US-UK Summit (Hansard, 15 February 1994)

§ 4. Mr. Connarty
To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what matters he intends to raise at the summit with the United States Government which might assist employment prospects in Britain.

§ Mr. David Hunt
This is a job summit and I intend to talk about jobs.

§ Mr. Connarty
I am grateful to the Minister for being brief, although he passed on no information of any worth. There are 543,000 fewer people in employment in Britain than there were a year ago and 451,000 fewer people in employment than in 1979. Surely it is time to talk to the United States about how it succeeds by having a minimum wage in most states and giving people trade union rights which we deny to employees of the same firms in this country.

§ Mr. Hunt
The hon. Gentleman said that I gave no information, but I said that I intended to talk about jobs at the forthcoming summit. In Britain we believe that three things are important: first, a stable economic framework; secondly, a flexible labour market; and, thirdly, the removal of barriers to enterprise. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that we have a great deal to learn from the United States, but not in the way that he suggests. It is a fact that over the economic cycle of OECD between 1979 and 1989, the United States saw growth of 26 per cent., which created 18.5 million jobs in that free enterprise economy. The European Community saw growth of output of 23.7 per cent., but that gave rise not to 18 million but only to 6 million additional jobs. The lesson for Europe is to go further down the route that I have suggested of deregulation, reducing bureaucracy and creating a stable economic framework, rather than going down the route that the hon. Gentleman advocated in his question. The way ahead lies with more free enterprise.

§ Sir Peter Hordern
Will my right hon. Friend confirm that in the United States, which has the most rapid growth of technology and productivity, there are no government training schemes of any kind? Does not that make nonsense of the Opposition's repeated claims that Government training schemes are the way forward?

§ Mr. Hunt
What I will say to my right hon. Friend is that when I recently visited the United States I found that the private industry councils, on which our training and enterprise councils were based, had provided the valuable lesson, to which he referred, that we must ensure that the private sector is fully involved in decisions on training. The figure that I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Chesham and Amersham (Mrs. Gillan), combined with the more than £2 billion that my Department spends on training, forms an effective public-private sector partnership.

§ Mr. Prescott
Will the Secretary of State make it clear to the summit that in 14 years of this Government we have seen unemployment treble to 3 million, that 3 million full-time employees have been replaced by 3 million part-time and self-employed workers, and that we have the worst trained and educated labour force of any country that will attend the summit? Will he also ask the Americans how they have created 18 million jobs—as he claimed—with a minimum wage provision? Will he make clear how much Britain is paying in family credit support to maintain low pay—wages subsidised by the taxpayer?

§ Mr. Hunt
Still the hon. Gentleman talks down Britain. He must think seriously before he starts to decry the achievements of this nation. I have given one. We have almost 1.4 million more people in work now than we had 10 years ago. That is a signal achievement. The lesson that we learn from the United States is not to go down the route that the hon. Gentleman and his party advocate in signing up to a socialist manifesto for the European elections. He proposes statutory works councils, a statutory minimum wage and a compulsory working week. Those are the last things that one would find in the United States. It is about time that the hon. Gentleman dropped those proposals, which would cost millions of jobs.

§ Mr. Alan Howarth
At the summit, will my right hon. Friend inquire about the progress in the employment of disabled people and the advantages to the American 793 economy in consequence of the Americans with Disabilities Act? Does he accept that in the United States of America—the land of free enterprise—it was concluded that voluntary arrangements would never sufficiently overcome discrimination against disabled people in respect of employment? Will he respond positively to the view of the Employers Forum on Disability and the Law Society, as well as the 311 hon. Members who have signed early-day motion 2, that the time has come for legislation to ban discrimination against disabled people in respect of employment in Britain?

§ Mr. Hunt
I know that my hon. Friend feels strongly about this subject. I hope that Britain can achieve more through greater opportunities for disabled people to gain access into work. As my hon. Friend knows, we have suggested proposals. We are presently considering the position following the representations that were made to us after the new access to work scheme was announced. I hope to make an announcement on that shortly. I do not think that compulsion is the route which we should follow. I believe that we must give increasing opportunities to disabled people to get into work.