Employers

Nigel Huddleston Excerpts

Wednesday 11th November 2026 Commons Chamber

[James Murray]

I would have thought that the right hon. Gentleman—excuse me—would have no difficulty in rowing in behind her, but he seems to be struggling with that somewhat, so I will make some progress.

I was speaking about the fiscal discipline that underwrites everything we are doing as a Government. Through the approach that we took in the Budget, we have maintained our fiscal rules while making no changes to rates of income tax or national insurance on income from employment or self-employment, or to the rate of national insurance that employers pay on wages or salaries for their staff.

[Nigel Huddleston (Droitwich and Evesham) (Con)]

The Minister is giving us lots of opportunity to intervene on him, and we are grateful for that. We keep hearing about the “difficult decisions” that Ministers are making to increase taxes. I do not think that is a difficult decision; it is a very easy decision to make—the laziest decision for a Government. I noticed that his list did not include the new tax on tourism. Will he please explain how Labour believes that we can help an industry by taxing it more?

--- Later in debate ---

[Nigel Huddleston (Droitwich and Evesham) (Con)]

Two weeks ago, when I spoke in the Budget debate, I criticised the Government for deliberately increasing the cost of running a business and of hiring people, in the full knowledge that it would cause more unemployment. I said that it is constituents, including mine, who are paying the price for Labour’s economic failure with their jobs. What I did not realise at the time was quite how prescient those comments were. On Monday, one of the largest employers in my constituency, Kanes Foods, went into administration, with the loss of 662 jobs. That is 662 people who last week were paying national insurance and income tax, but who this week are on benefits. My thoughts are with every one of those employees and their families.

Many people may not know or have heard of Kanes Foods, but most of us will have consumed its packaged salads or stir fries, which were on sale in major supermarkets and especially in Asda. Let me be clear that the business had some difficulties, and the administrators have particularly highlighted challenges with a recent waste water treatment issue. Let us be in no doubt, however, that Government policies did not help. When margins are as tight as they are in food production and distribution, even a tiny increase in labour costs can turn a profitable business into a loss-making one.

When the Government whacked up the national living wage by way more than inflation, they added to businesses’ costs. When the Government increased employer national insurance, it added somewhere in the region of £700 or £800 to the cost of employing each and every worker. When a business has hundreds of employees, as Kanes did, that is hundreds of thousands of pounds of additional costs. When the Minister comes to the Dispatch Box in a few minutes’ time, I would like to see him at least acknowledge that the Government have played a part in large numbers of my constituents now being unemployed, and perhaps bring himself to say sorry.

I hold the Government at least in part responsible for the situation, but on a more positive note, I thank the local community for supporting those impacted by the closure of Kanes Foods. In particular, I thank Primafruit, which has already gone out of its way to offer jobs to some of those who lost their jobs, and other businesses are coming forward. I also thank Jobcentre Plus in Evesham, which I spoke to yesterday, which is providing support for impacted constituents and information on how they can claim for pay, holiday pay and redundancy pay. The administrators are also working on that.

I am also concerned about the knock-on impact on the supply chain—on suppliers to Kanes, and on those who are owed money by Kanes. I appeal to them to talk to the administrators. I am hopeful, as are the administrators, that somebody will come forward and buy some of Kanes’ business, or its site. We may be able to get something back and resurrect the business—once a vibrant local family business, right in the heart of the vale of Evesham—in some way, shape or form.

A broader issue, and a key theme in today’s debate, is that this Government simply do not respect people who run their own businesses. They do not consider them to be workers, and the Government overall do not seem to have respect for the private sector. They do not seem to get business. They do not understand basic things like cash flow. They do not have a grasp of even the most basic economic principles, but that is not a surprise; they are socialists. As the saying goes, if a socialist understood economics, they would not be a socialist.

Before entering Parliament, I spent 23 years in the private sector, and that amounts to more private sector experience than the Prime Minister, the Chancellor, the Business Secretary, the Home Secretary, the Foreign Secretary and the Housing Secretary have combined. In fact, it amounts to more private sector experience than is in 90% of the Cabinet, which is startling, but it probably goes some way to explaining why this Government are well on track to continue Labour’s unenviable record: every single Labour Government since the second world war has left office with unemployment higher than when they started. Let us contrast that with the Conservatives’ record in government, between 2010 and 2024, of helping to produce an environment in which 4 million jobs—800 jobs a day, on average—were created.

There is an alternative. There is a pro-business, Conservative alternative, articulated by the shadow Business Minister in her opening speech, and that is why I will wholeheartedly support the motion.