Finance (No. 3) Bill

Debate between Vince Cable and Jonathan Reynolds

3rd reading: House of Commons & Report stage: House of Commons
Tuesday 8th January 2019 Commons Chamber

[Sir Vince Cable]

Thank you for your indulgence, Mr Speaker. I just want to say a few words in support of amendments 7 and 8. They are Brexit-neutral, in the sense that they require the House to approve any change, but of course they relate primarily to no deal. The fiscal issues, as the right hon. Member for West Dorset (Sir Oliver Letwin) explained them, were arcane and rather gentle. I tabled a more brutal amendment that was not called.

In the 30 seconds left, I want to relate an incident from this morning, when I went to the ferry port at Portsmouth. It is very clear that the Government are totally and utterly unprepared for the chaotic impact that there will be on the road system, including access to the naval base, if a no-deal Brexit occurs. Despite repeated requests from the council and others, the Department for Transport and the Ministry of Defence are refusing to co-operate, and the police now say that the M3 motorway will have to be closed from Winchester to Basingstoke in order to provide a lorry park. Repeated efforts to get Ministers to respond have not been heeded. A meeting was held for 19 regional MPs last week, but only one attended, so I am taking on the job of representing a no-deal Brexit. It is a task I undertake with all the enthusiasm of an arsonist trying to put out a bushfire, but I will do it.

[Jonathan Reynolds]

This has been a significant and important debate. In fact, it is clear that the House desires a longer and broader debate—that point was well made by the Chair of the Treasury Committee. No deal is some people’s preferred outcome, and they are the same people who told us that doing a deal would be the easiest thing in history. They were wrong then and they are wrong now. I feel that the case against the unilateral use of these no-deal powers has been comprehensively made, and I urge all Members to vote for our amendments, because that is best for jobs, prosperity and the national interest.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Vince Cable and Jonathan Reynolds

Thursday 24th October 2013 Commons Chamber

[Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op)]

10. What representations he has received from manufacturers on the case for continued UK membership of the EU with regard to their business and investment plans.

[The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (Vince Cable)]

Ministers and the Department frequently receive representations from manufacturers, and others, in support of continued UK membership of the European Union and the single market. A recent example is the report by the Engineering Employers Federation, “Manufacturing: Our future in Europe”.

[Jonathan Reynolds]

Manufacturing is vital to my constituency, the country, and to increasing exports and getting our economy back on stronger ground. Does the Secretary of State agree that the constant doubts cast over our relationship with the EU by Members of his Government are harmful to our manufacturing industry, which wants certainty so that we can invest and grow for the future?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Vince Cable and Jonathan Reynolds

Thursday 21st March 2013 Commons Chamber

[Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op)]

16. What progress he made on the adoption of an industrial strategy for the UK.

[The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (Vince Cable)]

We are developing long-term partnerships with business across a variety of sectors and policy areas. On Monday, I announced £1.6 billion of new Government funding over the next 10 years—well beyond this Parliament—to back our industrial strategy, concentrating initially on aerospace, automotives and agri-food.

[Jonathan Reynolds]

In recent weeks, the former director general of the Institute of Directors, Sir George Cox, in his excellent review of tackling short-termism in the British economy, added his voice to the call for a proper industrial strategy to support long-term growth. Since he took office and abandoned much of what the last Labour Government were doing, the Secretary of State has delivered many good speeches on delivering an industrial strategy, but we do not yet seem to have one. When will we get this sorted?

[Vince Cable]

We already have one. We are reversing much of the damage done with the decline of manufacturing industry under the Labour Government. I applaud the George Cox study. It follows, and in many ways echoes, the survey of long-termism and short-termism that I did through Professor John Kay.

Industrial Strategy

Debate between Vince Cable and Jonathan Reynolds

Monday 10th September 2012 Commons Chamber

[Vince Cable]

That is absolutely right. It is very important that we stress this. The big investment that has been made by the main car companies—the original equipment manufacturers—is only part of the story. There is now a will to bring back a lot of the lost supply chains, which went for a variety of reasons, including exchange rates and a fashion for outsourcing that has been partially reversed. This is being actively pursued through the Automotive Council, which is involved with the Government in doing so. As my hon. Friend may know, we have a supply chain funding initiative that is currently open to competition, and a variety of bids have come in actively to support the process that he describes.

[Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op)]

To be truly successful, an industrial strategy should be shared on a cross-party basis so that business knows that it can invest without having to see radical shifts in policy. However, it is not altogether clear that both sides of the Government agree on it—after all, it has taken two years to get to this point—so what assurances can the Secretary of State give us that it will not be undermined by the Treasury and the Prime Minister again?

[Vince Cable]

The starting point of the hon. Gentleman’s question is right: there has to be cross-party support, because if we are thinking 10, 15 or 20 years ahead, we do not know what form of Government will emerge over that time. There is undoubtedly cross-party support among Government Members. I think that I heard support from the Opposition, but I was not totally clear about that.