Question
The Poundland in Bridgwater closed in July. While the Minister is right to prioritise protecting jobs, will she accept that having introduced a £25 billion jobs tax, having added 350 pages of regulation in their unemployment Act and having delivered above-inflation rises to the minimum wage, it is her Government who are responsible for creating a hostile economic environment for British retail?
Answer
I am sad but not surprised to hear that response from Opposition Members. Their answer to a situation that is really worrying for 12,000 employees and so many more in the supply chain is to roll back rights for working people. That is not our answer. We are getting round the table and trying to protect jobs, as a responsible Government rightly should.56% point-scoring 22% vibes
Verdict: RED (20/100)
The question asked whether the Minister accepts responsibility for creating a hostile environment for retail. The reply did not clearly accept or reject that claim, and did not explain why the environment is not hostile. Instead, it mainly criticised the Opposition's proposals and gave a general assurance that the Government is working to protect jobs, without addressing the specific policies raised. The answer is largely hedged, so the person who asked would likely need to submit a follow-up for a direct response.
Verdict: RED (10/100)
The reply does not answer the question of whether the Government accepts responsibility for the hostile environment the question describes, nor does it engage with the jobs tax, the regulation cited, or the minimum wage rises. Instead, it turns to the Opposition's position and says the Government is protecting jobs, which is a general statement rather than a response to the specific accusation. A member of the public would likely conclude that the question was not answered and might need to ask again.
How we got there
| Question item | Coverage | Specificity | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the Government accept responsibility for creating a hostile economic environment for British retail, citing the £25 billion jobs tax, the additional regulation in the unemployment Act, and above-inflation minimum wage rises? | Not Addressed | Generic | The item asks whether the Government accepts responsibility for a hostile environment for retail, citing the jobs tax, the unemployment Act regulation, and minimum wage rises. The reply never addresses whether the Government accepts responsibility or engages with any of the three cited measures. It deflects to the Opposition's supposed position on rolling back rights, notes worry for 12,000 employees, and asserts the Government is protecting jobs, which is generic rather than a response to the accusation. |
| Will the Minister accept that the Government is responsible for creating a hostile economic environment for British retail, given the policies cited (the £25 billion jobs tax, the Employment Rights Act and above-inflation minimum wage rises)? | Partially Addressed | Hedged | The item asks whether the Minister accepts responsibility for a hostile environment for retail. The reply never explicitly accepts or rejects that claim, nor explains why the environment isn't hostile. It turns to attacking the Opposition's supposed plan to roll back rights (statements 2 and 3) and offers only the vague assurance that the Government is 'getting round the table and trying to protect jobs' (statement 4), which is a gesture rather than a concrete answer on the policies named. |