| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Michael Fabricant (Mid-Staffordshire): Does the hon. Gentleman accept that people are at least in work in this country? Is he aware that unemployment has inexorably risen in France and Germany, whereas, apart from the blip in the past month, there has been lower unemployment in this country for the past 29 months, contrary to the European trend? Does he welcome that?
Mr. Meacher: The hon. Gentleman fails to note that what he calls a small blip may turn out to be a very embarrassing rise.
Mr. Fabricant: We do not know.
Mr. Meacher: No, we do not know, but there are good reasons to expect it will be the case. If one considers that there have been 28 changes in the unemployment count, I suspect that the unemployment figure in Britain is probably not 2.5 million but closer to 3 million.
Mr. Fabricant: It is going down.
Mr. Meacher: No, it is going up.
In particular, the hon. Gentleman should consider the fact that, in the past three years, unemployment has decreased in this country only because the Government were forced, kicking and screaming, out of the exchange rate mechanism in 1992, which allowed a reduction--[Interruption.] I am glad that the hon. Member for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Fabricant) is nodding his assent; perhaps we have taught him something. That event allowed an interest rate cut, from about 15 per cent.to 6 per cent. If that had not happened, unemployment would still be nudging 3 million, even on the Government's figures; so let us hear no more about that matter.
In our country, after 17 years, employees have less protection--
Mr. Bernard Jenkin (Colchester, North):
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Meacher:
No, no at the moment.
Employees have less protection against unfair dismissal and fewer rights in redundancy than in any other European country.
Mr. Jenkin:
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Meacher:
I shall in a moment.
Seventeen years of Tory Government have made Britain the only country in Europe without legal pay protection for the poorest workers, without legal limits to working hours and in which discrimination against part-time workers in relation to pay and employment rights is legal. None of that is good enough for today's Tory party: it now wants the systemic destruction of employment rights, to move this country down towards the sweatshop economies of Latin America or thefar east--[Interruption.] The hon. Member for Mid-Staffordshire may not like the reference to the direction in which his Government have been taking us for 17 years, but that is the clear implication of their policies. He is rather squeamish. Ministers are much more willing to admit that that is the type of economy they want.
Mr. Jenkin:
Is the hon. Gentleman under the impression that none of our European partners provides some exemptions from employment legislation for smaller businesses?
Mr. Meacher:
The latest working time directive?
Mr. Meacher:
I am sorry; I was distracted and did not hear what the hon. Gentleman said.
Mr. Jenkin:
Is the hon. Gentleman under the impression that none of our European partners provides exemptions for smaller businesses from some obligations under employment law?
Mr. Meacher:
Of course; if one examines the European directives, contrary to the impression Ministers regularly give, one sees that they provide a great range of flexibility and are nowhere near as tight and limiting as is often said. The directives take account of the need for small businesses to succeed and, I suspect, small businesses succeed a great deal better on the continent than they do here. This policy is so objectionable not merely because it is grossly arbitrary and discriminates against up to half the work force, but because it patently does not work.
Our case against the Government is that they are now trying to ram down policies into the economy that have demonstrably failed. Ministers never tire of saying that deregulated labour markets are the only way in which to achieve steady improvements in economic growth, competitiveness and job creation, and the Prime Minister never misses an opportunity to lecture European leaders about the superiority of the Government's deregulation model.
Mr. Meacher:
I note that the hon. Member for Colchester, North (Mr. Jenkin) strongly supports that model, but perhaps he would like to consider its effects. We have had 17 years of deregulated labour markets, flexible and casualised working, deunionisation and the steady chipping away of employment rights--[Interruption.] Conservative Members are falling over themselves to express their support of the policies, but what has been the result? The relevant comparison is with other members of the Group of Seven leading
Mr. Fabricant:
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Meacher:
No, I will not give way to the hon. Gentleman.
That is a record of which Ministers should be ashamed. It is certainly not a performance to preach about to other European leaders or to encourage them to copy.
The Deputy Prime Minister--he is always at it--has been banging on again about making Britain the enterprise capital of Europe. It is essentially his policy of deregulation in the past decade that has made Britain the competitive backwater of Europe. [Hon. Members: "Come off it."] Conservative Members simply do not like to take account of the facts. The Government's policies are intended to produce growth, competitiveness and jobs.On the OECD evidence, they have produced none of those things.
Mr. Fabricant:
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Anthony Coombs (Wyre Forest):
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Meacher:
I want to move on.
Ministers constantly claim that the only way to increase jobs is through more flexible labour markets, lower wages, deskilling and cutting employment rights. They have been doing that for 17 years, and what has happened? There are fewer people in employment in Britain today than in 1979. More than 1 million fewer people are in employment in Britain today than the day the Prime Minister entered Downing street.
Mr. Fabricant:
What about the rest of Europe?
Mr. Meacher:
We are not talking about Europe.We are talking about Britain. This policy is expected to work in Britain. It has worked in reverse. There is higher unemployment than in 1979 and substantially higher unemployment than in 1990, even after the fall of the past two and a half years.
Mr. Meacher:
The hon. Gentleman can keep bouncing up and down if he wishes--perhaps that is where his skill lies--but I shall not give way, given the kind of points that he makes.
There has been a huge switch from full-time to part-time working. If we count two part-time workers as the equivalent of one full-time worker--that is roughly right--the rise in part-time employment since 1979 compensates only for less than a quarter of the loss of full-time jobs. In terms of full-time equivalents--which is probably the fairest comparison to make--the number of people in employment in Britain has dropped by 2 million since 1979. If that is a record of which this deregulating Government are proud, perhaps those who preach flexibility should be made to suffer it.
Mr. Anthony Coombs:
Will the hon. Gentleman answer one question? Which major country in Europe has the greatest proportion of its population of working age in work?
Mr. Meacher:
The fact is that if one looks--[Interruption.] Perhaps I could just answer. The work force in employment has fallen by 2 million in full-time equivalents since 1979. I do not believe, although I do not have the figures to hand, that any other major European country has a worse performance than that.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |