Unemployment (Hansard, 24 January 1963)

§ 26. Mr. Prentice
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on his recent discussions with members of the Trades Union Congress General Council on the problem of rising unemployment.

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
The meeting took place on 2nd January at the request of the Production Committee of the General Council of the Trades Union Congress, and there was an exchange of views about the problems of areas of relatively high unemployment.

§ Mr. Prentice
Will the Chief Secretary complete that report by indicating the great disappointment of the trade union leaders at the limited scope of the Government's proposals? Is not their dis- 268 appointment amply justified by the fact that the unemployment figure is announced today as having reached over 814,000?

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
The trade union leaders are perfectly articulate and, I understand, made a statement as to their own views at the time. There is no need for me to add to it.

§ Mr. Callaghan
Why is the Chief Secretary answering this Question? Does not the Chancellor of the Exchequer consider that the figure of unemployment is sufficiently grave for him to come to the House and give a statement about his own discussions? May I ask the Chief Secretary when the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposes to deign to come to the House and tell us what permanent measures he is going to take to keep the level of employment high and the level of unemployment low instead of the miscellaneous provisions we are getting at the moment.

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
I very much resent the tone of that question. [HON. MEMBERS:"Why?"] The hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that my right hon. Friend answers regularly in the House on Tuesdays and that I and my hon. Friend the Economic Secretary answer on Thursdays. As I was myself present at the meeting in question, I am in a perfectly good position to report to the House on the meeting and the hon. Gentleman knows full well that his insinuation that my right hon. Friend is not concerned about the level of unemployment is utterly unworthy of him.

§ Mr. Callaghan
Does not the Chancellor of the Exchequer think that the present situation demands his own personal account of these conversations? The Chief Secretary does not carry the responsibility. It is the Chancellor's responsibility and it is the Chancellor who should come to the House to account for his administration and gross failure at the present time.

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
If the hon. Member cares to use such Parliamentary knowledge as he has to put down a Question to my right hon. Friend on the day on which my right hon. Friend habitually answers, my right hon. Friend will be just as glad as I am to deal with the hon. Member.

§ Mr. Callaghan
What is this routine nonsense that the Chancellor cannot come to the House on the day on which the Chief Secretary is here? Are we really so much the creatures of routine that the fact that the unemployment figure has reached over 800,000 means that we cannot demand the presence of the Chancellor on an afternoon like this?

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
The hon. Member knows perfectly well that this is an arrangement which has persisted in the House and has been accepted by the House for a great many years. The hon. Member is not yet in a position to alter the arrangements of the House.

§ Mr. Speaker
I think that we should now direct our attention to another matter.

§ Mr. S. Silverman
On a point of order. May I ask whether there is, in fact, any such rule? Has it ever been substantiated?

§ Mr. Speaker
I shall have to check. I think that I remember that there was some announcement about it, but I would rather not answer off the cuff.