§ 4. Mr. William Hamiltonasked the Secretary of State for Scotland what new initiatives he has taken in the past 12 months to alleviate the problem of youth unemployment in Scotland.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Alexander Fletcher)We have announced the new youth training scheme, which will provide 12 months' education and training for all unemployed 16-year-olds from September 1983. The quality of places available under the youth opportunities programme has been improved. Information technology centres have been established to give unemployed young people training in the new technologies and we have introduced the young workers scheme to encourage employers to take on more young people as full-time employees.
§ Mr. HamiltonDespite cosmetic exercises, including the cooking of the figures by the Secretary of State for Employment, does the hon. Gentleman agree that youth unemployment and unemployment generally are going remorselessly upwards? Does he accept that nothing that the Government have done or intend to do will stop that trend? Does he recognise that the only long-term way to provide real jobs for these young people and others is to undertake massive public investment in housing, construction, communications and the rest?
§ Mr. FletcherEveryone is concerned about unemployment, especially among young people. That is why the 271 Government have taken the steps that I have mentioned. It is not public sector investment that is the main requirement but private sector investment in a healthy economy. The Government's steps to reduce inflation and interest rates are taking us in the right direction. There is nothing cosmetic about the youth training scheme. Employers who take on three additional trainees for every two recruited in the normal way will be eligible for a training grant of £1,850 for all the trainees. That provides real job opportunities for young people.
§ Mr. GrimondIs the Minister aware that boys and girls who are willing to undertake further training after leaving school are at a disadvantage compared with those who go into dead-end jobs? Will he investigate this problem in rural areas and ensure that the disadvantage is removed?
§ Mr. FletcherThat is not a new problem. Those staying on at school have always given up the immediate prospect of earning money in a job. If the right hon. Gentleman is referring to the £25 allowance, the Government agree that it could create problems. However, under the youth opportunities programme, there is no evidence to suggest that young people who would not normally do so have been leaving school just to take advantage of one of the schemes.
§ Mr. MylesWill my hon. Friend pay particular attention to the employment of young females in rural areas? Is he aware that if the young females stay, so will the young males?
§ Mr. FletcherI am always happy to accept my hon. Friend's advice, particularly on the rural economy and the habits of nature.
§ Mr. Harry EwingI am tempted to ask the Minister to comment on the old females in rural areas when the old males stay there.
Does the hon. Gentleman accept that there is growing concern that £1,850 is not sufficient to cover the total cost of the content in the new training programme for the mode A scheme? Does the hon. Gentleman also accept, in respect of the mode B scheme, that local authorities, both district and regional, will be required to provide the bulk of the training places? Will the Minister discuss with local authorities the real difficulties seen by the authorities in providing training places under the mode B scheme?
§ Mr. FletcherI am sorry that the hon. Gentleman is experiencing some difficulties of old age. The £1,850 is not insignificant when it is allocated to each training place. It helps employers to take on more people. That is why it has been introduced. Through the Manpower Services Commission we are in constant touch with local authorities about the training scheme. The budget for the YTS will meet the cost of the training that will be carried out in further education colleges. It is not intended that local authorities should bear that cost.