As we reported earlier, Ed Davey gave a significant speech today, and here is the full text.
This year, we will celebrate eighty years since the end of the Second World War.
Eighty years since Britain and her allies defeated the Nazis.
Ended the Holocaust and liberated the concentration camps.
Brought peace to Europe.
One of our country’s finest hours.
We led the world – not just in standing up to Hitler and winning the war, but in building what came next.
Creating new forums to foster peace and uphold human rights:
The United Nations, led at its birth by the British Liberal Gladwyn Jebb.
NATO, driven by Labour’s Ernest Bevin and led by its first Secretary General: the British General Lord Ismay.
The European Convention on Human Rights, drafted by the Conservative Sir David Maxwell Fyfe.
And new forums for trade and economic cooperation, forged at Bretton Woods where that great British Liberal, John Maynard Keynes, played such a crucial role.
Ambitiously designed not just to rebuild after years of destruction, but also to prevent the tit-for-tat trade barriers and nationalist, protectionist economic policies that had caused so much hardship and ultimately led to war.
Now, some of those institutions have been more successful than others. Some have withstood the test of time well, some less so.
But the point is this: When the world was in crisis, fragile and fearful, Britain took the lead, working with others to create a new order of things.
Recognising that the concerns of one nation inevitably become the concerns of all nations…
And guided by our fundamental British values of democracy, liberty and respect for the rule of law, we stepped up.
Amidst the rubble of war, in the shadow of the Holocaust, and with the new spectre of nuclear weapons, British leadership offered real hope.
And despite all the challenges that have followed – all the trials and tribulations of the past eighty years – there is no doubt that the world has been better for it.
More peaceful and more prosperous than it would have been without Britain’s leadership.
The United Kingdom, standing tall in the world. Championing our values. Working together with others. A powerful force for good.
That is what the world needed eighty years ago. And it is what the world needs so badly again now.
Because the world feels very fragile right now, doesn’t it?
In Eastern Europe, where Vladimir Putin continues to murder Ukrainian civilians and destroy their homes.
And where he is trying to extend his grip into Georgia, Moldova and Romania too.
Across the Middle East, where we have seen so much appalling death and destruction.
Where – despite the welcome news of a ceasefire – Palestinians in Gaza still face a humanitarian crisis. Where Hamas still holds innocent people hostage.
And where we still have a long road towards a lasting peace.
In Sudan, where tens of thousands have been slaughtered and twelve million forced to flee their homes.
Where the reports of mass killings and horrifying sexual violence against women are stomach-churning.
And from devastating wildfires in Los Angeles –
To horrifying floods in Valencia –
To catastrophic typhoons in the Pacific –
We see the terrible effects of climate change all around us.
And we see the impact of it all here in the United Kingdom too.
From the refugee crisis on our shores, to the rising food prices in our shops, to the sky-high cost of heating our homes.
The concerns of one nation inevitably become the concerns of all nations.
So much instability and insecurity. So many challenges facing our country and our planet.
And all of these challenges are about to be made much tougher, when President Trump is sworn in on Monday.
Because the truth is, while British leadership helped to shape so many of those crucial post-war creations – the UN, NATO and the rest.
They were also built on the fundamental assumption that the United States – the world’s largest economy and its most powerful military force – could be relied upon to play by the rules and uphold the agreements we forged.
And whatever else you might say about Donald Trump, it is clear he cannot be relied upon to play by the rules or stick to international agreements.
On Monday, he will become the first convicted criminal to take the oath of office.
And this is the President who, in his first term, withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement, the Iran Nuclear Deal and the UN Human Rights Council.
And who started the process of withdrawing from the World Health Organization – something he reportedly plans to finish this time around.
So much for “The Art of the Deal”. More like the art of breaking the deal.
More dangerously, this is the man who has praised Putin’s invasion of Ukraine as “genius”, and said he would encourage Russia to do “whatever the hell they want” to NATO allies.
The man who has even refused to rule out invading a NATO ally himself.
The man who says “trade wars are good”, and proudly calls himself “tariff man”.
When he was last in the White House, President Trump hit our economy with tariffs on British steel and Scotch whisky.
This time, he’s threatening to go even further.
So the reality is, unfortunately, very clear. The incoming Trump Administration is a threat to peace and prosperity in the UK, across Europe, and around the world.
For the next four years, the UK cannot depend on the President of the United States to be a reliable partner on security, defence or the economy.
With Donald Trump as unpredictable as he is, we cannot leave the destiny of the free world in his hands alone. Other democracies must step up, and the UK must help lead that effort.
Whether it is supporting Ukraine as it resists Putin’s war machine, securing lasting peace in the Middle East, tackling climate change, or promoting free and fair trade to grow our economies…
The UK must once again stand tall, leading on the world stage and working closely with those who share our interests – including, above all, our partners in Europe.
We cannot simply rely on the US to be there, as we too often have done in the past.
But let us also be clear: nor can we simply ignore Donald Trump or the United States for the next four years.
The US will still be the world’s largest economy. It will still spend more on its military than any other country.
And it will still be our biggest trading partner after the European Union.
So the question is not whether we deal with Donald Trump. We have to. The question is how.
How we deal with The Donald.
And the answer cannot be to do what some – like Kemi Badenoch – would have us do:
Approach Trump from a position of weakness. Go to him cap in hand and beg for whatever trade deal he’ll give us. In the hope of avoiding the worst of his tariffs.
Nor can we take the Farage approach of fawning over Trump and licking his boots. Seemingly more interested in advancing Trump’s agenda over here than the UK’s interests over there.
Neither of those is the way to get a good deal for Britain. Neither is the way to get Trump to take us seriously.
Just look at what The Donald says in his famous book, The Art of the Deal:
“The worst thing you can possibly do in a deal is seem desperate to make it. That makes the other guy smell blood, and then you’re dead.
“The best thing you can do is deal from strength”.
If we seem as weak or as desperate as the Conservatives or Reform would have us appear, Trump will treat the UK the same way he has treated so many throughout his career.
The Trump-led trade deal that the Conservatives would have us meekly accept would allow big American firms to buy up our NHS, or indeed to undercut responsible British farmers with lower animal welfare and environmental standards –
Just like the farmer-betraying trade deals the Conservatives signed with Australia and New Zealand in the last Parliament.
And in reality it wouldn’t even protect us from Trump imposing outrageous tariffs on the UK if he feels like it.
Because he has repeatedly shown himself to be so unpredictable, and so willing to break America’s deals if he decides they aren’t working for him anymore.
So how do we deal with Trump from strength?
How do we maximise our influence on his administration, to try and prevent the worst fears of a Trump presidency becoming reality –
Whether it’s handing Vladimir Putin victory in Ukraine, rolling back the progress we’ve made on climate change, or plunging the world into a destructive trade war?
The answer is to show we are not so reliant on the United States. That the UK has alternatives, and won’t be bullied into taking whatever Trump offers us.
And we do that by urgently strengthening our relationships with the UK’s other partners –
Whether that be Commonwealth nations like Canada or India, also figuring out how to deal with Trump –
Or, most importantly, our European neighbours, whose economic and security interests are so closely intertwined with ours.
I am not going to pretend this will be easy. We have looked on with justified horror at the rise of far-right parties in many EU countries, like France and Italy, Austria and Germany, Hungary and the Netherlands.
Some of those countries are led by people whose values we find as objectionable as Trump’s – perhaps even more so. And other countries may soon join them.
But that doesn’t change the fundamental fact that we and our European partners have closely shared interests when it comes to our economies and our national security.
We are neighbours.
An emboldened Putin is a direct threat to us all in Europe.
A Trump trade war will mean hardship and misery for all our people, across Europe.
So we must work together to prevent it. To deal with Trump together, from a position of maximum combined strength.
And to make Europe more secure in its own right, at a time when we can no longer rely on America to help us secure it.
Now, there may be some who scoff at the idea of Britain leading beyond our shores, after all the damage the Conservative Party did to our reputation on the world stage and our relationship with Europe.
But when you look at the crises engulfing capitals across the continent, I have no doubt that the prospect of renewed UK leadership – from a government truly committed to cooperation – would be heartily welcomed.
After all, if we don’t show that leadership, who will?
But there is a lot of work to do, after the Conservatives spent years cutting ties of trade, trust and cooperation, and sowing bitterness and hostility instead.
The Prime Minister has at least recognised the need to reset our relationship with the EU.
But so far, I’m afraid, that only seems to amount to saying “No” more politely than the Conservatives.
The UK must be far more positive, far more ambitious, and act with far more urgency.
That is why, today, I am calling on the Government to negotiate this year a brand-new deal with the EU.
Not just tinkering around the edges of the botched deal the Conservatives signed four years ago –
But negotiating a better deal for Britain, that has at its heart a new UK-EU Customs Union, to come into force by twenty-thirty at the latest.
Forming a Customs Union with the EU is not only the single biggest thing we can do to turbocharge our economy in the medium and long term,
But an agreement to work towards one will unlock big economic benefits for the UK now.
We can start tearing down those Conservative trade barriers this year…
Ripping up the expensive red tape that is holding back British firms – especially small businesses – from selling into Europe, costing our economy billions in lost exports.
This isn’t just a plan to deal with Trump, it’s a growth plan for our country – and how badly we need one of those.
And this new deal should include a reciprocal Youth Mobility Scheme –
Giving our young people incredible new opportunities to live, work and travel across Europe,
While also boosting British employers by helping them recruit the workers they need – especially in hospitality, construction, the creative industries and care, where they are desperately needed.
It would be a win-win for our country, and I still can’t understand why the Government continues to rule it out.
Let me give you one other, small but important example of the enormous benefits to be gained from a new, more positive and ambitious approach to Europe.
It involves a constituent of mine who runs a new air cargo firm.
Now in its second year, the business is expanding. They’ve just added a third Boeing seven-four-seven to their fleet.
Exactly the sort of growing British start-up that will grow our economy and create jobs.
But he explained how it is being hurt badly by new rules that make no sense.
Rules that mean they can’t have repair work done in Europe, apart from the one German workshop that is recognised by the UK.
So last year they had to fly twice to the US just to get their planes serviced, at a cost of four-hundred-thousand pounds a time, and who knows how many pointless carbon emissions.
Why don’t we let European engineers service those planes?
And why are we wasting time and money on a completely separate regulatory regime for aviation – for an industry that by its very nature works across borders?
We can get rid of that ridiculous red tape – and so much more like it – if we are part of bodies like the EU Aviation Safety Agency…
And if we negotiate mutual recognition of qualifications for engineers, for flight crew, and for other professionals from doctors and dentists to actuaries and accountants.
Those are benefits we can secure now, before we form a UK-EU Customs Union –
But by making that our explicit goal by twenty-thirty, by starting the work towards it now, we can make it so much easier to negotiate so many other economic and social benefits.
We can rebuild our crucial relationship with Europe so much faster.
And this isn’t just about economic security. It’s about defending our democracies from the threat of Vladimir Putin – and anyone else who would seek to trample on our sovereignty.
With Trump coming into office, European nations must be ready to step up our support for Ukraine if America steps back.
And at the same time, we must try and influence the Trump administration to do the right thing too.
On defence, as on trade, we have no choice but to deal with The Donald – from a position of strength, not weakness, and with our eyes wide open to the kind of man he is.
He’s transactional, so let’s treat him that way.
The good news is, we have leverage. We have something Trump desperately wants: a state visit. The pageantry at Buckingham Palace. A banquet with the King.
We all know he craves it. So I say we give it to him. But only if he delivers what we need first, for Britain and Europe’s defence and security.
And that is this:
President Trump must sit down with President Zelenskyy and other European leaders – in a summit convened by the UK.
To agree how we collectively use the hundreds of billions of dollars, pounds and Euros of frozen Russian assets to pay for the weapons Ukraine needs to win the war and beat Putin.
To put it in Donald Trump’s language: we are going to protect Ukraine and we are going to make Russia pay for it.
And if Trump delivers on that deal, pushing the necessary measures through Congress…
Then, and only then, do we roll out the red carpet for a state visit.
Just think of it. Britain, leading again on the world stage.
Working together with our partners in Europe and beyond. For defence, security and economic prosperity.
Just like we did eighty years ago.
That is how we can protect our economy from whatever Trump decides to do.
That is how we can defend European security – with or without his help.
That is how we can deal with President Trump from a position of strength, not weakness.
And that is how the UK can once again offer real hope in turbulent times.
Thank you.
20 Comments
In his Financial Times Politics newsletter this morning, based on the advance copy of Ed’s speech, Stephen Bush was very complimentary about Ed’s strategic positioning.
He pointed out that koining the EU Customs Union is a policy which:
– empahises our credentials as the most pro-EU party.
– will appeal to Lib Dem members
– cannot be echoed by the Conservative Party for obvious reasons
– cannot be echoed by the Labour Party because they have strong self-imposed constraints about the EU.
– whose benefits can be immediately seen by ordinary British citizens.
A splendidly vigorous and broad-ranging speech from Ed which we hope will be well reported. It is to be hoped also that Federal Policy Committee will be bringing his idea of a NEW Customs Union between Britain and the EU forward in a motion for our March Federal Conference in Harrogate for party members to debate and approve if we will, policy-making being of course members’ prerogative.
This is a fine speech, marching toward the sound of gunfire. The reference to the Commonwealth is good too.
Poor old Charles though – the bait to get Trump to agree. Still, that’s his job.
The vast majority of voters are preoccupied with meat and potato issues. NHS, immigration, crime, cost of living etc. Conflicts abroad don’t tend to resonate. Closer ties with the EU will never be a cure for our ills, it won’t now, and didn’t prior to us leaving. Listening to Ed’s very descriptive and blunt assessment of Russian involvement in Eastern Ukrainian, was in stark contrast to a fleeting mention of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Gaza will remain a stain on Liberal Western Governments for decades to come.
Craig Levene, I agree “meat and potato” issues matter immensely to people, but closer ties with the EU and helping solve international issues play a part in that. I agree also your comment that “Gaza will remain a stain on Liberal Western Governments for decades to come”.
I hope Ed will give another major speech reminding people that international relations play a part in our economic wellbeing, but focussing on the inequalities, poor productivity, need for better quality education for life (not just exam results), local government and restorative justice to reduce crime further.
I meant, alongside my critical comments, also to say that within its inevitably limited range of topics it is a very good speech, especially about the EU. I must add another question though. It might be worth a try, but does he really think we alone can influence Trump to help Ukraine before meeting our King?
And was followed up by an interview with Ed on Breakfast on BBC 1.
@ Tristan Ward, “This is a fine speech, marching toward the sound of gunfire”.
As somebody who was present in the Hall and actually heard Jo Grimond’s Gunfire speech, I may have a bit of an advantage over Tristan.
I’d say Sir Edward’s speech was competent, if somewhat overdue, but my gentle message to Tristan is that it’s a mistake to compare the present Manchester United forward line with the ‘Best, Law & Charlton’ that some of us can remember.
@David Raw
I suppose some may yearn for the good old days when we only had 6 or 12 MPs – I remember them – but I prefer 50 plus and the chance of more liberals in power making more decisions that affect people’s lives for the better.
My point is that Ed Davey is talking about the things that matter – which was of course what Grimond was trying to do in 1963. There’s a chance that by attacking Farage and Badenoch in the way Davey did and drawing attention to their potential appeasement of Putin and Trump that people will start to understand the risks they pose to the liberal and democratic way of doing things.
And maybe we and Ed Davey will get a bit more of the publicity he and the Lib Dems deserve.
Positive from the Guardia today:
Sir Ed Davey, called for Britain to join the customs union by 2030 as part of a larger deal with Europe. This was a genuinely significant speech, the first by any major UK party leader on Europe since the general election to be forward-looking and to put detail on the otherwise vague language of “reset”.
I mentioned Denis Law during an earlier response to Mr. Ward.
I have known Denis since his teenage years at Huddersfield and have just heard that he died today. I am so very sorry to hear this. A very great footballer, and a very great human being. I hope I will be allowed to say, R.I.P.
David Raw – please help me with this. I asked my Mum (born 1943) the other day why Grimond cut through to the mainstream. She said that in the 50s he was on a regular discussion programme with Bob Boothby? AJP Taylor? and others. He was so charismatic he practically burned the tube out of their telly. What was the programme? Do you know? Not a quiz question. I really want to know. I can’t trace it.
@ Ruth Clark Good to read your post, Ruth.
You have touched on one of Jo’s great abilities, Ruth. He had a great command of TV where he was calm, persuasive and charismatic. On the platform he had a towering presence and could rouse any audience….. not just about marching to the sound of gunfire…… and it wasn’t just Liberals that said that. Here’s a sample on You Tube.
Never had it so good: Press conference (Jo Grimond)
http://www.youtube.com › watch
31:33
Leader of the Liberal Party Jo Grimond takes his turn to appear before three journalists. Questioning him are Sydney Jacobson (political …
YouTube · David Boothroyd · 23 Jan 2023
You could also ask William Wallace who used to write some of Jo’s speeches during my time working at LPO. Jo didn’t need gimmicks. He was a modern man with modern ideas.
Ruth, I can’t recall the name either. I was lucky enough to see Jo speak, he was a very handsome man, with a strong physical presence . Charismatic indeed.
@Ruth Clark – I wonder if your mother was thinking of The Brains Trust? But it seems Jo Grimond was only on once. See https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0276652/fullcredits/cast
@ Mary Reid. Wow, what a cast, Mary. Grown up serious politics.
Might it be that part of Mr Grimond’s considerably effective appeal lay in his presenting a political party which offered a radically different approach from the others?
Might it also be that our current leadership is disadvantaged by offering no really different approach from the other two main parties. Such could be a “Mixed Economy”.which offers appropriate, dynamic and (cooperatively) competing private and State inputs.
Currently, might the L Ds seem to offer only minor modifications of obviously failing Neoliberalism?
Thanks all. Much appreciated xx
@ Steve Trevethan It’s not a question of might it be, Mr Trevethan, it’s more a question of fact. Possibly only those of us who witnessed that sort of grown up Leadership and charisma at the time – and look in vain for it now – can vouch for it.
Steve Trevethan Might it be that part of Jo Grimmonds appeal waspresenting a political party which was radically different .
How true resting on our laurels with new leadership on the right of politics and a weak centralist Labour party means that we need to move forward with a new and more robust liberal message that will catch the imagination of the electorate. our recently elected MPs have sounded good and an improvement on the old guard perhaps the” New Liberals” are developing fresh messages and should be encouraged .