§ Q5. Mr. James Hamiltonasked the Prime Minister when he will next take the Chair at a meeting of the National Economic Development Council.
§ Q9. Mr. Duffyasked the Prime Minister if he will take the Chair at the meeting of the National Economic Development Council at its August meeting.
§ The Prime MinisterI have nothing to add to the answer I gave to a Question from the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South (Mr. Ashley) on 15th July.—[Vol. 821, c. 153.]
§ Mr. HamiltonWill the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that when he goes to the next meeting of the Council he will discuss with it the figure of 134,000 people unemployed in Scotland? Will he also give some assurance to the people of this country about the unemployed school-leavers in Scotland, numbering between 50,000 and 60,000, some of whom left school at Christmas and have not yet obtained their first job? Will he discuss with the Council how the Government propose to solve this problem, bearing in mind that we have the worst unemployment situation in Scotland since the early 1930s?
§ The Prime MinisterThese matters were discussed at the last meeting of the N.E.D.C. and the proposals which my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer put to the House last Monday have a large measure of support in the C.B.I, and the T.U.C.
§ Mr. DuffyIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that today's unemployment figures show that there is 4.9 per cent. unemployment in Sheffield and yet it is not part of a development area? However welcome Monday's statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer may have been, it may now be dealing with an economy in a nose-dive. Should not the right hon. Gentleman go to the August 1676 meeting of the N.E.D.C. in order to take an early opportunity to receive soundings from both sides of industry about the relevance of his right hon. Friend's proposals?
§ The Prime MinisterWe have already had the reactions of both sides of industry—I dislike that phrase—the C.B.I, and the T.U.C, to my right hon. Friend's proposals, which have their support. The unemployment figures are too high ; my right hon. Friend has said so. But we must note that 24,420 of the unemployed people are adult students who have registered for vacation employment for two months. We must take that into account when considering the overall figures.
§ Mr. EmeryI accept that my right hon. Friend could play a rôle, but will he consider reverting to the situation, which was altered by the last Socialist Government, whereby the chair of the N.E.D.C. is always taken by the Chancellor of the Exchequer so that the Prime Minister can hold himself above the discussions within the N.E.D.C?
§ The Prime MinisterIt is perfectly true that when the N.E.D.C. was first formed the Chancellor of the Exchequer was always in the chair. The last Prime Minister changed the arrangement so that he was almost always in the chair. When we came to power, I arranged it so that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer normally took the chair but that when the Council on occasion wishes me to take the chair, I do so. I have in fact taken the chair three times. It seems to be an arrangement which works perfectly well.
§ Mr. CallaghanIs the Prime Minister aware that the country does not want him to hold himself above the disastrous figure of 820,000 unemployed and that he should be actively engaged in reducing the unemployment figure? The whole country will be dissatisfied with the present situation. Is the estimate of 100,000, as being the reduction in the number of unemployed likely to arise from the measures of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, acceptable to the Prime Minister? Is that the right figure? If it is, will he take it from me that the country will not accept a situation in which there are likely to be 700,000 people unemployed for a long time to come?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman, as a former Chancellor of the Exchequer, knows—and my right hon. Friend said this in the debate on Tuesday—that it is not the custom to make forecasts of the movement of unemployment.
§ Mr. CallaghanIt may not be the custom, but what is the Government's aim? Would they be satisfied with a reduction of this sort? Is it not time that the Prime Minister spent a little less time on the Common Market and a little more time on reducing unemployment in this country?
§ The Prime MinisterIf the right hon. Gentleman spent more time on getting an understanding of the Common Market, he would not be in his present position.