(6 days, 18 hours ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I congratulate the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) on securing this important and passionate debate, and I thank him for his own thoughtful and passionate contribution.
It was interesting to hear so many hon. Members name different local businesses in their areas without necessarily explaining what those businesses did—I am intrigued what Serendipity in Horwich or the Uniform Monkeys do. I would be remiss if I did not abuse my position by naming some of my favourites in my own constituency, including Bica in Netherlee; Wheataly in Clarkstown, which does the best Italian food in Glasgow; The Pad in Neilston; and Valentini’s ice cream in Giffnock.
What is encouraging about this debate is that it has placed the role of high streets in its proper context. Yes, they are full of businesses, which are about a bottom line, but as was said by the hon. Members for Woking (Mr Forster) and for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) and my hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff), this is about more than just soulless economics; it is about how we feel about where we live. It is essential that we understand that.
We must also place high streets in the wider economic context. They are not only the engines of very local economies but a barometer for how the wider economy feels. We have to recognise that the reason why so many of our town and city centres sometimes feel so down at heel is that before we lost the shops on those high streets, we lost the industry at the edges of towns.
It is important to put this debate in the context of the Government’s wider efforts to reindustrialise the country, to create good work and a sense of economic pride and purpose in places. I disagree with the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Andrew Griffith): yes, to tackle the insecure work and low incomes that left people without the money to spend in the neighbourhoods where our high streets are—
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
Whenever we talk about high streets, we think primarily about town centres, but there are smaller communities and sub-neighbourhoods, such as Bilton and Starbeck in my Harrogate and Knaresborough constituency—and even Kings Road, just a little further outside the town centre—that often miss out on support from the likes of the local chamber of commerce or business improvement district. Does the Minister think there should be additional measures for those that struggle because they are a little further from the town centre?
Blair McDougall
One of the hallmarks of our efforts through Pride in Place and other measures is recognition that there is not really a one-size-fits-all solution. In my constituency, we do not have one central high street; we probably have about a dozen separate ones, which sounds similar to the hon. Gentleman’s constituency.
It is clear from what everyone has said during the debate that high streets are facing real pressures, from changing consumer habits to crime and increasing costs. There is not a single quick fix—there is no one-size-fits-all solution. It will take determined effort and real strategy from the Government. A key part of that is our small business strategy, which was launched just short of a year ago and aims to cut red tape, cut costs and make things just a little easier in challenging times. We will build on the strategy later this year as we bring forward a cross-Government high streets strategy that aims to support the businesses that we have been talking about today and equip local authorities with the tools that they need to drive long-term regeneration. We are working really closely on that with businesses, representative organisations and, indeed, Members from across the House.
We have already started taking significant action through, for example, our high streets innovation partnerships—a £301 million package that aims to help local areas to reinvent and reimagine high streets, to make them more attractive places to live and put more services into them. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) mentioned a Woolworths that had been replaced by businesses of lower value over the years. There is a challenge for all of us within our areas, working with local authorities and health authorities, to make sure that we locate more services in our areas and drive more footfall to them.
I will give an example of that type of action. I also oversee the Post Office, and as well as the Government making the decision to keep the Post Office network open at its current level, there are really exciting plans under way from the Post Office to create a new community hub model for post offices in towns across the UK. That will offer a place for commercial services and public services to be delivered, and enhance the role that post offices have as an anchor in the high streets.
I will turn quickly to some of the issues raised by hon. Members and outline the areas that the Government are focusing on within each of them. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) raised the issue of payment providers. That issue was raised with me by Kadir’s, a chip shop in Barrhead in my constituency. The payment services regulator recently carried out two market reviews in this area to look at those cost increases and is currently looking at what action to take as a result.
Many hon. Members rightly raised the impact of business rates on high street businesses. They say that all of heaven rejoices more over one sinner who repents, so I welcome the acknowledgment by the shadow Minister that we inherited a system that was, frankly, a mess. It was chaotic; it kept changing. It did not give people any sense of stability. For high streets, we have to ensure that our business rates system is fair, stable and responsive to the changing economic situation that hon. Members have described. That is why, in the face of the cost of the first revaluation since the pandemic, we have put in the £4.3 billion support package.
The hon. Member for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler) asked when we will take on the big online giants—the warehouses—and start to shift some of the burden on to them and away from high street businesses. That is exactly what we did with those lower multipliers. That was paid for by putting the burden on to the big warehouses. We are working in that area. Rather than tinkering, we are doing that big structural change.
Let me turn to jobs, and particularly youth unemployment and the link to high streets. My hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis) said that he was a Saturday boy. I was a Saturday boy as well in Beveridge’s fishmongers in Giffnock. It taught me everything about how to talk to people. It gave me confidence. Every time someone came into the shop, I had to re-find my confidence—remake myself. I do not think that I would be where I am now had I not had that experience.
Some Members raised national insurance contributions in that context. Businesses still have those reliefs for under-21s and for apprentices under 25. It is worth about £2.5 billion. In terms of national insurance, there is relief there for employing young people, but I absolutely take the point. Obviously, the Milburn review is working on the much bigger issue of the number of young people not getting that opportunity.
(1 week ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
The visitor levy is the wrong policy at the wrong time, as the hon. Gentleman puts it, and I have discussed it with UKHospitality. Does he agree that we need to stop this tax, at the same time as cutting VAT? If we do not, we will end up with an effective VAT rate on hospitality and tourism businesses of 27%, which, compared with the rates in Ireland and Germany, for example, at 9% and 7% respectively, is just not competitive.
Joe Robertson
The hon. Gentleman is right, we need both. Our tourism and hospitality sector is one of the most highly taxed tourism and hospitality sectors, compared with our European neighbours, who already have a cost-competitive advantage.
(4 months, 3 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Iqbal Mohamed
I agree that council-approved, community-organised events bring people together. Those who are going know what they are going to, and any pets that will be affected can be kept away from that area for that period. The timing of those displays is also critical. There should be a watershed, whereby fireworks are allowed beyond a certain time of day. I fully support the hon. Member’s acknowledgment of the role of councils in helping communities to enjoy fireworks in a responsible and less damaging way.
We have heard that fireworks can be equally distressing for people, including veterans with PTSD, autistic and neurodivergent individuals, young children and the elderly. For those people, loud and unexpected noise can provoke severe anxiety. Worse still are the routinely reported cases of emergency workers being attacked with fireworks. Those impacts are not confined to a single night, but repeated over weeks and months, creating prolonged periods of stress. The harms that emerge from fireworks are not hypothetical—they are recurring, predictable and preventable.
The petitions do not call for some totalitarian overreach by the state by pushing for an outright ban. They recognise the cultural importance of fireworks in bringing communities together, but rightfully argue that public access, in its current form, is outdated and irresponsible.
There was an incident in my constituency during the last bonfire night—well, not a night; it is more like weeks—when a firework rocket had been let off at the wrong angle and pierced the windscreen of a parked car. Thankfully, nobody was hurt, but the rocket was lodged in the windscreen. I do not know what the owner’s insurance company said about that, but that could have been a child, a human being or an animal, and the results would have been catastrophic.
Other European countries have introduced more stringent restrictions, leading to fewer injuries and continued public support. Even within the UK, Scotland and Northern Ireland have stricter regulations than England. Alternatives such as organised displays, quieter fireworks and modern light or drone shows harnessing technological developments are increasingly popular and far less harmful. Responsible celebration should not come at the expense of animals, vulnerable individuals or community wellbeing.
I therefore urge the Government to listen carefully to this recurring debate. It is the first one I have taken part in; I was not able to take part last year, but I know from research that this subject comes around every year, and it is really important that we do something about it. I urge the Government to listen carefully to the petitioners, to conscientious animal welfare experts and to those who diligently advocate for persons with disabilities, and to bring forward meaningful reform that strikes a better balance—
Tom Gordon
I completely agree with the hon. Member, and I appreciate the hundreds of people in my constituency who have signed the petitions. When we talk about Government action, does he agree that if we end up with a licence scheme, it must give local authorities the money to enforce these provisions? If not, we will all be going back to our constituencies, picking up the phone to our council chief executives and saying, “This is the law, why are you not enforcing it?”.
Iqbal Mohamed
I completely agree. Councils are overloaded and overburdened; they are asked to do more with less, and it is really important that any legislation giving them the authority and powers to help with fireworks is backed by finance and teeth.
To conclude, let me repeat that I hope the Government will listen to the petitioners and introduce reforms that strike a better balance between celebration and compassion.
(6 months ago)
Commons Chamber
Antonia Bance
I would not wish to try the hon. Member’s generosity, but it seems to me that I have already been generous in my tribute to the work of the previous Government in continuing to maintain the machinery of the Low Pay Commission—something that this Government have continued—and in continuing to make sure that the national minimum wage rose. I will admit that many people in my position feared greatly in 2010 that the Conservatives would come into government—admittedly, in coalition—and immediately tear up the national minimum wage. The fact that they did not was a great thing. The pinning to two thirds of male median wages was a good thing, and I am so sad that the Leader of the Opposition has departed from the consensus on this point.
The national minimum wage is set by a tripartite body. It is not too high, because businesses were in the room arguing their case. The commissioners went out on visits around the country to look at the prevailing economic conditions. The wage is set by consensus using the tripartite machinery, and it is important that we all understand that that has served this country well and has made extreme low pay a thing of the past. I am sad that the Conservatives have departed from this consensus.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
The hon. Lady makes an excellent point about the need to see the minimum wage increase—people who live in my constituency of Harrogate and Knaresborough simply cannot afford to live or work in the area, and that is a real problem—but does she accept that it is not just the minimum wage that is the issue for employers, but the combination of increasing employer NICs and business rates? When I go out and speak to people, that is what they are worried about. It is not necessarily about the minimum wage, but the cocktail of measures that the Government have introduced.
Antonia Bance
The hon. Member need have no fear about the extent to which I talk to businesses in my constituency and more widely. I see at least one employer every single week—often not in retail and hospitality, as I represent a manufacturing constituency. I recognise the concerns, but I would say that in this country we need to have a functioning set of public services. We need an NHS that is not asking people to wait as long as it was when we took up office. In my constituency, waiting lists for those waiting over a year for an operation have fallen by 45%. That is absolutely incredible, and it was achieved because of the difficult decisions that our Chancellor of the Exchequer took to put money into the NHS. I know that many people regret that decision. They wish the ends—the reduced waiting lists—but they do not will the means. On this side, we will not dodge hard choices; we will the ends and we will the means.
Alison Griffiths
My hon. Friend is right. The Business and Trade Committee had a number of businesses come to Parliament to tell us about the stasis that the leaks in the run-up to the Budget caused to their businesses. As he says, that feeds through to the general population, who know the costs businesses are having to incur and that they are getting to the point where they can no longer sustain them. People are concerned for their jobs. They know that, if they do not have a job, having more employment rights are no use whatsoever. He makes a valid and important point.
The increase in Harbour Park’s costs amount to an extra £40,000, seriously impacting its ability to employ young people and give them a start in the job market.
Last weekend, I met Catherine, who runs the Navigator hotel in Bognor Regis. She employs young people in the town to work when she needs them during the busy summer months, when tourists fill the hotel rooms, drink in the bar and eat in the restaurant. Catherine told me that she started her business full of hope, but now, after the imposition of so many additional costs and taxes, she works a full-time second job just to keep her business afloat, and to ensure that her 10 employees still have jobs to go to.
Tom Gordon
I do not believe the hon. Lady has yet got one of these devolution mayors, although she can correct me if I’m wrong. We have one in York and North Yorkshire, who is now looking at how they might implement a tourist tax. Will the hon. Lady give her thoughts on the impact such a tax would have? When I met the Harrogate district chamber of commerce and spoke to the hoteliers in my area, they were concerned about how it would suck many tourists out of towns like Harrogate and pass them off to other areas. It would be an additional cost—I wonder what her thoughts on that might be.
Alison Griffiths
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for making that point, which takes me back to the conversation I had with Catherine this weekend. I hope she will not mind me saying this: she was so emotional that she was almost in tears at the prospect of a tourist tax being imposed by a Sussex mayor, who will come in next year—actually, that has been delayed into another year as well, hasn’t it? The rapid roll-out is not going quite so well. The emotion and fear that I heard in Catherine’s voice when we talked about that tax will not leave me for a long time. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising what a pernicious tax that could be.
(6 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Chris McDonald
I must admit that, as a regular tourist to Cumbria myself, I absolutely appreciate the joys of a countryside pub in the hon. Member’s constituency, and I understand the pressures that they are under. I will leave any commentary on the Budget to the Chancellor at the appropriate time, but rest assured that every day in this job I am making the case for increased competitiveness in British industry.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Martin McCluskey)
We are reviewing the system of consumer protection and oversight for home retrofit installations, as the system we inherited is deeply flawed. We are committed to creating a simpler, stronger system of standards and oversight that will give consumers the confidence they deserve. We will consult on proposals for retrofit system reform early next year.
Tom Gordon
I appreciate the response that the Minister has given. He will not be surprised to hear me banging on—
Order. I say to Mr Easton, you are going to have to sit down, because you are standing in front of the Member who is speaking.
Tom Gordon
The Minister will not be surprised to hear me talking about spray foam insulation once again. One of the biggest frustrations that people have is that they do not have faith or trust in Government schemes because of the failure of the installation of spray foam insulation under the previous Government. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that mortgage lenders do away with the blanket ban on providing mortgages to people with spray foam insulation, what steps has he taken to reform TrustMark, and what consideration has he given to fixing the problem once and for all?
Martin McCluskey
It is fair to say that I am gripped by this problem, because without confidence in the consumer protection around the installation of these schemes, we will not hit the targets for clean power by 2030, nor create the warm and safe homes that we need. I appreciate the constructive manner in which the hon. Gentleman has addressed the issue. As I discussed with him last month, we are working with lenders and financial institutions to resolve the accessibility of some outstanding financial products, but it is now not the case that all lenders have a blanket ban—we are making some progress on that. We will conduct further assessments to quantify the extent of spray foam, and I am keen to work closely with the hon. Gentleman and others who have examples from their constituencies that can inform how we design the future system.
(6 months, 4 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I congratulate the hon. Member for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier) on securing this important debate.
Over the last year, I have been campaigning on behalf of homeowners affected by faulty spray foam insulation installed under the previous Conservative Government’s green homes grant scheme. The aim was to improve the energy efficiency of homes across our country by offering households help to make their homes warmer, greener and cheaper to run. Many homeowners used the scheme to fund the installation of spray foam insulation. However, in a number of cases the installation was done incorrectly, causing moisture to become trapped, creating structural issues such as roof timber decay.
Under the green homes grant, as with other Government retrofit schemes, homeowners were told that only TrustMark-approved contractors could carry out the work, yet we have seen substandard and unqualified contractors admitted to the scheme, carrying out poor-quality work and then disappearing when problems emerge, leaving homeowners to deal with the consequences. These cases have exposed a growing problem: the rise of rogue builders and traders operating under the banner of Government assurance.
Although spray foam may seem niche, that case is not isolated. It is a symptom of a much deeper failure in oversight and consumer protection. The Government’s own quality assurance mechanism, TrustMark, as the hon. Member for Wyre Forest mentioned, is administered by the Department for Business and Trade, and it has failed in its most basic duty. TrustMark was established to ensure that only qualified and competent contractors were permitted to carry out work under Government-funded schemes, yet here we are with hundreds, if not thousands, of homeowners left with defective installations.
Recent announcements about improper installation under the Great British insulation and ECO4 schemes have further highlighted this failure. To put it simply, TrustMark is not fit for purpose. If the Government are to tackle the issue of rogue builders, they must start with those that they endorse under their own schemes. The Department for Business and Trade must work more closely with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero to ensure that future schemes are properly monitored, contractors rigorously vetted, and consumers protected. That must include a thorough evaluation of TrustMark’s capacity to deliver the effective consumer protection that it ought to offer. At present, it is failing to provide meaningful quality assurance or to keep rogue builders out.
What is worse is that these failures have created a second wave of exploitation. Rogue traders are now targeting households that had any form of spray foam insulation and offering to remove it, at great cost, even where the insulation is properly installed and functional. In many cases, these removals, which are completely unnecessary, cause further damage to the property, leaving homeowners with even greater costs.
These vulnerable consumers have been exploited not once, but twice: first by unfit contractors operating under a Government-endorsed quality scheme, and then by opportunistic builders and traders exploiting the chaos that that failure has created. As my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) mentioned, often the companies are then wound up, leaving people without a mechanism or a person to seek redress through. This is precisely why stronger oversight is needed.
The Department must work with TrustMark to ensure that contractor vetting, auditing and enforcement are properly co-ordinated, leaving no room for unsuitable contractors to operate under the banner of Government assurance. Secondly, there must be clear and accessible routes to redress. Homeowners should not be left to navigate complex complaints systems or take costly legal action against builders who may already have vanished. While TrustMark offers a dispute resolution service, those who have tried it will know how difficult it is to access and how rarely it delivers meaningful outcomes.
I therefore urge the Minister to take up this issue seriously. TrustMark must be reviewed, consumer protections must be strengthened, and we must clamp down on rogue builders who exploit public funds and private households. Rogue builders are not just a nuisance; they are a serious threat to consumer confidence, public spending and the integrity of the housing sector. It is time we treated them as such.
(10 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberI welcome the establishment of Bababing in the hon. Member’s constituency. I recognise that difficult decisions had to be taken in the Budget. I am sure he has pointed out to the owners of Bababing that those difficult decisions were taken as a direct result of the £22 billion black hole that his party left us to tackle. Our small business strategy will set out a range of measures we are taking to support businesses, which I hope will help Bababing and other businesses in his constituency.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
We recognise the vital role hospitality plays in driving growth and strengthening all our communities. That is why we have committed to permanently lower business rates for the sector from 2026-27 and announced a hospitality fund to co-invest in projects that boost productivity and help community pubs adapt to local needs. It is also why we have launched an industry-led licensing taskforce to reduce red tape and other barriers.
Tom Gordon
I regularly meet the Harrogate business improvement district and the chamber of commerce, and we have a thriving hospitality and tourism sector in Harrogate and Knaresborough. I recently met Alison, a constituent who runs a number of local bars and restaurants, and she is worried that with the increase in employer NICs, rising energy costs and the other pressures that this Government are not getting to grips with, businesses like hers will not be there to see the benefits of business rates reform. What is the Minister doing with Treasury colleagues to support local hospitality?
(10 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberI completely accept the significance of the Post Office in rural communities in particular, but it is equally essential that we have access to Post Office services in urban areas. The hon. Lady references the fragility of the Post Office, and that has certainly been the case in certain communities when finding postmasters who are willing to step forward and take on the role of running a Post Office franchise. That is why the initial steps that the Post Office management have taken to increase postmaster remuneration are important, by helping to make the role more attractive. It is also important that the Post Office has established a consultative council, to look properly at the way that postmasters are consulted and involved in big decisions about the future of the Post Office. If the hon. Lady thinks it would be useful, I would be happy to speak to her separately about the specific issues that her constituents face, and to understand a little more about the specific problems she has raised.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
I thank the Minister for his statement, and I add my thanks to our postmasters, including Andrew Hart in my constituency. Last year, residents in Knaresborough faced a prolonged period without a Post Office service. I had extensive communication with Post Office officials about service continuity, minimum standards, types and awards of contracts, and I found them evasive when I asked them questions about that. As the Minister says, such issues of governance will be addressed in the inquiry, but how might that feed into the Green Paper consultation? Will he meet me to address some of my concerns about the issues that we are facing locally?
In principle, I am very happy to meet the hon. Gentleman to discuss the issues with post offices in his constituency. He gives me the opportunity to put on the record my appreciation for the work that all our postmasters do. They are hugely important servants of all our communities, and they play a crucial role for our constituents—I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that opportunity. The Green Paper is an opportunity for people in rural areas as well as urban areas to come forward with their views about the future of the Post Office. I hope that all hon. Members will encourage their constituents to think about taking that opportunity, and take a moment to send in their comments.
(11 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberI welcome my hon. Friend’s question; he is right that VPAG is significant to the life sciences sector plan and that the industry is looking for resolution on it. The life sciences sector plan will be formally launched by Cabinet colleagues to coincide with the anniversary of the foundation of the NHS. Talks with industry are ongoing and we are trying to find a settlement, which I believe is possible. We should all recognise the economic benefits of the sector for his constituency, which he carefully outlined.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
I welcome the industrial strategy, but I want to push the Secretary of State on skills. Harrogate college often tells me that it struggles to access funding for technical and vocational training that meets the needs of local business. In the next academic year—in just a couple of months—it will face a £90,000 reduction in the devolved adult skills budget from the new Labour mayor. Will the Secretary of State clarify how the skills mission fund will work in practice for towns like mine, and whether it will be genuinely led by local economic need, not Westminster targets?
I recognise the case that the hon. Gentleman makes. Some of the courses that we need and that are central to our economy—engineering is a good example—are more expensive to put on and need greater capacity. When I talk about a funding package, it is to deliver the business-led, needs-led courses to which he refers, and I would expect Harrogate college to feel the benefits of that.
(1 year, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberFundamentally, I want to see greater market access to the US for small and medium-sized businesses in every part of the UK. We can tackle particular things as part of that, such as the regulatory system in the United States and the federal-state dichotomy, particularly for services and exports. All that is the prize on offer if we get this right. A big part of trade policy is also about not just free trade agreements, even though they tend to get the most prominence, but how we come to agreement on e-commerce and functions of online marketplaces and transactions. All that is a very practical difference that we can make, through good trade policy, to small and medium-sized businesses. That will be a premium and important part of the trade policy we are about to publish.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
The pharmaceutical sector appears temporarily to have avoided tariffs, but that may well change. However, medical devices and diagnostics do not appear to have that same exemption. The UK is home to many medtech and diagnostic companies, and the tariffs will have an impact on them both here and abroad and may well push up prices. What conversations is the Secretary of State having with colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care about ensuring access to medtech and diagnostics in the face of increasing prices?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. He may be aware of the biopharma conference held in the UK yesterday with the top chief executive officers of many of the leading companies in this area. It was attended by myself, the Prime Minister, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology.
The hon. Gentleman is right to say that we could see further announcements in this area. There are particular US issues, such as the differential in drug pricing, which has always been a fairly prominent part of trade negotiations. There is an integration and shared aspiration between people in Government, such as myself and the Health Secretary, and recognition of our need to be more forward-leaning, to use more innovation, to look at how we provide that and the relative allocation of resources in our existing health system. We take that very seriously, and we are very much looking at that. There is a lot to do, and it is a difficult situation, but we need more of the success that the hon. Gentleman outlined.