All 3 Debates between Mark Field and Vince Cable

Directors’ Pay

Debate between Mark Field and Vince Cable
Wednesday 20th June 2012

(12 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Vince Cable Portrait Vince Cable
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That is a perfectly correct statement of the balance we are trying to strike. We want investors and shareholders to be actively involved. In order to be so, they need to know what is going on and to have other information. I fully acknowledge that indirectly that has some regulatory impact. We have tried to strike the correct balance, and I believe we have done so.

Mark Field Portrait Mark Field (Cities of London and Westminster) (Con)
- Hansard - -

The Secretary of State is right to identify the deep public distaste not just for rewards for failure but for general rewards for those who are not in any meaningful way risk-takers or entrepreneurs. How will he judge whether the policy has been a success over the next three years? When we are sitting here in June 2015, on what basis will he see today as a success?

Vince Cable Portrait Vince Cable
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman is right to stress that we are talking not just about reward for failure but about the general escalation of the pay of top executives unrelated to company performance. It is not likely that we could produce a simple metric of how the policy will work through, but if annual or tri-annual reviews of policy are successfully implemented across companies, with well informed shareholders exercising their votes, I think that in a few years’ time we will see a good deal of restraint and more strategic thinking in the setting of pay policies. That is what we are trying to achieve.

Sunday Trading (London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games) Bill [Lords]

Debate between Mark Field and Vince Cable
Monday 30th April 2012

(12 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Vince Cable Portrait Vince Cable
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

They will not have to. We are discussing how individual workers can opt out, should they wish to do so or have a conscience, and to make that as easy as possible for them. As I will say later, though, there will be many opportunities across the UK, not just in London, for people to enjoy the benefits of the games.

Mark Field Portrait Mark Field (Cities of London and Westminster) (Con)
- Hansard - -

I have some sympathy with the point made by the hon. Member for Telford (David Wright), but will the Secretary of State explain the difficulties there would have been with introducing a hybrid Bill, making exceptions for particular parts of London and other areas where the Olympics will be held? In comparison, this Bill will provide for a temporary measure that could apply to the whole of the UK but which, obviously, is unlikely to be utilised in areas outside where the Olympics will take place.

Vince Cable Portrait Vince Cable
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Undoubtedly, there are practical difficulties in defining geographical boundaries, but actually that is not the real reason. The reason is that we believe that the whole of the UK will benefit, and we want the potential benefits of flexibility in the retail sector to apply.

--- Later in debate ---
Vince Cable Portrait Vince Cable
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I will take two more interventions, one from each side of the House. I am sure that other Members who wish to ask questions will be able to ask them during the main part of the debate.

Mark Field Portrait Mark Field
- Hansard - -

I think many of us feel that, 25 years ago or thereabouts, we reached a sensible compromise over Sunday trading, which would benefit smaller businesses while imposing certain restrictions on the large supermarket chains. I support the Bill, especially because the west end shopping organisations desperately want its provisions to be adopted. However, I fear that the lobbying has been carried out solely by the largest supermarkets. I broadly support what those supermarkets do in general, but does the Secretary of State recognise that there is an overwhelming feeling that they not only maintain a dominant position in many of our high streets, but will use the Bill as a precedent for the future?

Office for Fair Access

Debate between Mark Field and Vince Cable
Monday 20th February 2012

(12 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Vince Cable Portrait Vince Cable
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Yes, he will. He has been given additional resources in order to do his job properly. The issue on which my hon. Friend focuses, under-representation of at least some ethnic groups, is a particular focus of the letter that I, together with the Universities Minister, sent to the previous director as something that he should work on.

Mark Field Portrait Mark Field (Cities of London and Westminster) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Given that the Secretary of State feels that it is his role to intervene in these matters, will he tell us how many pupils who qualify for free school meals should be going to Oxbridge by the end of Professor Ebdon’s tenure? If that number is not reached, will he intervene yet again on Professor Ebdon?

Vince Cable Portrait Vince Cable
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I have not intervened beyond making the appointment, and Professor Ebdon has clear terms of reference. But since the hon. Gentleman has set out a standard, let me remind him and other colleagues of the current position. Pupils from independent schools are 55 times more likely to go to Oxbridge than children with free school meals. That is the imbalance that we are trying to address.