§ 19. Mr. Chapmanasked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware of the emergence of a persisting higher total of unemployment in Birmingham; and when he expects this total to fall to a more normal level.
§ 43. Mr. Julius Silvermanasked the Minister of Labour if he will make a statement on the employment situation in Birmingham.
§ Mr. FernyhoughOn 11th March, 1968, the total number of persons registered as unemployed in the Birmingham Group of exchanges was 18,020–15,923 males and 2,097 females—of whom 3,144 were temporarily stopped. The percentage rate in March, 1968, fell to 2.6 compared with 2.9 in February, 1968.
§ Mr. ChapmanDoes my hon. Friend confirm that this is now an unacceptable level of unemployment in Birmingham? If it persists over the coming two or three months, will he undertake to meet the Birmingham Trades Council to discuss it?
§ Mr. FernyhoughIt is unacceptable only if we are prepared to abandon what we are doing in the development areas. If a definite date can be arranged, I shall be happy to meet the Birmingham Trades Council. However, my hon. Friend will appreciate that if the economy continues to pick up as it now seems to be doing, that should be reflected in the employment position in Birmingham.
§ Mr. SilvermanWhile we accept, in broad terms, Government policy in this matter, may I ask whether my hon. Friend appreciates that the principle might be somewhat modified? Would he enter into consultations with the President of 895 the Board of Trade to consider the question of employment in this area, which is vital to the nation's economy?
§ Mr. FernyhoughI accept that it is an area vital to the country's economy, but if one begins to modify area policy, where unemployment is almost double what it is in Birmingham, the whole of the Government policy would be fruitless.
§ Sir G. NabarroHas the hon. Gentleman not perceived that since last Tuesday employment prospects in Birmingham and adjoining areas have considerably worsened? Is it not a fact that the heaviest of all burdens in the Budget fell upon the motor car industry, the principal employer of labour in the Birmingham conurbation?
§ Mr. FernyhoughIt is true that some burden fell upon the motor car industry—[Interruption.] I attended the Budget debate and rather gathered that hon. Members opposite felt that the heaviest burden came in relation to the wealth tax. I may be wrong. Hon. Members will be aware that the motor car industry is now engaged on a great drive for exports. This is where we want the growth to take place. This is where we hope we can create additional employment.
§ Mr. John PageIn view of the great influences of the motor industry on engineering employment in general, and Birmingham in particular, and the savage attack made in the Budget, will the Minister of Labour keep a very close eye on this, to see that unemployment in the Birmingham area does not get out of control? Is he aware that it could have a wide effect on other industries too?
§ Mr. FernyhoughIf that prophecy came true it would be our duty to look at the position again.
§ 23. Mr. Victor Yatesasked the Minister of Labour how many men and women at present unemployed in Birmingham have been unemployed for more than one month, two months, and three months, respectively.
Mr. FernyhonghThe latest date for which a comprehensive duration analysis of the registered wholly unemployed is available is 8th January, 1968. On that 896 date, in the area covered by Birmingham, Aston, Handsworth, Selly Oak, Small Heath and Washwood Heath Employment Exchanges, 9,876 men and 1,383 women had been on the registers for more than four weeks, 7,595 men and 1,004 women for more than eight weeks and 5,719 men and 672 women for more than 13 weeks.
§ Mr. YatesDoes the Minister realise that this increasing number of persons unemployed for more than three months is extremely serious? Will he consider with the President of the Board of Trade whether they are forcing too many factories to move, leaving skilled workers behind?
§ Mr. FernyhoughI accept that all unemployment is very undesirable and hurtful. Hon. Members have to face the fact that if we are to deal with the problems of Scotland, Wales, the South-West and the North-East we can do so only on the basis of pursuing the present policy until we achieve the desired end.
§ Mr. R. CarrIs the hon. Gentleman telling the House that the Government's policy for curing unemployment in the development areas is to create it elsewhere?
§ Mr. FernyhoughOf course not. What I am telling hon. Gentlemen opposite is that it is the duty of any Government with any understanding of the national need to see that there is a far better distribution of—
§ Sir G. NabarroMisery—
§ Mr. Fernyhough—unemployment in future than there has been. No Government can defend the over-heating that occurred in the South-East and the mass unemployment in the areas I have mentioned in the post-war years.
§ 28. Mr. Christopher Priceasked the Minister of Labour what was the total number unemployed in March, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967 and 1968 in the City of Birmingham.
§ Mr. FernyhoughIn the area covered by the Birmingham, Aston, Handsworth, Selly Oak, Small Heath and Washwood Heath employment exchanges, the total numbers registered as unemployed at March, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967 and 1968 were 7,210, 9,210, 3,980, 16,900 and 18,020 respectively.
§ Mr. PriceWould not my hon. Friend agree that those figures show that Birmingham can no longer be regarded, as it has always been regarded, as a rather lush area for employment? I accept the need for the Department to develop its development area policies, but will my hon. Friend pay particular attention in future to the problems of Birmingham, bearing in mind the increase which he has just announced?
§ Mr. FernyhoughThe increase is reduced on a percentage basis to 2.2 per cent. if we leave out those temporarily stopped, many of whom arise from industrial disputes. When there are areas which have an average three or four times greater than 2.2 per cent, I do not think that it would be a fair solution or economic policy to give any preference to Birmingham.
§ Sir G. NabarroDo not these figures give ample justification for my earlier prognosis that the position in Birmingham is steadily and progressively getting worse and will, as a result of last Tuesday's Budget, be made infinitely worse?
§ Mr. FernyhoughI am sure that time will prove that that prophecy, like many other prophecies which the hon. Gentleman has made, was completely wrong.
§ Mr. Victor YatesIt is nothing to do with the Budget—
§ Sir G. NabarroOf course it is.
§ Mr. Yates—but would my hon. Friend realise that there are thousands of small factories in Birmingham, many of which are being asked to move out, and it is in these where skilled workers will be made redundant? This is causing considerable difficulty. I hope that this aspect will be thoroughly examined.
§ Mr. FernyhoughI do not think there is any Government pressure on firms to move out. It is a voluntary decision made by the firm. But there is substantial diversification in Birmingham. I am sure that the growing economic activity will reflect itself in the employment position in Birmingham, as it will in the rest of the country.