Meeting of the Parliament 01 March 2016
I wanted to congratulate the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee and its convener on their choice of title for their report, but Gavin Brown has prevented me from doing that, because it seems that the title did not come from them. “Taking the High Road” is a fantastic title. It is very much a Scottish title and it tells us about the kind of society that the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government want.
Professor Chris Warhurst, the director of the Warwick institute for employment research, talked to the committee about the choices that Governments make—because this choice is one for Government much more than it is for employers. He said that there is a clear choice before us: taking the option of high road economies, which focus on high skills; or taking option of low road economies, which focus on low skills and low wages. We know that the SNP Government wants us to be on the high road with many of our European neighbours.
I listened to what Gordon MacDonald said and I will say something along the same lines. I have lived in Scotland for 30 years, and it is clear to me that successive Westminster Governments have taken us down the low road of low wages and low skills. The debates that we had in 2014 and the debates that we will have this year in the Scottish election campaign and thereafter in the European Union referendum campaign concern the road that we want to take for our economy and our wellbeing: is it the high road or the low road?
Something that we worked a lot on when I was a member of the committee was the idea that productivity is key to promoting the benefits of a higher wage society, for workers as much as for employers. Patricia Findlay, professor of work and employment relations at the University of Strathclyde, said to the committee that there is indeed an increased interest among policy makers and academics in linking job quality and productivity. I agree that the discussion around job quality and wellbeing at work must focus on job quality, productivity, innovation and competitiveness.
The committee report talks about EU data identifying that there are relatively low numbers of workplaces in the UK where staff engage in problem solving activities. That is true, and our continental neighbours are a lot better at giving employees and employers the space to engage and work collaboratively.
In the north-east, many international energy and subsea firms are engaging with their employees like never before. At a recent meeting of the cross-party group on oil and gas, we heard about the approach of Nexen, which gives us a great example of how to achieve better productivity by engaging employees. Nexen had a 30 per cent improvement in productivity in just six months. Engagement was the key, and the offshore workforce found the solutions to better productivity.
We were told that Nexen adapted the marginal gains theory, a system that was created by the British Olympic cycling team—one that the French Olympic cycling team must have missed, somehow. Nexen encouraged staff to break down routine work activities in a bid to identify small gains. The move will see an additional 140 million barrels of oil for Nexen—I am delighted that Patrick Harvie is not here to hear that.
It seems that everyone agreed on certain points when giving evidence for this report. Stephen Boyd from the Scottish Trades Union Congress said that industrial democracy is weaker in the UK than across the EU. I agree with the trade union movement about the importance of effective partnership between trade unions, businesses and Government. It is key to the future of our economy as much as it is to our wellbeing.
I will conclude with a quote from the departing chair of the Scottish Human Rights Commission, Professor Alan Miller, that I read in Holyrood magazine. He said:
“Scotland has withstood extremely well the toxicity of the Westminster debate”.
Reading the committee report, it is clear that Scotland has what it takes. We must keep a positive debate that focuses on taking the high road.
15:04