School Leavers (Index Project Training) (Hansard, 12 February 1981)

§ Mr. Leslie Spriggs (St. Helens)

It is a great privilege for me, on behalf of index project, a training scheme for school leavers, to explain to the Under-Secretary of State for Employment what index project training for school leavers really means, as briefly as I can, within the 15 minutes allotted to me.

First, local initiative is something to be commended and given support. Index project is a programme which involves the youth opportunities programme for jobs which exist now and for jobs in the future. The total annual cost will be approximately £200,000 for the first 18 months for 50 young people.

We need to ensure that a pattern of preparation for work is introduced and developed which will, first, provide the facilities to prepare young people for these occupations, and, second, offer education to make adaptable and versatile people recognise that such preparation involves education, and prepare them for life, as distinct from the narrower and traditional interpretation of providing the limited practical skills required in a particular job.

In the past, these young people would find work at 14 in low wage, low technology jobs. In an unstructured and unsystematic way, industry then prepared them for adult working life until they were paid adult rates at 21. Now they leave school at 16 and reach adult wages at 18.

1081 The raising of the school leaving age and the lowering of the age of adulthood to 18, the Yom Kippur war and the subsequent oil crisis, employment protection legislation and rapidly accelerating technological changes all occurred at the same time. They coincided with the effects of moving from the fallow fifties to the swinging sixties some 16 years earlier, and together they have induced a steep change in the order of things.

The cumulative effect of these events is that industry no longer trains young people for adult working life through employment, and that there can be no reversal of the new order. If we fail to take new measures now to deal creatively and imaginatively with this group of young people, the ineluctible outcome will be a progressive deterioration in the standard of the work force, with resulting economic and social degradation.

To ensure the future, we must innovate. We must change conventional wisdom and recognise that work preparation for these young people can no longer be left to, or forced upon, the individual employer, with the Government taking no more than short-term palliative measures for the unemployed.

A federal project is required. In St. Helens, we are trying the federal approach by establishing index project, intended as a pilot project designed to be effective by means of a federation of the local authority and central Government in the new conditions now upon us. There is a growing national recognition that because the nation, as well as employers, benefit from a high quality work force, a national involvement in the preparation of the work force is required.

In St. Helens we take the view that local solutions to the problems should be adopted. Index project has been designed on that principle. Index project is not seen as an all-embracing answer to the problems of preparing young people for adult work.

A selection of opportunities is currently available, and should continue. These are higher education, further education, apprenticeships, the youth opportunities programme for the unemployed and based on local industrial requirements. All the evidence points to a shrinking opportunity for juvenile employment in the years leading to adult, unskilled employment—this the only sector not overtly supported by the nation.

However, index does not demand that the cost should be borne by the Government. It should be shared by those who benefit, including the nation. Nor does it accept that the education service solely can undertake the cost and free employers from accepting the responsibilities and training for the immediate job.

Index project is an innovation by a town willing to face up to its responsibilities for the future. We ask the Government to play their part.

The commitment of the Government to the youth opportunities programme is an admirable first step in that direction. But it is only a first step. These measures do not conclusively bridge the gap between leaving school and adult work. Nor do they demand an equivalent commitment to the young people from employers who traditionally, or now more increasingly, confine their recruitment to adults.

The local commitment to index is growing constantly. For example, Pilkington Brothers currently has one manager actively in the development of the scheme and the 1082 provision of facilities and a specialist assistant to assist him, at an approximate cost of £11,000. National Westminster Bank has one manager actively assisting in the development of the project, at a cost per annum of £9,000. There are other organisations, such as Barclays Bank, which plays a major role in preparing the project for when it gets off the ground. We hope that it will commence in April, when an Index Co. Ltd. will be set up as a limited company and then, of course, the real work will commence.

Local authority accepts its role as an employer as well as representing the community itself. Every effort will be made by council offices to identify premises which will be suitable for the operation of index project. The borough council will endeavour to give whatever financial support it can. Such support could be through the provision of a specific grant, or to assist in meeting operational costs of index and/or granting rating relief, depending upon the circumstances at any one time.

At least 50 firms, collectively employing 41,000 workers—that is, 68 per cent. of the working population in the metropolitan district—accept the need and the concept. They intend to participate in the project when it gets off the ground. They are willing to consider secondment of personnel to the project. Each of the 50 firms will recruit from the young people who complete their contract under the index scheme. Clearly from time to time assistance will vary according to circumstances. Everybody understands that not all firms that make a commitment will be able to continue that commitment.

Several firms have agreed to second their staff for training purposes at their own cost. Currently firms are co-operating with index in identifying the job content of their own employees occupations. The work is carried out with the assistance of the Food, Drink and Tobacco Industry Board as the first phase of the design of the index training programme.

The trade union movement and the work force in St. Helens will be fully committed to the concept and the project. Each participating group will be represented on the board of the company—Index Project Ltd. The estimated funding requirement of about £200,000 per annum represents about £2,600 per annum, per trainee, including national insurance contributions which will be returned to the Exchequer. The figures are contained in appendix D. The Minister is welcome to a copy of it.

The Rainford Trust has shown its support for the project with a grant of £10,000 and it has pledged a continuing interest in the project. Pilkington Brothers is to grant £50,000. Barclays and National Westminster Banks are playing a major role in the project.

Unemployed young person's benefit amounts to £670 a year. Under the youth opportunities programme training workshop financing, the Exchequer can bear costs of about £2,300 per annum, per trainee, even though the scheme does not deal with the real need to bridge the gap conclusively between school and adult employment. The index project conclusively bridges the gap between school and training. On completion of 18 months training young persons are recruited directly into employment on a permanent basis by one of the 50 firms supporting the project.

St. Helens and the young people in the catchment area owe a great deal to Mr. W. K. Atherton, the head of Pilkington Brothers group training department, for the excellent work on the original design which is now 1083 christened the "index project." We owe our deepest gratitude to all our the public-spirited people who have indicated their support for St. Helens school leavers and their future. We owe them all deepest gratitude. It gives me pleasure to commend the index project to the House and to call on the Government to give it their blessing and financial support.

§ The Under-Secretary of State for Employment (Mr. Peter Morrison)

I am delighted that we have the opportunity for a proper debate on the matter raised by the hon. Member for St. Helens (Mr. Spriggs). About three weeks ago, we had only about one minute's debate on the hon. Gentleman's private Member's motion. He informed me that he was likely to raise the matter on the Adjournment. I said that I would be pleased if he did so and I am delighted to be able to debate the matter as carefully as I can.

When I was a new boy, I was frightened when I came to the House for the first time. I will always owe the hon. Gentleman a great personal debt because when I was due to attend my first meeting of the 1922 Committee in Room 14 I did not know where the Room was and I asked the hon. Gentleman, even though I did not know him at the time. We were in the bowels of the House and he kindly took me all the way up to Committee Room 14. He will not remember that, but I do, and I shall always be grateful to him.

As has been well demonstrated tonight, the hon. Gentleman has always taken a close interest in the index training scheme. If I may say so, without sounding incredibly pompous, I admire the interest that he has taken, because I also believe that there is much to be said for the scheme.

The hon. Gentleman and I are neighbours in the North-West. Our constituencies are not far apart. We share the concern, felt by all hon. Members, about young people who cannot find a job. I hope that, when I say that I am concerned about what is happening in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, he realises that it comes from the heart, because I am just down the road from him and I know the problems of St. Helens personally rather than from a distance.

Like the hon. Gentleman, I welcome any initiative taken by any individual or group of individuals or companies to help young people without work. I was interested to hear the figures quoted by the hon. Gentleman. He said that the scheme put to the MSC would cost £200,000 for 50 young people. I am sure that the commission is aware of the figures and will take them carefully into account.

The Government cannot do the whole thing on their own. We rely on co-operation from many bodies. That is why the index project is encouraging to me. The Government welcome the idea of individuals coming forward with schemes so that perhaps we can put a catalyst together to get the show on the road. In that respect, the sponsors of the scheme have my full support.

I was also interested to hear the hon. Gentleman refer to the St. Helens scheme as a federal solution. My eyebrows rose, but then I realised exactly what he meant. It was the right way of putting it. Local authorities as well as Government, industry and trade unions should all be involved, and I agree with the hon. Gentleman about a federal solution.

1084 I hope that the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that I am reasonably new to my job. Therefore, I had to do a bit of what I would call "educating Archie" to ascertain the exact nature of the index scheme. I must admit that on my Cheshire network I have heard about it, but only briefly, over the past two years. I have tried my best to get to the bottom of the scheme and to examine it carefully. I gather that the index project has already put two proposals to the Manpower Services Commission. It would not be in the interests of the House if we went over that ground again. We have to examine the third proposal and determine where we can help.

The main difficulty with the third proposal is that the scheme's sponsors say that the young people involved would be on the scheme for 22 months whereas the rules of the youth opportunities programme are that they should be on it for only 12 months. We have a divide of 10 months. The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that, although there can be—I hope that there will be—a compromise, the YOP programme must have some rules, not least because it is spending vast amounts of taxpayers' money. We must have some rules laid down, otherwise one would not be able to help via the programme as many young unemployed as are helped at present.

Through the YOP programme three times as many young people will be helped in 1981–82 compared with 1978–79. There is a vast increase in the programme. In 1981–82 440,000 young people will have the opportunity to take up a place under the programme providing that they have been unemployed for three months.

The Government are caring and are doing their bit. However, there is still a gap between the index scheme and the 10-month rule. What do we do? The hon. Gentleman said that Mr. Atherton has been a tremendous supporter and sponsor of the scheme. I gather that Mr. Atherton has written to the Manpower Services Commission asking for a meeting. I gather, too, that Mr. Holland from the MSC replied on 6 Febmary—I may be wrong on the exact day—saying that the commission was still considering some support and that a meeting would be forthcoming.

I hope, like the hon. Gentleman, that the meeting will be forthcoming and that it will be as productive as is possible. The divide is 10 months. I hope that both sides will consider carefully how each can help the other. I can give the hon. Gentleman a personal undertaking that as the Minister in this place who answers for these matters—my noble Friend the Minister of State, Lord Gowrie, is responsible in another place—I shall follow carefully the developments in the negotiations subsequent to the letter sent by Mr. Holland to Mr. Atherton. If there is anything that I or my noble Friend Lord Gowrie can do to help along the negotiations, we shall do it on behalf of not just the hon. Gentleman but his constituents.

I hope that I have given the hon. Gentleman the idea that I am concerned that we should, within reason, come to a happy conclusion of this event. There is no doubt that when a group of individuals—they are companies, but individuals are sponsoring the project—get together and try to do something constructive, the Government should do what they can to help, within reason.

I gather that the new company—Industrial Experience Projects Ltd.—has agreed to sponsor a project-based work experience scheme, under the youth opportunities programme. The hon. Gentleman said that he thought that it would go ahead in April. I hope that it will be as soon as that. I have been led to believe that it would probably 1085 be the autumn, but we need not quibble over the date at the moment. I gather that a "fit" is going on in one respect, but there is a "non-fit" in another respect.

I cannot reiterate enough my admiration of all the sponsors who have got together and tried to organise a scheme. It is the sort of ethos of life that I wish to promote and that the Government would wish to promote, because we believe that individuals or companies are better at doing things than Governments are on their behalf. I applaud everything that they have done. I hope that the matter will come to a successful fruition, provided that the companies understand the obvious constraints which we are under with regard to taxpayers' money. I am sure that they will understand them.

1086 I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising this important matter. It is important not just to him as the constituency Member. If we get the scheme going, it would be an example which other parts of the country could follow. I hope that the hon. Gentleman realises how grateful I am to him that he has raised the matter. At the beginning of his speech he talked about the fallow 'fifties and the swinging 'sixties. I thought that my speech could not live up to that alliteration. It has not, but I hope that he realises how sincere I am in reacting to the thoughts that he has put to the House this evening.