§ 36. Mr. MacGregorasked the Minister for the Civil Service whether, in the light of recent developments in Government policy on metropolitan areas, he will reconsider the need for a further review of the Civil Service dispersal proposals following the Hardman Report.
§ The Minister of State, Civil Service Department (Mr. Charles R. Morris)The Government have recently reviewed 1005 the dispersal programme announced in 1974. We have concluded that no useful purpose would be served by a further review.
§ Mr. MacGregorDoes the Minister agree that there have been substantial changes in economic and financial conditions since the original decisions were made and, in particular, that recently the Government have made a fundamental change of policy in relation to the new towns, aimed at reattracting jobs to London instead of locating them elsewhere, and also on inner urban areas? In the light of all these matters, does the Minister not think that a serious reappraisal should be made and published to Parliament, so that the House can decide?
§ Mr. MorrisWe have conducted a review recently and are determined that the dispersal programme, as announced in July 1974, will go ahead. I have no wish to minimise the problem. Some places—particularly London, to which the hon. Gentleman referred—have been particularly badly hit by unemployment, but for Greater London the current unemployment rate is 4.1 per cent., compared with 10.5 per cent. for Merseyside, 9.1 per cent. for Glasgow, 7.5 per cent. for Teesside, and 6.1 per cent. for Cardiff.
§ Mr. Christopher PriceThe overall unemployment rate in Greater London may be 4.1 per cent., but is my hon. Friend aware that in pockets of London such as South-East London it is nearly double that figure? Is he aware that among my constituents there is very great bitterness that with an unemployment rate at this level there is a determination to press ahead with some of these idiotic schemes, such as, in particular, the removal of the Government Chemist to Cumbria, which means that skilled workers who need to deal with matters concerned largely with Heathrow Airport are to be sent hundreds of miles away?
§ Mr. MorrisMy hon. Friend is right to express the concern of his constituents about this matter. The problem in London is the contraction in manufacturing jobs and not wholly the contraction in service, clerical and administrative jobs. The shortage in the Scottish, Welsh and English regions is of jobs for all kinds.
§ Mr. TebbitWill the Minister say perfectly clearly—just for a change—whether it is his intention that only the job will be moved or that the person who is doing the job will be moved? If it is the latter, it will do very little for those who are unemployed in the region. If it is the former, it will do very little for London.
§ Mr. MorrisI assure the hon. Gentleman that essentially it is the jobs that will be moved. In terms of benefit to the community, I suggest that the hon. Gentleman looks at the successful dispersal operations that have taken place—first, the dispersal of the Royal Mint from Tower Hill to Llantrisant in South Wales and, secondly, the successful operation involving the dispersal of the Post Office Savings Bank to Cowglen in Scotland. Had there been no such dispersal there would have been 5,000 fewer jobs in Cowglen than there are at present.
§ 37. Mr. Canavanasked the Minister for the Civil Service when he next intends to visit Scotland to view possible locations for the dispersal of Civil Service jobs.
§ Mr. Charles R. MorrisI intend to visit the Central Region of Scotland on the 27th May, but I should perhaps emphasise that the Government have at present no plans to locate further Civil Service work in Scotland, other than those that have already been announced. But, as and when opportunities occur, the claims of other places will be considered.
§ Mr. CanavanBearing in mind that the male unemployment rate in some parts of Scotland, for example, in Kilsyth, in my constituency, is more than 20 per cent., is my hon. Friend aware that many people in Scotland will be very pleased about his reaffirmation today of the Government's commitment to disperse jobs to Scotland? Will he confirm that it is still under active consideration to disperse some jobs to the Central Region? My hon. Friend can be assured of the utmost co-operation on the part of the local authorities in that area.
§ Mr. MorrisI look forward to having the opportunity of meeting my hon. Friend on his home ground and examining the facts that he has indicated to the House today.
§ Mr. Anthony GrantDoes the Minister realise that the whole Hardman exercise has become pure pantomime, because the number of people dispersed to Scotland—where the hon. Member for West Stirlingshire (Mr. Canavan) comes from—in the past two years has been 0.02 per cent.? Why will he not face the fact that the Civil Service will not move from London? Why will he not scrap the whole thing and look at it again?
§ Mr. MorrisThe hon. Gentleman can produce whatever percentages he likes in terms of dispersal but he knows as well as I do that the Hardman proposals, which were announced in July 1974, envisaged a dispersal over the 10-year period 1974–84. The reasons for the increasing interest on the part of some hon. Members is that we are coming now to the dispersal operation itself, and the dispersal commitments will be honoured.