| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mis-selling of Gas Contracts
5. Mr. Jamieson: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what discussions he has had with the Director General of Gas Supply about mis-selling of gas contracts in the south-west. [23920]
The Minister for Industry and Energy (Mr. Tim Eggar): My Department is keeping closely in touch with the Office of Gas Supply about the progress of gas competition in the south-west.
Mr. Jamieson: Is the Minister aware that trading standards officers in Devon have received record numbers of complaints about the selling by Swebgas of contracts to customers who were tricked into signing those contracts? Is he aware that Ofgas is totally helpless to protect customers? Is this yet another example of the Government looking after the market and putting the interests of consumers second?
Mr. Eggar: I have never heard anything more nonsensical, even from the Opposition. This Government introduced competition in the south-west and made it possible for consumers to be offered reductions of up to 25 per cent. in their gas bills.
Mr. Hicks: While in no way condoning unnecessarily aggressive salesmen, does not the introduction of other companies supplying gas in Devon and Cornwall afford the opportunity for gas price reductions in real terms, particularly in a region which hitherto has suffered as a consequence of regional differential pricing?
Mr. Eggar: I absolutely agree. Consumers in the south-west trial area can choose their gas supplier from 10 different competitors, a number of which are offering supplies without a standing charge or with substantial discounts to low-use as well as high-use consumers. That good news for consumers has been widely welcomed throughout the south-west.
Mr. Nigel Griffiths: Given the record number of complaints from customers in the south-west about mis-selling, how can consumers trust the same company to take over half the country's electricity generation?
Mr. Eggar: The hon. Gentleman always accentuates the negative. He is meant to represent the interests of consumers for his party, but we have not heard a single word of welcome from the hon. Gentleman for the substantial reductions in gas prices for individual consumers. The hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that individual consumers in the south-west can get reductions in their gas bills of up to 25 per cent. Why does the hon. Gentleman not welcome that fact, even though he has always opposed competition up to now?
Mr. Harris: Will my right hon. Friend reject the predictable carping of Labour Members and accept the
genuine thanks of consumers across the south-west, who welcome increased competition which in some cases will mean £70 off the average gas bill? Is that not a good example of Conservative policies in action to the benefit of consumers?
Mr. Eggar: I completely agree. Those Conservative policies were introduced in the face of opposition by Labour Front-Benchers, whose arguments have been disproved by the results of competition so far in the south-west. I have no doubt that in the coming months large numbers of my hon. Friend's constituents will benefit considerably from reductions. He mentioned £70 off the average gas bill, but in my view that figure may be extended--and there are likely to be increased standards of service to individual consumers in addition to price reductions.
Renewable Energy
7. Mr. Tipping: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what plans he has to help promote renewable energy sources and industries in the United Kingdom. [23922]
Mr. Page: The Government are stimulating the development of new and renewable energy technologies and industrial and market infrastructure via the non-fossil fuel obligation and a supporting programme.
Mr. Tipping: Will the Minister consider further steps to help this country's environmental technology industries--including, for example, solar power, for which the global market was worth £1 billion in 1993. At that time, Britain had 10 per cent. of solar panel exports but was spending less than 1p per person on solar research. Should not a research framework be established so that the UK can be the enterprise centre for creating new energy sources, making sure that British companies get a fair share of the world market?
Mr. Page: I am well aware of the hon. Gentleman's particular interest, and I broadly agree with the thrust of his question. He is right to remind the House that we sometimes take access to electricity for granted. We should never forget that millions of people have no electricity and that the only means of obtaining it will be through the use of photovoltaics. I can give the hon. Gentleman some good news. BP Solar alone achieved 7 per cent. of the world market in 1995 and has so far attracted orders in excess of £15 million. The market is huge, as the hon. Gentleman told the House, and I certainly want to see it developed.
Mr. Ian Bruce: My hon. Friend will know that the Government have been encouraging local authorities to burn municipal waste to create energy, but will he carefully consider the representations on the subject? Most constituents are in theory happy with that approach, but they do not want the effluent from incinerators anywhere near their homes. I wonder whether the Government have got local popular opinion wrong.
Mr. Page: The decision on where to locate any particular NFFO project is a planning matter for the local authority. The NFFO project is a two-pronged objective. One objective is environmental improvement, to reduce
the pollution that comes from conventional methods of energy production, and the other is the creation of a manufacturing base in renewables.
Mr. Battle: As the Minister said that he agrees with my hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood (Mr. Tipping) and that he is especially keen on photovoltaics, why does he not open up the fossil fuel levy, which at present excludes support for photovoltaics? Would it not be better to let them in to ensure that we end up a world leader in that industry and do not fall further behind?
Mr. Page: I remind the hon. Gentleman that the whole purpose of the non-fossil fuel obligation is to bring about a convergence of energy production from renewables so that that approach can actively and competitively compete in the market against conventional energy producers. The question of photovoltaics will be considered alongside all the others when we consider NFFO5 and, if it can achieve some market convergence, it could certainly be included. I would want to be convinced that the market convergence will be obtained, because I do not want to waste taxpayers' money.
Manufacturing (East Midlands)
8. Mr. Garnier: To ask the President of the Board of Trade when he next plans to visit Leicestershire for discussions with representatives of the manufacturing sector about Government policies to encourage exports and inward investment from and into the east midlands. [23923]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Mr. Phillip Oppenheim): Ministers in the Department keep in touch with all regions on a regular basis to stress the Government's commitment to competitiveness. The latest available figures show that the east midlands has the highest proportion of manufacturing gross domestic product of all the regions.
Mr. Garnier: Is my hon. Friend aware of just how successful the manufacturing sector of the east midlands and Leicestershire is in exporting not only to the European Union but to the wider world? Does he agree that one of the reasons for that is the highly useful role that the business links offices in Leicester and Market Harborough, which cover my constituency, have played? Does my hon. Friend also agree that the reason why we attract so much inward investment into those business regions is that we do not have a statutory minimum wage?
Mr. Oppenheim: I agree with my hon. and learned Friend, and it is not just the east midlands that has benefited. A recent survey showed that while the manufacturing productivity gap with Germany expanded to its widest margin by 1979, we in Britain have closed three quarters of that manufacturing productivity and competitiveness gap with Germany since 1979. That is quite an achievement and it shows that the period when Britain was in danger of becoming a second-rate, non-manufacturing, skivvy, low-wage economy was not under the Government but in the heroic days of Labour's industrial strategy.
Mr. Purchase: Is it not true that the majority of our productivity gains have been caused by loss of labour in
key manufacturing areas? Is it not also true that, in the face of Tory complacency, manufacturing as a fraction of GDP fell by more than a third in the years of Tory control? How does the Minister explain that away?
Mr. Oppenheim: First, the manufacturing sector in relation to GDP in Britain is at about the same level as in other European countries, such as France and Italy. Secondly--[Interruption.] If hon. Gentlemen would listen, they would hear that the number of manufacturing jobs has fallen in virtually every industrialised country. It has risen slightly in this country recently. What matters is not just the jobs in manufacturing but manufacturing productivity, which has risen because of organisational and efficiency improvements and manufacturing output. The key point is that whereas manufacturing output fell under the last Labour Government, it has risen sharply under this Government.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |