UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Grant Shapps – 2023 Chatham House Speech on Greater Energy Independence

    Grant Shapps – 2023 Chatham House Speech on Greater Energy Independence

    The speech made by Grant Shapps, the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, at Chatham House in London on 1 March 2023.

    Good afternoon everyone.

    It is great to be here at 10, St James’s Square. Famous not just as the Chatham House headquarters of course, but also the home of three ex-Prime Ministers.

    Including two eminent Victorians ones, the Earl of Derby, and William Gladstone, whose terms in office spanned a period of phenomenal economic growth during the second half of the 19th century.

    Of course, there were many different reasons for that growth, but the real powerhouse behind the Industrial Revolution was a single commodity – coal.

    For so long, cheap and abundant needed in such enormous volumes as industry expanded that by 1900, coal powered an incredible 95% of the British economy.

    Causing some to fear that supplies could run out. Bringing booming Britain to an abrupt halt. Economist Stanley Jevons wrote a book, predicting the likely exhaustion of our coal mines. The Times and the Economist published articles about it.

    And yet, in the race to industrialise, no-one addressed our complete reliance on just one source of domestic energy. Or what was assumed to be one of our greatest strengths, and how that could become one of our greatest vulnerabilities.

    Because energy security was simply not a priority.

    Today I want to explain why this backstory has parallels with modern Britain.

    And how we will learn from our past mistakes, to deliver my ambition as Energy Secretary for wholesale electricity prices to become amongst the cheapest in Europe.

    Russia-Ukraine

    Despite those dire warnings about coal’s longevity during the Gladstone era. We know that it became a far more enduring power source than anyone could possibly have imagined.

    Indeed, thanks to Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine 12 months ago, it’s even experienced a brief revival.

    Although Britain has slashed her coal use from 40% a decade ago, to less than 2% today. Some countries are reopening mothballed coal plants to replace Russian gas.  We’ve kept two or three of ours on standby – but thankfully have not had to use it this winter.

    We hope, for the sake of our climate, that coal’s renaissance will be very brief.

    Just as we pray – for the sake of the brave Ukrainian people – that this appalling, pointless war is over before too long.

    Putin has achieved nothing from marching into a sovereign nation, beyond disrupting energy supplies and hitting families with higher bills, killing thousands and displacing millions

    In every way, his reckless gamble has fallen apart.

    His military catastrophe. His miscalculation of the West on whether we would be divided. His spectacular undermining of his own country’s interests.

    The past year has shown that Russian fossil fuels – like Putin himself – belong in the past.

    The fallout from this tragic conflict may have caused us some short-term challenges and we know that it has. But ultimately, Putin’s war will just hasten the energy transition we all want to see

    Indeed, actually I’d go further. I’d say it marks a crucial turning point for Britain’s energy resilience.

    Never again will we be held to hostage by a tyrant.

    Never again will we allow our energy security to be threatened.

    And never again will we let one man hit the pockets of every family and business in Britain causing the government to step in and pay half – half – of a typical household energy bill.

    Instead, by accelerating plans to diversify, decarbonise and domesticate our energy supplies, we will take back power.

    And reform our energy market. To secure cheap, clean energy that Britain needs to prosper.

    Department for Energy Security and Net Zero

    So, creating the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero is a clear statement of intent from this Government.

    Nearly twice the size of the old Department of Energy and Climate Change.

    The new Department can now give energy and net zero the full and dedicated attention they palpably deserve.

    So, Chatham House, here are my main objectives as Secretary of State:

    1. To set Britain on a path to energy independence, in other words, delivering energy security.
    2. To bring bills down as soon as possible, and keep them down, so wholesale electricity prices are among the cheapest in Europe, delivering consumer security.
    3. To decarbonise energy as part of our commitment to net zero, delivering climate security.
    4. And to play our part in reducing inflation and boosting growth, delivering economic security.

    Distinct though these may be, each of these four objectives are closely entwined.

    Each one depends on the success of the other three.

    So a key mission for the new Department will be to work across different disciplines, and make best use of our expertise.

    But they also feed into the Prime Minister’s five priorities for Britain, in particular to halve inflation and get our economy growing, to build a strong, stable and prosperous future, thereby reducing debt in the medium term, for our country.

    The challenges

    I’m the first to admit the challenges we face are considerable. For decades, Britain has been increasingly reliant on polluting, imported fossil fuels. We’ve neglected investment in other forms of power, and in partiuclar in nuclear power.

    And that has left us more exposed to volatile international energy markets.

    The government has stepped in this winter, as I have explained, paying half of a typical household bill and a third of a typical business bill, even if many people perhaps don’t realise that’s what we’re doing in the face of rising prices

    I will continue to fight on behalf of the consumer – just as I’ve done recently with the pre-payment meters scam. But to address the main objectives I’ve set out.

    We must wean ourselves off fossil fuel imports. And remove the direct link between gas prices and renewables. And replace them with cheaper, cleaner, domestic sources of energy.

    Powering more of Britain from Britain.

    UK strengths

    Let’s not forget what we’ve achieved already.

    We were ranked top 3 in the world last year for clean energy investment – only the US and China, obviously much larger countries, were higher.

    We are a global leader in offshore wind power – with the world’s largest offshore wind farm.  And the world’s second largest.  And the third.  And fourth largest.

    And we’re pioneering many breakthrough energy technologies, through our open ecosystems. We have so much to promote here in Britain.

    The thriving tech sector. Our world class universities. and the North Sea, described recently by the Economist as “Europe’s new powerhouse”.

    Plus, our position outside of the EU gives us the freedom to regulate and deregulate, and build our business-friendly environment.

    So, we can and have increased energy security whilst decarbonising faster than any other industrialised nation. We expect growth in offshore wind to support 90,000 jobs directly and indirectly by 2030.

    And we’re developing the next frontier in this exciting industry. floating offshore windfarms – Currently the only operational ones in the world for example, is in the Celtic Sea around Cornwall and Wales.

    Proving that Britannia still rules the waves!

    We have incredible potential in areas like carbon capture and hydrogen. Carbon capture clusters, and exporting the technology, could support 50,000 UK jobs by 2030, with the backing of our £1 billion CCS Infrastructure Fund.

    Hydrogen hubs like places in Teesside, bringing back investment to areas that experienced significant decline during the 20th century

    And we promise sustained growth for the future.

    And we’re not just concerned with creating new jobs.

    Through our North Sea Transition Deal, we’re helping to decarbonise oil and gas and protecting thousands of existing jobs as well. So, bringing all this work together through the Energy Security Bill – the vehicle for delivering our strategy.

    It will modernise the way that we heat people’s homes.

    It will turbocharge British technology.

    And it will liberate private investment, scaling-up jobs and growth.

    Private investment

    But this is not just all about government, of course. My new department will be working flat out to fire up private investment in our energy transition.

    A couple of weeks ago I was meeting with Bill Gates to discuss how green energy opportunities can work here in Britain. He was hugely impressed by the drive and innovation, the political will which is not universal throughout the rest of the world, to transform energy security.

    His ‘Breakthrough Energy’ initiative was founded in 2016 to invest in fledgling green clean energy projects that have enormous potential. It’s just the kind of stimulation we need to scale-up green energy businesses in the UK.

    Nuclear

    But alongside all of those renewables, I am also firmly committed to nuclear within our future energy mix.

    We’re progressing with the construction of Hinkley Point C, and driving forward Sizewell C, a sister project that I funded at the end of last year, which could be powering the equivalent of six million homes and  supporting 10,000 jobs – it’s the first time in 40 years public money has been committed to nuclear in this country.

    And we’re setting up Great British Nuclear, to produce a resilient pipeline of projects, so it is not the last. I’ve appointed the country’s first ever nuclear minister in Andrew Bowie – already dubbed ‘Atomic Bowie’ within our department.

    All of this together will help us to meet those legally-binding target of net zero by 2050.

    Net zero and energy consumption

    As well as creating new green energy and jobs of tomorrow, we must make sure that we energy efficiently today. Our goal is to cut energy consumption from buildings and industry by 15% in this decade.

    Backed by £6 billion funding between 2025 and 2028, on top of £6.6 billion provided in this Parliament. This winter I know has been incredibly difficult for households across the country.

    Thankfully, there are now signs of the wholesale gas price coming down. But if anything positive has come from the past few months, it’s built awareness of the need to increase efficiency of energy use. An awareness we must develop, even when energy prices return to normal.

    Because the “Net Zero” part of my Department’s title is really just the flip side of “Energy Security”.

    All too often I think in the green debate in this country, it has been framed by a tiny minority of people who glue themselves to motorways. But that’s not the future when it comes to tackling climate change.

    I see decarbonisation as a fundamental, and mainstream aspect of everything we do.

    Conclusion

    With hindsight, then, we can perhaps forgive Gladstone and Lord Derby for neglecting energy security. Coal supplies had long been considered inexhaustible.

    And there was little concern for or even recognition of environmental impact as Britain’s economy boomed at that time. Today, by contrast, we have many compelling reasons to think differently.

    Putin’s invasion of Ukraine demonstrated something that the UK already appreciated – fossil fuels are not the future. Instead, greater energy independence, by investing in renewables and nuclear, is the way to ensure aggressors can never again hit people’s energy bills.

    And this reason alone is justification to overhaul our energy strategy.

    But when it’s also critical to achieving net zero.

    And creating hundreds of thousands of green jobs to level-up Britain. Then we must address energy security with much greater urgency and resolve.

    Those Victorian Prime Ministers were lucky, fears over coal reserves were ultimately unfounded as we know.

    But we won’t take a chance on our energy security again.

    This time, we’ll choose the responsible path.

    Make the right decisions.

    For our environment.

    For our prosperity.

    And for our children’s future.

    Thank you.

  • James Cleverly – 2023 Speech on the Nigerian Presidential Elections

    James Cleverly – 2023 Speech on the Nigerian Presidential Elections

    The speech made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, on 1 March 2023.

    The United Kingdom commends Nigerian voters for their participation in the Presidential and National Assembly elections and for their patience and resilience in exercising their democratic rights. We congratulate the President Elect, Senator Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

    We note the position of opposition parties on the election outcome and the concerns expressed by observer missions and civil society about the organisation of the process, including delays and technical challenges. We encourage the authorities to examine all concerns carefully, take action to resolve outstanding issues and focus on delivering the will of the Nigerian people.

  • Grant Shapps – 2023 Speech at Norwegian Royal Plenary Session

    Grant Shapps – 2023 Speech at Norwegian Royal Plenary Session

    The speech made by Grant Shapps, the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, in London on 1 March 2023.

    A little over 80 years ago, just before midnight, on Tuesday February 16th, 1943…

    A small team of Norwegian commandos, trained by the British Special Operations Executive in Scotland….. parachuted from an RAF plane onto a freezing mountain plateau in Telemark.

    Against overwhelming odds…..

    They managed to blow up part of the hydroelectric power plant at Vemork that had been taken over by the Nazis.

    Our Norwegian friends here will know, that it was the largest plant of its type in the world at the time – and a symbol of Norway’s status as an energy superpower.

    Not only was it the most audacious act of sabotage in modern military history..

    But because Vemork was mass producing heavy water used in the nuclear fission process…

    These heroes ended Hitler’s dream of building a nuclear bomb.

    Eight decades on, Britain and Norway still share the same special bond that made this extraordinary attack possible.

    Critical allies in standing up to aggression, most recently Putin’s evil war in Ukraine…..

    And we’re still committed to making the world a more secure place.

    Our bonds stretch back centuries; indeed, many British names and traditions bare the mark of the Norsemen and women who settled here many hundreds of years ago.

    Even our royal families are related – and it is a pleasure and honour to welcome His Royal Highness, Crown Prince Haakon to London today and – actually – back to London. After all, His Royal Highness studied here in London.

    I know that these ties will help us to continue working together as we speed up our transition to net zero…

    And build a green and prosperous future for all.

    Norway and Russia

    We are also hugely grateful for what you are doing today.

    Norwegian gas has been critically important in providing energy resilience to Europe this critical winter.

    Including for Britain – where it accounts for about a third of our current gas consumption.

    As we reflect on this year’s barbaric war in Ukraine, we have all been taught a valuable lesson.

    Never again must we allow our country to be held to ransom on energy as Putin has done.

    We must join together and utilise our flourishing renewables industries to defeat energy tyranny.

    Renewables

    Like Norway, we want to be smart about the way we think about our energy.

    And smart with the way we use our extraordinary renewable resources and green tech leadership.

    And as the UK works towards my goal of delivering the cheapest wholesale electricity prices in Europe by the middle of the next decade..

    …we can start to think about how best to nuture our energy industries for the long term.

    And like your fantastically successful sovereign wealth fund, we want to think about how we ensure the benefits of renewables are fed back into the economy – for the good of all.

    From offshore wind to carbon capture, utilisation and storage and to hydrogen..

    We will support these vital technologies, ensuring that they work seamlessly across borders.

    For example, our two countries need to work out the best use of the vast carbon storage capacity in the North Sea.

    And we need to ask how best we can work with other countries to increase CO2 trading across boundaries……. as well as working together on hydrogen.

    Indeed, I look forward signing after the speeches the expanded Memorandum of Understanding with Norway on Carbon capture and storage which will include closer collaboration on hydrogen.

    Conclusion

    Eighty years after that audacious Telemark raid we must join together and join forces once again…

    I know that our shared vision and our shared history will help us meet our big 21st century challenges:

    Energy security,

    Sustainability

    And affordability.

    These three goals need to become a mantra engrained onto our collective psyche so we can make the rest of this century a success for both our countries, and for the rest of the world.

  • Penny Mordaunt – 2023 Speech at the Edelman UK Trust Barometer

    Penny Mordaunt – 2023 Speech at the Edelman UK Trust Barometer

    The speech made by Penny Mordaunt, the Leader of the House of Commons, on 1 March 2023.

    Good morning, everyone and thank you all for turning up today to listen to me – although it is a mystery why.

    They could’ve asked a doctor, an engineer, a headteacher or a judge, to speak to you today.

    But no, the folks at Edelman have asked a politician to talk about trust.

    I’m not here as an endorser of my host’s research,

    nor its commercial organisation.

    I am not being paid to attend

    I’m here because they were kind enough to invite me and I believe trust matter, and trust-decay has real harm for our society and how it functions.

    Lose trust in democracy and democracy dies.

    Lose trust in capitalism and it fails too.

    The progress of humanity depends upon trust.

    Edelman have shown you the what, I want to talk about what we can do about it – not just in my profession, but all of us.

    Everywhere, national governments, parliaments and other authorities with their bureaucratised and traditional structures, are struggling to be effective and relevant in the modern world. And they have been steeped in scandal.

    Politicians share this timeline of trust decay with a cast of leaders from every walk of life. I will give you a quick recap.

    Since the turn of the century, we’ve learned that our leaders, rigged interests rates, laundered drug money, presided over an offshore banking system bigger than anyone thought possible,

    forced good companies into closure and destroyed pension funds as they themselves grew wealthier.

    Collectively, they oversaw an unprecedented destruction of wealth and the collapse of the financial system.

    They watched as life savings placed into investment funds set up by leaders of previously unimpeachable integrity turned out to be Ponzi schemes.

    They sold off reserves of gold to compensate for these exercises in corporate greed, while never once convicting a banker.

    Our spiritual leaders covered up sex abuse in the Church.

    Our charity leaders sexually abused the vulnerable.

    Our child welfare leaders have permitted child abuse.

    Our Police leaders have allowed predators to wear a uniform.

    Leaders of the automotive industry lied about emissions, were imprisoned, fled the country while out on bail and remain fugitives.

    The leaders of our water utilities polluted rivers then tried to cover it up.

    Global entertainment leaders have faced multiple allegations of sexual harassment and abuse.

    Britain’s leading broadcaster falsely accused political figures of being child abusers, while allowing actual abusers to commit crimes on their premises.

    Meanwhile, sporting leaders have been caught cheating and doping.

    Human rights lawyers have been struck off for misconduct and dishonesty.

    And the offshore tax operation thought to be a fraction of the UK economy, turned out to be a multiple of it.

    These failings – personal and organisational – are nothing new.

    But today it seems it’s not just that things don’t work or that some people are wrong’uns.

    There are new layers to trust decay.

    The system feels rigged against you.

    Some are feeling economic shocks for the first time as has been pointed out.

    Consumers feel they have less power.

    Some pay a premium for being poor.

    Life has gotten more complex.

    It is harder to help,

    Harder to communicate – to share platforms, to cut through the noise. To understand the world around us, to feel invested and invested in.

    Harder not to feel overwhelmed in the face of existential and greyer threats.

    Or the dizzying pace of technological change.

    We have generational voids – young people are fixated on rewriting or tearing down the past because they don’t believe they have a future.

    Older generations want to stop the noise. Stop the constant change. The bull***t (as they see it). Stop their world being turned upside down. Stop their values and institutions being belittled and patronised. These changes, in their eyes, are a type of catastrophe. They have lost the stars to steer by as slowly, the constants and comforts of their youth have disappeared. The high street has been hollowed out. Their childhood heroes have been debunked and their past rewritten. Local has been replaced with national and international. They feel overwhelmed; their world has been Amazonked.

    So why this complexity and division?

    The spread of a consumer society partially explains this–providing ever more efficiently to our own personal preference. We now have very specific requirements about our food, our work, holiday destinations, cars, clothes, just about everything.

    In fact we express our economic franchise far more frequently than we do our political franchise. In politics, we get a chance to vote every five years but in economics we do so every hour of every day.

    The rise of the internet means we can join groups that appeal directly to our own beliefs. Extremism can find extremists all over the world. We’re far more connected internationally than ever before. We can find anything to believe in there and people frequently do.

    Then there is the growth in media, especially social media that commercially is dependent on conflict – we may have many shared values, but when did consensus ever sell popcorn? Now we have a media which is deliberately controversial and confrontational. We have commercialised conflict. We have specific commentators whose job is to stir things up and the simple truth is that harmony and contentment is not valued by the media.

    And nor is it universally popular amongst politicians too.

    These forces are all conspiring to make us feel more atomised.

    Previously, we were split by gender, sexual preference, profession, location, marital status, education, football club, religion or politics. We are now split further by whether we are vegan, FBPE, BLM,  Brexiteer or Remainer, nationalist or unionist, woke or non-woke. Zoomer or boomer.

    This complete atomisation means that people do not feel that their values are shared. At best, those with different opinions are abused. At worst, they are cancelled and demonised.

    ‘We’ have become a million types of ‘they’.

    When this happens, trust between groups breaks down.

    Some are genuinely afraid.

    Afraid of saying the wrong thing or of worse.

    Mental health suffered, for some this exhibits itself in a new vice of choice: the paranoia of conspiracy.

    Here a few recent gems that have appears on mainstream broadcast this past weekend:

    The air-raids in Ukraine are fake, and the sirens are sound effects applied by the Ukrainian government.

    Controversial traffic calming measures are not the product of an overbearing lib dem council but a global conspiracy to get us to eat insects.

    I am all in favour of livening up local authority transport committees, but there are limits!

    The Government is shortly going to start rationing food, and a food rationing app is in development. This is a conspiracy between the government and large food corporations.

    Presumably there will be unlimited access to turnips.

    And this exploitative monologue:

    “Are we simply to be fed on a diet of propaganda right down to the lies about health and food and the climate and war and biology and race until we are so unwell, confused, exhausted and anxious that we don’t notice when they pick the last penny out of our pockets and lock us down in a digital ghetto watched round the clock by cameras and listening devices we pay through the nose to carry in our own pockets. And the rationing of tomatoes.”

    And now it’s time for the weather.

    Such alarmist nonsense gains credibility from being sandwiched between credible broadcast anchors. People whose loyalties have historically been to their profession and craft.

    Falsehood and deep fakes sit alongside information and legitimate debate in your social media timelines.

    We can tell the difference though, right?

    • An opinion poll a few years ago by Hope Not Hate showed:
      • 30% of 25-30 year olds believed antisemitic tropes they saw online.
      • 31 % of that age group thought that Covid had been intentionally released as a deliberate depopulation plan by the UN or the New World Order’.
      • 29 % thought that the vaccine programme was an attempt to insert microchips into people.
      • 50% of people aged 25-34 believed that regardless of who is in government, there is a single group of people who secretly control events and rule the world together. 50%.

    Being a government Minister, having attended Davos, I am clearly part of this group – and I am braced for a post speech social media pile on as to why I am an apologist for a global illuminati hell bent on ending humanity as we know it.

    As a former defence secretary and the UK Government’s former defensive cyber lead – I can testify there are enough organisations in the world trying to do us genuine harm, thank you very much, without us having to invent some.

    So how can we build trust?

    We need to recognise what is driving this.

    Conflict and division sells. It is a vice.

    Nothing new about that. It is why we all say we hate PMQs but thousands will be tuning in later today.

    But so much of the content I take issue with is not about debate. It is about profit. Attracting an audience which is addicted to such theories.

    Raise concerns about the harm being done and you are “one of them”, or a ‘free speech denier’.

    You’ll be told? ‘What is your problem? I was just asking the question, I just want to know what is your connection to the Rothchilds?

    Work in broadcasting and care about compliance and ethics? and you are and I quote, “Ofcom’s b**ch”.

    Division and disagreement is not bad.

    In fact I’d argue it is good. Its present does not make societies and communities weak. It makes them strong.

    We’ve just seen China does well on the lack of a trust gap. Nope not much division there.

    I don’t want to live in China.

    The UK is quite good at taking on and adopting new ideas partly because it listens to minority voices. The future always arrives as a minority. That’s sometimes where you can hear tomorrow.

    Because alongside different views and ideas there is a recognition of shared values.

    An understanding of what Freedom really means

    It is about rights but also responsibilities.

    Free societies need responsible adults.

    The value of free speech is not just in your freedom to say something, but also in our ability to listen and learn something. It is also the freedom to change your mind and the freedom to be uncertain.

    The absence of that freedom damages our ability to be effective, our wellbeing and we should never take that freedom for granted and we should recognise when it is under attack.

    We need new ways of helping people be digitally literate, and think critically.

    Government is acting on this:

    We are improving the effectiveness of the House of Commons.

    We have the Online Safety Bill and workstreams and the defending democracy task force.

    The Prime Minister is on a mission to restore trust, starting with clear priorities and accountability.

    He understands that trust is earned.

    But we recognise something else is required too.

    It is about the relationship between trust and values.

    You see, politicians spend a lot of their careers seeking the parenthesis.

    Searching for values that we share, that we care about.

    These might be the love of our families.

    The desire for health and prosperity.

    It might be the concern for our environment or our children’s future.

    A shared venture, a common project.

    What we all have in common.

    The future of Britain isn’t decided by politicians, it’s decided by the character of the British people. Their character is the national destiny.

    This fills me full of hope because I believe in the character of the British people. They’re sceptical. They don’t like bullies. They’re fair-minded. They’re thrifty. They don’t like greed. They like to help. They have a sense of humour. They are tolerant. They love freedom.

    My late friend Jo Cox said: “We have more in common than that which divides us.” Her words are freighted by the manner of her death. If the Commons had a motto it should be that.

    Politicians have an important role to play. We have convening power and we can, when we choose to, bring people together and we should.

    Before we find answers, we must find shared challenges.

    Common ground.

    Truths we know to be self-evident.

    Where you find common ground, you will find trust.

    Establishing shared values starts with being prepared to defend them.

    That is what we can do as politicians.

    It is what we must do as citizens.

    You see you need not trust the former but we all have to trust the latter.

    Thank you.

  • Kemi Badenoch – 2023 Speech at the Launch of the Legatum Institute’s Prosperity Index

    Kemi Badenoch – 2023 Speech at the Launch of the Legatum Institute’s Prosperity Index

    The speech made by Kemi Badenoch, the Secretary of State for Business and International Trade, in London on 28 February 2023.

    It’s a pleasure to be here at Legatum and launching this year’s Prosperity Index.

    The Index was created, as we have just seen, to help decision-makers across the world think about domestic growth and development, seeking policy solutions to drive improvements in prosperity.

    When I received the invitation to speak tonight it was as the Secretary of State for International Trade.

    Now, I am the Secretary of State for Business and International Trade, and my newly formed Department for Business and International Trade will enable me to achieve a lot more.

    As much as I enjoyed the trade brief, I lacked some of the levers to really drive forward the growth advantages of international free trade on a domestic market.

    There is so much to look forward to now that I’m looking after this brief.

    However, today we are here to discuss global prosperity. So I will be speaking about my five priorities on trade, where the focus is on global rather than just on domestic prosperity.

    My first priority is removing barriers that stop businesses succeeding.

    Domestically, this means not about taking away any safety nets. It’s about ensuring that we have a modern, dynamic, nimble economy where the regulations are fit for purpose and actually help businesses to start up, grow and export.

    Internationally, we want to remove barriers to trade, in particular remove barriers to our exporters.

    Leaving the EU was not an end itself, now it is incumbent upon us to realise the opportunities that Brexit has enabled.

    One of the things that we can now do with our independent trading policy is make sure that the global trade rules work for the UK, not just the UK and 27 other countries.

    So we identify the blockers faced by UK businesses in getting their goods and services into other countries, and we get rid of them.

    That’s meant, for example, getting Welsh lamb back on US dining tables for the first time in 20 years. And also opening up China’s huge beauty industry to cruelty-free UK cosmetics.

    So we’ve identified, in my department, over 100 key barriers to trade, and we are taking them down one by one.

    I know that this is something that Legatum cares very much about so I thought you would be pleased that was the first priority.

    The second priority is increasing our exports every year until we hit £1 trillion by 2030.

    Exports are a huge driver of economic growth, but, historically, we have fallen behind some of our competitors.

    And this is because compared to smaller countries like Sweden, we already have a large domestic market, which means many businesses don’t feel the need to export the way that their comparative businesses would do in smaller countries.

    We should be doing better. Not least because English is the international language of business and we aren’t capitalising on it as much as we should do.

    So, our job is twofold. At one end, it’s encouraging smaller businesses and showing them that there are markets for their products and services overseas.

    At the other, it’s about supporting our world-leading companies. Just as we did with Airbus and Rolls Royce this month in landing the biggest aircraft export deal in the history of global aviation.

    In removing market barriers, we make exporting more efficient. So my top two priorities work hand-in-hand.

    Thirdly, I want to make the UK the top investment destination in Europe.

    And this is important for many reasons.

    Without investment, businesses cannot grow. And, without growth, they will not export.

    So, in building a business-friendly environment in the UK, we need to keep barriers to investment under constant review.

    There are so many reasons why companies, and in fact other countries, want to invest in the UK (our position in the Prosperity Index is one of them, by the way, which is why we need to make sure that we keep doing well).

    These reasons come together in the unique offer we have, which is a strong rule of law and stable economic environment; world class institutions and a highly skilled labour force; and our history of innovation and creativity.

    There is so much about the UK that will ensure we have a prosperous future, but we don’t shout enough about it.

    When I was at the World Economic Forum last month, I was struck by how other countries played as a team and pitched their strengths across public and private sector.

    By contrast, UK ministers were alone in trumpeting the immense value of the UK, while our business groups and former politicians were complaining about the country and trying to relitigate Brexit.

    So I’ll give you an example. We are constantly being told that our exports are falling. And yet the opposite is true. We’ve just broken the £800bn mark for the first time and are well on the path to our £1tn export ambition.

    So some will tell you that all is doom and gloom and we are in decline.

    This is nonsense.

    Britain remains the unicorn capital of Europe – with more privately held start-up companies worth over a billion pounds more than France and Germany combined.

    Of the major economies, we are the per-capita Nobel Prize champions of the world.

    Domestic investment was up nearly 10% last year. And inward international investment stock broke the £2tn mark for the first time. So there is a lot to be happy about and a lot to be proud of.

    My fourth priority is signing high-quality trade deals.

    At the moment I’m currently negotiating our accession into the Trans-Pacific Partnership – this is one of the largest free trade areas in the world, it spans the Asia-Pacific and the Americas, and includes some of the world’s biggest current and future economies.

    So, the UK’s membership will add another like-minded partner and strong voice to this powerful alliance, and takes the trade bloc’s GDP to £11 trillion.

    But it’s not just about exporting goods or even services. The Trans-Pacific Partnership is also about the geostrategic shift to the Indo-Pacific as set out in the government’s Integrated Review and this really matters for our long-term security.

    It also matters for our long-term growth – this is where the global middle class of the future will come from and we need to be a player.

    That’s also why we’re pursuing a great trade deal with India. A deal to cut tariffs and open opportunities for UK services, making it easier for British businesses to sell to an economy set to be the world’s third largest by 2050. There are other trade deals in the pipeline – Israel and Switzerland, like us, services superpowers with complementary economic strengths. The Gulf countries too, and many others to follow.

    So, you may wonder why trade deals are my fourth priority and not my first. And, I’m going to repeat an analogy I’m sure some of you have heard me use before.

    Trade deals are like motorways. They are only useful if there are cars to drive on them, and the cars are exports and investments. That’s what trade is really, and that’s my main focus.

    So we are not just the department for getting deals, taking pictures, signing bits of paper. And that will become even more key as I flesh out our role as the Department for Business and International Trade.

    And my fifth and final priority is probably the one that is most relevant to all of you here at Legatum this evening.

    Free and fair trade is what global prosperity and security are based on. And it is not an empty platitude.

    Too often people of think of fair trade as just giving money to poor countries. Fair trade, for me, means ensuring that the rules-based trading system continues to thrive and does not collapse in the face of protectionism.

    Trade means treating companies and countries equally and making sure that the rules are abided by. That is what’s going to work for the UK and for the rest of the world.

    You will, I’m sure, have heard about the US Inflation Reduction Act. I made my opinions on this clear. We should not have a global subsidies arms race.

    Interventions like the IR Act may look good in the short term. But, in the long term, it runs the risk of becoming self-defeating, not least by creating a single point of failure on supply chains.

    We won’t deal with the economic challenge that we face from China by acting alone. There are many countries with similar views, not just the UK, the EU, Japan, South Korea or Australia.

    The countries who believe in free trade will be stronger acting together. And we have been promoting this as the UK for 70 years since the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade was agreed.

    And I will carry on speaking out on the world stage to promote free trade.

    So, my priorities will contribute not just to UK prosperity, but global prosperity.

    If we deliver on these, the Department for Business and International Trade will actually become the Office for Economic Growth, which I’ve always wanted us to be. And we will ensure that British values are promoted, perhaps even adopted, across the world, and that will deliver for the people of the United Kingdom.

  • Lucy Frazer – 2023 Speech at the Creative Coalition Festival

    Lucy Frazer – 2023 Speech at the Creative Coalition Festival

    The speech made by Lucy Frazer, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, on 28 February 2023.

    I’m absolutely delighted to be here – and I want to thank Caroline and Creative UK for inviting me to speak at today’s event.

    As you might have realised, it’s been a whirlwind few weeks in government and during that time we’ve seen departments being broken up, and new ones created.

    But I think those changes have left my department, DCMS, in really a strong position.

    We can now dedicate all of our energy on the sectors at the heart of our portfolio – particularly the creative industries.

    They are a key priority for the Prime Minister.

    They are a priority for the Chancellor, who has highlighted the creative industries as one of his key growth sectors for the UK economy.

    And they are a priority for me as Culture Secretary.

    In my first few weeks in the role, I’ve been lucky enough to go on a whistlestop tour of Britain’s creative landscape.

    I’ve been up to the Corrie set, and to the Brits.

    I’ve sat on the front row at London Fashion Week, and cheered on UK filmmaking at the BAFTAs.

    And during those last few weeks I’ve seen with my own eyes just how much talent we have in this country:

    the writers, the musicians,

    the lighting and sound technicians, the designers and the producers.

    But those people aren’t just making nice things.

    They are the workforce powering our country – pumping £116 billion into the national purse every year.

    The creative industries enrich our lives in every sense of the word.

    When they thrive, the country thrives.

    And while I’m new to DCMS, as a minister in other departments, I’ve seen just how much the arts can affect lives.

    As prisons minister I saw firsthand how pivotal drama and art can be to rehabilitation,

    in helping people find purpose, meaning and hope, and improve their skills for life outside their four walls.

    As the housing minister, we constantly talked about the importance of “place”…

    …how the quality of the buildings we inhabit and the beauty of the architecture around us affects the way we feel about our home towns and cities.

    And at the Treasury I saw how we can support companies to grow, expand and recruit.

    I am going to bring that experience to bear in this role, to push the creative industries to a new level of growth in the coming years.

    Now, it’s worth noting the huge level of support that the government is already giving to the creative industries.

    We are currently spending:

    Over £21 million through the UK Global Screen Fund, to promote the independent screen sector.

    Over £8 million to support new video games businesses to develop new products and talent through the UK Games Fund.

    £17 million to boost creative investment in six regions across England.

    Over £100 million in funding from UK Research and Innovation, to help us become world leaders in virtual production, and support smaller businesses to experiment and innovate.

    And today I can announce that we are spending another £2.5 million to support R&D in the creative industries in different places across the UK.

    Those are the things we are already doing to get the sector firing on all cylinders.

    But to push things to the next level, I’m going to focus on at least two things:

    People.

    Places.

    On people, I know that a key challenge for the sector is skills.

    Our film and TV industries, for instance, are booming.

    They’re creating thousands of jobs. Now we need people to fill them.

    Yet a recent survey of young people by the BFI and careers app ERIC found only 6 per cent believed a career in the screen industries, for example, was achievable.

    So we need to work together to give people the right skills and awareness from a young age, so that they can join these booming industries and enjoy fulfilling, well-paid jobs.

    On places, I want to use the creative industries to drive growth in every corner of the UK.

    Right now, more than half of creative jobs are in London and the South East.

    And we can do so much more.

    This is one of our strongest industries, and we need the entire country to feel its benefits.

    And there’s a clear route to doing that.

    Right now, there are certain hotspots outside London and the South East where creativity is absolutely booming.

    Where certain creative industries form natural “clusters”.

    So Leamington Spa, for instance, has become one of the video game capitals of the UK,

    While Belfast is a hub for film and TV production.

    I’m very interested in how we can boost those clusters,

    And a need to work across government so that we build homes and train stations in areas where our creative industries are thriving.

    I’m interested in how we can give businesses in those areas even more opportunities to innovate, to access investment, and to export the best of British creativity abroad.

    And finally, I want to understand how the tax system can best support the creative economy, and how it can encourage people all over the country to start and expand their own creative businesses.

    And I will set out how I intend to deliver them through the upcoming Creative Industries Sector Vision.

    DCMS has worked very closely with industry on the Sector Vision, and last week I met with some of the leading voices of the sector to discuss that project,

    during the first face-to-face meeting of the Creative Industries Council since before the pandemic.

    And when the Sector Vision is published, it will kickstart a whole new round of engagement together.

    It will outline how we will continue to work together, both government and industry, on a range of issues affecting creative businesses.

    It will give us the framework to partner up with the new Department for Science, Innovation and Technology on research and development…

    …and to work with the Department for Education on building a highly skilled and innovative workforce.

    And it will lay out how we intend to capitalise on this really exciting era for the creative industries…

    …An era where film and TV alone are now worth more than the entire car industry in the UK.

    This is where the jobs are, this is where growth is.

    So I want to capitalise on that moment, and use it to drive the sector to new heights, for the benefit of the entire country.

    So look out for its publication.

    And in the meantime, I want to thank everyone in this room for all the dedication and passion you bring to your work every single day.

    I know creative work can be a real labour of love.

    And it’s one of the reasons why I’m looking forward to working with all of you in the coming months.

  • James Bevan – 2023 Speech on How To Get An Organisation To Net Zero

    James Bevan – 2023 Speech on How To Get An Organisation To Net Zero

    The speech made by Sir James Bevan, the Chief Executive of the Environment Agency, at Chapter Zero in London on 28 February 2023.

    Introduction

    Most of the really useful lessons in life I’ve learned from getting things wrong. I have often only found how to do something successfully by failing to do it the first time. And sometimes the second and third as well. But I have always learned from those mistakes – eventually.

    This is one of those stories. It is a story of a work in progress, because while I and the organisation I lead, the Environment Agency, want this story to have a happy ending and are confident that it eventually will, we are still finding out what works and what doesn’t as we seek to get there and we don’t have all the answers yet: in fact, nobody does. But what I’m going to tell you is still, I hope, news you can use. And it’s possibly the most useful news there is, because it’s about how to tackle the biggest challenge of our time: the climate emergency.

    What we decided to do

    In 2019 we committed the Environment Agency to be net zero for carbon by 2030: that is, we would become an organisation that was no longer a net emitter of carbon and thus would no longer be contributing to climate change.

    We did that for three main reasons.

    We did it because the EA is a major player in helping the country as a whole get to Net Zero – for example by regulating down most of the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change and advising on how to mitigate its extent and adapt to its effects – and we did not think we could credibly tell others what to do if we were not doing it ourselves.

    We did it because much of what we do ourselves – building flood defences, tackling drought risk, helping design and create more resilient places – is all about tackling the impacts of climate change, and since we are trying to solve that core problem we did not want to be contributing to it ourselves.

    But we mainly did it because it was the right thing to do. Climate change is the biggest of all threats to our world, and everyone needs to play their part in tackling it.

    How we are seeking to do it

    When we made that commitment we also took some important decisions about how we were going to achieve it. We would aim to do it through the classic twin-track approach: by cutting all our own carbon emissions as far as possible – and we set ourselves a target for that of cutting them by at least 45% by 2030 – and by offsetting the rest of our emissions through tree planting, habitat creation and other measures that take carbon out of the atmosphere and lock it up safely so it doesn’t drive any more climate change.

    We also decided to adopt what was at the time the most comprehensive and scientifically sound definition of net zero. That meant we included in our target not just all the carbon the EA produces itself in its own operations, which is a lot – we pump a lot of water around the country to manage drought risk and alleviate flooding, pour a lot of concrete in our flood defence schemes, have a big vehicle fleet, hundreds of offices and over 12,000 employees, whose commuting we also included – but also all the carbon produced by our supply chain as well, which was considerably more.

    Other definitions of successful Net Zero were then and are now available, most of which at the time would have given us a much lower carbon target and made our task a lot easier. But we like a challenge in the EA. And we wanted the outcome to be as ambitious and impactful as possible.

    There was one further challenge element in all this, which was that there was no additional money to do it. We are funded mostly by government grant and the charge income we receive from those for whom we provide services, and neither of those income streams was going up. So we’d have to fund this from within our existing budgets.

    How it felt

    We have a saying in my executive team: “Everybody must be heard. We don’t all have to agree. But we do have to make a decision.” And on this decision everyone was indeed heard, we didn’t all agree, but we did eventually make a decision.

    There was little debate over the principle of whether we should aspire to be a Net Zero organisation: everyone thought that was right. But there were two main areas where views differed.

    The first was over the impact on our operations if we made that commitment. The EA exists to protect people and wildlife, and nobody wanted to compromise our ability to do that by chasing a net zero target that might undermine our ability to carry on pumping water out of homes or building flood defences, or all the other things we do to protect lives and livelihoods and create a better place. We settled that debate by agreeing that our commitment would be to do both things at the same time: we would aim to get to Net Zero by 2030 while continuing to deliver all the outcomes we exist to deliver for all the people and places we serve: reducing flood risk, regulating industry, preventing pollution, enhancing nature and so on. So there would be no stopping doing any of these things: instead we’d need to do at least some of them differently, sometimes radically so.

    The second debate was a more philosophical one, which was this: at the time of the decision, we didn’t actually know whether or indeed how we could reach our proposed 2030 target. So was it right to make a commitment to do something without knowing precisely how to do it? That is exactly the sort of clear-eyed practical question you’d expect from an organisation like the EA which always wants to operate on an evidence-based basis, and when it sets out to do something always wants to be sure it will achieve it. For the EA, committing to do something we didn’t know exactly how to do – which meant we were taking a big leap in the dark – was very counter-cultural.

    In the end we were inspired by something that many have called humanity’s greatest ever achievement: the US Apollo Programme. In September 1962 President Kennedy publicly committed the United States to putting a man on the Moon by the end of that decade and bringing him safely home again: a SMART target if ever there was one – specific, measurable and time-bound.

    When NASA heard about this pledge – which they did at the same time as everyone else listening to the speech – they were incredulous. They had no idea how that would be done, and even if they had known, very few of them thought it could be done in the seven years that the President had promised. And yet we all know how that story ended: with Neil Armstrong stepping onto the lunar surface in July 1969. We thought that if the US could put a man on the Moon inside seven years without initially knowing how to do it, the Environment Agency could probably get itself to Net Zero in eleven years on the same basis.

    The EA Board readily and unanimously endorsed that decision. They were then, and remain now, our biggest supporters and champions as we seek to deliver it.

    How we set about it

    Which was the next challenge. Once the decision in principle to make the EA Net Zero in 2030 had been made, there remained the small matter of how we were going to do it.

    At Harvard Business School they drill into every aspiring CEO the same message: the main thing is to make sure that the main thing really is the main thing. So we made the climate emergency the Main Thing for the EA. We put it at the heart of everything we did and now do.

    At the strategic level we made it the centrepiece of our Five Year Action Plan that drives what the whole organisation does. We put it at the heart of our new Flood Strategy, which among other things dictates how we spend most of our money. And we ensured that every time our executive leadership took a decision on any big issue, one of the questions we always asked before that decision was: how will this help us tackle the climate emergency?

    At the operational level we put in place governance arrangements to monitor and oversee delivery of our new Net Zero goal. We established Senior Responsible Officers for the key elements of it. But – critically – we made achieving that goal the business of every single EA employee. We helped our people understand what the goal involved and why we were aiming for it, including by putting everyone through training at our online Climate Academy. And we encouraged all our teams to think for themselves and identify ways in which they could change what they did and how they did it in order to help us get there. Then we stood back and waited to see what would happen.

    What happened was astonishing. President Kennedy’s commitment to an audacious but inspiring goal triggered a massive upwelling of enthusiasm and innovation from staff all across NASA. Exactly the same thing happened in the EA in relation to Net Zero. While some of the measures we put in place to get us there were necessarily driven from the top down – such as the decision that we would use low carbon concrete or alternative materials wherever they were available for all our construction – many of the things that happened came from the bottom up: initiatives invented by our local teams to cut, absorb or avoid carbon while delivering the day job.

    Progress to date

    I said this was a work in progress. We are now four years into our eleven year sprint to 2030, with seven still to go. How are we doing?

    Not bad: in 2019/20 (our zero baseline year) our direct operational carbon emissions totaled 31, 284 tonnes, mostly from pumping water to reduce flood or drought risk and pouring concrete to build flood defences. By the end of last year (2021/22) we had got that figure down to 20,485 tonnes, a cut of more than a third. We report on these figures publicly every quarter – another incentive to keep improving.

    We are finding new ways to do what we do. Example: using natural flood management techniques that don’t emit and actually absorb carbon such as planting trees, restoring rivers to their natural curves, creating hollows to store rainwater, all to absorb water and slow the flow which could otherwise cause flooding. We are also looking at more advanced technology like electric plant and vehicles, and hydrogen fuel cells.

    Meanwhile we are starting to offset our remaining emissions. We have built a pipeline of potential projects to absorb and offset as much as we can, using land we own ourselves as well as potential partnerships with others. These UK- and nature-based projects will include tree planting, creating wetlands and other new habitat like salt marsh. Example: The Lower Otter restoration project in Devon, which will not only reduce flood risk to the local community, but will also create 55 hectares of intertidal saltmarsh, providing habitat for wildlife and sequestering carbon.

    Will we get there?

    Will we get there by 2030? Honest answer: I don’t know. As we’ve gone further it’s got harder. As we have improved our data we’ve found that we were emitting more carbon than we thought we were when we made the 2019 decision, which means we have more to do to get to Net Zero in 2030 than we originally understood. We are finding it a lot more difficult than we thought it would be to secure credible offsetting measures for the remainder of our carbon output: there are a lot of fake or doubtful “offset” schemes, and we only want to invest in the ones that are real. Our preferred approach to offsetting is for nature-based solutions and it will take time for those to have effect: however innovative we are, we can’t change the fact that trees take a long time to grow.

    So right now I simply don’t know whether we can hit our original 2030 target. On our current emissions track and what we know we can currently offset, we won’t. Personally, I think we will. But that depends on several questions to which we don’t yet know the answer: on whether we can make deeper reductions in our own carbon footprint than originally planned, which in turn depends on technology not yet mainstream, affordable or even invented; on whether we can quickly find more offsetting arrangements that make a real difference; and on whether we can secure the funding we need to invest in that new technology and those offsets.

    But seven years away from their goal, NASA also thought they weren’t going to make it. And EA staff are just as clever, innovative and dedicated as those who put Neil Armstrong on the Moon. So we are going to carry on driving towards that target, do what we can, use what we have, and see where we get to.

    And while I would love to hit our 2030 target, not least since I have a big personal stake in doing so, if we don’t make it exactly on time it doesn’t mean that this isn’t something that’s worth doing. What matters is outcomes: driving down our emissions and locking up the rest as fast as possible. And to achieve that the most important thing is that we keep the goal in sight, that we get there as soon as we can, and that we continue to think differently about what we do and how we do it. Because if we are to tackle the climate emergency successfully – and I think we can and we will –– our thinking needs to change faster than the climate.

    What I’ve learned

    What have I learned from all this?

    I’ve learned that getting to Net Zero is easy to say but difficult to do, and a good deal harder than I thought it would be. There are technical challenges: there are, for example, currently no ultra low emission options for some of the heavy plant we need to do what we do. There are resource challenges: we haven’t been able to fund things like electric charge points for all our offices and depots or convert our whole vehicle fleet to low or no emissions. And there are still cultural challenges: getting everyone in the organisation and all our supply chain partners to Think Carbon and put as much emphasis on reducing or avoiding it as they do on meeting their other operational targets.

    But I’ve also learned that the decision to make ourselves a Net Zero organisation was the right thing to do, not least because it is giving us a whole set of benefits that I didn’t anticipate.

    Not only did the decision unlock a massive amount of enthusiasm, experimentation and innovation from many of our staff, but it is also changing the EA culture for the better, making us more entrepreneurial, readier to experiment and innovate, and less risk-averse. That will stand us in good stead in the future for everything else we want to do. And the fact that the EA is visibly and explicitly committed to tackling the climate emergency, symbolised most powerfully by our 2030 commitment, has played a significant role in helping us recruit the talented staff we need at a time when the employment market is very tight and we cannot compete with the private sector on pay. That too will stand us in good stead in the future.

    I promised you News You Can Use. How would I distill my advice to other leaders who want to get their own organisations to Net Zero? Here are my Top Ten tips.

    1. It’s all about leadership. Organisations behave like their leaders. So if you are serious about getting yours to Net Zero, show it and mean it. Your Board and your executive leadership team need to be united behind the goal and visibly committed to reaching it. Staff are very quick to identify when their leaders do and don’t mean what they say.
    2. The main thing is to make sure the main thing really is the Main Thing. If you want your organisation to get to Net Zero, you need to put it at the heart of your day to day business as an essential outcome that everyone is responsible for delivering, not treat it as a nice-to-have add-on or the responsibility of a few people in a Net Zero unit.
    3. Too much communication is never enough. Talk regularly to your own staff about the goal, why it matters, and where you are making progress: nothing succeeds like success.
    4. What gets measured gets done. Have a Net Zero metric as one of your Key Performance Indicators, review progress regularly, and intervene if you are off course.
    5. Reinforce the behaviour you want: recognise and reward those who are helping get there and tackle those who aren’t.
    6. Governance matters: work out how you are going to oversee delivery of your target, be clear who is responsible for what and hold them to account.
    7. Experiment. Be prepared to take a risk that something won’t work: at the very least you’ll learn how not to do it.
    8. Learn from others. Look at what other organisations are doing, share your own successful ideas and adopt theirs: none of us is as good as all of us.
    9. Don’t be afraid of stretching targets. You will come under regular pressure to adjust or dilute the targets or the deadline or both to make them easier to achieve. Don’t, unless you think it will lead to better outcomes. Unless your organisation is really stretched by the targets, you won’t garner the momentum you need to get there.
    10. The journey is as important as the destination. Even if you don’t hit your deadline, it’s still worth the effort: you will energise your organisation, stimulate innovation, attract more talent, and learn things you didn’t even know you didn’t know.

    Conclusion

    Since I’ve been channelling President Kennedy, let me end with another quotation from him. This is for anyone considering whether to commit themselves or their organisation to tackling the climate emergency and setting a Net Zero target: “If not us, who? And if not now, when?”

  • Independent Expert Panel – 2023 Report into the Behaviour of Neil Coyle

    Independent Expert Panel – 2023 Report into the Behaviour of Neil Coyle

    The report published by the Independent Expert Panel on 3 March 2023.

    Text of report (in .pdf format)

  • PRESS RELEASE : Independent Expert Panel recommends suspending Neil Coyle MP for five days for breaching Parliament’s Bullying and Harassment Policy [March 2023]

    PRESS RELEASE : Independent Expert Panel recommends suspending Neil Coyle MP for five days for breaching Parliament’s Bullying and Harassment Policy [March 2023]

    The press release issued by the Independent Expert Panel on 3 March 2023.

    The Independent Expert Panel (IEP) has today [3rd March] published a report recommending that Neil Coyle MP is suspended from the House of Commons for a total of five days for breaching Parliament’s Bullying and Harassment Policy.

    Following two separate complaints and investigations by independent investigators, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards upheld two allegations of harassment against Mr Coyle. The first complaint was from a parliamentary assistant working for another MP, and the second from a parliamentary journalist and member of the Parliamentary press gallery.

    Both complaints were made under Parliament’s Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme (ICGS).

    In the first case (BH22/1004) it was established that Mr Coyle had engaged in foul-mouthed and drunken abuse of the parliamentary assistant. The episode took place in Strangers’ Bar in the House of Commons. Mr Coyle did not appeal that decision so the IEP were left to consider sanction. The IEP sub-panel considering sanction found that Mr Coyle’s behaviour would have been:

    […] shocking and intimidating for any complainant, particularly a junior member of staff.

    It recommended that Mr Coyle should be suspended from the House for two sitting days (and not on a Friday) and that he should make an apology on the floor of the House by way of a personal statement.

    In the second case (BH22/1005) Mr Coyle was accused of bullying and harassment of a parliamentary journalist. On one of aspects of this episode, the respondent was found to have used abusive language with racial overtones. Mr Coyle appealed the Commissioner’s decision on several grounds. The sub-panel considered them carefully and gave detailed reasons for their rejection of all the grounds. It then went on to consider sanction for that case.

    The Chair of the IEP, Sir Stephen Irwin states, “the most striking aggravating factor in [this case] was the racial overtone in the verbal abuse.” He added that “in relation to both episodes, it was clear that very marked abuse of alcohol was at the root of events”. The IEP sub-panel when considering sanction noted the abuse of alcohol in these incidents and concluded that Mr Coyle:

    […] made such comments while under the influence of excessive amounts of alcohol which, while undoubtedly contributing to his behaviour, in no way excuse it, as the respondent rightly accepts. Nonetheless, since the incident, the respondent has taken considerable steps to ensure no repetition of the behaviour, including informing us that he has stopped drinking alcohol.

    It recommended that Mr Coyle should be suspended from the House for a further three sitting days (again, not on a Friday) and that he should make an apology on the floor of the House by way of a personal statement.

    Mr Coyle has accepted the sub-panel’s decisions. The IEP’s report into the case sets out the sub-panel’s full decision and reasoning.

    The Chair of the IEP regretted the fact that there had been breaches of confidentiality. He wrote that, on the day following making the complaint, in the second case “in full knowledge of his obligation to maintain confidentiality, this complainant made public all the details of his complaint, leading to wide publicity and to reputational damage to the respondent, before there had been any investigation or findings as to what had happened”.

    The sub-panel considered such a breach, and commented that:

    Breaches of confidentiality risk undermining this foundational ICGS principle by encouraging or implicitly condoning breaches in subsequent cases. The complainant’s breach of confidentiality also puts at risk the integrity of investigations and the effectiveness of the ICGS as a whole. Witnesses may not be willing to come forward and give evidence if confidentiality is not protected; or they may not feel able to give a full account; or their evidence may be tainted by the media coverage. This may result in valid claims not being brought, investigated, or sanctioned.

  • Committee of Privileges – 2023 Report into the Conduct of Boris Johnson

    Committee of Privileges – 2023 Report into the Conduct of Boris Johnson

    The text of the report issued by the Committee of Privileges on 3 March 2023.

    Text of Report (in .pdf format)