§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Waddington.]
11.49 pm§ Mr. Jim Craigen (Glasgow, Maryhill)I deliberately used the title "Employment in the Glasgow area" for this debate because I want Scottish Office Ministers to concern themselves much more with the city's shrinking economic and employment base, especially at a time when 58,000 people are out of work in Glasgow and more than 74,000 are out of work within the Glasgow travel-to-work area.
I want to warn the Minister of the accumulated effects of the Government's economic and expenditure policies on the city's industrial prospects. Glasgow now has one-quarter of Scotland's total jobless, although only one-sixth of her population.
The signs are of a further deterioration in the employment pattern within the city and a growing disparity between the position in Glasgow and the overall Scottish position. As the Minister knows, redundancies have been increased in West Scotland at an alarming rate recently, and I know that this has been giving concern 869 to the Manpower Services Commission in Scotland.
Next month, another clothing firm in my constituency will be closing. Eighty-five jobs are involved. This is a firm that two years ago was seeking my assistance because it had trouble over skilled labour shortage. The company gives the recession, foreign competition and falling local authority orders as being the main reason for the closure.
I should like to ask the Minister whether, in the Government support for the promotion of small firms, attention is being paid to the central Government procurement procedures. For example, has there been any change in the purchasing procedure, even within the Scottish Office in the way in which it makes purchases, or is it simply that there has been an overall drop in the amount of central Government and certain local government procurement?
As the Minister will be aware, Glasgow is no longer basically a manufacturing centre. We have had a continuous decline in our basic industries and in many of our low-technology metal engineering concerns, and nowadays less than 30 per cent. of the work force is engaged in manufacturing. It is the service sector which now provides 70 per cent. of Glasgow's jobs, and these occupations are becoming highly vulnerable to the decline in consumer spending.
This is a pattern which is reflected throughout the country, but I suggest that there are certain aspects of the position in Glasgow that will worsen the consumer spending pattern even further. Retailers, for example, are expecting their poorest trading results ever in 1980. There may be some pick-up at the time of the Christmas period, but even food sales are being affected at the minute.
As the Minister will appreciate, this has a knock-on effect, with a rippling impact on other industries and concerns. In his capacity as Minister for home affairs and the environment, he cannot escape the fact that the policies over the Scottish Special Housing Association and support for local authorities will result in redundancies in the construction industry at a time when that industry is already reeling under the effects of changes in the pattern of public expenditure. Indeed, several modernisation schemes within my own constituency 870 will be affected, quite apart from new-build projects in various parts of Scotland.
At a meeting that I attended last week in Glasgow, the convener of housing made clear that the city would require £72 million in housing support grant for 1980–81 just to maintain existing maintenance and repair work and the other housing services within Glasgow.
In looking at the employment or unemployment background of those in the Strathclyde region, one finds that last June about half of the total male unemployed were classified as general labourers available for unskilled or semi-skilled work, and about a quarter of the female total of unemployed were in the same category. This position is even more pronounced within the Glasgow area, and I need hardly tell the Minister that the opportunities for unskilled and semiskilled work have been shrinking over the years.
Glasgow has now been caught up in the consequences of overall Government mismanagement. I do not expect the Minister to deal with the exchange rate, interest rates, the level of inflation or public expenditure cuts. The Government are pursuing their own course on the basis that they want to reduce public expenditure, but to a great extent they are shifting the nature of public expenditure so that we shall be paying more to support people out of work.
Against the background of what is happening nationally, I should like the Minister to consider a number of measures which would do a little to ameliorate the position of special development areas, such as Glasgow, where, as I have pointed out, the purchasing power will be reduced.
With poor prospects facing school leavers in the Glasgow conurbation, I should like the Scottish Office to consider a centrally funded scheme of educational bursaries to assist 16 to 18-year olds to remain at school. I know that a discretionary bursary is operating. I understand that in Glasgow about 612 category A discretionary bursaries are currently being applied. But that has an impact on the local authority's expenditure.
Glasgow has a higher percentage of young jobless than the average for the country. Therefore, I should like the 871 Government to reintroduce the youth subsidy to small firms in special development areas. Our experience with the youth subsidy was helpful in the recruitment of school leavers. Moreover, the availability of a large number of well-qualified youngsters was one of the main arguments advanced by Glasgow in its campaign for Civil Service jobs.
What is the position regarding the Ministry of Defence dispersal jobs to the St. Enoch's site in Glasgow? One reads that the first tranche of jobs for the Overseas Development Administration to East Kilbride will be next February. But are we right in assuming that the suggested transfer of the Crown Agents pensions department will substitute the second tranche of dispersal for the Overseas Development Administration? Will the Minister indicate how many jobs in the Civil Service will be lost in the Glasgow area as a result of the Prime Minister's statement last May about future levels of national Civil Service staffing?
The last thing that many small business men in Glasgow want is the implementation of the Government's Green Paper on income during initial sickness. Seeking to transfer more of the cost of sickness to the employer will make the disincentive to recruit additional labour even greater. The Government ought to he reducing the employer's national insurance contributions in special development areas so as to ease labour recruitment. Moreover, I suggest that there is a good argument for abolishing the employer's national insurance surcharge in special development areas for those up to the age of 18. That would help considerably in the recruitment of youngsters.
I understand that the other Under-Secretary, the hon. Member for Edinburgh, North (Mr. Fletcher), has another ministerial commitment. It is fortuitous that the Minister present, with his responsibility for home affairs and the environment, plays a particular part in the handling of the rate support grant and the housing support grant settlements. I want him to bear in mind that nationally the local authorities and public bodies are responsible for about a quarter of all the places under the youth opportunities programme. I hope that he will remember 872 th0at when it comes to the settlements, because many local authorities will be under pressures concerning staffing.
The youth opportunities programme has provided a useful safety valve in easing unemployment among young people, but there is a limit to the pressure it can take in terms of numbers. It is now coping with many youngsters who are really of craft and technician potential and who were not thought of in terms of the original job creation programme. In the case of work experience in employers' premises, it stands to reason that if there is a continual reduction in the number of opportunities within private companies there will be fewer opportunities for youngsters to gain this kind of work experience.
I turn to the question of the enterprise zone which has been earmarked for the Greater Glasgow conurbation. The designated area is more or less next door to my constituency. It would be helpful to Glasgow's industrial prospects if the Government, having conceded rates relief in terms of an enterprise zone, were to extend that helpfulness to industry generally in Glasgow.
I should be interested to know tonight how the Government hope to prevent moonlighting by companies. I am concerned that some firms will see it as a house-moving opportunity and that it may not result in extra employment opportunities overall. Is there the danger that the enterprise zone could have a preponderance of warehousing jobs rather than manufacturing capacity?
I turn briefly to the excellent work which the Scottish Development Agency has been doing in recent years. I am not so much in contact with its work in the eastern Glasgow renewal area, although I have welcomed the work that it has been able to do, particularly environmentally and industrially so far, in the Maryhill corridor. Indeed, I have benefited to some extent through the fact that the Sighthill Park was one of its major commitments in creating a new public park in Glasgow.
I hope that the Government will sustain the efforts of the SDA in land renewal, because it is vital that the city should be as attractive as possible to incoming industrial concerns.
873 The Minister might comment briefly on the work in connection with the location of a Scottish exhibition centre. The SDA has been considering suitable sites. I think that rightly West Scotland, with its credentials in terms of motorway, airport and rail connections, is a suitable location. If a new site is chosen in Glasgow, I wonder whether it will kill off the Kelvin Hall.
Finally, the Government must do all that they can to encourage the efforts being made by the SDA over the promotion of a science park within West Scotland. I should like to see a science park located in Glasgow. The two universities must be fully involved in the exercise if we are to give the city a future and provide Glaswegians with the opportunity for more high-technology work in future.
Perhaps I can bend the Minister's ear over the Dawsholm site. The disused gas works are presently in the ownership of British Gas, which for some considerable time has been haggling with the Scottish Development Agency over the district valuer's price. It has refused to go to arbitration. It has put the site on the open market but seemingly has found no one who is interested in coming forward.
The district of Glasgow wants to develop the site for industrial purposes, but the land still lies sterilised. The Prime Minister has said that she is not for turning. I hope that the Minister will realise the significance of what I am saying. Unless Scottish Office Ministers interest themselves in Scotland's largest urban area, Glasgow will reach the point of no return industrially.
§ 12.6 am
The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Malcolm Rifkhid)I congratulate the hon. Member for Glasgow, Mary-hill (Mr. Craigen) on raising this subject for debate. As a Member representing a Glasgow constituency, he has a natural interest in both his constituency and the remainder of Glasgow. I assure him that the problem that he has raised has a much wider significance. I am sure that he will agree that Glasgow is one of the United Kingdom's great cities and that the economic health and prosperity of Glasgow can always be said to be a marker 874 and indication of Scotland's economic prosperity. The subject that he has raised is of considerable importance. I can assure him that Scottish Office Ministers of this Government, as of previous Governments, have recognised that by their words and their deeds and that they will continue to do so.
The problem of unemployment in the Glasgow area is serious and the Government share the hon. Gentleman's undoubted concern from not only a statistical point of view. We recognise the anguish that unemployment causes those who suffer it and the sense of frustration and waste inherent in any level of unemployment. We are as concerned as the hon. Gentleman to find a remedy to the problem.
The hon. Gentleman will appreciate—I think that it is undeniably the case—that regrettably the problems of unemployment in the Glasgow area, as elsewhere, are not a new phenomenon. Over recent years we have seen a remorseless rise in the level of unemployment. In 1974 there were 27,892 unemployed. Five years later, in 1979, the figure had doubled to 53,801. We now have a figure of almost 75,000. These are serious figures.
I mention that historical background to illustrate two fundamentally important aspects of the problem and not to make a party point. First, I must emphasise that the problem of unemployment did not begin 18 months ago as is sometimes suggested. The fact that unemployment doubled while the previous Labour Government were in office, despite a policy of increased public expenditure, should bring home to the House and the public that demands for increases in public expenditure are not an answer to Glasgow's problems or to the unemployment problem of the United Kingdom. During that period we saw increases in expenditure and a remorseless increase in the level of unemployment.
As the hon. Gentleman will be aware, the Government believe that the longterm solution to the problem is the conquest of inflation. Tonight is not the occasion to go into the reasons for that. These have been well ventilated, not least in yesterday's debate. There are a number of specific measures that the Government have taken and are taking that we 875 believe will make an important contribution to Glasgow's problems. The hon. Gentleman has referred to a number of them.
The hon. Gentleman mentioned the fact that Glasgow continues to have special development area status. The Government's decision to reduce substantially the proportion of Scotland that has such development area status has as one consequence considerable benefits for Glasgow and the west of Scotland. Instead of the whole of Scotland having a similar attraction to industry, the concentration of development area status in Glasgow and the adjoining areas has conveyed a relative advantage. That is an important consideration.
The hon. Gentleman also referred to the Government's decision to set up an enterprise zone in Clydebank, which is in the Glasgow working area. That is an important innovation and one that has already led to a considerable attraction of interest to develop the Clydebank zone. I entirely agree that it would be undesirable if the only consequence of establishing Clydebank as an enterprise was to encourage industries that already exist in the Glasgow area to move from other areas to Clydebank. That is not the purpose of an enterprise zone. I share the hon. Gentleman's view that the purpose of such a zone should be to attract new industry and jobs. We hope that the zone will come into practical effect by about 1 April. It will be a considerable contribution towards helping to deal with the economic problems.
The hon. Gentleman rightly paid tribute to the achievements of the Scottish Development Agency in the Glasgow area. It has made an important contribution. Since 1975, ½ million sq ft of factory accommodation has been made available. A further ½ million is under construction, which will make an important contribution to attracting employment and industry to the Glasgow area. Earlier this year the Scottish Development Agency unveiled its plans for a £40 million complex at St. Enoch's which it is believed will have a potential for 15,000 jobs. That, too, is an optimistic and encouraging note in the attraction of industry.
The hon. Gentleman indicated his view that the reduction in the resources of the 876 Scottish Special Housing Association would have an effect on the construction industry in Glasgow and elsewhere. However, one priority that it has been given by the Government is to continue the work that it is doing in the GEAR—Glasgow east area renewal—area of Glasgow. Concentrating its resources in the GEAR area and the other priority areas that the Government have indicated will make a major contribution to solving the problems that the hon. Member indicates. Since the GEAR project began, the association has completed a large number of housing units, which has been a major contribution to the construction industry. That trend is continuing, notwithstanding the reduced resources available to the Scottish Special Housing Association. Since the project began, 75 small factory units and six larger advanced units in the East End have been completed and almost all are occupied, thereby showing the potential for further development of this kind.
The hon. Gentleman expressed his concern that the local authorities may not find it possible to respond to the increased youth opportunities programme that the Government are providing. I understand his concern. However, the Manpower Services Commission has initiated a press and television campaign to try to encourage private industries to respond to an even greater extent in order to provide places for youngsters who wish to benefit from the programme. That will help to deal with any problem that the hon. Gentleman may envisage and provide a better prospect of long-term employment for the youngsters. A firm that benefits from the programme may be in a better position to offer the youngsters a permanent job.
The hon. Gentleman considered that the small firms employment subsidy should be reintroduced and not discontinued. The Government decided to discontinue the subsidy because it was seen to be the least cost-effective of the special employment measures and surveys had shown that a large proportion of the jobs supported by the subsidy would have arisen in any event. Clearly, at any time, though particularly when resources are limited, it would be unwise to use resources to appear to be providing jobs when all the evidence 877 indicates that the jobs would be provided anyway. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will agree, on reflection, that that would not be the best use of the resources.
The hon. Gentleman asked about dispersal. The Ministry of Defence has selected the units of London-based work expected to be moved and the task of establishing their accommodation requirements and planning for the building to house them is proceeding. On present plans, St. Enoch's will be ready for occupation in 1986. That time scale for completion is necessary in a development of this magnitude, costing about £15 million. Consideration is also being given to the feasibility of providing temporary accommodation to permit an advance move of posts and we hope to make a statement in the near future on the conclusion of those deliberations.
The hon. Gentleman asked whether there was any prospect of the pensions department of the Crown Agents being involved in any move. I understand that discussions are being held with the Crown Agents to see whether that is a possibility.
The hon. Gentleman commented on the question of an exhibition centre, and he will be aware that the SDA is undertaking a study of that possibility. The Government will obviously look with interest at the conclusions to see whether such a development would be appropriate.
878 The hon. Gentleman has put forward some interesting proposals which I will commend to my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary responsible for education and industry at the Scottish Office, because some of them relate specifically to his responsibilities.
I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government share his anxiety about the need to improve employment prospects for his constituents and the citizens of Glasgow as a whole. We recognise that Scotland's economy cannot be said to be prosperous or successful until that of Glasgow can be seen to be in that category. The Government have shown by their policies that they recognise the special needs of Glasgow and that its problems are more serious and considerable than those of many other parts of Glasgow. We have shown that not only in action on development area status but in the other ways that I have indicated.
I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on raising the issue. I know that it will not be the last time that the subject is debated, nor should it be, but I hope that I have given him some assurance that the Government share his concern and are determined to do all in their power to try to help to rectify the situation.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at seventeen minutes past Twelve o'clock.