§ Q2. Mr. Carterasked the Prime Minister how many letters he received on matters for which he is responsible during the Recess.
§ Q3. Mr. Ashleyasked the Prime Minister how many letters he has received since he took office on the questions of rising prices and unemployment.
§ Q5. Mr. Skinnerasked the Prime Minister how many letters he has now received since 18th June, 1970, on the subject of old-age pensions.
§ Q7. Mr. Spearingasked the Prime Minister how many letters he has received on the subject of the Common Market since 5th August.
§ Q10. Mrs. Renée Shortasked the Prime Minister how many letter he has received this year on the problem of unemployment.
§ Q11. Mr. Dalyellasked the Prime Minister how many letters he has received in the last three months on the subject of unemployment.
§ The Prime MinisterSince becoming Prime Minister I have received about 120,000 letters from members of the public on issues of Government policy. A number of these letters were concerned with entry into the Common Market. Pensions, the cost of living and employment. The cost of a more detailed statistical breakdown would be disproportionate.
§ Mr. CarterHow many people have written to the right hon. Gentleman bringing to his attention the fact that. since he became Prime Minister, the West Midlands has gone into economic decline and now shows, in employment terms, all the aspects of becoming an industrial dustbowl? What specific proposals does he have for remedying this situation?
§ The Prime MinisterAs I have said, it is not worth the cost of going into a statistical breakdown about the nature of the list. However, on the hon. Member's particular point, as he knows, I 541 paid a visit to the West Midlands during the Recess, where I had a long and very valuable discussion with the planning council on the document which they themselves have produced. I would suggest to him that he does not help the West Midlands by grossly exaggerating their particular problems. But I agreed with them to study the whole question of I.D.C. arrangements and the rest of it.
§ Mr. AshleyInstead of castigating union leaders as being responsible for unemployment, would the Prime Minister now accept that it is the Government's policies which are largely contributing to unemployment and rising prices? Could he now switch his sympathies from surtax payers to ordinary people, which would help the situation considerably?
§ The Prime MinisterOn the first part of that question, the hon. Member has only to discuss with the management of firms, as I did when I visited Stoke-on-Trent during the Recess, the reasons why they have redundancies to learn that excessive wage increases are one of the reasons. There can be no doubt about that, and we shall not find an answer to the problems unless we accept that. Second, on rising prices, the Chancellor's action in reducing purchase tax and halving S.E.T. is contributing to the process which the hon. Gentleman wants. As for taxation, the reduction in the standard rate benefited all taxpayers and the generous increase in child tax allowances helped all families.
§ Mr. SkinnerIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that he will be increasing the cost of living by handing over millions of £s to the French farmers? [HON. MEMBERS: "Rubbish."]
Returning to the question of the number of letters he has received from and about pensioners, is he aware that one came to him from a widow pensioner who lives in Bolsover, that he refused to reply to it and that finally this pensioner's letter was answered by a civil servant in the Supplementary Benefits Commission? Does this not show the right hon. Gentleman's total disregard for the plight of starving old-age pensioners, which can be resolved only by giving £8 to the single person and £14 to the married couple?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman might have been fair enough 542 to have acknowledged that if a letter from a pensioner concerns the pensioner's own particular circumstances and if that pensioner requires help, then much the most practical way of dealing with it is for it to go to the Supplementary Benefits Commission.
§ Mr. SpearingDoes the right hon. Gentleman recall that before the Summer Recess he said it was the duty of the Government to call on their supporters to follow their policy for entry into the Common Market? Has he changed his mind about that because of the letters he has received during the Recess? If not, what other reason has caused him to change his mind?
§ The Prime MinisterThe Government will, of course, ask their supporters to support them—including support in the Lobby—and what is more, they will get the support of the great majority of them.
§ Mrs. ShortDoes the right hon. Gentleman also recall that when he went to Birmingham and met the West Midlands Planning Council he refused, at the same time, to meet any of the trade union delegates who wanted to see him? Is he aware that they would have told him, as my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Mr. Carter) told him, that in the West Midlands we have an unemployment rate of 6 per cent. and that we are particularly concerned about the many thousands of young people who, having left school, have not been able to find any employment at all? Can he say specifically what action he now intends to take, having taken no action so far, to see that the prosperity of the West Midlands is restored?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Lady seems to have overlooked the fact that the trade unions are represented on the Planning Council and that their representative there was one of those who spoke, who said everything he wanted to say and took part in the discussion, having previously discussed the matter with his colleagues. I was, therefore, given the considered views of the trade unions in the West Midlands.
§ Mr. DalyellWhat is the policy on youth unemployment?
§ The Prime MinisterThe policy is, first, to ensure that there is an improvement in employment in the country as a 543 whole, which is the only way of getting more employment for youth. It is, second, to carry through a greatly improved training programme, which is what my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment is doing.
§ Mr. OnslowWould my right hon. Friend not agree that if hon. Gentlemen opposite are so concerned about unemployment, they might be a great deal better employed joining hon. Members on this side of the House explaining to those who demand wage increases far in excess of anything which increases in productivity can justify the great damage they are doing to their own interests and the interests of those who have already been priced out of a job?
§ The Prime MinisterI have always made the point that that would be helpful, and I still believe that it would be helpful. However, as I understand it, the Opposition have now rejected their previous statutory incomes policy and have put nothing in its place.
§ Mr. Harold WilsonReturning to the right hon. Gentleman's opening statement in which he referred to the disproportionate cost of answering the Questions, may I ask him whether he is telling the House that No. 10 no longer makes a weekly breakdown of the subjects of the letters that are received there? If that is still done, how much would be the cost of adding them together and so being able to answer my hon. Friends?
§ The Prime MinisterIf I were to attempt to give an accurate reply, it would mean going through all the correspondence again to find out which letters dealt with more than one subject and to note those other subjects.