Instinctively, many corporate leaders will want to steer clear of the rancorous debates which, in the U.S., will crescendo into November’s presidential election. Hiding away, getting on with returning to profit, trying to improve the battered share price and restoring a decent dividend will preoccupy many CEOs. Some will quietly drop commitments to look out for other stakeholders and the environment, citing the pandemic as an excuse.  This would be a huge error, not least because around a third of U.K. workers surveyed don’t have confidence in their firms’ leaders’ approach to navigating the current crisis, with a global survey showing that less than a third of respondents believe CEOs are doing an outstanding job dealing with coronavirus.

When it comes to the pandemic, there have been false comparisons made with times of war.  There are those who predict that once this crisis passes we can look forward to advances similar to those that followed World War II.  The societal changes and post war consensus of the 1940s were a by-product of the shared experience of people of all backgrounds and classes fighting side by side against fascism, leading to a collective demand for greater equality thereafter. It was against this backdrop that the 1945 U.K. Labour administration was elected which went on to create our National Health Service, which is playing such an important role in saving lives today. 

There was also a determination to prevent the world being ravaged again by the division and forces that led to the war. So from 1941 U.K. Prime Minister Winston Churchill and U.S. President Roosevelt led the establishment of the liberal international rule-based order which, ever since, has underpinned liberal democracy and trade across the globe, and guarded against authoritarianism and oppression. This struck a chord with President Roosevelt’s “New Deal” with the idea that nations would work on a multilateral basis to “improve labour standards, economic advancement, and social security.”

However, although we may now be fighting a war of sorts, albeit against an invisible enemy—coronavirus—we have been doing so separately in our own homes, in our own family units. Yes, our incredible key workers are putting themselves at risk to keep us safe but the great mass of our populations have had to stay indoors and abstain from doing things–they have not had to face the horror of leaving home, picking up arms and risking life and death in the same way as the war generation. Furthermore, the experience of coronavirus is not equally shared. For example, in the U.S. and the U.K. it disproportionately kills people of colour, and the people and places with the lowest incomes are the most vulnerable to job losses.  

And, far from precipitating international co-operation akin to what we saw under Roosevelt and Churchill, today we have witnessed countries going it alone, dealing with this crisis in a haphazard and uncoordinated way. The current U.S. President, Donald Trump, has even turned on the very international institution—the World Health Organisation—under whose auspices world leaders should be coming together to solve this global problem.

This is very tricky terrain for the C-suite of any company to navigate.

Many employees will return to work over the next few months hoping they still have a job, only to be told they don’t. 

The U.K.’s Office for Budget Responsibility has this morning published its latest estimate of the total cost of the government’s coronavirus policy interventions: a whopping £123 billion in 2020-21.

Quite rightly there are demands for a new social contract involving key workers being properly rewarded for their incredible work. 

Funding all of this will involve tax increases but who will be asked to pay for them?

Microsoft’s CEO, Satya Nadella, says we have seen the equivalent two years’ of digital progression in two months. Great for big tech but this will undoubtedly lead to household names in traditional sectors, like high street retail, going under. Upskilling and training redundant workers to adapt will be essential. We must also guard against further market concentration in the hands of the dominant players that are left standing and a reduction in competition (which is needed for a healthy functioning market). 

So we should use this moment to reform capitalism and foster a new kind of innovation economy where productive businesses, the state, and citizens work together to create wealth, reduce inequalities and ensure that globalisation works for many more people.   

In this context, there will be a lot of scrutiny of business, which has an important role to play, and will be operating alongside a bigger and more active state. But, as ever, opportunist, populist politicians will be looking to exploit this situation for their own cynical ends.

The populist Left will seek to use this moment to impose punitive and extreme measures on enterprise, and implement policies that will certainly not deliver growth or nurture an environment in which under-pressure firms can recover and get people back to work. 

On the populist Right, many of the main protagonists are currently in office. Their knee jerk decision making, based on ideology and emotion as opposed facts and evidence, and their wild policy ideas, have left them exposed as ill-equipped to meet the needs of this moment. President Trump’s suggestion that we inject ourselves with disinfectant provides a good example.

As ever, they will be looking for scapegoats with whom to park the blame for their incompetence.  Our countries do need to build more resilient domestic supply chains for strategic reasons to withstand the type of shock we have experienced. Yet these populists will demand a more drastic approach. There will be calls for deglobalisation and a degree of isolation as a means of protecting citizens, when this crisis has illustrated the importance of co-ordination and collaboration. 

The result—a perfect storm for companies during a pandemic induced global downturn: demands for more red tape, much more regulation, and punitive business taxation at the behest of the populist Left; and, calls for disproportionate restrictions on immigration, more protectionism, and nationalism, at the behest of the populist Right. Both will impede business and trade.

Business needs to see off this threat by acting to ensure that in a post coronavirus world a regulated, social market economy delivers the goods for more people. Everyone must play their part so CEOs need to become more vocal and activist in addressing environmental, social and governance (ESG) concerns, not less. They are in a good position to do so. Were it not for their firms’ technologies, enabling us to remain connected to our nearest and dearest, the experience of lockdown would have been a whole lot worse. If companies seize the moment and are in the vanguard of building back a better and fairer economy, those who stand in the way of enterprise will be deprived of the oxygen they need to whip up fear, anger and anti-business sentiment.

NATO has been key to Britain’s security since its foundation. In the aftermath of the Second World War, NATO, along with the EU and its predecessors, played a central role in restoring peace, stability and prosperity to a Europe ravaged by conflict. In the contemporary world, many of the security challenges the UK faces we share with our allies in NATO. We can best meet these challenges by facing them together. Liberal Democrats know that that Britain is safer and stronger standing together with our friends and partners in organisations such as NATO than we could ever be alone. 

Liberal Democrats will stop Brexit. In doing so we will protect our economy, unlocking the Remain Bonus. This will mean billions more in funding for our schools and other key public services. Crucially for our armed forces, this would mean over £900 million more investment by 2024/25 than they would see under the Tories. That money would enhance our ability to contribute to NATO and maintain our security. It would mean our armed services have the support and resources they need. 

Along with economic damage, Brexit threatens to seriously curtail Britain’s voice and influence in international organisations like NATO. If Brexit happens the UK’s global engagement will be significantly weaker than it is currently, and our influence over crucial EU-NATO coordination will be non-existent. This influence has been vital in the face of rising tensions and challenges facing EU states.

A central emerging challenge is cybersecurity. Through our commitment to NATO, a Liberal Democrat government would work with our allies to counter the damage done by foreign electoral interference and emerging nationalism. Right wing nationalism and isolationism, expressed by Boris Johnson’s commitment to Brexit, and Donald Trump’s “America First” rhetoric threaten the integrity of international organisations like NATO. Increasingly, Johnson is revealing himself as a knock-off Trump. We know now that Putin’s Russia interfered in America’s 2016 elections. The Tories’ suppression of the Security and Intelligence Committee’s report on interference in the Brexit referendum raises questions as to whether our democratic process was also under attack in 2016. 

The Tories’ aren’t alone in undermining the integrity of NATO and other multilateral international organisations. Labour holds that it is committed to NATO, yet Jeremy Corbyn has been candid about his views of the alliance’s place in the modern world. In 2012, he authored a Morning Star article titled “High Time for an End to NATO”. He’s made it clear that he thinks NATO should have been dissolved with the collapse of the Soviet Union, and as recently as 2014 he’s parroted the old line of Eastern Bloc propaganda, that NATO was founded simply to “promote a cold war with the Soviet Union”. Even more outlandishly, Corbyn has regurgitated the conspiratorial notion that NATO has “become the tools of US policy in Europe”.

Neither the Labour Party nor the Tories have a functional plan for today’s British foreign policy. Labour’s vision is the fantasy of a 70’s socialist, while the Tories are stuck dreaming of the age of Empire – the Liberal Democrats are looking to the future. Both the Tories and Labour are parties of Leave. Both would see Britain’s influence recede ever further from multilateral organisations like NATO and become increasingly isolated and impotent. We must not allow this NATO summit to be the last where we are serious players at the table. In government, Liberal Democrats will build a different, better and brighter future for a Britain that is as engaged as ever with our friends and allies in NATO, the EU and around the world.

Alongside our fellow Nato ally, France, Britain is the most capable military power. Our intelligence gathering capacity remains indispensable. Our membership of the Five Eyes intelligence partnership makes us a global leader in the fight against terrorism. And in Nato, Britain holds the position of deputy supreme allied commander Europe.

But Nato must reform and adapt to the changing nature of threats we face. We need to increase Nato’s conventional deterrent and help develop the application of artificial intelligence. Cybersecurity is now a “tier 1” threat and Britain has a key role to play in the integration of internal security and external defence, to meet the new challenges of hybrid warfare. Above all, we must provide credible deterrents that convince others that Nato is committed to Europe’s collective defence.

That is why the Liberal Democrats will ensure the UK upholds our Nato responsibilities, including by spending 2 per cent of GDP on defence. Using the “Remain bonus” and a growing economy, strengthened by staying in the European Union, we will be able to put more money into supporting our armed forces, and enhance the UK’s ability to play our part in Nato to maintain our security.

However, it is alarming that other Nato members’ commitment to the alliance is less than fulsome. President Trump described Nato as “obsolete” during his 2016 presidential campaign. President Macron quite rightly cited Trump’s failure to consult Nato allies, before his abrupt decision to pull forces out of northern Syria, as evidence of the US’s waning commitment to the alliance. This, in turn, paved the way for Turkey – another Nato member – to start an offensive into Syria to create what it called a security zone along its border. No one is more happy to see this state of affairs than Russia’s Vladimir Putin, an active opponent of Nato which suspended contact with his government over the annexation of Crimea in 2014.

Of course, Putin, Trump and Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, not only share a poor regard for Nato, they share a politics: right wing, conservative, nationalist and authoritarian. This is a criticism that equally applies to our prime minister Boris Johnson.

I do not need to repeat the various offensive things Johnson has said about different groups in our society. His capacity to lie – even to our Queen – is there for all to see. He unlawfully sought to shut down our legislature. He refuses to publish a parliamentary intelligence and security committee report into Russian interference into our democracy, in spite of the fact a former Conservative attorney general chairs the committee, a former head of MI5, the former national security advisor and a former head of the civil service, all say it should be published. It is all very Trumpian.

Giving Johnson a majority would be to give blank cheque to this type of politics in the UK – something which should worry us all and be strongly resisted. As Liberal Democrats and patriots, we will defend our liberal, internationalist, progressive values – British values – in the face of this politics of hate and division. 

The December European Council summit starts on polling day and the election results will come through while it is still meeting. Whoever wins may well head straight to that summit. And the clock will be ticking down towards the current scheduled date of departure, 31 January 2020. Once you discount the Christmas break, exit day will be due just over a month after polling day. 

So the public have a choice. Either Johnson fails to get a majority, and sufficient numbers of MPs are elected to provide for a people’s vote in the spring of 2020. Every Liberal Democrat MP and the full weight of our party will be thrown behind Remain in that scenario.

Or, Johnson is given a majority, allowing him a blank cheque to do exactly as he pleases. He has said he will seek to bring his Withdrawal Agreement Bill back to the Commons before Christmas, leaving little time for further scrutiny of it by a new parliament.

Rishi Sunak, chief secretary to the Treasury, let the cat out of the bag over the weekend when he disclosed that, regardless of whether the withdrawal agreement passes, if re-elected the Tories will continue to plan for no deal.

In order to stop this calamity, and for the numbers to add up to stop Brexit in a new House of Commons, at the very least we must reduce the numbers of Conservative MPs – all of their candidates have signed a pledge in this election to deliver this hardest of hard Brexits.

Over the last two weekends, The Observer newspaper carried out seat polls in a number of constituencies that usually vote Tory. They show the Lib Dems in second place with us poised to beat the Tories, particularly if Remainers vote tactically. This has been reinforced by Sir John Curtice who says the Lib Dems are best placed to beat the Tories in seats across the country.

The polling highlights the crucial role voters have in Tory-Lib Dem marginals in the coming weeks – stopping Brexit and Johnson’s extreme version of it is the prize.

Next Wednesday, NATO heads of state and government will gather not far from here to mark the 70 anniversary of the organisation. Founded in 1949 this inter-governmental military alliance of 29 European countries and the U.S. has sought to safeguard the freedom and security of its members.

It has been one of the lynchpins of the liberal international rule-based order established in the wake of the Second World War to spread liberal democracy across the globe and guard against authoritarianism and oppression.

The UK was instrumental in establishing this order and NATO itself. It was Winston Churchill who signed the Atlantic Charter of 1941 on behalf of the UK which set out the framework for this order, its aims and values. Clement Attlee and Ernest Bevin played pivotal roles in founding of NATO. We should be proud of this.

Other institutions which facilitate the multilateralism which is essential to maintaining this order include the United Nations, the World Trade Organisation, the IMF, the World Bank and, of course, the European Union.

So this a fitting moment to say something about what the Liberal Democrats’ approach would be in the next Parliament to the liberal international rule-based order, NATO and UK foreign policy.

Because UK voters have a choice to make at this election:

Give a majority to Boris Johnson, a man determined to take us out of the EU, who has chosen to align with right wing, authoritarian, nationalist forces who are opposed to the liberal international rule-based order;

Or elect as many Liberal Democrat MPs as possible, necessary to deprive Johnson of a majority and ensure the arithmetic in a new House of Commons can deliver a People’s Vote, and pave the way to secure not only Britain’s place at the heart of Europe but as a world leader too.

The situation is pressing and urgent – we have just 17 days to do it.

NATO

Let me start by underlining our commitment to NATO, which has been a cornerstone of the defence of our country.

Alongside our fellow NATO ally, France, we are the most capable military power. Our intelligence gathering capacity remains indispensable. Our membership of the Five Eyes intelligence partnership makes us a global leader in the fight against terrorism. And in NATO Britain holds the position of Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe. Long may that continue.

But NATO must reform and adapt to the changing nature of threats we face. For example, we need to increase NATO’s conventional deterrent and help develop the application of Artificial Intelligence. Cybersecurity is afterall now a tier 1 threat and Britain has a key role to play in the integration of internal security and external defence to meet the new challenges of hybrid warfare. Above all, we must provide credible deterrents that convince others that NATO is committed to Europe’s collective defence.

This is why Liberal Democrats will ensure the UK upholds our NATO responsibilities, including by spending 2% of GDP on defence. Under Liberal Democrats in government, this 2% will be worth £993 million more in 2024-25 than under a Tory government because, using the Remain Bonus, we will enhance the UK’s ability to play our part in NATO and maintain our security. In so doing, we will ensure the men and women in our armed forces have the support and resources they need to do their jobs.

However, it is alarming that other NATO members’ commitment to the alliance is less than fulsome. US President Trump described NATO as “obsolete” during his 2016 Presidential campaign. President Macron quite rightly cited Trump’s failure to consult NATO allies, before his abrupt decision to pull forces out of northern Syrian, as evidence of the US’s waning commitment to the alliance. This, in turn, paved the way for Turkey – another NATO member – to start an offensive into Syria to create what it called a security zone along its border. Consequently, out of some exasperation, President Macron described NATO as “brain dead” and warned European countries that we can no longer rely on America to defend NATO allies.

No one is more happy to see this state of affairs than President Putin of Russia, an active opponent of NATO which suspended contact with his government over the annexation of Crimea in 2014.

Of course, President Putin, President Erdogan of Turkey and Trump not only share a poor regard for NATO, they share a politics: right wing, conservative, nationalist and authoritarian.

America

It is Trump, perhaps more than any other, who has taken this politics mainstream in the Western World. In his words and deeds he has been unafraid to engage in bigoted, racist, sexist, and Islamophobic behaviour, to lie and to break the law. All the same criticisms apply to the UK’s Prime Minister who is following the Trump playbook and has become part of this global network of populist, right wing, authoritarian nationalists.

I do not need to repeat the various offensive things the Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, has said about different groups in our society. His capacity to lie – even to our Queen – is there for all to see. He unlawfully sought to shut down our legislature. He refuses to publish a parliamentary intelligence and security committee report into Russian interference into our democracy, in spite of the fact a former Conservative Attorney General chairs the committee, a former head of MI5, the former National Security Advisor and a former head of the Civil Service, all say it should be published. What does he have to hide? Why is he hiding this report from the British public? It is all very Trumpian.

We know that before his election Johnson was regularly in touch with and took advice from Steve Bannon, the man who was instrumental in seeing Trump and his unedifying brand politics into the White House.

On Johnson taking office, Trump lauded him as “Britain Trump”. Indeed, it was Trump who gave the order that the UK’s Conservative and Brexit parties should form an electoral pact. Nigel Farage obliged and so it has come to pass, with Farage claiming yesterday that the 2019 Tory manifesto is a copy of UKIP’s 2015 offer.

Giving Johnson a majority would be to give carte blanche to this type of politics in the UK – something which should worry us all and should strongly be resisted. As British patriots, we must defend our liberal, internationalist, progressive values – British values – in the face of this politics of hate and division.

Of course, our partnership with the US – our closest ally – is bigger than one man and will endure in spite of Trump. It is a partnership that has defined the West’s foreign policy, forged in two world wars, the Cold War and more recently in the fight against Islamic extremism.

It is often described as “special”. The truth is the relationship is neither special, nor is it sentimental. But it is based on hard-headed national interests.

Our mutual sharing of intelligence and the interoperability of our nuclear submarine forces makes it more than just a transaction. Our army, navy and air force are designed to fight alongside the US in a supporting role. The relationship gives us security, and it amplifies our capabilities across the world. We are very much committed to it for that reason.

Yet Britain cannot settle for just being a useful component of US foreign and defence policy. As Attlee remarked to Bevin in a Cabinet meeting discussing the nuclear deterrent, ‘We ought not to give the Americans the impression that we cannot get on without them; for we can and, if necessary, will do so.’ In this, our EU membership has been key. We have not only acted as a bridge between the EU and the US, but our membership of the EU has acted as a useful counterweight in our relationship with the U.S.

This delicate balance is under threat. Not only will we cease to be that important bridge between the EU and the US but, by withdrawing from the EU, inevitably Johnson will become more reliant on Trump in the short term if he is re-elected. Johnson is desperate to

secure a US trade deal to make up for the damage done to our global standing if Brexit happens. From my own contact with the US Government, it is clear a high price will be demanded and close alignment with US rules and regulation demanded – so we risk becoming a vassal state of the U.S. if Boris Johnson gets a majority. Leave the EU and the UK under Johnson will become President Trump’s poodle. This is what is at stake at this election.

Europe

It underlines the importance of stopping Brexit from happening in 17 days time.

Since the end of the Second World War the UK has been at the heart of the European project. It was Winston Churchill who called for a united Europe, declaring that the continent could not afford to drag forward the hatred and revenge from injuries of the past, and that the first step must be to recreate the ‘European family’ of justice, mercy and freedom.

While he may wish to portray himself as a Churchillian figure, Boris Johnson does a disservice to our country’s great war-time leader by claiming Churchill’s mantle for his own nationalist, isolationist agenda.

Seventy years later and our continent, once scarred by conflict and bloodshed, has healed.

The EU continues to be essential for peace, security, and cooperation in our part of the global neighbourhood. And the UK’s economic, political and security interests dictate that we continue to be a member of the European Union.

We share the same values, we have common interests, and can achieve more together than we can alone in a global economy that does not recognise borders. I simply do not understand how any political activist in our country can be “neutral” on this. And I am proud to be led by a leader who is resolute: our country is stronger, safer and better off in the EU.

This is an emergency. Things will move very quickly after polling day. The December EU Council summit starts on polling day and the election results will come through whilst it is still meeting. Whoever wins, may well head straight to that summit. And the clock will be ticking down towards the current scheduled date of departure, 31st January 2020. Once you discount the Christmas break, exit day will be due just over a month after polling day.

So two things can happen after polling day:

Sufficient numbers of MPs are elected to pass the necessary motions and legislative measures to provide for a People’s Vote in the Spring of 2020, for which the EU will grant a further extension. As the last parliament illustrated, what matters is the parliamentary arithmetic, not the wishes of any minority government. Every Liberal Democrat MP and the full weight of our party will be thrown behind Remain in that scenario.

Or, Boris Johnson is given a majority, allowing him to more or less blank cheque to do exactly as he pleases. He has said he will seek to bring his Withdrawal Agreement Bill back to the Commons before Christmas, leaving little time for further scrutiny of it by the new parliament. He is clear: he will see to it that we walk away from the club which we entered being dubbed as the sick man of Europe but would leave as the world’s fifth largest economy, in no small part due to our membership of it.

Chief Secretary to the Treasury Rishi Sunak let the cat out of the bag over the weekend as to what would happen next when he disclosed that, regardless of whether the Prime Minister’s Withdrawal Agreement passes, if re-elected the Tories will continue to plan for “no deal”. That makes sense because it is the course they are embarked upon. They say they have an “oven ready” trade deal but it is not even half baked. It will be impossible to conclude this free trade agreement – which is Canadian in flavour – with the EU by the end of December 2020. The Prime Minister has said he will not extend the implementation period beyond 2020 so, in all probability, the UK will be trading on “no deal”, WTO terms with the EU from 2021 under the Tories, with all the damage and fallout for our country which that will entail.

In order to stop this calamity and for the numbers to add up to stop Brexit in a new House of Commons, at the very least we must reduce the numbers of Conservative MPs – all of their candidates have signed a pledge in this election to deliver this hardest of hard Brexits. Here the Liberal Democrats have a vital and decisive role to play because only we can take seats from the Tories in significant numbers.

As Sir John Curtice has said, given current polling, in a substantial number of seats we are now likely to be the stronger challenger to the Conservatives. This is borne out by current in-seat polling. Over the last two weekends, The Observer has carried out seat polls in a number of constituencies that usually vote Tory, which show the Lib Dems in second place with us poised to be beat the Tories particularly if Remainers vote tactically.

Conversely, the Labour party would lose in all of them. Far from taking seats from Johnson, Labour is trying to defend its own from the Tories, particularly in the West Midlands, North East and Yorkshire. For the betting folks out there, Ladbrokes does not have Labour as favourites to win in any Tory-held seat – but it does with the Lib Dems. This highlights the crucial role voters have in Tory/LibDem marginals in the coming weeks – stopping Brexit and stopping Boris Johnson’s extreme Brexit is the prize.

Conclusion

And the UK deciding to remain in the EU will not only be a boost to the UK and the EU, but it will provide a much needed injection of oxygen into the liberal rule-based international order itself, which is under threat.

I’ve already mentioned Trump, Putin and Erdogan’s disregard for it. In China, we see in Hong Kong human rights abuses, democracy and the rule of law under attack. In Kashmir, the abolition of the region’s special status by the Indian government is a cause of alarm.

Across the world, nationalist populism – the pernicious mantra that one people is superior to another – is making strides. Matteo Salvini and his Northern League dominate Italian politics. Viktor Orban has distorted public life in Hungary to monopolize power there. President Jair Bolsonaro is undermining democracy in Brazil. The list goes on.

The order is imperfect. Yes, it must do far better at reducing inequality and fostering a more inclusive global economic system. But however flawed it may be, this liberal international order has none the less created peace and prosperity.

It helped transform states which had been aggressive autocracies – Germany and Japan – into liberal democracies.

The trade it has opened up between countries has helped ensure global competition no longer results in military conflict. In turn, this has helped lift hundreds of millions out of poverty and people are more healthy than before.

Furthermore, the liberal democracies that fall within the order have, in the main, also provided better protection of the rights and civil liberties of their peoples.

And Extreme nationalism was forced to retreat.

NATO and the EU – as key parts of the order’s architecture – have been instrumental in all of this.

Going forward, the great challenges of the twenty-first century are global – the climate emergency; human trafficking; the illegal arms trade; global poverty and inequality. I do not see how we tackle them if not through this order.

Re-electing a government that aligns itself with the forces ranged against the liberal rule-based order, forces which undermine NATO, cannot be the answer. Giving free reign to a government which seeks to separate our country from the EU and so diminish Britain’s capacity to cooperate with our closest neighbours in response to these threats, will be a huge backward step.

We offer a different course. Liberal Democrats are internationalists. This is at the heart of who we are as a party, it flows through everything we do.

To finish where I started: under that 1941 Charter which Chruchill signed, all countries would have the right to self-determination. All people the right to freedom of speech, of expression, of religion, and freedom from want and fear. The rule of law would be promoted. All nations would collaborate to ‘improve labour standards, economic advancement, and social security’ for all. If you vote for the Liberal Democrats at this election, that is precisely what we will work to make happen.

Thank you.

The people of Hong Kong are not making unreasonable demands. They are simply calling for the promises that were made to them to be upheld. These promises, enshrined in the Sino-British declaration, place a moral and legal duty on the UK to ensure that the rights and freedoms of Hong Kong are enhanced and protected. Democracy, human rights and the rule of law should be at the forefront of all UK foreign policy. And when it comes to Hong Kong, there is absolutely no excuse for the Conservatives’ inaction.

The UK government has thus far turned a blind eye to the situation in Hong Kong, failing to show any leadership or take decisive action. The Conservatives have let down the people of Hong Kong in their hour of need. We made a promise but they have so far ducked and weaved to avoid upholding that promise.

Liberal Democrats will bring an end to this unforgivable situation. Democracy, the rule of law, and human rights run through our veins. During the handover process in the 1980s and 1990s, these values motivated us to demand that the people of Hong Kong be given the right of abode in the UK if China were to renege on the promises made in the Sino-British declaration. The late Paddy Ashdown led this call, knowing the UK could not guarantee the promises we’d made without this supportive measure. As he said then, democracy is not a magic wand to be waived in front of a Chinese tank. It needs to be supported by something; it must be supported by the right of those people to leave if they wish and come to Britain.

Beijing has clearly now reneged on the promises of the Handover. They have dismissed the Sino-British Declaration lodged at the United Nations, and backtracked on the “one country, two systems” principle. That is why a Liberal Democrat government will reopen the offer of a British National Overseas (BNO) Passport to Hong Kong citizens. Around 169,000 Hong Kong residents currently hold active passports under this scheme, which was open between 1987 until the handover to China in 1997. However, since the scheme closed, Hong Kong citizens including the many young people involved in the protests are not able to apply.

BNO passport holders currently enjoy privileged status, including the right to stay in Britain for six months as a visitor. However, they do not enjoy permanent residency in the UK. As such. we would also extend the BNO Passport so it provides the right of abode. This would give Hong Kong citizens who hold a BNO passport the right to live or work indefinitely the UK without any immigration restrictions or the need for a visa.

We will not sit back and sacrifice the rights of the people we made a promise to. For too long the UK has failed to act. Ministers have failed to respond effectively while Beijing has trampled over the Declaration and threatened the rights of the people we vowed to support. A Liberal Democrat government will not allow this to continue.

By reopening the British National Overseas Passport offer and extending it to give the people of Hong Kong the right of abode, Liberal Democrats will not only be protecting and supporting the rights and freedoms of Hong Kongers who take up the offer, but will be sending a clear message to Beijing that the erosion must stop and be reversed. The measure will help prevent any future violations, giving teeth to the promises of the Handover.

Liberal Democrats will put equality, democracy and the rule of law at the heart of government. A key part of this is fulfilling the obligations we made to the people of Hong Kong. It’s beyond time to do so and unforgivable that the UK has failed to for so long. Liberal Democrats stand with the people of Hong Kong.

The promises made by Boris Johnson and the Conservative Government that the UK would have a whole host of trade deals in place by Brexit day have now long been seen to be nonsense, however this desperation by Liz Truss represents a new low.

This leak shows how Government ministers are willing to abandon safety standards on the food we feed our families in a hopeless attempt to try and replace the trade we will lose as members of the European Union.

The Tories’ vision of Global Britain is in tatters. Our position on the world stage is no longer being a leader in minimum standards to protect people’s welfare, but instead we are witnessing our Government try to roll these back or abandon them entirely.

This grovelling to Donald Trump to get a trade deal must stop. The route out of this mess is to stop Brexit and the Liberal Democrats will continue to lead this fight.

It has been an historic year for Israeli politics. The back-to-back elections were the first in the country’s history and demonstrate a shift in the political landscape. As of this summer, Netanyahu is the longest serving Prime Minister, but his future in that role is now less than certain. He will need to convince 61 members of the Knesset to support his government; he currently has only 55. If he fails to do so then it is likely that Gantz will be tasked with the job instead.

The Joint List, a bloc of Arab-majority parties that came third in the election have already said they want to remove Netanyahu from power and that Gantz should become Prime Minister. It is the first time since 1992 that an Arab political group has issued an endorsement for an Israeli prime minister.

Regardless of whether Netanyahu is able to form a government in the coming weeks, the election results demonstrate that things are shifting in Israeli politics. The ramifications of whatever happens in the next month will be huge. Netanyahu’s time in office has become increasingly marked by racist rhetoric, scathing attacks on the Supreme Court, and threats of annexing parts of the West Bank. The latter of which he has implied has had the green light from US President Trump. 

In contrast, Gantz has previously stated that Israel needs ‘to find a way to not to have dominion over [Palestinians]’. This said, Gantz’s position does not represent a major departure on issues including the West Bank. He has committed to continue the expansion of illegal settlements, and in response to Netanyahu’s annexation plans his party said “we are happy that the Prime Minister has come around to adopt the Blue and White plan to recognise the Jordan Valley”. 

It becomes increasingly evident that the international community must redouble efforts to secure a negotiated peace settlement with a two-state solution. As the Liberal Democrat Shadow Foreign Secretary, I am committed to such a solution. I also recognise that annexation would make reaching this considerably less likely. Not only would the move violate international law, it would also lead to further instability and risk providing encouragement to extremists everywhere. The threats from both Netanyahu and Gantz are therefore extremely concerning.

Regardless of whether Netanyahu is now able to form a government, the UK government must act to ensure that the UK formally recognises both states. Rhetoric about a two-state solution is meaningless if we do not even formally recognise one of those states ourselves. The legwork on recognition has already been done for Boris Johnson: my colleague Layla Moran, who is the first UK MP of Palestinian descent, has already brought the legislation to Parliament and it is ready to pass into law.

While threats of annexation are a big step away from a peaceful two-state solution, formally recognising Palestine would be a step closer again. It would help level the playing field and ensure that we can bring an end to the violence. The disproportionate force used by all sides, including the targeting of Israeli civilians by Hamas and Israel’s illegal policy of settlement expansion, is utterly abhorrent and we must do all we can to help secure lasting peace. 

As things stand, the agenda has been hijacked by extremists on both sides with very little sign of progress. Meanwhile, Trump’s interventions have been damaging and the UK Conservative government has stayed woefully quiet. With a possible new era of Netanyahu, we must give hope to Palestinians and help secure a two-state solution.

A Liberal Democrat government would immediately recognise the state of Palestine. As Foreign Secretary I would ensure that the UK’s voice as part of the UN Security Council and other multilateral platforms is used to help secure the resumption of peace talks. Regardless of who is the next Israeli PM, this is our duty and it is the right thing to do.

Conference, it is an honour and a pleasure to be addressing you as a Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament and as your Shadow Foreign Secretary.

Now, I’ve been to a few parties and I hope I don’t sound immodest when I say my experience of joining this party underlines that it was one of the best decisions I have ever made since going into politics.  

From the bottom of my heart, thank you for making me feel so welcome.  I could not be more at home in the wonderful Liberal Democrat family.

And the decision to join was not made out of crude self interest…If self interest or climbing the greasy poll is your goal, I would not recommend following my example.  

The truth is, all the incredibly difficult decisions I have made on the journey I’ve been on this year were routed in my values and principles.  I joined this party out of conviction.

As you know, I am a Remainer and proud of it – we have spent far too long apologising for being pro-European in this country.  Because you cannot be pro-Britain and put our national interest first without seeking to put Britain at the heart of Europe. 

But, even more importantly, I am a social democrat with liberal values.  You see, to be a Remainer is not only to be an advocate of our continued membership of the European Union; it is to hold a set of liberal, internationalist values of which we Liberal Democrats are the champions and defenders in Britain.

In an attempt to smear those of us who have an internationalist outlook, Theresa May said “if you believe you’re a citizen of the world, you’re a citizen of nowhere”.  What utter garbage. We are citizens of the world and – just you watch – at the next election you will see Liberal Democrats taking seats from the Tories in every part of the country as so many people are flocking to us, the strongest and biggest Remain party. 

Be in no doubt: this is the battle of our time and it goes far beyond Britain’s borders.

What it is to be a liberal

Our party exists to build and defend a fair, free and open society, a society in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity……That was taken straight from our constitution – as you can see, I’ve done my homework.

In essence, the society we seek to build is one where if you work hard and play by the rules, you should be free to lead a happy, prosperous and secure life free of domination of either the state or the market.  And we want to ensure future generations can do the same by preserving our planet for the long term continuity of life in all its forms.

I grew up in world in which we took these values for granted.

As a family of mixed heritage – English, Irish and Nigerian – our back story, alongside that of millions of others, stands as an example of Britain’s liberal, open, internationalist spirit.

The notion that we all share the same basic rights and should live together in peace, regardless of background is something we will always fight for.  

That different cultures should be able to develop freely and that there is diversity in modern Britain is not something simply to be tolerated – it is something we positively celebrate.

And, whatever the political complexion, we will always demand our governments respect the rule of law, with an independent judiciary able to uphold those laws, free from abuse and attack by the Executive.

This is the Britain we know and love – and Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and the peddlers of hate and division in our country better know that this is what we will fight for at the coming election.  

It is our job to make sure this country’s heart beats in a liberal and internationalist direction; not nationalist, populist authoritarianism. This is the new fault line in British politics and we know where we stand.

The liberal rules based international order

Because we recognise that these things cannot be achieved in isolation and that the pursuit of individual and social justice does not stop at the border, we seek to work together with other liberal democracies who share our values to overcome cross border obstacles to achieving our goals.  As Menzies Campbell said at conference back in 2005, “in an inevitably interdependent world, cooperation is not only in our interests, it is essential to survival”. And rhe best way to protect British interests, he argued, was “strong and effective multilateralism”.  He was right then and still is now.

That is why we are internationalists. That is why we are pro-European. Liberalism is needed at home to protect personal freedom and liberty; Liberalism and cooperation are also needed abroad to secure peace, promote democracy and defend human rights.

If we are elected, we will fight poverty, oppression, hunger, ignorance, disease and aggression wherever they occur and we will seek to promote the free movement of ideas, people, goods and services.  Conference, there is no constructive ambiguity on this in this party.

So we support the liberal international rule-based order established in the wake of the Second World War which has underpinned liberal democracy across the globe and guarded against authoritarianism and oppression.  The Atlantic Charter of 1941, of which the UK was a signatory, set out the framework for this order, its aims and values. 

With the memory of fascism and the threat of communism, collective security was paramount and a robust national defence married to a passionate commitment to social and global justice was the goal.

Under the Charter, all countries would have the right to self-determination. All people the right to freedom of speech, of expression, of religion, and freedom from want and fear. The rule of law would be promoted. And this struck a chord with President Roosevelt’s ‘New Deal’ – nations would collaborate to ‘improve labour standards, economic advancement, and social security’ for all.

It led to the international institutions which facilitate the multilateralism which is essential to maintaining this rules based order today: the United Nations, the World Trade Organisation; the IMF and the World Bank; and, of course, NATO to defend our democracies.  In fact it was in the 1940s that the Liberals were the first UK political party to vote in favour of a European Union.

The EU, once it came into being, evolved to become not only an important lynchpin of this order on the continent but it expanded this order to cover Central and Eastern Europe states too.  In government, we will seek to maximize British influence in all these institutions and play the most active possible role because, as Liberals, we put our values into action. 

There is no better an example of this than the late, great Paddy Ashdown, whose life and achievements we remember this week. 

As the first High Representative in Bosnia Paddy pulled together multilateral resources and created the political will to push ahead with political reforms. In a lesson that still rings true today, Paddy often liked to say that “if the international community is united, there is absolutely nothing we cannot do in the Balkans. If the international community is divided, there is absolutely nothing we can do in the Balkans.” 

Of course, the first thing we will do in Government is revoke Article 50 so that, once again, the British people can resume their role of providing leadership as a full and active member of the European Union.

This order is imperfect. It must do far better at reducing inequality and fostering a more inclusive global economic system. But however flawed it may be, this liberal international order has none the less created peace and prosperity.  

It helped transform states which had been aggressive autocracies – Germany and Japan – into liberal democracies.  

The trade it has opened up between countries helped ensure global competition no longer resulted in military conflict.  In turn, this has helped lift hundreds of millions out of poverty and people are more healthy than before.

Furthermore, the liberal democracies that fall within the order have, in the main, also provided better protection of the rights and civil liberties of their peoples.  

And Extreme nationalism was forced to retreat.  

Yet the advances made then are now at risk.

The decline of the liberal rules based order and the need for renewal

Today it is that liberal international order that is now in retreat.  As a result the world is becoming a more dangerous place.  Consider what has happened since Conference gathered last year.

If his attempted travel ban for muslims and scapegoating of Mexican immigrants were not enough to convince you that far Right politics has entered the White House, we have watched President Trump telling four congresswomen of colour to “go home.”  It is racism, pure and simple. What a disgrace.  

Abroad he is seeking to pull the US out of the Paris Climate agreement, he is flouting WTO rules in the pursuit of what he calls “fair trade”, and he has pulled the US out of the Iran nuclear deal.

In China, we are witnessing violent and repressive scenes in Hong Kong with the disproportionate use of force against the protests calling into question China’s commitment to upholding Hong Kong’s way of life and the “two systems, one country” model which demands the rule of law, human rights and democracy be observed.

Russia’s President Putin has claimed international “liberalism is obsolete” and at the same time made remarks which amounted to thinly veiled homophobia.  He also suggeste Trump’s racist rhetoric was justified given immigrants kill, plunder and rape with impunity.  This of course is the man who went into another country – Ukraine – and annexed part of it, Crimea.

In Kashmir, the abolition of the region’s special status by the Indian government, and the unrest and human rights abuses we have seen subsequently in the area, should be a cause of alarm around the world.

In short, across the world, nationalist populism – the pernicious mantra that nations should be homogeneous and one people is superior to another  – is making strides. Matteo Salvini and his Northern League dominate Italian politics. Viktor Orban has distorted public life in Hungary to monopolize power there. President Erdogan and President Jair Bolsonaro are undermining democracy in Turkey and Brazil respectively. 

So a giant battle is raging globally, between the pluralist, progressive creed of liberal democracy on the one hand and a desiccated authoritarianism on the other. 

Let us be clear: the Liberal Democrats are the only party that can get into office which is capable of meeting this challenge in Britain today.

Only the Liberal Democrats are capable of renewing international liberalism

You see, you cannot defend a liberal, rules based order abroad if you so openly flout the rules at home.  

Boris Johnson has facilitated the takeover of Her Majesty’s Government by the remnants of Vote Leave campaign  – an outfit  that was not only was found guilty of lying during the 2016 referendum in relation to its claims on the NHS by the Statistics Authority, but it was found guilty of cheating and breaking the law by the Electoral Commission.  

Now, as he seeks to force through a catastrophic “no deal” Brexit, the Prime Minister has shut down Parliament and is threatening to break the law if necessary.  The Tory right, who have taken over their party, like nothing more than to bang on about incarcerating more and more people who break the law, but strangely think a different approach should be adopting in relation to their law breaking.

And, as he seeks to force the UK out of the EU, he will become ever reliant on President Trump, whose political playbook he follows.  But President Trump has always been clear – it will be America not Britain First.

Beyond Brexit and cosing up to President Trump, no one seems to know what the foreign policy strategy of this government is.  What is clear is that we will not see the leadership on the world stage required from the new occupant of No 10.  He likes to think of himself as a modern Winston Churchill.  Churchill was of course the Prime Minister who signed the Atlantic Charter and played a private role founding the liberal international order – Boris Johnson has been busy kicking his relatives out of the Tory party.

This brings me to the Opposition.  The Labour Party likes to think of itself as a champion of liberal values at home and abroad.  Clement Attlee and Ernest Bevin played pivotal roles in the founding of NATO but this is not the party of Attlee and Bevin; this is Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour.

You cannot be a champion of liberalism if you are currently subject to a formal investigation by the Equality & Human Rights Commission for institutional racism against Jewish people.  You cannot be a champion of liberalism when your leader’s supporters think it is acceptable to abuse, vilify and deselect anyone who dares to question the leader. And you cannot claim to be liberal when the political editor of the BBC needs to take a bodyguard to your conference.

And then you look at Jeremy Corbyn’’s foreign policy positions.  Acting as an apologist for a hard-right -Russian government that thinks it can poison people on British soil, lauding authoritarian regimes in Venezuela and Iran, failing to support the prescription of Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation.  Attlee and Bevin helped found NATO – Jeremy Corbyn and those around him want to abolish it. 

Of course what unites both Johnson and Corbyn is the fact that they want to leave the EU, the organisation which has been the biggest champion of liberalism in our part of the global neighbourhood.  Neither is fit to lead this country.  

Its time for a change and someone who I know can provide that leadership: Jo Swinson.

Conclusion

Under Jo’s premiership we can breathe a progressive breath of fresh air into the British foreign policy. 

Liberal Democrats are internationalists. This is at the heart of who we are as a party, it flows through everything we do. 

We believe in tearing down walls, not building them. We believe in working together through multilateral organisations, not standing alone. 

And we believe that to tackle the biggest issues facing us today, from the climate emergency to terrorism, we need to ensure that the UK is at the table, achieving consensus internationally.  

Perhaps now more than ever, UK foreign policy is yearning for clear liberal, democratic values. A Liberal Democrat government would not be tied to outdated tropes or biases, but would be clear that the UK must continue to work with allies from across the world, playing a leading role in the EU and other international institutions. 

With Jo as our Prime Minister we will revive our reputation on the world stage and get on with helping to improve the lives of those across the world. 

As Liberal Democrats we have a duty to do this, to defend the values of human rights, democracy, and equality. 

And as your Liberal Democrat Shadow Foreign Secretary I can promise you that I will stand up for a truly global Britain.

Thank you. 

At the heart of our offer to voters across the UK are our values. I am a social democrat with liberal values. To be a Remainer is not only to be an advocate of our continued membership of the European Union; it is to hold a set of liberal, internationalist values of which we Liberal Democrats are the champions and defenders of in Britain.

As the Liberal Democrat constitution says, our party exists to build and defend a fair, free and open society, a society in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity. 

The society we seek to build is one where if you work hard and play by the rules, you should be free to lead a happy, prosperous and secure life free of domination of either the state or the market. The Liberal Democrats want to ensure future generations can do the same by preserving our planet for the long term continuity of life in all its forms.

For the Liberal Democrats, it is our job to make sure this country’s heart beats in a liberal and internationalist direction; not nationalist, populist authoritarianism. This is the new fault line in British politics and we know where we stand. We recognise that these things cannot be achieved in isolation and that the pursuit of individual and social justice does not stop at the border, we seek to work together with other liberal democracies who share our values to overcome cross border obstacles to achieving our goals.

That is why we are internationalists. That is why we are pro-European. Liberalism is needed at home to protect personal freedom and liberty; liberalism and cooperation are also needed abroad to secure peace, promote democracy and defend human rights. If the Liberal Democrats are elected to government at the next election, we will fight poverty, oppression, hunger, ignorance, disease and aggression wherever they occur, and we will seek to promote the free movement of ideas, people, goods and services.

We support the liberal international rule-based order established in the wake of the Second World War which has underpinned liberal democracy across the globe and guarded against authoritarianism and oppression. The Atlantic Charter of 1941, of which the UK was a signatory, set out the framework for this order, its aims and values. Under the charter, all countries would have the right to self-determination. All people would have the right to freedom of speech, of expression, of religion, and freedom from want and fear. The rule of law was promoted.

It led to the international institutions which would facilitate the multilateralism which is essential to maintaining this rules based order today: the United Nations, the World Trade Organisation; the IMF and the World Bank; and, of course, Nato to defend our democracies. In fact, it was in the 1940s when the Liberals were the first UK political party to vote in favour of a European Union.

Of course, the first thing we will do in government is revoke Article 50 so that, once again, the British people can resume their role of providing leadership as a full and active member of the European Union.

This rules-based order is imperfect. It must do far better at reducing inequality and fostering a more inclusive global economic system. But however flawed it may be, this liberal international order has nevertheless created peace and prosperity.  

But across the world, nationalist populism is making strides. Matteo Salvini and his Northern League dominate Italian politics. Viktor Orban has distorted public life in Hungary to monopolise power there. President Erdogan and President Jair Bolsonaro are undermining democracy in Turkey and Brazil respectively. A giant battle is raging globally, between the pluralist, progressive creed of liberal democracy on the one hand and a desiccated authoritarianism on the other. 

But you cannot defend a liberal, rules based order abroad if you so openly flout the rules at home. Boris Johnson seeks to force through a catastrophic no-deal Brexit by shutting down parliament and is threatening to break the law if necessary. And, as he seeks to force the UK out of the EU, he will become ever reliant on President Trump, whose political playbook he follows. But President Trump has always been clear – it will be America, not Britain First.

Meanwhile the Labour Party likes to think of itself as a champion of liberal values at home and abroad. Clement Attlee and Ernest Bevin played pivotal roles in the founding of Nato but this is not the party of Attlee and Bevin; this is Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour. You cannot be a champion of liberalism if you are currently subject to a formal investigation by the Equality & Human Rights Commission for institutional racism against Jewish people. You cannot be a champion of liberalism when your leader’s supporters think it is acceptable to abuse, vilify and deselect anyone who dares to question the leader. And you cannot claim to be liberal when the political editor of the BBC needs to take a bodyguard to your conference.

And then you look at Jeremy Corbyn’s foreign policy positions. Acting as an apologist for a hard right Russian government that thinks it can poison people on British soil, lauding authoritarian regimes in Venezuela and Iran, failing to support the prescription of Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation. Attlee and Bevin helped found Nato – Jeremy Corbyn and those around him want to abolish it. 

What unites both Johnson and Corbyn is the fact that they want to leave the EU, the organisation which has been the biggest champion of liberalism in our part of the global neighbourhood. Neither is fit to lead this country.  

It’s time for a change and someone who I know can provide that leadership: Jo Swinson. Under Jo’s premiership we can breathe a progressive breath of fresh air into British foreign policy, revive our reputation on the world stage, and get on with helping to improve the lives of those across the world.

Liberal Democrats are internationalists. This is at the heart of who we are as a party, it flows through everything we do. We believe in tearing down walls, not building them. We believe in working together through multilateral organisations, not standing alone. We believe that to tackle the biggest issues facing us today, from the climate emergency to terrorism, we need to ensure that the UK is at the table, achieving consensus internationally.  

Perhaps now more than ever, UK foreign policy is yearning for clear liberal, democratic values. A Liberal Democrat government would not be tied to outdated tropes or biases, but would be clear that the UK must continue to work with allies from across the world, playing a leading role in the EU and other international institutions. 

Liberal Democrats have a duty to do this, to defend the values of human rights, democracy, and equality. As the Liberal Democrat shadow foreign secretary, I will stand up for a truly global Britain.