Alan Duncan plans summit on manufacturing and industry policy

The Conservatives are planning a manufacturing summit later this year, aimed at policy solutions for helping British industry. Today's Telegraph reports that an overhaul of tuition fees is being considered, aimed at encouraging higher numbers to study engineers and science degrees. The Shadow Business and Enterprise Secretary Alan Duncan is quoted as saying:

"It seemed clear to me that we have to get more people through education and into the engineering sector. Maybe students could get cheaper loans or some subsidy at the end of their education. We are in the process of looking at the options. But we want to incentivise engineering graduates if we can."

Rolls Royce, where Duncan and other Tory MPs spent a week earlier this summer, has declined to comment on the idea. The EEF group for engineering employers welcomed the idea:

"We would have to see more detail and discuss the options. But manufacturers are reporting problems getting skilled people, and anything that can ease that situation is a good idea."

Comments

[Paul, Southampton]

Some suggestions for Alan Duncan:

1) Reduce or preferably eliminate corporation tax. Why? Because corporation tax redistributes financial resources from the productive, wealth producing sector of the economy to the inefficient public sector.

2) If the Tories won't or can't reduce or eliminate corporation tax, then they should give 100% first year writing down allowances on all capital investment. Why? Because this would make investment in manufacturing capacity more attractive.

3) Reduce or eliminate Employers' National Insurance. Why? Because taxes on employment make it more difficult to British companies to compete with businesses in countries which are not burdened with excessive taxation.

[Malcolm Dunn]

This sounds excellent. Not before time Alan.

[Richard North]

And the EU's emission trading scheme, which is provoking threats from major manufacturers to pull out of the UK? The climate change levy? The increasing cost of energy, not least due to the distortions of the EU's renewables target? And then there is the projected energy shortfall, with plans for load shedding directed at industry (which already happened last May), making the UK a poor bet for long-term investment.

What are Mr Duncan's proposals to deal with these issues?

[Malcolm Dunn]

What has that got to do with this subject Richard?

[Edward Huxley]

Richard North`s comments are very relevant. To which I would add, instead of or in addition to university degrees, apprenticeships. Why not?

[John Leonard]

Not before time! We need more of this!

[Richard North]

Malcolm Dunn, you ask "What has that (my comment) got to do with this subject Richard?"

The post itself reads, "The Conservatives are planning a manufacturing summit later this year, aimed at policy solutions for helping British industry."

Unless you are from the school that believes that rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic is the answer to all or any political issue, it would seem that addressing the energy issue is a central part of any "policy solutions for helping British industry" - more so as Mr Duncan is also "energy secretary".

Even in terms of the very limited scope of this initiative, a significant problem in the nuclear industry is the lack of trained engineers, but students are not going to come forward in the numbers needed until there is some policy stability on nuclear energy policy ... chicken and egg.

[John Moss]

We should apply the same policy to post 16/18 education and training as we do to schools. Vouchers.

[Forlornehope]

The problem is that anyone with the brains to become a professional engineer has easier and more lucrative choices. Yes it can be fun and rewarding in all senses but overall the expected costs and benefits don't compare with other opportunities. A recent survey in the USA put the most highly paid professions as Chemical and Aeronautical engineering, ahead of law and medicine. If the demand was there in the UK the rewards would be too. If business really wanted technically qualified people it would pay; it doesn't so it is clear there is no real demand.