UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Jim Shannon – 2023 Speech on Relations with China

    Jim Shannon – 2023 Speech on Relations with China

    The speech made by Jim Shannon, the DUP MP for Strangford, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

    I beg to move,

    That this House has considered the matter of relations with China during the presidency of Xi Jinping.

    I place on the record my thanks to the Backbench Business Committee for granting this debate. It was put in for at short notice; we wanted to do it as quickly as we could, so we thank the Committee for agreeing to it. It is important that we have the opportunity to discuss the last 10 years under China’s leader, Xi Jinping, and how his time in office has seen a drastic rise in nefarious activities inside and outside China, many of which have been used to attack human rights, freedom of speech and media, and freedom of religion and belief. I declare an interest as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief. That topic is very close to my heart. It is one of the reasons why I am here and it is ultimately and initially the reason why I asked for this debate.

    We speak up for those with a Christian faith across the world, for those with other faiths and, indeed, for those with no faith, so I am pleased to see right hon. and hon. Members here today, to see the shadow spokespersons and to see the Minister in his place. When it comes to speaking up for freedom of religion and belief in China, we could write a book on the number of occasions when China has disregarded it, has discriminated, has persecuted and has used actions that are illegal in any democratic society against those of Christian faith and, indeed, other faith. I am speaking here of the genocide of Uyghurs in Xinjiang., which the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) and others in the House and here today have brought to the attention of MPs on regular occasions.

    Margaret Ferrier (Rutherglen and Hamilton West) (Ind)

    It is reported that, in its efforts to control the Uyghur population, the Chinese Communist party has forced Uyghur women to marry Han Chinese men, to have abortions and to repress their Uyghur culture and religion. Does the hon. Member agree that Ministers must recognise the plight of the Uyghur people, and the Uyghur tribunal’s finding that they have been subject to a genocide?

    Jim Shannon

    The hon. Lady is absolutely right. The disgraceful and quite illegal treatment of the Uyghurs in China has disturbed us and put a burden on our hearts for them. We cannot understand how any country that espouses freedom—as China likes to say it does whenever it does the very opposite—can act in that way. The forced sterilisation of women, the abuse of women, the imprisonment of millions of Uyghurs in camps and the taking away of their religious liberty and their right to express themselves concern us greatly, so the hon. Lady is right to highlight that matter and to ensure that we have the opportunity to understand it.

    The crackdown in Hong Kong is another issue. We watched as we handed over Hong Kong to the Chinese. The Chinese made lots of assertions that they would ensure that freedom was maintained, and for a short period it was, but things have gone downhill over the past few years, and China is cracking down hard on any expression in Hong Kong.

    Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)

    On the question of Hong Kong, is it not obvious that one reason why the Chinese Government did not honour the terms of the joint declaration was that they were given lots of signals from this country that we did not really care that much about it and that we were quite glad to be shot of Hong Kong? Signals matter, and the signals that we send every time we prefer trade to human rights are entirely the wrong signals to be sending.

    Jim Shannon

    The right hon. Gentleman is truly wise in his words, and I fully agree with his comments. I had the same concern. When the deal was done, there seemed to be almost wishful thinking from the UK Government that things would be all right, when the reality should have told us—and the Government—that they definitely would not.

    The issue of tying business and economic opportunities in with human rights is something I have espoused in Westminster Hall, but also in the main Chamber and through the APPG as well. We need to marry the two together; the one cannot succeed without the others’ interpretation.

    Margaret Ferrier

    The hon. Gentleman is being generous with his time. Hundreds were expected to march in Hong Kong for gender equality ahead of International Women’s Day, but the demonstration was called off with just hours’ notice by organisers. Human Rights Watch said that the authorities seemed to be approving demonstrations while intimidating organisers and participants with jail time to deter participation. Does the hon. Gentleman share my concern about the continued impact of Hong Kong’s national security laws on the right to peaceful protest?

    Jim Shannon

    I do, and with some annoyance, anger and compassion for the residents of Hong Kong because they are being denied the freedom they once had. The UK Government have obviously stepped in and offered some passage for many Hong Kongers to come here to live. That is good news, but would it not be better if they were able to stay in their own country and exercise the freedom they once had?

    We also have the continuing repression in Tibet. It was a salient reminder, when I did my research before this debate, when I found out that the suppression in Tibet has been going on since 1950. That is five years before I was born, so Tibetans’ freedoms have been denied and restricted for a long, long time. I understand that the inauguration of a new Dalai Lama will be at the behest of the Chinese Communist party. A religious group cannot appoint its own leader in Tibet, but only because the Chinese Communist party will not let them. Again, that is another example of what is going on inside China, and of China’s influence and control.

    Tim Loughton (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Con)

    I am hoping to speak in the debate, so I will not intervene much. Just to be clear, whatever the Chinese Communist party Government think, the next Dalai Lama will be the responsibility of the people of Tibet and those entrusted by the current Dalai Lama to produce his successor. It will not be a result of what the Chinese Communist party allow or do not allow.

    Jim Shannon

    The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. The information I have suggested that the Chinese Communist party was going to try to use its influence to ensure that any choice would be the choice of the Chinese Communist party, but if, as the hon. Gentleman said, there is some control over that, that would be one of the good things that could come out of this.

    The issue of forced organ transplantation from members of the Falun Gong has been in my heart in this House for some 10 years now. It is being done on a commercial scale, and people have lost their lives. We must never forget the impact of that on the Falun Gong.

    There is also the persecution of Christians. Churches have been destroyed, with secret police sitting in church services, taking notes of those who are there, and recording car numbers and which houses people return to. We have also had the rise of cyber-surveillance in China, which is another indication of those being imprisoned, beaten and injured all because they happen to have a different religious opinion. Today, we had some good news: the Government indicated that they would suspend their agreement with TikTok. That is good news when it comes to security issues, and we must welcome it.

    In my time as an MP, I have seen the UK move from the “golden era” espoused by David Cameron and George Osborne to the confusion and lack of cohesion on China under this Government. In each case, the policies were driven by economics. Economics is of course relevant, but our policies must encompass other important factors such as our human rights obligations, and take into account our moral compass and what we believe. There is a real fear that focusing solely on money would mean that the UK’s fundamental beliefs in human rights and the rule of law are subjugated for the purpose of trade deals. The right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) referred to that; it is one of the key issues, and I seek clarification and encouragement from the Minister on it. That would be great for China and other authoritarian states, but terrible for the UK’s standing in the world. I urge extreme caution and recommend change.

    We are watching in real time the reduction of democratic states and the rise of authoritarian regimes. According to the Economist Intelligence Unit, 23 countries out of 167 monitored in 2020 could be called democracies. Fifty were considered authoritarian, and the others attained some form of flawed democracy or hybrid system, more likely than not under the control of one person.

    China and Russia are leading the global rise in authoritarian states. They are seeking to build their own alliances, disrupt democratic processes in other countries, interfere in elections, and create their own channels for communication and cyber-control away from the norms and standards expected by international treaties. They support each other at institutions such as the United Nations, where the evil axis gathers together to defend each other’s interests and provide financial and political support for one another. The unfortunate thing for us is that democracies seem incapable of working together to fight back against that in a single-minded, focused manner, so I have great concerns.

    The Chinese Government have committed a series of ongoing human rights abuses against the Uyghurs since 2014. I and others, including the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith), who is in the Chamber, have raised that issue. Abuse is also perpetrated against other ethnic and religious minorities in Xinjiang province. This is the largest scale detention of ethnic and religious minorities since world war two. It is of that size; it is almost impossible to take in the number.

    The United States has declared China’s human rights abuses a genocide, as have legislators in several other countries, including Canada, the Netherlands, Lithuania and France. We have even done so in this House of Commons in a debate led by the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green. The Parliaments of New Zealand, Belgium and the Czech Republic condemned the Chinese Government’s treatment of the Uyghurs as severe human rights abuses or crimes against humanity, which they truly are.

    China continues to deny any wrongdoing and threatens politicians and even entire countries with retaliation simply for daring to raise and debate these issues. Diplomats are deployed to berate senior Government officials and speak at news stations to explain that everyone is wrong and at this is all just Sinophobia and anti-China rhetoric. No, it is not; it is much more than that.

    Atrocities in Tibet have been going on since 1950—so much so that we barely react any more. The hon. Member for East Worthing and Shoreham (Tim Loughton) has spoken about Tibet for as long as I have been in this House, and long before that, I believe. He has highlighted it on many occasions. We cannot forget about it. We need to focus on what is happening there, which is hard to take in, with regularity and ferocity. Children are forced into re-education boarding schools as a way of eradicating their language and religion, with the hope that they will reject their own families and culture. Such policies have left a trail of family destruction and have cut cultural and historical memory.

    China plans to choose the next Dalai Lama, but I am very pleased that the hon. Gentleman said that those of the Dalai Lama’s religion will make that choice. I hope that will be the case and that China does not influence it in any way. We wait to see what happens.

    Hong Kong wants to be a peaceful and prosperous city, a thriving economic and social hub in Asia, and truly global in its influence, but it has been brought to its knees in just three years since the introduction of the national security law.

    Sir Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford Green) (Con)

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. I am grateful—

    Sir Edward Leigh (in the Chair)

    Order. I should say to the right hon. Gentleman that, as a matter of courtesy, he should have been here at the beginning of this debate.

    Sir Iain Duncan Smith

    I understand. I was about to explain and apologise, Sir Edward, for not having got here earlier: a Minister waylaid me.

    On Hong Kong, the Americans have now sanctioned about 10 people in the Hong Kong Administration for their behaviour over the new security laws. The UK, which once used to be responsible for Hong Kong and is a signatory to the Sino-British agreement, has sanctioned absolutely nobody. Does the hon. Gentleman think that is a balanced position to take on Hong Kong?

    Jim Shannon

    It is certainly not balanced. The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. He has highlighted this point in the Chamber on numerous occasions. He consistently and regularly points directly out to the Government that this matter must be addressed. If we are going to do things right, and it is our job in this House to do so, that has to be addressed. If the United States can sanction more people than we could even consider—I understand the number is maybe two in our country—we have to and we must do more. I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on all he does; we recognise his contribution.

    The national security law is an arbitrary piece of legislation, the details of which were kept secret until after it was passed. It criminalises any act of disobedience or dissent, and any challenge to the Government can be swept up in the catch-all categories of secession, subversion, terrorism and, crucially, collusion with foreign or external forces. Rather than being used to protect people, the national security law is being used to silence—the very opposite. Newspaper and internet news outlets have been shut, journalists arrested and protesters detained—all accused of one or more of the four national security law charges.

    The most infamous case of the law being used to crush media freedom in Hong Kong as that of Apple Daily, the most popular newspaper in Hong Kong, which is pro-democracy and openly called out Chinese Communist party activities. It was founded by a British citizen, Jimmy Lai, whose spent his 800th day in a Hong Kong prison last Friday 10 March. His national security law trial is repeatedly delayed, as the Hong Kong authorities scramble to find a new set of legal machinations just to keep him in prison. He is a British citizen. We should be doing more for him. I do not see that, and it disappoints me.

    China has broken its promises to Britain and to the people of Hong Kong that the city would enjoy its way of life under the one country, two systems formula, which promised a high degree of autonomy for 50 years following the 1997 handover. Hong Kong is now a puppet state of China. The recent multimillion dollar campaign, “Hello Hong Kong”, called on the world to come to the reopened city. It fell flat, given that 47 democracy campaigners were put on trial the very next day. Welcome to Hong Kong—“If you come to Hong Kong, here is what happens to you.”

    Across the world, China seems to be at the centre of multiple political and economic scandals, whether that is spy balloons over America or interference in Canada’s election. There seems to be an increasing sense that China has never been bolder in asserting itself around the world. The belt and road initiative, adopted by the Chinese Government in 2013, to invest in more than 150 countries and international organisations, is considered a centrepiece of Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s foreign policy.

    We can see China’s tentacles across Africa and in countries around the world. The policy has been used to extend Chinese economic and political influence around the world. It has been used to secure votes at multinational organisations such as the United Nations, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, and in many regional groupings across the world. It forces countries into debt economics. Even EU states now have ports, docks and infrastructure projects funded by the belt and road initiative, at a time when the EU should be shoring up its own defence, cyber and technological strategies. The initiative is causing splits inside the EU and creating division among Governments. That is great news for China and for other authoritarian states.

    Here in the UK, we have seen the rise of China’s economic and political engagement. In 2022, more students came to the UK from China than anywhere else. Nearly one in four international students is from China—approximately 152,000 students. Of the 2,600 international students studying at Queen’s University in Belfast, we have a vibrant Chinese community of more than 1,200 students.

    Along with that, we have seen the explosion of Confucius Institutes across the UK. The United Kingdom is host to 30 Confucius Institutes, more than any other country. Their ostensible purpose is to teach Mandarin and to promote Chinese culture, but in reality they are part of the above-ground arm of the Chinese Communist party’s United Front Work Department.

    According to a 2022 report by the Henry Jackson Society and the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation, those 30 institutes have been funded to the tune of as much as £46 million, mostly from the Chinese Government. Unlike the British Council, Confucius Institutes are formally part of the propaganda system of the Chinese Communist party, dependent on Chinese Government funding and, in general, subject to People’s Republic of China speech restrictions. Although Confucius Institutes are described as language and culture centres, the report confirms that only four of the 30 institutes stick solely to language and culture. Quite clearly, they do their own thing and ignore much of what is going on.

    Operating from prestigious universities such as the University of Edinburgh and the London School of Economics, Confucius Institutes have been informing Government policy and politicians, offering consultancy services to business, promoting trade and co-operating with UK organisations that work with the United Front Work Department, the interference activities of which were recently highlighted by MI5 and reported prominently in the papers and media. That is not innocent language and cultural exchange.

    In spite of the political attention paid to Confucius Institutes, and the press and academic attention during the last six years, the pattern has gone unnoticed, and its ramifications have been ignored—an issue that the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green brings to this House on many occasions. To combat those negative practices, the Government should consider the introduction of legislation to remove Confucius Institutes completely from UK universities. Will the Minister confirm whether the British Government will do just that? Further, it has been suggested that the Government should provide funding for UK universities to allocate to China studies and bolster knowledge regarding China’s presence in the UK. I believe that that merits consideration. It is not the direct responsibility of the Minister, but it is certainly one for Education Ministers.

    Time is passing, but I should mention the fact that many believe that there is a notable level of political interference—from funding from Chinese nationals to Members of Parliament, to the beating of Bob Chan in Manchester last October. I am sure we all vividly remember this man, who was beaten by the Chinese consul general and other diplomats in full view of the public and cameras. The consul general then went on TV to admit to and justify his actions; he did not even feel ashamed or regretful. The appropriate action should have been taken, yet it appears that it was left to fade into the background. Eventually, two months later, China recalled the diplomats, and it appears that no steps whatever were taken by the British to send the message that that behaviour is not tolerated. Again, that is disappointing and regrettable. I always say things respectfully to the Ministers, but I want my Government and my Ministers to be strong when it comes to standing up for human rights and against things that are wrong across the world.

    As a nation, we should be seeking constructive relationships with countries around the world. I understand that not all will be savoury, but we should be making human rights and good conduct cornerstones of our foreign relations—even, or especially, as the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland said, when it comes to trade and development. That is what sets our country apart from authoritarian ones such as China. There is no reason for the UK not to have a constructive relationship with China, but we should not be afraid on any occasion to say no and to show strength, and we need to do that more regularly and more courageously.

    Mr Carmichael

    The hon. Gentleman has given a comprehensive tour de raison of the issues. Considering it as a whole—I get a sense that he is coming to his peroration—does he think it reasonable or sensible that the integrated review refresh that we heard about on Monday now does not classify China as a threat?

    Jim Shannon

    That was a disappointment. The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. It is clear from my contribution, and will be clear from what others will say, that we do see China as a threat. We want to have a working relationship, but we have to recognise that China quite clearly does not.

    Surely, if any lessons are to be learned from the relationship with Russia over the last 10 years, for example, it is that kowtowing, appeasing or ignoring will lead to only more egregious actions by the aggressor state—from Russia in the past, but from China in the future. China has been watching the war that Russia has inflicted on Ukraine, and it will have noted that while Russian troops are killing, raping and bombing Ukrainian citizens, Western states in some cases have been prevaricating and debating what to do in response. China is watching, and so is Taiwan. Sending weapons is good, but it could all have been avoided if the warning signs about Russia were heeded several years ago.

    Margaret Ferrier

    Following the announcement that Honduras is seeking diplomatic ties with China, Taiwan has just a few remaining formal allies on the global stage, most of which are small, poor nations in the Pacific. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the UK must use its influence on the world stage to help protect Taiwan’s rights as an independent nation?

    Jim Shannon

    I certainly do and I very much welcome the Prime Minister’s announcement this week of the submarine deal between the UK, USA and Australia. That shows that there is a commitment, although of course we probably want to see much more than that. The hon. Lady is absolutely right and I thank her for that intervention.

    If we think that things are bad now, imagine the pain that will be inflicted on the UK and the world when—I use these words carefully—China invades Taiwan. Hon. Members will note that I said “when” rather than “if” China moves to take Taiwan. Xi Jinping has reaffirmed his commitment to communist Chinese rule of Taiwan, by force—his words—if necessary.

    We cannot fall asleep at the wheel while getting lulled to sleep by the comfort of investments, trade, and cash flows. We should begin the careful process of reducing our reliance on Chinese-made goods and products right now. Let us start taking a careful look at where British businesses invest and give them warnings that contracts and treaties may not be upheld, and to be careful about where they invest their money.

    Let us start speaking up for those who are being oppressed in Xinjiang, Hong Kong and Tibet. Let us get British citizen Jimmy Lai out of prison and let us not ponder solely on how China might react, but instead give China pause for thought about what it might lose by not working with the United Kingdom.

    I believe in good relations; I also believe in doing what is right, as we all do in this Chamber. I know that there is a balance to be struck.

    Sir Iain Duncan Smith

    I apologise to the hon. Gentleman for intervening on him again. However, I just want to make the point that I have met Jimmy Lai’s family, and the one thing they asked for is that the British Government give full public recognition to the fact that he is a British citizen and a British passport holder. The British Government have said that they will not do that because it might exacerbate problems, but honestly Jimmy Lai knows and expects that after the next court case this year he is likely to be imprisoned for a very long time—maybe for the rest of his life. He wants the world to know that he is a British passport holder and British citizen; he is proud of that and wants representation.

    Jim Shannon

    Again, the right hon. Gentleman makes the case for Jimmy Lai. I think the Minister—I am sure that he is taking note of all this—and his officials will ensure that Jimmy Lai becomes part of our priorities in this House now and for the future, as should be the case.

    As the Bible says—Sir Edward, I know that you and I read it every day—

    “speak the truth in love”.

    I do not see the balance thus far. I ask the Minister to look at where we are, and where we need to be, and to begin the journey there. Human rights and moral obligations are not merely desirable; they are the very foundation on which any relationship should be built. We have a chance to change this situation—to move it upwards—and get it right. That is what I urge the Minister to begin to do today.

    We are all here for one purpose: to speak up for those who have no voice—and there are many of them. Right hon. and hon. Members have spoken up for others across the world on many occasions. Today we focus on the evil intentions of China. Yes, we want to work with China, if possible, and address human rights and religious liberties, and the right for people to have freedom of expression in relation to where they worship. Those things are not happening there. We must highlight that today, and ensure that our Minister has a firm grip of what is happening. I hope that the Minister will respond to our asks.

  • Andrew Jones – 2023 Parliamentary Question on National Resilience

    Andrew Jones – 2023 Parliamentary Question on National Resilience

    The parliamentary question asked by Andrew Jones, the Conservative MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

    Andrew Jones (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (Con)

    16. What progress his Department has made on strengthening national resilience. (904122)

    The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Secretary of State (Oliver Dowden)

    Strengthening our national resilience is one of my personal priorities, and my Department continues to lead on this crucial work across Government. We identified seven immediate priorities through the resilience framework; of those, we have already published four. We will soon publish an updated national risk register. Since I last addressed the House, I have also chaired a dedicated resilience Sub-Committee of the National Security Council.

    Andrew Jones

    Our preparedness for national emergencies relies on our local resilience, too. In North Yorkshire, we have a high-functioning local resilience forum. Is my right hon. Friend ensuring that these local forums are all operating at the standards needed, and are integrated into our national resilience plans?

    Oliver Dowden

    My hon. Friend makes an important point. We work closely with all resilience forums, which are essential to our whole-of-society resilience approach to any emergency response. There are well-established processes for Government to liaise with local resilience forums to enable national and local integration. In addition, the 2022 resilience framework commits to strengthening local resilience forums, including through clearer accountability and assurance.

    Mr Speaker

    I call the shadow Minister.

    Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab)

    We all know how distressing it was for the relatives of people who died from covid to read the former Health Secretary’s leaked WhatsApp messages. There were some dreadful revelations about life and death decisions that were made, and about how they were made. The outcomes of the covid inquiry will be vital for learning lessons to strengthen national resilience—there could be another covid tomorrow. Will the Secretary of State confirm that all evidence from Ministers and former Ministers held on official channels, private emails and WhatsApps has been provided to the independent covid inquiry so that no more delays are caused by the Government?

    Oliver Dowden

    I can give the hon. Lady that assurance. There has been total and full transparency from Government, as we are required to do under the terms of the Act and the relevant legislation.

  • Tom Pursglove – 2023 Statement on Personal Independence Payments

    Tom Pursglove – 2023 Statement on Personal Independence Payments

    The statement made by Tom Pursglove, the Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

    Today, the department will publish the latest statistics on making backdated payments to personal independence payment claimants who are affected by the KT and SH decision of the upper tribunal. The release will be published at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/list-of-upcoming-releases-of-management-information-and-ad-hoc-analyses.

    The KT and SH UT decision, handed down on 21 August 2020, concerned how we decide whether hearing impaired or deaf people need an aid, appliance, or supervision, to wash or bathe safely under the PIP assessment.

    The department revised the guidance used for the PIP assessment process, for all new decisions, on 17 May 2021. We started the administrative exercise to check eligible claims back to the date of the UT decision on 4 April 2022.

    Since April 2022, we have reviewed around 4,000 cases against the KT and SH decision. This includes cases where claimants have previously been assessed as needing an aid or appliance to hear. All reviews have been carried out by a case manager within the department.

    Around 4,000 arrears payments, totalling around £11 million, have been made. No one should have seen their PIP reduced because of this exercise.

    Although we have completed the exercise, claimants can still ask the Department for Work and Pensions to conduct a review of their case, if they think they are affected.

    Our approach demonstrates that we have prioritised claimants who are most likely to benefit, to make backdated payments as quickly as possible.

  • Lee Rowley – 2023 Statement on Local Authority Interventions

    Lee Rowley – 2023 Statement on Local Authority Interventions

    The statement made by Lee Rowley, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

    Local councils play an essential role every day. They deliver core services, including to the most vulnerable citizens, they help shape our communities, and support local democracy. Where councils do not meet the high standards that we set for local Government, it is right that Government intervene in order to protect the interests of residents.

    Today I am updating the House on the intervention arrangements at three councils of concern to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. These are Thurrock Council, the London Borough of Croydon, and Slough Borough Council.

    Thurrock Council

    On 24 January 2023, I informed the House that the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing, and Communities and I were minded to expand the ongoing intervention in Thurrock Council. Over recent months, the new leadership at Thurrock Council have worked co-operatively and collaboratively with the commissioner, Essex County Council, to start the long journey back. In addition, our proposals were to appoint an independent managing director commissioner to work alongside Thurrock’s existing commissioner, Essex County Council, to provide commissioners with further powers over governance and staffing, and to direct Thurrock Council to take additional actions to support its improvement.

    I made this announcement after receiving two reports from Essex County Council in December last year, the commissioner’s first report, and an update letter on the best value inspection. Both documents laid bare the scale and complexity of the financial challenges facing Thurrock Council and noted significant concerns regarding a lack of robust governance and leadership capacity at the council.

    I invited representations on our proposal from Thurrock Council, and from members of the public, which I have now received and considered.

    Since that announcement, the Secretary of State and I have also received a best value inspection report on Thurrock Council from Essex County Council in its role as best value inspector, which I will publish in due course following a further representations process whereby any particular individuals criticised are given an opportunity to read and respond to those relevant parts of the report before it is published.

    Having carefully considered the best value inspection report, and the representations I have received about the intervention, I am satisfied that Thurrock Council is continuing to fail to comply with its best value duty. I am today announcing a formal expansion to the intervention in Thurrock Council to implement the changes we proposed on 24 January 2023.

    To begin, we will appoint Dr Dave Smith to be a managing director commissioner. He is a highly experienced former local authority chief executive who has held senior executive positions within local government for the past fifteen years, including chief executive of South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority and chief executive of Sunderland City Council. He will work closely with the existing commissioner, Essex County Council, to support Thurrock Council in its improvement journey. He will be responsible for the day-to-day operations of the council and will provide strategic direction and leadership, until such time as a permanent appointment to the post of chief executive can be made. As I noted in my January announcement, I intend for this appointment to strengthen the intervention model and to increase the council’s capacity to deliver vital improvements.

    The Secretary of State will also use his powers under the Local Government Act 1999 to update and expand his directions to Thurrock Council and its commissioners.

    In addition to the finance powers they already hold, the new directions will permit the commissioners to exercise further powers over:

    All functions associated with the governance, scrutiny and transparency of strategic decision making by the authority to ensure compliance with the best value duty. This will include oversight of an audit of the council’s governance.

    All functions associated with the council’s operating model and redesign of council services to achieve value for money and financial sustainability.

    The appointment, suspension and dismissal of statutory officers, including powers to determine the process for making these appointments and dismissals, and to define a new officer structure for senior positions at the council.

    The development, oversight and operation of an effective performance management framework for senior positions.

    The new directions will also instruct the council to take specific actions to support its improvement. These will incorporate the existing instructions to the council issued back in September, but they will go further, and instruct Thurrock Council to undertake the following new actions to the satisfaction of commissioners:

    To prepare, produce and implement an enhanced improvement and recovery plan, which builds on their existing improvement plan. This will include new elements to cover:

    An action plan to reconfigure the authority’s services commensurate with the authority’s available financial resources.

    A plan to ensure that the Authority has personnel with sufficient skills, capabilities and capacity to deliver the improvement and recovery plan, within a robust officer structure.

    An action plan to strengthen the authority’s governance function, to secure improvements in transparency and formal decision making. This should include measures to improve the authority’s scrutiny function, including the taking and recording of formal decisions.

    Arrangements to secure the proper resourcing and functioning of the system of internal controls, including risk management and internal audit.

    To undertake any action that commissioners may reasonably require to avoid, so far as practicable, incidents of poor governance that would, in the commissioners’ reasonable opinion, give rise to the risk of the authority failing to comply with its best value duty.

    To take steps to ensure that the role of accountable body to the Thames Freeport is exercised to the satisfaction of the commissioners. This should also be reflected in the improvement and recovery plan.

    As part of this next phase of intervention, Essex County Council will continue to act as a commissioner and I look forward to its report in June. As part of the January announcement, I indicated my intent to formalise the role of the leader of Essex County Council in this intervention. I can confirm that I will today issue an updated explanatory memorandum, to accompany the new directions.

    I am hopeful that the expansion to the intervention that I am announcing today will help the council to address the concerns set out in the commissioner’s first report and the best value inspection update letter, and to continue its work to improve the way in which the council is run. There will be an opportunity for further reflection on Thurrock Council when I publish the best value inspection report.

    The London Borough of Croydon

    Regarding the London Borough of Croydon, the council has been subject to two public interest reports by external auditors relating to poor financial decision making and associated governance failings (October 2020) and failures in financial control and poor governance arrangements relating to the refurbishment of Fairfield Halls (January 2022). Croydon has issued three section 114 notices since 2020, the latest being in November 2022 following the conclusion that it cannot balance its budget in 2023-24 and beyond.

    The former Secretary of State appointed an independent improvement and assurance panel in February 2021, chaired by Tony McArdle OBE and made up of independent experts, to offer the council advice, expertise and challenge as it sought to address failings related to poor financial control and governance. The panel has provided regular assurance reports to the Secretary of State on the council’s progress throughout this time, with their latest report being submitted in November 2022.

    Whilst the council has struggled to resolve serious governance and financial issues for several years, I want to place on record that the Secretary of State and I recognise the positive steps taken by the council, with oversight from the improvement and assurance panel, to lay the foundations for its recovery and ensure that legacy issues are being addressed. In May 2022, Croydon changed its model of governance with the election of a Mayor, Jason Perry, and a new council. The Secretary of State acknowledges the panel’s assessment in their latest report that the Mayor has been working constructively with them and is prepared to “take firm decisions” to return the council to a sustainable financial footing. The panel have also commented that within the council there is

    “much evidence of managers and staff grasping the scale of the problem and doing their best to fix it.”

    Historic issues have continued to be unearthed at Croydon and their potential impact on the council and the progress it has made to date must not be underestimated, particularly given its precarious financial position. Croydon is currently unable to achieve financial sustainability on its own accord and has requested an unprecedented level of support from Government as a result of these historic issues.

    On balance, the Secretary of State agrees with the panel’s latest assessment, that the acknowledged and welcome work of the new leadership has made good progress, however he has concluded, including as a result of the historic problems and the extent of improvement necessary, that the council is not meeting its best value duty.

    The Secretary of State is minded to implement the intervention package set out below and in line with procedures laid down in the Local Government Act 1999 to assist the existing extensive effort to go even quicker. Officials in the Department have, as a result, written to the council seeking representations on the proposed intervention package.

    The proposed package is centred on the council continuing to make the necessary improvements to the satisfaction of the improvement and assurance panel. The panel will be backed by directions issued to the council requiring it to follow the instructions of the panel if they are not satisfied with the progress being made. The panel will report to the Secretary of State every six months.

    It is important that the council leads its recovery but that it does not lose momentum in making the necessary improvements. As part of the representations period, Ministers will reflect on membership of the panel to ensure the arrangements are fit for purpose to support the council moving forward.

    We are inviting representations from the council on the Secretary of State’s proposals by 30 March. We want to provide the opportunity for members and officers of the council, and any other interested parties, especially the residents of Croydon, to make their views on the Secretary of State’s proposals known. Should the Secretary of State decide to intervene along the lines described here, he will make the necessary statutory directions under the 1999 Act. I will update the House in due course.

    Slough Borough Council

    I would also like to take this opportunity to provide an update on the intervention at Slough Borough Council. On 22 December 2022 I received a copy of the commissioners’ second report on the progress of the intervention. The report has made for stark reading. Commissioners describe there being

    “a real sense that many in leadership roles do not see leading and modelling corporate improvement as their overriding responsibility but only as something they have to do”

    This is wholly unacceptable. The well-publicised failures of Slough have stemmed from a poor culture of checks and balances, as well as inadequate leadership. The council and its leadership must accept this and embrace the need to change. The results of these past failures have devastated the council and made its financial position unsustainable. Within their report commissioners have gone so far as to query the viability of Slough as a unitary authority. For Slough to remain in its current form there will need to be a fundamental shift in the attitude and behaviour of the council and its leadership. The role of commissioners will be of paramount importance and their focus in the coming months will be on a new operating model for the authority.

    Our intervention now needs to move from its discovery phase to one of requiring the council to do the hard work of transformation. The council must step up. Equally, we will put in place a commissioner team who will move the council through the next stage of this journey. Max Caller CBE, lead commissioner for the intervention, wrote to the Secretary of State on 1 March to tender his resignation and stated his intention to retire from public life. The Secretary of State has accepted Mr Caller’s decision and I would like to thank him not only for the work he has undertaken as part of the intervention, but also for his many contributions to the local government sector. In addition, Margaret Lee, finance commissioner, also wrote to the Secretary of State on 12 March to tender her resignation for personal reasons. The Secretary of State has accepted Ms Lee’s resignation with immediate effect and I would like to thank her for her excellent work in Slough and Croydon and wish her well for the future. We will make an announcement on the revised commissioner team in due course and we will make appointments with the experience and skill set to ensure the council progresses, alongside the enhanced senior officer team now in place at the council.

    The intervention at Slough remains challenging. I strongly urge the leadership in Slough to consider the findings of commissioners’ report and reflect on what more they could be doing not only to meet the requirements of the statutory directions, but to drive forward necessary changes. Things must change.

    Conclusion

    I want to acknowledge the work of the dedicated staff who deliver the business-as-usual services of the councils included in today’s announcement, many of whom have strived to deliver those services over recent years despite the financial, leadership and governance challenges faced by their respective authorities. They will play a vital role in each council’s recovery. I have deposited in the House library copies of those reports I have referred to that are also being published on gov.uk today.

    We are also today publishing on gov.uk the second report from the Sandwell commissioners, which the House may wish to note. The commissioners report that they have seen some progress at the council in the past six months, though there is still a lot of significant work to be done, with a particular focus on the customer journey and culture. Last week I also published the third report from the Liverpool commissioners. The report is cautiously optimistic about the council’s progress. It is clear, however, that the council faces significant change in the months ahead with a transition in officer and political leadership plus the implementation of a significant transformation programme. The continuation of the intervention in Liverpool will be vital to support the council through this period of change.

  • Michael Gove – 2023 Levelling Up Update

    Michael Gove – 2023 Levelling Up Update

    The statement made by Michael Gove, the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

    Levelling up the United Kingdom is at the heart of our ambition as a Government. The Chancellor has announced a package of measures in his Budget which put power and money in the hands of our cities, towns, counties, and rural and coastal areas. Through this package, we continue to deliver the ambitions we set out in our levelling up White Paper, further supporting places across the country to reap the benefits of our economic success and strengthen their local economies and communities.

    Devolution and local economic growth institutions in England

    We have concluded our negotiations with the Mayors of Greater Manchester and the West Midlands on our “trailblazer” deeper devolution deals, subject to ratification. These deals mark a new chapter for English devolution and further progress in delivering our 2030 levelling up mission on local leadership. They transfer more control and influence over the levers of economic growth and levelling up to local, empowered, and more accountable leaders in England’s second city regions.

    We have agreed a trailblazing package, including a single departmental-style settlement, unprecedented 10-year retention of business rates, devolution of post-19 skills funding and functions, and control of the affordable homes programme outside London for the first time ever. This will enable the mayors and local authority leaders to grow the economies of Greater Manchester and the West Midlands and drive levelling up, for the benefit of local residents and businesses.

    These deals will act as a blueprint for deepening devolution elsewhere in England. We will begin talks with other MCAs on deeper devolution this year. The Government will set out more on plans for those talks soon.

    We are continuing to work with places to implement the new devolution deals signed in 2022, and to invite new areas to come forward with proposals, as we progress towards our levelling up mission for every area of England that wants one to have a deal by 2030.

    Through this work, we will empower places to take control of their own destinies. But with power must come accountability. We have published an English devolution accountability framework, which sets out clear and robust arrangements to ensure that decision-makers in areas with devolution deals are accountable to their residents and deliver value for money.

    Local enterprise partnerships (LEPs)

    The Government are committed to empowering local leadership at every opportunity. To this end, the Government intend for the functions of LEPs to be delivered by democratically elected local leaders, where appropriate in future. Therefore, the Government are minded to withdraw central Government support for LEPs from April 2024. The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities and the Department for Business and Trade will now consult on these proposals, before confirming a decision. The Government will publish an updated policy position to confirm next steps by summer 2023.

    Investment zones

    The autumn statement set out the Government’s ambition to embed innovation throughout the economy and support the growth of priority sectors. Investment zones will harness existing local strengths and leverage places’ innovation potential to drive productivity and support levelling up across the UK.

    Government have announced plans to enter discussions with places to host 12 high growth investment zones across the UK, each backed by £80 million over five years including generous tax incentives, bringing opportunity into areas which have traditionally underperformed economically. Investment zones will be clustered around research institutions such as universities and will be focused on driving growth the UK’s key sectors: digital and technology, creative industries, life sciences, advanced manufacturing and green industries.

    Eight places in England have been shortlisted to host investment zones, with the intention to agree plans with local partners by the end of the year. The eight places are those covered by: the proposed East Midlands Mayoral Combined Authority; Greater Manchester Mayoral Combined Authority; Liverpool City Region Mayoral Combined Authority; the proposed North East Mayoral Combined Authority; South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority; Tees Valley Mayoral Combined Authority; West Midlands Mayoral Combined Authority, and West Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority. An explanation of the methodology used to identify these places has been published on gov.uk.

    The Government are also working closely with the devolved Administrations to establish how investment zones in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland will be delivered, which will account for the four final locations.

    Levelling up partnerships (LUPs)

    Levelling up partnerships will bring the collective power of Government to provide bespoke place-based regeneration in a further twenty of England’s areas most in need of levelling up over 2023-24 and 2024-25.

    The following places will be invited to form levelling up partnerships over 2023-24 and 2024-25: City of Kingston upon Hull, Sandwell, Mansfield, Middlesbrough, Blackburn with Darwen, Hastings, Torbay, Tendring, Stoke-on-Trent, Boston, Redcar and Cleveland, Wakefield, Oldham, Rother, Torridge, Walsall, Doncaster, South Tyneside, Rochdale, and Bassetlaw. Our starting assumption is that we will work with the largest urban area within these local authorities, unless there is a strong rationale for choosing somewhere else.

    These places have been selected based on the analysis in the levelling up White Paper which considered places in England against four key metrics: the percentage of adults with Level 3+ qualifications; gross value added (GVA) per hour worked; median gross weekly pay; and healthy life expectancy. Geographic spread has been considered to make sure regions across England benefit from the programme. The methodology used to identify the 20 places has been published on gov.uk. We also want to explore delivering this programme in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and will consult with the devolved Administrations.

    Mayoral capital investment

    To give mayors the resources they need to level up their areas, the Government have also provided a further £161 million for high-value capital regeneration projects in city regions across England, including business premises and food science facilities in Tees Valley, and unlocking investment in a research campus in the Liverpool city region. The funding will support delivery of 32 projects, and a list of these has been published.

    Capital levelling up bids

    Following the second round of the levelling up fund (LUF), in which the full £2.1 billion LUF was awarded, the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities is using unallocated departmental budgets to fund, subject to subsidy checks, three further bids which narrowly missed out. These are in Sefton, Rossendale and Stockport local authorities, and are worth just under £58 million in total. Further detail on this is outlined in the accounting officer assessment for capital levelling up bids.

    Capital regeneration projects

    Since the conclusion of the levelling up fund round two, the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities has identified further funding to support regeneration and town centre bids that were made into the fund. The Government are announcing grants for 16 projects that can start to spend and deliver quickly across England, worth a combined £211 million. These projects, subject to subsidy checks, are located in the following local authorities: Blackburn with Darwen, Blackpool, East Suffolk, Kirklees, London Borough of Waltham Forest, North East Lincolnshire, Northumberland, Redcar and Cleveland, Rotherham, Salford, Sandwell, Tameside, Telford and Wrekin, Tendring, Wigan and Wolverhampton. Further detail on the selection process is outlined in the accounting officer assessment for regeneration projects.

    Community ownership fund

    To empower local people to save community assets that matter most to them, the Government have announced 30 more projects across the UK that will benefit from the community ownership fund. These projects will receive a total of £7.73 million in funding, bringing the total number of assets to 98 and our overall investment to £23.9 million for neighbourhoods right across the United Kingdom. The list of successful projects has been published on gov.uk.

    Other measures

    To support local authorities to continue to deliver their existing development plans and bring forward new council housing supply, HM Treasury will be offering a new preferential public works loan board borrowing rate for council housing activity through the housing revenue account from June 2023.

    To stimulate new housing supply and unlock development that would otherwise be stalled due to high levels of nutrient pollution, we will announce a call for evidence (CfE) from affected local authorities on nutrient neutrality credit scheme opportunities. Where high quality nutrient-credit schemes are presented, this Budget will provide investment to accelerate their delivery and unlock housing supply.

    All relevant documents are available as links from www.gov.uk/government/news/levelling-up-at-heart-of-budget.

  • Sarah Olney – 2023 Speech to Liberal Democrat Spring Conference

    Sarah Olney – 2023 Speech to Liberal Democrat Spring Conference

    The speech made by Sarah Olney to the Liberal Democrat Spring Conference on 18 March 2023.

    Interest rates, inflation, commodity prices, wage rates and fuel costs are part of our everyday conversation now in a way that they haven’t been since the 70s.

    We even all became experts on bond yields for a week last autumn, and tracking the exchange rate against the dollar was briefly a national pastime.

    Liz Truss’s lasting and only gift to the nation is that we all now know what a liability driven investment is.

    But I’m afraid that this elevated interest in the economy means that people are worried.

    They are worried about paying the bills, about the cost and availability of food in the shops, and about the value of their income against the rising cost of living.

    And how could they not be worried?

    In the last 12 months, inflation has reached levels I’ve not seen in my lifetime, interest rates have gone up to 4%, having been below 1% for nearly 15 years, and, even with the Energy Price Guarantee, energy bills have doubled.

    Not only has this Government failed to get a grip of the cost-of-living crisis. They’re hitting hard working families with unfair tax rises. Whilst at the same time leaving our schools and hospitals stretched to breaking point.

    Friends, we come together again after an unprecedented period of national turbulence.

    Brexit, the pandemic and Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine have all tested our national resources in different ways.

    It is time to reflect on the lessons we have learned about the strengths and weaknesses of our national economy so that we can set the right path for the future.

    There is one measure in which the UK tops the European rankings under the Conservatives.

    And that is income inequality.

    Under their policies, there are greater disparities in income between the richest and poorest in the UK than almost anywhere else in Europe. And the lowest income households in the UK are more than 20 per cent poorer than their counterparts in France and Germany.

    This is the true cost of the cost-of-living crisis under the Conservatives.

    The Liberal Democrats are the party of equality, opportunity and inclusion. We understand that if we want to improve Britain’s prospects, we have to start with those on the lowest incomes.

    If there is one thing that all parts of the political spectrum can agree on, it is that the UK needs to grow its economy.

    Under the Conservatives, so much of the UK’s potential is going untapped: anaemic growth; weaker investment; falling living standards. Britain deserves so much better.

    Economic growth will not just deliver prosperity for individuals. It will also raise the funds we need to invest in our public services.

    But, to be effective and sustainable, growth must also combat inequality.

    We need to bring into our economy the people who have been excluded by this Government. And we must remove the barriers preventing them from succeeding.

    And I see so much ambition and opportunity all across the UK.

    All that is lacking is the right political leadership to harness it.

    Under the Conservatives, our economy is being held back by a lack of people and skills.

    I cannot think of a sector, or business group, or public service that I have spoken to in the last eighteen months that hasn’t told me about its difficulties in attracting workers:

    The NHS; schools; the police force; hospitality; manufacturing; engineering; HGV drivers; construction; IT.

    Under this Government, there is no sector in our economy that has access to the skills it needs.

    One of the key drivers of workforce shortages is ill health.

    Because of this Government’s neglect, our NHS and social care are stretched to breaking point: more than seven million people are waiting for treatment. And thousands can’t get discharged from hospital when they’re ready, because there’s no one there to look after them.

    There are 165,000 vacancies in our social care sector.

    Fill these vacancies, and you could ease pressure on our NHS; cut discharge times; and let people return to their work quicker.

    The Conservatives simply don’t get that to fix the workforce, you need to fix social care first.

    But Liberal Democrats do.

    So we are calling on the Government to put in place a minimum wage for carers, giving them a pay boost of £2 an hour.

    This wouldn’t just be a recognition of their vital work. It would go a huge way towards attracting new workers to the sector, helping our NHS and our economy.

    A fair and pragmatic plan that the Government could comfortably afford if they reversed their massive tax cuts for big banks.

    But there’s another challenge, and that’s giving people the skills they need to succeed. And here too, we are being failed by this Government.

    We need a better offer for school leavers, to ensure that they can access the education that will unlock their potential; and the skills our economy needs for the future.

    We all know that apprenticeships have a huge role to play in this. And yes, we need more of them. But let’s also make them more attractive .

    Consider the options open to an 18-year old school leaver right now.

    They could choose to take up a typical high street job – say in retail or hospitality.

    It might not be the job of their dreams, but it’s a foot on the job ladder, and pays enough to make ends meet.

    But if they were to take up an apprenticeship, and perhaps pursue their true interests – in engineering, IT, or business – they’d be in for a nasty surprise: an “apprentice’s wage” of just £4.81 an hour. That’s nearly half the National Living Wage. Shockingly low, and nowhere near enough to get through the month.

    Not only is this a huge injustice – especially for young people. It’s exactly the wrong incentive if we’re looking to build the workforce of the future.

    So if the Government truly cares about skills, I’ve got an idea for them: end this unfair tax on young people’s ambition, and scrap the insultingly low “apprentice’s wage.”

    Give everyone equal access to the minimum wage. This would be a pay rise of up to 98%, opening a pathway to better paid jobs in the future.

    And employers need more help with apprenticeships too.

    The system put in place by the Conservatives in 2017 has led to a precipitous fall in apprenticeship starts. And around half a billion set aside for on-the-job training, through the so-called “apprenticeship levy”, goes unspent each year.

    This is a shocking waste of money, especially in the face of a skills crisis.

    By coincidence, the Association of Colleges estimate that the Further Education sector needs a funding boost of half a billion if it is to keep pace with the demands of the economy for additional skills.

    So why doesn’t the Government funnel these much-needed funds to our colleges and train more young people in the skills we need? And reform the Apprenticeship Levy into a broader, more flexible skills and training levy?

    Alongside measures to boost our workforce, we need to boost private sector investment into our businesses.

    The Conservatives’ policy on this has failed badly. Their constant flip-flopping on tax and investment rules, and their badly targeted incentives have not achieved the growth they promised us.

    What they should be doing instead is introduce the kinds of incentives that have been proven to boost productivity. Like tax breaks for training, to ensure that employees can continue to develop their skills, both for their own benefit and for the benefit of their employers.

    Or allowances for digital investment, to enable businesses to invest quickly and early in the newest digital tools to make productivity gains.

    And most importantly: encouraging proper; ambitious; bold investment in energy efficiency.

    Whether that’s for switching a fleet to electric cars, or installing solar panels, reducing demand for energy is not only essential to decarbonising our industrial sector, but also for bringing down production costs.

    The Conservatives should restore the research and development tax breaks they cut, to enable businesses to fully explore the opportunities opening up in Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, and to ensure that the UK can continue to be a powerhouse of technical innovation.

    If we wish to release the inherent potential of our economy, we need to develop our markets and meet the challenges of the future.

    A significant contributor to the country’s poor economic performance under the Conservatives is our reduced levels of trade with our European partners.

    This was of course a well-anticipated outcome of the Government’s policy of leaving the European Union.

    Erecting trade barriers with our nearest neighbours has not been matched by an increase in trade with the rest of the world. This is despite the Conservative’s promises of a multitude of lucrative trade agreements awaiting our departure from the EU.

    The Centre for European Reform estimates that, thanks to the Conservatives’ actions, the UK economy is already 5.5% poorer than it could have been.

    It’s not just the trade barriers they erected two years ago. The UK has also seen a dramatic decline in investment since 2016.

    The biggest driver of this trend is the chaos and instability wrought by the Conservatives.

    Their ideological obsession with erecting barriers to trade with our neighbours and friends;

    Supporting the most reckless Prime Minister in modern political history, who provoked division with our closest allies to support his personal ambitions.

    And continuing to threaten to unilaterally break international treaties.

    All of these have undermined investors’ confidence in the UK.

    And that confidence will not return as long as the Conservatives are in power.

    The recovery of the UK economy, for the benefit of all its citizens, depends upon the Conservatives losing the next General Election – a goal to which I know everyone in this room is 100% committed.

    There is another goal to which we are all committed, perhaps the only goal more urgent than ousting this terrible government.

    I refer of course to the achievement of Net Zero.

    Under the Conservatives, we’re not where we need to be.

    Action from the Government is lagging behind the progress we need to make.

    The private sector stands ready with the capital, skills and innovative capacity to decarbonise transport, energy and industry, but are lacking leadership and strategy from the government.

    We urgently need a bold plan for green investment.

    In new technologies, like tidal power, hydrogen and battery technology.

    In green skills for the future.

    And in long overdue projects, like the far-reaching home insulation scheme that our draughty houses are crying out for.

    Over the last eight years, Conservative mismanagement has badly hurt the UK economy.

    Britain deserves so much better than the lack of a plan, the lack of leadership, the lack of commitment to the country’s best interests that we see from the Conservatives.

    We need a Government that will rally together the public and private sector to get the most out of our people, our natural resources and all the other advantages that the UK has to offer.

    To deliver a future that’s fairer, greener and more prosperous for everyone, all across these islands.

  • Ed Davey – 2023 Speech to Liberal Democrat Spring Conference

    Ed Davey – 2023 Speech to Liberal Democrat Spring Conference

    The speech made by Ed Davey, the Leader of the Liberal Democrats, to the Liberal Democrat Spring Conference on 19 March 2023.

    I never knew my dad was a Liberal. He passed away when I was four – so we never got to talk politics.

    To be honest, I’d always assumed he was a Tory because mum told me he used to play snooker at the local Conservative club.

    So you can imagine what it meant to me when, years later, I came across this newspaper cutting my gran had kept – I guess from the late 1950s – about a garden party held by the Mansfield Divisional Liberal Association.

    With a fancy dress parade and music from something called the “Codas beat group”. The cutting quotes my dad, “Mr John Davey” – as Chair of the Mansfield Liberals – saying that, unlike the Government of the day, “Liberals were not ‘pig-headed and pie-eyed theorists’, but people dedicated to public service. “Their dedication to service was untouched by selfish motives, and that was the mark of the Liberal.” Well, Dad, I couldn’t have put it better myself!

    Conference, we’re all here today for the same reason that my Dad and his fellow Liberals were in that garden in Mansfield all those years ago: Because of our deep sense of public service. Because we love our country, we love our communities, and we want to serve them. And not a pig-headed pie-eyed theorist in sight!

    So, it seems I might have, unknowingly, inherited my liberalism from my dad. But I do know I learnt a lot from my mum.

    Having lost our dad to cancer, mum raised me and my two brothers on her own – even as she then became ill with cancer herself. When I was growing up, I didn’t realise how tough it must have been for mum. You don’t, do you? That’s the mark of a great parent.

    I always knew she was a brilliant mum. But looking back I can now see just what a remarkable woman she was. Mum taught me all about compassion. Resilience. Sacrifice.

    Loving, caring, and just keeping going. All the things that make us human. But she didn’t do it alone. Remarkable though she was, she couldn’t have done it alone.

    Mum needed support from the government. And support from our community. I remember walking our dog with her, to the local post office, to collect her widow’s pension, every fortnight.

    We weren’t especially hard up, but I’ve never forgotten how important those widow pension payments were for her. For us. As she adjusted to life as a single mum. Bringing up three young boys – all of us under ten, when dad died. And I’ll always remember some fabulous Indian curries that our neighbours – the Malhotras – used to bring round when mum was ill. And after she was gone. Just to make things that little bit easier for us.

    Conference, the incredible power of strong communities and a strong social safety net, must never be taken for granted. And the values I learnt from my mum – and my experiences looking after her during her long, painful illness – they’ve shaped my life and driven my politics. Probably far more than any liberal DNA I got from my dad.

    Compassion. Community. Fairness. Those are the values that make me a liberal. They’re why I’m a Liberal Democrat.

    Why I’ve always fought for social justice. For strong communities and for a more caring society. And they’re the values that make me so proud of our party. And when I meet people acting out those values every day across our United Kingdom, it also makes me so proud to be British.

    But Conference, those liberal, British values are also why I am so angry with this Conservative Government. Because they just don’t get it. I’m angry at the way these Conservatives have squandered the hard work and sacrifices of the British people.

    As families and pensioners, businesses and workers have all spent the last year battling soaring energy bills, rising food prices and the long shadow of the pandemic –

    The Conservatives have indulged in damaging party infighting and dangerous ideological experiments. Pig-headed and pie-eyed, my dad would have said! And I’m not just talking about Boris Johnson or Liz Truss or Rishi Sunak.

    I’m talking about every single Conservative MP: at every step of the way putting their own narrow self-interest above our national interest.

    The Conservatives: always so out-of-touch. Always taking people for granted. What a disgrace they are. Just at a time of crisis, when we did need “strong and stable” government, the Conservatives gave us chaos and division. When Britain needed integrity, they gave us Boris Johnson.

    When our country needed wise leadership, they gave us Liz Truss. When people needed change, they gave us more of the same with Rishi Sunak. When we needed a gallant crew on the bridge to steer our great British ship through choppy waters,

    We’ve instead had a bunch of mutinous pirates, only interested in who got to wear the captain’s hat. We needed Hornblower. They gave us Pugwash.

    Friends, this is going to sound revolutionary, but bear with me… When the country faces a cost-of-living crisis, I believe the role of government should be to help people and help businesses, properly. Not make it worse!

    But apparently these Conservative don’t see it that way.

    Their cost-of-living crisis has plunged a million more people into poverty – many of them children. Tens of thousands of families have been made homeless. Many more families are relying on foodbanks – including some of the hardest working people in our country. As last week’s Budget confirmed, people are seeing their living standards plummet at a faster rate than ever before. And the Conservatives’ answer? Appoint a new Deputy Chairman to tell people to stop whining. To tell them they can get by on 30p a meal.

    It’s not just that the Conservatives are out-of-touch – they are on another planet. Just look at the policy choices these Conservatives have made over the last year… while millions have struggled.

    Tax properly the record profits of the oil and gas giants, as Liberal Democrats were the first to argue – profits made on the back of Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine? It’s a “no” from Rishi Sunak. But take money out of the pockets of struggling families with unfair income tax rises? An enthusiastic “yes” from the Conservatives.

    Start to cut energy bills as gas prices fall, as we proposed, so families and pensioners don’t have to choose between heating and eating? No way, says Jeremy Hunt.

    But recklessly add hundreds of pounds to people’s monthly mortgage bills, pushing many to the brink of losing their homes? With pleasure, as they all gleefully cheered Liz Truss’s budget.

    The Conservatives aren’t serving the public – they are only serving themselves. Utterly devoid of the values that make our country so great. Compassion. Community. Fairness.

    These are touchstones for the British people. They are fundamental to us as Liberal Democrats. But they are alien to today’s Conservative Party. Conference, I don’t believe there is much that is guaranteed in British politics any longer.

    But there is one rule that I think is set in stone – And that’s how you know when a Government has reached the end of the road. Here it is. You can call it “Davey’s First Law of Politics” if you like.

    And it’s this: You know a Government has reached the end of the road when it chooses to pick a fight with Match of the Day.

    Honestly Conference. If they didn’t think it was all over before, they certainly do now.

    Incidentally, this newspaper cutting that quotes my dad also quotes a “Mrs J Maizel” who opened that garden party all those years ago – with a warning that, under the then Government, “the National Health Service will soon grind to a halt”.

    “Even if we have hospitals built,” she said, “without the changes that are needed, there will not be the nurses to staff them.”

    Conference, she could have been speaking to us today! But I don’t think even Mrs Maizel could have predicted the sheer depths of the crisis into which the Conservatives have plunged our NHS today. Patients in every part of the country, waiting hours for an ambulance…

    Weeks to see a GP… Months to start treatment for cancer. Seven million people on hospital waiting lists. And these are not just statistics – shocking though they are. Not just targets missed – appalling though that is.

    In far too many cases, these delays are the difference between life and death. Between the mother being there to see her daughter get married, or not. Being able to hold her first grandson – or never getting to meet him. Between enjoying the retirement she’s worked and saved her whole life to earn – Or never even getting to start it. I know what it means to lose your parents to cancer, far too young. How devastating. How unfair. Of course I get that it’s not always possible to prevent it. But I also know that, for too many families right now, it could have been prevented.

    Prevented, if we had a Government truly committed to public service values. And when you look to the future – Perhaps even worse than plunging our country into the twin crises with cost-of-living and healthcare – Is the Conservatives’ total lack of ambition to solve people’s problems. And their total lack of vision for the future. At every step of the way – on the economy, the cost-of-living or the NHS – Rishi Sunak has had to be dragged kicking and screaming just to do the bare minimum.

    His great “vision” for Britain, set out in his five-point plan at the beginning of the year, basically amounts to: “Try not to make things any worse.”

    Take economic growth. Remember when governments used to talk about targeting three, four, five percent? Rishi Sunak’s target? Anything above zero. It’s like a mid-table football club with a new manager, targeting to avoid relegation, rather than a place in the Champions League. And Jeremy Hunt in his Budget on Wednesday, proudly boasting not that the economy is growing, but that it might just avoid a technical recession after all. Total defeatism from a government that’s run out of ideas and has nothing left to offer.

    The way Conservative MPs talk nowadays, it’s like they know the truth: Their Government needs to be put out of its misery. So what of Labour? Labour’s ambitions are hardly much higher. Their only goal seems to be: “Not as bad as the Conservatives”. Talk about a low bar!

    The bar is so low with Labour, you’d need a team of deep-sea divers just to find it! Conference, our country can do so much better than that. The British people deserve so much more than that. And Liberal Democrats, our ambition for our country is so much greater than that.

    We understand that you can’t just keep applying one short-term sticking plaster on top of another –- while the wound deepens and festers underneath. We understand that – whether it’s energy bills, or social care, or the climate crisis, or even the political system itself – Tinkering around the edges simply isn’t good enough. For us, it’s about more than just changing the faces at the top of politics.

    It’s about more than changing who sits in power. It’s about changing where power sits. It’s about changing the whole way British politics is done.

    Liberal Democrats, we are the party of the deep political reform so many millions of our fellow citizens yearn for – And we must never rest till we have delivered that real reform. That real change. Our goal must be nothing less than to change the very nature of British politics itself.

    For a hundred years, Liberals and Liberal Democrats have fought for fair votes. To give everyone an equal voice in our democracy. To hold all Members of Parliament, properly to account. And while the other parties still cling to the discredited First Past the Post electoral system, Our zeal for Proportional Representation remains undimmed today. Conference, we will make it happen. We will make fair votes a reality.

    But, friends, we also know that reforming our politics – to put more power in people’s hands – goes far beyond changing the way we vote. It means shifting more power out of the centre in Whitehall, so local decisions are made by and for the people and communities they affect. That commitment to community politics is one of the foundation stones of our party. It sets us as Liberal Democrats apart from the other parties.

    We are passionate about local democracy. Passionate about the good Liberal Democrat councils can do for their communities – as demonstrated so brilliantly here in York. By councillors like Keith Aspden, who has led our party here in York for a decade. And we are passionate about giving people a say, a voice and real power outside elections and outside the town hall.

    Empowering people to be part of the decisions for their community is an incredibly potent force for improving people’s lives – and for engaging those who feel left out. Conference, let’s remember why this matters. Improving our democracy is an important end in itself, but it’s also how you build a better country. Make votes count. Give communities real power. Just imagine how things will get better.

    For here’s the secret. People want good schools. Good hospitals. Affordable housing and safe communities. People want a clean, healthy natural environment. They want an end to the Conservatives letting water companies get away with pumping filthy sewage straight into our rivers. The biggest environmental crime in our country today. And a crime that will cost the Conservatives dozens of seats if they don’t act. Our historic task is to create a new politics, where government has to respond to all of the people. Not just a few swing-voters in a handful of marginal seats. Or a tiny cabal of big-money donors. With a better electoral system. With more power in the hands of individuals and communities, Politicians and parties will have to be more focused on the things that really matter to people. And we’ll have better public services and a fairer society as a result.

    And Conference, it’s not just this ambitious destination and reforming vision that makes us so different. It’s our starting point too. The values we start from. Our principles. Our philosophy.

    We start from a fundamental belief in the intrinsic value of every human being. We are deeply optimistic about people. We see beauty in each individual. And we believe that if you free people – if you empower them, if you give them more choices in life – Then you unleash the best in people – and they create the better, fairer society we all want. You see, unlike Labour, we don’t think the state always knows best what people need. And unlike the Conservatives, we understand that an active state is essential to empower people and enlarge individual freedom. And we don’t sneer at the choices people make about their lives, just because they are different to the ones we might make about our own.

    We believe that the problems in our country – and around the world – come not from individuals having too much control over their lives, but too little. That’s why the core of our mission as liberals is to put more power in people’s hands – And making society fairer so everyone has the opportunity to put their power into practice.

    That’s what we’re about: Empowering people. And holding the already powerful to account.

    From the oil and gas giants who pollute our planet to the water companies who pollute our rivers. From out-of-control Prime Ministers who break the law, to out-of-touch MPs who take their constituents for granted. People thirst for a politics that can stand up to all this. That can stop the outrageous abuse of political and economic power.

    Conference, our reforming mission is to do just that. And liberals believe that basic rights and human dignity are not weapons to be brandished in some manufactured culture war, But the birthright of every individual. To be respected and to be cherished.

    That is where we always start from as Liberal Democrats. With people – and their freedoms. It’s what sets us apart from the other parties. And it’s what gives us a unique and vital role in British politics today. Conference, a vital and patriotic role, because so much of Britain’s great history has been a tale of our liberal values, in practice. Progress hasn’t always been smooth, and certainly hasn’t been as rapid as we’d like… But liberals have shaped so much of what we love about our United Kingdom today.

    It was Victorian Liberals who overturned centuries of protectionism and ushered in a new era of free trade and prosperity. It was a Liberal government that introduced health insurance, unemployment insurance, the state pension, and free school meals for children – more than one hundred years ago. And – even though liberals have rarely been in government since then – we have nevertheless driven so many of the progressive reforms of the last century. Expanding the welfare state and creating the National Health Service.

    Legalising abortion, decriminalising homosexuality and introducing same-sex marriage. Investing in renewable power and securing more aid for the world’s most vulnerable people. Fighting and winning the case for more investment in our children’s education. Liberal values in practice. Liberal policies in place. Thanks to us.

    But as we all know, Conference, the changes we have fought for have never come easily. How many times has our party paid a heavy price, for standing up for what we know to be right? We all bear the scars of the battle for a more liberal Britain. We have marched, many times, towards the sound of gunfire, and the noise still rings in our ears. And tragically, in recent years we have seen too much liberal progress unpicked, by a Conservative Party determined to take our country backwards. But we march on, undeterred.

    Just as it didn’t deter the great liberal heroes of the past, who fought bravely, who overcame the odds, and changed our country for the better. We stand on the shoulders of those liberals in Britain who helped to write the best chapters of our island story so far. Our job today is to write the next chapter for Britain. To make our country’s future as bright as we know it can be. To make our fair deal for people, a reality for all. To win the battle for liberal Britain. Conference, I joined this party. I campaign for this party. I serve this party as leader – because I believe only we can do it. Because our fair deal can only be delivered by a party that listens to people’s dreams and desires, and works with people to make dreams a reality.

    A party that doesn’t simply tell people what’s good for them. Our fair deal can only be delivered by a party open to new ideas. Prepared to seek out new solutions to the challenges of the future, rather than reaching back for the tired old answers of the past.

    As another liberal once said in another country, at another time of great change and challenge: “The cruelties and the obstacles of this swiftly changing planet will not yield to obsolete dogmas and outworn slogans.

    “It cannot be moved by those who cling to a present which is already dying, who prefer the illusion of security to the excitement and danger which comes with even the most peaceful progress.”

    No – it can only be moved by us: liberals who believe the future can be better than the past. Who embrace the excitement and danger of building that future. And who have the courage and the vision to make it happen. And that’s what liberals have always been all about.

    Listening to people, thinking big about the problems they face, and making the changes they need – even in the most challenging times. When Britain faced the existential threat of German invasion in the forties, the Liberal William Beveridge looked beyond the Second World War to envisage a universal healthcare system, free at the point of use.

    Open to everyone, regardless of wealth. The NHS. A Liberal invention and one of things that makes us so proud to be British. We cherish the NHS. We all have loved ones who owe their lives to it. And we will never forgive the Conservatives for what they have done to it. Leaving our brilliant nurses overstretched, underpaid and exhausted. Leaving hospitals to crumble. Leaving patients to suffer. In the twenty-five years since I was first elected to Parliament, I have never seen the NHS in a worse state than it is today. Conference, we have to save our NHS from this Conservative vandalism.

    And we know – as we have said many times over many years – that we cannot save and repair the NHS without fixing social care. So even as we battle through this current crisis, let us do as liberals have always done and set our sights on a better future – not just for the NHS, but for social care too. Because care remains the unfinished business of Beveridge’s reforms. And as we think about our historic mission to reform care, and save the NHS, let us never forget the millions of family carers who do the vast bulk of our nation’s caring. So as we reform social care, let us at the same time reform how we support our nation’s precious family carers.

    The mother and fathers. The sons and daughters. The grandparents and grandchildren. The kinship carers. The people who care because they love. As I said in my first speech as Leader, I want us to be the party of carers. The voice of carers. So we can save the NHS. My own caring journey has shown me how far we still have to go. My mum was an only child, so when her mum, my grandmother, became frail in her later years, it fell largely to me and my brother to organise her care. That experience, looking after my dearest Nanna, certainly taught me how challenging getting old can be. How failing eyesight, brittle bones and loneliness can take such a big toll.

    How a lifetime’s savings and work can so quickly be wiped away by extortionate care bills. How much of a battle it can be to make sure our loved ones spend their twilight years with dignity and in comfort. It shouldn’t be so hard. And today, as Emily and I care for our wonderful son John – Whose neurological condition means he can’t talk or walk by himself, Who lights up our world, but needs 24/7 care, and probably will do long after we are gone – As we care for John, and as I meet other carers all around the country, I see how important it is that we get care right. But, regrettably, how undervalued care and carers still are by the people in power. It shouldn’t be so hard. So I’m proud that our party has always prioritised care. Stitching together a long-term, cross-party solution to fund care for the elderly a decade ago – Only to see it ripped up by the Conservatives when they were back in government alone.

    Friends. We are seeing the consequences of the Tories’ treachery on care today: The appalling and avoidable crises in both social care and the NHS. So let us take up the challenge of finishing Beveridge’s work. Armed with the plan we adopted this morning, to build a system of social care that really works –Based on the same principles as the NHS So that everyone can get the care they need, when they need it. And carers can get the support, when they need it too. And let’s bring that same bold, visionary approach to our economy as well.

    Yes, we need immediate solutions to the cost-of-living crisis engulfing so many families and pensioners – Like using a proper windfall tax to cut energy bills – But we need far more than that too. The Government’s aim cannot just be mere economic survival. Stopping the recession may be the limits of Rishi Sunak’s ambition, but it is nowhere near enough. The British people deserve and need better. A strong and sustainable economy, with genuine prosperity and opportunity for all.

    Where businesses are able to create good jobs in all parts of the United Kingdom, and where hard work and aspiration are properly rewarded. And, Liberal Democrats, we know what that means: Backing small businesses – the lifeblood of our economy and the heart of thriving local communities.

    Prioritising people. With education and training. And yes, with quality childcare – but also making it easier for all family carers to juggle work and care, something the Chancellor totally ignored. Investing in new technology and harnessing the benefits of artificial intelligence. And above all, investing in a green economic recovery to create hundreds of thousands of clean, secure, well-paid new jobs – across the UK’s nations and regions.

    By the way, did you hear Jeremy Hunt on Wednesday, claiming it was the Conservatives who were responsible for Britain’s growth in renewable power? The sheer brass neck of it, when that lot tried to stop us every step of the way! Never forget, Conference, that it was the Liberal Democrats with our foot on the accelerator of solar power. The Liberal Democrats who made Britain the world leader in offshore wind. And Liberal Democrats who led our renewables revolution while the Tories tried to stop us.

    And there’s another historic, longstanding difference between the Liberal Democrat economic vision – and those of others. More relevant today than ever. I call it the elephant in the room of British politics. An elephant we always point to, even though other parties daren’t even whisper its name.

    So let me shout it, yet again: if you want to boost our economy, you have to repair our broken relationship with Europe. Conference, you don’t need me to tell you what a disaster the Conservatives’ botched deal with Europe has been for our country. You see it every day in your communities: The businesses strangled by red tape. The farmers, fishers and factories, unable to sell to their customers on the continent. The empty shelves in local supermarkets. It’s why we campaigned against it. Why, when Boris Johnson brought his terrible deal to Parliament, when even Labour supported it, Liberal Democrats stood alone and voted against it.

    And why now Liberal Democrats are the only ones with a real plan to fix Britain’s trade. To tear down the Conservatives’ trade barriers, rip up their red tape, and rebuild the ties of trust and friendship with our European neighbours. Because as liberals we are proud internationalists. Who understand that our country thrives most when it is open and outward-looking. When it stands tall in the world, instead of shrinking back from it. We understand that no nation – even one as resourceful and resilient as our great United Kingdom – no nation can afford to cut itself off. And we know that our country can be an incredible force for good when it plays an active role on the world stage –

    Guided by our fundamental British values of equality, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. It’s why our country has stood united in solidarity with the brave Ukrainian people in their struggle against Putin’s illegal invasion. I am so proud that throughout the last year we have been Ukraine’s strongest ally – And we must continue to stand with them, until Putin’s aggression is repelled for good.

    Like the Covid pandemic before it, the war in Ukraine shows the folly of thinking that events outside of Britain’s borders simply aren’t our concern. Their enormous impacts on the everyday lives of the British people show what Liberal Democrats have always known: Foreign policy is not secondary to economic and social policy. Good, ethical foreign policy is good economic and social policy. That’s why we stand for human rights everywhere in the world – from Xinjiang to Tehran.

    Why we work for peace everywhere in the world – from Kyiv to Kinshasa. Why we seek to end poverty and hunger everywhere in the world – from Delhi to Darfur. Why we oppose Suella Braverman’s appalling anti-refugee bill – nothing more than a criminal traffickers’ charter. And Conference, it’s why we Liberal Democrats increased the UK’s overseas aid to 0.7 percent of national income, and fought to enshrine that global promise into law. It was our party that fought for that law. Our party that introduced it. And our party that has always stood by it. Conference, that makes me so proud.

    Our zero-point-seven commitment survived three Conservative Chancellors. But then along came Rishi Sunak. Ripping up that proud commitment for the UK to lead the world on aid for the poorest. How cruel. How counterproductive. How unpatriotic. So Liberal Democrats, we will restore it. We are the only party committed to restoring it. We will put the UK back where it belongs: Leading the fight against poverty, hunger and disease – everywhere in the world. These fights are never easy and rarely popular. But we must continue to fight them. Because if we don’t, who will? Conference, this is who we are.

    We are the internationalists who take on the nationalists in England, Scotland and Wales. We are the champions of universal human rights, against those who seek to tear them up. We are the environmentalists who stand against those who don’t understand the value of our wonderful natural environment. Against those who refuse to face up to the existential threat of climate change. We are the people who support diversity as one of our country’s greatest strengths – and oppose those who stoke fear and division. We are the reformers – challenging the concentration of power in anyone’s hands. Reformers who will always seek to hand more power to people, and to hold the already powerful to account.

    We are the party of hope over fear.

    And – as Liberal Democrats have always been – we are the big thinkers with the vision to see past current crises and paint the future we want to build. So as we go out, confidently, into the communities we love – To campaign for our fantastic Liberal Democrat candidates, To elect strong local champions and fight for a fair deal – Let us remember why we are in this fight to begin with. As my dad said all those years ago, we are in this fight because of our dedication to public service. Because we love our country and want to transform it for the better.

    To build a liberal Britain, and spread real opportunity to every city, town and village across our great United Kingdom. To deliver the fair deal that the British people deserve. Liberal Democrats, that is our mission. That is our calling. That is our fight. It’s a fight we can win. It’s a fight we must win. So let’s get out there, and win it.

  • Steve Barclay – 2023 Statement on the NHS Staff Pay Offer

    Steve Barclay – 2023 Statement on the NHS Staff Pay Offer

    The statement made by Steve Barclay, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

    I am pleased to be able to inform the House that today 16 March 2023, I have made a formal offer on pay for 2022-23 and 2023-24 to the unions representing staff on the agenda for change contract. The NHS Staff Council has discussed this offer and the Royal College of Nursing, UNISON, GMB, the chartered society of physiotherapy and the British Dietetic Association will recommend the offer to their members in consultations that will be held over the coming weeks. Strike action will continue to be paused while they are consulted.

    Under the offer, over 1 million NHS staff on the agenda for change contract would receive two non-consolidated payments for 2022-23. This is on top of an at least £1,400 consolidated pay award that they have already received, which was in line with the recommendations of the independent pay review body.

    Under the terms of the offer, all staff would receive an award worth 2% of an individuals’ salary for 2022-23. In addition, staff would receive a one-off bonus which recognises the sustained pressure facing the NHS following the covid-19 pandemic and the extraordinary effort these members of staff have been making to hit backlog recovery targets and meet the Prime Minister’s promise to cut waiting lists. This NHS backlog bonus is an investment worth an additional 4% of the agenda for change pay bill, and would mean staff would receive an additional payment of between £1,250 and £1,600. With both of these payments, a nurse at the top of band 5, for example, would receive over £2,000 in total.

    For 2023-24, the Government have offered a 5% consolidated increase in pay. In addition, the lowest paid staff, such as porters and cleaners will see their pay matched to the top of band 2, resulting in a pay increase of 10.4%.

    For example, this would mean a newly qualified nurse would get over £1,300, increasing their base salary to £28,407. A nurse at the top of band 6 would receive a pay rise of over £2,000, increasing their base salary to £42,618.

    The Government firmly believe that this is a fair offer which rewards all agenda for change staff and commits to a substantial pay rise in 2023-24 at a time when people across the country are facing cost of living pressures and there are multiple demands on the public finances.

    Setting pay is an annual process and, as is always the case, decisions are considered in light of the fiscal and economic context and ensuring awards recognise the value of NHS staff whilst delivering value for the taxpayer. While it is right that we reward our hard-working NHS staff with a pay rise, this needs to be proportionate and balanced with the need to deliver NHS services and manage the country’s long term economic health and public sector finances, along with inflationary pressures.

    The Government asked the NHS Pay Review Body (NHSPRB) to report by the end of April 2023. We anticipate the progress made and the outcome of the union ballot to be taken into account. If the offer is accepted by unions, it will be implemented, but the Government would welcome observations from the NHSPRB on the pay deal in England.

    On top of the pay package, the Government are also committing to important measures including the development of a national, evidence-based policy frame- work which will build on existing safe staffing arrangements and amendments to terms and conditions to support existing NHS staff develop their careers through apprenticeships.

    In addition, having heard the concerns of nursing staff and their representatives about the specific challenges they face in terms of recruitment, retention and professional development, the Government have committed to address these issues and will therefore work with NHS employers and unions to improve opportunities for nursing career progression.

    The Government are also committed to improving support for newly qualified healthcare registrants. It will commission a review into the support received by those transitioning from training into practice. And the Government will consult on the permanent easement of pension abatement rules.

    This package, alongside the comprehensive NHS Long Term Workforce Plan that NHS England will publish later this year, will help to ensure that the NHS can recruit and retain the staff it needs to meet the growing and changing health and wellbeing needs of patients.

    Alongside making this formal offer, I have today also written to the Royal College of Nursing to outline that, in undertaking work to address the specific challenges faced by nursing staff—in terms of recruitment, retention and professional development—this work will involve: how to take account of the changing responsibilities of nursing staff; and the design and implementation issues, including scope and legal aspects, of a separate pay spine for nursing staff exclusively.

    The Government intend to complete this work such that resulting changes can be delivered within the 2024-25 pay year. In conducting this work, the Government will also consider whether any separate measures may apply to other occupational groups, taking into account the views of NHS Employers and unions.

  • Leo Docherty – 2023 Statement on the UK-lraq Relationship on 20th Anniversary of Iraq Conflict

    Leo Docherty – 2023 Statement on the UK-lraq Relationship on 20th Anniversary of Iraq Conflict

    The statement made by Leo Docherty, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

    My noble Friend the Minister for the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia and the United Nations, Lord Ahmad) has made the following written ministerial statement:

    20 March 2023 marks the 20th anniversary of the beginning of the conflict in Iraq. This anniversary is an opportunity to remember the service and sacrifice of all those who served in the conflict. At this time, we pay particular regard to those service personnel, British, allied and Iraqi, as well as civilians who died or were wounded in the conflict in Iraq. It is also a time to reflect upon the conflict and Parliament’s role in it, and to restate the UK’s enduring commitment to support the development of a stable, prosperous and democratic future for all Iraqi people.

    All of us will undoubtedly have in mind today the 179 British and allied personnel who lost their lives in the conflict. I pay tribute to them and to their bravery, and my sympathy goes out to their families for their loss. Their sacrifice and determination to make the world safer for all of us will never be forgotten. Next week Ministers from HM Government will attend commemorative events across the UK, remembering all those who served in the conflict and particularly those who gave the most. Today we have in our thoughts those service personnel that died, and those who were wounded or injured as a result of the conflict. We also remember and give thanks to all personnel of the UK armed forces who served in Iraq, and their families, who provided vital support at home whilst their loved ones were deployed.

    We also have in mind the many Iraqi citizens who were killed during the conflict or who have died since in military operations, bombings, acts of terrorism or through sickness and disease. There is no doubt that the people of Iraq have faced enormous and grave challenges over the last 20 years.

    As part of our remembrance, we must ensure we continue to implement the hard won and costly lessons. The UK Government have learned much from the Chilcot inquiry and continue to draw upon it as we improve national security decision making and implementation. The purpose of the inquiry was to examine the United Kingdom’s involvement in the conflict in Iraq, including the way decisions were made and actions taken, to establish as accurately and reliably as possible what happened, and to identify lessons to be learned. The FCDO continues to institutionalise the Chilcot lessons learned across policy, operations and strategy so that staff are equipped to support decision making and implementation in complex contexts.

    We should also look forward. Today, the UK and Iraq share a close and enduring partnership, working together to address shared global challenges. Through the global coalition against Daesh, NATO Mission Iraq and our long-term bilateral initiatives, we remain committed to Iraq in its fight to defeat Daesh and to enjoy peace and stability. We are working with the Government of Iraq to support economic reform, energy transition, human rights and freedom of religion and belief, and to mitigate the effects of climate change. These joint efforts to unlock Iraq’s immense potential, as represented by its young population, characterise the relationship in 2023.

    I saw this for myself during my visit to Iraq at the end of February. There has been significant progress since 2003 but we are committed to supporting further progress and strengthening our partnership with Iraq. The UK remains committed to preserving the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq. We stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the Government and people of Iraq to safeguard stability and deliver prosperity.

  • James Cartlidge – 2023 Speech on the Budget

    James Cartlidge – 2023 Speech on the Budget

    The speech made by James Cartlidge, the Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

    It is a real pleasure to conclude today’s debate. I am glad that the hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (Jonathan Reynolds) welcomed the measures in relation to the north-west and the Mayor. I join him in congratulating the hon. Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton) on her brilliant maiden speech, which I very much enjoyed. I especially enjoyed hearing about the women of Ormskirk and their famous gingerbread. I understand that King Edward VII is rumoured to have stopped the royal train in Ormskirk to get his supply of gingerbread to take with him to Balmoral. Her speech was delivered with great passion and I was particularly pleased to hear her tribute to her predecessor, with which we all agreed.

    Yesterday, the Chancellor delivered a Budget for growth —a Budget that builds on the decisions we took in the autumn to deliver stability and sound money; that provides a blueprint for prosperity that will spur on the economy and make us one of the most prosperous nations in the world; and that spreads opportunity. At the heart of the Budget is the steps we are taking to spread the opportunities of employment, to tackle labour shortage and to tear down the walls that stop people working.

    Many Opposition Members said there was nothing in the Budget about public sector workers. I hope they will join me in welcoming the fantastic news we heard, less than an hour ago, that an agreement has been reached that will provide a fair and reasonable pay deal for health workers, from nurses to paramedics and midwives, thereby ending strike action across the NHS.

    On the subject of workers in our brilliant NHS, we have seen today the most extraordinary U-turn yet by the Labour party. We should remember that barely six months ago the shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, the hon. Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), told us that Labour policy was not to have a specific scheme for the NHS but to abolish the lifetime cap. Let me quote what he said six months ago:

    “I’m not pretending that doing away with the cap is a particularly progressive move. But it is one that sees patients seen faster, and will inevitably save lives. I’m just being hard-headed and pragmatic about this.”

    We totally agree with him.

    Mr Dhesi

    Perhaps the Minister would like to retract his statement, because I think he is inadvertently misleading the House. When the shadow Secretary of State said that, he referred specifically to that scheme for doctors, not for everybody. He was not talking about giving the 1% throughout our whole country—the rich—that huge tax cut.

    James Cartlidge

    The quote says,

    “doing away with the cap”.

    The removal of the cap is a tax measure that applies to all people who qualify for it. There is a really important point that Opposition Members probably want to listen to: there is a real danger in making up policy as one goes along. To be clear, our tax change will come in immediately, or as soon as we can possibly do it—it will come in on 6 April—but it is our view that a specific scheme for the NHS would take up to a year to put in place. Were we to bring forward an NHS-only scheme, the Department of Health and Social Care would have to consult on that scheme and then respond to the consultation. Only after that could it start to develop the scheme, because it could not predetermine the consultation. After that, the Department would have to transfer eligible people into the scheme. All that assumes that there would not be legal challenges from those who would argue that such a scheme should apply to other key people in the public sector, such as headteachers, senior police officers and senior people in the Ministry of Defence who might think that they too work hard in our public services. The Labour party has made it up as it has gone along. The fact is that Labour has U-turned from a perfectly sensible policy back to being ridden with the politics of envy, which we have heard from every single Opposition Member today.

    Turning to some of the speeches, my right hon. Friend the Member for Norwich North (Chloe Smith) made an excellent contribution. She speaks with great expertise and passion on the matter of getting the disabled into work. She made the very important point that that is not just for the Government and that we also need to talk about the role that employers can play. I hope she will be pleased to hear that in the build-up to the Budget I, along with my hon. Friend the Minister for Employment and the small business Minister—my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Kevin Hollinrake)—engaged directly with employer groups and worked with them to come up with some of the Budget’s proposals, particularly the extension of the occupational health subsidy pilot, the returneeship policy and boot camps for over-50s. Those are very positive measures.

    The hon. Member for Glasgow South West (Chris Stephens) said that all the measures we have taken are on the backs of the poor, while the hon. Member for Jarrow (Kate Osborne) and other Opposition Members said that we have let down those on the lowest incomes. I remind the House that this year it is possible, for the first time, to earn £1,000 a month without having to pay any income tax or national insurance. We have doubled the personal income tax allowance since 2010, and in the last year we have increased benefits in line with inflation. On energy support, this financial year we have given a £650 cost of living payment to those on benefits, and in the financial year to come it will be £900. Those are not the actions of a Government turning their back on the poor. This is a Government taking difficult decisions to balance the books of this country, but in a compassionate way that helps those who have the least.

    Chris Stephens

    If the Government are doing so much for the poor, can the Minister tell us why in-work poverty is on the rise and why 40,000 civil servants, who work for this Government, are having to use food banks?

    James Cartlidge

    The key statistic is that since 2010 we have cut unemployment by 1.2 million. We have near record lows in unemployment and almost record highs in employment. Of course, we want to go further.

    I am glad that the Chairman of the Work and Pensions Committee, the right hon. Member for East Ham (Sir Stephen Timms), welcomed some of the Budget’s measures, particularly the important increase in the universal credit childcare cap and aspects of the White Paper. I am sure he is looking forward to engaging in detail with my right hon. Friend the Work and Pensions Secretary, who is sitting next to me.

    My right hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet (Theresa Villiers) was absolutely right to say that the Prime Minister has set these targets and that this year we are making fantastic progress on three of them. Inflation is set to more than halve this year. That is not a minor detail. Inflation—driven, after all, by Putin’s invasion of Ukraine—has been the biggest reason why there have been problems with growth in countries all around the world. She also made very important points about the extension of the energy price guarantee. Yes, inflation is falling, but that shows that we continue to take steps to support people with the cost of living. We know that those pressures have not completely gone away. The elevated prices of food and other products in our shops have all come from that surge in energy prices. That is why we have extended the energy price guarantee and continued the freeze on fuel duty and the 5p tax cut on petrol and diesel for motorists.

    The hon. Members for Eltham (Clive Efford) and for Easington (Grahame Morris) both put forward some very interesting proposals, which I hope have been noted by shadow Front Benchers, for a range of new wealth taxes to undermine the competitiveness of the UK. If there has been a theme among Opposition Members today, it has been a return to the politics of envy and of undermining aspiration and competitiveness.

    My hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset (Richard Drax) made an excellent point. We may exchange views on which taxes we should take action on, but he reminded us of the reason why we have had to take those difficult decisions. It is because of huge external factors that Opposition Members do not like to talk about. They include a pandemic, followed, literally, on 24 February, the day on which the pandemic regulations ceased, by Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. It has been an extraordinarily challenging time, requiring us to put in place £390 billion of additional support. We can debate whether it should have happened, but it did happen and, as my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jackie Doyle-Price) has said, that has consequences for taxes and we have had to take those difficult decisions.

    I also agree with the very important point made by my hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset about energy security. He is absolutely right. We are proud of the huge progress that we have made in reducing our emissions, at a faster rate than any other G7 country. Last year, 40% of our electricity was from renewables. The figure in the United States was just 20%. Yes, we welcome the steps that the US is taking through the Inflation Reduction Act 2022, but no one should be under any illusion that we are not making huge steps forward ourselves. However, we must always remember the role of energy security, which is why my hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset is right that, rather than turning our back on the North sea as others have suggested, we should be maximising the UK’s domestic supplies of energy. That is why I hope that colleagues will welcome the steps that we are taking in respect of small modular reactors. There was also the important announcement, which was welcomed by several Opposition Members, including the hon. Members for Preston (Sir Mark Hendrick) and for Stockton North (Alex Cunningham), of £20 billion investment in carbon capture and storage.

    I am delighted that my hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes South (Iain Stewart), the Chair of the Transport Committee, welcomed the news on East West Rail, which we have had exchanges on in previous Treasury questions. He is absolutely right about the central role that new infrastructure plays in driving growth and connectivity, and I hope that the announcement brings great benefit to his constituents.

    Alex Cunningham

    I am grateful to the Minister for acknowledging the support for carbon capture and storage, but this must be the start of the investment. We need another wave of investment followed by another wave after that. Are the Government really committed to it?

    James Cartlidge

    We have announced £20 billion of funding, which shows the strength of our commitment. We want to decarbonise and continue our rapid progress to net zero, but, along the way, we must maintain energy security, otherwise what have we learned from what has happened in the past 12 months, following the invasion of Ukraine? Our constituents want to know that we will do everything possible to grow the supply of UK domestic energy.

    Sir Mark Hendrick rose—

    James Cartlidge

    This is the last time I shall give way.

    Sir Mark Hendrick

    Is the Minister aware of Newcleo, a British company, that will burn waste plutonium in Cumbria without public subsidy or recourse to public funds, but purely with private investment?

    James Cartlidge

    I am not aware of that specific company but the hon. Gentleman is welcome to write to me. None the less, he is right to talk about the need for private investment.

    Another important step that we took in the Budget, which the hon. Member for Inverclyde (Ronnie Cowan) referred to—I am not sure whether he was supportive of it—was changing the taxonomy so that we encourage more private investment into nuclear, which is so important.

    Ronnie Cowan rose—

    James Cartlidge

    I apologise, but I cannot give way. I only have two and a half minutes left. The hon. Gentleman made a very entertaining speech and I enjoyed what he said on hemp, and I hope that he writes to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to pursue that.

    Yesterday, the Chancellor unveiled the biggest ever employment package. In the knowledge that, following Brexit, we will move from an employment model based on unlimited low-skilled migration to one based on high wages and high skills, we brought forward a set of major reforms to remove barriers to work. We have incredible potential. The World Bank has said that, out of all big European countries, we are the best place in which to do business. In the sectors of the future, we lead the world—whether that is financial services, life sciences, advanced manufacturing, creative industries or tech, but those sectors, and the entire economy, need a pipeline of talent. That is why we are introducing reforms that say to those who are long-term sick or have a disability that we will help you into, and at, work; reforms that ensure that those who can and want to work, do work, because independence is always better than dependence; reforms that help some of the most experienced people back into work; and reforms that mean women are no longer held back by the cost of childcare. With those reforms, we can grow our economy.

    Ordered, That the debate be now adjourned.—(Scott Mann.)

    Debate to be resumed Monday 20 March.