| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Ian Pearson (Dudley, South): May I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his statement? I particularly welcome his focus on supporting clusters; the "D" side of R and D; the expansion of the teaching company scheme and encouraging more spin-outs from universities; the new enterprise fund; and targeting new high-growth businesses?
Will my right hon. Friend do two things? First, will he reward and value academics who work with industry so that that option is not, as at present, the third best, behind publishing in refereed journals, or teaching? Secondly, on regional selective assistance, will he ensure that the metal-bashing companies to which he referred continue to be supported in upgrading their businesses, and that they will qualify for regional selective assistance? That will show that the Labour party values the manufacturing sector--unlike the Conservative party, which devastated the sector when it was in office.
Mr. Mandelson:
My hon. Friend can rest absolutely assured that our manufacturing sector remains, and will remain, central to our future prosperity and to the Government's aims, objectives and policies. The key point is that manufacturing, like every other sector of the British economy, has constantly to innovate and to bring in new ideas from our science and engineering base. It needs to bring in people with ideas for new products or production systems and new systems for working, because that is the only way in which traditional manufacturing industries and processes can maintain their competitiveness and their share of world markets. Many are doing that now; even more will have to do so in the future.
It is extremely important to reward academics. At the root of the schemes that the Department already organises and that we will refine in the future are arrangements by which academics can leave tenure and go into businesses
without fearing that their jobs will close behind them, which would provide a strong disincentive and discouragement. The teaching companies scheme, which produces first-rate technology champions from the academic sector who go to work in businesses, has proved a great success, and we intend to expand it.
Mr. Eric Forth (Bromley and Chislehurst):
I warmly welcome the Secretary of State's reference to the spirit of enterprise in the United States, and his crusade to bring that spirit here. Recognising that the United States is still the world's most productive major economy, with an unemployment rate at half that of the European Union, will he pledge that, if he seeks to steer the British economy in any direction, it will be in the direction of the United States and not that of Europe?
Mr. Mandelson:
It might be worth the right hon. Gentleman mentioning in that context that the United States operates rather an efficient minimum wage. It has had that legislation in place for some time, and it has never had any adverse effect on enterprise, business or prosperity.
My view is absolutely clear: Europe is the biggest integrated market outside the United States. We want to make that market as open, liberalised and competitive as possible. That is the only way in which we will create opportunities for British business. Conservative policies would cut us off from the huge home market that is available to British business and sink us somewhere in the mid-Atlantic, which would be of no value to anyone in this country.
Ms Sally Keeble (Northampton, North):
I warmly welcome my right hon. Friend's statement, and especially his comments in support of the new high-tech industries, which have already proved important in creating jobs in my constituency. Is he aware that many employers, including those in Northamptonshire, say that one of the big barriers to competitiveness is the lack of skills in the local work force? Whether one works in finance, construction or even retail or fast food, one needs some computer skills, so will he say more about measures that will give us a really competitive work force?
Mr. Mandelson:
My hon. Friend is right in both her points. The problem for new start-up high-technology businesses, which have a tremendous potential for growth, is the enormous difficulty that they have in gaining access to capital finance in the first place. The venture capital industry in this country is, I think, the biggest in Europe, yet at certain levels, in relation to certain sizes and types of firm--especially high-technology ones--there is an absence of expertise and analytical skills in the financial community.
There is in the financial community a risk aversion and a resistance to financing high-technology firms, which does them considerable harm. It is to get over that prejudice--as some people would see it--or lack of sympathy or understanding that we are taking the measures that we are through the enterprise fund. Through the operation of that fund, we will, as I said, develop a finance community that has much greater expertise and more understanding of that sector, and therefore much greater inclination to offer it seed finance.
Mr. Giles Radice (North Durham):
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Could you give some guidance to the House on the application of the Parliament Acts to the European Parliamentary Elections Bill?
Madam Speaker:
Yes. The rejection of the European Parliamentary Elections Bill for the second time by the other place now brings into play the provisions of the Parliament Acts. The House of Lords will be asked to return the Bill to this House, where it will be prepared for the Royal Assent. The Parliament Acts require that, before a Bill is presented for the Royal Assent under this procedure, it has been sent to the House of Lords at least one month before the end of the Session in which it was rejected for the second time. The Bill was sent to the Lords on 3 December. In order to comply strictly with the requirements of the Parliament Acts--and I certainly intend to interpret the Acts strictly--it cannot be submitted for Royal Assent until a month after that date.
The President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mrs. Margaret Beckett):
Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker. It may be for the convenience of the House if I say now that the Government will not ask the House to agree any motion directing that the Parliament Acts should not apply.
Mr. Bernard Jenkin (North Essex):
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. This morning, the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions launched a policy document on shipping at 10.30. That document is still not available in the Vote Office. Instead of the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry announcing non-policies this afternoon, would it not be better if the Government made policies that they have decided available to Members of Parliament?
Madam Speaker:
Would those Members on the Front Bench who are responsible for seeing that documents are available do so immediately? Perhaps I might have an explanation of why the document was not available in the Vote Office.
Mr. Menzies Campbell (North-East Fife):
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. You will have noticed that the Prime Minister in the House today, and the Foreign Secretary elsewhere, have been scrupulous in avoiding giving any information that might relate to any operations that might be carried out in the near future by British forces. In the event that any such operations are begun, may I take it that you will look sympathetically on any efforts to ensure that the House has the opportunity to discuss those matters before rising for the Christmas recess?
Madam Speaker:
I hope that the hon. and learned Gentleman will appreciate--I am sure he does--that I am scrupulous about such matters. I take to heart what he says and I think that I know the full feeling of the House, too.
Helen Jackson (Sheffield, Hillsborough):
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Before this afternoon's debate
Madam Speaker:
I shall deal with that if I am allowed to get on to the main business.
Mr. Tony McNulty (Harrow, East):
Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker:
No. Let me get on to the main business before I take points of order that relate to it.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |