| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Baldry: When the Chief Secretary looks at Hansard, as I am sure that he will do shortly, he will see that in almost the last sentence of his speech, he said that the Government were not prepared to unpick the Budget or the Finance Bill. If he has not yet realised that the road haulage industry is complaining about the provisions in this year's Budget, he has clearly not been listening to the industry.
Mrs. Diana Organ (Forest of Dean) rose--
Mr. Baldry: I shall not give way, because there are others who want to speak.
We are not putting forward the Brit disc as a panacea. As I am sure that my hon. Friends on the Front Bench will explain in greater detail, the proposal is a first step to try to redress the situation. If the Government do not start listening to the UK road haulage industry--
Mrs. Organ:
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Baldry:
No. I have made it clear that I shall not give way. I am sure that the hon. Lady is one of those who would like to have a chance to speak.
Mr. Christopher Leslie (Shipley):
I have listened with interest to the debate. My right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Treasury has adequately rebuffed all the
Looking at the subject objectively, the Government have listened to the road haulage industry. Like most hon. Members, I have haulage companies in my constituency. It is important to take into account their costs and the opportunities that they have to trade across the country and across Europe. I am pleased to see the constructive way in which the Government have addressed the problem. Rather than hyping up the militancy andthe protests that have disrupted the country--as the Conservatives have done--my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport has set up an industry forum to listen and consult with employees, union representatives and business leaders in the road haulage industry. The Government are trying to listen and to take on board some of their comments.
Mr. Swayne:
I have been listening to the concerns of the road haulage industry. I also listened to the Chief Secretary. Will the hon. Gentleman comment on the opening five minutes of the Chief Secretary's speech, when he told us, first, that there was overcapacity in the industry and, secondly, that it was fuel inefficient? The conclusion that we draw from that is that Government policy is designed to cause bankruptcy and fallout within the industry. One might even call it a price worth paying.
Mr. Leslie:
It is funny that the hon. Gentleman should quote that. I recall that it was said by Lord Lamont, a former Conservative Chancellor, about unemployment. It is a shame that the Opposition stick by that comment.
In my view, my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary got it absolutely right. Although the road haulage industry faces various difficulties, we have to consider the wider world and the environmental issues that we must address. The Opposition seem to ignore the fact that we face a worldwide environmental catastrophe, with global warming threatening the livelihoods of millions of people. We have only to see the appalling pictures from Bangladesh and elsewhere in the world, where weather conditions have worsened significantly--probably due in part to carbon dioxide and other emissions since the industrial revolution. It is incumbent on us, as the responsible party of government, to consider the issues and introduce policies that will go some way to honouring our share of the commitment to rectifying the environmental problems that we face.
It is important to point out that the fuel duty escalator, which was introduced by the Conservative Government, was designed in part to discourage the consumption of hydrocarbon oil fuels that produce carbon dioxide and other emissions.
The shadow Chief Secretary said that it did not matter that a saving of 2 million to 5 million tonnes of carbon would be lost as a result of his proposed policy of scrapping the fuel duty escalator. He described that
significant reduction as irrelevant. We need to recognise the importance of meeting our commitments at Rio and Kyoto.
Mr. Loughton:
Has the hon. Gentleman seen the report by the Automobile Association that calculates that the entire extra cost on the motorist imposed by the Budget was designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by no more than 1 per cent., and that exactly the same reduction could be achieved at much less expense by issuing every person in the country two energy-efficient light bulbs?
Mr. Leslie:
I have not seen that report so I will not comment on it. However, I read another report that said that continuing with the fuel duty escalator could produce a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from transport of between 5 and 12 per cent. by 2010. That is a significant figure, so it is worth keeping our eye on the ball.
When the Opposition were asked how they would substitute for the saving of 2 million to 5 million tonnes of carbon gained through the fuel duty escalator, they revealed their true colours. They wanted to cut back on the coal industry and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by returning to the policies that they pursued in government.
Millions of people were sickened by the previous Government's disregard for coal miners. My hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper), who intervened earlier, will have many constituents who are worried by the threat that a Conservative Government will be re-elected and shift the burden from the road haulage industry back to the coal industry. That would certainly not be a solution.
Mr. Sutcliffe:
Does my hon. Friend agree that there must be a dialogue on climate change so that the Government and industry work together to help improve the environment? That is why the forum is important; it provides the ability to set environmental targets and discuss their effect on industry. Is that not the proper way forward, instead of the militant action that the Opposition have supported?
Mr. Leslie:
As usual, my hon. Friend has hit the nail on the head. I hope that the industry forum will provide a way forward through partnership instead of the combative approach of the Opposition.
Mr. Bercow:
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving way. He spoke about the interests and views of constituents. Perhaps he can tell the House where in his election address he informed the good people of Shipley that he would be voting to increase taxes and regulation on Britain's road hauliers at a time when cabotage in the European Union means that low-tax, high-polluting foreign lorries can travel scot free on Britain's roads?
Mr. Leslie:
I am not sure that it is scot free. As I understand it, the changes in the cabotage rules will account for only 0.04 per cent.--
Mr. Leslie:
I am not sure whether it is any more significant in recent years. In any case, in my election manifesto I placed great emphasis on the environmental
Ms Moran:
Does my hon. Friend agree that the Opposition's view that we should return to their former policies is not only environmentally unsound, but is economic insanity as under the previous Government the country faced some £30 million net per annum in pollution and congestion costs?
Mr. Leslie:
My hon. Friend is correct. It is clear that the Conservatives never really intended to solve the problem of congestion or comprehensively deal with the transport crisis that was precipitated by their policies.
As I have mentioned road haulage firms in my constituency, perhaps I should say at this point that I have received more positive comments from road hauliers about the Bingley relief road which is going ahead thanks to my right hon. Friend the Minister. That policy will produce great benefit to industry in the Aire valley area. I may return to that point later. It is also worth mentioning that the Government are taking measures to encourage fuel-efficient and environmentally friendly trucks and lorries. For example, the vehicle excise duty concession has now doubled to £1,000. I hope that that measure, coupled with the increasing differential between the price of ordinary diesel and ultra-low-sulphur diesel, will help to clean up the environment and reduce carbon dioxide emissions, nitrogen dioxide emissions and particulates, which are seriously damaging the atmosphere and the health of all our constituents.
On competitiveness, I find it amazing that Conservative Members can single out one issue without looking at the context of the costs to the industry. We have heard about labour taxes in the rest of the EU, and that we have a relatively competitive position in this country. It is also worth emphasising the corporation tax reductions made by the Government, which will bring great benefit to road hauliers and many other businesses across the country. The hon. Member for Banbury (Mr. Baldry) said that his constituency had the largest number of profitable firms in the country, and I imagine that they will be benefiting from the Government's corporation tax reductions.
It is worth repeating the point that road hauliers must pay tolls on the continent. There are few tolls in this country; the Isle of Skye and the Humber are two examples. In France, the owner of a typical truck will have to pay £7,800 in an average year. Those costs must be taken into account and, in my judgment, there is still a great deal of competitiveness for the road haulage industry in this country.
The Opposition have made great play of the fuel duty escalator, and, no doubt, they will want to come back to that matter during discussions on the Finance Bill. However, I cannot see the logic of their position. The fuel
duty escalator has significant principles behind it that need reiterating. It not only has environmental benefits, but spells out clearly to the country the Government's plans over the longer period; rather than doing what the Conservatives would do, which would be to chop and change their tax plans in response to the political expedient of the day. At least this Government have continued what the previous Conservative Government were going to do, and have said that the escalator will continue.
Several references have been made during the debate to remarks by previous Chancellors. One that has not been mentioned so far is a comment by the right hon. and learned Member for Rushcliffe (Mr. Clarke) who, when he increased the rate of the escalator to 5 per cent., said in his Budget statement:
"It is not good policy in these environmentally conscious days to keep road fuel costs so much cheaper than they used to be."--[Official Report, 30 November 1993; Vol. 233, c. 938.]
At the time, at least, he recognised the environmental benefits of tackling some of these serious issues.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |