§ 3.58 p.m.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Energy (The Earl of Avon)My Lords, with the leave of the House, perhaps I may now repeat a Statement being made by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Defence in another place. The Statement reads as follows:
"With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I will make a statement on the participation of the armed forces in the Government's Youth Training Scheme.
316 "I have been considering the role of the armed forces in the Government's programme to provide training and work experience for unemployed school-leavers. The high quality of the training provided by our armed forces has convinced me that they should play a part. I therefore propose to make available some 5,200 places for the young unemployed volunteering for such opportunities which will be on the same basis as the Youth Training Scheme. The precise number of places available in the first year will depend on the number of applications and the capacity of the services' training organisation. The young people will volunteer to join one of the services on a 12-month engagement, part of which will be spent in formal training and the remainder in work experience. All volunteers will receive the same basic training as regular service men and women, and some will go on to learn skills and trades. All applicants for the scheme will be volunteers. will have to satisfy existing entry standards, and will be able to leave at any time on 14 days' notice.
"They will be servicemen and servicewomen, and in all but a few respects will qualify for the same benefits as single regulars and under the same disciplines. They will receive, as will youngsters joining civilian employers in the scheme, an allowance of £25 per week. I have decided that a deduction from this will be made for food and accommodation of £10 per week.
"The Ministry of Defence will receive the same subvention as civil employers. As the YTS volunteers will pay less than the normal service food and accommodation charge, my department will contribute about £1 million to subsidise this lower deduction.
"In order to give effect to these proposals, I shall be laying before the House Statutory Instruments to amend the appropriate service regulations. I hope that the scheme may be in operation before September this year.
"Mr. Speaker, I am sure the House will applaud the willingness of the armed services to devote some of their training skills for the benefit of young people. I recommend the scheme to the House."
My Lords, that ends the Statement.
§ Lord BishopstonMy Lords, the House will be grateful to the Minister for having repeated the Statement made in another place. A few questions may be relevant at the moment, although the House will have to await the Statutory Instruments, when they come later. May I stress, first of all, that my noble friends and I are not against young unemployed people being given a sense of purpose and being willing to accept some degree of discipline so that they are ready to meet the demands of a working life. That is very important to those who are jobless.
Many, I presume, will question whether this may be the best way to achieve it—it is one way—as it introduces some aspects which are not necessarily helpful to civilian life if those concerned do not wish to opt for a career in the forces at the end of the 12-month period. Will the Minister tell us what consultations have taken place with the MSC on this 317 matter, and with what result? Will he also tell us whether the MSC will be involved? Can we be told the full cost of the scheme, and whether the MSC resources generally will be cut, with the reductions being made elsewhere? Also, although it is called a voluntary scheme, will the Minister ensure that there will be no pressure put on the young unemployed people to accept it at the expense of other benefit?
The rates of pay and deductions have been given, and we are grateful for the details provided in the Statement. Will there be a gratuity at the end of the period such as other members of the armed forces may expect for a period of 12 months or even less? This may assist the youngsters in getting a start in civilian life later. Also, without being unduly critical, is this scheme a reflection on the success of other youth training schemes and of the reluctance of some employers to co-operate in them? The Minister will be aware, of course, that 50 per cent. of school-leavers have no job prospects, and some will say that this is another way of reducing the figures of the unemployed without necessarily ensuring a job at the end. I wonder whether the Government have considered an alternative scheme, or another scheme, which would give unemployed young people a chance to join, say, the industrial Civil Service on the same or a similar basis, where the training may be of greater use later on.
Finally, the House will have noted that the Statement has come from the Secretary of State for Defence, and not from the Secretary of State for Employment. While we recognise that it is important to reduce the number of unemployed—in reality, I believe, it is nearly 4 million now—it is important that we have a policy generally which is a comprehensive effort by all Government departments to rejuvenate our economy and provide everyone with a sense of purpose in the national interest.
Lord HuntMy Lords, I am privileged to have been invited by our colleagues on the Liberal Benches to respond to this Statement on their behalf as well as on behalf of my colleagues on this Bench. In thanking the Minister for repeating this Statement, on behalf of the Alliance I should like to give it a qualified welcome which could, depending on the answers which I hope the Minister will be able to give to my questions, become a more enthusiastic welcome. It is obviously true that this scheme will do nothing to strike at the root causes of unemployment, but it seems to us to be an entirely legitimate and acceptable option to offer to young people in the Youth Training Scheme. I believe it is an option which will appeal to a great many young people, and particularly to those many who not only accept but enjoy structured programmes.
The qualifications that I have are subject to the replies which I hope the Minister will be able to give to my questions. The Statement refers to there being available 5,200 places, at any rate in the first instance. Could the Minister give an assurance that the number will be carefully restricted to around that figure in order to obviate the burden that, as I see it, would otherwise be imposed on the fighting services, and also to invalidate the accusation that has been made that this is simply back-door conscription?
Secondly, the Statement refers to the opportunity to join one of the services. Would the Minister say 318 whether this means it is only one of the services which is going to operate the scheme, or will young people have the opportunity to be trained in all three of the services? If so, do all three of the services welcome this commitment? Thirdly, could the Minister give an assurance that the young trainees will not be trained in any sensitive or operational areas? Will training be confined to Great Britain, and not include Northern Ireland? Fourthly, would the Government consider extending this opportunity by offering training in the police services, with the obvious benefit that this would have to community relations?
Finally, is the Minister aware of references that were made by a Back-Bench spokesman from the Government Benches in another place, speaking on the seven o'clock programme on BBC's Radio 4, when he spoke of the services acting as "probation officers manque"? Would he agree that that was a singularly inept reference, even though he made it in a negative sense? It will be inaccurate and insulting to the prospective young trainees themselves, who are not, in all but a very few cases, likely to have been before a court; and secondly, it is inappropriate and unwelcome to make a comparison of that sort with the totally different work and skills of the probation service.
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, I am grateful to both noble Lords for their response. I hope I may be able to persuade the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, that his qualified welcome can in fact become a generous one. The noble Lord, Lord Bishopston, asked about the MSC. Yes, they were indeed consulted. Perhaps I might explain about the money. The Ministry of Defence, in common with civil employers participating in the scheme, will receive a subvention from within the cost of the YTS programme as a whole of approximately £17 million if the 5,200 come in in a full year. That is to cover the cost of training and the payment of £25 per week allowance. Given the decision of the Ministry of Defence to reduce food and accommodation charges, some costs will be borne by the MOD—possibly in the nature of £1 million, as I said earlier.
The noble Lord, Lord Hunt, asked about the burden of training placed on the regular army. The whole point of the 5,200 is that that is the figure which the armed forces themselves at the moment believe they could fit into their training programmes. Therefore, that has been the guideline: they themselves have put forward this figure, and it has in no way been imposed upon them. I honestly do not think we can describe 5,200 as backdoor conscription, because, of course, conscription would involve figures of some 200,000.
About the services themselves, all three services are taking people and, again, the vacancies are split up on the same basis, as I said in the earlier reply. The Royal Navy is anticipating to take up 500, the Army 3,700 and the RAF the balance of 1,000. So far as sensitive areas are concerned, it is not intended to send these personnel to any sensitive areas, and we shall be particularly guided by the fact that people under 17½ who are in the Army are not normally allowed out of the United Kingdom, anyway. I am not sure about the police service, but I will certainly bring that aspect to the attention of my right honourable friend the Home Secretary.
319 I fully agree with the noble Lord about the radio excerpt which he quoted. I find it totally misleading and very strange, because the armed services are at the moment very qualified people, there is virtually a waiting list to get in, and only the best are accepted. I think I can say to both noble Lords that it is not only the Ministry of Defence that is making a scheme available. At the moment, a lot of organisations are considering a scheme or are offering places under the Youth Training Scheme. These include the Royal Mint, the Ordnance Survey, off-shore supplies offices and some 12 to 15 other organisations, so there will be a follow-up outside the Ministry of Defence. I hope that I have answered most of the questions put by noble Lords.
§ Lord ShinwellMy Lords, may I ask the noble Earl whether this so-called voluntary scheme is an admission by the Government that there is not the remotest chance of solving the problem of unemployment among young people? May I ask him therefore why the Government describe it as a voluntary scheme? Is it voluntary, when young people who are unable to find employment are forced to accept any opportunity which would, I hope, provide them—although this has not been mentioned—with food and accommodation? I want to ask further—we have had no details—who will train these young people? I ask that because of my knowledge of what happened when I was associated with the War Office and the Ministry of Defence.
Do we have regulars available for that purpose? Is the noble Earl aware that to train one volunteer will require, in one way or another, three or four regulars? Do we have them? I also want to know whether these so-called volunteers will be provided with food and accommodation, where the accommodation will be and who is to pay for it. Are these people to pay for it out of the derisory sum which they are to receive, or will the Government provide it all? Finally—I ask this question because I realise that there are so many details to go into—are we likely to have a debate on this very important topic?
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, of course, this is not basically a scheme to solve unemployment. It is a scheme of training for youth today. It is a voluntary scheme because, as I explained in an earlier answer to the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, there are a number of other opportunities open to these young people which are being offered at the moment. Therefore, in no way are they forced to accept this scheme. The noble Lord asked who will do the training. The point about the 5,200 vacancies is that this is a capacity which the Army believe they can absorb into their present training structure. As regards food and accommodation, I said in my opening remarks that the total sum per week is £25, out of which the Army will be deducting £10 for food and accommodation. The volunteers will also be fully equipped and clothed by the Army. So far as a future debate is concerned, there will be an Instrument before the House so there will be an opportunity, if anybody prays against it, for a debate.
§ Lord Boyd-CarpenterMy Lords, will my noble friend allow me to give unqualified support for this intelligent and practical scheme and, at the same time, to ask him two questions as to its operation? The first question is as to whether, within the limits of numbers to which my noble friend referred, the young persons concerned will have an opportunity to express a preference for which of the services they should join for training. Secondly, and almost by way of converse to that, in the event of this scheme being, as I think it may well be, over-subscribed, will the services themselves have power to discriminate and select between one applicant and another?
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, details of the training itself have not yet been finished. In answer to my noble friend, I think it best to say that it would depend on the capacity of the training organisations in the chosen fields, when the youngsters apply, and on their own aptitudes. In the RAF, it may include for instance, MT driving, typists, administrative clerks, painters and finishers. In the Royal Navy it is hoped to train some youngsters as communicators, dental assistants or even medical assistants, and in the Army there is scope for training in light engineering. So that anybody will be able to opt for training. But, of course, the vacancies will be very limited in each area.
§ Baroness GaitskellMy Lords—
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, may I comment on what the noble Earl has just said and say that this is not an answer to unemployment? We can understand this, because this Conservative Government—
§ Lord Boyd-CarpenterMy Lords, is this a question?
§ Lord Molloy—have no answer whatsoever to unemployment. Would the noble Earl agree that what made this scheme possible—and I beg noble Lords to listen to this—was the policy of Her Majesty's Government, which has thrown nearly 3 million out of work and cannot find gainful employment for a large proportion of the youth of this country? If it were not for the massive failure of this Government—
§ Lord Molloy—to provide employment for youth in the first place, this scheme would be of no use whatsoever. But there were alternatives which the Government could have used. Is the noble Earl aware that the Prime Minister herself turned down a scheme—
The Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Earl Ferrers)My Lords, I wonder whether I may interrupt the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, because he will know that on a Statement it is customary to ask questions in order to elicit information about the Statement. He really is in danger—I say this with the greatest respect—of turning this into a debate on unemployment, which is a further subject, and which really is inopportune.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, I fully appreciate what the I noble Earl has said, and I know his embarrassment 321 about the unemployment situation. But may I ask the noble Earl this question? There were alternatives, and may I ask whether they were considered? I know that one was considered and rejected by the Prime Minister. That was the industrial Civil Service scheme, under which unemployed youth could have been absorbed into the industrial Civil Service to learn skills which would be of use to them afterwards. But was there not also a possibility of encouraging our youth to join our Territorial Army in a similar capacity? In the Territorial Army, they could have followed those other schemes and, at any moment when there was a change of Government, and when they could be provided with gainful employment, those years or months of training might have been useful to them when they returned to civilian life. Therefore, would the Minister agree—
Earl FerrersMy Lords, I really must interrupt the noble Lord, Lord Molloy. If I may quote the relevant part of the Companion to the Standing Orders, it says this:
Ministerial statements are made for the information of the House, and, although brief comments and questions for clarification are allowed, such statements should not be made the occasion for an immediate debate, unless the House so order".On behalf of the House, I have asked the noble Lord to restrict his remarks to questions for clarification upon the Statement, and I am sure that it will be appreciated if he would do so.
§ Lord MolloyThen, my Lords, may I ask one final question? Can the Minister say when these young men who enter this scheme will be returned to normal gainful employment, to the real benefit of our nation?
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, the noble Lord will not be surprised if I say that I disagree with many of the opinions which he has expressed. The noble Lord asked about the schemes turned down by the Prime Minister. I have no knowledge of these, but I read out the names of some of the other organisations which are considering a scheme. These were listed by my honourable friend the Minister of State for the Treasury, Mr. Hayhoe, in a Written Answer in Hansard of 12th April.
The noble Lord asked about the Territorial Army. We would of course encourage that in every way, but I should remind the noble Lord that the Territorial Army is part-time. There is little, therefore, that it could do to help with youth unemployment. However, may I say (slightly out of the side of my mouth this matter) that I very much hope that this kind of scheme will encourage boys who are keen on the army to continue afterwards in the Territorial Army. That is very much one of the hopes that we have for the scheme. So far as the length of time is concerned, this is a scheme for one year.
§ Lord RochesterMy Lords, I notice that in the Written Answer to which the noble Earl has just referred the Government set out, among other organisations, Ministry of Defence civilian establishments, including the Royal Dockyards and the Royal Ordnance Factories, which are considering offering places under the Youth Training Scheme. May I ask the noble Earl whether the Government are satisfied 322 with the overall response to the scheme by the Civil Service, local government and other organisations outside the private sector of industry?
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, I am sure that the noble Lord will realise that he is going outside the scope of this Statement, but so far as the Ministry of Defence is concerned I can say that once the decision had been made they bent over backwards to make it a practical and sensible scheme.
§ Lord BishopstonMy Lords, may I ask the Minister to reply to two questions that I put to him, which I think he overlooked? One was about a gratuity at the end of the period of service. I also asked the Minister for an assurance that those who are unemployed will not be pressurised, at the expense of their benefits, to go into this or any other scheme.
§ The Earl of AvonMy Lords, I rather hoped I had answered the noble Lord's question about pressure. There will be no pressure and no enforcement at all. And there will be no gratuity.