You have to feel sympathy for politicians… They go on the radio and try and defend the indefensible to an interviewer practised in the art of making them look like fools.
Fortunately for Mr Darling the interviewer today was less cruel than she should have been. Alistair Darling was talking about the Act that comes into force in time for the next working week that outlaws non-”objective” age discrimination.
Alistair Darling “would like” the law to abide by common sense. Which is like the fact that I “would like” criminals to be law abiding and that I “would like” addictive drugs not to be addictive. He is either naive or genuinely believes that this Act is well written… Which would be a first for this government.
His indefensible statements, though, came when asked about the minimum wage for under 21s. There is no coherent argument against having the same minimum wage for an 17 year-old as for a 22 year-old. That the minimum wage is an afront to market forces and that 17 year-olds are less likely to get a job on merit grounds is not the point — a fully competent 16 year-old should be paid the same as a fully competent 23 year-old and if the government insists on making laws that protect some wages, they shouldn’t dscriminate based upon age.
But poor Mr Darling had to try to defend this obvious illogical position without having any arguments in his armoury to defend with…
September 29th, 2006 at 2:54 pm
As usual I totally agree.
The minimum wage discriminates in two way - firstly it pays younger adults less, and secondly it prevents older adults from getting low-paid jobs because employers hire younger adults who they can pay less.
I’m not actually against the minimum wage in principle, just in the way that Labour have enacted it.
September 29th, 2006 at 7:23 pm
The minimum wage discriminates in two way - firstly it pays younger adults less, and secondly it prevents older adults from getting low-paid jobs because employers hire younger adults who they can pay less. Perfectly put.