Select committee inquiry
Industrial strategy inquiry
Closed
What the inquiry looked at
“The Committee will consider what the Government means by industrial strategy and questions how interventionist in the free market it should be, such as whether it should prevent foreign takeover of UK companies. Priorities for the private sector, in terms of what businesses want from a revamped industrial strategy, the pros and cons of a sectorial approach and possible geographical emphasis will also be explored by the Committee. It will also look at the industrial strategies of previous governments and of other countries to see if there are any lessons to be learnt.”
The committee's words, from the inquiry page on parliament.uk ↗.
What it found
In the committee's words, from the summary of 2nd Report- Industrial Strategy: First Review ↗
The Government’s re-found commitment to industrial strategy provides a significant opportunity to set a clear vision for what an “economy that works for everyone” should look like in practice, and put the UK on a path to reach it. We strongly support the Prime Minister’s aspiration of a stronger, fairer Britain “where wealth and opportunity are spread across every community.”
The Prime Minister’s rhetoric marks a significant shift away from that of previous Governments; consciously or unconsciously, it implies that the Government is willing to exchange some element of headline economic growth for more evenly distributed and resilient growth. At a time when Government is already having problems in balancing the books, any decision to slow the rate of short-term economic growth for other objectives (with a longer-term return) will make that task more difficult. Furthermore, success will only be achieved if policies are of a scale to match the Government’s ambition and clearly drive forward economic rebalancing.
But while the Government’s rhetoric marks a step change, and the creation of a new Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy has significantly raised expectations, the Government’s approach appears to be evolutionary and reflects a continuation of policy approaches introduced from May 2015—a focus on horizontal policies, regional devolution, and sectoral “deals”. As it stands, there is a real risk that certain proposals benefit incumbents while lacking the multiplier-effect that a good strategy can deliver through bringing greater coherence and focus to policy objectives.
Despite being over six months in preparation, with publication repeatedly delayed, the Green Paper has little discussion of the implicit tensions and conflicting demands that exist in policy making and provides little clarity on how regional rebalancing and sectoral deals will work in practice. It provides a long list of policy interventions but little by way of ground rules to provide a framework for future decision-making which, we would argue, should be the core of any long-term strategy. While we recognise that this is a Green Paper and the Government’s position is still developing, the weaknesses we have highlighted in this report leave us concerned that the Prime Minister has not yet been able to harness the political will across Government to truly drive forward her ambition and that the strategy will fall short of providing a clear framework for decision making in the long term.
We recommend that the Government reconsider giving sectoral strategies priority and instead focus on horizontal policies and specific ‘missions’ to meet UK-wide and local public policy challenges. This will make clear that the function of the Government’s industrial strategy–and of industry itself–is to solve societal problems and it will provide a clear focus for activity across Government and industry.
In conclusion, we urge the Government to continue to be ambitious developing its industrial strategy and ensuring that it remains true to the vision of achieving an economy that works for everyone.
What the government said
The government responded on 18 September 2017.
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response.
The government says its response is informing its developing thinking on the Industrial Strategy, with emerging themes to be set out in a White Paper later this year, and it agrees with some recommendations while declining others.
- On metrics and progress updates, it is "considering the role of metrics" and "the most appropriate mechanisms to update on progress", without committing to the Committee's specific proposals.
- It agrees with the importance of horizontal policies and with a mission-based approach, but says there is also advantage in sector-specific work through 'Sector Deals'.
- It does not accept a joint unit or an independent tax review. It does "not believe" a formal joint unit would provide sufficient added value, and does "not see the case for an independent review at this time".
- On R&D, it sets a vision of 2.4% of GDP within ten years and 3% "in the longer-term". On skills, the full transfer of adult education functions to combined authorities in 2019/20 is "subject to readiness conditions".
Read the government's response ↗ Read the report ↗ Report an error
How the inquiry ran
Each dot is a dated item listed on this page, from the inquiry's opening on 21 July 2016 to 18 September 2017.
- Oral evidence 6 sessions
- Report 3 Mar 2017
- Government response 18 Sep 2017
What it recommended 26 recommendations · 28 conclusions
1In recognising the extent to which economic growth has failed to trickle down to many...
Concluded (the committee's words)
In recognising the extent to which economic growth has failed to trickle down to many households and describing the causes of our poor productivity, the Government has provided a compelling argument for change. The Green Paper outlines deeply embedded weaknesses within the UK’s economy that have remained unresolved by successive governments. The UK’s headline economic success in recent decades has been felt by too few and its foundations are shallow. As a country, we have not invested enough in infrastructure or innovation, and our skills-levels remain poor despite significant spending. Too many people in too many parts of the country have not felt the benefits of growth.
2We strongly welcome and endorse the Prime Minister’s aspiration of “an economy that works for...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We strongly welcome and endorse the Prime Minister’s aspiration of “an economy that works for everyone”. The ultimate test of Government’s success in delivering this will be whether we see increased living standards across society and a reversal in the trend of widening gaps in the distribution of income and wealth.
3We agree with the Government’s vision that we should aspire towards an economy which is...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We agree with the Government’s vision that we should aspire towards an economy which is more productive and where the benefits of growth are felt more evenly throughout the UK. To this we would add that a further objective should be to ensure that the UK economy is fit to face the global challenges and opportunities of our age such as: the technological changes brought about through the fourth industrial revolution, and the challenges these will present for the labour market; changing demographics and an ageing population; and, the pressing need for decarbonisation.
4Successive governments over many decades have correctly identified long- term challenges and weaknesses within the...
Concluded (the committee's words)
Successive governments over many decades have correctly identified long- term challenges and weaknesses within the UK’s economy on matters like poor productivity, skills deficiencies, inadequate investment on infrastructure and low spending on research and development. However, few administrations have had unqualified successes and many have spent huge amounts of taxpayers money in failing to address these weaknesses. While the Prime Minister’s rhetoric suggests an intention to approach this with a welcome and renewed vigour, the incremental proposals outlined in the Green Paper leave us sceptical about whether the fresh thinking or political will is present across Government to deliver the Prime Minister’s objectives.
5An explicit industrial strategy recognises that many Government policies inherently have an impact on the...
Concluded (the committee's words)
An explicit industrial strategy recognises that many Government policies inherently have an impact on the different sectors, nations and regions that comprise the UK’s economy. We have a choice as to whether these policies are implemented in an incoherent, ad hoc manner or work together toward a clear vision of the kind of economy we want. As the Prime Minister has recognised, an industrial strategy can provide a ‘practical and proactive’ framework for government intervention that can help address our economic weaknesses and ensure that our economy works for everyone.
6The Prime Minister’s rhetoric marks a significant shift away from that of previous Governments; consciously...
Concluded (the committee's words)
The Prime Minister’s rhetoric marks a significant shift away from that of previous Governments; consciously or unconsciously, it implies that the Government is willing to exchange headline economic growth for more evenly distributed and resilient growth. At a time when Government is already having problems in balancing the books, any decision to sacrifice some element of short-term economic growth for other objectives (with a longer-term return) will make that task more difficult. We would welcome clarity as to whether this is the right way to interpret her remarks. Success will only be achieved if policies are of a scale to match the Government’s ambition and clearly drive forward economic rebalancing.
7In its response to this Report, the Government should outline a set of clear, outcomes-...
Recommended (the committee's words)
In its response to this Report, the Government should outline a set of clear, outcomes- focussed metrics that can be used to frame its goals and to measure progress in meeting these. We recommend that the Government should consider including metrics relating to the following: • Improving in real-terms earnings per household and closing regional disparities; • Reducing differential regional GDP per head between least and best performing nations and regions; • Improving UK productivity relative to comparator economies and closing the gap with the G7 average; • Improving UK Gross Domestic Expenditure on R&D relative to comparative OECD economies; • Improving levels of UK investment in fixed capital relative to comparable OECD economies; • Improving the UK’s position in international rankings on basic skills; • Improving the UK’s position in international rankings on infrastructure; • Ensuring emissions remain within Carbon Budgets and legal limits for air pollution; • Closing the UK trade deficit; and, • Improving the proportion of businesses which scale-up.
8We recommend that the Government publishes annual updates to its action plan outlining progress in...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the Government publishes annual updates to its action plan outlining progress in delivering policies and setting out any new policies and how they align with the overall strategy. The Government should also create a single dashboard of metrics relating to industrial strategy on GOV.UK which should be updated as new statistics are published.
9Horizontal policies form the backbone of effective industrial policy.
Concluded (the committee's words)
Horizontal policies form the backbone of effective industrial policy. However, as the Government has recognised, they alone seem unlikely to deliver the Secretary of State’s larger ambition of getting to grips with “the problems and opportunities that we face over the next 10, 15 or 20 years.”
10Sectoral policies appear to have worked well for the automotive and aerospace industries.
Concluded (the committee's words)
Sectoral policies appear to have worked well for the automotive and aerospace industries. However, with regards to other sectors this approach has had, at best, mixed results. Furthermore, this approach appears to have the greatest risk of policy being built on the vested interests of big businesses and incumbents that are best equipped to lobby. Despite Government allowing sectors to self-identify, there is a risk that a sectoral approach encourages businesses to maintain rather than break down silos, and leads to policies designed to suit preferred industries at the expense of other sectors and the wider public interest.
11We recommend that Government reconsider giving sectoral strategies priority and instead focus on horizontal policies...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that Government reconsider giving sectoral strategies priority and instead focus on horizontal policies and specific ‘missions’ to meet UK-wide and local public policy challenges.
12In in its response to this Report, the Government should set out the process by...
Recommended (the committee's words)
In in its response to this Report, the Government should set out the process by which it agreed to prioritise “deals” with the five sectors listed in the Industrial Strategy Green Paper, whether it held discussions with any other sectors about doing ‘deals’ and, if so, why those “deals” were not progressed at this time or referred to in the Green Paper. The Government also needs to clarify how it will evaluate future sectoral definitions, priorities and targets if it continues to pursue sectoral deals.
13Whereas a sector based approach is essentially another form of “picking winners”, a mission-based approach...
Concluded (the committee's words)
Whereas a sector based approach is essentially another form of “picking winners”, a mission-based approach provides a means of articulating a positive economic vision and picking public policy challenges and allowing all sectors to put forward contributions to solving these.
14We recommend that specific support for industry be guided by a targeted ‘mission- based’ approach,...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that specific support for industry be guided by a targeted ‘mission- based’ approach, channelling the Government’s support towards addressing the big challenges of the future. It is for Government to set those missions, in discussion with stakeholders.
15“Missions” need not be inconsistent with the Secretary of State’s vision of deals focussed on...
Concluded (the committee's words)
“Missions” need not be inconsistent with the Secretary of State’s vision of deals focussed on sectoral challenges. Rather, any such “deals” need a clear, time-bound goal. Furthermore, clear criteria are needed to decide which challenges are worth pursuing and which are not. Missions could provide a useful framework for setting those criteria.
16We strongly support the Prime Minister’s leadership in chairing the Cabinet Committee on the Economy...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We strongly support the Prime Minister’s leadership in chairing the Cabinet Committee on the Economy and Industrial Strategy. It is also a positive indication of intent that the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy sits on more Cabinet Committees than any other Cabinet Minister, creating scope for a significant degree of coordination. However, we are conscious that ‘joined-up Government’ has remained an aspiration for many years that too often is unrealised in practice. The recent publication of the new Housing White Paper is a disappointing and early illustration that Whitehall does not appear to be joined up when it comes to industrial strategy.
17We recommend that the Government consider establishing a joint unit bringing together civil servants from...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the Government consider establishing a joint unit bringing together civil servants from BEIS, the Treasury, the Department for Communities and Local Government, and the Department for Education to provide an inter- departmental team to develop and implement the industrial strategy.
18Industrial strategy needs to provide a clear framework for how government will make policy choices.
Concluded (the committee's words)
Industrial strategy needs to provide a clear framework for how government will make policy choices. Trade-offs will need to be made between where Government spends its marginal pound—for instance, whether that is better invested in skills or in science and innovation or whether it is better invested in London or Leeds. We do not believe that the approach adopted in the Productivity Plan, which was essentially a wide-ranging assortment of loosely connected policies, many of which were pre-existing, is a good model to follow.
19The Government needs to clarify the relationship between its industrial strategy and its strategy for...
Concluded (the committee's words)
The Government needs to clarify the relationship between its industrial strategy and its strategy for negotiating the UK’s future relationship with the EU. It is unfortunate that the recent White Paper on exiting the EU fails to do this in any meaningful way and reinforces a lack of coordination between the Government’s major challenge and its principal plank of business policy. It is logical for negotiating positions to be shaped and informed by the UK’s industrial strategy.
20It is clear that for a strategy to be genuinely long-term, Government will need to...
Concluded (the committee's words)
It is clear that for a strategy to be genuinely long-term, Government will need to build a strong coalition of support for its objectives across economic actors. Failure to do so will critically undermine aspirations for a strategy which lasts longer than a single minister or Parliament.
21It is crucial that the Government’s industrial strategy sets out strong mechanisms for dialogue and...
Recommended (the committee's words)
It is crucial that the Government’s industrial strategy sets out strong mechanisms for dialogue and collaboration with businesses (of all sizes) and unions, aimed at facilitating consensual agreement on future policy direction where appropriate. In responding to this Report, the Government should articulate how it plans to establish long-term stability within its industrial strategy.
22While it is to be expected that some of the UK’s largest employers and most...
Recommended (the committee's words)
While it is to be expected that some of the UK’s largest employers and most successful companies are able to secure direct access to Ministers, the Government must ensure that industrial strategy does not become a vehicle for acquiescing to special pleading that protects and entrenches incumbents and disregards the need of less established or unified sectors, disrupters, or smaller businesses.
23We recommend that the Government improve the transparency of its engagement with business by publishing...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the Government improve the transparency of its engagement with business by publishing details of external meetings in a single, searchable database and extending publication to include all meetings that take place at Senior Civil Service level.
24A weakness of previous strategies is that they have largely engaged with top-tier companies but...
Concluded (the committee's words)
A weakness of previous strategies is that they have largely engaged with top-tier companies but not engaged deeper into supply-chains. The Government’s industrial strategy needs to actively ensure that any policy interventions reach throughout the supply-chain.
25We recommend that the Government work with industry and local government to conduct a holistic...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the Government work with industry and local government to conduct a holistic review of the business services and support it offers with a view to simplifying access to advice on these in order to improve the ‘customer journey’.
26The Government needs to retain the flexibility to engage with businesses individually to encourage and...
Concluded (the committee's words)
The Government needs to retain the flexibility to engage with businesses individually to encourage and support investment in the UK. For instance, we firmly welcome the fact that the Government was able to provide Nissan with assurances that 60 Industrial Strategy: First Review have helped ensure support for tens of thousands of jobs. But such support should be transparent and made within a clear and understandable policy framework.
27As has been the case with its efforts to support the steel industry, the Government...
Recommended (the committee's words)
As has been the case with its efforts to support the steel industry, the Government should support industries it considers to be subject to anti-competitive pressures. But support should be in the context of helping industries that are facing challenging economic situations to adapt and thrive sustainably. Industrial strategy must not provide palliative care for failing and obsolete industries. Where industries are unsustainable, the Government’s priority should be to support individual workers, not to prop up particular companies.
28We agree with the Secretary of State’s assessment that the UK needs to do more...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We agree with the Secretary of State’s assessment that the UK needs to do more to commercialise its world-class R&D base and welcome commitments to do so. Catapult Centres are a promising model for public–private collaboration and we urge Government to allow them time to grow and avoid unnecessary tinkering. We also welcome evidence that universities are increasing their focus on commercialising their research; this should continue to be encouraged and supported.
29We are disappointed that the Government’s response to our Report on the Productivity Plan did...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We are disappointed that the Government’s response to our Report on the Productivity Plan did not accept our recommendation to set a target of increasing public and private R&D investment to 3 per cent of GDP.
30We repeat our previous recommendation that the Government should set a target to increase R&D...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We repeat our previous recommendation that the Government should set a target to increase R&D investment to 3 per cent of GDP and implement policies to achieve it.
31As part of its review of the tax environment for R&D, the Government should not...
Recommended (the committee's words)
As part of its review of the tax environment for R&D, the Government should not shy away from ambitious measures to ensure additionality.
32In line with the Secretary of State’s stated aim to support disruptors and economic innovation,...
Recommended (the committee's words)
In line with the Secretary of State’s stated aim to support disruptors and economic innovation, we recommend that the Government review with industry whether additional steps are needed to provide regulatory certainty for emerging business models.
33A skilled workforce is an essential foundation of economic success.
Concluded (the committee's words)
A skilled workforce is an essential foundation of economic success. Given the weaknesses identified by the Government in the UK’s skills base, the proposals contained in the industrial strategy Green Paper leave much to be desired. After six months in development we expected more than a disappointing combination of re-announcements, continuations of existing policy, and vague aspirations. It is deeply disappointing that the Green Paper fails to outline any detailed proposals for discussion in relation to encouraging the uptake of STEM subjects, and improving the skills of those already of working age. These will need to be addressed far more comprehensively in the White Paper. We welcome commitment to a proper system of technical education, linked to local needs, but it is unclear how this actually goes beyond proposals contained in the previous Productivity Plan. The Government needs to set out more detail about how it will achieve parity of esteem between vocational and academic training in practice.
34We recommend that the Government consider the potential for greater devolution of responsibility and funding...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the Government consider the potential for greater devolution of responsibility and funding for skills to local authorities and Local Enterprise Partnerships, who are well placed to work to identify regional needs and design appropriate solutions.
35In the context of negotiations over free-movement as part of withdrawal from the EU, Government...
Recommended (the committee's words)
In the context of negotiations over free-movement as part of withdrawal from the EU, Government must ensure that businesses continue to be able to access the skills they need. In its response to our Report, the Government should provide further clarity on how it intends to do this.
36We recommend that the Government exclude university students from immigration totals and promote high skilled...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the Government exclude university students from immigration totals and promote high skilled migration to the UK on an equal “who contributes most” basis to people wishing to invest and innovate in the UK.
37We presume that the Government has always prioritised “the highest value-for- money projects”.
Concluded (the committee's words)
We presume that the Government has always prioritised “the highest value-for- money projects”. Given this, we would welcome clarity on how its approach will differ in the future to better support rebalancing.
38The decision not to place the National Infrastructure Commission on a statutory footing risks creating...
Concluded (the committee's words)
The decision not to place the National Infrastructure Commission on a statutory footing risks creating the impression that the Government is not backing up its aspiration for a long-term policy framework with action that will help embed that.
39We are surprised that the National Infrastructure Commission gets little prominence in the industrial strategy...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We are surprised that the National Infrastructure Commission gets little prominence in the industrial strategy and it is unclear how the questions in the Green Paper are intended to complement the Commission’s own call for evidence. For example, has the Commission been asked to prioritise rebalancing in its assessment of the country’s infrastructure requirements? We would welcome clarification from the Government.
40The problem of impatient capital and the UK’s poor track-record on scale-up have been subject...
Concluded (the committee's words)
The problem of impatient capital and the UK’s poor track-record on scale-up have been subject to a number of reviews in recent years. We welcome the fact that Government is taking this issue seriously and look forward to seeing the review followed by meaningful action. We will also continue to consider this issue as part of our inquiry into Corporate Governance and a new inquiry into Scale-Up.
41Evidence on the impact of Growth Hubs is mixed.
Recommended (the committee's words)
Evidence on the impact of Growth Hubs is mixed. In its response to this Report, Government should set out how it intends to evaluate the impact of current funding in order to determine what needs to be done to support Growth Hubs to provide a better service in the future.
42Fiscal levers can play a key role in shaping business behaviour.
Recommended (the committee's words)
Fiscal levers can play a key role in shaping business behaviour. We recommend that Government commission an independent review bringing together broad representation to consider whether taxation levers can better be used to boost investment in physical and human capital, research and innovation.
43We recommend that the Government conduct a fundamental review of the outdated structure of the...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the Government conduct a fundamental review of the outdated structure of the business rates system, given that it acts as a disincentive to investment regardless of who is responsible for setting the overall rate.
44We welcome the fact that the Government is considering opportunities to better utilise public procurement...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We welcome the fact that the Government is considering opportunities to better utilise public procurement to maximise economic opportunity for UK firms, and it should make greater use of flexibility in existing state aid rules prior to our departure from the European Union. The Government should also consider the opportunities to further boost procurement from within the UK as part of its negotiating strategy for withdrawal from the EU.
45We welcome the review of the Small Business Research Initiative that the Government has commissioned;...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We welcome the review of the Small Business Research Initiative that the Government has commissioned; we hope this will be ambitious in its recommendations and that the Government will increase the scale of the scheme and better embed it across Whitehall.
46Given the Prime Minister’s previous comments about foreign takeovers, the Government needs to provide much...
Concluded (the committee's words)
Given the Prime Minister’s previous comments about foreign takeovers, the Government needs to provide much greater clarity and certainty as to what steps it intends to take to intervene in foreign takeover deals and in what circumstances.
47We recommend that the Government takes steps to ensure it has the power to retain...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the Government takes steps to ensure it has the power to retain IP benefits in the UK in the event of a foreign takeover where a business has been supported in developing new IP through taking advantage of taxpayer funding or tax-incentives. At the very least, it should ensure that any transfer of IP delivers a substantial return for taxpayers. This could be done, for instance, by placing constraints on access to funding and incentives. The Government should also develop mechanisms to clawback any tax relief or funding should tax-payer subsidised IP be transferred abroad.
48While we welcome the industrial strategy’s support for energy innovators, taking advantage of the economic...
Concluded (the committee's words)
While we welcome the industrial strategy’s support for energy innovators, taking advantage of the economic opportunities presented by decarbonisation also means ensuring the UK continues to be seen as a world-leader in the transition to a low-carbon economy. In this context, we trust that the Government will publish its Emissions Reduction Plan by the end of March 2017, as indicated to us by the Minister of State for Climate Change and Industry. The Government needs to ensure that the Emissions Reduction Plan and industrial strategy are coherent and consistent, with commitments in the industrial strategy to actively support delivery of current and future carbon budgets.
49The Committee welcomes the positive signs that the Government will look to work closely in...
Concluded (the committee's words)
The Committee welcomes the positive signs that the Government will look to work closely in collaboration with the UK’s various national, local and regional governments in developing its industrial strategy. Where additional powers are devolved, the Government needs to ensure that appropriate funding is also devolved.
50While variations in perceived performance of Local Enterprise Partnerships are to be expected—that is part...
Recommended (the committee's words)
While variations in perceived performance of Local Enterprise Partnerships are to be expected—that is part and parcel of devolution—the Government has a role in supporting and multiplying best practice. Given the prevalence of concerns and low awareness of LEPs, as well as fiscal constraints, the Government should review LEPs Industrial Strategy: First Review 63 to ensure that needless duplication is avoided, best practice is shared, and value for money is secured. This should include ensuring governance and accountability frameworks are fit for purpose.
51The Government needs to provide clarity on the respective roles and responsibilities between national, local...
Recommended (the committee's words)
The Government needs to provide clarity on the respective roles and responsibilities between national, local and regional institutions. Failure to do so will lead to unnecessary complexity and confusion for business and reduce accountability to the electorate. In partnership with business representatives, local government and the devolved administrations, the Government should consider whether any further steps are desirable to facilitate businesses in understanding and navigating different tiers of devolution. While many services may best be designed at a local level, the Government needs to ensure that it avoids creating barriers to cooperation between local institutions or inadvertently introducing perverse incentives that lead to needless and inefficient duplication of services.
52We recommend that the Government set out a clear plan to close per head spending...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the Government set out a clear plan to close per head spending gap on infrastructure, R&D and education between London and the rest of England.
53While the Government is experimenting more with fiscal devolution, such as the planned devolution of...
Concluded (the committee's words)
While the Government is experimenting more with fiscal devolution, such as the planned devolution of powers to set business rates, it is notable that the Industrial Strategy Green Paper is broadly silent on the potential for further fiscal devolution.
54While recognising the importance of the services sector, and the UK’s comparative economic advantage, supporting...
Concluded (the committee's words)
While recognising the importance of the services sector, and the UK’s comparative economic advantage, supporting industries which produce goods, technology, and innovation, will help boost productivity and create high-quality jobs. We welcome signs that the Government recognises the value of rebalancing our economy in this way.
Evidence
Oral evidence sessions 6
- 15 Dec 2016No witnesses recordedparliament.uk ↗
- 8 Dec 2016No witnesses recordedparliament.uk ↗
- 22 Nov 2016No witnesses recordedparliament.uk ↗
- 8 Nov 2016No witnesses recordedparliament.uk ↗
- 27 Oct 2016No witnesses recordedparliament.uk ↗
- 11 Oct 2016No witnesses recordedparliament.uk ↗