Category: Economy

  • Michael Howard – 1985 Statement on Merger of Scottish and Newcastle Breweries and Matthew Brown

    Michael Howard – 1985 Statement on Merger of Scottish and Newcastle Breweries and Matthew Brown

    The statement made by Michael Howard, the then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, in the House of Commons 13 November 1985.

    With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a statement on the report of the Monopolies and Mergers Commission on Scottish and Newcastle Breweries and Matthew Brown which was published on 12 November. The Commission has concluded that, while the merger could not be expected materially to benefit the public interest, there are not sufficient grounds for concluding that the proposed merger may be expected to operate against the public interest. In the absence of an adverse public interest finding by the Commission, my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State has no powers under the Fair Trading Act 1973 to intervene to prevent that merger, or to impose any conditions on it.

    Following press reports at the end of last week, it has been suggested that there may have been a leak of confidential information in advance of the report’s publication. An investigation is under way to establish whether there has been a leak.

    My attention has been drawn to the existence of a letter from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, about which he has written to the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw). That, together with all other material which may be relevant, will be considered in the context of the investigation.

    Mr. John Smith (Monklands, East)

    Is the Minister aware that this is an extremely serious matter because it reflects on the capacity of the Government and agencies responsible to them to hold commercially confidential information until the appropriate time for a public announcement? In those circumstances should not the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry who is responsible for the whole Department have come to the House to make the statement, instead of a relatively recently appointed junior Minister?

    Is the Minister aware that it is a little more serious than information “perhaps” having been leaked? It is well known that on 8 November, some days before the public announcement was made, newspapers carried stories predicting, not what the result of the Commission might be, but the result in terms which showed clearly that they knew the contents of the report, particularly the recommendation to which reference has been made.

    Is the Minister further aware that there was a significant movement of shares, whereby the shares of the company in question moved from 478p to 520p—an increase of 42p—on the information being made available fairly widely through the press? As a result of that, is it not clear that an investigation in considerable depth should be held—I welcome the fact that an investigation is being undertaken—with a full disclosure of what it reveals? Will the Minister guarantee that that will be done?

    Furthermore, should not the Government consider whether Ministers and officials, whether of Departments or agencies responsible to them, fully understand the important rules which exist about commercial confidentiality, and should they not take urgent steps to ensure that if those rules are understood, they are also enforced? It is disgraceful that a Government are unable to hold commercially confidential information as they are expected to. If they cannot do so, they are breaching an important trust to the British people.

    Mr. Howard

    It is of course a serious matter, and a serious investigation will take place. Of course that investigation will be in depth, as the right hon. and learned Gentleman suggests. All the matters to which he has referred will be carefully and fully investigated in that inquiry. It has not, however, been the practice of this or previous Governments to publish reports of internal inquiries and I therefore cannot give him the guarantee of publication which he requests.

    Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington)

    Is not the most remarkable aspect of this affair the letter which the Minister sent to me yesterday in which he said:

    “Although Matthew Brown have no present intention of closing the Carlisle and Workington breweries, the jobs there could not be regarded as totally secure in the longer term even if Matthew Brown were to remain independent.”

    Is the Minister aware that that is simply not true? I have correspondence in my possession from Matthew Brown giving me almost indefinite assurances about the future of the brewery in my constituency.

    Since Matthew Brown made £7 million profit last year, until the takeover was approved by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission, the brewery at Workington was as safe as the Bank of England and the hundreds of jobs directly and indirectly dependent on that industry were absolutely secure.

    Is it not clear that the Minister himself has given the green light to Scottish and Newcastle to close my brewery? He is encouraging Scottish and Newcastle to take that decision. Should he not resign because he has acted irresponsibly?

    Finally, may we have an assurance from the Secretary of State for Scotland who leaked—and it was his leak which led to speculation on the Stock Exchange and the rise of 50p in the price of these shares, whereby City slickers have lined their pockets? It is for him, too, to resign. He has offended the House, he has undermined the Monopolies and Mergers Commission and he has done a disservice to the company Matthew Brown which has made an honourable contribution historically to my constituency.

    Mr. David Maclean (Penrith and the Border)

    Mr. Speaker, on a more reasonable note may I ask my hon. and learned Friend—

    Mr. Campbell-Savours

    Answer.

    Mr. Speaker

    I must say to the hon. Gentleman that the question was a bit long so I was taken in myself. I apologise and call the Minister to answer.

    Mr. Howard

    In the letter which I wrote to the hon. Member for Workington, I did not express any personal views, but I recited the conclusions reached by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission. That report has been published and is available for all to see. I invite those who wish to test the hon. Gentleman’s wild allegations to refer to that report.

    Mr. Maclean

    May I say in all reasonableness that many of my constituents believe that the conclusions by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission are at variance with the evidence presented to it? In view of the inquiry that my hon. and learned Friend announced today, does he agree that it is better to put the whole matter on ice and to have a fresh submission to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission?

    Mr. Howard

    No, Sir. The commission’s report is available and I do not wish to make any further comment on it.

    Mr. Jack Straw (Blackburn)

    Will the Minister explain why he skated so gingerly over the letter which the Secretary of State for Scotland wrote to a member of the public in Leyland, Lancashire, last Friday, four days before the publication of the report, in which he disclosed the contents of the Commission’s report and the Government’s decision upon it? I do not impugn the integrity or the honour of the Secretary of State, but does not the fact that he sent that letter disclose a degree of incompetence and carelessness within the Scottish Office and the Department of Trade and Industry which is unacceptable when handling market-sensitive information?

    May I press the Minister on the nature of the investigation and its publication? There have been few examples of market-sensitive information being leaked, but when that has happened it has sometimes led to a full tribunal. Therefore, the precedents for the widest possible inquiry, including into share profiteering, are very good. I urge the hon. and learned Gentleman to ensure that the investigation is wide and that its results are published.

    Mr. Howard

    The letter to which the hon. Gentleman referred will be considered in the investigation. It will be a thorough one, and as wide as is necessary to discover the facts. Unlike the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw), I would not wish today to prejudge or anticipate the results of that inquiry.

    Mr. Ron Lewis (Carlisle)

    Is the Minister aware that there is very strong opposition in Cumbria, among all the political groups, to the decision to allow a takeover? Cumbria’s unemployment problem is grim, and despite everything that the Minister has said today we expect that in less than two years the breweries will be closed. Will he stand on the sidelines and act as Pontius Pilate, or will he do something about it?

    Mr. Howard

    All those matters were drawn to the attention of the commission, which is an independent body. As I said at the outset, my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has no power to intervene to prevent a proposed merger under the Act in the light of the conclusion of the commission in its report.

    Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield)

    While I warmly welcome the internal inquiry that will look into the unfortunate leak, may I support the request made by my hon. Friend the Member for Penrith and the Border (Mr. Maclean), bearing in mind the mass speculation from which many people—nothing to do with the brewery, but the city slickers described, quite rightly, by the hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours)—have made a great deal of money?

    Will my hon. and learned Friend consider setting aside the conclusion in the report of the Monopolies and Mergers Commission, and ask it to consider the matter again? Will he bear in mind the fact that many Conservative Members are deeply unhappy about and strongly opposed to a decision that will undoubtedly wipe out an important private brewery in the north-west of England?

    Mr. Howard

    I recognise the unhappiness to which my hon. Friend referred. However, the legislation pursuant to which the commission operates has been in existence for some considerable time, under Government of all political complexions. In this instance, it has been operated in the usual scrupulous manner, with all the procedures being properly followed. The Secretary of State has no power to intervene, for the reasons that I have given.

    Mr. Robert Maclennan (Caithness and Sutherland)

    Does the Minister recognise that, now that the finger of suspicion has been pointed at a Cabinet Minister, a number of public authorities and civil servants, it would be wholly inappropriate merely to conduct an internal inquiry, however wide-ranging? Is it not now necessary to ensure that a completely objective inquiry is conducted, by someone outside the public service?

    Mr. Howard

    No, I do not accept for one moment that a thorough internal investigation will not be objective. It will identify and ascertain all relevant facts relating to the matter.

    Mr. Ivan Lawrence (Burton)

    Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that there is widespread concern that smaller breweries are being swallowed by larger breweries, a process which may not be in the public interest?

    If the Government do not have powers to overrule the decision of the Monopolies and Mergers Commission, will my hon. and learned Friend seriously consider taking powers to give the Government of the day some right to take action if, in the political of social interest, it is thought necessary to do so?

    Mr. Howard

    I do not think that it would be wise to consider that aspect of the matter in the light of one case. However, it is my right hon. and learned Friend’s intention to review competition policy generally next year. These matters will be taken into account in the context of that review.

    Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)

    Is the Minister aware that the mass of the public will view this matter as one where a Minister has managed to tip off certain favoured people with information to which the remainder of the population is not privy? [HON. MEMBERS: “Disgraceful.”] As a result, will not many people make a financial killing? The Minister then comes to the Dispatch Box and blithely says that, instead of a proper public inquiry, the matter will be dealt with either by self-regulation or an internal inquiry.

    I put it to the Minister that, if someone in a betting shop had managed to land a big coup on the basis of backing a string of winners after they had passed the post, that would be a matter for the Attorney-General, the fraud squad and all the rest. Why does that not apply also to people in the City?

    Mr. Howard

    The investigation into the facts of the matter will be thorough. I have nothing to add to what I have already said.

    Mr. Piers Merchant (Newcastle upon Tyne, Central)

    Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that, despite the views of some hon. Members, there are areas in which the findings of the Monopolies and Mergers Commission will be welcome? They include Newcastle, where people have wide experience of the Scottish and Newcastle operation and are aware that its reputation and expertise will enable it to run Matthew Brown efficiently and effectively.

    Mr. Howard

    I note what my hon. Friend said. No doubt many representations to that effect were put before the commission.

    Mr. John Ryman (Blyth Valley)

    I wonder whether I could ask the Minister to give a sensible reply to my question? Although it is true that the Secretary of State cannot interfere with the recommendation of the Monopolies and Mergers Commission, does the hon. and learned Gentleman agree that the Secretary of State is under no obligation to accept that recommendation? He can accept or reject it.

    Mr. Howard

    No, the hon. Gentleman has not accurately summarised the effect of the legislation or the powers of my right hon. and learned Friend. Where the commission concludes that a merger is not likely to be against the public interest, my right hon. and learned Friend has no power under the Act to prevent it from taking place.

  • Kwasi Kwarteng – 2021 Statement on the UK’s Innovation Strategy

    Kwasi Kwarteng – 2021 Statement on the UK’s Innovation Strategy

    The statement made by Kwasi Kwarteng, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, in the House of Commons on 22 July 2021.

    Today the Government are publishing the UK innovation strategy, “Leading the future by creating it”.

    Innovation is central to tackling the largest challenges the world faces, from climate change to global pandemics. The UK must be in the vanguard of the response to these challenges. That is why the Government have placed innovation at the heart of our plan for growth and so much else we want to achieve, from fighting coronavirus to achieving net zero and building global Britain.

    The UK has a long and illustrious history of world-leading innovation, from the industrial revolution to the vaccine development of the past year. Now we have left the EU, we can move even more quickly to respond to emerging challenges and global opportunities, and cement the UK’s position as a world leader in science, research and innovation.

    To this end, the UK innovation strategy sets out the Government’s vision to make the UK a global hub for innovation by 2035, placing innovation at the centre of everything this nation does. Through this we seek to generate disruptive inventions, the most tech-centric industry and Government in the world, more tech “unicorns”, and a nation of firms and people that all aspire to innovate.

    To achieve these objectives, we want to unlock business investment in innovation. This is a core objective of the innovation strategy, and my officials have consulted with over 400 businesses and organisations to determine the factors that could lead to an increase in business innovation.

    In the innovation strategy we set out our plans against four key pillars, which will support the achievement of our vision:

    Pillar 1: Unleashing Business—we will fuel businesses who want to innovate.

    Pillar 2: People—we will make the UK the most exciting place for innovation talent.

    Pillar 3: Institutions & Places—we will ensure our research, development and innovation institutions serve the needs of businesses and places across the UK.

    Pillar 4: Missions & Technologies—we will stimulate innovation to tackle major challenges faced by the UK and the world and drive capability in key technologies.

    Through these pillars, the innovation strategy aims to both establish the right underlying policy environment and clearly signal those areas where the Government will take the lead.

    This innovation strategy is only the first step. In the coming months and years, we will maintain a laser-like focus on realising our ambitions for innovation. We will track a range of quantitative metrics to measure our progress in delivering our commitments, alongside in-depth intelligence from businesses and other innovation stake-holders. Innovation will also be a crucial element of our efforts to level up the UK economy. A detailed strategy for levelling up through research and innovation will be set out as a part of the Government’s forthcoming levelling up White Paper.

    I will place a copy of the innovation strategy in the Libraries of both Houses.

    R&D People and Culture Strategy

    I am also delighted to announce that the Government have today published their “R&D People and Culture Strategy”, delivering on the commitment we made in the R&D road map last summer. The road map recognised that people are at the heart of research and development, and that we need talented, diverse people, with the right skills, working in an environment that allows them to do their best work and deliver positive outcomes for our society and the economy.

    The R&D people and culture strategy sets out, for the first time, a whole sector vision that is backed by clear Government commitments. It is a call to action to create a more inclusive, dynamic and sustainable UK R&D sector, in which a diversity of people and ideas can thrive.

    Through this strategy, we will set out actions that will bring the best out of people and enable talent and ideas to flow freely between academia, business, and other sectors. We will ensure that everyone’s contribution is valued, and the UK has an outstanding research culture that truly supports discovery, diversity, and innovation, and offers varied and diverse careers that bring excitement and recognition.

    The strategy identifies three priority areas across which action is needed:

    People: redefining what it means to work in R&D in the 21st century—valuing all the roles that make it a success and ensuring the UK has the capability and capacity it needs.

    Culture: co-creating a vision of the culture we want to see within the sector—working together to make lasting change happen so that researchers and innovators with diverse backgrounds and ways of thinking can thrive and do their best work here.

    Talent: renewing the UK’s position as a global leader in R&D in attracting, retaining and developing talented people, making sure careers in UK R&D are attractive to talented individuals and teams both domestically and internationally.

    A talented and thriving R&D workforce will be key for realising our science superpower ambitions, and the R&D people and culture strategy will play an important role in supporting the vision I am setting out in the innovation strategy to make the UK a global hub for innovation by 2035.

    We have engaged widely with the sector to date on the issues identified in this strategy, and my hon. Friend the Minister for Science, Research and Innovation and I are very grateful to the hundreds of individuals and organisations who have contributed to their respective development. The Government will continue working closely with the sector to ensure the successful implementation.

    I will place a copy of the R&D people and culture strategy in the Libraries of both Houses.

    Post Office Horizon Update

    This House is aware of the distressing impact that problems with the Post Office’s Horizon IT system have had on the lives and livelihoods of many postmasters.

    Over the years, the Horizon accounting system recorded shortfalls in cash in branches. These shortfalls were treated by the Post Office as caused by postmasters, and this led to dismissals, recovery of losses by Post Office Ltd and, in some cases, criminal prosecutions. We now know this data was unreliable.

    The Court of Appeal handed down a landmark judgment on 23 April 2021, which quashed the convictions of 39 postmasters. A further 12 were quashed in the Court of Appeal earlier this week. Further convictions have been quashed in the Crown court. The Government have been clear that we want to see compensation delivered fairly and as quickly as possible. We have also been clear that it is for the Post Office to engage with the individuals in the first instance regarding how compensation can be paid. I am pleased to provide an update on the steps to begin providing compensation to postmasters whose criminal convictions were based on Horizon data and have been quashed.

    We have listened to affected postmasters and want to see them receive compensation quickly. The Government have therefore decided to support the Post Office so that it can make interim payments of up to £100,000 promptly to individual postmasters whose criminal convictions relied on Horizon data and have been quashed, ahead of final compensation settlements being agreed with them. I am providing this support in my capacity as sole shareholder in the Post Office.

    While we recognise that these interim payments may not represent the full compensation that postmasters may ultimately receive, and which will need to be determined between the Post Office and the individuals concerned, it is a means of providing monies to individuals at an early stage in the claims process. The process for finally determining the compensation to be paid will take time and will involve POL obtaining a full quantification of all claims. These claims need to be carefully examined so that postmasters ultimately receive fair compensation and the payments that they deserve.

    In the meantime, the Government thank the postmasters for their patience, recognising the impact that being wrongfully prosecuted has had on individuals, and believe that an interim payment is a way to begin to address the hardships they have faced ahead of when the final sum can be determined and paid.

    The Post Office is contacting the legal representatives of postmasters whose convictions have been quashed with further information about interim payments. We expect the Post Office to issue offer letters for interim payments within 28 days of receiving a claim from eligible postmasters.

    The Government are committed to supporting and maintaining the post office network, which, along with the postmasters, provides essential services to our urban and rural communities. This decision supports the Government’s priorities to support postmasters and to see the longstanding Horizon issues resolved. This support is in addition to the financial support BEIS has provided for the historical shortfall scheme to proceed, which was opened to recompense postmasters who repaid shortfalls and did not have a criminal conviction. In addition, BEIS launched the Post Office Horizon IT inquiry, which recently converted to a statutory footing, following the Court of Appeal judgment.

    We understand that the Post Office has already begun work to deliver the full compensation sum to postmasters and we will work with them towards this. With my status as sole shareholder in the Post Office, my Department continues to engage actively with Post Office Ltd on this and will maintain strong oversight of this process.

    Reforming the framework for better regulation

    Our exit from the EU provides us with the opportunity to think boldly about how we regulate and for the first time in a generation, we have the freedom to conceive and implement rules that put the UK first. The UK will use its newfound freedoms as an independent trading nation to boost growth, increase competition and create jobs by revamping the way rules and regulations for businesses are set. We will use this freedom to unlock cutting-edge technologies, unleash innovation, and propel start-up growth, levelling up every corner of the UK. This will be a crucial part of boosting our productivity and helping us bring the benefits of growth to the whole of our country.

    In seizing this opportunity, we are launching a consultation to seek feedback from interested parties on how we can reform the UK framework for better regulation.

    The consultation sets out five principles that will underpin the Government’s approach to regulation to ensure it benefits the British people:

    A sovereign approach: the UK will use its freedoms to take a tailored approach to setting rules in a way that boosts growth and benefits the British people.

    Leading from the front: we will act nimbly to support the development of new technologies.

    Proportionality: we will use non-regulatory options where we can, while acting decisively to put in place strong rules where they are needed.

    Recognising what works: regulations will be thoroughly analysed to ensure they work in the real world.

    Setting high standards at home and globally: we will set high standards at home and engage in robust regulatory diplomacy across the world, leading in multilateral settings, influencing the decisions of others and helping to solve problems that require a global approach.

    Proposals explored in the consultation

    The consultation follows a report from the taskforce on innovation, growth and regulatory reform, which the Prime Minister convened earlier this year, and examines a number of the taskforce’s proposals for reforming regulation, including the adoption of a less-codified, common law approach to regulation. There is also a focus on the process for measuring and reporting impacts under the better regulation framework. Areas examined in the consultation include:

    the adoption of a less codified, common law approach to regulation;

    a review of the role of regulators, especially around competition and innovation;

    delegation of more discretion to regulators to achieve regulatory objectives in a more agile and flexible way counterbalanced by increased accountability and scrutiny;

    streamlining the process of assessment of impacts;

    moving to earlier scrutiny of impact assessments and evaluation of existing regulation;

    consideration of options on measuring the impact of regulation;

    reintroduction of regulatory offsetting; and

    baselining the UK’s regulatory burden.

  • Angela Rayner – 2021 Comments on Treasury Select Committee Report on Greensill

    Angela Rayner – 2021 Comments on Treasury Select Committee Report on Greensill

    The comments made by Angela Rayner, the Leader of the Labour Party, on 20 July 2021.

    The fact that David Cameron apparently did not break any rules during the Greensill scandal proves that the rules that are supposed to regulate lobbying are completely unfit for purpose.

    The ACOBA system is pointless and toothless. As this case shows, it causes more harm than good by giving a veil of legitimacy to the rampant cronyism, sleaze and dodgy lobbying that is polluting our democracy under the Tories.

    Labour will ban former Ministers from lobbying government for at least five years after they leave office, and overhaul the current broken system and replace it with an Integrity and Ethics Commission that will close the revolving door and stamp out sleaze.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2021 Fiscal Risks Report Statement

    Rishi Sunak – 2021 Fiscal Risks Report Statement

    The statement made by Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the House of Commons on 6 July 2021.

    In accordance with the charter for budget responsibility, the OBR has today published its third fiscal risks report (FRR). FRR 2021 provides an update on the risks identified in previous reports, alongside focused coverage of three areas of fiscal risk: the coronavirus pandemic, climate change, and the cost of Government debt. I am grateful to the Budget Responsibility Committee, and staff of the OBR, for their work in preparing this report, which ensures that the UK continues to be at the forefront of fiscal transparency and management during these unprecedented times. The report was laid before Parliament earlier today and copies are available in the Vote Office. The Government will respond formally to FRR 2021 within the next year.

    The UK has experienced two “once-in-a-generation” economic shocks in just over a decade, and the challenges faced by the UK since the start of the pandemic have been substantial. Action taken over the last decade to restore the public finances to health enabled the Government to fund a comprehensive package of support for the economy when most needed. The report notes that our direct support to businesses helped keep many of our employers afloat, kept insolvencies in check and avoided the kind of credit crunch that occurred during the financial crisis. The Government have acted on a scale unmatched in recent history to protect people’s jobs and livelihoods and to support businesses and public services across the UK. Taking into account the significant support confirmed at spending review 2020 and Budget 2021, total announced support for the economy in response to covid-19 is £352 billion across 2020-21 and 2021-22.

    The report highlights the range of spending choices and risks we face, particularly relating to pandemic spending. These will be considered at the spending review. As the report notes, spending is increasing in cash terms, real terms, and as a share of GDP overall. Total managed expenditure is forecast to rise by 2.1% of GDP between 2019-20 and 2024-25. Core departmental spending is set to grow at an average of over 3% in real terms over this Parliament. Our plans will deliver the largest real-terms increase in departmental spending for any full Parliament this century.

    It is clear that unmitigated climate change is another significant fiscal risk and decarbonisation is essential for sustainable long-term growth and therefore also for the health of the public finances. The fiscal consequences of transition to net zero will need to be managed in line with the Government’s broader fiscal strategy. The Government will publish our net zero strategy later this year, which will set out more detail on how we will meet our net zero target.

    The pandemic and the Government’s necessary policy response has led to an unprecedented increase in Government borrowing and debt; FRR 2021 illustrates how this has made the public finances more sensitive to changes in interest rates. While borrowing costs are affordable now, interest rates and inflation may not stay low forever. The OBR’s latest forecast recognises that the Government’s current fiscal plans deliver a stable medium-term outlook for public sector net debt, but as I set out at that Budget, we need to pay close attention to the affordability of that debt.

    The risks discussed by the OBR in this report underline the importance of returning our public finances to a more sustainable path. The report finds that, in the face of many potential fiscal risks,

    “fiscal space may be the single most valuable risk management tool”.

    That is why the Government set out at Budget 2021 a plan for returning the public finances to a more sustainable path. It is vital that we rebuild fiscal space to ensure that the Government can maintain fiscal resilience to respond as future risks materialise, continue to invest in excellent public services and give businesses and citizens across the UK the certainty that comes with knowing we can and will support them.

  • Kwasi Kwarteng – 2021 Statement on Stellantis Investment at Ellesmere Port

    Kwasi Kwarteng – 2021 Statement on Stellantis Investment at Ellesmere Port

    The statement made by Kwasi Kwarteng, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, in the House of Commons on 6 July 2021.

    I am delighted to welcome the confirmation by Stellantis of a transformational investment at its Vauxhall plant in Ellesmere Port, which will see the site become the first mass volume, fully battery electric vehicle plant in the UK and Europe. Stellantis have committed to investing more than £100 million to transition the plant to produce a new generation of electric vehicles, safeguarding the future of the site and its supply chain for the next decade.

    This announcement demonstrates that our net zero ambitions are being welcomed and matched by business, as we work towards increasing the manufacture of electric vehicles in the UK. The Government are committed to ensuring we continue to be one of the best locations in the world for automotive manufacturing and are working closely with the sector to make sure it remains competitive, attracts investment, and protects and creates jobs.

    Just over six months ago we presented the Prime Minister’s 10-point plan for a green industrial revolution, setting an ambitious road map for transforming our economy, unlocking investment and levelling up the regions. The plan included a commitment to phase out the sale of new petrol and diesel cars and vans by 2030. The decision by Stellantis to invest in electrification in the UK, alongside recent announcements by Nissan and Envision in Sunderland, are excellent illustrations of business and the Government working together to achieve decarbonisation within the sector.

    I was pleased to inform the House in June of the strong consumer growth over the past year, which our strategy is helping to drive. As of March 2021, battery electric vehicle sales stood at 7.7% of the market, up 88% on a year earlier, while plug-in hybrid vehicles sales were 6.1%, an increase of 152%. Changing consumer habits such as the way we shop have also driven a strong increase in demand for light commercial vehicles, and this announcement will help transition the fleet with a new vehicle produced here in the UK. This investment will grow domestic production of electric commercial vehicles, help reduce our reliance on imports and play an important part in reducing emissions in towns and cities across the country.

    I am sure Members will agree that this is an important announcement for Cheshire, Merseyside and the north-west of England, which secures the continued presence of a key anchor for the local and regional economy. This significant investment has been secured thanks to a strong partnership approach between Stellantis and the Government, alongside Cheshire West and Chester Council, and the Cheshire and Warrington local enterprise partnership to maximise the benefits of the transformation of the plant to the wider local economy.

    This news will be welcomed by the workforce at Ellesmere Port and is a testament to their skills and hard work. The Ellesmere Port plant has been a crucial part of automotive manufacturing in the UK since it first opened nearly 60 years ago. This announcement means that that milestone will be marked next year with the production of its first all-electric vehicle—building a sound future on Vauxhall’s proud legacy.

    Today’s announcement is further proof that there is a bright future for automotive manufacturing in this country. The Government are committed to supporting this transition including £500 million to support the electrification of UK vehicles and their supply chains, as part of a wider commitment of up to £1 billion. As Secretary of State I will continue to champion the sector, ensuring that we make the most of the opportunities of the transition to zero-emission vehicles and attract further investment, boost innovation and sustain tens of thousands of jobs in manufacturing and the supply chain.

  • Bridget Phillipson – 2021 Comments on Latest GDP Figures

    Bridget Phillipson – 2021 Comments on Latest GDP Figures

    The comments made by Bridget Phillipson on 9 July 2021.

    After causing the UK to experience the worst economic crisis in the G7, the Conservatives should be getting the economy powering on all cylinders. Instead, this morning’s growth data shows how fragile the UK’s economic recovery is.

    Instead of the Conservatives’ failure to secure the recovery, Labour’s plan to buy, make and sell more in Britain would mean seizing new opportunities to shape a new future for Britain. This would give people new skills and jobs here in the UK, bring security and resilience back to our economy and public services and help our high streets to thrive again.

  • Alister Jack – 2021 Comments on Scottish GDP Figures

    Alister Jack – 2021 Comments on Scottish GDP Figures

    The comments made by Alister Jack, the Secretary of State for Scotland, on 23 June 2021.

    The UK Government has taken swift and robust action to deal with the pandemic. We have supported more than 900,000 Scottish jobs, given thousands of businesses vital loans, and VAT cuts have kept firms in the hardest hit sectors afloat.

    On top of this direct support, the Scottish Government has received more than £14.5 billion in additional funding. And the successful UK-Government-funded vaccine programme is giving us optimism for the future.

    We are beginning to emerge from these uncertain times, and three consecutive months of growth is encouraging. But we know we still have a huge amount to do to recover our economy, and that families and businesses across Scotland still need our help.

    A strong and stable recovery is the UK Government’s sole priority. Growth deals across Scotland have seen investment of £1.5 billion and our new UK-wide funding programmes will benefit communities right across the UK.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2021 Statement on the UK Infrastructure Bank

    Rishi Sunak – 2021 Statement on the UK Infrastructure Bank

    The statement made by Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the House of Commons on 17 June 2021.

    The UK Infrastructure Bank has begun operating in an interim form and is open for business.

    The bank, owned and backed by the taxpayer, will support and enable private and public investment in infrastructure, with core objectives to help tackle climate change, particularly meeting our net zero emissions target by 2050, and to support regional and local economic growth. The Government and the bank have also set out the institution’s investment principles today which will guide how it delivers its objectives.

    HM Treasury and the UK Infrastructure Bank have entered into a keep well agreement to ensure that the bank has sufficient funds to be able to meet its payment obligations in full as they fall due.

    The UKIB will be headquartered in Leeds, and will operate across the whole of the UK, supporting projects in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Over the coming months, the bank will continue to build its capability and capacity as it establishes itself as an independent institution.

    The Government are also publishing the bank’s initial framework document, which sets out the institution’s relationship to the Government.

    A copy of the framework document, alongside an unexecuted copy of the “Keep Well Agreement”, which has information redacted on the basis that it contains either commercially sensitive or personal data, will be placed in the Library of the House.

     

  • Rachel Reeves – 2021 Speech on the State of the Economy

    Rachel Reeves – 2021 Speech on the State of the Economy

    The speech made by Rachel Reeves, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 16 June 2021.

    Five years ago, my friend and colleague Jo Cox was murdered. There is not a day goes by when I do not think of her, and I know that on both sides of the House she is missed dearly.

    All the way through this pandemic we have said that the economic and health responses must go together. That means keeping support in place for as long as the public health measures demand it. When the public health restrictions are extended, as they were by the Prime Minister on Monday, the economic support should be extended too; otherwise we risk falling at the final hurdle. Having spent billions of pounds supporting the economy, it would be tragic to see thousands of businesses go to the wall just because the Government withdrew support a few weeks too soon. We are not calling for forever support, but for economic support that matches the timetable for opening up that the Government have set. That is the right thing for business, for workers, and for our economy too.

    Let us be clear about why we are here today: the Government’s delay in putting India on to the red list has allowed a dangerous new variant to enter our country. That is why we have the highest covid infection rate per person across the whole of Europe—all because the Prime Minister wanted his VIP trip to India. It was vain and short-sighted and has been devastating for public health. As well as the health impact, our assessment, using Office for National Statistics data, tells us that the delay in reopening will cost the UK economy £4.7 billion. That is money that is not being spent in British businesses at a crucial time in our recovery. That £4.7 billion would have been used by businesses to pay commercial rents, to pay people’s wages, to invest, to take on new staff, and to pay taxes into the Treasury as well.

    Of course I welcome what the Chief Secretary has to say today on commercial evictions, but the truth is that if the Chancellor believed that this economic package was enough, he would be here announcing it himself. Whatever this is, it is not doing “whatever it takes” to support British businesses and our economy. Given that the Government have moved the goalposts, let me ask the Chief Secretary why Ministers have not delayed the employer contributions to furlough, due to start on 1 July. Employers are being asked to pay more when they cannot even properly open for business.

    The vast majority of the 1.8 million people still on furlough are in the very sectors most affected by the ongoing restrictions: hospitality, live events and travel. On 1 July, loans to those businesses start having to be repaid. The self-employed and those excluded from financial support will be worried about their futures. Grants are ending, business rate bills are arriving and furlough is tapering off—all immediately after the Government have announced an extension to restrictions. How on earth can the Treasury justify turning off support and sending businesses new tax bills when the Government are saying that those businesses cannot even open?

    On Monday, the Prime Minister told the country that we need to learn to live with the virus. Where is the much-needed plan that would enable us to do that? Where is the plan for greater ventilation in workplaces, including public buildings and schools? Where is the plan to shift contact tracing to a local level, where we know it works best—not in a centralised, Serco-led call centre? Where is the proper support for people needing to self-isolate? Those are all essential measures to save lives and livelihoods, and to avoid the stop-start approach that has characterised the Government’s response to the pandemic.

    Given the WhatsApp messages from the Prime Minister about his own Health Secretary that have been revealed today—Madam Deputy Speaker, I will use more diplomatic language than the Prime Minister could manage—how can we have confidence in Government Ministers when the Prime Minister thinks that the person in charge of the pandemic response is “hopeless”?

    Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)

    Not just “hopeless”.

    Rachel Reeves

    Not just “hopeless”. People have given up so much over the last year. We have pulled together and shown the best of our country. People have done everything that was asked of them and much, much more. We should not be in this position today. Businesses and workers do not deserve to have the rug pulled from under their feet at the eleventh hour. We want to see businesses make it through the pandemic and thrive again, because they are an important part of what makes our country so great and they are essential for our economic recovery. We need them and they need us today. That is why the economic support we have should match the health restrictions that are still in place, and that is what the Government have failed to deliver today.

  • Steve Barclay – 2021 Statement on the State of the Economy

    Steve Barclay – 2021 Statement on the State of the Economy

    The statement made by Steve Barclay, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, on 16 June 2021.

    Before I make my statement, I add my appreciation to that of colleagues for Sir Roy Stone and the contribution he has made during his time in the House.

    There is little doubt that the four-week extension to restrictions announced on Monday will present additional challenges to thousands of people and businesses across the country. That is why at the Budget we went long and erred on the side of additional support. The package of support from my right hon. Friend the Chancellor was designed to accommodate short delays such as this. Indeed, he told the House at that time that we were

    “extending our support well beyond the end of the road map to accommodate even the most cautious view about the time that it might take to exit the restrictions.”—[Official Report, 3 March 2021; Vol. 690, c. 255.]

    Most of our economic support schemes do not end until September or after, providing crucial continuity and certainty for businesses and families—something that was welcomed by business leaders and sector leaders when it was announced. They praised the reassurance provided for the long term.

    Let me remind the House of the scale of support we have announced for British households and businesses over the past 15 months: £352 billion. We have protected jobs, with 11.5 million unique jobs supported by the furlough scheme, which will be in place until the end of September. At the Budget, we also extended the self-employment income support scheme, supporting nearly 3 million self-employed people and taking the total expected support offered through the scheme to nearly £3 billion.

    Businesses have been supported, too, with tax cuts, deferrals, loan schemes and cash grants worth over £100 billion. Our restart grants, worth up to £18,000 from April, have helped Britain’s businesses to get going, at a cost of £5 billion. Some £2.1 billion of discretionary grant funding has been provided for councils to help their local businesses. Last financial year, we provided an unprecedented 100% business rates holiday for all eligible businesses in the retail, hospitality and leisure centres—a tax cut worth £10 billion. This financial year, over 90% of these businesses will receive a 75% cut in their business rates bill across the year to March 2022, and we have extended the 5% reduced rate of VAT for a further six months. The loan guarantee schemes, including the bounce back loan scheme, have provided £70 billion of loans to 1.5 million companies.

    We have provided targeted sectoral support, too. At the Budget, for instance, we provided an additional £700 million to support local and national arts, culture and sports institutions as they reopen. That is on top of the £1.57 billion culture recovery fund, bringing our total support for sports and culture to more than £2 billion, with about £600 million yet to be distributed. It is businesses that will create jobs and grow the economy, and we have stood behind them since day one of this crisis.

    Just as we have supported jobs and businesses, so have we supported livelihoods too: the temporary £20 uplift to universal credit will continue until the end of September; we increased the national living wage to £8.91 from April and extended it to those over 23; we have increased the local housing allowance for housing benefit, meaning that more than 1.5 million households have benefited from an additional £600 a year, on average; and we provided a £670 million hardship fund to help more than 3 million people keep up with their council bills. This comprehensive package has helped to protect millions of jobs, businesses and livelihoods, and our plan is working. GDP is outperforming expectations: unemployment is forecast to be much lower than previously feared; consumer confidence has returned to pre-crisis levels; businesses insolvencies in 2020 were actually lower than in 2019; and signs in the labour market are encouraging, with 5.5 million fewer people on the furlough than in April 2020. In fact, figures released by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs just yesterday showed that the number of people employed has risen by more than 400,000 since November. Of course, covid has impacted different sectors in very different ways, and some particularly acutely, but it should be welcome news to everyone in this House that the early signs are of a recovery in our labour market.

    This plan has come at a cost, albeit one that has reduced economic scarring that would have been inflicted otherwise by covid. Last year saw the highest peacetime level of borrowing on record—£300 billion. We are forecast to borrow a further £234 billion this year and a further £107 billion next year, and at a higher level of debt the public finances are more vulnerable to changes in inflation and interest rates. Indeed, a sustained increase in inflation and interest rates of just 1% would increase debt interest level spending by more than £25 billion in 2025-26. As a result, at the next spending review, we will keep the public finances on a sustainable medium-term path, maintaining the trajectory established at the Budget, so that we have the resilience we need to respond to any future challenges.

    A huge and comprehensive economic shock has been met with a huge and comprehensive response—one that is working. I am pleased, however, to be able to make one further announcement today. Many businesses have accrued debts to landlords during the pandemic. Because of the threat that posed to jobs, we introduced protections to prevent the eviction of commercial tenants due to non-payment of rent. It is the Government’s firm position that landlords and their tenants should continue to resolve those debts through negotiations, and I welcome the various industry-led schemes already in place, and those being developed, to provide resolutions through arbitration. But in recognition of the importance of jobs in the many affected businesses at the heart of local communities, we launched a call for evidence in April on further actions to take to resolve those debts. As a result of that call for evidence, the Government now plan to introduce legislation to support the orderly resolution of these debts that have resulted from covid-19 business closures. We will introduce legislation in this parliamentary Session to establish a backstop so that where commercial negotiations between tenants and landlords are not successful, tenants and landlords go into binding arbitration. Until that legislation is on the statute book, existing measures will remain in place, including extending the current moratorium to protect commercial tenants from eviction to 25 March 2022.

    To be clear, all tenants should start to pay rent again in accordance with the terms of their lease, or as otherwise agreed with their landlord, as soon as restrictions are removed on their sector if they are not already doing so. We believe that that strikes the right balance between protecting landlords and supporting the businesses that are most in need. Based on the successful Australian approach, it sets out a long-term solution to the resolution of covid-19 rent, ensuring that many variable businesses can continue to operate and that debts accrued as a result of the pandemic are quickly resolved to mutual benefit. I thank those on both sides of the issue for their constructive engagement.

    Striking the right balance, just as we are doing with commercial rents, has been the key to our approach all along, and it will continue to shape our approach in the weeks ahead.