Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab)

My Lords, I want to start this debate by paying tribute to Sir Keir Starmer for his immense services to the country. He took Labour to a landslide general election victory. He inherited a country reeling from 14 years of Conservative rule resulting in a weak economy, failing public services and shockingly run-down defences. Under his stewardship the economy grew, public services improved, violent crime reduced and our international reputation has been enhanced, not least because of his stalwart support for Ukraine. No one can be in doubt that this country faces considerable challenges. As the Prime Minister told the Commons on Tuesday: “Things are not working as they should. Life is too expensive and too hard for too many”.—[Official Report, Commons, 1/9/26; col. 26.] The Prime Minister believes that much of this malaise has been caused by a series of damaging wrong turns that centralised political power and surrendered public control over vital utilities, leaving citizens vulnerable to inflated cost, which was then compounded by Brexit. The noble Lord, Lord True, said in his eloquent tribute to the noble Lord, Lord Sarwar, that we do not shout at each other in this Chamber. That is right, but I want to comment on a remark he made yesterday on the Statement when he accused this Government of going back to the 1970s. I gently point out to him that this country was much more equal in the 1970s. The last 40 or so years have seen us lose that equality, with 10% prospering but 90% falling behind or stagnating. Many of the places and people most affected have not recovered from deindustrialisation. The Government are ambitious to improve the standard of living, sort out social care and housing, boost vocational education, meet our NATO defence commitments and make the UK’s voice count. The Prime Minister is clear that devolution is the key to progress and prosperity, with the setting up of No. 10 North at the heart of the growth agenda. As a Brummie, I say that we have now redefined ourselves as being part of the north. The immediate measures taken by the Government are important both in themselves and as a visible sign of intent for the longer term. They include: capping bus fares at £2 in England, which has been a huge boost to many, many people; cutting VAT on electricity bills; reducing tax on pubs; investing to get rough sleepers off the street; funding to support the delivery in the first instance of more than 70,000 social homes; and action on the mountains of illegally dumped waste. The Prime Minister is using government to make a difference for people who feel hard pressed, solving problems that have been long neglected or where public authorities have been too slow, unwilling or seemingly powerless to act. The economy is clearly critical to this. Despite doom-laden predictions, the UK economy had GDP growth of 0.6% in the first quarter, followed by 0.4% in the second quarter. In fact, the UK is currently the fastest-growing G7 economy. Borrowing this fiscal year is running £6 billion below last year and, as the ONS has noted, it was the 12th lowest April to July period since 1993. The noble Lord, Lord True, mentioned borrowing yesterday. We hear a lot from the Conservatives about borrowing, and they certainly know a thing or two about it: the last Conservative Government borrowed more than the G7 average in every single one of their 14 years in Government. This year, this Government are borrowing less. I have to say that the appointment of Andrew Griffith, the co-author of Liz Truss’s mini-Budget, as shadow Chancellor makes one question the seriousness of the claim that the party opposite has to economic competence. In relation to debt, recent analysis by Morgan Stanley compared its estimate of the UK’s 96% general debt-to-GDP ratio at the end of this year with that of 120% for China, 120% for France and 125% for the US, with Japan and Italy higher still. Morgan Stanley commented two weeks ago that the UK stands out among the major economies in trying to do something about rising debt. Clearly, growing the economy becomes crucial to the future. There are three points that I will put to my noble friend that I think are important to growing the economy. The first is tackling the high costs of and long timescale for building essential infrastructure in this country. The Centre for British Progress has reported that British public investment is on a par with OECD averages but we get less back from it. The government response to the Fingleton review on nuclear regulation put it very well: “Our regulatory, environmental and planning processes have become too fragmented, too cautious and too slow, driving up costs”. The recently enacted Planning and Infrastructure Act will deal with some of the blockages, and I am delighted that elected mayors are going to be given powers to take over large-scale planning applications. I urge the Government to go further and extend that to energy infrastructure projects, and to speedily legislate for Fingleton’s recommendations. A second key factor in growing the economy is sticking to our commitment to net zero in the face of ever-worsening climate change. The Conservatives’ retreat from their commitments on net zero—this was the party that actually legislated for net zero—is no reason why we as a Government should resile from those targets; nor will obsessing about marginal increases in output from the rapidly declining North Sea oil and gas reserves have any impact whatever on energy prices. I readily acknowledge that energy prices are too high both for industry and domestically, but I hope the Government will be brave on this and fundamentally reform our flawed energy pricing system, in which volatile gas prices can set the cost of homegrown renewable energy. So, no retreat on net zero—it has huge potential for growth. CBI analysis recently estimated it to be a £105 billion sector, generating highly skilled jobs across every part of the UK. A third factor in growth, for me, is getting young people into work. Alan Milburn’s seminal review identified nearly 1 million 16 to 24 year-olds who are not in education, employment or training, and of course behind those statistics lie stagnated aspirations and hopelessness. Over the past decade, the proportion who say they are NEET due to a work-limiting health condition has increased by 70%. Once health-related inactivity takes hold, moving those people into employment becomes incredibly challenging. In contrast to the Conservatives’ brutal approach to welfare, I believe we need a welfare system to protect those who cannot work and provide proper financial security for people with severe or enduring disabilities. But for young people who could participate with the right support, our welfare system should be a springboard to employment. That is why the Government’s emphasis on vocational education, with links into local industry, is so important, and that was a subject of an excellent debate earlier today led by my noble friend Lady Morgan. I am convinced that negative attitudes towards vocational education have bedevilled this country over decades, leading to an FE sector deprived of resources, where staff are underpaid compared with schoolteachers, and where a VAT burden is unfairly placed upon them—I hope my noble friend may have some good news in relation to that. There is no question in my mind that technical excellence needs to be recognised as being as valid as academic excellence. Encouraging and allowing young people to follow a skills route at 14 opens the gateway to huge opportunities. The noble Lord, Lord Baker, spoke eloquently in the earlier debate about the importance of technical education. Of all the social issues we face, for me the provision of adult social care is the most pressing. Its current shortcomings impact badly on the NHS, as can be seen from the spectacle of corridor care, delayed discharges and too many people admitted into hospital. I also echo what the noble Baroness, Lady Casey, said in her July speech to the LGA when she argued that previous attempts at reform have failed because they have either tinkered with parts of the system or tried to push through changes without securing public consent for the tough choices involved, and there will be tough choices. The NHS needs to change as well. One reason—this comes from my personal experience with in-laws and my mother—that so many people are inappropriately in hospital is that, in too many cases, the NHS itself puts up barriers to treatment at home or in care homes, which forces people into A&E. We need the NHS to really start to shift that proposition. On the global stage, the Prime Minister is making the UK’s voice count. His decision to help Ukraine build long-range missiles is both encouraging and a sign of the UK’s unwavering support for that country. The global picture is one of increasing instability, as Mark Carney, the Canadian Premier, pointed out in his Davos speech last year. He said that “there is a rupture in the world order … we live in an era of great power rivalry”, with the rules-based order fading. In calling for co-operation among middle powers, Carney said that middle powers are not powerless: “They have the capacity to build a new order that encompasses our values, such as respect for human rights, sustainable development, solidarity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of … states”. We have huge potential in the UK to co-operate with like-minded countries, and that of course must include the EU. On that, the Prime Minister emphasised the benefits of a closer UK-EU relationship, forging links on trade, security and economic growth. This of course very much links to defence. The 2025 strategic defence review was clear. It said: “For the first time since the end of the Cold War, the UK faces multiple, direct threats to its security, prosperity, and democratic values”. The UK is committed to reaching NATO’s target of 3.5% of GDP on defence by 2035. The defence investment plan has brought an additional £15 billion for defence over the period to 2029-30, on top of what was allocated in the 2025 spending review. Despite media comment over the last few days, the Chancellor has been consistent over the last few months that he would set a clear path to meeting our 3.5% NATO commitment at the next spending review and a target date for 3%. I just repeat the words of the Prime Minister and Chancellor when they said: “The determination that we share is to do what’s necessary to keep the country safe, and a recognition, quite simply, of that truism, that for any government the first duty is to keep citizens safe”. What else is there to say? I believe that our new Prime Minister offers us hope through strong intent and hard actions, actions to deliver economic growth, improve security, and provide better public services and relief from the cost of living increase. For all our problems and challenges, we as a country have very much to be proud of. We have so much going for us and it is that and the hope that the Prime Minister brings that underpin this Government’s programmes and priorities. I beg to move.