PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES - United Kingdom Parliament

695 Debate on the Address
15 MAY 2013
Debate on the Address
696
Mr Meacher: As the hon. Gentleman and everyone
else knows, it was 10% less. I strongly opposed that; I
think that it was wrong. I do not think that 28% is right
either. The rate should be where Nigel Lawson left
it—namely, at 40%. But let us stick with 28%. That
would easily raise enough money to create between 1
million and 1.5 million jobs in two years, which would
kick-start a virtuous spiral of growth.
The third option is another tranche of quantitative
easing. The gigantic sum of £375 billion of quantitative
easing has already been printed, and it has disappeared
into consolidating bank balance sheets. A further, much
more modest, tranche of £25 billion, invested directly
into the economy, bypassing the banks, could once
again kick-start the economy without any increase in
borrowing at all.
It is also highly relevant to point out, which the
Chancellor never does, that the balance of payments on
our traded goods, which has been going up for a long
time, reached the staggering level of £106 billion in this
last year. That is 7% of gross domestic product. Worse
news can be seen when we consider the growth that we
like to think occurred in the UK during the best years
up to 2007. The National Statistics register shows growth
of £300 billion, but that is slightly less than the total for
equity withdrawal from housing for the same period. In
other words, the inflation of property assets largely
accounts for the apparent growth. So, rebalancing the
economy, which is now vital, is not going to occur
simply with a flourish of the Chancellor’s wand. It will
need a hard-won, relentless programme of manufacturing
revival, and the restructuring of the banks to ensure
that they look after the national interest and not their
own.
3.57 pm
Mr Ben Wallace (Wyre and Preston North) (Con):
People used to say that England’s bread hung by
Lancashire’s thread. In this debate, I want to focus on
some of the good news on the rebalancing of the
economy. The news has not been all bad, and, despite
the economic circumstances, my constituents and the
people of Lancashire have a good track record of
rebuilding and moving forward and of expanding exports
and manufacturing.
Manufacturing output rose last month. Today’s figures
show that, in my constituency, unemployment dropped
again. It dropped compared with last month and with
last year. We now have 81,000 more people working in
manufacturing than we did in 2011. Despite all the
economic troubles, the people of Lancashire live in the
real world. They know how the welfare changes have
helped to encourage people to get back into work, and
they know that the Government’s policy is trying to
help businesses large and small to export and grow.
Despite our domestic difficulties on the European
Union at the moment, that “real-worldness” of my
Lancashire constituents has been demonstrated in the
recent local elections. The real story in Lancashire was
not the United Kingdom Independence party; it was
that the Labour party failed to take back the county
that it had run for 26 years. Funnily enough, people are
not convinced by the Ed and Ed show, or by Labour’s
economic credibility. But let us move away from the
European thing. I know that the Opposition would like
to focus on it, but I think that it will pass—[Laughter.]
Opposition Members might laugh, but there are nine
marginal seats in Lancashire, and if Labour cannot win
Lancashire county council, it is not going to win a
general election fast. Labour knows that.
BAE is one of our local employers, and 19,000 people
work in the aerospace industry. Profits are up, orders
are up, and it has recently landed a £2.5 billion order
from Oman to build Hawks and Typhoons. The Typhoon
Eurofighter is made in Samlesbury and Warton. That
did not happen by accident, but because of the investment
in skills that successive Governments and this Government
have put into my constituency. Recently, the Government
announced extra funding for Preston further education
college, and more is on the way for Myerscough. Building
up the skills base is one reason why BAE remains one of
the most competitive and leading exporters in the country,
training thousands of apprentices every year—some
Government funded, some not.
As we speak, the Prime Minister is abroad yet again,
trying to make sure that we negotiate a free trade treaty
to allow British business to prosper in the American
market. Only recently, we had a state visit from the
President of United Arab Emirates, which was partly
about trying to sell more British and Lancashire-made
manufacturing to the middle east. The Prime Minister
has taken rebalancing the economy and moving forward
on growth seriously.
We have seen investment through the Department for
Business, Innovation and Skills, under its Secretary of
State—the Liberal Democrat part of our coalition—that
has helped to support the Lancashire local enterprise
zone in Samlesbury, where we hope to get skills academies
and more investment in our young people.
Then, beyond that, are the changes the Chancellor
has produced in the Budget—an increase in the use of
the R and D tax credit that rewards our investment, for
example, and the rolling out of the patent box, which
means people who exploit their intellectual property in
this country will pay some of the lowest corporation tax
in Europe. That is why this country has a future in
growing its manufacturing base and is on the right path
to rebalancing.
In future, I want the Government to continue to
invest in the F-35 joint strike fighter and the new
generation of unmanned aerial vehicles. I also look to a
city deal for Preston, hopefully worth £300 million—if
we can get the Treasury to move along a bit quicker.
Something that is important for the future of the
whole country is shale gas, and it is under my feet, in my
constituency, that the Bowland shale exists. It is currently
valued at 35 billion barrels of oil equivalent of gas—a
$200 billion revenue stream, should it be extracted. We
need it in Lancashire and in the country more widely for
security of supply; we need it as alternative energy; and
we need it to make sure that this country benefits from
its assets and its mineral wealth.
We in Lancashire have a story to tell. Lancashire’s
history is about reinventing itself and building for the
future. It is not for nothing that Preston is one of the
northern cities that bucked the trend since 1908 and has
been one of the most progressive cities. Let us remember
for the future that—
Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle): Order.