Employers

Gareth Snell Excerpts

Wednesday 11th November 2026 Commons Chamber

[Julia Lopez]

I completely agree with my hon. Friend. It has been seen in my constituency and across Whitehall. It is an absolute dog’s dinner of a policy that has created problems for not just the private sector but the public sector.

[Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

The shadow Minister makes a point about the increases to national insurance—absolutely fine; that is a political point that she is entitled to make. Will she tell me, using the exact same logic that she has applied to the criticism of this levy, why in 2021 she voted for the hypothecated health and social care levy, which was a 1.25% increase on national insurance for both employees and employers? Why was that an acceptable increase, but this was not?

[Julia Lopez]

That was a policy that was put forward. My right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak) decided to change it because the economy was in a challenging state after the pandemic and we needed to think again about whether it was the right thing to put that pressure on employers, so we went back on that policy.

To return to what employers have been going through, they have the ongoing stress and responsibility of employing people and wanting so desperately to continue to provide opportunity for them. They have to think about the other families who are relying on them as small business founders who are pushing to provide a community with a great service and a happy experience. They are pub landlords, builders, restaurateurs, service firms, salon owners, café owners, shop owners. Work, work, work, work, work.

Employers are not just working people; they are uber-taxpayers. They made it through covid, they made it through an energy crisis, but many are now saying that they cannot make it through Labour. When Labour broke its manifesto commitment in its first Budget by increasing national insurance, it did so in a highly destructive way. Not only did it increase the rate, but it lowered the point at which employers start paying NI on an employee’s salary. Lowering that threshold hit part-time, entry-level and lower-wage jobs the hardest, making employees so much more expensive to retain. I do not know about you, Madam Deputy Speaker, but suddenly, countless businesses in my constituency started sounding the alarm, especially those employing people who need flexible, part-time hours because of caring responsibilities.

--- Later in debate ---

[Daisy Cooper]

If there are no jobs in the UK, there will not be people coming to the UK to take jobs that do not exist. If we could join the single market, it would reduce red tape, reduce form-filling, and make it cheaper for businesses in the UK to grow. They would create more jobs, and there would be more jobs for young people. I simply cannot believe that the Conservative party, despite all the evidence and all the studies, will still not accept that having a stronger relationship with Europe is the single biggest way in which we can grow our economy—and it is only if we grow our economy that we can cut taxes and cut bills. For as long as the Conservatives refuse to acknowledge the damage of their Brexit deal, they will remain an out-of-touch, anti-growth, anti-business party.

[Gareth Snell]

The hon. Lady has made the argument here eloquently, many times, about joining the single market and the customs union. However, on 1 April 2019, the House came within three votes of a Brexit deal that would have allowed the retention of membership of the customs union. I voted for it, and others who were Labour Members at the time voted for it. Six Liberal Democrats, including the current leader of the hon. Lady’s party, voted against it. They walked into the Lobby with the Conservatives—with those of the right—to veto a Brexit deal that included membership of the customs union. Why did they do that?

[Daisy Cooper]

I will not apologise for the fact that we fought tooth and nail—we were the only large party that fought tooth and nail—to stop the damage of the Brexit deal in any shape or form.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stuart Andrew]

The hon. Gentleman is right. I was the head of fundraising at the hospice, so I know that it takes some time to plan a fundraising strategy. If a charity suddenly finds overnight that it has to find all that extra money, it will be almost impossible, and often they will end up having to eat into reserves, which is not a good thing.

[Gareth Snell]

I want to go back to the point that I raised to the shadow Secretary of State. The right hon. Gentleman was here when the health and social care levy came around. At no point did the Conservatives attempt to exempt charities and hospices from that tax rise. Why was it appropriate to keep them in scope when he was proposing it but completely inappropriate now?

[Stuart Andrew]

I point the hon. Gentleman to his party’s own manifesto. Labour promised that it would not do it. That is the reality of it, and that is the challenge that we are putting to this Government.

I really am worried about the opportunities for so many young people. We all remember how important getting our first job was. Mine was being a waiter at a hotel in Anglesey. It taught me about independence, it built my confidence, and it gave me real experience of working, sometimes with very challenging customers. It was really important to build that confidence. But it is becoming increasingly difficult for young people.

I know that employers in my constituency want to give young people those opportunities, but there is a cost involved in taking on and training someone. I spoke to one of the pub owners in my constituency who said that he always used to employ 14-year-olds to wash dishes, and when they got a bit older they would work as a waiter or waitress in the restaurant, and when they were a bit older still they would work behind the bar. As a result, he had trained staff, when they came back from university at Christmas or summer. He simply cannot afford to do that any more because of all the additional costs. Instead, he is employing older people. That is a real problem that we have got to address.

Many people who have just finished university or further education will be trying to get their first job, often without much experience. We should be doing all we can to encourage employers to give them that chance. That is why I support the Opposition’s proposal to halve employer national insurance contributions for under-25s, which would help businesses to plan ahead when taking on younger employers, making it more affordable to employ those who are just starting out. If we do not address this problem, there is a real danger that young people will find themselves permanently stuck in unemployment.

I will make another point to conclude. Some Members talk about employers as though they are somehow separate from working people, but when I visit businesses across my Daventry constituency, I meet people who are working extremely long hours and have often had to put their savings into getting the business up and running in the first place and to keep it afloat. They are serving customers, they are dealing with suppliers and they are doing the accounts. Sometimes they are worrying about whether they will have enough money left to pay themselves, let alone their workforce. They say to me that they wake up in the middle of the night worrying about where the money will come from. I do not think anyone could seriously suggest that those people are not working hard. They are making great personal sacrifices. We should be proud of everything they do and give them encouragement whenever we can. We should welcome the fact that they are providing employment for other people.

I want to see businesses in my constituency and across the country doing well, our local charities continuing their important work, and young people having the opportunity to get into employment, but we must recognise that increasing the cost of employing people has consequences, particularly for smaller businesses. Halving employers’ national insurance for under-25s would be a practical way of helping businesses give more young people a chance in life and the start that I enjoyed. For those reasons, I will happily vote for the motion.

--- Later in debate ---

[Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)]

The Government are quick to lecture Conservative Members about how to care for the most vulnerable, but at the very moment that Ministers say they want more people getting into work—as we have heard time and again this afternoon—they have increased the cost of employment. We all know that work is the best form of welfare, and Labour’s job tax is shooting the Government in the foot.

Time and again, local businesses tell me that they can no longer afford to take on apprenticeships. The double whammy of higher employer national insurance contributions and the increase to the minimum wage has simply become too much to bear.

[Gareth Snell]

The Conservatives have made the argument that they would like to see a reduction in national insurance. Will the hon. Lady spell out, in pounds and pence, by how much the Tory party would like to see the minimum wage cut to achieve the outcomes that she is suggesting?

[Rebecca Smith]

I thank the hon. Member for his question, but many questions of that nature have not been answered this afternoon. That is not what I am here to talk about. I am here to talk about the fact that businesses are currently dealing with this situation. What happens in the future is irrelevant; we are talking about what is happening while this Government are in power.

We know that by next year the annual cost of employing a full-time worker on the minimum wage will have increased by more than £4,000 since 2024—a whopping 31% increase in just three years.

[Gareth Snell]

rose—

[Jayne Kirkham]

rose—