Skip to main content

1-20 of 106 results for subject:Unemployment

Member X
Michael Meacher

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

More
Meacher, Michael (106)

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

Listening to the Chancellor and then turning to the Office for Budget Responsibility’s analysis of the Budget is like being seduced by “Fifty Shades of Grey” only to be brought down to earth by a harsh and unrelenting textbook on morality and sexual ethics. Leaving aside all the election giveaways,...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
25 March 2014
Reference
578 cc241-2
House
House of Commons

If I said that the Chief Secretary's defence of the Government's position was unconvincing, that would be generous. I want to focus on bank bonuses and the impact that they have on the economy, particularly on youth unemployment. It is striking that this year the pig-fattening season in the City—otherwise...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 January 2012
Reference
539 c116-7
House
House of Commons

No, I will not give way now. Bankers' bonuses have already nearly proved the ruination of this country. What we need is a smaller banking sector that serves the real needs of this country, and particularly of its young people, if we are to avoid a lost generation. Saying no...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 January 2012
Reference
539 c118
House
House of Commons

My hon. Friend makes a very important point. As I am sure everyone in the House realises, there is far too much short-term instinct, particularly in the City. What we need, and have not had, is the relational banking that exists in the mittelstand in Germany. Banks there spend a...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 January 2012
Reference
539 c117-8
House
House of Commons

There is a paradox at the centre of the autumn statement that makes it self-defeating. The statement was widely touted as a growth Budget, but it is the opposite. The infrastructure plans relate to the medium-term future, on a three to 10-year time scale, but even if they materialise they...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
6 December 2011
Reference
537 c254
House
House of Commons

Indeed. I very much support that point, and I shall come on to it later, if the hon. Gentleman allows me to make my argument. I draw the attention of the House to the point that I was making. The latest version of The Sunday Times rich list, published in...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
6 December 2011
Reference
537 c255
House
House of Commons

What is the right hon. Gentleman's precise estimate of the overall growth, if any, that will arise from today's package, given that there is no net increase in demand? Is not his core £5 billion infrastructure package—just 0.7% of current expenditure—merely tinkering at the edges and completely incapable of pulling...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
29 November 2011
Reference
536 c818
House
House of Commons

The Government's main jibe at the Opposition throughout this debate has been, ““What is the alternative to the cuts?”” I will spell out what I think that alternative should be. Of course the deficit has to be brought down —we all agree on that—but slashing public expenditure by £80 billion...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
29 March 2011
Reference
526 c259-60
House
House of Commons

Is it fair and reasonable to impose a fixed arbitrary limit on the total level of benefits that a family can receive, irrespective of the level of rents in inner-city areas, when that rent could well constitute 70% of the £500 per week ceiling? A family cannot possibly live on...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
11 October 2010
Reference
516 c42
House
House of Commons

I regret that the Labour Government did not succeed in narrowing the gap between rich and poor. However, they did something quite remarkable in reducing the number of children in poverty by 600,000. No, it was not enough, and we fell below our target. I can tell the hon. Lady...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
6 July 2010
Reference
513 c253-4
House
House of Commons

The right hon. Gentleman's fantasy that there will be a continuation of or an increase in capital investment is completely belied by the OBR forecast on page 90 of the Treasury Red Book, which shows that net investment will fall from £49 billion in the current year to £21 billion...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
6 July 2010
Reference
513 c234
House
House of Commons

My hon. Friend helpfully assists my argument. I want to be fair and point out the Government's proposals on corporation tax and the small companies tax to get firms investing, as well as the national insurance cuts for firms outside the south-east to aid new hiring. That is all very...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
6 July 2010
Reference
513 c252-3
House
House of Commons

I pay tribute to the three maiden speakers whom we have just listened to: the hon. Members for Ipswich (Ben Gummer) and for North East Cambridgeshire (Stephen Barclay) and my hon. Friend the Member for Scunthorpe (Nic Dakin). I am always struck by how confident, forthright, quite often amusing and,...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
6 July 2010
Reference
513 c250-1
House
House of Commons

The opposite conclusion should be drawn from the Irish economy. The Irish Government made huge, swingeing cuts of 12 to 15%, which absolutely decimated that economy. Sooner or later, of course there will be a revival in all economies, but at a fearful cost. We shall very much be going...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
6 July 2010
Reference
513 c251-2
House
House of Commons

Indeed. The hon. Gentleman is wrong on the figure; the last figure available for when Labour were still in government suggested an increase of about 100,000. That, of course, was the result of a recession caused by the bankers. The Labour party protected the poor and the unemployed to a...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
6 July 2010
Reference
513 c254
House
House of Commons

I have never believed what some Laffer economists say, which is that increasing taxes on the rich results in a reduction in the net income. I believe that that is based on a false premise.

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
6 July 2010
Reference
513 c253
House
House of Commons

No, time is going on and I want to conclude. The fact that those people make no sacrifice while everyone else is being hit extremely hard makes an utter mockery of any idea of fairness in the Budget. This is not an honest Budget or an honest Bill. It was...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
6 July 2010
Reference
513 c254-5
House
House of Commons

I think I must move on—and we must move on—from debating poverty between the parties. Since I have the privilege of speaking, however, I have the last word. The fact is that the Thatcher Government tripled poverty to more than 3 million over the period between the early 1980s and...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
6 July 2010
Reference
513 c254
House
House of Commons

How can the right hon. Gentleman believe that private investment will remotely compensate for this enormous fall in public sector net investment, given that household consumption is falling, particularly with the increase in VAT, the banks are not lending, and export markets are fading because of the situation in the...

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
6 July 2010
Reference
513 c235
House
House of Commons

If the Budget is to meet the objectives that the right hon. Gentleman has in mind, where exactly does he expect growth to come from over the next five years?

Member
Michael Meacher (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
6 July 2010
Reference
513 c200
House
House of Commons