HC Deb 06 March 1967 vol 742 cc1031-3
21. Mr. Allason

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what change there has been since 20th July, 1966, in the manpower of the construction industry; what steps he is taking to expand the manpower of this industry; and whether he will make a statement.

28. Mr. Hunt

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what progress has been made towards the attainment of an increase of 100,000 workers, compared with 1964, in the construction industries.

Mr. Prentice

Since 1964 there has been a small reduction in manpower, but there has also been a rise in productivity. Compared with July, 1966, the latest manpower figures show a fall of 73,000, or 32,000 if seasonably adjusted.

The industry's future expansion must depend on growing productivity rather than on an extra share of the labour force, but I expect the work of the Construction Industry Training Board to lead to an improvement in the supply of trained manpower.

Mr. Allason

What on earth has happened to the Prime Minister's expressed intention on 20th July that redeployment should involve an additional number of men going into the construction industry, now that we have just learned that there are far fewer? Is it a fact that the Prime Minister's intentions have been frustrated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer who applied the Selective Employment Tax, thereby driving people out of the construction industry?

Mr. Prentice

No, Sir. The measures announced by the Prime Minister on 20th July are going rather well. The passage in the National Plan on manpower in the construction industry expressed the view that the biggest increase should be among administrative, technical and clerical personnel as production methods became more sophisticated. This process has been going ahead and is up to target.

Mr. Hunt

Does not that dismal and depressing reply illustrate the absurdity of the targets fixed in the National Plan? Is not the greatest step forward which the right hon. Gentleman should take to assist the construction industry that he should advise the Chancellor of the Exchequer to abandon the Selective Employment Tax as from next month?

Mr. Prentice

No, I do not think the hon. Member could have listened to my reply to his hon. Friend. The analyses in the National Plan suggested that there had to be some shift towards professional administrative and clerical personnel as improvements in design and construction methods were introduced. There has been an increase in these categories which now stand at about 230,000. They are increasing more or less at the rate indicated in the National Plan.

Mr. Biggs-Davison

In order to get these men, should not the right hon. Gentleman try to restore confidence in the industry? To do that, will he see that private contractors can compete on equal terms with direct labour? May we have a pledge from the Government to this effect?

Mr. Prentice

I think my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government has got the balance between direct labour departments and private contractors about right. As I said, both have a contribution to make to the productivity of the industry.

Mr. Channon

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us clearly, does he want manpower in the construction industries to go up or to go down further? Was not Selective Employment Tax brought in to discourage employment in certain industries? Does he want this to happen in the construction industry?

Mr. Prentice

I want to see employers in the industry making a more efficient and effective use of manpower of all kinds.