Tag: Theresa May

Below is the text of the statement made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, in the House of Commons on 14 January 2019.

With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to update the House on the further assurances and clarifications we have received from the European Union on the Northern Ireland Protocol.

As a proud Unionist, I share the concerns of Members who want to ensure that in leaving the European Union we do not undermine the strength of our own union in the UK.

That is why when the EU tried to insist on a Protocol that would carve out Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK’s customs territory, I said no.

And I secured instead a UK-wide temporary customs arrangement – avoiding both a hard border on the island of Ireland and a customs border down the Irish Sea.

I also negotiated substantial commitments in the Withdrawal Agreement and the Political Declaration to do everything possible to prevent the backstop ever being needed – and to ensure that if it were, it would be a temporary arrangement.

But listening to the debate before Christmas it was clear that we needed to go further.

So I returned to Brussels to faithfully and firmly reflect the concerns of this House.

The conclusions of December’s Council went further in addressing our concerns.

They included reaffirming the EU’s determination to work speedily to establish by 31st December 2020 alternative arrangements so that the backstop will not need to be triggered.

They underlined that if the backstop were nevertheless to be triggered it would indeed apply temporarily.

They committed that in such an event, the EU would use their best endeavours to continue to negotiate and conclude as soon as possible a subsequent agreement that would replace the backstop.

And they gave a new assurance that negotiations on the Future Relationship could start immediately after the UK’s withdrawal.

Since the Council and throughout the Christmas and New Year period I have spoken to a number of European leaders and there have been further discussions with the EU to seek further assurances alongside the Council conclusions.

And today I have published the outcome of these further discussions with an exchange of letters between the UK Government and the Presidents of the European Commission and European Council.

The letter from President Tusk confirms what I said in the House before Christmas – namely that the assurances in the European Council conclusions have legal standing in the EU.

Mr Speaker, my Rt Hon Friend the Attorney General has also written to me today confirming that in the light of the joint response from the Presidents of the European Council and the Commission, these conclusions “would have legal force in international law”, and setting out his opinion – “reinforced” by today’s letter – “that the balance of risks favours the conclusion that it is unlikely that the EU will wish to rely on the implementation of the backstop provisions.”

And further, that it is therefore his judgement that “the current draft Withdrawal Agreement now represents the only politically practicable and available means of securing our exit from the European Union.”

Mr Speaker, I know that some Members would ideally like a unilateral exit mechanism or a hard time limit to the backstop.

I have explained this to the EU and tested these points in negotiations.

But the EU would not agree to this, because they fear that such a provision could allow the UK to leave the backstop at any time without any other arrangements in place and require a hard border to be erected between Northern Ireland and Ireland.

I have been very clear with them that this is not something we would ever countenance – that the UK is steadfast in its commitment to the Belfast Agreement and would never allow a return to a hard border.

But it is not enough simply to say this. Both sides also need to take steps to avoid a hard border when the UK is outside of the EU.

Failing to do so would place businesses on the island of Ireland in an impossible position having to choose between costly new checks and procedures that would disrupt their supply chains or breaking the law.

So we have the backstop as a last resort.

But both the Taoiseach and I have said consistently that the best way to avoid a hard border is through the future relationship – that is the sustainable solution. And that neither of us want to use the backstop.

So since the Council we have been looking at commitments that would ensure we get our future relationship or alternative arrangements in place by the end of the Implementation Period, so that there will be no need to enter the backstop and no need for any fear that there will be a hard border.

And that is why in the first of the further assurances they have provided today, the EU has committed to begin exploratory talks on the detailed legal provisions of the future relationship as soon as this Parliament has approved the deal and the Withdrawal Agreement has been signed. And they have been explicit that this can happen immediately after this House votes through the agreement.

If this House approved the deal tomorrow, it would give us almost two years to complete the next phase of the negotiations. And, of course, we will have the option to extend the Implementation Period if further time were needed for either one or two years. It is my absolute conviction that we can turn the Political Declaration into legal text in that time, avoiding the need for the backstop altogether.

The letters also make clear that these talks should give “particular urgency to discussion of ideas, including the use of all available facilitative arrangements and technologies, for replacing the backstop with permanent arrangements.”

And further that those arrangements “are not required to replicate the backstop provisions in any respect.” So contrary to the fears of some Hon. Members, the EU will not simply insist that the backstop is the only way to avoid a hard border. They have agreed to discuss technological solutions and any alternative means of delivering on this objective – and to get on with this as a priority in the next phase of negotiations.

Second, the EU has now committed to a fast track process to bring our future trade deal into force once it has been agreed. If there is any delay in ratification, the Commission has now said they will recommend provisionally applying the relevant parts of the agreement so that we would not need to enter the backstop.

Such a provisional application process saved four years on the EU-Korea deal and it would prevent any delays in ratification by other EU Member State parliaments from delaying our deal coming into force.

Third, the EU has provided absolute clarity on the explicit linkage between the Withdrawal Agreement and the Political Declaration, and made that link clear in the way the documents are presented.

I know some colleagues are worried about an imbalance between the Withdrawal Agreement and the Political Declaration because the EU cannot reach a legal agreement with us on the future relationship until we are a third country.

But the link between them means the commitments of one cannot be banked without the commitments of the other – and the EU have been clear that they come as a package.

Bad faith by either side in negotiating the legal instruments that will deliver the future relationship laid out in the Political Declaration would be a breach of their legal obligations under the Withdrawal Agreement.

Fourth, the exchange of letters confirms that the UK can unilaterally deliver all of the commitments we made last week to safeguard the interests of the people and businesses of Northern Ireland and their position in our precious union.

For it gives clear answers to address some questions that have been raised since the deal was reached…

…that the deal means no change to the arrangements which underpin north-south cooperation in the Belfast Agreement…

…that Stormont will have a lock on any new laws the EU proposes should be added to the backstop…

…and that the UK can give a restored Northern Ireland Executive a seat at the table on the joint committee overseeing the deal.

Mr Speaker, President Juncker says explicitly in his letter that the backstop “would represent a suboptimal trading relationship for both sides.”

We have spoken at length about why we want to avoid the backstop. But it is not in the EU’s interests either.

For this backstop gives the UK tariff-free access to the EU’s market.

And it does so with no free movement of people, no financial contribution, no requirement to follow most of the level playing field rules and no need to allow EU boats any access to our waters for fishing.

Furthermore, under these arrangements, UK authorities in Northern Ireland would clear goods for release into the EU Single Market with no further checks or controls.

This is unprecedented and means the EU relying on the UK for the functioning of its own market.

So the EU will not want this backstop to come into force – and the exchange of letters today makes clear that if it did, they would do all they could to bring it to an end as quickly as possible.

Nevertheless, Mr Speaker, I fully understand that these new assurances still will not go as far as some would like.

I recognise that some Members wanted to see changes to the Withdrawal Agreement: a unilateral exit mechanism from the backstop, an end date or rejecting the backstop altogether – although it should be said that this would have risked other EU Member States attempting to row back on the significant wins we have already achieved such as on control over our waters or the sovereignty of Gibraltar.

But the simple truth is this: the EU was not prepared to agree to this.

And rejecting the backstop altogether means no deal.

Whatever version of the Future Relationship you might want to see – from Norway to Canada to any number of variations – all of them require a Withdrawal Agreement and any Withdrawal Agreement will contain the backstop.

And that is not going to change however the House votes tomorrow.

And to those who think we should reject this deal in favour of no deal, because we cannot get every assurance we want…

…I ask what would a no deal Brexit do to strengthen the hand of those campaigning for Scottish independence – or indeed those demanding a border poll in Northern Ireland?

Surely this is the real threat to our Union.

Mr Speaker, with just 74 days until the 29th March the consequences of voting against this deal tomorrow are becoming ever clearer.

With no deal we would have: no Implementation Period, no security partnership, no guarantees for UK citizens overseas, and no certainty for businesses and workers like those I met in Stoke this morning. And we would see changes to everyday life in Northern Ireland that would put the future of our Union at risk.

And if, rather than leaving with no deal, this House blocked Brexit, that would be a subversion of our democracy, saying to the people we were elected to serve that we were unwilling to do what they had instructed.

So I say to Members on all sides of this House – whatever you may have previously concluded – over these next 24 hours, give this deal a second look.

No it is not perfect. And yes it is a compromise.

But when the history books are written, people will look at the decision of this House tomorrow and ask:

Did we deliver on the country’s vote to leave the European Union?

Did we safeguard our economy, our security and our Union? Or did we let the British people down?

I say we should deliver for the British people and get on with building a brighter future for our country by backing this deal tomorrow.

And I commend this Statement to the House.

Below is the text of the speech made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, in Stoke-On-Trent on 14 January 2019.

Tomorrow, Members of Parliament will cast their votes on the Withdrawal Agreement on the terms of our departure from the European Union and the Political Declaration on our future relationship.

That vote in Westminster is a direct consequence of the votes that were cast by people here in Stoke, and in cities, towns and villages in every corner of the United Kingdom.

In June 2016, the British people were asked by MPs to take a decision: should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or should we leave?

In that campaign, both sides disagreed on many things, but on one thing they were united: what the British people decided, the politicians would implement.

In the run-up to the vote, the government sent a leaflet to every household making the case for remain. It stated very clearly: ‘This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide.’

Those were the terms on which people cast their votes.

If a majority had backed remain, the UK would have continued as an EU member state.

No doubt the disagreements would have continued too, but the vast majority of people would have had no truck with an argument that we should leave the EU in spite of a vote to remain or that we should return to the question in another referendum.

On the rare occasions when Parliament puts a question to the British people directly we have always understood that their response carries a profound significance.

When the people of Wales voted by a margin of 0.3%, on a turnout of just over 50%, to endorse the creation of the Welsh Assembly, that result was accepted by Parliament.

Indeed we have never had a referendum in the United Kingdom that we have not honoured the result of.

Parliament understood this fact when it voted overwhelmingly to trigger Article 50.

And both major parties did so too when they stood on election manifestos in 2017 that pledged to honour the result of the referendum.

Yet, as we have seen over the last few weeks, there are some in Westminster who would wish to delay or even stop Brexit and who will use every device available to them to do so.

I ask them to consider the consequences of their actions on the faith of the British people in our democracy.

The House of Commons did not say to the people of Scotland or Wales that despite voting in favour of a devolved legislature, Parliament knew better and would over-rule them. Or else force them to vote again.

What if we found ourselves in a situation where Parliament tried to take the UK out of the EU in opposition to a remain vote?

People’s faith in the democratic process and their politicians would suffer catastrophic harm.

We all have a duty to implement the result of the referendum.

Ever since I reached an agreement with the EU on a Withdrawal Agreement and declaration on our future relationship I have argued that the consequences of Parliament rejecting it would be grave uncertainty – potentially leading to one of two outcomes.

Either a ‘no deal’ Brexit, that would cause turbulence for our economy, create barriers to security cooperation and disrupt people’s daily lives.

Or the risk of no Brexit at all – for the first time in our history failing to implement the outcome of a statutory referendum and letting the British people down.

These alternatives both remain in play if the deal is rejected.

There are differing views on the threat that a no deal exit poses.

I have always believed that while we could ultimately make a success of no deal, it would cause significant disruption in the short term and it would be far better to leave with a good deal.

Others in the House of Commons take a different view and regard no deal as the ultimate threat to be avoided at all costs.

To those people I say this: the only ways to guarantee we do not leave without a deal are: to abandon Brexit, betraying the vote of the British people; or to leave with a deal, and the only deal on the table is the one MPs will vote on tomorrow night.

You can take no deal off the table by voting for that deal. And if no deal is a bad as you believe it is, it would be the height of recklessness to do anything else.

But while no deal remains a serious risk, having observed events at Westminster over the last seven days, it is now my judgment that the more likely outcome is a paralysis in Parliament that risks there‪‪ being no Brexit.

That makes it even more important that MPs consider very carefully how they will vote ‪‪tomorrow night.

As I have said many times – the deal we have agreed is worthy of support for what it achieves for the British people.

Immigration policy back in the hands of people you elect – so we can build a system based around the skills people have to offer this country, not where they come from, and bring the overall numbers down. Sovereign control of our borders.

Decisions about how to spend the money you pay in taxes back under the control of people you elect – so we can spend the vast annual sums we send to Brussels as we chose, on priorities like our long-term plan for the NHS. Sovereign control of our money.

UK laws, not EU laws, governing this country – so the people you elect decide what the law of the land in our country is. Sovereign control of our laws.

Out of the Common Agricultural Policy – with our farmers supported by schemes we design to suit our own needs.

Out of the Common Fisheries Policy – so we decide who fishes in our waters and we can rebuild our fishing fleets for the future.

Retaking our seat at the World Trade Organisation, so we can strike trade deals around the world that work for British businesses and consumers.

The rights of valued EU citizens here guaranteed and reciprocal guarantees for UK citizens across Europe.

The partnerships between our police forces and security services, that protect us every day from threats that know no borders, sustained.

An implementation period that ensures our departure from the EU is smooth and orderly, protecting your jobs.

And yes a guarantee that the people of Northern Ireland can carry on living their lives just as they do now, whatever the future holds.

These are valuable prizes.

The deal honours the vote in the referendum by translating the people’s instruction into a detailed and practical plan for a better future.

No one else has put forward an alternative which does this.

Compare that outcome to the alternatives of no deal or no Brexit.

With no deal we would have: no implementation period, no security co-operation, no guarantees for UK citizens overseas, no certainty for businesses and workers here in Stoke and across the UK, and changes to everyday life in Northern Ireland that would put the future of our Union at risk.

And with no Brexit, as I have said, we would risk a subversion of the democratic process.

We would be sending a message from Westminster to communities like Stoke that your voices do not count.

The way to close-off both of these potential avenues of uncertainty is clear: it is for MPs to back the deal the government has negotiated and move our country forward into the bright future that awaits us.

I have always believed that there is a majority in the House of Commons for a smooth and orderly exit delivered by means of a withdrawal agreement.

That is why the government tabled the motion for the meaningful vote last month.

But it became clear that MPs’ concerns about one particular aspect of the deal – the backstop preventing a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland in the event that we cannot reach agreement on our new relationship before the end of the implementation period – meant that there was no prospect of winning the vote.

So I suspended the debate to allow time for further discussions with the EU to address those concerns.

Today I have published the outcome of those discussions in the form of letters between the UK government and the Presidents of the European Commission and European Council.

I listened very carefully to the concerns that MPs from all sides expressed, particularly the concerns of my fellow Unionists from Northern Ireland.

In my discussions with the EU we explored a number of the suggestions made by MPs, both about how the backstop would operate and for how long.

The EU have said throughout that they would not renegotiate the Withdrawal Agreement or reopen its text for alteration, and that remained the case throughout my discussions at the December European Council and since.

I also pursued in these discussions a proposal for a fixed date – with legal force – guaranteeing the point at which the future partnership would come into force. Because that is the way to bring an end to the backstop – by agreeing our new relationship.

The EU’s position was that – while they never want or expect the backstop to come into force – a legal time limit was not possible.

But while we did not achieve that, we have secured valuable new clarifications and assurances to put before the House of Commons, including on getting our future relationship in place rapidly, so that the backstop should never need to be used.

We now have a commitment from the EU that work on our new relationship can begin as soon as possible after the signing of the Withdrawal Agreement – in advance of the 29 March – and we have an explicit commitment that this new relationship does not need to replicate the backstop in any respect whatsoever.

We have agreement on a fast-track process to bring the free trade deal we will negotiate into force if there are any delays in member states ratifying it, making it even more likely that the backstop will never need to be used.

We now have absolute clarity on the explicit linkage between the Withdrawal Agreement and the Political Declaration, putting beyond doubt that these come as a package.

And finally the EU have confirmed their acceptance that the UK can unilaterally deliver on all the commitments made in our Northern Ireland paper last week, including a Stormont lock on new EU laws being added to the backstop, and a seat at the table for a restored Northern Ireland Executive.

The legal standing of the significant conclusions of the December Council have been confirmed. If the backstop were ever triggered it would only be temporary and both sides would do all they could to bring it to an end as quickly as possible.

The letters published today have legal force and must be used to interpret the meaning of the Withdrawal Agreement, including in any future arbitration.

They make absolutely clear the backstop is not a threat or a trap.

I fully understand that the new legal and political assurances which are contained in the letters from Donald Tusk and Jean-Claude Juncker do not go as far as some MPs would like.

But I am convinced that MPs now have the clearest assurances that this is the best deal possible and that it is worthy of their support.

Two other areas of concern raised and reflected in amendments tabled to the meaningful vote were on the protection of workers’ rights and on environmental standards.

I could not have been clearer that far from wanting to see a reduction in our standards in these areas, the UK will instead continue to be a world leader.

We have committed to addressing these concerns and will work with MPs from across the House on how best to implement them, looking at legislation where necessary, to deliver the best possible results for workers across the UK.

This afternoon I will set out in greater detail to MPs what is contained in the correspondence I have published today and what it means for our withdrawal.

And tomorrow I will close the debate.

But as we start this crucial week in our country’s history let’s take a step back and remember both what is at stake and what we stand to gain by coming together behind this agreement.

Settle the question of our withdrawal and we can move on to forging our new relationship.

Back the deal tomorrow, and that work can ‪‪start on Wednesday.

Fail and we face the risk of leaving without a deal, or the even bigger risk of not leaving at all.

I think the British people are ready for us to move on.

To move beyond division and come together.

To move beyond uncertainty into a brighter future.

That is the chance that MPs of all parties will have ‪‪tomorrow night.

And for our country’s sake, I urge them to take it.

Thank you.

Below is the text of the speech made by Theresa May to the Conservative Group of the Local Government Association on 5 July 2005.

And so, as sure as night turns to day, a General Election defeat has now been swiftly followed by another Tory leadership contest.

Of course we will need, in time, to elect a new leader.

But my concern is that, as usual, we are already rushing to a personality-based beauty contest.

When what we need most is to have a substantial debate about the future of our party.

So my message to our colleagues in Westminster is simple:

Stop looking for quick fixes.

There is no silver bullet.

Put the work in.

Face up to the scale of the problem.

Keep your eyes open, your thinking clear.

And empty your heads of ideological prejudice.

You see, there is a massive job to do, and so far I’m afraid most of our colleagues in Westminster have shown little or no sign that they understand just how big it is.

One of my faults, or so I’m told, is that I have a habit of quoting from Democrat Presidents.

Well tonight I will only quote from a fictional one, every Tory’s favourite Democrat, President Jed Bartlet from The West Wing.

In one episode, he’s talking about the mixed messages he’s receiving from his economic advisers.

“Everyone’s got a magic lever they want you to push,” he says, “…but in this job only a fool is ever certain. You don’t push any one lever. You want to push a little on all of them.”

Bartlet could have been talking about the current Conservative debate.

Because that’s the problem everyone seems to have a single policy answer to the massive problems we face.

For some, that policy is low taxes.

For some, it’s choice in the public services.

And for others, it is localism.

But the truth is that no single policy or idea will be sufficient to rebuild the Conservative Party’s relationship with the British people.

Just look at the evidence in the research published last week by Lord Ashcroft.

His polling showed that through January and February, Conservative policies on schools and the public services were never recalled by more than two per cent of the electorate at any one time.

It was simply not the case that people heard digested and rejected our policies.

They just didn’t think we were worth listening to.

It therefore cannot be the case that a renewal of our policies this time around will be the answer.

And yet here we are in danger of elevating certain policies to the status of ideological cure-alls.

And you know what?

We’ve done it before.

For years, we saw low taxes and privatisation as ends in themselves, rather than as means to delivering the kind of open, free enterprise culture we value.

As a result, people thought us dogmatic rather than pragmatic more interested in pursuing our ideology for the sake of it, than in making a difference to their lives.

We did it again at the General Election, when there was no better example of our failure to connect with people and their values than our approach to the public services.

While people wanted the right to good quality public services, on May the Fifth we offered them the right to choose.

Yes, we aspired to good quality schools and hospitals.

But, while Labour talked the language of aspiration and improvement, people perceived the extent of our vision to be choice-driven managerial jargon.

And now, along with our lingering ideological obsessions with low taxes and choice, a growing number of voices have identified localism as the theory that will mend our broken party.

In recent weeks, some in the party have told us that they’ve found the secret to winning the next election.

They’ve called it localism.

Apparently all we have to do is talk to local people, get interested in local issues, focus on local campaigning, and get involved with our local communities.

What on earth do they think councillors have been doing, day in, day out, year after year?!

But when you get into specifics, you find that the implications of their brand of localism are quite different to what I and, I suspect, most of you have always believed in.

It is a blueprint for nothing less than the almost complete dismantlement of government — at both a national and a local level.

Instead of government, they want to see Britain run by a plethora of locally-elected mayors, authorities, and officials.

A Britain more like America where people have the power to elect everyone from their local MP to their local dogcatcher.

Quite apart from what you may or may not think of this brand of localism, the really important question is who’s going to vote for it?

There are two clear political dangers of a radical agenda that seeks to bypass and replace all levels of government, and that allows people instead to elect their own local police chiefs and school boards

First, the concept of elected boards and authorities has the potential to undermine the long-standing, and genuinely popular, Conservative commitment to civil society and voluntary action replacing it with yet more politicians and elected officials.

For example, how many people, who currently offer their time for free in order to act as school governors, do you think would be willing to put themselves up for public election to a school board?

Second, these policies might sound to us, and to friendly policy wonks, like clear and compelling proposals.

But many voters will choose to hear a far less desirable message.

As far as they’re concerned, the message will be:

“You choose who you want to run things, you elect them, so now it’s your problem, not ours.”

Now I believe our values should include an instinct for local, people-based solutions, over Whitehall-bureaucratic centralisation.

I believe we should always seek to push down power from national government, through local government, and ultimately to people.

And I believe it is through the work of people like you and the base you have established at a local level that the Conservative Party can best approach the long journey back to government.

For the record, I was one of the co-founders of Britain’s leading localist think tank, Policy Exchange.

And I remain a committed localist.

But, I also want to be clear that a local approach to our politics and our policies can only ever be a part of the answer we are looking for.

And, in rushing to narrow policy specifics, my colleagues risk missing crucial wider points about what needs to happen to get the Conservative Party back into shape.

In short, neither localism nor any other single policy idea will ever be sufficient to guarantee the revival of the Conservative Party.

Lord Ashcroft’s polling also showed that, during the campaign, six times as many people saw the Conservative Party as ‘old-fashioned’ rather than ‘modern’. And twice as many people saw us as ‘dishonest’ rather than ‘honest’, and ‘not concerned about people’ rather than ‘concerned about them’.

These depressing results reflected the fact that the Conservative brand is seriously badly damaged.

If we are going to fix that, we will have to accept and respond to the way politics has changed and this is where you, as councillors, are way ahead of the Party in Westminster.

Today, politics is more than ever about individual people and families, and what government can do for them.

It is about making a difference to their day-to-day lives.

I know this because, like all of you, I was once a local councillor.

I was a councillor for eight years, and it taught me a lot.

Not least, I learnt that what people want is delivery on issues that matter, and not warm words and fuzzy jargon.

When I was Chairmen of Education on Merton Council, I was privileged to be able to champion the completion of an incredibly bold programme that was years ahead of its time.

We made sure that there was a free nursery school place available to every three and four year-old child whose parents wanted one.

This was way before central government had woken up to the importance of nursery education for children and their parents.

The lesson of how local councils can lead the way, because they operate at such close range to the lives of the people they are elected to serve, has never left me.

I think the Conservative Party, at a national level, now has to demonstrate that same kind of commitment to delivering the things that really matter to people.

And it has to demonstrate an absolute flexibility of thinking and approach, in striving to achieve those ends.

But initially at least, the Conservative Party has to focus far more on what those ends should be, and far less on the means of delivering them.

The time will come for the policy lever.

But four years away from a General Election, with the world changing faster than ever, this would be a very silly time indeed to start committing ourselves to narrow policy specifics.

So what now, if not policy?

I’ll tell you what.

Values, vision, beliefs, hopes, and dreams.

Now I know that these things are hard to summarise easily.

I know others are looking for answers that are crisper and more tangible.

But the time for ten-word slogans will come.

You see, politics is about people.

Politics is about delivering a vision, based on a core set of values.

Politics is about telling a powerful story with real substance.

Only then can you reduce that story to policy specifics that are snappy enough to influence the ‘ballot-box moment’.

Your story can begin, and it can end, with ten words, or even just five but, in between, it needs to be made flesh with hundreds, if not thousands of them.

That’s why we need to start today not by launching numerous detailed, distinct, and specific policies but by painting vivid pictures, and telling compelling stories, about what life would be like in Conservative Britain.

I believe the Conservative Party’s aim should be to give people security and hope and to help them achieve fulfilment in their lives.

Government alone cannot make people happy.

But it can ensure that its net contribution to people’s happiness and well-being is always a positive one.

So when we, as Conservatives, seek to set people free, to trust them, and to give them the best possible opportunities in life it’s actually helping them fulfil their potential today, and giving them hope for an even better tomorrow.

Because we believe that people, in the pursuit of their own happiness, will take better decisions for themselves that any politicians or bureaucrats ever could.

When we think about issues like healthcare and social security, we should do it knowing that, without such universal safety nets, people would feel hugely insecure.

When we argue for a strong economy and for growing wealth, we should be mindful that they are just means to an end.

Because we know that, by supporting our public services, and by helping people to live their lives as they want, wealth helps to generate security and happiness.

When we consider the values that the British people associate with their country – decent, tolerant, fair-minded, respectful, and equal – we should remember that it makes them feel secure and hopeful for the future to live in such a country.

And we should remember that it would make them unhappy ever to think that their country, or their government, was failing to live up to those values.

And finally, when we argue for tough-minded approaches to things like policing, asylum, or government spending it should not be because particular policies give us some ideological thrill.

It should be because there are growing problems to be dealt with that, if not addressed, will end up reducing people’s well-being in the long run.

Now is not the time for details.

It’s only July 2005 and we should not get ahead of ourselves.

Right now, if we could just begin to convince people that we’re serious about making a commitment to the big and the small things that make their lives that little bit better, then we would have taken a giant step on the road back to power.

I think you, as local councillors, know all this.

I think it’s what you do every day for the residents you serve.

And I think you understand, better than anyone, how politics is all about what you do for people, not about how you do it.

That’s why I believe it’s so important that you play a full part in the election of our next leader.

That’s why I find it ironic that, at a time when my colleagues seem so keen to hand over endless powers to local people, they want to take all powers away from our own local community.

They’ll let you vote for your local sheriff, but not for your party leader.

And that’s why I urge each and every one of you to write to your MPs, to your members, to the Party board and fight for all you are worth to protect your right to have a say in the future of our great party.

Because if we want to change this party, and, ultimately this country for the better we can only do it together.

Below is the text of the speech made by Theresa May on 12 July 2005.

Can I begin by thanking you all for coming here today. The events of the last few days have had a huge impact on the lives of everyone living and working in London. It is a sign of the resilience and determination of the people of London that we are all getting on with our business as usual. And I am doubly glad that you are able to join us today to discuss such an important issue, helping some of the most vulnerable in our society.

As you may know, the Conservative Party is currently engaged in a debate about it’s future direction, and about who should be the person to lead us. We have been given this opportunity by Michael Howard – an opportunity to take time to consider who and what it should stand for in modern Britain. It is an opportunity we cannot afford to waste. That is no idle threat. The reality is that, if we draw the wrong conclusions and set the wrong course as a result of the outcomes of this debate, then it will not only be our party that will suffer. In other words, this isn’t just about us.

Britain needs a strong opposition, it needs a Conservative alternative. Only then can we ensure that the Government is held properly to account, and that we have a genuine debate about the problems that we as a community face. So long as we fail to come up with radical solutions to the ills that are affecting modern society, then we will fail to leave the British public with our vision of a caring, compassionate society. By being seen as not addressing the issues that effect society today, we allow ourselves to be perceived as out of touch with the views of society.

The Conservative Party can do so much better than this. Our approach to politics and policy-making – based on an instinct for people, for local decision making, for trusting charities and voluntary groups, and for supporting civil society – can add so much to the quality of so many people’s lives. We genuinely have a positive and distinct story to tell about how we would deal better with problems like child support, family breakdown, about issues such as children in care, quality housing provision, improved educational standards, enhancing life and job opportunities, and urban renewal.

But if we are to do so we must first remind ourselves that there are no Conservative issues – there are just Conservative instincts, values and methods. That is why it is so important that we should address issues like the one we are discussing today.

As the political landscape has changed and as people’s priorities have changed, so must the focus of our efforts. In a democratic society such as ours, it is nothing less than our duty to do so. If we fail to do so, then we too will be failing the vulnerable in society. The challenge for us as a party is to give voice to our vision of what that society would be like, and how we would achieve it.

And that is why I am so pleased that so many of you have come along today to discuss this vitally important problem. Of course, the problem is that all too often, the work done by everyone sitting around this room today goes unnoticed.

Your difficult and often heartbreaking job of dealing with the aftermath of the breakdown of families, and the devastating effect that this can have on young lives is not glamorous or exciting. Often it is thankless and difficult. On most occasions it only reaches the headlines when something goes wrong. The breakdown in the system, the child that slips through the checks. The Victoria Climbie, the Adam case or the headline grabbing cases of ritual abuse. These are all shocking and terrible. We must never reach a point when such items do not wrench us from our comfortable television viewing, or shock us to the point of silence.

But what is equally as shocking, is that throughout this country, there are children who aren’t slipping through the net. They aren’t the children who will be headline grabbing cases of abuse or neglect. They are just the children who never quite get the life they deserve. The children who are quietly resigned to a life that they and that we should not accept. Everyday, there are too many children to whom this tragedy happens.

It isn’t because people don’t care enough. It isn’t because government or councils, social workers or charities aren’t concerned by the problem. It isn’t for any of those reasons. But it continues to happen, day in and day out. Young lives that should have been so happy and so promising are filled with tears, young people destined for a life on the streets, in and out of work, or even in prison.

These aren’t doomsday words, set out to paint the blackest picture to score political points. Many thousands of children leave care with hope and in families who love them. But too many children do not.

The figures speak for themselves. There are more than 61,000 children in care, the highest figure in over 20 years, an increase of 20% since 1997. More than 13 % of all looked after children were moved to a new placement three different times last year, 12 % of which were children under the age of 2, when emotional attachment and stability is so important.

But the harsh realities of life in care do not get any better as children get older. Despite the efforts of social workers and teachers, more than 1 in ten children in care miss 25 days of school or more a year. 6 in 10 children leave care without achieving a single GCSE to their name, and only 1% go on to university.

Government have failed miserably to achieve the target they set themselves that 75% of children leaving care should achieve a single GCSE. That the government has failed is not the thing that should lead us to take action. The thing that should force us to take action is the acceptance by government that one GCSE, one single qualification, in any way equips these young and vulnerable people for a life in the real world.

Whenever we hear government trumpet its aim to encourage 50% of all young people to go to university, we should all remind them, whether we vote Labour or not, that only 1%, a miserable one in a hundred children from care ever make it to university. This is a scandal that none of us would accept for our own children. Yet every day, we accept it for the children of others. Children that we the state, are supposed to care for.

How can we say that these are “looked after children”. The Government have the best of intentions and have made headway. But surely, if we are truly to “look after them” we must do more than resign them to a life that for many is without hope – where they are two-and-a-half times more likely to become teenage parents, where between a quarter and a third of people sleeping rough on the streets were in care as a child: where a quarter of those in our prisons were in care as children; we can and we must do better!

There are of course many good things going on to help these children. There are many initiatives to support families and prevent children being taken into care in the first place, and we will hear some examples later. There is some magnificent work to support such children in school, to help them achieve their goals, and make an independent and successful life for themselves. And there are many hardworking people, social workers working under difficult conditions, foster parents giving the time and the love that children need so badly, people working to reunite families, and to make new families and new homes for so many children., who are working day after day to give hope and a better life to these youngsters.

What I want to hear about today is how we can help. What more can we do? What can we as politicians do to help you make a better lives for our children? All our children deserve the best chances in life. We must work together to deliver them a better life.

Below is the text of the speech made by Theresa May on 23 November 2005.

I think today could mark a turning point for the Conservative Party. What is clear from what you have heard is that throughout our party, at every level, there is a growing realisation that we must change. And fundamental to that change is the role of women within the Conservative Party.

What this event has proved, without a shadow of a doubt that championing the cause of women in our party is no longer a minority sport. For a while there it seemed somewhat of an exclusive club – myself, my Shadow cabinet colleague Caroline Spelman, and a few doughty supporters.

But today that is simply no longer the case.

6 members of the Shadow Cabinet, former cabinet Ministers, senior members of the House of Commons and newly elected alike. Candidates, constituency chairman, activists, we all agree that we must ensure that more conservative women are elected to parliament at the next election. They have all chosen to sign our Women 2 Win declaration.

And perhaps most importantly, this view is shared just as equally by men in our party as it is by women. You will remember that just a few weeks ago, 6 male MPs were brave enough to put their heads above the parapet and say that it was time we took positive and radical action to guarantee more women candidates. Since then, a number of others have joined us. This is no longer an all girls club, the men have gate crashed the party.

I have been told by a number of senior labour MPs and journalists that the Labour party didn’t take electing women to parliament seriously until the men began to realise the impact it had on voters. The cut through that having women in senior positions, developing policy, and talking to the public had on the voter’s view of the labour Party.

And it worked. As we have heard, in 1997, Labour led the Conservatives among women by 12 points. And they have continued to lead us ever since.

Well the good news, the news that should cheer every member of our Party, and make the Labour benches sit up and take notice, is that now we realise it too.

Not all of those believe that the answer is all women shortlists. Not all believe that an ‘A’ list or a gold list is the best solution. But what we all agree is that waiting and hoping for more women to be elected is never going to deliver the results we need.

Women 2 Win is the signal that the Conservative Party is determined to win back the women vote and to win back power. It is a sure sign that we know what has to be done to represent modern Britain, and that we are prepared to take those steps.

Over the coming months and years, we will work to ensure that more women re selected. We will raise the profile of Conservative women in the Party and in the media. We want to raise the money to provide the training and support they need.

We want to work with the Party, with candidates department and training team to ensure that the finest candidates we can find are selected to represent our Party

And we want to arm our candidates with the skills they need to win back seats from Labour and the Lib Dems at the next election.

But of course, we can only play our part. As I have said, the support for our aims is wide ranging, and it is continuing to grow. But there are two people who we need to recognise what needs to be done if we are to guarantee success.

Of course, I am talking about the David’s!

It is a little known fact that there are more men in the Shadow Cabinet called David than there are women.

It is for that reason, that Women 2 Win are making this challenge to anyone who views themselves fit to lead our party and to govern our Country. Over the course of the remaining leadership election campaign, make clear your commitment to reform the Conservative Party into a Party that represents, reflects and understands Britain today. We urge you to sign up to the women 2 win declaration, and make a positive commitment to securing our parties future success.

In short recognise what we all recognize. That the Conservative Party really does need women to win!

Below is the text of the speech made by Theresa May, the then Shadow Secretary of State for the Family, at Conservative Central Office on 22 April 2005.

Drugs are at the root of a lot of crime, especially violent crime. They ruin families and destroy communities too. As the dealers and junkies take over, families move out, turning neighbourhoods into ghettos.

We cannot afford to sit back as drugs ruin more families and destroy more communities. We need a coherent, committed, consistent anti-drug programme.

Some people say that drugs are a matter of personal freedom. I disagree. It’s time we stopped blurring the distinction between right and wrong. We need to send a clear message: “Drugs are wrong”. No quibbling. No hedging.

Increasing drug abuse is not inevitable. Look at America where drug abuse by young people has declined. In two years there has been a more than ten per cent drop in the number of high school pupils taking illicit drugs – the first fall for a decade.

Why? Well partly because American children are getting a clear message about drugs – that they are wrong, that they aren’t glamorous, that they ruin lives.

But here in Britain youngsters all too often get mixed messages. We have a government that tells children what to eat – that sweets and crisps make you fat – but isn’t prepared to take a clear line on cannabis.

That is why a Conservative Government will reclassify cannabis – sending a clear message that the drug is dangerous.

And we’ll fund a major advertising campaign with a clear, consistent anti-drugs message.

We’ll tackle drugs at school too.

Head teachers need to be able to take firm action against drugs at school.

So the Conservatives will help schools introduce random drug testing, if parents and teachers want it.

We will provide the resources for testing machines in every local authority area.

Life is too precious simply to be written off – we have to give youngsters who get hooked on drugs the chance to get back on the straight and narrow.

All the evidence shows that residential rehab is the most effective means of treating addicts.

But in Britain today there are fewer than 2,500 residential rehab places available.

A Conservative Government will expand this massively, providing 25,000 residential places for hard drug users where they can spend six-months getting intensive treatment to get them off drugs.

That’s enough to help 50,000 addicts a year.

It will allow us, over the course of a year, to treat every young teenage drug addict in Britain.

And we will give the police the power to send young drug addicts ‘straight to treatment’ at a residential treatment centre without first going to court.

Young drug users will be faced with a choice. Take up these places and come off drugs. Or go to court and face the possibility of time in prison.

There will be no soft option or half way house. Young drug abusers will have to face up to the consequences of their actions. They will have to seek treatment or accept that they will be punished by jail.

Those that do seek treatment will have a fresh start. They will not face criminal proceedings and will not have a criminal record. That’s what we mean by the chance to change. Those that refuse treatment, or who do not complete their course, will be sent to court for their case to be dealt with by the criminal justice system.

Too many people in Britain today think that there is little or nothing that we can do about problems like drugs. Conservatives think differently. We don’t promise the earth. But we are committed to tackling the problems that matter to families today.

We will implement a coherent, consistent committed anti-drug programme.

The potential rewards are enormous. Imagine helping a generation of addicts back into society so that they can once again make a contribution to their communities. Imagine tackling one of the root causes of violent crime. Imagine passing on to our children a safer, more secure society than the one we have inherited.

It’s an ambition worth fighting for. David will now set out our action plan on violent crime.

Below is the text of the statement made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, at Downing Street on 10 January 2019.

Prime Minister Abe. It is a pleasure to welcome you to Downing Street.

The UK and Japan are natural partners. Thriving, innovative, island nations – committed to defending the global rules that we have shaped together.

Your visit comes at a crucial time. As the UK prepares to leave the EU and raise our horizons towards the rest of the world, our relationship with countries such as Japan will be increasingly important, and your Presidency of this year’s G20 allows us to work together towards our shared goals on the global stage.

Our people face many of the same challenges. But we also both have immense opportunities. And today we agree a deep and dynamic partnership to shape the 21st Century together.

Japan and the UK, as the world’s third and fifth largest economies, are already close economic partners. Japanese companies employ 150 thousand people here in Britain and trade between our two countries totalled £28 billion in the past year.

Our exit from the EU provides an unprecedented opportunity to strengthen this trade and investment relationship.

I welcome your renewed commitment, Prime Minister Abe, to us securing an ambitious bilateral arrangement, building on the deal already agreed between Japan and the EU. This gives businesses the stability and confidence to plan for the future, supports jobs, and gives more choice and lower prices to consumers.

Our enhanced bilateral relationship will also allow us to explore ways to go further.

We are already opening up export markets by ending the ban on sales of British beef and lamb to Japan. This will create opportunities worth over £120 million over five years, supporting farmers from the valleys of South Wales to the Highlands of Scotland.

Our enhanced co-operation shows that, at a time when global tensions are escalating, we stand together to promote free and fair trade.

As two of the world’s most innovative economies, we are uniquely placed to address the Grand Challenges of our time: an ageing society, the need for clean growth, how we respond to the increasing use of AI and data, and the future of mobility.

Today we mark the start of a significant joint programme of research and collaboration that will transform the way people live in the 21st Century.

British and Japanese experts, working side by side, will help people live independently in their home for longer, develop new treatments for chronic conditions like dementia and heart failure, and ensure a cleaner world for future generations.

Together we will also ensure businesses and innovators are able to use big data legally, ethically and safely in the future. This is our modern Industrial Strategy in action.

Our two cultures already inspire one another’s people. A quarter of a million Japanese tourists come to the UK each year, and we see growing numbers of British tourists visiting Japan.

As part of our cultural exchange the National Gallery will send a major exhibition to Japan – including the famous ‘Sunflowers’ by Vincent Van Gogh, a painter himself inspired by Japanese art.

And with Japan set to host the Rugby World Cup in 2019 and the Olympics and Paralympics in 2020, the UK is sharing our experience of delivering these events safely and successfully.

Global economic growth is underpinned by security.

In Tokyo, we signed a Joint Declaration that transformed our defence partnership and stepped up our collective response to the threats we both face.

We saw the strength of our relationship when Japan added its voice to condemn the nerve agent attack in Salisbury. I want to thank you, Shinzo, for the support your nation showed.

This year, we are increasing the number of combined exercises between our defence forces – on sea, land and air.

And we will deploy the Royal Navy warship HMS Montrose to the region, following on from three naval visits in the past twelve months.

This will help us to enforce sanctions against the DPRK as part of our joint determination to a peaceful resolution to tension in the region and the complete denuclearisation of North Korea.

I also welcome our collaboration on new technologies, including exploring co-operation on future combat aircraft and missile development that will ensure our forces remain an effective deterrent, while supporting high-skilled jobs and industries.

Working closely with Japan and our partners in the region ensures a more connected Asia that is free, open and stable.

And British expertise will help deliver infrastructure projects in the Pacific region, unlocking commercial opportunities for companies across the UK.

2019 is an historic year for Japan. We look forward to working closely with you to ensure a more peaceful, prosperous world.

And I am confident that our shared optimism and close friendship will see our nations stand together to shape our shared future.

Below is the text of the speech made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, at Alder Hey Hospital in Liverpool on 7 January 2019.

Thank you Simon [Stevens] for giving us that overview of the NHS Long-Term Plan.

I am delighted to be here with you all on this exciting occasion – because it’s one that truly marks a historic moment for patients across the nation.

And I am pleased that this plan is being launched here at Alder Hey – a hospital recognised for delivering world-class care. It’s over one hundred years since Alder Hey first opened its doors to treat and improve the lives of our children. And much has changed since then.

Advances in healthcare – from vaccinations through to drug treatments – have dramatically improved young people’s health.

But what has not changed is the extraordinary care and compassion of the hospital’s staff.

Something I have just seen for myself on the general paediatric ward – where brave young children are treated with outstanding kindness and dedication, and of course first-class medical care.

And today, as we launch the Long-Term Plan here at Alder Hey – we are taking a big step to secure the future of our NHS for our children – and for their children.

Now I have always felt incredibly proud to live in a country with a health service that is there for all of us when we need it most. Free at the point of use. Based on clinical need and not the ability to pay, and there for us at every stage of our lives.

And at the very heart of our health service are its staff. Time and again, our doctors, nurses and other health professionals have demonstrated why the NHS stands shoulder to shoulder with the best in the world.

They are the reason why the NHS is one of this country’s greatest institutions. An institution that is consistently what makes the people of this country most proud to be British.

As a government we have always recognised this unique importance of the NHS.

That’s why in 2010, when we took office and had to deal with the record peacetime deficit we inherited, we prioritised the NHS with real terms increases in spending every year.

That money has delivered real improvements for patients.

But demand for NHS services continues to grow – and our health service faces increasing challenges from an ageing population with complex health needs. It also needs to transform services and exploit the opportunities provided by new technologies.

NHS leaders told us that making the necessary changes in technology, workforce and infrastructure will take time and careful planning. That’s why last year – in its 70th year – I committed to an ambitious funding proposal to help make the NHS fit for the future.

Not a one-off injection of cash. Not money to plug a gap or shore up a problem – but funding to protect the long-term future of the NHS.

Over the next five years – the NHS England budget will increase by £20.5 billion in real terms compared to today.

This commitment is possible because of our strong public finances, and because as we leave the EU and take back control of our money, we will no longer be sending vast annual sums to Brussels.

And crucially we have funded this commitment with no increase to people’s taxes.

The NHS is the public’s priority, and so I have made it my number one spending priority.

In return for this funding – because this is not just about money – I asked the NHS to draw up a long term plan, one that is clinically led and locally supported, with an absolute focus on cutting waste and ensuring every penny is well spent.

And as we have just heard from Simon – this is a plan that will set the vision for the NHS over the coming decade.

So together – the five-year funding settlement along with the ten-year plan – will provide both the certainty and long-term direction needed to transform patient care and secure the future of our NHS.

Now as Simon has just referenced, last June, I set out six priorities which I wanted to see central to the plan – and which I am pleased to see reflected today.

A more integrated health system that views health holistically – organising care around the physical, mental and social needs of the patient, and centring on what matters most to them.

A health service that focuses much more on prevention and early diagnosis in order to address the needs of an ageing population.

An emphasis on reducing variation between organisations across the NHS so that the world class care available to some reaches all parts of the country.

A service where the workforce are better supported and recognised as the lifeblood of our NHS.

And I wanted to see the NHS make greater use of technology, not only to make healthcare safer and more effective – but to make the most of exciting new possibilities and give you greater control over your own care. That means everything from being able to monitor conditions from the comfort of your home, to accessing your GP via your smartphone.

Finally, I wanted to see the NHS go further than ever before to ensure mental health gets the proper attention it deserves, putting it on a par with physical health.

So we are reshaping the NHS around the changing needs of patients today.

The Long-Term Plan delivers against each of these six priorities – and much more – with actions backed up by record investment.

And precisely because the plan is over 10 years, we can go much further on integrating care and embedding technology than we otherwise would have been able to.

But a plan is only as good as its delivery.

And ensuring its benefits are felt by patients will require strong leadership and front line support.

That means empowering the NHS workforce to deliver – encouraging leaders in each organisation to learn from the best and for the best to help others.

And while many hundreds of people have contributed to the plan’s development, over the coming months a broader range of local NHS leaders and front line staff will need to shape how it is implemented across the country.

And I want to thank Baroness Dido Harding for leading on the workforce aspects of this.

Not everything can be done at once – so, as always, there will be some careful choices to make. But delivered effectively our Long-Term Plan for the NHS will secure our health service for generations to come.

Finally, I want to say a huge thank you to Simon Stevens, Ian Dalton, NHS staff, charities, voluntary groups and patients – and all those who have worked so hard, and contributed to this plan – as well as to Matt Hancock and his predecessor, Jeremy Hunt.

This is an historic moment. Our vision is clear. Our commitment is assured. So let’s deliver the NHS of the future.

Below is the text of the statement made by Theresa May, the Prime Minister, at the UK-Poland inter-governmental conference on 20 December 2018.

It is a pleasure to welcome Prime Minister Morawiecki to Lancaster House.

Our countries enjoy a broad, vibrant and diverse partnership underpinned by a shared history.

Next year, the UK and Poland will mark 100 years of renewed bilateral relations following the First World War.

We have stood shoulder to shoulder through the most significant moments of the past Century. That unique bond is at the heart of our close relationship today.

Since 2016, our consultations have succeeded in making us safer, more prosperous and more secure.

It is a partnership that works for both our nations, and will continue to deliver in the years ahead.

The UK and Poland are key strategic allies, and today agree ambitious steps that build on the landmark joint Defence and Security Co-operation treaty we signed, in Warsaw, last year.

Our armed forces will work side by side on regular joint training exercises, and will increase maritime co-operation in the Baltic Sea, including naval visits. We also agree to continue to work together on Ground Based Air Defence systems, demonstrating our close defence partnership.

Our security services will share expertise and intelligence to protect our people from serious organised crime, and prevent illegal activity across our borders.

On NATO, we agree reform is vital to ensure all allies deliver on their commitments as part of a strong, fully-supported Alliance that adapts to meet future threats. We continue to play our part with British troops currently deployed in Poland under Enhanced Forward Presence.

In sharing the same desire for a peaceful, stable Europe – we also recognise the same threats.

We are both deeply concerned at Russian attempts to undermine the international rules based system.

I want to thank you, Mateusz, both for the support you and your nation showed following the nerve agent attack in Salisbury, and for your commitment to attributing cyber-attacks of the OPCW to the Russian GRU.

These actions are unacceptable. And we will not stand for them.

Today we resolve to defend our democracies through annual consultations on Russia’s hostile activity and closer collaboration between our defence and security services.

Discussions will begin early next year.

And we will also share our expertise to set up a new unit in Poland that directly counters Russian disinformation, and ensures quick attribution of hostile activity against state or commercial targets.

We will also maintain the momentum of the Western Balkans Summit, which we both attended here earlier this year. As we pass the baton from London to Poznan, such work is crucial to stability in the region.

Our trade relationship, worth almost £20 billion last year, is thriving and we both welcomed the success of the first UK-Poland Business, Trade and Investment Forum earlier this year.

Next year’s Forum will focus on solutions for clean and sustainable growth, one of the defining challenges of the 21st Century.

We both want to ensure a cleaner world for future generations, and the Clean Growth Partnership we’ve established today puts us at the forefront of the global shift towards cleaner energy sources such as nuclear, offshore wind and greener transport.

As two of the most innovative economies in Europe, we will pilot a vibrant tech hub to unite start-up companies with entrepreneurial talent in both our countries, boosting our economies, increasing investment and creating high-skilled jobs of the future.

And next September’s UK-Poland Science Forum will build on the strong links between our universities and research centres, with a focus on improving opportunities for women in STEM subjects.

It was a pleasure to meet members of the Polish community earlier today, and talk about the immense contribution they make to our economy and society.

Almost one million Poles make their lives in Britain – the largest diaspora in the UK.

A similar number of Brits visit Poland each year.

These personal stories are what I think of when talking about the bond between our countries. That is why securing the rights of Polish and other EU citizens was my priority in the Brexit negotiations.

The Withdrawal Agreement guarantees their rights to live, work and study in the UK after we leave the EU.

And earlier this month we set out our commitment to protect the rights of EU citizens living in the UK in the unlikely event of no deal.

My message to Polish people is clear. You can stay, and we want you to stay.

Or put another way…

Tak, na pewno możecie zostać [Trans: Yes, you can definitely stay.]

As we leave the EU, the relationship with our closest partners like Poland remains vital.

I have reiterated to Prime Minister Morawiecki that Britain will continue to work with Poland and other member states to protect our people, shared values and interests.

I am confident that this partnership will continue to flourish.