2020
Clarke's Second Term
As the Prime Minister reconvened to say there was euphoria would be an understatement for their second election in a row the conservatives had won an election without anyone thinking they could.Not one poll showed the conservatives would win a clear overall majority so therefore there was Eupnhoria. But there would be a difference in the government,Micheal Portillo announced that after 28 years he would not be serving on the frontline of politics. Micheal Heseltine announced he would not be serving in the cabinet after being in the frontline of British Politics for 45 years. Though it was made clear that Heseltine would be allowed to stay on as Deputy Prime Minister primarily because as Clarke put it privately 'Micheal is irremovable ' The cabinet would be revived and reflecting all strands of the Conservative party. But then again with the right wing being extinguished and now irrelevant it was an interesting cabinet.
Prime Minsiter - Kenneth Clarke
Deputy Prime Minister - Micheal Heseltine
Chancellor of the Exchequer - David Cameron
Foreign Secretary- Alan Duncan
Home Secretary - David Davis
Health Secretary - William Hague
Education Secretary - Sajid Javid
Work and Pensions Secretary - Eric Pickles
Secretary of State for Trade and Industry - Ben Houchen
Secretary of State for Defence - Micheal Gove
International Development Secretary - Rory Stewart
Energy and Climate Change Secretary - Nick Boles
Chief Whip - David Liddington
Chairman of the Conservative party- Micheal Fabricant
Chief Secretary to the Treasury - George Osbourne
Local Goveqrnment and Communities Secretary - Andrew Mitchell
Housing and Urban Development Secretary - Theresa May
Environment Secretary - Justine Greening
Secretary of State for International Trade - Anna Soubry
Attorney General - Dominic Grieve
Secretary of State for Justice - David Gauke
Secretary of State for Scotland - Ruth Davidson
Seceretary of State for Wales- Stephen Crabb
There were Many changes with Alan Duncan being appointed as the foreign secretary was interesting as a pragmatic eurosceptic but a devout internationalist and his commitment to the Middle East had made him the most interesting choice for foreign secretary. Eric Pickles. David Cameron was still the Chancellor of the Exchequer and was unmovable. William Hague and David Davis remained as health and Home Secretary respectively. Eric Pickles kept his job which was no surprise. Ben Houchen was appointed the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry as the leader of Teeside Council he had been known in the media for his regeneration plans. And having a strong personal friendship with the PM he was made Secretary of Stare for Trade and Industry which was a strong surprise. Micheal Gove was made the defence secretary which was surprising but then. again it was the most powerful non spending related department in the government and it was because Clarke had been sceptical of him running Education so therefiore he gave Gove a sideways promotion. David Liddington got a promotion to the chief whip, Rory Stewart, Nick boles, George Osbourne and Micheal Fabricant stayed on. Andrew Mitchell was borough into the cabinet to reform local government, Justine Greening, Ruth Davidson and Anna Soubry and Stephen Crabb kept their jobs but then David Gauke was bought in as secretary of state for justice. So it was an interesting Cabinet reshuffle.Also in regards to the colour scheme. Ministers in Dark Purple as socially democratic interventionists (Pickles and Houchen). In a lighter form of purple means they are socially democratic but they are not as keen on substantial intervetntions in the economy )Davidson, Gauke,Stewart etc) those in light blue are solid and pure one nation conservatives. And those in darker blue are on the right of the party.
2020 Queens Speech
The Queens speech was goring to be interesting it was to be a second term conservative government with a clear overall majority they had the majority to launch whatever policies they saw fit and now the interesting part was even if the right wing tories wanted to stick two fingers up to the left of the tories they couldn't because contrary to the expectations they had won an overall majority and therefore it allowed Ken Clarke to be a proper authentic one nation conservative. So therefore the government spent a month craving the approach for the new queens speech. As David Cameron decided to work with Ken Clarke and Alan Duncan and other ministers decided to write the Queens Speech with the following provisions.
- No Raises in the headline rates of income tax
- Increasing the funding for the National Health Service by £8 billions
- Making sure that by 2021 nobody wanted more than 7 weeks for their care
- Making sure that people get Free Eye and Dental treatment
- Having a reduction in the rate of new targets to ensure that there can be greater levels of freedom within the health service,
- Allowing the increase in doctors and Nurses
- 25,000 new matrons to sort out the issue of MRSA once and for all
- Increasing Education Funding by £5.8 billions
- Increasing the revenue from the Graduate tax by increasing it to 6% by 2022
- Putting an extra 7,000 police officers by 2021
- Building 6 new Prisons next year
- Creating a New Industry fund of £50 billions in order to Increase manufacturing
- Setting ip a review under Lord Turner to deal with pensions.
- Ensuring Votes at 16 for the next General Election
- Having a referendum on the European Constitution in June next Year
- Reviewing the 5 tests on the Euro Next Year with a referendum in 2022 should the 5 tests be passed.
- Opening a commission under Lord Steel under the benefits of Proportional Representation,
The Queens Speech was interesting one the hiring of police officers and the prisons was typical tory policy and there were many moderate policies such as ensuring that there were more investment in Health and Education but also the referendum on the European Constuition which was to make sure the tory party could be okay with the queens speech. But then the pensions reform along with he attempted referendum on the Euro plus the commission on Proportional Representation would be interesting so therefore the Leader of the Opposition for now at least Alan Milburn would be opening up the debate for the opposition.
'Mr Speaker I congratulate the Prime Minister on winning his second election victory I must nays we on this side of the house were about us stunned as members on his side of the house. But of course there are things in this queens speech that we welcome not least because we proposed then as fo example the extra investment into schools and hospitals that is a very clear Labour Party proposal. A referendum on the Euro that is also a Labour Party policy the commission into proportional representation is a Labour Party policy and votes at 16 is the labour party policy. But its also good to see that the secretary of state for trade and industry the honourable member for North West Durham has had an impact on creating the Industry fund which is also a Labour Party policy. It is clear to me that all the best ideas are coming from this side of the house. But the fact that there are good ideas that come from this side of the house shows that we need to set up a bi partisan comission because the truth is we do have in common more than we think and what the country would like is for both major parties to work together and to come up with the solutions to the great issues that face this country, But in this spirit of bi-partisanship can I seek some assurances from the Prime Minister firstly he would not seek to raise the rates of income tax, secondly the industry fund would be specifically those areas that have the greatest levels of poverty It is in creating a proper society where people are cared for when tories bang the drum for equality of opportunity and for fairness within society why don't they tell the 22 right wing back bench MPs who control the Prime Minister's majority. Its always nauseating to see the members for spelthorne, esher and Walton, witham, Richmond Yorks and Taton sitting their with their right wing cleek. Have they no understanding of the issues that society faces wether it's unemployment, social decay, education standards of health standards the right wing contingent have no policies now though the Prime Minister ha done his reshuffle and has made sure the cabinet have no members of the right wing of his party except the honourable member for Haltenprice and Howden but mind you since he idolises the late Lord Jenkins I think his right wing credentials are firmly in the bin. Now the people elected a conservative government with an increased majority and of course we welcome that but I think the Prime Minister should be able to understand that the right wing of his party do not need to control his party in the last house 156 bills were passed with the Labour Party co-operation and let me tell him if he is willing to be governing like he did last time through the centre ground then his first term will be as good as his second term'
Milburn's speech was calling for greater unity and working with the other parties and though they had secured a majority they knew that if you take out the right of the party the governments commanding majority of 30 seats goes to -14. So therefore Clarke decided to make his speech about his agenda for Britain and what he wants is to create a better and bolder society where people can flourish should they work together. Clarke knew that whilst he could be triumphant for as he put it 'the sweetest victory of them all' and therefore this is how his response to the Queens Speech.
'Well to the right honourable gentleman he had some fun at my parties expense but I say good luck to him but let me just remind him who won and who lost the general election, I have 340 MPs and he has 238 and I sit here and he sits there. Now why did we win the general election will honourable members from the labour party may squirm over the fact that contrary to expectations we have won another general election because we have an ability to understand what the people want which is the third way to say that the state are behind you not in front of you as the Lib Dems want or onto of you as the Labour Party would desire but we believe in a cooperative state and that includes the tax cuts but also let's not forget the huge and substantial investment in the NHS and Education but also in public services and when the country hears our record then they give us thanks and give us a clear increased majority but what does this second term offer, massive increases in the funding for schools and hospitals, votes at 16, restoring free eye and dental checks and reducing waiting times. Now which one of those ideas can the leader of the opposition disagree with right none of them so why does he call himself the opposition maybe if we expel our 22 nutters would he prepared to join us on a national unity ticket. I mean for heaven sake it's not like they have propped us up for the last five years and will hopefully continue to do so for another 5 years. And if I may just make a clear point we have decided to propose a referendum on the European Constitution and now why we have decided to do this because this country may want to as I want to be at the heart of Europe or maybe they would seek to embrace their manufacturing strength and to be the best country in the world. But then if you look at what we are proposing it is truly modern reforms as we understand that the country doesn't want to go back to the 1980s but nor do they want to go to 2000s they want to go into the future and I believe that the future will be bright but all we need to do is to understand a very simple concept is to construct the bridge to the future that is so effective and therefore it requires us to effectively plan a new economy the whilst is based on manufacturing and an output based on growth if we are bale to priories an economy that grows it's way out of problems. And for the last 21 years we have had commanding rates of economic growth now I hope these continue but the way they can Continue ids through an ability to keep making things. This is why I keep banging the drum for greater levels of manufacturing. We as conservatives do understand that we need to help all the people and whilst the tax cuts did have a huge impact it is no doubt that what is required is good an effectively managed public services that whilst uses the independent sector and quite rightly that we do also encourages investment on a susbstantial proportion, this clear agenda for reform will make this country better and I hope that all honourable members of this house can vote for this Queen's Speech'.
The debate on the queens speech would be interesting as whilst there was no doubt that the government would pass the legislation because of their clear 30 seat majority there was one issue mainly how would the Prime Minister be able to effectively work with the right wing of his party so many times he has shown his disdain and contempt for the right wing regularly referring to them in private as 'idiots' and he had used blairite Labour MPs to sustain the agenda he supported over the years. But there was one key issue would Labour after being kicked in the guts be prepared to prop up the Clarke administration well on the basis of the Queens speech the answer was well yes. The Bi-Partisan commission had been inspired from President Colin Powell who had been elected in 2012 and had been an effective two term president that had given the republicans 46 states in 2016. And indeed the election in the United States where the republicans were polling at 53% and the democrats were polling at 45%. The Queens speech was debated for five days but it was voted through as right wingers were not going to vote down a referendum on the European Constution or reject the proposal of 7,000 police officers in one year or the expanding of prisons. But the moderates in both parties were not about to vote down the increases in health and education spending. And the Lib Dems were not about to vote down a proposal to set upon a commission under Lord Steeel for proportional representation and to have a referendum on it.
| Parties | Ayes | Noes | Abstentions |
| Conservatives | 322 | 4 | 14 |
| Labour | 12 | 221 | 5 |
| Lib Dem | 23 | 10 | 11 |
| Others | 14 | 9 | 7 |
| Total | 375 | 244 | 37 |
And that was a bi partisan victory the government had carried through the Queens Speech with a majority of 131. And that was just stimulating the momentum the government already had after winning their second general election. The public were well receiving off the start of the second term the cabinet had been authentically one nation conservative the promotion of Alan Duncan who was one of the most popular figures in the conservative govnerment was a stroke of genius and so was the appointment of Ben Houchen as the secretary of state for trade and industry Houchen who admitted that until 2014 he voted for the Labour Party only to convert to Ken Clarke's brand of compassionate toryism showed how the government we re willing to reach across voter lines. As Clarke said in his conference speech 'And I say to all our people forget the past no more tribalism we are on the side the same team and Britain united will win'. That line had stuck with voters to prove not only that Clarke was a conciliator but that he was willing to reach out to all voters.
Education Reform
It has been 4 years since the last Education Reform bill was put to the house and it was voted through it maintained the beliefs of the centre ground and the new Education Secretary Sajid David decided to proposed his agenda for reform 5 months after accepting the job as secretary of state for education in order to ensure that the reforms that had been made under the Conservative government were going to stay but equally they were to make sure that the reforms made to schools would be genuine and meaningful. So in the five months it took for the to write top the bill and to plan it out. Here is what provisions were in the bill.
- Increasing Education Spending by £30 billion by 2025/26
- Hiring 40,000 more teachers and 85,000 more teaching assistants
- Increasing the total quantity of Capital Investment from £65 billions to £110 billions by 2025/26
- Allow Schools to opt-in to the foundation status of schools in the someway of NHS Foundation trusts
- Setting up a commission of teachers and students to ensure that there is a review into the curriculum and examinations
- Making sure that GSCEs and A-Levels will be viable for the next twenty years but having the commission
- Lifting the ban on the construction of Grammar Schools
- Introducing 250,000 new voccational grants of £25 a week for students who wish to pursue a vocational educaiton
- Introducing 500,000 vocational grants for students who wish to pursue STEM subjects (Science, Techonlogy, Engineering and Math)
- Expanding the Education Maintance Allowances to include all incomes below £35,000 but ensuring that they are means tested
- Increasing the number of college places by 45% over the next three years.
- Reforming UCAS to in effect cut the regulations on UCAS.
- Increasing the Graduate tax rates to 6%,
'Mr Speaker this is the era of reform within the public services since. we promised to make sure that the system of education is not only effective but Also more useful for the 21st century and this bill I think does that more effectively than any education bill before and here is why. We are gauranteeing for Education an extra £6 billions extra every single year and that alone shows what works we are pleading substantial investment that will see every school receive an extra £1.3 million every single year that is obviously a very welcomed policy this investment will lead to the increasing investment in schools and that is part of the core philosophy of us one nation conservatives which is that whilst we have more investment in public services we do guarantee genuine and meaningful investment into education. But let's look at wha reform will be done for example the commission on reforming GSCEs and A-Levels the benefit of this comission is that whilst we will keep the current system of coursework is effective we do need to set up a commission a genuine and bi partisan one with all 3 major parties plus teachers and experts at the helm. We are genuinely trying to prioritise a new way of thinking that allows the system of education to be viable for the next two decades. But we also recognise that the new industries would be within the STEM subjects and therefore it is right that we provide genuine and meaningful incentives for people to study these subjects and that is why we have proposed the grants for people to study the STEM subjects but we also recognise that there are people wo which to study a vocational education and therefore we have provided grants for those wish to do that. It is about understanding what people wish to do is the core philisophy of Education but we have also placed an emphasis on people who wish to go to college and that is why we have seek to increase the number of college places by 45% by 2023/24. But the incentives are also there which is to expand and increase the education maintain allowance because it was a very effective policy set up by the party opposite but we will expand it. But there are hard choices the university graduate tax contribution we should seek to raise from 4% to 6%. Now there are people who have suggested we should seek to reintroduce the concept of university tuition fees, There are three reasons why I don't think that would be a good policy firstly it promotes an unstable form of university funding that does not have a stability. Secondly we pledged in the election not to seek a reintroduction of fees because it puts a huge psychological burden on those who want to go to university. And the third reason is where countries that do have fees 85% of students don't pay back the full loan. So therefore we will keep the graduate contribution set at 6% every year. But we are Also a government that believe I n reducing the overall burden of regulation so therefore we will have a 90 day comission on how to reduce the nonsense regulations from UCAS to make the system more fairer and better for students. So this bill would seek to increase funding for schools. pay teachers more, increase funding for schools more, creating a fairer system in education our children. Having proper expansion of college places to ensure a vast increase in the number of people admitted to college every year. Expanding and increasing the Education maintenance allowances for students.And introducing more funding for the unioverisite plus the deregulation it is a bill for the 21st century and one for many years to come and I commend this statement to the house'
The motion was transformative for Education but the conservatives knew that they couldn't be seen a running to the right after they won an unexpected general election victory by being moderates and winning over a broad coalition of voters. So therefore as the shadow education secretary stood up she knew that one thing was vot5al to dismantle the arguments of the govnerm,ent and try and align them with the right. Lisa Nandy had been a formidable shadow education secretary and when the next leader came in or if there was a reshuffle she would be receiving a promotion. So here was the response to the government.
'Mr Speaker during the election the Prime Minister promised real meaningful reforms to education and this isn't meaningful all this is the same old legislation from a same old government that would not understand the concept of change If it came up to them and slapped them. Because let's look at what they are proposing the first is the comission on education which he says is bi-partisan but of the 21 political people on this comission why are 13 of them Conservative MPs why shouldn't he split up based on promotional represenation I mean they have a commission in it so why shouldn't they everything based on proportionality. They have not started in this bill their proposed percentage for GSCEs and A-Levels and we know why because they do not have a belief in coursework and if they could parts of their party would seek to abolish it and therefore we w can not trust a party who is constantly linked to the right wing of it's party, now why have they seemed to raise the graduate tax from 4% to 6% and by the way in the fine print it does show a further increase in 2022 to 8%. Why is that now I agree with his opposition to tuition fees though the honourable member for Spelthorne called tuition fees 'a system to make sure the right people to go unvieristy'. How is it they can have a proper belief in universities when they are divided. And isn't that one of the core failings go this government they are ridden with divisions. There are people like the honourable member from Bromsgrove and the honourable member for Whitney and the honourable member for Rutland and Melton who would seek to introduce genuine reforms that would make peoples lives better but there are Peo;le like the honourable lady for witham, the honourable member for esher and Walton, the honourable member for mid Staffordshire, the honourable member for high Wycombe and the honourable member for spelthorne. Who are trying to ruin this country. So could the secretary of state gaurantee this house six things. The first is can he guarantee the investment will be put into schools directly and not be funnels through the gravy train also known as the Department of Education. The second thing is can he guarantee that any consultation will have at least 8 Labour Members. The third thing is will he bale to assure us that standards within education will be increased as a result of this legislation. The fourth thing is will he be prepared to detail In a later paper the precise regulations that will be reduced in the government's faith to not only cut regulation but to make life easier. The fifth thing is will they ensure that the Education Maintanance Allowance will be maintained under this conservative government properly. And the sixth and final thing is what will they do to ensure that the graduate tax will not be raised. These six questions are vital because what they will do is ensure that education will be protected for the next twenty years as it has a fundamental part of make sure of the financing of university education is to be maintained for the next generation and the secretary of state has got another chance to make his statement and if he can not do that then we will vote down this piece of legislaiton'
The Bill was debated for three days but the result was inevitable the government had debated it throughly by making sure that loyalists can be effectively arguing through the points of the government but the labour spokespersons couldn't be reasonable arguing against it as one of the core labour arguments is against Grammar Schools but the public have become in support of Gramamr schools and whilst the six tests that labour have put on the education bill which showed whilst the labour party would be opposed at least it had some logic and constructive advice and therefore solidified their image as the people who can be a constructive opposition. But as the division was called by the Speaker this is what the vote looked like.
| Parties | Ayes | Noes | Abstentions |
| Conservatives | 323 | 2 | 15 |
| Labour | 18 | 210 | 10 |
| Lib Dem | 34 | 2 | 8 |
| Others | 18 | 5 | 7 |
| Total | 393 | 219 | 40 |
This legislation had passed with a commanding majority of 174 it was clear that the bi partisan levels of support was commanding and therefore it showed how the levels of bi partisanship were strong and in a way the government knew that with 17-23 tory MPs who would never ever vote for the government because they considered it to be too left wing they had to rely on labour moderates to sustain their legislative agenda and therefore in away the arguments for proportional representation were somewhat undermined as there was greater levels of co-operation. But as a senior aide in Downing Street said 'What Ken, David and Alan and other moderates are trying to do is to poke the right wing just enough that eventually they snap so therefore the conservatives can lose their right wing image in favour of a centrist image to hold a lock on power' and that in itself was a sound strategy as they would be able to in effect create a new base of voters and whilst they had done that with the two election victories in a row and it was looking possible that the government could build upon that victory should they carve out a base of new voters.
The Guardian - Ken Clarke's Vision for a New Britain
Over the last five years I wanted to create a new society that unites people across the political spectrum my traditional form of conservatism which always has been based on the belief of opportunity for everybody. When I think off conservatism I think of a society where everyone can get on if they try hard enough and for a long time I always had those beliefs in hard work, individualism a society where the government doesn't intervene when it is not necessary but intervenes when it is necessary and an economy that through the traditional values of deregulation and reduced taxes will allow society to thrive for the better. These policies provided America with huge rates of growth in the 1980s and 1990s and the 2000s. And during that time I never stopped believing in compassion famously in 1988 I had 3 months worth of private meetings with Lady Thatcher to stop her from taking the incredibly ludicrous decision of privatising the National health service. Creating a fairer society is what we do best.
But there was a turning point in my views, The 1997 General Election was winnable for us though we were anhilaited. Lord Heseltine was one of the most successful PM's in being Able to stabilise the economy and the country as quick as we did. The economic policies we did in the final two years was based on the simple theory of growing the economy and paying down the debts and we grew the economy by 7% in the final two years and we brought the economy into surplus in 1996 which allowed us to start to pay down the debts which was wisely continued by Gordon Brown. We also cut Unemployment by 1 million in 2 years. Losing in 1997 by the scale we did was shocking and whilst the euphoria of the labour victory of 1997 was shocking it wasn't too surprising as the country wanted a change, but where we as conservatives went wrong is refusing to understand where the country wanted us to go they wanted us to move towards a more centrist position on everything and therefore force labour to show their true colours. Instead in Tony's first term we had a fight on ideological grounds that was unnecessary that got us less seats than we did in 2001. And then we elected Bill Cash which most accept was the conservatives losing grip of Reality and sanity and for those four years the country did not understand what the conservative party were believing. We came third in the 2005 Election we did not even get 30% of the vote. The Lib Dems got more votes for us.
That entire era for me was a singficnat turning point in my politics after the 2005 election seeing Labour winning 405 of the 650 seats and the tories only securing 115 seats of the 650 NPs, Made me realise two things the first is the right wing of the party would be not only a huge vote loser but would take the conservatives to the point of extinction remember if we had lost just another 818 votes in 8 seats the Lib Dems would have been the main opposition. The Second thing I learnt as a result of the 2005 Election was that we are a socially democratic nation and people do not want to return to the 1980s. They wish to have a society where of course the individual does well but they also went their neighbour to succeed a society where people can do well and where no one gets left behind. And I spent a decade reforming the conservative party in order to come round to that type of thinking.
And of course OI could list the achievements, Unemployment nearly at zero, living standards continuing to rise and showing no inclination of stopping or the longest period of sustained economic growth but also the fact that we have huge investment into the National Health Service and making sure we can have properly funded and properly reformed schools and hospitals. Creating an economy which still properly invests in the public services but brings in the proper societal reforms allowing the independent sector to come into the public services. But I think I did some bold things renaitonlisng steel was bold as everybody knew that the industry was failing and therefore cut is plain common sense that you do not under any circumstances allow an industry to fail and therefore we nationalised steel. I have also bene looking into rail nationalisation and in principle I think this is a very good idea because the east coast line is nationalised and that has been credited as the best rail service in the country in terms of rail quality and the service times and therefore under Ben Houchen we will seek to renationalise Britain's railways once the franchises expire next February . I approach policies not through vain ideological purity but through genuine and common sense reforms. I bang the drum for common sense because we are the party that believes in common sense.
Im a liberal in my devotion to freedom and personal liberties but I'm a conservative in my belief in markets and low taxes but when you run the country you have to appeal to all the people and I have an understanding of what needs to be done which is to effectively promote the values pot social justice and opportunity for all but then has a proper laser light focus of tackling the problems in the inner cities which often links to education and condition of the housing but also a lack of law and order. Education, Housing and Crime that's the 3 key aspects of being able to reduce crime but I do have some regard for social democrats and for those on the left because they have successfully captured the mantle of compassion and understand what we need as a society which is to be compassionate but also to understand the core belief which is through social responsibility and people working together society can be better.
Ken Clarke- 24th August 2020
The Article had been a success, Ken Clarke had set up his quarterly collums in the guardian and the times and his senior cabinet ministers wrote in other papers and had dedicated their social media accounts to be used defectively. The benefit of the articles was it helped him announce controversial policies and rail nationalisation would be put in the papers as means of getting the debate going. Luckily for the Prime Minister the rial nationalisation policy was accepted as necessary.
Labour Conference
The Labour conference were not in the best of spirits having lost their second general election in a row and had to loss it with a worse defeat It put them in a position of vunreability, Alan Milburn was popular but the issue was they were competing against a revived Liberal Democrats and a conservative leader who had been a well known politician for 33 years. And also the same tory leader whose approval ratings had averaged 62%. So therefore there was not an uprising calling for the Labour leader to go because it was not seen as likely that Ken Clarke would be leaden nth conservatives into a third general election mainly because of his health nobody knew what would be happening interns of the future of the government. But the Labour Party had decided to have a conference based on putting it's traditonal values in a modern setting. It was accepted that the country had fundamentally shifted to the left of centre views that Tony Blair and Peter Mandelson and Gordon Brown wanted. But off the Labour Party were to do a repeat of the 1980s then it didn't matter if Ken Clarke stood down Labour would be in opposition for a decade and a half. John McDonnell had decided to go first to talk about his views on being able to crackdown on crime. Law and order was still a tory area and therefore he would have to give a speech on law and order.
'Thank you conference this has been an interesting conference so far, today I want to talk to you about the issue of law and order it is vital to make sure that we can reduce crime now let me explain why it Is essential that we are allowed to make sure that we as a society can cut crime by backing our police and that is the key we have to champion our police officers and be throughly proud of everything they do and it is in our defence of the police and law and order is what allows us to understand what we as democratic socialists believe in which is to create a society where we can enhance the quality of our police, I believe we should provide greater accountability to our police and allow there to be police and crime commissioners and therefore be able to say to our police clearly and unambiguously we are proud of everything you do.And because we have a defence of the police we therefore understand that is necessary in the context of fighting crime there are no people better to reduce crime then our brilliant police officers. Crime fell under the last labour government and thought it has been reduced thankfully under this conservative government it has because they have stuck to the liberal measures that we support. But if we are going to reduce crime then we have to identify the reason crime goes up now the reasons Are fairly simple poverty is the key reason. If people have low incomes and do not feel secure then they will be more inclined to break the law and commit crimes now we as democratic socialists understand that we have to solve this now we can do this through compassion we are a party that believes in tackling poverty and that is the root of tackling crime ix through tackling poverty now we have to sure the country what we stand for and lets make it clear what we stand for in the case of social justice and solidarity and helping those who were not able to help themselves and therefore we have a conscience so let's use our concscience and our pragmatism in order to develop peoples understanding of the issue of crime which is of course we can be tough on sentencing but it's to understand the key element of society which is to help the poorest In society. Developing people's lives that's what we can do and for the next 5 years that is what we will do in opposition holding the government to account and making sure the day comes one day hopefully not too far away we can win a general election'
The speech had been a progressive's one highlighting the tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime had been a message that had resonated with so many people and therefore it helped. Next up was the foreign secretary David Miliband if Alan Milburn stood down it looked nearly certain that David Milliband would be the next labour leader and due to his personal popularity probably the next prime minister. Milliband decided to make his speech centred around the themes of internationalism he was able to make a speech genuine about working with people across the world so therefore here is how the speech went:
'Thank you conference this is an interesting time for our party we are in the midst of a change in our society and therefore here is what we have to do and in a society it is to work with others, Whilst there have been some great economic advancements which has developed and changed the country for the better and the reason we have to cooperate with internationalism is because it allows us to understand that we have to work with others everytimne there is a major conflict we have to work with others. The theme of cooperation is something that is essential in a great society and therefore if we are able to have a greater view of intrenaitonlism then we will be able to do it properly. Building and reforming society is Essential as what it does it would allow us to do is to reform the economy and rebuild society. Changing the economy and the public service reforms would be essential but how has Britain developed and succeeded over the last generation it is through understanding that we as a nation have to build and reform society and become a nation that begins to make things again and those policies were started by Labour and now whose taken those left of centre pro industry policies Germany, France,Brazil and Japan now of course it is going to take lots of time probably a generation for them to catch up b ut we led the world and it was because of the labour governnment and it was in no doubt because of a labour government. We invested over £500 billions into British Industry which has now allowed us to become the leading economic power that we are today. But do you know what else we did we cancelled the debt for the poorest nations in the world this did a huge amount for the world as it created so many schools and hospitals and thats why they are nations like Nigeria and South Africa with growth rates higher than most in the OECD and therefore we did so much for the world. Now this is why I believe we should be passionate on helping the labour party and why we as social democrats and democratic socialists should be able to work together and cooperate with each other is to understand that we need to unite because we are going to be in opposition for 5 years and what it requires us to do is to make sure that wee as people are able to effectively debate what we are doing. I hope we can build up a great society but it realises on the clear basis that we are a growing society and therefore it requires us all to work together and to cooperate and develop a better society and working together is what this party has been based upon for years and that is what makes us better so therefore let us get out there and work together thank you very much'
Next up was the shadow chancellor Ed Balls. Ed who was the shadow chancellor and a very successful chancellor under Gordon Brown and had incited things like the Industry fund and whilst he would be a successful leader it was accepted that he would be serving as the next chancellor. Balls who had been affiliated with New Labour having advised Gordon Brown for 16 years until winning his seat of Morley and Outwood in the 2010 General Election and was put in the cabinet as the chief secretary to the treasury in September 2010 and then made Chancellor in June 2013. Balls had drifted to the left in opposition and brought in the policy of nationalisation of the railways and the steel industry but also water. Well clearly he had some influence because a conservative government had nationalised steel and were about to nationalise the railways. Balls had decided to give a speech to the conference centring on the themes of democratic socialism. Yep thats right I think people can see where this is going but don't worry I will try my best not to do a 1980-1981 on the Labour Party and by that I mean I'm not gonna makes the tories into viscous people whilst having labour debating about mandatory re-selection and sending 8 months on electing a deputy leader. Anyway here is what the shadow chancellor had to say
'Conference we are a natural Labour Party and by that I mean we believe in the values of solidarity social justice and opportunity for all but we understand that these values have to be put in the modern world and weather it was getting this government to nationalise the stele industry which In think would be a great success as this Labour Party is a bold and transformative party we understand quite clearly that the values of the Labour Party those have those great views of solidarity social justice and opportunity for all these are the great values that we stand for. But in understanding what we are, the party that believes in full employment in opportunity for all. The party that understands of course we can have a proper economy that Private and public industry do so much good for industry but let me explain as the modern forward looking party that we have been for years we then have to understand that is the role of the goverment to care for people from the cradle to the grave we are a keyensoian party who understands the values of keyensians as social democrats we believe in the values of solidarity,. social justice and opportunity for all and therefore we need to develop the new form of public services. I know we can change as a society I think our future is exceptionally bright but there is only one thing stopping us and it's the leadership of the conservative party full off right wing ideology most of whom haven't really comprehended the facts of life now we understand as democratic socialists that you can't improve the public services through some mythical, big society it rewquiteds genuine and meaningful reform and that is what this party does best which is to effectively bring in experts and to listen to opinions and its through accountability and that is what we understand which is through cooperation and we as a Labour Party we understand that people working together is the essential comp-onet to a decent society. I know we can be better than this because this is Britain and we are changing and developing a new society together because as democratic socialists we understood that when we Brough tin the national health service that gave every single person the right forhealhtcare now how is that not a basic belief of our values can be put in the modern age and therefore iM announcing today the next Labour government will seek to nationlise the water and electricity industry. Profit as a concept is something that of course we have a duty to celebrate and we will always create an aspiration through people and there will be stronger levels of enterprise but never forget this there are industries that never should be in the private hands. It's the Publics water and there electrocute and it should remain that way. As a modern society we should have a modern outlook on not only the economy important as that is but it is to look on the new economy and say just how do we make it better and we will do that thank you'.
The conference speech from the shadow chancellor was a robust one it was able for him to put the economy back In track and that was a feeling credential he had which was his ability to show competence in running the economy as effectively as he did when he was the chancellor. The final spokesperson was Alan Milburn the Labour Party had suffered a form of deflation due to the unexpected election defeat which had not been seen coming. Milburn though popular with the centre ground knew that so long as Ken Clarke was the Prime Minister he would not be able to win the next general election. Milburn decided to say this in his speech
'As a party we have always had a dedication to transform society as a concept to something that is reality and that is what this apathy has done for years in understanding that there is such a thing as society and it is the same thing as the state. So therefore we have shown time and again our values to focus and prioritise on helping the poorest in society after all we are the party that helps the workers and that is because we were founded by the workers and therefore we have an ultimate duty to help the poorest in society and therefore that is something we must continue. The prospect to reform society is what we need to understand the only way the reforms can be pursued is through genuine modern socially democratic society and we understand that we have had a setback but we don't back down and we don't ever give up after 18 brilliant years in government it seems like the public wanted to prolong the change but we will be back of course we will be back we are one of the greatest parties with such a great history never forget it was the labour party that brought in the national health service which is by far one of the greatest acts of cilvisaitocn this country has seen it was a labour government that brought in the open university which broke down the final barrier to. university education, it was a labour government the`t borought in the national minimum wage which brought in a basic standard of pay it was the labour government that brought in the winter fuel allowance sure start and peace in Northern Ireland. So yes of course we need to change and of course we need to reform and of course we need to change things but let us not undermine and underwrite the huge achievements of the last labour government and labour governments in general. We have a brilliant history and we have done so much good and that is why we have a duty to win a general election and we have a duty to make sure that what we can do should we win power again is to change the country. Change is essential we Are a brilliant party and we4 have done so much for this country but we need to do is to not only secure the base but to reach out to ebverubdoy to ensure the labour party is the party of business aspiration and enterprise but also being the party of social justice so let's get out there and do it'
The Conference had been a success for the Labour Party being able to focus on their achievements and being able to talk about what the labour aorta did when they were in power and that seems to be the constant theme that the labour party would be coming back to power one day but the tories 2were showing no sign of stopping the new form of centre ground politics that has become the norm with all three political parties occupying various degrees of the centre ground with the Lib Dems being centre left, the labour party being left of centre and the tories being centrist to right of centre. The Labour Party could win the next general election and it was likely that they could win the election providing that the tories were not being led by the most popular man in Britain.
Conservative Conference 2020- Birmingham- Moving Britain to a new Age 04/10/20- 08/10/20
The Conservative party were to put it least ecstatic nobody except the prime minister genuinely thought they would be able to secure an overall majority and nobody thought they would have an increased majority the tory delegates even those on the right of the party could not be able to criticise the new one nation stream of thinking because igt made them powerful. There were going to be four speakers. David Davis, Alan Duncan David Cameron and Ken Clarke. David Davis was to be kept on as Home Secretary because to put it plainly nobody could do his job with his level of experience and he was likeable amongst the left and the right and in his speech he decided to focus on civil liberties ands the essence ion personal freedom. And therefore the tory conference convened for David Davis it was accepted that he would give a good speech on a new society of civil liberties.
'The word that keeps this party together is freedom, personal freedom is so important and we as a party have a duty to ensure the development of personal freedom within society now how can we do that it is by understanding what is our duty to protect and that is the concept of freedom and the way you enhance freedom is through greater levels of prosperity and therefore we as conservatives know that to value freedom is the core priority and therefore over the next 2 years we will conduct an internal review of government intrusiveness in personal freedom we will make sure that we can reduce the total overhaul of personal regulation because whilst we accept that the public private relationship within the economy is essential to the commanding economic position we have today the way we can sure that people are able to protect each other with jobs and social security but the way we ensure social protection is through being prudent and one of the main reasons we won is to put it plainly people trust us with their money and people trust us with their security. And we understand that as conservatives that security will be our number one priority and if people do believe in security then it is vital that we enhance people power now the reason I focus on people power is not because not is some grweat and empowering slogan but because it links to what we as conservatives believe that people know how to govern there lives better than the government and our devotion top freedom is so essential let us understand this whilst we are the party of opportunity we have to understand that the concept and the devotion to freedom is essential because if we give more freedom and control to peoples lives then they will be able to make there lives better and with that devotion to prudence that we always have it will help our society because there is no point at all to being imprudent with the countries finances it is to u understand that we are growing country with a growing economy and were should be using this fact to your benefit. Now I have put more police on the street we have built more prisons and we have cut crime now that is a successful record never to be undermined and it is our duty to make sure that crime keeps falling and that we can have the permanent and peaceful society thank you very much'
Davis focus on economics was interesting he was kn own to be the last voice on the centre right of the party and during the initial modernisation of the Conservative party, Davis was able to focus the party and making sure that they were able to keep the party ion line however his influence has declined a bit because the tories had won two general elections in a row. The Conservatives had effectively positioned themselves as the right of centre to the centrist party. Alan Duncan was next, this was his first speech at the tory platform as a cabinet minister. Duncan who was on the far left of the tory party had been delibertalty kept in as the foreign secretary he was able to make sure that with a new society that was being created he decided to talk about a Britain that leads int he world. And here is the closing remarks from his conference speech.
'Conference we know that as a nation that we have to lead and that is for two reasons the first is because we have a commanding rates of economic growth that has allowed Britain to have a plurality in it's share of the world trade and that is a huge achievement and therefore we as conservatives understand that now we are the leading economic power we have a duty to use this position and to capital on it in order to make sure that we candevelop there society that we can therefore develop a new society that we can develop based on the principles of internationalism and on economic growth and the reason his has relevance to foreign policy is because the stronger we are as a country the stronger we are as a society the more influence we have around the world I know that as a strong nation we can develop ourselves further and the maintaining of developing as a party that is based on internationalism. We need to develop ourselves as an internationalist party and that does not mean we become globalist far from it we lead the way around the world wether it's throgtuht NATO and the United nations we are leading the way people turn to us when. they want to make a decision and we have done that and why because we have placed a strong emphasis on Britain becoming a nation that makes things again after all in manufacturing is what we succeed in. We are a commanding nation wether it's in foreign affairs or having the commanding rates of economic growth and that is a stunning moment for this great nation to know that Britain is the strongest nation and the more we can develop as a country, it Is more Devoted to freedom and the Economy it is essential to make sure that we can have a thriving economy and a thriving society. Increasing prosperity in this country is necessary but we as prudent and sensible people understand we have two expand the prosperity for those abroad. We are compassionate people we never have been and we never will be a nasty party. We believe in helping people but we don't want to enforce our views. We want to be behind people cheering them on willing them to succeed but we don't want to be infront of them ordering them about. I eb leave in a. society where people are able to succeed with their talents but let us work on this together thank you'
David Cameron was up next and decided to talk about the agenda of reform it was accepted that the economy had blossomed under the conservatives and Cameron was seen by many as the compromise successor for Ken Clarke as he was modernising enough for Duncan/Pickles wing of the socially democratic faction of the tories but the tax bill and his prudence as chancellor made him agreeable to the right of the party and also he projected the modern tory party so well. Cameron wasn't as popular As Clarke but then that was because he wasn't as well known. Cameron decided to make his speech focused on the new society that he envisaged.
'Conference let me use closing remarks to talk about the society I envisage now it's a society where government is behind you but we have a`lwas believed in a society where the individual does more so government can do less and this has not changed but it is modernisation of the values which is crucial and the reason this is so is because we understand that our faith lies within the people and we trust the people to make better decisions Than government ever could but we also understand that as a modern party we are able to propose economic reform that is genuine and meaningful that is we provided the tax cuts which has stimulated the economy and has got us into a trade surplus and has made the UK into a trading nation and its controls the plurality of the world trade and that is a stunning achievement that when people want to invest we are there first choice we have risen to the point of being an economic superpower and that is because of common sense economic policy started by Labour but enhanced and strengthens under this modern one nation conservative govenrment. And remember this we are the compassionate party it was a conservative Wilberforce who led the campaign against the slave trade, it was a conservative Shaftesbury who fought against child labour in the 1800s it was a conservative Churchill who brought in the pension system and fought facism, it was a conservative macmillan who fought against unemployment it was a conservative Margret Thatcher who bought home ownership to millions who gave to the power to the people and who ended socialism, a conservative Micheal heseltine who led the way reviving Liverpool and industry and a conservative Ken Clarke who has increased living standards and has made Britain a nation that leads int eh world. We have a great record and we are a the party that believes in prudence but bringing our values to modern world. Because this isn't the 1920s or 1820s it is 2020 and we have to be a party that emulates the modern brain and the modern economy embaracing technology cutting taxes but having a laser light focus on growth and making sure we are and always will be the leading nation int the world. Because out society of the big society where people look after each other is the compassionate society'
Finally was the Prime Minister Kenneth Clarke, Clarke had been a successful Prime Minister and if he ran for a third term he would have been leaders for 20 years. So far he had led the party for 15 years and was going to beat thatchers record. Clarke had alienated the right wing but his general election victories and making the tories the seemed natural party of government again had effectively shushed the right wing. Clarke had decided to give a speech based on the theme of unity.
'As a party we are united origination we understood that our core values of Opportunity for all and individualism are brilliant but as David said so well in his speech this is 2020 and it's 1920 or 1820 we have to adapt to new parts of society and we have done that but there is a new thing ands that is technology will govern the way we live and society is essential that we understand that technology is going to govern the way we live for example the iPhone is a huge impact on our lives there benefits through an ability to connect the world through technology is what we need to understand that technology will change the world as we know it and the way technology enhances people's lives is something to understand`d that will develop our lives for the better, But it will also help public services in 90% of schools nearly every classroom has chrome books and mack books and as a result students can send their work over quicker and its marked quicker and there is a database which helps teachers understand how there students are doing. So technological change is benefiting there but also for the health service the £30 billions invested in machinery over the last decade has contributed to the plummeting waiting times that we have seen but also technology in defence sees that our soldiers get there equipment quicker. Now I emphasise the tech revolution Because we understand the problems that need to be dealt with and the climate crisis is one of the biggest we are the biggest nation on the earth we have the fastest rate of growth as of next year, we have a plurality in the world trade and we have no debts onto of that we are the centre of investment and new ideas. Britain as the leading power of the world must understand that we have to protect the earth as we know it after all we are stewards of society and we are compassionate people and therefore we want to help people so therefore over the coming months we will draw up the plan for a Green Industrial revolution this will be working alongside with industry in order to make sure that whilst we defend business we can address the climate crisis as we need to make sure that with global cooperation we can have zero emissions by 2035. I want to live ion a society without pollution and a cleaner society but it requires everyone to do their bit. Government can not lead this on their own it requires everyone to work together. We are the party of prudence and reform now we should stay that way but Ley us face the problems and tackle them thank you'
The Speech was in treating Clarke had used the tech revolution as a means of showing the tories were still the party of change and by citing the green industrial revolution plan it was able to maintain the broad appeal but it had gone further with the leader of the Green Party Jonathan Bartley saying that the Prime minsiter's plan for the green industrial revolution was 'Hitting the nail on the head and if the government do genuine action to solve climate change then It will get more voters Thant they think as the centre left of all parties would get behind it'. Clarke knew this was risky but he had just won a general election when nobody thought he could and therefore his power and authority in the tory party was exceptionally high and he could in effect walk on water if he wanted to.
US Election 2020
After 8 years of President Colin Powell, the election of 2020 was going to be interesting America had experienced a recession in 2011 which had in effect ended the credibility Edwards Administration but Powell did have to deal with a democratic house and a republican senate and after 2018 it was. a democratic congress. But like Reagan he commanded bi partisan support and unlike president Reagan he was a moderate having brought in Universal Coverage of Healthcare to all Americans and ensuring that those on incomes below $60,000 would be covered on Medicaid and those above 60 would be covered by Medicare. He also ensured that both programs would gaurantee free at the point of use healthcare. He also ensured Education Reform by allocating an extra $600 billion for the poorest schools in the bid to drive up standards which is why the Americans Education was ranked 8th in the world in contrast to 35th in 2012. After the Sandy Hook shooting In 2013, Powell did pass expansive Gun Control which banned assault weapons from the public and ensured universal background checks and criminalised any private dealers selling automatic weapons or assault weapons. He also saw the appointment of Justice Elena Kagen and Justice Carl Stewart and Justice Susan Carney. All three moderates but with liberal credentials on social issues and Roe v Wade was upheld and the Supreme Court in effect had a 7-2 liberal majority . Powell had installed executive order 13823 which had funded Planned Parenthood for the next twenty years. He had also ensured affirmative action for all African Americans with specific assistance for those in Chicago, Harlem, Bronx, Detroit, Los Angles and D.C. Powell had been given a landslide victory in his 2016 re-election securing 44 of the 50 states. Unusually he had secured 39% of the Afrcian American vote and 45% of the hispanic vote. Also with 28% of 'liberals' voted for President Powell. Powell in his second term had focused on maintaining the strong economy with the declining unemployment he had inherited a 9.8% rate of unemployment by 2019 it had gone to 3%. Inflation had gone from 12.3% in 2012 to 2.5% in 2019. In 2012 15.3% of Americans were below the poverty line by 2019 it was 3.1%. So he had a strong economy to campaign on and his Vice President was Charlie Baker the successful Republican in Massachusetts. Baker had a close relationship with Powell and was a moderate and like Powell was a popular candidate with cross party and cross demographic appeal.
Baker centred his campaign around the theme of continuity the public had largely approved of the administration and he picked as his Vice Preisdent Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts. Scott Brown had taken over from the late Ted Kennedy. Brown had been a beacon of the Powell agenda having been the leader of the progressive republican caucus controlling 19 of the 54 senators and the figure had gone down to 52 in 2014, and then 54 in 2016 but then 47 in 2018. But throughout the time the progressive republicans had grown from 19 to 23 to 27 and now 29 of the 47 senators were part of the progressive republicans. Brown had supported publicly the presidents agenda and had a very good personal friendship with the Vice President and therefore both could command the cross party approval that has helped them win 2 elections in a row,. Baker campaigned on the platform to keep the economy in good shape with the focus on reviving industry and to become the first country with full employment. Baker had also promised comprehensive immigration reform building on the immigration reform of 2015 which had allowed illegal immigrants who had come in before 2013 to say in America providing they didn't break the law and they learned English. But it also enhanced border security. Baker had his Republican convention in Cleveland Ohio which would be a battleground state though Baker was 12% ahead in the polls as it was clear that a time for a change mantra wasn't sticking. And besides as Baker said in the RNC 'I've heard a lot of talk about lurching well we will not be lurching to the left or to the right we will provide the good solid leadership that this country has had for 8 years and will need for another 8 years'.
The Democrats had decided to nominate Senate Majority Leader Kamala Harris. She had taken the democrats to control of the senate for the first time in 8 years and she had a traditionally progressive agenda which focused on free college tuition reviving social security and reviving the inner cities, Harris had bi-partisan credentials as she did have a good working relationship with the President where the VP said in a press conference 'Im sure Senator Harris a good cooperative friend when I'm president'. Harris had decided to campaign on police reform and making sure that Education would be the best in the world it was smart the traditional platform of healthcare and education was only half workable. As President Powell and Vice President Baker had in effect given free healthcare to over 200 million Americans. She promised to provide free healthcare for all. As for Social security whilst there had been 50 years of life put into it because of the bi partisan commission, Harris promised a new state pension system to be fairer and better regulated. Harris also promised to raise the minimum wage from $11 to $15 by the end of the first term. The issue there was the republicans had increased the minimum wage from $6.25 to $11. Harris at the DNC in Detroit, Michigan had talked about the time for a change and talked about the need to be there for the working class she was going back to the traditional base of the Democratic Party of the working class which was smart as it would be winning back the old core vote and would help. Harris had decided to nominate Congressman Alexandria Ocasio Cortez of New York as her running mate.
The Debates were good for both candidates, Baker had came across as a moderate and a man of reason he talked about the 'revival of American prosperity under President Powell' Baker had alienated large parts of the conservative base but they were small after the President got rid of them by expelling them after the Cruz/Hawley Scandal of 2014. Harris had talked about a new America and giving the necessary change and whilst change concept did work to an extent Baker put it down by saying 'Why do you want to change something that works change for the sake of it is stupid'. In the final days off the campaign it was looking like Baker would win. Baker had campaigned in Harlem to promote the inner city reform that had been done under the President and how he would continue to build on the education reforms and to be tough on the causes of crime. When a footage was shown of a white police office beating up Danny Fayad and killing him without justification. Baker said as President he would make sure the Attorney General 'Would like the criminal behind bars where scum like him belong'. Baker had called for police reform which would in effect outsoruign parts of the police funding to social services and inner city programs to get young people of the street this had bene done by Powell but Baker would expand it. As Polling Day arrived Baker had a 9% lead and would win the election.
| Vice President Baker (R-MA)/ Sen.Scott Brown (R-MA) | 392 Electoral Votes | 68,167,521 | 54.2% |
| Sen.Kamala Harris (D-CA) / Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-NY) | 146 Electoral Votes | 58,879,619 | 45.6% |
It was a clear win for the Vice President and it was a commanding victory winning by 9.6% was brilliant and the Vice President had secured 4 years of a Republican administration except there would be a difficult congress.
| Party | House | Senate | Governors |
| Democrats | 262 (-18) | 55 +(2) | 31 (-3) |
| Republicans | 173 (+18) | 45 (-2) | 19 (+3) |
So whilst the President Elect had pulled of a clear victory he would have to work with a democratic congress and a democratic governors. But then again when your elected by 28% of register democrats suppose you have some appeal. Baker placed the emphasis on unity being aware he would have a democratic congress and Sen Majority Leader Kamala Harris and Speaker Nancy Pelosi to work with. But in the UK Prime Minister Ken Clarke who was known to wanted Charlie Baker though he had backed the Democrats under President Clinton and Gore. He understood that Both Powell and Baker had put into practice his brand of pragmatic centrism which won elections and made lives better.
London Climate Summit- 05/12/20-09/12/20
Yep, that's the objective to achieve a net zero carbon emissions by 2035 and Clarke had decide to use his commanding position as the longest serving party leader and the most experienced politician to get what he wanted and for the first term Britain was looked on as a nation to be respected properly in that they were in the driving seat and what had used to belong to US, Japan and China had now come back to Brtiain. Clarke had called for 'the peace of the earth and the growing of society'.Clarke had formed a package which had the backing of the TUC,CBI and Greenpeace and there were three countries he needed China whose leader Xi Jimping who called the Clarke 'A man of experience and a man of decency and has and always be a close friend to China ' in his state visit to London in February 2018. India's leader Rahul Ghandi who had very Pro-British views but his party was funded by the coal industry and 10 million jobs depended in India depended and coal and steel. And then of course President Colin Powell of the United States. Powell had said the UK and the US were always brothers and best friends and President Elect Baker had said that the UK was the best nation on the planet. But the GOP still relied on the midwest which meant coal and steel and it still need the south which meant Oil. so the issue was more about credibility within politics.
Clarke had decided to set out his proposals on the first day which consisted of
- 100% cut in Carbon emissions by 2035
- 65% increase solar production by 2030
- 25% increase in wind turbines by 2030
- 10% increase in Nuclear Power Stations by 2035
- Total and complete ban on fracking of shale gas and Oil from 2023
- Total ban on any new explorations from 2023
- Banning all Oil refineries after 2030
- Closing down the Pits by 2030
- A complete ban on all non-hybrid cars after 2025 and a total ban on all non electric cars by 2035
- A banning of all non electric vans by 2033 and non hybrids by 2028
- Replacing all petrol stations with electric charging points by 2035
- Creating a £2 trillion global climate industry fund to provide jobs for any person who looses there job as a result of these reforms
- Creating a £5 trillion global infrastructure fund to build the new society based on green renewables.
- The Global climate fund should be completed by 2025 and the infrasutrucre fund would be completed by 2027.
As Clarke sat down with President Colin Powell there friendship was there first name basis was there and a genuine friendship. Clarke stated that the shale gas reforms must be introduced because 22.1% of carbon emissions increases comes from Fracking and should we eliminate fracking it would strike a blow to carbon emissions. Powell wanted 2027 and therefore Clarke moved to 2024 and then Powell said how's about 2025. It was agreed. Rahul Ghandi came next. Closing down the Pits by 2030 would be a death nail for the Indian manufacturing sector and therefore asked if it could be extended to be 2035. Clarke agreed it could be till January 2033. And then India announced they would support it . Clarke also had to negioatr with Crown Prince Mohamed Bin Salman of Saudi Arabia he wanted to extend oil referiries till 2035 and Clarke agreed till January 31st 2033. But the hardest negation would be at Millbank on. December 7th with President Jimping. He was the one person who could butcher this but he wanted to make China's contribution to both funds 20% instead of the 30% proposed. Clarke said that since the US and China had two of the largest economies it is right they contributed to a majority of the fund Clarke said the UK would put in 10%, the UK though the fastest growing economy on the planet still had a £3.2 trillion GDP and therefore £700 billions over the course of 7 years would be do-able as the UK capital surplus stood at £310 billions. And instead of being able to lend £2.43 trillion to the world in capitol investment over the next 7 years they would be lending £1.73 trillion to the world. China wanted 25% which was agreed. And In return the UK would put 15% in. So therefore the UK would be putting in £1.05 trillion into the funds.£300 Billions into the Global climate fund and the £750 billion in the global infrastrrucutre fund. The US and China would give 25% each. The UK would put 15% along with India's 15% Germany would put in 10%, France 5% and Canada would put 5%. The G7 would lead the effort in the money but in return there would be WHO and UN inspectors around the world making sure this was implemented.
Despite the financial cost the Climate Summit had been an undoubted success and a huge boost to Ken Clarke and the UK's global influence it had just negated the first comprehensive global climate change treaty that ensured that the world would be end it;'s increase in carbon emissions by 2035. And thats what helped the government in that at December 7 at 7.32pm it was signed and agreed that there would be global net zero and the initial plan was adjusted but the fundamental was there. The Prime Minister Ken Clarke said 'We have worked with the world to save the world', Alan Duncan who had got the deal with the Middle East and China sorted had said 'British influence is excelling and we are the nation to look to'. Nick boles the Energy and Climate Change secretary who came up with this plan had said 'This is the fundamental breakthrough in dealing with climate change providing this is implemented we have saved the world by working with the world'. Nobody not even the Guardian or the mirror would criticise the govnemrent. Ken Clarke's approvals shot up from 59% to 85% 3 days after the summit. It was the biggest breakthrough of his premiership. Even the opposition were falling all overthemsleves to praise the Prime Minister with the labour leader Alan Milburn called the Prime minister 'The legend who saved the nation' or the Lib Dem leader Tim Faron 'The Prime Minsiter has practically saved the world' Green Party leader Jonathan Bartley the Green Party leader 'The Prime Minister has acted on Green Party policy and has saved the world and he has led the effort and of course we fully congratulate him on this' . Next day's headline in the Daily Mail was Ken Clarke with the caption 'Saviour of the world'. For Now the government were getting brilliant press.
Up Next
Budget 2021
The Mayors Bill
Local Elections 2021
EU Constitution Vote
Labour Conference
Tory COnference
Last edited:
) but a few major issues to point out: