| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Small Business (Late Payment)
9. Andrew George (St. Ives): If she will make a statement on the late payment of debts to small businesses. [136684]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Nigel Griffiths): As a result of action taken by the Government since 1998, including the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998, the creation of the better payment practice group, the provision for small businesses to claim debt recovery costs and giving small and medium enterprise organisations rights to challenge unfair contract terms on behalf of their members, I am pleased to tell the
House that the average time taken to settle debts in the UK has reduced by more than a week, and is nine days less than the European average.
Andrew George : I am pleased to hear that the Government are taking a robust line on late payers, but what are they doing about one of the worst of all late payers, namely, themselves? Only last week, for example, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs admitted that £50 million is still owed to contractors who were involved in the clean-up after foot and mouth two years ago. Many of those companies are perilously close to bankruptcy, so when will the matter be cleared up, and will the companies be entitled to a statutory right to charge interest on those late payments?
Nigel Griffiths: Let me tell the hon. Gentleman which companies will not be entitled to claim that statutory right: those who are perpetrating or seeking to perpetrate fraud against DEFRA. The hon. Gentleman and the House will know that my colleagues in DEFRA have paid out many hundreds of millions of pounds, but they are challenging the many fraudulent claims. I am happy to tell the hon. Gentleman that in general the Government's payment record is 94.83 per cent. on time—up 3 per cent. in the past seven years.
David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire): In a far-off life when the working week was only 60 or so hours, I had a good number of clients who were in the construction, textile and haulage industries. In terms of late payment, their main difficulty was that most of their income derived from a single client. Will my hon. Friend tell the House how, in those circumstances, the worthwhile changes that have been made can actually be used to extract faster payment? People are unlikely to bite too quickly the hand that is feeding them with most of their revenue.
Nigel Griffiths: That is a real concern and I am sure that all hon. Members are aware of it. That is why we have taken several specific actions. The first is to allow representative organisations to take what might be considered a class action—I use the term loosely—on behalf of the companies, to overcome the fear factor. Secondly, when hon. Members raise cases with me I have undertaken to write to the large and powerful organisations that appear to be delaying payment. I am pleased to see that, in general, payment times are speeding up. We keep the matter under review, and the better payment practice group meets regularly to advise us on improvements.
Mr. Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield): But in spite of the Minister's judicious and careful use of statistics, he knows perfectly well that Departments are among the worst offenders. In the interests of open government, will he publish a league table to name and shame those Departments that are the worst offenders in this respect?
Nigel Griffiths: I am not sure where the hon. Gentleman has been: such information is published. It is put in the public domain and in the Library. I completely reject the hon. Gentleman's assertion about Government payment. As I said, the record is 3 per cent.
better than under the last Administration, so perhaps the hon. Gentleman can tell the House what he did at that time to make it so bad then.Internet/Broadband Access
10. Mr. Michael Connarty (Falkirk, East): What action she is taking to increase the availability of (a) the internet and (b) broadband services within the UK; and if she will make a statement. [136685]
The Minister for Energy, E-Commerce and Postal Services (Mr. Stephen Timms): I welcome the recent news from Oftel that half of UK households are now connected to the internet. The network of 6,000 UK Online centres was completed last year. The Oxford Internet Institute reports that only 4 per cent. of the population lacks ready access to the internet.
Eighty per cent. of UK households are now within reach of a broadband service—more than in the US. We are confident that the figure will reach 90 per cent. next year. We are approaching a broadband connection figure of 3 million. Wireless broadband and the growth of public sector broadband use will be especially helpful in further extending availability.
Mr. Connarty : I thank my hon. Friend for that answer and commend him and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for their continued enthusiasm for the spread of internet and broadband, which are, in a sense, the highway of the 21st century as rail and road were in the 19th century. However, the problem for my constituents—for example, in Grangemouth—is that a number of households or small and medium-sized enterprises are applying but no account is being taken of the fact that, in Grangemouth, we have BP, Syngenta, Avecia, GE Plastics and ENI Chemicals. They are all large users of the internet and broadband, yet they count as only one user. That means that SMEs cannot easily reach BT's targets. Can my hon. Friend take the question up with BT, to ensure that in industrial communities large users count as more than one unit?
Mr. Timms: My hon. Friend makes an interesting point. The Office for National Statistics said that, in July, 48 per cent. of households had access to the internet, but that 56 per cent. of people have used the internet in the past three months, reflecting the fact that a lot of people are using the internet at work, at school and elsewhere. Many big companies will already have made their own arrangements, so they are not dependent on the upgrading of local exchanges. Nevertheless, I will ensure that the interesting point that my hon. Friend makes is drawn to the attention of BT. I will meet the chief executive of BT shortly, and I will put the point to him when I do so.
Michael Fabricant (Lichfield): At the beginning of this year, the Government announced with some fanfare the broadband aggregation scheme—under which, for example, if there is a hospital, school or whatever in a rural area, there might be justification to provide broadband to those points. The Government went on to say—logically, I thought at the time—that that could enable broadband to be given to subscribers, but that has not happened. Nothing has happened; it has been all
talk and no do. Will the Minister prove me wrong and tell me precisely when the first exchange will be enabled under that scheme?
Mr. Timms: The hon. Gentleman is right to suggest that that initiative is very important. A great deal of progress has been made. All the regional aggregation bodies—he will be aware of them—will be established by the end of this month, and procurement through those bodies will start at the beginning of next year. That will be an effective way to change the basis for the service providers to invest in the provision of broadband in rural areas. Aggregation will take place at regional level, so we will be using the market as a powerful lever to improve private sector performance, but in a framework managed in the public interest by the public sector. The procurements will start in January, and I would expect the benefits to be felt very soon after that.
Brian White (Milton Keynes, North-East): Can my hon. Friend give an assurance that there will not be the equivalent of planning blight as people wait for the regional aggregation bodies to come into effect before they make decisions, and that public sector bodies such as local authorities can still honour the existing contracts?
Mr. Timms: Yes, I think I can give that assurance. Of course, we are seeing a very rapid growth in broadband at the moment. Something like 150,000 extra connections are made each month, and there is no sign at all of that tailing off. Indeed, we hope it will accelerate. I think I can give an assurance that there will not be a hiatus as a result of the new arrangements being introduced; indeed, they will contribute to further acceleration and growth.
Working Time Directive
11. Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York): What assessment she has made of the implications of the working time directive on (a) the service sector and (b) manufacturing industry. [136686]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Mr. Gerry Sutcliffe): The Department of Trade and Industry has commissioned research into the implementation of the working time regulations that considered a range of organisations, including those in the manufacturing and service sectors. The general conclusions drawn were that the regulations had marginal or no impact in 10 of the 20 organisations interviewed and that, where an impact was felt, it acted as an impetus to review work practices and work smarter. A recent follow-up study, published in July 2003, of a subset of those firms concluded that the recent legislative changes have not been problematic for most employers interviewed.
Miss McIntosh : Will the Minister confirm the figure given by the British Chambers of Commerce showing that the total cost to industry of implementing the working time directive is £2.3 billion? Will he give a commitment today that he will meet the 23 November
deadline to negotiate an opt-out from the 48-hour limit? Will he stand up for British business and resist the working time directive?
Mr. Sutcliffe: I cannot help but notice that the hon. Lady is the only Back Bencher sitting on the Conservative Benches—perhaps lots of job application forms are going in after the coronation of the right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard).
Miss McIntosh: Answer the question.
Mr. Sutcliffe: The right hon. and learned Gentleman needs a mention because he refused to accept the working time directive in 1991. The working time directive is important to employees and employers because it gives people four weeks holiday and an appropriate working week. Good employer-employee relations develop from the working time directive. We are happy to ensure that the United Kingdom's position remains as it is.
Hugh Bayley (City of York): Is my hon. Friend aware that for the second time in just a few weeks, the Nestlé Rowntree factory in my constituency announced a large number of redundancies, in three figures? The working time directive is important in the confectionery industry because of the Easter and Christmas production peaks. The factory supplies throughout the EU, in the eurozone as well as the UK. It is essential that we have a level playing field so that we compete fairly with the Nestlé Rowntree factories in Hamburg and Dijon. Does my hon. Friend agree that the regulations must be applied in exactly the same way in all factories?
Mr. Sutcliffe: I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend that it is important to have a level playing field. I am sorry to learn of the situation with Nestlé Rowntree, which has been in his constituency for many years in a variety of guises. I am happy to report that I work with Employment Ministers across the EU and the new accession countries. It is necessary to have a flexible approach to labour markets while ensuring that there are minimum standards for employees.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |