Tag: Speeches

  • John Major – 1992 Speech to the Institute of Directors

    johnmajor

    Below is the text of the speech made by the then Prime Minister, John Major, to the Institute of Directors on 28th April 1992 at the Royal Albert Hall in London.

    Mr President, Your Royal Highness, Your Excellencies, My Lords, My Lord Mayor of Westminster, Ladies and Gentlemen, I am delighted to be able to be with this Institute so soon after the General Election. It was an historic election. One that has rekindled confidence, and swept away the uncertainty that was holding back recovery.

    If we are to build a better future, then there is only one sure way it can be done. That way is by policies that promote the strength of industry and commerce and the principles of the free market. Experience has shown repeatedly that high tax, high inflation, trade union run, interventionist, and bureaucratic policies are not the way to achieve success. Our job in the years ahead is to persuade more and more people to listen to the truth. If we can remove that pendulum of uncertainty that all too often effects business prospects ahead of general elections, then we will have taken a mighty stride to continuing prosperity.

    Few voices have been more persuasive in pressing the case for free market ideas than this Institute. I am glad to be here today to thank you for the past you have played in winning the battle of ideas. Neither the red rose nor the prawn cocktail ever swayed your judgement.

    You stood firm for what you believed. So did we. I hope we will now go on working together in order to root the values of enterprise, choice, ownership, and opportunity even deeper into the bedrock of Britain. They are the values in which we all believe. We dare not take them for granted and we must never cease to fight for them.

    Throughout the election campaign I believed that recovery was waiting in the wings once confidence was restored. Some may have thought that this was the fanciful kind of thing that people say in the heat of an election campaign. Such things have been known. But I never doubted it. And the world clearly thought that recovery had started on Thursday night – the markets stayed open, and every one of them passed that judgement. In the light of the election result – and the response to it – I am more confident than ever that recovery is underway. We need a recovery that is steady and sustainable, not one that recreates the problems from which we are now emerging.

    Inflation has been going down – down below German levels for the first time since before man walked on the moon. And since April 9th, progress has continued. The pound going up. Tax cuts soon to come through again under a Conservative Chancellor. And let me say, I believe that Norman Lamont has done an outstanding job for Britain, not only in his latest Budget, but over the last difficult year and a half. Never taking the easy road – but always the right one. And rarely getting the credit for it.

    And those tax cuts will be deliberately targeted on those on more modest incomes. Not – dare I say it – on Directors but on people in modestly paid jobs: they might be young people starting out in life, part-time workers, many of them women, or disabled people who often command only modest incomes. But they will all benefit from having more money to spend as they think fit. And business will benefit too as their employees face less punitive taxation.

    Last month, the rise in unemployment was the smallest for nearly two years. Of course, we should not read too much into one month’s figures, but this is a hopeful sign and as recovery develops we can look forward to the figures steadying and then once again coming down.

    Certainly I now expect retail sales to move ahead. Business confidence is seen to be growing in survey after survey. Those are the sure signs of recovery. And as spring advances so will confidence.

    I do not pretend for a moment that the last years have been easy. Recession never is. I know the toll it has taken on businesses and on individuals. That is why I have been so keen to put in place economic management that minimises the risk of such a recession occurring again.

    But the problems should not blind us to the underlying changes which have taken place in Britain over the last decade. Or to the reasons why we have held firm over the last few months and years. Britain has changed immeasurably for the better. And we took the action we did – because we want a strong Britain, one that continues to grow in what will be the most competitive decade we have ever seen.

    In every part of Britain there remains a new spirit of enterprise. The small business sector is alive and growing. Management and workforce in our larger firms working as one to take on the competition and win. More workers having a direct stake in their companies – and I want to see a great deal more of share ownership like that. It has played an important part in improving industrial relations and in spreading wealth far more widely among our workforce.

    I see quality, design, and service once more at the forefront. ‘Made in Britain’ is again a badge of pride. I see British companies pushing forward the frontiers of innovation – in pharmaceuticals, electronics, telecommunications, indeed right across manufacturing industry. I see how productivity in Britain has risen by leaps and bounds.

    Last year the number of days lost to strikes was the lowest ever. Why? Because we changed industrial relations and changed industrial attitudes. The British disease? We can forget all that now. We cured it. And now half the world is queuing up for a dose of British medicine. That’s good for Britain. Good for our name. Good for our exports. Good for investment. Good for jobs.

    The British people did not want to see trade union power restored. That was one more reason why they supported us. People now look to us, as I know British industry does, to complete the work of trade union reform – and I promise you we will.

    We intend to introduce legislation shortly, as we said we would in our Manifesto. We will make automatic deduction of union membership dues without written authorisation unlawful. We will take measures to give individuals greater freedom in choosing a union. We will require all pre-strike ballots to be postal and subject to independent scrutiny, and that at least seven days’ notice of a strike is given after a ballot. And, as we promised in the Citizen’s Charter White Paper, we will give every person who uses public services the right to restrain the disruption of those services by unlawful industrial action. Never again should the hard-pressed consumer be held to ransom by illegal strikes of this kind.

    People also look to us to hold at bay that damaging social chapter in Europe that our opponents were jostling to sign. That, too, I promise you we will do. I believe strongly in deregulation, in getting government off the back of business. I want it to be understood throughout the Community that unnecessary interference with working practices is bad for business. I trust that that message will not be lost when the European Social Affairs Council reaches its conclusions on the Working Time Directive. It does not help the standing of the community when certain matters relating to employment are brought forward on the questionable basis that they are something to do with health and safety. I am not prepared to wave through plans that would add some five billion to the costs of British industry. Our European partners are keen to change existing legislation and place limits on shift patterns, prohibit working for more than 48 hours a week and sharply restrict Sunday working. They have a different structure of employment in their countries. These measures in the proposed Working Time Directive would hurt British industry and destroy jobs. They are not for us. No-one should be in any doubt. A Conservative Government will strongly oppose such damaging regulation wherever it is found and we will not readily acquiesce in any attempts to impose these costs on our industry.

    In the last thirteen years Government policies have made Britain a magnet for overseas investment. By 1990 we had received 40 per cent of Japanese investment in the European Community, five times as much as in Germany or in France. Much of that investment has been in British manufacturing industry, using our manufacturing skills. It is high time people stopped writing down our skills and damaging British manufacturing industry.

    It is true that some older industries have contracted, though in the process some, like steel for instance, have turned from industrial albatrosses into world leaders. But other industries have forged ahead. The output of the chemicals industry rose by 40 per cent in a decade: and that of plastics processing has nearly doubled in real terms. The UK is now the world’s third largest exporter of pharmaceuticals, and the information technology industry is thriving. Nearly one in ten of all the world’s personal computers are now made in Scotland.

    It is scarcely surprising that our share in world trade in manufactures is growing. Manufacturing productivity between 1980 and 1990 grew faster than in any other large industrial country – our best performance in any decade since the war. We should talk this record up, not talk it down. We should tell people that our manufacturing exports are reaching new records. Exports are up by three quarters on levels of a decade ago. We are now even a net exporter of television sets. And the British motor industry is becoming feared abroad for its export challenge, not jeered at, as it once so humiliatingly was, for strikes, poor quality and late delivery.

    That is the measure of the British achievement. And the members of this Institute have played a huge part in bringing it about. I see enormous international opportunities for us in the 1990s. And I want us to take them. Not just as leaders in defence and foreign affairs, but as increasingly powerful competitors in the international market place. Britain is ready to move forward, just when some of our main rivals are running into difficulties, or sliding back. These are opportunities that we must take. I am determined that we will take them.

    I believe the 1990s should usher in a new era for prosperity and for jobs in Britain. Things that they said could not be achieved together are now in prospect together. They will be our targets in the 1990s – stable prices, sustained industrial peace, free enterprise given the chance to compete and to win, lasting growth without the scourge of inflation.

    Our fourth Election victory has cemented the foundations for that success. It has opened up further opportunities. It has enabled business to invest with confidence and create the growing wealth our country needs.

    The completion of the single market in Europe is essential to that. That will be the number one on our list of priorities when we assume the Presidency of the Community in July.

    I make no secret of my view that we want a Europe that is a community of nation states. I do not want a United States of Europe. Such a concept could never be in the interests of the British people. Nor should responsibility be given to the Community when it can better be discharged at national or local level. That is a principle that I fought for at Maastricht. The principle of subsidiarity. You can take it from me that it is a principle to which this Government will hold fast. And to which it will hold Europe fast.

    And you can also be assured of this. The Single Market in Europe must be a genuine free market, right across the Community. Yes, where necessary, there must be common rules. That is essential. But rules, once agreed, must also be obeyed. Some of our partners have been keener on making new rules than keeping them. That is why at Maastricht we pressed successfully for new ways of making those who drag their feet come into line. For the first time, the European Court will have powers to impose finds on member states which do not comply with the rules. I am not prepared to see British business put at a disadvantage in countries that fail to meet their Community obligations. As a result of Maastricht, they will not be.

    Let me also add this. For it is fundamental to my belief about the future of the Community. The borders of Europe do not stop in the centre of our continent. We must not replace the iron curtain that has been torn down with a new regulatory net.

    In my view we have a truly historic decade before us. Who in this room really thought that they would love to see an end to communism? That they would watch on television the miracle of 400 million people being set free at last? Well, in 1992 we are seeing the birth of a new world. It is every bit as remarkable as that discovery of another New World five centuries ago in 1492. This new world will be based on our free market principles of enterprise, ownership, democracy and choice. We must go out there and work to make it secure. The world has made its choice between socialists and free markets. And it has chosen free markets.

    Already many of you are reaching out to these newly free nations of the East – to Hungary, to Poland, to Czechoslovakia, to Russia itself. As you do that, so must the Governments of the West. We must not, in our European Community, look in on ourselves. We must take the historic opportunity that has been offered to us. I want Britain to lead the way to a wider, more open and outward looking Europe. One which brings into the fold, as and when they are ready, not just the old neutral states of central and northern Europe, but the emerging democracies of the East. That is what we are going to be pushing for with the Presidency and beyond. What we must say to them is: when you’re ready to join the Community, we’re ready to accept you.

    And not just for economic reasons. The greatest prize we could leave to the next generation would be to spread to the nations of the east that gift of security and peace which has been the greatest benefit of the European Community. Never again must Europe be the cradle of world conflict. A wider Europe of nations working in partnership, reaching to and embracing Russia itself – that is our goal. That would be a better and a safer Europe. We may not see it in our political lifetime. But that is what I will be working for. And one day, I am certain, it will be achieved.

    Ladies and gentlemen, there are great challenges ahead for the Government and for industry. And also great opportunities. We must be determined to meet those challenges and take those opportunities. I promise you that the Government will be strong in pursuit of all that is in your interest and in that of all our nation.

    To do that we must be sure in our values. Sure in our policies. Sure in our faith in the quality of Britain and in its people. Our policy will be to trust the people. To give them choice. To give them opportunity. And to give them ownership.

    I have no doubt that the people of this country want a low tax, low inflation Britain in which success is possible and ambition rewarded. They want a Britain which recognises indisputably at last that free enterprise – not state intervention and socialism – is the route to national health and personal prosperity.

    That was the golden discovery of the 1980s – proof, here in Britain, that more private wealth means more public wealth too. We cut income tax. But we still created the wealth to spend far more and to far better effect on our National Health Service and on pupils in our schools.

    Private wealth and public welfare growing together hand in hand – it was the secret for which generations had looked in vain. Now in the 1990s, I promise you, we will go on with the policies that have been so successful. “Time for a change”, some said. Yes, but not the changes they had in mind.

    Our objective is a country in which everyone – everyone – feels they belong. Where they can own homes, own savings, and own shares in their industries – and then pass them on to the next generation. Where every child leaves school well prepared for the changing world that lies ahead. Where more young people go into higher education and can choose the training they need. Where everyone feels they have a growing stake in the future of the United Kingdom.

    It is free enterprise that will create the ideas, the jobs, the wealth, the public services that will make all this possible. Free enterprise. Your enterprise.

    Recovery is now under way. Our job is to build it. To make it secure and to make it grow. And that, I promise you, we will seek to do.

  • Sir John Major – 1991 Conservative Party Conference Speech

    johnmajor

    Earlier this week this Conference welcomed Mrs Thatcher. You gave her the most tumultuous reception. She deserved it. She led our country for over 11 years, our Party for over 15. We owe Margaret a great debt.

    The Britain she left us is immeasurably stronger than the Britain she found. Above all, she helped others to believe in us and us to believe in ourselves. And on those foundations she laid three great Election victories.

    It’s good to applaud; it’s grand to cheer. But the greatest tribute we can pay her is to do as she did. To win, and win, and win again. At this Conference – and what a successful Conference it’s been – you have heard how the next Conservative Government will secure the best future for Britain.

    We’ve heard some cracking speeches this week. From the right team. A young team – in fact the youngest Cabinet this century. A professional team.

    Just think for a moment. When the going gets rough in international affairs, who would be the first person you would send for? Gerald Kaufman? No. He would be the second person. The first person would be anyone but Gerald Kaufman. But far and away the best person would be Douglas Hurd, one of the finest Foreign Secretaries this country has ever had.

    Of course, Labour’s Captain tries to talk up his team. “A winning team” he calls them. After three election defeats? Well, it goes to show that there must be more than one way to look at history. Take waterloo. You thought Wellington won Waterloo? No, Waterloo was a smash hit for Napoleon. But we can help Labour to win one thing – the record for the longest run of election defeats. Played four. Lost four. And a probable vacancy for team captain.

    Last week at Brighton we had speech after speech about a fairy-tale future for the British people. In Labour’s Never-Mind-the-Cost-Never-Never Land. Then there was singalongaleader. It was all good fun if you like that sort of thing.

    But while this was happening out front, there was something thoroughly nasty seeping from under the platform. I refer, of course, to what Labour pretends to believe are the Government’s plans for the National Health Service. There’s only one way to deal with a lie: nail it to the wall of truth, as William Waldegrave so conclusively did yesterday. We have all been brought up with the Health Service. We use it. We cherish it. We are proud of it.

    I know that for millions of people in this country the National Health Service means security. I understand that. Because I am – and always have been – one of those people. I know that even when you’re fit and well, it brings peace of mind – just to know it’s there. It is unthinkable that I, of all people, would try to take that security away. A genuine belief I can respect, even when I profoundly disagree with it. But deliberate lies – repeated, repeated and repeated – merely diminishes its authors.

    The Health Service has been in existence for over 40 years. And who has been in Government for most of that period? We have. For 29 of those years it has been a Conservative Government. It has been under Conservative Governments that the National Health Service has been built up, enlarged and improved. And our reforms will carry that right through into the 1990s. So let me say now, once and for all, and without qualifications – under this Government the National Health Service will continue, to offer free hospital treatment to everyone.

    And so that no-one can misunderstand the position – and I hope the whole country is listening – let me make it even clearer. There will be no charges for hospital treatment, no charges for visits to the doctor, no privatisation of health care, neither piecemeal, not in part, nor as a whole. Not today. Not tomorrow. Not after the next election. Not ever while I’m Prime Minister.

    And if, after all I have said, there are still those who set out to frighten the vulnerable, the weak, and the old, with carefully calculated smears, then the public will know where to find them – in the gutters of public debate. Such people are not friends of the Health Service. They are the parasites that live on its back.

    No Conservative need be defensive about the Health Service. On the contrary, every Conservative has the right to share my disgust at what is said. Go to your local hospital. What do you find? You’ll find Conservatives. In the hospital shop. Serving with the League of Friends. Working on the wards. They are not just friends of the Health Service. They are part of the Health Service.

    The National Health Service doesn’t belong to the Labour Party. As its name makes clear, it belongs to the Nation. And – in both senses of the phrase – Labour isn’t going to get away with it. The Health Service is not a political football to be kicked around in the hope that, somehow or other, it will reopen the door of Downing Street to a Labour Government. It won’t. Neither by hook or by Cook.

    This is the first Conference I have addressed as Leader of the Conservative Party. It is hard to explain how I feel about that. It is a long road from Coldharbour Lane to Downing Street. It is a tribute to the Conservative Party that that road can be travelled.

    Perhaps at the back of this hall today there is another young man or woman who stands where I did 30 years ago. Who knows few people here. Who feels it is a long road to this platform, too.

    They should remember the last two leaders were a builder’s son from Broadstairs and a grocer’s daughter from Grantham. We don’t need lectures in the Conservative Party about opportunity. We are the Party of opportunity.

    This Party is open to all. And to all those who may be watching, wherever you come from, whatever your background, I say simply this, “Come and join us”. There are no barriers in our Party, just as there will be no barriers in the Britain we are building together.

    Some people ask whether we will have a different sort of Conservatism in future. Of course we will. We all bring our own beliefs, our own instincts, and our own experiences to politics. And I am no exception.

    But the fundamental beliefs of the Conservative Party, those beliefs that brought me into this Party, are the beliefs that Chris Patten expressed so brilliantly on Tuesday. They remain as strong today as ever. Old though our Party is, the values behind it are older still. They are rooted in the instincts of every individual. And it is through our policies that we make them come alive.

    What is it that we offer? A strong Britain, confident of its position; secure in its defences, firm in its respect for the law. A strong economy, free from the threat of inflation, in which taxes can fall, savings can grow, and independence is assured.

    I want to give individuals greater control over their own lives.

    – Every mother, every father, a say over their child’s education.

    – Every schoolchild, a choice of routes to the world of work.

    – Every patient, the confidence that their doctors can secure the best treatment for them.

    – Every business, every worker, freedom from the destructive dictatorship of union militants.

    – Every family, the right to have and to hold their own private corner of life; their own home, their own savings, their own security for their future – and for their children’s future.

    Building the self-respect that comes from ownership. Showing the responsibility that follows from self-respect. That is our programme for the 90s. I will put it in a single phrase: the power to choose – and the right to own.

    Do you know what Labour believes? That choice is something for them. They just can’t accept that choice is something most of us can be trusted with. You might make mistakes, they say. What arrogance. As if the State have never made mistakes, in our name, with our money. Try telling that the tenants of the crumbling tower blocks that disfigures our cities.

    And tell that to the citizens of Eastern Europe, who have risked their very lives for these freedoms, for the right to own, and for the power to choose. Ordinary values – for which ordinary people have, in our time, fought an extraordinary fight.

    During the summer I did quite a bit of travelling – Headingley, Edgbaston, Trent Bridge, Lord’s, the Oval. Also Moscow, Peking, Hong Kong and Kennebunkport. Wherever I went abroad, I found the same story. Britain is respected again. We don’t always realise the admiration and affection for Britain abroad.

    We’ve earned it, because when others have hesitated, we have always stood firm and given a lead. As we did again this year. In defence of freedom in Kuwait. We didn’t want that war, its waste, its suffering, its grief. But to achieve greater security in the world, we had to reverse the annexation of Kuwait. And to keep that security we must destroy Iraq’s nuclear weapons capacity. They are still trying to cling to it, still cheating, still lying.

    They cannot be permitted to succeed. One way or another that nuclear capacity must go. I hope it will go peacefully. If not, it must go by force. But go it will. In January I flew by helicopter over our army in the Gulf. I can still see the scene below me. A great convoy of troops and heavy equipment moving forward across the sands. For mile after mile. You could only marvel at the organisation and planning involved.

    But down on the ground, I had a different impression. Dug into position each unit seemed almost alone. Young men – mostly very young – thousands of miles from home in the wastes of the desert. Let me tell you what was in my mind when I met them. What would they think? Here was a new Prime Minister, unknown to them, untried, asking them to prepare for battle, perhaps not to return. How would they respond to that? And would they understand the reasons why they were there?

    Whatever doubts I had soon disappeared. They knew why there were there. They knew the cause was right. And they knew that they could do the job. They asked only to be allowed to get on with it. And, when they did, my goodness, how they proved their point. They really were the best of British.

    I learned something else from that extraordinary war and especially from that precision bombing that amazed the world. It’s this. If our troops are to do the job we ask, it is absolutely vital that their equipment and their training are the best.

    That is why in the last few weeks we have bought the new anti-submarine helicopter from Westland – the best. Why we are moving ahead with the new Challenger tank from Vickers – the best. And that’s why we will keep our own independent nuclear deterrent, Trident. The best security for Britain.

    And we will take with just a little pinch of salt the conversion of those who campaigned for CND for the past thirty years – and then suddenly let their principles ….what was the word? … lapse? What principles? First, peace at any price. Then power at any price. I know what this country will say to that. Never at any price. For a man who with no fixed view on the defence of Britain, there can be no fixed abode in Downing Street.

    As we saw again in the aftermath of war, a confident Britain is a force for good in a troubled world. If we had not created those safe havens in Iraq, hundreds and thousands of Kurdish people would have died last winter in bitter, freezing mountains. We spoke out strongly for human rights in Peking and spoke out first against the return of tyranny in Moscow.

    Alone among all the nations of the world we stand at the hub of three great interlocking alliances. Of NATO, which is and must remain the core of our defence. Of the European Community. And of the Commonwealth, which meets in conference next week. There we must persuade 50 nations, some – frankly – with a chequered political history, to a formal commitment to democracy and human rights.

    And in the 1990s I hope to see one former member of the Commonwealth once more take its rightful place. We have always fought for an end to apartheid. But we have worked just as consistently for the long-term goal of a fully free and prosperous South Africa. I believe that both goals are now in sight. And when they are reached I want to see South Africa back where she belongs – as a fully-fledged member of our Commonwealth of nations.

    A great debate is now underway in Europe. One in which the Conservative Party can speak with authority. Harold Macmillan first sought to take Britain into the Community, Ted Heath finally led us there, and Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act – with its vision of ever closer union between states. Closer union between states. Not a federal merger of states. That is still our policy.

    I believe strongly in partnership in Europe. Britain, as a great European power, has gained from our membership of the Community. That is the verdict of those people in our country who live by business, banking and trade, the very people on whom our prosperity and jobs depend. But it must be the right Europe. Let me set out for you the objectives that I have in mind, the principles that I will fight for, and the propositions I will resist.

    First we want a Community that will in time embrace the new democracies of the East. We have the chance to heal the scar that divided and disfigured Europe for two generations. The nations of Eastern Europe – Hungary, Poland, Czechoslovakia, the Baltic States – need to know now that when their economies are ready for the Community, the Community will be ready for them.

    Second, I want a genuine single market, open for business right across the Community. It must have common rules. And these rules must be obeyed. When we sign up to something, we put words into actions. Some of our partners, I fear, are keener on making new rules than on keeping them. We need a system that can deal effectively with those who call themselves good Europeans, but who hijack lorries or hold up free trade.

    We are now negotiating new Treaties on political and economic union. I am always ready to listen to new ideas. But they must be workable ideas. Ideas that make sense for Europe, and for Britain. There are vital issues at stake. They involve hard judgments of where our true interests lie. The idea of a single European currency is one with enormous ramifications, both practical and political. At best it is an uncertain prospect. And treaty must provide for a separate decision to be taken – not now – but at a future date by the British Government and the British Parliament. It’s our decision. A single currency cannot be imposed upon us. And I would not accept, on behalf of Britain, any treaty which sought to impose a single currency – at however distant a date.

    We already work closely with our European partners in financial affairs. So, too, in foreign policy and defence. When national interest and Community interest coincide, then common action is only common sense. But in no circumstances – not now, not at Maastricht – will a Conservative Government give up the right, our national right, to take the crucial decisions about our security, our foreign policy and our defence.

    We are working to reach an agreement at Maastricht in December. But I cannot guarantee that our negotiations will succeed. For it is no easy task to get 12 nations to agree. And for my part, I shall put the interests of our country before any agreement. Not any agreement before the interests of our country.

    I hope we can reach agreement. If we do, I will submit that agreement to parliament. For it is here in Britain that the crucial decisions must be taken. Not in the European Parliament. Not in the Council of Ministers. Not in the Commission – certainly not in the Commission. It will be for Parliament to decide on behalf of the people of Britain who elected it.

    So far I have spoken of alliances. Of how much we can achieve if we work with other nations. But when it comes to the search for new markets, even our closest allies remain our competitors. I have never accepted the craven argument that Britain can’t compete with Germany or Japan. And I have contempt for the defeatists who run down our country and write of its future.

    Those who said we couldn’t compete in Europe when we led Britain into the Exchange-Rate Mechanism.

    Those who said that we would have to push up interest rates. And that our inflation was bound to stay far higher than the rest of the Continent.

    All that was just a year ago this week. And look what has really happened since.

    We have cut interests rates – eight times.

    Our exports to the rest of the Community have shot up. Our imports have fallen. Our trade deficit with Europe has been almost wiped out. And in case you haven’t heard this morning’s news, our inflation rate has fallen to just 4.1%. For the first time in a generation we have brought inflation down to German levels.

    They said we couldn’t do it. We did it. And in just one year. Let me remind the sell Britain short brigade of just a few facts. We attract more American investment than any other European country, and twice as much investment from Japan.

    Only two years ago, this country had a 17,000 million pound deficit on manufactured trade. This summer, we had a surplus. Our manufacturers sold more abroad than ever before. They didn’t sell Britain short. They sold for Britain. And they had to fight for their markets when the going was hard.

    I know times have been tough. Unemployment has risen. Many people have faced great difficulties. I know how they feel – what it’s like for a family when a business collapses. What it’s like when you’re unemployed and when you have to search for the next job.

    I have not forgotten – and I never will.

    It is because of that that I will never play fast and loose with the economy. Many have pressed us to do so this past year – siren voices, urging us on to the rocks of inflation, and off the course to recovery. The Chancellor and I ignored those voices. And, as he told you, we can now see the way ahead out of recession, to the recovery that will bring investment. To the investment that will bring jobs.

    And the clearer the signs of recovery, the louder the Labour Party complains.

    Look how they rounded on the Governor of the Bank of England. All because he dared to confirm what everyone else was saying. That recovery is on the way. When he said there was a recession – they cheered him. When he said it was coming to an end – they called for his head. What are they going to do with those hundreds of businessmen telling the CBI exactly the same thing? Will Labour threaten to sack them too? All of them?

    Do Labour realise what their policies would do to business?

    – Stab it in the back just when it’s winning the battle for trade

    – Impose new levies

    – Pile on new costs

    – Bring back union power.

    It may be true that a Labour Prime Minister would no longer get his marching orders over beer and sandwiches at No 10. In these days of designer socialism, he’d get them over a G&T – down at the Old T&G.

    A minimum wage would create the very unemployment they claim to care about. New burdens would drive business out of markets. Higher taxes would drive business talent abroad. Above all, inflation would drive our economy out of the future and back to the past.

    Remember who suffers from inflation.

    – Infant businesses

    – People on fixed incomes

    – Pensioners

    Inflation is a tax paid by those least able to protect themselves. It is Labour’s invisible tax. It wouldn’t come through the letter box, though there are plenty that would.

    They have eight new taxes lined up already.

    Well, that’s not surprising. We’ve costed Labour’s spending promises. 35 billion pounds extra and still rising. Of course, they say there would be hardly any more tax for hardly anyone. But that’s hardly credible.

    The next Labour Manifesto will be the biggest tax demand in history. They love nationalisation. High taxes nationalise choice. It won’t be a case of ‘you pays your money, you takes your choice’. It will be – they take your money, they take your choice.

    High taxes would enrich the businesses, the laboratories, the the universities of American and the rest of Europe at the expense of the businesses and universities of Britain. We’d be back with something we haven’t heard of for twelve years – the brain drain. Our low tax policies have built up a brain bank for Britain.

    Our Party has always kept personal tax rates down. And in the next Parliament we will go on doing so.

    Lower taxes don’t just mean richer people. They mean a richer life. A life with wider horizons, in which people can develop their interests. Support their favourite charity, pursue their hobbies. Go fishing or to a football match, the theatre or the cinema, or just save up for a holiday.

    But lower taxes give people more powerful choices, too. The chance to save for the long-term, to invest in the future. Building up a pension. Starting a business. Giving their children a good start in life – and passing on to them the fruits of a lifetime’s work.

    In the 1980s we began a great revolution. Our aim was a life enriched by ownership, in which homes, shares and pensions were not something for others, but something for everyone.

    We can now see the lifeblood of ownership – of wealth – running through the veins of the country. Nearly four million more families now own homes. And eight million people more own shares. And four and a half million people now have personal pensions.

    But this revolution is still not complete. In the 1990s we must carry it further. We must extend savings and ownership in every form. And we now have the chance to make enduring change. For people in their middle years are inheriting homes, businesses, farms on a scale never before seen. The pioneers of the property-owning democracy are the parents of the capital-owning democracy to come.

    We Conservatives have always passed our values from generation to generation. I believe that personal prosperity should follow the same course. I want to see wealth cascading down the generations. We do not see each generation starting out anew, with the past cut off and the future ignored.

    So, in the next Parliament, I believe that we must go much further in encouraging every family to save and to own. To extend every family’s ability to pass on something to their children, to build up something of their own – for their own.

    Labour have their eyes on the money stored in the homes in which millions of people now live – and in the businesses they have created. But I believe that what people have worked to build up in life, the State should never destroy.

    As Harold Macmillan once memorably put it, people walk in public gardens, but they tend their own. I want to build a pride in our common inheritance of town and city, coast and countryside. In the very fabric of our nation.

    I want to foster ownership in its widest sense. In making people feel that public property belongs to them. Giving them more say – at the local level – in how things are run. Giving them a choice. Putting them in control.

    That’s the idea behind our Citizen’s Charter – about which Francis Maude spoke so well yesterday. It will be a centrepiece of our policies for the 1990s. I want to see public services in which the passenger, the patient, the parent can have confidence. And in which public servants can have pride.

    I see that Labour are now trying to copy my ideas. I suppose we shouldn’t be too surprised at that. Even the Labour Party has to have some good ideas amongst all the bad. It’s just that they filch the good ideas from us. The bad ones of course they think up for themselves. They don’t even hide it when they steal some of my clothes. Did you see how many of them were wearing grey suits last week? Have they no shame?

    The test for Labour will come in the next session of Parliament. We will be legislating on the Citizen’s Charter. We shall be giving parents a greater say in schools. Making the big utilities more responsive to customers. And as Michael Heseltine promised us yesterday, exposing incompetence in the council chamber.

    And how do you imagine Labour will vote? With us? For the charter? And for the consumer? Or against us? For the trade unions? For the old ways? For the past? But it’s not just a matter of changing the way we run things. It’s a matter of breaking down the false and futile divisions, based on class and envy, that have been around for generations. They are wholly artificial. Labour fosters those divisions. It thrives on them. Our task is to end them for good.

    I spoke of a classless society. I don’t shrink from that phrase. I don’t mean a society in which everyone is the same, or thinks the same, or earns the same. But a tapestry of talents in which everyone from child to adult respects achievement; where every promotion, every certificate is respected, and each person’s contribution is valued.

    And where the greatest respect is reserved for the law. There can be no harmony in a lawless society. The recent outbreaks of violence in some of our council estates involved a brutal disrespect for other people and their property. Such behaviour cannot be excused and will not be tolerated. In the face of such violence, I know that this Party will give the police the support that we always have. We admire the bravery and the professionalism of those young policeman and women who have been the front line against violent attacks. This Conference must leave no shred of doubt. Rioting is a crime – a serious crime. And it will be dealt with as such.

    But dealing with crime is not just something for other people – the police, or the courts, of the Government. It’s a challenge to everyone. And the way to fight crime is to change the attitudes that lie behind crime.

    The attitudes of people who say that theft of vandalism are somehow less serious. They call it property crime. Property crime? Tell that to the widow who has been robbed of treasured mementoes of her past life. That’s not a property crime. It’s a personal wound which can never be healed.

    This Government is going to crack down on crime, as Ken Baker made clear this week. Let me give you an example. What the irresponsible call joy-riding, we know as simple theft; dangerous driving, a disregard for human life, and the destruction of other people’s property. Some of these people are too young for a licence. We will ensure that when they reach driving age they can be banned from the road.

    As for those parents who stand by and watch while their children commit crimes, they are going to be held responsible for their children’s actions. Those in authority – parents and teachers as well – should use their authority to teach a sense of respect for others, for their rights, not just your own; for their opinions, their welfare and their possessions. Without respect for others, there can be no proper respect for the law.

    We don’t help our children by excusing bad behaviour, we betray them. And we lead them into worse behaviour. Sometimes it’s right to say no.

    A great deal has been written about my education. Never has so much been written about so little. Perhaps that’s why I am so keen on the subject. I believe that Ken Clarke’s programme of reform is a turning-point in education. It will mean that parents and pupils come first, that the key subjects are studied properly, and that the status of teachers is restored.

    Some have said that Ken Clarke and I are wrong to insist on simple pencil and paper tests for children in schools. Well, I’ll tell you what marks I would give to people like those. Nought out of ten for concern. Nought out of ten for interest in our children. Nought out of ten for commonsense. And, so long as there is a Conservative Government, they’ll get nought out of ten for influence in our schools.

    What Labour Governments did, and what all too many Labour Councils are still doing, is unforgivable – the years of levelling down; the destruction of good schools; the harassment of good teachers; the kicking away of the ladder of opportunity by those who climbed up it themselves; the setting of the union rule book above all other text books; the neglect even of spelling. That is where the long march of the Left in education has led us. Well, we are now rooting these ideas out. We are giving parents more influence in schools. If we want them to exercise responsibility for their children, we must give them a say in the education of their children.

    I will fight for my belief in a return to basics in education. The progressive theorists have had their say. And they’ve had their day.

    In the last twelve months we have seen the Socialist philosophy collapsing in ruins. Who will ever forget those days of high drama in the Soviet Union last August? Or the three young men in Moscow who gave their lives for reform.

    When I visited the place where they died, I was struck by the number of young people who pressed in around me. They had copied Western fashions, wore Western gear. For decades they and their parents had been taught that Socialism was the destiny of their future. That the Soviet Union would bury the West. But it wasn’t the West that the Socialist system had buried, it was the hopes and dreams of their own people.

    Socialism has gone in Czechoslovakia, gone in Poland, gone in Hungary, gone even in Sweden. And here in Britain, I’ll tell you what you’ll see over the next few months. You’ll see the Red Flag dying here. It’s going. Going. Gone. Suddenly, it’s just so old fashioned, so irrelevant, so out of date.

    What I owe to this country and to its people is difficult to put into words. My greatest wish now is to give back something of what I have been given.

    I want to work for a Britain that is the best educated and the best governed.

    Where schools and universities are the finest and accessible to all. Where inner cities don’t mean deprivation, but communities that bind and belong. And where no-one has to go in fear at night.

    I should like to live in a world where opportunity is for everyone, where peace is truly universal, and where freedom is secure.

    If that is what you believe in, then go back to your constituencies. tell them what we stand for. Tell them what we care for. And ask them to choose.

  • John Major – 1991 Speech to Conservative Central Council

    johnmajor

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech made to the Central Council meeting, held in Southport on 23rd March 1991.

    Ladies and Gentlemen, I must begin by telling you how proud I am to be here today. Proud to be your Leader. Very proud to have been chosen to lead your Conservative Party in the 1990s. Proud to follow Margaret Thatcher and proud to build on her policies in the years to come.

    And what I want to do today is to set out our agenda for the decade. A full agenda for a Conservative Government as we plan for the century that lies ahead.

    It’s a good moment for us to be taking stock together. My first weeks at Number 10 were dominated by international tension and the demands placed on this country by a dangerous war. Now – together -we are resolving the great domestic issues facing this country. And it has been a remarkable week.

    Seven days ago, Mr Kinnock accused us of not doing anything. Now he says we are doing too much. Just a week ago, he accused me of refusing to change our policies. Now he says I’m changing them all. He can’t seem to make his mind up. He’s very indecisive. I think the word is dithering.

    But then – poor man – he doesn’t have the experience of the Conservative Party.

    The Conservative Achievement

    Ours is the oldest political party in the world. But in many ways it is also the freshest. We have never rested on success. Never clung to past positions when the time called for fresh ideas. We have always been the first to look ahead to find ways to meet the challenges that face our country.

    That is why our party has lasted and grown. Our duty now is to press on with reform and to carry through the long-term changes this country wants and needs.

    Whenever the British people have looked for a new lead it is to the Conservative Party that they have turned.

    Rallying the country in the dark days of the last world war. Lifting post-war controls and creating wealth for the social improvements of the 1950s and 1960s. Leading Britain into the opportunities of Europe in the 1970s. And rolling back the tide of Socialism and opening up choice and freedom throughout the 1980s. All under Conservative leadership.

    What then is our task for the 1990s? It is to prepare to meet the challenges of the 21st century. And it is to dedicate ourselves to the service of the British people. Of all the people – however they vote, wherever they live, whoever they are. There must be no barriers, no boundaries, no doors bolted in the Britain that we strive to create.

    Guiding Principles for the 1990s

    Governments have three fundamental responsibilities:

    – to defend the security of the realm;

    – to protect the value of the currency;

    – and to raise the living standards of the people.

    We will discharge those duties as no other party would or could.

    And as we pursue them, five great principles will guide us;

    1. That we are a national party.

    2. That we give opportunity and power to the people.

    3. That we need a strong and stable economy in which the wealth that is created is owned more widely.

    4. That we want a citizen’s charter to deliver quality in every part of public service.

    5. And that we work, not for short-term gain, but for the long-term good of the nation as a whole.

    The National Party : uniting and leading the nation

    When I say that we are a national party, I mean two things. Firstly, that we are a party that works for all the people. But secondly, that we will stand four-square for the union. There is something unique about the United Kingdom, a country which draws together in partnership the rich traditions of four great nations.

    We have much to learn from each other and much to give. We must respect the particular needs of each of those nations. We must cherish the diversity that gives each of them its character. But above all we must stand together.

    There is far more that binds us than divides. And the things that bind us are the deepest of all. Common principles. Centuries of partnership. The very interweaving of families. When young men and women from England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales stood together in the Gulf, they were rightly proud of their roots. But no-one doubted that all fought together in the name of Britain. This Party must never let that spirit of union be lost.

    I want to take our policies to every corner of our country. Our ambitions should not be limited. In the 1990s I want to see us once more the leading Party in Scotland and in Wales. And I want to see the spread of Conservative values in Northern Ireland as well. There must never be no-go areas for Conservatism and for the hope our policies bring.

    Power to the people

    In the 1990s Britain faces an historic choice. To retreat into Socialism, or to move forward again to spread independence and opportunity to all.

    What is the difference between us and Labour?

    Power over the people is Labour’s dream. Power to the people is ours. Giving power to the people will be our second guiding principle for the 1990s.

    When we came to office, they said the people could not be trusted. We trusted them.

    They said that big industries were best in state hands. We sold them to the people. And their performance was transformed.

    They said public sector homes must not be sold. We sold them to the people. And one and a half million families have a security they only dreamed of before.

    They said lower income tax meant more greed. We cut tax for the people. And what resulted was not greed but opportunity, personal choice, and record charitable giving. The people gave Labour the right answer to that.

    So how right we were. Where Labour lectured the people, we listened. We understood their hopes. And we acted to make them reality.

    Labour’s legacy

    Perhaps some of you remember what used to happen under Socialism. How it used to feel for the ordinary man and woman. I do.

    When if you didn’t join a union you could be shut out of a job.

    When if you were a council tenant you had to beg to paint your own front door – and were lucky if you could.

    When you had to ask permission to take money on holiday abroad. Do you remember? £50. And Britons abroad were the humiliated paupers of Europe.

    When if you were a pensioner and put some savings aside for a rainy day, you saw their value halved in just five years.

    Now Labour talk to us about “quality” and “freedom”. “Quality and Freedom”. The Party that gave us the closed shop, the shoddy estate, and the shattered pound. What right have they to talk of freedom? They don’t understand it. They don’t trust it. And they would never deliver it.

    We are wholly different. Our aim is opportunity for all. And so long as I am privileged to lead this Party our Conservative revolution for the people will continue.

    Extending Choice

    I want no complacency in any quarter.

    I want to see more privatisation. The sale of the rest of British Telecom, and the new plans for British Rail and British Coal. For privatisation means personal ownership and better services. It has been an outstanding success.

    I want to see more competition, more contracting-out, less regulation and less government intervention. All that has been proved to be right. We will not change that winning formula.

    And I want to see more choice. You know, whenever we have extended choice for the people, the Left have fought us all the way. But time and again we have won. And through us, the public have won.

    Choice has improved the standard of services for all. It is a strange but telling truth. But if it’s bad for Labour it is almost certainly good for the people. And it is a safe, safe bet that if it’s good for Labour it is bound to be bad for the people.

    We opened up the market in television. Labour opposed us. But every night millions of people have wider choice – not only Channel 4, but satellite channels as well.

    We deregulated the sale of spectacles. I claim no special interest in that. Labour fought it tooth and nail. But the range of glasses was widened and better value ensued.

    A fortnight ago we opened up air routes to new airlines. Labour criticised us. But within hours of our decision fares across the Atlantic were cut by 15%.

    Last week we announced more competition in telephone services. Labour attacked us again. But as a result domestic and international call charges will be coming down.

    Watching television. Seeing properly. Travelling abroad. Just chatting on the phone. Some of the basic building blocks of a satisfying life. All improved by Conservative policies. All opposed by Labour.

    And, you know, when you look at Neil Kinnock’s so-called new policies, they don’t amount to much, do they? Yesterday’s mashed potatoes. Just contemplate them. Turn them round in your mind. And the more you think, the more he’ll shrink.

    More choice in the 1990s

    In the 1990s we will extend public choice yet wider. And the reason we do it will be to extend opportunity and improve family life for all.

    We are giving parents more say in the running of schools and making more schools independent of council direction.

    We will give those hospitals and those doctors who want it more control over the decisions that affect their patients.

    We will extend bus deregulation, bringing to the cities the long-distance coach revolution that has seen more people travelling more cheaply than ever before.

    And we will reform the market in housing bringing new opportunities to those now remaining under council control. Rents into mortgages. Giving life to empty council property. More use of homesteading. The aim is a new and better deal for those who are not yet home owners. They, too, deserve the opportunities that Conservative housing policies have given to millions. And they must not be locked out of receiving them.

    Personal independence in a strong economy

    This Government’s strongest commitment is to the long-term success of the economy. And to put more of the wealth that is created into the hands of the people. That is our third guiding principle for the 1990s.

    Last Tuesday, Norman Lamont demonstrated our intentions. Circumstances were not easy. Every tax cut had to be paid for. But our guiding principles shone through.

    To cut and simplify the burden of direct taxation on people and business.

    To support families.

    To nourish enterprise.

    To create a tax system which is fair, restrained and free from distortion. A system which leaves as much as possible of your income in your hands.

    That’s why we shifted more of the load of local taxation from people to spending – and why we will keep that local burden down under the new system that will replace the Community Charge.

    That’s why we made the shift in tax in such a way that the money goes to people directly, through lower charges – not to the councils who have driven the Community Charge so high.

    That’s why we used the Budget to strike more distortions out of the tax system.

    And that’s why we cut the rate of tax on businesses and increased child benefit for all families.

    Just compare our principles with Labour’s.

    They believe that all the fruits of economic growth – growth created by your efforts – should be spent by them.

    They believe none of it should be used to cut the burden of your tax.

    They are against a simpler tax system. They want to introduce ever more distortions into the system to confuse and bemuse the taxpayer.

    And they have one answer to every problem: spend more money. Taxpayers’ money. Your money.

    But Labour has one big problem. But apart from him. One or two of its politicians – just one or two – are uneasily aware that people don’t want more taxes and less wealth. So they are shamelessly trying to con the British people.

    Out of one side of their mouths, Labour tell you they would spend more on everything. Out of the other, they try to pretend they would spend almost nothing.

    Which is it? Will they tell us?

    Do they think the British people can’t add up?

    Don’t they know that the British people can? And they will see that Labour doesn’t add up.

    Local Government Reform

    Now Labour have made another miscalculation. They’ve asked for a confidence debate on our policies.

    And do you know what that means?

    They’ll have to tell us what their policies are.

    Take local government, just for a start. First, Norman Lamont dramatically reduced the burden of local taxation in the Budget. Then, on Thursday, Michael Heseltine revealed our plans to find the right role for local government in the future, so that we can work with it, not fight against it.

    By making it more accountable to voters. By simplifying its structure. By clarifying its functions. By testing its efficiency. And by reforming its finance.

    He set out the principles on which local taxation will be based in the future.

    First, on the number of people in each household. For I believe it is right that contributions should reflect the numbers using local services.

    Secondly, in part on the value of the property people live in. We will not allow high property prices in some parts of the country to feed through into excessive local taxes.

    We understand those fears. A fair local tax is one which does not fall too heavily on any single group. Let me be clear.

    We will not permit local authorities to impose penal taxes on the few -as they could and did under the old rating system – while the many bear no share of the costs of local government. And we will not allow the reform of local taxation to trigger a new spiral in local spending.

    We have made these clear pledges. And we have demonstrated our commitment to them by reducing the burden of local tax immediately.

    By contrast, what does Labour offer? A rag-bag of confused ideas dressed up as “fair rates”. How could rates ever be fair?

    Labour will not answer even the most basic question: at what level  should local taxation be set? How much should be raised? They can’t say. They won’t say. Because they don’t know. Dithering again. But don’t worry. If they won’t answer these questions, we will. We will do the sums for Labour and publish them.

    Beating inflation

    The key message from this Budget was that the battle against inflation is being won. This year inflation will be down to just 4% and falling still further.

    And as it falls, we will bring interest rates down as well. As we did yesterday – the fourth cut since we entered ERM. I disagree strongly with those who criticise our entry into the ERM. Does anyone seriously imagine that, against the background of the dramatic events of the last few months – a recession at home and abroad, a change of Prime Minister and even the fighting of a war – that interest rates could have been cut and the pound stayed strong outside the ERM? Of course not. And it is sheer folly to say so.

    We took tough action when it was needed to bring inflation under control. Now we are seeing the results. Inflation is coming down in Britain, when others are seeing it rise. Interest rates are falling, when elsewhere they are rising. And when across the world the impact of the recession is being felt, Britain is coming through the worst and will soon be growing again.

    And never forget how this country has progressed since 1979. In the 1980s our economy grew faster than Italy or France, faster even than Germany. The purchasing power of the average family is up by almost a third. Personal wealth has been spread wider than ever before.

    We can beat our competitors. And, yes, we can even beat our competitors in Germany. There is no reason to be defeatist about our prospects. I believe in Britain and in the ability of the British people to win. And win we will.

    Growing personal wealth; widening personal ownership

    Over the decades ahead we shall see the fruits of our free market policies. The widening of ownership isn’t an index of greed, as Labour so shallowly claim.

    Indeed, it is the very foundation of personal security, the keystone of independence, the gateway to opportunity and prosperity for generations to come.

    People who own homes; people who own shares; people who have savings. That security adds to a sense of dignity and pride. And they have an independence of action denied to those without homes or shares or savings. We want more of such people. Our Right-to-Buy policies have achieved a property-owning democracy. We now want to extend and deepen the Right to Own.

    Already – each year – some 10 billion pounds is inherited through home ownership. In a Conservative Britain, inheritance is no longer the privilege of the rich. It is already the prospect of the majority. And we must make it the birthright of all. We wish to see that money held by future generations for their own use.

    How different it is with Labour. Clause Four Socialism they say is dead. I wish it was. It’s still there in the small print. And tax demand Socialism lives on. The single unifying principle of every Labour government is higher personal taxation. They can always agree on that. Not much else. But always that.

    How characteristic that they now see family savings as a target for tax. You inherit, they take. You save, they tax. And this from the Party that says it wants investment. The only thing you can be sure of is that a Labour Chancellor will have his hands in your pockets, even more often than you do.

    Labour’s threat to savings

    Under Labour anyone inheriting a house or flat worth more than £30,000 and investing that money in savings would face a tax surcharge. That is their response to millions of people’s efforts to build their family’s security.

    Labour fought to stop those people buying their homes. While we helped them. But now they are back again. When those hard-earned savings in bricks and mortar come down to children Labour’s plan is to tax them away. A tax surcharge on savings. Nothing could more clearly show the hostility of Labour to personal independence. And the ignorance of Labour of the opportunities the next century will bring.

    And take pensions, too. Under Labour the opportunities to save for retirement independently of the state would be dashed away. Early next century there will be some three million more pensioners than there are today. Those working now want opportunities now to save money for old age in the way they want. Our Government has helped them to do just that. Some 4 1/2 million people now have personal pensions of their own.

    But what is Labour’s response to this social revolution? Again hostile, ignorant, vindictive. Their spokesman boasts he will “turn the pensions market on its head”. Only last week they announced the latest step in their vendetta against personal choice. They warned they would act immediately to grab over £600 million a year from investors in personal pensions and strip them of the help a Conservative government has given them. So, if you’re young today, remember today. Labour are planning to destroy your prosperity tomorrow.

    Safe in Labour’s hands?

    You know, as over the years we debated the National Health Service, one phrase became famous. ‘Safe in our hands’. Margaret Thatcher said it. And how right she was. Under her Government the Health Service had more resources, took on more doctors and nurses, and provided more treatment than ever before.

    Safe in our hands the Health Service was, is, and will be. It has served me and my family well over the years. And I can promise you this. It will be there in the future to serve every family well so long as a Conservative Government continues.

    But can Mr Kinnock say the same to the families working to build their independence?

    4 1/2 million personal pensions. Safe in your hands, Neil?

    The shares that over 5 million people have in privatised companies. Safe in your hands, Neil?

    The lower taxation that has raised living standards to record levels. Safe in your hands, Neil?

    The right to go to work free from union interference. Safe in your hands, Neil?

    The battle against inflation that means security for all. Safe in your hands, Neil?

    Five questions which Mr Kinnock will never answer. He dare not. But we know the answer. Not safe. Not secure. In fact, doomed – under Labour. The Conservative Party has fought for those rights and given them to the people of this country. We must never allow Labour to steal them away.

    And when we speak of safety there is one area above all that counts -the defence of the realm. Is that safe in Labour’s hands?

    Where would our defence have been if Labour had been in power this last ten years?

    Defence spending cut to ribbons. Our forces slashed.

    Our nuclear capability going or gone. Going or gone. Just as Saddam Hussein was building his own.

    We have seen this last two months how right we were to keep our forces strong and ready. And how superbly we were served.

    It was all possible because Margaret Thatcher’s Government prepared for the unexpected.

    Unlike Labour. Unprepared. Even for the expected.

    Of course, we welcome the changes that have taken place in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. But great uncertainties remain. And secure defence is still our foremost duty.

    For Labour defence is an embarrassment. Some of them hate it. Some resent it. Some just wish the need for it would go away. Those attitudes spell disaster.

    In our Party we know that the unexpected does occur, and that when it comes to defence you err on the side of safety. You don’t take risks with defence.

    The British people will never trust with office a Labour party they do not trust on defence.

    Quality in public service

    Mr Chairman; the fourth great challenge for us in the 1990s will be to take our Conservative revolution into the dustiest and darkest corners of public service. Too many people still have to feel the benefits of the changes we have made.

    Education

    Getting it right in education is crucial.

    Some people seem to think we have no right to insist on higher standards for our children. That it is a matter to be left to the “experts”. Well, people like that have some learning to do themselves. We do have that right. Every child in every classroom has a right to higher standards. And we intend to ensure that they receive them.

    Ken Clarke has insisted that children should be taught to spell. What a revolutionary thought. I agree with him on that. So do parents. So do employers. But it seems not everyone does. There are those who defend something called “real books” – where young children are given books and expected to pick up reading, as the Schools’ Inspectors put it, by a “process of osmosis”. It sounds pretty odd to me.

    It did occur to me that this “real books” method might explain Mr Kinnock’s grasp of economics. Because do you know what the Inspectors say about people taught by the “real books” method? I looked it up.

    “They were able”, the Inspectors said, “to tell stories, but relied heavily on pictures…”

    “They were ill-equipped to move on to unfamiliar material, for example non-fiction…” (They mean facts – unfamiliar indeed to him.)

    “They were weak readers of instructions and questions in subjects such as maths.”

    Adding up was never his strong point.

    Yes, it does sound familiar, doesn’t it? I think it explains a lot.

    But I have to say also that I have a suspicion, which I share with Ken Clarke, and millions of parents in this country today. And that is that there has been too much experimentation, too much theory, too little attention to the basics. Theories come and go. But children have just one opportunity to be taught. And that must not be lost.

    That is why reform in education is top of our list.

    – Pushing through the changes in our schools that give more say to parents and more freedom for schools themselves.

    – Tackling the truanting that if unchecked allows vulnerable children to lose out on opportunity and which is a seedcorn for crime.

    – Setting clear standards of what should be taught.

    – And, yes, I say it to those who still seem to be fighting it, testing to see how children are doing.

    Of course testing is right. How can you find out where teaching is going wrong unless you know whether it is going wrong?

    The key people behind a good education are good teachers. That is why I am determined to see their status properly recognised and quality rewarded. Good schools. Good teachers. Good discipline. And good results. That is what parents demand and pupils deserve. And what this Government will deliver.

    Ensuring quality : a citizen’s charter

    Our changes in education are about raising quality. But quality applies elsewhere as well.

    What we now aim to do is to put in place a comprehensive citizen’s charter. It will work for quality across the whole range of public services. It will give support to those who use the services in seeking better standards.

    People who depend on public services – patients, passengers, parents, pupils, benefit claimants – all must know where they stand and what service they have a right to expect. All too often today the individual is unable to enforce better service from those who provide it. I know how powerless an individual can feel against the stone-walling of a town hall. How hopeless when he is bounced from phone to phone by some impersonal voice. How frustrated to be told yet again: “we regret the inconvenience this may cause”. And I see no reason why the public should have to tolerate that. Not just inconvenience. But often hardship. And all too often personal loss.

    Most of those who work so hard and so well in our public services will agree with me when I say this situation must be brought to an end. And end it we will. By injecting competition, extending privatisation and widening competitive tendering. And alongside this by measures under a citizen’s charter to enforce accountability and achieve quality control. This will look systematically at every part of public service to see how higher standards can be achieved.

    Some mechanisms are already in place. The Audit Commission, for example, does superb work on behalf of the citizen. How typical that it is lined up in Labour’s programme for the axe.

    But we will define clear and appropriate mechanisms for enforcing standards right across the public service. Sometimes an audit function. Sometimes an ombudsman. Sometimes simply the separation of powers between those who provide services and those who check on them. Some other ideas, too.

    We will enforce publication of results by public services, make inspectorates truly independent, and make properly accountable those in control. We will seek to extend the principle of performance-related pay. And, where necessary, look for ways of introducing financial sanctions, involving direct compensation to the public or direct loss to the budgets of those that fall down on the job.

    We will also look to public bodies to publish clear contracts of service -contracts that mean something – against which performance can be judged. Our programme will mean that for the first time all those people who depend on public service will have strong support from within the public sector itself in enforcing quality control.

    Quality in service is our aim for the 1990s. Second-class services cannot be excused by handing out third-class treatment to those who complain.

    Building for the Long-term

    The principles I have set out for the 1990s – building the unity of the nation, giving opportunity and power to the people, sustaining a stable economy and spreading wealth, striving for quality in public services -all these are essential to Britain’s future. Together they flow from our fifth guiding principle – to consider the interests not only of this generation but of those to come.

    And as we build for the long-term, unlike our opponents, we will build on ideals, and on principle. Labour wouldn’t recognise principle if it gripped them by the windpipe. And the Liberal party is riddled with self-interest. We needn’t detain ourselves with Liberal policy. They would sign up to anything, so long as it means a seat at the table. That is Liberal policy. They say they want proportional representation. Note that. Their first and only policy objective. A policy that is in their own self-interest. Not on health. Not on the economy. Not on defence. On Liberal self-interest. And they will give anything for it. Defence cuts. Higher taxes. Even Labour Government. What they really want is not proportional representation but permanent  representation for the Liberal Party in Government whatever the policies. Well, there is a simple answer to Mr Ashdown. He can’t have it from us. And he won’t get it.

    It is because we care for lasting principles that I want to place Britain at the heart of Europe.

    But partnership in Europe will never mean passive acceptance of all that is put to us. No-one should fear we will lose our national identity. We will fight for Britain’s interest as hard as any Government that has gone before. I want Britain to inspire and to shape Europe as decisively as we have over the Single Market programme. Then we will fight for Europe’s interests, too. But not from the outside where we would lose. From the inside where we will win.

    We are rightly proud of our national traditions, all of them, English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish. We are proud of Britain, of what it has meant and will mean to the world. I wish that all who wrote and taught and spoke in our country could share that pride. I wish that they could help to open the eyes of the whole nation to what that means. For in the history of our nation and in the towns and villages that form it lies a great part of our identity.

    But that identity comes too from the values we share. And they are values that are shared by our friends abroad – personal freedom, opportunity, respect for one’s fellow citizens and their views, a fundamental belief that power should be with the people and not the state.

    Idealism, yes. But practical idealism. Democracy. Plain common or garden decency. It is those values I believe in. And it is those values that Britain stands for. The world needs those values more than ever before. And it needs us to work with those who share them. They are values that spring from the very fibre of ordinary men and women. Lasting values. Commonsense values. Conservative values. The values which I and all of us in our Party will fight to uphold.

  • Greg Clark – 2015 Speech to National House Building Council

    gregclark

    Below is the text of the speech made by Greg Clark, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, to the NHBC at Church House in London on 26 November 2015.

    A turnaround decade for housing

    Thank you, it’s an honour to speak to so many of you today – in a momentous week for housing, especially at an event hosted by the NHBC. Your timing couldn’t be better after the Spending Review, so that I couldn’t possibly come empty handed.

    The NHBC is a credit to the industry – an example of how standards can be raised and maintained independently of government.

    Not only does the NHBC certify houses, it also helps insure them – providing warranties on around 80 per cent of all the new homes built in this country:

    A model of taking direct responsibility that ought to be applied more widely.

    We can be proud that as other countries seek to establish similar organisations, it is to this country that they look for inspiration.

    The same cannot be said for every aspect of our country’s record on housing.

    The first decade of the 21st century was not our finest hour:

    • housing bubble that burst with devastating consequences
    • industry in debt
    • sites mothballed
    • workers laid off
    • skills lost
    • the lowest level of peacetime house building since the 1920s
    • post-war low in house building by the private sector – and by councils
    • shrinkage in the stock of affordable housing
    • sustained fall in home ownership
    • chaos in the regulation of lending
    • and a planning system grinding to a halt

    The roots of this failure run deep.

    Through decades of a complacency about different components of the housing market.

    Decades of political inertia.

    And decades in which this country consistently failed to build enough homes.

    The Prime Minister has spoken of his determination to make this our turnaround decade.

    A decade in which we eliminate the budget deficit. But also the housing deficit.

    This may not be a familiar term, but if the level of house building falls below the level of household formation then a housing deficit is exactly what we have.

    And, furthermore, a housing deficit that builds up into a housing debt – one that cashes out not just in house price inflation and falling ownership, but contributes to economic instability, social inequality and stunted opportunities.

    For the good of us all – and especially of the younger generation – we must, and will, put this right.

    Progress to date

    So, five years into this turnaround decade, what progress have we made?

    Most importantly, there’s been a significant recovery in the level of house building.

    This can be seen across of a variety of measures, there’s no shortage of competition for housing statistics on any given week, but on this occasion let me refer to NHBC figures.

    In 2009, they registered 81,000 new homes; this year they expect to register 160,000.

    This is based on a pretty consistent 80 per cent share of the market and approximates to a doubling of building levels during this period.

    And good progress continues to be made. The most recent year of figures shows a ten per cent increase in registrations.

    In fact, the net supply of housing has shown the biggest annual increase in almost three decades.

    This hasn’t happened by accident. From the start, we did what was needed to get the house building industry back on its feet:

    • by stabilising the banking system
    • through financial guarantees for development; and in helping first time buyers
    • over 230,000 households have been helped into home ownership through government schemes
    • over 100,000 through the various strands of Help to Buy
    • the number of first time buyers is at a seven-year high – and now stands at double the low established in the previous decade
    • crucially, we’ve increased the stock of affordable homes. Over 263,000 affordable homes have been provided in England since April 2010 – nearly one third of them in London.

    I might also add that twice as many council homes were built in these five years than during the previous 13 years.

    We reformed the planning system. I want to express my gratitude to many people in this room who supported us in this reform.

    They said it couldn’t be done, but the National Planning Policy Framework is now four years old – and bearing fruit.

    In 2010, most local authorities didn’t even have a Local Plan. Instead they had 1,300 pages of central planning guidance. And thousands more from the Regional Spatial Strategies.

    We removed this smothering blanket of verbiage and replaced it with the NPPF – a clear and accessible document of just 52 pages.

    Now, the great majority of local authorities do have a Local Plan – and we will ensure that the rest are in place by 2017. Moreover, these are better Local Plans.

    Those adopted since the NPPF set targets equivalent to 109 per cent of national household projections – versus 86 per cent for pre-NPPF plans.

    Planning permissions in the year to the 31 March 2015 were up 13 per cent on the previous year and 64 per cent on the year to March 2010.

    Overall, we now permit around a quarter of a million new homes every year; which, if built out, would be enough to close the housing deficit.

    The ongoing challenge

    But there’s more to do.

    Of course, planning for all the homes we need isn’t enough. We have to build them too.

    We must therefore go further and faster to ensure that this happens.

    Since the election this year, my department has continued with the most effective measures of the previous parliament.

    We’ve pressed ahead with the release of publicly-owned land for development.

    And we’ve introduced the Housing and Planning Bill, which is in committee stage as we speak.

    This Bill includes:

    • provision for 200,000 Starter Homes by 2020
    • an automatic register of brownfield land
    • and measures to speed up the CPO process
    • measures to support the extension of the Right to Buy from council tenants to housing association tenants

    Instead, we’ve agreed a deal with the housing associations to get on with the job without delay. In return, the government will ensure that the proceeds of Right to Buy sales are used to build new affordable homes for rent and purchase.

    The housing associations have set an example here for the whole industry:

    • a willingness to move forward in order to build the homes we need; a readiness to be part of the progress we all hope to benefit from
    • to get to where we need to be, we must give something in return
    • and all parts of the industry do have something to give

    We need to see a re-diversification of the sector. A big role not only for the housing associations, but also for councils, self builders, custom builders, small-and-medium-sized enterprises and overseas companies in that sector.

    This doesn’t mean a smaller role for the biggest players in the industry.

    Quite the opposite.

    To house a growing population we need more houses from everyone.

    This is not a zero-sum game.

    If we tried to play it that way, zero would be the sum of the progress made.

    The Spending Review

    Of course, a government shouldn’t ask others to move out of their comfort zones if it isn’t willing to do the same.

    For any Chancellor of the Exchequer, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, or Conservative government, intervening in the market and committing public money is not something done lightly.

    Yet we are determined to invest in what matters most to Britain’s future.

    As the Chancellor said yesterday in the Commons: “in this Spending Review we choose housing.”

    Specifically, we have secured over £20 billion from the Spending Review to support our wider ambitions to deliver one million new homes and to double the number of first time buyers.

    Individual measures include:

    • extend the Help to Buy: equity loan scheme to 2021 – supporting the purchase of more homes
    • in London, a doubling of equity loans to 40%, providing the capital’s aspiring home owners with a better chance to buy
    • and a £1 billion Housing Delivery Fund to support small and custom builders
    • there will be £8 billion for a total of over 400,000 affordable homes – the largest affordable housebuilding programme for many decades
    • and we’re making major investments in large-scale projects – including Ebbsfleet Garden City, Bicester, Barking Riverside and Northstowe

    So, while the Chancellor has made clear his determination to close the budgetary deficit, he was equally clear that this will go hand in hand with action on the housing deficit.

    Both are required to make this the turnaround decade.

    Both more and better

    Ladies and gentlemen, in the last five years both we and you have pulled house building up from the record lows of the previous decade.

    In the next five years we intend to push it up further, to levels not sustained for many decades.

    But this is not the limit of our ambitions.

    The challenges that I’ve described in this speech were many decades in the making.

    And so, as our focus moves from rescue to reform, we must address the deep structural weaknesses in the way that this country plans and builds for the future.

    This work is already underway through reforms like the NPPF, and the work must go on.

    Though the investment announced in the spending review is vital and necessary – we must also move to a future in which we which we can provide new homes without constant intervention from the centre.

    In which demand for housing can be met as readily as demand for other goods in our society.

    This goes beyond numbers alone.

    As well as building more homes, we must build better homes.

    Indeed, better streets and neighbourhoods too.

    I am proud that we have made – and will continue to make – such progress together on quantity.

    But let’s not waste the chance to also make progress together on quality.

    We must redouble our efforts.

    To achieve our objectives we don’t just need the commitment of the government and the industry, but of the nation as a whole.

    Ultimately that means convincing people that development is a force for making places better not worse.

    Therefore, the task before us is build both more and better.

    And, together, we will.

    Thank you.

  • Patrick McLoughlin – 2015 Speech on the Midlands

    Patrick McLoughlin
    Patrick McLoughlin

    Below is the text of the speech made by Patrick McLoughlin, the Secretary of State for Transport, at Derbyshire County Cricket Club on 27 November 2015.

    Introduction

    Thank you.

    It’s good to be back with you at this ground.

    This visit has become an annual highlight for me.

    It’s the third year in a row I’ve addressed the forum.

    A run like that is rare for a Transport Secretary.

    Before my appointment in 2012, there had been 7 Transport Secretaries in 7 years.

    When you are in charge of long-term infrastructure projects, change like that doesn’t always help.

    Rail, in particular, needs the perspective that comes with experience.

    So I am delighted to be back.

    Yet there has been one change since I was last here.

    And that’s to the forum itself.

    No longer the Derby and Derbyshire Rail Forum.

    But now the East Midlands Rail Forum.

    To me, that’s a statement of intent.

    Since the forum was established in 1993 it has grown in numbers, stature and influence.

    Now it’s the largest cluster of rail firms in the world

    And the new name reflects the forum’s ambition as it increasingly represents firms across our whole region.

    Growth in the East Midlands

    In June, the Chancellor visited the premises of a member of this forum.

    Garrandale – a great rail engineering firm.

    In his speech then, he said that five years ago our country was on the brink.

    We were borrowing £1 in every £4 that we spent.

    Midlands businesses were going under at a rate of over a hundred every day.

    And nearly half a million people in the Midlands were looking for work.

    If we were to save our economy, we had to act.

    And so we took some tough decisions.

    We cut spending.

    Cut corporation tax.

    And cut red tape.

    Five years on, our economy is growing strongly again, nationally and locally.

    The East Midlands is now home to 20,000 more businesses than in 2010.

    There are more people in work here than at any time since 1992.

    And on Wednesday the Chancellor reported that the Midlands is creating jobs at a rate three times faster than London and the south east.

    So our region is making great progress.

    Rail investment

    And one of the things giving this region its edge is its great concentration of rail expertise.

    Rail supply firms in this region are benefiting as we put more money into our rail sector than at any time since the Victorian era.

    Since the forum was established in 1993, passenger numbers have more than doubled.

    Rail freight is up 75%.

    The government is investing more than £38 billion in the rail network.

    And following Wednesday’s spending review transport capital spending in this Parliament will increase by 50% to a total of £61 billion; the biggest increase in a generation.

    That’s a great settlement for transport.

    And it’s a great opportunity for the rail supply chain.

    Hendy report

    But after so many years in which rail was underfunded, investment on this scale was never going to be easy.

    In June, I announced that Network Rail’s performance on the electrification of the TransPennine and Midland Main Lines had not been good enough.

    I asked Sir Peter Hendy to review Network Rail’s programme of works.

    And alongside the spending review, Sir Peter set out his plans to put its programme back on track.

    I can say today that I have accepted Sir Peter’s plan.

    It reaffirms our commitment to our railways.

    And shows how we will achieve our aim of transforming rail journeys for passengers.

    So we are pressing ahead with Crossrail.

    HS2.

    Thameslink.

    New InterCity Express trains on the East Coast and Great Western mainlines.

    North West and Yorkshire train lengthening.

    East-West Rail.

    Cornwall re-signalling.

    Wessex and Waterloo capacity enhancements.

    West Anglia main line capacity improvements.

    And the electrification and enhancement of the Great Western, Northern Hub, TransPennine, and Midland main lines.

    No infrastructure projects have been cancelled.

    But the report shows that the need for tough decisions is not yet over.

    Some projects will take longer and cost more than originally planned.

    As we put Network Rail’s focus firmly on its core task of delivery, some of that extra cost will be covered by Network Rail asset sales and new efficiencies.

    Skills

    But innovation and efficiency isn’t the only challenge for the rail supply chain.

    We are also facing a shortage of skills.

    Our country needs more rail workers of all kinds.

    More civil engineers.

    Mechanical engineers.

    Construction workers.

    Surveyors.

    Signallers.

    And even drivers.

    In all, we need 10,000 new engineers to improve the existing network, while HS2 alone will create 25,000 jobs during construction and 3000 jobs in operation.

    Yet as things stand today, parts of the industry will lose half their staff to retirement within 15 years.

    With our plans for investment, that’s unsustainable.

    So the government is addressing this skills challenge through new training institutions, such as the flagship National Training Academy for Rail in Northampton.

    Through creating 3 million new apprentices in this Parliament.

    And through the appointment of Terry Morgan, the Chairman of Crossrail, to develop a transport skills strategy.

    But, ultimately, we need the rail industry to invest in skills in new staff and new training.

    Because although government can make plans and provide some of the funding, it will be the rail industry who will deliver for the country.

    Midlands Engine for Growth

    But while we are working to secure our economy and to transform our transport we have a clear principle.

    Wherever possible, decisions about planning, spending and services should be taken by the people who will be most affected by those decisions.

    For that, we need to devolve power from London and out to the regions.

    So last month I was pleased by the launch of the newly-strengthened Midlands Connect Partnership

    Midlands Connect is a collaboration between the Midlands’ Local Enterprise Partnerships and local authorities.

    Over the months ahead Midlands Connect will work with HS2 Ltd, with Network Rail, and with Highways England to develop investment plans for the Midlands.

    They will look at maximising the economic growth from HS2, reducing journey times between our towns and cities, and making better connections to international gateways.

    There’s no better way to make the case for investment than for it to be informed by local people.

    Local businesses.

    Local representatives.

    And that is how we will make the Midlands an engine for growth.

    Conclusion

    So in conclusion, it’s great to be back.

    As Transport Secretary.

    At this event.

    And on home turf.

    For our nation’s railways, these are rare days.

    Customer numbers have never been higher.

    Investment has never been higher.

    Expectations have never been higher.

    And so it’s an opportunity.

    But also a challenge.

    I said at the beginning that rail needs the perspective that comes with experience.

    Looking around this room I can see 176 years of rail experience and the expertise to match.

    So I’m confident that we will succeed as we build the rail network our country deserves.

    Thank you.

  • Nicky Morgan – 2015 Speech on London Schools

    nickymorgan

    Below is the text of a speech made by Nicky Morgan, the Secretary of State for Education, made at City Hall in London on 27 November 2015.

    Thank you, Munira [Mirza, Deputy Mayor of London] for that introduction. And thank you, Boris [Johnson, Mayor of London], for organising and hosting this fantastic conference.

    It really is a pleasure to be here at a conference with such a sense of energy and purpose – and such a sense of pride in the work you do and the difference you make.

    I want to talk about educational excellence. About how London schools are already giving thousands of children an excellent education.

    About what we need to do if we’re serious about excellence everywhere. And I want to speak directly to you – the current and future leaders of education in London and beyond – about the opportunity for, and the importance of, leadership.

    I want to make a reality of educational excellence everywhere. This is more than an easy phrase. We spent a lot of the last 5 years talking about what we mean by and how we realise educational excellence. For the next 5 years, my focus is on what it takes to make this happen everywhere, across the country from Barking to Blackburn, and from Westminster to Wiltshire.

    The reforms of the last Parliament re-introduced rigour to our education system and placed high expectations back at the heart of our all schools.

    We removed qualifications from the performance tables that weren’t respected by employers and universities and instead began the process of introducing gold-standard qualifications that would equip young people to succeed in the modern world, and on the world stage.

    We introduced the EBacc to encourage more schools to offer pupils a rigorous academic core – and I’m struck and impressed that London secondary schools are leading the way.

    Because as your pupils grow up, they will need to stand their own with their peers from Shenzen and Chennai. And from Kraków, and from Frankfurt. And more.

    For some people, this is a scary prospect – but it’s also an exciting one, and I have confidence and pride in the talent and potential of our young people.

    And education is just as much about instilling those virtues and values, and allowing young people to develop their own unique talents, as it is about the grades they receive at the end of school.

    A well-educated child or young person should be well rounded, with a range of interests, a real sense of character and grit, equipped for adult life.

    Since I took up this role, I’ve visited almost 80 schools and met over 1,000 teachers – and I know that this is something we all agree on.

    Sally [Coates] dedicates a whole chapter of her book [‘Headstrong: 11 lessons of school leadership’ (2015)] to the importance of developing the whole child. She describes how “our pursuit of academic excellence can never be extricated from the challenge of developing responsible, mature, compassionate citizens who are able to channel their talents towards healthy, productive ends”. I entirely agree with her.

    So I’ve taken every opportunity to champion this broader education, through awards and grants for schools and projects that help to develop character; by promoting cadets in schools and the National Citizen Service.

    And I’m pleased and proud to make a point of celebrating and backing the work that schools do – such as at Goldbeaters Primary School, School 21 or Mulberry School for Girls and many other schools I’ve visited. These schools debunk completely the notion that there is somehow any tension between academic success and character education – in fact they demonstrate that the 2 are mutually dependent and inextricably intertwined.

    So, after 5 years of reform and challenge, we know what educational excellence looks like and how it can be unlocked. Our challenge is to make a reality of excellent education everywhere. And London schools show what can be done – including in some of the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods and communities in the country.

    Schools across London prove that there is no place for the old excuses about ‘kids like these’. And you make that point more powerfully than any politician could. We all know about schools like King Solomon Academy and Mossbourne – they’re famous nationally for the quality of the education they offer.

    But I’m sure that each of you will know other schools that achieve just as much. You show working hard not only gives children from every background the best possible start in life, but also power to transform whole communities, leading the way in instilling a culture of aspiration, ambition and refusing to settle for second best.

    London’s academies and chains of schools demonstrate this transformative power of this approach in everything they do.

    Groups of schools like the Ark and Harris academies are spreading excellence, and at the same time providing the structures so that teachers and heads can focus on the core of their jobs, allowing us to open new career paths and opportunities for great teachers, and for great school leaders.

    Just as there isn’t a ‘one-size-fits-all’ school, so there shouldn’t be a ‘one-size-fits-all’ career path for teachers. And, again, Sally – your career is a great example of some of the opportunities that being a teacher opens.

    And, of course, the London Challenge model and legacy lives on. Education in London has been transformed over the last 15 to 20 years. Important networks and ideas are now owned by schools yourselves, like the Challenge Partners.

    And the core elements are now the basis for the self-improving school-led system we want to spread across the rest of the country – with the expansion of Teach First, and the networks of teaching schools and of national and local leaders of education.

    But a strong school system requires sound funding. We know that there can be no better investment in the future of our country than a good education.

    That’s why, thanks to the difficult decisions we’ve taken elsewhere, the Chancellor was able to confirm in the Spending Review that we would meet our manifesto commitments to protect core spending per pupil and to maintain the pupil premium at current rates – and that the core school budget will be protected in real terms to 2019-2020.

    We have been able to go beyond that, and similarly protect the base-rate funding received for every 16-to-19 student, at its current level, to the end of this Parliament.

    None of this is to say that schools will not have to find efficiencies. Despite being more generously protected than most of the public sector, you as school leaders will be challenged to make your budgets go further. We will help you to do that – supporting smarter procurement and better sharing of best practice.

    The introduction of a national funding formula will also mean change. It is clearly unfair that a school in one part of the country can attract over 50% more funding than an identical school, with pupils who have identical characteristics but in another part of the country. We need to rectify that.

    This is about transparency, and about fairness – and so schools in London which have very high levels of deprivation or other additional needs will be funded to meet those needs.

    Let me be clear, that while we will consult on the exact formula, we will keep a very close watch to make sure that we are earmarking the right level of funding for deprivation, to ensure that those needs can continue to be met. And, of course, there will also be a geographical element to the formula that will recognise the higher wage costs that London faces.

    Before I finish, I want to say a few words to you as school leaders.

    You do a phenomenal job. Your work is important and inspiring. Although I’m sure there are days – and weeks – when everything feels like a grind, you lead schools that transform lives. In your schools, children grow up. You are their teachers and their role models, and you guide and support them through towards adulthood. You have a lot to be proud about.

    I am delighted that this month’s data shows teacher recruitment starting to rise with over 1,000 more post-graduates starting training this year, compared to last.

    There’s a lot more to do to make sure we’re recruiting, training and retaining the teachers that we need, especially in key subjects and in some areas of the country. But I take these figures as a good sign, and I hope that they reflect a greater recognition that teaching is a fantastic profession and an exciting career to join.

    You will know that I recently announced the National Teaching Service – it’s a new programme to recruit and deploy our best teachers and middle leaders into underperforming schools in areas where they are needed most.

    The programme will launch next September, with a pilot of 100 teachers and middle leaders in the North West of England. By 2020 it will have deployed 1,500 outstanding teachers and middle leaders to underperforming schools in areas of the country that struggle to attract, recruit and retain high quality teachers.

    And I want to encourage each of you to think about the leadership role that you play with pride and with ambition. I know you want the best for your own school and pupils, and that you work hard to make a reality of your goals.

    If you haven’t already done so, I’d encourage each of you to think about the opportunities to share more widely and take a lead in the school-led system. You could form a partnership with one or more other schools. You might take a leading role within your existing chain. Or you might think about how you could share what works here with schools and emerging chains beyond London.

    Deputy heads – your heads won’t thank me for this – but you too should be thinking about when and how you want to take the next step.

    In addition to those of you here at this fantastic conference, I also want us all to do more to nurture and develop the leaders of the future. I want to encourage talented teachers – and especially those from under-represented groups – to take this step, and to tackle the real or perceived barriers that hold them back.

    This is the right thing to do for individuals, and for the profession as a whole. And, more importantly, it’s essential if we want to make a reality of educational excellence everywhere.

    I know that these aren’t easy jobs. I see and hear the challenges you face when I visit schools, talk to school leaders, and when I respond to emails and letters from teachers and heads. We shouldn’t pretend that leadership like yours is easy, because it isn’t. But it is important, valuable and rewarding.

    I will continue to challenge schools to do better. It’s what parents rightly expect of me. I will challenge you to give more pupils an excellent start – and especially to do so for those pupils who we currently fail. I simply wouldn’t be doing my job if I didn’t.

    But I can promise you that I will do it with respect, and with a recognition that it isn’t an easy thing to ask. And I’ll do it because we all share a fundamental belief that every child deserves an excellent education.

    As London schools show – great teachers, great heads and great groups of schools can achieve phenomenal things. Thank you, for all that you do.

  • Ed Vaizey – 2013 Speech to the Local Government Association Conference

    edvaizey

    Below is the text of a speech made by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Ed Vaizey, to the Local Government Association Conference on 7th March 2013.

    Ladies and gentlemen,

    I’d like to thank Flick Rea for her kind introduction and for inviting me to speak at your annual conference, bringing together so many of you who work so hard to promote British culture, heritage, tourism and sport.

    These are not easy times to be in Government, at either national or local level. Faced with a crippling budget deficit, we are faced with difficult choices, some of which are painful to make. But we have to cut our cloth.

    But unique challenges also bring unique opportunities. While we must all learn how to do more with less, it offers us the chance to think differently about how we go about delivering. Yesterday’s model may not necessarily be the right template for tomorrow.

    That said, our creative and cultural sector is in rude health. The success of last year’s Olympic and Paralympic Games and the Cultural Olympiad demonstrated to the world the richness of what it is to be British in the 21st Century, with all its quirks and eccentricity.

    That’s why our creative and cultural sector is such a vital element in delivering economic growth, by encouraging economic investment through tourism and business. We have seen this at the Sage and Baltic in Gateshead, the Turner Contemporary in Margate and the Liverpool City of Culture. These are perfect examples of local regeneration being driven by culture.

    So in tough economic times, the Government is committed to safeguarding and nurturing our investment in culture, heritage and sport.

    In order to do this, we restored the share of arts and heritage funding from the National Lottery from 16% to 20% each. This increased chunk, combined with growing Lottery sales, means Arts Council England is now projected to receive £262 million in 2015, that’s over £100 million more than it received prior to May 2010.

    The Heritage Lottery Fund too, is now projected to receive £379 million in 2015, £160 million more than prior to 2010.

    And Sport England’s projected income will be £235 million compared with £134m prior to 2010.

    This all means that almost £3 billion will go to the arts over the lifetime of this Parliament, a billion in Lottery funding combined with almost two billion in direct Government funding.

    But state support is only one side of the coin, so to speak. Arts, culture and heritage cannot exist in isolation at a time of unprecedented economic challenges. As I said a moment ago, we must seize this opportunity to take a fresh look at how we deliver.

    That’s why the Government is supporting the sector to develop a stronger emphasis on philanthropy, including the £100m Catalyst Fund with Arts Council England and the Heritage Lottery Fund.

    We’ve also introduced a reduced rate of inheritance tax from 40% to 36% for those estates where 10% or more is left to charity, to encourage legacy giving to cultural organisations. This was also the focus of one of three reports published by the Government at the end of 2012, alongside proposals to boost fundraising capacity outside of London, and exploring the scope for harnessing digital technology.

    The pursuit of philanthropy is not a sticking plaster solution. It is about the pursuit of a long-term strategy to strengthen the financial resilience of the cultural sector.

    In the case of endowments, this might take a century to bear full fruit, and it is for that very reason we must get cracking, to promote a broader culture of giving.

    It is our ambition that that the four strands; philanthropy, earned income, commercial revenues, and state funding; brought together, will in turn attract other sources of investment.

    I see so many excellent examples of how this partnership approach, combined with fresh thinking, is delivering results.

    The Royal Shakespeare Company’s production of Matilda is a perfect example of how edgy, innovative and publicly-supported art can flourish into a critical and commercial hit.

    It took seven years of development by the RSC to create Matilda. Public subsidy enabled the company to take the risk on two brilliant writers, new to musicals. Today, total sales now exceed £24 million, with the advance standing at £4.5 million. It is the latest in a long line of valuable cultural exports that emerged as a result of public investment.

    That’s why I can assure you that culture and the arts are important to the Government. It seems ridiculous that I would have to state such a self-evident truth. I believe it is regrettable to observe some of the scaremongering, suggesting our arts and cultural sector is somehow “at risk.”

    So where does all this rubbish suggesting: “The Arts are in Crisis,” come from? Let’s look at the facts:

    This year’s Arts Development UK survey, looking at local authority arts spending, found that the average local authority budget for the arts is a fraction under £385,000 – an increase in cash terms on last year’s levels.

    Every £1 spent by local authorities on the arts brings in an extra £3.83 of additional funding. That suggests leverage funding of almost £1.5 million per local authority.

    Local authorities remain one of the major funders of arts in England and Wales, with an estimated spend of £134 million on direct arts services.

    During the five years of this parliament, Arts Council of England will put more than £90 million into the 28 English regional producing theatres.

    And in 2011 a £45 million Strategic Touring Programme was launched, to bring arts to people all around the country not just those in main centres.

    Plus the £37 million Creative People and Places fund will focus investment in parts of the country where involvement in the arts is below average.

    And just yesterday I announced that 11 areas of the UK are bidding to become this country’s City of Culture in 2017.

    British culture in crisis? I don’t think so.

    In this context I welcome the LGA’s publication on the relationship between arts and growth. It demonstrates that where local authorities recognise this relationship, investment at a local level has been maintained. Arts and heritage and its links with tourism are fundamental to supporting growth.

    To give you an example of this: Milton Keynes Council invested £197,000 in the 2012 Summer of Culture and International Festival, which in turn levered an additional £1 million from participating organisations. The total economic impact is estimated to be £6.4 million.

    Another is the 2010 economic impact study of the Anvil Arts Trust in Basingstoke, which runs The Anvil, The Haymarket and The Forge. I highlight this one not simply because it is in the Secretary of State’s constituency, but rather because it gets most of its funding from the local council, which found that the Trust generates a gross economic impact of £6.2 million. The study went some way to help councillors understand the importance of Anvil Arts as a sizeable economic entity, generating income and jobs.

    And in their year as European City of Culture, Liverpool received 9.7 million additional visitors to the city which in turn resulted in over £735 million in additional visitor spend. Derry-Londonderry hope to have 2800 tourism jobs by 2020 as a legacy from their year as the first UK City of Culture.

    Yesterday I announced the 11 cities and places which have put themselves forward to be the UK’s City of Culture in 2017. They are the ones that “Get It”. It’s only a shame that more don’t.

    The recently signed partnership between VisitEngland and Arts Council England will result in both organisations jointly championing England’s cultural offer, enabling us to better co-ordinate activity, and supporting destinations with the potential to grow their economies by nurturing local culture.

    Last November I met the Local Authority Heritage Champions at Painters Hall, and was particularly impressed at the work they do to ensure that heritage is underpinning their local authorities’ plans.

    They are yet more examples of innovative thinking and working in partnership, to deliver real economic benefit.

    Our rich heritage is rightly a source of great national pride. Our heritage is our hallmark and makes the UK distinctive in a globalised world. It is a tremendous draw for visitors too: 40% of leisure visitors to the UK cite our heritage as the major drawcard, a sign of our heritage delivering very real economic benefits. The heritage tourism sector is worth £12.4 billion a year to the UK, not only in entrance fees, but in pounds spent in shops, hotels and restaurants. That means jobs.

    A fine example is Wakefield which has become a major visitor destination for Yorkshire. The area offers excellent attractions including the Hepworth Wakefield, the Yorkshire Sculpture Park, the Theatre Royal, the National Coal Mining Museum for England and the National Trust’s Nostell Priory. These attractions combined received over a million visits in 2011/12, delivering £323m to the local economy, and creating 9,000 jobs.

    So in growing our economy, our heritage and history give us an edge. And having an edge can sometimes make the difference between winning and losing.

    But innovation and fresh thinking is delivering results in other parts of the cultural sector also: our libraries, where digital technology is being exploited to support economic growth and development.

    Now, libraries; or the public library service to be precise, are another area which are occasionally deemed to be “In Crisis.”

    So let’s look at some examples. Libraries in Northamptonshire are hosting Enterprise Hubs offering business start-up advice, job clubs and training workshops which are supporting the economic growth and development of the county.

    In fact the concept has been so successful, the council is planning to extend the concept by setting up a ‘hatchery’ space in their libraries, providing business incubation for up to one year.

    To help encourage young entrepreneurs they are allocating one of the Library business spaces to under 25s.

    I’m delighted our library service continues to thrive and modernise. Local Authorities invested £820 million in libraries last year. Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester are all making major investments in their central libraries, and Birmingham’s will soon be the largest library in Europe when it opens this year.

    In the spirit of fresh thinking, the Public Service Mutual model is offering another way to maintain the delivery of library, and other services. In York, work is underway developing the first staff-led, public service mutual in library and archive services, with help from the £10 million Mutuals Support Programme.

    It’s an impressive undertaking: York’s libraries and archive service has around 120 staff and a budget of £2.4 million a year, providing 17 libraries, as well as archive and local history services. The project is developing a final business plan and aims to get council approval to spin out in June, and we will be sharing what can be learned from the project with other providers.

    To support this growth, the Government has appointed a specialist adviser on libraries to work with local authorities and Arts Council England. I encourage you to engage with Yinnon Ezra over the coming months to consider different approaches to library service provision, and new ways of thinking about sustainability.

    The Arts Council has established a £6 million fund to support culture in libraries. We have published the CIPFA comparative profile reports for the first time. We are piloting automatic membership for school children and young people.

    And we are supporting a pilot £1.2 million project to turn six libraries into ‘incubators of innovation’ – to see them roll-out business support to towns and villages.

    Libraries “In Crisis”? Again, I don’t think so.

    But there can be no finer place to discuss arts and heritage than here in Chester with its rich cultural history.

    Since becoming a new authority in 2009 Cheshire West and Chester has developed a clear plan to make the area economically and culturally richer by using culture as a catalyst to drive economic, social and community regeneration.

    They will utilise the cultural offer to enhance the attractiveness and distinctive nature of market towns and rural area within the Borough, with a vision to deliver a new theatre and library complex, a Roman museum, and improvements to the visual arts infrastructure.

    It’s yet another example of ambition and innovation delivering both cultural benefits and economic growth. And yet another example of the arts in the UK waving, not drowning.

    Thank you.

  • Ed Vaizey – 2013 Speech to the Cable Congress

    edvaizey

    The below speech was made by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Ed Vaizey, at the Cable Congress held in London on 5th March 2013.

    Good morning everyone.

    I would like to thank the organisers of the 2013 Cable Congress, and in particular the UK’s very own Virgin Media, for inviting me to speak today.

    Before I begin, I must also say how pleased we all are that the 2013 Cable Congress is taking place here in London. We pride ourselves on the strength of the UK’s online economy, and it is, I think, appropriate that the Congress is taking place in one of the world’s most connected cities.

    You will, I’m sure, be hearing at length about investments and new technologies from experts in the field. I would like to say a few words about this Government’s priorities in the online and telecommunications fields, what we are doing to support the tremendous investment in broadband, and where we go from here.

    If I were to summarise the priorities, I would need only one word: Growth. Our number one aim is to get the British economy moving again and support the businesses, both large and small, that will drive this. And I believe that the digital, creative and communications industries have a key role in this.

    We want to see continued investment in Britain’s online industries, but we also need to ensure that the whole British economy enjoys the digital services and connectivity it needs to innovate and expand into new markets. A truly connected Britain that is open for global business the cornerstone of our ambitions for growth.

    The UK is already a world leader in the online economy, with the internet contributing over 8% of GDP. Our flagship businesses are tapping into global markets, and our consumers enjoy excellent choice and services when choosing their broadband and phones.

    However, the pace of technological change is such that we cannot afford to stand still. We are doing well, but I want us to do even better.

    Continued private investment is key to achieving this, and nowhere more so than the field of superfast broadband. If we are to build a world class connected Britain, investment in our broadband infrastructure must keep up with both technological innovations and the ever increasing requirements of business, and consumers.

    While we are on the subject of investment, I should mention the planned takeover, subject to shareholder agreement, of Virgin Media by Liberty Global. First, I am of course delighted that this will bring a new major company headquarters to the UK. Second, I welcome the prospects this will bring to continue investment in Virgin Media’s cable network here in the UK. As I said earlier, this investment is what keeps the UK’s online economy moving forward. This represents a great opportunity for the broadband market in the UK and, in particular, the rest of Europe. This can only be good for creating a world-class connected Britain.

    Firms like Virgin Media and BT lead the way when it comes to investing in our broadband infrastructure, and I must applaud the work they are doing and the capital they have committed. Virgin Media’s investment in doubling customers’ speeds is future proofing the network and opening up new opportunities for our online companies, and is only one part of its multi-billion pound programme.

    BT is rolling out its optical fibre network deeper into the local market than ever before, and has developed new products like its fibre on demand packages. The UK market also supports many smaller firms, often investing significantly to deliver ultrafast services to local communities. The pace of change is impressive – BT is making fibre available to 100,000 new homes and businesses per week, and combined with Virgin’s upgrade figures, take-up of superfast services in the last quarter alone was well over 650,000.

    In mobile broadband, we are seeing vital investment by mobile operators, first by EE with their launch of 4G last year and now by other operators in readiness for their nationwide rollout of 4G services later this year. It is this commercial investment that has driven innovation and growth within the sector, and we as Government are doing everything we can to support this work.

    Our aim is to remove the barriers preventing investment and innovation, and demonstrate that Britain is one of the best places in the world to do business online. So we will remove barriers and red tape. We cannot allow rollout to be delayed by planning refusals, or confusion when carrying out street works, or by long running legal issues over access to private land.

    Our goal is to provide certainty, to ensure the money invested in rollout is used to take superfast broadband further and not wasted on delays and disputes. It is important that the regulatory framework governing the telecoms sector is fit for purpose and competitive. While this of course sits with Ofcom, we are committed to ensuring the market fosters competition, supports multiple, innovative providers, and results in greater consumer choice.

    We have also taken significant steps to support mobile broadband. The successful 4G spectrum auction, whose winners were announced two weeks ago, is a vital part of this. We directed Ofcom to proceed with the auction, and brokered agreement with the mobile operators to allow this not only to happen, but to happen 6 months early. Similarly, we are planning for the future by overseeing the release of significant bands of public sector spectrum to the market.

    The pace of change in the world of mobile is very fast, and we are determined to ensure Britain is ready for the challenges ahead.

    The Government is also intervening in areas where commercial investment is not viable, through a major investment programme of £1.2 billion of public money. Through this investment, and working in partnership with industry, we will see much faster speeds, millions more homes and businesses able to enjoy these speeds, and a market which boasts high competition and low prices, particularly compared to our European neighbours.

    On this latter aspect, the UK’s broadband market is already in rude health. Ofcom’s European scorecard, which was published today shows that the UK currently benefits from low prices and a high degree of competition in the broadband market, and that the UK has the best deals available for consumers across a selection of pricing bundles in the major European economies.

    It is important that rural areas are not left in the slow lane when it comes to broadband access. We are bringing superfast access to 90% of UK premises, and a minimum of 2 megabits per second to everyone else. Rapid progress is being made on the rural programme: 11 projects have now signed contracts, and are either in progress already or about to start work. The remaining projects are entering procurements at a rate of one per week, and all should have completed their procurement phase by this summer.

    The Government’s investment is already delivering faster connections for consumers – I visited North Yorkshire in December to unveil their first active fibre cabinet, and last week saw the unveiling of the first Welsh cabinets in Bangor. It is worth noting that the Devolved Administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland will all benefit from significant central government investment in their broadband infrastructure, delivering a key part of driving UK growth and investment.

    Similarly, our £150m urban broadband programme – working closely with local authorities and the private sector – will ensure that our cities can compete with the best in the world. You just need to look at the success of Tech City here in London to see how establishing a digital hub with world class connectivity and expertise can spur today’s innovative idea into becoming the online business of tomorrow.

    But we cannot create a world class connected Britain just by laying more fibre in the ground or building new base stations. It is also crucial that we get as many people as possible online enjoying the benefits presented by better connectivity, and also encourage British companies to expand and develop their internet-based operations. Ultimately it is users that will turn infrastructure investment into growth.

    We are therefore ensuring that demand stimulation is incorporated into our Government-funded projects. The tireless work of Martha Lane Fox and Go ON UK, for example, has been vital in getting more people online and demonstrating how people’s lives can be changed for the better by embracing the digital world. We are exploring ways to encourage high speed takeup as part of our urban programme. And demand stimulation remains a key focus of all our local rural broadband projects, with a particular emphasis on SMEs.

    It’s worth reflecting that, in a recent report on Britain’s broadband, the think tank Policy Exchange found that 79% of British businesses have a website, but only 36% allow online payments. So not only do we need more businesses online, but more businesses with the skills, expertise and confidence to branch into online sales and exploit the global marketplace.

    But we are also well aware that doing more online presents challenges as well as opportunities. Embracing e-commerce will open up new markets, but also represents potential risks, for example around online fraud or website security. For consumers, the fear remains of personal data loss or online scams. This is why we are ensuring that the regulatory framework protects online businesses, customers and other users, while supporting a competitive and innovative market.

    Then, there is content. While our brilliant, innovative creative industries are driving growth in this sector – generating over £36 billion every year – the Government is ensuring that we provide them with support by way of tax breaks for animation, video games, high end TV and the film industry.

    Finally, let me repeat a point I made earlier: in building a world class connected Britain and supporting our internet economy, we are doing well, but the Government wants to ensure we are doing even better. This Government is committed to delivering the broadband infrastructure and services we need to compete with the best in the world.

    Our rural projects are moving rapidly from procurement to spades in the ground, the spectrum licenses are in place to allow the rollout of 4G services this summer, and our reforms to cut the red tape facing providers are already underway. It is crucial that Government, regulators and commercial providers continue to work together to achieve our goals to increase demand and encourage innovative broadband usage. We have invested heavily in improving our infrastructure – let’s now make full use of it.

    By working closely with the industry, I’m confident that we can realise our ambition of Britain as a world class connected country, a strong market for consumers, and a great place to do business.

    Thank you.

  • Ed Vaizey – 2013 Speech to the Oxford Media Convention

    edvaizey

    The below speech was made by Ed Vaizey on Wednesday 23rd January 2013 in Oxford.

    The Communications White Paper – Challenges and Successes of the last year

    I am delighted to be back and speaking at the Oxford Media Convention again this year.  I know that you will cover a lot of topics today, including Leveson, media plurality, the protection of children on-line and 4G spectrum and the changes that will bring.

    What I would like to do this morning is set out some of the issues the Government intends to address in our forthcoming White Paper, to give you some insight into the issues that we think are important. Some of these issues, you will be glad to hear, overlap with your discussions later today, so we should be on the same wavelength.

    But before I get into that, I wanted to reflect briefly on the UK media.

    This has been one of the most challenging years.  We have had Savile, Lord MacAlpine, the Leveson Report, the spotlight has been on failures. I want to talk about the success of the British media. The BBC covered the Olympics superbly. Channel 4 transformed forever the way the Paralympics are seen.  The Mail Online became the most visited English language newspaper website in the world.  There was record inwards investment in British film and television from the likes of Disney, Warner Brothers and Discovery.  Skyfall became the highest grossing film of all time at the UK Box office.  British consumers broke the £1 billion level in digital downloads.  And the UK advertising industry continued to lead the world in pioneering new ways of digital advertising.

    So there is a huge amount to be proud of, and I am proud to represent this sector in Government.

    Framing the Paper

    And it is on that note that I want to tell you about the White Paper that will come out later this year. The White Paper, when it is eventually published, will be the culmination of almost two years of discussions with industry and other stakeholders.  I want to thank everyone who has contributed to this discussion: in seminars, in responses to our discussion papers, on twitter and on the blog.

    There is a clear message that has come out and that is the industry wants evolution rather than revolution.

    There simply isn’t a great clamour for wide scale reform.  People have told us that, for the most part, our regulatory framework is working well. Industry isn’t being choked by regulation – something borne out by the huge success of recent years.  And consumers are embracing new formats and technology with more enthusiasm than almost anywhere else in the world, so regulation doesn’t seem to be stifling innovation.

    So what are the issues we want to address? The White Paper will focus on three key areas: connectivity, content and consumer issues.   I’m not going to tell you the detail what the White Paper will say – I wouldn’t want to spoil the surprise – but I am going to sketch out the issues that we face in each of the key areas and how we are approaching them.

    Connectivity

    First, then, I want to talk about connectivity and the infrastructure that underlies the entire communications sector, sometimes literally.  We have set our goal for the UK to have the best superfast broadband network in Europe by 2015.  We are investing £830 million in digital infrastructure to achieve this, money which will support the roll out of high speed broadband in rural communities, key cities and mobile not-spots.

    The issue of mobile infrastructure is particularly important right now.  One part of this that you won’t have been able to avoid hearing about is the introduction of 4G – indeed you are discussing it later today.  We already have 4G services from EE and the spectrum auction, currently taking place under the watchful eye of Ofcom, will set the ball rolling for the arrival of 4G in the spring from a choice of operators. This will maximise the value and benefit of this scarce spectrum resource.

    But rolling out 4G isn’t enough. Spectrum has many uses and there is a real need for more spectrum to be freed up and for the spectrum available to be better used. It needs to be used more flexibly; it needs to be allocated and re-allocated faster; it needs to meet the requirements of emerging technologies. In short it needs to support businesses to let them deliver for consumers.

    We already have the world’s most ambitious programme to release public sector spectrum.  But the White Paper will look ahead, and focus on mechanisms to ensure that we have the spectrum we need to meet the challenges ahead.

    Content

    But great fixed and mobile connectivity is nothing without great content.  That puts us in the UK in a fantastic position. Whether it is Television, Film, Radio or Video Games, the UK is leading the way in creating innovative, successful and entertaining content. I was delighted when I saw the report from the Commercial Broadcasters’ Association, showing that investment in UK TV increased by a third in 2012.  Broadcast has set out the ‘Big ambitious and bold plans’ including major investment in UK content. It talks about:

    “Sky establishing itself as a UK commissioner en par ‘with the big boys’”

    ‘Significant investment’ from UKTV … in new domestic shows “

    “The launch of ‘London-based commissioning hubs’  by Discovery and National Geographic “

    “Fox UK stepping up UK commissions … with an investment of £5m.”

    Investment in content continues apace. We want to support this investment.

    We want this level of success and investment not just to continue but to increase.  That’s why we are introducing tax breaks for High end TV, animation and video games to sit alongside the tax breaks already in place for the film industry.

    That is why we want to provide certainty to those investing in content. That is why we have renewed the Channel 3 and Channel 5 licences, to maintain the content requirements for our Public Service Broadcasters, protecting the delivery of the world class content that we value so much.

    But this isn’t enough.  We want the content market – the complex ecosystem of different organisations across the content production chain – to stay dynamic, flexible and responsive.  We want a mix of businesses of various sizes and with difference specialisms. We want it to be competitive. So we will have to look at the impact of convergence on markets. We want to make sure that, where previously distinct markets now overlap, the regulations are appropriate and that historic regulatory differences don’t inhibit competition.

    We also want to see a solution to the current situation on so-called retransmission fees where Public Service Broadcasters and Licence Fee payers have paid large amounts to satellite providers for the content to be carried. We’ve looked very carefully at arguments on both sides and recognise that this situation has evolved over time perhaps in a way we didn’t intend.

    I welcome the steps Sky have taken so far to reduce retransmission fees to a much lower level. But we want them to go further, taking into account the undoubted value that PSB’s offer to satellite platforms and their viewers, so that there’s a level playing field – zero fees either way.

    This would mirror the arrangement that is currently the case for PSBs and cable platforms, where no charges are made – an arrangement that we want to see this preserved. We’re looking closely at how we can help achieve this without allowing other kinds of services – which offer no support to PSBs and therefore ultimately no advantage to consumers – to benefit.

    We’re not going to rush into a regulatory solution because we think there’s no reason the market shouldn’t be able to work out a fair equitable solution as things stand, but if the industry can’t find a way to stop imposing this cost on Licence Fee payers and PSBs, we will look at our options for intervention.

    Consumers

    The final area I want to turn to is consumers, one that I think is particularly important in an environment where new technologies, platforms and services are emerging all the time. We want to make sure we continue to have a regulatory system that provides adequate protection for consumers.

    New products of every kind are providing great new opportunities for consumers: goods that people want, services that allow us to connect, socialise and work in ways that until recently we wouldn’t have thought possible. But with this comes new challenges.  The regulations that are currently in place could never have envisaged the services that we now take for granted. So we need to update regulations where necessary to fill in these gaps, but also to update the framework, to allow the flexibility to respond to these challenges as they emerge, rather than all at once every ten years.

    And, of course, action by industry itself has an incredibly important role to play. One area that I personally feel very strongly about – and where action is being taken – is in making sure that children are protected from harmful content.

    Now I know you’ll be discussing these issues later this morning.   I think it is important to stress that real strides are being made through the UK Council for Child Internet Safety.  UKCCIS is a pioneering body – it was one of the first organisations of its kind in the world – bringing together the key players in child internet safety and working with industry to give parents the tools they need to protect children: ISP delivered parental control solutions, device level solutions, and greater support and education than ever before.

    So real progress is being made, but we certainly aren’t making the mistake of thinking the work is done. We are working with industry to implement our new system, where every parent will be prompted to protect their child online. Protection will automatically be on if parents don’t make choices. No other Government has taken such radical steps before. And once this is in place, Britain will have the most robust internet child protection measures of any country in the world – bar none.

    To support this, next week I will be meeting with key Internet Service Providers, the Internet Service Provider Association, Reg Bailey and Claire Perry, MP – the Prime Minister’s advisor on preventing the commercialisation and sexualisation of children. We want to review what has been achieved so far – and there is a lot – and to make sure ISPs do more, particularly in terms of raising awareness of parental controls.

    There are other issues of consumer protection, the biggest issue in my postbag from the public is probably silent calls, unsolicited marketing calls and spam text messages.  Whilst direct marketing is a legitimate industry there is a need for better enforcement of the regulations to stop unwanted calls and texts. We have given enforcement bodies the teeth they need to do their work – through the powers to issue fines of up to £2m for silent calls and £500k for unsolicited marketing, changes that we introduced over the last couple of years – and it is good to see Ofcom and the ICO are using these powers.

    But much more needs to be done. The split of responsibilities between the Telephone Preference Service, Ofcom and the Information Commissioner’s Office is confusing. The regulators need to bite, and bite hard, so that there is effective enforcement. So we want to give greater clarity to consumers about who to turn to, and critically I want to see more effective enforcement by the regulators to move with greater precision and speed in targeting rogue players.

    The final consumer issue I want to touch on is personal data. Data is absolutely crucial to the success of on-line businesses.  It is absolutely crucial that we strike the right balance between the protection of consumers – making sure that they know how their data is being used – and the ability of business to use this data to deliver products and services that people want.  We took exactly this approach when I fought hard to ensure that the e-privacy directive achieved its aim of flagging cookies to web users, without stifling innovation.

    We now face the same challenge with the EU Data protection proposals. We welcome the call to update these provisions. But we want to work hard with our colleagues.

    I will work hard with our colleagues at the Ministry of Justice to ensure our approach to negotiations reflects the concerns of industry. At the same time it is important that industry can show that it understands the concerns that have been expressed about user privacy and make real efforts to work with our colleagues in Europe to address those concerns. Simply balking at the proposals on the table is not good enough, this is not going to go away so we need to work together to ensure what we end up with is practical for business, and delivers real safeguards for consumers.

    We are all living more connected lives, relying more on the communications industry to socialise, share, work, shop. And in this context we want everyone to feel confident that they understand and are able to manage their privacy, their interactions, their finance and their data online and across the different platforms. And we want to make sure that where this doesn’t happen people know which bodies they can turn to for support.

    Getting the framework right here – the right balance between regulation and industry action – is vital. Not only is it good for consumers, it is good for business and it is good for growth.

    Conclusion

    We as a Government don’t have all the answers for all the challenges this sector will face over the next decade. In fact I am saying the opposite.

    What we need is a regime that is responsive and flexible enough to regulate a fast paced environment. What we need is for these industries to continue to innovate and to take responsibility. This will give us a framework that is able to support growth and support the people of the UK in an increasingly interconnected world. This means the best infrastructure. This means we support world leading content. This means consumer confidence in this brave new world.

    I’m looking forward to sharing the Paper with you all, and even more so to working with you to see this realised.

    Thank you.

  • Ed Vaizey – 2012 Speech to the Future of Library Services Conference

    edvaizey

    Below is the text of the speech made by the Minister Ed Vaizey to the Future of Library Services Conference in London on 28th June 2012.

    I’m delighted to have the opportunity to speak at today’s conference. This is a great opportunity to talk about the thriving library service that we have in England.

    • A library service made up of more than 3,300 libraries;
    • A library service in which councils invest £900 million a year;
    • A library service which continues to innovate and develop;
    • A library service that continues to open libraries and refurbish library buildings.

    For example: Southwark’s new library in Canada Water is a state-of-the-art facility for the community, and just one of several new libraries in the borough; Oldham’s impressive Fitton Hill Library and Neighbourhood Centre has just opened; and Worcestershire is opening The Hive – the first ever joint public and academic library in the country.

    Add to that significant refurbishment programmes – from Nottinghamshire to Newham – and you get a taste of the good news out there.
    And Birmingham is planning to open the biggest library in Europe next year, costing almost £200 million.

    And thanks to stories like this, we learned from today’s Taking Part survey that library visits remain stable – they are not declining. I know that the library service is facing challenges. But I want to get the good news out, and present a more balanced picture.

    Arts Council: a development agency for libraries

    As I often point out, libraries are emphatically a local authority service, and are fully funded by local government and run by local government. Nevertheless, they can benefit from having a national development agency to push innovation and best practice.

    And our decision to give responsibility for libraries to the Arts Council (ACE) will provide exactly that service.

    The move unites cultural policy with library policy for the first time, as was envisaged in the 1950s debates that led to the Public Libraries and Museums Act of 1964. It builds on the work ACE already does – funding important organisations that support libraries, such as the Booktrust, the Reading Agency, and Writing West Midlands to name just a few.

    This also includes financial support. The Government and the Arts Council have already invested more than £500,000 to support development work by library authorities.

    Today I am delighted to announce that the Arts Council will be allocating £6 milllion from its Grants for the Arts programme over the next two years for library authorities to lead projects working with artists, arts organisations and other cultural organisations on arts and cultural activity through libraries.

    This fund will aim to stimulate ambitious, innovative partnerships between libraries and artists and arts organisations. It will help raise the ambition and expectation of libraries, and represents a significant commitment by the Arts Council to their new role.

    As well as supporting libraries with funding for programmes, it’s also important that we identify library authorities that may need specific help to address particular issues.

    Today I am therefore also pleased to announce an initiative with CIPFA to identify areas where individual authorities might be able to improve.

    CIPFA’s new ‘comparative profile reports’ have been developed to benchmark local council services against comparable authorities, or “nearest neighbours” as CIPFA calls them. My Department will be commissioning reports on all library authorities in England, which will be available in December this year.

    My Department will use the reports to look for ways in which we can help local authorities.  I must emphasise that this is not an attempt to sanction local authorities and certainly not a return to top-down, inflexible library standards. But if we see wildly diverging opening hours between two similar authorities with similar budgets and infrastructure, there will be an opportunity to ask questions and look at how opening hours could be improved.

    Or if one authority is spending twice as much on book stock as another, but providing a similar number of books, we can ask if there are ways to improve efficiency in the authority in question.

    I should also say that these reports will be publicly available, allowing MPs, councillors and other interested members of the public the chance to see how their local service measures up, and to ask well-informed questions – and also make well-informed suggestions for improvement.

    Libraries in the Digital Age

    Library buildings are and remain important.  And in the digital age, paradoxically, a bricks and mortar service is still extremely valuable.

    The People’s Network put in place by Chris Smith made a big difference to libraries.  Millions of people now use their library to access the internet. I heard recently that the Society of Chief Librarians’ target to get 500,000 people on line for the first time by the end of 2012 was actually passed in April this year.

    Now we need to go further. In the age of the smartphone and tablet, wifi is becoming an essential aspect of every-day life, and it is an ambition of mine for wifi to be in every library in England by 2015.  So I’ve asked my officials to explore how best to achieve this, working with colleagues across government.

    Working Across Whitehall

    Government support for libraries can be more effective if it works across Departments.

    We are now working with the Department for Education to provide automatic library membership for primary school pupils, to encourage them to use their local library – a wonderful idea put forward by children’s author Michael Rosen.

    In September we will pilot different approaches to test the most effective ways of supporting children and their families to use their libraries and read more widely.

    And libraries have been a key part of the Cabinet Office’s Race Online 2012 initiative to get the digitally excluded on-line. Libraries’ staff and volunteers saw 2.5 million people getting online, which is a very real demonstration of the role they play in tackling the digital divide. Arts Council and SCL are currently working with the Post Office to support the Government’s programme to get more people using government services online. This approach will be piloted in Birmingham this autumn.

    And the Cabinet Office has recently awarded £127,000 from the Social Action Fund to the Reading Agency to support teenage volunteers in libraries.

    So more Departments are getting the message that libraries can help them deliver their services more effectively – whether it’s education, digital literacy or volunteering.

    Volunteers and Community Libraries

    Libraries have always benefited from the work of volunteers. And volunteers, particularly those who have retired but want to remain active in their community, have also benefited.

    I would also like to pay tribute to the growing number of young people who support the Summer Reading Challenge.  Last year there were over 3000 young volunteers and we are expecting a significant increase in that number this year.

    This is a really good example of where volunteers add value to a scheme and also where they gain a really valuable work experience.

    Volunteers are crucial to the library service.  But let me state again, as I have so often, they are not a substitute for expertise of professional librarians, as well as other people trained in specific aspects of the library service.

    I am also pleased to see community supported libraries coming into play, particularly where a local authority is planning to close a building. Community run libraries are contributing to a diverse picture of libraries located within village halls, pubs, shops, churches, day care centres, tourist information centres and enterprise hubs.

    Community managed and community supported libraries will never replace the extensive network of council run libraries we enjoy.  But they do provide an important additional element of provision, and an important alternative model which can add to the rich variety of services already available.

    It is precisely because of this that my Department is currently working with the Arts Council, LGA, Defra, and DCLG to create a new information resource  for authorities considering establishing community supported or community managed libraries in their areas.  It is important that local authorities and community groups work together to ensure that library assets transferred to communities are sustainable in the long term.

    Funding Context

    Let me take this opportunity to state once again, that libraries are and will remain a statutory service.  The challenge for local authorities therefore is the provision of that statutory service in a tight financial climate.

    The Arts Council’s Envisioning research will help Councils think about what their service should look like in the future. And as a highlight of best practice, the LGA yesterday launched an invaluable publication ‘Local Solutions for Future Local Library Services’ which – as the name suggests – is packed full of useful case studies, some of which I’ve referred to today. It picks up on areas where libraries can improve the delivery of the service – and offers tangible solutions.

    Library Closures and service reviews

    I have made it clear from the moment I became a Minister that no library authority should contemplate closing libraries unless they have conducted a proper review of their library service.

    While some local authorities have put forward controversial proposals since 2010, all of them have conducted a library review, as I made clear to them they would have to do when I took office. I have no doubt that the efforts of library campaigners have also brought about welcome changes in some of the more extreme proposals put forward.

    Nevertheless, I am always mindful that libraries are a local service, paid for by local taxpayers.  As far as possible, local democracy not Whitehall diktat should have an impact on how they are shaped. A library inquiry is a power of last resort – it has only ever been used once in fifty years. It is not a tool to be used lightly, or for political expediency

    A figure of 600 library closures is regularly quoted in the media – but it is very wide of the mark.  A truer picture of building closures would be about a tenth of that.

    But even while there have been closures, sometimes services merge or move to community-management, and it’s important that we are able to have an intelligent debate about this. And it’s also important to remember that many libraries are also opening.

    Conclusion

    I remain resolutely optimistic about library services. I have never, even in opposition, depicted the library service as being in crisis.

    I look to a future where:

    • The Arts Council acts as a development agency for libraries;
    • Libraries can access funds and support from the Arts Council
    • Poorly performing authorities are identified and helped to improve;
    • Key initiatives can be taken forward by central government, such as wi-fi or automatic enrolment for school children;
    • Government and local authorities understand what a vital resource libraries are across a whole range of activities.

    But we must always remember that libraries are a local service – free to serve their local community, to innovate and adapt to local needs.

    I hope you will join me in continuing to spread the good news, and to highlight the excellent service provided by so many people throughout England.