Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Support for the Automotive Industry

Thursday 30 January 2025 · 1 question

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 1 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Rachel Taylor inquired about support for the automotive industry in her constituency, highlighting 3,000 jobs and the importance of attracting young people to careers in the sector.
  • The minister mentioned ongoing work across departments to tackle skills shortages, emphasizing collaboration with Skills England.
  • The response noted the automotive sector's exemplary apprenticeship schemes and regular interdepartmental meetings to develop strategies.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Rachel Taylor Lab North Warwickshire and Bedworth
Context

The MP is concerned about the economic impact of the automotive sector in her constituency. The Minister previously discussed £2 billion funding for zero emission vehicle manufacturing.

Question

Around 3,000 constituents in North Warwickshire and Bedworth work in the automotive sector, including small and medium-sized businesses providing engineering and manufacturing services as well as Jaguar Land Rover's battery assembly centre. A career in automotive should attract young people locally. What steps is the Minister taking to support workforce upskilling and apprenticeship schemes to prevent skills gaps relying on immigration?

Answer from The Minister for Industry (Sarah Jones)

There is ongoing work across various departments to address skills shortages, including collaboration with Skills England. The automotive sector has exemplary apprenticeship schemes that other industries can emulate. Regular meetings are held between DfE, Home Office, and DWP to ensure strategies encourage people into well-paid jobs.

Partly answered

Not addressed: No specific mention of concrete actions or timelines for upskilling the workforce in the automotive sector.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)