UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: 2019

  • Matt Hancock – 2019 Speech on the NHS People Plan

    Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Secretary of State for Health, at the East London Foundation Trust on 3 June 2019.

    1.3 million people in the NHS.

    If we were a country, we’d be the same size as Estonia. If we were a company, we’d be almost the same size as McDonald’s – but a lot better for you than a Big Mac.

    Since I became health secretary I’ve tried to meet as many staff, from as many different parts of the NHS, as possible. Admittedly, meeting 1.3 million people individually is difficult.

    I’ve spoken to hundreds of nurses, doctors, paramedics, porters, juniors, seniors, consultants, chief executives. I’ve tried to listen and I’ve tried to listen hard.

    And what’s clear is that people are the most valuable asset the NHS has. How we invest in, and look after, our people will determine the future of the NHS.

    And that future is so important because the NHS is the most valuable public service we have.

    A strong NHS, and strong public services, are the foundations of a strong society. So Britain must continue to be a place where we invest in people because we believe in the potential of people to make things better.

    It’s why we appointed Prerana Issar as the first ever NHS Chief People Officer. And it’s why Dido and her team have created the first ever NHS People Plan.

    I am extremely grateful to both of them because taking better care of our people is mission critical to the success of the NHS.

    Now, I know your time is valuable. So I’m not going to waffle on. And if you saw Good Morning Britain, you’ll know I’ve already been caught out once for too much waffle.

    So I’m going to be short today. And I’m going to be direct.

    I want to talk to you about 3 people. Three people who illustrate where we’ve come from, where we are now, and where we need to get to.

    Recruitment, retention, and an NHS that puts people first.

    The first person is a nurse. She, or he, doesn’t live in this country – yet.

    They’re in the Philippines, or India, or Poland, or any other number of countries around the world.

    They look to the NHS as a beacon of excellence, and of opportunity. Somewhere they can come to, to be the best nurse they can possibly be.

    Somewhere they can learn new skills, earn money, and return home as a world-class nurse, or stay and build a new home and a better life here in Britain.

    To that nurse I say: we welcome you, we need you, we want you to come and help us build an NHS that’s fit for the future.

    Because the National Health Service has always had an international workforce, from the Windrush Generation to the Warsaw Generation.

    We must never forget the enormous contribution that people born beyond these shores have made to one of this nation’s greatest institutions.

    The People Plan spells out how we need a new Windrush Generation for the NHS. A recruitment drive to attract the brightest and best doctors, nurses, and clinical staff from overseas.

    And I want to send a very clear message to those people: if you have the talent, the skills, and the determination to pack up your hopes and dreams in a suitcase and travel to the other side of the world, then the NHS will be your new home.

    Our NHS could not provide its world-class service to patients without the hardworking doctors and nurses from other nations.

    The second person I want to talk about is a British student.

    She, or he, is 18. They’re getting ready for their A-Level exams – hopefully not leaving it as late as I did.

    They were born in this century. Technology has shaped every part of their lives from the way they shop, eat, travel, bank, socialise, and even find love.

    They have more choice at their fingertips than previous generations would have had in a lifetime.

    In fact, there’s so many possibilities that it can be overwhelming. And then a parent, or a perhaps a career adviser, says: “Have you ever thought about becoming a nurse?”

    And this 18-year-old thinks: “I’m good at science, I’m interested in people, caring for others would be a rewarding career.”

    And then they start to look into it. They start to search online for information.

    And what do they see?

    Story after story about shortages, about the stresses and the strains, and only the problems.

    Never or rarely hearing about the nurses who love their jobs and wouldn’t choose to do anything else, despite the difficulties.

    Now, I know there are genuine problems with the system.

    That’s why Dido has taken a long-term approach to the first ever NHS People Plan so we can create a new system that puts people first, and is fit for the future.

    There are shortages. We use too many agency workers when we should have permanent staff.

    The job has become more challenging as the population ages and demand grows.

    Your roles are more complex and you need continuous training and new technology to keep up with the pace of change.

    But I fear that by only talking about the problems, we risk creating a perception that a career in the NHS isn’t for an ambitious, young, British person. Particularly when it comes to nursing.

    Nursing is a first-choice career. An NHS nurse has a passport to anywhere.

    In fact, it’s what makes my job so difficult because we can do a lot of things to convince people to stay in the NHS, but I’m afraid we can’t compete with the Australian sunshine.

    So we’re putting a record £33.9 billion a year into the NHS – and let’s not forget three-quarters of the NHS budget goes on staff.

    We’re opening 5 new medical schools. We’re increasing the number of clinical training places, and we’re increasing the number of routes into nursing through apprenticeships and nursing associates.

    But fundamental to delivering the People Plan, and tackling the nursing shortage in the NHS, is changing the perception of nursing as a career.

    That way we can get the right number of people and the right type of people in the NHS: talented, ambitious, hard-working, committed to caring.

    Third and finally I want to talk about someone who really helped me understand the retention challenge – what it means to you, on the frontline.

    He’s a senior consultant at a London hospital. And he said:

    Matt, when you join the NHS, everybody knows the deal: you work hard, you do everything you can for your patients and your colleagues, you put everything into the job because at the end of it you know you’re going to get a good pension, but that’s under threat. I can’t plan ahead. I’m afraid to take on extra sessions in case I get an unexpected tax bill, and if I was a few years older I’d be thinking about taking early retirement.

    And then he used a graphic but typically medical metaphor to describe the effect it’s having on the NHS. He said:

    Right now it’s like a haemorrhage. If we can stop the bleeding in the first 5 or 10 minutes, we can save the patient, but if we don’t, and we leave it, then we’ll be resuscitating the body.

    So I understand your frustration. Getting pensions right is how we stem the flow and convince our senior staff to stay in the NHS.

    So I’ve listened to you, and I’ve learnt from you, and this is what we’re going to do:

    A new pensions deal for senior nurses, doctors and GPs so you have greater flexibility and control over your pension so you don’t get hit with an unexpected tax bill.

    A new pensions deal that lets you take extra shifts, go for a promotion, and ultimately rewards you for your hard work and dedication, and encourages you to stay.

    We’re going to work with you to change the NHS Pension Scheme so it’s fair to you, fair to the taxpayer, and leads to better care for patients because that must be our goal.

    These proposed reforms recognise the unique role and importance of NHS staff. We want to ensure the NHS Pension Scheme continues to be one of the best around so we can continue to attract the best people.

    But these reforms must work for you, so we will launch a staff consultation across the NHS next month.

    We will have these changes in place by the start of the next tax year. This will allow NHS staff and employers to start planning for the future with confidence and peace of mind.

    And it will ensure the NHS is a place where everyone is looked after, and everyone is treated fairly.

    Making the NHS a better place to work: that’s where we need to get to. This plan is the first step.

    But this journey requires us all to work together: every part of our health service heading in the same direction.

    I’ve made it my mission to get the right technology in the NHS so we can make your lives easier, and give you back the gift of time. So you can do what you came into the job to do: caring for people.

    The NHS of the future will have more tech, more robots, more AI, but it will always have people at its core.

    As the march of the machines removes the jobs that can be replaced by code, so more and more as a society, we’ll need more people doing the jobs no machine can ever do: the caring, the empathy, the connection.

    So, we will make the NHS a more caring employer.

    We will transform the culture.

    The NHS of the future will always put people first.

    Because a strong NHS, and strong public services, is how we build a Britain that always put people first.

    That is a place we all want to get to.

    That’s the country we all want to live in.

    So let’s work together to ensure the NHS is a place where everyone feels valued, where everyone feels cared for, and where everyone can fulfil their potential.

  • Theresa May – 2019 Speech at Eid al-Fitr

    Below is the text of the speech made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, on 4 June 2019.

    I want to send my very best wishes to Muslims at home and around the world celebrating the festival of Eid al-Fitr.

    For more than three million British Muslims, the joyous occasion of Eid, spent with family and loved ones, marks the end of the holy month of Ramadan.

    Over the last month, many British Muslims have shared the holy practices of Ramadan with neighbours of all faiths and none – from doing charity work in the local community to preparing meals for the elderly or coming together to break the fast at the end of the day.

    During Ramadan, as at many other times of the year, I see the very best of the values which unite us all: of tolerance, of respect, and of selflessness.

    Sadly, there are those who only seek to sow division and to spread fear and hatred in our communities. This year we have seen despicable acts of terrorism targeted against Muslims both abroad and on UK soil, on innocent people attending their place of worship or going about their daily lives.

    There can be no place in our societies for the vile ideology that incites hatred and fear, and I stand with Muslims here in the UK and around the world against those who seek to destroy our values.

    So as we come together in celebration this Eid – to share meals and gifts with families, friends and colleagues – let us remain steadfast in the values we share.

    A happy and peaceful celebration to you all.

    Eid Mubarak.

  • Jeremy Hunt – 2019 Statement on 30th Anniversary of Tiananmen Square

    Below is the statement made by Jeremy Hunt, the Foreign Secretary, on 4 June 2019.

    Today we mark 30 years since the tragic events of 4 June 1989, remembering those who lost their lives protesting peacefully in and around Tiananmen Square.

    Over the past 30 years, China has ratified a number of UN instruments relating to human rights. However, people in China are still unable to exercise their right to protest peacefully in China.

    We continue to urge the Chinese Government to respect citizens’ freedom of association, assembly, expression and other fundamental rights and freedoms, as enshrined in China’s constitution and in international law.

  • Philip Hammond – 2019 Speech at the Resolution Foundation

    Below is the text of the speech made by Philip Hammond, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, at the Resolution Foundation on 30 May 2019.

    Thank you Torsten, it’s a great pleasure to be here with you this morning and I welcome your latest report as a valuable contribution to this debate.

    Ten years ago, the world was in the throes of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

    The banking system was broken.

    The economy was in recession.

    People were at risk of losing their jobs and their savings.

    Thanks to our economic plan, and the hard work of the British people, we have turned a corner in our long recovery from that period.

    The economy has grown now for nine straight years.

    The deficit last year was just 1.1% of GDP and our national debt is falling sustainably for the first time in a generation…

    …meaning that, going forward as a nation, we once again have genuine choices.

    And we have, of course, got a remarkable story to tell on jobs – with the employment rate at a record high and unemployment at its lowest point since 1975.

    I am proud of that record – but the job is not yet done.

    We are still dealing with the deepest scars of the recession – in the form of weakened productivity growth, and, especially, low wage growth, which remains below pre-recession levels, despite recent improvements.

    We have, of course, already acted to address the challenge of low wage growth for those on the lowest pay.

    The introduction of the National Living Wage in 2016 gave Britain’s low paid the biggest pay rise in 20 years.

    When we increased the rate again in April, 1.8 million workers were better off.

    The pay of a full-timer on national living wage has risen by £2750 a year since 2016

    And the percentage of jobs defined as low paid, as today’s Resolution Foundation report shows, is at its lowest level since 1980.

    But with around 18% of the workforce still working in low paid jobs, there is more to do.

    Despite the recent good news on wage growth, a decade of low rates of pay increase has slowed the rate of growth in living standards.

    And it has also played into a deeper sense of anxiety about our economic system, about our society and our politics.

    An anxiety which has been exploited by John McDonnell to propose statutory wage rises that would manifestly be unsustainable…

    …and deeply damaging to the interests of those they purport to benefit;

    A plan which is, in the words of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, “risky and dangerous”.

    The truth is that we have seen a gap open up – in Britain and in other developed countries – between the theory of how a market economy and free trade creates and distributes wealth, and the reality experienced by many ordinary people.

    We ignore that gap at our peril because if we do not address it, it will be filled with the reckless promises of the populists.

    But that doesn’t mean we should abandon our economic model.

    As so often is the case, the populists do not have the answers, but they are quick to identify the problems.

    So for those, like me, who believe passionately that harnessing the power of market economics is the only way to deliver progress…

    …it is imperative that we take decisive action to show that the regulated market model can respond to these challenges;

    …to deliver higher wages and higher living standards…

    …as well as providing solutions to the great societal challenges of our age.

    That means building the homes that the next generation needs;

    Supporting people of all ages to embrace technology change through retraining and reskilling, so that technology means higher living standards, not higher unemployment;

    It means closing the gap between our regions through sustained investment in infrastructure;

    And harnessing market-based solutions to show that de-carbonisation and rising living standards can go hand-in-hand.

    But above all, it means delivering rising living standards, through sustainable real wage growth, year after year.

    Of course, over the medium term, sustainable real wage growth is only possible through productivity growth.

    That’s why I have redirected government resources to that goal, through record levels of investment in infrastructure, a renewed focus on skills, and a relentless programme of support for innovation in the economy.

    But raising Britain’s productivity is a medium-term challenge. And there is some evidence to suggest that the continued availability of flexible, low-cost labour, may undermine the incentive for productivity-enhancing investment.

    So if we are going to meet our ambition of making the economy work for everyone, one of the best levers we have is to deliver carefully considered increases to the National Living Wage.

    In 2016, we set a target for the National Living Wage to reach 60% of median earnings by 2020 – and we will deliver on that, giving a pay rise to millions of workers.

    Now we need to decide where to go next.

    And as I said in the Spring Statement earlier this year, we want to be ambitious, with the goal of ultimately ending low pay altogether in this country.

    But we do not want to be reckless – taking excessive risks with the employment prospects of the lowest paid, or with our future economic growth.

    From my initial conversations with trade union and business leaders alike, it is clear that there is a broad support for that ambitious approach…

    …and broad support, too, for a careful implementation of it, avoiding unintended consequences.

    We are greatly helped of course in this country in navigating the path to a sustainable higher National Living Wage by the existence of the LPC, a highly respected tri-partite body embracing employers, unions and academics, able to act as an independent and impartial advisor on the rate of progress that is sustainable.

    So our task is to set the remit within which the LPC will work – and to ensure they have sufficient flexibility to allow them to deliver it sustainably.

    To help us identify how to do that, I asked Professor Arin Dube, as a recognised expert on minimum wage policy, to review the evidence, particularly evidence from international comparators. I’m delighted to welcome him to London this week – and I look forward to receiving his report in the autumn. And, indeed, to hearing from him in just a moment.

    Let me finish with one final thought.

    Whoever the next Prime Minister is, one of his or her central tasks will be to show a new, and sometimes sceptical, generation that a properly regulated market economy remains the most powerful force available to us for unlocking aspiration and raising living standards.

    And bold, decisive action on the National Living Wage, sustainably delivered, will be an important demonstration of the power of that argument…

    …and a necessary step to re-build confidence in the politics of the centre ground.

    Because that centre ground is under threat.

    On the left, the Labour Party characterises business as “the real enemy”;

    On the right, the argument for radical tax cuts, deregulation and smaller government is gaining ground – just as our population demographics are making them harder to do.

    And as we look to re-build the case for centre ground politics…

    …we should take a bold step in writing the next chapter in the story of statutory minimum wages in the UK – a story which began under the Labour Government of 1997…

    …but which took a giant step forward under the Conservative Government in 2016 –

    So that we demonstrate, once again, that the well-regulated market delivers for all our people.

    Now, I look forward to hearing the thoughts of Professor Dube and others about how we can turn that vision into a sustainable reality.

    Thank you.

  • Theresa May – 2019 Speech at Launch of Augar Review

    Below is the text of the speech made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, on 30 May 2019.

    Thank you, Philip, for that introduction, for all the work you and your panel have undertaken over the past year, and for sharing some of your findings with us this morning.

    Your report is a ground-breaking piece of work, because it is one that sets out in compelling detail the challenges confronting all of us who care about post-18 education in all its forms.

    It’s a sector that, since 2010, the Government has consistently supported.

    We have increased the funding flowing to universities, delivered more high-quality apprenticeships and developed brand new technical qualifications on a par with A-Levels.

    Yet, as we have just heard, there remains much to be done.

    The UK boasts some of the finest universities in the world, universities that we can proud of and that all governments should pledge to support and protect.

    But in technical education we have fallen behind other leading nations.

    Our further education colleges have the potential to transform lives and grow our economy, but the FE landscape can be confusing to navigate.

    Too many students, parents and employers see further education as a second-best option.

    And successive governments have failed to give it the support it needs.

    For nearly 20 years there has been a relentless focus on getting 50 per cent of young people into higher education.

    Yet most have lost sight of the fact that the original target referred not just to university degrees.

    It, quite rightly, covered the whole higher education spectrum – including vocational and technical qualifications.

    That is why, in February last year as you’ve just heard, I set Philip a clear and ambitious challenge.

    To break down the false boundaries between further and higher education.

    To look at all the options open to young people.

    And to say how they could be improved, and how the state should support students, so that every school-leaver – and indeed every adult learner – can follow the path that is right for them.

    With today’s report, Philip and his expert panel have provided a blueprint for how those improvements and changes could be carried out.

    As we’ve heard, it makes many recommendations across further and higher education.

    The proposals on adult and lifelong learning are also important.

    Decisions about whether and how to implement these recommendations will not fall to me, but to the next Government.

    But regardless of the debate to come, there can be no doubt that this report represents a major landmark.

    And that the data, analysis and insights it contains will help us to deliver a post-18 education system that truly works for everyone.

    That needs to begin with Further Education.

    Our FE and technical colleges are not just places of learning.

    They are vital engines of both social mobility and of economic prosperity, training the next generation and helping deliver our modern industrial strategy.

    But for too long, further education has been allowed to stagnate, with student numbers falling.

    With MPs, civil servants and, yes, even journalists overwhelmingly coming from university backgrounds, it’s no surprise that attention has drifted away from other post-18 options.

    I found it rather telling that, despite the wide-ranging remit of the panel, in the year since the review was launched the debate has concentrated almost exclusively on what it will mean for universities.

    As the panel argues, this focus on academic routes at the expense of all others has left further education overlooked, undervalued and underfunded.

    Routes into and through our colleges are confusing and opaque, with no equivalent of the clear, straightforward and comprehensive UCAS system.

    And this situation isn’t just bad for students – it’s bad for our economy.

    By failing to equip more of our young people with the technical skills they will need to compete in the jobs of the future, we have hampered our ability to compete on the world stage.

    Businesses here in the UK regularly tell me that they struggle to find workers with the technical qualifications they need – but that their rivals overseas have no such problems.

    As the report says, in Germany 20 per cent of the workforce holds a higher technical qualification.

    Here in the UK, just four per cent of 25-year-olds can say the same.

    Behind that statistic lies an immeasurable number of opportunities missed and potential wasted, both for individuals and employers,

    So reinvigorating FE is vital if we are to help all our young people develop the skills they need to get on – and if we are to truly make a success of our modern industrial strategy.

    As Prime Minister, it’s something I’ve worked hard to do.

    This Government has made sure there is an education or training place for every 16- to 19-year old who wants one.

    We’re rolling out T Levels – new, high quality technical qualifications on a par with A-levels – to give students a clear choice at 16.

    We’ve committed to launching Institutes of Technology in every major English city, and this year announced the first 12.

    And we’re creating more high-quality apprenticeships that deliver for students and employers alike.

    But while these reforms have made a real difference, the report is clear that if the half of young people who do not go to university are to have the skills they need for the future then we must go further.

    It’s not enough to simply say that FE and HE should be seen as equals.

    As the report argues compellingly, to make that happen we will have to invest much more in further education – in the buildings, in the equipment and of course in teachers who are expert in their field.

    And making a success of FE is not just about increased funding – it’s about giving these young people a genuine choice about their education.

    So more also needs to be done to ensure that further and technical options are every bit as attractive a path for students as more academic options – including by reforming the sector so that colleges can thrive.

    That will mean more specialisation and collaboration – while also continuing to make sure all young people have access to a college in their local area – and reforms to ensure the courses offered by colleges deliver the skills that are needed by local businesses.

    And of course we also need to make sure that only high-quality qualifications are on offer.

    That FE students are appropriately supported by Government.

    And that the route to Further Education is as streamlined and clear as possible – just as it is for universities.

    Now of course, for many young people, following the path to university is absolutely the right option.

    And prospective students in this country are blessed with many of the best universities in the world – four of the top 10 and almost a fifth of the top 100, according to the latest rankings.

    Our reforms since 2010 have been designed to ensure that success continues.

    We’ve given universities the long-term funding they need, removed the cap on student numbers, and made the system fairer – with the students who will benefit from a university education contributing more and the taxpayer contributing a little less.

    And, as this report shows, those reforms have been broadly successful.

    But I agree with Philip and his panel that, while the core structure of the system is sound, there is room for improvement in the way it functions.

    For example, we need to look again at the level of tuition fees.

    We’ve already frozen the maximum level of tuition fees and raised the threshold at which graduates have to start paying back their loans.

    But when, in 2012, the tuition fee cap was raised to £9,000 most predictions were that the full amount would only be charged by the top universities for the highest quality and most prestigious and potentially lucrative degrees.

    That is not what has happened.

    The vast majority of degrees are now set at the maximum fee – and the panel’s report rightly questions whether that is acceptable.

    After all, plenty of courses do not cost the full current rate of £9,250 per student per year to teach.

    And while the majority provide good outcomes for students, we know that is no longer true across the board.

    Indeed, the report rightly calls for further action to drive out the minority of degrees that are of poor quality – and I hope to see the Office for Students using the powers we have given it to do just that.

    So there is much to be said for the panel’s proposal to cut fees and top up the money from Government, protecting the sector’s income overall but focussing more of that investment on high-quality and high-value courses.

    The top-up funding would come from an increased teaching grant, with funding distributed in a way that reflects each subject’s reasonable cost and value.

    Scrapping fees would also lead to worse outcomes.

    It would, as we have seen in Scotland, force Government to reintroduce a cap on student numbers.

    An arbitrary annual limit that, far from opening the door to opportunity, slams it in the face of thousands of young people.

    And, worst of all, it would be socially regressive – disproportionately benefiting students who go on to earn the most.

    It simply cannot be fair to expect people working hard in low-paid jobs to fully fund the education of students from well-off families who will go on to earn much more as a result.

    All the evidence shows that scrapping fees would simply be the wrong approach –unaffordable, unsustainable and unfair.

    But reducing the cost of higher education would make a real difference to many students.

    And we should also be more upfront about what that cost will actually be.

    When the Office for National Statistics announced that it would be reclassifying student loans as part-government spending, most people focussed on the £12 billion it will add to the deficit upfront.

    But this piece of technical accounting also made clear to the world what the architects of the system already knew: that many students never pay off their loan in full, with taxpayers covering 45 per cent of the cost.

    I believe we should be much more transparent about this.

    Prospective students who are put off university by the idea of borrowing large sums for their tuition bills should know that, in reality, they are unlikely to have to pay back the full amount.

    But tuition fees are not the only bills students have to deal with – the cost of living can also be prohibitively high for students from less well-off families who are living away from home.

    Going to university was one of the biggest privileges of my life, opening the door to so many opportunities that followed.

    And I want this to be a country where every young person, regardless of which school they go to or what their parents do for a living, is able to follow a similar path if they so choose.

    Nobody should feel they have to go to university – and that applies to children from middle class backgrounds just as much as anyone.

    But nor should anybody feel that, because of who they are or where they are from, the world of HE is one that is not open to them because it will cost too much.

    Thanks to this government, universities are legally required to improve access – and if you’re an 18 year-old from a disadvantaged background, you’re now more likely to go to university than ever before

    But improvements are slow and the challenge remains large – the number of young people from working class families who apply to and take up places at universities is still a long way from reflecting the country in which we live.

    That’s why I made access one of the key areas of focus for the Augar Review, asking Philip and his panel to look at the lingering barriers that prevent some young people from applying for university, taking up a place, or completing their course.

    That included the issue of maintenance grants.

    In 2015 the decision was taken to replace maintenance grants with loans, allowing us to raise the maximum level of maintenance support for students in England to among the highest in the world.

    These loans are not like ordinary debt, and are only paid off when you are earning a good salary.

    But talking to young people from less well-off backgrounds, I’ve heard too often how this financial outlay can deter them from applying for university at all.

    I’ve spoken to parents and grandparents forced to scrimp and save to fund their children and grandchildren through university.

    And I’ve seen how young graduates starting out in their adult lives feel weighed down by the burden of student debt.

    So I was not surprised to see the panel argue for the reintroduction of means-tested maintenance grants both for university students and those studying for higher technical qualifications.

    Such a move would ensure students are supported whichever route they choose, and save those from the poorest backgrounds over £9,000.

    It will be up to the Government to decide, at the upcoming Spending Review, whether to follow this recommendation.

    But my view is very clear: removing maintenance grants from the least well-off students has not worked, and I believe it is time to bring them back.

    Securing the right education for every child and every young person is an aspiration that drove me in my earliest days in politics, when I was chair of the local education authority in the London Borough of Merton.

    It drove me from my first day as an MP – indeed, it was the subject of my maiden speech in the House of Commons more than two decades ago.

    And it has driven me throughout my time in Downing Street.

    I have always believed and I still truly believe that, if this is to be a country that works for everyone, then we have to make education work for everyone.

    Because the solutions to so many of the burning injustices that plague so many lives can be found in our schools, our colleges and our universities.

    So as we look ahead to the spending review and beyond, I believe the Government will need to take very seriously the report’s proposals to boost Further Education spending and put right the errors of the past…

    …To restore higher education maintenance grants, so students from the poorest backgrounds no longer leave university with a higher level of headline debt than the richest…

    …And to cut tuition fees, so students pay a fairer price for their education.

    Now of course, it is always necessary to prioritise when it comes to choices on public spending.

    These decisions will need to be taken in the round, as part of the balanced approach to the economy and public finances that has allowed us to make long-term investments in public services like the NHS.

    But only by taking action now will we be able to deliver the lasting change and improvements we need in further and higher education…

    Give every child and young person in this country the education they need to reach their true potential…

    And ensure that everyone, whatever their background, can go as far as their talent and hard work will take them.

  • Sajid Javid – 2019 Statement on Modern Slavery

    Below is the text of the statement made by Sajid Javid, the Home Secretary, in the House of Commons on 22 May 2019.

    Today I am laying before the House the final report of the independent review of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 (CP 100). Copies of the report will be available from the Vote Office and it will also be published at: www.gov.uk.

    Under the leadership of the Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May), the UK has transformed its response to modern slavery over the last five years. The Modern Slavery Act 2015 was the first legislation of its kind in the world. The Act provided law enforcement with new tools and powers to apprehend perpetrators, new duties on businesses to publish transparency in supply chains statements, enhanced protections for victims and created the Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner role. The impact of the Act is evident: more victims than ever before are being identified and supported, more offenders are being prosecuted and convicted and thousands of companies have published transparency statements and are taking action to prevent slavery and trafficking in their supply chains.

    Alongside the Act, this Government are delivering a comprehensive programme of policy measures to tackle modern slavery. We are reforming the national referral mechanism (NRM) to improve the support available to ​victims and to streamline the decision-making process. We are continuing to hold businesses to account on their obligations to publish transparency statements and central Government Departments will publish a transparency in supply chains statement this year, to set out the steps we are taking through public procurement to prevent the risks of modern slavery in our supply chains. We are also working with international partners to drive action to address modem slavery risks in supply chains and public procurement.

    We continue to play a leadership role internationally, pushing for co-ordinated action to deliver the sustainable development goals on modern slavery, supported by a commitment of £200 million of UK aid, as well as building partnerships with countries from where the UK receives high numbers of victims. To build on this work, the Government recently awarded a further £5 million in grants to seven organisations through the modern slavery innovation fund to trial new and innovative approaches to tackle this heinous crime.

    However, this Government are not complacent, and we are determined to lead global efforts to eradicate modern slavery, particularly as the methods used by criminals to exploit vulnerable people and our under- standing of the crime evolves. That is why in July 2018 I commissioned right hon. Member for Birkenhead (Frank Field), right hon. Member for Basingstoke (Mrs Miller) and the noble Baroness Butler-Sloss GBE to conduct an independent review of the Modern Slavery Act. The review considered four themes relating to provisions in the Act: the Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner, transparency in supply chains, legal application and the Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner. The final report has made a total of 80 recommendations.

    I am grateful to the reviewers and all those who contributed to the review for their commitment and comprehensive analysis. The Government intend to consider all recommendations in depth, before making a formal response in summer 2019.

  • Robert Buckland – 2019 Statement on the Sentencing Code

    Below is the text of the statement made by Robert Buckland, the Minister of State at the Ministry of Justice, in the House of Commons on 22 May 2019.

    I am today announcing the Government’s interim response to the Law Commission’s report on the Sentencing Code, published on 22 November 2018. The interim response can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/ government/publications/government-response-to-law-commission-report-on-the-sentencing-code. I am also announcing the Government’s intention to introduce ​the Sentencing (Pre-consolidation Amendments) Bill to Parliament, which will pave the way for the sentencing code.

    The Law Commission’s draft sentencing code is a consolidation of legislation governing sentencing procedure which aims to ensure that the law relating to sentencing procedure is readily comprehensible and operates within a clear framework as efficiently as possible. For the code to operate as intended, there are some amendments required to the existing law to facilitate the consolidation and to remove historic, and now redundant, layers of legislation. To enable this the Law Commission has also drafted a pre-consolidation amendment bill. Neither the code nor the pre-consolidation amendments make any changes to existing offences and penalties, nor do they introduce any new substantive law or sentencing disposals.

    The key recommendation of the report is that the draft legislation be enacted. The Government welcome the Law Commission’s report and draft legislation and consider the consolidation of sentencing procedure to be a major step forward in simplifying what is often a complex and technical area of law. It is absolutely vital that unnecessary errors made in our criminal justice system are minimised, and that the courts, offenders, and victims of crime and their families are not put through the time and expense of unnecessary appeals.

    The Ministry of Justice is looking carefully at substantive sentencing reform. For example, there is persuasive evidence showing that community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending, and therefore keeping the public safe. At this stage, we are still considering options and have not ruled anything in or out.

    However, questions of substantive reform are distinct from the important task of making sure that sentencing procedural law is clear and accessible to those that need ​to use it. We believe the sentencing code provides that clarity and transparency. I will bring forward more detailed proposals in due course, but I emphasise that the opportunity for the consolidation of complex sentencing procedural law presented by the code is a separate matter, and should be brought forward separately.

    The Law Commission has also made some further recommendations to the Government for the reform of sentencing law. These have not been given effect in the draft legislation and both Bills as drafted by the Law Commission can be enacted without taking these additional recommendations forward. The Government are grateful for the in-depth analysis that has gone into these complex issues during consultation, acknowledging that in some cases they were unsuitable for inclusion as part of the consolidation process or outside the terms of reference for the project. For those reasons, we do not propose that these recommendations be taken forward at this time, while noting that the benefit of the sentencing code is that it will be readily open to Parliament in future to make such changes. We will, however, provide a fuller response to these further recommendations raised by the Law Commission in due course.

    The Government thank the Law Commission for the considerable effort that has gone into producing the report and draft legislation. While the sentencing code itself should be brought forward through the parliamentary procedure for Law Commission consolidation Bills, I am pleased to announce that the Government will be introducing the Sentencing (Pre-consolidation Amendments) Bill to Parliament, giving effect to the pre-consolidation amendments, through the special procedure which is available for Law Commission recommended Bills.

  • Chris Skidmore – 2019 Statement on the Competitiveness Council

    Below is the text of the statement made by Chris Skidmore, the Minister for Universities, Science, Research and Innovation, in the House of Commons on 22 May 2019.

    The Internal Market and Industry Day of the Competitiveness Council will take place on 27 May 2019. Katrina Williams, Deputy Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom to the European Union, will represent the UK.

    The Research and Space Day of the Competitiveness Council will take place on 28 May 2019. Chris Skidmore MP, Minister of State for Universities, Science, Research and Innovation, will represent the UK.

    Day one—Internal Market and Industry

    The Internal Market and Industry Day will consider a number of non-legislative items, including a competitiveness “check-up”. Attendees will be asked to debate and agree the adoption of conclusions on “a new level of ambition for a competitive single market” and “an EU industrial policy strategy: a vision for 2030”. This will be followed by the adoption of “conclusions on the competitiveness of the tourism sector as a driver for sustainable growth, jobs and social cohesion in the EU for the next decade”.​

    Under any other business, there will be updates on the following current legislative proposals: (a) the directive on cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions; (b) the directive on the modernisation of the EU consumer protection rules; (c) the directive on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers; and (d) the regulation on the general safety of vehicles.

    The presidency with also provide information on better regulation and the forum dedicated to the auto industry. Finally, the Finnish delegation will provide information on the work programme of the incoming Finnish presidency.

    Day two—Research and Space

    The Research and Space Day of the Competitiveness Council will begin with a session on space, during which the Council will hold a policy debate on “strengthening Europe’s role as a global actor and promoting international co-operation, space diplomacy and contributing to building the global space governance”.

    The Competitiveness Council will then break for the 280th European Space Agency (ESA) Council where the UK, as an ESA member state, will vote on the ESA resolution “space as an enabler”. The Council will then reconvene for the 9th EU-ESA Space Council where there will be an exchange of views and adoption of conclusions on “space as an enabler”.

    The research session will start with a policy debate concerning “research and innovation as a driving force for a more competitive European Union”. Finally, the Finnish delegation will provide information on the work programme of the incoming Finnish presidency.

  • Philip Hammond – 2019 Statement on ECOFIN

    Below is the text of the statement made by Philip Hammond, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the House of Commons on 23 May 2019.

    A meeting of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council (ECOFIN) was held in Brussels on 17 May 2019. The UK was represented by Mark Bowman (Director General, International Finance, HM Treasury). The Council discussed the following:

    Early morning session

    The Eurogroup President briefed the Council on the outcomes of the 16 May meeting of the Eurogroup, and the European Commission provided an update on the current economic situation in the EU. Ministers then discussed the possibility of the European Investment Bank developing country strategies. Lastly, the Commission updated on the state of play on negotiations on the definitive system of value added tax.

    Excise duties

    The Council discussed the directive on general arrangements for excise duty (recast), the regulation on administrative co-operation of the content of electronic registers, and the directive on the structures of excise duty on alcohol and alcoholic beverages.​

    Current financial services legislative proposals

    The Romanian presidency provided an update on current legislative proposals in the field of financial services.

    International meetings

    The Council held an exchange of views on digital taxation in the international context, and the presidency and Commission updated the Council on the outcomes of the G20, IMF and World Bank spring meetings that took place in April. The Council then mandated the Economic and Financial Committee to approve the terms of reference for the upcoming G20 meeting in June. Lastly, the Finnish delegation debriefed the Council on the first meeting of the Finance Ministers coalition for climate action.

    European semester

    The Council adopted conclusions on the outcomes of the 2019 in-depth reviews of macroeconomic imbalances in member states as part of the macroeconomic imbalances procedure; and the implementation of 2018 country-specific recommendations.

    Institutional cycle priorities

    Under the non-legislative AOB, the presidency informed the Council on the follow-up discussions in regards to priorities for the next institutional cycle in the ECOFIN area.

    Working lunch

    Following on from the discussions at April informal ECOFIN in Bucharest, EU Finance Ministers held a working lunch to discuss the challenges of labour mobility and their potential solutions, followed by an exchange of views on the way forward in areas of the economic and monetary union, specifically in regards to the reform support programme.

  • Theresa May – 2019 Resignation Statement

    Below is the text of the statement made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, in Downing Street, London on 24 May 2019.

    Ever since I first stepped through the door behind me as Prime Minister, I have striven to make the United Kingdom a country that works not just for a privileged few, but for everyone.

    And to honour the result of the EU referendum.

    Back in 2016, we gave the British people a choice.

    Against all predictions, the British people voted to leave the European Union.

    I feel as certain today as I did three years ago that in a democracy, if you give people a choice you have a duty to implement what they decide.

    I have done my best to do that.

    I negotiated the terms of our exit and a new relationship with our closest neighbours that protects jobs, our security and our Union.

    I have done everything I can to convince MPs to back that deal.

    Sadly, I have not been able to do so.

    I tried three times.

    I believe it was right to persevere, even when the odds against success seemed high.

    But it is now clear to me that it is in the best interests of the country for a new Prime Minister to lead that effort.

    So I am today announcing that I will resign as leader of the Conservative and Unionist Party on Friday 7 June so that a successor can be chosen.

    I have agreed with the Party Chairman and with the Chairman of the 1922 Committee that the process for electing a new leader should begin in the following week.

    I have kept Her Majesty the Queen fully informed of my intentions, and I will continue to serve as her Prime Minister until the process has concluded.

    It is, and will always remain, a matter of deep regret to me that I have not been able to deliver Brexit.

    It will be for my successor to seek a way forward that honours the result of the referendum.

    To succeed, he or she will have to find consensus in Parliament where I have not.

    Such a consensus can only be reached if those on all sides of the debate are willing to compromise.

    For many years the great humanitarian Sir Nicholas Winton – who saved the lives of hundreds of children by arranging their evacuation from Nazi-occupied Czechoslovakia through the Kindertransport – was my constituent in Maidenhead.

    At another time of political controversy, a few years before his death, he took me to one side at a local event and gave me a piece of advice.

    He said, ‘Never forget that compromise is not a dirty word. Life depends on compromise.’

    He was right.

    As we strive to find the compromises we need in our politics – whether to deliver Brexit, or to restore devolved government in Northern Ireland – we must remember what brought us here.

    Because the referendum was not just a call to leave the EU but for profound change in our country.

    A call to make the United Kingdom a country that truly works for everyone. I am proud of the progress we have made over the last three years.

    We have completed the work that David Cameron and George Osborne started: the deficit is almost eliminated, our national debt is falling and we are bringing an end to austerity.

    My focus has been on ensuring that the good jobs of the future will be created in communities across the whole country, not just in London and the South East, through our Modern Industrial Strategy.

    We have helped more people than ever enjoy the security of a job.

    We are building more homes and helping first-time buyers onto the housing ladder – so young people can enjoy the opportunities their parents did.

    And we are protecting the environment, eliminating plastic waste, tackling climate change and improving air quality.

    I know that the Conservative party can renew itself in the years ahead. That we can deliver Brexit and serve the British people with policies inspired by our values – security, freedom, opportunity. Those values have guided me throughout my career.

    But the unique privilege of this office is to use this platform to give a voice to the voiceless, to fight the burning injustices that still scar our society.

    That is why I put proper funding for mental health at the heart of our NHS long-term plan.

    It is why I am ending the postcode lottery for survivors of domestic abuse.

    It is why the Race Disparity Audit and gender pay reporting are shining a light on inequality, so it has nowhere to hide.

    And that is why I set up the independent public inquiry into the tragedy at Grenfell Tower – to search for the truth, so nothing like it can ever happen again, and so the people who lost their lives that night are never forgotten.

    Because this country is a Union.

    Not just a family of four nations.

    But a union of people – all of us.

    Whatever our background, the colour of our skin, or who we love.

    We stand together.

    And together we have a great future.

    Our politics may be under strain, but there is so much that is good about this country. So much to be proud of. So much to be optimistic about.

    I will shortly leave the job that it has been the honour of my life to hold – the second female Prime Minister but certainly not the last.

    I do so with no ill-will, but with enormous and enduring gratitude to have had the opportunity to serve the country I love.