asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will list the leaders of trade unions he has met officially since taking up his present office.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many meetings he has had with leaders of trade unions since taking office.

I have already had a large number of meetings with trade union leaders but I do not think it would be right to detail them all.

I s the right hon. Gentleman aware from these meetings that many trade union leaders and members find it unbelievable that men have to work seven days a week to get a decent wage and that the moment they stop doing so industry grinds to a halt? Is he further aware that the Government cling like drowning men to the remnants of stage 3, as a result of which the worsening industrial relations are costing the country hundreds of millions of pounds a year? How much more destruction will the Government cause?

I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's first point. On his second point, I ask him and the House to reflect on the offer which has already been made to the National Union of Mineworkers, to which he refers. That offer in itself shows that the miners are recognised as a special case. It gives them a position which cannot be eroded under the proposals by other unions seeking to catch up. This is a very important position and one which Labour Members should recognise.

I welcome the number of meetings which my right hon. Friend has already had with trade union leaders. May I urge him to meet the widest possible cross-section of union leadership, not merely of unions at present in dispute but of all unions, and particularly the officers of unions throughout the country, at different levels?

I have met leaders of unions which are not involved in disputes, and I will continue to do so. I am only too pleased to discuss all the problems which those unions face. It is perfectly proper and right for me to do so. But I maintain the position which I put to the hon. Member for Wandsworth, Central (Mr. Thomas Cox).

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the Government had a historic opportunity yesterday? It is a great tragedy that they threw it away. What was the point of meeting trade union leaders except to seek their co-operation, particularly towards a constructive and restrained atmosphere for finding a way out of the present crisis? After the TUC leaders had gone as far as they constitutionally could in order to meet the Government, why were they turned down? Does not that leave the impression in the country that all those meetings were nothing more than a public relations exercise? [An HON. MEMBER: "By whom?"]

Not at all. There is no question of anyone being turned down as the right hon. Gentleman suggests. Nor is there any question of not considering very carefully what was said. I hope I made it very clear to the Press and to the country, on television last night, that I regarded the offer made by the TUC as a genuine offer and as an effort from its point of view to seek to solve a difficult problem. Equally, the Government must state the facts for the nation, namely, that they are standing by a counter-inflation policy which, in the current circumstances facing the country, is of vital importance to us all. To take any action that would go back on that, unless one was very sure about it, would be a disaster, because it would inflict grave hardship on our country and on jobs for our people in the longer term. These are problems which we must face and examine carefully in considering all the proposals. The Government realised that the TUC had put forward a genuine offer, but we did not believe that it would in itself meet the requirements of a successful counter-inflation policy.

I f that is so, what was the meaning of the right hon. Gentleman's statement to the House in the debate just before Christmas, when he asked that the TUC should make it clear that if the miners were treated as a special case it would not be used as a precedent for other cases? Has not the TUC met the right hon. Gentleman's point? If the right hon. Gentleman meant something more in December, will he say what it was and what else he expects from the TUC?

Will the right hon. Gentleman, who is always fair in these matters, read the whole of what I said? He has referred to only one part of my statement. I do not have the statement before me, but I said in another part that, if there were to be more for one group of workers, leaders of other groups would have to accept that their members would need to take substantially less. That was what I said before I made the other comment to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred.

Disgraceful, Willie!

I f the hon. Gentleman thinks it is disgraceful he had better read the full quotation, which I quoted again last Thursday. I did say that. The hon. Gentleman can check it.

Last night's meeting was obviously particularly important. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that it was only one of a very long succession of meetings between the Government and the trade unions and that no Government, and in particular no Prime Minister, have made such efforts to keep in touch with and consult trade unions as have the present Government and Prime Minister?

No one can deny the facts my hon. Friend has stated. They are absolutely true and are much to the credit of the Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment whether he will take steps to promote employment in the Leicester area for disabled young people.

Careers officers of the youth employment service in Leicester, as in other areas, are responsible for helping disabled young people to secure employment and can call on a wide range of facilities and support.

I s the Minister aware that, despite the ability of the disablement officers to call on others for help, it remains extremely difficult to place disabled people in work, particularly if they are suffering from multiple disablements? Is he also aware that happily, thanks to medical science, many more seriously disabled people are living longer? What do the Government propose to do to help such people to have a dignified and useful life?

Perhaps I should make it clear that the latest statistics show that there are no registered disabled young people unemployed in the Leicester area. In spite of that, however, representatives of the local authority and Remploy have recently co-operated in a survey of sheltered facilities in the Leicester area, and meetings will be taking place to consider the results of that investigation.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment whether he now proposes to seek to repeal the Industrial Relations Act.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment whether he will now seek to repeal the Industrial Relations Act.

No, Sir, but I repeat that I am willing to examine carefully any constructive suggestions for improving the operation of the Act.

I am not so sure that the trade union movement would want to make any further constructive suggestions about amendments in view of what happened last night and the way in which the Government were not satisfied with the pound of flesh, which is more than I would give. They wanted blood instead. [An hon. Member: "Get on with the question".] I will get around to it.

The hon. Gentleman has not been the foremost in producing sweetness and light into the proceedings of the House. However that may be, one must face the facts about the Act. The hon. Gentleman and others who take his view regard everything to do with the Act as wrong. One must consider some of the things that are not wrong and that he would not think were wrong. For example, there are the provisions about unfair dismissal. The hon. Gentleman must accept how much they have been used to the benefit of many union members.

Does my right hon. Friend recall that time after time my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has invited the trade unions—[An Hon. Member: "Question."] This is a question. Has not my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister time after time invited the trade unions—the TUC—to put forward suggestions for improving the Act? Exactly how has the TUC reacted? What suggestions has it made?

They are on the record. Why does not the hon. Gentleman read the documents?

There has been a widespread demand from both the Labour Party and the TUC that the Act should be totally repealed. That is their position, and I understand it. But I do not believe that in the long run it is a tenable position, because there are many parts of the Act that all hon. Members want to see preserved.

Why does the right hon. Gentleman speak with so little conviction on this subject? Why are the Government being so pig-headed? Why do they persist in their policy of confrontation, which is bringing us all to disaster?

I do not see how those comments arise from the Question. The hon. Gentleman says that I have been pig-headed. Many other things are attributed to me, but I have very seldom heard that said of me. I do not believe that these questions arise on the Industrial Relations Act. We have adopted a thoroughly reasonable, fair and sensible position as regards particularly the miners' industrial dispute and all the other matters, and we stand by it.

Would my right hon Friend need something more than a solemn and binding undertaking or statement of intent before the Government withdrew the Act?

We have made it perfectly clear that we have no intention of withdrawing the Act. We have said plainly that we are prepared to amend those parts of it which the results of their working have shown it would be right to amend. The Labour Party says that it wishes to repeal the whole Act. It would throw out many things that it specifically wants if it did so.

As the Government and their supporters consistently make statements that the miners are led by a small group of mindless militants and Communists, why have not the Government used the Act to conduct a ballot of miners to see whether they would accept phase 3?

The hon. Gentleman impugns my motives in a totally unfair way.

The right hon. Gentleman keeps repeating what other Ministers have kept repeating: that there is a contradiction in our position. Therefore, I wish to make it clear to him that appeals against unfair dismissal were the policy of the Labour Government and always have been our policy. We will continue with those appeals and improve the provisions. Otherwise, we intend the total repeal of the Act. We have made it clear over and over again that the choice before the people in the General Election, when it comes, is therefore either the repeal of the Act and a new deal under a Labour Government or continuing with the Act and other policies which have produced the worst system of industrial relations since the 1920s.

I do not accept all that the right hon. Gentleman says. I am sure that he, like everyone else, will wish to be very careful. If he says that the only parts of the Act he would retain are the unfair dismissal provisions, I wonder whether that is the position his party would take.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will now review the working of the Industrial Relations Act with particular reference to the income tax position of those unions which have deregistered under the Act and to the fact that such unions are not permitted to negotiate union shop agreements.

I will take these and other suggestions into account in considering possible amendments to the Act.

I s the Minister aware that to make this suggested amendment to the Industrial Relations Act would at once improve the relationship between the Government and the unions? Surely that is a small price to pay. Will he look again at the matter? The unions regard this aspect of the Act as being mean, petty and spiteful.

I am perfectly prepared to consider this proposal. I am not sure whether the hon. Member is correct because there are those who, understandably from their point of view, still demand the total repeal of the Act. Nevertheless, I take the hon. Member's point and I shall consider it carefully.

When my right hon. Friend considers any amendments will he consider making compulsory a secret ballot for the election of union officers to be conducted in the same impartial way as the elections conducted by the electricians' trade union?

Obviously it is correct to consider all these proposals when examining possible amendments to the Act.

I s the Secretary of State aware that large firms in industry make no use of the Act and that they, as well as the trade unions, would seek its amendment? When does he propose to bring firm proposals before the House?

I note the hon. Member's comment, but he must remember that a great deal of use is being made of the Act. Many cases have been settled by voluntary agreement before coming to the Industrial Relations Court and a great deal of work has been done on industrial relations which is of considerable value. The hon. Member and his hon. Friends cannot get away from that fact.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what recent talks he has had with representatives of the TUC on proposed amendments to the Industrial Relations Act.

I have had discussions with representatives of the TUC on a number of economic and industrial matters. The Industrial Relations Act has been touched on in our talks, but I have not discussed particular proposals for amendment.

Why does not the right hon. Gentleman take an initiative in this matter, particularly since Sir John Donaldson has said that the Act needs amending? Surely that would be a step in the process towards reconciliation, about which the Government are particularly fond of speaking. Is it not the case that the Government themselves are not using the Act? Will the right hon. Gentleman say which will come first, repeal of the Act or a General Election?

I have never proposed, nor has any of my right hon. Friends, that we should repeal the Act. We have consistently said that there are many parts of the Act, large portions of it, which are accepted to be of value by large numbers of people. The hon. Member asked what talks I have had on this matter. In the talks that I have held many people have said they want the Act repealed. Therefore, I have said that I am considering various amendments and proposals for amendments which have been put to me.

Why does not the hon Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton) take an initiative and make his own specific suggestions? Has my right hon. Friend noticed that Question No. 5 today was the first specific suggestion we have had from the Labour side for an amendment to the Industrial Relations Act?

My hon. Friend the Member for Howden (Sir P. Bryan) has considerable experience in these matters. [HON. MEMBERS: "He was sacked."] A great many demands have been made for total repeal of the Act. I regard them as unrealistic and I agree that few constructive amendments have ever been put forward.

I s it not the case that, during the passage of the Bill, the Opposition put forward a whole series of amendments, including those put forward by my hon. Friend the Member for Derby, South (Mr. Walter Johnson)? During the course of the Bill the Government on no occasion accepted any of the arguments in spite of being warned that, if the legislation went through unamended, it would create more industrial relations problems and would prove to be a great albatross round the Government's neck. Is it not time that the Government learned from the experience of hon. Members who have worked in industry for a long time and who know that the Act must be got rid of at the earliest possible moment, but that in the meantime it should be amended to ease the position?

The hon. Member speaks in contradictory terms. He says that those with experience believe that the Act should be got rid of altogether. I do not believe that that is the hon. Member's position. He says that there should be amendments in the short term. The Government have said that they are prepared to consider and, indeed, are considering amendments. It cannot be consistent to speak on the one hand about total repeal and on the other hand about amendments.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement about short-time working in the motor industry.

The motor industry is operating a threeday working week except where continuous process operations are involved or a firm has reached some special arrangement with the Department of Trade and Industry and the appropriate electricity board for a full working week but with electricity usage restricted to 65 per cent. of normal requirements.

What do the Government propose to do about the shortage of steel in the motor industry? Is the Minister aware that at the huge Leyland plant at Bathgate in West Lothian there are many, not only ex-miners, now working in the motor industry who think that, in not following the line offered by the TUC, the Government, in dealing with the miners, must be off their collective nut?

The serious steel situation was discussed over and over again in the House last week. I understand that the British Leyland truck factory in the hon. Gentleman's constituency is operating a three-day week from Monday to Wednesday and that about 3,500 workers are on short time and are receiving lay-off pay for the remaining days under an agreement with the firm. The guaranteed week provisions will operate when lay-off pay expires.

I s not the Minister aware that one of the problems facing the motor car industry is in assembly? A hold-up in any other sector throughout Britain can hold up the entire industry. Does he not agree that that is extremely serious to our whole export position? Will he take it from me that the members of the two main unions involved in the industry in Scotland, as elsewhere in Britain—the Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers and the Transport and General Workers Union—cannot understand the Government's refusal of the offer made by Hugh Scanlon and others, except by putting it down to the incredible rigidity, stupidity and vicious-ness of the Prime Minister?

I do not accept a single word of what the hon. Gentleman has said. He knows, as does everyone in the House who has listened to the debates and observed all that has gone on over the past few weeks, why the three-day week came about. I do not propose to add to that.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what is his estimate of the proportion of those currently registered as unemployed in the Birmingham travel-to-work area who are immigrants ; and how this compares with the proportion of immigrants in the total working population in the same area.

On 12th November 1973, 10 per cent. of the registered unemployed in the Birmingham travel-to-work area were coloured immigrants. I regret that up-to-date information about the proportion of immigrants in the working population in local areas is not available.

May I congratulate my hon. Friend on his new appointment? I welcome the fact that these figures do not seem disproportionate to the total immigrant working population, but will he look carefully at the matter and watch the situation? I am sure he will agree, as did his predecessor, that it is of vital importance to good relations in a city such as Birmingham.

The national picture over the last 12 months up to last November was that, in general, coloured unemployment as a percentage of total unemployment was falling but I share my hon. Friend's concern to see that real equality of opportunity is achieved.

May I, too, join in congratulating the hon. Gentleman on his first appearance at the Dispatch Box? I hope he will accept it in the right spirit if I say that I do not think he will be occupying that position for very long.

This is an assessment made by the Department of the circumstances at each of the local offices.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what advice is being issued, from his Department to small firms which are being forced to lay off workers due to the present economic situation.

My Department stands ready to advise small firms and their employees in the present emergency situation, and any employer consulting one of the small firms centres set up by the Department of Trade and Industry to advise small firms on sources of information will be referred to us on matters for which my Department is responsible.

Does the Minister accept that, while the three-day working week is drastic for the whole of industry, its effects are particularly serious for small businesses? For some of these businesses the effects may be permanent. What steps is his Department or any other Department prepared to take to protect small businesses which may not survive?

The best way to protect the interests of small businesses is for the overtime ban in the mines to come to an end. [Interruption.] That is the case and it is widely recognised on both sides of the House. In the meantime, if my Department can assist the hon. Member in any way with a particular problem which exists in his constituency, we shall be only too glad to do so.

Short of common sense prevailing and the overtime ban being lifted, are the Government considering any mechanism for a court of appeal for changing the three days allocated for working, either to rotate them or switch them to other days?

This matter is under consideration.

Will the Minister inform his right hon. Friend that he should take more notice of the small businesses than of the CBI, which is not particularly representative in that direction? Will he pay more attention to what is to happen to small businesses which find their cash flow seriously affected? How much longer does he expect they will be able to manage without going bust in wholesale numbers?

My right hon. Friend is well aware of the difficulties of the small business men in these matters. I understand today that he has had three meetings with representatives of small business men.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many pay settlements within phase 3 have been settled up to the latest convenient date ; and how many workers have been covered by such settlements.

At December 31st, 1973, 657 settlements covering nearly 4 million employees had been received by the Pay Board under the provisions of stage 3.

Does my hon. Friend not agree that, in the light of these figures, it would be monstrously unfair to those millions of workers who have accepted an agreement under phase 3 to permit the miners to settle outside phase 3?

Yes.

I s the hon. Gentleman aware that some of the settlements within phase 3 have been achieved in a peculiar manner? Is he aware of the settlements that have been reached in the contract cleaning industry, where many of the women employees are widows? Is he aware that their wage settlement is geared to the wage restrictions relating to national insurance contributions rather than to the need for an increase even within phase 3? Will the hon. Gentleman consider that?

I f the hon. Gentleman cares to table a Question on that matter, I shall do everything within my power to seek to answer it. There is no evidence to suggest that there has been any serious evasion of the code.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what representations he has received on his consultative document "Sheltered Employment for Disabled People".

The consultative document was published on 12th December. My right hon. Friend has already begun to receive some comments of interest.

I add my congratulations to my hon. Friend on his new position. Will he guide the House on how soon we might expect any action as a result of these proposals in the consultations which are now taking place?

As my hon. Friend knows, this is part of a review of our whole policy and approach to the treatment of the disabled. I cannot yet give a firm date, but we are giving high priority to the review.

Has the hon. Gentleman gone further with representations made about this document by the National League of the Blind? If he has, will he write in due course to let me know whether such representations have been acceded to?

We are considering all the representations which have been made. I shall keep the hon. Gentleman informed.

May I remind the hon. Gentleman, as I reminded his predecessor on many occasions, that according to the figures of his Department nearly 9,000 firms are in flagrant and deliberate breach of the law? What action will his Department take regarding the firms which ignore the quota system?

I think the hon. Gentleman will know from his experience in this Department that the interpretation of the quota arrangements has always been a matter of judgment. There have been few prosecutions. We are reviewing the whole question of our policies towards the disabled. It would be inappropriate now to alter present practice.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will now encourage the TUC and the CBI, and representatives of the nationalised industries, to hold discussions with a view to fixing an annual date for all major wage claims.

Such a proposal would present considerable practical difficulties.

I appreciate what my hon. Friend says. Does he not agree that the leapfrogging of wage claims, which sometimes happens within the same industry, is a contributory cause of rising prices, and that it is at least worth working towards an annual date for each industry?

I understand my hon. Friend's point about leapfrogging. I am not sure that the synchonisation of terminal dates would necessarily bring an end to leapfrogging. There would undoubtedly be a high once-and-for-all cost in getting negotiators to accept differing lengths of agreement to bring all terminal dates into line.

I f the hon. Gentleman finds difficulty in raising the points enumerated by the TUC and the CBI, may I ask whether he is prepared to discuss with those bodies what should be done to prohibit the actions of asset strippers such as Slater Walker, which has threatened firms in my constituency with take-over bids to such an extent that factories have been closed and hundreds of men have been thrown out of work? Does he realise that the land has been sold so as to ward off take-over bids? Is he aware that this has happened in the glass container industry, which is overloaded with orders and cannot meet either its domestic or export orders? Is the hon. Gentleman prepared to consider that example of industrial behaviour?

I do not comment on the example given by the hon. Gentleman. I am bound to say that few hon. Members could accuse the Government of being unwilling to discuss any matter with the TUC or the CBI. Neither the TUC nor the CBI has expressed any interest in the idea of a common date.

I s my hon. Friend aware that it utterly impossible for the country to evisage with any equanimity an annual rise of approximately 10 per cent? Will he kindly consider when it became the fashion for all wage-earners to demand an annual rise as opposed to a rise when they really need one?

That question might provide me with some interesting historical research. I am not sure whether I am prepared to carry it out at this moment.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will pay an official visit to County Durham.

I have no plans to do so.

That is a pity. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that unemployment in County Durham is now nearly twice the national average? Is he further aware of the continuing emigration of people from the county and the limited job opportunities which are available for school leavers? Has he seen the recently-published report of Durham County Council which warns that all these things are likely to continue? Is it not time that the Government did something about the failure of their policies for the North-East?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, I am a Member for the North of England, although I represent a Northwest constituency rather than a constituency in the North-East. However, I still have close conections with the North-East and I have frequently been there. I understand its problems. Let us not forget what was achieved following the plans which were laid by my right hon. and noble Friend the present Lord Chancellor when he visited the North-East. The North-East has benefited to a considerable extent ever since.

I f my right hon. Friend has not the time to at present to visit County Durham, will he visit the assisted area of Yorkshire and Humberside, where he will find that the Government's regional policies have been a marked success, and where in the West Riding, and especially Bradford, unemployment before the present go-slow in the mining industry was below the national average? Is my right hon. Friend aware that in the textile industry the co-operation between management and employees was outstanding and was recognised since special provisions have been made for the firms which work seven days a week?

My hon. Friend states facts which no one can dispute and which are to the credit of the area concerned.

When the right hon. Gentleman finally decides to pay a visit to Durham, will he travel via Newcastle airport and Brandling Park, where he will see a monstrous three-level junction on the urban motorway with two spurs which will go nowhere unless he can persuade his right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment to give the necessary loan sanction for the North-West radial route and the coast road extension?

I travelled to Newcastle airport on purely private affairs on New Year's Eve. I did not at that time visit the junction to which the hon. Gentleman refers. I shall consider what he says.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what arrangements he has made to provide special training courses for those who may become temporarily unemployed due to fuel shortage in the coming year.

None. Temporary unemployment does not lend itself easily to use for training.

Will my hon. Friend tell us to what extent Government training centres have been affected by the three-day week?

I can tell my hon. Friend that the expansion of the training opportunity scheme is not seriously affected by the cuts announced by my right hon. Friend on 17th December. There will be a slight slowing-down in the expansion of training places for GTCs. The expansion in colleges of further education remains unaffected. I am glad to say that that applies to the target of 50,000 to 55,000 trainees for 1974, which I know my hon. Friend will agree is a massive increase.

As the hon. Gentleman and all his ministerial colleagues are among those who will shortly be unemployed, will he make provisions for increasing the retraining facilities for unskilled workers?

I shall always do everything within my power to help the hon. Gentleman when he needs it.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment approximately how many workers were without full-time employment in the East Midlands and in the Kettering parliamentary constituency, respectively, on the most recent date in 1974 for which he has figures ; and what proportion of these he estimates can be attributed to the three-day week.

No figures of unemployment are yet available for any date in 1974. It is estimated that on Friday 11th January 1974 there were 88,000 in the East Midlands temporarily laid off and registered for unemployment benefit ; 5,000 were so registered at Kettering and Corby local offices, which cover most of the right hon. Member's constituency.

Should there be a General Election, will the hon. Gentleman guarantee to do everything he possibly can to publish the latest figures showing the effect of the three-day week on my constituents who, until the three-day week was introduced, had been enjoying full employment?

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would be better advised to address that advice elsewhere.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement on compulsory short-time working in industry and the three-day week.

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister explained the need for measures to restrict the supply of electricity to industry on 9th January and the three-day week was fully debated on the following day. At present I have nothing to add to what was said during those debates.

Do not the Government's fuel figures show that the three-day week is unnecessary and a "con" trick aimed at putting people against the miners? Do not the figures show that there are eight or nine weeks' supplies of coal even before the safety margin is reached? Is not that position revealed today by reports from the men working in the power stations to the effect that those power stations are bulging with oil and coal? If the right hon. Gentleman says that there is a shortage of oil, can he say why no crude oil is being refined for the power stations but is going to motorists instead?

The answer to the hon. Gentleman has been given consistently and frequently in all the debates that have taken place on this subject. The answer is simple and easy. The measures that were taken were acts of common prudence to preserve our energy supplies during the particular problems we are facing this winter. There was nothing else beyond that. I believe that the majority of people who are not seeking to make some form of political capital understand that. I have no doubt that these facts are perfectly clear to all who seek to understand the situation.

I s the right hon. Gentleman aware that our information in Scotland is that there is no embarrassing shortage of coal stocks at power stations and that there are more coal stocks at one of the power stations than there have been for many years, yet it has not turned a wheel for three or four days? Would he not agree, as there has been some talk from the Government Front Bench this afternoon about ballot votes, that he should consider holding a ballot vote among some of the small firms which employ half the workers of the country, asking them whether they agree with the Government's policy over the three-day week and fuel rationing?

There cannot be any doubt in anyone's mind that, if it is possible to conserve our energy supplies so that we continue to preserve the life of our country and its business on a three-day week basis, it is better to do that than to advance into total chaos, which would be a negation of government and a disastrous thing for any Government to do.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment whether he has been informed about the shortage of staff in the hotel industry ; and whether he will increase the quota of trained, temporary foreign workers into this country.

The industry has made plain its concern about shortages of staff and my right hon. Friend has the needs of the industry in mind. I hope soon to discuss with the industry the allocation of the quota for this year.

Does my hon. Friend realise that my constituents provide holidays for the people who have been working hard during the year? How are we to do this with present staff shortages in the industry?

A quota has to be seen as a total system of immigration control and not just as a means of labour supply. Efforts are being made to recruit and train British workers for the hotel industry. My Department will do all that it can to assist.