Proceeding contribution from Jonathan Reynolds (Labour) in the House of Commons on Saturday, 12 April 2025. It occurred during Debate on bill on Steel Industry (Special Measures) Bill.
Steel Industry (Special Measures) Bill
I think my hon. Friend refers to clause 7, which deals with compensation. Again, let me be clear: this is a clause that we would put in any Bill. We are not Russia, and we do not sequester assets. The language in the clause—the legal definition—is something that we would use in most standard procedures. Going back to the question from the right hon. Member for Goole and Pocklington (David Davis), the effective market value of Jingye is zero, so there is no inconsistency between those two points.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 765 c842
- Session
- 2024-26
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Compensation Assets Costs British Steel China Employment Iron and steel Powers Manufacturing industries Nationalisation Wales Scotland Port Talbot Scunthorpe Jingye Group Grangemouth
- Legislation
- Steel Industry (Special Measures) Bill 2024-26
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on hansard.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-02-18 15:20:52 +0000
- URI
- http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-04-12/2504122000042
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-04-12/2504122000042
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-04-12/2504122000042