HC Deb 01 May 1984 vol 59 cc182-4
11. Mr. Clay

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will estimate the percentage of people over the age of 50 years who were unemployed on 1 May 1983 and have since then obtained a job.

Mr. Alan Clark

After making allowance for the effect of the 1983 Budget provisions, it is broadly estimated that in January about one third of claimants who were unemployed and aged 50 and over in April 1983 had ceased to claim benefit. The reasons why people cease to claim are not recorded.

Mr. Clay

Surely the Minister's answer demonstrates the true state of affairs that lies behind the empty propaganda that we have heard over the past 12 months from the Government Benches about an economic recovery. Two thirds of those aged 50 and over who were unemployed a year ago are still unemployed. What does the Minister think about someone over 50 years of age who is employed by a privately owned, opencast mine in Durham and is paid £25 a week for 12-hour shifts seven days a week? Does he agree that that form of vicious exploitation is increasingly the only opportunity for work that is open to those in the category that we are discussing? Is the Minister not ashamed that he has created this pool of cheap labour?

Mr. Clark

The figure that the hon. Gentleman has quoted for someone working seven days a week at an opencast mine in Durham seems to be dubious in the extreme, although I am not questioning his good faith in putting it to the House. Plainly, it is a matter for the employee and his employer and has nothing to do with the Government. The position of those in the labour market aged 50 and over is certainly a matter for disquiet. The best solution is for employers to re-examine, against a background of rising economic activity, their recruitment practices so as not inadvertently to exclude the special skills and experience of these applicants.

Mr. Rowe

Is my hon. Friend aware that one of the best ways of helping this age group to return to some type of employment is to assist with self-employment? In my constituency the local enterprise agency is having considerable difficulty in meeting the demand for enterprise allowances to assist those people. Will my hon. Friend provide encouragement by increasing the supply of enterprise allowance money?

Mr. Clark

My hon. Friend is right. Applicants in that age group are among the most enterprising and successful at taking advantage of the scheme. A question on the enterprise allowance is on the Order Paper. I have good news to report to the House at this stage, and I am sure that my hon. Friend will be satisfied with what I shall say.

Mr. Leighton

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the views of the chairman of the MSC that people made redundant at 50 or over have virtually no chance of employment? In those circumstances, does the hon. Gentleman not believe that the very least that a civilised society should do is to pay a long-term supplementary benefit to the long-term unemployed over 50? That measure would cost just £90 million. Will the Government do that?

Mr. Clark

I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's pessimism about the prospects of that category of claimant. As I told the House in my initial answer, the number of claimants has been reduced by one third in a year. The hon. Gentleman is right in saying that the cost of extending long-term supplementary benefit to those people would be about £90 million. The application of resources is always a difficult matter to decide, and it must be evaluated.