Nick Clegg spoke to the British Chambers of Commerce conference in central London today. He spoke about creating opportunities for women, about the Liberal Democrats’ role in bringing about the recovery and about our plans for the future to boost business and the economy. Questioned afterwards, he also added that he wanted to see much more help for childcare in the future. Here is his speech in full:
British businesses have led an extraordinary success story over the last five years. And you have done so in extremely difficult circumstances.
We have one of the fastest growing economies in the developed world.
We now have more people in work than ever before.
We have more women in work than ever before.
A record 2m people have started apprenticeships.
Unemployment, and youth unemployment in particular, is falling and shows every sign of continuing to do so.
And all this in the wake of the biggest shock to our economy in generations, while uncertainty and instability has gripped our biggest export market – the Eurozone.
The most important thing a government can provide for businesses is stability and just a few short years ago that was far from guaranteed.
Cast your minds back to the turbulent days of spring 2010.
The aftershocks of the financial collapse of 2008 were still shuddering through our economy.
No one knew where the next shock would come from and where it would lead.
While British voters were heading to the polls, images of riots on the streets of Athens were beamed into British homes.
Five years on it seems hard to believe, but we could have been Greece. In 2010, their deficit was 11% of GDP, ours was 10%.
As the Greek economy fell of a cliff, ours teetered on the edge.
It could have been us, but it wasn’t because we took the decision to form a new kind of Government: a strong, stable coalition government capable of rescuing the economy.
The recovery that we – government and business – have achieved since then was not inevitable.
It is because British businesses invested, expanded and created jobs.
And it is because the coalition took the difficult decisions necessary to get our finances back under control and provided a bedrock of consistent, stable government, that we have turned the economy around.
But the repair job is not finished. Now is not the time to veer off from the sensible, balanced approach we have taken.
Yet, as the election approaches, that is what both Labour and the Conservatives propose to do.
So forgive me if I say a few words about the political choices which face the country at the General Election in May.
There are big differences between the political parties which could have a big impact on the British economy, on your business, on the economic fortunes of our country.
Labour has no coherent economic plan.
Despite paying lip service to the need for deficit reduction, they have not given any indication how they intend to do it.
A Labour majority government would borrow billions more and put our stability and our recovery at risk.
And the Conservatives, despite claiming they will ‘stick to the plan’, are actually proposing to veer away sharply from it.
They propose huge cuts to public spending, far beyond what is needed to balance the books, not because they are necessary but because they see an ideological opportunity to shrink the state.
The last thing Britain needs is the shock of a lurch to the left or right.
Only the Liberal Democrats can keep the government in the centre ground and ensure we secure our economic recovery, finishing the job but finishing it fairly.
Liberal Democrats will borrow less than Labour and cut less than the Conservatives.
What Britain needs right now, what businesses need right now, is stability. We must not take that for granted.
The risk of instability is not just about what happens at home but also about the decisions we take on Europe and the world too.
I believe this endless hokey-cokey about whether or not we stay in the EU is destabilising for British business.
My party’s view is clear. Yes to a referendum if and when the rules of the game change.
In other words, when there is a new EU treaty.
But I don’t believe the timing of such a momentous decision, which could potentially jeopardise millions of jobs in our country, should be determined by the domestic political needs of one party in Westminster.
Of course the EU is not perfect. We will always make the case for reform so that the EU works better for British business and British citizens.
But we should at all times be unambiguous that Britain is better off as a member of the world’s biggest borderless single market.
The early 21st century has been a time of great innovation and upheaval.
As a party that seeks to spread opportunity, the Liberal Democrats will always face change with a spirit of optimism, innovation and endeavour.
That’s why, while bringing stability and recovery was always our number one priority, this was always about more than just returning to business as usual.
We knew that if we wanted an economy that created opportunities for everyone that we would need to fundamentally rebalance it, away from its over-reliance on the financial sector in the City of London and towards skills, enterprise and growth in cities and towns across the whole United Kingdom.
That meant a step change in skills investment, leading to the creation of 2m apprenticeships.
It meant freeing up local areas from the grip of Whitehall through the Regional Growth Fund, City Deals and Local Growth Deals.
And it meant supporting start-up companies, small businesses and green, high-tech manufacturers through the British Business Bank and the Green Investment Bank.
That work has only just started. Creating a strong, liberal and open economy in which business and entrepreneurship can thrive is vital to the future prosperity of our country.
That means securing the recovery, finishing the job of deficit reduction, in full and on time, but doing so fairly.
A stable, centre-ground approach that balances the books and, once the deficit is cleared, allows us to start to bring down the national debt and invest again in our world class public services.
That stable foundation is the platform on which we will build the strong, modern and innovative economy Britain needs to compete in the 21st century.
We will build on the success of the Regional Growth Fund, which is on track to deliver more than half a million jobs and £16bn of private investment, continuing to invest in it throughout the Parliament.
We will continue to develop our Industrial Strategy, working with key sectors which are critical to Britain’s ability to trade internationally – such as the automotive industry, aerospace, and low-carbon energy.
We will invest in major transport improvements and infrastructure to create a ‘Northern Economic Corridor’ to drive growth, innovation and prosperity across northern England.
And we will continue to reform business tax to make sure it stays competitive, making small and medium-sized enterprises the priority for any business tax cuts.
Liberal Democrats believe, above all else, in creating opportunities for people to get on and reach their potential, regardless of the circumstances of their birth.
When we see barriers, we want them torn down.
When we find glass ceilings, we want them broken.
When we see vested interests resisting change to protect themselves, we want to wrestle power away from them.
Liberals will always challenge the established order because a country that denies opportunity to its citizens is a country that slips backwards.
That’s why building a modern workforce that takes advantage of the skills and talents of all our citizens, regardless of the circumstances of their birth, is crucial to building the modern economy we need to flourish in the 21st century.
Investing in children and young people has been central to the Liberal Democrats’ mission in Government.
Even in tough financial times, we fought for more funding for early years education, for free school meals for infants, for the £2.5bn a year Pupil Premium to help children from the poorest backgrounds in primary and secondary school, and for a massive increase in apprenticeships.
And we have no intention of letting up. We are the only party to commit to protecting education funding from cradle to college – not just for schools but early years and post-16 education too.
We have committed to making sure every child will be taught by a qualified teacher.
We have set an ambitious target to make sure that by 2025 every child leaves primary school able to read and write to a high standard.
And we will continue to invest in apprenticeships, with a major expansion of high-quality and advanced apprenticeships.
All of these things will help us build the modern workforce we need.
But there is one glass ceiling in British society that is still proving difficult to break through.
I am extremely proud that there are now more women in work in Britain than ever before.
There are more women on the boards of our major companies than ever before.
There are more opportunities for women than we have ever had in Britain before.
We have started to crack the glass ceiling, but we are still a long way from smashing it.
In Britain today, too many women find their talents are wasted.
Too many women still face a heart-breaking choice between pursuing their career and caring for their family.
And too many businesses let the status quo persist year after year.
Breaking the glass ceiling is as much a challenge for politics as it is for business.
There are too few women in parliament and at the highest rungs of government.
And no party is exempt. My own parliamentary party is too male and too pale. We can and must do more to make sure our party and our politics is more representative of the people we serve.
If we’re going to smash the glass ceiling then we – government and business – need to be ambitious.
So today, I want us to think big. By the end of the next parliament, I want a million more women to be in work than there are today.
That’s ambitious – but it’s not out of reach.
According to the OECD, the UK’s female employment rate is better than average, but with a million more women in work it would put us in the top five countries.
The number of women in work is increasing every year, we just need to accelerate that progress by removing the barriers that stop women who want to work from being able to do so.
There are currently 6.5m working age women who are not in work.
Of course, many will have chosen not to work and they have every right to do so, but for those who want to work we need to make sure that they have every opportunity to fulfil their potential.
For example, a third of working age women not in the labour force have caring responsibilities, either for children or for elderly or vulnerable relatives.
Many will wish to continue to care full-time, but those who want to work often find it impossible because of a lack of childcare, or flexibility at work, or complex benefit rules that mean work doesn’t pay.
It’s why we have expanded the amount of free childcare available, so that it is easier for people who have taken time off to look after their babies to return to work.
That’s why we have introduced the right to request flexible working, so that the demands of the workplace can be better balanced with the demands of modern life.
It’s why, from this April, we are introducing shared parental leave, so that mums and dads can decide for themselves how to balance work and family.
And it’s why, in Government again, Liberal Democrats will go further.
A month’s use-it-or-lose-it paternity leave to incentivise fathers to take time off after their baby is born.
Expanding free childcare further, to all two, three and four-year-olds.
More support for carers – the unsung heroes of our society – to help them return to work if they want to, including increasing the amount they can earn before benefits are withdrawn.
There are also 800,000 women who are currently unemployed but actively looking for work.
We can help them by increasing incentives to work by raising the tax free allowance to £12,500, completing the roll out of Universal Credit and extending free school meals to all primary school children.
There are hundreds of thousands of women currently not in work who have mental health problems.
We can help them by finally ending the bias in the health system against mental health, bringing down waiting times and expanding access to psychological therapies to help people recover more quickly from anxiety and depression.
Another success story of recent years is that the gap between the number of male and female entrepreneurs is narrowing.
But we still have a way to go before that gap is closed.
That’s why I want us to invest more in support and training for female business mentors and encourage greater female take up of the Business Bank’s Start Up Loans programme.
At the highest levels, too many businesses are male-dominated and too many still have a big gap between the average pay of male and female employees.
That gap is narrowing, but not quickly enough.
We want to see a million more women employed, but crucially we want them treated equally to men once they’re in work too.
That’s why we have stepped up our efforts to encourage girls into a wider range of careers, including encouraging more young women to pursue degrees in traditionally male-dominated areas like science and engineering.
It’s why we have worked to increase the representation of women on company boards.
It’s why we have promoted greater pay transparency and introduced measures and guidance to help companies identify and tackle their own pay gaps.
And it’s why my party wants to go further and introduce a requirement for companies that employ more than 250 people to publish the average pay of their male and female workers.
But there is only so much Government can do. If we are to stand a chance of smashing that glass ceiling we need British business to hold the hammer.
My challenge to you is to embrace change. Embrace shared parental leave. Embrace flexible working. Close the gender pay gap.
If we can unlock the talents of women, British business will boom. We will be more innovative, more entrepreneurial, more dynamic.
Together, we have achieved remarkable success over the last five years.
We brought stability out of crisis.
We have started to build a stronger economy and a fairer society, where there are opportunities for everyone.
We took a broken economy and turned it into one of the fastest growing economies in the developed world.
Now is the time to finish fixing the economy, do so fairly, and begin to think big about what Britain can become in the emerging new world of the 21st century.
Together we can build the strong, liberal, modern and innovative economy of the future.



14 Comments
I watched this earlier and the question and answer session (I need to get a life).
I don’t know where this “million more women in work” campaign has come from, but it might put fear into women that the governing parties are planning on cutting employment rights, creating a mass of low-paid jobs and sanctioning their benefits if they don’t accept them. It needs to go back to the drawing board and come back with an emphasis on quality of life and well paid jobs.
Other than that, it was good. The no show from Miliband didn’t seem to go down well and industry seems more concerned about the EU vote than I thought.
There are lots of good things in this speech but I don’t see where they add up to a million more women in work by 2020. Assuming I’ve found the right bits of NOMIS, since 2010 there have been about 1.7 million more jobs created, around 800,000 of them filled by women. Even if you get that ratio up to 50% (the trend is upwards but probably not to that extent) you would need 2 million more jobs in total to hit that 1 million figure.
And that is running from pretty much the bottom point in May 2010, in previous Parliaments there have been (roughly) about a million new jobs created so this Parliament is something of an exception.
And bits like this make me very annoyed:
“There are also 800,000 women who are currently unemployed but actively looking for work.
We can help them by increasing incentives to work by raising the tax free allowance to £12,500, completing the roll out of Universal Credit and extending free school meals to all primary school children.”
They are already “actively looking for work” – how the hell does “increasing incentives to work” help change that situation? It’s another facet of the “say something that sounds good” approach to policy writing that lead to the extraordinary section of the pre-manifesto which ran, “Tackle in-work poverty by giving people on low earnings help and advice to move up to higher paid jobs.” Which sounds like a real life version of Nicola Murray’s “inspire people out of poverty”.
There is some perfectly sensible stuff here, a moderate tone extolling the virtues of partnership between all ‘stakeholders’, little to frighten the horses – but little, either, to indicate an ambitious pro-enterprise agenda.
And the fleeting reference to the need to reform the EU sounded perfunctory in the extreme:
“Of course the EU is not perfect. We will always make the case for reform so that the EU works better for British business and British citizens.”
These two sentences hardly measure up to the challenge of addressing the EU’s shortcomings, setting out a credible agenda for its reform and the alliances needed to achieve it, and addressing the strategic challenges that will face the minority of non-eurozone members within an increasingly integrationist bloc.
This lip service to the need for reform, swiftly followed by the usual pieties about ‘the world’s biggest borderless single market’, is all too reminiscent of the line Clegg took during his TV debates with Nigel Farage.
The think-tank Open Europe noted back then that Nick “had virtually nothing to say about the EU’s flaws and failings and what reforms he’d like to see. Indeed, in response to a question from the audience about how the EU would look in 10 years’ time, he said that it would look ‘quite similar to what it is now’. Given what is happening in the eurozone, which will indirectly also affect the UK’s position in the EU…this is simply not credible. It also completely dismisses the public appetite for EU reform.”
While the polls indicate that the British public currently support our continued EU membership by a narrow margin, they also show a strong appetite for its reform and/or a looser relationship. Unless Nick Clegg can find something meaningful to say on the nature of the reforms he’d like to see, I suspect he’d be better off steering clear of the subject altogether.
I agree with Alex that Nick’s whole tone towards the EU is far too lacking in critique and he fails to see the matter from the perspective of millions who lack his privileged background, track record as a Commission insider and even marriage to an extremely successful non-UK high powered lawyer. For very many voters, the EU instead represents unchecked immigration, stifling bureaucracy, an economy in meltdown and generally has come to stand for “them” (and whose removal will make everything better). I rejoined the Party in response to the ‘Yes’ campaign and one of my most disheartening experiences was watching Nick being, frankly, not up to the job he had set himself of taking on Farage and exposing the latter as the Euro-phobe he has always been, irrespective of any facts, since his Powellite Sixth Form days at Dulwich College. The “same as today in many ways” comment was just stupid. I watched a German TV programme about the last four years in Greece yesterday evening and if Nick thinks any non-oligarch Greek wants to live like that for another ten years, he really needs to get a grip. The LDs have the longest track record of being pro-EU among all the UK parties and this should have placed us at the forefront of pressing for demands (starting with the true implementation of subsidiarity) which would make the EU work for the millions of its ordinary citizens and not the pampered bureaucrats of Brussels and Strasbourg nor the finance houses who brought about the catastrophes of 2008+ and then expected Joe Taxpayer to foot the bill for rescuing them!
Surely, we were nothing like Greece, in 2010, as we run our own economy and I thought our debt was long term. The coalition seem to have juddered our economy, by vocal scaremongering, when they came to power.
Sorry, I meant to say we run our own currency, (brain malfunction on my part.)
Indeed, Charles. It’s hard to suppress the suspicion that Clegg suggested the EU would not look all that different in 10 years’ time because it conveniently fits the Lib Dem position on a referendum: that the public need not be consulted unless there is a substantial change from the status quo – or in the relationship with member states – necessitating treaty change. The public cannot be trusted to make the right decision, ergo the conditions for a referendum must not be met and there mustn’t be substantial change. I can’t think of a better recipe for further alienating the public from the EU and the political class in general.
Large multinational companies benefit from regulations as the extra paperwork of regulation reduces the growth of small innovative companies. When developing new companies , the people need to spend time on improving the product/service, understanding the market, sales and managing cash flow. Every hour spent on EU regulation is an hour not spent on developing the company. Large multinational companies can afford to pay people dealing with EU Red Tape. The various EU rules requiring expensive testing has had a large adverse impact on many small traditional healthcare companies who have been selling products that have been used for centuries to the benefit of large multinational drug companies.
The problem is that most people running SMEs do not have the time or money to deal with civil servants and politicians. The company employing 3 people does not have the money to pay lobbyists to operate in Brussels.
When Nick has run a small engineering company his views may change.
Absolutely, Charlie. The volume of regulation, and the constant changes to it, plays into the hands of large corporates at the expense of SMEs and favour incumbents over new entrants, thus stifling competition: the exact opposite of what a liberal economic policy would aim to achieve. At best this is the law of unintended consequences; cynics would point to the army of corporate lobbyists seeking just such an outcome…
Alex Sabine,
Thank you . If the LDs returned to being the party of Liberty and SMEs then I think we could attract much support. Regulations favour crony corporatism, politicians, trade union leaders, civil servants and large practices of lawyers, accountants and PR people NOT innovative SMEs companies employing people full of initiative , technical skill, enthusiasm and drive.
Alex Sabine said “The fleeting reference to the need to reform the EU sounded perfunctory in the extreme:
“Of course the EU is not perfect. We will always make the case for reform so that the EU works better for British business and British citizens.”
These two sentences hardly measure up to the challenge of addressing the EU’s shortcomings, setting out a credible agenda for its reform and the alliances needed to achieve it”
Back in 2002, a younger Nick Clegg had far more trenchant, intelligent things to say about Europe:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/jun/05/politicalcolumnists.eu
Power corrupts…
Thanks for the link David, an enjoyable read. Indeed, in those halcyon days the young Nick Clegg MEP tempered his enthusiasm for the EU with frank criticism of its failings and proposals for its reform.
His chapter in the Orange Book called for proper subsidiarity and an end to EU interference in domestic affairs, while approving of its role in genuinely cross-border issues like environmental policy.
Nowadays I hear little of the former and rather too much of the latter for my liking… and barely a flicker of recognition of the hubristic folly and recession machine that the single currency represents.
Alex Sabine and Charlie
I also agree. We should be doing much more to assist SME’s along with mutuals and cooperatives.
Stephen Hesketh
All societies create a status quo. The Church has done much good but by the Late Middle Ages it was receiving vast amounts of money and spending much on itself rather than the poor. The Dissolution of the Monasteries meant about a third of agricultural land sold to many to many farmers which increased the wealth of the middle classes. The mandarins of China did much good for China from their inception in about 100BC but by 1200-1400 AD the prime beneficiaries were themselves rather than the Chinese state. The growth of the British State post 1914 and Europe post 1945 primarily benefits white collar bureaucrats together with lawyers and accountants due to the increase in the magnitude and complexity of regulation.
As Cicero said ” Cui Bono ?” who benefits. the Labour Party is the party of white collar state employees, large NGOs, the BBC and the Tories the party of finance and the large accountancy and law firms. State regulation and spending provides employment for Labour Party members/voters and prevents small innovative firms from competing against large global finance/law/accountancy firms which support the Tories.