[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 132 (Thursday, October 4, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10262-S10266]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
AFTER SEPTEMBER 11
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, since September 11 there has been such a
flood of emotions in America over the events of that day. I think all
of us have been transformed by the experience and transformed by some
of our fellow Americans and what they have said and what they have
done.
Some of the things that have been written are extraordinary. In just
one moment, I am going to submit for the Record one that I think is
exceptional, a piece from the BusinessWeek magazine of October 1, 2001,
by a writer named Bruce Nussbaum entitled, ``Real Masters Of The
Universe.'' I will not read the entire article, but I will submit it
for the Record. I would like to quote a few sentences from it. He said
some things with which I agree and I think help to put our experience
into some perspective:
A subtle shift in the American zeitgeist took place on
Sept. 11. It's hard to define, and it may not last. But on
the day of the World Trade Center cataclysm, the country
changed. Big, beefy working-class guys became heroes once
again, replacing the telegenic financial analysts and techno-
billionaires who once had held the Nation in thrall. Uniforms
and public service became ``in.'' Real sacrifice and real
courage were on graphic display.
Maybe it was the class reversals that were so revealing.
Men and women making 40 grand a year working for the city
responding--risking their own lives--to save investment
bankers and traders making 10 times that amount. And dying by
the hundreds for their effort. The image of self-sacrifice by
civil servants in uniform was simply breathtaking.
For Americans conditioned in the '90s to think of oneself
first, to be rich above all else, to accumulate all the good
material things, to take safety and security for granted,
this was a new reality. So was the contrast of genuine
bravery to the faux values of reality TV shows such as
Survivor.
He concludes:
Tragedy has the power to transform us. But rarely is the
transformation permanent. People and societies revert back to
the norm. But what is the ``norm'' for America? Where are
this nation's true values? Have we stripped too much away in
recent years in order to make us lean and mean for the race
to riches? It is hard to look at the images of the World
Trade Center rescue again and again. At least once, however,
we should look at what the rescuers are teaching us, about
what matters--and who.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent this article be printed in
the Record.
There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From Business Week, Oct. 1, 2001]
Real Masters of the Universe
(By Bruce Nussbaum)
A subtle shift in the American zeitgeist took place on
Sept. 11. It's hard to define, and it may not last. But on
the day of the World Trade Center cataclysm, the country
changed. Big, beefy working-class guys became heroes once
again, replacing the telegenic financial analysts and techno-
billionaires who once had held the nation in thrall. Uniforms
and public service became ``in.'' Real sacrifice and real
courage were on graphic display.
[[Page S10263]]
Maybe it was the class reversals that were so revealing.
Men and women making 40 grand a year working for the city
responding--risking their own lives--to save investment
bankers and traders making 10 times that amount. And dying by
the hundreds for the effort. The image of self-sacrifice by
civil servants in uniform was simply breathtaking.
For Americans conditioned in the '90s to think of oneself
first, to be rich above all else, to accumulate all the good
material things, to take safety and security for granted,
this was a new reality. So was the contrast of genuine
bravery to the faux values of reality TV shows such as
Survivor.
Sea of Flags
Noteworthy, too, was America's quick return to family,
community, church, and patriotism in the aftermath of the
tragedy. People became polite and generous to one another
without prodding. On that day and the days that followed,
they told their wives and husbands and children and parents
and significant others they loved them. And the flags, the
sea of flags that appeared out of nowhere and spread
everywhere, worn by business-suited managers and eyebrow-
pierced, tattooed teenagers. As if by magic, city taxicabs,
building canopies, and nearly every truck in sight were
flying flags.
The offerings of food, money, and blood were overwhelming.
The generosity was unsurpassed in our memories. But the
manner in which perfect strangers went out of their way to
help one another in all kinds of situations was most amazing.
To the surprise of its residents, New York became a small-
town community. The day-to-day antagonisms among the
citizenry melted away.
The rush to church, synagogue, and, yes, mosque was equally
unusual. People returned to their religious ceremonies and
congregations in huge numbers for support and guidance. The
overflow at the doors demonstrated that many who had not
visited in years showed up to participate in the familiar and
comforting liturgies of their childhoods. They joined with
their neighbors in mourning.
Lessons Taught
It was, for a moment, an old America peeking out from
behind the new, me-now America. We saw a glimpse of a country
of shared values, not competing interest groups; of common
cause, not hateful opposition. There were a few exceptions:
Jerry Falwell declaring we brought the death and destruction
down on ourselves because of homosexuality, abortion, and the
American Civil Liberties Union. A silly, stupid comment to be
dismissed in light of the comity of the day--but an extremist
remark nonetheless made in the name of God. How sad.
Tragedy has the power to transform us. But rarely is the
transformation permanent. People and societies revert back to
the norm. But what is the ``norm'' for America? Where are
this nation's true values? Have we stripped too much away in
recent years in order to make us lean and mean for the race
to riches? It is hard to look at the images of the World
Trade Center rescue again and again. At least once, however,
we should look at what the rescuers are teaching us, about
what matters--and who.
Mr. DURBIN. I recall a few days after this tragedy making a telephone
call to a friend of mine, a very successful business executive in
Chicago, just to ask him how things were going. He said to me on the
phone what this article said. He said: The roaring nineties are over.
We are going into a new era.
As this article says, he believes it is an era that focuses on a lot
of other things, whether it is family, community, and church, values
that all of us hold dear, and certainly a new respect for this great
Nation, which has been symbolized by the sea of flags that you see in
every community across Illinois and across the Nation.
It is a time of testing for this country, and we will rise to that
challenge, I am certain. We will count our friends.
Madam President, I would like to also make a part of the Record--I
will ask for consent in a moment--one of the most amazing speeches that
I have read. It is a speech by someone who is not an American but who
commented on our experience and then pledged his alliance, his
friendship, and his solidarity to help us in our effort. I refer to
British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who gave an exceptional speech on
solidarity with the United States in our war on terrorism. But it was
much more than that. It was a call to united international action to
work for democracy, prosperity, and freedom.
Out of this tragedy, Prime Minister Blair sees an opportunity to
remake our world and to reflect the values we hold dear. His inspiring
call is for a progressive vision of the future where the world
community, as a community, works for economic growth and social
justice, and to end regional conflicts. We, in the United States, have
been too caught up in dealing with our immediate crisis, from time to
time, to see that this is, as Prime Minister Blair says, ``a moment to
seize.''
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Prime Minister Blair's
entire speech be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the speech was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
Speech by British Prime Minister Tony Blair
In retrospect, the Millennium marked only a moment in time.
It was the events of September 11 that marked a turning point
in history, where we confront the dangers of the future and
assess the choices facing humankind.
It was a tragedy. An act of evil. From this nation, goes
our deepest sympathy and prayers for the victims and our
profound solidarity with the American people.
We were with you at the first. We will stay with you to the
last.
Just two weeks ago, in New York, after the church service I
met some of the families of the British victims.
It was in many ways a very British occasion. Tea and
biscuits. It was raining outside. Around the edge of the
room, strangers making small talk, trying to be normal people
in an abnormal situation.
And as you crossed the room, you felt the longing and
sadness; hands clutching photos of sons and daughters, wives
and husbands; imploring you to believe them when they said
there was still an outside chance of their loved ones being
found alive, when you knew in truth that all hope was gone.
And then a middle-aged mother looks you in the eyes and
tells you her only son has died, and asks you: why?
I tell you: you do not feel like the most powerful person
in the country at times like that.
Because there is no answer. There is no justification for
their pain. Their son did nothing wrong. The woman, seven
months pregnant, whose child will never know its father, did
nothing wrong.
They don't want revenge. They want something better in
memory of their loved ones.
I believe their memorial can and should be greater than
simply the punishment of the guilty. It is that out of the
shadow of this evil, should emerge lasting good: destruction
of the machinery of terrorism wherever it is found; hope
amongst all nations of a new beginning where we seek to
resolve differences in a calm and ordered way; greater
understanding between nations and between faiths; and above
all justice and prosperity for the poor and dispossessed, so
that people everywhere can see the chance of a better future
through the hard work and creative power of the free citizen,
not the violence and savagery of the fanatic.
I know that here in Britain people are anxious, even a
little frightened. I understand that. People know we must act
but they worry what might follow.
They worry about the economy and talk of recession.
And, of course there are dangers; it is a new situation.
But the fundamentals of the US, British and European
economies are strong.
Every reasonable measure of internal security is being
undertaken.
Our way of life is a great deal stronger and will last a
great deal longer than the actions of fanatics, small in
number and now facing a unified world against them.
People should have confidence.
This is a battle with only one outcome: our victory not
theirs.
What happened on 11 September was without parallel in the
bloody history of terrorism.
Within a few hours, up to 7000 people were annihilated, the
commercial centre of New York was reduced to rubble and in
Washington and Pennsylvania further death and horror on an
unimaginable scale. Let no one say this was a blow for Islam
when the blood of innocent Muslims was shed along with those
of the Christian, Jewish and other faiths around the world.
We know those responsible. In Afghanistan are scores of
training camps for the export of terror. Chief amongst the
sponsors and organisers is Usama Bin Laden.
He is supported, shielded and given succour by the Taliban
regime.
Two days before the 11 September attacks, Masood, the
leader of the opposition Northern Alliance, was assassinated
by two suicide bombers. Both were linked to Bin Laden. Some
may call that coincidence. I call it payment--payment in the
currency these people deal in: blood.
Be in no doubt: Bin Laden and his people organised this
atrocity. The Taliban aid and abet him. He will not desist
from further acts of terror. They will not stop helping him.
Whatever the dangers of the action we take, the dangers of
inaction are far, far greater.
Look for a moment at the Taliban regime. It is
undemocratic. That goes without saying.
There is no sport allowed, or television or photography. No
art or culture is permitted. All other faiths, all other
interpretations of Islam are ruthlessly suppressed. Those who
practice their faith are imprisoned. Women are treated in a
way almost too revolting to be credible. First driven out of
university; girls not allowed to go to school; no legal
rights; unable to go out of doors without a man. Those that
disobey are stoned.
There is now no contact permitted with western agencies,
even those delivering food. The people live in abject
poverty. It is a regime founded on fear and funded on the
[[Page S10264]]
drugs trade. The biggest drugs hoard in the world is in
Afghanistan, controlled by the Taliban. Ninety per cent of
the heroin on British streets originates in Afghanistan.
The arms the Taliban are buying today are paid for with the
lives of young British people buying their drugs on British
streets.
That is another part of their regime that we should seek to
destroy.
So what do we do?
Don't overreact some say. We aren't.
We haven't lashed out. No missiles on the first night just
for effect.
Don't kill innocent people. We are not the ones who waged
war on the innocent. We seek the guilty.
Look for a diplomatic solution. There is no diplomacy with
Bin Laden or the Taliban regime.
State an ultimatum and get their response. We stated the
ultimatum; they haven't responded.
Understand the causes of terror. Yes, we should try, but
let there be no moral ambiguity about this: nothing could
ever justify the events of 11 September, and it is to turn
justice on its head to pretend it could.
The action we take will be proportionate; targeted; we will
do all we humanly can to avoid civilian casualties. But
understand what we are dealing with. Listen to the calls of
those passengers on the planes. Think of the children on
them, told they were going to die.
Think of the cruelty beyond our comprehension as amongst
the screams and the anguish of the innocent, those hijackers
drove at full throttle planes laden with fuel into buildings
where tens of thousands worked.
They have no moral inhibition on the slaughter of the
innocent. If they could have murdered not 7,000 but 70,000
does anyone doubt they would have done so and rejoiced in it?
There is no compromise possible with such people, no
meeting of minds, no point of understanding with such terror.
Just a choice: defeat it or be defeated by it. And defeat
it we must.
Any action taken will be against the terrorist network of
Bin Laden.
As for the Taliban, they can surrender the terrorists; or
face the consequences and again in any action the aim will be
to eliminate their military hardware, cut off their finances,
disrupt their supplies, target their troops, not civilians.
We will put a trap around the regime.
I say to the Taliban: surrender the terrorists; or
surrender power. It's your choice.
We will take action at every level, national and
international, in the UN, in G8, in the EU, in NATO, in every
regional grouping in the world, to strike at international
terrorism wherever it exists.
For the first time, the UN security council has imposed
mandatory obligations on all UN members to cut off terrorist
financing and end safe havens for terrorists.
Those that finance terror, those who launder their money,
those that cover their tracks are every bit as guilty as the
fanatic who commits the final act.
Here in this country and in other nations round the world,
laws will be changed, not to deny basic liberties but to
prevent their abuse and protect the most basic liberty of
all: freedom from terror. New extradition laws will be
introduced; new rules to ensure asylum is not a front for
terrorist entry. This country is proud of its tradition in
giving asylum to those fleeing tyranny. We will always do so.
But we have a duty to protect the system from abuse.
It must be overhauled radically so that from now on, those
who abide by the rules get help and those that don't, can no
longer play the system to gain unfair advantage over others.
Round the world, 11 September is bringing Governments and
people to reflect, consider and change. And in this process,
amidst all the talk of war and action, there is another
dimension appearing.
There is a coming together. The power of community is
asserting itself. We are realising how fragile are our
frontiers in the face of the world's new challenges.
Today conflicts rarely stay within national boundaries.
Today a tremor in one financial market is repeated in the
markets of the world.
Today confidence is global; either its presence or its
absence.
Today the threat is chaos; because for people with work to
do, family life to balance, mortgages to pay, careers to
further, pensions to provide, the yearning is for order and
stability and if it doesn't exist elsewhere, it is unlikely
to exist here.
I have long believed this interdependence defines the new
world we live in.
People say: we are only acting because it's the USA that
was attacked. Double standards, they say. But when Milosevic
embarked on the ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Kosovo, we
acted.
The sceptics said it was pointless, we'd make matters
worse, we'd make Milosevic stronger and look what happened,
we won, the refugees went home, the policies of ethnic
cleansing were reversed and one of the great dictators of the
last century, will see justice in this century.
And I tell you if Rwanda happened again today as it did in
1993, when a million people were slaughtered in cold blood,
we would have a moral duty to act there also. We were there
in Sierra Leone when a murderous group of gangsters
threatened its democratically elected Government and people.
And we as a country should, and I as Prime Minister do,
give thanks for the brilliance, dedication and sheer
professionalism of the British Armed Forces.
We can't do it all. Neither can the Americans.
But the power of the international community could,
together, if it chose to.
It could, with our help, sort out the blight that is the
continuing conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo,
where three million people have died through war or famine in
the last decade.
A Partnership for Africa, between the developed and
developing world based around the New African Initiative, is
there to be done if we find the will.
On our side: provide more aid, untied to trade; write off
debt; help with good governance and infrastructure; training
to the soldiers, with UN blessing, in conflict resolution;
encouraging investment; and access to our markets so that we
practise the free trade we are so fond of preaching.
But it's a deal: on the African side: true democracy, no
more excuses for dictatorship, abuses of human rights; no
tolerance of bad governance, from the endemic corruption of
some states, to the activities of Mr Mugabe's henchmen in
Zimbabwe. Proper commercial, legal and financial systems.
The will, with our help, to broker agreements for peace and
provide troops to police them.
The state of Africa is a scar on the conscience of the
world. But if the world as a community focused on it, we
could heal it. And if we don't, it will become deeper and
angrier.
We could defeat climate change if we chose to. Kyoto is
right. We will implement it and call upon all other nations
to do so.
But it's only a start. With imagination, we could use or
find the technologies that create energy without destroying
our planet; we could provide work and trade without
deforestation.
If humankind was able, finally, to make industrial progress
without the factory conditions of the 19th Century; surely we
have the wit and will to develop economically without
despoiling the very environment we depend upon. And if we
wanted to, we could breathe new life into the Middle East
Peace Process and we must.
The state of Israel must be given recognition by all; freed
from terror; know that it is accepted as part of the future
of the Middle East not its very existence under threat. The
Palestinians must have justice, the chance to prosper and in
their own land, as equal partners with Israel in that future.
We know that. It is the only way, just as we know in our
own peace process, in Northern Ireland, there will be no
unification of Ireland except by consent--and there will be
no return to the days of unionist or Protestant supremacy
because those days have no place in the modern world. So the
unionists must accept justice and equality for nationalists.
The Republicans must show they have given up violence--not
just a ceasefire but weapons put beyond use. And not only the
Republicans, but those people who call themselves Loyalists,
but who by acts of terrorism, sully the name of the United
Kingdom.
We know this also. The values we believe in should shine
through what we do in Afghanistan.
To the Afghan people we make this commitment. The conflict
will not be the end. We will not walk away, as the outside
world has done so many times before.
If the Taliban regime changes, we will work with you to
make sure its successor is one that is broad-based, that
unites all ethnic groups, and that offers some way out of the
miserable poverty that is your present existence.
And, more than ever now, with every bit as much thought and
planning, we will assemble a humanitarian coalition alongside
the military coalition so that inside and outside
Afghanistan, the refugees, millions on the move even before
September 11, are given shelter, food and help during the
winter months.
The world community must show as much its capacity for
compassion as for force.
The critics will say: but how can the world be a community?
Nations act in their own self-interest. Of course they do.
But what is the lesson of the financial markets, climate
change, international terrorism, nuclear proliferation or
world trade? It is that our self-interest and our mutual
interests are today inextricably woven together.
This is the politics of globalisation.
I realise why people protest against globalisation.
We watch aspects of it with trepidation. We feel powerless,
as if we were now pushed to and fro by forces far beyond our
control.
But there's a risk that political leaders, faced with
street demonstrations, pander to the argument rather than
answer it. The demonstrators are right to say there's
injustice, poverty, environmental degradation.
But globalisation is a fact and, by and large, it is driven
by people.
Not just in finance, but in communication, in technology,
increasingly in culture, in recreation. In the world of the
internet, information technology and TV, there will be
globalisation. And in trade, the problem is not there's too
much of it; on the contrary there's too little of it.
The issue is not how to stop globalisation.
The issue is how we use the power of community to combine
it with justice. If
[[Page S10265]]
globalisation works only for the benefit of the few, then it
will fail and will deserve to fail.
But if we follow the principles that have served us so well
at home--that power, wealth and opportunity must be in the
hands of the many, not the few--if we make that our guiding
light for the global economy, then it will be a force for
good and an international movement that we should take pride
in leading.
Because the alternative to globalisation is isolation.
Confronted by this reality, round the world, nations are
instinctively drawing together. In Quebec, all the countries
of North and South America deciding to make one huge free
trade area, rivalling Europe.
In Asia. In Europe, the most integrated grouping of all, we
are now 15 nations. Another 12 countries negotiating to join,
and more beyond that.
A new relationship between Russia and Europe is beginning.
And will not India and China, each with three times as many
citizens as the whole of the EU put together, once their
economies have developed sufficiently as they will do, not
reconfigure entirely the geopolitics of the world and in our
lifetime?
That is why, with 60 per cent of our trade dependent on
Europe, three million jobs tied up with Europe, much of our
political weight engaged in Europe, it would be a fundamental
denial of our true national interest to turn our backs on
Europe.
We will never let that happen.
For 50 years, Britain has, uncharacteristically, followed
not led in Europe. At each and every step.
There are debates central to our future coming up: how we
reform European economic policy; how we take forward European
defence; how we fight organised crime and terrorism.
Britain needs its voice strong in Europe and bluntly Europe
needs a strong Britain, rock solid in our alliance with the
USA, yet determined to play its full part in shaping Europe's
destiny.
We should only be part of the single currency if the
economic conditions are met. They are not window-dressing for
a political decision. They are fundamental. But if they are
met, we should join, and if met in this parliament, we should
have the courage of our argument, to ask the British people
for their consent in this Parliament.
Europe is not a threat to Britain. Europe is an
opportunity.
It is in taking the best of the Anglo-Saxon and European
models of development that Britain's hope of a prosperous
future lies. The American spirit of enterprise; the European
spirit of solidarity. We have, here also, an opportunity. Not
just to build bridges politically, but economically.
What is the answer to the current crisis? Not isolationism
but the world coming together with America as a community.
What is the answer to Britain's relations with Europe? Not
opting out, but being leading members of a community in
which, in alliance with others, we gain strength.
What is the answer to Britain's future? Not each person for
themselves, but working together as a community to ensure
that everyone, not just the privileged few get the chance to
succeed.
This is an extraordinary moment for progressive politics.
Our values are the right ones for this age: the power of
community, solidarity, the collective ability to further the
individual's interests.
People ask me if I think ideology is dead. My answer is:
In the sense of rigid forms of economic and social theory,
yes.
The 20th century killed those ideologies and their passing
causes little regret. But, in the sense of a governing idea
in politics, based on values, no. The governing idea of
modern social democracy is community. Founded on the
principles of social justice. That people should rise
according to merit not birth; that the test of any decent
society is not the contentment of the wealthy and strong, but
the commitment to the poor and weak.
But values aren't enough. The mantle of leadership comes at
a price: the courage to learn and change; to show how values
that stand for all ages, can be applied in a way relevant to
each age.
Our politics only succeed when the realism is as clear as
the idealism.
This party's strength today comes from the journey of
change and learning we have made.
We learnt that however much we strive for peace, we need
strong defence capability where a peaceful approach fails.
We learnt that equality is about equal worth, not equal
outcomes.
Today our idea of society is shaped around mutual
responsibility; a deal, an agreement between citizens not a
one-way gift, from the well-off to the dependent.
Our economic and social policy today owes as much to the
liberal social democratic tradition of Lloyd George, Keynes
and Beveridge as to the socialist principles of the 1945
Government.
Just over a decade ago, people asked if Labour could ever
win again. Today they ask the same question of the
Opposition. Painful though that journey of change has been,
it has been worth it, every stage of the way.
On this journey, the values have never changed. The aims
haven't. Our aims would be instantly recognisable to every
Labour leader from Keir Hardie onwards. But the means do
change.
The journey hasn't ended. It never ends. The next stage for
New Labour is not backwards; it is renewing ourselves again.
Just after the election, an old colleague of mine said:
``Come on Tony, now we've won again, can't we drop all this
New Labour and do what we believe in?''
I said: ``It's worse than you think. I really do believe in
it.''
We didn't revolutionise British economic policy--Bank of
England independence, tough spending rules--for some
managerial reason or as a clever wheeze to steal Tory
clothes.
We did it because the victims of economic incompetence--15
per cent interest rates, 3m unemployed--are hard-working
families. They are the ones--and even more so, now--with
tough times ahead--that the economy should be run for, not
speculators, or currency dealers or senior executives whose
pay packets don't seem to bear any resemblance to the
performance of their companies.
Economic competence is the pre-condition of social justice.
We have legislated for fairness at work, like the minimum
wage which people struggled a century for. But we won't give
up the essential flexibility of our economy or our commitment
to enterprise.
Why? Because in a world leaving behind mass production,
where technology revolutionises not just companies but whole
industries, almost overnight, enterprise creates the jobs
people depend on.
We have boosted pensions, child benefit, family incomes. We
will do more. But our number one priority for spending is and
will remain education.
Why? Because in the new markets countries like Britain can
only create wealth by brain power not low wages and sweatshop
labour.
We have cut youth unemployment by 75 per cent.
By more than any government before us. But we refuse to pay
benefit to those who refuse to work. Why? Because the welfare
that works is welfare that helps people to help themselves.
The graffiti, the vandalism, the burnt out cars, the street
corner drug dealers, the teenage mugger just graduating from
the minor school of crime: we're not old fashioned or right-
wing to take action against this social menace.
We're standing up for the people we represent, who play by
the rules and have a right to expect others to do the same.
And especially at this time let us say: we celebrate the
diversity in our country, get strength from the cultures and
races that go to make up Britain today; and racist abuse and
racist attacks have no place in the Britain we believe in.
All these policies are linked by a common thread of
principle.
Now with this second term, our duty is not to sit back and
bask in it. It is across the board, in competition policy,
enterprise, pensions, criminal justice, the civil service and
of course public services, to go still further in the journey
of change. All for the same reason: to allow us to deliver
social justice in the modern world.
Public services are the power of community in action.
They are social justice made real. The child with a good
education flourishes. The child given a poor education lives
with it for the rest of their life. How much talent and
ability and potential do we waste? How many children never
know not just the earning power of a good education but the
joy of art and culture and the stretching of imagination and
horizons which true education brings? Poor education is a
personal tragedy and national scandal.
Yet even now, with all the progress of recent years, a
quarter of 11-year-olds fail their basic tests and almost a
half of 16 year olds don't get five decent GCSEs.
The NHS meant that for succeeding generations, anxiety was
lifted from their shoulders. For millions who get superb
treatment still, the NHS remains the ultimate symbol of
social justice.
But for every patient waiting in pain, that can't get
treatment for cancer or a heart condition or in desperation
ends up paying for their operation, that patient's suffering
is the ultimate social injustice.
And the demands on the system are ever greater. Children
need to be better and better educated.
People live longer. There is a vast array of new treatment
available.
And expectations are higher. This is a consumer age. People
don't take what they're given. They demand more.
We're not alone in this. All round the world governments
are struggling with the same problems.
So what is the solution? Yes, public services need more
money. We are putting in the largest ever increases in NHS,
education and transport spending in the next few years; and
on the police too. We will keep to those spending plans. And
I say in all honesty to the country: if we want that to
continue and the choice is between investment and tax cuts,
then investment must come first.
There is a simple truth we all know. For decades there has
been chronic under-investment in British public services. Our
historic mission is to put that right; and the historic shift
represented by the election of June 7 was that investment to
provide quality public services for all comprehensively
defeated short-term tax cuts for the few.
We need better pay and conditions for the staff; better
incentives for recruitment; and
[[Page S10266]]
for retention. We're getting them and recruitment is rising.
This year, for the first time in nearly a decade, public
sector pay will rise faster than private sector pay.
And we are the only major government in Europe this year to
be increasing public spending on health and education as a
percentage of our national income.
This Party believes in public services; believes in the
ethos of public service; and believes in the dedication the
vast majority of public servants show; and the proof of it is
that we're spending more, hiring more and paying more than
ever before.
Public servants don't do it for money or glory. They do it
because they find fulfilment in a child well taught or a
patient well cared-for; or a community made safer and we
salute them for it.
All that is true. But this is also true.
That often they work in systems and structures that are
hopelessly old fashioned or even worse, work against the very
goals they aim for.
There are schools, with exactly the same social intake. One
does well; the other badly.
There are hospitals with exactly the same patient mix. One
performs well; the other badly.
Without reform, more money and pay won't succeed.
First, we need a national framework of accountability,
inspection; and minimum standards of delivery.
Second, within that framework, we need to free up local
leaders to be able to innovate, develop and be creative.
Third, there should be far greater flexibility in the terms
and conditions of employment of public servants.
Fourth, there has to be choice for the user of public
services and the ability, where provision of the service
fails, to have an alternative provider.
If schools want to develop or specialise in a particular
area; or hire classroom assistants or computer professionals
as well as teachers, let them. If in a Primary Care Trust,
doctors can provide minor surgery or physiotherapists see
patients otherwise referred to a consultant, let them.
There are too many old demarcations, especially between
nurses, doctors and consultants; too little use of the
potential of new technology; too much bureaucracy, too many
outdated practices, too great an adherence to the way we've
always done it rather than the way public servants would like
to do it if they got the time to think and the freedom to
act.
It's not reform that is the enemy of public services. It's
the status quo.
Part of that reform programme is partnership with the
private or voluntary sector.
Let's get one thing clear. Nobody is talking about
privatising the NHS or schools.
Nobody believes the private sector is a panacea.
There are great examples of public service and poor
examples. There are excellent private sector companies and
poor ones. There are areas where the private sector has
worked well; and areas where, as with parts of the railways,
it's been a disaster.
Where the private sector is used, it should not make a
profit simply by cutting the wages and conditions of its
staff.
But where the private sector can help lever in vital
capital investment, where it helps raise standards, where it
improves the public service as a public service, then to set
up some dogmatic barrier to using it, is to let down the very
people who most need our public services to improve.
This programme of reform is huge: in the NHS, education,
including student finance,--we have to find a better way to
combine state funding and student contributions criminal
justice; and transport.
I regard it as being as important for the country as Clause
IV's reform was for the Party, and obviously far more
important for the lives of the people we serve.
And it is a vital test for the modern Labour Party
If people lose faith in public services, be under no
illusion as to what will happen.
There is a different approach waiting in the wings. Cut
public spending drastically; let those that can afford to,
buy their own services; and those that can't, will depend on
a demoralised, sink public service. That would be a denial of
social justice on a massive scale.
It would be contrary to the very basis of community.
So this is a battle of values. Let's have that battle but
not amongst ourselves. The real fight is between those who
believe in strong public services and those who don't.
That's the fight worth having.
In all of this, at home and abroad, the same beliefs
throughout: that we are a community of people, whose self-
interest and mutual interest at crucial points merge, and
that it is through a sense of justice that community is born
and nurtured.
And what does this concept of justice consist of?
Fairness, people all of equal worth, of course. But also
reason and tolerance. Justice has no favourites; not amongst
nations, peoples or faiths.
When we act to bring to account those that committed the
atrocity of September 11, we do so, not out of bloodlust.
We do so because it is just. We do not act against Islam.
The true followers of Islam are our brothers and sisters in
this struggle. Bin Laden is no more obedient to the proper
teaching of the Koran than those Crusaders of the 12th
century who pillaged and murdered, represented the
teaching of the Gospel.
It is time the west confronted its ignorance of Islam.
Jews, Muslims and Christians are all children of Abraham.
This is the moment to bring the faiths closer together in
understanding of our common values and heritage, a source of
unity and strength.
It is time also for parts of Islam to confront prejudice
against America and not only Islam but parts of western
societies too.
America has its faults as a society, as we have ours.
But I think of the Union of America born out of the defeat
of slavery.
I think of its Constitution, with its inalienable rights
granted to every citizen still a model for the world.
I think of a black man, born in poverty, who became chief
of their armed forces and is now secretary of state Colin
Powell and I wonder frankly whether such a thing could have
happened here.
I think of the Statue of Liberty and how many refugees,
migrants and the impoverished passed its light and felt that
if not for them, for their children, a new world could indeed
be theirs.
I think of a country where people who do well, don't have
questions asked about their accent, their class, their
beginnings but have admiration for what they have done and
the success they've achieved.
I think of those New Yorkers I met, still in shock, but
resolute; the fire fighters and police, mourning their
comrades but still head held high.
I think of all this and I reflect: yes, America has its
faults, but it is a free country, a democracy, it is our ally
and some of the reaction to September 11 betrays a hatred of
America that shames those that feel it.
So I believe this is a fight for freedom. And I want to
make it a fight for justice too. Justice not only to punish
the guilty. But justice to bring those same values of
democracy and freedom to people round the world.
And I mean: freedom, not only in the narrow sense of
personal liberty but in the broader sense of each individual
having the economic and social freedom to develop their
potential to the full. That is what community means, founded
on the equal worth of all.
The starving, the wretched, the dispossessed, the ignorant,
those living in want and squalor from the deserts of Northern
Africa to the slums of Gaza, to the mountain ranges of
Afghanistan: they too are our cause.
This is a moment to seize. The Kaleidoscope has been
shaken. The pieces are in flux. Soon they will settle again.
Before they do, let us re-order this world around us.
Today, humankind has the science and technology to destroy
itself or to provide prosperity to all. Yet science can't
make that choice for us. Only the moral power of a world
acting as a community, can.
``By the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more
together than we can alone''.
For those people who lost their lives on September 11 and
those that mourn them; now is the time for the strength to
build that community. Let that be their memorial.
____________________