§ Q3. Mr. Blakerasked the Prime Minister if he will pay an official visit to the Merseyside development area during the present session of Parliament.
§ Q15. Mr. Hefferasked the Prime Minister what plans he has to pay an official visit to the Merseyside development area during the present Session of Parliament.
§ The Prime MinisterI frequently visit Merseyside, and shall be there next week.
§ Mr. BlakerIs the Prime Minister aware that my constituents have an interest in conditions on Merseyside by virtue of the taxes which they pay and which go towards the £18 million a year which is paid out by way of the regional employment premium to firms on Merseyside? Since, as a result of these policies and despite the Prime Minister's visits, unemployment in the last year has gone up from 3.5 per cent. to 3.8 per cent., does the right hon. Gentleman think that my constituents are getting value for money?
§ The Prime MinisterAs to whether they are—[Interruption.]—getting value from their hon. Member, that, of course, is a matter for them to decide. I hope that the hon. Gentleman is not suggesting that he would, for example, de-schedule Merseyside as a development area. To the extent that it is not de-scheduled, they are entitled to S.E.T. refunds and R.E.P., and we have justified these.
207 I am glad to be able to tell him that while unemployment in his constituency is a matter of concern seasonally, the difference between Blackpool—[Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman asked if his constituents were getting value for money and I am telling him. The difference between——
§ Lieut.-Colonel Sir Walter Bromley-Davenport (Knutsford)Get on with it.
§ The Prime MinisterI am sorry if I am speaking too slowly for the hon. and gallant Gentleman's quick perception.
I was about to say that I am glad to tell the hon. Member for Blackpool, South (Mr. Blaker) that unemployment in the Blackpool area at the seasonal peak in January was 5.3 per cent., as against 7.3 per cent. in January, 1963, and 6 per cent. in January, 1964.
§ Mr. HefferIs my right hon. Friend aware that he would be most welcome to visit, when he next comes to Merseyside, which I understand will be next weekend, all the Merseyside constituencies and see the new hospitals that are being built since Labour came to power—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—the new roads that are being built—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—the new houses and flats that are being built—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—the new factories that are being built—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—and to look at all the other positive achievements that have been made since Labour came to office?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir. I thank my hon. Friend for what he said, and I see the hon. Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Mr. Tilney) about to rise to his feet to support my hon. Friend's remarks. In fact, I cannot get to my constituency without travelling through my hon. Friend's constituency or through the constituencies of my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, West Derby (Mr. Ogden) or the hon. Member for Wavertree. I have seen the evidence to support what my hon. Friend said in all three constituencies.
§ Mr. HeathWhen the Hunt Committee recommended the de-scheduling of Merseyside, which the Government rejected, how could that committee have been expected to know that unemployment on Merseyside, which was 18,000 208 when the Prime Minister fought the General Election in 1966 on the basis that there would be no increase in unemployment, would now be 30,000? Is that what the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer) wants the Prime Minister to see when he goes to Merseyside—unemployment rising from 18,000 to 30,000 in that space of time?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman will have heard the figures that I gave. The unemployment figures have actually fallen—from 4.7 in January, 1964, to 3.8 per cent. now—on Merseyside. If the right hon. Gentleman feels that Merseyside should be de-scheduled as a development area, he should say so.
§ Mr. SpeakerMr. Mahon.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I called Mr. Mahon.
§ Mr. Simon MahonWhen my right hon. Friend comes to Merseyside, which he does frequently, will he remember that many of us lived through the days of Toryism on Merseyside and that there is no great anxiety for those days to return? Will he accept the gratitude of my constituents for sending thousands of jobs to Bootle, which is becoming known as the Whitehall of the North?
§ Sir W. Bromley-DavenportOh dear.
§ The Prime MinisterMy hon. Friend will understand, in view of his experience—I know the part that he and others from Bootle have played in the work of the Merseyside Development Association—why hon. Gentlemen opposite do not understand that it is a continuing battle on Merseyside to find jobs for the area as a result of, for example, the high birth rate on Merseyside, not to mention immigration from Ireland—[Interruption.]—which floods into Merseyside when there are jobs available. I do not think that it would be the policy of hon. Gentlemen opposite—at least, of most of them—to stop that.
My hon. Friend will also understand what it has meant for Merseyside that the total financial assistance to the development area, which was running at £2.1 209 million in 1963–64, was, in 1968–69, running at £49.6 million.
§ Mr. SpeakerMr. Barnett, next Question.
§ Mr. TilneyOn a point of order. As the Prime Minister referred to me when replying to a supplementary question, would you not agree, Mr. Speaker, that I should have the right to ask a supplementary question?
§ Mr. SpeakerNo hon. Member has a right to a supplementary question.