"People can't understand why something "everyone in Westminster knows" doesn't make headlines, it is because we need to prove it.
Not everything "everyone knows" turns out to be true."
(Tweet from the Guido Fawkes blog twitter account yesterday)
Christopher Whiteside MBE is County Councillor for the Egremont North and St Bees Division of Cumbria County Council. The division includes St Bees, Bigrigg, Wood End, Moor Row, part of the Mirehouse area of Whitehaven, and surrounding countryside. He will hold this office until the county council is abolished on 1st April 2023. He is also Chairman of the North-West region of the voluntary wing of the Conservative party. Chris lives and works in Copeland with his wife and family.
"People can't understand why something "everyone in Westminster knows" doesn't make headlines, it is because we need to prove it.
Not everything "everyone knows" turns out to be true."
(Tweet from the Guido Fawkes blog twitter account yesterday)
Today, the Foreign Secretary will reaffirm Britain's support for Ukraine for the long haul, at the Ukraine Recovery Conference in Switzerland – setting out our long-term commitment to help the people of Ukraine rebuild.
The government has announced plans to reduce the cost of childcare for parents, boosting the number of childminders and driving up the take up of childcare offers to help parents with rising costs.
"Like a baseball game, wars are not over till they are over. Wars don’t run on a clock like football. No previous generation was so hopelessly unrealistic that this had to be explained to them."
(Thomas Sowell, American economist)
Lawrence Freedman is Emeritus Professor of War Studies at King's College London. He has written a number of interesting articles about the war in Ukraine.
He has published a post today called "Can Ukraine win?" which provides a very convincing assessment of the current strategic position of Ukraine and Russia.
He argues that in the current stage of the war the Russians have not been able to rely so much on manoeuvre because of losses in armoured vehicles. They have sought to make up for their losses with vehicles from the reserves, including, as widely reported, vintage tanks that were in use in the 1960s. New tank production may have ground to a halt because of the lack of key components, such as microchips, which have been sourced from the West and are now sanctioned.
Russia also seems to be running low on stocks of precision weapons, evident in some of their recent long-range strikes. It is likely, for example, that they did not intend the deadly attack on the shopping mall in Krevenchuk, and instead had a nearby target in mind, which they also failed to destroy. This demonstrated, in addition to the inaccuracy of their weapons, the general Russian carelessness when it comes to collateral damage and their inability to take responsibility for their mistakes (as always suggesting that for some reason the Ukrainians did this to themselves). Coming as the G7 was meeting, it helped to boost support for Ukraine, reminding the leaders about why it is important that Russia fails."
Looking at the ways both sides are seeking to adapt and strengthen there position, he writes that
"Both sides therefore must adapt, but, admittedly oversimplifying, the Russians are adapting into becoming more of a 20th Century army while the Ukrainians are becoming more of a 21st Century army. The Ukrainian adaption process will therefore taking longer but the prospect at the end is of a much more capable force."
The full article is well worth a read and you can find it here.
Twenty-five years ago this week Britain handed over Hong Kong to China in possibly the best state in history that any former colonial power ever peacefully relinquished control of a former colony.
We handed over Hong Kong as one of the richest countries in the world, richer on a per capita basis than Britain itself was at the time,
We handed over Hong Kong with independent courts, a free press, civil rights and a freely elected legislature.
Part of the territory we handed over had been leased to Britain for a hundred years, and the lease had run out. The original treaty would, in theory, have allowed Britain to keep part of the colony in perpetuity: however it could credibly be argued that what was left of the colony was not viable - and indeed China could and did make a reasonable argument that the treaty which ceded the territory hadn't exactly been negotiated on a free, fair and equal basis.
But we also handed over Hong Kong on the basis of promises that China would respect the rights of what became the "special administrative region" and apply a policy of "One country, two systems."
Neither of those things has happened. And the statement by President Xi that China has brought "true democracy" to Hong Kong could be taken seriously only by those who do not have the least idea what the word "democracy" actually means. China's stewardship of the territory has been cruel, tyrannical, and disastrous.
So on the 30th of June Foreign Secretary Liz Trustt made a statement to mark 25 years since the handover of Hong Kong, highlighting Britain's unwavering commitment to the people of the territory.
This week the UK government announced a 22 point plan to help the aviation industry to better run reliable services for passengers ahead for the summer holidays.
"Military experts tell us that the movements of Russia are much slower, less than expected.
"So, Russia is running into more and more trouble. Also, where recruiting is concerned, where replenishment is concerned, and the delivery from the back of the country is concerned, I would not at all bet on Russia.
"On the contrary. There is one very important point here: Ukrainians know what they are fighting for; they are motivated.
"The Russian troops have no idea what they are fighting for because they do not see any sense in this war"
(EU Commission President Ursula van der Leyen speaking this week.)
The Convservative government is committed to growing the NHS workforce and compared to a year ago, we now have:
👉🏽 Over 4,000 more doctors
👉🏽 Over 9,600 more nurses
👉🏽 Over 25,900 more NHS staff
Health Secretary Sajid Javid added, "Thank you to all staff who are working hard to bust the Covid backlogs."
The July 2022 meeting of Cumbria Health Scrutiny committee will take place on Monday 25th July at 10.30am, probably at Cumbria House, Botchergate Carlisle.
The meeting will be open to the press and public.
The agenda has not yet been published but when it is, I will put a link here. It is likely to include Mental Health Services in both parts of Cumbria, and also Lancashire & South Cumbria Pathology collaboration.
Grateful to Axel Folio on Twitter (@ISASaxonists) for making me laugh with this "medieval meme of the week."
Today the Conservative government has announced £82 million of investment as part of our plan to upgrade broadband for rural primary schools, levelling up children's access to the best possible teaching.
Today the Prime Minister will meet with New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern at Downing Street, agreeing new joint schemes to ensure New Zealand and the UK can address global challenges for the next generation.
My first reaction when I heard that the British Ambassador has been summoned to the Kremlin and handed a note complaining about
“offensive rhetoric from representatives of the UK authorities.”
was “Truth hurts, doesn't it Vlad?”
I had assumed that this might refer to various statements of the obvious from government ministers such as the PM's comment this week that the Russian President's forces had inflicted "barbaric" actions on Ukraine. If bombing maternity hospitals and shopping malls or tying up civilians and shooting them in the back isn't barbaric, I don't know what is,
But as the Evening Standard report says, "It was not immediately clear what specific remarks the statement was referring to.”
When I read what the one specific complaint reported to be in the letter that Russia's foreign ministry handed to Britain's ambassador, I was left scratching my head: The ministry said Russia had told her it objected to British statements containing “deliberately false information, in particular about alleged Russian ‘threats to use nuclear weapons’”.
If there is one area in which UK, US and Western leaders have generally been pretty careful in their language it has been in response to statements by both Putin and his close allies about nuclear weapons.
And what's all this about "alleged" threats?
At the end of February, within days of invading Ukraine Putin announced that he had instructed Russia's military chiefs to put Russia's nuclear weapons on high alert.
At the beginning of May pro-Putin Russian state TV host Dmitry Kiselyov displayed a video purporting to show how a single Russian Sarmat missile could turn Britain into a "radioactive desert", adding "a single launch, Boris, and there is no England."
In mid May, Aleksey Zhuravlyov, the deputy chairman of the Kremlin’s defence committee and member of the Russian Duma (parliament,) claimed Finland could be hit in 10 seconds with the Satan-2 hypersonic missile and that Russia could crush the Baltic states ‘like peanuts,’ adding that the missiles could hit Britain in less than four minutes.
On Monday 30th May he was at it again, saying on Russian state TV that Russia could destroy the entire East and West cost of the USA with just four nuclear missiles and 'there will be nothing left' on either coast.
Just a week ago a close political ally of Vladimir Putin has warned London will be bombed first if World War 3 breaks out. Andrey Gurulyov, another member of the Russian Duma’s defence committee, made the threat to Britain on the state-run Rossiya 1 channel, saying . “The first to be hit will be London.”
I think we need to be very careful to recognise what Russia is and is not doing here.
I don't believe for a second that the hard men in the Kremlin are daft enough to want to start a nuclear war. Once the nukes start flying literally nobody on the planet is safe, including themselves, and anyone who isn't clinically insane knows that. Only if facing an existential threat, or first use of nuclear weapons by the West (which will not happen) or China (which won't happen either) would they actually use nuclear weapons.
It is possible that the protest about Britain accusing them of making threats of nuclear war, even though they really have made such threats, is just propaganda: it is also possible that it is designed to reinforce the signal that they will not use nuclear weapons first unless NATO actually invades Russia (which is another thing which is absolutely not going to happen.)
What the Kremlin is doing by putting Putin allies on state TV to make these blood-curdling threats is warning the West about the risks if the war escalates to a direct confrontation between NATO and the Russian Federation. Doubtless they also hope that fear of such a confrontation might persuade Western countries to send less aid to Ukraine than might otherwise be the case.
NATO does have to make sure we don't get into a direct shooting war with Russia unless we are forced into it by a direct Russian attack on a NATO member state. Equally, we must not allow these threats to stop us sending assistance of all kinds to Ukraine.
One other thought. Western leaders have been extremely critical of the Putin regime since his illegal invasion of Ukraine began - and vice versa. If Putin is now starting to get sensitive about this, it is probably a sign that the Kremlin is increasingly worried about how their war is going.
Over half a million benefit claimants have been supported into work in less than 6 months thanks to the ‘Way to Work’ campaign, supporting Britain's economy to rebound from the pandemic.
The first of these four quotes about anger by the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius is an alternative translation of the same quote I used as my quote of the day on Sunday 26th June.
But I think all these quotes including both versions of the first one have something to teach us.
Today, the International Trade Secretary announced plans to lift over 100 trade barriers, unlocking export opportunities worth tens of billions of pounds.
International Trade Secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan said:
"Every week we remove trade barriers somewhere around the world, helping more and more businesses all over the country.
We know that businesses who export pay higher wages and are more productive than businesses who do not, but too often, complex trade rules and practical obstacles prevent them selling overseas.
This bonfire of the barriers will grow our economy by allowing our brilliant businesses to satisfy the enormous global appetite for their goods and services."
Unlocking new markets and global customers means more opportunities for UK firms to grow their businesses and support local jobs. That is why Britain is working hard on getting rid of barriers, including:
The UK gained greater freedom to remove trade barriers, along with the ability to negotiate its own Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), when it left the European Union. FTAs are securing new and substantial opportunities for UK businesses, and the work goes hand in hand with tackling trade barriers facing our firms today.
The Department of Trade has supported the resolution of around 400 barriers, across more than 70 countries, in the last two years. These included:
Yesterday, the Defence Secretary announced an increase in our contribution to NATO, boosting our collective defence in response to Putin’s barbaric invasion of Ukraine.
Today, the Prime Minister announced a further £1 billion military support package to Ukraine, sustaining Ukraine’s brave resistance to Putin’s invasion.
I am glad that Sweden, Finland and Turkey have been able to reach an honourable compromise which enables Turkey to drop its opposition to the two baltic countries becoming NATO members.
As I know from personal experience, Turkey has a genuine problem with some Kurds who have adopted terrorist tactics, though it is equally important not to label every Kurd who disagrees with the Erdogan administration as a terrorist - which Ankara has been accused of doing and not entirely without justice.
On 4th of November 1993 I was having a work discussion over a coffee in the 8th floor restaurant in a BT office block at 2-12 Gresham Street with another BT manager - who had previously been a Fine Gail member of the European Parliament and went on to have a third career as an academic - when the fire alarm went and we had to evacuate the building along with about 800 other employees.
What turned out to have happened is that we nearly became "collateral damage" in a co-ordinated series of terrorist attacks on Turkish targets throughout Europe.
A group of Kurdish terrorists had thrown a couple of improvised Molotov Cocktails through the ground floor windows of the building, almost certainly in the belief that they were attacking the Turkish bank to which part of the ground floor of the ten-story office block was had been leased.
Their escape plan being as incompetent as their selection of target, the wannabee terrorists ran off down the opposite road which took them right past the local police station, and a few minutes later they were guests of Her Majesty.
Had they been as harmless at making improvised explosive devices as they were inept in some other aspects of their attack the whole thing would have been extremely funny, but their bombs proved all too dangerous. Five BT employees were injured and taken to hospital, including a building inspector who was actually hit by one of the IEDs, covered in burning fuel and quite seriously burned.
This was one of five firebomb attacks in London, clearly co-ordinated with similar terrorist attacks on Turkish targets in Germany, Austria, Denmark, France and Switzerland on the same day which in total caused one death and at least sixteen injuries, some serious.
Most BT buildings have emergency generators to enable the company to maintain telephone service in the event of a power cut, with fuel, and many BT offices in that decade had stationary stores with large stocks of paper forms. It was bad enough that these Molotov Cocktails hurt five human beings: if they had landed in a stationary store or started a conflagration which ignited the fuel for the building's emergency generator, one can easily envisage the possibility of a very serious incident in which I, and hundreds of other people, could have found ourselves on the upper floors of a ten-story blazing building.
The attacks were blamed on the Kurdistan Workers party or PKK: it is beyond doubt that some Kurdish terror cell mounted a wave of potentially lethal attacks on civilian Turkish targets in several of the major financial centres of Europe which did kill one person and could easily have killed scores if not hundreds of innocent people, in which category I put both their Turkish targets and citizens of the the countries where the attacks took place.
It is probably obvious that even now, nearly thirty years later, I still have strong opinions about this attack, and I fully understand why successive Turkish governments argue that they have a genuine security problem with some Kurdish groups.
It is equally true that the Turkish regime has a bad record of accusing any Kurdish person whose views or actions they find inconvenient of being associated with terrorist groups. The fact that there are real terrorists does not make it fair or just to accuse every dissident from the same ethnic group as the real terrorists of being one, and some - not all - such accusations have almost certainly been unjustified.
It is important to target our indignation and any actions we may agree to take on the real terrorists, and not on peaceful opponents of the Turkish regime - or, for that matter, Kurds in Iraq and Syria who have fought with the West against the terrorists of DA'ESH.
Looking at the Tripartite Agreement which has been signed between Sweden, Finland and Turkey, it is clear that it will strengthen co-operation against the PKK and other real terrorists, but I cannot see anything in the agreement which would oblige the Swedes or Finns to take action against someone who had merely expressed an opinion which Ankara didn't like.
This clears the way to these two countries joining NATO as their populations wish.
Putin and his sycophants in the West may describe this enlargement of NATO as aggression but anyone with a working brain knows that it is nothing of the kind. Sweden and Finland are not joining the alliance because NATO has put pressure on them, but because Putin has. The Russian regime's repeated attacks on peaceful neighbours have proved that as long as Putin or anyone like him runs the Russian Federation it is and will remain a danger to every country in the vicinity whether they do anything to provoke him or not.
Finland and Sweden are joining NATO because that is what their people want and because of Russian aggression, not NATO aggression.
The NHS is a federation rather than a unified body to a far greater extent than is sometimes realised and some trusts have embraced new technology to a greater extent than others.
We are badly behind on some aspects of digital healthcare in Cumbria and I have been making a fuss about this since I was appointed to Cumbria Health Scrutiny committee.
It would be churlish and unfair to deny that there has been progress but we STILL have the position where trolley-loads of hard copy patient records are being wheeled round hospitals like West Cumberland hospital, a fortune is spent driving these hard copy records around Cumbria to and from storage and highly-paid medical professionals are spending some of their priceless and scarce time logging them in and out.
So I welcome the fact that the government is still working on their strategy for better use of patient data and making more use of digital solutions to offer better service to patients, as indicated when today the government announced the latest stage of the Plan for Digital Health and Social Care, using technology to free up hospital capacity and bust the Covid backlogs.
The UK government has today confirmed a £1 billion investment to upgrade our railway infrastructure, reducing delays and delivering more regular services for millions of passengers.
Today the Prime Minister calls on our NATO allies to invest more in defence, helping to protect us all from the evolving threats that we face in the decade ahead.
Yes, Steve Bray is an annoying berk.
(He's the nutter who dresses up in an EU cape and hat and shouts rude things through megaphones outside parliament and Conservative conferences.)
He's also part of the great British tradition of people who think something is wrong making a nuisance of themselves by shouting about it.
If he started behaving in a threatening way, the police should, and I think would, take action. But I have never seen him do that.
If he started shouting at people's kids outside their houses, or using his megaphone in a residential area in the evening or at night, that would be harassment and it would be right to take action, but to the best of my knowledge he hasn't done that either.
I'm not convinced that taking his amplification equipment off him is proportionate or reasonable or that this was the intention of the Police, Sentencing and the Courts act which came into force yesterday and the vast majority of which, such as mandatory life sentences for those who kill a police officer or emergency services worker, whole life orders for the pre-meditated murder of a child, and ending the early release of those who are still a danger to the public, I welcome.
Let's not make the odious little twerp into a martyr. Leave him alone.
Yesterday's front page headline from "The National" which is a pro-independence newspaper in Scotland:
I agree. The will of the Scotland's people, who voted by 55% to 45% that Scotland should remain part of the UK in what both sides agreed was a once-in-a-generation vote, should prevail.
So should the wishes of the Scottish people about whether there should be another referendum: an opinion poll in the Daily Record suggests that 60% of scots do NOT want another Independence referendum before the end of next year, against just 29% who do.
As far back as when I was a boy I recall my late mother saying that many of the things which happen in America seem to find their way to Britain sooner or later. I have read or heard the same thing since then many times from many other people.
And sometimes it is true, as with many aspects of the so-called "Culture wars."
But it is not always inevitable, and indeed the differences between ourselves and our cousins over the pond sometimes make it extremely unlikely. Indeed, when we import arguments from the "Culture Wars" of the United States of America to Britain we may find ourselves fighting arguments which are almost entirely irrelevant to the situation here.
Dominic Sandbrook has written on the excellent Unherd website a counterblast to those who keep importing arguments from the United States called
"Stop Pretending Britain is America"
which makes some very important points about the differences between our two countries.
The idea that anything like the overturn of Roe v. Wade could happen in Britain is just daft. Not least because we actually write things we want to be legal or constitutional rights into law rather than have courts create them.
When in the late 60's there was a majority view in Britain that abortion should in many circumstances be legal an MP who was then a backbencher - many people reading this will have heard of him, his name was David Steel - proposed what became the 1967 Abortion act and parliament passed it. This is how most democratic countries change the law, and although the exact details may be amended from time to time as medical technology and society changes, I confidently predict that this act will not be repealed in my lifetime or my children's lifetime.
But in America both sides of the abortion debate have in turn created and removed constitutional and legal rights through a court which in every other democracy would have been addressed by writing them into the constitution, the national law, or both.
In the "Roe v. Wade" decision, instead of creating a constitutional right to an abortion by writing it into the constitution, the US created one because the Supreme Court ruled that the "due process" clause of the 14th amendment to the US constitution, which says this ...
... conferred a right to privacy and in turn that this right to privacy over-rode the right of states to make laws imposing extreme restrictions on abortion.
This month, after working towards that end for fifty years, the opponents of that decision finally managed to persuade the present Supreme Court to overturn it.
One of the many ironies of this situation is that both sides appear to be perfectly happy to have an unelected court create or destroy constitutional rights, over-riding the ability of elected legislative bodies to make law in the process, when they like the decision and regard it as an absolute outrage when the same unelected court uses the same power to make an opposite decision which they don't like.
This is very important in the USA, and if I lived there I would probably have a lot more to say about it, but no sudden swing anything like this extreme could happen in Britain where instead of our law on abortion having been created by a court, it was passed by parliament in 1967, and only about 2% of our electorate want to repeal that law and make abortion illegal.
There are many other aspects of the situation in the USA which simply do not translate well on this side of the pond.
As Sandbrook writes in response to those who suggest that the British Conservatives will follow where the US republicans are leading,
"If you’re hoping to win selection for a safe Tory seat by talking about ending abortion, outlawing socialised medicine and encouraging the high-street sales of automatic weapons, then I’ve got a nice padded cell for you."
He adds, in response to those who are suggesting that the repeal of Roe v. Wade could happen here:
"Well, I suppose it’s just possible that in the next few years we could completely change our political system, radically reshape the relationship between the executive, the legislature and the judiciary, adopt a version of the US Constitution, develop a deeply religious political culture and set up a fervent anti-abortion movement — all of which would be the cue for our own Supreme Court to hand down a judgement allowing individual counties (Dorset? Wiltshire?) to outlaw abortion. Yes, I suppose it’s possible. It’s certainly no more implausible than a major British political party campaigning to throw out the 1967 Abortion Act — another thing that is clearly never going to happen."
and concludes
"Britain isn’t America. Why would we want to import their hysterical tone? We have plenty of issues of our own, of course; but they’re ours, not theirs. Our race relations aren’t perfect, but they’re among the very best in Europe, not that you’d know it from much of the media. Boris Johnson really, really isn’t a fascist, and the worst thing you can say about Keir Starmer is that he’s incredibly boring. And yes, we do take “the right to abortion, contraception, gay rights and same-sex marriage” for granted. But why wouldn’t we? Who’s threatening them? Does anybody seriously think Boris Johnson, of all people, is going to abolish contraception?"
You can read Dominic Sandbrook's piece in full at Stop pretending Britain is America - UnHerd
This week landmark reforms within the Police, Crime, Sentencing, and Courts Act come into effect – protecting the public and making our streets safer.
The cancer campaigner Dame Deborah James, A.K.A. "Bowel Babe" has died at the age of 49 from her bowel cancer, leaving a widower and two children.
She had spent the last five years of her life raising money and awareness of cancer, spreading messages like "Check your poo" - the sort of thing people didn't say in the past because it sounds a bit rude but the sooner you detect things like bowel cancer the better your chance of a less damaging outcome.
There have been many tributes including this one from the Prime Minister:
"I’m terribly saddened to hear that Dame Deborah James has died. What an inspiration she was to so many.
The awareness she brought to bowel cancer and the research her campaigning has funded will be her enduring legacy.
Because of her, many many lives will be saved."
Rest in Peace.
The tragedy at Grenfell shows how much we need to improve Britain's building safety regime and that this is a long standing problem for which governments and councils of all parties have to take responsibility.
But it is now being addressed and from today reforms within the Building Safety Act come into effect – protecting leaseholders from unfair bills as we remove dangerous cladding from buildings.
Today the British government has announced new measures to support Ukrainian scientists and researchers, helping the best and brightest to continue their work in the UK as we stand up against Putin’s barbaric invasion.
At the G7 summit (above), the Prime Minister called on world leaders to take vital and urgent action to get essential goods and supplies out of Ukraine – ending Putin’s stranglehold on food prices and making life easier for households across the world.
The UK government has announced £25 million of UK aid to help prevent and prepare for future pandemics, using the lessons of Covid to protect future generations in years to come.
At the G7 meeting it was announced that there will be a ban on all new Russian gold imports, as we ratchet up the pressure on Putin’s war machine.
In the 20th century there were repeated attempts to use lighter-than-air flight, which were not entirely without success, but the technology of the early and middle years of that century was not up to operating lighter-than-air vehicles larger than a blimp to the safety standards civil society would demand, while there were few military applications as airships proved hideously vulnerable to fixed-wing aircraft.
Over the last forty years, the excellent safety record of more recent airships and blimps have demonstrated that the original safety problems have been overcome, but the huge energy advantage enjoyed by lighter-than-air vessels - the fact that they do not have to use vast amounts of energy and generate a huge carbon footprint just to stay in the air - was not enough to offset the greater speed and flexibility of fixed-wing and rotary-wing heavier-than-air planes and helicopters. Hence airships and blimps have accounted only for a very small part of the aircraft we use.
However, with the increased price of fuel and the need to dramatically reduce carbon footprints, that equation is changing. And Britain may be at the forefront of a new era of lighter-than-air freight and travel.
The Airlander 10, built by Bedfordshire-based Hybrid Air Vehicles (HAV), has already landed a first-of-its-kind contract with Spanish airline Air Nostrum for 10 airships, which will be manufactured in South Yorkshire. These are expected to be in service providing regional air transport in Spain by 2026. The contract will bring with it 1,800 jobs and is supported as part of the Government's Northern Powerhouse strategy.
Designers say the Airlander's low-carbon output and ability to land on any stretch of relatively flat land will give it some very considerable advantages over conventional airliners.
Measuring 300ft in length, it will be the world's largest aircraft, and will be able to accommodate 100 passengers in a cabin much more spacious and less cramped than those of conventional airliners.
But HAV's real selling point is the Airlander's carbon footprint - as I understand it, this aircraft is expected to emit only 10 per cent of the greenhouse gas output per passenger mile of heavier conventional aircraft, at about 4.5kg per passenger per flight, compared with about 53kg per passenger on a jet plane.
By 2030, it is planned that the Airlander will use only electric engines and its operating carbon footprint will be zero provided it is using clean electricity.
Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng said at the weekend:
"Our aerospace sector is one of the crown jewels of the British economy and our well-earned reputation as a global centre of excellence for design and production has meant the world has come to us for the most innovative technology.
"Hybrid Air Vehicles ' airship will create high-skilled jobs as we build on our powerhouse export economy to showcase the UK's talented workforce globally."
The UK government has today announced some of the strongest safety measures in the world for medical devices, protecting patients and letting them access new treatments more quickly.
Whichever way you voted in the EU membership referendum, the majority of those who voted opted to leave, and Britain having done so, it would be stupid not to take advantage of the positive opportunities that gives us to set standards tailored to Britain's needs,
Setting our own standards does not have to mean a race to the bottom: it can and sometimes should mean setting higher standards than the EU.
An example is medical equipment safety standards, which can and should be set even higher as we learn lessons from the pandemic and from other recent events and learning in the field of medicine.
The UK government has announced a further £217 million for three major education projects across the Commonwealth, as we lead the way on championing girl’s education.
Today, the Prime Minister is attending the first in-person G7 summit since Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and calling on our allies to keep up their resolve on support for Ukraine.
This week the government moved forward on helping people to own their own home, lauching the latest phase of the Help to Build scheme, creating new jobs, supporting the construction industry, and giving thousands of families the opportunity to build their own home.
This week the Prime Minister met with the President of Nigeria, setting out our plans to boost economic ties and cooperation between the UK and Nigeria on energy supplies and clean technology.
The results in the Tiverton and Honiton and Wakefield by-elections were disappointing, and nobody in the Conservative party is pretending otherwise. I went to Wakefield twice and also took part in telephone canvassing. We had excellent candidates in both seats but there was clearly a lot of discontent, particularly in respect of the cost of living but about a number of other issues too, and we clearly need to learn from this.
This week the UK government committed £372 million of support for countries on the food security frontline, helping those countries hit hardest by rising global food costs including many Commonwealth states.