Steel Industry (Special Measures) Bill

Stephen Flynn Excerpts

2nd reading
Saturday 12th April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jonathan Reynolds]

I know there is huge interest, but I will make a little more progress and that might deal with some of the matters Members want to raise.

This is what it means to be a Government unashamedly on the side of working people—one that will never hesitate to take action to protect this nation’s assets and economic security. I understand that some have asked about precedent or referred to other troubled industrial situations. To be clear again, this is an exceptional and unique situation. The question for all Members is whether we as a country want to continue to possess a steel industry. Do we want to make the construction steel and rail we need here in the UK, or do we want to be dependent on overseas imports? As a Government, we are not passive in any way about the future of British industry.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

The Secretary of State has said this is “unique” and “exceptional” and made reference to energy transitions and thousands of jobs. In the Scottish context, many minds right now will be focused on the situation in Grangemouth, where we know that hundreds of jobs will be lost directly, as well as thousands in the supply chain. Were I, or perhaps even the local Member, the hon. Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman), to bring forward a similar Bill to save Scotland’s only oil refinery and give the Secretary of State the executive power to do as he pleases—as he is doing with British Steel—would the Labour party back it as it is backing this Bill today?

[Jonathan Reynolds]

I am pleased for the chance to address this issue. The importance of Grangemouth is why this Labour Government have pledged £200 million to secure its long-term future. It is an important asset, but it is not the only remaining refinery; it is one of three crackers in the United Kingdom—that is important. Specifically, it is not a comparable situation, and the behaviour of the company is not comparable to the case of British Steel.

I also say to the right hon. Member, and indeed to all Members, that this is why we fought and fought again to secure the future of British shipbuilding by saving all four of the Harland and Wolff sites in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The right hon. Member will know that the commercial interest was not in the Scottish yards, but we held them together precisely because of our commitment to Scotland and the Union. It is also why within weeks of taking office we secured a better deal for the workers at Port Talbot. We have repeatedly acted, and we will continue to act no matter how hard the circumstances.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

It is a privilege to follow such an impressive speech from the hon. Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald). I am sure his constituents will be incredibly impressed at his knowledge of this issue. I want to be kind not just to him but to the Secretary of State, once again. That is becoming a habit that I want to break, but certainly his sincerity today cannot be doubted. If there is one person who could be afforded the executive powers in this Bill with an element of trust, it is probably him.

There are some topics that have not been touched on in a huge amount of detail today and I will touch on them briefly now. Whether it is tariffs, competition or energy prices, we must not forget the fundamentals of why the steel industry faces such a challenging position. There is one other hugely important issue that has not been discussed at any length in the Chamber today, notwithstanding the future contribution that I imagine will be made by the hon. Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman)—it will not pass the lips of any other Members—which is the situation in Grangemouth. I say “the situation in Grangemouth” with an element of despair, because we all know that there are hundreds of people who are on the brink of losing their jobs.

The similarities are astounding. We have PetroChina on the one hand and a Chinese company in Scunthorpe on the other. We have a Chinese company in Scunthorpe saying that there are losses of around £700,000 and we have a Chinese company at Grangemouth saying that there are losses of around £500,000. We have a cracker in Grangemouth that has been deemed not useful anymore and we have blast furnaces in Scunthorpe that are categorised in the same manner. We all need to be conscious of those comparisons.

I say that on the basis that while the Secretary of State is right to say that this is important for jobs in Scunthorpe, this is right for the communities in Scunthorpe and this is right for Westminster’s national, UK-wide interest, is it not the case that it is important to the workers in Grangemouth? Is it not the case that it is important to the communities in Grangemouth? And is it not the case that it is in Scotland’s national interest that Grangemouth is protected?

[Alan Gemmell]

rose—

[Dr Zubir Ahmed (Glasgow South West) (Lab)]

rose—

[Stephen Flynn]

I am afraid that I will not give way because we are all constrained by time, in the same way that Labour Members will not take interventions either.

The Secretary of State’s answer to me earlier was that £200 million has been put forward through the National Wealth Fund. Each and every one of us knows that that is not in the gift of the Prime Minister or the Secretary of State to dictate. It ultimately relies on the private sector coming forward with a proposal. Indeed, in evidence given to the Scottish Affairs Committee just last week by EY, which has done the Project Willow report, it was quite clear in its observations that there will be no progress until 2030 at the earliest. That is simply not good enough, because while the Government mobilise every effort to save British Steel, they allow Grangemouth to fall on the back burner.

The hon. Member for Central Ayrshire (Alan Gemmell) referred to industrial strategies. He seems to forget in that context that energy is a reserved matter for this United Kingdom Government—something the Secretary of State is all too familiar with, given our previous roles in this here House.

The final thought I will leave with Labour Members is that they should remember the fact that the Bill they are supporting extends solely to England and Wales.

[Liz Saville Roberts]

It does not apply to Wales.

[Stephen Flynn]

The right hon. Member from Plaid Cymru corrects me to clarify the fact that the Bill applies only to England. The important consideration is: why is this not being extended to Scotland? Why is Grangemouth not being included, why is the smelter up at Lochaber not being included and why are the Dalzell steelworks not being included? The answer to why they are not being included is that Westminster is only interested in Westminster; it is not interested in Scotland. [Interruption.] I will not be shouted down by Labour Members, because they need to hear the truth. Scotland’s interests matter, and the people of Scotland are watching.

UK-US Trade and Tariffs

Stephen Flynn Excerpts

Thursday 3rd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jonathan Reynolds]

My hon. Friend is right to highlight that. I am tremendously proud of our automotive sector. Indeed, he may know that I come from and grew up in one of our automotive sector powerhouses, Sunderland, with the Nissan plant. It is incredibly important to lots of communities in the supply chain all around the UK, but particularly to our exports. The US is a key market, particularly for the high-value models, some of which he mentioned, which are incredibly valuable to this country. We want and seek to maintain that success.

On the kind of support, first, it is about dealing with this issue. Secondly, there are things such as the announcement in the Budget of the £2 billion for collaboration with the private sector in the automotive field, the money incentives for electric vehicle infrastructure and the changes around the wider ZEV mandate that we are consulting on and about to publish a response to, for which we need a more pragmatic response than we have seen in the past.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

Despite there being a trade deficit and despite the best efforts of this Government, including the Secretary of State, for whom I have a great deal of personal respect, the reality is that we have still been hit by significant tariffs from the States. People at home right now will be worried about jobs, inflation and the global headwinds, which will undoubtedly hit us irrespective of our own tariff situation. One industry in particular, back home in Scotland, that will be watching with eager eyes is the Scotch whisky industry, given the billions of pounds of exports that go to the United States. I do not want the Secretary of State to try and control—nor could he—Trump’s tariffs policy. What he can do, however, is control his domestic taxation regime. Will he take this opportunity to re-engage with the Chancellor in and around the Scotch whisky taxation status?

[Jonathan Reynolds]

The right hon. Gentleman knows the value that we place as a Department on the incredible product that is Scotch whisky. We have a particular set of policy initiatives on geographic indicators to make sure the brand is protected, and I always do everything I can to support Scotch whisky, which is just absolutely world class and always will be.

He is right to say that our joint success in Scotch whisky produces a prominence that sometimes makes it vulnerable to retaliatory measures because of the recognition of the success in that field. On domestic policy, I remain in close contact with the Chancellor on all matters and will do on this one. There are tremendous opportunities for Scotch whisky from some of the other trade negotiations that we are having, such as with India in particular, which is the biggest whisky market in the world, as the right hon. Gentleman will know. I think there could be real steps forward in terms of our market access there and the arrangements that we have, which will give us an advantage over other countries, and that is also a prominent part of our work.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Flynn Excerpts

Wednesday 8th March 2023 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the SNP leader.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

On International Women’s Day, can I ask the Prime Minister to reconfirm that under his proposed new asylum laws, a woman who is sex-trafficked to the UK on a small boat by a criminal gang will not be afforded protection under our modern slavery laws?

[The Prime Minister]

It is precisely because we want to target our compassion and our resources at the world’s most vulnerable people that we must get a grip on this system and break—

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Mr McDonald, I do not need to hear you chuntering all the way through. You could be joining the others for a cup of tea.

[Stephen Flynn]

I will take that as a yes from the Prime Minister that women who are victims of sex trafficking will not be protected under our modern slavery laws. What a complete and utter disgrace. But while it may shock, it should not necessarily surprise, because this is the Tory Government who in recent months have spoken of “invasions”. Just yesterday, this Tory Government said that 100 million people could be coming to these shores. This morning, this Tory Government said that the number could in fact be billions. That is complete and utter nonsense. May I ask the Prime Minister: from whom are his Government taking inspiration, Nigel Farage or Enoch Powell?

[The Prime Minister]

What a load of nonsense. In fact, the figure of 100 million does not come from the Government; it comes from the United Nations, and it illustrates the scale of the global migration crisis with which the world is grappling. That is why it is right that we take action: because if we do not, the numbers will continue to grow. They have more than quadrupled in just two years. It is a sign of what is to come, and our system will continue to be overwhelmed. If that happens, we will not be able to help the people who are most in need of our support, our generosity and our compassion. This has always been the way of this country. Once we get a grip on this system, that is who we can extend our support to, and that is why it is the right legislation.