HC Deb 30 July 1981 vol 9 cc475-6W
Mr. Frank Allaun

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many were unemployed at the latest available date in the construction industry and also in the brick, timber, glass and furniture industries, respectively; and what were the corresponding figures two years earlier.

Mr. Peter Morrison

The following table gives for May 1979 and May 1981, the latest date for which the information is available, the numbers registered as unemployed in the United Kingdom who last worked in the industries specified. The analysis is based on minimum list headings (MLHs) of the 1968 standard industrial classification.

May 1979 May 1981
Construction (MLH 500) 174,656 381,285
Bricks, fireclay ard refractory goods (MLH 461) 2,483 5,342
Glass (MLH 463) 3,277 8,746
Timber (MLH 471) 3,546 8,300
Furniture and upholstery (MLH 472) 5,185 12,671

Mr. Harold Walker

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will list all the travel-to-work areas in Great Britain in descending order according to the latest percentage unemployment rate in each; and in each case if he will give the designation in terms of qualification for Government assistance.

Mr. Peter Morrison

I shall reply to the right hon. Member as soon as possible.

Mr. Marlow

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what is the unemployment level in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries, excluding the European Economic Community; and how this compares with the level in the European Economic Community.

Mr. Peter Morrison

The latest available information published by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, based on national definitions, relates to the first quarter of 1981. The rate including member countries of the European Community was 7 per cent.; a rate excluding European Community countries is not available. For the same period the corresponding rate published by the Statistical Office of the European Community for the 10 European Community countries was 7.5 per cent. The rates are not directly comparable because of national differences in coverage, concepts and methods of compilation.