HC Deb 29 March 1968 vol 761 cc343-4W
Mr. Ian Lloyd

asked the Minister of Labour (1) why he has refused to alter the date of the withdrawal of unemployment benefit for seafarers under training, until the full details of alternative forms of assistance have been decided by Her Majesty's Government and discussed by both sides of the shipping industry, in view of the representations made to him by the British Shipping Federation and the National Maritime Board;

(2) what is the reason for the delay in reply to representations made to him by the British Shipping Federation on 11th July, 10th August, 7th September, 13th September 1967, 3rd January and 26th January 1968, requesting a postponement of the cancellation of unemployment benefit to seafarers on 11th April, 1968;

(3) why he has ignored the recommendations of the Pearson Report in February, 1967 that the Government Departments concerned should examine, as soon as possible, the case for a continuation of unemployment benefit to seafarers under training;

(4) whether he will now defer the date on which unemployment benefit is to be withdrawn from seafarers under training;

(5) whether he will now undertake an investigation of the representations which have been made to him by the British Shipping Federation and the National Maritime Board on the introduction of adequate alternative arrangements for the support of seafarers under training before the present assistance is withdrawn.

Mr. Gunter

After consultation with the National Maritime Board, and on the recommendation of the National Insur ance Advisory Committee, regulations were laid in April, 1967 to bring to an end on 13th April, 1968 the special payments of unemployment benefit to seafarers under training. My right hon. Friend, the Minister of Social Security and I have made clear that there can be no question of changing the prescribed date for the withdrawal of this concession.

I have also told representatives of the industry that the Government do not consider that special assistance towards the current costs of training would be justified, though I am ready to consider helping for a limited period with the costs of new and improved training courses. This means that the responsibility for making alternative arrangements for the remuneration of seafarers under training after 13th April rests with the industry.

In reaching this decision, my colleagues and I had full regard to the recommendations of the Pearson Committee, and to the representations made by the British Shipping Federation and the National Maritime Board. This inevitably took some time, and I informed the British Shipping Federation of the Government's decision as soon as it was reached.