Steel Industry

Debate between Iain Wright and Andy Sawford

Wednesday 14th January 2015 Commons Chamber

[Mr Iain Wright (Hartlepool) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House recognises the importance of the UK steel industry including as a provider of highly-skilled jobs and research and development; values the steel supply chain which supports strategic industries such as automotive, aerospace and construction; notes with concern Tata’s proposed sale of its Long Products Division and the impact this could have on UK steel industry capacity; welcomes the efforts of UK steel producers to cut carbon emissions and expresses concern that losing trade to countries with less efficient processes could increase global carbon emissions; further notes with concern that some steel imports do not meet British standards; calls on the Government to recognise the importance of the steel industry and to work with it, the Scottish and Welsh Governments and trade unions to provide a co-ordinated plan for the industry’s future; urges the Government urgently to reconsider whether mitigating measures on energy prices, planned to start in April 2016, can be brought forward to support the competitiveness of UK steel producers, to press the European Commission to launch an inquiry into the CARES certification of imported steel products to ensure safety and traceability and to take action through the EU and World Trade Organisation to challenge the uncompetitive subsidisation of steel products; and further calls on the Government to introduce an active industrial policy for the metals industry, including strengthening supply chains, strategic approaches to public sector procurement, encouraging innovation, skills development and resource efficiency and providing support for steel exporters.

Manufacturing matters if Britain wishes to have a modern, dynamic and innovative economy. A vibrant manufacturing sector is vital to an economy that wishes to prioritise high value and secure jobs and improved productivity, and to see rising living standards for all. In turn, the steel industry is vital to the future competitiveness and flexibility of British manufacturing.

This is not a debate that harks back to an industrial past, although I am proud to say from the Dispatch Box that I come from a family of steelworkers. Both my grandfathers, Jimmy Wright and Alan Harland, were steelworkers for most of their working lives at the British Steel site in Hartlepool.

However, this debate is not about the past. It is focused on the future—on our long-term competitiveness as a leading economic nation and on what is needed to secure our place as one of the top-ranking economies in the 21st century. Steel has to be a key part of that vision of a modern, innovative economy. As our motion makes clear, the UK’s steel and metals sector provides highly skilled jobs in all parts of the United Kingdom, from Hartlepool and Teesside in God’s own country of the north-east to, among others, Sheffield and Scunthorpe; Corby; Deeside in north Wales; Cardiff, Port Talbot and Newport in south Wales; and Clydebridge and Motherwell in Scotland.

The economic contribution that those facilities make through the wealth that is created by the plants and the workers who make the steel, and the way in which that wealth is then circulated around firms and businesses in those areas, whether through the supply chain or the spending power of the steelworkers, is the foundation of many local economies. Indeed, we should stress that the steel industry is literally the foundation of many valuable sectors of the economy, forming part of a number of important value chains in manufacturing—the construction, automotive, aerospace and energy sectors, in which Britain has a competitive advantage and which all play a significant role in downstream activities for the steel industry.

[Andy Sawford (Corby) (Lab/Co-op)]

As someone who is also from a family of steelworkers, it is good to hear my hon. Friend speak strongly about the traditions of the industry as well as its important contribution today. Will he join me in thanking the Community union, particularly its president, Dougie Fairbairn, who is from Corby and a very strong ambassador for Corby steelworks? We are not part of the long products division that we are focusing on today, but we recognise that we need to fight for the future of the steel industry, whichever part we are in.

[Mr Wright]

I thank my hon. Friend for mentioning Community, which is a fantastic trade union that wants to secure the long-term viability of the steel industry and is working hard to make sure that that happens. Its keenness to work with the work force, with management and with Government to ensure that we have a future in the UK steel industry is second to none, and I pay tribute to it.

As my hon. Friend said, this is not a sunset industry—steel cannot be seen as that. This is an industry that has, and should have, a future. Internationally, the acceleration of globalisation in the first half of this century provides rising demand for steel products, especially for long products, which I will refer to later. The World Steel Association has estimated that global steel use will rise from about 1.5 billion tonnes a year now to about 2.5 billion tonnes in 2050. Within that rising demand for steel, we see process innovation, technological developments, increasing efficiency and sustainability, and pressure to increase the added value of steel products by making them stronger, lighter in weight, less resource-intensive and more flexible in their uses and reuses. Those developments can be powerful drivers of comparative advantage for the UK steel industry.

Manufacturing (East Midlands)

Debate between Iain Wright and Andy Sawford

Tuesday 12th February 2013 Westminster Hall

[Mr Wright]

I shall come on to that important characteristic of the east midlands economy. I mentioned the important success of Rolls-Royce, but it would be wrong to think of the east midlands as a one-company region. Every hon. Member who contributed today, including you, Mr Hollobone, highlighted successful manufacturing firms in their constituencies, and it is important to do so.

[Andy Sawford]

The largest employer in my constituency is RS Components. One of its great features, and I am sure a great feature of Rolls-Royce and the many other companies that have been mentioned, is the way that it contributes to the local community, adding additional value though fundraising, supporting schools and so on. Will my hon. Friend congratulate our industries across the east midlands on that?

[Mr Wright]

I certainly will. An important characteristic of a good and responsible company is that it realises that it is part of a community, not isolated from it, and contributes, not only directly by providing employment, but to social good.

The hon. Member for South Derbyshire mentioned Toyota, an important manufacturer for not only the region, but the UK. I am looking forward to visiting the Toyota plant next Tuesday—I am giving her advance notice—to see the investment recently pumped into building the new Auris model. The investment in the new plant totals £100 million, and is creating an extra 1,500 jobs, with a further £85 million spent in the local supply chain.

The shape of the region’s economy is distinctive. It is particularly strong on mid-sized businesses that are crucial to the growing specialisation and increased productivity that manufacturing requires. The Mittelstand in Germany is often cited as a reason why the German economy is so successful, and if there is an equivalent in the UK, I suggest that it is in the east midlands. Mid-sized firms employ 290,000 people in the region. I agree with the conclusion in Grant Thornton’s report on the mid-sized business sector:

“MSBs—many of the East Midlands’ and UK’s most dynamic organisations—are integral to the recovery prospects and long-term health of the British and local economy.”

Within that, Government’s role is to provide a framework in which businesses can flourish, and to provide resources—whether by sector, by region, or nationally—so that businesses can realise their potential and enhance our competitiveness.

I therefore have a number of questions for the Minister. My first is on how Government procurement can help manufacturers and their supply chains. I am pleased to see my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North here, because he has been a strong champion of Bombardier. We are all aware of it, because it is probably the most vivid example of Government procurement policy failing British manufacturing. The Department for Transport looks specifically at price, rather than thinking about wider value to the supply chain; that illustrates that the Government do not seem to be joined up. What has the Minister learned from the Bombardier example? How can procurement back British manufacturing? I do not believe in protectionism at all, but we can have patriotism in procurement policy to create, as my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North said, a level playing field for British companies. Other nations do it; we should too.