Tag: Speeches

  • Jeremy Hunt – 2013 Conservative Party Conference Speech

    jeremyhunt

    Below is the text of the speech made by the Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, to the 2013 Conservative Party Conference in Manchester.

    Ladies and gentlemen, I’ve been in this job a year now. When I was given it I said that to be responsible for the NHS was the greatest privilege of my life, and so it has been. It has been a wonderful year in a remarkable organisation.

    And I’ve been very lucky to have a great team of ministers. Norman Lamb, Dan Poulter, Anna Soubry and Freddie Howe have been terrific. Please put your hands together to thank them for their work.

    I actually had an NHS operation on my head last year. You might say there are lots of things wrong with my head, but this was only minor surgery. I was lying on my back in the operating theatre. The surgeon had his scalpel out ready to start when one of the nurses looked at me and said “By the way Mr Hunt, what is it you do for a living?”

    I froze. In fact my mind flashed back to when Ronald Reagan was shot. As he was wheeled into the operating theatre, he looked up at the doctors and said “I hope you’re all Republicans”.

    I go out onto the frontline most weeks. Not just visiting, but actually rolling up my sleeves, putting on the uniform and mucking in. I have learned more from doing this than I’ve ever found out sitting behind a ministerial desk.

    I have done the tea round in a Worthing ward; washed down emergency beds in Watford; answered the phone in a busy London GP surgery; even done a nursing round in Salford. You’ll be relieved to hear that no one has asked me to perform surgery yet.

    I’m pleased to say staff are never slow to say when my efforts don’t meet their high standards. Disconcertingly the usual reaction I get is “you’re much nicer than we thought you’d be.”

    Going on the frontline you meet some remarkable people.

    People like the inspirational Elaine and her team at Salford, running one of the safest hospitals in the country right here on our doorstep.

    Or a GP I met in Feltham who had a patient who was diagnosed with a terminal illness.

    He went out of his way to visit the patient every day after he finished at work. Then one day he arrived at the patient’s home and was upset to see he’d just died. So he decided to wash and clean him. As he told the patient’s wife “I want this man to go out of his home with dignity.”

    To him that was just his job. To me, it’s the NHS. There for us and our families, no matter how old, how frail, how hard-up…treating everyone with dignity, respect and compassion.

    That incredible miracle of human nature that happens when one human being is confronted with another who’s unwell. However tired, stressed or busy they feel, they tap into hidden reserves of strength and compassion to comfort and help.

    I don’t come from a health background. I ran my own business. I’ve worked in Japan and set up a charity in Africa. But in all of the places I’ve worked I have never seen people strive harder than the doctors, nurses and professionals in our NHS. To all of you who work in the NHS, I want to say thank you for what you do for our country. You make us proud.

    CONFRONTING FAILURE

    But if you love an institution, you are even more determined to sort out any problems.

    Which is why every week I make sure I see personally some of the letters that come in about things that have gone wrong.

    Recently I read about someone who lost their wife because her records were mixed up and she was given the wrong medicine. Someone else wrote in who had lost their three year old son because the ambulance didn’t get there in time. Someone else had been brushed off when he complained that his father was left lying naked in a public ward.

    These are not typical of our NHS or its staff. And things do go wrong sometimes despite everyone’s best efforts.

    But the duty of of a Health Secretary, however painful, is to look into these problems, accept responsibility and do what it takes to stop them being repeated.

    Which is what happened this year.

    Not just at Mid Staffs hospital where so many terrible things happened. But at 11 more hospitals we had to put into special measures all in one go in July, something that has never happened before in the NHS.

    So this year we appointed for the first time a Chief Inspector of Hospitals. Modelled on the tough regulatory regime that Ofsted use for our schools, this is someone whose job is to speak out, without fear or favour, about the standards in our hospitals. The nation’s whistleblower in chief.

    What Professor Sir Mike Richards finds will not always be comfortable. But his tough new inspections, which started two weeks ago, will mean everyone for the first time will know the answers to some simple questions: how good is my local hospital? Is it safe? Does it have enough staff? Does it put patients first?

    I’m sure in most places the answer will be positive. But if it isn’t we need to know and then things will change.

    DENIAL

    It sounds simple.

    But many of these problems should never have happened in the first place.

    Let’s be clear – in a huge system like the NHS, things go wrong and mistakes are made whichever party is in power.

    But tragically under Labour the system did everything it could to cover up these mistakes.

    Giving Morecambe Bay the all-clear in April 2010 despite the deaths of 16 babies. That was wrong.

    Giving the all-clear to Basildon and Tameside Hospitals in late 2009 just weeks before stories emerged of blood-spattered wards, patients being treated on trollies and elderly patients left alone unable to eat. That was wrong.

    Refusing 81 requests, as their ministers did, for a public inquiry into Mid Staffs. That was wrong.

    Forcing a group of grieving families to wait in the snow, wind and rain because the health secretary refused to grant them even one meeting. That too was wrong.

    As the country’s leading expert on hospital death rates Professor Sir Brian Jarman says, the Department of Health was a ‘denial machine.’

    Indeed the Chair of the CQC talked of the pressure she was put under by a minister in that government not to speak out.

    That person, Barbara Young, is no Conservative – in fact she is a Labour peer. So even their own people felt desperately uncomfortable.

    To those Labour people who hated what was happening on their watch, I have this to say: you were right.

    Covering things up is not only worse for those who suffer. It means the problem doesn’t get fixed and may be repeated.

    And then it’s not the rich who suffer, it is the most vulnerable. Disabled children. Older people with dementia. Those with no relatives to kick up a fuss. Ordinary people who put their faith in the system, only to find the system wasn’t there for them when they needed it.

    Labour betrayed the very people they claim to stand up for.

    But what is even more worrying is they are still in complete denial about what happened.

    In his speech last week, Andy Burnham didn’t find time to mention Mid Staffs once. Not once. In the year of the Francis Inquiry, Morecambe Bay, the Keogh report, a brand new inspection regime – none of that was important enough to merit even a single mention by Labour’s health spokesman.

    But he did mention privatisation 13 times. They want the whole health debate to be about so-called privatisation.

    But use of the independent sector to bring waiting times down and raise standards is not privatisation. It’s what Tony Blair, Alan Milburn, Patricia Hewitt, John Reid and Alan Johnson all believed was right for patients.

    Ed Miliband now says that was wrong. But no ideology, left or right, should ever trump the needs of patients.

    Because for patients it’s not public vs private. It’s good care vs bad care. And we’ll stamp out bad care wherever we find it – public sector, private sector, hospitals, care homes, surgeries – and never cover it up.

    So today I can announce a major reform that will stop Labour or any government ever trying to cover up poor care.

    We will legislate in the Care Bill to give the CQC statutory independence, rather like the Bank of England has over interest rates, so ministers can never again lean on it to suppress bad news.

    The care of our NHS patients is too important for political meddling – and our new legislation will make sure that ministers always put patients first.

    OUR RECORD

    As Conservatives we show our commitment to the NHS by what we do as well as what we say.

    And we have a record to be proud of.

    We set up the Cancer Drugs Fund which has helped 34,000 people so far.

    This week David Cameron has announced it will continue for another two years. Even better would be if Labour in Wales agreed to introduce it there so we stopped the obscenity of Welsh cancer sufferers renting houses in England in order to get the cancer drugs they need to save their lives.

    And unlike in Wales, this Government made the difficult choice to protect the NHS budget in the face of unprecedented financial pressure.

    And look at what we’ve done with that budget. On basically the same budget in real-terms, the NHS is doing 800,000 more operations every year than Labour’s last year in office AND long waits have actually come down.

    In 2010, 18,000 people waited more than a year, now it’s less than 400.  And not just that:

    Four million more outpatient appointments every single year;

    MRSA rates halved;

    Mixed sex wards virtually gone.

    8000 fewer managers and 4000 more doctors

    All thanks to our Prime Minister David Cameron, whose personal commitment to the NHS has shone like a beacon from the moment he became our leader.

    OUR VISION

    But if we are to prepare the NHS for the future we cannot stop there.

    Andrew Lansley courageously put health budgets and decisions on treatment back into the hands of local doctors – and we are seeing huge innovation as a result.

    And if there’s one big change we need more than anything, it’s to transform the care older people receive outside hospital.

    It’s true for all of us, but especially true for older people that prevention is better than cure. Avoiding that fall down the stairs, stopping an infection going septic, halting the onset of dementia – these are things that give people happy, healthy last years to spend at home surrounded by family and friends. They also saves the NHS money.

    To do this, we need to rediscover the ideal of family doctors. Making GPs more accessible for people at work, as today’s announcement about piloting 8 till 8 7 day opening will do.

    But also giving GPs the time and space to care proactively for vulnerable older people on their lists, keeping tabs on them and helping them stay well longer.

    The last government’s GP contract changes in 2004 abolished named GPs – and in doing so destroyed the personal link between patients and their GPs. Trust between doctor and patient is at the heart of what NHS professionalism stands for – and we should never have allowed that GP contract to undermine it.

    So from next April we will be reversing that mistake by introducing a named GP, responsible for proactive care for all vulnerable older people.

    Someone to be their champion in the integrated health and social care system that we will be implementing from April following George Osborne’s announcement in July.

    Restoring the link between doctor and patient for millions.  And joining up a system which has allowed too many people to fall between the cracks.

    And for those who need residential care, we’ll do something else. We’ll stop them ever having to sell the home they have worked hard for all their life to pay for the cost of it.

    Our Dilnot reforms will make us one of the first countries in the world where people make proper provision for their care costs just as they do for their pension.

    CONCLUSION

    These are big and difficult challenges.

    But the party that really cares about the NHS is the party prepared to take tough decisions – so the NHS can be the pride of our children and grandchildren just as it is our pride too.

    No to the blind pursuit of targets – but yes to putting patients first.

    No to cover ups and ignoring problems – but yes to transparency and sorting them out.

    No to pessimism about the future of the NHS – yes to pride and confidence that with courage and commitment it can go from strength to strength.

    That’s our Conservative NHS: the doctors party, the nurses party and – yes – the patients party.

    Conference we have always been the party of aspiration.  It has always been our dream to make Britain the best country in the world for young people to grow up in.

    But we’re also the party that believes in respect for older people.  So as we face the challenge of an ageing population, under our stewardship of the NHS we can do something else too: we can make Britain the best country not just the best country in the world to grow up in, but the best country to grow old in too.

    Let’s stop at nothing to make that happen.

  • Jeremy Hunt – 2013 Speech to the National Conservative Convention

    jeremyhunt

    Below is the text of the speech made by the Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt, to the 2013 National Conservative Convention on 19th March 2013.

    When I became Health Secretary in September I said the job was the biggest privilege of my life.

    That’s because the NHS is one of our most cherished institutions.

    We can be proud that for 65 years our health service has ensured that everyone is entitled to treatment regardless of their background or income.

    Over the last six months I have visited hospitals, surgeries and care homes across the country.

    I have seen world-leading clinical practice, innovative use of technology and wonderful care from the dedicated doctors, nurses and healthcare assistants who look after 3 million people every week.

    This Conservative-led government has shown our commitment to the NHS time and time again: by our protection of the NHS budget; by putting doctors and nurses in charge of two thirds of the budget; by funding the Dilnot proposals so people never have to sell their house to pay for social care; and by fighting to make sure vulnerable older patients are always treated with dignity and respect.

    And we can be proud that our policies are making a real difference to people’s lives: on broadly the same budget as the last government, we are doing 400,000 more operations, 1 million more diagnostic tests and three million more outpatient appointments every year than happened under Labour; and 28,000 patients have benefited from the Cancer Drugs Fund they refused to set up.

    Although I am proud of those achievements, I am even prouder of the contribution made by the extraordinary staff who work on the NHS frontline.

    Let me give you one example: A & E departments now see 1 million more people every single year than when we took office.

    I know the incredible pressures the doctors, nurses and healthcare assistants who work there are facing to deal with this surge in demand.

    24/7 they do an extraordinary job and on behalf of everyone here I want to thank them for their remarkable dedication and commitment.

    But it’s my job as Health Secretary not just to praise the best of the NHS but also to be honest about the failures.

    If you care about something you don’t try to sweep problems under the carpet – you expose them, sort them out and make things better.

    And by criticising us when we do that, Labour show extraordinary complacency about the treatment suffered by some of the most vulnerable people in our society.

    As Conservatives, our instinct is to stand up for the individual. And that applies to the NHS.

    We must never allow the needs of an institution to become more important than the needs of the patients it was set up to serve.

    That’s why Andrew Lansley was so right to set up a public inquiry into what happened at Mid Staffs Hospital, something Labour refused 81 requests to do.

    And we should never forget what they allowed to happen on their watch:

    Patients left unwashed for days, sometimes in sheets soiled with urine and excrement;

    Relatives having to take bedsheets home to wash because the hospital wouldn’t;

    Patients with dementia going hungry with their meals sitting right in front of them because no one realised or cared that they were unable to feed themselves.

    Things that make your stomach turn. And we must never allow our love of the NHS to dent our determination to hold systems and individuals to account.

    So, where does that accountability lie? Most recent focus has been on Sir David Nicholson.

    As a manager in a system that failed to spot and rectify the appalling cases at mid Staffs, he has been held accountable in both parliament and the media.

    But he also led the campaign to bring down hospital waiting times and MRSA rates and we should not delude ourselves that Mid Staffs was all down to one man.

    Others have far greater responsibility.

    Like the board of the Trust, whose members astonishingly seem to have melted into thin air, some moving to other jobs in the system and others with generous payoffs.

    We need to restore accountability to hospital boards. That includes an end to gagging clauses – which I announced earlier this week.

    And we must look at measures to make boards criminally liable if they deliberately manipulate key patient data like mortality rates or waiting times.

    We need openness and transparency and there should be no hiding place for those who hide the truth and fiddle the figures.

    The Francis report rightly says that Ministers were not personally responsible for what happened at Mid Staffs.

    No minister of any party would have sanctioned or condoned what happened.

    But we also know from the report that the pursuit of targets at any cost was one of the central drivers of what went wrong.

    And it is Ministers who are ultimately responsible for the culture of the NHS. During this period a culture of neglect was allowed to take root in which the system became more important than the individual.

    The pursuit of targets stopped frontline staff treating people with dignity and compassion and betrayed what all of us believe the NHS is there to do.

    Of course there is a role for targets, whether in A & E or for waiting times.

    But not at any cost.

    And Labour Ministers made three huge policy mistakes which contributed to the culture of neglect we are now putting right.

    First, they failed to put in place safeguards to stop weak, inexperienced or bad managers pursuing not just bureaucratic targets, but targets at any cost.

    This is exactly what happened at Mid Staffs, where patient safety and care was compromised in a blind rush to achieve Foundation Trust status.

    Secondly, they failed to set up proper, independent, peer-led inspections of hospital quality and safety which told the public how safe and how good their local hospital was.

    And thirdly, they failed to spot clear warnings when things went wrong.

    The Francis Report outlines around 50 warning signs – so why did Ministers not act sooner?

    If those warnings were not brought to the attention of Ministers, why did they not create a system where they were?

    Instead there was a climate where NHS employees who spoke out about poor care were ignored, intimidated or bullied.

    Until we have a proper apology from Labour for those catastrophic policy mistakes, no one will believe they would not make the same errors of judgment again.

    This Conservative-led Government is absolutely clear about the steps we need to take to ensure accountability, compassionate care and respect for patients, particularly older people, are embedded in every corner of the NHS.

    These include a proper independent peer-review inspection regime led by a new Chief Inspector of Hospitals that won’t just look at targets, but also make judgements about whether hospitals are putting patients first.

    And it isn’t just about failure – we must recognise excellence.

    When Ofsted started recognising outstanding schools, we saw a new breed of ‘superheads’across the education system.

    We need the same in the NHS – so that our best leaders can help turn around failing hospitals.

    We also need a single failure regime where the suspension of the Board can be triggered by failures in care as well as failures in finance.

    And we will promote a patient-centred culture through the introduction of the Friends and Family Test.

    This will ask every NHS hospital inpatient whether they would recommend the care they received to a friend or family member.

    It will ask NHS staff whether they would want their own family treated in their own hospital.

    Implementing these changes will be a huge challenge.

    But in the end we are doing what Labour should have done but failed to do.

    The party that claims to speak for the vulnerable betrayed those very same people.

    And they betrayed the vast majority of doctors and nurses who want nothing more than to express the innate decency and compassion that made them give their lives to the NHS in the first place.

    And once again it falls to us, the Conservatives, to deliver that vision.

    And make sure that throughout our NHS no individual is too small, too unimportant, or too irrelevant to matter.

    That is our mission – let nothing stand in our way.

  • Jeremy Hunt – 2013 Speech on Innovation

    jeremyhunt

    Below is the text of the speech made by the Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt, on 13th March 2013.

    In 1953, when the NHS was just five years old, two men named Smith took a flight from LA to New York. They started chatting.

    One Mr Smith was the head of American Airlines. He was having a nightmare coping with the explosion in demand for airline travel.

    Back then it could take 3 hours to book a single ticket. They were dependent on the amount of work that 8 people huddling around a single rolodex could manage and they had reached their limit. Mr Smith was desperate.

    The other Mr Smith worked for IBM.

    That chance encounter transformed the industry.

    It led to a new computer system that allowed any travel agent anywhere in the country to know which seats were available on any flight, book and issue a ticket all in a matter of minutes.

    The implications were massive. Flying went mass-market – and American Airlines became one of the most successful airlines in the world. And we are still using the same system 60 years later – with the internet allowing us all to become our own travel agents.

    But think how history would have been different if the man from IBM had been sitting next to a Mr Smith from the NHS.

    What they introduced to the airline industry 60 years ago, we still haven’t done for health and social care today. While they innovated, we stagnated. The revolution that has transformed so much of our daily lives is only just starting to touch healthcare.

    Today I want to talk about the importance of innovation, of thinking differently and of finally harnessing the power of technology for the improvement of patient care and patient experience.

    The NHS today

    Very recently, the Francis Report into the appalling abuses of care at Stafford Hospital highlighted one of the biggest challenges facing the NHS. The need not only for high quality treatment, but for genuinely patient centred care.

    I am clear that our response to that report must be about getting the culture and values right in the modern NHS as about regulation and systems.

    In the end, that boils down to basic human interaction, to the care and compassion that is at the heart of what the NHS stands for. That is at the heart of the reason why so many people – our great doctors and nurses – dedicate themselves to the care of others.

    If we are to give them the time and space to deliver on those core NHS values, if we are serious about putting patients in the driving seat, then we need to embrace the time-saving efficiency and productivity that technology and innovation can unleash.

    We also need to recognise the improvements in patient safety that technology makes possible. Whether real time information on hospital mortality rates, comparative data on surgery survival rates or the simple availability to a doctor of a patient’s prescribing history before medication is administered – all should make closer the zero-harm NHS that is such a priority in the wake of Mid Staffs.

    Let’s be clear though: technology is a means to an end, not an end in itself. But if we ignore what it makes possible, we ignore the biggest single opportunity in front of us to transform the delivery of healthcare away from a medical model into a patient and person-centred approach.

    Patient Records

    One thing that, more than anything else, will drive innovation is electronic patient records.

    Paper records can only be in one place at a time, only seen by one person at a time. So they’re no use to a patient on holiday in Gloucester if his file is in a Godalming GP surgery.

    Or to an ambulance driver picking up a frail elderly woman in an emergency who, if he had her notes, could see she was a diabetic with a heart condition who had a fall last month.

    They’re no use to a hospital doctor who might not be aware of a patient’s other medication and prescribe drugs incorrectly – potentially lethally – because the notes have got lost.

    Unaware of a patient’s full history, complications arise in surgery.

    Diagnostic tests are repeated unnecessarily.

    And patients find themselves having to repeat their medical history over and over again, sometimes several times on the same day in the same hospital.

    But with an electronic record, all sorts of things are possible.

    Which is why I have taken what Sir Humphrey would call the ‘brave’ decision to ask the NHS to go paperless by 2018. And to acknowledge explicitly that the last government was right to see the potential of electronic records but tragically wrong in the way it tried to implement them.

    We will learn the right lessons – in particular avoiding top down Whitehall driven solutions in favour of locally determined solutions which work to national standards.

    Global best practice

    Many of the organisations here today offer new ways of using that information to improve care.

    Whether it’s doctors and nurses being able to access the right information, giving patients control over their own care, or enabling vast amounts of anonymised data to be used to further research into new drugs and treatments. The potential for fully electronic records is huge and is about to be realised.

    In Denmark, people can see all their hospital records online, and this year will be able to see their GP records too.

    In America, military veterans, who have their own healthcare system not unlike the NHS, can download their own health records. Something that almost 20,000 veterans do every month.

    In Sweden, over 85% of prescriptions are transferred from doctor to pharmacy online.

    We have great things happening here in the UK too – like King’s College Hospital on track to become paperless this year, and where nurses use iPod Touches to record and monitor a patient’s vital signs at the bedside.

    Or Maudsley Hospital’s MyHealthBox, the first time anwhere mental health patients have been given online access to their hospital and GP records.

    Or Newham University Hospital that has reduced missed appointments by 11% through use of Skype for diabetic outpatient appointments.

    But, we need to go much further, much faster. And we should not underestimate the size of the prize. With a paperless NHS, we may well be the largest fully online health economy in the world – with massive implications for improved patient safety, genuine patient empowerment and self-management as well as scientific research.

    Announcements: Johnson and Johnson

    Britain has a global reputation for research. We have world-leading universities and some of the greatest scientific minds. We have well established, high quality R&D, manufacturing and supply chain expertise. And, of course, we have the NHS.

    This all makes the UK a natural focus for global investment in innovation and the life sciences.

    And with a global healthcare market worth around 6.5 trillion dollars, the potential value to the UK in terms of economic growth and development is enormous.

    So I’m delighted to announce one such investment today.

    Johnson & Johnson’s Innovation Centre, here in London, will spearhead a multi-mullion pound drive to seek out and develop some of the ‘golden discoveries’ being made as we speak.

    They will support and develop promising new breakthroughs in our universities, our SMEs, our research councils and our big research charities.

    Johnson & Johnson’s Chief Scientific Officer, Paul Stoffels, said, this “is part of [their] broader innovation strategy to advance human health through collaboration with the world’s leading scientists and entrepreneurs.”

    And they’re doing it right here in England, where they have access to the finest health service and the finest people in the world.

    Unlike the big investments of the past, this isn’t about vast sums spent on shiny new offices and laboritories, it’s about focussing investment in new ideas, fresh thinking and new products.

    Being flexible and moving fast.  Just like many of the small companies here at Expo.

    NHS Commissioning Board App Library

    For as well as the big giants who push forward the bounds of innovation, we also need the small, disruptive companies. Often close to their customers, often led by people fresh from the coalface of NHS care, outside the traditional structures they bring energy and fresh thinking to age-old problems.

    So to help harness what they can offer the NHS Commissioning Board have today launched the Health App Library. Aimed initially at the public, it will play host to new mobile phone apps developed by companies large and small that can help to improve healthcare in myriad ways.

    These apps will do everything from helping people to get trusted information on their condition or to find relevant clinical trials, to making it easy for patients to create and manage their own care plans with their doctor using their own medical records.

    As the father of a one year old daughter, I am particularly interested in the e-Red Book, allowing parents to keep accurate and up to date records of their child’s early development online.

    But you will find many other apps in the Library, all with the knowledge that they are clinically safe.

    Innovation, excellence and Strategic Development (IESD) Fund

    Finally I can today announce the government is helping small groups – community groups, social enterprises – to play their role in improving care through the Innovation, Excellence and Strategic Development Fund. Today, a further 49 with benefit from grants totalling £5.5 million.

    This will cover a wide range of innovations, from tailored online psychological support for people with skin conditions, to phone apps to help people with disabilities gain greater independence, and support for children and young people to access and take control of their own mental health services online or through their phones.

    Conclusion

    Expo showcases why I am so optimistic about the future of health and social care. Creative people bringing new ideas, new perspectives, new approaches.

    It is the opposite of the old top-down, command and control NHS. It shows the future.

    A future of an NHS freed from the shackles of top-down bureaucracy where our excellent doctors and nurses can quickly find the solutions that work for them and their patients. Bringing speed and creativity to wards and consulting rooms across the country.

    Technology is a big part of this. Not a holy grail or silver bullet. But a way of turning the pyramid upside-down, so the NHS is led by the people it was set up to serve – its patients.

    Bill Gates said, “Never before in history has innovation offered promise of so much to so many in so short a time”.

    When it comes to taking advantage of that promise of what innovation, let’s put healthcare at the front of the queue. Thank you.

  • Jeremy Hunt – 2013 Speech at the Policy Exchange

    jeremyhunt

    Below is the text of a speech made by the Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt, to the Policy Exchange on 16th January 2013.

    In 1953, when the NHS was just five years old, two men named Smith took a flight from LA to New York.  They started chatting.

    One Mr Smith was the head of American Airlines.  He was having a nightmare coping with the explosion in demand for airline travel.

    Back then it could take 3 hours to book a single ticket.  They were dependent on the amount of work that 8 people huddling around a single rolodex could manage and they had reached their limit.  Mr Smith was desperate.

    The other Mr Smith worked for IBM.

    That chance encounter transformed the industry.

    It led to a new computer system that allowed any travel agent anywhere in the country to know which seats were available on any flight, book and issue a ticket all in a matter of minutes.

    The implications were massive. Flying went mass-market – and American Airlines became one of the most successful airlines in the world. And we are still using the same system 60 years later – with the internet allowing us all to become our own travel agents.

    But think how history would have been different if the man from IBM had been sitting next to a Mr Smith from the NHS.

    What they introduced to the airline industry 60 years ago, we still haven’t done for health and social care today.  The revolution that has transformed so much of our daily lives has only just started to touch healthcare.

    Today I want to talk about why we need to embrace that revolution with enthusiasm – but also the pitfalls if we get it wrong.

    The NHS today

    Right now, one of the biggest challenges facing the NHS is the Francis Report about the appalling abuses of care at Stafford Hospital, shortly due to land on my desk.

    I am clear that our response to that report must be about getting the culture and values right in the modern NHS as about regulation and systems.

    Technology is not the answer to this. It can never replace human interaction, nor the care and compassion that must be at the heart of what the NHS stands for.

    But today, I want to argue that it does have a role to play if we are to give doctors and nurses the time and space to deliver on those core NHS values.

    The clearest example of this is patient records.

    Because they are mainly paper-based, they can only be in one place at a time, only seen by one person at a time.

    So they’re no use to a patient on holiday in Gloucester if his file is in a GP surgery in Godalming.

    Or to a paramedic picking up a frail elderly woman in an emergency who, if he had her notes, could see she was a diabetic with a heart condition who had a fall last month.

    They’re no use to a hospital doctor who might not be aware of a patient’s other medication and prescribe drugs incorrectly – potentially lethally – because the notes have got lost.

    Unaware of a patient’s full history, complications arise in surgery.

    Diagnostic tests are repeated unnecessarily.

    And patients find themselves having to repeat their medical history over and over again, sometimes several times on the same day in the same hospital.

    International comparisons

    Other countries are making great strides.

    In Denmark, people can see all their hospital records online, and this year will be able to see their GP records too.

    In America, military veterans, who have their own healthcare system not unlike the NHS, can download their own health records.  Something that almost 20,000 veterans do every month.

    In Sweden, over 85% of prescriptions are transferred from doctor to pharmacy online.

    Here in the UK we too have some interesting pioneers.

    King’s College Hospital, for example, is on track to become fully paperless by the end of this year.

    The drive comes from the clinicians who demand to have the right information in the right place at the right time.  They’ve introduced electronic prescribing, and nurses use an iPod Touch to record and monitor a patient’s vital signs at the bedside.

    Maudsley Hospital’s ‘MyHealthLocker’, gives their patients online access to their hospital and GP records, a world’s first in mental health.  They can also feed back on their care plan, helping them to take control of their own healthcare.

    And Newham University Hospital is piloting using Skype for diabetic outpatient appointments that don’t require an examination.

    Missed appointments are down by 11%, patients don’t have to travel and the quality of care is improved.

    But today I want to argue that we need to go much further, much faster.

    So today I am setting a new ambition for the NHS.

    I want it to become paperless by 2018. The most modern digital health service in the world.

    Patients will be at the heart of this change – which means allowing for those unable or unwilling to engage in technology.

    But between the NHS and social care, there must be total commitment to ensuring that interaction is paperless, and that, with a patient’s consent, their full medical history can follow them around the system seamlessly.

    Challenges

    This will be a profound change with huge impact, impossible to underestimate. And with profound change come profound challenges.

    First, unsurprisingly, is money.

    If Labour failed to do this with their billions, how can we hope to do it on a much more limited budget?

    We shouldn’t forget that local hospitals and local GP practices spend their own money on technology all the time.  We just need a much more ambitious vision as to how to make that money and that investment count.

    Every NHS organisation, including all 266 NHS trusts, has a major incentive to do this because the savings are so enormous – £4.4 billion annually according to today’s PWC report – that money, released to spend on better care, can go a long way towards helping them deliver health services sustainably in a time of real financial pressure.

    Second, there is the objection that this should not be a priority because we want nurses talking to patients not looking at iPads.

    But how many times do we see a nurse station in a ward with nurses unable to catch your eye because their heads are buried in paperwork?  Proper investment in technology means more contact time with patients – which is why the Prime Minister announced a £100m fund to help nurses take advantage of it.

    Then there is the objection that patients don’t want technology. It’s true that only 3% of people book GP appointments online.  But 29% say they want to.

    Before online banking became available, were customers marching in the streets, demanding that banks put their accounts online?  Of course not.  But that didn’t stop people going online in droves – with 80% of us, including a third of pensioners, now banking online .  Never let it be said that this is only something of interest to younger generations.

    Then there is the critical issue of data security, which Fiona Caldicott is reviewing right now. Clearly we need protocols so that people can be comfortable that their data is only being accessed when necessary and with their permission.

    But if the banks can make people confident that their money is safe, we must surely be able to develop a system that keeps medical records safe too.

    Then there is the importance of the doctor-patient relationship.  There will be many times when only a face-to-face meeting will do.

    But allowing repeat prescriptions to be booked online will free up much more time for such meetings, as well as offering a better and more convenient service for patients.

    Finally, people say that we’ve been here before.  That Labour tried it and failed. The truth is that Labour had the right idea but the wrong approach.

    Labour’s Connecting for Health became the NHS equivalent of ordering an aircraft carrier. A project that became over-centralised, over-specified and ultimately impossible to deliver.

    What works – and you can see this everywhere – is local solutions, local decisions and local leadership.

    Most systems won’t necessarily need to be replaced, just updated or adapted so they can talk with each other.  A thousand different local solutions linking together using common standards.

    If this sounds incredibly complex, it’s actually very  commonplace.  It’s why your Blackberry can talk to my iPhone. It’s why all of those apps on our phones integrate so seamlessly.  It’s why you can use any computer, phone or tablet and log on to the internet to catch up on the latest news or watch a video on YouTube.

    Things don’t have to be the same.  They just have to be compatible.

    Why do it

    Today’s report by PWC confirms what we already know.  That the right sort of technology, used in the right way, can release billions of pounds to be re-invested in better, safer care – and millions of hours of staff time for better patient care.

    And it can do something else too.

    Over a million people have some form of contact with the NHS every 36 hours and have done so for over 60 years.  This produces mind-boggling amounts of data that, if properly utilised with the right safeguards, can help improve treatments, unlock new cures and transform the face of modern health and social care.

    The challenge

    The stakes are high.  But already we have made real progress in preparing the NHS for a paperless, digital future.

    In November, I announced in the NHS Mandate that by March 2015 everyone who wants it will be able to get online access to their GP record, as well as book appointments with their GP and order repeat prescriptions online.

    E-consultations, like those in Newham, will also become much more widely available.

    Today I can confirm that the NHS Commissioning Board have agreed that hospitals should be able to share digital data from April 2014, and to adopt paperless referrals from April 2015.  It is currently working on detailed guidance to help local NHS organisations make the leap.

    This follows on from other recent steps:

    Changing the standard NHS contract to insist that providers comply with defined information standards.

    Setting up ‘care.data’, a service to give local commissioners timely and accurate information on the performance of providers.

    From this summer, we’ll begin to publish huge amounts of clinical data on a wide range of surgical procedures, everything from vascular surgery to bariatric surgery.  Bringing unprecedented transparency to great swathes of NHS performance.

    And to drive all of this, from 2013/14, the NHS number will become a patient’s primary means of identification within the health and care system, enabling all of their records, wherever they are held to combine around the individual person.

    Conclusion

    So, to conclude, technology is not a holy grail or a silver bullet for all the challenges facing the NHS.  It must always be a means to an end and not an end in itself.

    But properly adopted, it has the potential to play a central role in facing up to the core challenge of dealing with an ageing society in which patients insist on a more personalised service.

    As Bill Gates said, “Never before in history has innovation offered promise of so much to so many in so short a time”.

    Well, health needs to be at the front of the queue in taking advantage of that promise – and I am determined it will be.

    Thank you.

  • Jeremy Hunt – 2012 Speech to the King’s Fund

    jeremyhunt

    Below is the text of the speech made by the Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt, to the King’s Fund on 28th November 2012.

    Our health and social care system faces many challenges and we rightly have lively political debates about all aspects of health policy.

    But sometimes problems are so deep-seated that when they surface no one really believes they can be solved. Or even worse, we stop noticing these problems because they have become so much part of the fabric.

    And then you have to defeat the defeatism as well as dealing with the issue itself.

    1. The normalisation of cruelty

    Today I want to talk about one such problem, perhaps the biggest problem of all facing the NHS.

    The crisis in standards of care that exist in parts of the health and social care system.

    Just look at what has come to light in the last few years:

    • Patients left to lie in their own excrement in Stafford Hospital, with members of the public taking soiled sheets home to wash because they didn’t believe the hospital would do it.

    • The man with dementia who was supposed to be monitored every 15 minutes who managed to leave a Pontypool hospital and drown;

    • The residents kicked, punched, humiliated, dragged by their hair, forced through cold showers at Winterbourne View.

    • The elderly woman with dementia repeatedly punched and slapped at Ash Court care home.

    • The cancer patient at St George’s, Tooting, who lost a third of his body fluid, desperately ringing the police for help, because staff didn’t listen or check his medical records.

    Isolated incidents? Well, sadly not. But as well as the depressing regularity of these stories, the most worrying thing is the fact that in certain institutions this kind of care seems to have  become “normal.”

    In places that should be devoted to patients, where compassion should be uppermost, we find its very opposite: a coldness, resentment, indifference, even contempt.

    Go deeper, and look at the worst cases – like Mid-Staffs and Winterbourne View – then there is something even darker. A kind of normalisation of cruelty, where the unacceptable is legitimised and the callous becomes mundane.

    There’s a simple test every layer of the health and social care system should be applying. And that is to ask: is this the care I would wish for myself, or for a loved-one?

    Care as you would wish to be cared for. In Winterbourne, in mid-Staffs, in Pontypool, Tooting, Ash Court, this principle was utterly and horribly abandoned.

    2. Betrayal of the majority

    It’s really important to stress that this is not the picture in most of the NHS or social care system. But the outstanding care that you see in so many institutions – even those under severe financial pressure  – shows why we must face these cases with anger, and not with resignation.

    Because they betray the outstanding men and woman who have given their lives to the NHS and caring professions – and who make this job for me the biggest privilege of my life.

    People like the nurse I met at St Thomas’ who was looking after a terminally-ill patient who had lost touch with his family 20 years earlier. This nurse looked the family up on Google and arranged to fly the patient back to Ireland so he could spend his last two weeks reunited with them.

    The Care Home Manager at Rathmore House in Swiss Cottage, caring for people with advanced dementia.  The manager who lives every day just to try to get a smile out of patients with advanced dementia even though, she says, they won’t remember the next day.

    The GP who works 15 hour days trying to work out care plans to stop her frail elderly patients being unnecessarily admitted to A & E.

    So many people represent NHS values at their finest. In every fibre of their body, they care as they’d wish to be cared for. And they are the ones most let down when we fail to tackle poor care head on.

    3. Why good care matters

    Nor should we make a false dichotomy between good treatment and good care. The King’s Fund, generously hosting us today,  has always championed a rigorous evidence-based approach to healthcare issues. They know good care directly supports good outcomes.

    Veena Raleigh’s work for the Kings Fund this month showed the link between good care and good outcomes across GP practices, what she described as a “strong association” between patient satisfaction and clinical performance on the Quality and Outcomes Framework.

    Consistent with this, a Lancet study in 2001 concluded that doctors who adopt a warm, friendly, and reassuring manner are more effective than those who don’t.

    And the Commission on Improving Dignity in Care has shown that when elderly people are not treated with compassion and respect this can affect their recovery, even if the clinical treatment itself is excellent.

    The argument is clear: good care means healthier patients and stronger balance sheets – yet too often the message isn’t hitting home.

    4. Stronger accountability from managers

    So what are the solutions?

    Let’s start at the top. We urgently need to strengthen corporate and managerial accountability for the care provided.

    Yet too often managers have seen their priority as financial or clinical outputs. Incentives in the system have driven people to focus on quantitative input measures rather than the basic human right to be looked after with dignity and respect.

    Most managers get this – indeed their passion for the highest standards of care is why they have chosen to become managers in the NHS or care sector. But too many do not. Buried in spreadsheets, they become blind to the realities of what’s happening day-on-day inside their organisations.

    It’s this whole culture of ticking the box, but missing the point which is what we have to put right.

    And we have to be much clearer about the consequences that will follow if leaders fail to lead, and fail to drive high quality care throughout the organisation.

    Just as a manager wouldn’t expect to keep their job if they lost control of finances, why should they if they lose control of care?

    The same is true for owners and Boards of companies. Accountability must stretch to the top. And when we publish our response to Winterbourne View we will set out in detail how we intend to achieve this.

    5. Greater transparency

    Secondly, we need to know much more quickly where the problems are.

    Next year we will roll out the “friends and family” test across the NHS. For the first time hospital users will be asked if they would recommend the care they received to a friend or close member of their family. NHS staff will also continue to be asked anonymously whether they would recommend their organisation to their own families.

    This is the closest measure we can get to “care as you would wish to be cared for”. And we will publish the results.

    So that’s a very important first step. But we need to do much more.

    As an MP I know how well each school in my constituency is doing thanks to independent and thorough Ofsted inspections. But I do not know the same about hospitals and care homes.

    Given the scale of the problems we’re uncovering, it’s now clear we need to have a proper independent ratings system.  It is not acceptable to deprive the public of the vital information they need, or remove the pressure for constant, relentless improvement in standards.

    I am not advocating a return to the old ‘star ratings’ but the principle that there should be an easy to understand, independent and expert assessment of how well somewhere is doing relative to its peers must be right.

    So this week I have asked for an independent study to be done as to how this might be achieved in a way that does not increase  bureaucracy.

    I want to see a system that will provide – like Ofsted does for schools – clear, simple results that patients and the public can understand;

    That will be – like Ofsted – an engine for improvement, driving organisations to excel rather than just cover the basics;

    A system that gives greater certainty that poor care gets spotted and addressed before standards collapse.

    When I receive the results of that study, I will consider it carefully alongside the Mid Staffs report from Robert Francis. I will then announce to Parliament how we intend to resolve this issue.

    6. Better training

    The final and equally important side to all of this is staff development. The King’s Fund and many others have shown that staff who feel engaged and valued in an open and supportive working environment deliver better care and support for patients.

    And yet in these highly charged, busy, stressful environments, too many are left ‘not waving but drowning’, cut adrift from the help they need to do their jobs well.

    And again the consequences can be profound. One well-respected study from 2006 found that hospitals with better supported staff provided better care and had lower mortality rates.

    An incredibly powerful finding, which shows that a lack of staff support, ultimately impacts on patients’ survival chances.

    Staff in healthy organisational cultures, given the space to process the difficult emotions that caring throws up, will provide better, safer care.

    So what is in train to support them?

    New standards for senior managers issued by the Council for Healthcare Regulatory Excellence – echoing the need for respect, compassion and care for patients at the heart of leadership and governance.

    A leadership qualities framework for adult social care published by my department which will do a similar job for care organisations

    Next week, we have the launch of the new Vision for Nurses, midwives and care staff following the £40m in leadership development programmes for nurses, midwives and registered care home managers announced by the Prime Minister in October.

    Next month – the establishment of the Professional Standards Authority to make sure the professional regulators do their jobs and protect the public effectively; and the beginning of a new era of medical revalidation, making our systems the best in the world for supporting doctors and ensuring standards;

    And then early next year – the first ever national set of standards and a code of conduct of conduct for health and social care support workers are published.

    All of this is underpinned by:

    an NHS Mandate explicitly saying quality of care should get the same attention as quality of treatment, and emphasising the pledges to staff in the NHS Constitution

    And a new organisation – Health Education England – entirely focused on the education, training and development of the health workforce.

    7. Addressing the challenges

    So a lot is happening. Of course there will be those looking at this and saying “Can we really do it?”; “Is it realistic to expect organisations to invest more in people and in the quality of care at a time when money is so tight?”

    There are indeed financial pressures in a period of rising demand and flat budgets.  But as the CQC said last week, most Trusts and care homes deliver excellent care despite a tough financial environment. So there is absolutely no excuse for those that do not.

    But it is also wrong to equate better care with more money. More accurate would be to say what today’s Kings Fund report states plainly: it is bad care that costs more – including the £1.4 billion spent on unnecessary emergency admissions.

    What about staffing levels and in particular the reduction in nursing numbers?

    As people stay in hospital for shorter periods, and indeed 80% of hospital appointments now do not involve an overnight stay, patterns of care change.

    But if quality of care is really to be as important as quality of treatment we should be clear that changes to workforce numbers must not compromise the care provided.

    8. Conclusion: widening the circle of compassion

    In surveying the broad sweep of the universe, Einstein once spoke of people shedding their individual perspectives and ‘widening the circle of compassion’ if humanity was to progress.

    In the health and social care universe, which can be every bit as unpredictable and complex as the world around it, the same message rings true.

    In its sixty-fifth year, pitted against its biggest ever challenges, we need an NHS that is always searching, always improving, always striving to do more for patients.

    We take for granted improvements in medicine, in surgery, indeed in life expectancy. But none of this is real progress unless we are also treating our citizens with the dignity and respect they deserve.

    Widening the circle of compassion. Denormalising the unacceptable in those rarer cases. And living the principle of care as you would wish to be cared for everywhere.

    The founding ideals of the NHS expect no less.

  • Jeremy Hunt – 2012 Speech to NCAS

    jeremyhunt

    Below is the text of a speech made by the Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt, to NCAS on 25th October 2012.

    Thank you Sarah [Pickup, President of ADASS].

    The importance of local authorities

    I think it’s appropriate that the very first speech I give as Health Secretary – the first beyond the confines of the Conservative Party conference – is not to an audience of doctors or nurses, but to local authorities.

    The word I have heard more often than perhaps any other in my first month is “integration.” Our National Health Service is an extraordinary organisation of which we are all deeply proud.  But by itself, it’s not enough.

    And given the challenges of an ageing population, our single most important partner is without question local authorities. The success or failure of health and care very simply rests on the success or failure of my relationship with you – and in particular the progress we make together towards building a sustainable system.

    Dilnot

    So before I go any further, let me talk about funding.

    How we pay for social care – both as a government and as individuals – is one of the big questions of our generation.

    The current system is entirely inadequate.

    It’s not sufficient, it’s not sustainable and it can be deeply painful for many, many people.

    Forcing them to sell the home they have lived in, had children in, made so many memories in.  It’s one of the worst things about being old in this country.

    So I am so proud that next year’s Care and Support Bill will introduce deferred payments meaning that no one is forced to sell their home in their lifetime to pay for care.

    A historic change.  But we need to go further in three areas in particular.

    Firstly the Dilnot cap, which we strongly support and are committed to introducing as soon as we are financially able. We need to build a society where it is as normal to make provision for your social care as it is for your pension – and until we do so we will never have a truly sustainable system.

    Secondly by working with you to help you deal with the huge pressures created by the cuts in your budgets that have come at a time of rising demand. The support for adult social care budgets that has come through the Department of Health – over £7 billion in this spending review period – is a mark of our commitment. But I recognise that for many councils significant efficiency savings will be needed on top of that.

    So we need to do something else, a third vital step. Which is to forge innovative partnerships between local councils and local NHS services that build more sustainable services to keep people healthy and in their own homes for longer. The new structures of the Health and Social Care Act, with clinically-led CCGs, local authority responsibility for public health and health and well-being boards, will provide the catalyst to make that happen – and it will have my enthusiastic support.

    20th century health

    When we look back over the last hundred years or so, this country has made incredible progress in health.

    From the start of the 20th century to the early years of the 21st, life expectancy has basically doubled.

    The causes are many.

    One, certainly, is our NHS.  But it is far from the only one.

    Better housing, clean water and sanitation, better working conditions, food quality standards, even road safety – all had a huge impact.

    And you have played a key role in every one of them.

    But there are more gains to be had, through:

    •    Better, more appropriate housing,

    •    By health and wellbeing becoming an integral part of planning, of transport and of education,

    •    By being better at reaching the poorest, the most vulnerable and the hardest to reach in our communities.

    Integration

    Now, the last couple of years have inevitably been dominated by a debate on structures.

    But structures are only a means to an end.  What really matters is better health and care outcomes.

    And for that we need a culture of cooperation across health and social care, with a person’s individual needs at its heart.

    The old structures simply haven’t worked well enough.

    •    GP practices not talking to hospitals.

    •    Hospitals not talking to each other.

    •    And the divide between the NHS and local authorities sometimes beggaring belief.

    This lack of openness, of communication, of trust… means that too many people simply fall between the cracks.

    All too often those with the loudest voices and the sharpest elbows – or at least those who have parents or children who have them – get the best treatment.

    Of course, we can point to examples of excellent, integrated care.

    Like Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council, which, with the local NHS, now provides free leisure facilities for everybody – that’s right, for everybody.

    The result?  The number of people doing the recommended amount of exercise has gone up by almost half [up 46% from 16.3% to 23.8%].

    And in Liverpool, where by bringing NHS staff together with social workers in integrated care teams, they have been able to cut unplanned hospital admissions and length of stay in hospital by a quarter.

    Good things happen when the NHS and councils come together.

    But where this happens, it happens despite the system, not because of it.

    You can’t design care around, say, a child with cystic fibrosis or a woman with breast cancer –her chemo- and radiotherapy, her drugs, her nursing visits, her social care, her mental health – if there is no meaningful contact between her GP, her consultant team, her local authority and her social care provider.

    That’s the great opportunity presented by Health and Wellbeing Boards and by Healthwatch, both of which go live in April.

    Bringing people together to improve the health of their community and the quality of care within it.

    Looking at the needs of local communities and working out how to meet those needs.

    Figuring out how to work together – councils, NHS, providers and the public.

    But also making sure that Health and Wellbeing Boards do not become ‘just another committee’.

    The work has already begun.  And I want to thank all of you who are involved making this happen.

    NHS number

    And while I’m on the subject of integration, can I give a plug for the NHS number? We have long spoken about using people’s NHS number to join up their records across health and social care. So I have a challenge for you.  If your council is not using the NHS number, please find out what needs to happen for it to be adopted.  It will be at the heart of the data exchange necessary for effective integration to be a reality

    Priorities

    As Health Secretary, I have been very clear about my four key priorities.

    •    Giving Britain some of the best survival rates in Europe for the big killer diseases: cancer, stroke, heart, liver and respiratory disease.

    •    Building a health and care system where quality of care is as important as quality of treatment.

    •    Dramatically improving the care for people living with long-term conditions like diabetes, asthma or arthritis – who currently account for more than half of GP appointments and nearly ¾ of hospital admissions.

    •    And transforming our care for people dementia so we become one of the best countries in Europe to grow old.

    Let me talk about the last one.

    A million people will have dementia by 2020. It already affects one in three over 65s.

    But shockingly our system diagnoses less than half the people who have it, even when access to good drugs can help stave off the condition for several years.

    There are some great examples of excellent dementia care.

    Like Manchester City Council’s Shore Green Extra Care Housing Scheme.  There, they use technology and modern building design to reduce the impact of people’s dementia and memory loss.

    Or the Meri Yaadain project in Bradford, raising awareness of dementia among the South Asian community.

    Or Hampshire County Council working with businesses and others alongside the Alzheimer’s Society and Andover Mind to help them become more dementia friendly.

    Dementia Compact

    Earlier this year, we launched a Dementia Care and Support Compact.  An agreement – a commitment – by social care providers to deliver first rate care and support for people with dementia and their families.

    In March, when we launched, 10 organisations joined up.  Today, we have 42, covering some eighteen hundred services across the country.

    If you’re from a provider that cares for those with dementia – and if you haven’t yet heeded the call – please consider signing up.

    That’s not an order.  It’s a heart felt request.  Because by making dementia care a priority, you will doing perhaps the single biggest thing that can transform the care of older people for whom you are responsible.

    Just as I am asking the NHS to do, I ask all of you all to look at how you operate, at how you behave.  To be inspired by new ideas and to ask yourselves what more you could do.  And then to make that change happen.

    Scandal of poor care

    Because the need for change is urgent.

    The best dementia care in England is exemplary.  But the worst is nothing short of scandalous.

    We’ve all seen the reports – of people with dementia being criminally abused by their care-workers or drugged-up with a chemical cosh just so a care-assistant can get a good night’s sleep.

    These may be extreme, isolated events but they do highlight a culture where those with dementia are not getting the dignity and respect they deserve.

    The Prime Minister’s Challenge on Dementia sets out an ambitious plan to build a dementia-friendly society.

    Yes, to invest in research and better treatment.  But more than that.

    •    to end the stigma of dementia.

    •    for people to feel comfortable talking to their GP if they think they have symptoms.

    •    for people to feel in control of their condition.

    •    for people with dementia to lead as near a normal life for as long as they can.

    •    for those who care for them to feel supported and confident.

    •    In short, for our communities to become dementia-friendly.

    If we are to succeed, local authorities must take the lead.

    And we will make sure we will give you every possible support.

    Dementia friendly environments

    So today I can announce that we are making £50 million available to support you and your NHS colleagues to create dementia friendly environments.

    Carers tell us time and again that when it comes to hospitals, care homes, or other settings, it’s often small things – whether clear signage, light and airy rooms or good handrails – that make a big difference.  Whilst you could say that this is not a huge sum of money relative to the scale of the challenge, if it helps make some of the small things better it will be transformational.

    Conclusion

    Finally let me mention the one missing ingredient that will make the difference between success and failure.

    Because it isn’t just about money or structures.

    Most important of all is leadership.

    Dementia friendly communities, better public health outcomes, deep and meaningful integration of NHS and social care services – none of this can happen without leadership.

    Your leadership.

    You are the ones who will make Health and Wellbeing Boards hot-beds of new ideas.

    You are the ones who will work with your colleagues in the NHS to drive change.

    You are the ones who will lead the charge on public health.

    You are the ones who will ensure that people can lead a full and independent life, supported and cared for with humanity, dignity and respect.

    You will make the difference.

    I will play my part.  But real success will come from inspired local leadership. And I want to support you every step of the way.

    Thank you.

  • Jeremy Hunt – 2011 Speech on School Games

    jeremyhunt

    Below is the text of a speech made by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Jeremy Hunt, at Telford Sport College Conference on 9th February 2011.

    Introduction

    I must admit to being somewhat terrified standing before you.

    I went to a sport-mad school. Sport was compulsory. And I was absolutely useless at it.

    I never made a first XI or a first XV. In fact like many people who showed little promise, I was banished to the cross-country running team.

    And then something strange happened.

    We had an annual whole school cross-country race, divided into a senior and junior course. My birthday is in November and all my classmates with earlier birthdays were promoted to the senior school race, with just me left behind.

    And to the total astonishment of everyone in the school, including me, I won the junior school race.

    That was the high point of my sporting career.

    But looking back on it, it was also a defining moment of my school career. Because the experience of unexpectedly winning a race transformed my confidence and in many ways turned me into a different person.

    For better or worse, I doubt I would be standing here today had I not won that race.

    Paying tribute

    So let me start by saying this: thanks to your work, thousands of young people up and down the country are having similar experiences.

    On their behalf I want to thank each and every one of you.

    There was yet another reminder of the power of sport a few weeks ago, when Newsround asked young people to nominate their favourite role models and post them online.

    You can probably guess some of the names that came up – Cheryl Cole, Justin Bieber, Emma Watson – but there were two things that I found striking.

    First, the number of children who chose sporting role models – people like David Beckham, Rebecca Adlington, and Tom Daley – and who talked about how much they admired them for their dedication and hard work.

    Second, the number of children who nominated not celebrities but the people who support and inspire them every day: their teachers, headteachers, and coaches – exactly those roles that many of you perform or inspire others to perform.

    Embedding progress

    But in thanking you, I also want to recognise that the last few months have been extremely challenging.

    I don’t want to rake over the coals of the debate we had in the autumn. Suffice it to say it has been an incredibly testing period across the whole of government as we seek to put our finances on a sustainable footing.

    I want to thank Sue Campbell and Steve Grainger in particular for their powerful advocacy of the work you do.

    Their enthusiasm and passion for school sport has been vital in helping us to create a structure that will retain and build on the best of what we have now.

    Not without change. Not without improvement. Not without having to live with fewer resources.

    But – yes please – with the extraordinary commitment and dedication so many of you have shown over many years towards getting more children and young people to play competitive sport.

    The package we have in place will put £47 million from this year’s sport budget towards helping you to embed the best elements of your work and secure staff roles to the end of the summer term.

    Even at a moment when he is actively looking to slim down other compulsory obligations on schools, Michael Gove has confirmed that PE will remain a core part of the National Curriculum.

    And over a transitional period of the next two academic years, £65 million of funding from his department will allow secondary schools to release a PE teacher for one day a week – to help organise competitive sport in primary schools and foster good practice.

    Meanwhile, the Department of Health will provide up to £6.4 million to secure the future of Change4Life Sports Clubs in secondary schools.

    And to extend this model into primary schools – creating further opportunities for those children who are the least active.

    At the same time, funding from my Department and from the Lottery will allow the establishment of a new nationwide School Games – opening up massive new opportunities for thousands of young people to take part in competitive sport.

    And now there is new funding available – from the Department of Health and Sport England – which will pay for hundreds of new School Games Organisers working three days a week – or more if schools view this as a priority and are able to increase that funding.

    Their role will be to help as many schools as possible sign up to the School Games.

    They’ll help you to set up intra- and inter-school competitions – making sure that the links are there to Change4Life clubs and sports clubs, that there is a range of sports that all can enjoy, and that those children turned off by sport are turned on to it.

    I hope and expect that many current competition and partnership development managers will consider taking on these roles.

    And because you need to have clarity on this as soon as possible, we will announce more details on the funding mechanisms for these posts in the very near future.

    Delivering broader benefits

    Why do we value school sport? Let me give you my top five reasons.

    Firstly because regularly taking part in physical activity brings huge benefits in terms of health and wellbeing.

    Secondly because with more than 1 in 7 children classed as obese, sport is a vital part of the drive against childhood obesity.

    Thirdly because participation in sport has been proven to reduce the chances that at-risk teenagers will commit anti-social behaviour.

    Fourthly because organised physical activity helps to boost concentration and feeds through directly into improved academic performance.

    And last but not least because competitive sport in particular prepares people for life in a way that little else comes close to.

    It helps young people develop confidence, the inner confidence that comes from stretching yourself to the limit and achieving what you never thought possible.

    It teaches you teamwork and the notion of an identity that extends beyond ourselves as individuals.

    And it teaches you to win with grace, yes, but also to lose with dignity. And in today’s highly competitive world, learning to lose is equally as important as learning to win.

    Shakespeare said: “Sweet are the uses of adversity.” But I never forget Churchill who said that “success is the ability to go from failure to failure without losing your enthusiasm”.

    Quite a useful saying for politicians to memorise…

    The ‘School Games’

    It was the founder of the modern Olympics, Pierre de Coubertin, who said: “The important thing in life is not the victory but the contest; the essential thing is not to have won but to have fought well”.

    And it will be our new School Games tournament – inspired by the London 2012 Olympics and Paralympics – that will be at the heart of our new approach to competitive sport.

    Of course, we are not starting from scratch. Thanks to you, there are already plenty of great examples of strong, well-developed competitions for children and young people.

    Not least the UK School Games – where I enjoyed meeting many of you in Gateshead last year.

    We want to build on this success rather than replicate it, and to do so in a way that allows every child the chance to take part, compete, and discover their hidden talents.

    We want to do it with a new tournament that will help drive up interest in competitive sport right where it matters most – within schools themselves.

    And we want to set this up in time for the Olympic and Paralympic Games as a key part of the sporting legacy they will leave behind.

    Because this is not about a one-off event in 2012, but about what happens each and every year from now on.

    Starting this academic year, all schools will have the chance to hold an annual School Games Day – the culmination of a broad-ranging programme of intra-school competition.

    We expect around 500 schools to pilot a School Games Day this year, with a national roll-out in time for 2012.

    And our goal is that these will be different – and better – than current school sports days.

    Indeed our ambitions for the School Games are so high that some schools may not initially be willing to make the commitment to be part of them.

    But let me give you three specific ways in which we want them to be a transformational shift:

    Firstly we want each School Games Day not to be a “one off” event, but the finals of a broader programme of competitive intra-school sport taking place throughout the school year.

    Secondly, drawing on the inspiration of the 2012 Paralympics, we want to make sure that this is a scheme that will offer disabled children as many opportunities as non-disabled children.

    And thirdly, drawing on the nationwide festival of culture that will accompany London 2012, we want every School Games to have a cultural element.

    Opening and closing ceremonies, for example, that could involve the school band or orchestra.

    At the next level – what we call Level 2 – there will be a rolling programme of leagues and tournaments promoting more competition between schools at a town or district level.

    As a former Shadow Minister for Disabled People, I am very proud of the fact that, for many areas, this will be the first time there has been an inter-school Paralympic-style competition in their area.

    I had a chance to discuss this with some of you last night, and I was enormously impressed by your commitment to seizing this opportunity to take a huge step forward for the disability agenda.

    From there, the most successful children and young people will progress to Level 3:

    Up to 60 new, county or city-level ‘Festivals of Sport’ that will showcase the best of local competitive sport in the inter-school finals.

    We will be piloting this in nine regions this summer: London, Manchester, and Lincolnshire, North Yorkshire, Cornwall and the Black Country, Hertfordshire, Kent and Tyne and Wear.

    Finally – at level 4 – the most talented young sports people will have the chance to represent their schools in a high-profile, national event.

    In the long term, this event will take place in September.

    But next year we want to offer these young sports people the chance to compete in the brand new Olympic Park – even ahead of the athletes themselves.

    That’s why the first national final will take place in May – precisely the moment when we can give your efforts the highest profile in the run up to the opening ceremony on July 27th.

    By doing this we can create a direct link between the achievements of our most promising young athletes at the School Games and the achievements of Team GB in the Olympics and Paralympics.

    And use their example to inspire all schoolchildren with the excitement and benefits of competitive sport.

    I look forward to working together to create a fantastic legacy for young people through the School Games.

  • Chris Huhne – 2012 Speech to the Royal Society

    chrishuhne

    Below is the speech made by the then Energy Secretary, Chris Huhne, to the Royal Society on 1st January 2012.

    Thank you. I’m delighted to be here today.

    It’s a great honour to address the world’s foremost scientific institution.

    John Dalton, Ernest Rutherford, James Chadwick.

    Without these distinguished Fellows of the Royal Society, the secrets of nuclear energy would have remained hidden for longer.

    So today’s subject is fitting. And I want to thank everyone involved with producing the Society’s report on fuel cycle stewardship.

    One of the clearest lessons from the history of nuclear energy is that government, industry and science work best when they work together.

    A scientific adviser must speak truth to democratic power without fear. In my view, it makes sense if democratic power then listens.

    It is in that spirit that I want to take an open and honest look at the history of nuclear power in Britain.

    If we are to retain public support for nuclear as a key part of our future energy mix, as I believe we should, then we have to show that we have learned the lessons from our past mistakes.

    And some of those mistakes were not small. Nuclear policy is a runner to be the most expensive failure of post-war British policy-making, and I am aware that this is a crowded and highly-contested field.

    We currently have around 6,900 cubic metres of high-level nuclear waste. That’s about enough to fill three Olympic swimming pools. We have enough intermediate-level waste to fill a supertanker, and a lot more low-level waste.

    We manage the world’s largest plutonium stocks – more than a hundred tonnes – and they will need guarding for as long as it takes us to convert it and build long-term deep storage. And if we don’t, we will have to guard it for tens of thousands of years.

    Half of my department’s budget goes in cleaning up this mess, and it will rise to two thirds next year. That is £2 billion a year, year in and year out, that we are continuing to pay for electricity that was consumed in the fifties, sixties and seventies on a false prospectus.

    Yet the total nuclear liabilities that the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority now deal with are estimated to be £49 billion, and I cannot be confident that the figure will not rise again as we discover yet more problems.

    Just look at the history of rose-tinted spectacles: the provisions for nuclear decommissioning costs in total were £2 million in 1970. £472 million in 1980. £9.5 billion in 1990. £22.5 billion in 2000. And now £53.7 billion.

    It seems to me essential reassurance to tax-payers and energy consumers that I and my successors can honestly say “This will never happen again”.

    Despite this history, I believe that nuclear electricity can and should play a part in our energy future provided that new nuclear is built without public subsidy. And it is precisely because of that post-dated bill from past nuclear mistakes that I reiterate with exceptional feeling “without public subsidy”.

    The reason is the same as so many other environmentally-minded people now give. Nuclear energy has risks, but we face the greater risk of accelerating climate change if we do not embark on another generation of nuclear power. Time is running out. Nuclear can be a vital and affordable means of providing low carbon electricity.

    In tough times, I am acutely aware of the stresses and strains on household budgets, and I want British electricity consumers to have the best possible deal.

    Of the three large scale low carbon technologies, the costs estimated by Arup are as follows. Offshore wind is assessed at £130 per megawatt hour, gas with carbon capture at £95 per megawatt hour, and nuclear at £66 per megawatt hour. These figures take account of waste and decommissioning costs, so nuclear should still be the cheapest low carbon source of electricity.

    And costs matter when a quarter of our power plants will close by the end of the decade.

    By 2023, all but one of our current fleet of reactors are scheduled to close, taking with them nearly 18 per cent of our electricity supply. We have to find 20 gigawatts of generating capacity and £110 billion of investment in the electricity market. That replacement cycle is double the normal level of energy investment.

    Gas is an option, even for the long term, with carbon capture and storage. But fossil fuel price volatility has increased, and world gas prices have risen by a 29 per cent in a year. It is surely not in our national interest to rely even more heavily than necessary on fossil fuels from volatile parts of the world.

    Renewables are a family of technologies which will last forever, with less environmental impact. They should be a growing part of our supply, as they are in other countries. But thanks to decades of under-investment by previous governments, the technologies are still relatively young. Uncertainties on some really promising technologies like wave and tidal stream are still considerable, and costs remain high.

    Nuclear too has uncertainties, as the cancellation of new programmes in Japan and Italy and the phase out of existing reactors in Germany all show.

    Our examination of the lessons of Fukushima from Dr Mike Weightman is reassuring about our regulatory regime and about safety, but the economics of new nuclear are still untested. The industry still has to prove that it can build these enormous investments on time and to budget.

    For all these reasons, our approach is to bring forward a broad portfolio of low carbon technologies: renewables, carbon capture and nuclear. It is the only sensible way to handle risk, as we all know when we run our own pension funds.

    However attractive one share may look today, it is rash to put all your money into just one stock. Governments should not bet the farm.

    The past

    So with my eyes open, and with a nervous look at the past, I say that we need nuclear to be a part of our energy mix in the future.

    But it is essential to learn from that past. As George J. Stigler said, history is a good teacher but there are inattentive pupils.

    So today, I want to look at Britain’s nuclear past to draw out those lessons.

    In many ways, Britain is the birthplace of nuclear energy. Like many first-time parents, we tried everything and we did so with enthusiasm.

    The world’s first commercial nuclear power station, Calder Hall in Cumbria, closed in 2003. It was opened by Her Majesty the Queen nearly half a century earlier.

    Life was very different in 1956, when Calder Hall was switched on.

    Rationing had only just ended. There were no motorways. Sputnik was but a sketch on a drawing board. Lasers and cash machines were still years away.

    The industry was in its formative years. Our attitudes to risk were different. The environment was not yet a subject of public concern.

    When Calder Hall opened, a Health Minister rejected calls for a government campaign against smoking. Seat belts were optional extras on a few imported cars.

    And our attitudes to spending were different, too. Britain was still effectively on a wartime footing: and when it came to strategic national decisions, the relationship between government, parliament and the people was still conducted on wartime terms. Secrecy. We know best. Don’t tell those who don’t need to know.

    Following the great smog in London, and the Suez crisis, an independent nuclear programme was held to be important for the nation’s security and prosperity.

    This was the setting in which Britain’s nuclear policy was designed. It was a different time. And decisions taken in the 1950s directly affected the liabilities that we are paying for today.

    Of course, we have been granted the gift of hindsight, and the benefit of reflection.

    As we give the green light to the next generation of nuclear power stations, we must use those precious insights. So let me turn to the lessons we have learned.

    First lesson, simple and clear objectives matter. In the early days, we could not decide between guns and butter.

    Nuclear technology was given the task of delivering two national priorities – energy for the masses, and plutonium for the military – without proper economic or democratic scrutiny. The reactor used at Calder Hall was chosen firstly for plutonium production; electricity generation was a side effect.

    Born out of military requirements but serving civilian needs, the new industry was torn in two directions. Confused objectives led to confused design decisions – and a high legacy cost.

    In the United States, by contrast, there was a competition for the most efficient and safe reactor design to produce electricity. A simple objective with a cost-effective result. The pressurised water reactor.

    The second lesson is avoid conflicts of interest.

    For the first two decades of nuclear energy, the UK Atomic Energy Authority was responsible for both promoting and researching nuclear energy.

    The Government’s official adviser on nuclear policy was an organisation solely devoted to nuclear energy. Gardeners like gardening, researchers want more research, and the UKAEA wanted more nuclear energy using their own designs.

    That meant advice to Ministers was not always impartial. Designs were chosen and delivered without proper oversight. There was no sceptical, commercial eye for either operating or decommissioning costs.

    The third lesson is keep it simple. Such is the extraordinary inventiveness of the British scientific community – to which I pay fulsome tribute here – that all eleven Magnox power stations were built to different specifications. Even their fuel elements were different sizes.

    From an energy policy point of view, we needed several good workaday Marks and Spencer suits. Instead, every reactor was bespoke from Savile Row.

    The second fleet of advanced gas-cooled reactors were built to a design that almost no-one else used. They did not deliver on budget or on time.

    The fourth lesson is that we forgot about our children. About their future.

    The regulatory systems were simply not geared toward long-term protection. In the early days, we didn’t plan for decommissioning or managing radioactive waste. Short-term political or financial decisions were taken, with long-term consequences.

    In other countries, a levy on nuclear power went into special funds to deal with decommissioning. Both France and the United States handled the problems much better than us.

    In the UK, the money was more free-range than ring-fenced. It was tipped into new projects, in the belief that it would be clawed back from asset sales. Too often, we played double or nothing with public cash.

    Which brings me to the fifth issue: we took our eye off the money. The nuclear industry was like a expense account dinner: everybody ordering the most expensive items on the menu, because someone else was paying the bill.

    In the early days of nuclear power, cost-effectiveness was not an issue. Decommissioning estimates were often approximate and greatly understated. We bought in to technological promise without exercising due diligence. When the arguments for technology changed, as they did for reprocessing, we did not subject them to proper scrutiny.

    Only in the late 1980s did reform bring about the end of a centrally directed energy policy. When nuclear power was held up to the cold hard light of the market, it proved to be uneconomic.

    Hidden subsidies and uncertainty over liabilities do not make for an attractive investment environment. Attempted privatisation of existing nuclear plants failed, partly because the true costs of cleaning up were becoming slowly apparent.

    And when waste started piling up, we effectively crossed our fingers and hoped that it would all go away. We did not act decisively, while our spent fuel and waste stocks grew.

    The future

    Never again. Never again. This government is determined not to pay for the present by mortgaging the future. We are determined to do the right thing for the long term.

    On governance, regulation and financing, we must show that we have learned the lessons of the past. We will make provision for future costs now, and pay down our decommissioning debt.

    We will tackle our nuclear legacy. The work on ponds and silos at Sellafield is proceeding as fast as the space and engineering allows: despite our financial situation, there is no financial constraint on dealing with urgent tasks.

    Thanks to the foresight of Patricia Hewitt, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority is managing radioactive waste at 19 sites across the UK. And my Department has just finished consulting on the long-term management of our plutonium stockpiles, and will publish the results shortly.

    Looking to the future, we will prevent a new legacy from building up.

    Operators of new nuclear power stations must have secure financing arrangements in place to meet the full costs of decommissioning, and their full share of waste management and disposal costs.

    They must submit their plans for approval by the Secretary of State, who will receive advice on the financing from an independent Assurance Board. No more Robert Maxwell style plundering of the public piggybank.

    Nor will we fall into the trap of secretly choosing reactor designs. Open competition for the best is our watchword, letting industry and investors assure value for money.

    Competition will make the utilities drive a hard bargain with suppliers. No more cost-plus monopolists who just pass on any increase regardless of the effect on consumers.

    Regulators are currently carrying out a Generic Design Assessment of new nuclear reactor designs.

    A generic assessment means the safety, security and environmental aspects of new reactor designs can be assessed once before applications are made for a whole series of sites. Unlike the old days, when every planning inquiry started from scratch as if another reactor had never been built.

    The National Policy Statements on energy also establish that energy infrastructure is needed, so that too does not have to detain a planning application. The Nuclear policy statement identified eight sites which are suitable for new nuclear power stations by the end of 2025.

    We will also ensure regulation of the industry is transparent, accountable, proportional and consistent. The industry has acquired a terrible reputation for secrecy, fed by unfortunate incidents like the falsification of MOX data. No more unnecessary secrecy. No more cloak and dagger nonsense. The competent need have no fear of openness, and in my experience the new nuclear industry know that this is the only way to win public trust.

    That is why we created the Office for Nuclear Regulation, which is intended to become a new independent statutory body.

    It brings together civil nuclear and radioactive transport safety and security regulation in one place. It will house internationally recognised expertise, and will respond quickly and flexibly to current and future regulatory challenges.

    And finally, we will continue to encourage investment, research and development – and to help build the skills base needed to support nuclear technology here in Britain. On current plans, total investment in new nuclear will reach some £50 billion.

    Each of the reactors planned for the next fleet will deliver investment equivalent to that for the 2012 Olympics. Each plant could create 5,000 construction jobs at peak, and employ a thousand people in operation.

    And by the way, there is even some consolation in our unhappy nuclear history. We are developing some world-beating businesses – with expertise in cleaning up old messes.

    Conclusion

    Nuclear power can play an important future role in our energy security provided there is no public subsidy. We have done everything we can to make sure it is safe, regulated, secure and affordable. Now our partners in the private sector must rise to the challenge and deliver it.

    Yes, that means investing. And it means committing to a culture of openness and public trust. Because although we must keep the lights on and the skies clear, there is a higher responsibility here, too.

    The decisions made in the early days rubbed against the grain of democracy. They left long-term impacts and heaped costs on future generations.

    The decisions we make about energy today will also leave a legacy. Our challenge is to make ensure it is a positive one. No more post-dated bills.

    Let me end like this. Sir Winston Churchill, who was half American, once said that the Americans can always be counted upon to do the right thing, when they have exhausted all the other possibilities.

    I approach a new generation of nuclear energy in the same spirit. On nuclear policy, we have exhausted the possibilities. We have made pretty much every mistake human ingenuity could devise. And boy, are we British inventive.

    We will now do the right thing.

  • Chris Huhne – 2011 Speech to the Liberal Democrat Conference

    chrishuhne

    Below is the speech made by the then Energy Secretary, Chris Huhne, at the 2011 Liberal Democrat Party Conference on 20th September 2011.

    One abiding set of values that all Liberal Democrats share is a respect for our environment, natural systems and sustainability.

    With this conference’s backing, we will hold course to be the greenest government ever.

    No more, no less.

    But are we still on course?

    Well, I can hardly pick up a Tory paper these days without a whinge about energy and climate change policies.

    It’s been nip and tuck between Vince and me in recent months to win an unpopularity poll – that’s on Conservativehome among Tory activists.

    So as we assert Lib Dem values within government, we must be doing something right – or is it Left?

    Personally, I have no doubt that climate change is one of the greatest challenges we face.

    But if you are facing a pay squeeze or even worse a lost job, if your pay packet no longer buys what you need, people understandably put other priorities higher up the scale.

    As always during hard times, every other issue pales into insignificance besides the big issues of earning your living.

    Keeping your job.

    Making ends meet.

    But cutting carbon is not a luxury to be ditched when the going gets tough.

    It is essential to the survival of mankind as a species.

    The science is ever more clear.

    Cutting carbon is also a vital part of our recovery from the deepest recession since 1929.

    Then we had David Lloyd George’s Yellow Book: now we have Green Growth.

    In the thirties, we did not create new jobs by bringing back the textiles, coal and iron jobs that were lost.

    We created new jobs in new industries.

    And the same is happening today.

    Every month, more than 300,000 people leave the unemployment register to find new jobs.

    Thousands of those jobs are now in the low carbon economy. It is our route to recovery. Green business is good business.

    There are now a million jobs in low carbon goods and services in Britain, and they are growing rapidly.

    New jobs in cars, where Nissan will produce the all-electric Leaf at Sunderland with a £5,000 premium for each car from our government.

    New jobs in energy saving, where our Green Deal, launched next October, is set to create 250,000 jobs across the nation, up from 27,000 now.

    With the Green Deal, we are stopping the scandal where we use more energy to heat our homes than in Sweden, despite their icy winters.

    Saving money that can be spent at home on British jobs, not foreign gas.

    And I am proud to announce that our party is putting our principles into practice.

    Every single Liberal Democrat council has now signed up to pioneer the Green Deal.

    New jobs too in renewable energy, where we are determined to be the fastest improving pupil in class – having started from being 25th out of the 27 EU member states.

    Onshore wind farms that are now the cheapest form of renewable electricity.

    Offshore wind farms that are setting the standard for the world.

    New jobs in heating, where our Renewable Heat Incentive is a world-beating first.

    Saving power by drawing heat from the air and the ground.

    And from our woodland, where we use only a tenth of the sustainable timber we could produce.

    New jobs in nuclear too, without a penny of public subsidy.

    And providing that we stick to the strictest safety standards in the world, and learn the lessons of Fukushima.

    And new jobs in coal and gas plants, as we provide them with a long-term future through capturing and storing their carbon.

    All told, energy investment will be £200 billion in the next ten years, double the normal amount as we replace Britain’s ageing power stations.

    Our Electricity Market Reforms will mean three quarters of our electricity comes from low carbon sources by 2030.

    Funded in part by the world’s first Green Investment Bank.

    When people ask where is the demand coming from to power the economic recovery, tell them its clean energy.

    It’s energy saving.

    It’s low carbon transport.

    It’s the new green industrial revolution.

    Now, some people argue that we should not be pushing low carbon business, because no-one else is.

    Nonsense.

    Look at China, with six of the biggest renewable companies in the world.

    Installing wind turbines across the South China Sea.

    Building 28 nuclear power stations in the time it will take us to build one.

    Building 10,000 miles of high speed rail in the time we will take to go from London to Birmingham.

    Covering 40 per cent of the Chinese population with low carbon economy zones.

    If that’s doing nothing, then climate sceptics have a weird idea of zero.

    The real risk is not doing too much.

    It is doing too little.

    And getting left behind.

    Other people argue that we cannot afford to boost the low carbon economy.

    It would be cheaper, they say, to rely only on oil and gas.

    To say it is to laugh at it.

    World gas – and hence electricity – prices have leapt by a third thanks to Libya and far eastern growth.

    Global factors.

    So we should surely try to limit our dependence on oil and gas, not increase it.

    Particularly as our own North Sea resources are running down.

    In the storm-tossed seas we have to sail, low carbon energy gives us security.

    Assurance.

    Safety.

    British energy consumers will on average be better off in 2020 thanks to our low carbon policies. Yes, I said better off.

    Getting off the oil and gas price hook and onto clean, green energy makes sense.

    And with energy saving, we can offset the effects of higher prices and end up with lower bills.

    In one generation, we will go from fossil fuel smokestack to low carbon cash back.

    But there is hardship now, and we are determined to help.

    Higher energy bills hurt.

    None of us should have to save on warmth in a cold winter.

    Some of the most vulnerable and elderly will shiver – and worse- if we do not help.

    That is why this Government is boosting by two-thirds the discounts to help people in fuel poverty.

    Why our Warm Homes Discount is a statutory scheme, not a grace and favour handout relying on energy companies’ good will.

    That is also why this Government will make those in fuel poverty a top priority for the Green Deal, helped by our ECO subsidy.

    Improving people’s homes cuts fuel poverty forever, while a discount only cuts fuel poverty for a year.

    Year after year, fuel poverty rose under Labour.

    Now we are helping the poor where Labour flannelled.

    We are acting where Labour talked.

    We are delivering where Labour failed.

    But it is not just the fuel poor who need help.

    Today I can announce a new package to help the hard-pressed consumer this winter and every winter.

    We are determined to get tough with the big six energy companies to ensure that the consumer gets the best possible deal.

    We want simpler tariffs.

    Requiring energy companies to tell you whether you could buy more cheaply on another tariff.

    And you can save real money.

    Ofgem, the independent regulator, calculates that the average household could save £200 by switching to the lowest cost supplier – but fewer than one in seven households do so.

    Britain privatised the energy companies, but most consumers never noticed.

    Contrary to the Times’ report, I neither said nor meant that this was laziness.

    It is just that consumers still think that they face the same bill whoever they go to.

    So I want to help households save money.

    With simpler charging.

    Clearer bills.

    Quicker switching.

    I also want more consumer-friendly firms – co-ops, partnerships, consumer charities – dedicated to doing the shopping around for consumers to make sure that you are always on the best deal, even if you do not have time to check yourself.

    Ofgem should also have new powers to secure redress for consumers – money back for bad behaviour.

    Ofgem is already stamping out bad doorstep practices that lead to energy mis-selling, with the guilty companies suffering swingeing fines.

    And we will stop the energy companies from blocking action by Ofgem, which can delay matters by a year.

    I remember when I was on the board of Which? the Consumers’ Association that the best guarantee of a good deal is more competition for your pound.

    We want to encourage new small companies to come into the market.

    Cutting red tape so they can grow bigger.

    Making it easier for them to buy and sell electricity in the wholesale market.

    And with Ofgem, we are cracking down on any bad practice that could smack of being anti-competitive.

    It’s not fair that big energy companies can push their prices up for the vast majority of their consumers – who do not switch – while introducing cut-throat offers for new customers that stop small firms entering the market.

    That looks to me like predatory pricing.

    It must and will stop.

    Labour and Ed Miliband had thirteen years to get this market right, and all they can do now is call for another inquiry by the Competition Commission.

    Another delay of two years.

    Another chance to sit on the fence .

    How feeble!

    We know what’s wrong.

    And with Ofgem, we are getting tough to put it right.

    John Donne once said that no man is an island entire unto himself, and no government in this complex and interdependent world is entire unto itself.

    National sovereignty’s historic writ does not run over so many issues that matter to every family in this country.

    National frontiers do not bar toxic waste, sulphur or carbon.

    That is why we must always work with our partners in Europe – and more widely – to secure our objectives, nowhere more clearly than on environmental issues.

    The European Union is also key to our prosperity.

    The Eurozone takes nearly half our exports.

    We export more to Ireland alone than to China, India and Brazil put together.

    Being part of Europe is not a political choice. It is a geographical reality

    It always was. And until the tectonic plates break up, it always will be

    We will not, as Liberal Democrats in government, weaken the ties that deliver our national interest through Europe.

    Let me make another point about our Coalition.

    Whatever we think of the Conservative campaign in the alternative vote referendum, and I for one thought that the vilification of Nick was appalling, for Liberal Democrats compromise is not and cannot be a dirty word.

    Finding common ground.

    Uniting in joint purpose.

    Partnership politics.

    That is what we had to do – Conservatives and Liberal Democrats – to get this country out of the economic danger zone.

    Many countries that have suffered from the debt crisis since then – Portugal, Spain, Italy – had smaller budget deficits than us.

    Yet we can borrow money at lower rates than at any time in three hundred years.

    This coalition government saved Britain’s credit standing by compromise.

    The danger if you don’t compromise is now clear from America.

    There the markets looked over the brink when the mad-cap Republican right in Congress would not compromise with the President.

    Let that be a warning to the Conservative right here: we need no Tea Party Tendency in Britain.

    If you fail to compromise, if you fail to seek the common ground that unites us, if you insist that only you have the answers, if you keep beating the anti-European drum, if you slaver over tax cuts for the rich, then you will put in peril the most crucial achievement of this Government.

    You will wreck the nation’s economy and common purpose.

    We are all in this together and we can’t get out of it alone.

  • Chris Huhne – 2011 Speech to the Renewable UK Conference

    chrishuhne

    Below is the text of the speech made by Chris Huhne to the Renewable UK Conference on 26th October 2011.

    I’m delighted to be here today, at Renewable UK’s annual conference.

    Our location is rather appropriate. Manchester was the thumping heart of the industrial revolution. This was the world’s first industrial city. It is home to the first industrial canal, and the world’s oldest railway station.

    The foundations for our prosperity were laid here. The engines which drove Britain’s extraordinary economic growth were built here – from the spinning mule to the steam engine.

    We could not have picked a better place to discuss their modern equivalents.

    Revolution

    Renewable energy technologies will deliver a third industrial revolution. Its impact will be every bit as profound as the first two. My argument today is a simple one: the revolution has already begun.

    From the Western Isles to the Isle of Wight – across the length and breadth of Britain. New companies are creating new jobs, delivering the technologies that will power our future.

    As we look to pull ourselves out of recovery and back to prosperity, renewable energy can light the way.

    Today, I want to look at the contribution renewable energy is making to our economy right now. The investment it is sparking, the jobs it is delivering, the growth it is creating.

    And I will look at what we can to do encourage that growth – and sustain those jobs.

    But first, I want to take aim at the faultfinders and curmudgeons who hold forth on the impossibility of renewables – the unholy alliance of climate sceptics and armchair engineers who are selling Britain’s ingenuity short.

    “Renewables are too expensive”, they cry. “They cannot deliver energy at scale.

    “They are uneconomic, unreliable and unwanted.”

    It is time to retire these myths.

    Money

    Let us start with the most egregious: that renewables are too expensive; that they could not exist without public subsidy; that they are held up by government cash alone.

    Last year, global investment in renewable energy rose by 32% to $211 billion. And $142 billion of that was new financial investment, which excludes government and corporate R&D.

    Renewables are grabbing a large and growing share of new energy investment.

    Yes, some of that investment is attracted by public subsidy. But globally, subsidies for fossil fuels outstrip subsidies for renewables by a factor of five.

    We subsidise renewables to bring on deployment and reduce costs. And we’ve seen some remarkable successes: the cost of solar energy just keeps on tumbling.

    Right now, support for renewable energy costs the average household less than sixpence a day. But decades of underinvestment in energy efficiency and reliance on fossil fuels costs us much, much more.

    About half of the average household bill goes on wholesale gas and electricity costs. These costs are highly volatile, and as Ofgem make clear, the higher gas price is the real reason bills have been going up over the past eight years.

    That is why we need a flexible energy portfolio.

    And that’s where the counter-argument of the climate sceptics falls down. “Forget wind farms”, they say. “Shale gas will be our saviour. We should abandon everything else.”

    I don’t believe government should pick winners. And if you do, I refer you to a Department of Trade and Industry white paper from 2004 that estimated oil would reach $23 per barrel by 2010. Even last year my own Department forecast oil at $80 per barrel. Brent crude is currently trading at $110 per barrel.

    Lashing our economy to a single energy source is a risky business.

    We don’t yet know the full extent of shale gas here; how economically or environmentally viable it will be to extract, or by when. At best, it is years away.

    Unconventional gas has not yet lit a single room nor cooked a single roast dinner in the UK.

    Yet those who clamour loudest for “realistic” energy policies would have us hitch our wagon to shale alone. Shale gas may be significant. It is exciting. But we do not yet know enough to bet the farm on it. Faced with such uncertainty we do what any rational investor does with their own pension fund – we spread our risks, we have a portfolio.

    Capacity

    The second fallacy is that renewables cannot deliver energy reliably or at scale.

    But today, more than 10 gigawatts of our electricity capacity is renewable. That’s enough to power six million homes.

    And with every passing year, renewable energy takes over another percentage point of global electricity capacity.

    In 2007, 5% of the world’s electricity was renewable. In 2008, it was 6%. In 2009, 7%. And last year, 8%. And it’s still growing. More than a third of the new capacity added last year – some 60GW – was from non-hydro renewables. The message is clear: when we build new power plants, increasingly we choose renewables.

    In fact, renewable energy can make our system more secure – not less. According to the International Energy Agency, renewables increase the diversity of electricity sources, making energy systems more flexible – and more resistant to shocks.

    Yes, some renewable technologies are intermittent. But the Committee on Climate Change estimates that even with 65% of our energy provided by renewables in 2030, intermittency may cost just 1p per kilowatt hour.

    After all, biomass is instantly dispatchable. And providing back-up for intermittent renewables is just not that expensive. We already swing from a low of demand of 40GW to a high of 80GW every day. Peaking plant has long been part of our mix. Without such backup the nation’s kettles would be cold in the Coronation St ad breaks.

    Every year, renewable energy is attracting more investment and delivering more capacity. It is also gathering more support. One hundred and nineteen countries have renewable energy targets or policies – up from an estimated 55 just six years ago.

    Attractiveness

    That brings me to the third great misconception about renewable energy: that it is unwanted.

    Earlier this year, Ipsos MORI polled a thousand UK adults on which energy source they preferred. By a clear margin, people favoured renewables.

    Eighty-eight per cent of those polled viewed solar power favourably; 82% for wind, 76% for hydroelectric, 57% for biomass.

    The highest placed traditional energy source for electricity was gas, at 56%.

    Seventy-three per cent of people would support a new wind farm in their area, as opposed to just 21% for a new coal plant.

    When you get behind the headlines, you find that support for renewable energy is strong – and growing.

    And so is its contribution to our economy.

    Economy

    Across the United Kingdom, renewables are providing jobs, investment and growth.

    And the numbers are really starting to add up.

    Over the last financial year, nearly 4,500 new jobs were created in the low-carbon sector, which grew by 4.3%.

    Fifty-one thousand and six hundred companies in Britain provide low-carbon and environmental goods and services. Exports are now £11.3 billion, up 3.9%.

    By Christmas we will have 3GW of biomass installed, and by Easter 5GW of onshore wind. In the past seven months alone, plans for £1.69 billion of investment and 9,500 jobs have been announced.

    Here in the North West, more than 950 jobs: 340 at the Siemens Renewable Energy Engineering Centre, just a few miles down the road; up to 600 over the next decade at Cammell Laird; three new Farmgen developments planned in Cumbria, with hundreds of jobs.

    This is the sharp reality of green growth. At a time when closures and cuts dominate the news cycle, next-generation industries are providing jobs just as in the recovery after the last deep depression in 1929 to 1931. It is new and innovative industries that grow fastest.

    Renewable energy is surging out across the United Kingdom, blazing a trail of start-ups and jobs.

    Across the Pennines, in Yorkshire, 2,250 jobs – £130 million in Real Ventures’ biomass plant, employing up to 285 people.

    And in the North East, more than 1,400 jobs – TAG Energy Solutions, delivering up to 400 jobs in the Billingham turbine factory.

    North of the border, one of the jewels in our renewable energy crown – £160 million of new investment and more than 420 Scottish jobs.

    Across the Irish Sea, 450 jobs in Belfast Harbour thanks to DONG Energy’s Duddon Sands offshore wind farm; 1,400 jobs in Wales.

    In the heart of England, 100 jobs in the East Midlands – and 50 in the West; 120 in East Anglia.

    Two thousand and two hundred jobs in the South East, supported by £172m – from Vestas, the Green Home Company, and more. And at Tilbury, the first UK coal plant to convert completely to biomass, safeguarding livelihoods.

    Across Britain, from the industrial heartlands to the northernmost extremities, new energy technologies are delivering jobs and growth just when we need them most.

    Capitalising on our geographical, physical and human advantages; Scotland’s research and natural resources. The Solent’s marine expertise. Manufacturing in the North East. Technology development in the M4 corridor.

    Renewable energy doesn’t just have the potential to bring Britain’s economy back to life – it has already started.

    Our job now is to allow it to really flourish. How? By setting clear and coherent objectives. And using regulation and closely targeted support to hit them.

    Targets

    By the end of this decade, we must cut our carbon emissions by 34% on 1990 levels. By the end of the next decade, they must be halved.

    To hit our EU renewable energy target, we must generate 30% of our electricity from renewables by 2020. That means a fourfold increase in deployment – turning our back on an inheritance that ranked us as the dunce in class, 25th out of 27 EU countries for renewables.

    Growth on that kind of scale will not be easy. It will require tough decisions, clear thinking, and tightly focused support.

    And everyone has a part to play.

    Industry must carry on making the case for renewables. Engaging with communities – and answering its critics by delivering renewable schemes that save money and save carbon.

    Government must break through the barriers that are stopping new schemes being built, overcoming the financial, planning and delivery hurdles that can hold up progress on renewables.

    And together we must do a better job of communicating. That means engaging with the communities who stand to benefit, and the investors who don’t yet see the promise that renewable energy holds.

    We must ensure the silent majority aren’t drowned out by the vocal minority – those opposed to renewable energy in all its forms.

    That means making sure communities that host renewables benefit more directly. That’s what our proposals on business rate retention are for. And that’s why we were pleased to endorse Renewable UK’s Protocol on Community Benefits.

    My challenge to you today is this: keep it up. Continue to develop and publicise new ways of rewarding those communities most affected by development.

    Opportunities

    Because, as the report you are publishing today shows, the opportunities are simply too great to ignore.

    Globally, around half a trillion dollars has been earmarked for green stimulus spending. We will need to spend a hundred times that by 2050 to hit our climate targets.

    We must be realistic. The pressure on the public finances means we cannot support everything at the level we otherwise would.

    So we must ensure we send clear market signals: deploying public finance intelligently, and breaking through barriers to growth.

    Our starting point is simple. We have a responsibility to the taxpayer to get the most carbon and cost-effective electricity generation online.

    Review

    That is why the Renewables Obligation Banding Review has studied carefully how much subsidy different technologies need.

    The Renewables Obligation reinforces our commitment to renewables, and it provides what developers most need: a stable framework as we look ahead to the Electricity Market Reform.

    Where new technologies desperately need help to reach the market – where they can be scaled up significantly while bringing down costs over time – we are raising support.

    Where investors are on the cusp, we will give them the short-term impetus they need. So marine energy projects up to 30 megawatts will receive five ROCs under our plans.

    Where market costs are coming down – in onshore wind, for example – we’re consulting on reducing the subsidy.

    On offshore wind, we set our ambition high in our recent Renewable Energy Roadmap. And because we want to see a huge increase in deployment by 2020, we must see costs come down.

    So we’re working to help to bring investors and developers together, for example through the offshore wind investor conference.

    And our host today, Andrew Jamieson, is also lending his talents to the Offshore Wind Cost-Cutting Task Force, which met for the first time last week.

    On biomass, our support will focus more strongly on cheaper transitional technologies. Conversion from coal to biomass, for example, exploits existing assets and helps build the supply chain.

    Overall the new arrangements will mean a lower impact on consumer bills than staying with the current bandings.

    In total, our low-carbon and energy-saving policies will reduce household enegy bills compared with a ‘do nothing policy’.

    Of course, this is a consultation. We want to hear views from industry and beyond. I am sure you will not be backwards in coming forward.

    Markets

    Our approach to renewable energy must encourage investment and deliver value for money for consumers.

    We are doing three things to help.

    First, we are using policy to create new markets that will stimulate new investment – like the Green Deal, our unprecedented energy efficiency programme. It will bring jobs, growth and opportunities right across the country.

    Or the world’s first Renewable Heat Incentive. It will create a whole new market in renewable heat. Not just big industrial and commercial installations, but also homes and businesses, too.

    We expect green capital investment in heat to rise by £7.5 billion by 2020, supporting 150,000 manufacturing, supply chain and installer jobs.

    So the first thing we’re doing is to create new markets; the second is to make existing markets work better.

    This is why we published in the summer our plans for the reform of the electricity market, which will deliver secure, low-carbon and affordable electricity.

    We’ve listened to the renewables industry in drawing up the reforms. That’s why we support a contract for difference model tailored to renewables and not auctioning in the near future.

    We’ll publish a technical update on the institutional framework and the capacity mechanism around the turn of the year, and we’re planning to provide more information on the CfD too.

    We’ll also build in a phased transition from the Renewables Obligation to the new arrangements.

    By offering certainty and clarity, we can secure the scale of investment we need. And by attracting in new investors, we will also increase competition in the UK energy market.

    Benefits

    Our third priority is to capture the benefits of the low-carbon revolution. That means ensuring more clean technologies are designed and manufactured here.

    We have a blossoming low-carbon goods and services sector, which seems to be thriving even in tough times.

    But China leads the world in solar photovoltaic panel production; Germany on energy efficient housing design.

    We’re missing a trick unless we start supporting low-carbon manufacturing here in Britain – and grow the green supply chain: locking in profits and expertise, and creating the exports that will keep Britain competitive.

    Yes, climate change is a manmade disaster. Yes, the UK is only 2% of global carbon emissions. But if we grasp the opportunity now our businesses and economy can be much more than 2% of the solution.

    We are not going to save our economy by turning our back on renewable energy.

    This has been at the heart of Liberal Democrat policy for decades and it is something the Deputy Prime Minister, the Business Secretary, and the Chief Secretary to the Treasury instinctively understand.

    But this goes beyond any one party. I know the Prime Minister agrees, which is why he is putting so much effort in to securing offshore wind manufacturing in the UK. And it is something I know my predecessor Ed Miliband understands.

    It is this three-party consensus that makes the UK such a good place to invest.

    It wasn’t always like that. It is nothing short of a national disgrace that in the 1980s the UK lost our leading wind research position to Denmark, because government refused to support the industry.

    It is a mistake I am determined that this Coalition Government will not make again. That is why in the recent ROC banding consultation I have sent a clear signal to the tidal stream and wave industry – we want the UK to be the best place in the world to invest, deploy and commercialise these technologies.

    So I can today assure you that this Government has resolved that we will be the largest market in Europe for offshore wind.

    We already have more installed offshore wind than anywhere else in the world and we are determined to remain at the forefront.

    That’s why we set aside £200 million for the development of low-carbon technologies, including £60m for supporting major new manufacturing projects on the English coast.

    We will be the best place to invest in marine power, and we will be the fastest growing country in the EU when it comes to renewable deployment.

    That’s why the Green Investment Bank has been capitalised with three billion pounds, to help unlock private sector investment at scale. For the first time ever, Britain will join every other leading developed economy in having a public development bank focused on key economic goals.

    Research

    And that’s why we’ll keep funding research and innovation – not just through DECC, but through the business and transport departments too.

    We’re also funding the Offshore Wind Accelerator, a partnership between the Carbon Trust and leading developers to demonstrate a new generation of full-scale, low cost energy. I’m pleased to announce today that a project funded through the Accelerator has been has been successfully installed with a met mast by the SMart Wind consortium, with funding support from DONG Energy.

    This kind of innovation will bring down the cost of offshore wind faster.

    That’s why we’ve allocated up to £30 million over the next four years to fund innovation to reduce offshore wind costs. And as part of this work, our first call for proposals will focus on components of emerging offshore wind systems, with budget of up to £5m. I expect it to be launched shortly.

    We’ve also allocated up to £20 million to support the world’s first commercial-scale marine energy arrays.

    And we’re working closely with organisations such as the Energy Technologies Institute, which just announced plans to invest up to £25m in an offshore wind floating system demonstration project. Opening up new areas off the coast of the UK, and helping to bring generation costs down.

    Non-financial

    So from the structure of the electricity market to research funding, we’re breaking through the economic barriers. But we’re also focusing on non-financial obstacles.

    We’re reforming the planning system, to ensure it’s no longer a brake on sustainable development.

    The energy National Policy Statements set out the national need for new renewable energy infrastructure. We have introduced a fast-track process for consents. And we will close the Infrastructure Planning Commission and return decisions on major energy infrastructure to democratically elected ministers.

    Over 1,000 pages of local planning policy for England are being replaced by clearer and more streamlined National Planning Policy Framework. And the Government will consult on measures for a ‘planning guarantee’.

    We’re also working to improve grid connections. The connect and manage regime is now up and running. Network companies are now looking much further ahead in their planning and engaging more effectively with stakeholders. Together, this will help the network acts as a facilitator rather than an obstacle to renewable generation.

    And a few months ago, we published the Renewables Roadmap – setting out for the first time how we will overcome barriers to deployment.

    It’s a comprehensive action plan to accelerate the UK’s deployment and use of renewable energy.

    Conclusion

    In many ways, Britain can lay claim to be the home of renewable energy.

    It is thought that the oldest tidal mill in the world once stood across the river Fleet, in London. The white cliffs of Dover looked over a tide mill that was recorded in the Domesday Book.

    And 130 years ago, we connected the world’s first public electricity supply, in Godalming, Surrey.

    It did not burn coal, or gas.

    No, the power plant in question was a Siemens generator driven by 100% clean, renewable power: a watermill on the River Wey.

    When Britain began its journey towards electrification, renewable energy was the future.

    But we ended up choosing another path. This time, things will be different.

    We will not heed the naysayers or the green economy deniers.

    With over £200 billion worth of energy infrastructure needed by the end of the decade, this is our golden chance to deliver a greener future.