§ Q1. Mr. Eadieasked the Prime Minister if he will now appoint an additional Minister to deal with the problem of unemployment in Scotland.
§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Edward Heath)I have nothing to add to the answer I gave on 9th November to Questions from the hon. Members for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) and Birmingham, Northfield (Mr. Carter).—[Vol. 825, c. 125.]
§ Mr. EadieIs the Prime Minister aware that we have now reached a grim situation of national emergency proportions, and that today something unprecedented has happened for Scotland in that over 90 local authorities have lobbied Scottish Members of Parliament on the problem of Scottish unemployment? Indeed, I have just left them. Has the right hon. Gentleman read the proposition put forward by the S.T.U.C., and the eight-point programme that was initiated in the financial columns of the Sunday Times at the weekend? Will he appoint a Minister with a standing remit to implement some of those proposals?
§ The Prime MinisterAs the hon. Gentleman knows, I have discussed these very serious matters with him and with some of his colleagues, as well as with members of the S.T.U.C. He will also be aware of the special measures which have already been taken for Scotland. I am, of course, always prepared to examine other proposals, and that is why, after discussion with the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues, we have further examined the points he raised with us.
§ Mr. MacArthurWill my right hon. Friend reject the arrogant criticisms of hon. and right hon. Members opposite, who made such a mess of employment in Scotland when they were in power? Will he promote the cautious growth of the total economy, which is the best way to produce the long-term employment which we need so urgently in Scotland?
§ The Prime MinisterI think that it is generally agreed that, whatever peculiar characteristics the regional unemployment problem may have, they can be dealt with satisfactorily only if the economy as a whole is prosperous. That is absolutely right. But it is also true, as my hon. Friend said, that Scotland has had this 1128 very heavy problem of unemployment, and rising unemployment, continuously since 1966. That is undeniable. Apart from the structural changes going on in heavy industry in Scotland, there is also the fact that employers are obtaining the same productivity with a smaller number of men employed.
§ Q3. Mr. Leslie Huckfieldasked the Prime Minister whether he is satisfied with the co-ordination of the activities of the Department of Social Services and the Department of Employment in dealing with unemployment in the West Midlands; and if he will make a statement.
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir. There is close co-ordination between the Departments both at Headquarters and at local offices throughout the country, including the West Midlands.
§ Mr. HuckfieldIs not the Prime Minister aware that it is these two Government Departments that have to bear the brunt of his Government's deliberate policies, especially as the highest unemployment tends to be amongst those who are either disabled or handicapped? Further, is he not aware that, despite all the reflationary measures his right hon. Friend may announce this afternoon, there is a feeling in the West Midlands that we may never again attain our former level of prosperity?
§ The Prime MinisterIf the hon. Gentleman is saying that the increased unemployment is the deliberate policy of this Government, he could not be more incorrect. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] I am very interested to hear the cheers from hon. Gentlemen opposite, because it shows that they are pursuing this purely as a political matter and are not concerned with unemployment. They know full well that it was their Government who, in the measures of 20th July, 1966, deliberately announced that they were increasing unemployment, and, in fact, doubled it.
§ Sir G. NabarroWould my right hon. Friend denounce the kind of stoppage like the Coventry toolroom dispute which, for utterly irresponsible reasons and with ostrich-like shop stewards, has created a situation where millions of pounds worth of valuable production has been lost, all of which is increasing unemployment and making it more difficult for employers 1129 and others in the West Midlands to restore full prosperity?
§ The Prime MinisterYes. Sir. I deplore all industrial disputes which lead to friction, loss of production and unemployment. In the November total of 127,000 unemployed in the West Midlands, 46,000 were temporarily stopped, one-third because of trade disputes. In the particular case which my hon. Friend mentioned, I hope that it is possible to reach a solution.
§ Mr. JayWould the Prime Minister say whether the present level of unemployment is in accordance with the Government's intentions or whether their calculations have gone wrong?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman knows full well that this Government have constantly said that unemployment is too high and that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has taken steps to deal with that through economic measures. The House will be debating this matter for the rest of the day. I should have thought that, with his experience, one might have expected rather more from the right hon. Gentleman than that he should try to make debating points of that kind on a serious matter.
§ Q5. Mr. John D. Grantasked the Prime Minister how many letters he has received about unemployment since 18th June, 1970.
§ The Prime MinisterI have nothing to add to the Answer I gave on 9th November to Questions from the hon. Members for Southall (Mr. Bidwell) and Bothwell (Mr. James Hamilton).—[Vol 825, c. 825.]
§ Mr. GrantI thank the Prime Minister for another non-answer. Is he aware that the statistic that concerns everyone, and which he should have indelibly imprinted on him, is 970,000? It looks like being one million very soon. Can he say how it feels to know that he will go down in the history books as the Prime Minister whose new style of government brought back the dole queue image to Britain?
§ The Prime MinisterIf the hon. Gentleman were prepared to examine the subject seriously, I would pay more attention to his remarks.
§ Mr. Raphael TuckWould the Prime Minister now answer the question which he so deftly ducked three weeks ago, namely, what period of time he expected the British people to understand by the term "at a stroke"?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman knows that we have already dealt with half of the selective employment tax and a very substantial amount of purchase tax. In this, we have pursued policies the reverse of those of his Government, who deliberately increased unemployment by increasing taxation.
§ Mr. Joel BarnettWould the Prime Minister reconcile a recent statement of his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, in which he said it would take some time to extinguish the present high level of unemployment, with the Prime Minister's statement in June, 1970?
§ The Prime MinisterMy right hon. Friend was explaining in that speech that one of the characteristics of the present level of unemployment is the fact that, because of very high wage increases over the past two years, employers are obtaining the same output with a very much lower number of employees. Therefore, this matter has to be dealt with not just by increasing new industrial capacity, ployed regardless of their production, but by increasing new industrial capacity and this is what the country has to do—and providing new services for the people. That is the only way in which employment will be provided.