Unemployment (Hansard, 6 June 1988)

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, in the 10 months between May 1987 and March 1988 seasonally adjusted adult unemployment in the United Kingdom fell by nearly 447,000.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that reply. However, some economic organisations believe that although the figures are not fiddled, they are not necessarily accurate. For example, the Employment Institute claims that the figures relate to numbers receiving benefit and not to the numbers of unemployed.

Noble Lords
Question!

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is the Minister aware that according to the Government's published claims the reduction from May until March of this year was 504,000 whereas the Employment Institute says that it was not anywhere near that figure? These statements are giving rise to some concern. Will the Minister be gracious enough to explain precisely how the Government make their assessment and why the other economic institutions disagree with it?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, the Employment Institute, formerly known as the Charter for Jobs, has made a considerable living over the past few years in reporting that the Government's surveys of unemployment are always wrong. Recently, it published an economic report in which it drew attention to the fact that the labour force survey showed that to May 1987 unemployment fell by only 30,000. That is a very good example of selective reporting. One figure was taken of those who were looking for work within the last week and it was then quite correctly indicated that the labour force survey showed that numbers had only fallen by 30,000 in the past year. It ignored the fact that the number of those who were looking for work over the past month had fallen by far more. At that time the unemployment count was 2,950,000; according to the labour force survey it was only 2,790,000. There are many ways of measuring unemployment. The methods used by OECD and the comparable ways used in the United States show that unemployment in this country is under 9 per cent.

§ Lord Orr-Ewing
My Lords, can my noble friend remind the House of the forecasts that were being made this time last year by Her Majesty's Opposition? Is it not true that the Opposition were forecasting that unemployment would not fall but would substantially increase in the autumn?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, it is true that the Opposition were forecasting that all sorts of horrendous events would happen, including vastly increased unemployment. It is also true that they promised to reduce unemployment by some 50,000 a month. That was a promise which was not believed. We did not promise anything, but we are in fact achieving something.

§ Baroness Turner of Camden
My Lords, is it not a fact that during the past year there has been considerable tightening-up of the availability-for-work test? Has that had an effect upon the figures? 1103 Will the Minister be kind enough to say whether the tightening-up of the availability-for-work test has made a difference? Does he not agree that despite the fall in the numbers of unemployed, a figure of over 2 million is still far too many and that action should continue to be taken to reduce that unacceptable number?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, of course a figure of 2,455,000 is far too many. I am sure that everyone in your Lordships' House looks forward to that total being progressively reduced as time goes by. Indeed the best indicator is that over half a million jobs came into being in the year to last December. It is true that availability testing makes it more difficult for people to obtain benefit. However, I like to think that now it is at least as difficult to get benefit as it is perhaps to get a library ticket. There are about a dozen questions which have to be answered. If the test has prevented some people taking up benefit—if it has they are those who are not entitled to it. I doubt very much whether there are any cases of people entitled to benefit who do not in fact receive it. We have all read in the newspapers plenty of evidence concerning people not entitled to benefit who have received it. Availability testing is only intended to prevent that.

§ Lord Bruce-Gardyne
My Lords, can my noble friend inform your Lordships of the last occasion on which the seasonally adjusted unemployment register fell by 450,000 in nine months?

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, I am very glad to be able to assure my noble friend that, so far as we can tell, that is the fastest and largest fall on record. It is 566,000 in the last 12 months. I should like to think that it will continue at this rate. If the economy continues to grow I hope that we shall see further reductions.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is the Minister aware that everyone is pleased to see unemployment being reduced? However, some of the scars remain among millions of families from the time when, under this administration, unemployment rose to nearly 4 million. It does not become the Government to boast of bringing about massive reductions in the unemployment that they created. Will the noble Lord not agree that the Employment Institute believes that the system in the United States—to which he referred—is the correct one? It is simply that unemployment equals the labour force minus employment. Ought that not to be the system? It is the system functioning in the United States which is much more accurate when wishing to obtain an honest and correct assessment of unemployment.

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, there are many academics in our land who make their living from describing how unemployment should, or should not, be described and how all these fairly obstruse economic matters are described. The cause of unemployment is precisely the same as the cause of employment. It is one word: customers. If one produces goods and services that people want, one 1104 has jobs. If one produces goods and services that people do not want, one has unemployment. I am happy to feel today that we are producing goods and services that people want. We have a secure basis for future employment. That is the only basis on which it can ever be determined.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, will the Minister agree—

Noble Lords
Oh!

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, this is so important to millions of people. They see many items being advertised and many attractive features being created, but they are outside the pale because they do not have enough dole money to purchase the items they would like to purchase. In the end that will be a bad thing for millions of families and more importantly, it will be a bad thing for our nation.

§ Lord Young of Graffham
My Lords, I do not think that I can add very much. The noble Lord may care to go through the usual channels. If there is a wish to debate this matter, I have no doubt that through the usual channels that can be arranged.