Edward Morello
MP for West Dorset · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom
“However, many independent producers have said that they are receiving far less—in some cases, only 130p to 140p per kilogram. Some farmers are losing as much as £50 on every pig they sell. That is unsustainable. Once again, it is independent farmers who have borne the greatest burden.”
“West Dorset farmers are proud of the standards they have achieved. Every farmer I have spoken to wants to see further improvements in animal welfare.”
“The hon. Member must forgive that my speech is weighted towards English rugby, as he is absolutely right that the important role rugby clubs play in a community is true in all four parts of the United Kingdom. Research has now described the evidence linking organised sport with improved psychological wellbeing as compelling.”
“Will the Minister work across Government and with governing bodies to deliver the new school sport partnerships and enrichment framework, and provide early clarity on the objectives, priorities, delivery models and timescales?”
“Government can play an important role by ensuring that schools have access to suitable facilities, qualified coaches and meaningful links with local community clubs. School sport should never operate in isolation. The stronger systems are those where schools, clubs and governing bodies work together.”
“It would enable clubs to expand youth sections, to create better facilities for women and girls and to host schools’ disability rugby and walking rugby. Rugby contributes more than £2 billion annually to England through improved health, stronger communities and economic activity. Those benefits are felt in every constituency.”
The complete record
Every one of 602 lines we hold for Edward Morello, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 13.
“The central Government revenue support grant for Dorset and Wiltshire is projected to fall from £12.8 million in 2026-27 to £10.3 million by 2028-29—a reduction of nearly 20% in three years. The fair funding model has, to date, removed about £1.8 million a year from the service’s budget. Put simply, the Government expect fire services to make up the shortfall the Government have created through council tax increases. In theory, council tax makes up 73% of fire service funding, business rates make up 11%, and revenue support grant from central Government makes up only 16%, but the underlying assumptions do not work for our rural areas. Council tax revenue depends heavily on local population growth and housing development. In many rural areas, including Dorset, the tax base is growing far more slowly than Treasury assumptions suggest.”
“Since the merger that created Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service in 2016, the service has had to find more than £15 million in savings and is under real financial pressure. That has already resulted in a 15% reduction in firefighter posts and the removal of second fire engines from five stations. Under the so-called long-term funding settlement offered by this Government, the authority has a revenue budget deficit of £1.2 million in year 1, £1.5 million in year 2 and £1.7 million in year 3. Frankly, I do not think “funding settlement” is the correct phrase. The Minister will mention the Government’s decision to allow fire authorities to raise the council tax precept by £5 per year, which is said to produce an average annual increase in funding of 4.1%, but, as has been outlined, that does not tell the full story.”
“The firefighters who serve our communities do extraordinary work. The stations at Charmouth and Maiden Newton, as well as the six other stations, are staffed by on-call firefighters—people who live and work locally but are ready to leave their jobs and families at the drop of a hat to respond to emergencies. They do so knowing that they may be putting themselves in harm’s way to protect their neighbours. In West Dorset, they are often the first responders to road traffic collisions, particularly on dangerous rural roads such as the A35. During the summer months they respond to wildfires and heath fires, which are becoming more and more frequent as temperatures rise. They also assist during flooding incidents, which our communities have experienced repeatedly in recent years, most recently during Storm Chandra.”
“If approved in the coming weeks, the closures would remove 16% of the service’s fire stations and lead to the loss of 72 firefighters. For many of the villages and towns these stations serve, they are the closest responders, and their loss would change the resilience of emergency coverage across our rural communities. The proposed closures have understandably caused deep concern among my constituents. I have met the chief fire officer and senior management, representatives of the two firefighters’ unions and the station commanders for both Charmouth and Maiden Newton. I have also received a huge number of emails and letters from residents who are rightly worried about what the changes will mean for their safety and the safety of the many visitors who come to West Dorset each year.”
“I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew) on securing this important debate, and I thank him and the Minister for giving me permission to speak. I am in danger of repeating many of the points that my hon. Friend made, but they are important points, and this is an important issue. The proposals from Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service would see the closure of eight on-call fire stations across Dorset and Wiltshire, including the stations at Charmouth and Maiden Newton in my constituency of West Dorset. I recognise that decisions about station closures ultimately sit with fire authorities, not the Minister, but when the pressures driving those decisions stem from central Government funding settlements, it is only right that the Government are held to account.”
“I beg the Minister and the Treasury to meet Dorset and Wiltshire fire service to review the underlying assumptions and reconsider the funding settlement.”
“A consultation on the proposed closures is under way and, like many, I urge all my constituents to make their voices heard. But the reality is that the service is being pushed towards these decisions by the financial framework that it has to operate within. Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service has already lost one fifth of its workforce since 2010. Removing another 16% of stations would push the service even further. I therefore ask the Government to look carefully at whether the current funding settlement for fire and rescue services properly reflects the needs of rural and coastal areas, and whether the current funding is undoing years of underfunding or, in reality, compounding it. It is not hyperbole to say that, without proper funding, we are putting people’s lives at risk.”
“If local stations close, travel distances will inevitably increase, which means longer response times for fires, road traffic collisions, flooding incidents and other emergencies. Sixty per cent of incidents that crews from the eight at-risk stations attend are outside the station catchment area. In critical, life-threatening situations, small delays will have consequences. That is particularly concerning in West Dorset, where the population increases by 42% during the summer months due to tourism. Our narrow country roads, the wider effects of rurality, seasonal visitor numbers and coastal geography all create travel difficulties that are not accounted for in the formulae. Time and again, it is rural communities that end up paying the price.”
“I fully accept that an increase in the precept would be one option available to the Government, but I would also like to challenge the Government on the underlying assumptions in Treasury funding models, not least with the forecast population growth and the lack of rurality in many of the funding models across the board. We are talking about fire services, but I could talk to rurality in the funding of Dorset police, Dorset NHS or any number of areas. The fact is that rural Britain is repeatedly underserved when it comes to the Treasury funding model. The result is that stations like Charmouth are now being considered for closure, with neighbouring stations, such as Lyme Regis, expected to cover larger areas without any additional resources.”
“I appreciate the steer from the Chair and apologise for the late arrival. My hon. Friend talks about the wider structural issues that drive homelessness, one of which is the winner-takes-all system when it comes to benefits. In that system, families that are breaking up may split child custody on a 50:50 basis, but the benefit awarding system only awards benefits to one parent. That results in the other parent having no access to their children, and often results in them losing their home and ending up homeless. Does my hon. Friend agree that, as well as the councils and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, we should also look at how the benefits system can ensure that parents can stay in accommodation and have access to their children?”
“Between now and 2050, the world will need to remove 165 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, with annual removals reaching about 10 billion tonnes a year by the mid-century if we are to limit global warming to between 1.5°C and 2°C. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has made it clear that without carbon-removal technologies, those goals will not be met.”
“Innovation does not happen on its own; it requires the right conditions, such as access to funding, clear regulation, market confidence, skilled workers and a Government who understand the importance of helping companies grow. That is particularly important for small and medium-sized businesses, which form the backbone of the UK economy. In the UK, there were 5.7 million SMEs, including 5.4 million microbusinesses, in 2025. Those companies often develop some of the most exciting ideas, but they also face the greatest challenges when trying to scale up. One area where the UK has a huge opportunity is climate technology. As the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on ClimateTech, and having spent nearly a decade working in renewable energy finance before entering Parliament, I have seen how much potential this sector has.”
“It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mr Betts. I congratulate the hon. Member for Bromley and Biggin Hill (Peter Fortune) on securing this important debate. I suspect that, at this point, I am in danger of labouring the points already made by other hon. Members, but I will persist. Perhaps it is a sign that we all know what needs to happen. I am sure the Minister will speak to those issues. The UK tech sector employs more than 1.7 million people and contributes more than £150 billion to the UK economy. Our technology ecosystem has created more than 185 unicorn companies, which are start-up companies valued at more than £1 billion. I suspect that, at the end of this debate, a word cloud would have the word “ecosystem” as the largest word, but there is good reason for that.”
“That includes raising research and development spending to 3.5% of GDP, investing in digital infrastructure, supporting local government capacity and ensuring that the benefits of technology are spread around the country. It also means continuing to invest in green technologies, which is essential if we are to tackle the climate crisis, while creating new industries and job opportunities. The UK has many of the ingredients needed for success: world-class universities, strong research institutions and an entrepreneurial technology sector. What we must do now is make sure that the environment is right for those companies to grow.”
“That contract has now been expanded to $200 million through to 2028, which represents the largest contract globally for distributed fibre-optic sensing technology. Small companies like Sintela can struggle to gain the same level of access to Government support and trade opportunities as larger firms. When business delegations travel abroad with Ministers or during state visits, the companies included are often the same large multinational businesses, but SMEs are often where some of the most exciting innovation is happening. If we want to support British tech companies properly, we must also ensure that small and medium-sized firms are included in trade missions, international delegations and export promotion. The UK needs a clear long-term approach to science and technology.”
“At that point, the technologies often require significant capital investment to scale, which requires the Government to project confidence to the sectors and investors. Without stronger support mechanisms, whether through the National Wealth Fund, the British Business Bank or other targeted policies, many promising technologies risk stalling before they ever reach market. In other sectors, there is more the Government can do. A fantastic company called Sintela in Dorchester in my constituency develops advanced fibre-optic sensing systems capable of detecting movement and activity across long distances of infrastructure. The technology has applications in security, energy systems and environmental monitoring. Last year, the company secured orders from US Customs and Border Protection worth more than $90 million.”
“The Government have already taken some positive steps: funding for carbon capture and storage clusters, investment in innovation programmes, such as direct air capture and bioenergy carbon capture, and plans for new clean tech innovation challenges. Those are all important developments. However, challenges remain, particularly when companies try to move from early innovation to large-scale deployment. Many climate technology companies face what is often called the valley of death. Early-stage funding can help to get ideas off the ground, but when companies reach pilot or demonstration stage, that funding often disappears. Data shows that although almost all seed-stage companies move forward, only one third successfully progress beyond series B investment.”
“I certainly agree that, if we want to become a market or world leader in a particular technology space, it is vital that we channel funding and support into those areas where we have the most opportunity and a competitive advantage. Climate technology is not only an environmental priority, but a huge economic opportunity to lead a sector the world will need for decades to come. The UK’s greenhouse gas removal sector alone is now valued at £1.2 billion, with investment increasing by more than 39% in 2024—faster than the technology sector as a whole. According to analysis aligned with the Climate Change Committee’s seventh carbon budget, greenhouse gas removal technologies could support over 60,000 high-quality jobs in the UK by 2050.”
“Shortly before the debate, the Minister said he would like to visit Weston-super-Mare and other locations. I invite him to beautiful West Dorset to visit the fibre optics company Sintela, which is one of the UK’s biggest success stories.”
“I thank the hon. Gentleman for securing this important debate. I agree with absolutely everything he has said. He talks about the problem with access to equipment; I know of one case, which is representative of many that come across my desk, that concerns the inability to hand back equipment after use. A constituent contacted me whose mother had died after two years of home care. She had a hospital bed, three commodes, an orthopaedic chair and a walking frame. The NHS provider had gone into receivership and there was no method whatsoever for her to hand back the equipment. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we are compounding the problems for people getting equipment by not reusing the stuff that is already out there?”
“That reminds me that rugby is not just a sport, but a community, and at the heart of that community is grassroots rugby. Local clubs are far more than places where games are played. They are community assets. They are where children, parents, supporters, coaches and volunteers come together. Yes, we go there to play and watch rugby, but they are also where fitness classes, community events and social gatherings are held. They are places where friendships are made and where people feel part of something bigger than themselves.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered Government support for English rugby. It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. Although I confess it is tempting to use this 30 minutes to talk about the disastrous result at the weekend, I will instead stick to the topic. I am a rugby romantic. For me and so many others, the game is about something far deeper than the scoreline. It is of course about solo tries, rolling mauls and high-pressure drop goals that win world cups, but it is also about the burgers from the clubhouse kitchen; standing on the sidelines in the rain, snow, wind and, very occasionally, glorious sunshine; the professional players having their signed shirts on the walls of their childhood club; and tying the laces of my son’s boots on a Sunday morning when he turns out for the under-sevens.”
“I agree wholeheartedly and am sure that the Minister will take the opportunity to speak to that pledge. Most importantly, grassroots clubs are where the future of the sport begins. They are where the next England star first learnt to pass, make a tackle and score a try. Yet many grassroots clubs are struggling. Across the country are clubhouses that are outdated, that have unsuitable changing rooms and where facilities are not always appropriate for the women’s game. Often there are no women’s changing rooms at all.”
“I wholeheartedly agree and will come on to the issues about funding, but also about how we measure the impact to ensure that, whether it be Rugby Football Union funding or Government—taxpayer —money through Sport England, we are measuring the outputs and making sure that we are delivering results.”
“In the last 24 years, 174 amateur clubs have disappeared, which should be a concern to all of us, because if we want rugby to thrive in the future, grassroots clubs must be protected and supported.”
“I wholeheartedly agree with the hon. Member about the wider benefits of rugby, and I will go on to speak about some of the important things that physical activity and sport bring to communities and young people. However, as he mentioned “Gladiators”, it would be remiss of me not to mention my son’s favourite Gladiator, Nitro. I am sure that my son will be delighted to have that on the record. [ Laughter. ] Financial pressures are constant. Many clubs survive only because of the extraordinary dedication of volunteers who give their time to keep the lights on and the pitches playable. Matches are regularly cancelled because clubs are unable to field teams in certain age groups.”
“They train and compete at the highest level, while also holding down second jobs. If we want the women’s game to continue growing, we must ensure that facilities are appropriate, that funding is sustainable and that players are able to become fully professional. The Government can play a role, not in controlling the sport but in supporting its development, and the same is true at grassroots level. Across my constituency of West Dorset, we have extraordinary rugby clubs: Bridport; Dorchester; Puddletown; and Sherborne. They represent everything that is good about community sport. However, even as we celebrate their achievements, we must expand the game. Grassroots rugby needs more targeted Government investment, particularly in the most deprived communities.”
“The Red Roses have become one of the most dominant teams in world sport. They have won three rugby world cups, including the most recent one in 2025. At that tournament, they defeated Canada in front of a record crowd of over 81,000 spectators at Twickenham. They have won 20 women’s six nations tournaments, achieved 18 grand slams and hold the record for the longest winning streak in international rugby union, with 33 consecutive victories. Since 2022, the funding has also supported a 35% increase in the number of age-grade girls playing rugby, and over 43,500 women and girls are now registered with the Rugby Football Union. Despite that success, however, the women’s professional game still faces major structural challenges. Many players in Premiership women’s rugby remain semi-professional.”
“I thank the hon. Member for his intervention and my Lancastrian wife will be delighted that rugby league was brought into this debate, as she always tries to convince me when I am watching league that it is better than rugby union. I absolutely take his point about targeted support and I am sure the Minister will, too. Government support has made a difference where it has been targeted effectively. Through arm’s length bodies such as Sport England, almost £14 million has been awarded to grassroots rugby from the legacy funding for the 2025 women’s rugby world cup. Since 2009, nearly £50 million of national lottery funding has been invested in the women’s and girls’ game, with £11.8 million of funding confirmed between 2022 and 2027. That investment has had positive results. We have seen that clearly in the growth of the women’s game.”
“Clubs such as Wasps, London Irish and Worcester Warriors have entered insolvency in recent years, unable to pay back the huge amounts of debt owed to the taxpayer. Even among the surviving clubs in the Prem, there are significant financial losses. Figures for 2025 showed that the biggest annual losses were £7.5 million at Saracens and £7 million at Sale Sharks, but every Premiership club recorded a loss, highlighting the financial pressures facing the professional game, even as it works to stabilise after the disruption of recent years. The Government have been very supportive through the loans system, and I hope that we will hear a firm commitment from the Minister that that will continue, but it is not acceptable for top-flight rugby.”
“Prem rugby has grown in popularity, attendance figures are rising, stadiums are filling and broadcast audiences continue to increase, but financial sustainability at the top of the pyramid remains a real concern, despite those successes. Several Premiership clubs continue to carry significant losses. Collectively, clubs owe large sums in pandemic loans issued through the Government support scheme. During covid-19, the Government provided £123.8 million in loans to premiership rugby clubs, which was 57% of the total amount to sports organisations. Champ clubs received a combined £4.8 million in loan support. That was vital support that helped clubs survive the pandemic, but the financial model of professional rugby is fragile.”
“That means providing equipment, time to have PE on the curriculum, proper time and training for teachers so that they have the confidence to coach, proper facilities to get changed in, pitches to play on, and access for all children to boots and sports clothing so that they are able to play. We must also recognise the role that rugby can play beyond the pitch. Sport is an important form of soft power. Football, music and the creative industries project British culture across the world, and rugby can do the same. Players such as Maro Itoje, Ellie Kildunne, Henry Pollock, Sadia Kabeya, Ellis Genge and Meg Jones are more than just elite athletes, they should be ambassadors for this country. We should also recognise the serious financial challenges facing the professional game.”
“In the 2024-25 season, T1 rugby reached 1,800 schools and around 80,000 students, with a near equal mix of boys and girls. Within four years, the programme aims to reach more than 5,000 schools. It shows what can be achieved when organisations work together with a clear strategy. Government Departments must do the same. Education policy and sports policy cannot exist in isolation. If the Department for Education and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport collaborate effectively, rugby can reach schools and communities that have never had access to the sport.”
“The Government have announced reforms, such as the new school sports partnerships and the national enrichment framework, and they are very welcome steps, but when will those programmes be implemented? Will they be in place for the next school year? Can the Government guarantee that there will be no cuts to school sports funding? School sports need stable, multi-year funding. Active children are more likely to remain active adults, so it brings enormous public health benefits. The RFU has also begun important work to expand the sport in schools. In 2024, it commissioned a review of rugby union in education, focusing on sustainability and participation. One of the most exciting initiatives is the roll-out of T1 rugby, which is a non-contact version of the game developed by World Rugby.”
“The sport needs far greater diversity, and participation from people of all backgrounds and socioeconomic circumstances. It is not just good for society but good for the sport, because a larger, more diverse player pool ensures that we have the best players and the strongest competition. That means that rugby must exist in more state schools across the country, but there has been a worrying decline in school sports provision. Data from the Youth Sport Trust shows that the number of hours of PE and sport delivered in schools has fallen by more than 45,000 hours since 2012. That cannot be the direction of travel if we are serious about the health and wellbeing of our young people.”
“I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman; in fact, I would quite happily have a whole other Westminster Hall debate on how we raise the level of the Championship, or the Champ, because the difference between the Prem and the Champ now is enormous. There are better models elsewhere. For example, we can look at France and the success of its second division—the “D2”, although I am not sure how that is pronounced in English. It is markedly different to second-tier rugby in this country. Rugby must be a sport open to everyone, and not just those who happen to attend traditional rugby-playing schools. Where state schools have had the right funding and support, they have thrived in school competitions, fuelled rugby academies, inspired a new generation of rugby fans and shown what is possible with the right conditions.”
“Countries such as France have demonstrated that that is possible. The current choice for professional rugby in England is between ringfencing the Prem, attracting investment and building for the future, or persisting as we are, which risks losing the professional game and clubs forever, because at the moment we do not have the investment, the viewership or the money to keep it afloat.”
“When that happens, the professional game will be able to support the wider rugby ecosystem, funding development pathways, supporting lower leagues and strengthening grassroots rugby. As we have discussed, at the moment the gap between the Prem and the Champ is just too wide. Promotion and relegation have long been a romantic part of British sport: they represent the idea that any club with enough determination and talent can climb to the top; they add jeopardy and excitement, and I wholeheartedly support them. But that system can only work if the financial foundations of the sport are strong enough to support it. The last team to be relegated was Saracens in 2020. The last team to be successful after promotion was Exeter Chiefs. Investors must have confidence that clubs can remain viable whether they are in the Prem or in the Champ.”
“Yes. Even with the renegotiation and the favourable terms that the Government have provided, they are creating a long-lasting problem for both Prem and Championship clubs. I suspect that, if 21% of premiership football clubs had collapsed inside 18 months, there would be widespread calls for a national inquiry. Collectively, Prem rugby clubs carry £300 million of debt, and often rely on the generosity of wealthy owners to remain afloat. We must acknowledge that reality, but we should not respond with pessimism; instead, we should focus on building a sustainable future. I welcome the Prem’s road map to becoming financially stable and ultimately self-sustaining.”
“You leave me in something of a quandary because I deliberately chose Government support for English rugby, rather than using the debate as an opportunity to beat up the RFU—although I certainly have my criticisms of it, and I will come on to some of those points. The Government repeatedly say that the RFU is an arm’s length body, but the reality is that the RFU is in receipt of millions of taxpayers’ money. Therefore, it is absolutely justifiable for parliamentarians to hold it to account, and my personal view is that right now, not enough money is getting to the lower parts of the rugby pyramid.”
“If we support grassroots rugby properly, if we bring the sport into more schools, if we invest in deprived communities, if we strengthen the women’s game and if we stabilise the professional leagues, then we will have a game that we love and that we can see flourish.”
“Through Sport England, the Government have invested £72 million into rugby union since 2016—most recently £16.9 million in the RFU across the 2022 to 2027 funding cycle. We have a right and a duty to make sure that public money is well spent in the right places and on the right things. Government can also actively take an interest in promoting and growing all parts of our game, from using our athletes as ambassadors for our country to directly supporting community rugby groups who reach out to those schools that we cannot reach. That brings me back to local communities and grassroots, because without grassroots rugby, none of the rest exists. The volunteers who mark the pitches, cook the food, coach the children and wash the kit are the true foundation of the sport. They deserve our recognition, our support and, most of all, our thanks.”
“Those figures show that when the game is accessible, exciting and well promoted, fans are eager to watch, attend and engage. The professional game also provides a platform not only to showcase elite rugby, but to inspire the next generation and increase participation. But we must translate that success into players that are playing at a grassroots level, something that I worry we are failing to do. Government have a role in English rugby, not by running the sport, but by ensuring transparency, oversight and responsible use of public money. When taxpayers are funding sports facilities, development programmes or covid loans, Parliament has a duty to ensure that that money is used effectively.”
“Apologies, Ms Vaz. We will come back to that topic in another debate. There are signs of growth and optimism in Prem rugby. The quality of rugby is among the best in the world. We are producing world-class talent that—the Six Nations aside—usually excels on the world stage. Attendance is growing, with several rounds of Prem rugby seeing sold-out fixtures and stadium occupancy reaching record levels. Broadcast audiences are also increasing, with round nine in January attracting more than 1.2 million viewers. The Premiership final last year, which as a Bath supporter I am legally obliged to mention—come on Bath!—drew in nearly 1 million viewers in addition to a live crowd of 82,000 at Twickenham. Following the final, social engagement interactions across Premiership rugby channels rose by 24%. TV figures are up 35% since 2022.”
“The Liberal Democrats support the regulations, which make necessary and consequential amendments following the passage of the Data (Use and Access) Act. They ensure that references across more than 800 pieces of UK legislation are updated to reflect the replacement of the Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioner’s Office with the new Information Commission, maintaining legal clarity and continuity across all four nations of the UK. The changes are technical and administrative, including minor amendments to the Data Protection Act on the definition of research and statistical purposes, the duty of the new Information Commission and the transition of pension arrangements for the incoming chair. They do not alter the regulator’s powers or the underlying policy framework, so we are happy to support them.”
“I praise the work of our police and our security and intelligence services in this case. I thank the Minister for his statement. Like him, I look forward to the publication of the Rycroft report. The Foreign Affairs Committee heard evidence from the Electoral Commission, as did the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy. Would the Government consider new clauses to the Representation of the People Bill to widen and strengthen the powers of the Electoral Commission and, importantly, provide it with the necessary funding to properly defend our democracy?”
“That is precisely why FCDO funding is so important. We invested heavily, both politically and financially, in our relationship with the United States, but we should be honest about the returns on our investment when the President does not share our values. When tariffs are imposed on British businesses and working families during a cost of living crisis, when trade decisions affect our farmers and our food standards, when strategic choices are made without our meaningful input, and when economic clout is used as leverage, it is reasonable to ask whether our limited diplomatic resources are being used in the most effective way now that the weakness and fragility of our relationship have been exposed.”
“We are no longer operating in a stable rules-based system dominated by one predictable power. We are moving towards a more fragmented, multipolar world. Middle powers are increasingly working together issue by issue on defence, trade and climate, rather than relying on a single hegemon to set the direction. As Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said in his powerful speech at Davos, middle powers must act together or risk being “on the menu”. For countries like the United Kingdom, the shift is important and it requires huge amounts of diplomacy and the use of our soft power on the world stage. Great powers can act alone. They have the market size and economic leverage to do so. Middle powers cannot. We rely on relationships; we rely on credibility; we rely on co-ordination with those who share our values; and we rely on diplomacy.”
“Day-to-day spending is being reduced by £457 million—a 5.3% cut; the second highest cut for any Department, behind only the Home Office. Capital investment is down by £228 million—a 66.6% reduction; again, the second highest cut for any Department, apart from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. Demand-led spending is dropping by a further £139 million, or 25.7%. These are sweeping cuts across the board, aimed disproportionately at the FCDO. They are why the FCDO has been forced into a restructuring process that may lead to the loss of nearly 2,000 jobs. These are significant reductions that come at a time when the world is becoming more and more volatile. If we continue in this way, our diplomatic presence will shrink not because of strategy, but because of budget constraints and Treasury spreadsheets.”
“I am sure I am not alone in having been contacted by constituents trapped in the middle east or by those further afield who were hoping to transfer in the middle east on their way home. I am extremely grateful to all the FCDO staff around the world who are helping them out. It has brought into stark relief the fact that, in an unstable world, diplomacy and our diplomatic footprint has never been more important. The people, embassies, development expertise, aid, investment and political relationships we maintain across the globe are so important for our national security, our economy, the future of our planet and what Britain represents. The latest funding settlement for the FCDO moves us in the wrong direction.”