(3 weeks, 2 days ago)
Commons ChamberI will now announce the result of today’s deferred Division on the draft Energy Prices Act 2022 (Extension of Time Limit) Regulations 2026. The Ayes were 380 and the Noes were seven, so the Ayes have it.
[The Division list is published at the end of today’s debates.]
Liam Byrne
I rise to say a couple of things in support of the Minister, who not only has done a heroic job in laying out the intellectual architecture for the legislation before he got to the House, but is so expertly steering it through the House. I wish him all the very best this afternoon in finishing the job.
I want to make three points. First, the measures that the Minister has set out are essential if we are to pursue the long-term interests of pension savers in this country. It is in their fundamental interests that they live and retire in an economy that is growing faster in the years to come. The only way in which we can collectively achieve that is by raising the investment rate in this country. For a long time, our investment rate was the lowest in the G7; it is improving and is now the second-lowest in the G7. It is for exactly that purpose that hon. Members on both sides of the House made the argument that we need to repatriate investment saving.
The fact is, we have got to resolve the paradox that, on the one hand, we have £3 trillion-worth of pension savings and, on the other hand, while we have some of the world’s best life science, best universities and best entrepreneurs, we do not have the investment institutions and systems that connect long-term savings to that brilliant tradition of entrepreneurial genius. Unless we fix that long-standing paradox, this country will not grow faster. That is not a Labour analysis; it is an analysis that was first advanced by the former Conservative Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Godalming and Ash (Sir Jeremy Hunt).
If we manage to get that right, the investment rate in the country will go up and the economy will grow faster in the years to come. Therefore, there is not a cost to the savings of Britain’s pension savers—it will actually be to their advantage.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons Chamber
Liam Byrne (Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North) (Lab)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I believe that I heard the hon. Gentleman accuse a political party in the Chamber of a “criminal abuse of democracy”. Did I hear that correctly? Is that remark in order, or does the hon. Gentleman—I use that word loosely—now need to back up his allegation with some hard evidence?
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his point of order. I am hoping that the hon. Member for East Wiltshire (Danny Kruger) will reconsider his words and withdraw them.
Liam Byrne (Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North) (Lab)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. You rightly expect the Executive to provide timely information to this House. On 13 August I wrote to the Secretaries of State for Defence, for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs and for Business and Trade to ask for important information about the legality of F-35 exports. We want that information ahead of a ministerial appearance before the Business and Trade Sub-Committee on Economic Security, Arms and Export Controls on Monday.
This is important, because the Al-Haq judgment handed down by the courts on 30 June made it very clear that under our constitution, the acutely sensitive and political issue of the legality of exports is a matter for the Executive—who are democratically accountable to Parliament and ultimately the electorate—and not for the courts. We have not had that information yet, and the hearing is on Monday. What steps can you advise me to take to get the information that the Committee needs?
I am grateful to the right hon. Member for giving me notice of his point of order. The Chair is not responsible for Ministers’ replies to correspondence, but all hon. Members should be entitled to expect a timely reply when they write to any member of the Government, particularly when they are asking for information on behalf of a Select Committee on which the House has conferred formal powers to seek information and to hold the Government to account. I am sure that those on the Treasury Bench will have noted the right hon. Member’s comments, and I hope that the Business and Trade Committee will be provided with all the information it requires as soon as possible.
Liam Byrne
My hon. Friend is right. We have to be careful not to stray too far into the territory of our sister Committee, but once upon a time we built villages around factories; in today’s economy, we need to build local economies around universities. The role of universities in empowering economic change is something we will want to return to in the very near future.
Final two questions and answers—very short, please.
(1 year ago)
Commons ChamberI call the Chair of the Business and Trade Committee.
Liam Byrne (Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North) (Lab)
I want to thank the Government for saving British Steel. Our Committee has been clear that it is essential for us to retain the ability to make primary steel in this country, and the steps that were taken a couple of Saturdays ago have helped derisk exactly that. The Government deserve credit for that. However, the Committee has written to the Government to say that a steel strategy needs to come forward as quickly as possible. It must be a clear, long-term vision for the industry, and there must be safeguards against the potential of a floodtide of steel from China. We need to use public procurement much more aggressively to support our local industry, energy costs need to come down, and we need a plan to keep scrap onshore. Will the Minister tell us when she plans to bring forward that steel strategy? Ultimately, what is good for the steel industry is good for Scunthorpe.
My right hon. Friend is of course right: the steel strategy is all the more important now than when we devised it in opposition and committed £2.5 billion for the steel strategy fund in our manifesto. We are looking at how we use that financial support, and, as he knows, at how we might do primary production. We are investigating future market opportunities and how we can increase demand here in the UK. He speaks of procurement, which of course is incredibly important. I have been talking to the procurement Minister and working on that, along with the Steel Council. We need to consider the availability of suitable sites for future investments.
Scrap is important, as my right hon. Friend says—how can we improve UK capability? Trade and overcapacity is a huge issue, and one that we share with our American colleagues, which is why we do not believe that the tariffs are necessary—we have the same problems and should try to solve them together. Carbon leakage, green steel, research and development, jobs and skills—we will develop a whole package of measures as quickly as we can. We will ensure that the plan, which we will publish in the spring, is one for the whole country and secures steel in the UK.
(1 year, 4 months ago)
Commons ChamberI call the Chair of the Business and Trade Committee.
Liam Byrne (Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North) (Lab)
I welcome the statement made by this hard-working Minister. I take it from the announcement that Mr Křetínský has cleared the investment screening tests that the Cabinet Office is responsible for. It would be useful to have that confirmed.
Let me press my hon. Friend about the universal service obligation. Is it his intention that beyond the initial five years he will seek six-day delivery and a universal service obligation in place for Royal Mail for as long as His Majesty’s Government retain the golden share?
I thank the Chair of the Select Committee for his comments. The golden share is to deal with tax residency and headquarters being domiciled in the UK. Obviously, there will be discussions about the universal service obligation. We know that this is a fast-moving market, and that will be for determination by Ofcom some time next year.