Unemployment Figures: Trends (Hansard, 19 February 1986)

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

§ The Secretary of State for Employment (Lord Young of Graffham)
My Lords, the latest unemployment figures are disappointing. Rises in the seasonally adjusted figures for the past two months have followed falls in the previous three months. However, it is too soon to conclude that the recent broadly flat trend has ended.

§ Lord Dean of Beswick
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord the Minister for that reply. However, will he not agree that since the noble Lord's own stewardship commenced at the Department of Employment, one conclusion that can be drawn from the latest set of figures issued by his department is that the number of people unemployed has increased by over 130,000, and that perhaps the most dangerous and relentless trend is the increased number of people who can be classed as long-termed unemployed? Is not this one of the key figures within those latest statistics, and can the Minister tell us when he expects that particular figure to start falling?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
No, my Lords, I am afraid that I cannot agree with the noble Lord's conclusion. I am of course the Secretary of State for Employment and, as is well known, the number of those employed in jobs since March 1983 has risen by 711,000 up to September 1985. We have been living through a period in which the workforce has been increasing; last year it increased by over 540,000. I very much hope that we are now entering a period in which the number of those wishing to take up jobs will not exceed the increase in the labour market.

§ Lord Alport
My Lords, of the 700,000 who have come into employment during the last period, can my noble friend the Minister say how many are in full-time employment and how many are in part-time employment?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, I do not think that we break down the figures in that way, but I should remind your Lordships' House that the surveys which we have carried out have shown that those in part-time work prefer to be in part-time work. There is nothing wrong or disgraceful about part-time jobs; to the contrary, we are moving into a period in which part-time jobs will become more and more evident, and you can increase earnings from part-time jobs. I shall not agree with any criticism of those who are happy working part-time and gainfully employed in so doing.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the period about which he is talking is not the past few months? There has been a massive increase in unemployment for four years, year in and year out. Is he not aware that all sections of this House as well as in another place are becoming a little tired of these rancid answers and excuses? The president of the CBI has condemned them, as has the TUC, and I think that most people in the House would also condemn them. I appeal to the Government: let us have no more excuses; let us have action.

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, the last thing that I shall ever offer this House is excuses. Responsibility must lie where it needs to lie, and that is with people. It is people who create jobs. As regards the CBI, perhaps I may remind your Lordships' House that the CBI themselves have forecast that 460,000 new jobs will come into existence over the next two years. Again, I would remind your Lordships' House that not only are we creating more jobs than any other country in the European Community, but that for two years running we have created more jobs than the rest of the Community put together. Furthermore, last month unemployment in Germany increased by 250,000, I feel that we must look at a world in which unemployment is a European problem and not be insular. We must recognise the great advances which are being made by the British public in dealing with that problem.

§ Baroness Nicol
My Lords, can the noble Lord the Minister say whether the Government have any plans to increase the level of benefit for the long-term unemployed to the supplementary benefit level? Is the noble Lord aware that at the moment the difference is something like £12 a week, and that this can mean life or death to a man with a family? Have the Government any plans in this direction?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, I am very well aware of the difference between in-work pay and out-of-work pay. It is a matter which greatly concerns me because I am concerned to see growth in employment in this country. We are sponsoring some very interesting pilot schemes into the long-term unemployed and ways in which we can help the long-term unemployed. I hope to be able to give informa- 615 tion on the schemes in due course. I shall do anything to help the long-term unemployed obtain work, and I hope that in the not too distant future we shall be able to report on those pilot schemes.

§ Lord Nugent of Guildford
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that on this side of the House we all recognise that he has done a massive job in increasing employment in this country but that he has been struggling against the tide? Is my noble friend also aware that his reference to the position in other European countries reminds us that this is not only an English problem, it is an international problem? What help is the European Commission giving in this respect by way of advice or grants which may help solve not only our problem here but the problem in Europe as a whole?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his remarks. However, perhaps I may say that the credit for the increase in jobs lies not with the Government but with those who create jobs: the people themselves. As regards the European Community, we have made advances in this respect, and last year, starting with a March meeting at which my right honourable friend the Prime Minister took the lead, we persuaded the Commission to look very carefully at the compliance cost, in employment and business terms, of new regulations that they are bringing out. We believe they have actually harmed the growth in employment, if not reduced it. I should remind your Lordships that the United States of America is a labour market of over 200 million people and so is Europe, and in 10 years the United States created 22 million jobs and Europe lost 2 million jobs. Those are the problems which those of us who live in Europe are facing.

§ Baroness Seear
My Lords, although the noble Lord has told us that we have created more jobs than the other nations in the European Community, will he tell the House how our percentage of unemployed persons compares with the percentage in those other countries in order to complement the figure?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, I am quite happy to put in the Library of the House a schedule of figures. They are calculated on different bases. Our figures are higher than most countries in the European Community, though not as high as some. Our rate of employment is increasing at a slower rate than others. It is difficult to make comparisons, but in the 1970s we had under-employment; we do not have that today. We are creating new jobs and this time we all believe the jobs will last.

§ Lord Alport
My Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether he is aware that nobody is denigrating a part-time employment, which is very important to those who are able to undertake it? Would he tell me how many of those 700,000 are men, who are normally the breadwinners of a family, and how many are women, who go out to work to add to the family income if there is a possibility that they should be able to do so?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, I regret that it is slightly off the particular Question to look at the 616 difference between full-time and part-time jobs, but I am not in the slightest bit ashamed of the answer, which really is that of course many of the part-time jobs go to women. We should be very pleased at that. Of all adults of employable age in the United Kingdom, no less than 65 per cent. are in paid employment. The figure for France and Germany is 61 per cent.; in Italy it is 54 per cent. The reason is simple: many more women in our society work, and all of us welcome that.

§ Lord Glenamara
My Lords, the noble Lord told us last week that he had recently visited the North-East of England. Is he aware that in many parts of the North-East unemployment is now higher than it was in the 1930s? In South Tyneside, for example, it is 24 per cent.; and male unemployment in some parts of the North-East is 40 per cent. The noble Earl, Lord Stockton, called attention to it recently. The noble Lord's noble friend sitting on his right told the House yesterday that we are advancing on every front. It is a bit difficult to appreciate that in the North-East of England. We have had no riots in the North-East, but what must we do to call attention to the plight of the North-East of England? When are the Government going to take notice and do something to help that part of the country?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, so far as I am concerned, when one man or one woman is unemployed the rate of unemployment is 100 per cent. for that individual, and it concerns me for each individual whether they live in the North-East or the North-West, or in the South. But we have to notice that the world has moved on: that no longer are we the world's largest supplier of bulk steel: no longer are we the world's largest provider of shipping; no longer do we have the same proportion of industrial output as we had in the early years of the century. We have to replace that with the new industries, and we have to encourage jobs to grow where they will naturally grow. The Government have long been seized of the difficulties of the North-East, and will continue to be so. We announced only last week an inner-city initiative to help part of the North-East. We have city action teams. I must tell your Lordships' House that each time I go to the Newcastle-Gateshead area—and I go three, four or five times a year—I come back encouraged by the progress I see being made there.

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, the noble Lord said that he found the unemployment figures disappointing. Is he aware that we on this side of the House, and the country generally, believe that the unemployment figures are appalling, not disappointing? Does he realise that since January 1985 the long-term trend has been very much upwards, and that there are 86.000 more people unemployed this January than there were last January? There are 1,800.000 more people unemployed now than there were in 1979, and 41 per cent. of them have been unemployed for over one year. That is indeed an appalling situation. Will the noble Lord tell the House what he is going to do in Cabinet between now and the Budget to persuade the Government that they should put the matter of getting unemployment down before individual tax cuts?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, I think unemployment is too serious a matter to play games with words. I said "disappointing" because we have had two months of increasing figures following a period of six months in which unemployment was flat, and indeed in the last three months was going down. Of course those of us on this side of your Lordships' House are well aware of unemployment. Long-term unemployment is going up, of course: it has been going up every year since 1979, as it has been going up in every country in Europe, because long-term unemployment is part of the increase of unemployment generally.
No government have taken the steps that this Government have taken. Next year we shall be spending over £1 billion in the community programme, bringing help to over 300,000 people who have been out of work for one year. As I have already referred to in your Lordships' House this afternoon, we are having pilot schemes in nine areas, with most encouraging results as to work that will help with the long-term unemployed. But let me remind your Lordships' House that you will never, never cure long-term unemployment by building roads or by building infrastructures, because those projects use machines and trained and skilled people. There are other ways, and we are finding them.

§ Lord Gisborough
My Lords, in view of the fact that for every £1 extra spent by everybody in the country per week on British goods rather than foreign goods, 100,000 people are put into work, will my noble friend take steps to encourage the further purchase of British rather than foreign goods?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, I suspect that the answer to further employment in the manufacturing industry lies in the hands of those who are responsible for producing our own goods. It is not the Government's responsibility for goods to be produced of good design, and it is not the Government's responsibility for goods to be produced of good quality, or to time, or at the right price. That lies in the hands of manufacturing industry itself; and when we can produce the goods at the right time and at the right price then I suspect that we shall find more British goods sold at home.

§ Lord Rochester
My Lords, are the Government prepared to give consideration to the CBI's proposed building improvement programme designed on a costed basis to enable private contractors to give temporary employment to long-term unemployed in the areas worst affected by high unemployment?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer receives many representations from all sides of industry, including, of course, the CBI, and I have no doubt at all that he is giving serious thought to all of them.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, has the noble Lord read—

Noble Lords
Lord Stallard!

§ Lord Stallard
My Lords, will the noble Lord accept that nothing in his replies today will be of any consequence, or certainly will be of very little consequence, to the many thousands of unemployed youngsters and adults in the inner London area—the area about which he said just before Christmas that there was no problem? Since he has made that remark, unemployment has increased, particularly in Hackney, where it now stands at nearly 30 per cent. The noble Lord's complacency today, and his attempts to gloss presentation over these figures, will have made the situation much worse so far as those people faced with a really tragic situation are concerned. As he said, it is not a matter for playing about with words, but we want to know what action the Government are taking to do something about the situation in inner London.

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, the leader of Hackney Council said that the riots were caused by unemployed 14 to 18 year-olds. I replied that they should be at school until 16, and from next year would have a place in the YTS until they were 18. I stand by that remark and continue to stand by it. There is all the difference between the opportunities for young people in the North-East and the North-West and the opportunities for young people in the southern half of England, and that is entirely another matter.

§ Lord Diamond
My Lords, would the noble Lord be good enough to reconsider the answer he gave when I thought he was telling your Lordships that the employed numbers had increased every year since the Government took office?

A noble Lord
Rubbish!

§ Lord Diamond
That, indeed, would be rubbish, my Lords, if it were what the noble Lord said. I am giving him this opportunity to clarify the situation. Is it not the case that the numbers of employed fell by about l¾ million in the first two years, have recovered slightly but are still more than one million less than when the Government took office?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, the figures I gave were for the period 1983 onwards, not for the period before then.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, has the noble Lord read the Bank of England quarterly bulletin for last December, which states that, despite the figures given by the Government, the number of real jobs created since the last election is 24,000 and not 240,000, as has been claimed?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, that Bank of England quarterly endeavoured to equate part-time jobs with whole-time jobs, and therefore reduced the figures. I do not think that those who have a part-time job would like to see it taken away and given to another to equate them with whole-time jobs. I am concerned with those in employment and whether it he full-time or part-time it should be what the individual wants.