Commenting, Co-Chair of the Parliamentary Party Committee on Work and Pensions, Jenny Willott said:

"With the Government planning a host of changes to benefits for disabled people, it is vital that we ensure that people have confidence in the assessment system.

"Conference has recognised some of the good work that this Government has already done in reforming the Work Capability Assessment by implementing the independent review of Professor Harrington, but there is clearly more still to be done.

"Whilst the Government is having to cut back public spending in order to clear up the economic mess left behind by Labour, it is really important that we continue to provide as much support as possible for sick and disabled people.

"As this motion shows, the Liberal Democrats are committed to making sure this happens."

Conference - the Liberal Democrats have now been in Government for more than 500 days.

And I know what you're all thinking. You're thinking - this is tough.

And I know that it hasn't always been easy; and that at times the reality of this Coalition business is very tough.

But that is the point. That is what we are here for.

Because who are we - if not the party who makes the hard calls.

We are the ones who opposed Iraq - when no one else did;

Who championed the Green agenda - when no one else did;

Who warned of the banking crisis - when no one else did;

And who stood up to Rupert Murdoch - when no one else did.

And now, we're trailblazers all over again, forming the first coalition since the Second World War -

And I understand that it can be challenging for us all.

In fact, sometimes, I let myself dream about what we could get done if we were in power by ourselves.

What a Liberal Democrat Britain would look like.

Perhaps we'd start by investing extra money in the most vulnerable children, I think;

Or by cutting tax for the lowest earners, instead of the highest.

Perhaps we'd bring back the earnings link for pensions; and create more apprenticeships for young people.

We could invest billions in green technology.

And make life easier for parents who want to share their childcare duties.

Pinch! - this is no dream - this is a reality!

This is what we are doing: right here, right now.

And conference, this reality is down to you.

Because you campaigned for it, because you fought for it - We are delivering it in Government.

People say Lib Dems are optimistic.

Well I agree!

For me - today it's a Liberal Britain, tomorrow, a Liberal world!

So I want to talk to you about why for me, a Liberal world is so important.

At the end of last year I was appointed Ministerial Champion for tackling Violence Against Women and Girls Overseas.

Now this is an important role with a vital mission:

Because right now, rape and domestic violence are a higher risk for women aged 15 to 44 than cancer, traffic accidents or malaria.

This is simply deplorable. It is a scandal and an outrage that we should not accept.

So I am honoured to take on this role, a particular privilege in this landmark year for political rights and human dignity.

2011 brought the Arab Spring, which saw millions of people fight for those most basic of principles.

For freedom, for opportunity, for human rights. For Government by consent, and not by force.

So many brave people, who in the face of such brutal oppression, went out there and declared, "No more."

But since taking this new role, the part of the revolution that interested me the most was the vital role played by women.

We saw women from Tunisia to Bahrain organising, leading, and participating in protests shoulder to shoulder with their countrymen.

In Yemen, a young women, Tawakul Karman, led the first demonstrations on a university campus against the vicious rule of President Saleh.

In Egypt, the video blog of Asmaa Mafouz, calling on her compatriots to fill Tahrir Square went viral, playing a significant role in the success of that event.

Women have been vital in movements from Martyr's Square to Pearl Roundabout -

Marching, making speeches, treating the injured - shedding their traditional roles and refusing to be spectators to a revolution.

In Yemen President Saleh went as far to call these women un-Islamic for marching side by side with men.

So what did they do? They turned out in greater numbers than ever before.

Proud Muslims, proud women, and proud democrats.

But the truth is that while there were many women on the front line, experiencing the most joyous moments of the revolution,

There were just as many, away from the cameras, experiencing some of the darkest.

Periods of conflict always leave women and girls vulnerable to attack, and the instability caused by the Arab Spring has been no exception.

There are reports of rapes in Libya, assault in Bahrain, forced virginity tests in Egypt;

And who can forget watching those harrowing images of Iman al-Obeidi bursting into the Rixos hotel in Tripoli - desperate, but determined to tell gathered journalists how she had been raped by Gadaffi's forces?

And the even more disturbing footage of her being forcibly gagged and bustled away by Government officials?

I was horrified, as I'm sure you were.

But the sad reality is that Iman could represent millions of women all over the world - terrified, abused, silenced.

But she refused to be silenced, and they must not be silenced any longer.

The Arab Spring has been a great political revolution - a fight for equality.

Equal rights to vote, equal access to the labour market, equal share in the future of your country - for all classes and races and religions.

But this must apply to women too.

Because while half their populations are isolated and marginalised, these new societies can never reach their full potential - economically, socially, or morally.

So I urge these new nations to ensure that this isn't only a political revolution, but a social revolution as well.

That this Arab Spring is followed by a Feminist Summer, where women can vote, work, speak their minds and live free from violence.

In Egypt, activist Mozn Hassan was in Tahrir square every day until Mubarak resigned.

Yet when she and other women marched for their rights on International Women's Day, they were harassed and threatened by the very men who they had once walked beside.

These heroic women are being told that now is not the time for women's rights - that there are more important things to deal with.

Well I say, now IS the time.

Now is the time for women to have a say in the way their country is run.

Now is the time for women to be allowed to work to feed their children.

Now is the time for women who have suffered sexual violence to know justice.

And now is the time, if there ever was one, for full legal, social, and political equality for all women in the Arab and Islamic world.

But I want to be clear that violence against women is not a problem just for Arabic or Islamic countries.

This is a problem across the globe; and political representation is just the first step in a long battle.

On my first visit as Ministerial Champion, for example, I visited India.

Now in India, women occupy four of the most senior political positions - Head of State, President of the Congressional Coalition, Head of the Opposition party and Speaker of the Lok Sabha.

But from my visit it became clear that despite this political representation, India, like many other countries across the globe can still be a very unsafe place for women.

On one of the days, I went to the village of Patna, in the northern state of Bihar - where reported incidents of domestic violence are highest in all of India.

In this region, two thirds of all women have suffered violence at the hands of their husbands.

And some of the stories I heard - of rape, of beatings, of kidnap and imprisonment - were truly harrowing.

Now I met with Ministers and civil groups trying to change this, and I commend both their efforts and their intentions.

But India proves that women in power doesn't always mean empowered women.

And legislation alone will not solve these problems.

For women to feel truly safe when they walk home from work late at night, what has to change is attitudes.

There must be social change, cultural change.

And this must be achieved through the education of men and boys, as well as through new laws that move away from the dangerously outdated notions of a woman's "modesty" and "virtue"and towards a judicial system that says sexual crime, domestic violence, and the abuse of women in all its forms is nothing less than an affront to their human rights.

But I do not preach to these countries blind to our own failures, conference.

Because we in Britain must admit that we have not solved the issue of violence against women.

And that we have our own outdated cultural norms to overcome.

Our country still has unacceptable levels of domestic violence, terrible conviction rates for rape, and a serious problem with human trafficking.

It is simply not acceptable that in a modern democracy like ours, an average of two women a week are murdered by their partners or ex-partners.

But neither is it acceptable for our law-makers, no matter how-well intentioned, to talk about rape in a way that seems both casual and callous.

As a nation, and as a Government, we must be clear that we understand that rape and sexual violence is about power, not about sex.

That what a woman wears, or does, or says, will never be justification for violence against her.

And that abuse in the home, by someone you know, is no less traumatising than abuse by a stranger.

Now I am incredibly proud of the work this government has done so far to tackle violence against women:
- The extra funding for rape support centres
- The introduction of domestic violence protection orders
- The opt-in to the European Human Trafficking Directive

But we know that there is much more we can and must do.

So I am delighted to see a motion from conference this Monday which encourages the Government to keep pushing, keep progressing, and not rest until we have eradicated violence against women in Britain once and for all.

Because while there are courageous women out there -

Like Iman, like Tawakul, like Asmaa - Like the women I met in India, who are willing to risk their freedom and their lives to fight for their rights, Britain must say - we stand with you.

While there are women who live in fear, in poverty, in isolation - Britain must say - we hear you.

And until all women across the world have complete equality - Britain must remain a leader and an inspiration to all nations in the way we treat our women.

But conference, while my official mission is to tackle violence against women, this won't stop me from continuing to fight for the rights of all persecuted minorities around the world.

Because it often follows that in countries where women are oppressed, other minorities are too.

In Africa, where the majority of countries still have no law against domestic violence, homosexuality remains illegal in all but sixteen countries.

In Saudi Arabia, where women are prevented from voting, driving, or learning; homosexuality is punishable by death.

So this government is playing a lead role in the UN to ensure that the international community recognises the persecution and human rights violations that LGBT people continue to suffer.

Against fierce opposition from some countries who seek to dismiss or dilute this issue we have played an instrumental role in building international support for our position.

And I am pleased that this culminated in a landmark UN resolution rejecting such abuses, which was signed by more states than ever before.

But sadly, this is not an area where the West can claim complete moral victory.

Even in European countries we have seen abhorrent attitudes towards LGB&T communities.

In Italy, violent homophobic attacks continue, while politicians use demeaning rhetoric.

In Lithuania, legal provisions came into force which attempted to stifle public discussion and restrict freedom of expression for LGBT people.

And in Turkey, research by Amnesty International found systematic fear and discrimination, in a country with no provision to prevent it.

So we will also work within the EU, to ensure that there is full implementation, across Europe, of the Council of Europe's measures to combat homophobic discrimination.

I will be in Brussels, again, on October 18th, raising this very issue.

And while on my travels as a Champion for Women's Rights, I am and will be a Champion for Gay Rights too.

I will be raising the issue with Governments all over the world and will continue to push everyone, from allies to adversaries, to recognise what we know is true:

That Gay Rights are Human Rights.

No excuses, no exceptions, no compromises.

But, conference, as with the treatment of women, Britain must not get complacent.

We are a world leader for gay rights, but as this conference made clear last year with your call for equal marriage, there is still more that we must do.

That is why I am delighted to announce today that in March, this Government will begin a formal consultation on how to implement equal civil marriage for same sex couples.

And this would allow us to make any legislative changes necessary by the end of this Parliament.

Civil partnerships were a welcome first step - but as our constitution states, this party rejects prejudice and discrimination in all its forms.

And I believe that to deny one group of people the same opportunities offered to another is not only discrimination, but is not fair.

Conference, this is a Liberal Democrat policy - but now it is a policy being put into action.

Along with all the other Liberal Democrat policies which are now, because of your commitment, a reality.

This is why I became a Liberal Democrat.

This is why you became a Liberal Democrat.

To build and safeguard a fair, free and open society.

And with Liberal Democrats in Government this is exactly what we are doing.

Thank you.

"I detect a very real change in mood"

NICK CLEGG, Deputy Prime Minister and Liberal Democrat Leader, talks exclusively to Adrian Slade
Finding an interview slot in a Deputy Prime Minister's schedule is a touch like applying for Olympic tickets. You wait a long time and have no idea what, if anything, you are going to get. Eventually I was lucky. I got the chance to go on the Clegg family school run, or walk actually, and then grab 30 minutes with Nick on the way to Whitehall in his Ministerial car.

Nick, his wife Miriam, sons Antonio and Alberto, his minder and I had taken the short walk to the boys' school where, in what seemed to be a rather charming ritual, the parents all wait for a few moments to wave goodbye to their offspring in the playground as each class queue enters the school doors. "We like to do this as often as we can" said Nick.

Being much smarter
He has had a very busy and much interrupted summer politically, although he self-deprecatingly brushed away my suggestion that Prime Ministers appear to get more holiday than their Deputies. So then down to the realpolitik. What exactly had he meant a few weeks ago when I heard him say that the party had been in the wrong place politically between September last and this May but was now being much smarter?

"Autumn to May was a gruelling and unforgiving period where we were being vilified and blamed for everything unpopular, not credited with anything popular and aggressively targeted by our opponents, generally and personally. I always knew we would be attacked from left and right but it was remorseless, and particularly painful over the tuition fees issue. After May I decided to step back, look and learn. And I have gone round the country talking with hundreds of members. We have always fought our corner in government but I think we are now being smarter in that we are letting that show a bit more."

Tuition traumas
In retrospect what would he have done differently over the tuition fees issue?
"We should have taken more time. Remember that politically we were completely isolated as a party. Both the other parties wanted to raise fees. Also the other alternatives would have meant taking money away from, perhaps, pensioners, the pupil premium or early years education. If you believe in social mobility it is important that you invest in younger children and a fair distribution for the graduate. I think we are doing both but we would have been in a better position to explain that to the country if we had first taken more time to explain what the dilemma was."

Had the drastic drop in support since the tuition fee protests in December done irreparable damage to the party and to Nick's reputation as a leader? Nick agreed about the damage but not that it was irreparable.

"Irreparable? I think it depends very heavily on how things look in a few years' time. On three things, particularly. I believe that, first, more rather than fewer disadvantaged children will be seen to be going to university; secondly, that people will not have actually been charged £9,000 because of what we are doing to keep fees down; and, thirdly, that there will not have been a dramatic drop in the number of students going to university. I think if we can show all these things, people will understand why we had to make the painful decision we did."

NHS worries
Earlier this year Nick had had to face a party outcry over the Coalition's Bill for the reform of the NHS. Again with the benefit of hindsight, what would he have said or done to forestall that?

On this too he believed the government should have taken more time.
"The principles of the reform are ones that any Liberal Democrat would recognise - less centralisation, greater say for local communities and about how money in the system is used and, along the way, a far, far clearer playing field for public, voluntary and private providers in the NHS, ending the Labour's scandalous practice of 'sweetheart' deals with the private sector. But where we got some things wrong was in the detail. I think it shows some political maturity that we were able to stop the clock, listen and learn and then get so much of what we discussed at Sheffield into the Bill."

Shirley Williams, among others, has recently expressed further concerns about the Bill, particularly the accountability of the Secretary of State. Nick had had a meeting and a number of conversations with Shirley about the points raised and had 'immersed' himself in NHS legislation over the previous week. His conclusions on the accountability issue were very firm.

"I am now totally convinced
that this notion that the Secretary of State can or will wash his hands of responsibility for the NHS in
any way simply is unfounded. Paul Burstow, Andrew Lansley and I
will nevertheless make sure that
on the floor of the House the detailed provisions of the Bill do confirm this."

Riots and reform
In his response to the recent riots and looting, David Cameron had talked of a broken society, possibly depriving families involved of their benefits and council housing, more punitive sentencing, greater use of tags and curfews and zero tolerance policing. As a Liberal Democrat which of these views, if any, did Nick subscribe to?

"There isn't one simple solution and it is important that we don't all rush to impose our own political prejudices on a complex set of circumstances. The big difference between these riots and the '80s, is that the '80s riots really challenged people and sparked a national soul-searching debate. This time, politicians of all shades have done exactly the reverse and rushed to invoke the riots as confirmation of what they have thought all along. That's why I, and a panel we have set up, have been sounding out views all around the country. My early view is that what we saw was a nihilistic outburst of crude, consumerist looting. People only do that if they have nothing to lose in society. Of course we need to punish crime, but crucially we must then make sure that we also rehabilitate. We have to continue to ask ourselves how we make sure that they have a foot on the first rung of the ladder of society."

In a recent Guardian article, Nick had expressed a strong note of caution about tampering with civil liberties and the Human Rights Act. He dismissed any notion that events had put Ken Clarke and Tom McNally's programme of penal and legal reform at risk.

"Exactly the reverse. I think they have strongly reinforced it. When you find that nearly three quarters of the adults in court after the riots have previous criminal records, it is yet another dramatic example of the revolving door of crime. For all the tough talk, if you don't change offending behaviour as well as punish, crime is going to go on. It's hopeless to bang people up if we don't try to change their behaviour. I am equally determined that we see more community sentences."

Nick remains convinced that the Conservative Party can be persuaded of this view.
The economic tightrope
Nick, Vince Cable and indeed the whole Cabinet have invested a lot
of political capital in economic recovery. Given the current economic climate, weren't his hopes in very real danger of biting the dust?

"There is no doubt that things have deteriorated," Nick admitted immediately, "in Europe and the world, and it's having an unforgiving effect on us here too. But I do not think that fiddling around with the fiscal measures and cuts one way or the other will create growth by next Tuesday and I don't know one economist who does.

"That is not to say we are powerless. There are things we can do and are doing, for example, to make it easier for people to grow businesses and employ people. And then there is investment for the long term - rail transport, renewable energy and the extra borrowing we are allowing local authorities to boost house building. But it does not do it all by next week."

50p tax commitment
Were he and Vince Cable ever going to get their way over bankers' bonuses and executive pay and was the 50p tax rate going to be abolished and replaced by a mansion or wider wealth tax?

"We have already imposed a levy on the banks. We have a commitment from them [Merlin] that they are going spend less on remuneration…" "Was that actually working in practice?", I interjected. "To be honest, it's patchy. We need to make sure there is no jiggery-pokery in the way it operates. And then of course there is the Vickers Commission, whose recommendations we all broadly accept. Would that be happening without Liberal Democrats in government? I doubt it.

"On the 50p rate I take a simple approach. You need a tax system that enjoys popular support and is patently fair. That is why one of the policies we put on the front page of our manifesto was raising the personal tax allowance to £10,000. As a result, this government has cut tax for millions of low and middle earners. We've already lifted a million people out of paying tax altogether and we will lift more as we continue to make progress towards that £10,000 mark. I could not be clearer - at a time when millions of people on average incomes are struggling to pay their a heating and shopping bills - our priority is cutting taxes for these people, not for people at the top."

Party and Conference
Most party members, I suggested, were still feeling pretty battered after 16 months of Coalition. When did he see himself, and therefore the party, starting to recover from almost the lowest levels of support ever recorded in the opinion polls?

"I don't follow polls carefully but I believe there was one recently showing us at around 17 per cent [there was but the poll average remains 10 per cent - AS] but anyway I don't entirely accept your characterisation. We are beginning to win local by-elections again - for example in Somerset; in - and I love this - Eton; and in Warrington. And in July there was slight lift in membership numbers.

"I like to get out and talk to people and I think I remain quite attuned to the way people react to me and to us. I detect a very real change of mood. Not euphoria but lots of questions and now a willingness to listen rather than the previous unwillingness and vitriol. Perhaps the reality of Coalition is becoming better understood. Even the BBC has done an objective analysis showing that 75 per cent of the party's manifesto is now being delivered in government."

What would he most like to see coming out of next week's Conference?
"First, for us as a party, that we enjoy each other's company. As you say, it has been a battering year. Let us spend time with people we have campaigned with for years, compare notes, bandage some wounds, learn lessons but let's do it together. Secondly, for the outside world, however much we may have been criticised, we are just trying to do the right thing by the country. Our Liberal instincts remain wholly intact and are influencing government."

As we approached Whitehall, Nick's minder asked me "Will you be going into Downing St, sir?" 'Not today thank you' I wanted to say. 'No thanks' was my actual reply. At 9.30 AM precisely I was politely dropped by Westminster Station.

Good morning. Today I'm going to talk about the economy. I'm certainly in the right place. For more than a century LSE scholars have been at the forefront of every major economic debate asking - and answering - the most pressing questions of the day.

Today, the big question facing governments is this: Given the unprecedented pressures in the global economy, what can we do to restore stability and encourage growth?

The Coalition will be saying more about that between now and our Autumn Statement, but I wanted to make this speech today because the international situation has changed dramatically. It is worse, even, to just six months ago. To quote Christine Lagarde, the new head of the IMF: 'We are in a dangerous new phase'. A huge rise in oil and food prices. A slowdown in overseas markets. Continued turmoil in the Eurozone. Ongoing uncertainty in the US. Far from a one off shock, the 2008 banking crisis has set off a chain reaction that continues to reverberate around the globe.

And here in the UK, we are still feeling the pressure. This week we've heard that inflation is still high at 4.5%. And, in the last hour, we've been told unemployment has risen.

So, the reality we face is stark; there is now little margin for error. But that does not mean we are helpless. It does not mean we intend to sit on our hands while the global economy falters.

Our critics say that all this government is capable of is cuts. That, beyond lowering a few business taxes, reducing a bit of red tape there is little else we are willing or able to do. That is absolutely wrong. We can do more, we are doing more, we will do more. Internationally, promoting cooperation, discouraging our global partners from turning inwards. And here in the UK, where, yes, we must stay firm on tackling our deficit but, at the same time, where there are levers we can pull to stimulate growth, not least to deliver infrastructure - something I want to give special attention to today.

First, international cooperation. As important today as it was in the weeks that followed Lehman Brothers' collapse, but even harder to achieve because, for so many of us, the options available now are even fewer than we had then. And, everywhere, governments are calculating the trade off between protecting their national interests and working together for our collective good. That is a false choice. Our fates are tied.

We urgently need to rebalance global demand and unwind dangerous imbalances. Having contracted for a while, the imbalance between countries in deficit and in surplus has widened again. Countries with large deficits and fiscal vulnerabilities must put in place credible fiscal consolidation plans, pushing forward structural reforms to improve their competitiveness, and surplus countries must actively increase domestic demand, keeping their markets open. Beggar-thy-neighbour approaches may be attractive now. They will be less so if, in another three years, we're still not out of this mess.

In terms of the Eurozone, the real failure has not been the original concept of monetary union. It's that the rules were never applied stringently enough. The Stability and Growth Pact was actively watered down in 2005, allowing members to wriggle out of their fiscal commitments to each other. Now we are seeing the effects.

But on a day like today, when people are talking openly about the possibility of Greek default, the key question is not: how do we seek to renegotiate the UK's place in the European Union in a treaty that hasn't even materialised yet. The single-most important question, the urgent question is what role can we play in helping the Eurozone avoid further turmoil, creating the stability needed for prosperity and jobs - in the Eurozone and in the UK too. A stable, healthy Eurozone matters massively to the UK. It's where we send 40% of all of our exports and, together, we all face a longer term problem of competitiveness - a problem not even a raft of new treaties could fix.

So beyond the immediate issues surrounding fiscal and monetary policy, what we need is deepening and widening of the Single Market. The world's largest, borderless marketplace - designed by a British Commissioner. A market that already adds £520bn to our shared economy and, if liberalised, in services and digital industry, could add £690bn. As Europe undergoes a period of longer-term change, that should be the UK's real priority - completing the Single Market is how we put UK's interests first.

We also need international cooperation to bring stability to our international banking system. Working together to implement agreements on bank capital under Basel 3, agreeing a common approach to the extra capital the most systemically important banks should hold. And, we need to get our act together on trade. Many countries are - so far at least - resisting the lure of protectionism, but progress on trade liberalisation has dramatically stalled. It would be a huge mistake to give in to that deadlock, to give up on the Doha round worth £110bn to the world economy every year. History shows that protectionism invariably follows in the wake of global economic slowdown. Our task is not to repeat history, but to learn from it. Yes, we do need to be realistic - progress will be slow. And Doha doesn't cover everything, for example on services and investment. So we must keep pushing on bilateral agreements, between the EU and others. Working harder to bring the EU and the US together - the world's largest economic areas.

So that's what we are striving for internationally. What about here, in the UK? The Coalition has always said our first priority is tackling our deficit. When we came into power our deficit was bigger that Spain's, Italy's, Portugal's, even Greece's. Because we set out a decisive plan to reduce it, we have not been picked off by the markets. As the OECD repeated last week, our plan remains right for the UK.

So there will be no deviation on deficit reduction. We knew our recovery would be choppy. We knew our political opponents would holler endlessly for a Plan B, even though their path leads to soaring interest rates and crashing credibility. That is the luxury of opposition. But, to those who say: "the facts have changed" - yes, they have. The economic context is much worse than before. But - more than ever - we have a responsibility to hold our nerve, seeing through the difficult decisions; maintaining market confidence; creating a platform for growth.

But let's get something straight: this is about economics. Not ideology. Not stubbornness. And our plan doesn't put a straitjacket on policy. Credible fiscal policy allows us to retain loose, responsive monetary policy. And our plan allows for the automatic stabilisers to work.

So the Government is not blind to the deterioration of the environment in which we operate. More needs to be done for our recovery - that's obvious. But deficit reduction was only ever intended as a means to an end. It's a fiscal framework to ensure stability and there are other, crucial steps we must take to deliver growth.

So what can government do for growth? Let's start with the wrong approach. It's a mistake for government to try and do everything. Before the crash, the previous Government's economic record, flattered by years of unsustainable household and government borrowing, led them to believe government was the only thing that mattered for the economy. Gordon Brown, as Chancellor and then Prime Minister, believed the money would never stop flowing, that whole communities could be sustained by public sector spending, that private sector growth could be driven by endless initiatives from the centre.

But the money did stop. And, despite over 3,000 schemes aimed at business support, an array of incomprehensible tax break, endless so called 'business solutions', business investment simply did not grow in the way it should have.

Whitehall cannot grow an economy. We need the ceaseless experimentation of thousands of businesses, private saving and investment to channel money where it is most productive. Equally, government shouldn't do nothing. Deal with the deficit, but then step back in the hope a thousand flowers will bloom.

That's as bad as trying to do everything, wishful thinking at its worst.

Take regulation. Some people will tell you: all regulation is bad for growth, the hallmark of the meddling state inhibiting the functioning of a market economy. That simply isn't true. Some rules are a problem: usually endless form-filling and unnecessary red tape. That's why we're looking across the board to reduce that burden. But some regulations are positively pro-growth. Instances of the state stepping in to protect businesses and support industry, like patenting rules - encouraging our creators to invest in new ideas - or competition law - ensuring the best can expand, the worst leave the market, and new players enter too.

Rather than do nothing, rather than do everything governments should do less, but do it better creating the conditions for growth. Like in tax, where this Government is simplifying the system and reducing corporation tax to make us more competitive. In our banks, where we have this week welcomed proposals to ringfence retail banks, protecting them from the volatility of global investment banking. That reform will take some time and in the short term our priority must remain, first and foremost, to get the banks to honour their commitment to lend £190m to businesses this year. In skills, where we're maintaining cash investment in schools, creating hundreds of thousands of new apprenticeships and taking what are controversial decisions on higher education funding to keep our universities world class. All supply side interventions to make the UK a better place to invest and do business.

But this isn't just about supply side reform. You have to think about demand too. Our troubles have very much been a demand crisis. The banks' sudden withdrawal of funds, asset price falls, volatility in the markets - all hit demand. And even if we had the least regulated, most skilled, most competitive economy on the planet, if no-one spends any money, that's not enough. Clearly, with debt so high - private and public - we have to be realistic about the restraints on boosting demand. And I've asked Vince Cable to do some work on how we create the environment and incentives for business to free up new capital now. When we need them to, rather than hold off.

And that brings me to infrastructure, because investment in infrastructure stimulates demand not overnight, but more quickly than many supply side measures. And it raises productivity well into the future too. Not just any infrastructure - we need to be clear about that. The previous Government took a kitchen sink approach: any and all capital spending constituted pro-growth investment. But that's not true. Most capital spending is worthwhile. But it doesn't all support long-term prosperity. You have to be ruthless, focusing on the investments that transform growth potential: transport, energy, digital communications. Roads and rail so manufacturers can transfer goods. Better broadband so small, high-tech companies can flourish. Renewable energy so low-carbon industry can too.

If you modernise this kind of infrastructure you stimulate activity in the shorter term and you build systems high growth industries can use for years to come. Transport schemes announced in the Spending Review, for example, will deliver major boosts to growth. Like the Switch Island link road in Merseyside, where £20m of Government investment will generate 35 times that in economic benefits. Or increasing the capacity of the M62, which will generate over £1bn for GDP. Investments that will keep on giving. The kinds of investments the UK needs.

We may be one of the best countries to set up and run a business. But we rank 28th in the world for infrastructure. A nation that once led the way in engineering and construction. The home of Wren, Brunel, Stephenson. It was Tim Berners-Lee, a British scientist, who developed the World Wide Web. Yet we rely on water and waste networks from the 19th Century. Our railways are a throwback to the 1970s. We have some of the most congested roads in Europe. While our competitors continue to invest in cutting edge infrastructure.

The approach has been too incremental. Haphazard. Slow. Governments have focused on specific projects instead rather than setting out a vision. Costs stayed high and investors took their money elsewhere. That has to change. So, last year the Coalition produced the UK's first ever National Infrastructure Plan to deliver the world-beating infrastructure our businesses need from High Speed Rail, to Cross Rail, to green energy, to the best superfast broadband network in Europe. And we're galvanising around that plan with renewed energy. A gear shift in government to unblock the system and get the money out the door.

First, money. Infrastructure doesn't come cheap. So, over the spending review period, we have matched the plans of the previous Government for capital spending at least, in each year. We're protecting spending in science and research, investing, for example, in new technology and innovation centres around the country. If we had more money, we would spend more on infrastructure, but there's no longer a tap in Whitehall, to be turned on in times of need and the absolute crux of this is stimulating private investment too.

One way is by leveraging private money through public funds, as our Regional Growth Fund does. For every £1 of government investment, the private sector is putting in £5 to create thousands of new jobs targeted at areas too dependent on the public sector. I've asked Michael Heseltine and his panel, when reviewing bids for the second round, to prioritise infrastructure projects that will deliver sustainable economic growth. And I'll be chairing a meeting of Ministers to begin looking at them this afternoon.

Our Green Investment Bank will also leverage funds for low carbon infrastructure, in the region of an extra £18bn by 2014-15. Vince Cable is ensuring Government identifies the first projects to get support faster than originally planned, looking at those from next month to get them moving as quickly as possible. And Chris Huhne will shortly be setting out our support for renewable energy - a year ahead of schedule - providing certainty for investors, capitalising on the UK's position as the largest market for offshore wind.

We're also ramping up our sales pitch. We know that the UK misses out because investors simply don't know the opportunities on offer. We know they hesitate if they don't see a long-term strategy. So I've asked Lord Green to use his Trade and Investment Committee to get our plan out there. Next week, Lord Sassoon will travel to Canada to pitch to pension fund investors. Later this month, Lord Green will do the same to leaders of the Gulf Sovereign Wealth Funds. We're targeting the Middle East, Latin America and China, where there are investors with five year investment plans of over £150bn each. We're also going to be much more proactive with institutional investors here at home too.

Finally, finding the money isn't just up to us. The Cities Minister, Greg Clark, and I met with representatives from our big cities last week. They are desperate to deliver the infrastructure their cities need. So we're drawing up new money-raising powers for councils to do that where they can borrow against future growth from locally raised business rates. Tomorrow Philip Hammond will also set out our plans to giving communities more power over the funding and decisions for local transport schemes.

So: as much public money as we can afford; a hunt for private investment; new money-raising powers for local communities. But we also have to make sure that money gets spent. There are a range of obstacles that can delay new infrastructure. Planning is most often cited. That's going to change. Under our plans, if a development is sustainable, the starting point is: it will go through.

Socially sustainable, economically sustainable, and environmentally sustainable. Those reforms are the subject of some debate, but let me lay a few myths to rest. This isn't anything-goes-planning, or the death of the countryside. We are putting local people in the driving seat in a way they never have been before. Scrapping top down, regional decision-making so local people can choose the areas they want developed - and those they don't. And, crucially, making sure they get the roads, rail, housing and other infrastructure their community needs.

The other barrier I want to talk about is actually within Government: Whitehall. Identifying projects and funnelling cash to them can take time - I understand that. These are big investments, and you have to get them right. But failure to deliver major infrastructure projects on time, on budget, is a perennial problem in the UK. The extension of the Jubilee line - delayed by over a year, costing an extra £1.4bn. Wembley Stadium - meant to open in 2003; didn't open until 2007. Improvements to the West Coast Mainline - should have cost £2bn and been completed in 2005 - didn't finish until 2008, and cost four times that much. The list goes on and on. And too often, Whitehall is part of the problem. We have to break this cycle. The country needs jobs, and time is no longer on our side.

So Whitehall will put its foot on the accelerator, making sure we deliver on our commitments. To that end, I can announce that we're going through the nation's capital spending plans to hand-pick up to 40 of the biggest infrastructure projects, the ones most important to growth, which will be given new special priority status.

Each will be rigorously examined by Ministers to make sure there are no delays, no blockages and the economy feels the benefits as quickly as possible. That includes, for example, high speed broadband rollout, work to transform the efficiency of the national grid, major improvements to the rail network, like Crossrail and Great Western Electrification and projects to reduce congestion on our road network. Targeting pinch points on the M1, the M25, and elsewhere.

Where we need to get investors and developers in, we'll do so. Where local conversations need to happen, we'll make them happen. Whatever the problem is - regulation, funding, procurement, planning - if we can help unblock it, we will.

Good work is already happening. For example, by Philip Hammond and his Transport team, responsible for a huge chunk of Government infrastructure investment. To make sure it happens across the board, Danny Alexander, the Chief Secretary, will be tasked with shaking the Whitehall tree so no-one is stockpiling capital that can be put to good use today. Danny has, this week, left Cabinet Ministers and top civil servants in no doubt of their responsibilities. Secretaries of State will have to report back to him on their progress throughout the Autumn - and no one likes falling out with the Treasury.

Since we came into government Ministers have been expected to make savings. Now they're under the same pressure to spend the money they've got and, on top of all that, we'll also soon be announcing our plans to boost to housebuilding -still its lowest since the 1920s.

So, to finish as I began, Government is not helpless. The Coalition is not reluctant. Despite the darkening global picture, despite the need to stay on top of the deficit, we'll do whatever it takes to return our economy to health. Whether driving cooperation abroad or pulling the right levers at home, as I said, a gear change for growth.

Thank you.

• Norman Lamb introduces the policity priorities debate, Facing the Future, that will take place at the Federal Conference in Birmingham
• The Violence Against Women and Girls motion to Conference is endorsed by Tom Brake
• and more information about the HQ move

Clegg stands firm on Free Schools

Free schools will not be "the preserve of the privileged few" and new measures will ensure that access to high quality education is fair for all. After the speech made by the Deputy Prime Minister on Monday, Liberal Democrats can be under no illusion as to the objective of the Free Schools policy as far as he is concerned - it is to improve social mobility.
In a far-ranging speech, Nick set out the proposals quite clearly - they include:

Brian Paddick will be formally unveiled as the Liberal Democrat
candidate for Mayor of London at a press conference on Monday morning.

Commenting, Brian Paddick said:

"I want to thank my fellow candidates for engaging in a high standard of
debate throughout the campaign.

"I also want to thank my excellent team without whom I would not have
been selected.

"Most of all, I want to thank London Liberal Democrat members who placed
their trust and confidence in me to be their candidate for Mayor of
London - I won't let you down."

• Loyd Grossman looks to the future of Higher Education
• MEP Chris Davis says Lib Dems have every reason to be positive
• Baroness Dee Doocey on the riots and Liberal values

The Party HQ has moved

The move of the party's headquarters from Cowley Street to 8-10 Great George Street, Westminster, was undertaken over the Bank Holiday weekend.
The new HQ offers all the advantages a modern campaigning party needs, as well as even closer proximity to Whitehall and Westminster. Indeed, the Liberal Democrats headquarters just off Parliament Square is nearer to Whitehall and the Houses of Parliament than those of either the Conservatives or the Labour Party.
The party's team of 70+ staff will be spread across one open plan floor and will have more meeting rooms available for staff, politicians and the voluntary party to use for party work.
Chief Executive Chris Fox said:

Darra Singh, Chief Executive of Job Centre Plus and former Chief Executive of Ealing and Luton Councils, will chair the panel announced by the Deputy Prime Minister on 16 August. The other panel members will be Simon Marcus, Heather Rabbatts and Maeve Sherlock.

The panel will deliver early findings by November, and present a final report to by March 2012, to the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and the Leader of the Official Opposition.

The panel will be able to structure their work as they deem appropriate, but it will be a purely grassroots exercise to listen to the experiences of those in communities affected by the riots and disorder including residents, shopkeepers, parents and young people.

Learning the lessons

In the immediate aftermath of the riots across England, Nick Clegg visited the main areas affected by the outburst of criminal behaviour earlier this month. The Deputy Prime Minister went to Tottenham straight away to meet victims and local police and to talk to residents that had been caught up in the mayhem. He has done the same in Liverpool, Manchester, Nottingham and Birmingham.

"As a liberal, I see violence and disorder of this kind as an attack on liberty, on the freedom for individuals to live and trade in peace in their own communities," he said in a speech recently. "We need to know who did what, and why they did it. We need to understand. I don't mean 'understand' in the sense of being understanding, or offering even the hint of an excuse. I mean understand what happened, to get as much evidence as we can."

With that in mind, the government is to establish the Communities and Victims Panel, which will be chaired by an independent figure. It will not be a public inquiry, but will serve as a way in which victims and communities can make their views known to enhance future policies. The panel will produce a report within six to nine months to be presented to the leaders of all three main political parties.

Nick also confirmed plans for a 'community payback scheme', with offenders helping to clean up areas hit by the disturbances. Victims will also be given the right to confront those who damaged their neighbourhoods to reinforce the fact that the actions of rioters had consequences.

As part of the measures to end the "cycle of repeat crime", those released from jail from March next year would be "met at the prison gates" by providers in the Work Programme. Offenders will, said Nick, be put through a "tough process so that they find work and they stay on the straight and narrow.

"I think the best defence against this kind of nihilistic behaviour is to ensure that everyone has a stake in society, and everyone feels a sense of responsibility towards their own community. That, in turn, means giving people the opportunities to get ahead so they feel they have a stake in their own future.

"That is why this government has decided to focus our social policies on social mobility, because having opportunity - real opportunity - gives people the drive, discipline and responsibility to do the right thing.

"Putting more money into schools with disadvantaged youngsters, expanding apprenticeships, increasing the provision of early years education. None of these will be quick fixes. There are no quick fixes. But these are the kind of investments that we need to make now, to spread opportunity in the future.

"While I passionately believe that it is the responsibility of government and broader society to ensure that every individual has real opportunities, I am equally clear that it is the responsibility of the individual themselves to take those opportunities up, and to play by the rules.

"Too often, it looks as if people who break the rules can prosper. Tax evaders and benefit cheats; bankers who break the bank but feather their own nests; MPs who rob from the public purse ….. rule-breaking spreads through society like a virus. The 'broken rule' effect means that we have to take a zero tolerance approach to all rule-breaking, all of the time. Rules are for all of us.

"Politicians usually say at times like these, 'let's learn the lessons'. But they rarely do. This time it can be different. The burning shame we feel at the disorder on our streets has to be combined with a thoughtful determination to understand it, and an unbending commitment to stop it from ever happening again."

The Candidate Leadership Programme is designed specifically to identify, develop and support some of the best candidates from under-represented groups within the Party. It is open to talented, motivated individuals who can demonstrate the combination of passion, drive and commitment that it takes to win a Parliamentary seat in the next General Election.

There are reserved places for women, those from black, Asian or ethnic minority backgrounds, and for disabled people. Applications from other under-represented groups, including LGBT individuals and those from low socio-economic backgrounds are very welcome*

If you are interested in applying for the Leadership Programme, or you know someone who would like to participate, please contact leadershipprogramme@libdems.org.uk.

Applications will close on 30th September but we will be processing forms as they are returned, so please apply as soon as you are ready. It is anticipated that further applications will be invited in the future, and this will be widely advertised.

* Eligibility will be on the basis of self-definition within these categories.