David Cameron talks with first time voters about the Scottish independence referendum, at the Lockerbie Ice Rink on May 16, 2014. Photograph: Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Only Labour can be trusted to help working women

David Cameron likes to boast that there are more women in the workplace than ever. But for too many, life is getting harder. 

The next Labour government will make work pay. The independent Institute for Fiscal Studies has found that families will be worse off at the next general election than they were at the last one. Ensuring a fair day's pay for a fair day's work is the only way millions of families will be able to cope with the cost-of-living crisis that has been one of the defining features of David Cameron's government.

The Prime Minister likes to talk about the record number of women in work, a fact which should in theory mean family finances are under less pressure.  However, a detailed look at those jobs and the terms and conditions attached to them tells a very different story. Here are a few facts that David Cameron never mentions.

First, the number of women working part-time is the highest on record. Six million women are working part-time, four times the number of men. Wages for part-time jobs are, on average, a third less than for full-time jobs. 

Second, the rise in the female workforce is due in large part to a 22 per cent increase in self-employment. But if you think the majority of these women are running tech start-ups from their kitchen tables you'd be wrong. This new-style working woman typically earns £9,800 a year - that's less than you'd earn annually on the minimum wage. The biggest increase in self-employment has come in customer services and "elementary" or routine jobs like warehouse pickers and packers.

Third, in many of the industries where women are concentrated, low-pay and zero hours contracts are the norm. A quarter of employees in hospitality are on zero-hour contracts and 300,000 care workers.

An independent report commissioned by the Labour Party last week found that care agencies are exploiting home helps: up to 220,000 workers are effectively being paid less than the minimum wage because visits are capped at 15 minutes, and no payment is made for time spent travelling between jobs. A third of all women are in low wage jobs. Kate, a full-time university catering assistant who lives in my constituency of Ashfield in Nottinghamshire told me that saying "no" to her kids has become a fact of life, and she hasn't had a family holiday in four years.

Given the facts on the ground, it's little wonder the gap between men and women's pay is increasing again for the first time in five years. In government, Labour narrowed the gap by almost a third, and closed the gap completely for women in their twenties and thirties working full-time. 

We must not forget the women who can't get any work - there are currently 400,000 women claiming Jobseeker's Allowance. The number was just half that in 2008 - before the financial crisis hit. These women need a Labour government to get them back to work  - and we will guarantee every young woman who has been unemployed for more than a year a paid starter job. We will extend the same guarantee to women over 24 who have been out of a job for two years.

Working women need a Labour government that will end the abuse of zero-hour contracts by giving employees the right to a fixed-hours contract after a year working for the same employer. We will substantially increase the minimum wage and call time on practices like "clock-watch" care and we will guarantee 25-hours of free childcare for three and four-year-olds as well as guaranteeing access to breakfast and after-school clubs.

David Cameron likes to brag about the fact more women are in the workplace, but ask him if he will do any of those things to help working women and he becomes a little coy.

Gloria De Piero is Labour MP for Ashfield. 

Getty
Show Hide image

Is defeat in Stoke the beginning of the end for Paul Nuttall?

The Ukip leader was his party's unity candidate. But after his defeat in Stoke, the old divisions are beginning to show again

In a speech to Ukip’s spring conference in Bolton on February 17, the party’s once and probably future leader Nigel Farage laid down the gauntlet for his successor, Paul Nuttall. Stoke’s by-election was “fundamental” to the future of the party – and Nuttall had to win.
 
One week on, Nuttall has failed that test miserably and thrown the fundamental questions hanging over Ukip’s future into harsh relief. 

For all his bullish talk of supplanting Labour in its industrial heartlands, the Ukip leader only managed to increase the party’s vote share by 2.2 percentage points on 2015. This paltry increase came despite Stoke’s 70 per cent Brexit majority, and a media narrative that was, until the revelations around Nuttall and Hillsborough, talking the party’s chances up.
 
So what now for Nuttall? There is, for the time being, little chance of him resigning – and, in truth, few inside Ukip expected him to win. Nuttall was relying on two well-rehearsed lines as get-out-of-jail free cards very early on in the campaign. 

The first was that the seat was a lowly 72 on Ukip’s target list. The second was that he had been leader of party whose image had been tarnished by infighting both figurative and literal for all of 12 weeks – the real work of his project had yet to begin. 

The chances of that project ever succeeding were modest at the very best. After yesterday’s defeat, it looks even more unlikely. Nuttall had originally stated his intention to run in the likely by-election in Leigh, Greater Manchester, when Andy Burnham wins the Greater Manchester metro mayoralty as is expected in May (Wigan, the borough of which Leigh is part, voted 64 per cent for Brexit).

If he goes ahead and stands – which he may well do – he will have to overturn a Labour majority of over 14,000. That, even before the unedifying row over the veracity of his Hillsborough recollections, was always going to be a big challenge. If he goes for it and loses, his leadership – predicated as it is on his supposed ability to win votes in the north - will be dead in the water. 

Nuttall is not entirely to blame, but he is a big part of Ukip’s problem. I visited Stoke the day before The Guardian published its initial report on Nuttall’s Hillsborough claims, and even then Nuttall’s campaign manager admitted that he was unlikely to convince the “hard core” of Conservative voters to back him. 

There are manifold reasons for this, but chief among them is that Nuttall, despite his newfound love of tweed, is no Nigel Farage. Not only does he lack his name recognition and box office appeal, but the sad truth is that the Tory voters Ukip need to attract are much less likely to vote for a party led by a Scouser whose platform consists of reassuring working-class voters their NHS and benefits are safe.
 
It is Farage and his allies – most notably the party’s main donor Arron Banks – who hold the most power over Nuttall’s future. Banks, who Nuttall publicly disowned as a non-member after he said he was “sick to death” of people “milking” the Hillsborough disaster, said on the eve of the Stoke poll that Ukip had to “remain radical” if it wanted to keep receiving his money. Farage himself has said the party’s campaign ought to have been “clearer” on immigration. 

Senior party figures are already briefing against Nuttall and his team in the Telegraph, whose proprietors are chummy with the beer-swilling Farage-Banks axis. They deride him for his efforts to turn Ukip into “NiceKip” or “Nukip” in order to appeal to more women voters, and for the heavy-handedness of his pitch to Labour voters (“There were times when I wondered whether I’ve got a purple rosette or a red one on”, one told the paper). 

It is Nuttall’s policy advisers - the anti-Farage awkward squad of Suzanne Evans, MEP Patrick O’Flynn (who famously branded Farage "snarling, thin-skinned and aggressive") and former leadership candidate Lisa Duffy – come in for the harshest criticism. Herein lies the leader's almost impossible task. Despite having pitched to members as a unity candidate, the two sides’ visions for Ukip are irreconcilable – one urges him to emulate Trump (who Nuttall says he would not have voted for), and the other urges a more moderate tack. 

Endorsing his leader on Question Time last night, Ukip’s sole MP Douglas Carswell blamed the legacy of the party’s Tea Party-inspired 2015 general election campaign, which saw Farage complain about foreigners with HIV using the NHS in ITV’s leaders debate, for the party’s poor performance in Stoke. Others, such as MEP Bill Etheridge, say precisely the opposite – that Nuttall must be more like Farage. 

Neither side has yet called for Nuttall’s head. He insists he is “not going anywhere”. With his febrile party no stranger to abortive coup and counter-coup, he is unlikely to be the one who has the final say.