The case for a Rural Living Wage

16th January, 2013 4:03 pm

As a minister at the old Department for Children, Schools and Families, I was very proud when Ed Balls agreed it would be the first government department to pay the London Living Wage. The high cost of housing and the concentration of poverty in the capital makes the case overwhelming; but the case for a rural living wage is equally strong.

If you are poor in rural areas it is a real struggle. The quality of life attracts asset rich retirees and second home owners, making housing often unaffordable. Local shops are a long way from distribution centres, competition is limited, and so prices are higher than the average. Wages are also low as local jobs can be limited to cleaning, care, hospitality and micro businesses; or if you’re lucky, the public sector. But the local council will be underfunded relative to urban councils, and can’t afford the support services you need if living in poverty.

The best way out of poverty is work – but only if work pays. Topping up low pay through the tax system is one way forward, as the tax credit system has shown. Better still is for employers to pay decent wages. That is why I hope Labour colleagues in the Counties will campaign for a rural living wage in this year’s Council elections.

It is also why I will be pressing Ministers this evening to withdraw their amendment to the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (ERR) Bill that would abolish the Agricultural Wages Board (AWB) for England.

Set up in 1917, the AWB has put a floor under wages for almost a century. It means farmers’ representatives negotiate terms and conditions every year with unions, and workers then get reasonable pay, protection and career progression. Without it, workers will have to deal direct with their employers, the reality of which would be pay cuts for the workers (of around £32.5m per year) and the burden of staff negotiations on farmers. Indeed, the latter is one of the reasons why the Farmers Union for Wales agrees with the Welsh Assembly Government in retaining the AWB.

Previously, as an MP, I represented the Frampton Estate where the Tolpuddle Martyrs had worked before their arrest in 1834. The outcry at their treatment and transportation was a crucial moment in the history of the trade union movement.  It was born out of James Frampton’s power to bully, and his influence over the local judiciary in passing such an extreme sentence.

But today, as Unite the Union say, “there is no more ‘tightly-knit’ community than a small rural community, where a farm worker’s employer, employer’s spouse or other members of their family may be in positions of social control such as a justice of the peace, a parish councillor, a school governor, all of these and more.” This makes negotiation by workers in these communities very difficult indeed.

Or as my colleague Margaret Prosser said when this issue was last debated in the Lords, “The most particular aspect is that in many circumstances the relationship between the worker and the employer is very personal. The relationship often involves just one or two employees and one employer. It is a very close relationship where day-to-day friendship and trust has to be established. How, in those circumstances, can the employee raise for himself or herself the sorts of questions that need to be answered if that employee is to feel secure in his or her employment and endeavour to improve his or her circumstances?”

There are many other reasons for retaining the protection that the AWB gives 154,000 workers in England – a much better deal for young people, better training, the particular conditions in what is a dangerous profession.  In return, the impact assessment says the positive employment effects will be ‘not significantly different from zero’.

It is also shocking that the consultation period for this proposal has been only for four weeks, with Ministers trying to rush the plans through. For me however, the AWB is the starting point for a living wage for everyone in rural England – and this move by a Lib Dem farming minister will undo the good work by Lloyd George almost a century ago.

Lord Jim Knight of Weymouth is Labour’s Shadow DEFRA Minister in the Lords. This piece was first posted on the Labour Lords blog.

  • Quiet_Sceptic

    You mention housing costs, for a lot of villages a ‘living wage’ wouldn’t even come close to paying for housing, even well paid jobs wouldn’t get you a house. You aren’t going to overcome that with a living wage or housing benefit.

    Part of the solution has to be having the planning system tilted in favour of allowing social housing to be built in rural area even when those areas are in scenic locations. You see no end of villages where virtually all development seems to have stopped sometime in the mid-1970s and the only thing built in the last 20-30 years has been very large, executive detached homes or perhaps more accurately, small mansions.

    • TomFairfax

      Hi QS,
      ‘ You see no end of villages where virtually all development seems to
      have stopped sometime in the mid-1970s and the only thing built in the
      last 20-30 years has been very large, executive detached homes..’

      Precisely. Even the so called ‘affordable’ homes built before 2010 were really just ‘smaller’ homes and not particularly affordable.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jim.crowder2 Jim Crowder

    There are few enough jobs in the countryside as it is. Putting up the costs of employment for companies that employ people won’t help.

  • TomFairfax

    I’m not convinced about a rural living wage. The main issues are housing and jobs and this proposal doesn’t deal with either. Second homes blight the communities because they are occupied part time and therefore mean local business see their markets shrink and close destroying jobs, while at the same time depriving the locality of housing available to those from the area. In some cases a Jersey style solution may be necessary to stop the rot.

Latest

  • Comment Featured Why I introduced the Assisted Dying Bill

    Why I introduced the Assisted Dying Bill

    My main reason for introducing the Assisted Dying Bill is simple. It’s a straightforward question of choice and dignity: with appropriate, strong safeguards, terminally ill adults of sound mind should be legally allowed to choose to have assistance to end their own lives. I value life, and I do understand that some people believe very deeply that ending one’s own life is always wrong. Nevertheless, the depth and sincerity of their belief should not mean that they deny choice to […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Leadership candidates slam Cameron for inaction over refugee crisis

    Leadership candidates slam Cameron for inaction over refugee crisis

    The Labour leadership candidates have this morning weighed in on the refugee crisis, in which it’s estimated over 2,500 people have died since the start of this year. Yesterday, David Cameron made the following statement, in which he claimed the following: “We have taken a number of genuine asylum seekers from Syrian refugee camps and we keep that under review, but we think the most important thing is to try to bring peace and stability to that part of the world. I […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured It will take heart and head to win again

    It will take heart and head to win again

    When I joined the Labour Party in 1979, age 17, I had no idea that for the next 18 years, Labour would be in opposition to a Tory government. As a young activist, I seemed to be on a different demo every week. Thatcher was in power and there was no shortage of worthwhile causes. Marches for jobs, marches against the cuts, Anti-apartheid, the Anti-Nazi League, women against violence against women,… It was a long list. I was full of […]

    Read more →
  • Comment We have the money to make Labour a movement – we can’t lose this moment

    We have the money to make Labour a movement – we can’t lose this moment

    Jessie J may have tried to argue it’s not about the money, money, money, but anyone facing a well-funded opposition at an election knows all too well the difference it makes. One aspect of the leadership contest yet to be fully discussed is the cash that it has generated for Labour. The combination of the volume of people paying the supporters rate, the increase in membership and the levy paid by leadership candidates means a serious amount of money will […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Leadership matters

    Leadership matters

    This week has really shown up the petty squabbling in the Labour leadership contest for what it is – inward looking and small. Because when it matters, the Labour Party has united around the issue of giving much needed asylum to refugees. Our differences may seem big – and sometimes they are . They do matter. But the gulf of difference between the way the whole of the Labour Party has reacted to what is needed and the nasty, small […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends










Submit