Debate on the Address

Martin Vickers Excerpts

Wednesday 13th May 2026 Commons Chamber

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to take part in this King’s Speech debate. I join with others in congratulating the hon. Members for Bradford West (Naz Shah) and for Harlow (Chris Vince) on the way they spoke earlier.

I want to focus in particular on the proposals to nationalise British Steel. My constituency takes in a part of the Scunthorpe steelworks site. Many hundreds of my constituents work in the industry, with many more working in the supply chain. It is worth noting that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government estimates that closure of the steelworks could equate to a loss in economic output in northern Lincolnshire of £802 million over the next five years.

As a Conservative, it is not natural for me to speak in favour of nationalisation; it is somewhat uncomfortable in many respects. However, the present situation—Jingye still owns the site, but Ministers and appointed officials manage it—is clearly not sustainable, and it is difficult to see any other alternative in the short term.

The hon. Member for Milton Keynes Central (Emily Darlington) spoke about the privatisations of the Thatcher years, and it is certainly the case that some of them need refining; certainly they need better regulating. It is worth noting, however, that for 13 years, between 1997 and 2010, the Labour party was in power and could have done something about those privatised companies. I think the big fault with the privatisation process was not the actual process initially, but what followed, with many companies now in foreign ownership and poorly regulated.

I want to comment on the EU reset that was proposed in the speech. I am an ardent Brexiteer. I am old enough to have voted to leave the EU—or the common market as it was then—in 1975, so my credentials in that respect are pretty good. I have no objection in principle to resetting our arrangements with Europe; clearly, we need to trade with Europe and we need good working relationships there. However, I would just warn Government Members that EU procurement rules and over-regulation will not be helpful to much of our industry.

If we are to remain a manufacturing nation—I share the view held by Members across the House that that should be the case—we need a domestic steel industry. As I have said in the House on previous occasions when we have discussed the steel industry, if we are going to maintain a domestic steel sector, which we must, there will be a cost to the taxpayer. Whether that is through subsidy or through nationalisation, the cost will certainly be there.

Scunthorpe thrives on the steelworks; as I have mentioned, 3,000 to 4,000 people work there, and many more work in the supply chain. Although I was born in Cleethorpes, I moved to Grimsby at the age of five, when my parents were allocated a council house, which they thought, quite rightly, was magnificent. In Grimsby, I lived through the decline of the deep-sea fishing industry, which means I am very aware of how such a decline can affect a town and its people. I subsequently went to work as the constituency agent for the current Father of the House in Gainsborough, which was in a similar situation at that time; the two big engineering companies had closed, and the inevitable downturn resulted. I do not want that to be repeated in Scunthorpe and the surrounding area.

I am grateful to the Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, the hon. Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald), for contacting me on Monday and going through the proposals. I hope that when Ministers wind up these debates, they will give an assurance not only that the Government are committed to the steel industry, but that they will ensure that the blast furnaces now in Scunthorpe remain operational until electric arc furnaces are up and running.

I will move on to one or two other items. We heard from the hon. Member for Newport West and Islwyn (Ruth Jones) that the Great British Railways Bill will transform the railway network. I suggest that transformation will cost money and that taking the private sector out of the railway industry will mean the taxpayer has to find yet more money, which may well result from Government borrowing.

The other hit that my local economy has taken recently has been the closure of the Prax Lindsey oil refinery at Killingholme, near Immingham. That, again, has led to the local economy taking a really serious hit in recent months. We have heard oil mentioned today. I urge the Government to look again at the licences for the North sea.

I would also like to talk about local government, as I see no mention in the King’s Speech of how we are going to improve local government services. I was a councillor for 26 years; I worked for 14 of those years on Grimsby borough council, which was in the two-tier system, followed by another 12 years at the North East Lincolnshire unitary authority. I support the changes to unitary authorities as a gradual process, but I suggest to the Government that local government reform as it is proceeding at the moment is just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic—it is not dealing with the serious business of the services that local government provides. The hon. Member for Dewsbury and Batley (Iqbal Mohamed) spoke earlier about basic council services—cutting grass, maintaining parks and libraries, and the like. I see no way in which this is likely to change. If we are to create a vision and make people want to be part of their local communities to a much greater extent, local authorities can play a major part in doing that, but they need resources.

I remember the days when even the lamp posts in Grimsby had the coat of arms on them. Now we have street furniture all over the place, but it is just basic grey steel. The place begins to look a mess. If we are going to tidy up our towns and improve the public realm, it is vital that local authorities have resources, but I do not see the Government looking seriously at ways to improve that.

Middle East

Martin Vickers Excerpts

Monday 2nd March 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

As I said, I took two decisions over the weekend. The second was to allow the bases to be used because of the actions of Iran and the need to protect our citizens, our nationals.

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

The Father of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), is no longer in his place, but can I put on the record my support for the words of caution that he expressed earlier? Can I turn the Prime Minister’s attention to oil supplies? It is not just about the risks to shipping; I understand from contacts in the industry that some refineries in the region are shutting down. Clearly, that could have a serious impact on business in this country. Could the Prime Minister assure us that contingency arrangements are in hand to maximise oil supplies?

China and Japan

Martin Vickers Excerpts

Monday 2nd February 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for that question, because Japan is a key colleague and partner when it comes to defence and security, which is why, across a range of issues, we discussed what more we can do, including on GCAP.

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

In an earlier answer, the Prime Minister mentioned Scunthorpe steelworks, where hundreds of my constituents are employed. We welcome the Government’s support to date. Was he able to discuss Jingye’s ownership with his Chinese opposite number, and can he give any positive assurances to my constituents about their long-term future?

[The Prime Minister]

May I give this assurance to the hon. Member’s constituents? We absolutely believe in the importance of steel being made in this country, and that is why we took the necessary measures, on a Saturday, as he knows, in relation to steel production in his constituency.

Government Resilience Action Plan

Martin Vickers Excerpts

Tuesday 8th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster referenced the considerable spending on flood defences over the next few years. He will be aware that the port of Immingham and much of the south bank of the Humber was severely affected by a tidal surge in 2013. Although much work has been done in recent years, can he give an assurance to businesses and residents that the south bank of the Humber will remain a priority for increased flood defence expenditure?

[Pat McFadden]

We have set aside some £4 billion for investment in flood defences. The details of when and where that will be spent will be set out by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

EU-UK Summit

Martin Vickers Excerpts

Thursday 22nd May 2025 Westminster Hall

[Martin Vickers in the Chair]

[Martin Vickers (in the Chair)]

I call Sadik Al-Hassan.

[Sir John Hayes]

I was still speaking, Mr Vickers.

[Martin Vickers (in the Chair)]

Sorry—I was told you had finished, Sir John.

[Ms Creasy]

Sir John was just getting started!

[Martin Vickers (in the Chair)]

Well, none of us would want to deny ourselves the chance to listen to Sir John. Back to you.

[Sir John Hayes]

I wondered whether the hon. Member for North Somerset (Sadik Al-Hassan) was going to finish my speech for me, Mr Vickers, but I am not sure it would have been quite in the same vein as that in which I intend to continue.

We have talked a bit about the youth mobility scheme, or the youth movement scheme or the youth experience scheme—call it what you will. Of course, it is true that some young people want to go abroad, but many more young people from abroad will want to come here, and we spoke a little before you came, Mr Vickers, about the consequences of that.

Things have changed since we left the European Union. The principal change internationally has been the greater need for national economic resilience, epitomised in the covid pandemic and then the European war in Ukraine that followed. Never has it been clearer that Britain needs to become increasingly resilient, and that means protecting our industries to some degree. It certainly means manufacturing more of what we need and growing more of the food that we consume in this country. Shortening supply lines will have many benefits, environmental and other but, fundamentally, it is about taking a national view of our economic interests.

Of course Britain co-operates and collaborates with others; but, as I said to the hon. Member for Walthamstow when she opened the debate, there is a world of difference between co-operation and governance. In a sense, that has permeated considerations of this subject since we started them back in the late 1950s. For a long time, many of those who favoured European governance pretended that it was a matter of logistics rather than principles, of details rather than essentials and, as we heard again in this debate, of co-operation rather than governance. Fundamentally, however, it is about the difference between supranational Government and collaborative measures—treaties and so on—between sovereign nations. That is at the heart of this debate.

It is unfortunate that when we joined the European Union—as you will remember, Mr Vickers, because you were a campaigner against it even in those distant days—it was labelled the Common Market. There was no sense there that we would be giving up our sovereignty—no sense that it would have any effect on our political structure or system of Government. It was just a trading association.

How things have changed. I know the hon. Member for Walthamstow welcomes that change, because she fought the Brexit referendum result in an honourable, but none the less stubborn way, if I might say so. I wonder whether she is as stubborn now.

--- Later in debate ---

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

If we are not part of the emissions trading system, we will not be able to get an exemption from the carbon border adjustment mechanism, which would cost British business £800 million. If the hon. Gentleman is saying that he wants British businesses to pay those taxes, he should be honest with the electorate about it.

My hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) spoke about bringing down costs. Things such as the export health certificate—£200 per consignment —were meaning that we were talking about thousands of pounds to get some lorries to move. Those are the kinds of things that we can sweep away.

It must be said that the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney), speaking for the Liberal Democrats, provided a measure of balance to what was said by those sitting to her right. Nevertheless, I have to agree with my hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset that if the Conservatives and Reform are in one position, and the Liberal Democrats are in another, it suggests that we have got the balance absolutely right.

I will conclude because I am conscious of the time. I know that we have gone over the allotted time, Mr Vickers, and my hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow needs to sum up the debate. We have made our choice—a ruthlessly pragmatic choice in negotiation. Our choice is that we are going to lower bills and have a situation that is great for jobs. We are getting more tools and information to secure our borders. If Opposition Members wish to be against that, good luck to them.

[Martin Vickers (in the Chair)]

Before I call Stella Creasy, I point out to the Minister that he referred to the Member for Clacton by name.

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

Forgive me, Mr Vickers. I will forever reference the hon. Member for Clacton.

[Martin Vickers (in the Chair)]

I am sure he will not take offence.

Oral Answers to Questions

Martin Vickers Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

Some 2,700 workers at Scunthorpe steelworks are facing redundancy, plus many more in the supply chain, and many of those people are my constituents. It is welcome that negotiations are continuing, but whatever the outcome, the local economy is going to need significant support. All those affected would appreciate it and be reassured if the Prime Minister could give an indication that he was personally taking an interest in this matter, and if at some point in the not too distant future, he would meet me, neighbouring MPs and the council leader to discuss the way forward.

[The Prime Minister]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising that. I do take a personal interest. A short while ago, I went to Scunthorpe to talk to the management and workers to understand the challenges at first hand and how deeply worrying this will be for those working there, their families and the community as a whole, which is why negotiations are taking place. I call on the company to accept the offer of financial support that has been advanced, so that we can achieve a sustainable future for the workforce, the industry and the local community, because I believe that there is, and needs to be, a bright future for steel. As I have said, I do take a personal interest in this.

US Steel Import Tariffs

Martin Vickers Excerpts

Tuesday 11th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Alexander]

I am happy to give that assurance. I should probably declare an interest as a member of the Community trade union. I can assure the House that trade unions—whether Community, the GMB, Unite or the other representatives of steelworkers—have been a central part of the dialogue that we started in July. Frankly, we inherited a situation in which there had been significant under-investment in steel capability in the United Kingdom for many years. We are backing up that commitment to dialogue with an act of commitment to public funds, and we are doing so in dialogue with the workforce as well as with the companies themselves.

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

The Minister is quite right that we do not want a knee-jerk reaction, but I gently point out to him that this announcement should not have come as a surprise, bearing in mind the President’s comments both before and after the inauguration. Many of my constituents who work at the Scunthorpe steelworks already face an uncertain future, and this will just increase their concerns. Can the Minister give an assurance that he will report back to the House as soon as possible about the meetings that will take place over the next day or two?

[Mr Alexander]

There are plenty of opportunities for Ministers to be held accountable in relation to the dialogue that we have started, and that we continue, with steel producers in the United Kingdom.

Turning to the hon. Gentleman’s initial point about whether this announcement has come as a surprise, candidly, it has not. However, it is also fair to recognise that the new President has a speciality in generating uncertainty—part of his style of negotiations is creating uncertainty as to what will happen next. As I sought to suggest in my opening answers, we have answers on steel today, but the proclamation that emerged overnight did not give us answers on aluminium. In those circumstances, it is right and reasonable to be mindful of the statements that have been made, which I can assure the House that we were, and to undertake analysis, which I can assure the House we are also continuing to review and reach a judgment on.

At the same time, we should recognise that the date on which these tariffs come into effect is 12 March. As a consequence, there is a window of opportunity to not only engage with the workforce and the companies to ensure that we better understand exactly what they are looking for in light of these specific measures, but critically, to engage directly with the Trump Administration. That is work to which our ambassador is already turning his mind.

UK-EU Relations

Martin Vickers Excerpts

Thursday 6th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

My hon. Friend raises an important point. I am pleased that we have already increased our National Crime Agency presence at Europol. The speed with which we can share data is hugely important. When crimes are committed, those early hours and days are so important for catching those responsible. We want to work with the EU and international partners so that criminals have no place to hide on our continent.

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

Those in the fishing industry will have noted not only that the Minister did not mention fish in his statement, but that he did not respond to the question from the shadow Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Alex Burghart), about fishing. Will he give an assurance to those in the industry that there will be no sell-out—whether on fishing grounds, quotas, days at sea and so on—and that he will do absolutely nothing to worsen the industry?

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

The hon. Gentleman is right to mention fishing. I can tell him first and foremost that I will engage with the fishing industry and its representatives about the issues that they face, particularly in selling into European markets. We will of course advocate for the interests of our fishers, and ensure that we fulfil our legal obligations on the marine environment.

Oral Answers to Questions

Martin Vickers Excerpts

Wednesday 20th March 2024 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

We continue to call for Israel to respect international humanitarian law and for civilians to be protected. Too many civilians have been killed and we want Israel to take greater care to limit its operations to military targets. Those are points that both I and the Foreign Secretary have made repeatedly to Prime Minister Netanyahu. We have previously assessed that Israel is committed and capable of complying with international humanitarian law, and of course we always keep that under review.

[Martin Vickers (Cleethorpes) (Con)]

The Prime Minister will be aware of plans by National Grid to build a network of 50-metre-high pylons through much of rural Lincolnshire. This is causing much consternation, particularly in rural villages. Can my right hon. Friend assure my residents that when Ministers finally consider the consultations that come forward from National Grid, they will give sympathetic consideration to putting some of the sections underground?

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise the concerns of his constituents. He will recognise the balance we need to strike by making sure that we give our country the energy security it needs but doing it in a way that is respectful of the impact on local communities. I will make sure that Ministers take into account the concerns he raised and that all the views of local constituents are taken into account.

Cabinet Office

Martin Vickers Excerpts

Wednesday 10th January 2024 Ministerial Corrections

The following is an extract from Cabinet Office questions on 23 November 2023.

[Martin Vickers]

The renewable energy sector offers great opportunities for SMEs to become involved in the supply chain. Many of them are unaware of the public sector tenders that are out there. What are the Government doing to ensure that SMEs are made more aware of the opportunities available?