Backing Business to Create Economic Growth
Chris Coghlan Excerpts(3 weeks, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Chris Coghlan (Dorking and Horley) (LD)
Last year I attended the funeral of my step-grandmother, Diana Faure Walker. I adored her, and I was so proud that she had been decorated in the war for her service as a nurse after D-day. She believed that Britain was a hope for the world. That was not naive idealism, but the resolve of the generation who won the war.
Today, liberal democracy in Europe is under threat from a dictator again, and too many of our generation are turning to fear. We are facing a Reform party Government, consisting of the same people who cost us £100 billion a year with the Brexit vote. Put them in government and the current chaos will seem like nothing. But there are still three years until the next election: enough time to set a new national mission, achieved with a new economic model to bring new hope. Of course we must restore economic relations with Europe, but we must also dramatically increase defence research and development to power economic growth and defend liberal democracy.
Academics now agree that the economic dominance of the United States is powered by public research and development, especially in defence. It was through American and British research and development that we learned how to mass-produce penicillin, which saved thousands of lives after D-day, yet for the last 30 years we have failed to use at scale the No. 1 policy to maximise growth. The Government have made some progress, but today we spend £22 billion a year on public research and development while the fastest-growing advanced economies spend double that.
The Government are rightly concerned about more borrowing, but we can remove most of the credit risk for defence research and development borrowing by issuing bonds jointly with our European and Canadian allies. We should follow the advice of Draghi, the former president of the European Central Bank, who urges the EU to reduce debt by borrowing for R&D at scale. Even with additional borrowing, the debt-to-GDP ratio falls as growth takes off.
Sir John Hayes
The hon. Gentleman is making a powerful point, which relates closely to an intervention that I made a few moments ago. If we are really to address the productivity gap, two things are essential: R&D, which breeds innovation to make our economy more efficient and effective, and investment in skills—particularly high-level skills, but skills across the board. Neither of those elements is emphasised in the King’s Speech. The hon. Gentleman clearly thinks they should be, and so do I.
Chris Coghlan
I entirely agree.
Imagine where scaling up defence research and development could lead our country. In three years’ time we could have a resurgent economy and Putin defeated. Together with our European, Canadian and Ukrainian allies, we could have defended liberal democracy. As I left my grandmother’s funeral, they played Fred Astaire’s “The Way You Look Tonight”, a song that she loved and danced to with British soldiers. The hope of that generation lives in us.
Royal Mail: Universal Service Obligation
Chris Coghlan Excerpts(7 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Sir Ashley Fox
If the hon. Gentleman stays, he will find that I answer most of those points in the remainder of my speech. Since 1840, the principle of the USO has been simple: everyone in the United Kingdom, no matter where they live, should have access to a reliable and affordable postal service. It is a promise of fairness. If I post a letter in Bridgwater, it costs the same to deliver to an address in Inverness as it does to one down the road in Taunton.
Chris Coghlan (Dorking and Horley) (LD)
I fully agree with the USO, but in some postcodes in my constituency 20% of first-class mail is delivered late. In Buckland, there is no mail service at all when the postlady is on holiday. Does the hon. Member agree that the Government must work with Royal Mail to improve service?
Sir Ashley Fox
Indeed. The hon. Gentleman will find that if only 20% do not get next-day delivery, they are doing better than average; that does not speak highly of Royal Mail. Since I was elected last year, many of my constituents have told me that Royal Mail is not working as it should. After hearing those concerns first hand, I visited the sorting office in Bridgwater.
In January, I ran a sample survey to ascertain the scale of the problem in my constituency. I ensured that each town and village was sampled, as I wanted to ensure that every area was covered. I had hundreds of responses. Only one in three got a delivery every day; 15% said they received post once a week or less frequently.
In North Petherton, a constituent repeatedly received a bundle of letters delivered once a week, with no Royal Mail van spotted during the rest of the week. I had a report of no deliveries in Othery for more than a fortnight. My constituents had to travel to the sorting office in Bridgwater to collect post personally. In Cossington, a constituent’s weekend magazine subscription went missing for seven weeks in a row. No one area had a wholly good or wholly bad service. In Burnham-on-Sea, 48% of respondents gave Royal Mail 10 out of 10 for reliability of service, and 30% gave it zero out of 10.
It seems that if a household is on a route with a good postie, it gets a great service, but if that route is not allocated, the letters sit in the rack for days on end with nothing happening. That is simply bad management.