thing I wanted to say is that all of this links to the long term economic plan that we have for our country. We’re involved in a giant turnaround exercise: to take an economy that was truly troubled after the 2008 Great Recession and give it a chance of success in the modern age.

Now this plan, at its heart, is about creating jobs, and we’ve got more people in work. It’s about cutting people’s taxes, and we’ve now lifted to £10,000 the amount of money you can earn before you start paying income tax. It’s about making sure that we build the schools and provide the skills that are going to be essential for future generations. It’s about controlling immigration and controlling welfare, so that people who work hard and do the right thing get rewarded. And it’s about building the infrastructure that this country needs.

So, it’s a plan and you can see every aspect of this plan and we’re going to report in on this plan over and over again. By the end of it I expect you’ll be bored to death of hearing about this plan but the point I want to make about this plan is actually not the facts and figures, but the values behind it. Because in the end, that’s what matters most of all: why are we doing this? Who are we doing it for? And what will the country feel like when this plan is successful?

And the values, I would say, at the heart of it are, first of all, that if you work hard the system should be on your side and help you, rather than punish you. That’s why being able to earn £10,000 before paying tax is so important. That’s why allowing pensioners to keep more of their savings, get a decent income in retirement and not to have to take out an annuity, so they can spend their money as they choose. That’s why that value – about trusting people, helping people and recognising the worth of working hard and saving – is so important.

But perhaps the most important value of all – particularly at a time when people see economies struggling, and, worldwide, the difficult positions people are in – most important value of all is stability and security. Giving people a sense that we want to help you have that security and stability in your life, whether that’s about helping people to get a job, whether it’s about helping people to start a business or whether it’s giving people that dignity and security in old age. Those are the values that lie behind this plan and this budget was very much in line with this plan and I’m really pleased about the steps we’ve been able to take to help pensioners have that dignity and security, to reward saving and to say, “It’s your money to spend as you choose.”

But I’m sure there’ll be many other things that pensioners want, that future pensioners are worrying about, that you want to ask me about today. So please don’t hold back; any question you like and I will do my best to answer it.

Question

Thank you. Prime Minister, I’m not going to talk about pensions; I’m talking about inheritance tax. And I recall your promise when you came into power – or just before you came into power – about inheritance tax was going to have a quantum leap – I think it was about £1 million – and now we see that it’s not. A lot of us save not just for ourselves but for our children, our grandchildren, and in this particular area we see house prices rising year on year, in fact, month on month, and yet we’re not being able to pass on a lot of that inheritance because most of our equity is tied up in a house. So that 1 issue, I think, gives us a lot of concern. Are you able to address that?

Prime Minister

If we go back – I’m not going to give you a history lesson, sir, I wouldn’t dare – but if we go back to 2007: in those days you could only – the threshold for inheritance tax was £325,000. And if you remember, George Osborne – then shadow Chancellor – made this speech and made this promise that we wanted to radically change that and lift it to £1 million. That was our aim. Straight away after that, Gordon Brown – realising what a brilliant pledge it was by George Osborne – then changed the rules so that you could pass between husband and wife, and also between civil partners. So the effective threshold for inheritance tax went from £325,000 to about £700,000.

But would I like to go further in future? Yes I would. I believe in people being able to pass money down through the generations and pass things onto their children. I think you build a stronger society like that. And I think, of course we should – you know, you have to have caps and limits and we have to think about those, but generally speaking we should be encouraging people to pass things on to their children. And 1 of the reasons why George Osborne made that pledge was this point about property, was that when the limit was £300,000 or so, quite a lot of, you know, hard working families who’d worked hard, who’d saved, who’d put that money into their house, were being caught by inheritance tax. And inheritance tax should only really be paid for by – only really be paid by the rich; it shouldn’t be paid for by people who’ve worked hard, who’ve saved and who’ve bought a family house in Peacehaven for example.

So the ambition is still there; I would like to go further. It’s better than it was [Party political content] but it’s something we’ll have to address in our manifesto.

Question

I wonder if I could ask you a question about infrastructure? We’re in this great county of Sussex – West Sussex, Brighton and Hove, East Sussex – 1.5 million people, but a bare 5 miles of motorway, Prime Minister, in the whole county. Is it possible you could ask the transport secretary to look at that motorway deficit, particularly in respect of lack of East/West motorway and the possibility of expansion of Gatwick Airport?

Prime Minister

Well, first of all, on the Gatwick Airport, I can’t really say anything about that because we’ve got the Davies Review that is looking at our airport capacity, and he’s said there are really 3 options. He said we need more – we need more capacity. Not immediately, it’s not a panic, but he says we do need to add another runway if we want to try and keep our hub status as a country. And he’s got 3 suggestions: he says that there is the Heathrow suggestion, the Gatwick suggestion, or possibly – the east of London option.

So all of those 3 are being looked at. I think he’s doing a good job. 1 of the things he’s done is stop people panicking about this issue. He says that it has to be addressed but we don’t have to do it tomorrow, but we do need to make a decision in good time and we will in the summer of next year.

In terms of roads, actually I would say this government has stepped forward with quite a lot of investment into road and rail schemes. I know sometimes in places like Sussex people say, “Well all the money’s going to go on HS2.” Does anyone think that; all the money’s going to be wasted on HS2? Here’s the fact of the day for you: in the next Parliament, we’re going to spend 3 times more on other road and rail schemes as we will on HS2. I think HS2’s really important, it’s actually going to link up our country, it’s going to help drive economic development through the Midlands and the North and bring the country together – but we’ll be spending lots of money on other things. So there will be money available for pinch-point schemes in places like Sussex, for road and rail improvements. In terms of motorway deficits I’m very happy to look at what you say. There have been some specific road upgrades in Sussex in the last few years, but we we’re happy to look at more.

Question

I’m 70 years old. I have a pension pot which I haven’t touched yet, but I’ve been looking into an annuity. With the budget changes, what benefits do you see for my pot?

Prime Minister

Right. Okay. One of the most important things in the budget is the money for face-to-face financial advice, because I think this is a very complicated area – pensions – and people really need to have good advice before they take a decision. What we’ve decided to do, sir, and this may help you – I don’t know your own circumstances – we’ve got the bigger decision that happens in April 2015, which ends the need to have to buy an annuity if you’re in a defined contribution scheme, and most people are now in defined contribution schemes. But even before that, we’ve taken a set of measures that help people to draw down income from their pensions by changing the rules around that they help people take a bigger cash lump sum, including in small pension pots, and they change some of the tax circumstances around those things. So my advice would be to talk to your own financial advisor, see your own circumstances, and whether these changes can help you.

Behind them all is a very simple piece of thinking, which is that you’ve worked hard, you’ve saved during your life. That money in your pension pot is basically your money and you should have greater freedom to spend that as you choose.

Now of course you then get the argument – and we’ve heard a bit of this over the last few days – “Well, if you allow people to spend their own money, they’ll blow it all on a cruise; they’ll spend all the money, and then where will we be?” Well first of all I’d say it’s deeply condescending to say to people who’ve worked hard, who’ve saved all their lives, who’ve been thinking about the future –to say, “Well you can’t trust them to spend their own money because they’re irresponsible people.” They’re not irresponsible people; they’re responsible people. That’s why they saved in the first place.

But if you want to get technical there’s another reason for feeling confident about this change which is that we’re changing the basic state pension system in this country. Right now, as you know, you get your basic state pension and then there’s a minimum income guarantee and a top-up through the pension credit which takes you up above £140 if you’re a single person. And what we’re doing is we’re replacing that basic state pension and the pension credit top-up – replacing it with what’s called a single tier pension, so when people retire, they will retire on a basic state pension of above £140.

Now why that matters so much is because it is lifting people out of the means test, it’s lifting people out of that pension credit top up, so even if they do go and spend lots of money on certain things they’re not going to be reliant on a means tested system. They’ll be reliant on the basic state pension which will have lifted them above the means test system. So I would argue this is the right thing to do; giving people more opportunity to spend their own money as they choose, giving people more freedom, but it’s also the right time to do it, because we’ve changed the system fundamentally so that it wouldn’t have the bad consequences were people to go and blow all their money. But I don’t believe they will, because I don’t believe people are fundamentally irresponsible; I think people are fundamentally responsible. I believe in trusting the people, a slogan my party came up with at the turn of the 20th century, and I think we should stick to it now.

Question

All I want to do is say thank you. I’ve been holding on to my trivial pension since you got elected, and I’ve been asking you to change it to what it is now. If I’d have cashed my pension in when I should have done, I’d have had 25% and £14,000 a year pension. Now, I can draw the whole lot out and thank you very much indeed.

Prime Minister

Thank you. I mean, there’s – what’s interesting about this argument is that we were – when I was a back bench MP – I was elected in 2001 – there was a private member’s bill then called the Curry Bill, and it was to try and abolish the need to take out an annuity. And we went along and we voted for this bill Friday after Friday, and tried to get it through, but even that bill wasn’t as good as what we’re doing now because there was no single tier pension proposal then so even an abolition of annuities proposal still had lots of small print about how much income you had to have before you could guarantee that you wouldn’t need an annuity. And so it’s this single tier pension move that’s made it possible to do what we’ve done, and I’m really glad that it’s going to benefit people like you.

You still pay tax on it, of course. You draw it down, but you pay it at your marginal rate and this is a really good argument, because then you can draw down money year after year in a way that makes sure that you pay tax on it, but you pay at your marginal rate, rather than pushing yourself up into a higher rate.

Question

The budget seemed almost perfect. What has George got left for next year; he needs to pull a few rabbits out of hats. Has he got anything left?

Prime Minister

Well, I mean, budgets are – it’s a very dramatic event, the budget, isn’t it? I think we all – it’s sort of a national event. I’m not sure other countries get quite as excited about their budgets as we do. But you know, a budget is only as good as the underlying economy that it is commenting on, and I think while, you know, I’m very keen today to talk about these important steps for pensioners and trusting people to spend their own money as they choose and rewarding savings, actually, in a way the real news in the budget was that the economy is improving. We still haven’t reached the peak that we were at before the crash, as it were, but we’re working our way back and the really encouraging thing is we’ve seen 1.3 million more of our fellow countrymen and women in work – that’s good news – we’ve got 400,000 more business operating in Britain, we’re exporting more to fast growing markets on the other side of the world.

So the economy’s on the mend but there’s a lot more work to do. What George and what I and others will be thinking about for next year’s budget will depend on how well the economy is doing and whether we can continue to make some progress in helping people to keep more of their money to spend as they choose. But that’s what it’s all about – budgets are great events, great buzzy events – but in the end what really matters is the long-term economic plan, turning the economy around and making sure we have an economy that is delivering a recovery for all. Because the truth is there’s still lots of people in our country, who – they may have found work, they may have found that job, but earnings are still going up quite gradually, prices in the shops are still quite high, people are still feeling that it’s a very tough set of circumstances, recovering from this very difficult, long and great recession. But we are getting there, and if we stick at the plan, we can make sure more people feel it.

Question

There are many people who’ve worked hard all their lives, done the right thing, as you rightly said, and when they get to pension age they obviously are, so-called, wealthy. Are you able to give any commitment on withdrawing Winter Fuel Payments and bus passes for so-called wealthy pensioners.

Prime Minister

Well I made a very clear pledge at a Saga gathering, and I made it again at the election, that we should keep the pensioner benefits. Obviously all pledges are about the Parliament that you’re going into and we make new pledges in our manifesto for the next Parliament. But we said very clearly we would uprate the basic state pension, keep the Winter Fuel Allowance, free TV license, the bus pass, the cold-weather payments, and we’ve done all of those things. We’ve kept our promises in all of those areas.

We’ll set out our policy for the next Parliament at the next election. I don’t want to pre-judge that. The only thing I would say to people who think you save lots of money by not giving these benefits to top-rate tax payers is that you save a tiny amount of money and you always introduce another complexity into the system. But we made our promise to this Parliament, we’ve kept our promise in this Parliament. I’m very proud of that, because I don’t think older people in Britain should be asked to suffer for the difficult decisions that we have to make. Making promises and keeping promises is a very important part of politics so woe betide the politician that makes one of these big promises and then says “Oh, sorry, I didn’t really mean it.”

Question

We’ve just very recently done a scrutiny in Brighton & Hove on the effects of alcohol in the city, because we do have quite a problem with binge drinking etc, and 1 of the things that came out of that was the amount of excessive drinking that is done in people’s homes by older people. It’s something that really came to the fore, and I just wondered if you could tell us what the thinking was in reducing the tax on beer by a penny a pint, and were health issues taken into account when that was considered?

Prime Minister

Absolutely they were. I think the decision behind the beer duty is really much more about our pubs.

We do have a problem in terms of binge drinking, and sometimes that’s spilling over into violence and bad behaviour and anti-social behaviour on our streets. We do have a problem with that, and we have to tackle it in lots of different ways. We need to address, 1 of the biggest causes of the problems, which is excessively cheap drink provided by supermarkets deep discounting and that’s why we’ve passed this rule to say you can’t sell for less than duty plus VAT, and that will have an impact. I think there are all sorts of things we need to do in terms of policing and in terms of public order which we are doing, and the evidence is that the situation is getting better rather than worse.

But I don’t think we should take steps that would disadvantage the responsible drinker and the responsible pub,. Pubs have had a pretty tough time in recent years – a combination of the smoking ban, very cheap drink in supermarkets, some of the other regulations and all the rest of it. And I’m a great supporter of Britain’s pubs, I think they provide a sort of social glue to help bring communities together – the focus for the village, the focus for your part of the town – and so trying to help pubs by cutting beer duty, which we’ve done in both of the last 2 budgets is the right thing to do.

I did look at the idea of minimum unit pricing for alcohol, which is an idea that’s got a lot of merit, because you’re basically saying a unit of alcohol, however it’s consumed, should never cost less than, say, 40p, and they’re trying this in Scotland. And that wouldn’t actually put up the price of a pint in a pub, nor would it put up the price of a bottle of wine in a supermarket. But I think 2 things: 1 is, we should wait and see how it goes in Scotland, and see whether it works in Scotland, and the second thing is, at a time when families are having to take difficult decisions about budgets and everything else, I think it’s just a change too many. So I let’s let the duty plus VAT thing settle down, let’s see what happens in Scotland, but yes, public health concerns about alcohol, public order concerns about alcohol, very important part of what the government’s doing. But don’t let’s clobber pubs as we try and get this right.

Question

I can see that ending the annuities is very popular with many people, myself included, and I can see that spending money on cruises would be a very good idea. But you were talking about dignity in old age, and you’ve only got to visit hospitals where perhaps 60% of the beds are taken by elderly people who are called patients, to see that many people don’t have dignity. And it feels like politicians have been asleep by the fireside for the past 30 years. Isn’t the truth that a lot of the pension pot that I and others will take – isn’t that going to end up in the pockets of private nursing home owners?

Prime Minister

Well look, first of all, I would repeat what I said about giving people the choice. You don’t have to take out an annuity; you don’t have not to take out annuity: you’ve got the choice now; you can decide whether that’s right for you. If what you’re saying is, “Does dignity and security in old age have a lot to do with much more than money?” I absolutely agree with you. We won’t have true dignity and security in old age until we make sure our NHS really does everything it can to look after older people better. Now, there are some great examples of care and frankly there are some less good examples of care and the Health Secretary and the Care Quality Commission are now really shining a light on standards and quality of care.

I think we need to do a lot more on dementia. That’s why I’ve set a dementia challenge for the country. We’re going to double the amount of research that’s going in. We’re encouraging communities and people to become more dementia friendly, to learn about the nature of these diseases. We’ve got to stop this rather condescending and wrong attitude that dementia is just part of ageing. It isn’t. It’s a disease and we ought to be trying to tackle it like we’re trying to tackle cancer or heart disease.

But the point about care homes is also important, because I know there is a concern that, of course, if you take your money out of your pension pot and have it as your own money, then it counts as your money when you are assessed for care needs. That is true; that is the case. But, again, you have the choice: you can leave money in your pension pot or take it out. And also, we are putting in place a cap on the amount of money that someone can be charged for their care needs. And I think this was a very important step we took in this Parliament, a step we took very much as a coalition; we talked about it, it was a very big change. And I think there was a great unfairness that if you were hit, say, with dementia, sometimes at a relatively young age, you could be facing hundreds of thousands of pounds in nursing home charges eating up every last penny of savings that you had in your house, in your savings account or elsewhere. Putting a cap on the maximum amount that you can lose is a fair and a good step to take.

We haven’t solved the problem of dignity and security in old age but protecting spending on the NHS, protecting the pension, protecting the pension benefits and now allowing pensioners more freedom to spend their own money as they choose are all good steps forward.

Question

Now, talking of health, pensioners have nothing unless they have health to enjoy their life. The Royal Sussex County Hospital, our local large hospital, in fact has had planning permission – you know where I’m going now, I think – has had planning permission for a massive extension which will be beneficial, should the need arise, to everybody here in this room. Could you assist to get the capital released to enable the build?

Prime Minister

You’ve given me a very clear message. I can’t say anything about it now. It’s something that the Treasury and the Department of Health are looking at. I know how important it is. You know, this is a vibrant city and people want to see really good health services in their community. So message received and understood.

Question

What can you do or what would you like to do where people own their own homes and when they go into a nursing home they’re made to sell their homes to pay for their care, whereas somebody that has not got their own home, they get exactly the same as I or any of my friends would get that have to pay for it and it costs them nothing? After all, national health is from the cradle to the grave and not everybody needs a nursing home.

Prime Minister

That’s absolutely right. It’s what I was discussing with the gentleman here. I mean, I think there has been this unfairness in the system in that you can have 2 people living next door to each other; 1 person’s worked hard, saved, bought their own home, the person next door has not done any of those things. The person next door without the savings, without owning the home, gets the whole of their care paid for while the person who’s saved gets charged. That’s why we’ve brought in the Dilnot cap, so that there’s a cap of £75,000 on how much you can draw down in terms of paying for that care. This should mean – because this is early days in terms of this policy coming in – that no one has to sell their home to pay for their care.

What we’re hoping it’s going to do once we’ve brought the cap in and said there’s a maximum that you can have to spend on your own care, is drive the creation of a really exciting insurance market so that people can insure even against losing the £75,000.

Now, this is all coming in in the next few years, it hasn’t started yet, so this insurance market hasn’t taken off in the way that I’d like yet, but it will. It’s an expensive step we’ve taken, because obviously, tragically, lots of people are having to sell their homes to pay for care now, but the ideal is a situation where you’ve got a cap, you’ve got an insurance market, no one has to sell their home to pay for care. And even if people choose to, they should be able to delay that into the future.

So that’s the aim, and I think again it links to this thing about dignity and security in old age, which is absolutely what drives me and drives this government in terms of coming up with the right policies.

Thank you very much indeed.

Below is the text of the press conference made by David Cameron, the Prime Minister, on the European Council on 21st March 2014.

Good afternoon. This has been a wide-ranging European Council, obviously with the situation in the Ukraine at its heart. I’ll come to that shortly, but first I want to say a few words on other important issues.

First, on the economy. In this week’s budget we set out more action to build a resilient economy that delivers security for hard-working people in Britain. And we set out specific measures to support manufacturers, investors, exporters, savers. Here at the summit we’ve discussed how to make Europe more competitive, to generate more growth and create more jobs. As I set out at Davos, there’s a real opportunity to bring back jobs to Britain and the rest of Europe, to re-shore those jobs. And today we’ve agreed to encourage that by doing more to cut red tape, to attract investment, and to stimulate innovation. As I’ve said, I believe Britain can be the re-shore nation. The news yesterday that Hitachi will be having their train-making headquarters in the UK is a good example of that.

We’ve also discussed how businesses need affordable energy prices to keep pace with their competitors elsewhere, so we’ve agreed to accelerate our efforts to complete the internal energy market and to improve the energy flow across the continent with more interconnections. We want the EU to play a strong leadership role in efforts to secure a global climate deal next year in Paris. That means swift agreement on a target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and I fully support the 40% target proposed.

On tax, I’ve also led the charge on tax reform, tax transparency, attacking tax evasion around the world, putting it at the heart of the G8 agenda. 44 countries have now committed to the early implementation of automatic information exchange on tax matters. And I’m delighted that at this summit, we’ve finally unblocked this issue in the EU with Luxembourg and Austria now committed to automatically exchange too, and a new commitment by all of us to agree new rules by the end of this year to ensure that the EU keeps pace with the new global standard.

I also raised the situation in Sri Lanka. As you know, this is an issue I care deeply about. I want to see reconciliation in the country, and that means properly addressing issues of the past. President Rajapaksa has failed to do this, so now we need an international, independent investigation into alleged war crimes. The UN human rights commissioner has called for this, and that is what a UK co-sponsored resolution at the UN human rights council supports. Countries will vote on that resolution next week, and today I secured the full backing of all of the European Union for that approach.

Turning to Ukraine. Since we last met, a sham and illegal referendum has taken place at the barrel of a Kalashnikov, and Russia has sought to annex Crimea. This is a flagrant breach of international law, and something we will not recognise. This behaviour belongs to the Europe of the last century, not this one. It cannot be ignored, or we risk more serious problems in the future.

So it was very important that the European democracies represented here should send a strong and united message that Russia will face further consequences. And that it what we have done. We have subjected 12 more individuals to travel bans and asset freezes, bringing the total to 33. We have cancelled the EU-Russia summit, agreed not to hold bilateral summits, and we’ll block Russian membership of the OECD and the International Energy Agency. We’ve agreed to rapidly implement economic, trade and financial restrictions on occupied Crimea. We will only accept Crimean goods in the EU if they come from Ukraine and not Russia, and it’s clearly set out in the conclusions agreed today.

We’ve also reiterated that if Russia takes any further steps to destabilise Ukraine, there will be far-reaching economic consequences. And we have, for the first time, in the conclusions published today, tasked the European commission to prepare such possible measures. Our message to Russia is clear: choose the path of diplomacy and de-escalation, or face increasing isolation and tighter and tighter sanctions. We’ve already seen 10% wiped off the value of the Russian stock market this month, reports of capital flight and down rated credit ratings.

But the best rebuke to Russia is a strong and successful Ukraine, free to make its own choices about its own future. Every leader at this summit is very clear on that. So this morning we took a formal step to closer relations between the EU and Ukraine, with the signature of a landmark agreement between us both. We welcomed President Yatsenyuk to our meeting for the second time in a fortnight, and I support his efforts to lead a stable democratic government that reaches out to the regions and respects the rights of minorities.

We also commend the restraint of the Ukrainian authorities under particularly difficult circumstances. We want an OSCE mission rapidly deployed, or we’ll send an EU mission instead. In the long term, the biggest challenge will be to build a strong Ukrainian economy, rooted in strong institutions that respect the rule of law. We continue to work on an IMF package for Ukraine, and we’ve called on MEPs to rapidly confirm the removal of customs duties on Ukrainian exports, which should benefit businesses there by up to €500 million a year.

Finally, we agreed to set up our efforts to reduce Europe’s dependency on energy from Russia, and we’ve asked the European Commission to produce, by June, a comprehensive plan to achieve this. So today we’ve agreed action to stabilise Ukraine in these difficult circumstances, to support the Ukrainian government, and to build closer ties between the EU and Ukraine. In the long run, Ukrainian success will be one of the most powerful answers to Russian aggression. This is the vital contribution that Europe can make to help the Ukrainian people in their hour of need, and we are determined to deliver it.

Thank you very much, happy to take some questions.

Question

You mentioned the future list of sanctions, possible sanctions, being drawn up, and these would be triggered if there’s further destabilisation of the Ukraine, so I wanted to know what you would regard as destabilisation.

And also, you’re sharing your thoughts on the unsatisfactory process by which Qatar was awarded the World Cup in the Sun this morning, obviously you want to say a bit more about that. But I was wondering under the current circumstances, given we’re pulling out of cooperation with Russia on a whole range of fronts, is Russia a suitable host for the World Cup?

Prime Minister

Well, first of all, on football, I’ll leave that for the football authorities. I said what I said about being involved in that process in my memories of it, but I think the football authorities will want to look at this evidence and see what they make of it. I think that’s the important point there.

On the issue of what counts as further destabilisation of the Ukraine: well, if – for instance, if Russian troops were to go into the east of the country, you know, the Russians need to know that would trigger, as it says in the conclusions that we’ve published, far reaching consequences in a broad range of economic areas. And that’s why for the first time these conclusions talk about the European Council asking the commission and member states to prepare possible targeted measures.

So I think it is very, very clear that we’ve done – I think, today, in respect of what’s happened in Crimea, I don’t think people were fully expecting what we’ve done, which is to say, from now on, goods from Crimea have to come through Ukraine or they’re going to get very hefty penalties and tariffs put on them. That is a step that I think is very important that we’ve taken, that I don’t think people were expecting. But we’re still being clear that the third stage of sanctions would be triggered by further destabilisation of the Ukraine and we’ve made further progress in setting out exactly what that means.

Question

America announced some measures yesterday that seemed to – sort of, highlighted the different approach between Brussels and Washington. Why is it that there are no businessmen or oligarchs on the EU list, and indeed, none have even been put forward to go on that list? I understand. Surely if you hit people like Abramovich, who uses the city London as a sort of playground, you would send a much stronger message to Russia.

Prime Minister

Well, first of all, I don’t really accept this idea that there’s a divergence between the EU and the US. I think actually both the US and the European Union have been taking strong, predictable, consistent and tough measures.

If we actually look at the number of people affected by these visa bans and asset freezes, it’s 32 from the US, 33 from Europe. In some respects, Europe has gone further than the US, obviously, with respect to what I’ve just said about trade measures against the Crimea.

I think the difference is the slightly different processes we have about how to highlight who should be subject to a visa ban or an asset freeze. The EU approach is very much to target people who had a direct connection with what has happened in the Crimea. And that’s why the figures that we have singled out are military figures, figures from the Duma, presidential advisors, heads of the Russian state news agency, and of course, a range of Crimeans. The Americans have done that and then also added also some other people as you said.

But we have slightly different approaches, but generally I think the EU and US are actually working well together actually demonstrating, as I said, a strong, tough, consistent and predictable approach.

Question

Also on the American side in the White House statement yesterday, they name economic sectors such as metallurgy, energy, trade, etc, as possible areas for the stage 3 sanctions potential. Is that something that you think the Europeans should be following – in the sense of naming and asking the commission to prepare further sanctions – that they should be naming the kind of parts of the economy that might be hit, to let the Russians know how they might be hurt.

And secondly, could you also tell us whether at last night’s dinner you had a mobile phone with you?

Prime Minister

On last night’s dinner, I did have a mobile phone on me but it didn’t work. I think very sensibly we decided to block the use of mobile phones at last night’s dinner so we could focus on the text and the work. It was hard pounding, it was a long night of negotiation, but I think actually we ended up with a, as I said, strong, clear, predictable set of things.

In terms of, you know, what I came to this council wanting to see was really 3 things. I wanted to see an expansion in terms of the number of people subject to travel bans and asset freezes, and that was achieved. I wanted to see clear measures in respect to what’s happened in the Crimea, and that has happened, particularly with the point I’ve made about how we’re going to target goods from occupied Crimea. And the third thing I wanted was to, more clarity on what would happen if Russia went further in destabilising the Ukraine, and for the first time we have tasked the Commission to prepare possible targeted measures.

To answer your question very directly about, well, what areas could these affect. The text says a broad range of economic areas. Now obviously, that must include some of the key areas like finance, like the military, like energy. There’s nothing left out from that text, and I want to be clear that all of those sorts of areas in my view would be and should be considered, and obviously the Commission and member states now need to prepare possible targeted measures in order to be in compliance with what we agreed last night.

Question

Just talking about the different approaches to individuals in the lists of sanctions, does that mean that you have ruled out, or the EU has ruled out ever adding oligarchs and businessmen to that list? I mean, yesterday we saw that Russian politician Alexei Navalny called from Roman Abramovich to be sanctioned by the West. Would you ever consider that?

Prime Minister

Well we certainly haven’t ruled anyone out from this approach. But as I say, the EU approach, and the way that it works under the laws that we have, is that you need to target people who have a direct relationship with the action that’s been taken.

That is why, if you go back a couple of weeks, I said very clearly, it should include Russian Members of Parliament. They have acted to vote again and again to accept this illegal referendum, to annex the Crimea to Russia. They are part of the problem, they’re part of what caused this, and so they should be targeted. And the same should apply in terms of military advisors, presidential advisors, and yes, anyone else, if there’s a direct link between what they are doing and the situation with Russian destabilisation of the Ukraine.

So that’s the approach that we should take, and people who get involved in that should know that they are liable to possibly be subject to an EU travel ban or asset freeze.

Question

A lot of countries, particularly in Eastern Europe, have this concern about their energy supply, and there is a suggestion that should these harsher sanctions – these harsher measures be taken – they should be compensated in some way for losses to their economies. Was this something that was discussed, and is this something you think is feasible?

Prime Minister

Well, it wasn’t something that was discussed. I mean, look, there’s a longer term issue here, which is that Europe needs to make itself more resilient and more independent in terms of its energy. And there was a good and long discussion about that, there were some good conclusions that you’ll see published today, asking the Commission to draw up a plan. But also, at – at my insistence, actually explanations of some of the things – like the Southern gas corridor, like making sure that shale gas can be imported from the US, like the way we approach the TTIP agreement – that I think could make a difference.

I also think that if you look at a map of Europe, and you look at a map of where shale gas is available, you see substantial shale gas reserves, not just in the UK, which we should be looking at, but also you see a lot of shale gas in Southern and Eastern Europe, which is worth exploiting as well.

So there is I think the issue with energy is that we should be looking at the long term energy diversification security and resilience right across Europe, that’s something I think colleagues are now enthusiastically pursuing.

We should also remember that of course Europe is, I think, 25% or so reliant on Russian gas, but if you look at Gazprom’s revenues, something like 50% of them come from Europe. So, you know, Russia needs Europe more than Europe needs Russia, and that’s an important point to make in these conversations.

Question

Prime Minister, have you had a chance to talk to the Portuguese government about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and Scotland Yard’s investigation into her disappearance?

And on a lighter note, bingo – the Chancellor says he loves playing the game, Nick Clegg says he’s a fan. Are you a fan? Do you play? Or do you plan on playing bingo in the near future?

Prime Minister

On Madeleine McCann, I have spoken to the Portuguese Prime Minister before, I didn’t speak to him at this Council about this issue, but obviously, I’m pleased that the Metropolitan police have taken this case forward, and they’ve been working with the Portuguese, and I stand ready if ever required to speak to the Portuguese Prime Minister or other Portuguese authorities again. But I haven’t been asked to by the Metropolitan police, so I think then they seem to be making some progress.

On the issue of bingo, the issue here is trying to make sure that we have a fair tax system, and I think bingo wasn’t taxed fairly, and I’m very pleased that we’ve managed to cut the tax on bingo.

Question

I wanted to ask you whether you have discussed other regions around Russia, such as Transnistria? Have you mentioned Moldova, and do you plan on signing DAAs with Georgia and Moldova sooner than August?

Prime Minister

Yes, we do actually. The conclusions say that the European Union reconfirms its objective to further strengthen the political association and economic integration with Georgia and the Republic of Moldova. We confirm our aim to sign the association agreements, including the deep and comprehensive free trade areas, which we initialled in Vilnius last November, no later than June 2014. That was a change that we made last night, and I think that was a very positive signal.

Obviously there were discussions about other regions and areas, and I think a general lesson people were drawing, which is that if this can happen in Ukraine, then we have to be very clear about how unacceptable it is, because otherwise we will face similar situations in similar countries with a similar sort of unacceptable behaviour.

Below is the text of the speech made by David Cameron, the Prime Minister, to the Knesset in Israel on 12th March 2014.

Shalom lekulam. Prime Minister, Mr Netanyahu, Mr Speaker, Mr Chairman of the Opposition, Members of the Knesset, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for that welcome. Well, if I was thinking of missing Prime Minister’s questions in the House of Commons, and finding somewhere to spend a quiet Wednesday afternoon, clearly I’ve come to the wrong place. But it is a great honour to address this historic parliament, for 65 years at the heart of the state of Israel, and a beacon of democracy to the region and the world.

My ambassador did warn me about what may happen today. He said, ‘People may shout. Some people might leave. Fights may break out.’ He said you may learn the meaning of a new Hebrew word: balagan. I don’t think we’ve even got close to that this afternoon. And let me say this: we should think of all of those who don’t have a parliament, who don’t have a democracy, who don’t have a voice, and we should be proud of our democracies, our parliaments and our disputes.

When I was last here in Jerusalem I came as leader of the opposition, and I remember being quite bemused as I sat listening to Israeli politicians telling me all about the challenges of coalition politics. They told me about building a coalition, keeping it together, balancing the demands of different parties. Sorting out all the disputes. And I just didn’t understand this strange system of government. But after nearly 4 years as Prime Minister of my own coalition, all I can say is, achshav ani mevin.

What I have always understood is the extraordinary journey of the Jewish people. Thousands of years of history in this holy land, thousands of years of persecution, and even today some people despicably questioning your right to exist. Now, my Jewish ancestry is relatively limited but I do feel some sense of connection from the lexicon of my great-great grandfather, Emile Levita, a Jewish man who came from Germany to Britain 150 years ago, to the story of my forefather, Elijah Levita, who wrote what is thought to have been the first ever Yiddish novel. But more importantly, I have learnt to understand something of Jewish values and character, and I have grown to appreciate the extraordinary contribution of the Jewish people to my country and to the world.

That sense of understanding has shaped my determination to remember the past, my commitment to Israel in the present, and my hopes for Israel’s future, and I would like to say something about each of those today.

First, remembering the past. One of the most moving experiences I’ve had as Prime Minister came in January this year when I held a reception in Downing Street for 50 survivors of the Shoah. I met some of the most inspiring people and heard some of the most extraordinary stories. Gena Turgel, who witnessed her brother being shot by the Nazis and lost another brother and 2 sisters before she was eventually liberated from Bergen-Belsen and went on to marry the British soldier who freed her.

And Ben Helfgott, who endured 3 years in a ghetto, 2 labour camps and 3 concentration camps before he made it to England, where he was reunited with one of his sisters, the only other member of his whole family to survive. Ben went on to represent Britain as a weight lifter in 2 Olympic Games, he set up a society for Holocaust survivors, was honoured in Poland for his reconciliation work between Poles and Jews, and I’m delighted that Ben has come with me here today.

All of the survivors have made such an incredible contribution to Britain, and one of the things so many of them have done, which never ceases to amaze me, is to go into our schools and share their testimony at first hand. It is hard to imagine the sheer strength of humanity it must take to do that. And let me say this – I am determined that long after they are gone and long after we are all gone, their memory will be as strong and vibrant as it is today.

As a father, I will never forget last year visiting the Holocaust Memorial in Berlin with my young children and for the first time trying to explain to them quite what had happened. I want every child in Britain to learn about the Holocaust and to understand just how vital it is to fight discrimination and prejudice in our world. It is vital we do all we can with our international partners to preserve the site at Auschwitz, which I will be visiting later this year. But we need to do more, and that is why I have set up the Holocaust Commission in Britain. A number of the Commissioners are here with Ben and me today and as we visit Yad Vashem later today, our pledge to Ben will be that Britain will never forget what he and his fellow survivors have taught us. We will preserve the memory of that generation for every generation to come.

But remembering the past goes far beyond that horrific suffering by that generation; it is about remembering the long and rightful search of a people for a nation, and the right for the Jewish people to live a peaceful and prosperous life in Israel. From the early pioneers, the men and women of the Palestine Exploration Fund, who saw the Jewish history in this land and the possibilities for the future, to the Balfour Declaration, the moment when the State of Israel went from a dream to a plan, Britain has played a proud and vital role in helping to secure Israel as a homeland for the Jewish people. And just as important as the history is the partnership we are building between our countries today. That begins with our commitment to Israel’s security.

On my last visit here, I took a helicopter ride heading north over Israel, looking right to the Jordan River and left to the Mediterranean Sea, I really appreciated for the first time just how narrow and vulnerable this land is. A vulnerability that has already seen 38 missiles from Gaza this year alone, a vulnerability that just this week has seen the interception of the KLOS-C ship, yet another despicable attempt by the Iranians to smuggle more long-range rockets into Gaza, a vulnerability that has too often seen nearby Palestinian schools being named in honour of suicide bombers. It gave me a renewed understanding of what it must be like to be afraid in your own home. So let me say to you very clearly – with me you have a British Prime Minister whose belief in Israel is unbreakable and whose commitment to Israel’s security will always be rock solid.

I will always stand up for the right of Israel to defend its citizens, a right enshrined in international law, in natural justice and fundamental morality, and in decades of common endeavour between Israel and her allies. When I was in opposition, I spoke out when – because of the law on universal jurisdiction – senior Israelis could not safely come to my country without fear of ideologically motivated court cases and legal stunts; when I became Prime Minister, I legislated to change it. My country is open to you and you are welcome to visit any time.

When I saw the threat the Hezbollah represented to Israel and beyond, I forged a Europe-wide consensus to proscribe its military wing, a key step in the fight against this enemy on your borders. I have led the fight against anti Semitism and extremism in Britain. We have removed over 26,000 pieces of illegal terrorist content from the internet, we’ve worked with the police and our universities to stop extremists spreading their divisive messages on our university campuses, and we’ve excluded more foreign preachers of hate on the basis of our strategy for preventing extremism than ever before. We said ‘no’ to Zakir Naik, we said ‘no’ to Yusuf Qaradawi and we said ‘no’ to Judon Mumbala Umbala, whose abhorrent displays of anti-Semitism have no place in a tolerant and inclusive Britain.

I have stood up to protect Jewish practices too. The Jewish community has been an absolute exemplar in integrating into British life in every way. But integration doesn’t mean that you have to give up things that you hold very dear in your religion. When people challenged Kosher Shechita I have defended it. I fought as a backbench Member of Parliament against the last attempt to do something to change this, and there is no way I’m allowing that to change now I’m Prime Minister – on my watch Shechita is safe in the United Kingdom.

I am proud to be pursuing the strongest and deepest possible relationship between our 2 countries, from our trade, which has doubled in a decade and is now worth £5 billion a year, to the world-leading partnerships between our scientists, academics and hi-tech specialists. Britain and Israel share a commitment to driving the growth of hi-tech start-ups. In Britain we’ve introduced huge tax breaks on early stage investment and special visas for entrepreneurs and in just 3 and a half years we’ve grown our Tech City in east London from 200 digital companies to more than 1,300 today.

Israel is the start-up nation, with the second highest density of start-ups outside Silicon Valley anywhere in the world. As your inspirational President Peres has put it – Israel has gone from oranges to Apple. Israel’s technology is protecting British and NATO troops in Afghanistan, it is providing Britain’s National Health Service with one in 6 of its prescription medicines through TEVA. Together British and Israel technical expertise can achieve so much more.

And to those who do not share my ambition, who want to boycott Israel, I have a clear message – Britain opposes boycotts; whether it is trade unions campaigning for the exclusion of Israelis or universities trying to stifle academic exchange, Israel’s place as a homeland for the Jewish people will never rest on hollow resolutions passed by amateur politicians. It is founded in the spirit and strength of your people, it is founded in international law, it is founded in the resolve of all your allies to protect an international system that was forged in our darkest days to put right historic wrongs. And it is founded in the achievement of your economy and your democracy, a country pledged to be fair and equal to all its citizens, whether Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Arab or Druze, it is your destiny. De legitimising the State of Israel is wrong, it is abhorrent and together we will defeat it.

Let me turn to my hope for Israel’s future: we all yearn for a lasting and secure peace between Israel and its neighbours. Britain fully supports the great work that American Secretary of State John Kerry has been leading, and we believe that in Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas, you have leaders who want peace too. We back the compromises needed, including a halt to settlement activity and an end to Palestinian incitement too. And we recognise the difficult and courageous decisions both sides are taking, not least with Prime Minister Netanyahu’s decision to release terrorist prisoners, with all the anguish that can bring for affected families.

But people come to this Parliament from all over the world and talk about maps and population numbers and processes and deadlines; they tell you how to run your peace process – I will not do that. You know that I want peace and a 2 state solution; you don’t need lectures from me about how to get there. What I want to say is something different; what I want to say is this – imagine what this land would be like if a 2 state solution was actually achieved.

Think of all the aspects of life that would change: Israel’s relationships with the world, its security, its long-term prosperity and the quality of life for all of its people. On Israel’s relationships, imagine – as John Kerry put it – mutual recognition of the nation state of the Palestinian people and the nation state of the Jewish people. And let’s be clear what that means: an end to the outrageous lectures on human rights that Israel receives at the United Nations from the likes of Iran and North Korea; an end to the ridiculous situation where last year the United Nations General Assembly passed 3 times as many resolutions on Israel as on Syria, Iran and North Korea put together; no more excuses for the 32 countries in the United Nations who refuse to recognise Israel; and for the Arab League, how many of those states yearn today for a different relationship with Israel, which the peace agreement would enable them to deliver.

Think of the capitals in the Arab World where Israelis could travel, do business and build a future. Imagine Israel, like any other democratic nation, finally treated fairly and normally by all. On security, imagine a peace deal that would leave Israel more secure not less secure, not a temporary deal broken by Hamas firing rockets at you or Iranian proxies smuggling weapons through the Jordan Valley, but a proper, lasting peace that allows a strong, moderate Palestinian government to end the fears of a failed state on Israel’s border, a deal that means the end of all claims and the end of all conflict, Israelis and Palestinians no longer each other’s enemy but actually working together to maintain security against those who would seek to harm us all.

On prosperity, the possibilities of peace are extraordinary. This is a region where demographics are demanding 40 million jobs in the next decade to keep pace with the rising expectations of young people, a region with a thirst for higher education today will need to be met with the jobs of tomorrow. So imagine the engine of Israel’s economy fully unleashed to work in the region and to meet the needs that are common to all, how to make the best use of land and technology to feed a rising population, how to harness water resources that are so precious to all. Imagine Israel’s technology working hand-in-glove with those making strides in renewables, securing the future needs of their peoples for a time when their economies are no longer so reliant on carbon.

Imagine the agreements, ready to be signed off with every major trading bloc in the world, committees deliberating not on what products to stop from Israel but what products they can bring in, and imagine too, how this new future would feel, because this isn’t just about security and prosperity, as important as those are; this is about justice for 2 peoples; dignity for the Jewish people and yes dignity for the Palestinian people too, generations of Jewish and Palestinian children for once growing up in hope, not fear.

Israel is a nation where around every corner there is a memorial and a reminder of those who fought to create a modern Israel from the human tragedies of the past. But those sacrifices, they weren’t just to build a state that was physically secure; they were to build a state that would fulfil its rightful moral position in a region where security, dignity and mutual respect would be the new watchwords. For Israelis, a life free from the everyday fear of terror; for the Palestinians, finally, the chance to live autonomously in a state of their own. Imagine if you could look your children and grandchildren in the eye and know that your hope could become their reality.

These are the dividends of peace that I long for in Israel and I will do everything I can to help to bring them about, and at the same time, we must be constantly vigilant about the wider challenges in the region. These are challenges we all face: the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran, and perhaps the greatest challenge of all, the poisonous ideology of Islamist extremism. And to people who try to say that Israel is the cause of these problems, I say that fundamentally misunderstands what these problems are about.

Take Iran: Israel is not the cause of the shadow that Iran casts over the world, there is no rule that says if Israel and Palestinians make peace, Iran is somehow going to dismantle its despotic regime or abandon its nuclear intentions. That can only be done through sustained international pressure. Now, I share your deep scepticism and great concern about Iran. I am not starry-eyed about the new regime. A nuclear-armed Iran is a threat to the whole world, not just to Israel. And with Israel and all our allies, Britain will ensure that is never allowed to happen.

Similarly, while, of course, extremism feeds on conflict in the Middle East and elsewhere, Israel is not the cause of the poisonous ideology that fuels terrorism across the region and across the world. We must be clear what we mean by this term – the poisonous ideology of Islamist extremism – and we must distinguish it from Islam. Islam is a religion observed peacefully and devoutly by over 1 billion people; Islamist extremism is a warped and barbaric ideology that tries to set our societies against each other by radicalising young Muslims all across the world.

At its furthest end are those who back terrorism to promote their ultimate goal – an entire Islamist realm governed by an interpretation of Sharia; move along the spectrum and you’ll find people, yes, who may reject violence but who accept various parts of the extremist world view, including real hostility towards Israel and the West, towards our democracy and liberal values. They provide succour for the men and women of violence and we must confront and challenge them too. That is what Britain’s approach to anti-extremism is all about. Now, no country knows more about the threat of terror, justified by this grim Islamist mind-set than you do here in Israel, but we too have paid our price on the streets of London and elsewhere in our country, and indeed around the world. So we share your resolve to overcome this evil.

And I believe that like our closest allies, Britain and Israel have the history, the values, the capability, and yes, the historic responsibility to take this on. We need a response that is tough, intelligent and patient. Tough, in that it does demand a strong security response, whether it’s that military action to go after the terrorists or international cooperation on intelligence and counter terrorism, to make sure the Taliban don’t take over in Afghanistan, or to support AMISOM against Al-Shabaab in Somalia.

And yes, it requires a tough, strong security response to defeat the Al-Qaeda linked terrorists and extremists in Pakistan, in Syria in Sinai and wherever else they’re found. But alongside a tough security response must be an intelligent political response. We know that the Al-Qaeda franchises thrive where there is political instability and weak or dysfunctional political institutions, so we must match a strong security response with a political approach that addresses these issues. That means supporting the building blocks of democracy, the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary, the rights of minorities, free media and association, a proper place in society for the army.

I’m a Conservative. I don’t believe in dropping these things from a great height. Every country must make its own way, but we should never forget those values that are at the heart of our own progress and that means supporting the evolution of effective and accountable government, and backing people in their search for a job and a voice.

Third, we must be patient and resolute. We are in the middle of a generational struggle against a poisonous ideology which is an extreme distortion of the Islamic faith, and which holds that terror and mass murder are not only acceptable but necessary. I’m convinced we will be fighting Islamic extremism for the rest of my political lifetime and we must tackle this poisonous thinking at home and abroad and resist the ideologues’ attempts to divide the world into a clash of civilisations.

The underlying conflicts and grievances that are exploited by terrorists are in many cases long standing and deep, and the building blocks of democracy which are a big part of the solution take time to put in place. But this tough, intelligent and patient approach is the best way to defeat terrorism and ensure our own security. And we must, and we will, pursue it with an iron resolve.

Later this week, you will celebrate Purim. You will recall the time when the Jewish people were under threat of extermination in ancient Persia, and you will experience a day of joy in memory of the way the Jewish people were saved and freedom was delivered. All of us here long for the day that the Jewish people can be free and safe in their homeland. I know the challenges in getting there are great, but far greater is the friendship I bring from Britain and the strength of our collective resolve. So as I stand here with you today and look to the future, my message is simple: we will be with you every step of the way.

Thank you.

Below is the text of the press conference between David Cameron, the Prime Minister, and Shimon Peres, the Israeli Prime Minister, in Israel on 12th March 2014.

Shimon Peres

Mr Prime Minister, thank you very much for your visit. Your address and [inaudible] moved the heart of the people, and you spoke about the heart of the issue.

But before I shall make any comments, I have to refer to what’s going on now in Gaza. It’s a very severe attack; over 40 or 50 missiles were fired against civilian population. All the mothers are now in the shelters, and they have to decide, the people in Gaza. It’s either peace or violence. We cannot behave as though nothing happened, and as I said this was the most severe attack for a long time. And I’m sure that the government will take the necessary steps to stop it.

Hamas must understand that you cannot have both ways. Either you run a normal life, or you made it a centre of terror. We shall not accept it as a centre of terror; we cannot permit ourselves. It’s not just a matter of how many people were wounded or killed; it’s a million, a million and a half people who are living there. They cannot have a night’s sleep, and they cannot have security. So right now I think we are weighing what will be the best response to put an end to it.

That also shows the dilemma that stands before us. We would clearly like to have peace, but we must stop this terror. And appreciate very much what you did with the Hezbollah. I think if they want to save Lebanon, they have to stop Hezbollah as well. You cannot have it in any other way. And this is very much right now on our mind, and I hope the sooner it will be settled the better it will be. We’re not interested to raise the flames, but we have decided to stop the fire.

Now I want to go back to the major issues. I think for all of us, Arabs or Jews, we have a real option: either to make a peaceful Middle East, or to break everything in the region.

What impressed me very much in your remarks was the vision you put before the people. It is the right one. There are times when you don’t have a choice; this time we have a choice, all of us. We made our choice. Our choice is peace, based on a compromise; a 2-state solution that was agreed. We have to implement it; we shouldn’t postpone it. And unfortunately, time is running out. Decisions will be taken in the coming few weeks, because there are some dates, I mean including the visit of Abu Mazen to Washington, the release of the 30 prisoners – all this is coming very soon. And one will affect the other.

So we have to act with much energy, and understand that if we shall make a mistake, it will cost a double price. It was very hard to renew the negotiations. If it’s re-interrupted, I can hardly see how we are going to come back. And, I know it’s difficult, but you have to make difficult decisions; all decisions are difficult. And I think your words were to the point about it. I believe that there are many in Israel, the real majority that would like to have it in a peaceful way, based on a 2-state solution. And I appreciate very much the position Great Britain took, and you have today announced in very clear words where you stand.

And also you, know, there’s a difference between war and terror. War may be local, between 2 sides; terror doesn’t have a location, and it involves hundreds of different organisations, that don’t have a policy nor a responsibility. So we have to work together – as we do by the way, Great Britain and Israel – to stop this menace, clearly and sharply.

I know that your time is short so I won’t extend my remarks, but I want also to thank you for the cooperation that exists between Great Britain – it started with Marks & Spencer, as you know, with trade – and now there is no Marx, or Marxism, but I think you were very – responding to us, when you went over to science, the future is science. We’re very grateful that under your premiership, science became the main issue, and I think we can see already the fruits of it. And I think the scientists are doing it with a full heart, because science belongs to everybody: it cannot support neither racism, nor nationalism, nor extremism. And we have to move ahead, and we can move ahead.

So again, thank you for coming, thank you for your clear position, thank you for your vision, and thank you for the way you handle our friendship. Thank you very much.

David Cameron

Well thank you very much, Mr President, for your welcome, and for what you’ve said about my speech today. To hear that from someone with your long track record of seeking peace and seeking solutions is a great honour for me to hear.

Let me be absolutely clear about these attacks from Gaza. We condemn them completely. And I think there are 3 important points to bear in mind. First of all, they are a reminder, once again, of the importance of maintaining and securing Israel’s future, and the security threats that you face. And you have Britain’s support in facing those security threats.

The second is that these attacks are completely indiscriminate, aimed at civilian populations, and people indiscriminately, and that is a demonstration of how barbaric they are.

And the third point is we must be absolutely clear in the international community and all friends of Israel and the Palestinian people as well, that there is no violent route to statehood. Statehood can only be achieved through dialogue and discussion, and through agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinian people; that is the only way progress can be made.

I wanted to come to Israel to once again demonstrate my friendship and support for Israel. I wanted to come to build the very strong bilateral relationship that we have, that I think has been strengthened over these last few years. We see that strengthening in trade, and investment; we see that strengthening in scientific research and collaboration. We see it strengthened in the extraordinary hi-tech investments taking place between Israeli companies and British companies.

But I also wanted to come to demonstrate again my strong support for the peace process, and as you said Mr President, this is a time of real opportunity: an opportunity to have a 2-state solution, and to make that work for the people of, of Israel, and for the Palestinians. And I think that now is the moment when we need the leaders of Israel, and the leaders of the Palestinian people, to take bold steps, courageous steps, and to take, yes, some risks, in order to deliver that 2-state solution. And you will have the strongest possible support from Britain, from members of the European Union, from all friends of Israel in taking those steps.

So that is what I’ve come here for this visit to discuss, but it’s an honour and a pleasure to be received by you Mr President, and I look forward to the discussions that we’ll have. Thank you.

Below is the text of the press conference between David Cameron, the Prime Minister, and Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian President, on 13th March 2014.

Mahmoud Abbas (via interpreter)

Ladies and gentlemen, the Israeli occupation force have recently – have killed with cold blood, 3 Palestinians in the West Bank and 3 others in Gaza Strip and we did not hear any apology or condemnation by the Israeli government. Yesterday rockets were fired from Gaza, so Israel responded to that, we condemn the aggression and the military aggression with all its forms including the rockets.

We stressed once again to His Excellency, that we will continue efforts to achieve a peaceful political solution that achieves peace and stability in our region. That ends the Israeli occupation that has started in 1967. Until we establish the independent viable state Palestine, sovereign state of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital. A state that we want – Jerusalem, we want it, an open city where all the 3 monotheistic religions can come and pray within the 2 state solution, to realise that the state of Palestine, that lives or co exists besides the state of Israel in security and good neighbourhood.

And here we appreciate the efforts exerted by President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry to push forward the peace process, to achieve its objectives within the specified 9 months for negotiations, at the same time we cannot forget to appreciate the important role played by the international quartet, including Russia, the EU, the UN and also the friendly counties all over the world.

In particular, we mention the tremendous efforts by the EU, represented in its statements, decisions and measures – all of which stress the need to have a solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict according to the international references and stressing that settlement is illegal based on international law. This is the position that was stressed by the Arab League Council, at the level of foreign ministers at its session held on the 9th of this month that once again stressed its support for the Palestinian position and support for the peace process that is sponsored by the US Administration, provided that it will be on the basis of international [inaudible] resolutions and the Arab peace initiatives and not to accept the Jewish State.

Your Excellency, once again, we stress our commitment to consolidate or cooperation, mutual cooperation, and our appreciation for the United Kingdom, Queen, nation and government, for all the support you provide for our people, at all levels. And we are satisfied as we see this relation grow and consolidate in all areas. Thank you, Your Excellency for your visit, your precious visit to Palestine, and I welcome you again on this Holy Land, as a guest, a friend – a dear guest for Palestine, from a dear nation and dear country that we respect. Thank you.

David Cameron

Well thank you very much, Mr President. And I’m delighted to be here today, alongside you President Abbas, in your own country and on my first visit to Palestine as Prime Minister. We have had good discussions today and I want to focus on 3 issues. First the peace process and the leadership that both you and Prime Minister Netanyahu show by entering these negotiations. As I said in the Knesset I believe you are a partner for peace. I know that achieving lasting peace means difficult decisions and real determination to keep going. Britain has faced its own experiences on this front and we will do everything we can to help you.

Our position is clear and has not changed; we want to see a 2 state solution. A sovereign, viable and independent Palestinian state, based on 1967 borders, with mutually agreed land swaps, alongside a secure Israel. And Jerusalem, a sacred city to 3 great world religions, must be the shared capital for both sides, with Gaza a fundamental part of the Palestinian state. We must not let those who seek to undermine the process, by firing rockets from Gaza, succeed.

I unreservedly condemn yesterday’s attacks and I know that you, Mr President, have repeatedly rejected violence, and I heard again what you said today. I know that you understand that Palestinian statehood will not be achieved through violence; that in the end this 2 state solution, can only come about from the 2 sides talking to each other.

Over the last 2 days I have been encouraged from my discussions with both yourself, Mr President, and Prime Minister Netanyahu, that the will is there, so I urge both sides to seize this window of opportunity. Second, we’ve discussed the opportunities that peace can bring. Britain wants to help Palestine to build strong institutions and a strong economy, so today we have agreed further support to help almost 100 Palestinian businesses to become more competitive; £6 million to help restore farming land in Area C.

This will benefit nearly 1,000 farming communities and increase production which the World Bank estimates could boost the Palestinian economy by $700 million. And finally we will fund HALO to clear 3 West Bank minefields, which will hand back land to rural Palestinian communities, freeing them up for economic growth. I am also delighted that the British Council will be reopening their English language centre in East Jerusalem after more than a decade. We want to see more institutions reopen in Jerusalem and the protection of Palestinian, life, culture and heritage in this unique city.

And let’s not forget that all of this will benefit Israelis next door, where a vibrant economy will find new partners. Third and last, Mr President, I know that the path to this future vision will not be an easy one, the final difficult steps towards peace will be hard, but the prize could be great. A Palestine without checkpoints; where you can travel freely in your own country and beyond, where you can visit your friends and family wherever they may be, and the West Bank and Gaza are together again. A world in which you have your dignity and your freedom at last and security for the Palestinian people too. It won’t be easy but this is a vision that we stand absolutely committed to helping you to realise. Thank you.

Question (via interpreter)

Your Excellency, after this meeting you are on your way to the United States of America to meet President Obama. We know that there are a lot of pressures to extend negotiations to the end of the year; are there any specific issues that you will ask the US Administration? Maybe to accept extending the negotiations?

Your Excellency, Prime Minister Cameron, yesterday at your speech in the Knesset, you said you support Israel to be a national homeland for the Jews. Don’t you think this position might harm the peace negotiations? Thank you.

Mahmoud Abbas (via interpreter)

We are on our way, yes, to visit the United States of America within the framework of our pursuit for the political solution that the United States of America is trying to do. Until this moment, we did not receive – maybe for –this will be in the near future. We didn’t receive the framework that we were promised to read and see, and based on what we read then we will have our position. We have agreed for 9 months for negotiations and we have a great hope that we achieve something tangible within this period of time. That’s why we did not discuss at all the issue of extending the negotiations, and it was not proposed either.

David Cameron

Thank you. In terms of describing Israel as the national homeland for the Jewish people; I said that because to me that is what Israel is, and that it is what it will be. Jews were persecuted around the world, 6 million were murdered in the Holocaust, and so the decision was taken that Israel should be homeland for the Jewish people; and that’s what it is. I also said, though, yesterday that the status of Israel and the description of Israel should be something for Palestine and Israelis to negotiate together and we shouldn’t interpose ourselves into those negotiations.

And I also said in that speech to the Knesset that it was important that Israel continued to be a country that gave rights to those who are of a different religion, to Christians, to Muslims, to Israeli Arabs. And that’s an important point too.

Question

Mr President, could I ask you the – in the Knesset the British Prime Minister said he opposed all boycotts of Israel. Do you agree with him?

And secondly, Prime Minister, in 2010, you said you opposed – you said that you regarded Gaza as a prison camp. Has anything happened since then to make you change your mind?

Finally, John Kerry yesterday said he had never seen such large levels of mistrust between the Israelis and the Palestinians as at present. Having seen both leaders in the past 24 hours, is that your assessment?

David Cameron

I think the question for you, Mr President was about boycotts. But the question for me on Gaza – I mean clearly the situation in Gaza is unacceptable. There are 1.7 million people living in Gaza. A huge number are reliant for their life on – on food aid. There is extremely high unemployment. There’s very low provision of healthcare and other things. It’s very important to get the economy, society moving in Gaza. And what we want to see is a Palestinian state that includes both the West Bank and Gaza and we need to work hard to achieve that.

As for the question about mistrust between Palestinian leadership and Israeli leadership, of course, what I’ve seen over the last 2 days is serious disagreements over vital issues that will have to be settled, if there ever is to be a successful 2-state solution, if there is to be a peace deal.

But what I’ve also seen is, I believe, 2 leaders who both want to be and can be partners for peace. I see that in Prime Minister Netanyahu and I see that in President Abbas. They both will have to take difficult and unpalatable and sometimes, unpopular decisions with their own constituencies in order to achieve that peace and to achieve that settlement.

But what I sense is that it is possible. I’m not saying it is definite or even that it is probable. But it is certainly possible. And what the international community should be doing and what countries like Britain should be doing is doing everything we can to encourage these leaders to be those partners for peace and doing everything we can to marshal aid and assistance and help and security from the rest of the world, to help point the size of the prize that will be there, if these leaders can make those steps forward and all the ways in which we can help.

And so I prefer to put it that way, in an optimistic way rather than simply referring to what we all know the disagreements and issues that remain between the 2 sides.

Mahmoud Abbas (via interpreter)

As for the Gaza Strip, we are fully aware that the State of Palestine includes the West Bank and Gaza strip, for sure. And this has to be there. That’s why we are trying to achieve reconciliation with Hamas, for them and for the national unity to be re-established for the Palestinian people. And that’s why we want to go for negotiations between us and Hamas, and this is what we continue repeating, and this is what we want to achieve, God willing.

As for the boycotters, we did not call – we never called for boycotting the State of Israel, because we deal with the State of Israel. As a matter of fact, we deal with the State of Israel so it’s not logical to say that we boycott the State of Israel. But, rather, we boycott and call for boycotting to what’s going on in the settlements, because settlement – all the world recognises that it is illegal, and so it its products should be boycotted. The Israeli products coming from the settlements need to be boycotted, and this is what happened in Europe, and this what we encourage. But boycotting Israel? No, we don’t call for this.

Question (via interpreter)

As for achieving the framework, is this the only way [inaudible] to achieve agreement?

How – how do you know – how do you deal with these concerns.

Question

[Inaudible] narrow these gaps and allow me to ask a question on Ukraine. Are you interesting in putting restrictions in Russian businessmen and Russian state’s banks, over Ukraine crisis? Thanks.

Mahmoud Abbas (via interpreter)

As for the issue of framework agreement we did not suggest a framework, but the one who suggested it are the Americans. And we said when we see the framework, we can judge this, or have a position. But so far we cannot say this is wrong or right, or acceptable or not acceptable, depending on what we hear from the media or unofficial channels until we get that framework; then we’ll have a position on that based on what we feel that it is necessary for the framework to be in line – totally in line with the international legitimacy.

David Cameron

In answer to your question, can Britain and countries like Britain narrow the gap between the Palestinian leadership and the Israeli leadership, I think all we can do is encourage leaders to take difficult and tough decisions to find compromises so that both sides can achieve the outcome everyone wants to see, which is a 2-state solution.

There’s no outcome that’s possible where every Israeli will be satisfied and there’s no outcome that’s possible where every Palestinian will be satisfied. There has to be compromise. And compromise is difficult. Compromise will take bravery, and our aim is to encourage these leaders to be brave and make the compromises because the prize is so great at the end of the day.

On the issue of sanctions against Russia because of what has happened in Ukraine, Britain as part of the European Union has set out a very clear map of those things that we will do in any event because of what has already happened, those steps that we will take in terms of asset freezes and travel bans if the contact group and talks between Ukraine and Russia don’t get going. And those will be brought into place if that doesn’t happen.

And then thirdly, we’ve said if there is further Russian destabilisation of the Ukraine we would consider – and we’ve set it out very clearly – action across a range of economic areas. And I expect the European Union countries to stick to what they have agreed to, those important 3 steps, and Britain would support that.

Question

A domestic question, Prime Minister if you don’t mind. Polls – a poll this week shows that most people don’t trust the government when it comes to immigration. Isn’t it time to admit that you’re never going to hit your target of bringing it down to tens of thousands and that in fact, you’re so far from hitting it that when you have the opportunity to employ a British nanny, you don’t even bring the numbers down by one yourself?

David Cameron

On immigration, we have a very clear approach, which is to say that it has been too high and it needs to come down. And it has come down. It has come down across the course of this government by almost 20%.

If we look at the components of that immigration, we’ve actually brought immigration from outside the EU down by something like a third to its lowest level since 1998. And we’ve done that by taking a range of steps. We’ve put in place a cap on economic migration from outside the European Union because we should be training British young people to do more of the jobs that are available. We’ve closed down something like 700 bogus colleges in our country because people were abusing the student route into Britain and we’ve taken a range of steps to make sure that family reunion is family reunion rather than another way of breaking the rules.

As to my own arrangements, I think I’ve answered lots of questions about this over the years. I have an excellent woman, Gita Lama, who looks after my children, who is a British citizen. She came originally from Nepal. She carried out her exam to become a British citizen and she does a fantastic job. And she certainly fits the description of someone who works hard and wants to get on.

I can confirm as well that I didn’t give her any assistance in these exams you have to take to become a British citizen. She did once ask me – one of the questions in the exam is what is the role of the British cabinet. And I won’t – I won’t share with you the answer that I gave. But I’ll leave you to speculate in the way that you normally do. Mr President.

Below is the text of the speech made by David Cameron, the Prime Minister, to the House of Commons in London on 10th March 2014.

With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on last week’s emergency European Council.

What has happened to Ukraine is completely indefensible. Its territorial integrity has been violated and the aspirations of its people to chart their own future are being frustrated.

This European Council sent a clear and united message to Russia that its actions are in flagrant breach of international law and will incur consequences. We agreed on a three-phase approach to stand up to this aggression and uphold international law: first, some immediate steps to respond to what Russia has done; secondly, urgent work on a set of measures that will follow if Russia refuses to enter dialogue with the Ukrainian Government; and thirdly, a set of further, far-reaching consequences should Russia take further steps to destabilise the situation in Ukraine.

Let me say a word on each of those steps. First, as a response to what Russia has already done, we agreed on some immediate steps. We have suspended preparations for the G8 in Sochi indefinitely. As I told the House last week, my view is that it would be completely wrong for a G8 summit to go ahead at all under current circumstances. We decided to stop work on a comprehensive new agreement on relations between Russia and the European Union, and we immediately suspended the talks that were under way on a more liberal visa regime in the Schengen area—the thing that Russian Ministers and business delegations have pushed for more than anything else.

Here in Britain, I have ordered an urgent review of all Government business with Russia. We have already announced that no Ministers or members of the royal family will visit the Sochi Paralympics. Many other planned ministerial-level contacts will be cancelled in current circumstances. All bilateral military co-operation is under review, with the presumption that we will suspend it, except for work carried out to fulfil international treaty obligations, such as European arms control inspections. I have ordered a review of licences for arms exports to Russia. It is hard to see how anything that could be used in Ukraine could be justified. As with other measures, it is best if possible to take these decisions in concert with our European allies.

There has been intense work to persuade Russia to come to the negotiating table with the Government of Ukraine and to discuss its stated concerns face to face. The idea of such a contact group, including other countries and organisations, was one I first proposed to the Polish Prime Minister back in January. The European Council agreed it was essential for such talks to start within the next few days and for them to deliver progress quickly. We also agreed that if Russia did not co-operate there would need to be further measures—the so-called second phase—which would need to start rapidly.

Therefore, at my instigation, the Council tasked the European Commission to begin work on additional measures which could be taken against Russia if these talks do not get going or do not start producing results. These will include asset freezes and travel bans. We are working closely with our American, European and other international partners to prepare a list of names, and these sanctions, plus the measures already agreed against Yanukovych and his circle, will be the focus of a meeting here in London tomorrow with key international partners.

There is an urgent need to de-escalate tension in Crimea. We are all clear that any referendum vote in Crimea this week will be illegal, illegitimate and will not be recognised by the international community. In addition, I have to say that any campaign would be completely impractical as well as illegal. There is no proper register or proper campaign, and the territory is covered with troops. It is completely impossible for a proper referendum campaign to be carried out. As I discussed with Chancellor Merkel last night in Hanover, Russia can choose the path of de-escalation by signalling it understands that the outcome cannot be acted on as legitimate. Chancellor Merkel and I were clear that any attempt by Russia to legitimise an illegal referendum would require us to respond by ratcheting up the pressure further.

Thirdly, and most significantly, we agreed that it was essential to stop Russia taking further unacceptable steps in Ukraine. The Council agreed that if further steps are taken by Russia to destabilise Ukraine, there will be additional and far-reaching consequences for the relationship between the Russian Federation on the one hand and the European Union and its member states on the other. The Council conclusions state that these consequences would “include a broad range of economic areas.”

Britain played a leading role in helping to reach this agreement, including through a meeting I convened with fellow leaders from France, Germany, Italy and Poland on the morning of the Council. Such sanctions would have consequences for many EU member states, including Britain, but as I argued at the meeting, the costs of not standing up to aggression are far greater. Britain’s own security and prosperity would be at risk if we allow a situation where countries can just flout international rules without incurring consequences.

Finally, we decided to send a political message of support to the Ukrainian Government and people. The interim Ukrainian President spoke at the European Council with great power and force. The Ukrainian people want the freedom to be able to choose their own future and strengthen their ties with Europe, and they want a future free from the awful corruption that they have endured for far too long.

At the request of the Ukrainian Prime Minister, we therefore agreed to bring forward the signing of the political part of the EU’s association agreement with Ukraine, and we agreed to help Ukraine tackle corruption. The EU has now frozen the assets of 18 people linked to the former regime, and Britain has deployed a team to Kiev from our National Crime Agency to help the new Ukrainian Government go after ill-gotten funds and return them to the Ukrainian people.

It is now vital that Ukraine proceeds towards free and fair elections that enable all Ukrainians, including Russian speakers and minorities, to choose their leaders freely, so Britain is now providing substantial and immediate technical assistance to Ukraine to support elections and assist with reforms on public finance management, debt management and energy pricing. Ukraine also needs support to stabilise and repair its economy. The EU agreed unilaterally to lower trade tariffs, and to work with the International Monetary Fund on a package of financial assistance to the Ukrainian Government.

As I agreed with President Obama during our call this weekend, there is still an opportunity for Russia to resolve this situation diplomatically. It should engage in direct talks with the Ukrainians, return Russian troops to their bases in Crimea, withdraw its support for this illegal and unconstitutional referendum in Crimea, and work with the rest of the international community to support free and fair elections in Ukraine in May. No one should be interested in a tug of war. Ukraine should be able to choose its own future and act as a bridge between Russia and Europe.

Britain’s own future depends on a world where countries obey the rules. In Europe, we have spent the past 70 years working to keep the peace, and we know from history that turning a blind eye when nations are trampled over stores up greater problems for the longer term. We must stand up to aggression, uphold international law and support the Ukrainian Government and the Ukrainian people, who want the freedom to choose their own future. That is right for Ukraine, right for Europe, right for Britain. I commend this statement to the House.

Below is the text of the speech made by David Cameron, the Prime Minister, to CeBIT in Hannover, Germany on 9th March 2014.

What can I say – music, violins, a robot thespian – this is how I spend all my Sunday nights.

It is a huge pleasure to be here and can I say to the Chancellor what an honour it is for the UK to co-host this event.

Germany is a country with a proud history in technology from the Fraunhofer institutes in your towns to the tech start-ups in Berlin and of course this world-leading conference we are opening here today.

As that advertisement we all grew up hearing said: “Vorsprung Durch Technik” and it is that spirit we are celebrating tonight.

Progress through technology. And what remarkable progress we see.

Today we can put in our pockets a computer more powerful than any computer in the world 20 years ago.

Just a decade ago – Skype was a typo, a tweet was something you heard from a bird, a cloud was something you saw in the sky – not somewhere you stored your data.

Companies that are starting in people’s garages and bedrooms one year are going stratospheric the next.

This is a world on fast forward a world of permanent technological revolution and in this world, countries like the UK and Germany will only succeed if we have a relentless drive for new ideas and innovations.

That’s why I am here today. And I have come here with a mission and a message.

Mission: Promoting UK tech

My mission here at CeBIT is to promote the extraordinary tech sector we have in the UK.

4 years ago, we put in place a long-term economic plan to turn our country around – and innovation is right at the heart of that plan.

Here is just a taste of what we’ve done.

We got the London Stock Exchange to make it easier for fast-growing firms to list.

We kept spending on science, despite the downturn.

We introduced huge tax breaks on early stage investment, tax breaks on video games, a Patent Box so if you invent in the UK you only pay 10 per cent tax on those profits.

Government IT has been revolutionised too.

When we came to office, government was spending about £16 billion per year – that is 1 per cent of GDP on its IT, overwhelmingly to large suppliers. So we stripped out the waste and opened up our IT contracts to small firms.

The G Cloud, from where we now procure services, is one of the world’s most innovative tender systems in the world.

Above all, we have rolled out the red carpet to the world’s ideas people. Special visas for entrepreneurs, visas for Tech City, allowing universities to expand by 30,000 students next year and no restrictions at all the year after.

We’re not stopping there. We’re putting coding on the curriculum in our schools for the first time putting £200 million into equipment for science teaching at our universities. And all this is working.

Come over to Shoreditch in east London and you can see it – Tech City is teeming with start-ups and new ideas.

It started less than three and a half years ago with 200 digital companies in that area of east London now there are 1,300.

Come over to Cambridge or Edinburgh or Oxford and you find clusters of tech companies who are changing the way we live now. I had some of them on the plane over with me this afternoon.

Touch Bionics – inventors of the world’s most advanced bionic hand.

Raspberry Pi – the phenomenon which has sold over 2.5 million units and counting.

Imagination – who provide the video and graphics for iPhones.

This is the UK tech scene today. Dynamic. Relentlessly ambitious. Leading the way.

It is our ambition to make the UK the most digital nation in the G8 and it is my mission to show the world that we’re getting there.

Message: we want to work with you

But I come here today with a message too, for our German friends:

We want to take these strengths and combine them.

We want to work with you to pool ideas, share data, innovate, to lead on the next big ideas.

And I’ll tell you three areas where I see us collaborating more closely.

First, 5G.

With 4G, an 800 megabyte movie takes around 40 seconds to download; with 5G that would be cut to one second.

This is a prize that researchers all over the world are going for and so I am delighted to announce a new collaboration, between the University of Dresden, King’s College University in London and the University of Surrey.

Three world-leading universities working on 5G hand in hand – that is something to be truly excited about.

Second, for our two countries to remain competitive, the European single market must keep pace with developments in the digital economy.

So Germany and the UK have agreed to work together to improve the telecoms single market.

We welcome the long-term ambition of the European Commission, but want to take steps that deliver benefits to businesses and consumers quickly, including the complete elimination of mobile roaming charges.

The third area I think we can work more closely on is the Internet of Things.

These are developments that could allow literally billions of everyday objects to talk to each other over the internet – using low-cost, low-power chips.

And this has enormous potential to change our lives.

Electricity meters that talk to the grid to get you the best deals.

Health monitors that keep an eye on your heart rate.

Water pipes that warn of a fall in pressure.

And yes, even a fridge that can order you milk when it notices you are getting low.

I see the Internet of Things as a huge transformative development a way of boosting productivity of keeping us healthier making transport more efficient reducing energy needs, tackling climate change.

We are on the brink of a new industrial revolution and I want us – the UK and Germany – to lead it.

Let me tell you how seriously we’re taking the Internet of Things in the UK.

We’re getting the infrastructure in place, with our regulator, Ofcom, taking a flexible approach to the use of Spectrum.

Indeed as our Spectrum Strategy will set out tomorrow, we aim to double the economic benefits of spectrum to UK companies and consumers from roughly £50 billion today, to £100 billion in 2025.

We’ll do this by allowing new applications to come online, new kinds of mobile technologies to be used, more data usage to be enjoyed and greater broadcasting services to be made available.

Beyond that we need the ideas to turn the Internet of Things from a slogan to a fact. So I have personally tasked the government’s Chief Scientific Adviser to explore what more we must do in this area.

We’re making available £73 million of funding to put the boosters under research. And I can announce today that we are launching a new European Internet of Things grant fund – valued at up to £1 million for companies that are grabbing these new opportunities.

But you know – the biggest thing the UK has to offer is our amazing companies. Like ARM the company whose chips are in 90 per cent of smart phones around the world. Or Neul who are here with us tonight – a brilliant new start-up in the same space. And the expertise we bring – in chip design, in software and services that is matched by the German expertise in producing industrial components. So this is a real and rare opportunity for us.

Take British ingenuity in software, services and design add German excellence in engineering and industrial manufacturing and together we can lead in this new revolution.

So to conclude today, let me extend those two invitations:

One: come to the UK and see for yourself what a fantastic environment we have for tech companies.

Two: let us join forces.

Let us in this generation make progress through technology – and let’s do it together.

Below is the text of the speech made by David Cameron, the Prime Minister, on 6th March 2014.

This meeting of European leaders takes place at a dangerous moment.

The territorial integrity of an independent nation has been violated.

The sovereignty of one of the EU’s neighbours has been blatantly swept aside.

The aspirations of the Ukrainian people – to live in a country free from corruption and free to chart its own future – are being crushed.

And Russia has acted in flagrant breach of international law.

This matters to people in Britain because we depend on a world where countries obey the rules.

It matters because this is happening in our own neighbourhood – on the European continent where in the last 70 years we have worked so hard to keep the peace.

And it matters because we know from our history that turning a blind eye when nations are trampled over and their independence trashed stores up far greater problems in the long run.

So we must stand up to aggression, uphold international law and support people who want a free, European future.

We need to de-escalate the situation. We must be clear with the Russians about their actions. And we must back the Ukrainian people.

Each part of this matters.

So first, we must find a way to defuse the situation and to restore stability in Ukraine.

Some progress was made yesterday in Paris to get the Russians and Ukrainians around the table together.

But today’s vote of the Crimean Parliament to join Russia and the decision to bring forward an unconstitutional referendum to 10 days time are serious steps in the wrong direction.

The Ukrainian government has been clear that such a referendum would be illegal.

And today European leaders have backed their position.

Illegal actions committed by Russia cannot pass without a response.

And I made very clear today that it cannot be business as usual with Russia.

So, we have agreed in respect of what has happened already:

– to suspend negotiations on a more liberal visa regime for Russians

– to stop work on a comprehensive new agreement on relations between Russia and the EU

– and to pull out of all preparations for the G8 summit in Sochi in June

And if Russia does not rapidly engage in direct talks with the Ukrainian government to find a solution to this crisis, we have been clear that we will go further.

We have today tasked the European Commission to start work on additional measures, including travel bans and asset freezes.

Of course the situation in Ukraine remains highly precarious – the slightest miscalculation could see it spiral out of control.

And we have issued a very clear warning to President Putin that he must not destabilise the situation further.

If Russia does not change course, the statement issued today now makes clear that there will be severe and far reaching consequences in areas such an energy, trade, and financial relations.

We are determined to support the new Ukrainian government and to stand by the Ukrainian people.

What they want is what people everywhere want – a strong economy, the rule of law, the right to choose their leaders and to hold them to account.

In other words, a job, a voice and hope for a better future.

The new Ukrainian government faces massive challenges.

They will need to carry out far-reaching reform needed to stabilise and repair their economy.

And as they do this, we are prepared to offer a powerful package of finance, trade and technical assistance.

They will also need to tackle corruption.

The EU has now frozen the assets of 18 individuals linked to the former regime. And Britain is ready to help the new Ukrainian government go after ill-gotten funds and to return them to the people.

Today, we have deployed to Kiev a team from the National Crime Agency, supported by the Met and CPS to help with these efforts.

At the same time, the new government must show that it is standing up for and representing all Ukrainians – whatever their ethnic background.

It will be particularly important that the May elections are free and fair and enable all Ukrainians, including Russian speakers, to choose their leaders freely.

We are facing the most serious crisis in Europe this century.

Getting agreement from the elected leaders of 28 European nations is never easy.

Britain has played an important part bringing countries together, setting out new measures that need to be taken and insisting on clear values: standing up to aggression and backing the rule of law.

But we have sent a clear and united message to Russia that its actions are completely unacceptable and will incur consequences.

We have given our backing to Prime Minister Yatsenyuk at this challenging time for him and his country.

And we have stood up for the Ukrainian people and their entirely legitimate hope for a better future for them and their children.

And we will continue to do so in the days and weeks ahead.

Below is the text of the speech made by David Cameron, the Prime Minister, on 4th March 2014.

We have a long-term economic plan to secure this country’s future: cut the deficit, cut taxes, create more jobs, cap welfare, reduce immigration and deliver the best schools and skills for young people.

That’s our plan. And it’s working. You see that in the growth figures.

In the 1.3 million new jobs, the 25 million people who will pay less income tax, the 400,000 more businesses and in the new apprenticeships being announced today.

New, more rigorous, employer-led apprenticeships are being extended to 29 new occupations from law and high tech engineering to tourism and retail, giving thousands of young people the chance to develop new skills that will help secure their future.

And we’re on track to have 2 million people start apprenticeships over the course of this Parliament.

But I’ve not come here today to reel off statistics. I’m here to talk about what this plan is really all about, what it’s all for. Too often we’ve given the impression that we’re just about fixing problems rather than changing things for a purpose.

But that completely misunderstands what we’re trying to do. This is more than some turnaround team of accountants rescuing a failing business.

We want Britain to be a success in this modernised globalised world – we want to be a country that succeeds in what I call the global race.

But it’s not just what we are doing that matters: it’s why.

It’s all about values.

And the most important value right now – after a difficult time for our country – is giving people a sense of economic security and peace of mind.

Take our mission to cut the deficit. Of course, cutting the deficit matters for our economy.

Higher deficits mean more debt and higher mortgage rates with more people living in fear of losing their homes.

But there’s something even more fundamental here about our values.

If we don’t get to grips with the deficit now we are passing a greater and greater burden of debt to our children.

We are saying that more and more of their hard earned future income should be wasted on paying off the bill we leave them.

Do we really want to be the ones who responded to a crisis by putting off to tomorrow what we had to do today?

Can we really teach our children the importance of being responsible and at the same time shirk the most fundamental responsibility of all?

Some of our opponents seem to think we can.

They think we can carry on spending and borrowing more and more, whatever the consequences for our children.

But I say no: racking up more and more debts for our children is irresponsible.

It’s not fair. It’s not right. And I’m not prepared to do it.

Imagine looking your children in the eye and trying to explain why we crippled their future with our debt. I couldn’t do that. And I’m sure you couldn’t either.

We all want the same for our children: a secure future and a chance to make something of their lives. But they won’t get that future unless we cut the deficit now.

So that’s the first part of the plan.

What about the second: cutting taxes.

This isn’t about some ideological commitment to a smaller state. It’s actually about our values. We believe in helping people keep more of the money they earn.

It’s the right thing to do.

Let’s be clear: there is no such thing as government money. It’s your money – taxpayer money.

It’s not my money, not George Osborne’s money, not the government’s money – it’s your money.

Hard-working people’s money.

The money that belongs to people who get up in the morning, come rain or shine, and put in a shift on the factory floor or in the office.

And there’s no question who spends that money best – it’s you, the taxpayer, not government.

So it’s wrong for government to take a single penny more of your money than we absolutely need.

There’s a bit of an attitude problem here that really makes me angry.

Some people talk as if the sums of money the government spends are so big that it almost doesn’t matter about the odd pound or 2 here or there.

That’s totally irresponsible.

You wouldn’t take that approach to managing your money.

And neither should we in government.

That’s important at the best of times but it’s more important than ever when families are feeling the squeeze.

Because every bit of government waste we can cut, every efficiency we can achieve, is money we can give back to you.

A bit of extra cash that can help a Dad afford those trainers for his son or help a Mum celebrate her daughter’s birthday with a meal out.

Having more money in our pockets is what gives everyone that sense of financial security and peace of mind.

It’s what enables us to provide for our families and feel more confident about the future.

The same is true about the third part of the plan – our mission to create more jobs.

Take Demi Owoseje, whose small business restores old furniture.

She’s been helped by our Start Up Loans scheme to develop a customer friendly website and branch into new areas like a rental range with customers now including Jimmy Choo.

She’s started creating her first jobs so she’ll soon be helped by our Employment Allowance that will give her a £2,000 cashback on the jobs she creates.

And from next year, she won’t have to pay a penny in National Insurance on anyone she hires who is under 21.

But what really matters is not the help we’ve given Demi, but the help she’s giving others.

Our opponents said we would see a million jobs disappear.

But in fact, entrepreneurs like Demi, have helped to create 1.3 million more jobs today than there were in 2010.

We see the new job numbers every month when the figures come out.

But what matters far more than the numbers is the dignity people get from having a job.

There is nothing like the pride of the first time you get a pay cheque.

It gives you the chance of a more fulfilled life.

It gives you the opportunity to be more independent.

Most important of all, it gives you a sense of security and the peace of mind that you can support yourself and your family.

That is what I want from this plan, more than anything: sustainable and well-paid jobs.

We’re not going to get there by attacking business or putting their taxes up.

We need to be in the business of helping business – so they create the jobs that we all depend on.

And it’s working.

We are seeing a revival of manufacturing exports and a growth in small businesses.

More jobs created each month. And better paid jobs.

Last week the Low Pay Commission recommended the minimum wage should increase to £6.50.

That would be the first above inflation increase in 6 years.

And it something that’s only affordable because of the difficult decisions we have taken with our long-term economic plan.

Of course, the numbers matter but what matters even more is what it means for hard working people.

It means that as we recover from the great recession hard working people on the minimum wage – who have suffered during the tough times – can know they will share in the recovery.

So yes, I look forward to accepting this recommendation.

Restoring the value of the minimum wage is a vital part of how we secure a recovery for all with economic security for every working family in Britain.

Let me turn to those out of work.

The fourth part of our plan is about capping welfare and reducing immigration.

At the end of the so-called boom years, there were around 5 million people in our country of working age but on out-of-work benefits.

Almost a million and a half people had spent most of the last decade out of work and the number of households where no-one had ever worked had nearly doubled.

And this happened at the same time as the largest wave of migration in our country’s history.

Now I don’t care whether you are the leader of the Labour Party or the leader of the church, this kind of failure is just wrong.

It’s wrong to let our own people do nothing, with no purpose in their life, dependent on benefits.

It’s wrong that we open our doors and communities to such rapid levels of immigration they can’t manage.

And wrong that we ask British taxpayers to fund this situation with their hard-earned money.

As I’ve said before immigration and welfare are 2 sides of the same coin – and we’ve got to fix them both.

Let’s start with immigration.

Last week figures show what a big task we still face.

But things are starting to change.

In just 5 years between 2005 and 2010, for every British person who fell out of work, almost 2 foreign nationals gained employment.

But over the past year, almost 90 per cent of the increase in employment we’ve seen has been for UK nationals.

We’ve cut migration from outside the EU to its lowest levels since 1998.

We’re making it harder for migrants to come here and claim benefits or access public services within earning that entitlement first.

And the idea of allowing new countries to join the EU with immediate unfettered access to our labour markets is never going to happen again.

But it’s not just about controlling migration. The other side of the coin is welfare.

Again it’s back to a fundamental question of values.

Last week I went to a dinner in honour of D-Day Veterans.

One of the Veterans told me about how he came back from the war, went to the labour exchange and couldn’t find a job.

But then eventually he got offered a job at Ford in Dagenham.

It was hard work but he was proud to do it.

He said “I was able to work, they offered me a job and I had a responsibility to take it.”

There wasn’t an option to say: “no thanks, I’ll take the benefits instead.”

He looked me in the eye and said: “why can’t we go back to that?”

I agree with him.

I’ve always been clear that those who can’t work will always be supported.

But those who can work have a responsibility to do so and the welfare system should never take that responsibility away.

Why should some people work every hour God sends to try and make ends meet, only to see money taken out of their wages to support people who could work but who choose not to?

That’s why if people turn down job offers their benefits will be cut.

I want Britain to be a country where people are able to get on, stand on their own 2 feet and build a better life for themselves and their family.

I want a Britain where we reward those who work hard, play by the rules and do the right thing.

That’s what our long-term economic plan is all about.

Not just making the numbers add up – but doing what’s fair and what’s right.

You don’t create economic security with hand-outs. You do that with the dignity, independence and yes, the pay packet that comes with a job.

And that takes me to the final part of the plan.

Delivering the best schools and skills for young people.

Nothing I have spoken about today is more important for our future than this.

Education is the best inoculation against unemployment.

It’s what gives our children the skills they need to compete, get a job and secure their future and it’s what gives our country the platform from which to innovate, create new products and take on the world.

So an economic plan that doesn’t include delivering a first-class, world-class education system, is no economic plan at all.

Now some people look at what we’re doing in education, and think we are driven by some deep-seated ideology.

That’s total nonsense.

We are driven by our values.

Values like discipline – because we know no child can learn in chaos.

Rigour – because we know dumbing down cheats our children of their future.

Excellence for all – because we should be ambitious for every child, not just some.

And a focus on the fundamentals – because there isn’t a job in the world where you don’t need to read or add up properly.

But you know the most important value I bring to education?

It’s faith in our teachers.

Of course, we will never excuse failure and never shy away from difficult conversations about the quality of teaching in our country when it’s let children down.

But if you look at our academy or free schools programme, there is a single thread running through it:

Giving teachers the freedom to get on and teach, giving them control over how their schools are run and trusting them to get on with the job.

But it’s not just about what happens at school – it’s about what happens after school too.

I want all school leavers to have a rite of passage to further training or education.

And that’s why apprenticeships like those being announced today are so important.

Take Aiden Rogers who showed me round the Rolls Royce apprentice academy last year and who is here with us today.

Aiden told me he was studying for a degree while also earning – and learning – his trade.

He feels that being able to say “I started as an apprentice” is something that gives him “instant respect and credibility”.

And he describes how his apprenticeship has given him the confidence to communicate ideas and the opportunity to apply everything he has learned in a hands-on industrial setting.

As the winner of the EEF’s outstanding achievement award for a first year apprentice, Aiden is already aspiring to the day when he’s in a senior position. He’s getting the skills to give him every chance of that future.

I want all our young people to have the skills and the opportunity to aspire to a great future.

And that’s why delivering the best schools and skills are at the heart of our long-term economic plan.

So yes, we are sorting out the economy and getting the numbers to add up.

But we’re doing something much more than that.

We are doing what’s right for our country.

What’s right for our children.

What’s right for our future.

Because I want us to build a better Britain where we can look after future generations.

Where people can meet their obligations and provide for their families.

And where together we can secure a better, more independent future for all our people.

That is my fundamental mission in politics: to deliver economic security and peace of mind for every family in Britain.

And that is what our long-term economic plan is all about.