§ Mr. Ian McCartneyTo ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment, pursuant to her oral statement of 16 January,Official Report, column 610, if she will place in the Library a copy of all correspondence and other data evaluated by her Department relating to the decision to pilot the project work scheme in the Hull and Medway travel-to-work areas. [12156]
§ Mr. Forth[holding answer 26 January 1996]The information requested is either data about the labour market, which is publicly available, or pre-existing documents. It would not be appropriate specifically to provide this information in the form requested. However, it may be helpful if I explain the way in which the choice of pilot areas was made. Hull and Medway and Maidstone were two of a number of travel-to-work areas of the right size to mount a manageable pilot at a reasonable cost, while still producing a sample large enough for proper evaluation. They were also relatively self-contained, which minimised the potential for distortion, and they represented two different sorts of labour market. The respective rates of unemployment and very long-term unemployment in the two travel-to-work areas is shown in the following table, compared with the national averages.
Pilot area Unemployment rate Per cent. VLTU1 as percentage of total unemployed VLTU2 as percentage of total workforce Medway and Maidstone 8.2 13.7 1.1 Hull 9.9 18.8 1.9 National average 8.0 21.6 1.7 1Very long-term unemployed, i.e., over 2 years. 2Seasonally adjusted, and provisional.