Philip Davies claimed people with disabilities or mental health problems were disadvantaged in the workplace because they had to compete with able-bodied candidates for jobs and could not offer to accept lower wages.
He told the Commons: "The people who are most disadvantaged by the national minimum wage are the most vulnerable in society.
"My concern about it is it prevents those people from being given the opportunity to get the first rung on the employment ladder."
Mr Davies (Shipley) told MPs: "When I went to visit Mind and I spoke to people there that were using the service offered by that charity they were absolutely upfront with me and they said that when they went for a job and they came across a situation where there were other people who had applied for that job, they've got mental health problems, other people haven't, they said to me 'Who would you take on?'.
"Because they were quite accepting of the fact it was inevitable that the employer would take on the person who hasn't got any mental health problems given that they were both going to be having to be paid the same rate.
"Given that some of those people with a learning disability clearly, by definition, can't be as productive in their work as somebody who hasn't got a disability of that nature, then it was inevitable that given that the employer was going to have pay them both the same they were going to take on the person who was going to be more productive, less of a risk, and that was doing those people a huge disservice."
Senior Tory Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) challenged Mr Davies, saying: "Forget the fact there's a minimum wage for a moment. Why actually should a disabled person work for less than £5.93 an hour? It's not a lot of money, is it?"
Mr Davies told him: "If an employer is looking at two candidates, one who has got disabilities and one who hasn't, and they have got to pay them both the same rate, I invite you to guess which one the employer is more likely to take on.
"Whether that is right or wrong, whether you would do that or wouldn't do, that to me is just the real world that we operate in."
The people being penalised were "those people with those disabilities who are desperate to make a contribution to society, want to actually start getting on the employment ladder and find time and time again that the door is being closed in their face".
Mr Davies continued, telling Mr Leigh: "If they were able to prove themselves earlier on and reassure the employer that took them on that they weren't causing a problem in a way that they might feel that they were going to - because I'm sure that there's a lot of myths out there, I'm sure many of these people would be just as productive as people without disability - but if they could take them on and give them a chance they may well be able to fund themselves moving up the pay rate much more quickly.
"At the moment they are just not getting any opportunity at all."
Chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party Tony Lloyd also challenged Mr Davies on his comments.
He asked: "How low would you be prepared to drop those wages? If somebody with learning difficulties was only a quarter as productive as the competitor would-be employee, how low would you be prepared to drop the pay rate, to a quarter of the minimum wage? Less than a quarter?"
Mr Davies told him: "I don't agree with the National Minimum Wage in principle. But I thought that what somebody was prepared to work for and what somebody was prepared to pay was a private matter between two people that shouldn't be interfered with by the Government."
He added: "I would much prefer to see the person with the learning disability being given the opportunity to get a job and do something worthwhile and contribute in a way that they would want to.
"You would prefer that they were sat at home and weren't able to get a job in the first place."
Mr Lloyd said supported or subsidised employment would be a better way of creating job openings.
But Mr Davies said Labour's policies had resulted in people being "priced out" of the jobs market or trapped on benefits.
Mr Davies was speaking during the second reading debate of Tory Christopher Chope's Employment Opportunities Bill.
Shadow business minister Gareth Thomas said Mr Davies made a "series of interesting remarks, not least the argument that those with mental health problems or people with learning disabilities face even greater challenges to find work, a point I accept".
But Mr Thomas added: "I can't, however, accept the logic of his argument, if one takes it through to its conclusion, that we should as a country accept a situation where those with learning disabilities or with mental health problems should accept lower wages compared to others."
Mr Davies (Shipley) told MPs: "When I went to visit Mind and I spoke to people there that were using the service offered by that charity they were absolutely upfront with me and they said that when they went for a job and they came across a situation where there were other people who had applied for that job, they've got mental health problems, other people haven't, they said to me 'Who would you take on?'.
"Because they were quite accepting of the fact it was inevitable that the employer would take on the person who hasn't got any mental health problems given that they were both going to be having to be paid the same rate.
"Given that some of those people with a learning disability clearly, by definition, can't be as productive in their work as somebody who hasn't got a disability of that nature, then it was inevitable that given that the employer was going to have pay them both the same they were going to take on the person who was going to be more productive, less of a risk, and that was doing those people a huge disservice."
Senior Tory Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) challenged Mr Davies, saying: "Forget the fact there's a minimum wage for a moment. Why actually should a disabled person work for less than £5.93 an hour? It's not a lot of money, is it?"
Mr Davies told him: "If an employer is looking at two candidates, one who has got disabilities and one who hasn't, and they have got to pay them both the same rate, I invite you to guess which one the employer is more likely to take on.
"Whether that is right or wrong, whether you would do that or wouldn't do, that to me is just the real world that we operate in."
The people being penalised were "those people with those disabilities who are desperate to make a contribution to society, want to actually start getting on the employment ladder and find time and time again that the door is being closed in their face".
Mr Davies continued, telling Mr Leigh: "If they were able to prove themselves earlier on and reassure the employer that took them on that they weren't causing a problem in a way that they might feel that they were going to - because I'm sure that there's a lot of myths out there, I'm sure many of these people would be just as productive as people without disability - but if they could take them on and give them a chance they may well be able to fund themselves moving up the pay rate much more quickly.
"At the moment they are just not getting any opportunity at all."
Chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party Tony Lloyd also challenged Mr Davies on his comments.
He asked: "How low would you be prepared to drop those wages? If somebody with learning difficulties was only a quarter as productive as the competitor would-be employee, how low would you be prepared to drop the pay rate, to a quarter of the minimum wage? Less than a quarter?"
Mr Davies told him: "I don't agree with the National Minimum Wage in principle. But I thought that what somebody was prepared to work for and what somebody was prepared to pay was a private matter between two people that shouldn't be interfered with by the Government."
He added: "I would much prefer to see the person with the learning disability being given the opportunity to get a job and do something worthwhile and contribute in a way that they would want to.
"You would prefer that they were sat at home and weren't able to get a job in the first place."
Mr Lloyd said supported or subsidised employment would be a better way of creating job openings.
But Mr Davies said Labour's policies had resulted in people being "priced out" of the jobs market or trapped on benefits.
Mr Davies was speaking during the second reading debate of Tory Christopher Chope's Employment Opportunities Bill.
Shadow business minister Gareth Thomas said Mr Davies made a "series of interesting remarks, not least the argument that those with mental health problems or people with learning disabilities face even greater challenges to find work, a point I accept".
But Mr Thomas added: "I can't, however, accept the logic of his argument, if one takes it through to its conclusion, that we should as a country accept a situation where those with learning disabilities or with mental health problems should accept lower wages compared to others."
No comments:
Post a Comment