UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • James Brokenshire – 2019 Statement on Rough Sleeping

    Below is the text of the statement made by James Brokenshire, the Secretary of State of Housing, Communities and Local Government, on 7 May 2019.

    Early adopters of the Rapid Rehousing Pathway

    In December, I announced the locations of the first 11 Somewhere Safe to Stay hubs, one of four elements that make up the Rapid Rehousing Pathway which were announced in the £100 million Rough Sleeping strategy last August. I am pleased to say that all 11 hubs are now operational. Furthermore, I can confirm that all 42 early adopters of the pathway, announced in February, are working hard to get staff in place and several are already delivering services. These 53 early adopters are focused on making sure that those who sleep rough, or are at risk of sleeping rough, are rapidly getting the support they need to move away from the street and sustain secure accommodation.

    Rapid Rehousing Pathway new funding

    I have now announced the allocations of up to £25.6 million of the second round of Rapid Rehousing Pathway funding. For 108 areas of the country this funding will provide:

    20 additional Somewhere Safe to Stay hubs, to rapidly assess the needs of people who are sleeping rough and those who are at risk of sleeping rough and support them to get the right help quickly. This will bring the total number of hubs to 31,16 more than the minimum that we committed to in the 2018 Rough Sleeping strategy.

    Up to £6.8 million of funding for 61 areas for supported lettings, offering flexible support funding to help people with a history of rough sleeping to sustain their tenancies in homes made newly available across the housing sector.

    At least 130 navigators who will develop relationships with and help over 2,500 people who sleep rough to access appropriate local services, get off the streets and into settled accommodation.

    Up to £3.5 million to establish or support 30 local lettings agencies to source, identify, or provide homes and advice for rough sleepers or those at risk.

    A full list of the areas funded is available at: https://www. gov.uk/government/publications/rapid-rehousing-pathway-2019-to-2020-funding-allocations.

    With this funding, local areas will be able to connect people with the right support and sustainable housing to move them swiftly away from the street and facilitate their recovery. This important work is part of delivering on the commitments outlined in the Rough Sleeping strategy and is crucial in bringing us a step closer towards ending rough sleeping.

  • Kelly Tolhurst – 2019 Statement on the Companies Register

    Below is the text of the speech made by Kelly Tolhurst, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, in the House of Commons on 7 May 2019.

    One of the key foundations of our modern industrial strategy is delivering a strong, transparent and attractive business environment in the UK. The strength of the UK’s business environment is founded on our fair and open regulatory frameworks. The companies register is the base on which that strength is built.

    While the overwhelming majority of UK corporates operate wholly legitimately, concerns have been expressed about the misuse of UK corporate entities, the filing of false information on the companies register held at Companies House and the use of innocent people’s information on the register to commit fraud and other acts of harm.

    In the last three years there have been almost 10,000 complaints to Companies House from people concerned about their personal details, with worries including fraud and misuse of personal details topping the list.

    We are therefore seeking views on a series of reforms to limit the risks of misuse. These include measures to: provide greater certainty over the identity of those shown as owning, running or controlling companies, including identity verification; improve the accuracy and usability of data on the register; protect personal information; ensure compliance and take action against offenders; and deter abuse of UK-registered corporate entities. We are committed to minimising burdens on law abiding businesses, especially the smallest. The consultation will therefore look at the best way to minimise burdens on businesses.

    These reforms build on our global reputation as a trusted and welcoming place to do business and a leading exponent of greater corporate transparency.

    The UK has one of the highest ratings for cracking down on anonymous companies, and the Government’s proposed measures build on the Britain’s world-leading anti-corruption activity. In 2016, the UK became the first country in the G20 to introduce a public register of company ownership, while new protections against identity fraud for company directors were introduced in 2018.

    These measures will boost the reputation of the UK’s business environment, ensuring reliability of the UK’s company register. Knowing that a company’s information is accurate and transparent is a fundamental part of a leading business environment—giving entrepreneurs and businesses the confidence they need to do business in the UK.

    I will place a copy of the consultation in the Libraries of both Houses.

  • Damian Hinds – 2019 Speech on School Accountability

    Below is the text of the speech made by Damian Hinds, the Secretary of State for Education, at the NAHT Conference in Telford on 3 May 2019.

    Thanks for welcoming me back. It’s terrific to be here, to feel so much ability crammed under one roof. Expertise. Experience. Passion.

    I see these qualities again and again when I visit schools up and down the country. Getting out and about and into classrooms is one of the best bits of my job – because I get to speak to so many teachers, leaders and children. I get a chance to see the fantastic teaching and learning that is your every day.

    This morning I made my 92nd school visit, and I have had the chance to meet hundreds of headteachers.

    And I find one common trait, time after time, in every school I visit and every leader I speak to. Ambition.

    Not a selfish, inward ambition – believe me, I’ve met a lot of politicians, so I know how to spot that! Rather, an outward ambition. An altruistic ambition. An ambition that everyone, no matter who they are, can reach their potential.

    Today, I want to tell you that your ambition is my ambition.

    World-class schools. Giving every child the best possible start in life. Led by brilliant, motivated teachers and leaders, who are empowered to do what they do best – to teach.

    To get there, we will have to continue to tackle the pressures that I know schools are facing. I have been open in acknowledging these. And I’m also committed to working with you to relieve them.

    Let me start with funding.

    I have heard you loud and clear on this. I know finances are challenging for many schools, that you have had to make, and do have to make hard decisions about resources.

    We are approaching a comprehensive Spending Review. There are always competing demands on public funds, but I will be setting out the case, the very strong case, for education. The case for investment in education is a special one, because so much else depends on what you do – so much for our economy and our society.

    There is one area of funding that I want to directly address now – the support that we give for children with special educational needs and disabilities.

    You and your staff provide high quality support to children with special educational needs and disabilities, every single day.

    This isn’t some distraction from teaching. This is teaching. Helping vulnerable children learn is at the centre of the moral purpose that brought you into the profession.

    I’ve visited some fantastic mainstream schools and colleges and of course special schools too, and I’ve seen this work for myself.

    Each time I have been struck by the dedication of the school and the staff working with these children, tailoring their approach to meet the needs of pupils with a diverse range of additional challenges. Whether this is flexible timetabling, one-to-one support or coaching – the commitment is unwavering and the ambition for these children uncompromised.

    So thank you, and in particular thank you to those SENCOs who provide so much valued expertise to other staff and families and to the headteachers who have created environments that enable these pupils to flourish.

    I know there are challenges – as your report last year made clear. And I know the challenges are increasing.

    The number of school-aged children with a statement or an Education, Health and Care plan rose by more than 13,000 between 2017 and 2018 and we’ve seen a steady increase in those children being educated outside of mainstream schools.

    And we know that more specialist provision is more expensive and that we have a capacity issue in the number of places at special school available.

    Supporting these children in mainstream schools where possible and where it is right for that child, is the right thing to do, as is increasing the amount of personalised support available in all settings to help them achieve great outcomes. But it is creating budgetary pressures.

    It is because of the pressures on Local Authorities’ High Needs budgets that last December I announced an extra £250 million of high needs funding. I also announced that we’ll invest just over £30 million to train more than 200 new educational psychologists a year, from next year, to help you and your teams access the right specialists. And we have allocated additional High Needs capital as well.

    That means that this year we have invested over £6 billion in education for children with complex SEND.

    But I’m under no illusion – this may not be enough. This is a growing, complex issue, and I want to work with you to solve it. Part of that is of course about funding. And it’s also about changing needs.

    When I’ve spoken to teachers recently, they’ve told me that it’s not just the volume of support that has gone up. It’s also that the needs that vulnerable young people have – and the support that they require – is changing. This too is increasing pressures.

    So I need your front-line expertise – to properly understand what is driving these pressures, where the funding system is working, and where it is not.

    That’s why today I’m announcing a call for evidence, to gather your views and make sure everyone can input. I know schools and teachers can’t do this alone, which is why I’m encouraging others who have a crucial role supporting these vulnerable children, including local authorities and health services, to join the conversation too.

    This evidence is important. We need a system that works for these young people. And we should be unequivocal – that our ambition for them is exactly the same as our ambition for every other child. That they achieve their full potential.

    Of course, funding challenges aren’t restricted to high needs. The right level of support for all schools, and for every pupil, is also vitally important. And here too, as well as securing the right overall settlement, I want to make sure that money is flowing through the system in the right way – that individual schools’ needs are being properly understood, and that we avoid creating perverse incentives.

    The national funding formula has taken a big step forward in addressing some anomalies in funding between different areas and we need to complete the job on this.

    But I also want to consider whether we can look more closely at how funding can accurately reflect the way costs operate in reality for individual schools. Of course some costs go up and down in direct proportion to pupil numbers, while others do not.

    If I’ve learned one thing it’s that when we talk to one another, when we collaborate, it’s then that we begin to see real progress in tackling the pressures schools face.

    One of the best examples of this I can think of, and one this profession can be very proud of is the Recruitment and Retention Strategy.

    This has been a huge endeavour and has involved teaching unions, leaders and teachers, all coming together to work out how we boost the profession and develop a more supportive culture in schools. I particularly want to thank NAHT for their constructive engagement on the strategy.

    We all want the teaching profession to be one that attracts the best people and offers them a satisfying, sustainable career.

    And yet too many teachers are leaving the profession. I know many of you will cover for gaps in your teams; that you have lost teachers, talented and valued members of the team.

    A key feature of the strategy is the new Early Career Framework, perhaps the most significant reform of the profession since teaching became a graduate-only profession.

    It will provide much more structured support for teachers at the start of their career, when they are most at risk of dropping out. By the time the new framework is fully in place we will fund additional support and training for new teachers up to at least £130 million every year.

    But of course the strategy isn’t just about new teachers – it also commits to supporting teachers throughout their careers. I want all those who are called to this vocation to enjoy the same kind of clear career pathways as other leading professionals, like doctors or lawyers.

    To do this we will offer more coherent pathways for all teachers, from reformed ITT content to the development of specialist NPQs that support those teachers who don’t necessarily want to go into leadership but who still want to develop, to specialise and to progress.

    There are other barriers to recruitment and retention. Last year I told you I had an urgent task – to look at how we can work together to address these barriers – and top of the list is workload.

    We know that teachers, and school leaders, work far longer hours than they should and this is one of the main reasons people give for leaving the profession or not moving into leadership roles.

    But we also know there is no silver bullet and that workload and the pressure you can sometimes feel can come from different sources – it can come from specific requirements generated within schools and from government. But it can also come indirectly from the accountability system.

    Primary school standardised testing in different forms is common around the world. Here in England, it can help inform parents, and it helps inform Ofsted.

    And clearly the progress that pupils make at secondary school, and the qualifications they achieve there, are really important to their futures.

    But I am clear that data alone do not and cannot give the full rounded picture of a school.

    I know that today the fear of the consequences of a single set of bad results can manifest itself in unintended consequences, excessive pressures on headteachers and leaders. Last year I promised we would consult with you on this and how we could make the system better.

    And today I am confirming that – after a very strong response to our recent consultation on identifying schools for support – that the ‘floor’ and ‘coasting’ standards will be dropped.

    This is in line with one of the key recommendations from NAHT’s commission on accountability. It means you don’t have to worry that one set of results could set off a number of unwelcome consequences.

    From September this year we will no longer publish these standards, nor use them for any purpose. Instead, we will use a single, transparent trigger for an offer of support – ‘Ofsted requires improvement’ – to make sure it is totally clear when leaders will be offered support.

    And while leaders of “RI” schools will always retain responsibility for their own improvement, we will be proactive in offering support to leadership teams who do want it.

    So, from next academic year, all “RI” schools not currently benefitting from this year’s package will be offered funded support from an expert leader to give them bespoke guidance.

    A more intensive package of assistance will be available for schools with two consecutive “requires improvement” judgements, to help them improve in a sustainable way. But again, I want to stress – it’s an offer, not an enforced intervention.

    I also want to consider what more we could do to address workload issues for school leaders in particular, and will continue to work with you in the coming months to understand the pressures you face on a daily basis, and come up with a plan to reduce these.

    Tackling workload is one of the ways we can build a supportive culture in schools and I know from our Workload Reduction Toolkit that headteachers and principals are already doing some fantastic, proactive work in this area – schools like Kensington Primary School in Newham, who have focused on the work-life balance of their staff as part of their whole school ethos and culture. We have published a video about their approach as part of the workload toolkit.

    The tools have been collectively downloaded more than 135,000 times since they first came out and I would urge any of you who have not yet had a look at it to do so.

    Last summer when we asked school leaders whether they had begun to take action on evaluating and reducing unnecessary staff workload, 96% said that they had, which is tremendous progress.

    I’ve already talked to you about some of the particular needs of children with SEND. Health and wellbeing is of course vital for all children. Schools have a particularly important role to play in this respect.

    I want all children to leave school prepared for life in a modern, diverse Britain. Part of the way to make sure they are is to learn about respect for each other and that no one is more important than anyone else, right from the earliest age. You’re never too young to learn compassion and kindness.

    We have just made the biggest change to health education in 20 years. From 2020 all primary schools will be required to teach children about relationships as well as health – secondary schools will have to teach sex education too – so that all children have the knowledge they need to be healthy and safe, and to manage their lives and relationships in a positive way. I want to thank the NAHT for all of their engagement on these reforms.

    I know many of us feel strongly about some of these issues and people hold different views, as they are absolutely entitled to do, but that does not mean we can shy away from them. It is all the more important to keep talking to one another to find a way forward.

    But, and I want to be perfectly clear about this, I back you to do your jobs, to make the right professional choices in the best interests of all your pupils and your teachers. And I expect you to be able to do this free from intimidation by others. I am pleased that my department is working with the NAHT to explore what some of the ongoing problems are and how we can solve them.

    And I welcome NAHT’s continued help as we put in place the right, sustained support for schools to build high-quality teaching of relationships and health education. We have allocated £6 million to that end this year, and future years will be considered as part of the spending review.

    Another area that continues to cause alarm is social media. I know this is something you will be debating over the weekend.

    For this generation growing up, technology and new media, including social media, change just about everything.

    The internet is a fantastic resource and an integral part of everyday life for many people. Living in a more connected world opens up fantastic opportunities, to share ideas and collaborate. It’s hard to imagine life without it.

    However, we know that the internet can also be used to intimidate and bully. This is not acceptable and can have serious consequences for victims of online abuse.

    The changes we’ve made to the RSE and health curriculum mean that as well as relationships education, young people will learn about safe and acceptable behaviour online and an awareness of how online actions can affect others, particularly how to protect themselves from possibly harmful content.

    This backs up what is already taught in the computing curriculum at all key stages, and covers e-safety and the different and escalating risks that can arise.

    We are also taking steps to put in place a new system of accountability and oversight for tech companies through the Online Harms White Paper.

    But while attention is mainly focused on protecting young people from possible online danger, they are by no means the only victims. The internet is not selective and I know that teachers and leaders can be vulnerable too.

    We will be updating our guidance for heads and school staff accordingly on how to protect themselves from cyberbullying and abuse and what to do if it does take place.

    Teachers and leaders should not be subjected to online abuse simply for doing their jobs and I’m 100% behind making sure the entire school workforce can go about their business free from fear or intimidation.

    The pressures that schools are facing – that you are facing – are real. Pressures that can erode and distract from the passionate pursuit of excellent teaching. And I am committed to making more progress to tackle these.

    But the past 12 months have taught me an important lesson.

    That we can summon concrete, positive change, if we work together. The Recruitment and Retention Strategy is showing this right now. We worked together to identify the problems – and to craft the solutions. And I want to recognise your important role in that and other work.

    So now, I want to bring together that same sense of collaboration and constructive challenge to other areas, including those we’ve touched on today.

    I am optimistic. I can’t help feeling more optimistic every time I visit another fantastic school.

    And I can’t help being reminded of what I said at the beginning of this speech. That your ambition is my ambition. And that together we can realise that ambition, for every young person.

  • Chris Skidmore – 2019 Speech on Research Talent

    Below is the text of the speech  made by Chris Skidmore, the Science Minister, at the LSE in London on 7 May 2019.

    Good morning. I’m delighted to be here at the LSE today. This is the first in a series of four speeches on how I believe the UK can best achieve our ambition to invest 2.4% of GDP in research and development by 2027. And, later, 3%.

    This is an important target, and one which sits firmly at the heart of this government’s Industrial Strategy and our aim to make the UK the most innovative country in the world.

    Achieving this goal is going to require significant investment. In 2017, the UK spent almost £35bn on research and development – or R&D – representing just under 1.7% of GDP.

    To achieve our target of 2.4%, total UK R&D investment would need to rise to around £60bn in today’s money. More than double our current investment levels. This would require us to have invested an additional sum of over £80bn cumulatively each year from 2017 across the public and private sectors.

    But we are on the right track. This government has pledged to increase spending on R&D activities by £7bn over 5 years by 2022. This represents the largest increase this country has seen in R&D investment in nearly 40 years.

    And as Minister for research and innovation, I will be making the case for this investment to continue as we approach the comprehensive spending review.

    This case is made easier by the fact that we are already quite good at maximising our returns on R&D investment. Despite being home to just 0.9% of the world’s population, the UK hosts more than 4% of the world’s researchers; we have three of the world’s top ten universities; and we produce more than 15% of the world’s most cited research articles.

    The UK really is one of the most innovative countries in the world and rightly deserves its title as an ‘innovation leader’, having scored 21% above the EU average in the 2018 European Innovation Scoreboard.

    Maintaining and strengthening this position in the face of growing international competition will be key to our success over the years ahead. So, in the course of this series of speeches, I want to take us back to first principles and unpick, bit by bit, what achieving our 2.4% target really means. And in my first speech on this topic this morning, I want to move us away from our usual focus on money and investment, and turn our attentions instead to the people we are going to need to make our ambition a reality.

    After all, it doesn’t matter how much money we pump into R&D over the years ahead. It won’t make the intended difference if we don’t have the right people in place. People to perform the ground-breaking research of tomorrow. People to develop world-leading innovations. And people to solve some of the world’s most challenging problems.

    Ensuring a strong pipeline of talent will be essential for bolstering the UK’s research prowess. This means making sure we have the required number of scientists, researchers and technical support staff to support our pioneering R&D efforts.

    The fact of the matter is, if we need to increase R&D spending by more than double our current investment levels by 2027, then we are also going to have to substantially increase the numbers of people we have working in R&D in the same period – perhaps by as much as 50%.

    To put that in figures, that means we need to find at least another 260,000 researchers to work in R&D across universities, across business and across industry.

    This is a big ask. So, we need to stop and ask some serious questions: where are these highly-skilled scientists, researchers and technicians going to come from? And what are we going to do, not only to tempt people to embark on a career in UK research, but also to get them to stay here and make the most of their talents and expertise?

    These are the questions that I want us to address this morning.

    Nurturing homegrown talent

    As it stands at present, the UK is the third largest producer of PhDs in the world. However, much of that is down to our ability to attract and educate talent from across the globe. When it comes to educating our own students to PhD level, we know we need to do much more. Both to encourage undergraduates to stay on for postgraduate-level study – and to address the gender imbalances and race disparities that continue to haunt the research profession.

    Of course, we’re continuing to make progress in these areas. The number of women accepted on to full-time STEM undergraduate courses has increased by almost 30% – largely thanks to the number of girls taking STEM A-Levels in England increasing by over 25% since 2010. But the proportion of women studying Physics is still notably lower than it should be.

    And we still have some way to go to eradicate gender pay gaps in the sector and increase the proportion of women in academic and research leadership. Not to mention the number of Black and Ethnic Minority role models that will inspire others and show them a research career can really be for people like them.

    As a government, we are thinking hard about the financial incentives that will also encourage more people to continue in higher education and research.

    Not only do we have a comprehensive student support system for students embarking on higher education across the UK. But, for students supporting their own postgraduate studies, we introduced Master’s loans in 2016. And these are already having a visible effect on the number of students opting to stay on for postgraduate education.

    Research commissioned by the Department for Education into the performance of the Master’s loan in its first year of operation has found the number of England-domiciled students opting to study for a Master’s degree at English universities grew by over a third (36%) in the academic year 2016/17.

    It also found that these loans have led to a significant increase in the number of Black students to study for a Master’s degree, a group historically under-represented in postgraduate education. Additionally, almost three quarters of the students surveyed who took out a loan said that they just couldn’t have studied without one. This is welcome evidence that the loan is helping remove financial barriers and supporting individuals from all backgrounds to study for an advanced qualification.

    And loans were extended to those studying at doctoral level from August 2018. Where we hope they will have a similar effect.

    Attracting international talent

    But as well as developing domestic talent, I want us to attract the best and the brightest from across the globe.

    As Universities and Science Minister, I am immensely proud that the UK boasts one of the strongest higher education sectors in the world. That it is home to many of the world’s leading universities and research institutes. This is a great national asset and a major draw for international talent.

    And this government is serious about making the UK their global go-to place. That’s why we set out a clear ambition in our International Education Strategy earlier this spring: to grow the numbers of international students studying in UK universities to 600,000 by the end of the next decade.

    Many of these students will be studying here at the postgraduate level, for Master’s degrees or PhDs. And we will introduce an automatic one-year ‘leave to remain’ period following the completion of all doctoral degrees.

    This will give international PhD graduates the time they need to find an appropriate research position after their studies – whether that be by continuing as post-docs or early career researchers in our universities and colleges. Or by taking their skills over to industry and bringing their ideas and innovations to market.

    On this, we are making it easier for international graduates to move into skilled work. International students studying for undergraduate level and above will be able to apply for a visa three months before their course finishes. Enabling them to take up skilled work after their degree. They will also be able to apply for a skilled work visa out-of-country under the same preferential conditions as they would experience if they were to apply for a visa in-country.

    In addition, a reformed sponsorship system will provide a simplified and more streamlined system. This will be less burdensome for employers and will enable businesses to harness the talent they need more easily.

    We are also investing in more international experiences for our own UK students. This will help develop them as ‘global citizens’, and ensure students of all backgrounds can add to our pipeline of talent on their return.

    International experiences enrich the education and personal development of our citizens, not to mention break down barriers to social mobility. That is why I was delighted to announce new DfE funding that will support UK undergraduate students from disadvantaged and under-represented backgrounds to take part in short research internships at Canadian universities through the Mitacs Globalink scheme.

    And I hope this is just the first partnership of many to help boost opportunities for UK research talent going forwards into the future.

    As a government, we want to be doing all we can to protect and grow our share of research talent. And we are serious about working together with the sector to ensure we are giving early career researchers, regardless of where they come from, sufficient opportunities for progression.

    Funding PHDs and other programmes

    But if we are to attract, retain and develop the research talent we need – both domestic and international – we must ensure we have the programmes we need too.

    And we have invested significantly in programmes, delivered by UKRI and the National Academies, to make sure this is the case. In 2017, we announced funding of over £300m over four years to increase the number of PhDs and fellowship programmes.

    We have committed more than £100m to the Rutherford Fund to deliver around 1,000 fellowships and placements for early-career and senior researchers.

    And, in June 2018, we announced a £1.3bn investment in UK talent and skills to grow and attract the best in science and innovation. As well as £350million for prestigious National Academy fellowships. This included £900million for the new flagship UKRI Future Leaders Fellowships, open to the very best researchers from around the world.

    Well, today I am pleased to announce the very first 41 Future Leaders Fellowships. Who will be provided with funding and support. And who will be instrumental in developing the next generation of research and innovations in their chosen disciplines – from the natural environment to big physics.

    It’s an incredibly exciting programme and I am delighted to have been able to announce the Fellows today.

    And I am just as excited to announce a first call for the new Stephen Hawking Fellowships. Working with the Hawking family, UKRI will support up to 50 postdoctoral scientists in theoretical physics over the next five years. In recognition of Professor Hawking’s exceptional contributions to scientific knowledge and the popularisation of science. This call is now open. And I would encourage anyone eligible to apply.

    Because we need to ensure the very brightest minds are in a position to help us address the huge environmental, social and technological challenges the world is facing today.

    That is why we’re focused on supporting highly-skilled people across disciplines to tackle these issues – what, in our Industrial Strategy we have called our Grand Challenges – from Artificial Intelligence to Clean Growth.

    In the field of AI, we have recently announced a package of measures. Including Master’s degrees, funded by industry. Alongside an additional 1,000 new PhD students across 16 dedicated AI Centres for Doctoral Training. And new Turing AI Fellowships. The first wave of fellowships was launched earlier this year as part of a scheme designed to attract, develop and retain global AI talent in the UK.

    Boosting researchers’ skills and success

    But success in research isn’t just about knowing your subject inside out – though undoubtedly this is essential. It’s about other skills and experiences too, particularly when making the move from academia to industry. And we need to encourage these if we are to create the UK research environment we want to see in the future.

    Between six and seven thousand PhD students per year are funded through UKRI, through its studentships and training grants – including Centres for Doctoral Training and Doctoral Training Partnerships. These models allow students to be trained in cohort environments and take a collaborative approach. Working with partners – including from industry – to create well-rounded researchers who are able to continue and pursue R&D careers.

    Recent investments in Centres for Doctoral Training will support more than four and a half thousand PhD students, in fields from quantum, to medical technologies.

    I was particularly pleased last month to see the University of Liverpool leading an innovative new project worth almost four and a half million pounds to boost the success of post-doctoral researchers outside academia. The ‘Prosper’ project is funded largely by Research England and other industry partners. It seeks to break down the barriers facing early career researchers when moving from careers in academia to industry.

    Because, to make it in industry, as well as having specialist technical knowledge, today’s researchers need core transferable skills – things like an ability to communicate effectively, to influence, and to work collaboratively.

    The Prosper model seeks to give post-doctoral researchers the “soft skills” they need. And, so, should help them develop into the high-performing technical and business leaders of tomorrow.

    I also know schemes like the Brilliant Club, whose founders I met earlier this spring, are doing highly valuable work. Not just in reaching out to school pupils from under-represented backgrounds to raise their aspirations. But also by training and developing doctoral and post-doctoral researchers to become highly effective communicators and leaders. These skills won’t just help them if they choose to stay on in education. They are vital for a whole host of business and industry careers too.

    Towards better research careers

    But as well as ensuring people have the skills they need to pursue a career in research, we need to ensure conditions are such that they want one. Currently, there are problems here.

    According to research by Vitae, over 70% of post-doctoral research staff in higher education are employed on fixed-term contracts, with 20% employed on contracts of a year or less.

    Many researchers, especially at the early stages of their careers, can find themselves going from one short-term research contract to another, without any job security or, indeed, any inclination of where they might end up next.

    It is this uncertainty and insecurity that drives many talented researchers out of academia and perhaps out of research altogether. And this is particularly true of female researchers, who are already under-represented in STEM disciplines and may be unable to realise their full potential.

    But it doesn’t need to be this way.

    Admittedly, the Roberts Review back in 2002 did much to shine a light on the precarious nature of academic research careers. And thankfully, it led to many UK universities thinking seriously about how they employ and develop research talent.

    In many respects, the UK has long been a world leader in this area – not least through its Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers, first launched in 2008.

    However, with more researchers needed in the future to power our national R&D ambitions, now is the time to increase our support for researchers. And to look again at how we can ensure they have a healthy and attractive working environment in which all researchers can flourish.

    I am pleased that an independent review of the Concordat has just taken place to ensure it is up-to-date to meet the needs of today’s researchers. And I look forward to seeing the revised version of the Concordat when it is published later this summer.

    As Universities and Science Minister, I am serious about taking the Concordat forward. And I am pleased to be hosting a high-level meeting with the Chair of the Concordat Strategy Group, Professor Julia Buckingham. Alongside Sir Patrick Vallance and other key sector leaders, to discuss how we can further improve research careers in the UK.

    I have said it before and I will say it again today: I am keen that postgraduates and early career researchers do not get lost from current and future policy debates – particularly around key issues like mental health and wellbeing.

    Post-docs are increasingly the Cinderella of the academic community – being neither students nor conventional academic staff members. So, their stories often go unheard and their concerns unaddressed.

    Yet, these are the people who are often juggling job insecurities with poor work-life balance. And all against a culture that many feel prevents them from speaking out and admitting their struggles – for fear they will be perceived as weak and not fit for the job at hand.

    Our current research culture relies on dominant power structures, where doctoral candidates and post-docs are largely dependent on supervisors or PIs for references and progression. This puts the power firmly in other people’s hands.

    Is it any wonder, then, that less than half of doctoral researchers report they would be likely to disclose any mental health and wellbeing issues to their supervisors? This closed culture urgently needs to change.

    So, I hope future joint work by the Office for Students (OfS) and Research England into the mental health and wellbeing of doctoral researchers can identify good practice to take forward in this area.

    I also encourage the OfS, Research England, and UKRI as a whole to look more widely at how the implementation of current policies affect researchers on the ground. The three higher education excellence frameworks – namely the REF, TEF and the KEF – are all integral to the way we govern and fund higher education, science, research and innovation. But we need to make sure they are not disproportionately affecting early career researchers and putting extra strains on their work. The recent headlines about universities spending around £87m on non-disclosure agreements since 2017 doesn’t help us to project an image of a sector that cares for its employees.

    Non-disclosure agreements exist for many purposes – such as protecting valuable research findings should a staff member change jobs. But in no circumstances should they be used by universities to ‘gag’ staff after experiencing poor behaviour in the workplace, including bullying, discrimination or sexual misconduct.

    Let me be clear. Any use of this sort of agreement to silence people or hide details of unfair practices is an outrage, and risks bringing the reputation of our world-leading higher education system into disrepute. Universities need to wake up to this fact and the very real threat it poses to the reputation of the sector.

    The government has recently consulted on proposals to tighten the laws around NDAs and confidentiality clauses for workers. We will be publishing our final proposals in due course. These will make clear in law that victims of harassment cannot be prevented from speaking to the police or reporting a crime. And ensuring they are clear about their disclosure rights.

    We need to take collective action now to stop the misuse of NDAs if we are to prevent any more talented people from being pushed out of academia. And the wider research pipeline.

    That’s why I strongly support Universities UK in its call to sector leaders to make sure all staff and students have a safe experience at university.

    As Minister across both the universities and science briefs, I am keen that we take a cross-departmental and cross-sector approach to the long-term career paths of researchers. And that we work together to tackle some of the systemic issues that are hampering the appeal of a research career, both inside and outside academia.

    From academia to industry

    On this, a key message I want to get across today is that academia isn’t the only place where talented researchers can have long and meaningful careers.

    It is particularly important we recognise this, since very few highly-skilled researchers will stay within the academy.

    Research by Vitae in 2017 showed that of the 80% of researchers in the UK who aspire to a future academic career, 60% expect to achieve one, yet only between 5 and 10% will actually ever get one.

    But this doesn’t mean that the other 90% or so are not pursuing worthwhile research careers. Over 70% of doctoral graduates in the Physical Sciences and Engineering, for example, work outside academic research four years after graduation.

    If we are to stand any chance of meeting our 2.4% target, then we need to make sure this continues and that talented researchers go on to use their knowledge and skills in business and industry.

    We also need a good number of researchers embracing their entrepreneurial spirit and starting their own spin-outs and SMEs.

    For too long, there has been a stigma in this country around pursuing non-academic research careers. So, we should never look down on early career researchers if they opt for a career outside academia. Rather, we should actively encourage our PhDs and post-docs to see the merits of pursuing an R&D career in other sectors and industries.

    For one, we need to stop talking about jobs outside academia as being ‘second choice careers’ or ‘Plan B options’. For our 2.4% target to work, we need people to be actively considering research careers across the entire science and innovation system. And aspiring to become industry employees or entrepreneurs from the get-go.

    And to do this I think we need to be positive and passionate about the hugely exciting potential of such work. About the role research – and particularly the point where business and research meet – will play be in helping us to adapt to our changing world.

    I have already mentioned our Industrial Strategy “Grand Challenges” – the huge environmental, social and technological challenges the world is facing today. We want to make sure that the UK is leading the way in responding to these challenges.

    This will require all of our best minds pushing frontiers of science and research and applying this into game-changing innovations and new ideas. This means helping researchers and academics connect better with businesses and supporting researchers to develop their own ideas. These businesses could become the industries of tomorrow. And it makes it a hugely exciting time to work in industry as a researcher.

    But it’s not just about meeting challenges. It’s about meeting the needs of business. We know from the Employer Skills Survey that employers in the UK report a persistent demand for graduates with STEM skills. And we anticipate this demand will only continue to grow over the years ahead.

    Across numerous sectors, employers report a significant demand for highly-skilled professionals, especially in IT and Engineering. As well as a need for staff with complex numerical and statistical skills. It may surprise you to hear that over 60% of roles on the Home Office shortage list are STEM roles – primarily seeking either Engineering or digital expertise.

    So, isn’t it high time we start to better connect graduates with the evident skills gaps we are experiencing right across our labour market?

    Yet, this isn’t going to be easy when many of their main role models inside universities know very little about careers in industry. And are themselves either unaware or unconvinced of the strength of research positions outside academia.

    There are schemes that aim to address this issue – such as the Royal Academy of Engineering’s Visiting Professors scheme. This funds senior industry practitioners to participate in course development, face-to-face teaching and the mentoring of Engineering undergraduates at a host university. It is a great programme, but it is not widespread practice.

    The difficulties aren’t just on the side of universities. Some employers are unused to recruiting PhDs and don’t fully understand the benefits that those with higher academic qualifications can bring to their workforce. I think of this as the ‘graduate paradox’ – the higher the academic qualifications you have, the less professionally qualified you may seem. This, I feel, is a particular UK problem we need to address.

    For too long we have had a culture in this country that doesn’t generally recognise, let alone reward, PhDs outside academia. But this is not the case in other European countries. In Germany, for instance, a PhD is often seen as a prerequisite for progression to senior roles in business and industry.

    Yet, here in the UK, people with hard-won PhDs sometimes choose to hide their doctoral qualifications when applying for professional roles outside academia. And many can find themselves having to spell out to sceptical employers the skills and experiences they have gained during the course of their studies.

    To get people thinking differently we urgently need to change mind-sets. And to boost the appreciation of postgraduate degrees among employers and wider society.

    We need a culture change right across the innovation system. Not just among academics to get them to realise the transfer-ability of their research skills. But among employers – so that they, too, can make it easier for researchers to make the transition into industry-based roles.

    Academic research and industry research should never be two distinct entities. There should be transferable pathways between the two. So those with industry-experience are welcomed into academia for their ‘on the job’ knowledge later in their careers. And those with academic experience can venture into industry and back again at any time they choose.

    Changes such as this will help keep international researchers in UK R&D long after they have graduated. And also help to boost the numbers of domestic students choosing to stay on for postgraduate degrees and research careers.

    As I have argued today, this will be vital to achieving our long-term aim: boosting the numbers of researchers in this country by more than 50%, to cement our R&D success.

    Retaining domestic and international talent.

    Funding the programmes we need.

    Boosting skills.

    Improving careers.

    And strengthening the links between industry and the academy.

    These are the ways we will nurture the talent we need now to meet the challenges ahead. To give the economy the boost it needs. And to help adapt to our changing world.

    Thank you.

  • Liam Fox – 2019 Speech at Global Trade Review Conference

    Below is the text of the speech made by Liam Fox, the Secretary of State for International Trade, at the Global Trade Review Conference held on 8 May 2019.

    Introduction

    I’d like to start with an exercise. Who here has an iPhone with them?

    Take it out, turn it over and tell me what it says on the back. The writing’s minute so you’re going to need pretty good eyesight, but I can assure you that I’m not here to give you an eye test.

    It reads: “Designed by Apple in California. Assembled in China.”

    iPhones are just one example of the complex and integrated supply chains across the global economy, where design and build can take place across a range of countries, with each step along the way adding value to the final product.

    If you measure trade merely in gross terms as a single transaction based on the final price you are missing the point. If you do not understand the complexity and importance of global value chains you will fail to set the appropriate policy frameworks. It is part of the challenge we face in a rapidly changing world of trade.

    For example, we are in the middle of a revolution in e-commerce, and the digital economy is now a major part of global trade.

    This has changed the game for everyone, from the largest corporations, to the thousands of small companies who have never before been able to trade internationally.

    Services are now a larger part of the world economy than ever before. And regulation has not kept pace. The WTO estimates that while services comprise around two-thirds of global GDP and almost half of employment – and nearly half of world trade on a value-added basis – the barriers to trade in services are around as large as those in goods half a century ago.

    For the UK, as a services-orientated economy – and the world’s second largest services exporter – this clearly needs to change if we are to realise our potential as a truly Global Britain.

    If we are make the most of the opportunities for future global prosperity in front of us, it’s essential that we draw up a new set of rules governing key areas such as e-commerce and cross-border data flows, and tackle head-on the obstacles to digital trade such as data localisation. We need to redouble our efforts to promote an open, efficient and transparent trading environment.

    The dangers of protectionism

    Somewhat alarmingly, we appear to be moving in precisely the wrong direction.

    For the first time in decades, the system of free, fair, rules-based international trade which underpins our global prosperity is under attack.

    Ever since the financial crisis of 2008, G20 countries have been taking steps which limit market access.

    Tariff and non-tariff barriers have been thrown up as countries try to defend or support domestic industries. Economists rarely agree on anything, but there is a near-universal conclusion that protectionism of this nature only ever leads to a dead-weight loss.

    The consensus is clear: open and competitive markets are the most efficient vehicle for delivering the prosperity we all want.

    Tariffs are a nice euphemism, but in truth are simply a tax on imports – an impediment to that prosperity, with far-reaching consequences. Tariffs are taxes. You can’t like tariffs but hate taxes.

    Tariffs mean people at home pay more for the things they use every day, and the businesses that we rely on to drive our economy will pay more to manufacture products with components from overseas.

    Tariffs hold back growth, hitting the poorest among us hardest.

    And what is worse, broad-based protectionism provokes retaliation driving up costs further.

    Drawing on data from more than 150 countries, the IMF recently concluded that tariff increases had an overall negative impact, reducing productivity, income and welfare.

    This has led to higher unemployment, higher inequality, and, incidentally, negligible effects on the trade balance. These barriers have the potential to dampen export orders and reduce manufacturing output, causing lost growth and kindling inflation.

    Protectionism in history

    Throughout history, attempts to protect domestic industries through tariff barriers – such as the Long Depression of the 1870s and the Great Depression of the 1930s – failed and failed miserably.

    In contrast, the reversal of these policies after the Second World War had the opposite effect.

    People talk about the moon landings or the climbing of Everest as the pinnacle of human achievement, but when you look at the broader benefit both pale in significance compared to the liberalisation of trade.

    For the impact this can have goes way beyond any story that GDP data can tell; it’s about something far, far more precious than that.

    A study by the IMF found that a change in the real income of the bottom 20% of the population in developing countries was strongly linked with a change in trade openness.

    In the past 25 years, trade has helped lift one billion of our fellow human beings out of abject poverty by creating jobs and raising incomes.

    As Francis Fukuyama put it in his latest book “Identity”, the percentage of children dying before their fifth birthday declined from 22% in 1960 to less than 5% by 2016.

    This unprecedented transformation in living standards has been made possible by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the World Trade Organisation, and our acceptance of a global rules based system driving one of the greatest of mankind’s achievements to date.

    Of course there are those who do not share this interpretation of events, who cannot channel their inner Adam Smith and who argue for intervention and protection.

    The infant industries fallacy

    It is certainly the case that some countries have historically developed their industries while simultaneously having high tariff barriers.

    Some have argued that this is the way forward for industries which require protection from more established competitors.

    However, this is not the case. As the OECD has laid out, there is a clear link between Global Value Chain integration and economic transformation for developing economies.

    The boom in international trade since the Berlin Wall fell – growing at 8% a year – has seen developing economies as some of its biggest beneficiaries.

    Whereas in the past some nations may have used tariffs to protect infant industries in a world where production and value chains were principally within that country, this model no longer works.

    As we have seen with my iPhone example earlier, we now live in a world where complex global value chains that cut across national boundaries are an ever more important part of how we do business.

    The use of imported intermediate goods and services has become dramatically more important for global exports.

    It is estimated that such trade has doubled, with the value added of imports as a share of exports rising from 10% in 1990 to around 20% in 2015.

    Imposing tariffs and non-tariff barriers in this globalised world threatens to fragment these supply chains, often damaging the very industries they seek to protect.

    Trade statistics

    A failure to understand the complexity of these global supply chains is also causing other problems.

    All too often, we hear about how a reduction of our trade deficit is an improvement and an increase a worsening. This is only half the story.

    The way the statistics are currently calculated does not capture the value added by each stage of the production process, nor the role of subsidiaries abroad.

    This has led several economists to argue that some notional trade balances – most notably between China and the United States – are very misleading.

    So, returning for the last time to the iPhone example: US import data will show an iPhone purchased in the US as an import at the retail cost, which is recorded as a trade deficit for the US, and a trade surplus for China.

    This does not reflect the fact that only a fraction of its value is added in China. Most of its value was added in California.

    And of course, Apple is a US company meaning much of the profit will ultimately end up there.

    The deficiencies in measurement tend to make the trade deficit of industrialised economies like the UK and the US – which excel at things like design and software coding, activities that not reflected in most trade metrics – appear larger than they are.

    Hal Varian, Google’s chief economist, has argued that the value of software in worldwide smartphone sales alone cuts the US trade deficit in half.

    WTO reform

    But a free and open system also has to be a fair one. Free trade does not have to mean a ‘free for all’. Despite its many successes, the international trading system is clearly not perfect and we must do everything we can to ensure that rules are applied fairly, universally and transparently.

    We cannot tolerate illegal dumping or subsidy or the inability to determine whether a business is in the state or private sector.

    In any dispute, our first port of call has to be the World Trade Organisation – the home of the rules-based international trading system that underpins our prosperity. For all its faults, it represents the best hope of retaining a global consensus on how we operate our trading system.

    The United Kingdom will soon take its seat around the table as an independent member for the first time in over 40 years. It is an opportunity for us to help shape the global debate.

    Working alongside our allies, we are making the case to update the WTO rulebook to tackle underlying trade tensions, which include industrial subsidies, state-owned enterprises and forced technology transfer.

    We must encourage trust and transparency in the WTO by updating the dispute settlement system and improving members’ compliance with notification requirements.

    And we need to ensure that the system of special and differential treatment for developing countries is fit for purpose.

    Levelling the playing field involves carefully considering poorer countries’ individual needs, and ensuring that every country from the poorest developing nation to the world’s richest economies reap the benefits of a liberal but rules based system.

    Conclusion

    Britain is a great and historic trading nation, but we have never seen this trade simply as an end in itself. Trade is a means by which we are able to spread prosperity.

    That prosperity underpins social cohesion and that social cohesion, in turn, underpins political stability, which is the building block of our collective security.

    It is a win-win system.

    But this system cannot be taken for granted and those of us who genuinely believe in free trade and competition have a duty to recommit ourselves to the multilateral system with the WTO at its centre.

    Yes let us recognise its faults and weaknesses but let us act collectively to make it work for all members – large and small, rich and poor, for today and for tomorrow. As we prepare to leave the EU, the United Kingdom has a Department of state for International Trade, dedicated to helping businesses like the ones in this room export, driving inward and outward investment, negotiating market access and trade agreements, and championing the concept and benefits of free trade.

    It is why we have a network of Her Majesty’s Trade Commissioners, with the experience and autonomy to drive our trading performance in specific markets, from China to North America to Africa. You will hear from some of them later.

    However, this is not a mission Government can ever fulfil alone.

    Businesses – like the ones represented here today – have a crucial role to play.

    We want everyone who understands the vast opportunities that free trade represents, and the prosperity it brings, to help make this case.

    To be a voice, promoting the benefits of the global multilateral trading system – and making that case throughout the UK and internationally.

    We want you to make the case for international trade in practical terms – how it benefits your businesses, your communities and makes a real difference to people’s lives.

    It is this case that will win the battle against the siren voices of protectionism. We should not be by-standers in our future. We should set a firm course to shape the coming era. For Britain and the world.

    And we must success for the price of failure would be too high.

    Thank you.

  • Sajid Javid – 2019 Statement on Police Pursuits Consultation

    Below is the text of the statement made by Sajid Javid, the Home Secretary, in the House of Commons on 2 May 2019.

    Last year, we published a public consultation on the initial findings of a review of the legislation, guidance and practice surrounding police driving in England, Wales and Scotland. As we said last May, this Government are determined to get ahead of and tackle emerging threats like motorcycle-related crimes, including those involving mopeds and scooters. People must be able to go about their daily lives without fear of harassment or attack and criminals must not think they can get away with a crime by riding or driving in a certain way or on a certain type of vehicle.

    Since this work commenced, we have already seen an impact on offending behaviour through operational responses, such as ensuring that merely removing a crash helmet will not result in the police discontinuing a pursuit. The Government will continue to work closely with the police in England, Wales and Scotland, the ​College of Policing and other organisations to clarify driver training standards, including the requirements for refresher training.

    I am grateful to the 383 individuals and organisations that responded to the consultation, including 222 police officers, forces and other related organisations. We will be publishing a full response later today on gov.uk. I am pleased to confirm that the overwhelming majority of responses were supportive of the proposals set out in the consultation, either in full or in principle. In addition, during and since the consultation period, we have also continued to work with the Independent Office for Police Conduct, the Crown Prosecution Service, the Police Federation, the National Police Chiefs Council and others in order to refine our proposals.

    The Government will seek to introduce a new test to assess the standard of driving of a police officer when parliamentary time allows. This new test will compare the standard of driving against that of a careful, competent and suitably trained police driver in the same role rather than use the existing test which compares driving against a standard qualified driver who would not normally be involved in police action.

    As a result of the responses to the consultation and the related work, the Government have also decided to examine how we can best:

    Make clear that police officers should not be regarded as being accountable for the driving of a suspected criminal who is attempting to avoid arrest by driving in a dangerous manner, providing the pursuit is justified and proportionate.

    Review the various emergency service exemptions to traffic law to ensure they remain fit for purpose.

    We have been clear from the beginning of this review that we must ensure that the outcome of these changes enables the police to do their job effectively and keep us safe while ensuring that we continue to keep our roads among the safest in the world. I believe that the action we intend to take will do just that, while giving police officers greater confidence that they will be appropriately protected by the law if they drive in accordance with their training with a view to protecting the public.

    We would like to develop a uniform approach across Great Britain and will engage with the devolved Administrations in recognition of devolved interests.

  • Alan Duncan – 2019 Statement on the Foreign Affairs Council

    Below is the text of the statement made by Alan Duncan, the Minister for Europe and the Americas, in the House of Commons on 2 May 2019.

    My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and I attended ​the Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) on 8 April. It was chaired by the High Representative of the European Union for foreign affairs and security policy (HRVP), Federica Mogherini. The meeting was held in Luxembourg.

    Current affairs

    The High Representative and Foreign Ministers had an exchange of views on the most pressing issues on the international agenda. In particular, they expressed their concern over developments in Libya. They urged all parties to implement immediately a humanitarian truce, refrain from any further military escalation and return to the negotiations. They reiterated their full support for the efforts of the UN Special Representative Ghassan Salamé in working towards peace and stability in Libya.

    Foreign Ministers also referred to the implementation of the penal code order in Brunei and expressed their strong opposition to cruel and degrading punishments, prohibited by the convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, which was signed by Brunei in 2015.

    In relation to the 1996 Helms-Burton Act, the Council reiterated the EU’s strong opposition to the extraterritorial application of unilateral restrictive measures, which it considered contrary to international law.

    Afghanistan

    Ministers discussed the situation in Afghanistan. They focused on how the EU could best contribute to current peace efforts. The High Representative debriefed Ministers on her visits to Islamabad on 25 March and Kabul on 26 March.

    Eastern partnership

    Ministers discussed the eastern partnership (EaP) in view of the EaP ministerial meeting (13 May) and the high-level event (14 May) to mark the EaP’s 10th anniversary. Ministers highlighted the importance of the partnership, which is based on shared values and principles, and an approach combining inclusivity and differentiation.

    Ministers welcomed the progress achieved with eastern partnership countries within the “20 deliverable for 2020” framework, and in particular the tangible and concrete results in trade, people-to-people contact, transport, connectivity, infrastructure and economic reform. They agreed that implementation of reforms in sectors such as governance, anti-corruption and the judiciary require additional efforts.

    Informal lunch on Venezuela

    Foreign Ministers exchanged views on Venezuela. They discussed the outcome of the second meeting of the international contact group (ICG) on 28 March in Quito. They agreed to step up work on the two tracks of the ICG: facilitating humanitarian access, and creating the conditions for free, fair, transparent presidential elections.

    Council conclusions

    The Council agreed a number of measures without discussion:

    The Council adopted conclusions on the Afghanistan’s peace process.

    The Council endorsed the framework on counter-terrorism, developed jointly by the UN and the EU. The framework identifies areas for UN-EU co-operation and priorities until 2020.​

    The Council endorsed the 2018 progress report on the EU strategy against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

    The Council concluded the agreement establishing the EU-Latin America and the Caribbean international foundation.

    The Council adopted conclusions on the European Court of Auditors’ special report No 15/2018 entitled “Strengthening the capacity of the internal security forces in Niger and Mali: only limited and slow progress”.

    The Council authorised the signature of the EU-Pakistan strategic engagement plan on behalf of the EU.

    The Council endorsed the continuation of the EU’s action in support of the UN verification and inspection mechanism for Yemen (UNVIM), from 1 April 2019 to 30 September 2019. The EU is contributing €4.9 million to UNVIM for one year.

    The Council authorised the opening of negotiations with Vietnam for an agreement to establish a framework for its participation in EU crisis management operations.

    The Council adopted conclusions on an EU strategic approach to international cultural relations and a framework for action (ST 7749/19).

  • Robert Goodwill – 2019 Statement on the Agriculture and Fisheries Council

    Below is the text of the statement made by Robert Goodwill, the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, in the House of Commons on 2 May 2019.

    I represented the UK at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council in Luxembourg on 15 April.

    The main item on the agenda was the reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP) post-2020, with a focus on the proposed new green architecture. Ministers highlighted their willingness to commit to higher levels of overall ambition such as spending 30% of pillar 2 funding on climate change actions, and endorsed the new policy design. However, some member states also pressed for large chunks of the Commission’s proposals to be optional, including some of the Commission’s eco-schemes.

    This was followed by a ministerial lunch debate which focused on the impact of large carnivores and other species on agriculture. The Commission’s position that 100 % state aid was permissible to compensate for attacks on livestock did not satisfy several member states, who wanted greater latitude for farmers to shoot wolves and other predators.

    Council reconvened with an exchange of views on the task force in rural Africa, with the final report proposing a new alliance between the EU and Africa. I intervened on the item, highlighting the importance of developing countries in the global food supply and giving examples from UK projects that increase smallholder inclusion in the value chain and empower women economically.

    Commissioner Hogan also provided an update on the market situation, describing a stable and positive picture overall with concerns in sugar, apples and pears, and olive oil.

    A number of other items were discussed under “any other business”:

    The Netherlands informed Council about EU action against deforestation and forest degradation. I intervened, stressing our support for the proposal and encouraged the Commission to prepare an ambitious communication to step up action against deforestation.

    Slovakia presented its joint declaration with the Czech Republic and Poland on the renewable energy directive post-2020.

    The presidency informed the Council of the outcome of the research and agriculture conference held in Bucharest on 5 April.

  • John Bercow – 2019 Statement on Fiona Onasanya

    Below is the text of the statement made by John Bercow, the Speaker of the House of Commons, on 1 May 2019.

    Before I call the next speaker, I must advise the House that I have received notification from the petition officer for the constituency of Peterborough, in respect of the recall petition for Fiona Onasanya. The recall petition process for the constituency of Peterborough, established under the Recall of MPs Act 2015, closed today at 5 pm. As more than 10% of those eligible to sign the petition have done so, I advise the House that the petition was successful. Fiona Onasanya is no longer the Member for Peterborough, and the seat is accordingly vacant. She can therefore no longer participate in any parliamentary proceedings as a Member of Parliament. I shall cause the text of the notification to be published in the Votes and Proceedings and in the Official Report.

  • Karen Bradley – 2019 Statement on the Northern Ireland Executive

    Below is the text of the statement made by Karen Bradley, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, in the House of Commons on 1 May 2019.

    This statement is issued in accordance with section 4 of the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation and Exercise of Functions) Act 2018 (EFEF Act). Section 4 of the Act requires that I, as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, report on a quarterly basis on guidance issued under that section of the Act. It also required me to report on how I plan to address the impact of the absence of Northern Ireland Ministers on human rights obligations within three months of the day the Act was passed.

    The Act received Royal Assent on 1 November 2018. Following careful consideration of the sensitive issues section 4 deals with, and in consultation with the Northern Ireland civil service, guidance under section 4 was published on 17 December 2018.

    The first report required under section 4 was published as a written ministerial statement on 30 January 2019. It is again worth reiterating that abortion and same sex-marriage are devolved matters in Northern Ireland, and neither the EFEF Act nor the section 4 guidance change Northern Ireland’s law in relation to these issues or enable the law to be changed by way of guidance issued in my capacity as Secretary of State.

    I appeared before the Women and Equalities Committee on 27 February 2019 to provide evidence as part of its enquiry into abortion law in Northern Ireland. I welcome the Committee’s work on this important issue and the report it published on 25 April 2019. The Government will carefully consider the Committee’s report and recommendations and respond in due course.

    As before, I have consulted the head of the Northern Ireland civil service in the preparation of this report. He has advised that the Northern Ireland Departments continue to note the guidance and comply with their legal obligations when exercising any relevant functions in relation to abortion and same sex-marriage. He has also confirmed that relevant Departments are also considering the Women and Equalities Committee’s report.

    I continue to believe that the current absence of devolved government in Northern Ireland should not dislodge the principle that it is for the devolved administration to both legislate on, and ensure compliance with, human rights obligations in relation to such devolved matters. I would encourage a restored Executive to progress legislation on these issues as a matter of priority.

    Restoring the Executive remains my absolute priority. As I announced on Friday 26 April 2019, the Government have agreed, together with the Irish Government, to ​establish a new process of political talks, involving all the main political parties in Northern Ireland, in accordance with the three-stranded approach. The aim of these talks, commencing on 7 May 2019, is to quickly re-establish the democratic institutions of the Belfast agreement so that they can effectively serve all of the people for the future. I am firmly of the view that the people of Northern Ireland need their elected representatives back in government to take important decisions on the issues that matter most to them.

    As I have previously stated, I will keep the Government’s position on abortion and same-sex marriage under review in the light of the UK Government’s legal obligations, and in the light of any relevant emerging legal judgments, as appropriate.