UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Amber Rudd – 2017 Speech to APCC and NPCC Partnership Summit

    Below is the text of the speech made by Amber Rudd, the Home Secretary, to the APCC and NPCC Partnership Summit on 1 November 2017.

    London is one of my favourite cities to travel through. I love the architecture, the history and the throng of the crowd. But today’s route really made me stop and think. My journey started near Parliament, and from there I drove over Westminster Bridge, past Borough Market and through London Bridge, and this year, these places of course have taken on a new significance.

    We’ve witnessed terrorist attacks at these sites and Manchester Arena, Finsbury Park and Parsons Green. On each occasion police officers responded with exemplary skill and bravery – working long hours and putting themselves in harm’s way to keep others safe. We will never forget the heroism of PC Keith Palmer who was fatally stabbed while defending our Parliament.

    So today I want to start by saying thank you to all of you who have played your part and I know it’s been utterly exhausting.

    I would also like to take this opportunity to extend my deepest condolences and sympathy to the victims and families who have lost loved ones in New York in such a vile and cowardly act of terrorism. Our thoughts are with you at this most difficult time.

    The day after the Parsons Green attack, I met officers who had been part of the response team. I could see what a strain events like this put on emergency services. And in Manchester, I met the team of detectives who are working tirelessly to investigate the Manchester Arena bombing. It’s true that in all jobs there are bad days at work, but there’s few which involve confronting terrorists.

    But I’m not here today to talk about terrorism – horrific as it is. What I want to talk about is local policing and how best to fight the day to day crime which blights people’s lives.

    The Crime Survey for England and Wales, acknowledged by the ONS as our best measure of long term crime trends, shows there’s been a substantial 9% fall in crime over the last year – and a 38% drop since 2010. This has led to more confidence in the police with latest figures showing that 78% of people now have confidence in their local force.

    But we also know that police-recorded crime had gone up by 13% this past year. This reflects continued improvements in crime recording and an increased willingness of victims to report crime. However, it also reflects a genuine increase in some specific crime types including homicides, knife crime and firearms offences.

    Types of crime which ruin lives and cause irrevocable damage to families and communities.

    We all need to account for, and find solutions to, these worrying rises.

    But behind these national rises are huge local variations.

    Take the example of police recorded knife crime for instance. While in the year to June 2017 it was up by 36% in the Metropolitan Police area, it was down 16% in the Greater Manchester Police Force area. During this same period, the East of England has seen a 19% drop in homicides, whereas the East Midlands has seen a 35% rise.

    Local policing can make a difference. You’re probably tired of Conservative Home Secretaries standing here and saying the Home Office doesn’t run policing.

    But it’s crucial. You are the ones who are responsible for cutting crime and delivering an effective and efficient police service for your local area.

    Of course, part of being a Police and Crime Commissioner is about speaking to the government about resourcing. But it mustn’t just be about lobbying the government for money.

    It needs to be about cutting crime, delivering on the priorities you were elected on and being held to account by local people in your area when you don’t.

    So when crime statistics go up, I don’t just want to see you reaching for a pen to write a press release asking for more money from the government. I want you to tell your local communities and the victims in your area what your plan is to make them safer.

    Because policing can make a difference.

    Just as we at the Home Office will set out what we are doing to make the country safer.

    Because we do still have a role to play. Giving you the powers you need. Supporting you when you need to be supported. Challenging you when you need to be challenged. And yes, in making sure you have the right resources.

    When it comes to powers, I hope you, as police leaders, feel we are responding to the recent changes in crime. Because as crime changes, the powers you need are changing too.

    Following the worrying recent rise in violent crimes, we’re taking action. We’ve recently published our consultation outlining how we’re intending to crack down on violent crime and offensive weapons. This will be complemented next year by the publication of a new strategy to combat serious violence.

    We’re going to prevent children purchasing knives online and we’re going to stop people carrying acid in public if they don’t have a good reason. And as I outlined at the Conservative Party Conference, the sale of acids to under 18s will be banned and the public sale of sulphuric acid dramatically limited.

    Attacks with knives and acid ruin lives. Confidence and happiness can be lost forever.

    We need to make sure that the thugs who think of attempting these horrible acts are stopped before they are able to realise their hateful ambitions – and that they face the full force of the law.

    And on stop and search.

    I know there are those who think it’s a controversial tactic, and I know it has been badly used in the past.

    But figures show that stop and search reforms are working. The stop-to-arrest rate has risen and once again is the highest on record. The new data published as part of the ‘best use of stop and search’ scheme shows that around two-thirds of searches result in some kind of police action.

    It is my belief that stop and search is a useful tool for the police, especially to target rising levels of knife crime and acid attacks, and that you should have the confidence to use it where necessary. My message to you today is that officers who use stop and search appropriately will always have my full support.

    However, let me be quite clear. No-one should be stopped because of their race or ethnicity. Locally, where there are racial disparities in the use of stop and search, chief constables will still need to explain these.

    Because if stop and search is misused, then it is counter-productive and, more importantly, it damages confidence in policing.

    And when you tell me you need additional powers, it’s my job to listen carefully.

    You said that officers have concerns about pursuing and apprehending moped-riding criminals. You explained that some officers worry about their legal position when pursuing suspected offenders when they’re on mopeds or scooters.

    So we’ve listened and we’re taking action. We’re reviewing the law and practice regarding police pursuits. We want to make sure officers feel they have the legal protection they need to go after moped and scooter gangs. And I can announce today that we will finish the review early next year.

    My officials at the Home Office are working with the police, including the Police Federation as well as the IPCC and other criminal justice agencies, to do this. But I can say today that there will be change. Officers have said they don’t feel confident they will be supported if they pursue a criminal on a moped. These criminals terrorise our streets, intimidating people into giving over their phones or wallets and leaving many too scared to walk outside their front doors. I don’t want any officer to feel that they cannot pursue someone like this because they have taken their helmet off. We will always support the police and officers, not the criminals who commit these awful crimes on our streets.

    But the job of the Home Office isn’t just to give new powers; it’s also about providing support, constructive challenge and ideas.

    Because police reform is not an objective which left the Home Office when Theresa May did. And whilst policing is in a much better state now than it was in 2010, there’s still work to be done and that work is easier to do when we collaborate.

    I’m really pleased that in the policing vision 2025, you’ve set out a transformative programme for yourselves. My department is committed – and stands ready – to do whatever it takes to support you with these plans. This includes making our expertise and resources available to the Police Reform and Transformation Board where helpful, for example to help them address commercial, procurement or programme management issues.

    We also want to help you further professionalise the sector. That’s why we continue to work alongside the College of Policing. We are putting in place multiple reforms in this area, such as the Policing Education Qualifications Framework, to ensure that policing continues to develop its existing workforce and attract the best recruits. We are also establishing the Licence to Practise Scheme to give those who operate in the most high risk and high harm areas the correct skills and training to do so.

    We’re also supporting those of you in the audience who want to deliver greater efficiency and effectiveness through closer collaboration between emergency services, to benefit your local communities. We’ve legislated to enable PCCs to take on responsibility for fire and rescue services locally, where a local case is made, and to place a statutory duty on all three emergency services to collaborate. But you are in charge and you can decide where the opportunities lie for your area and your communities.

    I am delighted that on the 1st October, Roger Hirst in Essex formally became the country’s first Police, Fire & Crime Commissioner, and I know PCCs elsewhere have, or are considering, submitting their own proposals.

    And look, as I’ve said, I know that policing can be a stressful business. You work long hours, you deal with people at their worst and no doubt this has an impact on physical and mental health. That’s why in July I announced £7.5 million of funding to pilot and – if it is successful – fund a dedicated national police welfare service to help those who need it.

    But I’ll tell you something that we won’t stand for. Officers being attacked, abused and spat at while they do their jobs. This sort of behaviour is unacceptable. That’s why we are supporting new legislation which will send a clear message that we will not tolerate attacks on emergency workers and we will ensure that those who are violent are punished.

    You protect us and it’s right that we protect you.

    So the Home Office’s job, and my job, is to give you the powers you need to keep us safe.

    We will use our coordinating role to support and, where necessary, challenge you.

    And, yes, it’s our job to provide you with the right level of funding and resources.

    We’re investing £1.9 billion in cyber security which will contribute to relieving pressures on individual forces tackling online and cyber enabled crime.

    We’re providing funding to bolster counter-terrorism policing in the wake of this year’s terror attacks. For example, we’re putting an extra £24 million into counter-terrorism policing in addition to the £707 million already announced.

    And since 2015 we’ve protected the total amount of spending that goes to policing in line with inflation. That means that overall police spending is increasing from £11.4 billion in 2015 to 2016 to around £12.3 billion in 2019 to 2020.

    Within that we’re spending hundreds of millions of pounds to ensure you continue to reform and become more productive.

    And today I am pleased to announce the award of £27.45 million police transformation funding to a further ten projects which includes:

    – £1.9 million for the Metropolitan Police to design a single call handling system and centralised control rooms for London’s emergency services

    – £6.87 million to South Wales Police to help them join up with health professionals and other local partners to better support the vulnerable people they come into contact with, many of whom have had traumatic childhoods

    – £2.87 million to MOPAC’s drive project which involves working with serial perpetrators, offering one-to-one support to break the cycle of domestic abuse

    All the remaining successful bids will be listed on the Home Office website.

    I know a number of you have been calling for more money on top of this. We’ve always been clear that decisions about funding need to be based on evidence and not assertion.

    That’s why the policing minister will have visited or spoken to every force in the country ahead of this year’s spending settlement.

    We appreciate that the increase in complex, investigatory work has put pressure on forces, as well as the efforts to deal with the unprecedented wave of terrorist attacks we’ve sadly seen this year.

    But police financial reserves now amount to more than £1.6 billion and the independent inspectorate remains clear that there is more forces can do to transform, with greater efficiencies still available.

    So these are the considerations we will balance as we take decisions on future funding. Listening to your concerns, but also critically evaluating them. So we get the decisions right for the people we serve.

    But I don’t want to finish by talking about resourcing. Because I don’t believe the people we serve want to hear disagreements between us on whether a hundred million pounds should be given straight to forces as part of the core grant, or instead bid for as part of the transformation fund.

    They want to hear about what we are doing, together, to cut crime.

    Because being a PCC, or chief constable for that matter, should be about agreeing and then delivering on a plan to cut crime in your area.

    Remind yourselves that millions of people voted for you in the PCC elections in 2016. They voted for your plans to keep them safe.

    Because, they like me, believe policing can make a difference.

    And we’re already seeing some great examples of your initiative:

    Like Marc Jones, the PCC in Lincolnshire who has funded an initiative to deploy a team of nurses to the police control room to help officers deal with incidents involving mental health issues. Or like Martin Surl, the PCC for Gloucestershire who backed a 12 month trial to reintroduce horseback patrols to help serve the public and reduce crime.

    And if you look back over the cumulative effect of your work since PCCs were first elected in 2012, then you should be really proud.

    You’ve presided over a fall in traditional crime, you’ve made efficiencies which have saved hundreds of millions of pounds for the taxpayer, and you have increased the proportion of officers on the frontline. You’ve brought real democratic accountability to British policing and you’ve shown true leadership.

    But now it’s time for you to rise to the challenge of leading the next chapter of reform so you deliver for your local communities.

    Because policing can make a difference. And together we can improve people’s lives.

    Thank you.

  • Matt Hancock – 2017 Speech on Building a Full Fibre Britain

    Below is the text of the speech made by Matt Hancock, the Minister of State for Digital, at the Broadband Stakeholder Group 2017 Conference held on 2 November 2017.

    Thanks for the opportunity to speak with you today.

    Like many of you, I often meet interesting people in my job. But there’s one serious frustration. And that is, just as I’m talking to them about the many fascinating things they do, instead they want to badger me about their broadband. Every day.

    This problem reached its zenith just last week when I met Tim Peake, Britain’s inspirational astronaut, and he collared me about the broadband on his space station.

    Tim, for next time you’re up there, I’m sure one of our ambitious Altnets can help.

    So today is different. Because today, it’s you who’ve got to listen to me talk about broadband. And not just my broadband, but everyone’s.

    It is a full year since I spoke to the Broadband World Forum, and set out our plans for a full fibre future. Today I want to talk about the exciting momentum that is building in this industry and about our plans for the future.

    Let’s start by acknowledging Britain’s current high levels of connectivity.

    The recent Global Connectivity Index published by Huawei, once again ranked the UK top five out of 50 major nations in terms of connectivity.

    Our superfast connectivity is the best in Europe.

    Our economy has the biggest digital economy, by proportion, of major nations, and we have one of the highest percentages of individual Internet usage. President Trump’s use of Twitter probably contributes to America’s higher score.

    This is in no small part because Government has strongly supported the digitalisation of the economy, and made sure the business environment is friendly to new innovations and the growth of the market.

    The statistics to back this up are clear.

    We have announced that up to £645 million is to be made available to help take superfast broadband coverage to 98 per cent of the nation over the next few years.

    In total we are investing £1.1 billion in our digital infrastructure to support the next generation of fast and reliable mobile and broadband communications for consumers and businesses.

    And to support businesses we are introducing 100% business rates relief for operators who install new fibre on their networks.

    Superfast broadband is also now available to over 94% of premises, on the way to hitting our target of 95% by the end of the year, and on mobile, the MNOs are legally obliged to reaching ninety per cent geographic coverage by December. 4G coverage continues to rise sharply.

    The Connectivity Index also predicts that, as these amazing digital technologies advance, our advantage will drive future economic growth. That’s one economic forecast I am prepared to make.

    But we can always, always do better.

    Over the past year we have published both our Digital Strategy and published our 5G strategy.

    We have agreed on the separation of BT and Openreach.

    Virgin Media continues at pace with the rollout of Project Lightning bringing ultrafast speeds to more and more of the country.

    KCOM are also doing their part and are on track to cover 150,000 premises with their Lightstream Project in Hull.

    We have seen record levels of investment into the altnets, including £500 million from Cityfibre and £200 million from Hyperoptic.

    Openreach has established its independent board and declared its clear direction in the pursuit of the full fibre future.

    We have published proposals for the USO.

    We have secured over a billion pounds more of taxpayers’ money for next generation technologies and we have introduced rate relief for putting new fibre into the ground.

    So we have been busy.

    I think this effort demonstrates beyond any doubt the UK Government’s commitment to a full fibre and 5G future. We are guided by our mission to deliver full connectivity where people live, work, and travel.

    I said a year ago that “I will be on the side of the challenger, helping in every way I can to deliver fair competition and a level playing field.”

    I meant it then, I mean it now.

    And I’m delighted the Altnets are going from strength to strength.

    CityFibre, which is already in more than 40 cities, has announced plans to extend its network in more than ten extra cities across the UK.

    Gigaclear is bringing ultrafast speeds to consumers and their network now spans over 15 counties.

    Community schemes like B4RN and others are expanding.

    Indeed INCA has estimated that coverage from its members could potentially reach 18 per cent of UK premises by 2020.

    We welcome these developments and encourage more.

    But before I set out our next steps on delivering full fibre and 5G, let’s turn first to progress on the current technology of fibre to the cabinet or, as it might better be known, copper-to-the-premise.

    We have invested £1.7bn of UK taxpayers’ money in delivering superfast broadband. For today’s needs, it delivers what an average household wants.

    Reaching 95% by the end of the year is a very important milestone, and not least with the over £600m of funding from claw-back in the existing BDUK contacts, we hope to go further.

    Universal coverage of high speed broadband of at least 10Mbps is an important manifesto commitment that we must deliver, so everyone has today’s technology, as we develop the solutions and market for tomorrow’s.

    On the USO, we have published our consultation on the regulatory option and will be responding to the consultation shortly.

    We are also considering the offer put forward by BT to deliver the USO. We welcome their proposal, and we are considering both options on the table, but unless BT can convince us they will deliver universal coverage by 2020 we will have no option but to go down the regulatory route.

    We are determined to deliver high speed broadband to all by 2020.

    And then, we turn our attention to full fibre. For while the existing copper network is important today, a copper-to-the-premise solution is not fit for the future.

    So while completing the rollout of today’s technology is important, we are determined to be on the front foot with the technology of tomorrow too. That means full fibre. We cannot stress enough that full fibre is the future.

    For we are in the very early days. UK full fibre coverage is just 3%. This will not stand. We will strain every sinew to get it rolled out in Britain.

    Over the last year we have unveiled a whole suite of policies to get the UK’s full fibre roll out going.

    Like the CTTP roll out, this is a mixed-economy approach: with some taxpayers’ funding, but the majority of funding from the market.

    First, we are helping to level the playing field by supporting insurgent altnets reach their fibre ambitions through the Digital Infrastructure Investment Fund, which will improve access to commercial finance.

    Next, we are investing £200m to fund locally-led projects across the UK. This “Local Full Fibre Networks” programme aims to provide the fastest and most reliable broadband available.

    Working with providers and local bodies we have shaped a programme focused on improving the business case for the private sector to invest in fibre networks, and to connect even more homes and businesses.

    The Local Full Fibre Network project involves upgrading connections into public buildings with fibre, providing gigabit connection vouchers to increase business take-up; and improving access upgrades to publicly-owned infrastructure. And we’re working with Network Rail and others to open up existing fibre, and roll out new fibre down train lines. This rail project is incredibly important and we welcome approaches from industry on how to get connectivity down our railways.

    We’ve got going. Our six wave one projects will trial the approaches outlined for the programme, including public sector as an anchor tenant, reusing public sector infrastructure, and testing gigabit vouchers.

    We are particularly interested in how the market responds and how much full fibre build is stimulated.

    But we’re not just waiting for the results. We’re already pushing on with the next wave.

    We are developing a competitive process for local areas to bid for resources from a ‘Challenge Fund’, and that is for projects that will support the stimulation of large scale commercial investment in full fibre networks. Recently we invited local bodies from across the UK to submit expressions of interest in the programme, and their responses will help further shape how we operate this fund.

    Details on how the fund can be accessed will be announced shortly, and at that launch we will clearly explain the competitive process through which funding will be allocated. Be clear, there will be no ring fencing of funds to particular regions. Regional roadshow events in support of the Challenge Fund process will take place over the coming months.

    The crucial thing about all these projects is that they are actively designed to show this works, to level the playing field, and to help make the business case both inside and outside Government.

    Of course taxpayers cash isn’t everything. So we’re also working on reducing cost and ensuring the market is structured right.

    Many of you have complained about the cost of laying fibre. Ofcom are working to reduce costs, to open up ducts and poles, to reduce burdens and to get the wholesale pricing structures right. They and we are determined to ensure there is a strong return on the investment that is so badly needed. We very much welcome Ofcom’s efforts in these areas and hope the outcome of the Wholesale Local Access market review will further encourage fibre investment. And I welcome the laser-focus of Lord Adonis’s National Infrastructure Commission which is demonstrating the case for and the terrific returns to connectivity.

    To reduce some of the direct costs of roll out, on top of the business rates holiday, we have set up a barrier busting taskforce across Government.

    In May 2017 the Broadband Stakeholder Group published its report ‘Tackling Barriers to Telecoms Deployment’. This looked at the factors slowing down the rollout of UK Broadband, including local authority planning and the business rates regime for fibre.

    As a direct response to this excellent report, our Barrier Busting Taskforce aims to reduce the costs of street-works, liberalising planning, to simplify wayleave agreements and tackle every and any barrier to rollout. We will systematically examine every issues flagged in the report, and then working with local bodies to identify solutions or to implement best practice. We are working with local authorities to standardise their approach and reduce bureaucracy, and we’re prepared to change regulations if needed, on planning, transport, and wayleave rules if we need to. We want to hear from you about the practical barriers to deployment.

    Like you, we want to get the cost per premise passed down.

    As well as government funding, and busting barriers, we are determined to ensure that we get the market structure and incentives right.

    I believe that the market for full fibre will look very different to the market for copper connections, and we want to see a fully competitive market for full fibre with a panoply of potential players. And I’m pretty sure one of the reasons so many players large and small are getting going at scale now is to play a part in that competitive market in the future.

    The first action we took last year of course was to reach agreement on the future structure of BT and Openreach. I welcome that agreement, and I can already see the new Independent Board under the astute Chairmanship of Mike McTigue making a difference.

    The test of the success of the legal separation will be twofold.

    First, significantly increased investment by BT Group, through Openreach in the country’s full fibre digital infrastructure.

    And second, Openreach becoming more responsive to its industry customers, both by entering into new arrangements with customers other than BT group, and being proactive and enthusiastic on working with others on the ground, for example opening up access to ducts and poles. Like Ofcom, we want Openreach to provide better access to data on its duct and poles so competitors can plan new networks.

    While I welcome the work Openreach are doing to reposition themselves, I am concerned at the speed BT Group are moving in formally implementing the agreed split. Unless we make significant progress very soon we will have to talk to Ofcom about what would be needed to make this happen.

    So, we have made progress in improving the market, to ensure we have a competitive market for our full fibre future.

    But we want to make sure we get it right.

    So in the coming months, we will be examining the market for investment in future connectivity in the UK, to ensure we have markets and regulations that encourage investment now and in the future. The purpose of this work, which we shall lead, will be to build on what has been achieved so far, and make sure that the conditions are as good as they can be to maximise investment in full fibre and new technologies.

    This commitment to developing a full fibre Britain will make the country the best place in the world for a telecommunications company to invest, because with full fibre comes unlimited potential for business. I’m not sure if I mentioned, but we really are determined to deliver Britain’s full fibre future.

    Finally, I want to turn to the interaction with mobile. Because of course what really matters to people is not the mode, but the connection. A fast, reliable, secure connection, whenever you need it, wherever you live, work, and travel.

    In a market that’s increasingly vertically integrated, the links between fibre and mobile are increasingly clear.

    At a basic level, I find it astonishing that a large proportion of 4G base stations today are connected via copper and radio links. While this may be adequate for 4G services, it makes it hard to maximise the benefits of 4G, let alone reach the fast approaching multi-gigabit demands of 5G.

    And we’re going to need fibre spines in much greater density to deliver that 5G connection.

    I don’t believe 5G and full fibre are alternatives. Even if 5G can bring great speeds to your phone, there’s only ever limited spectrum, so full fibre and 5G are complementary technologies.

    Our 5G strategy, published at Budget 2017, sets out how we will lead the world in 5G, and we are working on an update to be published before the end of the year.

    In October, we launched a competition to select a number of projects to be funded in 2018/19 as part of the 5G Testbeds & Trials programme.

    This first phase of the programme will help encourage the development of a 5G ecosystem in the UK and builds on the foundations laid by our investment in the 5G university research announced at the Budget. As with full fibre, our aim is to demonstrate the benefits 5G can deliver for businesses and how new applications and services can be developed using 5G technology.

    The full fibre and 5G programmes are being taken forward under a shared budget, and we hope to fund joint projects that explore the interplay between the two.

    As I travel the world I am yet to find a country more prepared than we are for 5G. I’m absolutely determined that Britain will be at the front of the queue.

    So there you have it.

    I’ll end by saying this.

    We all want people to stop badgering us about their broadband. And I want to ensure they don’t have to badger us ever again, whether they are up in space or down here on earth.

    We have set these goals. We’ve hired some brilliant people to deliver them. We are clear-eyed in our ambition.

    But we can’t do it without you.

    We can get the ball rolling. We can set the framework.

    But it is you, the businesses of Britain, who are going to deliver the connectivity people crave.

    So take this moment. Rise to the challenge. And together we will give Britain what it needs to be fit for the future.

  • Nick Gibb – 2017 Speech at FASNA Conference

    Below is the text of the speech made by Nick Gibb, the Minister of State for School Standards and Minister for Equalities, at the FASNA Conference on 2 November 2017.

    Year on year, the voice of Freedom and Autonomy for Schools National Association (FASNA) grows ever more prominent in the nation’s great education debates. FASNA – under the stewardship of Tom Clark – continues to be an independent voice, arguing for the empowerment of teachers and the pursuit of evidence-based policies that enable schools to raise standards for all pupils.

    FASNA promotes autonomy for schools, believing that autonomous schools are the best vehicle to innovate and raise standards for their pupils, in the best interest of local communities. This is a belief that we share. Thanks to the reforms of this government, support from organisations like FASNA and the hard work of teachers and headteachers around the country, there is now a burgeoning empirical evidence base for this belief.

    Herein lies the power of greater freedom and autonomy for schools. By empowering teachers and headteachers and promoting an atmosphere of innovation and evidence, power is wrestled from the old authorities. Ideas are weighed and, if they are found wanting, they can be discarded.

    By unleashing the proliferation of ideas, it is no longer the exclusive prerogative of LA advisers or education faculties of universities to dictate pedagogy or curriculum to teachers. Teachers – empowered by our reforms – have seized back their profession.

    And thanks to powers granted by the government and the expansion of the academies and free schools programmes, teachers and headteachers now enjoy far greater control over the destiny of their school. Decision making has truly been localised and professionalised.

    Alongside the greater freedoms made available to teachers in free schools and academies, the government also scrapped 20,000 pages of unnecessary regulation and guidance, freeing teachers to focus on teaching.

    Greater powers now exist to deal with disruptive behaviour, which for too long blighted English education. Importantly, the government granted teachers anonymity if they faced allegations from parents or pupils.

    But freedom has not only been granted, it has been seized. For example, Tom Bennett’s report, ‘Creating a Culture’ – drawing on evidence and examples from high performing schools – documents how all schools in all circumstances can achieve high standards of behaviour.

    It is the determination of teachers to prove that all children thrive when given a classical liberal education – after decades of being told that Shakespeare and good behaviour isn’t for children from certain backgrounds – that has been the most important consequence of greater teacher autonomy.

    The flourishing online community of teacher-bloggers – who share their experiences, challenge received wisdom and critique evidence – are raising the status of the profession and improving the lives of pupils. Few examples from teaching better sum up the perennially underestimated effects of freedom than the effect that this heterodox collection of teachers have had on the profession.

    And this new education commentariat – distinguished from those they are replacing because of their current classroom experience – are taking their influence offline. Through teacher-organised, grassroots conferences such as ResearchED, evidence of what really works in the classroom is spreading quickly throughout the system.

    From Andrew Old’s long-standing campaign against the so-called ‘Ofsted teaching style’, to Greg Ashman’s tireless commitment to evidence-based practice and Jo Facer’s thoughtful and personal reflections, these classroom teachers provide insight, commentary and challenge from the classroom – making redundant those who seek to speak for teachers.

    And teachers have seized control of schools too. This year’s GCSE results go to show the effect of greater autonomy: 8 of the top 10 schools for progress made by pupils were academies or free schools.

    These extraordinary schools are changing what is thought to be possible and raising expectations across the country. They are an example to any school seeking to improve.

    And whether you look at Reach Academy Feltham, Dixons Trinity Academy or the Harris Academy Chain – which had three schools register Progress 8 scores above 1 – there are some obvious similarities.

    All of these schools teach a stretching knowledge-rich curriculum. Each has a strong approach to behaviour management, so teachers can teach uninterrupted. And all of these schools serve disadvantaged communities, demonstrating that high academic and behavioural standards are not – and must not – be the preserve of wealthy pupils in independent schools.

    In the areas of the country where the government’s reforms have matured most rapidly, school-level autonomy twinned with a sensible accountability system has created a range of different schools from which parents can choose.

    All around the country, the government has built the foundations of an education system through which teachers and headteachers control the levers over school improvement and parents exercise choice, wrestling power away from local education authorities and handing it back to local communities.

    With an intelligent accountability system to maintain high standards, innovative schools collaborate and compete with one another to improve teaching, the quality of their curricula or retention of their staff.

    The guiding principles behind the reforms to the curriculum, assessment and accountability structure were simple: raise standards, increase rigour and ensure that every child – whatever their background – receives a high-quality, knowledge-rich academic education up until the age of 16.

    Schools are now judged based on the outcomes and progress they achieve for their pupils, giving a truer picture of the achievements of schools. The government wants to do even more to attract teachers to schools in challenging areas, but the change in emphasis in the accountability system should go a long way towards breaking down the barriers to attracting teachers to where they are most needed.

    Of even greater significance has been the refinement and improvement of the national assessment system. In order to encourage schools to enter more pupils into rigorous academic GCSEs, the government introduced the EBacc performance measure, a key combination of academic subjects: maths; English; two sciences; a humanity; and a language. This combination of subjects provides pupils with a broad academic core of knowledge and provides pupils with the best opportunity of being admitted to the UK’s most prestigious universities.

    A recent report from the Sutton Trust found that pupils at schools that had enthusiastically adapted its curriculum to enter more pupils into the EBacc combination of subjects were more likely to achieve good English and maths GCSEs and go on to take A level or equivalent Level 3 qualifications, as compared to a set of schools with similar characteristics.

    Additionally, the pupil premium gap closed slightly more in these schools compared with schools with similar pupil intakes, but which had not adapted its curriculum choices to promote greater take up of the EBacc.

    This policy has resulted in some significant improvements. Since 2010, the proportion of pupils studying the science component of the EBacc has risen from 63% to 91%. Similarly, the proportion of pupils studying either history or geography has risen from 48% to 77%. These figures show the scale of what has been achieved in education over the past seven years.

    However, there is much more to do if we are to achieve our manifesto target of 75% of pupils studying for the EBacc by 2022 and 90% studying the EBacc suite of qualifications by 2025. This year, for the first time the proportion of pupils entering subjects in all five pillars fell slightly, whilst the proportion of pupils entering four pillars or more rose 6%. More pupils took more EBacc subjects, but fewer pupils took all five EBacc subjects needed.

    The proportion of pupils taking GCSE languages has risen from 40% to just 47% this year, falling from 49% last year. Too few pupils are being taught a foreign language. In an ever more globalised world, having an economy with a voracious appetite for people with knowledge of a foreign language and being a great trading nation and host to the world’s financial capital, we must do more to ensure more pupils study languages at GCSE.

    We cannot always rely on businesses’ demand for multi-lingual senior staff to be met by foreign born or non-UK employees or those educated in the independent sector. We need those opportunities to be equally available to young people educated in our state schools.

    Our accountability system – including the EBacc entry and attainment measures – rewards schools for their achievements and incentivises behaviour that improves outcomes for pupils, maintaining standards and allowing for innovation. But, too many schools have been competing on an unequal footing because of the unfair and anachronistic funding system.

    The unfair, opaque and outdated school and high needs funding system meant the same pupils would attract significantly different levels of funding depending on where in the country they went to school. The government is grasping the nettle and addressing this unfairness.

    As FASNA knows, the need for reform has been widely recognised, because of the manifest unfairness in the current system. For example, Nottingham receives £555 more per pupil than Halton despite having similar proportions of pupils eligible for free school meals.

    For the first time, school funding will be distributed according to a formula based on the individual needs and characteristics of every pupil and school in the country. This will direct resources where they are needed most, and provide transparency and predictability for schools.

    Time and time again since 2010, the government has demonstrated the desire to take on the big questions that confront our country.

    Following extensive consideration, involving two public consultations – generating over 26,000 responses – and a large number of meetings with teachers, headteachers, councillors, governors, academy trusts and MPs, the government announced the final national funding formula for schools and high needs in September.

    The introduction of the national funding formula is supported by significant extra funding of £1.3 billion across 2018-19 and 2019-20, over and above the budget announced at the 2015 spending review, ensuring that no school will lose out as a result of these reforms.

    Thanks to our careful management of the public finances, we are able to increase core funding for schools and high needs from almost £41 billion in 2017-18 to £42.4 billion in 2018-19 and £43.5 billion in 2019-20. That’s £2.5 billion more in 2019-20 than in 2017-18. This will allow us to maintain school and high needs funding in real terms per pupil for the next two years.

    To provide stability, the Government has announced that local authorities will continue to decide final, individual school budgets for the next two years.

    However, the funding local authorities receive will – for the first time – be allocated according to a clear and transparent formula based on the characteristics of pupils and schools in their areas.

    This historic reform, backed by increased investment, will ensure:

    An increase in the basic amount of funding every child attracts to their school, compared to our proposals in December

    A minimum per pupil funding level of £4,800 for secondary schools and £3,500 for primary schools in 2019-20

    A minimum cash increase for every school through the formula of one per cent per pupil by 2019-20, with underfunded schools seeing rises of up to three per cent per pupil in 2018-19 and a further three per cent per pupil in 2019-20

    A £110,000 lump sum for every school to help with fixed costs, and an additional £26 million to rural and isolated schools to help them manage their unique challenges

    The final national funding formula will benefit schools right across the country. Rural schools will gain on average 3.9% through the formula, with those schools in the most remote locations gaining 5.0% and schools with the highest numbers of pupils starting with low attainment will gain on average 3.8%.

    In order to provide transparency to the public, we have published the full detail online, so that everyone can see notional figures illustrating what these reforms mean for their local schools.

    We have also recognised the need for additional investment in high needs to support the most vulnerable pupils. Every local authority will see a minimum increase in high needs funding of 0.5% in 2018-19, and 1% in 2019-20. Overall, local authorities will gain 4.6% on average in their high needs budgets.

    These much-needed reforms to school funding provide teachers and headteachers with the resources they need to continue to drive up standards in schools, and they allow parents to choose the best school for their child safe in the knowledge that they will receive the fair funding their child deserves.

    By combining greater autonomy, raised expectations and a level playing field for all, the school system has gone from strength to strength. Where appropriate, the government has stepped back, with teachers, schools and MATs having control over their destiny. No longer does the scourge of the ‘Ofsted teaching style’ dictate pedagogy in English classrooms. Now teachers are free to pursue and debate the most effective teaching methods.

    But government has played, and will continue to play, an important role. As well as levelling the playing field and liberating teachers from unnecessary constraints, the government has played a crucial role in raising standards for all.

    Thanks to the phonics reforms, 154,000 more pupils are on track to be fluent readers this year than in 2012. The review of the national curriculum has seen knowledge restored to the heart of schooling, better preparing pupils for working life and introducing them to the great conversations of humankind.

    Government will continue to raise standards for all children, whatever their background. We are determined to close the ‘word gap’ that exists when pupils first arrive at school. We know that disadvantaged pupils arrive in reception with less developed language and vocabulary than their more affluent peers.

    In the interests of having a socially just and socially mobile society, it is important that we do more to address this inequality. Children who struggle with language in reception are six times less likely to reach the expected standard in English at age 11 and ten times less likely to achieve the expected level in maths, demonstrating that early language development is key to unlocking potential.

    And we are determined to make progress in preparing pupils for the rigours of secondary school. The new primary maths curriculum and the introduction of the multiplication tables check will help ensure that every pupil leaves primary school knowing their times tables, granting secondary maths teachers the freedom to cover complex mathematical concepts secure in the knowledge that their pupils have the requisite domain knowledge.

    Alongside a dynamic and self-improving school system, government has an important role to play in spreading excellence to all parts of the school system.

    That is what we will continue to do.

    Over the past seven years, the school system has been transformed:

    Teachers and headteachers have been empowered, being given additional responsibilities, more autonomy and a greater voice

    Rigour has been returned to our education system, with more pupils studying core academic subjects and innovative free schools and academies leading the way in raising standards

    Schools will be funded fairly and transparently for the first time FASNA has played a key role in the national education debates, arguing for greater freedom and autonomy for schools. Your contribution has been invaluable in shaping, developing and fine-tuning national policy, and I look forward to working with you in the future.

  • Greg Clark – 2017 Speech to Institute of Energy Economics

    Below is the text of the speech made by Greg Clark, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, to the Institute of Energy Economics on 31 October 2017.

    Introduction

    So Charles, thank you very much indeed and thank you for staying despite the extensive introduction from Charles. I am sure Charles explained that we have had a series of votes on the Finance Bill and we have just finished so I am here with you and looking forward to questions and the discussion.

    But can I say to Charles what a pleasure and privilege it is to be here under Charles’ chairmanship. As I am sure Charles said to you, when I was hotfooting it over Parliament Square, Charles and I worked on energy policy extensively in opposition and I can see many familiar faces in the room who we got to know and were advised by then.

    I think that the conclusions and the analysis that we drew during that time – looking forward to a low carbon economy and putting Britain on a path to a prosperous low carbon future in which we could benefit industrially as well as economically from the changes that were in prospect – what we were on to there has stood the test of time and I was very grateful for Charles’ advice and support throughout all of it.

    Now, this is billed as a lecture. I am not one that believes in lecturing an audience as distinguished as this rather the other way round.

    I think rather than telling you how things should be this is a particular point in the development of our policy not least after Dieter Helm’s review published a few days ago just in time for Halloween I know that much of the industry was debating whether this was a trick or a treat.

    But the discussion is being launched inviting your thoughts and reflections on what Dieter has had to say and I will say a bit more about that in a second.

    But it seems to me that the energy challenge that is facing us is an important one and one replete with opportunities; it is an opportunity for those of us serving in public life to look at how we can make life easier for businesses, and for consumers today and in the future. And energy is one of these areas where I think we can make a very big difference.

    So I want to talk today about Government’s role in responding to what is a very rapid pace of change in the energy sector and if you just think about what has happened in the last 12 months…

    For the first time in 135 years the UK did not use coal to generate electricity in a 24-hour period…

    And against many predictions, the price of offshore wind has almost halved in our most recent auction, achieving a price that most people did not expect to see even a few years ago until the 2030s…

    Large-scale, low cost batteries started outbidding some more conventional generation in our capacity auction. And the list of innovations goes on across the energy sector:

    Proliferation of new models of electric vehicles;

    Cost transformations that we have seen for oil and gas operators in the North Sea, a very crucial sector that continues to be vital to our industrial future;

    Smart technologies to help people save money in their homes.

    Much of this entrepreneurship and innovation we rightly celebrated in last month’s Clean Growth Strategy.

    And so no one can doubt this is a time of extraordinary change in the energy market.

    And during a time of change, Government’s job is to make sure that the possibilities and technological transformation in particular is made available for people across the economy.

    Energy and Industrial Strategy

    And that should mean lower bills for consumers; families who want to heat their homes for less, businesses large and small who want to reduce their energy bills.

    It means taking the opportunity to enhance our energy security, particularly in our electricity market, through a smarter, much more responsive system.

    It means continuing to reduce our carbon emissions and to make sure that this transformation benefits our wider economy.

    It seems to me that by investing in innovation and encouraging further the creativity that has long characterised the energy sector in this country, we can create new businesses and provide good jobs.

    And high value industries will help to improve people’s earning power right across the country.

    Now these are goals for the long-term; and we are thinking not just about the next few years but about the next twenty years as a strategic view of energy should.

    So we need a long-term plan to work towards those goals.

    And that is why the place of energy and clean growth is so important in our Industrial Strategy. We published a green paper earlier in the year and very shortly we will be responding to the consultation with a white paper in which again the role of energy will be absolutely pivotal in the proposals that we set out because the pipes and the wires, the power stations and the heating systems are obviously a crucial part of our economic infrastructure as a country.

    But beyond that, the challenges and opportunities for our energy sector match many of those for our wider Industrial Strategy: building on those strengths that we have in this country by creating new jobs in the energy sector with a challenge to make sure that we equip ourselves with a skilled workforce able to discharge some of the tasks and duties that will be required.

    And to make sure that this sector alongside our other areas of national strength continues to be and is even more in the future a hotbed of innovation and ideas, and with public engagement by government crucial to that.

    Now some people were surprised when Theresa May made an Industrial Strategy so central to the economic agenda of the country.

    But in my view every country has an industrial strategy, whether they are called one or not. Think back to the early 1980s: the assessment that was made of the challenges and the weaknesses of the British economy.

    And so to be explicit and to be deliberate about an industrial strategy to consider what are the challenges of the future?

    How well we are equipped to meet them? And what we need do to best to prepare to get the most out of them? It seems to me is an essential function of government, not an option.

    So it seems we should set out our plans for each. But a strategy is not a strategy if it is a short-term set of measures, if it is an ephemeral set of policy directions.

    It seems to me that if you are to have a strategy it needs to be there for the long term and in a context of public policy and public life that has elections every 5 years, and sometimes more frequently.

    It seems to be all the more important that you embed the longevity of a strategy by making sure that it is done in a way that commands support right across the economy and right across the county and political divides.

    And so the approach that we have taken in our consultation on the industrial strategy has been a very extensive consultation with the aim to produce – as we will in our white paper – a document, but more than that an approach.

    I think it will endure because it captures the challenges that we face for the future and sets out an approach to them that if it does not enjoy total consensus on everything it does then at least there will be I think a substantial respect for the policies and steps that we are taking.

    And of course nowhere is this more important than in energy where questions as diverse but substantial as how the consumer welfare is protected?

    What is the role of technologies like nuclear power?

    The future of the gas grid?

    How we make use of our experience in the North Sea in terms of future exploration but also our expertise in decommissioning and in services around the world?

    These are big challenges and opportunities that I intend to make absolutely central to our strategy. So let me say something about the Government’s role in energy markets.

    This was of course one of the key questions in Dieter’s Cost of Energy review, which we published – all 242 pages of it – last week.

    Anyone who knows Dieter Helm – I suspect everyone in this room knows – that Dieter is completely independently minded, is rigorous in his approach and is unflinching in his analysis, and I commissioned him precisely on that basis.

    The work that he has done during the summer resulting in his publication last week is a tremendous commitment of his brain power, his experience and his conversations with many people in this room.

    And I am very grateful for what is a comprehensive and radical piece of work just as we – certainly I – hoped and expected.

    I wanted him to ask awkward questions and to challenge the status quo.

    And the reason for that and the reason that I commissioned the review and the reason that I commissioned Dieter to do it was to start with a formidable set of evidence and prescriptions, a debate about the future of our energy, and in particular our electricity sector in the light of the radical and exciting changes in technology I described earlier.

    Now our intention in responding to Dieter’s report and the context of our industrial strategy is to lay out – as we are doing through the strategy as a whole – a clear set of policies and institutions that we intend to endure.

    So when faced with that challenge, as Dieter’s review points out, we have to ask ourselves a set of questions:

    How can we reduce complexity in our energy markets and what is the role for Government?

    How can we harness the potential of distributed energy and smarter energy systems?

    What will the role of system operators be in the future?

    What is the future of our energy networks and how we regulate them?

    And what do we do about the rise of zero marginal cost technologies?

    These are significant challenges and thorny questions but they could not be a more exciting set, it seems to me, of challenges and opportunities to move from a world in which energy was a precious resource that was strictly rationed in to the prospect of a world in which energy is abundant and available for a much wider set of uses across the economy.

    Now I am sure that many people – I dare say everyone – in this room will have strong views about whether Dieter was right in his contributions or whether a different approach should be taken; whether his vision of the future of the power market was right or whether there was a different approach that should be taken.

    We are keen to hear those views and so I am going to launch, in the next few days, a call for evidence in response to Dieter’s arguments and I would hope that this society and its members will contribute.

    It is not just your written responses that are important though they are, we want to make sure that we understand and discuss and debate your views and recommendations.

    Retail

    I just wanted to say something in this context about an important part of the industry that has been garnering a lot of attention recently which is the retail side of the market.

    It was evident from the election campaign that almost every political party in the country reflected the view of constituents up and down the country that there is a concern in the current working of energy markets for consumers in the retail sector, at least in the short term.

    Our work to cut costs and drive investment will be taking forward our existing commitments for further Contracts for Difference and Capacity Market auctions.

    We remain committed to nurturing the kind of low carbon economy that we set out in the Clean Growth Strategy. But in particular, a commitment to keeping bills low means ensuring the retail market is fit for purpose.

    Since privatisation, as many people in this room know, this market has displayed some of the strengths and also some of the weaknesses that markets can produce.

    On the “up” side, we have a hugely competitive business-to-business market with razor thin margins and a growing number of sophisticated intermediaries who can and do help optimise how businesses use their energy.

    For example, today, a hospital might use its own backup combined heat and power generation to sell energy back to the grid at times of higher prices.

    Another “best-of-the-market” example comes in the competitive section of the domestic sector.

    The CMA found that about one in three customers is an active participant in the competitive segment of the market.

    It is full of new dynamic firms bringing innovation, better service and a different offer to customers.

    It has also developed a supporting and innovative array of switching sites and collective switch providers who work out better ways for consumers to save money.

    And so at its best, the competitive parts of energy supply are comparable with some of the best in the world.

    Unfortunately, at the moment, the gap between the best and the worst in domestic retail is too large.

    This is a theme that we find in many parts of the economy today, a kind of emerging polarisation, with the savviest and those consumers who suppliers can identify a repeated pattern of behaviour that makes them prone to switch getting good service, good prices and feeling that the future opening up for them is bright and competitive.

    While others whose behaviour can be discerned by their suppliers to be irresponsive to prices who increasingly know behaviour of consumers often better than those consumers know their own behaviour.

    They can and do use that information to provide a service and a set of prices that is not the equal of what is available in the competitive side of the market.

    And as a result, in my view, too many customers, often more vulnerable, are punished for their loyalty, as the CMA in its report made clear.

    They found that as a result, an average of £1.4 billion a year was being paid over recent years more than competitors would pay in what the CMA described as a truly competitive market.

    As you know the CMA proposed robust action to protect customers on prepayment meters.

    But in my view, just like the minority report of the enquiry, the CMA’s remedies did not go far enough.

    This view again was confirmed by some of the price rises on the standard variable tariffs that we have seen over the last 12 months that even Ofgem at the time had cause to question and criticise.

    I also judged that the degree of harm identified by the CMA, given the time it will take for the market to transform, and the uncertain impact of the CMA’s remedies, required an earlier response.

    As you know this was the view of one of the panel members, Martin Cave.

    But I think it was also a more basic and philosophical difference in that a well-functioning market and I think consumers look to policy-makers to ensure that the market serves all customers.

    I do not think it is compatible with a positive view of the market in which consumers are forced to enter a suspicious, defensive relationship with their suppliers, the requiring to be ever-attentive to the risk of being overcharged, and where a loyalty that some consumers want to place in their suppliers is rewarded with much higher bills than if they did not take that approach.

    And so I think that as government and regulators we should be working to ensure that markets emerge that do enjoy the confidence of customers and where companies care for their long-term reputations and where it is possible for consumers to place their trust in their suppliers confident that trust will not be abused.

    We are entering, as I said earlier, an exciting new world across the energy sector but in particular it seems to me in the domestic energy sector where decentralised energy production… where the potential use of electric vehicles as storage on the system can take us.

    But in order to take most households on this journey, people will need to feel that they are in the hands of trusted and trustworthy organisations and to achieve this objective is going to take a mixture of rapid reaction by Ofgem… … publication of our draft bill to impose a temporary wider price cap on SVTs is there to address that…

    and, I would hope, more voluntary and unilateral measures from the energy companies themselves.

    Ofgem as everyone knows is an independent regulator and has the legal powers that are required to cap prices in consumers’ interests.

    The quickest way in my view to get that price protection in place is for Ofgem to use these powers.

    So, I welcome the Ofgem board’s decision to consult on extending the CMA price cap to more of the most vulnerable households this winter: a further million this winter and a further two million next winter is an appropriate use of those powers.

    In all, between the pre-payment meter cap and Ofgem’s proposed extension of it, five million households will be shielded from paying excessive prices to stay warm this winter over and above what was intended, what was made the case on publication of the CMA’s report.

    But it is well known and I have said in public that I believe Ofgem could and should have gone further within their powers, but I respect their independence and I welcome the quick solution that they have put in place and are taking for the most hard-up households.

    But my view is that the limited cap is not in itself sufficient to eradicate the detriment that was identified in the CMA report.

    Therefore we published draft legislation that will require Ofgem to design and set a price cap for all customers on standard variable tariffs and default tariffs that will be in place until 2020, with the option to extend it to 2023.

    It requires Ofgem to find a design that addresses the harm without undermining the long term competitive nature of the market.

    The cap is a temporary staging post while we – and the industry – move to a better deal for all households.

    Now it seems to me that in setting that cap Ofgem will want and I know that they intend to make sure that the vigorous competition that exists in the competitive part of the market will continue and indeed this has happened since the imposition of the cap in the prepayment meter market.

    As Ofgem pointed out in its State of the Market report just today, suppliers are still in that section of the market offering tariffs below the cap – the cheapest across the market was £70 below the prepayment meter cap in August.

    As you know in Northern Ireland, where price controls are currently in place, the incumbent has lost 40% of its market share since 2010.

    The other concern that some commentators have raised with price caps is that they can be set at a sufficiently low level that suppliers no longer want to supply.

    I think that this can easily be avoided in the careful design of a cap. A well-designed cap needs to be responsive to the market but also to give consumers comfort that they are getting a fair deal. That their loyalty is not being exploited.

    It seems to me that this is a role for sensible government and regulation – to be actively engaged in a market until it has settled into the equilibrium that everyone contributing to the CMA report the majority and the minority foresaw.

    And so it is to Ofgem to design the right cap.

    Dermot Nolan, the Ofgem CEO, has given a speech recently in which he considers various design ideas.

    Dieter, of course, has developed his own ideas in the course of the Energy Review.

    I welcome this – this is exactly why we wanted to publish a bill that could have the scrutiny that is required.

    And it is important that energy companies themselves should wholeheartedly participate in this thinking.

    And indeed, be trying to solve this problem unilaterally by getting their customers off these tariffs that have been identified by the CMA as being at the detriment to consumers.

    Clean Growth

    So we are taking action to protect consumers, but it is important not to lose sight of the medium-term changes that will be needed to respond rapidly to changing technologies.

    And it is important to invest for the long term, too.

    If we get our approach right – combining competition with particular interventions where needed; ensuring that markets are working for all consumers; making sure as Dieter suggests that we are alive to the possibilities, innovation and change that are replete in this country.

    If we have an energy system where renewables, nuclear, gas and other technologies are working together to ensure security of supply.

    If we have strength through diversity.

    And if we target affordable bills for businesses and households, where we are helping people to stop wasting energy and improving the productivity of our businesses.

    And where we champion very explicitly the prospects for clean growth – which is the last point I want to focus on this evening – where we are not just decarbonising our economy, but our businesses and innovators are capturing commercial opportunities of the low carbon transition.

    That seems to me to be an area of promise for this country.

    One estimate suggests that the UK’s low carbon economy could grow in the region of 11 per cent per year up to 2030…

    … meaning that in just 13 years it could support as many as two million jobs…

    … and export billions of pounds in low carbon goods and services each year.

    So, by focusing on clean growth, we have big opportunities:

    We can cut the cost of energy…

    We can cut how much carbon we generate…

    We can drive economic growth…

    We can drive the creation of high value jobs across the UK…

    And we can improve our quality of life.

    This is precisely what our Clean Growth Strategy is all about – and it is great to see so many people here that were at the launch of the Clean Growth Strategy – it is about making a positive change to how we live.

    For businesses, the largest pool of contributors to emissions, we will help them improve how they use their energy, aiming to improve their energy productivity by at least twenty per cent by 2030, saving businesses £6 billion a year…

    …and we will make sure through our innovation approach that we support areas in which we have excellence and in which the UK has a commercial and technological opportunity.

    One example of that is the work that we have been doing on battery technology and ultra-low emission vehicles. We have launched the Faraday challenge – designed to ensure that the UK is the place in the world where new battery technology especially in combination with the auto sector is not just developed but is commercialised.

    Part of the Clean Growth Strategy of far-reaching goals and priorities, setting the scene for the long-term plans that will be relevant across government …

    such as the upcoming 25 year plan from my colleagues at DEFRA…

    …and the Department for Transport’s Road to Zero…

    …and as I said the Industrial Strategy that will be published during the weeks ahead.

    So the common denominator is clear: the model of clean growth, of innovation and industrial opportunity that this energy sector has needs to be at the heart of the thinking and the strategy for our whole economy.

    Conclusion

    To capture that prize we need a strategic approach.

    Over the past year, we have been setting out some of the building blocks of that approach, we published the Smart Systems Plan, we published just a couple of weeks ago the Clean Growth Strategy, we set out the Faraday challenge for battery storage, the decision to restart our civil nuclear energy programme, the Helm Review of the Cost of Energy, and our Industrial Strategy Green Paper.

    During the months ahead the conversation that we will have with everyone in this room will I hope put in place a set of institutions, policies and practices across the economy that will restore to this country the position of leadership in the future of energy that we have enjoyed at various times through our industrial history.

    We have in this country the ingenuity, the expertise, the heritage but also the current practice to be able to make us I think one of the most important foundations of the economy of the future.

    Thank you very much indeed for inviting me to come belatedly this evening I look forward to your initial questions and to the conversation that will I hope take place vigorously.

  • Priti Patel – 2017 Speech at BICOM Jewish News Conference

    Below is the text of the speech made by Priti Patel, the Secretary of State for International Development, to the BICOM Jewish News conference on 2 November 2017.

    Introduction

    Lords, ladies and gentlemen; distinguished guests and friends.

    Theresa, thank you for your introduction. It is a pleasure and a privilege to be speaking here today, at this event to mark the centenary of the Balfour Declaration, in the presence of esteemed colleagues. I am extremely grateful to BICOM and Jewish News for hosting this important event and for inviting me to speak – it is an honour.

    100 years on from the Balfour Declaration, Britain is proud of the role we played in helping to make a homeland for the Jewish people – after so many centuries of persecution.

    As the Prime Minister said last week in Parliament, we are proud of the role that we played in the creation of the State of Israel and we will certainly mark the centenary with pride. The Prime Minister said she is pleased about the good trade and other relationships we have with Israel which we are building on and enhancing.

    She also said that we must be conscious of the sensitivities that some people have about the Balfour Declaration.

    I agree.

    It is also vital to look forward towards establishing security and justice for both Israelis and Palestinians through a lasting peace. We believe the best way to achieve this is through a two-state solution based on a negotiated settlement that leads to a safe and secure Israel living alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian state.

    Today, the United Kingdom remains a close and reliable friend of Israel.

    From the strong and enduring bilateral relationship, built on decades of cooperation in education, technology medical research, business, arts and culture to the trade relationship which between our two countries is at record levels.

    Within the region in particular, Israel is an important strategic partner for the UK. Britain’s commitment to Israel’s security remains unwavering as is our support of Israel’s absolute right to defend its citizens. During meetings with Prime Minister Netanyahu earlier this year, the Prime Minister reiterated the UK’s commitment to building on the strong ties that already exist between our two countries and to continue to build upon our people to people ties.

    I believe there is great potential for our two countries to work together, as we work to set the foundations for a more stable and prosperous future.

    A changing world

    As International Development Secretary, I see and make decisions everyday about our changing world and about some of the poorest and most troubled places.

    It is staggering but true that there are more refugees and displaced people now than at any time since World War Two – with over 15 million in the Middle East region in particular.

    In fact, the Middle East and North Africa is the only region in the world where poverty rates are expected to rise in the coming years… if nothing changes, the number of people living in extreme poverty will continue to escalate.

    There are already 29 million children living in poverty in the region and many countries in the region also have a poor track record on women’s rights; development is going into reverse.

    The Middle East is therefore not just a security challenge, but a development challenge too.

    Violence and conflict are pulling people back into poverty.

    We are seeing the enormous potential of people squandered – because governments and leaders have failed to create the conditions for stability, opportunity and growth…conditions where fairness and human endeavour can flourish.

    As a result some areas of the world have become fertile territory for extremist groups and organisations and their poisonous ideologies.

    Extremist groups are seeking to control schools and what they teach by repressing all freedom of thought and a secular education.

    Which is why we must invest in those people and communities so that we can end the hateful ideology that seeks to create division across countries, communities and people.

    And let me say, that 100 years on from the Balfour Declaration, it is deplorable that anti-Semitism has once again raised its ugly head in our country.

    We will fight it wherever it appears.

    And speak out against intolerance, hatred and bigotry in all its forms.

    And together we must ensure that it appears no more.

    UK development

    The UK has a critical role to play in development and in helping to tackle the root causes of terror and violent extremism.

    Education is a critical part of this.

    Education is critical to breaking down barriers, in attitudes, perceptions about people and cultures.

    By investing in education and education systems we are able to go across boundaries, in a world where physical borders have less and less meaning.

    Today across the Middle East in particular, we see over 10 million children out of school in a region that is experiencing the largest reversal of education progress in history.

    In the Middle-East, Britain has led a global campaign to ensure there is no lost generation of Syrian children. Last year, we helped get over 700,000 children into formal education.

    Protecting and educating a generation of vulnerable young people is critical to development to turn them away from the toxic messages of extremists and instead providing new opportunities through education, skills and work.

    As believers in the two state solution, DFID’s work is focussed on building the institutions of a future Palestinian State through our work in education and in providing basic services from water to health.

    This includes job creation through economic growth opportunities for women and young people.

    But also to build and support people to people ties across communities through co-existence programmes and support.

    And we are working across communities and across the region to support peace and stability.

    I have seen for myself the very best of Jewish organisations and charities around the world including here in the UK doing such amazing work by investing in people.

    Because education, skills and jobs are crucial to opening up opportunities and widening horizons… bringing hope and the possibility of a better future.

    The case for open markets, private sector investment and technology has also never been stronger in development.

    This is how we can transform the poorest and most unsecure parts of the world, and help countries stand on their own two feet.

    It is to no country’s benefit if we leave millions of people without hope or aspiration… another generation locked into the vicious cycle of the politics of hate and repression.

    Working with Israel

    I have always been struck by the exceptional achievement that is the state of Israel.

    A country that has turned desert into fertile and plentiful land.

    A country that started with nothing, in a struggle for subsistence and survival and is now a world leader in technology and innovation.

    A country that despite the challenges of a turbulent region has become a democratic success story.

    A country that is at the forefront of the skills revolution, whether in technology, life skills, vocational skills and is creating the most practical solutions to enhance the lives of the poorest and most marginalised in the world.

    The desire and responsibility to want to help others, coupled with a can do attitudes, is Ladies and Gentlemen, precisely the sort of Jewish Homeland that was dreamt by Herzl and was of course was supported by the historic letter – the Balfour Declaration.

    I have long admired Israel’s extraordinary ingenuity and leadership in technology and innovation, and I am delighted that the UK is working so closely with Israel, in so many ways.

    For example the Israel/UK Tech Hub helps the UK to ally with Israel’s status as the “Start-Up Nation” – with more start-ups per capita than anywhere but Silicon Valley – and with its incredible innovative and entrepreneurial culture.

    And in turn Israel is partnering with the UK’s world-leading science, research and the fast growing tech sectors.

    In my role as Development Secretary I am keen that we continue this collaboration and work together to help create jobs and opportunities in the poorest parts of the world and also to provide essential support to the most vulnerable and marginalised in society.

    The UK is also committed to deepening our partnership – across trade, security, and cultural interests – and working together to tackle pressing global issues.

    This is important for security and stability in the UK, and across the world.

    Conclusion

    On this Centenary, it is fair to say that the Balfour Declaration was indispensable to the creation of a great nation.

    In the decades since its birth, Israel has prevailed over what has sometimes been the hostility of neighbours to become a liberal democracy and a dynamic hi-tech economy.

    In a region where many have endured authoritarianism and misrule, Israel has always stood out as a free society.

    Britain will stand by these values and stand by Israel.

    And by doing so we stand up to tackling this region’s challenges in the short-term and for the long-haul – working to build a more prosperous, more stable future for us all.

    These values were precisely the sort of values that were central to the historic letter we commemorate today.

  • Theresa May – 2017 Speech at Balfour Centenary Dinner

    Below is the text of the speech made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, at the Balfour Centenary Dinner held on 2 November 2017.

    Lord Rothschild, Prime Minister Netanyahu, Chief Rabbi, distinguished guests, Lords, Ladies and Gentlemen, I am so pleased to be here with you tonight – and to be with you Lord Balfour on this special evening – as we mark the centenary of the letter written by your great-Uncle: which I believe to be one of the most significant letters in history.

    A letter which gave birth to a most extraordinary country.

    And a letter which finally opened the door to helping make a Jewish homeland a reality.

    It was a letter that is all the more remarkable when you consider its length, its context and its sensitivity.

    First, it was exceptionally concise – just 67 words and one single sentence.

    In my experience such brevity is not typically a feature of letters from the Foreign Office!

    Second, we should consider the context in which this letter was written.

    Let us cast our minds back to the time of 1917. In an era of competing imperial powers and with Britain still embroiled in the midst of the First World War, the idea of establishing a homeland for the Jewish people would have seemed a distant dream for many; and been fiercely opposed by others.

    Yet it was at this very moment that Lord Balfour had the vision and the leadership to make this profound statement about restoring a persecuted people to a safe and secure homeland.

    Third, this was a letter that remains very sensitive for many people today – but it was not ignorant of those sensitivities.

    Indeed, Balfour wrote explicitly that: “nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”

    So when some people suggest we should apologise for this letter, I say absolutely not.

    We are proud of our pioneering role in the creation of the State of Israel.

    We are proud to stand here today together with Prime Minister Netanyahu and declare our support for Israel. And we are proud of the relationship we have built with Israel.

    And as we mark one hundred years since Balfour, we look forward to taking that relationship even further.

    As Prime Minister Netanyahu and I discussed in Downing Street earlier today, we want to deepen our links in areas where Israel is leading the world – in areas like agriculture, health, science, technology and innovation.

    Israel is the true start-up nation and we are proud to be your partner.

    We also remain absolutely committed to Israel’s security.

    For it is only when you witness Israel’s vulnerability that you truly understand the constant danger Israelis face – as I saw on my visit in 2014, when the bodies of the murdered teenagers Naftali Frenkel, Gilad Shaer and Eyal Yifrah were discovered.

    So I am clear that we will always support Israel’s right to defend itself.

    And in a world where Britain and Israel increasingly face the same shared challenges and threats, I am just as clear that our security services will continue to deepen their already excellent co-operation to keep all our people safe.

    So I believe we should gather here tonight with a great deal of pride in all that we have achieved – and all that Israel stands for as a symbol of openness, as a thriving democracy; and a beacon to the world in upholding the rights of women and members of the LGBT community.

    But marking this centenary is not just about what has been achieved.

    We must recognise how difficult at times this journey has been – from the Jews forced out of their homes in Arab countries in 1948 to the suffering of Palestinians affected and dislodged by Israel’s birth – both completely contrary to the intention of Balfour to safeguard all of these communities.

    And we must, I believe, seize this opportunity to renew our resolve on what is still to be achieved.

    For sadly, Balfour remains unfinished business – as his fundamental vision of peaceful co-existence has not yet been fulfilled.

    And I believe it demands of us today a renewed resolve to support a lasting peace that is in the interests of both Israelis and Palestinians – and in the interests of us all.

    So I am delighted to see US Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross here with us this evening and, Wilbur, you can be assured of the full-hearted support of the United Kingdom for the efforts that the Trump administration is making to bring the parties together to reach that peace deal.

    A peace deal that must be based on a two-state solution, with a safe and secure Israel alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian State.

    And let us be honest with each other: there will need to be compromises from each side if we are to have a realistic chance of achieving this goal – including an end to the building of new settlements and an end to Palestinian incitement too.

    But as we work together towards Balfour’s vision of a peaceful co-existence we must be equally clear that there can never be any excuses for boycotts, divestment or sanctions: they are unacceptable and this government will have no truck with those who subscribe to them.

    Neither can there ever be any excuse for anti-Semitism in any form. Just as there is no excuse for hatred against Muslims, Christians, or anyone based on the peaceful religions they choose to follow, the place of their birth, or the colour of their skin.

    And yes, this means recognising that there is today a new and pernicious form of anti-Semitism which uses criticism of the actions of the Israeli government as a despicable justification for questioning the very right of Israel to exist.

    This is abhorrent and we will not stand for it.

    That is why the United Kingdom has been at the forefront of an international effort to create a new definition of anti-Semitism which explicitly calls out this inexcusable attempt to justify hatred.

    So let me be clear. Criticising the actions of Israel is never – and can never be – an excuse for questioning Israel’s right to exist, any more than criticising the actions of Britain could be an excuse for questioning our right to exist.

    And criticising the government of Israel is never – and can never be – an excuse for hatred against the Jewish people – any more than criticising the British government would be an excuse for hatred against the British people.

    Put simply, there can be no excuses for any kind of hatred towards the Jewish people.

    There never has been – and there never will be.

    And let me say this too. We will never forget where that hatred and prejudice can lead.

    That is why it is right that the United Kingdom will have a permanent and fitting National Memorial to the Holocaust standing next to Parliament together with a learning centre that will teach the lessons of the Holocaust for society today and act as a voice against hatred in the modern world.

    And I am delighted that just last week, the cross-party United Kingdom Holocaust Memorial Foundation announced that Sir David Adjaye, Ron Arad and the landscape architects Gustafson Porter and Bowman have won the international design competition for the memorial and learning centre with their evocative concept design for this new national landmark at the heart of our democracy.

    In saying all of this I do not underestimate the scale of the challenges we face together.

    The challenge of fighting hatred in all its forms.

    The challenge of bringing people together.

    The challenge of fulfilling Balfour’s vision of peaceful co-existence.

    But neither do I underestimate the scale of the prize that is at stake.

    I saw a glimpse of that prize just last Saturday when I attended a charity concert with the West-Eastern Divan Orchestra on London’s South Bank – an orchestra that brings together young Israeli and Palestinian musicians as well as those from several other Arab countries to promote co-existence and intercultural dialogue.

    They were performing together raising money for the Jacqueline du Pre Tribute Fund which helps fund MS research.

    And through their shared love of music they escaped the divides of their history to come together for a united cause.

    In their actions, and in many others like it, the spirit of Balfour lives on.

    So let us tonight be inspired by that spirit.

    Let us recognise the contribution of Balfour in fulfilling what was once little more than a two-thousand year old dream for a persecuted people.

    Let us take inspiration from the vision he showed as we work together for that future where Arabs and Jews can live in peaceful co-existence.

    And as we look to that future, let us mark with pride what has been achieved with the creation of the State of Israel and – in Balfour’s own words – “a national home for the Jewish people.”

  • Paul Thomas Arkwright – 2017 Speech on UK-Nigerian Relations

    Below is the text of the speech made by Paul Thomas Arkwright, the British High Commissioner to Nigeria, on 3 November 2017.

    We all know Nigeria’s great potential: largest economy in Africa; set to be 3rd most populous nation in the world by 2050; Africa’s largest oil producer; fertile land; abundant natural resources; a large internal market; and a young, energetic population, with a deserved reputation for creativity and entrepreneurial spirit.

    That spirit is particularly strong here in Oyo State, and in Ibadan – home of Nigeria’s oldest University, and the first TV station in Africa; the 5th most populous state in the country; an important link in the South West prosperity hub that extends from Lagos, with the potential to serve as a hub for West Africa.

    UK-Nigeria prosperity relationship is strong. UK companies (Unilever, Shell, PZ Cussons, British Airways, Diageo/Guinness, etc.), are among the longest running international businesses in Nigeria. Prudential plc recently purchased a majority stake in Zenith Life – the first such market entry from the UK into Nigeria. The UK is usually in the top 5 of Nigeria’s trade partners, and is the largest source of capital inflows into Nigeria – including investment from the City of London.

    Nigeria edged out of recession in the second quarter of this year – with year on year growth of 0.55%. This is clearly better than staying in recession, but is far from sufficient to generate the 2m+ jobs required each year just to keep pace with population growth.

    The government’s Economic Growth and Recovery Plan sets out an ambitious range of targets for ensuring that Nigeria builds back better from recession. We are working with the Nigerian government and other development partners to support these efforts – but the challenges are great, and we hope to see accelerated progress in tackling structural reforms, especially in power and infrastructure.

    There are some positives to report. DFID has been supporting the implementation of the Action Plans for improving the Business Environment, which have delivered results in reducing bureaucracy, streamlining processes, and enhancing capacity. These reforms have helped Nigeria leap up 24 places in the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business rankings, released this week – one of the top 10 most improved countries on the list. 145th is still not high enough for Nigeria’s longer term ambitions – regulatory reform will need to turn into more attractive reality. But it is a start. And should give encouragement to stand against those who say that nothing can be done.

    Encouraging greater investment is key to the work that the UK government is supporting in Nigeria. Whether that’s DFID’s programming supporting state-level investment promotion; the UK’s global Prosperity Fund supporting further Business Environment reform, trade, and investment capacity; CDC (the UK’s development finance organisation) investing in projects like the Azura power plant; or British companies opening new facilities – as Guinness Nigeria has done in Edo State, or as Reckitt Benckiser is planning in Ogun State.

    Our broader relationships are also strong – the UK is home to a large Nigerian diaspora, is one the largest source of remittances into Nigeria, and we share historical, cultural and sporting ties, with heavyweight champion Anthony Joshua celebrated as much here in Nigeria as he is in the UK. I understand he credits part of his power to the pounded yam of his Nigerian family roots.

    Last week the London Stock Exchange hosted a forum Nigerian Capital Markets and Banking. Our Secretary of State for International Development spoke of the UK’s commitment to harnessing capital market tools to boost investment that can create jobs, increase tax revenues, and deliver inclusive growth.

    In the past two months our Department from International Trade team has hosted two large delegations from Nigeria – on infrastructure and agriculture, two major priorities for both the UK and the Nigerian governments where we see great potential for cooperation, investment, and growth.

    His Excellency, Abiola Ajimobi, the Governor of Oyo was one of six state Governors and Deputies who joined the Federal Government Minister for Agriculture for the agricultural investment roadshow hosted in London. We heard great interest from investors in the City of London, as well as agri-tech and processing innovators in the UK about partnering with Nigerian states and companies to boost a priority sector for growing incomes, jobs, and exports in the future. The substantial poultry farming and maize production in Oyo State provide great opportunities, and we are working hard to encourage UK firms to partner with Nigerian producers, to help develop the processing value chains here.

    The UK’s Trade Envoy, John Howell MP will be visiting Lagos next week to take forward those talks and build on the exchanges to help drive further cooperation as we work together to build on the great potential that Nigeria has. Because we have to turn that into reality.

    Several things will help us achieve this: coherent and consistent policy making at the federal and state level – businesses manage risks all the time, but too much uncertainty and they cannot plan their investments; reliable and transparent legal and administrative processes – the confidence that the property and prosperity they build will be protected; and long-term relationships of trust and cooperation – not only with government, but with banks, suppliers, producers, educational and training institutions, and host communities.

    This is why UK-Nigeria relationship is one of partnership – of governments, officials, businesses, and most fundamental of people. Working together to tackle shared threats and also to build shared prosperity.

    As a final reminder – the deadline to apply for our fully-funded masters programme Chevening Scholarships is next week, Tuesday 7 November. In the last year, we awarded 43 scholarships to future leaders from Nigerian to study a one year Masters courses at the best universities in the UK.

  • Stephen Barclay – 2017 Statement on Money Laundering

    Below is the text of the statement made by Stephen Barclay, the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, in the House of Commons on 26 October 2017.

    The UK is one of the world’s largest and most open economies. The Government are committed to tackling the risk of illicit financial flows from money laundering and terrorist financing, and to protecting the UK as an attractive country for legitimate business and a leading global financial centre. As the threats from illicit finance and terrorist financing continue to evolve, so must our understanding of the risks and our response.

    Today, the Government are publishing the UK’s second national risk assessment of money laundering and terrorist financing. This 2017 assessment, jointly published by the Treasury and the Home Office, shows how our understanding of and response to money laundering and terrorist financing have developed since the first assessment in 2015.

    The key findings of the 2017 assessment are as follows:

    High end money laundering and cash based money laundering remain the greatest areas of money laundering risk to the UK. New typologies continue to emerge, including money laundering through capital markets and increased exploitation of technology.

    The distinctions between money laundering typologies are becoming increasingly blurred. Criminal funds are progressing from lower level laundering and are being accumulating into larger sums to be sent overseas using more sophisticated methods.

    Professional services are a crucial gateway for criminals looking to disguise the origin of their funds.

    Cash, alongside cash intensive sectors, remains the favoured method for terrorists to move funds through and out of the UK.

    A wide-ranging set of reforms by Government and law enforcement over recent years is still in its early days, but is starting to take effect.

    The UK has been at the forefront of recent global efforts to shut down money laundering and terrorist financing. The 2016 London anti-corruption summit led to over 600 specific commitments made by more than 40 countries and six major international organisations.​
    In 2015, the UK published its first ever national risk assessment of money laundering and terrorist financing. This set out candidly the areas where action was needed. In 2016, the Government published an action plan and committed to the most significant reforms to our anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing regime in over a decade.

    Many of the actions in this plan have now been delivered or are underway. The Criminal Finances Act 2017 will provide tough new powers such as unexplained wealth orders. The Money Laundering Regulations 2017 bring the latest international regulatory standards into UK law. The publicly accessible register of people with significant control (PSC) was introduced in 2016, and records the beneficial owner of a company, thus improving corporate transparency. Progress continues with reforms to the suspicious activity reporting and supervisory regimes.

    This 2017 assessment provides a critical component of continued partnership and prioritisation between Government, law enforcement, supervisors and the private sector.

    A copy of the report has been deposited in the Library of the House.

  • Paul Beresford – 2017 Speech on the A3 and RHS Wisley

    Below is the text of the speech made by Sir Paul Beresford, the Conservative MP for Mole Valley, in the House of Commons on 26 October 2017.

    I offer special thanks to the Minister. I know from my own past experience that notice arriving on a Minister’s desk saying that they are answering the last debate of the week is met with a groan; he is smiling now, but there might have been a groan at the time.

    As the Minister is aware, M25 junction 10 is where the A3 and M25 link. The growth of traffic on both roads is such that this is probably the busiest interchange in the UK; it has the highest accident record, I believe, and experiences frequent disruption and car jams in both directions on the A3, contributing to M25 jams. There are delays for miles around. As a main link between the south-east and London, the demand pressure on the A3 and the junction is growing and will continue to do so.

    On the western border of the A3, just south of junction 10, is the world-famous Royal Horticultural Society Garden, Wisley. To those without a compass—or any understanding of a compass—it is on the left of the A3 after Ockham, just before the M25 as one drives to London. Access is currently off the A3, either directly if driving towards London on the A3, or via the Ockham roundabout. There is a slip road off the A3 to the entrance and a similar slip road on to the A3 on exiting. It is adequately, but not obtrusively, signposted.

    I am sure the Minister is aware of the importance of the gardens. RHS Wisley is the United Kingdom’s centre of excellence for horticultural science, research and education. I am referring not only to the world-class high-standard horticultural education and research, but also the annual influx of 18,000 schoolchildren from over 450 schools and the 1.2 million of the general public who flood in annually. I suggest to the Minister that if he ever visits, he gets there and parks his car early, because he will walk for about half a mile to get in, such is the demand. I must declare an interest, as most of my family belong to the RHS and visit regularly. They find the miniature insects absolutely fascinating, and they tear around the garden and try not to fall into the pools and ponds.

    Wisley is a grade II-listed park and garden of about 240 acres of historical and horticultural delight. It employs 400 full-time staff and about 250 volunteers. The RHS is a third of the way through a £160 million investment development programme; £160 million for a charity in this country is some programme. That will lift the number of full-time jobs at Wisley by 60 and the anticipated visitor numbers will lift to not far short of 1.5 million annually. That will bring an accumulated benefit impact locally of about £1 billion over 10 years.

    Because of the garden’s location, there is no public transport and no realistic prospect of public transport. As one drives, or often crawls, along the A3 one could be forgiven for not knowing the gardens are next to the A3. The gardens and their ancient woodlands are buffered by a well-planted shield with over 500 mature trees, many, if not most, over a century old.

    I accept that major improvements to junction 10 and the A3 are a necessity; that is glaringly obvious. The RHS accepts this, and Highways England engineers ​have been working on plans to sort the problem out. The plan that it appears most likely to favour, however, will hit Wisley gardens hard and dramatically. The buffer provided by all the trees will go, and the entrances and exits will be complicated, adding about 7.5 miles to the round trip per visitor car. I believe, as does the RHS, that this complicated entrance will be a deterrent for visitors. Just as the investment is expected to increase, and just as it is going to help to fund the attraction, the deterrence will come in. The need for direct access and exit from the A3 is obvious. The effect on local traffic through our local villages and surrounding countryside will be significant if the possible preferred plan goes ahead.

    There has been considerable discussion with Highways England, which is still meeting and discussing the prospects with the RHS. That is very helpful. Indeed, Highways England has told me that it is not against what the RHS and I see as the required south-facing slip roads at Ockham, which would meet many of the problems. However —this is where the crunch comes for the Minister—that would apparently be outside the geographical perimeters of the current scheme: the A3 road improvement scheme. New funding would be required—compared with the size of the programme that we are looking at, which is not great—as well as a business case and further consultation with local authorities and perhaps landowners. It is a further problem, but it offers a solution that goes with the grain, rather than against it. A relatively small delay to produce a sensible scheme is better than blundering on and then looking back in time and asking why we did not do this right when we had a chance.

    I was going to ask the Minister if I could bring a couple of RHS representatives to his office, but I have changed my mind. Better than that, I am inviting him to come down to Wisley to see it for himself. If necessary, I will personally drive him from his office, or better still—for a Minister in the Department for Transport—from the local station. We will arrange an on-site visit with free entry, a short tour with a photo opportunity, and a cup of coffee with an RHS bun. Actually, because it is an old charity of long standing, we will get some Victoria cream sponge sliced for him. Seriously, though, an on-site visit is the only way for him to put this whole problem in perspective. Looking at maps is not the same as looking at the trees. I want us to get this right for generations to come, over the next decades and running into the next century, bearing in mind that Wisley gardens have already been going for a century. I would hate my hon. Friend the Minister to be the one to be named by Wisley visitors as they ask why he did not get it right when he had the chance.

  • Justine Greening – 2017 Speech at Teach First Conference

    Below is the text of the speech made by Justine Greening, the Secretary of State for Education, at the Teach First conference on 24 October 2017.

    I very much share the common mission that you have today, which is social mobility – and it’s something that has very much shaped my own life.

    You’ve just heard from the ComRes poll, and the problem is that poll is correct. Where people start still overwhelmingly does define how the rest of their life will play out, and today is all about tackling that head-on and saying that none us should accept a country that works that way.

    But also, I think you can challenge the impossible because I think we can change and we can shift the dial and I think we can, finally, make our country a country where there really is equality of opportunity for young people wherever they’re growing up.

    Of course, I started off my journey in Rotherham. I went to my local comprehensive and I had amazing teachers that really did help me to think that I could aim high, that I could possibly make something of the opportunities that were waiting for me in the rest of my life if I was able to study at school and work hard.

    The thing that I have never forgotten, and that I passionately believe, is that talent in our country is spread evenly. There isn’t this one community that is creating these amazing children that are going to go on and do brilliant things – those young people are all over, and we have to have an education system that allows them to make the best of themselves wherever they’re growing up.

    So I want to talk briefly today just about some of the things that we’re doing, to be clear with you about how important social mobility is for me and for the Department for Education now, and perhaps to start off by saying I agree with the speaker that introduced Muzoon [Almellehan, UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador] – we do need to go for it. But I think part of the problem is that it’s very hard to aim for an opportunity and to go for it if you don’t really know what that opportunity is and what it looks like.

    For me, growing up I never thought about becoming a lawyer or doing law at university because I’d literally never met a lawyer in my life. I’d heard about lawyers, but I’d no idea what that job entailed, what the career would be like. And I think this isn’t just about education. It’s about connections, aspirations and I think the session after me will help really get into how that is absolutely vital, alongside what we’re doing in our education policy.

    We know, as Russell [Hobby, Teach First] said, that for some communities poor social mobility has become entrenched. So people are growing up in parts of the country where actually they’re likely to have worse outcomes and then they’re likely to have worse career opportunities for them, even when they leave school.

    There are some people for whom those opportunities are there, for whom that education is there, for whom those networks are there. For them, they’re pushing at open doors. But for other young people, other children, they don’t even know that the doors exist in the first place.

    I think that teaching and the teaching profession is one of the biggest levers we’ve got to level up opportunity in our country. It’s part, of course, of the solution. Not the whole solution, but it’s a crucial one and it’s probably why many of you are here today as people who went into the teaching profession and I remember, just after I got elected, being approached by Teach First to come into parliament and to talk to me about all the work that this still quite new charity was doing, even then. I remember being blown away by how fantastic it sounded.

    I can also remember, I have to be honest, thinking that had it been there at the time when I was thinking about doing my career choices after going to university that actually it’s something really would have appealed to me.

    I think the early days, that first stage, of Teach First where you really ran towards some of the burning education issues of the time, which were often the plight of underperforming inner city comprehensives, many of them right here in London. And these were schools that, for those children in them, just weren’t getting the start that would mean they could benefit from a better education and more than that, they were disproportionately young people coming from more disadvantage backgrounds. So this sense of an education system that was actually exacerbating people being able to get on, in some respects, rather than levelling up the opportunity.

    But schools like Hackney Downs and the rise of new academies that Labour actually first brought in then, of course, championed and pushed forward by us in government, like Mossbourne. Those sorts of reforms really started, I think, a race to the top and were very much pushed forward by an amazing teaching profession.

    You’re going to hear from another amazing head, David Benson of Kensington Aldridge Academy – a school that has faced huge challenges over recent months but risen to them incredibly and is inspiring.

    So, Teach First teachers are making a huge difference but they’ve gone beyond just teaching to setting up their own schools. I think alongside much of the work that has happened in cities like London, in particular, we’ve seen the real fruits of those benefits for levelling up opportunity. And now London and its education results probably give Singapore a run for its money because of the changes that have come in.

    But they’ve been changes that have been pushed forward and pulled through by amazing teachers and I think we’re here today because this was almost phase one. But there’s a much bigger phase that we now need to really get into because if the task before was around inner city comprehensives and looking at places like London, actually now it’s about looking at the regional disparities that we have still in our education outcomes and the fact that if you’re a child in London, the fact that you want to look at how many children in London have got, say, three outstanding primary schools that are within three miles of their homes, in other words outstanding schools and great choice, that’s actually 90 per cent of children growing up in our city here.

    But if you go to Bradford, do you know what the percentage is? It’s three. And I think that statistic, if nothing else, really shows how we now need to take all of the learnings – and all of your learnings in many respects – that we’ve seen over the years in education, particularly how we’ve changed things here, and make sure that we now lift up the results for children in many other different parts of the country.

    I personally think that, as we go through Brexit, one of the things that we need to change in our country is that it needs to feel different in terms of opportunity and we need to make sure that we tackle the opportunity deficit that exists for far too many of our young people that are growing up around Britain today.

    I think you know how hard this will be because actually if we could all fix it by talking and doing speeches it would have all been sorted a very long time ago. I think if it had just been about goodwill we’d have fixed it a very long time ago, but in the end my view is that you’re not going to shift the dial on social mobility with some grand visions.

    Actually fixing social mobility, delivering on equality of opportunity is something that’s more complex, more gritty, quite local in many respects, very long-term. It requires a persistence that I think sometimes is hard to deliver in government and I think you need to build a strategy brick by brick – and that’s precisely what we’re determined to do.

    We’re going to start in early years. We’re going to work with you in schools. We’re going to make sure that young people post-16 for the first time really have outstanding choices, not just on academic routes but on technical, applied education routes too. And we’re going to make sure that our young people going into university really know what the outcomes are after they invest in those courses.

    I think underneath all of that needs to be two things. Firstly, a willingness to work in in partnership together – which I’ll come onto in a second – but secondly, something that I think Teach First is all about, which is innovation. When you look at what Teach Firsters have gone on to do, whether it’s Frontline, Brilliant Club, The Access Project, Jamie’s Farm, the Institute for Teaching, Right to Succeed. These are all programmes that are doing so much now to create opportunities for young people.

    That innovation and willingness to challenge and change needs to come from government as well. I think when you look around our country there are so many areas where we know what works, not just in London, but outside too. And it’s now time to capture to what works, to have an evidence-based approach on that, and really spread it to the areas that can benefit from in the most.

    The Education Endowment Foundation, I think, is a lynchpin in enabling us to make sure that we catch that evidence – that we marry it up with things like research schools and we really use it to drive policy and policy development over the coming years. But at the heart of all of this, for me, is teachers and an amazing teaching profession. It’s teachers that changed my life for the better, like most people at school if you point to the people that shape you most in life, it will almost certainly be your parents and your teachers.

    So what we’re going to be doing is investing in home-grown talent in the parts of the country and the communities where we really want to lift up our teaching and lift up our schools, the teachers who are already there, who work in these challenging schools, who have already got the close connections with the communities. But I also think it’s about attracting more great teachers into those areas as well. I think this is an instinct that many, many teachers already have.

    Teaching is a vocation and I think that’s why all of you have gone into it – you want to make a difference and I think we’ve got to make it easier for you to follow the grain of your human nature, to follow your gut instinct, to be able to go into those schools and really work as teams and lift them up. So, yes, we want to have a look at this in a much more systematic way because it requires a more systematic approach if we’re really going to make things different.

    I want to make sure that teachers know that when they go into more challenging schools that they will get the full credit for having done that rather than simply going to a school where they’re brilliant but maybe it’s with children who are already able to access great teaching. I think that means we’ve finally got to get a grip on managing workload, we’ve got to have an accountability regime that doesn’t create barriers for teachers going to work in those schools where they’re needed most.

    The reason that it’s so crucial to me to put this in place is that I want to carve out some space to really focus much, much more on teachers’ professional development. I realise that until we crack the workload nut that’s much, much harder.

    Of course, the work that Amanda Spielman and Ofsted is doing in this area is also absolutely vital if we’re going to shift the system so that you can do what you want to. Our number one goal, I think, is lifting teaching as a career and I think helping shout about the fact that actually it’s probably one of the most rewarding careers anyone can go into.

    We want to make sure that the best graduates think seriously about it as an option when they come out of university but that does mean, I think, improving the offer for existing teachers and that starts with strengthening QTS [Qualified Teacher Status]. For me it’s about making sure that as our teachers leave Initial Teacher Training that, when they finally get into the schools that they’re going to be teaching in, that actually that’s the next stage of their development not just the end of it.

    Focusing on CPD [Continued Professional Development] in the early stages of a young teacher’s career is absolutely critical. That’s why I want to strengthen QTS. We’ve had a fantastic group of people, many of them teachers, all of them education experts, working with us at the DfE to pull together how we can do this best and we’ll be launching a consultation shortly to what all of you think good looks like.

    I really do want to see this move on and I want it to be a stronger, better, more powerful QTS that can really turbocharge teacher’s development and beyond that, then making sure that the National Professional Qualifications and the reforms there. We’ve set aside £10 million to really incentivise those being taken up in the areas where we think we want to work hardest on improving leadership.

    It’s about steadily building a whole career path and there’s much, much more of course to do on all of this but it’s fantastic for me to see the role that Teach First is going to play in all of that and certainly you will be one of the first 42 providers of those new, reformed NPQs.

    All of that work sits alongside the broader work that’s underway on using an evidence base to really understand how we can help develop, professionally, teachers in our more challenging areas. Whether it’s the Teaching and Leadership Innovation Fund, including programmes from that – one of which is also led by a Teach First ambassador. Those programmes are launching in schools next year.

    I’m keen to look at how we can strengthen the pipeline of teachers going into parts of our communities that would most benefit from great new teachers. That’s why we’ve announced that we’ll be piloting the teacher loan reimbursement scheme in more difficult parts of the country so that we can really improve not just retention, through a stronger career path, but critically recruitment as well.

    That pilot scheme will focus on new science and modern foreign language teachers. We’re going to launch it in 25 very different local authorities whether it’s Derby, Oldham, Northumberland, Middlesbrough, Norfolk, and it will cover those early years of student loan payments.

    Of course, Russell mentioned Opportunity Areas, and we’ll continue all of the work that’s well underway there. And I think what we were trying to achieve with the Opportunity Area strategy was to have, again, a more systematic look and recognise that many of the challenges that are faced inside schools, and faced by teachers trying to do their role inside schools, actually need solutions not just within the schools themselves but to work much more broadly with communities, with charities, with businesses outside schools too.

    That’s precisely what we’re doing. And the second piece of this really, for me – I talked about innovation – is partnership. I think the knowledge that Teach First will be on that next stage of the journey with us, looking at how we can really shift the dial on tackling the regional disparities that are still there in our education system, I think is a huge prize for all of us to aim for.

    Teach First was never called just Teach London, or Teach south-east, and for me I think it’s going to be fantastic for you to be so clearly on this next phase of our journey of raising education standards across our country.

    Just to finish, I think absolutely everybody wants the same objective here. There are 4,000 people in this room but one objective, which is raising social mobility. Achieving a country where we have equality of opportunity, finally. I think we should recognise that Britain’s never been a place where there has been equality of opportunity. We’re not alone, that’s pretty much the same for overwhelmingly pretty much every single country in the world.

    But I think if you believe, as I do, that any country – whether it’s Syria, or whether it’s Britain – any country’s greatest asset is people. Enabling those people, every single individual, to be able to flourish and reach their potential and thrive, surely is the biggest step we can take to making sure that our country’s a successful one in the long-term – but also a happy one too where people can truly feel fulfilled.

    We’re looking across my department at how we can tilt our programmes, how we can focus our efforts, how we can make sure that across all of our policy areas and teams things are joined up. How we can make sure that all of those things are joined up with organisations, including Teach First, that are doing so much work every single day on exactly the same issue.

    I believe that things can absolutely be different in our country in the future than how they’ve been in the past. I think it will take huge effort. I think it will take long-term effort. But I really do believe that if we work together we can achieve a first for Britain – and that’s a Britain that really does have equality of opportunity for all. Thank you.