§ 8. Mr. HANNON
asked the Lord Privy Seal if he is in a position to state the number of workpeople of all grades for whom employment has been provided under the schemes promoted by His Majesty's Government for the relief of unemployment?
§ 7. Mr. D. G. SOMERVILLE
asked the Lord Privy Seal if, taking the White Paper recently issued showing that the different sanctioned schemes for the relief of unemployment had provided 164,000 man-years of work, he can state exactly how many of these men whose labour has thus been provided for are actually now engaged in such work?
It is very difficult to give precise figures, but such returns as are available show about 50,000 men directly employed upon works assisted by the Unemployment Grants Committee and upon roads. This figure which relates in part to the end of February and in part to the end of March does not include men indirectly employed on the preparation and transport of materials and so on, nor does it include persons employed on schemes assisted under Part I of the Home Development Act or under the Colonial Development Act.
§ Sir BASIL PETO
Can the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that he is preparing fresh schemes for the employment of people out of work as fast as his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer puts them out of work by withdrawing the Safeguarding of Industries?
§ Sir HERBERT SAMUEL
Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of these men are employed upon entirely new schemes and how many on schemes which are in replacement of old schemes now completed?
It is difficult to give figures. For instance, there has been approximately £80,000,000 sanctioned under different heads, but it is probably true to say that not £10,000,000 of that, for reasons such as not having received Parliamentary sanction, local authorities 6 not giving permission, and so on, are yet commenced. It is equally difficult to separate them without tremendous and unnecessary work.
Am I right in thinking that these schemes do not include women, and that the Central Committee on Women's Work is the only one set up to help the unemployed women, and can he extend that Central Committee to give training other than domestic training to women unemployed?
The figure varies, but the unfortunate increase during the past few months, amounting to 128,000 women, is due to difficulties in India and other places.
I know that, but cannot the right hon. Gentleman extend the only training scheme he has given to women to make it training for other than domestic service?
The Ministry of Labour are primarily concerned with that aspect of the question. I do not know the exact details, but I will certainly look into it.