Manufacturing Skills

Richard Quigley Excerpts

Tuesday 20th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered manufacturing skills.

It is a sublime pleasure to serve under your superb chairship, Sir Christopher. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Derby South (Baggy Shanker), who, due to his giddy elevation to Parliamentary Private Secretary, has allowed me to hijack his debate and talk about the Isle of Wight. Derby has rightly received a lot of focus, so now it is our turn.

Although I will of course continue to argue that the Isle of Wight does best at everything, it would be unfair of me not to recognise what Derby does exceptionally well, whether it is trains, aerospace or the development of small modular reactors, coupled with the exciting Team Derby initiative announced in last year’s Budget. It is a city that demonstrates the value of bringing together industry, skills and investment to drive growth.

[Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)]

I am an MP for Derby—or, as our Prime Minister called it, the “great city of Derby”—which is famous for its advanced manufacturing and engineering skills. Our largest employers, such as Alstom, Rolls-Royce and Toyota, are able to invest in skills through apprenticeships. Just last week, Great British Railways, which will have its headquarters in Derby city centre, announced up to 600 new apprenticeships. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government must focus more on enabling and supporting smaller manufacturers to invest and train up new apprenticeships to address the skills shortages across the country?

[Richard Quigley]

The great city of Derby has two great MPs, and I agree entirely with my hon. Friend: the more we can do to help small businesses take on apprentices, the better. Anything that teaches people who would not go down the university route a set of skills and takes them into good paid work is absolutely ideal.

[Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)]

The challenge in my region is that foreign direct investment comes in, builds big factories and hoovers up the existing skilled workforce from local small and medium-sized enterprises, and there is not a pipeline to replace them. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is important that regional government works with the further education sector and employers to ensure that there is a proper joined-up skills system so that we do not just bring in new businesses but support our existing SMEs?

[Richard Quigley]

That is a really good point. On the Isle of Wight, we send 25% of our school leavers to university, but 25% end up not in education, employment or training. A lot of effort goes into the structure and support for getting people to university—we can see how to get to university from the moon—but we do not have the same structures around those who do not end up going to university. My hon. Friend makes the good point that we need to encourage home-grown skills.

Hon. Members are used to hearing me complain about the everyday inequalities that islanders face—do not worry, I am not going to mention ferries. However, today is a welcome opportunity to celebrate an area where the island truly punches above its weight: the advanced manufacturing sector. Per capita, the Isle of Wight has one of the highest concentrations of technology and advanced manufacturing businesses in the country. What is particularly exciting is that we are showing no signs of slowing down. New investment, growing businesses and the development of future skills are helping to ensure that the Isle of Wight remains at the forefront of advanced manufacturing for years to come.

Far from being a peripheral economy, the island is helping to shape the industries of the future and is proving that innovation can thrive in every corner of the country. Take shipbuilding as an example. Once seen as a traditional industry, it is now a showcase for advanced manufacturing. It is an industry in which the island excels. At Wight Shipyard, aluminium welding skills are among the best in the world, and Diverse Marine combines craftsmanship with cutting-edge design and innovation to produce vessels that are lighter, more space efficient and use less fuel.

That success is built on the achievements of island businesses that are leading the way in advanced manufacturing. Companies such as Vestas are helping to power the UK’s transition to clean energy through the manufacture of wind turbine blades, while GKN Aerospace and BAE Systems continue the island’s proud tradition of high-value engineering and world-class aerospace expertise. Johnson Electric develops and manufactures precision motion technologies that are integrated into products used by millions of people around the world, and Rheinmetall’s specialist vision systems provide advanced capabilities for defence and security operations across the globe.

Then there is Inflight Peripherals Ltd, a company whose design innovation reaches millions of people every year. There is a good chance that anybody who has ever sat in an aircraft cabin and plugged their headphones or a device into an in-seat power module has experienced a piece of Isle of Wight manufacturing without realising it.

Such businesses demonstrate that the Isle of Wight is not just preserving our industrial heritage, but helping to define the future of advanced manufacturing and innovation in the UK.

[Connor Naismith (Crewe and Nantwich) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend mentions some fantastic local businesses in his area, leading the way on the transition to clean power and net zero. Crewe and Nantwich is home to Bentley Motors, one of the area’s largest manufacturing employers. The company recently announced 93 early-career opportunities, including 29 apprenticeships, 15 graduate positions and 49 industrial placements, investing directly in the skills of the next generation of workers. Does my hon. Friend agree that employers such as Bentley are demonstrating the long-term commitment to skills we need to see across the country?

--- Later in debate ---

[Richard Quigley]

My hon. Friend is entirely correct. Companies such as Bentley offer good, hands-on skills that can be transferred anywhere. If the company needs someone to test drive one of its vehicles on the Isle of Wight, I am that person.

Across the Isle of Wight, manufacturers are developing specialist composites, marine technologies and precision-engineered products that are exported around the world. Those businesses do not just create jobs, they create highly skilled careers, drive innovation and demonstrate that world-class manufacturing can thrive in the UK, especially on the Isle of Wight.

Earlier this year, I was proud to welcome the Minister for Climate Transition, my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds North West (Katie White) to the Isle of Wight, where we visited investors and saw first hand the world-leading manufacturing taking place on our doorstep, helping to lead the way as the country makes the green energy transition. What excited me even more, was the announcement of the new Large Structures Innovation Centre, backed by the National Composites Centre, the High Value Manufacturing Catapult and the University of Bristol.

The centre will be an open-access national facility dedicated to developing, demonstrating and industrialising large high-performance structures, with an initial focus on next generation wind energy. The significance goes far beyond the investment. If we want Britain to remain a leader in advanced manufacturing, we need a pipeline of highly skilled engineers, technicians, fabricators and composite specialists, who can turn innovation into commercial success.

[Baggy Shanker (Derby South) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank my hon. Friend for securing the debate and for his excellent contribution. In Derby, apprentices at Alstom are making a huge difference, not just for their own futures but for the rail industry across the UK. More than half the manufacturers I speak to tell me that the shortage in the skills pipeline is their biggest limiting factor for growth. Does my hon. Friend agree that having more apprentices throughout their early years is a key way to reduce that skills gap and help economic growth?

[Richard Quigley]

I thank my hon. Friend from the great city of Derby for his intervention. He makes a good point in the context of university or not university. Even before apprenticeships, work experience that gets people across the threshold of employers is an important step to providing the skills we need for the future.

The Isle of Wight’s Centre of Excellence for Composites, Advanced Manufacturing and Marine is at the heart of that effort, giving young people and adult learners the chance to develop the cutting-edge manufacturing, engineering and technical skills employers need. That is further proof that advanced manufacturing is not just part of the economy of the Isle of Wight, it is a cornerstone of our future, creating highly skilled jobs and providing opportunities for the next generation.

For me, that is one of the most important parts of this debate. Our skills future matters and we must ensure that no young person is left behind or constrained by the outdated assumption that university or academia is the only viable route forward. Two weeks ago, my office hosted its second annual skills summit, where we brought together island employers, educational institutions and training providers to discuss how to ensure that local people have the skills needed for the jobs being created on their doorstep. There is little value in securing investment and manufacturing opportunities if young people are not equipped to take advantage of them.

We need to ensure we invest in the future of this manufacturing ambition. Apprenticeship starts in engineering and manufacturing have fallen by more than 40%, and many manufacturers still cannot access the training they need. That is why the Government’s investment in vocational education, apprenticeships and manufacturing matters. It sends a clear message that there is more than one route to success.

A young person on the island, who is perhaps unsure whether to take the conventional university path, should be able to look at our thriving manufacturing sector and think, “There is a career there for me.” They should be able to see world-leading businesses on the Isle of Wight and know they do not have to leave the island to build a highly skilled, rewarding career. That is what makes the Government’s emphasis on investing in manufacturing and vocational education so exciting, but it is also why we must move further and faster.

After 14 years of chronic underinvestment in both advanced manufacturing and the opportunities available to young people, there is significant ground to make up. If we want Britain to lead in the industries of the future, we need to invest not only in factories, facilities and innovation, but in the people who will design, build and operate them. The success of advanced manufacturing on the Isle of Wight shows what is possible when talent is given the opportunity to thrive. Our challenge now is to ensure that every young person across the country can see a pathway into those careers and access to the training, apprenticeships and the technical education needed to get there.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

The hon. Member is making a powerful speech. Does he agree that the skills shortage can sometimes start with a lack of procurement? For example, factories in my constituency used to clothe the world and Leicester was the second most prosperous city in Europe because of its textile industry. It has gone from having 1,500 factories to 96 because we do not have the procurement or the investments into the factories that give opportunities for skilled workers.

[Richard Quigley]

I could not agree more. The idea that we can move everything offshore because it is cheaper means we are forgetting what value looks like. If we look at models of community wealth building around the country and the world, procurement is where we start.

[Hannah Spencer (Gorton and Denton) (Green)]

Students in Gorton and Denton tell me they often have to spend two to three years on a course before they can even be considered for an apprenticeship. Make UK reports that 39% of manufacturers do not think our education system can deliver the skills that they need. Does the hon. Member agree that we need to make apprenticeships more accessible and flexible so people are not held back from skilled jobs and manufacturers can get the workers they desperately need?

--- Later in debate ---

[Richard Quigley]

The Isle of Wight and the north share a lot in common; we often do not get the focus we need. We know how to get to university; that is a structured route. Even if someone does not get the grades, they can get into university—the whole school will get them into university. On the other side, the option is to just go off to a further education college, if they are lucky. I entirely agree with the hon. Lady’s point.

Our challenge now is to ensure that every young person across the country can see a pathway into those careers and access to the training, apprenticeships and the technical education needed to get there because investing in manufacturing is only half the job. Investing in the skills that power it is what turns ambition into long-term economic success.

--- Later in debate ---

[Richard Quigley]

I thank the Minister for her response and Members for their engagement—with the exception of the shadow Minister, who appears to be in cloud cuckoo land. We should all be excited about the shared enthusiasm for growing and nurturing our manufacturing skills sector. The call to action today is for us all to make apprenticeships as exciting and desirable as university and say that it is okay to learn a trade.

I look forward to tutoring colleagues from all parties so that they too can create a powerhouse of manufacturing skills in their constituencies, through world-class businesses and thriving skills support groups for education establishments helping to develop the next generation of engineers and manufacturers. I suspect they may find it harder than we make it look on the Isle of Wight.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered manufacturing skills.

Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill

Richard Quigley Excerpts

2nd reading & Money resolution
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)]

Listening to the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Faversham and Mid Kent (Helen Whately), is quite something—one would think that the recipients of this benefit were spending the money on soft furnishings for their second homes. They are not; they are spending it on food, rent and clothing for their children. The rise in child poverty under the previous Tory Government has been a shameful stain on this country, and I am proud to be part of a Government who are taking action, not only to provide food and basic necessities but to give children the opportunity to escape cycles of poverty and build secure, independent futures. In the months since this policy was announced, we have heard some truly shameful language from Opposition Members, including describing this Budget as a “Budget for ‘Benefits Street’”. In doing so, they completely denigrate the 450,000 children who never chose to be born into poverty, and who for the most part have simply had the misfortune of growing up during years of successive Conservative Governments.

It is telling that using taxpayers’ money to lift children out of poverty is framed by the Conservatives as an irresponsible use of public funds, while the £10 billion lost to covid fraud is something we are apparently expected to forget and move on from without consequence. I would genuinely welcome the shadow Secretary of State and the Leader of the Opposition to my constituency, so that they can explain directly to the nearly 1,600 children who will be lifted out of poverty by the removal of the two-child cap why the Leader of the Opposition so routinely denigrates people like them and their parents—parents who themselves are paying the price for a Government she was part of, who sent mortgages soaring and allowed inflation to reach 11%. Sadly, I will not hold my breath. When she is not using the Isle of Wight as a punchline for one of her poor, laugh-less jokes, she treats it as a photo opportunity, without having the basic respect to engage with local people, local media or, indeed, the local MP.

Perhaps we should not be surprised. The Conservative party has consistently failed to understand the real, tangible difference that such policies make to people’s lives. Instead of reckoning with the impact of their poverty-accelerating decisions, they choose to vilify those who stand to benefit from the Bill. As I understand it, Reform would now reverse the two-child cap to find money to pay for a cheaper pint at the local pub. Presumably Reform’s next policies would increase the drunk-driving limit to whatever people think they can get away with and lower the age of buying cigarettes to 12, because daddy will be too busy down the pub saving money to buy his own cigs.

As a small business owner, I know too well the damaging legacy of austerity, and the removal of the two-child cap represents the clearing away of one of the most shameful legacies of the austerity years. I know from first-hand experience the impact that Government decisions have on local economies. Austerity was not just a line in a Budget; it was a decade of under-investment that hit businesses such as mine hard. It hollowed out our high streets, weakened consumer confidence and squeezed the incomes of working families.

This policy is about more than tackling poverty and the intergenerational damage it causes; it is about giving hard-working families the chance to feel that they are a part of their high street again, and supporting those who have lost a wage earner or whose wages have simply failed to keep pace with the cost of living. It is called social security for a reason, and it is the solemn responsibility of any Government to provide a safety net to those who, through no fault of their own, have fallen on hard times.

This policy is not just about the removal of the benefits cap; it is an investment in our greatest asset—the British people—and in our future. It is about ensuring that the next generation do not go to school hungry or without the basic necessities and about putting our country on a stronger footing by giving every child a fair start in life.

Oral Answers to Questions

Richard Quigley Excerpts

Monday 26th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Pat McFadden]

It is very nice to see the Conservative Front Bench here—you can never be sure these days who is going to be turning up on the opposite side, Mr Speaker. I take it from the shadow Minister’s question that she is against youth hubs, but I have to remind her that the initiative began under her Government; we have expanded it. It also seems that she is for a cut in wages, but the Government do not think that is the way to go. I remind her that more people are in work than there were a year ago; the economic inactivity figures are down; real wages are rising; and as for unemployment, it was going up for the past few years, including while the shadow Minister’s party was in power.

[Mr Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)]

2. If he will take steps to ensure that the Timms review of personal independence payment does not propose changes that would affect people undergoing cancer treatment.

[The Minister for Social Security and Disability (Sir Stephen Timms)]

My review of the personal independence payment will be co-produced with disabled people, and its 12-person steering group will meet with me and my two co-chairs face to face for the first time later this week. I cannot pre-empt the choice of priorities and recommendations, but the review will draw on the full range of voices to build a system that is fair to everybody.

[Mr Quigley]

I thank the Minister for his response. Many cancer patients receiving PIP and universal credit were alarmed by proposals put forward last summer suggesting that individuals undergoing active cancer treatment might be required to complete a work capability assessment before accessing those benefits. What assurances can the Department give that people in the midst of cancer treatment will not be burdened with these assessments at such a vulnerable and challenging time?

[Sir Stephen Timms]

My hon. Friend raises a good point. However, on the work capability assessment, people claiming universal credit can be treated as having limited capability for work and work-related activity—LCWRA—if they are being treated for cancer, if they are likely to be treated within six months, or are recovering from treatment. I hope that will reassure my hon. Friend’s constituents.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Stephen Timms]

The hon. Lady makes a good point, and it is one of the reasons we are reforming Access to Work. We consulted on reform in the Green Paper last year, and I think she is right that we need a less bureaucratic system for access, not least for appointees.

[Mr Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)]

I wish you a speedy recovery, Mr Speaker—as I understand it, the other fellow came off much worse.

On the Isle of Wight, our NHS trust takes students who would otherwise have ended up NEET—not in education, employment or training—and puts them through a pre-apprenticeship scheme that gives them not only the skills but, more importantly, the confidence needed to start an apprenticeship and then go into work. I encourage the Secretary of State to visit the Isle of Wight to see the great work that the trust does. Will he encourage other employers to do the same thing?

[Pat McFadden]

I will certainly visit the Isle of Wight if I can—diary permitting. The issue he raises about confidence is crucial. When I speak to our work coaches, time and again they say that building the confidence of young people to get out there, to apply for things and to go into new and unfamiliar circumstances is a critical part of their work.

Young People not in Education, Employment or Training

Richard Quigley Excerpts

Wednesday 26th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Mr Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)]

What a pleasure it is to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley (Linsey Farnsworth) for securing this debate.

Every generation says, “I’m glad I am not a child today.” That is often a cliché, but I am glad I am not a 16-year-old today trying to decide where my future lies, not least because we are forcing children to start choosing their future from the age of 11. That is because the route to university is so clear, that it is effectively a queue—a queue whose direction and length can be seen from the Moon. But for those who are not academic, there is no queue. We treat those not going to university like free-range chickens—“Just go and find something and please don’t bother us.” Those children often end up in low-paid and insecure work.

Around 65% of school leavers do not go to university, so why are we not focusing on vocational training and qualifications? We all know that we have a shortage of builders, plumbers and care workers—jobs that the country relies on. My team and I have focused our resources on looking at vocational training, education and employment. Many young people on the Isle of Wight do not feel that university is a place for them. Many do not feel the urge to leave the island for work, but feel that they have no choice.

How do we support NEETs? The answer is that we stop them becoming NEETs in the first place. We provide clear, vocational routes for those who do not want to go to university, but want to learn a skilled trade. We create a ladder to good, well-paying jobs—and, crucially, a future on the Isle of Wight for those who want it. In just over 18 months, the Isle of Wight Youth Trust has prevented 65 young people from becoming homeless, returned 98 young people to full-time learning or apprenticeships, and moved 273 young people into paid employment. That is great work.

Since I stood in this place five months ago, speaking on similar issues, we have come a long way. My team and I have convened a group of major employers on the island to ensure that we work alongside employers to provide work experience, training and good apprenticeships, which have become the Isle of Wight’s hallmark. Although I may be the first MP to offer T-levels, I sincerely hope I am not the last. NEETs are not inevitable; they are the product of missed chances and broken links between education and employment.

Mansion House Accord

Richard Quigley Excerpts

Tuesday 13th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Torsten Bell]

It is characteristically bold of the Liberal Democrats to cautiously welcome these measures. However, the hon. Member is right to raise the question of Australia and Canada. We look across at places with similar pension schemes to those in the UK, and the levels of private asset allocation in those schemes is far higher than we see here in the UK, so he is absolutely right on that front.

On the two specific points the hon. Member raises, I agree on investment in the social rented sector. Many of our pension funds are already doing that, and I know that other major ones will be making announcements in that area in the months ahead. He also raises the breadth of investment opportunity. He is absolutely right that there are large, national-level projects, but there are also many more local projects. Where those are financed by the private sector, pension schemes may want to look at them as well.

[Mr Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)]

Will the Minister spell out how this deal provides real change for constituents across the country, and what it means for infrastructure projects, especially housing?

[Torsten Bell]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There is no way that Britain can return to growth unless it starts investing in its future again, rather than living in its past, which is, if we are honest, what we have been doing in recent years. This is part of a much wider story. I hope that there is cross-party consensus—there is certainly consensus across the pensions industry, and among most economists who look at the UK economy—that we need to move to a higher investment level. The finance for that is one thing; some comes from abroad and some comes in domestically, but it also needs to come from our pension schemes.

Obviously, it is for the public sector to play its part, but we should be careful in distinguishing this. The Government are doing our bit on public investment levels, with £113 billion extra of public investment compared with the plans inherited from the Conservative Government. That is doing a lot of the work to move us to the higher investment equilibrium, but there are lots of projects, and in the end most investment happens in the private sector. That is where I welcome the progress made by the pensions industry today.

Oral Answers to Questions

Richard Quigley Excerpts

Monday 16th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Emma Reynolds]

I was the first Minister for eight years to meet the WASPI campaigners to listen to their concerns. The ombudsman took six years to investigate six cases. We are working at pace on this issue. We hope to come to the House soon—if the hon. Gentleman will listen to my answer—to update him and the public on what we will do next.

[Mr Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)]

Young people in supported housing, including in my constituency, effectively pay a marginal rate of tax of 55% on their universal credit when they start work, meaning that earnings of just £133 a week see their housing benefit tapered to nil. That means that work does not pay. Will the Minister look at the economic benefits of reducing that taper and increasing the applicable amount, ensuring that work does pay and improving housing security?

[Sir Stephen Timms]

My hon. Friend raises a very important point. There is a problem in the interaction between the universal credit taper rate and the housing benefit taper for people in supported and temporary accommodation. We are, at the moment, looking at options for how to tackle that quite serious work disincentive problem.

International Investment Summit

Richard Quigley Excerpts

Thursday 17th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Kevin Hollinrake]

I will come on to confidence in a second, if I may.

The reality is that the UK has always been a good place for foreign investors. For the past three years, it has been No. 3 in the world for foreign direct investment; the only countries ahead of us have been the US and China.

The Minister referred to the wonderful event at the Guildhall. We have wonderful places to host international events, and we support what they do to show the best of Britain to our international investors. I was pleased, but perhaps surprised, to see Elton John entertaining the audience; I was expecting Taylor Swift. Was that ever on the agenda? There is obviously a very strong relationship there. But when I thought about it, and when I heard about the reversal of position on the DP World investment, I thought, “Well, it’s obvious why they’ve done that: they’ve asked Elton and the Transport Secretary to join in a duet of ‘Sorry Seems to Be the Hardest Word’.” Interestingly, a No.10 press release on this mentioned a rogue operator—I was not sure whether that meant the Secretary of State or the company—so I am not sure where that all landed in the end, or whether that was just a rogue comment by the Secretary of State.

None the less, we welcome the investment and we will absolutely support any successes that the Government can achieve, but, as the Opposition, it is right that we challenge where challenge is due. We have many concerns about some of the things to which the Minister refers. She is absolutely right to say that stability is the key. It breeds confidence in investors, which breeds investment. That is why we are particularly concerned about the changes to business taxation. Some were floated months ago and have been left hanging in the air. We know that this is now affecting investment, particularly around capital gains tax and around business relief—it used to be called business property relief—which is very close to my heart.

Business relief gives private businesses and businesses listed on AIM the ability to pass on their assets to the next generation without inheritance tax. There are a number of questions around whether that relief will be continued. It is hugely important that the Government do continue it, because it affects some of this country’s fantastic family businesses, which generate around £200 billion of tax receipts every single year and employ nearly 14 million people. That business relief is there for a reason. It is not a tax loophole; it is an incentive for family and intergenerational businesses to pass on their assets from one generation to the next. Similarly, that happens with agricultural property relief.

We are also concerned about the Government’s unwillingness to confirm that there will be no rise in national insurance for employers. Members on both sides of the House have described that as a jobs tax, and that is exactly what it is. All the uncertainty around business taxation will mean a suspension of investment and a reduction in the amount of hiring, particularly when it is seen in conjunction with the potential workplace changes that the Government are making, which we will debate in the House on Monday and about which we have great concerns. In particular, those relating to union powers could take this country back to the 1970s. I know that many Members in this place will not remember the 1970s, but I do and it was not a good place to be.

In the Prime Minister’s statement, he talked about cutting red tape. If, as currently drafted, the 28 new regulations—particularly those for small and medium-sized enterprises—are added to the Employment Rights Bill, it would seriously damage growth, investment and SMEs. But the Minister does not need to take my word for that. Let me read out some of the comments about the changes that the Government are thinking of making that will damage investment. The Federation of Small Businesses said that its members are viewing the measures coming down the line with “trepidation”. Tina McKenzie described them as

“clumsy, chaotic and poorly planned.”

She said:

“There are already 65,000 fewer payroll jobs since Labour took power, and the new Government is sending out troubling signals to businesses and investors.”

Those are her words, not mine.

The Institute of Directors said that confidence is fizzling out. Its index in relation to investor appetite has gone from plus 30% in June 2024 to minus 7% in October 2024. That is in just four months. The CBI said that 62% of employers say that the UK will be a less attractive place in which to invest. Ernst & Young said that

“60% of asset management (private equity) clients have asked them to start work on moving abroad.”

[Mr Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)]

Does the hon. Member agree that he is now guilty of talking down the entrepreneurial spirit and the ability of UK companies to cope with an exciting new Government?

[Kevin Hollinrake]

I am very keen not to do that. That is my point. It is gloom and doom from the Opposition —sorry, I mean the Government; I have to stop doing that—and it is brought on by these significant changes. These are not my comments, but the comments of sensible business representative organisations, which are representing their members. We should listen to the voices of business in this context. Even Richard Walker of Iceland Food, one of the Government’s supporters, says that the changes must happen slowly to avoid a “disastrous impact”.

I realise that we have a lot to get used to these days. I have to get used to calling those on the Labour Benches “the Government”, and I also have to get used to being a backseat driver. It is even more frustrating being a backseat driver when the learner driver in the driving seat does not know the difference between the brake and the accelerator.

Importantly, stability is one of the key levers that the Government have at their disposal. Winston Churchill once said that some people see “private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Some see it as a cow that they can milk. Few people see it for what it really is—the strong horse that pulls the whole cart”. It is hugely important that we get behind private enterprise in this country. It is hugely important that we get that stability in tax policy, workplace policy and the employment relationship. It is hugely important that we continue to level up this country. I note that levelling-up seems to have disappeared as a departmental aim, but that is still hugely important to all parts of this country, not least to the part of the country that I represent. It is also hugely important that we control energy costs. We know that that is a key concern to many businesses around the UK. Another key concern is that we cut the red tape for our larger companies.

The area that I focused most on as a business Minister was SMEs, which are the backbone of our economy. The No. 1 area that they struggle with is access to finance. I would really like to see some different measures in that area.