Groceries Code Adjudicator

Andrew George Excerpts

Tuesday 25th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe (David Chadwick) on an excellent and eloquent speech, which covered all the issues. I also thank the hon. Member for Salford (Rebecca Long Bailey) for contributing very tellingly.

My background in this subject is that, from 2002, I chaired what was known as the Grocery Market Action Group, which had among its members the National Farmers Union, the Country Land and Business Association, ActionAid, Traidcraft, Friends of the Earth and others. It was amazing to have such a disparate group of organisations in the same room, actually working together and agreeing 100% about the injustices and dysfunctionality of the way in which the grocery supply chain was operating.

We presented a range of evidence to the Competition Commission. That ultimately provoked an investigation in 2008, which resulted in the commission proposing the establishment of a groceries code to drive fair trade through the supply chain. The Groceries Code Adjudicator was created to enforce the code and ensure that it was applied by those supermarkets. In those days, only five had a turnover in excess of £1 billion, which was the recommendation of the Competition Commission at that stage.

Having done that, and having worked for over a decade to get the legislation through, I obviously have some skin in the game, which I probably need to declare. I am not trying to claim the credit myself, because it was a cross-party effort.

[John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington) (Ind)]

Why not? Go on!

[Andrew George]

Well, I suppose I should—no, I will not. One stands on the shoulders of giants, and Colin Breed did a tremendous amount of work from 1997 to 2001. He produced an excellent report called “Checking out the Supermarkets”, which laid a lot of the groundwork for the Grocery Market Action Group. Albert Owen, David Drew and other Labour Members were also very supportive and active throughout those years. There was not always cross-party agreement, or even agreement within my own party, that we should intervene in the market in the way that was proposed. We had to win that argument, and ultimately we did.

At the end of the day, the justification for why the Groceries Code Adjudicator, or any kind of market intervention of that nature, was needed, was that, fundamentally, we had a dysfunctional supply chain operating largely to the benefit of the supermarkets. Not all of our agricultural sector was benefiting from European subsidies or any other public subsidies in those days, but it had become dependent on subsidies because the market was so dysfunctional that public money was needed to prop up the whole system. If we have a functioning market, one can enable the agricultural sector to free itself from dependence on public subsidy. That was largely what was behind what we were trying to do in those days.

When the Groceries Code Adjudicator was established and the code was created, the intention then was only that it would create a framework in which future Governments would review its progress and then build on the framework by introducing or reducing regulations. Certainly the framework was to provide the skeleton on which further developments could happen; of course one cannot anticipate all circumstances.

I want to follow up on the points made by the hon. Member for Salford and my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe. There are a number of improvements that I hope the Government will look at very closely. For example, the code should be applied throughout the supply chain, not just to the direct supplier to the supermarket. It was never the intention of the Grocery Market Action Group that the adjudicator should look only at the final transaction between the ultimate supplier to the supermarket and the supermarket itself, because the impact of that contract could be fed right down through the supply chain.

The second point concerned third-country suppliers. The reason why Traidcraft, the Fairtrade Foundation and so on were involved is because they were rightly hoping that third countries could be involved. Then, as my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe said, the adjudicator could launch its own investigation on the basis of market intelligence. Finally, it could work alongside the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority, for example, to use its intelligence to take matters forward. Fundamentally, we have a framework that can be developed and improved. It certainly should not depend on seconded staff. We do not get commitment to the cause if we depend entirely on seconded staff, as my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe said. I hope the Minister will look carefully at this. Thank you very much, Mr Twigg, for allowing me to speak.

[Derek Twigg (in the Chair)]

We have just two more Members left to speak, but I want to call the Front-Bench spokespeople no later than 5.08 pm.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Justin Madders)]

Certainly, Mr Twigg. It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair this afternoon. I thank the hon. Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe (David Chadwick) for securing this important debate.

Before I talk about hon. Members’ contributions, it is worth reminding the House of the role of the Groceries Code Adjudicator. Hon. Members obviously have a great deal of understanding of what it does, but it is important to put on the record its limits, which a number of Members referred to. In primary colours, its role is to enforce the groceries supply code of practice by providing advice and guidance to suppliers and large retailers on matters relating to the code; arbitrating in disputes between large retailers and their direct suppliers; investigating issues to ascertain whether there has been non-compliance with the code; and imposing sanctions and other remedies for breach of the code.

The code applies to the 14 largest grocery retailers in the UK, which have an annual turnover of £1 billion or more. Some Members spoke about changing that threshold—I would be interested to see what the effect would be—but it has been in place for some time. The competition measure is owned by the Competition and Markets Authority, and was put in place following a very detailed market investigation in 2008, which found that direct suppliers of groceries to large supermarkets faced unfair risks that adversely affected competition and, ultimately, consumers. As the hon. Member for St Ives (Andrew George) and others mentioned, it was in no small part due to a great deal of campaigning from a number of groups and hon. Members that the code saw the light of day.

The code regulates designated retailers’ dealings with their direct suppliers, which, as we have heard, do not include all the farmers and primary producers. Although it prevents the unilateral variation of supply agreements without notice, puts limits on seeking payments for wastage and requires retailers to pay for goods on time, it does not regulate the prices agreed between retailers and suppliers, which is a commercial negotiation between the two parties. However, it requires that such negotiations be conducted fairly and transparently, and the GCA has been keen to ensure that negotiations around cost price pressures do not lead to non-compliance with the code. In 2022, the GCA published the seven golden rules to remind retailers of best practice when agreeing prices with suppliers, and all the regulated retailers have signed up to them.

As we have heard, the GCA was established in June 2013, and since then there has been strong evidence to show that it has been effective in promoting compliance with the code and in changing retailers’ behaviour to improve fairness for direct suppliers. Improvements in retailer compliance with the code are evident from the annual survey. Average compliance with the code has increased from 75% in 2014, when the code was introduced, to 91% in 2024. It is also positive to see that among suppliers there is a high level of awareness of the GCA and the code itself, although I noted that the hon. Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe said that there is a question about awareness among some farmers, and I am happy to explore that further with him.

Moreover, all three statutory reviews of the effectiveness of the GCA concluded that it has been a highly effective regulator. The next review will commence after 31 March, and will look at the performance over the past three years, from 2022 to 2025. Given what we have heard today, I encourage hon. Members and their constituents to contribute to it. The hon. Gentleman raised concerns about the adjudicator’s remit and resources, and there will be an opportunity for him to feed those comments into the review.

The hon. Gentleman also mentioned what he described as bullying by supermarkets. A number of hon. Members talked about a fear of reprisals for raising concerns, and we obviously take that very seriously. It is important to note that the GCA has a statutory requirement to maintain supplier confidentiality. It has relaunched the Code Confident campaign and a confidential reporting platform called “Tell the GCA”, and published a code compliance officer commitment to confidentiality. The 2024 annual survey reported that 82% of suppliers were aware of its commitment to confidentiality. That is a good report, but obviously 18% were unaware of it, and clearly there is a perception out there that matters can find their way back to the supermarkets, which is something we can look further into.

The hon. Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe and a number of others questioned why the GCA cannot instigate its own investigations. I am told that it can carry out investigations of its own accord if it has reasonable grounds to suspect that a large retailer has broken the code or failed to follow a recommendation following a previous investigation by the adjudicator. It is for the adjudicator to determine how he uses his powers, and he has issued statutory guidance setting out his criteria for launching an investigation. The adjudicator’s four prioritisation principles ensure that he targets resources effectively and proportionately. Impact, strategic importance, risk and benefits, and resources are all part of those principles.

[Andrew George]

The Minister is certainly right, providing the investigation was on sound grounds. The worry was always that the investigation may identify a supplier simply by doing it, and that the anonymity intended when an intelligence-driven inquiry or investigation was generated may uncover that particular supplier. Therefore, a wider range of powers—not on the basis of being able to conduct fishing expeditions—to investigate on justifiable grounds is something that I hope the Minister will look at further.

[Justin Madders]

I hear what the hon. Member has said, and no doubt that is something that can be put in as part of the review. When I spoke to the adjudicator, he said that his approach is about ensuring compliance and helping to prevent problems from escalating in the first place, avoiding the need for formal investigations and dispute resolution. He has said that he is satisfied that his current powers provide the necessary tools to enforce the code and change retailer behaviour. He has also been clear—and has said publicly—that if he needs to instigate an investigation he is more than ready to do so.

That leads on to some of the points Members made about the resources of the adjudicator. My information is that there are actually nine staff rather than seven, but the overall point is that that does not seem to be a great deal, given the number of supermarkets and the purchasing power that we are talking about. But it is entirely within the adjudicator’s gift to ask for more resources through the levy. If he feels he needs more, he can also talk to the CMA about secondments—that is something that is entirely up to him. If there is a question that things are not happening because of resources, I am confident that the adjudicator would come forward and discuss that with us.

My hon. Friend the Member for Salford (Rebecca Long Bailey) rightly referenced her leadership of the Bakers, Food and Allied Workers Union parliamentary group, and I am proud to associate myself with that group, having represented it on many occasions in my former legal career. I know how much it has done in this area, and how this area affects its members. My hon. Friend was right to talk about how that sector is often characterised by a race to the bottom, with insecurity and low wages. That is what we hope to tackle through the Employment Rights Bill.

My hon. Friend the Member for Salford also made a number of interesting suggestions about how we move forward, which I will not be able to respond to in detail today, but I note that the Business and Trade Committee has recently begun an investigation into pricing practices. It focuses primarily on dynamic pricing, but the evidence session I attended covered a range of areas where prices were an issue. That report is something I will look forward to reading in due course.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) also referred to the use of private equity in the supermarket sector, as did my hon. Friend the Member for Salford. He was right to reference other sectors where that has become more of an issue. The CMA has recently looked at that issue in the veterinary sector, so it may be that it has the opportunity to conduct an inquiry, should it wish to do so. My right hon. Friend mentioned a survey in which 13% of respondents had no access to sick pay. We think that that is absolutely wrong, and that is why the Employment Rights Bill will ensure that statutory sick pay becomes a day one right for everyone, regardless of their earnings.

My hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson) talked about how dairy farmers in his constituency would like the GCA to apply to their work. He may be aware that the Fair Dealing Obligations (Milk) Regulations 2024 came into force in July last year, and will apply to all existing contracts from 9 July this year. I will pass his comments to the relevant Minister in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to see whether those regulations will assist in dealing with his constituents’ issues. DEFRA is also looking at powers in the Agriculture Act 2020 to see whether expanded regulations could improve fairness in the pig sector, as well as looking at the egg and fresh produce sectors. There are therefore a number of tools at our disposal to tackle some of the issues that Members have raised.

The dairy regulations are enforced by the Agricultural Supply Chain Adjudicator, Richard Thompson, who was appointed last summer. We expect that in future he will deal with any fair dealing regulations in the other sectors that I have mentioned. It is important to note that ASCA and GCA are in regular contact to ensure that the two regimes operate effectively alongside one another. We will conduct a review to understand the effectiveness of the fair dealing regulations.

As I have already mentioned, there will also be the triennial review of the GCA. Hon. Members have spoken with great knowledge and passion about a number of issues that they would wish to put forward, particularly about the GCA’s remit and powers. I encourage them to do so, and we will see what the review takes forward. The points made about the importance of this country’s food security and fairness to consumers and producers are absolutely right. I congratulate the hon. Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe on securing the debate.

Critical Minerals: Domestic Production

Andrew George Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd December 2024 Westminster Hall

[Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. I congratulate the hon. Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon), not only on bringing this issue to the House’s attention, but on the manner in which he introduced it, emphasising its importance.

There have been a number of contributions to the debate, in the form of both interventions and speeches. The hon. Member for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland (Luke Myer) emphasised the importance of keeping the whole strategy under review. The hon. Member for Basingstoke (Luke Murphy), who is no longer in his place, emphasised the importance of the strategy and of ensuring that our national security is protected in the manner in which our policy is produced.

The hon. Member for Hitchin (Alistair Strathern), who is also no longer in his place, emphasised the huge potential economic benefit to this country of further developing the strategy. The hon. Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel) also contributed and, of course, the ever-present hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) gave a telling contribution, making the vital point that although Cornwall is the epicentre of activity as far as critical minerals are concerned, other Celtic regions in the United Kingdom make an important contribution, as indeed do other locations throughout the country.

The hon. Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes), whose constituency is within the Government zone of the south-west, as I describe it, emphasised the importance of taking a wider regional and national view on the integration of the various component parts necessary to developing a strategy. The hon. Member for St Austell and Newquay (Noah Law), who is the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on critical minerals, again emphasised the importance of the sector to the British economy.

It is important to establish a clear strategy and, to be fair, the previous Government established a strategy in 2022, on which the current Government can build. They also established the Critical Minerals Intelligence Centre, which is run by the British Geological Survey and is another building block on which to develop a future strategy. And the strategy does need to be developed; it cannot be left where it is.

It is important to emphasise that the industry is vital not only to the country’s intention to address climate change but to the integration of climate change and nature conservation. When one looks at the extraction of any precious component or metal, such as lithium, from Cornwall’s remarkable geography, one has to consider the consequences for nature conservation. I find it particularly pleasing that, in the constituency of the hon. Member for St Austell and Newquay, there is a strong working relationship between Imerys and local nature conservationists. For example, only recently it was detected that the little ringed plover, which is a particularly vulnerable species, is now breeding in what was originally the clay wastes of the clay country, and within the area where lithium is likely to be extracted in the future. In other words, it is possible for those extractive industries and nature conservationists to work together and accommodate each other within the same environment. As we go forward it is really important that that conversation goes on.

Like the hon. Member for Camborne and Redruth, I went down South Crofty, below 3,000 feet, but before it closed in 1997. I certainly agree with him and hope that the mine will open again soon so that it can make a major contribution to the Cornish economy. There has been a lot of reference today to refining the products themselves, and one only has to look in the constituency of the hon. Member, as well as where I live in Hayle, to see the consequences of smelting for the environment. It was certainly known in the 19th century, when a lot of smelting went on in the town, how it impacted the health of people in the area.

We have only to look at what is known in the area as scoria stone, which is an incredibly heavy and extremely brittle stone that was the by-product of the smelting process, to see the environmental impact of the process. It is really important, therefore, to use modern technologies in the UK to ensure that it does not have those detrimental impacts, on both the health of the people living nearby and the environment, if the UK is to achieve the objective proposed by the hon. Member for Camborne and Redruth to avoid the necessity of exporting the minerals extracted in the UK to the other side of the globe for refinement.

The technologies need to be developed. As the hon. Member for Camborne and Redruth and others have emphasised, there is a great deal of skill, both academically and in terms of training, available in the local economy and through local colleges to develop those technologies, and to improve our chances of being able to take full advantage of the opportunities that lie ahead. They are exciting opportunities that I hope the Government will do their best to encourage.

The Liberal Democrats have called on the Government to develop a new industrial strategy to tackle the big challenges of our time—supercharging the green economy, boosting living standards, addressing regional inequalities and creating the conditions for sustainable growth. We would rebuild business and investor confidence by committing to fiscal responsibility, respect for international treaties and the creation of a stable business environment. We would effectively communicate the objectives and tools of the industrial strategy to industry, and provide clear signals for investment, as well as consistency and confidence for future business decisions.

We would create broad access to training and skills for the purposes of developing apprenticeships. We would set up incentives for research and development, decarbonisation and the take-up of digital technologies, especially among SMEs. We would ensure that the UK’s regulatory, research and development, and tax frameworks are geared towards fostering innovation.

We would set up a plan for investment in key infrastructure to enable the industrial strategy, covering areas including rail, building insulation, the national grid and electric vehicle charging. We would create a thriving manufacturing sector by investing in the skills of the future; promoting zero carbon transport and energy efficiency; harnessing affordable clean energy; and adopting an ambitious international trade policy. We would re-establish the industrial strategy council and put it on a statutory fitting to ensure vital oversight, monitoring and evaluation of the industrial strategy and to explore ways in which to improve interdepartmental work across Government.

One business in Cornwall told us that the national wealth fund’s minimum project size is too high to suit mining exploration—the exploratory stage—which might have a detrimental impact on exploring new opportunities for mineral extraction in places such as Cornwall. If mining exploration does not happen, the much bigger extraction and processing projects cannot come forward. I therefore urge the Minister to look at that issue.

The critical minerals strategy says:

“We will reduce barriers to domestic exploration and extraction of critical minerals”

and

“Carry out cutting-edge research and development to solve the challenges in critical minerals supply chains…We will promote innovation and re-establish the UK as a centre of critical mineral and mining expertise.”

But Cornish mining companies say that they face years of bureaucratic hurdles simply to get the Government to recognise their status as R&D-led companies, which is vital to their application for EIS tax relief. Does the Minister believe that the Government are doing all they can to enable that kind of research and development in the sector?

I am delighted that the Minister will be coming to Cornwall next year; we will certainly give her a very warm welcome when she comes. We look forward to having very constructive and productive talks with her.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister for Industry (Sarah Jones)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris, and a pleasure to speak in such an important debate. I congratulate Parliament’s official tin champion, my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon), on securing this debate. I thank him for the conversations we have already had about tin in particular and critical minerals more broadly; it is a joy to have someone with such enthusiasm, passion and knowledge joining us in Parliament.

My hon. Friend has already done much in his time in Parliament to support critical minerals—tin, in particular —in his area, and he is an active member of the all-party parliamentary group, to which he brings genuine passion. I look forward to visiting his constituency in the spring or the early part of 2025 to talk more about what can be done in his area. His speech summed up the challenges and opportunities very well. He spoke about what more we can do, and how that will impact on economic deprivation and help our country’s security. He pointed to many interventions that he thinks the Government should be looking at, which I will come to later. We are developing a strategy that will cover a lot of the issues.

The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) talked about Northern Ireland and the engagement that the UK Government should be having with colleagues there. He is right that a UK strategy could not be developed without engaging our partners—and I can absolutely give him that reassurance. He talked about mining in Northern Ireland, and about salt. I recommend that he reads a book called “Material World: A Substantial Story of Our Past and Future” by Ed Conway, if he has not already done so; it includes a whole chapter on salt and how important it is for the world, which is fascinating.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes) talked sensibly about the south-west and the opportunities that can come from critical minerals. He talked about the Camborne School of Mines, and about what more we can do on skills. I will come to that later.

The spokesperson for the Lib Dems, the hon. Member for St Ives (Andrew George), made a thoughtful speech, a lot of which I agreed with. I think he will be pleased with what we have done. He referenced, as did the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for North West Norfolk (James Wild), the previous Government’s strategy. That strategy was brought in by Kwasi Kwarteng—remember him?—who a couple of months later became the ill-fated Chancellor of the Exchequer; he probably looks back on that strategy with some wistfulness about what he managed to achieve.

What I would say about the previous Government’s strategy is that it included a lot of, “We would like to do more of this”, “We want to do a little bit more of that”, and “We would like to encourage this”, but it did not set any particular targets, or have any deliverables or accountability. In fact, the Foreign Affairs Committee criticised it for its lack of ambition and progress; I think that speaks for itself.

The hon. Member for North West Norfolk made a slightly bizarre speech, in which he referenced the 18 critical minerals. There was an announcement last week, which has been referenced by several Members, that there are no longer 18 but 34 critical minerals. I know it is difficult being in opposition—there is a lot less support than there is in government—but I would expect the shadow Minister to be up to date on these things.

The shadow Minister also raised the electric vehicle mandates. To be clear, the previous Government pushed back the ultimate target from 2030 to 2035, but did not push back any of the stage posts by which car manufacturers had to reach that target. He said that this Government have tied themselves in knots, but the reality is that we have inherited those knots; they are the problems that we are now dealing with. We are having to consult on and look again at some of the issues, because the car manufacturers are crying out for support.

Everybody who has spoken talked about how important critical minerals are for the industries of tomorrow and how much more we will need them in the future. Whether it is in advanced manufacturing, clean energy, defence or digital technologies, we know that we will need more. Last week, the Critical Minerals Intelligence Centre published its latest list of critical minerals, increasing the number from 18 to 34 and adding the likes of nickel, aluminium and titanium to the UK’s criticality list. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth was very pleased that tin is now on the list as well. I thank the British Geological Survey, which runs this process, for the task it undertook, and for its vital work looking at the volume and variety of materials and minerals needed for our economic growth and clean energy ambitions.

Economic growth is the absolute driving force of this Government, which is why we have published our industrial strategy Green Paper and will publish the final industrial strategy in the spring. It will bring stability and a long-term plan, and will break down all barriers to growth, including skills, technology and R&D. It will be the blueprint for growth in our most important sectors. If growth is the vehicle that gets us to a pro-innovation, pro-worker, pro-jobs economy, then critical minerals is the fuel at the heart of that strategy.

I am pleased to confirm that the Department for Business and Trade will publish a critical minerals strategy next year, which will support the industries of tomorrow, explicitly target UK strengths, articulate the impacts on people’s lives, deliver for businesses and create new jobs across the country. The strategy will be ambitious. I want it to set targets. It will cover domestic production, the circular economy, the UK’s future demand, international partnerships, and responsible and transparent supply chains. In partnership with our stakeholders, we will consider the best way to track progress to ensure that we can be held to account for delivering on our promises.

Starting with domestic production, I know that in Cornwall and Devon we have several promising lithium, tungsten and tin mines seeking to restart commercial production, which we have talked about at length. Since coming to power, we have seen progress made across multiple projects, including Imerys British Lithium, Tungsten West and Cornish Metals. Already we have seen interest from overseas, with like-minded allies partnering with UK projects, as represented by Rio Tinto’s strategic partnership with Green Lithium, the low-carbon lithium refinery in Teesside.

One key tool is the national wealth fund, which we announced within days of coming to office. The national wealth fund recognises the importance of a secure supply of critical minerals and has a clear mandate to support them, as evidenced by its £24 million investment in Cornish Lithium.

[Andrew George]

I am grateful to the Minister; it is enormously helpful to hear her respond to these matters. She will have picked up the question I raised earlier about the national wealth fund and the fact that smaller projects, particularly those at the critical exploration stage, feel that they cannot take advantage of it. Is the Minister prepared to investigate that further?

[Sarah Jones]

I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for his intervention. Yes, I have been making a list of issues to look at as we go through the strategy; that is certainly one, and there are several more.

With our new strategy, we want to see more success stories right across the UK, from Cornwall to County Durham and beyond. Indeed, as I have said, the new strategy will represent all four nations of the UK. In Wales, the Royal Mint can now recycle electronic waste to recover critical minerals. In Northern Ireland, Ionic Technologies delivered a successful feasibility study for its rare earth oxides facility in Belfast. In Scotland, we have seen a resurgence in mineral exploration for nickel, lithium, manganese and more.

As has been said, the UK boasts some of the largest lithium reserves in Europe. Industry forecasts reveal that by 2030 the UK may be able to produce 50,000 tonnes of lithium every year for 20 years. To put that into perspective, that would meet over half of the UK’s demand for electric vehicle batteries. Beyond lithium, the UK possesses the world’s largest platinum group metal refinery in the form of Johnson Matthey in Royston, as well as the only western source of rare earth alloys in the form of Less Common Metals in Cheshire. I hope that paints the picture of the growth potential for critical minerals. Unlocking this potential will require policy support as well as private investment, which is why our strategy will seek to attract billions of pounds in international investment.

We all know that we cannot refine or mine our way into meeting the huge quantities of minerals that not only the UK, but the whole world, requires. That is why the strategy will place greater emphasis on making the most out of the minerals that surround us—in other words, recycling critical minerals for industrial batteries and wind turbines. Analysts say that EV battery recycling alone could provide almost half the required battery minerals by 2040. We have set up a critical minerals ministerial group, which is jointly chaired by me and the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Our new critical minerals strategy will drive ambitious reform to promote recycling and the retention of critical minerals within the UK economy.

In the meantime, I am delighted that the recycling of battery minerals is now in scope of the automotive transformation fund. It is great to see innovative businesses like Altilium benefiting from that funding by working to bring critical minerals recovery from lithium-ion black mass to the UK. Beyond battery minerals, the UK is building on its world-leading R&D strengths. In September, Innovate UK awarded £3.5 million to nine UK projects, working to increase the security of supply of rare earth elements as part of the climates fund.

Our strategy will be underpinned by data, mapping out UK industry demand for critical minerals. DBT is partnering with the Critical Minerals Association, the Materials Processing Institute and Frazer-Nash Consultancy to evaluate the opportunity for increased recycling and midstream processes to take place on these shores. We will also make use of the Critical Minerals Intelligence Centre and its forthcoming foresight studies detailing demand in key technologies.

Even with increased domestic production in the UK, the reality is that we will still need diverse and resilient international supply chains to drive industrial growth, and we have debated this morning the impact of a small number of countries providing the vast majority of our supply. We will deepen our international collaboration through a more targeted approach, working with big trading partners, like-minded mining nations and producer countries. We also intend to work through multilateral initiatives, including the Minerals Security Partnership, to secure the critical minerals needed to realise our growth mission. In that context, I welcome the fact that UK Export Finance has had an expanded mandate since the Budget to finance overseas critical minerals projects that secure supply for the UK’s high-growth export industries. We must be mindful of the importance of responsible mining. Apart from anything else, a responsible supply chain is a much more resilient one, and that must be embedded into everything we do.

My hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth and I are both speaking today and tomorrow at Europe’s largest conference on critical minerals, which is taking place right here in London. That is no surprise, because the UK is the global hub for mining finance. The UK’s markets are some of the strongest and deepest globally, and the Government are committed to building on those strong foundations to ensure that they continue to deliver for firms and investors, supporting growth, including through our reforms to the UK listing rules. We will continue to work with our friends and partners in industry to ensure that the city plays a leading role in promoting investment into clean critical minerals projects at home.

I praise my hon. Friend the Member for St Austell and Newquay (Noah Law) for his speech. He chairs the all-party parliamentary group and brings a huge wealth of knowledge to this place. In particular, he focused on skills, and on the importance of Skills England and ensuring that all the strategies are joined up. The industrial strategy, Skills England and our critical minerals strategy all need to feed into the same outcome: to secure jobs and growth for our communities and our people.

In conclusion, the Government are serious about the opportunities that critical minerals will bring to our country; they will fuel the next 10 years of innovation, clean growth and economic renewal. I look forward to working closely with industry—which I am already engaging with and talking to—and academia, as we develop our strategy and make our ambitions a reality.

Post Office Horizon Scandal

Andrew George Excerpts

Thursday 18th July 2024 Commons Chamber

[Justin Madders]

I thank the hon. Member for his question. He makes an important point. Justice is one side of the coin, but there is also accountability for what has happened. A lot of people want to see that: not just those directly affected, but everyone who has been outraged by the years of inertia and obfuscation that we have seen in this scandal. The purpose of the inquiry is to get to the heart of who knew what, who did what and who did not do what they should have done, and whether individuals should take some responsibility for their actions. I have no doubt that, when those recommendations are released, we will want to see some very swift action on the back of that.

[Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)]

I was privileged to be one of those MPs who, a decade ago, was campaigning on this issue in Parliament with the now Lord Arbuthnot and campaigning on cases in my constituency—people had been treated appallingly. Those people have not yet received compensation. If there is going to be any kind of delay in compensation to those who have suffered, is there any way that early, interim payments can be made to those who need the support now and certainly before too long?

[Justin Madders]

I thank the hon. Member for his question, and join him in praising Lord Arbuthnot’s work in this area. As of 31 May, £222 million has already been paid out in compensation. There have actually been significant interim payments as well. We understand that, while this is a very large scheme, it is important that we get early payments, so I assure the hon. Member that interim payments are a very large part of this programme.