UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2016

  • Justine Greening – 2016 Speech at the Education World Forum

    justinegreening

    Below is the text of the speech made by Justine Greening, the Secretary of State for International Development, at the Education World Forum in London on 18 January 2016.

    Introduction

    I’m delighted to be here with you this evening, to discuss education priorities for the next generation. It is fantastic to see so many countries represented here at this conference.

    When I was attending my local comprehensive school in Rotherham, I never thought I would one day find myself talking to the Education World Forum as the UK’s Secretary of State for International Development.

    I know that I wouldn’t be here today if it wasn’t for my school – and particularly those amazing teachers who supported me to learn and then inspired me to achieve my dreams.

    I still remember, in particular, my French teacher and what was great about him as a teacher, was that he would make learning fun but you would always come away with clear points learnt. 10 years later I still remembered a lot of what he taught me – and one of the real tests of education is not just what you remember at the end of the year, but what is still with you a decade later. Teachers also give the opportunity for us to learn important values and provide us with the space to develop our own style and be creative.

    These teachers transformed my life and prospects – and, I’m sure, many of you looking back on your schooldays would feel the same way. Everyone starts school a rough diamond – our teachers are like jewellers who polish us and make us the best and brightest we can be.

    For me, this is why education matters, to realise your potential and ultimately be able to choose the life you want and have a chance to put dreams into action.

    And that’s why this Forum matters – it’s a moment to come together and a chance for us to reflect on the progress that is being made – but also on the challenges that remain. This gives the opportunity to take stock, reflect and understand the perspective in order to develop a strategy, and also to share experience of what works and doesn’t work.

    The challenge

    In my role as Secretary of State at DFID, we really have seen tremendous progress. The world has made dramatic and unprecedented progress – helping more and more children go to school, since the Millennium Development Goals were agreed 15 years ago. A whole generation received an education that was denied to their parents and their grandparents. The education goals are some of the most important within the Global Goals.

    The North Nigerian Chibok girls exemplify the importance of education. They had managed to complete primary and secondary school already and were denied the opportunity to progress.

    So we cannot rest on our laurels.

    In September, the world signed up to the new SDG Four for providing a quality education for every child by 2030 and ensuring that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development as well.

    This is the right ambition at the same time – as we know – it is not going to be easy. There is a huge challenge ahead.

    My teachers, and many of your teachers, were fantastic but there are still millions of children around the world without teachers, without a classroom, without so much as a textbook.

    It is an issue of quantity. 124 million children and adolescents are out of school, rough diamonds. This means we may never see what they could’ve been and what they might’ve achieved.

    It is also an issue of quality. And many more are in school but without basic skills. At least 250 million children of primary school-age cannot read and write – even after some of them have spent 4 years in school. The issue of quality is so important.

    We know girls around the world are still less likely to attend school than their brothers. There is an unseen army of girls.

    Some of these girls come under pressure to take on the burden of domestic work in their homes. Some of them are taken out of the classroom to undergo FGM (Female Genital Mutilation) or child marriage and never return… Still more out of school because of their country being in conflict situations.

    Either way, all of these girls are losing out on an education and losing out on the life and future they might have chosen for themselves. This is why it has been a focus for DFID for a number of years and also why the UK has a vital role around the world.

    Some children are being denied an education because of where they are – such as the 37 million children out of school in crisis-affected countries. I have just returned from Lebanon and Jordan where I met Syrian refugee children who are in school.

    In my recent visit it showed that by working together with the Jordan Minister we can achieve great things. I also had an excellent meeting with the Lebanese Minister. We are hugely supportive of their aim to get every Syrian child into education.

    DFID’s work

    All of this is why, for my Department, education is an absolutely core part of what we do.

    The UK has helped 11 million children get a decent education in the last five years, training 190,000 teachers, building classrooms and ensuring the poorest girls and boys have school bursaries and textbooks. And we’re going to keep on doing all of that work – we’ve committed to help 11 million girls and boys gain a decent education by 2020.

    It is important that we focus on those that are most likely not to be in school. The hardest to reach children – particularly girls and children in crisis affected countries – are, and will continue to be, a huge focus of our work. We are working in Democratic Republic of Congo to try and encourage this.

    Educating children in emergencies is, of course, an urgent, global challenge.

    And the UK has allocated £115 million to provide protection, psychosocial support and education for children affected by the crisis in Syria and the region.

    And this year there will be two key moments for the world to rise to this challenge.

    One is, at the London conference on the Syria crisis next month, where we are proposing that the Conference agrees the ambitious goal that all refugee children from Syria and host country children are in education by the end of the 2016/2017 academic year. I hope the whole international community can get behind this vital commitment. There will be no future for Syria if we do not invest in its young generation now.

    We all have choices about how we want to educate our children and want them to grow up with a chance to fulfil their potential. We must look to focus on those out-of-school and about ensuring they are able to go back and rebuild. You have to realise they feel cheated out of education.

    And secondly, beyond Syria, the World Humanitarian Summit in May is another crucial moment for us all to commit to a better international model for schooling the millions of children affected by conflict and disaster.

    Through education, we can also help protect children and young people from the dangers of extremism by teaching tolerance, freedom of religion or belief, and global citizenship.

    Conclusion

    Investing in education is to invest in a country’s potential and future. This is important because a country’s best asset is its people.

    Ultimately, if we get this right, we are building better, safer futures for all children around the world

    You all have amazing jobs – roles that will shape children’s’ futures. I believe a countries biggest asset is its people.

    For me education is about about freedom, it’s the way you become yourself, the best version you can be and it’s about choice – being able to choose the future you want and there is nothing more important.

    Thank you – and enjoy your evening.

  • Nick Gibb – 2016 Speech on School Leadership

    nickgibb

    Below is the text of the speech made by Nick Gibb, the Minister of State for Schools, at The Key in London on 26 January 2016.

    Can I start by saying thank you for inviting me to visit The Key and discuss school leadership with you today? In just 8 years you have grown to become a fixture in the English education ecosystem, and I am a great admirer of the guidance and support you offer to school leaders.

    I am all too aware that a government cannot drive up school standards alone. What government can do is set the conditions in which schools are able to improve themselves. That is why heads are so central to our vision of a school-led system, and why I want to talk about school leadership today.

    In his memoirs about his own school days, Winston Churchill recalled his old master Dr Welldon, and observed that: “Headmasters have powers at their disposal with which Prime Ministers have never yet been invested.” And that was before the current era of unprecedented school autonomy.

    Compared with 2010, all headteachers have more power to exclude pupils whose behaviour disrupts the education of those around them, more power to move on teachers who do not meet their expectations of quality teaching, and more power to determine how teacher pay should relate to performance.

    In addition, headteachers no longer have to complete self-evaluation forms, submit annual absence and performance targets to local authorities, or instruct their teachers to teach in a particular style – and produce written lesson plans – simply to please Ofsted inspectors.

    We have got rid of 10 different data collections for schools since 2010, such as ‘making good progress’ and ‘standards fund monitoring’, and we have removed 21,000 pages of unnecessary school guidance, reducing the volume by 75%, and centralising all that remains in one place on the GOV.UK website.

    For headteachers who lead academies the freedoms are more extensive still. They have more control over their funding, the ability to change term times and the school day, greater freedom over their curriculum, and the freedom to choose where to go to get the best services, such as behaviour support and school improvement – or indeed to provide such services in collaboration with other academies.

    But, more importantly, the academies programme has been driven by the fact that, like the lotus fruit in The Odyssey, once headteachers taste school autonomy there is no going back.

    We have been guided in this policy by the international evidence that high levels of school autonomy, coupled with strong accountability and excellent leadership, are consistent features of the top-performing education systems. Conversely, there is nothing more deflating than being responsible for an organisation over which you do not have adequate control.

    A great privilege of having served as Schools Minister in 2 successive governments has been meeting inspiring headteachers. In particular, I have been deeply impressed by those heads who have grasped the opportunities offered by today’s era of school autonomy to make a clean break with the current orthodoxies of how schools should be run, and plough their own furrow.

    It is a remarkable fact that the best non-selective state secondary school in the country today, according to the 5 A*-to-C measure, is not situated in a middle-class suburb, or a pleasant rural town. Instead, it is situated in one of the most disadvantaged London wards for child poverty, and 41% of the school’s pupils are eligible for free school meals – almost 3 times the national average.

    Yet at this school, King Solomon Academy, 95% of pupils gained 5 good GCSEs in 2015, and 77% of pupils passed the EBacc, an achievement which would have been branded fanciful at the time of their opening in 2009. In that year, King Solomon Academy was founded by Max Haimendorf as a ‘new academy’, and from its inception it used academy freedoms to break from the orthodoxies of English state-schooling.

    The behaviour and ethos of King Solomon Academy is explicitly modelled on the strict ‘no excuses’ approach of American charter schools, but coupled with a deep concern for the well-being of the pupils – tough love, some may say. In addition, the curriculum focused on depth before breadth. Their inspirational mathematics teacher Bruno Reddy ensured that every pupil mastered their number bonds and times tables to the point of instant recall, as a prerequisite for further teaching.

    As our free school and academy reforms mature, I am certain that we will see more and more brave and free-thinking school leaders, such as Max, whose pupils achieve previously inconceivable feats under their charge.

    Ever since she burst onto the public stage in 2010, I have been a great admirer of Katharine Birbalsingh. She is currently running a free school in Wembley which shows an admirable disregard for the way in which English schools are normally operated. At her school, desks are always in rows, there are no graded lesson observations of teachers, and pupils memorise subject content for weekly tests. And, if visitors to the school do not like what they see, Katharine says ‘tough’ – they must reserve judgement until the school’s first set of GCSE results in 3 years’ time.

    However, we can’t have a school system defined by a handful of exceptional individuals. For there to be a real step change in the life chances of pupils throughout the country, we need school leadership to show strength in depth in all parts of the country.

    And to ensure that heads are the best they can be, there is a role for the government to play. Over the past 6 years, our reforms have focused on building the networks of collaboration and support which will allow best practice to spread to most schools.

    The National Professional Qualifications are now delivered by schools and other providers, allowing aspirant heads to train on the ground with serving headteachers. Some of our leading teaching schools and MATs have embraced this opportunity to create new leadership development organisations, such as Inspiring Leaders, Taudheedul Education and Cabot Learning Federation.

    We have funded other targeted programmes to develop excellent leaders for challenging schools, such as High Potential Senior Leaders, currently delivered by Future Leaders, and High Potential Middle Leaders, currently delivered by Teaching Leaders.

    Programmes such as these act as a pipeline for young, aspirant heads who want to gain leadership responsibility, and are keen to do so in those schools that need them most. So far, High Potential Senior Leaders has provided training to 667 assistant and deputy headteachers, helping them to secure and excel in their first headship position.

    In addition, we are encouraging more of the best school leaders in the country to become national leaders of education (NLEs), with a stated purpose of improving education provision beyond their own school. As of January 2016, there are over 1,000 NLEs and more than 370 national leaders of governance.

    For bright and ambitious young graduates, a career in teaching now offers rapid advancement opportunities to rival any other profession. If our schools are to improve across the board, our education system needs to reward hard work and ambition, not just time served.

    And career advancement for teachers does not end with headship. The challenges of running a multi-academy trust demand a whole different set of abilities compared to headship, but equally should offer an exciting new avenue for our brightest and best in the profession to continue progressing throughout their careers.

    This government will have achieved its aims, if, in the years to come, teaching has become established as one of the most exciting, rewarding and fulfilling professions available to young people.

    We are aware, however, that even the best headteachers are not superhuman. That is where organisations such as The Key serve a clear purpose. Running a school is a demanding and complex process, and the help that The Key offers in all areas, from planning a budget for the coming year, to risk-assessing a school trip, is invaluable.

    The Key also offers help in school improvement, school curriculum and classroom teaching. Here, I would encourage your organisation, and all other organisations involved in the same field, to be as discerning and rigorous as possible in deciding what to promote as ‘good practice’.

    I will give an example of how it can be done badly. In a report last year, a highly influential international thinktank examined ‘Schools for 21st-Century Learners’, promoting to schools approaches such as ‘authentic learning’ and ‘technology-rich environments’.

    In a passage on ‘inquiry learning’, this report cited a case study of a secondary school in the north west of England where pupils work for 1 day a week on research projects; where they were free to pursue their own interests with teachers simply acting as ‘facilitators’.

    On reading this case study, I decided to investigate how well the school in question actually performs. It turns out that for the past 2 years, over half the pupils have not achieved 5 GCSEs graded A* to C including English and maths, and in 2013 the school was graded ‘requires improvement’ by Ofsted.

    Why on earth, I ask myself, would an organisation which is geared towards improving educational outcomes profile a struggling school with unimpressive examination results as an exemplar? The only answer I can reach is that for many in education, a preference for child-centred teaching methods is still allowed to trump actual evidence of failure and success.

    I am confident that the education sector is moving towards becoming a mature profession, where evidence is finally allowed to trump orthodoxy and dogma. To speed this process along, it is the responsibility of all organisations involved in helping headteachers with school improvement to be absolutely rigorous in scrutinising the methods and approaches they promote.

    Whether promoting the merits of project work or direct instruction, synthetic phonics or whole word, a knowledge-based curriculum or a thematic curriculum, educators must ask themselves, “Do I wish this to be true, or do I know this to be true?”.

    In England, we have some truly astonishing schools which achieve great results against the odds, and the number of such schools is growing with every year. We should not be looking to struggling schools where half of the pupils do not meet the minimum expected standard for inspiration.

    So my challenge to The Key, and any organisation of a similar nature, is to ask yourselves whether you are comforting schools by reflecting current orthodoxies, or challenging schools to improve by promoting approaches which have been proven to work.

    I look forward to answering your questions.

  • Claire Perry – 2016 Speech on Train Tickets

    claireperry

    Below is the text of the speech made by Claire Perry, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport, at the Transport Ticketing and Passenger Information Conference 2016, Old Billingsgate Market, London on 26 January 2016.

    Introduction

    Good morning.

    I jumped at the chance to speak today (26 January 2016) at the seventh Transport Ticketing and Passenger Information Conference. Because although transport ticketing has come a long way in 7 years, the impressive technology on display here today shows how much more can be delivered. And I think we are at a tipping point of improvement and innovation, where government can help but private transport operators can drive forward and deliver the changes.

    So this morning I would like to give you a refreshed government perspective on transport ticketing. To set out what has already been achieved. But also to set out a direction of travel for the future.

    How far we have come

    The great news from recent years is just how far smart ticketing has spread outside London.

    While London still leads in the number of journeys made using smart tickets, the regions are catching up.

    Britain’s 5 biggest bus operators have just announced their plan to introduce contactless payments on all their 32,000 buses operating outside London by 2022. And next month, customers with a smart card registered account travelling on Essex’s C2C rail services who suffer a delayed journey, even for only a few minutes, will receive compensation automatically.

    While rail customers in the Midlands and the north can now download tickets directly to their mobile phones and have them scanned on-board and at the station gatelines. I saw the system in action last July and was really impressed — a simple and quick digital ticketing system planned and introduced by the rail industry working together. It’s fitting that the north of England, the birthplace of the modern railway and a place where the first Edmondson railway ticket was issued is once again pioneering the future of ticketing.

    That pioneering spirit is one reason why in the Spending Review we committed £150 million to support Transport for the North — a new partnership of the northern city authorities, government and national transport agencies who are together working on a plan to bring a single smart ticketing and travel information system to the north of England, making travel by rail, bus, Metro and tram as simple and convenient as possible.

    Making rail journeys better

    So there’s a huge amount happening across all forms of transport.

    But as Rail Minister, my primary focus is on making rail journeys better. It’s no easy responsibility.

    For decades, successive governments have failed to spend the amount of money needed to support the demands we are placing on our railway network. Since privatisation, passenger journeys have more than doubled, and customers rightly expect a good journey for what they are paying.

    But by 2009, the World Economic Forum ranked the quality of Britain’s railways as 21st in the world. Far behind Germany at 5th and France at 4th, and even one place behind India. That is completely unacceptable.

    Rail is not some heritage “has been”, but a vital, fast and clean part of a 21st century transport landscape. So since 2010, we have begun a massive programme of rail investment: committing over £38 billion to improve our railways — and that sum does not include the vast bulk of HS2 spending.

    We are building new stations, and refurbishing old ones like Reading, Manchester Victoria, Birmingham New Street and London Bridge. Laying new tracks. Electrifying more than 850 miles of the network. And bringing thousands of new train carriages into service.

    Since 2013, we have also had a fresh approach to franchising. Rather than assessing franchise bids purely on the basis of the best possible price, we also take into account quality of service for rail customers. So any operator who wants to run a rail franchise in this country must show how over the lifetime of the franchise they will deliver a better service for customers.

    It’s an approach that is delivering real benefits, such as better trains, more frequent services, onboard wi-fi, refurbished stations and better customer information and service.

    But we cannot claim to have truly modernised our railways if we don’t also transform ticketing.

    South East Flexible Ticketing

    Since 2011, we have made good progress on smart ticketing in the south east of the country through the South East Flexible Ticketing programme, known as SEFT.

    SEFT is a government-backed programme under which train companies can collaborate to offer smart ITSO-based tickets that work seamlessly across the south-east.

    The programme has grown to include 5 train companies covering over 70% of the south-east’s annual season ticket commuter market.

    But SEFT is doing more than extend smart ticketing coverage. SEFT is showing that different operators can come together. They can get their back-office IT systems to talk to one another. And they can provide a seamless customer experience across different operators and different transport modes.

    So SEFT has helped smart ticketing technology to mature and industry expertise to grow. But above all, it has helped us reach the point at which future innovation can be led by the private sector. By companies who know their customers’ needs and have the ambition to meet those needs, and an ambition to run their businesses with more innovation and efficiency.

    And it’s that sense of ambition that our new approach to franchising is designed to stimulate.

    So when last year we set out our aims for the forthcoming Southwestern and West Midlands franchise competitions, we said that we wanted bidders to make a significant increase in the use of smart ticketing.

    When the competition begins in earnest in the spring, we expect to see some really exciting proposals. But this expectation isn’t a one-off.

    In the future, anyone who bids to operate a rail franchise will need to show plans to offer smart ticketing that meets customers’ needs.

    Thanks to our SEFT programme there’s a proven system ready for train operators to use, so customers can enjoy a seamless travelling experience.

    The future — moving on from magstripe

    Because, after all, the industry’s overriding commitment should be to the fare-paying customer.

    And if smart ticketing is to become established on our railways, it will mean the death of the tangerine ticket; the familiar orange magstripe paper ticket that has served Britain’s rail customers for thirty years.

    A ticket that has done its job well, but now seems woefully inadequate for the future — especially for an industry focused on customer service.

    Convenience

    As Rail Minister and a regional MP, I travel on our railways a lot. And I know how after a few journeys the tangerine tickets proliferate in every purse, pocket and bag.

    Tickets, seat reservations and even the receipt from the ticket machine — all the same size and colour. All needing to be physically printed at some point in my journey. Easily lost or mistaken. Leading to the familiar gate line ‘pocket pat-down’. Or the shamefaced plea for mercy from the harassed station staff. “Honestly I did buy the return, here is my receipt.”

    Imagine how much worse that is when you are the Rail Minister.

    But it’s not my experiences that matter. But the missed opportunity to link ticketing across travel modes, deliver much more customer convenience, and drive great customer relationship management.

    Customer choice

    Any good business wants to get to know its customers better. To know their preferences and habits. To be able to close the gap between what customers pay for and what they actually use. And to offer new products and services that meet their needs. That’s what smart ticketing can offer both company and customer. And that’s why it’s important that in the longer term customers are offered not just digital tickets, but truly smart tickets.

    I am often asked what sort of smart ticketing the government wants to see. And my answer is this. The government is agnostic. The choice should be the customer’s.

    If the customer wants to load their tickets onto the bank card they used to buy their tickets online, or onto their phone, a watch, or a bracelet, or, if like one Moscow Metro user they want to insert a chip under their skin, the choice ought to be theirs.

    And rail operators should be free to figure out how to deliver what their customers want and what works for their business.

    But amid all the radical ideas, careful thought must also be given to the needs of customers who over many years have grown used to paper tickets.

    There’s nothing wrong with a big bang introduction of new technology. But some people will benefit from a staged approach, or extra help from staff. Many people still like interacting with others when buying tickets. Or carrying paper proofs of their purchase. And of course, smart devices need electrons.

    Conclusion

    So I hope that I have given the conference plenty to talk about.

    Since privatisation, customer numbers on our railways have more than doubled, and the government is now investing an unprecedented sum of public money in rail.

    It’s fair to expect the industry to respond with new ticketing that customers want to use. Because the momentum is with smart ticketing. It’s no longer an optional extra. It’s an inevitability.

    Smart ticketing has already made travelling easier for millions of customers. Now the challenge is to bring its benefits to millions more.

    That’s an exciting prospect — and I’m looking to the industry to make it happen.

    Thank you.

  • David Cameron – 2016 Press Conference with Enda Kenny

    davidcameron

    Below is the text of the press conference between David Cameron, the Prime Minister, and Enda Kenny, the Irish Taoiseach held in Ireland on 25 January 2016.

    Well, good afternoon everyone. I’m pleased to welcome the Taoiseach Enda Kenny, my good friend, here today. But before I talk about the importance of our bilateral relationship I’d like to take a moment to express my deep sadness on learning of the death of Cecil Parkinson. He was the first big political figure that I ever worked for and got to know. He was a man of huge ability. He was passionate that what he was doing, and the team of ministers that he worked with was about transforming Britain in the 1980s by improving industrial relations, by reforming the trade unions, by making sure the business was in the private sector, by encouraging entrepreneurship. He was passionate about those issues and a very effective minister.

    And he was someone I really enjoyed working with and he taught me a great deal. He was part of a great political generation that did really extraordinary things for our country. He’ll be hugely missed by many on all sides of the political divide and my thoughts are with Cecil’s wife, Ann, and their family at this very sad time.

    Turning to today’s meeting our bilateral relationship with Ireland has never been stronger. We’ve spoken about the good progress we continue to make in reforming the UK’s relationship with the EU to address the concern the British people have about our membership. And we’ve also spoken about the migration crisis, and the importance of using our strong bilateral relationship to work together to address it, including through the Syria Donors Conference that I’ll be hosting here in London next month. And I want to say a word about each of these.

    Firstly, our bilateral relationship. UK–Irish relations have never been stronger or more productive than they are today. This year we’ll reach the halfway mark in our decade of joint cooperation which we first announced together in 2012. Our trade relationship is growing with trade between our countries now worth more than €1 billion every week. Ireland is now our fifth biggest market for goods and our sixth biggest for services. And the strength of the Irish economy, in particular its growth in recent years, underlies why Ireland is such an important partner for the United Kingdom.

    Over 3 million Brits visit Ireland each year. In Northern Ireland, the Executive has now delivered its first budget since the Fresh Start agreement, a result that is in no small part down to the hard work of the parties in Northern Ireland, but of course supported by both the British and Irish governments. The UK government remains fully committed to working alongside the Irish government to build a brighter, more secure future for the people of Northern Ireland. We want to help them to deliver the peaceful and prosperous society that they deserve.

    Now we’ve spoken today about the importance of strengthening the external border of the Common Travel Area, something I consider to be vital. And of course 2016 also marks the centenaries of important events in our shared history. We’ll mark them as we should in a spirit of mutual respect, inclusiveness and friendship.

    On EU reform, as I’ve said before, we need to fix the aspects of our EU membership that cause so much frustration in Britain, so we get a better deal for our country and secure our future, but also a good deal for all in Europe too. Throughout we’re driven by one consideration: what is best for Britain’s economic and national security. In the end, the British people will decide whether we’re stronger and better off with our European neighbours as part of the European Union or on our own. That’s because we made a promise – and we kept it – to deliver an in/out referendum.

    Today we’ve discussed the areas I set out where we need to see reform, on economic governance, on sovereignty, on competitiveness and of course on welfare. The UK and Ireland share a strong desire to make the EU more competitive, and to prioritise free trade agreements with the fastest growing markets across the world. We’re making progress in our negotiations and I’m confident that, with the right political will, we can secure the reforms that will address the concerns of the British people.

    We’ve also discussed the terrible humanitarian situation caused by the Syria crisis and what more we can do as an international community to help. Next month I will bring together world leaders in London to talk about just how we do that. We need to agree concrete action that will give hope to so many: jobs, so people can provide for their families; and education for their children. We need to act now to help refugees in the region as well as enabling them to play a leading role in Syria’s reconstruction in the future. This is not just in the interests of Syria and her neighbours; it’s in the interests of the refugees and Europe too. The more we do to enable people to stay in the region, the less likely we are to see them making the perilous journey to Europe.

    So thank you very much, Enda, for the discussions today. Thank you for your support and help, and I very much look forward to working with you in the months and, I hope, years ahead.

    Enda Kenny

    Thanks David. First of all, I want to say that it’s a privilege to be back here again at Downing Street. I really wanted to come over to talk about the issue of Europe and the referendum with the Prime Minister. I have to say that I do that following on the very positive approach and the encouragement that there was at the European Council meeting in December.

    People are aware that President Tusk will table a paper, probably next week in regards to the four issues that the Prime Minister put on the table. I actually believe that all of these are solvable in a really positive sense because you know our position in Ireland, Europe will be much stronger with Britain as a central and fundamental member.

    So it’s a vital issue for Europe, it’s a vital issue for Britain, but it’s also a critical issue for Ireland. And that’s why earlier today I spoke down at McCann FitzGerald, one of the leading legal firms here in London, to make the important point that British business needs to make this point very positively, that we can be a stronger union, a stronger Britain, a stronger Ireland, by making changes that reform Europe in a way that helps everybody.

    So I want Britain to remain a central member of the European Union because from our – Ireland’s point of view, this is a really critical issue. And I say that in the spirit of real positiveness, because I do believe that the four baskets that were put on the table by you at December are all issues that can be concluded successfully and strongly in the interests of everybody throughout the Union.

    We also discussed the question of the – which David referred to – the 1916 centenary commemorations, and we have a very comprehensive, inclusive, sensitive whole series of things this year. I’ve invited the Prime Minister to come over himself at some time during the course of the year if that’s appropriate, and obviously he will consider that in due course.

    We discussed the Fresh Start in Northern Ireland. We agree now that the issues that were decided upon and agreed upon by the parties of Northern Ireland, that we can give impetus to that ourselves to see that these things will happen.

    So, from that point of view, clearly the question of migration is another one on the table. We discussed that, the implications and the difficulties of the challenge that Europe faces here in dealing with unprecedented numbers coming in.

    So I’m much better informed in respects of Europe, and obviously we’ll meet up again before the European Council meeting so that we give a really positive presentation to this, and in so far as we can help the Prime Minister and Britain here to have our European colleagues understand the importance of this, we will.

    Question

    A question for both of you if I can. Taoiseach, you said that you’re confident that negotiations can be concluded successfully and strongly. Do you think they can be concluded in February, and do you see a need for a hurry on this deal and for the referendum to happen as quickly as possible?

    And Prime Minister, the business community has come out today and expressed concerns and fears about the impact of Brexit on trade. It seems on the inside it’s about fears over trade, on the outside fears over migration. Could this whole Brexit referendum discussion descend into a kind of competitive project fear?

    Enda Kenny

    I’ve made the point on many occasion that, in the teeth of the recession, Ireland was the only country that had to vote on a referendum – by referendum on the Fiscal Stability Treaty, and actually it was the voice of Irish business that really convinced people not to take the risk of putting those jobs at risk.

    So, in the same way, British business here will have the opportunity to speak about the importance and the power of 500 million European Union being reformed to work more effectively in the interests of greater trade, of trade agreements, of the opportunity to cut unemployment, the opportunity to create employment, and so on.

    So whether it be finished on – at the European Council meeting on February, I just can’t say. I haven’t see President Tusk’s paper yet, and obviously the Prime Minter has pointed out himself his view on whether it’s absolutely necessary to do it in February or not. My belief is that, of the four issues that were tabled there, there are some complications clearly with one or two of those, but I think these are issues that can be sorted and that can be agreed. And I would hope, personally, that it might be possible to do it in February but then I can’t speak about all of the other countries around the table. But it’s an issue that needs to be dealt with. It’s a critical issue. We regard it as being very important for the relationship between Ireland and Britain but also between their continuing strength and functioning of the European Union with Britain continuing as a central member.

    Prime Minister

    My whole approach to this issue is one that is very positive. I mean, I think we should be focusing on the positive opportunity for Britain. Imagine the scale of the prize if we can remain a member of the single market with 500 million consumers, a quarter of the global economy, with a seat at the table and a say over the rules, and making sure that we do right by our business for jobs and investment and growth in the UK, combined with action to make sure we deal with the things that frustrate people about the EU.

    So that’s what I’m going to focus on in the run up to try to get this agreement and then, hopefully once we have this agreement, to win the argument about why Britain should stay in a reformed Europe. But we need to get that agreement. It is possible for it to happen in February. As I’ve said, if there’s a good deal on the table, I’ll take that deal, I’ll take it to the British people and explain why it’s the best of both worlds.

    But it’s got to be the right deal. If it’s not there, we’ve got plenty of time. We don’t need a referendum until the end of 2017. But I’m always keen to deal with these issues, and I’ve tried to approach this in a very sensible way throughout the last few months, travelling around Europe, explaining what needs to be done, putting very concrete and sensible proposals on the table, and if all of those get a proper and sensible response, we can do this in February. But if it’s not right, I’d rather get it right than do it in a rush.

    Question

    Could I start by asking the Prime Minister, how much of a help do you think that the Irish government will be to you ahead of next month’s summit?

    And also, to the Taoiseach, what contingency plans, if any, is the Irish government looking at, given that there could be a Brexit and potentially a referendum within the coming months?

    Prime Minister

    Well, let me answer the question first. I mean, Enda and the Irish government have been and I believe will continue to be hugely helpful, because Enda is very respected in the European Council. He’s someone with great experience, with great knowledge about how the organisation works. I think he knows that Europe would be better off if Britain stayed in, because of the contribution that we bring. Obviously the very close trading and economic relationships between Britain and Ireland play a part.

    So in terms of trying to get across why the issues that Britain’s put on the table matter so much, I think that we’ve had very strong support from the Irish government, and I think that has helped to get the message across about why these things need to change, and, as I’ve said, the size of the prize if they do change. So we worked very closely together, and the speech you made at the European Council in December when I made my presentation was extremely powerful, and I think a lot of people were very impressed by what he said.

    Enda Kenny

    Thanks. Obviously we’re focused on the positive end of this, as I’ve said, being a member and continuing to be a member of 500 million people. That’s where we need to be, so our focus is on helping Britain, but helping our colleagues in Europe to understand that everybody can benefit from more effective reforms. Prime Minister Cameron wrote many – a few years ago now, in respect of the single market and the digital market and opening up the trade agreements that we could follow through and cutting out red tape and useless administrative conditions, and that’s where we need to be, with a really effective, streamlined, competent and lean Europe. And I think out of this situation comes a brilliant opportunity to actually prove that the European Union can do what it’s supposed to do, and that it’s become a real powerhouse globally in terms of trade and economics and opportunities and jobs and employment, and all of these, being a world leader in setting down conditions and all of these things. So that’s what we’re focused on.

    To be fair about it, the Department of Finance did commission a report from the Economic, Social and Research Institute, which pointed out the possibilities that might happen were Britain to decide to exit. I don’t contemplate that, to be honest with you, but it did point out the impact on trade and on wages and salaries, and for people it should be really serious and not without a risk. So for us, it’s a critical issue, that’s why we’re here to have the best information from the Prime Minister to, in so far as I can, explain to our European colleagues the importance of all working together here at a time of great uncertainty internationally for a variety of reasons. Here is an opportunity, and the European Union founded on the principles arising out of war from peace and opportunity and all of these things, we can make this happen, and every one of the 28 have got to understand, where there’s a problem in any country, help that country to make it better for everybody.

    Question

    Prime Minister, a British court last week ruled that migrants in Calais are entitled to come to this country if they’ve got a family connection, under human rights laws. Have they got that right?

    And to the Taoiseach, are you concerned that a British vote to leave the European Union could jeopardise the peace process in Northern Ireland?

    Prime Minister

    On the issue of migration and Calais, I think it would be a very bad move to make Calais a magnet for even more people to come by saying there was some sort of direct access from Calais into the UK. That is the wrong approach.

    But factually, it is important to understand that, under the existing Dublin rules, if someone claims asylum in another European country – in France or in Italy or in Germany – and they can prove a direct family connection – a mother, or a father, or a sister, or a brother – then they are able, under the Dublin regulations, to come to Britain, which – I think that’s a different matter, and that’s when we talk about children who might be alone in Europe or elsewhere able to make that claim under the Dublin regulations so they can be reunited with their family. That’s a different matter, and something that is in the Dublin regulations that of course we support.

    Enda Kenny

    In respect of the point you made about the peace process in Northern Ireland: well, the guns are silent, and this has taken a great deal of work from so many people over so many years, and we’ve complimented the politicians who lived up to their responsibility in respect of the Fresh Start, which took ten weeks before Christmas to finalise, but I’m glad that that’s now moving and they’re getting on with implementing the mandate and the responsibility that they have.

    I think it’s important to say that the road out of inequality and the path out of that unfairness is employment and opportunity, and that’s why we have shared trade missions to a number of locations. There’s a great deal of cooperation both in respect of issues of economics and Europe and the agri-sector or trade or whatever else, so these are all shared, which means that the prosperity opportunities for Northern Ireland rise and increase. Chancellor gave the opportunity for the Executive, if they wish, to reduce the level of corporate tax rate in Northern Ireland, to that approaching the Republic. We share that view. Obviously it’s a matter for the Executive to implement in 2018, but that’s going to harmonise the economic opportunity for the island of Ireland.

    We should not put anything like that at risk. And from our perspective, it would create serious difficulties for Northern Ireland were that to happen. So I don’t want to see that happen, and, in so far as we can work, we work on the positive end of this future benefits and potential to come from a strong Britain being part of a strong Europe, and Ireland associated with that, north and south.

    Question

    Taoiseach, over the weekend, you repeatedly refused to rule out doing a deal with Michael Lowry post-selection. Are we going to return to the kind of parish pump deals that Fianna Fáil did with independent TDs if the numbers don’t stack up for Labour and Fine Gael?

    Enda Kenny

    Well, that’s why you want a strong and stable government that has a coherence about it in terms of the progress we have made over the last five years and where we want to be over the next five years. So I would say to people, when they reflect, when the election is actually called and when they start to deal with the issues here, we know where we can be, and obviously our plan is to set out opportunities for further employment, to make work pay, and to keep the recovery moving now, because it’s heading in the right direction. And the first opportunity for people to reflect on that will be when they go to the ballot boxes, and if they want a strong, stable and coherent government, they can vote for the candidates of the Fine Gael party and the Labour party.

    Question

    One follow-up, there, for yourself. Do you have any advice for Mr Kenny on getting a surprise overall majority?

    Prime Minister

    I wouldn’t give advice, but that last answer sounded to me like a long-term economic plan that was working for the people in the Republic. But we work very closely together. The Irish elections are a matter for the Irish electorate. All I know is that we work closely together and we’re looking forward to doing that in the, as I say, months and years to come.

  • Baroness Verma – 2016 Speech at the International Conference on Family Planning

    baronessverma

    Below is the text of the speech made by Baroness Verma, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for International Development, in Bali on 25 January 2016.

    I would like to thank our hosts for inviting me, my fellow honourable Ministers and all conference participants for listening to my words today.

    The UK has put girls and women at the front and centre of our international development work.

    We believe it’s a matter of basic human rights.

    Giving girls and women a choice

    Girls’ and women’s right to have control over their own bodies…to have a voice in their community and country…to live a life free of violence and the fear of violence…to choose who to marry and when…their right to be in education … to determine whether and when to have children and how many to have and their right to work, earn money and build the future they want.

    But gender equality is also also critical to wider development goals…no country can truly develop if it leaves half its population behind.

    We know that when girls stay in school for just one extra year of primary school they can boost their eventual wages by up to twenty per cent.

    And when women get extra earnings, we know they then reinvest that back into their families and back into their communities.

    McKinsey estimate that if women in every country played an identical role in markets to men…as much as twenty eight trillion dollars would be added to the global economy by 2025.

    The same research finds that if every nation only matched the progress of its fastest-improving neighbour, it would add twelve trillion dollars to the global economy.

    Investing in girls and women is the right thing to do…it’s also one of the very best investments we can make.

    Sexual and reproductive health and rights are absolutely fundamental to this. When women have multiple, unintended pregnancies and births – when they face a high risk of dying in childbirth and when they are unable to decide for themselves whether, when and how many children to have, they are also unable to participate fully in education and employment.

    We know rights-based family planning enables a girl to avoid a life trajectory of early, frequent and risky pregnancies, and instead complete her education and take up better economic opportunities.

    These are the essential elements of the demographic transition, the shift from high fertility and mortality to far fewer births and deaths, the shift that ensures investments in gender equality, in education and in training and jobs can be converted into the demographic dividend of higher economic growth and prosperity for all. We’ve seen these policies and process in action in countries across East Asia particularly. We’re ready to support countries in Africa who choose this path.

    Getting back on track

    A lot of progress has been made. But we are not yet on-track to reach the FP2020 goal we all committed to in 2012 at the London Summit. We are failing to reach adolescent girls and young women who want to use family planning. We are failing to reach the poorest. We are failing to meet the reproductive health needs of women and girls in conflict.

    We are failing to change social norms about family planning so that women’s and girls’ rights and their ability to control their own fertility become an ordinary part of life for communities everywhere. These are the changes that will be truly transformational.

    We have come together here in Bali because we are all committed to change. There is much more we all need to do to deliver on the commitments in 2012. If we act now, we can still reach this goal and be on course for universal access by 2030.

    That means truly prioritising family planning . It means budgeting for it, finding the funds for the contraceptives and tackling head-on the discrimination that prevents young people, especially unmarried women and girls, from getting the services they need. It means changing attitudes and social norms so that it is the uncut girl who finishes her education before marriage is valued. It means demonstrating our support publically, encouraging others to do the same and making sure that access to safe and affordable contraception becomes a normal part of life for everyone.

    The UK’s role

    The UK will play our part. Our Government is fully committed to the goal of family planning for all who want it. We will deliver on the ambitious commitment of our Prime Minister. By 2020 this will result in 24 million additional women and girls using modern voluntary contraception. The numbers are important – this is an ambitious agenda. But we also need to ensure that no-one is left behind – and here we explicitly mean adolescents and women and girls living through humanitarian crises.

    That’s why DFID is challenging itself to find innovative ways to meet the family planning needs of young people, including adolescents. And why, in humanitarian crises, DFID’s calls for proposals will now require the sexual and reproductive health and rights of women and girls to be considered. The UK commitment to the renewed Every Woman Every Child Strategy, launched at the UN in September, puts these issues at the heart of our vision for the sector to 2030. We remain committed to supporting progress across the continuum of care, prioritising maternal and newborn health, and addressing HIV, particularly for key populations.

    The UK is very clear – access to voluntary modern contraception is a crucial part of wider sexual and reproductive health and rights – as agreed by the world in Cairo in 1994 and its subsequent reviews. I am therefore proud that the UK government is also a strong voice on the more difficult issues. Access to safe abortion, for example, reduces recourse to unsafe abortion and saves maternal lives. We need the courage to do what the evidence tells us women and girls still need.

    Increasing access to affordable, quality female and male condoms to young people is also critical in order to provide dual protection against unwanted pregnancy as well as HIV and other sexually transmitted infections.

    I am proud that the UK has led the way in supporting the Africa-led movement to end FGM. Ending FGM and ending child marriage are fundamental to girls and women being able to control what happens to their own bodies –and their own lives. The Girl Summit in 2014 in London was a watershed moment which broke the silence on these sensitive and taboo issues. No girl should live with the fear of being cut, the fear of being married too young, the fear of carrying a child too young, the fear of giving birth when her body is not ready, the fear of the potential risks of this – of haemorrhage, of being left with a leaky bladder thanks to obstetric fistula, the real risk of dying.

    We need to act now

    We have a big job ahead of us, but if we step up our collective efforts we can succeed. There are 225 million women and girls who want to use modern contraception and can’t get it. This is a staggering number – yet we know what needs to be done. We need clarity of purpose, everyone needs to focus and get on with it. This is fundamental. We must not fail these millions and millions of women and girls. We cannot fail them. A block on the sexual and reproductive health and rights of women and girls is a block on economic development across the board.

    But we do need to act now. We have a narrow window to get back on track with FP2020 goals. We also have a tremendous opportunity with the new SDGs, whose implementation will be secured or lost in the next few years. The family planning community needs to be at the heart of those discussions. These means a fresh commitment from all of us. And it means talking to other sectors to put the comprehensive sexual and reproductive health and rights for every girl, adolescent, women everywhere, at the centre of absolutely everything to do. Thank you.

  • Jeremy Corbyn – 2016 Speech to the Fabian New Year Conference

    jeremycorbyn

    Below is the text of the speech made by Jeremy Corbyn, the Leader of the Opposition, to the Fabian New Year Conference on 16 January 2016.

    The absence of fairness and the wish for more of it is what drives us into political activity. We want a fair treatment for all, a fairer society and a fairer world.

    Fairness is easily to claim but hard to deliver. David Cameron makes the argument that cuts are fair because it is not fair to burden future generations with debt.

    Superficially, a very compelling argument but how is cutting investment in, and opportunities for, tomorrow’s generation fair? It’s not. It’s deeply unfair.

    And today’s young people are already paying the price:

    The maintenance grant is being abolished – John McDonnell recently joined a demo against that – and nurses’ bursaries are being cut – Heidi Alexander joined the demo about that last week – housing is becoming less affordable whether as a renter or a buyer.

    David Cameron is burdening today’s young adults with more debt than ever. Shackling them with a lifelong fetter on their ability to live independently, to rent or buy their own home, to start a family.

    They don’t believe it’s fair but many people believe the economic crash means cuts have to be made. Not fair, but necessary.

    That is our failure. Our failure to offer a convincing alternative to people who already agreed with us that it isn’t fair. How was it that we couldn’t make a convincing case that fairness was necessary?

    Investing in our future, investment in new infrastructure, industries and jobs is guaranteeing fairness. Investing in housing, new railways, new digital infrastructure creates jobs, creates a social and economic return. Cutting investment, as this government has done, cuts opportunity and cuts fairness.

    Fairness isn’t just an abstract morality that we claim; it is something we together – as Labour – have delivered over decades in Britain.

    Labour governments only became possible when everyone had the vote; men and women, working class as well as the propertied classes. It was the labour movement, the trade unions, the Suffragettes and our Party that campaigned for that to happen.

    Universal suffrage is inherently fair and we used its electoral force to create a fairer Britain.

    Like Tony Benn said “Democracy transferred power from the wallet to the ballot. What people couldn’t afford for themselves, they could vote for instead”.

    We are the party that created the institutions that built a fairer and more equal Britain: we founded the NHS established the safety net of social security we implemented comprehensive education we built council housing we created the Open University we instituted the Human Rights Act and the Equalities Act and the minimum wage.

    And we are the party founded by trade unions – the organisations that deliver fairness in the workplace.

    Anyone can wrap their policies in the language of ‘fairness’, it is only Labour that has delivered fairness through institutions and laws.

    Today the Britain built by Labour fairness is under attack and we have to find new ways to institutionalise fairness in British society again.

    Now, the very basis on which those victories were secured – the vote – is under attack.

    Having narrowly won the general election, the Tories are now trying to rig the system to keep themselves in power, and weaken opposition both inside and outside parliament.

    Late last year they drove through a new voter registration scheme that will slash the number of young and inner-city voters. And later this Parliament they will cut the number of parliamentary seats. The Conservatives are gerrymandering the electoral system to benefit themselves.

    By directly attacking Labour’s funding through their trade union bill and by cutting public Short money support for opposition parties’ research, they are deliberately setting out to constrain democratic accountability.

    Add to that their “gagging law”, which prevents charities, unions and thinktanks from taking part in political debate near election time.

    Their threats to use the BBC’s charter renewal to hack away at its independence;

    Their packing of the House of Lords with Tory peers; their moves to restrict the powers of local councils, it all adds up to a serious attack on democratic rights and freedoms.

    Theirs is the party funded by hedge funds backed by a press owned by multi-millionaire or even billionaire tax avoiders

    Their concept of fairness is of a very different order to ours. Fairness for only a few is not fairness, but privilege.

    Hidden among the fake concern for ‘balancing the books’, is the same hoary old Tory ideology – to shrink the state, to shrink fairness.

    Look at the floods – flood defence schemes up and down the country cut back because of a political ideology that says the state must be shrunk.

    I saw the consequences of that. I met the families who had lost their personal possessions: their photos, children’s toys, family pets – in homes that now have the foul stench of sewage-polluted floodwater.

    I met too with the councils who told us about flood defence schemes cancelled or left unfunded. I met with Environment Agency staff who complained about the cuts to their staffing. I met with Fire & Rescue Service personnel whose numbers have been cut and who still don’t have the statutory responsibility for floods that would mean they had the equipment and kit to better respond.

    Just because the Tories are running the state into the ground, don’t think it’s our public services that are the problem.

    This is the same Tory strategy – they did it with the railways – underfund it, make cuts, run the service down, then offer up privatisation as the solution.

    Cynical dishonest and unfair.

    It’s not just public services though they see only a limited role for the state because they want fairness limited too.

    Their laissez-faire attitude to the steel industry could let a downturn become a death spiral in that sector. While other governments across Europe acted to protect their industry, the Tories let ours close, let jobs go, let communities suffer.

    That is not the Labour way I’ve raised the issue with the Prime Minister, discussed it with the Chinese President and Chinese ministers and diplomats Labour brought together industry, unions, MPs and communities to try to find a solution.

    I visited people in Scunthorpe they are proud of being a steel town, want to work and know how vital that industry is to their town’s prosperity.

    Look across Europe and the support was there – in some cases they took their plants into public ownership to protect vital industry they offered schemes to help with energy costs and they have an industrial strategy and procurement strategies. They don’t let whole regions sink into decline.

    Across Europe too – other countries’ investment in renewable energy leaves Britain languishing as one of the dirtiest, most polluting countries on this continent. This government is failing to invest in our future energy sources – its reckless negligence has seen the UK solar industry diminished.

    But what is even more unfair is the inheritance it leaves our children – a polluted environment and a country without long-term energy security. That too is not the Labour way.

    We are determined to build alliances across Europe for progressive reform to ensure the EU always works in people’s interests.

    Labour backs Britain’s continued EU membership as the best framework for trade and co-operation in the 21st-century along with the protection of human rights through the European Convention.

    But we need to make EU decision-making more accountable to its people put jobs and growth at the heart of European policy strengthen workers’ rights in a real social Europe, and end the pressure to privatise services.

    Most of all, we want a Europe of solidarity that works together to address climate change that doesn’t pull the drawbridge up on free movement that acts together to tackle the refugee crisis, and the causes of refugees – and deals with disgraceful situation in Calais.

    That’s the Europe that is possible and that Labour must work to deliver. I met last month with our sister parties to start to build those working relationships.

    A fairer society – whether in Europe or in Britain – can only be built by working together and by enshrining fairness through institutions and laws.

    This is about transforming our principles into practical policies – what Labour has always done when it has been successful.

    It is guided by this practical fairness that Labour must move forward together.

    I want to set out some of the ideas under discussion – policies to institutionalise fairness in Britain again:

    We are committed to a publicly owned railway, to bring down fares and to get investment in a modern railway – which would be governed not remotely from Whitehall, but by passengers, rail workers and politicians, local and national.

    To democratic control of energy, not as an end in itself, but to bring down costs and to transition to carbon-free energy. Do you know half of German energy suppliers are owned by local authorities, communities and small businesses? There are now over 180 German towns and cities taking over their local electricity grids, selling themselves cleaner, and cheaper, electricity they increasingly produce for themselves That is something we as Labour should want to emulate – and the most innovative Labour councils are starting to do so.

    To integrate health and social care recognising that if you cut social care – as this government has done – then that has a negative impact on the NHS with fewer beds available and longer waits at A&E. If we fund prevention fairly through an integrated strategy, we can save money in the long run without undermining fairness.

    Creating a lifelong education service, so that opportunity is available to all throughout our lives recognising that in the modern era we need to be able to re-train and re-skill our workforce as technology evolves, and industries change. Again this is in sharp contrast to this government’s unfair slashing of college funding and the adult education budget.

    Universal childcare – so that we build on the great Labour legacy of Sure Start and the 15 hours free childcare that has supported so many young parents into work and provided high quality childcare so that all children have the best start in life.

    In workplaces too we must ensure that fairness is hardwired the scandal of SportsDirect has shocked people. So as well as repealing the Tory Trade Union Act when it becomes law, we need a set of rights for all workers from day one to stop exploitation. It was Beatrice Webb who coined the term ‘collective bargaining’ – recognising that together we bargain, alone we beg.

    But we need to go beyond that and ensure that everyone benefits when companies succeed. One proposal is pay ratios between top and bottom so that the rewards don’t just accrue to those at the top of the G7 nations only the US has greater income inequality than the UK pay inequality on this scale is neither necessary nor inevitable.

    Another proposal would be to bar or restrict companies from distributing dividends until they pay all their workers the living wage. Only profitable employers will be paying dividends, if they depend on cheap labour for those profits then I think there is a question over whether that is a business model to which we should be turning a blind eye.

    Too much of the proceeds of growth have accumulated to those at the top. Not only is this unfair, it actually holds back growth – as OECD research has found. A more equal society is not only fairer, it does better in terms of economic stability and wealth creation.

    And a large-scale housebuilding programme – recognising the housing crisis that has been so recklessly exacerbated by this government we need homes that are for families not for investment portfolios. Our country cannot succeed unless everyone can live together in our towns and cities – the cleaner and the city trader the carer and the chief executive a new generation of council housing delivered by councils able to borrow prudentially.

    These are all only suggestions. You – Labour Party members, affiliates and supporters – in this Hall and beyond. You will decide what our policies are policy made by small cliques in small rooms often only brings small returns.

    The passion to change things, to make things better, is what drives us all. Labour needs to hear from all those fired by that passion.

    Ed Miliband expanded the vote to elect the Leader – empowering members and supporters. I want to do the same with our policy-making. We all have ideas; we all have a vision for a fairer Britain and a fairer world.

    Labour will be stronger and more in touch with our communities when it hears from its greatest strength our members, supporters and affiliates.

    Our party is changing our membership has doubled since that defeat in May our party is in a process of regenerating – a difficult process of adjustment for us all at times – but a huge opportunity to breathe life into all sections of the party and draw on the collective wisdom of all.

    Only Labour can offer a vision of a fairer Britain. Let’s work together to create and deliver that fairer Britain.

    Thank you.

  • Jeremy Corbyn – 2016 Speech at Unite Policy Conference

    jeremycorbyn

    Below is the text of the speech made by Jeremy Corbyn, the Leader of the Opposition, at the Unite Policy Conference on 16 January 2016.

    I’m delighted to be here at the first Unite Scottish Policy Conference.

    But I join you at a time when we are facing the greatest attack on the trade union movement and our democracy that we have ever witnessed.

    You will have already heard a lot about the Trade Union Bill, which has now passed through the House of Commons.

    Only the House of Lords stands in the way of the Bill becoming law next year.

    We already have the most restrictive labour laws in Europe they are now moving beyond restricting trade unions, they are trying to take away your voice for good.

    Labour opposed this Bill in the Commons and our peers are opposing it in the Lords I have to tell you in all likelihood, the Bill will become law – and we will have adapt to the new realities it brings.

    But amid those new realities, there is an eternal truth; Politics is about power.

    The word ‘democracy’ itself contains that concept. It is formed of two Greek words: ‘demos’ meaning ‘the people’, and ‘kratos’ meaning ‘to rule’ or ‘to have power’.

    So democracy means ‘the people have the power’. That is, ‘the people have power’, not the Tories in Westminster, not the suits in the boardrooms, not the billionaires ensconced in their tax havens. We, the people.

    But we only realise our power, when we stand together as one.

    Socialist politics is about forcing unaccountable power to be accountable and about stripping the unaccountable of their power.

    Millions of people face unaccountable power every day. At work in their workplace – the boss, the management. They’re not elected by the workforce, they cannot be voted out. They are appointed by those with money.

    They set your pay, decide on your pension, your working hours, your working conditions.

    Never was that more brutally on display that in the Grangemouth dispute and that showed why we must strengthen trade union and employment rights.

    The co-operative movement – the other historic part of our labour movement – was also established to say, ‘there is a different way’ that there is value in every worker and every voice in the workplace.

    People find it when they are sacked without reason, when they cannot afford a lawyer to defend them in court, or when they are sanctioned at the job centre.

    They want you to know your place to do what you’re told without thinking or questioning. To like it or lump it.

    They have the power and you must accept it. I know, I’ve never accepted that either.

    Our labour movement was formed to fight that powerlessness. To put power in the hands of worker, and of all people.

    It is not only at work that people feel this powerlessness.

    People feel it when they can’t get a permanent home because of a lack of council housing, or because buy-to-let landlords have turned housing into an investment opportunity for a few, instead of a home for the many.

    Education is a right not a privilege and it must remain so. We must protect our schools, our colleges and our universities. Education is about us liberating our minds and liberating ourselves.

    We built on our own institutions like the Workers’ Educational Association in 1903 – which still delivers over 14,000 courses a year in England and Scotland, and it was a Labour government that created the Open University.

    We founded the welfare state – the Attlee government inheriting a national debt four times the size that Osborne inherited in 2010.

    It created the NHS, built hundreds of thousands of council homes, and introduced the social security system.

    Today, those institutions of fairness and opportunity – built by our movement – are being systematically dismantled. In Scotland as in England, college funding is being cut, adult education budgets are being slashed. Taking away opportunities from thousands of people.

    If we look back in our history, it was the labour movement that fought for the right to vote – to extend to the working class, and to women.

    Today the Tories are trying to weaken those bonds they are trying to remove 1 million people from the electoral records by rushing through individual electoral registration.

    They know who this will affect: the young, insecure workers, BME communities, the people least likely to vote Tory.

    These gains were only built by Labour governments or the pressure of the labour movement.

    Today those bonds are being renewed and more people are coming back to Labour.

    But even as those bonds are being renewed, the Tories’ Trade Union Bill is trying to break them by cutting off trade union funding to the Labour Party.

    The Labour Party got a long wrong in the past, we let working people down – including here in Scotland ­- and we need to win back trust.

    The Labour Party has changed and is changing still the Labour Party standing at the May elections is a different party, with a renewed sense of social justice at its heart. There will be no support from this Labour Party for disastrous foreign wars.

    In Kezia Dugdale, we have a dynamic young leader in Scotland who is rebuilding our party. We are fighting the Tories attacks on social security we stopped their cuts to tax credits. We are resisting cuts to Scottish council budgets that pay for schools and social care and Labour councils across Scotland have pledged that they will refuse to implement the Tories’ Trade Union Bill. We appeal to the SNP to work with us to derail this Bill.

    Whether it’s the trade unions, the Labour Party, the welfare state or public services like colleges or the health and safety executive these institutions are under attack because they are the basis of our power.

    We as the labour movement have to take a new approach the labour movement – the trade unions and the next Labour government working together to eradicate the scourge of in-work poverty.

    By doing so we can tackle the exploitative casualisation of the workforce – and make work a source of security.

    I was elected on a platform of extending democracy in every part of the country and every part of society giving people a real say in their communities and workplaces, breaking open the closed circle of Westminster and Whitehall – and yes, of boardrooms too.

    We are setting up a commission for workplace rights it will be led by my shadow minister for trade unions, the former President of the National Union of Mineworkers, Ian Lavery MP.

    Not only will we repeal the Trade Union Bill when we get back in 2020 we will extend people’s rights in the workplace – and give employees a real voice in the organisations they work for.

    That means new trade union freedoms and collective bargaining rights of course because it is only through collective representation that workers have the voice and the strength to reverse the race to the bottom in pay and conditions.

    The Tories are determined to tip the scales still further in the direction of the employer. That same rigging of workplace power is what has led directly to the explosion in executive pay and boardroom excess while low wages and insecure employment have mushroomed under Cameron.

    Myself and Ian Lavery want your input as we draw up policy for the world of work fit for the 21st century.

    Over half of the 422,000 people who voted in the Labour leadership election, voted online and even the Tories used online voting to select their London mayoral candidate.

    But they don’t want us to have equal rights to do the same one rule for them and another for us.

    We will also modernise trade union balloting.

    Trade unions should be allowed to ballot their members online and securely in their workplace.

    The Tories boast that there are record numbers in employment.

    But don’t just look at the quantity of that employment, but the quality too.

    It is no coincidence that the quality of jobs has declined as trade union membership has also declined.

    It is also no coincidence that productivity has declined as trade union strength has weakened. Trade unions force employers to invest in their workplace and their workforce unionised workplaces mean greater job security, and if workers are staying then employers invest in them.

    We also need to redouble our efforts to promote equality – to reduce and eradicate the gender pay gap partly that is about stopping discrimination against women workers, and partially about ensuring an equality of status and pay for the sectors in which women workers dominate; care, cleaning and catering.

    It is our movement, the labour movement, that challenged this way of thinking that found practical solutions to this wielding of power.

    It was Labour’s Barbara Castle who started that process with the Equal Pay Act 45 years ago. It’s time it was implemented by all employers in the spirit in which it was intended.

    We founded trade unions to bring people together in their workplace to provide a counterweight to the power of the owners and to management.

    The Tory party was founded when working class people didn’t have the vote. The Tories’ purpose remains to keep power from the majority that the only wealth creators are billionaire tax dodgers.

    They believe they have a divine right to rule and they are currently stuffing the House of Lords with Tory peers to weaken opposition to their divisive agenda.

    After the travesty of the Poll Tax, the Labour government delivered devolution, which has meant you as a country can make different choices; over health, education and housing.

    Democracy means you can make your own choices based on your values. We as the labour movement always fight for the extension of democracy at every level and in every sphere.

    That is the historic mission of the labour movement to share power in more and more hands they want to restrict it in fewer and fewer hands.

    When you act together in solidarity when we realise our collective power, then we stop being individuals who get things done to us we become a force that can make choices and determine our own destiny.

    We say austerity is a political choice not an economic necessity because it is true and it is empowering. It is not inevitable, it is something that can be resisted and stopped.

    And when the Scottish Parliament receives more powers over tax and welfare, the Scottish Parliament should harness those powers to end austerity in Scotland.

    For workers and trade unions too, the rate of technological advance can be disorientating and a threat to jobs. But why should it be?

    Why isn’t it the case that making labour less intensive, making our work easier, is something we all share in? Why is it only the bosses who benefit by reducing costs or making higher profits?

    There is a better way.

    The best way to get job security, get a pay rise, or win equal pay is through well-organised unions in every workplace.

    You are the most effective opposition to the Tories’ austerity agenda and you also stand in the way of their plans for privatisation.

    This Tory government wants to sell the goods and services we have collectively built over generations.

    They want to row back every gain that we have made together. But we can resist and we can defeat them.

    I want to pay tribute to all the Labour led local authorities who have promised not to assist in the draconian attacks this Trade Union Bill represents.

    That spirit of resistance and rebellion is what won us democracy it is what built trade unions it is what will enable us to see off austerity and this Tory government.

    The slogans of our movement are not empty slogans they are truths learned in struggle. United we stand, divided we fall. Unity is strength. The workers united will never be defeated.

    We will defeat this government. We will defeat austerity when Labour gets back into power:

    We will repeal the Trade Union Bill and extend employment rights

    We will bring the railways back into public ownership

    We will democratise our energy so that communities are in control

    We will rebuild a social security system that is about support, not sanctions

    We will build a fairer society, together.

    Thank you.

  • Theresa May – 2016 Statement on Alexander Litvinenko Report

    theresamay

    Below is the text of the statement made by Theresa May, the Home Secretary, in the House of Commons on 21 January 2016.

    With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement about the death of Alexander Litvinenko on 23 November 2006, and the statutory Inquiry into that death, which published its findings this morning.

    Mr Litvinenko’s death was a deeply shocking event. Despite the ongoing police investigation, and the efforts of the Crown Prosecution Service, those responsible have still not been brought to justice.

    In July 2014 I established a statutory Inquiry in order to investigate the circumstances surrounding Mr Litvinenko’s death, to determine responsibility for his death, and to make recommendations. It was chaired by Sir Robert Owen, a retired senior High Court judge. And it had the Government’s full support, and access to any relevant material, regardless of its sensitivity.

    I welcome the Inquiry’s report today, and I would like to put on record my thanks to Sir Robert Owen for his detailed, thorough, and impartial investigation into this complex and serious matter. Although the Inquiry cannot assign civil or criminal liability, I hope that these findings provide some clarity for Alexander Litvinenko’s family, friends, and all those affected by his death. I would particularly like to pay tribute to Mrs Marina Litvinenko and her tireless efforts to get to the truth.

    The independent Inquiry has found that Mr Litvinenko died on 23 November 2006, having suffered a cardiac arrest as a result of acute radiation syndrome, caused by his ingesting polonium 210 on 1 November 2006.

    He ingested the fatal dose of Polonium 210 while drinking tea at the Pine Bar of the Millennium Hotel on the afternoon of 1 November 2006. The Inquiry – which in the course of its investigations has considered “an abundance of evidence” – has found that Mr Litvinenko was deliberately poisoned by Andrey Lugovoy and Dmitri Kovtun, who he had met at the Millennium Hotel on the afternoon of that day.

    The Inquiry has also found that Lugovoy and Kovtun were acting on behalf of others when they poisoned Mr Litvinenko. There is a strong probability that they were acting under the direction of the Russian domestic security service – the Federal Security Service or FSB. And the Inquiry has found that the FSB operation to kill Mr Litvinenko was probably approved by Mr Patrushev, the then head of the FSB, and by President Putin.

    The Government takes these findings extremely seriously – as I am sure does every member of this House. We are carefully considering the report’s findings in detail, and their implications. In particular, the conclusion that the Russian state was probably involved in the murder of Mr Litvinenko is deeply disturbing. It goes without saying that this was a blatant and unacceptable breach of the most fundamental tenets of international law and of civilised behaviour. But we have to accept this does not come as a surprise. The Inquiry confirms the assessment of successive governments that this was a state sponsored act. This assessment has informed the Government’s approach to date.

    Since 2007 that approach has comprised a series of steps to respond to Russia and its provocation. Some of these measures were immediate, such as the expulsion of a number of Russian embassy officials from the UK. Others are ongoing, such as the tightening of visa restrictions on Russian officials in the UK. The Metropolitan Police Service’s investigation into Mr Litvinenko’s murder remains open. And I can tell the House today Interpol notices and European Arrest Warrants are in place so that the main suspects, Andrey Lugovoy and Dmitri Kovtun, can be arrested if they travel abroad.

    In light of the report’s findings the Government will go further, and Treasury Ministers have today agreed to put in place asset freezes against the two individuals.

    At the time the independent Crown Prosecution Service formally requested the extradition of Mr Lugovoy from Russia. Russia refused to comply with this request – and has consistently refused to do so ever since. It is now almost ten years since Mr Litvinenko was killed. Sir Robert Owen is unequivocal in his finding that Andrey Lugovoy and Dmitri Kovtun killed him. In light of this most serious finding, Russia’s continued failure to ensure that the perpetrators of this terrible crime can be brought to justice is unacceptable. I have written to the Director of Public Prosecutions this morning asking her to consider whether any further action should be taken, both in terms of extradition and freezing criminal assets. These decisions are, of course, a matter for the independent Crown Prosecution Service. But the Government remains committed to pursuing justice in this case.

    We have always made our position clear to the Russian government and in the strongest possible terms and we are doing so again today. We are making senior representations to the Russian Government in Moscow. And at the same time we will be summoning the Russian Ambassador in London to the Foreign Office, where we will express our profound displeasure at Russia’s failure to co-operate and provide satisfactory answers. Specifically, we have, and will continue to demand that the Russian Government account for the role of the FSB in this case.

    The threat posed by hostile states is one of the most sensitive issues that I deal with as Home Secretary. Although not often discussed in public, our security and intelligence agencies have always – dating back to their roots in the First and Second World Wars – had the protection of the UK from state threats at the heart of their mission. This means countering those threats in all their guises – whether from assassinations, cyber attacks, or more traditional espionage. By its nature this work is both less visible and necessarily more secret than the police and the agencies’ work against the terrorist threat, but it is every bit as important to the long-term security and prosperity of the United Kingdom.

    The House will appreciate that I cannot go into detail about how we seek to protect ourselves from hostile state acts. But we make full use of the measures at our disposal from investigatory powers right through to the visa system. And the case of Mr Litvinenko demonstrates once again why it is so vital that the intelligence agencies maintain their ability to detect and disrupt such threats.

    The environment in which espionage and hostile state intelligence activities take place is changing. Evolving foreign state interests and rapid technological advances mean it is imperative we respond. Last November the Chancellor announced that we will make new funding available to the security and intelligence agencies to provide for an additional 1,900 officers. And, in the same month, I published the draft Investigatory Powers Bill so that we can ensure that the intelligence agencies’ capabilities keep pace with the threat and technology, while at the same time improving the oversight of and safeguards for the use of investigatory powers.

    In the Government’s recently published National Security Strategy and the Strategic Defence and Security Review, we set out the range of threats to the UK and our allies – including from Russia – and our comprehensive approach to countering these threats. Since the publication of the previous SDSR in 2010, Russia has become more authoritarian, aggressive, and nationalist. Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and its destabilising actions in Ukraine have directly challenged security in the region. These actions have also served as a sobering demonstration of Russia’s intent to try to undermine European Security, and the rules-based international order. In response, the UK, in conjunction with international partners, has imposed a package of robust measures against Russia. This includes sanctions against key Russian individuals, including Mr. Patrushev who is currently the Secretary to the Russian Security Council.

    This Government is clear that we must protect the UK and her interests from Russia- based threats, working closely with our allies in the EU and NATO. This morning I have written to my counterparts in EU, NATO and 5 Eyes countries drawing their attention to both the report and the need to take steps to prevent such a murder being committed on their streets.

    We will continue to call on President Putin, for Russia, as one of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, to engage responsibly and make a positive contribution to global security and stability. They can, for example, play an important role in defeating Daesh, and – together with the wider international community – help Syria work towards a stable future.

    We face some of the same challenges – from serious crime to aviation security. And we will continue to engage, guardedly, with Russia where it is strictly necessary to do so to support the UK’s national interest.

    Mr Speaker, Sir Robert Owen’s report contains one recommendation within the closed section of his report. Honourable Members and Rt Honourable Members will appreciate that I cannot reveal details of that recommendation in this House. But I can assure them that the Government will respond to the Inquiry Chair on that recommendation in due course.

    Finally, I would like to reiterate the Government’s determination to continue to seek justice for the murder of Mr Litvinenko. I would like to repeat my thanks to Sir Robert Owen and, in particular, Marina Litvinenko. As Sir Robert says in his Report, she has shown “dignity and composure” and “has demonstrated a quiet determination to establish the true facts of her husband’s death that is greatly to be commended.”

    Mr Litvinenko’s murder was a truly terrible event. I sincerely hope that for the sake of Marina and Anatoly Litvinenko, for the sake of Mr Litvinenko’s wider family and friends, and for the sake of justice, those responsible can be brought to trial. I commend this statement to the House.

  • David Cameron – 2016 Speech in the Czech Republic

    davidcameron

    Below is the text of the speech made by David Cameron, the Prime Minister, in Prague in the Czech Republic on 22 January 2016.

    Well thank you very much Bohuslav for those warm words.

    I’m delighted to be back here in Prague today.

    This visit has been an opportunity to discuss our strong bilateral relationship.

    Our 2 countries have a great history of working together. I think of the brave Czech airmen who flew with the Royal Air Force in World War 2, I think of our armies fighting side by side in Afghanistan and our shared commitment today to an open and competitive European Union and also, as you said quite rightly, fighting against terrorism and extremism which are the threats to our countries and our world.

    It’s also been an opportunity, as you said, to discuss the progress we are making in reforming the UK’s relationship with the EU to address the concerns that the British people have about our membership.

    And it’s also an opportunity to discuss the challenges posed by the migration crisis and how we can work together as European allies to address this crisis, including through the Syria donors conference I am hosting in London next month.

    Let me say a few words about each of these areas.

    Firstly, EU reform. We agreed at the last European Council that we would work to find solutions in each of the 4 areas I have set out – on economic governance, on sovereignty, on competitiveness and on welfare.

    The British people want to see a stronger role for national parliaments and an acceptance that ever closer union is not the aim of all.

    They want new rules to govern the relationship between those inside the eurozone and those outside.

    And they think, and I think, much more should be done to make the EU a source of growth and jobs – cutting back needless bureaucracy and driving forward completion of both the single market and trade deals with the fastest growing parts of the world.

    I support the principle of free movement and I greatly value the contribution that many Europeans, including Czechs, make to Britain.

    But the challenge British people have identified is the scale of the vast movement of people we have seen across Europe over the last decade and the pressure that can put on public services.

    That is the problem we need to address.

    It is hard work – because what we’re looking for is real and substantive change.

    But I firmly believe there is a pathway to an agreement.

    We’ve had very positive discussions about all of these things here today. And preparations for the discussion at the February European Council are now well underway in Brussels. So I’m confident that with the help of European partners, with good will, we will be able to get there and find genuinely mutually satisfactory conclusions.

    We have also discussed today the importance of continuing to work closely together to find a comprehensive solution to the migration crisis, of securing a stronger external EU border – and of doing much more to help the vulnerable refugees in the region.

    We agreed we need to continue to pursue a comprehensive approach that tackles the problem at source and stops migrants from making the perilous journey to Europe.

    This is a problem facing the entire region, and Europe needs to work in unison to tackle it.

    Britain is playing its full part, with over £1.1billion already committed to the humanitarian effort in Syria and the resettlement of over 1,000 Syrian refugees in the UK and plans to resettle 19,000 more.

    And of course I will be hosting the international Syria donors conference in London next month as I said.

    I hope we can all work together to raise funds for refugees in the region. And I want us to address longer-term issues around jobs and education, giving those vulnerable people real hope and opportunities for the future.

    Above all, thank you very much Prime Minister Sobotka for welcoming us here today.

  • George Osborne – 2016 Speech at Davos

    gosborne

    Below is the text of the speech made by George Osborne, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, at Davos on 22 January 2016.

    It’s great to be here again speaking to British business leaders.

    I’m glad to see so many familiar faces.

    It takes me back to the last time I spoke at this lunch, four years ago.

    I spoke then of the sombre mood at Davos, and of the great challenges facing both the British and European economy.

    Back then we were still struggling to recover from the financial crash that brought us to the brink, and the great recession that did so much damage.

    As a new Chancellor, I had set out a clear economic plan for us to follow. We would tackle the crisis in our public finances.

    We would cut business taxes and boost enterprise.

    We would take the difficult long term steps to ensure a lasting private sector recovery rather than pump up the public sector balance sheet still further and risk catastrophe.

    I described it as “a hard road to a better future.”

    But by the time I spoke here to you, the enemies of that plan and our long term solution were circling.

    There was talk of a double dip recession.

    Our unemployment rate had just hit its peak of 8.5%. Real wages were falling.

    The clamour for plan B – and a return to spending and borrowing – was growing.

    But you – the British business community – never wavered. You kept faith with our plan – plan A.

    You understood there was no easy shortcut to the work Britain had to do. You kept your nerve and so did we.

    And I want to thank you all for the role you have played over these years – for your support and commitment to the difficult choices we’ve taken to turn Britain around.

    And the results have been there for all to see.

    Britain has been one of the fastest growing advanced economies in the world these past few years.

    This week we saw our unemployment fall again to almost 5%.

    And now we’ve got the highest employment rate in our history.

    Real wages are growing.

    The deficit as a share of GDP is down to nearly a third of what it was with solid public finance data this morning.

    On the back of this, business investment is forecast to grow at 7.4% this year – the fastest growth since before the crisis.

    That shows your confidence in the UK economy.

    I’m proud of these economic achievements.

    And I think you should all be proud too.

    Because much of the success of our economy is down to you – you’re the job creators, the innovators, the providers of opportunity.

    And thanks to you, the UK has been a bright spot in the world economy.

    We have been a chink of light cutting through the global gloom.

    But that gloomy backdrop means we cannot rest or become complacent.

    Some seem to think the job is done and we can afford to let up.

    The new year is only three weeks old, and already I’m facing calls to abandon our public spending controls and borrow freely.

    That would be precisely the wrong response.

    We need to continue to implement our long term economic plan. We need to keep cool heads as the market heats up.

    Now, as much as ever, we need to go on putting our own house in order.

    For as I’ve said, we face a dangerous cocktail of risks from the global economy. Everyone here in Davos is discussing China’s slowdown, and plunging oil prices.

    And here’s a sobering fact:

    2016 has been the worst start to a year for the financial markets in my lifetime.

    And I’m not so young anymore.

    Oil is now around $30 a barrel.

    Let’s be clear: cheaper energy is helpful to many of you here – and to British families.

    But the speed of the drop has hit oil-producing emerging economies hard.

    And Iran – OPEC’s second biggest member – is now bringing on more supply.

    Long term that is good news, but we could all do with a little less of this volatility in our lives.

    Meanwhile, as corporate earnings seasons kicks off in the US, there are reports it could be a weak one.

    With some people already querying the US rate rise.

    It adds up to a hazardous mix.

    But my message today is one of confidence: we can meet these risks and overcome them, if we stick to our plan.

    We are all here to talk about the future – for your businesses, for our countries. So I wanted explain what the best antidote for the dangerous cocktail is.

    To offer concrete proposals on how the global economy needs to change.

    And explain how we plan to reform Britain’s economy too.

    The Chinese are fond of their proverbs and they have a good saying.

    They say that “talk does not cook rice.”

    It is simple, it is true, and it is particularly relevant now.

    There’s a lot of transition taking place – transition that is difficult and turbulent, yes; but transition that is fundamentally positive too.

    We know that China is transitioning from investment to consumption.

    We know that global oil markets are in transition, with new suppliers like Iran and new technologies like shale.

    We know that interest rates in the US are in transition.

    And we know there are big forces at work as the demographics of many Western nations change, altering the balance between investment and savings.

    These are the shifting tectonic plates of the global economy.

    So since we all know they are shifting, we should also know that those shifts create tremors.

    The question is: how large will those tremors be?

    And the question for all of us here is: do we just talk about this transition – or do we take the action, and show the political will, to adjust to this transition and make it as smooth as possible?

    You will hear, here at Davos, any number of political leaders promise reform.

    What we need to see are the results.

    We need to see every shoulder at the wheel.

    Every country acting as one in search of growth.

    We need China to keep reforming. To deliver on the commitments in the Fifth Plenum to allow markets to play a greater role as it consistently says it wants.

    We need Japan to stick to all three arrows of its bold plan. To deliver not just stimulus but the structural change to deliver the sustainably higher growth rates it so badly needs.

    In countries like Russia and Brazil we need greater efforts to diversify, away from state owned companies and to increase investment, particularly in infrastructure.

    And in our continent of Europe I’m tired of seeing yet more action plans for completing the single market and yet more calls for free trade deals. I want to see those plans put into effect.

    That is part of the reform we are now seeking in the EU.

    Our global institutions can play their part too – and up their ambition.

    The theme of Davos this year is the digital economy.

    And we should give our global institutions a reboot.

    Take trade.

    Opening up markets with trade deals can help all your businesses grow, helping every economy you operate in.

    I welcome the recent trade agreements in Nairobi, but it is simply unacceptable that the Doha Round of trade talks that were kicked off in 2001 have still not been concluded.

    It is no easy task but the World Trade Organisation has a strong leader. Let’s get behind him.

    Or take the IMF.

    The IMF tells us reforming the supply side of economies by backing competition can boost growth.

    So I want the Fund to hold countries feet to the fire – tell us when we are not doing enough to reform.

    Christine Lagarde has shown real leadership and guided the IMF through a very difficult period with integrity and intelligence.

    I was the Finance Minister who proposed her for the job 5 years ago.

    Yesterday I nominated her again, for a second term, so she can complete the job.

    And we will need more from the G20 too.

    China will lead this year and the focus – on trade, and on competitive reforms – dovetail with what we need from the WTO and the IMF.

    Working together across these institutions we should make it a year of action.

    For as that Chinese saying goes, talk does not cook rice.

    And in turbulent times we need action to deliver economic security at home. At its heart are sound public finances.

    When we came to office in 2010 the deficit was over 10% of GDP. £1 in every £4 the country spent had to be borrowed.

    We’ve dramatically reduced that deficit – but it remains too high. So does our debt.

    The Budget last summer and the Spending Review that followed took further difficult decisions so that we turn that deficit into a surplus.

    I said at the time that we needed that surplus as the precaution against tough times ahead. People said it wasn’t necessary, we should run a deficit forever.

    I think events at the start of this new year have borne out our judgement. They serve as a salutary reminder that we need to do everything we can to fix our public finances and build our resistance for whatever lies ahead.

    Reducing government spending is easy to talk about; but hard to deliver.

    Every government budget has its pressure groups who will go on our TV and radio to defend every pound we spend. But we have persevered in the patient work of saving money and reducing borrowing.

    In the UK we are seeing what independent observers like the OBR describe as the most sustained reduction in government consumption in over 100 years.

    Indeed, it’s the biggest fiscal consolidation any G7 economy has achieved in modern history.

    You, the business community, have consistently backed us as we’ve taken these difficult decisions – because you know that there`s no security unless a country lives within its means.

    Just as we’ve put the public purse on a stable footing we’ve radically reformed financial stability too.

    People ask me about whether we’re keeping an eye on levels of private debt. Yes we are.

    Indeed, I created the new Financial Policy Committee in the Bank of England precisely to spot those kind of risks.

    The Committee has already taken action to limit bubbles in the housing market, and require our banks to hold more capital.

    It’s looking at Buy-to-Let mortgages and it’s made it very clear it will take further action if needed.

    For economic security is a foundation that every working person and every company operating in our country gains from.

    Sound public finances, a sound financial system.

    These don’t happen by accident.

    They’re not a consequence of speeches… They require hard decisions, persistence and action. And we are delivering it.

    Of course, stability is essential, but it is not by itself enough.

    After all, graveyards are pretty stable places.

    We need a dynamic economy.

    We need major reforms to improve our productivity, which is the key to sustained rises in living standards.

    We start with education and skills.

    It’s been a perennial British weakness. Lots of governments have talked about it as a priority.

    But changing schools, demanding excellence and driving up standards is easier said than done.

    The vested interests gather. The unions circle the wagon around the status quo.

    But we’ve challenged that status quo – and I think people will look back on the far-reaching reforms we’ve made to schools under Michael Gove and Nicky Morgan as one of the most important economic and social reforms any post-war government has undertaken.

    Five years ago 200 schools were academies; today over 5000 are.

    Our reforms mean 1.4 million more pupils are being taught in good or outstanding schools.

    Our reforms mean millions of new apprenticeships, giving young people the chance to learn a trade.

    And despite all the protests, we raised student loans and now our universities are flourishing, many rank among the best in the world, and more kids from low income backgrounds are going to college than ever before.

    Now under the leadership of my friend and colleague Sajid Javid we’re pushing forward with more apprenticeships funded by a levy, more improvements in schools and university reforms – again bitterly opposed – but absolutely right.

    Not just talking about excellence, but delivering it.

    As well as investing in people we must invest in hard infrastructure

    In Victorian times we led the world in rail.

    The first inter-city railway in the world was British, the fastest steam locomotive in history was British.

    But then we fell back.

    Now I want us to get back the cutting edge, building new high speed lines.

    Again, we faced opposition. Everyone is in favour of infrastructure in general until you propose something specific. But now the budgets for HS2 are set, the legislation is going through Parliament and construction will soon begin.

    We’re also backing the largest road investment programme since the 1970s, building new nuclear power and investing in renewable energy too.

    And we’re now trying to instil long term thinking in all our infrastructure planning – taking it out of the day-to-day political fight.

    Crossrail took 20 years to get off the ground because a political consensus couldn’t be found.

    It was the first project I was asked to cancel, and the first project I gave the green light to – and now this awe-inspiring underground railway is taking shape.

    I’m not going to stand by and let British people travel for longer to work, or pay more for their utilities just because we struggle to get political consensus for the big decisions.

    That’s precisely why I wanted to set up the National Infrastructure Commission – it’s why I reached out for the very best person to help me set it up in Andrew Adonis.

    And now I’m looking forward to reading their first report before the Budget on how we can improve transport in the north and in London and every region across the country.

    We are also committed to creating a competitive economy. Now again, we know, competition doesn’t always happen if you leave it to the market alone.

    That’s why in November we published a new plan to break up monopolies and back new entrants.

    Why shouldn’t customers choose their water provider? Why can’t more pharmacies deliver drugs online? Why can’t supermarkets offer legal services? Of course, there will be protests from those whose businesses are shielded by existing regulation.

    We need action to let competition flourish, back the new company that doesn’t always have a seat at events like this, and put the customers first.

    And we need to improve connectivity.

    We start from a decent base: British households are pretty savvy when it comes to the internet.

    The average Briton spends £1500 online each year with the internet contributing more than 10% of our GDP – higher than anywhere else in the G20.

    We are the top destination in Europe for Foreign Direct Investment and the leading FinTech hub in Europe.

    These are encouraging signs. Because a digital economy is a productive one

    But here’s another statistic for you: just a 10% increase in the UK’s digital density could add £40 billion to GDP by 2020.

    Those are the sort of gains we must grab

    That’s why we will be publishing our far-reaching Digital Strategy this year, setting out what we will do to ensure that the benefits of digital are felt throughout the economy.

    And we must go on building stronger and deeper links with the rest of the world.

    That’s why events like this are important Because yes, it is true that growth in emerging markets has slowed recently, down from 7.5% a year in 2010 to 4% a year in 2015.

    But even with this slower pace of growth, the emerging economies are still expected to have accounted for 70% of all the growth in the world in 2015.

    We don’t deliver sustained growth by becoming insular and isolated.

    We’ll protect ourselves by reaching out to the world and broadening our links.

    By looking to each and every trading opportunity.

    So that we are doing business with many countries, and many sectors. That`s why we are determined to pursue reform of the EU and achieve a better relationship for Britain with our European partners, as David Cameron explained yesterday.

    That’s why, earlier this week I welcomed Indian Finance Minister Arun Jaitley in Downing Street and we reaffirmed the strength of our economic relationship, jointly announcing the upcoming issuance of the first-ever Indian offshore Rupee bond in London – cementing our future as the world’s centre of finance.

    And it’s why I hosted the first ever UK – Brazil Economic and Financial Dialogue in London at the end of last year.

    These relationships help to boost trade for British businesses – exports from the UK to the emerging economies have increased by 16.5% since 2010. And let me just say a few more words about China.

    We want China to rebalance.

    All of the troubling statistics – slowing energy use, low metals demand—are signs of the same thing, a shift to a consumption based economy.

    So my main message on China is that we won’t rubberneck and fret about each new bump on the road.

    We’re in it for the long haul.

    We are going to support China on the difficult route of economic reform that it is following.

    We want to be China’s best partner in the West.

    Some say the stock market volatility in China means we’re wrong to strengthen our economic ties.

    But those critics can’t look beyond the next days’ headlines.

    China is an economic colossus, it is the second biggest economy on the planet. It’s a huge part of our world’s future.

    Any economy that size you want to trade with, whether it is growing at 7%, 6% or 5%.

    Even at this growth rate, China will add an economy equivalent to the size of Germany’s to world output by the end of this decade. So we strengthen our links across the world.

    But we will only thrive as an outward looking nation that wants to trade with the world if we have a pro-business government.

    So my aim, and what I’m working to achieve, is making Britain the best place to be a global firm.

    For five years we’ve unashamedly backed business, large and small.

    You asked us to set a permanent level for the Annual Investment Allowance; we did that and made it bigger too. At £200,000: it’s at its highest ever permanent level.

    You asked us to reform R&D tax relief, so we made it more generous.

    You asked us to deal with the punitive 50% income tax rate because it was destroying enterprise – and though it was not popular, I cut it.

    But the business tax reform I am most proud of is the reform we’ve made to corporation tax.

    When I became Chancellor it stood at 28% – and as a result, Britain did not stand out as a low tax destination for business. Today it does.

    In Budget after Budget I’ve cut the rate – from 28% to 20%. The lowest in the G20.

    I could stop there. Let other countries catch up. Or we could press on and press home our advantage.

    The future favours the bold. So I’m cutting corporation tax again, to 19% and then to 18% by the end of the decade.

    Let us forge ahead and let others follow our dust tracks.

    Overall the business tax cuts we’ve announced since 2010 will be worth nearly £100 billion to business this decade.

    To repeat, that is £100 billion of support.

    At times when we’ve had to make many other difficult decisions on the public finances I hope those facts make my priorities clear.

    And I want to assure you of another thing.

    That these choices are born from deeply held views I hold about enterprise and free markets.

    I`ll be frank with you: There aren’t many votes in cutting taxes for business.

    And so we don’t pander to business to win your votes.

    We support firms like yours because we honestly believe that the business community shows some of the best British values.

    Of self-reliance, of building for the future.

    Of innovating to solve problems, and of open and fair competition.

    That is what the UK is about.

    That`s what this government is about.

    That is what your businesses do. And without your success there are no jobs, no resources for public services, no future.

    We’ve all come a long way together since I spoke to you at this lunch four years ago.

    There were bumps on the way, but we stuck to the course. Now, as markets around the world heat up, we in Britain will keep a cool head.

    Because we have further to go to achieve our aim – and become the most prosperous major economy in the world by 2030s.

    My door is always open to you.

    I will need your ideas to achieve that goal.

    And I’m looking forward to working with you all in the years to come to make it happen.

    For, as the team who’ve provided this meal today know: talk, my friends, does not cook rice.