§ 2.51 p.m.
§ Lord HATCH of LUSBYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, in view of the speech made by the Minister of State at the Department of Employment in this House on 20th June, they believe that the Budget does not create unemployment or employment.
368The MINISTER of STATE, DEPARTMENT of EMPLOYMENT (The Earl of Gowrie)Yes, my Lords; as I pointed out in my speech, the Budget is part of the Government's strategy to restore incentives, encourage efficiency and create a climate in which industry and commerce can create more real jobs. What happens to employment depends partly on the response of the private sector to the new opportunities it is given and partly on responsible pay bargaining.
§ Lord HATCH of LUSBYMy Lords, may I ask the noble Earl the Minister whether he still stands by the statement that he made in col. 1089 in the Official Report of 20th June:
— one cannot say that a Budget is creating unemployment or employment"?May I ask him, further, whether he is aware that the organisation Cambridge Econometrics has stated in its report that it estimates that the number of available jobs could shrink by 250,000 as a result of the Budget and that, of the cuts, 100,000 will be in the Civil Service and local government?
The Earl of GOWRIEMy Lords, I certainly stand by my earlier remarks. I am not quite sure whether the noble Lord is trying to elicit information or is trying to make a point on a difference of interpretation in economic strategy. I refer him to remarks, which I quoted in both my speeches, made by the right honourable gentlemen Mr. Joel Barnett and Mr. Healey, which seemed to be making the exact point that I was myself trying to make.
§ Lord HARMAR-NICHOLLSMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that it depends on whether you look at this in the short term or the long term? In the long term, high taxation and the extension of bureaucracy proves to increase unemployment. From 1929 onwards, when that policy has been applied by various Governments, that has been the result. When other Governments have adopted the opposite line, of reducing taxation and minimising bureaucracy, unemployment has come down. So if it is the short term that the noble Lord who asked the Question has in mind, it may well be that he wants to get his propaganda point in before the effect is proved to be otherwise.
The Earl of GOWRIEMy Lords, I am feeling slightly like the tennis net between my noble friend and the noble Lord, Lord Hatch of Lusby. However, I do not think this is quite the proper time to go into the issues of the debate, though I would certainly agree with my noble friend that one must look on Budget strategy as having a slightly longer-term effect than three weeks.
§ Lord GLADWYNMy Lords, may I ask the Leader of the House whether he believes that this is a matter which can be suitably dealt with in a Question and Answer period? Is it not really something which can be dealt with only by an Unstarred Question or a Short Debate?
The Earl of GOWRIEMy Lords, I agree with the noble Lord, but I must, of course, in all politeness, answer the Questions that I am asked.
§ Lord WELLS-PESTELLMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether it is not a fact that, as a result of the cut-backs in local authority services which will be brought about by the Budget, there is going to be serious unemployment caused in local government building, resulting in increased unemployment generally?
The Earl of GOWRIEMy Lords, employment in the public sector will not increase at the rate that it has previously been increasing. I quite agree with that.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, may I ask a question which is not critical of the Minister? I am not entering into this controversy, but may I ask him this question, which may be helpful to the Government and to the country? Were we getting the truth about the number of unemployed? Is it not likely that a vast number of people are "moonlighting"; that is, taking odd jobs and earning something while, at the same time, they are registered as unemployed? Is that not possible?