How are speeches selected and edited?
- Quotes and speeches are selected on the basis of their relevance and notability - whether they bring new information to a debate, are rhetorically interesting, or whether they are interesting in the context of their speaker.
- Omissions to speeches are noted by ellipses (...) but are otherwise as recorded in Hansard.
- Not all speeches are selected here.
- AI is used to draft articles summarising Parliamentary debates. All summaries are reviewed and edited manually before publication. You can read the script used to generate the summaries.
Nationalising British Steel
Edited by Peter Warrington, 2026-06-12 Speeches from the second reading of the Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill, as MPs clash over state ownership, rising energy costs, and controversial import tariffs.British Steel is set to be brought into public ownership, the prime minister has announced. Sir Keir Starmer said legislation would be brought forward to give the government powers to take “full ownership of British Steel”, subject to a public interest test.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8xwg0gdrpzo 11th May 2026
Key Quotes:
“We are doomed to relearn the hard lessons of the 1970s: if it moves, tax the hell out of it; when it stops moving, subsidise it.” - Andrew Griffith (Conservative)
“Our determination now is that the future may best be served by full public ownership in the national interest, not because of ideology, but because of practical pragmatism.” - Peter Kyle (Labour)
“The Prime Minister went kowtowing to China, gave it an embassy spy base and, instead of a deal on Jingye, came back with a box of fortune cookies with only a bill for the taxpayer to be found inside.” - Andrew Griffith (Conservative)
“Steel is to the UK what Yorkshire tea and Yorkshire puds are to God’s own county, what the hotpot is to Lancashire and what black cabs are to London. It is to the UK what the St Leger is to Doncaster and what the hood is to Haxey. It is about us. It is about what makes us and drives us. It is about pride.” - Lee Pitcher (Labour)
“I think what we are hearing is that that is good enough for the bankers, but it is not good enough for the steelworkers.” - Chris McDonald (Labour)
“Globalisation is dead and, to be honest, I welcome its death, because all it ever did was leave working-class communities such as mine behind, ripping out the heart of industrial communities like Hartlepool.” - Mr Jonathan Brash (Labour)
“This is a classic example of legislation that has been written with noble intentions—to save the UK steel industry—but due to a lack of consultation with industry, lack of industry knowledge by the authors and a total misunderstanding of the knock-on effects, this single piece of legislation will kill stockholding and manufacturing in the UK.” - Sarah Bool (Conservative)
“A speech such as the one we have just heard from the shadow Minister [Andrew Griffith] may have just about cut the mustard five or six years ago, but it certainly does not work today in a world of weaponised interdependence… we cannot, as Ronald Reagan once said, be innocents abroad in a world that is frankly no longer innocent.” - Liam Byrne (Labour)
“Artificial intelligence cannot do welding yet, because it does not have any arms—yet.” - David Chadwick (Liberal Democrat)
“The steel industry is so good that we have not nationalised it twice; we have nationalised it thrice, because the steel industry was also partly nationalised in 1948.” - Chris McDonald (Labour)
House of Commons Steel Nationalisation Debate - May 21st 2026
The House of Commons met to debate the Second Reading of the Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill. Opening the debate, the Secretary of State, Peter Kyle (Labour) proposed the Bill:
For generations, the steel industry has stood at the very heart of our national story… Today, this Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill repays, in part, the debt that we owe Britain’s steel communities… Public ownership would allow us to explore future opportunities for the company and to retain its vital resource as a critical piece of our national infrastructure—one that is essential to our economic resilience… The powers given to the Government by the legislation cannot be exercised without due caution and proper care… The Bill does not nationalise British Steel in and of itself, but it grants the Government powers to do so if considered necessary.
Responding for the Opposition, Shadow Secretary of State, Andrew Griffith (Conservative) moved an amendment to decline the Bill’s second reading:
…this House declines to give a Second Reading to the Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill because it believes that politicians should not be running businesses… We are being asked to nationalise British Steel, and put the British taxpayer permanently on the hook for a business that this Government had every chance to keep in private hands, but chose not to… We cannot have an industrial policy for steel without an energy policy for industry. Britain has the highest industrial electricity prices in the world, and every choice the Government are making has pushed those prices further up… under this Government, we have already seen a flurry of Trump-style tariffs—doubling steel tariffs and halving quotas—that elevate the interests of one firm over the automotive, aerospace, advanced manufacturing and defence sectors.
Liam Byrne (Labour), Chair of the Business and Trade Committee, rose to support the Bill while challenging the Shadow Minister’s arguments:
I am going to speak against the amendment and in support of the Bill for the simple reason that a speech such as the one we have just heard from the shadow Minister may have just about cut the mustard five or six years ago, but it certainly does not work today in a world of weaponised interdependence… Regardless of those remarks, there are a couple of areas where I think the shadow Minister made some important points… There are six areas I would like [the Secretary of State] to respond to… First, it is important that the Secretary of State wills the means and not simply the ends… The second area is lower energy costs… The third area… is the issue of tariffs… The fourth area is procurement… The penultimate area… is scrap supply… The final point… is about consolidation…
Speaking for the Liberal Democrats, Sarah Olney (Liberal Democrat) set out her party’s position, welcoming the emergency intervention but urging long-term caution:
The Liberal Democrats broadly welcome this legislation as a temporary, emergency and targeted step, aimed specifically at turning around British steel, before returning it to the private sector… nationalising steel producers is not the answer in the long term; I ask the Minister to confirm that the Government also view this as an interim rescue measure… from 1 July the Government’s new UK steel and trade measure will impose tariffs on imported steel… some specific grades of steel are not domestically produced, so the Government are harming the purchasing power of UK businesses. Will the Government commit to re-examining the application of tariffs on certain grades of steel to ensure that they do not inadvertently damage domestic buyers?
Stuart Anderson (Conservative) highlighted the direct threat of the incoming steel tariffs on local manufacturers in his constituency:
I do not support this Bill… We have a great local business called Amodil… The big issue that Amodil faces is the tariffs on the stainless steel products it brings in that cannot be made in the UK in the required quantity or type…
[The Secretary of State, Peter Kyle, intervened: ‘With regard to Amodil, I will look into that company personally. The intention with the measures that I have brought in is to protect domestic production… It is not to prevent goods that we do not make here… from suffering.’]
… Looking at steel as a whole, this matter is just one part of the stainless steel industry… I request a pause for, say, just six months… because there is a massive knock-on impact that will seriously hurt the stainless steel industry…
David Chadwick (Liberal Democrat) contrasted the Government’s swift action in Scunthorpe with the lack of support for Welsh steel communities:
Welsh communities were crying out for help, Westminster shrugged its shoulders… When 2,800 jobs were wiped out in Port Talbot, there was no emergency Saturday sitting, no recall of Parliament, no emergency legislation and no sudden declaration that steel was a vital national…
Richard Tice (Reform UK) welcomed the Bill, noting that he had long advocated for the nationalisation of the Scunthorpe site:
It is exactly seven years since I started calling for British Steel at Scunthorpe to be taken into public ownership. The Conservatives rejected my splendid advice, and the chaos we have seen is a result of that… I congratulate the Secretary of State and the Minister for Industry on bringing forward this Bill… I am concerned that there is an attitude of, ‘We’ll quietly let the blast furnaces go cold and disappear, and then replace them with electric arc furnaces.’ We need a big, bold vision to renew, reline and rebuild at least one blast furnace.
Sarah Bool (Conservative) raised concerns about the drafting of the import tariff legislation and its impact on high-grade aerospace suppliers:
The bold steps that we have before us include granting powers to nationalise the industry and introducing a 50% tariff in six weeks’ time on the import of steel products… Alex [Bailey, owner of Dynamic Metals] explained to me, the drafting of the legislation is such that there is no way customs will be able to differentiate between a generic steel and a specialist steel as they use the same harmonised system codes upon import… the additional burden that he will have to pick up on 1 July amounts to £3.2 million. He will be bankrupt within six months if this measure goes ahead… this single piece of legislation will kill stockholding and manufacturing in the UK.
Summing up the debate for the Opposition, Dame Harriett Baldwin (Conservative) questioned the financial wisdom and lack of strategy behind the Bill:
With this Bill, we have a chaotic, unplanned, non-strategic journey that will end up burning through taxpayers’ money at every stage… This legislation will certainly not put things on a secure footing… Did they decide that before the Steel Industry (Special Measures) Act 2025 was introduced? If so, why was the House not told that at the time? Why should the taxpayer be the one who foots this bill? How is this value for money… What assessment has the Minister made of the chilling impact that the measures in this Bill will have on other inward investors…
Winding up the debate for the Government, Chris McDonald (Labour) defended the strategy, emphasizing the government’s commitment to British industry and workers:
Ownership matters, and it makes a difference. Strategy matters… when I went to the Corby steelworks recently, I saw the sacrifice of individuals and communities with their hard and dangerous labour… To move on, I am as concerned as the shadow Secretary of State… to get in private sector investment. We have carried out a very careful balance with this Bill to ensure that the steel industry is fully informed, understands our intentions and is supportive… A number of Opposition Members mentioned tariffs. There are no tariffs in this Bill. However, as we heard from the Trade Minister… and from the Secretary of State… there is an open door for companies to come in and discuss those issues… we are unashamedly on the side of British business, and we are unashamedly on the side of the steel industry and steel communities.