when did the labour party introduce national living wage? never believes that the conservative government. >> the minimum wage with opposition from the conservative party. wages are lower than they were ten years ago and the prime minister has been in office for just one year, during that time disposable income has fallen by 2%. the economic consequences of austerity are very clear and so are the social consequences. life expectancy stalling for the first time in 100 years. today, the iss forecast income any quality is going to get worse and child poverty will rise to 5,000,000 x 2022. does the -- >> order! members are shouting, shouting excessively. they must calm themselves, take some sort of soothing medicine. >> i will try to help the honorable member. that is the prime minister not realize that her talk of a strong economy doesn't remotely match the reality that millions of people face with low wages and poverty? >> the right honorable gentlemen is wrong in some of the fact he is putting forward. inequality is down, life expectancy is c

and labour's way means everyone pays the price of labour. [shouting] >> mr. speaker, when tories talk of tough choices we know who suffers, it's the poorest and most vulnerable in our society. young people employed on zero hours of contracts are more likely to have worse mental and physical health. students who have worked hard at university graduating with the 7000 pounds worth of debt that will stay with them until they retire. mr. speaker, let me spell it out to the prime minister. this is the only country in which wages have not recovered and the global financial crash. more people are using food banks, 4 million children living in poverty, record in work poverty, young people who see no prospect of owning their own home, and 6 million earning less than the living wage. the lope epidemic is a threat to our economic stability. can she take some tough choices and instead of offering platitudes, offer some real help and real support for those in work, young people, who deserve better and deserve to be given more optimism, rather than greater inequality? >> w

does the fed use the bureau of labour statistics data on labor participation? chair yellen: i believe that is the core data. bureaui have their, the of labor statistics employment data on my ipad. i'm lookg at it. unfortunately i did not do it ahead of time, so i cannot put it on the screen. but when i look at the actual data, all people over 16 years old, so basically everyone a --king age, that has gone the labor participation rate has gone from 66.6% in 1994 to 62.9%, a three percentage decline. you have suggested that is because people are getting older. they are dropping out of the workforce. that is not what this chart says. that 65 and is older has actually increased 18.6%, a% in 1994 to 6.2% increase in that 20 year period. let me just finish the question. 55 and older, which is broader and includes those of normal retirement age, the number has gone up by 10 percentage points. the group that has gone down is the 25 to 50-year-olds. they have declined from 83.4% participation to 80.9% participation. yeargroup, the 25 to 54 old group, their peak earnings