§ 12.6 a.m.
§ Mr. J. D. Dormand (Easington)The Easington constituency consists of a number of villages and a new town, Peterlee, about three-quarters completed. I mention that fact because it reflects the nature of employment in the area. Most of the villages have at some time had a coal mine, while the new town was established to provide, among other things, alternative employment to coal mining, particularly when that industry began to contract. Not so many years ago there were 10 pits in the constituency, and an embryo new town with no industry: now there are six pits and a nearly completed new town with insufficient industry to provide employment for my constituents.
I turn, first, to the position of coal mining in the area. We have suffered four closures, and I understand that one of the remaining six pits—Shotton Colliery—is likely to close early next year. If it does, the closure will add several hundred more men to the already too high total of unemployed miners, now some 450, whose future is very bleak except for a possibility which I shall mention later. I hope that the Minister will be able to give me some information about the future of Shotton Colliery, which is of vital importance to my constituents and to their families.
The coal industry has long been the shuttlecock of Britain's economy. The traumatic effect of so many pit closures in recent years may have caused a loss of morale amongst employees from which the industry will never fully recover. The success of the recruiting campaign earlier this year can, therefore, only be described as astonishing. This is due, I believe, not so much to a lack of alternative employment—although that is undoubtedly a contributory cause of the situation—as to the loyalty of the miner to his industry.
It is not possible in any walk of life to find a more loyal or dedicated worker than the miner. Heaven knows why this should be the case, because coal mining must be the most disagreeable and the most difficult of all jobs. As a regular visitor to the pits in my area, and as one who comes from a mining family, I 224 say that miners should have £20 a week merely for going down the pit, quite apart from what they do when they get down there.
Because of the tolerance of the miner in the face of great uncertainty, I believe that the time has come for the Government and the National Coal Board to say to him, in a message loud and clear, and without equivocation, "We shall guarantee stability in the mining industry for the foreseeable future." I am aware of the difficulties and problems that such a policy would entail, but I believe that the country as a whole owes it to the mining community. If miners and all who work in the industry can be convinced that the Government really mean that, the country will have one of the most efficient coal industries in the world and will, at the same time, provide a solid and continuing core of employment in mining areas.
The Queen's Speech said:
…my Government's first care will be to increase employment…".As with other aspects of their policy, the Government are failing miserably in providing jobs. The present disgraceful national figure of a million unemployed is more than reflected in Easington, where the percentage rates for men and women respectively are 8.1 and 4. On 8th November, 1,850 males and 272 females were registered as unemployed. On 3rd December, there were no fewer than 284 school leavers out of work, which is a disastrous situation for young people. As one whose work was concerned with young people before coming to this House, I know the potentially dangerous results which the lack of a job can have on people of that age. Against that gloomy picture, we had only 148 notified vacancies on 4th November.The figures that I have given show the serious situation in which we are placed. On Friday of last week, when I returned home to my constituency and picked up the local newspaper, I read that two firms in Peterlee new town were to close. They are small firms, but, in our dismal position, every job counts. I believe that that demonstrates that matters will continue to deteriorate.
On 2nd November, the Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry 225 was dealing with the problem of unemployment in Hartlepools. He said:
We all know that underlying the figures and the very real problems there is the greater and much more important factor of the come and go of industrial activity in the world at large, the boom-slump or the recession-inflation cycle, and that this is in fact the cause of the present difficulty and not regional policy."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 2nd November, 1971; Vol. 825, c. 160.]I do no subscribe to that entirely, though I believe that, in a capitalist world, it must be true to a larger or smaller extent. But if that is the case, the basic answer must be greater intervention by the State in an attempt to correct the imbalance caused by free market forces.If the problem of unemployment is to be solved in my constituency, there must be more help from the Government. In this respect, I add my plea to the many made by hon. Members representing constituencies in the North-East for the return of investment grants. After all the evidence produced since the Government announced their decision to abolish them, there can be no doubt that such grants make a more than effective contribution to the solution of the unemployment problem.
When we debated the problems of the regions last week, my hon. Friend the Member for Chesterfield (Mr. Varley) produced a great deal of evidence to support the statements that I have just made. At this late hour, I shall not repeat that evidence.
The same strong case can be made for the retention of the regional employment premium beyond 1974. I implore the Government to think again on these two matters.
I said just now that we in Easington must have more help from the Government. But I suppose that most hon. Members could say the same on behalf of their constituencies. However, mine is unique in making the claim that we have the science centre in the new town of Peterlee. If that centre develops as it should, it will be second only to the North Carolina science centre. The last Government approved in principle the proposal that Peterlee should be the science centre for the North, and the present Government support that view. So far, progress has been reasonably satisfactory. But development is now at 226 the stage where, if success is to be achieved, Governmental assistance in tangible form must be given to supplement what the Peterlee Development Corporation and other bodies have achieved by their own efforts. I have asked dozens of Questions in the House about projects coming to Peterlee—Government offices, Government factories, forensic laboratories, the Centre for Transport and Land Use Studies and so on—all without reply. I have come to the conclusion that this Government have little or no interest in my area. Maybe it is because they pick up so few votes. With their miserable performance, they will get even fewer on the next occasion.
I make one more plea for at least one Government research institute, or one sponsored by the Government, to be placed at Peterlee. The Minister may not know that the universities of Newcastle and Durham have recently, within the last two weeks, produced a plan for a research centre at Peterlee. I hope he will investigate these proposals as a matter of urgency and provide the money which will undoubtedly be needed. A research centre will not solve the unemployment problem, but it would give prestige to the area and attract labour-intensive industries. It is of the greatest importance that we should be able to build up a diversity of industry.
May I appeal to the Minister to speak to his right hon. Friend who has responsibility for roads. In County Durham we have the motorway running through the centre of the country and on the eastern side, running through my constituency, we have the A19, which has recently been developed to something like motorway standards. Both roads are of increasing value to the economy of the North-East. For my part of the county the essential requirement is an east-west link road between these roads. Such a road is vital. The proposals for future road development in Durham are now with the hon. Gentleman's right hon. Friend. The link road has the strongest support of the Durham County Council; it is one of its top priorities. If the Government's statements about freedom for local authorities mean anything the Minister should accept this recommendation. I am convinced that such a link road will make a significant contribution towards solving our unemployment problem.
227 In this sombre picture I have painted, there is a gleam of light which could go a long way towards solving our problems. The Minister will know of negotiations which are well advanced for the establishment of a large engineering factory in Peterlee. I do not wish to mention names or details in case that upsets what might be a rather fine balance, but I understand the firm will provide several thousand jobs for men within a few years. I implore the Minister to ensure that his Department, the Treasury and any other Department give every possible help to bring about the successful completion of this proposal. I hope that I am pushing at an open door. If a major project such as this is lost to my area through Government intervention then all hell will be let loose in Easington and I will be leading it.
We in the North-East have every reason to be bitter, sceptical and cynical following the establishment of the value-added tax office at Southend; after the announcement last week that the Inland Revenue Office is not to be established at Washington and because of the relaxation of I.D.C. policy since this Government came into power.
May I refer to a national problem which arises in my constituency from time to time and which has occurred again recently. I refer to the restriction on the range of incentives available to those firms wishing to expand after having received the full range of incentives offered by the Government. I fail to see why there should be a reduction in the financial assistance offered to such firms, firms which have proved their loyalty and worth to us. In the difficult circumstances which exist in my constituency, they are greatly valued. Surely the only criterion should be whether new jobs are created, and as these firms are to expand it is more certain that they will remain with us, unlike some of the fly-by-night concerns we have experienced. I have written to the Secretary of State about this, and if the Government are serious about wanting to reduce unemployment they should realise that an alteration to the rules and regulations governing this matter will make a significant contribution to a reduction in the number of unemployed.
Under pressure, the Government gave my constituency special development area 228 status earlier this year. It is too soon to say whether it will be successful, but I acknowledge that this was a necessary first step in tackling the problem of unemployment. We anxiously await the results.
I have tried to be constructive, and I hope that in his reply the Under-Secretary of State will be equally constructive in trying to solve the terrible problem of unemployment in Easington.
§ 12.21 p.m.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Employment (Mr. Dudley Smith)I must immediately refute the allegation by the hon. Member for Easington (Mr. Dormand) that the Government have little or no interest in the Easington area. I can assure him that we certainly do have an interest in that area, as we have in all parts of the country which have a particularly high rate of unemployment.
I assure the hon. Gentleman that there is no complacency on this side of the House over the unemployment figures, or the extent of the difficulties which face this or any other Government in attempting to achieve a satisfactory level of employment. We are well aware of the difficulties in Easington. The November unemployment rate of 8.1 per cent. in the Peterlee and Wingate areas is far too high. I must stress that we are very concerned about what this means in terms of personal problems and hardships for families whose breadwinners are out of work, and for the social fabric of the area.
We must be specially concerned about the problem of young people, some of whom are still seeking their first job. Fortunately, the great majority of school leavers are now employed, but even so, on 8th November, 129 school leavers were still unemployed out of a total of 1,100 who left school at the end of the summer term. My Department is paying half the costs of the special industrial training board's schemes providing off-the-job training for youngsters who have not been found apprenticeships. Six boys from the Easington area have been accepted for an Engineering Training Board course and two for a Road Transport Training Board course. We are also paying the costs and allowances for short semi-skilled training courses mainly for 17-year-olds at colleges of further education or employers' establishments.
229 I in no way wish to belittle the needs of the Easington area or to attempt to make out the situation as being anything other than serious. However, it is only fair to say that the picture is not quite as black as the hon. Gentleman painted it tonight. Although unemployment in Peterlee and Wingate has risen in the past 12 months, it has not risen proportionately by nearly as much as the average for the country as a whole. The number of notified vacancies in the area in November was double what it was a year ago, and we can all take some comfort from that.
There are two basic causes of Easing-ton's unemployment and shortage of new jobs. One is recessional, resulting from the hitherto low level of demand in the economy as a whole. The other is Easington's heavy traditional dependence on coal mining and the gradual running down of that industry in the area. As the House well knows, the Government have been taking steps for 12 months or more, through tax reductions and incentives, and through many forms of direct spending, to encourage investment, increased demand and output, and to bring additional employment over the whole country. Already there are clear signs that these general measures are taking effect.
In addition, we have given various forms of special help to the assisted areas. For example, we have given them much higher grants for housing improvement, which will cost £46 million. Then there is a large programme of infrastructure works amounting to £160 million for all assisted areas. Of the £80 million which goes to England, between a third and a half will go to the Northern Region. Already £27 million has been allocated to the Northern area. This includes £400,000 for hospitals in the Sunderland and Hartlepools Hospital Management Committee area, to which Easington belongs. Half a million pounds goes to schools in the Durham County Education Authority area, and Durham County gets £435,000 for improvements to principal roads and nearly £2 million for trunk roads. This shows that we care.
The hon. Gentleman mentioned the link road. This matter is being considered by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, who will be announcing his full programme for new roads in due course. I 230 understand from my right hon. Friend that there is still scope for additional schemes within the infrastructure programme, and he will be glad to consider any further proposals which satisfy the criteria.
Turning to the industrial structure, Easington has for a very long time been a coal mining area. To a large extent, it still is, and because of the efficiency and reserves of the pits in the area it will continue to be. The hon. Gentleman rightly praised the loyalty and reliability of the miners. It is not for me to talk about the future of mining because it is not my Department's responsibility, but we are well aware of the importance of mining and the mining community.
It is as well to remind ourselves occasionally that coal mining is still a great and important industry in this country which will continue to provide the livelihood of many people. Nevertheless, there have been colliery closures in Easington, as in other areas, and there have been new industries and new forms of employment coming to the area. The result has been more variety of jobs and less dependence on coal mining. In 1961, 75 per cent. of male employees were in coal mining. By 1970 the proportion had fallen to 60 per cent. The rundown in coal mining naturally accounts for some of the unemployment in the area, though perhaps not as much as one would expect. In September, 322 men, or 25 per cent. of all males wholly unemployed in the Peterlee and Wingate area, were unemployed through planned reductions in colliery manpower.
To the best of my knowledge, no closure is imminent. The hon. Gentleman mentioned one possible closure. I am willing to look into that matter and consult my hon. Friend responsible in the Department of Trade and Industry, but my information is that there is no imminent closure. The situation has improved in mining. There has been no colliery closure since January, 1970, and there is no closure imminent. There have been a few labour force cuts at existing collieries, but between June, 1970, and September, 1971, only 92 redundant miners came on to the unemployed register for the first time, following their redundancy. In the same period the number of ex-miners who entered fresh jobs was 103.
231 It was because of the high unemployment and the problems of structural employment changes that Easington was included in the Northern Development Area. In February of this year we went a step further and made the Easington area, including the New Town of Peterlee, a special development area with all the financial and other advantages in attracting industry which this confers. We did this because we realised the situation; we were not pressurised into doing it. The result has been a quickening of inquiries from potential developers.
Since February the Peterlee Development Corporation has had 31 inquiries compared with 23 in the previous nine months and several very promising possibilities are under discussion at the moment. I do not want to overplay this, but it is encouraging. Of the existing firms at Peterlee one is at present building an extension and another is about to start one. Two other firms have applied for extra land. I understand also that the Peterlee Development Corporation is about to build two more advance factories to meet the demand which will surely come. Since June, 1970, the corporation has allocated three advance factories totalling 56,000 square feet. Since 1968 a total of 19 industrial development certificates has been granted for the Peterlee and Wingate area. covering 428,000 square feet and an estimated 1,380 new jobs. Included in these figures are six I.D.C.s so far this year for 130,000 square feet and 420 jobs.
I was interested to hear the hon. Gentleman mention some other development. I will certainly look into this. I have not the exact details of it, but if it will provide extra employment we shall certainly welcome it.
§ Mr. DormandIs the Under-Secretary of State referring to the university research centre or to the engineering factory?
§ Mr. SmithI understood the hon. Gentleman talked about an engineering factory. I do not have the details, and it would be entirely wrong of me to commit myself, but I will certainly look into that. It was news to me when the hon. Gentleman mentioned it.
He mentioned that, in his view, we ought to reinstitute investment grants and 232 regional employment premiums. These are matters about which I know the hon. Gentleman has been very assiduous in asking Questions, but I honestly do not think these things are the cure for unemployment. He referred to the V.A.T. centre, and he questioned my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister about this, and my right hon. Friend explained on 9th November that the work of V.A.T., apart from that at Southend, would be spread round the country in regional offices. I think this is the reason the hon. Gentleman has not got it at Peterlee. I will certainly look at the question of the research centre and call my Government colleagues' attention to that. This was something I was not entirely aware of. I did know about the science centre. The Development Corporation has gone to a great deal of trouble to promote the concept of a science centre, an imaginative concept which, naturally, the Government hope will succeed.
I think that what I have tried to say in these few minutes makes it abundantly clear that we are taking a wide variety of steps both to deal with the slack in the economy in general and to move towards a solution of the long-term structural problems of Easington and the other areas of high unemployment. These problems, as the hon. Member knows very well, cannot be easily or quickly solved. No one would pretend that they can be. If they could have been solved suddenly, they would have been solved by the previous Administration, but we believe that by giving Easington special development area status we have given the area a powerful advantage, and I am sure that we shall see the benefits of it before long when the flow of investment and industrial development increases.
I am confident that, despite all these problems, we shall get the drop in unemployment and the rapid increase in prosperity in Easington we all want to see. I am sure the hon. Member will be the first to acknowledge that the measures taken by the Government will have worked for what is, admittedly, a difficult area, so that it can have a much brighter future—Peterlee and the whole Easington area.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at twenty-six minutes to One o'clock.