§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Rossi.]
§ 10.12 p.m.
§ Mr. Simon Mahon (Bootle)I am grateful for the opportunity to present the difficulties of my constituents in these difficult days of unemployment in the North-West.
The Home Secretary said just now that entry into the Common Market might reduce the tensions caused by unemployment in the regions. I certainly hope that that is so. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said recently that the level of national unemployment was intolerable. A man of his generation must know that any level of unemployment is intolerable if one is among the unemployed.
It was announced today that there has been a loss of 28,000 jobs in the North-West since the beginning of 1971, and that nearly 60 factories have been closed. In my constituency we have had an alarming increase in unemployment. Most of the unemployed are men. There are today 2,556 men unemployed, 184 boys, 397 women and 90 girls, a total, including 35 temporarily stopped, of 3,272. That is over a thousand up on the figure last July, which was 2,225. That is the reason for my concern in bringing the matter to the notice of the Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. Last month, we had a total of 3,041. This is a rapidly ever-increasing figure. It is a 50 per 173 cent. growth which is causing my local authority, the local labour committees and employment committees great concern.
We are part of the Merseyside travel-to-work area. The figures for that area show another disastrous increase in unemployment. There are 10,000 more unemployed in the area this year than on 12th July last year. There are 31,164 men, 2,212 boys, 4,485 women and 1,325 girls out of work, making a total of 39,186. This means that unemployment on Merseyside is 5.9 per cent. Last year the percentage was 4.3—a total of 28,656. I am sure that the Minister will agree that this is an intolerable figure which must cause tremendous concern.
We on Merseyside find it startling, and we are wondering whether the position is now out of control in view of the national figure of 829,181, which is an increase of 67,037 since June. None of us who have suffered unemployment can look with other than fear and trepidation at the winter prospect of 1 million people unemployed, although we hope that the figure will never assume such proportions. None of us who remembers the 1930s, who left school then and understand what it was like on Merseyside, wants to see a return to those days in any shape or form.
One of the most disturbing aspects is the fact that so many young people will be leaving school over the next two months. Altogether, 450,000 young people will be looking for work—an increase of 25,000 on last year—and 15,000 are now on the unemployment register. This situation covers the constituency of my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition and other Liverpool constituencies—Kirkby, Scotland, Toxteth, Exchange and others. We in Bootle are also very conscious of our difficult position.
I consulted the figures back to 1965. I could not find since then anything to compare with the present situation. But on 12th July, 1965, we in Bootle had 883 out of work, whereas today we have four times that number unemployed, in spite of action which has been taken. I regret to say that I have had to go back to the 1940s for comparative figures, so I hope that I shall not be accused of overstating my case. Recently, the Government have taken steps which were forced upon 174 them because of the unemployment situation and because they realised that we have to have massive investment to create increased demand. We all applaud their action and only hope that it is not too late or too little.
In hearing my plea, the Government must consider the position of the school leavers. They must also consider many of the people I know on Merseyside who would willingly retire from industry. Many of them are men of my generation who fought in the war. Many of them find it difficult to attend work today. These men should be taken out of the labour market and should be able to live in dignity.
When I was a boy there used to be a cry in the Labour Party, "Give us work or maintenance." The cry should have been, "Give us work and maintenance." When people cannot any longer work, they should be accorded a proper dignity. The T.U.C. has given consistent warnings about this matter, and I hope that some notice will be taken.
I have covered the regional and national position in a brief way. To come to the essence of this debate, I should like to say something about my own council, which I am sure the Under-Secretary will agree has been very co-operative with industrialists and with the Government. It has certainly been very helpful to anybody who has come into the town of Bootle, which is at the north end of the River Mersey and contains the largest docks on Merseyside. We have done well. We have utilised small sites for industry. One would think it almost impossible to get a factory on some of these small sites, but with the initiative which has been shown this has been a help in preventing loss of jobs. I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the House on many years ago sending the first Government office to Bootle. We have since attracted other Government offices to that area, and these offices have provided plenty of work, and indeed a different and more dignified type of work for the young women of North Merseyside.
I am glad to say that in recent days in regard to the massive Inland Revenue office, which has been bedevilled by bad labour relations, we have managed to bring about an improvement in the situation. We hope that when that office is 175 complete, it will bring some 3,000 or 4,000 jobs to the area.
We have done as much as we can in the way of urban renewal. We are a good education authority and an excellent housing authority. We have completed the new strand development, and have provided as many industrial sites as we possibly can.
Great difficulty was caused by Sir Arnold Weinstock's intervention in Bootle and in Merseyside. It was a regrettable incident. Those of us who helped to establish this massive factory covering 60 to 70 acres are sad to see that in all that area there is now left one man on one machine. When that man finishes his present job, that machine, like all the other machines, will be sold and taken away and this massive factory will be left. We gave English Electric key workers some 750 houses. The company said it would give us 7,000 jobs. However, we are now left with no jobs at all.
I ask the Minister what is to be done about the English Electric factory. We were promised by the Labour Government that initiative would be taken to get somebody to come in to carry on the work that was so violently interrupted. Nothing happened under a Labour Government. I appeal to the present Government to show more initiative in trying to provide some kind of fruitful employment in this factory which, to my mind, has suffered one of the most violent pieces of industrial vandalism by Sir Arnold Weinstock which has ever taken place in this country. I regret having to say this, but it is a fact.
This factory is near the greatest dock in the world. It is on the new Seaforth dock which cost £40 million to build. I have been told by the Minister for Transport Industries that, despite £40 million of new capital expenditure on the biggest dock in the world, not one solitary new job will be provided from that investment.
Very often, one reaches the position where one feels that building grants provide work. However, I can tell the hon. Gentleman that I know of a case where £100,000 of building grant was given to a well known wealthy firm on Merseyside and that the completion of the building concerned resulted in the provision of 46 176 jobs fewer than the firm had provided before the building began.
The area which I represent is still to a degree a great ship-repairing port. My town provided the Gladstone Dry Dock which, two years ago, was converted into a container berth. I believe that we need to reconsider the ship repairing facilities on Merseyside, especially when we talk about the south end docks closure.
I think that I have said sufficient to underline my anxieties. There is work to be done. The tragedy is that people can do it but are not allowed to. Everyone in this House knows how badly the sick, the elderly, the disabled, the mentally retarded and the physically handicapped need help. They could all be helped by people who at present are out of work. People who are at present unemployed could assist in the repair of cities like Merseyside, with its snarled-up transport and its polluted atmosphere. Work could be provided in all these directions. It is the will to provide work which is lacking.
It may be said that I am advocating a policy which sounds easy but which is difficult to put into practice. However, the Ford Company of America, a private enterprise firm, has taken this sort of action in some of its plants. The company says to a person, "Do you want to work?" If the answer is, "Yes", a job is provided.
I have investigated a recent case of a department store in the United States which took 16 youths from a ghetto. All of them had failed standard employment tests. They were put through a course of 10 weeks' special training. After completing the programme, 14 of them became permanent employees of the store and two were employed elsewhere. Those young people had been described as unemployable. As a group, they attained well above the level expected, and all but two of them exceeded the predictions of the sales aptitude tests.
I believe that we shall not have massive unemployment for very long. We need our young people, as we have always needed them. I ask the Minister to consider some of the ideas that we have already for training today's young people who will be badly needed by 1975, with a view to seeing whether we cannot take them out of the maelstrom of unemployment.
177 Finally, will the hon. Gentleman consider receiving a responsible deputation of all parties from my local authority?
§ 10.28 p.m.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Mr. Anthony Grant)I have listened with considerable interest to the hon. Gentleman's exposition of the situation in Bootle. I congratulate him on a vigorous and moving presentation of his case.
To deal with his last point first, I shall be delighted to see him and his representatives, by mutual arrangement. I shall be only too pleased to continue the discussion then.
I sympathise fully with the hon. Gentleman's concern about the problems of Bootle, and I am glad to have the opportunity of speaking tonight, because I want to make it clear that the Government are fully conscious of the impact of unemployment in all parts of the country, and especially in development areas such as Bootle.
As the hon. Gentleman says, Bootle forms part of the Liverpool travel-to-work area, which comprises the greatest part of the Merseyside development area, and it is in the context of the Liverpool travel to work area that Bootle's difficulties must be viewed.
The total unemployment percentage rates in this area, after rising in recent months, showed a welcome drop in June to 5.5 per cent. I am very sorry to note that the provisional rate for July has moved back to the May level of 5.9 per cent. As the hon. Member will appreciate, however, unemployment on Merseyside has been persistently above the national average since long before his party relinquished the reins of Government. It goes back a long time. It it precisely because of the persistently high unemployment levels that the Government, following their review of regional policies, decided to maintain the assisted status of Merseyside, with all the substantial Government assistance that this policy involves.
There have, of course, been major closures and redundancies in the area so far this year and earlier. Many of these have been reflected in national trends in rationalisation; others have arisen from the special difficulties of the area's traditional industries, such as shipbuilding, 178 and the reorganisation of the Mersey Docks is likely to result in a smaller dock harbour force as new and more efficient handling methods spread. However, it is good to know that nearly all the workers made redundant by the closure of the Netherton factory, as a result of the G.E.C./A.E.I, merger, have since found other jobs.
The hon. Gentleman raised the question of the disposal of the Netherton factory, which is, of course, privately owned and is exceptionally large by some standards. I can assure him that our regional office maintains a register of all vacant factories in the Merseyside development area, and never loses in opportunity to bring this particular factory to the notice of any potential developer who has expressed an interest in Merseyside.
An unfortunate feature of the current unemployment situation to which the hon. Member has drawn attention tonight is the increased unemployment amongst school leavers. I need hardly stress that this is a national question of great concern to the Government. Whilst the number of school leavers in both the Liverpool travel-to-work area and in the Bootle employment exchange area is higher than those of the corresponding period last year, I understand that it is, as yet, too early to assess how many have left school for employment this summer. Some have already obtained jobs and some may decide to return to school; but I recognise that employment prospects, particularly for boys, have been affected by the closure of firms which have traditionally offered apprenticeships and by the reluctance of other firms to maintain their normal intakes of school leavers. Again, however, this situation reflects national trends, which the Government confidently expect to reverse by the economic measures taken since October last year, including particularly those announced during the past fortnight, to stimulate national growth of the economy.
So much for the "debit" side of the situation. I want to turn now to what I may call the "credit" aspects, as it were, which, in my view, give sound grounds for optimism for the future of the Liverpool area.
Forecasts by firms planning development suggest the creation over the next 179 three to four years of some 14,000 jobs, of which 11,500 will be for males. These exclude estimates of additional jobs arising from industrial projects of less than 10,000 sq. ft., as well as estimates for expansion by firms in their present premises, or indeed new jobs in the service sector. At this point I may remind the House and, indeed, Bootle, that industrial development certificates are freely issued for development areas.
As regards the creation of jobs, apart from projects such as continuance of work on the second Mersey Tunnel, for which £6 million of the total cost of £8 million has attracted Government grant there has been deliberately encouraged growth from disperal of Government Departments centred on Bootle including the Giro Centre, with 3,000 staff, and an Inland Revenue P.A.Y.E. unit providing ultimate employment for 2,000 in 1973–74. There are also expected to be 400 jobs available as a result of the establishment of a computer centre and central pay office for the Department of Employment at Runcorn. To my mind this not only illustrates the Government's concern to alleviate unemployment in the area, but also demonstrates the area's suitability for development in the service sectors.
Integral to the question of employment prospects is the subject of training. As the hon. Gentleman knows, there are Government training centres at Liverpool and Runcorn, with a total of 650 places and vacancies in certain trades, and a new centre at St. Helen's opened in May which, when fully operative, will provide a further 120 places. In addition, the Liverpool area will benefit from measures to improve and extend retraining facilities nationally for unemployed workers, as announced in the House by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment on 20th July. These include substantial increases in training allowances, and the greater use of colleges of further education and employers' establishments for training purposes.
As regards the training of young unemployed persons, I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his suggestions and for others that we have had but again I draw his attention to the statement by my right hon. Friend in which he referred to consultation about the promotion of 180 more expensive training for the unemployed, including, for the first time, those under 18 years of age, in colleges of further education. Moreover, I understand that, at the request of the National Youth Employment Council, the Central Youth Employment Executive is undertaking a survey of local suggestions for training schemes, or other measures to alleviate unemployment amongst young people.
Over and above all that, however, I emphasise the fact that the Liverpool travel-to-work area is in a most favourable position to benefit from the measures of assistance accorded to development areas, as well as from the tax cuts now taking effect as a result of the Budget provisions earlier this year and, of course, the measures announced on 19th July by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
In Parliament it is often overlooked just how substantial the benefits available to development areas really are, and I should like to draw attention briefly to some of these.
First, there is the opportunity of purchasing or renting a D.T.I. factory new, or previously occupied.
Second, there are the building grants. The rates have been increased by the Government by 10 per cent. to 35 per cent. and 45 per cent. for expansion of existing premises and for new projects, respectively.
Third, loans granted after 27th October, 1970, will reflect a more liberal approach towards general capital expenditure.
Fourth, there are removal grants.
Fifth, there is help for the transfer of key workers.
Sixth, there are three special industrial training schemes for firms expanding in the development areas, which are additional to the national schemes operated by the industrial training boards.
Seventh, there are tax allowances. The arrangements announced by the Government in October last year were considerably enhanced by the Amendment to the Finance Bill agreed in the House on 7th July. The widening of these provisions to cover equipment for services, as well as manufacturing, industries in development areas, as announced in the Chancellor's statement of 19th July, is I suggest 181 of particular value to the Liverpool district.
Still another measure of great potential value to the Merseyside development area in regard to the construction industries is the Government's decision, announced in the House on 14th July by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, to authorise capital expenditure on infrastructure works in the development areas, which take effect during the present and following financial years, and I hope that Bootle will be able to take full advantage of that.
Apart from the fact that its unemployment rate has been consistently lower than that for the development areas as a whole, the Merseyside development area, despite current unemployment problems, possesses many advantages. The area includes the country's leading port for manufactured goods, and is an important banking and insurance centre, with excellent communications, and absence of severe infrastructure problems. It also enjoys the prospect of part solution of its unemployment problems in the new overspill towns of Knowsley, 182 Runcorn and Skelmersdale. At Knowsley a Department-owned site of 100 acres has been almost wholly taken up.
I know as the hon. Gentleman said, that there are sometimes difficult labour relations in the area, but this is a problem which local initiatives will, I am sure, overcome.
With all the significant varied types of special Government assistance open to industrial developers, coupled with the benefits arising from the Chancellor's measures strongly directed to stimulating the national economy, I do not think we need be too pessimistic about the future of Bootle.
On the contrary, I consider that the area is exceptionally well placed to recover from recent set backs, and I urge the hon. Gentleman and all the people of Bootle to seize the new opportunities that now lie before them.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at nineteen minutes to Eleven o'clock.