Tag: Speeches

  • Nadhim Zahawi – 2021 Statement on the Vaccine Rollout

    Nadhim Zahawi – 2021 Statement on the Vaccine Rollout

    The statement made by Nadhim Zahawi, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, on 8 February 2021.

    Earlier this week, we saw one of the greatest milestones in our fightback against this virus, as the number of people who received their first dose ticked over 10 million, and has now surpassed 12 million.

    We’re now vaccinating at an incredible pace, and during one hour on Saturday we delivered nearly 1,000 jabs a minute across the United Kingdom.

    The vaccine is our way out of this pandemic, and it is thanks to the hard work of everyone involved that we have vaccinated over 90% of over 75s and visited every eligible care home possible with older residents in England.

    From the moment COVID-19 was identified over a year ago, the global community of researchers, scientists and manufacturers have concentrated all their expertise and their efforts into vaccines and treatments so we can beat this virus.

    The emergence of other variants is yet another challenge they are rising to meet.

    Our world-leading genomics capacity has allowed us to identify these different strains when they have appeared in the UK. Where we have seen evidence of the South African variant or other worrying mutations, we have moved to deploy surge testing to try and stop it spreading any further.

    It is a timely reminder that currently, even with the vaccine rollout going well, we all need to live by the national restrictions and act as if we might have the virus to stop us spreading it.

    We have also taken stringent measures to stop new variant cases coming into the country, with travel bans for over 30 countries identified as having the highest risk of importing these variants. This is in addition to the negative test you need to arrive in the country, and the 10-day quarantine you must undertake once you are here.

    I know the government is working at speed to introduce a further measure of enforced hotel quarantine for arrivals from high-risk countries to introduce yet another barrier against these variants coming into the UK.

    Our brilliant scientists and medical advisers are now working on the potential for new versions of existing vaccines to offer further protections against COVID variants. Last week we announced an agreement with the manufacture CureVac to allow new varieties of vaccines based on messenger RNA technology to be developed quickly and to procure 50 million doses of a new version of a vaccine, if it is required.

    But we should bear in mind that recent studies show the vaccines being deployed right now across the UK appear to work well against the COVID-19 variants currently dominant in the UK. In terms of other variants, not in the UK, we need to be aware that even where a vaccine has reduced efficacy in preventing infection there may still be good efficacy against severe disease, hospitalisation, and death. This is vitally important for protecting the healthcare system.

    While it is right and necessary to prepare for the deployment of an updated vaccine, we can take confidence from the current roll out and the protection it will provide all of us against this terrible disease.

    We are ready to protect our most vulnerable and stay a step ahead of the virus, whatever it throws at us.

    Thanks to the work you’re doing, we’re getting safer every day. But even though this programme is accelerating rapidly, this is still a lethal virus that is capable of causing devastation and disruption.

    So while the vaccinators do their work, we must all keep following the steps that we know make a big difference: hands, face, space, and if you have symptoms get a test.

  • Kwasi Kwarteng – 2021 Comments on Pay as You Grow Repayments

    Kwasi Kwarteng – 2021 Comments on Pay as You Grow Repayments

    The comments made by Kwasi Kwarteng, the Business Secretary, on 8 February 2021.

    The comprehensive and generous financial support package we have delivered across the UK has protected jobs, saved businesses and kept local economies on the move.

    While our vaccine rollout is moving at an incredible pace and the end is in sight, we know times are still tough for many companies and extra support is needed.

    These flexible repayment options will give businesses the time they need to recover from the pandemic before paying back loans, giving them the breathing space and confidence to build back better.

  • Nick Thomas-Symonds – 2021 Comments on Government’s Quarantine Plans

    Nick Thomas-Symonds – 2021 Comments on Government’s Quarantine Plans

    The comments made by Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Shadow Home Secretary, on 7 February 2021.

    These revelations expose the fact that – as Labour warned – the UK Government’s quarantine measures will continue to leave us completely exposed to emerging strains of the virus.

    Not only are the measures far too slow to begin – 50 days after the South African strain emerged – they are also dangerously inadequate. Tory incompetence is dangerous.

  • Rachel Reeves – 2021 Comments on Public Services

    Rachel Reeves – 2021 Comments on Public Services

    The comments made by Rachel Reeves, the Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, on 7 February 2021.

    This Government has eroded not only our public services to the brink of collapse, but so much of what it means to be an honourable and transparent government.

    While this Tory Government has denied key workers in our public services a pay rise, they paid 900 management consultants at Deloitte £1,000 a day to work on test and trace.

    The beating heart of our country is the key workers who have kept us going through this last year. That’s why we applauded them. Children weren’t banging pots and pans for management consultants. They were clapping our key workers.

    The public is also paying a high price for this Government’s mismanagement and waste. This current Tory Party is rife with conflicts of interest. It’s all cheques and no balances.

    People expect all of us seeking government to spend their money with care and respect – and a Labour government will.

    Labour will clean up government contracting by strengthening FOI, introducing a new Independent Anti-Corruption Commissioner, and an Integrity and Ethics Commission to make us a world leader in good governance and transparency.

  • John Healey – 2021 Comments on Army Numbers

    John Healey – 2021 Comments on Army Numbers

    The comments made by John Healey, the Shadow Defence Secretary, on 7 February 2021.

    There is serious concern that Britain’s Armed Forces remain 10,000 below the total strength Ministers have said is needed and we believe there is cross-party support for making sure the MoD keeps our full-time forces up to strength and battle-ready.

    The strength of our forces should rightly be set by a full assessment of the security threats we face and this is a central question the new Integrated Review must answer. Our adversaries will exploit continuing holes in our capability. The UK needs a proper defence strategy without further delay.

    Labour also wants to ensure the Government’s Armed Forces Bill will deliver step-change improvements in work and living conditions for the forces, veterans and their families.

  • Matt Western – 2021 Speech on the Towns Fund

    Matt Western – 2021 Speech on the Towns Fund

    The speech made by Matt Western, the Labour MP for Warwick and Leamington, in the House of Commons on 4 February 2021.

    I welcome the Government’s interest and their recognition of the importance of Royal Leamington Spa to be a recipient of potentially £10 million. As an important sub-regional shopping centre, it is a vital part of the region’s economy and quality of life, so let me praise the council officers at Warwick District Council for the quality of their original submission and the work they have done since in refining the proposals against a reduced contribution proposed by the Government. That said, £10 million is a sound amount for them to work with, and I hope it can do much to address the air quality in the town, highlighted by the World Health Organisation as an issue, while revitalising the commercial centre more widely.

    However, let me cut to the chase. Over the past decade the Government have cut £15 billion from local authorities across the UK, yet handed back just £3.6 billion to some towns which they invited to bid for moneys. Members will know that back in October I questioned the Prime Minister—did I have the guts, he asked me—about how it could be that the Secretary of State could approve tens of millions of pounds for his Minister and his constituency town of Darwen, while that Minister could return the favour and approve tens of millions of pounds for the Secretary of State’s constituency town of Newark—beyond belief. But how were the 101 towns selected in the first instance? Surely, if the Government were honest in their claim to level up, they would have allocated the moneys to the most deprived communities across England, but they have not. In the past year, we have heard many cases of the Government using algorithms, or more often malgorithms, but this is back-of-a-fag-packetithm. While Housing, Communities and Local Government officials may have recommended that the Government did one thing—namely, allocate funds to the most deserving communities—instead the Secretary of State and Ministers allocated moneys to towns in the lowest priority category.

    It is also worth noting that the Government chose to allocate by region, not need, so the north and the midlands were disadvantaged by their political ploys. How else could Bournemouth benefit but, shockingly, South Shields be left off? Both are seaside towns, but I think I know which is in greater need of the funding. It is something Harry Redknapp would have appreciated more than most. I will not even go into Cheadle. While Big Ben no longer bongs, this Government bung, and they are doing it on an industrial scale. A simple analysis of the towns that have received moneys underlines the political tactics laid bare. Certainly the timing of the announcement, in the last few weeks before the last general election, might give us a clue. It was carefully targeted at marginal seats. Interestingly, the impartial cross-party Public Accounts Committee concluded in its investigation that the selection process was not impartial. It took evidence from Christopher Hanretty, a professor of politics at Royal Holloway, who said that

    “the process by which towns were invited to bid for money from the Towns Fund was driven by party-political electoral advantage”,

    riding roughshod over any pretence to be levelling up this country. Any section 151 officer in a council would be sacked if they acted like this.

    Any impartial observer will see this for what it is, and certainly the public do. It is grubby government of the worst order.

  • Sarah Olney – 2021 Speech on the Towns Fund

    Sarah Olney – 2021 Speech on the Towns Fund

    The speech made by Sarah Olney, the Liberal Democrat MP for Richmond Park, in the House of Commons on 4 February 2021.

    Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for giving me an opportunity to speak in this debate. It has been fantastic to hear the stories of how the towns fund has helped individual town centres, and I am pleased for those communities that have seen a boost from the fund. Members will know that the National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee, of which I am a member, have expressed doubts about the transparency of the decision making relating to the fund’s distribution. I do not want to reiterate these concerns, as they have been expanded on by various Members in this debate, but I note that the approach of selecting certain town centres for funding while excluding others is bound to lead to inequalities. Town centres that could have benefited from funding will miss out. The hon. Member for Ealing Central and Acton (Dr Huq) made an excellent point about London suburbs, and obviously I, too represent one. There are lots of opportunities in London’s suburbs for levelling up, not least now that we are seeing less commuting, and lots of town centres will be looking for funds to revive, to help those who are working from home more often.

    In the interim, our town centres have had to weather the unprecedented economic blow of the pandemic lockdown and a further decimation of the retail industry. Once the restrictions are lifted, there will be an urgent need to make a substantial economic offer to town centre businesses, not just to help revive them, but to provide jobs, and to deliver local goods and services, and, most importantly, public spaces, where local people can come together and meet each other. It is those informal meetings that we are all missing out on during lockdown. All our town centres will need assistance to bounce back from this crisis, so I call on the Government to take measures that will support all our communities, and abandon this winners and losers approach that we have seen with the allocation of funds from this towns fund.

    The need to review our approach to business rates has been aired many times in this Chamber, and I hope we will hear more on it in due course, in order to level the playing field between physical and digital businesses. Similarly, I would like to see a change in the way in which commercial leases are granted and an abolition of upward-only rent reviews. I have heard that ask from many, many businesses in the past year. We should also reform local authority funding to give all councils more money to spend on investing in their own town centres. There are great opportunities for our retail and hospitality sectors, and our cultural organisations, once the lockdown restrictions are lifted, and they will bring new employment to every part of the UK. I urge the Government to put the investment necessary into those sectors to help them all recover from the current downturn.

  • Charlotte Nichols – 2021 Speech on the Towns Fund

    Charlotte Nichols – 2021 Speech on the Towns Fund

    The speech made by Charlotte Nichols, the Labour MP for Warrington North, in the House of Commons on 4 February 2021.

    Every one of us in this House wants to see investment in our constituents and our communities, particularly after a decade of Tory-imposed austerity, so I welcome the £22 million that has been allocated to Warrington from the fund. As part of the town deal board, I pay special thanks to all the stakeholders and officers of Warrington Borough Council for drawing together this successful bid. But—you knew that there would be a “but”, Mr Deputy Speaker—this is not a sustainable alternative to proper, long-term funding of our towns and their needs, and cannot and should not be sold as such by the Government.

    As has already been mentioned, the past 10 years have seen core funding for local authorities cut by £15 billion, and our councils are struggling even more with the understandable impact of covid on their income streams and spending expectations, which the LGA estimates will be a further £2.6 billion. In comparison, the towns fund programme replaces only a fifth of the shortfall. We cannot expect our towns to thrive, as I would like to see, if our funding is stripped to the bone and sometimes the marrow, and we are left hoping for a special handout from Westminster once a decade. How does that assist long-term planning, or the development of sustainable local economies? We need a more holistic approach.

    In Warrington, I want the certainty of a long-overdue new hospital Bill. I want assurances that there will be funding for the restoration and redevelopment of local leisure and library facilities, including Culcheth Community Campus and Padgate library. Above all, I want a guarantee that Warrington Borough Council will be reimbursed for the moneys it has had to spend because of the pandemic, or else all the work that has gone into this bid will be fatally undermined. I want towns such as mine to be self-sustaining and able to offer opportunities for young people and well-paid jobs so that they become hubs of prosperity, rather than being emptied out. We in Warrington benefit greatly from the high-skilled and highly rewarded employment opportunities provided by the nuclear industry. I want the Government to do more to deliver the next generation of new nuclear, which will provide more such quality prospects in Warrington and elsewhere, and to commit to an industrial strategy that makes levelling up the north-west about deeds, not words.

    In his response to today’s debate, I hope the Minister will set out how he will judge the success of the towns fund, and how he will ensure that continuous financial support for towns is restored, rather than acting as though we should be grateful for a chance to bid for funding in a once-in-a-decade competition.

  • Philip Hammond – 2006 Speech to Conservative Party Conference

    Philip Hammond – 2006 Speech to Conservative Party Conference

    The speech made by Philip Hammond, the then Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, on 3 October 2006.

    I watched some of the Labour Conference last week. It was better than a soap opera.

    Tony Blair on his way out;

    Gordon Brown on his way up;

    And after that description of the Chancellor as “an effing disaster” – John Hutton probably on his way to JobCentrePlus.

    But during a gap in the beauty parade of leadership contenders, they did find a bit of time to talk about social justice.

    They obviously think they own that agenda.

    You know how it is with them: you can tell by the tone, by the arrogance; by the way they take people for granted.

    Now we are staking out our claim to that turf.

    So I want us to send a message to them today. And it is this: “the Tories have got their tanks on your lawn”.

    And I’ll tell you why: because Labour has failed. Failed the most disadvantaged in our society.

    In Labour’s Britain, means testing is up, social mobility is down and income inequality is entrenched.

    The poorest are paying a higher share of taxes, and receiving a smaller share of benefits than in 1997.

    And the proportion of children living in workless households is the highest in Europe.

    So much promised. So little delivered. And now they have run out of steam. Devoid of new ideas. Their top-down, centralised approach failing Britain’s most vulnerable people.

    As for fighting poverty – most of them are too busy fighting each other.

    So it falls to us to pick up the challenge of delivering social justice to the most disadvantaged.

    Those who have not shared in the growing prosperity of our society.

    Those who remain locked in a cycle of deprivation. Workless and without hope.

    The mistakes and failings of one generation repeated by the next.

    This is deep-rooted poverty – not just lack of money, but lack of aspiration, lack of self-esteem, lack of hope. It is a moral, as well as a material, poverty.

    And tackling this poverty is a moral, as well as an economic imperative for the next Conservative Government.

    It took the Labour Party almost the first hundred years of its existence to grasp that a competitive economy is the essential foundation for social justice.

    But we have always understood that.

    And we understand too that social justice is an essential foundation of a competitive, modern economy.

    Because in 21st Century Britain, our human capital is our principal natural resource.

    In the past our wealth was built on iron and coal, gas and oil.

    But in the knowledge-based economy of the future, our prosperity will be sustained by the skills and the talents of the people who live in these islands.

    So, we cannot stand by and watch children leave school without basic skills.

    We cannot allow drug addiction to destroy promising young lives.

    We cannot tolerate 5 million adults languishing on out-of-work benefits.

    And we will not.

    Social justice and economic competitiveness point us in the same direction: active support and investment to bring those excluded millions back into the mainstream of our society.

    Through education; Through training; Through healthcare; Through work- support and childcare.

    So that they can contribute to, and share in, our nation’s prosperity.

    For their benefit. For their children’s benefit. And for the benefit of our economy and our society as a whole.

    Delivering social justice and delivering the skills our economy needs.

    Of course, there is another way to meet the needs of the economy. The way that Labour has followed. To rely on an influx of migrant workers. Make no mistake, we welcome the contribution that generations of immigrants have made to our country and to our economy.

    But isn’t a continued dependence on uncontrolled migration a betrayal of the 5 million workless adults in Britain today?

    5 million adults who already have homes; 5 million adults who are already using the NHS; whose children already have school places.

    We owe it to them and, frankly, we owe it to ourselves, to make the effort and the investment that will allow them to fill the jobs that a growing economy will generate.

    In the 1980’s Margaret Thatcher tackled head on, and reversed, Britain’s long-term economic decline. And we should be proud of that success.

    But it left unfinished work: repairing the social consequences of radical economic change.

    Labour, with its state-led model has tried, and failed.

    So it’s down to us to finish the job. To tackle the deep-rooted social problems that still blight Britain today.

    With the same passion, the same commitment, the same single-mindedness, with which we tackled the economic problems of the 1980’s.

    Traditional trickle-down economics hasn’t done it. Labour’s centralised state model hasn’t done it either.

    So we need a new direction.

    A new direction that will succeed where Labour has failed.

    And I’ll tell you how – By trusting people and by sharing responsibility.

    By creating a genuinely level playing field for the private and voluntary sectors. So that they can share in the delivery of our social agenda.

    By devolving power and resources to communities. So that they can tailor local solutions to local problems.

    By creating a spirit of social responsibility, that will engage individuals, families, communities, businesses.

    And because we want to help millions more people into work – older people, carers, and people with disabilities – we must make work itself more flexible.

    Work tailored to the circumstances of the would-be workers, not workers squeezed into jobs that they don’t fit.

    So, we need change.

    But we also need continuity. Ideas and institutions that have stood the test of time.

    So the family will be at the heart of our social policy.

    Because the evidence that families provide the best environment for bringing up children is now so overwhelming that even the Labour Party has noticed it.

    But, as usual, they don’t quite get it.

    John Hutton said last week that the family is the bedrock of the welfare state.

    He was wrong. The family is much more than that.

    The family is the bedrock of our entire society.

    So, a Conservative Government will support and nurture the institution of the family and will never allow the State to supplant it.

    But, in modern Britain, families come in all shapes and sizes. We have to recognise that.

    Because we aspire to govern this country, made up of all those diverse families. And to earn that privilege, we have to show that we value them all.

    Of course, social justice isn’t only about children and families – it transcends generations, and pensioners are among the most vulnerable in our society.

    That hasn’t stopped Gordon Brown snatching £5bn a year from pension funds.

    Or extending means-testing to embrace nearly half of all pensioners.

    But he is failing the most vulnerable of them; 1.6million are not claiming the Pension Credit to which they are entitled.

    Why?

    Because it is too complicated;

    It is too intrusive;

    And because they are too proud.

    But their fuel bills and their council tax go on rising, just the same.

    We understand the needs and aspirations of older people and we will put them at the heart of our policy development process.

    Nobody should leave this hall today in any doubt that the commitment to social justice is at the very core of our new agenda for the Conservative Party. Both as an end in itself; and as a means to support a competitive modern economy.

    Economic stability.

    Growth and prosperity.

    The only long-term guarantees of social justice;

    Of jobs, for all those who can work;

    And of generous levels of support for those who genuinely cannot.

    Labour has had its chance – and failed.

    Now we must map out for the people of Britain our vision for society:

    A society where opportunity is open to all;

    And where all are genuinely able to benefit from it.

    Where there are no hidden barriers or glass ceilings.

    No sink estates written off as “no go” areas;

    No self-perpetuating underclass, left without help and without hope.

    Now is the time to take up that challenge.

    To highlight Labour’s failure.

    And to seize back the social justice agenda that they have tried, and failed, to make their own.

    Time to show the people of Britain, by our deeds as well as our words, that they can, again, trust us.

    Trust us to deliver social justice, and economic prosperity. Which together will form the foundation of the truly Great Britain that we aspire to build.

  • Andrew Mitchell – 2006 Speech at the Conservative Party Conference

    Andrew Mitchell – 2006 Speech at the Conservative Party Conference

    The speech made by Andrew Mitchell, the then Shadow Secretary of State for International Development, on 4 October 2006.

    I think David Cameron has given me the most exciting job in the Shadow Cabinet and one of the most worthwhile.

    A billion people- a sixth of the world’s population – exist each day on less than the price of a coffee from the foyer outside here.

    Tackling this is the great moral challenge of our time. We cannot, we will not, walk by on the other side.

    Making this difference is vital to our long-term security. If we can help Africa join the modern world their people won’t want to flee to Europe to find a better life.

    The Conservative Party is rightly insisting on firm but fair immigration controls, and an end to Labour’s chaotic mismanagement of the asylum system.

    But just ask yourself this: what possesses a young African man to get in an open boat, to pay all the money he has to the modern version of a slave trader, to risk his life on a journey of 1000 miles across the Atlantic, in the hope of stumbling ashore on a European beach?

    People who do that – in the kind of numbers we’re seeing today – these are pretty desperate people.

    If we help them, we not only do what is morally right, we also address problems we face here at home.

    You know, there are some who say this is a Labour issue.

    But I say that international development is not a Labour issue or a Conservative issue but a British issue.

    And our support makes the British contribution hugely stronger and more effective.

    And that’s not surprising because Labour have built on the foundations they inherited from the Conservatives. Chris Patten and Lynda Chalker – two excellent Tory Development Ministers – left a valuable legacy of strong policies on good government and on corruption.

    And it was Conservative ministers who negotiated the cancellation of £1.2 billion of debt owed by the world’s poorest countries.

    So just as we believe in social justice at home, we believe in social justice abroad.

    But the Conservative agenda for tackling global poverty is not the same as the agenda of the Left and today I want to talk about our approach on aid, on corruption and on conflict.

    Labour are obsessed with inputs, putting money on the table – how much we spend. But as Conservatives we are concerned with outputs – how many schools we build – and even more concerned with outcomes – how many kids get an education.

    Many on the Left believe that the cure for poverty is big plans conceived by visionaries and academics.

    But just as big government in Britain doesn’t necessarily mean big solutions, so big projects imposed on the developing world often don’t translate into real progress for those we should be helping.

    Money given in hand-outs to governments too often fails to reach the village at the end of the track where they have neither a school, nor a clinic, nor even clean water.

    And this is the lesson for the big planners like Gordon Brown – if they are minded to listen. Aid is not the same thing as development. Aid in itself has not and will not deliver long-term prosperity or an end to poverty.

    It is the small steps to development that make a lasting change to people’s lives: the village well that means women don’t have to walk five miles a day for water.

    The £4 malaria net that means a baby survives to reach the age of five.

    The village school that means families no longer have to chose between children working in the fields or learning how to read and write.

    Focussing on these steps is not as dramatic as declaring that we will end poverty tomorrow. But as I’ve seen in some of the poorest parts of the world, these are the steps that make a real difference to the poorest.

    Remember my story about Marjina Begum. Microfinance has helped millions of people like her. From a woman in Ghana who needs a second-hand sewing machine to start a clothes business, to a man in Mozambique who wants tools to repair shoes, or a beggar in Bangladesh who borrows to buy chickens who lay eggs he can sell.

    And incidentally, it also opens up societies to new ideas, such as equality for women and girls. Given microfinance and education, women are already the ones driving real change all over the developing world.

    We are committed to increasing our aid substantially to 0.7 percent of our national income by 2013.

    We will spend more because we know that well-spent aid can work miracles. Killer diseases like HIV/AIDS, TB and Malaria condemn millions of people to a slow, painful death. Using our aid money effectively to prevent the spread of these awful diseases will save millions of lives in the years ahead.

    British aid has helped millions of children into school, and supported the provision of clean water and sanitation as I saw in Dhaka this summer.

    Earlier this year David Cameron suggested giving aid vouchers to poor people so that they could choose what sort of development service they want and who they want to provide it.

    That is the right way to advance this agenda.

    I want to see poor people as masters and owners of the international development system and not as passive recipients of it.

    Aid agencies – should be subject to independent evaluation, not merely self-evaluation as at present.

    And so I can tell Conference today that we have asked our Policy Group to consider setting up an International Aid Watchdog. Uncluttered by conflicts of interest, this would provide independent and objective evaluation of the effectiveness of British aid.

    Labour spends your money; Conservatives will get results.

    Corruption is the enemy of effective aid.

    When Paul Wolfowitz of the World Bank found that the President of the Republic of Congo had spent £ 50,000 on putting up himself, his butler, his personal photographer, his hairdresser and about 50 other members of his entourage at The Palace Hotel in New York, he was outraged.

    When he wasn’t satisfied with the audits of the state oil company, he suspended debt relief.

    Labour say that Paul Wolfowitz is being too harsh in tackling corruption. I say that Mr Wolfowitz is right. A Conservative Government will champion zero-tolerance of corruption.

    We owe it to hardworking British taxpayers to speak out and take action wherever and whenever corruption is exposed.

    But at the heart of everything we do in international development is conflict prevention and reconciliation. Because if you are one of the poor children and families that live in a camp in Darfur – one of those who William Hague and I met earlier this year – it doesn’t matter how much aid and trade you receive, you are going to remain poor and destitute, frightened and bitter, until the conflict and the shooting stop.

    Many of us are praying that the sinews of the international community are strong enough to protect the weak and desperate who are now waiting in fear and terror in Darfur.

    And Darfur is a real test for the international community.

    Will we stand by once again as we did over Rwanda?

    Will we watch helplessly as the will of the UN is flouted by a regime in Khartoum guilty of genocide and ethnic cleansing?

    Will we allow their helicopters to shoot innocent civilians – men women and children – and fail to enforce the no-fly-zone set up by the UN in 2004 but never implemented?

    We should hit the generals where it hurts by stopping their shopping trips to Paris, freezing their foreign bank accounts and closing down their network of overseas businesses.

    The international community must now ensure that the African Union are given the resources they need to carry out their mandate.

    And if the leaders in Khartoum are caught outside Sudan, we must send them to The Hague to face charges of crimes against humanity.

    As we end our debate today, we know that our approach to tackling global poverty is different from that of the Left. Conservatives believe in working with the grain of human nature and in giving poor people themselves the chance to get ahead and lift their families out of poverty.

    As your International Development team learn lessons from around the world, we are confident that Britain under a Conservative government will answer the moral call from developing countries for open markets and effective aid.

    Under the Conservatives British aid will make the greatest possible difference to health and education and to political stability.

    And we are convinced that our blend of idealism and practicality, our enthusiasm and our dedication, will commend itself to the British people at the next election.