HC Deb 09 May 1995 vol 259 cc553-4
7. Mr. Harry Greenway

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what new studies he is conducting into workfare; and if he will make a statement. [21622]

Mr. Portillo

None at present. The essence of any system of benefit for unemployed people must be that the recipients are actively seeking work and are willing to undertake work when it is made available, but I do not believe that the state should be the employer of last resort.

Mr. Greenway

What does my right hon. Friend make of rumours that the Labour party is planning to set a minimum wage of £180 a week? [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] Whatever they say, those are the rumours. Does my right hon. Friend recall that Beveridge said that people should be on benefit for six months, and that that should be followed by work or training for work with a view to long-term employment, as the real means of saving the lives of people in the right sort of way?

Mr. Portillo

On my hon. Friend's first point, I congratulate him on being the only person who has any idea of the level at which the Labour party would set the minimum wage, because the Labour party simply will not tell us. On his second point, of course it has been understood since the time of Beveridge that people must be willing to demonstrate their availability for work. Ultimately, that must mean that one can test that availability by providing something for unemployed people to do and expecting them to do it. I do not want to quibble about language and say whether that is workfare or not. It is not what I would call workfare, but it seems a perfectly reasonable proposition.

Mr. Eastham

Let me assure the Secretary of State that 2.5 million people in the United Kingdom desperately need a job. As for workfare, three weeks ago members of the Select Committee on Employment were in America, and we found that, because of the Reagan Government's policies, workfare did not exist there. One of the problems that has been acknowledged is the fact that the mothers of one-parent families need training and, more than anything else, some child care. Is that not a fact that the Government have never faced?

Mr. Portillo

I am not responsible for policies in the United States; I am responsible for policies in this country. I am proud of the service that the Employment Service provides to claimants, helping them to stay in touch with the labour market and become more employable and providing them with opportunities to improve their training and make themselves attractive to employers after long periods of unemployment. Those are the policies that we follow, and we have been opposed in those policies day after day and week after week by the Labour party.

Sir Ralph Howell

In view of the acknowledged success of the workstart pilot schemes devised by Professor Snower, will my right hon. Friend institute a workfare scheme, which is also supported by Professor Snower and myself?

Mr. Portillo

We are continuing with the workstart scheme. From April this year there will be 5,000 places at a cost of £30 million. The principle of the workstart scheme is that we provide a subsidy to firms to take on people who have been unemployed for a long time. My right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has announced that from April 1996 there will be a rebate of national insurance contributions for one year for employers who take on the long-term unemployed. That is another means by which we provide a subsidy to employers to take on people who have been without work for a long time.