| Previous Section | Home Page |
Column 737
Mr. Jackson : My right hon. and learned Friend and I meet TEC chairmen on a regular basis to discuss a range of issues, including questions of funding.Mr. O'Hara : What advice or comfort can the Under-Secretary of State offer to those providers of training on Merseyside who have been driven out of business because insufficient resources have been allocated to the Merseyside TEC to provide contracts to them? What succour or comfort can he offer to the unemployed in my constituency of Knowsley, South, where 65 jobless now chase every vacancy advertised in the jobcentres? How can he possibly justify cutting training which is so desperately needed by a work force without jobs such as that in Knowsley, South?
Mr. Jackson : There has been an increase in the overall budget made available by the Government for training. Negotiations between particular TECs and providers must be a matter for those TECs and providers. [Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker : Order. May I ask the House not to indulge in private conversations. It is difficult to hear even at this end.
Mr. Alton : If the protests that have been made about cuts in training places on Merseyside are simply synthetic protestations, as the Minister said earlier, can he explain why projects such as the Hexagon project on Merseyside face closure? How can he explain that when 71,000 people in the city of Liverpool alone are currently unemployed? Surely that is an area where more training, not less, is needed.
Mr. Jackson : I know that the hon. Gentleman is sympathetic to the idea of localism that lay behind the creation of the training and enterprise councils. The TECs are in the best position to make informed judgments about the qualities of particular providers. I will not second- guess the judgments made by Merseyside TEC in respect of any provider, including Hexagon.
North London Training and Enterprise Council
14. Mr. John Marshall : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what discussions he has had with the chairman of the North London TEC to discuss the contributions of trade unions to training.
Mr. Marshall : Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the day after the Transport and General Workers Union's disgraceful decision to boycott Government training schemes, the union was described as "the Labour party in so many ways"? Is he aware that the right hon. Gentleman who so described it was none other than the Leader of the Opposition?
Mr. Howard : I am. The Transport and General Workers Union voted to boycott youth training, to boycott employment training and to boycott the training and enterprise councils. Not a word of condemnation of that disgraceful position has come from the Leader of the Opposition, who is sponsored by that union, or from the shadow spokesman on employment, who is also sponsored by that union, or by any of the renegade crew who man the Labour Front Bench.
Column 738
Unemployment, North-west England
15. Mr. Loyden : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what new policies he has to reduce unemployment in the north-west region.
Mr. Howard : The Government's main role is to ensure a sound and stable economic framework within which enterprise can flourish and the battle against inflation can be won. In addition, since 1979 regional selective assistance worth £326 million has been committed to the north-west, creating more than 60,000 new jobs and safeguarding more than 60,000 existing jobs.
Mr. Loyden : Is not it patently clear that the Conservative party and the Minister have no understanding whatever of what unemployment means to the unemployed, their families and communities? After 13 years, it is an absolute disgrace that no input has been made to tackling unemployment. The Government have failed absolutely to tackle unemployment except for some cosmetic surgery. Is not it about time that the Government recognised that the only cure for unemployment is to get rid of the Conservative Government as soon as possible?
Mr. Howard : If the hon. Gentleman really cares about unemployed people, will he join me today in calling on his Front-Bench colleagues to abandon their policy of a national statutory minimum wage, to abandon their jobs tax and to abandon their embrace of the European Community social action programme so that we can avoid the disastrous consequences for employment that would follow from such policies?
Mr. Dickens : Will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm that the north-west of England is coming out of recession faster than the rest of the country? Will he also confirm that we are leading the way in many training schemes and that there is no doubt that housing-- [Interruption.] Will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm that there is no doubt that, in housing and in many other matters, the north- west of England is showing the way and will continue to show the way?
Mr. Howard : I agree with my hon. Friend, who will continue to champion the cause of the north-west in the next Parliament. The only things that could put a stop to the recovery from recession in the north- west of England and elsewhere are the policies of the Labour party--for example, the sharpest ever peacetime tax increase, the national statutory minimum wage, and changes in the law to encourage strikes. Those would be the policies to put a stop to recovery. [Interruption.] We shall ensure-- [Interruption.]
Mr. Howard : We shall ensure that-- [Interruption.]
Training Schemes
16. Mr. Flannery : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many unemployed people are currently engaged in training schemes.
Mr. Howard : There are currently some 300,000 young people on youth training, and around 150,000 people on employment training in Great Britain. Last financial year,
Column 739
some 740,000 people entered Government training programmes, compared with 110,000 in 1978-79--a sevenfold increase.Mr. Flannery : Is not it a fact that during the 13 years of this Government, 25 methods have been found to try to prove that unemployment is massively smaller than it is? Is not it also a fact that the unemployed are generally on useless training schemes and that, therefore, unemployment and the slump are far more massive than the Government care to admit?
Mr. Howard : The hon. Gentleman is talking characteristic nonsense. More than 80 per cent. of those on youth training gain a qualification or a job, or enter a further education course. We are the only country in Europe to guarantee a two-year training course leading to a qualification for 16 and 17-year-old unemployed young people. That is what the hon. Gentleman should recognise.
Mr. Bill Walker : Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that since 1979 the Government have introduced more training places and a wider range of training courses both in width and in depth, in a way that has never been attempted before? We have spent far more money. Therefore it is nonsense for the Opposition to claim that we have done nothing at all about the problems of retraining.
Mr. Howard : My hon. Friend is right. We are spending two and a half times as much, after taking account of inflation, as was spent by the last Labour Government on training. That is because this is the only Government who understand training and care about training, and are determined to make sure that our people have high-quality training.
EC Working Time Directive
17. Sir Anthony Durant : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what representations he has received from the CBI regarding the draft EC working time directive.
Mr. Forth : The CBI responded fully to my Department's consultative document on the proposed working time directive. It firmly opposed the Commission's proposals. I fully agree with the CBI that the directive would be a needless strain on United Kingdom
competitiveness, and a threat to jobs and earnings.
Sir Anthony Durant : Does my hon. Friend agree that the proposals, as attacked by civil engineers, would be a restrictive practice and would restrict the flexibility of the construction industry? [Interruption.]
Sir Anthony Durant : I did not know that my question was so good. Would not the proposals restrict jobs, cause inefficiency and, with the minimum wage proposals, be very damaging to industry?
Mr. Forth : My hon. Friend is correct. No significant employer representative body in the United Kingdom has done anything other than condemn those irrelevant and damaging proposals very roundly. Her Majesty's Government will continue to fight to persuade our colleagues in the European Community that the proposals
Column 740
are not only unnecessary and unjustifiable, but would be extremely damaging to employment throughout the Community, particularly in the United Kingdom. I thank my hon. Friend for drawing my attention to the representations that he has made.Mrs. Wise : Will the Minister explain why European companies can apparently provide their workers with better conditions in terms of hours and minimum wages than this country's employers? Why is it that European companies do not regard looking after their workers well in terms of hours and wages as destroying competitiveness, but instead see it as a way to obtain good work from their workers? Why is that?
Mr. Forth : There are two good reasons. First, for many of our European partners, the rules apply on paper but not in practice. They simply do not put into effect the rules that the Community agrees. Secondly, investors from outside the Community, from places such as Japan, the United States and many others, look at the European Community and decide that the United Kingdom is by far the best place in which to invest due to the stability, skills and reliability of our work force. That explanation speaks volumes and answers the hon. Lady's question.
PRIME MINISTER
Engagements
Q1. Mr. Simon Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 10 March.
The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall have further meetings later today.
Mr. Hughes : Is it not an appalling indictment of 13 years of this Government's economic policy that yesterday one of Her Majesty's coroners described the shortage of beds in one of Britain's principal hospitals--a shortage that has led to the death of a pensioner from Southwark--as appalling due to a 2 per cent. insufficiency in gross domestic funding of the national health service? As a result of the Government's policy, the pensioner's widow is more than £17 per week less well off in real terms than she was when the Government came to power. Is that not an example of private wealth at the expense of public underfunding? Are the Government to continue with the same policy or enact a U-turn at the last moment?
The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman well knows that there has been a dramatic increase in national health service spending on any measure one cares to take, far and above the amount necessary either to keep pace with the general level of inflation or to keep pace with the level of inflation in medical costs. The hon. Gentleman knows that that is the case, and he also knows that there has been an increase in net spending at all levels of income in this country.
Mr. Onslow : Has my right hon. Friend had time to study the important report on occupational pensions by the Select Committee on Social Services? Does he agree that it contains a great many lessons for many people, particularly on the Maxwell scandal? Will he give the
Column 741
House an undertaking that, when the report calls for action from the Government, we can rely on my right hon. Friend to take action without delay?The Prime Minister : I have seen the report. Our first step must be to examine it thoroughly and look at all the recommendations made by the Select Committee. It raises a number of complex and inter-related matters, some of which are for the pensions industry, some for the banks, some for actuaries, auditors and regulators. Some relate to the present legal framework. We need time to examine fully the findings of the Select Committee and to give our response. It is necessary to bear it in mind that the vast majority of occupational pensions schemes operate successfully in the United Kingdom--some 100, 000 of them. The cause of the problem with Mirror Group pensioners is all too clear ; There appears to have been a massive fraud, perpetuated under the very eyes of the trustees.
Mr. Kinnock : May I strongly recommend the report in question to the Prime Minister? I hope, it will lead, after the election, to his supporting us in putting its main recommendations into effect. Does the right hon. Gentleman recall giving the House, from that Dispatch Box, the assurance that the Government would not achieve the objective of tax reductions
"on the back of a burgeoning Government borrowing requirement now or in future"?--[ Official Report 14 July 1988 ; Vol. 137, c. 588.] Does he still stand by that assurance?
The Prime Minister : Nothing that my right hon. Friend does or announces later this afternoon will change our objective, or our intention of maintaining medium-term balance in the fiscal situation.
Mr. Kinnock : I asked whether the Prime Minister stood by the assurance that borrowing requirement would not increase to pay for tax cuts, now or in future, under any Government of which the right hon. Gentleman was leader. Does the Prime Minister still stand by that opinion-- yes or no?
The Prime Minister : I did answer that question. Before asking his second question, the right hon. Gentleman might have consulted the shadow Chancellor, who said last week that-- [Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker : Order. This is very unseemly behaviour.
The Prime Minister : I am sorry that Labour Members do not like to hear what they themselves said, but I intend to repeat it. As the shadow Chancellor said last week, "I"--that is, the shadow Chancellor--
"am prepared to go on the basis of accepting the PSBR which emerges from the Budget."
Clearly the Opposition have no independent judgment whatsoever.
Mr. Sumberg : Will my right hon. Friend take time this afternoon to watch the recent interview by Mr. David Frost, which revealed the success of the Government's health service provisions, and also that the Opposition's figures are totally bogus? That interview revealed also that the hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook) does not know his NHS from his NUPE.
The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend makes his point extremely clearly. The bogus statistics of the hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook) have been finally revealed.
Column 742
Without the steady drip-feed of leaked documents, clearly the hon. Gentleman is in some difficulty with his figures. As was pointed out to him in that interview, this year there has been a 7.1 per cent. increase in the number of patients treated compared with last year, which is higher even than the Government's forecast increase in patient care. I remind the House of the so-called Cook test. The hon. Gentleman said that the success of the trusts must be measured "by the simple test of whether they do more or less work for the national health service patients."The trusts have clearly passed that test, and I look to the hon. Gentleman to admit that.
Q2. Mr. Patchett : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 10 March.
The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Patchett : Given the proposed increase in pensions, does the Prime Minister honestly feel that it is sufficient--yes or no?
The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman knows what is the pensions increase. It has been announced, it is Government policy, and I stand by that policy.
Sir Donald Thompson : My right hon. Friend will have heard in recent Question Times much about medicine in London. Will he turn his eyes to the country as a whole and to the north--to the West Riding and my own constituency, where the health service is thought to be one of the best in Europe?
The Prime Minister : It is not only thought to be so but it undoubtedly is so, and getting better in each and every part of the United Kingdom. That is largely because of the dedication of the staff and the increased resources provided by this Government.
Q3. Sir Patrick Duffy : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 10 March.
The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Sir Patrick Duffy : I refer the Prime Minister to the barrage of criticism from the Select Committee on Defence over the Government's handling of Army cuts, and its implied call for a defence review. Is the Prime Minister aware that among right hon. and hon. Members on both sides of the House who understand the Government's overall objectives, there is still a genuine fear that the outcome will be overstretch in peacetime and a dangerous shortage in times of tension? Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that that is one risk--one national lottery--which we can well do without?
The Prime Minister : The Army of the 1990s will be structured to meet our needs in the face of a changed threat, in particular the end of the Warsaw pact and the millions of Warsaw troops who previously were geared immediately to face us. Our forward planning is designed to enable us to take stock precisely as the Select Committee advocated. I stress that we believe our proposals are right, and we set them out clearly in "Options for Change."
The hon. Gentleman says that all parts of the House take that view. Although I know that he does, I do not believe that all parts of the House do share that view. The
Column 743
occupants of the Opposition Front Bench appear to advocate 25 per cent. cuts in defence expenditure while the occupants of the Liberal Benches advocate 50 per cent. cuts in defence expenditure, both of which are irresponsible and both of which would have a devastating effect on our capacity to defend ourselves.Q4. Mr. Evennett : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 10 March.
The Prime Minister : I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Evennett : Does my right hon. Friend agree that proportional representation reduces democracy and effective government? Will he confirm that after he has won the general election and is back in No. 10, he will have no intention of changing our voting system? Will he condemn the occupants of the Opposition Front Bench for using the issue in a squalid attempt to lure Liberal voters into their camp and for indulging in two- faced opportunism?
The Prime Minister : I am not sure that Liberals generally need much luring into Labour policies ; they are very similar. My views on proportional representation are well known. PR does not lead to effective government and I do not support it. Indeed, I agree entirely with what the Leader of the Opposition said a few years ago, that
"proportional representation is fundamentally counter-democratic in any case."
I am not sure that the right hon. Gentleman has told the hon. Member for Dunfermline, East (Mr. Brown) that, but perhaps the hon. Gentleman is putting down an early marker for after the next election.
Q5. Mr. Jack Thompson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 10 March.
The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Thompson : Will the Prime Minister explain what compensation is available under his supposed citizens charter for the late arrival of economic recovery? Does he realise that it is not just an hour but a year and a half late?
The Prime Minister : I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his ingenuity. I can tell him precisely what will be there. It will be a very low level of inflation, lower than we have known at any time in recent years, and steady sustainable growth leading to secure jobs, sustaining the Conservative party in government for many years.
Mr. Burns : Will my right hon. Friend tell me how best to reply to a constituent of mine who has recently completed a course of treatment at Broomfield hospital in Chelmsford and who tells me that the nurses and doctors were fantastic, that the treatment was magnificent and that he is fed up to the back teeth with the constant efforts of the Labour party to undermine and talk down the achievements of the health service?
The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend's constituent speaks for many people who have enjoyed the splendid services of the national health service in the last year or so.
Column 744
I advise my hon. Friend to tell his constituent that his experience is not unusual and that it is a tribute to the service that is available from the national health service. He might add that the reforms that are bringing that about are in danger under the plans proposed by the Labour party and that nobody could guarantee the increasing support and assistance from the NHS if those reforms were turned back.Q6. Mr. Bidwell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 10 march.
The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Bidwell : Is the Prime Minister aware that the Home Office is withdrawing section 11 funding from all the colleges in the London borough of Ealing and that that adversely affects the Pathway further education centre in my constituency, where we have the largest concentration of people from the new Commonwealth? I find that totally objectionable from a Government who are shaping up to borrow and spend to save their necks.
The Prime Minister : I am not aware of the point that the hon. Gentleman raises but, as he knows, a tremendous amount of support has been made available through the Home Office and other sources to assist members of the ethnic minorities in this country. That continues to be the case.
Mr. Thornton : With not a red rose in sight on the Opposition Benches, does my right hon. Friend realise that the traditional red rose of Lancashire is alive and well on the Government Benches? What message would my right hon. Friend and my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancashire give us to take back to our constituents in the light of recent research showing that nearly 200 of the top British firms believe that the best way to increase unemployment and inflation and decrease investment would be the calamity of a Labour Government?
The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is right. I share his remarks about the red rose belonging to Lancashire. It also belongs to the Rugby Football Union, which shows the red flag on its grand slam tie that it was generous enough to send me this morning. My hon. Friend is also right about the calamity of a Labour Government, because 86 per cent. of companies in that survey thought that Labour would be bad for the economy. I am concerned about what on earth is wrong with the other 14 per cent.
BILL PRESENTED
General Elections
Mr. Tony Banks, supported by Mr. Tom Clarke, Ms. Diane Abbott and Mr. Jeremy Corbyn, presented a Bill to make statutory provision for fixed term parliaments, compulsory attendance at polling stations, a public holiday on days set for general elections ; and for connected purposes ; And the same was read the First time ; and ordered to be read a Second time on Thursday 9 April and to be printed. [Bill 112.]
| Next Section (Debates)
| Home Page |