asked the Minister of Labour how many unofficial strikes were reported to his Department between 1951 and 1960 inclusive.

There are difficulties of definition and classification involved and I regret that information for the years before 1960 is not available. I can, however, say that in 1960 there were 2,832 strikes reported to my Department, 68 of which were definitely stated to be official.

Is the Minister aware that the policy laid down by the Leader of the House was that Conservative action should be relevant and decisive? May I ask what has been his policy and that of his predecessors over this matter during the last ten years?

If the hon. Gentleman is asking what is the policy towards unofficial strikes, I will tell him that the trade unions, the employers and the Government have condemned unofficial strikes as being damaging to those who take part in them, damaging to others who do not take part in them and damaging to the interests of the country as a whole.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware of the shortage of labour available for building municipal houses in Birmingham; and, in view of the housing authority's need for at least twice the present labour force of 2,300 men, if he will take steps to encourage more men into the building industry in Birmingham.

There is no shortage of unskilled building labour in Birmingham, but the area is affected by the general shortage of building craftsmen. In the long term, the supply of skilled men depends on the industry's intake of apprentices, and we have urged building industry, along with others, to seize the opportunity of the "bulge" to step up its recruitment.

Is the Minister aware that for the past five years Birmingham has always had between 4,500 and 5,000 houses in the pipeline which could not be completed at much more than 2,000 a year, and so it will take more than twenty years even to touch the fringe of the housing problem? In view of the fact that a considerable number of these skilled craftsmen are being used in connection with the building of offices in huge blocks in the city of Birmingham and that the city is becoming a city of chain stores, will he consider with his right hon. Friends some system of priority to allow a greater number of houses to be built in Birmingham?

My right hon. Friend, of course, cannot direct labour to any particular form of building. Without destroying the freedom of many people he cannot adopt the form of priority suggested by the hon. Gentleman.

Is the Minister aware that if the Socialist-controlled city council had not given planning permission for the redevelopment of the city there would not have been a shortage of labour? Is not this question a smokescreen to hide the failure of the Socialist-controlled city council?

Mr. Ellis Smith.

If the plans to which the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley (Mr. Cleaver) is referring—

Order.

Mr. Ellis Smith, the next Question.

asked the Minister of Labour what study he has made of the recommendations in the report of the Joint Standing Committee of the Pottery Industry, a copy of which has been sent to him; what action he intends to take further to reduce the ill-effects of dust and to increase the provision of protective clothing of better design and materials; and if he will arrange for the publication of the report.

These recommendations concerning protective clothing represent an important advance in relation to the dust hazards in the industry. They have been circulated to all firms in the industry. I propose to seek the views of the Joint Standing Committee about the preparation of a report on their work to date for publication. I shall be considering what other steps to take by which we can secure full benefit from this work.

Is the Minister aware that that reply will be greatly appreciated owing to the suffering which occurs in the area? Does he appreciate that this will contribute towards minimising that suffering?

I greatly appreciate what the hon. Gentleman has said.

Is the Minister aware that the British Ceramic Research Association, which is responsible for this piece of attractive and useful research, should be congratulated? Is he aware that this is not the first piece of work of this type which has been so helpful? In view of the value of this and the fact that it is shown that these fibres do not hold noxious dust, should not the Minister see that other industries, such as the foundry industry, for example, should be notified of the advantage of suitable protective clothing?

I appreciate what the hon. Member said in the first part of that supplementary question. On the second part, as I indicated to the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South (Mr. Ellis Smith), I am considering what other steps to take to secure the full benefit from this work.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will consult the National Coal Board to find out how many miners due to become unemployed during the phased closure scheme will be partially disabled and industrially diseased, with a view to the immediate preparation of a plan for financial and other assistance to expand the Remploy factories in coal-mining areas to absorb all miners so industrially afflicted.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will consult the National Coal Board to find out how many disabled miners are likely to become redundant as a result of mine closures; and to what extent he is prepared to expand Remploy factories to cater for their special needs.

asked the Minister of Labour if he wil consult the National Coal Board to ascertain the approximate number of disabled miners who are likely to become unemployed owing to the present plan for mine closures; and if he will make immediate preparations for the building of sufficient Remploy factories in suitable areas to cater for their special needs.

asked the Minister of Labour if he has yet had consultations with the Minister of Power and the National Coal Board to ascertain how many disabled miners will be made redundant as a result of planned pit closures; and whether he will give consideration to financing Remploy for further expansion to employ them.

My Department keeps in close touch with the Ministry of Power and the National Coal Board over the closure of collieries. Should there be any disabled miners for whom the National Coal Board is unable to provide other employment, my disablement resettlement officers will give them every assistance in finding work. Very few miners with disabilities would, however, be likely to be in need of employment in Remploy factories, which is reserved for those so severely disabled as to be unlikely to obtain employment under ordinary conditions.

Will the Minister now take upon himself the task of assessing this problem as a whole? There are about 200 pits to be closed in the next five years. Many of the industrially disabled and diseased cannot go to other collieries because those collieries already have their quota, and factories will not take them. Therefore, Remploy seems to be the likely best intake; but it would require much more finance than has been given hitherto for the development of Remploy. Should not the right hon. Gentleman now conduct a survey with this in mind?

I am keeping in very close touch with the National Coal Board on this matter. The Board expects to absorb elsewhere some of these men quite close to their place of work and most of the men whose pits will be closed in 1962. I certainly take cognisance of what the hon. Member has said. I am as anxious as he is to see that these men are given a proper chance.

Is the Minister aware that there have been two closures in the south-west coalfield and more are likely in the new year? There are employed at those collieries seriously disabled men whose only chance of obtaining employment when they become redundant is with Remploy. Can he take this up with Remploy?

I am not prepared to accept as categorically as the hon. Member said it that the only chance of employment for these men is Remploy, but I have said that I am very conscious of this problem and I shall see that the best is done for the men concerned.

Is the Minister aware that in areas where pits are to close usually the unemployment figures are higher than the national average? Is he aware that from 12th October to 8th November there was a decrease in unfilled vacancies of over 21,000? Can I impress upon the Minister that he must take special precautions and prepare for the special needs of these unfortunate miners who will find the greatest difficulty in finding jobs when their pits close?

I sympathise with what the hon. Member has said, but I think he will agree that the National Coal Board has a very good record in planning for redundancy ahead. It has done everything possible to find employment. I shall keep in close touch, and I believe that between us we shall be able to solve the problem in a satisfactory way.

If I heard him aright, the right hon. Gentleman indicated that the type of disease and injury applicable to miners was not in general the type for which Remploy caters. Is he not aware that the type of injury and disease catered for by Remploy is similar to that of a considerable number of these people who are injured and have various diseases and that they could be catered for if the Chancellor of the Exchequer gave him a little more cash to exert more energies to give better opportunities and scope in Remploy?

I am sure the hon. Member did not want to misquote what I said. I said that my advice is that "Very few miners with disabilities would, however, be likely to be in need of employment in Remploy factories, which is reserved for those so severely disabled as to be unlikely to obtain employment under ordinary conditions." The House has taken a great interest in this matter and I will look at it most carefully.

In view of the very serious problem to which my hon. Friends have drawn attention, is not this the very worst moment for the Minister to contemplate cuts in the estimates for Remploy factories and Government training centres, which are relevant to the problem of the people to whom the Question relates?

I do not think that is part of the Question, neither do I know on what authority the hon. Member said that there are to be cuts in the Remploy estimates. In fact, we are increasing the amount of money to be made available to Remploy factories.

asked the Minister of Labour what particular proposals he has in mind for Scotland, which would assist miners, who are likely to become redundant as a result of pit closures in Scotland in the next few years, to find other employment.

The National Coal Board has already indicated that it expects to provide alternative employment for the great majority of miners affected by the pit closures which have been announced for Scotland. My officers will do all they cart to assist any miners needing other work.

Is the Minister aware that after the last pit closure we had as many as 50 per cent. of the mining labour becoming redundant? Does he realise that some of that 50 per cent. are still looking for employment? Does he realise that this calls for special planning to coincide with the pit closures so as to guarantee to men, on whose industry the whole economy depends, their right to alternative employment at the end of their mining career?

I repeat what I said in answer to a previous Question: the National Coal Board expects to find alternative coal mining employment for most of these men within daily travelling distance of their homes, either at once or within a relatively short time of the pit closure. I also repeat that the National Coal Board has a very good record in this matter.

Is the Minister aware that there will certainly be some for whom the National Coal Board will not find jobs? Is he aware that those men will be living in areas in which there is already high unemployment? Is he also aware that all the figures which he gives to bamboozle Scotland about jobs in the pipeline do not alter the fact that there are fewer people in civil employment at present in Scotland than there were four or five years ago?

Most certainly the people of Scotland are not being bamboozled about the fact that the Government have, through direct and indirect action, provided a large number of jobs and new industries in Scotland. I shall do all I can—in conjunction with the President of the Board of Trade—to see that jobs are found for those who are not provided for under the National Coal Board redundancy plan.

asked the Minister of Labour if local employment exchanges have a list of those firms manufacturing for export in their areas; and whether such firms are given priority in their demands for labour.

There is no system of priorities, but my officers do everything possible in conjunction with the Board of Trade to assist firms whose export production is hampered by shortage of labour.

Does my right hon. Friend think, in view of the importance to the nation of export industries, that a more distinct arrangement could be made? There is a large engineering firm in my constituency which is exporting over 40 per cent. of its products and has the utmost difficulty in obtaining skilled or unskilled labour from the local labour exchange.

I have the greatest sympathy with what my hon. Friend says, but to do effectively what he has suggested would demand the direction of labour and I do not think any of us wants to contemplate that in peace time. I can assure my hon. Friend that we do our level best to assist in the problems of bottlenecks such as that in the example he has given.

asked the Minister of Labour (1) whether his attention has been drawn to the present dispute between Equity and the Independent Television Companies' Association; what steps he has taken with a view to conciliation; and if he will make a statement;

No request has so far been made for my Department's assistance, although my officers have had informal discussions with representatives of Equity, the Independent Television Companies' Labour Relations Committee and the Independent Television Authority. I understand that further negotiations are now to take place between Equity and the employers.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for his reply, may I ask if he is aware that as a result of a fairly substantial offer of increased fees made by the companies the two parties are now very close together? In these circumstances, would he not consider using his good offices to bring an early end to this dispute?

If his information is correct and these parties are close together and about to start further negotiations, I think my hon. Friend will agree that we should hope they will settle their disputes without bringing in the Minister of Labour.

Is the Minister aware that it is indeed true that the two parties to the dispute are very close together and it is hoped that their dispute may be settled? Surely that will release the hon. Member for Down, North (Mr. Currie) to worry about the unemployment problem in Northern Ireland.

In defence of my hon. Friend, I should say that I think that is a most unwarranted and unnecessary interjection.

asked the Minister of Labour what was the average of registered unemployed in Scotland in 1951 and in 1961 to date, respectively; and what were those averages expressed as a percentage of the total of insured employees.

The figures are 53,413 and 67,639; that is 2·5 per cent. and 3·1 per cent., respectively.

Does the Minister realise that what he is saying is that after ten years of Conservative rule Scotland has more unemployment than ever? Does he realise that although that may be good enough for his party and Government it is not good enough for the people of Scotland? Is it not about time that he got cracking with plans, not platitudes, to bring additional work to Scotland so that citizens of the United Kingdom in that part of the country may enjoy the privilege of the right to work?

The hon. Member enjoyed his supplementary question. He realises that 1951 was a year of particularly low unemployment. He accuses me of platitudes and of doing nothing. I remind him that since October, 1951, industrial development certificates have been approved covering nearly 90,000 jobs. Every Scottish Member knows that we are doing all we can to encourage the development of a broader-based and progressive economy in Scotland. He may not know that by October of this year no fewer than 29,000 jobs had arisen or are expected from factory building and financial assistance provided under the Local Employment Act, 1960.

Is the Minister aware that the figures which he has given, distressing though they are, fail to take account of the tens of thousands of Scotsmen who have been driven to seek jobs outside Scotland and that but for this the figures would be much worse? Would he not impress upon the President of the Board of Trade the need for a much greater programme than is at present being undertaken in connection with Scotland?

My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade will take note of what the hon. Member and others have said, but, in fairness, I ask hon. Members not to minimise the immense effort which has been made in providing extra jobs in Scotland.

Mr. Scott-Hopkins.

On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment as early as possible.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will state the figures of unemployed in Cornwall to the latest available date.

On 13th November, there were 4,534 persons registered as unemployed in Cornwall of whom 3,065 were males and 1,469 females.

In view of the very high number of unemployed compared with the population of Cornwall, particularly my part of north Cornwall, and the fact that only two factories have gone there since the Local Employment Act, 1960, will the Minister consult the President: of the Board of Trade as a matter of the utmost urgency to get more factories and more jobs available in Cornwall, particularly north Cornwall? It is of the utmost importance.

I have the utmost sympathy with my hon. Friend about the difficulties in Cornwall. As he knows, they are mainly due to the remoteness of the area. He will appreciate that with the exception of Bude, Launceston, St. Austell and Truro, the whole county is listed as a development district, and the Government are doing what they can to help.

asked the Minister of Labour what information he has regarding the closing down of Kleeware Plastics Factory at Aycliffe Trading Estate; and if he will make a statement.

I understand that the management have decided to close the factory because experience has shown that it is too far away from their main production units to function efficiently. My local officers will do all they can to help any of the workpeople seeking alternative work.

Is the Minister aware that when the employees received notice of the closing of this factory it came as a great shock to them, because many of them live in the adjoining new town of Newton Aycliffe? Did any consultation take place between the employers and the trade union, as the responsible body on the trade union side for the workers there, prior to the decision being taken to close this factory? If not, is this not another example of sheer contempt for the services and loyalty of employees to the firm over many years? What are the possibilities of these 300 people being found work in other grades of employment on the trading estate?

I will take the last point first, because I think that it is the most important. I understand that there are reasonable chances of alternative employment for skilled and clerical workers who will be redundant under this closure. The prospects for semiskilled and unskilled personnel are not so good.

The first and second points which the hon. Member raised concern a different question from that on the Order Paper and I should be wrong to try to answer them without a further look at them. If he would like to come to see me I should be very happy to meet him.

asked the Minister of Labour on what date and where he last held a meeting with the Trades Union Congress to discuss the effect of unofficial strikes on the country; what was the result of that meeting; and what action he decided to take.

As I explained in my reply of 16th November to my hon. Friend, I have been having regular discussions with the Trades Union Congress and the British Employers' Confederation on the whole question of improving industrial relations. The purpose of these discussions is to remove the cause of unofficial strikes.

Is the Minister aware that up and down the country unofficial strikes have been caused by people who are Communists and who are doing great damage to this country's export trade all over the world? Will he please consider doing something more than mere exhortation?

My hon. Friend is quite right that many of these unofficial strikes which have been taking place have been doing great damage to the trade of our country.

But not by Communists.

I did not say that. The strikes have also been doing great damage to the men themselves and, in my opinion, to their workmates. I am glad to say that we are not living in a dictatorship. I believe that there is full realisation of the fact which I have mentioned—that unofficial strikes are not to be tolerated, in the interests of the unions, the employers and the Government. We have all condemned them. How, in a democratic society, should we set about trying to deal with them? Surely the sensible, practical and British way is by getting people to cooperate together, to point out the folly, to remove the causes and to settle matters by the normal processes of negotiation and good sense.

Does the Minister agree that the Trades Union Congress published a very good and very useful report on unofficial strikes last year which drew attention to some of the failings of the trade union movement and that there is a good deal of real leadership taking place to try to put some of these things right? Will he further agree that it would be helpful if the management organisations would equally publicly and equally comprehensively deal with the problem from their angle? Would he agree that 60 per cent. of the strikes in this country last year took place in four industries and that they were further concentrated on certain firms, and that this tends to the conclusion that the most common reason for strikes is bad management?

It would be a great mistake to try to apportion blame between management and workers. [HON. MEMBERS: " Oh."] I am speaking for myself, not for any other hon. Member, and that is my opinion. I believe that it would be a great error. Both parties have admitted that there are faults on each side. The hon. Member is quite correct. Last year 60 per cent. of the unofficial strikes took place in four industries alone. I have been discussing with employers in the motor-car industry, shipbuilding and the dock industry ways and means of removing the causes of these very damaging disputes.

I am confident that management is trying to do everything possible to improve relations, but will my right hon. Friend put this suggestion to the T.U.C. as perhaps a constructive one? My suggestion is that the unions should, if possible, strengthen their central secretariat organisation so as to have more officials available to attend to local disputes before they go too far. The weakness of the central secretariat in some cases allows local disputes to get out of hand.

I have told both sides of industry that each must do a great deal in this connection. They do not disagree with this. I believe that they are prepared to take effective action to deal with this problem.

Is the Minister aware that many trade unionists are greatly perturbed by the unofficial strikes in the House of Commons and that, if there were as many unofficial strikes in industry as there are in the House of Commons as regards people not attending their work, it would be impossible for industry to run properly?

The hon. Gentleman might refer that question to the Leader of the Opposition or to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, who is here now.

In view of the urgency of this matter, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

asked the Minister of Labour how many people were employed in Remploy factories in April, 1950, April, 1955, April, 1960, and on the most recent available date, respectively; and if he will make a statement about the future prospects of Remploy.

The number of severely disabled workers employed by Remploy was 4,387 in April, 1950; 6,306 in April, 1955; 6,322 in April, 1960; and 6,195 last month. The progressive increase in the Government's grant to Remploy which was announced last year is intended to enable the company to increase its employment of severely disabled workers.

Is the Minister aware that the creation of Remploy Ltd. by the Labour Government was one of the most inspired and imaginative pieces of legislation passed by the House of Commons? It has resulted in the rehabilitation of the hopes and confidence of thousands of people. Is he further aware that the very depressing statement about the non-expansion of Remploy Ltd. during these last years has cruelly dashed the hopes of those who expected so much from the company? Will he do everything within his power to ensure that the watchword for Remploy is "Expansion" and not "Retraction"?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the formation of Remploy was indeed a very great step forward and that the Government of the day deserve credit for it. As for actual expansion, that took place chiefly between 1950 and 1955. There was very considerable expansion in those years. As I have already told the House, more funds are, being made available for the continued expansion of Remploy during the next few years.

asked the Minister of Labour how many registered disabled persons were on the books of the Abertillery Employment Exchange on April, 1950, April, 1955, April, 1960, and on the most recent available date, respectively.

One hundred and eighty-two, 66 and 59 registered disabled persons were unemployed in April, 1950, 1955, and 1960, respectively. On 20th November, 1960, there were 70 and on 20th November, 1961, 64.

While rejoicing that the figures are following a decreasing trend, may I ask the Minister if he is aware that these people, so often referred to as the forgotten men of industry in a township like Abertillery where there is so little alternative employment outside the heavy industries, have a very gloomy outlook ahead of them unless something is done to bring about a diversification of industry in this type of community?

I do not dissent from what the hon. Gentleman has said and, like him, I am very glad that these figures show a real reduction between 1950 and the present time. The hon. Gentleman may be interested to know that out of the 64 now registered in Abertillery only 12 were considered to need sheltered employment, and we hope that Remploy's position will improve in the coming year so as to take at least some of them.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will state the percentage increase in the total of unemployment in the Northern Region at 13th November, 1961, as compared with 16th October, 1961, and the percentage increase in the total of unemployment for Great Britain over the same period.

In the Northern Region unemployment rose from 2·5 per cent. to 2·9 per cent. between October and November, 1961; this increase expressed as a percentage is 15·2 per cent. The comparable figures for Great Britain were 1·6 per cent., 1·7 per cent. and 5·9 per cent., respectively.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the last percentage figures he gave with regard to the Northern Region show a particularly disturbing trend? Does he agree that the figure for the Northern Region is higher than that for any other region? Does he further agree that this is beyond the normal seasonal increase? He is aware of the problem of semi-skilled and unskilled employment in the Northern Region. Does he not feel that some very active steps are required on his part to deal with the new situation?

This is not the highest regional figure. Scotland is the highest. Much of this increase, which I am glad to say is still below 3 per cent., is, as the hon. Gentleman says, due to seasonal factors, but much of it is also due to reduced activity in the shipbuilding and ship-repairing industries, in iron and steel maintenance, and in construction work. These are the factors which have contributed to the increase.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will give the number of unemployed, male and female, in the Northern Region for the months from November, 1960, to the present month.

As the reply consists of a table of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The Minister has already admitted in a previous Answer that the Northern Region has twice the national average of unemployment. The basic industries are continuing to decline and the subsidiary firms that have set up on the trading estates are now retracting to the London Region. Will the Government get out of their Whitehall and the London Region mentality and plan for the rest of the country?

I think that the hon. Gentleman has slightly misquoted me. I did not say that the rate in the Northern Region was twice as high as anywhere else. On the general point of his supplementary question. I certainly am in touch with my right hon. Friends who have particular responsibilities in this matter. We shall continue to do all we can to keep the situation reasonably under control.

asked the Minister of Labour what steps are being taken by his Department in co-operation with the Trades Union Congress and employers' organisations to ensure that racial discrimination does not take place in the employment and wage rates of immigrant workers.

I am not aware of any discrimination against immigrant workers in their wage rates and conditions of employment. If the hon. Member has any evidence to the contrary, I shall be glad to be given this.

Is the Minister aware that his statement will cause a great deal of satisfaction to most people in the House, but I think that it will be a very disturbing piece of news to some of his hon. Friends who have suggested frankly and openly in letters to the Press that coloured persons are being used for this purpose? Is it not about time that we nailed this lie?

The hon. Gentleman quite clearly understood my reply, and I think it will be of very considerable satisfaction to hon. Members on both sides of the House.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will give the figures, for each employment exchange area in the county of Durham, of unemployed, male and female, over the past 12 months from November, 1960 to the present day, stating separately those from juvenile employment offices.

As the Reply consists of a Table of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that at the weekend I attended a secondary school which has 1,097 children or young people on its rolls? They will shortly come on to the employment market. As there is no prospect of employment in the area, what do the Government intend to do to help these young people?

I am sure that none of us wishes to exaggerate the problem, even if a problem exists. The facts at the moment are that this year there were nearly 2,500 more summer school leavers than there were in 1960. I am glad to say that only 137 of those are still seeking work.

Is it not a fact that by far the biggest occupational group in the tragic unemployment figures of the North-East is the unskilled worker? Cannot the Government tackle this problem in two ways—first, by initiating training schemes for unskilled workers and, secondly, by themselves providing work for unskilled workers?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that we are doing our best to diversify industry in the Northern Region. This will help very much, because the wider the range of skills the wider the range of training for those skills.