Tag: Speeches

  • David Cameron – 2015 Press Conference with Indian Prime Minister

    davidcameron

    Below is the text of the press conference between David Cameron, the Prime Minister, and Narendra Modi, the Indian Prime Minister, in London on 12 November 2015.

    Thank you everyone; good afternoon. It’s a huge pleasure to welcome Prime Minister Modi to London today on this, his first visit to the United Kingdom since taking office. It is the first of an Indian Prime Minister in almost a decade, and it’s a real opportunity to open a new chapter in the relationship between our 2 countries.

    I believe we are already natural partners, as the world’s oldest democracy and the world’s largest democracy, we share so many of the same values. And the ties between our people bind us together, with 1.5 million people of Indian origin living here in the UK, the second largest Indian diaspora anywhere in the world.

    Yet I do not believe that we’re realising the true potential of this relationship. And that is what Prime Minister Modi and I want to change. We want to forge a more ambitious, modern partnership, harnessing our strengths and working together for the long term to help shape our fortunes at home and abroad in the 21st century. As leaders, we share similar priorities to create jobs and opportunities for all, to protect our people from terrorism, and to tackle global challenges like climate change.

    And it makes sense to work together on these issues. So today we’ve discussed how to build a stronger economic partnership, a stronger defence partnership, and a stronger global partnership. And let me say a word about each.

    First, our economic partnership. Britain is the biggest major investor in India, bigger than the USA. British businesses already support nearly 700,000 jobs in India, and India invests more into the UK than it does in the rest of the European Union combined, creating almost 8,000 new jobs here last year alone. And during this visit, British and Indian companies are announcing new collaborations, together worth more than £9 billion.

    But I think there’s scope to go much further. Today we’ve discussed Prime Minister Modi’s vision for India, to transform its economy, building 100 smart cities, increasing the skills of 500 million young people, providing around the clock electricity for all; building 10,000km of roads. These are immense projects, and we’ve talked about how Britain can help to transform this vision into a reality. We want to become your number one partner for securing the finance needed for this ambitious plan, making London the world’s centre for offshore rupee trading.

    We’re getting that started with plans already in place today to issue over £1 billion of bonds, right here in London, including the first ever government‑backed rupee‑denominated bond to be issued internationally. We want British companies with their world‑class consulting, project management and engineering skills to help you plan, design and build these new cities. So I am delighted we’ve agreed a new 5‑year partnership to develop 3 cities: Amravati, Indore and Pune. We want UK and Indian scientists to work together to develop the low‑cost, low‑carbon energy that’s vital for the future, and that’s why we’re establishing a new, £10 million joint research collaboration into new technologies. We want our companies to truly make in India, and that’s why we’re re‑invigorating our forum of business leaders who we’ll see tomorrow.

    Second, we’ve agreed to establish a stronger, broader defence and international security partnership. All countries have a right to self-defence, and we want to assist India, the world’s largest defence importer, to modernise her capabilities. We’ll establish a new government‑to‑government framework to help make this happen. This will also mean increasing co-operation on new technologies and new capabilities, like cyber, like our aircraft carriers too.

    We’ll deploy a Royal Navy warship to the Bay of Bengal next February to take part in India’s first major international gathering of warships for a number of years. And we’ll work together to better protect ourselves from new and emerging threats, such as cyber‑attacks, with the UK helping to establish a new centre to train 1 million India cyber‑security professionals and offering assistance to set up a new Indian cyber‑crime unit.

    Finally, as global powers with a global outlook, we discussed what more we can do to solve the challenges we face. The UK firmly supports permanent membership for India on the United Nations Security Council. International institutions need to reflect the world as it is today, in order to maintain relevance and to support the rules‑based system that benefits us so much.

    Today, we agreed on the vital importance of securing an ambitious global deal in Paris later this year that keeps our goal of limiting global warming by 2050 to 2 degrees, within reach. And we discussed what more we can do to support free trade, in particular by accelerating talks on a free trade deal between the EU and India, which could benefit more than 1.7 billion people and be worth over £15 billion each year to the EU and India combined.

    So we’ve had some excellent discussions here today and I look forward to more this evening and of course tomorrow as well. We both have big ambitions for the relationship between our countries. We want a modern, essential partnership founded on old ties, but defined and fuelled by the modern, diverse, dynamic countries that we are both today.

    Thank you. Prime Minister Modi.

    Narendra Modi

    Mr Prime Minister Cameron, members of the media. Prime Minister Cameron has shown great hope and positivity with regard to the relationship with India. I’d like to thank you for that. You have done a great deal to strengthen this partnership between India and UK. I would like to thank you for your warm welcome and your gracious hospitality, and all the time that you have set aside for me during my visit here. So I’d really like to thank you for your past efforts in strengthening the partnership between our 2 countries.

    I am delighted to visit the United Kingdom. This is a relationship of immense importance to us. We are – the familiarity of history, the extraordinary people‑to‑people ties and our shared values give it a special character. And this has made it possible to give a special character to our relations. We also have vibrant and growing partnerships across all areas, trade and investment, defence and security, science and education, clean energy and health, technology and innovation, art and culture.

    At the international level, we have a broad range of shared interests that are vital to both our countries. Today we have agreed to intensify our political dialogue and hold regular bilateral summits. We have decided to turn our shared values into a partnership to support development in other regions of the world, and alongside we are committed to deepen co-operation across all areas.

    Today, we have signed a civil nuclear agreement. This is a symbol of our mutual trust. And we have also resolved to combat climate change. The global centre for clean energy partnerships in India is one of the areas where we have agreed to co-operate, and this will strengthen safety and security in the global nuclear industry.

    We attach great value to defence and security co-operation with the UK, including joint military exercises, and trade – defence trade and collaboration. And this co-operation will continue to grow. I am gratified to note that in February 2016, UK will participate in the international fleet review in India. UK will also be strong partners in India’s defence modernisation plans, including our make an India mission in the defence sector. And I’m convinced that UK will play an important role in this mission of ours.

    Economic partnership is a key pillar of our partnership. I am convinced that this relationship will grow rapidly in the years ahead, given the size and scale of opportunities in a rapidly expanding India and Britain’s own formidable economic strengths.

    The UK is the third-leading investor in India, and India invests much more in UK than in other European Union countries. In – for greater investment in India, we are launching a new fast-track mechanism. We also welcome the revival of the India-UK CEO Forum. We are – we will also increasingly raise funds in London’s financial market. I am pleased that we will issue a railways rupee bond in London stock market. This is – for this is where the journey of Indian Railways had begun.

    In the next 2 days, I am looking forward to our engagement with the business sector, and we are – we hope to hear significant announcements from this sector. I am pleased with the progress in our co-operation in clean energy and climate change involving our governments and the private sector. This is an area of immense importance, and it offers enormous opportunities.

    Our – with regard to India’s comprehensive and ambitious national plan on climate change, we have a lot of expectations from our bilateral co-operation. We look forward to a concrete outcome in Paris within the framework of the UN Convention on Climate Change, that charts decisive goals for a sustainable and low-carbon future for the world.

    We have also achieved many other tangible outcomes in other areas that are all part of India’s national priorities. These include smart cities, healthcare, clean river initiatives, skills and education. Indeed, we agreed that technology, research and innovation will be strong foundations of our partnership across all areas. Both our nations will be able to create more opportunities for our people and increase their prosperity. And at the same time, we will advance our many shared interests and address our challenges. These include peace and stability in Asia, especially in South Asia and West Asia; maritime security; cyber security; and of course, terrorism and extremism.

    Prime Minister Cameron, I will continue our discussions on these and other issues in Chequers today and tomorrow. But before I conclude, I wish to thank Prime Minister Cameron and the UK for the strong British support for India’s permanent membership of the reformed UN Security Council and membership in the international export control regimes. I look forward to the honour of speaking in Parliament and addressing the India-UK business summit. And I will have, therefore, the opportunity to speak at length about the rich promise of this relationship.

    Today, we have outlined a bold and ambitious vision for our strategic partnership, and the decisions we have taken today reflect our firm commitment to pursue it and the confidence to achieve it. Indeed, the outcomes today have shown that we have already taken our relationship to a new level. Thank you.

    Question

    Prime Minister Cameron, you’ve visited India 3 times since you came to power. Why has it taken so long to get a return visit?

    And Prime Minister Modi, India is becoming an increasingly intolerant place. Why?

    David Cameron

    Let me answer your question. Actually, India is not only the first major country I visited as Prime Minister, it was also the first major country I visited as leader of the opposition, so I have been wanting to see a strengthening of this relationship, not just for the last 5 years, but the last 10 years, and I think we have made some important progress. The figures on investment are very striking, you know, India invest more into Britain then into the whole of the rest of the EU combined, and in terms of G20 countries, Britain is the biggest investor, bigger than America, bigger than France, bigger than Germany, into India. But I think where we agree, is that we shouldn’t rest on our laurels, we should try and raise our sights and look at these projects, like Smart Cities, like Digital India, like Clean India, where we can bring expertise and really forge a partnership. India soon will be the third largest economy in the world, Britain is the fifth largest economy in the world. We have, I think, real potential. As for the time it takes to have a visit, I’m delighted that the Prime Minister is here. We’ve met many times before at G20s, most recently in New York, and we agreed to make this visit an absolute centrepiece of building the stronger relationship, which is what we are doing today. Prime Minister.

    Narendra Modi

    It’s true that there has been a gap of 10 years. Nonetheless, during my term in the past 1 year there have been 11 ministerial visits from India to the UK and from the UK to India. Therefore, the relations between the UK and India is continuing. In fact, I have had the opportunity of discussing at length with Prime Minister twice, and we have all committed to taking our relationship forward. In terms of the questions you have raised, India is a land of [inaudible] – India is the land of Ghandi and therefore there is something that is deeply entrenched in our culture, in our traditions, which is that of not accepting anything that is – that has to do with intolerance. Therefore, if any event takes places, wherever it may occur in India, whether it’s once or twice, in a country of 1.2 billion people, every incident that happens is a serious incident for us, and we do not tolerate such incidents of violence at all. We take strong actions and we will continue to take strong actions and legal actions against such incidents. India is a vibrant democracy which, on the basis of the constitution, protects every citizen, and the values of every citizen in accordance with our constitution, and we’re committed to that.

    Question

    So, my question is to both the Prime Ministers. Sir, both India and the UK are victims of terror from the same terrorist groups. Both our cities are being bombed by the people who are trained from the same sort of terrorism. Both countries lost lives in Afghanistan, the same set of terrorists. In your discussions today sir, did you discuss the shared concerns? And did you agree on some of the co-operation in this field?

    Narendra Modi

    Thank you. As far as terrorism is concerned, your concern is vital for anyone who believes in humanity, and I would like to state that – with satisfaction, that in the United States all the initiatives taken against terrorism, both India and the UK have been standing together shoulder to shoulder, to fight against all sorts of terrorism and we have taken a common stand in the UN.

    Both our countries face extreme threat from terrorism, that is why fighting terrorism is not something that just 1 or 2 or 3 countries can do. This is the responsibility of every human that’s in the world, every humanitarian, every human being. Today, terrorism has spread so far that it has no frontiers. It has no barriers. New groups are born every day. New equipment falls into their hands every day, so terrorists don’t manufacture their own equipment, obviously it comes from somewhere. Mahatma Gandhi used to say that you only get justice when you know what injustice is. So, who do we designate as terrorists? Who helps the terrorists? In fact, there is a proposal in the United Nations on this issue, but unfortunately, it is just hanging without any settlement and the UK and we agree that we need to discuss this at length. That is why all well-meaning nations should work together. All those who help terrorists, in one way or the other, should be fought against and we all should work towards protecting humanity.

    David Cameron

    [Inaudible] today about the terrorist threat that we both face. We’re going to have intensive discussions tomorrow morning on exactly this issue. India has suffered on the streets of Mumbai, for instance. We have suffered on the streets of London, and we have to confront, particularly this Islamist extremist violence and terrorism, which is doing so much damage, not just to our countries but also to the world. The argument I would make is it’s not enough simply to close down terrorist groups and close down ungoverned space which is what our intervention in Afghanistan was about; was to try and make sure that that country was run by a government with the power to keep terrorist groups out of that country. We also need to deal with the narrative that the terrorists use, with the culture of grievance they try to build up to justify unjustified actions, and that, I think will be part of our discussions tomorrow.

    Question

    Thank you Prime Minister. Prime Minister Cameron can I ask you, how comfortable do you feel welcoming Prime Minister Modi to this country, given that for the first 2 years of your premiership he was not permitted to visit this country because of his record as Chief Minister of Gujarat?

    And on Europe, can I ask you, Donald Tusk has just said that unless the European Union strengthens its external borders, there will be no future for Schengen. Do you agree with him?

    And what do you say to Martin Schulz who says that Europe is very happy to spend billions of pounds on bankers helping them, but is pretty miserable when it comes to helping migrants?

    And Prime Minister Modi, can I ask you, in the next 2 years, the United Kingdom will be having a referendum on whether to remain in or leave the European Union. Do you see a future for the United Kingdom outside the European Union? And also Prime Minister Modi, can I ask you, tomorrow night you will obviously have a rapturous reception at Wembley Stadium, but there are a number of protestors out today who are saying, and I’m wondering what you say to them, that given your record as Chief Minister of the State of Gujarat, you do not deserve the respect that would normally be accorded to the leader of the world’s largest democracy? Thank you.

    David Cameron

    Well, lots of questions there. Let me try and answer all of them. I’m pleased to welcome Prime Minister Modi here. He comes with [inaudible] from the people of India who made him Prime Minister with a record and historic majority. As for what happened in the past, there were legal proceedings. There were also, as my colleague, Priti Patel said earlier today, representations from the British government at the time. But we are now discussing the future partnership between Britain and India, both of us backed by our countries for this parliament to work together to strengthen the partnership that we have.

    On the other issues that you raise: the reason for supporting banks in a crisis is not that they are uniquely wonderful things or wonderful people, but simply if you allow banks to collapse, they pull down every other business with them. But that’s why we’ve reformed the system in this country so that if banks get in trouble in future, they are bailed out by their own creditors and not by the taxpayer.

    As for support for migrants, I think Britain can hold its head high up internationally because we have given more than any other European country, indeed more than any other country in the world, apart from the United States of America, to help with the Syrian refugee crisis, supporting the neighbouring countries, supporting people in Syria, and of course supporting the refugee camps. No country apart from America has done more.

    As for what Donald Tusk says about Schengen: Britain is not in Schengen. We have kept our own borders, while being part of the European Union. So, it is not really for me to say, but obviously I want to help my colleagues in Europe deal with this migration crisis. That is why actually we have done more than any other European country to support the European asylum support officers that are helping to deal with this crisis on Schengen’s external borders. And we’ll continue to do that.

    But clearly, you need to have either a system with external borders or a system with internal borders. You can’t have borders that don’t work at either level. But as I say, Britain will remain out of Schengen. We will keep our own borders. We think that’s important for our security.

    I think those were all your questions. Prime Minister.

    Narendra Modi

    I came in 2003 and had been warmly welcomed at that time as well. The UK has never stopped me from coming here. They have never banned me from coming here. Perhaps I could not come because of my own time constraints, so please do correct this wrong perception you may have.

    Secondly, yes, there will be a referendum in the UK after 2 years. I believe that the citizens of this country are very intelligent and wise. I have nothing to say to them, as far as India is concerned. If there is an entry point for us to the European Union, that is the UK and that is Great Britain. And if we have economic co-operation with any country, then the largest economic co-operation is with the UK. Yes, we are going to other European Union countries as well, but we will continue to consider the UK as our entry point into the European Union, as far as possible.

    Question

    My question is: India is facing a lot of changes currently, and you have recently initiated many initiatives. So, Prime Minister, I would like to ask you, given the economic and social situation in India, what kind of co-operation are you expecting from the UK?

    And Mr Prime Minister Cameron, I would like to ask you that India and UK have had historical relations. How would you define them in this new context? And what kind of new steps you will take so that these relations are further strengthened?

    Narendra Modi

    The direction that India wants to take in its future progress, for instance, let me give you an example. We have very high [inaudible] density in India. About 27,000 to 28,000 towers are standing tall, and they all use diesel, and we have to import diesel. That is not something that is very good for the climate, as you know. And UK has developed a hydrogen fuel cell technology. We wish to – that UK would make this technology available to the – to India, so that we can use it to power these towers, which will increase the number to 40,000. So on the one hand, we’ll be able to stop using diesel, we will contribute to reducing our carbon footprint, and therefore impact the climate. And if you look at coal, we have to try and figure out how we can bring about coal gasification using green energy, skill development. UK has done extraordinary work in terms of skill development. In the health sector as well, UK has worked in building a very good health system, hospital system.

    So we have discussed all these different issues, and we have also seen how even the poorest person in India can benefit from all this. And my visit to UK this time would – enables me to say how we can move forward and how we will be moving forward together.

    David Cameron

    That’s what we’ve been talking about. I think it’s probably true that for years, the relationship between Britain and India was in some way imprisoned by the past. I think sometimes in recent years, it’s been imprisoned by misconceptions that trade with India is simply about outsourcing. Look at the relationship today. If someone had told you 20 years ago one of the most successful car manufacturers in Britain expanding and selling all over the world would be a combination of Indian capital and British design and manufacturing expertise, people would say, ‘Really, is that going to happen?’ Well, that’s what Jaguar Land Rover, just one example, is all about.

    So I think it’s time to set this relationship free from those misconceptions and from the past, and recognise that this is a modern, dynamic partnership of 2 countries who face similar challenges: how do we get growth and prosperity, how do we combat terrorism, how do we ensure a green environment for our future and our children? Those are the things that we’re now talking about, and I think the excitement is that with Prime Minister Modi’s vision of smart cities, of clean India, of digital technology, of skilling up tens of millions of young people in India, there are huge opportunities for Britain to play a part in building that future together, and that’s why we are so, I think, excited today to be signing so many different agreements across such a wide range of areas, demonstrating this is a truly modern and dynamic partnership.

    With that, we have a packed timetable – 2 speeches this afternoon, including the first to Parliament – and we must go and make the most of that. But thank you very much.

  • David Cameron – 2015 Statement on Syria

    davidcameron

    Below is the text of the statement made by David Cameron, the Prime Minister, at Downing Street, London on 13 November 2015.

    Good morning. Last night, the United States carried out an air strike in Raqqa, Syria, targeting Mohammed Emwazi – the ISIL executioner known as Jihadi John.

    We cannot yet be certain if the strike was successful.

    But let me be clear. I have always said that we would do whatever was necessary, whatever it took, to track down Emwazi and stop him taking the lives of others.

    We have been working, with the United States, literally around the clock to track him down. This was a combined effort. And the contribution of both our countries was essential.

    Emwazi is a barbaric murderer. He was shown in those sickening videos of the beheadings of British aid workers. He posed an ongoing and serious threat to innocent civilians not only in Syria, but around the world, and in the United Kingdom too.

    He was ISIL’s lead executioner, and let us never forget that he killed many, many, Muslims too. And he was intent on murdering many more people.

    So this was an act of self-defence. It was the right thing to do.

    Today I want to thank the United States: the United Kingdom has no better friend or ally.

    And I want to pay tribute to all those professionals in our own security and intelligence agencies and armed forces for the extraordinary work they do on behalf of our country. On this, as so often, they’ve been working hand in glove with their American colleagues. We are proud of them.

    If this strike was successful, and we still await confirmation of that, it will be a strike at the heart of ISIL. And it will demonstrate to those who would do Britain, our people and our allies harm: we have a long reach, we have unwavering determination and we never forget about our citizens.

    The threat ISIL pose continues. Britain and her allies will not rest until we have defeated this evil terrorist death cult, and the poisonous ideology on which it feeds.

    Today though, my thoughts, and the thoughts of our country, are with the families of those who were so brutally murdered.

    Japanese citizens Kenji Goto and Haruna Yukawa, American journalists Steven Sotloff and James Foley and aid worker Abdul-Rahman Kassig.

    And of course our own citizens. Aid workers David Haines and Alan Henning. Nothing will bring back David and Alan. Their courage and selflessness stand in stark contrast to the empty callousness of their murderers.

    Their families and their friends should be proud of them, as we are. They were the best of British and they will be remembered long after the murderers of ISIL are forgotten.

  • David Cameron – 2015 Lord Mayor’s Banquet Speech

    davidcameron

    Below is the text of the speech made by David Cameron, the Prime Minister, at the Lord Mayor’s Banquet Speech held at the Guildhall in London on 16 November 2015.

    Introduction

    My Lord Mayor, My Late Lord Mayor, Your Grace, My Lord Chancellor, My Lord President of the Council, Lord Speaker, Your Excellencies, My Lords, Aldermen, Sheriffs, Chief Commoner, Ladies and Gentlemen.

    We meet today in the aftermath of the worst terrorist attack in Europe for a decade.

    The thoughts and prayers of this hall – and our whole country – are with the friends and families of all those affected – including the British victims.

    These were innocent people going about their lives enjoying a Friday night out brutally gunned down by callous murderers.

    Murderers who thought that their acts of depravity could somehow destroy everything we stand for.

    They could not have been more wrong.

    Britain, France and our allies around the world will never be cowed by terrorism.

    We will only redouble our resolve to defeat it.

    Tonight I want to talk about how.

    But before I turn to the specific terrorist threat, let me first say a word about our wider approach to Britain’s national security.

    Because at the heart of the National Security Strategy that we are publishing next week are some key choices which provide the foundations from which we can defeat this terrorist scourge.

    Economic security

    The first choice is about ensuring our economic security.

    As I argued at this dinner last year, economic security and our national security go hand-in-hand.

    You cannot have one without the other.

    It is only because we have a strong economy that we can afford the resources to invest in our national security.

    It is only because we have halved the deficit and made our economy the fastest growing in the G7 last year that we can maintain the second best funded armed forces in all of NATO – and together with France, the most capable and globally deployable in Europe.

    So we will continue to see through our long-term economic plan and take the difficult decisions to deal with our deficit.

    Hard power

    Second, we are using our economic strength to invest in hard military power.

    As I will explain later, whatever others might wish were the case, the reality is that there are times when you do need to be able to deploy military force.

    And if you don’t have it, you can’t deploy it.

    So in a difficult spending review where resources are tight, we are choosing to spend 2% of our GDP on defence every year for the rest of the decade.

    With a growing economy this means a rising defence budget – with more money every year.

    But it’s not just about the amount of money we spend or the size of our forces, it’s also about our ability to deploy them quickly with the right equipment to get things done.

    We have seen how vital drones are in the fight against ISIL so with this extra money we are doubling our fleet of drones.

    We know we need the ability to carry out airstrikes so this money will provide for more fighter aircraft.

    We want to increase the capabilities of our brilliant special forces.

    So there will be a £2 billion programme of new investments over this Parliament.

    We will maintain our continuous at-sea nuclear deterrent.

    And we will also invest in a new generation of cyber defences to block and disrupt attacks before they can harm our United Kingdom.

    All these measures – and more – come from the choice that we make to spend on our security to deal head-on with the wide range of threats that we face today.

    Aid

    But keeping our people safe in the modern world means tackling the causes of the threats we face – not just dealing with their consequences.

    So the third key choice that we make is to keep our promises to the poorest in the world by spending 0.7% of our Gross National Income on aid.

    I have made the argument many times before that this is the right thing to do morally and I’ve made the argument that it’s in our national interest.

    But tonight I want to make a slightly different point tonight.

    Our aid budget makes us the fastest in the world to react.

    At the migration summit in Valetta last week, as other countries were struggling to work out their contribution to the international effort to stop this lethal trade in human beings across the world, I was able to say very quickly what we would spend, where the money would come from, what we’d do.

    We don’t need to spend time deliberating wondering whether we can afford to help or not, we can focus immediately on what we can do that will help the most.

    So when a typhoon hits the Philippines – British sailors were among the first to arrive.

    And with Ebola in Africa, I knew we could afford to act – and act comprehensively and it was the rapid contribution of British forces, humanitarian workers and medical staff who helped to make Sierra Leone Ebola-free last week and prevent the spread of this dreadful disease around the world.

    This ability to respond swiftly, flexibly, generously means that we have a big impact on the way the world responds to crises.

    And we are going to enhance that capability by refocusing our aid spending so we will target at least half of the Department for International Development’s budget on stabilising and supporting broken and fragile states, and do so much more to help refugees closer to their homes.

    This will make our aid spending an even more fundamental part of our strategy to keep our country safe.

    And it will help to maintain Britain’s position as number one in the world for soft power.

    And yes, it may be called soft power but whether it’s saving the lives of refugees by stopping them from having to make that terrible journey across the Mediterranean, helping the Lebanese build defences against ISIL, or helping countries establish the building blocks of democracy and justice and the rule of law, I can tell you that soft power packs a real punch.

    Building alliances

    The fourth key choice we have made in taking a comprehensive approach to our security – is to engage with countries around the world even when there are difficult issues to address.

    Some people said I shouldn’t have invited the leaders of India, China and Egypt to Britain in recent weeks.

    Others concluded that it’s a sort of zero sum game, with the drawbacks of engagement being balanced out exactly by the benefits to our trade.

    Frankly, I disagree with both of those views.

    It is not just about trade – important as that is.

    It’s about influence.

    It’s about using our world class diplomatic network to build relationships that mean you can work together to solve shared problems and have the ability to express concerns where you need to.

    Think about the consequences of not engaging.

    Is anyone really saying that I shouldn’t talk to the Egyptians on the day after an airliner is blown up in their country and when it is Britain’s national interest that we support their airport security and get our own people safely home?

    The people who wanted me to raise the dumping of cheap steel with the Chinese are also often the same people who say I shouldn’t meet the Chinese in the first place.

    Well, I can’t raise the issue if I’m not talking to them, just as we can’t influence their rise in the world if we’re not willing to engage.

    The bottom line is this.

    Yes, it is a strategic choice to engage with countries where we have concerns.

    But my view is this.

    You can’t conduct foreign policy by press releases and pious statements in Parliament.

    You have to engage and build the alliances that can make a difference.

    A deeper partnership means a deeper conversation and a greater ability to address the issues that might concern us.

    So the National Security Strategy that we are publishing next week will give Britain the resources it needs to increase both its hard and soft power and build the relationships that can project and enhance our influence in the world.

    And it’s against this background that I want to turn specifically to the terrorist threat that we face.

    Full spectrum

    The more we learn about what happened in Paris the more it justifies the approach that we are taking in Britain.

    When you are dealing with radicalised European Muslims, linked to ISIL in Syria and inspired by a poisonous narrative of extremism, you need an approach that covers the full spectrum – military power, counter-terrorism expertise and defeating the poisonous narrative that is the root cause of this evil.

    Let me take each in turn.

    Military power

    We have to be realistic and hard-headed about the threats we face: confronting this murderous violence requires a strong security response.

    Those who say we should have somehow arrested ‘Jihadi John’, don’t get the reality of the world we are in.

    The same is true of Junaid Hussain or Reyaad Khan.

    There is no government we can work with in Syria, let alone that part of Syria.

    There are no rigorous police investigations or independent courts upholding justice in Raqqa.

    We have no military on the ground to detain those preparing plots.

    And there was nothing to suggest that any of these people would ever leave Syria or stop planning to murder British and American citizens.

    In that situation, you do not protect people by sitting around and wishing for another world.

    You have to act in this world.

    And that means being prepared to use military force where necessary.

    Counter-terrorism

    Turning to counter-terrorism, our security services have foiled no fewer than 7 different terrorist plots right here in Britain over the past year alone.

    We should all be extraordinarily grateful for the work they have done in thwarting these attacks and keeping us safe.

    But we need to do more to ensure our agencies have the resources and the information they need to prevent and disrupt plots against this country at every stage.

    So in next week’s Strategic Defence and Security Review, we will make a major additional investment in our world class intelligence agencies.

    This will include over 1,900 additional security and intelligence staff and more money to increase our network of counter-terrorism experts in the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.

    We will also more than double our spending on aviation security around the world with more experts overseas working side by side with host nations in the most vulnerable locations.

    We also need to do more to make sure the powers we give our security services keep pace with changes in technology.

    So we have published a draft Bill that will ensure that GCHQ, MI5 and our counter-terrorism police continue to have the powers to follow terrorist movements by tracking their online communications to intercept those communications under a warrant and to obtain data from computers used by terrorists and paedophiles.

    Now of course there will be those who criticise these measures as an infringement of civil rights.

    But I disagree.

    They are about protecting those liberties from terrorists who want to take them away.

    Furthermore, these are powers that have been used in every major recent counter terrorism investigation by MI5 and the police.

    And they have played an important part in thwarting many attacks from a plot to blow up the London Stock Exchange in 2010 to a sickening attempt to imitate the killers of Lee Rigby by murdering a soldier with a knife and a hammer in August last year.

    Our legislation will get the balance right – with powers matched by strong safeguards and judicial oversight to make us world leaders on transparency and accountability.

    Defeating the ideology

    But military power and counter-terrorism expertise will only get us so far.

    To defeat this terrorist threat in the long term – we must also understand and address its root cause.

    There is far too much confusion about this.

    Some say it’s wronged Muslims getting revenge on their Western wrongdoers but this overlooks that ISIL, al-Qa’ida and Boko Haram murder Muslims in huge numbers.

    Some say it’s because of the Iraq War but that overlooks that 9/11 – the biggest loss of British citizens in a terrorist attack – happened before the Iraq War.

    Some say it’s because of poverty and deprivation but that overlooks that many of these terrorists have had the full advantages of prosperous families or a Western education.

    I am not saying that these issues aren’t important.

    But we could deal with all of them and some people would still be drawn to extremism.

    The root cause of this threat is the poisonous ideology of extremism itself.

    This ideology, this diseased view of the world, has become an epidemic – infecting minds from the mosques of Mogadishu to the bedrooms of Birmingham.

    And we have to stop it at the start – stop this seed of hatred even being planted in people’s minds, let alone allowing it to grow.

    That means confronting the ideology with our own liberal values, exposing this extremism for what it is – a belief system that glorifies violence and subjugates its people – not least Muslim people.

    It means tackling both the violent and the non-violent extremism in all its forms because unwittingly or not those who promote extremist views – even if nonviolent themselves – are providing succour to those who want to commit or get others to commit violence.

    It means improving integration – by moving away from segregation in our schools and communities and inspecting and shutting down any educational institutions that are teaching intolerance.

    And it means actively encouraging reforming and moderate Muslim voices to speak up and challenge the extremists.

    And this final point is vital.

    Of course, this extremist ideology is not true Islam. That cannot be said clearly enough.

    But it is not good enough to say simply that Islam is a religion of peace and then to deny any connection between the religion of Islam and the extremists. Why? Because these extremists are self-identifying as Muslims.

    From Tunisia to the streets of Paris, these murderers all spout the same twisted narrative that claims to be based on a particular faith.

    To deny that is to disempower the critical reforming voices that want to challenge the scriptural basis on which extremists claim to be acting – the voices that are crucial in providing an alternative worldview that could stop a teenager’s slide along the spectrum of extremism.

    We can’t stand neutral in this battle of ideas.

    We have to back those who share our values – with practical help, with funding, campaigns, protection and political representation.

    This is a central part of how we can defeat this terrorism in the long term.

    And it is a battle of ideas that we must win – not just here at home – but together with our allies all around the world.

    This will be a huge challenge.

    But in Britain we have the soft power – the influence, the educational expertise and the alliances with other countries – to win this battle and defeat the causes of hatred and intolerance that threaten our security and the security of our allies across the world.

    Conclusion

    Lord Mayor, here in this great Guildhall is a copy of the Magna Carta signed just months before the first Lord Mayor’s Show 800 years ago and enshrining in this land the principles of liberty, justice and the rule of law.

    As this Hall stood open to the sky after the bombings of London in the heat of the Second World War it was Winston Churchill who addressed this Banquet as it temporarily moved to Mansion House.

    He spoke of the resolve of this ancient City of London and our determination that however long and hard the toil may be the British nation would never enter into negotiations with Hitler.

    It is that historic British resolve that we celebrate here again tonight.

    And it is that same resolve that will defeat this terrorism and ensure that the values we believe in – and the values we defend – will again in the end prevail.

  • Justine Greening – 2015 Speech on Syria

    justinegreening

    Below is the text of the speech made by Justine Greening, the Secretary of State for International Development, in New York, United States on 17 November 2015.

    Let me thank Stephen O’Brien, Zeinab Bangura and Leila Zerrougui for their sobering briefings. And indeed the UK expresses its condolences in relation to the terrorist attacks over recent days in Paris, Beirut and elsewhere. They are a vivid reminder of the horrific human toll of the Syria and regional crisis.

    Like others here today, I’ve met Syrian refugees who have fled the bloodshed and violence consuming their country for over 4 years now. And their tales are of experiences that no one should have to go through.

    But, we must accept that these people have been let down. The generosity of countries bearing the brunt of the refugees like Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey has not been matched by a similar generosity from the whole international community. UN appeals are 45% funded. Overwhelming suffering and loss has been matched by political deadlock and an inadequate financial response.

    My message to the Council today is that for Syria, for its people, for us all – time is now running out.

    Time is running out for us to meet the most basic needs of the Syrian people – whether they are inside Syria or have fled the country.

    Time is running out for Syria’s children. A whole generation who are being robbed of a childhood, an education and a future.

    And time is running out for the international community, as we try to cope with the overwhelming numbers of refugees who have themselves run out of hope and are now looking elsewhere to build a new life for themselves and their families.

    Since day one, Britain has worked hard to help people on the ground and been at the forefront of the humanitarian response to this crisis – pledging $1.7 billion to date.

    But the need is immense and growing. Greater efforts are needed, not only to meet people’s basic needs – but to provide jobs and an education for Syria’s children.

    That’s why our Prime Minister has just announced that the UK will co-host a global conference on the Syria crisis in February next year. This conference must be a turning point. It must raise the resources and deliver the policy changes that are needed.

    Let’s not forget, our response to this crisis, the actions we take – or don’t take – on Syria – will define how we respond to other protracted emergencies. The challenge of educating whole generations of children at risk of being lost to conflict. And, with forced displacement likely to remain a major feature of the global landscape, the challenge of supporting refugees and the countries that host them.

    But we recognise that humanitarian action alone is not sufficient. Syria isn’t a natural disaster, it’s a man-made one.

    We all know what’s causing the deaths and suffering. The Assad regime bears the primary responsibility. It’s Assad’s barrel bombs… it’s ISIL’s brutality too. It’s the targeting and the killing of aid workers. It’s the deliberate disregard for international humanitarian law, too often dressed up in a false, perverse argument of sovereignty.

    A negotiated political transition is the sole way to end the conflict in Syria and is key to alleviating the humanitarian crisis. I am encouraged by the constructive discussions in Vienna and the new momentum behind the process working towards peace for the people of Syria.

    But until that political settlement is reached we must recommit to:

    • ending targeted and indiscriminate attacks on civilians, particularly aerial attacks and shelling;
    • to the protection of health facilities, schools and essential infrastructure;
    • ensuring unimpeded access for humanitarian organisations;
    • and an end to the use of siege tactics;
    • and preventing and responding to gender-based violence. As is the case in all conflicts, girls and women have been left the most vulnerable to violence, abuse and exploitation.

    As we meet today, there are a long list of things that we will fail to agree on in relation to the Syria crisis. But help for those caught up in this crisis, humanitarian aid being able to reach those in need, these things shouldn’t be on that list. These are things that we should be able to agree to.

    There can be no excuse for flouting humanitarian law. There can be no excuse for preventing humanitarian agencies from reaching those in need. The Council must make that clear.

    We agreed Resolution 2191 on allowing the UN to use cross-border routes. This resolution has been critical for helping us get aid to people who would otherwise have had none. It is essential that we renew that resolution.

    Syria is perhaps the defining conflict of our age, not just for those in the region, but for all of us. It has shown all too clearly where there are failures in our humanitarian and political responses.

    And the World Humanitarian Summit next year will be a vital moment for us to commit to a new 21st century response to a protracted crisis – that brings together our development, humanitarian work and human rights. And, in this age of crisis, this summit is a vital moment to recommit to our humanitarian values and law.

    As the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon and the International Committee of the Red Cross President Peter Maurer have said, now is the moment to rally for humanity.

    We must respond to that call for the sake of Syria, and for the wider world, and for future generations. This is our shared responsibility and challenge – we must meet it. Thank you.

  • Justine Greening – 2015 Speech at UN Security Council

    justinegreening

    Below is the text of the speech made by Justine Greening, the Secretary of State for International Development in New York on 17 November 2015.

    Thank you Secretary General, Wided Bouchamoui and Ambassador Skoog for introducing this session. I’m very pleased to chair the UN Security Council again today, the first Development Minister to be doing so. That’s because development and security are intrinsically linked.

    The United Kingdom extends its heartfelt condolences to those tragically caught up in terrorism. From Paris to Syria; from South Sudan to Yemen; from Beirut to Sharm el-Sheikh – we see more clearly than ever the pain, suffering and cost of conflict. The human cost. The Council heard yesterday about the bloodshed in Syria that has shattered so many lives.

    But also the social and economic cost to the whole country – and to future generations. It is estimated that the Syrian conflict has turned the clock back on that country’s development by 30 years.

    And it is conflict affected states that are the most off-track for achieving the Millennium Development Goals.

    The reality is – if we’re to achieve the new Global Goals for ending poverty, and live up to our promise to leave no one behind, then preventing conflict and building peaceful societies is absolutely vital.

    These past 15 years have shown us that trying to build development in any country without a solid foundation of peace and stability is like trying to build a house on the sand: it will simply be washed away when crisis hits.

    So how can we make sure that solid foundation is in place? Stability is not only about addressing war and conflict – it’s about countries having strong economies, healthy and educated populations and, critically, it’s about the strength of their institutions. Our Prime Minister has called it a Golden Thread of development.

    Stability means the rule of law and property rights, an independent judiciary. Because the poorest people on the world aren’t just going hungry – they lack justice, they want jobs, they want the right to own their own land and build their own businesses.

    And if individuals don’t have a voice in society it doesn’t mean their grievances aren’t there, only that there is no fair forum for them to be heard and so grievances fester and build.

    Stability means rights for girls and women. We know girls and women are those most vulnerable when crisis hits. And they must be an integral part of any peacebuilding and conflict solution. The ongoing high level review of Women, Peace and Security will be critical to this.

    And women’s economic empowerment is essential to sustainable development. Recent research estimates that if women in every country had the chance to play the same role in economic markets to men, as much as twenty eight trillion dollars would be added to the global economy by 2025.

    Stability means a society and institutions free of corruption. Corruption is bad for development, it’s bad for the poorest, and it’s bad for business. It corrodes the fabric of society and public institutions, acting as a perverse welfare system that transfers resources from the poor to the rich.

    So it’s addressing these things that can build the backbone of a stable state, without them individuals can’t fulfil their potential, communities cannot thrive, businesses won’t invest – the whole country stagnates.

    It’s not only national institutions that matter. The strength of international institutions is critical as well.

    We know the UN Security Council has a vital role in peacekeeping decisions and swift humanitarian actions. A vital role in ensuring that International Humanitarian Law is adhered to when conflict erupts – and in helping to find political solutions.

    But – as the Security General’s report on the United Nations and Conflict Prevention, and the UN peace operations and peacebuilding reviews set out – increasingly our international institutions need to take on a greater role in addressing the underlying causes of fragility and conflict.

    This means prioritising conflict prevention as much as its resolution – by taking early action when faced with the signs of deteriorating situation.

    It means moving from peacekeeping to peacebuilding.

    By investing in basic services in fragile and conflict-affected states, by helping to build a stronger economy and jobs, by supporting strong and accountable institutions: the rule of law, respect for human rights, free and fair access to markets and the rights of girls and women, and tackling corruption. And achieving that progress through the UN, and the World Bank and IMF as well.

    The UK believes that doing this is strongly in our national interests, in all countries’ national interests.

    Investment in prosperity and stability overseas is critical if we don’t want global problems to end up on our own doorsteps. Lack of development and exclusion provides fertile ground for extremism, for terrorism, organised crime and conflict to thrive. It drives migration.

    The UK has made a historic commitment to spending 0.7% of our national income on Development, with much of that spend already in fragile states and conflict-ridden countries. We’re supporting development and peacebuilding through the UN, and we are committing UK troops to UN operations in Somalia and South Sudan.

    We believe this investment is the right thing to do – and right for our national interests too.

    It’s about saving the next generation from the scourge of war, it’s about allowing every individual an opportunity to live the life they want, to build the future they want, free from violence and the threat of violence. And it’s about global prosperity and global peace and security, because conflict is costly in every sense.

    If we act now and together – then we can build a better, more prosperous, more secure planet for us all.

    Thank you.

  • David Cameron – 2016 Statement on European Council

    davidcameron

    Below is the text of the statement made by David Cameron, the Prime Minister, in the House of Commons, London, on 5 January 2016.

    With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the European Council meeting which took place before Christmas.

    The Council focused on 3 issues – migration, terrorism and the UK’s renegotiation.

    I’ll take each in turn.

    Migration

    First, on migration, even in winter there are still many migrants coming to Europe, with over 3,000 arriving via the eastern Mediterranean route each day.

    Now of course, Britain is not part of the Schengen open border arrangements and we’re not going to be joining.

    We have our own border controls and our border controls apply to everyone attempting to enter the UK and every day those border controls help to keep us safe.

    Let me repeat: these controls apply to all – including EU citizens and we have stopped nearly 95,000 people at our borders since 2010, including almost 6,000 EU nationals.

    These people were not allowed to come in. What Schengen countries are now trying trying to put in place are a pale imitation of what we already have.

    What they do is, of course, a matter for them. But it is in our interests to help our European partners secure their external borders.

    So we have provided more technical expertise to the European Asylum Support Office than any other European country including practical assistance to help with registering and fingerprinting of migrants when they arrive in countries like Greece and Italy.

    We have also focused on the root causes – not just the consequences – of the migration crisis.

    That is why we continue to play a leading role in the efforts of the International Syria Support Group to end the conflict in Syria through a political process and that’s why we have backed the agreement reached in Morocco which should pave the way for a new united, national government in Libya.

    We have deployed HMS Enterprise in the Mediterranean to go after the people traffickers. We have provided £1.12 billion in humanitarian assistance for the Syrian conflict – by far the largest commitment of any European country, and second only to America.

    Find out about Syria refugees: UK government response
    And the donor conference that I am hosting next month together with Germany, Kuwait, Norway and the United Nations will help further, raising significant new funding to help refugees in the region this year.

    Mr Speaker, the Council focused on implementing the previously agreed measures on refugee resettlement.

    In Britain, we said that we would resettle 20,000 Syrian refugees during this Parliament, taking them directly from the camps.

    And I can tell the House that – exactly as promised – over 1,000 Syrian refugees from camps in Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon were resettled here in time for Christmas. These people are now in homes, their children are starting this new year in our schools and they can look forward to building a new life here in Britain.

    I know many in this House have called for us to take more refugees, or take part in EU relocation and resettlement schemes.

    The reality is that we have already done significantly more than most of our EU partners in this regard.

    Indeed the House might be interested to hear the figures. By the time of the December Council, only 208 refugees had been relocated within the EU – that was out of the 160,000 agreed. And in all other member states put together, according to the most recent statistics, just 483 refugees had been resettled from outside the EU under the EU’s voluntary resettlement scheme.

    The point is clear: we’ve said what we would do – and got on and done it.

    Terrorism

    Turning to terrorism, the latest appalling video from Daesh is a reminder of their brutality and barbarism. It is desperate stuff from an organisation that hates us not for what we do, but for what we are – a democratic multi-faith, multi-ethnic nation built on tolerance, democracy and respect for human rights.

    Mr Speaker, Britain will never be cowed by terror. We will stand up and defend our values and our way of life. And with patience and persistence we will defeat these extremists and eradicate this evil organisation.

    Mr Speaker, I am sure the whole House will want to join with me in paying tribute to the British servicemen and women who have spent this Christmas and New Year away from their families.

    In the last month RAF aircraft have conducted 82 strikes in Iraq and Syria. In recent weeks the priority of the international coalition has been supporting the Iraqi Security Forces’ successful recapture of Ramadi, to which our air strikes made an important contribution. They have also helped Kurdish forces repel major Daesh counter-attacks in northern Iraq.

    In Syria, there have been 11 RAF strike missions, 10 against Daesh controlled oil infrastructure and 1 against Daesh terrorists near Raqqah. And we continue to fly intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions, providing vital support to our other coalition partners.

    In terms of the discussion at the Council, we now have a clear agreement on new rules to share passenger name records. This is a vital breakthrough but we still need to go further.

    So the Council agreed to take forward urgent proposals on more systematic data-sharing on stepping up our co-operation on aviation security and on working together to do even more to starve Daesh of money and resources – choking off the oil and clamping down on firearms and explosives, to stop them getting into the hands of terrorists.

    We also agreed to do more across Europe to counter the extremist propaganda and the poisonous ideology of Islamist extremism that is the root cause of the terrorism we face.

    The Daesh threat is a threat to us all – and we must stand together to defeat it.

    UK renegotiation

    Mr Speaker, turning to the UK renegotiation, I have set out the 4 areas where Britain is seeking significant and far-reaching reforms.

    On sovereignty and subsidiarity, where Britain must not be part of an ‘ever closer union’ and where we want a greater role for national Parliaments.

    On competitiveness, where the EU must add to our competitiveness, rather than detract from it, by signing new trade deals, cutting regulation and completing the single market.

    On fairness for countries inside and outside the eurozone, where the EU must protect the integrity of the single market and ensure there is no disadvantage, discrimination or additional costs for a country like Britain – which is not in the euro and which is never, in my view, going to join the euro.

    And on migration, where we need to tackle abuses of the right to free movement, and deliver changes that ensure that our welfare system is not an artificial draw for people to come to Britain.

    Mr Speaker, this is the first time a country has tried to renegotiate its membership of the EU from a standing start.

    Many doubted it was even possible.

    But at this Council we had an entire session focused on this issue, lasting several hours, and with almost every European leader contributing.

    I am happy to go into detail on what was an extensive discussion.

    But the key points were these.

    There was strong support for Britain to stay in the EU. European leaders began their remarks not by saying Britain is better off in Europe, but that Europe would be better off with Britain staying in it. And all wanted to reach an agreement that would address the concerns we have raised.

    There was extensive discussion on all 4 areas. Difficulties were raised with all 4. And the most difficult issues were around free movement and welfare. But there was a great deal of goodwill.

    And at the end of the discussion the Council agreed – and I quote directly from the conclusions – that we would “work closely together to find mutually satisfactory solutions in all the 4 areas”.

    I think it is significant that the conclusions talk about solutions – not compromises.

    And I made clear that these solutions would require changes that are legally binding and irreversible.

    So Mr Speaker, while each of these areas will require hard work, I believe there is now a pathway to an agreement.

    Later this week I am continuing my efforts to secure that agreement with further discussions in Germany and Hungary.

    And I hope we can reach a full agreement when the Council meets again next month.

    But what matters is getting the substance right, not the speed of the deal.

    If we can see this through and secure these changes, we will succeed in fundamentally changing the UK’s relationship with the EU and finally addressing the concerns that the British people have over our membership.

    And if we can’t, then as I have said before I rule nothing out.

    My intention is that at the conclusion of the renegotiation, the government should reach a clear recommendation and then the referendum will be held.

    It is the nature of a referendum that it is the people not the politicians who decide.

    And as indicated before Christmas, there will be a clear government position, but it will be open to individual ministers to take a different personal position while remaining part of the government.

    Ultimately it will be for the British people to decide this country’s future by voting in or out of a reformed European Union in the referendum that only we promised and that only a Conservative majority government was able to deliver.

    And I commend this statement to the House.

  • Theresa May – 2016 Statement on Counter-Terrorism

    theresamay

    Below is the text of the statement made by Theresa May, the Home Secretary, in the House of Commons, London on 5 January 2016.

    With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement about our work to counter the threat we face from terrorism in light of the latest propaganda video from Daesh.

    This weekend Daesh released a video depicting the sickening murder of five men who they had accused of spying for Britain. The video also featured a young boy.

    I would like to echo the Prime Minister’s words that this is a barbaric and appalling video. Daesh seek to intimidate and spread hateful propaganda, but in doing so they only expose their own depravity and the emptiness of their proposition.

    The House will understand that this is an ongoing police investigation and I cannot comment further while that investigation continues. To do so could prejudice the outcome of any future judicial process. And for the same reason, I cannot comment on the alleged identities of the man or the child in the video.

    Since the start of the conflict in Syria, more than 800 people from the UK who are of national security concern are thought to have travelled to the region, and we believe that around half of those have returned. Those who have travelled include young women and families.

    We have seen deadly Daesh-inspired terrorist attacks in Europe and other countries including the attacks last year in Paris, Lebanon, Turkey, Kuwait and Tunisia, where 30 British nationals along with others were murdered at a tourist resort.

    Mr Speaker, it is imperative that the police and security services have the resources and the powers they need to keep us safe.

    Since 2010, we have protected the counter-terrorism policing budget. As we announced in November, through the Strategic Defence and Security Review, we have made new funding available to the security and intelligence agencies. This will provide for an additional 1,900 officers – an increase of 15% – at MI5, MI6 and GCHQ to better respond to the threat we face from international terrorism, cyber-attacks and other global risks.

    We have also strengthened the powers available to the police and security and intelligence agencies.

    In 2013, I updated the criteria governing the use of the Royal Prerogative, which allows the Government to cancel the passports of those planning to travel to engage in terrorist-related activity overseas. And in 2014, I removed 24 passports from people intending to travel for terrorism-related activity.

    Last year, the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act provided new powers to deal specifically with the problem of foreign fighters, and prevent radicalisation. This included a new power to temporarily seize the passports of those suspected of intending to leave the UK in connection with terrorism-related activity. These powers have been used on more than 20 occasions and in some cases have led to longer-term disruptive action such as use of the Royal Prerogative to permanently cancel a British passport.

    And in November, we published the draft Investigatory Powers Bill, which is currently undergoing pre-legislative scrutiny.

    Since April last year, exit checks have been in place on all international commercial scheduled air, sea and rail services using the UK. The information this provides is already supporting our intelligence work, enabling us to make appropriate interventions. In addition, the UK has joined the European watchlist system – so-called SIS II – meaning we are now alerted when any individual is stopped at a border checkpoint or by police anywhere in Europe and is checked against the system.

    And through our Prevent and Channel programmes we are working to protect people from being drawn into terrorism. In partnership with industry we are working to secure the removal of extremist videos through the police Counter-Terrorism Internet Referral Unit. They are currently securing the removal of around 1,000 pieces of unlawful terrorist-related content every week.

    It is clear Daesh will continue to try and poison minds, and to hurt people in Europe and other parts of the world. We must not let that happen and we stand with all those who want to stop them.

    Time and again we have seen people of all faiths and backgrounds join together and demonstrate their opposition to terror, and to stand for democracy and freedom.

    Britain will not be intimidated by Daesh, and together, we will defeat them.

  • Liz Truss – 2016 Speech to Oxford Farming Conference

    Liz Truss
    Liz Truss

    Below is the text of the speech made by Liz Truss, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, to the Oxford Farming Conference on 6 January 2016.

    Thank you. 2015 was a tough year in farming, ending with a very tough time indeed in Cumbria, Lancashire and Yorkshire. People had been getting ready to celebrate Christmas, but found themselves instead cleaning out their homes, clearing debris off fields and disposing of dead livestock.

    Our immediate effort has been focused on the emergency and on restoring infrastructure and communications, and we have made available grants of up to £20,000 for farmers. In the longer term, we are working to build resilience and farmers have a key role to play.

    Global challenges

    The flooding we have had to confront is one of a whole set of interlinked challenges in the environment, food and farming that face Britain and the world. They are of strategic importance.

    In this room today, we have many of the people with the bold and ambitious vision to tackle those challenges and seize the opportunities they bring.

    There are going to be well over 9 billion people in the world by 2050, needing 50 per cent more food and water than today. We will have to meet this demand while reducing the impact on the environment, and while extreme weather becomes more frequent.

    The shape of the global economy is in flux, bringing ever-more intense competition and price volatility – and new economic superpowers. Our relations with China are entering a golden era. Last year, I led our biggest-ever delegation of food businesses to what is now the world’s most valuable food market.

    The growth in world trade and prosperity will bring huge opportunities to sell our high-value, superb quality food and drink as long as we are at our most productive and competitive.

    The people who reap full advantage will be the ones with the skills, the innovation, the investment—and the ambition.

    Re-making Defra

    Defra is reshaping itself to step up to this new level of challenge and opportunity, helping Britain be a global leader in farming.

    We have secured £2.7 billion to invest in capital – 12 per cent more than in the previous five years. That includes a doubling of investment in our world-class capabilities in science and animal and plant health. We will invest in technology, digital systems, growing our exports, world-leading science, protection against animal health and plant disease – and of course flood defences. This will enable us to modernise Defra and turn it into a trailblazer for government.

    In the past, Defra and its agencies have been accused of operating in silos. One bit of the network would be looking at flood protection, another at farming, another the environment, without linking up all the challenges. And we have been criticised for taking too much decision-making out of local hands. We have duplicated functions like human resources and IT, meaning we have not always provided best value for money. While it is right that we manage major national risks, we should not seek to micro-manage everything.

    This is changing. Defra and its organisations like the Environment Agency, APHA, the RPA and Natural England will in the future be more integrated, operating towards clear shared goals. And from July, the Environment Agency and Natural England will be using the same boundaries and the same plan. There will be one back office so we can put more resources into the front line, helping us save 15 per cent from our running costs, improving the value we provide to the taxpayer.

    Under the leadership of James Bevan and James Cross, these organisations will be more pragmatic, responsive to local communities and better value.

    The need for a joined-up, bold vision is what has inspired the 25-year plans we will publish in the next few months for food and farming and for the environment.

    We will decentralise decision-making. That’s the approach we are taking with the Somerset Rivers Authority and the Cumbrian Floods Partnership – I am glad the Communities Secretary has given the Authority the power to raise a Shadow Precept from this April on the way to long-term local funding.

    Subject to parliamentary approval, we will also allow farmers across the country to maintain ditches up to 1.5km long from April, so they can dredge and clear debris and manage the land to stop it getting waterlogged. This follows the successful pilots we started two years ago. We will also soon announce proposals to give internal drainage boards and other groups more power to maintain local watercourses.

    Our reforms will also help farmers by getting rid of unnecessary red tape. It will become simpler to apply for permits. We will cut thousands more inspections with the Single Farm Inspection Task Force.

    And we are improving the way the RPA operates under Mark Grimshaw’s leadership. 2015 was a very challenging year – with a complex new CAP and tough international markets. Despite the majority of payments being made by December 31st, as we pledged, I recognise cash-flow is an issue for many. That’s why I am making sure the RPA has all the resources it needs to make sure payments go out as soon as possible.

    Brussels

    If our food and farming industry is to power ahead, it is vital that Brussels becomes more flexible, more competitive and cuts the red tape.

    That is why I am fighting for reforms like getting rid of the three-crop rule, reforming the over-the-top audit and controls regime, and the absurd requirement for farmers to put up ugly posters in the countryside to publicise EU funding.

    I fully support the Prime Minister’s renegotiation of our relationship with the EU. I have seen how hard he is fighting to get a better deal for Britain. Of course it is difficult – negotiating with 27 countries will never be easy. But front and centre of our mind is Britain’s economic and national security. Let me give you one example: improving Europe’s competitiveness is a key plank of our reforms, and I can see what it would mean for our farmers and food producers.

    It would make Europe more flexible, outward-looking and dynamic, and we could see faster progress on a China Free Trade agreement. That will mean our dairy producers no longer paying 15 percent tariffs. And it could make a real difference to companies like Cranswick in Yorkshire, who employ 5,000 people and have contributed to the doubling of our food trade with China over the past five years. There is a huge prize at stake and one worth fighting for.

    In the end, the British people will decide. Because we made a promise and kept it – to deliver an in-out referendum.

    Productivity and competitiveness

    This country already has some of the best farmers in the world. Many of them are in this room. And I am proud that our food is produced to world-leading standards of quality, safety, traceability and animal welfare. To make the most of this talent and quality, we need to work with farmers to raise our productivity and close the gap with some of our leading competitors.

    That means supporting businesses to increase investment, improve skills across the sector, grasp innovation opportunities and make the most of one of our most precious assets, the Great British Brand.

    Investment

    Farming businesses have invested strongly in recent years and we need to drive that forward. We need more capital going into the right investments to improve productivity in farming and throughout the food chain. That includes foreign investment – in 2014, foreign companies invested more in British food and drink than in all other manufacturing put together.

    We are providing support with our reforms to tax averaging and investment allowances that will help farmers plan capital spending for the long term.

    The best managers in farming are putting money into skills, innovation and the right technology to boost productivity and profits. I would like to see this best practice spread right across the industry.

    Innovation and skills

    Britain has some of the most visionary scientists in the world at places like Rothamsted and John Innes. We have world-famous colleges and universities like Cirencester and Harper Adams, who are training a new generation of farmers.

    In addition, the government is putting £80 million into centres for livestock, crop health, precision engineering and data. We are developing the Food Innovation Network, announced by the Prime Minister last summer, to make sure ambitious entrepreneurs are linked up to the latest scientific knowledge. And we will be raising skill levels across the workforce by trebling the number of apprentices in food and farming.

    British brand

    2016 will be the Year of GREAT British Food, opening a long-term campaign. We are going to have a calendar of trade missions and events in the UK that showcase businesses big and small.

    Our farmers are intensely proud of British produce and for years they have wanted to get the message out. I am pleased that the beef, lamb and pork levy boards, as part of the AHDB, will be involved in the campaign and celebrating the British origin of their produce in everything they do.

    And people will know meat will be British, thanks to the new rules on country of origin labelling for pork, lamb and chicken that came into force last April.

    The new Great British Food Unit, which we promised in our manifesto, started work this week, bringing practical help and expertise, particularly for producers breaking into new markets. We have already made improvements, bringing in a 24-hour turnaround time for export health certificates.

    Resilience

    We have to sharpen our competitiveness and productivity and look outwards, and we have to build up our resilience to the growing risk of shocks and events from the changing climate and increased global trade.

    Floods

    There is no single answer to improve our resilience to flooding. Dredging, tree planting, improved defences, all have a role to play.

    For the first time we have put in place a 6-year programme for flood defences of £2.3 billion – a real terms increase in investment. More than half of our best-quality land is on plains where there is a potential risk. And over this decade we will be protecting an additional million acres – 580,000 in the last parliament and a further 420,000 by 2021.

    The new Natural Capital Committee led by Dieter Helm will, as part of its remit, look at catchment management and upstream solutions to flooding, learning from innovative programmes like Slowing the Flow in Pickering, which works with nature to reduce risk.

    And our National Flood Resilience review, which will report in the summer, is stress-testing the way we assess risk to make sure we build the right defences in the right places in the light of the latest science on climate change.

    Animal disease

    We are also improving our resilience to animal disease by investing around £65 million in new capital. This will bring us state-of-the-art laboratories and fund the upgrade of our bio-containment facilities at Weybridge, securing our ability to fight diseases like swine fever and avian flu.

    I am absolutely committed to eradicate TB. We are making good progress against what is the gravest animal disease threat facing Britain, with half of England due to be declared TB-free by 2020.

    Our approach of tackling the disease both in cattle and wildlife has worked in Australia and is working in Ireland and New Zealand.

    Thanks to the efforts and dedication of local farmers, all three areas – Somerset, Gloucestershire and Dorset – hit their target in 2015. The Chief Veterinary Officer is clear this policy needs to be followed over a wider area to secure full disease control benefits. That’s why I announced, in line with his advice, I want to see culling in more areas this year.

    New cases of TB are levelling off, but we still have the highest rate in Europe. I will do whatever it takes to get rid of this terrible disease.

    Conclusion

    We have a long-term plan to improve competitiveness and build Britain’s resilience. The global challenges we face bring huge opportunities for new prosperity, jobs, environmental progress and global leadership.

    This will require bold ambition and bold solutions from government and from industry. Britain is well placed to succeed, we have a proud heritage and, I believe, an even prouder future. Together we can make sure our food producers will take the lead in feeding the world.

    Thank you.

  • Harriet Harman – 1982 Maiden Speech to the House of Commons

    harrietharman

    Below is the text of the maiden speech made by Harriet Harman to the House of Commons on 5 November 1982.

    I know that hon. Members sadly miss Harry Lamborn, who died this summer. It is a great privilege to represent the people of Peckham, but I regret that I have come here as result of a by-election following Harry Lamborn’s death. I should have preferred to come here after a general election, knowing that he and his wife Lil were enjoying a well-earned retirement. Harry will be long remembered in Peckham not only for the 10 years that he served in the House as Member of Parliament but for the many years before that when he was a Southwark councillor. His contribution to the area is warmly remembered and he will be sadly missed.

    Peckham is not faring well under the Government’s policies. Since 1979 unemployment has more than doubled and more than 80 young people chase each job at the Peckham careers office. More than 9,000 families are on the housing waiting list, at a time when more than 1,000 skilled building workers are on the dole and the council owns land on which it would build but for the fact that Government cuts have almost put an end to new council building.

    For those in council homes—nearly 80 per cent. of homes in Southwark are rented from the council—the Government have forced up rents and plan to do so again. Under the Government’s housing policy, the home owner in Chelsea receives nearly twice as much public subsidy as the council tenant in Peckham. Despite the fact that rents are increasing, repairs take much longer because of cuts in the budget for major maintenance. I am not talking simply about a lick of paint; I am talking about major maintenance and vital repairs. Living standards for those in work are falling.

    I wish to mention the case of one constituent. I should not call her a “case” but, unfortunately, she is a welfare case. She works a six-day week for 47½ hours in the catering department of St. Thomas’s hospital. She receives only £58 take-home pay and her rent is £45 a week. That is why she is a welfare case. It is a scandal that someone who works so hard in the public service must fight her way through a web of rent and rate rebates just to be able to live. For the increasing number of those who are out of work, living standards are falling even faster and their lot is to stand around on street corners with nothing to do.

    Vital public services have been hit badly. Southwark council can provide only about 500 nursery places for the borough’s 13,500 under-fives. Even when the Inner London Education Authority has the money to build schools and provide nursery places it is not allowed to do so. The Government prevent ILEA from providing more nursery places.

    The Government are directly responsible for something which people in Peckham are extremely concerned about, and that is the increase in crime. We do not know very much about the causes of crime, but we know that as youth unemployment increases so juvenile crime increases. Therefore, the Government’s responsibility for directly increasing unemployment, especially among young people, gives them a direct responsibility for the increase in juvenile crime. This is not to excuse crime, but if we are to solve the problem we must understand its causes and tackle them.

    We know also—Government reports have borne this out—that dark corners of rundown ill-lit estates attract muggers and vandalism. The Government’s cuts in housing have a direct effect on crime in our inner cities.

    Increasing the powers of the police, especially their powers randomly to stop and search—it seems that what the Government will be providing in their police Bill will amount to random stop and search—will do nothing to attack the causes of crime. However, what it will do—and we know this to be so—is to strain further the relations between the police and the public. It will alienate further the police from the public they are supposed to serve and make it harder for the police to do their job. If the Government are serious about wanting to improve the relationship between the police and the public, they should bring London’s police under the control of locally and democratically elected people. Statutory consultation will not do. The police will consult, but having done so they can and will be able to go their own way.

    The effect of Government policies on Peckham is no accident. It is not the effect of the mismanagement of a Government who have got their sums wrong but the politics of inequality. There is no need for the tragic waste of talent of the young person in Peckham who would make an excellent electrician or carpenter but who cannot find an apprenticeship, let alone a job. There is no need for people to remain homeless while building workers are on the dole and while land becomes a blight because it is empty and becomes an eyesore. There is no need for pensioners to go to bed halfway through the afternoon as the winter approaches because they cannot afford to pay their heating bills, let alone the standing charges. There is no need for young mothers to become depressed as they struggle to bring up children in small flats with no nursery facilities and no play facilities in the area.

    There is no need for any of that because we are a wealthy nation. We are rich in oil and natural gas and rich in the skills of the work force. But we must plan to use this wealth to put people back to work, to build homes and hospitals and to provide the schools and services that millions need. We must increase the wages of the low paid to stop the gulf of inequality that is opening up and to put spending power back in people’s pockets to regenerate the economy. During the recent by-election some reports painted Peckham as little better than a dump. It is not a dump, and such reports and such descriptions have been deeply offensive to the people of Peckham, who are struggling to make their area a decent place in which to live, to work and to bring up their children. This Government are making that struggle much harder.

    The Government have taken to talking about “the inner city problem”. They point to places such as Peckham and talk about “this problem”. That is completely the wrong way round. The Government do not have an inner city problem; but the inner cities have a Government problem. It is not the people of Peckham who are the problem. The problem lies with those on the Government Benches who are deciding Government policies. It is about time that we stopped criticising the inner city areas and started criticising the Government.

     

  • Peter Hain – 1991 Maiden Speech in the House of Commons

    Below is the text of the maiden speech made by Peter Hain in the House of Commons on 17 April 1991.

    Entering the House after the high profile of a by-election is rather like having been head prefect in primary school, only to be plunged into the obscure anonymity of a secondary school new boy. I am confident that that fate awaits me when I sit down today.

    It is an honour and a privilege to represent Neath, or Castell Nedd, whose importance dates from Roman and Norman times, and which has the cosiest town centre in Britain, surrounded by scenic valleys and majestic waterfalls, with, to the west, the a spectacular night-time view of Pontardawe’s unusually tall and striking church spire.

    There is a strong sense of community, an immense network of voluntary activity, and a rich culture of amateur opera, music, and male voice and ladies’ choirs. On the eastern tip of the constituency is Richard Burton’s home village of Pontrhydyfen. Amateur sport is widespread—football, athletics and, of course, the best rugby team in country. Recently I was introduced to a class of nine-year-old children at Godrergraig primary school. The teacher said, “Here is a very important person.” One of the nine-year-olds got up and asked, “Do you play rugby for Neath?” That, I thought, was a man who had his priorities right.

    I have enjoyed renewing my interests in the game at Neath’s home ground, the Gnoll. In my youth, that interest involved running on rugby pitches, both as a player and, later, in another capacity, which I shall refrain from describing, as this speech is made with your indulgence, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

    I am privileged in another way: I follow two Members, both survived by wives still living in Neath. Margaret Coleman is a highly respected figure in her own right in the community. Jenny Williams, now in her nineties, was a much-loved Labour party activist, and wife of D. J. Williams, who hailed from the close-knit village of Tairgwaith in the north-west of the constituency. In 1925, D. J. Williams wrote of the destructive impact of capitalism in the coal industry in terms that remain true today.

    Donald Coleman’s tragically premature death was not just a bitter blow to his family; it deprived Neath of a favourite son, and this House of its finest tenor. Although I will do my best to follow in his footsteps as a diligent constituency MP, I am afraid I cannot hope to match his talent for music and song. The exuberance with which he sang and preached his love for Neath reflects the intense civic pride in the town and in the villages of the Dulais, Swansea, Amman, Neath and Pelenna valleys.

    But local residents cannot survive on civic pride, mutual aid and mutual co-operation alone. They take great pride in educational achievement. I have met nobody in Neath who cannot remember how many O-levels he or she has. There is a great tradition of skill and hard work in Neath and its valleys. Much has been done in the face of Government indifference and neglect, but so much more could be done if the publicly sponsored investment in industry, infrastructure and initiative for which the people of Neath and its valleys are crying out were provided.

    Surely Neath is entitled to the seedcorn investment, decent training provision and long-term loan finance that only national Government or the Welsh Office is able to provide. The old Blaenant colliery site —headgear still erect as a monument to the last pit in Neath; one of over 30 to close in the constituency in the last 30 years —nestles beneath the village of Crynant in the picturesque Dulais valley. The old Aberpergwm washery and pit site is just below the little village of Cwmgwrach in the Vale of Neath. Both are prime industrial sites, yet both stand idle, black and gaunt, their potential wasting away as 11 people chase every job vacancy, training places are cut to the bone, and businesses go bust. Nobody in Neath wants a free ride. People want simply the opportunity to build a new future.

    That future must include high-quality health and community care provision. With its history of mining and heavy industry, the people of Neath suffer disproportionately from ill health. With a higher than average proportion of citizens of pensionable age—22 per cent. compared to 17.7 per cent. for Great Britain —there is a particular need for a properly funded health and community care network. Yet the Welsh Office and the Treasury have still not given the go-ahead for the new hospital that Neath so desperately needs, and West Glamorgan county council has been forced, under pain of poll tax capping, to close one of its old people’s homes.

    Neath borough council, meanwhile, has had to spend an extra £523,000 on collecting the poll tax, compared with the cost of collecting the rates. On top of this, the borough had to install a new computer system for processsing the poll tax, at a cost of £300,000. Neath’s 16,000 pensioners are entitled to question the priorities of a society and a Government that waste such colossal sums of money while hospital waiting lists grow, and responsibility for community care is unceremoniously dumped on local authorities without the necessary resources to finance it.

    How can we claim to be caring for citizens in need when the iniquity of the poll tax continues to penalise them so savagely? Even after the recent £140 reduction in the poll tax, residents in the Blaenhonddan area of Neath will be paying £113.66 a head. This is £85 more, incidentally, than I pay as a resident in Resolven, a few miles up the Neath valley, even though we are paying for the same local authority services, because of the discriminatory way the Welsh Office operates the transitional relief scheme.

    One resident in the Blaenhonddan area—a woman from Bryncoch—is caring for her 83-year-old mother who has Parkinson’s disease. The mother has a tiny widow’s pension and has to pay the full £113. Their combined household poll tax bill is £339, yet both she and her husband are on tiny incomes which are so widespread in the Neath area. The hypocrisy of preaching community care while practising such a pernicious policy is not lost on that woman or her neighbours in Neath. Conservative Members who turn a blind eye to her predicament call to mind Thomas Paine’s summer soldier and sunshine patriot who in a crisis shrink from the service of their country.

    How can the House claim to be safeguarding the interests of individuals such as a 72-year-old man from the village of Gwaun-cae-Gurwen, where the Welsh language is spoken with pride, whose eyesight deteriorates daily? He has waited 18 months for a cataract operation—a simple, cheap operation. Yet waiting lists for ophthalmic surgery at Singleton hospital have doubled since 1987, and there are now 1,400 local people like him awaiting in-patient treatment. Perhaps most outrageous of all, he was told that he could have the operation next week if he could go private at a cost of £3,000. He might as well have been invited to go to the moon, for that is a sum quite out of the question for someone living on the pittance that pensioners get today. He can be forgiven for noting with anger the grotesque fact that 200 people, just 0.0004 per cent. of the population, now monopolise 9.3 per cent. of the country’s economic wealth—some classless society indeed.

    Meanwhile, the quality of the environment and the standard of living continue to deteriorate, especially for our elderly. Local bus services in the Neath valleys have been cut ruthlessly. Fares are exorbitant. Yet who can afford a car on a basic retirement income, perhaps topped up by a miner’s tiny pension? It is difficult enough for senior citizens to pay their colour television licence and the standing charges on their phone, electricity or gas. It is difficult enough for them to find the money to eat properly as food bills rise remorselessly while the real value of pensions declines compared with wage earners.

    If Neath’s senior citizens had free bus passes, if standing charges on basic utility services were reduced or abolished for pensioners, if those on low incomes were entitled, like their colleagues in sheltered housing, to television licences for £5 rather than £77, if Neath and Lliw borough councils were not banned by the Government from using their combined housing capital receipts of £7.6 million to build new homes and hit by cuts in housing funding from installing universal central heating and upgrading their existing housing stock, if communities like Cwmllynfell at the heads of the four main valleys in the constituency were not choked by coal dust, disruption and heavy lorry traffic from existing and threatened opencast mines—if all those vital factors were addressed, the standard and quality of life of my constituents would be dramatically improved and, with it, there would be less need to depend upon health and community care provision.

    Furthermore, if the curse of “London knows best” were removed, local people would of their own volition radically recast their priorities. That is why decentralisation of power through newly invigorated local councils and an elected assembly for Wales are so vital. That is why a freedom of information Act and an elected second Chamber are so essential. The voice of the people must be heard, not smothered by anachronistic and elitist institutions of Government.

    During the last 12 years especially, Britain has become an “I’m all right, Jack” society, putting instant consumption before long-term investment, selfish “mefirstism” before community care, and private greed before the public good. The result is ugly to behold: the tawdry tinsel of decadence camouflaging a society rotten at the roots.

    I thank the House for its indulgence or, as we say in Neath, “Diolch Yn Fawr.”