Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Let me comment on some of the interesting points made in the debate. The hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr. Hammond) introduced his partys proposals, which were interesting to hear. It struck me that he was generous in giving way during his speech until he reached the section on his partys proposals for a new framework. At that point, he wanted to rush to the end as quickly as possible and avoid answering questions. Clearly, some interesting ideas have been put forward, but there is a great deal of vagueness on the detail, such as on what the forecast period would be. Many detailed points were raised in interventions, but, sadly, as in many other areas of Conservative policy, the detail is missing.
The contribution of the hon. Member for Twickenham (Dr. Cable) was characteristically thoughtful and helpful, not least in making some trenchant observations and criticisms of the Conservative partys policies. I enjoyed the contributions of my hon. Friends the Members for Luton, North (Kelvin Hopkins) and for South Derbyshire (Mr. Todd), who is right to draw attention to the way in which we have maintained capital investment. Total schools capital investment has risen from less than £700 million in 1997 to £6.4 billion this year. The removal of the need for classroom roofs to be supported by pit props is among the benefits of that.
I was grateful to the hon. Member for Gosport (Sir Peter Viggers) for his kind remarks. I agree with him about the decisions made in 1997, which he supported. Of course, I also support the other decisions that were made. In relation to the arrangements introduced in yesterdays legislation on dormant accounts, a long-term process is envisaged. I noticed that the House did not divide on those proposals.
The hon. Gentleman raised the question of remuneration in the financial sector. The issue is about undesirable incentives towards excessive risk taking, which we have undoubtedly seen. That is why the FSA has said that it will take more account of financial institutions remuneration structures in its risk assessment of banks, and that is the right approach.
The hon. Member for Stone (Mr. Cash) queried some of the figures. Let me make the point that the Office for National Statistics figure to which he referred was general Government gross debt rather than public sector net debt, the figure to which I referred36.5 per cent. in 2006-07, rising to 36.8 per cent in 2007-08.
We do not take risks with stability in the economy. By taking the right decisions, we can make sure that Britain continues the success of the past decade and meets the challenges of the next, building greater prosperity and fairness. The Monetary Policy Committee has been acknowledged in the debate as a cornerstone of the successful economic policy frameworks that have delivered sustained growth and, on average, lower inflation than in the euro area and the United States. We firmly support the 2 per cent. inflation target, and will support the Bank of Englands Monetary Policy Committee in the decisions it takes to ensure that inflation comes back to target within the next couple of years.
We remain fully committed to the fiscal policy objectives that we have pursued consistently since 1997. The pre-Budget report will set out how we are striking the right balance between supporting the economy on the one hand and ensuring that the Government live within their means and that the public finances remain on a
sustainable path on the other. We will continue to act on our commitment to develop secure, efficient, stable and fair financial markets. We are strengthening the financial stability framework that we put in place in 1997, which has worked well.
As my right hon. Friend the Chancellor set out yesterday, however, the Banking Billintroduced earlier todaywill enhance our ability to respond to difficulties in the financial sector by: strengthening early regulatory intervention and liquidity assistance; providing the authorities with permanent powers to deal with failing banks; strengthening depositor protection through the financial services compensation scheme; and putting in place a new statutory role for the Bank of England in preserving financial stability.
The problem for the Conservative party is that its philosophy simply does not work in times such as these. It wants to see Government withdrawingdoing less. That approach simply cannot work in such testing times [Interruption.]
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst): Order. There is too much noise in the Chamber. I need to hear the right hon. Gentlemans winding-up speech.
Mr. Timms: The approach simply cannot work in such tough times. That is why Conservative Front Benchers have got all the key judgments wrong in the past few weeks. They were wrong on Northern Rock, wrong on Bradford & Bingley, and wrong on short selling. People are noticing their approach. As the Financial Times said this morning,
they have developed a habit of calling on the Government to take action that is already in the pipeline.
The framework undoubtedly faces its toughest test since it was introduced a decade ago. It has served us extremely well. We will come through the test with renewed confidence. Over the past decade, we have taken the right decisions for a strong and stable economy. Now we are taking the right decisions for continuing prosperity. That is the right approach, and I ask the House for its support.
Question put, That the original words stand part of the Question:
The House proceeded to a Division.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Perhaps the Serjeant at Arms could start by investigating what is happening in the No Lobby and then, if necessary, investigate what is happening in the Aye Lobby.
The House having divided: Ayes 222, Noes 296.
Question, That the proposed words be there added, put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 31 (Questions on amendments), and agreed to.
Mr Deputy Speaker forthwith declared the main Question, as amended, to be agreed to.
That this House notes that the purpose of the fiscal framework is to smooth the path of the economy in the short term, to secure sustainable public finances in the medium term and to ensure that spending and taxation impact fairly between generations; recognises the success of the framework over the past decade, reversing historical under-investment in the infrastructure of public services, reducing debt from 43 per cent. of GDP in 1997 to below 37 per cent. last year and allowing borrowing to increase this year in order to support the economy; welcomes the £4 billion of tax cuts helping families and businesses this year; further notes the turmoil in the world economy and financial markets; recognises that Government is rightly focused on the turbulence in the financial markets and helping families and businesses with the twin shocks of the credit crunch and high commodity prices; and welcomes the Governments commitment to take whatever steps are necessary to protect the stability of the financial system..
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst): I have to inform the House that Mr. Speaker has selected the amendment in the name of the Prime Minister. I must also announce to the House that I am placing a 12-minute limit on Back-Bench speeches in this debate.
Chris Grayling (Epsom and Ewell) (Con): I beg to move,
That this House notes with concern the recent increases in unemployment, and the widespread forecasts that the total may rise in the months ahead; further notes that the UK already has almost five million people in receipt of out of work benefits; and calls on the Government to implement measures to help British business secure existing jobs and to improve the back to work support available to those who do become unemployed.
Before I begin my remarks, may I welcome the members of the rather extensively new Department for Work and Pensions team to their positions? There has been a big change in the departmental ranks, but we on the Conservative Benches look forward to debating with all of them in the weeks and months ahead.
Much of the media attention over the past couple of weeks has rightly been on the crisis in the financial markets, which was the subject of the earlier debate this afternoon. In the second debate today I want to turn the attention of the House to an issue that is becoming an increasingly big concern for people around the country: unemployment. None of us wants to see the unemployment rate rise. We all hope that the gloomier forecasts about unemployment prove to be over-pessimistic, but the truth is that things are getting worse, and not only in the financial services sector. Yesterday, we had 600 jobs lost at the automotive firm LSUK in Sheffield. One thousand people per day are currently joining the dole queue. Unemployment is up by more than 40 per cent. in some areas. Employment is falling; vacancies are down by 60,000, and youth unemployment stands at more than 1.25 million.
Chris Ruane (Vale of Clwyd) (Lab): The hon. Gentleman mentioned employment levels, so may I inform him that in 1997 the employment level in my constituency was 23,000 and in 2007 it was 29,000? Does he know the employment levels for his constituency over that period?
Chris Grayling: The hon. Gentleman will find that the headline figures on employment levels that the Government and Ministers have been bandying around in recent weeks do not tell the whole story, and I shall return to his remarks shortly.
Next Section | Index | Home Page |