Off-Topic: Michael Gove's Speech on 16th January 2019

Most of my readers know that I'm English. My passport says that I'm British, but to me Great Britain is an abstract entity. I consider myself English first and British second.

Some of you also know that I don't live in England. Three years ago I moved to Germany, where I'll probably remain for the rest of my life. This wasn't because I preferred Germany. It was for purely practical reasons, which I won't go into here. I'm a foreign immigrant in Germany, and I'm a patriotic Englishman.

That doesn't mean that I think everything about England is good. It's possible to love your country but keep your eyes open to recognise what's wrong about it. The good thing about living in a democracy is that if you don't like your government you can vote against it. I don't like the current government, led by the Prime Minister Teresa May, because I find it guilty of social injustice on many counts. I'd like to cast my vote against her at the next general election, but the trouble is that the alternative is far worse.

Yesterday there was a motion of no-confidence in the government called by Jeremy Corbyn, the Leader of the Labour Party. If the vote had been successful there would have been a new general election. There was a five-hour debate before the vote, but it was pointless. Everyone knew what the result would be. The ruling coalition of the Conservatives and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) would vote against the motion, while all the other parties would vote in favour of it. The motion was defeated by 325 to 306 votes, which is approximately the parliamentary majority. Nobody expected any different. Not even Jeremy Corbyn expected to win. The motion of no-confidence was political posturing to make himself look important. Because of his ego trip a day was wasted when the parliament could have been discussing more important things.

The debate was irrelevant. For the first few hours not many members of parliament were present. It wasn't until the last hour before the vote that they started to arrive.

The final speeches were held by Tom Watson, the deputy Labour Leader, and Michael Gove, the Conservative Environment Minister. I was impressed by Tom Watson's speech. He seems to be a good alternative to Jeremy Corbyn. However, I sat in awe as Michael Gove spoke. It was the first speech I've ever heard from him. Apart from being a talented speaker, he aptly summed up what the rest of the speakers had been afraid to say. After briefly discussing up the achievements of the Conservative Party he spent the closing minutes of his speech talking about Jeremy Corbyn as an alternative leader. He described Jeremy Corbyn as anti-Semitic, misogynistic and a supporter of Fascism. The Labour MPs tried to drown him out, unwilling to accept that he was telling the truth.

Here is a full transcript of the speech.

Mr. Speaker, as you know, having sat throughout this entire debate, it has been a passionate debate characterised by many excellent speeches. But perhaps the bravest and the finest speech that came from the opposition benches was given by the member for Barrow-in-Furness.  It takes courage, and he has it, having been elected on a Labour mandate representing working class people to say that the leader of the party that you joined as a boy is not fit to be Prime Minister; he speaks for the country.

And that takes us to the speech from the Shadow Secretary of State [Tom Watson]. He spoke well, but I felt he did not rise to the level of events. But one thing that was characteristic about his speech: he did not once mention in his speech the Leader of the Opposition, or why he should be Prime Minister.

Now, I have a lot of time for the Honourable Member. We have several things in common. He's lost weight recently. We've both lost weight recently. Him much more so. We’re both friends of Israel. Him much more so. And we both recognise that the Member for Islington North [Jeremy Corbyn] is about the worst possible person to lead the Labour Party. Him much more so.

As well as great speeches from the backbenches we also had some interesting speeches from the frontbenches. We had a speech of over 20 minutes from my great friend the leader of the Scottish National Party in this place. But again, in those 20 minutes he did not once mention the Common Fisheries Policy. I think everyone in Scotland who recognises the potential to free ourselves from the Common Fisheries Policy which Brexit provides will note that in 20 minutes of precious parliamentary time the SNP didn’t mention them, aren’t interested in them, and as far as the fishing people of Scotland are concerned, the SNP has literally nothing to say.

I must now turn to the speech from the leader of the Liberal Democrats, someone for whom I also have affection and respect. He made a number of good points, but he also said that he regretted the referendum. This from the party that was the first in this House to say that we should have a referendum on EU membership. Because he doesn’t like the result of the last referendum he now wants another referendum. The Liberal Democrat policy on referendums is not the policy of Gladstone or Lloyd George. It’s the policy of Vicky Pollard: No, but Yeah, but No, but Yeah.

I should also commend the speech given by the Leader of the Democratic Unionist Party. He explained that he had been inundated with text messages today from people in this House who were saying, "Please, please, please, back the government tonight". And some of those text messages had even come from Conservatives.

And I think critically, when we think about confidence in this country and in this government, there is a daily vote of confidence, which is being executed by the individuals investing in this country, creating jobs and opportunity for all our citizens. Under this government, this country remains the most successful country for foreign direct investment of any country in Europe. With more than £1,300 billion being invested in the last year. That is why Forbes magazine says that this country is the best destination for new jobs in the world.

The independent organisation JLL has said that the best place for the future of services in the world is here in the United Kingdom. Once again, London has been recorded by independent inspectors as the best place in the world for tech investment. And we see that when Spanish rail firms like Talgo shortlist six destinations for investment for new rolling stock, all six in the United Kingdom; when Boeing opened a new factory in Sheffield to create jobs for British workers; when Chanel moved from France to London in order to establish a new corporate headquarters; and when Starbucks moved from Amsterdam to London in order to ensure more investment in jobs. The Opposition should wake up and smell the coffee.

All of this, in the words of the BBC , "despite Brexit". Through that investment, those jobs that have been created under my Right Honourable friend the Prime Minister’s inspirational leadership, have been invested in public services and social justice. As we heard from the member for Dudley South [Mike Wood], 1.9 million more children are in good or outstanding schools. It is also the case that the gap between the poorest and the richest in our schools has narrowed under this Conservative government. We also have a record level of investment in the NHS; in fact my Right Honourable friend the Secretary for Health has made a ten year plan with £20 billion investment,  £394 million pounds extra every week for our NHS.

We also have investment in our national security. We meet the 2% target for investment in NATO, and we have two new aircraft carriers capable of projecting British force and influence across the world in defence of freedom and democracy. And in contrast, while we are standing up for national security, what about the Right Honourable gentleman, the Member for Islington North? He wants to leave NATO. He wants to get rid of our nuclear deterrent. And recently in a speech he said, "Why do countries boast about the size of their armies? That is quite wrong. Why don’t we emulate Costa Rica that has no army at all?"

No allies, no deterrent, no army! No way can this country ever allow that man to be our Prime Minister in charge of our security.

If he can’t support our fighting men and women, who does he support? Who does he stand beside? Well, it was fascinating to discover that that the Right Honourable gentleman, the Leader of the Opposition, was there when a wreath was laid to commemorate those who were involved in the massacre at the Munich Olympics of Israeli athletes. Now, he says he was "present, but not involved".

"Present but not involved" sums him up when it comes to national security. When this House voted to bomb the fascists of ISIS after an inspirational speech by the Member for Leeds Central [Hilary Benn] in which 66 people, including the Shadow Secretary of State, voted with this government in order to defeat fascism, I’m afraid that the Honourable Gentleman, the Leader of the Opposition, was not with us. In fighting fascism, he was present but not involved.

And similarly, when this House voted to take the action necessary when Vladimir Putin executed an act of terrorism on our soil, there were many good Labour members who stood up to support what we were doing, but not the Right Honourable gentleman.

Interruption by Danielle Rowley, Labour MP for Midlothian; "The motion is on the government. How is this relevant?"

Speaker: "If the Secretary of State were out of order I'd have said so. I didn't, because he isn't".

If the Leader of the Opposition won’t stand up against Putin when he attacks people in this country, if he won’t stand up against fascists when they are running riot in Syria, if he will not stand up for this country when critical national security questions are being asked, how could we possibly expect him to stand up for us at European negotiations?

Will he stand up for us against Spain over Gibraltar? Will he stand up against the EU Commission in order to ensure order to ensure that we get a good deal? Of course he won’t,  because he won’t even stand up for his own members of parliament.

Why is it that a Labour member of parliament [Ruth Smeeth, Jewish Labour MP for Stoke-On-Trent] needs armed protection at her own party conference? Why is it that nearly half of the female Labour MPs wrote to the Leader of the Opposition to say that he was not standing up against the vilification and the abuse that they received online, which had been carried out in his name? If he cannot protect his own members of parliament, if he cannot protect the proud traditions of the Labour Party, how could he possibly protect this country?

We cannot have confidence in him to lead. We have confidence in this government, which is why I call on the House to be reject this motion.

That was the final speech before the vote. Michael Gove's last words were almost drowned out by the Speaker calling the House to order, because it was 7 pm and time to vote. Michael Gove didn't hold the speech for the members of parliament, because he already knew how they would vote. He held the speech for the viewers at home, to remind them that it would be a disgrace for England, the country I love so much, to be led by a disgusting reprobate like Jeremy Corbyn.