HC Deb 20 May 1975 vol 892 cc1190-2
2. Mr. Watkinson

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a further statement on the introduction of the Temporary Employment Scheme.

The Secretary of State for Employment (Mr. Michael Foot)

At this stage I am not able to add to what was said by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Budget Statement on 15th April 1975 about the Temporary Employment Subsidy Scheme.

Mr. Watkinson

Will my right hon. Friend accept that this is an imaginative scheme to deal with the problem of unemployment? Will he also accept that his hon. Friend, the Minister stated in the debate on the Employment Protection Bill that conversations were to take place between the TUC and the CBI? Have there been any such conversations? Is it the Government's intention that the scheme should apply only to development areas? Could it not be applied across the country to all areas where unemployment is above the national average?

Mr. Foot

I appreciate the interest of my hon. Friend in the scheme, and I believe that it can be a very important scheme when it is developed. There have already been discussions with the Manpower Services Commission on the matter and, of course, the employers and trades unions are represented on the commission.

It is our intention to continue our consultations with the TUC and the CBI. We then hope to incorporate an amendment in the Employment Protection Bill which would cover the proposal. As for the suggestion of my hon. Friend that it should cover the whole country and should not be confined to development areas, that would make it a much more costly scheme. The present proposal is that it should be confined to development areas.

Mr. Brittan

I accept that the scheme is imaginative in the sense that it shows imagination, but will the Secretary of State explain what steps he is taking to ensure that the scheme is not just another excuse for continuing overmanning? Is that not a real danger? What steps is he taking to guard against it?

Mr. Foot

I welcome the hon. Gentleman's brilliant definition of the word "imagination". We shall have to take it to heart. These factors were taken into account when we proposed the scheme, which will be subject to debate in the House. But we do not think that we should be deterred, by the kind of consideration the hon. Gentleman has suggested, from seeing how the scheme could help in our present situation.

Mr. Rooker

Does my right hon. Friend accept that while it may be more expensive to apply the scheme to the whole country, there will be bitter disappointment in areas, such as the West Midlands, which are thought to be prosperous but which are not so prosperous and where unemployment is, in pockets, way above the national average? There will be bitter disappointment if the scheme does not cover the whole country.

Mr. Foot

I fully appreciate the view which my hon. Friend is putting. The announcement by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Budget Statement was of a more limited scheme, and it is on that basis that we are making the preparations. But I have no doubt that representations will be made to us by my hon. Friend and others.

Mr. Hayhoe

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the amendments are likely to be tabled?

Mr. Foot

Progress in the Employment Protection Bill proceedings depends not only on the Government but on the wisdom of others. I understand that we are making good progress in the Committee, and I hope that that will continue. The sooner we can reach that part of the Bill, the better we shall be pleased.