Oral Answers to Questions — Trade and Industry – in the House of Commons am 1:49 pm ar 19 Mawrth 1997.
Mr Bill Michie
, Sheffield, Heeley
To ask the President of the Board of Trade what recent representations he has received regarding reform of the regulatory system for the privatised utilities. [19444]
Mr Eddie Loyden
, Liverpool, Garston
To ask the President of the Board of Trade what recent representations he has received regarding reform of the regulatory system for the privatised utilities. [19450]
The Minister for Competition and Consumer Affairs (Mr. John M. Taylor):
The Government receive representations on the regulation of the privatised utilities from time to time and have recently received a copy of the report of the independent Commission on the Regulation of Privatised Utilities.
Mr. Williams:
When the privatised utilities make profits of over £10 billion a year with a rate of return of 20, 15 and even over 40 per cent., is it not clear, as the Select Committee on Trade and Industry has said, that the initial price controls unduly favoured shareholders over consumers? As a former energy Minister has said, we need a radical overhaul of utility regulation. Would not that provide the best tax cuts of all that would benefit most people on the lowest incomes?
Mr. Taylor:
The Labour party never seems to have any word of approval for success. The Select Committee on Trade and Industry report, to which the hon. Gentleman alluded, stated:
Customers get over 70 per cent. of efficiency improvements while shareholders get under 30 per cent.
If the Labour party would like to take its last chance to come clean on a windfall tax, I can assure it that consumers, customers, small shareholders and pension fund beneficiaries would like to know its position.
Mr Bill Michie
, Sheffield, Heeley
Bearing in mind that 10 regional electricity companies have already been taken over and that there is another takeover in the pipeline—quite a few takeovers have involved United States companies, including Yorkshire Electricity—does not the Minister agree that we must toughen the regulations and give more power to the regulator so that company accounts are more transparent and there is greater defence of the consumer? If the Government do not adopt that approach, the new regulator will be nothing more than a paper tiger.
Mr. Taylor:
The hon. Gentleman's homework will lead him to the conclusion that mergers are for the Monopolies and Mergers Commission and, likewise, matters of fair trading are for the Office of Fair Trading. Meanwhile, I do not think that anyone could say that the regulators lack powers or accountability. They are answerable to consumers, the MMC, Select Committees, the National Audit Office and judicial review. That is a great deal of accountability.
Mr Eddie Loyden
, Liverpool, Garston
Can the Minister really claim that the regulators have been forceful enough in making those companies—which are near-monopolies—respond to their first responsibility: to provide a good service to consumers? Most of the so-called efficiency in those industries is gained by scrapping jobs. That is one reason why the employment figures in this nation are so high.
Mr. Taylor:
The fact of the matter is that the new arrangements—to which Labour did not, of course, subscribe, and which it has hindered all the way—have brought very considerable benefits to consumers, in increased standards of service and lower prices. The price of domestic gas is down by 20 per cent. and British Telecom charges are down by 40 per cent. in real terms. Those are significant benefits to consumers.
Mr Keith Hampson
, Leeds North West
As a member of the Select Committee, may I draw my hon. Friend's attention to two points? The Committee pointed out that, in the early stages, the gains to shareholders could not have been accurately assessed because no one knew how far they could be quantified. Moreover, the evidence of Professor Littlechild, printed by the Committee, is that he "dealt"—that is the word— with the windfall in the early stages by transforming the price reviews thereafter to the point at which this country now has the cheapest electricity and gas for industrial users of any country in Europe.
Sir Peter Emery
, Honiton
Will my hon. Friend ask our right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to ask the chairmen of the public utility companies to calculate and publish their estimates of what the increase in costs might be if any Government saw fit to introduce a windfall tax, so that the consumer can know now what the increase in the cost of gas, electricity and telephone calls would be?
Mr. Taylor:
The challenge for my right hon. Friend is very important, and I think that I am allowed to say on behalf of the President of the Board of Trade that the answer is yes, we will seek those costings. The electorate will want to know what they are, as will consumers, small shareholders and pension fund beneficiaries.
Mr Den Dover
, Chorley
Does the Minister accept that all my constituents think that the regulators have done a marvellous job in keeping prices down? Will he pay tribute to the privatised utilities, which have made enormous efficiency savings and gains, to the benefit of everyone across the country?
Mr. Taylor:
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There have been great efficiency savings and reductions in prices, but Opposition Members do not seem to be interested in anything that is good for consumers. However, I remind them that we are.
Nick Harvey
Shadow Spokesperson (Trade and Industry)
In the light of the obvious need to review the powers of regulators, and in the light of the growth of competition, which is welcome, is not it time to consider the creation of an office for the regulation of all the utilities together? It could share expertise and experience, ensure consistency of approach and avoid duplication and would be a really powerful regulator across all these industries.
Mr Spencer Batiste
, Elmet
Does my hon. Friend recall that, in the late 1970s, the then nationalised industries cost the taxpayer £500 million a year in subsidy? Will he confirm that, for the past seven years, the privatised industries have contributed on average nearly £9 billion each year? Does not that demonstrate that Labour's hostility to privatisation would have caused much damage to this country and its industry in the 1980s and 1990s, just as the windfall tax would do if they were ever in a position to put it in place?
John Battle
, Leeds West
Are not the Government's claims of energy price cuts proving to be another great Tory myth? Is the Minister aware that, as he spelled out in his written reply to me on 25 February, Britain is 11th out of 15 in the European league tables showing reductions in prices to residential electricity consumers since 1990, which is after privatisation? Is he aware that even Greece has cut prices by more than a quarter during that period?
The truth is that prices in Britain have risen in real terms. The Minister admitted as such, so will he now accept that as the truth at the Dispatch Box? The Tories' record shows that current domestic prices are well up on 1990 prices. Labour will address regulatory reform to put the consumer first for a change. Consumers have been short-changed under this Government, and they will be better off under Labour.
Ministers make up the Government and almost all are members of the House of Lords or the House of Commons. There are three main types of Minister. Departmental Ministers are in charge of Government Departments. The Government is divided into different Departments which have responsibilities for different areas. For example the Treasury is in charge of Government spending. Departmental Ministers in the Cabinet are generally called 'Secretary of State' but some have special titles such as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Ministers of State and Junior Ministers assist the ministers in charge of the department. They normally have responsibility for a particular area within the department and are sometimes given a title that reflects this - for example Minister of Transport.
Secretary of State was originally the title given to the two officials who conducted the Royal Correspondence under Elizabeth I. Now it is the title held by some of the more important Government Ministers, for example the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
The Opposition are the political parties in the House of Commons other than the largest or Government party. They are called the Opposition because they sit on the benches opposite the Government in the House of Commons Chamber. The largest of the Opposition parties is known as Her Majesty's Opposition. The role of the Official Opposition is to question and scrutinise the work of Government. The Opposition often votes against the Government. In a sense the Official Opposition is the "Government in waiting".
If you've ever seen inside the Commons, you'll notice a large table in the middle - upon this table is a box, known as the dispatch box. When members of the Cabinet or Shadow Cabinet address the house, they speak from the dispatch box. There is a dispatch box for the government and for the opposition. Ministers and Shadow Ministers speak to the house from these boxes.
The political party system in the English-speaking world evolved in the 17th century, during the fight over the ascension of James the Second to the Throne. James was a Catholic and a Stuart. Those who argued for Parliamentary supremacy were called Whigs, after a Scottish word whiggamore, meaning "horse-driver," applied to Protestant rebels. It was meant as an insult.
They were opposed by Tories, from the Irish word toraidhe (literally, "pursuer," but commonly applied to highwaymen and cow thieves). It was used — obviously derisively — to refer to those who supported the Crown.
By the mid 1700s, the words Tory and Whig were commonly used to describe two political groupings. Tories supported the Church of England, the Crown, and the country gentry, while Whigs supported the rights of religious dissent and the rising industrial bourgeoisie. In the 19th century, Whigs became Liberals; Tories became Conservatives.
