| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Manufacturing (Worcestershire)
10. Mr. Michael J. Foster (Worcester): If he will assess the competitiveness of manufacturing industry in Worcestershire. [115669]
The Minister for Trade (Mr. Richard Caborn): The west midlands economic strategy was published in autumn last year. It examined the competitiveness of the whole region, including Worcestershire, and recommended five priority actions to address issues that it identified. The economic strategy takes a wide view of the issues that bear on competitiveness, rather than concentrating solely on manufacturing. It identified the need for an increase in skills, support for innovation and a number of business clusters that could be developed in that area.
Mr. Foster: I thank the Minister for that answer. What support will be given to Worcestershire's manufacturing industry following BMW's decision to sell Rover?
Mr. Caborn: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has answered a number of questions that were raised--
Mr. Michael Fabricant (Lichfield): Not enough.
Mr. Caborn: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
A taskforce has been established and will report in the next few weeks. The Government will draw up their policies following its recommendations.
Mr. Alan Duncan (Rutland and Melton):
Many manufacturers in Worcestershire are heavily reliant on their business with Rover. They will be none too pleased with the Labour Government's completely incompetent handling of the Rover issue: they raised hopes and then showed their naivety by being taken for suckers. What is the latest on the Secretary of State's proclaimed mission to find another buyer for Rover? To whom has he spoken? Who is on his nice little shortlist? What are the prospects
Mr. Caborn:
If Conservative Members had developed the industrial infrastructure of this nation when they were in power, we would not be facing these problems. I have no doubt that, if they were in power now, they would dispense with the committee that is considering the position of Rover, because Conservative Front Benchers intend to abolish the region development agencies. Conservative Members dismiss the plan for competitiveness that the RDA has proposed with the support of all the stakeholders in the region. The Conservatives have no track record on manufacturing.
11. Mr. Peter Luff (Mid-Worcestershire):
What recent discussions he has had with Advantage West Midlands about the future of car manufacturing in the west midlands. [115670]
The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Mr. Stephen Byers):
I met Alex Stevenson, chairman of Advantage West Midlands, on Friday 17 March, when I asked him to lead a taskforce to deal with the consequences of BMW's decision on Rover. I met members of Advantage West Midlands when I attended the first meeting of the taskforce on 18 March, and I met Mr. Stevenson again on 23 March.
Mr. Luff:
As the Minister for Trade said in response to a previous question, Advantage West Midlands is leading the Longbridge taskforce. Does the Secretary of State recall telling the Sandwell and Dudley chamber of commerce recently that Advantage West Midlands came in the bottom half of the performance league of regional development agencies? Indeed, he hinted that it was one of the three underperforming agencies. Is it not bad enough to have the future of Rover handled by a Secretary of State who does not know what is going on, without his recklessly entrusting so much of the future of Longbridge and the whole of the motor manufacturing industry in the west midlands to such an incompetent organisation?
Mr. Byers:
The taskforce has an important role to play. The way in which it has already conducted itself by bringing the partners together is a good lesson in how to respond positively to the difficult situation that we face in the west midlands. I believe that there is a lot of confidence in the taskforce. It has the serious job of economic regeneration and job creation. We should judge it on the programme that it produces, and should not talk it down, because that will not help anyone. We should plan constructively for the future. That is what Advantage West Midlands is about, and, more importantly, what the taskforce has been charged with doing. I am confident that it will do precisely that.
Mr. Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley):
It was stated earlier that Professor Rhys does not believe that sensitive information should be shared with the Government. When pressed, he could not produce any evidence of that, and had to state honestly that it was merely his personal hunch. When the taskforce considers how to save jobs in the west midlands,
Mr. Byers:
I agree with my hon. Friend. What was interesting in the evidence given yesterday by BMW executives to the Select Committee were the many references to nods, winks and hunches and to the time on the face of a clock. That is really no way to do business. I think that, when the evidence is clearly before the Select Committee, people will be able to judge who said what and when, and the actions that were taken as a result. I will welcome that.
My hon. Friend's important point on components was well made. The fallout from BMW's decision goes beyond the west midlands. Clearly, the west midlands is more seriously affected than any other region, but the supply chain is across the country. What we have to do--we are able to do it now because of the inventory that we have from BMW--is to identify those manufacturers and engineering companies that are part of the supply chain, so that we can give them help and assistance when it is appropriate to do so.
Mrs. Angela Browning (Tiverton and Honiton):
I wonder whether the Secretary of State could explain a bit about this taskforce that he has set up. Is its remit--in the light of his own remarks, on 16 March, that he believed that Longbridge had a "viable long-term future"--to try to keep the Longbridge operation as it is now? When he last spoke to the House on the subject, he seemed to be somewhat sceptical of the Alchemy deal. Is the taskforce working with Alchemy, or is it looking for alternative options for Longbridge?
Could the Secretary of State also explain how the taskforce committee has been set up? Concerns have been expressed that Bromsgrove council, for example, has not been included in the taskforce, although its council area covers one third of the Longbridge site. Why is it not included? The council clearly has an interest in the long-term future of Longbridge.
Mr. Byers:
If the hon. Lady has suggestions about how the taskforce can be improved, I would be more than happy to take them on board. It is important that we have a taskforce in which everyone has confidence. If there is an issue about Bromsgrove not being represented on the taskforce, I should be more than happy to reflect on that and to ensure that there is appropriate representation.
I am particularly pleased that the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir N. Fowler) has agreed to be part of the taskforce. It is important that we have cross-party representation on the group, because there is a serious job of work to be done. The taskforce has a very important role, and I want it to be successful. I hope that all hon. Members will agree that that is the best way forward.
Mrs. Browning:
I hope that the Secretary of State will consider the representations that he received, before the crisis broke, from my colleague, Mr. Malcolm Harbour MEP. Mr. Harbour wrote to me--on 27 February, before the Secretary of State knew that there was such a serious problem at Longbridge--asking me to read and agree to
Mr. Byers:
For the simple reason that it was a matter of the Government talking to the Commissioner. As the hon. Lady must know from her own experience as a Minister--certainly the right hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. Redwood) will know from his experience as a Cabinet Minister--when there are Government to Commission meetings, one does not involve Members of the European Parliament. That is not the way in which business is done, and I am sorry that the hon. Lady is not aware of that. The right hon. Member for Wokingham is nodding in agreement.
Mr. John Redwood (Wokingham)
indicated dissent.
Mr. Byers:
The right hon. Gentleman knows that that is the way these things work. I am sorry that the hon. Lady is ignorant of these matters, but that is the reality of the situation.
My purpose in writing to you now is to confirm that I would be pleased to join you for your meeting with Mr. Monti, both to demonstrate the cross party support for the aid package--
to Rover--
and also to contribute my experience as a former senior Rover executive.
On 27 February, my colleague Malcolm Harbour was so concerned about the situation at Rover that he, with the support of official Opposition Front Benchers, offered the Secretary of State that expertise. Why has it not been taken up?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |