05/10/2016: Conservative Leader's Speech Daily Politics

Good morning from sunny Birmingham, where in just half an hour,

Theresa May will deliver her first keynote Conference address as Tory

leader and Prime Minister to reject her party's "libertarian

right" in favour of a new centre ground.

Welcome to this Daily Politics Conference Special.

Theresa May claims the Conservative Party she leads is "firmly

in the centre ground of British politics", and in a pitch to Labour

voters, says she will put "the power of Government squarely

at the service of ordinary working-class people".

But what are the policies to match the rhetoric?

I'll be talking to education secretary Justine Greening

about those plans for more grammar schools.

And we'll have the warm-up act here this morning -

Scottish Conservative leader and prominent Remain

campaigner Ruth Davidson on the impact of Brexit.

Also in today's programme, after just 18 days in the job,

Diane James quits as Ukip leader - who will replace her to lead a party

All that coming up in the next two hours.

Yes, two hours of public service broadcasting at its finest.

Theresa May is due to speak just after 11:30 - we'll have that live

Joining me now to take stock on the final day of Conference

here - Isabel Oakeshott of the Mail and Harry Cole of the Sun.

When Theresa May almost attacks what she calls the libertarian right, who

is she referring to? Well, I was struck by two things. First of all,

many voters are fed up feeling that it is not acceptable to talk about

immigration. She is having a at those, the elite who patronise

people who worry about immigration. Well, there are still actually

figures within her own parliamentary party who are having this kind of

Primal Scream of objection at the outcome of the referendum. So there

is partly a message to those within her party about accepting that this

was a verdict on immigration. I am also struck by what she says about

the role of government and how different that is to what David

Cameron was saying about the role of government. She is expected to say

today that there is a strong place for government, that this is not a

continuation of David Cameron's big society. He very much saw the

voluntary sector stepping in to do a lot of the jobs that a Labour

government had perhaps traditionally provided. She seems to be steering

back from that. Is it much of a change? David Cameron believed in

government. Not really. The risks such a thing as the society, it is

just not the same as the state. It is a bit of a slap to the hard right

of the party in saying, look, I am going to be my own person and I will

not be ashamed of saying we will use the state. I am not a man who

presents Ed Miliband a lot, but he came out with a Tweet this morning

when he said, there is a rumour going around that there might be a

nod towards energy price capping and price freezing the speech. Ed

Miliband said, this sounds familiar but I believe they will not be

calling Mrs May a Marxist revolutionary who is taking us back

to the 70s. She clearly sees a gap in the market to put her tanks on

the centre ground or even the centre-left. George Osborne's

Budget, post the election last year, took more from the Labour manifesto

than from the Tory manifesto. Well, there was a huge opportunity for

Theresa May because of the state the Labour Party are in a state that

Ukip is in. 3.8 million votes up for grabs who formally voted for Ukip

and now have nothing much to vote for there. And a lot of disaffected

working-class Labour voters. You have to look at this in the context

of the whole conference. If you looked at this one speech today, you

could say maybe she's making a bid for the centre ground, but she has

also spent the last few days talking about a hard Brexit. She had the

Tory right and the Eurosceptics releasing her praises here in

Birmingham, saying she wanted to remain the mother she seems prepared

to do a hard Brexit. So there is a bit of rebalancing and a touch of

party management. As Home Secretary, it was hard for the Labour Party to

pin her down. She was keen to be seen as a socially liberal,

reforming Home Secretary. So she's tried to rebalance things. And Ukip.

What an utter car crash. Again. Firstly, Nigel Farage definitely

does not want to come back as party leader. I am sure about that. He's

certainly addicted to politics. He loves the attention and there was a

role for him doing something else. But he is technically the leader. He

promises he is retiring. Is it true Ukip had to call the electoral

commission to find out who was the leader? There was a model and I

understand that I am James put in Latin on her form, under duress.

People will want to know who is going to take over and what are they

fighting over? This may be an opportunity for them, because they

may now be able to get a leader who is more voter friendly for

disillusioned, north of England working-class Labour voters. There

were real sighs of relief among Northern Labour MPs whose

constituencies voted for Leave. Steven Woolfe was blocked on a

technicality from standing last time. He will be back in the

running. Suzanne Evans, a southern former Tory, will be back in the

running. We will see a battle for the heart and soul of the party. I

asked her why she would appeal to the north if she was the epitome of

the Home Counties bourgeoisie, but she said she didn't know what I was

talking about. We have to leave it there, but we will be coming back to

Ukip. Now - a few minutes ago,

Theresa May and her husband Philip made the short walk over

the footbridge that links the conference hotel

here to the conference centre We're told that she will speak

for about 50 minutes to an hour. There will be a strong attack

on Labour and on politicians and pundits who she says sneer

at the patriotism of the working classes and their concerns

about immigration and crime. I'm joined now by the Education

Secretary, Justine Greening. Theresa May will tell us today that

her intention is to "Put the power of government squarely at the

service of ordinary working class people". How do plans to increase

selection in schools help working class people? Free school meals

children who are in grammar schools have a rate of progress that is

twice as good as they're better off counterparts in those schools. So

much so that for those children, grammar schools close the attainment

gap that we often see between free school meals children and others.

But hardly any free school meals children go to grammar schools. One

of the points we make in the consultation document is opening up

the question about our existing grammars can do more to give access

to disadvantaged children and change their tests so that they are less

easy to be tutored, how they can set up primary school figures in the

deprived areas so more children have access to them. Kent is full of

grammar schools. What percentage of the grammar school kids there are

eligible for free school meals? Across the country... Know, in Kent.

It is 2.7%. And yet the number of kids eligible for free school meals

in non-grammar schools in Kent is 18%. So the grammar schools in Kent

are basically middle-class fiefdoms. Across England, the percentages just

under 4%. This is why we are right to have the consultation document

looking at how we can address that. What is untenable to set out the

kind of statistics that you just have, which I think we should

change, and then be against us launching a piece of work that looks

at how to improve that. But again, take Kent. There are 30 to grammar

schools in the county. They do very well for the people who get to them,

but they are not for ordinary working class people. 33% of

secondary school children receive the pupil premium, but in Kent, 6%.

We seem to agree. I am trying to work out how these scores are

helping working class people. This is why we are right to open up the

discussion about how current grammars can do a better job of

being engines of social mobility when we know that they bring on

children who are on free school meals twice as fast as other

children. All the more reason to open up a discussion about how we

can change the statistics you have put on the table. But you didn't

come up with the idea of more grammar schools, that was Theresa

May. Given how much change we have seen across the rest of the

education system, we were always going to have to return to grammars

and look at how they fit in. But you never advocated that. Did you

discuss expanding selection with the Prime Minister ahead of your

appointment? We did discuss what we needed to do in terms of getting

more good school places for more children. That is not what I asked.

Did you discuss the expansion of grammar schools before you became

Education Secretary? We discussed them as I became Education

Secretary. Prior to that, she was Home Secretary, so it would have

been odd for me to discuss education with her. The statistics you have

talked about are important and I are all the more reason to open up the

debate about how grammar schools can work effectively in the 21st

century, rather than leaving a system that does not deliver. For

the purposes of honesty and plain dealing, which is what we are told

the May government is about, the impetus for grammar schools has come

from 10 Downing Street, not from you. I think we should be looking at

how we can make sure that current grammar schools work better for

disadvantaged children, and we should look at how we can meet the

desire for parents around the country for more choice. So it

didn't come from you, it came from Downing Street. The Prime Minister

is keen to make sure, as I am, that we have more good school places,

particularly for children in parts of the country that don't currently

have them. This is not the whole strategy. But you are going to leave

it to local areas to decide if they want more grammar schools or not,

write? Correct. Is surely follows that the areas that the side that

will be the Tory middle-class areas. The inner cities which are under the

control of labour are not going to have grammar schools. We will have

to see how local communities choose to use the choices we give them. You

are right that there are some areas that already have grammars and many

parents may feel that their children don't have as good a chance of

getting into those grammars because children from further afield are

coming into them. So we are opening up that system to deliver the

choices that many parents want. As for the rest of the country where we

don't have grammars, it will be up to local communities. And in those

areas where they may be most needed to give a hand up the bright

working-class kids, under your system, these are the areas least

likely to get them. So to come back to Mrs May's words, it will not be

for ordinary working class families. The consultation document on

grammars is not our whole education strategy. The broader reforms we

have already put in place and that I continue to lift standards across

the country, we have 1.4 million more children in good or outstanding

schools. Those will continue. There are over 1 million in bad schools,

which is why yesterday in my speech, I talked about piloting new

approaches in different places where we have not seen progress, to see

what it will take to lift the educational attainment for those

children as well. In the 50s and 60s, there were grammar schools in

every inner city in the country across the UK, not just in England.

Under your system, even if the return to grammar schools is a good

thing, the way you are planning it, they will be overwhelmingly in Tory

shire areas. They will not be in inner cities. It is about what local

communities want. In many respects, this is what the Prime Minister is

saying. We should be responding to the priorities of ordinary people.

If grammar schools are such a good thing, why not just establish 30

grammar schools across the inner cities of Britain or of England?

Because we want to work with people rather than against them and

alongside the rest of the reforms we are bringing forward, including

identifying some pilot areas. We would not work inside schools, we

would work outside schools on improving careers, mentoring, the

kinds of experiences that young children can get through the

national citizens service. The consultation document we opened up

on grammars, for the reasons you set out at the beginning of this

interview, is part of a broader push on how we make sure it doesn't

matter where you are as a child in England, you get the best possible

education. Many people would say that's what

this country needs is not more grammar schools but some elite

technology schools of the credit that Germany excels in two siege --

to teach science, engineering, mathematics. How much of your speech

yesterday did you devote to these kind of schools? Probably advert.

One of the points I made, aside from talking about the million schools

which are not doing good enough according to an Ofsted, is to make

sure our technical education is as good quality as academic route has

become over recent years, and it isn't, which is why we need to do

something about it. At the moment, we have an apprenticeships policy

that I think can drive much better choices for children and young

people but we need to look that up matter with further education

colleges, technology colleges... Why don't you just establish 30 elite

technology schools in inner cities? The university technical colleges

are about that sort of approach, more technical, working with

universities and employers. Again, I come back to how we make our

education system work for all children. Not every child wants to

go down in academic route. Most young people would go on to

university, so it is important that we make the technical education

route as good as the academic route has become. -- most young people

won't go on to university. If you look at countries like Germany,

which have a much stronger approach on this, we need to catch up with

them. I had a representative from the CBI on the platform with the

yesterday because I think, for British business in Brexit Britain,

this is vital. Top Conservatives have spoken to me for decades about

doing this but our technology schools are still a shadow of

Germany and Austria. We have a long way to go. Why don't the political

class ever do it? You are all liberal arts Oxbridge educated and

you never provide elite education in the kind of schools that our country

really needs. We don't need more people graduating in arts, we need

them in engineering and science. I am not a liberal arts... I

understand that. I couldn't agree with you more. There is a tendency

for a bunch of people creating policy to think that education is

the education they act. This is one of the shifts we have been making in

recent years but I want to make sure we join up these different policies

effectively so that... Aren't grammar schools just a diversion if

the real meat of this country is for a lead schools, to give kids who are

more inclined that way a world-class technology? -- the real need of this

country is for Elliott schools. We are hugely short of these schools.

Why don't we do that? The main people getting diverted by the

grammar schools consultation document is everybody apart from me.

You are just Education Secretary! There is a lot more to do for the

million children in schools that are rated not good enough. There is more

to do on technological education. There is more to do on making sure

that careers and mental ring are in place for children who don't know

what opportunities are out there. I never thought about doing law at

university because when I was growing up I had never met a lawyer.

I had that fate to wait me. I think it matters, so it is about

broadening your horizons, which is why British business has an

important role to play now in both talking about the skills it needs

but also getting into schools to help make sure that children

understand the range of opportunities, so they set their

sights and ambitions high. What will you do if the government decides to

build a third runway at Heathrow? I am trying to win that argument.

Everybody knows my views. I have represented my community for many

years on this. I have articulated... We know you are against it but if it

becomes government policy what will you do? That is a big if. Would a

free vote be enough to keep you in the government? I don't know how we

will progress any decision. And so it was the nation is possible? I'm

not going to get into hypothetical decisions. -- so a resignation is

possible. Are you saying that the government has made a decision? We

know it has we are just waiting on when it is going to be announced.

One thing I have learned in politics is that I am not going to answer a

hypothetical question about something that may or may not ever

happen at some point in the future. Enqueue. Come back and talk to us

more about education. -- thank you. It's a subject we care about an this

programme. Now, the words "Ukip" and "chaos"

have tended to come hand-in-hand in the months following the EU

referendum, which saw Nigel Farage stand down as leader and the party

descend into infighting. Hopes that his replacement,

the MEP Diane James, would be able to pull Ukip's warring

tribes together, appear to have been ill-founded,

as last night she became the political equivalent

of the mayfly and announced she was standing down after just 18

days in the job. So it's another turn on the Ukip

leadership merry-go-round. Diane James was elected to succeed

Nigel Farage as leader But the new Ukip leader told

the Times newspaper last night she was stepping

down for "professional Mrs James said "I do not have

sufficient authority, nor the full support of all my MEP

colleagues and party officers to implement

changes I believe necessary Douglas Carswell -

the party's only MP - refused to comment last night,

tweeting that he was busy tucking I am not sure if that is a coded

message. Nigel Farage, asked if he would seek

to return as leader, There is already speculation

there could be a new leadership election including the likes

of Suzanne Evans and Steven Woolfe, who missed the deadline

for the last contest. Meanwhile, Ukip's chairman said

he would today be checking with the Electoral Commission

who the party's official Yes, he is going to call the

election commission! And who is still listed as Ukip

leader on the Commission's website? Well, Mr Farage, who has already

been party leader three times as well as once "unresigning"

after just three days, has told the BBC that he believes

he has once more been thrust into the top job,

as interim leader. He also ruled out the possibility

of his rival, the Welsh Assembly member Neil Hamilton,

being installed as leader. We will have to see about that. I

find that extremely unlikely. No. I do not see any prospect of that

horror story coming to pass. Why would that be a horror story? Eat is

the leader of Ukip in the Welsh Assembly. I'm afraid he is. Why

would it be a horror story? I am afraid he doesn't do our public

image a whole host of good, but there we are, that's life, we are a

democratic party and he was chosen by people to become a member of the

Welsh Assembly for us. I don't think it has done us a whole load of good

but that's life. So Nigel Farage is back in charge again, at least for

the time being. Well, Ukip's leader in the Welsh Assembly, Neil

Hamilton, joins me now. What do you make of Nigel Farage saying the idea

of you being leader of Ukip is like a horror story? Well, I suppose

different things frighten different people but, as Harold Macmillan said

in the course of a long political life, he found that criticism was

rarely inhibited by ignorance. So Mr Farage is just ignorant in regarding

you as a horror story? Well, he hasn't been to Wales and he knows

nothing about it so he isn't qualified to comment. That's

irrelevant. I have no interest in becoming the leader of Ukip in any

circumstances and I have never, ever held myself out as a potential

leader, so that isn't relevant to the current situation. What is

relevant is why Diane James resigned. Can you shed any light on

that? I didn't support Diane for the leadership and one of the reasons

why was I thought she was too fragile for the job. So it has

proved to be. I thought she would last a bit longer than 18 days, but

it's an immense task or anybody to be the leader of a political party,

particularly one as fractious as Ukip. Very often, the smaller the

party, the more difficult the task, across the factions are more

vicious. Undoubtedly, Diane was not suited to that role. She is a very

nice lady. She is reasonably good in front of the media. But I just think

that she wasn't, how shall I say, muscular enough for that task. She

said, I do not have sufficient authority or the full support of all

my MEP colleagues and party officers. Who was she talking about?

Well, I haven't a clue and I don't know what she means that she didn't

have the authority. The authority to do what? The authority of the Ukip

leader is defined by Ukip's Constitution. If she wanted to make

constitutional changes, it wouldn't be the MEPs or even the Ukip

national executive who would be a bar to that, it would be the Ukip

membership, because every member of the party would have a say in a

ballot on whatever changes she wanted to bring about. We never

actually discovered what those changes might have been. Who is the

leader of your party? It doesn't have one because she has resigned.

The Ukip Constitution is clear. In these circumstances, the national

executive to appoint an interim leader, which I assume it will do at

its meeting on the 17th of October. According to the electoral

commission website, Nigel Farage is still technically your leader. The

electoral commission doesn't decide on who the leader is. His name may

still be on the form registered with them, but that is merely a

historical technicality relating to when he was the leader. It doesn't

affect the reality that Ukip doesn't currently have a leader. The reality

is that nobody is quite sure who the leader of your party is at the

moment, which must be unprecedented in British politics. I have just

said that there isn't a leader. Fortunately, Ukip seems to be better

without a leader in the Labour Party can do with one. Maybe you should

dispense with the idea of a leader altogether and just do without it.

There's a thought! We are where we are for the time being. Whoever the

new leader of Ukip is, he or she will need to build a team that can

work together. Nigel is a great, dynamic force. Ukip would not be

where it is today without him. We wouldn't be leaving the EU without

Nigel Farage. He has earned his place in history. He was the right

man to get Ukip to where it is now but I think it now needs a more

collective approach than he was able to bring, for the future, and I am

sure that the new leader with that spirit would be successful. So you

think we should now have, for Ukip, a collective leadership? You and I

were at university at the same time and student unions used to have a

rotating chairman. Is that what you were thinking of? No, it isn't. I

think what we need is a leader who is the first amongst equals rather

than a super dominant, like Nigel was. In a domestic context, where

Ukip is going to be making its way in the years to come, as well as

trying to get Britain out of the EU, which is a single issue where

Nigel's characteristics, abilities, strengths were absolutely

instrumental in achieving that objective, will not be quite so

necessary when we are operating entirely in a domestic context, such

as we are in Wales, where I am the leader of the Ukip group but I am

very inclusive in the way that I run it. The sixth of us work together

very harmoniously and happily and everybody gets a crack of the whip.

-- the six of us. I bought one of your leading lights had already

resigned from Ukip, but never mind. Who do you think should be be next

leader of Ukip? Well, I supported Paul Nuttall but unfortunately he

decided not to become a candidate in the last election. He is still the

deputy leader. Personally I would like to see him as the interim

leader and I hope that I can persuade him to put his hat in the

ring. I think he is incomparably the best qualified candidate to follow

Nigel Farage and I hope he will step up to the plate. If not, there are

others, like Steven Woolfe, Suzanne Evans, who each have good qualities,

but I think they would need to work together as members of a team

because everybody has weaknesses as well as strengths and we need to

compensate for those. Neil Hamilton, thank you for joining us.

So while we wait for Theresa May to take to the stage

here at Birmingham, let's take a look back at the big

events that have shaped the Conservative Party

And it certainly has been an eventful 12 months,

culminating of course in a change of leader and a change

Statement, the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

These terrorists are plotting to kill us and to radicalise

Within the last hour, I've negotiated a deal to give

the United Kingdom special status inside the European Union.

I want a better deal for the people of this country.

28 member states cannot even organise a takeaway curry.

We can now say the decision taken in 1975 by this country to join

In my view, we should aim to have a new Prime Minister

in place by the start of the Conservative Party

I have concluded - that person cannot be me.

While Boris has great attributes, he was not capable of uniting that

team and leading the party and the country in the way

I don't tour the television studios, I don't gossip about people

over lunch, I don't go drinking in Parliament's bars, I don't often

I just get on with the job in front of me.

I'm therefore withdrawing from the leadership election

and I wish Theresa May the very greatest success.

We will shortly be heading to Buckingham Palace

where I'll tender my resignation as Prime Minister.

Her Majesty The Queen has asked me to form a new government,

Maybe even a boss who exploits the rules to further his own career.

And we welcome viewers from the BBC News Channel

who join us now for this Daily Politics conference special.

We are waiting for Theresa May to take the stage and give us her first

major keynote address as Prime Minister to the party faithful here.

She spoke on Sunday, but this is the big set piece event. She will be on

her feet in a couple of minutes. We will bring it to you all live and

uninterrupted, and we will give what you might like to call post-match

analysis. Let's have some pre-match analysis.

We're joined now by a man who probably has a better idea

of what could be in Theresa May's speech than many -

the Conservative peer and Times columnist Danny Finkelstein.

We're also joined, as we always are for these important events,

by the BBC's political editor Laura Kuenssberg.

A year ago at the Tory party conference, David Cameron was being

lauded as the party leader that had won their first overall majority

since 1992, and the Cameroons were dominant. David Cameron is not here,

the Cameroons are, like lost tribe. Discuss. My column on the day of the

speech that David Cameron said last year said, enjoy this moment,

because this is the peak. The reason is that I thought there were a

number of things that could be in the way. One was the economy. Then

there was the referendum, which he always thought he had the potential

to lose, but it was a very big call. I thought he told European leaders

he was a winner. He believed he could win it, but he always thought

there was a serious chance that he wouldn't and that that would bring

an end to his premiership. He thought he could keep Britain inside

the European Union and persuade people to stay and reform it and he

didn't succeed. But when you get to the position he was in last year, he

had won that majority and you could see there was bound to be a rocky

period ahead. Let's have a look. There is with Davidson, the leader

of the Scottish Conservatives. She is the warm up act this morning --

Ruth Davidson. The stuff we were leaked overnight in advance, Laura,

was a kind of repositioning, trying to make out that Mrs May was more in

favour of government that could be good government and the rest of it.

David Cameron was not a free market libertarian. Indeed not. But leaders

in the end are judged by what they do, not what they say. It may be

that what she does today turns out to be seen as a staging post in

terms of the development of Tory thinking. If you think back to

Margaret Thatcher famously saying there is no such thing as society,

there are individuals and families, and they must look after themselves

first. David Cameron said there is such a thing as society, but it is

not the same as the state. Today, Theresa May will talk about her view

of society, where everybody has to play their part and will say that

the state can be good if it is done in the right way. However, when

she's introducing policies like grammar schools, when her Home

Secretary is making what many people thought of yesterday as a

contentious speech about immigration that business doesn't like and many

people felt it had gone too far with nasty undertones, can those two

things match up? In the end, she will be judged by what she does as

Prime Minister, not what she says today. But it is a bold bid for

disaffected working-class Labour voters. Which has yet to be fleshed

out in actual policy. The idea that the state can do good is hardly

revolutionary. That was the whole theme of Harold Macmillan's the

Middle Way, which he wrote in the 1930s and impairment and when he

became Prime Minister in 1957. Absolutely. There are many echoes of

that in Conservative history but in this country and abroad, from Teddy

Roosevelt. Mr Nixon believed in an act of state. So it definitely has a

role in Conservative tradition, but has been less deployed. The problem

is that because we have left the European Union, we will need to make

the country more welcoming to business. We are probably going to

have to drive down Labour costs and reduce regulation. Why not drive up

productivity? You need to do both. If you drive up productivity, many

would suggest that people think wages in this country are low enough

as it is. You can't be the party of working class people if you cut

wages. So I am saying there is a tension between some of the

requirements of a business friendly environment after Brexit and the

desire to appeal to those who voted for Brexit precisely because they

are worried about low wages. So she has to manage that tension. There is

also a tension in saying you are on the side of ordinary people and

saying the state can be a good force in people's lives when we are still

in a period when the government is cutting spending all of the place.

Yes, Philip Hammond has inflated the airbag this week. If Brexit goes

terribly wrong and awful things happen to the economy, he has made

it clear that he is ready to borrow and he is ready to slow the pace of

the cuts if the economy needs more support by tearing up George

Osborne's fiscal rules, which he might have done anyway in these

circumstances after the referendum vote. That will continue to be a

difficulty. You can say, I am going to look after everybody who makes

the effort and works hard, but if you are doing that at a time when we

are going to be in the sixth year of government cuts that are going to

continue for the next few years, that is a real tension. As ever, the

gap between what what a government does and the rhetoric may be too

great for people to buy her vision. How long has she got to turn this

party of the wetting class rhetoric into reality? It depends how well

economy does. The better the economy does, she has more room for

movement. The cliche about a rising tide lifting all boats, people will

feel better. There is no question that actions matter, but words

matter too. She is right to talk, because the government spends nearly

half of our income and the Conservative Party has not altered

that. As a share of GDP, it is falling. It is true that all

governments are spending a lot of money. It is right to position the

Conservative Party as a party that, while it believes in limited

government, still believes the government can do good things.

Otherwise, when you talk about the NHS or state schooling, people don't

believe you. So the words do matter. We are just getting some shots

inside the hall. It has filled up. It is not a massive arena by the

standards of the old Blackpool Winter gardens. That was a big

place. Or having looked at the US conventions, this would be like a

fringe event. A lunchtime seminar. I heard that she is not using an

autocue? But she's not memorising it either. No gimmicks, no fuss, I

suppose no concession to what she and some around her would see...

That is her husband. They were introduced to each other by Benazir

Bhutto. One of my colleagues on the Times had a piece on the history of

the two of them. They have been in politics a long time, and he is a

very professional political figure. In the nasty party speech she made

as chairman of the Conservative Party, she would not make it until

she had consulted Philip. We are on the Conservative Party video at the

moment. It is the policy of the BBC never to show the videos of any of

the political parties, so we will keep talking. People have drawn

analogies with Denis Thatcher, but he had very strong views in private

but was not really a political animal. He might have had a gin and

tonic in the corner while she would go through drafts of this speech. By

contrast, I was told this morning that Mr May has been part of the

effort of putting this speech together. The speech was finished

late last night. Some of her team were out on the tiles around the

edges of the conference while she was asleep. It was all done in an

orderly fashion. No more four o'clock in the morning finishing.

That is a different way of doing things. I passed you are going up as

Chris Hawkins was coming in. I am not sure what I was coming out of,

but never mind! It has not been all plain sailing. She implied that if

we train more British doctors, we are almost effectively going to

deport more foreign doctors, and immediately have to rein back on

that. When working for William Hague, we discovered how difficult

it is to get the language right on immigration. I am the son of two

refugees and very sensitive to the importance of refuge and

immigration. And yet we found it almost impossible not to raise

hackles with the most careful language. If you look at Jeremy

Hunt's language on foreign doctors, it was incredibly respectful of

them, and yet immediately, people were saying he was xenophobic. Mrs

May herself and senior Tories at the time accused Gordon Brown of

borrowing the slogans of the BNP when he used the phrase British jobs

for British workers. It is remarkable how political language

across all parties has changed around immigration. But don't we get

tied up? If Hillary Clinton said, we want American jobs for American

workers, would that be controversial?

The centre ground party has to respond to public concern on

immigration so we have to carry on until we get the language right and

people like me, social and economic liberals, have to respond to the

public mood and find ways to control immigration in a way which still

lets business thrive and is humane and open. Are you a libertarian? I

voted to remain, but I think that the response of a lots of other

people who voted to remain to that result, the kind of rejection of it,

how dare the electorate vote against our opinion and they must all be

incredibly stupid to disagree with me, I found that quite obnoxious

despite being on the Remain site myself. So I am sympathetic. Another

thing they may have to rein back on, a number of things may not see the

light of day, the publishing the list of foreign workers, every

company. The proposal is for companies to publish the proportion

of their workers that are foreign-born. Here is the Prime

Minister coming onto the stage, taking the waves of the crowd. She

immediately get a standing ovation. As Laura was saying, she isn't going

to use autocue. She feels she speaks more normally and naturally simply

with a script in front of her. None of Ed Miliband trying to memorise

his speech. I think he tried that twice and didn't do it a second

time. Here she is, taking the applause of the Tory faithful. It's

the first time they have seen her as Prime Minister in front of the

conference on the closing date of a Conservative Party conference. Let's

hear the Prime Minister, Theresa May. When we came to Birmingham this

week, some big questions were hanging in the air. Do we have a

plan for Brexit? We do. Are we ready for the effort it will take to see

it through? We are. Can Boris Johnson stay on message for a full

four days? LAUGHTER

APPLAUSE Just about? But I know there is another big question people

want me to answer. What is my vision for Britain, my philosophy, my

approach? Today, I want an answer that question very directly. -- I

want to answer. I want to set out my vision for Britain after Brexit, I

want to lay out my approach, the things I believe. I want to explain

what a country that works for everyone means. I want to set our

party and our country on the path towards the new centre ground of

British politics. Built on the values of fairness and opportunity.

Where everyone plays by the same rules, and where every single

person, regardless of their background, or that of their

parents, is given the chance to be all they want to be.

APPLAUSE And, as I do so, I want to be clear

about something else. That a vision is nothing without the determination

to see it through. No vision ever built a business by itself. No

vision ever closed a family or fed a hungry child, no vision ever changed

a country on its own. You need to put the hours in and the effort,

too. -- no vision ever clothed a family. But, if you do, great things

can happen. Great changes can occur. And, be in no doubt, that's what

Britain needs today. Because, in June, people voted for change and a

change is going to come. APPLAUSE

Change has got to come because, as we leave the European Union and take

control of our own destiny, the task of tackling some of Britain's

long-standing challenges, like how to train enough people for the jobs

of the future, becomes ever more urgent, but change has got to come,

too, because of the quiet revolution that took place in our country just

three months ago. A revolution in which millions of our fellow

citizens stood up and said they were not prepared to be ignored any more.

APPLAUSE Because this is a turning point for

our country, a once in a generation chance to change the direction of

our nation for good, to step back and ask ourselves what kind of

country we want to be. And, let's be clear, we have come a long way over

the past six years. We brought the deficit down, got more people into

work than ever before, taking the lowest paid out of income tax,

established a new national living wage, helped nearly a million new

businesses to set up and grow, got almost 1.5 million more children

into good or outstanding schools, but record investment into the NHS,

created nearly 3 million new apprenticeships and brought crime

down by more than a quarter to its lowest ever level. That's a record

of which we should all be proud. APPLAUSE

And, this morning, it's right that we pause to say thank you to the man

who made that possible. A man who challenged us to change and told us

that, if we did, we would win again, and he was right. We did change. We

did win. The first majority Conservative government in almost 25

years. A great leader of our party, a great servant our country. David

Cameron, thank you. APPLAUSE

But now we need to change again, for the referendum was not just a vote

to withdraw from the EU. It was about something broader, something

that the European Union had come to represent. It was about a sense,

deep, profound and, let's face it, often justified, that many people

have today that the world works well for a privileged few but not for

them. It was a vote not just to change Britain's relationship with

the European Union but to call for a change in the way our country works

and the people for whom it works forever. Knock on almost any door in

almost any part of the country and you will find the roots of that

revolution laid bare. Our society should work for everyone but if you

can't afford to get on the property ladder or your child is stuck in a

bad school, it doesn't feel that it is working for you. Our economy

should work for everyone but, if your page has stagnated for several

years in a row and fixed items of spending keep going up, it doesn't

feel like it's working for you. -- your pay. Democracy should work for

everyone but, if you have been trying to say things for years and

your complaints fall on deaf ears, it doesn't feel like it is working

for you. And the roots of the revolution run deep, because it

wasn't the wealthy who made the biggest sacrifices after the

financial crisis but ordinary working-class families.

APPLAUSE And, if you are one of those people

who lost their job, who stayed in work but on reduced hours, who took

a pay cut as household bills rocketed, or, and I know a lot of

people don't like to admit this, someone who finds themselves out of

work or on lower wages because of low skilled immigration, life simply

doesn't seem fair. It feels like your dreams have been sacrificed in

the service of others. So change has got to come.

APPLAUSE Because, if we don't respond, if we

don't take this opportunity to deliver the change people want,

resentments will grow, divisions will become entrenched, and that

would be a disaster for Britain. Because the lesson of Britain is

that we are a country built on the bonds of family, community,

citizenship, of strong institutions and a strong society. The country of

my parents, who instilled in me a sense of public service and of

public servants everywhere who want to give something back. The parent

who works hard all but takes time out to coach the kids' football team

at the weekend, the local family business in my constituency that has

been serving the community for more than 50 years, the service men and

women I met last week who wear their uniforms proudly at home and serve

our nation with honour abroad. APPLAUSE

A country of decency, fairness and quiet resolve. And a successful

country, small in size but large in stature, with less than 1% of the

world's population but boasting more Nobel laureates than any country

outside the United States, with three more added yesterday, two of

whom worked here, in this great city. A country that boasts three of

the top ten universities in the world, the world's leading financial

capital, and institutions like the NHS and the BBC whose reputations

echo in some of the farthest corners of the globe. All possible because

we are one United Kingdom. England, Scotland, Wales and Northern

Ireland. And I will always fight to preserve our proud historic union

and will never let divisive nationalists drive us apart.

Yet, within our society today, we see division and unfairness all

round. Between a more prosperous older generation and a struggling

younger generation, between the wealth of London and the rest of the

country. But, perhaps most of all, between the rich, the successful and

the powerful and their fellow citizens. Now, don't get me wrong.

We applaud success. We want people to get on. But we also value

something else, the spirit of citizenship. That spirit that means

you respect the bonds and obligations that make our society

work, that means a commitment to the men and women who live around you

and work for you, who buy the goods and services you sell. That spirit

that means recognising the social contract, that says you train up

local young people before you take on cheap Labour from overseas, that

spirit that means you do as others do and pay your fair share of tax.

-- cheap labour from overseas. But today too many people in

positions of power behave as if they have more in common with

international elites than with the people down the road, the people

they employ, the people they pass on the street. But, if you believe you

are a citizen of the world, you are a citizen of nowhere. You don't

understand what the word citizenship means. So, if you are a boss who

earns a fortune but doesn't look after your staff, an international

company which create tax laws as an optional extra, a household name

that refuses to work with the authorities, even to fight

terrorism, a director who takes out massive dividends while knowing that

the company pension is about to go bust...

I am putting you on warning. This can't go on any more. A change has

got to come, and this party is going to make it.

Said today, I want to set out my plans for a Britain where everyone

plays by the same rules and every person has the opportunity to be all

they want to be. It's a plan to tackle the unfairness and injustice

that divides us so that we may build a new United Britain, rooted in the

centre ground, a plan that will mean government stepping up, righting

wrongs, challenging vested interests, taking big decisions,

doing what we believe to be right, getting the job done. That is the

good that government can do, and it's what I'm in this for, to stand

up for the week and to stand up to the strong. And to put the power of

government squarely at the service of ordinary working class people,

because too often, that isn't how it works today. Just listen to the way

a lot of politicians and commentators talk about the public.

They find your patronage and distasteful, your concerns about

immigration parochial, your views about crime in liberal, your

attachment to your job security inconvenient. They find the fact

that more than 17 million voters decided to leave the European Union

simply bewildering. Because if you're well of uncomfortable,

Britain is a different country, and these concerns are not your

concerns. It's easy to dismiss them, easy to say that all you want from

government is for it to get out of the way. But a change has got to

come. It's time to remember the good that government can do, time for a

new approach that says that while government doesn't have all the

answers, government can and should be a force for good, that the state

exists to provide what individual people, communities and markets

cannot, and that we should employ the power of government for the good

of the people. Time to reject the ideological templates provided by

the socialist left and the libertarian right, and to embrace a

new centre ground in which government steps up and not back to

act on behalf of us all, providing security from crime, but from

ill-health and unemployment too. Supporting free markets, but

stepping in to repair them when they are not working as they should.

Encouraging business and supporting free trade, but not accepting one

set of rules for some and another for everyone else.

And if we do, if we act to correct unfairness and injustice and put

government at the service of ordinary working people, we can

build that new United Britain in which everyone plays by the same

rules and in which the powerful and the privileged no longer ignore the

interests of the people. Only we can do it. The main lesson I take from

the conference last week is that the Labour Party is not just divided,

but divisive, determined to pit one against another, to pursue vendettas

and settle scores and to embrace the politics of pointless protest that

simply pulls people further apart. That is what Labour stands for,

fighting among themselves, abusing their own MPs, threatening to end

their careers, tolerating anti-Semitism and supporting voices

of hate. You know what some people call them? The nasty party.

And with Labour divided, divisive and out of touch, we have a

responsibility to step up, represent and govern for the whole nation. So

where labour build barriers, we will build bridges. That means tackling

unfairness and injustice in shifting the balance of Britain decisively in

favour of ordinary working class people, giving them access to the

opportunities that are too often the preserve of the privileged few,

putting fairness at the heart of our agenda and creating a country in

which hard work is rewarded and talent is welcome. A nation where

contribution matters more than entitlement, merit matters more than

wealth. A confident, global Britain that doesn't turn its black on

globalisation, but ensures the benefits are shared by all. A

country that is prosperous and secure, so every person may share in

the wealth of the nation and live their life free from fear. That is

what I mean by a country that works for everyone. And if we believe in

the good that government can do, it's important for people to trust

us to deliver the change they need. We can start, as I said on Sunday,

by doing something obvious. That is to stop quibbling, respect what the

people told us on the 23rd of June, and take Britain out of the European

Union. It took that typically British quiet

resolve for people to go out and vote as they did, to defy the

establishment, to ignore the threats, to make their voice heard.

So let us have that same resolve now, and let's be clear about what

is going to happen. Article 50 triggered no later than the end of

March. A great repeal bill to get rid of the European Union

communities act introduced in the next Parliamentary session. Our

laws, made not in Brussels, but in Westminster.

Our judges, sitting not in Luxembourg, but in courts across the

land. The authority of EU law in this country ended forever. The

people told us they wanted these things, and this Conservative

government is going to deliver them. It is of course too early to say

exactly what agreement we will reach with the EU. It's going to be a

tough negotiation. It will require some give and take. And while there

will always be pressured to give a running commentary, it will not be

in our national interest to do so. But let me be clear about the

agreement we seek. I want it to reflect the strong and mature

relationships we enjoy with our European friends. I want it to

include cooperation on law enforcement and counterterrorism

work. I want it to involve free trade in goods and services. I want

to give British companies the maximum freedom to trade with and

operate within the single market and let European businesses do the same

here. But let's state one thing loud and clear - we are not leaving the

European Union only to give up control of immigration all over

again, and we are not leaving only to return to the jurisdiction of the

European Court of Justice. That's not going to happen. We are leaving

to become once more a fully sovereign and independent country,

and the deal is going to have to work for Britain.

And that Britain, the Britain we build after Brexit, is going to be a

global Britain. Because while we are leaving the European Union, we will

not leave the continent of Europe. We will not abandon our friends and

allies abroad, and we will not retreat from the world. In fact, now

is the time to forge a bold new confident role for ourselves on the

world stage, keeping our promises to the poorest people in the world,

providing humanitarian support for refugees in need. Taking the lead on

cracking down on modern slavery wherever it is found, ratifying the

Paris agreement on climate change. Always acting as the strongest and

most passionate advocate for free trade right across the globe, and

always committed to a strong national defence and supporting the

finest Armed Forces known to man. And this week, our excellent Defence

Secretary Michael Fallon proved not only that we will support them with

our heart and souls, not only will we remain committed to spending 2%

of our national income on defence, but we will never again in any

future conflict let those activist left-wing human rights lawyers how

rang and harassed the bravest of the brave, the men and women of our

Armed Forces. It's about restoring fairness,

something that must be at the heart of everything we do. Supporting

those who do the right thing, who make a contribution. Helping those

who give something back, and that is at the heart of my plan for our

economy too, an economy that is fairer and where everyone plays by

the same rules. That means acting to tackle some of the economy's

structural problems that hold people back. Things like the shortage of

affordable homes, the need to make big decisions on and invest in our

infrastructure. The need to rebalance the economy across sectors

and areas in order to spread wealth and prosperity around the country.

Politicians have talked about this for years, but the trouble is that

this kind of change will never just happen by itself. If that's what we

want, we need the vision and determination to see it through.

That is why Philip Hammond and Greg Clark Tom working on new industrial

strategy to address these long term structural challenges and get

Britain firing on all cylinders again. It's not about picking

winners, propping up failing industries or bringing old companies

back from the dead. It's about identifying the industries that are

of strategic value to our economy and supporting and promoting them

through policies on trade, tax, infrastructure, skills, research and

training investment. It's about doing what every major and growing

economy in the world does, not just sitting back and seeing what

happens, but putting in place a plan on getting on with the job. So we

will identify the sectors of the economy, financial services, yes,

but life sciences, tech, aerospace, car manufacturing, creative

industries and many others that are of strategic importance to our

economy, and do everything we can to encourage, develop and support them.

And we will identify the places that have the potential to contribute to

economic growth and become the homes to millions of new jobs. That means

inspiring and economic and cultural revival of all our great regional

cities. And we have made a start. Thanks to George Osborne's northern

Powerhouse, over the past year foreign direct investment in the

north has increased at double the rate of the rest of the country.

Here in Birmingham... Thanks to the incredible Jaguar Land

Rover, the West Midlands is the only part of the country that runs a

trade surplus with China. And across the region, the Midlands engine is

on track to deliver 300,000 more jobs by 2020. Now it's time to build

on that success in Birmingham, Manchester and other cities across

the country. And as we are here in Birmingham this week, let's show our

support for the Conservative Party's candidate for next year's mayoral

election, a success in business running John Lewis, an action man in

Birmingham playing his part in transforming the city, a man to get

things done. The future mayor of the West Midlands, and the street. --

Andy Street. An economy that works for everyone

is an economy where everyone plays by the same rules. I understand the

frustration people feel when they see the rich and powerful getting

away with things that they themselves wouldn't dream of doing

and they wouldn't get away with if they tried. I understand, because I

feel it, too. There is always an excuse, a reason why something can't

be done, but when that's used as a basis for inaction, faith in

capitalism and free markets fall. The Conservative Party will always

believe in free markets and that's precisely why is this party that

should act to defend them. From Edmund Burke onwards, Conservatives

have always understood that, if you want to preserve something

important, you need to be prepared to reform it. And we must apply that

same approach today. That's why where markets are dysfunctional, we

should be prepared to intervene. Where companies are exploiting the

failures of the market in which they operate, where consumer choice is

inhibited by deliberately complex pricing structures, we must set the

market right. It's just not right, poor example, that half people

living in rural areas, and so many small businesses, can't get a decent

broadband connection. It's just not right that two thirds

of energy customers are stuck on the most expensive tariffs. And it's

just not right that the housing market continues to fail working

people either. Ask almost any question about social fairness or

problems with our economy and the answer so often comes back to

housing. High housing costs and the growing gap between those on the

property ladder and those not lie at the heart of falling social

mobility, savings and low productivity. We will do all that we

can to help people financially so they can buy their own home. That's

why help to buy and right to buy the right things to do, but as Sajid

Javid said in his bold speech on Monday, there is an honest truth we

need to address. We simply need to build more homes. This means using

the power of government to step in and repair the dysfunctional housing

market. It means using public sector land for more and faster

house-building. It means encouraging new technology that will help us

build more houses faster and putting in more government investment. It

means stepping up and doing what's right for Britain, making the market

work for working people, because that's what government can do. And

something else we need to do. Take big, sometimes even controversial

decisions about our country's infrastructure, because we need to

get Britain firing in all areas again. It's why we will press ahead

with plans for High Speed 2, linking London and Birmingham and eventually

counted and cities in the north, why we will shortly announce a decision

on expanding Britain First airport capacity and why, having reviewed

the evidence and added new national security safeguards, we have signed

up to Hinkley Point. We will take the big decisions when they are the

right decisions for Britain because that's what government can do. We

can make these decisions because our economy is strong and because of the

fiscal discipline we have shown over the last six years, and we must

continue to aim for a balanced budget. But, to build an economy

that works for everyone, we must also invest in the things that

matter, the things with a long-term return. That's how we will address

the weaknesses in our economy, improved our productivity, increase

economic growth and ensure everybody gets a fair share. And that's not

the only reason. Because, while monetary policy, with superlow

interest rate and quantitative easing, provided the necessary

medicine after the financial crash, we have to acknowledge there have

been some bad side effects. People with assets have got richer, people

without them have suffered. People with mortgages have found their

debts cheaper. People with savings have found themselves poorer. A

change has got to come and we are going to deliver it because that's

what a Conservative government can do.

This party will always be the party of business, large and small, but we

must acknowledge that the way a small number of businesses behave

fuels the frustration people feel. It's not the norm. I know that most

businesses and the people who run them are hard-working, entrepreneur

Oriel and public spirited at heart, but the of a few are the reputations

of the many. -- entrepreneurial. So the party that believes in business

is going to change things to support it, to offer the people who are

supposed to hold this is -- big businesses accountable are drawn

from the same narrow circles and two from the scrutiny they provide is

not good enough. Change has got to come. Later this year, we will

publish our plans to have not just consumers represented on company

boards but workers as well, because we are the party of workers, of

those who put in the effort, those who contribute and give of their

best. That's why we announced on Saturday that we are going to review

our laws to make sure that, in our modern and flexible economy, people

are properly protected at work. That's right, workers' right. Not

under threat from a Conservative government, workers' rights

protected and enhanced by a Conservative government. And let me

say something about tax. We are all Conservatives here. We all believe

in a low tax economy, but we also know that tax is the price we pay

for living in a civilised society. Nobody, no individual tycoon and

single business, however rich, has succeeded on their own. Their goods

are transported by road, their workers are educated in schools,

their customers are part of sophisticated networks taking in the

private sector, public sector and charities. We have all played a part

in that success, so it doesn't matter to me who you are. If you are

a tax dodger, we are coming after you.

If you are an accountant, financial advisor or a middleman who helps

people to avoid what they owe to society, we are coming after you,

too. An economy that works for everyone

is one where everyone plays by the same rules, so, whoever you are,

however rich or powerful, you have a duty to pay your tax, and we are

going to make sure you do. This is a big agenda for change, but it is

necessary and essential. It is a programme for government to act to

create an economy that works for everyone, an economy that's on the

of ordinary working class people, and an economy that can support the

vital public services and institutions upon which we all rely,

to invest in the things we hold dear, like the NHS, one of the

finest health care systems anywhere in the world and a vital national

institution. An institution that reflects our values, our belief in

fairness, and in which we all take enormous pride. And I mean all,

because there is complete cross-party support for the NHS, for

its status as a provider of free at the point of use health care, for

the thousands of doctors and nurses that work around the clock to care

for their patients. We all have a story about the nurse who cared for

a loved one or the surgeon who saved the life of a friend, so let's take

this opportunity to say to those doctors and nurses, thank you.

The NHS should unite us, but year after year, election after election,

Labour tried to use it to divide us. At every election since it was

established, Labour have said, the Tories would cut the NHS, and every

time we have spent more on it. Every election, they say, we want to

privatise the NHS, and every time we have protected it. In fact, the

party that expanded the use of the private sector in the NHS the

fastest was not this party but the Labour Party.

The only party to ever cut spending on the NHS is not this party but the

Labour Party. That's what they did in Wales. And, at the last election,

it wasn't the Labour Party that pledged to give the NHS the money it

asked for to meet its five-year plan. It was this party, the

Conservative Party, investing in extra ?10 billion in the NHS, more

than its leaders asked for, and this year more patients have been

treated, more operations are being carried out by more doctors and

nurses than ever before. That's a tribute to everyone who works in the

NHS, but also to one man, Jeremy Hunt, who is one of the most

passionate... Jeremy is one of the most passionate

advocates for patients doctors, nurses and others who work in our

health service that I have ever known, so let's have no more of

Labour's absurd belief that they have a monopoly on compassion. Let's

put an end to their sanctimonious pretence of moral superiority.

Let's make clear that they have given up the right to call

themselves the party of the NHS, the party of the workers, the party of

public servants. They gave up that right when they adopted the politics

of division, when their extreme ideological fixation is led them to

simply stop listening to the country, when they abandoned the

centre ground. And let us take this opportunity to show that we, the

Conservative Party, truly are the party of the workers, the party of

public servants, the party of the NHS. Because...

Because we believe in public service. We believe in investing in

and supporting the institutions that make our country great. We believe

in the good that government can do. Government cannot stand aside when

it sees social injustice and unfairness. If we want to make sure

that Britain is a country that works for everyone, government has to act

to make sure opportunity is fairly shared. And I want us to be a

country where it doesn't matter where you were born, who your

parents are, where you went to school, what your accent is like

what God you worship, whether you are a man or woman, gay or straight,

black or white. All that should matter is the talent you have and

how hard you are prepared to work. If we are honest, we'll admit that's

simply not the case for everyone today. Advancement in today's

Britain is still too often determined by wealth or

circumstance, by an accident of birth, by privilege, not merit.

Rebalancing our economy is a start but, if we are serious about

overturning some of the long-standing injustices and

barriers that stop working people getting on, we need that economic

reform to be allied with genuine and deep social reform, too. Because a

society that works for everyone is a society based on fairness, and only

genuine social reform can deliver it. Genuine social reform means

helping more people onto the housing ladder, it means making sure every

child has access to a good school place. It means never writing off

people who can work and consigning them to a life on benefits, but

giving them the chance to go out and earn a living and to enjoy the

dignity that comes from a job well done. But, for those who can't work,

we must offer our full support, which is why it was so important

that Damian Green announced on Saturday that we will end the

mandatory retesting of those with chronic health conditions, but only

induces stress. -- that only induces stress. And genuine social reform

means addressing historic injustices that hold too many people back. Some

of my proudest moments as Home Secretary came when we began to

tackle deep-seated and long-standing problems that few had dared to

tackle before. I introduced the first ever Modern Slavery Act,

grinning in tough new penalties to put slave masters behind bars, with

life sentences for the worst offenders. I cut the police use of

stop and search by almost two thirds and wood used the disproportionate

targeting of young black men, and I know how impressive Home Secretary,

Amber Rudd, is committed to carrying on that work. -- reduced the

disproportionate targeting of young black men.

But injustices remain. If you're from a black Caribbean background,

you are three times more likely to be permanently excluded from school

than other children. If you're a black woman, you are seven times

more likely to be detained under mental health legislation than a

white woman. People in ethnic minority households are almost twice

as likely to live in relative poverty as white people. But it's

not just those from minority backgrounds who are affected. White

working-class boys are less likely to go to university than any other

group in society. We cannot let this stand, not if a country that works

for everyone is the principle that binds us all together. That's why I

have launched an unprecedented audit of public services to shine a light

on these racial disparities and let us do something about them. They are

all burning injustices, and I want this government, this Conservative

government, to fight every single one of them.

A society that works for everyone is one of fairness and opportunity. A

society in which everyone has the chance to go as far as their talents

will take them. That's why, in one of the first speeches I gave as

Prime Minister, I set out my plans to transform Britain into a great

meritocracy. And that starts in our schools. I want Britain to be a

country in which every child has access to a good school place that

is right for that individual child. Britain after Brexit will need to

make use of all the talent we have in this country. We have come a long

way to stop thanks to the free schools and academies programme, and

the efforts of teachers and governors, there are now 1.4 million

more children in good and outstanding schools compared with

2010. But we need to go further, because there are still 1.25 million

children in schools that are just not good enough. And if you live in

the Midlands or the north, you have less chance of attending a good

school than children in the South. This simply cannot go on. That's why

Justine Greening and I have set a new package of reforms building on

Michael Gove's success to increase the number of good school places the

country. So there is not just a school place for every child, but a

good school place for every child, a school place that suits the skills,

interests and abilities of every single pupil.

That's why we want more of our great universities to set up or sponsor

schools in the state sector, just as the university of Birmingham has

done a few miles from here. It is why we are saying to the great

private schools that, in return for their charitable tax status, we want

them to do more to take on children without the means to pay or set

unsponsored good state schools. It's why we want more good faith schools

for parents and pupils who want them. And it's why we have said that

where there is demand from parents, where they will definitely take

pupils from all backgrounds, where they will play a part in improving

the quality of all schools in their area, we will lift the ban on

establishing new grammar schools too.

And here we see the challenge. Because for too long, politicians

have said to people in communities who are crying out for change that

they can't have what they want. They have said we don't think you should

have it, even though we might enjoy those things for ourselves. And you

end up in the absurd situation where you stop these good, popular,

life-changing schools from opening by law. Imagine. Think of what it

says. If you're rich or well off, you can have a selective education

for your child. You can send them to a selective private school, you can

move to a better catchment area or afford to send them long distances

to get the education you want. But if you're not, you can't. I can

think of no better illustration of the problem of why ordinary working

class people think it is one rule for them and another for everyone

else, because the message we are sending them is this. We will not

allow their children to have the same opportunities that wealthier

children enjoy. That is a scandal, and we, the Conservative Party, must

bring it to an end. So my vision is for Britain to be a

great meritocracy. It's what I've always believed in, the cause of

everything I have ever done in politics has been designed to serve.

A country based on merit, not privilege, is a country that is

fair. And when we overcome injustice and unfairness, we can build that

new united Britain that we need. And United, we can do great things. We

saw that in the summer in Rio. We saw how individual success was

powered by collective effort, how the dedication and talent of one was

supported by a united team, and Howard government's determination,

John Major's Conservative government's determination to back

up that success contributed. We were honoured to welcome four members of

the team, Helen Richardson-Walsh, Dame Sarah Storey, Vicky Thornley

and Andrew Triggs Hodge, to our conference on Monday. And to them

and to every athlete and every member of team and Paralympics GB,

we say, thank you. You did your country proud.

It was a memorable summer for British sport. But one moment stood

out for me above all other. It wasn't from Rio. It happened later.

Just a couple of weeks ago, on the sun-drenched streets of Mexico, our

celebrated triathlon Champion Jonny Brownlee was heading for glory, the

finishing line in sight, when he faltered, stopped and was falling,

exhausted, to the ground. And just behind him, his brother, Alistair, a

tough competitor, who typically yields to no one, had the chance to

run on and steal the prize. But seeing his brother struggle, he

didn't pass on by. As other competitors run past, he stopped

reached out his hand and gently carried him home. And there, in that

moment, we saw revealed an essential truth, that we succeed or fail

together. We achieved together all fall short together. And when one

among us falters, our most basic human instinct is to put our own

self-interest aside, to reach out our hand and help them over the

line. That's why the central tenet of my belief is that there is more

to life than individualism and self-interest. We form families.

Communities, towns, cities, counties and nations. We have a

responsibility to one another. And I firmly believe that government has a

responsibility too. It is to act, to encourage and nurture those

relationships, networks and institutions, and to step up to

correct injustices and tackle unfairness where it can, because

these are the things that drive us apart. That's why I said today, as I

have always said, that my mission and the mission of this party is to

build a country that truly works for everyone, not just for the

privileged few. It's why when I stood on the steps of Number Ten for

the first time as Prime Minister 84 days ago, I said that the Government

I lead will be driven not by the interests of the rich and powerful,

but by the interests of ordinary working class people. And this week,

we have shown the country that we mean business. Not just protecting,

but enhancing workers' rights, building an economy that is fair,

where everyone plays by the same rules, getting more houses built,

more doctors in the NHS, investing in things that will make our economy

grow, hundreds of great new schools, universities and fee-paying schools

helping state schools to improve. And yes, where parents want them and

where they will improve standards for children of whatever background,

the first new grammar schools to open in Britain for 50 years.

This is a bold plan to bring Britain together, to build a new united

Britain, rooted in the centre ground, an agenda for a new modern

conservatism that understands the good that government can do, that

will never hesitate to face down the powerful when they abuse their

position of privilege, that will always act in the interests of

ordinary working class people. That's what this government is

about, action. It's about doing something, not being someone. About

identifying injustices, finding solutions, driving change. Taking,

not shirking, the big decisions. Having the courage to see things

through. It's not always glamorous or exciting, but at its best, it's a

noble calling. And where many just see government is the problem, I

want to show it can be part of the solution too. And I know this to be

true. For as I leave the door of my office at Number Ten, I passed that

famous staircase, the portraits of prime ministers past, lined up along

the wall. Men, and of course one woman, of consequence, who have

steered this country through difficult times and changed it for

the better too. There is Disraeli, who saw division and wit to heal it.

Churchill, who confronted evil and have the strength to overcome.

Clement Attlee, with the vision to build a great national institution,

and Lady Thatcher, who taught us we could dream great dreams again.

Those portraits remind me of the good that government can do, that

nothing good comes easy. But with courage and vision and

determination, you can always see things through. And as I passed them

everyday, I remember that our nation has been shaped by those who stepped

up to be counted when the big moments came. Such opportunities are

rare, but we face such a moment today. A moment that calls us to

risk bond and to reshape our nation once again -- it calls us to

respond. Not every generation is given this opportunity. Not every

generation is called to step up in such a way. But this is our

generation's moment to write a new future upon the page, to bring power

home and make decisions here in Britain, to take back control and

shape our future here in Britain. To build an outward looking, confident

trading nation here in Britain. To build a stronger, fairer, brighter

future here in Britain. That is the opportunity we have been given. And

the responsibility to grasp it falls upon us all. So to everyone here

this morning and the millions beyond, whether for Leave or Remain,

I say, come with me and we will write that brighter future. Come

with me and we will make that change. Come with me as we rise to

meet this moment. Come with me and to gather, let's seize the day. --

together. And the Prime Minister finishes her

first forlorn keynote address to the Conservative Party faithful here in

Birmingham. -- her first full on. She got on stage to the sound of the

Rolling Stones. She made a joke about Boris Johnson and went

straight into what she said was her vision of the country. Perhaps a bit

surprising, Mr May is joining her on the platform, giving her a

congratulatory hug. Something we never saw from Denis Thatcher. I

think he would rather have poked his left eye out and have gone onto the

stage to greet Margret Thatcher, but there we are, we have got the spouse

on the stage, waving. She gave her vision of what she sees the country

should be like. She said she had the determination to see it through.

There was the statutory trade and -- tribute to David Cameron, but there

was a change of emphasis from the camera new years. She emphasised

that pay was stated. She emphasised -- empathised constantly with

ordinary working families. There was an attack on Philip Green, for

paying massive dividends when BHS was in trouble. He wasn't named

checked, but there was no doubt who she had in mind. The constant

refrain was that a change has got to come, echoing the famous song by Sam

cook, Change Is Going To Come, which became the anthem of the American

Civil Liberties Union movement. I'm not sure even Mrs May would think

her vision is quite up there with the American civil rights movement,

but there we are. Echoes of that. She wanted a government in the

service of ordinary working people. Interestingly, she said that, with

Brexit, this country would no longer be under the jurisdiction of the

European Court of Justice and would have to have the ability to control

immigration. What she didn't go on to say was, if you had these things

together, that means no membership of the single market. A relationship

to it, but no membership if you are not going to be under the

jurisdiction of the ECJ. She wanted Britain to be bold, new, confident

on the global stage. She said they were still going to aim for a

balanced budget but gave no indication of the timetable of that.

As part of the repositioning, she wanted the Conservatives to be the

party of public service and public servant. She repeated a number of

the things she said on her way into Downing Street, about the life

chances, opportunities or lack of them, that young black kids in the

country have, Sapporo working-class boys and so on. It was rhetoric, it

was aspiration. There was very little policy pledge that would

allow us to see whether these huge aspirations will be fulfilled, but

it was a clear attempt by Mrs May to place her tanks not just on the

centre ground but actually on the centre-left ground of British

politics, with an emphasis on being a government of ordinary working

people. She didn't just say ordinary working people, she said ordinary

working-class people. Danny Finkelstein has been listening. What

did you make of it? I think the language about government was

striking. It is true, of course, that lots of Conservative leaders

have talked about government in the past, but not quite in the same way.

Maybe the closest parallel might be MacMillan with his middle way and is

more self-confident Keynesian talk about governance. He was in favour

of economic planning. This wasn't quite that it will certainly the

most full throated assertion of the Conservative Party's believe in

using the power it has is a government. She is using the

opportunity of not really having our position to try to take the whole of

the centre ground for the governing party. A lot of people have said

that the big advantage for the Conservatives, despite everything

that has happened with Brexit, it is still a party of government, a big,

powerful group of people who have got a majority in parliament and the

Labour Party can't touch it. She was trying to use that space. It was her

first speech and you are allowed a lot of rhetoric in your first

speech. The challenge next year will be to see whether that has been

transformed into policy that has changed the lives of ordinary

working-class people, in Mrs May's words. Let's go to Adam, who is

finding out what the party faithful maid of Theresa May's first major

conference speech. Adam. Ruth Davidson just ran up the stairs

and is heading your way. We are going to get people's reactions.

What did you think of that? It was very good. What was the message, if

you boil it down? Country for everybody. What did you think of it?

Everybody working for everybody, fairness, getting back to what

Conservatives do best. It sounded a bit Ed Miliband in places, saying to

step in and help when the market isn't helping ordinary people. But

she will put it into practice and he didn't. How different was it to

David Cameron? Completely different. I thought she was fantastic. She

speaks as though she intends to do what she has set out to do and she

has given me, certainly, confident she will do that. We are on the BBC.

Are you happy with the idea of the government getting involved in all

sorts of things? Fantastic speech, inspirational. We are leaving with a

spring in our step. What about the government intervening more? It is

to be an instrument of change and she has thrown down the gauntlet.

She will be a government for the one country, one nation Tory years.

Loads of opinions. We hand back. -- one nation Tories.

We are joined now by Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Conservative leader. It

must've been a bit uncomfortable for as a modernising Cameron Remain

supporter. I don't think I would categorise me as any wing of the

party. In Scotland, we do policy on our own, that is devolution. I think

I am a Davidsoner. What? Something like that. Better than a Cameroner.

There are a number of things that Mrs May stands for that you are not

in favour of. You are not going to propose the reintroduction of

grammar schools in Scotland. I'm not, and I know it is a fuel years

since you attended Paisley Grammar. Not that long! I'm not 120. The

education system in Scotland has been different even before

devolution. Since devolution, we have been wholly in charge of

education in Edinburgh. Our path involves giving more powers to

individual school leaders and headteachers, taking it out of local

authority control where necessary. But not grammar schools. Nope. You

would like to stay in the single market. I would have liked to stay

in the EU! You lost that. The Prime Minister said she wants British

businesses to have the freedom to operate within... But not as a

member. Everyone can access. I wanted to stay part of the single

market because I wanted to stay part of the European Union. But you

accept that the Prime Minister said we did not want to fall under the

jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. If you accept that, you

can't be a member of the single market. You can have access to it,

but not membership. I accept that 17.5 million people voted

differently from me and I might not like it but, when there is a

democratic decision like that, and we have never had that number vote

for anything before... But you would still like us to remain a member of

the single market, and that is clearly not Mrs May's policy. Rings

will obviously changed when we come out. For people who won it, there is

an option for politicians who were on the losing side of that debate.

That is either to go off and sulk or you put your shoulder to the wheel.

I have been working hard with different sectors across Scotland to

find out what they want out of this, things like financial services or

energy, oil and gas, food and drink, fishing, farming, where they see

worries and they want protection, where they want opportunities. You

would like free movement of people. These are all of the things that I

voted for. But we voted to come out. I would still like to be in the

European Union. This isn't news. But the terms on which we will no longer

be in the EU are important. But you would still like to see free

movement and the single market. But things are going to change. What

about the idea that companies should be forced to publish the number of

migrant workers they employ? That is a consultation and it will be spoken

about and companies will be asked to contribute. It isn't something I

would propose, and you heard me say in my speech that I want us to be

the international party we have always been, to say to people that

live and work here, that made their home here, if they contribute, this

is their home and they are welcome. But the government has said that.

They have said that EU citizens in this country are essentially a

bargaining chip. David Davis said last night that they are not and he

is 100% certain they will be saying he wants to make sure that is the

first thing that is sorted out, so people can have that certainty. We

can announce now that, regardless of the negotiations, anybody who has

come here legally from the EU and is working, without a criminal record,

is automatically guaranteed to remain if they want to do in this

country. You would like to do that, wouldn't you? And the government

want I understand, but the government also has a responsibility

to the 1.2 million Brits that lived abroad that they get assurances in

the countries where they live. I was pleased to see David Davis saying

that he was certain this could be sorted out quickly and he was going

to push it to be one of the first things that happened so that that

security could be given to people both from the 27 other nations of

the EU and also the 1.2 million Brits that lived abroad. On Sunday,

you were reluctant to say that you had confidence in Boris Johnson.

Would you like to say it today? I said clearly that I had had a good

sit down with him. We had a bit of a ding-dong during the referendum...

We enjoyed that. You have said, I have always adopted the role of the

Foreign Secretary. Do you have confidence in Boris Johnson? I have

a lot more confidence than I did on the other side of the debate. We

talked about Brexit and many other links because I want to make sure he

champions Britain abroad, not just in leaving the EU, because we can't

let that dominate the agenda, and much of this conference has been

about other things. I understand, and we have been talking about these

other things. Do you accept, in the final few seconds that we have, that

Mrs May set a high bar there? The aspiration is to help ordinary

working families. We need to measure that progress. Next year rhetoric

will not be enough and we will need to see signs of progress. If I was

somebody considering tax dodging or facilitating somebody else to dodge

taxes and I saw Theresa May's gimlet eye as she stared into the camera

saying, you will not get away with this, I would be pulling up my

socks. I think you will see action, not just words. Is it true you want

to go on Strictly? I would bloody love it! Would you be better than Ed

Balls? He's quite enthusiastic. I think he is doing well. Our audience

is much bigger, not. That's all from the Conservative