Liz Kendall
Main Page: Liz Kendall (Labour - Leicester West)Department Debates - View all Liz Kendall's debates with the Cabinet Office
(1 day, 5 hours ago)
Commons Chamber
Ian Sollom (St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire) (LD)
Our world-leading universities and the research that they do are crucial to economic growth. On average, every £1 of public research and development investment generates £8 in economic benefits for the UK over the longer term. That is why this Government are investing £86 billion over the spending review period—the largest ever investment in R&D made by any Government—to support our best and brightest researchers, boost jobs and growth, and back the long-term success of the UK.
Ian Sollom
I thank the Secretary of State for her answer. The UK’s universities do indeed produce world-class research, but I would suggest that we are still missing too many opportunities in commercialisation. The Government’s proof of concept fund is really quite inadequate—from the figures, it is 30 times oversubscribed—and equity and intellectual property arrangements are laborious and deter both investors and entrepreneurs. Will the Secretary of State commit to expanding that proof of concept funding and reforming those barriers that hold back university spin-outs?
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to say that we do not lack in great ideas or great start-ups in this country. We need to support them better to scale up, and that is what the Government are doing across a range of sectors. The hon. Gentleman can look at the actions we are taking on UK pension schemes, to get them to invest more in UK companies, and in the Treasury and across the board. I am sure there is more we can do, but it is absolutely at the top of our agenda.
The Business and Trade Committee recently visited the remarkable new Cavendish laboratory in Cambridge, and the key issue that came up was the balance between research funding going to post-doctorates and to PhD students. It is a complicated, niche issue, but would the Minister arrange for me, UK Research and Innovation and the appropriate people to meet, to try to resolve this long-running issue?
I absolutely will arrange for my hon. Friend to meet the relevant Minister and UKRI to make sure we get this right, because we have to do more to back our world-leading researchers and then turn that research into innovation and future growth. That is the first part of the journey, and we want to—and will—get it right.
The UK life sciences sector is one of our greatest national assets in not only saving lives, but driving jobs, growth and innovation. The sector has been projected to grow by £41 billion across the UK by 2030, employing an extra 100,000 people. Our life sciences sector plan will help us seize this potential and secure our ambition to be Europe’s leading life sciences economy by 2030 and the third most important globally by 2035.
In Llanelli, we are eagerly watching the Swansea Bay city deal-funded Pentre Awel complex nearing completion, where it is planned that life sciences will be a central focus in partnership with universities such as Cardiff, Swansea and Trinity Saint David. What assurances can the Secretary of State give me that life sciences will be a top investment priority for this Government and help us to create the good, high-quality jobs that we want in the area?
My hon. Friend has my absolute assurance that backing our brilliant life sciences sector, universities and companies is a top priority for this Government. Alongside our support for the Swansea Bay city deal, which, as she says, includes life sciences and wellbeing, we have a £520 million life sciences innovative manufacturing fund, which is currently open for bids across all four nations. I know that she will be championing her brilliant businesses for part of that support.
The patent box and full capital expensing are Conservative policies introduced to back the life sciences sector, and they are absolutely vital to the country’s future long-term prosperity. Will the Secretary of State commit to protecting these policies at the Budget from a Chancellor desperate to fix the public finances with short-term cuts and fixes?
I absolutely support all measures that back innovation, and despite what the hon. Gentleman says, I know that the Chancellor wants to do that too. It is the innovators, entrepreneurs and businesses that create jobs and growth in this country, and we are determined to do even more, particularly in these crucial sectors for the future.
I welcome the Government’s new strategy on replacing animals in science, which was published yesterday. Will the Secretary of State commit to enshrining the targets in the strategy in law, so that industry, campaigners and the wider public have the certainty they need that this Government will move as fast as possible to end unnecessary animal testing?
I am very proud of the fact that we have published the strategy, delivering on one of our crucial manifesto commitments. My hon. Friend can rest assured that patience is not one of my greatest virtues, and I want to see it implemented and delivered as quickly as possible.
I am chair of the all-party parliamentary group on life sciences, so I know only too well that the industry, which has hitherto been a jewel in our crown, has been struggling to justify further such investment in our economy. Could I press the Secretary of State further on her answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Havant (Alan Mak), and ask her to reassure the House that she has put in a specific, ambitious and vigorous proposal to the Treasury in advance of the Budget to recognise that the life sciences industry is taking more risks than other kinds of investors?
Patience may not be my middle name, but I consider that—hopefully—specific, ambitious and vigorous are part of my character. There is no route to future growth in this country without science and technology, particularly with life sciences at the core, and I and the Minister for Science in the other place, Lord Vallance, are straining every sinew. There are challenges in our life sciences sector, but we are determined to back those world-leading companies, for British patients and for the British economy.
Josh Fenton-Glynn (Calder Valley) (Lab)
The Government are determined to seize the opportunities that new technology brings, but to do that we must protect our children online and protect our critical national infrastructure from technological threats, too. That is why, today, we are tabling an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill, so that we can crack down on the use of AI to depict child abuse, and why we are introducing our new cyber-security and resilience Bill to modernise the law and keep vital services safe.
Josh Fenton-Glynn
On 20 October, a phone mast serving thousands of people in Hebden Bridge and Mytholmroyd was removed without warning, cutting O2, Vodafone and Three coverage. Residents were told that they would be disconnected until April. It was only through the intervention of Baroness Lloyd and I that a temporary fix was found—after three weeks. Given the essential role of mobile services in our communities, this removal impacted businesses, GPs, safeguarding and many more areas. Our mobile phones have become a utility and they are regulated—
Mobile services are essential to communities, and it is not good enough that the mast in my hon. Friend’s constituency was decommissioned without warning. Prompt action by my Department ensured that services were restored by 7 November, and Virgin Media O2 and VodafoneThree have assured us that customers will be compensated. I am sure that my hon. Friend will continue to champion his constituents’ needs.
It is very tempting to ask the Secretary of State whether she is on Team Wes or Team Keir, but from the sounds of it today, she is on Team 4% Kendall. I will ask instead about one of the Prime Minister’s most cynical bloopers: mandatory digital ID. The Prime Minister says that mandatory digital ID will curb illegal migration. By how much will it do so by the end of this Parliament?
I am proudly on Team UK, as are the other Members on the Government Benches. That is why we are focused on creating jobs and growth in every part of the country, backing Britain’s best researchers and innovators, and modernising our public services using the power of tech, AI and digital ID. These are the British public’s priorities; it is a pity that Opposition Members are not focused on them.
Team UK, not Team Keir—I understand. The whole mandatory ID scheme hangs on the promise to curb illegal migration, but the Secretary of State can provide no numbers on that—not a percentage or even a range. Labour has already made employing Brits harder and more expensive, and now people will not be able to get a job if they resist a mandatory digital identity that will not stop the boats. Did the Prime Minister take this project away from the Secretary of State because he has no faith in her, or because she cannot bear to repeat his guff?
Digital ID will modernise the state and public services to better meet people’s needs, fit services around them and help to tackle illegal immigration, which is what the British public want and need to see. It is right that the Cabinet Office and my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister are leading this vital cross-Government programme. When it is implemented and when services are fitted around people—[Interruption.] The hon. Lady is chuntering from a sedentary position, Mr Speaker, but it is precisely in order to modernise the state that we are doing this. Unless she is focused on the future, the hon. Lady’s party will remain stuck in the past.
James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)
I am happy to look into what my hon. Friend says in more detail. He knows that our post-16 education and skills White Paper sets out our vision and plan for universities, including record investment from my Department into research and development, and protecting the strategic priorities grant for science, technology, engineering and maths subjects. There is more that we can do, and I am happy to discuss it with him further.
Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)