Enterprise Bill [Lords] Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Tuesday 8th March 2016

(8 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Anna Soubry Portrait Anna Soubry
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The fact that the Green Investment Bank has been so successful absolutely proves that such investments can be profitable and worth while. In other words, the bank has shown through its success that there is market failure no longer.

David Mowat Portrait David Mowat (Warrington South) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Members on the Opposition Benches seem to be saying two things. The first is that the private sector does not do long-term projects. Well, Shell, BP and others do many projects over decades. They also say that the private sector does not do innovative projects well. Those suggestions are just nonsense.

Anna Soubry Portrait Anna Soubry
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my hon. Friend for his excellent intervention, which I wholeheartedly endorse. We have always said the Green Investment Bank would stay green after privatisation. Green investment is what it does, as its management have made clear. We have explained that the only reason we are repealing the green protections from legislation is to allow the GIB to move to the private sector, by removing state control over the bank. However, we understand the concerns raised by hon Members and noble Lords, and we have found a device to protect the GIB’s green purposes without legislation.

--- Later in debate ---
Gerald Howarth Portrait Sir Gerald Howarth
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I have enormous respect for my right hon. Friend and I understand his point, but the place I represent is the home of the British Army, as well as the birthplace of British aviation, and it is steeped in technology. I know these people—I did so when I was a Defence Minister, as I have throughout my constituency experience in Aldershot—and I value them. I am afraid that I think they are rather special and that they have been neglected. I have specifically pointed out that their grades have not been made up to MOD grades, because they are busy in their laboratories doing what they like doing—inventing and helping to protect us all—so I will not resile from singling them out. My hon. Friend is entirely right to say that I am doing so, but I hope he will accept my apology for that.

David Mowat Portrait David Mowat
- Hansard - -

The point about the entire public sector is a reasonable one, but it would be stronger if the Government had not specifically exempted parts of the public sector, namely those in the City of London, such as the privatised banks, and particularly the compensation schemes in what are public sector bodies, such as the Financial Conduct Authority.

Gerald Howarth Portrait Sir Gerald Howarth
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend makes a good point.

--- Later in debate ---
Albert Owen Portrait Albert Owen
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That is absolutely right. The reality is that the Bill will take away the conditions of service that these people signed up to.

David Mowat Portrait David Mowat
- Hansard - -

I am listening carefully to what the hon. Gentleman says and I have a lot of sympathy with it, but I do not follow one point he made regarding private companies versus public companies. If they really are private companies, how can the Bill apply to them? Am I missing something?

Albert Owen Portrait Albert Owen
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is very confusing. This has not been made clear, but my understanding is that if these people were to leave today, they would be given the full package, yet the companies have been told that the measure will apply from October and those very companies are now saying that people cannot go until then. That is what is being said by the hon. Gentleman’s constituents and my constituents who have been writing in.

The Minister could end the confusion today. She could say that she will honour, as Mrs Thatcher and other Tory Ministers did, the protected rights and status of these individuals, and we could have a vote. Lawyers will argue about whether people can be protected, but we should not leave it to the lawyers—the House of Commons has the opportunity to act today. I hope that Members across the House will support new schedule 1.