UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Nicola Sturgeon – 2015 Speech at Jimmy Reid Memorial Lecture

    nicolasturgeon

    Below is the text of the speech made by Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish First Minister, at the Jimmy Reid Memorial Lecture held in Glasgow on 24 November 2015.

    Thank you, Grahame [Smith, General Secretary of the STUC].

    You know, I sat quite a few of my university exams in this room. But I don’t think I’ve ever been set a bigger test than to follow what we have just seen.

    To give a lecture in Jimmy Reid’s honour – in the room, indeed on the very spot, where he delivered, what is undoubtedly the finest political speech in Scotland’s postwar history – is a daunting challenge. It is also of course an enormous privilege.

    I was privileged to know Jimmy, and it’s a particular honour tonight to speak in the presence of his family. I am grateful to them, and to all of you, for coming here tonight, and to the Jimmy Reid Foundation for organising tonight’s event.

    I’m going to start with the rectorial address you’ve just listened to – partly because it’s magnificent, but partly also because it’s directly relevant to what I want to talk about tonight. The reason that speech has endured – and you heard it very clearly in that clip – is that Jimmy, above all else, was making a moral case. He was articulating the values which he exemplified throughout his entire life.

    He argued that humans are essentially social beings. We flourish through contact, conversation, the contribution we make to each other and to our wider society. And so when people sign up to the values of a rat-race, when they allow themselves to be blinded to the misfortunes of others.

    And also, when things are done to people – when they are told they are expendable, or feel excluded from decision-making – it doesn’t simply cut their income. It corrodes their soul and diminishes their sense of self. So the basic principle of empowerment – through respect for individual dignity, and encouragement of individual potential – is at the core of what I want to talk about tonight.

    The title of this speech is that worker’s rights are human rights. I’ll spend some time looking at the UK Government’s Trade Union Bill – since it’s such an extraordinary and unwarranted assault on some of the social and economic rights we value and have come to take for granted.

    I’ll then make a broader case about rights; about our duty to recognise and cherish the value, dignity and potential of every individual in our society – and the fact that when we fail to do so, we don’t just harm those individuals, but diminish our society as well.

    But I want to start with some immediate context. Tomorrow, the Chancellor of the Exchequer will announce the results of the UK government’s spending review. He has a chance – possibly the final chance – to accept austerity is not a necessity, to change course on some potentially catastrophic decisions.

    For example, if all of the UK Government’s proposed tax credit changes are implemented, around 200,000 families with children in Scotland stand to lose an average of approximately £3000 a year. More than three quarters of the families who receive tax credits have at least one person who works. The cuts are directly targeted at working people on low incomes and their children. They hurt many of the people we most need to help.

    I call, again tonight, on the Chancellor to reverse his decision to cut tax credits when he has the opportunity to do so tomorrow. If he doesn’t do so, the Scottish Government will set out proposals to protect the incomes of low paid families in our budget in December.

    Obviously, the substance of the Chancellor’s proposals on tax credits is of greatest concern, but the process is deeply damaging too.

    There was no consultation before the Chancellor announced these cuts in June and no mention of them in the Conservative manifesto. The decision was taken behind closed doors with no opportunity for people to vote against it, and the full implications and will be made clear to families in letters around Christmas time. This is something which is being done to people – to working families and their children – with no opportunity for meaningful debate or discussion, or for them to influence their own destiny.

    If you reflect on the opening of Jimmy Reid’s rectorial address– its evocation of “the despair and hopelessness that pervades people who feel with justification that they have no real say in shaping or determining their own destinies” – it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that UK Government policy is not tackling alienation, it is breeding alienation.

    The tax credit cuts; the bedroom tax; the way in which budgets in recent years have impacted most negatively on women, those on low incomes and people with disabilities – These are things which are being done to the least powerful in our society, by a Government which too often seems oblivious to the consequences.

    And they are now being accompanied by other measures which seem set to strike at basic and fundamental rights – protections which are most valuable, for people who are at their most vulnerable. The proposal to abolish the Human Rights Act is one deeply regressive step; the Trade Union Bill is another.

    When Jimmy Reid spoke here in April 1972, it was towards the end of the Upper Clyde Shipworkers dispute. The work-in Jimmy helped to organise was arguably – in fact, in my view, unarguably – the greatest achievement of the post war union movement in Scotland. It asserted the fundamental right of individuals to work. It did so through a peaceful, positive, optimistic, uplifting protest which captured the imagination of people at home and around the world.

    It stands as an enduring example of how trade unions empower people; of how they provide a voice for those who might otherwise go unheard.

    The right to strike is an essential part of that, but the real value of trade unions goes much further. They help employers to create the safe, humane, productive working conditions which head off industrial disputes – and which build better businesses. Because of that, trade unions are a force for good in modern society.

    That’s certainly been our experience in Scotland. Industrial relations here are strong. The number of working days lost due to strikes has declined by 84% since 2007- that’s the highest reduction anywhere in the UK. Last year, fewer days were lost in Scotland, relative to our working population, than in any other part of the UK.

    And so the UK Government’s proposed Trade Union Bill is based on a worldview we simply don’t recognise. It sees the relationship between employers and unions as one of conflict rather than co-operation. It does not reflect public opinion here, or the reality of industrial relations either. It offers illiberal solutions to a problem which simply doesn’t exist in Scotland.

    And it makes an overwhelming case – one which both the Scottish government and the STUC made last year – for trade union law to be devolved to our own democratically elected parliament in Scotland. After all, that Bill doesn’t contain a single proposal, in my view, which would ever be passed by the current Scottish Parliament. In fact, in a debate two weeks ago, the Scottish Parliament disagreed with the bill by 104 votes to 14.

    It’s worth looking at some of the measures. The UK Government wants the right to restrict facility time. Facility time means that employees can spend time carrying out union duties – helping employees at disciplinary hearings, offering training, or meeting employers. It’s a vital part of partnership working, it is the embodiment of how we do industrial relations – it’s not an abuse which needs to be controlled.

    The UK Government also advocates a ban on public sector employers using “check off” facilities – that’s the payroll mechanism which enables union membership subscriptions to be deducted at source.

    Now the Scottish Government, as an employer, has been operating a check-off facility for years. The costs are so minimal that we have never charged unions for it.

    The UK Government intends to make our actions illegal. It’s maybe worth repeating that. The UK Government doesn’t want to stop using check-off procedures themselves; it wants to make them illegal for the Scottish Government to use.

    It’s an extraordinary and completely unacceptable attempt to control how we act as an employer. It demonstrates that fundamentally, the UK Government wants to discourage union membership. The provision has no other conceivable purpose.

    The UK Government also wants the power to call in agency workers to take over the duties of people who go on strike. And it has consulted on the proposal that picket leaders should wear armbands or identification tags – a proposal that quite frankly borders on the sinister.

    Liberty has pointed out that this provision increases the chances of blacklisting – something which has been a very real and recent danger for union members.

    Overall, in fact, Liberty has stated that the Bill “represents a severe unnecessary and unjustified intrusion by the state into the freedom of association and assembly of trade union members.”

    The UK Government’s own Regulatory Policy Committee has pointed out that key consultation proposals aren’t backed by any supporting data. The entire Bill is driven by dogma and ideology rather than being underpinned by evidence. That’s why the Scottish Government is part of a broad coalition – among the devolved administrations, the trade unions and wider civic society – we are, and will continue to be vigorously opposing the Bill.

    We have argued for it to be voted down at Westminster. We have proposed that Scotland should be exempted from its provisions. And since the Bill will have a significant impact on Scotland – including on how the Scottish Government as an employer carries out devolved functions – we will argue that it should only apply to Scotland if legislative consent is given by the Scottish Parliament. It is almost impossible to imagine that such consent would ever be granted.

    We will do everything in our power to frustrate this Bill. Finally, if the Bill is passed, and its provisions do apply to Scotland, the Scottish Government will not willingly co-operate with it. We will seek to do everything we can to continue the good workplace practices that the Bill attacks. Indeed, I can pledge categorically tonight that we would never employ agency workers in the event of industrial action in the Scottish Government.

    But in addition to opposing this Bill we want to do something much more positive. We want to exemplify here in Scotland that there is a better way of conducting industrial relations; one which is based on a different vision of society. After all, there’s a fundamental contradiction in the UK Government’s approach. The UK Government claims to want a high-wage/high-productivity economy. But if you genuinely want to bring that about, hostility to union membership makes no sense.

    It’s maybe worth looking at West Germany after the war. It developed what became known as Rhine capitalism. It was based on a strong sense of partnership between workers, trade unions, businesses and the public sector. Rhine Capitalism encouraged competitive markets, but combined them with strong social protections. As a result, the German economy has been characterised by innovation, high productivity and strong exports.

    That approach to the economy was based on a distinct vision of society. Article 1 of postwar Germany’s constitution places human dignity as the underpinning principle of the entire state. That feeds into concepts such as the constitutional principle of the “social state” – a state which strives for social justice.

    What we’re aiming to create in Scotland isn’t identical, of course – this is a different time and context. But the core principles are very similar – they’re based on human dignity, value and potential. We have put a commitment to inclusive growth at the heart of our economic strategy. We reject the idea that a strong economy and a fair society are competing objectives. Instead, we recognise them as mutually supportive.

    Of course we need a strong economy to fund the public services we value so highly.

    But it is just as true that a more equal society, where everyone can participate to their full potential, will lead to a stronger and more sustainable economy. And workers who are well educated and trained, well paid and highly valued and supported, will be more productive than those who aren’t.

    That is the principle driving our Fair Work Convention that was established earlier this year. It’s a partnership between Government, unions, employers and employees. It aims to promote productivity in a way that ensures that companies and employees all benefit.

    We’ve also established the Scottish Business Pledge for companies that openly embrace those values to show public leadership and commitment. More than 150 companies in Scotland have signed up. And we are championing the real living wage – last year there were only 34 living wage accredited employers in Scotland, now there are 400, and that number is growing.

    We have also published new procurement guidance which explicitly recognises fair work – including payment of the living wage – as important considerations when we decide how public sector contracts are awarded.

    Now, these are just beginnings – but they are very important beginnings. We’re starting to use the influence and purchasing power of government to send a clear signal. Progressive employment practices are something to be celebrated – not simply because they’re good in themselves, though they are, but also because they contribute to long-term economic and business success.

    And of course the basic principle that applies to businesses – that they prosper when their people are valued and empowered – also applies to society as a whole.

    Many of you will remember Jimmy Reid’s memorial service. Billy Connolly was one of the speakers, and told a story about going for walks with Jimmy in Govan when they were young. This was probably in the late 1950s or early 1960s. It resonated particularly strongly with me because many of the streets they walked are streets I now represent in parliament.

    Jimmy would point to a tower block and say: “Behind that window is a guy who could win Formula One. And behind that one there’s a winner of the round-the-world yacht race. And behind the next one … And none of them will ever get the chance to sit at the wheel of a racing car or in the cockpit of a yacht.”

    Jimmy put the same sentiment even more poignantly when he spoke in this hall – “I am convinced that the great mass of our people go through life without even a glimmer of what they could have contributed to their fellow beings.”

    Getting people to see that glimmer, and kindling it into a spark or fire of ambition, and then enabling them to realise that ambition – that is one of the key challenges today for government and for wider society.

    Indeed, if you were to ask me to sum up what I consider to be my mission as First Minister, assuming I am re-elected next May, it would be that – the mission of making real progress towards genuine equality of opportunity It will require sustained work to tackle intergenerational poverty.

    That’s why I’ve appointed an independent adviser on poverty – to advise and, more importantly, challenge my government to subject all of our policies to the test of whether they help tackle poverty.

    It’s also why our commitment to transformative, high quality and universally available childcare; and our determination to close the attainment gap at school; and our work to ensure that more children from deprived areas get to university are such important priorities for this government.

    But helping everyone to realise their potential, creating a society in which the determinants of an individual’s success are their own talents and their capacity for hard work, not the accident of their birth or their family background – that will also require sustained work to overturn stereotypes and challenge assumptions.

    Last week I went to two events, one after another – one relating to digital skills, and another relating to childcare.

    Both are hugely important – we will need thousands more digital specialists in our workforce every year for the next decade, and we will also need many more childcare workers.

    But if we proceed as we always have done – 80% of the new digital workers will be men, and more than 90% of the child care workers will be women. It would be wrong to proceed as we have done. That’s why I put such emphasis on gender equality and the need to tackle gender stereotypes.

    Similarly, we know we need many more doctors over the coming years. But if we proceed as we have in the past, only 1 in 20 will come from the most disadvantaged areas, rather than the 1 in 5 that equality of opportunity would demand. That’s why the work I’ve put in train through the Commission for Widening Access to university is so important.

    Because the facts that I have just cited don’t reflect the real talents of people in Scotland – instead, they reflect social circumstance and entrenched assumption.

    And the truth is this – we simply can’t afford as a society, morally or economically, to squander so much of our talent. The price is too high.

    I was incredibly fortunate when I was growing up, to have parents who instilled an absolute belief that if I wanted to, had the ability and worked hard enough, I could go to university and achieve my dreams. I’m all too aware that too many people still – more than 30 years later – aren’t that fortunate.

    So there’s a responsibility on all of us to encourage each other’s ambitions, and also to vigorously challenge society’s barriers and stereotypes.

    And there’s a particular obligation for Government in everything we have responsibility for – whether it’s – support for pregnant mothers, or care for older people; tackling the inequities in our education system ; reducing reoffending, or developing a new welfare system; promoting equal marriage rights, or resettling refugees.

    There is an fundamental human right and an obligation to demonstrate that we value the dignity and recognise the potential of every individual. It’s an important part of empowering our people and our communities.

    One of the things which came to define the referendum debate last year was not just a desire, but a yearning, for a better society – not just a more prosperous society, but also a fairer one country as well. That wasn’t confined to those who voted yes – it was shared across the entire country.

    And one of the things which also changed last year was that we all got to see that alternative futures for Scotland are possible. As a nation we could see what every individual would ideally know from birth – that we control our own fate; that with hard work, the sky is the limit.

    I see it as my job, and the job of my government to take that sense of possibility, and to help people experience it in their day to day lives. Our great challenge – and opportunity – is to ensure that:

    Schoolchildren thinking about their future know that if they work hard, they can achieve their dreams;

    That workers have a real voice in how their employers operate; That their rights are not expendable; that welfare recipients are spoken to as human beings, not scrutinised as cheats;

    That people who run small businesses get encouragement to grow;

    That citizens have a say in the future of their communities;

    That older people receive the support and care they need to live with security and dignity. That is the society we should be striving for.

    Jimmy Reid rejected a society where human beings are told that they are expendable; where ordinary people are excluded from the forces of decision-making; where people feel themselves to be victims of forces beyond their control.

    We must reject a society where workers’ rights are derided; where inequality is unchecked; where working families wait to get letters telling them their income is being cut by thousands of pounds.

    Instead, we can build a better society, based on respecting rights, recognising dignity and encouraging and, crucially, enabling each other’s potential.

    Near the beginning of my speech I quoted some of the opening words of Jimmy Reid’s rectorial address. I want to end with the final verse of the final song which was played at his memorial service. It was Paul Robeson’s wonderful version of “Ode to Joy”. It speaks of a society where:

    None shall push aside another

    None shall let another fall.

    March beside me, sisters and brothers

    All for one and one for all.

    The verse represents the antithesis of the rat race Jimmy Reid rejected. Its vision – of individuals making progress through solidarity – is the one which he worked towards throughout his life.

    My hope is that we in Scotland can make much more progress towards it in the years ahead. If we do, we will live in a wealthier, fairer, better nation. And we will have built a fitting memorial to the wonderful, inspiring and challenging legacy of the great and irreplaceable Jimmy Reid.

  • Nicola Sturgeon – 2012 Speech to SNP Party Conference

    nicolasturgeon

    Below is the text of the speech made by Nicola Sturgeon to the 2012 SNP Party Conference on 21st October 2012.

    I am immensely proud of what was achieved in the past 5 years – not by me, but by those who work day and daily to care for the sick and vulnerable.

    Today, in our Scottish Health Service, we have the lowest waiting times on record. We have the lowest ever rates of hospital infection. Patient care is safer than ever.

    And, unlike in England, our NHS is secure as a public service.

    There will be no privatisation of the NHS in Scotland – not by this government. Not now, not ever.

    Today, I want to pay a personal tribute to our National Health Service. To all of the doctors, nurses, managers, allied health professionals, cleaners, auxiliaries – to everyone who works so hard – I say a heartfelt thank you.

    I owe you a debt of gratitude. We all owe you a debt of gratitude.

    Delegates,

    Moving on from the NHS was always going to provoke mixed emotions in me.

    But there were no mixed emotions about accepting the First Minister’s invitation to be the new Cabinet Secretary for Infrastructure and the Constitution.

    My first job was to agree the transfer of power that puts beyond doubt the ability of our Parliament to legislate for an independence referendum.

    That job was started by Bruce Crawford and I want to take this opportunity today, on behalf of the whole party, to thank Bruce for his excellent and vital contribution to the Scottish Government over the the past five years.

    Delegates,

    As you know, the agreement with the UK government was signed on Monday.

    I have it here.

    An original, signed copy of the Edinburgh Agreement.

    Delegates,

    This piece of paper allows me to stand here before you and say, without a shadow of doubt, that there will be an independence referendum.

    It will be in the autumn of 2014.

    And just as we promised, it will be a referendum made here in Scotland.

    Young people who can marry, have kids and pay taxes will get the right to vote on the future of our country.

    Not to give us an advantage.

    But because votes for 16 and 17 year olds is the right thing to do.

    There will be just one question on the ballot paper.

    One question.

    And to that one question, there is only one answer.

    That answer is Yes.

    Delegates,

    This will be a referendum made in Scotland.

    And it must also be a referendum decided fairly and squarely.

    The issue that most exercised the UK government during the negotiations was campaign funding.

    They think that the limits proposed in our consultation are too low.

    Well, let me be clear. We will set the spending limits with care. We will listen to our consultation. We will listen to the Electoral Commission. We will listen to both campaign organisations.

    And then we will take a decision that is right for Scotland. A decision that guarantees a level playing field and a fair contest.

    Make no mistake, this time around, Scotland’s future will not be bought and sold for anyone’s gold.

    Delegates,

    Our government’s top priority is economic growth.

    The GDP and employment figures this week remind us just how fragile our economy is.

    As a government we are doing everything we can to get the economy growing again.

    But as we push in one direction, Westminster pulls in the other.

    Last week, David Cameron stood up at his party conference and said that, despite all the problems in the economy, he thought that Britain was on the right track.

    He made that claim less than 24 hours after the IMF predicted that the economy will shrink this year.

    And this week we had the sorry spectacle of the Prime Minister making a complete mess of energy policy.

    As families face rising bills, David Cameron came up with a plan that quickly looked more like a practical joke than a practical policy.

    Unfortunately, energy price regulation is reserved.

    But where we can act, we do.

    So while the fuel poverty budget is being cut to zero in England, our government will invest £200m in this and the next two years to tackle fuel poverty.

    That is real, tangible help to the people of Scotland from this Scottish government.

    Delegates,

    The hard fact is that the Tories have failed Scotland.

    And the overwhelming case for our independence is made all the stronger by the unfair, destructive, self-defeating policies of this arrogant, incompetent, out of touch Tory government.

    We need a change of direction.

    If we are to get our economy back to long term health, get our people back to work, create opportunities for our young people and make sure that our nation’s wealth is used to build a stronger and fairer society, then we need control of our own resources. We need the power to take our own decisions. We need independence.

    Without it, we are working with one hand tied behind our back. While we want to invest in the modern infrastructure our country needs, the Tories are slashing our capital budget by one third.

    And they are doing it at a time when we should be supporting our construction industry, not attacking it. Creating jobs, not destroying them.

    Delegates,

    Housing investment benefits the construction sector but it also delivers a vitally important social return.

    As a government, we have a proud record on housing.

    In the last Parliament, we increased investment by 40% compared to the previous administration.

    We built more houses for social rent.

    And it was this government – our government – that started a new generation of council house building in Scotland.

    Just last year, councils built more than 1000 houses.

    Do you remember how many council houses Labour built in their last four years in office?

    Let me remind you. It was 6. A grand total of 6 council houses – each and every one of them in Shetland.

    That is why this party will never, ever, take lessons from Labour on housing.

    Today, I can announce a further shot in the arm for house building in Scotland. A boost for the construction industry that so badly needs our help and support.

    Thanks to the sound decisions announced by John Swinney in his budget last month, I can announce a package of £45 million that will go directly to supporting the delivery of 1,200 new houses across councils, housing associations and the private sector.

    Action that will protect up to 800 jobs.

    Action from a government doing everything in our power to get our economy moving.

    Delegates,

    We are doing everything we can but our economy needs more.

    So I have a very direct message for the Chancellor today. A message on behalf of every construction firm clinging on by their fingertips, on behalf of every unemployed person desperate for some light at the end of the tunnel.

    Our economy needs a capital stimulus and it needs it now.

    If the Chancellor cares about getting growth back in our economy, if he cares about getting people into work and giving our young people hope of a brighter future, then listen – not to us – but to the growing band of economists and business organisations who say it is time to take a different course.

    Use the Autumn budget statement to increase capital spending and accept, once and for all, that we will not cut our way out of this recession.

    We must build our way out of recession.

    Delegates,

    I don’t meet many people who think the economic policies of successive UK governments have been good for Scotland.

    But I do meet people who ask, how do we know independence will be better?

    Friends, there is no country in the world – big or small – that is guaranteed success.

    But the combination of our natural resources and the skills and intelligence of our people make us just as capable as any other nation in the world of being a successful, prosperous independent country.

    That Scotland could thrive as an independent nation is not, never has been, never should be in doubt.

    And shame on any politician who ever suggests that it is.

    But we’re not nationalists just because we believe Scotland could be independent.

    We are nationalists because we believe Scotland should be independent.

    For us, independence is the means by which we build a wealthier, healthier and fairer Scotland.

    The last Government Expenditure and Revenue calculations – the GERS figures as they are commonly known – showed that in 2010/11, Scotland was better off than the rest of the UK to the tune of £2.7 billion.

    That’s £500 for every person in Scotland.

    Delegates,

    Only independence will ensure that, in future, Scotland’s resources are invested for the benefit of Scotland’s people.

    Never before has it been more important to make and win that argument.

    In the last few weeks, we have seen the emergence of a new Tory/Labour effort to write Scots off as subsidy junkies.

    According to Johann Lamont, we have a something for nothing culture.

    Ruth Davidson says that nine out of ten of us make no contribution and are little more than scroungers on the state.

    What an insult to each and every hard-working, law-abiding, tax-paying citizen of this country.

    Now, I don’t expect any better of the Tories. But what has happened to Labour?

    The truth is Scotland doesn’t have a Labour Party and a Tory Party any more.

    What we have is the Thatcherite Tories of Ruth Davidson and the one nation Tories of Johann Lamont.

    One Scotland, two Tory parties.

    Labour should be ashamed of itself.

    Delegates,

    The unionist parties don’t just oppose independence – they want to roll back the hard won gains of devolution as well.

    Free personal care, medicines free at the point of need, bus travel for pensioners, education based on the ability to learn not the ability to pay.

    These are not signs of a something for nothing society.

    They are the hallmarks of a decent society and we will fight to protect them.

    And to those who say they can’t be afforded when the Tories are cutting our budget, we say this.

    The answer to Tory cuts is not to hit the elderly, the sick, the struggling family or the young person aspiring to a university education.

    The answer to Tory cuts is to control our own resources.

    Control our own resources so that we can get our economy growing.

    Control our own resources so that we can choose the priorities of our people over weapons of mass destruction on the river Clyde.

    Delegates,

    We will be better off with independence.

    Not just economically. We will be better off as a society too.

    The welfare reform agenda of the UK government is a real cause for concern.

    Not because its wrong to encourage people into work. I agree that the best route out of poverty is work.

    But I do not agree with that being used as the excuse for crude budget cuts that will hit the disabled and the vulnerable hardest.

    Last month, Citizens Advice reported that the number of Scots needing food parcels had doubled as a result of welfare changes and benefit delays.

    Food parcels in energy rich Scotland.

    That is unacceptable. It offends our sense of decency.

    And if that is what our opponents mean by better together, then I say the case for independence is unanswerable.

    Because, you see, I don’t accept that it is inevitable.

    Yes, money is tight. Yes, Labour and the Tories have put us in debt.

    But there are still choices to be made.

    In his last budget, George Osborne made a choice for us.

    He chose to cut the top rate of tax for people earning over £150,000 a year from 50 to 45p.

    A tax cut that will cost more than £10 billion over the next three years. A tax break funded by cuts in welfare for the poorest.

    Delegates,

    That is just wrong.

    Its robbing Peter to pay Paul. Except that’s probably not the best way to describe it. Because while those who benefit from top rate tax cuts are usually men, those who are hit hardest by welfare cuts are women and children.

    Delegates,

    I do not believe that would ever be Scotland’s choice.

    That is why each and every one of us has a duty to explain to our friends and our neighbours the reality of independence.

    It’s not about waving flags.

    It’s about the kind of society we want to build for ourselves and our children.

    Independence is about having the powers we need to eradicate, once and for all, the obscenity of child poverty in our rich society.

    Delegates,

    Make no mistake, we need independence to ensure that we have a welfare state that reflects our values.

    But, as a government, we are determined to do everything we can now to mitigate the worst impacts of these cuts.

    Next April, responsibility for the Social Fund passes from Westminster to the Scottish Parliament. The Social Fund comprises Community Care Grants, small amounts of money to help vulnerable people live independently, and Crisis Grants for people who have nowhere else to turn and who need access to small lifeline grants to provide the basics like food for their children.

    I welcome the transfer of responsibility. But the amount of money being transferred with it – £24m – is less than was spent on the Social Fund back in 2005.

    Delegates,

    I can announce today that we will replace the Social Fund with a new Scottish Welfare Fund.

    And we will go further.

    We will reverse the cuts that have been made to that Fund by both Labour and Tory governments.

    We will increase it by £9 million and provide essential crisis support in these difficult times for 100,000 more of our most vulnerable people.

    Our Scottish Government will not desert any of Scotland’s people in times of need.

    Friends,

    The case for independence is strong and it is compelling.

    Over these next two years, we will set out for the people of Scotland the opportunities of independence.

    But we will also set out the cost of Scotland not being independent.

    Without independence, regardless of which unionist party is in power, billions more of our oil revenues will be spent on Westminster priorities rather than on our own.

    We will see our welfare state continue to be dismantled.

    And, make no mistake, promises of more powers will disappear without trace because Westminster will think it has put Scotland firmly back in its box.

    And, without independence, we will have to bear the cost of a new generation of nuclear weapons on the river Clyde when we should be getting rid of Trident from Scottish waters once and for all.

    Delegates,

    The stakes are high but the choice is clear.

    It is a choice of two futures.

    A future shaped by those of us who live and work here. A future that reflects our values and speaks to who we are. Or a future shaped by a Westminster system that is increasingly out of touch with Scotland and the values we hold dear.

    I trust – we trust – that the Scottish people will make the right choice and their answer will be yes.

    Friends,

    Our opponents will do everything they can to misrepresent what we stand for.

    But we know and Scotland knows that our cause is a noble one. The Scotland we seek is modern, welcoming and inclusive.

    We want a new relationship of equals with our friends in the rest of the UK. One that is based on co-operation and solidarity.

    I am as proud a Scot as its possible to be. I’m also the grand-daughter of an English-woman. I represent a constituency where, in one primary school alone, more than 20 different languages are spoken.

    Some of the strongest supporters of independence I know are people who have come to Scotland from other countries.

    They understand that important though national identity is to each and every one of us – be it Scottish, English, Irish, British, European, Pakistani, whatever – that’s not what independence is about.

    Independence is about making sure that those of us who choose to live here have the political, social and economic powers that we need to build a prosperous, successful, confident and outward looking country.

    That is our independence and we are proud to champion it.

    Delegates,

    I often imagine visiting that multi-lingual school in my constituency ten years from now to speak to children who aren’t yet born about the days before Scotland was independent.

    I imagine the look of incredulity on their faces as they struggle to comprehend that their country was ever not independent.

    And the really wonderful thing is knowing that no-one will ever tell these kids that Scotland is too wee, too poor or too stupid to stand on our own two feet.

    No-one will tell them that because we will have proved it wrong and they will be the living embodiment of the modern, successful country we know an independent Scotland can be.

    Delegates,

    That dream can become our reality. That is the prize now within our grasp.

    Be under no illusion, the next two years will be the toughest of our political lives. We’ve got a lot of work to do.

    But when did we ever let that put us off? If we had, I wouldn’t be standing here as Deputy First Minister and Alex Salmond would not be the outstanding First Minister of Scotland that he is today.

    We won a majority last year because we had the best record, the best team and the best vision for Scotland.

    And we will win the independence referendum because we will put forward the best case, the strongest case, the positive case for our country’s future.

    Fellow nationalists,

    We are so lucky.

    Not many people get the chance to shape a nation.

    And yet this is the opportunity that each and every one of us has been given.

    What a privilege for our generation of Scots.

    So let us make this promise today, to ourselves and to future generations.

    We will win our independence.

    Yes, we will.

  • Nicola Sturgeon – 2012 Speech on Universal Benefits

    nicolasturgeon

    Below is the text of the speech made by Nicola Sturgeon on 3rd October 2012.

    It’s always good to start on a note of consensus, so let me say that there is one thing that I agree with Johann Lamont about.

    We do have big questions to ask and to answer about the future of Scotland – about the kind of country we want to be.

    So I don’t criticise Johann Lamont for asking the questions.

    But, unlike her friends on the Tory benches, I take issue with the conclusion she has reached.

    It’s a conclusion that has its roots in the deeply misguided belief of Labour that this parliament should be responsible for divvying up the national cake but have no power to influence the overall size of that cake.

    A conclusion – no matter how much she tries to duck and dive and deny that this benefit or that is under threat – that puts at risk many of the hard won social policy victories of this parliament, like free personal care.

    And policies, like the council tax freeze, that just five months ago were backed wholeheartedly by Labour when they promised to continue it for another 5 years.

    Presiding Officer,

    We’ve had Nick Clegg apologising for breaking his promises in government – Labour must be the first party on record to manage to break its promises from opposition.

    It would be funny if it wasn’t so tragic. It beggars belief that a Labour leader would reach the conclusion that the best response to Tory cuts is to take away benefits and opportunities from pensioners, the sick, families already struggling to make ends meet and working class kids who aspire to a university education.

    And how does Johann Lamont describes policies designed to take a bit of the pressure off household budgets, to give our elderly some dignity and peace of mind in their later years, to ensure that education is not the preserve of the wealthy but open to all who have the ability to learn?

    She calls these policies part of a ‘something for nothing’ culture.

    What an insult to those who work hard, pay their taxes, save what they can and simply expect that their government gives them something back in return.

    What a betrayal of the values that once defined the party she leads. The party of Nye Bevan reduced to attacking the very principle of universality.

    Now, Labour tries to say it’s about making the well-off pay more – that it’s about people like her and me.

    Well, let me tell her the truth. Let me tell her who she has really put in the frame, who she has chosen to make this debate about.

    It’s the pensioner in my constituency – who has worked all of her life – who told me recently that before concessionary travel, she rarely got to see her elderly sister who lives in Inverness but is now able to do so regularly.

    It’s the woman with a serious, life-limiting chronic condition – earning little more than £16,000 – who told me that she had often had to choose which of her medicines to take because she couldn’t afford to take them all.

    It’s the dementia sufferer whose free personal care might just make the difference between her having to sell her family home or not.

    And it’s the young person from a working class family who dreams of going to university but knows that, no matter how supportive and encouraging her parents are, she would never be able to if she had to pay tuition fees.

    And since Johann Lamont likes to make these things personal, let me tell her this: that one is about me because it is exactly the position I – and I am sure many others in this chamber – was in.

    We are beneficiaries of free education – we have no right to pull up the ladder of opportunity and deprive today’s young people of what we were able to take for granted.

    So, presiding officer, these are the people that Johann Lamont has chosen to make this debate about.

    No wonder voices in her party are calling it chaotic and shambolic.

    And no wonder the Tories are queuing up to congratulate her.

    Because these are the people she thinks should bear the brunt of Tory cuts – the people that she would subject to the indignities of means testing for their bus pass or their personal care.

    Well, we think differently.

    We will protect the council tax freeze, free education, bus passes and personal care for our elderly and the principle of healthcare free at the point of need.

    We will continue to do so within a balanced budget – a budget that every year is presented to this parliament for the kind of debate that Labour say they want.

    A budget that, yes, is being cut by the Tory government that Labour is so keen to team up with, but that will nevertheless strive to boost growth, protect jobs and household budgets and make Scotland a fairer place to live.

    A budget that despite the nonsense talked by Labour, has and will continue to be informed by the Beveridge and Christie reports – whether that is in our approach to preventative spend, our focus on efficiency, our difficult decisions on pay restraint or our ambitious programme of public service reform.

    We have and will continue to take the tough decisions. We will make our choices and stand by them.

    And let’s not forget that the choices we have made were overwhelmingly endorsed last year by the Scottish people.

    But the choices we make within the fixed budget we have at our disposal are not the only differences between Labour and the SNP.

    Nor, perhaps, are they even the biggest.

    The fundamental difference is this.

    Labour is happy to accept a future for Scotland that has us simply deciding how to pass on Tory cuts. We are not.

    The real tragedy of Johann Lamont’s speech is that she has allowed herself to be imprisoned in a Tory straitjacket, accepting forever the inevitability of decisions taken elsewhere.

    Accepting a situation where we have the responsibility for dividing up the cake, but no power to influence its size.

    We think differently.  We want all of Scotland resources to be available to this parliament so that we can seek to chart a different course and shape a different future.

    I have said before and I will say again, independence is not a magic pill. It will not take away the difficult financial climate that we live in – thanks in no small part to the economic mismanagement of successive UK governments. Nor will it remove at a stroke the difficult decisions that flow from that.

    But it will open up different choices.

    In Johann Lamont’s world, the only choice is whether to punish the pensioner or the student, to pass on cuts to the sick or to the family struggling with council tax.

    With independence, we will have different choices. We will have the ability to make economic choices that might get our economy growing faster so that revenues increase.

    We will have the choice to shape a welfare system that seeks to reduce welfare costs by lifting people out of poverty, rather than have imposed on us one that pushes people deeper down into poverty.

    And we will have the choice – the real choice – not to spend hundreds of millions of pounds on Trident nuclear weapons and invest instead on the things that really matter.

    So that’s the real debate – the one that this country needs to have.

    It’s a debate about who is going to determine the choices that define our politics. Who is going to shape our future as a country?

    A right wing Tory government or this parliament and the people whose lives are affected by the decisions we take.

    I know this wasn’t Johann Lamont’s intention, but I have no doubt that her interventions of the last week will lead many more people to the latter option – to the conclusion that our own destiny should be in our own hands.

    The conclusion is that Scotland will be better off independent.

  • Nicola Sturgeon – 2011 Speech at SNP Party Conference

    nicolasturgeon

    Below is the text of the speech made by Nicola Sturgeon, the then Scottish Deputy First Minister, to the SNP Party conference on 21st October 2011.

    Let me start today with just two words.

    They are sincere and heartfelt.

    Thank you. Make no mistake: it is your hard work – and that of the generations of nationalists in whose footsteps you follow – that make it possible for me to stand here before you today as a member of an SNP majority government.

    I know I speak on behalf of all my colleagues in the Scottish government and every member of the Scottish parliamentary group when I say that, as party activists go, you are quite simply the best.

    And what an achievement. An SNP majority government.

    Be honest, how many of you thought that was even possible? I know I didn’t. And, whatever he might try to tell you now, neither did Alex.

    Our opponents certainly didn’t think it could be done. They thought they had come up with the perfect voting system – one that would stop the SNP ever winning a majority.

    It turns out they couldn’t even get that right. What an incompetent bunch they are.

    Delegates, on May 5 we didn’t just win. We broke the mould of Scottish politics.

    69 seats. 53 first past the post victories.

    And indulge me just for a moment – 5 constituency victories in the city of Glasgow.

    I tell you, it will take something special to match the atmosphere in the Glasgow Exhibition Centre in the early hours of May 6.

    First we won my own constituency – Labour’s top target seat in Scotland – with a majority more than double that of the biggest Labour majority in the city.

    And then Glasgow Kelvin, Cathcart, Shettleston and Anniesland all joined the SNP fold.

    Delegates,

    It was such a great feeling that I am determined to do it all over again in 2012.

    I intend to be in the Glasgow Exhibition Centre next May when the SNP removes the dead hand of Labour control from Glasgow City Council.

    And, delegates, let us resolve today to win next year’s council elections in every part of Scotland.

    Our victory in May was seismic. We re-drew the map and changed the face of Scotland forever.

    But, impressive though it was, it’s not the scale of our victory that matters most.

    What matters most are the reasons for it. We won because we kept our promises to the people of Scotland.

    We demonstrated competence in government, not just in good times but in tough times.

    We were honest when we couldn’t make the progress we wanted. And we showed humility when we got things wrong.

    We demonstrated that we were on the side of individuals, families and communities right across our country.

    We knew how much pressure household budgets are under, so we froze the council tax.

    And, delegates, we will continue to freeze the council tax for all of this parliament.

    We understand the aspirations of working class men and women to see their kids go to university, so we abolished tuition fees.

    And, be in no doubt, education will stay free with the SNP.

    We believe that the corner shop, the family business and the local entrepreneur, are the engines of economic growth, so we removed the rates burden from tens of thousands of small businesses.

    Delegates,

    We were a minority in Parliament but we built a coalition with the Scottish people.

    And, of course, we had something else that none of the other parties even came close to.

    In Alex Salmond, we had a candidate for First Minister who was head and shoulders above the rest.

    Alex led from the front. He gave the people of Scotland a message of hope and a vision for the future.

    And, when the going got tough, he didn’t run away and hide.

    Alex – we thank you for your leadership of our campaign, our party and, above all, for your outstanding leadership of our country.

    Delegates, We won because we are in touch with the country we serve.

    We are part of the families, the communities, the towns, cities and villages that we represent.

    We are not run by remote control from London. We don’t take our orders from elsewhere. Our decisions are rooted here in Scotland, in the lives and experiences of the people we ask to vote for us.

    We are Scotland’s party. And that is why we won.

    Delegates, Everyone accepts that lessons need to be learned from election defeats. But the same is true of election victories.

    The lesson for us is that people liked the substance of our government. And they also liked its style.

    Our majority gives us a mandate to govern decisively and we will. As Bruce Crawford will testify, it’s great not having to worry about knife edge votes in parliament.

    But we are not in politics to do things just because we can. We are in politics to do the things we should.

    We are in politics to do right for Scotland. To make our country fairer. To make our country independent.

    We are the progressive force in Scottish politics. That means standing up and being counted for what we believe in.

    But it also means persuading and building consensus. Our coalition with the people matters just as much now as it did when we were a minority.

    So let us be clear. We will continue to govern with conviction and purpose, but also with humility and a willingness to listen.

    We will work hard to translate our majority into real and solid achievements for Scotland. But we wont’t govern just by the weight of our numbers.

    Delegates, The real worth of our government is that we have the confidence, the conviction and the ability, to govern by the power and the strength of our argument and that is what we will do.

    Of course, in the last parliament, as a minority, we occasionally won the argument but still lost the vote.

    That’s what happened on alcohol minimum pricing. Labour’s decision to vote down minimum pricing haunts them to this day.

    That vote said they cared more about petty party politics than about the public health of the nation.

    And no party that gets its priorities that wrong is fit to govern our country.

    Delegates, I can tell you today that our minimum pricing bill will be reintroduced to parliament within the next month.

    When that Bill is passed, Scotland will become the first country to introduce a minimum price per unit of alcohol. The world is watching us.

    Being first with a policy means that it comes with no absolute certainties.

    I know that. But I also know that the evidence, the real life experiences of doctors, nurses, the police, and sheer common sense tell us it can work to reduce the dreadful damage that alcohol misuse does to our communities.

    So it may not be the politically easy thing to do, but I believe in my heart that it is the right thing to do.

    And I am very proud to be part of a government that has the courage to do what is right.

    Last year, dozens of clinicians signed a newspaper advert backing us on minimum pricing.

    Last week, 60 leading clinicians in England – speaking on behalf of tens of thousands more – wrote to the newspapers pleading with the UK government to abandon their plans to privatise the NHS.

    Those pleas fell on deaf ears. It now seems inevitable that the Tories, aided and abetted by their Liberal partners, will break up the NHS in England.

    Delegates, Our country may not yet be independent.

    But, thankfully, our NHS is independent. And let me make this clear. The NHS in Scotland will remain a public service, paid for by the public and accountable to the public.

    There will be no privatisation of the National Health Service in Scotland. I say that not out of blind ideology – though I have always thought that the ideology of a health service, in public hands and free at the point of need, is a rather fine one.

    I say it because I believe – I have no doubt – that our NHS can and will outperform the privatised experiment south of the border.

    It is well known that we already have waiting times lower than at any time in the history of the NHS in Scotland. What is less well known is that we are now the only part of the UK where hospital waiting times continue to fall.

    Delegates, that is an achievement to be proud of.

    And it hasn’t been achieved by NHS staff competing against each other. It has been achieved by NHS staff working together in the interests of patients.

    So we will continue to build on these achievements. We will make good on our pledge to protect spending in the NHS.

    Over the next four years, an extra £1 billion will be invested in our health service.

    And I guarantee this: that money won’t be wasted on senseless reorganisations. Every single penny will support frontline patient care.

    Delegates, We do face tough times. I know that the health service and it’s staff are not immune from these challenges. But I believe that if we work together for the public good, Scotland ’ s NHS will get through these difficult times and emerge stronger.

    And I will do everything in my power to make that happen. It was Nye Bevan – the founding father of our health service – who said that the NHS would last as long as there were enough folk left with the faith to fight for it.

    Well let us leave no doubt. We have faith and we will always fight for Scotland ’ s National Health Service.

    Delegates, The NHS delivers excellent standards of care but it needs to do more to keep people well and out of hospital.

    One of the biggest challenges in the health service today is the rising incidence of diabetes.

    Nearly 10% of hospital spending now goes on treating diabetes and the complications it causes.

    And the health consequences for patients of not managing the condition properly can be devastating.

    It is now widely accepted that insulin pumps can make a real difference to the ability of people with Type 1 diabetes to manage their condition and prevent complications.

    They don’t work for everyone but clinical guidelines say that far more people in Scotland should have access to them than is currently the case. Right now, only about 2.5% of patients have them.

    So I make this commitment today. By 2013, 25% of all type 1 diabetes sufferers under the age of 18 will have access to insulin pumps.

    And over the next three years we will triple the total number available to sufferers of all ages to more than 2,000 – improving the quality of life for patients right across Scotland.

    Delegates, Shortly after the election, I said that improving care for our elderly people is my personal priority.

    As part of that commitment, let me make this clear – our government will always support what is one of the Scottish Parliament’s proudest achievements.

    Free personal care for the elderly is safe in our hands. But we know there are big challenges ahead in providing care for the elderly.

    The answer to that challenge lies in improving how we care for our older people. What most people want more than anything as they grow older is to stay in their own homes. To live independently for as long as possible.

    And, delegates, we have an obligation to our older people to make that happen. But too many older people end up in hospital when they shouldn’t and too many stay there much longer than they need to.

    We have made big progress in reducing delayed discharges in hospitals.

    The current target is that no-one should be in hospital more than 6 weeks after being deemed fit for discharge. Labour never came close to meeting that target.

    We have made progress. But it doesn’t go far enough. There are still far too many patients who are stuck in hospital for up to six weeks just because the right care is not available for them in the community. That is far too long.

    Delayed discharges waste NHS resources. 200,000 bed days are lost every year.

    That’s equivalent to a large acute hospital being occupied all year by people who don’t need to be there. And it costs £ 50m.

    But worse, much worse, is that delayed discharges rob older people of their quality of life. We must do more to tackle these unnecessary waits. And, delegates, I am determined that we will.

    We will cut the maximum time that it is acceptable for any older person to be delayed in hospital. The target will initially reduce from six weeks to four weeks.

    And I can announce today that by the start of 2015, under this SNP government, no older person will be unnecessarily delayed in hospital for any longer than two weeks.

    Delegates,

    I am proud of Scotland’s National Health Service. And I am extremely proud of the people who work in it. Let us thank them for all that they do.

    Theirs is a difficult job in the best of times. But these are tough times.

    The economic climate – and our commitment to no compulsory redundancies – means that a pay freeze for all but the lowest paid has been unavoidable.

    But what is avoidable is the increase in pension contributions planned by the UK government.

    Make no mistake, these increases are not about making pensions sustainable.

    They are a Westminster cash grab for the purposes of deficit reduction.

    So, let me say this very directly to the UK government. As Scottish Health Secretary, I object – at a time when wages are frozen – to you reducing the deficit at the expense of Scotland’s NHS workers.

    They should not be paying for the mistakes of the bankers and Westminster politicians who wrecked our economy.

    Delegates, It would make more sense for pensions policy to be decided here in Scotland.

    And that is what will happen when Scotland is independent.

    We are closer to that now than ever before. Our victory means that there will be an independence referendum.

    To paraphrase the late Donald Dewar – I like the sound of that.

    The panic engulfing our opponents shows that they know we are winning the independence argument.

    But we must take nothing for granted. The decision on Scotland’s future rests with the Scottish people.

    Our responsibility is to persuade them that independence offers a better future for our country.

    We know that the campaign against independence will be relentlessly negative.

    We are told that legions of UK ministers will come north to tell the Scottish people what to do.

    But, don’t worry, Jim Murphy says he won’t share a platform with David Cameron.

    Just ponder that for a moment. He won’t share a platform with a Tory Prime Minister. But he’s quite happy to let the same Tory Prime Minister keep the power to cut Scotland’s budget.

    What a disgrace.

    Delegates, For the UK parties, the independence debate is not about the best interests of Scotland.

    They just want to keep control of Scotland’s resources.

    David Cameron gave the game away when he came north last week to lay claim to the next generation of north sea oil.

    Well, hear this, David Cameron. It always was Scotland’s oil. It still is Scotland’s oil.

    And it is time the people of Scotland got the benefit of it. The other parties say they want us to spell out what independence means.

    So let me spell it out.

    Independence means no longer having to watch our national wealth being squandered by Westminster governments.

    Independence means having an economic policy suited to our needs, with increased capital investment supporting and creating jobs.

    Independence means having a welfare system that can tackle the scourge of child poverty. It means not having to put up with Tory policies that will consign tens of thousands of our children to a life of deprivation.

    Independence means deciding for ourselves whether to send our young men and women into conflict. And it means knowing that we need never, ever, again be dragged into an illegal war.

    Independence means getting to decide our own priorities.

    And, delegates, independence will mean no longer having to put up with the obscenity of Trident nuclear missiles on the river Clyde.

    Delegates, Our case for independence will be based on the simple but powerful belief that, as a country, we are better placed than anyone else to take the right decisions for our future.

    That with the talents and skills of our people, and control over our own resources, we can build a more successful, prosperous and socially just country.

    It’s a message of empowerment and responsibility. A message of hope and possibility.

    And I believe, with every fibre of my being, that it will prevail.

    Delegates, I believe that we will win the independence referendum.

    Fellow nationalists, We now have the opportunity that so many have worked so hard for over so many years.

    The once in a generation opportunity to win independence. It’s down to us to make sure we grasp that opportunity.

    Edwin Morgan, the late Scottish Makar said: ‘Don’t let your work and hope be other than great’.

    Well, friends, our cause is great. Let us make sure that our hope and our work live up to it.

    Let the words of Edwin Morgan ring in our ears as we seek to win the independence of our nation.

  • Baroness Symons – 2003 Speech on the UK and Egypt

    Below is the text of the speech made by the then Foreign Office Minister, Baroness Symons, in Egypt on 21st January 2003.

    Thank you, BEBA, for arranging this excellent lunch.

    I am so pleased that His Excellency Youssef Boutros Ghali and I are able to attend this excellent lunch and to say how much I appreciated the meeting of the Egyptian British Business Council.  The Business Council was set up by our two Prime Ministers, and the seniority of the Board members is a reflection of the importance of our business relationship.  The EBBC is in a unique position to feed the views of the UK and Egyptian business community into both our governments.   I commend the efforts that Mohammed Nosseir and Richard Paniguian have put into making this meeting a success.

    The meeting discussed important issues for the Egyptian economy, such as the drop in foreign direct investment in the last year or two.  I am responsible for attracting inward investment into Britain, so I know how difficult it can be to get companies to invest.  There is only a limited amount of foreign direct investment waiting to find a home, and there are many countries competing for it.  Each country has to play to its strengths, but also identify its weaknesses and deal with them.  The bottom line is that unless a country’s business environment is as attractive as its competitors’, companies will go elsewhere.

    MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS

    There is a temptation, when times are difficult, to hang on tight to what is familiar and to delay change.  With the Palestinian conflict seeming a long way from a just resolution, and an Iraq crisis hovering over all our heads, the environment feels uncertain.  There will be difficult weeks and months ahead, but I very much hope that the outlook will be better by the end of this year.  My Prime Minister has shown his determination to press ahead with the steps needed to put the Middle East Peace Process back on the rails.  We greatly valued Egypt’s participation in the recent meeting in London on Palestinian reform.  Britain will continue to work closely with its friends in the region to get beyond the current cycle of violence and despair, and back to a political process with a just outcome for both sides.

    IRAQ

    On Iraq, war is not inevitable.  But time is running out.  The threat which Saddam Hussein poses is to us all.  That is why the international community must tackle it with deliberate and unified determination.  It is why the UN has acted with such determination and sense of purpose, and why we believe it is so important to uphold the authority of the UN – as we did unanimously on the passage of UNSCR 1441.  We all want passionately to avoid military conflict.  This is a message my Prime Minister has repeated over and over again.  But nobody could be comfortable with the previous or current situation.  For years the Iraqi regime has flouted the authority of the UN.  For more than 4 years it has been able to develop weapons of mass destruction with no international check whatsoever.

    Over the next few weeks, possibly months, we will be working for the highest possible degree of international consensus.  We hope that the world community will stick to its unified resolve and bring this issue to a peaceful conclusion.  But the key decision rests with Saddam Hussein.  Saddam has to cooperate with the UN, and give up his weapons of mass destruction or he will leave the international community with no choice.  As long as there is doubt about Saddam’s compliance with UN Security Council Resolution 1441, the threat of force must remain.   And as Mr Blix has recently commented, Iraq’s co-operation with the Inspectors falls well short of what is needed.

    Whatever unfolds in the region, the Egyptian economy will need investment, and more exports in the years ahead.

    BOOSTING TRADE AND INVESTMENT

    Your Government has taken some important steps forward in the past year or so to improve the investment climate:

    I commend your legislation on money laundering.  Britain is now helping to train the Financial Investigation Unit;

    The reform of the Banking System now underway is very important.  A strong banking system helps attract investment;

    Your new law on Intellectual Property Rights brings Egypt up to international standards, and makes Egypt a more attractive place for investment in industries like pharmaceuticals;

    The new Labour Law should lead to greater flexibility which is necessary for employers to have the confidence to create new jobs.

    Your Government’s renewed commitment to adopt the EU-Egypt Association Agreement is also very welcome.   Over time, it will boost the levels of trade and investment.  I am very pleased that your Prime Minister raised this in our meeting this morning.  The UK aims to ratify the agreement this spring.

    These steps, together with Egypt’s strategic position as a gateway into both Africa and the Middle East, have helped your country to ride out many of the economic problems caused by 11 September and the regional uncertainty better than many expected.  I applaud the measures taken, and the resilience of the Egyptian people.  And of course it is important not to ease up.  In the modern competitive world, to stand still is to fall behind.

    CREATING A BUSINESS-FRIENDLY ENVIRONMENT

    What do companies look for in a market when they are wanting to invest?  There are many criteria they use.  They want stability, both political and economic.  They want security, both for their investment and for their employees.  They want as large a market as possible.  In these areas, Egypt fares well.  But investors also want a business-friendly environment, and here, if I may say so, Egypt needs to take further steps if it is to be truly competitive.  As we have discussed on the EBCC this morning, investors want freedom to be able to work as flexibly and efficiently as possible, adjusting their prices and employment levels to suit the market.  They want a transparent and efficient bureaucracy which will allow them to get on with what they do best.  They want to be sure that they will be able to import their raw materials speedily, and export their finished goods with the minimum of fuss.  And they need ready access to hard currency to run their businesses and to repatriate their profits.

    In these areas, Egypt does not always compare well to other markets, and this means investors have doubts about whether they should come to Egypt, and fewer jobs are created here.   From talking to colleagues today – British and Egyptian – I think that is an issue we would all like to see change.

    Investment and trade reinforce one another.  The UK is a trading nation, as is Egypt.  We believe strongly in the benefits from free trade, and the role of trade in bringing the benefits of globalisation to all countries.  British exporters earned over 430 billion dollars last year from selling their products and services overseas, which is the equivalent of 30% of our Gross Domestic Product.

    Britain’s trade with Egypt remains broadly in balance: a total of some 900 million pounds sterling.  Both Egyptian exports to Britain and British exports to Egypt increased last year – a development in we can all take pleasure, despite it being a difficult year for many economies and in the wake of 11 September.

    PRIORITY ACTIONS ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE POLICY

    Getting the right outcomes on international trade policy will boost trade across the world.   The outcome of the WTO meeting in Doha in November 2001 was a substantial step forward.  I would also like to applaud the very helpful and pivotal role that Egypt played at the WTO meeting at Doha.  There is still a long way to go.  But the goal is worth it.  Cutting the protectionist barriers to trade world-wide could boost developing country incomes by 150 billion dollars – that’s three times the value of the international aid currently being given to those countries.  And the World Bank have calculated that substantial trade liberalisation could lift an additional 300 million people out of poverty by the year 2015.

    I would pick out two priorities for urgent action, and thus two priorities for our international negotiations in the WTO.  Firstly, market access.  The EU has a good record on industrial products.  But on agriculture, Europe is part of the problem.  Many of the poorest people in the world work in the labour-intensive agricultural sectors, yet this is the very sector where the average tariffs are highest.  It is not just Europe:  Japan and the United States are also badly at fault.  But Europe simply cannot indulge in high-flown rhetoric about free trade while delaying further reforms to the Common Agricultural Policy in the form of subsidies which distort trade.  Our subsidies encourage over-production that has two distorting effects.  It cuts us off as a market for developing nations, and it encourages dumping elsewhere.  The British Government will continue to press for change.

    Secondly, services.  Efficient services are crucial to all economies.  Without access to better communications, sound financial services and efficient distribution systems, developing countries will find it impossible to compete in world markets.  It is in their own interests for developing countries to open up their markets in services.

    International trade is good for business.  Research has shown us those companies engaged in international trade tend to be more productive, and more competitive.  They spend more on innovation, they are more capital intensive and their productivity is higher.  By choosing to compete in world markets, they take advantage of innovation overseas and adapt it for themselves.  That also encourages the transfer of technology – which is so important in most industries.  Innovation creates trade, which in turn creates more innovation, in a virtuous circle.

    CONCLUSION

    The UK is proud to be the biggest Western investor in Egypt.  The top twelve UK companies have invested $18billion in Egypt, and plan to invest a further $7billion over the next five years.  They are doing good business here.    Like other markets, if you have a good product at a sensible price, people will buy it.  And of course working in Egypt has its own particular problems and advantages – no two markets are ever the same.  But with patience and the right partners, there are real opportunities here.  I have had the chance to meet a delegation of people from small and medium sized businesses from the North-West of England yesterday and I want our businessmen to find these opportunities to deepen still further the trade and investment relationship.  It creates jobs in both countries, and benefits both economies.  Let us become ever-closer partners in business, as our leaders are moving ever closer as partners in the search for peace and long term stability in the Middle East.

  • Hugo Swire – 2014 Speech in Kathmandu

    hugoswire

    Below is the text of the speech made by Huge Swire, the Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, in Kathmandu on 3rd June 2014.

    Sabailai namaste. Aunubhaekoma dhanyabad. Which I am told means “welcome and thank you for coming”. I would also like to welcome listeners to Capital FM 92.4 in Kathmandu and Radio Sarangi 101.3 in Biratnagar and Pokhara.

    Introduction

    As British Foreign Office Minister with responsibility for South Asia, I am delighted to be here, on my first ever visit to Nepal.

    It is a real honour to be asked to speak at the iconic Tri Chandra College. Countless important and influential figures from Nepalese culture, science and politics have preceded you through this hallowed institution.

    Indeed, the college is renowned for being at the heart of Nepal’s vibrant student political scene, so it is no surprise that it counts a former Prime Minister and several serving Constituent Assembly members among its eminent alumni – some of whom are here today.

    Each of them began as you are – students. And so I am particularly pleased to have the opportunity to talk to you- the next generation of Nepal’s business and political leaders. Your futures, and the fate of your nation, are in your hands.

    Everyone I have spoken to has told me that Nepal is a land of exceptional beauty – which I saw for myself earlier at Pokhara with its views of the Annapurna range. That it is a land rich in history and culture. But also one blessed with great potential.

    I urge you to seize that potential – as well as fulfilling your own – and the unique opportunities open to you as Nepal moves out of the shadow of conflict towards a lasting constitutional settlement, and lays the foundations for peace, prosperity and political stability.

    And, as you do so, you will continue to find in Britain the staunchest of allies.

    Bicentenary of UK-Nepal relations: the history

    It is no coincidence that my visit comes on the cusp of two very significant bicentennial anniversaries in UK-Nepalese relations. Both of these matter immensely to the UK and its people. Taken together, they form the heart of our bilateral ties.

    The first anniversary will be next year’s bicentenary of recruitment to the Brigade of Gurkhas. There is no finer or more feared unit of soldiers anywhere in the world – or better ambassadors for the values held by the Nepalese people. And this year we commemorate the start of the First World War, a conflict during which two Gurkhas were awarded the Victoria Cross – Britain’s highest award for gallantry in the face of the enemy.

    Indeed, their service continues to be admired, valued and respected in equal measure, across the UK, to this day. Their sacrifices are remembered as one of our own – as befits one of the most heavily decorated regiments in the British army. I was therefore pleased to be able to see firsthand the outstanding work of the Gurkha Welfare Scheme – which ensures dignity in old age and a better quality of life for the Gurkhas’, their dependants and their communities.

    I say this not just as a former soldier – but also the son-in-law of a Gurkha officer. That certainly gave me an early appreciation for the might of the Gurkhas. It is nerve-wracking enough meeting your girlfriend’s parents for the first time, without knowing that her father has 30 Gurkhas under his command!

    March 2016 will mark the second important anniversary in our bilateral relations: the bicentenary of the Treaty of Sugauli which saw the first permanent diplomatic mission established in Kathmandu, by Britain of course. And right up to 1951, we were the only foreign country represented here. If that does not count as a special relationship, then I am not sure what does.

    The world has changed beyond all recognition since these events 200 years ago. So why should you, the future of Nepal care? Why should they still matter today? And why do we still value them as highly as we do?

    Because the difference between what we can do alone and what we are capable of when we work together is immense. Our solutions to the challenges we face, not the problems themselves, should shape our futures and make a difference to the world- whether in security, peace and prosperity, tackling climate change or ensuring that people everywhere have a voice and a vote.

    Building a safer future

    With peace at home, Nepal is working with the UK to build a safer future for the world. Nepal has the distinction of having moved from being an “importer” of security during the conflict to an “exporter” of security today.

    Across Nepal young people know all too well the cost of war, and are working for peace and stability in some of the world’s toughest environments.

    Nepal’s contributions to UN Peacekeeping Missions worldwide do your country enormous credit – and Britain knows from experience that Nepalese Army personnel currently wearing blue helmets are regarded as some of the most reliable and effective operators in the field.

    Without you, the world – and by extension the British people – would be less safe, and less prosperous.

    Building growth and prosperity

    Once peace is assured, people’s thoughts naturally turn to the universal goal of securing a better life for themselves and their children.

    The question on everybody’s mind becomes “how can we get our economy growing, create jobs and opportunity for all?”

    It’s a question that has been central to meetings throughout my visit. Nepal has a proud recent record in reducing poverty- supported by the international community- led by the UK: Nepal’s largest bilateral aid donor.

    But students, like you, the world over, ask the same questions: how will I get a job and make use of the qualifications for which I have worked so hard?

    Ultimately no one else can make growth happen for you. The answer has to come from Nepal – and from each of you. Innovate, be creative, take risks, find the gap in the market and when you have a good idea, don’t stop until it becomes a reality.

    And it is also your role to hold Government to account and ensure it delivers on its promises to create a thriving and open business environment.

    And I am pleased to be here at the head of a delegation of British companies looking to do business with Nepal and deepen our bilateral trade and investment links.

    Green economy and Climate Change opportunities

    One area that is especially interesting for me – and the biggest potential I see personally for Nepal’s future prosperity – is the scope for Nepal to pioneer a truly green economy.

    The UK has shown its commitment to greening its own economy, pushing for a 30% reduction in carbon emissions by 2020 and establishing an International Climate Fund of 3.9 billion pounds to help climate vulnerable developing countries like Nepal. We congratulate the Government of Nepal for the leadership it has shown on climate change – keeping climate change on the national agenda, and leading the LDC nations in climate talks.

    Everyone I have spoken to talks of the energy crisis here and climate change is already having a real impact. Clearly this needs to be fixed, otherwise economic growth and investment will be held back, and health and livelihoods will be damaged.

    But Nepal, a negligible carbon emitter, is in the enviable position of having the potential to supply all its energy needs in sustainable, low carbon ways. We are helping Nepal move in this direction, supporting work in climate adaptation, disaster risk reduction, forestry and hydropower.

    By 2015, the UK will have spent 45 million pounds from the International Climate Fund on community forestry activities, and to support remote communities to adapt to climate change through micro-hydro schemes, solar home systems and biomass gas converters.

    Hydropower is central to Nepal’s economic growth, and we are working to help Nepal deliver on this potential – tapping the energy of the fast flowing Himalayan rivers will be a major part of the solution, both here and in your wider region.

    But I am also struck by the potential for other sources of renewable energy, from solar, water and forest resources. Taken together, Nepal really is a land of incredible potential, and I have met people in my last day here who are already making concrete progress towards turning that potential into reality.

    Through innovation and hard work entrepreneurs are already building the future right here in Kathmandu – households and businesses are already installing low carbon and resource efficient technologies to cut their bills and improve their lives.

    Imagine a future – a not too distant future – in which the flat roofs of the Kathmandu valley generate energy from solar panels, or are used to produce food. A future in which new jobs and opportunities are created in sectors that at the moment are either just emerging or simply do not exist – everything from the design and installation of smart energy grids, to measuring and managing water consumption; designing efficient public transport; to improving logistics that reduce waste and improve productivity.

    These may seem distant dreams to someone in living in rural Nepal. But, as the science students here will know, Nepal is in a position to leapfrog old technologies and to build a low carbon and resource efficient economy that will deliver sustained and sustainable growth for both yourselves and future generations. All it needs is vision, energy and a willingness to work together, and in the UK you have a partner with world-class centres of excellence in science and engineering that can help Nepal make effective use of its resources whilst preserving its breathtaking environment.

    So it is in these fields – the green economy and managing climate change – that I see scope for increased commercial, personal and academic links between the UK and Nepal.

    It is at institutions like this one – with talented and enterprising students – where I see those new green energy jobs being created. This is the place where academic research will be translated into practical action and lay the foundations of both the UK and Nepal’s future prosperity.

    Which is why I am pleased to announce today a tripling of Chevening Scholarships, to encourage more students from Nepal to study at the UK’s world-leading universities and join the long tradition of educational and academic exchange between our two countries.

    The peace process and democracy underpin growth

    There is a Nepalese proverb that I am sure you know well: “Opportunities come but do not linger.”

    Today, in all these areas, there are opportunities for Nepal to seize. But to make the most of them, the time has come for its leaders to complete the peace process, agree a new Constitution and hold local elections. Only these can bring the political stability and greater democratic accountability needed to help Nepal unlock its economic potential.

    From my discussions with them, the leaders of this incredible country understand that. I assured them, and I assure all of you here now, that the UK will remain committed to helping Nepal realise that vision, in any way we can.

    Conclusion

    Our countries have been united in a unique friendship for almost two hundred years.

    And if cooperation between the UK and Nepal can conquer the world’s highest mountain, as happened 61 years ago, there is surely no limit to the heights we can reach. Those famous, oft-quoted words of Sir Ralph Turner from almost 90 years ago, remain as true today as the day they were written: “the bravest of the brave, most generous of the generous, never had country more faithful friends than you.”

    By working together to solve the challenges of the present we will lay the foundations of a further 200 years of UK-Nepal friendship. We want to hear and see more of you –your diplomats, soldiers and students. Your voice is respected, and your views welcome.

    The world faces many new challenges, but brings huge opportunities too. We must seize them together. Because they may not linger.

  • Hugo Swire – 2014 Speech in Central America

    hugoswire

    Below is the text of the speech made by Hugo Swire, the Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, on 5th March 2014.

    Supporting British business – large and small – and building prosperity for the United Kingdom is at the heart of what we do at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. And Central America is an important region for us in that effort.

    So I am delighted to open this conference and to speak about the British Government’s work to deepen ties and to help British business explore the exciting opportunities in the SICA countries of Central America and the Dominican Republic.

    I would like to thank Hugo Martinez, Secretary General of SICA, for honouring us with his presence today. I first met him in El Salvador, back when he was Foreign Minister and am delighted that he is here today in his new role. I also wish to thank Luis Ramon Rodriguez, the Dominican Republic Minister of Agriculture who is here representing the Dominican Republic’s Presidency of SICA

    And Baroness Hooper, Chair of the Latin America All Party Parliamentary Group – a very helpful ally on Central American issues. And of course our sponsors who have contributed to making this Conference happen. A sign of the growing commercial interest in the region.

    Canning Agenda

    Many will be familiar with the Canning speech Foreign Secretary William Hague gave in 2010. Where we set out Britain’s most ambitious effort to reinvigorate relations with Latin America in decades.

    I have often spoken about increased resources we have put into Latin America, trade envoys, new embassies opened – and the relationships developed through our increased ministerial visits to the region – over 25 last year alone. The message is: Britain is back in Latin America.

    That is definitely true of Central America and SICA countries, a region which I had the pleasure of first visiting twice already and I look forward to returning later this year.

    My first visit back in 2012, when I met with the Secretary General, Hugo Martinez, was in part to open our new Embassy in El Salvador. Our Embassy there has 6 staff. That is compared to the 600 staff at the American Embassy. So by my reckoning, one British diplomat is worth 100 American…

    So, I am pleased that British interests in the region are strong and growing. We are fostering closer political relationships and people to people links: taking advantage of our thriving diaspora communities; through tourism; through educational exchanges, such as the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s own Chevening Scholarship scheme; and, of course, through greater trade and investment – the focus of today’s conference.

    Good conditions for trade in Central America

    Our trade links are flourishing because the conditions in Central America are increasingly conducive to doing business.

    Taken together, the SICA countries represent a combined market of some 52 million people and a combined GDP of £257 billion.

    They form a region that has seen solid growth that Western economies would love to see themselves – approximately 4% GDP per annum over the past ten years.

    A number of countries in the region have moved up the World Bank’s ease of doing business ranking and are taking real steps to improve their regulatory and competitive environment.

    Central America, of course, benefits from a natural geographic advantage – a bridge between the two subcontinents and a natural hub for trade, tourism and transport.

    There are proposed new inter-oceanic infrastructure projects in both Guatemala and Nicaragua, which offer exciting opportunities, should they go ahead. El Salvador is planning major airport expansion. Belize and Honduras have spectacular coast lines and tourism opportunities. Costa Rica is an increasing exporter of high-value goods, such as medical devices.

    Panama offers many opportunities. Growth is an astounding 9% – and it is developing as a regional finance and distribution hub. It is unsurprising therefore, that the UK is already the largest foreign investor there.

    But it is not only thanks to these factors that our trade and investment links are improving so rapidly. It is also, as I mentioned earlier, the renewed effort the British Government is putting into strengthening ties with Central America and supporting business.

    HMG action to support trade links

    Trade Missions like those organised by the Central American Business Council, often with the close involvement of UK Trade and Investment and our embassies in the countries concerned, are an excellent way of making direct connections between British business and the untapped commercial potential of the region. The Council has already organised highly successful energy-focused missions and will be organising a retail trade mission to San Salvador and Panama City shortly.

    Just last month, after a year and a half of intensive work at the highest Government levels, I am delighted that the British Embassy in Santo Domingo has been able to open the Dominican market to British meat exports. I would like to thank the Dominican Minister of Agriculture for his co-operation in achieving that success.

    And the Government is working with SICA – having become an extra-regional observer last year – to identify a number of areas where British expertise could help make a difference throughout the region – particularly in the security and justice sectors.

    So, these are just a few examples of the work we have been doing to develop trade links with Central America.

    British business in Central America

    But I am delighted that a number of British companies are already soundly established in Central American markets, enjoying solid commercial partnerships. Covering a wide range of sectors. For example, London and Regional are working on a major development of the ‘Panama Pacifico’ business and residential community in Panama; bridge construction specialists Mabey Bridge are exploring infrastructure opportunities; and a number of British energy companies are involved in a mix of energy projects, both on and off-shore.

    Retail is another strong and growing sector and I am delighted to see the popularity of British brands across fashion, homewares and food and drink – Top Shop, Dyson and Waitrose to mention just a few examples – making the most of the growing opportunities for expansion in the region.

    Central American business in UK

    And Central American exports are gaining recognition here in the UK. British consumers are increasingly aware of the provenance of goods and the quality of the coffee, cocoa and rum produced in the region, to name but a few.

    I consider coffee to be a fundamental part of my life-support system, and having sampled a wide range of the excellent coffee from the region I would be hard pressed to pick a favourite. But I will just point out that the rum supplied at this evening’s reception comes courtesy of our friends in the Dominican Republic. That is not to put off our whisky exporters in the UK of course, who I know have the region firmly in their sights. I am sure there must be a recipe for a good cocktail combining those two spirits….

    I recognise – despite all the success I have mentioned – there are undoubtedly still some challenges for British companies wishing to do business in Central America: the same is true for any region. But I am confident that these issues will continue to be addressed, both at a national level and through SICA, under the able direction of Hugo Martinez.

    Look ahead

    And looking forward, I can already see we have another busy year ahead of us.

    The ever popular Latin America Investment Forum will be back in London in May and I know the SICA Embassies will once again play a very active role.

    I hope to return to Central America later this year and see more of the region.

    We hope to continue working with the region on projects to promote harmonisation of rules and regulations and to increase transparency. All of which should help improve the general business environment and increase investor confidence.

    And I am confident that the EU-Central America Association Agreement, that we hope to ratify in Parliament later this year, will also make a significant difference to prosperity in both regions.

    The Agreement will strengthen political dialogue and cooperation and allow Central American countries to consolidate and improve their access to EU markets.

    2014 is, of course, the centenary of the Panama Canal, and September will see a UK trade delegation visit to explore the opportunities for British expertise to contribute to the Canal expansion project.

    Conclusion

    So, there should be no doubt of the energy, commitment and activity being devoted to the region, by the British Government or by British business.

    There is a huge amount for us to do in 2014 – but our hard work will pay dividends- both in the UK and in the SICA countries of Central America and the Dominican Republic.

    Thank you.

  • Hugo Swire – 2014 Speech at World Wildlife Day

    hugoswire

    Below is the text of the speech made by Hugo Swire at the UK Mission to the UN at Geneva on 3rd March 2014.

    Ladies and gentlemen, it is an honour to be here, and I am grateful to the Good Planet Foundation for the wonderful prints they have provided today.

    I want to say a few words about the importance the United Kingdom attaches to ending the illegal wildlife trade.

    It is not just an environmental crisis. It is a global criminal industry that drives corruption, insecurity and undermines efforts to cut poverty and promote sustainable development. There is even anecdotal evidence that terrorism could benefit from it. Tackling it would build growth, rule of law, stability and good governance.

    That is why the UK supports the vital work of CITES under the admirable leadership of John Scanlon

    That is why we applaud Thailand and CITES’ initiative to establish World Wildlife Day,

    And that is why the British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, hosted the London Conference on the Illegal Wildlife Trade two weeks ago, in the presence of their Royal Highnesses the Prince of Wales, the Duke of Cambridge and Prince Harry.

    I am delighted the conference was such a success. It agreed ambitious measures, showed new political commitment and marked a turning point in the effort to halt, and reverse, the current poaching crisis.

    For the first time, governments committed to renouncing the use of products from animals threatened with extinction.

    They agreed to support the current CITES commercial prohibition on the international ivory trade until the survival of elephants in the wild is no longer threatened

    And they agreed to treat poaching and wildlife trafficking as serious organised crime – like trafficking in drugs, arms and people.

    After the conference, the work continues. Chad burned its 1.1 ton ivory stockpile. Vietnam strengthened its protection of endangered species. The UK added Anguilla to the list of UK Overseas Territories covered by CITES. And we welcome Botswana’s offer to host a follow conference next year.

    But there is much more to do. And we strongly encourage countries that were not present at the Conference to associate themselves with the London Declaration.

    So my message is simple: the illegal wildlife trade must stop now.

    Together, the international community can stop it. And if we act on the London Conference commitment, I believe we will.

  • Hugo Swire – 2014 Speech on Human Rights

    hugoswire

    Below is the text of the speech made by Hugo Swire on 3rd March 2014.

    Madam Vice President, Madam Deputy High Commissioner, Excellencies, it is an honour to be here today to address the Human Rights Council in this distinguished company.

    The United Kingdom is committed to strengthening the work of this vital forum; to supporting countries in improving their human rights records; and to holding to account those who commit serious and systematic violations of their citizen’s rights.

    People around the world look to this Council to defend their fundamental rights, freedoms and dignity. I am delighted that the United Kingdom has once again been afforded the opportunity to contribute to this vital work. I would like to thank all those who supported our candidacy and I look forward to working with other members of the Council, and the wider international community, in protecting the most vulnerable and championing global causes including ending sexual violence in conflict, the need for the full participation of women in peace-building, and the universal right to freedom of expression and freedom of religion or belief.

    Without action – if we let human rights abuses go unchecked and ignored – we sow the seeds of future instability, conflict and humanitarian crisis. That is why the Secretary General’s “Rights up Front” Initiative to strengthen the UN’s ability to tackle human rights abuses early and effectively is so important and why this Council must be at the forefront of that effort.

    When countries show they are willing to engage seriously with the Human Rights Council, we can and should work with them in a spirit of partnership and collaboration. This can produce real change, as we know from working with Somalia. The United Kingdom has played a leading role in mobilising international support for Somalia. The London Conference we co-hosted in 2013 recognised the immense importance of human rights in the peace process and in September we co-sponsored, with the Somali government, a resolution of this Council, calling for increased UN support to help end human rights abuses and combat impunity.

    In many other countries too, concrete and positive change is underway and I pay tribute to all those who make this progress possible. I thank the High Commissioner for Human Rights for her leadership and the valuable work of her Office; the Treaty Bodies, the Special Rapporteurs and Commissions of Inquiry for providing us with crucial information on human rights situations across the world. I thank all those dedicated men and women in the field working to help states and civil society to strengthen protection for human rights. Through the Universal Periodic Review, our countries also have a valuable opportunity to learn from each other and discuss together the human rights challenges we face.

    But while we strive for partnership and collaboration, we cannot stay silent if countries fail to live up to their human rights obligations.

    A year ago, this Council asked the High Commissioner to report on the human rights situation in Sri Lanka. That report, received by members of this Council in recent days, is unambiguous. The Government of Sri Lanka has failed to ensure independent and credible investigations into alleged violations and abuses committed by both parties during the conflict in Sri Lanka. The majority of recommendations from successive Human Rights Council resolutions remain unimplemented, nor has the Sri Lankan Government accepted offers of technical assistance from the UN. The time has now clearly come for international action with regard to Sri Lanka. This Council has a duty to act on the findings of the report we collectively commissioned and to establish the truth. If we fail to do so, where does that leave us? I hope the Human Rights Council can unite to support the call for an independent investigation into alleged human rights violations and abuses on both sides. This will help pave the way for lasting reconciliation.

    I believe that the support and technical assistance of the Office of the High Commissioner and the collective concern expressed in the resolutions of this Council have a valuable role to play in ensuring progress towards lasting peace and reconciliation in Sri Lanka.

    The Commission of Inquiry on Syria has collected vital evidence on the worsening human rights situation. We condemn all violations and abuses, regardless of who commits them. But I want to be clear. States have a primary duty to protect their populations, but instead the Syrian government terrorises its people with barbaric attacks, besiegement, rape, torture, systematic executions and disappearances.

    Here in the Human Rights Council we should confront the appalling human rights situation in Syria and agree a resolution. To ensure our credibility, this Council must show the Syrian people that their suffering will not be ignored, and we must renew the mandate of the Commission of Inquiry. We need to be clear that those who commit horrendous and appalling crimes will be brought to justice, and we must ensure that the Commission of Inquiry has full access inside Syria, because the Assad government cannot be allowed to hide its crimes.

    Two weeks ago, this Council received the report of the Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). Their findings indicate widespread, state sanctioned, horrific violations. They include: torture; rape; summary executions; disappearances; and using starvation as a means of control and punishment. The UK strongly believes there should be no impunity for human rights violators. The DPRK has for too long refused to comply with its international obligations or engage properly with this Council or its mechanisms. We must take action. We cannot stand by.

    Elsewhere, the UK is extremely concerned by events in Ukraine. Just last night the British Foreign Secretary visited Kyiv and called on Russia to respect the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine. He also spoke to the UN Secretary General to encourage international efforts to de-escalate tensions in the region. The UK supports Ukraine’s new government and calls on all parties to ensure that the rights of all Ukraine’s citizens, including from minority groups, are respected.

    Mr President, we believe that the international community must address all forms of discrimination, not least on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, and we must also promote respect for diversity. We must work through the UN to address discriminatory laws which criminalise the LGBT community.

    Sexual violence has marked every conflict in our lifetime and shattered the lives of women, girls, men and boys on every continent. For too long, these crimes have been treated as secondary issues, as inevitable consequences of war, and only a tiny number of perpetrators have ever been held to account.

    This is unacceptable. Ending these horrors is a moral cause for our generation. All of us, Governments, civil society and the UN must work together to shed light on these crimes, to shatter the culture of impunity, and support, protect and reintegrate survivors.

    140 countries have now signed the historic declaration of commitment to end sexual violence in conflict which we launched at the General Assembly in September last year. But that is only the beginning. We must now turn those commitments into lasting practical action, raise awareness and build partnerships worldwide. That is why the Foreign Secretary has convened a global summit in London in June this year, the largest ever on this issue, which he will co-host with the Special Envoy of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Angelina Jolie.

    They will bring together governments, their militaries, law enforcement agencies, legal experts, international organisations and civil society to agree the necessary steps that will put an end to sexual violence in conflict. I hope that all the countries in this room today will join us in this effort to remove these abhorrent crimes from the world’s arsenal of cruelty. In the 21st century, the world will not understand why countries cannot support such an initiative.

    Mr President, together we can make an enormous contribution. We should not underestimate the impact we can have if we work collectively. So, I hope that we can work closely in the Human Rights Council to improve respect and protection for human rights worldwide, to respond quickly and robustly to serious violations and to create lasting change in support of international peace and security. And eradicate injustices that affect people – often the most vulnerable – in the world.

  • Hugo Swire – 2014 Speech at British Council in Rangoon

    hugoswire

    Below is the text of the speech made by Hugo Swire, the Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, in Rangoon on 30th January 2014.

    Introduction

    This is my second visit to your fascinating and beautiful country as a Foreign Office Minister. I first visited just over one year ago, shortly after I took up my current ministerial post. I am delighted to be back, and grateful to all those who have welcomed me so warmly throughout my travels this week.

    Over the last three years, the world has watched with admiration and, frankly, surprise, the remarkable changes that have taken place here.

    Over one thousand political prisoners released. A thriving and active new Parliament. An end to fighting across much of the country. A human rights commission established. Trades unions formed. Emerging economic liberalisation. Freedom of the press. These are just some of the most obvious examples.

    I am proud that the British Government has been swift to welcome these reforms, and to recognise the courage and leadership of those who have made those changes happen.

    In 2012, Prime Minister David Cameron was the first western leader to visit here since the reforms began, and during his visit he paid tribute to the leadership of President Thein Sein and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. In 2013 the UK played a central role in moving the EU’s relationship with this country beyond sanctions. This year, we have increased our development aid to around $100m per year. We have also opened a trade and investment office, and are actively encouraging responsible investment from British companies.

    It is no exaggeration to say that the relationship between our two countries is being transformed. We are re-building a friendship based on mutual respect, founded in our deep and enduring shared history and in the long-standing support of the British people for your struggle for democracy.

    The two key challenges

    It is therefore as a friend – a frank and constructive, but critical friend- that I speak to you today at the start of a decisive year for this country’s future.

    You face many challenges on the path of reform, but there are two areas in particular where you have arrived at a critical juncture: democratic reform, and the peace process.

    On both fronts, further progress will require extraordinary courage. But success will create a legacy lasting for generations, and form the bedrock for Burma’s future stability and prosperity.

    Democratic reform

    Let me speak first of democratic reform. Put bluntly, continued democratic reform in this country requires constitutional change. Constitutional change is important for two main reasons: to ensure that this country’s political system moves fully into line with democratic standards, and to ensure that this political system reflects the aspirations of the people.

    This week, all eyes here are on the Constitutional Review Committee, which should submit its report to Parliament tomorrow.

    Speaking to people throughout my visit, it has been absolutely clear to me that there is overwhelming support amongst ordinary people for constitutional change. Change that brings the constitution in line with international democratic standards. Change that delivers greater devolution of powers to states and divisions through a strengthened federal system. Change that cements the independence of the judiciary. Change that removes the military’s veto over democratic reform and gives citizens greater control over their own destinies.

    Many of these reforms are complex, and will require careful consideration. For now, I would like to highlight one amendment that is very simple, and very important. I refer to ‘59f’- the Presidency clause.

    Central to any modern democracy is the principle that citizens should have the right to choose who governs them. Yet under this country’s present constitution, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of the main opposition party, is blocked from becoming President, even if her party wins a majority of seats in the 2015 elections. Why? Because her two adult sons have British citizenship.

    The 2008 Constitution is perhaps unique. I can think of no other constitution that makes an individual citizen’s eligibility to become President conditional on the nationality of their adult children. This unreasonable restriction was not included in Burma’s previous constitutions, in 1947 and 1974. I can only assume that the restriction was written into the 2008 constitution in order to prevent one particular individual from ever becoming President. This is surely no way to write a constitution.

    As Prime Minister David Cameron has made clear, it is time for this restriction to be removed. It is a hangover from a very different era. It is fundamentally undemocratic. And it is fundamentally wrong. Without amendments to allow all citizens to contest the Presidency, the 2015 general elections cannot and will not be fair elections. And without fair elections, the credibility of Burma’s democratic reforms will be cast into doubt.

    I welcome President Thein Sein’s recent comment that all citizens should have the right to run for President- but I urge him to follow this up with active support to make this a reality.

    The two major groups in Parliament clearly also have a central responsibility for determining whether constitutional amendments can happen. I refer to the MPs of the USDP party, and the Tatmadaw. And the moment has arrived when both of these groups must clearly set out their stance.

    As leader of the USDP party, Thura U Shwe Mann has stated his personal support for amending the presidency clause. His stance is admirable, and reflects a strong sense of fair play.

    But I am concerned by the recent suggestions of some USDP members that Daw Suu’s eligibility should be conditional on her adult sons renouncing their existing citizenship. As far as I am aware, there is simply no other modern constitution in the world that makes such demands of the adult children of political leaders. I urge all USDP MPs to take the honourable approach, and be prepared to compete on a level and democratic playing field in 2015, through serious amendments to 59f.

    The second key group within Parliament is of course the military MPs. The 2008 Constitution can be amended only with the support of the Tatmadaw. This gives the Tatmadaw leadership a unique power, and a unique responsibility.

    But it also places the Tatmadaw’s stance under heavy scrutiny, including in the UK, where our military engagement in your country is subject to intense interest. A constructive approach by the Tatmadaw to constitutional reform will send the strongest possible message of commitment to change and help to convince the sceptics that our engagement is right. It will be recognised and welcomed both inside this country and in the wider international community. Senior General Min Aung Hlaing today has the opportunity to secure a unique legacy: to be the Commander-in-Chief whose courage enabled his army to break free of the shackles of the past.

    Longer term, I and many others hope that this country will follow the example of other states in the region, where the military has progressively moved out of the legislature, and taken its proper place as a professional modern institution under the control of the civilian government. As Daw Aung San Suu Kyi herself noted when she visited Sandhurst Military Academy in the UK last year, the strongest and most respected militaries are found in the most robust democracies.

    The peace process

    This brings me to the second great challenge facing this country in 2014: the peace process.

    For over sixty years since independence, this country has seen terrible internal conflicts. Millions of people, particularly in the ethnic minority border areas, have suffered unimaginable traumas. But in a sense, everyone here has been a victim, having lived under the shadow of a military dictatorship that justified its very existence on the grounds that the country risked breaking apart without it.

    Yesterday I visited Kachin State, the first visit by an international minister since the latest outbreak of conflict three years ago. I held discussions with the State Government, representatives from the Kachin Independence Organisation, and religious leaders. I was also humbled to meet veterans of World War Two, and I was proud to recognise their magnificent contribution.

    I visited camps near Myitkyina, where I spoke to families who had lost everything: their homes, their farms, and, in some cases, their friends and relatives. Most had been living in temporary shelters for almost three years. Their message was consistent: they wanted a sustainable and just peace, so that they could return in confidence to their homes, and rebuild their lives.

    The international community today fully recognises the importance of the peace process, and its centrality to this country’s future. Without a fair and equitable peace settlement that reflects the aspirations of its diverse communities, the potential to become a prosperous, stable and democratic country will never be realised.

    That is why the UK firmly supports the efforts of the government, political parties and armed groups to reach a nationwide ceasefire and establish an inclusive nationwide political dialogue. The precise shape of this dialogue, and its outcomes will be determined by the parties involved. But the broad guiding principle seems clear: that Burma must evolve towards a political system that truly enshrines equality and greater self-determination for its many minority ethnicities.

    We are under no illusions as to the scale of the challenge. Before I became a Foreign Office Minister, I was Minister for Northern Ireland. And long before that, I served as a British Army officer. I know from personal experience the difficulties of resolving a long-running conflict. But as our own Northern Ireland experience has shown, real progress can be made even in the most apparently-intractable conflicts. Ultimately, it takes a combination of extraordinary hard work, and courageous leadership.

    In this respect, your country has been very fortunate indeed. Today ceasefires are in place across most of the country. A nationwide ceasefire is within reach. This stage could never have been reached without the remarkable courage and perseverance of leaders on all sides. It is an extraordinary collective achievement.

    It is, of course, only a first step. But it is an essential first step towards building trust and creating conditions for the political dialogue that must follow.

    The UK will do our part to support this process in whatever way we can. On the diplomatic front, we will continue to engage with all parties. This week I have discussed with government, Tatmadaw, and ethnic leaders the British Government’s readiness to play a helpful role at future rounds of peace talks, subject to agreement by all sides.

    At the same time, I am pleased that we have been able to share our own experiences from the Northern Ireland peace process. Over the last year, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, Minister U Aung Min, the United Nationalities Federation Council, the Karen National Union, and the 88 Generation have all visited London and Belfast, drawing lessons from what we did right, and what we got wrong. We have also been running workshops for ethnic armed groups focused on security sector reform. And we stand ready to provide further technical support and funding for the political dialogue itself.

    We also remain firmly committed to supporting the victims of conflict. The British Government has been the largest bilateral donor of humanitarian aid in Kachin State, committing $20m over a two-year period. Our support to refugees on the Thai border continues. And we will expand our health, education and livelihoods programmes into ceasefire areas, bringing tangible benefits to villagers who have lived in dire insecurity and without access to basic services.

    We will also remain unceasing in our efforts to address human rights violations in conflict and post-conflict areas. I have been particularly concerned by reports of ongoing sexual violence by Tatmadaw soldiers against women and girls in ethnic minority areas. The British Government, led by our Foreign Secretary, has established the Preventing Sexual Violence Initiative. In Naypyidaw this week, in meetings with government and the Commander-in-Chief, I have lobbied for this country to join 138 others, including six of its ASEAN partners, in endorsing the Declaration launched at the UN General Assembly. This year we are funding projects worth nearly half a million dollars focused on Preventing Sexual Violence here, including training women in basic legal skills and counselling.

    The military

    In discussing both constitutional change and the peace process, I have already touched on the critical role of the Tatmadaw, and I want to briefly expand on this. In 2012, the British Government took the decision to re-establish relations between our two countries’ militaries. Last year, we appointed a Defence Attaché for the first time in twenty years. We made these moves after consultation with opposition, ethnic and civil society leaders, the vast majority of whom firmly supported cautious and calibrated engagement.

    Earlier this month, the UK’s Defence Academy delivered a classroom-based course to the Tatmadaw for the first time, covering topics including the role of the military in a democracy, security sector reform, governance, accountability, and the rule of law. It did not enhance the Tatmadaw’s military capacity or capabilities. The training aimed to expose future senior officers to new thinking, and encourage the Tatmadaw to prepare for a new role. I very much welcome that this course, dealing with such challenging subjects, was able to take place and that those attending engaged frankly and openly. The fact that senior officers attended the opening and closing ceremonies clearly demonstrated the value they attached to it, and I welcome their willingness to have a dialogue over issues like human rights and humanitarian law. I was also pleased that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi could be there in person at the closing reception.

    The fact that we are engaging with the Tatmadaw does not mean we will shy away from raising very real and continued concerns. Sexual violence and humanitarian access are two concerns I have already mentioned. Child soldiers is a further example: I welcome the recent release of 96 child soldiers, but I have made clear that there is an urgent need for the existing Joint Action Plan with the UN to be extended, to address a problem that, despite encouraging progress, remains far from resolved.

    But let me be clear; I am convinced that cautious engagement with the Tatmadaw is the right thing to be doing, and that now is the right time to be doing it.

    Rakhine State and Anti-Muslim Violence

    Every democratic transition has its challenges- some common, some unique. Here, the constitution and the peace process are rightly seen as the biggest of those challenges. But it is also essential, at a time of change, to stay alert to the wider risks and threats. We must, for example, ensure that the new space for media freedoms is firmly protected, that the right to peaceful protest is consistently defended, that land rights are addressed fairly and transparently.

    Yet there are two areas of concern that I wish to highlight in particular, as I believe that they risk gravely undermining the wider reform process. I refer to the situation in Rakhine State, and the violence targeted towards the wider Muslim community.

    One year ago I visited Rakhine State. I was the first European Minister to do so. I heard directly the grievances, fears and concerns of both the Muslim and the Buddhist communities. I went to a mosque as well as to a Buddhist monastery. I saw the terrible conditions of the Muslim camps. Twelve months on from my visit, there has been little progress in addressing either the humanitarian situation or underlying intercommunal relations. I have been appalled to hear of further tragic deaths this month in Northern Rakhine, and we have called for a credible investigation into these allegations.

    On the humanitarian front, the rise in intimidation and threats towards UN and international staff attempting to deliver life-saving food and medical supplies to vulnerable displaced communities is utterly unacceptable, and actually quite shocking. I urge Rakhine community leaders to tackle this trend urgently, as a matter of conscience. I also reiterate the responsibility of the authorities, both at state and Union level, to facilitate full and unimpeded humanitarian access to those in need, and to address robustly any efforts to block such access.

    To the Union government, I further urge rapid action to address the citizenship status and basic rights of the Rohingya. The government has committed to running a full citizenship verification exercise, and this should be conducted without further delay. The continuation of the status quo is unacceptable, and presents growing risks to the country’s long-term stability.

    I recognize the desperate poverty that afflicts all communities in Rakhine State, the result of many decades of chronic underinvestment in the country’s second-poorest region. The international community must be committed to poverty alleviation programmes in every township in Rakhine state. And on the part of the government, the state’s rich natural resources revenues must be shared equitably, including with the local population.

    Beyond Rakhine State, over the last 12 months attacks against Muslim communities in Meiktila and elsewhere have also been of deep concern across the world. The violent actions and aggressive rhetoric of a small minority of extremists is harming the reputation of this country, and raising serious questions about religious tolerance and rule of law.

    Rule of law is clearly the responsibility of the government, judiciary and security forces, and I welcome the swifter and more balanced actions taken in response to the latest outbreaks of violence. Those carrying out violence, and those inciting it, must be held accountable, in line with the government’s pledge for ‘zero tolerance’. Police must also learn how to respond effectively, and I am pleased that British police officers have played a central role in the EU’s police training programme over recent months, aimed at improving the handling of relations with communities.

    Religious tolerance is a responsibility for everyone in this room, but I am heartened by the united call from major religious leaders for dialogue, understanding and empathy. All too often around the world we have seen fragile new freedoms tragically shattered by divisive ideologies that prey on fear and rumour. It is my fervent hope that your country does not suffer this fate, and that the voices of moderation and wisdom prevail, such that you can realize your vast potential as a peaceful democratic and diverse country.

    UK support to Burma’s development, including Rangoon General Hospital, and our trade relationship

    It is on this note that I want to end. Your country is at a crossroads, so inevitably my speech today has focused on the very real challenges ahead. Yet if those political challenges can be overcome- and I do believe that they can- then this is a country of vast potential. With a large young population, plentiful natural resources, and a strategic location between some of the world’s biggest markets, your economic prospects ought to be bright. And don’t underestimate the international community’s goodwill towards you.

    The British government’s policy is clear. We are encouraging responsible investment, and we are encouraging trade relations. We believe that British investment can bring benefits to all parties- through sharing of knowledge and technical expertise, through job creation and vocational training, and through improving labour standards. British businesses are interested. We are already seeing some early success stories: for example, JCB selling over 50 machines in their first year of operations here, and Aggreko delivering their first power supply project for the Ministry of Energy, on budget and ahead of time.

    At the same time, we are working with the government to help create the right conditions for investment that benefits all, not least the poorest. Above all, this means strong rule of law and transparency, and that is why the UK is supporting government and civil society in signing up to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and the Open Government Partnership, and working with ministries on improving public financial management.

    At the same time, British aid is improving the health and education of this country’s poorest people. This year we are further increasing our annual aid budget for Burma to $100m. We are funding the treatment of diseases like malaria and tuberculosis, providing life-saving healthcare for mothers and their babies, and supporting improvements to the standards of basic education. UK-funded livelihoods programmes are helping rural farmers to increase agricultural production, and giving villagers access to credit. And we are supporting the regeneration of the historic Rangoon General Hospital, which has for many decades played a central role in the healthcare system.

    Conclusion

    Through development, through trade, and through ever-closer links between our two peoples, we want to be an active partner working with you over the years ahead to realise your country’s undoubted potential. But ultimately the effectiveness of development aid, the eradication of poverty, the boosting of trade and investment – all of this rests on political foundations. And in the year ahead you have the opportunity, through leadership and through dialogue, to set the political foundations for a stable and prosperous future.

    This is a moment that calls for courage and for vision. But the progress that your country has already made over the last three years has surely shown that it is the bravest actions that reap the greatest rewards. Today, Burma can take great strides forward on the path of peace and on the path of reconciliation. And there can be no going back from the path on which you are embarked. Thank you.