The Economy — 1 Dec 1998
I beg to move, as an amendment to the Address, at the end of the Question to add:
"But humbly regret that the Gracious Speech contains no proposals to save jobs or help businesses, but instead continues the policies that are pushing Britain's economy into a sharper downturn than is forecast for any other major EU economy; call on the Government instead to pursue policies of maintaining Britain's competitiveness by reversing its proposals which increase costs on business and to return to the policies conducted by the previous Government which left a golden economic legacy of low inflation, steady and sustainable growth and falling unemployment; and also urge the Government to make a clear statement of its position on the question of European tax harmonisation."
I notice, from the Register of Members' Interests, that the right hon. Member for Horsham (Mr. Maude) said that he undertakes remunerated advisory work for Morgan Stanley investment bankers. As we are debating the economy, should he not have declared that interest at the beginning of his speech?
Today in The Daily Telegraph the Prime Minister is dead against harmonisation, but yesterday in the Financial Times he was all for it. Which Prime Minister does the Chief Secretary support? Does he support yesterday's Prime Minister, or today's? Perhaps he supports both. Will the real Government at last stand up?
I am sure that that sounds even more impressive in German.
So have I.
We were promised
"a new understanding of how labour markets really work",
That is never mind the fact that, potentially, we are heading for zero growth, rising unemployment, economic uncertainty and a mis-reading of what is happening in the world economy.
I warmly welcome that very good measure and simplification. Labour Members may not be aware--even Ministers, as they do not see the papers of the previous Government, may not be aware of it--that I myself spent three years at work on the matter. Undoubtedly, a similar measure would have been introduced had a Conservative Government remained in office. However, I unreservedly welcome that part of the Queen's Speech.
Question put, That the amendment be made:--
The House divided: Ayes 134, Noes 373.
Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.
What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.
What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.
What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.
|Party||Majority (No)||Minority (Aye)||Both||Turnout|
|Con||0||129 (+2 tell)||0||80.9%|
|Lab||320 (+2 tell)||0||0||77.2%|