Unemployment: Women (Hansard, 26 June 1984)

§ Lord Dean of Beswick
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

The Minister of State, Privy Council Office, and Minister for the Arts (The Earl of Gowrie)
My Lords, the figures for unemployed female claimants of all ages in the United Kingdom were 323,800 in 1979 and 923.300 in 1984. I will, with your Lordships' permission, circulate the full information in the Official Report.

§ Lord Dean of Beswick
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Minister for that reply. Does it not indicate that, in the timescale that he has quoted, 781 unemployment of women in this country has trebled? Is is not a paradox that under the first woman Prime Minister of this country more women have been made unemployed than since before the war? Taking into account that since the war women have become in many families a major factor in earning money to advance the quality of life for their families and themselves, is this not an unacceptable trend? Can the Minister tell us when this trend will be reversed?

The Earl of Gowrie
My Lords, no, I cannot say when the trend will be reversed because the Government do not accept, as the noble Lord and his party suggest, that the Government can control the overall level of unemployment in this country. I may say that the noble Lord's party. when in office, were singularly unsuccessful in putting that into effect.
There are two things that I think are encouraging. One is that women's unemployment remains considerably lower than men's—that is to say, 9.4 per cent. compared with 15.6 per cent.—and the other is that the latest MSC labour market quarterly report shows an increase in part-time employment accounting for the increase in total employment. Every 24 hours some 20,000 find jobs in the labour market. As I said in answer to a supplementary question on an earlier occasion in your Lordships' House, Britain has a very high proportion of its labour force in work.

§ Baroness Seear
My Lords, does the noble Minister not agree that those figures greatly understate the extent of female unemployment because a very great many women are not entitled to benefit and therefore do not register, and others have given up all hope of getting a job? Would the Minister also confirm the possibility that in view of the desirable increase in part-time employment—and we are glad to hear that it is increasing in some areas—the Government should take the lead in finding ways within the Civil Service and in encouraging ways in local authorities to employ more women on a part-time basis, particularly in basic, domiciliary services provided by local authorities, which have been cut at a time when they need to be greatly extended?

The Earl of Gowrie
My Lords, I am most interested in the noble Baroness's supplementary question. This very morning, as a Civil Service Minister, I have been working on this issue of part-time posts which, not exclusively but largely, involve women. It is not an easy issue. Many of the services required by the public need full-time workers. However, we are seeing that wherever possible we devolve jobs to people on a part-time basis.

§ Baroness Lockwood
My Lords, will the Minister also agree that the figures he has given are an underestimate of the number of women unemployed because such a high proportion of women are in part-time employment? Even if they were to register as unemployed, they would not be entitled to benefit because of their part-time status. Is the Minister prepared to look at this? Will the Government recognise that part-time employment must qualify for unemployment benefit?

The Earl of Gowrie
My Lords, the answer to the latter point would an unequivocal, "No". It would, in my view, be an insane thing for the Government to do. Employment is employment, and unemployment is unemployment. We are highly grateful for any employment we have at the moment in the Western economies, part-time of full-time.

Viscount St. Davids
My Lords, as the noble Earl has stated that the number of those in the workforce is increasing, particularly the number of women, would it not be of interest if, besides giving the number of women unemployed at various dates, he also gave, in order to compare them similar figures for women who have obtained jobs during that period?

The Earl of Gowrie
My Lords, not for the first time I am grateful for the perceptions about the very fundamental and, in my judgment, permanent changes that have taken place in the labour market, which have been drawn to the attention of the House by the noble Viscount. In fact, there is no evidence that women are suffering disproportionately from the problem that affects everyone. The employment figures show that in June 1983 the number of men in work was 88 per cent. of the number working in June 1979. The corresponding figure for women working full time—this includes the part-time issue—was 90 per cent., while the number working part-time has actually increased in real terms. While that is of no satisfaction to women who are seeking jobs and who are not able to find them, the overall picture is not as gloomy as the Question suggests.

§ Baroness Lockwood
My Lords, I wonder whether the Minister misunderstood my question. The point I was making was to ask whether the Government are prepared to recognise that women who have been working part-time and have become unemployed are, as unemployed, entitled to a benefit even if they are prepared to take up only part-time employment if part-time employment is available.

The Earl of Gowrie
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness for her point of clarification. It is a little wide of the original Question. I shall look at it and let her know.

§ Lord Dean of Beswick
My Lords, while taking account of the points that the Minister has made in reply to various questions, may I ask him whether he is aware that, as a result of the economic situation and of unemployment among men, in innumerable households the woman has become the breadwinner? Despite the figures that he has given, the number of women becoming unemployed is increasing substantially. Does he not appreciate that where this happens and the woman who is the breadwinner is made unemployed, we are creating on a still increasing scale families of despair? When is this going to alter?

The Earl of Gowrie
My Lords, I have two points to make about this. The first is the statistical one. I am aware of the aridity of statistics in relation to individual suffering. However, from this Dispatch Box one has to look at the picture overall. There is no statistical 783 evidence that women are suffering disproportionately. In fact, on balance, they have done a little better than men. That, as I say, is no consolation for those seeking work and unable to find it.
The other point is that the vast majority of people are in work. Those people who are in work, if they really care about unemployment, must look to their own condition and their own good fortune in terms of wage demands and the rest if their concern for those who are out of work is to be meaningful.

§ The Earl of Lauderdale
My Lords, will my noble friend not agree that the current very sad coal strike threatens employment in many parts of the economy through the blockage of supplies to power stations and steelworks, and that it is therefore incumbent on everyone to try to get a solution to it?

The Earl of Gowrie
My Lords, I agree wholly with my noble friend. There are knock-on effects for people working in traditional areas of female employment. The fact is that, each day the coal strike continues, jobs go out of the economy, not simply for the duration of the coal strike but permanently.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, the noble Earl has answered questions very skilfully. Is it nonetheless true that female unemployment has increased more quickly than male unemployment since 1979? Is it not the case that well over 3 million men and women are out of work at present? Will the noble Earl be good enough to tell the House, coal strike or no coal strike, what positive and constructive steps the Government are taking to alleviate the serious employment problem?

The Earl of Gowrie
My Lords, as I have said on many occasions, the only way in which any Government can create permanent sustainable employment is for this country to become more competitive both internationally and domestically. It is to that end that the Government's policies are precisely directed. Anything else would be purely short term, as the record of the Labour Government demonstrates.

§ Lord Jacques
My Lords, will the Minister bear in mind that there is a contrary view? There are certain things that need doing in this country, and it is better to do them when we have people unemployed than when we have full employment.

The Earl of Gowrie
My Lords, I would be the first to agree that much needs to be done in this country. Usually, at this point in questions about unemployment, there are suggestions that the Government should put more money into capital expenditure. However, in relation to the original Question on the Order Paper, there are very few female jobs in most large-scale capital construction projects.

§ Baroness Seear
My Lords, is the Minister not a Minister in a department that is trying to encourage women into non-traditional jobs?

The Earl of Gowrie
My Lords, yes. We are trying to encourage people to get the basic training to allow them to have a far wider series of choices than did their predecessors. That, as I think the noble Baroness will be aware, is a general and encouraging trend in the economy. Young men and women have a greater range of choice if they get such training. That is why training is so important.

§ Lord Leatherland
My Lords, does the Minister not think that it would be good idea for the Government to promote a campaign in favour of marriage, and then the men could keep them?

The Earl of Gowrie
My Lords, I am not quite clear of the point that the noble Lord, Lord Leatherland, is making. Sometimes, from that corner of the House, there come suggestions that the overall employment picture would be better if women did not go out to work. That is the view that I have consistently and from personal experience resisted.

§ Baroness Ewart-Biggs
My Lords, will the Minister say whether there are any opportunities for job-sharing among women? Many must be well situated in terms of family responsibilities to take up any such opportunity.

The Earl of Gowrie
My Lords, when I was a Minister at the Department of Employment I looked carefully at opportunities for job-sharing. They exist, and as a Minister in the Civil Service, I have tried to encourage them. I am afraid that job-sharing can only help, probably, at the margin. It might interest the noble Baroness to know that the overwhelming number of new jobs being created in the American economy are through very small businesses and through the franchising to small businesses of business arrangements created by larger businesses. It seems to me that this is a most profitable and encouraging direction, which we should follow.

1979	323,800
1980	396,400
1981	628,100
1982	737,000
1983	849,900
1984	923,300