obtain higher wages, and by the fact that employers always prefer to fire the least productive workers. in fact, the unemployment rate in spain for persons with only a primary education has increased in 2008 by almost 8 pp, as against 5 pp in the case of those with a secondary education and only 2 pp in that of persons with a further education. the data also show that not only are the largest increases in the unemployment rate among groups with lower levels of education, but that these groups also have the highest unemployment rates. yet we should not only strive to improve the educational attainment of our workers before they start working. we should also promote training within the firm. if we managed to make our labour market institutions more like those of other developed countries, we would also do away with labour market arrangements that hinder workplace training and do not give employers any incentive to improve their firms ’ human capital. we urgently need a debate between all political, economic and social agents to convince them of the need for reforms. the government and the parties who support it, the opposition parties, trade unions, employers, academics, researchers and the media should all participate. and we should not forget those who the reforms would benefit most : unemployed workers and employers who still do not exist, but who would be able to if there were a significant structural change in labour market institutions. without sufficient social acceptance this debate will obviously not even be joined, so it is very important to clearly underline the objectives pursued which i ’ ve repeated ad nauseam in this speech, but which i shall attempt to express again in a different way so as not to tire you. we should all agree that the best protection against unemployment is not that which concerns itself with subsidising the unemployed, but that which ensures that the majority do not lose their job. we should admit that it is useful to allow employers to improve their productivity because that way we will see higher real wage growth. and, finally, we should let workers take the opportunity to switch to better - paid jobs without losing a substantial part of their protection in the event that they lose such jobs. you will have realised that my approach to the debate on labour market reform is far removed from that of those who confine it to the question of whether or not to lower dismissal costs. in my view it is a mistake to debate cheaper firing alone, and i believe that we can only make headway if we focus on finding formulae that allow us to increase productivity, to reduce the numbers

things : that our main problems are structural ; that our chief task is to improve and boost productivity ; that we ought to seize the moment to reform our regulations and institutions ; and because whatever we do to improve productivity does not run counter to exiting the crisis but, quite on the contrary, may help us emerge more rapidly from it. to conclude, let me reiterate what i said earlier. if i ’ ve talked of only one area of structural reform, namely labour reform, it is because i think it is the most important one for relaunching corporate start - ups and reducing unemployment. but is it not the only area of reform, and nor are others less necessary. giving a greater degree of legal security to rental contracts, and liberalising the related terms, is absolutely necessary for reducing rental costs and for making a smoother real estate adjustment, without a collapse of the value of the wealth in which spaniards have their assets concentrated. re - launching privatisation, liberalisation and the boosting of competition in numerous sectors is vital because, by reducing unwarranted business margins, workers'real wages can be increased without harming competitiveness. and thus we could say for many more areas of reform. but we'd need many more speeches to talk about this. and fear not, i won't be making them today. thank you.