Commons Chamber

Wednesday 10th December 2025

(began 1 month, 2 weeks ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
11:34
11:34
11:35
11:35
11:36
11:36
11:36
11:36
11:37
11:37
11:38
11:38
11:39
11:39
11:40
11:40
11:40
11:41
11:42
11:42
11:43
11:43
11:43
11:44
11:44
11:44
11:44
11:45
11:45
11:46
11:46
11:47
11:47
11:47
11:48
11:49
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:51
11:51
11:51
11:52
11:52
11:52
11:53
11:53
11:53
11:54
11:55
11:55
11:55
11:55
11:55
11:56
11:56
11:56
11:57
11:57
11:58
11:58
11:59
11:59
12:00
12:00
12:02
12:02
12:03
12:04
12:04
12:05
12:05
12:06
12:08
12:08
12:09
12:09
12:10
12:11
12:11
12:13
12:13
12:14
12:15
Ed Davey Portrait Rt Hon Ed Davey MP (Kingston and Surbiton, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Sir Ed Davey, leader of the >> Sir Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats. >> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Can I join the Prime Minister in offering join the Prime Minister in offering our condolences to the family and friends of Lance Corporal George Hooley, who died on duty in Ukraine. Our thoughts and prayers are with them. Can I congratulate Glastonburys Lando Norris on becoming the 11th British driver to win the Formula One World Championship, and also everyone at McLaren's in Woking who powered him to the title Mr Speaker.

President Trump's new national security strategy is a deeply alarming document, quite apart from the irony of President Trump accusing others of trampling on basic principles of democracy, it repeats far right tropes of civilizational erasure and threatens that the US government will cultivate resistance in Europe. No wonder Vladimir Putin has welcomed that strategy. So, will the Prime Minister pick up the phone and make it clear to President Trump that any attempts to interfere with our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

democracy are totally unacceptable? The.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I join him in congratulating Lando for the incredible win? And I Lando for the incredible win? And I went down to a Woking on Monday to see some of the team at McLaren, and they're all wearing the pride and they're all wearing the pride that that brought with them. On the question of Europe and President
12:16
12:16
12:17
12:18
12:19
12:19
12:20
12:21
12:21
12:22
12:23
12:23
12:23
12:24
12:25
12:25
12:26
12:26
12:27
12:27
12:28
12:29
12:29
12:29
12:30
12:30
12:31
12:31
12:32
12:33
12:34
12:34
12:35
12:35
12:36
12:37
12:37
12:38
12:39
12:39
None Portrait Ten Minute Rule Motion: Data Publication and Quality (Immigration, Nationality and Country of Birth)
-

12:40
Katie Lam Portrait Katie Lam MP (Weald of Kent, Conservative)
-
-
To move that leave be given to bring in a bill to make provision about the collection and publication of data on immigration status, nationality and country of status, nationality and country of birth of certain persons relating to users of certain public services, claimants of certain benefits, the prison population and arrests. To require that such data is published at least once per calendar year. To require the Secretary of State to review the quality and consistency of any such data collected and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

purposes. Hear, hear. I firmly believe that for nearly three decades, migration to this three decades, migration to this country has been too high and remains so. Every election winning manifesto since 1974 has promised manifesto since 1974 has promised to reduce migration. And yet since 1997, with the unsurprising 1997, with the unsurprising exception of 2020, net migration has run at more than 100,000 people per year. Like governments before per year. Like governments before it, the last government promised to reduce migration.

As my right hon. Friend the Member for North West Essex has said, it failed to do so. To paraphrase my hon. Friend the Member for West Suffolk. Mass migration is the single biggest broken promise in British politics, and the single biggest reason that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

trust in our politics is in such short supply. Yeah. But whatever we believe, it is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

But whatever we believe, it is an objective fact that our national conversation around immigration is often hampered by shockingly poor often hampered by shockingly poor data. When that data even exists at all. My hon. Friend, the Member for all. My hon. Friend, the Member for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston has worked for years to highlight this problem as the Migration Observatory, a group of academics at the University of Oxford noted just last week. Migration data is plagued by gaps and quality issues which reflect structural and long term problems with data silos, disorganised databases and failures to keep complete records.

All in all, the Migration Observatory identified ten areas of public policy which a lack of high quality migration data is currently undermining. All of this starts with the fundamental question how many people are in this country and who are they? And the truth is that we do not know. Remarkably, the United Kingdom does not have a proper system of entry and exit checks. We do not record the number of people arriving in the country, or the number of people actually leaving.

The migration figures that we see published every year are just best guesses. When people do arrive here, we don't have comprehensive data on exactly where they've come from or where in the country they might be moving to. Our best guess for this comes once a decade at the census. But given the scale and pace of migration since the last census in 2021, this information will now almost certainly be hopelessly out of date. Recently, we saw the office for National Statistics issue new figures on net migration for 2024.

Using these new methods, the ONS now thinks that emigration of British nationals had been underestimated. Underestimated by two thirds of a million people between 2021 and 2024. For years, policy in this country was made on the basis of the old guess, which showed British national emigration running at below average. These new figures invite serious questions about why so many British nationals, the vast majority of them young, are leaving this country. And yet, for years, the official data showed that there was no such problem.

And so the conversation in this place never proceeded beyond the level of anecdote. When people do arrive here, we know far too little about them. We don't know the number of foreign criminals who've been awarded visas since 2021 or where they've come from. We don't have the full information on how many people moved between the asylum system and the formal legal migration system. In the case of EU migrants, we don't know why these people are coming here or how many of them already have EU settled status.

All of this concerns the flow of migrants coming to this country, not those already here. When it comes to assessing the contribution of migrants who are already here, our understanding is even worse. In 2020, data about income tax and National Insurance contributions broken down by nationality was discontinued. We have no such data by visa type. We have little data on the earnings or employment rate of migrants by immigration status, visa type or nationality. Following the collapse of the Labour Force Survey, we don't know the immigration status of benefits claimants for benefits other than Universal Credit, which makes up about half of our working age benefit spend.

When it comes to Universal Credit, we don't have detailed nationality data on claimants. We don't know how much migrants are costing this country in legal aid or in translation services. We don't know what proportion of eligible foreign nationals are receiving pension benefits. We don't know the total cost in any given year to the NHS, or to state education of migrants pre and post indefinite leave to remain status. We don't have full official figures on the total number of foreign nationals in social housing, or where those in social housing were born.

So without data on what migrants are contributing to the public purse and what they might be costing, we cannot possibly have a full and informed conversation about the relative impact of migration on the taxpayer. In turn, we cannot make fully informed decisions about who should come here, from where and under what conditions. Of course, fiscal contributions are not the only important measure when it comes to data on migrant crime. The picture is just as patchy as my right hon. Friend the Member for Newark has repeatedly highlighted.

Well, we do have, albeit outdated, figures on the prison population by nationality. We still do not have full official data on the number of people arrested by nationality, the immigration status of prisoners, or the number of people sentenced but not imprisoned by nationality. The indicative data that we do have about migrant crime has been obtained via Freedom of Information Act requests, and is often incomplete or disputed because it is not released on a consistent basis. It is also very hard to assess over time.

Yet in the absence of any alternative, this is the basis on which we must conduct the debate. We have no information at all on the nationality or immigration status of those referred, to prevent a glaring gap in our ability to combat extremism and all this. Everything that I've said relates only to the UK's legal population. We do not have and have not had for some time, a credible estimated figure about the number of people who are in this country illegally. There has been no official attempt to combine data sets.

We could use utility usage, health restrictions, census data, grocery purchases to establish this number. So we cannot know what pressure this might be putting on public services or on infrastructure. And we cannot properly assess how much money needs to be invested into our border force and immigration enforcement. We don't have any information about internal deportation targets within immigration enforcement and Border Force, and what proportion of those targets are being met? We don't know what happens to asylum seekers who've been refused asylum, but have not been returned to their home countries.

We don't know how often and in what context human rights based claims are made to thwart removal and how often those claims are successful, particularly as we don't yet have access to the judgements of the first tier immigration tribunal. How can we possibly have a well-informed conversation about illegal migration without a full understanding of the facts? Those of us who wish to end the era of mass migration are often the loudest voices in calling for more data. Yet those who believe that this period of mass migration has been a good thing for our country should be the biggest supporters of more comprehensive and accurate data on the impact of migration.

We are often told, including in this House, that the British people have been misled or misinformed about the true impact of immigration on our country, that mass migration has, in fact, been better for this country than many believe. If that is the case, then let us see it in the data. If, as many members on the benches opposite and to my left may claim, the majority of migrants are a net fiscal positive, then let us see it in the data. If, in fact, migrants are no more likely to commit crime than British nationals, then let us see it in the data.

Based on the indicative data that we do have, I believe this is exceedingly unlikely. But until we have access to the full facts, the conversation about migration in this place and across our country will necessarily fall short. There is no good reason to oppose a better informed national conversation around immigration. More data and evidence would allow us to make better decisions about who should be allowed to come to and stay in our country, and in what numbers. It would allow us to truthfully assess the impact of different migrant groups, moving us on from generalisations about the whole of migration, and towards a more productive conversation about the relative contributions of specific migrant groups by nationality and visa type.

And most importantly of all, it would provide transparency for the British people and enable more detailed scrutiny of any government's policy on migration in countries like Denmark, where migrant contribution data is published regularly. The government trusts its citizens to consider the data, consider their policies and in turn, to make up their own minds about whether or not they support the action being taken. After decades of broken promises, this is the very least. The British people deserve the right and ability to scrutinise in full the migration policy of their elected government.

I sincerely hope that Ministers in the Home Office and across government will recognise this, and will work with the ONS to produce a more comprehensive and accurate data set in the years ahead. Immigration policy cannot be set in isolation. The people living in this country are this country, and so the flow of people coming here necessarily has an impact on every area of our lives. Governments do not exist independently of the nations that they govern, and nations do not exist independently of the people who constitute them.

They are wholly and entirely a result of those people, their collective contributions and their collective failings. Immigration policy, therefore, is upstream of our public finances, the health of our public services, the cost of housing, the quality of our schools, the population of our prisons, the cohesion of our communities, and the strength of our democracy. The very least that we can do when discussing an issue of such enormous importance, is to ensure that public policy is properly

**** Possible New Speaker ****

informed by the full facts. The hon. Member have leave to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The hon. Member have leave to bring in Bill. The question is that the hon. Member have leave to bring in the Bill. As many of that in the Bill. As many of that opinion, say aye. The contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. The ayes

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Who will prepare to bring in the bill? Neil O'Brien. Chris Philp. Claire Coutinho. Matt Vickers. Sarah Bool. Lewis Cocking. Jack Rankin. Harriet Cross. Peter Bedford Andrew Snowden Bradley

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thomas. And myself, Mr. speaker. Katie Lam.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Katie Lam.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Katie Lam. Yes. Very good. Yeah. Yeah, yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes. Very good. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Data, publication and quality. Immigration. Nationality and country of birth. Bill.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

country of birth. Bill. Second Reading. What day? Friday. The 16th of January.
12:51
12:51
Nigel Huddleston Portrait Nigel Huddleston MP (Droitwich and Evesham, Conservative)
-
-
labour. Most economists, and indeed most sensible people, understand that when you increase the price of something, there is less demand for it. By increasing the cost of jobs, Labour caused unemployment. And yet this year, fully aware of rising unemployment, the Chancellor remarkably came back for more. And with her colleagues in the Cabinet, she is imposing even more costs on business through the unemployment bill, with more regulations and a whole new set of taxes like the tourism tax. These decisions will do even more damage.

Snatching the opportunity of a first job, a seasonal job, or an entire career

**** Possible New Speaker ****

from young people and indeed people of all ages? Yes, indeed. Particularly the tourism tax.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Particularly the tourism tax. There was a question I posed to the government only a couple of months ago when the Minister said, and I ago when the Minister said, and I quote, that we think they've been taxed enough. Is it a surprise to this side of the House, then, that we see a tourism tax is being

**** Possible New Speaker ****

we see a tourism tax is being brought forward? Yes. Yes, indeed. Minister. Friends make an important point because I was here to hear that not because I was here to hear that not only did he say there were no plans to bring in a tax, but clearly there were, because a few weeks later one was brought in. But he did say that the sector has been taxed enough. Well, I agree with that, Minister. I don't therefore agree with the Chancellor.

Now, of course, not content with the damage to businesses and jobs done in last year's Budget, the Chancellor this year decided to go even further in her latest Budget and went for the pockets of working people directly by making them pay more tax. A clear manifesto breach. Working people are paying the price for this government's inability to tackle the ballooning welfare bill, and their inability to control the unions and their backbenchers. The Budget was not about the economy, it was all about internal party management.

It is appalling that we have a Chancellor who appears to be willing to see thousands of our constituents losing their jobs as long as she saves hers. In short, the Budget was a £26 billion tax hike on working people in order to pay for Labour's welfare spending. Last year's Budget destroyed jobs. This latest one disincentivized work. It takes a special kind of incompetence to destabilise both the demand and the supply of labour simultaneously. But this government

**** Possible New Speaker ****

has somehow managed to do just that. I'm grateful. Isn't the truth here that we

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Isn't the truth here that we have a government that's got no business experience and thinks that you can simply push the costs down you can simply push the costs down to business, squeeze and squeeze them and they'll they'll pass the prices on to customers. They'll

**** Possible New Speaker ****

have no customers. They'll be no businesses. There'll be no jobs. Yeah, absolutely. My right hon. Friend is making a really important point. It's quite remarkable, following the Budget to hear Labour MPs go to their constituents saying, oh, we've helped you out. We've reduced the costs. Talk to them. They'll find it was the very opposite of that.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

On that point, I thank the shadow. Secretary of State for giving way. He, like me, will have been out in our constituency speaking to out in our constituency speaking to small businesses, and I'm sure Labour MPs would have been over the weekend to a local publican, told weekend to a local publican, told me that she was going to have to lay off staff in January because of the extra taxes that this Chancellor came back for, more Chancellor came back for, more taxes that she said she wouldn't do.

Since the last Budget, I just wonder whether the shadow Secretary

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of State had those experiences in hospitality businesses that employ particularly young people. Sir? Secretary of State?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes, my hon. Friend is absolutely correct. The hospitality sector has been particularly hard hit by Labour's damaging economic hit by Labour's damaging economic policies. Many of us out on Small Business Saturday spoke to many of those businesses, and unfortunately, those businesses, and unfortunately, I think UK hospitality fear that there could be a further 100,000

**** Possible New Speaker ****

job losses because of their policies. Yes. Sir Bernard.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Sir Bernard. Most grateful to him. Could he? Could I draw his attention to Matt Allum, who runs the cricketers and two other pubs in my constituency who is devastated by this Budget, having been clobbered last year with the NIC increases, but that our policy of relieving smaller businesses and high street businesses of business rates would make all the difference. And could

**** Possible New Speaker ****

you persuade the government to Excellent. Well, exactly. I suspect during today's debate we'll hear many names of great pubs. I'll try and visit as many of them as I can, as visit as many of them as I can, as long as they're as long as they still survive. Indeed. But he is absolutely right. There is an alternative course of action here. alternative course of action here. There is a conservative, pro-business economic policy that we can advocate. And I'll come on to some of the numbers later on in my speech and show the appalling impact, in particular on pubs.

So

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in certainly. Yeah. The hon. Gentleman for giving

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The hon. Gentleman for giving way and yes, I was out, like many, I'm sure of my colleagues on these benches talking to small high street businesses in my constituency in Saltaire specifically, and for many of them, specifically, and for many of them, the permanent reduction in business rate announced by the Chancellor is rate announced by the Chancellor is very welcome. And they are not hit by property re-evaluations and will be getting reductions in their business rates and welcome the levelling of the playing field with the online giants.

How would he be proposing to pay for his party's unfunded proposals?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Stafford. Yeah, I suggest the hon. Lady talk to those those constituents talk to those those constituents again. And I don't think you have to be a sparkling economist to work out that when something's gone up, out that when something's gone up, it's higher. It's not lower. They're not getting a permanent reduction in business rates. The numbers are going up. That's basic numbers are going up. That's basic economics and facts. And of course, I'll just make a little bit of I'll just make a little bit of progress and then I'll give way to the hon.

Gentleman. So in its part time seasonal and temporary workers, young workers and people in sectors such as food production, tourism, retail and hospitality are particularly being hit. But we perhaps should not be surprised for this. As many hon. Members have already pointed out, Labour just don't understand economics. They

**** Possible New Speaker ****

don't understand business and they don't understand incentives. I'll of. All.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

All. Jim Shannon for bringing this forward. This is an incredibly important debate. And and government with respect to government with respect to government has a has a lot to answer in the points that are put forward. Can I put a point on the forward. Can I put a point on the Northern Ireland agri food sector, in particular the licensing process, how they bring people in is so laborious. It's putting people off. It means that when we need the workers in agri food sector, we're not getting them.

So the time is right to put forward the case for hospitality. Can I put forward the case for the Northern Ireland agri food sector, who are also on the grid pressure, and this system from government will disadvantage him?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Absolutely. The the hon. Gentleman is making a really important point here because of course, we see the particularly hard hit where the numbers are easily available in the hospitality sector, and there's a lot of reports going out about the job reports going out about the job losses there. But the whole sector's multiple sectors will be hit by these changes. The hon. Gentleman has also pointed out it's not just the tax hit, it's the regulatory burden. And as I just re-instates this point, this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

re-instates this point, this government doesn't understand business. Yes. Scott Arthur thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I do thank you for giving way. In 2023, just under 4600 licensed premises closed

**** Possible New Speaker ****

down right across the UK was the that? Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Now the pandemic was largely to blame for that, which is precisely why, in order to recover from the why, in order to recover from the pandemic, this government's spent £400 billion to help save lives and £400 billion to help save lives and livelihoods, including supporting the hospitality sector. So I'm afraid I don't accept the premise afraid I don't accept the premise there. Now, few members of the Cabinet, of course, have ever worked in the private sector, and I don't think any of them have.

Actually, I don't think any of them have actually run their own business. Maybe one the hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Gentleman. Perhaps you can correct me. Party opposite will know what my background and work career because background and work career because I mentioned I used to be a teacher. Every single time I would just ask the gentleman to consider the fact the gentleman to consider the fact that many members of his party talk about education and they haven't been teachers. Would he not recognise that? Actually, as recognise that? Actually, as members of Parliament, we come here taking with us the experience of people that we speak to.

He spoke about the fact that members about the fact that members opposite get out and speak to businesses. Would he not recognise that we come to this House with the experiences of those people we represent? So the argument that because we haven't ever worked in the business that we can't talk about business is nonsense, Chris.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

You mean you may not have to you may not have to work in business, but I do expect every member of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

but I do expect every member of Parliament to come to this House Yes. It was. It was a wonderful scene.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It was. It was a wonderful scene. As my hon. Friend will remember to see the King and the president of the United States sit down at of the United States sit down at the Windsor only recently, and what was particularly striking was on the British side. Only the king had the British side. Only the king had run a business. He ran the Duchy of Cornwall. Nobody else had run a business on the American side.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Everybody had run a business. Isn't that quite a stark identification? I would, and. I think I think the right hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think I think the right hon. Gentleman, again is correct. You know, having people who run a business is good for government. business is good for government. I'm sorry to hear the hon. Members opposite don't believe that their Cabinet would be better if there were a few more pro-business people were a few more pro-business people in them. I can assure him. I can assure him most of his constituents agree. So I will give way. Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

agree. So I will give way. Yes. I do thank the hon. Gentleman. I do have some affection for him. And he has a lovely smile. But on the on that same point, can he tell me how many members of the Shadow Cabinet, or indeed any one of the opposition MPs who serve on their front bench, have ever had to sustain a long term position on a low paid, insecure work raising a family, because those voices are equally important in this debate.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. I have. A great deal of affection for the hon. Gentleman as well. We go the hon. Gentleman as well. We go back quite a long way for when we're elected, I will tell I will tell him. And it's one thing that tell him. And it's one thing that actually, I think on both sides of this house, we do need to recognise there are people on both sides of there are people on both sides of this house who come from quite poor backgrounds, from modest backgrounds, and actually trying to play that as if this benches are play that as if this benches are all full of posh people and the opposition benches are not, is simply not true.

And I think the hon. Gentleman is doing disservice to the to to, to the House to try

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and give an alternative impression. Yes. Simon Hoare one. State school boy to another state school boy and the first of our families to go to university. Would you agree with me that we all have gaps in our knowledge, have gaps in our knowledge, understanding and experience? But the way that you fill them is that you ask the people who practice in you ask the people who practice in that sector, exactly, listen to what they have to say. Don't just tell them they're wrong, that you're right because you're the you're right because you're the government, and change.

When the here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Again, the hon. Gentleman put it incredibly well, and to say it's an onus of all of us in this place to onus of all of us in this place to make sure we do listen. We do learn and we advocate on behalf of those who are making. I'll give away one

**** Possible New Speaker ****

who are making. I'll give away one more time, and then I'll make a little bit of progress. And turn your backs. Thank the hon. Member for giving

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank the hon. Member for giving way. And I think with affection, the times that we've stuck together on the Politics Midlands sofa, while we're being nice to the hon. while we're being nice to the hon. Member, I wonder if he would tell us, for the benefit of the House, how many zero hours work has he

**** Possible New Speaker ****

spoken to in the preparation of his speech today? Yeah. Go on sir. Yeah, I've spoken to a few zero

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, I've spoken to a few zero hour workers and I can tell you many of them are not happy with the policy because you're going to make some of them unemployed, right. So some of them unemployed, right. So a few, as I said, Mr. Speaker, the one thing that we do know about Labour, of course, is that they do Labour, of course, is that they do know how to spend other people's money. They just have no idea how it's created, how wealth is created, how the money that pays for our public services is generated in the first place.

But they certainly know how to tax and spend. We've seen tax increases of £66 billion in just two budgets, and tens of billions of pounds in additional debt. As Margaret Thatcher said, the problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money. I'll give way to them. Well.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. Members, hon. Members on the opposition.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

on the opposition. Sorry, Mr. Hoare, your voice is carrying, and I don't need to hear it because.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it because. It didn't carry all the way to me. The is carried to me. That's why

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm defending you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. speaker, the hon. Gentleman and honourable and right hon. Members on the opposition benches often talk about wealth creators. Now, of course, business people are wealth creators. Entrepreneurs are wealth creators. But what do you agree with me? That wealth is also created by the public services that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

we need, by the infrastructure that for. So, Secretaries of State, I.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

So, Secretaries of State, I. Think the gentleman's final words are quite how are they paid for the top 1% of income? Taxpayers for the top 1% of income? Taxpayers in this country pay 29% of all income tax. There are estimates that Labour government policies have led to 16,000 of the have led to 16,000 of the wealthiest people in this country, leaving the. That's the equivalent of a third to a half a million of of a third to a half a million of average taxpayers.

The burden, therefore, is spread on the others. So instead of demonising some of the wealthiest people who pay incredibly and make an incredible contribution towards our public

**** Possible New Speaker ****

services, maybe they should thank them instead. Yes. It's not just the wealthy people who have left as well. We know from who have left as well. We know from the ONS data that 257,000 Brits have gone when it was supposed to have gone when it was supposed to be estimated at 70,000, of which about two thirds to three quarters were under the age of 35. So we are were under the age of 35. So we are losing young people to the rest of the world because of the implications of not being able to get a job in this country.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

get a job in this country. Now, the Secretary of State, yes. Yet more common sense coming from this side of the chamber. I agree with the hon. Gentleman. And of course, it's young people in particular who do not have confidence in this government and are fleeing. Mr. speaker, it's quite clear I don't have a particularly high regard for Labour's economic competence, but even I didn't expect them to be running out of money quite so quickly. I expected them to be bad.

I didn't expect them to be this bad. And it doesn't give me any joy or political joy to say that because it's our constituents, my constituents, their constituents, who are paying the price for Labour's incompetence with higher taxes and in many cases, with their jobs and livelihoods, I genuinely wish they were better at government, but that is wishful thinking, because here's another hard truth about Labour. Despite the party's name, despite the false advocacy for working people, every Labour government since the Second World War has left office with unemployment higher than when they started, every one always leaving the Conservatives to clear up their mess.

While we conservatives know the best thing you can do for working people, the best thing you can do to lift people out of poverty is help them get a job. And the Conservatives have a far, far better record than Labour in doing that. Between 2010 and 2024, the conservative led government oversaw the creation of 4 million jobs. That's an average of 800 a day. Mr. speaker, this government is destroying them by the tune of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hundreds of jobs per day. Yeah. I thank. The Secretary of State. For giving way. Well, we know

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For giving way. Well, we know what the government wants to do to support tourism and hospitality. It wants to get those on welfare to wants to get those on welfare to work in that sector, despite the fact that some of those on welfare are there because the government are there because the government has taxed tourism and welfare. Does he think that socialism or incompetence?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

incompetence? I think the hon. Gentleman. Knows what my answer to that is. The the irony. It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad. Of of the policy that they announced over the weekend to put government subsidies in to creating jobs, when actually they could do a better job at running the economy and there would be created themselves. It's something I will come on to again in a moment. Mr. speaker, in terms of the record of the last government, of course, we also took millions of people out of paying income tax.

We increased the tax free allowance from £6,475 that we inherited under Labour, to £12,570. And as soon as we were in a position following the pandemic to start reducing taxes, that's exactly what we did. Reduce the National Insurance on workers from 12% to 10%, and then again from 10% to 8%, with a plan to eliminate employee national insurance altogether and, of course, align the thresholds. Labour talked about backing business when in opposition, but they're doing no such thing in government. In the Budget, the Chancellor had the brass neck to say she was helping the hospitality industry with business rates.

In reality, hotels, pubs, theme parks, restaurants, cafes all seeing an increase, an increase in their business rates, as are the wider retail and leisure sectors. Investment in hospitality and tourism is already being paused or diverted overseas due to the UK's rising costs and regulatory environment. I'll give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend, Shadow Secretary of State for giving way. Is he as concerned as I am that a typical pub in my constituency is paying around 2500 pounds per month more in cost compared to 12 months ago. And just to put this briefly into context, to cover those costs, into context, to cover those costs, assuming a couple go in and spend £100, that's 25 additional sittings £100, that's 25 additional sittings that they've got to clear, just that they've got a seat just to clear their costs.

How are these going to survive? Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well my hon. Friend and neighbour is absolutely right. And I think the equivalent increase in I think the equivalent increase in the cost for the average pub over the next few years, and I do have the figures I'll come into in a the figures I'll come into in a minute, is the equivalent of needing to serve an extra 10,000 pints. How many pubs are going to be able to do that? Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

be able to do that? Yes. I'm very grateful. To the Shadow. Secretary of State for giving way. Epping Forest is home to some way. Epping Forest is home to some wonderful pubs and hospitality businesses like The Bull and the Queen Vic in Boyes, the Thaden Oak and Mila in Loughton. I hope he'll join me in congratulating them and reaching the finalists of the British Kebab Awards next year. But does he agree with me that it's only with the Conservatives approach of scrapping business rates and supporting our high streets and these fantastic businesses, that these businesses

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will be able to survive and then thrive in the future? Yeah, absolutely.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, absolutely. The hon. Gentleman, again, a great advocate for the hospitality and leisure sector. And indeed and leisure sector. And indeed there is an alternative. There are alternative approaches to back business and enable them to succeed and generate taxes and employment. and generate taxes and employment. He's absolutely right. And congratulate them on the Kebab Awards as well. As a big fan of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Awards as well. As a big fan of kebabs. I'll have to make a visit at some point now. Yes. I'm very grateful to. The Shadow Secretary. Of State.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For giving way to agree. That this Budget, the last one. Has been a hammer blow to our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Has been a hammer blow to our already. Flagging high streets. And does he also. Recognise that the. Only retail premises.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Only retail premises. That can be exempted. From business rates. Currently are those that are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Currently are those that are listed? They're unoccupied and that introduces perverse consequences

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for the tone and texture of our high streets. By abolishing business rates, we will remove that perversity and the look and feel of our high streets

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and the vibrancy of our high streets should be improved. Nigel Huddleston.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Nigel Huddleston. Yes, sir. The right hon. Gentleman, again is correct. And of course, it's not just the tax policies, but the wraparound, the policies, but the wraparound, the devil in the detail of what can and cannot be included in various exemptions. That causes some, perhaps unintended or unintended perhaps unintended or unintended consequences. And I think we all care very much about the future of our high streets, which is exactly our high streets, which is exactly why at conference, we announced the retail, hospitality and leisure relief that we did.

Now, as I said, Madam Deputy Speaker, in the Budget, as I said, the the hon. Lady, the Honourable the right hon. Lady, the Chancellor had the brass neck to say she was helping the hospitality industry with business rates. They were doing no such thing. As I said, they're increasing the business rates considerably. And while hospitality is the UK's largest employer of 16 to 24 year olds, these cost pressures directly threaten in particular youth employment. New analysis from the UK. UK hospitality reveals that small hospitality venues alone will see business rates rises by £318 million over three years, and subsectors like the often mentioned in this debate, pubs will see a whopping increase.

The average pubs business rates, even with the reduced multiplier and transitional relief, will increase 15% next year. That's an extra £1,400 in 2728. An average pubs rates will be 4500 pounds higher and 2829 £7,000 higher In total over three years the average pub, the average pub will pay an extra £12,900 and an average hotel will be paying an extra £28,900 in rates next year. In 2728 it will be £65,000 higher and in 2829, £111,000 higher.

In total, over three years, an average hotel rates bill will increase by over £200,000 just in time, no doubt for them to also face the dreaded new tourism tax and Labour's unemployment bill will do nothing but impose thousands in a second, will impose thousands of pounds in extra costs on businesses across the country. Not to mention, of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

course, the ricochet impact on temporary and seasonal jobs. I will give way to the hon. Lady. I thank the Shadow Secretary of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Shadow Secretary of State for giving way on the point of the tourism tax, which of the tourism tax, which potentially will come on top of the increase in business rates. I spoke to Katherine from the Navigator to Katherine from the Navigator Hotel last week, who is in despair at these additional costs and at these additional costs and fearing for the future of her hotel and indeed for the ten employees

**** Possible New Speaker ****

who work in that hotel, what reassurance can you give her? Absolutely.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, the tourism tax is an appalling tax. We've said it will do immense damage to an already do immense damage to an already overtaxed industry. And the hon. Lady, I think, will be aware there is a consultation going on. I think is a consultation going on. I think we all need to encourage our constituents, particularly those working in these sectors, to participate in the consultation, to make sure that Labour don't do the damage that we fear that they may do to an already hit sector.

And of course, many sectors of the economy rely on seasonal employment during peak times, whether that's food production sectors during peak picking and growing seasons, retailers in the run up to Christmas, or the hospitality and tourism industry over peak summer season, and of course, during school holidays. But if the Minister and MPs on the Labour benches have actually been engaging with and listening to businesses in their constituencies or across the country since they came to power, they would know the frustration that so many of those businesses feel they want to employ more people, especially young people.

They want to give learning and skills development opportunities, perhaps to people with their first job, but they have been unable to do so because Labour's policies are making it unaffordable for them to do so. And how bizarre is it? As my hon. Friend pointed out a few moments ago, how bizarre is it that the government announced plans over the weekend? Note, Madam Deputy Speaker, over the weekend, not to this House to help young people with skills building opportunities in hospitality, care and construction through taxpayer funded government schemes.

The very industries that the government is undermining with its own tax policies. If the government didn't attack these industries, businesses would be generating these opportunities and these jobs of their own volition, not needing government handouts. So rather than spend £820 million using public money to help create jobs that may not be sustainable, surely it would have made more sense not to have taxed the hospitality, construction

**** Possible New Speaker ****

or care sectors in the first place. Even hospices were not exempt from Yeah. Good work.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Good work. I'm very grateful to my hon. Friend, there's a very fundamental misunderstanding, I think, between misunderstanding, I think, between this side and that side of the House, that side seems to believe that the government creates jobs, the government creates wealth, the government creates everything on this side of the House. We recognise that actually it's individuals who get up in the individuals who get up in the morning who group together. And we call those groups companies. They they try and come up with ideas, they try and stretch themselves and they try different ideas.

Some of them succeed, some of them fail, and actually relieving the pressure on them is not somehow letting them get away with something. It's enabling them to express the freedom of ideas that they have. Now. I think the second fundamental misunderstanding, it's not about who's had an experience of a job and who hasn't. It's who's had an HR department and who hasn't. Now, the problem that we've got on the other side is not that they're bad people or good people. There's, as we all know, there's different people on all sides of the house.

It's that the reality is that if you have an experience of a business that's only ever had an HR department, there's only ever been large enough to look at different ways of India cost savings. In that sense, it's not the same as if you're the one who's trying to pay for one person, two people or three people. Now, actually, 80% of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

businesses in this country have fewer than ten employees. That's who we're talking about. Nigel Huddleston.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Nigel Huddleston. Yeah. My right hon. Friend is making some really important points. Again, not only the specific examples, but the fundamental examples, but the fundamental difference in political and economic philosophy between our side and their side of the chamber. side and their side of the chamber. We believe in personal responsibility, low tax, small government, living within your means and being unapologetically means and being unapologetically pro-business because we recognise that it's the private sector that generates the jobs and the economic activity that pays for our vital public services.

The Labour side agree the complete opposite. And of course, I think we've recognised as the leader has said many times we get into difficulty when we stray too far away from these things. We let down the country, we let down the economy. When we stray away from our principles, Labour let the country down and destroy the economy. When they stick to their

**** Possible New Speaker ****

principles. I'll give away the hon. Lady. I thank the hon. Member for giving way, I think, to his point giving way, I think, to his point about the employment of young people in somewhere like Northern Ireland. We have one of the highest Ireland. We have one of the highest levels, if not the highest level of youth unemployment and young people not in education, training or employment. Would you agree with me employment. Would you agree with me that the Budget absolutely hammers any prospect of those young people being employed in hospitality or tourism, for example?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

tourism, for example? Nigel Huddleston yeah, the hon. Lady is obviously speaking to her constituents and businesses in her constituency and of course, young people who are extremely disappointed and feel let down by by this government and their economic philosophy, which is why the Budget announcement and then followed by this announcement recently, oh, we're now going to kind of help them a little bit with, with some public money is just bizarre. It shows it shows that they do not get basic economics.

And it's particularly hitting young people. Now. I'll give away briefly to the hon. Gentleman again.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I do thank him for giving way. Under a Conservative council and conservative government, Stoke on conservative government, Stoke on Trent had one of, if not the highest Neet levels anywhere in the country. Those numbers are now country. Those numbers are now coming down. What does he think was the reason why my city had to endure that under his government endure that under his government and his council? And would he accept that part of that was because economic growth in this country was not equitably felt country was not equitably felt across this country, and the economic growth that only takes place in one part of the country is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

equally damaging. As much as some of the things he is professing to be damaging today. I do agree with some the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I do agree with some the principles that the hon. Gentleman articulates there in terms of the need for economic growth to happen outside of the M25 as well. London is a great dynamo. It needs to be London Plus, but we do need to make sure that we grow across the country. But that, of course, was exactly the point of the levelling up agenda. But I'm afraid we can't up agenda. But I'm afraid we can't have this kind of we can't have this, this, this kind of wishful thinking of forgetting that both the economic crisis in 2008 and then, of course, the pandemic and the other global crises had a major impact on the economy.

And therefore, economies around the world were challenged. The difference in where we are now is that our economy is doing badly, uniquely because of Labour government decisions. That's the difference. So of course, the National Insurance increases. Madam Deputy Speaker in last year's Budget alone cost the hospitality industry over £1 billion. The business rate increases that they're facing now make matters even worse, there's a this isn't so much giving with one hand and taking with the other. Madam Deputy Speaker, it's giving with one hand, then punching them in the face and then giving them a good kicking when they're down on the ground as well.

That is an appalling attitude to take towards business, but that is this government's attitude. I'll

**** Possible New Speaker ****

give way. I thank the hon. Member for giving way. Just last week, I giving way. Just last week, I visited one of the many fantastic cafes in my constituency where the hard working owner told me that she hard working owner told me that she had chosen not to take on a had chosen not to take on a Saturday job worker, somebody young person. As a direct result of the increase in business rates. Does he increase in business rates. Does he agree with me that because of the policies of this government, it is directly affecting employment for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

young people in Chester South and Eddisbury and across the country? Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Nigel Huddleston yes, I had the pleasure of visiting a cafe in the hon. Lady's constituency. I sincerely hope it wasn't the one sincerely hope it wasn't the one that we visited, but this is a common theme across across the country, and we're hearing it on way too many occasions. And what's way too many occasions. And what's interesting as well, these businesses, these business owners, often very small businesses, feel really guilty that they cannot employ people in a way that they would want to, that they can't give the Christmas jobs and so on.

They should not feel guilty about this. The government should feel guilty about that.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. Does he agree that it's not just the tax rises, the additional cost burden that's causing a lack of confidence, but that lack of confidence in itself that lack of confidence in itself is probably the most corrosive aspect of all, because once that's entrenched, it's very hard to entrenched, it's very hard to unpick, particularly when businesses repeatedly facing a government that is doing the exact

**** Possible New Speaker ****

government that is doing the exact opposite of what they pledged in their manifesto. Nigel Huddleston. Yes, and the hon. Gentleman knows confidence is a major driver of economic activity. And when the public when consumers and when businesses don't have confidence, all things fall apart. And without a significant change of direction, I'm afraid I can't see this confidence returning. As I said, I don't get any joy saying that I want the government to get their act together. I want them to be economically competent for the sake of our constituents.

Very briefly, and I'll try and conclude.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I would like to thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. I just I'm interested in suggesting I just I'm interested in suggesting that our principles were the things that causes the problem, which bit of our plan for small and medium sized businesses, action to tackle

**** Possible New Speaker ****

sized businesses, action to tackle late payments, reducing regulatory burdens and expanding access to finance. Does he disagree with. Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes. Yeah. I mean this is just noise. The hon. Lady needs to speak to hon. Lady needs to speak to businesses in her constituents constituency and I think she'll. Well, the facts are the National Insurance increases the business rates, increases the additional burdens on businesses. If anybody in the opposition benches can name any business, major business organisation that's welcoming the employment bill, the unemployment bill, as we call it, then I would welcome them to do so now.

But I don't think they can because it's anti-business. That's the point. We're pro-business. They're anti-business. The principle is really key here. To be pro-business means being pro workers and being pro public sector, because that's how the taxes are generated. And the the government have the exact different I won't I won't give I'll give way in a, in a moment to somebody behind me. But I do need to I'm aware, madam Deputy Speaker, I'm on the final stretch. Yes. Now I can only assume I can.

I can only assume, Madam Deputy Speaker, that the Labour government just doesn't understand the negative impact that its tax policies are having on the tourism, hospitality and leisure space because to do such harm willingly is pure economic vandalism. This government's lack of understanding of the private sector and how jobs are created beggars belief. But none of this would be necessary with a competent, pro-business government. There is an alternative, a pro-business, conservative alternative that backs business, that wants the private sector to succeed, that backs entrepreneurs and wealth creators, and has policies that enable job creation and economic growth through policies such as the 100% business rates relief for retail, hospitality and leisure.

But instead, this government has decided on an economic strategy that punishes enterprise burdens the taxpayer. Disincentivizes work increases dependency on welfare and grows the size of the public sector. That is the wrong strategy. The Labour government is destroying the economy. They promised change at the last election. Madam Deputy Speaker, well, we certainly got it. Slower growth, higher taxes, higher spending, more debt, more welfare and higher unemployment. Time and time again, Labour have betrayed the trust of the British public.

And we on these benches will not tire of holding this disastrous Labour government to account for their utter incompetence. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

country cannot afford three more years of this Madam Deputy Speaker Britain deserves better. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. The question. Is, as on the Order Paper, I call the Minister to move the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

amendment. Minister Blair McDougall. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I beg to move the amendment in the I beg to move the amendment in the name of the Prime Minister. Around this time every year, I like to
13:24
Blair McDougall Portrait Blair McDougall MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
-
-
this time every year, I like to reread A Christmas Carol. And last night I read that passage from Dickens where the protagonist says that quote, every idiot who goes about with Merry Christmas on his lips should be boiled with his own pudding and buried with a stake of holly through his heart. And I have have to say, the tone of that speech from the hon. Gentleman made Ebenezer Scrooge sound positively festive. I say to him, we we recognise that it has been a hard few years for business.

We, despite the appalling economic legacy that his party left us and this festive period, we can look forward to the New Year with a sense of optimism. Living standards are rising, wages are growing faster than prices. The Productive business index. A few days ago found that nearly three quarters of small businesses expect revenue increases over the next three months, and nearly two thirds have seen rising order volumes in the last three months. And the hon. Gentleman mentions, as did other members, small Business Saturday.

Small Business Britain report that spending during Small Business Saturday last weekend was the highest it has been in five years, and Madam Deputy Speaker, despite despite what the hon. Gentleman says, I ran a business for a decade and I know how hard the last decade was. I be a modest to agree with what he says from a sedentary

**** Possible New Speaker ****

position. I will give way. Yes. The hon. Gentleman. On Saturday.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Last I was in Herne Bay, in Mortimer Street, where there was an absolutely fabulous toy shop called Kids Corner. It was empty. I said to them, how you doing? And they said, the shops empty, the street said, the shops empty, the street is empty. Nobody is spending any money. The hospitality industry is money. The hospitality industry is on its knees. My hon. Friend the Member for Canterbury and I attended a round table recently where every single person present said that they were having a hard time and some were in danger of going into liquidation.

One cafe and I raised this in the house earlier this week. One chain of cafes employing young people, 25 cafes in the last 12 months. Over those 25 cafes had a profit of £12. That is due entirely to this government's policies.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, gentlemen, hits the nail on the head when he talks about people not spending money. That is people not spending money. That is exactly why this Labour government is taking action to put money into is taking action to put money into people's pockets. And we have got to realise and recognise that a big part of the reason why it has been part of the reason why it has been such a difficult ten years for business was because of stagnating living standards, because of living standards, because of stagnating wages under his government, and I know that hospitality, leisure and retail, who have very thin margins, have been hit especially hard by the pandemic, by the cost of living crisis, by changes in shopping habits.

But it is exactly because of that that we recognised it and published for the first time in a decade, the first strategy for small businesses from government. It's why we are putting more money into people's pockets. And it is why, actually the fiscal credibility that they just do not seem to value at all on that side of the House matters to our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

constituents. I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. The Globe Inn in North Petherton is a fantastic local pub. This financial year. Its local pub. This financial year. Its business rates bill is zero. By business rates bill is zero. By 2930 it will be £5,000. Thanks to this government. That's an extra 10,000 pints they will have to sell

**** Possible New Speaker ****

10,000 pints they will have to sell to meet that extra cost. How is the government's strategy helping them. Mr. McDougall?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, you'll know about the transitional relief that we are putting in and I will come to that putting in and I will come to that in a moment. But we are putting more money into people's pockets. I more money into people's pockets. I spent five days last week speaking to small businesses. I was in to small businesses. I was in Staffordshire, I was in the North west. I was in Scotland meeting with dozens of small businesses, with dozens of small businesses, and all of them said to me the same thing was that what they want is footfall.

As the right hon. Gentleman said, they want people to start spending money again and to get customers. I make some some progress for a second and we are lowering costs. The hon. Gentleman mentioned the burden of regulation and red tape. I have to ask, where was he for the last 14 years when we came to power, we inherited a situation where businesses were spending 380 million staff hours on foreign filling and red tape every year. We are we are getting into

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that now in a way that just did not happen. Olivia Bailey I won't. Offend the giving way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Offend the giving way. And on that point. businesses. Like the co-op and. Ikea are supportive. And on the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Ikea are supportive. And on the point of red tape. Businesses in my constituency tell me time and time again that bureaucracy is holding

**** Possible New Speaker ****

them back. So can he outline further how we're going to be cutting red tape? Yeah, absolutely. So well, let's

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, absolutely. So well, let's let's start with a few weeks ago where we removed thousands upon thousands of particularly smaller companies from having to engage in so much of the corporate reporting, which was completely unnecessary, saving about a quarter of £1 billion on the way to our wider effort and our wider target of cutting the regulatory burden by 25% and cutting five £5 billion, I will give

**** Possible New Speaker ****

way to the the member of the. Thank you very much, Madam

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. I'm grateful to the Minister for giving way. I invite Minister for giving way. I invite him to visit the hairdressers in Aldwick in my Bognor Regis and Littlehampton constituency. He will Littlehampton constituency. He will tell him that he spends hours after hours to ensure that he can even stay profitable. So you might be withdrawing some aspects of small business paperwork, but it doesn't remove the fact that the maths don't add up. And unless he is spending hours dotting every I, crossing every T and making sure that he's cutting costs where he

**** Possible New Speaker ****

can, his employees won't have jobs to spend more money. Yeah. Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister. It should be an important point, which is exactly why we are trying to drive down costs for for to drive down costs for for business, not least when it comes to red tape. And if there is something in particular that your constituents business do not know if it's the hairdressers that you frequent yourself, maybe I could pop along and I'd be very, very

**** Possible New Speaker ****

pop along and I'd be very, very happy to listen. Order, order Minister, I don't wish to put on the public record which restaurants I do and do not frequent. So continue. Mr. Marie Eagle.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker, and they raise a business rates as well. It's exactly because we recognise the stress that retail, hospitality the stress that retail, hospitality and leisure face that the smallest of those properties will have now the lowest business rates since 1991, and those with values below 500,000 will be at their lowest 500,000 will be at their lowest rate since 2011, a permanent tax cut worth nearly £1 billion a year and benefiting over three quarters of a million retail, hospitality and leisure properties.

I will give way one more time to the Alison Griffiths.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much to the Minister, and I'd just like to tell him about Charlie Hockaday, who him about Charlie Hockaday, who runs the Fox in in Feltham. He tells me that with the new business rates reform coming through from rates reform coming through from this government, he will be paying this government, he will be paying £1,600 a month more in business rates going forward. That is the rates going forward. That is the equivalent of 35 per pint that he sells.

So how does that equate to pockets?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'll talk about the the transitional relief that we've put transitional relief that we've put in under the plans we inherited with this valuation. Pubs were looking at a rate bills increasing by about 45% because of because of by about 45% because of because of the relief that we put in. That's about a 10th of that in terms of percentage. So so we are acting. percentage. So so we are acting. But I have to say, Madam Deputy Speaker, the party opposite knew that this revaluation was coming.

They knew that the temporary Covid relief was coming. And how much did they have in their financial plans to help businesses with this? Nothing. Nothing, nothing. Not a single penny was allocated for it. And now they criticise us for having put in a £4 billion package to help businesses with that. And worse, worse than that. Madam Deputy Speaker, they also oppose the higher business rates on the warehouses of online giants that we have put in place, which is exactly what is paying for the structural change which allows for permanently lower business rates on retail and hospitality.

I will give way to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

progress. Grateful to the Minister. But the reality is, and we all the reality is, and we all understand this, governments have to make choices. But the choices that this government has made is that this government has made is not to cut spending on welfare, which has limited the choices elsewhere. There is a real choice elsewhere. There is a real choice there. And if if this party had been in power, we wouldn't have taken those choices over the summer, taken those choices over the summer, which would have meant the Budget would have been in a very different sector.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Which was exactly my point, that you were not going to make these choices. They were not in your choices. They were not in your financial plan. They were not in the hon. Gentleman's financial the hon. Gentleman's financial plans, and they are in ours. I will, but only because I have deep affection for the hon. Gentleman.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

affection for the hon. Gentleman. Minister as a charming and and soon to be very well haircut soon to be very well haircut gentleman, no doubt, but the. The point that my hon. Friend was making, and I'm afraid that reinforces it is it was clearly not in the government's plan otherwise either. Otherwise they wouldn't have bought through the welfare changes they planned in July, but have since been bounced out of by

**** Possible New Speaker ****

their own backbenchers. So clearly it wasn't their plan either. And that's why we're in this position. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. But it isn't our plan. We have just passed this Budget which gives this relief on business rates. Let me continue, perhaps with and return to the theme of A Christmas return to the theme of A Christmas Carol and visit with the Ghost of Christmas Past. Perhaps we could Christmas Past. Perhaps we could travel back to when the hon. Gentleman gushed about Liz Truss's mini Budget with her unfunded tax giveaway as representing a new era, which he said would help everyone with cost of living pressures.

What? Unlike Ebenezer Scrooge, the hon. Gentleman has not repented. He has not seen the error of his ways and the impact of unfunded commitments. Instead, he is at it again, calling for tax cuts without any idea

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. I thank the Minister. The members opposite talk about political choices. They made a political choice to bring in austerity, which meant that actually there was lack of funding to the NHS. My constituents Harlow is full of sole traders who say to me what really affects their ability to earn money, to actually have money in their pocket, to spend in the pub or other establishments is the fact they have to wait for years on end to get a doctor's appointment, or to get a doctor's appointment, or to actually get an operation.

So would he agree with me that the right choice that the Chancellor has made

**** Possible New Speaker ****

is to invest in NHS, to ensure we get the waiting time down so that my workers can get back to work? Mr. McDougall.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mr. McDougall. He's he's absolutely right. And of course, that's one of the important ways we get the welfare bill down as well and get more bill down as well and get more money into people's pockets and ultimately more money into tills. But instead of these fantastical But instead of these fantastical unfunded tax cuts, we are giving real help to high streets across the country. Millions of British the country. Millions of British people will benefit from the £5 billion Pride in Place programme, which puts local people in 339 neighbourhoods in the driving seat of renewing their own areas.

I will.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for giving way, and I am also grateful to the government for the fact that Ramsgate in particular is Ramsgate in particular is benefiting from the Pride in Place Fund, but more widely on the issue of seasonal work, which is vital for coastal communities like mine. for coastal communities like mine. Can you confirm that seasonal workers and people who are who are working in hospitality will benefit working in hospitality will benefit from many of the measures in the Budget, including that tackle the cost of living and raise their cost of living and raise their wages.

For example, the minimum wage, cuts to energy bills and indeed freezing of bus and train

**** Possible New Speaker ****

fares. Minister, absolutely. On this side of the House, we recognise that link between recognise that link between standard of living and how business is sustainability is working. She mentioned her own area benefiting from pride in place and the hon. from pride in place and the hon. Gentleman's part of the world. He's got Smethwick, Darlington, Bilston, Dudley and Bedworth all receiving funding through Pride in Place. And in addition to that, we are also making sure that we protect the character and the safety of high streets because, again, what small businesses say to us again and again is that they need footfall.

So we need to make high streets attractive place to go. So we are clamping down on the illegal high street activity and premises such as mini marts, barber shops, vape shops and nail bars and at the Budget announced an additional £15 million a year more, alongside wider measures to tackle those

**** Possible New Speaker ****

bogus retailers. Yes sir. For giving way has has

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes sir. For giving way has has he compared and contrast pride in place with the Future High Streets Fund, which was approved mechanism Fund, which was approved mechanism for uplifting the state of many of our high streets, including my constituency. But he's he's trotting out a load of things he thinks are going to benefit retail and hospitality. The whole point about retail and hospitality is they have to be welcoming places and open to all. What then, does he make of the dozens of pubs and restaurants up and down the country that are now being feeling forced to put up signs in their windows saying No, Labour MPs.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mr. McDougall. Well, I have yet to see any such

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I have yet to see any such pub with that sign of my my friend, my my hon. Friend from Stoke-on-Trent Central in terms of Stoke-on-Trent Central in terms of the other scheme that he mentioned, spoke about how disastrous the implementation of that was in the implementation of that was in the ground. And we're trying to learn lessons from that. But the hon. lessons from that. But the hon. Gentleman also criticises on the Employment Rights Bill, and I compared him to Scrooge earlier on.

But I'm sorry to say that here is where he is even less charitable than Dickens character. Scrooge famously wanted. Indeed insisted on his workers having regular hours over Christmas. The hon. Gentleman does not seem to want that. Even Scrooge, by the end of the story, gave Bob Cratchit a pay rise so that his family could enjoy Christmas, and here he is arguing against it again. I'll give him Gareth Snell.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I do thank the Minister for giving way. I remember sitting on that side of the House when the Conservatives were in government, and they would be, I won't be here. They will be trumpeting. They're increasing the minimum wage and the, the, the creation of the living wage as a demonstration of their commitment to helping low paid people in this country. Does he people in this country. Does he does he worry now that if you if you take the point that the hon.

Gentleman has been making and extrapolate to its natural conclusion, they're actually advocating for a cut in the minimum wage as a way of helping business, which would be detrimental to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

thousands of people in Stoke on Trent that rely on that money to pay their bills. Yeah, I couldn't agree with him more. And just again, not understanding that link about what is in people's pockets and what goes into the tills. And can I also goes into the tills. And can I also say I spent a fantastic day with you with your local businesses last week, and was impressed how they week, and was impressed how they all were on first name terms with the hon.

Gentleman, I will, yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the hon. Gentleman, I will, yes. The hon. Member not agree that part of the problem was called was caused by the members opposite who didn't welcome the minimum wage in 1998, said it was going to destroy businesses and then later when they got in, split the minimum wage. So people over 25 got more than people under 25 causing this inequality, which is what we're having to deal with. Now.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. She's absolutely right. And I recall as a as a younger man recall as a as a younger man working in this place, the all night sittings as the Conservatives night sittings as the Conservatives united with the people in the other place to try to stop our effort to make work, pay for people. And here make work, pay for people. And here we are again, a quarter of a century later, actually.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The issue, Madam Deputy Speaker. The hon. Gentleman was in here while governments were coming up with their plans and their policies. In 1998, while I was starting a business and running it and employing people. And the difference is that you can't install a minimum wage if someone actually doesn't have a wage at all, because they haven't got a job, and what his, what his party are doing are putting people out of work, there are now 31% more young people not in employment in the Gosport constituency than there were that time, this time last year.

That's a disgrace, isn't it?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. If she was at the start of the debate, she would have heard me debate, she would have heard me talking about I ran a business as well, but she talks about job creation and the first year of this creation and the first year of this government, 138,000 more jobs. And we have to understand. No, I have given way several times. I have to given way several times. I have to make I have to make some. But the government is fully supportive of the variety of working arrangements that people, including young people, might choose, depending on their circumstances.

But the word Madam Deputy Speaker is choose. Until now, that flexibility has been entirely one sided, something that employers have used to their benefit. But it is time to let workers have their rights. And the hon. Member for Stoke on Trent asked a question about whether people on the other side of the House understand what it is like to be an insecure worker, particularly at this time of year. This is the most expensive I'm going to. I'm nearly finishing.

I'm coming to a close. But thank you. At this time of year, this is the most expensive time of the year. It's the most expensive month on this side of the House. We are proud to be acting to ensure that families can plan for the expense of Christmas, that families can look forward to Christmas without worrying about the anxiety of whether they can make it to the end of the month, and the criticisms of that, and the lack of understanding from the other side about how important the cost of living and the money in people's pockets is to the success of business is, quite frankly, humbug.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I call the spokesperson Liberal Democrats. Forgive me.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Sarah Olney. The original question was as on the Order Paper, since when an amendment A has been proposed as on amendment A has been proposed as on the Order Paper? The question is that the original words stand part of the question. I now call the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of the question. I now call the spokesperson for the Liberal Democrat Sarah Olney. Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. It's a pleasure to speak in this
13:45
Sarah Olney Portrait Sarah Olney MP (Richmond Park, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
>> It's a pleasure to speak in this debate, training, hiring and retaining a skilled workforce are issues affecting businesses across the country. Many businesses, such as in the farming and agricultural sectors, depend upon recruiting the right people at the right time. Obstacles to hiring seasonal workers could have a significant impact on businesses which are already struggling with sky high energy bills, trouble recruiting the workforce they need, and are facing high costs in trading. With Europe, we're seeing a practically stagnant economy with business confidence down and unemployment up, and this is particularly prevalent amongst young people, many of whom traditionally found their first jobs in the hospitality sector.

The largest employer of young people. However, this sector is struggling to employ new workers and the damage that's being done to the prospects of our youth struggling with unemployment levels will be detrimental to the broader economy in the years to come. Many of these challenges began under the administration of the last conservative government. It was the previous government who undermined farming, agricultural, hospitality, so many other sectors dependent on seasonal work by negotiating failed trade deals with the EU, with Australia, with New Zealand and breaking their promise to reform business rates.

Their record is a dispiriting picture of low growth, high interest rates and falling living standards. People endured years of conservative mismanagement, which is why it's so disappointing that this government has wasted the last 18 months by failing to pursue policies that promote growth and by imposing an unfair, National

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Insurance jobs tax that has stifled business investment. Will my right hon. Friend give way? Happy to.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Happy to. I'd like to thank my right hon. Friend for giving way. In the West Country, we've seen an icy chill Country, we've seen an icy chill effect of the NICs hike on our hospitality and tourism industry, hospitality and tourism industry, particularly in Torbay, the Torbay Coast and Countryside Trust that Coast and Countryside Trust that has looked after some of our beautiful natural spaces, has had a £100,000 cost of the NICs hike on them, which has forced them to close their doors and take a step into the dark.

Does my right hon. Friend agree with me that the government needs to explore the impact of the next hike on some of these fragile sectors of our economy, and see how they can step

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in to support them. Thank you. My hon. Friend, for his intervention.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Friend, for his intervention. And it's really it's tragic to hear about the closure of of his local organisation. They're not just organisation. They're not just depriving local people of the opportunity to enjoy the services that they were providing, but also, as I was saying, depriving young as I was saying, depriving young people in particular of the opportunity to take their first job on the Employment Rights Bill, on the Employment Rights Bill, Liberal Democrats have been clear. We welcome many of the principles underpinning the legislation, but we've been pushing the government to make crucial improvements to ensure that it properly delivers for workers and small businesses.

We strongly believe in giving all workers security over their working patterns, and we are deeply concerned that too many struggle with unstable incomes, job insecurity and difficulties in planning for the future. On flexible work, we will continue to advocate for what we think would have been a fairer and less onerous system, based on giving workers a new right to request fixed hours, that businesses would not be able to unreasonably refuse. And when it comes to seasonal work, we are glad, thanks to the work of the Liberal Democrats in the House of Lords, the government has made significant concessions for the benefit of businesses and workers, placing a statutory duty on the Secretary of State to consult with key stakeholders before exercising powers to specify what a temporary need is in relation to the right to zero hours contracts provisions.

And we're also pleased that government has listened to Liberal Democrat calls for clarity by providing examples of how an employer could approach seasonal demand while complying with the new right to guaranteed hours. These provisions, secured by Liberal Democrat peers, will support workers by giving them more control over their working hours, while ensuring that businesses are properly consulted and given the resources to navigate this new legislation. This weekend, towns across the country mark Small Business Saturday, but many small businesses will have struggled to celebrate given the challenges that they're facing.

Recent government decisions, including the devastating business rates hike in last month's Budget, are causing huge damage to small hospitality firms, with many now considering

**** Possible New Speaker ****

whether their business remains viable but happy to give way. I thank my honourable.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable. Friend for giving way. Tourism is vital to the economy of West is vital to the economy of West Dorset. Hospitality in West Dorset is one of the largest employers. Our population soars by 40% during Our population soars by 40% during the summer months. These businesses require seasonal workers. Given all the headwinds that she's outlining and facing the high street facing and facing the high street facing UK hospitality, does she agree that the government should reward the sector or look after the sector

**** Possible New Speaker ****

with a 5% drop in VAT? I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention is absolutely right. intervention is absolutely right. The hospitality sector has been disproportionately impacted by the hike in National Insurance hike in National Insurance contributions because it employs generally people on lower wages for a shorter period of time, and with the with the decrease in the threshold in particular, that has been very damaging to many, many been very damaging to many, many businesses that have that kind of employment pattern.

But my hon. Friend is absolutely right. What we really need to be doing is boosting growth, boosting demand, and we think that that could happen by introducing a 5% decrease in VAT for hospitality businesses, because we need the government to give hospitality the tools it needs to grow and help boost the wider economy. Thousands of venues are facing steep and unprecedented cost rises, making this a critical moment for the hospitality sector. And I urge the government to tackle this cost of doing business crisis

**** Possible New Speaker ****

crisis by adopting our proposal on VAT. Pubs, bars? Yes. How much would it cost?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

How much would it cost? Luke Evans policy cost. And grateful to the hon. Member

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And grateful to the hon. Member for his his point the the the the cost of the VAT, the VAT cut could cost of the VAT, the VAT cut could be met by the, I believe off the be met by the, I believe off the top of my head it's about £9 billion But what we think is that that could be met by the, by the, the, the, the, the money that we've lost from leaving the European Union from Brexit, £25 billion a year has been lost to the Treasury as a result of leaving the European Union, thanks to the Conservatives botched Brexit deal.

And there are so many better ways that we could have been spending that money. That the Conservatives botched Brexit deal has cost us pubs, bars, cafes and restaurants across the UK who rely on seasonal workers need all the support they can get. So I sincerely hope that Ministers will listen to today's motion calls for the abolition of business rates, and the Liberal Democrats agree that we need to see a complete overhaul of this unfair and damaging system. However, in 2019, the previous conservative government promised a fundamental review of the business rates system, which they failed to deliver.

And in their recent Budget, the government committed to rebalancing business rates. But we saw nothing of the sort. UK hospitality says that the average tax increase for hospitality will be 76% over the next three years. Meanwhile, warehouses, embassies and large supermarkets will see bills go up by just 16%, 7% and 4%, respectively. The Chancellor said she's looking to introduce permanently lower business rate multipliers, but the painful reality is that the new higher valuations will wipe out any benefit benefit that businesses might have seen.

Increasing the minimum wage, as the government announced in the recent Budget, is of course, welcome and will support millions of low paid workers. But it's not just workers that need a boost. It's small businesses to. Unless businesses are able to grow, there's a danger that the long list of cost pressures they face will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

result in fewer jobs being way. I thank the hon. Lady for giving

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Lady for giving way. Talking to small and medium sized enterprises in my constituency of Shipley, they constituency of Shipley, they really welcomed the announcement that there would be free training for apprenticeships so that they can actually help the next can actually help the next generation of young people get into higher skilled jobs and to have careers. Does she agree and support careers. Does she agree and support the government's announcement about the apprenticeships as part of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Youth Guarantee? I thank, I thank the hon. Lady, my my colleague on the Public Accounts Committee for her intervention. She's absolutely right. I 100% and very wholeheartedly welcome any boost to wholeheartedly welcome any boost to apprenticeships. And that that announcement in the Budget. However, announcement in the Budget. However, the caution is and always continues to be. Will there be sufficient business growth to enable those high skilled jobs to be created that will enable our young people to progress in their careers? Businesses from all sectors across the UK continue to struggle with high energy bills, compounded with the burden of the NICs rise and concerns about certain aspects of the Employment Rights Bill on their monthly employment costs.

The cost of employment has risen significantly over the last year, and there have been nearly 70,000 hospitality job losses since just since last October. Our small businesses face huge challenges and very many are already struggling to absorb rising costs. So unless more is done to support them, vital entry level jobs. Essential contributions to the culture and character of our local communities may be lost, as this motion looks to examine the challenges facing businesses. Perhaps unsurprising omission is the absence of any reference to the damage caused by the last government's failed Brexit deal.

The appalling agreement negotiated by the Conservative Party has been a complete disaster for our country, particularly for small businesses who are held back by reams of red tape and new barriers to trade, costing our economy billions in lost exports. The dismal impact of their terrible Brexit deal is becoming increasingly clear. A recent survey of 10,000 UK businesses found that 33% of currently trading enterprises experienced extra costs directly related to changes in export regulations. Due to the end of the EU transition period.

Small businesses have been particularly badly affected, with 20,000 small firms stopping all exports to the EU, and a recent study has found that goods exports have fallen by 6.4% since that trade deal came into force in 2021. And while the Liberal Democrats welcome the steps, even if hesitant that this government is taking to rebuild our relationship with the EU, I urge the government to recognise that this should only be the start towards a new bespoke UK EU customs union, which this House voted for just yesterday.

Independent analysis has shown that a closer trading relationship with the EU would boost GDP by 2.2%, and would bring in roughly £25 billion of extra tax revenue every year, which would be crucial for fixing the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

public services which the Conservative Party left broken. Yes, I'll give way. I'm very grateful to.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm very grateful to. The honourable. Lady. And I'm not suggesting that she should have been hanging on my every word yesterday, but she was every word yesterday, but she was in the chamber during that debate. I wouldn't call 100 votes in favour and 100 votes against a win. A ten and 100 votes against a win. A ten minute rule bill is going to go nowhere. So why? Her leader is jumping up and down on social media jumping up and down on social media as if he's just introduced the Magna Carta? I fail, I fail to understand.

But did she not hear me when I said that in conversations with the European Union, the EU itself will not entertain a new customs union with the United Kingdom. They want to evolve the agreement that we have as per the agreement, but not have Groundhog Day. Which bit of that is her party

**** Possible New Speaker ****

not understanding, or are they just ignoring it because it's convenient? There are only.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

There are only. I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention, and I did listen very carefully to his speech yesterday, which I thought he delivered very well, and I am grateful to him for putting the points against our Bill. He is points against our Bill. He is absolutely right. It was 100 on each side. However, it did pass with the with the help of Madam Deputy Speaker, who was in the Deputy Speaker, who was in the chair yesterday, and it has progressed to its Second Reading.

But I take his point. I take his point. And what I would say to the hon. Gentleman is, how does he know if there is a political movement for change in this country, a political will towards further integration with the European Union, with the European Union, if there is a political will in favour of a customs union, I'll just finish this point, if I may, then I think that the EU would welcome that and would be very keen to have a conversation on that part.

I'm

**** Possible New Speaker ****

going to give way to the hon. Lady you. I thank. The hon. Member for giving way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The hon. Member for giving way. Would the hon. Member not not agree that the trade agreement that was that the trade agreement that was signed earlier this year and the SPS agreement, which is actually the EU, now have a mandate to the EU, now have a mandate to discuss and which will hopefully be through by 2027, will make a massive difference to a lot of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

massive difference to a lot of the export done. So we are getting there. It takes time, but we are getting there. Yes, yes yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The to the hon. Lady for her intervention. What I would say this is very piecemeal. It's taking time. is very piecemeal. It's taking time. I think if we had a more wholehearted approach to a customs union, we would be able to unlock union, we would be able to unlock all sorts of benefits that are not possible with the piecemeal approach. I'm going to give way to the hon. Gentleman and then I will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the hon. Gentleman and then I will come back to you. I suggest to you customs Union might take a little bit of time. might take a little bit of time. Yeah, maybe just a day or two. She asked a perfectly legitimate question. How do I know? In direct response to her party's motion, it's an issue I raised directly with representatives of the European Union, and the answer was no, thank you. That's how I know I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

knowledge. Sarah Olney. I'm grateful to the hon. Gentleman for for sharing that knowledge with us all, and knowledge with us all, and obviously that's something to reflect upon. However, I would say that it was the this is why we're that it was the this is why we're pressing the government, and I think it is the government who holds the who holds the purse holds the who holds the purse strings, who hold the pen here. And that is, I think, up for up to them to be making those making those

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to be making those making those Yes. I thank the honourable. Member for giving way, and I will ask this question in the spirit of genuine curiosity, if I may, the trade deal done by the Prime Minister, by the Chancellor, by the business Secretary earlier in the year, with the United States guaranteed more than 200,000 jobs in the West Midlands in Jaguar Land Rover and in its supply chain, what future does the hon. Member envisage for those jobs? In her ideal scenario, where we go back into a customs union tomorrow, and what would she say to my constituents and the people in our West Midlands region about the prospects for those jobs? Has she thought about it and does

**** Possible New Speaker ****

she have a plan? I thank the hon. Lady for her intervention. What I would say intervention. What I would say about that is our our allies in America are becoming increasingly America are becoming increasingly unreliable, and it is absolutely right that we should look elsewhere for our alliances, not just on for our alliances, not just on trade, but on defence and recent moves. Just this week show us on what shaky ground our agreements what shaky ground our agreements with the US are built upon and for the long term future of the car industry in West Midlands and of course, the future of our whole economy.

We need to be looking to Europe to to to build up those relationships with our European neighbours, because our partnerships with the US are becoming our allies in the US are becoming increasingly unreliable. And I would find if I was one of her constituents, I would be looking for the government to be fully investigating other opportunities for trade, as well as with the US more broadly, as we look at issues affecting the workforce. Liberal Democrats welcome the industrial strategy that this government put in place, alongside a funding boost for skills and training.

However, this progress stops well short of the fundamental reform we need to see if we're going to address the workforce shortages which many industries are facing. British businesses must be able to hire the people they need with the skills they need. A key cause of workforce shortages is ill health. To tackle this deeply entrenched problem, the government must do more to invest not only in our NHS but also in social care so people can get the healthcare they need and rejoin the workforce more quickly.

Any business will tell you that the apprenticeship levy doesn't work, despite the government's attempts at reform, firms can't get the funding they need to train staff, and hundreds of millions of pounds of funding is going unspent. The Liberal Democrats have long called for proper reform of the levy, replacing it with a wider skills and training levy that will give businesses real flexibility over how they spend money to train their staff. We were pleased to hear in the Budget that more details on the wider Youth Guarantee and Growth and Skills Levy package would be announced shortly, but can the Minister provide a timeline for when we can expect to see this detail? And again, I wish to ask the Minister to set out a timeline for the introduction of a youth mobility scheme which will be beneficial to our economy, easing some of the burdens which the hospitality sector is facing.

Businesses across the country, especially our small businesses, are struggling with unprecedentedly high costs, such as the government's unfair National Insurance rise, sky high energy bills and a broken business rate system and struggling businesses means fewer jobs and lower pay. So it's absolutely clear that we must look for ways to support local businesses and all those that rely on them. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
14:02
Euan Stainbank Portrait Euan Stainbank MP (Falkirk, Labour)
-
-
Euan Stainbank Deputy. >> Speaker, in this debate today, I'm going to confine my remarks to the criticisms of the Employment Rights Bill, because it's where my Rights Bill, because it's where my experience sits. And also, as I tried, in no small part thanks to the efforts of yourself, Madam Deputy Speaker, to get into the Employment Rights Bill, but sadly was not able to speak on Monday. But saying that it is imperative that all hon. Members do listen to small businesses as I did this Saturday as I helped the Falkirk delivers and Falkirk Business Improvement District came out with this tangling Christmas lights and carrying ladders about Falkirk High Street as they set up their first and inaugural festive Falkirk Festival of Trees.

I would definitely encourage any hon. Members to visit any of the vastly brilliant hospitality venues that we do have in Falkirk, but with that out of the way, I am going to focus my contribution on the impact of the Employment Rights Bill, because what we have heard from the Opposition benches and I would say small businesses are looking for more solutions. Very few of them said we should either cut welfare substantially in a way that would push children into poverty, or rejoin the European Union as the immediate solution, but it is important and imperative that we talk about seasonal workers, not just businesses that hire seasonal workers.

It is, of course, an important perspective we should hear, as I have just stated, but it can often be a parochial view. Talking to one side of the labour market, the employer, and fails to grasp the incentive system that we need to change in order to get people into work, which is what I believe the Employment Rights Bill does do. After years of hearing the stick from government of tough language about benefits, sanctions, and I think often kicking down a workless generation, which they directly caused and they directly failed to also address when in government they now repetitively slam the carrot, which is now the Employment Rights Bill, and this government's broader agenda to make work pay again.

So in lieu, I will provide my own relatively recent experience to the House, with the exception of the pandemic, where I lost my insecure hospitality job as one of the workers that was not provided for low assistance because of the nature of the contract I was under, and I had to move in for the first time since I was 17. Back with my parents. I have not gone one week since I was a teenager unemployed. I spent my weekends after long days of studying law and at school, working behind the bar at weddings, in various functions within the hospitality industry and in the retail industry.

I did this because of the ethos my family instilled in me as a 16 year old. When I got my first seasonal job at Argos, that nothing is better for your self-esteem, your progression, your social skills, your life, your independence or ultimately your wallet than to get yourself in and keep yourself in work. And I still remember hitting 1000 orders in Christmas Eve 2016, and that first job alongside many of my generation who worked hard during that seasonal job and made sure that that business was running, and then to be told on Boxing Day that I was not going to be kept on in that particular job.

What we have to remind ourselves in this debate that the workers who work over Christmas in hospitality and retail and gift shops are the economy that we are talking about here. They are the ones that keep the lights going on in our high streets consistently. But the sectors that have worked in, in my experience, working on minimum wage and insecure and low pay, high turnover and insecure hours are major characteristics, which meant my income up until I moved out of the hospitality sector in June 2022, was sometimes enough to pay my rent, bills, food and the occasional trip to the pub or a Falkirk match.

And sadly, sometimes it was not. This is still the reality for far too many who work in the hospitality, retail, social care and many other sectors. And this is ultimately the reason I got into politics to improve the lot of those who, despite grafting and seeing little result for themselves or their families and sometimes working in quite deep poverty, still went in each day and got on with it. That same spirit lives on today in the hospitality workers who are currently in dispute with their employer at the Village Hotel and Vue in Glasgow.

The hard working generation that I am a part of are down there once again organising and demanding better because contributing and keeping our economy going, they deserve fair pay and conditions over Christmas. More than anything, it was the reason I ran for election because I saw in my generation the corrosive social sickness that the previous government neglectfully allowed this country, and especially my generation, to be infected with. After 14 long years, many in my generation looked at the workplace with no prospect of being able to build a better life than the one their parents had in the last Parliament, being the one I believe in history in which living standards went down, and for too many in my generation, off the back of that, they could see that they could work hard and see little reward, or they could sit about and see little reward as well.

Something had to radically change. This country had to make work pay again. This was the message in the manifesto that we on this side stood on and promised the country that we would deliver if we had the privilege of winning office. This is what the Employment Rights Bill is designed to do with day one rights to statutory sick pay, to allow workers when they fall ill, to bounce back into the workplace quicker and healthier. Day one rights to paternity leave, which was secured this week.

And I'm very grateful to the Minister for doing so so that fathers can spend their precious first few days they receive at home with their newly born bairns, which I imagine is going to be crucial for many families this Christmas. But saying that earlier this week and Ministers are aware, I was desperately disappointed when the concession was made to the Tories and Lib Dems and the Other place on day one. Rights against unfair dismissal. The same peers who, throughout the passage of the Employment Rights Bill, have fought on to bargain on behalf of the bad bosses to weaken the sick pay and paternity leave of millions of ordinary people, the obstructions of the other place and delivering the core manifesto commitment which will benefit so many in my generation and seasonal workers especially to boot, must be addressed by the government at another time with, in my perspective, far more radical intent in regards to the other place.

I cannot and I will not forget the workers I pulled pints alongside. It's only going to be my

**** Possible New Speaker ****

third Christmas. I will give way. I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. He's making an excellent speech, an 18 to 20 year old this Christmas, who's serving a pint, will be earning £1.40 an hour more. Does my hon. Friend agree with me? This demonstrates Labour's commitment to young people.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

commitment to young people. Yes, absolutely. And I also think it disgraceful that the Leader of the Opposition this week has suggested that we should freeze has suggested that we should freeze the minimum wage. That means in later years, the workers who are going to keep the lights on this Christmas in the gift shops, in the pubs, in the restaurants should be entitled to less as inflation, inflation goes up. Well, they are part of the economy. If you did not have the workforce actually keeping the lights on in the first place, there would be no restaurant, there would be no pub, there would be no Christmas custom, sadly.

And that is the experience of far too many people in hospitality. So as this is my fourth Christmas in my working life, that I'm going to be able to spend my family instead of actually working in the hospitality industry, that has been characterised, and I'd be very interested to see if any of the opposing benches can share their experiences. I'd be very interested to hear of that. Considering how much experience and business was utilised early in the debate by themselves, I'm not going to forget throughout the progress of my career in this place and the votes that we make, the workers I pulled pints beside and served tables with.

I have heard too many stories about kids being bullied, belittled and booted out the workplace by bad bosses in the first two years of their working life. I do worry, and I've shared this concern with Ministers, that, especially in the seasonal work sector, that this will simply happen over the six month mark and I think it is something that we should come back later in the Parliament to address. I would also say to opposing members, when they come, I would expect nothing but an apology for the 1.5 million people who were put into poverty whilst in work over their shambolic 14 year tenure.

They built a low wage, insecure, low productivity economy, all whilst practising austerity, and then come back to this house with essentially the same ideas, but

**** Possible New Speaker ****

with 200 less MPs. I will give way. I thank him for giving way. What

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for giving way. What does he say to the 89,000 people who've lost their hospitality jobs over the last 12 months? Yeah, you and Simon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, you and Simon. There is an extensive amount of hospitality jobs lost over the previous five years as well, I previous five years as well, I don't deny, and I speak to small businesses in my constituency every week, that they have had a hard pressed number of years. I know I pressed number of years. I know I was there, I was working within the industry. I think it is important that we do back our hospitality sector. And I said earlier in the debate that I do think there should be more to come.

They talked to me about energy prices as well, which are still substantially. I will give way if it is insistent, potentially with some experience

**** Possible New Speaker ****

well. I thank the hon. Member for giving way a second time. So 89,000 giving way a second time. So 89,000 hospitality jobs lost, lost in the last 12 months. Youth unemployment up 12% of 16 to 24 year olds up 12% of 16 to 24 year olds currently unemployed. There's an estimated 40% fewer seasonal jobs estimated 40% fewer seasonal jobs this year. That's the biggest decline in 15 years. Energy costs are up. Business rates are up. are up. Business rates are up.

Confidence is down. Regulation is up. Does it acknowledge that all of this happening at the same time is not a coincidence, and that it must be, at least in part, in relation to the really poor choices made by

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this government? Yes. Well, I don't accept the premise.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I don't accept the premise. I think it is important to recognise that the hospitality has struggled over a number of years. I am not in any way denying that at am not in any way denying that at this stage. However, I do not then know why the Employment Rights Bill is contained within this, considering the provisions have not considering the provisions have not come into place today, I would say it is important that we do listen to hospitality and give feedback, to hospitality and give feedback, but it is also important that we do not discourage young people out of seeking those opportunities out in the first place, which has been seen for far too long for the last 14 years under your government, as I'm going to draw to a close, I won't take any more interventions.

Moaning about the rates of maternity pay and the minimum wage being frozen. I don't need it. Don't worry about it. Moaning about the rates of maternity pay or proposing to freeze the minimum wage is not likely to incentivise more young people to grasp that first opportunity. It's not more likely to make more of the people we talk about here than meets my generation, actually encouraged what this government are delivering. But I do see that we need to go further and faster, both on employment rights and support for the hospitality industry in my constituency.

Instead of stepping back at the first sign of opposition from Tories and Lib Dems, I would say on employment rights measures. And my hon. Friend did point out something that is quite important. The younger workers who are going to be working our constituencies because of what this government has done, are going to be £1.40 an hour better off in their workplace. I only wish that back when I got my first seasonal job, we had a government that saw the value of my labour over the Christmas period just as well.

So

**** Possible New Speaker ****

thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Joe Robertson Madam Deputy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Joe Robertson Madam Deputy Speaker, Tourism and Hospitality offer seasonal work, flexible work opportunities, part time work and that's why many people choose to that's why many people choose to work in that sector, particularly young people. Tourism and hospitality is also one of the most taxed sectors in Europe compared to other European countries. So what did the government do for that sector? It reduced flexibility and increased taxes, and that is having real world consequences.

It is little wonder that of the job losses lost under this government, 55% are in retail, hospitality and leisure. Youth unemployment is up two and it's having real world consequences in coastal communities like on the Isle of Wight, towns that are reliant on the visitor economy, towns that are seriously concerned that this is just the start, that the government is making plans for a tourism tax, which will hit small businesses even further. Towns like Ryde, like Sandown, like Shanklin, like Ventnor, 38% of our local economy on the Isle of Wight is based on tourism and visitors.

When you tax something, you can expect less of it and we expect fewer visitors, which will hit our economy. And it is local businesses, not just in my constituency, who provide the first opportunity of a job for so many of our young people, young people who may want part time, flexible work because they are also in education. Yet this government says that state knows best. And through its unemployment rights bill, has reduced flexibility, which benefits those looking for work as well.

And it's done already. Some U-turns, some important U-turns, such as getting rid of the ridiculous idea of day one rights, by the way, something the previous Labour government never did. But it needs to go further. So what do I say to small business owners, to hard working families on the Isle of Wight when they see job opportunities disappear, their taxes go up? The only answer I have for them is your taxes are going up.
14:16
Joe Robertson Portrait Joe Robertson MP (Isle of Wight East, Conservative)
-
-
More tax for more welfare because the government today wants to grow an already substantial welfare bill. It didn't last summer. Last summer, the government tried to reduce welfare. Not by much, but it did try a reduction. But it had to abandon its plans. While while the Minister was delivering a speech in Minister was delivering a speech in this place because its backbenches said no, this is not a government being led from the front. It's being led from its backbenches and we have a caretaker Prime Minister in office.

So having abandoned his welfare plans, the Chancellor has done the opposite and increased welfare spending, and the government has a solution for the challenges affecting tourism and hospitality, for the fact that they are finding it hard to find people to do jobs. The government's solution, we hear just a few days ago, is to encourage people on welfare while they are on welfare, to do some of those jobs, but there are vacancies. Those job losses exist because of this government's taxation policy.

In fact, there are more people on welfare because of tax on small businesses, tourism and hospitality, hospitality. And now the government is asking those people who once had a job in the private sector and are now relying on the state to help them out by doing some of that work. I mean, this is both socialism and incompetence, and ultimately the whole country loses out because the economy is grinding to a halt. Inflation is up, unemployment is up, and the best way of funding public services is to grow the economy.

And by growing the economy, you increase the tax take without any taxes going up. In fact, you can reduce taxes and increase the tax take if your economy is growing and that is the money that pays for public services. Now, the Minister said when he spoke from the despatch box a short while ago, that the shadow Secretary of State was like Scrooge for setting out the severe challenges that this government's economic policy is presenting hard working families and businesses.

Madam Deputy Speaker, it is not Scrooge to hold up a mirror to decision makers to show them the outcome of their decisions. It doesn't matter whether it's Christmas time or at any other time. The Minister and the government need to hear the hard truth. And that is our role on

**** Possible New Speaker ****

these benches, and we're not going to be put off from talking about it. Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I draw members attention to my I draw members attention to my register of interests. I'm chair of the all party parliamentary Group on carers and also a member of the on carers and also a member of the Public Accounts Committee. I'd like to first just commend my hon. to first just commend my hon. Friend from Falkirk for speaking so much about his personal experience of working in the hospitality industry. I, like him, started out working as a waitress in a local hotel in Ilkley, just £1.70.

So I'm very pleased that the Labour government are doing all it can to raise that minimum wage for our youngest workers. The opposition appear under the guise of wanting to support seasonal workers, to actually be looking to scrap the biggest uplift in workers rights in a generation that this House has recently voted on a landmark bill, the Employment Rights Bill, that delivers on this Labour government's promise to put an end to insecurity, poor productivity
14:20
Anna Dixon Portrait Anna Dixon MP (Shipley, Labour)
-
-
and low pay for working people. The Conservatives, along with reform the Liberal Democrats, opposed ending exploitative zero hours contracts, opposed ending fire and contracts, opposed ending fire and rehire, opposed day one rights for paternity, parental bereavement leave and opposed giving statutory sick pay to some of the 1.3 million sick pay to some of the 1.3 million of our lowest paid workers. I would like, therefore, Madam Deputy Speaker, to focus my remarks on the benefits of the Employment Rights Bill, what it means particularly for adult social care and for unpaid carers.

Well, care workers are not necessarily seasonal. They have a lot in common, low pay, often insecure and variable hours each week. It was, in my view, a tragedy that during Covid, so many of our hard working and dedicated care workers feared staying at home when they were ill because they weren't entitled to statutory sick pay. And I am therefore very proud that this Labour government is strengthening those care workers rights. I don't see it as a choice. What's good for workers is good for business.

Take, for example, unpaid family carers. Flexibility is hugely important to the many of those that juggle care and work. It ensures that unpaid family carers, many of whom are women, can feel confident to apply for a job knowing that those rights are there from day one. Workers with guaranteed hours aren't going to be worrying about whether they can feed their kids or pay the bills. Keeping people in work, reducing recruitment costs and reducing absenteeism and boosting productivity. That's the result of providing for and giving security to workers, healthy workers a healthy workplace is better for workers, for business and for our economy.

The other thing that the Employment Rights Bill does for care workers is to make good on the promise of a fair pay agreement for care workers. The Health Foundation's analysis has found that 1 in 5 of residential care workers live in poverty. I find that an absolute travesty, given the vital work that care workers do looking after older adults and disabled adults day in, day out. And it's not surprising, perhaps, then, given that the public recognise what work great work these care workers do, that 77% of the public believe that care workers are paid too little.

So not only is the government, through this delivering on the Fair Pay Agreement for social care workers, but has already ensured a fairer funding formula for local authorities. And I do hope that as this gets negotiated, it will result in a fairer package of terms and conditions. Many of the providers not for profit providers already do pay the national living wage, but it's really important that care workers feel that they have a career, that it is a good job, and hopefully we can attract more young people into these sorts of jobs, giving them a more secure career to go into care work, not the low pay zero hour contracts, but guaranteed hours and better pay that can enable them to get that first step on a career in health and care.

And these changes will make a huge difference to those who provide amazing care and support for disabled adults and older people. The second area that I just want to highlight in my speech that I made, Madam Deputy Speaker, is the introduction of the Fair Work Agency, and you may be wondering what that has to do with care workers. But sadly, under the Tories, the decision to open up the skilled worker visa to care workers with no plans or preparations in place resulted in the horrific exploitation of care workers overseas.

Agencies were charging extortionate fees. New businesses here were set up registering solely to employ these overseas workers. I've heard cases Madam Deputy Speaker where they were given tied accommodation, then they were given zero hour contracts. They were expected to travel far away to get care work and as a result, they got into debt. If they complained, they were sacked with no sponsor. They couldn't take any other job in the economy here. Madam Deputy Speaker this is verging on modern slavery, and that's why I am very glad that the new Fair Work Agency will have powers to crack down on both these unscrupulous employers that leave workers so susceptible to abuse.

I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will give way to the hon. Gentleman. I'm grateful to the hon. Member for giving way. There's a bit of a for giving way. There's a bit of a debate going on at the moment. Unemployment has gone up every month since the government has been month since the government has been in power. The government benches say that's the fault of the last government. We on this side say government. We on this side say it's the fault of two budgets which have been anti-business.

And so would the hon. Member like to sort of put her money where her mouth is and say that if unemployment in, when would she say if she has faith in the Chancellor's policies, that unemployment in Shipley and across the country is going to come down for the first time, if you could put a month and a year on it, that would be great testament to her

**** Possible New Speaker ****

faith in the Chancellor. I. For his intervention. Clearly,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For his intervention. Clearly, you know, the package of changes that the Chancellor brought in are doing a huge boost to the economy and jobs. The investment going into businesses through the the support for scaling up businesses. I've got very brilliant businesses like Penningtons who are investing in a whole new warehouse, confident to base their business in Shipley and to expand. And I believe that some of the capital funds will go a long way towards that. And the apprenticeships and the youth guarantee are also we're already seeing youth unemployment coming down, and I'm very confident that that will continue.

We do have too many vacancies, still unfilled posts within care work, and I think a lot of that is because it is a very hard job, both physically and emotionally. And yet many people who were working in care found that they could get a better paid job down at Aldi. So we have to lift up the value of care work. We need to value it more as a society to attract people. There are jobs that we need to encourage young people into these vital jobs like care work.

Going back Madam Deputy Speaker to the Public Accounts Committee, briefly, before I come to sum up, the Public Accounts Committee was very highly critical of the lack of assessment of these exploitation risks. It did lead to vulnerable migrant workers facing debt bondage and unfair conditions. And so, as I say, I'm really pleased with the creation of the Fair Work Agency, Hope, and perhaps the Minister can can address this, whether it will also be able to help tackle the problem of overseas recruitment fraud as well.

But care workers are exploited in other ways, too, like other part time workers are often not paid for travel or the night sitting, although there have been legal cases to say that they should. So again, the Fair Work Agency, as I understand it, will also be making sure that these underpaid workers who are effectively not even receiving the minimum wage, that that will be tackled. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, I support the government amendment to the opposition motion.

I believe that Labour is pro-business, pro-worker the care sector is a major part of our economy. It employs some 1.6 million people, as well as providing vital care and support to millions of people. And I hope that these reforms will be the beginning of us creating the foundations for a national care service. Thank you very much.
14:28
Simon Hoare Portrait Simon Hoare MP (North Dorset, Conservative)
-
-
Simon Hoare. >> Very much indeed. Madam Deputy Speaker, let's just take a look, if we may, at the amendment which Mr. Speaker has selected in the name of Speaker has selected in the name of the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister's amendment tells us that he welcomes the policy paper. He welcomes the plan for small and medium sized business, which sets out wait for it, Madam Deputy Speaker, which sets out a comprehensive vision for productivity and success.

My hon. Friend for South Northamptonshire is less well trained in keeping her excitement levels under control. As you, Madam Speaker, because she says from a sedentary position, wow and wow indeed. 14 years of opposition, 18 months in government and a policy paper, a plan and a comprehensive vision that is the sum of the contribution that the Treasury Bench towards these important and vital parts of our sector. This government needs to learn. I suggest a key and important lesson that policy papers, plans and comprehensive visions deliver of themselves.

Nothing. They create no jobs. They give no certainty. They provide no confidence to either employees, employers, to investors, to entrepreneurs, to innovators or consumers. Strategy and policy are not the same things. Vision and delivery are not two sides of the same coin. They tell us in the amendment that the government's Employment Rights Bill will help seasonal workers by bringing the UK's outdated employment laws into the 21st century. But I would dispute first and foremost that our employment laws are outdated.

I think they have been organic and iterative over the decades. As one would expect, but they're not going to help seasonal workers who can't become seasonal workers because putative employers haven't either. The confidence to employ or the headroom to create those jobs and pay those salaries. So we're in this fantasy land, this fantasy idea of how you run an economy, you legislate and hey presto, pantomime like it happens. A strategy is published and bingo, it's all resolved.

Not the case. So let us turn down this first example will be, I'm sure, of enormous interest to the party opposite. I want to turn to Mark Fulton, the constituent my constituent in Tolpuddle, who is the landlord of the martyrs in. Now, anybody who knows their trade union history and I know the hon. Lady does well, it's a lovely park. She's been there. She hasn't been barred yet, but she's been there. 1834 1834. The Tolpuddle Martyrs. It's after them that this pub is named.

It was bought by the village for £500,000. It's a community asset type pub and one of the significant stakeholders is the TUC itself, who decided that thirsty trade unionists after the Martyrs Memorial might enjoy a pint. And indeed one of the excellent sandwiches which the hon. Lady has referenced. Well, Mr. Fulton, Mark Fulton writes to me post the Budget, and I quote, with the impact of this Budget, we will risk losing these vital community hubs that are so important to our local life and economy.

He, like others in all of our constituencies, have been arguing for and the freedom now exists outside of the European Union for a bespoke reduction of VAT on pub sales, including the wet trade. We are asking publicans who are providing far more in those facilities, those community hubs which Mark talks about, but they fight one hand tied behind their back when in essence they are paying a VAT rate of 28% of 20%. Forgive me, compared to those of supermarkets 2% business rates are clearly going to go up.

And this is again the fantasy world of this government sector representative group after sector representative group tells the government by the government's own figures in calculations, their business rates will be rising. Oh no, oh no, says the Minister. No, no no, they're wrong, they're wrong. Everybody else is wrong. I'm right because I'm a Minister of the Crown. This is the politics of the Emperor's new clothes. Yeah, and it's about time 1 or 2 people on that side of the House, on the government benches, stood up and told the Treasury team that many of their policies leave this government naked in terms of trying to garner and foster a small entrepreneurial business sector.

Employment, National insurance, employer, national insurance, increases in the minimum wage. Again, I quote from Mark Fulton, the latest rise, risking the opportunities for young people to be employed in our sector. He goes on to remind us that 40% of young people begin their careers in hospitality, the sector playing a crucial role in training, upskilling and supporting social mobility. All of that put at risk. And all of this, surely, Madam Deputy Speaker, irrespective of geography or party affiliation, should be worried if there is a cogent argument being deployed that social mobility.

Is being reduced directly as a result of government policy. As my hon. Friend for the Isle of Wight said in his excellent speech, much of the decisions these harmful decisions taken in this recent Budget were not of the government's choosing, but in essence, a fulfilment of what the Chancellor rightly said to rebellious backbenchers on welfare rebel, if you like, we'll abandon if we have to, but there will be a cost that will have to be paid and the cost will be tax, and therefore the concomitant diminution in confidence, both in employers and in customers.

I could quote several publicans, but Barbara Cousins, who owns and runs the Langton Arms in Tarrant Monkton, would have my guts for garters if I didn't take the opportunity of mentioning her. And my hon. Friend knows it well and says what a good pub it is. She replicates many of the points that Mark Fulton makes, but she does make a point particularly well. Rural pubs reliant upon seasonal summer trade in tourist areas are now obviously those pubs have to pay business rates, but whereby their major competitor in those small rural settings, Airbnb, pay no business rates at all.

It is an unlevel playing field and the government had an opportunity and possibly still does. As the finance bill progresses, to try to level that playing field. But we are asking these important sectors of our economy to go into bat for UK plc, to create the jobs that create the tax, that funds the public services, and at every step in turn, this government seems hell bent on hobbling them, on hamstringing them and tying their hands behind their back.

The government has a laudable aim to see housebuilding increase. Who doesn't? Again, an important part of social mobility. And we know that a lot of seasonal jobs are created in the construction sector. But in a customer email sent out just this very day by Travis Perkins saying from the 1st of January, supplier increases in prices will come in across the industry. Roofing. Let me just I will, but let me just finish this point. Roofing up 7%, bricks up 8%, blocks up 9%, landscaping up 8%.

Drainage up 8%. Plaster, plasterboard and cladding up 7%. Now you can increase costs and you can absorb as much as you can. But at some point, as Travis Perkins is pointing out, those increased costs can no longer be self absorbed and have to be passported off to the consumer. And when the consumer's costs go up, their margins of profit decrease their likelihood and potential and appetite for creating additional jobs disappears like a like a late or an early spring frost.

It goes like that, arguably, Madam Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, never to return. Lady.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Member for giving way. I'm so glad someone raised the construction industry in this debate. Although, of course, this debate. Although, of course, the jobs that the hon. Member is talking about aren't seasonal, they're contracts. And the key to maintaining sustained employment in the construction sector is having a strong pipeline of repeated projects so that people can build projects so that people can build their skills and move on to the next contract and the next contract and build a career in that way.

And and build a career in that way. And would he agree with me that this government's announcement of construction technical excellence colleges across the country, including close to me, at the end of the new tram line in Dudley, the announcement of £39 billion over the next ten years for sustainable housebuilding, including social and affordable house building, and the announcement of the largest sustained infrastructure funding in four decades, mean that there is going to be a sustainable pipeline and there will not be seasonal workers in sector Simon Hoare.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Over the next ten years. Again, it's another wow moment. Jan, it's another wow moment. Jan, tomorrow, in fact, we don't even know if it's jam tomorrow. It's a promise of something which might materialise. These sectors need materialise. These sectors need support now and I want to Madam Speaker bring my remarks, if I may, to a close by just highlighting this. What I fear is going to be a terrible downward pulling spiral of confidence, both from investors, employers and consumers.

I'm not an economist, but it does seem to me self-evident that if you increase the costs of employing people, you're likely to see fewer people employed. You might not expand your business, you may not create that new job. Now, general elections of themselves create a lack of confidence in the sector. This government was returned with a massive majority, which should be giving stability and confidence to the marketplace. And in actual fact, and it's the greatest perversity that we've seen since July 2024.

The complete reverse is taking place. And why is that? Because the Chancellor last year created in her own mind a black hole. She decided to fill it by additional taxes, and she assured the House in the country that this was a one off. This was a one off. Growth was going to do everything else. Spending was going to be looked at. Everything would be hunky dory. Well, that didn't come to pass. The government changed the environment. And what happened? We have the Budget of just a few weeks ago, fabrication, economic being economical with the Actualité.

Now that is saying to potential investors and job creators, well, we thought we might have believed them on year one. Year two transpired not to be the case. How many more acts that would make the Artful Dodger blush? Are they going to be dipping into our pockets next time, next time, and next time? Because we're going to have a rebellion on this, or we're going to have a rebellion on that, and that rebellion is going to have to be funded not by a recalibration of where government spending is allocated, but just increasing the pot that the government has to spend by increasing taxes.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I took the advice of our clerks with regards to whether I should conclude with a word or not, and the advice was I'd be better to sort of slightly spell it out, and I'm going to take their advice. I'm a small business owner in my constituency, and North Dorset is a constituency not of large firms. They're family businesses. Most will be micro, some will be small, precious few will be medium sized. There is a family business that has grown and was seeking to employ.

He wanted his kids to get involved with it as well and he said to me, Simon, he said, you can tell that Rachel Reeves because he said, Rachel Reeves, not the not the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the right hon. Lady, you can tell that the scriptwriters will probably be looking for a headline to describe this Budget in a few easy words for the media. She should describe it thus. Why the f should I bother Budget? Why the f should I bother to invest, to create, to provide opportunity for our young? To then pay the taxes to deliver the public services that we require? If the government doesn't give an F this side of the House certainly does.

There is an alternative conservative vision for this, and I look forward with colleagues to presenting that to the country over the coming months.
14:44
Alison Hume Portrait Alison Hume MP (Scarborough and Whitby, Labour)
-
-
Alison Hume. and I wish to refer members to my membership of Unison and the Writers Guild of Great Britain in Writers Guild of Great Britain in my constituency of Scarborough and Whitby. There are thousands of seasonal job opportunities each year, and as well as an enlarged tourism sector during the summer months, this regular seasonal employment for the rest of the year, such as the fabulous Scarborough Lights Festival, which is going on at the moment each and every winter. Overall, 11% of working people in Scarborough and Whitby are employed in retail, with another 20% working in hospitality.

The Employment Rights Bill will boost and protect these workers. They will will protect them against zero hour contracts and last minute shift cancellations. Madam Deputy Speaker, Having worked as a freelancer for many years, I understand the pressures that workers in the so-called gig economy face. Too many women have to constantly juggle their work around caring responsibilities with no certainty as to whether they will work enough to pay the bills each month. And I was one of these women.

This bill will establish day one parental rights and strengthen statutory sick pay, transforming the world of work for millions of women. In fact, 40% of unemployed women say that flexible working hours will likely get them into work if the party opposite claims to be pro growth, they cannot disregard the economic benefits of legal protections that will help women to enter and stay in the workforce. The Employment Rights Bill protects both employers and workers by implementing common sense protections and real financial provisions that will drive growth in coastal communities like mine and across the country, and I fully support the government's amendment here.
14:46
Luke Evans Portrait Dr Luke Evans MP (Hinckley and Bosworth, Conservative)
-
-
And Doctor Luke Evans. >> Thank you. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. And as it comes to Christmas, I tend to think of shows that I like to watch. And one of them is Blackadder in Blackadder Goes Forth. And near the end of it, there's a famous quote as Blackadder finally trying to get away, and he can't. He knows he's going to go over the top and he goes, well, it rhymes with clucking bell. And for me, that's what many in my constituents who run businesses now are feeling about the not one, but now two Labour budgets.

And when I think about the high streets that I have in L Shilton and Barwell and Hinckley, and you think about the little cafes and the restaurants that we have and the shops and the pubs, they're really feeling the pressure now because the government came in on a mandate of raising taxes. That's true, but at the tune of seven or maybe £8 billion, not £40 billion in the first Budget and £26 billion in the second Budget.

And now every government, our side has done it. When we were in government before, mainly to raise taxes. But the problem with the government at the moment and what the issue is hitting all my businesses are, and I've said it once and I'll say it again, it's this toxic concoction of everything changing at once, this constriction around the whole idea of growth. And we see it on the micro level on the high streets of Hinckley and Burbage, but also on the macro level as a country ever tightening red tape, ever tightening tax, all under the auspices that we're supposed to be growing as a country.

And we've seen inflation go up, we've seen unemployment go up and we've seen growth stagnate. And this is the reality that this country is facing. But so are my high streets. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think the hon. Gentleman for giving way under 14 years of the giving way under 14 years of the Conservatives productivity growth stagnated the worst in the G7. stagnated the worst in the G7. Would the hon. Gentleman like to enlighten members as to whether he thinks that helped or hindered

**** Possible New Speaker ****

thinks that helped or hindered businesses and the employees that they employ? Yeah. I'd love to.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'd love to. Elucidate, because I think if we go back to 2010, if you remember when we had to deal with the financial crisis, we had to borrow 158 billion to deal with that. Then we had to get the coffers back in the right position. And we were just about doing that before the pandemic hit, where we had to borrow another £400 billion to deal with. And every time she wasn't here in the in the last government. But every time we were here, the other side of the House were asking for us to spend more, and now we're feeling the pressures of having to deal with that.

And she talks about what she inherited. Well, she did also on her side, inherited the fastest growing economy in the G7. And yet we also had inflation at target and we had very little unemployment. All of those things are changing now under this government because of this government's policies. And it's easy to see why. If we look at the first Budget, we had, the increase in the national living wage, we had the increase in the National Insurance contributions, and we also had for hospitality the relief cut.

It was 75% for hospitality relief and now it was cut to 40%. Fast forward to this Budget and we've had the national Living Wage raised again. We've also had that relief cut again. And now the government has come forward and saying, well, we're putting in transition measures. But the problem is the transitions measures mean that for the majority, and it is the vast majority of businesses, they are actually going to see a 15% increase. Now that is capped. I will give the government credit to that.

But the problem is for the vast majority of them, it's 15% this year into 30, 40 and up to 70% in the three years. That is the prospect that these hospitality businesses that have already been struggling by the very nature of what the pandemic put in place in the first place, and the difficulty of the fact that we've had high inflation because of the war in Ukraine means it's very, very difficult for these businesses. They are the most vulnerable ones. And yet the toxic concoction this government is putting in place is making it worse.

And so I fear when I go down my high street for Christmas, speaking to those businesses and I do, of what prospect does the government have for them? How is it going to encourage them and bring them forward? Because I agree, I don't think the other side is anti-business. I agree they want to support workers, but I think they are slightly blinkered and naive to thinking of giving extra rights and extra increases in pay without taking into a consequence what may well happen, because it's all very well having increased pay.

But if you don't have a job, that's increase in nothing. And that is the heart of the problem we have here. We want to see more secured pay. The previous previous Prime Minister for Uxbridge talked about high productivity, high value jobs. We all want that on both sides of the house. It's how we get there and we don't get there by tying a tight noose around the businesses that are going to drive those jobs. And that's my real concern here, because if you're thinking of setting up a restaurant in Market Bosworth or looking to start a new pub in Donisthorpe, why? Why would you do it? Why would you take the risk, take on that extra employment, take on someone's livelihood? Because most employers are good employers and they care deeply about their workforce.

Because already what we're seeing is cafes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My hon. Friend. Give way. I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. I just wanted to for giving way. I just wanted to reflect on the point he was making about risk, and that employers are about risk, and that employers are taking personal risk when they set up businesses, when they employ people, and when they have so much people, and when they have so much cost piled upon them. That risk benefit equation evaporates, and with it, the jobs that they deliver to other people in their communities.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I bow to her experience because she is entirely right. As someone who I know has run many businesses, who I know has run many businesses, been involved, she speaks the truth of what businesses and risk takers are looking at in this country, are looking at in this country, saying, why would I take that risk? Why would I take that responsibility if there isn't any reward, I would have had more truck reward, I would have had more truck with the government if they sequentially set out that maybe over the next 3 or 4 budgets, this over the next 3 or 4 budgets, this is the way they wanted to get there so that you could increase, for example, the National Insurance contribution as a one off and then build around it.

But the problem is it's this toxic concoction of it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

all coming in one go. I will give way. Gentleman. He's making a very interesting speech. And on his point about risk, speech. And on his point about risk, I think hon. Members on that side always look at that through the lens of the employer. Now there are lens of the employer. Now there are of course risks. I spent most of my career in the private sector, so I career in the private sector, so I do have some experience of this. However, would he also accept that employees take risks when they take employees take risks when they take up a job? They need to be paid sufficiently so that they can live their lives with dignity, look after their children, etc.

And would he accept that it is a balance? It is a balance that people must think about in both

**** Possible New Speaker ****

seeking jobs and employers giving jobs. Absolutely right. And of course,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Absolutely right. And of course, as an MP, he will be an employer of his staff and team. And no doubt he is a good employer who offers good is a good employer who offers good terms. And he cares deeply about the staff that he's looking after. The problem is we have a taxpayer The problem is we have a taxpayer funded job. The private sector don't and have to generate that funding. And so they're the ones funding. And so they're the ones who have to take the risk and work out whether or not there will be a job there in the first place.

And worse still, at the moment, because of the government's Budget choices, many cafes pubs are looking to reduce their hours of being open, reduce their staffing hours or possibly even having to close because they can't make the numbers work up. And it's that cumulative effect that we've talked about that we see at the micro level on the likes of Twycross, but at the macro level of the country, with every industry talking out and saying we are having problems here. So I was hoping the government might come forward and listen to those ideas, because if the mantra, as the government has always been when it came in the election, the number one mission was growth.

All the measures that are being taken are anti-growth in this way, and we're seeing the results of that with inflation being higher. So as I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

come to the end of what I have to say, oh, of course. I'm grateful to the hon. Member for giving way. Is he as frustrated as I am that we're often accused from the government benches of from the government benches of talking down the economy? And from my recollection over the last 14 my recollection over the last 14 years, on average, the Conservative Party set the conditions for the creation of 800 jobs per day. And creation of 800 jobs per day.

And having just checked the statistics, I think it's running at about 373 under the current government. And inflation has risen net net every month that the government had been in power since July last year. And so would he take an intervention from any of the very few members on the government benches that are there, from someone who's prepared to say when they think unemployment might actually start to fall from the record levels of low unemployment that they inherited

**** Possible New Speaker ****

from the last government. Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, with your leave, I will take an your leave, I will take an intervention on that point at this time, if anyone would like to. But I think more importantly, I think I think more importantly, I think what my hon. Friend is, is, is making a right point. It's government's job to set the framework. There is no such thing framework. There is no such thing as government money. It is taxpayers money earned by those who create the wealth, which are create the wealth, which are businesses and workforce, that go out to do it, to provide the public sector the money that they need to be able to do their job.

And this is a simple if I turn it into my trade as a doctor, we talk about a, B, C, d, e. When you come to a patient, there is no use dealing with the circulation, the heart if the person doesn't have a clear airway. The same applies here. We need to have an economy that's growing and thriving, to be able to give the foundations to the funding, to be able to go into the likes of the NHS and the education side. And this is where I think the government might be slightly wrong and got the balance wrong, as we heard from the Member for Rugby, because if you tilt it too far and make it too tight for people not to ever take that risk, we aren't going to have that tax inflow in the first place.

Or worse still, we've seen the 16,000 millionaires and counting leave the country. But even more sadly, is those I will give away. And I'm grateful.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

To the. Member for giving way. I had the pleasure of meeting two risk takers in my constituency this weekend, watch watchers and auto club, run by people who were simply wanting by people who were simply wanting to grow and offer chances and opportunities to young people in my town. However, whilst I was there, I also met many micro and small businesses, all of whom felt businesses, all of whom felt neglected and they felt that they weren't being offered the support that they deserved.

I supported the Employment Rights Bill. I support the rights of employees. However, I am beginning to wonder and worry. Are we pitting employers against

**** Possible New Speaker ****

employees and vice versa? There. I very much welcome his intervention and there is a risk of intervention and there is a risk of doing that. But we have to remember it doesn't need to be like this because there are many, many good because there are many, many good employees and many, many good employers. Far more than we this House like to talk about. Our job House like to talk about. Our job is to protect those margins. The worry is if you make those margins too tight, you actually hinder the too tight, you actually hinder the very people who are doing a good job, which I think is what the inference he is pointing towards.

And I certainly hear in my constituency. And that's why I'm asking the government to rethink this balance, to rethink about all this toxic concoction of legislation, red tape, taxation all at once causing such a big problem. Because at the end of the day, if we don't have those businesses driving our growth, if we don't have them providing those jobs there, you can have as many employment rights as you want. But if you don't have a job, they don't apply. It's as simple as that.

So in conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker, like at the end of the Blackadder Goes Forth, he resigns himself to going over the top. Baldrick does tap him on the shoulder and says. Sir, I, I do have a cunning plan. I hope there is a cunning plan coming from Chancellor to be able to deal with this. But I won't wait with

**** Possible New Speaker ****

bated breath. Chris Vince. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. And I thank the Minister and the Shadow Minister for opening this debate today, and to both of them for taking my slightly too long intervention. And can I thank Sir Tony Robinson for his visit to Harlow before the general election. Harlow before the general election. He had a cunning plan to get myself elected as the MP for Harlow, and in that particular cunning plan he was successful. I want to start by thanking businesses in my constituency of Harlow for everything they do.

I am later this week visiting the wonderful Stort Valley gifting to get my Christmas presents. I take the the lead from my predecessor in this house, Robert Halfon, who did the same thing. But I want to talk about another Stort Valley business,
14:59
Chris Vince Portrait Chris Vince MP (Harlow, Labour )
-
-
Stort Valley Growers, who are in my constituency. I'm sure there's a constituency. I'm sure there's a joke from the party opposite about growth, but I'm going to let them make that themselves. I met with them recently and I will continue them recently and I will continue to meet with them as I do with other businesses in my constituency. I mentioned specifically, Madam I mentioned specifically, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Valley Growers, because they do use seasonal workers, seasonal workers, particularly seasonal workers who've come from other EU countries.

And what I found, I met with the Stewart Valley Growers Association recently alongside Nazeing Parish Council, and what I found particularly heartening about that meeting is how keen navy and parish council were to work with the Valley growers to support seasonal workers to make them feel part of the community during the time they spent in the UK. Now they did raise concerns. I'm looking try not to look at the Member for Richmond as I say this, but she did.

Richmond Park sorry, but they did mention concerns with regards the the the additional red tape, red tape following Britain leaving the EU. And I would ask the Minister in his winding up to consider to consider that and particularly how we can cut down red tape to ensure that the Stalk Valley growers, who do an important job growing food for people in our in my constituency, but across the UK, get the seasonal workers they like. What was raised in that meeting was the fact that many of these seasonal workers come over to this country to, to to work in, in nazeing on a regular basis.

And they have said in recent years they've seen some of those families because often they are families not returning. I welcome the measure the government has taken in the Budget to support businesses and workers they employ, tackling late payments, reducing regulation burdens and also extending the grace period for extending business premises. I also welcome Madam Deputy Speaker. Harlow is one of the places that will benefit from the Pride of Place programme. Looking at how we revive our public spaces, I think something that I always try and find cross-party agreement when I give my speech.

I hope, Madam Deputy Speaker, we can all agree that our high streets face challenges and I look forward to seeing how we can revitalise Harlow in that respect. What I would also say, what I would like to ask the Secretary of State is to consider in his summing up, how we can cut the the red tape and bureaucracy which is holding back businesses that I speak to. I welcome, Madam Deputy Speaker, the commitment of the co-op. I have to declare an interest as a Labour and Co-op MP to bring down the cost for thousands of items as a result of the government's changes to business rates.

I will very briefly talk about the IRB and my favourite Swedish furniture makers. People often criticise and say Ikea is not a British company, but it employs British workers and they absolutely welcome the Employment Rights Bill. When I met with them earlier this year, the number one thing that their number one complaint about the IRB was it was taking too long to implement. And I think it's very interesting, Madam Deputy Speaker, that when I speak to staff at Ikea, they are very, very happy in their jobs and very, very loyal to a company that treats them incredibly well.

And I think we should be thankful of that. We must, madam Deputy Speaker, turn a page on insecure, poor, poor, poorly productive and low paid jobs. And I want to add my welcome. She's not in her place. I welcome the comments that my hon. Friend from Shipley made about the need to support unpaid carers. I take the opportunity to talk about unpaid carers and young carers at any opportunity. In this slightly off topic, I appreciate the Madam Deputy Speaker because they are absolutely a hugely important part of this country and really make a huge difference ultimately.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I said in one of my interventions, of course, being a government is about making choices, sometimes making difficult choices. We saw under the last government austerity that led to our schools and our hospitals are absolute breaking point. We do need to invest in those vital services for people in Harlow, being able to go to the hospital to actually get those appointments is going to make a huge difference to them. They can get back to work and continue to contribute to the economy.

Thank you for your time today and I look

**** Possible New Speaker ****

forward to hearing further contributions from the House. Dame Caroline Dinenage. Thank you very much. Madam Deputy Speaker. As I mentioned to Deputy Speaker. As I mentioned to the Minister, when he was in his place earlier, I started my first business at the age of 19, and it's business at the age of 19, and it's what I did for 20 years before I became an MP, I ran businesses. It's why I'm so upset at some of It's why I'm so upset at some of the way that this government have behaved, because I understand viscerally how taking that leap viscerally how taking that leap takes, takes everything.

It takes everything you have. It takes your time, your money, your energy, your social life. And it's all a risk, you know, for so many months and years. In some cases you work almost without pay. But the reward is just so fantastic because you
15:04
Caroline Dinenage Portrait Dame Caroline Dinenage MP (Gosport, Conservative)
-
-
can employ people, you can create jobs, you can offer opportunities, you can change lives, you can change futures, and you can generate your own supply chain for others, for other small businesses to do the same. And you can play a really valuable part in your local really valuable part in your local community. It's what small businesses across our communities are doin they are brave, they are resilient, they are dedicated and they need to they are dedicated and they need to be valued.

But over recent years, so many of them are suffering. First of all, the pandemic took a huge toll on them, followed by the energy crisis. And now, I suppose worst of all, there was a government that pledged to see them, to see their contribution and to help them grow, to deliver growth. And this government is letting them down. I just feel so viscerally that enterprise and and entrepreneurship should be rewarded. It's why I run local schemes in my constituency. I've got the best independent shop competition running at the moment, in line with Small Business Saturday last weekend.

It's the sixth year I've run this competition. We get the results on Saturday. It's very hard fought on my Facebook site. At the moment, thousands of residents are voting and they love doing it because residents like to show how much these independent traders, these little shops mean to local jobs, to our communities and to keeping vibrant and and compelling high streets. Last year I held Best Pub competition and after another very fierce public vote, the winner was the Windsor Castle in Hadaway.

And when I went to visit them to give them their certificate, I saw the time, the effort, the pride that their team put into everything they do, into the programme of events, into the decorations, into the hospitality they offer, just like all the other pubs that were on that long list, and how much local people value their local. But the message from these pubs Madam Deputy Speaker is stark. They are suffering. Despite the Chancellor's spin, the average hospitality business will see business rates rise by almost £20,000 over the next three years.

The statistics have already been mentioned today very effectively by our frontbench shadow Minister, but these numbers are real lives, they're real jobs, they're real futures, and they represent an existential threat that £20,000 represents an existential threat to the margins of these businesses. It will drive them to extinction. Combine that with rising energy costs, with the government's promised to tackle last year's national tackle overheads, with last year's rise to national Insurance, this is a perfect storm and it's having a direct impact on jobs in my Gosport constituency, particularly young people.

It's closing off traditional routes into work. As a parent, I know that a part time Saturday job, seasonal, seasonal, seasonal job is so valuable. We we probably all did it. My first job was Oliver's Shoe Shop in Waterlooville High Street, £10 a day Madam Deputy Speaker spent most of it on shoes. It taught me a lot. It taught me employability skills. It taught me how to save some money. Actually not. I spent most of it on shoes, but it also taught.

It also taught me a very valuable lesson. I didn't want a career in retail or selling shoes, but all these are fantastic life lessons. They're fantastic experiences that prepare people for their future careers. And some of these are on contracts that the party opposite have such a visceral problem with. But yet they do. They offer flexibility. They offer, they offer convenience, particularly during exam time when our young people don't want to necessarily be doing all those hours. And there are sectors which need that flexibility.

Hospitality, leisure events we heard from in the select committee this week. We heard from some of the major events, things like the London Marathon, that their number of staff that they need grows enormously as you go towards the event and then obviously tails off afterwards. And these are sectors that offer the most chances for young people, and they are right in the crosshairs of the government's punishment. The evidence is clear. Madam Deputy Speaker, in Gosport, it couldn't be more tangible. Young people are now out of work.

Benefits has gone up 31% in the last year alone. A recent Telegraph article painted a bleak picture of prospects for young people in my Gosport constituency. It makes for very

**** Possible New Speaker ****

tough reading. Yes, of course. Thank the right hon. Lady for giving way. Does she accept that giving way. Does she accept that more 18 to 24 year olds are in employment than a year ago? 210,000 employment than a year ago? 210,000 more according to the November Labour Force Survey. So the story

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of doom and gloom that she is explaining is not entirely the case. Let me be the.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Let me be the. Case, but he needs to read his data with just a little bit more accuracy, because the number, a number in unemployment has also gone up. And as I just said, I'll repeat it again. It's gone up 31% in the last year in the Gosport constituency alone. And it's all very well swapping numbers across the chamber. But these are lives, these are futures. These are opportunities to get on a career ladder. And he should be ashamed of his of his party for what they're doing for young people in my constituency, it's the law of unintended consequences.

If local businesses are not giving opportunities to young people, it impacts the fabric of a town. It impacts the social fabric of a town. I recently received an email from one of the pubs in Gosport who said, And I'm going to quote, I can guarantee we will not be open this time next year if things continue. The Labour government is doing nothing to help this industry. The knock on effect is to customers, to staff, to us, to jobless, to homeless. Sadly, there will be no British culture left and that is the very sad truth of it.

It's only the government at the moment who are gaining and laughing all the way to the bank, the place and the building and the whole customers. The whole aspect of the local pub will be no more Madam Deputy Speaker is what he said. And then there's the hair and beauty salon and another, another fantastic industry worth £5 billion and as much again in social value. But according to the National Hair and Beauty Federation, the government's tax policies are forcing businesses to make very tough decisions, taking on fewer staff, fewer apprentices, apprentices, incentivising staff to become self-employed.

Without all the protections that the government, the government seem to think that they want to promote. The British Hair Consortium have warned of an existential drop off of the number of apprentices entering the sector. A beauty parlour in Gosport recently told me that they weren't optimistic at all about the health of the sector over the next year, and they don't think the government are supportive of businesses like

**** Possible New Speaker ****

theirs. I will. Thank you very much for to the speaker for giving way. Would she speaker for giving way. Would she agree with me that the way to solve the crisis in apprenticeships, in hair and beauty and the crisis in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

bogus self-employment, in hair and beauty, is to strengthen the single status of worker? Yeah. Well, it's. All very.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

All very. Well supporting the status of work if if there are jobs to offer people. But if you haven't got a people. But if you haven't got a job, you know, it's all very well having status. But if you haven't got a job to attach that status to, you feel like a bit of a lemon. And as I'm sure the hon. Lady might do after that question. But the thing is, what businesses are saying, and she really should listen to them in her own constituency, actually, that they don't feel that the government are supporting them.

And actually, you know, given given her track record in her, in her previous life, she should understand that these hair and beauty industries are industries that disproportionately employ a lot of young people, a lot of women, and are very often women owned businesses. So this is a government that is not friendly to women owned businesses either. Retail, hospitality, hair and beauty. Taken together, these are all sectors that will prove the death knell of our high street. And the hon. Gentleman from Harlow over there spoke about how important it is to see his high street regenerated.

If we are going to regenerate our high streets and see them as living, breathing, vibrant things, we need to make sure that they are filled, that we imagine them as, re-imagine them as places not just where we shop, but where we live, where we work, where we socialise, where we use our leisure activity. And that the only way that that's going to be delivered is if they are filled with small, independent traders. But since the Budget, over 1000 pubs and restaurants have closed the equivalent to two every day.

A similar trend we're seeing in the culture, Media and Sport Committee through our work on grassroots music venues, which are still closing at the rate of two a week, and similar to what my hon. Friend for Hinckley and Bosworth said. They say the small business rate review outcome is nothing short of a disaster for them. A cap of 15% this year goes up to a 40% cap in 2829, and that after transitional relief that that's that that's what they're getting after transitional relief.

And that still won't be the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

end of it. Yes, I'll give way. I'm very grateful for giving way. I think one of the concerns is when I think one of the concerns is when the Chancellor stood up and said they're changing business rates. There was some relief across the industry, but realising that actually what is happening is actually what is happening is because the temporary relief that's been there for five years from the pandemic is now being stripped away. It, on the other hand, we're It, on the other hand, we're getting these new business rates, but actually they're much worse than they were before.

So it's the cumulative effect of crossing both cumulative effect of crossing both over that's causing the problem and why bills will actually go up rather than come down. Does she agree with me 100%?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He absolutely hits the nail on the head. This is what the Grassroots Music Venue Trust are Grassroots Music Venue Trust are saying. They say that despite multiple Ministers on the record saying that business rates would go saying that business rates would go down for the live music sector, they cannot find a single venue in the country where bills will be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the country where bills will be lower. It's it's really it's of course I'll give way. hon. Lady, for giving way. She

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hon. Lady, for giving way. She may recall my Prime Minister's question last week I raised the case of Claire Howard Jewellery and Fakenham, just one of many shops that contacted me in the aftermath of the Budget. But there's a real sense of anger that, on the one hand, the Budget was claiming that there was a reduction in business rates, particularly for hospitality, retail and leisure. But their experience looking at the numbers was that it was going in exactly the opposite direction. Does she agree with me that there is a real sense of a breach of trust? When you hear politicians saying one thing in public, when secretly in the small print, doing the opposite? Thank you.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. I mean, he's he's absolutely right to to to talk about this. They may to to to talk about this. They may be fooling their backbenchers, but they're not fooling our constituents. And it goes back to constituents. And it goes back to the wider question, which I know it isn't just members on this side of the House that are asking. Our the House that are asking. Our constituents are asking it to whose side of this Labour Party on what is the strategy and whose side are is the strategy and whose side are they on? Are they on the side of business that's not on the side of working people.

80,000 working people have lost their job in the hospitality sector alone. They aren't on the side of my constituents either. I've already said the Minister may not have been in the room when I mentioned it, but 31% more young people on unemployment benefit in the Gosport constituency in the last year alone. They're not they're not on the side of my constituents. National insurance contribution rises have hit them disproportionately due to the very high proportion of people in my constituency who work in either caring or leisure or other service occupations.

It's three times more than the national average. And the Budget this year confirmed that Labour aren't on the side of our small businesses or our high streets either. It's why I welcome the Shadow Chancellor's plans to introduce that to 100% business rate relief for the retail, leisure and hospitality sector, and I think the Minister should look at it. So look, I want to bring my comments to a conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker. But what I would say is that the Minister opened with his analogies to A Christmas Carol and likened the shadow Minister to Ebenezer Scrooge, which is a a travesty.

He's nothing like a Scrooge. But, well, The Christmas Carol can offer a cautionary tale to all of us. Madam Deputy Speaker, let's talk about Jacob Marley, the ghost whose heavy chains are a metaphor for the burdens he created in his actions in life. He says, I wear the chains I forged in life. I hope the minister's chains don't prove to be the misery that he and his government are delivering for businesses and our communities in. Thanks.
15:17
Antonia Bance Portrait Antonia Bance MP (Tipton and Wednesbury, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I will beg the indulgence of the House, just for a moment to welcome the opening this week on marketplace in central Wednesbury marketplace in central Wednesbury of the new Walden restaurant. The menu looks absolutely delicious and I very much look forward to sampling it soon. I also wanted to mention Chris Birch from the Swift Group in Wednesbury, who I met yesterday. He was in town to go to the Goldman Sachs 10-K small businesses reception yesterday evening, Chris and his 36 employees.

He's the managing director. It's a family owned business. Make industrial kitchens, commercial kitchens. He spoke to me about the help that he's received with solar panels that are going to be introduced on his buildings, and he's got a grant for that with the grant to help with CRM, with the help he's received from the Goldman Sachs scheme. And he also spoke to me, and I was so very pleased to hear this. And I know in particular, the Minister for Small Business will be glad to hear this as well.

He spoke to me about his recent success in winning a major government public procurement contract to supply every prison in the country with kitchen equipment, huge multi-million pound contract won by SME thanks to the targets that have been put in place to ensure that SMEs are able to access public procurement. And I know all of the House will be so very pleased to hear that, and that that bit of the small business strategy is really beginning to take effect. And I thank Chris for coming down to Parliament and telling me about it yesterday, and I look forward to visiting him and his staff team soon.

Now, in response to some of the points made in the debate today, I know, and none of us on this side will apologise for being a government in a hurry. Perhaps at times we do try to do many, many things at the same time, but there is a reason for that which is opposition will teach you about the powerlessness of being unable to affect the things that you want to. And I can hear in the frustration of members opposite, the regret they feel for their powerlessness in the face of a government doing things that they don't like.

But it will be good to hear some of the members opposite apologise for the damage of the 14 years that has led us to the situation that we're in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

now. Of course I will. He's apologising. Grateful to the hon. Lady for giving way, and I notice that giving way, and I notice that there's quite a lot of young people in the public gallery at the moment. in the public gallery at the moment. This the former government left almost record levels of low unemployment, and unemployment has unemployment, and unemployment has gone up every month that this new government has been in power. So government has been in power.

So would she like to answer how this government in a hurry is actually heading in the right direction, and perhaps suggest when unemployment in her constituency and across the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

country might start to come down, rather than continually going up? Yeah. Good question. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Member for his intervention. And as I'm sure he knows me well enough by now that I'm not going to by now that I'm not going to indulge in silly games. But what I will say, what I will say by now, will say, what I will say by now, what I will say is that the priority for this government is to get the economy growing, which is why we're investing in why we're investing in infrastructure. It is why we are rebuilding our public services.

It is why we put the greatest level of investment in our public infrastructure. It is why we are investing £39 billion in housebuilding. As I said to the member, no longer in his place for North Dorset earlier today, it is why we are rebuilding our public finances and yes, at times that does involve some difficult choices and some that not everyone may always agree with. But we are making the fair and the right choices, asking people with the broadest shoulders to bear the heavier load, rebuilding public

**** Possible New Speaker ****

services, helping with the cost of living. And yes, clearing up the Tory mess. Yeah. We are cutting borrowing more

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We are cutting borrowing more than any other country in the G7, leading to a doubling of the leading to a doubling of the headroom to £21.7 billion. We have the highest levels of public investment in four decades. We are backing entrepreneurs and fast backing entrepreneurs and fast growing companies with tax breaks to list and to hire. Here in the UK. to list and to hire. Here in the UK. Our planning changes will back the builders. Devolution for local growth will mean local growth spreads outside London and the South East.

Something so very close to my heart and to the hearts of many in this place. And yes, we are proud to be putting up the national minimum wage so that people have more money in their pockets, because the core problem affecting the retail and hospitality industries is that people don't have money in their pockets to spend on our high streets and getting the getting wages going up, and they are going up faster than prices. Getting wages going up is the way to have people with more money in their pockets.

It is, of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

course, good friends. With Rugby. My friend is making an excellent speech. Did she notice yesterday that the Leader of the Opposition said that she didn't want the national minimum wage to want the national minimum wage to increase at all? And does she think that this indicates that there might be a cold freeze in the air?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

might be a cold freeze in the air? I'm Tony Benn. I thank my hon. Friend and he reads my mind. This was the point I reads my mind. This was the point I was just about to make. I was so sad to see the Leader of the Opposition abandon what was one of the better policies of the last government, that there should be a fast rising national minimum wage at all times? I agreed with very little. I agreed with the last set of Prime Ministers before this one on very little.

But one thing I did agree with them on was that it was right to maintain the machinery of the Low Pay Commission, a tripartite body where unions, businesses and academics come together with government to look at the prevailing conditions in the country, get out there and visit businesses of all types in all regions. In just a moment when I finished this point of all types in all regions, including hospitality and retail, and set the national minimum wage at a level that would work both for workers and for businesses and approach this government has continued, and I am sad to see that the Leader of the Opposition intends to abandon it and abandon low paid workers to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

frozen pay. Of course I'll give way. Grateful to the hon. Lady for giving way. Would she acknowledge giving way. Would she acknowledge that under the last conservative administration, the minimum wage rose and at the same time we rose and at the same time we created 4 million new jobs and left unemployment at a record low. And unemployment at a record low. And the difference now is, in only 17 months, unemployment has risen by months, unemployment has risen by 280,000.

As a direct result of her government's policies. So our caution on the minimum wage is it is now at a level with their economic policies that you are price, that they are pricing young

**** Possible New Speaker ****

people out of work. Tony Vaughan Bath. I thank the hon. Member for his

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention and I wouldn't wish to try his generosity, but it seems to me that I have already been me that I have already been generous in my in my tribute to the work of the previous government in continuing to maintain the continuing to maintain the machinery of the Low Pay Commission, something that this government has continued, and continuing to make sure that the national minimum wage sure that the national minimum wage rose. I will admit that many people in my position fear greatly in 2010 that the Conservatives will come into government, admittedly in coalition, and would immediately tear up the national minimum wage.

And the fact that they didn't was a great thing. The pinning to two thirds male median wages was a good thing, and I am so sad that the Leader of the Opposition has departed from the consensus on this point. The national minimum wage is set by a tripartite body. It is not too high because business were in the room arguing their case. The commissioners went out on visits around the country to look at the prevailing economic conditions. It is set by consensus, using tripartite machinery, and it is important that all of us understand that that has served this country well has made extreme low pay a thing of the past in this country.

And I am sad that the Conservatives

**** Possible New Speaker ****

have departed from this consensus on that point. I will. Thank her for.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank her for. Giving way. I think she makes an excellent, excellent point about the need to see the minimum wage increase. People who live in my constituency of Harrogate and Knaresborough simply cannot afford to live or work in the area, and it's a real problem. But does she it's a real problem. But does she accept that it's not just minimum wage? That's the issue for employers, but it's the combination of increasing employer NICs, business rates. And that's what people really when you go out and you go out and speak to them,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that's what they're worried about. Not necessarily the minimum wage, but the cocktail of this package that the government have introduced. Yeah. hon. Member for his intervention.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hon. Member for his intervention. And he need have no fear about the extent to which I talk to businesses in my constituency. And businesses in my constituency. And more widely, I see at least one employer every single week, often not in retail and hospitality, representing a manufacturing representing a manufacturing constituency like mine. I recognise the concerns, but I would say in this country we need to have a this country we need to have a functioning set of public services. We need to have an NHS that wasn't asking people to wait as long as it was.

When we took up office. In my constituency, waiting lists have fallen by 45% for people waiting over a year for an operation. That is absolutely incredible and it is achieved because of the difficult decisions our Chancellor of the Exchequer took to put money into the NHS. I know that many people regret that decision. They wish the end, the reduced waiting list, but they do not will the means on this side. We will not dodge hard choices. We will will the ends and we will will the means Budget.

Of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

course I will. She's incredibly generous. I just wondered how she then feels, just wondered how she then feels, given the the focus on cutting waiting lists and and tackling NHS challenges, how she feels about the National Insurance employer contributions which also fell on to contributions which also fell on to places like GP surgeries, care homes, children's hospices in actual fact, you know, that are also proving an enormous burden on also proving an enormous burden on the NHS and are sucking up quite a lot of the extra money that the government purports to be putting into it.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

The hon. Lady makes her point well, and she's made it this only for me to respond on that point. I for me to respond on that point. I would also say. I would also say that after 14 years of flatlining wages, wages are now growing faster wages, wages are now growing faster than prices. That is incredibly important. And I was so proud to see wages go up by more in the see wages go up by more in the first ten months of this government than they went up in the first ten years of the last, and the Budget did more on the cost of living, whether it be frozen fares, frozen prescriptions, frozen fuel duty, £150 off energy bills and my favourite policy thousands of pounds in the pockets of the poorest families in the UK, which they will spend on high streets like those in my constituency calling on Union Street in Wednesbury in central Tipton, of our shopping centre, because that is where low income families spend any extra pound on food and on will.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you for giving way. She's been characteristically courteous and she is around this house. and she is around this house. However, I just she's absolutely correct in outlining the choices and some of the policies that her and some of the policies that her government has made. But does she not agree with me that in order to have delivered those things, that have delivered those things, that is off the back of higher taxation, which means that the employer employers in this country have less employers in this country have less money to employ people, which means that the proceeds of growth do not mean that there will be better public services.

She's right that she spent her government are spending more money, but that's on taxation. That's not on growth or entrepreneurship in this country because of the policies that her government is putting forward.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Member for his kind words and for his intervention. It is absolutely clear that It is absolutely clear that alongside investment in public services, there is investment in infrastructure, there is investment infrastructure, there is investment in housebuilding, there is investment in making sure that this is a good country to grow and scale is a good country to grow and scale a business. I am glad of those things. I am also glad that we took action to ensure that the poorest families are able to feed all of their children.

Yeah, the way to make the high street thrive is people with more money to spend. And I will also say, I will repeat the statistic that my friend the Member for Rugby used. There are more 18 to 24 in work this year than there were a year ago, but neat numbers are still too high. People who are familiar with the constituency I represent will not be surprised to hear that they are particularly high in my corner of the Black Country, and this is in no small part due to the failures of the party opposite in government, not least during the pandemic when they kept the schools closed but allowed pubs to open.

Now those opposite keep calling on us on this side to engage in further welfare reform to cut the welfare bill. And it is interesting to me that when we do so, when we announce a clear, costed, proven evidence plan to get young people back into work, as we did this weekend, they then don't like it. It feels like history repeating itself. 1516 years ago I remember the Future Jobs Fund and the way that the Future Jobs Fund gave hope to a generation of young people kicked out of work from a global financial crisis, no fault of their own.

Hundreds of thousands of them got jobs through the Future Jobs Fund, and it was particularly effective with the hardest to help young people and in tough labour markets, in places like that which I represent. And it was canned basically on day one by a conservative Chancellor. I am so glad I will do in just a moment. I am so glad that our Work and Pensions Secretary is building on the legacy of the Future Jobs Fund to help a new generation of young people happily give way, much.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Like the hon. Ladies constituency, my constituency relies on its manufacturing industry and there our apprenticeship guarantees and support will make a huge difference to people in my constituency. But I to people in my constituency. But I look back at her history lesson and go back to the scheme. I recently go back to the scheme. I recently met someone who, at 16 did a apprenticeship and he's just about to take over as chief chief operating officer of the company that he works for.

That's the difference. A good apprenticeship

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and investing in young people can make. Agree with my hon. Friend, as I have done since the first time we worked together more than 20 years worked together more than 20 years ago. On the subject of welfare reform. It is. It is interesting to hear the advocacy for it. And of course, today we've heard a lot course, today we've heard a lot about the difficulties with business rates, and I won't rehearse the arguments that have been well made by my friends on the frontbench about the action that this government is taking to help the hospitality and retail sectors on business rates.

But I will make this point. We've heard repeatedly from the benches opposite that they would like to abolish business rates for retail and hospitality, and yet they don't have a plan to do what they say they want to do, because to pay for it, somehow they will find £47 billion worth of savings, and the majority of that will come through indiscriminate cutting of the welfare Budget. It is not clear to me how that is a credible plan. When the annual welfare bill went up by £114 billion a year on their watch.

Now, of course, you would not expect me to speak in a debate like this without talking about my pride in our Employment Rights Bill and our plan to make work pay. I am proud beyond words to speak for hospitality workers and for seasonal workers who will benefit from this bill. Earlier this week, I asked colleagues in the trade union movement to run the numbers based on government statistics as to how many workers will benefit from the reduction of the waiting period for protection from unfair dismissal from two years to six months, 6.3 million workers will benefit from that, from protection from being unfairly dismissed without due process for reasons that are not good enough.

36% of hospitality workers will benefit from that as well. I am so, so very glad that we are making rules that will benefit disproportionately. The workers most likely to be exploited at work. Alongside that end, I will of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

course give way. I'm grateful to my hon. Friend who continues to make an excellent speech regarding regarding regarding unfair dismissal. I do think it's worth putting on to the record that much of the debate over recent hours and days and weeks has recent hours and days and weeks has has implied that employers will not be able to dismiss people. That's simply not the case. What we're simply not the case. What we're talking about here is unfair dismissal, not dismissal.

And so this is a right that is absolutely got to be at the heart of the biggest uplift in workers rights that any government has brought in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for a generation, or perhaps more. I agree with my friend the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I agree with my friend the Member for Rugby on that point. Employers may continue to dismiss as long as they do so for fair as long as they do so for fair reasons and following a fair process. And good employers already process. And good employers already do that. Share my favourite measures in the Employment Rights Bill. It could be a very long speech, but I'll bring myself to a speech, but I'll bring myself to a close. I will, I will, I will, I will, I will just say this I am so proud of the ban on zero hours contracts, and I suggest to my friends on the front bench that we should have a nice short reference period for that when the consultation comes out.

So proud of the plans on sick pay, on fire and rehire. I am so proud of our enhanced parental leave on the Fair Pay Agreement on the triple SME for school support staff. In conclusion, I often say that my goal is for people in my constituency to be able to take the family out for a curry on Friday night and not worry about the cost. I want that for all workers, including for the hospitality workers who are serving and cooking that curry and the seasonal workers who make it such a pleasure.

When you're on the beach at Blackpool or when you're down at Brighton having that curry, that is why we need a government focussed on growth. That is why we need new rights for every worker in the Employment Rights Bill and higher national minimum wage. Thank you Jamie Stone.
15:35
Jamie Stone Portrait Jamie Stone MP (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. I shall, of course, Deputy Speaker. I shall, of course, as you would expect, Madam Speaker, talk about my far away and far flung constituency. But first of all, I just want to say that the hon. Member for Shipley is not with us. Now. What she said about cars us. Now. What she said about cars rang a bell with me. Absolutely, because I am a carer for my wife and the Member for Falkirk. When he talked about the jobs he'd had as a young man.

Now I try and affect in this place and urbane and smooth image. Not very successful I might say, but what I can tell you is that owing to my father's, I love my father dearly. But owing to his rackety finances, when I was a student, I had to work all the time that I was a student, and I had to do lots and lots and lots of jobs, that sort of thing that that member for Falkirk was talking about. And I remember being a kitchen porter.

That is the lowest form of life in a big canteen. You get your backside kicked by every sous chef there is. And for the record, I was very glad that I was a member of the Transport and General Workers Union at the time. Yes, because I went to my shop steward because a particularly obnoxious sous chef was really a bully. And so I'm grateful for that, that, that then that August institution. So there we are. That's something you didn't know about me. I am surprised, I'm bound to say that the hon.

Member for Great Yarmouth was here, but the absence of the Scottish National Party and reform is surprising, because whichever side of the argument you take, this is a colossally important issue. Now, to turn to my own constituency now, much has been made of the hospitality and the importance of seasonal workers to hospitality. And it is absolutely true. And in conversation this morning with Mr. Murray Lamont, the owner and manager of Mackays Hotel in Wick, he stressed to me that particularly in this time of year, in the run up to Christmas, that these workers are crucial.

He's actually a very, very good employer indeed. But without that his business could not tick. I might actually just point out for a digression into an interesting chamber. Mention has been made of Ebenezer Scrooge. Well, Mackays hotel in Wick is actually in Ebenezer Place, which is the shortest street in the United Kingdom. It is six foot nine inches long. So think about that. So any hon. Members find themselves in Wick? I do recommend going to Mackay's hotel. Mr. Murray is a charming man.

I want to talk secondly about something that the chamber will not know about. It is called potato roguing. Now I know I have a reputation of talking about seed potatoes a lot in this place, and so I shall continue in that vein. When you grow seed potatoes, they have to be of the highest quality, because people in Lincolnshire or whatever, or indeed in Europe, they buy them because they're the best seed potatoes and they come from my part of the world.

But if you have a dodgy spud in your bag of seeds, whatever, make a potato that is, then that's no good at all. Because. So we have seasonal workers whose job is to walk down the lines of potatoes, identifying one that's not the right species pulling it out or one that's diseased. Mosaic virus is is important. So again, to namecheck a constituent, Mr. James Gordon of Bindle Farm potato grower of excellence, tells me that without these seasonal workers he would be in trouble.

He is exporting the best quality potatoes to the south of England and across the channel. So my plea is a simple one. Some say this and some say that in this argument I get that. But at the end of the day, what matters to me and my constituents is that these seasonal workers are given the help that they need, whatever form that may take and also to their employers, and that they're recognised for just what an important part of the economy of one of the most remote and far away parts of the United Kingdom.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I'm sorry to talk about potatoes all the time. Oh.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Anna. Gather. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, in South East Cornwall, we truly know and value Cornwall, we truly know and value the pressures of seasonal work. It can be unreliable and involve unsociable hours, yet it is hugely unsociable hours, yet it is hugely valuable and remains a vital part of our Cornish economy. The government is taking steps to make government is taking steps to make seasonal work more secure and increase fairness. Tourism is a key part of our local economy and part of our local economy and supports many livelihoods.

It's because of our wide range of hospitality venues, retail locations and small businesses powered by hard working and dedicated staff that make that
15:40
Anna Gelderd Portrait Anna Gelderd MP (South East Cornwall, Labour)
-
-
offer possible. Seasonal work has helped families and local businesses for generations, like our cafes and restaurants in Looe and Polperro, retail shops in Lostwithiel or helping to pick vegetables and flowers. Near vegetables and flowers. Near Liskeard. There are more 18 to 24 year olds in employment than they were a year ago, and the Employment Rights Bill strengthens good practice in the workforce, helps people into work and protects their wellbeing. I want to thank local businesses for their hard work. They're always incredibly interesting visits they invite me to regularly and when I meet with them, they tell me of their concerns and their hopes for the future.

Recently, I was very glad to have the opportunity. Yes, I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mayhew. I'll take this. But the rest of it I wrote the. I'm very grateful to the hon. Lady for giving way. And she's right. Would she agree with me that there's a balance to with me that there's a balance to be struck? As with every policy between employment rights on the between employment rights on the one hand and business growth on the other, and the sign as to whether or not an economy has got it about or not an economy has got it about right is whether employment and growth are going hand in hand or not.

And does she share my concern that as a result of the policies of this current government, the fact that unemployment is going up month after month, and particularly youth unemployment, that is a warning

**** Possible New Speaker ****

sign that the balance is not correct. And I thank the hon. Member for his intervention, and I agree with him on certain points around the importance of balance, but I won't importance of balance, but I won't make a habit of agreeing in totality. And no, I think there's a huge amount of other things within the economy which I'm about to get to in my speech that I wish to focus on. So when I spoke with my local publican, his words local publican, his words particularly struck me last week.

And what he said was this. He said his workforce absolutely deserve support. He said his workforce are the heart of his business, and it's important to remember that as we move forward with this work and the party opposite, including the hon. Member who just intervened, is calling for this bill to be scrapped in its entirety. I struggle to see how that shows respect for seasonal workers. I struggle to see how that shows respect when they should. We would, you know, they would be denied sick pay to low paid workers and expect the people to turn up when they're unwell, putting colleagues and customers at risk.

The publican I spoke to talked to me about that and several other things. I think that approach is wrong. I think it's unfair. I think it's out of touch. And, Madam Deputy Speaker, I believe we show our values by how we treat those who keep the economy moving, both business owners and those in their workforce. Supporting workers to recover from illness, in particular, helps them to return to work sooner and stronger. Business owners know that. I hear that from them frequently, so I welcome the government's action to improve employment employment rights in the sector, including in the seasonal workforce, tackling exploitative zero hour contracts and one sided flexibility is beneficial for employers.

It reduces recruitment costs through increased staff retention and levels the playing field on enforcement. These are good steps. They're good steps for workers and for businesses. And after years of stagnated productivity, our communities deserve this step forward. Seasonal work will always have a vital place in Cornwall, but families also need year round employment so they can plan for their future and avoid hardships through the winter months. And that means creating skilled, secure opportunities through projects like the New Kernow Industrial Growth Fund, secured by Cornish Labour MPs.

And as part of this Labour Budget. This will give communities across Cornwall a path to long term prosperity as we work with them and the seasonal workforce in other ways. Cornwall draws millions of visitors each year and we must ensure that the system works just as well for the residents who welcome them. So I welcome that this government has set out how employment rights help boost productivity and by doing so, ultimately supports stronger economic growth and higher living standards.

Seasonal workers deserve to be part of those improvements, and I'll keep working with the government to deliver just that. Alison Griffiths.
15:44
Alison Griffiths Portrait Alison Griffiths MP (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, Conservative)
-
-
Yes, thank you. >> Yes, thank you. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. >> And in constituencies like mine,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And in constituencies like mine, seasonal, flexible and part time working is central to the local working is central to the local economy. Seaside towns like Bognor Regis and Littlehampton thrive on the cafes and attractions along the seafront, and the pubs and shops on the High Street. During the booming summer season, these businesses rely on seasonal workers to meet the demands of the tourists who flock to enjoy our wonderful stretch of Sussex coastline. Many seasonal workers are young people, taking their first step on the career ladder during school, college or university holidays or long term unemployed people looking for a route back into work.

Even parents and pensioners who benefit from being able to work when it suits them to do so. And indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker, in writing this speech, I cast my mind back to my early jobs chopping vegetables in my local harvester, waitressing in every imaginable kind of environment on a part time basis. When those restaurants needed me, and indeed earning sometimes double, even triple my wages. If I was prepared to work on Christmas Day or on New Year's Eve, which as a student, I welcomed, and then on into the pubs who employed me during my university career.

All of those roles probably unviable now. And yet it is the retail, leisure and hospitality sectors which provide these vital jobs that are bearing the brunt of the government's damaging economic policies. After the Chancellor's first Budget last October, more than 89,000 hospitality workers have lost their jobs. That's over 50% of all jobs lost in that time. Madam Deputy Speaker, the government tells us that the Employment Rights Bill, the darling of the trade unions, will make life better for working people.

They're wrong. The Institute of Directors warn the bill is already undermining job creation and research by FTI consulting finds that 59% of SMEs will have to cut jobs. But don't take it from me, Madam Deputy Speaker. Listen to ash, who co-owns Harbour Park, a seaside amusement park in Littlehampton. From ensuring the rides run smoothly to keeping visitors well fed and hydrated, local attractions like Harbour Park rely on seasonal workers to open their doors every summer.

After the chancellor's disastrous second Budget a fortnight ago, Harbour Park will see their business rates rise by 72.6%, despite the so-called transitional discount in 20 2627, that increased by a further 97.5%.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Which of course I'll give way. I should make clear that I spent

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I should make clear that I spent my career before coming to politics, running a retail leisure business rather so I'm intimately familiar with seasonal workforce. I employed about 1000 people as part of my job. Does she not agree with me that Does she not agree with me that it's not just the business rates going up? So your your fixed costs going up, the uncertainty to the to the consumer confidence that not to have consumer confidence caused by both this year and last year.

The leaking up to the Budget knocks the people coming through the gate as well. So your your turnover is depressed just at the same time as your fixed costs are rising. There's an absolutely catastrophic

**** Possible New Speaker ****

combination for people who are trying to earn a living and employ others. Yeah, yeah. I thank my hon. Friend for his

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. Of course, he's he's absolutely right. With the Business and Trade Select Committee, we had and Trade Select Committee, we had a number of businesses who came into Parliament to tell us about into Parliament to tell us about the stasis that the the leaks in the run up to the Budget caused their businesses. But of course, as their businesses. But of course, as you say, that feeds through into the general population who know the costs that businesses are having to incur, are getting to a point where they can no longer sustain them.

So of course, people can are concerned for their jobs. They know that having more employment rights, if they haven't got a job, is of no use to them whatsoever. So my hon. Friend makes a valid and viable very important point. So the just going back to Harbour Park, the increase in their costs will mean an extra £40,000 seriously impacting their ability to employ young people and to give them a start in the job market. And then last week, last weekend, I met Catherine, who runs the Navigator Hotel in Bognor Regis.

She employs young people in Bognor Regis to work when she needs them. During the busy summer months, when tourists fill the hotel rooms, drink in the bar and eat in the restaurant. Catherine told me that she started her business full of hope, but she now works a full time second job just to stay afloat after the imposition of so many additional costs and taxes on her. And she is doing this not just to keep her business afloat, but to ensure that the ten employees who

**** Possible New Speaker ****

work in her hotel still have jobs that. Point.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Point. Lady, for giving way on that point. I don't believe she's yet got one of these Devo mares, but got one of these Devo mares, but she can correct me if I'm wrong. I don't believe she's yet got one of these devolution mares we have in York and North Yorkshire, and they are now looking at how they might implement a tourist tax. I just wondered if she might be able to wondered if she might be able to give her thoughts on the impact that would have.

When I met with the Harrogate District Chamber of Commerce and spoke to hoteliers in my area, they're really concerned about how this will suck money out of towns like Harrogate and pass it off to other areas. I don't know if she might give any, you know, that's an additional cost and I wonder what her thoughts on that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

might be. Alison Griffiths I am incredibly grateful to the hon. Member for making this point, because it takes me back to this conversation with Catherine this weekend, and I hope she won't mind me saying this. She was almost in tears and so emotional at the prospect of a tourist tax being imposed by a tourist tax being imposed by a Sussex mayor that would come in the next year. So since that's been delayed as well, hasn't it, but delayed as well, hasn't it, but into into another year.

So yeah, the, the rapid rollout isn't going quite so well. The emotion that I witnessed and the fear in her voice when she described it will not leave me for a long time. So I'm very grateful to the hon. Member for raising what a pernicious tax that could be.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

That point. I will give way. I really do thank you for giving way and I am really looking forward to a tourist tax coming to Edinburgh next year because like local authorities in England, we local authorities in England, we benefit greatly from tourism and it is fantastic for the city. But it does have impacts on the operation does have impacts on the operation of the council in terms of litter, etc. and what the tourist tax does etc.

and what the tourist tax does is help the council make the place better for citizens, but also for tourists. And the idea is that it will drive tourism, bring more business to the city. And I am sure, I am sure the hon. Lady, I am sure she is well travelled. I'm sure she's been to many places right across Europe, and she's never thought twice about paying the tourist tax, and she'll have benefited from how that money is invested in those local economies. So what is different about English

**** Possible New Speaker ****

towns and cities? It means that it's just not going to work here. I thank the hon. Member for his

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Member for his question. And of course, I'm delighted to answer this question because there's a very important because there's a very important difference. And in the UK right now, the tourist economy is being hammered by increased minimum wage. The Employment Rights Bill, high The Employment Rights Bill, high energy costs. I could go on. There are businesses on our high streets and but particularly seasonal businesses who are now really having to bear the brunt of the Employment Rights Bill.

They are suffering. And if you had met the hotel owner in Bognor Regis, a tourist town, if you had met her, I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

think you would be really questioning what you're saying. Continue. Please be seated. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Continue. Please be seated. I have no desire to meet your local businesses. You're obviously directing it to the hon. Member. Please continue.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My apologies to Madam Deputy Speaker. The short. The short Speaker. The short. The short answer is if it was one single tax instead of multiple taxes, then quite possibly it would be a good idea. In the current context of multiple taxes, which are drowning businesses into oblivion, it is not a good idea. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, if the unemployment, if the unemployment rights bill passes, Ash and Catherine will have to offer guaranteed hours to their flexible seasonal workers, even during off season troughs with increased employer national minimum, sorry National Insurance contributions and the national minimum wage rising again, these fixed schedules make hiring people unviable.

Far from protecting people working seasonably and flexibly by forcing businesses to provide guaranteed hours throughout the year, the Employment Rights Bill will threaten their jobs. Madam Deputy Speaker, the government should be supporting businesses like Harbour Park and the Navigator Hotel that give young people their first job and keep coastal towns like Bognor Regis and Littlehampton alive. Instead, they're putting them in a vice. Ministers must change course, withdraw the Employment Rights Bill, reverse the tax hikes and back the flexible seasonal jobs our communities rely on before more businesses close and more workers lose their jobs.
15:55
Sarah Bool Portrait Sarah Bool MP (South Northamptonshire, Conservative)
-
-
Yeah. >> Yeah. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As the late, great Andy Williams sings, it's the most wonderful time of the year. But I'm wonderful time of the year. But I'm afraid that is actually not true. If you are a farmer, a business owner or in retail, hospitality or leisure. Following the Chancellor's Budget just two weeks ago, the only line in that song that resonates is they're being scary. Ghost stories caused by the Chancellor's announcements and memories of tales of the glories of Christmases long, long ago, before Labour got in.

One of the many problems I think, that we face with the government's approach to working is that they start with the premise that any flexible or part time working or zero hour contracts is, by nature wrong and unfair, but it simply reflects the needs of the market and businesses at any given moment, and personal preference to take food production. It should be obvious, but it is often seasonal and cyclical. The labour demands of farming and horticultural businesses are variable and difficult to forecast, with 100% accuracy, crop conditions, weather conditions and customer demand all contribute to the inherent unpredictable unpredictability in food production.

On Monday night, Labour and Liberal Democrat MPs voted against an amendment from the other place to insert a proper definition of seasonal work into the Employment Rights Bill reform didn't even bother to show up. The government has instead proposed an amendment to consult another issue that the government hopes it can just kick into the long grass and hope that we forget about it. This difficulty, also to forecast, also spills through into the hospitality sector, as has been acknowledged, with benefits ballooning and the tax bill for working man increasing day by day.

Everyone is feeling the pinch and they're all tightening their belts, so it becomes incredibly hard to forecast the current levels of need. Now I was speaking to one of my local businesses, a hospitality business, who have already been hit by a 900,000 NICs bill this year alone. And the Chancellor and they were trying to explain to me, essentially, Madam Deputy Speaker, about the impact of NICs and what that actually means in reality, because I think we throw around large numbers, but we don't actually understand the intricacies of that.

Now, the Chancellor has said to the Treasury Select Committee that she didn't see the link between the NICs increases and unemployment. I just fail to see how she can't see that link. The As NICs is paid basically just to let's do it. Let's do a NICs 101 NICs is paid on a month by month basis, and when someone earns £417 a month, then it is triggered. So if a student or anyone just work for one month and did more than 35 hours in a month at minimum wage, businesses will then have to pay that additional 15% of National Insurance on every pound above £417.

So when cash is king, if you roll that out, no wonder businesses are then thinking that they can't take

**** Possible New Speaker ****

on any other employees or even questioning. Absolutely. She's making a very important

**** Possible New Speaker ****

She's making a very important point about this. But it's not just or even primarily the increase from 13.8 to 15% on the overall rate. It's the it's the, the the number at which it kicks in being reduced at which it kicks in being reduced from 9200 from memory down to 5000. That has a particular impact on the That has a particular impact on the part time employed. The youth employment and the lower wage employment. Because it's it it means that you start paying NICs as an employer much earlier on in people's pay journey.

And does she agree with me that that's exactly

**** Possible New Speaker ****

why we're seeing youth unemployment rising, as well as general unemployment rising? Sarah Bool.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The hon. Member makes an entirely valid and correct point, and that is why we started point, and that is why we started to see the rise of unemployment in South Northamptonshire amongst the 16 to 25 year olds. So it's exactly 16 to 25 year olds. So it's exactly on that point alone. And the business owner I was speaking to was saying, the problem is you start at this level, but that start at this level, but that increase has to push up across all wages, across all levels of business.

So suddenly businesses are finding themselves drowning in the amount of money that they're having to pay or potentially pay. But that therefore is going to stifle the market. I mean, we even talk to some of my hairdressers. I mean, hairdressers have been mentioned numerous times to the Minister, but they have said to me the impact of NICs means that according to the British Hair Consortium, there will be no new apprentice starts in 2027. That's staggering and it's appalling when the government is talking about all

**** Possible New Speaker ****

these opportunities for younger members. Of course. I'm grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way. She may be aware for giving way. She may be aware that just across the channel, of course, in France, high regulation, course, in France, high regulation, high tax has led to consistent long term high youth unemployment. As Andy Williams also sang. There's a Andy Williams also sang. There's a lesson to be learned from this, and you don't have to look too far Sarah Bool.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Sarah Bool. As always, my hon. Friend makes a very valid point, and Andy Williams is getting a lot more airtime than I think any of us imagined today, but I think it's really important that. Oh, sorry. Of course.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm afraid I don't know anything about Mr. Williams, so I can't I can't add to this love fest of Williams. I wonder if she's reflected as I have, that where we have households which have been have households which have been work less for quite a long period of time, very often those sort of of time, very often those sort of temporary seasonal intro jobs show our young people the value of work, our young people the value of work, the importance of work, the benefit of work to themselves, what it can do for their families and their communities.

And when those opportunities are reduced, so that opportunity and potential for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

curtailed. Sarah Bool. Thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker, and absolutely, and we really do need to be encouraging that next generation through into the workforce. And at the moment, I just can't see that they're getting any of these opportunities. And this is opportunities. And this is something that the government is so proud to try and promote. But yet but yet look at the impact, look at but yet look at the impact, look at the figures. There can be no denying that we are achieving none of what they are hoping to achieve

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of what they are hoping to achieve in the future. But look, of course. Given way. We across these benches are mainstream parties, we have to develop solutions to the problems that we face, partly because we know that in our chamber we have the likes of reform. Now our country is in debt to the tune of 2.7 trillion, and we're spending around 105 billion each year to service the debt before we spend any money on anything else. And we have to therefore, in this difficult situation, think about how we come up with those solutions.

If we also were to fund our public services to get people back into work, which helps to grow the economy, and we are to do the other things that we as a country want to do. What is the right way of raising the funds which allow our country to pay down our debt, to pay down the amount that we're spending each year to service our deficit, and also bring the change that people want in delivery of public services. And please don't say welfare reform because I agree with you.

We need to do welfare reform. If I may, I agree with you that we need to do welfare reform, and the Milburn Review and the Timms Review are going to be critical to taking forward an effective welfare reform package. But what else would she do?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think the hon. Member, at least he has acknowledged that you actually have to repay debt, unlike the Green Party, who suddenly believed that repaying debt interest isn't actually a viable or true alternative in this world. But true alternative in this world. But but you. But the member denies about welfare. That is a fundamental element of that. And so fundamental element of that. And so I'm glad to see that he agrees with that. But there's so much more. So why are you going? Why are they why why are you going? Why are they why is the party opposite increasing that welfare bill? But then you have then the members have to actually grow the economy, and that means supporting the businesses, giving them the opportunities, reducing tax, putting more money in each of our, our, our pockets to be able to grow that.

And unfortunately, we can see from everything that has come from the government so far, the economy is not growing. So, you know, watch this space, but you're this is the problem we're going to be struggling with. But anyway, South Northamptonshire has 95 pubs, which are obviously crucial to our rural community and to our economy. And they are a great example of a place where you can start with young people in their first jobs. I know there's one there, White Hart in Hackleton, and they said there was a young girl who has down syndrome, and she couldn't actually get a job outside the village because of transport issues.

She she had her first job there, but that job will be threatened by all the measures

**** Possible New Speaker ****

from this government. Of course. I'm very grateful to the hon. Lady for giving way again. The Lady for giving way again. The centre for Policy Studies has undertaken an analysis of all the impacts of both the last Budget and the one last month on the cost of employing 18 to 20 year olds. And the shocking figure is that it will cost an employer £4,000 a year more to employ a single person between the age of 18 and 20.

Given that, is she surprised that employers, just like the pub that she was mentioning, are taking very rational decisions not to give

**** Possible New Speaker ****

young people jobs? Sarah Bool I agree entirely, and I am devastated to hear it, because that is exactly not what we need from this society and for for people, for the young generation going forward. I mean, research going forward. I mean, research from the Taxpayers Alliance showed that in 2024, the average pub paid almost £100,000 per year in taxes on the sale of just alcoholic drinks alone. And then add to that the alone. And then add to that the changes to BPR that's coming and the recent increase to employers NICs, hospitality is really being smothered.

But there is a way out. There is no need for an enforced and permanent dry January. The Conservatives have a plan, and in that plan it includes the abolition of business rates for hundreds of thousands of high street businesses. Now the government benches often deny it, but pubs and shops have seen their business rates, bills, bills more than double under this government and we say that it is not more government that is needed in this situation to bring back the festive cheer to our high streets.

But it is government getting out of the way and allowing businesses and entrepreneurs to actually flourish. There is a big difference between business and the government. Businesses, as has been mentioned, take risks with their own money. They provide jobs and they grow the economy. They are brave. As the Member for Gosport said earlier in her speech. But this government just risks taxpayers money, destroys jobs and contracts the economy particularly. I look to my farming community. I have 550 farms.

They are the driver. They are the lifeblood of South Northamptonshire and one of the biggest issues they have, alongside things like Nick's, is the inability to be able to plan. A lot of discussion has been had about we've got to help companies grow for the future. Part of that growth requires the ability to make long term plans. Now, we have seen under this government the removal of SFE and capital grants have gone on and off. There's a double cab pickup tax, there's a fertiliser tax.

Then you add in Nick's employers insurance tax and then obviously the changes the Apr and BPR. How are they possibly a supposed to plan and be supposed to be investing in the future. One of the members earlier talked about

**** Possible New Speaker ****

all the importance of the construction industry. Sorry. I'm grateful. Can I just take it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful. Can I just take it back to that point about planning? Why? How can businesses be expected Why? How can businesses be expected to plan if, having been told in 24 to plan if, having been told in 24 one Budget was a one off tax rate, 25 was an unforeseen second tax 25 was an unforeseen second tax rate, but no further plans. Well, that's not a promise that one can necessarily rely upon the presumption that there will be more next year.

How can businesses be expected, whether they're agricultural, industrial or whatever? Plan for growth, for investment, for job creation, when they have absolutely no idea at all

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of the trajectory of the tax take, which the Treasury is hell bent upon. Very, very. Good, terrible. The honourable.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Good, terrible. The honourable. Friend, because he makes exactly that point. It was mentioned earlier on about the importance of the construction industry and how the construction industry and how they were going to give more construction of apprenticeships and jobs to young people. But fundamentally, for those jobs to be fundamentally, for those jobs to be offered, we need people to be investing in the first place. And actually, companies are not they can't they can't make the decisions. can't they can't make the decisions.

They don't know where the money is coming. They don't know where the money will next be taken from them. And so we are not creating the environment for them in which to grow. And I don't see anyone disagreeing with me on the other

**** Possible New Speaker ****

benches from that. So I think it clearly makes its own point. I asked the of course. I'm grateful to my hon. Friend,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to my hon. Friend, what seems to be missing on the benches opposite is any recognition of the growing anger among young people, and the fact they're being people, and the fact they're being shut out of the jobs market. It's the most damaging time in your life when you're young, to be barred when you're young, to be barred from work and just not in an Andy Williams. But the Minister didn't seem to be an Andy Williams fan, as the clash sang under a previous Labour government.

Career opportunities are the ones that Bool.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Absolutely. And I asked in the Prime Minister's questions earlier on about the fair choices that this on about the fair choices that this government has made. And I just think that fundamentally, these these choices that they've made are not fair. I mean, trying to introduce a digital ID scheme that is going to cost. Well, unfunded from the government, but could cost from the government, but could cost up to at least £1.8 billion on something that most of the public do not want, given that 3 million do not want, given that 3 million people signed the petition against it as a minimum, and then saying that, you know, inflicting all these tax hits on all of our businesses, it's just madness.

There is absolutely no sense of direction from this government. It is not a pro-growth Chancellor, but a no growth Chancellor. And that will be the legacy that is left. So look, I never thought that a Christmas song could also sum up a government's economic approach. But if you look at We Wish You a merry Christmas, it really appears that we are, and we won't go until we get some phase from this government when they're demanding figgy pudding or more like tax in this instance.

So I'm really hoping, though, that the government will see the light and that eventually they will help businesses to unlock, reach their potential and let them have a merry Christmas and a very happy New Year.
16:09
Ashley Fox Portrait Sir Ashley Fox MP (Bridgwater, Conservative)
-
-
Yes, sir. >> Ashley Fox. Thank you, Madam. >> Deputy Speaker. I am. >> Very fortunate. >> To represent a beautiful part of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

To represent a beautiful part of the Somerset Coast. Burnham on Sea, Berrow and Green all have lovely Berrow and Green all have lovely sandy beaches and are visited by many holidaymakers every year. Seasonal tourism is not just part of the local economy, it is the bedrock of those communities. Our motion today regrets the many measures introduced by this government that hit both the economy at large and has a particularly bad impact on those areas dependent on hospitality and tourism.

The effects are even worse for those businesses who employ seasonal workers. I've said before that whilst this government was elected on a promise to go for growth, most of their actions over the last 17 months seem designed to achieve the opposite. Before the election, many businesses backed this new government. They believed the Chancellor's prawn cocktail offensive. They thought this government would be a reincarnation of the Blair government, which at least in its early years, managed to control public expenditure.

Instead, it seems to be the very worst of Wilson, Callaghan and Healey. The reality is that rather than implement the modest tax rises and spending increases contained in their manifesto, Labour increased taxes by £40 billion last year and a further 26 billion this year, a huge increase in taxes on businesses and hard working families to pay for more welfare spending. All the businesses I speak to in my constituency are suffering. They have lost any faith they ever had in this government and who can blame them? The Globe Inn in North Petherton is a fantastic local pub.

This year it won't pay any business rates, but that will rise in 2029 30 to £5000 a year. That's 10,000 extra pints they will have to sell just to pay the government's higher taxes. Now, this might not sound a lot to Labour Ministers sitting opposite, but I can assure them that for a small business with a tiny profit margin margin, any additional cost can have a hugely negative impact. And it's not just business rates

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that are going up. I'm happy to give way. I'm very grateful for the hon. Gentleman for giving way. It's I Gentleman for giving way. It's I think there was a mistake that we can fall into here, which we talk of SMEs as though they are of SMEs as though they are corporate entities and in many occasions they are simply not. They are often a husband and wife team working incredibly long hours, their business, part of their their business, part of their family is often living above the shop.

And I say all this because, as in my local pub the other day, a Greyhound and the tenant who runs that, he and his wife told me that the outcome of the government's changes in tax policy was that they were covering the shifts that would have been covered by employees, that they've already let go. But the cost isn't just economic, it's also hugely damaging to their relationship, to their their sort of their whole way of life. It's incredibly stressful. Does he accept that it's not just economic but it's societal, the damage Cox.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I'm grateful to my hon. Friend for making that point, and I agree with him. And in fact, the globe isn't a husband and wife team, globe isn't a husband and wife team, but it's a mother and daughter team, and these bear heavily on their and these bear heavily on their business. And it's not just business rates that are going up. There's also the hated jobs tax that we've heard about earlier and the consequences of the Anti-jobs the consequences of the Anti-jobs employment bill.

Now, on paper, Madam Deputy Speaker guaranteed hours and scheduling rules sound protective of workers. But for seasonal workers whose livelihoods depend on flexibility, immediate availability and quick uptake of short term work, these measures risk doing precisely the opposite. Let us let us take some examples, forcing employers to offer guaranteed hours after a short reference period will make businesses reluctant to take on seasonal staff at all. I know this from experience in Burnham on Sea, where who turns up will depend very often on the weather.

If you have 2 or 3 weeks of very good weather, you will need lots of seasonal workers. This could be followed in this great country of ours by many weeks of rainy weather. What do you say to the employer that's now contractually bound to offer work for employees that aren't required, because the tourists are not there?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

When a I'm happy to. Answer questions, I thank the hon. Gentleman for allowing me to hon. Gentleman for allowing me to intervene. I just wanted to reflect on Harbour Park in my constituency on Harbour Park in my constituency where they are. They would be required to pay people rain or required to pay people rain or shine, and at a time when they're receiving no income from visitors. Would he agree with me that this is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Would he agree with me that this is going to cause many businesses acute hardship? Ashley Fox. Thank my hon. Friend for intervention. She's correct. In fact, what will probably happen is many businesses will offer less work, and it tells us that these regulations have been drawn up by people who have never run a business. Yeah. When a farm, a holiday park or a festival operator knows they might be legally required to provide fixed hours even when demand disappears with a change of weather or tourist numbers, the safest option will be not to hire so many people.

It should not surprise this government when this is what they decide to do. Seasonal workers could see fewer opportunities, shorter seasons and more competition for every shift. Secondly, the strict advance notice rules and penalties for changing shifts might offer security for those longer term part time workers, but seasonal work often depends on rapid last minute scheduling. If a grower can't schedule pickers until they know the fruit is ready, or an events company can't bring in extra hands until bookings spike, they may be forced to reduce the number of workers they engage at all, and the added liability on agencies will shrink the pool of temp placements that many seasonal workers rely on.

It is natural that agencies will become far more cautious about taking on temps. No doubt some will pull out of short seasonal contracts altogether. This means fewer people will be in short term work. Fewer people will be building experience in their first jobs. Fewer will have the stepping stones to full time employment. This bill will act as a hammer blow to seasonal work. Employers will hesitate to hire, and workers will lose the very flexibility that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

makes seasonal work viable. There have to be there. My hon. Friend is making a powerful speech, and he's entirely powerful speech, and he's entirely right about the impact on seasonal workers. But we should always look beyond the producers to the beyond the producers to the consumers. What will the impact be at music festivals and all sorts of events all around the country? events all around the country? Community events, we will see higher prices. We will have less competition and less choice. competition and less choice.

Socialism in action. Everybody losing, including society as a whole.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hon. Friend, he makes a powerful point with which I agree. The point with which I agree. The combination of extra cost and extra regulations means it becomes incredibly burdensome for small incredibly burdensome for small businesses to afford to take on staff. The above inflation staff. The above inflation increases to the minimum wage add further pressure, and this all has a disproportionate effect on a disproportionate effect on industries like hospitality and tourism. My constituent, Cathy owns a shop in Burnham on Sea, which she has run for 20 years.

But the recent changes imposed by the Chancellor are making it harder and harder for her to operate. Cathy currently employs 316 year olds, increases in the minimum wage and future changes to employment law will force her to stop the practice of giving youngsters their first job. There are only so many tasks you can give someone of this age, but now salary increases and other changes make this prohibitive. Two of the three will be leaving and Cathy tells me they will not be replaced.

Is it any wonder that youth unemployment is rising? Many businesses will think why risk it now? Every Labour government leaves office with higher unemployment than when they started last July. Unemployment was 4.4%. It's now 5%, and that 0.6% increase doesn't sound very much to Labour members, but it's actually an extra 282,000 people out of work and claiming benefit. And I fear we have not reached the peak because while unemployment is rising, business confidence is falling. The Prime Minister and Chancellor cling to their jobs, telling their nervous backbenchers that it is they and only they, that the markets trust.

I have to say that this boast is not all it might appear. What it really means is that the alternatives are so awful that they would tax and borrow and spend even more, that if Keir and Rachel

**** Possible New Speaker ****

honourable. Member knows better than to refer to.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

refer to. Members by name. My apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker, that if the current Prime Speaker, that if the current Prime Minister and the current Chancellor were to disappear, that all were to disappear, that all confidence in the government would collapse. It does seem the Prime Minister has as much faith in his Minister has as much faith in his Cabinet as the rest of us have in him. It is unfortunate that this government is comprised almost entirely of people from public sector, academic or union backgrounds.

Precious few have ever operated a business. They don't understand how running a business works, and it shows. But there is another path this government could take because it is not too late, and I call upon the government to withdraw their Employment Rights Bill, to go back on their Budget, to get rid of their benefit street Budget and lower taxes for hard working families and businesses. Thank you.
16:20
Andrew Griffith Portrait Andrew Griffith MP (Arundel and South Downs, Conservative)
-
-
Shadow Secretary. >> Yeah. >> Deputy speaker, it's always a pleasure to serve under you. We've heard today from members across heard today from members across this House who understand a fundamental truth. The hospitality in particular sector is the cornerstone not only of our economy, but our society as well. It's a great strength of our parliamentary system that we all represent unique districts that are all, one way or another, replete with high streets, hospitality businesses, pubs, restaurants, hotels that we all in this house wish to support.

And we've also observed on both sides the importance in binding our communities together, giving people a warm place to stay, a refuge from loneliness, keeping our high streets vibrant. These are the places, Madam Deputy Speaker, where life happens. But we've also heard today about how hospitality performs a vital and arguably unique role in providing the next generation with that vital first step on the career ladder. I imagine, Deputy Speaker, that many of us had our very first experience, that priceless exposure to the world of work to become world ready in retail or hospitality.

Certainly I did myself, and we've heard many other such examples. And it does this because precisely because it's a feature, not a bug, that it provides flexible, seasonal work that allows young people to earn their first wage. Combine that with other responsibilities or opportunities and in so doing, learn the important dignity of labour. And as we've heard from honourable and right hon. Friends, it is in particular pubs, hotels and restaurants who are hurting as the direct result of the choices the Chancellor made, not just in last year's Budget, but then once again in this year's Budget, delivered at that despatch box.

Just a few weeks ago, in my own South Downs constituency, more than a dozen venues have contacted me just in the last 24 hours, hearing about the debate that we are having in this place today, Ruth and Martin at the Cricketers in Duncton described to me how their rates are going up by four and a half to £5,000 a year, money they do not have. The Fox Goes Free in. Charlton has been a public house for over 400 years, continuously servicing their community and like

**** Possible New Speaker ****

every pub making that huge contribution. And their business.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And their business. Rates bill has increased by more than £13,000 next year. Now, bear than £13,000 next year. Now, bear that in mind when somebody from that side of the House, Madam Deputy Speaker, talks about how they've introduced permanently lower business rates, it's a it's a laughable idea. I've heard similar laughable idea. I've heard similar and worse from the alarms in Eastergate the Half Moon Inn at North Chapel, the Labouring Man in Cold Waltham and the Onslow Arms in Loxwood.

But lest that's not a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

happily give way. I'm grateful to my hon. Friend, because on Budget day, Tom, the because on Budget day, Tom, the landlord of the King's Head in Hedon, heard that business rates were going to be cut for businesses were going to be cut for businesses like his. Instead, it's gone up from the rateable value has gone from 9000 to £32,000 on that pub, which provides such an important service to the people of Hedon and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

service to the people of Hedon and the surrounding villages. Well, my right hon. Friend is exactly right, and I wouldn't incur any wrath by accusing anybody of misleading this house, but I'm afraid it's exactly the same story that I've heard from the Bridge Inn in Amberley. The Star and Garter in Easton, the Bricklayers Arms in Midhurst and the Black Horse in Byworth. These cannot surely be a coincidence. These cannot be isolated examples of the permanently lower business rates that the Chancellor.

Of course I'll give way, and I'm looking forward to hearing about how one understands that statement about the permanently lower business rates that this government has introduced, of which we cannot seem to find an example.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

If the hon. Gentleman would like to come and walk with me down the to come and walk with me down the high street in Saltaire, where the property valuations mean that actually many of the businesses will be having lower business rates in absolute terms. And the point is, have you, excuse me, has the right have you, excuse me, has the right hon. Gentleman explained to his local pubs that this property local pubs that this property revaluation has been hanging around for many, many years but his Tory government did nothing to actually implement it, and that is the main reason why some of his pubs may be experiencing some increases due to property valuation, not to do with the business rates.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Andrew Griffith well. Hear the hon. Lady's point and I'm I'm glad she's she's found some I'm I'm glad she's she's found some examples. I know she neither in that intervention nor her remarks earlier actually went as far as earlier actually went as far as naming any of those. And I'll happily take another intervention if she'd like to do so. I've named if she'd like to do so. I've named many such examples. The revaluation exercise on pubs is not some long delayed exercise.

It's it's a routine, frequent time time frame that the Valuation Office goes through. So this isn't something that's been pent up for many, many years. This is just the process of revaluation that goes on. And of course, when it comes to the rubber hitting the road of how much business rates is being levied on pubs, how much cash will leave their stretched businesses struggling with all the different ranges of costs. What matters to them is the net effect of revaluation. This government's removal of the retail, hospitality and leisure relief that we on this side of the House put in and of course, the ongoing rates multiplier.

In fact, every pub and hotel that I've spoken to in my rural constituency bear out precisely the figures from UK hospitality and the British Beer and Pub Association that we have heard many times today, and I know they ran drop ins in this House earlier today for members on both sides of the House, and Tom Richardson, at the Three Moles in Salem, explained to me how it is the turnover basis of assessing rateable values, combined with the cost headwinds that this government has amplified.

I'll be so kind as to imply they wouldn't all happen from the 1st of July in 2024, but nevertheless, the choices that the government's made, in particular that change in the National Insurance rates and the change in thresholds on national insurance has enormously pushed up the cost of employment. On top of that, businesses are still waiting for the promised reduction in energy prices. Madam Deputy Speaker, whether it's electricity costs or heating oil, those prices have more than doubled in some cases.

At Tottingham Manor Hotel in Henfield, they've got to find nearly £50,000 extra due to employment costs, changes that this government have made. And it's no surprise. And we heard again and again from colleagues this afternoon how pub and hotel owners are at the end of their tether. Nobody should want to preside over a series of choices where one landlord told me they've not been able to draw a wage from their pub for the last six months. Another told me how she was working seven days a week, 16 17 hours a day, just trying to keep their pub open.

The cost of hiring staff, as we heard from many colleagues today, has become so prohibitive that owners are having to cut back. They're not able to hire or support or sustain staff, and taking more and more upon themselves, stretching their working day, taking on more tasks, creating one of the doom loops in which, sad to say, this Chancellor so specialises. And we heard that from so many of my colleagues making contributions this afternoon, the Member for my my near neighbour for the Isle of Wight East, talked about the challenges on the island, the seasonal work in particular, how young people are hurting, but how that's costing all of us in terms of the country.

The Member for North Dorset talked about how this government is awash with policies and plans and visions. But words butter no parsnips. They don't provide the jobs that we need, and least of all the Employment Rights Bill as it comes down the line, is going to really hurt and disincentivize family businesses with which this sector is replete. The Member for Hinckley and Bosworth talked, as did others, about the cumulative effect of measures. No one single axe falling on their heads, tax rises, National insurance increases, higher energy costs, more red tape, it feels.

Madam Deputy Speaker, and I have to say, I think this is right and we should listen to small enterprises. When they say this, it feels like the government is not on their side. It is no surprise that pub after pub, hostelry after hostelry is erecting a sign on the door saying No Labour MPs there. And I remember the Minister said he has not seen one of those signs and I trust, I trust that his constituency will take that as a personal challenge to ensure that one such sign is brought to his attention in the near future.

The Member for Gosport talked about how this government is doing that most terrible of thing of preventing young people getting on the job ladder, getting their first chance of work, and if the government weighs down precisely the sort of businesses that do such a good job at providing those opportunities, that is difficult. My neighbour for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton talked particularly about the tourism economy and to all of the challenges and headwinds that I've talked about, the Chancellor's choices, we can add the bed tax, which will increase the cost of anybody.

It will deter the chance of somebody holidaying here in the UK enjoying the wonderful vistas of Bognor Regis and Littlehampton or the South Downs, and simply encourage people to go to other countries. Following the wake of the very many young people that my friend earlier talked about that are leaving this country, such as the dearth of opportunity that we see. And then we heard from the Member for South Northamptonshire talking about the degree to which the hospitality and pub sector is already overtaxed.

And then finally, the Member for Bridgwater again, talking about that really important point about how all the burdens fall back on families, in family businesses, we're seeing nothing less. I'm afraid to say, than a full frontal attack on seasonal work. And we see that no more so than in the unemployment bill that comes to this House this week. Like King Canute, this government is literally legislating to outlaw seasonality, the rhythms of the tides. If a seaside cafe hires a student to wait on outside tables in the glorious sunshine.

Labour want them forced to offer the same hours. Once the shutters have come down in the autumn. The demise of strawberry and cream cellars in Wimbledon fortnight. It'll even be in this most not particularly seasonal moment. But it will even be the death of Father Christmases and assistant elf helpers in shopping centres across the nation, because there is little demand. Madam Deputy Speaker, for a Christmas elf in January, February or March. It's bureaucratic madness. Yet Ministers press on, deaf to the cries of those who would most benefit from the choice they don't like.

They don't like it, Madam Deputy Speaker, but they haven't got an answer. So look, you don't they should know. They should know by now. Madam Deputy Speaker, you don't protect workers by bankrupting employees. You don't support our high streets and communities, pubs and restaurants by taxing them into submission. We conservatives understand business. Unlike the current Cabinet, many of us have worked in businesses and enterprises ourselves. We stand with the risk takers in this country who create wealth, not the bureaucrats who seek to destroy it.

And that's why our motion today supports seasonal, flexible and part time working. We will take 250,000 high street businesses and pubs out of business rates, entirely paid for by the welfare reforms. They don't have the backbone to push through, and we will repeal all of the job destroying measures in Labour's unemployment bill. Madam Deputy Speaker, we back the engines of growth in our economy, the providers of jobs. This government seeks to take them and push them to the wall.

I commend this motion to the House.
16:34
Kate Dearden Portrait Kate Dearden MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Halifax, Labour )
-
-
Minister Kate Dearden. >> Minister Kate Dearden. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, it's a pleasure to close this debate on behalf of the government. I want to start off by saying that I'll take absolutely no lessons on running the economy after what they did after 14 years of government, given there has been so many references to songs and music today. Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to suggest a song for hon. Members opposite that they might want to reflect on.

And it's a classic Elton John. And that's Sorry seems to be the hardest word. I noticed yesterday, Madam Deputy Speaker, that the party opposite produced a Christmas video in which they claimed that Santa's elves were seasonal workers and you couldn't make it up. And may I congratulate the Shadow Minister on his somewhat alarming AI skills, but gently point out that if the members opposite reference point for the modern economy is Father Christmas's workshop, then that does explain a lot. But frankly, Madam Speaker, I'm not surprised.

On Monday, the hon. Member repeatedly quoted figures purportedly on the cost of the Employment Rights Bill from the Growth Commission, which boasts a miss Elizabeth Truss as an adviser. So forgive me if I take any of his economic advice with a large pinch of salt. Let me be clear on this side of the House, we do not believe in pitting employers and employees against each other. No one wants a business to succeed more than the workers who rely on it for their livelihood.

This government will not indulge in scaremongering so beloved by the party opposite, and I will take the opportunity to clarify some of their misleading claims. But first, I want to acknowledge how difficult the past few years have been for small businesses, particularly in the hospitality, retail and leisure sectors. These sectors were disproportionately impacted by the pandemic, by a botched Brexit and by a cost of living crisis that has robbed the British people of their disposable income. I'm going to carry on making progress and I want to respond to the Liberal Democrats spokespersons point and just clarify, as many of my hon.

Members reflected on that, we are not seeking a return to rejoining the customs union. We are focusing on deals with countries such as the US and with India on trade. And my hon. Friend the Member for Tipton and Wednesbury demonstrated this so clearly in terms of our trade agreement with the US. It guaranteed thousands of jobs under Jaguar Land Rover. I will come to her point on the youth guarantee later in my speech and respond to those reflections. But I want to pay tribute first and foremost to all those running and working in small businesses, especially in such important sectors like hospitality and retail.

I know from my own and my family's experience just how hard it is. My first job, Madam Speaker, was in a cafe in the hospitality sector. It's where I developed my first opportunities. It's why I developed to become a manager of that cafe and absolutely loved my job there. That's a really important aspect of our community and for livelihoods, for local people. My my dad worked in the Printworks growing up and he was made redundant by his bosses under the watch of the Tory government.

I worked with my dad and my mum and we, we, I worked, I worked with my mum and dad and took the opportunity that hospitality sector provided to them to give him the opportunity to set up a small business, to run this cafe successfully for 14 years, and we are so proud of that. As a family that gave the opportunity to more young people in where I grew up, in that community and in that really, really important part and aspect of our lives.

And I have so many excellent businesses in my Halifax constituency. I'm proud to champion at the despatch box and in government, and that's why this government was elected, to provide economic growth that will raise living standards and support our vital sectors across our economy. But as the Minister for Employment Rights, I should also say that this government was elected on a promise to make work pay. The UK has employment laws are mostly a product of the 20th century. They have not kept pace with how businesses now employ people, nor how people experience working lives.

Today. The world of work has fundamentally changed in recent years. It is no longer the norm for employees to stay in one company, or even a single sector, for their whole career. New technology continues to rapidly transform how we work, where we work, and when we work, and the rise of the gig economy has changed the certainty and stability that employment used to provide. The Employment Rights Bill steps to fulfil our commitment to bring employment rights into the 21st century. And lots of hon.

Members spoke really passionately about this bill and the importance to them and their experience that they bring to this House. My hon. Friend from Falkirk spoke powerfully from his personal experience of working in hospitality and how he stands up for his constituents in the sector. And he demonstrated just how important this bill is to provide predictability and security as best as a baseline in jobs. My hon. Friend for Shipley spoke to the Fair Pay Agreement. Her experience standing up for care workers in her constituency and across the country, the importance of statutory sick pay for millions for thousands of people across this country, and of course, the employment of the Fair Work Agency.

And it's absolutely essential that we get this bill off the statute books, and we can ensure that people can see the benefits it will bring to them, particularly setting up the enforcement powers of the Fair Work Agency. She mentioned the overseas recruitment and what matters in UK employment law and enforcement is where the worker is based. If the worker is based in the UK, then in general they have access to UK employment law and enforcement agencies can and do take action, no matter, no matter where the employer is based.

And I'd be happy to talk further with her if she has any further questions to set up the Fair Work Agency. My friend the Member for Scarborough and Whitby, I thank her for her support and she made a passionate and to the point case about why this bill is so important, as did my hon. Friend the Member for Tipton and Wednesbury. I agree with every word that she says about the importance of this legislation to working people and to our brilliant businesses across this country, as well as my hon.

Friend the Member for South East Cornwall. The Employment Rights Bill strengthens workers rights and growth, and many British businesses already offer their employees benefits and protections that far exceed what is covered in the legislation. It will give those seeking employment, including young people looking for the first job, the security that will be treated fairly by their employers and encourage them to. And as we have said, we are not springing these changes on businesses. We're working very, very closely with them as we implement these over a number of years and gradually do so.

And that's why we'll be consulting with them and working with them really closely. Lots of hon. Members opposite mentioned zero hours contracts, and many people in the UK value the option to work flexibly, but some employers have taken advantage of that. We are determined to tackle the issue of one sided flexibility, which can leave people unclear when they will next get paid work and unclear how much time they need to keep available for work to. Of course, some businesses, including those in hospitality, retail, agriculture and tourism sectors, experienced fluctuating demand across the year.

There are ways for businesses to plan their work in a way that does give their workers that degree of security, and that's why there is flexibility already built into the bill to address issues of seasonal demand. There are several ways that an employer could approach the issue while complying with the new rights of guaranteed hours, depending on work on their circumstances. The right to guaranteed hours does not force companies to make seasonal workers permanent, and nor does it force companies to give unnecessary hours to employees.

It gives workers the right to choose certainty and stability in their contracts where they want it, and help them Budget and plan for their lives. I met a brilliant business recently in Manchester and heard from one of their employees about the difference that guaranteed hours made to him and his work, planning his bills with his family finances and giving that stability in his livelihood. It was absolutely vital for him and changed his life. And this legislation will change many other lives of people across the country who are looking for that.

I've got lots to make progress on next on business rates. Very, very briefly. I'll give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Giving way. I wonder if she might like to apologise to the 280 plus thousand people who don't are plus thousand people who don't are not in work now, compared to the level of unemployment last year. And could she spell out what can that business that I don't know, that business that I don't know, provides catering at summer festivals and then ceases to have any festivals to service? How can any festivals to service? How can they fulfil their role of guaranteed hours to a workforce that they don't need anymore?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister. I've heard lots of members opposite reflect on unemployment. What they've failed to mention is the average unemployment rate during their time in office over 14 years in government was 5.5 5.4%, substantially higher than the current unemployment rate. As he will know from the debate on Monday. We have committed to consulting on seasonal work so we can work with businesses, trade unions and all stakeholders in getting this legislation right. And I'm determined and and will continue to listen and work with them on the details.

And that's why it's so important that we get this bill off the statute books and can consult and stick to our roadmap to implement it, because many working people across this country and businesses want to see that certainty and want us to crack on. Madam Deputy Speaker, I'll try and make some progress as I realise we are pressed for time and on business rates. Several hon. Members, including the Member for North Dorset, Hinckley and Bosworth and Gosport, raised the subjects of business rate reform, as did the shadow Minister.

And let me say this in response, this government is determined to remove barriers to investment, helping our businesses to succeed. Our high streets to thrive and our economy to grow. We are introducing permanently lower tax rates for retail, hospitality and leisure properties with rateable values below £500,000 from April next year. This will give long term certainty and support to the High Street, and it stands in marked contrast to the previous form of relief, which created a yearly cliff edge and which had to be due to end entirely in April of this year the next year.

Equally, Madam Deputy Speaker, we know this tax cut must be sustainably funded, and so we are applying a higher rate from April of next year on the most valuable properties, those with rateable values of £500,000 and above. And let me be clear, these represent less than 1% of all properties, but they cover the majority of large distribution warehouses, including those used by online giants. Some members have spoken to the raising of the National Insurance changes at last year's Budget, and I've already mentioned the state of the finances and what we inherited due to the party opposite.

That meant we had to take difficult decisions to get the nation back on track, and one of the toughest decisions was to raise the rate of employer National Insurance contributions. But we are protecting the smallest businesses from these changes, including many of those in hospitality, leisure and retail sectors. These were difficult but necessary steps to protect our public finances and ensure that we can continue funding our essential services such as the NHS, social care and investment in the economy. Moving swiftly on, Madam Deputy Speaker, lots of members have mentioned the visitor levy and our mission is to kickstart economic growth and devolve fiscal powers and that's absolutely critical to that.

Introducing a visitor levy provides us with a new lever to raise and reinvest locally, and we have published a consultation at the Budget so that public, the public, businesses and local government can shape the design of the power to introduce the levy that will be devolved to local leaders, and they will decide on how to introduce levy and how it will be used to drive growth in their region. That's a historic step for English devolution. Members also mentioned the Member for Hinckley and Bosworth and the Member for South Northamptonshire.

And just to reflect on some of their comments that I don't don't share their lack of enthusiasm in the continued investment into this country under this government. Just.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And I'm grateful because in her motion. If I return her to the motion, she talked about the comprehensive she talked about the comprehensive vision for productivity and success for small businesses. Now, this is incredibly similar to the same motion that we had on the high motion that we had on the high street debate. But interestingly, what's gone is the 25% cut in administrative burden. Now, the administrative burden. Now, the Minister raised it but didn't actually comment on is the government committed to reducing government committed to reducing that 25%, and if so, where does it come from and why is that figure now disappeared from this motion

**** Possible New Speaker ****

when it was in the last one? Minister. My hon. Friend mentioned it earlier in his opening remarks and mentioned all the steps that we are mentioned all the steps that we are taking to reduce those burdens, and he outlined all the policies we are taking to back our small businesses taking to back our small businesses across this country. To his point on investment, just last month, the announcement of £3 billion by JP announcement of £3 billion by JP Morgan at tower, one of the largest financial services investment in recent years, or Scottish Power, recent years, or Scottish Power, with a £24 billion clean energy investment to create 2000 jobs up to 2028.

We are proud of that investment. I will finish on the Youth Guarantee as lots of members have stressed. Obviously the importance of young people and getting to employment, and there are more than 18 to 24 year olds in employment. There were a year ago the Tories left the Neet rate rising and that is they saw a colossal increase of almost a quarter of a million young people out of work. We are determined to turn that around. Neet numbers are still too high and lots of members have rightly reflected on that.

We want to give young people a brighter future and that will be the impact of our youth guarantee. These measures are backed up by the evidence on what works to support young people, to earn and to learn. There is a national crisis of opportunity and we are taking action in response. Whether it is the Youth Guarantee, the Growth and Skills Levy and more widely by interrogating the root causes of these issues. With the support of Alan Milburn. To summarise, Madam Deputy Speaker, this Labour government is on the side of working people and our brilliant businesses.

We have boosted pay for millions of the lowest earners and we're putting money back into people's pockets. We are making work pay again in a way that suits the 21st century. That will create security and opportunity for everyone, no matter their background. And most of all, it's a commitment to a core British value that those who work should be reported, should be rewarded. Or, as we put it in Yorkshire, a fair day's pay for a fair day's work. We are getting on with the job.

We are focussed on fixing the long term damage to our economy and setting Britain on the path to renewal. And that's why I call upon the House to support the amendment today.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. The question is that the original words stand part of the original words stand part of the question. As many as are of that opinion, say aye. of the contrary. opinion, say aye. of the contrary.
16:48
None Portrait Division
-

The question is that the original word stand part of the question, as many are of that opinion, say, are of the contrary. No. No tellers, for the eyes are Gregory Stafford and Andrew Snowden. The tellers for the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And. Order. Order. Order!

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right. 98. The noes to the left. 325.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

noes to the left. 325. The ayes to the right were 98. The noes to the left 325. So the noes have it. The noes have it noes have it. The noes have it unlock. The question is that the proposed words be there added. As many as of that opinion, say aye. of the contrary. No, no. Division. The The question The question is that the proposed words be there

**** Possible New Speaker ****

added as many as of that opinion, say aye. of the contrary. No. No.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

No. The tell us, for the eyes are Mark Ferguson and Taiwo Owatemi the Mark Ferguson and Taiwo Owatemi the tellers for the noes Andrew Snowden

**** Possible New Speaker ****

North North Dorset North Dorset.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order!

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order! The Ayes to the right 320. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Ayes to the right 320. The Noes to the left 98.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right were 320. The noes to the left, 98. To the eyes. Have it. The ayes have it. Unlock. I declare the question as amended to be agreed to. Order!

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Point of order. Saqib Bhatti. PQ. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I bring an issue of grave concern this afternoon at Prime Minister's Questions, the Leader of the Opposition asked the Prime Minister how many teachers there were since the Education Secretary were since the Education Secretary came into office in 2024. The Prime Minister replied there were more Minister replied there were more than when they left office. However, the government website, the DfE website, makes clear that the Prime Minister was wrong. There are 400 Minister was wrong.

There are 400 fewer teachers under Labour. This is more than an inaccuracy, and it's exactly why public the public
17:13
17:14
17:15
Mel Stride Portrait Rt Hon Sir Mel Stride MP (Central Devon, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I will of course, heed your remonstrations and remarks. Madam Deputy Speaker, it is said that astrologers are there to make economists look good. The second hand car dealers are there to make politicians look good. It is inconceivable that anywhere in the world there is any trade or career that could possibly make this Chancellor look good. Indeed, if one looks at the polls, Madam Deputy Speaker, the the Ipsos poll, in terms of approval rating for this Chancellor, she has achieved -60%.

That is a record low for a poll that was first commenced in the 1970s. A recent YouGov poll stated that the Chancellor was the least trusted on the economy, even more so than Jeremy Corbyn. And, yes, Liz Truss.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hon. Member for Islington North.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hon. Member for Islington North. We don't refer to members by name Sir Mel Stride. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Honourable right hon. Gentleman for Honourable right hon. Gentleman for Islington North and Liz Truss, the Chancellor is not so much the wilting lettuce as a complete liability. And why could this possibly have occurred? We had a possibly have occurred? We had a government opposite who came to power with one of the largest majorities in the history of our country. You could always see that majority from the moon because of the huge failure on their part.

Take unemployment. Madam Deputy Speaker, we now have unemployment at a five year high. It is back at the levels that it was last seen during the pandemic. In the latest forecast from the OBR, we see unemployment higher in every single year than was the case in the forecasts back in the spring. Inflation, the IMF tells us, will be at the highest level of the G7 this year and next year, too. And when you look beneath the headline figures, at the rate of inflation for food, for example, it is at almost I will momentarily 5%.

And for a party that claims and professes to stand up for the poorest in our society, that is a disgrace when it comes to growth. We know from the Obr's latest forecasts that every year going forward, growth will be lower than it was set out in the spring forecast and our borrowing costs. Not so long ago, Madam Deputy Speaker reached a 27 year high. We are now paying more on our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

borrowing than Greece, and I give way to whoever it was that was seeking to intervene. Well, I've been called worse.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I've been called worse. Madam Deputy Speaker, let's be honest. Can I can I thank the Shadow Chancellor for giving way, congratulate him on finally working out what apologies are now. He's demanding them from this side. Perhaps before he carries on. Could Perhaps before he carries on. Could he apologise for the 15% spike in interest rates under Liz Truss? The thousands of pounds that were put thousands of pounds that were put on mortgages under Liz Truss, the billions that were cut from local governments under his government, the fact that he ran the health

**** Possible New Speaker ****

service under his government. If people make mistakes, they should apologise. When's he going to start? I've had many things to say

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I've had many things to say about the mini Budget, both at the time that it happened subsequently and more recently. As to. But can I and more recently. As to. But can I remind the hon. Gentleman that on the day of the general election, we had a near record level of had a near record level of employment, a near record low level of unemployment? We had we had had of unemployment? We had we had had the highest growth in the G7, and we also had inflation bang on target at 2%.

It is almost double that at the present time. And the reason why, the reason why, Madam Deputy Speaker, this government has failed can be distilled down to just two words. One of them is deceit and the other is incompetence. Before the last general election, the party opposite said during the run up to that election they would not be putting up taxes left, right and centre. And yet within a few short months they were to roll out £40 billion of tax increases, including £25 billion by way of increased NICs

**** Possible New Speaker ****

taxes on employment. And what? Oh, how could I resist? I'm grateful to my right hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to my right hon. Friend giving way, and he is right to put his finger on this issue of trust, because it's not the 280,000 trust, because it's not the 280,000 people who are not employed now compared to what it was like last year. It's not the lost year. It's not the lost opportunities for so many young people in hospitality, or indeed so people in hospitality, or indeed so many other areas of failure, the reduction of teachers. But the issue that is most corrosive for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this government is a loss of trust, because you can see their mendacity from Mars. Hey, honourable.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hey, honourable. Friend is absolutely right. I think even from Pluto you can see that actually to be more accurate. And he is so right about the loss of jobs in hospitality. About of jobs in hospitality. About 90,000 jobs destroyed, many of them young people who would otherwise have had that first opportunity to have had that first opportunity to get onto the career ladder. And that's as a direct consequence of the increase in National Insurance, because it wasn't just an increase in the rate.

Madam Deputy Speaker, as you will know, it was a reduction in the threshold at which that tax cuts in and that disproportionately affects those on lower income, in particular women, part time workers, and, yes, young people. And we have seen the consequences. We have seen I will in a moment. We have seen the consequences of that up and down our country. And I have spent a lot of time speaking to employers, everything from the large employers down to those in the high streets. They are all struggling and they are struggling because of the decisions that were taken by this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Chancellor. And I give way to the hon. Lady. Thank you. I welcome the debate, and I thank the Shadow Chancellor for giving way on the point about women. We are here to talk about women. We are here to talk about the conduct of the most powerful woman in this country that used her woman in this country that used her Budget to remove the rape clause, to take children out of poverty, to take children out of poverty, and to give justice to miners in my patch.

That never would have happened without her. I welcome this moment to celebrate our Chancellor, and I thank you for it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

here. Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the hon. Lady for that, that thank the hon. Lady for that, that passionate intervention, the best way to get people out of poverty. Madam Deputy Speaker, is through work. And here to the hon. work. And here to the hon. Gentleman's point, the record of the last government was exemplary. the last government was exemplary. We had 4,000,004 million more jobs, 800 800 new jobs every day under

**** Possible New Speaker ****

800 800 new jobs every day under the last conservative government. I give way to the hon. Gentleman. There was insight in a different place. I feel like I was having a feeling of deja vu, because this appears to be the same debate that we had on the Budget just just a week or so ago, when when I pointed out to him that the problem that we we have is that two thirds of children growing up in poverty have a parent in work, it was a third before the before the last government got in, and so would the former work and pensions Minister across the way.

A like to apologise for that and be like to reflect on why work wasn't working as a route

**** Possible New Speaker ****

out of poverty under his government. Well, I just ask the hon. Gentleman what he thinks the effect of increasing taxes on hard working of increasing taxes on hard working people does for poverty. Any economist will say it drives economist will say it drives poverty up. So there is also the question, Madam Deputy Speaker of question, Madam Deputy Speaker of the farm tax, the changes under the inheritance tax regime, when the then shadow DEFRA secretary looked, Tom Bradshaw, the president of the NFU, in the eye in the run up to the general election and said at least on that count, at least on that count, farmers had nothing to fear from a future Labour government.

Well, that lasted about five minutes before they changed and the Chancellor changed her position. That is going to cause untold misery to farmers up and down our country. It will mean that farms that have been passed down generation to generation over many, many years are now going to fall into the tax net and potentially have to be broken up. And I think

**** Possible New Speaker ****

there was somebody yes, I give way to the hon. Gentleman. I am grateful to the Shadow Chancellor. We know of this Chancellor. We know of this Chancellor, that there are serious questions over her alleged questions over her alleged experience in the financial services sector. We can see that she has no experience in either industry or commerce. But perhaps the worst of her detriments is her clinical lack of empathy, where she seems totally unable to connect, cause and effect.

And that is why she is allowed the disastrous.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Could I just respectfully remind the hon. Member that comments do the hon. Member that comments do need to be about what is in the matters?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

matters? Dave Doogan indeed, and in terms of that conduct and those decisions of that conduct and those decisions that have been made that is most evident in the egregious family farm tax, a betrayal of the farm tax, a betrayal of the producers of our food, no less, and the, let us call it, management of market sensitive information.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Before the Budget, which had a material effect on the economy of these islands. Yeah. The hon. Gentleman makes

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The hon. Gentleman makes excellent points. I will come to the issue of the market moving effects of some of the comments effects of some of the comments made by the Chancellor, but on the point that he rightly raises about point that he rightly raises about the impact on people's lives. These are real jobs. These are people struggling with real businesses. These are farmers getting up early These are farmers getting up early in the morning and going out and working and doing what they know to be right.

And yet they are way down, way down by the decisions taken by the party opposite. The party opposite said that they had no intention of means testing the Winter Fuel Payment. There was no mention of means testing the Winter Fuel Payment in the party. Opposite's manifesto during the last general election, and yet within a very short period of time, that is precisely what they did. And before members opposite get excited about excluding millionaires and multi-millionaires from those payments.

The reality is, Madam Deputy Speaker, that about 80% of those pensioners living below the poverty line, below the poverty line were impacted by that decision, a decision that would have done nothing for poverty but to actually entrench it and drive it up. And I give way to the hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Gentleman. I'm grateful to the Shadow Chancellor giving way, because one of the concerns that I have, and of the concerns that I have, and this is the repeated pattern we've now seen with the Budget, was at the time the government sat on an impact assessment that showed that impact assessment that showed that 100,000 pensioners would be pushed into poverty and 50,000 pushed into absolute poverty. That was the absolute poverty. That was the government's own assessment. They did not release to the House or the country before pushing this policy country before pushing this policy through.

And we've now seen that in the Budget. Is he concerned about me? This is a pattern of behaviour

**** Possible New Speaker ****

rather than a one off mistake. Mr. speaker, my hon. Friend is absolutely right. Look, the government talks a good game on government talks a good game on poverty, but when it comes down to actually what they do, I'm afraid we see something entirely. We see something entirely different. I will give way to the hon. Lady.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will give way to the hon. Lady. Thank you very much for giving way. And on that point of poverty, and on the point of actually what and on the point of actually what this means to our constituents, we are sitting in Northern Ireland with the Local Growth Fund, and the Treasury refuses to understand that actually, the way we do things is different. We don't need a 70% capital, we need it the other way around. And that, to me, just seems to speak to some of the sort of motion that I'm comfortable to speak to, which is it fails.

Sometimes the message is not getting through because our constituents need us to understand whether it's farm tax, whether it's the winter fuel allowance. We need a government that will listen. They promise to listen. And so far I've not heard that reflected.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely right. The hon. Lady is absolutely right. There is another change to the inheritance another change to the inheritance tax regime, of course, equally destructive to the agricultural property relief changes. And that property relief changes. And that is business property relief changes, the tax changes relating to family firms up and down the country. I firms up and down the country. I have met Madam Deputy Speaker with many of them. These are sometimes substantial businesses that have substantial businesses that have gone from having a bright outlook under the last government to suddenly being concerned about the provisions they are now going to have to make to avoid being broken up as a consequence of the ruinous changes to the inheritance tax regime.

For those those businesses, it is destroying investment, it is destroying jobs, it is destroying growth. And it is the story of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

party opposite. I give way to the hon. Gentleman. I do thank. The Minister, Madam speaker, on

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Minister, Madam speaker, on the point that he raises about his newfound concern for pensioners in poverty. If I recall, the one time, poverty. If I recall, the one time, the one time that the triple lock has been suspended was under the Conservatives in 2020 and 2021, and Conservatives in 2020 and 2021, and I believe the hon. Gentleman is on record as saying it's unsustainable and should be replaced with a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

double lock. Is that still his position or does he support the triple lock? Can I can I invite the hon. Gentleman just to look back a little bit further in time, before the triple lock was introduced by the government of my party, to the time that his party was last in office, under under his government, under his last government, pensioner poverty. Pensioner poverty was the fourth highest in Europe. It was the fourth highest in Europe. And that is why we brought in the triple lock to clear up the mess that his party had created.

The government opposite also said during the run up to the general election that unlike all socialist governments in the past, they would not be massively borrowing and massively spending. And yet the plan set out in that first Budget in the autumn of last year, was to spend around half £1 trillion more across the Parliament than the plans that they had inherited, and that was added to further in the recent Budget. Billions of pounds more to be borrowed and spent. And what was the consequences of that? It was that inflation has been stickier and higher for longer.

As I've already set out. It'll be the highest in the G7 this year and the highest in the G7 next year. Madam Deputy Speaker, and the consequences of that are, of course, that the Bank of England has had to keep interest rates higher than would otherwise have been the case and for longer. And the consequence of that, yes, there should have been more reductions if they hadn't fuelled inflation, if they had not fuelled inflation. Madam Deputy Speaker, we would have seen interest rates coming down faster and quicker.

And the reality is that has heaped pressure on people with mortgages. It has heaped pressure on businesses and their borrowing costs, and it is added to the servicing costs of the huge national debt to which they are readily adding even further monies such that we are now just to service our national debt, spending £100 billion a year, rising to 140 billion, according to the latest OBR forecast, which is over double what we spend on defence. In fact, Madam Deputy Speaker, if debt servicing were a Whitehall department, it would be the third largest in Whitehall.

Not a department, not a department, not a department out there looking after the public services. The more teachers that the Prime Minister apparently doesn't realise are not there at the moment, this is money simply going to pay off the profligacy of the party opposite. Gentleman.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For giving way. I just wanted to help him out because he seems a bit confused on his party's watch. The confused on his party's watch. The debt service went over 100 billion. When they took over it was only 30 When they took over it was only 30 billion. So would they now like to apologise? They tripled it. Will he now apologise for for mortgaging now apologise for for mortgaging our children's future with their finances?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

finances? So I could just give the hon. Member a very basic lesson in economics. In 2010. In 2010, in 2010, when my party came to office, we inherited a deficit at over 10% of GDP. That means, as any economist will tell you, that is the amount of money that is being added to the debt. Every single year. It was over 10% under the watch of the party opposite. And that is the story of increased debt. The debt pile as a percentage of GDP was coming down just before Covid.

The party opposite, the party opposite, along with just about everybody else in the political firmament at the time of Covid, urged us to spend ever more in order to support the economy and to support jobs. And that's precisely what we did. And of course, that came with a fiscal cost three times might be a bit too much. We'll come back to you later. I'll give way to the hon. Gentleman.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank him for giving way. I do remember that after the global financial crisis, which hit every country in the world, the Conservatives did inherit a growing economy in 2010. inherit a growing economy in 2010. And I do remember that they said that they'd wipe the deficit by the end of that 2015 Parliament. Simply end of that 2015 Parliament. Simply it simply didn't happen. And we do acknowledge COVID's been a huge pressure on the economy, but we are taking steps to get that deficit

**** Possible New Speaker ****

taking steps to get that deficit down and to get borrowing down because it's a. Huge burden on. Well, the steps that the hon. Gentleman's party is doing as he terms it, to get the deficit down, is actually to borrow ever larger sums of money, half a trillion extra compared to the plans that his party inherited and added to further by the Chancellor in the last Budget. Now, after the first Budget, Madam Deputy Speaker, you will recall that the Chancellor said that she would not be coming back for more tax.

And this brings me on to this issue of misleading. That was clearly a misleading statement, because we have now seen in this recent Budget, £26 billion more in tax in the year 2930, but 26 billion is the extent of the increased tax rises because they have fuelled inflation for the reasons that we have been discussing amongst ourselves, that has led to fiscal drag actually dragging in, in total, £38 billion of additional taxation in that year. And the party opposite have got to start to understand that if you tax the economy and tax and tax and tax, that you will get less growth, you will get less productivity, you will get less employment.

And that is precisely what we are seeing, they said. Also, if you recall, Madam Deputy Speaker, that the Chancellor would not be taxing hard working people. Well, that just simply was not true. There were £7 billion worth of additional taxes within income tax. By freezing the income tax thresholds for those extra years. And that is a direct contradiction of what the Chancellor said with great gusto in the previous Budget. She said she was not going to do that because that would hurt.

That would hurt hard working people. And she was going to stick to her promises. Well, clearly she didn't mean it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

when she said it. I give way to the hon. Gentleman. I'm grateful to my right hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to my right hon. Friend, I wonder how best this behaviour can be described as a falsehood, an untruth, a fib, a lie, falsehood, an untruth, a fib, a lie, or a whopper? Or are there other synonyms which would better describe this repeated failure to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

describe this repeated failure to do what you promise? Yeah. I thank him for that observation, and I have been cautioned by the and I have been cautioned by the chair to me as to the language that I use, I think misleading. I think it was clearly misleading that somebody should come to this House, say that they would not be putting up taxes. This is a one off. She used the expression, I think, to wipe the slate clean and yet be back for £26 billion more only a matter of months later.

The right hon. Lady also said that she would control welfare spending. Well, how did that go? The first thing that the party opposite did was to scrap the reforms that we had brought in. In fact, when I was Secretary of State for Work and Pensions that the OBR had scored as meaning 450,000 fewer people, going on to long term sickness and disability benefits at a multi with a multi-billion pound, with a multi-billion pound. I think I've got a jack in the box over here obviously actually.

And and yeah, but the jack in the box is kind of great to observe isn't it. I'm not sure that that's the case in the case of the hon. Gentleman, but I might take, I might take it's probably about a fourth intervention from, from him momentarily. They scrapped our plans so that 450,000 people that would not have gone on to those benefits are now heading exactly in that direction. The U-turned, of course, on the botched attempt to bring in their own reforms, because perhaps some of the members opposite, sitting here this evening refused to back them.

And that cost about that cost about £5 billion. We have seen, Madam Deputy Speaker, speaker, that in the case of the Tim's review, which is now looking into the issue of the reform of Personal Independence Payments, the terms of reference for that review make it quite explicitly clear that there will be no attempt to manage down any of the forecast numbers for that benefit. Within the Obr's forecast, the party opposite has given up on welfare reform, but they have done momentarily.

I assure the hon. Gentleman, I will, I will come to him. But what they have done in the meantime, of course, in this latest Budget, is to take entirely the wrong decision, which is to tax all those hard working people to the tune of £7 billion and a high proportion of that, to transfer straight across to those who are on benefits, including scrapping the two child cap. Those are the wrong priorities. They are about the socialist obsession with redistribution, and nothing to do with driving the incentives in the economy that grow the economy and make everybody better off.

I will actually give way to my hon. Friend Chancellor giving way. We heard from the government backbenchers about borrowing from the last government, and of course, that was for the country as a whole, with, for example, the Covid recovery loans. What we've seen with this Budget is what I would call career recovery loans, which is which is the benefit of two people, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Prime Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Yeah, it's absolutely right in her heart. I do not believe that her heart. I do not believe that the Chancellor really thinks that the right decision was to scrap the two child benefit cap. I, I two child benefit cap. I, I genuinely do not, I do not, and this is a case of the political or this is a case of the political or fiscal tail wagging the welfare dog. It's as simple as that, that they It's as simple as that, that they have given up the the front bench have given up on any serious welfare reform.

Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, of course, the Chancellor has reassured us by telling us that she has rebuilt her headroom. She has doubled the headroom against her fiscal target, although it should be pointed out, although it well, it should be. It should be. I will in a moment. It should be pointed out, of course, that that is a fiddle fiscal target. It is not the fiscal target that we were working to the same definition of debt. It is not net public sector debt at all.

It is something different. And in fact, if you were to apply the targets that we were running to, which were much more stringent to the figures, that in the forecast that we see from the recent Budget, those are those targets will be under water in every single year of that forecast. And we should acknowledge that there is a real risk to the stability now of our economy, even with and apparently doubled fiscal headroom. The first is the first is that when it comes to defence spending, whilst within those numbers there is indeed 2% reaching 2.7% of GDP in 2027, there is nothing beyond that.

Except, of course, the government knows that it is going to have to spend more on defence, and it knows that every 1% of GDP increase in defence spending is about £25 billion, more than the entire fiscal headroom that the Chancellor has set aside. The Chancellor also knows that part of the problems that she did have with the forecasts, albeit there were other things that moved strongly and positively in her direction, was a productivity downgrade by the OBR a downgrade from 1.3 to an average of 1%, productivity growth across the forecast.

Well, the trend for productivity over the last 15 years has just been 0.5%. So if the OBR decides in a couple of years time, Madam Deputy Speaker, to return to an assumption of trend growth in productivity, that will actually wipe out £28 billion of headroom, it will destroy all the headroom and more. Similarly, the path of interest rates a 1% increase in interest rates across the forecast would cost £16 billion. There are, of course, in relation to particular spending pressures, such as send a £6 billion cost pressure because that has been taken from local authorities onto the government's books in 2028, and it is not accounted for in any way as to how that additional cost is going to be net met.

Similarly, efficiency savings apparently of £4 billion in 2009 30 the target year. All very handy if you're trying to hit a fiscal target, but no explanation whatsoever as to where those efficiencies are going to be found or how they are going to be found. And the final point before I give way, I will give way to the hon. Gentleman. The final point I would make is that the tax increases set out by the Chancellor, of course, are all back ended. That's when those frozen thresholds kick in.

So we are led to believe or expected to believe that in the run up to a general election, a party that has shown no resolve, no backbone, no capacity to take difficult decisions, is going to suddenly find some backbone and stick to their guns and deliver those tax increases in the eye of a coming general election. Madam Deputy Speaker, it simply will not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Friend. Grateful to the Chancellor. We see there's no more evidently in health when it comes to the health when it comes to the abolition and redundancies in the icbs. Given that that's a 50% redundancy, we now understand that, redundancy, we now understand that, that the funding for that is just being reprofiled into later being reprofiled into later spending in 2028, 2029. Isn't this exactly the kind of example that he's looking at, where there's going to be real problems coming up in the next couple of years when it comes to trying to drive through the agenda the other side has.

Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The reality, Madam Deputy Speaker, is that back end loading the tax pain and the squeezing of spending as this government is doing, is simply pushing off the inevitable. And the evidence is inevitable. And the evidence is that the party opposite, despite their huge majority, does not have the backbone or the plan to control the backbone or the plan to control spending or take difficult decisions, even on tax. Madam decisions, even on tax. Madam Deputy Speaker Charles Dickens in David Copperfield, that's what this Chancellor is like.

Mr. Micawber, who was just waiting all the time for something to turn up, and Mr. Micawber has those that are familiar with that story will recall not only ruined himself through his inability to manage his own finances, he ended up ruining another person, too. This Chancellor and her inability to manage the public finances is, I'm afraid, going to be the ruin of our nation. And for most of us at Christmas, it will be not so much a question of great expectations, but one of bleak House.

And I Give way

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to somebody was, yes, the the gentleman there has been very patient so. And I thank the shadow

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And I thank the shadow Chancellor for giving way and he talks about fiction. Well I think let's talk about the Liz Truss let's talk about the Liz Truss Budget which was fiction. Now before we get there, though, Madam Deputy Speaker, can you imagine if Deputy Speaker, can you imagine if the Chancellor had turned up to this House to deliver her Budget this House to deliver her Budget with a 4.2 billion headroom, 2.2 billion below the stability rules? It would have been. That would have been fiction.

She didn't. She's taken the fiscally responsible decisions and created a 21.7 billion headroom that that covers us for future financial shocks.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Does he not agree with me on that? Exactly. The reason why there's the obsession with fiscal headroom is this is the Chancellor that set is this is the Chancellor that set up too little back in the day, blew it all, had to rebuild it, blew it it all, had to rebuild it, blew it all and has had to rebuild it again. That's why the markets are so sensitive to fiscal headroom. And the fact that the Chancellor is now saying she needs 22.5 billion as fiscal headroom against her primary fiscal headroom against her primary current Budget target is evidence of the fact that she had woefully too little back at the time of the first Budget, when she had 9.9 billion.

That's what the moral of that story is, and I'll certainly give way to my political reality, is that this government has been dead in the water since it failed to get its very modest reduction in the rate of growth in the benefits Bill through this Parliament earlier in the year, and the ridiculous nonsense we saw in the Budget when, having sacked backbenchers, suspended backbenchers at the last Budget because they voted to end the two child limit to to come back with this great triumphal announcement.

She was going to do it for him. But can I entreat my hon. Friend, to give, give way one more time to the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central, so he can give us an

**** Possible New Speaker ****

explanation of his socks. Yes, I think, Madam Deputy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes, I think, Madam Deputy Speaker. The less said, the less said about the socks, the less said about the socks, the better, I think. Yeah, well, I think that think. Yeah, well, I think that that's not bad. I have to say, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think the tie runs at a close second, tie runs at a close second, actually. You know, that's a pretty shocking to. But, Madam Deputy Speaker, can I turn now to the not just the substance of the Budget, but the chaotic pantomime we had into the run up to the Budget.

We had every possible kite flown by the Treasury as to which to as to which taxes were potentially going to be going up. We had so many kites that it blotted out the sun, the long shadow of all that chaos were swept across both businesses who stopped investing and consumers who stopped spending. And don't take my word for that. Take the observation of Andy Haldane, the former chief economist at the Bank of England, who said that all that speculation made businesses and consumers, quote, hunker down.

And it had real economic consequences. And Madam Deputy Speaker, when.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My right hon. Finally, I will take my final hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hon. It's been very generous. The truth is the dither, the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The truth is the dither, the delay, the change in their mind, the party opposite and the run up to the Budget had a real impact on real people's lives. Does he agree with me that pensioners in particular were encouraged to particular were encouraged to withdraw funds from their pension funds, which will have an impact on them for many, many years to come? What does he think of that? What does he think of the remarks of Michael Summerskill, Chief Executive Officer of AJ Bell, who said that billion, millions of pounds, billions of pounds withdrawn from pension funds precisely because of the changing mind of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Ipswich.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Absolutely right. This is why this behaviour was so irresponsible. There were people that would have There were people that would have drawn down on their pensions because they were extremely concerned about what was being briefed out by the Treasury as to briefed out by the Treasury as to what may be the changes coming down the line in terms of the ability for them to do that after the for them to do that after the Budget. We also had people leaving the country as a consequence of being worried about an exit tax, being worried about an exit tax, which was another kite that was flown by the Treasury.

This was grossly irresponsible behaviour that had real life impacts in the real economy. And Madam Deputy Speaker, when it comes to misleading, there is much to consider around the complete mismanagement of the run up to this Budget. That is not just my view. Indeed, a member of the Cabinet was quoted in the press saying, and I quote, the handling of this Budget has been a disaster from start to finish. That's a member of the Cabinet. The impression is, given that there was a deliberate attempt to paint an inaccurate picture of the public finances, designed to give political cover for Labour's plans for more taxes and more welfare spending.

The Chancellor delivered a pre-budget statement in Downing Street on the 4th of November. In it, she said that the OBR would be downgrading their productivity forecasts, meaning lower tax receipts. But the Chancellor failed to mention that in reality the Obr's forecasts had already shown her four days earlier that overall tax receipts were £16 billion higher, not lower than previously thought. To quote the Obr's Budget report. In isolation, the reduction in productivity growth could have lowered revenues by around 16 billion.

However, the booster receipts from higher inflation and changes to the composition of nominal GDP growth more than offset this. Ministers have pointed out that there was a need to increase headroom, but that was not the justification for tax rises that was being made before the Budget. And it is an admission that the headroom that the Chancellor left in, left in her first two fiscal events was inadequate and irresponsible. Crucially, it also fails to acknowledge that a significant proportion of the increase in taxes was actually used to fund policy decisions to spend more on welfare.

Then, Madam Deputy Speaker, on the 14th of November, the media were briefed that a plan to increase income tax rates had been dropped following an improved forecast from the OBR. We now know that was simply untrue. The finalised pre measures forecast came weeks before this on the 31st of October. That is why it is vital that the FCA investigates the briefings and leaks which went on, and I have written again to them this week on that matter, even after the Budget.

In a Guardian interview, the Chancellor said income tax rises had remained on the table well into November. And I quote, she said, because we didn't know the size of the downgrade in productivity. Indeed, again, this is simply untrue. We now know that at no point was there a deficit of the scale suggested to the media. And we know that because the OBR felt it necessary to take the unprecedented step of publishing their forecast rounds in full? The question remains as to why Ministers seem to have been so taxes were going up, the utter weakness of this Labour government and the need to buy off their backbenchers with yet more welfare spending and in the process, the uncertainty and speculation fuelled by the Treasury had an impact on families and on growth.

People made decisions. As my right hon. Friend has rightly pointed out about their finances. They locked in higher mortgage rates, businesses, put off making investments and hiring workers. The British public have been left worse off and they have been misled. They deserve an apology and they deserve much better than this weak and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

irresponsible government. Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes. The question is, as on the Order Paper James Murray Minister. Thank you very much, Madam

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker, and thank you to the opposition for giving me another opportunity to remind hon. another opportunity to remind hon. Members opposite how the Budget cut the cost of living, cut NHS waiting lists and cut government borrowing. lists and cut government borrowing. Madam Deputy Speaker, I've seen the Shadow Chancellor across the despatch box so much in recent weeks and what feels like almost a daily basis. I think I might almost miss him over the recess, almost.

But Madam Deputy Speaker, no matter how many times I've seen him over the Dispatch Box in recent weeks, he has shown he does not want to talk about the fact that this is a
17:53
James Murray Portrait Rt Hon James Murray MP, The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Ealing North, Labour )
-
-
Budget that takes £150 off energy bills, a Budget that freezes rail fares and prescription charges, a fares and prescription charges, a Budget that lifts 550,000 children out of poverty, a Budget that increases our headroom to £21.7 increases our headroom to £21.7 billion, a Budget that gets debt falling and cuts borrowing in every year, a Budget that invests in our year, a Budget that invests in our NHS, our defence, our roads, our railways and every region and nation of the UK. They do not want nation of the UK.

They do not want to talk about the substance of the Budget, because they can see that the Chancellor has delivered a Budget that delivers for working people. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I didn't expect that, he says. He says, Madam Deputy Speaker, he says that a energy bill payers in the UK are now £150 better off, forgetting, of course, that the forgetting, of course, that the energy bills are currently almost £600 higher than Labour promised they would be at the election. Ofgem are coming with £108 additional on infrastructure additional on infrastructure charges. Energy bills will go up again in January and again in April.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Is he want to reflect? Is that really the record he's standing on? Yeah. Good question. Madam Deputy Speaker. I'm unclear from the hon. Gentleman's intervention whether he supports £150 off energy bills, whether he supports our extra £150 off for supports our extra £150 off for those 6 million households on the lowest income that will benefit people right across the UK with the people right across the UK with the cost of living challenges that they face. And Madam Deputy Speaker, we know that that is what matters to know that that is what matters to people right across the Britain.

But instead, Madam Deputy Speaker, are focusing on what this Budget means to people across Britain. We heard from the shadow Chancellor his comments and a motion which focuses so much on process and whilst process I accept, Madam Deputy Speaker is very important. It has been covered extensively in recent weeks, indeed most recently by the Chancellor of the Treasury Select Committee this morning. So let me put on record our response to the motion and to the comments that the Shadow Chancellor made about process. Madam Deputy Speaker, let me begin by again addressing the speech the Chancellor made on the 4th of November, when the Chancellor addressed the country that morning, her purpose was simple to give the British people an honest sense of the circumstances we were facing and the principles that would guide her as she took decisions about the Budget.

The Chancellor wanted to highlight the challenges our country was facing and her priorities in the face of those challenges. And that is exactly what she did. Following the Obr's review of productivity, the review of the impact of 14 years of the Conservatives being in power, the Chancellor knew that we were facing a downgrade. And to understand the scale of this impact, members of the opposition need only to consult the Budget document. There. They will see that the Obr's Productivity Review, which covered the Conservatives time in office, reduces, and I quote, the amount of revenue the OBR expects the government to collect by around £16

**** Possible New Speaker ****

billion in 20 2930. Giving way, I think it's the dishonesty which has kept dishonesty which has kept everybody's throat because a year ago the Chancellor at the Budget said that she wasn't going to freeze income tax thresholds because and I think I quote, it would be an additional tax on would be an additional tax on working people. Therefore, in breach of the Labour manifesto, she then did a year later exactly that, then did a year later exactly that, and then claimed that it wasn't a breach of the manifesto.

That is rank dishonesty. That's why the chair is allowing language that wouldn't normally be used in this chamber, because this motion and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this government mean we have to address issues which normally don't occur. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Madam Deputy Speaker, the hon. Gentleman is mistaken. We have kept to our manifesto commitment not to raise the rates of income tax, raise the rates of income tax, national insurance and working people and VAT. What we also said in our manifesto is that we will in our manifesto is that we will keep taxes on working people as low as possible, and we have only been able to do that because of the other fair and necessary choices the Chancellor took on taxation.

I will give way if he will say, does he support our changes to council

**** Possible New Speaker ****

tax on high value properties? Confirm on the issue of the manifesto. It doesn't say that it manifesto. It doesn't say that it wouldn't raise the income tax rates, it just says it wouldn't raise those taxes. The words rates isn't those taxes. The words rates isn't in there. And it's that that is misleading. It's that that makes everyone outside throw things at their television because they're disgusted by a government that can't face up to simple truths.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

can't face up to simple truths. Yeah. Madam Deputy Speaker the word rate is definitely in there. It talks about the income tax rates, additional main and higher rates of income tax. And it's very clear that we were talking about the rates of tax on working people. As I said, the manifesto also says that we will keep taxes on working people as low as possible. And I note that he did not take my suggestion there to comment on some of the other tax choices we took at the Budget, the fair and necessary choices the opposition are picking and choosing what they want to refer to in the Budget.

The Budget is a package. If they don't like it, they should explain what they would

**** Possible New Speaker ****

do instead. I'll give way. On this matter of picking and choosing. Would the right hon. choosing. Would the right hon. Gentleman not accept that whilst he is absolutely right, that on the 4th of November, the Chancellor did point out that there was downgraded productivity? We now know that to be 16 billion. And she knew that at be 16 billion. And she knew that at the time. She, however, by omission, did not mention the upgrade to the did not mention the upgrade to the number that was twice as much as that 16 billion and thereby gave an inaccurate reflection of the state of the public finances at that time.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

No, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Chancellor set out the productivity review that was underway by the OBR. review that was underway by the OBR. And in fact, if he consults the OBR publication published on Budget day, he will see in black and white the productivity downgrade reduced tax receipts by £16 billion. The Chancellor was clear in her speech Chancellor was clear in her speech on November the 4th that this, combined with the clear need to increase headroom to build resilience in public finances, resilience in public finances, would require everyone to contribute.

And that is what happened. The hon. Gentleman had a really very long time to comment earlier in this debate. So I'm going to I'm going to make some progress. I may give way to him

**** Possible New Speaker ****

later. I'm going to make a bit of progress. I'll give way to the gentleman behind him. The Minister. For giving way. Now, the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For giving way. Now, the Minister is a reasonable man, and I imagine that. He. Would subscribe to the government's much vaunted duty of candour that it's selling in its Public Office Accountability bill, currently in committee. It's so currently in committee. It's so important to the government that the Prime Minister himself had to introduce a Second Reading. So will he then just examine what has happened over the past couple of months? And and does he really believe that the Treasury and in particular the Chancellor of the Exchequer, can truly be said to have discharged that duty of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

candour in her dealings? Yeah. Hold on. I need.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker, as the right hon. Gentleman should know, this government takes our responsibilities to public office responsibilities to public office incredibly seriously, and we've made sure that we focus on that in the way that we conduct ourselves the way that we conduct ourselves in office. The Chancellor, in speaking to people on November the 4th, was setting out the challenges 4th, was setting out the challenges that we knew we were facing and the principles that would guide her in approaching the decisions ahead of the Budget.

And that was important

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to set out the priorities that she would have. And taking those way. I thank the right hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for giving way, being very generous. Would the right hon. Gentleman accept that on the 4th of Gentleman accept that on the 4th of November, the Chancellor knew that there was around a £32 billion upgrade to the state of the public upgrade to the state of the public finances due to additional tax, due to inflation and other factors. And to inflation and other factors. And if he does accept that, could he explain to the House why no mention

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Chancellor? Yeah. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker. What the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker. What the Chancellor knew when she was giving her speech on the 4th of November was that headroom stood at a was that headroom stood at a precarious £4.2 billion, and that was before previously announced policy measures had been accounted policy measures had been accounted for. Now, as I have said before, in this House, and as professor Miles of the OBR said to the Treasury of the OBR said to the Treasury Select Committee, that was a very challenging fiscal situation.

And if I were here, Madam Deputy Speaker, trying to justify a headroom of £4.2 billion or less, it would be completely indefensible. That means that doing nothing was not an option. £4.2 billion of headroom would have been insufficient and deeply irresponsible. The Chancellor was clear in her speech at the beginning of November that she would seek to build more resilient public finances, with headroom to withstand global turbulence. The Chancellor set out her priorities for the Budget, and those priorities were exactly what the Budget delivered.

The apparent astonishment of members opposite that a government could set out circumstances, honestly explain its approach and then deliver as promised, is very telling. It must be an alien concept that they never considered during their time in office. Madam Deputy Speaker, as the Chancellor set out on the 4th of November and then delivered in her Budget, she wanted to cut NHS waiting lists. And that is exactly what we are doing. Waiting lists are already down by 230,000, with an extra 5 million appointments delivered since the election and 250 new neighbourhood health centres on the way.

Secondly, I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will give way. I thank the honourable. Member for giving. Way, and one of the things that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Way, and one of the things that I am most proud of, having stood on doorstep after doorstep in Tipton and Wednesbury and closely at the general election hearing, people general election hearing, people tell the dreadful stories of how long they and their relatives have been waiting for hospital treatment. been waiting for hospital treatment. It's the 45% fall in people waiting more than a year for their operation in the Black Country, in operation in the Black Country, in our hospital trusts, and I am glad that the Chancellor made the decisions that she did at the last

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Budget that has enabled this year. I thank my hon. Friend for talking about the experience of her constituents, and she's absolutely right that because the NHS is so important to all of us, that is why it's so important for the Chancellor to protect it in the Budget and the decisions that she took. Protect our investment in the took. Protect our investment in the NHS to get it back on its feet. And that will improve people's experience right across the country.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

experience right across the country. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, I'll give way. Chris Vince. I'm sure you give Mr. On the NHS and the point that I've made in the previous debate is very really important. The investment in NHS isn't just about investing in building, it's actually investing in people and actually investing in working people in my constituency. Harlow have lots of people who are self-employed, who are sole traders, as we call them, and actually them having to wait for years to get NHS appointments is actually bad for the economy and bad for for their pocket.

Would he agree with me?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My hon. Friend is absolutely right that whilst improving the NHS is a clear priority because of all of our experiences of the NHS and of our experiences of the NHS and our reliance on it to keep healthy and to make sure our families are healthy. It is also an economic healthy. It is also an economic investment because we know that people being out of the workforce due to ill health is a serious drag due to ill health is a serious drag on our economy, and that's a situation we inherited from the previous government.

So our investment in the health service, investment in the health service, our desire to get the NHS back on its feet is not just the right thing to do by families across the country, but, as he says, for economic growth. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker. I'll give way one more time, then make some progress.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister, for giving way. And on the same topic. The way this Budget was handled has undermined public confidence in. North Norfolk in many ways, few more so than the fact it produced radio silence on our long pledged dental school at the University of dental school at the University of East Anglia. Does he agree with me that if the Treasury has spent a little less time on their fiscal fandango and more time delivering fandango and more time delivering dentistry improvements in North Norfolk, this Budget may have gone down better with many of my local residents.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

residents. Madam Deputy Speaker. Maybe I will take the hon. Gentleman more seriously if he spent a little less time opposing the decisions we take on tax to fund public services, because, quite frankly, we're taking fair and necessary decisions on tax precisely to fund the NHS and other public services on which we all rely and Madam Deputy Speaker I have set out at length what we're doing to protect the NHS. But the second priority the Chancellor had going into Budget was to tackle the cost of living.

And that is exactly what we are doing at this Budget. The Chancellor chose to freeze rail fares for the first time in 30 years, to extend bus fare caps, to freeze prescription charges, to increase the basic and new state pension to raise the minimum, and living wages to extend the fuel duty cut to help more than half a million children who would otherwise live in poverty, and to save the average household £150 off their energy bills. Madam Deputy Speaker, as the Bank of England deputy governor told members yesterday, this Budget will reduce inflation between 0.4 and 0.5%.

And finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Chancellor's priority going to the Budget was to cut our national debt in government borrowing. And that is exactly what we are doing because of the choices the Chancellor gave way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

To my hon. Friend, give way. The party opposite have spent a lot of this debate saying that apologies this debate saying that apologies are due from this side of the House, yet under them the party opposite, £11 billion of taxpayers money was £11 billion of taxpayers money was lost in Covid fraud. Does he agree with me that if there's an apology

**** Possible New Speaker ****

with me that if there's an apology is due from any side of the House, it would be that one? My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Sorry seems to be the hardest word to say for the members opposite, doesn't it? When it comes to Covid fraud, when it comes to the state, they left the NHS. When it comes to the Liz Truss mini Budget, when it came to everything they did to public services and our economy, writing off the next generation in vast swathes of our nation, they should stand up and say sorry.

No, Madam Deputy Speaker, the priority for the Chancellor at the Budget was also to make sure that we cut our national debt and government borrowing. And because of choices the Chancellor made, the Budget borrowing will fall as a share of GDP in every year of this forecast. Net financial debt will be falling as a share of GDP. Two by the end of this Parliament, and will be lower by the end of the forecast than when we came to office. And of course, as I have said already, our headroom now stands at £21.7 billion, meeting our stability rule a year early, giving businesses the confidence to invest and leaving government freer to act when the situation calls for it.

Madam Deputy Speaker, whatever mischief the Conservatives try to make, however personal they make their attacks, the truth is, the Chancellor was clear about the challenges the country faces. She set out her priorities and taking those challenges head on, and she delivered a Budget that meets the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

priorities of the British people now and in the future. I thank the Chief Secretary for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Chief Secretary for giving way and as usual, he's out here defending the Chancellor. I do feel quite sorry for him. He's feel quite sorry for him. He's outlined, quite rightly. He's reeled off a number of policies that his Chancellor and his government have made a choice about. But before the election, the Chancellor said that it was going Chancellor said that it was going to be on the back of a fully costed manifesto instead. Taxes have gone up to pay for those choices, and that means that the manifesto wasn't fully costed.

So therefore this motion is correct. Isn't it tonight that the Chancellor misled the country before the election and in this Budget? Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker, the hon. Gentleman opened his remarks by saying that he feels sorry for me. saying that he feels sorry for me. He needn't. I am proud, I am proud to be defending a Labour Budget in to be defending a Labour Budget in this chamber. And frankly, I may repay the the the sympathies to him. I feel sorry for him to be stuck on I feel sorry for him to be stuck on those benches, for I fear he may be for a very long time.

Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, the other point of process that the motion today refers to in the Shadow Chancellor has referred to in his comments is around speculation ahead of the Budget. And let me start by by addressing the premature publication of the Economic and Fiscal Outlook, or Ifo. Now, we know that the Ifo is a highly sensitive document, which is obviously not meant to be published until after the Chancellor has finished presenting the Budget to the House. The fact that this was accessed online before the Chancellor's Chancellor began her Budget speech was a very serious matter indeed.

I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

As to the accidental or deliberate kind of release of this information before, but we know on information before, but we know on the 14th of November the press were briefed, which was clearly, clearly with incorrect information. What the Minister confirmed to this the Minister confirmed to this House today, who gave authority for that press briefing to go ahead, which misled not only the press but also the country?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

also the country? I'm sorry. I think the hon. Gentleman was incorrect in what he said. Madam Deputy Speaker, he said said. Madam Deputy Speaker, he said that I may have implied the premature publication was deliberate. I certainly did not imply that, but it is nonetheless a very serious matter, which is why we're responding to it with the commensurate seriousness the matter deserves. We know the OBR rightly took responsibility for this mistake, and soon afterwards its chair, Richard Hughes, resigned.

In fact, whilst we were here discussing this matter at these very Dispatch Box last Monday. Now that, of course, was a matter for Mr. Hughes, and a decision of his choosing, the Chancellor wrote to him to thank him for his professionalism and dedication. I and many others in this House have made clear our gratitude for his work as a public servant. But nonetheless, it was a serious breach and the government is acting

**** Possible New Speaker ****

with seriousness in response. I will give way. I thank the Minister for giving way. I read the the OBR report with interest and one of the recommendations of the report, which drew my attention, was, and I quote, that the process of quote, that the process of publishing afos should immediately be removed from locally managed websites and conducted in an environment more appropriate for environment more appropriate for the nature of the task. And I ask him all Treasury colleagues to find out if this immediately means this has been done.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

has been done. Well, I thank my hon. Friend for his question. And he's he's right to point out there are a series of recommendations in the report they published within a few days, in fact, of the premature publication. And we're acting on the recommendations of the Obr's report. And one of the recommendations we're acting on is to determine whether this has happened before at previous fiscal events, because whilst they indicated it may have happened earlier this year at the Spring Statement, they did not look into previous fiscal events either under this Chancellor or indeed Chancellors of the previous government when they were in office.

So we are looking into that to make sure we can we can find out what happened. But more widely Madam Deputy Speaker beyond the SFO and the OBR, we put the utmost weight on Budget security, as I told the House last week. And that's why, again, as I have told this House, a leak inquiry is underway with the full support of the Chancellor and the whole team at the Treasury. In addition, the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury will conduct a review of the Treasury's security processes to inform future fiscal events.

The Budget security review will happen in the new year, and we will publish the outcome once it has concluded. But more immediately, Madam Deputy Speaker, whilst recognising the seriousness of what happened with the Obr's forecast, let me be clear that we remain fully committed to working with an independent OBR and we recognise its vital role as a core part of our fiscal framework. The government will soon launch a competitive external recruitment process to appoint a new chair, subject to the consent of the Treasury Committee.

In the meantime, Professor David Miles and Tom Josephs will jointly lead the OBR until a new chair is in place. Madam Deputy Speaker, I am very happy to come here every day to explain the decisions that we took at Budget in the interests of the British people. It is clear, Madam Deputy Speaker, that the Conservatives do not want to talk about £150 off energy bills, freezes to prescriptions and rail fares, our investment in our NHS and the fact that we are cutting debt.

They do not want to confront the fact that this is a Budget which not only delivers for Britain but does so in challenging times. A Budget which invests in Britain, which supports the NHS, which helps people with the cost of living and gets our debt and borrowing down. It is a Budget delivered by a Chancellor who takes challenges head on, who takes the right decisions for our country and meets the priorities of the British people. And it is a Budget from a government who will not let Britain's future be defined by failures of government's past.

Madam Deputy Speaker, this is a Budget we are proud of and we

**** Possible New Speaker ****

reject the opposition motion. A Liberal Democrat spokesperson Daisy Cooper. Yeah, yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, yeah. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It's a real delight to speak in this debate because I honestly this debate because I honestly thought I wouldn't get the chance. There was a risk. I thought, that the shadow Chancellor might even filibuster his own opposition day debate. As much as I enjoy his his his poetry readings and all the rest, Madam Deputy Speaker, we all know that the Budget process was a bit of a mess. More leaks than a holy sieve, lots of flip flopping and all the rest.

And by the time we got to Budget Day, I think many of us were relieved that the process was over. But let's not pretend that this was all new. Previous budgets had had a number of different leaks, and we all know that the Liz Truss mini Budget

**** Possible New Speaker ****

surely wins the gold standard for sidelining the OBR. What's my hon. Friend give way?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Friend give way? I will thank my hon. Friend for giving away with the Chancellor's giving away with the Chancellor's flip flopping on the Budget, various leaks and misleading comments about the state of public comments about the state of public finances. It is clear that Labour are beginning to look equally as are beginning to look equally as incompetent as the Conservatives in their running of the economy, and the government. Does my hon. Friend, agree that Labour have let down the public and must start being public and must start being transparent with us all?
18:14
Daisy Cooper Portrait Daisy Cooper MP (St Albans, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that point. I would agree with him and I think transparency is critical. And on that particular point about transparency, we Liberal Democrats think that it is time to overhaul this entire process. Colleagues will know that when Sweden faced a similar crisis in its Budget process in the 90s, it overhauled its Budget process. And now they have a system where they publish a draft Budget. There is lots of time for it to be debated.

Amendments can be tabled by opposition parties before it is concluded. And I think that the public would welcome transparency because then it would be incumbent on both the government but on all opposition parties to set out how they would fund their pledges and how they would raise revenue and manage government spending as well. These debates over the last few weeks have raised questions about the role of the OBR and Madam Deputy Speaker. I want to put it on record that we Liberal Democrats think that we should keep the OBR.

We think it plays an important role as an independent organisation that can scrutinise the Treasury. But we do think that there is scope to have more democratic accountability and to tease out the differences between and the divergences between forecasts, whether by, between OBR and and the Treasury. Madam Deputy Speaker, I am slightly perplexed that the opposition day motion focuses on process and not on policy, and that is promoting spin over substance. The reality is that this Budget has committed stealth taxes on households and stealth taxes on our high streets, and has fundamentally failed to galvanise growth.

Maybe it's obvious to people at home as to why it is that the Conservatives have not tried to focus on the substance, because those stealth taxes were started by the Conservatives and are carried on by Labour. The Conservatives failed to fix the business rates system, and Labour has not taken that fundamental change forward, and it is clear that both parties continued to refuse to go for growth with Europe. Now I say to the Minister he tried. He responded to the hon.

Member for North Norfolk, who asked a very reasonable and legitimate question about why it is that the Treasury has not given an answer as to whether or not it's going to provide funding for dental training places in in his county and for his constituents. That is a legitimate question to ask. I was disappointed that the Minister tried to outline that we haven't supported his tax rises when we Liberal Democrats have repeatedly, over the last year and more, set out how we would raise taxes differently.

He knows from the debates that we've had in this House that we set out a number of different ways reforming capital gains tax, looking at other taxes, having a windfall tax on the big banks recommended by the Ippr and endorsed by independent economists. And we have set out how getting a customs union with the European Union would boost public finances by £25 billion a year. So I understand that the Minister and the Treasury bench chuntering right now may wish to level that accusation at the Conservative Party, but that accusation does not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

stack up when talking to the Liberal Democrats. I'll give way. Thank you. Grateful to the Liberal Democrat

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Grateful to the Liberal Democrat spokesperson. Is she frustrated, as I am at the normally temperate Chief Secretary to the Treasury? Chief Secretary to the Treasury? Chuntering about do you agree with our taxes? As though there is only one way to raise fiscal revenues? one way to raise fiscal revenues? And if you do not agree with Labour, then you've got it wrong and ironic at least point of view. There are at least point of view. There are many ways to raise taxes. Is she concerned, like businesses across Scotland, that this government has taken 66 billion out of the real

**** Possible New Speaker ****

economy, with no concern about what that will do to growth? I thank the hon. Gentleman for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I am concerned about the impact of this Budget on businesses, particularly on the issue of business rates. Madam issue of business rates. Madam Deputy Speaker, we have been very clear as a party that we are trying to be a party of constructive opposition in the Budget. Last year, it was clear that the jobs tax was going to raise £10 billion, not the £25 billion they claim, but £10 billion. After adjusting for spending, after rebates for the NHS and education and for adjusted behaviour.

And we set out a number of proposals that could have raised that £10 billion. And when the government in this Budget did raise remote gaming duty, we Liberal Democrats welcomed that because that was in our manifesto at the last general election. So I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman that there are other ways of raising taxes, and we hope the government looks at some of our proposals, including our ideas on reforming capital gains tax, which would be a fairer way of raising revenue and raise more money from

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the 0.1% super wealthy. hon. Lady. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will give way. I am grateful to the hon. Lady. Just to go to a point which I was going to raise with her before she going to raise with her before she raises herself. The jobs tax is peculiarly misconceived. Tax at 2526 billion hit on the real 2526 billion hit on the real economy with all the lost jobs which we've seen as a result. And it doesn't even raise much money. it doesn't even raise much money. And if you look at all the negative impact in the round, it may actually be even less than 10 billion.

So 25 or 26 billion hit and potentially single billions

**** Possible New Speaker ****

raised its economic madness. And it shows why the government needs to think more deeply. Yeah. I would agree with the hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I would agree with the hon. Gentleman that the jobs tax has been damaging. And what I would say to Ministers on the on the Treasury to Ministers on the on the Treasury bench is that the combination of the jobs tax and the higher business rates bills will have a business rates bills will have a profound impact on those very small businesses on our high streets. And our high streets are critical to our high streets are critical to our communities. And for most ordinary folk who don't follow the statistics on growth and unemployment and GDP and everything else, they walk out of their front door, they look at their high street and they just decide, is the economy working in our area or not? And it is so vital that we support our high streets.

And on that point, I would genuinely urge Ministers to look again at the multiplier for retail, hospitality, hospitality and and leisure because it is the case that even though the Ministers talked in a very technical way about one element of the bills, and they continue to say that the rates are coming down and we know they've come down for retail, hospitality, leisure by £0.05. They did give themselves the powers to reduce it by £0.20. And what businesses heard was the word lower.

They heard the word lower business rates lower, lower, lower. They didn't think about the technicality of how the rates is calculated. They just heard the word lower and the bills are now saying higher. And so businesses have made decisions on that on that basis and are really, really struggling. So just to conclude, Madam Deputy Speaker, if I've said it once, I'll say it again. We cannot tax our way to prosperity. We have to grow our way to prosperity. We hope very much that as Ministers move ahead with these debates, not only do we reform the OBR and Budget process, that we have more transparency in this House, but we also hope that the government thinks again about

**** Possible New Speaker ****

going for growth with Europe. Thank you, Chris Vince. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and it's a pleasure to speak in this opposition Day debate. I would say it's the first time I've spoken to in a while, but it was about two hours ago and I want to thank I hours ago and I want to thank I want to I want to get heckled. I want to thank both my right hon. Friend, the Chief Secretary to the Friend, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and the Shadow Shadow Chancellor for their differing but but equally engaging styles of beginning the debate.

I was a little disappointed the Shadow Chancellor didn't give me any Shakespeare quotes, but he did provide some Dickens at the end. So

**** Possible New Speaker ****

yeah. I'm really okay. On the on the point of Dickens

**** Possible New Speaker ****

On the on the point of Dickens because the honourable the shadow Chancellor did raise it. Mr. Bumble was described as a minor parish was described as a minor parish official who had a great idea of his own oratorical power and his own self-importance. Does does that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

suggest anyone in the chamber? I remember him at all. I thank my hon. Friend for the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for the question. My next point, actually, I'm going to actually have to disagree with him, and the reason I'm going to actually have to disagree with him is because I was going to say, in all sincerity, I was a little bit disappointed with this particular motion from the opposition. I did feel it was particularly targeted at an individual, and and I and I recognise. Now, look, let me just make the point, please. I recognise that, you know, within the motion we're talking about the, the Chancellor's position, not, not not naming her.

So I recognise that there's an attempt to try and talk about the role that she holds rather than, than the individual, but I just feel I just don't like that the way the motion singles a particular person, I think it could have been worded in a way that talks more about the the Budget process, but that's just my particular view. And the reason I say that, the reason I say that is because I feel very strongly about the importance of political debate. But I, I always try and avoid and I hope people from across the House do see that.

I always try and avoid political attacks on on individuals. And I just wanted to be honest that, that, that, that makes me feel

**** Possible New Speaker ****

uneasy. I will give way. The hon. Gentleman, can I can I share his appreciation as well, share his appreciation as well, that this is about the post and the and a role of a government Minister, not not a local MP and not a person not not a local MP and not a person individually. But when he's dishing out sympathy and empathy, can I encourage him to think of his constituents like mine, who are disabled, who thought for the longest time they were going to longest time they were going to lose their livelihood until the government U-turned on that policy? Can I encourage them to worry about those family business owners who now have no idea how they're going to afford to pass their local, growth generating business on to the next generation, not to mention

**** Possible New Speaker ****

farmers who are now scared to die. I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I don't think I'm his intervention. I don't think I'm ever been can be accused of being devoid of sympathy. I got in this role as an MP because I generally passionately care about making a positive difference to people's lives. In fact, as people know lives. In fact, as people know across this house, in my previous jobs, I worked in the charity sector and I worked as a teacher, and I got involved in those jobs and I got involved in those jobs because I wanted to make a positive difference to people's lives.

And one of the big things that the I'm completely gone off my speech now, one of the big things that the Budget spoke about, obviously, is the raising of the two child cap. Now, I recognise concerns that members opposite raise about the increase in welfare spending, you know, which did go up under their watch as well. However, when I'm presented with a statistic that tells me over a thousand young people will be taken out of poverty
18:24
Chris Vince Portrait Chris Vince MP (Harlow, Labour )
-
-
because of that policy, I find it very difficult to ignore. I'd like to stay, madam. Madam Deputy Speaker as well. On a lighter note that it will be collective relief that it will be collective relief across the House that no members of my immediate family, or in fact my extended family, have ever worked extended family, have ever worked for the Treasury or for the OBR. That being said, like many members across the House, particularly on these benches, and I'm glad that the hon.

Lady, the leader, as deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats, mentioned this as well. I do value the independence and the work that the Office of Budget Responsibility does, and in particular its independence. It is, of course, as many members have mentioned, of course, extremely disappointing that the Obrs economic and fiscal outlook was prematurely accessed by external users before the Chancellor's speech on Budget Day. I'm really pleased that the Office of Budget Responsibility have responded to this very, very quickly and in their own words, it is also important to note the F0 contains market sensitive information, i.e.

information that is not public and could have a material impact on financial markets. This is why in the run up to the delivery of the Budget, any leaks concerning the obr's forecast weather accurate as is the case as in this case, or inaccurate weather in Italy as in this case, or deliberately are to be greatly deplored. This, Madam Deputy Speaker, is a good Budget for residents and families in Harlow with rail fares, freezes, prescription free fees, additional investment in my NHS, as I've covered previously, which has sadly been neglected.

A rise in the minimum wage, a rise in the state pension. Yes, brief mention of my mother, who is delighted. And for the vast majority of residents in Harlow who don't own a property of over £2 million, no increase in tax. Madam Deputy Speaker, we saw in 2022 what happened when the OBR is bypassing the Budget setting process, but we must ensure that it backs up this, that it that backs up this non-departmental public body is fit for purpose and mistakes like this do not happen again.

I will.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Be extremely grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I think it was Gladstone who said that the first duty of a statesman is, to be honest, is the hon. Gentleman who I think would be recognised across this House as someone for whom this House as someone for whom honesty is natural state. Is he entirely comfortable with the entirely comfortable with the Chancellor cherry picking the confidential briefing from the OBR on that November 4th speech, and not setting out the full

**** Possible New Speaker ****

not setting out the full circumstances that she was then aware of? I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. He will be aware that the OBR were very confident that the the Chancellor did not mislead in the statements that she put out, and I am confident with that. The Chancellor was consistent in her priorities for this Budget, tackling the cost of living crisis, bringing down waiting times and cutting borrowing. It can't be right that £1 in every town is being spent on interest payments alone, and we cannot go back to austerity.

We have seen with schools and hospitals that will literally fall apart. I'd like to finish with two quotes, Madam Deputy Speaker. The first is from Margaret Thatcher. I always cheer myself immensely up. My misquoted Margaret Thatcher. I always cheer myself up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one's personality personally, it means they have not a single political argument left. And finally, to quote Dickens, charity begins at home, but justice begins next door.
18:28
Harriett Baldwin Portrait Dame Harriett Baldwin MP (West Worcestershire, Conservative)
-
-
Chair of. Harriett Baldwin, thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker, the former former chair, I think I think you'll find that I appreciate having the chance to say a couple of additional points, because my right hon. Friend set out an extensive case this afternoon. I just want to mention the fact that on the Budget speech I made right after the Budget, I mentioned that Shenaniganz had happened with regard to this Budget. And I think we are beginning to find out a bit more about what those shenanigans were.

The office for Budget Responsibility is published. A full analysis of what the error was that led to them publishing the Budget before it was delivered by the Chancellor. And on the 1st of December, the chair of the office for Budget Responsibility rightly resigned for that technical breach. And I think he showed real leadership, and I would like to thank him for his service. But it has distracted us from a much more serious breach that happened. And we heard clarified from the Chancellor this morning in evidence to the Treasury Select Committee that there are two categories of leaks, apparently from the Treasury there are authorised leaks and there are unauthorised leaks.

And I think we're going to hear a report from the permanent Secretary about what were the unauthorised leaks. But I think those authorised leaks also need to be focussed on because, let's face it, this all started in the run up to the general election when the Chancellor promised many, many, many times not to raise taxes. And then in what I think was probably one of the greatest robberies since Ronnie Biggs and the Great Train Robbery actually managed in her first Budget to increase taxes by £40 billion a year And then in this recent Budget, increased taxes by a further £26 billion a year.

I'd love to, but I'm going to try and really raise through what I'm saying. And I think that we can see that there's a track record there of saying one thing and then doing another. And now what we see is a revealed preference from our Chancellor, a revealed preference for tax hikes. She wasn't able to deliver the welfare reforms she was seeking. She hasn't been able to deliver much in the way of savings from any government department. And so she's always going to go for tax hikes.

We've now seen that in her behaviour despite her assurances to the contrary. And so I just want to point out how damaging that has been to the British economy, to decision makers in the British economy, that there has been all this speculation, these authorised leaks have led to changes in behaviour across the UK economy. People have made real world, real life decisions and now we know, Madam Deputy Speaker, that that every fiscal event during this Parliament, the Chancellor will have a default position to tax more, to tax your home, more to tax your car, more to tax your pension, more to tax your savings, more to tax your job, to tax the farm you want to pass on to your children, to tax anything that she can justify.

And I think that that's really the lasting legacy of this period of shenanigans, this period of selective leaking, this period of manipulating behaviour. And I believe it's done lasting damage to our Chancellor. And we are right to be condemning her conduct today.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. I will be starting wind ups at 640. So I call Jeevun Sandher.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

640. So I call Jeevun Sandher. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker, it's a pleasure to speak in this debate. At this moment, look debate. At this moment, look clearly a very serious moment for our country. The most serious moment in 100 years. We face moment in 100 years. We face existential crises that are threatening our affordability with the far right on the march, the climate crisis, a planet that is climate crisis, a planet that is burning and a military crisis in Europe, any one of those would pose a huge and massive danger.

And on top of that, a nation that is deeply, deeply divided. And the question for this House, indeed, the question for this Budget is did
18:32
Jeevun Sandher Portrait Dr Jeevun Sandher MP (Loughborough, Labour)
-
-
it help us meet this moment and does it help us meet those challenges? That's why I'm surprised today by the opposition surprised today by the opposition motion that focuses so much on process, rather than things that actually matter to this country and at this moment. Yeah. You know, I've seen hard budgets before across this country and elsewhere. And I lived in Somaliland when I worked there, the most serious drought in living memory, where the choice in that Budget was between choice in that Budget was between feeding children or paying soldiers.

I've seen hard budgets. I've seen charts have to make difficult decisions. And indeed, like then, as in now, we are facing a difficult and existential and dramatic moment for our country. And the point about this Budget and the point about this government is having us meet these moments. How do we make life affordable? How do we ensure we stop the planet from burning, and how do we ensure that we prepare for war so we can prevent it? Those are the questions before us, and those are the questions the Chancellor addressed in this Budget.

That is why we are here to take each of them in turn. Affordability. Yes. The £150 off energy bills, of course, but creating good jobs across this country by building the homes that we need and yes, increasing Social Security payments for the poorest people in this country so that children do not go hungry. Secondly, on climate, that's not just about the investments we are making publicly. That's not just about reducing emissions, although of course it is about those things, but it's also about leadership as well, not just political leadership.

So you go to other nations and say, yes, we are doing our part to reduce emissions, but also we can sell those innovations around the world so we can help those countries reduce their emissions as well. Yeah. And finally, and most importantly, given the news we're seeing across this nation, indeed across Europe, preparing for war so we can prevent it. And I'll remind members opposite that it was the Prime Minister from their benches, a great Prime Minister, perhaps this nation's greatest, who spoke about the lack of not preparing for war, about the years the locust has eaten, about things that generation did not do, and the dangers and the dramatic and the most destructive war in the history of humankind.

And I say politely and with goodwill to the members opposite, perhaps with those are things they could have focussed on today. Perhaps that's what's important at this moment for our country. And in this time I will finish to give

**** Possible New Speaker ****

other people a moment. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Graham Stuart.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Graham Stuart. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, I'm deputy speaker. Britain is hurting, families are cutting back, hurting, families are cutting back, bills are soaring and inflation is twice the bank's target. And just last month, the Chancellor claimed last month, the Chancellor claimed that she had no choice but to raise taxes on working people. And in true Harry Enfield style, she blamed the Tories, the Tories, the Tories and, of course, the OBR. But just on the, on the on on the subject of honesty, because honesty is the thread that goes through today's debate, it's worth me returning to our earlier exchange, in which I said that the Labour manifesto didn't specify that it was the rates of those taxes that would rise, and I was quite wrong.

So the Minister was correct, and I would like to apologise to him and the House for getting that incorrect. Moving back to the Chancellor, the OBR told her in October that tax receipts, as has been explained already in this debate, were 16 billion higher than expected. She knew that, but suggested otherwise. And that's not spin, Madam Deputy Speaker. It's not sophisticated political communications. It's deceit. And it and it and it does matter. I have very limited time. So if you'll forgive me, it matters because the Chancellor has a nearly £3 trillion debt to service, and trust is everything.

And we've seen because of the fact that the policies implemented and the promises that have been made by the Chancellor are at such variance that the markets, unlike, I believe, any other major Western nation, have put a higher and higher cost on borrowing for this country that has very real world impacts. Investors from Beverley to Berlin need to believe what she says. After all, credit comes from the Latin credo, meaning I believe. And if that belief falters, borrowing costs rise and more of our taxes go to paying lenders instead of funding the priorities of the British people.

And when trust goes, growth goes. Investors hesitate, businesses hold back, and families feel the pinch. The Chancellor appears to have learnt nothing from last year's Budget of broken promises, a Budget that brought higher unemployment, which fewer businesses and lower growth. And instead of learning from that first
18:37
Graham Stuart Portrait Rt Hon Graham Stuart MP (Beverley and Holderness, Conservative)
-
-
exercise, and as the spokesman for the Liberal Democrats pointed out, the weakness of the jobs tax is not just that it would hurt growth, but doesn't even raise much money. It was peculiarly poorly thought through. This is a Budget, as I say, that now was repeated this year that now was repeated this year with more of the same. The British people know that you tackle the cost of living by getting people cost of living by getting people into work, not increasing the number of people on welfare by creating opportunity, not dependency.

But Britain has a Chancellor who talks about helping working people while making it harder to work to save and succeed. Throwing the OBR under the bus while she's at it. And that's not a vision for the future, Madam Deputy Speaker, and it's certainly not leadership. It's fantasy dressed up as policy, and the people of Beverley and Holderness can see right through it because Labour came to power. Promising change. Unfortunately, change has been delivered, but not that which we were promised. 280,000 more people on the unemployment register.

More than 200,000 businesses closed and 5000 people now signing off sick every single day. Because of the decisions made by this Labour government. People are angry about the impact of Labour policy. But when I talk to my constituents, they're particularly angry about feeling misled and so can I. I hope I've shown my own candour. I'll be at my earlier error, for which I apologise again. Can we try in this chamber across the House? Try to speak honestly and accurately and not gaslight or mislead? Thank you.
18:39
James Wild Portrait James Wild MP (North West Norfolk, Conservative)
-
-
James Wild to wind up. Madam Deputy Speaker. And this is a rare and serious conduct motion that calls on the Chancellor of the Exchequer to apologise for misleading the country about the state of public finances, breaking promises on tax and breaching the OBR confidentiality process, in short, for not being straight with the British people. I was expecting to refer to more contributions this afternoon, but it has been a slightly curtailed debate. And the the the very comprehensive introduction from my hon.

Friend and the the members for Harlow and Loughborough were surprised and disappointed that the Chancellor is being held to account not for her personality, but for her conduct. And as my right hon. Friend just said, this debate is about honesty and trust and confidence and what happens as a result and about the shenanigans, as my hon. Friend for West Worcestershire put it. And on Times Radio this morning, my hon. Friend was asked why this debate matters. It matters because the deliberate briefing and misrepresentation of the Budget has damaged workers, savers, pensioners and investors.

So let's start with the simple truth. This government and the Chancellor spun false narratives about the public finances to justify their political choices, to increase welfare

**** Possible New Speaker ****

spending. Giving way during the. Budget

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Giving way during the. Budget debates, I asked the shadow Chancellor whether he would address the fact that he did, on multiple occasions, refer to the public finances in a in a fantastically finances in a in a fantastically negative tone, which which appeared far, far from the truth that was far, far from the truth that was revealed at the Budget, suggesting at one point that there was a £40 billion black hole in the public finances. So I offer him this opportunity.

He's suggested that we should be straight with the public about the state of the finances. Will he take this opportunity on behalf of his colleague to apologise for that now?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, if the hon. Gentleman had been here for the whole debate, he'd had the opportunity of the he'd had the opportunity of the opening 45 minute speech to put that to my right hon. Friend. And what happened as a result of all those policy kites that were flown? those policy kites that were flown? Pensions were drawn down, fewer mortgages were approved, and investment paused. That's not my verdict. The Bank of England warned verdict. The Bank of England warned the economy was heading for slowdown as a result of the uncertainty.

The British Chambers of Commerce said that uncertainty affected investment and recruitment, and hundreds of thousands of people drew down their pensions. Those are the real impacts of this activity, these shenanigans, and there is genuine anger across the country at the damage, this uncertainty cause. And the Chancellor must take responsibility because she is responsible for that uncertainty. And people are already cynical about politics. But what could we do more to undermine trust than abusing the OBR process? To cook up a story, to make a case for higher taxes that were not needed? It's the Chancellor who is at the centre of misleading the country.

On the 4th of November, she stayed staged that unprecedented press conference to roll the pitch for tax rises and I won't. And in breach of the confidentiality rules, she warned that over productivity downgrade meant lower tax receipts. Indeed it did. But the OBR report makes very clear that downgrade was more than addressed by higher tax receipts. In other words, there was no black hole. The Chancellor had the numbers. She knew the position. Now we know what she said was simply not true.

Instead, she crafted a narrative to justify decisions, to increase taxes, to fund higher welfare spending. On the 13th of November, the Financial Times reported that the Chancellor had decided against the much brief income tax increases the next day, after the gilt market had responded badly. Journalists were then briefed that the tax tax rises would not happen thanks to an improved fiscal forecast. But that is not what the OBR Preet Kaur Gill financial measures said. Little wonder the OBR took the extraordinary step of publishing the forecasts, exposing the truth that there was no giant deficit being briefed to the press.

The OBR said it took this action to address misconceptions about the forecasts. And where might these misconceptions come from? You don't need to be Sherlock Holmes to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

identify the Treasury as the culprit. I'll give way. Keep going. You are the hon. Member for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

You are the hon. Member for giving way. The OBR also told the Treasury Select Committee on which I sit, that the narrative that the I sit, that the narrative that the Chancellor set out on the 4th of November was consistent with the forecasts at that time. When the OBR made that point, were they right or were they wrong? Are you questioning what the OBR said?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker is not questioning anyone. I'm pointing out that the Chancellor said that there was a big £16 billion downgrade from the productivity, but she didn't mention that that was all offset. That was all offset. She did not mention that if the if the Minister wants to intervene, say, she did mention that on the 4th of November, I'll give way. She didn't she didn't at all. Yesterday when in the House the Chancellor was asked if she had authorised or allowed confidential details of the Budget or forecasts to be briefed to the press, and she gave a categorical no.

So if the Chancellor didn't license briefings, can the Minister give a cast iron commitment that no other Ministers, special advisers or officials in the Treasury or number ten briefed or authorised briefings about potential measures or the forecasts? And frankly, if you believe all of these were unauthorised briefings, then the Treasury is utterly out of control. And I have a bridge to sell you. There is a leak inquiry. But the permanent secretary said today it centres on the 13th of November, not the tsunami of tall tales on potential Budget measures.

Why might that be, I wonder? Nothing less than a full inquiry of the findings made public. Will do. And that brings us to the broken promises referred to in the motion. A year ago, the Chancellor delivered the biggest tax raising Budget in modern history, hitting the British people with £40 billion of tax rises. And then in this Budget, taxes were increased yet again by £26 billion, despite the Chancellor promising not to come back for more. Life comes at you fast.

But the Chancellor a year ago also said extending the freeze on income tax thresholds would hurt working people and take money out of their payslips. They all remember that. They all remember her saying that I certainly do. And so she said she wouldn't do it. She wouldn't freeze the thresholds. Then what did she do? Oh, she froze the threshold. She imposed a three year extension, £23 billion coming out of the pockets of 1.7 million people who will pay higher taxes for her failures.

And as the motion says, the Chancellor should apologise for breaking her promise not to raise taxes again. Madam Deputy Speaker, what Chancellors say matters the public and the markets need to believe them, to trust that they aren't being misled. Well, that is not the case around the events of this Budget. That's why this motion calls on the Chancellor to apologise for the misleading picture she presented of the public finances, for the Treasury briefings that did so much damage to businesses and to people, and for breaking her promise not to increase taxes.

Frankly, in the face of such a charge sheet, an apology is the very least that the British public deserve. And I commend this motion to.
18:47
Dan Tomlinson Portrait Dan Tomlinson MP, The Exchequer Secretary (Chipping Barnet, Labour)
-
-
Minister. and my thanks as well to my right hon. Friend, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, for his earlier remarks, which I think set the framing for today's debate rather framing for today's debate rather well, because, as he set out, Madam Deputy Speaker, here we have an opposition day debate, a chance for members to really interrogate government policy, to challenge our decisions, to say what they would do differently, to paint a picture of the kind of country that they would build if they were in charge.

Oh, what a sight it would be, Madam Deputy Speaker, in short, an opposition day debate is a chance to be a serious opposition. But as my right hon. Friend set out in his opening remarks, they have not chosen to do that, instead preferring to rehash their already discredited complaints about process, which we have already

**** Possible New Speaker ****

addressed extensively, rather than talking about the actual Budget. Would he.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Would he. Give way? I'm going to make some progress, if that's okay, because the my hon. Friend will know there the my hon. Friend will know there are many other members who have not yet spoken, and I may I may give way to them later. I think it is way to them later. I think it is worth us recounting, Madam Deputy Speaker, just how many times members opposite have chosen in the members opposite have chosen in the last few days to major on process rather than policy? Members opposite are very interested in what was said by Who, on what day.

So let us recount it. On Wednesday, the 26th of March, the Leader of the Opposition, in response to the Budget raised process multiple times, introducing to Hansard the somewhat intriguing phrase fiscal fandango. No, me neither. Admittedly, this was immediately after the OBR dumped the Budget just before the Chancellor stood up. So that's fair. But then the Tory and here we go. Two can play at this game process. Pasodoble really began. Thank you everyone. On the 27th of November, the shadow Chancellor raised it in a Budget debate.

On the 2nd of December, the shadow CST raised process. In a Budget debate on the 3rd of December, the Leader of the Opposition raised it a Prime Minister's Questions, which was the same day that the opposition called an urgent question on the resignation of the chair of the OBR, which had coincidentally happened during a statement two days earlier by the CST on the OBR. On its forecast yesterday, the opposition frontbench raised this at Treasury orals, and today we're having an opposition day debate on the same topic.

After the Chancellor took questions this morning on it at Treasury Select committee, all of this political dancing has, I think, denied the opposition the chance to actually scrutinise the Budget. I'm not sure how much of it they have read. Let me remind them, Madam Deputy Speaker, that this is a Budget which cuts the cost of living, which raises pay for those earning the least, which invests in our NHS and which meets our fiscal rules, and delivers £21.7 billion of headroom, a Budget which delivers on the promise of this government and delivers for the British people.

By contrast, Madam Deputy Speaker, the opposition are stuck in the past, playing the songs of old again and hoping for a new and hoping for a new audience. I'll happily give way, my friend, for giving way. There are 4000. There are 4600 reasons in my constituency why this Budget is the right thing to do. 4600 children who will be lifted out of poverty as a result of this Budget. I understand from the party opposite, they will plunge those 4600 children back into poverty if they ever win the next general election, as part of a £46 billion welfare cut.

Will my hon Friend agree with me that that will be morally bankrupt, as well as potentially scrapping the triple lock? I would agree with my hon. Friend and he is a strong he is a strong advocate for making sure that we do all we can to support people, lift people out of poverty, and grow our economy and our towns and cities across the country. By contrast, the opposition are stuck in the past, playing the songs of old again and hoping for a new audience.

After a year and a half on those benches, they know that all they have to offer the country is the same as they offered before a reheated and not renewed set of conservative policies tax cuts for the wealthy, wages held down for the poorest, cuts to public services and child poverty rising. Madam Deputy Speaker, the problem isn't just that they're playing the old tunes, it's that the half of the old band has jumped ship to join the more extreme party that hasn't even bothered to show up today.

I don't know how they're going to manage to perform. Madam Deputy Speaker, without the likes of the Member for Ashfield on their team, the Member for East Wiltshire, Jonathan Gullies, Dame Andrea Jenkyns, Nadine Dorries, Ann Widdecombe, Sir Jake Berry, Mark reckless, Maria Caulfield, Marco Longhi and those are just the Tory Reform switchers who I've heard of, Madam Deputy Speaker. But there are many more MPs who I think are probably as well known as me, so I do have a soft spot for them.

But for completeness, let me remind the house of their service and their defection to Leah, Nicky, Chris Green, Anne Marie Morris, Nietzsche. Sorry I didn't get her surname right. Graham Simpson, Adam Holloway, Alan Amos Graham Stuart.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Last time I checked, Madam Deputy Speaker, this was supposed to be about the conduct of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I know Chancellor of the Exchequer. I know he's relatively new to the Dispatch Box, perhaps, but. But the minute

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Box, perhaps, but. But the minute guidance. I thank the hon. Gentleman for his point of order, and I'm sure

**** Possible New Speaker ****

his point of order, and I'm sure the Minister has heard that point of order and will be returning to his speech. Minister. Indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker, I've heard the point of order loud and clear. It's worth remembering this is an opposition day debate. I think it's within the remit to talk about the opposition and the fact that they've lost all of their players to the other team. Madam Deputy Speaker, though I, I also think it's time to move on from talking about process today, because on this side of the House, we have a country to run, an economy to build, and public services to mend.

Maybe instead, we could have talked today about whether it's right to raise wages for those on the lowest incomes. They didn't want to bring that up. Maybe, Madam Deputy Speaker, because wages have risen faster in the first ten months of this government than they did in the first decade of the conservative government. Or maybe because it turns out that their latest policy is a real terms cut in the living wage. Instead, Madam Deputy Speaker, we could have talked about the cost of living today, but again, they didn't choose that as a topic because while their mini Budget crashed the economy and added thousands of pounds to mortgages, since this government has come to power, the Bank of England has cut way.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thanks for giving way. He makes a point about the previous disastrous mini Budget of September disastrous mini Budget of September 2023, when I do believe, the shadow Chancellor said at that time, I Chancellor said at that time, I welcome much in this statement. There is a great deal that will help millions of families and help millions of families and businesses up and down the country. Does the Minister agree with me? That's why he focuses on process, because his judgement on policy is so poor.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

so poor. Yes. I agree entirely with my hon. Friend, there are too many members on the other side of the House who defended the mini Budget, which crashed the economy and added thousands of pounds to mortgages. In contrast, Madam Deputy Speaker, since this government has come to power, the Bank of England has cut interest rates five times, taking £1,200 off a typical two year fixed rate mortgage. And at this Budget, we cut £150 from the average energy bill.

We've frozen rail fares and prescription charges, extended bus fare caps and fuel fuel duty cuts. But they don't want to talk about that either. Maybe, Madam Deputy Speaker, they could have chosen in their opposition day debate to talk about fiscal stability and increased headroom. But again, they chose not to do that because of the £21.7 billion of headroom that the Chancellor secured at the Budget, which will help protect our country from global shocks and unforeseen challenges. Of course, they don't want to talk about child poverty either, because they know that this Budget has lifted 550,000 children out of poverty, where the last government was content to leave them, preferring instead preferring instead to rebrand the hungry children that they let down in power and brand them as benefit scroungers when they should be treated as our future, not as our opponent.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I think I've got a couple more minutes, so let me just address some of the points made during the debate today. I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for engaging in policy on business rates. We have had conversations already this week and I'm sure we'll have more. We have begun the work to rebalance the system with a £900 million switch from the highest value properties to those on the high streets. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow for his Thatcher quote that he included in his speech.

It was a good quote, and it bears repeating. She said. I always cheer up immensely if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left. I noted, and thank the hon. Member for West Worcestershire for her speech, going through every single tax change and saying she opposes them all. I think that's the sort of opposition that we've got used to on this side of the House, rather than constructive opposition coming forward with proposals that can raise revenue in a fair way, such as, for example, the changes on EV, which will stop us losing £12 billion of fuel duty revenue in the coming years.

Just no, no, no, over and over again. Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank my hon. Friend to the Member for Loughborough his experience in this place on economics as richly valued, and I enjoyed his speech as I always do. And finally let me know. It's been a very short debate, hasn't it? Madam Deputy Speaker, the Member for Beverley and Holderness. I'm glad that he did take the time to read the Labour manifesto during the debate. That's much appreciated, and that he was able to clarify to the House that my right hon.

Friend, the Chief Secretary was right to say that we've stuck to our manifesto commitment. Now go on, I'll happily give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to the Minister for giving way to bring him back to the debate. The point is about honesty in the real world. Consequences of in the real world. Consequences of the briefing that happened around this Budget. So does the Treasury accept that hundreds of thousands

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of people drew down their pensions and irrevocable decision? Yes or no? Lords Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lords Minister. What the Treasury does accept is that at this Budget, the government had to make the decisions to make sure we could increase our fiscal sure we could increase our fiscal stability and get borrowing falling in every single year. The previous government, Madam Deputy Speaker, wasn't able to control our public finances and that. And yet in every year of this forecast, borrowing will be falling and we've increased our headroom by more than double to £21.7 billion. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Bolsover give way.

Yeah. Go on.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

That's helpful. I always try to be helpful and I do thank him for giving way. But do thank him for giving way. But there was a lot of speculation about the Budget, but a lot of that was coming from opposition benches.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

was coming from opposition benches. Yes, every single £40. Billion.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Every single clickbait headline was repeated in here in order to fuel speculation. It was incredibly

**** Possible New Speaker ****

fuel speculation. It was incredibly damaging. Does he not agree? Yes. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would agree with the economy that the opposition. I would agree with my hon. Friend, that the opposition are incredibly damaging for the economy. Madam Deputy Speaker, the clean up operation from the disaster zone that is the last 14 years is well and truly underway. Our economic plan is working with growth up with employment, up with interest rates, down with borrowing, falling, with a labour Budget focussed on the British people delivered by a Labour Chancellor making the fair and right choices, we reject this absurd monologue of emotion from the party opposite, and we will stick to our plan for a better Britain, he.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is, as on the Order

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is, as on the Order Paper, as many as are of that opinion, say I. Of the contrary, no know.
18:59
19:11
19:12
Wes Streeting Portrait Rt Hon Wes Streeting MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Ilford North, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. And can I thank you, Mr. Speaker, And can I thank you, Mr. Speaker, business managers, including the Official Opposition, for facilitating this evening's facilitating this evening's statement. With your permission, I will make a statement on industrial action by resident doctors as we action by resident doctors as we head into Windsor. Our hospitals are running hot and the pressures on the NHS are enormous. Flu season has come earlier with a sharp rise in cases, the peak still to come and this year's strain more likely to affect older people more severely.

Already, the number of patients in hospital in England with flu is the highest on record at this point in the year. It is 50% higher than this time last year and ten times higher than in 2023. 95% of hospital beds are occupied. Growing numbers of staff are off sick, and we are already seeing the pressure in our A&E departments. It is against this backdrop that the BMA is threatening to douse the NHS in petrol, light a match and march its members out on strike.

This represents a different magnitude of risk to previous industrial action. The BMA resident doctors committee is in dispute on two issues pay and jobs on pay. Resident doctors have already received a 28.9% pay rise, the highest in the public sector for a first year resident doctor. That is the equivalent of a £9,400 pay rise. I have been consistent, honest and upfront with resident doctors that we cannot go further on pay this year. There is a gap between what the BMA is demanding and what the country can afford, nor would further movement on pay be fair to other NHS staff for whom I am also responsible, and many of whom will never in their careers earn as much as the lowest paid doctor.

As I've made clear to the BMA and other trade unions, I am open to discussing multi-year pay deals with any trade union. If we stand a chance of bridging the gap between affordability and expectations on jobs. I have much more sympathy with the BMA demands. I have heard the very real fears resident doctors across the country have about their futures. It is a legitimate grievance that I agree with. My conservative predecessors created training bottlenecks that threaten to leave huge numbers of resident doctors without a job in 2019, there are around 12,000 applicants for 9000 speciality training places this year.

That has soared to nearly 40,000 applicants for 10,000 places now. It used to be the case that UK graduates competed among themselves for speciality roles. Now they are competing against the world's doctors. That is a direct result of the visa and immigration changes made by the previous conservative government post-Brexit, and it is compounded by the Conservatives decision to increase the number of medical students without also increasing the number of speciality training places. Taxpayers spend £4 billion training medics every year.

We then treat them poorly and some leave to work abroad or in the private sector, so it's time we protect our investment and give bright, hardworking UK medical graduates a path to become the next generation of NHS doctors. Our ten year plan for health set out our commitment to provide that path. It pledged to introduce 1000 extra speciality training places and prioritisation of medical graduates from the UK and Ireland today. In an offer to resident doctors. I can announce that I am able to go further.

I want to thank Sir Jim Mackey, the chief executive of the NHS, and his team, who have been going trust by trust to see how many extra places can be funded and are needed thanks to their hard work. I am in a position today to be able to offer 4000 speciality places for resident doctors, starting with an additional 1000 for those applying this year in the Department of Health and Social Care. We have been working intensively on UK graduate prioritisation.

The barriers have been legal ones, so I have been working intensively with my team to see how quickly we could introduce legislation. Thanks to their efforts, the co-operation of colleagues across government and my counterparts in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, I can notify the House tonight that, subject to resident doctors agreement, we intend to introduce urgent primary legislation in the form of a bill to be presented to Parliament in the new Year. For this will prioritise graduates from UK medical schools over applicants from overseas during the current application round and in all subsequent years.

The reforms will also prioritise doctors who have worked in the NHS for a significant period for speciality training. This will not exclude international talent who will still be able to apply to roles and continue to bring new and vital skills to our NHS, but it will return us to the fair terms on which home grown medics competed before Brexit. The impact of these changes is that instead of four doctors competing for every training post, it will now be fewer than two doctors for every place.

That is a good deal for doctors. Following discussions with the BMA, we are also addressing the specific costs faced by resident doctors which do not apply to other NHS staff. So while I cannot go further on pay this year, I am able to offer today to put money back in resident doctors pockets by reimbursing Royal College portfolio membership and exam fees, with the latter backdated to April. The allowance for less than full time resident doctors, many of whom are parents and carers, will be increased by 50% to £1,500, helping to close the gender pay gap.

So in recent days I formally made this offer to the BMA resident doctors committee. The BMA will now survey its members in the coming days on whether to accept this offer and end its dispute with the government. The BMA told us that they will survey their members quickly and give us less than 48 hours notice on whether the strikes are going ahead. Madam Deputy Speaker, that presents serious operational challenges for NHS leaders who need certainty now as to whether they are cancelling patient appointments and cancelling staff annual leave to cover strikes.

So in my determination to prevent the havoc that strikes would cause this Christmas, I therefore made one more offer to the BMA, which I will share with the House. The country and frontline doctors now, so that the BMA could run a genuine ballot of its members and call off next week's strikes. While that ballot ran, I offered to extend their strike mandate. This would have allowed enough time for the BMA to reschedule next week's strikes for the end of January were the offer to resident doctors rejected in a ballot, it would have avoided the chaos that looming strike action threatens at the most dangerous time of year by removing the spectre of strikes next week.

I also knew that extending the BMA strike mandate would leave me open to attack from political opponents. It was a risk I was willing to take to stop the Christmas strikes going ahead. Madam Deputy Speaker, I must report to the House that the BMA leadership said no. In the coming days, as the NHS prepares for strike action, which may or may not happen. There are patients whose operations will be cancelled. There are NHS staff who will have to tell their families that they won't be home for Christmas, because they have to cover for resident doctor colleagues, and this was entirely avoidable.

No one should be in any doubt that the BMA has chosen to play politics with people's lives this Christmas, and to continue holding the spectre of strikes over the NHS. I ask resident doctors to bear that in mind when they cast their votes. Madam Deputy Speaker, the power to end these strikes now lies in the hands of doctors. Resident doctors face a choice to continue the damaging industrial action in which everyone loses, or to choose more jobs, better career progression, more money in their pockets and an end to strikes.

It would mean emergency legislation to put our own home grown talent first, to increase the number of speciality training places from 1000 to 4000, with a quarter of those delivered now to reduce the competition for training places from around 4 to 1 to less than 2 to 1 to put more money in doctors pockets by funding Royal College exam fees, portfolio fees and membership fees, with exam fees backdated to April to increase the less than full time allowance by 50% to £1,500.

The chance for a fresh start to end this dispute and to look ahead to the future with hope and optimism. A chance to rebuild resident doctors working conditions and to rebuild our NHS. I urge every resident doctor to vote for this deal and I commend this statement to the House.
19:24
Stuart Andrew Portrait Rt Hon Stuart Andrew MP (Daventry, Conservative)
-
-
Because Shadow Health Secretary Stuart Andrew. >> Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker, and can I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement and also thank him sincerely for making me thank him sincerely for making me aware last night of his intention to come to the House and make a statement today. Now, given that statement today. Now, given that the next set of planned industrial action is due just a few days before Christmas, and at a worrying time when winter pressures are increasing early, with more flu patients needing hospital beds, we all want to see an end to these strikes on this side of the House.

We want to offer our thanks and our gratitude to all those in the workforce who have worked so hard to try and minimise the impact of the strike so far. Now, in his statement, the Secretary of State talks about the competition for places. This is not new information. And he said himself that the figures have soared in the last two years. So why is it that only now is he addressing it so close to a damaging strike? He could have dealt with this back in the previous talks with the unions, but he didn't.

But I have said that I want us to be constructive in opposition. And so I welcome the offer, the work he has done to offer more places to UK doctors and depending on the detail of the legislation, we will help to secure that aim. And I make this offer to work with him to ensure that we get there. But can I ask him, therefore, with regard to the 4000 places he has announced and the specifically 1000 that are announced for this year, perhaps he could tell the House which specialisms these places will be available in.

Can he break it down into GP's surgery, obstetrics, anaesthetics and so on? And is he confident that there are enough trainers and enough capacity in training settings that he has chosen? Because GPS are trained in general practice as well as in hospitals and community training in some specialist like paediatrics. And when will these places be available for applications? Will he also look at replicating the Australian model of placing any international doctors in areas of the country with the greatest need? Because we know we need to address those issues now? All of this, of course, is dependent on the BMA accepting this offer.

But what if they don't? After all, their track record speaks for itself. We warn that giving pay awards with no conditions would encourage them to come back for more, and they have. So if they reject this, what are his plans to manage and deal with it? As he said himself, the NHS is under pressure from combined flu and RSV. So what is he doing to ensure those who are eligible for the vaccines actually have them? What additional resources has he made available to manage the strikes if they happen, and for winter pressures if they don't? Does he recognise that if they reject this offer and they carry on with the strikes, that his government's own Employment Rights Bill will make things much worse next year? So will he think again about the reductions in the minimum thresholds for strikes and reintroduce the minimum service levels? And also, does he expect that this new legislation and the announcements he's made today will have any implications for the Equalities Act? And if so, what are they and how will he address them? And will he have to disapply the act? These strikes must end.

The BMA are behaving appallingly. But I have to say to him, if he doesn't deal with those issues around thresholds and minimum service levels, it is only going to get much, much worse with unions like the BMA. At the end of the day causing more issues and it is patients, our constituents and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

their families and loved ones who will suffer. Secretary of State.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Secretary of State. First of all, Madam Deputy Speaker, can I just thank the shadow Health Secretary for the constructive terms on which he's agreed to work with the government? That should give resident doctors across the country who receive across the country who receive their survey confidence of knowing their survey confidence of knowing that should they vote for this deal, there will be emergency legislation introduced in the new year. We will be able to work at pace because with the majority that this party has in this House, but with cross-party support in the other place, we can make sure we expedite that and achieve our goal of making sure that the changes that we've always intended to make and we committed to, to make well in advance of us today to international medical graduates, we will be able to expedite that so that it has a direct impact on people who are applying for speciality places now, and even in recent weeks, have experienced that disappointment of not receiving the training place they had hoped for.

We can keep that hope alive. We can improve the number of speciality places available if resident doctors vote for this deal. So I urge them to do that. In terms of why haven't we dealt with this before? I am tempted once again to revert to my usual analogy of the arsonist heckling the fire brigade. However, given the constructive terms on which he is, he's offered to work with us on this. I will pull my punches a little. Just to say, however, that in terms of putting together the 1000 extra additional places now and bringing together the legislation urgently, that requires a significant level of operational detail, planning to open up additional speciality places.

Because the shadow health Secretary's right, we have to make sure we've got enough trainers. And so Jim Mackey and his team have literally been working trust by trust to make sure we can give him and the house and resident doctors that assurance that we can facilitate these extra places. And on the legislation, he will know and people will appreciate. This is fiendishly complicated. I've had to get agreement from business managers and a packed legislative programme here. We've had to make sure that the the bill would be legally watertight and consistent with both our domestic law and international treaty obligations, and I've needed the support from my counterparts in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

And I must thank them sincerely for the spirit in which, regardless of party, they have worked with this government so we can give resident doctors all of that assurance in terms of what happens if the strike goes ahead. Look, first of all, he's absolutely right. Front line staff and NHS leaders have done a superb job in managing previous rounds of strike action. In fact, the last round of strike action, we did indeed maintain 95% of planned care. And I believe and we will we will see when the waiting list figures are published in January.

I believe that the impact on waiting list progress, therefore, will not have been as severe as it might have been. However, I've got to be upfront with the shadow Health Secretary and with the House that there is a much different degree of risk this time. So while we're aiming to maintain 95% of elective activity, again, we're aiming to I cannot guarantee that. And I cannot give that assurance in all good conscience, given the level of pressure we are under. And that is why I just find it inexplicable, actually, that having offered to extend the mandate so the BMA could reschedule the same amount of strike action in January if their members reject this offer, I do not understand why they wouldn't do that.

And honestly, and as a as a Labour MP, I've spent lots of time in rooms with trade unions and negotiating, I. I honestly cannot think of a single other trade union in this country that would behave in this way. I really can't, and I'm actually shocked by it. And I'm shocked because of the risk it poses to patients. I'm shocked because of the pressure it places on other NHS staff, and I'm shocked because it threatens the recovery of the NHS that we all care about.

I would say to resident doctors following these exchanges, listen to what the Conservative Party opposite have said about trade union laws, about their rejection of the deal that we struck within weeks of coming into office. There is not a more pro NHS, pro doctor government waiting in the wings. There is a Labour government committed to the NHS, committed to the NHS workforce that has gone further than any other government before, both on pay, terms and conditions and the pace in which we're improving those things.

These were never grounds for strike action before. They are certainly not grounds for strike action now, and I appeal to resident doctors over the BMA to do the right thing, vote for this deal and work with the government that wants to work with you.
19:33
19:34
Wes Streeting Portrait Rt Hon Wes Streeting MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Ilford North, Labour)
-
-
Thank you Chris. Friend. She brings considerable frontline experience to this House, having worked in the NHS and having worked in the NHS and dedicated her life to it herself. I am pretty sure that as well as speaking for her constituents, she speaking for her constituents, she is speaking for so many other NHS staff. I don't want to see nurse pitted against doctor NHS staff pitted against each other. I don't want to see people resenting each other at a time when we should be pulling together to get the NHS back on its feet, and to make sure it is well down the road to recovery.

And that's why, even at this late stage, I urge the BMA to think again. There is nothing to stop me extending the strike mandate tomorrow. And for us, even at this late stage, to give Jim Mackie, an NHS leaders, the opportunity to stand down planning for strikes next week. Even at this late stage, it would be an extraordinary gesture of goodwill. It would be a Christmas present for the country. It would benefit doctors, resident or otherwise. It would benefit all NHS staff.

And most importantly of all, it would benefit patients. I hope that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

message is heard in good faith by the BMA. Even now. Liberal Democrat spokesperson Danny Chambers.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Danny Chambers. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and thanks to Secretary of State for his statement today, because for his statement today, because people are going to be hugely alarmed at the threat of more industrial action right before Christmas. And we can't forget how Christmas. And we can't forget how we got here. We know the previous government under resourced the NHS.
19:35
Danny Chambers Portrait Dr Danny Chambers MP (Winchester, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
It was overburdened, people felt underappreciated and the whole system was being held together by the goodwill of the staff working in there. But having said that, you know, when we're in a situation, the timing is terrible. We've got the worst winter flu outbreak in decades. A few days right before Christmas, we have to urge the BMA to work constructively to resolve this dispute in a way that is fair for patients and fair for taxpayers. And I think most of the public feel that having just had a 29% pay rise last year, pushing for another 28.9% this year is unaffordable and unreasonable.

But the Secretary of State did touch on their legitimate concerns. The previous government increased medical school places without increasing the facilities to to deliver the specialist training placements necessary. So this was a predictable bottleneck that we're now up against. And waiting lists are long. We need more doctors. And we've got doctors that have been trained largely at the taxpayers expense, struggling to find work. So we very much welcome these extra 4000 placements that was announced today. That's hugely necessary.

Can we ensure that these will address the shortages in GPS psychiatry? You know, the areas where we have very acute shortages at the moment. And just to put these 4000 places in context, as much as they are needed. Last year, 10,000 doctors applied for 500 psychiatric training courses. The the Secretary of State said about 40,000 of applying for 10,000 places. You know, is there work to try and increase these places even more in the next few months and and years as quickly as possible? And this has all taken in the context of in Winchester hospital is a really good example.

1 in 5 beds taken up by people who just don't have any social care packages. We know that it's not good for them. They're stuck in the hospital and we want to get them home for Christmas, but also it's going to affect the flow through the hospital right now in a winter flu crisis. So we welcome this action. We urge the BMA to call off these strikes. But can we address the legitimate grievances that you have announced?
19:38
Wes Streeting Portrait Rt Hon Wes Streeting MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Ilford North, Labour)
-
-
Secretary of State can I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for his support, as well as the constructive challenge? And he is absolutely right to to to describe the challenge that that we the challenge that that we inherited and we are seeking to deal with. There are a number of steps we've taken along the way. steps we've taken along the way. For example, we promised to recruit an additional 1000 GPS to the front line in our first year, and we expanded the scheme.

In order to do that, we're able to actually recruit an extra 2500. And what we're what we're setting out to do with this deal because of the international medical graduate dimensions. This it means those extra speciality training places go even further. So while I would not pretend, and frankly, don't ever pretend that the steps we've taken in our first 18 months in office have solved everything all at once, and there's no shortage of things to solve. I would just say to BMA members considering how to cast their vote.

A 28.9% pay rise action on international medical graduates through urgent legislation. The expansion of speciality training places. This is real progress. It's meaningful change in people's pockets. It is meaningful change to people's lives, working conditions and career progression and prospects. So please don't let perfect be the enemy of good. We've got a lot of fronts to and a lot of fires to put out as a as a government. And that does take time. We are committed. I'm personally committed to working constructively with the BMA together on things like workforce planning to address those issues if they are willing to work with us.

That's all I ask. That's all I ask from any part of the NHS workforce. Work with us. Work constructively, understand our constraints and work through the challenges with us and we will all get to a better place and create a rising tide in the NHS that lifts all ships.
19:40
19:41
19:42
Layla Moran Portrait Layla Moran MP (Oxford West and Abingdon, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Chair of the Select Committee. Layla moran. Madam Deputy Speaker, Layla moran. Madam Deputy Speaker, this is just not the time for this. As much as we have huge sympathy As much as we have huge sympathy for many of the grievances of resident doctors, we also understand that the next few weeks understand that the next few weeks are critical to not just the next few weeks, but how the next few months in the NHS are going to run. So I echo calls for the BMA to listen to reason, but I'm also sparing a thought, and I hope the Secretary of State is too, to those overseas doctors that we also rely on so heavily, there is an acute workforce shortage.

How in this plan and in this legislation, is he going to avoid creating a two tier system that risks undervaluing the critical work that they do to also

**** Possible New Speaker ****

prop up our NHS? I thank the chair of the Select

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the chair of the Select committee for that contribution, which I think is really important on two fronts. Firstly, she's on two fronts. Firstly, she's absolutely right. This really is not the time for this kind of disruption. And I think the BMA disruption. And I think the BMA know that and I don't think these are bad people I'm dealing with. I think they are frustrated with me and this government. They don't think we've gone far enough. I am equally frustrated with them.

And the fact that they do not recognise how far and how fast we have come, but that's the nature of the dispute. There is an opportunity for us all to park that and worst case scenario, revisit that in January with the extended mandate, and I hope even now that they will seize that opportunity. I actually think it would do them the world of good in the eyes of the public, in the eyes of their members and the wider NHS family, on international medical graduates and on overseas workforce.

I'm really glad she raises this point. The NHS has always been an international employer, and we have been so fortunate as a country that since 1948, people have come from around the world to help us build and sustain a national health service. Without them, it would collapse. And we never want to be a country that closes the door to international talent. I think what's extraordinary is that so many of those overseas doctors, when they see these competition ratios and they compare our approach to their home countries and other countries, they think we've lost the plot.

They can't believe we already don't already do this. So I think they'll understand what we're doing and why. I hope they'll be reassured that international recruits who have given service to the NHS will also be able to apply for speciality places, because we want to recruit and retain great talent. But they will also recognise how this is a game changer for the ratios for home grown talent. I think they will understand that. I think they will respect that. Not least I've been at pains as health secretary given some of the ugly rhetoric that's come from one corner of this chamber, to emphasise that while some people in this House might tell those international recruits

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to go home, as far as we're concerned, they are home. For Jen Craft.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For Jen Craft. Thank you, Deputy Speaker. My mum, a former shop steward, always drummed it into me that there are drummed it into me that there are no winners in a strike and I think never is that a stark as a situation as we are facing now. I know that there will be healthcare workers in my constituency who are already are under tremendous pressure, and they will be looking at the situation coming up
19:45
19:46
19:47
19:48
19:49
19:50
19:51
19:51
19:53
19:54
19:55
19:55
Wes Streeting Portrait Rt Hon Wes Streeting MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Ilford North, Labour)
-
-
Can I just say that is a very thoughtful and appropriate question. thoughtful and appropriate question. Just to reassure the House, I am the Minister of State for health, have been working with agenda for change. Unions, particularly unison, RCN, GMB, to make sure that we are dealing with the how we can deliver fairer pay for other parts of the NHS workforce and an improvement to the to the conditions and to the status of the nursing profession specifically, but also fairness for all NHS workers.

That's one of the considerations I've had to bear in mind in terms of what we can offer the BMA and resident doctors, and I've been very clear with the resident doctors reps about that privately, and I'm very happy to restate that publicly. Doctors have not had a bad deal from this government, frankly, and I have a responsibility to all parts of the NHS workforce, especially those who

**** Possible New Speaker ****

are lowest paid and who often lie bills. Doctor Simon Opher.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Doctor Simon Opher. Thank you. Can I commend the Secretary of State around the international medical graduates? Because it is something that we Because it is something that we have discussed in the past, and bringing forward emergency legislation is absolutely crucial here. So thank thank you for that. here. So thank thank you for that. Can I also say trainers in the NHS and I reassure the party opposite
19:57
19:57
19:58
19:59
20:00
20:00
20:00
20:01
20:02
20:03
20:03
20:04
20:04
20:05
20:06
20:06
20:07
20:08
Wes Streeting Portrait Rt Hon Wes Streeting MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Ilford North, Labour)
-
-
I agree with my hon. Friend entirely in what she says, and this is the point. I've impressed upon the chair of the Resident Doctors the chair of the Resident Doctors Committee. This deal is not the end of a conversation about jobs and of a conversation about jobs and career development in the NHS, because there are plenty of problems for us to solve. And although we can't afford to go further on pay this year, what we've done so far, 28.9% is not the extent of what the government can and is willing to do on pay.

It just does require a bit of give and take, and I actually think we'll have much more constructive progress and meaningful progress if we work together. I've got my part to play in that. And and you know, we from my point of view, we need to reset the relationship. It has it has hit the buffers somewhat in recent weeks. I'm willing to do that. I think we've got people we can work with on the resident doctors committee, but I think we're going to have to grasp the olive branch as it's presented

**** Possible New Speaker ****

today, so we can make more progress in the new year. Mike Reader people in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mike Reader people in Northampton are on a bit of a rollercoaster. Madam Deputy Speaker they've seen the benefits of a Labour government with £16 million Labour government with £16 million secured for our new urgent care centre at Northampton General, but they'll be rightly worried now reading the news. Well, the Secretary of State have helped me in sending a message to my constituents to assure them that
20:09
20:09
20:10
20:11
Wes Streeting Portrait Rt Hon Wes Streeting MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Ilford North, Labour)
-
-
what will still be less than 48 hours notice as to whether or not these strikes go ahead. If they were to take up the mandate extension, then they could properly run a referendum, give their members more time to consider, more time to discuss in the workplace, more time to discuss with their families and their reps. And I don't see how more participation in the conversation and in the ballot can't, you know, couldn't possibly be a good thing. And as I've made clear to the resident doctors, there are no downsides for the BMA in this.

In fact, the only person who risks having a downside is me. If they, even after that, reject the deal and then they're out on strike again in January. So this is this is a, you know, not even a win win scenario. This is a potential win lose scenario. So I don't know why they wouldn't take it up. I do think this is a great offer for for for doctors. I do know there will still be more to do. And I do know that whether it's the implementation of the ten point plan that Jim McKee has come up with, where I've offered to work with the BMA trust by trust, employer by employer to see progress, or any of the amount of other things we can do together.

If we work together, we can get more done together. If we're working as partners rather than adversaries, we will all enjoy it a lot more and we will make more progress. And that's the opportunity available.
20:12
20:13
20:13
20:14
20:15
20:15
Wes Streeting Portrait Rt Hon Wes Streeting MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Ilford North, Labour)
-
-
occasions in different contexts, I think it is a sensible compromise and it avoids that dreaded phone call of the NHS staff member who had holiday plans for Christmas, who's having to cancel them and go back to work, the dreaded phone call. Most importantly of all, of the patient who's been gearing themselves up for that test or scan they're worried about, or that operation or procedure they've waited far too long for, or indeed, the dreaded situation of having to call 999 in an emergency, uncertain about whether the ambulance is going to arrive on time, anxious about whether you are going to be waiting in a car park, in a queue, in the back of an ambulance, or indeed waiting on a trolley in a corridor.

Madam Deputy Speaker, it gives me no pleasure at all to acknowledge that those bleak situations I have described are in play today. In the NHS there is already activity being stood down. But even if the strike action weren't looming, the NHS is not in a state that I would want myself, or people I love, or the people I represent or our country to be treated in because of the enormous pressures it is under. With that in mind, and listening to the contributions we've heard from across the House this evening, from members on both sides who are not anti-doctor or even anti-bcma, I really urge them to do the right thing, not just to adopt this deal, but even at this late stage to adopt the offer of mandate extension to put off to January, the spectre of strike action to give their members time to think and time to vote, and time to make a decision about whether or not to accept a deal that would make a meaningful material difference to their job prospects, their careers, and the future of our National Health Service.

It's not too late to change course. It's not too late to change their minds, and there's never any shame in doing so. If you think it's right. And with that in mind, can I thank all hon. Members for their contributions? And thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

giving us so much time on such an important issue. Thank you. And that concludes the statement.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And that concludes the statement. We now move on to petitions, and I'll ask that the benches clear and swap over, and the house settles swap over, and the house settles before we move to the statement. Petition Jess Asato. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
20:18
20:19
20:20
Andrew George Portrait Andrew George MP (St Ives, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
decision which has been taken without any consultation whatsoever. The impact on the vulnerable on businesses and charities, which face complex transactions and on face complex transactions and on the digitally excluded, have not been taken into account and are going to be very significant indeed. going to be very significant indeed. They, they, they observe that Lloyds was bailed out to the tune Lloyds was bailed out to the tune of £37 billion of taxpayers money during the financial crisis, and yet treats the town in this manner without any consultation, leaving customers with just one bank in Truro two, 2 or 2 hours, a two hours of bus journey away in Truro.

So the petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the government to bring forward measures to ensure a network of accessible full time banks throughout the United Kingdom and in every market town, and to call on Lloyds to keep its Penzance branch open and the petitioners

**** Possible New Speaker ****

remain, etc. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Petition bank closure in Penzance.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Point of order Point of order John McDonnell.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I apologise for not giving notice of the point of orders. Earlier today. I raised a point of Earlier today. I raised a point of order with regard to correspondence I'd submitted to the Secretary of State for justice. At that I said I'd written to the Secretary of State a week ago, had received no response. This is with regard to
20:22
20:23
20:23
None Portrait Adjournment: Potential merits of a public inquiry into Cammell Laird workers imprisoned in 1984
-

sacked, they lost their jobs, redundancy and pension rights and
20:23
Kim Johnson Portrait Kim Johnson MP (Liverpool Riverside, Labour)
-
-
redundancy and pension rights and sent to prison in an unprecedented assault on trade unionists. They have been fighting ever since to have been fighting ever since to clear their names and it is my honour to be their voice in this place today and I want to put on place today and I want to put on record my register of interest as the chair of the all party the chair of the all party parliamentary group on the miscarriages of justice. And I'd like to begin by recognising the work of those who helped bring this debate here today.

And they are the 37 themselves. They are Billy Albertina, Eddy, Albertina, Frances Albertina, Jemmy Albertina, John Albertina, Jemmy Barton, Christopher Billsborough, John Brady, Michael. Byrne, Thomas. Cassidy, Thomas Culshaw, John. Dooley, LOL. Duffy, Colin. Hurley, Nicholas. Finnegan, John. Flynn, Andrew. Fraser, Barry. Goulding, Paul. Hennessy, Edward. Kenny, Paul. Little, Eddie. Marnell, Jemmy. McCarthy, Anthony McGarry, Philip. McEwan, Michael. Mooney, Aidan. Morley, Sam. Morley, Alan. Pryor, Francis. Roache, Stephen. Smith, Christopher. Thompson, Tommy. Webb, Tommy.

Wilson, Chris Whitley, George Whittaker and John Wright. And there are several other people I want to thank, including the previous MP for Birkenhead, my very good friend Mick Whitley, whose brother was one of the 37 for his tireless work and campaigning both in and outside of Parliament. Thanks to my hon. Friend, the MP for Harrow West, who led the Westminster Hall debate on the topic back in 2023 and has continued to support the campaign. I would also like to recognise the contribution of the MP for Birmingham Northfield, who has a long history of supporting the campaign as a GMB officer and who used one of his first written parliamentary questions as an MP to secure a commitment from the then justice Minister to consider a review into the jailing of the Cammell Laird workers.

I am happy to give way Laurence Turner.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm both grateful to her and I wish to congratulate her on wish to congratulate her on securing tonight's debate and for reading again into the record. The names of the 37. I wonder if I might put two sentiments on my own on record. The first is a tribute on record. The first is a tribute to the work of Eddie Marnell, who over many years as a member of Gmb's northwestern Irish region and Gmb's northwestern Irish region and the Central Executive Council, championed their cause outside this house and through the union inside it.

I also wish to pay tribute to the work of my former colleagues at GMB. I can attest to the many hours which have been spent in support of that cause, and I understand that the union is due to meet the campaign again in the new year.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Kim Johnson I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention and again support his support for Eddie Marnell, and I continue to look forward to the continued support of GMB going forward. I will happily

**** Possible New Speaker ****

give way. Can I commend our Bedford Liverpool Riverside for bringing this forward? And I also attended this forward? And I also attended that debate in Westminster Hall, along with our own lady and others, and and fully support the campaign. and and fully support the campaign. The other one is referred to standing on the picket line. And in an earlier question for the resident doctors statement that took place before. Like her, I've stood in the picket line along with nurses and others in Newtownards on many occasions.

The imprisonment and the removal of the redundancy packages would not normally occur in any instance where a workforce has decided to strike, and many of these workers never regained stable employment. So it does not really agree with me that there is definitely a case to be answered in terms of the regaining of finance, and more must be done to seek justice for the 37 workers that still suffer today and have not had justice.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend and totally agree. Justice does need to totally agree. Justice does need to be served and those 37 have been affected because of the financial affected because of the financial demands that were put on them. Because of the action that they took, they were striking workers took, they were striking workers and not criminals and should never have gone to prison. And I'd like to pay tribute to Paul Heron and to pay tribute to Paul Heron and Claire Williams, who are providing legal advice for the campaign, with the intention to launch a successful legal appeal against the original charges.

And I'd like also to pay thanks to the GMB union for their support, and I look forward to the continued support going forward. In 1984, faced with sweeping redundancies and the decline of the shipbuilding industry, workers are Cammell Laird their workplace, including a gas rig and a Royal Navy frigate, to resist job losses and defend their livelihoods and their communities. Management's response, backed by the government at the time, was swift and very heavy handed. The workers were threatened with dismissal, the loss of their redundancy payment and even police intervention.

They were deliberately targeted to send a warning to others. An attempt by the state to break industrial action and demoralise workers taking strike action across the country. The workers reluctantly agreed to end their occupation in September 1984, after weeks when their water supply was cut off. They were immediately arrested for failing to turn up to court for an earlier judicial review hearing. They were convicted in their absence and sent to Walton Jail, Merseyside category A high security prison.

Their appeal at the High Court in October 1984 was presided over by Lord Lawton, who had been a member of Oswald Mosley's British Union of Fascists. He had visited Hitler in the 1930s and had been selected to run for Parliament. He was a long standing enemy of the trade union movement, and was the only too happy to uphold the unprecedented 30 day prison sentence for contempt of court, a grossly disproportionate punishment. The whole case stinks of an establishment stitch up.

There were plenty of other similar cases at the time throughout the movement. Not even the NUM leader, Arthur Scargill, was in prison despite being convicted of the same charge. The only comparable case of an imprisonment of a large group of workers due to a national dispute was the Shrewsbury 24 and 46. Seven years later, their convictions have now finally been overturned by the CCRC. When the 37 were charged with contempt of court and sent to a high security prison.

Liverpool City Council was locked in a fierce battle with the Thatcher government at the time, over a 30 million cut to central government funding for what was deemed by the government as an illegal Budget. The council remained defiant, adopting the mantra we would rather break the law than break the poor. More than anything, it focussed on building council homes and creating jobs, work unmatched by any other authority at the time. This was the political environment in which the Cammell Laird 37 had to contend with the workers for proudly not only for their own jobs, but for the future of the shipyards, their only crime, you call it a crime, was defending their livelihoods.

The strikers ensured that there was absolutely no damage to any property during their occupation. The strikers even allowed the MoD inspectors into the occupation to inspect the frigate and carry out maintenance work. Criminals. No responsible trade unions carrying out legitimate action of their own workplace and respecting the property they were in control of, and for this they were incarcerated in prison for 30 days. The justice for the Cammell Laird 37 campaign resonates deeply with my constituents and Liverpool Riverside, and across Merseyside, they are widely considered heroes for standing up to Thatcher's policies of managed decline that destroyed our industries and decimated our communities.

This struggle took place against the backdrop of the broader union fight backs and parallel injustices such as Orgreave and Hillsborough, where ordinary people paid the price for fighting back against a government hell bent on crushing working class communities. For decades later, the fight for justice continues. Sadly, half of the 37 have died while waiting for their names to be cleared. Action is needed now to ensure that the surviving workers receive justice, because justice delayed is justice denied.

I grew up in Liverpool during the Thatcher years. The neo liberal policies of forced on our city would define us for years to come. Liverpool in the 80s was a highly dependent on the docks for work. We suffered unemployment rate of almost 50%. Our communities were deeply aware that the fight for jobs was not just to improve the current situation, but to preserve jobs and workplaces for generations to come. Thatcher's privatisation drive resulted in British shipbuilders going from employing 62,000 workers in 1982 to just 5000 workers five years later, and in Merseyside alone, we lost 34,000 manufacturing jobs between 1978 and 1981.

Due to Thatcher's policy of managed decline. It was this hollowing out of industry that these workers were trying to defeat. They deserve full recognition and gratitude for the struggle they waged, and an apology for the disgraceful way they retreated. The justice for the Cammell Laird 37 campaign lacked the Shrewsbury 24. The miner's strike and so many other union struggles of the time goes to the very heart of how Thatcher's government responded to workers who dared to stand up for themselves. I remember the police brutally inflicted.

I remembered the police brutality inflicted on striking miners at Orgreave, followed by lies and cover ups by politicians, the police and the media. And I'm proud that this Labour government has now committed to a full inquiry into Orgreave. It follows logically that there should be a public inquiry inquiry into the jailing of Cammell Laird workers, a miscarriage of justice with many obvious parallels. However, the priority now must be releasing the government papers to help the legal team clear their names of the 37.

And there is no doubt that this was a major miscarriage of justice, sanctioned at the highest levels of government. No other industrial action resulted in so many men being sent to prison. The 30 day sentence was grossly unfair. By the time they were released, the men had lost their jobs, workplace rights, they redundancy payments and pension payments. Research by the GMB shows that at least one of them could have lost 120,000 or more. Some were blacklisted for many years and struggled to find work afterwards, causing immense suffering and economic hardship for the reason we believe they should be a public inquiry.

The limited records from the National Archives and Thatcher's private papers demonstrate that Ministers were determined to privatise the building of warships of shipbuilding sell off the remainder of state owned the Cammell Laird 37 knew that this was what they were up against at the time, a government hell bent on privatisation at any cost. It is a systematic, ideologically driven undermining of the British shipbuilding industry by a group of Ministers determined to drive through the privatisation of British shipbuilders, regardless of the wider economic and social consequences that warrants a public inquiry.

So the 37 and all those impacted can understand why the treatment they received was so uniquely punitive and destructive. A public inquiry is not merely symbolic. It is essential. It is crucial to understand how and why a government acting through Ministers and courts, imposed such punitive measures on ordinary citizens for exercising their rights to industrial action. We are calling for the actions of Ministers from the time to be investigated for all the remaining records to be made public. This includes the Ministry of Defence and British Gas contracts, and any Crown estate leases relevant for a future appeal.

Following a GMB campaign almost a decade ago, the European Parliament Committee on Petitions called on the UK government to release all relevant papers, but this has never been actioned. And more importantly, we want a formal government apology for these workers. The legal team believed the court was given inaccurate information at the time of the initial prosecutions, and that the workers may not have been lawfully dismissed. They argue that Cammell Laird may have had no legal standing to bring the claims that led to the injunctions, and that the occupation may have occurred on land that was not under the company's control.

These claims are groundbreaking, and with the help of the Minister today, we can ensure that the campaign's legal team has access to the appropriate documentation to finally bring about justice for the 37 the. During the 2023 Westminster Hall debate, led by the hon. Member for Harrow West, the Justice Minister at that time stated that his Department had conducted extensive searches of its records and those in the court and prison system, and he confirmed that he understood that nothing had been found in relation to the Cammell Laird strike action or the strikers themselves.

He also confirmed that other departments, including the Cabinet Office, Home Office and the then Department for business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, also confirmed that they believed they don't hold any relevant records, which I find quite astounding. However, the Cammell Laird campaigners believe an exhaustive search hasn't been undertaken. Papers must exist that relate to the closure, and every effort should be made to identify

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and release them. I'm happy to give way Justin Madders. Grateful to my. Friend for giving way and congratulate her on bringing this debate. Also declare for the record my membership of the GMB trade union. I was at that Westminster union. I was at that Westminster Hall debate when the government Minister at the time said that a search had been taken. I think it's search had been taken. I think it's fair to say, given the way she has spoken today, about the highest levels of government pushing this issue forward.

I think it's very issue forward. I think it's very hard for us to believe that an exhaustive search was conducted at the time. But would you agree with that with me that what our shadow Minister said during that debate, and I quote, that a Labour government would release documents held by government relating to the Cammell Laird prosecutions and carry out a review into the jailing of the striking workers is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

something that we should be able to agree very, very quickly indeed. Yeah. I welcome my good friends

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I welcome my good friends intervention. I totally agree, and I'm hoping in the minister's summing up we might hear something summing up we might hear something direct in relation to that request, but we do need answers as to who but we do need answers as to who was behind the incarceration of the 37 Cammell Laird workers for contempt of court. These men weren't vandals. They weren't criminals. They were trade unionists defending their jobs, pensions and the future of the shipyard.

And in conclusion, I would be grateful if the Minister, during his summing up, could give full commitment for the search for the truth, for the government to raise every relevant document, fully investigate the decisions that led to their imprisonment, and agree to meet with the campaigners and the legal team to discuss what support they need to exonerate all workers. 41 years on, the call remains the same. Justice for the Cammell Laird 37. They deserve our recognition and our gratitude for their courage in standing up and fighting back.

And while this debate, whatever follows, will not undo the damage done to the lives of those men, to their families and to our communities, it will go a long way towards achieving justice. Jobs, not jail, still must remain the guiding principle. They deserve our full support and securing a formal government apology and clearing their names. We will not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

rest until the truth is uncovered and justice is finally done. Thank you Minister. Thank you, Madam.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker, I congratulate the hon. Member for Liverpool Riverside on securing this Riverside on securing this important debate this evening and her powerful speech, characteristically powerful speech on this really important issue. And on this really important issue. And I join her in praising all the campaigners, of course, in particular the 37 names that she particular the 37 names that she read out in the House today. I also declare an interest as a member and a proud member of the GMB trade union, and again praise their work on this important issue.

As we've heard, Madam Deputy Speaker, in 1984, 37 workers were involved in an occupation at the Cammell Laird shipyard at Birkenhead in a bid to stop compulsory redundancies. The 37 men were sentenced to 30 days imprisonment for contempt of court after defying a judge's order to leave a partially built gastric. They were imprisoned for 30 days in HMP Woolton. They were subsequently subsequently dismissed from their jobs, and their loss lost their right to redundancy and a pension. I want to begin by stating on record that I recognise that the actions and the experience they suffered was a disgrace, and although it occurred before I was born, the issues raised and the profound effect that has had on those 37 workers and indeed the communities that my right hon.

Friend represents, is profound. I'm deeply sympathetic to the case and to the individuals affected by it, and I recognise that for some, due to the passage of time, some of those individuals have sadly passed away. Before I turn to the specific question being posed, I would like
20:42
Jake Richards Portrait Jake Richards MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Rother Valley, Labour)
-
-
to, if I may emphasise that this government is committed to tackling injustice and ensuring fair and progressive rights in the workplace, progressive rights in the workplace, so these types of malpractice never happen again. And I'm very aware happen again. And I'm very aware that I'm about to set out many measures that the government are hoping to introduce in their Employment Rights Bill, and I pay Employment Rights Bill, and I pay tribute to my hon. Friend, the Member for Ellesmere Port, who is here and sitting there who's done here and sitting there who's done so much work on this both in opposition and then in government.

The plan to make work pay. Sets out the government's ambitious agenda to deliver by ensuring employment rights are fit for a modern economy, empowering working people and contributing to economic growth. The plan will bring our employment rights legislation into the 21st century. The government fulfilled its manifesto commitment to bring forward legislation within 100 days of entering office, by introducing the Employment Rights Bill, as the House will no doubt be aware, the bill is currently going through ping pong and is in the first phase of delivering our plan to get Britain moving forward and create the right conditions for long term, sustainable, inclusive and secure economic growth growth.

I would like to stress that blacklisting is completely unacceptable and has no place in modern employment relations. Any individual or trade union who believes that they have been the victim of blacklisting can and should enforce their rights for an employment tribunal or the county court. The 2010 blacklisting Regulations are reinforced by powers in the Data Protection Act 2018 protecting use of personal data, including information on trade union membership and sensitive personal data. The Information Commissioner's Office regulates use of personal data, investigates breaches of that data.

It has the power to enforce a to take enforcement action, including searching premises, issuing enforcement notices, and imposing fines for serious breaches. Now, the question posed by the debate is whether there are potential merits of holding a public inquiry into the Cammell Laird workers imprisonment in 1984, and I recognise, as has been discussed already in the chamber, this is an issue of abiding parliamentary interest, including it being the subject of a Westminster Hall debate in February 2023. Before I was a member in this place, moved by the hon.

Member for Harrow West and among the and among the hon. Members generally in Parliament for some time, who have long campaigned for justice in this area. Public inquiries are independent investigations into matters of significant public concern. They are established by the government and led by an independent chair. They are usually asked to establish the facts surrounding serious issue, and consider lessons to be learned from what has happened, as well as make recommendations intended to correct the deficiencies for the future. For example, an inquiry may be established to establish established to look at the cause of a major disaster, accident or other event involving significant damage or loss of life.

When government considers that a matter is sufficiently serious to warrant inquiry, there are a number of options for the form of the inquiry might take, including establishing an inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005. Critically, Madam Deputy Speaker, although the Ministry of Justice owns the Inquiries Act 2005 and the Inquiries Rules 2006, justice Ministers do not decide whether to set up an inquiry that falls to the department with policy or operational responsibility for the issue under consideration, industrial relations and how they were historically dealt with are not a matter for me or the Ministry of Justice, and as such it would be inappropriate to comment on the potential merits of an inquiry in this instance, as has already been touched upon, and as was set out by a predecessor in the Ministry of Justice in the Westminster Hall debate.

Obviously, document disclosure is a vital part of any inquiry or indeed any assessment of whether an inquiry is necessary, as the government have previously disclosed, my department has conducted those extensive searches of our records within the court and prison systems, and nothing has been found in relation to the Cammell Laird strike action or the strikers themselves. Other departments have likewise previously confirmed they do not hold potentially relevant material. But I've heard what the hon. Member have to say, and tomorrow morning I'll go back to my department and make sure those searches are done again, and send correspondence to the relevant departments to make sure they do those again as well.

It is important to note, as has already been accepted, that inquiries do not determine civil or criminal liability. They are not a substitute for court proceedings and they do not determine guilt or award compensation. The appropriate route to challenge a conviction and or sentence is by way of appeal, such as. Once the appeal has been exhausted, it is possible to apply to the Criminal Cases Review Commission, where a person believes they have been wrongly convicted of a crime in England, Wales or Northern Ireland.

A request can be made to Independent Criminal Cases Review Commission who can investigate and, where appropriate, refer cases back to court. The Commission has. Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. The Hillsborough campaign for for an independent panel. And it was through an panel. And it was through an independent panel that information was brought to light, which enabled them to move forward. Does my hon. them to move forward. Does my hon. Friend believe that an independent, independent panel would help the 37

**** Possible New Speaker ****

campaigners moving their case forward? I take the suggestion very seriously. As I said on terms of the documents disclosure, which I think is the first step for the campaign and what the hon. My hon. Friend is seeking. Tomorrow morning, I will be going into my department, and I will be looking at this issue again. And her speech and this campaign and the adjournment debate has, has meant that will happen. I can assure her that I will do that and take that very seriously indeed.

And we consider no options are off the table on this Gainsborough. Yes,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of course. One of the areas that is worth exploring is the Cabinet papers exploring is the Cabinet papers themselves. And what discussion took place because these Cammell Laird workers are the innocent Laird workers are the innocent victims of a political strategy that was devised in Cabinet to suppress all opposition to the introduction of the monetary policies, the monetarism, under the Thatcher government during that Thatcher government during that period. The hon. Gentleman may not be may not have been born at the time, but I was.

And what was happening was that any area of resistance to the government was suppressed. So as a GLC councillor, we were abolished in Lambeth and as well as local councillors were surcharged and removed from office. And then individual trade unionists were then suppressed in a way which was more brutal than we ever thought possible, both in terms of the way they inflicted damage as a result of forcing trade union action, but also the imprisonment. This resides in the Cabinet discussions that have taken place at the time, and in particular Nicholas Ridley, etc.

and as we saw in the Shrewsbury campaign, the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

influence that they had on the courts as well. Sir. I'm grateful to my hon. Friend's

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to my hon. Friend's intervention, me making a point about the passage of time was not me being flippant about the seriousness of this. In my constituency is the site of where the Orgreave events occurred, and I'm very pleased that this Labour government has launched a public government has launched a public inquiry. I'm not going to comment on individual disclosure searches for different departments, different conversations that the different conversations that the Dispatch Box. I'm sure he can appreciate that that wouldn't be appropriate.

I've made a commitment to look at this issue again when I go back to my department tomorrow morning. I do take that seriously and will keep him and other members updated. One of the difficult aspects of the Cammell Laird workers imprisonment is that these were committals for contempt of court, which is a civil matter rather than convictions for criminal offences. This is a technical issue, but this case therefore does not meet the criteria for a miscarriage of justice which relates to wrongful convictions. This might be appear to be an issue of semantics, but as there are distinct processes which apply in cases where a person has wrongfully been convicted of a criminal offence, it is important that we are clear on the distinctions between a miscarriage of justice and what we may term a historic injustice.

The Law Commission is currently reviewing, at the government's request, the Law on Contempt of Court. The first part of their report on liability for contempt was published last month, and the second part will be published next year and will include a review of Routes of Appeal and also the sanctions courts are able to impose for different types of contempt. Therefore, Madam Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, I am deeply sympathetic to the case and to the campaign and to the individuals who are affected by this industrial relations and how they were historically dealt with are not necessarily a matter for the Ministry of Justice.

I've made a number of commitments to this Dispatch Box to look at certain issues again as a result of this adjournment debate that is this House working and I repeat those I repeat those commitments and I will report back to the hon. Member. I thank her for her for tabling this debate and the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

opportunity she has given me to respond to it and the actions I take from it. The question is that this House,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that this House, in our adjourn, as many as are of that opinion, say aye. The ayes
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page