Thanks everybody for coming today, and thank you to Dr Nick Cullinan, Director of the National Portrait Gallery for hosting and opening up early especially for us.

I hope that everybody here heard very clearly the commitment and the passionate advocacy of cultural education from Nick Gibb as the Minister of State for School Standards and the importance of cultural learning in our education system.

I could too make the argument for how the combination of technical expertise and creative cultural content are the point at which Britain will earn its crust over the 21st century. But I think it is far better for that argument is made by Nick, because you would expect it from me as the Minister for Digital and Culture. But you can see that this is an argument that the whole of Government adopts and buys.

But of course how you do this has been a point of contention recently. But we believe strongly that the arts should be for everyone and not just a privileged few and perhaps most importantly that arts should be used as the potential to be an incredible force for openness and social mobility.

This is drilled through our Industrial Strategy, which sets out the combination of our creative flair and technical expertise, and underpinning that as a direction of travel must be the necessity of the next generation to be well prepared and have a well-rounded education.

Over the last few months I think we have seen some significant, positive developments in arts education and I want to build on that momentum.

The first was the work of DfE in saving art history A-Level.

Now Art History A-Level may have only had a relatively small number of entries of around 1,000 each year – and that was part of the problem – but the symbolism of when it was made not available and then when it was saved and the amount of people who have been through Art History A-Level and who see that as the grounding for their career in the arts is incredible, so I am delighted at the work to save it.

But it is part of a much bigger drive. DfE also announced £300 million to help children from all backgrounds to enjoy the benefits of music and the arts and in the Autumn Statement the Chancellor announced funding towards work between the RSA and Education Endowment Foundation to pilot and examine through scientific research based on randomised control trials the impact of cultural education on disadvantaged pupils. And if like me you believe in the hypothesis that high-quality rigorous cultural education enhances people’s life chances then this research is the opportunity to see this hypothesis proven.

Nick has spoken about Ebacc and how this welcome report from the New Schools Network puts to rest arguments that the policy is stifling cultural education.

But I will make just one further point.

In order to win this argument that we in this room believe in about the importance of art in education, we have to make the argument in the right way.

We all believe in the intrinsic value of the arts.

I am not an artist by profession. But artists know how to relate to an audience.

And we have got to understand that our audience is the education profession. We need to help support and persuade them to deliver this rounded education.

Our audience is the teachers and head teachers who are focussed through their life’s passion and life’s work and life’s passion on driving up exam results and driving up life chances.

So we need to articulate the value of cultural education in the language of life chances and exam results.

I passionately believe that cultural education – arts, music, drama, drawing, dance, even portraiture – is complementary not contradictory to success in maths and English.

This should not be an argument about a battle between the arts and other subjects, but instead a battle for stronger, better, well-rounded education.

Ultimately, the best schools in the country do this. They combine excellent cultural education to complement excellence in other academic subjects. This report backs up that analysis. It looks at the data and says if you want to drive up standards across the board, push your arts and music offer.

Rigorously taught, music complements maths; drama complements English; and the study of art complements history. The rigour matters but so does the breadth.

Of course, everyone can play their part in this debate and we need your help directly to support schools too. Everyone can do their bit.

We are actively encouraging leaders in the arts, as in other fields, to make a direct, personal contribution through organisations like Speakers for Schools, which arranges talks in state schools by successful people to inspire pupils. Both Nick Gibb and Nick Cullinan have played a big part in making that happen, and if you are not involved then you are not doing your bit so I urge you to get involved.

So lets concentrate on how we win this argument and that is by concentrating on the complementarity on how arts education drives up standards. And not by engaging in a false battle between arts and science and English and maths. But instead by saying that if you’ve got the talent and if you want to spark somebody’s motivation and imagination in an artistic subject then lets make sure that everybody in our country has the opportunity to embrace the arts, and in so doing drive up their success in science and maths and English too, and ultimately enhance their life chances are enhanced.

I think we have got a chance to do this now and I look forward to working with all of you on it. But ultimately our goal is that every single person has the chance to fulfil their true potential. Lets do that based on the evidence and lets work together to make it happen.

Construction work on the Newhaven flood alleviation scheme started on 3 January 2017, after 2 years of development including consultation with the local community. After a competitive tendering process, the Environment Agency has employed the services of contractors JacksonHyder to carry out design and construction of this scheme.

The Newhaven flood alleviation scheme has been developed in partnership with Lewes District Council, East Sussex County Council, the Coast to Capital Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) and South East LEP to reduce the flood risk to approximately 431 homes and 387 commercial properties by significantly improving the standard of existing tidal defences in the East Sussex town.

Floods Minister Thérèse Coffey said:

This £18 million flood defence scheme is a great example of our commitment to better protect the Sussex coast from the kind of devastating flooding experienced in 2013.

All along this coastline, communities are thriving and growing. But we understand the region’s full potential cannot be realised without tackling flood risk. That’s exactly what we’re working with our partners to achieve in Newhaven and throughout the country.

Gordon Wilson, Environment Agency Area Flood and Coastal Risk Manager, said:

I am delighted that construction has started and I would like to take the opportunity to thank the Newhaven community for their invaluable feedback and support throughout the design, consultation and planning processes.

In order to improve the current aging flood defences, unavoidably there may be some disruption whilst essential construction work takes place. We always aim to keep any disruption to a minimum and we thank the community in advance for their ongoing support.

When the whole project is complete in 2019, the scheme will reduce the tidal flood risk to hundreds of homes and a significant number of commercial properties in the area, as well as protecting important local infrastructure such as the road network, railway tracks and the train station. This scheme will also support the wider regeneration of Newhaven, helping to bring new investment, jobs and homes to the area.

Councillor Andy Smith, Leader of Lewes District Council, said:

I am very pleased that work is underway on this hugely beneficial project for the future of Newhaven and its residents.

Most importantly, it will give a high level of protection to homes and businesses as well as the transport network, greatly reducing the risk of a repeat of the 2013 floods which caused widespread damage and upset. In addition, the scheme also supports the wider regeneration of Newhaven and will help to bring new investment, jobs and homes here.

Councillor Rupert Simmons, lead cabinet member for economy at East Sussex County Council, said:

We’re delighted that the Environment Agency has started work to improve flood protection for Newhaven. When the scheme is completed it will significantly reduce the risk of flooding, benefitting residents and providing a real boost for businesses in the town.

Councillor Steve Saunders, Town Mayor of Newhaven, said:

I welcome the start of work on these flood defence works by the Environment Agency. This is good news for Newhaven because they will provide much needed protection to local homes, businesses and infrastructure as well as enabling regeneration to take place in the town.

The Coast to Capital LEP and South East LEP are each contributing £1.5 million, as part of their wider commitment to regeneration in Newhaven. This funding has allowed the scheme to start construction in January 2017.

Tony Middleton, chief operating officer at Coast to Capital LEP, said:

It’s exciting to see the flood defence project starting to come to life. The LEP has funded this scheme because the construction of the defences will act as a catalyst for the wider regeneration of Newhaven and continue to protect the vital local infrastructure surrounding the area, drawing in new investment, jobs and homes for the area.

Chris Brodie, Chairman, South East Local Enterprise Partnership, said:

South East LEP welcomes this important milestone and is pleased to be able to support this vital project which is important, not only in protecting the existing business community of Newhaven and local infrastructure, but significantly improves future opportunity for investment in new jobs and homes.

• All media enquiries: 0800 141 2743 (please ask for the duty press officer)
• Email us at: southeastpressoffice1@environment-agency.gov.uk
• Follow us on Twitter: @EnvAgencySE

MHRA investigation results in guilty pleas for supplying unlicensed, and potentially dangerous, medicinal products.

Gediminas and Vytautas Staskevicius appeared in the Oxford Crown Court charged with offences under Trade Mark, Misuse of Drugs and medicines regulatory legislation. The two men were set to go on trial for charges relating to offences in between May and July 2015. But, before the trial could begin, the two men pleaded guilty to all charges.

Gediminas has been sentenced to 16 months imprisonment, suspended for 2 years. Gediminas must also complete 120 hours of unpaid work and pay £1,500 in costs. Vytautas has been sentenced to 8 months imprisonment, suspended for 2 years. Vytautas is also subject to a curfew between the hours of 9pm and 7am, lasting for two months.

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) began investigating Gediminas Staskevicius in May 2015. We received information that suspected illegal medicines were delivered to Gediminas’ address. In addition, an unknown person used a post office near Gediminas’ home to post counterfeit medicines to various international destinations.

In July 2015, enforcement officers from the MHRA entered the men’s residence, and storage units hired in their names. The officers found almost 470,000 tablets of unlicensed erectile dysfunction medication, counterfeit medicines and the class C controlled drug Tramadol. The officers also found over £6000 in cash and electronic records of medicines trading including customer details.

Selling medicines which are unlicensed, controlled or counterfeit is not only illegal but also poses a serious health risk to the public. The medicines sold illegally by these men are potent and can cause serious side effects.

We are currently running our #FakeMeds campaign to raise awareness of the risks of buying fake medical products online, and to encourage people to buy medicines and medical devices safely.

Alastair Jeffery, Head of Enforcement for MHRA, said:

Fake and unlicensed medicines pose a serious health threat.

There is no way of knowing whether they are acceptably safe. There are also no guarantees as to what unlicensed medicines contain; there may be impurities or incorrect ingredients which affect their safety and performance.

We will continue to target criminals supplying illegal medical products and raise awareness of the harm fake medicines cause.

You can avoid risking your health, and wasting money, by buying licensed medicines from legitimate high street or online retailers.

Background

1. MHRA is responsible for regulating all medicines and medical devices in the UK. Our work is underpinned by robust and fact-based judgments to ensure that the benefits justify any risks. MHRA is a centre of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency which also includes the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control (NIBSC) and the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). The Agency is an executive agency of the Department of Health. www.mhra.gov.uk
2. Check whether a website can sell medicines online by searching our registry.
3. Online retailers displaying the distance selling logo are registered with the MHRA to supply legitimate medicines.
4. www.gov.uk/fakemeds
5. Follow #FakeMeds on Twitter

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) stepped in after the UEA made significant changes to the content of a course – by introducing compulsory modules thus limiting students’ choice of optional modules – and not adequately informing prospective students who had received course offers about the changes.

UEA regarded the changes as ‘minor’ – in line with its contract terms at the time – and therefore did not consult existing students or inform offer holders immediately, as they would have done if they had considered the changes to be ‘substantial’. The CMA welcomes UEA’s undertaking which ensures that, in future, it will treat the addition of a compulsory module to a course as a ‘substantial change’.

UEA has also confirmed that it will make timely updates to its website of any substantial changes. This will ensure that anyone thinking about applying has access to up-to-date and accurate information.

Nisha Arora, CMA Senior Director, Consumer, said:

For most students, going to university is an expensive, once-in-a-lifetime event and they should enjoy the best possible experience. So it’s important that prospective students have accurate and up-to-date information when choosing their course and existing students are given timely information about any substantial changes that are made to their course. And any contract terms which deal with variation, for example to course content, must be fair.

The CMA welcomes UEA’s constructive approach and its commitment to revise its terms and conditions and comply with consumer protection law.

The CMA published advice for higher education providers on how to comply with consumer protection law in March 2015, as well as guidance on consumer rights for students.

Following that work, the CMA launched a compliance review and published the results in July 2016. The review revealed that awareness of consumer protection law obligations has increased since the CMA’s work began in this sector with many universities reporting improvements in their practices and terms. However, the CMA’s review also revealed examples of poor practice.

The CMA has now secured commitments from 6 universities since November 2015. Further information about the compliance review and the action taken to date against universities, is on the case page.

Notes for editors

1. The CMA is the UK’s primary competition and consumer authority. It is an independent non-ministerial government department with responsibility for carrying out investigations into mergers, markets and the regulated industries and enforcing competition and consumer law. For CMA updates, follow us on Twitter @CMAgovuk, Flickr, LinkedIn and like our Facebook page.
2. UEA fully co-operated with the CMA’s investigation and agreed a Part 8 undertaking with the CMA, which reflected the changes which it had made voluntarily to its terms and conditions.
3. The key pieces of consumer protection legislation relevant to this investigation were the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 and the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Part 2 and the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (for contracts concluded prior 1 October 2015).
4. The above legislation is enforced through the courts. Ultimately, only a court can determine whether a particular term or practice infringes the law and no such finding has been made in this case.
5. UEA made changes to the content of Year 2 of its 4-year undergraduate American Literature with Creative Writing course. Prior to the changes being made, Year 2 of this course consisted entirely of optional modules. Year 2 was changed when UEA introduced 2 new compulsory modules which then reduced the number of optional modules that students could choose to take. UEA considered that these changes enhanced the course and were of benefit to students.
6. UEA of its own accord made concessions to existing students on the American Literature with Creative Writing course BA, for example, allowing them to pursue optional modules which were not in the new course profile.
7. Media enquiries should be directed to Simon Belgard (simon.belgard@cma.gsi.gov.uk, 020 3738 6472).