Off-the-job Training (Hansard, 25 May 1993)

§ 3. Mr. Gerrard
To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what information she has on the extent of off-the-job training in the south-east.

§ Mr. Michael Forsyth
More than 700,000 employees in London and the south-east have received off-the-job training since last autumn.

§ Mr. Gerrard
Is it not the case that only three quarters of firms in the south-east are providing off-the-job training for their employees, and that in 1992 it averaged about two days per employee? Is that not a very poor record compared with that of many other European countries? Is it not also the case that the voluntary provision of training is failing, and that we need to require employers to provide appropriate training for their employees?

§ Mr. Forsyth
The hon. Gentleman is quite wrong. One of the interesting things that have happened is that training has held up despite the difficulties facing firms as a result of the recession. We shall not take any lectures on the importance of training from a party that has consistently opposed employment training and youth training, no doubt at the behest of its trade union paymasters.

§ Mr. Evennett
May I congratulate my hon. Friend on his determination to increase the number of people taking job-related training? Will he confirm that, in the south-east in particular, manufacturing firms expect to increase their training budgets, or at least to keep them at the same level? Surely that is the way to proceed. Does he agree that we must have more training, and that manufacturing firms in the south-east are proving that they believe in training and are determined to invest in the future?

§ Mr. Forsyth
I entirely agree with everything that my hon. Friend has said. He is right to emphasise the importance of raising the skill levels in the work force if we are to compete with countries from the Pacific rim, Japan and others, which are the key to prosperity. That is why it is so important that the private sector itself takes the initiative, why we are promoting Investors in People and why we reject the state-imposed regimes which Labour Members favour but which would add to industry's lack of competitiveness in Europe.

§ Mr. Tony Lloyd
The Minister mentioned the Investors in People programme. Has not it been a dismal failure, although it gives us no satisfaction to say it? Is it not the case that less than a third of the 10,000 whom it was hoped would sign up have done so? Is it not the truth that, despite what the Minister said, during the recession training decreased in the private sector? Have not the Government cut their training budget? Now that we know there is to be a round of public expenditure cuts, will the Minister stand at the Dispatch Box and tell us whether the Department of 738 Employment will once again sacrifice its training budget and the nation's needs when the Chief Secretary to the Treasury does his work?

§ Mr. Michael Forsyth
Could we just for once hear an Opposition Front-Bench spokesman welcoming good news for Britain? The Investors In People programme covers 250,000 employees, and many organisations are committing themselves to it. Instead of running down Investors In People, why does not the hon. Gentleman join the Government and everyone else who wishes this country well, and encourage people to take advantage of that excellent scheme?