From Global Empire to Global Hub
Easter Banquet, Mansion House
April 2nd, 2008
Mr Lord Mayor, Your Excellencies, Aldermen, Mr Recorder, Sheriffs, Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a great honour for my wife and I to be with you for this year’s Easter Banquet.
To the diplomats gathered here from around the world, I want you to know that we value your cooperation, your friendship, your advice, your partnership – and we even, up to a point, value your criticisms as well.
To the representatives of the City of London I say thank you for your hospitality, and thank you for the contribution you make not just to the economic vibrancy of our country but also through your philanthropy to its social wealth as well.
To both of you I want to offer a simple message. The City of London was built on a global British Empire; it has been reinvented as a global hub. Our foreign policy was framed in the 18th century for a global British Empire. For the future I believe we must become a global hub.
We have much to learn from the City. It is known for its openness, values and rules. Diplomacy needs the same combination. The City is known for its innovation as a source of competitive advantage; it is plugged into all the global networks that matter; it projects influence through diaspora communities who come here to live and work; so too must our foreign policy. And just as the City does not confine itself to working with other financial centres, foreign policy must recognise the need to make links outside government with business and NGOs.
The Lord Mayor, as the Ambassador for the UK financial services industry, is not just an economic figure; he is a political, social and cultural one. Sir, you are making an enormous contribution to this vision of Britain as a global hub, helping to keep the UK as the number one European destination for foreign investment and to foster international stability and prosperity. We congratulate you and the City of London for all you do.
Today, foreign policy dominates the news. All eyes are currently on Zimbabwe. As I said in the House of Commons, the delay in announcing the results is only fuelling speculation about rigging. The people of Zimbabwe have spoken. Their voices must be heard. Against the odds the MDC have prevented ZANU(PF) from taking a majority in the House of Assembly. But the Presidential results are still unknown. They need to be announced swiftly. And if it does go to a second round international monitors must be allowed to ensure a free and fair poll.
In Basra the democratically elected Iraqi government is seeking a lasting basis for people to go about their lives freely. We are supporting them and will fulfil our obligations to the Iraqi people.
On Tibet, we share widespread international concern at events last month, and we are urging both sides to come to the negotiating table. With the Olympics this year China is going to stay in the news. We want to support and see a successful Olympics, as part of China's re-engagement with the world. This is not at the expense of human rights: it is part of a drive for their promotion.
But our job is not just address the immediate crises, but the underlying issues. The former Prime Minister Tony Blair said in 2001 that the kaleidoscope was in flux. He meant that the global rules of the foreign policy game had been revolutionised by the end of the Cold War and the rise of Al Qaeda. Seven years on it is incumbent on us that we are no longer dazzled by the flux, but instead settled in our understanding of the challenges of we face.
Those challenges, I believe, fall into four categories. CT/CP
The first great challenge is the rise of international terrorism influenced by Al Qaeda in a world where weapons proliferation is a serious threat.
Countering terrorism means not just denying terrorists safe havens from which to mount attacks against us. It means countering the grievances and the ideologies that attract people to terrorist messages.
There is work for us here both at home and overseas, but Afghanistan is a priority. It will be the focus of the Nato summit in Bucharest later this week. It is clear that there is no military solution there. The military can only provide the space for the reconstruction and development without which progress will be temporary.
In the next year, we need to see the same progress in building the Afghan police as we saw last year in the Afghan army. Unless people feel secure from kidnapping, extortion and ambushes, their loyalty towards the state will always be weak. The international community, particularly the European Union, can do more to support the Afghan Government by providing training and mentoring and this will be discussed in Bucharest.
The police need to enforce the rule of law; but it is through politics that competing interests and claims on resources can be resolved. If Afghanistan can develop effective local not just national governance, people can reconcile differences through politics rather than force. That is why we are supporting the Afghan government's efforts to reform local government, building on the creation of almost 20,000 community development councils, which plan, manage and monitor development projects, such as rural roads, wells and schools.
Effective government is critical to providing the economic and educational opportunities that offer a alternative to radicalization or the drug economy. That is why the Department for International Development is putting three times as much investment into Afghanistan than other countries with similar levels of population and income.
However, a crucial issue is the relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan. We welcome the new Pakistani PM Gillani's commitment to make countering extremism a top priority. We hope this will herald a deeper cooperation between the two nations because unless there is agreement on how to address the Taliban, Al Qaeda and other insurgents, the two countries risk shunting the problem back and forth across the border.
As the Prime Minister said when launching the National Security Strategy last month, we need more robust implementation of the NPT. Which brings us to the case of Iran.
Iran has misled the international community with covert programmes on uranium enrichment. It has refused to give answers about why it needs this technology. It has hidden the most sensitive aspects of its programme for nearly two decades and still refuses IAEA inspectors the access they seek.
We have offered Iran a generous package including access to the latest civil nuclear technology. If Iran does not take up the incentives on offer, we have to be prepared to use sanctions to ratchet up the pressure. That is why we worked hard to secure the passage of further sanctions under UNSCR 1803 last month. At the same time, we said we would look to refresh the offer we made in June 2006. Iran’s leaders need to understand that they have a choice between cooperation and increasing isolation - and it is for them to decide which way to go. Conflict
The second great challenge comes from unresolved and latent conflict.
2008 is the sixtieth anniversary of the establishment of the State of Israel. This is an opportunity for us all to recognise the achievements – in democratic governance, science, culture and business – in that small country.
It is also an opportunity for us to acknowledge once again that true security for the people of Israel can only be realised when Palestinians' own legitimate aspirations for statehood are met in their turn. Israel's future depends on it having normal relations with its neighbours, and above all on the creation of a new and viable Palestinian state, alongside a secure Israel, and the UK will continue to support that development.
Instability in the Middle-East says much about how warfare has changed in recent years. Whilst the risk of a military conflict between the great powers has receded, today we are witnessing more conflict within states.
There are important lessons for the UN, NATO and EU as well as other regional organisations such as the African Union.
First, we must focus on preventing conflict and intervening before problems escalate. We need to address the risks that cause conflict: from economic inequalities and ethnic tensions to competition for scarce natural resources. We need to help countries become more resilient to those risks, in particular through improving governance and democratic accountability so that competing interests can be resolved through politics. Where conflict seems unavoidable, we need better early warning systems both at the UN and regional level, with clear triggers to determine when and how the international community might intervene.
There will be cases where military intervention is our only option. So second, we must forge a stronger international consensus on when and how to intervene and how we operationalise the agreement on the responsibility to protect. By focusing on the role of prevention and early intervention, I believe we can widen and deepen the commitment of the international community to human security.
Thirdly, we need to match our military effort with civilian engagement. There is, after all, limited value in securing a town if law and order breaks down as soon as the troops move on. That is why are developing a 1000-strong UK civilian standby capacity so that we can quickly deploy police, judges and emergency service professionals to assist failing states and to help rebuild countries emerging from conflict. And we are pushing for this to be matched by our European neighbours. High Growth low carbon
The third great challenge for foreign policy is the relationship of climate change to economic growth, especially in poor countries. These are two sides of the same coin not parallel tracks.
Climate change used to be seen as a purely environmental issue. The Stern review showed it had major implications on the global economy. The credit crunch and the current turmoil in the finance and stock markets is causing pain, but Stern has warned that the economic impact of climate change could be comparable to that of the great depression and two world wars. Climate change is also a security issue. As we are seeing in Darfur, it multiplies the stress on natural resources, in particular, food and water, and can be a catalyst for conflict. The impact of climate change on global prosperity and security means that it must be placed at the heart of foreign policy.
The diplomatic network can play a critical role in forging a solution. The blockages to tackling climate change are neither technology nor policy. From renewables and nuclear power to carbon capture and storage, technology exists or is emerging to take the carbon out of energy production. From the EU emissions trading scheme to regulation and taxation, we have the policy tools to put a price on carbon and drive investment in green energy.
What we lack are the political conditions in some of the major countries to agree to urgent and ambitious measures at Copenhagen next year, including legally binding targets to cut global emissions quickly. Changing those conditions is a mission for the UK’s diplomatic network. And it is a priority for our engagement within the EU, where the forthcoming EU-Latin America and Caribbean Summit represents a great opportunity to forge a strategic partnership on climate change and poverty reduction. International Institutions
The fourth and final challenge is different from the first three: it is about developing effective international institutions.
I believe international institutions – from the UN to regional institutions like the EU or cross-regional associations like the Commonwealth - have a vital civilising mission in the modern world. The shared threats we face demand a collective response.
But most of the existing international architecture, created in the aftermath of the second world war, was not designed for the 21st century. We face new threats - from climate change and energy insecurity, failing states and global financial instability. The balance of power in the world is shifting. Although the US will remain by far the dominant power for my lifetime, the rise of India and China is clear. And with the spread of democracy and increasing emphasis on human security and not just national security, there is an increasingly global consciousness of human rights.
These changes are already testing our existing multilateral institutions, both in terms of effectiveness and in terms of credibility. We must renew them:
* First, we must adapt existing organisations to new priorities. The IMF needs a mandate not just for crisis management but for crisis prevention. The World Bank's focus on poverty reduction must take full account of the impact of climate change. And when it comes to peacekeeping, whether in the UN, EU or NATO, we need to ensure that the military are working hand in glove with civilian experts. * Second, we need to make them more representative and accountable. The UN Security Council must be expanded and organisation such as the G8 should be reformed to reflect the rise of the emerging powers. Decisions on peace and security or global economic stewardship should not be taken whilst some of the biggest players are out of the room. And we need to move towards merit-based appointments for senior positions and voting arrangements in the International Financial Institutions that better reflect the global economic realities. * And third, we need greater subsidiarity. Not everything requires global action. Where possible we should promote regional cooperation to address problems that spill over into the neighbourhood. The African Union can play a strong role in bringing peace to Darfur; ASEAN can push for political reform in Burma. And the European Union, in particular through enlargement, can bring prosperity and stability to Turkey and the Balkans.
In Britain, for too long, we have viewed participation in the EU as being at the expense of national sovereignty and national interest. But it is through the European Union that we can have greatest influence on some of the great challenges that face the planet.
The passage of the Lisbon Treaty, and associated commitments to a period of institutional stability, creates an opportunity that has not existed during my political lifetime. Instead of debating how the European Union works we can deliver on what it is for.
The priorities should be clear – defined by the limits of national action and the requirements for international coordination.
Europe is the biggest single market in the world. When it ratchets up environmental standards it sparks innovation across the global car market. If we phase out high polluting cars we set standards beyond our borders as well as within them.
Europe is a regional, political and economic grouping of magnetic appeal. When we open up membership to the countries of the western Balkans or Turkey, we act as a catalyst for democratic, economic and social reform. Just look at the experience of Eastern Europe.
Europe is Russia’s biggest customer, biggest partner and biggest market. Our single market is our strongest diplomatic tool to build the robust EU relationship we want with Russia. When we negotiate an agreement on economic, social and cultural issues, we send a very clear signal about our commitment to include Russia in the international system, and advance our own interests in a way impossible if we act alone. That is what we must do to advance our energy security.
And on far-flung foreign policy issues that motivate European citizens - whether it be supporting free and fair elections in the DRC, or providing humanitarian assistance and support for the police in Palestine - when the EU is united we are effective.
None of these global challenges can be achieved by the UK acting alone. On these issues, the EU is a vehicle for the expression of UK foreign policy not a threat to it; the more successful the EU, and the greater its collective economic might, the more effective our bilateral links. The Prime Minister has talked about hard-headed internationalism. On key issues that means being pro Europe and pro reform in Europe – so that it is an outward looking organisation focussed on the new threats to security and prosperity. Our position within Europe is not a tactical weakness, but a strategic opportunity. Conclusion
The people in this room represent all the alliances and partnerships that are vital to British foreign policy.
We do not have a bilateral relationship with the EU; we are part of the EU; and should aspire to play a leading role.
The United States is our single most important bilateral relationship – born of shared values, strengthened by shared sacrifice. I always point out to people that if we want to do good in the world we need the power of an internationalist and engaged United States on our side.
We are proud of our position at the UN, and of our proposals for reform that emphasise our shared interests with countries like Germany, India, Japan, Brazil, and African countries seeking UN Security Council membership.
We believe in the Commonwealth – one quarter of the countries of the world, bound by history and values. And I look forward to the day, soon I hope, when Zimbabwe comes back.
British government, British business and British civil society have networks and assets that give us global reach. If we apply them to the four great challenges of times, we can be a force for good for Britain, and a force for good in the world.
Lord Mayor, your role is symbolic of some of Britain's strengths. So is your hospitality. In recognition of your efforts and your example, it therefore gives me great pleasure in asking all your guests tonight to rise and offer a toast to:
The Lord Mayor and Lady Mayoress
Easter Banquet, Mansion House
April 2nd, 2008
Mr Lord Mayor, Your Excellencies, Aldermen, Mr Recorder, Sheriffs, Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a great honour for my wife and I to be with you for this year’s Easter Banquet.
To the diplomats gathered here from around the world, I want you to know that we value your cooperation, your friendship, your advice, your partnership – and we even, up to a point, value your criticisms as well.
To the representatives of the City of London I say thank you for your hospitality, and thank you for the contribution you make not just to the economic vibrancy of our country but also through your philanthropy to its social wealth as well.
To both of you I want to offer a simple message. The City of London was built on a global British Empire; it has been reinvented as a global hub. Our foreign policy was framed in the 18th century for a global British Empire. For the future I believe we must become a global hub.
We have much to learn from the City. It is known for its openness, values and rules. Diplomacy needs the same combination. The City is known for its innovation as a source of competitive advantage; it is plugged into all the global networks that matter; it projects influence through diaspora communities who come here to live and work; so too must our foreign policy. And just as the City does not confine itself to working with other financial centres, foreign policy must recognise the need to make links outside government with business and NGOs.
The Lord Mayor, as the Ambassador for the UK financial services industry, is not just an economic figure; he is a political, social and cultural one. Sir, you are making an enormous contribution to this vision of Britain as a global hub, helping to keep the UK as the number one European destination for foreign investment and to foster international stability and prosperity. We congratulate you and the City of London for all you do.
Today, foreign policy dominates the news. All eyes are currently on Zimbabwe. As I said in the House of Commons, the delay in announcing the results is only fuelling speculation about rigging. The people of Zimbabwe have spoken. Their voices must be heard. Against the odds the MDC have prevented ZANU(PF) from taking a majority in the House of Assembly. But the Presidential results are still unknown. They need to be announced swiftly. And if it does go to a second round international monitors must be allowed to ensure a free and fair poll.
In Basra the democratically elected Iraqi government is seeking a lasting basis for people to go about their lives freely. We are supporting them and will fulfil our obligations to the Iraqi people.
On Tibet, we share widespread international concern at events last month, and we are urging both sides to come to the negotiating table. With the Olympics this year China is going to stay in the news. We want to support and see a successful Olympics, as part of China's re-engagement with the world. This is not at the expense of human rights: it is part of a drive for their promotion.
But our job is not just address the immediate crises, but the underlying issues. The former Prime Minister Tony Blair said in 2001 that the kaleidoscope was in flux. He meant that the global rules of the foreign policy game had been revolutionised by the end of the Cold War and the rise of Al Qaeda. Seven years on it is incumbent on us that we are no longer dazzled by the flux, but instead settled in our understanding of the challenges of we face.
Those challenges, I believe, fall into four categories. CT/CP
The first great challenge is the rise of international terrorism influenced by Al Qaeda in a world where weapons proliferation is a serious threat.
Countering terrorism means not just denying terrorists safe havens from which to mount attacks against us. It means countering the grievances and the ideologies that attract people to terrorist messages.
There is work for us here both at home and overseas, but Afghanistan is a priority. It will be the focus of the Nato summit in Bucharest later this week. It is clear that there is no military solution there. The military can only provide the space for the reconstruction and development without which progress will be temporary.
In the next year, we need to see the same progress in building the Afghan police as we saw last year in the Afghan army. Unless people feel secure from kidnapping, extortion and ambushes, their loyalty towards the state will always be weak. The international community, particularly the European Union, can do more to support the Afghan Government by providing training and mentoring and this will be discussed in Bucharest.
The police need to enforce the rule of law; but it is through politics that competing interests and claims on resources can be resolved. If Afghanistan can develop effective local not just national governance, people can reconcile differences through politics rather than force. That is why we are supporting the Afghan government's efforts to reform local government, building on the creation of almost 20,000 community development councils, which plan, manage and monitor development projects, such as rural roads, wells and schools.
Effective government is critical to providing the economic and educational opportunities that offer a alternative to radicalization or the drug economy. That is why the Department for International Development is putting three times as much investment into Afghanistan than other countries with similar levels of population and income.
However, a crucial issue is the relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan. We welcome the new Pakistani PM Gillani's commitment to make countering extremism a top priority. We hope this will herald a deeper cooperation between the two nations because unless there is agreement on how to address the Taliban, Al Qaeda and other insurgents, the two countries risk shunting the problem back and forth across the border.
As the Prime Minister said when launching the National Security Strategy last month, we need more robust implementation of the NPT. Which brings us to the case of Iran.
Iran has misled the international community with covert programmes on uranium enrichment. It has refused to give answers about why it needs this technology. It has hidden the most sensitive aspects of its programme for nearly two decades and still refuses IAEA inspectors the access they seek.
We have offered Iran a generous package including access to the latest civil nuclear technology. If Iran does not take up the incentives on offer, we have to be prepared to use sanctions to ratchet up the pressure. That is why we worked hard to secure the passage of further sanctions under UNSCR 1803 last month. At the same time, we said we would look to refresh the offer we made in June 2006. Iran’s leaders need to understand that they have a choice between cooperation and increasing isolation - and it is for them to decide which way to go. Conflict
The second great challenge comes from unresolved and latent conflict.
2008 is the sixtieth anniversary of the establishment of the State of Israel. This is an opportunity for us all to recognise the achievements – in democratic governance, science, culture and business – in that small country.
It is also an opportunity for us to acknowledge once again that true security for the people of Israel can only be realised when Palestinians' own legitimate aspirations for statehood are met in their turn. Israel's future depends on it having normal relations with its neighbours, and above all on the creation of a new and viable Palestinian state, alongside a secure Israel, and the UK will continue to support that development.
Instability in the Middle-East says much about how warfare has changed in recent years. Whilst the risk of a military conflict between the great powers has receded, today we are witnessing more conflict within states.
There are important lessons for the UN, NATO and EU as well as other regional organisations such as the African Union.
First, we must focus on preventing conflict and intervening before problems escalate. We need to address the risks that cause conflict: from economic inequalities and ethnic tensions to competition for scarce natural resources. We need to help countries become more resilient to those risks, in particular through improving governance and democratic accountability so that competing interests can be resolved through politics. Where conflict seems unavoidable, we need better early warning systems both at the UN and regional level, with clear triggers to determine when and how the international community might intervene.
There will be cases where military intervention is our only option. So second, we must forge a stronger international consensus on when and how to intervene and how we operationalise the agreement on the responsibility to protect. By focusing on the role of prevention and early intervention, I believe we can widen and deepen the commitment of the international community to human security.
Thirdly, we need to match our military effort with civilian engagement. There is, after all, limited value in securing a town if law and order breaks down as soon as the troops move on. That is why are developing a 1000-strong UK civilian standby capacity so that we can quickly deploy police, judges and emergency service professionals to assist failing states and to help rebuild countries emerging from conflict. And we are pushing for this to be matched by our European neighbours. High Growth low carbon
The third great challenge for foreign policy is the relationship of climate change to economic growth, especially in poor countries. These are two sides of the same coin not parallel tracks.
Climate change used to be seen as a purely environmental issue. The Stern review showed it had major implications on the global economy. The credit crunch and the current turmoil in the finance and stock markets is causing pain, but Stern has warned that the economic impact of climate change could be comparable to that of the great depression and two world wars. Climate change is also a security issue. As we are seeing in Darfur, it multiplies the stress on natural resources, in particular, food and water, and can be a catalyst for conflict. The impact of climate change on global prosperity and security means that it must be placed at the heart of foreign policy.
The diplomatic network can play a critical role in forging a solution. The blockages to tackling climate change are neither technology nor policy. From renewables and nuclear power to carbon capture and storage, technology exists or is emerging to take the carbon out of energy production. From the EU emissions trading scheme to regulation and taxation, we have the policy tools to put a price on carbon and drive investment in green energy.
What we lack are the political conditions in some of the major countries to agree to urgent and ambitious measures at Copenhagen next year, including legally binding targets to cut global emissions quickly. Changing those conditions is a mission for the UK’s diplomatic network. And it is a priority for our engagement within the EU, where the forthcoming EU-Latin America and Caribbean Summit represents a great opportunity to forge a strategic partnership on climate change and poverty reduction. International Institutions
The fourth and final challenge is different from the first three: it is about developing effective international institutions.
I believe international institutions – from the UN to regional institutions like the EU or cross-regional associations like the Commonwealth - have a vital civilising mission in the modern world. The shared threats we face demand a collective response.
But most of the existing international architecture, created in the aftermath of the second world war, was not designed for the 21st century. We face new threats - from climate change and energy insecurity, failing states and global financial instability. The balance of power in the world is shifting. Although the US will remain by far the dominant power for my lifetime, the rise of India and China is clear. And with the spread of democracy and increasing emphasis on human security and not just national security, there is an increasingly global consciousness of human rights.
These changes are already testing our existing multilateral institutions, both in terms of effectiveness and in terms of credibility. We must renew them:
* First, we must adapt existing organisations to new priorities. The IMF needs a mandate not just for crisis management but for crisis prevention. The World Bank's focus on poverty reduction must take full account of the impact of climate change. And when it comes to peacekeeping, whether in the UN, EU or NATO, we need to ensure that the military are working hand in glove with civilian experts. * Second, we need to make them more representative and accountable. The UN Security Council must be expanded and organisation such as the G8 should be reformed to reflect the rise of the emerging powers. Decisions on peace and security or global economic stewardship should not be taken whilst some of the biggest players are out of the room. And we need to move towards merit-based appointments for senior positions and voting arrangements in the International Financial Institutions that better reflect the global economic realities. * And third, we need greater subsidiarity. Not everything requires global action. Where possible we should promote regional cooperation to address problems that spill over into the neighbourhood. The African Union can play a strong role in bringing peace to Darfur; ASEAN can push for political reform in Burma. And the European Union, in particular through enlargement, can bring prosperity and stability to Turkey and the Balkans.
In Britain, for too long, we have viewed participation in the EU as being at the expense of national sovereignty and national interest. But it is through the European Union that we can have greatest influence on some of the great challenges that face the planet.
The passage of the Lisbon Treaty, and associated commitments to a period of institutional stability, creates an opportunity that has not existed during my political lifetime. Instead of debating how the European Union works we can deliver on what it is for.
The priorities should be clear – defined by the limits of national action and the requirements for international coordination.
Europe is the biggest single market in the world. When it ratchets up environmental standards it sparks innovation across the global car market. If we phase out high polluting cars we set standards beyond our borders as well as within them.
Europe is a regional, political and economic grouping of magnetic appeal. When we open up membership to the countries of the western Balkans or Turkey, we act as a catalyst for democratic, economic and social reform. Just look at the experience of Eastern Europe.
Europe is Russia’s biggest customer, biggest partner and biggest market. Our single market is our strongest diplomatic tool to build the robust EU relationship we want with Russia. When we negotiate an agreement on economic, social and cultural issues, we send a very clear signal about our commitment to include Russia in the international system, and advance our own interests in a way impossible if we act alone. That is what we must do to advance our energy security.
And on far-flung foreign policy issues that motivate European citizens - whether it be supporting free and fair elections in the DRC, or providing humanitarian assistance and support for the police in Palestine - when the EU is united we are effective.
None of these global challenges can be achieved by the UK acting alone. On these issues, the EU is a vehicle for the expression of UK foreign policy not a threat to it; the more successful the EU, and the greater its collective economic might, the more effective our bilateral links. The Prime Minister has talked about hard-headed internationalism. On key issues that means being pro Europe and pro reform in Europe – so that it is an outward looking organisation focussed on the new threats to security and prosperity. Our position within Europe is not a tactical weakness, but a strategic opportunity. Conclusion
The people in this room represent all the alliances and partnerships that are vital to British foreign policy.
We do not have a bilateral relationship with the EU; we are part of the EU; and should aspire to play a leading role.
The United States is our single most important bilateral relationship – born of shared values, strengthened by shared sacrifice. I always point out to people that if we want to do good in the world we need the power of an internationalist and engaged United States on our side.
We are proud of our position at the UN, and of our proposals for reform that emphasise our shared interests with countries like Germany, India, Japan, Brazil, and African countries seeking UN Security Council membership.
We believe in the Commonwealth – one quarter of the countries of the world, bound by history and values. And I look forward to the day, soon I hope, when Zimbabwe comes back.
British government, British business and British civil society have networks and assets that give us global reach. If we apply them to the four great challenges of times, we can be a force for good for Britain, and a force for good in the world.
Lord Mayor, your role is symbolic of some of Britain's strengths. So is your hospitality. In recognition of your efforts and your example, it therefore gives me great pleasure in asking all your guests tonight to rise and offer a toast to:
The Lord Mayor and Lady Mayoress
No comments:
Post a Comment