| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Departmental Policy
14. Mr. Gapes: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what account she takes of the relationship between the levels of (a) unemployment and (b) employment in formulating her Department's policy decisions. [7064]
Mr. Forth: The Department's latest assessment shows that our policies are working; employment is rising and unemployment is falling.
Mr. Gapes: If unemployment is falling in the way in which the Minister claims, why are there 800,000 fewer people in employment than when the right hon. Member for Huntingdon (Mr. Major) became Prime Minister? Is not the truth that hundreds of thousands of workers are disappearing from the job statistics and that, despite the Government's claims, many people face greater job insecurity as a result of the Government's policies?
Mr. Forth: No. For political purposes, those such as the hon. Gentleman would like people to think that they face greater job insecurity. It is irresponsible of Labour Members to continue trying to plant that idea in people's minds. There is nothing to support that in the relevant statistics on the average length of job tenure or any other issue. The hon. Gentleman seems to imply that the labour force survey figures, endorsed by the
11 Dec 1996 : Column 276
International Labour Organisation, no less, are wrong. He cannot mean that, because I am sure that Labour Members all think that ILO-endorsed figures must be the bee's knees. Since they show that unemployment has been falling and employment is rising, I hope that the hon. Gentleman goes off and does more homework.
Mr. Nigel Evans: Irrespective of the relationship between unemployment and employment, does my hon. Friend agree that it would be damaging to unemployment and to employment prospects if this country were to adopt the social chapter or the minimum wage?
Mr. Forth: My hon. Friend is right to remind the House--I do not think we have had the reminder today--that, were this country ever to contemplate signing up to the social chapter or a statutory minimum wage, we would be likely to suffer what our continental partners who signed up to these measures have suffered. They have high and rising unemployment, as opposed to our recent experience which, I am happy to say, is of lower unemployment than most of our direct competitors and partners, and falling unemployment. Any rational man must surely conclude that there is an obvious causal connection between the social chapter and a minimum wage on the one hand and high and rising unemployment on the other.
Mr. Blunkett: I was going to wish Ministers a happy Christmas, but I suspect that the Minister of State would merely shout, "Humbug," in his usual fashion. Why did unemployment triple under this Government without a minimum wage and without the social chapter? On job tenure, why did 52 per cent. of all those who gained a job in the past year return to the unemployment register within a year? Why has the proportion of inactive males increased by 27.3 per cent. in the past five years? Why has there been a drop in the number of males with full-time jobs in the past 12 months? Is this not a Goebbels approach to statistical analysis that tries to pretend that the more inactive people there are in the labour force, and the fewer full-time jobs there are, the more beneficial it is to the nation as a whole? Is that not the real humbug of Christmas in 1996?
Mr. Forth: That proves that the hon. Gentleman's researchers have had to become more ingenious in finding some sort of figure to support his gloomy view of what is going on in this country today. The reason why unemployment rose throughout the advanced and developed countries in the 1980s was partly intensive global competition and--in this country--partly the fact that we inherited a position of grotesque structural overmanning in our industries that had to be dealt with. The Government elected in 1979 dealt with those problems, and that has put us in a competitive position that is the envy of our continental partners and competitors. That is the reality, and I invite the hon. Gentleman to consider it over his, I hope, very happy Christmas.
Sir Donald Thompson: How is it that the Opposition believe the figures when they get worse, but disbelieve them when they get better? Do their prejudices extend
11 Dec 1996 : Column 277
to our service industries, about which they are constantly sniping? [Interruption.] Snipe, snipe, snipe. That sector is where new jobs will come from.
Mr. Forth: Yes, I agree, and it is perhaps time that we did some snipe-shooting. My hon. Friend made an important point. The service sector is a vital part of our economy--one that is growing successfully in leisure, tourism and financial services--and it improves our international competitiveness by leaps and bounds. It is putting us in a strong position to export and to attract inward investment. All these factors put together give rise to our optimism and positivism, and lead me to wonder where Opposition Members get their negativism and the gloom and doom that they peddle every time we have Education and Employment questions.
Mr. Beggs: Will the Minister seek co-operation from other Departments and officials throughout the United Kingdom in dealing with planning applications so that the Government's policy of keeping jobs in rural areas can be achieved? Will he request that sympathetic consideration be given to those who want to start new play groups in rural areas?
Mr. Forth: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for making that important point. I can assure him that we work constantly with our colleagues in the Department of the Environment and in the territorial offices to ensure that all our policies help the rural areas in every possible way and do not hinder them. It is easy--rightly--to become absorbed by the problems of inner cities and we must never forget that the problems of dispersed and remote rural areas are just as serious and deserve every bit of policy attention. We will continue to give that attention.
Assisted Places
15. Mr. Hanson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what plans she has to review provision for assisted places in 1997-98. [7065]
Mr. Hanson: If the Minister has no plans for a review, perhaps she should take time to consider whether any changes should be made. Does she agree that the £140 million that is planned to be spent on subsidising 40,000 people on assisted places schemes next year could be far better spent on reducing class sizes for 400,000-plus five, six and seven-year-olds? Will the Conservative party make time for a review next year and try to take care of the many rather than the few?
Mrs. Gillan: I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman. Everyone knows that Conservative Members believe that the assisted places scheme offers a valuable choice to many parents throughout the country. The scheme plays an integral part in our policy of choice and diversity. The Labour party's proposals to phase out the assisted places scheme would yield about £5 million in the first year, which could possibly deliver 200 teachers into the system,
11 Dec 1996 : Column 278
meaning that the Labour party would weigh the interests of 200 more primary teachers against those of the 10,000 children whom they would deprive of the scheme.
Sir Patrick Cormack: Does my hon. Friend accept that, excellent as the assisted places scheme is, it is still nowhere near as good as the direct grant scheme that it replaced?
Mrs. Gillan: The assisted places scheme is an extremely good scheme, but we all know what happened to the direct grant scheme and who was responsible for abolishing those schools.
Training Opportunities (Young People)
16. Mrs. Fyfe: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what plans she has to extend training opportunities for those aged under 25 years. [7066]
Mr. Paice: The White Paper "Learning to Compete", published on 9 December, builds on the exciting range of opportunities for young people. It sets out a learning entitlement up to national vocational qualification level 3, through a choice of routes including national traineeships and further expansion of modern apprenticeships, with special measures for those who need extra help to get started.
Mrs. Fyfe: If the Labour party can guarantee real training with meaningful qualifications for a quarter of a million under-25s, what excuse does the Minister have for the betrayal of under-25s in the past 17 years?
Mr. Paice: The hon. Lady would have done the House a greater service by drawing attention to, and admitting, the fact that Labour party policy is an absolute sham. The Labour party proposes to give people the chance to study only to NVQ level 2, which is equivalent to five GCSEs, when already nearly half our young people achieve that while they are at school. The Labour party is therefore merely extending the opportunity to become semi-skilled, in contrast with our proposals, announced on Monday, which will entitle all young people to study for a level 3 qualification as an entry into higher education or to become a qualified craftsman, technician or supervisor, with a real platform for a future career.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |