§ 19. Mr. W. Hamiltonasked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what is the normal annual rate of wastage of man power in the three southern dockyards; and if he will provide the actual figures for each of the dockyards annually since 1958.
§ Mr. HayAs I said in the course of supplementaries on 19th June last there is a lot of room for misunderstanding of what wastage can mean and I could not vouch for the accuracy of figures for past years. So far as normal wastage for 1962–63 is concerned I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Edinburgh, East (Mr. Willis) on the same date.
§ Mr. HamiltonCan the hon. Member hazard a guess as to how many Questions my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, East (Mr. Willis) and I have to put down before we drag out of the Minister the number of jobs which will be lost in these dockyards?
§ Mr. HayI think that it would be very unwise of me to guess on anything, but these matters may possibly be raised in the course of the debate in the next week, and we might be able to examine them more easily than at Question Time.
§ 20. Mr. Willisasked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what estimates he has made of the fall in the number of men employed over 65 years of age during the current year at Chatham, Portsmouth, and Devonport, respectively.
§ Mr. WillisIs the hon. Member aware that in the course of a statement made on 29th May and his Answer last week it seemed that about 5,000 jobs are to be lost in the three southern dockyards? What is the Admiralty doing to try to find some alternative forms of employment, and what are the Government doing in order to avoid hardship in these ports?
§ Mr. HayThat is a very much wider Question. I am sorry if there has been any misunderstanding about the exchanges which took place at Question Time last week. As far as the over 65's are concerned—and this is what the Question is about—we cannot estimate with any accuracy which is worth while the fall which there would be in the course of the current year at the three southern dockyards. As for the future, when the work load declines and if redundancy occurs, we would seek naturally to let it fall, to begin with, on the over-65's, who have already reached retiring age but have continued to work because they wanted to do so and because we wanted them to do so.
§ Mr. BurdenDoes not the hon. Gentleman realise that this constant uncertainty is most damaging to the morale of everybody in the dockyards and in the dockyard towns? Will he exercise himself to the utmost in order to try to give some much more tangible answer in the debate which is to take place next week?
§ Mr. HayI agree with the hon. Member that uncertainty, if it exists, is damaging. The Answer which I gave a fortnight ago was intended to clear up a lot of the uncertainty, and all the information coming to me suggests that to a very great extent that uncertainty has in fact been dissipated. If there is anything further which I can add in the debate next week, I shall be only too happy to do so.
§ Mr. WillisSurely the hon. Member appreciates that in the original statement it was said that to the number which would be lost as a result of wastage must be added those spelled out in my Question? If that is the case, the number must be getting on for 5,000.
§ Mr. HayI am afraid that the hon. Member is again falling into the pitfall into which he fell a week ago. In my Answer of 29th May I said that we expected a number of factors to deal with any decline in the labour force, and those factors were, amongst others, normal wastage, restriction on overtime, restriction of adult entry and a fall in the number of men over 65.