(11 years, 12 months ago)
Commons ChamberI, too, was in the Westminster Hall debate this morning and I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Member for Exeter (Mr Bradshaw) on securing it.
As we have heard, regional pay would damage our economy and the NHS. As the shadow Secretary of State said, 60 senior academics have written to The Times to warn the Chancellor that there is “no convincing evidence” to support his claims on the benefits of regional pay and that
“On the contrary, such a policy could reduce spending power, undermine many small and medium-sized businesses in areas of low pay, and aggravate geographical economic and social inequalities.”
According to research by the New Economics Foundation, the Government’s evidence of an alleged public sector pay premium
“suffers from a number of serious shortcomings”
and their statements are
“at best misconceived, at worst mischievous and ideologically driven.”
It concludes that regional pay would cost our economy £2.7 billion at best—if the private sector expanded where the public sector contracted—but that the cost could be up to £9.7 billion each year, with the loss of 110,000 jobs. Regional pay would reduce spending power in the south-west by £1.2 billion.
When we consider regional pay from the perspective of the NHS, we cannot, or at least should not, talk about private sector jobs replacing public sector jobs. The public’s response to the Government’s disastrous reorganisation of our NHS proved that patients do not want to be treated by Virgin Care or Serco, but Ministers still seem determined to remove the N from NHS.
For my constituents, today’s debate is even more important because, as we have heard, trusts in our region have been developing the NHS south-west pay, terms and conditions consortium. This morning, I asked the Under-Secretary of State for Health, the hon. Member for Broxtowe (Anna Soubry)whether the Government knew about the consortium before it was established and whether they encouraged the trusts to set it up, and it was interesting that she said, “My understanding is we were involved”—[Interruption.]
That is a fascinating answer because it is at odds with the one I received from the Secretary of State during Health questions.