| Previous Section | Home Page |
Mr. Butterfill : As my hon. Friend is responsible for tourism, does he agree that a minimum wage, such as in Spain, would profoundly damage the tourism industry? Could not it lead to the unemployment and empty hotels that are evident throughout Benidorm?
Mr. Jackson : The connection between minimum wages and the loss of employment opportunities is palpable, obvious and has been demonstrated. Opposition Members should recognise that.
Mr. Beith : Is the Minister trying to contend that unemployment in Britain is not high and rising? As the
Column 769
recession is likely to last longer than the Government predicted, is he now prepared to put some weight behind measures designed to ensure that people get work by seeing that more effort is made to rebuild schools and hospitals and to insulate homes?Mr. Jackson : The hon. Gentleman will be aware of the employment action programme that was announced a couple of weeks ago by my right hon. and learned Friend and which will provide such opportunities. Unemployment in Britain is below the European Community average. It is rising higher because we are at a different stage in the economic cycle, but last month's unemployment increase was the lowest since January, which gives some reason for hope.
Dock Labour Scheme
8. Mr. Nicholls : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what recent representations he has received about the effect of the end of the dock labour scheme ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Forth : None, Sir. The complete absence of such representations is further proof that the fears of damage to the economy, increasing industrial problems and general dislocation in ports that were expressed vociferously by the Opposition during the passage of the Dock Work Act 1989 were without substance or foundation.
Mr. Nicholls : May I commend to my hon. Friend a paper produced for Aims of Industry entitled "The End of the Dock Labour Scheme--An Interim Appraisal", which contains clear and irrefutable evidence that the abolition of the scheme has been of much benefit to workers in the ports industry and to the nation as a whole? Does not my hon. Friend find it bizarre that, in the face of that compelling evidence, the Labour party refuses to deny that if it took office it would reintroduce the scheme?
Mr. Forth : My hon. Friend, whose knowledge of the matter is great, is absolutely right. The publication to which he refers shows that new life has been breathed into several ports since the disappearance of the dock labour scheme. Many areas, communities and people can look forward to a happier future thanks to the measures that were introduced so courageously by, among others, my hon. Friend. It is remarkable that no Labour Members-- official spokesmen or otherwise--have sought to distance themselves from the deplorable dock labour scheme, which cost so many jobs. I invite them to do so today.
Mr. Ron Brown : Is not there something wrong with the Minister's records? To my knowledge, dockers in Leith have protested strongly about the ending of the dock labour scheme, which benefited employers and employees. What has gone wrong with the information that the hon. Gentleman collates? Not only Leith dockers but the labour movement are complaining about the ending of the dock labour scheme. Its restoration may not be official Labour policy, but I assure the hon. Gentleman that one person in particular--me--will argue for that restoration to be included in the Labour party manifesto.
Mr. Forth : I am delighted that a Labour Member has now said unequivocally that he at least wants a return to the old scheme. If Leith has a certain reputation in the
Column 770
House for eccentricity, that is perhaps understandable, but there are few who would agree with the hon. Gentleman, because all the evidence, from Hull, Liverpool and nearly all the great ports of the country, is that since the abolition of the scheme, with the willing support of dock workers, we have witnessed a revival of activity in the ports, which are offering a new level of service and efficiency and are bringing customers back. I hope that any of the hon. Gentleman's constituents who take the view that he described will think again and if they look positively at the opportunities facing Leith and them, they will see a revival of their opportunities.Minimum Wage
9. Mr. David Shaw : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what is his latest estimate of the cost and effect on unemployment of introducing a minimum wage ; and if he is reconsidering his policy on this matter.
Mr. Howard : A national legal minimum wage set at two thirds of median male hourly rate, as proposed by the Labour party, could cost up to 2 million jobs-- [Hon. Members :-- "No."]--if higher-paid workers were successful in fully restoring pay differentials. That policy makes economic nonsense. My policy is to continue to point out at every opportunity the devastating consequences-- [Hon. Members :-- "Wrong."]--which that minimum wage proposal would bring about.
Mr. Shaw : I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for that reply. No doubt the country will be shocked by the information contained in it. Has he any useful advice about the minimum wage to offer to the Leader of the Opposition, who will tomorrow be addressing the conference of the Transport and General Workers Union?
Mr. Howard : It was interesting to see the extent to which Labour Members were keen to disavow what is official Labour party policy and is stated in clear words in all Labour's policy documents. Perhaps it is not too late for the Leader of the Opposition to realise the absurdity of his policy and to abandon it when he talks tomorrow to the Transport and General Workers Union.
Mr. John Evans : Does the Secretary of State appreciate how distasteful it is to listen to Conservative Members, most of whom have outside jobs which more than double their parliamentary salaries, continually seeking to block any improvement in the wages and conditions of millions of British workers who suffer some of the lowest wages in the European Community?
Mr. Howard : That kind of sneer will not help to resolve the issue of how we can best improve wages and conditions. We can best help to do that by paying family credit to those on low pay, rather than substituting for low pay no pay, which is the policy of the Labour party.
Mrs. Gorman : Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware of experience in the United States, which introduced a minimum wage law in 1947, since when unemployment among the ethnic minorities and especially black unskilled people has continued to rise, so much so that many American states have abandoned the minimum wage law and introduced a right to work law?
Mr. Howard : My hon. Friend is entirely right. Every independent study has demonstrated that the policy would
Column 771
cost jobs. The only point on which they disagree is how many jobs would be lost. When will the Labour party see sense and abandon its absurd policy?Mr. Blair : When will Conservative Members admit that they are talking nonsense about Labour's policy? They have doubled unemployment and are now presiding over the fastest rise in unemployment in Europe-- [Interruption.] --and do not know what to do about it. The most interesting point about the Major Government is that while they pour scorn on, and deride the notion of, protection for some of the poorest paid in our society--often women, many of them working in conditions of great hardship for £3.40 an hour--they will not lift a finger when the chairmen of privatised industries pay themselves an extra £80,000 or £90,000 a year. That is the true face of Majorism.
Mr. Howard : The simple answer is that we protect those on low pay through family credit. The Opposition would simply destroy their jobs.
Industrial and Vocational Training
10. Mr. David Nicholson : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement on progress with industrial and vocational training.
Mr. Howard : Progress has been substantial. Employers have been put in the lead of training locally and at industry level and are more committed than ever to raising the levels of skills in the work force. Employer training has increased by 85 per cent. over the past six years. Major reforms of education and youth training are raising the attainment of young people. Good progress is being made on the reform of vocational qualifications.
Mr. Nicholson : Will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm that the evidence from the latest survey carried out by the Confederation of British Industry is that private industry is maintaining its commitment to training? In view of the representations made to me by Somerset training and enterprise council which I have communica-ted to him, will he confirm that the Government will maintain their commitment to provide the resources necessary to deliver the youth training guarantee?
Mr. Howard : I am happy to give my hon. Friend that confirmation. We shall continue to work in partnership with the training and enterprise councils to provide training of ever-higher quality.
Mr. Blair : When we are receiving reports from around the country that youth training and employment training have waiting lists because so many people are trying to get on them, when, even after last month's announcement, funds for training are being cut--[ Hon. Members :-- "Question!"]--and when the Department of Employment's review--[ Hon. Members :-- "Question!"]
Mr. Speaker : Order. I trust that the hon. Gentleman will ask a question. That would help.
Mr. Blair : When the Department's own review says that the relationship between TECs and the Government cannot be sustained as a result of funding cuts, why does
Column 772
not the Secretary of State take responsibility for the crisis in training which the Government have caused and about which they are doing nothing?Mr. Howard : What the hon. Gentleman should be considering is yesterday's vote by his trade union--the Transport and General Workers Union--to boycott youth training, employment training and the training and enterprise councils. In view of his utter failure to dissuade even his own trade union from boycotting and turning its back on training, will the hon. Gentleman and the Leader of the Opposition, both of whom are sponsored by the Transport and General Workers Union, today undertake not to accept a penny more of tainted money from that union until it abandons its boycott of training?
Mr. Paice : Can my right hon. and learned Friend confirm that the latest CBI survey shows that three quarters of firms expect to maintain or increase their investment in training? How does that compare with the proposals for a tax on employment to pay for training--would not that cost more jobs and is not it typical of all the policies of that lot on the Opposition Benches?
Mr. Howard : My hon. Friend is entirely right. It is still the knee- jerk reaction of the Opposition to pull for compulsion at every turn. Their policies on this issue would be as disastrous as the training levy boards of the past.
Training Opportunities
11. Mr. Hain : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement about training opportunities for (a) those with special needs and (b) women returnees.
Mr. Jackson : Training and enterprise councils are required to set out in their business plans how they intend to offer suitable training to people with special needs and those returning to the labour market. Those plans form the basis of their contract with my Department and a substantial proportion of the £1.7 billion spent through TECs on employment training and youth training go to people with special needs and to women returners.
In addition, we have the £35 million of resources for ET targeted at those with special needs which was announced by my right hon. and learned Friend the other day.
Mr. Hain : Does the Minister accept that the gap between what the Government say in the House about training and what is happening throughout the country is incredible? In west Wales, for example, the number of training weeks has been cut by 43,000, or 21 per cent., including 38 places for special needs trainees. The number of courses for part-time training has been chopped all over Neath, depriving particularly women returnees of much-needed opportunities. Those women cannot take up full-time courses because of child care responsibilities. Is not it time the Government admitted that their training programme is an absolute disgrace and a shambles?
Mr. Jackson : We need no lectures from the Labour party. We are spending two and a half times as much in real terms on training, vocational education and enterprise as was spent when the Labour party was last in office.
Column 773
Every time Labour Members make a statement about these matters, their expenditure commitments are qualified by references to "resources allowing".PRIME MINISTER
Engagements
Q1. Mr. Win Griffiths : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 July.
The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.
Mr. Griffiths : The Prime Minister must be aware of the 253 per cent. pay increase of the chief executive of Yorkshire
Electricity--yet another in a long line of outrageous pay increases to the chiefs of former publicly owned industries. Is not it true that the right hon. Gentleman refuses to do anything about those pay rises because of his friends and former colleagues on the boards of those companies, who are stuffing their pockets with money as fast as it can be snatched from the long-suffering consumer?
The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman gives a prize example of Labour humbug. The Labour party's policy document "Opportunity Britain" states :
"British industry now needs a long term commitment from Government but not in the form of second guessing industry".
The hon. Gentleman should remember that.
Mr. Gwilym Jones : May I remind my right hon. Friend that, so far this year, his Government have supported the creation of 4,500 new jobs in Wales and nearly £352 million of investment for the Principality? Every announcement of such good news has been greeted contemptuously by Labour Members. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the tactics of the luddite left are the surest, fastest way of undermining investor confidence?
The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales has just returned from the United States with a significant package of job-creating projects, promising more than 500 new jobs. I should have thought that the Opposition would welcome that.
Mr. Kinnock : When the Prime Minister meets the Heads of Government of the G7 major industrialised nations next week, will he explain to them how he managed to get an oil-rich country like Britain to the bottom of the employment, growth and investment leagues?
The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman should look at what has happened over the past 10 years, when our growth has far outstripped that of almost every other industrial nation. Over the decade as a whole, we have one of the best job creation records of any nation.
Mr. Kinnock : The Prime Minister chooses to speak of the past. Will he therefore recognise that, for the past three years, we have been at the bottom of those employment, growth and investment leagues and that, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, with his policies we will be in that position
Column 774
again next year? Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that this is the first time that any country has been at the bottom for four consecutive years? As the right hon. Gentleman has been a Treasury Minister or the Prime Minister over the whole period, does he agree that he should accept unique responsibility for this unique failure?The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman should have read on in the OECD report, where it was made clear that lower inflation is the essential condition for sustained growth. Everybody recognises that except the right hon. Gentleman. Indeed, only last week at the National Economic Development Council, trade unionists such as Mr. Jordan, Mr. Edmonds and Mr. Willis all supported the steps to reduce inflation. Only the right hon. Gentleman does not know where prosperity begins.
Mr. Kinnock : By pushing the economy into deep recession, the Prime Minister can, of course, reduce inflation. Does he think that, under his policies, he will be higher placed on the growth, employment and investment leagues next year? Does he recognise that, if he is not, he is just laying the seeds for further inflation?
The Prime Minister : We are absolutely refusing to take action now that may lay the seeds for future inflation. We are determined to ensure that we not only get inflation down but keep it down. Unlike the right hon. Gentleman, we shall not take the easy option now at the risk of problems later.
Mr. Robert Banks : Has my right hon. Friend read the reports of the conference of the Transport and General Workers Union--the union which, incidentally, sponsors the Leader of the Opposition--
Mr. Speaker : Order. This must be related to the Government's responsibilities.
Mr. Banks : Has he read about its calls for the scrapping of all trade union laws, with the consequent return of Mr. Ron Todd's secondary strikes and flying pickets? Is not he thankful that in framing industrial laws, his party conferences have not been tainted by the block votes of the trade union ballots?
The Prime Minister : It is perfectly clear that Labour Members are sensitive about their relationship with the trade unions. They are right to be, because their idea of democracy is demonstrated every year when the leader of the Transport and General Workers Union visits the Labour party conference--one man, 1 million votes, and the right hon. Gentleman does as he is told.
Q2. Mr. Hoyle : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 July.
The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Hoyle : When the Prime Minister takes time off from his engagements, will he do what the Home Secretary so conspicuously failed to do yesterday and accept total and unconditional responsibility for the appalling lapse in security that allowed two alleged terrorists to escape from Brixton gaol? Does not he realise what an enormous propaganda coup the Government have given the IRA?
The Prime Minister : Everyone shares the concern at the lapse in security yesterday which resulted in two prisoners escaping. That is a matter of genuine regret, not least by
Column 775
my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. Those problems have occurred before under previous Governments, but only this Government have taken action to tighten security, improve the conditions of prison staff and provide new and proper prison places.Mr. Butterfill : Does my right hon. Friend agree not only that a minimum wage would be damaging but that a minimum wage based on median wages would be the worst of all, because it would continue to ratchet upwards as the median moved upwards? That would lead to a catastrophic rise in wages, destruction of jobs and a policy that could have been dreamt up only by a shadow Cabinet controlled by 18 trade union-sponsored Members out of 20.
The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is entirely right. It is now generally understood by everyone except those on the Opposition Front Bench that a minimum wage policy would devastate British industry and create a substantial amount of unemployment.
Q3. Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 July.
The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Banks : As the Prime Minister says that he believes in the creation of a classless society, will he assure the House that he will not recommend the creation of any hereditary peerages?
The Prime Minister : The subject of honours is not a matter that I am required to answer in front of the House and I do not propose to do so.
Q4. Mr. Hannam : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 July.
The Prime Minister : I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Hannam : Does my right hon. Friend share my concern about the admission by Iraq that it has been developing a nuclear weapon? Does he agree that any responsible political party in this country should give a firm pledge not to give up nuclear weapons as long as other countries still have them and countries such as Iraq are developing them?
The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend and can certainly give him the assurance that he seeks. Iraq has now admitted to having a secret uranium enrichment programme. That is a clear violation of the nuclear safeguards agreement and of Iraq's non-proliferation treaty obligations. As I said some time ago at the Scottish conference in Perth, we shall ensure by whatever means it takes that Iraq can never again build up a capacity to threaten its neighbours with nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.
Mr. Ashdown : Leaving aside for a moment the question of how the Bank of Credit and Commerce International got into its present position, will the Prime Minister assure the House that he personally understands the scale of the tragedy that is befalling BCCI investors? Is he aware that in some communities in Britain, up to 30 per cent. of traders are account holders in BCCI? Will he look at the
Column 776
rules governing compensation, which many regard as incapable of meeting the needs of those innocent people whose livelihoods are being destroyed?The Prime Minister : I do, of course, understand the depth of tragedy that the apparent collapse of BCCI may mean. As yet, we are not sure what the outcome of the Serious Fraud Office investigation, the Bank of England investigation or other matters will be. The deposit protection fund was explicitly set up to protect small depositors, particularly those people with whom the right hon. Gentleman is most concerned, and it will apply in these circumstances.
Q5. Mr. Robert G. Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 July.
The Prime Minister : I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Hughes : Has my right hon. Friend had time to read the private Member's Bill that would give the National Audit Office power to cost Opposition policies? If the Bill becomes law, will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that the National Audit Office will be given sufficient staff to carry out that important task because it is a big job--commitments are added week by week and speech by speech by Labour spokesmen--or is it a task which would be beyond anybody?
The Prime Minister : I welcome my hon. Friend's tongue-in-cheek suggestion, but I fear that he suggests a little too much. Only last Friday, the Labour party explained that its regional assemblies would be funded by block grant from Westminster. As usual, no price tag was attached and we may yet have to determine what that price tag is. As many hon. Members may have seen on "Panorama" last night, a member of the Labour party, Professor Rowthorne, summed up the matter adequately. Asked about Labour's spending plans, he said : "Frankly I think they don't add up. If you take their whole list of spending plans and say where's the money for this going to come from I think the answer is--I have no idea."
We have a very good idea--from the taxpayer's pocket.
Mr. John P. Smith : Will the Prime Minister take this opportunity to reassure the people of Wales by condemning the ludicrous suggestion that the Royal Welch Fusiliers could ever be merged with the Cheshire regiment, or that the oldest and one of the finest regiments in Wales could ever be disbanded?
The Prime Minister : We have very great concern for the regimental structure, which is more than the Opposition have shown during the past few years. Final decisions on "Options for Change" will take account of all relevant factors. Those decisions have not yet been made. When they are, my right hon. Friend and I shall be here to answer for them.
Q6. Mr. Riddick : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 July.
The Prime Minister : I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Riddick : When my right hon. Friend met the leaders of the trade unions yesterday, did he feel that his position was significantly enhanced by the fact that those same trade unions do not wield 90 per cent. of the votes at
Column 777
his party's conference and do not provide 70 per cent. of the funding for his party and that 18 of his Cabinet Ministers are not sponsored by trade unions?The Prime Minister : Yes, I agree that that gives me a degree of freedom not open to everyone else. There is no doubt that Conservative employment laws have brought about a record on industrial relations which is currently the envy of the whole of Europe. We had fewer strikes last year than at any time since the war. In contrast, Labour's strikers' charter gives the unions exactly what they want and no one can doubt their ambitions. As Ron Todd said I shall read this slowly so that hon. Members can listen : "We do not want to go back to 1979--things weren't that good even then."
Q7. Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 July.
The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Winnick : As hostilities are being renewed, with accusations and counter-accusations by former Cabinet Ministers, is there any truth in the rumour floating round Westminster that a small EC peace-keeping mission is to come over here to try to restore some peace in the Prime Minister's party?
NEW MEMBERS
The following Member took and subscribed the Oath :
Peter Kilfoyle, Esq., for Liverpool, Walton.
BILL PRESENTED
Restoration of the Franchise
Mr. Harry Barnes, supported by Mrs. Alice Mahon, Mr. Harry Cohen, Mr. Ken Livingstone and Mr. Eddie Loyden, presented a Bill to remove impediments to electoral registration ; and to limit the uses which may be made of electoral registers : And the same was read the First time ; and ordered to be read a Second time on Friday 19 July and to be printed. [Bill 212.]
Statutory Instruments, &c.
Mr. Speaker : With the leave of the House, I shall put together the 10 questions on the motions relating to Statutory Instruments.
Column 778
Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 101(3) (Standing Committees on Statutory Instruments, &c.)
| Next Section
| Home Page |