Technology Sovereignty Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateDave Robertson
Main Page: Dave Robertson (Labour - Lichfield)Department Debates - View all Dave Robertson's debates with the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology
(1 day, 9 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
Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to take part in a debate with you in the Chair, Ms Vaz. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West (Dame Chi Onwurah) for securing this debate. In my best Geordie, I will say that she’s done a geet canny job again. [Laughter.] That is the end of my Geordie—don’t worry.
Much like my hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes Central (Emily Darlington), I am here to talk about quantum technologies. For most people, the word “quantum” sounds like the title of a James Bond film—and if I am honest, “Casino Royale” is better—but it is so important for the future of our economy, and not just because crusty old physics teachers like me get really excited about it. The quantum industry is projected to generate $100 billion globally by 2035, which is now not that far away. That economic impact is one thing, but the fact that it will also revolutionise defence and huge amounts of our civil infrastructure means that it is a great example of why technological sovereignty is not just an economic issue but a security issue.
The UK is home to some really exciting quantum research and quantum businesses, and it is vital that we keep this industry here, strong and growing. The Government aim to make the UK a leading quantum-enabled economy by 2033, which I absolutely welcome, but too often these businesses are tempted abroad as they scale.
How do we stop that? One way, which hon. Members have not touched on today, probably because of the time limit on speeches, is to improve the skills supply. That is not just at the PhD level that we often associate with physicists, but at the level of the lab technicians who will physically build the machines and maintain the infrastructure—it is vital that we have the skills supply to provide those guys too. People do not need to aspire to a doctorate to work in this sector; we need more pathways for apprentices to do these roles, which are more skills-based than some other roles.
We also need better access to capital for quantum companies. We have brilliant start-ups, but every time they go through a round of funding, they find it harder and harder to secure the funds they need to be able to remain in the UK. We need specialised infrastructure, such as cryogenic systems, advanced fabrication facilities and secure quantum networks.
We also need to ensure that many more of our colleagues understand that this next industrial revolution—the quantum revolution—is coming and we need to get ahead of it. That is why I have brought together a number of Members to form the all-party parliamentary group on quantum technologies, and I thank many colleagues here in Westminster Hall for being part of that.
I will finish with a plea to the Minister. We are here to talk about technological sovereignty, but we live in a globalised world and I hear real concerns from the sector about procuring helium. The international situation in the strait of Hormuz means that Qatar, which is home to one of only two plants that produce semiconductor-grade helium, has been forced to pause production because it has been targeted by Iranian airstrikes. I do not expect the Minister to have an answer to that issue immediately, but I do ask him to have a look at it and consider how we can support the sector during this time of huge uncertainty.