Tag: 2016

  • Sal Brinton – 2016 Speech to Liberal Democrat Party Conference

    Below is the text of the speech made by Sal Brinton, the President of the Liberal Democrats, to the 2016 party conference on 20 September 2016.

    Good morning, Conference. Here we are, constitutional amendments concluded – how will we all manage next week without the excitement?

    But seriously, I want to thank you for your involvement and responses to the challenge I put to you over a year ago to think how we could improve our Federal structures, and how we can work more effectively as a party. The thousands of suggestions and comment that you made to the Federal Executive have truly helped shape what came to Conference, and your contributions to the debates over the last four days has been genuinely helpful.

    The policy debates have been outstanding too, and I particularly want to thank the many people who spoke at Conference for the first time. In debate after debate, new members and first time speakers were called to the stage to give your views, and what effective contributions they were!

    As we wait to hear from Tim Farron later this morning, I have been very aware how during this conference we have been reflecting on our history, with some on Twitter even going as far back as the Whigs! Tim reminded us at the Rally that nearly one hundred years ago the Liberals lost touch with the base, the core voters, and forgot what we were there to do, and we spent years in the wilderness. And yet, many of our members worked tirelessly even though it was very tough going.

    Once again the press and media are bemused that we are in such good heart. I have taken a particular delight in telling them that it is because we are open, tolerant and united, unlike Labour, the Conservatives and UKIP!

    Diane James’s honeymoon period as new leader of UKIP was short lived. Within an hour of taking up her post on Friday, she had scrapped the speeches of her four opponents, and perhaps most fun of all, turned Neil Hamilton’s speech on Saturday into a coffee break.

    Yes, a coffee break.

    What’s more, he discovered this from a reporter from Newsnight who had a copy of the revised schedule before Neil Hamilton. UKIP’s purges aren’t even done behind the scenes.

    And then there is THAT photo of her and Nigel Farage that was all over the press and media. I know that Nigel Farage backed Diane James as his successor, but that photo is so revealing. She just didn’t want him that close. So UKIP score nul points for being neither open, tolerant nor united.

    And Labour? Well, here in Brighton and Hove, Momentum have taken over the local party, and are so public about their attempts to de-select him that *they* have been suspended. And it isn’t just here in Brighton – across the country, Jeremy Corbyn’s activists are taking over local parties and moving against anyone perceived as anti-Corbyn. Some MPs are threatening to sue those trying to deselect them.

    Pro-Corbynites hate dissent so much that anything that doesn’t come out of the Corbyn playbook is attacked in a vile and vicious way.

    Unpleasant politics when used against political opponents is distasteful.

    When used against people in your own party it is unforgivable. But that is what they are, unforgiving. Certainly not open, tolerant nor united.

    And watching all of this from her new home at No.10 Downing Street is Theresa May. Last week she yet again re-affirmed that Brexit means Brexit, even though it is now absolutely clear that neither she nor her 3 Brexit ministers have any idea of what it means….

    Does it mean remaining or leaving the Single Market –

    Theresa May or she may not.

    Does it mean keeping or curtailing free movement of people

    Theresa May or she may not.

    Does it mean continuing to invest in our universities to keep them the best in the world?

    Theresa May or she may not.

    Does it mean working with European countries to protect the environment and tackle climate change?

    Theresa May or she may not.

    The Tories have been good at papering over the cracks of their splits, but the resignation of David Cameron as an MP seems to have encouraged his wing of the party to speak out.

    Theresa May’s Conservative party record on police stop and search on BAME people, on immigration, and on the Snoopers Charter are not open, tolerant or United.

    And the Liberal Democrats?

    This Sunday, one paper’s editorial headline was ‘Lib Dems’ revival is a blow to sorry Labour’,

    and it then went on to say:

    ‘fair play to the Lib Dems.

    under Leader Tim Farron the party has risen from the ashes of electoral oblivion to reposition itself as the only effective opposition…

    The Lib Dems have not only capitalised on the fallout from the EU Referendum but also the disintegration of the Labour Party…

    They are speaking up for ordinary voters on issues that really matter, such as the NHS and education.’

    The Observer on Polly Toynbee’s day off?

    The Independent?

    No, this, my friends, is the Sunday Express!

    I’m delighted that Tim is at last getting the recognition that he deserves, and I suspect that phrase ‘the only effective opposition’ might appear in a few leaflets and tabloids over the next few months.

    We are the only major party that has not traded on fear, that challenges the racism, nationalism and populism that is sweeping the country at the moment. We’ve not just watched the appalling increase in hate crime, but we heard on Sunday in the combatting racism debate how our own friends and members have been attacked. That is why I still wear a safety pin – and I do get comments from people who say how reassuring it is to know that there are people who will call out any hate crime. Keep calling it out, every time YOU see it. You cannot know how powerful it is to intervene, politely but firmly, to support a victim of such behaviour.

    I want to finish by returning to my theme from last year – the future of the party. It’s wonderful that we have had 18,000 new members since the referendum and that we are doing so well in by elections and I want to ask you to do three things over the next few weeks, regardless of whether you are a new member, or an old lag, like myself to help propel the Lib Dems further in winning ways.

    Firstly, should Jeremy Corbyn be re-elected, I know that a number of Labour supporters and members will be feeling very lost.

    Befriend them.

    Let them know that we are still the party that is pro the EU, that whilst Labour are facing inward and fighting, we will be the party who holds the May Tory Government to account, on investment in the NHS, and on fighting against a growth of grammar schools. They may now want to support us, and even join us because they share our values.

    Secondly, I want to see new people coming forward to stand for elections in the party, whether local party elections, regional elections or federal elections.

    One of the very strong messages you told us in the governance review was that too few people stand for office in the party.

    So, do not assume it is someone else’s job! You want fresh faces in these roles – please stand!!

    This is especially important if you are from an under Represented group – women, BAME, disabled and LGBT+. Your party needs you!!

    Find out what the role entails and put yourself up for election. It’s that simple. And it’s your destiny!

    And finally, thirdly, help build on our by election successes.

    Go to help in Witney – we have one month to make our mark. Tonight the local party selects their candidate, but the first leaflets have already gone out. Much more help is needed, and parliamentary by elections are so much fun too. I promise you will enjoy it!

    And go and help in your nearest council by election – every extra pair of hands truly makes a big difference. I promise you’ll learn skills there that you can use in your patch.

    And last, but not least, try to stand a candidate in every election. The reception so different, so much more positive out there than even six months ago.

    We won Tupton, in North East Derbyshire, even though we didn’t stand a candidate in the previous election. Even if we won’t do as well every time, standing a candidate reminds the voters we are there fighting for them, and using ALDC’s brilliant toolkit ‘Pick a ward and win it’, you can build up you supporters network, campaign locally, and move on to victory.

    I am so proud to be your President.

    Proud that you have refused to allow the press and the media to write us off.

    Proud that you are in the front line of the revival of our party.

    Proud that you stand alongside Tim Farron in showing this country that there is one party, and one party only:-

    who will fight for the vulnerable and dispossessed,

    who will fight for our place in Europe and the world

    And who believes that Britain is and should be Open, Tolerant and United.

  • Tim Farron – 2016 Speech to Liberal Democrat Party Conference

    timfarron

    Below is the text of the speech made by Tim Farron, the Leader of the Liberal Democrats, at the 2016 party conference.

    Liberal Democrats are good at lots of things. But the thing it seems that we’re best at, is confounding expectations.

    We were expected to shy away from taking power, but we stepped up and we made a difference.

    We were expected to disappear after the 2015 election, but we bounced back, we are almost twice the size we were then, we’ve gained more council seats than every other party in this country put together.

    And I’ve being doing a bit of confounding expectations myself. You see, I am a white, northern, working class, middle aged bloke. According to polling experts, I should have voted Leave.

    May I assure you that I didn’t.

    But mates of mine did. People in my family did. Some of them even admitted it to me. And some of them didn’t. But you told my sister didn’t you, and somehow thought it wouldn’t get back to me. You know who you are.

    I have spent most of my adult life, worked and raised a family in Westmorland. I’m proud to call it my home.

    But I grew up a few miles south, in Preston in Lancashire.

    Preston is where I learnt my values, it’s where I was raised in a loving family where there wasn’t much money around and at a time when, it appeared to me, the Thatcher government seemed utterly determined to put every adult I knew out of work and on the scrapheap.

    But our people and our community were not for breaking.

    The great city of Preston is a no nonsense place, proud of its history, ambitious about its future.

    It is the birthplace of the industrial revolution;

    It is the place where Cromwell won the most important battle in the English Civil War. The complacent establishment stuffed by the outsiders.

    Which links rather neatly to the referendum. Preston voted 53% to leave. There were some places in Lancashire where two-thirds of people voted out.

    And I respect those people.

    If you’ll forgive me, they are my people.

    And if they’ll forgive me, I’m still utterly convinced that Britain should remain in Europe.

    I was on the 23rd June, I am today, I will continue to be.

    Not because I’m some starry-eyed pro-European with Ode to Joy as my ring tone – we all know what I have as my ring tone – but because I am a patriot and believe it’s in our national interest to be in.

    For more jobs, for lower prices, to fight climate change, to stop terrorism, catch criminals, to have influence, to be a good neighbour, to stand tall, to stand proud, to matter.

    And, above all, because I believe that Britain is an open, tolerant and united country – the opposite of the bleak vision of Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson.

    Britain did not become Great Britain on fear, isolation and division – and there is no country called Little Britain.

    There is nothing so dangerous and narrow as nationalism and cheap identity politics.

    But there is nothing wrong with identity. I am very proud of mine.

    I am a Lancastrian, I am a Northerner, I am English, I am British, I am European. I am all those things, none of them contradict another and no campaign of lies, hate and fear will rob me of who I am.

    But we lost didn’t we?

    Now – I was born and raised in Preston but the football-mad half of my family is from Blackburn, so I’m a Rovers fan. Defeat and disappointment is in my blood.

    So those who say I’m a bad loser are quite wrong.

    I am a great loser.

    I have had loads of practice.

    But the referendum result to me was like a bereavement. I was devastated by it.

    We Liberal Democrats worked harder than anyone else in that campaign, we put blood, sweat and tears
    into it.

    We put the positive case for Europe, while Cameron and Osborne churned out dry statistics, fear mongering and shallow platitudes.

    It’s easy to say – after such a narrow a referendum result – that we are a divided country. But in many ways we are.

    And the split between leavers and remainers is just a manifestation of that division.

    Britain today is far too unequal. There is too much excess and too much poverty.

    Too much wealth concentrated in some parts of the country and too little in others.

    So a couple of weeks after the referendum I went back to Preston. We booked St Wilfrids Church Hall just off Fishergate.

    When my office booked the place they had no idea that it meant something to me personally. You see, the last time I’d been in there was for my Nan’s funeral ten years earlier. The last time I’d walked out of that church was as a pall-bearer for her.

    So I was in what you might call a reflective mood when I began the meeting. There were perhaps 70 people there. Most of them had voted to leave. And most of them pretty much fitted my demographic.

    They weren’t mostly die-hards. I reckon, honestly, that three quarters of them could have been persuaded to vote Remain up until about two or three weeks out.

    One guy said that the clincher for him was George Osborne’s ‘punishment budget’.

    And when he said that, pretty much the whole room chipped in and agreed with him.

    There was near universal acknowledgement that this had been the pivotal moment.

    Here was this guy, George Osborne, who they didn’t really like.

    And who they felt didn’t really like them.

    And he’d appeared on the telly bullying them into doing something they weren’t sure they wanted to do.

    And they reacted.

    You see, if you base your political strategy on divide and rule, do not be surprised if the people you have divided decide to give you a kicking.

    I don’t blame the people in that church hall for their anger – actually, I share it. I’m angry.

    And I’m angry at the calculating forces of darkness who care nothing for the working people of this country, nothing for our NHS, nothing for those who struggle to get by, and who exploited that anger to win an exit from Europe that will hurt the poorest the hardest.

    The people in that church hall in Preston, they’d voted differently to me but I thought, you know what, we’re on the same side here.

    We see a London-centric – no, Westminster-centric – approach from politicians and the media. Treating the provinces as alien curiosities.

    Those people in Preston – and Sunderland and Newport – see a divide between those who win and those who lose. When the country is booming, they don’t see the benefit. And when the country is in decline they are the first to be hit.

    At that meeting they talked about low wages. About poor housing. About strains on hospitals and schools.

    Their problems weren’t caused by the European Union, they were caused by powerful people who took them for granted.

    By politicians who have spent decades chasing cheap headlines and short-term success for their political careers, and never acting in the long-term interests of the whole country.

    So those people in that room, like millions of others, wanted, quite understandably, to give the powerful a kicking. So they did.

    I wanted Britain to remain in the European Union and I still do.

    But we have got to listen, to learn and to understand why millions of people voted to leave. We can’t just tell them they’re wrong and stick our fingers in our ears.

    So I want to do two things.

    I want to persuade those who voted leave that we understand and respect their reasons, that we are determined to take head on the things about today’s Britain that have left so many people feeling ignored.

    And I want to give them their say over what comes next.

    Theresa May says Brexit means Brexit. Well thanks for clearing that up.

    Nearly three months since the referendum and we have a government with new departments, new titles, a new prime minister…but no plan. No vision. No clue.

    And no leadership.

    Theresa May did so little in the Remain campaign that she actually made it look like Jeremy Corbyn pulled a shift.

    And today, the absence of leadership from the Prime Minister is astonishing, the absence of clarity as to what will happen to our country is a disgrace.

    Three months on, it isn’t good enough to have brainstorming sessions at Chequers while investment and jobs steadily bleed away;

    …while our standing and relevance in the world diminishes in direct proportion to the number foreign visits by Boris Johnson.

    …while British industry is crying out for direction, for certainty, for any idea of what lies ahead.

    Make no mistake, the Conservative Party has lost the right to call itself the party of business. It has lost the right to call itself the party of the free market

    It no longer supports business, no longer understands the need for calm economic pragmatism – but instead pursues the nationalist protectionist fantasies of the Brexit fundamentalists who have won the day.

    Indeed, my message to any business in this country – large or small – is if you are backing today’s Conservative Party, you are funding your own funeral.

    There is only one party now that believes in British business – large and small; that believes in entrepreneurship and innovation: the Liberal Democrats

    We are the free market, free trade pro-business party now.

    Theresa May – tell us what Brexit really means.

    You’ve had three months. You are the Prime Minister. Stop dithering. What is your plan?

    The Liberal Democrats have a plan. We know what we want and we know where we want to take our country.

    When Theresa May does agree a deal with the EU, we want the people to decide.

    Not a re-run of the referendum, not a second referendum, but a referendum on the terms of the as-yet-unknown Brexit deal.

    And if the Tories say, ‘we’ve had enough referendums’, I say ‘you started it!’

    We had a democratic vote in June. We can’t start this process with democracy and end it with a stitch up.
    If we trusted the people to vote for our departure then we must trust the people to vote for our destination.

    Short-termism

    Politics is about serving people. And millions of people have not been well served by generations of politicians who put their own short-term political needs before the long-term interests of the people they were supposed to be serving.

    David Cameron’s handling of our relationship with Europe is a master class in selfish, shallow short-termism. Party before country at every turn.

    The Conservatives risked our country’s very future, the life chances of millions of our young people, all in a failed attempt to unite their fractured party.

    David Cameron risked our future, and he lost. And while he waltzes off to riches and retirement, our country is plunged into economic uncertainty, insecurity and irrelevance on the world stage.

    The Tories took the gamble, but Britain will pay the price. What an absolute disgrace.

    Their short-termism doesn’t stop with Brexit.

    Look at their handling of the refugee crisis. The biggest crisis facing our continent since the Second World War.

    They did nothing to help right until the point they thought it was in their short-term interest to act, when a photo of three-year-old Aylan Kurdi face down in the sand was on the front page of every newspaper.

    The people were shocked, heartbroken, they demanded action and the Tories did the bare minimum.

    But since the front pages have moved on, they have barely lifted a finger.

    Now there are some on the centre left who are squeamish about patriotism, but not me.

    I’m proud of my country; I hate it when my government makes me ashamed.

    When I was on the island of Lesbos last year, after we’d helped to land a flimsy boat of desperate refugees, I was handing out bottles of fresh water.

    And a few yards away was an aid worker from New Zealand, who knew that I was a British politician.

    She looked at me and shouted, “stop handing out bottles of water and take some f***ing refugees.”

    Because that is how Britain is seen. Mean and not pulling its weight.

    And maybe that doesn’t bother some people, but it bothers me.

    Because I am proud of who we are – always a sanctuary for the desperate, the abused and the persecuted; and I will not stand by and watch my country become smaller, meaner and more selfish.

    That is not Britain. We are better than that.

    And a year on. The crisis is worse, not better.

    Not that you’d know it. We don’t see those desperate families in the media every day.

    We aren’t confronted so often with the knowledge that they are just like us and that they need our help.

    Much to the Government’s delight, compassion fatigue has set in. The news has moved on.

    We’ve had Brexit, a new Prime Minister, a Labour leadership contest.

    And none of that makes a blind bit of difference to a nine-year-old kid stuck alone and hungry and cold in a camp in northern Greece.

    Or to the family, this morning, fleeing their burning camp in Moria.

    This government wants us to forget this crisis, it’s too difficult to solve, too risky to take a lead.

    But we have not forgotten, we will not forget, those children could be our children, how dare the Government abandon them.

    But short-termism in politics goes back a lot further than just this government.

    Look at the way the Conservatives in the 80s and Labour in the 90s treated the banks. Sucking up, deregulating, encouraging a culture of risk and greed.

    Instead of building an economy that served the long-term needs of the whole country, they put all their eggs in one basket – the banks.

    And, for a while, things were good. Britain boomed.

    But they didn’t invest in the modern infrastructure that could benefit the north of England, or Scotland, or Wales, or the Midlands, or the South West.

    They didn’t invest in the skills the next generation would need.

    They didn’t invest in our manufacturing base.

    All they did was allow the banks to take bigger and bigger risks, and build up bigger and bigger liabilities.

    And when the banks failed, we were all left paying the price.

    In lost jobs, in lower wages, in debt, in cuts to public services.

    Short-term thinking. Long-term consequences.

    And nowhere is the danger posed by short-term thinking greater than with the future of the National Health Service.

    Can you remember a time when there weren’t news reports on an almost daily basis saying the NHS is in crisis?

    For years, politicians have chosen to paper over the cracks rather than come clean about what it will really take – what it will really cost – not just to keep the NHS afloat but to give people the care and the treatment that they deserve.

    And that means, finally, bringing the NHS and the social care system together.

    In my Grandpa’s journey through Alzheimers, he had good care in the home he spent his last couple of years in. But when he first became ill after the death of my Grandma, the place he was put in was despicable.

    Lonely, unclean, uncaring.

    It’s a few years back, but as I fought to get him out of that place and into somewhere better, it occurred to me that this was a standard experience for too many older people and their loved ones.

    Maybe some people can just shrug and accept this, well I can’t.

    I’ve seen enough terrible old people’s homes. And I’ve seen enough people who’ve had to wait forever for treatment – particularly people who don’t have someone to fight their corner.

    It’s not civilised to let people slip through the net.

    It’s not civilised towards the people who love them, who go out of their way to try and make their lives easier when everything else is making their lives harder.

    It’s not civilised and it’s not good enough.

    I worry about this, not just for the NHS in general, but, if I’m honest, for myself and my family.

    We will all, if we’re lucky, grow old.

    We all deserve to know that, no matter what happens, we will be cared for properly and treated with dignity and respect.

    If the great Liberal William Beveridge had written his blue print today, when people are living to the ages they are now, there is no doubt that he would have proposed a National Health and Care Service.

    He would have been appalled about the child who has to look after their disabled parent or the hundreds of thousands of women across the country who are unable to work because they are disproportionately the care givers.

    So let’s today decide to do what Beveridge would do. Let’s create that National Health and Care Service.

    And let’s stop being complacent about our NHS.

    We have of course a brilliant NHS, the best staff in the world, free care at the point of access…but we are spending far less on it every year than we need to.

    Of the 15 original EU countries – including Spain, Greece and Portugal – we rank behind them in 13th place when it comes to health spending. It would take tens of billions of pounds a year just to bring ourselves up to their average.

    It’s not good enough.

    So we need to face the hard truth that the NHS needs more money – a lot more money – not just to stop it lurching from crisis to crisis but so that it can meet the needs and the challenges it will face in the years ahead. So that it can be the service we all need it to be for the long-term.

    That means having the most frank and honest conversation about the NHS that the country has ever had.

    What Beveridge did for the 20th century, we need for the 21st century.

    In Norman Lamb we have the politician who is most trusted and respected by the health profession – and deservedly so. And Norman and I are clear, we will not join the ranks of those politicians who are too scared of losing votes to face up to what really needs to be done.

    We will go to the British people with the results of our Beveridge Commission and we will offer a new deal for health and social care, honest about the cost, bold about the solution.

    If the only way to fund a health service that meets the needs of everyone, is to raise taxes, Liberal Democrats will raise taxes.

    Short-term thinking is the scourge of our education system too.

    Governments have designed an education system – especially at primary school level – that is focused not on developing young people for later life, for work or for further study, but on getting them through the wrong kinds of tests.

    It’s not about whether kids can solve problems, or converse in other languages – or even their own. It’s about statistics. Measurements. League tables.

    Instead of building an education system, we have built a quality assurance industry.

    It’s no wonder so many teachers are so frustrated. No wonder so many leave the profession.

    Parents deserve to know that their child’s teacher is focused on teaching.

    Teachers are professionally undervalued, driven towards meeting targets instead of developing young minds.

    And, as ever, it is the poorest kids who suffer the most.

    In the last government we introduced a policy – a long-term policy – to try and help the poorest kids keep up with their better off classmates: the pupil premium. And this school year more than two million children will benefit from that Liberal Democrat policy.

    And I am so proud of Kirsty Williams, who is making a real difference, every day, to the lives of children of across Wales.

    The Pupil Premium is not safe in the Tories’ hands – but it is safe in Kirsty’s.

    And what’s more, she’s doubled it. That’s what happens when you get into power.

    But we need to do so much more.

    I talk a lot about opportunity – about breaking down the barriers that hold people back. Nowhere is that more important than in education.

    I want our schools to be places where our teachers have the freedom to use their skill and their knowledge to open young minds, not just train them to pass exams.

    I want them to be places where children are inspired to learn, not stressed out by tests.

    So I want to end the current system of SATS in primary schools that are a distraction from the real education that professional teachers want to give their children; that weigh heavy on children as young as six and add nothing to the breadth of their learning.

    What are we doing wasting our children’s education and our teachers talents on ticking boxes?

    And what are we doing, in 2016, threatening to relegate 80% of our children to education’s second division by returning to the 11-plus?

    Every parent wants to send their kids to a good schools. But more selective schools are not the answer.

    We need better schools for all our children, not just those who can pass an exam at the age of 11. We can’t just leave children behind.

    Over the last 40 years, millions of children have been liberated by comprehensive education who would otherwise be consigned to second class status in the secondary audience.

    And it’s important to remember who did that: Shirley Williams.

    We will defend your legacy Shirley. It’s not just about being a liberal – this is personal.

    Assessment is vital, exams are important, but let’s have assessment that leads to a love of learning and a breadth of learning; that is relevant to what children will need next at school and in their future as adults.

    There is nothing more long term than the education of a child that stays with them for their entire life.

    So let’s end the box ticking. Let’s teach our children. And let’s trust our teachers.

    The country needs an opposition

    One thing you can’t accuse Jeremy Corbyn of is short-term thinking. His lot have waited over a hundred years for this.

    Finally, they have taken the Labour Party. Like all good Marxists, they have seized the means of production.

    They’ve even seized the nurseries too – opening branches of ‘Momentum Kids’. Or as they are also known, Child Labour…or Tiny Trots.

    The Lib Dems have never had any trouble with entryists – unless you include the Quakers.

    My problem with Jeremy Corbyn is nothing personal. After all, I used to see him quite a lot. In the Blair years he was always in our lobby.

    No, my problem with Jeremy Corbyn is that, for him, holding the government to account is not a priority.

    Winning elections is a bourgeois distraction – unless it’s his own leadership election.

    It is baffling to see the Labour Party arguing about whether or not they should even be trying to win an election.

    Can you imagine that? The Liberals and Liberal Democrats spent decades out of power and then when the opportunity finally came – in incredibly difficult circumstances, when the easiest thing in the world would have been to walk away – we chose to take power because we knew the point of politics is to put principles into action. To get things done. Not just to feel good, but to do good.

    So we took power … and we got crushed.

    So you could forgive us for thinking twice about whether power is really worth it.

    But of course it’s worth it.

    Having fine principles but no power is just turning your backs on the people who need you the most, its letting someone else win the day.

    We have huge crises in Britain today – in our NHS, in our economy, in our relationship with the rest of the world.

    We have a Conservative government that got the support of less than a quarter of the electorate at the last election, led by a Prime Minister who nobody elected, that has plunged our country into chaos.

    They spent a year going for the working poor, refugees and junior doctors.

    And what have the Labour Party been doing? Going for each other.

    Instead of standing up to the Conservatives, they were sitting on the floor of half-empty Virgin trains.

    Because maybe Jeremy Corbyn thinks there are more important things than winning elections, but for millions of people desperate for an affordable home, for a fair wage, for a properly funded NHS, they cannot wait. How dare the official opposition abandon them?

    Whichever party you supported at the last election, we all know that Britain needs a decent, united opposition.

    So if Corbyn’s Labour has left the stage, then we will take the stage.

    People say to me, ‘this is a great opportunity for the Liberal Democrats’…

    …but this is more than opportunity…it is duty.

    Britain needs a strong opposition. The Liberal Democrats will be that strong opposition.

    Do you ever listen to these Labour people arguing among themselves, throwing around the word Blairite as if it’s the world’s most offensive insult?

    I even hear some of the Momentum folks referring to Gordon Brown as a Blairite – I’m pretty sure he’s a Brownite.

    So, just to reassure you, I am not a Blairite.

    I was proud to march against his illegal invasion of Iraq. I was proud to stand with Charles Kennedy. And I was incredibly proud when Charles’ brave stance was vindicated in the Chilcot report.

    I was also proud to be in the party that stood up against his government’s attempts to stamp on our civil liberties – from compulsory ID cards to 90-day detention without charge.

    And I was proud of Vince as he called out his government for de-regulating the banks.

    But there is more to Tony Blair’s legacy than that.

    I kind of see Tony Blair the way I see The Stone Roses, I preferred the early work.

    Tony Blair’s government gave us the National Minimum Wage.

    It gave us working tax credits.

    It gave us NHS investment and a massive school building programme.

    I disagree with him a lot, but I will not criticise him for those things. I admire him for those things.

    I respect him for believing that the point of being in politics is to get stuff done, and you can only get stuff done if you win.

    Otherwise you’re letting your opponent get stuff done instead.

    The Corbyn crowd like to talk in terms of loyalty and betrayal.

    Well, there is no surer way to betray the people you represent than to let your opponents win.

    I believe in working across party lines. I’m prepared to work with people of all parties and none if it will make people’s lives better.

    But I couldn’t work with Jeremy Corbyn, because Jeremy Corbyn would never work with me.

    I wanted to work with him during the referendum campaign, but he wouldn’t share a platform.

    Labour is having its leadership contest in a few days’ time, so of course Jeremy Corbyn may not be leader for much longer. In which case, it could be Owen Smith.

    Now, I don’t know Owen Smith that well. But, unlike Corbyn, he is certainly on our side of the European debate.

    So, if Owen Smith wins, I want to make clear that I am open to working together.

    And there are others I could work with too.

    There is a contest happening now for the chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee – it is an important position but, let’s face it, it’s a retirement position.

    Among the contenders are Yvette Cooper, Caroline Flint and Chuka Umunna.

    Shouldn’t that be their leadership contest?

    What are these people doing, jostling for position in a sideshow. They should be centre stage.

    The Government needs an Opposition, and that means progressives should be prepared to put our differences aside in order to hold them to account.

    But if Jeremy Corbyn does win, where does that leave us?

    A Conservative Brexit Government that, without us to restrain them, are showing their true colours: reckless, divisive and uncaring; prepared to risk our future prosperity for their own short-term gain.

    And a Labour Party that has forgotten the people it is there to stand up for. Hopelessly divided and patently unfit for government, with no plan for the economy or the country; led by a man who is obsessed with re-fighting the battles of the past and ignoring the damage the Government is doing to our future.

    There is a hole in the centre of British politics right now; a huge opportunity for a party that will stand up for an open, tolerant and united Britain.

    There is a hole in the centre of British politics right now for a rallying point for people who believe in the politics of reason, of evidence, of moderation…

    …who want facts, not fear;

    …who want responsibility, not recklessness;

    …who want to believe that someone is looking out for the long-term good of our country.

    There is a hole in the centre of British politics right now that is crying out to be filled by a real Opposition.

    We will stand up to the Conservative Brexit Government.

    If Labour won’t be the opposition Britain needs, then we will.

    That’s what we’re fighting for. A Britain that’s open, tolerant and united.

    And we will only build that Britain if we win. So here is my plan.

    We will dramatically rebuild our strength in local government, deliberately, passionately, effectively.

    Winning council seats is our chance to shape, lead and serve our communities to put liberalism into practice.

    Liberals believe in local government, I believe in local government, every council seat matters to me.

    So my challenge to you is to pick a ward and win it, and my commitment to you is that I choose to build our party’s revival on victories in every council in the country.

    And my plan includes continuing to grow our party – our membership is up 80% in just 14 months – but that is merely a staging post, we will continue to build a movement that can win at every level.

    I will lead the Liberal Democrats as the only party committed to Britain in Europe, with a plan to let the people decide our future in a referendum on the as yet non-existent Tory Brexit deal.

    I will lead the only party with a plan for our country’s long-term future. Green, healthy, well-educated, outward-looking, prosperous, secure.

    I will build the open, tolerant, united party that can be the opposition to this Conservative government. On NHS underfunding, on divisive grammar schools, on its attacks on British business.

    I want the Liberal Democrats to be ready to fill the gap where an official opposition should be. I want the Liberal Democrats to be the strong, united opposition.

    I want us to be audacious, ambitious and accept the call of history.

    A century ago, the Liberals lost touch with their purpose and their voters, and Labour took their chance and became Britain’s largest progressive party.

    Today I want us utterly ready and determined to take our chance as the tectonic plates shift again.

    I didn’t accept the leadership of our party so that we could look on from the sidelines, I did it because our destiny is to once again become one of the great parties of government, to be the place where liberals and progressives of all kinds gather to provide the strong opposition that our country needs.

    That is my plan. I need you to join me to fight for it.

    Let’s be clear, we’re talking about doing a Trudeau.

    Now, he’s better looking than me and he’s got a tattoo – I can fix one of those things, if you insist.

    I wouldn’t get into the boxing ring with him, but I reckon I could have him in a fell race.

    But the point is Trudeau’s Liberals leapt over an inadequate official opposition to defeat a right wing Conservative government. Do you fancy doing that? ‘cos I do!

    And there are some who will say…steady on. You’ve only got eight MPs.

    Well look, maybe for the time being you might be sceptical about us doing a Trudeau, but let’s agree that we can definitely do an Ashdown.

    To take this party from a handful of seats to dozens of seats, from the fringe to the centre, from irrelevance to importance.

    But what would us doing an Ashdown mean for Britain today?

    Well, look, no one believes, whether boundary changes happen or not, that Labour will gain a single seat from the Tories.

    The SNP could only possibly take one seat off the Conservatives.

    But there are dozens of Tory seats in our reach.

    Which means that the only thing standing between the Conservatives and a majority at the next election is the revival of the Liberal Democrats.

    So let’s make it happen.

    And we have to make it happen. Because there is a new battle emerging – here and across the whole western world – between the forces of tolerant liberalism and intolerant, closed-minded nationalism.

    Of all the things that depressed me the morning after the referendum, seeing Nigel Farage celebrating really took the biscuit.

    Here is a man who fought a campaign that pandered to our worst instincts: fear, anxiety, suspicion of others.

    And he is not alone. His victory was welcomed by Marine Le Pen in France, Golden Dawn in Greece and by nationalists and populists all across Europe.

    And in a few weeks he went from standing in front of that odious Breaking Point poster demonising desperate refugees…

    To standing on a podium in Mississippi next to Donald Trump.

    And make no mistake, Farage’s victory is becoming the Government’s agenda.

    When Conservatives talk about a ‘hard Brexit’, this is what they mean.

    A Brexit that cuts us off from our neighbours, no matter what the consequences for people’s jobs and livelihoods.

    A Brexit that toys with the lives of hard-working people who have made Britain their home, paid their way and immersed themselves in their communities, just as more than a million Brits have made their homes on the continent.

    A Brexit that will leave us poorer, weaker and less able to protect ourselves.

    But we will not let Nigel Farage’s vision for Britain win.

    To coin a phrase. I want my country back.

    To people who support Labour who look at the last election result and say, can I really take the risk of backing the Liberal Democrats? Let me blunt with you: the risk is for you to do nothing.

    In 20 years’ time we’re all going to be asked by our kids, when our NHS, our schools system, our unity as a country has been impoverished by 20-odd years of Tory rule, and when our economy has been relegated, our green industries trashed, and our status diminished after two decades of isolation from Europe.

    We’re going be asked, why did you let that happen? What did you do try and stop it?

    You might explain, well we lost the referendum so we had to move on and live with it.

    Or you might explain, well I was in the Labour Party, Momentum destroyed it but I couldn’t bring myself to leave and back someone else.

    And they’ll look at you and say, why didn’t you even try?

    Why did you let us limp out of Europe? Why did you stick with a party that handed the Conservatives unlimited power?

    And you’ll know that you could have done something different. You could have joined us. You could have fought back. You could have taken a risk.

    Because joining the Lib Dems today, is a risk. It’s a big ask.

    But let me very clear. As we stand on the edge of those two horrific realities: Brexit and a Tory stranglehold on Britain, the biggest risk is that you do not join us.

    So be absolutely certain of this reality.

    The only movement with the desire and the potential to stop the calamity of Brexit and the tragedy of a generation of Conservative majority rule, is this movement, is the Liberal Democrats.

    So, you can despair if you want and accept the inevitability of a Tory government for the next quarter of a century.

    Or you can recognise that the Liberal Democrats can prevent that inevitability.

    That means you. It means us. Together.

    Together, we must fight to keep Britain open, tolerant and united.

    Together, the Liberal Democrats must be the real voice of opposition.

    Together, we must win.

  • John McDonnell – 2016 Speech to Co-operative Party Annual Conference

    John McDonnell GB Labour MP Hayes and Harlington

    Below is the text of the speech made by John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, to the Co-operative Party Annual Conference in Cardiff on 9 September 2016.

    I want to pay tribute to the Co-operative Party which is now 99 years old and looking forward to its century next year.

    It is refreshing to be addressing the Co-operative Party who have partnered with the Labour Party through thick and thin since our electoral pact in 1927. It’s our unity as a movement that has always been our strength.

    But let’s be clear: the whole labour movement is at a turning point.

    The Leave vote was one marker for that. Simply put, it means the status quo is no longer an option.

    The despair that helped fuel the vote to Leave was driven by a deep disaffection with the political process.

    Successive governments have used an economic model that concentrated too much wealth in too few places and in too few hands.

    It was this model that spectacularly blew up in the crash of 2008, and whose consequences we are still living with.

    But the challenge for the labour movement stretches beyond criticising the failures of the old model.

    We have to recognise that if our solution to the crisis today is to pretend the clock can be turned back, we will fail.

    Since the Second World War, a political strategy has come to dominate the left that stressed the central importance of central government in transforming society.

    A successful progressive government would just have to oversee growth, and then redistribute the proceeds.

    The strategy for the left was then to win control of the state, and use the state to redistribute incomes from a growing economy.

    For seventy years, through Old Labour and New, this fundamental model of social democracy held.

    Some of Labour’s greatest successes were built on this model, whether the NHS or Sure Start centres. Tax money was taken from rising incomes and spent in a progressive manner.

    That model now seems to have come to an end.

    The economists talk about “secular stagnation”, which is the idea that the developed economies are in for a period of extended low growth. The International Monetary Fund, in its latest forecasts, has downgraded its expectations for economic growth in the developed world.

    And we know from OECD figures, analysed by the TUC, that real hourly wages have fallen 10% in this country since the crash – a worse performance than any other OECD member, except for Greece.

    We have to search for a different approach.

    The next Labour government will stand ready to invest across the whole country.

    Whilst this government still intends to cut public investment in real terms over the next few years, we know that it is investment that will deliver the economic transformation this country now urgently needs.

    That is why we have proposed a £500bn investment programme, backed up with a National Investment Bank and a network of regional development banks.

    This will deliver the funding needed to allow every part of our country and every person to reach its full potential.

    There’s a growing consensus, in these times of economic uncertainty and faltering economies, that public investment is essential to delivering prosperity.

    From the OECD to the IMF, and from the TUC to the CBI, responsible organisations concerned with the state of our economy have identified public investment as central.

    It beggars belief that Phillip Hammond has not already turned his back on former Chancellor George Osborne’s failed austerity strategy.

    The co-operative economy

    The evidence that co-operative enterprises and worker-owned companies can produce far better results is compelling.

    Twice as many co-operatives survive the crucial first five years as other businesses. And worker-owned enterprises offer a clear productivity advantage.

    So that is why after this conference season is over, we will begin a major piece of work on developing the co-operative economy.

    With UK productivity now lagging further and further behind the US, Germany, and France, it’s time to turn the corner on the model of economic growth that promotes low-paid, insecure work in huge quantities.

    It’s a disgrace that zero hour contracts have risen by 20% in the last year alone.

    But by giving people a stake in the companies they work for and spreading the ownership of those companies, we can start to transform corporate Britain.

    That’s why I’ve argued for a “Right to Own” for employees. If a company is facing a change of ownership or closure, they should have first refusal on forming an alternative employee-owned business plan.

    Backed up by financing from the new regional development banks, who will be tasked to deliver low-cost financing to co-ops, this can be one way to resolve some of the issues now bearing down on our local economies.

    With two-thirds of Britain’s family businesses at risk of closure when their owners retire, employee ownership can help solve our brewing succession crisis.

    But we should be looking to the examples of Germany and the US and elsewhere, where co-operatives form a major part of how their economies operate.

    I want to see the next Labour government put in place measures that will at least double the size of our co-operative sector, giving a nearly £40bn boost to the whole economy.

    We’d look to introduce legislation to assist the formation of mutual guarantee societies, mobilising funds for small businesses by enabling them to club together to raise credit.

    Over 8% of lending to SMEs across Europe is made through mutual guarantee societies. We can end the starvation of funding for our small businesses here.

    We plan in the coming weeks to launch a guide, jointly with the Association of British Credit Unions, helping councillors and local authorities up and down the country to support the work of local credit unions.

  • Matt Hancock – 2016 Speech on the Creative Industries

    Matt Hancock
    Matt Hancock

    Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Minister for Digital and Culture, on 9 September 2016.

    This summer in Rio, Team GB had the whole world talking when we beat most of them to second place in the Olympics.

    Our sports men and women proved that, when talent is supported, this small group of islands can make an outsized contribution on the world stage.

    It’s a point you in our creative industries make year in, year out.

    Let’s consider the evidence.

    BBC Worldwide is the biggest non-American distributor of TV.

    We are the second biggest exporter of music. The whole world sings along to Coldplay, Stormzy and Adele, though it’s probably best I don’t prove the point right now.

    Our film studios at Pinewood and Leavesden have lately been home to some of the planet’s biggest franchises; not just to British heroes like Harry Potter and James Bond but Jason Bourne and Han Solo.

    And as new forms of entertainment come along, we excel at those too.

    What’s the best-selling entertainment product of all time?

    It’s Grand Theft Auto V, which took a billion dollars in just 3 days – and it was made right here in Britain, in Edinburgh.

    So when people say the problem with our economy is that we don’t make things any more, let’s get out there and tell them this.

    We make immersive stories, uplifting music, iconic characters, and beautiful designs.

    We produce, on an industrial scale, all the things that enrich life and make it worth living.

    As Picasso said “The purpose of art is washing the dust of daily life off our shoulders.”

    And while the product is often fun, even frivolous, it’s serious business.

    The creative industries consistently outperform the rest of the economy.

    I want to pay tribute to my brilliant predecessor, Ed Vaizey, for the work he did to help make this happen.

    And creative industries will be absolutely central to our post-Brexit future.

    Economically, because where artistic design intersects with digital capability is the nexus at the heart of the future economy.

    This nexus of art and technology is how Britain will pay her way in the 21st Century.

    But not just economically. Perhaps more importantly culturally.

    As my friend and colleague Karen Bradley, our new DCMS Secretary of State, has said, art and the culture that underpins it has intrinsic value too.

    Our creative industries are, and always have been, central to how we are seen and how we see ourselves as a nation.

    We must define Brexit Britain as open and optimistic, gregarious and global.

    Progressive and positively engaged in the world, as Britain is when we are at our best.

    The creative industries are critical to securing that status.

    Our cultural capital has long served as our global calling card, delivered by James Bond in his Aston Martin, Doctor Who in his TARDIS, or as a simple Hello from Adele.

    This matters more than ever, not just because of Brexit, but because of the transformation technology has unleashed over a generation.

    As routine work – the filing, the sifting, the sorting – is increasingly handed over to robots and AI, our human skills, our creative skills.

    Empathy, intuition, aesthetic and moral judgment.

    These are things which can’t be taught to a machine.

    Even the most sophisticated CGI relies on human creativity.

    The tech revolution is happening.

    No King Canute can stop it.

    But we can, and must harness it, so yes we support the disruptors, but also support those disrupted by change, to change.

    By growing the stock of jobs that rely on those skills, we can humanise jobs while we automate work.

    And the point is this: that this sector, which is so central to who we are as a country – which can trace its lineage back to the Southwark playhouses of the sixteenth century, and beyond – is also central to our future prosperity as a nation.

    This country benefits so much from your work.

    From Manchester to Margate, Dundee to Dalston, start-ups and entrepreneurs come to cluster around the creative institutions that make up a city’s cultural quarter.

    The lesson is clear: make an area interesting and you attract interesting people to work there.

    The hipster is a capitalist.

    Cultural rebirth, connectivity, and economic revival go hand in hand.

    So, the question I want to address today is how do we in government help you deliver on that promise?

    We can’t do it top-down, with a prescriptive approach.

    Kennedy once said that “If art is to nourish the roots of our culture, society must set the artist free to follow his vision wherever it takes him.”

    This surely is true.

    It’s been at the heart of the Arts Council’s approach over the past seventy years.

    It’s an approach I strongly support.

    Before entering politics I worked in tech.

    Just as in high art, so in the creative art of technology you can’t prescribe these things from the top.

    If the Government had tried to reinvent the Internet as some kind of “Open Knowledge Library” instead of leaving it to Jimmy Wales and his amazing team at Wikipedia, it would have taken years, probably billions over budget, and would undoubtedly be more ugly and clunky than the organically developed version we all love.

    No, we can’t prescribe creativity from above.

    But similarly creativity isn’t automatic or exogenous. Creativity doesn’t flow down like manna from heaven.

    It is in our gift to create the conditions for creativity to thrive: the spaces, the skills, the connections, the leadership and the public financial support to make that chaotic, invigorating magic ecosystem grow.

    We can and must strive to create the circumstances in which the essential humanity of every person can find expression, no matter how flawed each and every one of us are.

    This is a mark of a civilised society.

    Today I want to set out three broad principles based on the many conversations I’ve had so far, that will inform my approach to this job: Principles of backing success, access and synthesis.

    Let me take each in turn.

    The first principle is backing success.

    As I hope you can tell, we are passionately committed to the success of our creative industries, not only because of the jobs you create, but lives you enrich, the horizons you broaden, the worlds you unlock for millions.

    Across music and theatre and tech and the arts, with fashion week – which I adore – next week.

    From coding to craft, from publishing to production.

    Advertising, architecture, TV, film, radio, photography, design, dance, drawing, games, museums and our world beating galleries.

    Their full value cannot be always quantified by the Office for National Statistics but we value them for what they are.

    And we have shown, time and again, we are prepared to invest.

    In practical terms, what this means is: I will fight to ensure that the creative and digital industries are at the heart of this Government’s industrial strategy, with a tax, regulatory and public investment framework that supports you to grow.

    And whatever ideas, whatever your fears, my door will be always open and we will ensure that you are heard at the highest levels of government.

    I know the huge importance industry places on the creative sector tax reliefs, and I want to assure you that they will not be adversely affected by Brexit.

    And I know the Chancellor shares his predecessor’s enthusiasm for the sector.

    Looking at the figures, it is clear the tax reliefs have been a great success.

    Since the film tax relief was introduced 1,800 films have been supported, accounting for over £8 billion of UK value.

    And since then we have introduced new reliefs for video games, animation, children’s television, theatres and just this week passed the legislation for the orchestra tax reliefs, to encourage business and support British creativity.

    In 2013 we introduced the high-end television tax relief to capitalise on the nascent boom in high quality television dramas.

    145 programmes have since been supported.

    And we have provided some £45 million in video games tax relief since it was introduced in 2014, supporting over £400 million games production spend in the UK.

    We have committed £60 million a year to the pioneering GREAT campaign, which works with 21 Government Departments and over 140 British Embassies and High Commissions, to support and promote your businesses abroad and attract world-class events to the UK.

    Yes, there will be challenges to overcome but we are committed to ensuring that as we prepare to leave the European Union we do so in a way that protects the British economy and ensures Britain remains an attractive destination for investment.

    And still more can be done.

    I can today tell you that we have just launched a consultation on the next tax relief for museum and gallery exhibitions, and we want to hear your ideas and views on its design.

    And I look forward very much to working with the Creative Industries Federation and Creative Industries Council, and listening to the views you represent, not least the work you’ve done on the challenges and opportunities of Brexit.

    Working together we will build on success: the success of the creative industries and the tax credits that underpin them.

    That’s my first principle, backing your success to the hilt.

    My second principle is access.

    We want to build an economy that works for everyone not just the privileged few.

    Your sector is potentially one of the greatest forces for openness and social mobility we have.

    Talent knows no boundaries.

    It was found in four lads from Liverpool who just wanted to make music, in a girl from Margate who wanted to share her art, in kids from homes up and down the country with a flair for acting, writing, gaming.

    Imagining.

    Talent is not restricted to the privileged and the comfortable.

    And as talent is so even-handed, so should its gatekeepers be.

    No one should be excluded from any of your industries because of their accent, their gender, or their postcode.

    As the Prime Minister said on the steps of Downing Street: it’s part of building a country that works for all, not just the privileged few.

    Just as culture transcends boundaries and speaks to the common humanity in us all so creativity allows us to transcend the circumstances of our lives.

    So let us drive open diversity. In recent years we’ve learnt many important lessons about how to improve diversity in elite institutions, from mentoring to name-blind recruitment and targeted campaigns.

    We are ready to help you apply them in your own industries.

    And I make no apology for holding you to a higher standard than the rest of the private sector.

    You have a special responsibility to be a force for openness and social mobility in Britain.

    There’s already some great work being done.

    As a backbencher I worked with Suzanne Bull and her team at Attitude is Everything to improve access for disabled people to music venues, and I want to see that agenda go further.

    As Skills Minister I funded Creative Access, and I want to see that agenda go further.

    Once of my first acts in this job was to launch Project Diamond, and I want that to go further.

    I think you get the message: the access agenda needs to go further.

    And access means more than just access to creative industry jobs.

    We also need to improve geographical access to arts, culture and creativity.

    It’s about diversity in all its forms: it’s about social mobility as well as gender, ethnicity, disability or sexual identity.

    It’s about education too and encouraging and supporting children and young people to engage with and have access to arts and culture from an early age both inside and outside of school to support the next generation of the creative industries.

    Since 2012, we have invested over £460 million in a range of music and cultural education programmes including the creation of the National Youth Dance Company and the BFI Film Academy.

    Pilots for our Cultural Citizens scheme which will connect disadvantaged children with arts organisations in their local community will start this month in three areas of England where cultural participation is low.

    I’m working with my colleagues at the Department for Education to support creative subjects in schools.

    As well as social mobility we want to drive geographic diversity, and see London’s success matched in every part of our land.

    This matters to me personally too.

    Coming from Chester, support for provincial theatres like the Gateway, and for regional brilliance in Liverpool and Manchester are important to me.

    And just as important, when I came to London as an enthusiastic but unconnected twenty year old, it was places like the National Portrait Gallery, the Wallace, the ENO, and then the Tate Modern that welcomed me in.

    We need to pull off the trick off supporting world-beating excellence, and spreading that excellence to all parts.

    If there’s anyone who knows how to make the spreading of excellence build on not dilute that excellence, it is Sir Nick Serota.

    So I’m absolutely delighted he is stepping up from the amazing work he’s done at the Tate to pursue this agenda at the Arts Council.

    We want to blast British culture out of its heartlands of WC1 to every part of our islands.

    I have asked Neil Mendoza to lead a full review of our museums.

    It will cover how best to support museums large and small, widening participation, supporting both digital innovation and learning.

    We need to learn from the best, from the heights of the British Museum’s glorious Pompeii exhibition a couple of years back, to the innovation of thriving small museums like in Wrexham.

    It will give a frank assessment of the challenges, and propose ways to overcome them.

    The only thing not up for review is free entry to the permanent collections of national museums.

    I want all to engage in how we support our amazing museums.

    Next year will see the City of Culture in Hull – a place I know well from my youth – and I’m incredibly excited to support Hull in delivering on its excellent promise – though I’m not sure I’m ready to get naked and paint myself blue just yet.

    This will be a great chance to showcase the transformative power of our creative industries.

    You need only look at Liverpool’s renaissance since its year as City of Culture.

    Then, the following year will see the first Great Exhibition of the North, a two-month display of culture, creativity and design, in one of England’s great northern cities.

    We have four brilliant bids – Blackpool, Bradford, Newcastle/ Gateshead, and Sheffield.

    We want to show directly elected city mayors how they can use you to boost their local economies while defining a regional identity.

    So those are my first two principles: backing success and improving access.

    My third is synthesis, of culture with digital technology.

    Like the creative industries, the digital economy is something we as a country are disproportionately good at.

    London is home to the biggest and fastest growing tech cluster in Europe and similar hubs are growing all over the country.

    We do more e-commerce per head than any other nation.

    And on the digital transformation of government, we are the source code.

    Other countries copy our methods.

    But there is more that we can do to build on the symbiotic relationship between technology and culture.

    There is a reason we have a Minister for Digital and Culture.

    Apple became a global behemoth, not because it invented much of the tech in an iPhone but because it combined that with of Sir Johnny Ive’s iconic design work.

    Of course it functions amazingly well but, let’s face it, the clincher is it looks so cool.

    Increasingly we’re able to meld time-honoured craft with cutting edge technology.

    The live streaming of plays now brings West End shows to audiences nationwide – this very weekend, for the first time ever, Shakespeare’s Globe will livestream a production, A Midsummer Night’s Dream – while London Fashion Week streams to over 200 countries.

    The soon-to-open hip-hop musical Hamilton will use Uber-style dynamic pricing, so ticket prices respond in real-time to consumer demand.

    And many of our most important museums are now digitising their collections, so they can be accessed by scholars around the world.

    We want to bring the two worlds even closer. Our aim is to have not only the best content in the world, but also the best digital platforms on which to display it.

    This is our sweet spot for the twenty-first century.

    And I want to say this about creators, platforms and the corporates who work with them.

    You know just how critical, and how disruptive this nexus of culture and technology can be.

    Enforcement and fair treatment of rights owners is critical to healthy creative industries.

    You can’t grow the digital market if you don’t support content.

    And ultimately, content and distribution grow together.

    Yes there’s a debate and negotiation about shares. But our task is to grow together.

    The Digital Economy Bill, which I will take through parliament this autumn drives that forward.

    This synthesis also means treating fast, reliable connectivity, broadband and mobile, as the fourth utility, as essential to modern life as access to water or electricity.

    It means both digital and artistic skills getting the attention they deserve in education.

    And it means a culture that is deeply supportive of enterprise, of creativity, of innovation.

    Where if anyone around the world wants to test an innovation – to try their cutting edge health practices on patients or literally roadtest a driverless car, they look to the UK first.

    We are living through a period of profound innovation and the digital revolution has brought huge challenges.

    But it also brings exciting opportunities.

    By their nature many modern advances, both digital and artistic, aren’t measured in GDP.

    What price the sight of a beautiful building, or of a family connecting over Skype, even of the health benefits from running around playing Pokemon Go?

    Measurable or not, I passionately believe that human lives the world over are enhanced through your creativity.

    It is incumbent on us to use that creativity to benefit all, not just the privileged few, to spread the advantages widely, and ensure all are supported in this time of great change.

    These are the principles that will guide my approach to the creative industries: success, access, synthesis.

    To maintain UK culture’s immense, powerful, vital, growing, essential and defining role in our economy.

    To capture the nexus of creative technology that is the sweetspot for our future prosperity.

    And to make sure the benefits are felt by and the opportunities are open to everyone from every community from all parts of this land.

    I can’t wait and I look forward to working with you all to make that happen.

  • James Brokenshire – 2016 Speech to Washington Chamber of Commerce

    jamesbrokenshire

    Below is the text of the speech made by James Brokenshire, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, in Washington DC, United States of America, on 8 September 2016.

    It is a great pleasure for me as the UK Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to have the opportunity to share some words with the Washington Chamber of Commerce today.

    And I’m very grateful to you for agreeing to host me, and to your Senior Vice President for International Policy, John Murphy, for moderating this session.

    This is my first overseas visit since being appointed Secretary of State for Northern Ireland by the new UK Prime Minister, Theresa May, in July. And I was particularly keen to come to the United States which has played such a supportive and important role in Northern Ireland over recent years.

    So today, I’d like to say a few words about the current state of affairs in Northern Ireland – including why it is such a great place to do business – and about the impact of the United Kingdom’s decision to leave the European Union.

    Special Relationship

    But I should like to underline at the outset the enduring strength of relations between the United Kingdom and the United States.

    As President Obama said last year “The special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom is rooted in our shared values and mutual commitment to global peace, prosperity and security”.

    And the reality is that no two countries on earth do more together.

    Our relationship has been a bulwark of international peace and security for over seventy years. Economically, the US remains the largest single country for UK exports, while the US is the UK’s largest inward investor. And in 2015 the UK and the US were the two fastest growing economies in the G7. So be in no doubt. The alliance between the United Kingdom and the United States is one of the oldest and strongest in the world.

    It’s a force for democracy, peace and security the world over. And we remain deeply committed to ensuring that it both endures and prospers.

    Northern Ireland – open for business

    One place where successive US administrations and key individuals have helped to move things decisively forward in recent years is in Northern Ireland. And the progress in Northern Ireland is rightly held up as an example of what can be achieved when democracy and dialogue prevail over the alternatives.

    Today, Northern Ireland enjoys almost unparalleled political stability with the longest unbroken run of local, devolved government since the 1960s.

    The economy continues to grow, with unemployment falling and over 55,000 more people in work since 2010. And in the last year Northern Ireland’s exports to the US have increased by a staggering 74 per cent. Relations between Northern Ireland and Ireland have never been stronger. The overall security situation is unrecognisable from the period of the troubles.

    And Northern Ireland is a highly competitive place in which to invest. We have a highly educated, skilled and dedicated workforce. We have two world class universities with strong links to local business and commerce. There are great transport links into the rest of the UK, Ireland, Europe and beyond. Invest Northern Ireland is able to offer imaginative packages to potential investors.

    Our operating costs are over 48 per cent lower than London and 14 per cent lower than Dublin. Northern Ireland benefits from the UK having the joint lowest rate of corporation tax in the G20 – 20 per cent today coming down to 17 per cent by 2020.

    And the UK Government remains committed to handing corporation tax powers to the local administration which has set itself the goal of bringing the rate down to 12.5 per cent, the same as in the Republic of Ireland. So it’s not surprising that Belfast is one of the leading destinations for foreign direct investment into the UK outside of London.

    But don’t just take my word for it. Our greatest ambassadors are the companies that have invested in Northern Ireland.

    Like the Executive Vice President of Allstate who said “As a result of investing in Northern Ireland 15 years ago Allstate has saved over a billion dollars”.

    Or the Executive Producer of Game of Thrones, filmed largely at the Titanic Studios in Belfast. As he put it “I can’t imagine any other city or any other area where we could have done this show. Anything we throw at Northern Ireland they deliver.”

    All of this is why Northern Ireland has attracted almost 900 international investors – companies like Citi, Allen and Overy and the New York Stock – as well as a multitude of companies from the rest of the UK.

    My clear message here in the United States today is that Northern Ireland is open for business.

    Brexit

    And it will continue to be open for business after the United Kingdom leaves the European Union. Of course I realise that decision has caused some uncertainty, so perhaps I can comment on some of the implications of the referendum in June and say some words both of reassurance and of optimism.

    First, the people of the United Kingdom were given a choice in the referendum, and they voted decisively to leave the European Union.

    I campaigned for remain, but I am clear that we must and will respect that democratic decision and give effect to it.

    And while respecting the views of those parts of the UK that voted to remain, this was a United Kingdom vote. The UK as a whole voted to leave – and it is the whole of the UK that will leave the EU. There is no provision for some parts of the UK being within the EU while other parts are outside.

    I am also confident the UK will make a success of life outside the EU. Indeed, I believe it presents us with great opportunities.We will succeed because the UK is a great global trading nation. And we’ll make a success of Brexit because the fundamentals of the UK economy are sound.

    As a result of the difficult decisions we have taken since 2010 the UK’s deficit is down by nearly two thirds. As I said earlier along with the US we were the fastest growing G7 economy last year. Employment is at record levels – with an average 1,000 jobs a day created over the past six years.

    We continue to attract more foreign direct investment than any other country in Europe. And, according to the World Bank, in 2015 we overtook the United States as the top country in the world for ease of doing business.

    So while, yes, leaving the EU will inevitably involve some challenges and as the Prime Minister said at the weekend it will not all be plain sailing, we approach this with optimism and a positive view of what we can achieve for the UK.

    Protecting Northern Ireland’s interests

    For my part, as Northern Ireland Secretary I want to ensure that the unique interests of Northern Ireland are protected and advanced. This is particularly the case in relation to the land border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

    So let me try and offer these words of re-assurance. The UK Government emphatically does not want to see a return to the borders of the past. And I know that determination is shared by the Irish Government and the Northern Ireland Executive. The open border and the Common Travel Area have served us well for many years. So we shall be working hard together in our efforts to keep them for people and business.

    Support for the Agreements

    There have been some suggestions that leaving the EU risks unravelling all the progress that has been made in Northern Ireland in recent years, and that it could fatally undermine the settlement forged by the 1998 Agreement and its successors. I fundamentally reject that argument.

    The UK Government remains fully committed to the Agreement and its successors. That includes the political institutions. Those elements of the Agreements that deal with people’s rights and identity. And all the constitutional guarantees – underpinned by the consent principle.

    Working in close partnership with the Northern Ireland Executive, the Irish Government and our friends in the United States the UK Government will always do the right thing for Northern Ireland.

    Conclusion

    In conclusion Brexit will work for the United Kingdom. As a strong, outward looking country we are well placed to forge exciting new trading relationships with existing partners, like the United States, but also with emerging economies.

    We are in a strong position to negotiate our own trade agreements and be a positive and powerful voice for free trade. We will forge a new relationship with the EU that works for the UK. And we’ll get out into the world and do business right across the globe.

    Outside the EU the United Kingdom will prosper and have a strong and positive future – remaining always a staunch ally of the United States.

    Thank you.

  • Theresa May – 2016 Speech on Meritocracy

    theresamay

    Below is the text of the speech made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, at the British Academy in London on 9 September 2016.

    When I stood in Downing Street as Prime Minister for the first time this summer, I set out my mission to build a country that works for everyone. Today I want to talk a little more about what that means and lay out my vision for a truly meritocratic Britain that puts the interests of ordinary, working class people first.

    We are facing a moment of great change as a nation. As we leave the European Union, we must define an ambitious new role for ourselves in the world. That involves asking ourselves what kind of country we want to be: a confident, global trading nation that continues to play its full part on the world stage.

    But at the same time, I believe we have a precious opportunity to step back and ask some searching questions about what kind of country we want to be here at home too.

    In fact, it’s not just an opportunity, but a duty. Because one thing is clear. When the British people voted in the referendum, they did not just choose to leave the European Union. They were also expressing a far more profound sense of frustration about aspects of life in Britain and the way in which politics and politicians have failed to respond to their concerns.

    Some voted for the first time in more than 30 years. Some for the first time ever. And they were inspired to do so because they saw a chance to reject the politics of ‘business as usual’ and to demand real, profound change.

    Fed up with being ignored or told that their priorities were somehow invalid, based on ignorance and misunderstanding, or even on occasion that they were simply wrong to voice the concerns that they did, they took their opportunity to send a very clear message: they will not be ignored anymore.

    They want to take back control of the things that matter in their lives. They want a government that listens, understands and is on their side. They want change. And this government is going to deliver it.

    Everything we do will be driven, not by the interests of the privileged few. Not by those with the loudest voices, the special interests, the greatest wealth or the access to influence. This government’s priorities are those of ordinary, working class people. People for whom life sometimes can be a struggle, but who get on with things without complaint.

    They get on with their jobs – sometimes 2 or even 3 of them – because they have families to feed and support, bills to pay and because to work for a fair reward is the right thing to do.

    They get on with their lives quietly, going about their business, going out to work, raising families, helping neighbours, making their communities what they are.

    They don’t ask for much, but they want to know that the people that make the big decisions are on their side, working for them. They want to believe that everyone plays by the same rules and things are fair.

    And above all they want to believe that if they uphold their end of the deal – they do the right thing, they work hard, they pay their taxes – then tomorrow will be better than today and their children will have a fair chance in life, the chance to go as far as their talents will take them.

    These are not outrageous demands or ridiculous desires, but for too many of these people today life does not seem fair. They are the people who made real sacrifices after the financial crash in 2008, though they were in no way responsible.

    They wonder if others – some of whom really do bear responsibility for the crash – did the same.

    More than anything else, they worry – truly worry – that the changing world around them means that their children and grandchildren won’t have the same opportunities they have enjoyed in life.

    They deserve a better deal.

    And to give them that, we should take this opportunity to step back and pose a fundamental question: what kind of country – what kind of society – do we want to be?

    I am clear about the answer.

    I want Britain to be the world’s great meritocracy – a country where everyone has a fair chance to go as far as their talent and their hard work will allow.

    I want us to be a country where everyone plays by the same rules; where ordinary, working class people have more control over their lives and the chance to share fairly in the prosperity of the nation.

    And I want Britain to be a place where advantage is based on merit not privilege; where it’s your talent and hard work that matter, not where you were born, who your parents are or what your accent sounds like.

    Let us not underestimate what it will take to create that great meritocracy. It means taking on some big challenges, tackling some vested interests. Overcoming barriers that have been constructed over many years.

    It means not being afraid to think differently about what disadvantage means, who we want to help and how we can help them. Because where once we reached for simple ways of labelling people disadvantaged and were quick to pose simple – and often fairly blunt – solutions, in these modern times disadvantage is much more complex.

    It’s often hidden and less easy to identify. It’s caused by factors that are more indirect and tougher to tackle than ever before.

    But tackle it we must if we are to give ordinary, working class people the better deal they deserve.

    It means marking a significant shift in the way that government works in Britain too. Because government and politicians have for years talked the language of social justice – where we help the very poorest – and social mobility – where we help the brightest among the poor.

    But to make Britain a great meritocracy, we must move beyond this agenda and deliver real social reform across every layer of society so that those whom the system would currently miss – those just above the threshold for help today yet those who are by no means rich or well off – are given the help they need.

    It means putting government firmly on the side of not only the poorest in our society, important though that is and will remain, but also of those in Britain who are working hard but just about managing. It means helping to make their lives a little easier; giving them greater control over the issues they care about the most.

    This is the change we need. It will mean changing some of the philosophy underpinning how government thinks and acts. It will mean recalibrating how we approach policy development to ensure that everything we do as government helps to give a fair chance to those who are just getting by – while still helping those who are even more disadvantaged.

    I don’t pretend this change will be easy – change rarely is – but this is the change we need if we are to make Britain the great meritocracy I want it to be.

    Over the coming weeks and months the government will set out an ambitious programme of economic and social reform that will help us make this change and build a true meritocracy in our country.

    But there is no more important place to start than education. Because if the central concern ordinary working class people have is that their children will not enjoy the same opportunities they have had in life, we need to ensure that there is a good school place for every child, and education provision that caters to the individual needs and abilities of every pupil.

    Schools that work for everyone

    We start from a position of strength. This government has a proud record of school reform. We have opened up the system, introducing a real diversity of provision. We have schools where teachers and headteachers are free to make the decisions that are best for them.

    And through successful policies such as a renewed focus on learning the basics of reading in primary schools, and initiatives to help young people pursue a strong academic core of subjects at secondary level, we are ensuring that every child has the opportunity to develop the core knowledge that underpins everything else.

    We have put control in the hands of parents and headteachers, and encouraged people from all walks of life who are passionate about education to bring their best ideas and innovations to our school system.

    The Academies and Free Schools movement overseen by pioneers such as Andrew Adonis and Michael Gove has been a huge success and begun to build an education system fit for the future.

    As a result, there are more good or outstanding schools today than ever before in our country. And there are now more than 1.4 million more pupils in schools rated good or outstanding than in 2010.

    Our curriculum reforms mean that the proportion of pupils taking core academic subjects at GCSE is up by almost 4-fifths. We are driving up school standards to match the best international comparisons, with a record number of pupils securing a place at one of our world-class universities this summer. We can be proud of these achievements but there is still a long way to go.

    Because for too many children, a good school remains out of reach. There are still 1.25 million attending primary and secondary schools in England which are rated by Ofsted as requiring improvement or inadequate. If schools across the north and Midlands had the same average standards as those in the south, nearly 200,000 more children would be attending good schools.

    Let’s be honest about what these statistics mean.

    They mean that for far too many children in Britain, the chance they have in life is determined by where they live or how much money their parents have.

    And they mean that for far too many ordinary working class people, no matter how hard they work, how many hours they put in or how many sacrifices they make, they cannot be confident that their children will get the chances they deserve.

    For when you are working 2 jobs and struggling to make ends meet, it is no good being told that you can choose a better school for your children if you move to a different area or pay to go private. Those aren’t choices that you can make. And they are not choices that you should have to make.

    So we need to go further, building on and extending our reforms so that we can truly say that there will be a good school place for every child, and one that caters to their individual needs.

    But as we do it, we also need to change our philosophy and approach, because at the moment the school system works if you’re well off and can buy your way into the school you want, and it provides extra help and support if you’re from a disadvantaged family.

    If you’re eligible for free school meals, and your parents earn less than £16,000 a year, then there is extra help on offer. That is good and right – and as long as I am Prime Minister, the pupil premium for the poorest children will remain.

    But the free school meals measure only captures a relatively small number of pupils, whose parents are on income-related benefits.

    If we are going to make the change we need and build a great meritocracy in Britain, we need to broaden our perspective and do more for the hidden disadvantaged: children whose parents are on modest incomes, who do not qualify for such benefits but who are, nevertheless, still only just getting by.

    If you’re earning 19, 20, 21 thousand pounds a year, you’re not rich. You’re not well off. And you should know you have our support too.

    At the moment there is no way to differentiate between the school experience of children from these families and those from the wealthiest 10%.

    Policy has been skewed by the focus only on those in receipt of free school meals, when the reality is that there are thousands of children from ordinary working class families who are being let down by the lack of available good school places.

    Putting this right means finding a way to identify these children and measuring their attainment and progress within the school system. That work is underway and is central to my vision of a school system that truly works for everyone.

    But we must also deliver a radical increase in the capacity of the school system so that these families can be sure of their children getting good school places.

    And this is really important. Because I don’t just want to see more school places but more good school places. And I don’t just want to see more new schools, but more good new schools that each in their way contribute to a diversity of provision that caters to the needs and abilities of each individual child, whoever they are and wherever they are from.

    Every child should be given the opportunity to develop the crucial academic core. And thanks to our reforms that is increasingly the case. But people understand that every child is different too, with different talents, different interests, different dreams. To help them realise their potential and achieve those dreams we need a school system with the capacity and capability to respond to what they need.

    School capacity

    So as we radically expand the number of good school places available to all families – not just those who can afford to buy an expensive house, pay for an expensive private school, or fund the extra tuition their child needs to succeed – I want to encourage more people, schools and institutions with something to offer to come forward and help.

    In the last 6 years, we have seen individuals and communities put staggering amounts of time and effort into setting up good new schools. Some of the best state schools, charities, universities, private schools, and businesses have stepped forward to get involved.

    And, increasingly, the best state schools are sponsoring the least good. This has been a revolution in our schools system.

    But with 1.25 million children still attending schools that are struggling, we need to do much more to increase the capacity of the system so every child can get the education they deserve.

    So let’s now build on the success of school reform, let’s encourage others to play their part, and let’s remove the barriers they face so we can do more.

    Let’s sweep away those barriers and encourage more people to join us in the task of delivering a good school place for every child.

    Let’s build a truly dynamic school system where schools and institutions learn from one another, support one another and help one another.

    Let’s offer a diverse range of good schools that ensure the individual talents and abilities of every child are catered for.

    That is my ambition.

    And there are 4 specific proposals I want to talk about today that I believe will help.

    Universities

    Firstly, I want to build on the success we have already experienced when some of our great universities have stepped in to help by sponsoring or supporting a local school.

    Universities have a huge amount to offer England’s schools. They have been part of the fabric of our education system since the 13th century and have had a profound impact on our schools over generations.

    Recently we have seen The University of Cambridge establish The University of Cambridge Primary School and The University of Birmingham open an impressive new free school for secondary school pupils and sixth formers.

    The new specialist Sixth Form, King’s College London Mathematics School, is already performing impressively and the University of Brighton is involved in sponsoring more than a dozen different primary and secondary schools.

    These are the kinds of innovation I want to encourage. This kind of active engagement in building the capacity of our school system is in my view far more effective than spending huge sums on bursaries and other financial support that tackle the symptoms but not the cause.

    The right for a university to charge the higher level of tuition fee has always been dependent on their ability to fulfil specified access requirements. And this year, in fulfilling these requirements, they are expected to spend over £400 million on bursaries and other forms of financial support for students.

    Yet the evidence is clear: it is the attainment of pupils at school that is the over-riding factor in predicting access to university.

    I am not saying there is no place for bursaries. But overall, I do think the balance has tilted too far. We need to go to the root of the problem, which is that there are not enough students from disadvantaged backgrounds and from ordinary families fulfilling their potential with the grades to get into the best universities.

    So I want our universities to do more to help us to improve the quality of schools so that more students of all backgrounds have the grades, the subjects, and the confidence, to apply to top universities and to be successful in their exams in the first place.

    So the government will reform university fair access requirements and say that universities should actively strengthen state school attainment – by sponsoring a state school or setting up a new free school. And over time we will extend this to the sponsorship or establishment of more than one school, so that in the future we see our universities sponsoring thriving school chains in every town and city in the country.

    Faith schools

    Second, I want to remove the obstacles that stop more good faith schools from opening.

    Britain has a long history of faith schools delivering outstanding education. They already account for around a third of all mainstream schools in England. They are popular with parents and significantly more likely than other schools to be rated by Ofsted as good or outstanding.

    I believe we should confidently promote them and the role they play in a diverse school system.

    Yet for Catholic schools in particular there are barriers in their way. When a faith-designated free school is oversubscribed, it must limit the number of pupils it selects on the basis of faith to 50%.

    The intention is to improve the diversity of the school’s intake but in practice it has little impact on many Jewish, Muslim, Sikh and Hindu schools because they tend not to appeal to parents of other faiths.

    So despite the best intentions, the rule is failing in its objective to promote integration. But it does prevent new Catholic schools opening, because the Catholic Church believes it contravenes its own rules for a Catholic bishop not to prioritise the admission of Catholic pupils.

    This is especially frustrating because existing Catholic schools are more ethnically diverse than other faith schools, more likely to be located in deprived communities, more likely to be rated good or outstanding by Ofsted, and there is growing demand for them.

    So we will remove this 50% rule to allow the growth in capacity that Catholic schools can offer. Instead we will consult on a new set of much more effective requirements to ensure that faith schools are properly inclusive and make sure their pupils mix with children of other faiths and backgrounds.

    Of course, there must be strict and properly enforced rules to ensure that every new faith school operates in a way that supports British values. And we should explore new ways of using the school system to promote greater integration within our society generally.

    We will encourage the grouping together of mono-racial and mono-religious schools within wider multi-racial and multi-religious trusts. This will make it easier for children from different backgrounds in more divided communities to mix between schools, while respecting religious differences.

    We will explore ways in which schools can enter into twinning arrangements with other schools not of their faith, through sharing lessons or joint extra-curricular activities to bring young people from different schools together.

    And we will consult on the idea of placing an independent member or director who is of a different faith or no faith at all on the governing body of new faith schools.

    We will also explore new requirements for new faith schools to prove that parents of other faiths would be happy to send their children to the school through a proper process of consultation.

    But fundamentally I believe it is wrong to deny families the opportunity to send their children to a school that reflects their religious values if that’s what they choose. And it’s right to encourage faith communities – especially those with a proven record of success, like the Catholics – to play their full part in building the capacity of our schools.

    Independent schools

    Third, I want to encourage some of our biggest independent schools to bring their knowledge, expertise and resources to bear to help improve the quality and capacity of schools for those who cannot afford to pay.

    This is entirely in keeping with the ethos that lies at the heart of many of these institutions. Most of the major public schools started out as the route by which poor boys could reach the professions. The nature of their intake may have changed today – indeed these schools have become more and more divorced from normal life.

    Between 2010 and 2015 their fees rose 4 times faster than average earnings growth, while the percentage of their pupils who come from overseas has gone up by 33% since 2008. But I know that their commitment to giving something back to the wider community remains.

    These are great schools with a lot to offer and I certainly don’t believe you solve the divide between the rich and the rest by abolishing or demolishing them. You do it by extending their reach and asking them to do more as a condition of their privileged position to help all children.

    Through their charitable status, private schools collectively reduce their tax bills by millions every year. And I want to consult on how we can amend Charity Commission guidance for independent schools to enact a tougher test on the amount of public benefit required to maintain charitable status.

    It’s important to state that this will be proportionate to the size and scale of the school in question. Not every school is an Eton or a Harrow. Many public schools are nowhere near that size.

    Smaller independent schools who do not have the capacity to take on full sponsorship of a local state school will be asked to provide more limited help such as direct school-to-school support where appropriate. This could include supporting teaching in minority subjects such as further maths or classics, which state schools often struggle to make viable. It could include ensuring their senior leaders become directors of multi-academy trusts; providing greater access to their facilities and providing sixth-form scholarships to a proportion of pupils in year 11 at each local school.

    But for those with the capacity and capability, we will ask them to go further and actually sponsor or set up a new government-funded school in the state sector and take responsibility for running it and ensuring its success.

    Alternatively, we will ask them to fund a number of places at their own school themselves for those from modest backgrounds who cannot afford to pay the fees.

    We know this can work. For example, Westminster School is the key partner in sponsoring Harris Westminster Sixth Form, where students at the free school share the facilities and teaching expertise of Westminster School.

    In my own constituency, Eton College sponsors Holyport College, offering Holyport pupils access to its sports facilities and the chance to join its educational activities.

    And before it became a state-funded academy, Belvedere School in Liverpool worked with the Sutton Trust to create an Open Access Scheme where places were awarded purely on the basis of academic merit, and parents were then asked to pay on a sliding scale of fees fairly tailored according to their means.

    I want all independent schools with the appropriate capacity and capability to take these kinds of steps.

    I want them to play a major role in creating more good school places for children from ordinary working families; because this government is about a Britain that works for everyone – not just a privileged few.

    Selective schools

    There is one final area where we have placed obstacles in the way of good new schools – obstacles that I believe we need to take away.

    The debate over selective schools has raged for years. But the only place it has got us to is a place where selection exists if you’re wealthy – if you can afford to go private – but doesn’t exist if you’re not. We are effectively saying to poorer and some of the most disadvantaged children in our country that they can’t have the kind of education their richer counterparts can enjoy.

    What is ‘just’ about that? Where is the meritocracy in a system that advantages the privileged few over the many? How can a meritocratic Britain let this situation stand?

    Politicians – many of whom benefited from the very kind of education they now seek to deny to others – have for years put their own dogma and ideology before the interests and concerns of ordinary people. For we know that grammar schools are hugely popular with parents. We know they are good for the pupils that attend them. Indeed, the attainment gap between rich and poor pupils is reduced to almost zero for children in selective schools. And we know that they want to expand.

    They provide a stretching education for the most academically able, regardless of their background, and they deliver outstanding results.

    In fact, 99% of existing selective schools are rated good or outstanding – and 80% are outstanding, compared with just 20% of state schools overall.

    So we help no one – not least those who can’t afford to move house or pay for a private education – by saying to parents who want a selective education for their child that we won’t let them have it.

    There is nothing meritocratic about standing in the way of giving our most academically gifted children the specialist and tailored support that can enable them to fulfil their potential. In a true meritocracy, we should not be apologetic about stretching the most academically able to the very highest standards of excellence.

    We already have selection to help achieve this in specialist disciplines like music and sport, giving exceptionally talented young people access to the facilities and training that can help them become world class. I think we should have more of this. But we should also take the same approach to support the most academically gifted too.

    Frankly, it is completely illogical to make it illegal to open good new schools. So I want to relax the restrictions that stop selective schools from expanding, that deny parents the right to have a new selective school opened where they want one, and that stop existing non-selective schools to become selective in the right circumstances and where there is demand.

    In return, we will ensure that these schools contribute meaningfully to raising outcomes for all pupils in every part of the system.

    In practice this could mean taking a proportion of pupils from lower income households, so that selective education is not reserved for those with the means to move into a catchment area or pay for tuition to pass the test.

    They could, as a condition of opening a new selective school, be asked to establish a good, new non-selective school. Others may be asked to establish a primary feeder school in an area with a high density of lower income households to widen access. They might even partner with an existing non-selective school within a multi-academy trust or sponsor a currently underperforming non-selective academy.

    But the principle is clear: selective schools have a part to play in helping to expand the capacity of our school system and they have the ability to cater to the individual needs of every child. So the government will make up to £50 million a year available to support the expansion of good or outstanding existing grammars.

    Now I know this will be the source of much debate in the consultation over the coming months, so I want to address very directly some of the key arguments made by those who oppose the expansion of grammar schools.

    First, there are those who fear this could lead to the return of a binary system, as we had in the past with secondary moderns. But this fear is unfounded: there will be no return to secondary moderns.

    As I have set out today, far from a binary system we are supporting the most diverse school system we have ever had in our country.

    From free schools sponsored by universities and independent schools, to faith schools and selective schools, the diversity of high quality school provision means we will be able to cater properly for the different needs of all pupils and give parents real control over the kind of school they want for their children.

    We do not want to see whole new parts of the country where the choice of schools is binary. So we will use the approvals process to prevent that from happening.

    Second, there are those who argue that selective schools tend to recruit children from more affluent backgrounds. The problem here is not selective schools per se but rather the way that wealthier families can already dominate access to the schools of their choice through selection by house price. I want to stop that and new grammars can help.

    We are going to ask new grammars to demonstrate that they will attract pupils from different backgrounds, for example as I said, by taking a proportion of children from lower income households. And existing grammars will be expected to do more too – by working with local primary schools to help children from more disadvantaged backgrounds to apply.

    Third, there are those who argue that grammars don’t actually select on ability because wealthy families can pay tutors to help their children get through the tests. This might have been the case in the past with the old 11-plus. But it does not have to be the case today.

    While there is no such thing as a tutor-proof test, many selective schools are already employing much smarter tests that assess the true potential of every child. So new grammars will be able to select in a fair and meritocratic way, not on the ability of parents to pay.

    Fourth, there are those who worry about the cliff-edge of selection at 11. Some fear it is too early, some fear it is too late. The truth is that it doesn’t have to be a cliff-edge at all. This is back in the old mindset of the grammar schools of the past. A modern, meritocratic education system needs to be much more flexible and agile to respond to the needs of every child. So we will demand that new grammars make the most of their freedom to be flexible over how students move between schools, encouraging this to happen at different ages such as 14 and 16 as well as 11.

    This means that children who are at a non-selective school sponsored by a grammar might join the grammar for specific subjects or specialisms where they themselves are outstanding – or they might move to the grammar full-time later than aged 11, based on their performance at their current school.

    Finally, people get lost in the argument about whether the grammars schools of the 1950s and 60s improved social mobility or not. But I want to focus on the new grammars of the future: those that will be just one element of a truly diverse system which taken as a whole can give every child the support they need to go as far as their talents can take them. And give every parent access to a good school place for their child.

    This is the true test of schools that work for everyone. And the true test of a meritocratic society.

    The great meritocracy

    There has been a lot of speculation in the last few weeks, but as you now know this is not a proposal to go back to a binary model of grammars and secondary moderns but to build on our increasingly diverse schools system. It is not a proposal to go back to the 1950s but to look to the future, and that future I believe is an exciting one.

    It is a future in which every child should have access to a good school place. And a future in which Britain’s education system shifts decisively to support ordinary working class families.

    These families are not asking for the world. They just want to know that their children and grandchildren will enjoy the opportunities they have enjoyed and be given the chance to go as far as their talents will take them. Unhindered by background or circumstance. And by the artificial barriers some want to put in their way.

    In a country that works for everyone it doesn’t matter where you were born, or how much your parents earn. If you work hard and do the right thing, you will be able to go as far as you can.

    I want this country to be a great meritocracy. I want to see more houses built, better productivity so we can have more well-paid jobs, more economic growth not just in the south-east of England but across the whole country to help more people get on.

    But more than anything else, I want to see children from ordinary, working class families given the chances their richer contemporaries take for granted. That means we need more great schools.

    This is the plan to deliver them and to set Britain on the path to being the great meritocracy of the world.

  • Boris Johnson – 2016 Speech on Peacekeeping

    borisjohnson

    Below is the text of the speech made by Boris Johnson, the Foreign Secretary, at Lancaster House in London on 8 September 2016.

    It is reassuring to be here for such a distinguished audience. And an audience that is engaged in supporting an activity that is after all one of the most important, and of course one of the most idealistic, causes in which humanity can be engaged. I congratulate you all on what you’re doing.

    I am going to try and wrap up for us as the host country today by saying how grateful I am to everybody who has spoken so far, to our co-hosts, to our colleagues from the UN, and of course to all those who have pledged to build on today’s important work, including in France in just a few weeks from now.

    I know that you have also heard from those who’ve experienced the sharp end of conflict – both serving peacekeepers and our NGO colleagues doing important work in those countries afflicted by conflict. Hearing these voices is a reminder for us that the decisions we make today can have a real impact on the lives of people around the world.

    The number of countries and international organisations in this room today shows how vital this subject is.

    I think also today’s meeting has been a testament to how seriously the UK takes its role in international affairs, and its support for the UN in particular. The UK has always been steadfast in its commitment to work with our allies in the pursuit of global peace and security.

    Our role at the UN is at the very heart of that international commitment. That’s why I was very glad to visit New York in my first week in this job and I’m very glad to be going back there in just a few days’ time with today’s communiqué in my hand to continue to champion the things we’ve agreed today.

    Of course the UK’s commitment to peacekeeping does not begin or end with this Ministerial. We believe in peacekeeping and we will work with you to make it better. The UK is already a leading voice on peacekeeping reform in New York.

    And New York is obviously not the only place where we are showing our support. As Michael, my colleague, has said earlier today we are putting more UK troops and police officers on the ground through our deployments in South Sudan and Somalia. And you will have heard that we are increasing that commitment by providing a Role 2 hospital in South Sudan. I’m pleased to see all these UK personnel serving alongside counterparts from a number of countries present in this room today.

    We have achieved a lot and there have been a lot of exciting new pledges. A communiqué, signed by so many of you – and we hope many more of you will sign up later on – that sets out a blueprint for the future and a commitment to driving forward what we call the 3Ps of peacekeeping. And what are the 3Ps of peacekeeping? [question to the audience] Planning. Pledges. Performance. The 3Ps of peacekeeping. And as John Lennon said, let’s give the 3Ps a chance.

    Our pledges today will swell the ranks of peacekeepers. But we will not have fulfilled our task until the UN can choose the troops it sends into a conflict not just on the basis of who is available, but on what skills are best suited to the task.

    We have set out our ambition to increase the number of women serving in our militaries. But we will not have achieved our task until women are fully represented in every aspect of peacekeeping. Until we see Gender Champions like the UK’s own General Messenger in New York and in every member state. Because I want peacekeeping to benefit from the indispensable skills that women bring to resolving conflict.

    We have talked today, I know that Michael Fallon has talked earlier on, about instilling a culture of accountability for performance. Accountability to mission commanders. Accountability to the UN and the Security Council. And above all accountability to the people that missions are sent to serve and to protect. But we will not have achieved our task until we can demonstrate to those people that immediate and transparent action is being taken in instances of poor performance and that there has been a genuine attempt to understand why things went wrong.

    To do that we need to make reform and to make the desire to do better part of UN peacekeeping’s DNA. We need to continue under the next Secretary-General the great work being done by Secretary-General Ban and his team.

    To do that requires all of us to pull in the same direction – the UN, the Security Council and the troop and police contributing countries. Foreign and Defence Ministries. The different Departments and Agencies of the UN. The people in our capitals and the people around the world.

    And we, the Member States, must bring the full weight of our political influence to bear on those who seek to fuel and foment conflict. Those who work against the ideals of peace that the UN stands for. We must support peacekeepers in the field with all of our tools, from sanctions, to embargoes to good old fashioned diplomacy. I can tell you now that the UK will always be a part of that collective effort. A staunch defender of the importance of the UN, of the power of diplomacy and of the future of peacekeeping.

    If, in the coming months and years, we can continue to build on what we have agreed today – make the 3Ps a reality; stand alongside our peacekeepers as they protect civilians, help people hold free and fair elections, and deliver humanitarian aid – then we can truly hope to reduce conflict. And maybe one day, we will have less need to call on the brave men and women in blue helmets. But for now, we certainly do need them, so together let’s make sure that we have them in the right numbers, with the right skills, and the right equipment to do the job properly.

    Thank you very much.

  • James Brokenshire – 2016 Speech to British Irish Association Conference

    Below is the text of the speech made by James Brokenshire, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, at Pembroke College at Oxford University on 9 September 2016.

    I am delighted to be here this evening, and to attend my first British-Irish Association Conference as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.

    So thank you to Hugo McNeill for your kind invitation, and to you and your team at the BIA for the important work you continue to do.

    I’d also like to pay tribute to my predecessor, Theresa Villiers, who worked tirelessly over four years as Secretary State, securing both the Stormont House and Fresh Start Agreements.

    Theresa left Northern Ireland in a stronger and more stable place, and we should be very grateful for the job that she did.

    I welcome the presence this evening of the Taoiseach, Enda Kenny.

    The UK-Irish relationship has never been stronger, and that is something we both need to use to our mutual benefit as the UK negotiates its departure from the European Union.

    I feel genuinely honoured and privileged to have been asked by the Prime Minister to serve as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.

    In all of the previous times I’ve spent in Northern Ireland, I have always been struck by its beauty, its spirit, the warmth of its people and the sheer opportunity and potential it holds.

    It is a very special part of the United Kingdom.

    And it has been great to get out and about across Northern Ireland over the summer.

    Stepping the stones of the Giants Causeway, crossing Lough Erne and surveying the stunning countryside of County Fermanagh, walking the historic walls of Derry / Londonderry, enjoying the experience of the Titanic Centre with family, seeing the catch off the fishing boats in Kilkeel. Appreciating just how good a sixteen year old Bushmills single malt really is.

    But even more importantly talking to people. Reflecting on their worries and their anxieties. Listening to their hopes and aspirations. Hearing that sense of just how far Northern Ireland has come over recent years, but also how it needs to progress in the future. What Northern Ireland can be, what Northern Ireland will be in the years ahead.

    I am in little doubt that there are few greater responsibilities in government than taking forward the efforts of so many people over recent decades to build a peaceful, stable and prosperous Northern Ireland.

    But that is precisely the agenda I will to pursue wholeheartedly to the best of my abilities.

    Committed to the Belfast Agreement and its successors. Working with all parts of the community to see Northern Ireland flourish.

    Advancing the clear agenda of the Prime Minister to be a One Nation Government that will work for the whole of the United Kingdom, and for all of its citizens.

    UK Exit from the EU

    And seeing that we get the best possible deal for Northern Ireland as the UK looks to a future outside of the EU.

    And I think it is right that I start with the issue of Brexit.

    The people of the United Kingdom were given a choice in the referendum. And they voted decisively to leave the European Union.

    I campaigned for remain, but I am clear that we must and will respect that democratic decision and give effect to it.

    And while respecting the views of those parts of the UK that voted to remain, this was a United Kingdom vote.

    The imperative now is to work together and ensure that we have a positive and successful vision for Northern Ireland – inside the UK, within the closest set of relationships within these islands, but outside the EU.

    We have to make the most of the opportunities that our departure from the EU presents.

    The UK has always been a great global trading nation and that’s what we’ll continue to be – getting out there and doing business right across the world.

    That’s why I have just spent two days in Washington – with the simple message that the UK, and Northern Ireland in particular, is open for business.

    And another reason we will make a success of our departure is because the fundamentals of the UK economy are sound.

    We’ve reduced the deficit we inherited by nearly two-thirds.

    Employment is at record levels, with an average 1,000 jobs a day created over the past six years.

    We continue to attract more foreign direct investment than any other country in Europe.

    And in Northern Ireland the economy continues to grow with unemployment falling and more than 55,000 people in work since 2010. So while, yes, leaving the EU will inevitably involve some challenges and as the Prime Minister said last weekend it will not all be plain sailing – we approach this with optimism and a positive view of what we can achieve for the UK.

    And as we establish a UK negotiating position, the Prime Minister has made clear her desire to engage fully with the devolved administrations, including the Northern Ireland Executive.

    We also want to offer reassurance and certainty across a number of key sectors.

    Future of EU structural funds

    And that’s why the Chancellor announced last month that all European structural and investment funding agreements in the UK signed before this year’s Autumn Statement will be fully funded, even after we have left the EU.

    That includes funding agreed under the Peace Four and Interreg programmes.

    In addition, we will match the current level of direct payments given to farmers until 2020 – a boost to the agriculture sector which in Northern Ireland is the backbone of the local economy.

    As Secretary of State I am also fully committed to ensuring that as we establish our negotiating position the unique interests of Northern Ireland are protected and advanced.

    Northern Ireland / Ireland border

    This is particularly the case in relation to the border.

    So let me try and offer these words of re-assurance.

    The UK Government emphatically does not want to see a return to the borders of the past.

    The Prime Minister emphasised that on her visit to Stormont and I want to underline that point again this evening. And I know that determination is shared by the Irish Government and the Northern Ireland Executive.

    The open border and the Common Travel Area have served us well for decades. So it is a priority to keep them open for people and business.

    Perceived risk to the Belfast Agreement

    I also want to respond to suggestions that leaving the EU risks unravelling all the progress that has been made in Northern Ireland in recent years, and that it could fatally undermine the settlement forged by the 1998 Agreement and its successors.

    I fundamentally reject that argument.

    For a start I am confident that all parties in the Assembly support the current political settlement, want it to work and are fully committed to exclusively democratic and peaceful means.

    For our part, the UK Government remains fully committed to the Agreement and its successors. That includes the political institutions.

    The Assembly, the North-South Ministerial Council and the British-Irish Council will all continue to reflect the unique political relationships throughout these islands.

    In addition those elements of the Agreements that deal with people’s rights and identity will be upheld. As will all the constitutional guarantees – underpinned by the abiding principle of consent.

    And there remains continued overwhelming support for the current settlement, as the opinion poll this week has shown.

    Political stability in Northern Ireland has been hard fought over many decades, and we will not do anything to undermine it. This Government remains determined to do the best for Northern Ireland and for the United Kingdom as a whole.

    Stormont House and Fresh Start Agreements

    And doing the best for Northern Ireland means implementing the Stormont House and Fresh Start Agreements.

    This time last year at the BIA my predecessor effectively launched the second cross party talks process in twelve months.

    She did so against a background of impending crisis within the devolved institutions, with a return to direct rule seemed increasingly in prospect.

    In addition two murders in Belfast had again thrown the spotlight on the continuing existence of paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland.

    After ten weeks of intensive talks the resulting Fresh Start Agreement set out a way forward – to secure implementation of the Stormont House Agreement and to tackle the continuing malign influence of paramilitary groups.

    All of this was underpinned by an additional financial commitment by the UK Government which together with the funding in the Stormont House Agreement would give the Executive up to £2.5 billion extra spending power.

    And I’m pleased to say that implementation continues to go well.

    For our part at Westminster the UK Government is legislating for welfare reform in accordance with the terms set out in the Fresh Start Agreement.

    We’ve introduced new measures to encourage fiscal responsibility within the Executive so that it can live within its means.

    And we remain committed to the devolution of corporation tax powers in accordance with the conditions on financial stability set out in the Stormont House Agreement.

    There are new obligations on Ministers and MLAs to tackle paramilitarism.

    And we’ve passed the legislation to establish the new Independent Reporting Commission to promote progress towards ending paramilitary activity connected with Northern Ireland.

    I look forward to signing the Treaty along with Charlie Flanagan shortly that will enable the UK and Irish Governments, along with the Executive, that will enable us to get the new Commission up and running by the end of the year.

    Tackling paramilitarism

    Along with the strategy being developed by the Executive following the publication of the Fresh Start Panel report I hope that the Commission can play a key role in confronting the scourge of paramilitarism.

    Let’s be clear.

    Those engaged in what is often described as paramilitary activity serve no political cause.

    They commit crime using the cloak of paramiltarism to line their own pockets.

    They use intimidation and fear to power and exert influence within their communities.

    They hold communities back … deterring investment and jobs and preventing people from moving forward with their lives.

    They were never justified in the past, they are not justified today and they should disband.

    I recognise that this is easier said than done.

    It requires a concerted effort across society.

    We need to look at how we prevent young people being drawn into these groups in the first place.

    We need to help communities challenge the influence and legitimacy of these groups.

    We need look at how we can better support people coming forward to give evidence in paramilitary linked cases.

    And we need to ensure that the criminal justice system works to prosecute more of these people and put them behind bars for longer.

    So the measures in the Fresh Start Agreement are only a beginning.

    And they will rightly be judged on whether they make a difference where it matters – on the ground.

    But working with the Executive and the Irish Government I’m determined to make progress.

    We cannot tolerate cold blooded murder in alleyways masquerading as justice.

    It has to stop – and these groups must be put out of business for good.

    There is no doubt that since the Fresh Start Agreement politics has been more stable than for some time – with the new Executive getting on with the job of developing its Programme for Government.

    And of course politics is evolving, with the power-sharing structures at Stormont now accommodating a government and an opposition.

    I welcome these developments.

    In my first public statement as Secretary of State, I said that making progress on the issues of the past would be one of my key priorities.

    Legacy of the past and new institutions

    In recent weeks I’ve been meeting groups representing victims and survivors as well as individuals who either lost loved ones or were injured during the Troubles.

    It has been a profoundly moving and affecting experience.

    Hearing their powerful testimony.

    Seeing the pain, raw emotion and, frankly, suffering that still persists decades on.

    Recognising their desire for information, for answers and in some cases for justice to be done and to be seen to be done.

    And being very conscious of their frustration that the current structures aren’t working and the failure to establish the necessary political consensus to bring about change.

    They are the ones who suffered the most during the Troubles, and we have an obligation to do what we can to help them.

    So I would like to say this.

    I believe that the so called legacy bodies set out in the Stormont House Agreement continue to provide the most effective way to make progress on this hugely sensitive but hugely important issue.

    Delivering the Stormont House Agreement, including the legacy bodies, and also reforming legacy inquests was a key Northern Ireland manifesto pledge for the Conservative Government at the last election.

    It is something to which I am fully committed.

    The new bodies will be under obligations to operate in ways that are fair, balanced, impartial and – crucially in my view – proportionate.

    They will not provide for any amnesties or immunities from prosecution where an evidential case against individuals can be made.

    The Government, the police and all the agencies will also be under obligations to provide full disclosure, without limitation or qualification, to those investigating crimes or misconduct.

    The rule of law must be upheld, without fear or favour.

    But in the reports that are subsequently published, I am determined to strike the right balance between the obligation to the families to provide comprehensive disclosure, and my fundamental obligation as Secretary of State to protect lives and keep people safe and secure.

    Over recent months my department has been fully engaged on work necessary to establish the Historical Investigations Unit, the Independent Commission for Information Retrieval, the Implementation and Reconciliation Group and the Oral History Archive.

    The work has been shaped by many meetings with political parties, academics and victims’ groups, and with the Irish Government who also have important obligations in respect of the past.

    I now believe the process would benefit from a more public phase. And over the coming weeks I will reflect on what form that might take.

    My purpose is to implement fully and faithfully all parts of the Stormont House Agreement, and I believe it is right there should be a public chance to comment on the detail we have developed through our many discussions.

    I want the public to have their say and to build confidence in the new bodies so that they can get on with their work from the outset and make a difference for those people we have a duty to help.

    I want to have these bodies up and running as quickly as possible.

    But the bodies will only work if they can command support and confidence from across the community.

    Conclusion

    In conclusion.

    Brexit, Fresh Start implementation and legacy all represent big challenges.

    But working with our key partners the UK Government approaches them positively.

    As we seek to build a brighter, prosperous more secure future for Northern Ireland.

    And a Northern Ireland that works for everyone.

     

  • Karen Bradley – 2016 Speech on the Arts

    karenbradley

    Below is the text of the speech made by Karen Bradley, her first keynote as the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, in Liverpool on 9 August 2016.

    Thank you – it’s fantastic to be back in Liverpool, this wonderful world city.

    World city? Liverpool is not even in the top 250 or even 500 by some measures of cities by population.

    But two years ago the Rough Guide said it was one of the three cities you MUST visit. Along with Sarajevo and Rio.

    That’s because Liverpool – like the UK – punches way above its weight for Culture, Media and Sport.

    The waterfront is a World Heritage site. There is gorgeous architecture. World-class performing arts. Amazing museums, and galleries.

    I am really looking forward to visiting Tate Liverpool and the Museum of Liverpool later today.

    And what a privilege it is to be here at the Philharmonic.

    As the new Culture Secretary, I am already getting around the country – and the world – to demonstrate how culture, media and sport are all key parts of the Government’s overall industrial strategy.

    On my first day in my department, I received two things. One was the most amazing warm welcome from the team. The other was a briefing pack, stuffed full of facts and figures.

    Particularly striking were the statistics on the economic heft of the DCMS sectors. They account for a big chunk of GDP and lots of jobs.

    You will hear me make liberal use of these statistics. But today I want to focus on something else.

    Because everything DCMS covers has a value that goes beyond the economic.

    They matter in and of themselves.

    Watercolour painting, playing a sport, visiting ancient and beautiful places, drawing, writing poetry, mastering a musical instrument – all of these lead to a life well lived. They raise the human condition and cheer our spirits.

    Simply put, they make us happy.

    This is just as important as the positive impact that DCMS sectors can have on educational attainment, physical and mental health, community cohesion, and crime reduction.

    In fact, treating the personal, individual benefits to a 12 year-old girl from learning the piano as wholly distinct from the overall benefit to society of music is a false dichotomy.

    For it is precisely the aggregate effect of these individual experiences that will bring about a healthier, smarter, more peaceable, more cohesive, and happier society.

    And so they must be available to everyone, not the preserve of a privileged few.

    And how we make sure we reach everyone is what I want to talk about today – the scale of the challenge and what we are doing about it.

    The challenge

    The challenge is how do we make sure culture, media and sport fit into everything we do? How do we give them their rightful place as part of our civil society?

    In today’s speech I will be concentrating on the arts and culture.

    A determination to widen access to the arts is not new. It animated John Maynard Keynes – the first Chairman of the Arts Council – and Jennie Lee – the first minister for the arts – whose 1965 white paper said, “the best must be made more widely available”.

    In the intervening half century since Jennie Lee’s paper, access to the arts has remained unequal, and some specific pursuits still appear to be for a privileged minority.

    That is not to say there has been no progress. Throughout the United Kingdom one can find examples of incredibly successful projects.

    When In Harmony Liverpool began at Faith Primary School in 2009, 84 children took part. Now more than 700 hundred young people and their families take part in orchestral music every week, for free.

    I know that In Harmony concerts are the talk of the town. That is only possible thanks to expert tuition – a violin sounds wonderful in skilled hands but sometimes challenging in unskilled ones!

    You can’t get better than the Liverpool Philharmonic, and their teachers and musicians have made a huge difference. I am sure that they find it rewarding too. Nothing can beat the joy of watching a child accomplish something they didn’t think they could do.

    I would love to play an instrument, but because I wasn’t very good at the recorder at school, I was told I wasn’t musical at all. I was good at maths though, and that influenced my early career.

    As Professor Brian Cox has said, no-one thinks they can simply pick up a violin and play but they think maths is a natural talent. But in truth, both music and maths take time – and hard work makes all the difference.

    Music will now be a part of the lives of hundreds – and soon thousands – of Liverpudlian children who might not otherwise have had that chance. This is a gift beyond measure.

    So how big is the challenge we face in making arts and culture a central part of everyone’s life?

    The Government runs a survey called Taking Part. Arts engagement is nearly 82 per cent among adults from the upper socio-economic group – compared to just over 65 per cent from the lower socio-economic group.

    The gap in arts engagement between white adults and adults from a black or minority ethnic background has widened. And people with a long-standing illness or disability are significantly less engaged in the arts.

    Small wonder that people from disadvantaged backgrounds are poorly represented in the artistic professions – or that young people from such backgrounds are less likely to play an instrument and are underrepresented at conservatoires compared to higher education in general.

    So we know what the problem is – what are we going to do about it?

    Well earlier this year my department brought out its own Culture White Paper, and I want to pay tribute to the energy and resolve of the brilliant Ed Vaizey, who led this work.

    But the short answer to the question is that we are going to pilot different schemes and expand and replicate the ones that work and do more of what we know works already.

    Here is the longer answer:

    In January David Cameron announced the Cultural Citizens Programme. It is a fantastic initiative which could give thousands of children the chance to take part in a range of cultural activities, such as free visits to local plays, behind the scenes access to museums and galleries, and exclusive trips to world class venues, so they realise that culture is just as much for them as for anyone.

    It will be led by Arts Council England, with support from Historic England and the Heritage Lottery Fund.

    We are going to begin running pilots from next month, with 600 disadvantaged young people. The idea is to provide fun experiences that increase confidence and lead to permanent engagement.

    I am delighted that one of these pilots will take place here in North West England, in Liverpool and Blackpool, partnering with Curious Minds.

    To support that aim of getting culture into everyday life, we are looking at how to incorporate it into the National Citizen Service, in which more than 200,000 young people have taken part since 2011. I’ll be visiting an NCS centre in Liverpool later today.

    I hope that many of the kind of the kind of organisations here today and across the DCMS portfolio will want to take part. The deadline is tight and bids must be in by this Thursday. But Liverpudilans have never been shy of creativity, so please do get involved!

    My department received a massive injection of talented staff and brilliant ideas – as well as a great minister in Rob Wilson – when we assumed responsibility for the Office for Civil Society.

    OCS has a plethora of projects designed to help everyone, no matter what their background, to thrive. Art and culture can play a central part in most of them.

    An £80 million fund will help local commissioners create Social Impact Bonds to address deep-rooted social problems. The Bonds will focus on six key themes: drug and alcohol dependency, children’s services, early years, young people, older people, and healthy lives.

    The Affordable Lending portal – a partnership between private and social sector bodies – will make it easier to access loans from responsible lenders.

    Big Society Capital is a social investment fund that has already helped hundreds of organisations.

    The Centre for Social Action has to date supported more than 80 organisations in expanding opportunity, specifically for young people.

    And by the end of this Parliament the number of Community Organisers will be increased from 6,500 to 10,000.

    So, these are some of the things DCMS is going but it really is a challenge for the whole of government.

    That is why I will be working closely with the new Education Secretary Justine Greening to make sure that no child is left out of this country’s magnificent and extraordinary cultural inheritance. Education is, of course, vital to expanding people’s horizons and developing lifelong passions.

    I will also work closely with Liz Truss at the Ministry of Justice to see how arts and culture can be part of prison reform.

    This is really part of being a government that works for everyone.

    And the arts can do wonders for mental and physical health as well as for people with long-term conditions like dementia and Parkinson’s.

    Arts Council England is already helping make culture available to all by making a fundamental change in its approach to diversity.

    Every organisation it funds is now expected to make their work better reflect the communities they serve. Under a banner called The Creative Case for Diversity, Arts Council England will monitor progress and this will influence their funding decisions.

    The Government is also looking at how we can tear down the barriers to a career in the arts.

    A new experience that reaches someone who would not otherwise enjoy a rich cultural life changes that person’s world. That sort of experience has immeasurable value, but can also have a cumulative impact that can effect change on a local and even national scale.

    Culture can help regenerate villages, towns and cities.

    Places are not simply somewhere to build a factory. To have heart and soul, they need galleries, music centres, cherished heritage sites, libraries, and museums and sports facilities. They need to be like Liverpool.

    The Government is working hard at rebalancing funding between London and the regions. The Great Place Scheme will bring together national arts and heritage Lottery funders with councils, cultural organisations and universities to ensure that culture forms a core part of local authorities’ plans and policies.

    Next year, Hull will be UK City of Culture.

    That status helps bring communities together, attracts visitors, raises the profile of culture, and develops lasting partnerships.

    And the Great Exhibition of the North in Summer 2018 will showcase the exceptional art, culture and design of the North of England.

    So places can be regenerated by culture – but only because of the effect on individuals. Culture, media and sport have real, lasting impacts that benefit all of us.

    Let me end by quoting a Liverpool parent who I hope would support that view. They said,

    “… an event like going down to the birthday concerts and taking family, you know? This year’s one, oh I was in tears. You’d have to be pretty cold to say it didn’t make you well up, or make you proud, because it does, it really, really does.”

    So said a parent whose child played at Liverpool Philharmonic Hall thanks to In Harmony.

    I am incredibly privileged to have this role because it means that I can do my bit to ensure that many, many more people have cause to shed tears of pride.

    I expect every organisation and individual that DCMS supports to put their shoulder to the wheel – and I invite anyone else who can help to join us on this journey. I will be making sure the whole of government is involved.

    The prize is huge: massive benefits for society, which will stem from thousands upon thousands of individual experiences of the joy of arts, culture and sport – a joy that no-one should be denied.

    Thank you.

  • Iain McNicol – 2016 Statement on Labour Leadership

    Below is the text of the statement made by Iain McNicol, the General Secretary of the Labour Party, on 26 July 2016.

    Over the summer the party will embark on a big debate about our future. Labour members and supporters will choose our candidate for next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.

    The Labour Party should be the home of lively debate, of new ideas and of campaigns to change society.

    However, for a fair debate to take place, people must be able to air their views in an atmosphere of respect. They shouldn’t be shouted down, they shouldn’t be intimidated and they shouldn’t be abused, either in meetings or online.

    Put plainly, there is simply too much of it taking place and it needs to stop.

    The two candidates Jeremy Corbyn and Owen Smith, our Deputy Leader Tom Watson and our NEC have been very clear – there is no place for abuse of any kind in the party.

    However words of condemnation are meaningless unless they are backed up by action.

    The NEC has already taken the difficult decision to suspend most Party meetings while the Leadership election is ongoing. And over the coming days and weeks the Party will be taking further action to protect our members and to identify those responsible for this appalling behaviour.

    I want to be clear, if you are a member and you engage in abusive behaviour towards other members it will be investigated and you could be suspended while that investigation is carried out.

    If you are a registered supporter or affiliated supporter and you engage in abusive behaviour you will not get a vote in this Leadership election.

    Details of any abusive behaviour can be reported by emailing validation@labour.org.uk.

    Choosing our candidate to be the next Labour Prime Minister is a great responsibility on us all. We owe it to the millions of people who need the Labour Party to fight for them, to conduct our Leadership election in a way that gives them confidence in our ability to build a better Britain.