Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lindsay Hoyle (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 9 June 2009. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Manufacturing and Employment.


Manufacturing and Employment

I do not disagree. As I go on, I will mention some of the benefits. The hon. Gentleman is anticipating what I am going to say. I am talking about the downside, but I also want to talk about the pluses. We should build on what we do best. Recently, the Engineering Employers Federation raised its job loss forecast for 2009 to 188,000. If those jobs are lost, skills will be gone for ever as workers struggle to re-enter the labour market. We must face up to that problem as well. When we talk about the automotive industry, people often think exclusively of cars. However, I am keen to highlight the needs of all vehicle manufacturers, particularly Leyland Trucks, which employs many of my constituents. It is a world leader and the last major truck manufacturer in the UK. It meets the environmental targets that we expect of major truck manufacturing. It makes the trucks that we want on our roads. It needs support. The company has invested heavily in meeting environmental needs and reducing emissions from its trucks, but it is struggling. It is still building trucks, but it has had to reduce its work force significantly, and staff are working on reduced hours. Now is the time for the Government to step in. The Government can do a lot, perhaps through a short-time working subsidy to ensure that Leyland Trucks retains its skilled labour and can compete when the market improves. We do not want the company to wither on the vine. It comes back around. Who has been given the contract for our new Army trucks? Has it been given to Leyland Trucks? No, it has gone to MAN, in Germany. A lot of promises were made. MAN said, "We own ERF in Cheshire now, so we'll bid for the Army contract." What has MAN done? It has closed ERF. I understand that ERF now has a little garage based in Stafford. That is its footprint. The vehicles will be built in Germany and shipped over. It is that sort of nonsense that we must overcome. It is no different from Army uniforms being made in China and shipped back here. That is not about European competition; it is about bad judgment. Leyland Trucks is important, and we could do much more for it. We have given tax advantages to the car industry—I will mention more about that—but we need to do something for manufacturers of vans and larger vehicles to help them through the recession. Why are we not giving tax breaks up front and incentives to sell trucks? Fleet buyers will always be there. Royal Mail will be there for ever and a day. No one will ever make money on Royal Mail, but they can make money on small buyers—the people who drive one, two, three or four wagons. Those are the people who matter. Helping the manufacturers would help them, because new vehicles would give them better efficiency, but it would also keep jobs and skills in place. That is what we need to support. Will my hon. Friend the Minister consider it? We have done a good job on the car scrappage scheme, but we need to do something for trucks that will bring benefit. I hope that he will take that on board. Leyland Trucks is important. During the economic downturn, we have witnessed a 60 per cent. fall in production, which highlights the huge impact of the financial crisis on our vehicle manufacturing sector. We accept that we cannot compete on price and stoop to allowing lower-skilled jobs to move to low-paid economies, but it is worrying that highly skilled and well-paid jobs are now going abroad at a similar rate. We need urgently to reassess our policy if we want manufacturing to survive. We need to end our passive manufacturing policy and the notion that factory closures do not matter. They matter, particularly to those who lose out and are forced to enter low-paid work as a result of closures. We cannot afford to let manufacturing wither away. Now more than ever, the Government must prioritise support and invest in our manufacturing base to meet today's challenges and ensure that we are best placed to grasp the opportunities of tomorrow. The Government document, "Building Britain's future: new industry, new jobs", offers a platform for doing so. It points to an encouraging shift in industrial policy. Coupled with that, Government initiatives such as the car scrappage scheme are having an impact and helping to kick-start demand in the automotive sector. That is welcome, but it is aimed mainly at small cars. We need encouragement to buy family cars. Families need bigger cars. People cannot tow a caravan with a Nissan Micra, or fit three kids, two adults and a dog inside. We build good family cars, such as the Toyota Aventis. The powertrain of the Mondeo, including the engine and the gearbox, comes from the UK. Incentives to sell more of those vehicles would be a big bonus, because Ford employs thousands of people in the UK. The car scrappage scheme could be extended. We do not want to fall off a cliff at the end of the 12 months. We must manage the end of the scheme and give other incentives. We must be imaginative in coming up with ideas. I welcome the scrappage scheme, which is working well and making things better. However, my challenge to the Minister is that we can do more.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
493 c165-6WH 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Business Employment Government assistance Motor vehicles Manufacturing industries Public sector Procurement Training Trade competitiveness Train to gain programme
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk