Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Greg Clark and Tom Pursglove

Tuesday 11th June 2019 Commons Chamber

[Greg Clark]

As the hon. Lady knows, I am always keen to ensure that we take every step we can to preserve the continuity of skilled people, and I would be happy to do that.

[Tom Pursglove (Corby) (Con)]

The excellent new Minister has been a strong supporter of the new UK steel charter. Will he update the House on the progress he has made in getting it adopted across Government?

British Steel

Debate between Greg Clark and Tom Pursglove

Wednesday 22nd May 2019 Commons Chamber

[Greg Clark]

I am grateful for what the right hon. Gentleman says. It is important that I should state, and that the House should recognise, that the official receiver is independently appointed by the court. The official receiver has a team of special managers from Ernst & Young who were appointed today, and their responsibility is to secure the best possible resolution for the assets they inherit. They have strict duties to the court, and they cannot be directed by me. My experience of the Insolvency Service and the official receiver is that they will want to recognise the importance of continuity, which I contend will help to secure the best value for the future of the site. From my conversations, I know they have that very much in mind, but it is important to emphasise that they are independent and do not take direction from me.

[Tom Pursglove (Corby) (Con)]

I impress upon my right hon. Friend the expectation of my constituents in Corby that he must pull out all the stops to secure the future of this business. Will he advise the House of whether any other steel businesses have indicated a willingness to take on the business at this stage?

[Greg Clark]

I certainly agree with, and will act upon, the first part of my hon. Friend’s question. It is a matter for the official receiver to consider, but during the course of the day—after all, it was just this morning that the company went to court—I have had some early indications of interest. I intend to be active in helping to promote these important assets to prospective investors, whether or not they are currently aware of the opportunity this may give them to invest in successful facilities in the future.

British Steel: EU Emissions Trading Compliance

Debate between Greg Clark and Tom Pursglove

Wednesday 1st May 2019 Commons Chamber

[Greg Clark]

The hon. Gentleman talks about taking us to the cliff edge. It is a legal responsibility on the part of each emitter to comply with its requirements to surrender allowances. Notice was given, and as some of my hon. Friends pointed out, every other company acted on that. We were presented late in the day with a choice I described as unenviable. We responded to that pragmatically, and I detect in the hon. Gentleman’s tone a recognition that this is the right step. To avoid repetition of this situation, the advice from the company and the industry is clear: the House needs to come together, long before 31 October, and agree a withdrawal agreement that would result automatically in the ability to release allowances, not only for this year but for the following year too.

[Tom Pursglove (Corby) (Con)]

I very much agree with the steps taken by my right hon. Friend. However, is he essentially saying that this whole situation has arisen because the United Kingdom, and specifically our steel industry, is being punished by the European Union, despite our still remaining a member?

[Greg Clark]

I would not put it that way myself. The suspension was put in place because we were liable to leave on 29 March. Given that the year to which the allowances refer is the calendar year from January to December, it was the observation that, as things stood, we were unlikely not to be a member of the scheme for the great majority of that year; now that we have agreed an extension of up to 31 October, that is clearly a different matter. The discussions we have had so far with the Commission have been constructive in recognising our ability to issue new allowances.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Greg Clark and Tom Pursglove

Tuesday 30th April 2019 Commons Chamber

[Greg Clark]

One specific north-east-focused step is to invite the hon. Lady to vote for the deal that has been put before the House.

[Tom Pursglove (Corby) (Con)]

The steel industry is, rightly, a key part of the industrial strategy. In that context, what early discussions has the Secretary of State had on the steel charter and the key asks contained within it?

Rolls-Royce Redundancies

Debate between Greg Clark and Tom Pursglove

Thursday 14th June 2018 Commons Chamber

[Greg Clark]

The hon. Lady knows—we have had previous exchanges on this across this Dispatch Boxes—that the future of the employees there depends on defence export orders. I think she would acknowledge that there is no one more vigorous than our colleagues in the Ministry of Defence, the Department for International Trade and my Department when it comes to meeting businesses and those who are in defence procurement to emphasise the good quality and importance of our aerospace industry right across the country.

[Tom Pursglove (Corby) (Con)]

As my right hon. Friend knows, I am a big supporter of the value of the industrial strategy for midlands manufacturing, so what specific role does he see for Rolls-Royce within it?

International Investment

Debate between Greg Clark and Tom Pursglove

Tuesday 17th October 2017 Commons Chamber

[Greg Clark]

That is exactly what is proposed in the Green Paper. The focus is on national security, which is an important responsibility for the Government. It is important that investors and businesses know the procedures so that they can have the greatest certainty when conducting business, including when contemplating takeovers.

[Tom Pursglove (Corby) (Con)]

Will my right hon. Friend say a little more about the role of industrial strategy in helping to harness international investment?

[Greg Clark]

One of the strengths of the UK’s economy is our reputation for innovation and discovery through the application of science. Our industrial strategy deepens our commitment to that. We have seen the biggest increase in public investment in research and development for more than 40 years. Part of our strategic approach means establishing companies that make use of that technology, and having a regime under which companies that do use that technology can be confident about taking in foreign investment is part and parcel of the positive, mature regime that we want to establish.

Energy Price Cap

Debate between Greg Clark and Tom Pursglove

Monday 3rd July 2017 Commons Chamber

[Greg Clark]

My hon. Friend is right, and the proposal to consult consumer groups and to go beyond the CMA’s remedies—at least what the majority report of the CMA recommended—is welcome. As I said, that is a step in the right direction, but I would want to see this put out in detail and implemented before I would be satisfied with it.

[Tom Pursglove (Corby) (Con)]

Speaking as someone who represents an industrial town, has my right hon. Friend, as part of the wider debate on these issues, had the opportunity to assess what impact nationalising the energy companies would have on household and commercial energy bills?

[Greg Clark]

I have indeed. The impact of finding the billions of pounds necessary to take these industries into public ownership would not only be a disaster for our public finances, but the destruction of investor confidence in a whole range of industries that we need investment in.