HC Deb 02 March 1953 vol 512 cc150-60

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Kaberry.]

9.59 p.m.

Mr. Howard Johnson (Brighton, Kemptown)

I am pleased to have the opportunity of raising the question of unemployment in the County Borough of Brighton. I want to pay a very sincere tribute to the many persons who have helped me in giving me information for this debate. I should like to thank the Borough Surveyor of Brighton; the deputy town clerk; Mr. Till, President of the Brighton and Hove Hotels and Restaurants Association and, last but by no means least, Mr. Thorne, the manager of the Brighton Employment Exchange. He has shown great patience and has given me a great deal of assistance.

I want to make it perfectly clear that the views I am expressing are entirely my own and that I take full responsibility for them——

It being Ten o'Clock, the Motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Kaberry.]

Mr. Johnson

I was saying that I have had a great deal of assistance from a large number of bodies, but I comment adversely on the fact that I have had no information or assistance from the Brighton, Hove and District Trades Council. That is a matter of great regret to me, because it is that Council which has sought to make political capital out of this matter.

My objects in raising the matter tonight are twofold. First, I hope that we may get a true perspective of the issue of unemployment in Brighton, and secondly, I want to counteract a certain amount of Communist propaganda which has been disseminated in my own constituency of Kemptown in regard to unemployment. I very much regret that certain members of the Socialist Party in Brighton—who ought to and do know better—have allied themselves to this propaganda. I have always held that unemployment should transcend in importance the party political arena.

The total of unemployment at the last available date I have—16th February of this year—was 3,929 persons, 2,633 being male and 1,296 female. To get some sort of picture, it is necessary to compare that total with the total on 16th February, 1951. The figure then was 3,539, so there has been an increase of 390 persons unemployed. I greatly regret the fact that there has been an increase of even 390 persons; I should like to have seen a decrease of 390. Nevertheless, this does not represent the terrible and serious problem which it is being made to represent by certain malicious and low-minded persons in Brighton.

When one analyses these figures, one finds that of that total of 3,929 persons unemployed, over 1,300 are more than 50 years of age. I deeply appreciate the problem of unemployed persons who are over 50 years old; but I do not blink the fact that it is extraordinarily difficult to get employers to employ new labour in the persons of those who are of that age. I hope that the Minister, by means of propaganda, will be able, to make employers realise that very frequently persons of more mature years are better and more trusted employees than younger persons. If the Minister can do something in that direction, he will be helping to solve a very severe human problem. Of the 3,929 persons unemployed, 477 have been unemployed for over 12 months, and it must be fair to assume that some of them are probably, for various causes, almost unemployable. It may be that because some have bad characters, or for other good reasons, employers hesitate to accept them.

Also, of the 3,929, 624 are registered as disabled. Here Brighton has a very serious and important problem which must be dealt with without further delay. Brighton has the highest number of registered disabled unemployed of any town in the South-Eastern region. At the request of the various Ministries, Brighton Corporation sterilised three-quarters of an acre of land at East Moulescoomb for the erection of a Remploy factory. I cannot imagine a town in the country that needs a Remploy factory without any further delay more than Brighton does.

On 12th June last I asked the Minister when a Remploy factory would be built on the three-quarters of an acre designated by Brighton Corporation, and he replied that Brighton was high on the list but there were some difficulties about the Remploy organisation which made it difficult for the factory to be built at an early date. Those difficulties must be overcome. If it means starting a fresh organisation, it must be started. If it means a grant of new finance, the money must be found so that the 624 disabled persons can be employed in sheltered occupations in a Remploy factory without further delay.

When we get down to the hard core of unemployment in Brighton, we find that the hotel and catering industry has 853 persons unemployed at present, building and civil engineering 706, the distributive trades 474 and manufacturing and engineering 347, making a total in those categories of 2,380. The building and civil engineering figures are interesting. Unemployed bricklayers number five, carpenters 31, painters 231—I am advised that by Easter there will be no unemployed painters whatsoever in the County Borough of Brighton and that, on the contrary, builders will be crying out for them and they will not be available— and building labourers 439.

What are to be the remedies? A number have been suggested. First, the deployment of further industry in Brighton has been suggested. On this subject I have, I regret to say, a few grumbles on which I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to assist me. They may not come strictly within his jurisdiction, but perhaps he can use some influence with his colleagues in other Ministries.

By the early summer three new factories will have been built on the Hollingbury factory estate to employ 620 more persons. Having regard to what I have said, I hope that within a short time the three-quarters of an acre of land at East Moulescoomb will have had a Remploy factory built upon it. At East Moulescoomb there are two companies, New Wellbeck Ltd. and R. J. Adcock Ltd., who are anxious and willing to proceed with their new factory built for them on terms agreed by the Brighton Corporation, which will employ 150 persons.

The only difficulty now is the frustration—I use this term advisedly—of the Ministry of Supply in giving them a building licence. I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to take up the matter of these two companies with the Minister of Supply in order to see whether something cannot be done to hasten on the building of the factory, which is going to be shared by these two companies.

In connection with the third factory at Lower Bevendean, the Brighton Sheet Metal Works must move there as quickly as possible. They are in premises totally unsuitable for industrial purposes where, with the best will in the world, they are causing some nuisance and annoyance to persons living in the residential neighbourhood where the factory is at present situated. They were issued with an industrial development certificate by the Board of Trade on 30th December last. They are meeting obstacles and obstructions from the Ministry of Supply and were refused a building licence as recently as 11th February. So, again, I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to look into that case, because this is a factory which is doing valuable work in connection with supplying equipment to another company in Brighton which has a big export trade and is earning a great deal of dollars.

The third factory site there is allocated to the Service Plating Company, Ltd., a company which has lost—and quite rightly, in my opinion—a town and country planning appeal because their work has caused great nuisance and annoyance to persons living in the neighbourhood of that factory. They want to go out to Lower Bevendean, and the corporation are anxious and willing to build them a factory there, but again we have the difficulty of the Minister of Supply. If the Parliamentary Secretary would deal with these three cases with the Ministry of Supply, he would be doing a great deal to solve the hard core of unemployment, so far as light industry in Brighton is concerned.

In the few minutes which I have left— because I want to give the Parliamentary Secretary as much time to reply as possible—I should like to stress the fact, that the Government have, quite rightly, advocated that the Lower Bevendene factory estate shall only be used for the building of new factories from areas of Brighton which are not suitable for factories and which are to be kept residential, and do not wish to see new industries coming from other parts of Great Britain to Brighton.

Therefore, I think it follows that the Minister and the Government regard Brighton—and rightly, in my opinion— as predominantly a holiday resort—I was going to say the predominant holiday resort of Great Britain. That being so, I say that it is absolutely essential—and I say this in the presence of my colleague the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion (Mr. Teeling)—that the Government should do a great deal to encourage the holiday industry in Brighton.

As I said earlier, there are 853 persons at present unemployed in the hotel and catering industry. I suggest that there are a number of things that the Minister and his colleagues could do to help the holiday industry in Brighton. First, there could be some intelligent amendments made to the Catering Wages Regulations, particularly in connection with split time and with the spreadover of hours and wages. The holiday industry does seem to have, in the last two or three months, a better feeling of confidence in and of co-operation with the Catering Wages Board. For that I commend my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of Labour, but that good work can and must continue.

If Brighton is to be regarded as a holiday town, and if, therefore, hotels are to be regarded as its main industry, it would help substantially if the free limit for repairs could be extended for the hotel industry. On 9th December last I asked the Minister of Works that hotels should be included in the higher free limit of £2,000 as industrial buildings, but I regret to say that that was refused. It would help very much if hotel proprietors could get on with the job of repairing and redecorating their hotels up to the maximum of £2,000 without having to go through all the paraphernalia and red tape of licensing.

One of the most important things for the hotel and catering industry is that the Chancellor's directive to the banks with regard to credit should be eased for hotel proprietors. I know, as I am certain does my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton, Pavilion, of hotels which have not been able to carry out repairs and redecorations during the winter months, just when there are unemployed painters in Brighton, because their bank managers have not been able to give them overdraft facilities during the winter months, as they always have done in the past, knowing full well that those overdrafts would be paid off during the summer months.

That has had a very bad effect upon the unemployment figures for painters and decorators in Brighton, and something ought to be done about it at a very early date. I know of hotel proprietors who, during the winter months, have had to sack staff they would gladly have retained had their bank managers been able to extend credit facilities by way of overdrafts during the winter months, as they always have done during past years.

Also, Purchase Tax should be remitted substantially for the purchase of necessary goods by hotels, boarding houses and restaurants. But the greatest thing that could be done to help Brighton as a holiday resort would be a healthy reduction in the rate of Income Tax so that more people in the middle and higher income brackets could come down and spend long week-ends in the delightful holiday resort of Brighton during the winter months, which is the time we want them so badly.

Last, but not least, the Government and the people of Great Britain having decided that Brighton is the predominant holiday resort of our country, the Government ought to allow Brighton Corporation to get on with its job of making Brighton the most attractive holiday resort of modern times. To do that they must allow the Corporation to spend more money. Brighton very badly needs a large conference hall. This year a tremendously important international conference is being held in Brighton. We could have had another one at the same time, but we are continually having to refuse conferences because we have not got full and adequate accommodation to take the great international conferences which badly want to come to Brighton.

Brighton also wants a winter garden. It has got the land and the site; it has got everything except permission from the Government to get on with the job of building a winter garden and building a conference hall. It is no use answering that the economic situation does not permit this, because if we were allowed to do these things we could retain many many more visitors in this country instead of them going abroad and spending there currency we can ill afford. I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to assist me with all those matters.

10.19 p.m.

Mr. William Teeling (Brighton, Pavilion)

I want to intervene for just one minute, because to a large extent this matter also concerns my part of Brighton. I am most grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Kemptown (Mr. H. Johnson) for bringing this matter forward, but I should like to point out that most of the unemployment, I think I am right in saying, is in his division of Kemptown and not in mine, the Pavilion division. There is a certain amount, it is true, but I would point out that we must consider not only the Kemptown division and the Pavilion division but also the town of Hove, and that the three of us work together as three large towns.

For many years, there has been a considerable amount of publicity, and rightly so, about the advantages of these two towns, and that has largely been responsible for bringing many people to Brighton, seeking employment when they cannot find it elsewhere. That is one of our main problems, which I think the Minister of Labour should study—the problem of people coming to Brighton for work. This question of people moving to places of great attraction occurs in America and other States. They come to these warm, bright and cheerful places in order to find employment. My hon. Friend thinks that the trippers should come to my part of the town, but that is another affair.

Several hon. Members from Sussex have been getting together recently with the object not so much of dealing with light industries in our own district as with trying to get something for Sussex as a whole. I refer, for instance, to the question of the sugar beet industry in Sussex. There is a possibility of the development in the Chichester area in the near future of an industry which could be of considerable help to Brighton. We should think not only of what we can get locally for Brighton or for Kemptown but of what is possible in the district as a whole, or in the area, so that the train services or the other normal transport services can take people out of Brighton to work.

10.22 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour (Mr. Harold Watkinson)

Brighton is the kind of town which is not usually associated with the problem of unemployment, so that my hon. Friend the Member for Kemptown (Mr. H. Johnson) and my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton, Pavilion (Mr. Teeling) have done a very useful service in raising the subject tonight. Brighton is a town which gives us a certain amount of anxiety about unemployment because, like many other towns where work is of a seasonal nature, the employment possibilities fluctuate enormously between June and December. One of the problems is that if we provided enough employment to keep everybody working in December, there would be many vacancies and a shortage of labour in the peak months of the summer. That makes the problem very difficult.

Perhaps it will put the matter more in perspective if I point out that among roughly 90,000 insured employees in the Brighton area—and we have to treat it as a whole from our point of view— nearly 70,000 are engaged in a services industry of one kind or another. That is, over 70 per cent. Yet the authorities in Brighton have tried very hard, and I think that it is fair to say that they have had some assistance from the Government, in trying to diversify the employment in the area. The proportion of employees in manufacturing industry is only 26 per cent. of the total number of insured employees, whereas the percentage for the whole of Great Britain is over 40 per cent.

I think we are right in taking as our first cure for the problem the further development of factory estates and the further building of factories where that is possible, either in Kemptown or elsewhere in the Brighton area. I have noted the individual cases mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Kemptown. and I will look into them, always bearing in mind that the Ministry of Labour are asked to give only their advice on this occasion and do not issue the certificates and licences.

The general level of unemployment in the area is very high at the moment and I thought it was a sign of my hon. Friend's very proper concern for his constituents —and we all know how energetic he is in their interests—that he asked a Question the other day on the subject. I think I can at least say that probably from now on the general level of unemployment will start to fall quite rapidly and that by the month of June the figures will be down to a very much lower level.

That leaves the hard core of the problem, which in the Brighton area consists largely of people who are difficult placing prospects for our employment exchange. There is included in it the large number of disabled persons. My hon. Friend asked me what are the prospects for finding them sheltered employment in a Remploy factory. On 19th January there were just under 600 registered disabled persons who were unemployed and capable of ordinary employment and 77 capable of sheltered employment only.

The difficulty is that Brighton is too attractive a place and people go there for medical reasons, probably because their doctors say that it would benefit their health. I am afraid that they do not always consider, before they go, whether there is likely to be employment when they get there. As my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton, Pavilion, said, because Brighton is so attractive there is a constant drift of people there and, once they get there, they stay. It might sometimes be as well if they took the advice of our employment exchange, which is always readily available to them, as to the prospects of continuing employment.

As to Remploy factory employment, there is no prospect at the moment of having such a factory in Brighton. My hon. Friend is correct in saying that he was told the Brighton project is high on the list. However, as both my right hon. and learned Friend and myself have said in this House several times recently, until Remploy is on a more satisfactory financial and economic foundation and is trading more successfully, we have had to ban all new Remploy construction anywhere in the country. So the fact that a factory cannot be given to Brighton does not mean that it is being given to anyone else. It is an inevitable result arising from the fact that Remploy, to give some security to its existing employees, must consolidate its position before new factories are built. That does not alter the fact that the local authority can do a certain amount to meet the problem of sheltered employment, although I realise that it is not perhaps enough to meet the case. When Remploy factories can be built again, Brighton will undoubtedly maintain its high place on the list and I am sure that neither of my hon. Friends will allow my right hon. and learned Friend or myself to forget that fact.

To sum up, the answer is that Brighton is one of those places, partly because it is attractive as a residential area, partly because it is essentially a seaside town with a marked seasonal business, which is bound to have at this time of year a fairly heavy level of unemployment. The only long-term answer is more light and diversified industry and that, so far as we can, Her Majesty's Government will try to assist. The special problem of the disabled people again arises from the nature of the town itself, but when the time comes when Remploy factories can be built again, the case of Brighton will be carefully considered. I must be fair and not raise hopes: that time is still a long way off.

On the last point—the catering wages problem—my right hon. and learned Friend recently announced the reconstitution of the board and some special expert committees which we hope will now be able to study much more carefully the application of the Act to special sections of the catering and hotel industry. We are looking for great things from those new committees, and they will try to meet the special problems of Brighton.

I am afraid that Brighton must expect a good deal more unemployment in December than it has in June, but it will be the continuing effort of Her Majesty's Government to even out those peaks and valleys as much as we can. I know that in that we shall always be urged on by both hon. Members for Brighton, who take such a great interest in their town and who are always so active in this House in furthering its interests.

Question put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-nine Minutes past Ten o'Clock.

Back to