Tag: Press Release

PRESS RELEASE : Ukraine – 1,000 Ukrainian patients transferred to European hospitals

The press release issued by the European Commission on 5 August 2022.

As of today, the EU has successfully coordinated 1,000 medical evacuations of Ukrainian patients via its Civil Protection Mechanism to provide them with specialised healthcare in hospitals across Europe.

As the number of wounded people in Ukraine increases day by day, local hospitals are struggling to keep up with the demand. At the same time, Poland, Moldova and Slovakia have requested support for medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) operations from their respective countries given the large inflow of people. To relieve pressure on local hospitals, since 11 March, the EU has been coordinating patient transfers to other European countries who have available hospital capacity.

The patients have been transferred to 18 countries: Germany, France, Ireland, Italy, Denmark, Sweden, Romania, Luxembourg, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Austria, Norway, Lithuania, Finland, Poland and Czechia. Recent operations include the transfer of two patients to Czechia on 3 August and 15 patients evacuated to Germany, four patients to the Netherlands and 2 patients to Norway on 4 August.

Commissioner for Crisis Management Janez Lenarčič said: “Russia’s unjustified war in Ukraine is driving Ukrainian health systems to breaking point. To help Ukraine cope with the skyrocketing medical needs, the EU has stepped up its operations. On top of delivering medicines and medical equipment to Ukraine via our Civil Protection Mechanism, we are also coordinating medical evacuations. 1,000 Ukrainian patients have been transferred to hospitals in 18 European countries. I want to thank all countries who are welcoming the Ukrainian patients in this critical time. EU solidarity saves lives.”

European Commissioner for Health and Food Safety Stella Kyriakides said: “From day one, the EU has been working tirelessly to support Ukraine and its people in the face of Russia’s brutal military aggression. As part of this, the EU Civil Protection Mechanism has allowed patients in urgent need of treatment and care to receive it in hospitals across the EU, while relieving pressure on the healthcare systems of Ukraine’s neighbouring countries. This is true European solidarity in action. Together with Ukrainian authorities, we are also looking into ways to bring patients back home when they have finished their treatment, if they choose to do so. This lifesaving work will continue, as will the EU’s unwavering commitment to supporting Ukraine”.

Background

The medical evacuations are financially and operationally supported by the EU Civil Protection Mechanism. The MEDEVAC transfer scheme supports the transfer of patients that fulfil the eligibility criteria, be they chronically ill or wounded by the war. The mechanism enables the Commission to report to the Ukrainian authorities where in the EU/EEA countries the patients have been transferred. For a secure transfer of patient data, the patients’ health records are shared using the Early Warning and Response System (EWRS).

August 16, 2022
PRESS RELEASE : EU’s open border system is ‘like hanging a sign welcoming terrorists to Europe’

The press release issued by Vote Leave on 4 December 2015.

The EU’s open border system – the ‘Schengen’ system – has recently been condemned by the former Secretary General of Interpol, Ronald K Noble, as ‘an international passport-free zone for terrorists to execute attacks on the Continent and make their escape’.

1. The Schengen system forbids countries from carrying out systematic checks on anyone with an EU passport from entering the EU. This makes it much easier for jihadists to enter from the Middle East. The former head of Interpol says this ‘is like hanging a sign welcoming terrorists to Europe. And they have been accepting the invitation’.

2. The UK has lost control of many aspects of border controls and migration (though we have some opt-outs from some EU policies). Our border controls are under constant attack from the European Court of Justice (ECJ). Last year, it said that our Government cannot require migrants from other EU states to have a permit issued by UK authorities – even though permits from other EU countries are systematically forged. The Italian ID card, for instance, is simply a laminated piece of card, and we have no control over the way other EU countries issue their passports. This makes it easier for terrorists to slip through the net.

3. The EU prevents us from removing violent criminals (see the Rafacz case where we could not remove a violent killer). The ECJ also makes it harder for our Government to strip citizenship from British nationals who have gone abroad to engage in terrorism so they will retain the right to come back and live in Britain.

4. Using the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights, EU judges now decide what powers our intelligence agencies and police have to protect us. In November 2015, a UK law to help the security services track terrorists was referred to the ECJ for a decision on whether it is allowed. If we remain in the EU, the ECJ will continue to take more control every year using the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

5. The Charter also stops us removing foreign criminals and terror suspects from the UK if it would violate their ‘private or family life’. It prevents European nations halting the flow of boats across the Mediterranean which have cost so many lives (see particularly the 2011 Hirsi Ali case which prevents EU states turning back a boat of terrorists if there is among them one person at risk of persecution at home).

6. The Charter also removes from the UK the power to interpret the vital 1951 UN Convention ourselves – the EU is now in charge of how we implement this international agreement. The Charter goes far beyond what the UN Refugee Convention requires and threatens the safety of vulnerable migrants and EU citizens. David Cameron once promised ‘a complete opt out’ from the Charter. Now he has abandoned this promise.

7. Brussels’ priority is taking more powers from member states, not security. They are still debating security powers which they said they needed after the Madrid train bombings in 2004. Last week, the President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, said the dangerous Schengen zone must continue or else the euro would die. Now the European Commission wants an EU army and intelligence agency, while the European Parliament has voted to strip the UK of our seat on the UN Security Council.

If we vote to remain in the EU, we will lose more vital powers over security every year. It is safer to Vote Leave and take back control. Outside the EU, we will continue to co-operate with our European partners to fight terrorism and organised crime – just as we do with important allies like the USA – but we will be outside the supremacy of EU law, the rulings of the European courts, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

Vote Leave, take control.

August 16, 2022
PRESS RELEASE : 200,000 UK Businesses Trade with the EU

The press release issued by Stronger In on 6 January 2016.

Being part of Europe means UK businesses get free access to over 500 million customers in the EU – and can trade with no tariffs or barriers.

This helps them grow and create jobs here in the UK. 200,000 UK businesses trade with the EU (Source: HMRC) and one in every ten UK jobs is linked to our trade with the EU (Source: Office for National Statistics and House of Commons Library).

And it’s estimated that remaining in the EU will mean another 790,000 jobs being created across the UK over the next 15 years – creating more opportunities now and for the future.

August 16, 2022
PRESS RELEASE : Karren Brady – British Families Better Off in Europe

The press release issued by Stronger In on 12 October 2015.

Karren Brady, a Board Member of Britain Stronger in Europe, has written an important article in The Sun explaining why British families are stronger, safer and better off in Europe:

“The EU referendum question is: will Britain be stronger in or out of Europe?

For me the answer is clear: British families, consumers and businesses are stronger in than out.

But I know many Sun readers want to be convinced. Europe is not perfect – no partnership is – so we must show the benefits outweigh the costs.

Europe is our largest trading partner. 45% of our exports go there, worth £226 billion last year. 200,000 businesses trade with Europe. European trade supports millions of British jobs. £70 million of investment come to Britain from Europe every day. And a bigger market has driven down prices for consumers, for example cheaper flights.

Why put all this at risk?

Those campaigning to walk away and stand alone – like Nigel Farage and Daniel Hannan – cannot guarantee jobs and living standards will be protected if we leave.

They have simply got it wrong when they say they want Britain to be like Norway. Norway is outside the EU but has trading rights. Sounds good? But in exchange Norway has to accept EU rules – including free movement of people – but has no power to influence them. They pay millions into the EU budget too. It’s the worst of all worlds.

This is also why EU-exit is not an answer to people’s concerns about immigration. If you want access to free trade with Europe, free movement is part of the deal.

Of course the system can be tightened. So it is essential to be in the room at the top table arguing for change – as the Prime Minister is rightly doing.

This campaign cannot be about scare stories. We do not support joining the Euro or a Euro Army. Neither are on the ballot paper or even on the horizon.

We want to strengthen the pound in your pocket – and we will make sure the Queen’s face remains on it.

Britain can be proud and prosperous from within Europe. If countries such as Germany, France and Denmark can hack it, why can’t we?

Yes, we must fight for Europe to work better in Britain’s interests, but weakly walking away is out of character for a country with our history.

We have a bigger vision: leading in Europe while trading around the world.

That’s why we are asking you to vote to keep Britain in and make British families stronger, safer and better off.”

August 16, 2022
PRESS RELEASE : Stuart Rose Joins as Campaign Chair

The press release issued by Stronger In on 12 October 2015.

We’re delighted to announce that Lord Stuart Rose, the former Executive Chair of Marks and Spencer, has been appointed the new Chair of Britain Stronger In Europe.

With unparalleled experience of business and enterprise, he knows the value that being part of Europe brings to businesses across Britain.

Lord Rose said, “Most people, myself included, will make a hard-headed, practical calculation in the coming referendum on what is best for the British people. I believe that Britain is stronger in Europe.”

“The choice in the coming referendum is between remaining stronger, safer and better off inside Europe, or taking a leap into the unknown, risking our prosperity, threatening our safety, and diminishing our influence in the world. I believe the case for Britain to remain in the EU is clear.”

August 16, 2022
PRESS RELEASE : The 10 Questions the Leave Campaign Must Answer

The press release issued by Stronger In on 19 February 2016.

We hope to see the completion of the Prime Minister’s renegotiating package shortly. This would make Britain even stronger in Europe and is something the country should get behind.

When we do we will know what ‘in’ looks like. Britain will have the best of both worlds: the benefits of economic partnership but not taking part in arrangements that don’t suit us.

We will still be in the dark, however, on what ‘out’ looks like. Those campaigning for Britain to leave will excitedly declare their hand. But while we know what they will say about Europe, they still cannot tell us how Britain would prosper outside Europe.

Here are the ten questions that everyone campaigning for Britain to leave must be able to answer if they are to have a credible or achievable alternative. At present, it is clear they do not have one.

1. Would Britain have full access to the single market, covering both goods and services?

As part of the single market UK businesses and those they employ benefit from trade barriers being broken down. Tariffs are removed and regulations are commonly agreed. This increases trade, drives competition, lowers prices and enables business expansion, which increases employment. Is this what the leave campaigns want to sacrifice with a leap in to the dark?

2. Would Britain adhere to free movement and European employment regulations?

The leave campaigns have long argued that Britain must end free movement and repatriate employment regulations. There is no country that opts out of both and retains full or even partial access to Europe’s single market. Those campaigning for Britain to leave must come clean on their precise policy on free movement and EU regulations and its implications for financial security, prices and jobs.

3. Is there an existing trading arrangement Britain would seek to emulate?

We have heard the leave campaigns cite Norway, Switzerland, South Korea, Mexico and even Peru as examples the UK should follow. Each has a different trading relationship with the EU, each of which is worse than being a full member and getting the full benefits of economic partnership. However, the leave campaigns seem totally unable to say what Britain outside Europe looks like. So they must tell us: which country should the UK follow?

4. Would Britain cease paying in to the EU budget completely and therefore make zero annual contribution?

We have heard much about made-up figures on how much the UK sends in EU budget contributions. In truth, we get back more than we put in. But those campaigning to leave must say whether they intend to end contributions altogether. There is no country which makes no payments at all and retains access to the single market. If we were to make no payments, we would experience more trade barriers than we do now, risking jobs, prices and financial security. Is this what leave campaigners really want?

5. Under a free trade agreement, what terms would you campaign for and what evidence exists that this could be achieved?

Many claim that if the UK were to leave we would be given a new trade deal that would give us all the benefits but none of the costs of being in the EU. So far, some fantastical ideas have been suggested. Any deal would have to be agreed by the European Council and European Parliament. Therefore, leave campaigns must come clean about what trade deal they would seek and must show that this would be agreed by European partners.

6. How long would it take to negotiate a new free trade agreement with the EU?

If the UK voted to leave, under Article 50 the UK would have two years to agree a withdrawal deal. But trade deals take far longer to negotiate. How long do leave campaigners expect a UK-EU deal to take, and what would happen to the UK economy in the meantime during a period of such dramatic uncertainty?

7. How would the UK renegotiate bilateral trade agreements with the 50+ countries with whom the EU has agreements, from which the UK currently benefits?

The EU has trade deals with 50+ countries, from which the UK benefits. If we vote to leave, we lose access to these deals and those countries’ markets. We would have to renegotiate these ourselves, as a country of 65 million rather than a bloc of 500 million. This would take years and we would not be guaranteed the same terms we currently enjoy. What guarantees can the leave campaigns give that the benefits we currently enjoy could be replicated?

8. Can it be guaranteed that no job in Britain would be put at risk by our leaving Europe?

Three to four million jobs are linked to our trade with the EU, our largest trading partner. If we were to leave, trade would be hit and therefore these jobs would be at risk. Leave campaigners have already admitted that jobs would be lost. Can they guarantee no job, in the long or short term, would be lost?

9. Can it be guaranteed that investment would not be put at risk by our leaving Europe?

Almost half of all foreign investment in Britain is from the EU and our access to the single market is a primary reason for the foreign investment we get from around the world. If we leave the single market and erect new trade barriers, this investment would be at risk. Many businesses have said that they would rethink long investment decisions. Can leave campaigns guarantee this would not happen?

10. And can it be guaranteed that UK-EU trade would not be damaged by our leaving the EU?

Half of our trade in goods goes to the EU. Over 200,000 UK businesses trade with the EU. We sell six times more in goods to the EU than we do the BRIC countries. If the UK were to leave Europe, trade regulations would be set in Europe and tariffs may apply to our imports and exports. This would make trade more expensive and complex. Can it be guaranteed that trade would not be hit?

August 16, 2022
PRESS RELEASE : Will Straw – Brexit Campaigners have Conceded UK Outside the EU Wouldn’t Have Access to Single Market

The press release issued by Stronger In on 18 February 2016.

Nigel Lawson, the Chair of Vote Leave, and Daniel Hannan, leading leave campaigner, have today conceded what for months the leave campaigns have sought to conceal: Britain outside the EU would lose access to Europe’s single market.

Writing in today’s Telegraph Nigel Lawson says that outside the EU Britain “would continue to trade with the EU, as the rest of the world does today, almost certainly assisted by a bilateral free trade agreement.”

We must be absolutely clear about what this means: Britain would not be part of the single market in goods and services, which is so critical to the UK economy, our businesses and families’ personal finances.

Daniel Hannan, speaking on Sky News, again said that the UK should seek a relationship with the EU similar to that of Switzerland, which does not have full access to the EU’s single market, in particular in services. Services make up 78% of the UK economy, so being cut out of the privileged trading terms currently on offer would have a huge impact on jobs, prices and the economic opportunities available to working people.

Why should we focus on the single market? Because the issue central to our country’s economic future, and indeed this ongoing debate about the UK and Europe, is not whether we would trade with the EU but the terms on which that trade would be conducted.

Currently, as a full member of the EU’s single market, covering both the goods and service sectors, Britain benefits from having no tariffs on our trade and having a seat at the table when trading regulations are set, so we can ensure they work in our industries’ interests.

This increases UK-EU trade since trade barriers are reduced, which enables British-based businesses to expand in their nearest market and increase employment. This increases competition, which drives innovation and lowers prices. And this harmonises regulations, which lowers the overall burden of regulation on businesses. There is simply no alternative trading model which delivers these benefits to the same extent. Such is the attraction of the single market that it is a primary reason for foreign investment in the UK.

This collaboration of course means we need protections, for example over our own currency, which is why the Prime Minister has rightly prioritised this as part of his renegotiation.

If we follow Nigel Lawson’s argument, we may get a trade agreement covering some goods, but we would likely pay tariffs on others, which would push up costs of imports for businesses and therefore consumers, and the costs of exports, which would hit demand for British goods. Given that in the UK 200,000 businesses trade goods with the EU, 75% of our businesses that do so internationally, this would undoubtedly have an impact on their capacity to expand and employ.

Critically, even if we had a free trade agreement with the EU, we would not be in the room when our competitors – whether Germany, France or other major European economies – were determining the terms of trade, for example the standards that products need to meet to enter the European market. Not only would that be bad for British business, as they would be adapting rules to suit the priorities of other European markets not our own, but it would hardly be a boost for British sovereignty: we would go from rule maker to rule taker.

And anyone arguing that they need us more than we need them should consider that half our goods exports go to the EU whereas on average just 5% of EU countries’ come to the UK.

The single market is particularly important for the service sector, where we have a trade surplus with the EU. Currently, within the single market, we have access to the ‘passport’, which allows financial services firms based in the UK to conduct business across the whole European Economic Area while still being regulated in the UK. This, combined with common regulatory standards, has reduced costs, increased expansion and has seen the UK become home to many overseas companies’ headquarters. Switzerland, Daniel Hannan’s favourite example of what the UK should become, does not have this and if we leave this will be lost, with clear implications for jobs at home.

We could of course join the single market having left the EU, as Norway does, paying in to the budget, accepting free movement and accepting EU regulations, but having zero influence. But surely leave campaigners don’t want to adopt a system where we pay but have no say.

We have long asked leave campaigners what ‘out’ looks like, and now we are beginning to find out. The EU is our largest trading partner – we sell six times more to the EU than we do to the BRICs – and the world’s largest free trade zone. As the single market develops it will create jobs and opportunities. If the UK stands outside looking in we will not only miss out, we will be paying to abide by rules signed off in Brussels without a voice of our own.

So now that we have some clarity from the leave campaigns the choice is clear: increased trade within Europe to support jobs and low prices for businesses and families, or the UK outside, with our financial security at risk.

Will Straw is Executive Director of Britain Stronger in Europe

Read more at http://www.strongerin.co.uk/brexit_campaigners_have_conceded_uk_outside_the_eu_wouldn_t_have_access_to_the_single_market#CSikOPoxibu684IG.99

August 16, 2022
PRESS RELEASE : Vote Leave response to Donald Tusk’s letter

The press release issued by Vote Leave on 7 December 2015.

Responding to Donald Tusk’s letter to the EU Heads of Government, Matthew Elliott, Chief Executive of Vote Leave, said:

“In an effort to secure a deal at any cost, David Cameron is only asking for trivial things, not the “fundamental change” he used to say we need.

That’s why he is now having a manufactured row with the EU to try and make his renegotiation sound more significant than it really is.

People are fed up with politics as usual and want real change. They want an end to the supremacy of EU law, to take back control of our borders and to stop sending £350 million a week to Brussels. The only way to do that is to Vote Leave.”

Notes to Editors

The full text of the letter can be found here: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2015/12/07-tusk-letter-to-28ms-on-uk/

David Cameron has dropped 9 out of ten of his promises to change the EU. These include the promise he made just a year ago that ‘we want EU jobseekers to have a job offer before they come here’ (speech at JCB, 28 November 2014, link) and his promise of a ‘complete opt out from the Charter of Fundamental Rights (speech on EU, 4 November 2009, link). Neither promise is part of the Government’s renegotiation, as the Foreign Secretary told the European Scrutiny Committee on 17 November.

Discussions about ‘sovereignty’ and ‘subsidiarity’ are trivial. Nothing in the promised package of reforms will end the supremacy of EU law over laws passed by the British Parliament. Clarifying the meaning of the words ‘ever closer union’ will not change this.

The Prime Minister has no plans to restore control of our borders. He is instead focused on minor changes to welfare – and even there, the President of the European Council says there is ‘presently no consensus’ on the Prime Minister’s demands.

The President of the European Council is clear that the UK will not be allowed ‘a veto right’ to stop new EU legislation that discriminates against British businesses.

Promises of reforms to boost competitiveness should not be taken seriously. The EU’s Lisbon Agenda of 2000 promised that ‘an average economic growth rate of around 3% should be a realistic prospect for the coming years.’ These promises were not fulfilled and similar pledges today are not credible.

August 16, 2022
PRESS RELEASE : Ten Years of David Cameron: Ten Years of Broken Promises on the EU

The press release issued by Vote Leave on 6 December 2015.

David Cameron marks ten years as Leader of the Conservative Party on 6 December. Over the last decade, David Cameron has broken ten key promises he made to change the EU – a broken promise for every year.

BROKEN PROMISE 1: Taking back control over social and employment laws

In the special Question Time debate between David Cameron and David Davis in November 2005, David Cameron said: ‘I think that we should have a very clear strategic imperative, which is that we need to bring back the powers over social policy and employment policy that are causing so much damage to British business.’
He repeated that promise in March 2007, saying that ‘it will be a top priority for the next Conservative government to restore social and employment legislation to national control’ (The Guardian, 6 March 2007, link).
Yet neither of the Governments David Cameron has led have taken back control of any powers in social or employment law – and on 1 December 2015 George Osborne admitted to the Treasury Select Committee that these important areas formed no part of the Government’s renegotiation with the EU.

BROKEN PROMISE 2: A ‘complete opt-out from the Charter of Fundamental Rights’

In 2009, David Cameron promised to negotiate ‘a complete opt-out from the Charter of Fundamental Rights’ (speech on EU, 4 November 2009, link).
Yet this forms no part of his renegotiation. Philip Hammond has now admitted that ‘the Charter of Fundamental Rights is enshrined in the European Union architecture. We have no proposals in the package we have put forward that would disengage from that’ (European Scrutiny Committee, 17 November 2015, link).

BROKEN PROMISE 3: Stopping the ECJ overruling our criminal law

In 2009, David Cameron promised to ‘limit … the European Court of Justice’s jurisdiction over criminal law to its pre-Lisbon level’ (speech on EU, 4 November 2009, link).
Since then, he has done nothing to limit the jurisdiction of the ECJ. In fact, in November 2014, the Government opted back in to 35 justice and home affairs measures including the European Arrest Warrant, accepting the jurisdiction of the ECJ over them – an irreversible decision which the Government has no plans to terminate.

BROKEN PROMISE 4: Changing EU treaties before the referendum

David Cameron used to make promises about ‘treaty change that I’ll be putting in place before the referendum’ (The Daily Telegraph, 5 January 2014, link).
On 16 November 2015, the Minister for Europe David Lidington said: ‘Our timetable for referendum by the end of 2017 means that you just cannot [have] treaty negotiation and 28 national ratifications within that timeframe’ (The Herald, 16 November 2015, link).
And this week the President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, killed off that promise entirely, saying: ‘it’s impossible to change the [EU] treaty before the referendum’ (The Guardian, 2 December 2015, link).

BROKEN PROMISE 5: Stopping EU migrants coming to the UK without a job offer

Just last year, David Cameron promised that ‘we want EU jobseekers to have a job offer before they come here’ (speech at JCB, 28 November 2014, link).
Yet this forms no part of the renegotiation he started less than six months later.

BROKEN PROMISE 6: Removing EU jobseekers after six months

In the same speech, David Cameron promised that ‘if an EU jobseeker has not found work within six months, they will be required to leave’ (speech at JCB, 28 November 2014, link).
Yet EU law – which the Government is not seeking to change – prevents the removal of jobseekers who are seeking work and have a genuine chance of finding it, regardless of how long they have been in the UK (ECJ, 15 September 2015, link).

BROKEN PROMISE 7: Ending EU laws which harm our NHS

David Cameron promised that his Government was ‘committed to revising the [working time] directive at EU level to give the NHS the flexibility it needs to deliver the best and safest service to patients. We will work urgently to bring that about’ (Hansard, 18 January 2012, col. 746, link).
Almost four years later, nothing has come of this ‘urgent’ work – and on 1 December 2015, George Osborne confirmed to the Treasury Select Committee that this formed no part of the Government’s renegotiation.

BROKEN PROMISE 8: Stopping the European Parliament meeting in two places

The Conservative Party’s manifesto for the 2009 European elections pledged that ‘the European Parliament must end its absurdly wasteful practice of meeting in Strasbourg as well as Brussels’ (link).
The Conservative Party topped the poll in those elections – yet David Cameron has done nothing about this wasteful duplication, which costs European taxpayers over €100 million a year, and Downing Street has confirmed that this forms no part of the Government’s renegotiation (10 November 2015, link).

BROKEN PROMISE 9: Reforming the Common Agricultural Policy

David Cameron promised in his manifesto earlier this year to ‘push for further reform of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy’ (Conservative Party Manifesto 2015, p. 21, link).
But he is not pushing for any such reform as part of his renegotiation. Indeed, Downing Street has admitted that ‘we have never mentioned this in the context of the renegotiation’ (10 November 2015, link).

BROKEN PROMISE 10: Reforming the EU’s Structural Funds

David Cameron also promised in his 2015 manifesto to seek ‘further reform of … Structural Funds’ (Conservative Party Manifesto 2015, p. 73, link).
Again, he is not pushing for any such reform as part of his renegotiation – and Downing Street has admitted that ‘we have never mentioned this in the context of the renegotiation’ (10 November 2015, link).

August 16, 2022
PRESS RELEASE : NZ and UK must maintain Pacific climate focus says UK Minister
The press release issued by the Foreign Office on 16 August 2022.
Tackling climate change and biodiversity loss in the Pacific remains top priority says UK Minister,

The UK will welcome NZ agritech companies next month to build new research, science and innovation links.

Speech on last day of visit to Australia, Vanuatu and New Zealand – to boost ties with the UK’s Pacific partners.

Tackling climate change and biodiversity loss in the Pacific should remain a top priority for the UK and New Zealand, says a visiting British Foreign Minister.

At the British High Commission in Wellington to an audience of diplomats, policy-makers and academics, Amanda Milling, the UK Minister for Asia and the Middle East, welcomed New Zealand’s pledge to reduce carbon emissions to net zero by 2050.

On the last day of her tour to Australia, Vanuatu and New Zealand, she also underlined the joint UK / New Zealand commitment to deliver on the Glasgow Climate Pact, which pledges to cut emissions and limit global warming to below 1.5°C.

Tackling climate change and biodiversity loss in the Pacific should remain a top priority for the UK and New Zealand, says a visiting British Foreign Minister.

At the British High Commission in Wellington to an audience of diplomats, policy-makers and academics, Amanda Milling, the UK Minister for Asia and the Middle East, welcomed New Zealand’s pledge to reduce carbon emissions to net zero by 2050.

On the last day of her tour to Australia, Vanuatu and New Zealand, she also underlined the joint UK-New Zealand commitment to deliver on the Glasgow Climate Pact, which pledges to cut emissions and limit global warming to below 1.5°C.

Minister for Asia and the Middle East, Amanda Milling said:

I heard first-hand in Vanuatu about the impacts of climate change in the Pacific, and the importance of supporting Pacific Island countries to build resilience.

The UK and New Zealand are working with partners to ensure those countries can access climate finance, and that Pacific Island voices are heard.

The Minister’s visit to the region – to boost diplomatic and trade ties with the UK’s vital Pacific partners – follows COP26 President Alok Sharma’s tour last month to Australia, New Zealand and Fiji, and the meeting of Prime Ministers Boris Johnson and Jacinda Ardern in London on 1 July 2022.

At that meeting, the leaders signed a new research, science and innovation arrangement which will see both countries share expertise and develop new technologies, including in the fields of agriculture and climate-change.

As part of this agreement, the Minister announced the UK will welcome some of New Zealand’s most advanced agritech companies next month to build new links, with some of the UK’s leading firms visiting New Zealand on a similar mission in November.

On the UK’s recent trade deal with New Zealand, Minister Milling said:

We are also looking forward to our free trade agreement entering into force and watching our trade with New Zealand soar. But this about so much more than business opportunities. It’s about the participation of indigenous people and women in trade. And it’s about a greener deal; bolstering commitments to the Paris agreement and Net Zero, while encouraging investment in low-carbon tech.

Finally, on Ukraine, Minister Milling thanked New Zealand for its support in standing against Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine arguing Putin has “thrown the international rules out of the window, shattered global stability and stamped on the principle of territorial sovereignty.”

She went on to add that: “We must ensure that Putin loses, and that Russian aggression is never again allowed to shatter peace, freedom and democracy in Europe.”

While in New Zealand, Minister Milling visited Auckland, the Waikato and Wellington. She met Aupito William Sio, Associate Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister for Pacific Peoples in Aotearoa New Zealand, to discuss the challenges for Pasifika; Te Taumata, MFAT’s Māori engagement group, and the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee.

She also attended a memorial for the former Māori Queen, Dame Te Atairangikaahu and visited several businesses in the Waikato, promoting the recently signed UK-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement.

Further Information

The UK is helping Pacific nations and others to protect the marine environment and reduce poverty through our £500m Blue Planet Fund. This will directly support delivery of the region’s 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent.

At COP 26, the UK announced £274 million for a new ‘Climate Action for a Resilient Asia’ programme across the Indo-Pacific. This will support up to 14 million people to adapt to global warming.

The UK also pledged £40 million to help Small Island Developing States become more resilient, including in the Pacific in November 2021.

The UK and New Zealand are working with partners to ensure those States can access climate finance, and that Pacific Island voices are heard. This includes collaborating with Fiji to address concerns raised through the Taskforce on Access to Climate Finance.
August 16, 2022