Tag: Speeches

  • Sadiq Khan – 2021 Statement on the Removal of the Heathrow Free Travel Zone

    Sadiq Khan – 2021 Statement on the Removal of the Heathrow Free Travel Zone

    The statement made by Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, on 17 March 2021.

    I was disappointed by the decision by Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL) to suspend the bulk of its support for public transport services, including the Heathrow Bus Free Travel Zone. As soon as Transport for London (TfL) and I became aware of HAL’s plan, our concerns were relayed, both verbally and in writing. On 3 December 2020, TfL’s Director of City Planning wrote to the HAL Surface Access Director citing concerns that these changes may encourage more staff to switch to making journeys to and from work by car.

  • Volodymyr Zelenskyy – 2022 Speech at the 34th Award Ceremony of the National Constitution Center

    Volodymyr Zelenskyy – 2022 Speech at the 34th Award Ceremony of the National Constitution Center

    The speech made by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the President of Ukraine, on 8 November 2022.

    Dear Friends!

    It is a great honor to be awarded with the Medal of Liberty, presented to me by senators Chris Coons and Rob Portman during their visit to Kyiv.

    This award really demonstrates how and what Ukrainian people are fighting for. Liberty is the main word for us and what really unites all Ukrainians.

    As in any democratic society, Ukrainians have different views on life and politics. As the case was in previous years, we felt divided arguing whether we would ever be able to stand together.

    But when Russia decided to destroy our freedom and wipe Ukraine off the face of the earth, we immediately got united and we keep this unity.

    All divisions are put aside. There is no place for political conflicts. Because when there is a mortal threat to freedom, everything else is not important.

    Millions of people are fighting and working to protect Ukraine. They are very different people. After the Russian full-scale invasion started, they all decided – “we are here” and we will never give up our freedom.

    And I believe that this Liberty Medal is for all men and women of Ukraine who, after the 24th of February, showed to the world’s largest autocracy that only defeat is what it can win in Ukraine.

    These are our soldiers and officers. This is a massive wave of our volunteers – those who provide our defenders with everything they need. These are farmers who stopped Russian armored vehicles on the roads to their communities and helped the Army. These are IT specialists, who build defense against Russian cyberattacks. These are companies that work despite constant Russian terror and keep jobs for Ukrainians. These are doctors who help always everywhere. These are school teachers and university professors who can read lectures even in bomb shelters and distantly from the trenches on the front lines, but they do not give up and teach children – teach them to believe in themselves, in freedom and in Ukraine.

    In less than nine months, more than thirty thousand Ukrainians have been honored state awards for their contribution to our national defense.

    First of all, they are our heroic soldiers. These are rescuers who do away with the effects of Russian shelling. These are energy workers who return electricity to people after Russian missiles and Iranian drones hit power plants – Russia wants to leave millions of our people without energy in the winter. These are transport workers who supply our defense, economy and communities. These are different people of various jobs who are all equally fight against the invasion.

    However, this Liberty Medal is an award not only for our people.

    When this war began, Ukraine heard something very important from the world – we heard that “the democracies are here.” And we see now what democracies are capable of when they act in unity.

    Every potential aggressor in the world sees the help that the United States and the free world is providing to us, and all the sanctions imposed against Russia – sees and believes that it is better not to start a war against freedom at all. In fact, this is one of the greatest contributions to the global peace and security during our lifetime.

    Together with our partners, we are developing a new security architecture – these are security guarantees for Ukraine and Europe which will not only re-empower the principles of the UN Charter, but will also become a model for nations in other parts of the world – a model to avoid new cruel wars.

    And that is why, I believe that this Liberty Medal is also to all friends of freedom in the United States and other countries. To all those, who are helping us to restore our territorial integrity, and thus to restore peace.

    This Liberty Medal is to those who support us with weapons, air defense systems, finance and diplomacy. To those who are helping to rebuild after the Russian strikes. To those who impose sanctions against Russia and its accomplices such as the Iranian regime.

    When after the beginning of the Russian invasion, I said – “the president is here”, when millions of Ukrainians decided at the same time – “we are here” and we will not surrender, and when the world supported us, saying – “democracies are here”, then it meant and still mean – “freedom is here “, “human dignity is here”, “law is here”. And one day it will definitely mean – “peace is here”.

    I call on you to maintain unwavering unity, as it is now, until that very day when we all hear those important words we have been dreaming of… Until we hear that peace has finally been restored. Democracies must not stop on their way to the victory.

    I thank you for your attention!

    Thank you for your support – President Biden, both parties of the Congress, and every American citizen! Please know that you support not just a country or its leader, you support millions of people who, like you, cherish freedom.

    And I decided to send the prize money of our Liberty Medal to help Ukrainian veterans – to rebuild and modernize the rehabilitation center for veterans in the city of Borodyanka, Kyiv region of Ukraine. Let everything bring our victory closer!

    Слава Україні!

  • Kemi Badenoch – 2022 Speech on Free Trade to the CATO Institute

    Kemi Badenoch – 2022 Speech on Free Trade to the CATO Institute

    The speech made by Kemi Badenoch. the Secretary of State for International Trade, in Washington DC on 14 November 2022.

    Thank you Ryan, that’s a fantastic and accurate introduction. So thank you, it’s a real pleasure to be speaking this evening at the CATO Institute. It’s lovely to see so many people who’ve come to listen to what I have to say on trade!

    So I’ve been in the role of Trade Secretary for two months now under two Prime Ministers, and there is a tendency when speaking to think-tanks to talk about the importance of free trade.

    But this is the CATO Institute, and if I have to explain to this audience why free trade is important then we have some very serious problems.

    So, instead, I’d like to talk very personally about what Free Markets and Free Trade mean to me.

    Many of you may not know, but I grew up in Nigeria and moved to the UK when I was 16.

    Where I did grow up had military governments and so I have a first-hand experience of authoritarianism and protectionism that I think is quite unique, and it’s unique not just in the UK, but in what we call “the West today”.

    I think it’s actually quite extraordinary that I’m standing here in front of you as the UK’s Trade Secretary but here I am, and here’s what I want you to know.

    When I talk about a belief in free trade, it’s not empty rhetoric. I’m speaking from personal experience about what happens when you don’t have it. I’ve seen what happens when a nation can’t trade or worse embraces protectionism.

    The result isn’t growth and the nurturing of local industries which is always the excuse that people give. The result is poverty, and the very best of a country’s talent leaving to find opportunities elsewhere.

    People worry about the free market and they talk about this as if it’s an uncontrolled experiment, but the market is people having the freedom to make choices to improve their lives. It does need good regulation, so that people don’t cheat the system, it needs good regulation to prevent unfair trading practices, monopolies and exploitation of consumers.

    So it’s not an untraveled free market, but you do need to have free trade and free markets because when you don’t, weird things happen.

    So I talk about things that I’ve seen growing up. For example when the government wanted to improve the tomato industry in Nigeria and so it banned tomato imports. And what didn’t happen was loads of farmers deciding to grow tomatoes, what instead happened was tomatoes becoming like diamonds in terms of how hard it was to get them.

    The supply dried up completely, the prices went up, big companies that used tomatoes as an ingredient cornered the market, and people who needed to use them to just make food—caterers, restaurants, people for whom that was almost the only vegetable they had, couldn’t access it because that’s not how you grow a local industry.

    And I saw it happen over and over again with finance, capital controls turning the currency into wastepaper effectively.

    Or, a story I love to tell about when the government banned rice imports and rice became a black market product.

    And when my mother came to visit me in London, her suitcase was not full of things from Harrods and Hamleys, it was full of Tesco value rice which she packed right up to fill her entire suitcase. For those of you who know what I mean by Tesco value rice it became a very, very precious commodity.

    That’s what a lack of free trade and free markets creates, and there’s dozens and dozens of examples that I could give but, like I said, at CATO I shouldn’t have to explain why that is.

    But the reason why I talk about it is because I’m fighting for something I really believe in. Free markets and free trade make the world a better place and that is the only purpose to becoming a politician. Nothing else matters.

    So why has the world become more protectionist? I think that’s a more interesting question rather than preaching to the choir about the benefits of free trade and free markets.

    Why has the world become more protectionist? Everyone here knows that protectionism is not the answer.

    The US and the UK have done a lot to expand the concept of free trade – especially in the last 75 years, we founded the multilateral trading system with our allies, and our transatlantic partnership embodies why free trade works and why it matters so much.

    But one of the many reasons I’m so frustrated by the trope that Brexit was the UK retreating from the world, is because it is completely untrue. I voted to leave the European Union and I saw Brexit as a once in a generation opportunity for the UK to embrace the world. And trade was – and still is – at the heart of that.

    So why does it feel like everyone is becoming more protectionist?

    And the answer is uncertainty. We live in uncertain times.

    A global pandemic that changed our understanding of the world, Russia’s war in Ukraine, and a more assertive China are just three of the things that are making people more fearful about the future.

    Relatively low economic growth in the West over recent decades compared to what people are used to has also caused a part of this problem. So what can we do? What do we need to provide more security for the people of the world. That relative low economic growth is absolutely terrifying, and for those people who saw the post war 20th century it makes a lot of our contemporaries feel poorer than they actually are. And if you compound that with the belief that their jobs are being taken away either by technology or offshoring, it is no surprise that the instinct is to protect what we have.

    So if we are going to make people feel less protectionist, we’re going to have to make them feel more secure first. And we need to show how free trade and free markets, when done properly, do provide security.

    So trade as a tool of security is at the very heart of the trade policy that I’m going to be pushing as the UK’s Trade Secretary. The US and UK can provide security and indeed certainty by doing three things:

    One, investing in the future, not just the present.

    Two, Securing and diversifying supply chains, which means more trade, not less.

    And three, deepening international partnerships, which is one of the reasons I am here.

    Here are some examples of how we’re doing this in the UK in just one area – so let’s talk about climate change as an example.

    Two weeks ago, I launched the UK’s Green Trade and Investment Expo securing millions of pounds that will grow our economy and create jobs across the industries of the future.

    We all know that climate change is a challenge for us all, wherever we live in the world. But we know that we can and should solve it by using free trade and investment to accelerate the technological progress that will protect the planet. And something that not enough politicians say, we must do this, we must protect the planet in a way that does not impoverish the UK, the US or let’s be honest any other country.

    I talked then about securing and diversifying supply chains. We will need this to improve energy security globally.

    So back home in Europe, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has made it clear that relying on authoritarian regimes for energy is not sustainable. Doing so has made it harder and more expensive to heat our homes and the ensuing energy crisis has increased inflation to levels not seen in recent memory.

    So our trade relationships will help secure our energy supply. But it’s long-term investment in nuclear, in renewables in democratic countries that will reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and keep down consumer costs.

    And trade is more than selling each other goods and services, it’s also about foreign direct investment. Technological investment creates the jobs of tomorrow.

    I said to all those investors who came to the Expo from around the world, including the US, investment can future-proof the economy if we get it right.

    More importantly, as we’re seeing in the UK it drives economic growth and keeps communities alive. Communities such as Blyth in the North East of England which was a coal mining town once in decline, but is now thriving as it becomes one of the UK’s most important bases for offshore wind and is driving the clean energy revolution, funded by investors from across the world – including here.

    And that’s just on climate change.

    Now that we’ve left the European Union and have an independent trade policy what does this look like in practice?

    Well, we’re using our new freedoms to negotiate new trade deals and upgrade existing ones– deepening our ties with our allies while creating new economic partnerships.

    We’re joining the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership, or CPTPP as we call it – it’s a network of 11 countries, spanning from Asia to the Americas, it’s got Canada and Mexico in it, maybe the US someday – but it covers at the moment half a billion people.

    We’re strengthening our relationships with our partners and allies in the Indo Pacific, a region that will be responsible for half of global growth in the coming decades. We’re thinking about the future.

    We’re in talks on a free trade deal with India. India’s a country that’s going to be the world’s third biggest economy by 2050.

    We’re acting to protect global supply chains after Covid-19 and of course the invasion of Ukraine revealed so many vulnerabilities.

    And what do we want from the US?

    Well, we’ve made no secret that we want to deepen trade ties through a comprehensive free trade agreement. So those of you who want more free trade with the UK, please write to your Congressman. And I hear there’s some new ones this week.

    But the lack of an FTA is no barrier to boosting trade.

    Our trading relationship with the US was worth over $250 million over the past 12 months.

    So we are each other’s number one source of foreign direct investment. More than 1.2 million Americans work for UK companies in the United States, and every day just under 1.5 million Brits go to work for an American firm.

    So the UK has been nimble and innovative in finding other ways of working with you beyond free trade agreements.

    For instance, we’re signing Memorandum of Understandings on a state-wide level.

    In May, we signed one on trade and economic cooperation with Indiana – that’s a state that already buys $1.4 billion worth of UK goods every year. North Carolina followed in July.

    And my team is securing others and looking to sign even more.

    So as I said, I’m here to continue deepening our international partnership.

    Our trading relationship does not just build itself. We need to work at it. That doesn’t just mean giving speeches about how much we love each other, it also sometimes means fixing problems and offering challenge when required.

    So while I’m here, I’ll also be raising our concerns about the Inflation Reduction Act. We know this was a strategic step to protect the US economy and we also know that there’ll be many people in DC, and across the country who support it.

    But it’s important these measures don’t conflate long standing allies and partners like the UK, with those other countries that might want to damage US interests.

    So everyone here knows the ins and outs of the Inflation Reduction Act. However, you may not know that the substantial new tax credits for electric cars, not only bars vehicles made in the UK from the US market, but it also affects vehicles made in the US by UK manufacturers.

    So the investment and innovation taking place in the UK should be helping the US with tomorrow’s challenges.

    US businesses already have over $500 billion invested in our economy – that’s more than anywhere else in the world, and to put that figure into context it’s more than Sweden’s annual GDP.

    So it’s one thing if over the long term one country locks out its friends to compete with opponents, but it’s another if you’re locking out the investment made by your own companies.

    And those same opponents don’t hesitate to use strong arm tactics to create geopolitical divides and to threaten and coerce smaller economies.

    So if the US and UK are to future proof ourselves and our allies against a changing world, we need to approach trade in a more muscular way.

    As world leading centres for strategic industries, we need to develop trade policy that reflects how global commerce is evolving. And we need to use it to fight even harder for the ideas and values that underpin our democracies and economies.

    And we must help each other do that. So that means working together to shape the rules that govern global commerce before those who want to grab control and stifle free trade get there first.

    Protecting intellectual property rights is one example. Both our economies were built on the work of inventors and entrepreneurs.

    And intellectual property rights drive the innovation, they incentivise inventors, they protect and reward their ideas. And if we conflate these ideas of Intellectual Property with protectionism, we risk choking off innovation.

    So, it’s important that the UK and US work together to champion the multilateral rules-based system, uphold the international Intellectual Property rights framework – and with every trade barrier that falls and every contract that gets signed between businesses, opportunity and prosperity increases around the world. This means democracy flourishes and the case for autocracy diminishes.

    There is an exciting future ahead for us both in terms of UK-US trade cooperation. I’m thrilled to be part of that and to be working with you here in Washington and also across the US.

    And I look forward to a shared transatlantic future filled with even more friendship, economic cooperation and mutual success.

    Thank you.

  • PRESS RELEASE : President held another meeting of the Staff of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief [November 2022]

    PRESS RELEASE : President held another meeting of the Staff of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief [November 2022]

    The press release issued by the President of Ukraine on 2 November 2022.

    President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy held another meeting of the Staff of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief on Wednesday.

    The Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the commanders of the troops of operational directions reported on the current situation at the front. The intelligence representatives informed about the defensive and offensive capabilities of the enemy. The next steps to restore the territorial integrity of Ukraine were agreed upon.

    At the meeting, the parties discussed the course of reconstruction of critical infrastructure facilities, in particular in the energy sector, which were destroyed the day before as a result of the air attacks of the terrorist state. The work of the air defense forces of Ukraine, which stopped another attack by enemy kamikaze drones at night, was noted.

    The President emphasized the need to speed up work in order to form an effective air defense system of Ukraine.

    The participants of the meeting also considered the issue of providing the units with ammunition and the course of preparation of the troops for the winter period.

    The meeting was attended by: Head of the Office of the President Andriy Yermak, Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Oleksiy Danilov, Minister of Defense Oleksiy Reznikov, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Valerii Zaluzhny, Chief of the Main Intelligence Directorate Kyrylo Budanov, Head of the Foreign Intelligence Service of Ukraine Oleksandr Lytvynenko, Commander of the Ground Forces Oleksandr Syrskyi and the commanders of the operational directions.

    The meeting was also attended by: Minister of Internal Affairs Denys Monastyrskyi, Minister of Foreign Affairs Dmytro Kuleba, Minister of Infrastructure Oleksandr Kubrakov, other members of the government, heads of law enforcement and security agencies.

  • George Eustice – 2022 Speech on the UK Trade Deals with Australia and New Zealand

    George Eustice – 2022 Speech on the UK Trade Deals with Australia and New Zealand

    The speech made by Greg Hands, the Conservative MP for Camborne and Redruth, in the House of Commons on 14 November 2022.

    The current Secretary of State for International Trade had no role in the discussions on these deals, although my right hon. Friend the Minister for Trade Policy did and will recall some of them. The Secretary of State was not in the Cabinet at the time, nor in any of the Cabinet Committees, while the Minister has defended the position that was taken at the time.

    My position is obviously slightly different: I was in the Cabinet in 2021 and I was on the Cabinet Sub-Committee that argued over the Australian trade deal—for, yes, there were deep arguments and differences about how we should approach it—but since I now enjoy the freedom of the Back Benches, I no longer have to put such a positive gloss on what was agreed. I hope my right hon. Friend will understand my reason for doing this, which is that unless we recognise the failures the Department for International Trade made during the Australia negotiations, we will not be able to learn the lessons for future negotiations. There are critical negotiations under way right now, notably on the CPTPP and on Canada, and it is essential that the Department does not repeat the mistakes it made.

    The first step is to recognise that the Australia trade deal is not actually a very good deal for the UK, which was not for lack of trying on my part. Indeed, as my right hon. Friend pointed out, there were things that we achieved, such as a special agricultural safeguard for years 10 to 15, staged liberalisation across the first decade and the protection of British sovereignty in sanitary and phytosanitary issues. It is no surprise that many of these areas were negotiated either exclusively or predominantly by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on behalf of the UK team, but it has to be said that, overall, the truth of the matter is that the UK gave away far too much for far too little in return.

    What would a good agreement have looked like? It would have been one having enduring TRQs on beef in particular, but probably also for sheep. The volumes would probably have started at about 10,000 tonnes per annum, raising after a decade to about 60,000 tonnes or perhaps 80,000 tonnes, which could have been manageable. We did not need to give Australia or New Zealand full liberalisation in beef and sheep—it was not in our economic interest to do so, and neither Australia nor New Zealand had anything to offer in return for such a grand concession. Let us not forget that, while we are about to open our market to unbridled access for Australian beef, Australia remains one of the few countries left in the world that maintains an absolute export ban for British beef. Not a single kilo of British beef can be sold in Australia since it maintains a protectionist ban, using the BSE—bovine spongiform encephalopathy—episode as a sham reason for doing so.

    The impact of full liberalisation is hard to predict; the reality is that, provided we maintain a ban on hormones in beef, volumes might remain quite low, but here is the big challenge. The CPTPP negotiation that is under way could mean accession and agreement to new dispute resolution processes that will undermine the UK’s sovereignty in SPS issues and actually undermine our approach when it comes to banning hormones in beef. If some foreign court or foreign mediation process were to say as a matter of treaty that the UK had to accept beef from Australia treated with hormones, that could change the nature of this agreement considerably; volumes could rise significantly, perhaps to more than 200,000 tonnes over time, and that would have a very severe impact on British beef.

    Anthony Mangnall

    I may be wrong, but it is my understanding that CPTPP dispute mechanisms are through the World Trade Organisation, and I am not sure that the WTO, as it stands, can override any one of our SPS standards. Does my right hon. Friend agree?

    George Eustice

    The CPTPP has provisions for its own dispute resolution and they are modelled on what happens in the WTO, but here is the thing: if we do not get the negotiation right with CPTPP it might undermine our ability to practise our own SPS regime and have independence in this area.

    If we were to have a significant increase in Australian beef, because we had been forced by a court or a dispute resolution service to allow hormones in beef—and there have been close challenges in the past, through the WTO—that would be intolerable for any British Government. The Government of the day would probably have to trigger article 32.8 of the agreement and give six months’ notice to terminate the FTA. In my view the best clause in our treaty with Australia is that final clause, because it gives any UK Government present or future an unbridled right to terminate and renegotiate the FTA at any time with just six months’ notice. Many Members will remember that we had hours of fun in the last Parliament discussing triggering article 50 of the treaty on European Union; I suspect we would prefer not to have to go back to that, but article 32.8 is the ultimate and final sanction, which, as things have turned out, is a critical safeguard given the size of the concessions made to Australia in the trade deal.

    What lessons should we learn? First, and most important, we should not set arbitrary timescales for concluding negotiations. The UK went into this negotiation holding the strongest hand—holding all the best cards—but at some point in early summer 2021 the then Trade Secretary my right hon. Friend the Member for South West Norfolk (Elizabeth Truss) took a decision to set an arbitrary target to conclude heads of terms by the time of the G7 summit, and from that moment the UK was repeatedly on the back foot. In fact, at one point the then Trade Secretary asked her Australian opposite number what he would need in order to be able to conclude an agreement by the time of the G7. Of course, the Australian negotiator kindly set out the Australian terms, which eventually shaped the deal.

    We must never repeat that mistake. The Minister and Secretary of State will currently be getting submissions from officials saying that we need to join the CPTPP in a hurry and that if we do not do so now we will not join the club early enough and will not be shaping the rules—they will be saying, “We might miss the boat, this is a crucial part of the Pacific tilt” and so on. But the best thing the Minister can do is go back and tell Crawford Falconer, “I don’t care if it takes a decade to do this agreement; we will get the right agreement—we will never again set the clock against ourselves and shatter our own negotiating position.”

    The second lesson is that we must look at making a machinery of government change. I believe all responsibility for agrifood negotiations, including relating to tariff rate quotas, should be transferred from the Department for International Trade to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, because DEFRA has superior technical knowledge in this area. It is important to remember that DEFRA never left the world stage; the DIT is a new creation with people often lacking experience but doing their best to pick things up, whereas even during the EU era DEFRA maintained a presence in trade negotiations, advising and informing the EU’s position and dealing with matters such as market access around the globe. DEFRA is worldly and has deep technical knowledge in this area and it should, therefore, take full responsibility for negotiating TRQs in agrifood.

    The third change we must look at making is strengthening the role of Parliament in scrutinising and perhaps even agreeing the negotiating mandate. Countries such as Japan and the United States and the EU all use their parliamentary processes to their advantage. When we were negotiating with Japan and seeking to increase access for British cheese, I remember Japan said, “We would love to, but unfortunately we can’t because there is a parliamentary motion that we cannot breach. Therefore, we cannot retreat on this position.” The UK does not have that. We could use Parliament and a mandate agreed by Parliament to say to trading partners, “We’re not able to agree to what you’re asking for.” However, if they perceive that Crawford Falconer calls the shots and that he will always go through some back channel to get something agreed, we will not be in a strong position and our negotiating position will be undermined.

    That brings me to my final point. I have always been a huge fan of the British civil service; I was never a Minister or politician to level criticism at them. I enjoyed nine years of incredibly good relations with civil servants at all levels, but I do want to raise a comment about personnel within the Department for International Trade. Crawford Falconer, currently the interim permanent secretary, is not fit for that position, in my experience. His approach was always to internalise Australian demands, often when they were against UK interests, and his advice was invariably to retreat and make fresh concessions. All the while, he resented people who had a greater understanding of technical issues than he did. It was perhaps something of a surprise when he arrived from New Zealand to find that there were probably several hundred civil servants in the UK civil service who understood trade better than he did, and he has not been good, over the years, at listening to them. He has now done that job for several years, and it would be a good opportunity for him to move on and for us to get a different type of negotiator in place—somebody who understands British interests better than he has been able to.

  • James Heappey – 2022 Statement on the UN Peacekeeping Mission in Mali

    James Heappey – 2022 Statement on the UN Peacekeeping Mission in Mali

    The statement made by James Heappey, the Minister for the Armed Forces, in the House of Commons on 14 November 2022.

    West Africa is an important region for the United Kingdom and our allies across Europe. And the UK is strongly committed to supporting the UN to deliver its peacekeeping commitments around the world. That is why since 2018 we had been supporting the French-led counter-terrorism mission in Mali with CH-47 Chinook helicopters under Operation BARKHANE and more recently, since 2020, through the deployment of a Long Range Reconnaissance Group as part of the UN’s MINUSMA peacekeeping mission.

    The House will be aware, however, that in February, President Macron announced the drawdown of French troops in Mali and was joined in that announcement by all other European nations, as well as Canada, that were contributing to the French-led Operations BARKHANE and TAKUBA. In March, Sweden announced that it would be leaving the UN’s MINUSMA mission.

    Today, Mr Speaker, I can announce that the UK contingent will also now be leaving the MINUSMA mission earlier than planned.

    Mr Speaker, we should be clear that responsibility for all of this sits in Bamako. Two coups in three years have undermined international efforts to advance peace. On my most recent visit last November, I met with the Malian Defence Minister and implored him to see the huge value of the French-led international effort in his country.

    However, soon afterwards, the Malian Government began working with the Russian mercenary group Wagner and actively sought to interfere with the work of both the French-led and UN missions. The Wagner group is linked to mass human rights abuses. The Malian government’s partnership with Wagner group is counterproductive to lasting stability and security in their region.

    Mr Speaker, this Government cannot deploy our nation’s military to provide security when the host country’s Government is not willing to work with us to deliver lasting stability and security.

    However, our commitment to West Africa and the important work of the UN is undiminished. We’ve been working closely with our allies to consider options for rebalancing our deployment alongside France, the EU and other like-minded allies. On Monday and Tuesday next week, Mr Speaker, I will join colleagues from across Europe and West Africa in Accra to co-ordinate our renewed response to instability in the Sahel.

    This will be the first major gathering in support of the Accra Initiative – a West African-led solution focussed initially on preventing further contagion of the insurgency into Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana, Togo, Benin and Niger and tackling the growing levels of violence in Burkina Faso as well as Mali – making this a very timely conference indeed.

    And of course, Mr Speaker, it is not just the UK military that will remain committed in West Africa – the UK will continue its commitment to Mali and the Sahel through our humanitarian, stabilisation and development assistance, working in close coordination with partners.

    Nor, Mr Speaker, is this a reduction in our commitment to the United Nations. The UK remains an important contributor of troops through Operation TOSCA in Cyprus, and staff officers across several missions, and provide training to around 10,000 military, police and civilian peacekeepers from a range of countries annually. We remain the fifth largest financial contributor and will continue to drive reform in New York. Indeed we are working with New York on developing a pilot – to be delivered through the British Peace Support Team based in Nairobi – to develop the capacity of UN troop contributing nations across Africa.

    Mr Speaker, we will of course co-ordinate with allies as we drawdown from Gao and have been sharing our plans with them over recent months. The Army will be issuing orders imminently to reconfigure the next deployment to drawdown our presence. We are leaving the MINUSMA mission earlier than planned and are, of course, saddened by the way the Government in Bamako has made it so difficult for well-meaning nations to remain there.

    The work of our troops has been outstanding, and they should be proud of what they’ve achieved there. But through the Chilcott Report and our wider experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, we – like so many allies – are clear that the military instrument should not be deployed on counterinsurgency or countering violent extremism missions unless there is a clear and compelling commitment towards political progress.

    We will work quickly with allies in the region and across Europe to support the Accra Initiative to deliver security, stability and prosperity in West Africa. Our commitment to that region is undiminished.

     

  • Jamie Greene – 2022 Statement on Arson Attack on Edinburgh War Memorial

    Jamie Greene – 2022 Statement on Arson Attack on Edinburgh War Memorial

    The statement made by Jamie Greene, the Conservative MSP for West Scotland, on Twitter on 14 November 2022.

    This is a disgusting and disrespectful attack on the war memorial at Edinburgh City Chambers – those responsible are the lowest of the low.

    If you have any information, please get in touch with the police on 101.

  • Trudy Harrison – 2022 Speech on Rivers Achieving Bathing Water Status

    Trudy Harrison – 2022 Speech on Rivers Achieving Bathing Water Status

    The speech made by Trudy Harrison, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, in the House of Commons on 9 November 2022.

    I thank Members for showing such interest in this important subject. In particular, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Andrew Jones), who has a wonderful career ahead of him as a blue badge guide—or, indeed, in any role in the tourism industry in his area—such was the wonderful picture that he painted. I congratulate Members across the House on championing what DEFRA very much wants to achieve: clean water.

    Let me set out how we are going to achieve that. We are absolutely committed to driving up the water quality of our lakes, our rivers and our coasts for the public to enjoy and for the benefit of nature. Designated bathing waters protect people’s health at popular swimming spots across the country. As a Member of Parliament in the Lake district who has enjoyed much wild swimming for many of my 46 years, I know the benefits that that can bring. The water quality at those sites is monitored regularly—much more regularly than previously, as Members noted—and improvements are made if it does not meet the minimum standard.

    There are 421 designated bathing waters in England. As my hon. Friend mentioned, the vast majority are coastal, but in the past two years we have designated our very first bathing waters on rivers. It is very much thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley (Robbie Moore) that we have been able to achieve that in his constituency. I am pleased to say that we have many more applications for rivers to be designated bathing quality areas.

    Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)

    The Minister will be surprised to hear that I want to talk about a river and not a lake. We are seeking bathing status and clean water status for the River Kent. The “Clean River Kent” campaign has raised over £8,000 to do sampling, lab testing and surveys—massive thanks to it for raising that money, and to the people who sponsored me to do the Staveley trail to help raise a bit of it. Does the Minister agree that the regulator should be driving this work, instead of local groups having to raise the money to do it? Does she also agree that the water companies could come up with some of the money to fund these bids, because, let’s be honest, it is their fault that the rivers are not in a clean state to start off with?

    Trudy Harrison

    The hon. Gentleman raises an excellent point on the part water companies must play in cleaning up our lakes, rivers and coastal areas. I am a neighbouring MP and will be delighted to meet him to talk about the natural management that could be done—very much part of my portfolio in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs—to assist in cleaning up Lake Windermere in particular and of course the River Kent.

    Bathing waters across England are a success story, with almost 95% achieving “good” or “excellent” status last year, the highest rate since the new stringent standards were introduced in 2015. Of these, 70% of bathing waters were classed as “excellent”, the highest quality standard, whereas just 28% of bathing waters met the highest standards in force in the 1990s. That demonstrates the excellent progress the Government are making in cleaning up our waters and holding water companies to account. Over the last 30 years, there has been good progress, following more than a century of poorly regulated industrial practices. A large proportion of the improving trend in bathing water quality can be attributed to improvements in sewage treatment.

    Over £2.5 billion has been invested by English water companies to improve bathing water quality since privatisation, and England now has the cleanest bathing waters since records began. We know there is more to do to continue to drive up the quality of our rivers, lakes and coastal areas so people can enjoy them and nature can thrive. Areas used by large numbers of bathers and that have facilities to promote and support bathing are eligible for designation. We welcome applications for bathing water designations for both coastal areas and inland waters such as rivers. We actively encourage applications by writing annually to the chief executive of every local authority in England; we also write to other stakeholders such as swimming associations, because local authorities and stakeholders best know which popular riverside bathing areas may be suitable for designation. Once a site is designated as a bathing area, the Environment Agency will assess what action is needed to improve the water quality so that it can meet the standards that the public rightly expect and which are set by the bathing water regulations.

    In 2021, we were delighted to approve the first designated river bathing water on the River Wharfe in Ilkley, and I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley for his superb championing to get that designation over the line—I know he is supporting other Members across the House. That was followed by Wolvercote mill stream on the River Thames at Oxford this year, so it is wonderful to have my hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Robert Courts) here, championing bathing water quality and improving all water quality across the country. The designations are driving action to improve water quality.

    My Department has received a lot of interest this year, and clearly society is paying a lot of attention to cleaning up our water. Our aim is to announce which new sites will be eligible to be designated before the start of the next bathing season, which is officially 15 May 2023, so get your Speedos ready—other outfits are available. We look forward to receiving the application for the River Nidd in the very near future, and I will be delighted to work with my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough, as will the Minister responsible for this area, my hon. Friend the Member for Taunton Deane (Rebecca Pow).

    Guidance to assist applicants with their applications is already available on the Government website, and we plan to update this next year. To respond to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough, that will make it easier for community groups to understand the criteria for bathing water and ensure that only the necessary information is requested, to save such a lot of time and effort. In addition, we are reviewing the Bathing Water Regulations 2013 to ensure that they reflect changes to how and where people use bathing waters.

    My hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough raised the subject of wet wipes. There is absolutely no doubt that wet wipes cause huge damage to sewers and to the environment when they are incorrectly flushed away. In fact, they make up 90% of the material that causes sewers to block. Let me take this opportunity to remind everybody across this House and across the country to bin it, don’t flush it.

    Blockages can cause pollution and surface water flooding, and cost the water industry in England and Wales £100 million a year. The case for action is very clear. We are considering various options to tackle the issues caused by wet wipes. In November 2021 we launched a call for evidence that included questions on those options to help us build our evidence base and to inform our approach. That call for evidence closed on 12 February, and the Government will publish a response later this year.

    Once again, I thank all Members, in particular my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough, for championing the best quality water we can possibly achieve, to support people to enjoy bathing and so that nature benefits from clean water, which we will all benefit from. I also agree, as has been said across the House, that water improvement is a team effort. We can all play a part. That is why we will continue to take action to require water companies and industry to achieve the necessary improvements to reduce pollution. I am pleased that water companies have committed £56 billion to be spent over the coming years to clean our water and improve storm overflows.

    We recognise that healthy and well-managed water is key to our wellbeing and an important part of the Government’s pledge to hand over our planet to the next generation in a better condition than we inherited it.

    Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)

    I hope the Minister is reassured that my speedos are at the ready for about May, I should imagine, no sooner.

  • Robbie Moore – 2022 Speech on Rivers Achieving Bathing Water Status

    Robbie Moore – 2022 Speech on Rivers Achieving Bathing Water Status

    The speech made by Robbie Moore, the Conservative MP for Keighley, in the House of Commons on 9 November 2022.

    I start by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Andrew Jones) on securing this important debate. I know how passionate he is about securing bathing water status for parts of the River Nidd in Knaresborough and I thank him for allowing me to make a short contribution.

    In December 2020, a stretch of water on the River Wharfe in Ilkley in my constituency was granted bathing water status—the first stretch of river in the UK to be awarded such a designation. I know how important that is, having heard my hon. Friend’s points about sewage getting into rivers. I put on record my thanks to the Ilkley Clean River Group, which did such a good job in getting our application off the ground in the first place and continuing with its efforts. I hope that my hon. Friend’s campaign is a success.

    Why does this matter? Simply, we all care about improving water quality and ensuring that our rivers are clean, healthy and thriving environments. Of course, achieving bathing water status on rivers provides an additional mechanism to ensure that a river ecosystem is as healthy as it can be. The River Wharfe in Ilkley has had, and continues to have, problems with pollution being discharged due to inadequate sewage infrastructure. When it rains, Yorkshire Water’s sewage treatment works in the surrounding area often spill into the River Wharfe. Residents along Rivadale View will be familiar with that, as will residents downstream of the Ashlands sewage plant. Even more damaging are storm overflows, which are frankly inadequate to deal with the high percentage of rainfall we receive. My hon. Friend has already commented on our challenges with the combined sewer system.

    Let us be clear: until now, no Government have had the willpower to tackle sewage discharge. I was pleased to vote for the Environment Act 2021, which will help tackle and put a stop to sewage discharge. I must say it was disappointing that the Opposition parties did not, like us, vote for that Act.

    Of course, having secured bathing water designation, we are provided with an additional mechanism, which will help clean up our river system by putting additional pressure on water companies—in my case Yorkshire Water. Regular testing is now required. Perhaps unsurprisingly, that has resulted in the River Wharfe being classified as poor, but the data that is collected will put additional pressure on Yorkshire Water and other water companies to secure investment in infrastructure and additional apparatus to ensure that the stretches of water where bathing water designation is secured are clean.

    Let me finish by making a couple of points about what I have learned from our experience. It is not good enough just to have a single monitoring point on a river; we must consider a stretch. I have concerns about the term “bathing water status”; I think “clean water status” would be much more apt, because that is what we are all trying to achieve, and there are some difficulties with rivers and it being safe to swim. In addition, the guidance from DEFRA needs to be updated to deal with rivers and not just coastal areas.

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough and wish him all success in his campaign on the River Nidd. If he has the success that we have had in Ilkley, that will put more pressure on the utility companies to clean up our rivers, which is what we all want to see.

  • Andrew Jones – 2022 Speech on Rivers Achieving Bathing Water Status

    Andrew Jones – 2022 Speech on Rivers Achieving Bathing Water Status

    The speech made by Andrew Jones, the Conservative MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough, in the House of Commons on 9 November 2022.

    I am delighted to have been successful in securing this debate to cover such an important subject, and it is very good to see my hon. Friend the Minister in her place at the Dispatch Box. She has led many Government initiatives on improving our environment, which of course I strongly support.

    There are many elements to the work to improve our water quality, but I am only going to focus on one specific element in this debate. As colleagues will have seen from the title of the debate, I want to see more rivers achieving bathing water quality status. Specifically, I want the River Nidd at the Lido Leisure Park in Knaresborough to achieve bathing water status. Even more specifically, that is a pinpoint location rather than a stretch of river, because that is the process we have to engage in.

    My hon. Friend the Minister is a knowledgeable and well-travelled lady, but I should detail for the House a bit more about the Nidd. It is a tributary of the Ouse, rising in the high dales on Great Whernside and flowing down through Nidderdale, skirting Harrogate and going through Knaresborough before joining the Ouse. The upper section is in the Nidderdale area of outstanding natural beauty, then the Nidd gorge, and when it reaches Knaresborough it forms part of one of the most famous Yorkshire views. I cannot distribute pictures, but I ask hon. Members to imagine a castle on a crag, a viaduct over the gorge and homes cascading down the valley side—Knaresborough is a very beautiful town.

    Just downstream from that famous viewpoint is the lido, a leisure home site owned and run by Meridian Parks and the Maguire family. It is also a popular location for wild swimming. Of course the issue of water quality is not confined to one area, and while we have many designated bathing areas around our coast, there are very few inland areas and those few are overwhelmingly lakes, not rivers. Indeed, looking at the data from the Outdoor Swimming Society, 98% of areas with bathing water status are coastal.

    There is one river in our area of Yorkshire that has achieved that status, and it is the River Wharfe in Ilkley. It is good to see my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley (Robbie Moore) in his place, and I know he intends to say a few words and share some insights from his excellent work there. The purpose of seeking this debate was to highlight that many more rivers must be awarded bathing water status right across our country and to promote our campaign for the River Nidd in Knaresborough.

    Philip Dunne (Ludlow) (Con)

    Inadvertently or not, my hon. Friend is making almost precisely the points that the Environmental Audit Committee made in its inquiry into water quality in rivers: that bathing water quality status should be an objective of every water company over the next pricing period, so that we can radically improve the quality of our rivers and allow more people to take great pleasure from swimming in all weathers in more and more rivers around the country.

    Andrew Jones

    My right hon. Friend is absolutely spot on. I have to say that I had not picked up all the output of his Select Committee, so apologies for that, but I strongly agree with everything he has said this evening. He is right that it should be an objective, but to achieve that objective, a team approach is needed, and one that involves the local community, local businesses, Government agencies, local government and national Government.

    Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for bringing this debate forward. I spoke with him before in the Tea Room, so he sort of knows what I am going to ask, and I am sure he is well prepared for it. To achieve bathing water status, it needs the efforts and the input of councils for a start, as well as that of local communities. It also means that the local councils and agencies should look at safe swimming in rivers. It is important that if the waters are right, they have to be safe for swimming. Does he feel that there should be legitimate signage and information posts to make strictly clear that if there is no information, individuals should not swim in any section of that river? It is about the quality of the rivers, but it is also about the safety.

    Andrew Jones

    Well, it would not be an Adjournment debate if the hon. Member did not intervene. These things should become proprietorially known as “Shannon moments”. I obviously agree with his point that water safety is critical, but also his point about informing people about where it is safe and not safe. There is a role for local government in signage. I certainly agree with him.

    I have met Nidd catchment anglers, the owners of the lido, residents and businesses, and they are all on board with the proposal for the Knaresborough site. So how do we reach that important water quality standard? The answer is to improve the actions and inputs on water quality from so many stakeholders.

    One key concern for river water quality is the Victorian design of our sewerage system. This system mixes foul water—sewage—and rainwater run-off in the same sewer system. Combined sewer overflows were installed to enable sewers to cope with the additional volume during periods of heavy rain. That enabled the sewers to discharge into rivers. If the CSOs did not exist, it would back up into our homes when the system is overloaded, and that would be worse, but we have seen them operating more frequently due to increasing population and in particular due to changing weather patterns, with more intense rainfall.

    Robert Courts (Witney) (Con)

    I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for letting me intervene on him. He speaks with total passion on this issue, and it is a passion that West Oxfordshire feels, too, about the Evenlode and the Windrush, which we have. He is right that this challenge must be overcome with a team effort, but does he agree that sooner or later the Victorian infrastructure he has spoken about will need to be upgraded and water companies’ investment will be key to that?

    Andrew Jones

    My hon. Friend is as wise as ever. I happen to know the Windrush a little bit, and it is a very beautiful part of our country. He is most fortunate to have it in his constituency. While it is a team effort, it will have to be backed by investment. It is one of a number of policy areas where our requirement for infrastructure has not kept pace with modern demands, so he is absolutely correct, and I do agree with him.

    One area where we have seen significant progress is with the increased monitoring of CSOs, and that has contributed to greater awareness of the number of discharges. In 2016, only 5% were monitored—next year it will be 100%. That is very good progress. Information from the House of Commons Library, based on monitoring data supplied by the Environment Agency, shows that 97% of CSOs are monitored in Yorkshire, which is ahead of the national picture. In 2021, each CSO in Yorkshire discharged on average 34 times, with the average duration at 5.8 hours. While that is the second-best performance for the duration of discharges in England, it is still way too much and it shows just how far there is to go.

    In terms of progress on this issue by my local water company, Yorkshire Water has recently announced an additional £100 million investment, funded by its shareholders, on top of its existing five-year business plan, aimed at reducing average bills by a minimum of 20% a year by March 2025, and that is compared with a baseline in 2021. In addition to the increased extreme weather and flash flooding events that cause CSOs to operate, a change to what we put into the system has been occurring over the past decade or so, particularly with wet wipes, but also with nappies being the main new entrants alongside fat from cooking.

    Wet wipes are responsible for 90% of sewer blockages and contribute to the formation of fatbergs—all hon. Members probably know what fatbergs are; they are truly grim. When the sewers are blocked, the CSOs operate and flush the wet wipes, and anything that is backed up behind them, which obviously includes human waste, into waterways. The hon. Member for Putney (Fleur Anderson) has done good work with her Plastics (Wet Wipes) Bill to remove plastic from wet wipes. I support that work and think it is right, but even removing plastic from wet wipes is not guaranteed to make the problem go away. Consumer behaviour can change, however, which could help; the UK currently flushes 11 billion a year.

    I raised the issue of new building standards at business questions last week. Rainwater run-off from new housing estates contributes to the volume of water that can overwhelm sewers and trigger a CSO to operate. In terms of building standards, developers must ensure that water is retained on site for longer before it is gradually released into the system. Attenuation tanks and ponds have a role to play. We have just had an important debate on levelling up rural Britain, and agricultural practices are also involved. Rainwater can cause fertilisers, pesticides and animal waste to enter rivers and lower water quality, which is highly significant in many parts of our country.

    We as legislators also have a major role to play. The Environment Act 2021 contains a variety of measures, but at its heart is transparency. It makes it a legal requirement for companies to provide discharge data to the Environment Agency and make it available in near-real time to the public. That increase in monitoring and transparency has already led to more enforcement action, and in some cases fines, for water companies where breaches have been found—and quite right too.

    I view water improvement as a real team effort; it is not for a single actor to take the actions. It means improved targets, vigilant monitoring, enforcement action, increased investment from water companies, and behavioural change. Achieving bathing water status is a significant step to implementing the changes needed to improve river water quality more widely because, if achieved, the Environment Agency will develop a bathing water profile and put plans in place to monitor and protect the bathing water.

    That is why I wanted to bring this complex and long-standing issue to the House to ask the Minister what more can be done to promote the quality of inland waterways. Bathing water status in the UK has mainly been a coastal issue up to now, but rivers must be included far more in future. I also wanted to highlight, of course, our campaign to secure bathing water quality status for the River Nidd at the lido in Knaresborough to make one of Yorkshire’s best even better.