§ 1. Mr. MullinTo ask the Secretary of State for Employment what plans he has for reducing the number of unemployed; and if he will make a statement.
§ The Secretary of State for Employment (Mr. Michael Portillo)The Government will continue to control inflation and Government spending and borrowing. Those policies have reduced unemployment by 558,000 since December 1992 to a level almost 2 percentage points below the European Community average.
§ Mr. MullinHas the Secretary of State noticed that, despite all the rhetoric, the level of public spending is the same as the level that his Government inherited from the Labour Government in 1979 and that his party is now the party of high taxation? Might not that be because it is extremely expensive to maintain the best part of 3 million people who are permanently out of work? Does he now regret advocating policies which have led to mass unemployment?
§ Mr. PortilloI am an advocate of policies that will lead to mass employment. Keeping inflation low and keeping control of public spending and public borrowing are the way to ensure that employment is created in this country. The hon. Gentleman has created a reputation for himself as a seeker after truth and justice, but when he speaks in the House on unemployment he is a propagandist and seeks to distort. His party is in favour of higher taxation and higher spending and, therefore, it is in favour of higher unemployment.
§ Sir Ralph HowellWhile welcoming the fact that unemployment is falling, is that not partly due to the trend for one regular full-time job to be turned into two part-time jobs? Should we not cease to deceive ourselves that unemployment is falling in the long term when in fact it is 65 per cent. higher than it was four years ago?
§ Mr. PortilloMy hon. Friend should look at the figures that we published last month, which showed an increase over the past year of 221,000 full-time jobs anti only 83,000 part-time jobs. My hon. Friend is too careful a student of the figures to fall in with the propaganda put out by the Labour party, which despises part-time employment even though such employment is often the ladder to full-time employment and also the way in which many people wish to structure their working lives. Even 124 if my hon. Friend had fallen in with that propaganda, the most recent figures show that the number of full-time jobs is rising faster and that they are more numerous than part-time jobs.
§ Mr. ChidgeyWill the Minister confirm that unemployment among ethnic minority groups is running at more than three times the national average? What action is his Department taking to compile evidence of racial discrimination in employment and what measures is the Secretary of State planning to eradicate the imbalance in the unemployment figures?
§ Mr. PortilloA series of questions answered recently by, I believe, my hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley (Mr. Oppenheim) drew attention to worrying levels of unemployment among ethnic minorities, which is indeed a problem. My Department tries to address its policies and to approach its client group so that opportunities for those facing discrimination of any sort—including, for example, older workers and those who have been long-term unemployed—are maximised. We shall continue to tailor our measures to provide the most effective help for all sorts of people and for those facing any prejudice, to improve the working of the labour market and to help those people to improve their employability.
§ Mr. MerchantDoes my right hon. Friend agree that a proper understanding of the employment situation requires examination of not only the very welcome fall in unemployment, but the increase in the number of people in jobs? Will my right hon. Friend confirm that an increase in that latter figure is correct?
§ Mr. PortilloYes. For some time the Opposition used to take heart—I use that phrase because they like to look for bad news—from the fact that although the number of people employed was clearly rising, according to the labour force survey, which was the internationally agreed standard, at the same time there was a reduction for several quarters according to the other survey, the work force and employment survey. Now both measures have come into line and both surveys say that there has been an increase in the number of people in work, and also a substantial increase in the number of self-employed. Unemployment is falling, and employment and self-employment are rising, so there is no bad news left for the Opposition: the only conclusion to be drawn is that the economy is doing well under the policies pursued by the Government.
§ Ms HarmanWill the Secretary of State admit that there has indeed been bad news today for the 2,900 Rumbelows staff who have learnt that they are to lose their jobs? What has he to say to them? Will he recognise that there will be no feelgood factor so long as everyone at work in this country feels that his or her job is under threat? Does not the right hon. Gentleman's complacency, which he has demonstrated yet again today, simply remind everyone that the Government are out of touch and do not care?
§ Mr. PortilloI have recently read some articles on the national minimum wage written by the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott) which made me believe that the hon. Member for Peckham (Ms Harman) had been replaced on the Front Bench. I welcome her back to her place with great relief. However, 125 in all the time that she and I have had dealings I have not felt that statistics were her strong point. Today she has demonstrated again that she will grasp at any piece of bad news that she possibly can. Why did she not tell us that B and Q has today announced more than 2,300 more jobs? Why does she talk only about jobs that have been lost and not about jobs that have been created? It is because she is interested only in creating gloom and in scoring political points; she is not interested in the British economy or in the plight of the unemployed. Why does she not take the opportunity to correct the false impression that she gives and acknowledge that when jobs are lost in some companies they are created in others, and that 226,000 extra jobs have been created over the past year? That is the fact of the matter, and that is what she should be talking about.
§ Mr. Nigel EvansHas my right hon. Friend had the opportunity to read this year's Barclays Business News, which states that last year a net figure of more than 24,000 new small businesses were started? Does he agree with me that—[Interruption.] If the hon. Member for Hemsworth (Mr. Enright) would listen, he might hear something worth listening to. Does my right hon. Friend agree that with more than 2.6 million small businesses in this country we need to encourage those enterprises and that the last thing that we want to do is heap non-wage costs on them, as the Labour party would do? Would that not destroy jobs?
§ Mr. PortilloMy hon. Friend speaks good sense, but I am afraid that he is wasting his time speaking good sense to the Labour party, which is not interested in small businesses, in enterprise culture or in creating jobs in the real world. The Labour party is interested only in propaganda and point scoring. The proof of that, as my hon. Friend says, is the fact that Labour policies for the future are to sign up to the social chapter and destroy jobs in this country, to impose costs on employers and to disregard the warning given by Mercedes-Benz this week that it would have to move jobs out of Europe because of the social chapter. The Labour party wants to move us into the social chapter so that jobs will be destroyed in Britain, too.
§ Madam SpeakerOrder. Before we make further progress, I must tell hon. Members that I hope that we shall be able to make more progress. The first question has taken almost 10 minutes.
§ Madam SpeakerOrder. I ask Back Benchers and Ministers to be brisk in their questions and their responses. Otherwise it is most unfair to Members whose questions are further down the Order Paper. I want to see better progress made in future.