| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Deregulation
4. Mr. Campbell-Savours: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the effects of his policies of deregulation or industrial competitiveness.[36749]
Mr. Freeman: Our policies to push forward deregulation and promote competitiveness are set out in the 1996 competitiveness White Paper, published last month. The White Paper has been widely welcomed by business, including the Confederation of British Industry, the Engineering Employers Federation and the Institute of Directors.
Mr. Campbell-Savours: Is not the inevitable consequence of the failure properly to regulate the destruction of not only competitiveness but the product itself? Is not that the core message that comes through the row over bovine spongiform encephalopathy?
Mr. Freeman: If the hon. Gentleman will look back to previous Labour Governments before 1979, he will find that the proposals then for draft legislation would not have affected the development of BSE, because they were to do with preventing salmonella. Developments in the rendering industry in the 1980s came about from a decision by the industry itself, not a failure to regulate or deregulate. The hon. Gentleman cannot in any way ascribe the tragic increase in BSE, and now its solution, to a failure to regulate or deregulate.
Dr. Hampson: Does my right hon. Friend make the assessment that educational performance is basic to increasing competitiveness, and that we have a long way to go in the primary sector? May we count on the speedy and extensive expansion of the network of literacy and
numeracy centres, which is one of the best initiatives that the Government have launched but which is as yet relatively unsung?
Mr. Freeman: I agree. The skills audit, which was a parallel exercise to the competitiveness White Paper, was valuable and revealing. It shows how far this country has to go in not only primary and secondary education but higher and further education. I understand my hon. Friend's point and will certainly convey it to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment.
Policy Objectives
5. Mr. Miller: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his monitoring of the effectiveness of the Government's policy objectives. [36750]
The Parliamentary Secretary, Office of Public Service (Mr. David Willetts): The Government aim at combining economic dynamism with constitutional stability and to continue--in stark contrast to the Labour party--our success in communicating those objectives.
Mr. Miller: In light of the Minister's answer, what impact will the resignation of the Paymaster General have on the Government's ability to achieve their objectives? Will that stability emerge as a result of that resignation, or will it take more resignations before stability emerges?
Mr. Willetts: The Government will carry on communicating their messages about economic success and continue protecting the British constitution from the Labour party's batty and damaging agenda.
Mr. Hawkins: Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Government's success in achieving their policy objectives was most recently emphasised by the huge inward investment in Wales announced in the last few days? Will we continue to see the successful implementation of Government economic policies, which could never have occurred if Labour's policies had been followed?
Mr. Willetts: My hon. Friend is right. More than 40 per cent. of all American and Japanese investment in Europe comes to this country, which is a vote of confidence in the Government's economic policies.
Competitiveness Unit
6. Mr. Touhig: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the competitiveness unit in his Department.[36751]
Mr. Willetts: As the recent competitiveness White Paper showed, we are doing well in world growth league tables, and our productivity is improving strongly. The best evidence of our success is our record of attracting inward investment--most recently, the Lucky Goldstar plans to invest £1.7 billion in manufacturing in Newport--the largest single inward investment ever in Europe.
Mr. Touhig: The OECD's latest employment study warned that low pay and the lack of a highly skilled
work force are combining to constrain our economic competitiveness. What are the Government doing about that?
Mr. Willetts: Our competitiveness White Paper shows that we have one of the lowest unemployment rates in Europe. In addition, within the Group of Seven we moved up from the fifth or sixth place on growth rates that we occupied in the sad days of the last Labour Government to third place in the 1980s. If the hon. Gentleman studies the White Paper, he will find the answer to his questions.
Mr. Nigel Evans: Does my hon. Friend agree that low pay is not the problem with Britain, but that no pay, through increased unemployment, would be the problem if we proceeded down the road to ruin with the social chapter, minimum wage and 48-hour directive that would be heaped upon us if the Labour party were elected to power?
Mr. Willetts: The pay of the average production line worker in this country compares very favourably with the pay that the equivalent worker would take home in Germany, France and Spain. The difference is that in Britain we have kept a grip on the extra costs imposed by Government, whereas in Germany, France and Spain, because of the social chapter, the extra costs imposed by Government are much higher. That is why Britain has lower unemployment.
Mr. Caborn: In view of what the Minister said about the OECD and the White Paper--which drew heavily on statistics from the OECD--does he agree with the OECD's statement that there is a link between our declining national competitiveness and the growth in wage inequality and job insecurity?
Mr. Willetts: I do not accept that there has been any decline in national competitiveness. The evidence assembled in successive competitiveness White Papers shows precisely that there has been a clear improvement in our position on growth per head compared with other advanced western countries. Of course, one in three of all those leaving school now go on to higher education, as against one in eight under the last Labour Government, which is significant evidence of how educational standards are improving.
European Union
7. Sir Teddy Taylor: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what is his Department's role in the co-ordination of Government Departments in respect of publicising the impact of EU membership.[36752]
The Deputy Prime Minister: My right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary has overall responsibility for co-ordinating the Government's policy towards the European Union, including the presentation of that policy.
Sir Teddy Taylor: On the day of the tragic resignation of a very sincere and truthful Minister, will the Government consider whether, in the national interest--and bearing in mind the deep divides on Europe in both parties--it might be best to resolve the issue by letting
the people decide for themselves, through a referendum, which way they wish to proceed in Europe? Would not that be the best way of co-ordinating policy and accepting the simple fact that the country belongs to the people and not to the political parties?
The Deputy Prime Minister: If my hon. Friend is suggesting that there should be a referendum on whether the United Kingdom should leave the European Union, which is how I understood his question, the answer is that that would not be compatible with Government policy. It is clearly the Government's policy that, in the over-arching and overall interests of this country, it is fundamental that we be a leading member of the European Union.
Mr. Dalyell: What can the Government or the Community do to publicise the guidelines on airport safety and the safety of aircraft, which were formulated after Lockerbie--and which, incidentally, were eloquently outlined in The Sunday Telegraph--so that at least some of the basic principles are implemented, which has not been the case so far? That question is especially relevant in view of the dreadful events in Spain and on the TWA aircraft.
The Deputy Prime Minister: The hon. Gentleman raises the latest tragic event in civil aviation. As yet, we do not know the precise causes of that tragedy. I shall certainly draw the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary to the hon. Gentleman's continuing concern in the context of the Lockerbie disaster.
Mr. Beith: How many Ministers are there left who share the view of the former Paymaster General about the Government's policy on a single currency? How many are there left who think that Britain's participation in the single currency is a genuine option? Are there enough of them to co-ordinate it?
The Deputy Prime Minister: The right hon. Gentleman has judged the Government's behaviour in the context of Liberal Democrat policy. The Government's White Paper has clearly set out our policy on the forthcoming intergovernmental conference. We have made wide-ranging statements on the fundamental issues relating to Europe. The Government's policy is perfectly clear. If a Minister cannot accept that policy, the honourable course is to resign.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |