Author: admin

PRESS RELEASE : Zero Pollution – Europeans seriously worried about air quality and call for stronger action [October 2022]

The press release issued by the European Commission on 24 October 2022.

Europeans are worried about the effect of air pollution on health and the environment, according to a special Eurobarometer survey published today. Most also think that industry, public authorities and employers need to do more to improve air quality. Respondents clearly favour an international or European approach to improving air quality and a large majority of the respondents who have heard of EU air quality standards say that they should be strengthened.

Commissioner for Environment, Oceans and Fisheries Virginijus Sinkevičius said: “People tell us that they want clean air to breathe. People living in cities, asthma sufferers and those living near industrial plants, they are all worried and they are asking us to act. The Commission will lead the way with an ambitious proposal to strengthen EU air quality standards.”

Key findings of the survey

Concern about health and environmental impact of air pollution

Most Europeans think that health conditions such as respiratory diseases (89%), asthma (88%), and cardiovascular diseases are serious problems in their countries resulting from air pollution. Europeans are also worried about the environmental problems caused in water bodies by air pollution such as acidification and eutrophication (both 83%). Acidification (water becoming more acidic) and eutrophication (excessive amount of nutrients in water leading to overgrowth of algae suffocating other organisms) are among the main consequences of worsening water quality.

Perception that air quality has worsened

Nearly half of the respondents hold the view that that air quality has deteriorated in the last ten years (47%). This percentage is however an 11-point drop since 2019.

Support for strengthening EU air quality standards

The Eurobarometer reveals that citizens lack information about air quality problems in their country. Most of Europeans remain poorly informed about the existing EU air quality standards as only a minority of respondents (27%) have heard of them. Nevertheless, a large majority of the respondents (67%) who are aware of EU air quality standards say that they should be strengthened. This is true in all but five Member States.

Support for more action to promote air quality, especially at international level

A large majority of Europeans think air pollution should be addressed at the international level (65%) followed by the European and the national level (both 42%), and finally the regional or local level (32%). A significant proportion of the respondents also believe that actions should be carried out at all levels simultaneously (19%).

Individual action to reduce harmful emissions

A majority of Europeans think that large industrial installations, fossil-fuel based energy producers, public authorities, and employers are not doing enough to promote good air quality.

A majority also thinks that the household sector is doing enough. Respondents are more likely to have taken some action to reduce emissions themselves this year than in 2019. Using public transport, cycling, or walking is the most frequent method Europeans report they use to reduce harmful emissions into the air.

As announced in the European Green Deal as part of the zero pollution ambition for a toxic-free environment, the Commission is about to propose a revision of the current EU air quality standards. This will align them more closely with the most recent World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations, and will strengthen provisions to help local authorities achieve cleaner air. The revised proposal will also focus on better implementation in order to help reach those standards in practice.

30/10/2022
PRESS RELEASE : The Princess of Wales becomes Patron of Captain Preet Chandi’s expedition across Antarctica [October 2022]

The press release issued by Buckingham Palace on 26 October 2022.

The Princess of Wales has today become Patron of Captain Preet Chandi’s expedition across Antarctica. Captain Chandi MBE is aiming to become the first woman to cross Antarctica solo and unsupported, travelling over 1000 miles.

Captain Chandi is taking part in the challenge to inspire future generations to believe in themselves, to push their boundaries and show how the outdoors can help them achieve their dreams. The Princess has long been an advocate of the huge impact the outdoors can have on our wellbeing and the life skills it nurtures, such as confidence and resilience.

She is committed to promoting this to young people, including through her work with organisations such as the Scouts, of which she is joint President. Preet’s historic expedition is the pinnacle of such activity and that is why The Princess is delighted to have been invited to be Patron.

Captain Preet Chandi MBE said:

“My aim for this expedition has always been to inspire people to push their boundaries. I want to bring people on this journey with me, to help them believe that nothing is impossible.

“It is an absolute privilege to have The Princess of Wales as the Patron.”

In January 2021, Captain Chandi created history by becoming the first woman of colour to reach the South Pole solo and unsupported. She finished the route in 40 days, just short of the female world record of 38 days held by Joanna Davidson of Sweden.

This time Preet will pull all her kit and supplies on a sledge weighing around 120kg while battling temperatures of -50c and wind speeds of up to 60mph. She is due to begin her trek at the start of November and has 75 days to complete the journey.

Captain Chandi is a physiotherapist and serving member of the British Army, currently working as a physiotherapist at a Regional Rehabilitation Unit in Buckinghamshire, providing rehabilitation for injured soldiers and officers.

30/10/2022
James Bethell – 2022 Speech on the Growth Plan (Lord Bethell)

The speech made by James Bethell, Lord Bethell, in the House of Lords on 10 October 2022.

My Lords, I join many others in welcoming the return of my noble friend the Minister to the Front Bench; I thoroughly support her sentiments, which she put very well, about the critical importance of growth. I put on the record that no one in the UK Government has ever talked of trickle-down economics—I checked and it is just not the case.

I want to emphasise the significant contribution that public health improvements can make to the wealth of the nation and to achieving the important 2.5% growth goal referred to by my noble friend the Minister. My noble friend Lord Wolfson said that the growth Statement was slightly short of supply-side suggestions, and I agree with him. I am speaking to persuade noble Lords that investment in public health can not only save millions of lives from preventable disease and epidemics but allows us to live longer, accomplish more and contribute more to the economy. Public health also helps reduce inequalities by ensuring that people are not needlessly prevented from fulfilling their potential or contributing to the economy because of illness, disease or premature death.

However, the public health of the nation is not contributing enough to the wealth of the nation; quite the opposite. There is a great exodus from the workforce due to ill health. In a report published today, the Health Foundation noted that economic inactivity in the UK has increased by 700,000 people since before the pandemic; that includes 300,000 people aged 50 to 69 years who are at greater risk of never returning to work. This increase in poor health and economic inactivity restricts our labour supply and our economic growth. The recent OBR report estimates that this contributes £2.9 billion to welfare bills, and I think it probably undercooks that number.

The country’s poor health is also driving up costs for the NHS. Even though it consumes 40% of public expenditure, it is overwhelmed with demand and its costs are growing. Late-stage acute healthcare is the wrong part of the economy to be growing. We should be investing in prevention, not cure. That is the way to grow the economy. If we do not, we are failing to take advantage of the technological revolution that can use genomics, big data, artificial intelligence, modern vaccines and the latest diagnostics to help assess health risks, identify disease and get people on the road to recovery more quickly than ever before.

It was disappointing that the Chancellor did not refer to health in his plan for growth and a shame that my noble friend the Minister did not do so either. I ask the Minister responding to please reflect on the significant link between health and wealth in his comments. In particular, I urge the Treasury to appoint a commission—armed with an economic slide rule rather than a scientist’s microscope—to look at the nation’s health, much as Nick Stern looked at climate change, as an economic threat rather than a scientific phenomenon, so that we can hammer out a plan to get out of the economic cul-de-sac of an increasingly unhealthy population.

30/10/2022
Edward Razzall – 2022 Speech on the Growth Plan (Lord Razzall)

The speech made by Edward Razzall, Lord Razzall, in the House of Lords on 10 October 2022.

My Lords, I can answer the noble Lord’s question as to why a number of us are questioning this after 12 years of Tory government. After 12 years of Tory government, the UK economy is currently a basket case. First, our growth is forecast to be the worst in the G20 apart from Russia over the next 12 months. Secondly, we are the only G7 country whose economy has not recovered to pre-pandemic levels. Thirdly, our productivity is significantly worse than that of our major competitors. Fourthly, we have the damaging effects of Brexit.

What are the Government doing about it? We have learned a number of things from their recent announcements and comments from government hangers-on. First, apparently it is all Putin’s fault. If that is so, why are we doing worse than all our major competitors? Secondly, it was apparently perfectly satisfactory to make a significant fiscal statement without the usual verification of numbers by the OBR, so why were the Government surprised by the gilt market reaction? What is worse, we now know that the Chancellor had a draft report from the OBR on his desk on his first day in the office. He refused to publish it, presumably because it did not support his numbers, and now he has been forced to bring forward his fiscal statement and the OBR report, noticeably on Halloween day. Thirdly, apparently the Government will generate growth through tax cuts, as the noble Lord, Lord Howard, indicated. But however you describe it—Reaganomics, the Laffer curve or Donald Trump in 2017—there is no evidence that it works. As the noble and learned Lord, Lord Clarke, who is sadly not in his place, memorably said last week, it is the sort of thing tried by South American banana republics and it does not work.

I will not spend my time intruding on the private grief of the Government’s incompetence in the handling of the recent announcements—others have and will—but will confine myself to a number of questions to the Minister. First, will he explain why the Government are so set against a windfall tax on oil companies to help fund the extra borrowing necessary to protect householders from energy price rises? These excess profits are entirely a windfall and had no connection with management activity. All that will now happen, presumably, is that huge dividends will be paid to shareholders—mostly institutions resident outside the United Kingdom.

Secondly, do the Government accept that during the period after 1949, when growth averaged 2.5%, 2% of that came from productivity gains and 0.5% from increasing immigration? If the Government want growth, will they confirm that the latter will be acceptable to the Home Secretary?

Thirdly, if, as the Prime Minister says, all government policy should be to generate growth, there are a number of things that the Government could do to alleviate the damaging effects of Brexit. Will they take the advice of the noble Lord, Lord Frost, to negotiate improvements with the EU? For example, will they negotiate to help the shellfish producers who can no longer sell into Europe? Will they help the creative industries by helping the musicians who find it impossible to tour in Europe, therefore depriving us of substantial export revenue? Will they negotiate to help the many SMEs who have stopped selling to Europe because of pointless bureaucracy?

The economy is a disaster. Brexit has proved a disaster. The Government are a shambles. Surely it is time for this Government to go.

30/10/2022
Greville Howard – 2022 Speech on the Growth Plan (Lord Howard of Rising)

The speech made by Greville Howard, Lord Howard of Rising, in the House of Lords on 10 October 2022.

My Lords, I find it difficult to understand the fuss over the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s plan for growth. With the start of money printing in 2008, inflation and the higher interest rates were built into the system before there was a Conservative Government. The 40% rate of tax was in place up until the last days of the previous Labour Government. Most major currencies have fallen against the dollar, with the yen down 50% and the Japanese authorities intervening. The Government can hardly be blamed for the invasion of Ukraine and the resulting fuel crisis. They can take credit for acting promptly to help people.

Instead of applauding the outstanding plan for growth, which will result in greater prosperity, we hear a cacophony of unjustified abuse from the anti-growth coalition, made up of those who believe that if nothing changes and the handouts are kept going, all will be well. I tell them to face up to reality. You have to create wealth to spend it, and that is what this Budget is about. The other complainers are the metropolitan elites and the bien pensants who believe they can decide better what to do with other people’s money than those people can decide for themselves. That just does not work either morally or economically. People should be entitled to the fruits of their labour and to get what they work for, not have it confiscated for fashionable projects.

Economically, high taxation and redistribution by government is inherently inefficient and results in massive waste. Everyone wants better roads, a better health service and other essential services. These cannot be achieved by living in the cloud-cuckoo-land of believing that all you have to do is tax more to be able to spend more. You cannot. It does not work; the tax take shrinks. By lowering taxes and removing stultifying regulations, a framework is created that will allow the genius of the people of Great Britain to deliver growth in the economy. This will permit government debt to be repaid and public services to be enhanced. It will inevitably take time, but the reality is that if the top-class public services we would all like to see are to be delivered, there is no other choice.

Taxes are at their highest level for many years and must be reduced for the economy to grow. Money left in people’s hands grows; they do things with it. Governments consume wealth; they do not create it.

30/10/2022
John Hendy – 2022 Speech on the Growth Plan (Lord Hendy)

The speech made by John Hendy (Lord Hendy) in the House of Lords on 10 October 2022.

My Lords, it is a constant theme of Conservative economic policy that the rich are incentivised to be more productive by increasing their incomes whereas the poor are incentivised by threats to reduce theirs. The growth plan is full of examples, such as, at paragraph 3.22, the removal of the higher rate of tax from those earning more than £150,000, which has now of course been abandoned and, at paragraph 4.9, removing the limit on bankers’ bonuses. On the other hand, paragraph 3.24 proposes more conditions on eligibility for universal credit: “intensive conditionality”, the Chancellor calls it. It is specifically aimed at

“claimants who are in work and on low earnings”.

We know that most claimants are, in fact, in work. Universal credit is, in fact, a subsidy for employers who pay the lowest wages.

Average wages are rising by 5.2% per annum, while the consumer prices index rose by 9.9% in the year to August. The value of earnings from wages is therefore falling by an average of nearly 5% per annum. That is a huge hit to the living standards of working people. Consequently, demand in the economy is shrinking. That cannot be redressed by giving a few thousand high earners more money, but, if the incomes of ordinary working people rise, that money will be spent and demand will increase.

The differential between earnings and prices has another impact. Notwithstanding the Government’s energy price cap at twice last year’s rate, working people are becoming desperate. That is why there is a wave of strikes, with overwhelming ballot mandates. But rather than address the catastrophe facing working-class people this winter, the Government propose further restrictions on the only leverage that working people have to protect their standard of living when persuasion fails—industrial action. Not content with the most restrictive laws on trade unions in the western world, the additional restrictions of the Trade Union Act 2016, raising this year the limit on damages payable by trade unions, and enabling agency strike-breakers, also this year, the Government now propose yet further restrictions on the right to strike in paragraph 3.28 of the Growth Plan: minimum service levels for transport services, and every employer’s offer to be put to a ballot of employees.

The objection is not just one of principle—these restrictions are in breach of the conventions of the ILO and the European Social Charter, from which the Government undertook not to regress in Article 399 of the trade and co-operation agreement at the end of 2020; there are also problems with practicalities. If the minimum service requirement is, say, 10% of train services, who will select the train services to run and on what basis? How are those who are to staff them to be selected and forced to work? Ten per cent of train services will require near 100% of signallers and most of the station staff. Are they to be denied the right to strike?

In relation to balloted offers, must there be a ballot for an offer of a penny extra an hour when the members have voted unanimously for an extra £5? If they reject the offer, can the employer then further postpone the strike by offering another penny, and so on until the statutory duration of six months for a strike ballot is exhausted? How are the workers to be balloted? Presumably, as for strike ballots—and unlike the ballot for the Prime Minister—by post only, not online. That takes weeks. Who will pay for it?

Instead of attacking workers trying to defend their standards of living, I commend to the Government the restoration of the system of sectoral collective bargaining that was a feature of our economy when it was successful. It is a feature of the successful economies of Europe and is currently the subject of legislation in New Zealand and the fast food industry in California. It gained support only last week—

Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist (Con)

The noble Lord has exceeded the advisory speaking time by some margin.

Lord Hendy (Lab)

—in the OECD Employment Outlook 2022. Those are my last words.

30/10/2022
Simon Wolfson – 2022 Speech on the Growth Plan (Baron Wolfson of Aspley Guise)

The speech made by Simon Wolfson, Baron Wolfson of Aspley Guise, in the House of Lords on 10 October 2022.

My Lords, I declare my interest as a serving chief executive of a FTSE 100 retail company, a post I have held for 21 years. Understandably, today’s debate has focused on recent government events and the mini-Budget, but it is important to stand back a little from that and reflect on the fact that the pound had devalued from $1.37 in just a year to $1.15 before the Chancellor spoke. Interest rates were rising and were always going to rise.

Although the Government’s recent actions undoubtedly exacerbated the situation, it is important to remember that the cost of living crisis we are experiencing at the moment is rooted in a chronic shortage of goods, fuel and labour. It is essentially a supply-side problem. The pandemic paralysed the world’s manufacturing and disrupted global freight routes. The war in Ukraine piled energy price rises on top of what was already a fragile global economy. To get us through the pandemic it was quite right that we had borrow-and-spend remedies. They were not only desirable but essential to prevent economic collapse, and today they are essential to prevent people suffering too much from the energy crisis. However, demand measures can only target the symptoms of supply-side inflation: they cannot deliver a cure and there is always a price to pay.

If we are to solve the cost of living crisis, it will require bold supply-side measures, and while I welcome the Government’s rhetoric on supply-side reform, I share the concerns of the noble Lord, Lord Newby, and many other noble Lords about the lack of detail. The noble Lord, Lord Kerr, and many others are right that tax cuts alone—although they are in my view welcome—are not going to stimulate growth. Fortunately, there are a number of very powerful measures that can make an enormous difference. Contrary to what I have heard some noble Lords say today, businesses are not in the habit of sitting back and relaxing and not bothering to invest. Believe it or not, we do not need a lot of encouragement, incentives or tax breaks to invest. What we really need is for Governments to stop preventing us investing.

Here, the measures that the Government can adopt are numerous. There is the radical overhaul of our planning system. Here I share the cynicism of the noble Lord, Lord Macpherson, about government’s ability to deliver on this. There is no doubt that the delivery of the homes people want to live in in the places where they want to live and work can do more to stimulate growth in this country than any other measure alone.

The intelligent relaxation of controls on economic migration, as pointed out by the noble Lords, Lord Shipley and Lord Birt, could do an enormous amount to stimulate the economy, perhaps, as I have suggested elsewhere, through a visa tax that would ensure that UK employers employ overseas workers only where there is really no UK alternative.

Stemming the flow of new business regulation and quasi-regulation that wastes so much time and so much money for so little good would do an enormous amount to stimulate growth. Here I stress that I hope that the Government understand that it is stemming the flow of new regulation that will really make the difference; not some imaginary bonfire of existing regulation that we have already learned how to cope with. There is also the liberalisation of trade rules and the repeal of needless tariffs that do nothing to protect British industry.

In addition to these essentially liberating measures, the Government can also save money. The cancellation of HS2 would reduce borrowing and release much-needed materials and skills back into the UK economy. With HS2 costs so much higher than appraised and the benefits so implausible in an online world, surely now it must go.

Supply-side reforms are the key. They will accelerate long-term growth but will also do something else. A determined, reasonable, carefully thought through plan for supply-side reform will do much to restore market confidence in the United Kingdom. The markets will reward this country for the right steps as quickly as they punished us for the wrong measures that we took a few weeks ago.

30/10/2022
PRESS RELEASE : Only highest-quality vocational qualifications to count post-16 [November 2012]
The press release issued by the Department for Education on 20 November 2012.

Only the highest-quality vocational qualifications will continue to count in reformed performance tables for colleges and school sixth forms, Education Minister Matthew Hancock announced today (20 November 2012).

He said that the move would ensure that post-16 institutions focused on valued qualifications that make it easier for young people to get good jobs or go on to higher education.

The proportion of 16- to 18-year-olds (studying at level 3) now taking at least one of the 4,000 post-16 level 3 vocational courses available (BTECs, City and Guilds, NVQs and so on) has risen from 31 per cent in 2008 to 45 per cent in 2011 – from 104,000 students to more than 167,000.

All these 4,000 courses count in the current performance tables. But the degree of rigour and stretch in these varies considerably and most rely heavily on internal assessment, like coursework, rather than externally marked exams and other work.

Around 90% of these could be cut from the new-look tables if they fail to meet rigorous criteria due to be outlined in a Department for Education consultation next year. These could include, for example, external assessment and recognition by universities and employers.

The announcement, made by Mr Hancock in a speech to the Association of Colleges, follows Professor Alison Wolf’s review of vocational education.

He said all students could continue to study any accredited qualification, and that lecturers and teachers should ensure young people study the courses that are right for them. But he added that in the future only those courses which meet the rigorous new criteria would continue to count in performance tables.

Professor Wolf said in her ground-breaking report that there were far too many low-level qualifications that did not properly progress young people. As well as the thousands of level 3 vocational course students, about one in five 16- to 18-year-old students are on level 1 or level 2 courses – those aimed at 14- and 15-year-olds. None of these courses count in the tables at the moment.

Previous government announcements stemming from her report, and strengthening post-16 education, include reforming the funding system so that institutions are paid per student not per qualification. The government has also introduced new study programmes for 16- to 18-year-olds (both from September 2013).

Today’s announcement (20 November 2012) is part of a package of reforms designed to drive up standards in post-16 education even further.

Other changes announced by Mr Hancock today include:
- Reformed performance tables from January 2014, showing institutions’ performance in A-levels and in vocational qualifications separately. Then from 2017, there will be separate columns for academic, vocational and “occupation-specific” qualifications – practical, competence-based qualifications (eg plumbing or brick-laying) which can be identified as providing high-value routes into a trade or profession. The tables for January 2013 will be interim tables that show the current joint measure (academic and vocational) and a separate academic column.
- New minimum standards that will apply to school sixth forms, sixth-form colleges and further education colleges. These will identify the weakest performing institutions either in A-levels or in vocational qualifications. This is part of a strategy to weed out under-performance, and treat academic and vocational qualifications as different but equally important part of a high-quality education, with comparable measures across schools and colleges.
Until now, minimum standards have applied only to further education colleges, sixth form colleges and training providers, and have been based on success rates. There have been no standards that apply to school sixth forms.

Professor Wolf said in her report that “success rates” (a retention measure, based on the number of students who start and pass a course) created perverse incentives which encouraged colleges to guide students into less challenging qualifications.

Education Minister Matthew Hancock said in his speech:

For vocational education to be valued and held in high esteem we must be uncompromising about the value added of vocational education.

I share with Alison Wolf the view that we must encourage the use of the most rigorous and valuable vocational qualifications.

I also share her view that far too little genuinely occupational education takes place among 16- to 18-year-olds.

In the coming weeks we will publish a consultation on how to identify the highest value vocational qualifications for 16- to 18-year-olds, just as we have done for 14- to 16-year-olds.

Vocational qualifications must be stretching and strong.

Mr Hancock added:

We need to be firmer in tackling educational and financial failure, and turning under-performing colleges around.

So students and employers alike can see performance for themselves, I can confirm that, from this year, we will introduce common standards and measures of performance between schools and colleges. Both will be expected to meet minimum standards.

A levels and vocational qualifications are different, so they will be judged separately from each other.

But each will be judged in the same way for all institutions. We said we’d introduce a level playing field, and we will.

Professor Alison Wolf said:

I am delighted that the government proposes to consult on major reforms to level 3 vocational qualifications.

It is deeply worrying that we combine ever-higher numbers of young people in post-16 education with well-documented skill shortages in areas which depend on high-quality occupational training.

You cannot make a vocational qualification high status by simply announcing that it should be. But if a vocational qualification is demanding, respected by employers and a clear route into employment, and if we can ensure that students and parents know this, it will gain the prestige it deserves.

We need more people taking more qualifications of this type, and the proposed consultation should be an important step in that direction.

The government also announced today that 117 qualifications available at key stage 4 (ages 14 to 16) would count in the 2015 secondary school performance tables. They have all met the characteristics as set out by the Department for Education.
30/10/2022
Cherilyn Mackrory – 2022 Speech on Floating Offshore Wind Projects

The speech made by Cherilyn Mackory, the Conservative MP for Truro and Falmouth, in the House of Commons on 18 October 2022.

I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Preseli Pembrokeshire (Stephen Crabb) for securing this important debate, which places a spotlight on an exciting emerging sector for my constituency of Truro and Falmouth in Cornwall and the south-west as a whole. Cornwall is already at the heart of the green revolution. We are mining and drawing out lithium and are drilling for deep geothermal, which is why I have worked on the all-party parliamentary group for the Celtic sea to promote floating offshore wind projects off our Cornish shores.

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for North Devon (Selaine Saxby), who set up the all-party group. She works tirelessly on this issue and is brilliant at bringing all the different threads together. When we became MPs in 2019, I was lobbied by only one company. Not a year later we had a reception on the Terrace where there were between 50 and 100 companies present, and that number continues to grow. It is a growing sector and one that should benefit all parts of the United Kingdom.

I was delighted to welcome the Defence Secretary, the COP26 President and the Business Secretary to Falmouth to see first hand how Cornwall can help deliver this vision. It is right that the Government have a target to raise the UK’s floating offshore wind capacity from one gigawatt to five by 2030. Floating offshore wind in the Celtic sea will be crucial to reaching that target, with the Crown Estate recently announcing that the leasing round for the region will be launched in mid-2023. That could deliver 4 GW of installed UK floating offshore wind capacity by 2035, supporting up to 3,200 jobs, with the potential of £682 million spend in the local supply chain by 2030.

A key part of the strategy is the TwinHub project, which is the first floating offshore wind project in the Celtic sea, based off the Cornish north coast. TwinHub has developed a new design that places two turbines on one platform, which gets twice the bang for its buck. This offshore wind farm will produce more energy while taking up comparatively less space and, by 2025, will be generating enough electricity to power 45,000 homes. The wider opportunities that floating offshore wind and the Celtic sea present will create over 1,500 skilled jobs, with £900 million headed for the regional economy by 2030 based on current projections.

As my right hon. Friend the Member for Preseli Pembrokeshire alluded to, the grid support maintenance will require cohesive collaboration between the public and private sectors, but we need the big port upgrades to build these floating offshore wind farms. Falmouth is one of the deepest ports in the world and is ideally positioned to become an integration port where turbines will be put together before being towed out to sea. Falmouth is also best placed for the maintenance of components and used vessels. The south-west supply chains will then be built up and will develop a strong network of experienced project developers and a wealth of skills and experience. These are all high-quality careers for the future of Cornish children in my schools. Falmouth should therefore receive its first share of the £160 million floating offshore wind manufacturing investment scheme to unlock wider private sector investment in the Celtic sea.

North sea ports already have the necessary infrastructure to be competitive due to their historical industry. If Celtic sea ports such as Falmouth are not upgraded, we risk utilising just one sea rather than the two. I urge the Government to look at further streamlining planning regulations to speed up the upgrades. One thing that the Celtic sea APPG has done perfectly is to encourage a port strategy. If I have one plea for the Minister, it is to try to do that, so that we know which ports will be best placed to do which parts and we can turbocharge development to ensure we get it right. Incidentally, Cornwall Council has submitted its application for an investment zone, which will include Falmouth port. I pay tribute to the council and our portfolio holder for economic growth, Louis Gardner, who has turbocharged efforts since coming into post recently to ensure we get this right for Cornwall.

Cornwall has a rich and proud maritime industrial history. I believe the Government can build on that by supporting investment in the port of Falmouth and the development of TwinHub, as well as ensuring high-skilled, well-paid careers for Cornish young people. If we can do that, Cornwall can continue to be at the heart of the green revolution. I urge the Government to listen to everything that is being said today.

30/10/2022
Mark Spencer – 2022 Speech on the National Food Strategy and Food Security

The speech made by Mark Spencer, the Minister of State at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, in the House of Commons on 27 October 2022.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Member for Tatton (Esther McVey) and the hon. Member for Bristol East (Kerry McCarthy) on securing this important debate, and I thank the Backbench Business Committee for allowing the time for it.

We are fortunate in the United Kingdom to have a highly resilient food supply chain that is built on strong domestic production and imports via sustainable trade routes, but it is worth acknowledging that food security has become a very hot topic politically. When I was elected in 2010, I highlighted food security as a very important topic in my maiden speech. It is not new to me; it is something I have been worrying about and concentrating on for most of my political career.

But we can meet these challenges. Domestic production figures have been very stable for most of this century. We produce 61% of all the food we need and 74% of that which we can grow in the UK. Those figures have changed little over the past 20 years. When food products cannot be produced here, or at least not on a year-round basis, British consumers have access to them through international trade. That supplements domestic production and ensures that any disruption from risks such as adverse weather or disease does not affect the overall security of the UK’s supply chain. I acknowledge that, as many Members have said, educating our consumers on what is seasonal and what is grown in the UK is a very healthy thing to do.

Across the UK, 465,000 people are employed in food and non-alcoholic drink manufacturing. We are proud to have a collaborative relationship with the industry, which allows us to respond to disruption effectively, as demonstrated in the response to the unprecedented disruption to supply chains during the covid-19 pandemic. DEFRA monitors food supply and will continue to do so over the autumn and winter period. We work closely with the industry to keep abreast of supply and price trends, which will be particularly important in the run-up to Christmas.

We recognise that rising food prices are a big challenge for household budgets. The latest figures for year-on-year food and drink prices show an annual rate of inflation of 14.6% in the year to September 2022, up from 13.1% in August 2022. While we remain confident in sectors being able to continue to deliver products to consumers, my Department continues to work to identify further options that will help businesses to reduce costs and pass on those savings to consumers.

The Government have committed £37 billion of support to households with the cost of living. That includes an additional £500 million to help with the cost of household essentials, bringing total funding for that support to £1.5 billion. In England, this is in the form of an extension to the household support fund, running from 1 October 2022 to 31 March 2023.

We must be prepared for the future. That is why we published the Government’s food strategy in June, setting out our plan to transform our food system, and I have a copy of it here. The hon. Member for Cambridge (Daniel Zeichner) said we had not given any thought to that; I hope he has had an opportunity to read the Government’s food strategy, to which the hon. Member for Bristol East referred. The strategy puts food security right at the heart of the Government’s vision for the food sector. It sets out our ambition to boost food production in key sectors and to create jobs, with a focus on skills and innovations, ensuring that those are spread across the whole country. Our aim is to broadly maintain the current level of food we produce domestically and boost production in sectors where there are the biggest opportunities. Setting this commitment demonstrates that we recognise the critical importance of domestic food production and the role it plays in our food security.

As the Prime Minister said only this week, at the heart of this Government’s mandate is our manifesto, which includes our commitment to protect the environment. The Government are introducing three environmental land management schemes that reward environmental benefits: the sustainable farming incentive, local nature recovery and landscape recovery.

Our farming reforms are designed to support farmers to produce food sustainably and productively, and to deliver the environmental improvements from which we will all benefit. I assure the House that boosting food production and strengthening resilience go hand in hand with sustainability—we can do all those things. We can make sure that we increase biodiversity, we can improve the environment and we can continue to keep ourselves well fed in the UK.

Although our food supply chains remain strong, some specific commodities have been affected by the invasion of Ukraine, especially sunflower oil. The Government are supporting industry to manage those challenges. For example, DEFRA worked closely with the Food Standards Agency to adopt a pragmatic approach to the enforcement of labelling rules, so that certain alternative oils could be used in place of sunflower oil without requiring changes to the labels. DEFRA will continue to engage with the seafood sector, including the fish and chip shop industry, to monitor the impacts and to encourage the adoption of alternative sources of supply, which will be of great importance to the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael).

The food strategy announced our intention to publish the land use framework, to which several hon. Members referred. We will set out our land use change principles to ensure that food security is balanced alongside climate, environment and infrastructure outcomes. We are seeking to deliver as much as we can with our limited supply of land to meet the full range of Government commitments through multifunctional landscapes.

We also need to recognise that the production of food and the support of our farmers have an impact on those landscapes. It is no coincidence that the beautiful stone walls in North Yorkshire, which tourists enjoy going to see, are there to keep sheep in. If we remove the sheep—

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown

And the Cotswolds.

Mark Spencer

And the Cotswolds, I hear an interested hon. Member say from a sedentary position. Similarly, it is worth recognising that the beautiful rolling moors of Exmoor and Dartmoor look as they do only because of the food that is produced and the sheep that graze on them.

The food strategy also sets out the significant investments that are already being made across the food system, including more than £120 million of joint funding with UK Research and Innovation in food systems research and innovation; £100 million in the seafood fund; £270 million across the farming innovation programme; and £11 million to support new research to drive improvements in understanding the relationship between food and health. That is vital; agritech and investment in new technologies will help us on the way.

We are taking steps to accelerate innovation by creating a new, simpler regulatory regime to allow researchers and breeders to unlock the benefits of technologies. My right hon. Friend the Member for Tatton talked about her constituent who is producing an awfully large number of tomatoes—I forget how many.

Esther McVey

Some 650 million.

Mark Spencer

That could produce quite a lot of ketchup. New technologies in harvesting and production will assist those industries as we move forward. I hope that hon. Members on both sides of the House will be here to support the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Bill as it passes through the House on Monday.

In the eight minutes that I have been allowed, it has not been possible to answer all the questions of Back Benchers. I think there were 11 speakers, which would have given me 40 seconds to respond to each contribution. If there are comments or questions that I have missed, however, I would be more than happy to write to hon. Members; I understand that this is a topic of great interest to hon. Members on both sides of the House.

Food has rarely been as high on the Government’s agenda. It is a critical issue and the Government are prioritising it accordingly. We have already seen the high resilience of our food supply chains, but my Department will continue to work closely with the industry to address any evolving issues. We will prepare for the future by investing in research and innovation. Our farming reforms will help to support farmers to maintain higher levels of food production, and we will protect the environment at the same time.

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)

The Minister’s speech prompts me to heap praise on the great farmers of the Ribble Valley. We have a lot of stone walls there too.

30/10/2022