| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Coalfield Communities
8. Mr. Tipping: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what steps he has taken to ensure that the activities currently undertaken by British Coal Enterprise in coalfield communities will continue. [7892]
The Minister for Small Business, Industry and Energy (Mr. Richard Page): The sale of British Coal Enterprise is a matter for British Coal, which has recognised from the start that in considering proposals the continuation of effective assistance to coalfield communities by purchasers is a priority.
Mr. Tipping: Will the Minister confirm that he has seen research from independent experts showing that British Coal Enterprise has created thousands of jobs in coalfield communities? Will he talk to the chairman of British Coal to ensure that BCE is not necessarily sold to the highest bidder but goes to the bidder offering value for money--that is, the bidder who promises to retain and create much needed jobs in coalfield communities?
Mr. Page: I pay tribute to the work that BCE has done over the years. It estimates that it has created about 123,000 job opportunities in the coalfield areas. British Coal has pre-qualified 14 organisations to bid for all of BCE or its individual activities. These include nine organisations for business funding, six for work space and four for Grosvenor. The deadline for receipt of firm offers will be the end of the month and BCE remains on course for sale by the end of March. British Coal will regard as a priority those bids which seek to continue BCE's work.
Mr. Battle: As a result of the Government presiding over wholesale pit closures, entire communities are facing a generation of unemployment. Does the Minister agree that some mining communities still face unemployment levels between 30 and 50 per cent. above the national average? Has not the promise made by Ministers two
years ago to mining communities suffering dislocation proved entirely inadequate? Selling off British Coal Enterprise will not help. Where are the Government's detailed action plans for investing in desperately needed economic restructuring to ensure that mining communities get some work and some hope? Or will the Government walk away again, leaving behind a shambles with everyone but themselves expected to pick up the tab?
Mr. John Marshall: Arthur would like that.
Mr. Page: As I have said, the sale of BCE is a matter for British Coal. I must reject what the hon. Gentleman says. The Government continue to provide support for economic regeneration activities through regional selective assistance and the single regeneration budget, in addition to support available for European structural funds. The coal industry to which the hon. Gentleman seems to be harking back--and which I believe, indeed, that Arthur Scargill wishes to recreate--was losing the country and the taxpayer £1.3 billion a year. The hon. Gentleman seems conveniently to forget that sort of figure. I know, however, that he will gain comfort from the fact that unemployment rates in all of the 27 coal communities have fallen since 1992 as well as from the fact that coal production in 1995 was up on that in 1994 and imports were down in that period. That is a success story of which we should all be proud.
Insurance and Financial Services
9. Mr. John Greenway: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what is his latest assessment of the value to the United Kingdom of overseas earnings from insurance and financial services. [7893]
The Minister for Competition and Consumer Affairs (Mr. John M. Taylor) It has been estimated by British Invisibles that net overseas earnings of the UK financial sector rose by nearly a third in 1994 to £20.4 billion, of which net overseas earnings by insurance institutions contributed £3.9 billion.
Mr. Greenway: Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating the London Insurance and Reinsurance Market Association on its fifth anniversary yesterday and on the success achieved in that time at the new London underwriting centre, which has contributed to the excellent news that he has announced? When I asked leading members of the association yesterday what concerned them about the future, I was told that it was European monetary union. It seems that they are as ambivalent about it as the House is. They said, however, that in view of the complexities of a single currency for London-based insurers it is vital that the Government remain central to the discussions about EMU. Will my hon. Friend bear those concerns in mind?
Mr. Taylor: I certainly will. I join my hon. Friend in congratulating LIRMA on its fifth birthday. He will know better than me that the main currency of reinsurance is US dollars, but the London market is well used to dealing in multiple currencies. My Department stays in close touch with the industry. I agree with the prudence of staying close to all negotiations in Europe.
Mr. Olner: Although I welcome the earnings that insurance companies bring into the country, does the Minister agree that Baroness Thatcher was completely and
utterly wrong when she thought that all this country's benefits could in future be supplied by the insurance industry and not the manufacturing industries, whose capacity we have lost year after year?
Mr. Taylor: I think that it is appropriate for me to tell the House that the UK has an extremely successful insurance market. London is the world's leading insurance centre. The Department of Trade and Industry, with secondees from the industry, is working with insurers to maintain our competitiveness: this includes a major benchmarking initiative to spread best practice throughout the industry; making the best use of new technology; and improving management development and training. Insurance is a major British success.
Small Businesses
10. Mr. Hawkins: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what further steps are planned to remove unnecessary regulations on small businesses. [7894]
Mr. Page: Small firms are vital to Britain's well-being. My ministerial colleagues and I therefore always look for ways to reduce the burden of regulation on small firms. One of the most significant ways in which my Department achieves that is by exempting small business from regulation wherever possible, for example in company law and competition law.
Mr. Hawkins: I welcome what my hon. Friend has just said about small businesses, which are so vital in constituencies such as those in Blackpool. What are the Government doing systematically to ensure that unnecessary regulations are not placed on the backs of small businesses to start with? Surely prevention is better than cure.
Mr. Page: My hon. Friend has put his finger on the nub of the problem. Prevention is better than cure. The Government, through the competitiveness White Paper which is produced every year, are looking to see how they can reduce the various regulatory burdens on small business. I know that a series of conferences is taking place throughout the country, entitled "Your Business Matters", and the messages on the burdens that are unnecessary are coming through and will be responded to.
The most positive thing that has happened has been the appointment of a small business Minister in every Government Department, as announced by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade. I am convinced that those small business Ministers, who will watch legislation as it is proposed and how it might affect smaller businesses, are the way to improve the situation for the future.
Mr. Gordon Prentice:
Have not 1,000 regulations been identified as suitable for repeal, and have not the vast majority of them been carried into law by the Government since 1979? Do not the facts contradict the rhetoric that we always get from Conservative Members? Have not the Government engulfed small businesses in red tape and bureaucracy?
Mr. Page:
I look forward to the hon. Gentleman supplying me with information that proves that the statement that he just made is factually correct, because I sincerely have my doubts. Of the 1,000 regulations earmarked for amendment or repeal, more than 500 had
Sir Michael Grylls:
I welcome the very good work that my hon. Friend has done, but will he undertake to use the maximum exemption limit for small firms--those with a turnover of £4 million--rather than a lower figure? The limit of £4 million, as allowed by the European Union, would exempt far more firms from unnecessary red tape. Surely we should use the maximum figure rather than set a lower figure, because a firm with a turnover of £4 million is still a very small firm.
Mr. Page:
My hon. Friend is well known for the support that he has given small firms over the years, and I can only listen to what he has to say with reverence and attention. I assure him that we shall do whatever we can to reduce burdens on small firms.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |