18/04/2016

:00:00. > :00:00.delayed or having to be written without his valuable input?

:00:00. > :00:11.I always enjoyed my appearances before my honourable friend and his

:00:12. > :00:19.colleagues on the select committee. It is sometimes not always easy to

:00:20. > :00:22.reconcile their offers with some of my international travel commitments

:00:23. > :00:29.by I will certainly today have a look at them. They seem like busy

:00:30. > :00:32.man with many commitments and a full diary but House committees are very

:00:33. > :00:40.important and I'm sure the Secretary of State will not forget that. Get

:00:41. > :00:45.it sorted, man. Hawks are built at my constituency and promote the best

:00:46. > :00:52.of British, so I wonder if there are plans to procure new plans for the

:00:53. > :00:57.red arrows? I recently announced a new support contract for the Hawk

:00:58. > :01:03.aircraft which takes it out to November 2020 and we have time to

:01:04. > :01:08.decide how to sustain them beyond that. What I would like to say

:01:09. > :01:11.though is that the red arrows are due to commence a substantial

:01:12. > :01:13.programme of displays in this country and overseas this summer and

:01:14. > :01:22.I hope many members of the House have an opportunity to watch them.

:01:23. > :01:28.100 years ago, my constituency was established as a centre to deal with

:01:29. > :01:32.nerve gas attacks. They continue to do a fantastic job tackling the

:01:33. > :01:37.grave threats we face in this country from Daesh. Following the

:01:38. > :01:42.visits of the Secretary of State and other ministers, what reflections

:01:43. > :01:49.would they have on the continuing role of DSTL in my constituency?

:01:50. > :01:52.DSTL is meant to defend our nation and forces against a wide range of

:01:53. > :01:56.threats, it is just as crucial today as it was 100 years ago. We will

:01:57. > :02:00.continue to invest in science and technology to stay ahead of our

:02:01. > :02:08.adversaries and I would like to congratulate all of our staff there

:02:09. > :02:11.and in my own constituency on reaching this milestone and for the

:02:12. > :02:18.remarkable work they do in helping keep our country safe. With both

:02:19. > :02:22.existing and potential success of programme in mind along with tried

:02:23. > :02:30.and, what measures have this department taken to identify on

:02:31. > :02:35.exported -- unexplored ordinance? The department takes a safety of our

:02:36. > :02:41.nuclear fleet at the highest possible level, so there are

:02:42. > :02:45.continuous attempts to ensure that any potential threat to our

:02:46. > :02:48.submarines are monitored. If the honourable gentleman has something

:02:49. > :02:51.specific you'd like to draw to our attention, he should do so and I

:02:52. > :03:00.would be happy to meet to discuss it. Tata steel develop new types of

:03:01. > :03:03.steel for our aircraft carriers. Can my outer friend ensure that British

:03:04. > :03:11.steel manufacturers continue to innovate and deliver for the Royal

:03:12. > :03:15.Navy? I am grateful to my honourable friend for highlighting the success

:03:16. > :03:19.of Tata Steel in supplying to the aircraft carrier. There are other

:03:20. > :03:22.grades and types of steel, which are not presently available in this

:03:23. > :03:26.country, and we would certainly be able to talk to the ministry about

:03:27. > :03:35.what steps they can take to make such types available. The Army

:03:36. > :03:41.reserve in my constituency... They are being in correspondence with the

:03:42. > :03:44.Minister and have yet heard a response from rumours he had to be

:03:45. > :03:47.confirmed or consulted with the wider community about its imminent

:03:48. > :03:55.closure, can I have a response please, Minister? I am grateful to

:03:56. > :03:59.the honourable Lady for her letters on this. We have also had a word in

:04:00. > :04:07.the margins, we are looking into this matter, we do have a robust

:04:08. > :04:10.system for appeals to this and so far I am unable to offer the

:04:11. > :04:14.honourable lady any comfort but I will come back to her shortly.

:04:15. > :04:20.Further to the question I asked by my honourable friend, the 1206

:04:21. > :04:22.training squadron in Litchfield is one of the biggest in the West

:04:23. > :04:26.Midlands but it too has been suffering from the lack of glider

:04:27. > :04:35.training position. What hope can you give my friends and core members

:04:36. > :04:41.that their training will be resumed? I am delighted to be able to answer

:04:42. > :04:46.a question from the distinguished president of that squadron.

:04:47. > :04:53.LAUGHTER Two years ago, nearly two years ago, all had to be disbanded

:04:54. > :04:57.for safety reasons. We have been unable to find a contractor who can

:04:58. > :05:00.credibly take on the repair of the vigilance, but the Vikings are all

:05:01. > :05:07.on their way up, together with a small number of vigilance. By 2018,

:05:08. > :05:13.we will be delivering a full programme of colliding with an

:05:14. > :05:21.enhanced level of powered flying with more tutors in starting this

:05:22. > :05:24.year. Some 5000 service personnel serving overseas, they want to have

:05:25. > :05:31.postal votes. They've applied for that and tell me that their votes

:05:32. > :05:34.are sent to the regiment, to those overseas, that they are

:05:35. > :05:37.disenfranchised. And I asked the ministers question. What is he doing

:05:38. > :05:45.to ensure that these votes are given to those overseas who wish to vote?

:05:46. > :05:49.We actively partook in the governmentwide scheme which is lost

:05:50. > :05:52.on the February -- 1st of February to ensure our service personnel were

:05:53. > :05:57.aware that they could register. We will be doing the same again through

:05:58. > :06:01.issuing a defence information notice in me with the regards to the EU

:06:02. > :06:06.Referendum, but it is ultimately down to individual service, and

:06:07. > :06:10.whether they do or do like her register or vote. Could I ask my

:06:11. > :06:15.right honourable friend or perhaps the Minister of state, the

:06:16. > :06:27.honourable and very gallant lady,... LAUGHTER Gallon because she is in

:06:28. > :06:34.the Royal Navy reserve. Could I ask whether they could assure the House

:06:35. > :06:38.that no investigator used by either public interest lawyers is paid for

:06:39. > :06:47.for any service by the Ministry of defence? I can give that assurance.

:06:48. > :06:57.Although the Ministry of defence does not direct the investigations

:06:58. > :07:03.of them, it is responsible to ensure public money is being spent well and

:07:04. > :07:08.efficiently. Although we can clearly justify investigations into

:07:09. > :07:11.wrongdoing and investigations that exonerate our armed forces, we

:07:12. > :07:17.cannot justify spending money on processes which frustrate those

:07:18. > :07:19.processes and we have given very clear ministerial direction that

:07:20. > :07:23.those agents are not to be paid with public money and we have received

:07:24. > :07:29.assurances that that is the case. I am sorry it demand exceeds supply

:07:30. > :07:41.but we must now move on. Urgent question. Heidi Alexander. If you

:07:42. > :07:46.will make a statement on the imposition of a new junior doctors

:07:47. > :07:54.contract. Secretary of State for Health. Thank you Mr Speaker. This

:07:55. > :07:57.house has been updated regularly on all developments related to the

:07:58. > :08:01.junior doctors contract, although there has been no change whatsoever

:08:02. > :08:06.in the government's position since my statement to the House in

:08:07. > :08:09.February. I referred numbers to that statement on the 11th of February

:08:10. > :08:15.that answers the elementary questions on the 3rd of March, we

:08:16. > :08:18.set out the position very clearly. I am happy to read illustrate those

:08:19. > :08:24.positions to the honourable lady. The government has been concerned

:08:25. > :08:28.for some time about higher mortality rates in hospitals. That is one of

:08:29. > :08:32.the reasons we placed a seven-day NHS in our manifesto. We have been

:08:33. > :08:36.discussing how to achieve this through contract or form with the

:08:37. > :08:44.BMA for over three years. Without success. In January, I asked the

:08:45. > :08:50.highly respected chief executive of Salford Royal to lead in negotiating

:08:51. > :08:54.team as a final attempt to resolve outstanding issues. He has had some

:08:55. > :08:59.success with the agreement reached in 90% of areas. However, despite

:09:00. > :09:04.having agreed in writing in November to negotiate on Saturday pay, and

:09:05. > :09:09.despite many concessions from the government on this issue, the BMA

:09:10. > :09:12.went back on that agreement in negotiation leading to the

:09:13. > :09:17.conclusion that there was no realistic prospect of a negotiated

:09:18. > :09:20.outcome. He therefore asked me to and the uncertainty for the service

:09:21. > :09:25.by proceeding with the introduction of a new contract without further

:09:26. > :09:31.delay. That is what I agreed to and what we will be doing. We will start

:09:32. > :09:35.with foundation your ones from this August, and proceed with a phased

:09:36. > :09:39.implementation for other trainees as their contracts expired through

:09:40. > :09:45.rotation to other NHS organizations. Let me be clear, it has never been

:09:46. > :09:49.the government's plan to insist on changes to existing contracts, but

:09:50. > :09:52.only to offer new contracts as people change employer as they

:09:53. > :09:57.progressed their training. This is something the Secretary of State,

:09:58. > :10:02.with NHS organizations of employers are entitled to do, according even

:10:03. > :10:09.to the BMA's on legal advice. National health service fund -- and

:10:10. > :10:14.trusts are technically able to pay conditions for the staff employee.

:10:15. > :10:18.-- foundation trusts. The NHS as a strong tradition of collective

:10:19. > :10:25.bargaining so trusts up to use national contracts. They have made

:10:26. > :10:28.clear that a single national of is essential to safeguard the delivery

:10:29. > :10:32.of medical training and implementation of the national

:10:33. > :10:36.contract will be a key criteria in the financial investment in training

:10:37. > :10:41.posts. The Secretary of State is entitled to do this, I have improved

:10:42. > :10:46.micro-approved the national contract. This government has a

:10:47. > :10:49.mandate from the electorate to introduce a seven-day NHS. There

:10:50. > :10:55.will be no retreat from her forms that save lives and improve patient

:10:56. > :10:59.care. -- approved. Contracts for training doctors are an essential

:11:00. > :11:02.part of that programme and it is a matter of great regret that

:11:03. > :11:14.obstructive behaviour from the BMA has made it possible to achieve

:11:15. > :11:20.that. Mr Speaker, just when you thought this whole sorry saga could

:11:21. > :11:24.not get any worse, it now appears the government policy is in complete

:11:25. > :11:29.disarray. Despite giving us all the impression back in February that he

:11:30. > :11:36.was going to railroad through a new contract, it now seems the health

:11:37. > :11:43.secretary is simply making a suggestion, or as his lawyers would

:11:44. > :11:46.say, approving the terms of a model contract. Last night, the Health

:11:47. > :11:49.Secretary took to Twitter to claim this was not a change of approach

:11:50. > :11:55.and we have heard the same again today. So on behalf of patients, I

:11:56. > :12:03.have to ask them, what on earth is going on? We need a straightforward

:12:04. > :12:09.answer to a simple question. Is he imposing a new contract, yes or no?

:12:10. > :12:18.If he is not, but merely suggesting a template, why did he not make this

:12:19. > :12:22.clearer before hand and why, in his oral statement on the 11th of

:12:23. > :12:29.February, did he lead Parliament, the media, the public, and crucially

:12:30. > :12:33.50,000 junior doctors to believe that he was announcing imposition?

:12:34. > :12:40.The junior Doctors committee took the unprecedented step of escalating

:12:41. > :12:47.their industrial action on the back of his decision to force through a

:12:48. > :12:54.contract. How can the Health possibly justify a situation whereby

:12:55. > :12:59.his rhetoric, underpinned by nothing but misplaced bravado and

:13:00. > :13:04.bullishness, could lead to the first ever all-out strike of junior

:13:05. > :13:09.doctors in the history of the NHS? He must get back to the negotiating

:13:10. > :13:14.table and quickly. Mr Speaker, we also need answer to further

:13:15. > :13:20.questions. Do all NHS employers have free reign to amend the terms of the

:13:21. > :13:27.health secretary's so-called model contract? Does this include non-fans

:13:28. > :13:32.age and trusts? Is it legal for health education England to

:13:33. > :13:39.effectively blackmail trusts on the part of the House secretary by

:13:40. > :13:43.withholding funding, if that is what government policy now is? Finally Mr

:13:44. > :13:49.Speaker, it seems to me that there are two basic scenarios here. Either

:13:50. > :13:54.the Health Secretary has known all along that he does not have the

:13:55. > :14:01.power to impose a new contract, and so all of this is part of a cynical

:14:02. > :14:06.attempt to take on a trade union. Or, was the oblivious to the fact

:14:07. > :14:11.that he did not have the power to do this, in which case, what is going

:14:12. > :14:20.on in his department? Mr Speaker, this is no way to run the NHS.

:14:21. > :14:24.Today's revelations call into question the motives, judgement, and

:14:25. > :14:32.competence of this health secretary, and this house, doctors, and

:14:33. > :14:40.patients deserve some answers. Mr Speaker, this is a truly desperate

:14:41. > :14:43.attempt to diverge attention from the single biggest question that

:14:44. > :14:47.people in this house wants to know, which is due the labours of party

:14:48. > :14:51.support or do they not support a strike which will see thousands of

:14:52. > :14:58.people up and down this country see their care suffer? Now let me answer

:14:59. > :15:03.her question very directly. Yes, we are imposing a new contract, and we

:15:04. > :15:09.are doing it with the greatest of regret. Because the BMA refuse to

:15:10. > :15:15.talk over three years, with three independent processes, 75 meetings,

:15:16. > :15:19.73 concessions we made in a huge effort to try to come to a

:15:20. > :15:24.negotiated settlement. But with respect, I think Sir David Dalton,

:15:25. > :15:26.the trusted chief executive for Salford Royal understand things

:15:27. > :15:31.better than the knowledge she has shown today, because she has

:15:32. > :15:35.concluded after working out that the negotiated settlement was not

:15:36. > :15:39.possible, and that is why I announced on the 11th of February

:15:40. > :15:44.that I would be introducing a new contract. With respect to foundation

:15:45. > :15:48.trusts, if she listened to my statement, it is indeed true that

:15:49. > :15:53.foundation trusts have the freedom to introduce a new contracts with

:15:54. > :15:57.pay and conditions. And they can choose to exercise that freedom, but

:15:58. > :16:00.none of them do. She has about not foundation trusts, they do not have

:16:01. > :16:05.that freedom, that is why we will be introducing a new contract for

:16:06. > :16:11.everyone. Let me say this to her, we have had a lot of talking, but none

:16:12. > :16:15.so specious as the story she planted in the Guardian this morning, which

:16:16. > :16:18.was absolutely nonsense, about the government changing its position. We

:16:19. > :16:24.have not changed our position. The fact of the matter is the government

:16:25. > :16:30.has bent over backwards to try and avoid this strike. Right now, the

:16:31. > :16:34.people refusing to talk, whether on design with hospital managers, or

:16:35. > :16:38.training Reform with the academy, are not the government but the BMA.

:16:39. > :16:43.Had they negotiated on Saturday pay as they said they would, we would

:16:44. > :16:48.have an agreement by now. Instead, we have a strike. The first-ever

:16:49. > :16:59.withdrawal of emergency care in NHS history. I just say this... If

:17:00. > :17:05.everybody columns themselves, everybody will be heard. Rather than

:17:06. > :17:07.try to fabricate some story about the government changing its

:17:08. > :17:12.position, which she knows it perfectly well is not. The words

:17:13. > :17:17.that do need be said in this chamber this week about whether or not it is

:17:18. > :17:21.appropriate for BMA to be telling people to deny life-saving care to

:17:22. > :17:25.patients. Some people in the NHS have shown great courage in speaking

:17:26. > :17:32.out, even against their own profession. The NHS England medical

:17:33. > :17:36.Director, the former labour minister, Dane Sally Davis, the

:17:37. > :17:40.chief medical Officer. But there is one person on public stage who

:17:41. > :17:44.hasn't had not that courage to demand a Red Sea straits and that is

:17:45. > :17:49.the shadow health said secretary and I hope at the earliest opportunity

:17:50. > :17:54.for the sake of her constituents and the Labour Party, say that it is

:17:55. > :17:57.wrong to withdraw emergency care. It is disproportionate, and appropriate

:17:58. > :18:01.to do so, in pursuance of a pay dispute in the right thing now is to

:18:02. > :18:09.show the Reich urged to reform these contracts for the benefit the

:18:10. > :18:13.patient and seven-day NHS. The BMA has always been a trade union, and

:18:14. > :18:16.it has had bitter political battles with just about every secretary of

:18:17. > :18:20.state that the national health service has had since it started.

:18:21. > :18:25.But it has never previously contemplated strike action,

:18:26. > :18:29.withdrawing urgent services, in pursuit of what is essentially a pay

:18:30. > :18:33.claim. Nor do I believe that before this year, the Labour Party would

:18:34. > :18:39.ever have supported them in the past if they had. So does my right

:18:40. > :18:42.honourable friend agree that as the pressures are obviously mounting on

:18:43. > :18:51.the NHS with the ageing population and rising demand, it is urgent that

:18:52. > :18:57.we move toward a seven-day service. It would be totally wrong for him to

:18:58. > :19:02.delay that in the face of industrial action or in the face of nit-picking

:19:03. > :19:06.legalisms from a shadow Secretary of State who is just discover what the

:19:07. > :19:12.legal status of foundation possible or hospitals is actually is. My

:19:13. > :19:18.right honourable friend speaks with huge wisdom and experience and, he

:19:19. > :19:20.makes the point about what has happened under previous labour

:19:21. > :19:25.government and he might also say that those were the same governments

:19:26. > :19:28.they gave us the current badly flawed contracts. Because those

:19:29. > :19:32.previous labour government did not stand up to the BMA, because they

:19:33. > :19:36.don't difficult decisions, we saw the pay build balloon and some

:19:37. > :19:40.shocking failures of care. Leadership is not just about talking

:19:41. > :19:43.and negotiating, it is also about acting. That is what ministers have

:19:44. > :19:47.to do, and in this situation we have a very simple decision, after three

:19:48. > :19:51.years of talks, do we proceed with the measures necessary to deliver a

:19:52. > :19:54.seven-day NHS and better care for patients, or do we ducked those

:19:55. > :20:06.decisions in this government chooses to act. If I could just yet again

:20:07. > :20:10.talk to the Secretary of State. It is not excess deaths on the weekends

:20:11. > :20:14.as people admitted at the weekend, dying within 30 days, he said it

:20:15. > :20:19.again today. And really this is just being repeated again over and over.

:20:20. > :20:24.The Secretary of State has described within the same pay envelope, having

:20:25. > :20:28.more doctors that weekend, not fewer during the week, reducing a maximum

:20:29. > :20:32.of 91 hours to 72 hours, I do not see how the maps of that could

:20:33. > :20:37.possibly add up when we are not managing to cover those that we

:20:38. > :20:41.have. These rotor gaps are injuring patients. I was very disappointed in

:20:42. > :20:46.the Equality Impact Assessment to see the identification of the impact

:20:47. > :20:51.on women and other people trained less than full-time. And see that

:20:52. > :20:57.dismissed as acceptable collateral damage. We are facing the first ever

:20:58. > :21:02.all-out strike next week, and I cannot believe that we are not in

:21:03. > :21:07.negotiations. We should be at the table, to try and prevent that. I

:21:08. > :21:10.would ask the secretary how he plans to get us out of this. Come back to

:21:11. > :21:18.the table, it is the only way an impasse will ever end. I ask her how

:21:19. > :21:20.long she excises to sit around the table before because we have been

:21:21. > :21:29.trying to discuss this for three years. How does the maths at up? I

:21:30. > :21:34.will tell you had that adds up. It adds up because we're putting an ?10

:21:35. > :21:38.billion in real terms into the NHS over the course of this Parliament,

:21:39. > :21:44.conservatives but money into the NHS. The SNP incidentally takes

:21:45. > :21:47.money out of the NHS. She talks about the Equality Impact

:21:48. > :21:50.Assessment. I have to say for someone who normally has very good

:21:51. > :21:57.attention to detail, what she quoted were paragraphs that actually were

:21:58. > :22:00.about changes that were agreed to by the BMA. What she did not quote was

:22:01. > :22:06.paragraph 95 which said that the overall assessment of the new

:22:07. > :22:09.contract was that it is fair, justified, and will promote the

:22:10. > :22:15.equality of opportunity. Why is that? Because shorter hours, shorter

:22:16. > :22:20.consecutive nights in fewer weekends make this a pro women contract that

:22:21. > :22:23.will help people juggling important home and work responsibilities.

:22:24. > :22:32.Would my right honourable friend agree that it is appalling the

:22:33. > :22:35.decision to for the first time during strike action, Junior doctors

:22:36. > :22:41.will not be providing life-saving care for young children, honourable

:22:42. > :22:44.patients, that it is totally incomprehensible given that there

:22:45. > :22:52.own leader has said that it is indefensible to do that. It is

:22:53. > :22:55.totally incomprehensible and I know that many doctors will be wrestling

:22:56. > :22:59.with their consciences, but I think in the context of this house, this

:23:00. > :23:05.could also be a time that we can put aside party differences stop I think

:23:06. > :23:09.there is a time where all sides of this house would have condemned the

:23:10. > :23:13.withdrawal of life-saving care in a pay dispute. That day has sadly

:23:14. > :23:17.passed and I think it is the conservatives now who have to show

:23:18. > :23:19.leadership in this. The NHS faces huge challenges as my right

:23:20. > :23:25.honourable friend said, but we're not going to tackle this challenge

:23:26. > :23:29.is if we allow obstructive unions to hold a gun to the government's head

:23:30. > :23:32.and refuse to allow us to proceed with really important changes.

:23:33. > :23:36.Modern contracts that will allow safer care for patients, better

:23:37. > :23:47.terms for doctors, we are determined to do the right thing for the NHS

:23:48. > :23:50.and be the party of the NHS. If the Secretary of State wanted to do a

:23:51. > :23:57.deal with anybody, don't you think it is a bit unwise to say to my

:23:58. > :24:04.right honourable friend who put the urgent question in, that she planted

:24:05. > :24:11.a story in a newspaper. That is accusing her of on reprehensible

:24:12. > :24:16.conduct. I think you should look at withdrawing it. Because I am an

:24:17. > :24:21.expert on this subject, somebody said to me on the picket line, do

:24:22. > :24:35.you know what sums up this government? Went Thursday practice

:24:36. > :24:40.to deceive. I better not finish it. What a magic web they weave when

:24:41. > :24:49.Thursday practice to deceive. That is what they are. If planting a

:24:50. > :24:54.story in a newspaper is reprehensible, then I think not many

:24:55. > :24:59.members of this house would survive his very high code of moral conduct

:25:00. > :25:05.for very long. But let me say this to him and let me say this to all

:25:06. > :25:08.members on the benches opposite. I think it is very important that we

:25:09. > :25:13.are honest about problems that we face in the NHS. Whatever those

:25:14. > :25:18.problems might be. That we do not sweep problems under the carpet, one

:25:19. > :25:22.but not the only problem we face, is the excess mortality rates we have

:25:23. > :25:25.for people admitted over weekends and I think there was a time when

:25:26. > :25:28.the Labour Party would have recognised that their own

:25:29. > :25:32.constituents are the people who depend most on public services like

:25:33. > :25:40.the NHS and have most to gain from a full seven-day NHS and they should

:25:41. > :25:43.be supporting us, not opposing us. We are eight days from an

:25:44. > :25:47.unprecedented full walk-out of junior doctors, including the

:25:48. > :25:51.withdrawal of emergency care. What our constituents want to know is

:25:52. > :25:55.whether they will be safe on the strike days. I wonder whether the

:25:56. > :25:58.Secretary of State will join me in the shadow Secretary of State on

:25:59. > :26:02.Khalid on the BMA to at least exempt casualty departments and maternity

:26:03. > :26:08.units from this walk-out because we know that even with well

:26:09. > :26:14.arrangements in place to bring them back to hospitals, the delays will

:26:15. > :26:18.cost lives. She speaks very constructively on this issue and she

:26:19. > :26:22.is absolutely right that the departments most at risk our

:26:23. > :26:24.emergency departments, maternity departments, and intensive care

:26:25. > :26:29.units and those of the areas that we are most keen to make sure we

:26:30. > :26:34.maintain critical doctor cover over the two stargaze planned. So I

:26:35. > :26:39.really do hope that the BMA will co-operate with NHS agreement. As we

:26:40. > :26:42.had identified where the gaps might be and we will share those with the

:26:43. > :26:48.BMA and I hope they will help us plug those gaps with junior doctors

:26:49. > :26:51.because in the end, no one wants any kind of strategy and we all have a

:26:52. > :26:58.responsibility to make sure that doesn't happen. -- tragedy. The

:26:59. > :27:03.Secretary of State will be aware with a medical diagnosis that words

:27:04. > :27:07.matter. That clarity matters. The same applies to us as politicians.

:27:08. > :27:12.The Secretary of State has said today that he is imposing a

:27:13. > :27:16.contract. In contrast with his legal team are saying to the doctors, so

:27:17. > :27:25.can need for avoidance of doubt, set out explicitly what legal powers he

:27:26. > :27:32.thinks he has to do that? I am very happy to do so. We are introducing a

:27:33. > :27:36.new contract from this August, it will be for all Junior doctors. They

:27:37. > :27:40.will go progressively through the different ranks of junior doctors

:27:41. > :27:43.and over the course of the next year, the vast majority of new

:27:44. > :27:48.doctors will move onto the new contracts. The reason that we did

:27:49. > :27:52.not in the original statement use the word impose, is not a matter of

:27:53. > :27:56.semantics, but we are proceeding with this new contract and everyone

:27:57. > :27:59.will move on to way, which is what the gist of what most people mean by

:28:00. > :28:05.it, but what we're not doing changing existing contracts. So when

:28:06. > :28:09.people move trust or to a new position, they will move onto a new

:28:10. > :28:13.contract and that is why we use the phase introduction of new contracts.

:28:14. > :28:17.It would have been much better for the introduction of new contracts to

:28:18. > :28:24.be through a negotiated process and that is why we took such trouble,

:28:25. > :28:28.went to 75 meetings as they say, 73 different concessions, to try and do

:28:29. > :28:32.it on a negotiated basis. Very regrettably, that proved not to be

:28:33. > :28:38.possible, which is why we took the difficult decision to proceed with

:28:39. > :28:42.these new contracts anyway. Does the Secretary of State agree with me

:28:43. > :28:47.that it is totally unjustified for doctors to demand higher premium

:28:48. > :28:52.rates at the weekend when almost all other NHS workers and indeed most

:28:53. > :28:57.working people across the economy do not get that. It is completely

:28:58. > :29:02.disrespectful for the BMA to suggest that Doctor's lives are somehow

:29:03. > :29:06.uniquely disproportionately inconvenienced by Saturday shifts,

:29:07. > :29:16.when other working people are not? It is true that the BMA rejected

:29:17. > :29:20.Saturday premium pay that is more generous than the Saturday premium

:29:21. > :29:24.pay offered to nurses, health care assistance, or paramedics working in

:29:25. > :29:28.the same hospital in the same operating theatres as they

:29:29. > :29:33.themselves do. I think many people will ask if that was a reasonable

:29:34. > :29:37.position to take, given that their overall pay was protected. But I

:29:38. > :29:40.think they will also ask, where even if they did disagree with the

:29:41. > :29:45.government on that point, is it appropriate or proportionate to

:29:46. > :29:49.withdraw life-saving emergency care from patients in pursuance of their

:29:50. > :29:52.disagreement on that case, or is it something that will shape many

:29:53. > :29:56.people's confident in what the NHS stands for?

:29:57. > :30:02.Mr Speaker, I have been disappointed by the Secretary of State and his

:30:03. > :30:06.anguish and his tone and dessert urgent question so far. I think

:30:07. > :30:09.actually when you look at the way the Secretary of State has responded

:30:10. > :30:12.you can understand why the discussions ended up in a way that

:30:13. > :30:18.they have. In response to what he asked about how long this is out

:30:19. > :30:22.for, I would say as long as it takes. Isn't it a fact that the

:30:23. > :30:25.problem with the discussions and negotiations so far as the

:30:26. > :30:30.government's failure to respond to the BMA and failure to help the

:30:31. > :30:32.junior doctors who actually do care about their patients that want to

:30:33. > :30:36.provide good quality care? Hear, hear!

:30:37. > :30:41.I think that sums up the difference between the two parties because it's

:30:42. > :30:45.true that Labour would take as long as it takes negotiating these

:30:46. > :30:51.changes. That is why we ended up with some very poor contract in

:30:52. > :30:54.1999-2003 him and 2004. We said after three years of trying to get

:30:55. > :30:58.reforms to contracts that will make the NHS safer for patients and

:30:59. > :31:01.indeed better for doctors, we actually need to proceed with a

:31:02. > :31:07.manifesto commitment and ministers had to decide and act as well as

:31:08. > :31:11.talk. We didn't choose this outcome. We tried very hard to negotiate an

:31:12. > :31:14.outcome. But if you say you should talk for as long as it takes, then

:31:15. > :31:19.what you are actually saying is that the other party has a veto over

:31:20. > :31:24.change. And no one should have a veto over an elected government's

:31:25. > :31:29.manifesto commitments. Hear, hear! Thank you, Mr Speaker. One thing the

:31:30. > :31:33.whole house can agree on, I'm sure, is that the postponement of

:31:34. > :31:37.treatment or operations is never cost free to patients. Would my

:31:38. > :31:43.right honourable friend agree with me that every hospital has an ethics

:31:44. > :31:46.committee? Would he further agreed that all striking doctors should

:31:47. > :31:53.consult that hospital's ethics committee? And would he agree that

:31:54. > :31:59.to remove emergency cover by any Doctor for industrial reasons would

:32:00. > :32:02.be very unlikely to meet with the approval of any medical ethics

:32:03. > :32:09.committee? And finally, will we understand that for any Doctor to

:32:10. > :32:14.act until the league is unacceptable and would place him or her in

:32:15. > :32:19.serious jeopardy? My right honourable friend speaks very

:32:20. > :32:30.wisely. I think that there's been a whole chorus of senior doctors who

:32:31. > :32:32.have urged doctors to think hard about the ethics involved and I

:32:33. > :32:36.think he is absolutely right to say consulting with an ethics committee

:32:37. > :32:41.in the trust is a wise thing to do. I also think they might take note of

:32:42. > :32:45.what the General medical Council has said about it being increasingly

:32:46. > :32:49.difficult to justify the withdrawal of emergency care and their view of

:32:50. > :32:54.the medical ethics involved, but this is, in the end, a personal

:32:55. > :33:00.decision for doctors. I think it is, in the end, about whether it is

:33:01. > :33:05.right in an industrial dispute about pay to withdraw emergency care for

:33:06. > :33:09.patients. This is a bridge the NHS has never crossed before and it is a

:33:10. > :33:14.very big decision, not just for the NHS but for every civil doctor

:33:15. > :33:18.inside the NHS. On the basis of his previous comments, his opening

:33:19. > :33:21.comments, can he tell the House that he is absolutely confident that he

:33:22. > :33:33.has the legal power to impose a new contract? Yes. The BMA promised to

:33:34. > :33:39.the gauche yet on Saturday pay will stop at they kept that promise? No,

:33:40. > :33:42.they haven't. And if they had kept their promise, I don't think we will

:33:43. > :33:45.be having a strike now, I think we would have a negotiated settlement

:33:46. > :33:48.and the NHS would be able to proceed with these contracts, which have

:33:49. > :33:52.very important benefits for doctors like reducing the numbers of the

:33:53. > :33:56.executive nightstick they can be asked to work,

:33:57. > :34:01.consecutive long days they can be asked to work. That refusal to

:34:02. > :34:05.negotiate on the crucial issue, not a reduction in their take-home pay

:34:06. > :34:08.because the reduction in Saturday premiere was made of four with an

:34:09. > :34:12.increase in basic pay, but the refusal to go see it on that point

:34:13. > :34:15.was what led Sir David to say that a negotiated settlement was not

:34:16. > :34:18.possible. A matter of huge regret, but one which I'm afraid please the

:34:19. > :34:27.government no option to proceed in the way we do. -- no option but to

:34:28. > :34:31.proceed. It was once said to me that there are employers who could pick a

:34:32. > :34:35.fight with themselves. LAUGHTER In 30 years in a world of work I

:34:36. > :34:39.cannot member a legitimate sense of grievance so potentially mishandled.

:34:40. > :34:44.Hear, hear! Can ask the Secretary of State is,

:34:45. > :34:46.does he not recognise that he's poisoning relationships with a

:34:47. > :34:50.generation of junior doctors and will he not get that to the

:34:51. > :34:55.negotiating table and stay there until this dispute is resolved?

:34:56. > :34:58.Hear, hear! Without going over the previous

:34:59. > :35:04.point about the three years that we have been around the negotiating

:35:05. > :35:07.table, I just say I think there are legitimate grievances by junior

:35:08. > :35:11.doctors and I think that extend well beyond the contract. I think there

:35:12. > :35:15.are some big issues with the way training has changed over the years.

:35:16. > :35:18.I think there are some serious issues we need to address about the

:35:19. > :35:22.quality of life for junior doctors. Sometimes they have a partner

:35:23. > :35:26.working in a different city and are unable to get training posts thereby

:35:27. > :35:33.to each other. We want to address those issues. That is what we set up

:35:34. > :35:39.the review led by Professor Bailey, the president of the Academy of

:35:40. > :35:44.Royal colleges -- at Tammy of medical Royal colleges. Pulis

:35:45. > :35:47.reviews them and review? Is the BMA and that is why it is so important

:35:48. > :35:50.that we get around the table and talk about how we resolve these

:35:51. > :35:55.problems rather than remaining in entrenched positions copy can my

:35:56. > :36:01.right honourable friend confirm that the new contract actually gives far

:36:02. > :36:07.better worklife balance than the current ones. It cannot even help

:36:08. > :36:13.them land for important family events. Absolutely. One of the key

:36:14. > :36:16.changes in the new contract that we hope to see is much more

:36:17. > :36:21.predictability about weekend working. Is that since Virginia

:36:22. > :36:26.doctors that when they do into work at the weekends, they will get the

:36:27. > :36:29.same support around them that they would get there the week. It can be

:36:30. > :36:33.and can be sure so when you are called into work at the moment as a

:36:34. > :36:36.junior doctor. All these things are improvements. What is made very

:36:37. > :36:41.difficult is that these improvements are being misrepresented by the BMA

:36:42. > :36:45.to its own members. People have become very suspicious about these

:36:46. > :36:48.changes and that is why we tried so hard to get a negotiated outcome and

:36:49. > :36:53.that is why it's been so disappointing that it hasn't been

:36:54. > :36:57.crossed. Can the Secretary of State confirm that the studies of

:36:58. > :37:03.mortality rates within 30 days of weekend admissions have in no case

:37:04. > :37:08.set that the roster and of junior doctors is a problem? And instead,

:37:09. > :37:14.of talking about others negotiating, why doesn't he take responsibility

:37:15. > :37:22.and get around the negotiating table himself? Hear, hear!

:37:23. > :37:26.With respect, not very far away from her constituency is Salford Royal.

:37:27. > :37:30.With the very respect to chief executive book included that a

:37:31. > :37:34.negotiated outcome was not possible! And that is why I reluctantly took

:37:35. > :37:40.the decision to proceed with the new contract, and with respect to the

:37:41. > :37:44.studies on mortality rates, we have had eight studies in the last six

:37:45. > :37:47.years. Six of them have said staffing levels at weekends are one

:37:48. > :37:51.of the things that need to be investigated. The clinical standards

:37:52. > :37:57.say that you need senior decision-makers to check people who

:37:58. > :38:01.are admitted at the weekend and junior doctors, when they are

:38:02. > :38:04.experiencing counter senior decision-makers, which is why they

:38:05. > :38:11.have an important role to play in delivering Saturday care. I know

:38:12. > :38:14.that the BMA very properly balloted its members before embarking on a

:38:15. > :38:20.policy of industrial action. But have they yet balloted junior

:38:21. > :38:27.doctors on this specific question of withdrawing emergency cover? No,

:38:28. > :38:36.they haven't. I think that is what is causing many junior members to

:38:37. > :38:39.pause for thought. But there are many people who say that this

:38:40. > :38:47.escalation is something that the BMA should consult its members again

:38:48. > :38:52.over. Secretary of State except that we need closer on the junior doctors

:38:53. > :38:58.in and for doctors to enable the NHS to concentrate as well on issues

:38:59. > :39:03.such as the projected ?8 billion shortfall in the NHS, the cheeky out

:39:04. > :39:07.about us services which are under real pressure? The worst ever NHS

:39:08. > :39:10.performance in the first month of this year, and also the long-term

:39:11. > :39:16.threat to the financial viability of our whole health and social care

:39:17. > :39:19.system? We do face many challenges. He's absolutely right. We need to

:39:20. > :39:24.focus on goals and so the sooner we resolve this dispute with the BMA,

:39:25. > :39:29.the better. I would simply say to him that if we were to carry on

:39:30. > :39:32.negotiations that were clearly not going to go anywhere at all, I think

:39:33. > :39:37.this dispute would go on for even monitor. We have been trying to

:39:38. > :39:40.resolve these issues for a very, very long time. In the end, you have

:39:41. > :39:46.to decide if you're going to do what it takes to move forward. If, Mr

:39:47. > :39:50.Speaker, the number of Parliament came through saying every five weeks

:39:51. > :39:53.one of the constituents was dying unnecessarily, and that that could

:39:54. > :39:58.be said by everyone of 650 MPs at the lower estimate a number of those

:39:59. > :40:01.deaths, or once every two weeks at the higher it meant, I hope you

:40:02. > :40:04.would drop this kind of debate every day until we actually have a system

:40:05. > :40:08.which is safe for patients, safer for patients, safer for junior

:40:09. > :40:11.doctors, and which actually got into the open who are the nameless

:40:12. > :40:16.characters behind the BMA negotiating is who are refusing to

:40:17. > :40:19.come out and actually argue on the merits of their case why it is they

:40:20. > :40:25.won't discuss the Saturday Pecos Mac Hear, hear!

:40:26. > :40:27.My right honourable friend is right. Part of the hallmark of this

:40:28. > :40:33.government's patrols to be NHS has to be honest about where we have too

:40:34. > :40:36.many avoidable deaths and things like the weekend of fact for people

:40:37. > :40:41.admitted at the weekend has too many avoidable. The reason we discharged

:40:42. > :40:45.that this possibility as we believe in the NHS and want the NHS to be

:40:46. > :40:50.the safest, highest quality system in the world. Just as this

:40:51. > :40:53.government has performed to state education, it has dramatically

:40:54. > :40:57.improved the quality of our state education so too we need to have

:40:58. > :41:01.equal reforms to be NHS. That is what he is actually right to say we

:41:02. > :41:04.ought to focus on these things and debate them in this house and not

:41:05. > :41:08.always, one other point I would add, not always say that there are some

:41:09. > :41:12.Abby someone who has to be blamed when you're dealing with these

:41:13. > :41:14.difficult situations. I think one of the things that, unfortunately, led

:41:15. > :41:18.to high feelings in this dispute has been the sense of blame being tossed

:41:19. > :41:26.around when actually what the government wants to do is to try and

:41:27. > :41:28.solve problem. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Cannot tell the Secretary

:41:29. > :41:31.of State I was admitted to the hospital in the early hours of

:41:32. > :41:35.Saturday morning and weekend. I spent five and a half weeks in

:41:36. > :41:39.intensive care. I had many conversations with doctors during

:41:40. > :41:45.the time I was in Saint Mary's Hospital. I really do asked him to

:41:46. > :41:50.look at the circumstances of those doctors today who do work weekends.

:41:51. > :41:55.We do have a weekend NHS! It is not true to say that there are people

:41:56. > :41:58.like me whose lives are not saved because we were admitted at weekend

:41:59. > :42:03.and the doctors made it possible for us to survive. So can you stop

:42:04. > :42:07.talking down to the medical profession and start defending the

:42:08. > :42:11.government? Hear, hear! With respect, Mr Speaker, that

:42:12. > :42:17.states the problem precisely. Because he has not targeted the fact

:42:18. > :42:23.that I am wanted to do something about excess mortality rates that

:42:24. > :42:27.mean that we have an 11 - 15% higher chance of death if you are admitted

:42:28. > :42:30.at the weekends than if you are during the week. This is proven in a

:42:31. > :42:34.very comprehensive study. He has taken that to be something that is

:42:35. > :42:38.an attack on the medical profession. Nothing could be further from the

:42:39. > :42:44.truth. It was actually the medical profession, the Royal colleges, the

:42:45. > :42:50.first pointed out this problem of the weekend effect. We are doing

:42:51. > :42:54.something about it, simply. Health Secretary has rightly mentioned the

:42:55. > :43:00.excellent Salford Royal, which the BMA has used to suggest a new

:43:01. > :43:05.contract isn't necessary. Because of the progress it made on seven-day

:43:06. > :43:08.working and clinical standards, but is it not the case that what might

:43:09. > :43:13.be right in a large hospital in a densely urban centre is not

:43:14. > :43:16.applicable right across our national health service, which is why the

:43:17. > :43:24.very radical changes to working practices that he is rightly

:43:25. > :43:29.prosecuting as necessary. Yes, I think there are some hospitals that

:43:30. > :43:31.have managed to eliminate the difference between weekend and

:43:32. > :43:36.weekday and mortality under the current contracts. But only a few.

:43:37. > :43:42.It's clear, talking more widely with the medical profession, we need to

:43:43. > :43:45.have a sustained national effort and contract reform as part of that

:43:46. > :43:49.effort if we are to offer that promised uniformly across the NHS to

:43:50. > :43:54.every patient we will offer the same high quality care every day of the

:43:55. > :43:57.week. Part of that is also to have a long contract for junior doctors

:43:58. > :44:01.that deals with the anomalies that they themselves recognise within the

:44:02. > :44:08.current contract, which is why this is the moment for wider performs. --

:44:09. > :44:12.reforms. This is clearly a fight that the Secretary of State, went

:44:13. > :44:15.looking for because he expected to put himself on the side of the

:44:16. > :44:18.patient's. Trouble is it hasn't worked out like that because the

:44:19. > :44:23.patients, like my honourable friend, use these services and they know

:44:24. > :44:26.that junior doctors are in work at the weekend and that it's some other

:44:27. > :44:33.procedures that sometimes not available. At their feelings that

:44:34. > :44:35.would be fear and expand the that they, their children, their elderly

:44:36. > :44:44.relatives do not get sick or fault or need help on strike they. It will

:44:45. > :44:46.be soon as the word about this. Does the Secretary of State taken

:44:47. > :44:52.response ability for the situation he has caused Woods Hear, hear!

:44:53. > :44:55.On the contrary, I take full response ability for delivering a

:44:56. > :44:58.safer NHS for patients. That is my job. If she wants to talk about

:44:59. > :45:03.patients, perhaps she might listen to the comments of one of the most

:45:04. > :45:07.famous patient safety campaigners in the country, James Dicken, which

:45:08. > :45:13.tragically lost his son because of the stakes made at Morecambe Bay. He

:45:14. > :45:17.said "There has been much progress to it a safer NHS in recent years,

:45:18. > :45:23.but there is much more to do in regards to be corrupt culture that

:45:24. > :45:32.flourished under Labour". Thank you, Mr Speaker. CHATTERING Can my right

:45:33. > :45:37.honourable friend confirm that on the last occasion of the strike

:45:38. > :45:41.action, that call was rejected by 40s -- 47% of junior doctors. Now

:45:42. > :45:45.what is wanted to root move urged -- remove emergency cover. Can he

:45:46. > :45:49.confirm what he thinks it will serve for a mandate of future actions

:45:50. > :45:54.should less than half support the cause for future stars? I think that

:45:55. > :45:58.is a very important point to make. I've also made this point about the

:45:59. > :46:01.mandate the BMA half before the current strike action. Lots of

:46:02. > :46:06.honourable members today have been saying that we should get around the

:46:07. > :46:11.negotiating table. But they may not be aware of is the BMA decided to

:46:12. > :46:14.balance the strike action before it even sitting down to talk to the

:46:15. > :46:19.government about what our plans were. They decided to go straight to

:46:20. > :46:21.ballots for industrial action on him and frankly, a false perspective of

:46:22. > :46:27.what the government's plan changes were. I think that is the cause of a

:46:28. > :46:33.lot of the misunderstandings in the current dispute. But I'm sure most

:46:34. > :46:36.honourable members, I've had many doctors come to my constituency, not

:46:37. > :46:42.junior doctors but registrars who are hospitals rely on. They have

:46:43. > :46:46.sometimes been in tears and asked me if the Secretary of State will

:46:47. > :46:50.define exactly what he means by seven-day NHS, because clearly there

:46:51. > :46:57.is seven-day care. Is it just an ideological mantra? I'm not quite

:46:58. > :47:00.sure what his definition of ideological list. If that is giving

:47:01. > :47:04.safer care to patients, I think that is an ideologically that we can all

:47:05. > :47:07.share. I will tell you what the answer to this question is that he

:47:08. > :47:11.can relate to his constituents. What we want to do is reduce the

:47:12. > :47:17.difference in mortality rates from people admitted at the week and at

:47:18. > :47:21.the weekends. We have identified four the chemical standards that we

:47:22. > :47:24.believe are necessary to do that. Making sure that we can deliver

:47:25. > :47:29.those clinical standards across the NHS is going be how we deliver the

:47:30. > :47:35.strategy. Can my right honourable friend imagined the distress and the

:47:36. > :47:40.anxiety felt by my constituents who have come to see me down the last

:47:41. > :47:43.six years, concern about the treatment of their relatives

:47:44. > :47:48.admitted at the weekend? When they see the BMA Tama and indeed the

:47:49. > :47:51.Labour Party, appearing to use them and other patients as hostages in a

:47:52. > :48:00.long-running dispute that must come to an end? What patients want is

:48:01. > :48:06.absolutely right. What patient wants is a safe NHS where it doesn't

:48:07. > :48:10.matter what day of the week you are admitted if something goes badly

:48:11. > :48:13.wrong. I think the big surprise here is that this isn't something that

:48:14. > :48:19.the whole house can unite behind, because this is something if you

:48:20. > :48:21.believe in the NHS, which I think we all do, should strongly support. We

:48:22. > :48:27.are standing up for those patients and I hope the Labour Party, the

:48:28. > :48:31.party that found at the same. -- the party that founded the NHS. Update

:48:32. > :48:36.the House on any legal action against the department and whether

:48:37. > :48:40.the part done -- whether the department will be defending a? We

:48:41. > :48:45.have two cases and we are defending them vigorously. Think you, Mr

:48:46. > :48:47.Speaker. I also have been contacted by an number of junior doctors who

:48:48. > :48:50.are increasingly disillusioned by the way the BMA are happening this

:48:51. > :48:57.dispute. Especially the militant tendency of strike that action for

:48:58. > :48:59.many months now. With the Secretary of State for two other groups of

:49:00. > :49:02.junior doctors who want to resolve this dispute, recognise that reform

:49:03. > :49:07.contract is needed, and want to get back to the patients. Of course I am

:49:08. > :49:11.delighted to engage with junior doctors and indeed I have been

:49:12. > :49:15.talking to a number over recent months. I agree with you. My

:49:16. > :49:20.observation from talking to junior doctors is that most of the common

:49:21. > :49:25.with them they're not talking about things they don't like with respect

:49:26. > :49:27.to the new contracts. What they are actually concerned about is things

:49:28. > :49:31.to do with the way they are training happens, things to do with policy of

:49:32. > :49:37.life, things that I think we can sort out outside the current

:49:38. > :49:39.contractual negotiations. But, as she has been crisply passed along to

:49:40. > :49:42.those doctors, there are many things in the new contract that will

:49:43. > :49:48.benefit junior doctors and we should make sure everyone knows that. Thank

:49:49. > :49:52.you, Mr Speaker. How can the Secretary of State claim he is

:49:53. > :49:55.motivated by desire for a seven-day NHS when he and others in the

:49:56. > :49:58.Coalition government to just let it to allow hospitals to make up to 49%

:49:59. > :50:03.of their money out of private patient? Can he tell us if hospitals

:50:04. > :50:07.achieved that 49% of their active donor activities going to private

:50:08. > :50:11.patients, what impact will that have on the mortality rates of NHS

:50:12. > :50:15.statements -- NHS patients? The difference between this side of the

:50:16. > :50:19.House and that is that we don't have an ideological view about it trust

:50:20. > :50:25.that says that it wants to offer them private treatment in order to

:50:26. > :50:29.benefit the NHS patent -- patients in that same trust. That is what

:50:30. > :50:32.some trusts are doing and it's done within strict constraints. I think

:50:33. > :50:38.what most people know is all the scare stories that were put out at

:50:39. > :50:43.the time of the social care of Bill and the act of 2012 have not

:50:44. > :50:46.materialised. What we are finding is that just are being very sensible

:50:47. > :50:49.about making sure they get that balance right and, indeed, in

:50:50. > :50:56.certain circumstances it makes they did adapt Doak -- it makes a

:50:57. > :51:00.difference. The key thing is that patient safety has got to be looked

:51:01. > :51:05.after. But my right honourable friend consider changing the law so

:51:06. > :51:12.that hospitals can make use of dedicated military doctors to fulfil

:51:13. > :51:18.that service if it is needed? My honourable friend always makes

:51:19. > :51:21.important suggestions that can benefit his own constituency and

:51:22. > :51:27.rightly so. I don't think there is a need to change the law for that to

:51:28. > :51:30.happen. I think that were there to be a need for military help, I think

:51:31. > :51:38.the military would stand ready to do that. At the moment, what we're

:51:39. > :51:41.doing is making contingency plans by drawing on coastal to work for those

:51:42. > :51:43.who aren't involved in industrial action. Our hope is that any

:51:44. > :51:49.departments throughout the country will be covered by that extra

:51:50. > :51:53.support. If the health secretary is not able to impose the original

:51:54. > :51:56.contract, a constituency will be expected to abide by a new contract

:51:57. > :52:01.that is not legally binding. Does he agreed that maintaining the cost is

:52:02. > :52:05.absolutely vital, particularly on the case of a fifth lock-out which

:52:06. > :52:08.could involve everyone being involved? What action to the

:52:09. > :52:13.Secretary of State taking to restore faith within the NHS must he staff

:52:14. > :52:17.and the general public? The new contract is a legally binding

:52:18. > :52:21.contract and it will apply to all junior doctors in the NHS, just to

:52:22. > :52:25.be absolutely clear on that point. But how do we restore confidence?

:52:26. > :52:28.Obviously, a row as low at the height of an industrial relations

:52:29. > :52:32.dispute, but I think the real way to restore confidence is to point out

:52:33. > :52:37.that doctors who are working incredibly hard inside the NHS, that

:52:38. > :52:41.this government, this year is giving NHS the sixth biggest increase in

:52:42. > :52:44.funding in its history. That we are committed to making the NHS the

:52:45. > :52:48.safest and highest quality system in the world. And that we believe that,

:52:49. > :52:52.if he does that, you will also be a better place for doctors to work as

:52:53. > :52:55.well. And all these things will come I believe, come together. I've used

:52:56. > :53:01.the visit of the period we have to get through first. My right I will

:53:02. > :53:04.friend, the health secretary, that against the background of the

:53:05. > :53:07.General Hospital being under huge pressure, there is a great deal of

:53:08. > :53:11.local sympathy for gender doctors. But increasingly people are bemused

:53:12. > :53:18.as to what the strike is about, given that it involves a reduction

:53:19. > :53:22.from 91 to 72 and eight 13.5% increase in basic pay. They are

:53:23. > :53:28.imposed as opposed to strike action and any that would -- and any strike

:53:29. > :53:32.action that involves the withdrawal of emergency cover. He's right. I'm

:53:33. > :53:36.sure that position will be shared by many members. Of the public. I think

:53:37. > :53:41.people are perplexed the Cubs both sides and the negotiations that have

:53:42. > :53:46.been in January concluded that there was only one area of outstanding

:53:47. > :53:50.difference am a witch was Saturday paid -- because both sides. I

:53:51. > :53:53.adopted a compromised position on Saturday pay which I thought was the

:53:54. > :53:58.fairest thing to do. The BMA were not prepared to counter any reflects

:53:59. > :54:03.ability on Saturday whatsoever. And of the situation I made a difficult

:54:04. > :54:07.decision about whether we go forward or don't address the big issues we

:54:08. > :54:10.need for a seven-day NHS. So, I think my cam, I shared his concern

:54:11. > :54:14.about whether these strikes are really worth it. I am concerned

:54:15. > :54:20.about being kept on the residence for catering will stop is the

:54:21. > :54:24.secretary of state -- if the Secretary of State is correct that

:54:25. > :54:27.he has the power to oppose contract, can you tell the House where the

:54:28. > :54:30.power derives from? Can he also is planned by the government's legal

:54:31. > :54:35.teams failed to argue that case? As can he explain? I hope she

:54:36. > :54:37.understands that I'm not good to go into the case of the legal cases

:54:38. > :54:41.that we are currently arguing, but if I can make it clear, the

:54:42. > :54:45.Secretary of State does have that power. We are using that power

:54:46. > :54:52.correctly. We will argue that case very strongly in the High Court.

:54:53. > :54:55.Thank you, Mr Speaker. There are many hundreds of operations

:54:56. > :54:59.cancelled during the last stride. His next start means that there is

:55:00. > :55:03.an unprecedented step of emergency cover being withdrawn. Many junior

:55:04. > :55:06.doctors are themselves worried about this. Does my right honourable

:55:07. > :55:11.friend agree that it's time for the BMA leaders who were calling for

:55:12. > :55:13.this strike to heed the worries of those junior doctors, to heed the

:55:14. > :55:20.worries of patients and call district? Hear, hear!

:55:21. > :55:24.I absolutely agree with that. It is entirely legitimate to disagree with

:55:25. > :55:30.the government of the day about contract reform and we have tried to

:55:31. > :55:34.make a set as to why that contract reform is a port in -- we have tried

:55:35. > :55:36.to make a case. But I think it is hard for the patient to pay the

:55:37. > :55:40.Christ -- parts for that disagreement. While the NHS can cope

:55:41. > :55:44.with the withdraw for labour for elective care, it is much bigger

:55:45. > :55:47.deal when his emergency care that is being written on. People are

:55:48. > :55:53.extremely worried about that impact. I think doctors should worry about

:55:54. > :55:58.how the public will view their own profession if they proceed with this

:55:59. > :56:02.wholly unnecessary step. I'm glad to see that the Secretary of State has

:56:03. > :56:06.come to the chamber today to answer this question. I do point this for

:56:07. > :56:13.myself, his eagerness to get here at the springs and. There is a lack of

:56:14. > :56:18.clarity around this debate. Staff to get paid a premium weight for

:56:19. > :56:23.working on social hours -- premium rate. It said this only allows them

:56:24. > :56:30.to improve conditions and pay and not diminish them. Can I suggest 98%

:56:31. > :56:33.of those that voted in the BMA's supported industrial action

:56:34. > :56:38.including for withdrawal of labour? Can I suggest that the Secretary of

:56:39. > :56:43.State arms himself with the facts and get back around the negotiation

:56:44. > :56:46.table? Hear, hear! The point I will make to the

:56:47. > :56:49.honourable Lady, she's right, I did spray tear because I was a little

:56:50. > :56:53.concerned that defence questions may not last the full hour. Indeed, they

:56:54. > :57:01.did know. I'm sure Mr Speaker is about that. The point I would make

:57:02. > :57:03.about the dollars which did receive the overwhelming support of junior

:57:04. > :57:09.doctors is that that was balloted before junior doctors knew what the

:57:10. > :57:12.deal on the table was. We ended up with, on the very heated issue of

:57:13. > :57:17.Saturday premium rates, a proposal where we are as a government,

:57:18. > :57:24.agreeing to pay premium pay on Saturdays for any doctors who work

:57:25. > :57:27.one Saturday or more a month. So, at the moment effectively, we have this

:57:28. > :57:32.extreme step, the withdrawal of emergency care in order to boost the

:57:33. > :57:36.pay of doctors who work less than one Saturday a month. I think maybe

:57:37. > :57:40.-- many members of the public will say that's not proportionate. Let's

:57:41. > :57:45.be clear, this is an old-fashioned wave dispute. One that is militant,

:57:46. > :57:48.long-standing, trade unionist will stop LAUGHTER

:57:49. > :57:53.My constituents are asking why is it that these are the most high paid

:57:54. > :57:57.NHS workers, and they should be paid extra for working Saturdays when

:57:58. > :58:04.some of the lowest paid do not. My honourable friend is right. Doctors

:58:05. > :58:07.who strike will need to explain that to be nurses, paramedics and health

:58:08. > :58:12.care assistants working in their own operating theatres. That is, in the

:58:13. > :58:15.end, why this strike is happening. The BMA said in writing in November

:58:16. > :58:19.that they would negotiate on Saturday pay. They went back on

:58:20. > :58:22.their word. In February and as a result that is the only outstanding

:58:23. > :58:26.issue because as a result we now have these extremely step of

:58:27. > :58:33.withdrawal of emergency care. I find it hard to justify. Thank you, Mr

:58:34. > :58:35.Speaker. But at the beginning of the question, the Secretary of State

:58:36. > :58:40.said he was publishing a model contract which he believed that by

:58:41. > :58:45.convention trusts were doing and would implement. He subsequently

:58:46. > :58:49.said that he has a legal duty for which can be opposed by him. I think

:58:50. > :58:52.he needs to clarify that and it would be helpful to publish that

:58:53. > :58:59.legal advice. He's not going to be surprised -- surprised... Presumably

:59:00. > :59:01.these skeleton arguments. I think we have the right to know the answers

:59:02. > :59:07.to these questions as well. Absolutely! With respect, all he

:59:08. > :59:11.needs to do is get behind that out of the response to the point I made

:59:12. > :59:19.earlier this afternoon. Make it quick, we do have the right to

:59:20. > :59:22.introduce a new contract. On the basis, that will be a contract that

:59:23. > :59:26.will apply to all junior doctors. The trust you indeed have the right

:59:27. > :59:31.to set their own terms and conditions, but the choose not to do

:59:32. > :59:36.so. This unprecedented withdrawal of emergency care seems to revolve

:59:37. > :59:39.principally around the issue of pay on Saturday. Can the Secretary of

:59:40. > :59:42.State clarify what the pay of lift will continue to be available to

:59:43. > :59:51.junior doctors who work regular Saturdays? Absolutely. More to the

:59:52. > :59:54.point, the doctors, any doctors who see an increase in a Saturday

:59:55. > :59:58.workload will see a significant increase in their pay, including

:59:59. > :00:03.their premium pay as well. So, this contract is designed to make sure we

:00:04. > :00:08.reward people who work the longest hours, who worked the most

:00:09. > :00:12.anti-social hours, but to do so in a way, including women, but to do so

:00:13. > :00:15.in a way that means that we can't afford to deliver a seven-day NHS

:00:16. > :00:20.which is why it's good for patients as well -- that we can afford.

:00:21. > :00:27.Week omissions or for urgent cases, while many weekday admissions are

:00:28. > :00:32.for elective surgery and other nonlife burning conditions. Isn't

:00:33. > :00:36.this the main reason for the midst of excess weekend death, and why is

:00:37. > :00:42.it that the anxiety of the strike would be felt only by patients in

:00:43. > :00:45.England, while the other nations of our country are not? Is that bad

:00:46. > :00:51.negotiation or is it because the health service is never really saved

:00:52. > :00:55.and Tory Hans? I just wonder whether he would have the courage to say

:00:56. > :01:05.that in Wales. But let me just answer his question very directly

:01:06. > :01:09.and say that the 15% increase in mortality rates for people over the

:01:10. > :01:13.weekends falls to 11% when you take into account the more chronic

:01:14. > :01:16.conditions of people admitted during the weekends. There is a small

:01:17. > :01:25.reduction, but it is still significant. Covering the Secretary

:01:26. > :01:29.of State back to the question he did not answer when he was asked by my

:01:30. > :01:32.honourable friend the shadow Secretary of State, if the

:01:33. > :01:36.government is now arguing that the Secretary of State does have the

:01:37. > :01:40.power to impose a contract, can he explain why in the lesser of the

:01:41. > :01:46.15th of April, those that did not argue that case and whether can he

:01:47. > :01:57.point to where doesn't prove he has these powers? We do have that power

:01:58. > :02:01.by law. And the lesser that we put out in defence of the legal action

:02:02. > :02:04.taken against the government explains very clearly why we have

:02:05. > :02:10.that power and how we have that power. -- letter. It is all written

:02:11. > :02:13.there for him to see. I can assure him on something as contentious and

:02:14. > :02:21.difficult as this, we take every care to make sure we are acting

:02:22. > :02:25.within the law. If I was Secretary of State for Health, I would feel

:02:26. > :02:28.personally responsible for this unprecedented action taking place on

:02:29. > :02:32.my watch and I would do everything I could to build bridges to make sure

:02:33. > :02:36.it did not happen and that patients were not threatened in the way we

:02:37. > :02:40.all fear. What does the Secretary of State doing to build trust between

:02:41. > :02:45.himself and the NHS trust workforce? I will tell him one of the things

:02:46. > :02:48.we're doing and that is turning around the hospital in his own

:02:49. > :02:53.constituency that was in special measures and we actually turned

:02:54. > :02:56.around it because it is no longer in special measures and the care has

:02:57. > :03:02.improved dramatically. What else are we doing? Over three years, 75

:03:03. > :03:05.meetings, 73 concessions made, three independent processes, we have tried

:03:06. > :03:11.everything to get negotiated outcome but in the end we have to do what is

:03:12. > :03:16.right for patients. The Secretary of State needs to face reality, there

:03:17. > :03:22.is a crisis of junior doctors in paediatrics, AMD, and specialisms

:03:23. > :03:28.which demand seven-day working people. And the junior doctors know

:03:29. > :03:32.these contracts will make it worse. So why isn't the Secretary of State

:03:33. > :03:38.doing everything within his power to sit around the table, even if not in

:03:39. > :03:44.person himself, even if not with David Dalton, to get these issues

:03:45. > :03:48.resolved? That is exactly what we have been doing. Indeed there are a

:03:49. > :03:51.number of changes in these contracts that will be beneficial for people

:03:52. > :03:56.working in any department, as has been recognised by the president of

:03:57. > :04:01.the Royal College of medicine. I would say to her that the difficulty

:04:02. > :04:07.we will have had has been in terms of morale, that we haven't faced

:04:08. > :04:10.with a BMA that has consistently misrepresented the contents of this

:04:11. > :04:15.new contract to its own members. Nothing could be more damaging for

:04:16. > :04:18.morale than that. What we need to do I'm afraid is wait until people are

:04:19. > :04:21.on the new contracts, then they will see they are actually a big

:04:22. > :04:31.improvement on the current terms and conditions. The right thing for

:04:32. > :04:38.doctors in the right for patients. This great concern in the present

:04:39. > :04:45.time at the depths of parents and Pereira of a local cabinet maker

:04:46. > :04:49.Harry. I have spoken to the foreign office today who has been extremely

:04:50. > :04:54.helpful both with the family and with me and I am grateful to the

:04:55. > :04:58.support they are offering but can I, through your good offices Mr

:04:59. > :05:03.Speaker, make clear to the government of Peru that the wider

:05:04. > :05:09.community would be extremely grateful for any efforts that they

:05:10. > :05:14.can put in to try and find this young lad, 29 years old. His

:05:15. > :05:20.families going through terrible stress the present time. I thank the

:05:21. > :05:26.honourable General and for giving me notice of his point of order. While

:05:27. > :05:32.this is not a metaphor for the -- matter for the chair determine, he

:05:33. > :05:36.has made his point on the constituent extremely clear. He

:05:37. > :05:41.would have been heard on the bench and his concern will be conveyed to

:05:42. > :05:48.the relevant ministers. I hope and trust they will have contact as

:05:49. > :05:52.appropriate of a kind that I hope will in due course and preferably

:05:53. > :05:59.soon, the labour the concerns of the honourable member. If there are no

:06:00. > :06:05.further points of order, we come now to two select committee statements.

:06:06. > :06:08.In a moment I shall ask Mr Jenkins to adjust the House. He will do so

:06:09. > :06:15.for up to ten minutes, during which undermine the House in this context,

:06:16. > :06:20.no interventions may be taken. At the conclusion of his statement, I

:06:21. > :06:26.will call members to put questions on its subject and will call him to

:06:27. > :06:33.respond to these in turn. Members can expect to be called only once.

:06:34. > :06:38.Interventions should be questions and should be brief. The front bench

:06:39. > :06:43.may take part in questioning. The same procedure will be followed for

:06:44. > :06:48.the second select committee statements. These are extremely

:06:49. > :06:52.important matters, and I hope the House will understand that I

:06:53. > :07:00.expressed the hope that together you do not consume more than 40 minutes

:07:01. > :07:04.of our time, as there are important back bench business committee

:07:05. > :07:09.debates, two of them to be precise, for which we need to move on and I

:07:10. > :07:13.want to accommodate all interested contributors. With that, I call the

:07:14. > :07:22.chair of the Republic administration. I am grateful to

:07:23. > :07:28.have this opportunity to make a statement on a report entitled

:07:29. > :07:32.appointment of the commission for Public appointments, which we

:07:33. > :07:38.published last week. The post commissioner for Public appointments

:07:39. > :07:41.or CPA was established in 1995, following the committee on standards

:07:42. > :07:49.in Public life and their first report. The report recommended the

:07:50. > :07:54.post's creation as a means of enhancing public confidence in the

:07:55. > :07:59.Public appointments process and public appointments made under it.

:08:00. > :08:05.The role of the Commissioner for Public appointments is set out in

:08:06. > :08:11.the public appointments order of counsel, 2015. Since the post and

:08:12. > :08:15.August of Commissioner was established in 1995, the heaven for

:08:16. > :08:21.commissions for public appointments. From 2011 to 2016, the post of CPA

:08:22. > :08:33.was held jointly with role of first civil service Commissioner, however,

:08:34. > :08:38.the departure of David... This was the result of a recommendation made

:08:39. > :08:45.to the ministers by a member prior to the publication of their review

:08:46. > :08:48.of public appointments. As I indicated, by the recruitment

:08:49. > :08:52.advertising for this post, the Commissioner will be expected to

:08:53. > :08:58.work within the government in implementing the reviewers

:08:59. > :09:04.recommendations. The Crimson Rubio however, was only published in March

:09:05. > :09:09.this year. After two hearings with the government's preferred

:09:10. > :09:15.candidate, Peter Riddle, and after some discussion, we have given him a

:09:16. > :09:20.qualified endorsement as Commissioner of Public appointments.

:09:21. > :09:27.He is well-known to many in this house is a respected journalist and

:09:28. > :09:32.commentator. Was appointed to the counsellor due to an investigation

:09:33. > :09:41.into retaining ease and he was chair of a society and most recently

:09:42. > :09:46.directed late -- director... We were me concerned however that the change

:09:47. > :09:51.proposed by the Grimston revealed, as interpreted by the government,

:09:52. > :09:54.alongside other changes such as the introduction of a large ministerial

:09:55. > :09:59.office where by ministers can appoint themselves, can themselves

:10:00. > :10:03.make appointments to their private offices instead of the civil

:10:04. > :10:07.services, that this may be leading to an increasing politicized nation

:10:08. > :10:15.of senior public appointments. We will report on our inquiry on the

:10:16. > :10:23.Grimston Review and a new order in Council had been published. These

:10:24. > :10:27.proposals are controversial. They propose a significant removal of the

:10:28. > :10:32.powers exercised by the office of CPA over the public appointments

:10:33. > :10:37.process. Ministers, instead of CPA, which set the rules by drawing up

:10:38. > :10:42.the new government's code. Ministers could decide to run an appointment

:10:43. > :10:45.process without referral to the CPA. Ministers and not the CPA could

:10:46. > :10:54.determine the membership of ministers, they could include on

:10:55. > :11:00.selection panels and official acting as ministers represented of what

:11:01. > :11:02.without the consent of public appointments, and ministers would

:11:03. > :11:08.have latitude to interview and appoint someone even if the

:11:09. > :11:15.selection panel has marked him or her below the line. The new order

:11:16. > :11:20.and counsel and code of conduct for public appointments had yet to be

:11:21. > :11:23.published, even in draft form. Publication of the Grimston Review

:11:24. > :11:30.was expected last year but held back. There was a gap of only three

:11:31. > :11:34.days between the publication of the Grimston Review, along with the

:11:35. > :11:37.government's response, and Mr Riddle being named as a preferred

:11:38. > :11:41.candidate. This left us no opportunity by the time of Mr

:11:42. > :11:46.Riddle's appearance on the 21st of March to consider the Grimston

:11:47. > :11:50.Review. We concluded it would have been inappropriate for us to make a

:11:51. > :11:55.report on the government's preferred candidate, which could have been

:11:56. > :11:56.regarded as implicit and unqualified endorsement of the government's

:11:57. > :12:05.interpretation of the Grimston Review. After our initial session

:12:06. > :12:10.before Easter, we issued a call for evidence on the Grimston Review. We

:12:11. > :12:18.took evidence from the outgoing CPA from Sir Jerry Grimson himself and

:12:19. > :12:22.my right honourable friend, the member from West Suffolk, prior to

:12:23. > :12:26.our concluding employment on Mr Riddle on the 12th of April. I am

:12:27. > :12:31.very grateful that the government delayed Mr Riddle's appointment

:12:32. > :12:37.while we completed our scrutiny. We intend to report on the implications

:12:38. > :12:41.of his review shortly. We will welcome any further evidence. The

:12:42. > :12:45.present committee on standing in public life has warned this could

:12:46. > :12:50.add up to a public perception of a system which is being operated under

:12:51. > :12:55.increased political patronage. It could also run counter to the

:12:56. > :12:59.intentions to increase transparency and diversity. The outgoing CPA has

:13:00. > :13:06.expressed his opposition to these proposals as a reversal of the

:13:07. > :13:10.reforms of 20 years ago. Grimstead has made it clear that transparency

:13:11. > :13:16.rather than direct powers currently held by the direct Commissioner

:13:17. > :13:20.would enable the Commissioner to... The office made it clear that the

:13:21. > :13:24.CPA would be consulted by ministers and that the CPA would no longer

:13:25. > :13:30.have the power to direct an independent appointment process as

:13:31. > :13:35.now. We will therefore be closely monitoring as Mr Riddle works with

:13:36. > :13:39.those making recommendations and how he responds to the recommendations

:13:40. > :13:46.that we have yet to make on the Grimston Review. We will underwrite

:13:47. > :13:49.Mr Riddle's authority as Commissioner of Public appointments

:13:50. > :13:53.and will make use of our ability to carry out and follow-up scrutiny if

:13:54. > :13:58.necessary. To make sure that any concerns we have our being heard. We

:13:59. > :14:04.agreed with Jerry Grimston that the role of the CPA should be robust and

:14:05. > :14:07.authoritative. Should not be undermined. Furthermore, in the

:14:08. > :14:10.light of the Grimston Review's propose changes to the appointments

:14:11. > :14:14.process and in alignment with other roles such as the parliamentary

:14:15. > :14:22.health service and the chairs of the office budget response authority, we

:14:23. > :14:26.recommend that future appointments of the Commissioner for Public

:14:27. > :14:29.appointments should be subject to a resolution of both houses of

:14:30. > :14:33.parliament. This would be an additional safeguard and act as a

:14:34. > :14:37.public reassurance that independence and status of the public

:14:38. > :14:43.appointments is not threatened. We also recommend a similar procedure

:14:44. > :14:45.should apply to the first service Commissioner. I am pleased to

:14:46. > :14:54.present this report to the parliament. Thank you Mr Speaker. I

:14:55. > :14:58.would like to come into the task amend the chair for his statement

:14:59. > :15:00.today. Sir David Normandin, the outgoing Commissioner of public

:15:01. > :15:05.appointments has said that the government's proposals put at risk

:15:06. > :15:09.20 years of progress and risk of sharing and a return to the days of

:15:10. > :15:12.lyrical patronage. Indeed he said as commissioner he would once a month

:15:13. > :15:17.be contacted by Prime Minister or other ministers asking why party

:15:18. > :15:21.donors, officeholders, or former MPs had not been short listed or

:15:22. > :15:23.recommended for posts. In the light of these concerns, does the

:15:24. > :15:27.honourable member share our fears that dismantling the powers of the

:15:28. > :15:30.independent Commissioner of public appointments will open a door to

:15:31. > :15:34.political cronies being gifted public service jobs, either as

:15:35. > :15:39.rewards for donations, or to create an army of political forces in the

:15:40. > :15:42.public sector? Reddan appointments made on merit, skills or public

:15:43. > :15:47.serving a dose, is in the government putting itself at risk of

:15:48. > :15:52.accusations of cash for jobs? I think it is the danger, not that

:15:53. > :15:57.these things will actually happen, but people will say that they may

:15:58. > :16:06.seem to be happening. It could make it harder for the government to put

:16:07. > :16:09.a friend or supporter into a public appointment job if the Minister is

:16:10. > :16:13.more directly involved. These arrangements were created in order

:16:14. > :16:18.to protect ministers. If ministers are frustrated that the wrong people

:16:19. > :16:21.are being interviewed, or people with the wrong job specifications

:16:22. > :16:26.are being appointed, or people with the right skills are not being given

:16:27. > :16:30.an interview, it is up to the ministers to make sure the jobs as

:16:31. > :16:34.petitions for these jobs are as they think they should be before they

:16:35. > :16:38.were permit process has started. I am not going to defend the public

:16:39. > :16:45.appointments process in total. I think the Grimston Review has a much

:16:46. > :16:50.needed debate then started about public appointments, but I think

:16:51. > :16:55.before my committee and before I give a definitive view about the

:16:56. > :17:02.proposals, that Jerry Grimston has brought forward, we consider all the

:17:03. > :17:07.elements. I congratulate my honourable friend and his committee

:17:08. > :17:09.for the excellent publication and for the robustness of this

:17:10. > :17:17.recommendation and him making a statement to the House today. Can I

:17:18. > :17:23.ask him what was Mr Riddle's reaction to this when the points are

:17:24. > :17:28.put to him and the cc him king invited back to his committee before

:17:29. > :17:35.the end of 12 months? On that latter point, we certainly intend to give

:17:36. > :17:40.Mr Riddle an opportunity to report to the committee before long to see

:17:41. > :17:44.how he will seek his new role. We would not have agreed his

:17:45. > :17:49.appointment unless we are convinced he was determined to be independent.

:17:50. > :17:57.But, with so many of his powers now being questioned, with ministers

:17:58. > :18:02.substantially proposing to take back control of the appointment process,

:18:03. > :18:10.how he carries out that role is going to be crucial. And how he

:18:11. > :18:16.maintains the importance of the role of the office of public appointments

:18:17. > :18:19.commissioner is going to be very interesting for us to observe.

:18:20. > :18:24.Whatever changes are made, I would like them to be made on the basis of

:18:25. > :18:29.consensus. We have picked up a certain amount of tension between

:18:30. > :18:36.civil servants and ministers about these appointments. There may be an

:18:37. > :18:38.opportunity to build a better understanding of both parties so

:18:39. > :18:44.that these changes are not necessary. With the honourable

:18:45. > :18:50.member agree with me that to ensure the best

:18:51. > :18:53.these opportunities and vacancies being promoted far and wide. That

:18:54. > :18:57.would go some way to ensure applications are received from

:18:58. > :19:00.candidates regardless of race, colour, religion, university or

:19:01. > :19:06.school do they happen to go to. It opens up the process to varied walks

:19:07. > :19:12.of life and experience, to a different arena. Advertising the job

:19:13. > :19:15.in a specialist website and forwarding to our pals and

:19:16. > :19:19.encouraging them to apply is not an effective or appropriate way to find

:19:20. > :19:26.the strongest candidates. The public is rightly demanding the opportunity

:19:27. > :19:30.to apply for jobs such as this commissioner and should be widely

:19:31. > :19:38.publicised throughout the spectrum of the United Kingdom to make sure a

:19:39. > :19:43.device range of applicants apply. Disenchantment and apathy are what

:19:44. > :19:48.this is promoting. I am grateful for the honourable judgement's

:19:49. > :19:52.contribution and I thank him for the diligent work he put in on the

:19:53. > :19:55.committee -- committee and I do not think he would mind me putting on

:19:56. > :19:59.record as to the discussions to which I referred, he was one of

:20:00. > :20:03.those which expressed a strong reservation about this appointment.

:20:04. > :20:11.Not least because nobody could possibly describe Peter Riddle as a

:20:12. > :20:15.outsider to Westminster. Whether an outsider is appropriate to this

:20:16. > :20:21.particular role is debatable. We do not know who else was interviewed

:20:22. > :20:26.for the role. That is not the job of the select committee. It is one of

:20:27. > :20:29.the frustrations during appointment hearings -- pre-appointment hearings

:20:30. > :20:34.that we are not entering the person for the job, we are merely trying to

:20:35. > :20:37.establish in our own minds whether the proposed appointment is an

:20:38. > :20:42.appropriate one and the prison of necessary skills and expenses to do

:20:43. > :20:48.the job. That is what we concluded, but with reservations. I think Mr

:20:49. > :20:57.Riddle in his evidence confirmed his evidence Demarco determination to

:20:58. > :20:59.have a wider role of people interested in public appointments

:21:00. > :21:03.than currently. We do not want to go back to the discrete tap on the

:21:04. > :21:07.shoulder, why do you not apply for this job, which she stood exist

:21:08. > :21:17.before the new rules were brought into existence. Are we going back to

:21:18. > :21:20.pre-Nolan days which were rife with personal and political patronage? Is

:21:21. > :21:26.this a case of the role of the Commissioner king emasculated so Sir

:21:27. > :21:28.David Normandin said he sealed off the monthly attempts by the Prime

:21:29. > :21:34.Minister, other ministers, to appoint Torry donors of former MPs

:21:35. > :21:38.to key roles. We have been back in that position and would it be

:21:39. > :21:42.emasculation, very similar to what has happened to the government's

:21:43. > :21:46.advisor on ministerial conduct, where we have seen cases of the most

:21:47. > :21:52.egregious misconduct by ministers that were not referred to the

:21:53. > :21:58.advisor. Going back to the bad old days of the trust that we have lost

:21:59. > :22:03.in this country as a parliamentary system. Our representation used to

:22:04. > :22:10.be at rock bottom after the great scandal of members expenses, it is

:22:11. > :22:17.now subterranean and worse. And won't be -- what the implementation

:22:18. > :22:21.of grandson's implementations had... Is the government going to act to

:22:22. > :22:29.make sure these abuses of patronage will not return? I am reminded by

:22:30. > :22:33.the honourable gentleman's warnings of the cries of Sir John the Baptist

:22:34. > :22:40.from the dungeon until his head was presented on a platter. But the

:22:41. > :22:46.warnings are important. We have to be able to have a system that we can

:22:47. > :22:49.defend against such warnings. People are always going to be suspicious

:22:50. > :22:57.that there is something of a fix to public appointments. And it is a

:22:58. > :23:00.perfectly legitimate thing, asking for the authority of such

:23:01. > :23:03.appointments, it does rest with ministers. We want a balanced and

:23:04. > :23:08.transparent approach where there are safeguards and I do or be, if

:23:09. > :23:14.ministers get a grip of the jobs suspicions at the outset of these

:23:15. > :23:18.appointment processes, and they have confidence in the independence of

:23:19. > :23:21.the panels that are doing interviews, there should be no

:23:22. > :23:25.problem with people of quality who they want getting through those

:23:26. > :23:34.interviews. But it is not the case, that is something we need to

:23:35. > :23:38.address. I am very grateful for the select committee support for the

:23:39. > :23:42.appointment of Peter Riddle to this post. He is a heavyweight and

:23:43. > :23:48.distinguished Public servant. The Grimston Review, which the chairman

:23:49. > :23:53.mentioned, follows the Nolan principles and adds to them the

:23:54. > :23:57.principle of diversity in public appointments. While the proportion

:23:58. > :24:05.of appointees to such posts, who declare a political allegiance is

:24:06. > :24:12.the lowest on record, down from over 20% in the early 2000 to under 5%

:24:13. > :24:15.now, it is important there is transparency in this area. So on

:24:16. > :24:18.those grounds, a gives me great pleasure to have the opportunity to

:24:19. > :24:22.ask the chairman of the select committee a question rather than the

:24:23. > :24:27.other way around. As a sturdy defender of the principle of

:24:28. > :24:31.parliamentary democracy, does he not accept that voters would expect

:24:32. > :24:38.ministers to make appointments to these vital public roles? Yes they

:24:39. > :24:42.do, and of course they do, because in the end no public appointment of

:24:43. > :24:46.the general nature we are talking about is made without a minister.

:24:47. > :24:54.Without him signing off the decision. The question is twofold,

:24:55. > :24:58.are ministers being presented with the selection of candidates they

:24:59. > :25:03.deem to be appropriate? And if they are, can we be certain that the

:25:04. > :25:06.process is not being fixed to get their friends and cronies through

:25:07. > :25:11.the appointment process? We need a balance that the public will respect

:25:12. > :25:18.and have faith in and again, I make the point about job specifications.

:25:19. > :25:21.If we get the process right at the outset, there should be no need for

:25:22. > :25:25.the Minister to complain. If we take away too many of the safeguards,

:25:26. > :25:28.it's ministers who will be criticised for the appointments they

:25:29. > :25:36.are making. Not the civil servants who will be sitting on the panels.

:25:37. > :25:40.I'm grateful to the chair of the select committee. We now come to the

:25:41. > :25:46.second select committee statement, I call the chair of the procedure

:25:47. > :25:50.committee. Thank you very much for calling me to present the third

:25:51. > :25:57.report of the procedure committee, the third report of this 2015, 2016

:25:58. > :26:02.session. Mr Speaker, I have to say this, but I do believe when it comes

:26:03. > :26:08.to private member's bills, the government is in the last chance

:26:09. > :26:13.saloon. I simply adore this place and I adore taking part in debate,

:26:14. > :26:17.but really, Friday for so many people in this place, good and

:26:18. > :26:24.hard-working committed people, are becoming no go zones. The private

:26:25. > :26:30.member Bill process really now is in total disrepute. I am hoping we can

:26:31. > :26:35.bring it back from the edge in the few month ahead, because if we

:26:36. > :26:40.cannot, I really can't see a world where private member's bills, as we

:26:41. > :26:44.know them, cease to exist. Because people in this place are doing so

:26:45. > :26:46.much good work and in their constituencies and around other

:26:47. > :26:49.legislative matters, they really want not be willing to give their

:26:50. > :26:54.time for something which many would say indeed tens of thousands are

:26:55. > :27:02.saying through petitions is broken. Can I just bring the House's

:27:03. > :27:07.attention to our report? First of all, the current system is designed

:27:08. > :27:11.to fail. The ballot system, which we do not recommend getting rid of in

:27:12. > :27:15.its entirety, the bound system at the start of each parliament creates

:27:16. > :27:20.a scenario whereby people put their name into a lottery and if they are

:27:21. > :27:27.lucky or unlucky as the case may be, their name comes out and they are

:27:28. > :27:31.bombarded with worthy causes to take forward as legislation. That is

:27:32. > :27:34.really if you are a member of the opposition, if you are a

:27:35. > :27:40.government-backed venture, you are bombarded by bright and good ideas

:27:41. > :27:44.from the webs. You are seen as an avenue for the government to get its

:27:45. > :27:48.legislation on the books. What this means is you either have hand-out

:27:49. > :27:53.bills, which are worthy but boring, and to be fair, a lot of back bench

:27:54. > :28:00.legislation will forward by opposition members, which quite

:28:01. > :28:03.frankly is ill thought through and perhaps not deserving of becoming

:28:04. > :28:07.law. That is how the system is structured, that is what is created

:28:08. > :28:12.by the system. Our absolute key recommendation is to give the back

:28:13. > :28:17.bench business committee a role in how private members bills are

:28:18. > :28:22.conducted in this place. We have come up with a report that suggests

:28:23. > :28:29.up to four bills, the forced for Fridays can be decided by the back

:28:30. > :28:32.bench business committee. -- four. Hopefully this will mean that groups

:28:33. > :28:37.and members of Parliament, individual members with a really

:28:38. > :28:42.good legislative proposition, can invest a great deal of time, to a

:28:43. > :28:45.year of working on that proposition. Talking to ministers, respected

:28:46. > :28:50.members in this place, building coalitions within Parliament, and

:28:51. > :28:53.outside Parliament. And then taking that legislative idea before the

:28:54. > :28:57.back bench business and saying, this is the work we have done. This is

:28:58. > :29:01.what underpins our legislative idea, this is not a flight of fancy, and

:29:02. > :29:05.has real support both in this place and out there in the wider community

:29:06. > :29:09.and populace. The back bench business committee would then decide

:29:10. > :29:14.yes, there is a great deal of work underpinning this, it deserves to be

:29:15. > :29:17.heard in Parliament. And it is only up to the first four bills. The back

:29:18. > :29:22.bench business committee in a year could decide that no bills are

:29:23. > :29:26.worthy of getting one of those sought after slots. But it could be,

:29:27. > :29:31.and some parliaments, that they decide there are four bills worthy

:29:32. > :29:38.of being taken forward. I rather -- my other recommendation is to say

:29:39. > :29:43.that on the first seven Fridays, the first back bench member' bill will

:29:44. > :29:48.get a guaranteed a vote at second reading. Why is that important? It

:29:49. > :29:55.is important because a lot of people do not turn appear because they

:29:56. > :29:58.feel, with some understanding and some demonstrable proof, that the

:29:59. > :30:04.honourable gentleman from Shipley is going to spend a lot of his time at

:30:05. > :30:10.finding on things of importance often, that matter to him, but

:30:11. > :30:17.sometimes he fails to express himself in, what can I say

:30:18. > :30:22.generously? A measured period of time, and can await for vast acres

:30:23. > :30:25.of time. I am afraid a lot of people, as much as they love the

:30:26. > :30:28.honourable Judge when and other honourable members who specialise in

:30:29. > :30:35.boring the House to tears, that they find better things to do with their

:30:36. > :30:39.time. I am saying that our proposal does have protections, even for the

:30:40. > :30:46.honourable member. Because I do not want to ruin his Fridays. If a bill

:30:47. > :30:49.comes out of committee and comes in to report stage and it still does

:30:50. > :30:55.not meet with the honourable member' approval, he can get up to what he

:30:56. > :30:59.does best. But what I am hoping, Mr Speaker, is that by allowing the

:31:00. > :31:01.first seven bills to at least get into committee, those people

:31:02. > :31:07.sponsoring the bills have a serious and significant amount of time in

:31:08. > :31:10.which to talk to ministers, to build support, and perhaps iron out some

:31:11. > :31:12.of their problems in the bill that would otherwise lead it to being

:31:13. > :31:22.talked out. I will go on briefly Mr Speaker

:31:23. > :31:31.because I don't want to keep the House. We will go to reducing the

:31:32. > :31:35.number of bills from 20 to 14. Of those 14, for potentially can be

:31:36. > :31:39.assigned by the back edge business committee and a further ten to the

:31:40. > :31:44.ballot. If the Backbench Business Committee decides there is nothing

:31:45. > :31:49.worthy to be introduced that will have 14th in the ballot. There is a

:31:50. > :31:55.proposal to change the name from private members bill to backbench

:31:56. > :32:00.bill. Again we cannot force anything on the House. This can be contested

:32:01. > :32:06.in debate. We will recommend changing the system, what we have

:32:07. > :32:10.dozens of presentation builds on the order paper on a Friday so you can

:32:11. > :32:16.only have one presentation built per day. We want to remove the dummy

:32:17. > :32:23.bills from the order. We will not be asked if we removed these dummy

:32:24. > :32:26.bills to turn up to comment on a Friday to go on a bill that has no

:32:27. > :32:31.chance of seeing the light of day. There is also a possibility and we

:32:32. > :32:37.will just refer to it in a report of perhaps taking a Private Memebers'

:32:38. > :32:42.Bill on a Thursday but again that is just a suggestion Mr Speaker. We do

:32:43. > :32:46.say that not every happy thought that occurs to a member in this

:32:47. > :32:51.place should become law. That would not be a good thing. But we do think

:32:52. > :32:58.that serious legislative process positions should have the chance of

:32:59. > :33:04.progressing. I've read closely the speech given by the right Honorable

:33:05. > :33:07.gentleman last week in Westminster Hall's debate. I apologise to

:33:08. > :33:12.everyone in this house for not having resolve this matter in the

:33:13. > :33:16.last Parliament. As the chairman I of course have to be held

:33:17. > :33:19.accountable for the lack of progress. I conclude my brief speech

:33:20. > :33:23.by saying Mr Speaker that the government is very much in the last

:33:24. > :33:27.chance saloon and if it does not act now, there are other people in this

:33:28. > :33:32.place who will be less understanding than I. The change they will bring

:33:33. > :33:51.forward will make the governments's eyes water. Hear, hear! We adore

:33:52. > :33:56.this member Dominic the private members bill is likely bus. It is

:33:57. > :34:00.not only open to abuse. It is regularly abuse. It misleads the

:34:01. > :34:03.public and it wastes the time of the House. We stand foursquare with the

:34:04. > :34:08.committee and will do everything we can to support him. There is just

:34:09. > :34:14.one tiny exception to his report which is that he says we should

:34:15. > :34:18.start in 2017 - 18. Well frankly Mr Speaker what is wrong with now? Why

:34:19. > :34:20.can't the government give us time to debate these changes before the next

:34:21. > :34:27.session of Parliament and do it in May. My Mac this is an ideal

:34:28. > :34:31.suggestion. I look to the Government front edge to be revolutionary in

:34:32. > :34:37.its approach to our report and take it forward as quickly as possible.

:34:38. > :34:43.I'm sure the Honorable Lady for the domestic front bench will have her

:34:44. > :34:49.for libel friends. Thank you Mr Speaker. I wore them to be brief. My

:34:50. > :34:52.Honorable friend failed to mention when saying that the first bill on

:34:53. > :34:57.the order paper should be guaranteed to vote. He failed to mention that

:34:58. > :35:03.the first bill may already be to vote. All it requires is for the MPs

:35:04. > :35:08.to support it as we have seen with the overseas bill and the EU

:35:09. > :35:13.Referendum Bill. If the matter is so important, there are plenty of

:35:14. > :35:16.people that will debate them. Does my little friend not agree that if

:35:17. > :35:22.the bill cannot muster even the support of 100 MPs then it clearly

:35:23. > :35:27.does not actually have the support that other people claim that it had?

:35:28. > :35:31.I will say to my Honorable friend and I love him dearly, that his

:35:32. > :35:39.determined efforts and those of a few of his colleagues and in the

:35:40. > :35:41.previous Parliament Labour colleagues, please have almost

:35:42. > :35:46.destroyed peoples faith in this place and the process. They are

:35:47. > :35:50.simply not turning up because to often they spend a lot of time

:35:51. > :35:57.listening the honourable gentleman and as I said we're trying to ruin

:35:58. > :36:04.the honourable gentleman's support. What these bill needs is a little

:36:05. > :36:06.space at the second reading to get approved at second reading so

:36:07. > :36:10.negotiations can take place with government before they go into

:36:11. > :36:22.committee, so there is a chance of some outcome. LAUGHTER. Mr Speaker

:36:23. > :36:28.as a member of the committee at play tribute to the skillful work here of

:36:29. > :36:33.piloting this report through. Those of us from Scotland are claimed,

:36:34. > :36:40.familiar with the far more robust procedure. If the government is not

:36:41. > :36:45.willing to give a go on the proposals and our report, cannot ask

:36:46. > :36:48.him to echo what was said by the shadow Leader of the House of the

:36:49. > :36:53.government giving us time early opportunity to implement these

:36:54. > :36:57.proposals and looking at the back bench business committee also to

:36:58. > :37:01.give us some time? I do have the government is listening to the

:37:02. > :37:04.states today. The mood is darkening and quite rightly so. It is not just

:37:05. > :37:08.here in the chamber but out there among those that we represent. I

:37:09. > :37:11.would like to thank the Honorable gentleman as I would like to thank

:37:12. > :37:16.the entire committee and the clerks for their hard work in bringing

:37:17. > :37:22.forth a very sensible report. The honourable gentleman should leave so

:37:23. > :37:31.agitated by this because he knows it is very difficult to oppose it. One

:37:32. > :37:33.of the problem with the Private Memebers' Bill is that pressure

:37:34. > :37:41.groups may the expectation that every bill that is brought forward

:37:42. > :37:46.as a private members bills fans a really good chance of becoming law.

:37:47. > :37:50.It is incumbent upon all of us to make sure that the Private Memebers'

:37:51. > :37:59.Bill procedure is more widely and better understood. My Honorable

:38:00. > :38:01.friend makes an excellent point. When communicating with constituents

:38:02. > :38:05.we do deter from telling them exactly how it is. We are

:38:06. > :38:16.embarrassed about what happens on Fridays. Mr Speaker I would not go

:38:17. > :38:23.as far as to say that I adore the Honorable member but certainly I do

:38:24. > :38:26.hold him in high regard. Such criticisms that were made were not

:38:27. > :38:30.directed at him or his committee but would he not agree with me that this

:38:31. > :38:38.is an issue that now needs to be resolved and speedily? What we need

:38:39. > :38:45.is that by the will of the House that the options will be sent out,

:38:46. > :38:48.some options which I have an other Honorable members have can be put

:38:49. > :38:57.down and people can actually vote on how they want to proceed. The

:38:58. > :39:02.gentleman makes a fantastic point. If we bring forth this report in the

:39:03. > :39:05.government finds time, there will be opportunities for members to table

:39:06. > :39:09.their own amendments to the report. This hopefully is a vehicle for

:39:10. > :39:19.change in this place and for improving a fairly bankrupt Private

:39:20. > :39:23.Memebers' Bill system. I commend the report and come into the chairman

:39:24. > :39:27.who has been a superb leader of the procedure committee in recent years.

:39:28. > :39:33.Does he feel like I did? That the process of misleads the public and

:39:34. > :39:37.brings the House into dispute? If the government fails to act now, and

:39:38. > :39:40.this is our second report on this issue, that this problem will get

:39:41. > :39:46.deeper and the public will lose even more faith in the process of this

:39:47. > :39:51.house? I agree with my Honorable friend and the Honorable Lady

:39:52. > :39:54.opposite, that she has worked tirelessly on this report and has

:39:55. > :40:01.been involved in this process for a number of years. We are setting our

:40:02. > :40:04.constituents a false prospectus as Private Memebers' Bill Fridays are

:40:05. > :40:13.currently constructed. They will not forgive us by the for that. I

:40:14. > :40:18.commend my Honorable friend for his committee but I would say that I

:40:19. > :40:24.think he is being very unfair on our Honorable friend from Shipley. Our

:40:25. > :40:29.audible friend he is the one who actually turns up on Fridays to

:40:30. > :40:37.scrutinize drafted legislation. There are 50 to Fridays and only 13,

:40:38. > :40:42.when this house sits. The myth has built up that every Friday is a

:40:43. > :40:47.constituency Friday as an excuse for members not to be here, when the

:40:48. > :40:50.bold truth is that there is only one person per constituency who is

:40:51. > :40:56.entitled to represent their constituents in this house. That is

:40:57. > :41:06.the member of Parliament. Those MPs who do not turn up on Friday, not

:41:07. > :41:09.those members who do. I have been so generous in my appraisal of the

:41:10. > :41:12.contribution of the honourable gentleman from Shipley. He often

:41:13. > :41:16.does very important word but on occasions he does not in my view.

:41:17. > :41:23.The truth of the matter is that people are not coming here because

:41:24. > :41:30.they have lost faith in Fridays and they are bored from listening to the

:41:31. > :41:37.honourable gentleman from Shipley. Mr Speaker if we have a guaranteed

:41:38. > :41:42.second vote on the Private Memebers' Bill. Do you know that the deputies

:41:43. > :41:49.can put time limits on speeches and that would be a happy occasion to

:41:50. > :41:54.the use of some in this place. Mr Speaker can I thank the chair of the

:41:55. > :41:57.committee for his absolute cheering of the committee and bring forth

:41:58. > :42:02.this report. Does he agree with me that this report, if he goes ahead,

:42:03. > :42:07.will increase the transparency and credibility of private members Bill

:42:08. > :42:15.processes. This will therefore increase our spending in the eyes of

:42:16. > :42:18.the general public to whom we serve. Incrementally it will. But we have a

:42:19. > :42:23.lot allowed to recover in this place. As I have said to the

:42:24. > :42:26.honourable gentleman and the honourable gentleman knows, there is

:42:27. > :42:29.no guarantee if we do not succeed in bringing this report forward that

:42:30. > :42:34.the House will tolerate Private Memebers' Bill remaining on Fridays.

:42:35. > :42:41.It could well end up on another night of the week. Thank you Mr

:42:42. > :42:45.Speaker. As a member who has been here on Fridays, and this being

:42:46. > :42:50.elected, I have seen both the good and bad on a Friday, in terms of

:42:51. > :42:54.debates. Therefore I welcome this report. With the Honorable member

:42:55. > :43:01.agree with me that we need less focused on individuals and secondly

:43:02. > :43:04.how does he see the back bench business committee being able to

:43:05. > :43:09.defined level of cross party support given the comments they had about

:43:10. > :43:13.pressure groups earlier, making it look like bills have no chance to

:43:14. > :43:20.get through? How does he see we can get it definitive ability to work on

:43:21. > :43:25.what will be supported in those time slots? I actually have been involved

:43:26. > :43:35.in a successful private members bill. One involving mental health...

:43:36. > :43:41.Akali from point of spent an enormous amount of time, over a

:43:42. > :43:46.year, with a member of the other place in building up a Coalition of

:43:47. > :43:50.support across the benches, talking to private secretaries, talking to

:43:51. > :43:52.ministers, talking to well-informed pressure groups, who are well

:43:53. > :43:59.respected by both sides of the House. By the time it appeared on

:44:00. > :44:03.the floor of this house, much of the hard work and the groundwork had

:44:04. > :44:06.been done. That is what I am hoping that members of the back bench

:44:07. > :44:17.business committee will be looking for when assessing whether a bill is

:44:18. > :44:20.in one of those coveted for spots. Dunn thank you Mr Speaker. I

:44:21. > :44:25.couldn't bend the honourable gentleman. I was also grateful for

:44:26. > :44:32.the chance to get evidence to the committee of preparation of this

:44:33. > :44:36.report. It seems to me that provided we allow filibustering to be the

:44:37. > :44:40.means by which the government that the legislation in 2016, the

:44:41. > :44:48.reputation of this house will the become lower. Even if it is to be

:44:49. > :44:51.2017, August 2018, when these new substantial changes are made, the

:44:52. > :44:55.onus is now on the government to have a debate in time to discuss

:44:56. > :45:04.these issues and have suggestions move forward. Filibustering Fridays

:45:05. > :45:07.and that we have changed now. I am delighted that the mood of the House

:45:08. > :45:12.is more ambitious than the committee. The houses to be

:45:13. > :45:14.commended for that. If we can bring forth these recommendations older,

:45:15. > :45:20.that would be a truly fantastic thing but we do need to restore

:45:21. > :45:27.faith in Fridays, so that people on Fridays have a chance to put their

:45:28. > :45:30.point of view in. Also we need people watching Fridays, with

:45:31. > :45:35.interest, have a chance to hear a diversity of voices within this

:45:36. > :45:41.place. What I do not want to see is poorly drafted legislation getting

:45:42. > :45:46.onto the statute. The protections we are proposing will not protect bills

:45:47. > :45:52.if they are not up to scratch at report stage. They can be dealt with

:45:53. > :45:57.by a variety of means. Thank you Mr Speaker. I am grateful to the

:45:58. > :46:00.honourable member for this incredibly impressive piece of work.

:46:01. > :46:07.I support many of the recommendations in it. It looks like

:46:08. > :46:13.it will at last bring an end to what is going on on Fridays where on many

:46:14. > :46:24.occasions there is no serious attempt to properly debate. It

:46:25. > :46:29.brings the parliament into this beauty went very serious issues are

:46:30. > :46:32.the subject for this house. The honourable lady makes a very good

:46:33. > :46:37.point. Debate in this place should never be about sport but should be

:46:38. > :46:39.about contesting the issues and arguments and propositions before

:46:40. > :46:45.the House. I agree with the honourable Lady and her sentiments.

:46:46. > :46:52.Hopefully we will be dumb and begin to travel in the right direction.

:46:53. > :46:58.Thank you Mr Speaker. Can I congratulate the committee on the

:46:59. > :47:01.report and in its success in trying to get more support. We have a very

:47:02. > :47:06.tired and discredited system. I think some of the debate we've had

:47:07. > :47:09.in the short time has focused on the benefits of Fridays and therefore

:47:10. > :47:13.does not talk about the sitting days. Cannot urge the procedures

:47:14. > :47:16.committee to look at that also with urgency. I believe some of the

:47:17. > :47:24.answers may well be in terms of getting different city times for

:47:25. > :47:27.private members bills. We do have a procedure underway for looking at

:47:28. > :47:33.the sitting times. We did pledge in the last Parliament to do a survey

:47:34. > :47:38.of members views on sitting hours and bring forth a neutral motion

:47:39. > :47:44.which members could then amend. I hope that provides the honourable

:47:45. > :47:47.gentleman with some information. He will get an opportunity at some

:47:48. > :47:56.stage in the near future, to look at the sitting hours of the House.

:47:57. > :48:00.Thank you Mr Speaker. Can I just ensure the honourable member from

:48:01. > :48:05.Shipley, that I did make an effort to turn up earlier in the session to

:48:06. > :48:09.Fridays is new member, and I am afraid now that I have to write back

:48:10. > :48:12.to my constituents that my time is probably better spent in my

:48:13. > :48:17.constituency. I welcome the report and I hope it gives people more

:48:18. > :48:22.confident in back bench business. Does he agree with me that the risk

:48:23. > :48:27.of this reform is also seen as the enemy of good and we need to build

:48:28. > :48:33.at least as much consistency as possible? The honourable general

:48:34. > :48:35.makes a good point. I hope the government is listening to the

:48:36. > :48:40.honourable gentleman must try and build some consensus that find a way

:48:41. > :48:44.for it to work. I don't have appointed for, with a perfect

:48:45. > :48:48.solution. Every happy thought that occurs to a backbencher should not

:48:49. > :48:51.necessarily become law. I will say this, with my time in the House and

:48:52. > :48:54.served on the to different governments, the people who

:48:55. > :48:57.specialise in talking about these pills, are very good about talking

:48:58. > :49:03.about opposition bills but seem to go missing in action when it comes

:49:04. > :49:07.to a government hand-out bill. Thank you Mr Speaker. Can I also welcome

:49:08. > :49:13.the report procedures committee and strongly agree with the comments of

:49:14. > :49:17.the honourable member that meant we did have an excellent debate in

:49:18. > :49:22.Westminster on this issue last week. We need change across the House. I

:49:23. > :49:27.would like to see a slightly bolder proposal. I would like to see the

:49:28. > :49:29.move of moving these bills away from sitting Fridays but nevertheless

:49:30. > :49:35.this is a step of the right direction. Can I ask other than this

:49:36. > :49:40.house for the government to act quickly on this? We really need to

:49:41. > :49:44.move quickly on this in order to restore the reputation of

:49:45. > :49:47.Parliament. By Matt I think the honourable gentleman. It is

:49:48. > :49:51.important to recognise for the sake of both sides of the House that the

:49:52. > :49:55.procedure committee can not impose anything on this house. Our

:49:56. > :50:00.recommendations will be subject to debate and subject to vote. An issue

:50:01. > :50:04.that I thought the honourable gentleman from Shipley would be

:50:05. > :50:08.aware of, but clearly he isn't. But it is the case that all a

:50:09. > :50:12.recommendations will be subject to a vote on the floor of the House. The

:50:13. > :50:16.honourable gentleman from Shipley, I'm sure we'll have a chance to

:50:17. > :50:20.carry the day, for his side of the argument as demand or gentleman

:50:21. > :50:28.opposite will have the opportunity to carry his point of view. I am

:50:29. > :50:33.much grateful to everyone who has ventured into that exchange. We now

:50:34. > :50:37.come to the backbench debate on the introduction of the national living

:50:38. > :50:43.wage and changes to employee contracts. As a courtesy I might

:50:44. > :50:48.mention to the House that initially this motion was to be moved by the

:50:49. > :50:55.Honorable Lady and member from Mitchum, unfortunately the

:50:56. > :51:01.honourable lady sustained an injury and had to go to hospital. She was

:51:02. > :51:09.not allowed to be available, despite her willingness to be. She's not

:51:10. > :51:12.available to move the motion today. In the circumstances, I'm sure

:51:13. > :51:17.colleagues will agree that it's perfectly fitting and right that the

:51:18. > :51:18.motion should be moved instead by the Honorable member Burr from

:51:19. > :51:34.Enfield North. Hear, hear! Thank you Mr Speaker. And on behalf

:51:35. > :51:40.of my honourable friend I move that this house agrees that Britain

:51:41. > :51:47.deserves a pay rise. Note that some employers are cutting overall

:51:48. > :51:51.renumeration package is to offset the cost of the introduction of the

:51:52. > :51:57.national living wage. This leaves thousands of employees worse off. We

:51:58. > :52:02.call for the government to guarantee that no worker will be worse off as

:52:03. > :52:10.a result of the introduction of the National Living Wage. My honourable

:52:11. > :52:12.friend has been campaigning tirelessly on the implementation of

:52:13. > :52:17.the National Living Wage and fighting for all workers to truly

:52:18. > :52:22.benefit from the new proposal. Unfortunately as Mr Speaker said,

:52:23. > :52:26.she is currently in hospital and is not able to be here with us today. I

:52:27. > :52:31.am sure members across the House will join me in wishing her a very

:52:32. > :52:37.speedy recovery. Hear, hear! I have spoken to her today and she is on

:52:38. > :52:41.the road to recovery and I understand she will be listening and

:52:42. > :52:48.possibly watching our proceedings today. I was intended to speak in

:52:49. > :52:56.support of my great friend and colleague pump network. In the light

:52:57. > :53:00.of the circumstances I am honoured to be able to present her speech

:53:01. > :53:06.today and leave this on her behalf. I know she is delighted that the

:53:07. > :53:09.debate is able to go ahead without her and she thinks the Backbench

:53:10. > :53:18.Business Committee for making time for this debate today. When my

:53:19. > :53:20.honourable friend from Mitchum and more than made her application to

:53:21. > :53:26.the Backbench Business Committee, she really had no idea just how huge

:53:27. > :53:30.an issue this would be. It all started a few months ago when a

:53:31. > :53:37.friend of hers approached her with his pay slip. He said that he was

:53:38. > :53:45.given new terms and conditions which said he had to sign or lose his job.

:53:46. > :53:52.They are cutting back his Sunday pay and winter bonuses. He said he

:53:53. > :53:57.thought he was going to have his pay reduced. How right he was. My

:53:58. > :54:04.honourable friend was shocked when she calculated he would lose up to

:54:05. > :54:09.?50 per week. That's about to ?2600 per year. This was going to be after

:54:10. > :54:15.his basic pate was increased by the introduction of the National Living

:54:16. > :54:20.Wage. So to be clear, this was a pay cut after the Chancellor guaranteed

:54:21. > :54:24.that Britain was getting a pay rise. After raising this with the Prime

:54:25. > :54:30.Minister, who currently did not have much of an answer for her. My

:54:31. > :54:35.honourable friend started receiving dozens of e-mails from employees

:54:36. > :54:43.around the country. She had calls from staff at all levels and from

:54:44. > :54:49.all walks of life, who would also be losing side what I thank my

:54:50. > :54:55.Honorable friend for giving way. Does she share my concerns that

:54:56. > :55:02.because the differential with under 25 not being eligible that we're now

:55:03. > :55:06.seeing stories where there are individuals losing out on overtime

:55:07. > :55:12.and other hours because that is being given to younger workers who

:55:13. > :55:15.can be played less? Not only our younger workers beat them at losing

:55:16. > :55:20.out because they're being paid less but others as well. Indeed a very

:55:21. > :55:25.valid point that my honourable friend makes is that this is a

:55:26. > :55:29.double whammy. Not only are some workers losing out because of the

:55:30. > :55:35.terms and conditions that employers are altering but also they are

:55:36. > :55:39.losing valuable other hours. Many of these workers absolutely depend on

:55:40. > :55:51.being able to work extra hours under overtime. But so many companies

:55:52. > :55:59.nationwide all employees are on new terms and conditions under variation

:56:00. > :56:03.of contract. Describe Sundays and holidays and seasonal bonuses and

:56:04. > :56:07.allowances that staff relied upon to top of their income. These pay cuts

:56:08. > :56:15.were much greater than the games of the National Living Wage. Hence, so

:56:16. > :56:19.many employees were losing hours. I am grateful to my boyfriend. Does

:56:20. > :56:24.she think it is a good idea if the United Kingdom government made a

:56:25. > :56:27.register of those companies who have undertaken such action and brought

:56:28. > :56:31.those companies to a Round Table to explain to them that the purpose of

:56:32. > :56:37.the living wage was to improve People's expenditure powers, not to

:56:38. > :56:41.reduce them back by Matt I would indeed. And what we're doing here

:56:42. > :56:47.today is to ask the government and chance but to address these issues

:56:48. > :56:49.and there are of course penalties for employers who don't pay the

:56:50. > :56:53.National Living Wage. These are being strengthened and I would

:56:54. > :57:01.suggest that along with those penalties should be penalties for

:57:02. > :57:14.employers who deliberately reduced pay based on the National Living

:57:15. > :57:18.Wage. During model friends speech last month she did a lot of work to

:57:19. > :57:25.get the recognition that it deserves. The business ministers

:57:26. > :57:32.interest in the matter also brought further attention to this issue. My

:57:33. > :57:36.honourable friend from Mitchum and Morton's speech she highlighted how

:57:37. > :57:40.illogical and unfair it was to claim that Britain was getting a pay rise,

:57:41. > :57:44.while hard-working employees across the country were being hit by such

:57:45. > :57:48.pay cuts. She reminded the government that the week before the

:57:49. > :57:53.Prime Minister and Chancellor had been unwilling to promise that

:57:54. > :57:59.nobody who worked on the shop floor would be taking home less money

:58:00. > :58:04.after April first. Last year the Chancellor said he was committed to

:58:05. > :58:09.a higher wage economy. He said it can't be right that we go on asking

:58:10. > :58:13.taxpayers to subsidize businesses which paid the lowest wages. He

:58:14. > :58:21.promised this change would only have a fractional effect on jobs. He said

:58:22. > :58:29.the cost of business would be just 1% of corporate profit, A cost that

:58:30. > :58:36.he offset with the Corporation tax. I congratulate her on opening the

:58:37. > :58:40.speech and how she is doing. Can also raise that the case that there

:58:41. > :58:46.is faced with a bill of ?330 million for this legislation and I hope to

:58:47. > :58:53.talk today about the impact it's having on the and conditions there.

:58:54. > :59:00.The overall cost has been estimated as the government has provided. The

:59:01. > :59:03.cost to business is offset by the reduction in corporation tax.

:59:04. > :59:08.Smaller businesses will also benefit from increased business rate relief

:59:09. > :59:16.and higher national insurance allowances. Of of course in terms

:59:17. > :59:19.there is also a significant impact on local authorities and I think

:59:20. > :59:28.that has not been taken into account. I am grateful to my

:59:29. > :59:35.girlfriend for giving way. In fact the local Government Association and

:59:36. > :59:42.others have estimated that the funding could subside, or the tax

:59:43. > :59:47.increase will barely cover the cost of providing the living wage, as

:59:48. > :59:51.local authorities should. Therefore this is once more a government

:59:52. > :59:59.pledge that is being delivered through tax rises...

:00:00. > :00:11.The most vulnerable and needy suffer the most. Companies like that these

:00:12. > :00:16.the national living wage to reform their pay and reward structures.

:00:17. > :00:23.This is actually a euphemism for cutting staff pay. My Honorable

:00:24. > :00:29.friend later restated panicking e-mail to clean things up. The chief

:00:30. > :00:33.executive officer and the head of human resources were eager to convey

:00:34. > :00:41.how much they appreciate their staff, and how generous their report

:00:42. > :00:47.package was -- reward. They were going to extend that period of

:00:48. > :00:52.compensation for those members, who are going to lose out, buy an extra

:00:53. > :00:58.12 months and increased from 12 to 24 months. This is of course of the

:00:59. > :01:05.reputational pressure they were under. While this is definitely a

:01:06. > :01:08.good step forward, achieved from the considerable public pressure. A lot

:01:09. > :01:15.of questions remain unanswered. What will happen to these employees after

:01:16. > :01:20.24 months? Is that company hoping that we forget about the issues and

:01:21. > :01:30.these lefties long serving members lose out? Will they get they pay

:01:31. > :01:37.they deserve? Does she think that the transferred's decision to

:01:38. > :01:41.conflate the national wage with reality of living wage, was the

:01:42. > :01:45.gimmick of the outset that allow these employees to think it wasn't

:01:46. > :01:51.to be treated seriously and that is why we are now seeing these

:01:52. > :02:05.different actions by it big chains of employers? Yet exactly set the

:02:06. > :02:11.given the signs the real living wage foundation, is significantly higher

:02:12. > :02:18.than that that the Chancellor has proposed. So yes, one would have to

:02:19. > :02:26.question and he had not -- should not have been unaware I give way to

:02:27. > :02:34.my honourable friend. I'm thankful for my friends, does she agree with

:02:35. > :02:42.me that although the local living wage is, some with internationally

:02:43. > :02:50.higher reputations, to introduce the has realised -- A vision of zero

:02:51. > :02:54.contract workers is likely to be accelerated, and that she also agree

:02:55. > :02:59.with me that the government should not just go for a register, which

:03:00. > :03:06.would be welfare, and expose things. But also see how these projects are

:03:07. > :03:15.being used to undermine wage rates, and the security people have in

:03:16. > :03:22.their employment? At fluidly. -- absolutely. There is no question

:03:23. > :03:30.beside Lope comes job security. The situation is getting worse, and what

:03:31. > :03:38.is happening here, trends and conditions -- terms and conditions.

:03:39. > :03:44.It's people who are vulnerable, and needy, are always the most affected,

:03:45. > :03:47.and have the weakest voice of them. If it weren't for the fact that

:03:48. > :03:54.trade unions had raised their voices, and we are raising our

:03:55. > :03:59.voices, my Honorable friend had not caught focus so much on this issue,

:04:00. > :04:08.I doubt the level of awareness would append anything will like it is now.

:04:09. > :04:15.Whatever the outcome, it is totally wrong that any company should be

:04:16. > :04:18.cutting wages of loyal, long-standing employers of staff off

:04:19. > :04:25.the national living wage. Make no lives -- make a mistake, the big

:04:26. > :04:31.companies can do it, anyone can. When my friend met with the chief,

:04:32. > :04:38.he told her she was a bit annoyed that being that his company was

:04:39. > :04:43.being singled out. He said we are a great employer, and we are not the

:04:44. > :04:48.only ones making the changes. I think we are in the realm of two

:04:49. > :04:52.wrongs making a right here. He is right though about not being the

:04:53. > :04:57.only one. That company was very unlucky that they got the attention

:04:58. > :05:04.they got. They were unlucky that my Honorable friend worked for them,

:05:05. > :05:08.with one of the many high street retailers which have been doing

:05:09. > :05:14.exactly the same thing. It is true that that company is being

:05:15. > :05:23.particularly lawless when it comes to their company staff. A few people

:05:24. > :05:31.around the country contacted her friends about backcountry. There is

:05:32. > :05:38.a man who had been employed for over 15 years let's call him Mr Jones to

:05:39. > :05:45.give section. He has a family, two children, is the sole wage earner in

:05:46. > :05:50.his house. He works hard, but part-time because of the his

:05:51. > :05:58.physical disability. He works every Sunday he can, as well as all

:05:59. > :06:03.sociable hours they offer. But in April, under the new contract he

:06:04. > :06:11.will be coerced into sound -- into signing you'll lose ?1000 of gear.

:06:12. > :06:17.Because of the one-off payments the company will be set to lose out, Mr

:06:18. > :06:24.Jones will still lose out at this period, because the company he works

:06:25. > :06:33.for has no contingency plans. Mr Smith is a low earning hard worker.

:06:34. > :06:39.Her total monthly which would be reduced by a staggering 30% pay cut.

:06:40. > :06:47.The 201 up payments that she would receive would do nothing for the

:06:48. > :06:53.?2000 years she would use -- lose. I would like to quote Mrs. Smith how

:06:54. > :06:58.exactly am I going to make up this way each I have a young son to

:06:59. > :07:05.support, and next year is looking very bleak for us. I worried how I

:07:06. > :07:10.will support my family next year. I am heartbroken that the company I

:07:11. > :07:17.worked for so hard, I've done 16 hour shifts for, come in on days off

:07:18. > :07:26.for, has treated me like this. I give way and it is not also about

:07:27. > :07:34.current income, people affected in this way, it is also in pension, so

:07:35. > :07:44.the larger effect is not just now, but will be affected when he

:07:45. > :07:51.resigned. Measure that, that double whammy, with loss now, and lots of

:07:52. > :08:02.your pension income, with husbands of these companies. They gain from

:08:03. > :08:10.putting pay -- cutting. They should not cut it. This company says they

:08:11. > :08:16.have rectified the situations, to place themselves in the shoes of Mr

:08:17. > :08:21.Jones and Mrs. Smith and honestly say they feel optimistic about their

:08:22. > :08:29.future. Let us turn our attention to other employees and employers that

:08:30. > :08:43.we know are doing similar things. There is that bakery that makes

:08:44. > :08:49.supreme loaf and gangster pies... Project date has listened -- written

:08:50. > :08:59.to all of its staff, no shop employees at Bradgate... The

:09:00. > :09:05.introduction of the national living wage made quite a difference for

:09:06. > :09:09.them. But Bradgate bakery has found an opportunity to save money, this

:09:10. > :09:14.is because of the universal truth that companies will usually pay

:09:15. > :09:20.their workers a lot less that they can afford if they can get away with

:09:21. > :09:23.it. I give way I think my Honorable friend for giving links that she

:09:24. > :09:28.agree with me that the part of the problem with this, is employees see

:09:29. > :09:40.the national living wage, minimum living wage, has a floor rather than

:09:41. > :09:51.the ceiling for plate -- payments? We are already into a good debate.

:09:52. > :10:00.Joan Ryan. Certainly the national living wage, doesn't mean that all

:10:01. > :10:05.the employees can pay that. Bradgate like the other company found an

:10:06. > :10:12.opportunity to save money, date change their strategy to phase out

:10:13. > :10:21.Sundays by 2019. While employees on National Minimum Wage, 1378 per hour

:10:22. > :10:24.for last month, by 2019 it will earn just ?9 per hour. That is the

:10:25. > :10:33.national living wage according to Bradgate bakery. What this means in

:10:34. > :10:39.sum, is that Bradgate workers are being sold alive. They are told that

:10:40. > :10:50.their pay is increasing, but the government is giving ?1, Bradgate is

:10:51. > :10:59.taking another. An honourable... This means that by 2018, reduction

:11:00. > :11:08.on night shift, will be paid 2700 and ?18 of last end of the paint 344

:11:09. > :11:13.less a year. I want to make two things clear up, first increasing

:11:14. > :11:24.the minimal wage is not about that. My honourable friend from Mitchum

:11:25. > :11:29.Morgan, they introduced it in the Labour Party was 20 years ago. We

:11:30. > :11:33.hope the party moves to increase it. Our workers work hard and they

:11:34. > :11:39.deserve every penny they are to entitled to. We quite agree with

:11:40. > :11:48.each other that Britain does need -- deserve a pay rise. Every minimum

:11:49. > :11:56.wage rate rise has been greeted with predictions of doom, and gloom.

:11:57. > :11:59.These dire warnings have not come true. Thirdly, we all know that

:12:00. > :12:04.businesses tend to pay their workers less than the actually can't,

:12:05. > :12:09.because that is what profit-making is all about. Business should not be

:12:10. > :12:13.cutting staff pay by a terms and conditions to offset the cost.

:12:14. > :12:19.Despite what they say, there are alternatives.

:12:20. > :12:27.They can cut that shareholder pay just a little so that those who work

:12:28. > :12:33.hard get what they truly deserve. They could use the one point third

:12:34. > :12:40.percent cut tax classic to fund the increase of the minimum wage. We

:12:41. > :12:48.have discussed that company and the Bradgate bakery but here's the

:12:49. > :12:53.problem. Huge companies like Morrison cut their pays to the

:12:54. > :13:08.little attention of the media. The firm is simultaneously scrapped some

:13:09. > :13:18.things to save money. Cafe Nero are cutting free staff lunches to save

:13:19. > :13:25.costs. According to media reports today, it looks like that Cafe will

:13:26. > :13:29.also be scrubbing overtime rates on Sundays. This is all part of a

:13:30. > :13:36.worrying trade and that I think my friends will agree. We believe there

:13:37. > :13:44.is a precedent for cross party support for this issue. Indeed, my

:13:45. > :13:48.honourable friend from Mitchum and Morgan was honoured to receive

:13:49. > :13:53.support from the Croydon South member. He joined her for calling

:13:54. > :13:58.that no one loses out and there are people my honourable friend said.

:13:59. > :14:03.She said any member who was a joint on calling and direction of calling

:14:04. > :14:07.employers out from the government, whichever side of the House they may

:14:08. > :14:14.be as a of mine. The truth is, securing meaningful trade is not be

:14:15. > :14:21.on the government public abilities. Everyone should receive a pay raise.

:14:22. > :14:23.If the government was going to be radical in strengthening wages, then

:14:24. > :14:34.he needs to deliver that radical change. It is built on a proper pay

:14:35. > :14:39.for a hard days work. The same people that all political parties

:14:40. > :14:48.claim to represent, the outcome they truly reserved -- deserve. I moved.

:14:49. > :14:55.Can I suggest that people use up to seven minutes, if you stop

:14:56. > :15:04.interventions, I will have to drop the time. We wanted everyone in. Mr

:15:05. > :15:11.Davis I want to make a few brief points with the time available. The

:15:12. > :15:21.first thing is, that the whole concept of a national living wage is

:15:22. > :15:24.an intellectual nonsense. The fact is, the amount of money that people

:15:25. > :15:31.need to earn to cover their living -- living it depends on how much

:15:32. > :15:42.there housing costs are, how close they would to work, how much it cost

:15:43. > :15:48.them to get to work. The idea that there is one of national living wage

:15:49. > :15:50.that can apply to everyone in the whole country irrespective of their

:15:51. > :15:55.personal circumstances is a nonsense. I think we should make

:15:56. > :15:59.that clear from the start. We need to talk about the national living

:16:00. > :16:06.wage, and an increased level of the minimum wage. The national minute

:16:07. > :16:11.national living wage is eight nonsense. We're talking a higher

:16:12. > :16:16.minimum wage. Every single employer in the country is some rich baron

:16:17. > :16:27.living in a huge mansion, driving around in a badly and is -- Bentley.

:16:28. > :16:31.The fact of the matter is that the majority of these businesses are

:16:32. > :16:37.small or medium sized enterprises. Many of those businesses and I

:16:38. > :16:42.advised her to skate to go to your constituency and speak to some shop

:16:43. > :16:47.owners. Some owners are struggling to earn a living. Many of the people

:16:48. > :16:54.themselves very often don't earn the minimum wage themselves. Yet, she

:16:55. > :17:00.buries them for trying to do down there stopped when she knows they

:17:01. > :17:09.are working desperately long hours to keep their staff in employment,

:17:10. > :17:24.because their staff... I what I've heard from my white animal friends

:17:25. > :17:34.-- right honourable friend... It is like when people say, should people

:17:35. > :17:40.get a pay raise, go to nine, ?10 an hour? Everyone will say yes. If you

:17:41. > :17:48.ask people if you want a Royals Royce the Allstate gas, if you say

:17:49. > :17:52.you want a Rolls-Royce but you have to live in a tent for the rest of

:17:53. > :18:01.your like most people would say no. There are consequences. Mr Speaker,

:18:02. > :18:03.we all know if you want to reduce something the consumption of

:18:04. > :18:12.something you increase the cost of something. If you want to have fewer

:18:13. > :18:21.people smoking you put the price up. Not drinking, bring the price up.

:18:22. > :18:26.Can I say to the honourable members the same rules apply to employment.

:18:27. > :18:33.If you put up the cost of employment you will find less people employed.

:18:34. > :18:38.That is just an economic fact I give way I'm grateful to the honourable

:18:39. > :18:44.gentleman, but it is not a binary choice of up Rolls-Royce or a tent.

:18:45. > :18:49.That is not the living reality of most of our constituencies. We

:18:50. > :18:56.except at the moment that the big help project and its food bank after

:18:57. > :19:06.last year helped to feed for three days 6000 people three and a half

:19:07. > :19:10.thousand were children. If you got peoples wages more people are going

:19:11. > :19:18.to be dependent on food banks. Does he think that is the 21st century or

:19:19. > :19:24.the 19th century? What is more likely to send people to the bank is

:19:25. > :19:29.not having a job at all. The office of budget said quite clearly won the

:19:30. > :19:33.policy was announced by the Chancellor, they said that there

:19:34. > :19:38.estimate of the consequences of raising the rate, would be 4 million

:19:39. > :19:46.hours a week would be lost. Half of those have had hours would be the

:19:47. > :19:53.loss of 60,000 jobs. The great office about this office, is that

:19:54. > :19:55.they can understand because guns of this policy. Look, there are

:19:56. > :20:05.advantages to having a minimum wage, and a higher wage. I very much

:20:06. > :20:17.welcome that. The honourable members of opposite should be honest about

:20:18. > :20:24.the consequences. The point they must face the consequences. We must

:20:25. > :20:39.have fewer people employed as a result one of the ways, companies

:20:40. > :20:46.like B and Q and Morrison, the fact of the matter is I've no idea what

:20:47. > :20:53.the policy is today, they may be continuing with that policy. What

:20:54. > :20:59.I'm saying to people, many people working at the company, the 10%

:21:00. > :21:04.discount card was a very, very valuable commodity to them. We

:21:05. > :21:17.should be wary about actually time people, forcing employees to put up

:21:18. > :21:25.tape, -- paid. We can't just pretend that actions have no consequences up

:21:26. > :21:28.increasing people public page. -- pay. Of course we need to think

:21:29. > :21:37.carefully of what the consequences will be. Because in Bradford where I

:21:38. > :21:40.am, there'll be 2% extra on council tax, a very small portion of that is

:21:41. > :21:58.being passed onto independent care homes. I thought is to help them

:21:59. > :22:02.with national living wage. ... The consequence of that could be that

:22:03. > :22:09.their are a lot of close own stash care homes that closed down. We do

:22:10. > :22:14.want to see this in the UK not because employers are mean, nasty

:22:15. > :22:20.people, but simply they can't afford to put pay the national minium wage

:22:21. > :22:25.for care home fees. There is a economic reality about this with the

:22:26. > :22:31.people like it or not. When I met with a number of employers recently,

:22:32. > :22:34.the other point they made Mr Deputy Speaker, was that this policy takes

:22:35. > :22:39.no account at differentials. When you raise the pay of the people at

:22:40. > :22:43.the bottom, to a higher rate, it's not the people at the bottom get a

:22:44. > :22:50.pay raise, everyone in the organisation as well. If I was paid

:22:51. > :22:58.pound hour more than they were, I want an extra pounds an hour as

:22:59. > :23:01.well. All the employers, if anyone knows anything about running a

:23:02. > :23:08.business particularly those who run small businesses, and our

:23:09. > :23:14.constituencies, there is never a debate about higher and higher

:23:15. > :23:18.wages. Something has to give. By this differentials to disappear, but

:23:19. > :23:27.to the happiness of the people but we had before, or fewer employees,

:23:28. > :23:35.for fewer and fewer hours I cannot give wait, there's not much time.

:23:36. > :23:41.Finally, the national wage, this increase of national wage will

:23:42. > :23:46.almost certainly lead to more people coming into the EU from the and the

:23:47. > :23:52.UK if we don't leave with the referendum. That is a basic fact.

:23:53. > :23:58.The second thing is, minimum wage, is great for people who already are

:23:59. > :24:03.in work and are getting paid. You can have a minimum wages Heisey

:24:04. > :24:07.like, but it is a very little use to you, there are many people in this

:24:08. > :24:17.country find it difficult to get on the job of the latter were also the

:24:18. > :24:22.reasons,. Amid point before, when people like it or not. There are too

:24:23. > :24:31.fewer disabled people in this country that are not employed. I

:24:32. > :24:35.want the government to think about what the going to do when we have a

:24:36. > :24:41.high wages to help disabled people find a job. Whether they subdivide

:24:42. > :24:46.his employers something has to be done. We can't as we people on the

:24:47. > :24:50.scrap heap or unable to get a job because the first run of the job

:24:51. > :25:01.run, was too far away to be given a chance in the first place. We have

:25:02. > :25:08.the thing about always consequences. And opening think the honourable

:25:09. > :25:18.friend for her efforts with the back fence -- backbench debate. I wish

:25:19. > :25:22.her a speedy recovery is a know she will achieve this by sheer force of

:25:23. > :25:30.will power. I like to thank my Honorable friend for stepping in. I

:25:31. > :25:37.must admit when I sat here in this chamber, the 70 months ago by side

:25:38. > :25:39.-- alongside many others, but her chances were increasing cave from

:25:40. > :25:51.the lowest paid and I was speechless. So my political life,

:25:52. > :25:55.I've improve work conditions for the people of this country. Especially

:25:56. > :26:00.the lowest paid. What am I proudest moments in my political life is CA

:26:01. > :26:12.Labor government and this class, get rid of the national widget... I was

:26:13. > :26:18.especially therefore understandable circumstances, delighted that the

:26:19. > :26:23.Chancellor had his own road to Damascus conversion, has finally

:26:24. > :26:28.seen the light it is every work wishes in this great country and

:26:29. > :26:36.possibly at the top of the latter deserve to repaired -- paid fairly.

:26:37. > :26:41.But, there's always a but with this government is a rapidly discovered

:26:42. > :26:47.that my citizens was not displaced. It was very much spot on, as was

:26:48. > :26:56.recognised by the now departed, secretary of state, the Jester the

:26:57. > :27:01.public tag line about giving substance in their eyes was nothing

:27:02. > :27:12.but hot air and bluff. The stuff was the stuff of fairy tales, it

:27:13. > :27:18.suddenly became clear that this country is being hammered, just as

:27:19. > :27:26.they are but this tyrant government. Despite the public embarrassing mess

:27:27. > :27:32.with past credits, Universal credit, jobs introduced this very month of

:27:33. > :27:39.of thousands of low paid workers who are going to receive universal

:27:40. > :27:46.credit. The first page provided by this government. The topic of today

:27:47. > :27:49.public debate the chances spectacular fair earlier to make

:27:50. > :27:59.sure that big business is so-called national living wage. Rather than on

:28:00. > :28:11.the back of workers. My Honorable friend, the member from the gym and

:28:12. > :28:25.Morgan has shown that when given a choice, how for cutting simply,

:28:26. > :28:30.share from. Would you agree with me many businesses in the care sector

:28:31. > :28:36.should be getting away art -- are getting away with this, not plain --

:28:37. > :28:46.paying for travel time, clipping, they're cutting tea breaks, lunch

:28:47. > :28:51.breaks, editing getting in the way that is even further comparative

:28:52. > :29:02.now. I'd like to thank my Honorable friend for making a good example of

:29:03. > :29:07.that Saturday potluck workers described a contract which is a

:29:08. > :29:10.number of benefit's worker benefits it is believed that many will lose

:29:11. > :29:15.thousands of pounds. Their response of the company is to increase the

:29:16. > :29:20.scheme, and to protect the value of his workers overall packages. This

:29:21. > :29:34.is simply not good enough, the parent company Kingfisher,

:29:35. > :29:40.jaw-dropping numbers, jaw-dropping hypocrisy. Once again this Tory

:29:41. > :29:46.government is deciding over exploitation those least able to

:29:47. > :29:52.meet and let their voice be heard, what they're doing is simply unfair

:29:53. > :29:57.simply unacceptable and simply cannot go on. This Chancellor,

:29:58. > :30:05.cannot plead ignorance and the sample episode is unexpected

:30:06. > :30:10.by-product of his bad deeds. Why? My Honorable friend from Ashfield on

:30:11. > :30:12.the 21st of March reveals that this government was aware the public

:30:13. > :30:20.government that big business would choose default on the with cuts to

:30:21. > :30:27.the national packages. This is the government public view and I quote

:30:28. > :30:32.exactly how to respond, appropriate to this circumstance any changes

:30:33. > :30:37.with the contractual pair should be discussed and worked with workers in

:30:38. > :30:43.advance. This government survey does not get it if the choice with

:30:44. > :30:47.workers is unemployment and a to changes, and want to go to their

:30:48. > :30:50.overall contractual benefits, most if not all will of course stop

:30:51. > :31:00.buying. She is making an excellent speech,

:31:01. > :31:05.there are a group of workers, namely the self-employed who are in very

:31:06. > :31:07.difficult position, I would give an example, a constituent recently

:31:08. > :31:13.contacted me, her partner works for a courier company, once his petrol

:31:14. > :31:16.has been before he is getting paid about ?260 a month for working a 50

:31:17. > :31:21.hour week, she told me she works on a minimum wage as a pizza delivery

:31:22. > :31:24.driver and is earning three times as much for doing happy hours. Does

:31:25. > :31:28.that not show a whole group of people out there who are being

:31:29. > :31:32.forced into a difficult position Quick I would like to thank my

:31:33. > :31:38.Honorable friend for making that important point. Big business knows

:31:39. > :31:42.that the voice of the lowest paid is easily silence. The fear of

:31:43. > :31:45.unemployment is a powerful tool. What is needed is for this

:31:46. > :31:49.government to step up and to legislate, to say that the business

:31:50. > :31:52.should fund the so-called national living wage, not through Cox to

:31:53. > :31:56.workers right benefits but through an quite rightly sacrificing a

:31:57. > :32:04.percentage of their own pockets. This is not done there but properly

:32:05. > :32:10.given a tax on big business profits. Soon, they will pay just 17% tax on

:32:11. > :32:15.their profits, down from 20%. So, I call on this government to legislate

:32:16. > :32:19.to require big business to use the extra cash released from reviews

:32:20. > :32:22.corporation tax levels to fund the so-called national living wage, and

:32:23. > :32:27.not as I fear they will, to deliver large dividends to the bear

:32:28. > :32:32.shareholders in the coming years. This government must step up, it

:32:33. > :32:40.must end this injustice, it simply cannot go on. Thank you Mr Deputy

:32:41. > :32:42.Speaker. Thank you for calling me Madam Deputy Speaker, it is a

:32:43. > :32:46.pleasure to follow my Honorable friend from Bradford South, I would

:32:47. > :32:51.also like to thank my Honorable friend for helping secure this

:32:52. > :32:58.debate and I hope she gets well very soon. Let me start by saying while

:32:59. > :33:01.Britain certainly does deserve a pay rise, it is been due one ever since

:33:02. > :33:06.it doesn't tan, I would also make the point that if we listen to the

:33:07. > :33:11.rhetoric from the government, we may be forgiven for believing that the

:33:12. > :33:14.new national living wage will and all the problems of those that are

:33:15. > :33:18.struggling to make ends meet. We have heard the countless numbers of

:33:19. > :33:21.actors with differing regional taunts delivers on its of what the

:33:22. > :33:28.new national living wage and for them. During radio adverts, in

:33:29. > :33:32.reality this is not a real living wage, far from it. While many

:33:33. > :33:37.received the step up, assuming our society will be facing an uphill

:33:38. > :33:40.challenge from the 1st of April. The chair of the all party parliamentary

:33:41. > :33:43.group for small shops has spent the last couple of months talking to

:33:44. > :33:47.business owners who fear that the increase in their wages bill will be

:33:48. > :33:51.the final nail in the coffin as there is simply not able to meet

:33:52. > :33:55.those costs. I'm coming up to some of the points the Honorable member

:33:56. > :34:00.raised. There were some promising features in the budget on business

:34:01. > :34:04.rates and small businesses. From April 2017, they will either be

:34:05. > :34:10.taken out of the rating system completely or have a smaller burden

:34:11. > :34:15.to pay. However, the is the key word there. I will indeed. I think the

:34:16. > :34:20.Honorable gentleman for giving me that point, he mentioned that the

:34:21. > :34:24.business wage of the government new measures in that. I don't know

:34:25. > :34:30.whether he is aware but some local authorities it may cost them more.

:34:31. > :34:33.The Honorable member is absolutely right, it is a real concern for

:34:34. > :34:36.local authorities the disparity across the country is a good point.

:34:37. > :34:41.The other point I am making in relation to business rates is that

:34:42. > :34:43.from 2017, there is an issue there because small businesses will be

:34:44. > :34:47.struggling for a whole year before they receive that relief that is in

:34:48. > :34:51.the budget. As I have mentioned already in the chamber, the retail

:34:52. > :34:57.business rate relief grants is being stopped this year for small business

:34:58. > :35:00.owners as well. Small businesses employ 35% of the nation workforce,

:35:01. > :35:05.but when you look at those of the minimum wage, it rises to over half.

:35:06. > :35:08.From the 1st of April, small businesses will have been dealt a

:35:09. > :35:12.double whammy of increased wage bills, and a reduction in support

:35:13. > :35:17.from her business rate grants. They will be under real financial

:35:18. > :35:21.pressures for a whole year. Am going to make it a bit of progress, the

:35:22. > :35:24.larger retailers will be able to offset their costs by reducing the

:35:25. > :35:30.benefits they pay out such as Sunday's day as we have seen for

:35:31. > :35:33.examples the Honorable member has been reading Indymedia recently. But

:35:34. > :35:38.for these smaller businesses, they will have to put it price, so their

:35:39. > :35:42.recruitment practices or maybe downscale their operations. Some

:35:43. > :35:46.will just have to shut down, unable to shoulder the Castonzo 2017.

:35:47. > :35:52.Having already been struggling for years. The truth is, the new

:35:53. > :35:56.national living wage should have coincided with the changes to the

:35:57. > :36:01.business rate system. The next issue I would like to reason relates to

:36:02. > :36:03.the precious social care sector, this sector has faced a wave of

:36:04. > :36:08.pressure from this government over the last few years. Recently we have

:36:09. > :36:12.heard a lot about the social care presets, the ability to please

:36:13. > :36:17.consult that back does not present for care costs. Senior members have

:36:18. > :36:23.told me with the introduction of the national living wage, this provides

:36:24. > :36:27.very little funding if any, poorer areas and it is a similar point to

:36:28. > :36:31.the one on business rates will raise just over ?1 million due to the fact

:36:32. > :36:36.that the type of council tax properties that we have in the

:36:37. > :36:40.borough. Even the conservative led local Government Association have

:36:41. > :36:43.warned that the national living wage will put adult care services at

:36:44. > :36:47.breaking point. What makes this new change more worrying is that

:36:48. > :36:52.currently many in the care sector are not even pay the minimum wage.

:36:53. > :36:57.It has shown that pay structures such as not paying travelling time

:36:58. > :37:00.means that those that care for our elderly loved ones are not being

:37:01. > :37:04.paid for the vital work they do. If you want to give the care workers

:37:05. > :37:07.the wage they deserve, then it must be adequately funded. These are some

:37:08. > :37:12.of the most hard-working people, they deserve to earn at least the

:37:13. > :37:19.minimum wage but unless the appropriate funding is in place,

:37:20. > :37:22.they simply won't happen. I thank him for giving way, I was not

:37:23. > :37:26.referring to the living wages as such, what I was talking about was

:37:27. > :37:29.the change in the business rates to local authorities and the cost of

:37:30. > :37:34.the local authorities, some of them will lose out on this. I understand

:37:35. > :37:40.that point and I agree completely, let me finish by saying that Britain

:37:41. > :37:43.does indeed deserve a pay rise, not some public relations stunt from a

:37:44. > :37:47.Chancellor obsessed with political strategy. An increase in the minimum

:37:48. > :37:53.wage must be done properly and small businesses must be held so they can

:37:54. > :37:56.afford it. But, it most importantly enable individuals to be able to

:37:57. > :38:02.support themselves. The minimum wage remains a great favour triumph, and

:38:03. > :38:08.by the looks of it, we will need a Labor government to once again give

:38:09. > :38:13.Britain a proper pay increase. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker, I would

:38:14. > :38:18.like to start cracking tree to my Honorable friend for securing a

:38:19. > :38:21.debate on this important topic. And I wish you a speedy recovery. I

:38:22. > :38:26.would like to congratulate my Honorable friend for the way that

:38:27. > :38:30.she is meeting this debate. Like so many members in this house, I

:38:31. > :38:33.welcome the news in Laster's budget that the government would introduce

:38:34. > :38:38.a new national living wage which would see workers aged 25 and older

:38:39. > :38:44.receive ?7 20 an hour in April and increase it 50p from October 2000

:38:45. > :38:49.15. What it was set at ?6 70. As well as the fantasy you to ?9 our

:38:50. > :38:53.right 2000 20. Both of these measures are important step toward

:38:54. > :38:56.securing a real living wage, which the Labour Party continues to

:38:57. > :39:00.campaign for. After years of workers and during the bulk of the

:39:01. > :39:03.government austerity agenda, it pay increase for 1.8 million workers is

:39:04. > :39:10.welcomed, even though it does not go far enough. For me this is a local

:39:11. > :39:13.issue which affects many in my constituents, since going into the

:39:14. > :39:21.House of Commons, 19% of people in my constituency have benefited from

:39:22. > :39:26.the which this year, this would rise to 27% by 2020. I understand that

:39:27. > :39:31.these changes would this abortion and the impact small businesses who

:39:32. > :39:34.employ 35% of the adult workforce, and 52% of brain's minimum-wage

:39:35. > :39:37.workers, and it will always be concentrated in the hospitality and

:39:38. > :39:42.retail sectors of the counts for over 46% of all minimum wage jobs. I

:39:43. > :39:46.also note the concerns and particularly from this sort of care

:39:47. > :39:51.sector which is already underfunded, and the government urgently needs to

:39:52. > :39:56.do more to just the short funding. In recent weeks leading up to the

:39:57. > :40:00.implement of these new which, we have seen a campaign of fear put out

:40:01. > :40:05.by large employers who simply do not want to pay their employees a fair

:40:06. > :40:09.wage. Some have claimed that anything which would lead to job

:40:10. > :40:16.losses. Others had the gall to say that recently wages is a tax

:40:17. > :40:20.targeted at businesses use of low skilled workers. When the truth of

:40:21. > :40:25.the matter is that the taxpayers have to pay the tune of ?11 billion

:40:26. > :40:32.a year. Prior to these wage rises, the four big supermarkets were

:40:33. > :40:39.costing 1 billion a year any tax credits, an extra benefit way they

:40:40. > :40:42.underpaid staff. What I have found disturbing quite frankly shameful is

:40:43. > :40:45.the way in which some large employees in the service sector have

:40:46. > :40:51.used the introduction of a living wage as an excuse to cut basic work

:40:52. > :40:57.entitlements. Some employers have cut holiday pay, lunch hour pay,

:40:58. > :41:04.sick pay, and contracting hours. You retail hub already been mentioned

:41:05. > :41:12.have got the memo holiday pay and all the benefits were mutually

:41:13. > :41:18.raising pay. One test co-worker said that the loss of pay will come to

:41:19. > :41:21.the amount of ?75 a month, this could be difference between making

:41:22. > :41:27.next month rent or being kicked out into the streets. Will my Honorable

:41:28. > :41:32.friend give way? I thank you for giving way, she is making some very

:41:33. > :41:39.underhand practices in those worker which she paid tribute with me to

:41:40. > :41:43.the whole have been a key role in exposing a lot of these problems

:41:44. > :41:46.over the last few months and underlining why trading is so

:41:47. > :41:48.crucial in standing up for workers in workplaces or indicate sector or

:41:49. > :41:54.the retail sector she is referring to. I'm very happy to upgrade to my

:41:55. > :41:58.Honorable friend, that has done so much to stand up for workers rights,

:41:59. > :42:06.when they are faced to the threats of the companies. Continuing, they

:42:07. > :42:10.have reportedly stopped paying staff during lunch breaks, while others

:42:11. > :42:16.told they could not afford to the National Minimum Wage and give them

:42:17. > :42:20.at lunch time, this is despite the fact that they saw their profits

:42:21. > :42:25.grow by eight and a half percent to 240 million in the 12 months last

:42:26. > :42:31.year. The company has not pay corporation tax since 2007. As

:42:32. > :42:35.mentioned earlier in this debate, being Q has demanded that employees

:42:36. > :42:38.sign away rights to a range of initiatives worth ?1000 a year or

:42:39. > :42:45.face a prospect of being sacked. This intimidating of staff should

:42:46. > :42:47.not be tolerated in any workplace. The low pay commission has warned

:42:48. > :42:53.that some employees may decide to enable employees as apprentice or

:42:54. > :42:56.self-employed to avoid having to pay a living wage, others just have been

:42:57. > :43:01.floated by larger retailers include cutting the number of staff earth

:43:02. > :43:08.beating up the implementation of technology which has more self

:43:09. > :43:10.checkout. These actions are in a complete contradiction to the aims

:43:11. > :43:15.of the living wage. As the government pointed out they said it

:43:16. > :43:21.would prompt employees to invest in trade to make their workers more

:43:22. > :43:24.productive and brake pedal pay low productivity gap. I don't see how

:43:25. > :43:27.cutting in work benefits will make employees more productive or how it

:43:28. > :43:34.would break the cycle of low pay and insecure work. Another high-profile

:43:35. > :43:39.companies have said that they would increase from us is to cover the

:43:40. > :43:44.changing wages and pass it on directly to be considered. I was

:43:45. > :43:48.astonished to hear someone in my own constituency tell the customer that

:43:49. > :43:52.the price of bread has gone up because of the change to wages.

:43:53. > :43:56.These are companies that can afford to pay living wage, they should not

:43:57. > :44:00.be a system where employees can choose between a holiday pay or

:44:01. > :44:06.living wage for raising prices for sacking staff. They show their

:44:07. > :44:10.contempt for the customers, contempt for department and the law and was

:44:11. > :44:14.important of all contempt for their staff. The very individuals who put

:44:15. > :44:17.their sweat and blood and time and effort so ease at the top can

:44:18. > :44:21.receive guard salaries deducted record profits. If these large

:44:22. > :44:27.companies employ thousands of people across the UK, can't afford to play

:44:28. > :44:32.their lawyers and accountants large fees to cut their tax bill and a

:44:33. > :44:34.corporation tax. I don't see how they can't afford to pay their

:44:35. > :44:40.employees a real wage that they and their families can live off.

:44:41. > :44:44.Government estimates the total cost to employees have been fermented the

:44:45. > :44:53.national living wage in 2016 and 2017 is ?1.1 billion, yet last year

:44:54. > :44:58.according to the tax fraud, cost ?16 billion with tax evasion alone sing

:44:59. > :45:02.the government have four billion less in tax. That money lost to the

:45:03. > :45:06.economy could cover the cost of the implementation of a real living

:45:07. > :45:12.wage. Some claim that anything which would lead to job losses, it is

:45:13. > :45:15.worth pointing out in the of these scaremongering among job losses that

:45:16. > :45:19.there has been little to no negative impact on our economy or jobs to the

:45:20. > :45:26.introduction of a minimum wage in 1999 despite those same people

:45:27. > :45:30.making the same arguments then. I'm happy to say that some employees

:45:31. > :45:37.have welcomed the wage, some irrespective of their wage or the

:45:38. > :45:40.government living wage. This debate is not simply about the cost of the

:45:41. > :45:47.living wage, it is a wide reflection on the divided society. I would like

:45:48. > :45:51.to share with you, I am running out of time, my own experiences, for 24

:45:52. > :45:55.years I owned and ran a sickness. Business in which I employ ten

:45:56. > :45:59.people. For all that time, I recognise that the staff were a real

:46:00. > :46:04.asset in helping to build the success of the business. They work

:46:05. > :46:07.hard, and contributed much and were valued highly, and I was proud to

:46:08. > :46:13.pay them a real living wage, and they certainly deserve no less. When

:46:14. > :46:16.I was leader of the council, I was pleased to introduce the real living

:46:17. > :46:21.wage for all employees. Not only is this the fair and decent thing to

:46:22. > :46:24.do, it makes some economic sense. When people have more money in their

:46:25. > :46:31.pocket, they are created more and better services and jobs for

:46:32. > :46:34.damaging businesses act as a boost. I'm calling on the government to

:46:35. > :46:40.protect these workers for rights that are being undermined. The

:46:41. > :46:52.employees should not see the living wage as an opportunity to cut back

:46:53. > :46:57.on a holiday. I congratulate the Honorable member and I wish him a

:46:58. > :47:01.recovery, I am sorry she could not be hit the lever her debate, and I

:47:02. > :47:07.think the Honorable member for bringing forward this debate. I want

:47:08. > :47:12.to start by recognising that the idea of a living wage sounds

:47:13. > :47:16.positive, it sounds like a great thing, in fact it sounds like a

:47:17. > :47:21.boost for people on low incomes, indeed who would argue with an

:47:22. > :47:25.increase to the living wage or a wage at all. But the fact is this is

:47:26. > :47:29.not a living wage. I don't often find myself agreeing with the

:47:30. > :47:35.Honorable member, I don't think I ever have one this day when he

:47:36. > :47:40.states that nothing more than an increased minimum wage is although

:47:41. > :47:45.this policy is. The fact that we are debating albeit already witnessing

:47:46. > :47:47.the unintended consequences of this policy, the reality of an adverse

:47:48. > :47:53.effect on workers benefits only proves that this government has once

:47:54. > :47:56.more undermined the role of workers in favour of businesses. Once more,

:47:57. > :48:02.the hard-working people of this country will pay while the tankers

:48:03. > :48:06.and businesses and tax avoiders continue to profit. As employees

:48:07. > :48:10.seek to manage the impact of wage bills, the reality is that no

:48:11. > :48:17.business wants to lose profit. Reducing staff numbers, cutting

:48:18. > :48:20.hours, misusing contracts, abusing contracts, and reducing employee

:48:21. > :48:24.benefits are just some of the ways for businesses are managing to sub

:48:25. > :48:30.the cost of being people real living wages. While expecting more from

:48:31. > :48:37.their employees, so let's be clear, the real living wage as defined by

:48:38. > :48:44.the foundation takes into account these costs. Calculated and failed

:48:45. > :48:55.to take into account the cost of living. How can it be called a

:48:56. > :48:57.living wage? The Honorable ladies making the same argument, it is

:48:58. > :49:01.important to understanding living wage should be seen in the context

:49:02. > :49:05.of an argument of pay. She is right to say that employers will then look

:49:06. > :49:09.at the total wage bill and look for other changes but she should not

:49:10. > :49:13.conflict the two. I think she would like to support the government

:49:14. > :49:21.intention of increasing the pay of workers, which you agree with that?

:49:22. > :49:24.We can agree workers deserve a minimum wage, and to go back to my

:49:25. > :49:31.argument, it is merely an enhanced minimum wage. What I will come the

:49:32. > :49:36.living wage, this does not meet the mark. Sadly, this is not even apply

:49:37. > :49:41.to those under 25, try telling a 17-year-old part-time worker that

:49:42. > :49:46.there are workers off less value than someone a few years older. It

:49:47. > :49:51.is we think of our young people. Is this the value placed Honorable

:49:52. > :49:55.Young people were? Who are all too often forgotten in this government

:49:56. > :50:00.priorities. Determining which is important, in Scotland we recognise

:50:01. > :50:03.that, we set a target for 500 real living wage employees by the end of

:50:04. > :50:10.this Parliament and we have already exceeded it. Last year, the Scottish

:50:11. > :50:14.Government announced that it had anti-SNP government introduced to

:50:15. > :50:19.pay BB living wage as an integral part of the public sector pay policy

:50:20. > :50:23.since about 11 we have already invested one billion per year in the

:50:24. > :50:26.living wage rates across parts of the public sector for the Scottish

:50:27. > :50:33.Government controls the page directly benefiting these workers.

:50:34. > :50:35.Scotland already has a higher proportion of workers paid a living

:50:36. > :50:40.wage than any other nation across the UK. In my constituency, there

:50:41. > :50:50.are some good examples, somebody posted examples as to the medical

:50:51. > :50:55.centre ENT seek contractors, although for leading the way as new

:50:56. > :51:01.living wage employers. Setting an example of what can be achieved. In

:51:02. > :51:05.fact this government in many ways will undermine the possibility and

:51:06. > :51:08.the incentive to achieve a real living wage. Despite what the

:51:09. > :51:13.government have said, they must do more to ensure that no worker is

:51:14. > :51:15.worse off as a result of this change, we have all seen the

:51:16. > :51:22.worrying reports of employers mitigating the cost by cutting

:51:23. > :51:28.hours, Premier rates for overtime. I know the Honorable member has a lady

:51:29. > :51:32.at the Prime Minister whether he would guarantee that no worker would

:51:33. > :51:39.be made worse off as a result of the national living wage. Of course, she

:51:40. > :51:45.never see a response, perhaps the Minister will get that commitment

:51:46. > :51:49.today. I am depressed by the negativity of this debate because I

:51:50. > :51:53.have got people coming to me in my constituency pleased that they're

:51:54. > :51:56.going to get ?900 more in their pockets, 40% of people are going to

:51:57. > :51:59.get a wage rise, and this is something that this government has

:52:00. > :52:03.been speaking up for, people want more money in their pockets, this is

:52:04. > :52:06.what we're going to get, businesses on the whole are pearl it in my

:52:07. > :52:13.constituency, it is difficult but they are for it. The reality is that

:52:14. > :52:16.what it is well, and you will always be welcome for people to have more

:52:17. > :52:21.pennies in their pocket, the fact is the government are not looking at

:52:22. > :52:24.the full picture, when it comes to it, it outweighs any benefit from

:52:25. > :52:35.their so-called national living wage, how can you defend that this

:52:36. > :52:39.is a living wage at all? Am grateful my speaker he sent me a message that

:52:40. > :52:44.indicated on the 1st of April he got a pay rise but on the 31st of March

:52:45. > :52:47.you received it preprinted letter for change in circumstance

:52:48. > :52:53.indicating he is not better off but worse off. Thank you for badly

:52:54. > :52:58.making that point, despite the Chancellor's claimed that they need

:52:59. > :53:06.a pay rise, I mean dude, but indeed they do deserve it, they will wages,

:53:07. > :53:11.jobs that they currently experience without any real benefit in fact an

:53:12. > :53:15.erosion of any employee benefits that they once had is also telling

:53:16. > :53:20.the government believe woman will benefit most from these change in

:53:21. > :53:24.policy because actually the fact is that it recognises that woman are

:53:25. > :53:28.more likely to be stopped in minimum wage part-time uncertain employment,

:53:29. > :53:32.it tells the story of gender inequality where women are

:53:33. > :53:36.systematically paid less than men. It perpetuates the gender pay gap,

:53:37. > :53:42.something which the Minister has pledged to end in a generation. But,

:53:43. > :53:45.indeed he these to appear to be matched by words. Once again, this

:53:46. > :53:57.government knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

:53:58. > :54:02.First of all, I'd like to congratulate my Honorable friend on

:54:03. > :54:07.securing this important debate today and for my Honorable friend for

:54:08. > :54:12.stepping in and introducing bad for her in a very impressive manner.

:54:13. > :54:15.Giving that at one point or another we found ourselves working for

:54:16. > :54:19.somebody else, we get far too little attention in the space to the

:54:20. > :54:22.reality of the world of work. To many, that reality involves

:54:23. > :54:27.insecurity uncertainty, and expectation. What this debate is

:54:28. > :54:31.exposed already is the level of expectation that still pervades too

:54:32. > :54:35.many workplaces in this country. Many members have listed examples of

:54:36. > :54:38.employees abusing their bargaining power to take a leak with one hand

:54:39. > :54:44.what the new minimum wage gives with the other. I agreed with the

:54:45. > :54:48.president of the union whose members have seen what he said he felt the

:54:49. > :54:51.way you minimum wage have been introduced had allowed employees to

:54:52. > :54:55.force the changes to contractual entitlement. If it is the

:54:56. > :54:59.government's intention that an increasing the minimum wage meant to

:55:00. > :55:03.end the underwriting of property stages then they surely cannot have

:55:04. > :55:09.wanted that increase to be paid out of the pockets of the very people

:55:10. > :55:15.this policy is intended to help. On that point, maybe he can answer this

:55:16. > :55:20.the change in the living wage over five years would effectively be a

:55:21. > :55:24.30% increase in the Labor costs for companies. That is 30% more they

:55:25. > :55:28.would have to pay, I agree the government did not want that result

:55:29. > :55:31.in people losing wages, but what would he say to the employers, the

:55:32. > :55:35.small-business people that they are talking about who have to meet that

:55:36. > :55:38.increase in cost, what alternative would he like to see them

:55:39. > :55:44.undertakes? Increase prices? What else would he like to see? I think

:55:45. > :55:48.he is missing the point of the whole debate which is at the moment we

:55:49. > :55:51.have a very dishonest settlement whereby on the one hand we have the

:55:52. > :55:54.government thinks you're going to get more money in your pocket but

:55:55. > :55:59.actually what we are seeing again and again from employers is methods

:56:00. > :56:02.to take the money from another method and what we want from the

:56:03. > :56:06.government is much more clear and transparent way of dealing with it

:56:07. > :56:13.so employers do end up paying what the government has decreed is the

:56:14. > :56:17.minimum people can live on. Specifically on the point of small

:56:18. > :56:21.businesses we know that for the lowest paid workers who often work

:56:22. > :56:24.for small businesses, if they have a pay increase, they tend to spend it

:56:25. > :56:30.locally so the local economy grows and in addition the governments have

:56:31. > :56:38.given tax cuts to businesses. Small businesses are not being deprived of

:56:39. > :56:43.any benefit. I think we have all heard example today of large

:56:44. > :56:45.national chains where we can all use our spending power to actually go

:56:46. > :56:50.somewhere else and support those local businesses that are indeed the

:56:51. > :56:55.lifeboat of our communities. But, we should not be surprised about the

:56:56. > :56:58.weight that this is panning out because for some employers this is

:56:59. > :57:02.the way they have always operated. Seeing every issue that affect their

:57:03. > :57:07.businesses as an excuse to whittle away at the terms of conditions of

:57:08. > :57:13.their staff. There applied in a written parliamentary issue is there

:57:14. > :57:16.for two earlier on but any changes to terms and conditions should be

:57:17. > :57:20.discussed and agreed with workers in advance. I am sure that advice will

:57:21. > :57:23.come as a surprise to the Health Secretary in particular given his

:57:24. > :57:26.approach to the junior doctors dispute. I'm afraid the idea that

:57:27. > :57:31.employers are going to wait, an agreement on this issue is fanciful

:57:32. > :57:35.and I'm sorry to say there is no relation to the reality on the

:57:36. > :57:38.ground. Those were presented by Trade Union Bill least have a

:57:39. > :57:41.fighting chance with the reality is that employers can and do change

:57:42. > :57:46.and when they do it is always to the and when they do it is always to the

:57:47. > :57:50.betterment of the people that they employ. Once an employee gives a

:57:51. > :57:55.notice of change, an employee has very little redress, and they do

:57:56. > :57:59.have legal redress as an option, the introduction has made that in most

:58:00. > :58:05.unlikely roots of an 80% drop in claims since these were introduced.

:58:06. > :58:08.My own constituency has input in one of the top five living wage for

:58:09. > :58:12.women working across the Northwest according to the TUC, sixth sense

:58:13. > :58:16.percent earning less living wage, any increases in basic they have to

:58:17. > :58:19.be a step in the right direction for that of workers as long as it is not

:58:20. > :58:24.at the expense of other elements of the pay package. It would be a

:58:25. > :58:28.mistake to claim that simply increasing basic pay me that there

:58:29. > :58:32.is not their workplace excellence. We know there are many routes and

:58:33. > :58:37.mechanisms used to stop effective workplace protection, the focus of

:58:38. > :58:42.employment, zero contracts, as his Parliament can see we could actually

:58:43. > :58:45.see unscrupulous employers sacking people just before their birthday so

:58:46. > :58:50.they can get in someone on a cheaper rate. We Seymour apprenticeships

:58:51. > :58:53.that could pop up because they offer the chance for an employee to pay

:58:54. > :58:58.someone in the word rate for the same job. What is going to be done

:58:59. > :59:05.to be tackled this. Barely half of all of them jobs in both of these

:59:06. > :59:11.factors in my constituency, I have conducted my own research and it has

:59:12. > :59:15.revealed widespread abuse which the government at the moment appear to

:59:16. > :59:19.be disinterested in tackling. The research which was conducted at the

:59:20. > :59:23.end of last year showed that 90% of the 9000 outlets surveyed did not

:59:24. > :59:29.pay the real living wage but it also highlighted the widespread practice

:59:30. > :59:34.of what is known as shifting, this is where staff are sent home in the

:59:35. > :59:37.middle of a shift without any pay or compensation. Over 80% of

:59:38. > :59:41.respondents in the survey admitted that they would do this and what

:59:42. > :59:44.this means is that people can end up out-of-pocket simply by going to

:59:45. > :59:49.work, being made to wait around without pay and then being sent home

:59:50. > :59:51.without even having had their travel costs reimbursed. I hear a lot about

:59:52. > :59:56.the government wanting to get everyone into work was able to but I

:59:57. > :00:01.hear no condemnation by them of this blatant expectation of people who

:00:02. > :00:03.are trying to do the right thing in order to find themselves

:00:04. > :00:07.out-of-pocket by the very nature of going to work. So, yes let's make

:00:08. > :00:11.every job one that rewards people with a wage that they can actually

:00:12. > :00:14.live on but at the same time it's put in place a proper system of

:00:15. > :00:17.workplace protection so that a government policy is not allowed to

:00:18. > :00:22.be undermined by unscripted as and private practices taking way over

:00:23. > :00:26.benefits to the people and of the better off or in some cases actually

:00:27. > :00:30.worse off. I believe to achieve this we need a fundamental change in

:00:31. > :00:33.government approach starting with the recognition that she unions and

:00:34. > :00:36.collective bargaining have a significant role to play in the

:00:37. > :00:40.future prosperity of our nation. Not only do we need a change in

:00:41. > :00:47.government but we also require fundamental change in many employees

:00:48. > :00:50.attitudes and move away from the view the worker as a disposable

:00:51. > :00:53.activity to be replaced by a machine that does not question or expect to

:00:54. > :00:58.get paid and does not belong to a union. For many people being in

:00:59. > :01:01.workings on ability and uncertainty about their future, how can we

:01:02. > :01:05.tolerate a situation where being in work can routinely mean people not

:01:06. > :01:08.knowing whether they have earned enough to put food on their family's

:01:09. > :01:14.table at the end of the day, we should not be forced into thinking

:01:15. > :01:17.this policy is a panacea, the new minimum wage those with children

:01:18. > :01:22.would be ?700 a year worse off thanks to the changes introduced by

:01:23. > :01:26.this government. So, the reality is that we are debating this today

:01:27. > :01:31.because the culture in this country place little emphasis on employment

:01:32. > :01:33.rights and until it is resolved, the injustices we hear about today will

:01:34. > :01:43.continue. Can I join colleagues in

:01:44. > :01:49.congratulating the member in securing this debate, I wish her the

:01:50. > :01:54.best in a speedy recovery. I thank all my number for opening the debate

:01:55. > :01:56.in her absence. One of the biggest challenges for this government has

:01:57. > :02:02.been the persistence of low paid work and I welcome any, and all

:02:03. > :02:07.measures to redress this. I asked the government to reconsider the

:02:08. > :02:11.decision to deny the national living wage to under 25. I believe it is an

:02:12. > :02:16.absolute travesty that your people have been told they are not worth ?7

:02:17. > :02:22.an hour. I asked the government to think about the message that sends

:02:23. > :02:35.to young people. Those between 21-25 are paid 50 feet less than others.

:02:36. > :02:40.Those under the age of 18 are paid under ?4 an hour. It would be

:02:41. > :02:47.frustrating enough for those under 25 to miss out on a financial boost,

:02:48. > :02:50.however, the Minister for the financial office outlined his

:02:51. > :02:55.reasons, saying that anyone who has employed people know that people in

:02:56. > :03:00.their first jobs are not as productive on average. There was an

:03:01. > :03:06.active choice not to cover under 25. What a blow to the next generation,

:03:07. > :03:09.Madam Deputy Speaker. To some perspective, Queen Victoria

:03:10. > :03:13.inherited the throne at the age of 18, Steve Jobs was 21 when he

:03:14. > :03:22.co-founded Apple, Mark sucker berg was hunting when he created

:03:23. > :03:30.Facebook, adult was 20 when she produced the famous album, tales of

:03:31. > :03:35.the Prime Minister at 24 have made us all feel like underachievers in

:03:36. > :03:38.this chamber. There is nothing new about young politicians. Far from

:03:39. > :03:45.being the average, and dare I say the honourable member is doing an

:03:46. > :03:50.outstanding job at the age of 21. I accept those embarking on a new role

:03:51. > :03:58.require support and training from their employers, however, that could

:03:59. > :04:01.be the case for any new employee, regardless of their age. To give you

:04:02. > :04:07.an example of how unjust this could be in practice, imagine a young

:04:08. > :04:11.person who goes into training in the workplace or into employment at 18.

:04:12. > :04:14.They could've potentially been in the job for seven years before they

:04:15. > :04:23.were entitled to the living wage. A new could start in the next best and

:04:24. > :04:27.could be paid the minimum wage with seven years last experience because

:04:28. > :04:31.they are over the 25 year threshold. Alternatively, a young person who

:04:32. > :04:36.works hard at school and pursues an academic group in university, and

:04:37. > :04:42.research indicates that a typical student outside of London might

:04:43. > :04:47.expect to graduate with around 35 to ?40,000 worth of debt. Most students

:04:48. > :04:51.on a three-year cost graduate at the age of 21. The office of national

:04:52. > :04:55.statistics identified around 47% graduate: Graduates are employed and

:04:56. > :05:04.nine graduate roles, a trend that has increased and 2009. We are faced

:05:05. > :05:09.with the graduate who has done the right thing and is saddled with

:05:10. > :05:16.pound delete macro debt as a result. And he isn't even entitled to the

:05:17. > :05:19.new minimum wage. They also have to pay their debt back to the

:05:20. > :05:24.government, which doesn't make sense. When I graduated at 21 and

:05:25. > :05:29.started working for an as and the, working in sales overseas and in the

:05:30. > :05:34.UK, I was one of the few employees who was, at the time, was not heard

:05:35. > :05:41.or had children. I was asked at short notice to work engagements in

:05:42. > :05:45.evenings and weekends. This reflects the expresses of young people to the

:05:46. > :05:52.country. We are asked to work more because of our youth. Harder bigger

:05:53. > :05:57.packages, and we often applied with a desire to prove ourselves and move

:05:58. > :06:01.up the letter. Also, sometimes, because the circumstances mean that

:06:02. > :06:04.it is easier for their employer to ask them rather than an older

:06:05. > :06:09.of staff. A man who works in my of staff. A man who works in my

:06:10. > :06:19.office who is 23 graduated at 21 from Oxford. The other members of

:06:20. > :06:26.staff who are over 25, it would be unfair to pay them less because of

:06:27. > :06:35.his age. And just. There is a danger that the under 25 not being paid

:06:36. > :06:39.enough makes the older workers more vulnerable. The unintended

:06:40. > :06:43.consequence is that under 20 funds are more attractive than those over

:06:44. > :06:47.25. I hope the government will outline how it intends to introduce

:06:48. > :06:51.safeguards into the living wage and in an economy where a few pounds is

:06:52. > :07:01.the difference between winning a contrast, and how we will proceed

:07:02. > :07:06.without exporting under 25 is -- exporting, and treating over 25 is

:07:07. > :07:12.in a way that would make them vulnerable. There was a report

:07:13. > :07:16.published saying that young people from varied socioeconomic bathrobes

:07:17. > :07:25.are starting out with a crippling amount of debt. Figures from the

:07:26. > :07:29.statistics of the office of national statistics said that when the

:07:30. > :07:33.effects of low paid on under 25 is that they are sucked into debt.

:07:34. > :07:37.16-25 -year-olds have the highest level of debt compared to their

:07:38. > :07:42.income, double the debt of the population as a whole. Would it make

:07:43. > :07:46.sense to give this group a helping hand, and extend the national living

:07:47. > :07:52.wage to the under 25? Is a response to a question from another member

:07:53. > :07:57.about the normal wage, the Prime Minister said, we want to see people

:07:58. > :08:01.taking him money, but we are on the wrong side of the debate. I asked

:08:02. > :08:09.the government to rethink the decision to deny under 25 the

:08:10. > :08:20.national living wage. Drew Henry. Thank you, and can I express my

:08:21. > :08:25.thanks for a powerful introduction. I wish the honourable member a

:08:26. > :08:30.speedy recovery and find in can displace healthy. Let's be clear,

:08:31. > :08:35.what has been put forward by the UK government is not a living wage, it

:08:36. > :08:38.is enhanced minimum wage. We've heard that before, but it is

:08:39. > :08:51.important to stress that a real living wage is 84 ?25 not some 20p.

:08:52. > :08:54.The real living wage calculation is according to the basic cost of

:08:55. > :09:02.living. The adequacy of households to maintain an acceptable standard.

:09:03. > :09:11.A higher minimum wage for the over 20 funds will help some, but has

:09:12. > :09:21.other consequences. In January it was made clear that this is not a

:09:22. > :09:26.real living wage. My honourable friend have made some very important

:09:27. > :09:32.points by the differential pay for workers. I thought it was a powerful

:09:33. > :09:37.point about the unique effects that government workers find with this

:09:38. > :09:46.new introduction of a so-called living wage, which is actually a

:09:47. > :09:50.minimum wage. I differential in the pay for young workers is, quite

:09:51. > :09:57.simply, unacceptable. Pepe should be fair pay. -- fair pay. There should

:09:58. > :10:02.be no exceptions for the job that you do. The current UK government

:10:03. > :10:09.are discriminating against under 25. The way they have gone forward also

:10:10. > :10:14.brings into question the future role of the commission who have been

:10:15. > :10:18.devalued. The Scottish Government have introduced the real living wage

:10:19. > :10:26.as an integral part of the public sector policy back in 2011 - 2012.

:10:27. > :10:31.One point fumbling pounds per year were invested by the Scottish

:10:32. > :10:38.Government to wages. It requires all employers covered by what patent

:10:39. > :10:44.policy to pay the real living wage. -- public pay policy. The Scottish

:10:45. > :10:53.Government is encouraging the real living wage and, now, 80% of the

:10:54. > :10:56.workers in Scotland are paid that. We've heard that living wage

:10:57. > :11:02.employers are up and running in Scotland and have set a target but

:11:03. > :11:07.2017 to make that 1000. Happy to give away. You may have listened to

:11:08. > :11:11.members from the Labour opposition say that they wanted to make sure

:11:12. > :11:15.that no employee is made worse off by changes to the national living

:11:16. > :11:20.wage. As the Scottish Government have a policy to ensure that is the

:11:21. > :11:23.case? Why the Scottish Government has done is introduce the real

:11:24. > :11:27.living wage, and that means that they have taken control to make sure

:11:28. > :11:37.that there are proper safeguards to make sure people are treated fairly

:11:38. > :11:42.across the country. It was mentioned that as a council leader, a member

:11:43. > :11:48.introduced a living wage. That is honourable, and something we have in

:11:49. > :11:54.common, because I was also responsible for leading the charge

:11:55. > :11:58.to introduce the National Minimum Wage. We included apprentices of all

:11:59. > :12:05.ages in the Council on the real living wage, there was no

:12:06. > :12:08.description for the under 25. Young people were getting the same

:12:09. > :12:14.fairness, and that should be extended to the Highlands and to the

:12:15. > :12:18.Highlands and Islands enterprise. The councils in Scotland are held by

:12:19. > :12:30.the Scottish Government to provide care workers, as were mentioned by

:12:31. > :12:35.many people earlier, both in care homes and to provide care in the

:12:36. > :12:40.community with the real living wage. We are committed to making progress,

:12:41. > :12:50.further, on that. The Scottish Government in 2015-2016, ?5 million

:12:51. > :12:58.to improve the quality of care workplace, including real living

:12:59. > :13:03.wage progress. The first Minister of Scotland has said that from October

:13:04. > :13:06.2016, thanks to the Scottish Government and their decisions, the

:13:07. > :13:14.real living wage will be paid into social care workers across Scotland.

:13:15. > :13:20.It hurt a lot about business from the benches opposite. -- heard. The

:13:21. > :13:24.one thing we have in common is a description of the living wage

:13:25. > :13:28.proposal by the UK government as a minimum wage. He talked about

:13:29. > :13:34.business and the struggle with it. I mentioned earlier that Scottish

:13:35. > :13:40.businesses who have credited businesses who provide the national

:13:41. > :13:44.living wage. The international fair work programme was set setup to

:13:45. > :13:48.deliver their work by providing an effective voice, opportunity and

:13:49. > :13:53.security, fulfillment and respect. Let me tell you that the real living

:13:54. > :14:00.wage for business pays dividends, literally. It pays them in

:14:01. > :14:04.productivity. People do more because they enjoy doing more for companies

:14:05. > :14:08.that respect them. You get better retention of staff. People aren't

:14:09. > :14:13.looking around for the next job to try to help them spread through the

:14:14. > :14:18.day. They are getting paid fairly. Companies are able to plan better.

:14:19. > :14:21.The team morale is fostered, and people are able to week better

:14:22. > :14:30.collegiately to achieve better results for business. Open these are

:14:31. > :14:36.able to turn their focus not just on its how they recruit and replace

:14:37. > :14:43.staff, but they focus on growth. A real living wage paid by companies

:14:44. > :14:48.to people provides good results. Let me finish by pointing out that the

:14:49. > :14:51.list of living wage employers include the Scottish Government, the

:14:52. > :14:55.Welsh Government, the Scottish Parliament, the House of Commons,

:14:56. > :15:02.and the House of Lords. The major political parties, including the

:15:03. > :15:08.SNP. There are a couple of notable omissions. The UK government, and of

:15:09. > :15:12.course, the conservative party. Something has to be done to ensure

:15:13. > :15:17.the fair pay across the place, and that the under 25 should not be

:15:18. > :15:21.should be put in place to make sure should be put in place to make sure

:15:22. > :15:32.people have a decent chance to have an adequate standard of living. Can

:15:33. > :15:35.I pay tribute to my honourable friend on the work she has done on

:15:36. > :15:41.this issue and preparation for the debate and on the honourable member

:15:42. > :15:45.for the way she opened the debate. I want to focus on the government's

:15:46. > :15:57.so-called minimum wage indexing the care sector. The care sector is

:15:58. > :16:02.under increasing financial pressure in this country, and many

:16:03. > :16:05.organizations recognise the government's failure to provide any

:16:06. > :16:13.additional funding could result in care providers coming financially

:16:14. > :16:16.not liable. It will have the impact on the staff as well. The local

:16:17. > :16:25.Government Association estimates that introducing the National

:16:26. > :16:33.Minimum Wage will cost 300 and ?30 million in the care sector. Wants to

:16:34. > :16:36.make a point about my local area or local care only raise 14 ?6 million.

:16:37. > :16:44.The cost of the national when minimum wage is 24 ?7 million. It

:16:45. > :16:49.has been left to our taxpayers to pay this with the mechanism that is

:16:50. > :16:54.insufficient. The government's national living wage announcement

:16:55. > :17:00.places additional unfunded requirement on the care sector that

:17:01. > :17:07.they cannot function with. The standard cost of living increases

:17:08. > :17:11.from contracts with local authorities and increases in

:17:12. > :17:14.regulatory fees. The aggregate impact of all of these attacks is

:17:15. > :17:25.substantial. Providers estimates will cost 5% in the first year and

:17:26. > :17:29.some percent each year thereafter. I have already been told that some

:17:30. > :17:37.care providers of the other businesses will alter the employment

:17:38. > :17:40.contracts as a way of coping. This means that additional costs from the

:17:41. > :17:44.national living wage are being paid for by care workers themselves. As

:17:45. > :17:48.we have already heard in this debate, we start from a position

:17:49. > :17:54.where many care workers are already underpaid. The National Audit Office

:17:55. > :17:58.has reported that up to 20,000 care workers are illegally paid. I

:17:59. > :18:05.believe the actual figure is much, much higher. In HMRC investigations

:18:06. > :18:11.of care providers in 2011-2015, more than right attempt were not complied

:18:12. > :18:17.with the National Minimum Wage. It was collected that care workers are

:18:18. > :18:23.collectively cheated of a a year due to pay levels below the minimum

:18:24. > :18:30.wage. In many cases this is done through a variety of methods that

:18:31. > :18:33.result in care workers not being paid for travel time despite

:18:34. > :18:40.statutory guidance on this. In order to work a fair wage, a business

:18:41. > :18:48.said, that your workers work from 7am to 9pm with cats throughout the

:18:49. > :18:55.day while we wait in the car -- gaps. Some workers are paid as

:18:56. > :19:01.little as ?3 50 per hour which is not enough when waiting time is

:19:02. > :19:07.considered. Earlier in the debate the honourable member from Shipley,

:19:08. > :19:11.in response to a point I made, said he got the biggest source of

:19:12. > :19:18.additional people for food banks would be people who lost their job.

:19:19. > :19:23.The actual facts are that the majority of people who use food

:19:24. > :19:29.banks are those in low and insecure employment. We are talking about

:19:30. > :19:37.people being paid ?2 50 an hour. The other thing that happens, if there

:19:38. > :19:45.is any complaint that they make, is that they don't get hours and they

:19:46. > :19:50.make it harder for them to make ends meet. An undercover reporter was

:19:51. > :19:54.employed as a care worker in a care sector, and he confirmed the point

:19:55. > :20:00.about being paid way under the minimum wage. He was paid just ?3 89

:20:01. > :20:05.an hour working in the London Borough. Rather than improving pay

:20:06. > :20:16.with the introduction of the national living wage, is having an

:20:17. > :20:21.adverse affect on care workers. Their workers a macro worker's wages

:20:22. > :20:24.have been raised, but it is balanced by bringing in other changes that

:20:25. > :20:31.have negative impacts on their employees. Sick pay, previously two

:20:32. > :20:39.weeks on full pay and four weeks on how they have ended. Workers have to

:20:40. > :20:45.work 7am to 9pm. There will no longer be paid the first ten miles

:20:46. > :20:53.of their journey. They're already paid well below HMRC's recommended

:20:54. > :20:56.read. They are effectively paying for their own payrolls, they

:20:57. > :21:02.believe. I have heard someone from the East Midlands cutting staff

:21:03. > :21:08.allowances and charging more for services to equate the National

:21:09. > :21:12.Minimum Wage. By cutting the mileage allowance by 52 to 20p am mile, and

:21:13. > :21:18.by excluding the first and last seven miles of travel, 35% of the

:21:19. > :21:23.workforce are going to lose out. Some workers have reported they will

:21:24. > :21:31.lose up to ?1000 a year which is shameful. The introduction of what

:21:32. > :21:35.this government called the national living wage was supposed to improve

:21:36. > :21:39.the living standards of employees, but it appears that some care

:21:40. > :21:44.workers are receiving little or no benefits, and some may even be worse

:21:45. > :21:48.off. If care workers continue to suffer because of unpaid travel

:21:49. > :21:52.time, care visits that are too short, and unfair working conditions

:21:53. > :21:57.this will have a detrimental affect on their work and the well-being of

:21:58. > :22:01.the people who do care for. The social care Institute for excellence

:22:02. > :22:06.has warned that stress and low morale, resulting from the way

:22:07. > :22:18.occurs are treated, can have a direct impact on productivity. The

:22:19. > :22:23.care sector needs quality workers. It is acceptable that a job that has

:22:24. > :22:26.been historically undervalued has been so exported today and that care

:22:27. > :22:33.workers are not aid the minimum wage for jobs that they do. -- paid. Can

:22:34. > :22:36.the Minister tell us what the government will do to ensure that

:22:37. > :22:46.care workers are not worse off as a result of the national living wage?

:22:47. > :22:52.I'd like to thank the Member for securing the debate, and the member

:22:53. > :22:56.who spoke very well in her place. The Chancellor announced the

:22:57. > :22:59.national living wage was triumphalism, but like so many

:23:00. > :23:04.aspects of this government's policy, it was exposed as nothing more than

:23:05. > :23:08.smoke and mirrors. It is not a living wage, for a start, it is a

:23:09. > :23:17.rebadging of the minimum wage. The real minimum wage is independently

:23:18. > :23:18.determined and set at 825 an hour. A person can't live off of it, it is

:23:19. > :23:23.not a living wage. This government not a living wage. This government

:23:24. > :23:30.should apologise to the living which foundation and the employers and the

:23:31. > :23:34.many campaigners who have fought over the years to support the real

:23:35. > :23:40.living wage. Grass and insult to those campaigners, to appropriate

:23:41. > :23:44.their term, and will leads to misleading job adverts in the

:23:45. > :23:48.future, as well. It is not a real living wage if it is not actually a

:23:49. > :23:52.living wage. It is not a living wage if you happen to be under 25. The

:23:53. > :23:57.Chancellor said that Britain deserves a pay raise, and it is

:23:58. > :24:05.getting one. Under 25 are, clearly, not written in this country. -- not

:24:06. > :24:10.Britain. Under 25 are not entitled to higher rates of minimum wage.

:24:11. > :24:19.Their fair day's work is not receiving a fair day's pay. Since

:24:20. > :24:26.the minimum wage in -- inception, and it has been SNP policy for years

:24:27. > :24:33.now to equalise the minimum wage. I am very, very proud to raise that

:24:34. > :24:37.today. I have heard it said that, perhaps, younger workers lack

:24:38. > :24:44.experience, but the minimum wage is not based on experience, but wage. A

:24:45. > :24:48.worker can work for nine years before they are legally entitled to

:24:49. > :24:51.this new minimum wage by 25-year-old would get it on the first day they

:24:52. > :25:00.started. They could walk in the door and not get the higher living wage.

:25:01. > :25:03.This new minimum wage has a exacerbated, as we heard earlier,

:25:04. > :25:08.the differential between wages paid to younger workers in this country

:25:09. > :25:16.and the most pronounced effect has been, as a member has mentioned, for

:25:17. > :25:20.apprentices. There are 54,000 apprentices in the UK who are not

:25:21. > :25:26.entitled to this living wage. They have jobs, families and various

:25:27. > :25:31.difference means that they may need to make during the course of a week

:25:32. > :25:35.and they deserve a fair pay. They can be expected to live off of

:25:36. > :25:43.nothing. This provision of this sort is opposed in all other parts of

:25:44. > :25:47.society. This discrimination must end, and I call on the government to

:25:48. > :25:51.take action on this. If they would not, I would like them to devolve

:25:52. > :25:56.the implement walk to the Scottish Government who are making tremendous

:25:57. > :26:00.progress in Scotland. The Deputy Speaker, the need to equalise the

:26:01. > :26:04.minimum wage has increased significantly for bigger workers who

:26:05. > :26:08.happen to find themselves with contracts. One of my constituents, a

:26:09. > :26:12.few weeks ago who worked in a bar in Glasgow city centre, she received a

:26:13. > :26:19.phone call from her employer telling her, there is no need to come into

:26:20. > :26:26.work. Her services were no longer required. After the shock from the

:26:27. > :26:33.sudden dismissal, she researched options and it was said she had no

:26:34. > :26:38.rights. What she suspects, but what she can't prove, is that she was let

:26:39. > :26:42.go because she was over 25 enter other colleagues are under 25. I

:26:43. > :26:50.heard this from other friends who have seen their hours cut if there

:26:51. > :26:55.are over 25. It is difficult to make ends meet in those jobs and find

:26:56. > :27:06.other jobs in those sectors. I would urge the, I will give way. The

:27:07. > :27:10.potential for discrimination at the age of 25, would she be interested

:27:11. > :27:17.to hear what steps the government might take to make sure that that

:27:18. > :27:20.does not happen? I would be interested to see the steps in

:27:21. > :27:26.regards to discrimination, but also to what we could do to equalise the

:27:27. > :27:32.weight so that unscrupulous employers are not tended to

:27:33. > :27:40.discriminate in the first place. There was a photograph posted of a

:27:41. > :27:44.shop window that said, we need a waitress under 24. That is illegal,

:27:45. > :27:49.they can't do that, but it is by hovering this differential in the

:27:50. > :27:55.living wage. -- by having this differential. The attention it needs

:27:56. > :28:01.to be paid to under 20 fives because they are as committed against, as

:28:02. > :28:06.well as those in contracts. I want to talk about the enforcement of

:28:07. > :28:10.minimum wages. I asked the Minister about the enforcement of the minimum

:28:11. > :28:14.wage. Some figures I have seen suggested that there are great

:28:15. > :28:23.number of people not earning the wages they were entitled to. For

:28:24. > :28:33.people aged over 21 earning less than a certain amount in our, over

:28:34. > :28:39.100,000 for those figures, those under 18 earning less than their

:28:40. > :28:45.entitled 80,000, those who are apprentices earning less than they

:28:46. > :28:48.are entitled by 30,000, as I mentioned earlier. Despite he

:28:49. > :28:56.figures and the fact that there are so many people not earning the wages

:28:57. > :29:00.they are entitled to, only nine successful prosecutions of employers

:29:01. > :29:03.have been made despite hundreds and hundreds of people not actually

:29:04. > :29:07.getting the wages they are entitled to. That is because they are in a

:29:08. > :29:13.position of weakness. We have to do an awful lot more. The Minister

:29:14. > :29:17.mentioned that they are investigating more, but only nine

:29:18. > :29:21.prosecutions is absolutely woeful if you look at the scale of the

:29:22. > :29:24.problem. There is another way of looking at this. The Scottish

:29:25. > :29:29.Government has worked with employers. They have worked on

:29:30. > :29:35.imposing a real minimum wage because yes, that may be a challenge for

:29:36. > :29:41.employers, but they have achieved 56,000 employees now earning real

:29:42. > :29:52.minimum 25 an hour minimum wage. Large organizations like Barclays,

:29:53. > :30:00.small organizations, organizations who provide services like Glasgow

:30:01. > :30:03.Association for mental health, universities and supermarkets, if

:30:04. > :30:09.they are all able to do that, there is no reason why other employers

:30:10. > :30:16.cannot work for that as well. The Scottish Government and employers

:30:17. > :30:22.have moved toward getting people onto that successful scheme. They

:30:23. > :30:28.asked of all, that employers pay the real minimum wage. The yet to meet

:30:29. > :30:37.two of the eight elements of the Scottish business plan, and you have

:30:38. > :30:43.to work towards completing that. It has been successful.

:30:44. > :30:49.It's a pleasure to follow the Honorable Lady and I would like to

:30:50. > :30:53.pay tribute to my Honorable friend for securing this debate and to my

:30:54. > :30:57.friends from Enfield North for standing in her place and I hope

:30:58. > :31:03.that my friend to a speedy recovery. I want to focus my remarks tonight

:31:04. > :31:07.on it a specific group of workers, seafarers because they are the only

:31:08. > :31:12.group of workers who are excluded from the full protection of National

:31:13. > :31:17.Minimum Wage legislation and equal pay legislation. Ships working in UK

:31:18. > :31:22.waters between UK ports and between UK and continental ports are crewed

:31:23. > :31:26.by staff on pay weights that are well below the national minimum wage

:31:27. > :31:31.and increasing companies are clicking outside the UK to quit

:31:32. > :31:35.their ships with none UK seafarers particularly ratings in order to

:31:36. > :31:43.profit from some national minimum wage pay rates. These exploitative

:31:44. > :31:47.pay and employment practices are driving the decline in the number of

:31:48. > :31:54.UK seafarers, in the early 1980s, there were 28 errors and officers

:31:55. > :32:00.and 30,000 ratings in the UK navy but by June of last year, the total

:32:01. > :32:05.number of UK seafarers had dropped to 23,380 eight fall of nearly 60%.

:32:06. > :32:10.The position for UK ratings particularly deck and engine have

:32:11. > :32:15.become exceptionally carious with eight pairs and 830 working at the

:32:16. > :32:22.last year among a fall of over 25% since 2011 and over 70% in the last

:32:23. > :32:27.30 years. The expectation in the UK shipping sector is happening because

:32:28. > :32:29.not EU seafarers are excluded from the full protection against

:32:30. > :32:35.nationality based pay discrimination in the part of the apps of 2010.

:32:36. > :32:38.Following years of campaigning by maritime unions, the last Labour

:32:39. > :32:42.government commissioned an independent assessment to the impact

:32:43. > :32:44.of nationality based pay differentials in the shipping

:32:45. > :32:47.industry. This is known as the cards are revealed. And it concluded in

:32:48. > :32:52.May 2010 at the end of that parliamentary term that there would

:32:53. > :32:58.be no adverse impact on the shipping industry for jobs and recommended

:32:59. > :33:01.the outgoing of all nationality based seafaring differentials. The

:33:02. > :33:05.last Coalition Government however rejected the recommendation. But the

:33:06. > :33:13.government was forced under threat of a fractured by the European Union

:33:14. > :33:16.to protect the eighth seafarers of nationality pay based pay

:33:17. > :33:19.discrimination and in recent months maritime trade unions have

:33:20. > :33:23.contributed to a working group with the government and industry on the

:33:24. > :33:29.effects of the existing protections in the quality apps which will

:33:30. > :33:33.report the summer. At the moment, passengers and businesses travelling

:33:34. > :33:40.on vessels crewed by the bearers are being crewed by seafarers earning as

:33:41. > :33:41.little as ?2 40 an hour. The legalized exploitation has

:33:42. > :33:47.systematically undermined maritime jobs in the UK, damaging the skills

:33:48. > :33:52.base and driving up unemployment rates in seafaring communities

:33:53. > :33:56.across the UK. The RMT trade union estimates that prior to the

:33:57. > :34:02.introduction of the increase in the national minimum wage, over 8300

:34:03. > :34:04.seafarers ratings working on UK or other vessels qualifying for the

:34:05. > :34:10.tonnage tax are likely to be earning hourly rates of pay below the

:34:11. > :34:14.national minimum-wage. It stands to reason therefore that introducing a

:34:15. > :34:17.higher statutory minimum wage would put most seafarers below that

:34:18. > :34:23.threshold and more employers in breach of the national minimum-wage

:34:24. > :34:26.legislation. In its March 2016 reports, to the government the bill

:34:27. > :34:32.pay commission has recommended that stronger third-party complaint

:34:33. > :34:37.system is introduced for employees beaching the national minimum-wage.

:34:38. > :34:41.That is the creation of a public protocol HMRC investigation of

:34:42. > :34:44.third-party complaint. This would provide feedback to the complainant

:34:45. > :34:48.and could be a potentially useful source of additional evidence of

:34:49. > :34:51.rates of pay and contractual terms and conditions of employment for

:34:52. > :34:55.seafarers. The low pay commission said and I quote recommend that the

:34:56. > :34:59.government establishes a formal public with a call for HMRC to

:35:00. > :35:03.handle third-party whistle-blowing on breaches of the national minimum

:35:04. > :35:07.wage. We should include arrangements for giving all possible feedback to

:35:08. > :35:11.relevant third parties and appropriate continuing involvement

:35:12. > :35:16.in a resulting casework. I would urge ministers to accept this

:35:17. > :35:19.recommendation, is just an third-party complaint procedure

:35:20. > :35:22.currently represents the most effective way to tackle the rates in

:35:23. > :35:27.the shipping industry. Which fall below the national minimum-wage to

:35:28. > :35:30.to the understandable reluctance that the affected seafarers have

:35:31. > :35:40.currently been complaining directly to the UK Government. First of all I

:35:41. > :35:42.would like to thank my Honorable friend the Member for Meachem for

:35:43. > :35:45.bringing this debate to the House and also for the sterling work that

:35:46. > :35:49.she has done to highlight this really important issue and I am

:35:50. > :35:54.sorry she cannot be here today and I do wish her a speedy recovery. I

:35:55. > :35:56.would also like to thank my Honorable friend in member for

:35:57. > :36:03.Enfield North for the adequate way she has introduced the debate. I do

:36:04. > :36:06.have mixed feelings about the government's new living wage, of

:36:07. > :36:12.course an increase in low-paid workers wages is to be welcomed,

:36:13. > :36:18.however what we have here in effect is a new national minimum-wage, the

:36:19. > :36:21.real living wage as other members have mentioned is set by the living

:36:22. > :36:26.wage foundation and calculated by the Center for research and social

:36:27. > :36:31.policy at the University. The research looks in detail at what

:36:32. > :36:34.households need in order to have a minimum acceptable standard of

:36:35. > :36:39.living. The government national living wage is not connected to

:36:40. > :36:43.these calculations, the government rate is based on median earnings

:36:44. > :36:48.while the living wage foundation rate is calculated according to the

:36:49. > :36:54.cost of living. It is considerably higher amount at 825 an hour,

:36:55. > :36:59.outside of London in ?9 40 inside London, and the government version

:37:00. > :37:03.of the living wage. I do have a particular interest in the real

:37:04. > :37:09.living wage, as to what you see figures published last year showed

:37:10. > :37:15.that my constituency of Heywood and Middleton was worst in the Northwest

:37:16. > :37:19.for payment of the real wage is 40% of workers in my constituency

:37:20. > :37:24.earning less than that. It would therefore be churlish of me not to

:37:25. > :37:28.welcome the government's version of the living wage as a step in the

:37:29. > :37:32.right direction. I wish it were called something different, and I

:37:33. > :37:37.wish it were more. But, obviously for my constituents and for low-paid

:37:38. > :37:45.workers up and down the country, I will what should be a pay rise for

:37:46. > :37:49.round 1.9 million employees. Which is why I am so appalled by the

:37:50. > :37:54.methods used by one of our national retailers be in queue to try to

:37:55. > :37:58.wiggle out of paying their workers anymore money as a consequence of

:37:59. > :38:04.the introduction of the government new living wage. I almost have to

:38:05. > :38:09.grudgingly admired their ingenuity in the various ways they have

:38:10. > :38:12.employed in attempting to co-opt other areas of pay in order to save

:38:13. > :38:20.themselves from having to pay workers anymore money. Being cute is

:38:21. > :38:25.a well respected national retailer and it is regrettable to see the

:38:26. > :38:29.company behaving in this manner. I do feel I should declare an

:38:30. > :38:34.interest, my partner subject Habibou DIYer but he contributes essentially

:38:35. > :38:40.to their profits. He too was shocked to hear that the staff who served

:38:41. > :38:44.him so well and so frequently are being treated so shabbily. Thanks to

:38:45. > :38:52.the tireless campaigning of my Honorable friend for Meachem, BNQ

:38:53. > :38:58.have now announced a two get the action period for which I am a full.

:38:59. > :39:03.But with a major retailer whose parent company Kingfisher declared

:39:04. > :39:06.profits of 512 million last year. Surely incrementing the new minimum

:39:07. > :39:11.wage without attending to of said the cost by cutting other elements

:39:12. > :39:17.of pay would have been the right thing to do and the actions of a

:39:18. > :39:24.good employer. Yesterday, it was my pleasure to visit the beautiful

:39:25. > :39:28.village in the rules out constituency it is a model village

:39:29. > :39:37.of architect designed houses, originally built to house the

:39:38. > :39:40.workers in the soap factory. A businessman and philanthropist put

:39:41. > :39:46.into action in his belief that good housing ensures a happy and healthy

:39:47. > :39:50.workforce. He also implemented a workplace pension scheme and sharing

:39:51. > :39:55.that he's workers may enjoy a comfortable retirement. I cannot

:39:56. > :40:02.help but compare and contrast the all truism in May the 19th and early

:40:03. > :40:06.20th century with the present-day anti-social attitude of some modern

:40:07. > :40:11.businesses who appear to think only of profits and the shareholder and

:40:12. > :40:19.not of that vital asset their employees. But not all of businesses

:40:20. > :40:23.are villains, it was my pleasure recently to attend an event in

:40:24. > :40:26.parliaments held by the living wage foundation which showcase the work

:40:27. > :40:32.of small businesses who have signed up to be accredited living wage

:40:33. > :40:36.employers. These employers said to me that they had a much higher rate

:40:37. > :40:40.of staff satisfaction as a result of becoming living wage employers and

:40:41. > :40:46.importantly that it had improve their status and standing as an

:40:47. > :40:52.players in the community. One employer said to me if I can't

:40:53. > :40:57.afford to pay the living wage then quite simply you should not be in

:40:58. > :41:02.business. A philosophy which some of our larger employers can learn from.

:41:03. > :41:06.The government's tag lines for the national living wage is a step up

:41:07. > :41:12.for Britain, but some companies are trying to take a step back on their

:41:13. > :41:16.commitments to work or's writes. For companies are trying to find a

:41:17. > :41:20.loophole to take away remuneration from their employees I would ask all

:41:21. > :41:24.members from both sides of the House to work together to stop this

:41:25. > :41:31.happening and to protect low-paid workers. I do hope that one outcome

:41:32. > :41:34.of this debate will be to allow workers who fear they cannot speak

:41:35. > :41:38.out against new contracts being imposed for fear of losing their

:41:39. > :41:43.jobs, I would hope that they would be able to contact their local MP

:41:44. > :41:48.for their support in standing up and speaking out to ensure that not one

:41:49. > :41:52.of their constituents lose out as a result of the new so-called living

:41:53. > :42:01.wage which surely was never the intention. Thank you Madam Deputy

:42:02. > :42:07.Speaker, I also want to begin my remarks today by paying tribute to

:42:08. > :42:10.the Honorable member for Meachem, not just for the efforts to secure

:42:11. > :42:14.this debate but for the where she has been doing pretty consistently

:42:15. > :42:18.over recent months on this issue. I am sorry to hear that she is not

:42:19. > :42:22.very well at the moment and I wish her a six recovery and a return to

:42:23. > :42:28.be house. The Honorable member for Enfield North I felt that up to the

:42:29. > :42:31.debate, members across the House should be disturbed that some

:42:32. > :42:34.companies are seeking to undermine the legislative provisions of the

:42:35. > :42:39.minimum-wage increase by cutting other employee benefits such as the

:42:40. > :42:42.additional premiums for Sunday workers and the social hours and

:42:43. > :42:45.bank holidays. I am glad that some of those firms have been named and

:42:46. > :42:49.shamed this afternoon because there is really no excuse for public

:42:50. > :42:54.debate and trying to offset business costs on the backs of the very

:42:55. > :42:57.lowest paid workers. It is just unacceptable. However, reputational

:42:58. > :43:02.damage has been shown in the past to have a very limited impact on such

:43:03. > :43:07.firms and I hope the government will take the opportunity to meet a set

:43:08. > :43:10.of the action they intend to take to ensure that employees meet their

:43:11. > :43:17.obligations and don't erode the terms and conditions of those on the

:43:18. > :43:20.lowest paid and the most insecure jobs Bernadeau at the government

:43:21. > :43:23.whether they will look at the variation of contract procedures to

:43:24. > :43:27.see what can be done to make sure that companies do not try to get

:43:28. > :43:32.around what is I believe a well intentioned increase in the pay of

:43:33. > :43:38.those on the lowest wages. I think many people over 25 for working hard

:43:39. > :43:40.in minimum-wage jobs would have been very pleased to learn that they were

:43:41. > :43:44.getting at least a modest pay increase but that will turn sour for

:43:45. > :43:48.those who now find that they are going to be losing out instead. The

:43:49. > :43:52.number of members today have highlighted cases from their own

:43:53. > :43:56.constituencies, many of them in the retail sector but also the social

:43:57. > :43:59.care sector and the hospitality industry, another key point made

:44:00. > :44:04.this afternoon was made by my Honorable friend the Member for

:44:05. > :44:10.Glasgow Central, also points made ID member of Halifax in the reports

:44:11. > :44:13.whereby young people under 25 are finding themselves in particularly

:44:14. > :44:18.vulnerable positions can be reached that magic arbitrary age and find

:44:19. > :44:22.that they suddenly become less attractive to their current employer

:44:23. > :44:26.because they are not going to have to be paid more. It does seem to me

:44:27. > :44:29.that it is an arbitrary age, it doesn't seem to be based on anything

:44:30. > :44:36.more tangible than one year birthday is in fact 25, a young adult is

:44:37. > :44:38.probably at the peak of their neighbour abilities and their

:44:39. > :44:42.cognitive functions and surely that should be recognised that they are

:44:43. > :44:50.getting a fair date paid for a period he worked at the same as any

:44:51. > :44:53.other employee. We must not lose sight of Sutton wages which has had

:44:54. > :44:58.enormous benefits for those working in low-paid sectors of the economy.

:44:59. > :45:01.The vast majority of them women. When we think back to the

:45:02. > :45:06.introduction of the minimum-wage some years ago, indeed every other

:45:07. > :45:08.time that minimum pay has been introduced, a wide range of

:45:09. > :45:13.interests have lined up to one that it would lead to higher employment,

:45:14. > :45:17.firms going out of business, and the economy going to hell in a handcart.

:45:18. > :45:21.The reality has been quite the opposite, in reality the people on

:45:22. > :45:26.wages of money in their pockets, they have tended to spend it,

:45:27. > :45:30.usually they spent it in their local communities, they have spent it

:45:31. > :45:39.boosting their local economies, not so much up it has ended up stashed

:45:40. > :45:42.in offshore bank accounts. Honorable members have made the point about

:45:43. > :45:45.what has happened in the past with regard to increasing the national

:45:46. > :45:49.minimum-wage, would she accept that this is a different approach because

:45:50. > :45:52.in the past the increase in national minimum wage came from a discussion

:45:53. > :45:57.and decision by the low pay commission in conjunction with

:45:58. > :46:02.business, and the national wage is an imposed increase, it is different

:46:03. > :46:05.from what has happened in the past. I think all of us need to appreciate

:46:06. > :46:10.the work that the low pay commission to to assess what levels of pay

:46:11. > :46:16.increases our economy can sustain without putting up unemployment and

:46:17. > :46:20.gaining that optimal balance between the two. I'd do rather worried that

:46:21. > :46:26.the ball has been undermined by this process, notwithstanding that

:46:27. > :46:29.significant pay increase is certainly long overdue. I think we

:46:30. > :46:33.do need to recognise the benefit that the minimum wage has brought,

:46:34. > :46:38.and the need to bring wages into closer alignment with the real cost

:46:39. > :46:43.of living in the longer term. I think I would echo the point that

:46:44. > :46:47.was made was forcefully by the Honorable member my friend when she

:46:48. > :46:51.welcomed the increase in the minimum wage for those over 25 but that