UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Boris Johnson – 2018 Speech at Paris Conference

    Below is the text of the speech made by Boris Johnson, the Foreign Secretary, at the Paris Conference on chemical weapons held on 18 May 2018.

    I’m grateful to the French Chair of the Partnership for convening this important meeting.

    We gather at a moment when the rules that guarantee the security of every country – including the global ban on chemical weapons – are gravely imperilled.

    Almost a century ago, the world united to prohibit the use of chemical weapons with the Geneva Protocol of 1925.

    More recently, 165 countries have signed the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1997 and agreed never to develop, manufacture or stockpile these munitions.

    Banning this terrible category of weapon must rank among the seminal diplomatic achievements of the last century.

    And yet I have the unwanted distinction of representing a country which has experienced the use of chemical weapons on its soil, not in a 20th century conflict but on 4th March this year,

    when a nerve agent struck down a father and daughter in Salisbury.

    Sergei and Yulia Skripal were rushed to hospital after being found reeling and distressed on a park bench.

    In the days that followed, our experts had to seal off nine locations in Salisbury – including a restaurant and a cemetery – in order to screen them for possible contamination.

    A police officer, Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, was hospitalised after suffering the effects of exposure to the nerve agent.

    Scores of unwitting bystanders had to be checked for symptoms.

    Their only involvement was that chance had placed them in certain areas of Salisbury on 4th March;

    they could have been from any country – including those represented here – for Salisbury ranks among the most popular tourist destinations in Europe.

    The fact that no bystander was seriously harmed owed everything to luck and nothing to the perpetrators, who clearly did not care how many innocent people they endangered.

    I am glad to say that Mr Skripal was released from hospital earlier today – though he is still receiving treatment. His daughter and Detective Sergeant Bailey were discharged last month.

    Our experts analysed samples taken from the scene and identified them as a fourth generation, military-grade “Novichok” nerve agent.

    The highest concentration was found on the handle of the front door of Mr Skripal’s home.

    We sent samples to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, whose experts independently confirmed this identification.

    “Novichok” nerve agents were first developed in the Soviet Union in the 1980s.

    The British Government has information that within the last decade, Russia has produced and stockpiled small quantities of “Novichok” under the same programme that also investigated how to deliver nerve agents, including by application to door handles.

    The fact that such a pure nerve agent was used narrows down the list of culprits to a state actor.

    And there is only one state that combines possession of Novichoks with a record of conducting assassinations and an obvious – indeed publicly avowed – motive for targeting Sergei Skripal.

    We are left with no alternative conclusion except that the Russian state was responsible for attempted murder in a British city, using a banned nerve agent in breach of the Chemical Weapons Convention.

    Our friends around the world shared our assessment and 28 countries and NATO acted in solidarity with Britain by expelling over 130 Russian diplomats – the biggest coordinated expulsion in history.

    Many of those countries are represented here today; once again, I thank them from the bottom of my heart.

    This resolute action demonstrated our shared determination to ensure there can be no impunity for the use of chemical weapons,

    whether by a state or a terrorist group,

    whether in the UK or Syria or anywhere else.

    On 7th April, barely a month after the Salisbury incident, the Asad regime used poison gas in the Syrian town of Douma, killing as many as 75 people, including children.

    Britain, France and the United States responded by launching targeted, precise and proportionate strikes against the chemical weapons infrastructure of the Syrian regime.

    Even before the atrocity in Douma, a joint investigation by the UN and the OPCW had found the Asad regime guilty of using chemical weapons on four separate occasions between 2015 and 2017.

    Russia’s response was not to enforce the ban on chemical weapons but to use its veto in the Security Council to protect Asad by shutting down the international investigation.

    That is all the more tragic when you consider that Russia is a permanent member of the Security Council with special responsibility for upholding peace and security, including the global ban on chemical weapons.

    Given that the Kremlin seems determined to block any international investigation empowered to attribute responsibility for chemical attacks in Syria, then we must work together to develop another mechanism.

    In the meantime, we have it within our power to impose sanctions on any individuals or entities involved in the use of chemical weapons.

    We can collect and preserve the evidence of these crimes.

    We can call for a special session of the Conference of States Parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention, in order to consider how best to support the Convention and its implementing body, the OPCW.

    And we can make clear our resolve that the global ban on chemical weapons shall not be allowed to fade into irrelevance.

    If that moral calamity were to happen, the security of every nation would be at risk.

    My goal is to be the last foreign minister who attends a gathering like this as the representative of a country that has witnessed the use of chemical weapons.

    Thank you.

  • Tony Blair – 2018 Article on Brexit

    Below is the text of an article by Tony Blair, the former Prime Minister, published on 22 May 2018.

    We publish today a comprehensive guide to the issues around the Customs Union or Customs Partnership as a means of unlocking the deadlock of the Brexit negotiation. It is the work of Dr. Andy Tarrant, a recognised expert on EU affairs.

    It shows conclusively that:

    There is no Customs Partnership which will deliver the same benefits as staying in the Customs Union, even if the EU were prepared to accept such a Partnership.

    However, the Customs Union will not, on its own, deliver frictionless trade between the UK and the EU and therefore is neither good enough for British business nor a full answer to the Ireland question.

    Only membership of the Single Market or signing up to EEA comes close to genuine frictionless trade.

    Even that unless combined with a Customs Union would still have some friction attached.

    The ‘freedom’ to pursue trade deals is unlikely to result in any substantial benefit to Britain, involves very difficult choices, and in any event if it worked, would take a decade or more before any benefit was realised.
    The Government now know this. So, they’re again reverting to postponement rather than resolution of the Dilemma.

    The Dilemma, as I have described previously, is whether we stay in a close economic relationship with Europe to avoid economic damage, in which case one way or another we will end up abiding by Europe’s rules; or whether we break from Europe decisively, to have ‘freedom’ from those rules, in which case the economic damage at least short and medium term will be considerable.

    There is no way round this Dilemma. These are the two competing versions of Brexit. They aren’t ultimately capable of fudge. The Customs Partnership is just the latest failed attempt at fudging.

    Therefore, the Government have reverted to postponing the decision by agreeing to extend the period by which we will keep to Europe’s rules after the transition should that prove necessary.

    This is a very dangerous strategy. If this Dilemma is not resolved prior to March 2019, then Britain will be leaving Europe with no clear idea of what the future economic relationship entails. After March 2019, we will have no negotiating leverage. We will have left. We will be completely dependent on what we are given by the EU, with no say in Europe, no representation, no bargaining power.

    The Government should be obliged to decide which version of Brexit they want for any vote in Parliament to be meaningful before March 2019.

    But what is also now clear is that the leadership of both main political Parties are engaged in the same sleight of hand, namely pretending that we can have frictionless trade whilst leaving the Single Market.

    As our paper shows, this is simply wrong. The Single Market is a unique trading area where not only is trade tariff free, it is free of non tariff barriers, through regulatory alignment. It therefore allows complete freedom of trade for goods and a substantial amount of free trade in services where Europe has adopted common sets of rules.

    Membership of the Customs Union alone does not solve the problem of friction, because if Britain wants freedom to diverge on product regulation then there will still need to be checks. And, of course, if Britain is part of a Customs Union then it cannot make its own trade deals.

    The Customs Union option in any event does not at all address the question of services, particularly financial services where we have a huge surplus with the European Union.

    At some point the Dilemma must be resolved by a choice. And here is where the case for sending the issue back to the people is now overwhelming. Either option is a form of Brexit. Supporters of Brexit are to be found on both sides of the Dilemma. Brexit could mean either of these two very different outcomes. How then can it be said that the British people in June 2016 decided for one option over the other?

    The only right method of resolution is to give to the people who made the original choice to leave Europe, the choice of which Brexit they prefer or whether given that choice, in the light of what we now know, they want to proceed with Brexit or stay in Europe.

    Here is the challenge to both Party leaderships.

    The Conservative Party believes that if they ‘deliver Brexit’ they have fulfilled their mandate and the British people will be grateful that at least Brexit is done.

    This is a fundamental strategic error. The so-called ‘soft Brexit’ which will see us still tied to European rules in some form or another, will not satisfy the most ardent Leavers. They’re already shouting betrayal.

    So, if the Conservative Party thinks it has solved its European problem if it goes for a mishmash of theoretical freedom from, but practical alignment with, European rules, it is profoundly mistaken. It is just another route to disillusion.

    For the Labour Party the position is even more stark. As was entirely predictable and predicted, we now find ourselves in the worst of both worlds.

    The Leavers think we’re not really for Leave because we want to stay in the Customs Union and as I say for many Leavers that is an unacceptable compromise.

    The Labour Party position is also contradictory. If the reason for being against EFTA or the Single Market is we don’t want to be merely rule takers, then the Customs Union solution has the same objection. We will be taking the trade rules Europe negotiates. Go and talk to the Turks. They are bound by Europe’s trade agreements, and they are forced to align with a lot of European rules to minimise friction. Even so, their arrangement doesn’t work well.

    The Remainers, however, have now cottoned on to the fact Labour is not really for remaining either, except in the very limited sense of the Customs Union, and so, unsurprisingly, they’re losing faith in Labour as a route to avoid Brexit.

    The Labour Party will pay a heavy price for the leadership’s closet Euro-scepticism.

    The tragedy is the price the country will pay for Labour’s failure to lead.

    It would be a straightforward and in my view electorally winning position if the Labour Party were to say: we accepted the referendum verdict; we gave the Government the opportunity to negotiate a good deal; it is now apparent they can’t; it is equally apparent that this is not only because of division and incompetence but because there is no resolution to the Dilemma; therefore, we reject the deal but you, the British people, should have the final decision. You began Brexit, you mandated the negotiation and you should decide how it ends.

    45 years of European membership with all the intricate trading arrangements born of geography, common interest and then the Single Market means that Leaving Europe is economically painful. Look at the chart in our paper of how in 50 years our export relationships have been transformed.

    Labour cannot argue for a ‘jobs first’ Brexit and then oppose what is plainly the only way of protecting British jobs which is to remain part of Europe’s economic structures. It is greatly to the credit of those MPs both Labour and Conservative that they are prepared to put the country’s interests before their Party whip and support an EEA type amendment.

    The reality of the choices we face is what we now know in a way we did not in June 2016. It is a choice of two futures. They contrast starkly. There is no ‘having our cake and eating it.’ We must choose as a country in the light of two years of – let’s face it – inconclusive and unsatisfactory negotiation.

    We can all speculate as to which future the British people would now choose once they know the outcome of the negotiation.

    But there is only one sure way to find out and that is to ask them. The Labour Party should be leading that case.

  • Theresa May – 2018 Speech on Science

    Below is the text of the speech made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, at Jodrell Bank on 21 May 2018.

    Introduction

    Jodrell Bank was established in 1945, in a Britain rebuilding in the aftermath of the Second World War.

    Motors from the gun turrets of battleships were built into the machinery used to rotate the dish of the awesome Lovell Telescope behind me.

    The first scientists to use it were continuing research into radar which had begun in wartime, with the purpose of defeating our enemies, but which they continued in peacetime, to extend human knowledge.

    Memories were fresh of the destruction that had been wreaked through what Winston Churchill called ‘the lights of perverted science’.

    But stronger than the doubts about technological change was a faith in the potential of scientific inquiry to overcome the great challenges of their time – want, disease, ignorance and squalor – and to light the path to a better future. They were men and women who stood at the threshold of a new age.

    Their grand-parents lit their homes with oil lamps and travelled by horse and cart, but they would live to see jet travel and space flight.

    Jodrell Bank is an icon of the United Kingdom’s tradition of scientific achievement and is today at the cutting edge of twenty-first century discovery.

    And as I look towards the future, that spirit of scientific inquiry, and its power to shape a better tomorrow, is at the heart of my vision.

    Because the world today stands at the threshold of a new technological age as exciting as any in our past.

    Great changes in how we live, how we work, how businesses trade will reshape our economy and transform our society in the years ahead.

    This technological revolution presents huge opportunities for countries with the means to seize them.

    And Britain is in pole position to do just that. We are ranked first in the world for research into the defining technologies of the next decade, from genomics and synthetic biology, to robotics and satellites.

    With 1 per cent of the world’s population, we are home to 12 of the top 100 universities.

    And London is Europe’s leading tech start-up cluster, attracting more venture capital investment than any other city.

    But this success is not automatic. We are at the forefront of scientific invention because we embrace change and use regulation not to stifle but to stimulate an environment for creativity.

    We have great universities because we have strengthened historic institutions and nurtured new intellectual powerhouses with public investment.

    Britain’s businesses can take on the world because they have access to a skilled workforce and modern infrastructure.

    Key to our success has been the combination of individual ingenuity and ambition with government action to invest in the future.

    British scientific achievement

    UK global leadership in science and innovation is one of this country’s greatest assets.

    For centuries Britain has been a cradle of scientific achievement.

    William Harvey’s discovery that blood circulates around the body provided the basis for modern physiology and lead directly to every great medical advance of the last 400 years.

    Isaac Newton’s establishment of the laws of motion, optics and gravitation defined the parameters of physics and laid the foundations on which modern science rests.

    Michael Faraday’s discovery of electromagnetic induction unlocked the potential of electricity to light up the world and power the modern age. Every day, we benefit from the work of generations of British scientists and engineers. Every time we use a computer or go online, we benefit from the genius of Alan Turing and the foresight of Sir Tim Berners-Lee.

    Every journey in an airliner is powered by the turbo-jet technology pioneered by Frank Whittle.

    Every day my life and the lives of millions of people around the world are made infinitely better because of the ground-breaking work on the structure of insulin by Dorothy Hodgkin.

    Each of these scientists and inventors has an inspiring story of human achievement borne of hours of patient labour from which we all reap the rewards.

    Contemporary British science is just as inspiring. Developing gene therapies to treat – and even cure – diseases that until now have been beyond us.

    Creating new materials like graphene that open-up opportunities across industry and medicine – from lighter display screens to synthetic bone tissue.

    Producing CT and MRI scanners to provide new ways of seeing inside the body to diagnose disease and target treatments.

    Scientific research is a noble pursuit and a public good – whether or not it leads directly to a commercial application.

    But when a discovery does have the potential to create or transform an industrial sector, time and again British entrepreneurs have been the first to capitalise on it.

    In the eighteenth century, Stoke-on-Trent became the ceramics capital of the world after Josiah Wedgewood industrialised the manufacture of pottery.

    In the nineteenth century, George Stephenson made Newcastle the first city anywhere to export railway locomotives.

    In the twentieth century, Arthur Pilkington made St Helen’s the global centre of innovation in glassmaking.

    The great towns and cities of Britain grew up as global centres of innovative production.

    However, the nature of innovation and progress is that new technology inevitably replaces old.

    And in the twenty-first century, some parts of the country that once thrived because of innovation and technology have seen the jobs and opportunities of the past fall away.

    But in others we have seen Britain’s capacity for invention and reinvention create twenty-first century success stories:

    Cardiff has gone from exporting coal to pioneering in semiconductors.

    Dundee from jute to computer gaming.

    Hull from whaling to wind-turbines.

    Our challenge as a nation, and my determination as Prime Minister, is not just to lead the world in the 4th industrial revolution – but to ensure that every part of our country powers that success.

    That is what our modern Industrial Strategy is all about.

    Investing in science and research to keep us at the forefront of new technologies and the benefits they bring.

    Nurturing the talent of tomorrow – through more outstanding schools, world-leading universities and the technical skills that will drive our economy.

    And transforming the places where people live and work – the places where ideas and inspiration are born – by backing businesses and building infrastructure not just in London and the South East but across every part of our country.

    Science at heart of a modern Industrial Strategy

    Government has always had a crucial role in supporting scientific research and the technological advancements that flow from it…

    …from the founding of the learned societies under royal patronage in the seventeenth century to the expansion of state-funded research in universities through the twentieth century.

    In the last few years, government support has helped create new landmark institutions, like the Francis Crick Institute – Europe’s biomedical research facility – and the Aerospace Technology Institute in Bedford – leading on research and technology in the aerospace sector.

    And in the Industrial Strategy, we have made a commitment to take our support for UK science and technology to another level.

    £7 billion in new public funding for science, research and innovation: the largest increase for 40 years.

    But to truly succeed we will go even further.

    As a government, we have set the goal of research and development investment reaching 2.4 per cent of GDP by 2027 – more than ever before.

    That could translate to an additional £80 billion investment in the ideas of the future over the next decade.

    But even that figure fails to capture the scale of the possibility this will create.

    Because science and technology have a dynamic relationship.

    The scientific breakthroughs of today will lead to technological advances which themselves open the door to further scientific discovery, the likes of which are beyond our imagination.

    And it won’t just be public funding – our R&D target covers the combined power of government and business alike.

    That is what the Industrial Strategy is all about – not just the state spending money but using smart public investment to harness private funding.

    Not government running enterprise, but a strategic state using its power and influence to create the right conditions to allow us to thrive in the long term.

    A strategic approach means ensuring we have an education system that gives young people the skills they need to contribute to the economy of the future.

    That means more free schools and academies providing great school places, a curriculum that sets the highest standards, and proper support for our teachers to deliver it…

    It means more rigorous science GCSEs preparing young people better for further study and work, and more young people going on to do sciences at A-level.

    And to attract talented science graduates into the teaching profession, we are offering tax-free bursaries worth up to £26,000 in priority subjects.

    And it means going even further in the future.

    Transforming technical education with new high-quality T-levels that are every bit as good as A-levels.

    New Institutes of Technology to provide higher-level education and training.

    And a national re-training scheme to help workers of all ages adapt their skills to the jobs of tomorrow.

    This is action from a strategic state to drive policy changes that will benefit our economy, our society and the individuals we serve.

    And it’s not just in education.

    A strategic approach means…

    …renewing and extending our infrastructure with faster trains, bigger stations, better road connections…

    …delivering next generation mobile and broadband connections, with faster speeds and better coverage…

    …ensuring we have the right regulation, modern employment standards, effective corporate governance rules.

    It means government doing what only it can do: fixing the essential foundations of our economy.

    That allows researchers, innovators and businesses to do what only they can do: generate and develop the great ideas, products and services that create jobs and produce growth.

    And if we do this – if we get the essentials of our economy right – we can focus our talents and ambition on seizing the opportunities of the future.

    Grand challenges

    We cannot predict the future or guess what technological or scientific breakthroughs might lie just around the corner.

    But we can observe the long-term trends that are shaping change in our world today and which will drive and demand innovation in the years ahead.

    We know that artificial intelligence and the big data revolution is transforming business models and employment practices across all sectors of the economy – especially in services, which are so important to our country.

    We can see that a rising global population and ever-increasing urbanisation, combined with new transport technologies, are driving profound changes in how we move people and goods around our cities and countries.

    We know that our society here in the UK, and in other developed countries around the world, is getting older – creating new demands and opportunities.

    And the international determination to address climate change and deliver clean growth in the future is one of the facts of our time – and one of the greatest industrial opportunities of all time.

    The modern Industrial Strategy identifies these four Grand Challenges as the areas of enormous potential for the UK economy.

    By channelling our efforts into meeting them – building on our strengths in science, innovation, and commerce – we can develop technologies to export around the world, we can grow whole new industries that bring good jobs across the UK, and we can achieve tangible social improvements for everyone in our society.

    Four missions

    From John Harrison’s development of the marine chronometer, to the sequencing of the human genome and treatments to tackle the AIDS crisis…

    …we have seen throughout our history that setting ambitious and clearly-defined missions motivates human endeavour.

    There is huge potential in a missions-based approach to drive faster solutions – and it is an approach being pioneered here in the UK, by University College London’s Commission on Mission-Oriented Industrial Strategy.

    So today I am setting the first four missions of our Industrial Strategy – one in each Grand Challenge.

    If they are to be meaningful, they must be ambitious and stretching.

    That means that our success in them cannot be guaranteed.

    But I believe that by setting a high ambition, we can achieve more than we otherwise would.

    So these are the missions I am setting today.

    AI and data

    First, as part of the AI and Data Grand Challenge, the United Kingdom will use data, artificial intelligence and innovation to transform the prevention, early diagnosis and treatment of diseases like cancer, diabetes, heart disease and dementia by 2030.

    Late diagnosis of otherwise treatable illnesses is one of the biggest causes of avoidable deaths.

    And the development of smart technologies to analyse great quantities of data quickly and with a higher degree of accuracy than is possible by human beings opens up a whole new field of medical research and gives us a new weapon in our armoury in the fight against disease.

    In cancer, our ambition is that within 15 years we will be able to diagnose at a much earlier stage the lung, bowel, prostate or ovarian cancer of at least 50,000 more people a year.

    Combined with the great treatment and care provided by our NHS, that will mean every year 22,000 fewer people will die within five years of their diagnosis compared to today.

    We will work with industry and the medical research community to announce specific ambitions in a range of other disease areas over the coming weeks and months.

    Achieving this mission will not only save thousands of lives.

    It will incubate a whole new industry around AI-in-healthcare, creating high-skilled science jobs across the country, drawing on existing centres of excellence in places like Edinburgh, Oxford and Leeds – and helping to grow new ones.

    Healthy ageing

    Second, through our healthy ageing grand challenge, we will ensure that people can enjoy five extra healthy, independent years of life by 2035, whilst narrowing the gap between the experience of the richest and poorest.

    We are living longer lives because of medical advances, better drugs, healthier lifestyles, and safer workplaces.

    It is a sign of our success, of our progress as a society, and is to be celebrated.

    But as we extend the years of our life, we should also work harder to increase quality of life in our later years.

    That should not just be the preserve of the wealthy – everyone, of every background and income level, has the right to enjoy a happy and active retirement.

    We can do that by supporting more people to stay happy, healthy and independent in their own homes for longer, instead of going into hospital.

    It will take a collective effort to achieve this.

    Employers can help, by meeting the needs of people who have caring responsibilities and by doing more to support older people to contribute in the workplace – and enjoy the emotional and physical benefits of having a job if they want one.

    Businesses can contribute, and benefit, by supplying the needs of a growing market.

    Innovative and well-designed products and services – from housing adaptations that make our homes safer for older people to live in, to smart technologies that help people continue to enjoy life if they have a health condition.

    These innovations can also be exported to a rapidly growing market around the world.

    And we can all play our part – by making healthier lifestyle choices ourselves, and by supporting our friends and neighbours as they get older.

    We can build a stronger society, where more people can contribute their talents for longer and fewer people face loneliness and isolation.

    Future of mobility

    Third, in the future of mobility grand challenge, we have a mission to put the UK at the forefront of the design and manufacturing of zero emission vehicles and for all new cars and vans to be effectively zero emission by 2040.

    Technology is revolutionising how we power vehicles, how they are driven, how we navigate and how we access information about public transport.

    Britain led the world into the railway age. We pioneered jet air travel.

    By putting the UK at the forefront of the twenty-first century transport revolution, we can ensure our automotive sector – one of our greatest success stories – continues to thrive and create good jobs across the country.

    We can make our towns and cities cleaner, safer and more productive places to live and work.

    We can set a global standard for managing technological change to maximise economic and environmental benefits.

    We will work with industry to achieve this ambition, and share the benefits this opportunity presents.

    Clean growth

    And fourth, in the clean growth grand challenge, we will use new technologies and modern construction practices to at least halve the energy usage of new buildings by 2030.

    Heating and powering buildings accounts for 40 per cent of our total energy usage.

    By making our buildings more energy efficient and embracing smart technologies, we can slash household energy bills, reduce demand for energy, and meet our targets for carbon reduction.

    By halving the energy use of new buildings – both commercial and residential – we could reduce the energy bills for their occupants by as much as 50 per cent.

    And we will aim to halve the costs of reaching the same standard in existing buildings too.

    Meeting this challenge will drive innovation and higher standards in the construction sector, helping it to meet our ambitious homebuilding targets and providing more jobs and opportunity to millions of workers across the country.

    It will be a catalyst for new technologies and more productive methods, which can be exported to a large and growing global market for clean technologies.

    These four missions are just the beginning – and in setting further missions across the four grand challenge areas, we will work closely with businesses and sectors.

    In each one of these four missions, scientific and technological innovations have the potential to create jobs, drive economic growth across the country and deliver tangible improvements for everyone in our country.

    This represents a level of ambition every bit as high as that which created Jodrell Bank and rebuilt Britain in 1945.

    We live in a different world today. Our economy is more globalised. Our strengths are in services, as well as in manufacturing. Our population is older.

    And the Industrial Strategy sets its sights on our future, not our past.

    As we look towards that new future for the UK outside of the European Union, the UK’s ingenuity and creativity will be what drives our progress as a nation.

    Science and Brexit

    William Wordsworth described the statue of Sir Isaac Newton that stands in the chapel of Trinity College, Cambridge as being ‘the marble index of a mind forever voyaging through strange seas of thought, alone.’

    That romantic image belies the truth that the essence of scientific progress is not private contemplation, but collaboration.

    Nothing is achieved in isolation and it is only through co-operation that advances are made. Every great British scientist could only reach new frontiers of invention because they built on the work of others, exchanged ideas with their contemporaries and participated in an international community of discovery.

    William Harvey learned medicine at the University of Padua.

    The first secretary of the Royal Society, Henry Oldenburg, was an immigrant from Germany.

    The discovery of DNA in Cambridge was the work of an Englishman, Francis Crick; an American, James Watson; a born New Zealander, Maurice Wilkins; and a descendent of Jewish immigrants from Poland, Rosalind Franklin.

    Indeed Newton himself put it best when he wrote that, ‘if I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants’.

    Science is an international enterprise and discoveries know no borders.

    The United Kingdom today is at the centre of a web of international collaboration.

    Our immigration system supports this, with no cap on the number of the students who can come to our universities, and thousands coming every year, learning from some of the finest academics and contributing to the success of some of the best universities in the world.

    Indeed, since 2010 the number of overseas students coming to study at UK universities has increased by almost a quarter.

    The UK will always be open to the brightest and the best researchers to come and make their valued contribution.

    And today over half of the UK’s resident researcher population were born overseas.

    When we leave the European Union, I will ensure that does not change.

    Indeed the Britain we build together in the decades ahead must be one in which scientific collaboration and the free exchange of ideas is increased and extended, both between the UK and the European Union and with partners around the world.

    I know how deeply British scientists value their collaboration with colleagues in other countries through EU-organised programmes.

    And the contribution which UK science makes to those programmes is immense.

    I have already said that I want the UK to have a deep science partnership with the European Union, because this is in the interests of scientists and industry right across Europe.

    And today I want to spell out that commitment even more clearly.

    The United Kingdom would like the option to fully associate ourselves with the excellence-based European science and innovation programmes – including the successor to Horizon 2020 and Euratom R&T.

    It is in the mutual interest of the UK and the EU that we should do so.

    Of course such an association would involve an appropriate UK financial contribution, which we would willingly make.

    In return, we would look to maintain a suitable level of influence in line with that contribution and the benefits we bring.

    The UK is ready to discuss these details with the Commission as soon as possible.

    Conclusion

    What I have set out today – unprecedented investment into science and research; four missions to drive businesses, academia, and government to meet the Grand Challenges of our time; and a clear commitment to extend our international collaboration after Brexit – build a positive vision for our country’s future.

    An open and innovative economy.

    The best place to start and grow a high-tech business.

    An outward-looking country, open to talent and ideas from around the world. A global centre for scientific discovery and creativity, where progress is driven by an optimism about the possibilities technological change can bring.

    There is no escaping the complexity of the challenge, but there should be no mistaking the scale of the opportunity before us either.

    The world is about to change – and is indeed already changing – at a remarkable pace.

    Technologies with the potential to transform our society will come of age in the years ahead.

    This is an exciting time to be alive – and rich in possibility for the curious, the inventive and the determined: the children in schools today studying STEM subjects in record numbers thanks to our education reforms.

    The undergraduates from an ever more diverse set of backgrounds now embarking on higher studies.

    The aspiring engineers and skilled workers who will benefit from our reforms to technical education over the coming years.

    The young researchers from around the world, starting their careers working in British laboratories.

    All have the chance to be part of one of the most exciting periods of discovery the world has ever known.

    Amongst their number will be names to be inscribed alongside the greatest figures of the past on the honour roll of scientific achievement.

    And together, we can continue a tradition of innovation that will extend our horizons and transform our lives.

  • Michael Gove – 2018 Speech on Plant Health

    Below is the text of the speech made by Michael Gove, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, RHS Chelsea Flower Show on 21 May 2018.

    Thank you for those incredibly kind words and thank you also for the chance to come to Chelsea. Like all of you here I’m captivated by what’s been achieved by the designers, growers and everyone who has been brought together to create something truly magical for a limited period of time and something that we can all share.

    It’s a very special moment in the light of the nation Chelsea Flower Show. It’s a very special organisation the RHS and can I begin by expressing the thanks that I feel all of us to Sir Nicholas, the RHS and to everyone who has made this Chelsea possible. Can we show our gratitude please.

    This has been something of a Chelsea weekend for me. I spent Saturday at Wembley with my son watching Chelsea Football Club who afloat the FA cup. I can see that many of you were there. But it’s a somewhat different crowd who are here this afternoon. But what we are also celebrating is excellence in another field.

    But of course, both the Chelsea Flower Show and the FA cup were significant events this weekend. But there’s another event even more significant, if you forgive me this weekend, that was of course, the wonderful wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. And like many of you, I was held wrapped by the sermon delivered by Michael Curry. I thought that perhaps after hearing that sermon I should rewrite my speech.

    I shall begin thus, there’s a power in flowers, flower power can change the world. And indeed, there is a power in flowers, and flowers can change our world because its flowers that provide us with food and drink. It’s flowers that clean up the mess that mankind makes and ensures that climate change can be dealt with by coping with the CO2 that we emit.

    It’s flowers increasingly that are providing the treatments that will heal the sick. It’s flowers that ensure our Earth remains in balance. And in that sense, those who invest and those who care for, those who husband and nurture flowers, those who work in horticulture are those who are contributing so powerfully to keeping our Earth in balance and ensuring that future generations have a chance to flourish. So Chelsea as well as being an amazing celebration of creative, aesthetic power and of commercial flavour.

    It’s also a celebration of those who do the most fundamental work of all, the work of nurturing this planet, the only one that we have, so it can survive and flourish in the future. But of course, that work as Nicholas reminded us is threatened and challenged by the impact of globalisation and climate change.

    Now of course, globalisation and trade brings many benefits, it’s the single most powerful force for rescuing us from poverty and of course, the whole history of the RHS, the history of Chelsea is a history of taking different parts of the globe and celebrating fusion and growth.

    But even as our history is one of trade and interchanging, even as globalisation brings benefits. We know that the unique mixture of global trade flows on the scale that we have at the moment, and climate change occurring at the pace it is at the moment creates new threats and new dangers to the UK’s environment and particularly to plant life here. Whether it’s Oak Processionary Moth or Xlyella, it is the case that changing weather and also the flow of international trade brings to our shores, bugs, parasites and threats which now have a chance to flourish, multiple and cause devastation as never before.

    And that requires vigilance and above all, it requires a partnership between Government and the industry in order to ensure that we can continue to enjoy the benefits of trade. But we also provide protection for that which we grow here. And in particular, I want to thank Nicola Spence and all those who within the Defra family do so much in order to ensure that we have appropriate protection for that what we grow here. And the particular threat of Xlyella as Sir Nicholas pointed out has acted as a wakeup call, a particular goad to ensure that we do everything necessary in order to provide protection for our plants and our environment.

    And the plant health service carries out targeted inspections of plant and wood imports at ports and airports every day of the year in order to ensure that we can be protected. For the past five years, the UK and the work of the plant health service has ensure this have made around 900 interceptions of harmful organisms from Non-EU countries. That’s more than any other EU member state, that’s around 40% of the EU total, and it’s that energetic work which has ensured that our nurses can continue to flourish and we can continue to protect that what we grow here. And only last week, our plant inspectors outed the thousand pest to the UK plant health register. It’s an invaluable tool which reflects the outstanding work in making sure that we screen new pests and new diseases, and ensure that growing here can continue successfully. And of course, we continue to monitor these threats and we continually seek to ensure that we have the arrangements in place and expertise at hand in order to be able to deal with threats like Xlyella and others.

    Now of course, as well as the action that’s been taken which already exists within the Defra family. There’s more activity that we are launching today which you may have heard about. Today we are launching the Action Oak initiative and this particular initiative is intended to ensure that we, Defra, the RHS and others can bring together world-leading research in order to ensure that the oak, one of our most iconic species, can be protected from the predators and pests that increasingly pose a threat to this amazing example of the glory in the garden that is England. And of course that work, the Action Oak initiative, is simply one of a number of areas of collaboration which Defra seeks to lead with people in this room and with industry beyond it.

    And Sir Nicholas has already spoken about the new senior cross-industry alliance which meets for the first time on Wednesday and it will bring together the nurseries, retailers, tree suppliers, landscapers, foresters and of course our Chief Plant Officer Nicola. To ensure that all of the usual rivalries that exist in the commercial world are put aside so we can have one joint endeavour in order to provide the highest levels of biosecurity, in order to provide them with the reassurance they need. And in particular, we should note that here at Chelsea decisions have already been taken without waiting for Government in order to ensure that the appropriate protections are in place.

    And that’s the case the RHS here has banned from its show. Nine of the overseas growing species that are already known to be a Xlyella risk, including rosemary and oleander. And of course where the RHS have led, other nurseries are leading, Barcham is a specialist tree grower has again displayed outstanding leadership in the way it grows its own stock and makes sure it never imports any plants from immediate release. I believe that it’s through working together with the best in the industry and making sure that we use the expertise that we have that to provide that higher level of biosecurity which Nicholas has asked for and is so important.

    Because since we published our biosecurity strategy in 2014, I believe that we in this country have built a stronger reputation for setting the highest standards of biosecurity for plants and trees. Our approach is based on science combined with grassroots visualise and with the inspections which our expert team are responsible for. But we all agree in this room that there is no room for complacency and I do believe that there are opportunities as we leave the European Union to tighten our security further.

    In the ten years’ time, I wanted to be able to say that our oaks are thriving, that pests have been kept at bay, and I want my children and grandchildren to be able to come to Chelsea to marvel at the diversity of what is on show here. To pleasure and joy in the nature world around them, and to know that the power that there is in flowers is their preserved and enhanced for generations yet to come.

    Thank you all very much.

  • Theresa May – 2018 Speech at High Performing Teachers’ Reception

    Below is the text of the speech made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, in Downing Street, London, on 21 May 2018.

    Good evening everyone and welcome to Downing Street.

    We have teachers here from across the country, including from a school in Wimbledon Park where I used to be a governor!

    One of the many wonderful things about living here and working here at No 10 is that I can draw inspiration from the countless great figures who have passed through these rooms over many years.

    I was asked earlier what it feels like to feel the history of this place when you are sitting in the Cabinet Room – so many great decisions have been made here, and it has seen so many great people.

    But few can claim to have shaped and influenced as many lives as the incredible people here this evening.

    You educate. You inspire. You unlock the potential of young minds, turn their aspirations into reality, you nurture the innovators, leaders and entrepreneurs of tomorrow.

    I was making a speech earlier today about science and the importance of nurturing innovation and creativity among our young people for the future. So teachers do a remarkable job, and you represent the best of the best. Indeed, we have among us Andria Zafirakou, who I am delighted to welcome back to Downing Street today, who has been named as the world’s best, the first ever British winner of the Global Teacher Prize.

    But amazing though it is, we are not here today just to celebrate Andria’s achievement. We are here to celebrate all of you, and all of your colleagues ups and down the country who do such vital work day-in, day-out.

    You are completely committed to giving every child the education that is right for them.

    And Damian and I are absolutely committed to helping you make that happen. You can see that from what we have achieved so far and what we are doing next.

    Compared with 2010, nearly two million more children are being taught in schools that are good or outstanding. We have raised teacher numbers to record levels. We are looking at ways of reducing your workload by stripping out unnecessary bureaucracy. We are working with the profession on a new strategy to drive recruitment and boost retention.

    And we are doing all of this because this is a government that supports and values teachers. Because we know that the success of every young person, in whatever they go on to do in life, is shaped by the education they receive at school.

    I was just asked about what education means to me. I said what I say to young people is education is the key to unlock the door to your future, and it is so important.

    Although I have to say on my first day at school I did not perhaps view it in quite the same way. Because on my very first day at primary school, the headmistress had to literally carry me, kicking and screaming, into the classroom.

    I think at the time she said “look what a silly girl we have here”.

    Fortunately, it did not take long for me to realise and appreciate both the power of education and the impact that good teachers have on so many young lives.

    That’s something that stayed with me in my time as a councillor, when I was chairman of the education authority in Merton. It stayed with me as a new MP, when the very first speech I gave was about education, and in my first frontbench job, was as shadow schools minister and then as shadow education secretary.

    And it is something that drives me today as Prime Minister.

    When I stood on the steps outside this house almost two years ago, I talked about my desire to tackle the burning injustices facing our country today.

    And education is the key to doing so, and that means teachers like you are the key to making Britain the great meritocracy it can and should be.

    The generations of famous figures who have graced this room throughout history owe their successes to the teachers who inspired and educated them. Teachers just like you.

    So I want to thank you, and thank all teachers, for everything you have already done to nurture the next generation.

    And let me say, once again, how much I look forward to working with you so that every child in every corner of this country has the best possible start in life.

  • Penny Mordaunt – 2018 Statement on Sexual Exploitation in the Aid Sector

    Below is the text of the statement made by Penny Mordaunt, the Secretary of State for International Development, in the House of Commons on 17 May 2018.

    Following the written ministerial statement of 20 March, Official Report, column 11WS, ​I am updating the House on what the Department for International Development (DFID) is doing to protect recipients of UK aid and those working in the sector from harm—safeguarding for short—with our focus on preventing and responding to sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment.

    Ensuring DFID’s programmes meet the highest standards

    Around 60% of DFID’s funding is delivered through multilateral organisations. On 21 April I co-hosted with the Dutch Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Co-operation a roundtable with senior representatives of international financial institutions—I am placing the list of names in an annex to this document in the Libraries of both Houses—and discussed how we can pool best practice and resources to tackle this issue across the sector. All 10 institutions signed a joint statement reaffirming their commitment to preventing sexual harassment, abuse and exploitation, both within their own institutions and their operations, many of which are funded by DFID. I will be pressing for them to translate this commitment into further concrete actions in 2018.

    From my recent meetings in Washington it is clear that multilateral organisations are taking this issue extremely seriously and looking to learn from previous cases and improve their systems and processes. For example, the World Bank has strengthened its staff rules covering sexual misconduct and abuse and is rolling out staff training and a wider review of its human resources policies with respect to sexual harassment and exploitation.

    The UN Secretary-General has made clear his zero tolerance approach to both sexual exploitation and abuse and sexual harassment. In the past two weeks I have discussed safeguarding with the heads of the United Nations Development Programme and the United Nations High Commission for Refugees. At the UN system chief executives board meeting in London earlier in May, Secretary-General António Guterres led a special session with the heads of 31 UN agencies, funds and programmes on addressing sexual harassment within the UN system. This included a new 24-hour helpline for staff to report harassment and access support, so fast-tracking complaints. I am pressing for agreement to a consistent UN-wide approach on reporting, investigation and outreach, and support when cases of sexual exploitation, abuse or harassment occur.

    I am also pressing all organisations that DFID funds to learn from best and worst practice. Last month Save the Children UK withdrew from bidding for new UK Government funding while it looks to learn lessons and the Charity Commission carries out a statutory inquiry into its handling of internal cases.

    Following my letter to DFID partners seeking assurances on their safeguarding policies and procedures, I have now received responses from our top suppliers, multilateral partners, development capital partners and research partners. This is a total of 283 organisations. I will publish a high-level summary of the returns on gov.uk later this month updating the information published on 20 March on the 179 charities directly receiving UK aid. I am including the link to that document in an annex to this document in the Libraries of both Houses.

    Following the 5 March summit organised by DFID and the Charity Commission, DFID has convened four NGO working groups and an external experts group to ​develop concrete ideas. I met representatives of the working groups and the experts this week to discuss which of their initial proposals could make the biggest difference. The work is focusing on:

    accountability to beneficiaries and survivors—prioritising those who have suffered and survived exploitation, abuse and violence, and designing systems of accountability and transparency that have beneficiaries at their centre;

    how the aid sector can demonstrate a step change in shifting organisational culture to tackle power imbalances and gender inequality;

    ensuring that safeguards are integrated throughout the employment cycle, including work on the proposal for a global register/passport; and

    providing full accountability through rigorous reporting and complaints mechanisms, and ensuring that concerns are heard and acted on.

    Ensuring all UK aid meets the highest standards

    On 28 March I chaired a meeting of UK Government Departments that spend official development assistance (ODA). I updated Ministers on DFID’s work including the new safeguarding due diligence standards which I announced in March. Following a successful pilot, the new process will be rolled out to other programmes later this month. DFID will write to all other UK ODA spending departments with the details should they wish to adopt the same approach.

    This month senior DFID officials have held further meetings with opposite numbers from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Cabinet Office and the Charity Commission to discuss how we can raise our own performances on safeguarding and that of others in the aid sector.

    I am in contact with the Ministry of Defence about pre-deployment training for peacekeeping operations, and DFID’s HR director has been working with colleagues across Whitehall to drive up internal HR standards.

    Working with other donors to drive up standards

    The Department is working closely with Canada as G7 presidency and at a meeting of G7 Development Ministers at the end of May I have been asked to lead a discussion on sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment.

    DFID is now chairing monthly meetings of a group of 15 donors—I am placing the list of names in the Libraries of both Houses—to seek collective action including in our key implementing partners.

    DFID is also working with the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to explore how to measure donors’ performance on sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment as part regular peer reviews. I plan to write to all DAC donors, observers and other major donors updating them on our work and seeking their suggestions.

    The UK is leading the change needed on this issue. We have made good progress since March and I will use every opportunity possible in the coming weeks and months to push for much more. I will host an international conference in London on 18 October.

  • Greg Clark – 2018 Statement on Energy Policy

    Below is the text of the statement made by Greg Clark, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, in the House of Commons on 17 May 2018.

    The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, my right hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (James Brokenshire) and I wish to reiterate the Government’s view that there are potentially substantial benefits from the safe and sustainable exploration and development of our onshore shale gas resources and to set out in this statement to Parliament the actions we are taking to support our position. This joint statement should be considered in planning decisions and plan making in England.

    The UK must have safe, secure and affordable supplies of energy with carbon emissions levels that are consistent with the carbon budgets defined in our Climate Change Act and our international obligations. We believe that gas has a key part to play in meeting these objectives both currently and in the future. In part as a result of the UK’s diverse range of energy sources, which include natural gas, we have had competitively priced energy since 1990 while reducing carbon emissions across the economy by 49%—a leading performance among developed nations. Gas still makes up around a third of our current energy usage and every scenario proposed by the Committee on Climate Change setting out how the UK could meet its legally binding 2050 emissions reduction target includes demand for natural gas. As set out in the clean growth strategy, innovations in technologies such as carbon capture usage and storage (CCUS) have the potential to decarbonise this energy supply still further and prolong its role in our energy mix.

    However, despite the welcome improvements in efficiency and innovation from companies operating in the North sea, the ongoing decline in our offshore gas production has meant that the UK has gone from being a net exporter of gas in 2003 to importing over half (53%) of gas supplies in 2017 and estimates suggest we could be importing 72% of our gas by 2030. Our current import mix, via pipelines from Norway and continental Europe and LNG terminals that can source gas from around the world, provides us with stable and secure supplies. However, we believe that it is right to utilise our domestic gas resources to the maximum extent and exploring further the potential for onshore gas production from shale rock formations in the UK, where it is economically efficient, and where environment impacts are robustly regulated.

    We also believe that further development of onshore gas resources has the potential to deliver substantial economic benefits to the UK economy and for local communities where supplies are located by creating thousands of new jobs directly in extraction, local support services, and the rest of the supply chain. A potential new shale gas exploration and production sector in the shale basins of England could provide a new economic driver. We also see an opportunity to ​work with industry on innovation to create a “UK Model”—the world’s most environmentally robust onshore shale gas sector—and to explore export opportunities from this model, a core theme of our modern industrial strategy.

    But to achieve these benefits, we need to work with responsible companies prepared to invest in this industry as they proceed with the exploration process, to test the size and value of the potential reserves and to ensure that our planning and regulatory systems work appropriately while assisting local councils in making informed and appropriate planning decisions. So we are setting out a series of actions, including those committed to in the Government’s 2017 manifesto to support the development of shale gas extraction.

    Planning

    The UK has world-class regulation to ensure that shale exploration can happen safely, respecting local communities and safeguarding the environment. The development of the shale gas industry so far has already led to millions of pounds being invested in the UK, supporting businesses and the supply chain, and creating British jobs. We have recently seen four planning approvals for exploratory shale development. The Government remain fully committed to making planning decisions faster and fairer for all those affected by new development, and to ensure that local communities are fully involved in planning decisions that affect them. These are long-standing principles. No one benefits from the uncertainty caused by delay which is why, in September 2015, Government set out a range of measures to help ensure every planning application or appeal was dealt with as quickly as possible.

    However, recent decisions on shale exploration planning applications remain disappointingly slow against a statutory time frame of 16 weeks where an environmental impact assessment is required. So we are announcing a range of measures to facilitate timely decisions. These measures only apply in England.

    Planning policy and guidance

    This statement is a material consideration in plan making and decision taking, alongside relevant policies of the existing national planning policy framework (2012), in particular those on mineral planning, including conventional and unconventional hydrocarbons.

    Shale gas development is of national importance. The Government expect mineral planning authorities to give great weight to the benefits of mineral extraction, including to the economy. This includes shale gas exploration and extraction. Mineral plans should reflect that minerals resources can only be worked where they are found, and applications must be assessed on a site by site basis and having regard to their context. Plans should not set restrictions or thresholds across their plan area that limit shale development without proper justification. We expect mineral planning authorities to recognise the fact that Parliament has set out in statute the relevant definitions of hydrocarbon, natural gas and associated hydraulic fracturing. In addition, these matters are described in planning practice guidance, which plans must have due regard to. Consistent with this planning practice guidance, policies should avoid undue sterilisation of mineral resources, including shale gas.​
    The Government have consulted on a draft revised national planning policy framework (NPPF). The consultation closed on 10 May 2018. In due course the revised national planning policy framework will sit alongside the written ministerial statement.

    We intend to publish revised planning practice guidance on shale development once the revised national planning policy framework has been launched ensuring clarity on issues such as cumulative impact, local plan making and confirmation that planners can rely on the advice of regulatory experts.

    Planning decision making

    To support a decision-making regime that meets the future needs of the sector we will progress our manifesto commitments by:

    Holding an early-stage consultation, in summer 2018, on the principle of whether non-hydraulic fracturing shale exploration development should be treated as permitted development, and in particular on the circumstances in which this might be appropriate.

    Consulting, in summer 2018, on the criteria required to trigger the inclusion of shale production projects into the nationally significant infrastructure projects regime.

    Further, we will strengthen community engagement by consulting in due course on the potential to make pre-application consultation a statutory requirement.

    Support for those involved in decision making

    We are aware that the shale applications and the planning process can be complex for local authorities. Building capacity and capability within local authorities to deal with shale development is a vital step towards speeding up decision making. We will help achieve this by announcing today:

    The launch of a new £1.6 million shale support fund over the next two years to build capacity and capability in local authorities dealing with shale applications.

    The creation of a new planning brokerage service for shale applications to provide guidance to developers and local authorities on the planning process to help facilitate timely decision making. The service would focus exclusively on the planning process and will have no role in the consideration or determination of planning applications. The service will not comment on the merits of a case and will also have no role in the appeals process.

    In addition, the Government recognise that early engagement with local authorities, including capitalising on formal pre-application discussions, is critical in building confidence in decision making and securing support for development proposals and set realistic timeframes for decisions. We expect this to be formalised by a planning performance agreement providing certainty for all parties. And we then expect all parties—including decision makers in local authorities—to stick to the timetable.

    Opportunities for redress

    While we are confident that the measures announced in this written ministerial statement will speed up decision making on shale applications, we cannot be complacent. Therefore:

    We will continue to treat appeals against any refusal of planning permission for exploring and developing shale gas, or against any non-determination as a priority for urgent determination by the planning inspectorate, making additional resources available where necessary.

    Under the written ministerial statement in 2015 the criteria for recovering planning appeals were amended to include proposals for exploring and developing shale gas. This was applied for a two-year period subject to further review. ​The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government has conducted a review and remains committed to scrutinising appeals for these proposals. We are therefore announcing that the criteria for considering the recovery of planning appeals are continued for a further two years. The new criterion is added to the recovery policy of 30 June 2008, Official Report, column 43WS.

    The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government will actively consider calling in shale applications particularly where statutory deadlines have been exceeded. Each case will be considered on its facts in line with his policy. Priority timeframes for urgent determination will be given to any called-in applications.

    The Government continue to commit to identifying underperforming local planning authorities that repeatedly fail to determine oil and gas applications within statutory timeframes. When any future applications are made to underperforming authorities, the Secretary of State will consider whether he should determine the application instead.

    Shale Regulator

    The UK regulatory regime for shale gas is considered among the most robust and stringent in the world. However, we acknowledge that it is also complex, with three regulators, the Environment Agency, the Health and Safety Executive and the Oil and Gas Authority, all with responsibilities for regulation. It is not always transparent to both the public and industry who is responsible for what. Therefore, the Government are setting up a shale environmental regulator which will bring the regulators together to act as one coherent single face for the public, mineral planning authorities and industry. We intend to establish the regulator from the summer.

    We anticipate that the plans for the shale environmental regulator and future consultations will only apply in England.

    Community Benefits

    We strongly believe that communities hosting shale gas developments should share in the financial returns they generate. The Government welcome the shale gas companies’ commitment to make set payments to these communities, which could be worth up to £10 million for a typical site. Actions to support local communities are an important complement to the planning actions set out above. With that in mind, we want to go further, and we will work with industry to see how we can improve this offer.

    In addition to this offer we also announced in the autumn statement 2016 that the shale wealth fund will provide additional resources to local communities, over and above industry schemes and other sources of Government funding. Local communities will benefit first and determine how the money is spent in their area.

  • Claire Perry – 2018 Speech on Gas

    Below is the text of the article written by Claire Perry, the Minister of State for Energy and Clean Growth, on 18 May 2018.

    Developing our North Sea oil and gas has been a Great British success story.

    Since the first wells started producing in the 1960s we have created a secure domestic energy supply, created thousands of high quality jobs, delivered billions to the economy and driven the growth of a huge engineering sector that we have exported to the world.

    Even with the amazing improvements in North Sea production, volumes are declining and we are now importing almost half of our gas supplies.

    Although we are in no way reliant on Russian gas despite what the Russians would have you believe.

    Because gas is so important for our economy we know that we will need it for decades to come.

    It also fits with our world-beating climate goals as it generates less CO2 than oil and coal.

    That is why every estimate of our 2050 emissions reductions targets from the independent Climate Change Committee includes gas in our energy mix and why it is right to continue to look for gas that can be safely extracted from the potentially huge reserves hundreds of metres beneath our feet.

    And there are other benefits too.

    Shale gas extraction could provide a big clean growth boost for local communities as part of our modern Industrial Strategy – bringing thousands of high quality jobs, local investment and financial benefits to many parts of the country.

    And our world-leading environmental regulations mean we could create even more investment and export opportunities from innovations like recycling waste water.

    There are those who argue strongly against shale gas, using the most colourful and scaremongering language they can find and intimidating local communities and decision makers with lots of protesters from out of town.

    In my experience, most of these arguments are made by people who actually just don’t want us to use gas at all – now or ever.

    While we should all be hugely proud of our huge progress on renewables that delivers almost 30 percent of our electricity needs, we cannot meet our energy and heat needs now, or for many years to come, at a price we can afford, without using the gas that geography has gifted us.

    That is why we committed to support the development of onshore British shale gas and to deliver a clean safe and affordable energy supply for the country.

    It is why I have set out these changes to the planning and regulation regime to make sure there is support available for all involved in this process.

  • Tom Watson – 2018 Speech on Gaming Machines

    Below is the text of the speech made by Tom Watson, the Labour MP for West Bromwich East, in the House of Commons on 17 May 2018.

    Good morning to you, Mr Speaker. I am grateful to the Minister for advance sight of her statement, and I refer hon. Members to my entry in the register.

    At the outset, let me warmly congratulate the Minister on her decision today. I am not going to be mealy-mouthed about it: we are absolutely delighted that the Government have decided to deliver a Labour party manifesto pledge. Today, we have had this on FOBTs and yesterday we had the railways taken back into public ownership—it is just a shame we could not make it three with the Leveson inquiry earlier in the week. I genuinely believe this is a great moment; it is the right decision and I applaud the Minister for making it. Having been in government, I know how tricky it is to reach a consensus on these complex regulatory issues, and she deserves recognition from those in all parts of the House for getting this through. We should also recognise that this is a victory for the many people in this House who have led this campaign, particularly my friend, colleague and fellow deputy leader, my hon. Friend the Member for Swansea East (Carolyn Harris), who has fought tirelessly for this, alongside other Members, including the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr Duncan Smith), whom I also regard as a friend.

    During this process, we have seen how some parts of the gambling industry have stood in defiance of Ministers, civil servants, parliamentarians, clinicians and other professionals, and have sought to delay at every turn common-sense decisions that would have given comfort to those who have been afflicted by these machines. ​There is a lesson in this: if the UK is to retain its reputation for innovative, light-touch regulation and responsible gambling, the wider industry needs to start taking its responsibilities and obligations to players seriously. Any Government, whatever their political hue, will be deeply concerned about the situation we find ourselves in: we have 430,000 gambling addicts; 2 million vulnerable players at risk of developing an addiction; and 25,000 young people who gamble every week. It is incumbent on the industry now to show the Government and Parliament its progress on how it shoulders these responsibilities and uses its £13.8 billion a year yield to deal with harms created by gambling. Across the industry we have global leaders in innovative online gambling products who are seeking solutions to these issues through investment and technology. However, too many household name companies have belligerently denied the facts in front of their noses, so our message today is clear: clean up your act or a future Labour Government will do it for you.

    In that spirt of unity and cross-party co-operation, I would like to make a few suggestions to the Minister, if I may—[Interruption.] I say that genuinely; there is no need to laugh. We understand there are concerns about revenue reduction, and the Minister has suggested she will increase remote gaming duty to cover this. Would it not be more appropriate to close the loophole that allows British online gambling companies based in Gibraltar to avoid paying tax? Secondly, the Government have chosen not to implement a statutory levy for research, education and treatment at this point, but there was a significant call for that, including from some gambling industry leaders. So will she think again on it, in order to guarantee that resources are available for treatment? Thirdly, we all want addicts to access the most appropriate treatment, so will the Government please start to collect proper data in that area? I have asked a number of questions to Ministers about how many addicts are receiving treatment on the NHS and how much treatment costs the NHS, but we have been told time and time again that the Departments do not hold or collect that data. I am sure we all agree that if we are to understand and better treat this problem, we need better data.

    Fourthly, some of the largest companies affected by this decision have argued for restrictions on betting advertising for football in particular. Given that that is also the No. 1 concerned expressed by parents, it seems to me that the Government have been hasty in ignoring it.

    Finally, our view is that the 2005 Act is no longer fit for purpose. We need a new gambling Act that is fit for the digital age. How draconian that new Act might be is dependent on how the industry chooses to engage with Parliament. We call on the innovative and responsible new leaders of the gambling industry to show us that they take their obligations seriously, and to work with us to alleviate problem gambling.

    In conclusion, cutting the maximum stake on FOBTs is a big step in the right direction, but it is just one part of the puzzle. In praising Ministers, I urge the Government to use the new spirit of consensus to introduce a new gambling Act, fit for the purposes of the digital age.

  • Tracey Crouch – 2018 Speech on Gaming Machines

    Below is the text of the speech made by Tracey Crouch, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Sport and Civil Society, in the House of Commons on 17 May 2018.

    With permission, I will make a statement on the gambling review and the publication of our response to the consultation on proposals for changes to gaming machines and on social responsibility requirements across the gambling industry.

    In October 2016, the Government announced a review of gaming machines and social responsibility measures to ensure that we have the right balance between a sector that can grow and contribute to the economy and one that is socially responsible and doing all it should to protect consumers and communities from harm. Underlying that objective was a deep focus on reducing gambling-related harm, protecting the vulnerable and ensuring that those experiencing problems are getting the help they need. Following a call for evidence, we set out a package of measures in a consultation that was published in October last year. The package included social responsibility measures to minimise the risk of gambling-related harm, covering gambling advertising, online gambling, gaming machines and research, education and treatment.

    The consultation ran from 31 October 2017 to 23 January 2018. We received over 7,000 survey responses from a wide range of interested parties and more than 240 submissions of supplementary information and evidence from the public, industry, local authorities, parliamentarians, academics, charities and faith groups. We welcome the responses to the consultation and, in preparing our conclusions, we have reflected on the evidence, concerns and issues that have been raised. We considered the responses alongside advice that we have received from the Gambling Commission and the Responsible Gambling Strategy Board, and we have set out measures on gaming machines, as well as action across online, advertising, research, education and treatment and, more widely, the public health agenda in regard to gambling.

    Before I set out the detail of the package of measures, let me say that we acknowledge that millions of people enjoy gambling responsibly and that we are committed to supporting a healthy gambling industry that generates employment and investment. However, over the course of the review I have met many people who have experienced gambling addiction and those who support them, including relatives of those who have sadly lost their loved-ones to suicide as a result of the impact of gambling. In addition, I have visited the incredible treatment services that are there to support addicts. We are clear that gambling can involve a serious risk of harm to individual players, as well as to their families and to the communities they live in, and we must ensure they are protected.

    The Government are satisfied with the overall framework of gambling regulation but, as part of our action to build a fairer society and a stronger economy, we believe that when new evidence comes to light, we need to act to target any gambling products or activities that cause concern. It is important to acknowledge that, although gambling-related harm is about more than one product or gambling activity, there is a clear case for the Government to make targeted interventions to tackle the riskiest products, with the objective of reducing harm.​

    One product in particular, B2 gaming machines or fixed odds betting terminals—FOBTs—generated enormous interest throughout the review process. At consultation, we set out the evidence for why we believe targeted intervention is required on B2 gaming machines, and we set out the options for stake reduction. Although overall problem gambling rates have remained unchanged since the Gambling Act 2005, it is clear that consistently high rates of problem gambling remain among players of these machines. Despite action by industry and the regulator, a high proportion of those seeking treatment for gambling addiction identify the machines as their main form of gambling.

    According to the latest available data, across Great Britain 11.5% of players of gaming machines in bookmakers are found to be problem gamblers, and a further 32% are considered at risk of harm. In England, 13.6% of players of FOBTs are problem gamblers—the highest rate for any gambling activity. We are concerned that such factors are further amplified by the relationship between the location of B2 gaming machines and areas of high deprivation, with players tending to live in areas with greater levels of income deprivation than the population average. We also know that those who are unemployed are more likely to most often stake £100 than any other socioeconomic group.

    Following our analysis of all the evidence and advice we received, we have come to the conclusion that only by reducing the maximum stake from £100 to £2 will we substantially impact on harm to the player and to wider communities. A £2 maximum stake will reduce the ability to suffer high session losses, our best proxy for harm, while also targeting the greatest proportion of problem gamblers. It will mitigate risk for the most vulnerable players, for whom even moderate losses might be harmful. In particular, we note from gaming machine data that, of the 170,000 sessions on B2 roulette machines that ended with losses to the player of over £1,000, none involved average stakes of £2 or below, but losses of that scale still persist at stakes of £5 and £10.

    The response to our consultation has been overwhelmingly in support of a significant reduction in B2 stakes. The majority of respondents to the consultation submitted opinions in favour of a £2 limit, indicating strong public approval for this step. I am grateful for the cross-party work on this issue, and I pay particular tribute to the hon. Member for Swansea East (Carolyn Harris) and my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr Duncan Smith), the latter having been a very strong supporter of change when he was in government.

    Elsewhere in the industry, we are, for the time being, maintaining the status quo across all other gaming machine stakes, prizes and allocations. We have, however, agreed to an uplift for stakes and prizes on prize gaming, which we consider to be sufficiently low risk.

    We are aware that the factors that influence the extent of harm to a given player are wider than any one product, and include factors around the player, the product and the environment. The response therefore also sets out action on: increasing player protection measures on other gaming machines on the high street; increasing protections around online gambling, including stronger age verification rules and proposals to require ​operators to set limits on a consumer’s spending until affordability checks have been conducted; doing more on research, education and treatment of problem gambling, including a review by Public Health England of the evidence relating to the public health harms of gambling; enhancing protections around gambling advertising, including a major multimillion pound advertising campaign led by GambleAware on responsible gambling, to be launched later this year; and filling the gaps in evidence on advertising and harm, with substantial new research commissioned by GambleAware on the effects of gambling advertising and marketing on children, young people and vulnerable groups.

    Looking ahead, we will also be considering the issue of 16-year-olds playing national lottery products as part of the next licence competition for the national lottery. We aim to gather evidence on this issue with sufficient time to consider it fully ahead of the next licence competition. Changes to the B2 stake will be effected through regulations in Parliament. The move will need parliamentary approval and, in recognition of the potential impact of this change for betting shops, we will also engage with the gambling industry to ensure it is given sufficient time for implementation.

    In conclusion, we want a healthy gambling industry that contributes to the economy, but also one that does all it can to protect players and their families, as well as the wider communities, from harm. We will work with the industry on the impact of these changes and are confident that this innovative sector will step up and help achieve the necessary balance. I commend this statement to the House.