§ 11. Mr. Willisasked the Minister of Labour how many of those leaving school in Scotland in 1962 are still without employment.
§ Mr. HareThere were 54,600 school leavers this year. 1,099 were registered for employment on 15th October.
§ Mr. WillisIs it not an indictment of the policy of the Government that almost 2,000 school leavers in Scotland cannot get jobs, and, in view of the exceedingly bad effect which this has on young persons anxious to do their bit, do not the Government think that they should give more attention to this problem than they have done up to the present?
§ Mr. HareI share the hon. Gentleman's concern about the difficulty in placing these young people in employment. I am glad to say that the figures between September and October have improved very considerably. Certainly, I shall not rest content until I can see what more can be done. I hope also that it is of some comfort that, of those who have entered into jobs, the proportion of apprentices in this areas is considerably higher than in the rest of the country. Something like 40 per cent. have got apprenticeships, as compared with 36.9 per cent. in Great Britain as a whole.
§ Mr. WoodburnWhile welcoming that bit of information, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether there is not a very large proportion of the 2,000 in Fife and Clackmannan? In view of the closing down of pits and the possibility of lost jobs in the future, is he not aware that unless the Government get some new industries into these places there is likely to be permanent unemployment among the school leavers? Will he consider the possibility of keeping them at school until the jobs are available for them or in some way occupying intelligently the energies and abilities of these young people?
§ Mr. HareWe are endeavouring to place these young people in jobs. On the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's question, it is the policy of the Government to do all we can to steer new industries into areas of high unemployment, such as Fife and Lanarkshire—Fifeshire, in particular. This has been stated repeatedly, and we shall certainly endeavour to do so.
§ 12. Mr. Willisasked the Minister of Labour how many jobs have been lost in Scotland during 1962.
§ Mr. HareThe only reliable and comprehensive figures are those derived from changes in the number of employees in employment; I regret that these figures are not yet available for 1962.
§ Mr. WillisWhy is it that the Minister was able to give these figures in previous years but is unable to give them today?
§ Mr. HareThat is a perfectly fair question. The answer which I gave the hon. Member previously—I think it was in February last year—was based on estimates of redundancies in manufacturing industries from instances reported to my own local offices. The answer was, therefore, far from comprehensive because it did not take into account jobs lost in other industries or new jobs provided. The answer which I hope to be able to give him in February next year —[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—I have been asked for the figures for 1962, and my answer is not unreasonable. The figures which I shall be able to give next February will be based on total numbers employed; this will be worked out from the figures of insured employees derived 581 from the mid-year count of all insurance cards.
§ 32. Mr. Rossasked the Minister of Labour if he will state the total number of unemployed in Scotland at the latest available date; and how many of these have been out of work for six weeks or more.
§ Mr. HareOn 15th October, 1962, 84,797, of whom 51,166 have been unemployed for six weeks or more.
§ Mr. RossWill the Minister ask his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to support measures to deal with his own failure, while he was President of the Board of Trade, to bring employment to Scotland?
§ Mr. HareWe are all deeply concerned about this unemployment situation, but we have got to be fair. It is true that the decline in some of the older industries has exceeded the provision of new jobs, but every Scottish Member knows that, if the very energetic action which has been taken by the Board of Trade had not been taken, the situation in Scotland would have been very grave indeed.
§ Mr. JayCould the right hon. Gentleman say what the corresponding figure was a year ago compared with the 84,000?
§ Mr. RossSurely the fact that there ace 20,000 more after all this so-called adequate effort—a 30 per cent. increase —denotes that the Government have failed and that the Local Employment Act is not the answer. What are the Government going to do about it? It is no good the Government saying that they are concerned and worried about it when we have had the spectacle of three senior Ministers coming to Scotland during the Recess and all saying different things about the same problem.
§ Mr. HareI do not know about that; I think the hon. Gentleman is using his imagination. The House ought to be fair. In the last two years £41.7 million has been paid out under the Local Employment Act to provide for projects in Scotland. I know that the hon. Gentleman complains when I talk about "jobs in the pipeline", but they will provide 582 30,000 new jobs. This is a very considerable contribution, although it is not satisfactory or enough in terms of the unemployment situation. If this action had not been taken by the Government the situation would have been grave indeed.
§ 33. Mr. Lawsonasked the Minister of Labour what was the increase in the number of males in civil employment in the London and the South-East and the Eastern and Southern Regions and in Scotland, respectively, from mid-1959 to mid-1961.
§ Mr. HareI regret that figures for civil employment are not available by regions. The hon. Member may care to have the increases in the number of insured employees, and as these take the form of a table I will, with permission, circulate them in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
§ Mr. LawsonIs it not rather strange (that the Minister cannot give this information when something very near to this information can be obtained from other Government publications? Is he not aware, for example, that in Scotland there was a decline in the number of jobs by 10,000 over this period and that the probability is that there is an increase of some hundreds of thousands in the number of jobs in the two regions which have been mentioned? Is there not a suggestion, in refusing to give this information, that there is something disturbing that the Minister is trying to hide?
§ Mr. HareI am not trying to do that. I am trying to give the House accurate information. The figures of civil employment are not available in regions because we cannot estimate the numbers of employers and self-employed.
§ Following is the information:
| ESTIMATED NUMBER OF INSURED EMPLOYEES (MALES) | |||
| — | Mid-1959 | Mid-1961 | Change 1959–61 |
| London and South Eastern | 3,421,000 | 3,527,000 | +106,000 |
| Eastern and Southern | 1,530,000 | 1,593,000 | +63,000 |
| Scotland | 1,393,000 | 1,383,000 | -10,000 |
§ 34. Mr. Lawsonasked the Minister of Labour what new policy he proposes to reduce the continuing migration of 583 workers into the London-Midland regions and to promote the development of a much greater volume of employment in Scotland and in the north of England.
§ Mr. HareThe Government will continue to apply vigorously its policy of using its powers under the Local Employment Act to limit the issue of Industrial Development Certificates in areas of low unemployment and to encourage industrial expansion where unemployment is high.
§ Mr. LawsonIs the Minister aware that the information which he refuses to give, and which I am sure he can get if he likes to look for it, will show that there has been an enormous concentration of jobs in the south and south-east region and that there has been a draining away of jobs in Scotland and the north-east—indeed, in most of the peripheral areas? Will the right hon. Gentleman look at the double-sided problem in that the south is being grossly and scandalously overcrowded and that the north and north-east and other parts are being drained of people?
§ Mr. HareI am not trying to conceal it. I accept a lot of what 'the hon. Gentleman says. It is the policy of the Government to do all we can to steer new and expanding industry to areas of high unemployment such as the North-East, Scotland and Merseyside.
§ Mr. ManuelWill the Minister stop telling the House that the Local Employment Act can cure this situation? It is getting worse from week to week in Scotland. Will he bear in mind that the Chancellor of the Exchequer on his last visit to Scotland indicated clearly in a speech that the Local Employment Act would not cure Scotland's pressing unemployment situation?
§ Mr. HareI think the hon. Gentleman is referring to a letter that the Chancellor of the Exchequer wrote to the Scottish Council. He made the point that the Local Employment Act on its own would not be successful, but he also mentioned the other action that the Government had in mind. I have already mentioned it in answer to previous Questions. It consists of increased public investment, increased acceleration of road programmes, the release of post-war credits and any other steps which the Chancellor may have in mind.