Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Christopher Pincher

Main Page: Christopher Pincher (Independent - Tamworth)

Oral Answers to Questions

Christopher Pincher Excerpts
Thursday 3rd April 2014

(10 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Ed Davey Portrait Mr Davey
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that question; that is exactly what we did in 2010. Since then, we have seen a boom in the number and size of independent suppliers taking on the big six that Labour created. As Ofgem and the competition authorities’ assessment makes clear, however, we need to see more progress. That is why I am strongly behind the market investigation reference.

Christopher Pincher Portrait Christopher Pincher (Tamworth) (Con)
- Hansard - -

There is already a cash gap between what the big six are planning to spend on infrastructure and the amount that needs to be spent. Does my right hon. Friend agree that a price freeze would serve only to discourage competition, which would reduce investment and place a greater burden on the taxpayer and the consumer?

Ed Davey Portrait Mr Davey
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and this point is not discussed enough. When we talk to the industry, and to investors in the UK and internationally, they tell us that one of the things they fear most from Labour’s price freeze is that it would prevent them from going ahead with the investments that they want to make. A price freeze would undermine investment; it would represent a lurch back to the ’70s. Let us look around Europe to see what has happened when price freezes have been implemented. Hungary implemented a price freeze—indeed, a price cut—recently, and investment there has plummeted. All that is needed is a grasp of standard economics, but the Labour party does not appear to have even that.