§ Mr. Kilroy-SilkI beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 9, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely,
The potential loss of 1,000 jobs at the Otis Elevator plant in Kirkby through the Government's threat to withhold temporary employment subsidy.This is clearly specific, in that the Government are threatening to withhold TES from Otis Elevator in Kirkby because it it alleged that the Otis company in London will be in breach of the pay guidelines if it implements the nationally agreed settlement for engineers. The Otis Elevator Company firmly denies that it is in breach of the pay guidelines.It is clearly an important issue, since 1,000 jobs are at risk. That is important any time, anywhere. It is extremely important in a high unemployment area such as Kirkby, which has witnessed many massive redundancies in the past few 1667 years. Its importance there cannot be exaggerated. Indeed, the loss of those jobs would be catastrophic. It is extremely important to the men and their families, to the company and to the town that the Government should not take any steps which would in any way jeopardise their jobs.
It is important, too, that we should have the opportunity to discuss the fact that the Government are threatening the company and its workers with discretionary powers which we have not debated or approved and pay guidelines which are not statutory and with which many of us, at least on the Government Benches, profoundly disagree.
Moreover, it is a fact that the Kirkby plant has settled within the pay guidelines. It seems totally unreasonable and unfair that the workers in my constituency should be victimised and punished for action which has been taken elsewhere, to which they are not a party and from which they will derive no benefits.
The urgency of this case is demonstrably clear. One thousand jobs are in jeopardy. The company has said clearly and without any qualification that redundancy notices have already been issued and will take effect from next week or in 10 days. The urgency does not need to be debated. What needs to be debated is the urgency of the Government's giving a decision, and giving it in favour of the Kirkby factory. There is no reason why the Government should not announce now that they will grant temporary employment subsidy to the Otis Elevator factory in Kirkby. A debate on this application will give the Government the opportunity to announce that decision.
Therefore, I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment so that the House may urgently discuss this specific and important matter.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Member for Ormskirk (Mr. Kilroy-Silk) gave me notice before 12 o'clock today that he might seek to make an application under Standing Order No. 9 this afternoon.
The hon. Gentleman asks leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that he thinks should have urgent consideration, namely, 1668
The retusal of Her Majesty's Government to grant temporary employment subsidy to Otis Elevator, Kirkby, so endangering 1,000 jobs.I listened carefully to what the hon. Gentleman said. I remind the House, as I have done on many occasions, that it is for me to decide not whether a matter is important but whether it should take precedence over the business either today or tomorrow. I am afraid that I cannot grant the hon. Gentleman's application.