HC Deb 18 November 1986 vol 105 cc419-20
1. Mr. Dormand

asked the Paymaster General what were the numbers of persons unemployed for one year and two years, respectively, at May 1979 and the numbers at the latest available date.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Employment (Mr. John Lee)

On 5 April 1979, the closest date to May 1979 for which such an analysis is available, the numbers of unemployed registrants in the United Kingdom who had been unemployed for over one year and over two years respectively were 366,700 and 179,800. On 9 October 1986 the numbers of unemployed claimants were 1,341,000 and 844,500. Direct comparisons of unemployment by duration since 1979 are not possible because of changes in the way figures are collected.

Mr. Dormand

Those figures are a disgrace and an affront to society. They demonstrate more clearly than anything why the Government's economic policies are an utter failure. When will the Government realise what a devastating effect long-term unemployment has on a family? Will the hon. Gentleman give an assurance that when he talks about a reduction in unemployment, whether in his statements or in his speeches, he will identify the reduction in the long-term unemployed?

Mr. Lee

We are slowly winning the unemployment battle. The numbers are beginning to fall. In the latest quarter there was a fall of 7,000 in the number of long-term unemployed, compared with a rise of 25,000 a year ago.

Unemployment will not be helped by the sort of suggestion made recently by the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott), Mr. 1 per cent., with his famous training levy. Nothing would make matters worse.

Dame Jill Knight

Does my hon. Friend have figures for job vacancies during a similar period? Does he recognise that unless job vacancies are subtracted from the number of unemployed we cannot get a true picture of unemployment in Britain?

Mr. Lee

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. In the vast majority of areas vacancies are on the increase. Indeed, the figures announced last week show that the overall number of national vacancies was the highest since 1979.

Mr. Leadbitter

The Minister referred to the difficulties of making comparisons with 1979 because of the different methods of calculating unemployment. Does he accept that the Government know very well the basis of those changes in the calculation? For reasonable methods of comparison, would it be possible for him to place that figure in the Official Report, taking into account the changes that have been made by the Government?

Mr. Lee

A question on that matter will come later. The allegation that there have been 16 changes is misleading and exaggerated. Only six have a discernible effect, details of which were published in the Employment Gazette. Three were minor changes, two were changes in the method of compilation, four resulted from procedural changes for paying benefit and two were to correct inaccuracies.

It is not surprising that the Opposition are becoming increasingly rattled, depressed and dispirited with the unemployment figures and the national opinion polls moving against them.

Mr. Fallon

Will my hon. Friend confirm that unemployment in the north-east, for example, fell by 9,000 last month? Why do Opposition Members not recognise good news, or do they prefer high unemployment'?

Mr. Lee

My hon. Friend is absolutely right.

Ms. Richardson

Of the figures which the Minister gave in his initial reply, what percentage of women were unemployed at both dates? Will the Minister also give an estimate of the number of women who are unable to register because the Government want to remove them from the statistics but who are available for work?

Mr. Lee

I regret that I do not have the figures on women, but about 600,000 jobs were lost in manufacturing during the period of the previous Labour Government.