Tag: Matt Hancock

Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Minister of State for Digital, at the opening ceremony for Singapore international Cyber Week on 18 September 2017.

I am delighted to be here with you today.

We meet at an auspicious time.

A time of change faster than anyone has known. Around the world, we are living through a technological revolution which brings unimaginable opportunity. And with this unimaginable opportunity, so too risks unknown just a few short years ago.

The internet fifty years ago. The world wide web, twenty five years after that. Ten years ago, social media and the smartphone, and now artificial intelligence and machine learning. New generic technologies that have sporned a thousand revolutions, from fintech, to lawtech, to edtech or govtech, indeed in almost every area of our lives. The pace of change is relentless. And if you don’t much like change, I’ve got bad news. For the nature of artificial intelligence means we are likely to be experiencing, right now, the slowest change we will see for the rest of our lifetimes.

So now is a good moment to bring together some of the leading nations in the world of digital technology. And it’s good to be here in Singapore for this discussion. Like us, Singapore is a small island nation with an emphatically global reach, that revels in a culture that’s open and looks for trading partners the world over among friends and neighbours, near and far.

And amongst friends, let us be open and talk not just of those opportunities, but how we protect those opportunities, for the good of all our citizens, from those who would do harm.

Since its conception, the internet has brought enormous freedom. But the internet is growing up. To protect that freedom as it grows we must also be restless in protecting a safety and security online.

From the pioneering work of Ada Lovelace and Charles Babbage to the visionary Tim Berners-Lee, the UK has always been at the forefront of digital innovation.

Yet around the world, none of us can rest on our laurels. For each nation, even areas where our strengths are well-established, such as our world-renowned creative industries, are being transformed, and kept at the cutting edge, by developments in technology.

I feel this keenly, as before I became the Digital Minister, my first job was solving the Y2K bug in cobol. Thankfully, that went ok.

Yet even the most enthusiastic supporter of new technology must acknowledge that it also brings risks. The challenge we now face is how to harness the power of emerging technology so it works always in our favour, always to improve the quality of people’s lives, and that where it poses dangers we mitigate against them.

In 2011 we hosted the London Conference on Cyberspace, a discussion that continues in New Delhi later this year. From ASEAN to the UN, Interpol to ICANN, we are strengthening our partnerships on a bilateral, regional and global level to collectively tackle threats, build confidence and transparency, and strengthen global cyber security.

That includes building capacity in less developed nations so they can combat threats at source. This work involves supporting the development and implementation of national cyber security strategies, and we’ve supported capacity building projects in over 50 countries in the past few years.

As we negotiate our exit from the European Union, and position ourselves as Global Britain, we aim to be even more open to collaboration, with all our international friends and partners. In this age of digital we are all becoming more and more connected. It is estimated that in less than a decade the Internet will connect one trillion things.

Both our countries will take on major responsibilities next year. Singapore will be chair of ASEAN and the United Kingdom will host the Commonwealth Summit in London. I am sure these will both be great opportunities to deepen our friendship and strengthen our working relationships.

Today I’d like to share with you the principles we apply to the cyber challenge:

Principles of openness to new ideas, of adaption to change; and preparing for the future.

How we seek to seize the opportunities of the growing tech industry, how we adapt to the changing environment, and how we are preparing for what lies ahead.

The first principle is to be open and optimistic about the opportunities digital technology is creating, for businesses and for all citizens. We seek an internet that is open and free. And we seek a tech industry that is vibrant and innovative. The UK’s tech industry has huge momentum, is growing strongly, and is ripe for investment.

Since 2001, tech industries have created 3.5 million new jobs in the UK, more than four times the number that have been replaced. London is now recognised as one of the top tech clusters in the world, and we have internationally competitive hubs across the whole UK. Over just the last year a whole series of multi-billion pound investments have been agreed.

This openness and this technology is helping our citizens, to learn, to better manage their finances, to access government services and simply be better connected to their friends, their family and to new acquaintances. In short, technology improves people’s lives.

So our first principle is never to see just the threat, but keep front of mind the fundamental openness of the internet, and its power to do good.

The second principle is to be ready to respond to change and honest about the risks.

The UK categorises cyber crime as a tier one threat to our national security. Since 2011 we have had in place a National Cyber Security Strategy, which sets out how a full spectrum plan.

The Strategy covers the direct tasks we in Government must take to detect threats, deter and disrupt adversaries, and keep Britain secure online. But moreover, it recognises that we can’t do this alone.

Our full spectrum approach ranges from developing the new skills and expertise we need, supporting the cyber ecosystem, collaboration with critical infrastructure, the established cyber industry, start ups, and academia to protect our national security and protect the public’s way of life, while contributing to our prosperity and building a more trusted and resilient digital environment. I’ve been struck here in Singapore just how similar the challenges, and the responses are.

Our growing expertise was perhaps best showcased during the 2012 Olympics. The London games were the first ever “digital games” – the first to provide public Wi-Fi access in all Olympic venues, with more content broadcast online than ever before, and much of it accessed via mobile devices – and yet, despite a peak of over 11,000 attacks per second, the network was never once compromised.

We are now six years into that Strategy. In the time since, our cyber security industry has gone from strength to strength. The workforce has grown by 160 per cent and cyber security exports were worth £1.5 billion to the UK last year alone. I’m delighted that many of our leading cyber security businesses are here this week too.

UK universities play a critical role at the forefront of research into cyber security. Because while we address the challenges of today we must work to anticipate those of tomorrow. We have awarded fourteen UK Universities the status of Academic Centre of Excellence in Cyber Security Research, reflecting world class research.

Last year, we refreshed the Strategy. The refresh had at its heart one inescapable fact we had learned: that successful cyber defence requires the collaboration of government, academia, and business. A strong cyber ecosystem needs all three.

Based on that insight, we put together and opened our new National Cyber Security Centre as the authoritative voice on cyber in the UK. As we designed it, we looked around the world to see best practice, including at your CSA here.

The NCSC is formally part of GCHQ, but culturally reaches outside the secure fence to draw on academia, and work with and inform businesses, citizens and the public sector about emerging threats, to provide very practical support when attacks happen, talk to the public, work with international partners, and educate our nation on how best to stay safe online. Crucially, it brings together national leadership on cyber security in one place.

Our safety, of course, means our friends’ and partners’ safety, whenever you do business with us. We are committed to making the UK the most secure place in the world for digital and online activity. Respected, and most importantly, trusted.

So this is how we are adapting to the constantly changing risks.

Our third principle, is always to look to the future.

For we much cite cyber security within a bigger attitude we take to how digital technology is transforming society’s norms.

Digital technology is a force for good in the world. To keep it that way, we are proposing a new framework, a new global consensus, for how we interact, do business and participate online.

The aim is to protect and promote freedom online, by ensuring that we promote liberal values that underpin freedom while preventing harm online. Our starting point is that the boundaries and norms that exist off-line also apply in the online world.

This approach lies at the heart of our proposed Digital Charter, recently announced by Her Majesty the Queen. The Charter seeks to balance freedom and responsibility online while establishing a new framework for how we all conduct our digital business.

Every society is facing the same sorts of challenges. And by the nature of the technology many of the solutions are global too. Local nuances will depend on each country’s culture, but ultimately this balance is needed everywhere.

So our hope, if we get all this right, other countries will want to join us.

Humanity, the world over, we share this technology. Together we have developed it, and together people worldwide now collaborate to develop it further.

We are all connected by it, and harmony will lie in – perhaps even depend upon – a shared sense of its norms. The debate is moving quickly, as the pace of technology increases. As more and more of how we interact – our society, in short – moves online we must be sure it abides by the rules of decency, fair play, and mutual respect we have all built in the offline world.

Cyber security sits in this context.

So let us be clear. We are part of something much bigger than ourselves. We have a job to do.

So let us keep talking, let us keep sharing, so we reach a mutual understanding of how we can best harness this amazing new technology, for the benefit of all mankind.

Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Minister of State for Digital and Culture, on 27 September 2016.

It is a pleasure to speak at this Royal Television Society conference – and to take up the post as Minister responsible for our most vital, cherished and thriving sector.

I’ve always thought that there is a risk that because people so enjoy what you make, they might take for granted the craft – the sheer industry – behind it. When you entertain, when people are laughing, or crying cathartic tears, or cheering on a favourite contestant, they don’t always care to be reminded that for some people – for you – this is work. Complex, demanding work.

I do not take your work for granted. And in Government we know that you’re exceptionally good at what you do.

Throughout its history, TV has been one of the UK’s greatest success stories. In recent years it has grown at twice the rate of the rest of our economy, and annually generates over £13 billion in revenue. Of that, the growing independent production sector now contributes £3 billion a year.

More than just the economic statistics, your work really matters. You are one of the UK’s best shop windows, introducing the world to our culture, telling them who we are as a nation. That we are hugely creative, inquisitive, innovative, silly when we want to be, daring. The export market for finished programmes, international commissions and format sales has more than doubled in size over the past decade to over a billion today.

You and your programmes are among our most powerful cultural ambassadors. Kids in South Korea queue to meet Peter Capaldi. Crowds in New York scream for Benedict Cumberbatch. And all over the world people make their arms into an X and tell Simon Cowell “No one wants this more than me.” That is soft power in action. And it is great for the UK.

But of course this is also a time of great change. Digital technology is revolutionising viewing habits. And it is primarily these challenges – and these opportunities – I want to talk about today.

Traditional TV viewing, in front of the set, now accounts for only around two thirds of the nation’s viewing time. It’s perhaps ironic that as we watch the families on Gogglebox face a traditional screen many of us will do so on phones, laptops or tablets.

And what we watch is changing. 72% of us now regularly watch short-form videos, on YouTube and elsewhere. James Corden’s car-pool karaoke, that Calvin Harris video featuring Rihanna, Hillary Clinton’s latest spot ad, even back-copies of PMQs – everyone’s taste is catered for, mine included.

And if we want more conventional length programmes we won’t necessarily turn to the conventional channels. Netflix now reaches 4.4 million households in the UK, and Amazon Prime over a million.

These figures may sound unsettling – disruptive to the way you’ve always worked.

But let’s bear in mind too that some of our greatest, most creative TV shows were made when the medium was relatively young. Series like Monty Python or the plays of Dennis Potter were able to experiment so freely, so successfully, because no one was yet clear what the rules were. Some of those brilliant, innovative shows, like Doctor Who and Coronation Street, are still with us today so it’s easy to forget just how radical they once were.

The exciting thing about now is: the toys are new again. The rules are being rewritten. This can and should be another Golden Age of creativity.

And the Government will support you in making it so.

I’ve set out three core priorities for all the creative industries, and they are no less important in TV than the others.

The first is backing success.

In all we do, we want to back success where we find it; to build on and strengthen Britain’s creativity.

So we have introduced new TV tax breaks. And they are working. In the first full year of the TV tax credit, nearly £400 million was invested in high-end television programmes, a further £52 million in animation, and £35 million in video games.

Amid this constant change, Public Service Broadcasting remains hugely valued in most viewers’ lives. In a typical week, figures show 84% of us will watch Public Service television. And the vast majority – 73% of viewers, according to a recent poll – believe it is doing a fine job.

Following one of the largest ever consultation exercises in the UK, the new draft BBC Charter establishes the Corporation’s funding, its governance, its mission and purpose, its scale and its scope for the next 11 years, beyond the life of this Parliament and the next.

The new draft Charter secures the BBC’s independence by taking the next Charter review out of the electoral cycle and by creating a BBC Board that has fair and transparent appointments and the majority of whose members are appointed by the BBC itself.

And by enhancing its distinctiveness, accountability, transparency and efficiency it will make sure the BBC continues to thrive. New powers for Ofcom and the NAO, new requirements on competitive tendering, partnership and market impact, and new transparency duties on pay and genre spend are all important elements of the draft Charter reform package. And of course the BBC will enjoy an inflation-linked increase to the licence fee for the next 5 years.

The Charter also firmly embeds the BBC’s historic duty to be impartial. For liberal democracy to flourish, serious debate needs to be anchored in fact. And with a proliferation of media voices the role for our trusted Public Service Broadcasters here is ever more critical.

Of course public service broadcasting is only part of the mix. The UK has a vibrant multichannel sector delivering over 500 channels via free and pay platforms.

Over half of spend on content is now from these alternative sources. And, counting investment in Film and Sport, the UK multichannel sector spent over £3 billion on content in 2015. On original UK content multichannels are investing £800 million.

These channels – and their location in the UK – bring significant benefits to our economy, including over 12,000 jobs and around £4bn of annual gross value added.

The prestige of the UK as the number one broadcasting hub in Europe is something that I’m enormously proud of and which brings very significant benefits to the UK creative sector. I know many of you worry about the impact of Brexit.

The EU referendum highlighted the need to bring this country together, and that can only be achieved by reaching out to – by directly addressing – all its constituent parts. You and your industry have that power.

And your role in defining how we see ourselves as a nation – and how we are seen around the world – is more important than perhaps any other sector’s. Throughout her history Britain has succeeded best when we’ve been open, positive, engaged, and looking outwards, towards the whole world. You can help define Britain’s place in the world today, and bring the people of Britain along with us.

On the specifics, we absolutely get the importance of: the Country of Origin principle; continuation of UK content’s designation as European work; access to skilled labour; to funding and to the central importance of the broadcasting industry.

And we are working on those things as we prepare to negotiate Britain’s exit.

We want to celebrate and strengthen our pre-eminent role in broadcasting as we move forward. UK success is here to stay. You can take it from me that UK success is here to stay.

That brings me to my second principle: expanding access.

It is a central objective of this Government that everyone, from every background, should have equal chance to succeed, equal chance to access arts and culture. In TV, you are already bringing culture – high-brow, middle-brow, resolutely low-brow, it really doesn’t matter – into homes up and down the land.

And you do it every day of the year.

But just as your audience is wide and diverse, so should your industry be. While there is already a push for greater diversity on-screen, and we will continue to support that, it must be matched by a similar drive behind the scenes.

Among writers, directors, commissioners – executives. Ideally, this room would echo to a range of accents, from all parts of the country, from every ethnicity, from every class and gender. Does it yet? I challenge you. The BBC move to Salford has been a triumph, and it is one that I would like to see other broadcasters follow in terms of spreading people, production and investment beyond London.

On diversity and social media there is already much good practice.

I was delighted to launch Diamond in August and sure it will go from strength to strength

The BBC is on track to meet their 2017 goal of over 14 per cent BAME representation on and off screen.

ITV have achieved 14 per cent on-screen BAME representation across all channels.

85 per cent of Channel 4’s commissions now meet their guidelines on diversity.

And Sky has achieved its aim of 20 per cent on screen and writing talent from BAME backgrounds

New technology and distribution is making it easier to break through. But does commissioning reflect the diversity of our modern nation? On gender, disability, sexual identity, and ethnicity, yes, you are beginning to make strides. But what of social and geographic diversity?

I ask you, and I hold you to a higher standard, because a popular, demotic industry like yours, with such a wide and diverse audience, should be leading the way.

So reflect the country you serve. Thrive on Britain’s diversity. Look to opportunities beyond the nearest horizon.

Show by example that people from any walk of life can get ahead if they’ve got talent.

My third priority is to drive the opportunities of digital syntheses.

There is a very good reason I’m the Minister for Digital and Culture. The synergy between art and technology has never been more important. This link: between our creative and cultural assets, and the digital platforms and technology that deliver it, is, in my profound belief, how Britain will pay her way in the twenty first century

This sector is perhaps the best example of what I’m talking about: the pipes and wires of digital delivery meet the beauty and creative genius of the TV sector. Convergence has delivered exciting, disruptive new business models and programme formats like the challenge of multi platform media.

I’m very clear on our job.

If a Wikipedia page is slightly slow to load, it probably won’t greatly try the patience. If a programme we’re engrossed in begins to buffer it can feel like the end of the world. And all the tension you’ve carefully crafted – the gags you’ve expertly timed – are ruined.

So I’m absolutely determined the UK’s digital infrastructure must-be world-leading. We have substantially invested in our digital communications infrastructure – both for mobile and fixed connectivity – with three quarters of a billion pounds from central government. We are rolling out superfast broadband across as many homes and businesses as possible. We have already achieved 90% coverage. We are on track to reach 95% by the end of next year, and we are pushing fibre too.

It will get easier and quicker, year on year, for people to access the brilliant shows you make.

And digital needs content. That nexus between technology and culture is our future economy’s sweet spot, and it is at that nexus that your industry has always lived, and where it must continue to thrive.

Yes there are challenges but there are huge opportunities to reach more people, to open more minds, embrace new technology to educate, excite and entertain like never before. That is a passion we share and in doing so I will be at your side.

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

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

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

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

Let’s consider the evidence.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The creative industries consistently outperform the rest of the economy.

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

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

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

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

But not just economically. Perhaps more importantly culturally.

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

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

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

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

The creative industries are critical to securing that status.

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

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

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

Empathy, intuition, aesthetic and moral judgment.

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

Even the most sophisticated CGI relies on human creativity.

The tech revolution is happening.

No King Canute can stop it.

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

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

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

This country benefits so much from your work.

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

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

The hipster is a capitalist.

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

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

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

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

This surely is true.

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

It’s an approach I strongly support.

Before entering politics I worked in tech.

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

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

No, we can’t prescribe creativity from above.

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

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

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

This is a mark of a civilised society.

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

Let me take each in turn.

The first principle is backing success.

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

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

From coding to craft, from publishing to production.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

145 programmes have since been supported.

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

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

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

And still more can be done.

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

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

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

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

My second principle is access.

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

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

Talent knows no boundaries.

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

Imagining.

Talent is not restricted to the privileged and the comfortable.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There’s already some great work being done.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This matters to me personally too.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

My third is synthesis, of culture with digital technology.

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

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

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

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

Other countries copy our methods.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And ultimately, content and distribution grow together.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But it also brings exciting opportunities.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Minister for the Cabinet Office, in London on 12 July 2016.

The Civil Service is engaged in a mission to improve the lives of everyone in Britain.

Put simply, its role is to help the government of the day develop and implement its policies. But we know this is far from simple. This means tackling some of the country’s most complex and unique challenges.

There are always challenges. And now more than ever we must rise to them.

From steering the country through the ravages of war, to global leadership in tackling climate change. From the rise of the automobile to the heights of the digital world, the Civil Service for 160 years has served Britain with dedication and distinction.

Now we must add to our tasks the task of leaving the EU. While I voted remain, all democrats must respect the clear decision of the British people.

Now we must rise again to the challenge, and make Brexit Britain the global success we all know in our hearts it can be.

And I’m delighted to be here, setting out this challenge, at Civil Service Live.

We’ve held events across the country, from Coventry to Cardiff, Sheffield to Glasgow, and now London.

Over 7,000 civil servants have attended and many will have contributed to the conversation about how we build a brilliant Civil Service.

That feedback has been used to test and shape the Workforce Plan that I will outline to you today.

Through all this change, the strength of the Civil Service rests on the rock of its immutable core values – objectivity, honesty, integrity and impartiality.

Because honest administration and official advice given without fear or favour means a better government and a safer and better society for our citizens.

Through this change, the legitimacy of the Civil Service rests on its service of the democratically elected government of the day.

I know the Civil Service will turn brilliantly to deliver on the new direction the people have set our nation on.

And the capability of the Civil Service rests on how it shapes and adapts to the changes in the world.

So this is about how we build on these foundations, and equip the Civil Service to deliver its mission for the people of our country.

Why are we here?

A year ago, I set out my expectations for what the Civil Service needs to look like in 5 years time.

Delivering better services, with strong leadership and outstanding people.

We are well on the way to achieving that vision. But everyone knows there is more to do.

Today we are publishing a plan that sets out how we can take that further.

Building on years of work to reform the Civil Service, it sets out a clear vision of a Civil Service workforce we want to see.

A workforce packed full of talented, motivated, dynamic people, dedicated to improving the country they love.

With more people recruited from outside, from different backgrounds, with different experience of life and work.

An organisation with more authority, more engagement, more accountability and more trust throughout.

The Workforce Plan is all about how the Civil Service can adapt to be the best.

How we respond to the changing nature of work, and especially the digital revolution.

Why we need to change.

And what we plan to do to deliver that modern Civil Service our country will need.

Let me take each in turn.

Future of work

We need to build a Civil Service that can adapt to a world where new technology is radically changing the future of work.

It’s a challenge and a huge opportunity.

For years physical tasks have been automated. Now cognitive tasks are being automated like never before.

This is inevitable. It can’t be resisted. But we can and must make this change work for us.

The goal is to automate work, but humanise jobs.

This sort of transformation, using the best technology, means we can deliver better services and lower costs.

It can free people up to do the thinking, the managing, the creating.

But it also means the jobs will be different.

I’ve been struck in the year I’ve been responsible for digital transformation, that any particular technology is only a tiny part of the solution – maybe 10%.

90% is about culture, training and human behaviour.

I no longer think of digital transformation.

I think about business transformation; using the best available digital technology.

We must support this disruption, and support those disrupted.

And support for those whose jobs are disrupted puts a focus on training and skills like never before.

Training in the new technology. That’s important, and this plan will reform Civil Service Learning to deliver cutting edge training.

World-class leaders

And the skills to embrace change; to manage effectively; to trust and to take responsibility. These skills can be taught. They can be learned.

For too long, management of our people in parts of the Civil Service has been the preserve of the amateur. But management – change management; culture management; people management – these things can and in future will be actively taught.

And I want to turn upside down the way training is decided on.

In the past there’s been a laissez-faire attitude to training that has encouraged people to train, and to train in what they fancy or think will be useful.

This approach is a dereliction of duty.

Training is part of a manager’s toolkit. Part of the role of the line manager is to guide people’s careers. This means steering – and requiring – training that a member of staff needs. Hands on, caring deeply about the progress of each direct report.

Not relying on faux-objective box-ticking ‘competency tests’, but on trusting managers to know, and care for the progress of their team.

And that of course requires leadership. Inspirational confident leadership, at every level, that develops talent and empowers staff to deliver.

We have some areas of excellent leadership in the Civil Service. I want to pick out the Department for Work and Pensions in particular for praise.

But across the board, standards can and must be higher if we’re going to get the best out of people.

That is why the Civil Service will be setting up a new flagship leadership academy. This will work with leading academics to provide world-class learning. Creating an ethos of excellence where leaders learn from each other.

And leadership should not be the preserve of those at the top. We need world-class leaders at every level.

So we will create leadership and management apprenticeships, building on the excellent expansion of apprenticeships already begun.

And we will be re-launching the learning curriculum for all civil servants.

This will provide valuable learning opportunities for those at every level.

The result will be leaders who are confident and inspiring. Leaders who empower and listen to their people.

Most inclusive employer

It’s been said before and with good reason; the Civil Service’s greatest single asset is its people.

So as well as strengthening those who are already civil servants, how do we attract the best too?

I believe passionately that to govern modern Britain, the Civil Service must become more like modern Britain.

We need to cast our net wider and further. We should be attracting and developing the best talent from right across our society, no matter who they are or where they come from.

Because everyone should have the chance to succeed and serve their country.

And because organisations work better when they are more diverse.

Evidence shows that decisions drawn from a range of experiences, backgrounds and attitudes are better decisions.

In March, we published the ambitious Talent Action Plan and launched our ambitions social mobility strategy, setting out the steps we are taking to become the most inclusive employer in the UK.

We will be undertaking a comprehensive review of the employee experience. Including the way the Civil Service identifies talent, to ensure every talented individual has the opportunity to progress.

True social mobility will only be achieved if we attract, recruit and promote people based on merit and potential, not polish.

This is essential to unlock the potential of all staff in our workforce, and all future recruits. Whether they are based in London or elsewhere in the UK. Where they work in policy, operations or elsewhere. Whether they attended university or not. And whatever their family background.

Movement

Last year I said I wanted a more porous Civil Service, with more exchange in and out.

Young people entering the job market today can expect to move jobs between 12 to 15 times on average.

Careers are changing and with it the standard of a job for life is long gone. Many people now expect to change jobs during the course of their career.

Civil Service structures need to reflect this, supporting short- and long-term careers. Making it easier for people to move in and out with ease.

Everyone should have the chance to apply for a job serving their country.

So we will be opening up recruitment. Roles will be advertised externally, by default, first in the Senior Civil Service, then throughout by the end of this Parliament.

Secondment opportunities will be expanded. Increasing exchange in and out, working with other employers to make normal an exchange of skills that will benefit the Civil Service. It will benefit wider society too. Increasing diversity of thought and experience, and helping us to tackle the hardest national problems.

Career paths

Movement should be planned and purposeful, to build skills and expertise where they are needed, whilst recognising that sometimes it takes time in post to build experience.

We want to stop the absurd reality that to get a promotion you have to move. It prevents people getting deep experience and staying put to see a job through, and encourages people to flit from one job to another.

No longer should we take people with no experience of an area or job and throw them in at the deep end because they have a gap in their experience.

Gone are the days of the gifted amateur. Today’s world is too complex and demands are too high. Today’s plan takes the professionalisation of the Civil Service further.

So I’d say to everyone wanting to build a career in the Civil Service:

Specialise; focus on your strengths; become the expert, become the best in the world at what you do. Don’t flit around.

And under the new plans for a professionalised Civil Service you will be rewarded.

Alongside this to develop breadth of experience, and depth of expertise, we must build career paths at all levels of the organisation, that reach right to the top.

We are leading the way by co-chairing the development of national apprenticeship standards for professions.

We also now have specialist Fast Stream programmes for Digital, Commercial, Finance, Project Delivery and HR. These are growing technical skills in our people from the start of their careers – setting them up for success. And I want to see top people from all these professions reaching the top.

This all complements the work that professions are doing more widely. Commercial, for example, are creating career paths across the Civil Service that extend beyond departmental boundaries.

All this will allow civil servants to make informed decisions. Informed decisions about how they develop their career, about the learning they need to build skills, and about when they should move role or seek promotion.

Flexible reward

To attract and promote the best talent from across society, we also need to reward and promote hard work and success. And we need to reward specialist expertise.

We are recruiting in an increasingly global and competitive market. And we need to be able to compete. The reward offer needs to provide value for money. But it also needs to be fair.

We need a total reward package that can continue to attract talented people. Both now and in the future.

Commercial and digital skills are in demand and in short supply. Not just in the UK but globally.

Government manages some of the most complex, and high risk, commercial contracts. So we must be ready. And we must prepare now.

So we are creating a new commercial organisation, for senior specialists.

It will help us attract these skills. It will create structured career paths and offer a competitive reward proposition through a set of new pay ranges.

We’re also looking at pay for digital specialists over this year.

And more widely, we will be reviewing the reward framework for civil servants.

Conclusion

All civil servants should find something in this for them.

It is ambitious. And it is rightly ambitious.

The Civil Service does vital work for the nation.

But it’s also practical and deliverable. And it must be delivered. For the benefit of the Civil Service. For the benefit of civil servants. And for the benefit of the nation.

This is where you have a part of play. This plan cannot be delivered without the support of civil servants.

It needs to be more than just a piece of paper. And it will be each one of you that brings it to life.

We will help you to do this. Giving you the tools and the support to build a modern career in a modern civil service workforce.

I’ve said before I want to see jobs as good as at Google. I mean it. And one of the reason the jobs in the Civil Service are so good is because the mission is so important.

We serve our country. Come, serve, and gain that deep expertise. There is no more noble calling.

Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Cabinet Office Minister, in Smith Square, London on 6 July 2016.

Everyone in this room is a reformer.

You’ve dared to do things differently for one reason above all: because you want to be the best at what you do.

And my message to you today is simple: this government is on your side.

We’re on your side because we believe in giving public servants the freedom to deliver their services in the way that they know best.

Because it’s better to give people a stake in their own success than a top-down target from on high.

And because we know you can have public service values and financial discipline: an entrepreneurial drive that’s driven by mission more than money.

Thanks to your work over the last 6 years, your approach is now grounded in clear evidence.

Let’s take the first: that if you trust people to innovate then that’s exactly what they do.

Look at Six Degrees, a Salford-based social enterprise that spun out from the NHS in 2011.

The team specialise in providing talking therapies for people suffering from depression or anxiety.

Since spinning out they’ve pioneered a new single point of access service, starting small then winning a commission to expand the service more widely.

They’ve teamed up with Salford University to develop new ways of improving communication skills for those who care for people with dementia.

And a senior staff member won the prestigious Mary Seacole Award for her work on improving access to mental health services within BME communities.

Or look at Realise Futures, a chain of 6 social enterprises, offering employment opportunities to disabled and disadvantaged adults in Suffolk.

Staff at all levels are encouraged to submit ideas at senior operational meetings.

One idea that came out of this process was to expand their veg box delivery business. In turn, this has led to more orders and more jobs.

From school support to adult social care, leisure centres to libraries, behavioural insights to building management, public service mutuals are rewarding innovators and changing lives.

Let’s take the second point: that the mutual model often means a happier, more engaged workforce.

We already know that, on average, absenteeism falls by a fifth and staff turnover by 16% following a public sector spin-out.

Survey data from across the sector show that staff become more likely to recommend their service to friends or family, feel more trusted to do their job, and more likely to feel like they can do their job to the standard they see fit.

And staff that feel in control in their own destiny are better placed to deliver for the public.

Take Achieving for Children, a jointly-owned social enterprise run by the Boroughs of Richmond and Kingston.

The team deliver integrated children’s services across both local authorities, from early years help to fostering to special educational needs.

Ofsted took the unusual step of moving the service up two grades, from ‘inadequate’ to ‘good’. They say that, since their last inspection, local children’s services have been ‘transformed’ .

The third advantage of mutuals is that it allows us to combine the best of public and private sectors: hard-hitting social impact and a healthy bottom line.

RippleZ is a social enterprise providing NHS services to vulnerable teenage parents in Derby.

Since spinning out they’ve won three NHS contracts, increasing their turnover by £1 million and growing from just 11 staff to 48 in the last 5 years.

Or look at Community Dental Services, which we expect to grow from £7 to 12 and a half million following recent NHS contract wins.

It’s very likely to hit £20 million by the next financial year.

So not only are public service enterprises free to innovate, they’re also free to grow: reinvesting their profits, doubling down on their success, scaling up as far as their ambitions can take them.

Many of these organisations began life with support from the Cabinet Office Mutuals Support programme, or the NHS Right to Request.

But this is no longer just a series of programmes, it’s fast becoming a national movement.

In 2010 the UK was home to just 9 public service mutuals. Six years on it’s 115, employing 35,000 staff, delivering around £1.5 billion in public services.

And now we want to go further.

Large parts of the public sector are open to this model, but there are still too many public servants who want to spin out but don’t feel like they can.

We understand, we are on their side, and we will back their ambitions every step of the way.

Our manifesto included a ‘right to mutualise’ and we want to work with you on delivering that commitment.

We’ve backed this up with £4 million in support at the Cabinet Office.

We’re looking to publish our new mutuals strategy in the Autumn, and we’ll be talking to you over the summer, to get your ideas about what you think should be in it.

I know you’re clear-eyed about the challenges ahead, about the barriers we need to unblock before we can take this revolution to the next level: sceptical service commissioners who prefer the tried and tested; sceptical lenders, put off by your lack of credit history; and the need for more commercial and technical skills.

But let’s be clear too about the huge advantages we have too: as a world-leader in the field of social investment, as a pioneer in payment by results, and with a state that has consistently shown itself ready and willing to reinvent itself to better serve the public.

So in our strategy we expect to look at issues like raising awareness of the opportunity, strengthening the evidence base still further, improving access to finance, and creating a more supportive commissioning environment.

I’m looking forward to working with you on setting out these vital next steps.

Of course this agenda is not a silver bullet, and no-one here would claim otherwise.

Digital transformation, data-driven improvement, user-centric service design. inspiring leadership: these all matter as much as the delivery model.

But our principle is clear, if public servants believe they can deliver a service better by taking control of that service, we have a duty to let them try.

This is life-changing work, and I pay tribute to everyone in this room who’s advanced the cause of public service reform.

Now we must aim higher, innovate faster, and not be afraid to fail first time.

That’s the means; the end is to help all our fellow citizens succeed.

That’s our mission.

You have my support.

Let’s go out and make it happen.

Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Cabinet Office Minister, at the National Digital Conference held on 15 June 2016.

It’s a pleasure to be back.

Today’s conference is all about how we make it to the future and given that theme it would be easy to start with a riff on the marvels of modern technology.

I could talk about blockchain, 3D printing, artificial intelligence or data science. I could talk about how I drove around my constituency in an autonomous electric car this weekend, going for miles without steering or touching the pedals.

But I’m not going to do that. Because everyone here knows that digital is the easy part of digital transformation.

The hard part is the transformation.

It’s easier to write new software than to rewrite an organisational culture. Easier to upgrade to the latest device than to upgrade to the latest skills. Old technology can be replaced but old habits die hard.

Put simply, innovation is easy but change is hard. You can see the truth of that both in the economy as a whole and within organisations, including government.

Today I want to touch on both. Let’s take the economy first.

Digital technology is inherently disruptive. And on the whole, technological disruption is good for our economy.

Consumers benefit from better, faster, more convenient, more responsive services, at lower cost, often for free.

At the same time, digital platforms have created whole new marketplaces, in which millions can trade on their time and talent.

The single parent who tops up her earnings selling hand-made jewellery on Etsy. The Uber driver saving up to open a restaurant – they too are beneficiaries of disruption.

Some say new technology is displacing workers. Throughout history people have said that technology would.

The problem for the techno-pessimists is that real wages are rising and employment is at record levels.

In fact, the more technology we have, the more productive we become.

This cuts costs and allows people to spend more of their money on other things, creating new jobs.

The problem for optimists like us is that people don’t live life in the aggregate. Nobody experiences the economy as a whole.

The challenge of technological disruption is that its effects are spread unevenly.

Just ask travel agents, checkout assistants, HMV employees or Blockbuster franchisees.

My argument is that we won’t capture the full benefits of all this innovation if we don’t help people to manage the change.

That means continuing to invest in basic digital skills, delivering on our commitment to support one million people to get online, driving forward our massive expansion of apprenticeships and getting all young people earning or learning.

It means tilting policy towards pay rises – as we have with the National Living Wage – so everyone has a chance to share in a growing economy.

And where a concentrated area is hit by a big change, like a sudden factory closure, it means being prepared to intervene: working with business to redeploy and retrain workers, working with local government to bring new business in.

So that’s the challenge for the macro-economy: supporting the disruptors and the disrupted, getting to the future without leaving anyone behind.

Now I want to turn to the challenge for our own organisations. Because to fully exploit the transformative potential of new technology we too have to change the way we work.

And as in the wider economy, change can be hard.

I want to set out three guiding principles, based on what we’ve learnt from the last six years of digital transformation in central government.

Start small

My first principle is to start small, because the best way to convince the naysayers is to build something that actually works.

The Government Digital Service (GDS) was deliberately conceived as an insurgent start-up bolted onto the Civil Service, not some grand Ministry of Technology.

And rather than tell GDS to go out and disrupt the entire public sector, we gave them a specific set of high volume transactions to transform.

The idea was to demonstrate clearly to the rest of government not just the technology, but the underlying methodology that made it work.

Agile working, user research, A/B testing, rapid iteration, data-driven feedback, real-time service improvements and so on.

Its delivered 20, usually, brilliant digital public services, and it’s also proved our point.

Now digital transformation is going from start-up to mainstream. GDS has been backed with £450 million in the Spending Review to drive forward the next phase of transformation over this Parliament.

Right across Whitehall and the public sector, digital transformation is a core part of everything we’re trying to do.

So that’s my first principle: start small and scale-up.

My second principle follows from the first, and it’s that digital transformation ultimately is business transformation.

Digital transformation is business transformation
No one here needs to be told that this agenda is not about replacing paper forms with websites.

Rather, it’s about recognising that you can’t redesign a service without redesigning the organisation delivering it.

Before GDS, government technology was really just contract management. Digital services were designed, built and delivered by other people, working towards inflexible contracts that locked us into ageing IT.

Now, by contrast, we’ve brought our tech architecture, project management and delivery in-house.

It means we control and understand our own technology, and, where we do procure through the digital marketplace, we have the knowhow to be an intelligent customer.

It also means we can do the common stuff once, then share it with everyone.

Tech has traditionally functioned in departmental silos with limited interoperability.

Yet we all have the same users and, ultimately, the same budget, so it makes much more sense to think of our technology as belonging to a single system.

It’s why we’re now building platforms for common activities, like GOV.UK/Pay for payments or GOV.UK/Notify for status tracking, which can be reused across government.

Crucially, this also means we can work to deliver more complex services, involving multiple departments, in a way that is seamless and straightforward from the point of view of the user.

In future it will be possible to set up a business easily online, for example, or tell government once that you’ve changed your address, or register for the government’s free childcare offer once.

This new way of doing things requires new skills.

We need more specialists for sure, but we also need the Civil Service as a whole to add digital to their skillset.

So our Digital and Technology Fast Stream is developing the tech-savvy leaders of the future, with a cohort of almost 100 graduates currently working right across government.

At the same time, we’re working with our most senior civil servants to ensure they are equipped with the skills, tools and vocabulary to lead this transformation.

But for me the most important aspect of business transformation is transforming the way we think about delivery.

In the past, government would launch a new service and then not think about it much until the minister was hauled up in front of the Public Accounts Committee to explain why it wasn’t delivering as planned.

Instead we’re now moving towards a culture of continuous incremental improvement, where service managers adjust the service in real-time, in response to user feedback.

Take GOV.UK/Verify, the new service allowing you prove who are online.

It’s now live, and already over half a million identities have been verified securely online. GDS have carried fortnightly user research, including in their user lab and in citizens’ homes as they use the service.

This has led to improvements that mean a new GOV.UK Verify user is almost twice as likely to successfully complete the process than they were a year ago.

Underpinning any transformation is the central role of data.

Which brings me onto my third point. We increasingly need to think of the role of data in delivering public services.

Data as a public service

Let’s take a very topical example: voter registration.

When the register to vote service crashed last week, within two hours we knew exactly what was wrong and we could fix it – because we had the data.

Each of our digital services has a page on the GOV.UK performance platform, allowing us to see how many people are using the service at any one time.

This meant we knew exactly how many people had been trying to get onto the system when it crashed.

Armed with this information, we were than able to make a case for emergency legislation to give people more time to register.

We’ve spoken for many years about evidence-based policymaking, but modern data science is making this a reality.

Interlinking disparate datasets is allowing for radically more targeted interventions.

Combining tax and education data allows us to see which courses deliver the best employment outcomes, for example.

The Digital Economy Bill will take this further forward, to ensure that shared information can improve public services reduce fraud and improve the statistics we rely on.

This is done in a way that supports privacy and strengthens trust but also ensures that society benefits from the opportunities of data science.

With a sensible data-driven approach, it will be possible, for example, to provide automatic discounts off the energy bills of people living in fuel poverty.

Or to deliver more timely interventions for troubled families dealing with multiple government agencies.

And where we’ve published government data in an open, usable format, people have discovered applications for it that we simply couldn’t have imagined.

Travel apps, property valuation software, food hygiene ratings for online takeaway platforms, footfall simulations for retail businesses, a service to check whether your bike’s been stolen – these are just a small fraction of the applications that have so far been engineered by third parties using government data.

Not only that, but the traditional accountability function of data has also been enhanced by digital technology.

Anyone can see our performance platform, how often a service is used and how it much costs per transaction.

In a data-driven world, our effectiveness as a government is a matter of fact rather than opinion.

So these are the principles that guide our approach to digital transformation:

– start small then scale up

– treat tech as the means rather than the end

– treat data as a public service in its own right rather than an afterthought

Yes change is hard, but in the end it’s worth it. The most exciting thing about technology is that it frees people up to focus on the most fulfilling parts of human experience.

We can digitise the drudgery and make public service more rewarding.

We can automate work and humanise jobs.

This is a huge agenda and a huge opportunity to deliver for the citizens that we serve.

Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Minister for the Cabinet Office, at the Keith Joseph Memorial Lecture at the CPS in London on 8 June 2016.

It is a huge honour to give this lecture in the memory of the great Sir Keith Joseph.

And a particular privilege that several members of the Joseph family are here tonight.

My generation can’t remember the Britain that existed before the revolution borne by Sir Keith.

We owe him a great debt of thanks.

But my generation is having to refight battles which we all thought Sir Keith had won.

Keith Joseph was clear-eyed in analysing the problems of his time, rigorous in his pursuit of solutions.

And one of today’s great challenges, that needs his sort of rigour, is the disruptive rise of new technology.

So today, I want to ask how he would have approached the rise of technology, and what my generation must do to rise to it.

Let’s start with a story.

Fifteen years ago, the video rental company Blockbuster was at the very height of its powers.

It had 60,000 employees and 9000 outlets worldwide, dominating its market almost as completely as the Roman Empire dominated the Mediterranean in the age of Hadrian.

Back then the famous blocky, yellow font could be seen on every high street in every town across Britain.

But, like the Romans, the decline proved just as irreversible.

In 2010 Blockbuster filed for bankruptcy. Shops were boarded up, thousands lost their jobs.

Their fate had been sealed when Blockbuster refused to move with the times, when the founder of a little-known tech start-up arrived at Blockbuster’s giant Dallas HQ with a business proposal.

He was offering to run their brand online, and was apparently laughed out of the room.

But today that little-known start-up – Netflix – has 80 million subscribers, including me, and no one’s laughing at them now.

This story of disruption has been repeated in different forms, with different protagonists, the world over.

Yet the underlying plot remains the same.

An entrepreneur uses new technology to disrupt an established business model, offering consumers a better, faster, cheaper, or more convenient service.

The disruptor rakes in billions, consumers benefit, but the disrupted lose their livelihoods.

And those old jobs are often gone forever. Netflix employs just 3,500 employees worldwide.

Tonight I want to address two big questions that come from this.

First, is this disruption a good thing?

Is the overall picture one of innovation and rising prosperity, or of dislocation and growing insecurity?

The second question flows from the first, and it’s the oldest question in Conservative politics.

What, if any, is the role for government?

What place for lumbering Leviathan in a world that gets faster and more interconnected every year?

It’s vital we have answers to these questions, both so we can govern well, and because ideas we thought Sir Keith helped vanquish long ago are back on the agenda.

This is a battle of ideas we’ve got to win.

In recent times, two political tendencies have grown strong by feeding on the anger and anxiety of the disrupted.

There is the populist right.

Trump. Le Pen. Farage: angry nativists who want to wall off the world.

Then there is the populist left.

Corbyn, McDonnell. Sanders: unreconstructed Socialists who’ve learnt nothing from the mistakes of history.

Both sides reject open markets; both are obsessed with recreating a better yesterday.

Their political programme amounts to a demand that things go back to the way they were: to the spirit of ’45, or les Trentes Glorieuses, or the glory days of the American past.

Both seek false certainties.

They are reactionaries, so we need to be Conservatives, preserving the best of the past with the best of the new, seeking security and opportunity based on a hard-headed analysis of a complex world.

The reactionary Socialism of the far Left and the closed minds of the reactionary Right would unlearn hard-won lessons of how to build a prosperous and dignified society.

They must be resisted.

Instead, a big opportunity awaits those who can provide an optimistic, open, forward-looking agenda, engaged in the world while resolutely focused on engaging people in what they want in life:

A satisfying job, a loving relationship, a caring family, a good home and a safety net when they need it…

… where their children can do better than them; where anyone – anyone – can, by rights, go as far as their talents and efforts can take them, irrespective of background, and where we know and acknowledge that change is hard and people deserve a helping hand through it.

That is the modern Conservatism that we must offer.

So let’s ask these two big questions.

First, should we be afraid of disruption?

Since Keith Joseph’s death twenty years ago, the global economy has changed profoundly.

Back then a third of the world survived on less than $2 a day.

Just a billion people earned enough money to make any discretionary purchases at all.

China’s economy was smaller than Italy’s.

Twenty years on, in part because of what he did and what he stood for, that extreme poverty has more than halved…

…The global middle class has doubled to over 2 billion, and China creates an Italian-sized economy every 18 months.

The explanation for that growth is a massive expansion of the free market, twinned with the mass-deployment of new technology.

It is impossible to separate out these forces, since both complement and catalyse the other.

Technology has opened up ever more avenues for trade. Think refrigeration and pasteurisation. Mass transit and bulk shipping. Click and collect.

At the same time, markets have refined and diffused new technology.

The result is that, as a world, on all objective measures, we’re getting richer, healthier, less hungry taller and more interconnected.

And yet despite all this, many suggest that we’ve hit the end of the road of rising living standards.

Today’s received wisdom seems to be that, despite all this technology, we live in an age of stagnation, that our children will not be as prosperous as our parents, and that technology is somehow making everything worse.

This belief is popular in academic circles, it’s espoused by Nobel-Prize winning economists and by politicians of the Left and the Right.

Now one of Sir Keith Joseph’s great talents was to face up to flawed assumptions, to be a warrior against lazy consensus.

In his day the received wisdom was that inflation was unmanageable, the trade unions ungovernable and that Britain’s best days were behind her.

He tackled that received wisdom head-on, and we now must do the same.

So let us tackle this modern day pessimism that technological progress is bad news.

We can start with its internal contradiction.

Some say that the pace of innovation has slowed, that we’re now living in a world of diminishing technological returns to production.

This is the thesis of a book by Professor Robert Gordon that’s fashionable in academic circles right now.

Others say that new general-purpose technology is destroying good jobs faster than they can be replaced.

But they can’t both right. Do we have a problem of too much disruptive technology, or too little?

Are we stuck in a new Middle Ages? Or, are we hurtling towards a dystopian future?

Let’s look at the first.

Has invention lost its momentum?

Professor Gordon argues that we came up with revolutionary inventions during what he calls the second Industrial Revolution, from 1870 to the post-war boom.

Inventions like electric lighting and the internal combustion engine, were, he says, transformational. But now, he says, the advances we’re making are only incremental.

To paraphrase, instead of making the jump from the telegraph to the telephone – written word to human voice – we’re just building slimmer phones.

As a result, he claims, young Americans will be first in their history not to exceed their parents’ standard of living.

When I hear that I can’t help but think of the words of William Preece, chief engineer at the British Post Office back in the 1890s.

Preece, an expert on the telegraph, just couldn’t see the point of the phone, saying: ‘we have plenty of messenger boys’.

He wasn’t alone.

‘Unworthy of the attention of practical and scientific men’, concluded a Parliamentary Select Committee set up to investigate Edison’s light bulb.

I’m glad the accuracy of Select Committee predictions has improved.

‘We have reached the limits of what is possible with computers,’ said pioneering computer scientist John von Neumann in 1949.

Even our heroes sometimes make mistakes. Sir Keith once visited a high-tech factory as Industry Secretary and asked one of the directors: ‘Do you think television has really come to stay?’

Or maybe, with the advent of Netflix, he was once again ahead of his time.

Now, for the first time in history, we have reached a point where machines can do cognitive as well as physical labour, thinking as well as doing.

And this affects almost everything.

Let’s take cars.

Professor Gordon says they accomplish the same basic role of transporting people from A to B as they did in 1970, just with a bit more convenience and safety.

But this misses one vital detail. Computers are now learning to drive. Driverless cars promise a new revolution.

You can work in them en route. They can reduce emissions and traffic, make journey times shorter, give disabled people far greater mobility.

And as the vast majority of accidents are caused by human error, they promise to cut road deaths too.

For the average British family their car is their second biggest investment, and yet they’re used just 4 per cent of the time.

What a massive waste of resources.

Should driverless cars become ubiquitous, families will be able to spend their savings on something far more useful than a steel box that spends most of its life sat on the driveway.

Everywhere we turn, digital technology is driving improvements in almost every sphere of life.

From 3D printers producing jet engine components, to the sensors in concrete that report on its own structural integrity…

…From smart traffic planning, to dynamic energy demand …

…The fact is we are just in the foothills of a new technological revolution, that will do even more to lift living standards and improve the human condition.

Gordon’s hard evidence for a loss of inventive momentum is in the data on productivity, and here we optimists need to have an answer.

Because the data does show a slowing that coincides with the rise of the Internet.

My response is that we need better measurement, because the current measures are broken.

It may surprise you, but we don’t measure productivity directly, we essentially take measured GDP and divide it by the total number of hours worked.

GDP matters. It’s the sum total of all the income our economy creates. It’s the best measure we’ve got of peoples’ standards of living.

But this way of measuring it was designed in the middle of the last century to capture exactly the sort of things that were being made then – cars and fridges and widgets of all kinds.

It suits the economy of the second Industrial Revolution because it is a product of that revolution.

For decades this didn’t matter much. The economy was all about widgets.

But now it’s all about binary digits.

Why does this matter?

It matters in the theory because digital is breaking down the binary distinction between consumption and production that much of economics has been built on since the days of Adam Smith.

While much progress in the last two centuries was based on separating consumption and production in pursuit of efficiency, much of what gets produced in digital form today is done so at zero marginal cost to the producer and at zero cost to the consumer.

And in the act of consuming a digital service we are also producing, because much of the digital economy runs on the user data we provide.

In an information age, these zero marginal costs fundamentally change the economics. I don’t know what all the conclusions will be, but this is a big challenge to the economics profession.

And this matters hugely in practice too, because many of the benefits of technological advance don’t get picked up in traditional measures of GDP.

Let’s take an example.

A few years ago we released TfL travel data as open data, free for anyone to access and reuse.

Then CityMapper came along and used that data to build an app telling you whether it’s quicker to walk or take the Tube when you go home on a fine summer’s evening like this.

Not only that, but it tells you how many calories you’ll burn in the process.

Surely that represents an improvement in peoples’ wellbeing and quality of life?

Not according to GDP as measured.

The enjoyment of the walk compared to the sweaty compression of the Tube? Not measured.

The health benefits? Not included.

The improvement to the environment? Nope.

The time saved? Nada.

In fact the only way that decision troubles the scorers is that the cost of your Tube ticket no longer counts as economic activity.

GDP is lower.

Productivity, as measured, is lower. We are, according to the stats, worse off.

The failure of GDP to capture the consumers’ side of life – the environmental or health considerations, for example – isn’t new, although where the impact was often negative – with more widgets meaning more pollution for example – now it’s often positive.

But the failure of GDP to measure the economic impact accurately – not even getting the direction of the GDP impact right – is on a completely new scale.

Because it’s not just CityMapper.

The watch that reminds you to take your medicine.

Ordering your weekly shop online.

Sharing pictures with your family, even though you’re a continent away.

These all have no impact on measured GDP, but they enrich our lives immensely.

What about the money saved from an online home-swap?

The app that saves energy?

How about the time and cost saved when you make a money transfer on your phone for free?

These changes, formally, reduce existing measures of GDP and therefore productivity.

Yet these are the innovations of our time.

One recent study in America found the welfare gains associated with access to free products on the Internet was equivalent to a 0.75 percentage point boost to growth each year.

Fortunately, here the ONS recognise these problems, and we’re lucky to have one of the best statistical agencies in the world rising to the challenge of measuring the modern economy.

There are some big questions for them to answer.

What is the nature of the value consumers receive from digital services?

How does the sharing economy fit in?

So my response to Professor Gordon is clear: progress hasn’t faltered. Progress marches on.

Now let us look at the second hypothesis of the naysayers.

What if robots are coming for our jobs?

In George Eliot’s Middlemarch, set in 1832, a riot nearly breaks out when engineers from London come to survey the parish for the construction of a railway.

‘There’s no knowing what there is at the bottom of it’, says one suspicious local, ‘ and it’s to do harm to the land and the poor man in the long-run.’

Some things never change.

This sums up the second hypothesis: that innovation is happening, that it might well benefit some, but everyone else is going to lose out.

This is not a new concern.

And I’m afraid I’ve got an admission to make.

Two hundred years ago in Nottinghamshire there was a large cottage industry of wool knitting.

Then Richard Arkwright invented the water frame and the Luddites organised riots in protest.

In 1812 1000 people met up near Arnold outside Nottingham to smash up the frames, and the riot was only stopped when dragoons rode in to arrest the ringleader.

The Luddites were protesting against the effects of the inevitable march of technology.

And the Luddite leader’s name? Benjamin Hancock.

Fast forward to 1933. Then it was John Maynard Keynes, who was worried about the ‘new disease’ of ‘technological unemployment’.

In 1963, it was Harold Wilson telling the Labour Party conference that technological progress would lead to ‘a high rate of employment for a few, and to mass redundancies for the many’.

Each time we enter a downturn and unemployment rises people point their fingers at the robots of the day.

My argument is that blaming technology is a mistake.

Today we’re recovering still from a deep cyclical downturn, not just an ordinary demand-led recession but a debt crisis.

As Carmen Reinhart and Ken Rogoff’s history of financial crises shows, after a systemic banking crisis it takes on average 8 years to reach pre-crisis levels of income.

It took the UK 7 years to do this after the 2008 crisis, so there’s nothing to suggest that this time is different.

That Great Recession is now thankfully abating, and a jobs-rich recovery is in train – which, unlike some pessimists like Paul Krugman, I think is unambiguously a good thing.

Likewise on pay.

In the aftermath of the Great Recession, real wages stagnated.

The good news is that here in the UK they are rising again, and there is no evidence of permanent stagnation.

There is, rightly, a debate about the labour share – the proportion of national output paid out in wages.

I’m firmly from the school of thought that holds that the purpose of growth is better pay, and so we should bend policy towards pay-rises.

Where in the last Parliament we made huge progress on the quantity of jobs, now we must make further progress on quality. Whether it’s ensuring shareholders can express a view on executive pay in the last Parliament, or introducing a National Living Wage in this one.

Here I differ from many Conservatives of a generation ago.

But where a generation ago the challenge was in the unaccountable power of trade unions, now the labour share is at historic lows, and we want to ensure everyone benefits from economic recovery and that the proceeds of growth are spread fairly.

Here too, as with jobs, with the right approach, technology can be our ally in the drive for higher pay.

Yet techno-pessimists continue to forecast a future in which the average human is obsolete.

Those who only see the job losses have fallen for the classic Lump of Labour fallacy.

As Keith Joseph himself said, the history of the last 200 years, packed as it is with labour-saving inventions, demonstrated the error.

Once again he was right.

There is not a static stock of jobs, which, if destroyed, reduces available employment.

People are dynamic.

Technology boosts productivity. It cuts costs and allows people to spend more of their money on other things. This creates new jobs.

The jobs our forebears did 100 years ago were vastly different from the ones we do today.

My great grandfather was a Nottinghamshire miner. When he was in his prime in the 1920s, over a million people were employed in coalmines deep underground.

Now there are none.

Last year there were 20,000 fewer personal assistants and secretaries than in 2001.

Thinking ahead, there are still 1 million jobs in call centres, and 200,000 check out operators.

But for how long?

Carl Frey and Michael Osborne at Oxford University estimate that 35 per cent of UK jobs are at risk from automation.

Yet while every period of unprecedented innovation has seen its pessimists predicting mass unemployment, technological advancement has never previously failed to deliver new opportunities.

The same is true today.

Employment rates in the UK are at record highs.

Whole occupations exist that didn’t exist 20 years ago.

In the future machines will do lots of the things that are currently done by humans.

But get this right and technology will free us up to do the jobs that only we humans can.

Jobs that involve problem-solving, creativity and social intelligence, for instance. Coming up with new business ideas, writing thrilling books, making scientific breakthroughs. Caring for one another, teaching one another, motivating one another.

We should automate work and humanise jobs.

Let’s give the mundane to the machines and purpose back to people.

—

Causing technological unemployment isn’t the only charge levelled at the disruptors.

They’re also accused of being the driving force behind unacceptable levels of inequality.

So is technology creating undeserving rich?

For Conservatives who believe in social mobility this is a serious issue.

Because it’s no good creating a fantastically productive and sophisticated economy if only the top few can enjoy it and the rest are consigned to the scrap heap.

Some argue that digital technology has an inherent tendency to concentrate wealth and market power.

This is because the value of a digital network increases as more people join.

Simply put, the more who sign onto Facebook, the more use it is to everyone.

So many digital services are dominated by a few giant platforms – Google for searching, Amazon and Ali Baba for retail, Uber for minicabs.

The owners of these platforms can make a fortune, and we’ve seen vast fortunes made.

But these platforms have another crucial characteristic: they create new markets so millions or billions of others can improve their lives.

Indeed, Professor William Nordhaus has suggested that only 2 per cent of the social value of innovation is captured by the innovators themselves.

The PhD student who drives an Uber part-time to fund her course.

The family-run takeaway business who use Just Eat to grow their brand.

The retired couple who supplement their pension trading on Ebay.

They all benefit from the platforms and the new markets that they create.

What’s more, by replacing mundane jobs technology can enhance social mobility too.

Technology, ultimately, is what makes it possible to live better lives than our parents and grandparents.

I say the more difficult and dangerous work that can be done by machines, the better.

But some argue that the real truth is more brutal – that we can’t all rise: that for each person who climbs, another must fall.

So who is right?

I know which view Keith Joseph would have supported.

He would have pointed out that, just as free markets and technology mean people as a whole are more prosperous than at any time in the course of human history, so these same forces mean the overall direction of social mobility is upwards.

He would, in other words, have argued that the lump of labour fallacy is matched by a lump of advantage fallacy.

As humanity becomes wealthier through technology, as work is automated and jobs are humanised, all can rise.

Of course there can only be one Lord Chief Justice or Chief Executive of Rolls Royce. But if we get this right there will be more of these interesting, rewarding and stimulating jobs and a higher proportion of the workforce in them.

In short, we shouldn’t think of social mobility as relative to our peers. That is the politics of envy.

We should think of social mobility as relative to our forebears. That is the politics of progress.

But social mobility is not automatic, it doesn’t happen without effort.

So while it is wrong to discriminate against anyone because of their background, it is right to measure how effectively people can access the top.

Let’s take the specific example of entry into the Civil Service.

A lot of ink has been spilled over the last couple of weeks about our approach to broadening access to the Civil Service.

Some have accused me of fomenting a class war, others have called me suicidally brave.

So I want to set out exactly what we are, and are not, planning to do.

Recent evidence suggests that the Fast Stream is less socially diverse than Oxbridge.

And it’s true that too little effort has gone into finding talent from all parts of our country and all backgrounds. This is much broader than the school you attended.

I’m a product of, and proud supporter of, Britain’s independent schools. I’m about as far from a class warrior as you could get.

But the Civil Service is not drawing on the all the talents it could.

And unlike gender or ethnicity, for example, this isn’t normally measured.

Over the past few years we’ve put a huge amount of effort into broadening access to the Civil Service.

Our apprenticeship schemes bring in talent from completely new backgrounds.

We’ve expanded outreach to encourage people to apply more broadly.

We’re making recruitment processes less London-centric.

And we want to measure, overall, how successful these policies are.

Any background measures would be collected on an entirely voluntary basis and used anonymously.

Let me be absolutely clear. They will not form the basis of any individual recruitment decision.

When it comes to appointment, that is and should always be on merit.

Positive action yes. Positive discrimination no.

In fact, we’re going further to remove discrimination. Some have suggested that the best way to tackle this is anonymous applications. They are exactly right.

Since September we’ve ensured that applications are both name-blind and school-blind.

This now covers 70 per cent of the Civil Service by default, and will soon be standard across the board.

It’s part of a wider plan to remove bias in peoples’ applications.

Just like the success we’ve had in radically increasing the number of women on boards, this meritocracy can only be promoted by eschewing quotas and sticking rigorously to appointment on merit, while measuring how well we do in giving everyone a fair chance to serve their country.
—

So.

It is my core belief that technology enhances opportunity and upward social mobility. But we must not be blind to the challenges in getting there.

So given all this, let us turn to what is the role for government?

Keith Joseph spoke eloquently of a Conservatism that emphasises security, stability, the human urge to form loving bonds with family and community.

This has never been wholly reconciled with the demands of the free market.

Sometimes developed economies – the UK included – have historically not done enough to support those who lose their jobs to economic disruption.

Especially when the losses have come in highly concentrated geographic areas, meaning whole towns and industries have closed virtually overnight.

Luddite may now be a byword for backwardness, but the original Luddites were skilled workers with families to feed, who’d seen the value of lifetime’s craftsmanship vanish overnight, and who had no legitimate, democratic power to protest.

We have to remember that for all the benefits driverless technology will bring, it’s not much good if you’re a truck driver.

So how do we get to the future without leaving anyone behind?

For a modern, compassionate Conservative it is vital that we address this question.

Supporting the disruptors and the disrupted

The first thing need to do is support the disruptors.

This isn’t just about the Valley.

Huge efforts over the last 6 years have gone into creating a dynamic environment for enterprise in which peoples’ talents and passions can be unleashed.

We can be incredibly proud that we are home to fastest growing tech cluster in Europe, that we’ve embraced sharing economy platforms like Uber and AirBnB, that we do more e-commerce per head than any other nation, and that other governments are using code written by our very own GDS.

Of course, technology sometimes has its frustrations, as I’ve discovered myself in the last 24 hours.

But it is the flexibility of an economy that allows its people to make the most of the new technologies available.

By contrast, the Left are currently fixated with the idea, espoused by Mariana Mazzucato, that government itself is the best disruptive innovator.

It’s true that the things that make a smartphone work – GPS, the Internet, even Siri – began life as DARPA research projects.

Yet no-one at the Pentagon dreamed that one day Cold War-era military hardware would be used for online shopping. That required the market.

Yes, there is a vital role for government in scientific research, but only as part of a dynamic economy that can take that research to market.

Likewise we need a regulatory framework that stays up to speed with new technologies and ensures a level playing field.

We need a business environment and competition policy in which the disruptors can themselves be disrupted: pro-market not pro-incumbent, where businesses can arrive, thrive and fail to survive.

It means relentlessly tackling barriers to entry, like licenses, restrictive practices and monopolies, while pursuing smart deregulation so businesses aren’t crippled by bureaucracy and consumers are protected.

It means lower corporate tax, to encourage businesses to expand.

And it means allowing for new platforms to be developed.

Just one example. Care work is a difficult, low-paid and incredibly important job that has so far been untouched by the digital revolution.

It can’t be done by machines, but how about a platform allowing local authorities, with appropriate safeguards, to get services directly from care-workers, that would cut out the huge agency fees and allow direct user feedback from families?

Another way the government can support disruption is to release the data it holds on behalf of the country.

Where we’ve published our data in open, usable format, entrepreneurs, academics and pioneering local authorities have found applications for it that we simply couldn’t have imagined.

Travel apps, property valuations, flood modelling, footfall simulations for retail: these are a small fraction of the applications that have been engineered with open data.

So far we’ve released 29,000 datasets and counting.

We are already world leaders at this, with a blossoming data economy to show for it, but there is much more to do.

So first, we support the disruptors.

Second, supporting both disruptors and the disrupted demands the right skills.

The quality of schools are critical of course, and must produce rounded, dynamic and entrepreneurial young people prepared to adapt to an ever-changing world.

We need to think of digital skills as foundational, alongside English and maths, and continue the massive expansion of apprenticeships.

But we must stop thinking of education as ending at 18 or 21. Constant learning is the norm, and we must do much more to harness education technology to expand the options for adults and children alike.

Third, we must support those who are disrupted too.

True Conservatism has always rejected laissez-faire.

After all, the purpose of a strong and flexible economy is to support people.

Where job-losses from automation are dispersed, and among people with transferable skills, the challenge is not as great.

But when a big change hits an area with a high concentration of jobs in one place we’ve got to be prepared to intervene.

The benefits of technological progress are well worth the cost of government intervention to support the disrupted.

Over the past few years, government has improved its toolkit for helping communities manage disruption.

In 2011, when Pfizer decided to sell its Sandwich site, the Government stepped in to create an enterprise zone with lower business rates and superfast broadband.

In 2012 when Ford shut their production plant in Southampton we worked to redeploy workers who were out of a job.

By 2014, under 2 per cent were out of work.

We are now working intensively to save the Port Talbot steelworks.

And for those who say we shouldn’t have industrial strategies, my answer is clear: government has an imprint on the economy just by existing, so let’s be strategic about that imprint and not passive.

Geography matters too: increasing agglomeration, like with the Northern Powerhouse, improving transport and economic ties reduces the impact of any given shock.

Balancing the proven value of clusters, with the need to avoid wherever possible isolated industries.

So we must help new businesses create jobs, not just in general but specifically in the places that need them.

This all means government rolling its sleeves up and getting its hands dirty to regenerate and attract businesses where jobs have been lost.

Look at the Orgreave colliery site, derelict for years after the mine closed.

But now, thanks to our work in the last Parliament, it’s a cutting-edge catapult centre combining business, government and academic research.

Our attitude to the rise in self-employment matters too.

Some see the rise in self-employment as a problem: by contrast it brings flexibility and dynamism that needs to be matched by tailored support where feasible.

This is the way a modern, dynamic, free economy works.

Freeing disruptors to expand, helping the disrupted where needs demand. Supporting people to change, not to stay the same.

Sir Keith Joseph spent his life in a battle of ideas in pursuit of a free society that worked for its citizens.

He believed, as he put it, in ‘government as a maker of rules for men who want to fashion their lives for themselves’.

Today we must remake those rules, drawing inspiration from and learning from the past, recognising that technology is not an enemy of humanity but a collective expression of humanity.

We have a duty to win this battle against the reactionaries of left and right.

We need to be on the side of the disrupted, as well as the disruptors.

Throughout history it’s been the role of Conservatives to trust in the ingenuity of the human spirit, and put forward the ideas that prepare the world best for the future.

Now our generation must win that battle of ideas once again.

There is a lot at stake, but the prize is worth it.

We have the opportunity to remake Britain once again as a world-leading, dynamic, prosperous society, in which all can play their part.

We should be excited about what the future could hold, determined that all should benefit from it.

And in so doing win the case for a country in which all can reach their potential.

Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Minister for the Cabinet Office, at the Grange Hotel in London on 25 May 2016.

I’m very grateful to the Telegraph for asking me here to this crucial conference on cyber security.

As we’re guests of the Telegraph, I want to start with a little story about the telegraph. Not the paper, but the technology.

A century ago, the First World War was raging in Europe, and the Allies were desperate to bring America into the war on our side.

Then, in January 1917, the German ambassador to Mexico received an encrypted telegram from Berlin.

It instructed him to offer the Mexican government money and diplomatic support for an audacious invasion of the United States.

But this message was subject to one of the first and perhaps most influential cyber security breaches in history.

It didn’t matter that the idea was half-baked, that the Mexicans had no interest in invading Arizona. When the contents were revealed, American opinion was outraged.

Shortly after, Congress voted to join the war.

So why did the German high command entrust such a sensitive message to Western Union, then, as now, a wire transfer company?

Because they had failed to appreciate an obvious network vulnerability.

The subsea cable they were using did not travel directly from Europe.

Instead it went through Britain, stopping off at Land’s End, where the signal was boosted before being transmitted to America.

This meant it very easy for British Naval Intelligence to listen in on the traffic.

Once war broke out, any diplomatic telegrams passing through were copied down and dispatched to Room 40, the forerunner of GCHQ.

I mention this story as a warning against complacency.

Telegraphy was the email of its day: trusted and widely used, familiar rather than cutting edge.

People thought it was secure, but it wasn’t.

A hundred years on, our trusted communications are wireless, instantaneous and virtually cost-free. Data is stored in the Cloud, not in filing cabinets.

And this has changed the world beyond all recognition, in my view emphatically for the better.

Vulnerability in cyber security

From the little to the life-changing, remote robotic surgery to online box-sets. We are freer, more prosperous, more knowledgeable about the world than ever before.

Yet this brings with it renewed vulnerability.

Barriers to entry have come crashing down for companies and cyber-criminals alike.

Unlike in 1917 you don’t need to be a state to inflict a massive data breach.

When peoples’ cyber security isn’t up to scratch, you just need a laptop and an Internet connection.

The tech may have got smarter, but the biggest weakness in any system is still the human being.

In the last year, 2 thirds of large businesses in the UK experienced an cyber attack.

Almost a quarter suffered a breach at least once a month.

This matters because we are one of the world’s leading digital nations.

Twelve and a half per cent of our economy is now online. No other country does more e-commerce.

In government too we’ve begun to upload the state, using technology to build more responsive, user-centric public services.

I call it the smartphone state.

And we’re still only in the foothills.

Smart energy, networked cities, quantum computing: these all have the potential to transform our lives and refashion our economy.

But to deliver on that promise we have to be able to defend our digital society from those who wish it and us harm.

A strong cyber defence requires three things.

First, we – industry and government – together must recognise that this is a shared responsibility, a duty that we owe our fellow citizens.

Second, that we deliver on that commitment by equipping them with the right skills.

And third, that we can and must turn our vulnerabilities into a source of economic strength.

Let me take each in turn.

Shared responsibility

First, it’s vital to recognise this is an issue for CEOs as well as spooks.

The vast majority of the UK’s Critical National Infrastructure is operated by the private sector. Power, water and telecoms are all critical targets.

Even outside that our digital lives are in your hands, everything from our life savings to our holiday snaps.

I’m encouraged to see that two thirds of businesses say cyber security is now a priority for senior managers.

Yet there remains a gap between awareness and action.

Only half of the businesses we surveyed this year have taken steps to identify cyber risks.

Make no mistake, the next data breach will happen. It’s your duty to make it’s not your company splashed across the papers when it does.

But we don’t expect you to do it alone.

We’ve created the UK’s first systematic National Cyber Security Programme, and we’re almost doubling the funding with £1.9 billion over the next five years.

We’re setting up a National Cyber Security Centre under GCHQ.

The centre will provide a single point of contact for businesses in need of advice and support.

I want it to become a hub of world-class, user-friendly expertise: a global leader under the steady hand of Ciaran Martin, bridging the gap between the worlds of government and industry.

And today I’m publishing the centre’s prospectus , setting out how it’ll work ahead of its full launch later this year.

And we want to hear from you what you think and how it can help your business.

I strongly recommend that you feed back to us, so we can design the National Cyber Security Centre around your needs.

The right skills

We already know that your number one need is for skills, and this is the second part of facing down the cyber threat.

It’s not just that we need more skills. Computer security needs to become a basic life skill, like learning to drive.

And while we want everyone to pass the test, we also need our elite Formula 1 drivers.

So we’re growing the talent pool at every stage of the education system.

Learning coding in schools, competitions to get more girls into cyber, residential courses for students in Years 12 and 13 – sponsorship for the most promising undergrads – all under the Government-backed Cyber First banner.

We’ve opened new routes into cyber security, like the new Trailblazer apprenticeship.

And I’m proud to give my support to the new Extended Project Qualification, which the Cyber Security Challenge just created.

This level 3 qualification, equivalent to an AS Level, teaches the basics of cyber security in three months, and can be studied in schools, colleges or through the Challenge itself.

But industry has to play its part too.

We need more businesses to offer training, sponsorship apprenticeships: more breaks for the best minds.

Because if we commit now, together, the struggle in cyberspace is Britain’s opportunity.

That’s the third part of securing our cyber defences: not just protecting the digital economy but growing it.

Turning risk into reward

We’re already one of the top 5 exporters in the world, and the global market is growing by 20% a year.

A strong cyber security industry means a safer Britain.

So we’re funding test labs where cyber start-ups can refine their prototypes:

– a cyber security fund to scale the established players

– a cyber security innovation centre in Cheltenham.

And today I can announce a new cyber security trade champion for the Gulf, to help UK companies win business in the region, while supporting the work of the UK Cyber Ambassador.

This comes alongside our dedicated cyber specialist in Washington, who’s been supporting our engagement with cyber businesses in the US.

Our goal is to create a commercial ecosystem where cutting-edge research is backed, start-ups get scaled, and British companies win business around the world.

Conclusion

So shared responsibility, the right skills, and boosting the cyber economy: get these 3 right and we can get across this challenge.

Everyone has their part to play to close the chinks in our armour and the gaps in our capability.

There is no doubt that cyber attacks are a serious and growing problem.

But the history of technological advance – and with it of human progress – is the history of solving problems.

After the First World War the Germans, determined that their codes would never again be cracked, built mechanical encryption machines.

In turn we built the world’s first digital computers to break them.

We can’t know what we’ll evolve in response to the current threat.

But if we are honest about the threat, if we work together we can drive progress, power innovation, build better tech and a safer, more prosperous Britain.

That is our task and I look forward to working with you to achieve it.

Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Cabinet Office Minister, in London on 19 May 2016.

When Alan Turing proposed the Turing Machine and his theory of machine intelligence, he would not have imagined that his early ideas of computing and algorithms would be enhanced and evolved using the quintillions of bytes of data we generate today.

This explosion of data has a profound and positive – socially, in work, in public services and in life.

Turing’s work on enigma during the war, working with Bill Tutte who remained less recognised, is a piece of history we are all familiar with. But some of Turing’s most influential research came later, in artificial intelligence.

When Turing devised the Turing Test, to determine whether a computer was human or not, the idea of machines thinking and working for themselves was in something which may have seemed like science fiction.

But we have come to expect Siri to tell us about delays on the Jubilee line, for Google to translate a webpage automatically, or to use an automated till at the checkout.

Now there are those that worry that technological change will make us worse off, that automation raises the prospect of mass unemployment. Machines will take over all our jobs, and there will be nothing left for humans to do.

We’ve heard this before – from the Luddites to Keynes to Harold Wilson, history is littered with those predicting the end of work. And history has proved them wrong every time.

Digital transformation

Technological progress does not remove the need for human endeavour. There is no fixed amount of work to be done.

Technology improves productivity and reduces costs, allowing people to spend more on other things, in turn creating new jobs.

The trick is not to hold back the machines, but to harness their power.

We should celebrate the fact that technology can replace, and in some cases improve, administrative tasks, freeing us humans up to focus on what we’re best at, using our creative skills to iterate and improve services.

But transformation is disruptive, and it’s understandable people worry.

As a government we must support them, making sure we provide all the support people need.

And this support is well worth it. Because the increasing use of data, digital services and automation provides citizens with a huge opportunity if we manage it properly.

For government it gives the chance to improve the services we provide by making them more efficient, accurate and suited to citizens’ needs. Data helps us better serve citizens.

Across government we are working hard to ensure data and data-science techniques are put to good use; improving data quality and security through canonical registers, integrating data into digital services; and using cutting edge data science techniques to improve government policy and services.

For example, using the thousands of feedback comments we receive on our digital services to predict prominent problems or peaks in demand.

Data science advancement

Using social media posts about sickness in the local area to predict where norovirus might next strike ahead of medical lab reports. Or harnessing blockchain technology to follow the use of money given on behalf of taxpayers in grants.

Our Digital Economy Bill, set out by Her Majesty yesterday, will help us unlock more advances.

But the technology is only part of the overall solution. Digital transformation has no meaning or real world effect unless it is the driver for business transformation, of changes in culture.

To get that right, advances in data science must be made in a strong framework that is protective of privacy and reassuring to the public.

The Bill will allow more modern use of data, to improve services or tackle fraud. And it will do this within a strong framework of data protection and protection of personal information.

It is vital we seize the opportunities that data science presents. The biggest risk would be to do nothing and to miss out on the enormous potential to improve the lives of our citizens.

Data privacy

Privacy or cyber security are nothing without reliable verification of identity. So I’m delighted to announce that GOV.UK Verify has passed its service assessment and will go live next week.

Verify allows secure and straightforward identity checking without the need for an identity database – and underpins the digital transformation of government and I want to thank the Verify team for their innovative, determined and dedicated work.

Now with these safeguards we want to unlock the progressive power of data science to improve lives.

And we want people in government to feel confident using new techniques. This means setting out clear guidance that brings together the relevant laws and best practice, gives data scientists and their teams robust principles to work with. It is all about encouraging new and innovative ways to better solve problems and deliver.

So today we are launching our new Data Science Ethical Framework, setting out in one place our framework for using data. It will help people using data to ask the right questions and take appropriate steps.

Today’s publication is a first version developed across government,civil society, industry and academic partners.

We aren’t saying that it is a finished article. Today we ask for your help to iterate the framework to keep abreast of the changing landscape and developments and ensure it is a document that continues to work.

Technology is constantly changing, new techniques constantly invented. These offer huge opportunities to improve lives, to create jobs, to connect better the citizens and the state. We must be at the forefront of this change, secure yet ambitious, else we will count the cost.

The opportunities are greater than Alan Turing could have imagined, all those years ago. Let us seize them, to improve the lives of the citizens we serve.

Thank you.

Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General, in London on 11 May 2016.

Thank you Patricia, our new and brilliant Secretary General of the Commonwealth.

Mr President, it is an honour to welcome you here, with united determination to tackle corruption. I pay tribute to the work you have led and leadership you have shown.

Everyone here today, from Civil Society, from business and from governments around the world stands testament to that determination.

We are here today because of what we share: The view, forged by experience, founded in evidence, not just, that corruption is an evil in itself – and that surely is so – not just that corruption exacerbates other evils of poverty and extremism and want but that together, as global community, we know endemic corruption can be wiped from this Earth.

Corruption is the cancer at the heart of so many of the world’s problems.

But there is nothing permanent about countries being held back by its scourge.

There is nothing inevitable about the injustice it represents.

Corruption is made by man and it is within man’s gift to end it.

It will not be easy. The forces ranged against are powerful and strong.

But we here are the optimists.

This week marks the world’s first international summit dedicated to the eradication of corruption.

The goal is to make the fight against corruption a priority for world leaders.

The summit will tomorrow discuss, and, with effort, agree to, commitments aimed at seeing a real reduction in global corruption.

Attended by people from across the world, from countries each at different stages of taking on this challenge.

For corruption exists in every country to different degrees. No matter what the starting point, what matters is our shared determination to tackle the problem.

We are bringing together world leaders, business and civil society to agree a package of practical steps to expose corruption, so there is nowhere to hide; punish the perpetrators, and support those affected, and drive out the culture of corruption wherever it exists.

Now it’s worth taking a moment to reflect on the scale of the challenge, and why we are here to tackle it.

The cost of corruption

First, the cost.

Consider just the economic costs.

On top of the lives ruined and the immorality.

The economic costs are stark.

It is estimated that corruption adds 10% to business costs globally and that cutting corruption by just 10% could benefit the global economy by $380 billion every year.

Corrupt practices inhibit business; precious resources are whittled away directly in bribes, and indirectly in biased decisions.

Customers, honest businesses and taxpayers pick up the bill.

And these direct costs are just the start.

Other effects of corruption

Opportunities are lost; lives blighted; investment hindered; and the chance for people to get on and get up and make the most of the world around us and fulfil their potential – all this is held back.

And it is not the well off who suffer the most.

It is very poorest who are hardest hit.

Those for whom there is no escape.

In their name it is our duty to act.

And let us share another honest truth.

Let us openly admit this fault.

When it comes to tackling corruption, the international community has looked the other way for too long.

For too long.

We simply can no longer afford to side-step corruption: we must step up.

That is our task today.

What the UK has done

Prime Minister Cameron has put corruption on the agenda as never before: at the G7, the G20, the OECD and the United Nations.

We want to work through the existing international infrastructure – not to invent another layer, but to convert the multinational system to the task.

We are taking the lead in calling the summit.

And we are not just talking but acting at home.

It was my privilege to pilot through Parliament the rules to establish a public central registry of beneficial ownership.

When this goes live next month we will be the first in the G20 to do it.

It is now in the UK a criminal offence for a company to fail to prevent a bribe being paid.

We are driving open data, transparency and open contracts.

And we will now make it a criminal offence for corporations who fail to stop their staff facilitating tax evasion.

But no government, working alone, can tackle this problem.

In an increasingly inter-connected world of instant communication and mobile capital, no country is immune from the threat posed by corruption.

And no country can fight it alone.

We are making progress.

Good governance is now at the heart of the Sustainable Development Goals to transform the way the international community fights poverty.

We have created a new international anti-corruption unit in the UK’s National Crime Agency, to recover funds stolen from developing countries and prosecute those responsible.

Over the next 36 hours we must aim high for an agreement among governments to the next vital steps.

Yet governments do not operate in a vacuum.

A strong civil society has a critical role to play, holding us in government to account and driving innovation in the detection and reporting of corruption. Tomorrow we will launch our Open Government Partnership National Action Plan, developed with civil society.

Technology gives us an opportunity for openness. And business must play its part.

Conclusion

We all have our part to play.

So let us seize this moment.

This is the time.

Corruption is a global problem that demands co-ordinated action.

We must act together so there is no hiding place for those that perpetrate, the corruption that spreads injustice and divides our world.

Let us today resolve.

That while, yes, the task is hard.

Surely, the prize is worth it.

So let us work to our objective, with optimism and ambition, and deliver our goals in the interests of the citizens who we serve.