@ALDEParty Congress resolutions 2014 - Boosting Bioeconomy in Europe

The first resolution for consideration comes courtesy of Suomen Keskusta, the Finnish Centre Party. It may not surprise you to know that they're quite keen on forest products...

The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Party convening in Lisbon, Portugal on 20-22 November 2014:

Notes that

• climate change is one of humankind’s greatest challenges;
• the European Council has committed Europe to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 to 95% by 2050;
• Europe is highly dependent on the energy from third countries and the dependence has only increased during the last two decades; the EU’s annual import bill for fossil fuels is around 400 billion euro;
• bioeconomy and renewable energy sources offer an enormous potential to tackle climate change, promote growth and jobs in Europe, decrease the energy dependence from third countries, and make a major contribution to energy security at international, national, and local levels;
• renewable energy technologies are available and becoming more and more competitive;
• forest-based bioeconomy has remarkable potential especially in the more forest rich regions of Europe;
• citizens’ well-being, industrial competitiveness and the overall functioning of society are dependent on secure, safe, sustainable and affordable energy;
• from food to fuel, or medicine to clothing, nearly anything that’s not metal or glass can be produced in or by plants; Biomass can be processed like crude oil into energy, chemicals and raw materials;
• the EU adopted its bioeconomy strategy in 2012 and it is linked to Horizon 2020, the EU Framework Programme for research 2014–2020;

Calls on

• the EU to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by 2030 in line and in parallel with the other key players on the basis of an ambitious and binding international agreement;
• the EU to set ambitious 2030 targets for renewable energy sources;
• Member States to reduce their dependence on imported fossil fuels;
• the EU and Member States to make more substantial efforts to move faster from fossil-based economy to bioeconomy especially by upgrading their bioeconomy competence base and investing more on education, training and research;
• the EU to drive for new technologies that focus on sustainable, renewable and recyclable raw materials in order to create new jobs, growth and added value;
• the EU and Member States to secure the competitiveness of the existing bioeconomy industries by providing them with a favourable setting in which to operate and grow;
• the European Commission to encourage the use of renewable, bio-based, recyclable, and environment-friendly raw and other materials in various sectors, such as construction;
• the Member States to replace the use of coal with biomass and other renewables;
• European companies to generate new bioeconomy business by means of risk financing, bold experiments and the crossing of sectoral boundaries.

Ros in the Lords: City of Bradford Metropolitan District

In the course, of Ros's research into her family roots, it has become apparent that her father's side of the family are properly Northern, and in linking up with the far flung strands of family, the notion of Bradford as the base for a renaissance in British textile manufacture has been mooted as a 'good thing' - it's amazing what emerges from family discussions. And so, when Baroness Eaton, whom Ros knows from her days in the Local Government Association, sought a debate on the future of Bradford, Ros was keen to contribute...

Baroness Scott of Needham Market (LD): My Lords, the Committee may be wondering why a woman from deepest Suffolk is speaking in a debate on Bradford. The answer lies in the genes: my father was a Bradford man and, thanks to the wonderful work of the West Yorkshire Archive Service, I know that generations of my ancestors, going back over 300 years, came from the area around Bradford, Leeds, Halifax and Huddersfield. These towns were part of the backbone of the industrial revolution, and in the case of my ancestors it was the textile industry that occupied them. In my ancestry are wool combers, sorters, cloth dressers, weavers, dyers, spinners, carders, warp dressers and weft men, and this continued right up to the death of my uncle in the early 1970s. During the 1940s and 1950s, these jobs were done increasingly by immigrants from the Indian subcontinent who were prepared to tolerate the low wages and poor conditions in the industry. By the 1970s and 1980, instead of the people coming to the jobs, the jobs went to the people—most of the textile and garment industry moved to the Far East, where labour was cheap.

I mention that because there is growing evidence that we should be rethinking all this. The textile industry can now be almost totally automated; fewer people are required, and those who are required are highly skilled. Every process, from design to manufacture and packaging, can be computerised and automated. Digital connections mean that small start-up businesses can almost instantly be connected to markets, research and suppliers from right across the globe.

The competitive advantage of cheap labour does not necessarily exist anymore. If noble Lords are not convinced, I can point to Apple and General Electric, both of which are bringing their manufacturing capability back to the United States. Reshoring, the opposite of offshoring, is a growing reality, and I can point noble Lords to the recent work by our colleague, the noble Lord, Lord Giddens. In the textile industry, Jaeger has restarted UK production, having ceased in 2000. The fact is that wages in Asia have risen while they have stagnated in Europe and the US. The head of a company manufacturing household textiles in both the UK and China recently commented that it is his UK plant that is more productive, due to the highly skilled workforce and the fluctuations in currencies.

Transport costs are going up all the time, which makes reshoring increasingly viable. Producing closer to the markets also has the advantage of shortening order times, giving a flexibility that many big retailers particularly welcome. Customers and businesses are becoming more aware of sustainability arguments and the ethical considerations, which were so graphically highlighted by the terrible loss of life in the garment factory in Bangladesh. The UK is currently still uncompetitive in cheap mass-produced markets but has a big advantage in quality.

In Seoul, John Lewis is now one of the most popular stores in the city. Its quilts and bedding are being made in Lancashire, and the managing director points to the design, quality and overall value that are leading to their success. The “Made in Britain” label is definitely seen as a plus, and retailers such as Marks & Spencer are committed to promoting it. The textile trade body is promoting UK manufacture under its Let’s Make it Here initiative, which links companies at all stages of the supply chain.

Vince Cable has talked about the growth of reshoring. The textile industry is ripe for this, and I would appreciate assurances from the Minister that its importance is being taken seriously. The Government have a role in promotional activities, helping start-ups and ensuring that capital, and the right skills, are available. Bradford still has a small but thriving textile sector, but it could do so much more. How magnificent it would be if Bradford, with all its industrial heritage, could once again become a thriving centre for textile manufacturing.