§ 1. Mr. Costainasked the Minister of Public Building and Works what further proposals he has for alleviating the present level of unemployment in the construction industry; and whether he has discussed these with the industry's representatives.
§ 4. Mr. Gordon Campbellasked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will now institute a review of the conditions in which construction firms are having to operate and of the state of the industry.
§ 5. Mr. Michael Shawasked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will now hold a further meeting with the construction industry leaders about the state of trade in the industry.
§ The Minister of Public Building and Works (Mr. John Silkin)My normal contacts with the industry are adequate in the light of the announced Government measures.
§ Mr. CostainBut does not the Minister appreciate that unemployment in the building industry is now the highest that it has been for many years? Does he not realise that this is due to the Government's policy of increasing the cost of building? Would it not be a splendid thing if he got on with some of the much-needed building work? If he cannot support house building, what about getting on with prisons?
§ Mr. SilkinThe hon. Gentleman is always very exuberant at this time of day. The measures announced by my right hon. Friends the Minister of Housing and the Chancellor are already having their effect on the confidence of the building industry.
§ Mr. CampbellWhat will the right hon. Gentleman do about the intolerable burdens facing the construction industry, the full weight of which cannot be assessed much beforehand—including transport costs, S.E.T. and B.S.T.?
§ Mr. SilkinThere is a question about the costs of the construction industry later on the Order Paper, and it would be out of order for me to deal with it at the moment.
§ Mr. ShawIs the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that his Department is as close to the industry as possible in getting correct information for forecasts? Is it not a fact that last year his predecessor forecast an increase in output of no less than 4 to 5 per cent., but it turned out to be a decrease of some 3 per cent.?
§ Mr. SilkinI am fairly happy about the forecasting which has been done, since the building E.D.C. and the National House-Builders Registration Council seem to have come to much the same conclusion. Of course, forecasts are only forecasts of trends and inevitably need to be revised as time goes on.
§ Mr. HefferWhile accepting that unemployment levels in the building industry are too high, and that much more needs to be done to solve the problem, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he saw the other day a B.B.C. television programme in which a building worker said that he was working on " the lump " and at the same time drawing unemployment benefit? Does this not suggest that the figures of unemployment in the building industry are somewhat inflated as a result?
§ Mr. SilkinMy hon. Friend has a valid point. Undoubtedly, the growth of nominal self-employment is reflected in unemployment figures, but I hope that before the end of this Session we shall have dealt with that problem.
§ 2. Mr. Costainasked the Minister of Public Building and Works what estimate he has formed of the likely effect of the Budget proposals on output in the construction industry.
§ Mr. John SilkinThe effect of the Budget proposals will be to enhance the prospect of an increase in output this year and of a greater increase in 1971.
§ Mr. CostainShould not the Minister frankly admit that that is wishful thinking? Does he not realise that one of the proposals in the Budget is to give special concessions for building industrial factories, but they have to be built within two years? How does he reconcile that 1038 with the fact that it takes two years to plan and erect a building of this kind? [HON. MEMBERS: " Too long."] Does he not realise that this is one side of the industry which is reasonably busy? Would it not be better to get on with that which is lagging behind?
§ Mr. SilkinThe industry has asked for some time that there should be a drop in Bank Rate and easier credit facilities, among other things. It has also asked for an increase in mortgage facilities. All these things have now been given to it. As to the industrial building allowance, this is for work actually commenced. It does not have to be completed by 1972. The allowance is for a reasonable period.
§ Mr. Frank AllaunIs it not a fact that while the Budget has provided additional credit for house buyers it has not done so for house builders? Will the Minister speak to his right hon. Friend to impress on the banks that they should give priority loans to house builders?
§ Mr. SilkinAs my hon. Friend is aware, bank lending is to be allowed to increase by, I think, 5 per cent. during this year. That is a direct help to house-builders. The construction industry is being afforded more priority in the granting of loans, and, of course, the drop in Bank Rate from 8 per cent. only six weeks ago to 7 per cent. is a further help.
§ Mr. Chichester-ClarkDespite what the right hon. Gentleman said about the Budget proposals, are they not an attempt to use the building industry as an economic regulator, which is exactly what the Minister earlier deplored? Can he not reconcile some of these conflicts with his colleagues?
§ Mr. SilkinI certainly deplore the use of the building industry as an economic regulator for numerous reasons. The Chancellor was endeavouring to protect the industry from the cross-winds, and I think he has succeeded to a very agreeable extent.
§ 9. Mr. Frank Allaunasked the Minister of Public Building and Works if he will state the number of building workers unemployed at the latest available date.
§ 14. Mr. Speedasked the Minister of Public Building and Works if he will list 1039 in the OFFICIAL REPORT the number of construction workers unemployed in April in each of the last 10 years; and whether he will make a statement.
§ Mr. John SilkinThe number of wholly unemployed workers in the construction industries in April, 1970 was 114,726. I shall circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the numbers unemployed in April of each of the last 10 years. There has been a steady reduction in the numbers unemployed since January, and I expect this trend to continue under the stimulus provided by the Budget proposals
§ Mr. AllaunIs my right hon. Friend aware, in addition, of the numbers of workers who have left the industry, and of the fall in the number of apprentices? As the housing section is hit worse than the other section, would he take some new steps to assist it?
§ Mr. SilkinI take my hon. Friend's point. I am very concerned about this. Nevertheless, I think that, on reflection, he might agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heller) that the growth of the lump of self-employment has added unnecessarily to the figures.
§ Mr. SpeedIs it not a fact that the April figure is again the highest unemployment figure in the construction industry for at least 30 years? Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that if nothing further is done the numbers will go down to a more realistic figure of perhaps 20,000 or 30,000 unemployed in the industry?
§ Mr. SilkinI certainly believe that we are on a downward trend now. I hope and trust that the measures which have been announced will have their effect.
§ Following is the information:
| Number of wholly unemployed in the Construction Industries | |||
| April. 1960 | … | … | 49,700 |
| April, 1961 | … | … | 40,780 |
| April, 1962 | … | … | 60,351 |
| April, 1963 | … | … | 91,547 |
| April, 1964 | … | … | 57,986 |
| April, 1965 | … | … | 44,349 |
| April, 1966 | … | … | 44.204 |
| April, 1967 | … | … | 97,003 |
| April, 1968 | … | … | 106,846 |
| April, 1969 | … | … | 105,843 |
| April, 1970 | … | … | 114,726 |
§ 19. Mr. Eyreasked the Minister of Public Building and Works how many bankruptcies have occurred in the building industry in the 12 months ended 30th April, 1970, and in each of the two preceding periods of 12 months.
§ Mr. John SilkinInformation for 1970 is not yet available. The number of bankruptcies in the construction industries in England and Wales in the calendar years 1969, 1968 and 1967 were 957, 831 and 860 respectively.
§ Mr. EyreIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that these figures represent an enormous increase in bankruptcies compared with earlier years, particularly with 1964? Is it not a distressing comment on Government policies, particularly when one thinks of the lost building output and rising unemployment?
§ Mr. SilkinI deplore bankruptcies in the construction industry as in any other industry, but we must not over-emphasise the situation. The number of bankruptcies is more than in previous years but not overwhelmingly more, and the figures we have are only up to 1969. I expect the trend to be better this year.
§ Mr. Hugh D. BrownIs my right hon. Friend not grossly under-estimating the public interest in this matter, especially in Scotland? There, firms with household names have gone into liquidation and there has been hardship to house purchasers and considerable alarm when some companies which have gone into liquidation have sprung up into existence again under a different name after a period of months has elapsed.
§ Mr. SilkinI was asked about bankruptcies. There is a difference between bankruptcies and liquidations, one being a question of ordinary individuals and the other of companies.
§ Mr. JoplingIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that many firms in the building industry, while not in danger of liquidation or bankruptcy, have taken such a beating over the last few years that they will find it hard to increase house production and other building when we get a Conservative Government to give them the go ahead?
§ Mr. SilkinI am not in a position to prophesy what is going to happen in 30 years' time.
§ Mr. HefferAs private enterprise has miserably failed in this industry over the past few years, will my right hon. Friend indicate that in the plans of the next Labour Government we will introduce a public building corporation and bring this industry under proper control on the basis of public ownership?
§ Mr. SilkinThis is a point which my hon. Friend has made from time to time, and I still think it is very worthy of consideration.