 Is that all again? Yes, good. I'll battle on it so you can tell me on the line. No. Right, let's move it up. There we are. There it is. What do you think it's for you? It's just for you. Can you go in there? It's actually a toilet round. Is that better? You had it wrong this week. I'm saying that I have an extraordinary time in this. If you can write the history of one's own time as to sit on phones, I was baffled by what's going on as anybody. So everything I say this evening will be coated with humility. Gentleman. I was having a cup of tea with a white wolf friend of mine this week. He was a historian by training. And historians, as you know, I'm sure there are several of you in the audience who have had a historical training, like to see things in terms of questions with a capital Q. And we thought there were four questions in play at the moment, all into lots. And it makes it very baffling to try and leave it. The European question, obviously. The Irish question has reopened in a different way because of the European question. There's the UK question, or the union of the UK whole. And there's our place in the world question. The footmeasure, my friend, is a different accent. Given the troubles in Germany in forming a government, perhaps the German question you can ask as well. So it just gave me a sense of complexity with all of it. Now historians don't go into theory, so you're not really allowed to relieve that to social scientists. But I do have a couple of theories, perhaps, about my training, which is essentially writing the history of Britain since 1945. And my theory really is an observation as much as anyone else that naturally I think we're all contemporary historians or our own country or our own time. We all want to try and make sense of it in our poems and set it in the context of where we've come from. It's rather like... I think what is the recent history books said quite well and the history of Northern Britain said quite well is that it's not like going to a football match. Even if you've been there, you want to see whether, and to play papers the following morning, whether what you've saw corresponds to what the specialist football corresponds to. It actually happened. I think there's a human impact behind the habitat of contemporary history. That said, there are several in health warfare. Historians must never be tempted to get into the forecast of business. It's a sin against the Holy Ghost for us. But Mark Twain gives us a sort of letter. Mark Twain said that history doesn't repeat itself, but sometimes it rhymes. It's another far as you can guess. But my ideal after the pursuit of contemporary British history is John Bucker, a great son of Scotland, who, in his 1940 memoir, Memory Hold the Door, wrote this line. In the cycle to which we belong, we can only see a fraction of the curve. In the cycle to which we belong, we can only see a fraction of the curve. I think the job of the historian is to describe the curve that travels so far, as best as he or she can, and leave it up to everybody else to see what he makes. It's tough enough to reconstruct in the past without extrapolating problems. But there's always a terrible temptation to search for what the great French historian of the phoenome Brodell called the thin whisk to one of the justice zone. So if I stray this evening, particularly when we get to questions and discussions, I'm going to try and be as buckin-out as I can. But the particular curve I'd like to trace this evening by way of illustrating contemporary historians' craft is one of the questions I enlisted a moment ago. Britain's place in the world question, which has been rather tormenting us pretty well since my first conscious members in the 1950s, particularly the Suey's crisis of 1956, which is the first crisis I've had any idea about. I remember listening to radio newsreel and thinking, but we don't lose wars. I understand the reaction of the young man, the young boy, nine years old, because a lot of us, I suppose, males mainly, spent a lot of time in the cinema watching warfars. We grew up to the sound of the Merlin engine to the Brits prevailing in difficult circumstances of being historical. All of which is true, it's not only difficult. So it was a strange reaction to the Suey's crisis. And from that day to this, I've written more in newspapers with a degree of care. So Britain's place in the world question why the Suey's crisis, to walk into shock, the loop has always intrigued me. I remember going with Franks, who was a great professor of philosophy here before the war, who was appointed to war service and rose to be a permanent secretary for the extraordinary young age, describing to me that the Suey's was a lightning flash which illuminated the landscape that had long been able to change for all of us. A very stark and very good image. But he wasn't the extraordinary time now for trying to sort out our place in the world. I think where we are is another world we might be in. Now, I think in my lifetime, I was born in 1947, there have been four great geopolitical shifts in our place in the world, the UK perspective. The first one was happening when I actually came into the world, the chilling of the Cold War, which was freezing international relations almost by the week in 1970. And those of us of a certain age, I think they were one or two in the old days as well, the generation that grew up under the shadow of the bomb, the first generation, so to say. We were children of a number of Bronze Age and Iron Age, there were a uranium age. And we didn't need a degree in theoretical physics in the 50s to understand, or appreciate, the surge in destructive power from the atomic bomb, which is better now, the thermonuclear hydrant bomb, the difference of 1,000 footings. So growing up in that peculiar new era of the Cold War, the first last year of a mass consumption society, the welfare state working its way through the health service to improve things, but we all knew from quite a young age to be honest, we could all disappear because we were up in the course of a single afternoon with a great blast of heat and radiation dust, strange generation to crack. Of course the ending of the Cold War, I think it was the greatest shared bill of our lifetimes, which they didn't end with General War, it was a very unique exchange, I think it's still in after this, actually. That's 1989 now, actually. The other great geopolitical shift was disposing of the tropical empire, the main British empire, the Great Russian in 1906. Some people think it's worth looking at that as a kind of model to see a genuine deliberate reposition of our assembly in the world, because it was done very well in many ways. There's bloodstreaming, there's politics in the midst, but many would argue that nothing became a part of this, it's an empire of people, but the land was leaving on it, and there were 40 independence packages that they would be called down, between India, Pakistan and Burma, of course 748, and Zimbabwe, and Russia, 1980. 40 of them. It was a huge geopolitical shift, but it was by and large in the control of British ministers at the time it was entirely, and it was done with an all-party consensus which is certainly lacking now in the geopolitical shift. People realised at the time to do it, and it was done with some aplomb. Some were saying it wasn't finished until on Continent 997, so it was a long drawn-out geopolitical shift. Now, as you've forgotten that, it's very hard to teach non-students the British empire to crack through the crust, you have to tell them of certain stories, you know, like the old jokes. The jokes are the great residual of empire, an empire, of course, to be a service on which the sun never set, because God couldn't trust the Brits in the dark. A 12th British leadership before the one we're living through now, which I hope to, could help to make sense of the scene, is what The Economist magazine called Britain through rather neatly, negotiations that succeeded in 1970-72, leading to our accession to what was the European economic community in 1973. And I've been rereading Sir Connor Neill's official history, Sir Connor Neill is the father of the great Northern European philosopher, and he was the lead diplomat in the negotiations that got us in. And of course it was going with the grain, because once Poggedon and Teddy had struck the deal in broad terms, they were going with the grain, and Europe wanted us denying what it is here. Very different from now. And the Scottish question, for example, which of course is current in many people's minds, is what was hardly mentioned in the official history, mainly in short-fishing questions. I wouldn't emerge to be in short-fishing questions, but the Scottish element, for example, in that official history of getting in, was my image. And the legislation that got us in the European community in 1972 was a pipeline, though, just like the European withdrawals. It was a pipeline that really called the accusation on its air, all the objectives, and the legislation that we've passed before the drawing. And now, one of the great problems with the bill which hollows the House of Lords to be kidding down on the problem, is the evolution. It's very, very vexing. There's 111 activities that have got some evolutionary element in them. There's an agreement about 80 of them that they should come straight out but the remainder of them is going to be a real tussle, a really good thing to relate to the UK internal market. None of that in 1972. So, when we look back to that during the two years of getting us in, it looks like a stick compared to getting us out. I think it probably is. Though I'm not pessimistic, I'm going to try to cheer up and lay down a bit heavier because I'm not pessimistic on any design. The other problem we're living with, because it is all, is trying to run two systems of democracy by which I mean pleniscidri democracy, referendum, and representative democracy, which we're used to, producing a constituency based on peace and so on. Now, the European question has so vexed since it was first posed in its long form in 1950, when Jean-Marie turned up from the House of the Council of Lords, but we've had to push it outside our representative democracy system because it's too difficult to handle. And as a result, last June's election was amongst other things, an attempt to bring the pleniscidri democracy outcome into the mainstream of representative democracy. It didn't work, and we're living with the consequences. The European question is particularly vexed for a number of reasons. One is we didn't invent the idea of a constituency. Last year we convinced ourselves we invented NATO, which we did, really. And when you think about General Inslee's private description of NATO, it's not the previous issue, but Russia's out the Americans in the German sky. But in which you show your looking at it, that the Cullman Steel community always think when you're looking at an institution, whose mind was it that first succeeded it, because it bears the imprint of a very long time forever. And the Cullman Steel community, the precursor of European Unionism now, came out on the line of clever, Catholic, left-wing French bureaucrats. Clever, Catholic, left-wing French bureaucrats. Most people have got a problem with three of the five. I haven't, actually, if it doesn't apply to the French people, because I don't mind a bit of technocracy. But it's not invented here, so to say. It's always given us problems. If we invented it, it would have been so different. It would have been a tiny sectarian in the area of Irish violence. Not many people in it. Perhaps four letters a year to the partisans of the nation. We should buy more if we do a bit more on the free trade deal here as well, but only if you've got time. But we didn't, did we? The other problem with the European question, we're living with it all the time now, last month, and today, I can't help to caught up with what the Cullman sector says. I've only had a day off with the Cullman Steel community. So the trade deal is very much with us, the Cullman, and the single trade deal. But the British structural agreement policy has left right. And the European question is not susceptible to that. Because it's a different question. It busts up partisans within, doesn't it? We used to take the interns to have no respect to that, wasn't it? The labour hasn't taken a turn to this in the early 1980s, which was deeply unfair on the science of national policy question. But certainly partisans have a successive breakdown of recent decades. Because it's not, you cannot contain it or handle it within the normal frame of left-right. And so the busts up happen within partisans. Because they do within partisans. So the European question has been sent to tribes. I sometimes think that the almighty who created these islands in a particularly good mood gave us a wonderfully varied geology producing stunning variations of landscape, a temperate climate kissed by the galtary, a people in climate torrents and said, all this is true, but unless you bust this get too smart, I shall give you the European question. It's extraordinary how unexpected it is. Also, it has this peculiar quality. Victor Ostar, in that he thinks that, used to like the quote from all the south states, all the south states description of life, are fine to go. He said, it's routine punctuated by orgies. And when you think about it, the European question going through routine is unbelievably boring. There is nothing more tedious, except perhaps rate support when it's confusing. So that's a game. And then suddenly it makes the political weather and takes over everything. And otherwise, calm and rational people behave in a brilliant old way with the European question. You see it every day at home. It's not the day you ask a world of four questions, one of which is European relations. And all of a sudden people have learned a ton of decades of the models of civility. They get immensely scratchy. They get rude. They get untiny. They make a lot of noise. Then we revert to the things that we really believe and care about, and we'll share a certain view or like. Badgers. Social care and the other things. We all come down. I apologise if there were a thing there watching the House of Lords in the European Union. And when this bill came to us, it would be so interesting to come. But anyway, all of these things are set to one. If you might have gathered from a ten of my remarks and the remainder, and I'm not one of those who think we should have another referendum because what's the deal in an open society based on the power of influence system? It's quite simple, really. It's raised voices, yes, raised fists now. And the key to that deal is abiding by election outcomes. And even though a referendum is technically only advisory, the electorate was told in 2016 by both the governing party and the other parties that the result would be respected. And I don't think it's very dangerous to have another one, even though I'm a remainder almost to my last one. But I'm just giving my personal views about the speaking of the prejudices that I have. But there's something else going on in terms of defence in the world, which is not getting that much attention. It's a little burst. It's like that lovely line in T.E. Lawrence's Seven Pillars of Wisdoms, like the flash of the Kingfisher's wings across them. And that's the capability review, very boring title, of the past of the 2015 strategic defence and security review. And the defence element has been winnowed out as the new Secretary of State, Kevin Williamson, wants it to happen that way. The Prime Minister has been persuaded. That defence review is the war. It's very interesting, but even look at the reviews that we have. Quite a fascinating review of our industrial strategy. The one we had in last in January is the AIDS of the war. The first one was underway when I came into this world in 1947. It was essentially economic, and it started to suffer after the government of this annual economic surveys. And they've all been about the same thing at the industrial strategies. Low skills base in terms of our workforce. The inability to give technical education, I don't understand why, places as a result of the science has analysed and dissected by a powering for provision in the 1860s. It's reported that the less we've got, it's still playing out. Is that better? Good. Take this one. Take this one. The less we've got technical high schools of the kind we already stand with in Prussia, our economic decline would be assured. 1868. So all these industrial strategies have looked at that. And our inability to fully industrialise our family-good science base. And the lack of productivity that comes from those two. How many more goes to be needed? The same in the defence rooms facing the world. You slice away at little bits without ever looking at the whole spectrum thinking what could we seriously do for a rational and helpful vision of the medium. So there's a kind of sameness about the pattern of British government over the years. But very few people are aware that we're living through this 13th institute since the war. Now if I was drafting it, which I'm not, I would start with an assessment of the assets we still have out of the country despite these multiple uncertainties and the multiple anxieties that go with it. For now it is 12 problem. Everybody will have a different list of the assets we still possess in terms of influence in the world. But I'd be interested in hearing some of yours in a minute. Now these are the reasons to be cheerful. We live on top of the world the sixth largest economy. It's got a lot of sunset industries a quarter of what everybody has. A lot of summarises too. And the residue of capacity in this country is very high. So the sixth largest economy is a member of the permanent fire of the United Nations Security Council. And because of our history, we're a member of more international organisations in any other country of the world even though we're trying to share one of our most important relationships at the moment. Underpinning this we have a range of top-flight armed forces embracing some stunning specialities special forces, submarines that go across the list. Remarkable range. Some are critical of this. A lot of people in London think that we've reached trying always to be a pocket what they call a pocket superpower to keep little bits of top-of-the-range equipment and trained men and women and a whole wide spectrum of specialities. That's our instrument. I think there's something in that but it still produces a tremendous range of armed forces that are going under great pressure at the moment because of buttertree constraints. Many people think we shouldn't but we possess a top-of-the-range nuclear deterrent and I was in Barrow two weeks ago seeing the Stiegelbeer after the new fleet of submarines that they had bought class that was based on the Bangerhards in the 2030s onwards. Since nearly 50 years now since the spring and summer of 1969 when the Polaris boats began in their continuous patrolling the deterrent came from the air for some of the water which had been there ever since and we've managed with just four submarines to sustain continuous at sea deterrents which for my very first submarine was quite miraculous. When all else has faded with my historical memory I shall remember always the date when it was announced that the Polaris submarine could take me out of the job the 14th of June 1969 because it was also my blame. It would be pleased to say ladies and gentlemen that Mrs Hennessy and I have maintained the marigold equivalent of continuous at sea deterrents. I've no idea what that is. We have none on the left. We have a remarkable range of very skilled and specialized intelligence agencies and because of our alliances the World War II Intelligence Alliance the so-called Five Eyes with the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand and the Two Eyes and the Image which the government doesn't talk about much which is us in the United States we're one of only three countries to reach the other two being Russia and the United States and China coming up fast but if we didn't have those alliances we'd go to the Second Division Streetway and in a rotten and nasty world that is an asset of very considerable proportions. Closely related to this theme we have crowd services but our career services are not politicized we have an uncorruptible service we have our forces that are recruited to on the basis of the promotion and the promotion of the basis of merit of politics and we still have a very good top-flight diplomatic service that's been hollered out by the citizens. I don't want to be too unkind in the Foreign Secretary because there's a long queue of people doing that. There's some way to go some of you want to remember George Brown the Foreign Secretary and how it was early on who was a very gifted man until the Sherrys and this is Boris's touchstone this is a very smart phone it's not what I've actually been to to suggest it to I gather it's true that there was a diplomatic conference in the Latin American diplomatic conference in Venezuela in the 60s and George was still a Foreign Secretary long and boring day he had a couple of Sherrys who did a dance that evening he sees the lady in red standing in the corner it goes over it says Madam, I'm a match to the Queen's Foreign Secretary George Brown may I have the next dance notice the brown you may not said the lady in red but four reasons I did test dancing this is not a waltz it's a better way than nationality I'm infected man on the woman I have a card in the last bit of a cracker so we've got some way to go isn't it still on the jolly side the best trade statistics we've got are now amazing at these they refer to our scientific and research price we give the world 1.5% of its population we produce 5% of the world's scientific papers but 15% of the world's most cited scientific papers isn't that amazing isn't that amazing isn't that amazing isn't that amazing thinking heavy that our weight in the world and the one other thing few things everybody's agreed on in the great Brexit debates because we've got to find ways to sustain that is that bit of a relationship with the European Union and we've got to find ways to continue to do that because I'm sure you're going to want to wear being a great university city like this all this and more we have what we might call a rich barcode of soft power cultural power what Melbury Brown calls our cultural world service it's not just the BBC world service the British Council it's our publishing, it's our universities it's really quite remarkable and we are cultivated if you want to use that word beyond all measure in terms of the size of our population and influence of the rest of the world this sounds terribly slug but I think it's true I would add because I'm a monarchist, the Queen she's a singular ascension, she's been a girl standard monarch just think, in February 1952 the first intelligent summits which she gets every week and which she reads very carefully were a bit about standing his capabilities and his intentions his breath techniques and the first catalytic papers would be provided to her by Churchill and the continuity that she's brought in the stability I think he's not talked about that much but I think it's very real for most people and I remember I was at some policy type doing just before Christmas and one of those scratchy weeks on the European negotiation front when we looked as if we might not even get past the first bit and I said to the person I was having lunch with this evening's news would be very interesting because it will all be about the tension in Brussels and the deficience in the cabinet and is it going to get any further or not and then the second item will be the Queen receiving the aircraft carrier to the Royal Navy and it would just be a sort of quiet reminder that there's one bit that just carries on one bit that the constitution works so I think she's a great asset but the final thing I would have to put to this list which you may think really does push it too far is self-ironing I think we are one of the most self-ironing people in the world and I think this is a great advantage and I remember in 1990 I can't remember what it was because I'm by and large with a polyanner over the spectrum so she's not pessimistic usually there's something that's grinding me down a bit about the country and I was doing it with a great George Steiner for a radio for a documentary and we chatted afterwards he said you know right to be gloomy if you live in six cultures and six languages as I do you will know that there's no phrase in any other language or culture with the potency of the English so come off it the tables of the world you're not in vain so I had that one as well but one last bit now this is very young fashionable and you may think it's the rise though is part of it for all the fact that we like it we still care about it the expenses scandal was dreadful 2009 but one of the big points about it was that it showed that we all care we didn't just shrug our shoulders and say all the way they are what to expect if we had done that would have been frightful but people got really upset about it and I think people do care about Parliament and in the gloomy moments which are not very frequent for me in addition to thinking that George Steiner is very lying I always reach for a quotation from one of the most remarkable prime ministers of the 20th century Winston Churchill and it's contained in the diary of the fellow liberal MP McCann and Scott and my friend Paul Anderson have only really voted to prove to my attention it's a difficult moment for the Great War it's March 1917 and Churchill had been dying late at the House of Commons with McCann and Scott and this is McCann and Scott's account of what happened as we were leaving the house that night he called me into the chamber to take a last look round all this darkness except for a ring of faint light all around under the gas look at it he said this little place is what makes the difference between us and Germany it is the virtue of this that we shall muddle through the success of a lack of this Germany's brilliant efficiency these sort of final destruction this little room of the shrine of the world limited isn't that glorious muddle through we shall I have no idea now but I did say that Tenbar State on Benson Valentine's Day 2018 muddle through we shall so thank you very much