House of Commons
Thursday 21 January 1999
The House met at half-past Eleven o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
TRADE AND INDUSTRY
The Secretary of State was asked--
Fairness at Work White Paper
1. Mr. David Borrow (South Ribble): What assessment he has made of the impact on families of the new rights proposed in the Fairness at Work White Paper. [65190]
The Minister of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Mr. Ian McCartney): The measures in our proposed legislation will encourage a partnership approach and a fairer workplace environment, which will benefit all employees and their families.
We are introducing nine specific measures, which will help parents and carers to balance work and family life by providing three months' parental leave for mothers, fathers and adoptive parents, by providing domestic time off in emergencies for all employees and by simplifying and improving women's maternity rights.
Our proposals were developed in consultation with the key stakeholders. Four out of five employers who commented on the White Paper's family-friendly employment proposals supported them in some measure. Our proposals to simplify the maternity provisions received almost universal support.
Mr. Borrow:
I am sure that many families will welcome the White Paper. Does my hon. Friend agree that employers in both the public and private sectors benefit from the operation of family-friendly policies? Will he influence his Department to spread best practice from both public and private sectors to employers who do not yet operate family-friendly policies?
Mr. McCartney:
I thank my hon. Friend for that question. Our fairness at work proposals have received a great deal of support throughout government, employers' organisations and trade unions, which are working together to improve best practice. The Bill will result in a significant change in culture, with the support of virtually every employer in Britain.
Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West):
Has the Minister assessed the impact of parental leave provisions on the employment of women in the future, given that his departmental assessment is that those provisions will cost £110 million?
Mr. McCartney:
The hon. Gentleman should realise that the parental leave directive was agreed by employers and trade unions, which made joint recommendations. As a consequence, the overwhelming majority of employers support the measures, which will at last give men and women a chance to balance their work responsibilities with their caring responsibilities at home.
Mr. Jim Marshall (Leicester, South):
Does my hon. Friend accept that many family members work in companies that employ fewer than 20 people and that, in some cases, those are among the worst employers in the country? In view of that, will he give further thought to reducing the number of employees in a company who are excluded from the provisions of the proposed legislation?
Mr. McCartney:
The proposals are comprehensive. My hon. Friend is asking about a different issue, which will be dealt with in the fairness at work Bill under recognition issues. There will be no change in those proposals. Employers of whatever size will have opportunities to be represented on issues of discipline and grievance procedures. Application of the proposals will be universal and parental leave has the support of employers' organisations.
Mr. Tim Boswell (Daventry):
May I take this opportunity to welcome the new team, although it is nice to have to deal with one of the old lags first. Will the Minister enlighten the House in two respects? First, will he clarify which is the authorised version of the recognition proposals--the version according to Derby, South or the version according to Hartlepool--that has finally been adopted?
Secondly, on fairness at work more generally, will the Minister explain how he can make statements about universal support and a wide welcome for his family-friendly policies when he seems incapable of producing an overall assessment of the compliance cost to British industry?
Mr. McCartney:
From one old lag to a very old lag, I thank the hon. Gentleman for welcoming my continuing presence at the Department. I may qualify for unfair dismissal under the Bill.
Opposition Members must realise that we have taken into account the effects of the proposals on all workers in Britain. The hon. Gentleman is a little off-beam. He simply cannot accept the changing culture in the workplace, with employers and employees striving for better partnership arrangements, including a partnership that reflects their rights and responsibilities. When we publish the Bill soon, he will see in the round the comprehensive nature of our proposals and the overwhelming support that they will receive from people in the workplace--both employees and sensible employers.
2. Fiona Mactaggart (Slough):
What discussions he has had with his international partners on the prospects for an international agreement on investment; and if he will make a statement. [65191]
The Minister for Trade (Mr. Brian Wilson):
Negotiations in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development of a multilateral agreement on investment are no longer taking place. The United Kingdom and the European Union as a whole have called for investment to be on the agenda of a future round of negotiations in the World Trade Organisation. Decisions on the content of that agenda will be taken at the WTO ministerial meeting later this year. In the meantime, the UK is participating in the analytical work of the WTO trade and investment working group.
Fiona Mactaggart:
Many people in my constituency who expressed concerns about the MAI process will be relieved at its collapse. They urge me to ensure that the future process is less deformed and takes better account of environmental, social and developmental issues in discussions on international investment. Will the Minister reassure me that a framework will be provided for future negotiations?
Mr. Wilson:
I endorse my hon. Friend's comments. I came late to this issue, but there was no doubt that, from the outset, the perception arose that this was a multinational conspiracy, and that it was the developed world putting one over on the less-developed world. It does not matter about the accuracy of those perceptions, the fact that they were allowed to run made it extremely difficult to secure the agreement that was being sought.
We should start with a clean sheet of paper and seek to obtain an agreement on investment rules that serves both the developed and the less developed world. We must also make it clear from the outset that it must be done on the basis of consensus, and that it must take full account of environmental and social issues, such as conditions of employment.
3. Mr. Howard Flight (Arundel and South Downs):
If he will make a statement on Her Majesty's Government's policies to assist small firms. [65192]
The Minister for Small Firms, Trade and Industry (Mr. Michael Wills):
Small and medium businesses are crucial to a successful enterprise economy, and the Government are firmly committed to stimulating the creation, competitiveness and growth of new and small businesses.
The key principles underlying the Government's approach include fostering an enterprise culture that encourages innovators and risk takers; providing and maintaining a supportive economic environment; identifying and removing barriers to growth and providing high quality business support for firms at all stages of
their development. The Government also work within the European Union to help to further these aims throughout Europe.
Mr. Flight:
I welcome the new Minister to his post. Is he aware of the recent national insurance contributions regulations, which can impose huge additional taxation on entrepreneurial businesses, specifically on approved and unapproved pension schemes when companies go to the market to float for money, and on share conversions in management buy-outs where the business is succeeding? If he is aware of that, please could he make appropriate representations to his colleagues at the Department of Social Security for some amelioration of the situation? If he is not fully aware of it, please could he look into in the matter?
Mr. Wills:
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind words of welcome. The Government are proud of their record on corporate taxation. We have conducted a major reform, and as a result corporation tax is at its lowest level ever--20 per cent. for small firms. That is the lowest level of any major European economy.
Yvette Cooper (Pontefract and Castleford):
I welcome my hon. Friend to his new position, and wish him well at the Dispatch Box. Is he aware of the importance to small firms of proper enforcement of the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998? A company in my constituency received a letter from Rentokil saying that it was prepared to continue business only on its own late terms with limited interest. Since I wrote to the Department, Rentokil has withdrawn that letter, and has promised to comply with the Act. What other action is the Department taking to ensure compliance with the Act?
Mr. Wills:
I thank my hon. Friend for her kind words of welcome. I reassure her that the Government are committed to changing the whole culture of payment. The 1998 Act was an important start, but we realise that we must do more. That is why we have established the better payment practice code. The better payment practice group contains representatives from all sides of industry, including large and small firms. It ensures that the spirit as well as the letter of the Act is implemented. I understand that Rentokil has agreed to comply with both the spirit and the letter of the Act.
Mr. Brian Cotter (Weston-super-Mare):
I welcome the Minister to his new post. Is he aware that, in a survey this month, more than 50 per cent. of small business owners said that they would not consider starting a business because of the burden of legislation they now face? Will he give an assurance that legislation this year will not affect the viability of small businesses?
Mr. Wills:
The Government are committed--[Interruption.] We are, indeed, committed to small firms and to ensuring that as many people as possible start up small firms. I am delighted to tell the House that the latest evidence from Barclays bank and National Westminster is that business start-ups are up in the third quarter of last year compared with the third quarter of 1997. It shows that the Government's policies on small firms are working.
As regards legislation, we are aware of the problems that small firms experience in complying with regulations. That is why we have set up the better regulation task force to ensure that regulations are implemented effectively and sensitively in relation to small firms and, indeed, all businesses.
Mr. John Healey (Wentworth):
An important part of the Government's policies to support small firms is help with start-ups--especially in areas such as Rotherham, where the ratio between employers and population is only about half the national average. We welcome the Government's commitment to supporting 10,000 new start-ups in the high-tech sector this year, but what steps is the Department taking to support start-ups in other industries?
Mr. Wills:
We are committed to helping all start-ups. The competitiveness White Paper is particularly dedicated to helping businesses to start up when we think that they have a high growth potential that will create jobs, productivity and growth, but, as I have said, we are committed to helping all start-ups. That is what business links are tasked with, and that is what we shall continue to deliver.
Mr. John Redwood (Wokingham):
I congratulate the Minister on his appointment. Under Labour, only a few people are born to office. Some seek office to live well, and some have office thrust upon them. As the Minister has no salary and does not do red boxes, I assume that he is in the latter category.
One of the most important things that the Government can do to assist small firms is to ensure that the law applying to companies is fully and fairly enforced on all of them, so that they can trade on equal terms. The Opposition welcome the institution of a rogue director hot line, which the Government have set up to help small firms in this context. Does the Minister agree that Mr. Derek Draper should be referred to the hot line for his violations of company law at 3C Ltd? Does he agree that new Labour establishment should be referred to it for the failure of Progress Ltd. to submit accounts for that Blairite magazine--and does he think that he should be referred to it for his failure to submit the necessary paperwork relating to one of his companies?
Mr. Wills:
I hoped that the right hon. Gentleman might start the new year with a more gracious approach, but he has reassured me nevertheless by continuing in the spirit that he adopted last year.
Of course--
Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham):
Spit it out!
Mr. Wills:
That is exactly what I am about to do, and the hon. Gentleman will welcome the answer when I give it.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |