§ 48. Mr. LANSBURYasked the Minister of Labour the amount of the grant which has been made to the cost of carrying out the Lee Conservancy new works and navigation improvement scheme between Bow and Hackney; whether any stipulations have been made that in return for payments of this grant 50 per cent. of the men engaged on the work must be taken from distressed areas; whether the work is in the main such as is suitable for unskilled labour; and how many men were 624 registered as unskilled labourers at the West India Dock, Hackney, East India Dock Road, and Stratford Exchanges on Monday, 15th April?
§ Mr. BETTERTONThe grant approved is the usual grant for non-revenue producing schemes on which the local authority agrees to employ men from the distressed areas up to 50 per cent. of the number of men engaged on the work. The capital sum in this case is £63,900 and the authority responsible will receive 75 per cent. of the interest and sinking fund charges on any loan raised to meet expenditure for the first half (up to 15 years) of the loan period, and 37½ per cent. on interest and sinking fund charges for the remainder of the loan period (up to 15 years). The answer to the second and third parts of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the fourth part, I regret that without much labour I am unable to give the information in the precise form set out in the question. There are considerable numbers of unskilled labourers unemployed for varying periods in the areas mentioned, but the unemployment there is not so heavy, nor so prolonged, as in the distressed areas from which half of the labour will be recruited.
§ Mr. LANSBURYIs the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the distress in this area is the usual condition of casual labour and unemployment, and how can the hon. Member answer my question by saying that it is not the same; and is he aware that the authority itself on Saturday unanimously agreed to ask the Government to withdraw the condition that they must employ these men owing to the thousands of men in that area who are looking for a job when only about 150 can be employed?
§ Mr. BETTERTONI am not aware that an application was made on Saturday, but, if the hon. Member says it was, of course I accept his statement. At the same time, the original application was made by the Lee Conservancy well knowing the conditions attaching to it.
§ Mr. LANSBURYWhen the Labour Department gets this application from the Lee Conservancy will they reconsider the matter, seeing that there are literally many thousands of men standing round wanting this kind of work?
§ Mr. BETTERTONThat would involve a change of the policy which we have often debated in this House, and which I cannot modify or alter in answer to a supplementary question.
Mr. THOMASIf the Parliamentary Secretary is satisfied that he is bringing unemployed people into a district where there are already more unemployed than are necessary to do this work, is it wise to proceed in this way?
§ Mr. BETTERTONIt is entirely a matter of opinion upon which the views of the Government and the opinions of other people differ very much.
§ Mr. LANSBURYIs it not a fact that all the public authorities from the London County Council down to the borough councils have protested against the policy of the Government which will accentuate and make more terrible the problem of casual employment in London?
§ Mr. BETTERTONI am not aware that any protests have been received from the local authorities concerned. That is a question of policy which we have very often discussed in this House, and I cannot elaborate it any further at the present time.