UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Sam Gyimah – 2018 Speech at Science and Technology Select Committee Summit

    Below is the text of the speech made by Sam Gyimah, the Minister of State for Universities, Science, Research and Innovation, on 22 February 2018.

    I was in Bulgaria two weeks ago, speaking to EU science counterparts about Horizon 2020, our continued participation in that but also Framework Programme 9.

    What struck me as a relatively new appointee is how respected and how valued our contribution is in our country in the European project but also science in general. And this is something I’m saying as a Member of Parliament, but also someone who has come in from the outside.

    We need to do more to make the public appreciate not just how much we punch above our weight in terms of impact, but the breakthroughs that impact real lives with UK based science behind it.

    This is why another visit I did was particularly interesting. I went to Imperial where I met Zeno the robot, a robot that could help with autism; there you could see scientific breakthrough, innovation and how it impacts real life.

    Science is key to our future and our success.

    The challenges we will face in the years to come – from clean growth and an aging population to the future of transport and the advancement of AI and robotics – will only be met by a concerted research and innovation effort as I’m sure you’re all aware.

    These are global challenges and so we need to operate in a global marketplace; and that requires investment today, if we are going to get ahead of the curve and we should be ready to provide the goods and services that the whole world will want tomorrow.

    That’s why we’ve put R&D at the heart of our Industrial Strategy committing to spend 2.4% of GDP on research by 2027 and initiating that with the biggest increase in public R&D funding for 40 years, which is something that we can be proud of as a country.

    I think meetings like this just serve to underline how much of society science and technology touches.

    I’ve mentioned Zeno the robot, and I appreciate the partnership between British and European researchers – Zeno came from just such a partnership.

    That’s no novelty; The UK has long been an international scientific force.

    Let’s take one specific metric. Many of you will already be aware of this but for me it’s a source of pride.

    For argument’s sake, if you look at Nobel Prizes for Chemistry, British researchers and institutions have been involved in a three year winning streak. But we’ve been winning the prize on our own since 1904 and through collaboration since 1929.

    By country of birth we have produced 95 Nobel Prize winners, a significant number of which were in the sciences and that’s before we consider those international researchers working within British institutions.

    It’s true that we sit behind the United States on this but considering their population is nearly five times as big as ours it becomes clear just how good Blighty is at scientific research.

    But we know that innovation doesn’t happen on its own; unless you’re Newton, ideas don’t just drop out of the sky.

    The best ideas arise when the best minds are able to work together, collaborating within a stable, long-term framework. Over the years, an ever-growing number of Scientific Nobel Prizes have been awarded to international teams and to ideas which have been developed in multiple countries.

    Sir William Ramsey’s 1904 Nobel Prize, for example, may have been awarded while he was working at UCL but his doctorate was earned in Germany.

    We draw in proportionally more internationally mobile R&D than other large countries, with a total of 17% of UK R&D investment financed from abroad.

    So it should be no surprise that, as time has gone by, the UK has developed some of its closest relationships with our European neighbours, supported by EU research funds.

    Nor that we have attracted around 20% of grant funding awarded through the European Research Council, such is the quality of our work.

    Since the start of the Horizon 2020 programme to September 2017, we have attracted more than two and a half billion euros in funding for our innovative universities and, under Horizon 2020, we are a top five collaboration partner for all EU27 countries.

    This has benefitted our international partners as much as it has benefitted us: for example, nearly half of all collaborations at the University of Barcelona are with UK partners.

    Moreover, there are benefits that reach beyond Europe and across the world.

    Under Horizon 2020, UK participants have played a major part in developing a faster test for Ebola. Working with EU academia and industry, we have developed a portable device which can determine whether a person is infected within 75 minutes. That could become a game-changer around the world with quicker diagnosis helping us to contain the virus more effectively saving lives and resources on a global scale.

    Other collaborative projects focus on innovative medicines decarbonising construction and gravitational waves.

    These are big, ambitious projects, built on collaboration.

    We want to see their like for years and years to come.

    The key question that some of you have asked me in private and I’m sure is on all of your minds is how do we ensure stability and continuity in the short term.

    I know how much of a concern this is for you.

    Through my travels and my correspondence I have been hearing from you directly.

    In particular, I know the concerns around uncertainty, notably around funding streams.

    This government wants to give you as much reassurance and clarity as we possibly can in these negotiations.

    As underlined in December by the joint report published by EU and UK negotiating teams, UK-based organisations and people will be able to bid for Horizon 2020 funding and lead and participate in consortia in 2019 and 2020.

    I’ve been speaking to Commissioner Moedas on some of the detail around this and how and when the detail can be worked out, in terms of being on the Committee and influencing the remainder of the Horizon 2020 projects that are there as well.

    The joint report states that UK entities’ right to participate in EU programmes will be unaffected by the UK’s withdrawal from the EU.

    It also outlines that no EU citizen currently in the UK lawfully, including staff and students at our Universities, will be asked to leave the country when the UK exits the EU.

    This means that there will be no change from the current arrangements for over two and a half years.

    To provide further reassurance, in addition to agreement of the joint report, our commitment to guarantee the UK share of Horizon 2020 funding stands no matter the outcome of negotiations so all successful Horizon 2020 bids submitted while the UK remains a member state will be able to continue with an uninterrupted flow of funding.

    And my message to all UK based scientists is to continue bidding into these programmes. As well as protecting UK beneficiaries from the impact of EU Exit and providing the certainty that those projects need to complete their work.

    So what will the future look like?

    Of course, with or without the decision to leave the European Union in 2020 the current EU research programme will come to an end. Horizon 2020 was always a time-limited project, and this continues to be the case.

    But you will want to know what comes next for the UK.

    I assure you that we are actively engaging, from inside the room, to make sure that the next generation of programmes build on the successes of Horizon 2020.

    And one of the things I needed clarity on certainly during my bilateral meetings at the Informal Competitiveness Council, was that future programmes focus as much on excellence as they have done in the past and I was given very strong reassurances on that.

    The Prime Minister and I have been clear that we would welcome an agreement to continue to collaborate with our European partners on major science, research, and technology initiatives enabling us to tackle the global challenges we face – as Europeans and as global citizens.

    This adds to our determination to focus on excellence, but also our intentions to be an open, international partner.

    The UK has always been a strong believer in the international nature of research, and will continue to encourage the EU and countries around the world to collaborate on global issues.

    I want the EU to flourish, and I want to see science tackle the big issues we are facing down.

    But I am the UK’s Minister for Science so, naturally, I want the UK to be the go-to place for scientists, inventors and tech investors across the globe.

    That means rest of the world as well, not just the EU.

    I’m very proud that the UK became the first nation to sign a formal Science and Innovation agreement with the United States in September 2017.

    We’ve also signed a similar agreement with Canada and have developed a joint Science and Innovation Strategy with China.

    These agreements provide new opportunities for our universities, institutions and businesses so that they can take on bold new challenges in some of the most dynamic research environments in the world.

    Through our Science and Innovation agreement with the United States, we’ve invested £65 million in the Long Baseline Neutrino Facility and the Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment.

    These are extraordinary projects so much so that some people call them “mega science”! Hardly the most scientific term, but you can’t deny it has a ring to it.

    And no wonder – these investigations are aiming to address the big questions about the origins and structure of the entire Universe. Participating in these projects will keep us where we belong: pushing at the outer limits of human understanding showing the rest of the world what we can do.

    We have achieved a great deal with our EU colleagues and I hope we will continue to do so.

    We are committed to establishing an ambitious science and innovation agreement with the EU so that we can maintain our close relationship.

    We have made a clear commitment to excellence and innovation and no country in the world would want to turn their back on that.

    An official agreement between the UK and the EU would be a win-win allowing ongoing collaboration through an established, effective mechanism provided that we maintain the shared focus on excellence.

    And if, as the Prime Minister referred to in her Florence speech, the UK continues to take part in specific policies and programmes such as those that promote science, education and culture, any ongoing contribution we agree to make should be proportional and designed to cover our fair share of the costs involved.

    We need your help to share these ideas internationally with your partners and collaborators, who can raise this issue with their national governments.

    Your actions will support us in securing the best deal for all.

    We are heading in the right direction embracing the opportunities and delivering stability and clarity wherever we can.

    Still, I know you will have other issues you want to see addressed.

    They are fixed in our minds as negotiations continue we will continue to welcome international talent to the UK and we will do all we can to maintain funding to support innovation across the UK.

    Our ambitions – and our hopes – are high.

    We know you want to keep collaborating and so too do your counterparts.

    From Sir William Ramsey’s Nobel in 1904 to Richard Henderson’s in 2017 we have built our scientific reputation on collaboration.

    Our relationship with the European Union is changing so now, more than ever, is the time to speak up for collaboration.

    That’s what I intend to do – here, in Westminster, throughout Europe and around the world.

    And just as a post-script, this week the government announced the Higher Education Funding Review and I’d like to assure you that I’m very focussed that sustainability of any funding system, any changes would have to have regard for sustainability by universities.

    With that in mind, I’m planning to stay for as much of the next session as I can, and I know the Committee in two weeks time will enable me to answer more detailed questions on our plan for the way forward.

    Thank you for having me and I look forward to working with you to ensure that our collaboration continues, but even more than that the UK generally becomes a place to go to for science and innovation post-Brexit.

  • Theresa May – 2018 Chinese New Year Speech

    Below is the speech made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, for Chinese New Year on 21 February 2018.

    Good evening everyone, welcome to Downing Street, and a very happy Chinese New Year to each of you.

    It’s an honour to have you here this evening to celebrate not just the start of the Year of the Dog, but also the deepening links between the UK and China.

    As many of you know, I have recently returned from an important trip to China, strengthening the Golden Era of relations between our countries.

    I had the privilege of visiting three wonderful cities: Wuhan, and Beijing, and Shanghai.

    I had fruitful discussions with President Xi and Premier Li.

    And I saw first-hand the growing strength of the trade and investment relationship between our two countries.

    And I was delighted to take a 50-strong business delegation with me, and I think the visit helped to secure more than £9 billion of commercial deals that will benefit people here at home and in China. Those deals will create 2,600 jobs in the UK.

    But the ties that bind our two countries are about more than just business.

    They’re also about people. The 150,000 Chinese students currently studying in the UK. The growing number of young British people studying or working in China.

    The hundreds of thousands of tourists who travel between our countries each year.

    And of course the thriving Chinese community in the UK, who do so much to make the UK the country it is today.

    Confucius wrote that “Virtue is not left to stand alone – he who practises it will have neighbours.”

    I think it’s a powerful message for all of us seeking inspiration for the year ahead. And it exemplifies the contribution made by so many Chinese people in this country.

    I’m thinking in particular of people like James Wong from Birmingham.

    James chairs the committee that runs one of the UK’s largest Chinese New Year festivals, bringing tens of thousands of people together every year.

    And he’s also an absolute pillar of his local community, combatting loneliness by bringing elderly people together to enjoy free meals in the restaurant that he runs.

    And last year James was officially voted “Brummie of the Year”, which speaks volumes about the face of modern Britain and the contribution and integration of the UK’s Chinese community.

    And in January James also received a ‘Points of Light’ award to recognise his work.

    And he’s here with us today to help celebrate. Many congratulations James!

    Now, when I was in China President Xi, quoting Shakespeare, said of UK/China relations that “What’s past is prologue”. And I, like him, am committed to building on the progress of recent years to deepen our relationship yet further.

    For many years, many people have worked hard to bring the UK and China closer together – indeed, many of them are here with us tonight, including the Chinese ambassador.

    The result of their work is the Golden Era we are living through today.

    And, when I look around this room, when I see the passion, commitment and enthusiasm of so many people, I know for sure that the next 12 months will be another auspicious year for our businesses, for our governments, and above all for our peoples.

    Have a very happy and prosperous new year.

    Xin Nian Kuai Le.

  • Sajid Javid – 2018 Speech at Midlands Engine Investment Fund

    Below is the text of the speech made by Sajid Javid, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, on 22 February 2018.

    Thanks, Nick, it’s a pleasure to be here.

    In the very heart of the Midlands Engine.

    And a nearly a year on from the launch of our Midlands Engine Strategy.

    We’ve achieved great things over the last 12 months, including:

    – announcing a new East Midlands Manufacturing Zone pilot
    – agreeing a second devolution deal with the West Midlands Combined Authority
    – launching an ambitious Industrial Strategy – with opportunities for the region to boost productivity and skills

    But there’s much more to come.

    We’re committed to making the Midlands a powerful engine for economic growth.

    When we say we’ll build an economy that works for everyone; we mean it.

    But, to just step back a bit, if you can put your money into anything, anywhere in the world – why would you invest in the UK today?

    Why the Midlands?

    Well, we all know that Midlanders are very grounded people.

    It’s where Sir Isaac Newton discovered gravity after all.

    And very sensible.

    It’s where John Cadbury invented my favourite chocolate.

    And if there’s anywhere that shows that something small can be mighty.

    It’s the Midlands.

    Where the Mini Cooper was invented.

    Where Tolkien dreamed up the hobbits.

    Where 27,000 Midlands business – many of which are small enterprises – exported £47.5 million of goods globally.

    It’s an exciting time for the Midlands Engine.

    In December, Coventry was awarded UK City of Culture 2021.

    And Birmingham announced as the hosts of the 2022 Commonwealth Games.

    Derbyshire, too, is set to showcase the marvels of Midlands’ manufacturing at a new museum where it all started…

    …on the site of the world’s first ever factory.

    We want to harness its huge potential and help give small firms across the Midlands that much needed boost to grow their business.

    To generate jobs to benefit the whole Midlands and, ultimately, the British economy.

    Which continues to confound the pessimists.

    With growth forecasts for 2018 and 2019 upgraded to 1.9%.

    More people in work than ever before.

    And interest rates remaining low.

    Giving British businesses a great opportunity to grow – and those who invest in them, a great return.

    Investing in the UK, and The Midlands Engine, is a no-brainer.

    Because the ‘heart of England’ is just that – the lifeblood powering this country’s prosperity…

    …not to mention innovation, culture and even cuisine.

    And I’m not just saying that because I’m a proud Midlands’ MP. It’s the land of Shakespeare and the steam engine.

    Charles Darwin and Rolls Royce.

    Newton and Nightingale.

    Wedgwood and Walkers Crisps.

    And, of course, that most English of dishes – the balti!

    Yet, too often these strengths go unsung and are overshadowed by our preoccupation with the North / South divide.

    But it’s Birmingham – where we are today – not somewhere in the North or the South – that is England’s second city.

    And it’s the Midlands’ regional economy that’s worth more than £230 billion – larger than countries such as Denmark.

    An economy that boasts over 14% of the UK’s high-growth businesses.

    That’s underpinned by a prime central location – within easy reach of London and the UK’s Northern heartlands.

    And by excellent transport links.

    A road and rail network that connects the Midlands with the rest of the country…

    …with the new HS2 route set to cut journey times dramatically.

    As well as 2 international airports that connect the region to Europe and the world.

    Then there are its many universities, with their cutting-edge research and teaching excellence.

    And with people under 20 making up a quarter of the region’s population, its young, dynamic workforce.

    So the economic case for the Midlands is clear.

    Which brings us to the Midlands Engine Investment Fund.

    Why this fund and why now?

    Because it’s not just the small businesses in line for funding who’ll benefit.

    The growth and the jobs they generate, as a result, will benefit the entire Midlands – and, ultimately, the British economy.

    So we all have an interest in supporting them and seeing them succeed.

    And ensuring that every single part of the UK can play to its strengths and spread prosperity …

    …something which is absolutely central to our Industrial Strategy and creating a country that works for everyone.

    The Midlands Engine Investment Fund is doing just that…

    …which is why, as the Midlands Engine Ministerial Champion, I’m proud to give it the government’s full backing.

    As you know, the fund is the result of investment and collaboration involving many players…

    – my department and the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
    – the British Business Bank
    – Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs)
    – the West Midlands Mayor and business leaders
    – and also European funding

    And I want to thank everyone involved – many of you who are here today…

    …who have helped forge these strong partnerships at a national and local level.

    We can see these efforts starting to pay off…

    …with the first companies to receive small business loans and debt finance under phase one of the fund already reaping the rewards.

    These include Direct Digital Controls, in the West Midlands.

    A business that specialises in installing and maintaining energy and environmental control systems.

    Thanks to investment from the fund, it’s expanding. It’s now set to take on four new employees and train an additional apprentice.

    There’s Olberon, a medical devices company, based in Nottingham.

    Finance from the fund will have a huge impact on its international commercial sales…

    …by allowing the firm to develop existing links with distributors and market its products more effectively.

    And also BCME, owner of specialist education provider – Echo Factor – in Leicester…

    …which will use the fund’s support to maximise student numbers and become more self-sustaining.

    And, Renewable ON Ltd, a clean energy lighting specialist, from Milton Keynes.

    The loan funds it has received will go towards cash flow including stock, wages and marketing to fulfil initial orders.

    Many of these sorts of small companies struggle to access the financial support they need from mainstream lenders…

    …because they don’t meet conventional criteria on security or risk.

    The Midlands Engine Investment Funding ensures that they will finally get this help…

    …and be able to grow, generate jobs and realise their untapped potential.

    But, as I said earlier, these ripples of prosperity will spread far beyond those who receive the funding.

    And we can already see evidence of this, with an increased buzz around business start-ups…

    …stronger SME growth and improving business confidence.

    All of which are fuelling a greater demand for external finance.

    And I expect this momentum to build following today’s launch of the Fund’s remaining equity and proof of concept funds.

    Funds that will back the Midlands’ most innovative small companies – start-ups, scale-ups and everything in between – to succeed.

    That will support them to work with our top universities.

    That will help them develop and test pioneering technologies, processes and products and bring them to market.

    And provide venture capital to realise the ambitions of our high-growth companies.

    Having spent 19 years in finance – including in private equity and investments…

    …I know, first-hand, what a difference this investment in ground-breaking ideas and technology will make.

    Putting the Midlands on track to create the word-class companies of the future.

    So, with over £250 million now available – and these funds being matched pound for pound by investment from the private sector…

    …there’s a huge prize at stake.

    A boost for around 1,500 SMEs across the Midlands.

    An estimated 3,800 jobs created as a result.

    And, vitally, a return that will be ploughed back into the region to drive growth in years to come. I know that these companies’ ambitions – and those of the Midlands’ business sector, as a whole – know no bounds.

    And neither do ours.

    Which is why Sir John and I undertook a trade mission to China last November to promote closer business links with the Midlands Engine.

    This was a great success, with 18 Midlands’ companies from a variety of sectors taking part.

    And lots of interest and enthusiasm generated among Chinese businesses and potential investors…

    …some of whom are in active discussions about future trade and investment prospects in the Midlands.

    We’re now looking to follow this up with a Midlands Engine trade mission to India later this year.

    I know that you’re thinking…

    …but this is not a showdown between whether Birmingham or Mumbai does the best curries!

    There can only be one winner in that contest – clearly those that my mum makes!

    We’re going all out to spread the world overseas about the Midlands Engine and the endless opportunities it offers.

    Because the Midlands…

    …it’s dynamic businesses and talented, hard-working people…

    …are, without doubt, up there with the best in the world.

    With an illustrious past that few countries can match, never mind regions.

    And, with the Midlands Engine Investment Fund delivering more jobs, growth and productivity…

    …an even more exciting future ahead.

  • Greg Clark – 2018 Speech at NFU Conference

    Below is the text of the speech made by Greg Clark, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, at the NFU Conference on 21 February 2018.

    Ladies and Gentlemen,

    It’s great to be with you today. Thank you for inviting me.

    It is a great honour to be here for the first time at a National Farmers Union (NFU) Conference.

    As someone who has known all my life that farming is foundational not just to our economy, but to our country, it is a particular privilege to be here.

    Providing the food and drink we live on and stewarding the countryside that is so much part of our national and local identity means there is no more essential industry.

    As Guy said, I was born and raised in the food and drink business with my father and grandfather’s retail dairy delivery round supplying our neighbours in Middlesbrough with fresh Yorkshire milk seven days a week.

    When I talk about agriculture as an ‘industry’ that’s not to ignore the fact that farming and growing is more than just a sector of the economy. It’s a life. And its all-consuming.

    I was glancing through Farmers Weekly before Christmas and there was an interview with a young farmer from Wales called Tom Parry.

    The journalist asked him: “If you won the lottery… what’s the first thing you would spend the money on?”

    His reply? “More sheep.” But food and farming is an industry nonetheless and as Guy alluded to before, it’s one of our greatest.

    The agricultural sector is the biggest manufacturing sector in the UK. Employing almost four million people and larger than the automotive and aerospace sectors combined.

    And what that means in my view is that it deserves the same seriousness of engagement with all parts of government about the future that other successful industries like aerospace, automotive can count on, like life sciences and financial services expect to get with government.

    And for your unique role in stewardship and in feeding the nation, like any industry, you need to be profitable and we need to help make sure the right conditions exist right for investment in the future.

    Now, of course, you have a government department dedicated to farming and rural affairs and it is headed by one of the most innovative and effective Secretaries of State in government.

    But I’m determined, with Michael, that you should participate fully just as other industries do in the work that is being done by the whole of government.

    Including my department, the Business Department, as we work together to make Britain more prosperous in the future.

    I think we need to do a better job in emphasising the centrality of agriculture to our economy and to our economic future.

    If proof were needed of that, it can be found in the most recent agricultural exhibition in the London Science Museum.

    This started off with farming in the Iron Age and ended somewhere around 1952. 1952?

    That’s 15 years before I was even born. Imagine if the space exhibition ended in 1952. You’d miss all the good stuff.

    No moon landings. No space shuttle. No International Space Station. It’s the same with farming.

    So it’s fantastic that the Science Museum is planning a new £3 million exhibition to show the real face of modern British agriculture to the whole country and especially to the rising generation of people who may not have the knowledge or experience of agriculture, which should open later this year.

    I don’t know who farming’s Tim Peake is but it’s very important that the place of this industry at the forefront of innovation should be there.

    Because this is one of the most innovative of our industries and we need to ensure that the next generation need to see the opportunities for earning and advancement there are in a career in food and farming.

    And I think it is also important that other industries need to see that agriculture is a source of ideas that can drive new ways of working and using technology in their own sectors.

    There is a great translation and diffusion of learning across adjacent industrial sectors and I think we underplay the opportunities from the innovations that you have made into other industrial sectors.

    That’s why I was determined to place food and farming at the heart of our Industrial Strategy, both for this sector and because of the relevance to sectors across the economy.

    And why I’m so thrilled with the contribution and enthusiasm of so many people in this room. Of course the NFU, to the Country Land and Business Association (CLA), the Food and Drink Federation and so many others.

    The challenge for our Industrial Strategy is the same challenge for this sector. How can we become more productive and so more prosperous.

    I want to commend the excellent work that Tom Hind of the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (AHDB) has been carrying out on productivity in this sector. It has uncovered that since the mid-1990s productivity growth in agriculture and horticulture has fallen behind our principal competitors.

    In fact, it has grown at just one-third of the rate enjoyed by the Netherlands and the USA. Relatively slow growth in productivity in recent years has characterised much of the British economy.

    The Industrial Strategy set out a number of ways in which with a sustained national effort we can improve productivity.

    It seems to me they are relevant to this industry as much as others.

    The first is innovation.

    This is one of the most innovative sectors of our economy and the advantages of bringing together our best scientists with our most forward-thinking producers, is clear.

    I think most people would agree that the agri-tech strategy which launched five years ago has proved a success.

    The Catalyst, for example has helped fund projects fighting diseases in pigs, rearing lobsters off the Cornish coast and improving the efficiency of Strawberry production, to name but a few.

    But there is great potential for much more and so the Industrial Strategy commits to the biggest ever increase in public research and development investment. An extra £3 billion a year by 2021.

    It brings in a focus on four Grand Challenges, technological changes sweeping across the world in which Britain has a leading position.

    I am committed to making sure that agriculture plays a big role in many of these.

    One of these is Artificial Intelligence and the analysis of big data.

    Intelligent algorithms using data on atmospheric conditions and soil moisture has the real potential to dramatically reduce, for example the water needed for agriculture.

    Michael Gove and I have agreed that agricultural technology will be one of the priority sectors for the new Office of Artificial Intelligence announced in our Industrial Strategy.

    Through our Grand Challenges on the future of mobility, we know right around the world the way we are transporting ourselves, the way vehicles are powered and how we are connecting ourselves is changing, and we want to make Britain the go-to place in the world for the development of new autonomous vehicles.

    I am determined this won’t just be the vehicles you see on our road, and that agriculture will be a big part of that.

    Through the Hands-Free Hectare project Harper Adams University and York-based company Precision Decisions are planting, tending and harvesting crops using only autonomous vehicles and drones.

    This project was funded through Innovate UK and was the first in the world to farm a crop in this way.

    So I have insisted that our Connected and Autonomous Vehicles programme is making funding available to off-road driverless innovation, with a particular application to agriculture.

    And yet another challenge – in this country – we’ve often been better at the invention and discovery of new ways of doing things that the implementation of them.

    The AHDB was right in saying we need to put an increased emphasis on the ‘D’ in R&D, the development half of research and development.

    As part of the Industrial Strategy, we announced a Transforming Food Production Challenge. And I’m delighted to announce today that the government will invest £90 million to make this challenge a reality.

    It will include the creation of ‘Translation Hubs’ bringing together farmers and growers, businesses, scientists, and Centres for Agricultural Innovation, to apply the latest research to farming practice.

    It should be a big boost to the knowledge exchange that already takes place across food and farming. And with the technological revolution that is happening the skills of the farming workforce need to keep pace.

    New technologies require new abilities. Today’s modern British farmer is a Swiss-Army-Knife of skills.

    An engineer, an environmentalist, a data scientist, a biochemist, often an energy producer, a tourism entrepreneur, and always an investor too. All of these skills are essential to the jobs that you do.

    Yet at the moment, we under-invest in skills and training relative to many of our competitor countries.

    And if we are to take advantage of the productivity improvements that technology offers we need to have tailored programmes of skills, education and training to meet the needs of sectors, as well as more farmer-to-farmer learning, to demonstrate what works in practice.

    The Industrial Strategy emphasises new T-Levels which will provide an important opportunity for a new generation to start their careers in agriculture with relevant skills and we will work closely with the NFU to make them effective.

    Apprenticeships will be a crucial part of this. And our reforms to apprenticeships are intended to present high quality opportunities for individuals and employers alike.

    These reforms are some of the most substantial the government has ever made. But they are still young, and we are listening to feedback as the programme develops.

    I also hear loud and clear, the challenges you are experiencing in your workforce currently.

    As a West Kent MP, the Hoppers huts that can still be found in the fields around our coasts are a reminder that agriculture has always relied on seasonal workers whether from home or abroad.

    In particular, two-thirds of your workers born outside of the UK come from the EU. This is an absolutely crucial component that I know Michael Gove touched on yesterday.

    And as we move to a new relationship with the EU it is essential that you can get the workers you need.

    ‘A secure supply of skilled and seasonal labour’, is one of eight priority areas for our new Food and Drink Sector Council that has been created as part of our Industrial Strategy.

    That clear focus and commitment to make sure you get what you need to do the important job that you have, is vital. And the purpose of forming the Council is to not just talk about the issues, but to act on its advice.

    Upgrading our infrastructure is another way in which we can help improve productivity and as Guy mentioned earlier, I cannot recall an occasion on which I met the NFU branch in which the need for considerably better broadband and mobile coverage was not top of the list of improvements required.

    Michael was emphatic on it yesterday and I completely share his view. The imperative becomes even more pressing because many of the technologies that can transform agricultural productivity and things like Artificial Intelligence rely on the fast transformation of large quantities of data. It is becoming more important than ever.

    The Industrial Strategy commits an extra £200 million of investment in the Local Full-Fibre Networks Programme. As Michael said yesterday, 95% of the UK population can now access superfast broadband, a target which was reached last December.

    As is evidence, there is much further to go, including making super fast high-speed broadband a legal right to everyone.

    There is perhaps no industry in Britain in which local industry and the distinctiveness that one place has from another is as intrinsic as in farming.

    My longstanding view is that government policy has been too uniform in failing to take opportunities to recognise that what is needed for a northern city or a place like Birmingham to maximise its potential will be very different for a rural county.

    And around the world, we see that one of the most successful ways in which productivity grows is through clusters of adjacent businesses with particular local relevance each reinforcing the other.

    We see it all, from life sciences in Cambridge to elite motor manufacturing in Northamptonshire. Successful clusters attract ambitious followers creating expertise and jobs.

    Through institutes such as FERA outside York, which I know very well, to the Wellcome Trust’s Sanger Institute outside Cambridge, I think there are huge opportunities to gather businesses that can make the most of the proximity of our resources.

    A big part of our Industrial Strategy is to do what I know virtually everyone in this room does, and be leaders and participants in their local economies and to give more power to invest locally in other sectors and other industries, helping make the most of local opportunities.

    Finally, strengthening relationships are vital if we are to capitalise on the individual strengths of the sector.

    Food and farming has always been a diverse and some would say fragmented, sector. But that is not to say that the opportunities that come from working together don’t exist. In fact I think they are more plentiful in this sector than many others.

    The supply chain from farm to fork and indeed into farms is a crucial source of quality competitiveness and innovation.

    Fragmentation compared to other sectors simply emphasises the need to make a deliberate effort to come together effectively.

    That’s why I’m delighted that the new Food and Drink Sector Council met for the first time last month. I know Michael Gove spoke about this yesterday.

    It brings together government departments, farmers and growers, food and drink manufacturers the logistics industry, hospitality industry, retailers and others with a stake in a flourishing sector.

    I’d like to thank Sir Peter Kendall for representing the voice of farmers on the Council and its working groups.

    One of the Council’s early tasks is to propose a Sector Deal to drive forward each aspect of the Industrial Strategy as it reflects food and drink: innovation, skills, infrastructure investment, building up local strengths and getting the right business environment for start-ups and for growing businesses. Each one of these pillars of our Industrial Strategy, I’m absolutely determined will apply to the food and drink sector and should be represented in a strong and ambitious Sector Deal.

    I take it personally. Michael Gove and I will jointly lead for the government on negotiating this deal. I want this to be a totemic deal that shows to sectors that perhaps have not considered food and farming and agriculture to be part of the economic future of our country, in the way that it so clearly is.

    And I hope it will be a beacon to the British industry and the rest of the world that British agriculture is mustering its considerable strength to seize the opportunities before us.

    So ladies and gentlemen, Thank you for inviting me to be with you today.

    When I first set to thinking about the Industrial Strategy I had a clear vision that this strategy must be for the whole of our economy and for the whole of Britain. And so agriculture one of our largest and most innovation-rich industries had to be at the heart of it.

    I am so thrilled at the positive response that it has received from farmers, growers and those engaged in food production.

    And whether it is spreading innovation or building a workforce with the skills of the future. These are vital steps. Not all these steps can be taken all of them overnight.

    A short term strategy, after all, is a contradiction in terms.

    But I strongly believe that by acting deliberately now we can act together to create the future of farming.

    Thank you very much indeed.

  • Greg Clark – 2018 Speech at Manufacturing Conference

    Below is the text of the speech made by Greg Clark, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, at the EEF Manufacturing Conference on 19 February 2018.

    Ladies and gentlemen,

    There is a manufacturing renaissance gathering pace in Britain today.

    With the right support, it can transform not just the prospects of the British economy but the lives of a new generation of men and women for whom a career in engineering will be part of a revolution in the way the world lives.

    Because from how we travel to how we generate power.

    From technologies that help detect and diagnose diseases to processes that cure them.

    From machine learning to new outlets for human creativity.

    The transformations that the world is going through are areas where British capability is renowned.

    Earlier this month I opened a new manufacturing facility near Oxford for a company called YASA Motors.

    It will produce 100,000 electric motors a year. Cutting the ribbon I was standing next to a vehicle powered by YASA Motors.

    A hybrid C-X75 built by Jaguar Land Rover whose Chief Executive Ralf Speth is here tonight.

    It’s a car with the speed of a Bugatti Veyron and the emissions of a Toyota Prius.

    An astonishing example of British innovation and British manufacturing genius.

    But, because the motor is just one component of a complex product you could be forgiven for not knowing about it.

    And it is a problem that too few people know how successful British engineering is and what opportunities there are within it.

    For about 40 years now, too many young people in schools have been put off a career in manufacturing by a tacit, but pervasive, assumption that this was a sector in decline.

    That prospects were waning and jobs would be uncertain.

    That things would be made overseas and not here in the UK.

    That if you were bright and ambitious you should think about other sectors, not engineering.

    Well, that couldn’t be more wrong.

    We are not experiencing the end of engineering but its rise to primacy.

    The domination of design, engineering and technology into every aspect of commercial and consumer life from food production to retailing to healthcare.

    And we are already experiencing the benefits.

    At the end of 2017, UK manufacturing output was at its highest level for 10 years with the longest run of sustained growth for 20 years.

    Employment in manufacturing is on the rise and from conversations I’ve had with many people in this room would rise further if only you could lay your hands on enough people with the skills you need.

    We know, as a nation, that to be more prosperous we have to raise productivity and you in this room show how it can be done.

    Productivity in manufacturing rose four times faster than the economy as a whole over the last decade.

    At this time of growth for engineering I am determined that your government must be activist in helping you seize the opportunities it presents.

    To do that we need to listen to what you say and act on it.

    So let me respond directly to Judith Hackitt’s 3 challenges:

    – Brexit
    – Industrial Strategy
    – Skills

    Brexit

    First, Brexit.

    The first requirement for business is an agreed transition deal.

    The EEF, under Terry Scuoler’s leadership was instrumental in making the case for the implementation period.

    And every Wednesday morning I meet your new Chief Executive Stephen Phipson and other business leaders.

    The unambiguous view of businesses – large and small is that there must be no sudden change.

    And that businesses must have around 2 years to prepare for our new relationship.

    This is what was the Prime Minister committed to in her Florence Speech and it is what was agreed in the joint report with the EU in December.

    During this period business wants to count on continuity rather than endure a double change.

    So during this time firms of all sizes, will still be able to trade with the EU in the same way, as now.

    The rules and standards that govern that trade will apply, as now.

    EU citizens will still be able to work in the UK, as now.

    And if, as I believe will be the case, this is formally agreed next month that continuity will be available for around 3 years from now.

    But I also hear loud and clear from business that an implementation period is necessary but not sufficient.

    As Judith said, “ultimately, we need clarity and certainty”.

    And I agree with those who say that ultimately what businesses need is clarity and certainty of a good deal.

    We could have total clarity and certainty tomorrow if we chose to duck the job of getting into weeks of difficult negotiations and opted instead for exit on default WTO terms.

    That is not, in my experience the clarity that business wants.

    Instead, I believe we need to take the approach of building a good deal.

    Building this good deal will mean:

    – testing proposals with our counterparties and assessing the response
    – harnessing the insights and understanding that come from good personal relationships
    – making adjustments and exploring common ground

    What do we want to achieve in that good deal?

    The ability to trade with a now growing European market without tariffs or complex customs requirements.

    And having confidence that non-tariff barriers like regulatory and product standards won’t be used to exclude us.

    In so many areas, the UK sets the standard on standards.

    Our expertise and rigour is renowned around the world and we want to keep British experts influential in international and European standards organisations wherever it makes sense to do so.

    We are determined that taking back control should not mean giving up our influence.

    And – of course, modern manufacturing depends on thrives on complex and specialist supply chains in which your products are the accumulation of products from all over Europe.

    If you believe, as I do, that British manufacturing has a golden period ahead of it, then it follows that its ability to continue unhindered is foundational.

    Brexit isn’t the only area in which the government and manufacturers need to work in partnership.

    Industrial Strategy

    It is crucial to our Industrial Strategy.

    The new, independent Industrial Strategy Council will do precisely that:

    – set the metrics
    – measure progress
    – report publicly on that progress; and
    – make recommendations to government

    And let me say just a word about the objective of our Industrial Strategy.

    At a time when new technologies are creating new industries, changing existing ones and transforming the way we live our lives. And when Britain has an outstanding position in so many of them we would be crazy not to prepare ourselves to seize the opportunities of the future.

    To help with this our Industrial Strategy sets out 4 Grand Challenges

    – AI and the data-driven economy
    – clean growth
    – the future of mobility; and
    – meeting the needs of an ageing society

    Now – we need Britain’s public and private sectors our outstanding businesses and universities to join forces and lead the world in seizing these opportunities.

    It’s backed by the biggest increase in public R&D investment this country has ever seen.

    Three billion pounds more invested every year by 2021 to build on our reputation for excellence.

    But we don’t want to do what we’ve done too much in the past.

    Come up with the ideas here and then see these applied and developed elsewhere.

    One of the tests of the use of this money is to see the impact on manufacturing here in the UK.

    It’s why as part of our Faraday Battery Challenge we’re working with industries to build a Battery Manufacturing Development facility in the West Midlands.

    And it’s not all about the brand new.

    There are so many practices and techniques that the best performing companies in Britain employ that can be spread more widely through supply chains.

    I was chatting to John Neill from Unipart earlier.

    When I visited their HQ recently the sign on the door said:

    Join the productivity revolution.

    That’s what the Made Smarter Review led by Juergen Maier of Siemens has set out: how we can diffuse good practice throughout manufacturing.

    I’d like to thank Juergen for his personal leadership of this.

    It is brimming with ambition to create 175,000 new manufacturing jobs and raise productivity by a quarter.

    We’re backing his analysis.

    We need to do more to spread innovation.

    So I am delighted that we will set up a Made Smarter Commission and I have asked Sir Mark Walport, Chief Executive of UK Research and Innovation, to work with Juergen Maier on the development of an Industrial Strategy Challenge on the digitalisation of our manufacturing industry as Mark previously did for the Faraday Challenge.

    Skills

    But if Britain’s manufacturers are to lead the world they’ll need people with the right skills.

    Last November I visited EEF’s Technology Training Centre in Aston.

    There, I met apprentices learning about robotics, smart factories and Computer-Aided Design.

    EEF does some stellar work with young people including providing apprenticeships for companies like Mondalez who are here tonight.

    The reforms to apprenticeship are the largest government has ever made and they are still young but we need to make sure the programme achieves all its aims.

    We will listen to you and continue to work with you on how the Levy can spent so that it works effectively for industry.

    And – crucially – so that it supports productivity growth.

    But there’s another crucial challenge we still need to overcome.

    So many of you here tonight have one thing in common.

    You’re engineers.

    Yet today, at the exact moment we need the next generation of engineers to help develop tomorrow’s technologies we’re facing a shortage.

    We need to seize 2018 – the Year of Engineering to dispel some of the myths around this profession like the ones I mentioned earlier.

    Part of the answer is about showing our young people the true faces of modern manufacturing. People right here in this room.

    So let’s tell them how – on Deeside Toyota produce a new engine every 57 seconds.

    How – In Hull, Siemens are building wind turbine blades as long as six double-decker buses.

    And how – In Stevenage, Airbus Space and Defence built a spacecraft, which travelled nearly 4 billion miles to land a probe on a comet.

    Above all – let’s send a clear message that whatever part of the UK you’re from there’s an amazing engineering story right on your doorstep.

    Making things runs in our veins.

    Again and again, the UK has literally manufactured the future.

    The light bulb, the passenger railway, the CT scanner, graphene, the lithium-ion battery, the list goes on and on.

    I’m an optimist.

    I truly believe that there’s no problem that can’t be solved by the ingenuity of our engineers.

    And no product that can’t be made by the sheer determination of our manufacturers.

    So let’s harness the unbridled brilliance of Britain’s makers.

    As we put into practice a modern Industrial Strategy for modern British manufacturing.

    And let’s make the technologies the rest of the world will use tomorrow right here in the UK.

    Thank you.

  • Liam Fox – 2018 Speech on Manufacturing

    Below is the text of the speech made by Liam Fox, the Secretary of State for International Trade, at the EEF National Manufacturing Conference on 20 February 2018.

    Good morning.

    It is a great pleasure to be here with you all at the EEF Manufacturing Conference.

    In the course of my job as Secretary of State for International Trade, I have been invited to address representatives of all of Britain’s major industries.

    Each has their own innovators, and each of them has a number of world-leading companies, breaking new ground and raising this country’s profile overseas.

    None of them, though, boasts quite the same concentration of talent, of drive, and of cutting-edge technology as manufacturing.

    And few other industries are doing as much to enhance the UK’s global reputation.

    Since the Department for International Trade was created in July 2016, the ministerial team and I have conducted around 150 overseas visits.

    Everywhere we go, the British manufacturing stamp is a kitemark of quality, innovation, and world-leading technological advances.

    Our industrial heritage, of course, plays no small part in this.

    But all too often we encounters the lazy assertion that ‘Britain doesn’t make anything anymore’.

    How many here today have, like me, gritted their teeth when confronted by such ill informed negativity.

    So let’s today send out a loud and clear message that British manufacturing is not only alive and well but capable, cutting-edge and confident.

    Those of us familiar with the UK’s manufacturing capabilities know that the United Kingdom is one of the largest manufacturing economies in the world, with nearly £270 billion in exports.

    It would be nice to see more of this reflected in our media.

    Last year saw a particularly robust performance, with manufacturing growing by 2.8%, compared to 1.8% for the economy as a whole.

    We’ve had the longest period of consecutive monthly manufacturing growth for 30 years, and order books for British manufacturers are well above their long term trend.

    And this in an economy that has record levels of employment and saw the highest FDI in our history in 2017.

    The mills and foundries of the last century may have largely disappeared. But in their place has emerged an industry built upon expertise, research and development, fuelled by a world-class education system.

    Sheffield, for example, is a city long famed for the quality of its steel.

    Now, Sheffield University’s Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre has built Europe’s largest aerospace castings facility, and is producing some of the biggest castings in the world today.

    This is just one success story among many. The sheer diversity of businesses represented in the UK is testament to this.

    From automotive and aerospace, to energy and engineering, the UK offer is as diverse as it is deep.

    The advent of digitalisation, the adoption of automation, and an increasing pressure on companies to create more energy-efficient products is driving a revolution in global manufacturing.

    British companies are at its forefront.

    The UK composite materials sector, for example, predicts that the UK domestic market will grow 6 times by 2030, to some £12 billion, driven by the need to develop lightweight structures for energy efficiency.

    In aerospace, the government has worked in partnership with UK primes and tier 1s to identify new supply chain opportunities for fuel systems and cockpit assemblies.

    And last year, the automotive sector manufactured more than 2.7 million engines in the UK.

    Car production remains one of the prides of British manufacturing. Last year, around 15% of the total UK r&d spend was generated by automotive companies.

    Firms like Nissan, who have announced another £250 million investment in their Sunderland plant, are here because of that access to new technology and industry developments.

    It is small wonder that, in 2017, a new car rolled off a British production line every 19 seconds.

    The government is keen to further its support for critical, cutting-edge technologies.

    We have committed to raising the UK’s r&d spend to 3% of GDP, putting us in the top quartile of OECD countries.

    This has been backed with substantial government support.

    Many of you will be familiar with the £246 million Faraday Challenge, designed to boost the development of the next generation of battery technology.

    We have also committed £100 million of spending for connected and autonomous research and development for the automotive sector.

    And, together with the aircraft industry, we have devoted a combined £3.9 billion towards aerospace r&d.

    This level of government support is unprecedented. It demonstrates a real and sustained commitment to attract the right investment in the right areas, in line with our Industrial Strategy.

    Indeed, manufacturing courses through the Industrial Strategy, whether it’s our ambition for pharmaceutical production in the Life Sciences Sector Deal, or the vision for advanced manufacturing in Juergen Maier’s Industrial Digitalisation review.

    So does trade, with the Industrial Strategy keeping us at the forefront of crucial areas of comparative advantage, such as clean growth, artificial intelligence and the automotive industry.

    But we shouldn’t be surprised that trade and manufacturing are central to our plan to improve productivity, when manufacturing productivity has been growing up to 3 times faster than the wider economy and the 9% of businesses that export play such a central role in our productivity growth.

    Our approach is already paying off. Companies like Airbus, who are jointly investing with the government to create a new research facility in the South West, are continuing to show their confidence in the strength of the United Kingdom.

    As the MP for North Somerset, I particularly welcome Airbus’s expansion in the South West. Their new wing-testing centre near Bristol will serve as an innovation space for supply chain companies across the region. It has also cemented the UK aerospace industry as the second-largest in the world.

    Investments such as these demonstrate the high esteem in which British manufacturing is held around the world. But as well as attracting inward investment, my department stands ready to ensure that this capability is shared beyond the borders of the UK.

    Time and again, research has shown that companies which export their products are more profitable, resilient and productive.

    In short, exporting can increase your bottom line, driving up profits which then in turn allows businesses to invest more.

    It is a virtuous cycle, which can be kicked off by the right government support.

    My department’s ultimate aim is to open up the world’s fastest-growing markets for UK companies.

    Soon, for the first time in more than 4 decades, we will be able to develop a trade policy framework that works, first and foremost, for the UK economy, UK firms, and UK citizens.

    Already, we are laying the groundwork for new trading relationships with countries across Africa and Asia.

    Many of these economies will be the drivers of global growth in the 21st century. In fact, the IMF projects that 90% of global growth in the next 10 to 15 years is likely to come from outside the EU.

    As their people become more affluent, and their domestic industries more mature, demand for British manufacturing expertise will grow exponentially.

    We know that the UK is in a unique position to partner these countries, and that our manufacturing firms stand ready to help realise their ambitions.

    Already, my department is deploying our extensive overseas network, stretching across 108 countries, to seek opportunities and provide in-market support for UK firms.

    This network is being bolstered by 9 HM Trade Commissioners to promote UK industry abroad. I was delighted to recently announce our commissioners for South Asia, China and North America: Crispin Simon, Richard Burn and Antony Phillipson.

    These new Commissioners will lead our overseas teams, and will develop a regional trade plan that will set out the priorities to be delivered across export promotion, investment and trade policy. They will have more autonomy to do what works best in their region to improve trade with key markets of the future.

    And UK Export Finance is one of the unsung heroes of our economy, working to ensure that no viable manufacturing export fails due to a lack of financing or insurance options, so that once firms do decide to export, there are no unnecessary barriers in their way.

    In the last financial year they made £3 billion available to help boost UK exports; at the same time we have seen exports of UK goods increase by over 11%.

    And it’s not just for big business. Accessing government-backed export finance is faster and easier for SMEs than ever before.

    As of October 2017, small and medium-sized businesses can get UKEF bonds and working capital support for up to £2 million in a matter of seconds directly from their bank, without having to apply separately.

    But trade doesn’t just benefit exporters themselves.

    Supplying to exporters allows smaller companies to access new markets and benefit from the worldwide demand for UK goods and services while they’re still growing. And the benefits from trade have positive spill-over effects across the supply chain.

    Capital is the lifeblood of commerce. If companies can’t get export finance it doesn’t matter where along the supply chain it happens – it still clots. But if finance flows freely the benefits do not just accrue to those actually doing the exporting.

    They circulate to their suppliers and throughout the economy, better practices and higher productivity from contact with overseas markets and better returns from selling abroad.

    That’s why small UK businesses who are not yet exporting themselves, but sell to other UK companies that do, can now also benefit from UKEF’s trade finance support.

    And that’s why in the 2017 Autumn Budget we announced a new supply chain product for exporters, which will help exporters access financing to pay their suppliers.

    This allows smaller companies in exporters’ supply chains to receive early payment to support their cash flow, at the same time as giving the exporter time to pay for supplies of goods and raw materials.

    UK Export Finance is here today: if you’re considering exporting, they could be the help you need to start selling overseas.

    All of these innovations come, of course, at a time when we are seeking a new partnership with the European Union.

    I understand that every business here today will be hoping for a glimpse of what this new relationship will look like.

    I know that businesses value certainty and stability above all else.

    I cannot comment on the negotiations that are still underway. I can, however, tell you that this government opposes erecting barriers to trade where none yet exist, or disrupting the commercial relationships that exist between this country and our continental partners.

    I am currently taking the Trade Bill through Parliament, to give you the certainty you need that there will be a functioning trade regime on day one. The implementation period will also provide time to adjust, which manufacturers tell us they need.

    Our Trade and Customs Bills will give us the powers we need to transfer the EU’s existing trade arrangements with third countries, which will allow us to protect your access to overseas markets.

    They will also give us the tools we need to fight back against any unfair subsidies or dumping from abroad.

    We are currently consulting on which of the EU’s existing trade defence measures we should keep. I want the interests of UK businesses and consumers to be foremost in the government’s mind, so I encourage you to contribute your views.

    We want to protect the interests of British manufacturing. We want to maintain your access to markets across Europe, and beyond. And we want to ensure that the UK continues to attract the best and brightest talent from across the world.

    I am greatly encouraged by new data from UCAS that shows a record number of European students applying to study in the UK’s world-leading universities, despite the dire predictions being made.

    The UK will always be the finest place in the world to live, study, or do business.

    Outside the EU we have now established a series of working groups and high-level dialogues with key trade partners from the USA to Australia and China to explore the best ways to progress our trade relationships for the future.

    The efforts of the manufacturing industry have ensured that Britain will remain a world-leading technology hub far into this century.

    We are a nation of innovators. And, as government and industry work together, we can build a brighter and more prosperous future, for the UK and the world.

    So let’s talk up the success of a UK manufacturing sector that is not only investing and exporting, but is a confident and key player in building that more prosperous future.

    There is a big world out there – and British manufacturing can lead the charge to ensure that the people of this country can take their rightful place in the global prosperity of the future.

    Thank you.

  • Michael Gove – 2018 Speech on Farming

    Below is the text of the speech made by Michael Gove, the Secretary of State for the Environment, Fisheries and Rural Affairs, at the NFU Farming Conference on 20 February 2018.

    Thank you for that very kind introduction.

    It’s a great pleasure to be here at this – my first – NFU conference.

    But also a sadness that it will be your last as President, Meurig.

    You have been an outstanding leader of this organisation, a powerful voice for farmers and a highly effective advocate for agriculture, and you have influenced every level of Government.

    I have – hugely- valued your candour and wisdom and will miss our regular meetings.

    Everyone in this room should know, and I am sure does, how determinedly you have stood up for their interests in all our conversations and you deserve the gratitude of everyone in this room for your exemplary leadership. Thank you for the work you’ve done.

    You leave very big boots to fill.

    But it is the NFU’s strength – and this country’s good fortune – that you have a talented field stepping up to take on new leadership roles in the union and I wish them all every success

    Food at the heart of life

    One issue you have continually impressed on me Meurig, and you repeated in your fantastic speech just now, and one principle I wholeheartedly agree with, is that the heart of farming is food production.

    Like you I admire farmers as stewards of the countryside – as you put it to me, Meurig, – the very first friends of the earth.

    I personally appreciate everything farmers do to keep our soils rich, our rivers clean, to provide habitats for wildlife and to help in the fight against climate change and broader environmental degradation. And I want to see farmers better rewarded for these vital public services.

    But I know that farmers would not be in a position to provide these public goods, indeed we would not have the countryside we all cherish, without successful, productive, profitable farm businesses.

    More than that, without successful farm businesses and high quality food production we won’t be able in the future to maintain the balance and health of our whole society and economy. Rural communities depend on profitable agricultural businesses to thrive. The landscapes which draw tourists, from the Lake District to Dartmoor, the Northumberland coast to Pembrokeshire, depend on farmers for their maintenance and upkeep. The hotels, bed and breakfasts, restaurants and pubs which do so much to enhance the attractiveness of these areas for all visitors depend, crucially, on high quality local produce and a healthy local food economy to be at their best.

    And I believe that if we get policy right for those who produce our food we can ensure sustainable and balanced growth across the United Kingdom, we can ensure the investment is there in the future, not just to make the countryside and the country as a whole flourish, we can enhance our environment, provide rewarding employment for future generations, improve the physical health and well-being of the population and to shape a better world for our children and grandchildren.

    Food, at last, at the heart of government thinking

    That is why in this job I have been determined to ensure that the voice, influences and concerns of those who produce our food has been amplified as much as possible, and put at the heart of Government thinking in every policy area.

    I fear that, in the past, the concerns of farmers and food producers were given insufficient weight in the design and implementation of UK Government policy. And Meurig as you reminded us, some of the comment of previous holders of this office did not give this sufficient attention.

    Defra, and its predecessor department MAFF, were kept unjustifiably low in the Whitehall pecking order.

    That was a mistake. But it could be, and was, defended by some on the basis that the major policy decisions governing farming and food production were taken not at a domestic level but at European levels through the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy. Since UK ministers and civil servants had little room to shape, let alone, reform the CAP’s operation there was, it was argued, little justification for expending energy thinking hard about food policy.

    This failure, and it was a failure, was all the more lamentable because, as everyone here knows, the food and drink industry is Britain’s biggest manufacturing sector. It’s also Britain’s fastest-growing, with our export growth over the last few months having been driven by massive increases in food and drink sales.

    That growth has been enabled by Britain’s decision to leave the European Union and the new opportunities it has given our exporters. And leaving the EU also, of course, requires us to develop new policies overall on food and farming. As a result for the first time in almost half a century, we are free to design policies from first principles that put British farmers, and consumers, first.

    The brilliant team of civil servants in Defra have been rising to that challenge and also critically ensuring that the rest of Government rises to that challenge as well.

    So we can now have, for the very first time in Government, a strategy that is designed to integrate the concerns of everyone involved in food and drink production – from farm to fork – to develop the right policies for the future. That food strategy is at the heart of the broader Industrial Strategy which you will hear more about from my friend and colleague Greg Clark, the Business Secretary, tomorrow. Indeed strengthening the food and drink sector overall is integral to the broader economic policy direction the Prime Minister has outlined for the whole of Government. Which is why this year the Department for International Trade has its top agenda item improving food and drink exports.

    Working with the Business Department we have also established a Food and Drink Sector Council with representatives from primary producers, processors and distributors, the hospitality sector and retail, to identify where more needs to be done to improve prospects for the food and drink sector. Current and past NFU Presidents are among the representatives on the council and working groups, who will look at how to further improve productivity, enhance training, support innovation and open new export markets.

    This work is intended to be the precursor to a new Food and Drink Sector Deal to build on existing successes and help to prepare the sector better for the future.

    Fresh thinking about food also government has also meant that we have been working with the Department of Health and Social Care and the Department for Education on policies to improve nutrition, health and well-being, and it has been Defra that has been the driving force for improvement in these areas.

    And we have also been working across Government to improve procurement. As we leave the EU, we will have the chance to review how we use the immense buying power of the public purse to, at last, properly support British food producers. Changing how Government procures food can help drive the change we all want to see – we can use public money to reward British farmers and food producers who grow healthy food in a sustainable fashion, we can invest more in local food economies and we can support higher environmental standards overall.

    So I hope you can see, the voices of farmers and food producers, their hopes and concerns, expectations and ambitions, and indeed obligations and duties, are now more central to Government thinking than at any time in fifty years. It is crucial that we, together, make the most of this historic opportunity as we leave the EU, this unfrozen moment, so that we can shape policy decisively in the interest of future generations.

    The future of food and farming

    So what should our, shared, aim be? What do we, ideally, want the future to look like?

    Well my own view is that we want to uphold the trinity of values identified by E.F. Schumacher – health, beauty and permanence.

    We want a healthy and beautiful countryside, producing food that makes us healthier as individuals, in a society which has a healthier attitude towards the natural world, an attitude that values permanence, where we wish to preserve and enhance natural capital and where we value the traditions and the virtues of rural life.

    But, as I explained in my speech to the Oxford Farming Conference earlier this year, the pursuit of all these values takes place against a background of accelerating demographic, scientific, political and economic change, which Meurig explained.

    Change is inevitable, whether in or out of the EU. Population growth, technological innovation, environmental pressures and evolving social attitudes require us all to adapt.

    But we need policies which can help farmers and food producers develop resilience in the face of this change, help you to adapt to new opportunities and meet the expectations of future generations, while all the time promoting health, celebrating beauty and valuing permanence.

    And I believe that outside the EU there are exciting opportunities for us to shape the future in a way which reflects all of our shared priorities. We can design the policies best fitted for our food producers and consumers. And best equipped to ensure our food economy remains sustainable and profitable in the long term.

    Because if we’re honest, the Common Agricultural Policy has not worked either for our food economy or for the natural environment. That is why we have outlined a new direction of travel in our 25 Year Environment Plan, published earlier this year, and we will also be publishing a Consultation Paper on the future of agricultural policy in England very shortly.

    And I do hope we can see similar ambition in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Because outside the EU the devolved administrations will have more powers than ever before to shape agricultural policies that suit their jurisdictions and they will be free to devise methods of support that suit the farmers and the consumers in their individual nations.

    Of course, we are all working together to ensure there will be UK-wide frameworks on areas of common concern like animal and plant health and we don’t want any decisions taken by any constituent part of the UK that will harm our own internal UK market. And of course we want to work together to ensure that we develop world-leading animal welfare and environmental standards. But I believe that we can get the balance right, between UK frameworks, that ensure that we can work collectively together, effectively, and also the maximum level of devolution in order to ensure that policy fits the needs of individual nations of the United Kingdom.

    And we also know that leaving the EU also means – critically – reforming the current system of subsidy for farming and food production. As we all know the current system of support doesn’t work for producers or consumers anywhere in the UK. And it doesn’t deliver sustainability for the long term.

    As Meurig pointed out, paying people simply, paying landowners simply, according to the size of their landholding drives up the cost of land, ties up capital unproductively and acts as a barrier to entry to new talent that we all want to encourage into farming, it impedes innovation and it’s holding back productivity growth.

    Worse than that, the rules associated with current subsidy payments are unwieldy and, all too often, counter-productive. They require farmers to spend long days ensuring conformity with bureaucratic processes which secure scarcely any benefits, environmental or otherwise, and in turn, those processes require a vast and inflexible bureaucracy to police.

    And one particular area which is ripe for reform is the current farming inspection regime, which, despite several recent attempts at simplification, remains as unwieldy as ever. Every year, farmers are confronted by a barrage of inspections from different agencies, often duplicating costs in time and money.

    So that’s why I’m delighted to announce today we will be conducting a thorough and comprehensive review of the inspection regime, and our aim will be the simplify it. We want to see how inspections can be simplified, in some cases removed, reduced, or improved, in order to reduce the burden on farmers. And also at the same time, providing consumers with guarantees about animal and plant health standards.

    This review is not only long-required but also it’s timely as we design future farming policy and maximise the opportunities of leaving the EU. This review will provide answers to essential questions that we need to grapple with to guide our future approach, subject to the outcome of our negotiations with the EU.

    This review will be led by Dame Glenys Staceys, a friend of mine who has over twenty years’ experience in driving reform within public sector organisations. And Dame Glenys understands your concerns. She was also, formerly, Chief Executive of Animal Health, the precursor to APHA and she is dedicated to making sure that the inspections systems works for farmers.

    More detail about this review, and also about our proposed system of future agricultural support, will be in our consultation paper on future farming policy which will be published very shortly.

    The paper will outline, not just for inspections but a number of areas, a clear direction of travel. But this paper is a consultation not a conclusion.

    Future support schemes, future inspection schemes, can only work if they reflect the reality of life for farmers and food producers. So what we will outline is a model for discussion and refinement. Yes it will have detail but it’s not an inflexible new order. We will need time, and critically, your input to get any new system of support right.

    A transition period to get reform right

    And that is why I have said that there will be a transition period for farming to ensure we get the right new system in place in due course. That period needs to be long enough to ensure we can all adjust to make the most of future opportunities.

    Now I know, that when we’re thinking about transition one critical aspect is access to labour. And Meurig made the point loud and clear.

    Farming currently depends on access to labour from abroad – both seasonal and more permanent. And also, often ignored by people outside this sector.

    Much of that labour is often very highly-skilled labour. Whether its stockmen and dairy workers or the official vets in our abattoirs, 90% of whom are from EU27 nations, agriculture needs access to foreign workers.

    It’s already the case that the supply of labour from EU27 countries is diminishing as their economies are recovering and growing. So, in the future, we will need to look further afield than just the EU. And think more creatively.

    But I also understand that you need to see action quickly. Not least to deal with imminent pressures in the year ahead. The NFU has put forward strong and, to my mind, compelling arguments for a Seasonal Agricultural Workers Scheme. I understand the impatience of people in this room for an announcement, I fully acknowledge your concerns and we will be saying more shortly.

    But also, we need to look beyond the need simply for seasonal labour, and that’s why I’ve been talking to the Government’s Migration Advisory Committee to ensure that when they are review the shape of immigration policy after we’re free of EU constraints, that the need for continued access to skilled labour for people in farming is at the heart of their thinking. We need that if we’re going to keep our farming sector productive and profitable.

    Of course, as I said before, in the medium to long term we need, of course, to move away from a relatively labour intensive model of agriculture to a more capital intensive approach. But we can only do that if farming stays profitable. And we can only ensure farming stays profitable with access to the right labour.

    And as well as clarity on access to labour, I also want to give the greatest possible clarity on future funding.

    At the last election as you heard the Prime Minister reinforced in the video we saw just now, we were the only party to pledge that funding for farming would be protected – in cash terms – for the whole of this Parliament – until 2022.

    We will, of course, be leaving the EU formally in March 2019 but the Government hopes we will secure an agreement from the EU to an implementation period to prepare fully for all the opportunities of the future.

    And in farming specifically we have already said that we will pay the 2019 BPS scheme on the same basis as we do now. We then anticipate keeping BPS payments during a transition period in England, which should last a number of years beyond that implementation period.

    And while we want to provide those guarantees to enable all farmers to prepare for change, we also hope that we can alter some aspects of payment in significant ways as soon as we can after leaving the EU.

    At the Oxford Farming Conference I explained that during the transition we propose at the moment to reduce BPS payments for those in receipt of the highest salaries, and redistribute some of that money to provide different forms of support. There are a number of ways in which we can reduce those payments and I am open- minded as to the best way of proceeding and we will consult in the command paper to be published very shortly.

    What, and who, we should support

    But talking about different methods of support, brings me to the new system that we want to outline and the values behind it.

    We propose to progressively, transfer money away from BPS payments as I’ve said towards the payment of public money for the provision of public goods.

    We will guarantee all existing agri-environment schemes entered into before we leave the EU but, critically, we will also invite farmers, land owners and land managers to think creatively now, and to help us pilot new ways of investing in environmental enhancement and in other public goods.

    We will outline in the consultation paper what we think could be covered by the definition of public goods and how payments could be made. But, again, the consultation paper is a contribution to the conversation, not the final word. We want to listen to farmers, and others, to ensure that our policy proposals can effectively deliver all the outcomes that we wish to see.

    I’m on record as saying and I completely want to underline here that I believe the most important public good we should pay for is environmental protection and enhancement. The work farmers do to ensure our soils can sustain growth in the future, that woods are planted to prevent flooding and provide a carbon sink and that hedgerows and other habitats provide a home for wildlife is hugely important. As Meurig has said, it’s at the heart of what farmers are currently doing, and it should be properly paid for.

    We already estimate that soil degradation costs the economy of England and Wales £1.2 billion every year. Soil is a building block of life, alongside water and air and we need as a country to invest in its health.

    We all have, all of us as citizens, a moral obligation to hand over our environment in a better state than we found it. And no-one appreciates that better than farmers. And if we are to ensure that our environment is enhanced then all of us as citizens, as taxpayers, must invest in it, and it is those who are most intimately involved in caring for our environment, our farmers, who should be supported with public money most energetically in achieving that ambition.

    But of course there are other public goods we should also use public money to secure.

    I believe that we should invest in research and development to improve productivity and to bring further environmental benefits.

    Some of the developments which improve both profitability and the quality of produce spring from farmers themselves who are developing new and more sophisticated approaches towards natural food production. Changing cultivation methods, for example moving towards min and low till agriculture, require fewer expensive inputs and yield healthier food, they deserve to be championed and shared. Across the world farmers are learning from their experience with natural systems and are making changes to everything from animal husbandry techniques to cropping patterns with transformational results.

    And we also need to invest in the potential of new technology. I know the NFU has campaigned hard for a multi-species Livestock Information Programme. I hope to make a firm announcement shortly, as you made a compelling case for investment in that technology, and as Meurig pointed out, improving traceability, providing guarantees on the origin of quality food, is something that consumers want, and that farmers deserve. And that’s why I hope to say more, as I say, in a week or so.

    Also when it comes to technology, whether its automation and machine learning, data science or gene-editing, improved tracking and traceability of livestock or new plant bio-security measures, there are a plethora of specific innovations which can increase productivity across farming, bring food costs down and also help us to improve animal and human health and ensure we better protect the environment. These are public goods in which we should invest and they can only be fully realised if we invest in a way which individual farmers and land owners, at the moment, are simply not equipped to on their own. Without public investment to support scientific breakthroughs, and then to help disseminate them across agriculture, we won’t secure the improvements that we all want to see.

    And making sure these breakthroughs bring the greatest benefits to the greatest number, depends I think on even greater collaboration and cooperation between farm businesses in the future. And I want to incentivise greater collaboration – not least to ensure we can guarantee environmental improvements at a landscape scale and also to help smaller mixed and livestock farmers cope with market volatility.

    Public access to the countryside is another public good that we should value. Now I don’t want to encourage everyone to ride or walk roughshod through working areas, walking through fields of wheat, it may well help connect us to the countryside but it’s not always the right thing to do. And the more connected we all are to the countryside, the more we know and appreciate what’s involved in farming and food production, the more understanding I think there will be of the need to value and support what farmers do. That’s why initiatives like Open Farm Sunday, supported by the NFU, and the work of organisations like LEAF is so important and why they need to be supported.

    As does the work of organisations like the Prince’s Countryside Fund which support smaller farms, especially those in more challenging areas. I firmly believe that supporting those farmers, often smaller farmers, who help keep rural life, and economies, healthy is a public good.

    I am acutely conscious that the changes which are coming to farming leave some sectors more worried than others. And I am particularly aware for example that many smaller farmers, such as dairy farmers in areas like Devon or upland sheep farmers in Cumbria and Northumberland, fear that the future is particularly challenging for them. Margins are tight. Milk and lamb prices are far from generous. The risks to profitability of Bovine TB or other forces beyond the farmers’ control only add to stress. And the prospect of public support diminishing or even disappearing makes many wonder how they can go on. I believe we have to ensure that future methods of agricultural support recognise how critical it is to value the culture in agriculture – Devon and Somerset would not be as they are – with the countryside as beautiful as it is and communities as resilient as they are – without our dairy farmers. Cumbria and Northumberland, Yorkshire’s Dales and Pennine Lancashire would not be as they are – both as breathtakingly beautiful and as resilient – without our upland sheep farmers.

    And yes, I am happy to acknowledge that I am romantic about it. You cannot read James Rebanks’ A Shepherd’s Life, with its descriptions of life sheep farming in the Lake District, without realising how precious and valuable a link with all our pasts the continuation of farming in communities such as James’ provides. Men and women are hefted in those hills just as much as the sheep they care for. And preserving profitable farm businesses in those communities is just as much a public good as investment in anything that I know.

    I also believe investing in higher animal welfare standards and in improved training and education for those in agriculture and food production are clear public goods. We already, as everyone here knows, have a high baseline for animal health standards, which we will continue to enforce. However, we could also support industry-led initiatives to improve these standards, especially in cases where animal welfare remains at the legislative minimum. This could include pilot schemes that offer payments to farmers delivering higher welfare outcomes, or payments to farmers running trial approaches and technologies to improve animal welfare that are not yet industry standard.

    Of course there are other public goods that we can all identify and debate how to support. But, as I have said before, while the list may be extensive, public money is not inexhaustible so we must argue for this investment not just with passion but also precision.

    Only connect

    Which brings me to investment in a public good which I know is of critical interest and vital benefit to everyone engaged in farming, but also to many others across the country.

    I’m talking about broadband.

    And, while on the subject, 4G mobile coverage.

    Connectivity overall.

    It is ridiculous that you can get better mobile phone coverage in Kenya than in parts of Kent. It is unjustifiable that in the country that first guaranteed universal mail provision, invented the telephone and television and pioneered the World Wide Web that broadband provision is so patchy and poor in so many areas.

    Farming cannot become as productive as it should be, rural economies cannot grow as they should, and new housing cannot be provided in rural areas as so many hope to see and we cannot have an economy that works for everyone unless everyone has access to decent broadband and mobile coverage.

    Daily life, especially active economic life, is becoming increasingly difficult for those without access to fast, reliable and affordable broadband. It is the necessary infrastructure of all our lives in these times, as essential as mains electricity or clean drinking water.

    And yet rural communities in Britain are denied good access to this contemporary utility today just as the farmers of the Hill Country in Texas were denied electricity in Congressman Lyndon Johnson’s day – until the New Deal transferred power to the people.

    If we could provide a universal service obligation for mail in the past – so that everyone in the country knew their post would be collected and delivered on the same basis as every other citizen – and if we can provide a universal guarantee now that every citizen will be given the same access to the healthcare they need when they need it, then why should we persist in discriminating over access to the essential service that is decent broadband?

    Progress has been made, we have already raised the availability of super-fast broadband from 65% of premises in 2010 to 95% by the end of 2017, but more needs to be done. We have committed to making high speed broadband available to all by 2020 and mobile coverage to 95% of the UK by 2022. And as you will have seen, this weekend we announced a new initiative to use church spires to boost broadband and mobile connectivity in rural areas. This kind of creative thinking shows how our nation’s beautiful heritage can work hand in hand with twenty-first century innovation. But we still need to go further.

    And I will indeed face down some of the vested interests. Some say that if individuals choose to live in rural areas, where broadband provision and mobile phone coverage may cost more, that choice should not be “subsidised” by others in urban areas. To which I say, but where do the urban dwellers get their food from, who keeps the countryside beautiful for them, who protects the landscape, keeps our nation’s green lungs breathing, who maintains the health, beauty and balance of nature for future generations? The people in rural areas who are currently being deprived an important service so many take for granted and need it now.

    We’re planning to spend north of £60 billion on HS2, 30 times as much as it would cost to provide universal superfast broadband for everyone in the country.

    Surely investment in broadband is just as vital, and an urgent part of improving our critical national infrastructure.

    Of course inside the EU, rules on state aid have prevented us from investing in broadband in a way that is best for the UK.

    Outside the EU, just one fifth of our annual net contribution to the EU could transform our national infrastructure.

    The Prime Minister has made clear that the days of the UK making vast annual contributions to the EU will be over. And when we leave the EU we can put that money towards domestic priorities, like making our digital infrastructure work by improving rural broadband and connectivity overall. I will be working closely with my fantastic colleague, Matt Hancock, the new DCMS Secretary of State and I know as a rural MP he shares my passion for sorting this out.

    Universal broadband and 4G coverage for all – paid for by the money we no longer have to give to the EU – that is what we mean by taking back control.

    And that’s not the limit of my ambition for rural Britain and our farming sector.

    I’ve argued before, with Meurig, that we should not seek to compete on the basis of a race to the bottom but by occupying the high ground of strong environmental, welfare and quality standards.

    We shouldn’t be afraid to say that we produce the world’s best food – our beef and lamb, cheese and milk, cod and salmon, soft fruit and salad vegetables – are recognised globally as the gold standard in fresh produce. One of the reasons why our exports are growing so fast.

    And that’s precisely why we should not and will not lower environmental or animal welfare standards as part of any new trade deals. We should no more lower our standards than the best brands in any market would lower theirs. Indeed, together, we should aim higher.

    The trend of our times, and it will only accelerate, is to invest in food that is healthier both for ourselves and our planet.

    Rather than feeding ourselves the chemically-adulterated, over-sugared, trans-fat rich processed foods that contribute to obesity, diabetes, heart disease and massive additional pressure on the NHS, there is, rightly, a growing demand that we help more and more people adopt a healthier diet.

    Adopting a healthier diet can only be good for British farmers, because it means eating more sustainably produced and carefully cultivated, British produce. More fresh British fruit and veg, fresh British milk and farmhouse cheese, grass-fed beef and lamb, sustainably caught fish and shellfish, British peas and beans, pulses and seeds.

    The more we can support local food economies where farmers and growers provide fresh produce to local retailers, the more we can ensure supermarkets and others pay fair prices for fresh British produce, the more children in school learn to buy wisely, cook properly and eat healthily and the more government procurement values fresh, healthy, British food, the better for all our health.

    That is why I believe the money we spend, as a country, supporting healthy food production is an investment not an expenditure, a way of reducing significant future costs, not an enduring burden on the exchequer. Wholesome food production is an invaluable investment in the health of our nation, from which we all reap the benefits.

    A brighter future

    As I hope you can tell, I believe farming, British farming, has a bright future, and I want to ensure it has a bright future.

    I want to ensure that you have a stronger voice in Government. I want to ensure that you are at the heart of decision-making. I want to ensure that the new resources that Defra enjoys as well as the new structures that we sit at the heart of should deliver a stronger voice for you.

    I want to ensure you have access to as much clarity as possible over future labour, and funding arrangements as we leave the EU. And I believe we can develop a labour market policy and a system of funding support that is fairer to all and which enhances productivity.

    I want future funding to be allocated in a way which commands enduring public support, which clearly delivers important public goods, which delivers productivity and innovation breakthroughs that individual farmers might not be able to secure on their own, which supports greater collaboration, gives farmers greater bargaining power, delivers environmental benefits at landscape scale, makes soils healthier and rivers cleaner, encourages the development of new habitats for wildlife and above all incentivises healthy food production.

    I want to see public investment at last treat rural areas fairly – not least by making the universal service obligation on broadband truly universal – so ensuring farming and food production can be more productive than ever

    And I want to harness the increasing interest that the next generation has in the health of our citizens and our planet to ensure we recognise the importance of supporting those who grow and rear the fresh, local produce which is best for us as individuals and for our environment.

    Driving reform in all these areas will ensure that British farmers are better supported to do what they do better than any farmers in the world – produce the best quality food in the world to the highest standards in the world – and it is time we started celebrating that for the future. Thank you.

  • Karen Bradley – 2018 Statement on Northern Ireland

    Below is the text of the speech made by Karen Bradley, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, in the House of Commons on 20 February 2018.

    With permission I should like to make a statement about the current political situation in Northern Ireland.

    Over recent weeks there have been talks involving the main political parties, particularly the two largest parties, the Democratic Unionists and Sinn Fein, to see if there is a basis for re-establishing the Executive.

    The UK Government has facilitated and supported these intensive negotiations. We have been in close touch with all the parties, and responded to requests for advice and support

    The Irish Government have also been involved in accordance with the well-established three-stranded approach.

    And I would like to place on record my appreciation of the contribution made by the Irish Foreign Minister, Simon Coveney, and his team.

    In addition my Right Honourable Friend the Prime Minister has been consistently and closely involved, speaking to party leaders and visiting Belfast last Monday. I have continued to give her up-to-date reports as the talks have progressed.

    The aim of those talks has been very clear: to bring about the re-establishment of inclusive, devolved government at Stormont which Northern Ireland has effectively been without for over thirteen months.

    In doing so, we have been able to build on the progress made by my predecessor, my Right Honourable Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup, who I warmly welcome back to this House today.

    In the Government’s view, both the DUP and Sinn Fein participated in discussions seriously and in good faith.

    And we believe that progress towards reaching agreement on all the key substantive issues has been made.

    It became possible in the light of this progress to identify a basis for a possible agreement to allow an Executive to be formed, embracing how the parties ensured the Executive was sustainable, and how they reached a balanced and fair accommodation on the difficult issues of language and culture, and how this was reflected in a package of legislation. Many other issues were addressed too, if not always resolved. Unfortunately, however, by last Wednesday it had become clear that the current phase of talks had reached a conclusion, without such an agreement being finalised and endorsed by both parties.

    As I said then, it is important for everyone to reflect on the circumstances which have led to this and their positions, both now and in the future.

    What is important today is for me to give some direction as to next steps.

    First, as our manifesto at the last election set out, this Government believes in devolution under the terms of the 1998 Belfast Agreement.

    We want to see local politicians taking decisions over local matters accountable to a local Assembly.

    We need devolved government to help deliver a stronger economy, to build a stronger society and to ensure that Northern Ireland’s voice is properly heard as we leave the European Union.

    In addition we want to see all of the other institutions of the Agreement operating in the way that was intended.

    I cannot reiterate too strongly that devolved government is in the best interests of all the people of Northern Ireland because it ensures their interests and concerns are fairly and equitably represented.

    It is also in the best interests of maintaining and strengthening the Union, to which this Government remains fully committed, consistent with the principle of consent.

    So we will continue to explore with the parties whether the basis for a political agreement still exists.

    And as my Right Honourable Friend the Prime Minister has re-affirmed we stand ready to bring forward the necessary legislation that would enable an Executive to be formed at the earliest opportunity.

    That is this Government’s clear hope and desire, something that I believe is shared widely across this House.

    Second, however, things in Northern Ireland cannot simply remain in a state of limbo.

    A number of challenging decisions will have to be taken.

    Ultimately the Government has a responsibility to ensure good governance and the continued delivery of public services.

    In particular, as the Head of the Northern Ireland Civil Service has made clear, there needs to be certainty and clarity about a budget for Northern Ireland for next year as soon as possible.

    And I intend to take steps to provide clarity on the budget and I will update the House as soon as I am in a position to do so.

    This is clearly not where I want to be but in the absence of an Executive in Northern Ireland I will have no other choice.

    Longer term the Government will not shirk its responsibilities to take whatever steps are necessary to provide certainty and stability for the people of Northern Ireland, while maintaining our commitment to govern with rigorous impartiality in the interests of all the people of Northern Ireland.

    But we will only do that once we are sure that all other viable options designed to restore devolved government have been properly considered, including my statutory obligation to call an Assembly election.

    In the absence of devolution it is also right that we consider the issue of salaries for Assembly Members.

    At the end of last year my Right Honourable Friend for Old Bexley and Sidcup received recommendations on this from Mr Trevor Reaney, a former Clerk of the Assembly.

    The Government will need to decide shortly on the next steps.

    I acknowledge the public concern that while a number of Assembly members continue to carry out constituency and representative functions, current salaries are maintained while the Assembly is not meeting.

    On the issue of addressing the legacy of Northern Ireland’s past the Government has manifesto commitments to consult on the implementation of the bodies set out in the 2014 Stormont House Agreement and to support the reform of inquests.

    I would much prefer to do this in the context of an agreement that sees the restoration of a devolved Executive.

    But I am conscious of the Government’s responsibilities to make progress in this area to provide better outcomes for victims and survivors, the people who suffered most during the troubles.

    So we will continue to proceed toward a full consultation as soon as possible, so that everyone can have their say.

    Mr Speaker, as the House will recognise this April marks the 20th anniversary of the historic Belfast Agreement.

    That Agreement, along with its successors, has been fundamental in helping Northern Ireland move forward from its violent past to a brighter, more secure future.

    And this Government’s support for the Agreements remains steadfast. As does our commitment to govern for everyone in Northern Ireland.

    There is no doubt that Northern Ireland has taken huge strides forward in the past twenty years.

    In my short time as Northern Ireland Secretary I have seen a place full of wonderful talent and huge potential.

    Yet any commemorations this year will look decidedly hollow if Northern Ireland still has no functioning government of its own.

    So everyone needs to continue striving to see devolved government restored and to build a Northern Ireland fit for the future.

    That remains the clear focus and determination of this Government.

  • Penny Mordaunt – 2018 Speech on Safeguarding in the Aid Sector

    Below is the text of the speech made by Penny Mordaunt, the Secretary of State for International Development, in the House of Commons on 20 February 2018.

    With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to update the House on my Department’s response to the sexual abuse and exploitation perpetrated by charity workers in Haiti in 2011, and the measures we are taking to improve safeguarding across the aid sector.

    I’d like to start by paying tribute to Sean O’Neill of The Times and the two sets of whistleblowers – those in 2011 and later – for bringing this case to light.

    On February ninth, The Times reported that certain Oxfam staff when in Haiti in 2011 had abused their positions of trust and paid for sex with local women. These incidents happened in the aftermath of the devastating earthquake in 2010, which killed hundreds of thousands of people and left millions more homeless and reliant on aid for basic needs such as food and shelter.

    This is shocking, but it is not by itself what has caused such concern about Oxfam’s safeguarding. It was what Oxfam did next.

    In chaotic and desperate situations the very best safeguarding procedures and practices must be put in to place to prevent harm, but when organisations fail to report and follow up incidents of wrongdoing that occur, it undermines trust and sends a message that sexual exploitation and abuse is tolerated. We cannot prevent sexual exploitation and abuse if we don’t demonstrate zero tolerance.

    In such circumstances we must be able to trust organisations not only to do all they can to prevent harm, but to report and follow up incidents of wrongdoing when they occur.

    In this duty Oxfam failed under the watch of Barbara Stocking and Penny Lawrence.

    They did not provide a full report to the Charity Commission. They did not provide a full report to their donors. They did not provide any report to prosecuting authorities.

    In my view Mr Speaker they misled, quite possibly deliberately. Even as their report concluded that their investigation could not rule out the allegation that some of the women involved were actually children.

    They did not think it was necessary to report to the police in either Haiti or the country of origin for those accountable.

    I believe their motivation appears to be just the protection of the organisation’s reputation. They put that before those they were there to help and protect – a complete betrayal of trust.

    A betrayal too of those who sent them there – the British people – and a betrayal of all those Oxfam staff and volunteers who do put the people they serve, first.

    Last week, I met with Mark Goldring, Chief Executive of Oxfam, and Caroline Thomson, Oxfam’s Chair of Trustees.

    I made three demands of them –

    That they fully cooperate with the Haitian authorities, handing over all the evidence they hold.

    That, they report staff members involved in this incident to their respective national governments.

    And, that they make clear how they will handle any forthcoming allegations around safeguarding – historic or live.

    And I stressed that for me holding to account those who made the decision not to report and to let those potentially guilty of criminal activity slip away, was a necessity in winning back confidence in Oxfam.

    As a result of those discussions, Oxfam has agreed to withdraw from bidding for any new UK Government funding until DFID is satisfied that they can meet the high safeguarding standards we expect of our partners.

    I will take a decision on current programming after the twenty-sixth of February as I will then have further information which will help me decide if I need to adjust how that is currently being delivered.

    Given the concerns about the wider sector this case has raised, I have written to every UK charity working overseas that receives UK aid – 192 organisations – insisting that they spell out the steps they are taking to ensure their safeguarding policies are fully in place and confirm they have referred all concerns they have about specific cases and individuals to the relevant authorities, including prosecuting authorities.

    I have set a deadline of the twenty-sixth of February for all UK charities working overseas to give us the assurances that we have asked for and to raise any concerns with the relevant authorities.

    We are also undertaking in parallel a similar exercise with all non-UK charity partners – 393 organisations in total and with all our suppliers including those in the private sector – over 500 organisations – to make clear our standards and remind them of their obligations, and we are doing the same with all multilateral partners too.

    The UK Government reserves the right to take whatever decisions about present or future funding to Oxfam, and any other organisation, that we deem necessary. We have been very clear that we will not work with any organisation that does not live up to the high standards on safeguarding and protection that we require.

    I will also be sharing details of this approach with other governments departments, who are responsible for the ODA spend.

    Although this work is not yet complete it is clear from the Charity Commission reporting data – and lack of it from some organisations – that a cultural change is needed to ensure all that can be done to stop sexual exploitation in the aid sector, is being done.

    And we need to take some practical steps. Now.

    We should not wait for the UN to take action. We must set up our own systems now.

    My department, and the Charity Commission, will hold a safeguarding summit on the fifth of March, where we will meet with UK international development charities, regulators and experts to confront safeguarding failures and agree practical measures, such as an aid worker accreditation scheme we in the UK can use.

    Later in the year, we will take this programme of work to a wide-ranging, global safeguarding conference to drive action across the whole international aid sector.

    And I’m pleased to say the US, Canada, the Netherlands and others have already agreed to support our goal of improved safeguarding standards across the sector.

    The UK is not waiting for others to act. We are taking a lead on this.

    I will also be speaking to colleagues across government and beyond about what more we can do to stop exploitation and abuse in the UN and broader multilateral system.

    The message from us to all parts of the UN is clear – you can either get your house in order, or you can prepare to carry out your good work without our money.

    I welcome the UN’s announcement on the fourteenth of February that the UN does not and will not claim immunity for sexual abuse cases. This sends a clear signal that the UN is not a soft target, but we must hold the UN to account for this.

    Further actions we have taken in the last week include the creation of a new Safeguarding Unit. We have also promoted our whistleblowing and reporting phone line to encourage anyone with information on safeguarding issues to contact us.

    We have appointed Sheila Drew Smith, a recent member of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, who has agreed to bring her expertise and her challenge to support my Department’s ambition on safeguarding. She will report to me directly.

    I have asked to meet leaders of the audit profession to discuss what more they can do to provide independent assurance over safeguarding to the organisations that DFID partners with globally.

    And I have held my own Department to the same scrutiny that I am demanding of others. I have asked the department to go through our centrally held HR systems and our fraud and whistleblowing records as far back as they exist.

    I am assured that there are no centrally recorded cases which were dealt with incorrectly.

    Separately, we are reviewing any locally reported allegations of sexual misconduct involving DFID staff. To date our review of staff cases has looked at 75% of our teams across DFID and will complete in a fortnight.

    Our investigations are still ongoing and if, during this process, we discover any further historic or current cases, I will report on our handling of these to Parliament.

    DFID, other government departments and the National Crime Agency work closely together when serious allegations of potentially criminal activity in partner organisations are brought to our attention and we are strengthening this, as the new Strategy Director at the NCA will take on a lead role for the aid sector.

    I am calling on anyone who has any concerns about abuse or exploitation in the aid sector to come forward and report these to our counter fraud and whistleblowing team. Details are on the DFID website and all communications will be treated in complete confidence.

    Later today I will have further meetings, including with the Defence Secretary, regarding peacekeeping troops, and the Secretary of State at DCMS regarding the Charity Sector.

    My absolute priority is to keep the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people safe from harm. It is utterly despicable that sexual exploitation and abuse continue to exist in the aid sector.

    The recent reports should be a wake-up call to all of us. Now is the time for us to act, but as we do so we should note the good people working across the world in this sector – saving lives often by endangering their own – and all those from fundraisers to trustees who make that work possible across the entire aid sector.

    In the last week alone UK aid and UK aid workers has helped vaccinate around 850,000 children against polio.

    And we should also recognise that work can only be done with the support of the British people.

    I commend this statement to the House.

  • Theresa May – 2018 Speech on Education

    Below is the text of the speech made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, at Derby College on 19 February 2018.

    I took my very first steps into elected politics as a local councillor, in south London.

    For two years I was the chairman of the education authority in Merton.

    It was an experience I will never forget.

    I saw how vital good schools and colleges are to a community. How the hopes and aspirations which parents have for their children and which young people have for their futures are bound-up with the quality of education on offer.

    And here in this fantastic setting, in a building from Derby’s proud past, which today is helping to define a fantastic future for this city and county as part of Derby College the immense value of great local institutions, providing people with an education that truly works for them, is clear.

    I drew on my experiences in south London when I first became an MP, and made my maiden speech in Parliament on the subject of education in 1997.

    I said then that the aim of education policy should be to ‘provide the right education for every child’. That ‘for some children that will be an education that is firmly based in learning practical and vocational skills. For others, it will be an education based on academic excellence.’

    A lot has changed in the last 20 years, but that core principle that the needs of every child and every young person deserve to be met still drives my vision of the education system our country needs.

    And the need for such a system has never been greater.

    First, because the new technologies which are shaping the economy of the future will transform the world of work and demand new knowledge and skills in the decades ahead.

    Technologies like artificial intelligence, biotech and new advances in data science have the potential to drive up living standards and open new possibilities for human achievement and personal fulfilment. But if we are to seize those opportunities, if we are to make Britain a great engine room of this technological revolution in the twenty-first century we need to make the most of all of our talents.

    The sixth form students I met at Featherstone High School in Southall this morning, and the young people studying here at Derby College, will be starting their careers in the new economy of the 2020s and 2030s. To give them the skills they need to succeed, we need an education and training system which is more flexible and more diverse than it is today.

    One which enriches their lives with knowledge, gives each of them a great start in life, and is there for them when they need it.

    And there is another reason why we must act now to deliver that education system that truly works for everyone. Because the Britain of the 2020s will be a Britain outside of the European Union, pursuing a new course in the world.

    I want the Britain which those young people will be living in to be a self-confident, outward-looking Britain.

    The best friend and ally of our EU partners.

    But also a Britain which is out in the world, forming even closer ties with friends and allies right across the globe. We will learn together, collaborating in research which makes new scientific breakthroughs and improves our understanding of the world.

    We will trade together, spreading opportunity and prosperity ever more widely.

    And we will stand together in support of the shared values which unite Britain with so many other like minded countries – in Europe yes, but across the world too.

    To become that Britain where a thriving economy drives up living standards and creates greater security and opportunity for everyone and where the prosperity which economic growth generates is more fairly shared in our society we need education to be the key that unlocks the door to a better future.

    Through education, we can become a country where everyone, from every background, gains the skills they need to get a good job and live a happy and fulfilled life.

    To achieve that, we must have an education system at all levels which serves the needs of every child.

    And if we consider the experience which many young people have of our system as it is, it is clear that we do not have such a system today.

    Challenges we face

    Imagine two children currently in secondary school and thinking about their futures.

    One is a working class boy from here in Derby.

    He aspires to a career as a lawyer, but he doesn’t have a social network to draw on with any links to the profession, and he doesn’t know if someone like him can make it.

    The road he will have to take to achieve his dream is much more challenging than the one his counterpart who is privately educated will face.

    Almost a quarter of the students at our research-intensive universities come from the 7% of the population who go to private school.

    And the professions which draw their recruits primarily from these institutions remain unrepresentative of the country as a whole, skewed in favour of a particular social class. For the boy from a working class home here in Derby, the odds are stacked against him and as a country, we all lose out when we do not make the most of everyone’s talents and ability.

    And now imagine a second child.

    She is a girl from a middle class background, who is privately educated.

    Her dream is to be a software developer, and she wishes she could go straight into the industry.

    But she faces another set of pressures, which tell her that studying academic A-levels and making a UCAS application to a Russell group university is what the world expects of her.

    The idea that there might be another path just as promising and better suited to her individual hopes and dreams simply doesn’t occur. In each case, the system is not working for the individual or for our country.

    Paul Johnson of the IFS recently wrote about the experiences his two sons had of leaving school. One, a natural fit at university, found the application process simple and straight forward.

    The other, who wanted to pursue a technical course, found it much more difficult because, ‘everything points to university as the default.’ Roughly half of young people go to university and roughly half do not. But in the twenty years since we introduced tuition fees, public debate on tertiary education has been dominated by a discussion of how we fund and support those who go to university, and there has been nothing like the same attention paid to how we support the training and develop the skills of the young people who do not.

    Most politicians, most journalists, most political commentators took the academic route themselves, and will expect their children to do the same. And there remains a perception that going to university is really the only desirable route, while going into training is something for other people’s children.

    If we are going to succeed in building a fairer society and a stronger economy, we need to throw away this outdated attitude for good and create a system of tertiary education that works for all our young people.

    That means equality of access to an academic university education which is not dependent on your background, and it means a much greater focus on the technical alternatives too.

    One of the great social achievements of the last half-century has been the transformation of an academic university education from something enjoyed almost-exclusively by a social elite into something which is open to everyone.

    But making university truly accessible to young people from every background is not made easier by a funding system which leaves students from the lowest-income households bearing the highest levels of debt, with many graduates left questioning the return they get for their investment.

    And for those young people who do not go on to academic study, the routes into further technical and vocational training today are hard to navigate, the standards across the sector are too varied and the funding available to support them is patchy.

    The UK’s participation rate in advanced technical education – teaching people skills which will be crucial for the future – is low by international standards. The latest annual figures show that fewer than 16,000 people completed higher qualifications through the further education system.

    That is compared to almost 350,000 undergraduate degrees which were awarded last year.

    This imbalance has an economic cost, with some businesses finding it hard to recruit the skilled workers they need.

    But it also has a social cost in wasted human potential, which we too often ignore.

    So now is the time to take action to create a system that is flexible enough to ensure that everyone gets the education that suits them.

    That’s what the review which I am launching today sets out to deliver.

    And in doing so, it will build on the enormous progress we have already made in raising standards in our schools since 2010.

    School standards

    The success of every young person in whatever they go on to do in life, is shaped by the education they receive at school and the Conservatives have put restoring rigour and high standards in our primary and secondary schools at the heart of our education reforms.

    We launched a major expansion of the academy programme, putting school teachers in charge of raising standards in their schools.

    And we also went a step further, creating free schools – to give teachers, universities and charities the chance to bring greater innovation and specialism to the mix.

    I have always believed in the great potential which Free Schools have to improve the lives of children.

    That’s why I put them in the Conservative election manifesto in 2001, as shadow education secretary. And now free schools score some of the very highest results at GCSE.

    The range of reforms which we put in place are leading to improved outcomes for young people. 1.9 million more children are being taught in schools that are good or outstanding.

    The attainment gap is shrinking at primary and secondary school.

    And England is improving internationally. The job is not yet done, but we are making excellent progress, and enormous credit is due to the teachers whose hard work has driven these improved outcomes.

    Tertiary Review

    On top of the firm foundation of a great primary and secondary education, and the reforms we are putting in place to introduce high quality T-levels we now need to ensure that options open to young people as they move into adulthood are more diverse, that the routes into further education and training are clearer, and that all options are fully accessible to everyone.

    That is why I am today launching a major and wide-ranging review into post-18 education.

    The review will be supported by an expert panel.

    And I am delighted that Philip Augar has agreed to chair that panel.

    It will focus on four key questions. How we ensure that tertiary education is accessible to everyone, from every background.

    How our funding system provides value for money, both for students and taxpayers.

    How we incentivise choice and competition right across the sector.

    And finally, how we deliver the skills that we need as a country.

    This is a review which, for the first time, looks at the whole post-18 education sector in the round, breaking down false boundaries between further and higher education, so we can create a system which is truly joined-up.

    Universities – many of which provide technical as well as academic courses – will be considered alongside colleges, Institutes of Technology and apprenticeship providers.

    There are huge success stories to be found right across the sector, at every level, and by taking a broad view, Philip and his expert panel will be able to make recommendations which help the sector to be even better in the future.

    Student finance

    Our universities are world-leaders and jewels in Britain’s crown.

    16 British universities are in the world’s top 100, and four are in the top ten.

    I want to know how we can build on that success, and at the same time ensure that people from all backgrounds share the benefits of university study. So the review will examine how we can give people from disadvantaged backgrounds an equal chance to succeed.

    That includes how disadvantaged students and learners receive maintenance support, both from Government and universities and colleges.

    But the review will also look more widely, and examine our whole system of student funding.

    There are many aspects of the current system which work well.

    Universities in England are now better funded than they have been for a generation.

    And sharing the cost of university between taxpayers as a whole and the graduates who directly benefit from university study is a fair principle.

    It has enabled us to lift the cap on the number of places – which was in effect a cap on aspiration – so universities can expand and so broaden access.

    But I know that other aspects of the system are a cause for serious concern – not just for students themselves, but parents and grandparents too.

    This is a concern which I share. The competitive market between universities which the system of variable tuition fees envisaged has simply not emerged.

    All but a handful of universities charge the maximum possible fees for undergraduate courses.

    Three-year courses remain the norm.

    And the level of fees charged do not relate to the cost or quality of the course. We now have one of the most expensive systems of university tuition in the world.

    We have already begun to take action to address some of these concerns.

    We scrapped the increase in fees that was due this year, and we have increased the amount graduates can earn before they start repaying their fees to £25,000.

    The review will now look at the whole question of how students and graduates contribute to the cost of their studies including the level, terms and duration of their contribution.

    Our goal is a funding system which provides value for money for graduates and taxpayers, so the principle that students as well as taxpayers should contribute to the cost of their studies is an important one.

    I believe – as do most people, including students – that those who benefit directly from higher education should contribute directly towards the cost of it. That is only fair.

    The alternative – shifting the whole burden of university tuition onto the shoulders of taxpayers as a whole – would have three consequences.

    First, it would inevitably mean tax increases for the majority of people who did not go to university, and who on average earn less than those who did. Second, it would mean our universities competing with schools and hospitals for scarce resources, which in the past meant they lost out, putting their international pre-eminence at risk.

    And third, it would mean the necessary re-introduction of a cap on numbers, with the Treasury regulating the number of places an institution could offer, and preventing the expansion which has driven wider access in recent years.

    That is not my idea of a fair or progressive system.

    Diversity and choice

    And Philip and his colleagues will also look beyond universities, to examine choice and competition right across the sector and recommend practical solutions.

    This will build on reforms which are already in train to increase the options which are available across further and higher education.

    Over the last few years, reforms to technical education have improved every aspect of the offer available to young people. We now have higher standards for apprenticeships and vocational courses.

    T-levels are on the way, which will provide a high-quality, technical alternative to A-levels.

    A new network of Institutes of Technology will specialise in the advanced technical skills our economy needs.

    This review will now identify how we can help young people make more effective choices between these different options. That could include giving young people better guidance about the earning potential of different jobs and what different qualifications are needed to get them, so they can make more informed decisions about their futures.

    But this isn’t just about young people.

    Retraining throughout the course of your career, to change jobs or gain promotion, will only become more necessary as new technologies have an impact on our economy.

    We need to support flexible life-long learning, including part-time and distance learning – something which the current funding system does not always make easy.

    So by focusing on these four key priorities, making tertiary education accessible to all, promoting choice and competition in the sector, delivering the skills our economy needs, and getting value for money for students and taxpayers we can give every young person access to an education that suits their skills and aspirations.

    One which opens up possibilities for their future and helps them into a rewarding career.

    Conclusion

    Almost thirty years ago, when I was in charge of that local education authority, an incoming Conservative Prime Minister, who like me went to a state school said that the great task of the coming decade should be to ‘make the whole of this country a genuinely classless society’.

    Eighteen months ago, when I became Prime Minister, I spoke of my desire to make Britain a Great Meritocracy. Today, our ambition for the Britain we will build outside the EU must be just as great.

    And it must be matched with a determination to turn that ambition into reality.

    Because by voting to leave the EU in 2016, millions of people across this country were not just choosing to leave the European Union they were sending a clear message about how our society and our economy works – or rather doesn’t work – in too many communities.

    If we are truly to make good on the instruction of the referendum, we need to reconnect everyone in our society to a sense of fairness and opportunity.

    We need to make Britain a country where everyone can go as far as their talents will take them and no one is held back by their background or class.

    Where education is the key to opening up opportunity for everyone. The vision I have for the Britain we will build is of a country which is fit for the future, delivered through bold social and economic reform.

    That is why we are building an education system which unlocks everyone’s talents, and gives them the skills they need to go as far as their hard work will take them.

    It’s why we support the market economy and back entrepreneurs and wealth creators – but step in when businesses don’t play by the rules.

    And it is why we are making the UK the very best place in the world to start and grow a high-tech business – while also making sure that new technologies work for everyone in society.

    If we get it right, we can build a country that truly works for everyone.

    A country where your background does not define your future, and class distinctions are a thing of the past. Where a boy from a working class home can become a High Court judge, thanks to a great state education.

    And where a girl from a private school can start a software business, thanks to a first-class technical education.

    That is my vision for a fairer society and how we will deliver it.

    A society where good, rewarding work is available for everyone. An economy with the skills it needs to succeed. Britain as the Great Meritocracy, a country that respects hard work, rewards effort and industry, where a happy and fulfilled life is within everyone’s grasp.