The right hon. Gentleman makes his point explicitly and brilliantly. If the lessons of the past 20 years on major infrastructure projects where we have required special social benefits are to be learnt, monitoring is absolutely essential. That is why I think that our amendment's approach is very sensible. It would require the Secretary of State to bring forward her plan, and an agreement with the infrastructure provider, so that it could be approved by this House. The additional level of scrutiny given would not just be an assurance in the contracts; there would be proper parliamentary accountability to ensure that the benefits, for Londoners in this case, are spread across the capital and give young Londoners a fair start.
We know that the Thames tunnel will be a huge infrastructure project, and we have all seen the bad news on youth unemployment today, so we are calling on the Government to ensure that young Londoners get a fair share of the 4,000 jobs the tunnel will deliver. In short, this is a real opportunity to help guarantee apprenticeships and high-level skills. I hope that the Minister will be able to accept both amendments, which would improve the Bill for Londoners now and for all households in the years to come.
Water Industry (Financial Assistance) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Gavin Shuker
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 14 March 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Water Industry (Financial Assistance) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
542 c316 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:08:51 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_817552
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_817552
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_817552