Automotive Industry Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde)
(Lab/Co-op) I beg to move, That this House recognises that the
automotive industry is the jewel in the crown of British
manufacturing and believes it can have a bright future creating
good jobs for people across the UK; regrets that after 13 years of
Conservative neglect the UK risks losing this world-class industry,
putting thousands of jobs under threat; condemns the Government for
its lack of an...Request free trial
Automotive
Industry
(Stalybridge and Hyde)
(Lab/Co-op)
I beg to move,
That this House recognises that the automotive industry is the
jewel in the crown of British manufacturing and believes it can
have a bright future creating good jobs for people across the UK;
regrets that after 13 years of Conservative neglect the UK risks
losing this world-class industry, putting thousands of jobs under
threat; condemns the Government for its lack of an industrial
strategy and the negative impact this has had on investment in
the UK’s automotive sector; calls on the Government to urgently
resolve the rules of origin changes which are due to take effect
in 2024, working with partners across Europe to negotiate a deal
that works for manufacturers; and further calls on the Government
to adopt an active industrial strategy to build the battery
factory capacity needed to secure the automotive sector for
decades to come.
It is a real pleasure to open this debate on an issue that I know
is close to the hearts of many colleagues and constituents. Many
Members present represent some of the most iconic names in UK
automotive production. For me, it is very much an issue of huge
personal significance. Sunderland, where I grew up, is of course
renowned not just for its wonderful football team but for the
tremendous success of the Nissan plant. I am very proud to say
that many friends from my childhood still work in that plant. Of
all the great businesses that I get to visit, that is one of my
absolute favourites, and I know that colleagues will feel just as
strongly about the parts of the automotive industry that they and
their constituencies are associated with.
That industry is full of skilled and committed workers,
innovation, export success and huge growth potential. However, we
have called this Opposition day debate because even the most
ardent defender of the Government could not fail to be worried
about the health of the sector as it stands. The British car
industry should and could be booming, as should the wider
automotive sector, yet production has slumped by over a third
under the Conservatives. There are huge concerns about a series
of major policy failures, including domestic battery production
facilities, trade barriers post Brexit, and higher energy costs
and other supply chain issues. Although this is an Opposition day
debate, I know that those concerns are shared widely across the
House, and I hope that, by having this debate, we are able to
express the clear political commitment of this House to that
crucial sector.
(Alyn and Deeside) (Lab)
My hon. Friend will be aware of the world-class Toyota engine
plant in my constituency that produces the highest-quality hybrid
engines—one of the first plants outside Japan to do so. Does he
agree that hybrid is part of the solution, not, as the Government
think, part of the problem?
I do not know whether I am supposed to declare an interest, but I
drive a Toyota hybrid myself—I have a large family and have to
get between Manchester and London, and that is a pretty sound
option for doing so. I am aware of the issue that my hon. Friend
raises, as is the shadow Transport Secretary, my hon. Friend the
Member for Sheffield, Heeley (). We must be careful to ensure
that there is certainty so that that transition we are all
seeking can happen. I know that there are particular issues
relating to that sector and that side of the industry. We are
alert to those issues, and we will, of course, work with him, his
constituents and the expertise in this country and beyond to
ensure that that timescale is done properly. For many people
seeking to make the transition—we are seeing a huge response from
the public on that—that is the option that is currently
available, particularly for families. We must bear in mind that
the solution has to be something that works for all our
constituents, and we must be cognisant of their concerns. I am
grateful to him for raising that point at this stage of the
debate.
I worry at times that the Government, and maybe especially the
Secretary of State for Business and Trade, do not have a great
deal of time for industry at all. Artificial intelligence, tech
and financial services are all crucial sectors, but we should not
for one moment think that there is no role for industry. Nor
should we ever believe that there is a false choice between
services and manufacturing. Support for the automotive sector is
not nostalgia. Many of the plants that we will talk about in the
debate are the lifeblood of their communities, providing good
work and good wages. However, just as in other crucial
industries—steel is another good example—I get no sense that
securing the long-term future of the sector and managing the
transition to a low-carbon economy are priorities for the
Government.
That is not just the view of the Labour party; it is what
industry itself has been telling the Government. Mike Hawes of
the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders said at its recent
conference:
“We…need a…response urgently”.
Stellantis has warned that:
“If the cost of EV manufacturing in the U.K. becomes
uncompetitive and unsustainable, operations will close.”
The automotive industry faces a series of challenges that must be
taken seriously. The rules of origin, which are due to come into
force from January next year, will require 45% of a vehicle’s
value to be made in the UK or the EU or a 10% tariff will be
imposed that will destroy most profit margins entirely. Of
course, those requirements increase significantly over time. We
have a lack of progress on battery manufacturing; Germany already
has 10 times the battery-making capacity of the UK. We have wider
business challenges, including the highest industrial energy
costs in the G7, and rising inflation and borrowing costs.
However, what we have seen from other countries is that none of
those challenges is insurmountable. Other countries are pulling
ahead. China is home to numerous battery giants such as CATL and
BYD, while the United States famously has Tesla. But the EU has
also ramped up battery production through initiatives such as the
European Battery Alliance and how has 35 battery factories in
place. In contrast, the UK is yet to develop a robust battery
manufacturing sector, which makes us heavily reliant on imports
and risks the long-term presence of automotive production in this
country.
I think we all recognise that, over time, vehicles will be built
where the batteries are made, not the other way around. We will
never be able to match the sheer fiscal firepower of the US
Inflation Reduction Act, but we do have advantages—competitive
advantages on workforce and skills, and on research and
development—and if we had a Government with sufficient political
commitment, the future could be very bright indeed.
(Dartford) (Con)
Last month, I visited the new Caterham Cars production plant in
my constituency, to which the company has had to move because its
production is insufficient to meet the demand that it has at the
moment. It will take on more employees and apprentices, and it
will manufacture more of the vehicles for which it is famous. I
remind the shadow Secretary of State that that expansion in the
industry has happened under a Conservative Government. Does he
welcome that news?
I am incredibly happy to welcome that news and the positive story
that the hon. Member sets out, but I do not think that any of the
success that he has seen detracts from the fact that there are
significant policy challenges. The overall number of vehicles has
declined, as he will know, and yes, the pandemic and the
semi-conductor supply chain issues happened, but that does not
remove the need for this House to take seriously the rules of
origin, the battery-making capacity and so on. We are not in any
way on track. There is also, frankly, the international
competitive position. Other countries are simply indicating that
they want those industries and that investment much more than we
do. It is not so much that the Conservative party has turned up
to a gunfight with a knife, but that it is not showing up to the
fight at all.
What we need is a plan of action. That is what the Labour party
has developed, and it is what we want the chance to implement
should we form the next Government. Our plan addresses battery
capacity and charging infrastructure, as well as key issues such
as planning and grid regulation. We are up front about the
challenges that we face, but we are ambitious for the future.
Frankly, that is nothing short of what is required. Our plan
starts with having an active industrial strategy. I know that
some Conservatives do not like that kind of terminology, but I
say simply that all countries need an industrial strategy. To go
back to the example of Nissan, that was part of an explicit
strategy—by even Margaret Thatcher’s Government—to attract
automotive expertise to the UK. The absence of any coherent
modern industrial strategy is hurting investment into the UK.
Other countries are simply pushing ahead, recognising that the
challenges that we are facing have to be met nationally by
Governments with skin in the game. Industry is crying out, first,
for stability, and secondly, for a partner and some clear policy
signals. That is exactly what it will get from a Labour
Government. That is why we have said that we would put the new
Industrial Strategy Council on a statutory footing, giving some
reassurance that the instability of the Conservative years is at
an end.
Our green prosperity plan will part-fund the battery-making
gigafactories that are so essential to our future. That will be
catalytic public investment to unlock the much greater sum of
private investment we need. The reality is that no battery
factory in the world has been developed without that kind of
Government commitment. We know that the Government are in talks
with some firms about potential investment decisions, and I say
in good faith to Ministers, “That is good. We want you to
succeed.” Where those companies need assurances from the
Opposition should a change of Government occur, we will of course
have those talks. However, it would be far better and a far
better deal for the taxpayer to make those offers publicly, and
to be negotiating with a range of potential partners to get the
best deals for Britain, because domestic battery production is so
important.
(Weaver Vale) (Lab)
Could the shadow Minister clarify how many gigafactories this
Government have enabled to be built in the UK?
I am more than happy to. My hon. Friend will know that we
currently have one facility, which is the Envision facility at
Nissan in Sunderland. The overall number will depend on how big
those factories are, but broadly we will need three to four in
the interim, and by 2040 we will need eight to 10.
Germany, for instance, already has four to five gigafactories up
and running. A further four are almost up and running, and it is
in talks for a further advance on that position. The sense is
that Germany is genuinely 10 times ahead of us in that capacity,
and while people might think, “Well, Germany is a country with
incredible automotive history, reputation and strength”, there
are other countries that we are already losing out to. Spain, for
instance, has a very active industrial strategy when it comes to
the automotive sector, and eastern Europe has had tremendous
success in that area. Because automotive is about regional
markets, simply seeing what other countries are doing will have
huge consequences for the potential for investment in this
country. Crucially, we should be playing to the UK’s strengths in
areas such as research and development, like the fantastic
programmes at the UK Battery Industrialisation Centre in Warwick,
which my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Heeley and I were
able to visit recently.
My hon. Friend has rightly talked about producing batteries, but
the position with hydrogen is very similar: if we look at what
Germany is doing, particularly with buses and bigger vehicles, we
are years behind. We really need to invest in that area.
I thoroughly agree—the scale of ambition that I see around the
world daunts me when I compare it with this Government’s
ambition. There are some incredibly exciting technologies out
there, including sodium-ion batteries that would reduce our
dependence on lithium and almost certainly cut costs in battery
production. Hydrogen is clearly going to be extremely exciting,
as are fuel cells, and there are markets for off-road vehicles
that could be huge potential markets for the UK. We should also
not forget buses: that is an area in which new technology could
contribute to things like cleaner air, as well as better
transport.
(Buckingham) (Con)
Does the shadow Minister agree that on top of battery innovation
and hydrogen innovation, the UK is leading in another field: that
of synthetic fuels? However, giving the automotive sector a
really strong future in this country involves a whole-system
analysis, not just of how the vehicle is manufactured but how the
energy that will run it is manufactured. That involves looking
again at the zero tailpipe standards that are coming in, because
if we have that whole-system analysis, we will get to green
technology and greener transport but with a whole-picture
effect.
I agree with part of what the hon. Gentleman has said. I agree
about the whole-system analysis: many parts of the
decarbonisation journey that industry will need to take on will
be a much bigger question than simply unplugging one form of old
fossil fuel technology and plugging in another. For instance, the
steel industry will have to think about scrap if it is to make
the conversion to electric arc furnaces; and if we are to move
towards synthetic fuels, we will clearly have to look at where
the feed stocks are coming from.
However, one of the most defining features of the past 13 years—I
say this without any kind of partisanship—has been a series of
very ambitious targets from this Government in areas that relate
to decarbonisation, but with no real means to deliver them. That
target is then pulled away, and confidence in the British state
to decarbonise falls apart. I am thinking particularly about the
famous “cut the green crap” comments from the former Prime
Minister, , regarding home insulation.
When we talk about changing existing Government policy, we should
not underestimate just how little confidence the international
business community has in this Government’s promises at times.
Broadly, the approach has been very ambitious targets but with no
means to actually deliver them, which undermines the case.
(Worsley and Eccles South)
(Lab)
My hon. Friend is making a very effective speech. As he is
talking about targets, will he come on to the roll-out of
charging points? My constituency has three motorways in it and
incredibly high levels of pollution. We need to remove all the
barriers, both to net zero and to reducing that pollution. Does
my hon. Friend agree that constituencies in the north such as
mine need that situation addressed? It is shameful that, as I
understand it, more chargers were installed in Westminster this
year than across the whole of the north of England. We in the
north have those issues of pollution, and we need to move faster
in addressing them. My hon. Friend may be planning to come on to
that point, but it is an important one.
I am incredibly grateful to my hon. Friend for making those
points. The approach of the Front Bench—from her, from me on
industrial policy, and from my hon. Friend the Member for
Sheffield, Heeley on transport policy—must bring those two things
together. We need the policies in place that will make this
country a world leader in the production of vehicles and ensure
that it also works for consumers. She raises the fact that there
are more charging points in Westminster—I know my hon. Friend’s
constituency, which is not far from mine—and the difference
between comparable parts of this country, north and south, in the
level, density and availability of chargers is unthinkable, let
alone in comparison with Norway, for instance. Not only do we not
have enough chargers but grid, maintenance and connection issues
often mean they are out of order. I absolutely assure my hon.
Friend that when we as a shadow Cabinet and a potential
Government think about these issues, both vehicle production and
consumers are paramount. Clearly, consumers want to purchase
electric vehicles—that is the growth part of the market—but too
often we do not have the infrastructure in place. It cannot be
some form of novelty. I have driven electric vehicles around
Greater Manchester when it was something of a novelty—I could get
access to chargers and, at times, preferential parking spaces
near Deansgate, which is no small thing—but for mass market
usage, neither the policies nor the infrastructure are yet in
place. That needs to be widely recognised.
On the international trade position, it was always imperative to
have a domestic battery industry, but it has become an
existential issue because of the Government’s approach to our
trading relationship with the EU. As discussed in relation to
regional export markets, eight in 10 vehicles made in the UK last
year were exported, so it is widely recognised that the impending
cliff edge in the trade and co-operation agreement with the EU on
rules of origin is a serious challenge to the future of the
sector in the UK. The Government have been far too slow to
realise the scale of that danger, and while they may promise that
a deal is coming soon, I am afraid that “soon” cannot come soon
enough. Major UK manufacturers including Stellantis, Jaguar Land
Rover and Ford have all warned that a failure to reach a deal
would cost jobs in the UK.
It has been two and a half years since the trade and co-operation
agreement was formally signed. That is precious time that could
have been used to plan and prepare, but those are two words that
this Government often fail to understand. What have they done in
that time? They have not secured investment in battery capacity.
They have not improved our relationship with our biggest export
market, and they certainly have not worked with industry to find
solutions.
We know that a breakthrough is needed, and we would use our plans
to make Brexit work to ensure that the rules of origin work for
British manufacturers. We cannot achieve a compromise without
working with our partners in Europe, and I believe that only
Labour can be that good-faith partner. Our plan to invest in
battery capacity, alongside compromises on the rules of origin,
is the sensible way forward to meet our climate objectives and
trade obligations and retain our industrial base.
We will make the UK a clean energy superpower by 2030, with net
zero carbon electricity lowering costs for the UK car industry by
no longer leaving UK industry prone to the volatility of
international gas prices, alongside better grid connections and
planning reform to ensure that “made in Britain” does not become
a thing of the past. That is the prospectus for action we need.
Right now, this country needs some optimism. The mantra of this
Government—that this is as good as it gets—is as depressing as it
is wrong.
(Bosworth) (Con)
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Go on, then.
Dr Evans
There is a news report about a new global company being launched
by the French motor giant Renault and the Chinese manufacturer
Geely that will invest €7 billion here, creating 19,000 jobs. Is
that not exactly the kind of optimism Conservative Members talk
about?
I think those companies must have seen the opinion polls and are
wondering whether a Labour Government are coming, if there is as
positive news as that could be. I would simply say to all
Conservative Members that, on any aspect of industrial policy,
there is too often on their side a desire to pick individual
stories or statistics and try to pretend that substantial and
significant issues do not exist. If we talk to anybody reasonably
objective in this sector, they will point out—on battery
production, rules of origin, charging infrastructure, industrial
energy prices—that there are real challenges and they require
some serious engagement from the other side, which to date has
not been forthcoming.
(Warwick and Leamington)
(Lab)
I would like to add to that comment—my hon. Friend is making an
excellent speech, by the way—what was said at the industry
conference held by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders
a couple of weeks ago. The industry was speaking as one, and I am
afraid it was critical of the Government, saying, “All these
years on, remember that Baldrick at least had a cunning plan.
Sadly, the Government don’t.”
I followed that conference very closely—my hon. Friend the shadow
Transport Secretary spoke at the conference, and I have spoken at
that conference in the past—and that was absolutely the
sentiment. Perhaps humility does not come easily to Conservative
MPs, but I ask them to take on board those genuine views from the
industry on the situation we find ourselves in.
The automotive sector could be a practical illustration of the
transition to new jobs and new opportunities that we all want to
see. We have laid out our plan for the sector. Some Conservative
colleagues may disagree, but let us have from them some
alternative proposals, because the status quo will not do. Our
motion is a plan to deliver £30 billion in economic growth in the
parts of the country that need it most. It is a plan that could
create 80,000 additional jobs—good jobs of the kind that people
can raise their family on. It is a plan for Britain that would
mean we once again lead the pack and feel confident for the
future. I believe the choice is clear—a plan under Labour or
further decline under the Conservatives—and I think we all know
whom the public would prefer behind the wheel.
1.12pm
The Minister for Industry and Economic Security ( )
What a disappointing opening speech. There was an opportunity to
praise, promote and protect the automotive sector—and to talk
about all the positive news stories—but all we have heard for the
last 10 or 15 minutes was the automotive sector being talked
down. I appreciate that the timing of this debate has not gone
well for the Opposition: as my hon. Friend the Member for
Bosworth (Dr Evans) mentioned, today we have heard about the
Renault Group and Geely having chosen the UK as the headquarters
of a new company developing ultra low emission engines and
potentially investing billions of pounds in the UK—up to €7
billion. That shows not only the confidence of the automotive
sector, but its commitment to the UK, and these are the
opportunities or the stories we should be talking about.
The hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde () constantly referenced
the SMMT statistics, but he forgot to mention the ones he should
have reported at the Dispatch Box so that we could once again
promote how healthy and dynamic the automotive sector is. Car
production in Britain rose for a fourth straight month in May.
The SMMT has confirmed that a total of 79,046 cars rolled out of
the factory gates a few months ago, which is an increase of more
than 26%. Passenger car numbers are boosted by a greater appetite
for hybrid electric motors built in Britain. The bosses at the
SMMT have said that, while there have of course been challenges
around the world, manufacturers have
“defied the challenging economic backdrop to fulfil customer
demand for the latest British-built models, at home and
overseas,”
so that manufacturing and production are indeed up.
This is a positive news story, and any opportunity we have to
speak about the automotive sector should be positive, not
negative or all about political point scoring. This is a serious
topic and a serious industry. I know the hon. Gentleman is keen
to be very ideological within the Westminster bubble, but I would
suggest he steps a little outside it. I know my hon. Friend the
Member for South Derbyshire (Mrs Wheeler), who is a champion for
Toyota, which has the largest manufacturing plant in her
constituency, would welcome a visit by Labour Members so they can
see how the sector is booming just in her constituency. There are
over 2,000 people working at the plant in South Derbyshire and
involved in the supply chains, and 80% of the cars manufactured
are exported to Europe. Exports are up, by the way, which I will
get on to. Toyota continues to innovate and it is at the
forefront of producing hybrid cars. It has been cutting emissions
for over a decade and takes net zero seriously, having energy
from solar panels all around the plant. The point she would want
to make is, “Get out of the Westminster bubble, visit South
Derbyshire, see what is happening at Toyota”—and at many other
firms, as I will go on to say—“and you will see the work is going
well.” Our job is to protect, promote and praise, not to talk the
sector down.
(Luton North) (Lab)
It is all very well and good talking about optimism, but does the
Minister accept the reality facing the automotive industry in the
UK today, and the stark warnings given by Stellantis about future
job losses if the Government do not sort out the rules of origin
problems?
Ms Ghani
I want to state for the record—and for the hon. Lady, who was
obviously sitting there while I was speaking—that that was not
optimism. Those were the facts and figures promoted not by
Government, but by industry representatives. I had a meeting with
Stellantis recently. We know that a number of challenges are
reflected globally, not just in the UK, such as being able to
recruit into the sector. The hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde
missed another opportunity to talk about the fantastic jobs that
are available. Of course, on rules of origin, that is an issue
not just in the UK; it is an issue for lots of other countries
that want to export and import, too.
The Minister talked about the importance of the Toyota factory.
In my constituency, I have the engine plant, which produces
quality hybrid engines. Why are this Government opposed to hybrid
engines?
Ms Ghani
This Government have a strong mandate to reach net zero and the
consultation has just taken place on said mandate. The right hon.
Member will know that I have been spending a lot time with the
automotive sector, including taking delegations to meet the
Minister of State, Department for Transport, my right hon. Friend
the Member for Hereford and South Herefordshire (), who will be overseeing that.
My job—I also chair the Automotive Council—is to champion
business, and on occasion to try to remove all the barriers it
needs removed for it to manufacture more and export more. I know
that the Transport Minister will be speaking more about that
later.
I will get on to all points the hon. Member for Stalybridge and
Hyde raised, but he mentioned growing up in Sunderland. Just for
the record—I can see there is a Birmingham MP here, the hon.
Member for Birmingham, Perry Barr (Mr Mahmood)—I grew up in
Birmingham very close to a car plant that employs many members of
my family, including my brother Nasim, so this sector is very
close to my heart. I have been told not to make any football
jokes about Birmingham and Sunderland at this point; I will leave
that for the final speech.
Will the Minister give way?
Ms Ghani
Is it on a football point, because I will not be able to handle
that? If it is not on a football point, I will take the
intervention.
This point is not about football; it is about the debate. To pick
up on the Minister’s analysis, she is correct on the statistics
she gave about the UK market. She will know that we started from
a pretty poor base post the pandemic and that our production was
particularly hit, but other countries recovered better. It is an
international market that is fighting for investment—I am sure
she will accept that—and that is why it is of concern.
Ms Ghani
It is an international market that is fighting for supply chains.
The SMMT was clear that, when manufacturing production was low,
that was down to access to products and critical minerals, which
I will come on to. As well as taking care of the industry, I am
responsible for critical minerals and for supply chains. We are
working with the industry, which I met just this morning, to put
together a supply chain import strategy, which will be out in the
autumn. We need to get a number of things right to make it even
easier for the sector to do even better than it already is, but
it is in a really good place and I will go on to mention some of
the facts and stories about that.
The sector is indeed a jewel in the crown of our economy. It is
vital, because of where it is based across the country, to
supporting the levelling-up agenda, net zero and advancing global
Britain. Our automotive industry employs 166,000 people, adds
over £70 billion to the UK economy and is our second largest
exporter of goods. The UK is proud to be home to major global
manufacturers such as JLR, Nissan, Stellantis, Toyota, BMW and
Ford. But that is not the whole of the UK’s automotive
eco-system: we have a lot more to be proud of, from our luxury
and performance sector, including Rolls-Royce
Bentley, Aston Martin, McLaren and Lotus, to heavy goods vehicles
and buses, such as Leyland Trucks, Wrightbus, Alexander Dennis
and Switch, as well as the future of mobility, encompassing
connected and autonomous vehicles. Those manufacturers are
supported by a diverse, resilient and growing UK supply chain
that spans a wide range of components and includes companies such
as Bosch, NSK, Meritor and Swindon Pressings. These are valued
partnerships, and the sector knows that my Department for
Business and Trade is the Government’s first port of call to help
businesses grow and flourish, and to create jobs, apprenticeships
and opportunities around the country.
I thank the Minister for being generous with her time. All the
manufacturers that she mentioned face a cliff edge in January
2024, with the 10% tariff. What are the Government going to do
about it? It is desperate in terms of those jobs in our
communities.
Ms Ghani
I assume that the hon. Member is referring to the rules of origin
tariff. That is why we are working hard and negotiating with the
EU, and working with our partner representative groups within the
EU, so that they can be lobby as well. This is not just an issue
in the UK. This is a European issue too, and we are making sure
that those voices are heard loud and clear with our partners
across Europe.
(Ellesmere Port and Neston)
(Lab)
I have a specific question for clarity: have the Government
formally requested a reopening of the rules of origin for
2024?
Ms Ghani
The Government are working hard to share the challenges that will
be faced by all manufacturers in Europe, not just the UK, when it
comes to importing and exporting vehicles. This is not just a UK
issue, and it is important that not just we but our counterparts
in Europe make these arguments loud and clear to the EU. I
recently met SMMT and asked that its sister bodies do the same
where they reside in European countries, to ensure that those
arguments are heard loud and clear.
As I said, there is huge diversity of companies within the supply
chain and manufacturing of all automotive vehicles, and the UK
has a full automotive eco-system across the UK. The sector is
here because it recognises the UK’s unique strengths. Our
engineers are world class—it is not for nothing that six out of a
total of 10 Formula 1 teams are based in the UK. More broadly,
the sector recognises that this Government have its back. We want
to use innovation, skills and a competitive business environment
to ensure that the UK automotive sector can thrive.
I am grateful to the Minister, because she alluded to the point
that I was making about the automotive industry. We have talked a
lot about manufacturing, but the UK is the world leader in things
such as research and development, as well as in
testing—autonomous testing, safety testing; we are literally the
world leaders in this stuff. I mainly know that because a lot of
it is based in my patch. Does the Minister agree?
Ms Ghani
I could not disagree with my hon. Friend, who is a champion for
all things technology and transport, as well as for his
constituency. The investment made in R&D has enabled large
manufacturing firms to work closely with our academic
institutions, and to de-risk some of the technologies that are
now becoming mainstream, and we continue to support that area.
That leads on to my next point about the Advanced Propulsion
Centre and the automotive transformation fund, which are key in
us trying to de-risk and adopt new technologies to drive the
sector forward.
On the Automotive Council, the hon. Member for Stalybridge and
Hyde said that he was engaging with the sector, but I am not
quite sure where and when. A lot of the comments he made will not
go down well with the sector because they were not very positive
on all the work it has been doing. I engage directly with firms
to see how hard they are committed to the sector, and what they
expect from their politicians is support, not to be talked
down.
I put on record my thanks to Graham Hoare, the current co-chair,
Mike Hawes, Neville Jackson, Ian Constance, Markus Grüneisl, Paul
Willcox, Murray Paul, Adrian Hallmark, Michael Leiters, Tim
Slatter, , Richard Kenworthy and many
other indispensable members of the Automotive Council. I thank
them for all the work they do, considering how challenging times
have been not just for us but for our counterparts in Europe. I
recently spoke at the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Trader’s
parliamentary reception, and I welcome its “Manifesto 2030” with
its five key priorities: green automotive transformation
strategy, net zero mobility, green skills, made in Britain, and
powering UK clean tech. There is a lot that we agree on, and I
look forward to working with the sector to try to protect and
strengthen the whole automotive industry. Car companies want to
innovate, and we want to support them to do so. That is why the
Government have an overarching goal of making the UK a global hub
for innovation, as alluded to by the my hon. Friend the Member
for Bosworth.
In embracing that innovation—this is further to my intervention
on the shadow Minister—the UK is a leader in the development of
the synthetic fuel sector. By that, I do not mean fuels made from
feedstocks; I mean green hydrogen merged with atmospheric carbon
capture, whereby what comes out of the tailpipe is the same
volume of carbon that is then recaptured to make the next load of
fuel. With whole system analysis, that will be shown to be net
zero, but the zero tailpipe mandate gets in the way of that. Does
the Minister agree that, to embrace this innovation properly and
to give an eclectic future to the automotive sector, we need to
embrace those innovators as well?
Ms Ghani
We do need to embrace those innovators. One of the reasons we
have so much investment in the UK in innovation and the
automotive sector is that we are often first out of the door in
helping to de-risk and test that technology. The Minister of
State, Department for Transport, my right hon. Friend the Member
for Hereford and South Herefordshire, will touch on tailings, but
just last week I was at the Lower Thames Crossing, which is
putting out a pitch to ensure that all vehicles on the
construction site have green hydrogen. The several thousand
vehicle movements on and off the site carrying freight will also
have green hydrogen. The site is a port, and given the level of
construction that is taking place, it may be one of the largest
construction sites to get to green hydrogen first. I am not sure,
but I think it is pretty well on track to being a world leader in
that.
The UK-wide innovation strategy sets out our long-term plan for
delivering innovation-led growth. Our primary objective is to
boost private sector investment across the whole UK, creating the
right conditions for all businesses to innovate, giving them
confidence to do so and ensuring that we are leading the future
by creating it.
Will the Minister come on to the point that I raised with my hon.
Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde () about the roll-out of
charging points? That is an important point. People are making
decisions about electric vehicles, and we want them to make the
right decisions. There is an absolute dearth of charging points
in my constituency and many parts of Greater Manchester, and
Westminster has installed more public electric charging points
than the whole north of England. The Government are asleep at the
wheel. When will they wake up and do something about that?
Ms Ghani
We are topping and tailing this debate with a Transport Minister
and I know he is keen to touch on charging points, but the public
charging network is growing quickly, and public charging devices
have more than tripled in four years, from 10,300 devices in
January 2019, to more than 43,000 in June 2023. The Government
expect that around 300,000 charge points will be needed as a
minimum by 2030. They are being rolled out at pace, but I do not
doubt there will be constituency, case-by-case charge point
concerns and the Minister will reflect on those.
One concern that the SMMT and all Members of Parliament who have
manufacturing plants in their constituencies regularly raise with
me is access to talent. Car companies need highly skilled
individuals across the entirety of their business. One reason the
UK is attractive is our world-leading universities, with four UK
institutions in the global top 10, according to the QS world
university rankings. But that is not all. We have supported the
automotive sector through the apprenticeship levy, with £2.7
billion funding by the 2024-25 financial year. That will support
apprenticeships in non-levy employers, often SMEs, where the
Government will continue to pay 95% of apprentice training
costs.
We recognise the importance of a level playing field. That is
why, at the spring Budget, the Chancellor launched a new capital
allowance offer. Businesses will now benefit from full expensing,
which offers 100% first-year relief to companies on qualifying
new main-rate plant and machinery investments from 1 April 2023
until 31 March 2026, the 50% first-year allowance for expenditure
by companies on new special rate assets until 31 March 2026, and
the annual investment allowance, which provides 100% first-year
relief for plant and machinery investments up to £1 million.
Due to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, energy costs have been an
issue and a concern for the sector. That is why we have again
intervened on behalf of the automotive sector, as well as many
others, to ensure that the UK’s offer is competitive. It is why
the Government have implemented a range of targeted measures to
ensure that energy costs for high energy intensive industries,
including battery manufacturing, are in line with other major
economies around the world, levelling the playing field for
British companies across Europe through the British industry
supercharger scheme. In addition, to take just one example, the
industrial energy transformation fund, now in its third phase,
was designed to help businesses with high energy use to cut their
energy bills and carbon emissions by investing in
energy-efficient and low-carbon technologies. This Government
announced £315 million of funding in the 2018 Budget available up
to 2027.
The hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde talked about providing
confidence and support for the sector, and I want to flesh out
some of the announcements he was unable to bring himself to say
at the Dispatch Box in case that was put into Hansard. Companies
continue to show confidence in the UK, and we have announced
major investments across the UK, including the £1 billion from
Nissan and Envision to create an EV manufacturing hub in
Sunderland. I was just on the phone to Envision this morning. It
is an end-to-end supply chain. We have £100 million from
Stellantis for its site in Ellesmere Port, and £380 million from
Ford to make Halewood its first EV components site in Europe.
Jaguar Land Rover has also announced that it will be investing
£15 billion over five years into its industrial footprint as part
of its move towards electrification. That is great news for the
west midlands, where JLR has three production sites, research and
development facilities, and its headquarters. I am hugely
confident that the UK will continue to attract investments large
and small to enable the EV transition and deliver green jobs.
Those are the stories we should be promoting at the Dispatch Box,
not playing down.
The Government recognise the concerns of the sector, and we are
dealing with serious global challenges, including rising costs
because of Putin’s horrific war in Ukraine, supply chains
disrupted by covid aftershocks and countries turning inward
towards protectionism, by which, of course, I mean the Inflation
Reduction Act. Acknowledging those issues, over the course of the
summer I have been holding a series of business roundtables to
understand exactly where the challenges in supply chains are most
acute, and where the Government and businesses can work together
more closely to ensure that the UK’s supply chains are resilient,
now and in the future.
Those headwinds have been felt across the globe, and where the UK
sector has been impacted, it has not been uniquely impacted. The
entire automotive sector is midway through a once-in-a-lifetime
shift away from the internal combustion engine towards
zero-emission vehicles. That is good not just for our net zero
ambitions; it also has the potential to provide wider economic
and social benefits. Of course, our competitors know that too,
and the race to secure zero-emission manufacturing capacity
across the world is fierce. Some countries seem willing to spend
eye-watering amounts. We will be offering targeted investment in
the future of the auto manufacturing sector. That means focusing
on exactly where we know we are ahead of the game
internationally, offering targeted and measured support that
reflects the size and scale of our outstanding automotive
sector.
As I have said, we have more than a chequebook to attract
companies to these shores; our highly productive and skilled
workforce, focus on innovation and tech and the ease of doing
business are key factors in a company’s decision to base itself
in the UK. There is a backdrop of intensely challenging
constraints on the sector globally, while the sector is
undergoing a seismic technological transformation. It is clearly
a difficult situation for manufacturers across the world, but
there are positives to be considered, especially here in the UK.
The SMMT reported that UK commercial vehicle production has just
had its best May performance since 2008, growing by 36.9%—I
thought the hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde might crack a
smile for the sector—and year-to-date output is some 47.6% above
the pre-pandemic levels of 2019. That is the message we want to
send internationally. It clearly shows that the UK automotive
sector is strong, dynamic and fundamentally capable. I want the
UK to have a thriving automotive industry. As we take on these
global challenges, we will take them on together with the
sector.
Some mention was made of R&D support, and I will share all
the work we have done. Our R&D and capital programmes
delivered through the Advanced Propulsion Centre and the
automotive transformation fund are positioning the UK as one of
the best places in the world to design, develop and build
zero-emission vehicles. They are working together to support the
creation of an internationally competitive electric vehicle
supply chain. In the coming months, after engagement with
industry, the Government will build on those programmes to take
decisive action and ensure future investment in the manufacture
of zero-emission vehicles, as part of our commitment to building
a cleaner, greener, more sustainable Britain fit for the world of
the future, not the world of the past that the hon. Member for
Stalybridge and Hyde is fixated on.
The automotive transformation fund supports the creation of an
internationally competitive electric vehicle supply chain in the
UK. It provides support to late-stage R&D and capital
investments in strategically important technologies. That
includes unlocking strategic investments in gigafactories, which
I will come to, motors and drives, power electronics and fuel
cell systems. Our automotive industry has a long and proud
history. We are determined to build on our heritage as we invest
in the technologies of the future, positioning the UK as one of
the best locations in the world to manufacture electric
vehicles.
I have spoken previously about the Advanced Propulsion Centre,
because it does fantastic work in driving technology forward. It
was founded in 2013 as a £1 billion joint venture between the
automotive industry and the Government to help the industry meet
the challenges of innovation and decarbonisation. It facilitates
funding to UK-based research and development projects developing
zero-emission technologies. The programme helps accelerate the
development, commercialising and manufacture of advanced
propulsion technologies in the UK. So far, it has supported 199
projects involving 450 partners. It is estimated to have
supported more than 55,000 highly skilled jobs and is projected
to save more than 350 million tonnes of CO2—the equivalent of
removing the lifetime emissions of 14.1 million cars.
Those projects include the setting up of a joint venture between
Unipart and Williams Advanced Engineering to manufacture
batteries in Coventry, Danfoss setting up a centre of excellence
for hydraulic R&D at its plant in Scotland, and Equipmake
increasing the size of its manufacturing plant in Norfolk to meet
demand for its electric drive unit. That shows how much work can
be delivered and how many jobs created if we work with industry
and help it de-risk in adopting new technologies.
I recently visited the Warwick Manufacturing Group, which the
hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde alluded to. I am surprised
he did not applaud the work further.
(Sheffield, Heeley) (Lab)
He did.
Ms Ghani
He could have gone further.
I saw at first hand the cutting-edge future mobility research
being done in Coventry, the birthplace of British motor
manufacturing. While in Coventry, I also had the opportunity to
attend the Advanced Propulsion Centre to discuss how we can build
on the success of our existing R&D and capital investment
programmes. During the visit I met year 6 pupils from Templars
Primary School in Coventry who attended the Advanced Propulsion
Centre’s STEM day. That is a prime example of outreach activity
to inspire the next generation of automotive engineers.
We cannot talk about the automotive sector without thinking about
the broader supply chain and one of my particular passions,
critical minerals, which I am surprised the hon. Member for
Stalybridge and Hyde did not spend more time discussing. He
missed out the key point of what is needed to produce electric
vehicles. We know that China dominates the EV market, partly due
to its grip on the supply chain. It controls much of the mining
of crucial raw materials, and 80% of battery making for EVs is
controlled by Chinese firms. It is also the world’s top car
exporter.
I am not sure whether the hon. Member has had time to read Ed
Conway’s recent book, “Material World”, which makes some key
points on lithium. We know that reserves of the metal are
concentrated in a handful of nations. In his book, he said that
lithium reserves are concentrated in “a handful of nations”, so
that “while the rest of the world panics about China’s dominance
of the battery supply chain, many in Beijing are simultaneously
panicking about China’s reliance on the rest of the world’s raw
materials.”
We know that an EV car battery contains 40 kg of lithium, 10 kg
of cobalt, 10 kg of manganese and 40 kg of nickel, and that is
before we consider the graphite that goes into the anode. Those
materials have to come from somewhere, which is why we updated
our critical minerals strategy in the “Critical Minerals
Refresh”—[Interruption.] That was a positive noise from the hon.
Member—to ensure we were supporting the sector through the whole
supply chain. I encourage colleagues to read Ed Conway’s book. I
am not on commission, by the way; it is just a good read.
The hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde talked about not having
a strategy, but we are working with industry to make sure it can
plan for the future. To do that, we had the “Critical Minerals
Refresh”, which came from the integrated review. We are making
sure that we are focused on batteries and the EV supply chain
here in the UK. Recent good news that the hon. Member also forgot
to mention is the joint venture between British Lithium and
Imerys, announced on 29 June. That is a massive boost to the
critical minerals supply chain in the UK.
By the end of the decade, the development of Cornwall as the UK’s
leading lithium hub will supply enough lithium carbonate for
500,000 electric cars a year. To help secure the supply of
critical minerals, the Government have not only refreshed our
critical minerals strategy, but put in place a task and finish
group to work with industry so that it can highlight its
particular vulnerabilities and we can provide it with the
confidence and resilience it needs in its supply chains.
Most recently, I visited Indonesia, where I met Indonesian
Ministers to emphasise that the UK has a lot to offer on critical
minerals, particularly in relation to private finance,
environmental, social and governance capabilities, and mining
services. I also visited key mine sites and met companies that
are critical in the battery supply chain and in critical mineral
production, including some innovative UK companies showcasing the
best of British—I know that sentence would be hard for the hon.
Member for Stalybridge and Hyde ever to put on the record.
This year, I have also visited South Africa, where I represented
the UK at the Minerals Security Partnership ministerial meeting
and confirmed the UK’s intention to host the next such meeting
during London Metal Exchange Week in October. I also visited
Canada, where I signed the UK-Canada critical minerals statement
of intent and launched our critical minerals dialogue with
Canada, forging a key partnership with one of the most important
global players in the critical minerals ecosystem. The hon.
Member will want to have a moment to reflect on and applaud our
work internationally and domestically on critical minerals.
Any other countries?
Ms Ghani
So many—too many to list right now.
We also need to look at battery recycling. We want to create a
regulatory space that supports the appropriate treatment of EV
batteries. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
is currently reviewing existing UK batteries legislation and
working at pace to publish a consultation in the second half of
2023. We have also funded the Faraday battery challenge, which
has enabled research into the safe and efficient segregation and
repurposing of EV battery cell components. Altilium is exploring
how to recover the critical metals from old EV batteries and
process them effectively so that they can be reused in new
batteries. Reblend aims to develop the core processes and
capabilities for a UK-based automotive battery recycling industry
that can recover cathode materials from production scrap and
end-of-life automotive and consumer batteries for reuse in
automotive batteries going forward. We are not only trying to get
close to host countries and make sure that we are mining
ethically, but seeing how we can ensure that we are recycling
batteries.
The Minister of State at the Department for Transport, my right
hon. Friend the Member for Hereford and South Herefordshire, will
touch on a few issues about the zero-emission vehicle mandate, so
I will quickly touch on rules of origin. To support the
transition, we must not only champion innovation but address all
barriers to trade with partners and markets all over the world.
Our closest trading partner is of course the EU, with whom we
share not only climate goals and a trajectory towards
electrification, but deeply integrated supply chains. More than
50% of cars manufactured in the UK and exported are destined for
EU consumers. For those reasons, I am working closely with the
industry to address its concerns about planned changes to the
rules of origin for electric vehicles in the trade and
co-operation agreement between the UK and EU.
Since signing the deal, unforeseen and shared supply chain shocks
have hit the auto industry hard. That has driven up the cost of
raw materials and battery components, making it harder to meet
the changing rules. That risks industry on both sides facing
tariffs on electric vehicles at a crucial time in the transition
to electrification. I am determined to seek a solution to this
shared problem and will work with the EU to fix it for 2024. The
Prime Minister has raised the issue directly with European
Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, and I and other
Ministers are engaging with our EU counterparts. We will continue
to work closely with industry to address any and all blockers to
the electric transition so that our great UK auto industry
continues to benefit from access to global markets and UK
consumers have the best possible options as we make the switch to
electric vehicles.
I wanted to touch on hydrogen, but I believe I am running out of
time. I was also going to reflect on success in the aerospace
sector, which is very much linked to the automotive sector, but I
will not because I can see that you would like me to conclude,
Madam Deputy Speaker.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
Order. For the sake of clarity, there is plenty of time for the
debate and the hon. Lady can take as long as she wants. She has
so far held the floor for 32 minutes. It is not for me to judge
how long she ought to speak for; it is for her to judge the mood
of the House.
Ms Ghani
Well, I think the mood of the House is to be more positive about
the automotive sector. I could list even more stories, but I will
conclude because I believe that Opposition Members would despair
about all the positivity about the automotive sector that we
could talk about and reflect on.
We are home to more than 25 manufacturers that build more than 70
different vehicles in the UK, all of which are supported by 2,500
component providers and some of the world’s most skilled
engineers. It is incredibly important to reflect how difficult it
has been for the automotive sector globally, but of course we
have huge success stories here in the UK. In 2022 we exported
vehicles to more than 130 different countries and built more than
three quarters of a million cars, with the onwards trajectory
rising year on year. This is a healthy sector going above and
beyond not only to reskill and upskill, but to meet net zero
targets.
The Government are supporting the UK automotive industry, and the
sector is a stalwart example of innovation and dynamism to the
rest of the world. It is a great sector to get into, whether
someone joins it as an apprentice or even by taking on a regular
job. Of course, there is more to do. There are more opportunities
to secure as we transition to zero-emission vehicles and we
realise the potential of connected and autonomous mobility. We
have already achieved a great deal in partnership with this
fantastic sector, but we are determined to do more. We work with
the sector—we do not sit in Westminster coming up with plans that
we then U-turn on—and that has given the sector the confidence it
needs to continue to invest in the UK. The job of those
representing the sector is to praise, promote and protect, not to
talk the sector down.
And to deliver.
Ms Ghani
Delivery is based on the investment I have reflected on
throughout my speech. I look forward to hearing lots of sensible
speeches throughout the debate.
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker
I call the SNP spokesman.
1.46pm
(Gordon) (SNP)
I had ample cause to reflect as I listened to the Minister’s
speech, replete with positivity as it was, that there are
probably not all that many electric vehicles on the market that
could not have been charged up to about 80% in the time the
Minister was on her feet. I wondered whether she was looking to
give her name to a standard unit of measurement that we might
adopt for such an infusion of charge into a vehicle.
The debate is of course about an industrial strategy, or the lack
thereof. While I was preparing for the debate, I had the
opportunity to stumble over a few of the various iterations of
industrial strategy we have had under Conservative Governments
past and present. We had one called “Industrial Strategy:
building a Britain fit for the future” dating from 2017, which in
most respects seemed to be a pretty conventional industrial
strategy in what it set out to achieve and the sectors it sought
to develop to do that. That was of course replaced by something
called “Build Back Better” under the unlamented premiership of
the former Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip, which notably
promised an “open and dynamic economy” and “World-class knowledge
and research”, all the while the Government seemed determined to
cut us off from our largest competitors and closest market. It
promised
“A stable framework for growth and strong institutions”
and boasted of “low, stable inflation”, which sounds somewhat
risible after the experience of the past few months. It also
promised levelling-up in terms of people and places, despite the
fact that we have seen a significant lack of transparency in the
allocations made through that funding stream. I suggest that
those allocations will do nothing to recalibrate the grossly
disproportionate imbalances of wealth and life opportunities
across the nations and regions of these islands.
That takes us to the automotive industry. In many ways, it is
something of a surprise that there still is one. Part of the
deeply held mythology of the Conservatives in terms of the shape
of the post-1979 UK is a tale they like to tell of industrial
dysfunction and poor industrial relations. While that certainly
took its toll on the automotive industry, I think it is the
general lack of care that we have shown for manufacturing and the
economic vandalism inflicted over that period as services were
esteemed over manufacturing that makes the continued existence of
our mass automotive sector in the UK a near miracle. That is not
just as a result of the general lack of respect for
manufacturing; there was also the general economic policy.
Since being elected to this place, I have always tried to talk
more about the future of the North sea oil and gas fields than
about their past mismanagement. Successive Governments,
Conservative and Labour, were desperate to get the oil and gas
pumping as quickly as they could, to reduce the crippling balance
of payments deficit. The result was to push up the value of
sterling beyond anything sustainable, which made manufacturing
exports uncompetitive. Together with what we might call the
policy of sado-monetarism that was imposed with high interest
rates, manufacturing was driven down even further and
unemployment was allowed to spiral later in the decade to above 3
million, leaving scars in the form of decades of lost
opportunities and diminished life chances.
Although automotive production rallied later in the decade thanks
to significant overseas investment, in recent years those
concerns have re-emerged. The Society of Motor Manufacturers and
Traders has reported that manufacturing decreased every year from
2016 to 2022. I hear what the Minister says about the positive
trend of the past four months, but there is a longer-term trend
over the past six years that cannot simply be wished away because
of the past few weeks. In that time, a number of UK-based
manufacturers have announced UK plant closures or reductions in
capacity.
Greening the automotive industry will be a key element in the
green transition. Personal transportation will be here for good,
so it is imperative that we seize fully the industrialising of
our green opportunities. We have touched on the importance of
gigafactories. Batteries are heavy things by their nature,
because of the materials that go into their production. There are
lots of regulations on their transport, particularly
cross-border. They are hazardous to transport over long distances
due to their flammability. That means that there will be a strong
incentive to ensure that EV manufacturing is located relatively
close to where batteries are manufactured—probably in the same
country and region.
For all the promises of factories, Britishvolt and the potential
of gigafactories here, the UK is at risk of falling even further
behind Europe in battery manufacturing. Capacity in continental
Europe is expected to reach nearly 450 GWh by 2030. That is
simply dwarfing the scale of the ambition, never mind the scale
of delivery, that we are likely to see over the next few years.
If those batteries are made in Europe or Asia, there is a simple
decision that vehicle manufacturers can take about where to build
the electric vehicles of the future.
All that is compounded by rules of origin. The new post-Brexit
rules that come into effect in January 2024 will place 10%
tariffs on exports of electric cars between the UK and the EU, if
at least 45% of their value does not originate in the UK or the
EU. We have heard about Stellantis, the world’s fourth largest
car manufacturer, which has warned that the commitment to make
electric vehicles in the UK is in serious jeopardy unless the
Government can negotiate a deal to maintain existing trade rules
until at least 2027, to give them a chance to adapt.
(Paisley and Renfrewshire
North) (SNP)
I looked at Labour’s Opposition day motion; is my hon. Friend as
surprised as me that it does not mention Brexit anywhere?
I was very surprised about that. It seems to be the elephant in
the room, and of this discussion. If my hon. Friend is patient, I
will come to that towards the end of my speech.
Not just Stellantis makes such warnings; they have been echoed by
Jaguar Land Rover and Ford, which have said that if the cost of
EV manufacturing in the UK becomes uncompetitive and
unsustainable, operations will close. Mike Hawes, the chief
executive of the SMMT, warned at a summit recently:
“We can’t afford to have a last minute, 31 December agreement,
because business needs to plan its volumes.”
Andrew Graves, a car expert at the University of Bath has warned
of dire consequences of the industry, noting:
“you will start to lose the whole of the UK industry, not just
Vauxhall and a couple of other manufacturers…it really makes no
industrial sense to locate in the United Kingdom.”
The UK Government’s lack of action to ensure that the UK has the
capacity to build batteries necessary for EU production—coupled
with Brexit, as my hon. Friend the Member for Paisley and
Renfrewshire North () rightly raised—has made it
virtually impossible for domestic UK production to help us meet
our targets on CO2 emissions. As Mike Hawes said:
“We urgently need an industrial strategy that creates attractive
investment conditions and positions the UK as one of the best
places in the world for advanced automotive manufacturing.”
That must be a priority for the UK Government, but I do not see
any indication beyond warm words that it is. To quote someone
else who might know what they are talking about, Andy Palmer,
former chief operating officer at Nissan and chairman of battery
start-ups InoBat and Ionetic, has warned that
“we are running out of time”
to get battery manufacturing up and running in the UK, and that
the failure to address the issues also caused by Brexit could
lead to 800,000 jobs lost in the UK—basically those associated
with the car industry.
On job losses, Madam Deputy Speaker you will remember as well as
I do the impact of the closure of Linwood car plant on the town.
Many would say that Linwood has still not fully recovered from
that closure, when thousands of workers were put on the
scrapheap. Is my hon. Friend worried about what will happen to
places such as Sunderland and Ellesmere Port if the Government do
not get a grip?
I share my hon. Friend’s concern. [Interruption.] There is some
sedentary chuntering—if the hon. Member for Bosworth (Dr Evans)
gives me a chance to respond to the intervention, I will gladly
give way to him if he has a substantive point to make. We can
still see the industrial scars of the devastation reaped by the
sudden closure of the Linwood factory in 1981. What we do not see
quite so readily but is still every bit as debilitating is the
impact on families who lose opportunities to participate fully in
the economy. There is a very high price associated with getting
this wrong, which goes far beyond simply not seeing factories on
greenfield sites.
The motion speaks about a lack of a meaningful UK industrial
strategy, which is a fair accusation. It calls for the need
to
“urgently resolve the rules of origin changes”
that are looming in 2024. At this point, I am bound to observe
that both Labour and the Conservatives make grandiloquent
promises about how each would seek to harness the power of the
British state to transform the economy and, with it, the lives
and opportunities that follow. For the two years in every three
over the last century that the Conservatives have had power, or
the one year in every three that Labour has had power, neither
has done that.
I mentioned the various iterations of Conservative industrial
strategy; I have read Labour’s industrial strategy, which carries
the signature and many photographs of the hon. Member for
Stalybridge and Hyde (). In many ways it is a
very fine document, but when it comes to the impact of rules of
origin, as with much else, a position promising to make Brexit
work means absolutely nothing. I say this as gently as possible:
Brexit can never be made to work, either in its current form or
in any conceivable variant. As long as making Brexit work is part
of the strategy, no matter which party it belongs to—Labour or
the Conservatives—it will be left with a slow puncture.
Will the hon. Member give way on that point?
I was coming to the end of my remarks, but I will give way since
I mentioned the hon. Member.
I understand the strength of feeling on that point and how, when
we have this conversation, many will revert to that Brexit
argument. However, I ask the hon. Gentleman to recognise not the
political case but the economic one: we have the lowest business
investment in the G7 under this Conservative Government. We want
to provide a stable platform for that investment to increase in
gigafactories, R&D, hydrogen and all the things we want to
see, but reopening that debate—and the independence debate—is not
the stable way to realise those opportunities in future. If we
spend all our time doing that, we will find that other countries
get to a point that we will never be able to catch up with,
because we did not focus on the real opportunities at hand.
I thank the hon. Gentleman for that intervention, but I could not
disagree more. This is not a stable platform. The Conservatives
are offering us the stability of decline, and it seems that
Labour is embracing that for fear of frightening its former
voters in the red wall. It seeks to get them back not with
honesty, but by telling people what it thinks they want to hear.
It should have the intellectual honesty to recognise that the
real debilitating impact on securing future growth opportunities
is not from the issue he mentions, but from the barriers that
have been imposed. To hear that Labour intends to further padlock
them in place will depress a great many people the length and
breadth not just of Scotland but, looking at opinion polling, far
beyond.
I regret to say that although the motion contains many fine
words—it is certainly a fine document in many respects from
Labour—while it remains saddled to the Brexit the Conservatives
have given us, it will not do anything to tackle the fundamental
problems it diagnoses.
2.00pm
(Bosworth) (Con)
I rise to speak in this debate because it is called “Supporting
the Automotive Industry”. With the sense of humility that the
Opposition asked for, I read the motion. It states:
“this House recognises that the automotive industry is the jewel
in the crown of British manufacturing and believes it can have a
bright future creating good jobs for people across the UK”.
Then it falls apart, because it states that it
“regrets that after 13 years of Conservative neglect the UK risks
losing this world-class industry”.
I thought, gosh, as a matter of humility, have I missed
something? What have the Opposition been talking about that I
have so obviously missed? So I thought I would do a quick search
on Hansard to see when the automotive industry has been talked
about. The Leader of the Opposition, the right hon. and learned
Member for Holborn and St Pancras (), has mentioned it once since
2015, and that was when he was quoting my right hon. Friend the
Member for Surrey Heath () confirming that the
automotive sector was ready for Brexit. The shadow Secretary of
State for Transport, the hon. Member for Sheffield, Heeley
(), has never uttered the words
“automotive industry” in Hansard. To be fair, the shadow
Secretary of State leading the debate, the hon. Member for
Stalybridge and Hyde (), has mentioned it six
times, so once every two years, which is really useful to
note.
I am sorry, but that is not credible. Was the hon. Gentleman in
the Chamber for the urgent question when Britishvolt, the
flagship automotive battery policy, fell apart? Was he there when
Stellantis gave evidence to the Select Committee or when we asked
two urgent questions? On both occasions, the Government objected
to us using Parliament to raise those important issues, so I am
afraid I do not find his position credible.
Dr Evans
That will lead me on to what I want to talk about, which is the
positive side of this. Britishvolt wanted to have its
headquarters in my constituency, and I met it to see what would
happen. The Government protected £100 million of British
taxpayers’ money. If that had gone to the wrong place, the shadow
Secretary of State would have been at the Dispatch Box lambasting
the Government for frittering away taxpayers’ money, so I will
take no lectures on that point.
I am here to talk about the positive side of the automotive
industry. In the east midlands, we are very proud of what we have
to offer in the manufacturing industry. It has been through a
tough time for the past 50 or 60 years, but we are making real
progress. Only recently, Bosworth was noted as a net zero hotspot
and described as
“connected areas with concentrated net zero activity, where
businesses create jobs and add to the local hotspot’s
economy”.
That means better paid jobs, better opportunities locally, better
local businesses and, nationally, 840,000 jobs. Within that
context, the average wage for someone in the industry is £42,600,
compared with the national average of £33,000.
What does that look like in reality on the ground? That is what I
want to spend a few minutes talking about. On Monday, I was at a
place called Horiba MIRA. For those who do not know it, imagine
the silicon valley of the automotive industry. Imagine the Google
complex of anything to do with the car industry. From designing
to manufacturing to testing, it all happens in this one space. It
is unique in the world in what it can do. It was supported by
Government from 2010 all the way through, with investment to grow
as an enterprise zone, and was then allowed to flourish and
attract international investment from the likes of REE, an
Israeli company, bringing hundreds of millions of pounds in and
bringing 300 jobs with it.
That is just a start in describing what is going in the
automotive industry. I agree with those on both sides of the
House who have said that this really is a revolutionary
opportunity. Everyone in the world is trying to work out the best
way to take it, and the best way is to support our research going
on right here, including in happening in my constituency. MIRA
Technology Park has over 600 high-value jobs, with specialisms in
anything from autonomous car driving to battery technology, road
safety and defence. Those technologies are all being tested right
here in the UK. In November 2022, Horiba MIRA’s assured connected
autonomous vehicle testing won the test facility of the year
prize at the Vehicle Dynamics International awards, based on
innovation in products, teams and technology. In June 2023, MIRA
won an award from Jaguar Land Rover at its seventh annual global
supplier excellence awards, demonstrating outstanding
achievements in JLR’s global supply based on
“customer love unity, integrity, growth, impact.”
That all sounds very good, but when I ask my constituents whether
they are aware of what is going on in our constituency, they do
not really know what MIRA is. That is part of why I am so pleased
to speak in this debate, because actually the UK is fantastically
good in this space. It is not just about creating jobs—at MIRA,
someone can go from being an apprentice all the way through to a
PhD level qualification on cyber-security in cars. It is also
innovating for the future to get to net zero and create energy
security. It has been partnered by local enterprise partnerships,
investment zones and the Midlands Engine to help drive
investment, change policy and bring inward investment from the
international community.
On Monday, I was very proud to welcome the president of Horiba,
Mr Horiba. We saw two things: the research it is doing with Ceres
on hydrogen battery technology to allow us to have battery
technology in houses and vehicles; and driving simulators. If
someone wants to break into the industry and is designing a car,
they can now use a simulator to test how it will handle, what it
will look like, and how it will feel in terms of comfort and
safety. All that can be done simply in a computer-generated room,
which takes out the need to make 50 to 100 prototypes and
collapses it down to about one or two. But Horiba does not just
have dark rooms with TV screens—there is an entire race track to
test every single condition one can think of that a car might
need to go through. That is right here in our country, leading
the world on the international stage on how to bring in
investment. I am really pleased that we can talk about that.
There is more in my constituency. We have Triumph Motorcycles.
For those who do not know, Steve McQueen leapt away on a Triumph
motorcycle. James Bond was seen going over the rooftops on a
Triumph motorcycle. I am very proud to have Triumph Motorcycles’
headquarters in my patch, creating over 1,000 jobs. In the last
three years, it has broken records for the number of bikes it has
sold, which has gone up by 30% across the world. All across
America and into Latin America, it is breaking into the industry
and the market. That means high-end innovative jobs designed and
manufactured right here in my constituency. This is the kind of
thing that Members on both sides of the House are not good enough
at talking up and talking about. That level of innovation and
finishing makes a huge difference to my local community.
I want to mention two other businesses. Flying Spares, based in
Market Bosworth, is a second-hand remodelling firm for cars such
as Rolls-Royces. If someone need a part, it will ship it anywhere
across the world. That is an innovative way of creating longevity
and helping achieve net zero by recycling our high-end products.
JJ Churchills is a fantastic advanced manufacturing aeronautical
and defence agency, which employs 110 people, with high-end
apprenticeships, in the middle of the countryside. This is
happening right in my constituency—it is 85% rural, yet I have
businesses like that.
The final jewel in the crown is Caterpillar, which last year made
£59 billion worth of sales worldwide. The company, which has
1,000 people working in Desford in my constituency, is looking at
making green hydrogen-fuelled electric tractors, forklift trucks,
dumper trucks—you name it. I have had the pleasure of sitting
there and driving Caterpillar vehicles in Arizona remotely. That
is the sort of innovation that we can do. Caterpillar is sourcing
its manufacturing right here in Desford, and has been for 70
years.
I mention all this to highlight some of what is going on in my
small area of Leicestershire. People choose the UK because of the
skillsets we have, the tech environment we create, the regulation
we have in place and our stability in the global market. That is
why they come here. Does that mean we should shut up shop,
because we have done enough? No, of course not. It is important
to make sure that there are signposts and avenues so that people
know where to invest. When I speak to the likes of the Midlands
Engine, which is looking for ways to drive investment in the 11
million people in its area, among the questions that come up are:
where should businesses go, and how do they connect with
Government?
The hon. Member is trying manfully to paint an extraordinarily
positive picture of the industry, but does he not think that the
rules of origin and Brexit will have a negative impact on the
automotive sector? Yes or no?
Dr Evans
If that was the case, Triumph would have struggled, but it has
not.
A fundamental point has not been concentrated on enough. I am
danger of straying into the territory of my Department, the
Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, but the hon. Member
for Worsley and Eccles South (), who is no longer in her
place, raised the subject of infrastructure. It does not matter
what we are discussing, be it wind, EVs, power generation or
gigafactories; unless we sort the grid out there will be a
fundamental difficulty. I believe that, broadly speaking, the UK
is five years ahead in delivering on net zero. The problem is
that so many companies are coming forward that they simply cannot
be connected. I ask the Minister to speak to his colleagues in
the Government to make sure that we deal with infrastructure. I
know a report is coming out this month on the grid and how we can
take it forward.
My final plea goes to Members in all parts of the House of
Commons. Please come to my constituency of Bosworth and see just
how marvellous our automotive industry is. From design to
manufacturing to testing at the highest world standards, we have
it all right here in Bosworth. You are more than welcome to join
me.
2.13pm
(Birmingham, Perry Barr)
(Lab)
It is a privilege to speak in this debate as one of the very few
fully apprenticed trained engineers in this House. Birmingham and
the west midlands have been the beating heart of manufacturing
for the whole country and we want that to continue.
Jaguar Land Rover is a huge company in a constituency
neighbouring my own. In my constituency, I have Bracebridge
Engineering Ltd, specialists in metal fabrication and sheet metal
work; P&B Metal Components, which supplies the automotive and
aerial industries; Coker Engineering, which offers CNC turning,
milling and grinding and assembly; Dana UK Axles, supplier of car
parts to JLR; and many other manufacturers. I am particularly
proud to have IMI Truflo Marine, the most revered experts and the
best manufacturer of valves for submarines—the only one in the
world—doing fantastic work in my constituency. We also have
Fracino, whose coffee machines are better than most Italian-made
ones and are supplied to most of the coffee houses in this
country. The company was set up by an Italian family based in my
constituency and does fantastic work.
The issue I really want to talk about today is training and
apprenticeships, because I also have in my constituency the
Engineering Employers’ Federation training school. I opened the
centre 10 years ago, since when it has grown fourfold. The Leader
of the Opposition, my right hon. and learned Friend the Member
for Holborn and St Pancras (), has visited twice to see the
great work being done there. His predecessor, the right hon.
Member for Islington North (), also visited. If the
Minister wishes to come, I will be happy to guide her around.
The EEF training centre is a serious organisation that works very
hard to produce apprenticeships. EEF members in Birmingham pay
for their apprentices to go there, where they are taught to level
3 and to graduate level, too. I ask the Government to look at how
to provide capital support to the EEF training school and
colleges across Birmingham and the west midlands, and across the
country, so that they can buy the sort of equipment they need—CNC
machines, sheet metal equipment and so on—to train people
properly. I have too many colleges unable to provide such
training because they do not have the capital they need for
equipment. To support the industry we have and to get the
industry we want, we need to support apprenticeships, whether
people train at EEF or other colleges in my constituency and
elsewhere.
My hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde () and others have rightly
raised the issue of charging points, as well as our lack of
battery manufacturing capacity. I think we should also be looking
at our capacity to enable connection to the grid. At the moment,
those who want to supply energy—solar, wind or any other sort—to
the grid face a 10-year waiting list. I know that you are shocked
to hear that, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I am sure that others are
too. To reach the levels of charging points and battery
manufacture the UK needs to support a huge increase in EV
manufacturing, we have to resolve that. All of us want
better-engineered vehicles to save future generations from
poisonous gas emissions. To do that, people need to be able to
connect to the grid to power those charging points, but they
cannot do so now and will not be able to in the foreseeable
future, not for 10 years. I ask the Minister to speak to whoever
is in charge of that, to make the case, because this is a huge
need for the whole industry.
The hon. Member is absolutely right. As a Parliamentary Private
Secretary at the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, I
am acutely aware of those issues. I know that the Government put
in place a Minister for the grid to look at that side of things.
I believe that very soon a report will come out, which I am
hopeful will answer the UK’s questions about connecting to the
grid.
Mr Mahmood
I thank the hon. Member for making that point. I would like to
discuss with him the new industries that want to come in and do
that, but rather than a report, I want to see some action and
delivery. The country cannot wait another 10 years.
Triumph used to manufacture at a factory in Small Heath in
Birmingham, where my father used to work. He was a
setter-operator on a lathe that produced Triumphs in my
constituency. The British industry was then taken over by lots of
imports from Japan—we were not able to compete—but I am glad that
British industry is now able to compete. That is what I want for
the future of the British engineering and manufacturing industry:
for us to be able to compete in those areas so that we can show
the world that we are the world leaders.
Dana in my constituency is very competitive in the motor vehicle
industry. It supplies axles and other engineering components to
the car industry. I want continued support for Dana and for it to
have more apprentices and to be able to move forward. The key
issue is skills, skills and more skills. Unless we get those
skills, we will not be able to do what we want.
About six or seven years ago, Truflo did not have the capacity.
It kept on members of staff until they were 70, rather than them
retiring. Truflo then worked with the University of Birmingham to
get apprentices on board to close the gap and get engineers to
work for the company. It is the only valve company that works to
the quality required to work in submarines—once a submarine is
underwater, if it does not have the best equipment, it becomes
very serious.
We have a great industry in the west midlands and we have great
people doing great work. All I want is to ensure that in this
debate we discuss the issue of engineering and manufacturing, so
that we can move forward and see how we can deliver. I would like
the Minister to follow through on that, and perhaps we can
discuss some of the issues afterwards.
The real issue is, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge
and Hyde said, that we need to get British industry working, and
we need to work together to move forward. That can be done by the
engineering and manufacturing sector. Green energy relies on the
engineering and manufacturing sector. We do not want to have to
import wind turbines; we can make them in the UK. We can make
solar energy and hydrogen energy in the UK, and so we should. Let
us enable the people in our industry to move forward on these
issues. Let us support our industry and move forward.
Thank you for allowing me to speak, Madam Deputy Speaker. You
know that I have another appointment very soon, so I will
terminate my speech at this point. My hon. Friend the Member for
Stalybridge and Hyde has introduced a fantastic and much-needed
debate so that we can discuss this important issue.
2.21pm
Dame (Llanelli) (Lab)
My constituency of Llanelli has made a huge contribution to the
automotive industry over many years. Industry grew up there from
the very early days of smelting iron ore with local coal, to
smelting copper ore imported through the town’s docks, and on to
the world-famous tinplate industry, which lives on in the Tata
works, which are often referred to as steelworks but which are
referred to locally as the tinplate works.
Given its metal tradition, it is no wonder that motor
manufacturing and engineering flourished in Llanelli and have
been and continue to be very important sources of employment. As
well as the larger firms, such as Marelli and Gestamp, there are
myriad smaller firms, such as Excel Precision Engineering. They
all produce a range of components that are part of the immensely
complex supply chain that supplies the many iconic names in the
UK motor industry. So many jobs in Llanelli depend on motor
manufacturing and, indeed, across Wales there are some 9,000 jobs
in the industry.
The complex supply chain makes it vital that the Government have
a clear industrial strategy and trade policy, to give the
industry the long-term certainty that it needs to invest. We are
already seeing the effects of the Government’s dilly-dallying,
with production down nearly 10% in 2022 and exports down 14%,
which equates to a significant amount when eight out of 10
vehicles are exported. This means empty order books in the supply
chain, which is very worrying for workers.
This is about not just the need to produce huge volumes of car
batteries but adapting the design of many of the component parts
of vehicles, with investment to gear up production lines to
produce them. Furthermore, as petrol and diesel cars are phased
out, some components will no longer be needed. To survive, the
factories that make them will need to transition to manufacturing
relevant components for the future, which is a future of electric
vehicles.
Just in case the Government still have not heard the message
coming loud and clear from the industry for months and months,
the challenges are: high energy prices; rules of origin; the need
for a long-term industrial strategy and certainty about the
future; support for research and development; and the enormous
challenge posed by the way other countries incentivise the
industry to site new factories and new production lines in their
countries.
Let us look at some of the asks. First, I implore the Government,
instead of pressing ahead with the imposition of 10% tariffs from
January 2024, to work together with the EU to postpone the
escalation of the rules of origin requirements until 2027. We
also need the Government to support research and development and
the bringing of innovation to the market. For example, my
constituents have a company that has developed the means to make
an EV car battery 15% more efficient. That could make a huge
improvement by getting more miles out of a vehicle per charge or
facilitating less weighty batteries. That is the sort of
enterprise that we need to support.
India is an associate member of the Horizon programme, yet staff
in our universities still do not know whether their projects will
be able to go ahead. They do not know whether we will continue to
be part of the Horizon programme. The Government need to clarify
that as soon as possible, so that we do not lose excellent
researchers who will go elsewhere if they cannot further their
research here in the UK.
Manufacturers have pointed out time and again that the UK has
much higher energy prices than our competitor countries. This
affects not only energy-intensive industry but all manufacturing.
The solution is clear, and Labour has plans to implement it. We
on the Labour Benches recognise the real urgency of the need to
invest significantly in renewable energy. That is precisely what
we would prioritise so that we could slash bills for industry and
households while creating jobs—as well as, of course, tackling
climate change and ensuring our energy security so that we are
never again held to ransom by a foreign despot increasing gas
prices. Instead, we have seen the Conservative Government ban the
expansion of wind energy in England and take a half-hearted
approach to lifting the ban, stalling on solar and, quite
frankly, desperately underperforming on the roll-out of renewable
energy over the past few years.
We then come to the huge amount of investment that is needed now
to transform production from petrol and diesel vehicles to
electric vehicles. The US Inflation Reduction Act is a massive
game changer. The EU has responded by developing its own
incentives, but we have still not had a coherent response from
this Government. Time is running out, because companies are
making decisions now, and once they ramp up the production of
electric vehicles elsewhere, we will see workers in factories
here left with nothing but finishing off the remaining orders on
existing lines, with no future. If, once those decisions are
made, companies do invest elsewhere, there will be no bringing
them back: once they have gone, they have gone, adding to the
loss of 37% of UK motor manufacturing jobs that this Conservative
Government have presided over. That is a full third of the
industry lost since 2010. Although I welcome any new investment,
it really does need to be put into the context of what this
Government have allowed us to lose.
We are all aware of the urgent need to establish battery
factories here in the UK. Germany has clocked up 10 factories,
while we are struggling on one. What are the Government going to
do to ensure that we get the battery factories we need, and in a
timely fashion? It is no good being too late when all the
industry has gone elsewhere.
In addition, we need adaptation and transformation right across
the industry. That is why we in the Labour party have set out our
plan to implement a proper industrial strategy and establish an
industrial council to provide long-term stability of policy. We
have also set out our UK version of the US Inflation Reduction
Act: our green prosperity plan. Our national wealth fund will,
when needed, provide the finance to invest in the transformation
of our automotive industry to produce EVs, which are an important
part of our plans to get to net zero. We will boost UK battery
capacity with the part-financing of eight additional
gigafactories and accelerate the roll-out of charging points to
give providers confidence to charge their EVs.
To reiterate, it is not simply the Labour party but the whole
industry that is very concerned that we are not seeing a clear
industrial strategy or the necessary moves to build battery
factories by incentivising firms to continue putting their
production here, by bringing down energy prices and by ensuring
that we have a thriving motor manufacturing industry for the
future.
2.30pm
(Luton North) (Lab)
It is a privilege to follow my hon. Friend the Member for
Llanelli (Dame ), who is right to talk about the importance of
innovation and enterprise in this sector.
This is an important debate, which is why it is disappointing
that there are now more Government Parliamentary Private
Secretaries in the Chamber than there have been Conservative
speakers in this debate. The public and workers will question why
the Tories think so little of the automotive sector and will draw
their own conclusions.
I am pleased that parliamentary time has been given today to
focus on the automotive industry, which has a long and proud
history in the UK. As we have already heard, from Sunderland to
Coventry, Ellesmere Port and Luton, industrial cities and towns
across the country have been hallmarks of manufacturing and
quality production in our automotive sector for decades.
My constituents in Luton North have a particular interest in this
debate. In a moment I will address the recent events at the SKF
plant at Sundon Park in my constituency, but first I would like
to discuss another automotive crisis facing the Luton community.
Luton’s Vauxhall plant is based in the constituency of my hon.
Friend the Member for Luton South (). She is a champion for the
automotive sector, and I wish the hon. Member for Bosworth (Dr
Evans) had looked up how many times she has mentioned the
automotive sector and industry, as he would have reached double
digits for sure.
Vauxhall has been a proud industrial landmark of our town since
1905. The plant played a major part in the war effort during the
1940s, producing the Churchill tank and becoming a centre for
repairing battle-damaged tanks. Thousands of Bedford lorries were
turned out at Kimpton Road, including the QL, which was the
company’s first four-wheel drive vehicle and a key feature of our
country’s military fleet.
If we fast forward to the present day, we see that the Luton
Vauxhall plant employs around 1,500 people from across our town
and has been essential to creating skilled, unionised local jobs,
running apprenticeship schemes for young people and fostering
local talent, including across supply chains and other local
businesses. The plant now specialises in producing vans, around
70% of which are exported to mainland Europe. I am so pleased to
have had the pleasure of visiting the plant with my hon. Friend
the Member for Luton South to meet the workers, and we saw how
proud they are of what they turn out. Long may it continue, in
the face of the challenge from this Tory Government.
Businesses such as Vauxhall not only provide jobs to people in
Luton North, they are also intrinsic to our identity as a town.
Generations have worked there, known each other and grown
together. Automation changed the face and size of Britain’s
automotive sector but, as quickly as we saw it rise, we are now
sadly seeing it decline.
Thirteen years of Tory chaos have turbo-charged the closure of
factories and the destruction of workers’ livelihoods. The
Conservatives’ disastrous handling of Brexit negotiations, the
explosion of the economy by the previous Conservative Prime
Minister and the long abandonment of any semblance of an
industrial strategy are just a few of many contributing
factors.
Locally, even in the face of the Government’s evolving mess, we
have seen a committed, quality automotive sector and supply chain
in Luton, but it is now hanging by a thread. The Minister talked
about optimism, but this is the reality facing thousands of
workers across the country. Other jobs linked to manufacturing,
the automotive industry and the supply chain are similarly under
threat.
SKF is a major employer in my constituency. SKF is a ball bearing
manufacturing plant, formerly closely tied to Volvo. SKF, like
Vauxhall, has been a proud feature of Luton for more than 100
years, and it is another prime example of how this Government are
sitting on their hands while they oversee the slow, managed
decline of manufacturing in this country.
Last month, SKF announced its plan to close the Luton plant and
move production to Poznan in Poland by the end of 2024. This is a
devastating blow to our town and our local economy, and it could
see the loss of up to 300 jobs. I went to meet workers and Unite
union reps at SKF, and they are all deeply concerned about the
sudden closure. They told me that, throughout covid, they were
considered key workers. They operated and worked throughout,
putting their safety behind production, for the good of the
company and for the good of the economy.
Generations have worked at SKF in Sundon Park, and thousands have
given their best working days to that business, only for SKF’s
board members to turn their back on them and for this Government
to turn their back on manufacturing workers again. Seriously,
what do the Government want? A land of Amazons? A blanket of
windowless storage warehouses, where people compete and break
themselves to meet unrealistic and ever-increasing pick rates?
That is what they are turning our country into.
I am pleased the Minister was keen to take up invites to visit
Members’ constituencies, so will she please commit to meeting me
and workers at SKF who face losing their jobs to see how we can
save SKF’s future in Luton?
Ms Ghani
I recently had a meeting with the hon. Member for Luton South
() and Stellantis, and I am
always open to meeting colleagues on both sides of the Chamber.
Of course I will meet the hon. Member for Luton North (), those employees and Unite the
union.
I thank the Minister for giving that commitment. It will mean a
lot to the workers of SKF and to the constituency and the wider
economy.
Long-standing businesses with ties to our constituencies and our
constituents are being forced to shut up shop and relocate
elsewhere because the lack of Government support has left them
with little choice. The lack of an industrial strategy has been a
major factor in the lack of certainty over not just the last few
years but, sadly, over the last 13 years.
There are positive examples of companies in the industry refusing
to give up their UK-based factories and the workers who work in
them. Next door to SKF in my constituency sits Comline, an auto
parts business. When I visited Comline in Sundon Park, I was
impressed by its innovation in dealing with the challenges thrown
at it from all angles. It has a flourishing business that values
its staff, and it has established strong trade links with offices
abroad, which has perhaps guaranteed its continued success.
Although I am glad that that has given the company security, it
is deplorable that the Government have made international trade
so complex that Comline has found it easier to trade with
countries thousands of miles away than to trade with its offices
in Northern Ireland.
Despite our proud history, I remain deeply concerned that our
automotive industry has been consistently let down, with the
industry’s concerns ignored by this Government. The Government
have been warned by representative bodies and businesses for
months, even years, of the cliff edge facing the UK automotive
industry due to the combination of changes to the rules of origin
and a lack of battery-making capacity in the UK.
The collapse of Britishvolt in January 2023, having planned to
build a £3.8 billion gigafactory in Blyth, Northumberland, is a
stark reminder of these failures and is undoubtedly a disaster
for the UK car industry. Even more worrying is the wider picture.
Even if Britishvolt were going ahead, we would be far short of
where we need to be to continue making cars in this country. The
Faraday Institution says we need 10 gigafactories by 2040 to
sustain our automotive sector. Without domestic batteries, we
will have no domestic automotive industry at all.
While this Government dither on their investment strategy, a
Labour Government would commit to rapidly scaling up UK
battery-making capacity by part-financing eight additional
gigafactories to create 80,000 jobs and power 2 million electric
vehicles. New gigafactories will also allow the UK’s automotive
sector to source components locally and avoid tariffs from rules
of origin agreements.
The Stellantis three—my hon. Friends the Members for Luton South
and for Ellesmere Port and Neston () and me—are sitting
together, In May 2023, the car maker Stellantis, which owns
Vauxhall, Peugeot, Citroën and Fiat, issued warnings that it may
have to close UK factories if the Government do not renegotiate
their Brexit deal. Under the current deal, UK car makers could
face 10% tariffs on exports to the EU from next year due to rules
of origin on where parts are sourced. Unfortunately, it is not us
but business—companies such as Stellantis—that must be convinced
that the Government will sort this out. Other car manufacturing
giants and competitors, including Ford and Jaguar Land Rover,
have joined Stellantis to warn that the transition to electric
vehicles will be affected unless the UK and the EU delay the
strict rules of origin that are due to start next year and could
add tariffs on car exports.
This is not a new argument that I have had. Before entering this
House in 2019, I was a trade union officer with GMB. I declare
now that I am also a proud member of it, which will not surprise
anybody. Alongside the late , who was a champion for the
automotive industry—I hope everybody from across the House could
agree on that—we took workers from Toyota, AstraZeneca, the
whisky-making industry in Scotland and the Stoke potteries to
meet the then Cabinet Secretary, now the Secretary of State for
Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. I can see you looking at
me, Madam Deputy Speaker, so let me say that I have informed him
that I was going to mention him in the Chamber. When we went to
speak to him with this delegation of manufacturing workers, every
single one of us questioned what was going to happen when the
rules of origin changes kicked in. He shrugged his shoulders,
arrogantly saying, “This is going to be worked out.” Yet here we
are, in 2023, many years later, and all those industries and
workers are still left without a proper answer.
While the EU is pumping billions into manufacturing as part of
its green industrial revolution plan, and the US is investing
with the Inflation Reduction Act, our automotive industry is
still being left behind. The UK lags behind the rest of the world
in terms of global automotive manufacturing relative to GDP,
ranking sixth in Europe and 17th in the world last year. The
Minister talks about optimism, which is of course welcome, but
that is the reality facing workers and the sector. I ask the
Government to get real on this, because blind optimism does not
pay the bills. It does not create certainty for an industry and
it certainly does not make car manufacturers such as Stellantis
think that this Government are serious about the automotive
sector.
That means my constituency is missing out on potential businesses
starting and growing in Luton North, and local people who are
keen to work in those industries are being failed. This
Government are not only preventing new British jobs from
materialising, but diminishing existing jobs before our eyes. As
I said, we are facing a possible 270-plus job losses at the SKF
factory. That is coming at the same time as there are threats to
close ticket offices, including at Leagrave station. We cannot
take more job losses in Luton North. My constituents are having
the jobs they have done diligently for generations stripped from
them, in the automotive sector, in rail and in all manner of
business breakdowns.
It is clear that this Government’s sticking-plaster approach
cannot continue. Labour has stated time and again that securing
an agreement with the European Union to make Brexit work for the
automotive industry is critical to ensuring its survival. The
knock-on effects of the Government’s approach are being felt
across the manufacturing industry more widely. Staggering energy
costs, a lack of an industrial strategy and investment, and a
more competitive European market mean that manufacturing across
our country could soon cease to exist in its entirety. Clearly,
our automotive industry needs a Government that will fight to
support it to be competitive in the global market. Labour will
deliver a modern industrial strategy to bring investment and jobs
to industrial heartlands. That will create an employment revival
where there has been years of Conservative depression, because on
these Benches we are about creating strong jobs with a secure
future, not stripping them away.
Under Labour leadership, battery-making capacity in the UK would
boom. We would support the creation of eight new gigafactories,
with this all laid out and costed in our green prosperity plan.
The new factories would allow for our home-grown automotive
businesses to source their auto parts within the UK. That would
be huge for businesses such as Comline in Sundon Park. Crucially,
with these new gigafactories, we would introduce about 80,000 new
British jobs. I know how much that would mean to my constituents,
from youngsters getting apprenticeships to older people knowing
they do not need to worry about redundancy before retirement.
With eight new gigafactories, we would also power 2 million
electric vehicles, which is so crucial for working towards our
commitment to net zero. All of that would bring in an additional
£30 billion to our economy. It sounds like a good deal to me.
We are committed to building strong economic foundations that
businesses need to succeed, including through reforms to the
apprenticeship levy and business rates to give firms flexibility
where they need it, and making the UK a clean energy superpower
by 2030 with net zero carbon electricity, lowering electricity
costs for the car industry. That is the leadership and the
strategy that the automotive industry has been crying out for,
and that is what a Labour Government would provide.
2.45pm
(Luton South) (Lab)
It is an absolute pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member
for Luton North (), a good friend who spoke so
passionately about the length of time Luton has been associated
with Vauxhall Motors—I appreciate the Minister nodding at that.
As we have heard, the automotive industry is critical to the UK’s
economy; it is a jewel in the crown of British manufacturing. I
agree with the comments made by our Front Benchers about the
importance of maintaining a good manufacturing sector in our
country and the associated good, skilled jobs.
In Luton, we are proud of our automotive heritage. For once, let
me carry on a football analogy by saying that we are also proud
of our premier league football team. Generations of families have
worked at the Vauxhall plant, making many well-known family cars
and, more recently, medium-sized vans, based on the Vauxhall
Vivaro. I have seen the heritage displayed in all sorts of ways.
When I visited Someries Junior School recently, it had the full
history of Vauxhall set out in a montage, where the cars had been
drawn on and the history from 1905 was talked about. Similarly,
when I have been out talking to the people of Mid Bedfordshire, I
knocked on the door of someone who works at Vauxhall and is the
daughter of one of the Unite representatives.
I was pleased to meet the Minister recently to talk about the
importance of the automotive sector to Luton and the need for a
long-term strategy to safeguard the industry and good jobs in our
town. Having joined this place in 2019, I first raised the issue
of the need for a strategy specifically to support the automotive
industry some three years ago, in July 2020. The Minister has
seen me raise many an automotive issue. If the hon. Member for
Bosworth (Dr Evans) was here, I could assure him of how many
times I have raised the issues of semiconductors, electric
vehicle batteries, gigafactories, the supply chain, rules of
origin and charging infrastructure. There is a genuine interest
here about the importance of all of it to our economy.
(Huddersfield)
(Lab/Co-op)
I am hesitant to interrupt, because I know of my hon. Friend’s
expertise in this area. However, may I ask her: are the
Government giving enough help for the future of our industry?
Many believe that hydrogen power is coming fast, and that its
impact might be similar to what the invention of the railways
meant for the canals. Are the Government giving enough hope and
resources to the industry to look forward to hydrogen power as
well as battery power?
I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. Obviously, the
Opposition are hosting this debate to get support for the
automotive sector, and his question about whether the Government
are giving sufficient support to hydrogen is perhaps one for
them. I want to make sure that I have my points on the record
about the future of electric vehicles at the Vauxhall plant.
Three years on, I am still calling for that long-term plan from
the Government. Despite the Minister reciting many a meeting,
visit and champion of X, Y and Z, where is the plan that we can
all look up to and see how it is going to support our sector? We
have seen this Conservative Government preside over a 37% fall in
British motor manufacturing since they came into office in 2010.
Indeed, eight out of 10 cars produced in the UK are exported, yet
exports of cars manufactured in the UK fell by 14% in 2022.
Government inaction, which we are debating today, threatens the
future of the automotive industry and of Vauxhall in Luton,
particularly the future of its electric vehicles.
The UK is heavily reliant on battery technology from Asia. While
the UK currently falls under the threshold of rules of origin
quotas, the ratcheting up from the beginning of next year poses a
risk to the UK automotive industry. As we have heard, Stellantis,
the owner of Vauxhall, told the Business and Trade Committee
inquiry into the supply of batteries for EV manufacturing in the
UK:
“There will not be sufficient battery production supplies in the
UK or in Europe by 2025 and 2030”
to meet the rules of origin requirements.
Rather than working with the EU to suspend a ratcheting up in
rules of origin requirements until 2027, I am concerned that we
will see too little, too late from the Government, and the
Conservatives will oversee the imposition of 10% tariffs from 1
January next year. Just for nuance, those tariffs are 10% to 22%
for electric vans, which particularly impacts the Vauxhall plant
in Luton South.
Overall, these tariffs would hinder the UK’s struggling
automotive sector, pass on yet more cost to British people,
already struggling with a cost of living crisis made in Downing
Street, and would make the green transition unnecessarily
unaffordable for millions across the country.
Until we have sufficient domestic battery production, our
industry will be at a major competitive disadvantage, in
particular against Asian imports, specifically from South Korea,
Japan and China. The reality is that if the cost of EV
manufacturing in the UK becomes uncompetitive and unsustainable,
the future of domestic operations will be at risk. Decisions will
be made by producers to move production elsewhere, if there is no
confidence in the UK Government’s desire to facilitate a
sustainable automotive and electric vehicle market, a point well
made by my hon. Friend the Member for Llanelli (Dame ), particularly as British businesses are also facing
the highest energy costs in Europe.
It is also important that the Government recognise the innovation
and technological advancements posed by the wider industry. Since
joining the all-party motor group, I have learned a lot about how
motorsport in the UK—the best in the world, with the greatest
engineering and tech teams—influences the ordinary automotive
sector. For many years, we have seen a cycle where cutting-edge
motorsport develops innovative automotive solutions and
efficiencies that the automotive sector later adopts for the
wider market.
We have heard about steps being taken on sustainable fuels, but
much more has been linked to the huge strides in technology
relating to software. It is right to remember how the motorsport
industry pivoted brilliantly during the pandemic to support the
ventilator challenge. I raise this because if the Government sit
back and allow the demise of our automotive industry, we will
risk losing the world-class engineers, tech experts and
motorsport companies, as they will look elsewhere for an
environment that is more conducive to the sport. That would be
detrimental, not only to the entertainment side of motorsport,
but as a significant contributor to our economy and society.
As we have heard, Labour has an excellent plan to turbocharge
electric vehicle manufacturing. In government, we will prioritise
an agreement with the European Union to ensure that manufacturers
have time to prepare to meet rules of origin requirements. We are
committed to rapidly scaling up UK battery making capacity, by
part-financing eight additional gigafactories, creating 80,000
jobs, powering 2 million electric vehicles and adding £30 billion
to the UK economy.
Labour will accelerate the roll-out of charging points and give
confidence to motorists to make the switch, with binding targets
for electric vehicle chargers. Our plan includes measures to make
the UK a clean energy superpower by 2030, with net zero carbon
electricity, lowering electricity costs for the UK car industry.
I look forward to supporting Labour’s business team to make this
a reality, so that the young people in Luton South see a positive
future ahead of them, with good, skilled jobs for the long
term.
2.54pm
(Wansbeck) (Lab)
It should come as no surprise to anyone that since the
Conservative Government took power in 2010, the country’s
automotive industry has been failed by a lack of investment or
any long-term strategy. Since 2010, as set out by other speakers
in the debate, we have experienced a 37% decline in British motor
manufacturing. That is not insignificant and it is set to
continue.
I am lucky enough to be a member of the Business and Trade
Committee. A couple of months ago, I asked experts, on a panel
discussing the UK’s industrial strategy, how the UK is placed to
take advantage of the electric car industry, and about the levels
of investment on offer to support companies settling in the UK
and creating jobs here, compared with those in the US and across
Europe. Put simply, their response was startling but it was
absolutely correct. The response from each industry expert was
that right now there is no comparison between what is on offer
with the Inflation Reduction Act in the US and what is on offer
in Europe. That is unfortunate, but that is the reality of where
we are at this moment in time.
Looking at the statistics regarding this extremely important
debate, the Conservatives have presided over a 37% decline in
British motor manufacturing since 2010. There are 780,000 people
employed across the UK automotive sector, with 182,000 of those
directly employed in manufacturing. Annual UK car production fell
by 9.8% in 2022, from 859,000 units to 775,014 units. The UK lags
behind the rest of the world in terms of global automotive
manufacturing relative to GDP, ranking sixth in Europe and 17th
in the world in 2022. Eight in every 10 cars produced in the UK
are exported, yet exports of cars manufactured in the UK fell by
14% in 2022. The EU is by far the largest export market for
UK-produced vehicles—57.6% of vehicles produced in the UK are
exported to the EU.
It is now three years since a gigafactory in my constituency of
Wansbeck was proposed, and we have been hoping for the
development of Britishvolt at Cambois. In the run-up to
Christmas, at a time when people are wondering if they are going
to get additional socks, Old Spice, Blue Stratos or new boxer
shorts, I got a great surprise, finally. In December 2020, I got
a call from a businessman who informed me that he was to develop
a big company called Britishvolt, only two miles from where I
live. It was as if all my Christmases had come at once: 8,000
much-needed jobs in an area like Wansbeck and like south-east
Northumberland, covering different skills. They were secure,
unionised jobs that were set out in the telephone conversation I
had in December 2020, just prior to Christmas. We were going to
get a big gigafactory. It was heralded at the time by Ministers
as a perfect example of levelling up. It was heralded by the then
Prime Minister as a project that would boost the production of
electric vehicles in the UK, while levelling up opportunity and
bringing thousands of highly skilled jobs to communities in our
industrial heartlands. However, Ministers were not so keen to be
attached to it when Britishvolt went into liquidation after
failing to get the funds that it needed to continue. That
included the money that the disgraced former Prime Minister told
me from that Dispatch Box was “in the post”. I asked him at PMQs
when BritishVolt would be receiving the £100 million from the
automotive transformation fund. He rose, clenching his fists
anxiously, and said that the cheque was in the post. I support
the CWU and I support the strikes at the Royal Mail, but I am
afraid that that cheque never arrived. I do not blame the strikes
for that, although others may wish to do so.
That money never ever arrived for Britishvolt. I listened to a
Member earlier who said that, had that money been paid to a
community such as mine, it would have been frittered away. Let me
tell Members: people in my community deserve as much investment
in jobs than anywhere else in this country—whether it be a
constituency led by the Conservatives or by the Labour party. My
constituency deserves to be cared for the same as anybody else.
If £100 million is being invested in one constituency, it is seen
as fantastic; it should not be seen as being frittered away in a
constituency such as mine. It is an insult to everyone in the
south-east of Northumberland, and obviously to my patch.
The current situation, as the Minister knows, is that the
Britishvolt project was bought by an Australian company, Recharge
Industries, and it has given us a glimmer of hope. I asked the
Minister a few weeks ago in Question Time whether we could meet
up to discuss what support the Government could give to Recharge
Industries. She agreed to meet, but we have not yet had the
opportunity to do so, so I gently nudge her and say that I would
welcome that discussion, because we need that gigafactory. Every
industry expert says that we have the best site in Europe for a
gigafactory. The only way that it will happen is if we get the
support that we need from the Government. So far, it does not
look as if that will happen. As I have said before, it would
create 8,000 jobs: 6,000 jobs in the supply chain and 2,000 at
the factory.
I thank my hon. Friend for giving way and ask him to excuse me
for having to leave the Chamber temporarily. The point he is
making is important. I was in his area earlier this year and saw
for myself the new National Grid facility. With its
interconnectors and the 3% of UK electricity potential coming
ashore from Norway, it is, I agree, the perfect site for a
gigafactory—alongside Coventry, of course.
I will not get into the football analogies that have been drawn
on today. I am pleased that my hon. Friend has visited my
constituency and seen for himself the potential that Energy
Central has in Northumberland. Whether it is the two
interconnectors or the Catapult facility in Blyth for renewable
energy, we have a lot going on in the Blyth estuary region and,
of course, in Wansbeck.
We need to give people some hope. We need to give my constituents
the same sort of hope that everybody else is getting. I have sat
patiently listening to Members who have lots of jobs in their
constituencies. They are very happy with those jobs and the fact
that things could not be any brighter. The hon. Member for
Bosworth (Dr Evans) said, “Come and have a look at Bosworth. It
is fantastic.” I say to him, “Come and have a look at Wansbeck
and see how that stands as compared with Bosworth.” I am
delighted for the people of Bosworth, but he should be coming to
my constituency to see the difference. It is just not fair.
Dr Evans
When it comes to the automotive industry, we should be talking
about the whole of the UK. The hon. Gentleman speaks passionately
about the site of the gigafactory. I know it well, because
Britishvolt spoke to me about the site and what it has to
deliver. I am more than happy to support him and his
constituents, because this is about what the UK can offer to the
rest of the world. The automotive industry here is a leader in
doing that, so I will champion that, because it happens to be in
my constituency. I would love to see it thrive in the hon.
Gentleman’s constituency, too, so that we have jobs and
prosperity across the UK.
I thank the hon. Gentleman, but he should come and have a look.
He can drive his electric vehicle up the road and call in to see
the obvious difference between my constituency and his.
This is indeed a UK-wide issue in that if one of us succeeds in
the sector, then we all succeed. However, we are talking about
not just the jobs of the future that need to be created and
maintained, but, unfortunately, the jobs now that need to be
saved. There are just not the equivalent jobs for people to go
to. Is this not a serious problem for the sector? It is not just
about future jobs, but about saving the jobs now.
That is an excellent point. The reality is that we have lost 37%
of production in 13 years. If there is not a halt to that and if
there is not the investment that is required to maintain and then
increase employment, we will see a total loss of the automotive
industry in this country. It is as simple as that. Members have
mentioned the different new rules coming into place, the state of
origin rules and issues such as that. It is getting more and more
difficult to maintain and increase what we have, on top of a 37%
decline. The reality is that we do not have anything in place to
make that transformation from where we are now to where we need
to be. We need to have, I think, nine new gigafactories. We have
one. In fact, it is half a gigafactory. That is just not good
enough. We keep being told by the Conservatives that they are on
the case, that the development is coming, and that they will be
developing it—whether it be in Coventry, in the midlands or
wherever; hopefully, the next one will be in my constituency—but
it is not right to continue saying that we are on track. We are
not on track. There needs to be some investment. We need the
readies. We will not get people rolling up to different areas
saying that they will build a gigafactory unless they have
support from the Government.
We should look at the support that other countries have given to
their businesses in grants and loans: CATL in Germany received a
loan of €750 million, 22.8% of the total build cost; Northvolt in
Sweden got €505 million, 17.1% of the build cost; GM in North
America got $2.5 billion; Stellantis $1 billion; Tesla $1.3
billion; and Ford $884 million. Britishvolt, which had so much
promise, were promised £100 million, 2.3% of the build cost. That
was heavily caveated to the point where the company never had a
penny of Government support.
We should take a look at the stats. What Labour is suggesting
would provide a fantastic opportunity. It needs to be grasped.
Regions up and down the country will benefit greatly as a result
of what has already been described as turbocharging electric
vehicle manufacturing. There could be £30 billion-worth of
investment in the regions. We cannot turn that down, but we have
to get on with it, which is why I hope that once the election
comes and we get elected as the next Government this can be
introduced without delay. It will make a huge difference to areas
such as the north-east, which will have 13,000 jobs in vehicle
manufacturing. Its share of the £30 billion in economic benefits
from the Labour plans will be £2.45 billion. Areas such as the
west midlands will have 57,000 such jobs, and it will receive
£10.76 billion in its share of the investment. The list goes on.
The north-west will have 22,000 jobs in vehicle manufacturing and
£4.13 billion-worth of investment.
That Labour party turbocharging of electric vehicles is so
important and so exciting, but my constituency has been
absolutely battered. It has been bruised by the
deindustrialisation programme of past Conservative Governments.
The lack of an industrial strategy from the Government is still
holding my area back significantly. Levelling up means an active
state willing actively to protect and invest in the interests of
people in held-back areas such as my constituency of Wansbeck.
The area where the site would have been developed lies in
Cambois, a coastal area in the parish of East Bedlington.
Bedlington and Wansbeck—not in Blyth. Britishvolt was never in
Blyth. A number of people have mentioned that today, and I have
already mentioned it to the Minister a few times. Britishvolt was
not in Blyth; that is a Conservative seat next door. Britishvolt
is in Wansbeck—my patch. I thought that I would make that point
once again, because it appears that very few people listen to
what has been said.
We have a proud history in the industrial revolution. It is a
coal area. My patch was coal town. We were built on coal. We were
part of the great industrial revolution, not only extracting the
coal that powered it, but being the birthplace of wrought iron
rails in the Bedlington Ironworks, which triggered the railway
age. Why should that industrial heritage not be continued at the
site of what could be the heart of the green industrial
revolution—the transport industrial revolution—simply because
once again the Government have failed to deliver for the people
of Wansbeck and south-east Northumberland? We need to do a lot
better for my constituents.
3.12pm
(Ellesmere Port and Neston)
(Lab)
I am grateful for the Speaker’s agreement, and that of the Whips,
to my speaking in today’s debate.
If anybody does not know it yet, Ellesmere Port, which I am proud
to represent, is synonymous with Vauxhall Motors. I know that my
hon. Friends the Members for Luton North () and for Luton South () will say that Luton is
equally synonymous. I put on the record my gratitude for their
support, and that of their predecessors, when we faced similar
battles to keep our plants open. We have heard already that we
all have to succeed if the UK car industry is to succeed. I will
show my solidarity with them to keep this important sector going.
They will recognise the pride that we all have in being such a
major part of the UK car sector.
Generations of my constituents, though not as many generations as
those of my hon. Friends the Members for Luton North and for
Luton South, have worked in the Vauxhall Motors plant since it
first opened in around 1960. When I drive away from my house in
my constituency in my Vauxhall Astra, I go past many houses that
have Vauxhall workers in them, or Vauxhall pensioners, or people
who have had family and friends who work at Vauxhall. That is
just before I get to the end of my street. It is a long street,
but I think that it is symbolic of the fact that every part and
corner of my town has a link to the factory. Indeed, as the town
grew the plant grew, from the 1960s onwards. Although it does not
employ anything like the 12,000 people that it did at its height,
it is still a substantial employer in the town. That of course
does not take into account the many people employed in the supply
chain and associated industries; neither does it account for the
great potential that we have for greater numbers if the new van,
which is coming soon, proves to be the success that we hope that
it will be.
The parent company may now be called Stellantis, and my hon.
Friends the Members for Luton North and for Luton South and I are
now “the Stellantis three”, but Vauxhall Motors is the name that
gives us pride in our community. It is something that we all
recognise. The jobs that Vauxhall Motors, or Stellantis, provides
are the sort that I want our future success to be built on:
highly skilled, unionised, permanent jobs, manufacturing
something that is a matter of national and local pride. When the
shadow Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for
Stalybridge and Hyde (), spoke about his pride
in the Nissan plant in Sunderland, those words really resonated
with me. Those of us who have big local manufacturers take great
pride in what they have done for our communities, and indeed the
wider economy.
As you would expect, Madam Deputy Speaker, the plant has regular
fights for survival, and I am proud that alongside many others I
have played my part to ensure that it is still there, but it does
not get any easier. Every five years or so, when the next model
is discussed, plants across Europe are effectively pitted against
each other to bid for the next job. The productivity of the local
workforce and their co-operation with Unite the union, which for
the record I am a proud member of, work extremely well. They show
tremendous leadership to work with management. In the past, that
has put us in the best possible position to secure future work.
The partnership between the trade union and management is a real
exemplar of how employee relations can be conducted for the
benefit of everyone.
The local authority, and indeed central Government, have played
their part too, both in recent years and in the previous decade,
with initiatives such as the car scrappage scheme and the
Automotive Council, which helps not just Vauxhall Motors but the
entire sector more generally. Before the new van rolls off the
production line for the first time, which I hope will be shortly,
the challenge to secure the next model has already begun. That
challenge has many similarities with the obstacles that the
entire sector needs to overcome, as we have heard about.
I am confident that our workers and management locally will be
able to show that they are competitive compared with other
plants, but will that be enough if they face a 10% surcharge on
their exported products, as it looks as if they may be facing
from next year? I think that we all know that expecting any
business to remain competitive if it has an additional 10% cost
added to it is unrealistic. As my hon. Friend the Member for
Luton South mentioned, for vans the tariff could go up to 22%.
The clear warning signs are there that we need to do something
dramatic to avoid that cliff edge.
There are six months to go before we get to that point, which
shows that we are in the danger zone. As has been mentioned, the
Government had years to address this issue. They either need to
renegotiate the deal to get rid of the tariffs or get enough
battery plants on the ground so that tariffs do not matter any
more. Unfortunately, neither of those things has happened. When
the EU is pumping billions into manufacturing as part of its
green industrial plan, and the US is investing trillions as part
of the Inflation Reduction Act, the inaction in the UK becomes
negligence. If we want the UK to be a clean energy superpower by
2030, and to avoid falling off a cliff edge before then, we need
a much more interventionist Government who will help the
automotive sector to make this important transition.
Gigafactories, charging infrastructure and reshoring the supply
chain will not happen by magic, especially when the US and EU are
actively pursuing that for their own industries.
Look at the evidence given to the Business and Trade Committee
about the challenges that we face. These are some of the quotes
given to the Committee on the matter recently:
“At the moment, the UK does not have a strategy. It does not have
a runner in this race…Capital is far more incentivised to go to
the US.”
Right now there is no comparison with what is on offer with the
Inflation Reduction Act, and what is on offer in Europe. That is
unfortunate, but it is the reality of where we are. The problem
is that when other nations are putting in massive amounts, not
putting in that level of cash makes us uncompetitive. It is
difficult for shareholders to make a positive decision if we are
not putting the same amounts on the table. That is what the
industry has been very clearly telling us.
We know, as we have heard already, that we need at least eight or
possibly nine gigafactories to make the UK car industry viable,
but, as my hon. Friend the Member for Wansbeck () said, we may have half a gigafactory coming on
stream, or maybe two at best, if we are lucky. He told us in some
detail about the struggles to get that gigafactory up and running
in his constituency, and that should tell us that this needs full
attention. I know my hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead
() has been actively
campaigning to get a gigafactory site in his constituency capable
of serving not only Vauxhall Motors but probably also JLR and
some other factories in the region.
I am pleased to say that our request to meet the Minister was
granted, just before this debate in fact—what a great coincidence
that was—because we think there needs to be recognition that
there is a lot of chicken and egg in this situation. If we do not
have the gigafactories, we will not have the car plants; if we do
not have the car plants, we will not have the gigafactories. As
my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North said, we all have to
succeed in this. It cannot be just one or two plants. For the
future to work in this sector, we all have to succeed.
Let us get more of these gigafactories up and running, with
spades on the ground in the next 12 months, before we get the
point where the sector decides that there just will not be the
capacity to move forward with a viable UK car industry. As we
know from many other industries, once it is gone, it is gone. As
the Faraday Institution has said, we need a “timely and
co-ordinated effort” to attract more gigafactories to the UK. We
need to develop a resilient, sustainable and efficient supply
chain and build up skills capabilities. That takes leadership,
and it is about time we saw some from the Government.
We definitely need a strategy, and one that is interventionist in
its outlook. When people decry the £28 billion a year that my
party is committed to spending on greening the economy, I have to
say to them, just look at what a fraction of that could do for
the car industry. I believe it could be money well spent.
However, we can also do other things better. We need to make
better use of the taxpayer pound that we already spend, and the
most cursory look around the fleets in most other countries shows
that we stand almost alone in failing to recognise the importance
of social value as part of our procurement process. In France,
the police drive Citroëns, Renaults and Peugeots produced in
French factories. In Germany, they drive Mercedes, BMWs and
Volkswagens. In Spain they drive Seat vehicles; in Sweden, it is
Saabs and Volvos and in Italy they drive Alfa Romeos, Fiats and
even sometimes Lamborghinis.
All those countries are governed by the same directive as we used
to be, yet they all seem to be able to procure vehicles in the
way that supports their own industry. We are no longer part of
the EU, so we have no excuse now, and I ask myself what is
stopping us being able to make use of public sector procurement
powers to support our automotive sector. I ask myself why police
officers in Cheshire are using vehicles made thousands of miles
away when they could be in vehicles made just down the road at
Vauxhall Motors. It does not have to be that way. The automotive
sector has had more than its fair share of challenges due to
Brexit, as we have heard, but let us use some of those so-called
new-found freedoms to bring us some benefits as well.
A proper strategy on charging points is needed, but, just as with
the overall industrial strategy, there is a mistaken belief that
things should just be left to the market. In consumers’ minds
there is now hesitancy about moving over to EVs and making a huge
financial commitment at a time of cost of living crisis. The
initial cost and inconvenience of running an electric vehicle is
at the forefront of their considerations. Brand-new electric
vehicles are far more expensive than second-hand traditional
vehicles and, while electric vehicles are becoming a greater
proportion of new sales, I am concerned that we will face a
natural ceiling on them before too long.
As technologies progress and electric vehicles become more
numerous on the roads, focus has turned to the availability and
practicality of owning one. Concerns have arisen around access to
and the cost of on-street charging. Given that around one third
of UK homes do not have access to off-street parking, whether a
driveway or a garage, we need a more effective way to public
charging before we reach 2030. There is also a profound
unfairness in the fact that those whose properties lack driveways
pay four times as much in VAT as those who can use domestic
supplies of electricity.
The Government’s commitment to building 300,000 new charging
points is to be welcomed, but between 2017 and 2022 only 1,603
were installed, and almost 75% of those were located in the west
midlands, the south-east and London. The north-west received only
0.7% of the total installed. London now possesses 100% of the
charging points required by 2025, yet every other region in the
country is lacking. According to analysis by Transport &
Environment, most of the UK’s regions possess less than 50% of
the estimated charging capacity required by 2025. In regions such
as my own in the north-west, the north-east, the south-west and
Northern Ireland, it is only around 30% of the capacity required.
My local authority, Cheshire West and Chester, has only 28% of
the chargers required by 2025—a stark comparison with wealthy
London boroughs such as Westminster, which already has 358% of
the chargers it needs.
That is not a good record for a Government who stood on a
platform of levelling up the country—there appears to be no
strategy to deal with those regional disparities. I am not sure
that the Government even recognise that they exist. There is a
huge opportunity for so-called “left behind” towns to receive
some central investment for major charging points, so that those
who cannot access private sources of electricity can come in to
their town centre, charge their car and rejuvenate their town
centre at the same time. There is a real opportunity there, but
it will not happen by chance; it needs Government action.
When the Government’s report on charging infrastructure
acknowledges that the process is arduous, we have to ask what
they are going to do to change it. The report states:
“Installing and operating chargepoints requires several parties
across the energy sector, local government and the transport
sector to work together effectively.”
But where does the responsibility for that ultimately lie? That
is the endgame for the whole automotive sector.
Someone has to step up to the plate and say, “Yes, this jewel in
the crown of our manufacturing sector is going to be supported
and supported properly, because we recognise that for our
constituents, for our economy and for our environment, the car
industry in the UK will only survive if there is the political
will, backed up by a properly funded strategy, to make sure that
it actually happens.” If the Conservative party will not do that,
it should make way for one that will.
3.26pm
(Warwick and Leamington)
(Lab)
It is an honour to follow the excellent speech of my hon. Friend
the Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (). As someone who is
passionate about this industry, I would say that there is huge
support for talking up the sector on the Opposition side of the
Chamber, as we have heard in the contributions of colleagues over
the last couple of hours.
When I think of the sector’s contribution to UK plc, I think
about the alloy wheels being made in Fort William, the Ferodo
brakes being made in Chapel-en-le-Frith and the panels being
beaten out in various parts of the country. I think about the
likes of the factory just around the corner from where I live
that makes the gearbox for the Bugatti Veyron, no less. Up and
down this country we have some of the finest companies and the
finest engineers making products, contributing to the supply
chain and to the original equipment manufacturers that produce
vehicles of all sorts, from motorbikes to diggers.
I also pay tribute to a great old friend of mine who we all
remember, , who called this automotive
industry the “jewel in the crown” of UK manufacturing. That is
something I have always believed, and indeed I spent a great deal
of my life working in it.
On the point about the few contributions made about the sector in
this place, back in May 2018 I held a parliamentary debate on the
subject, and I was disappointed by the number of contributions
from certain quarters. Five years ago, I talked about the
challenges that the industry faced, and the points I made then
are hardly different from some of the points that the Society of
Motor Manufacturers and Traders has highlighted in its five-point
plan.
The real fear across the industry is that the Government are not
acknowledging the importance of the sector, and certainly have
not over recent years. Until a few years ago, the right hon.
Member for Tunbridge Wells () had an industrial strategy,
which was recognised by the industry, but that has, of course,
fallen by the wayside. Indeed, I attended the SMMT international
conference a year ago. A collection of industry heads from around
the world, as well as UK bosses from right across the sector,
were assembled for a full day’s conference. The keynote speech
was given by the Prime Minister, who was then Chancellor. Sadly,
it lasted a minute and 40 seconds.
I will not put words into the mouths of others, but the reality
is that, that day, the industry felt utterly disrespected by this
place. The Government are the Government, but the industry
thought, “Well, what does Parliament really think about the
contribution we are making to the UK economy?” Such a short
keynote speech was felt, by Japanese or European colleagues who
came over here to listen to the UK Chancellor, to devalue the
industry’s work, as well as its investment. Unfortunately, those
signals are very badly read in boardrooms across the world
because, of course, the UK industry is made up of companies that
are headquartered in Japan, Paris, Munich or wherever, and they
listen carefully to the messages coming out of this place. That
is important.
To give credit where it is due, Margaret Thatcher actually
recognised the importance of the UK industry by bailing out
British Leyland back in the day, which saved brands such as
Jaguar Land Rover and Mini, as well by attracting inward
investment from the likes of Honda, Toyota and Nissan. Sadly, we
have lost investment from Honda, Ford and others in the past few
years. That is why we are at a challenging point for the
industry’s future.
We are blessed to have some great companies here, including
Jaguar Land Rover, Stellantis, as we have heard, and BMW Mini.
Then, of course, we have luxury and performance manufacturers
such as Rolls-Royce Bentley,
McLaren, Aston Martin—just down the road from me—and all the
other myriad specialist companies, including Lotus, Caterham,
Morgan and so on. The sector is even wider if we include the
likes of Norton, Triumph—about which we have heard—JCB and
Caterpillar, as well the bus and coach manufacturers that have a
presence here and in Northern Ireland, such as Wrightbus, which
are doing some superb product development and addressing the need
to get to net zero.
The sector is so valuable. It can contribute £67 billion in
turnover and £14 billion in added value to the UK economy, and it
typically invests £3 billion a year in research and development.
However, the industry has been so reliant on fossil fuels that
the transition to net zero is a critical point in its history. I
will outline some of the issues, one of which is the political
stability—or the lack of it—to revive and attract the business
investment that we need. Of course, I welcome this morning’s
announcement by Renault-Geely, but we are really behind the
curve. I will also pick up on a few challenges such as the ZEV
mandate and the new trading relationship with Europe, including,
of course, the rules of origin issue, which is so critical. I
will then touch on energy and the other import costs that are a
real drag on investment in the UK, as well as the need for an EV
and hydrogen infrastructure mandate if we are to get the sector
going.
The transition needs a clear industrial strategy; it needs to
become a political priority. Sadly, the words “industrial
strategy” have not really been part of the Government’s
vernacular over the past few years, as we have heard. Make UK
said that, under this Government, we have had a decade of
“flip-flopping” on industrial strategy. Do they back business or
not? clearly did not, going by his
immortal words. Of course, we had the kamikaze Budget of last
autumn. That is all damaging to the way in which the global
industry perceives the UK. This is not talking down the UK; it is
the reality of the messages coming out of this place. Businesses
want security and stability before they invest for, say, 30 or 40
years. Think about the Toyota plant at Burnaston, which has just
celebrated its 30th year—that is a fantastic achievement. Nissan,
of course, is that bit older, but those are really prized assets
that we have.
Turning to net zero and the Government’s ambitions with electric
vehicles, we need to press on that issue and ramp up battery
manufacture. As we have heard, we are way behind compared with
other countries, but we also need to support wider adoption of
vehicles. The plans we have—offering interest-free loans and
potentially trialling a national scrappage scheme—are important.
However, as I said, the charging point network for EV is way
behind schedule. My hon. Friend the Member for Worsley and Eccles
South () made the point that more EV
charging points are being installed in Westminster than in the
north of the country. That is quite a sobering statistic, and
where we do have those few chargers, they are all too often
poorly maintained. There needs to be a mandate to ensure that
that infrastructure is delivered, not just for EV but for
hydrogen hubs. We have made something like a tenth of the
investment in hydrogen hubs that Germany has, which of course
will be aimed at future heavy goods vehicles and other mass
transport systems. Until recently, we had 12 hubs; that number
has now fallen to six, I think, so we are going backwards when it
comes to hydrogen hubs.
We have talked about battery production, and heard the passionate
speech from my hon. Friend the Member for Wansbeck (). As someone who went to his constituency 40 years
ago, I know how important that gigafactory would be for his
constituents, and I would love to see that happen. The
technologies are moving on rapidly: we can look at the work being
done by Warwick Manufacturing Group, which is leading the
development of battery technology, or by UKBIC, which is the
industrialisation centre just outside Coventry. The UK absolutely
could be at the forefront of that work, but we need the
investments to make it happen, and as demonstrated by
Britishvolt, that has just not been happening. There are some
questions about what is happening with Recharge Industries as
well.
I touched on hydrogen; Members have also made points about
sustainable fuels, and there is something to be said about what
could be done in that sector. The motorsport industry is doing a
huge amount of work exploring those technologies, and again, we
are very much at the forefront of what can be done in that
space—how existing internal combustion engines could be used with
that kind of fuel to bring them close to net zero. That
innovation is so important, whether it be through motorsport or
our higher education institutions. We heard about HORIBA MIRA
from the hon. Member for Bosworth (Dr Evans) and we have
motorsport valley down the M40, but the Advanced Propulsion
Centre at Warwick is also doing some fascinating work, supporting
new companies with emerging technologies to make them
commercially viable.
As the Government will know, there are some real concerns about
the ZEV mandate, certainly about the tradeable element and what
it will mean if manufacturers miss their targets, as well as what
those targets will be after 2030. Then, of course, we have the
rules of origin, which—as we have heard from colleagues,
particularly “the Stellantis three”—are a real and critical hit
to the sector. I am not sure whether I am a Stellantis fourth in
disguise.
In spirit.
Maybe in spirit, yes—that is exactly what it is. Those tariffs
will be real tariffs, going both ways, but they will particularly
impact on battery electric vehicles. That is why Labour would
prioritise an agreement with the EU, because we have to deliver a
modern border and customs framework that will facilitate smooth
and cost-effective trade.
I will make a couple of other points. We need the skills to make
this all happen, both in the network of our dealers and in our
factories and our manufacturing sector, but we also need clean
energy. We have such a cost disadvantage in this country compared
with France and a lot of Europe, but particularly when compared
with Spain, where energy costs something like a tenth of what it
does here. That is why Labour will launch an urgent mission for a
fossil fuel-free electricity system by 2030, because we have to
reduce the cost to businesses and to EV drivers as well. When we
see the work that President Biden is doing through the IRA, we
realise just how much can be done with a vision, and that is what
I think is frustrating so many want-to-be investors in this
country.
In closing, I come back to the speech of my hon. Friend the
Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (), which I thought was a
clinical dissection of the challenges facing the sector. This is
a really important sector—from e-mobility to motorbikes and
diggers—for the value it provides not just in the abstract to UK
plc, but as I cited in my opening remarks, to communities and
constituencies up and down the country. When I speak to
businesses in the sector, which is virtually every week and
certainly every fortnight, they impress upon me the desperate
need for some clarity because they want to make long-term
decisions. These are companies such as JLR, Stellantis, Toyota,
Nissan, BMW, Mini and others, and decisions have been made by
boards elsewhere around the world. That is why, with colleagues,
I will always talk up this industry. It is an industry that I
think is so important to our future, and an industry at the point
of transition. However, we will be honest about the challenges.
We must champion the prospects and what this country can provide
to them, because we want the investment, and the industry wants
us to provide regulatory, political and economic stability.
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
To wind up, I call the shadow Transport Secretary.
3.41pm
(Sheffield, Heeley) (Lab)
This has been an excellent debate, informed by real experts from
across the House who are clear champions of their constituencies
and of the automotive industry. I think the House can agree,
following today’s debate, that our automotive industry is truly
the crown of British industry.
However, I would say very gently to the Minister that her speech
really did sound out of touch with the reality that the industry
and the workforce across our country are currently facing. We
were treated to 35 minutes, but there was absolutely no plan, no
explanation as to why we still do not have in place the strategy
to ramp up our battery production, and no plan for how we are
going to deal with the looming rules of origin deadline or the
ZEV mandate.
As we have heard powerfully today, the industry is struggling
under a Government who have no plan or strategy, and are
constantly risking more jobs being shipped overseas. My hon.
Friends the Members for Luton North (), for Luton South (), for Ellesmere Port and
Neston (), for Llanelli (Dame ), for Wansbeck and for Warwick and Leamington
() all spelled out clearly the
impact of this on their communities. This debate has been
enormously enhanced by their contributions, and they are huge
champions of the automotive industry in this place.
In the face of the new geopolitical reality and the approach our
global allies are taking, the Government’s current approach is
little short of reckless. The Biden Administration are at the
forefront of this new economic approach, taking an active role in
rebuilding America’s manufacturing base through their
groundbreaking Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS Act. The
European Union, with its Net Zero Industry Act, aims for 40% of
its green industry to be based at home, and the Powering
Australia plan is set to create 600,000 jobs and spur 76 billion
Australian dollars of investment. Yet here in the UK, this
Government seem content to settle for less and are resigned to
good jobs and green growth continuing to head overseas.
So much for levelling up: it is exactly the communities that have
already suffered from deindustrialisation that will be hit all
over again. We know the story, and we have heard it again today,
of how good, high-skilled, well-paid jobs disappear and their
alternatives are low-paid and insecure, and of how poverty rises,
inequality increases and the social fabric of communities is
permanently torn. We simply cannot allow it to happen again,
because the warning signs are already flashing.
Just two weeks ago, the Business and Trade Secretary and I both
spoke at the British car manufacturers conference. The industry
was clear that it urgently needs a strategy—or anything—from this
Government. Mike Hawes, who has been quoted many times today,
warned:
“We just need a plan, and one more cunning than Baldrick’s. I
don’t care whether it’s called industrial competitiveness,
activism, or dare we say it, an industrial strategy. We just know
we need it, and we need it urgently.”
What did the Secretary of State have to say in response? I quote
directly:
“We will come out with plans soon, please stick with us”.
Is that really the best the Government can offer—begging industry
to wait a little longer and to hold its nerve, as they admit that
they have no plan after 13 years in government?
The reality is that we cannot afford to wait any longer. For
decades, our car industry has been at the forefront of innovation
and expertise. We have heard fantastic examples of that from my
hon. Friends the Members for Warwick and Leamington, for
Ellesmere Port and Neston, for Birmingham, Perry Barr (Mr
Mahmood), for Llanelli, and for Luton North, as well as from my
hon. Friend the Member for Luton South, who is a fantastic
champion of motorsports. Under the Conservatives, however, we are
losing the race for the jobs of the future. Car production has
already slumped by one-third since 2010. By 2025, Germany will
manufacture 10 times more batteries than we do, and the US 30
times.
We heard the whole sorry tale of the history of Britishvolt from
my hon. Friend the Member for Wansbeck. He is right—it is an
ideal site for a gigafactory, because it has the grid connections
and supply chain in the north-east, but it has been failed,
repeatedly, by this Government. Manufacturers are already leaving
the UK or shutting up shop: Arrival has left Bicester for the US;
Honda has closed its Swindon plant after 35 years of production;
Ford has cut thousands of jobs at its Halewood plant; and
manufacturers in the supply chain such as SKF in Luton are at
risk of being offshored to Poland. Yet more problems are looming,
self-inflicted by this reckless Government.
We have heard many times today of the impending cliff edge
through the trade and co-operation agreement, with new rules of
origin requirements that will apply huge tariffs to UK exports if
we cannot produce enough batteries at home. The Government have
had two and a half years since the agreement was signed, but they
have failed to use that time to ramp up our battery capacity.
That is coupled with their own looming ZEV mandate that industry
has no detail about. Our industry will be slapped with tariffs,
and demand will move to countries with the battery capacity such
as China.
Communities such as Llanelli, Luton, Birmingham, Elsmere Port and
Wansbeck will suffer, as will those such as Blyth, West Brom,
South Derbyshire, Durham, and Crewe. That is why many
constituents across the country will wonder why this debate has
been so one-sided and from one side of the House, and why Labour
will create the conditions for our car industry not just to
survive, but to thrive. Our vision is one where good jobs in the
industries of the future—jobs that people can be proud of and
raise a family on—are brought back to our industrial heartlands.
That is why, alongside my hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge
and Hyde, we have developed a plan to turbocharge electric
vehicle manufacturing.
First, we will address the consequence of the Conservatives’
Brexit deal, acting to avoid the cliff edge in the TCA that will
slap tariff on our electric vehicles. We will rapidly scale up
our domestic battery industry by part-financing eight additional
gigafactories through our green prosperity plan. We will
accelerate the EV charge point roll-out by setting new, binding
targets on Governments, and we will make the UK a clean energy
superpower by 2030, lowering the sky-high electricity costs for
UK industries and cutting £93 billion in energy bills for the
British people, by investing in cleaner, cheaper, homegrown power
for our country.
With Labour’s plan to turbocharge our EV transition the
opportunities are clear for all to see, and we have heard them
expressed loud and clear today: resilience to withstand
geopolitical shocks; 80,000 good, green jobs right here, not in
China; £30 billion of investment across the country, forging
resilience at home while creating new partnerships abroad; an
active state working in concert with innovative, world-leading
manufacturers, pursuing a modern industrial strategy; and new
life breathed into our hollowed out industrial base. Mr Deputy
Speaker, Labour will not shy away from the challenges facing our
car industry. We will back it every step of the way, and we have
the plan to prove it. I urge colleagues to support our motion
today.
3.49pm
The Minister of State, Department for Transport ()
It has been an interesting and absorbing debate, and I thank all
those who have taken part in it. I must say that I take my hat
off to the hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (). It is interesting to
know that he grew up in Sunderland, and I notice his great
affection for the Black Cats—an affection I greatly share—Niall
Quinn and the glory days of Peter Reid. Who but the hon.
Gentleman could better hark back to the 1990s, and how much does
he do so in politics as he does in football? It is a little
unnerving to see him newly hirsute—at least in terms of the past
year or three. He is getting an unnervingly close resemblance to
His late Majesty King George V, which creates a somewhat
unnerving impression across the Dispatch Box when one is trying
to respond to the important points he makes.
The hon. Gentleman came, as did the hon. Member for Sheffield,
Heeley (), with a clear agenda for this
debate, which was to tell a desperate story of a struggling
industry and a country labouring in its automotive manufacturing.
Unfortunately, they have both had desperately bad luck in their
choice of debate, because those gloomy speeches are made, and the
desire for optimism is expressed, and then it turns out that
Geely and Renault have today announced a pioneering new
investment to become a global leader in new engine technologies.
Not only that: it turns out that we just laid the new charge
point regulations, which will make it easier than ever to own an
EV. Those were widely welcomed, I might add, by Mike Hawes of the
SMMT, who was richly quoted today by Opposition Members, and with
reason. Fascinatingly, only today, Tesla has announced its
intention to become an electricity supplier, which will itself
become an enormously important part of that wider systems
infrastructure that has been rightly mentioned. What a day to
choose to be gloomy on. What a day of good news, and how much
that reinforces the picture of an industry that is dealing
brilliantly with the challenges and changes to its own
circumstances.
Will the Minister give way?
I would give way, but I want to respond to the many other points
from Members who actually made speeches.
I made a speech.
I hope the hon. Lady will let me get to those points first.
[Interruption.] We can go on, or Opposition Members can listen to
what the Government are trying to say.
The hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde talked about low
business investment, and he is absolutely right that one should
not pick and choose statistics but try to give a full picture. I
was, therefore, slightly surprised that he ignored the fact that
business investment has grown steadily since 2010. The Institute
for Government published a report that tracks the crashing of
business investment in this country to the Labour Administration
and dates its recovery from 2008 to 2010. That is the picture of
business investment that the hon. Gentleman asks us to get
to.
My hon. Friend the Member for Bosworth (Dr Evans) rightly
highlighted MIRA. What a great facility that is and what a great
testing opportunity it will create for this country over the next
few years. He is right to talk about grid connectivity and to
mention Triumph Motorcycles, a business that I met only the other
day, but he would have wanted to mention the strategic framework,
which was announced last year, for electricity provision. If
there is a report coming soon—he can speak from his knowledge of
that in a Parliamentary Private Secretary context—I can only
applaud that.
The hon. Member for Worsley and Eccles South () worried about the roll-out
of charge points. I hope she will be reassured by the new regs on
charge points, which we have only just laid and which were
welcomed by the SMMT and many other players across that industry.
I also hope she will be pleased that ChargeUK, representing the
charge point operators, has announced that £6 billion will be
invested in charge points across the country over the next few
years. That is a direct result of the ZEV mandate, which ties the
creation of charge point infrastructure to the support for EVs in
the systemic way that parties across the House, including the
Opposition, recognise. It is those two things that will grow
together. It is the ability to aim against that target of
specific EV numbers coming into and being sold in this country
that creates the priming for private investment, and rightly
so.
I was pleased to hear the contribution of the hon. Member for
Birmingham, Perry Barr (Mr Mahmood), who was absolutely right to
raise the topic of apprenticeships. As an apprentice in this
House, I salute him; he echoed the “Education, education,
education” policy of a former Member of this House with “Skills,
skills, skills”, which I completely agree are very important. Let
me remind him that in my constituency we are pioneering a
specialist STEM technology university—the New Model Institute for
Technology and Engineering—which is just the thing that can be
used to build skills and to prime levelling up across the
country.
What a wonderfully fresh and enthusiastic speech from the hon.
Member for Gordon (). I was excited to hear
it, but tragically it turned out to be a tag-team “curse on both
your houses” misery exercise, relitigating Brexit long after that
horse has left the stable. That was rightly picked up by the hon.
Member for Stalybridge and Hyde, who did not want to be drawn on
Brexit. I understand why: the country took a decision and we are
working with the consequences.
The hon. Member for Gordon said that the speech by my hon. Friend
the Minister for Industry and Economic Security—a brilliant
speech it was, too—was the length of time it would take to charge
an EV. At 35 minutes, that is not quite true, but that is
absolutely the ambition that we want to get to for all EV
operators across the country. We want people to be able to charge
very rapidly while they go and pick up a cup of coffee in the
usual way.
I thank the hon. Member for Llanelli (Dame ) for her comment. She asked for a renewable energy
focus and was right to do so. I hope that I can reassure her by
reminding her that National Grid reported that in 2010 less than
20% of our energy was renewable, while in 2022—last year—more
than 50% was renewable in five months of the year. That is
tremendous progress. She may also be pleased to know that coal,
which was used for 43% of electricity generation in 2012, is now
at 1.5%. That is tremendous progress on both those fronts.
On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Listening to the
Minister’s response, I want to give him the opportunity to
correct the record. Not only does he seem not to be living on the
same planet as us, but he is clearly not in the same Chamber. He
implied that I had not spoken in the debate, but I gave a lengthy
speech on the issues we are facing in Luton right now. I invite
him to correct the record at the Dispatch Box.
I would be happy to respond to the hon. Lady. That is not
actually what I said. I said that I wanted to respond to the
speeches and therefore I would not take interventions at that
time. I will of course—[Interruption.] If she would prefer me to
respond not to her speech but to an intervention, I will let her
make an intervention.
I thank the Minister for finally allowing an intervention. He
talked about optimism. Does he feel optimistic that the
manufacturing industry now faces a 10% tariff on passenger cars
and a 22% tariff on vans? Does he believe that we should all be
optimistic about that future, or does he believe the reality—that
the manufacturing industry faces a cliff edge?
If that is the best the hon. Lady can do, she would have been
better to wait for my response to her speech. No, the truth of
the matter is that this country is engaged in discussions and
negotiations with European partners about the circumstances—we
export an enormous number of cars, which is an important fact
from their point of view as it is from ours—and it would be
futile to discuss those matters in public. We all know that none
of these negotiations is ever done in public, and that includes
commercial negotiations, which Labour appears to wish to be done
in public as well.
Let me proceed a little more. The hon. Members for Luton South
(), for Wansbeck () and for Sheffield, Heeley () touched on new gigafactories.
I invite Opposition Front- Bench Members to comment further if
they wish, because this is a much-heralded part of the Labour
strategy, and if the Labour party seeks to subsidise eight new
gigafactories, perhaps they would like to put on record how much
public money—taxpayer’s money—they propose to spend on that and
how it would be funded. We very much look forward to seeing their
plans. I will be interested to see whether they bear any
resemblance to market conditions or show any signs of doing
anything other than immiserating and impoverishing the British
taxpayer.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House recognises that the automotive industry is the
jewel in the crown of British manufacturing and believes it can
have a bright future creating good jobs for people across the UK;
regrets that after 13 years of Conservative neglect the UK risks
losing this world-class industry, putting thousands of jobs under
threat; condemns the Government for its lack of an industrial
strategy and the negative impact this has had on investment in
the UK’s automotive sector; calls on the Government to urgently
resolve the rules of origin changes which are due to take effect
in 2024, working with partners across Europe to negotiate a deal
that works for manufacturers; and further calls on the Government
to adopt an active industrial strategy to build the battery
factory capacity needed to secure the automotive sector for
decades to come.
|
