asked the Minister of Labour what stage he has reached in his examination of the social and economic issues of implementing the right to equal pay for equal work; and when this examination will be completed.

This examination is bound to take time, but it is making good progress. I cannot yet say how soon it will be completed.

Would my right hon. Friend tell the House that it is his definite intention to introduce legislation to keep an election pledge given to the nation by the Labour Party that it would implement the right to equal pay for equal work?

As my hon. Friend knows, the pledge given by the Labour Party was that if returned to power it would seek, at an appropriate stage in its first term of office, to consider ways and means of implementing equal pay. We shall fulfil that pledge.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say what the cost of such a proposal would be?

There are so many actuaries and economists working on it now that I do not know.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will give instructions to the officials operating the Professional and Executive Register that they should give special help to applicants over the age of 50 years.

All our employment officers, including those working on the Professional and Executive Register, are instructed to do what they can to persuade employers to consider older people on their merits. Even where an employer has set an age limit, suitable older workers are included amongst those selected for submission.

Is the Joint Parliamentary Secretary aware that, while his recent interest in this subject is appreciated, there is nevertheless the feeling that some of the officials of the Professional and Executive Register tend not to press as hard as they should the claims of those over 50? Is he aware that the numbers placed in employment are still very small, and will he do what he can to improve the position?

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman accepts that this is a very difficult problem for the staff of the Professional and Executive Register, not least because a lot of employers are very worried about the possibility of blocking employment for younger people by retaining older people for too long; but I accept the spirit behind his Question.

asked the Minister of Labour what estimate he has made of the additional manpower to be made available to industry over each of the next three years by reason of the introduction of automation.

It has not been found practicable to make year by year estimates of this kind. The Manpower Research Unit's study No. 1 concluded that over the next five years the effect of technological changes on total manpower was expected to be quite marked in particular sectors of employment but that in very few cases could the effects be ascribed specifically to automation in the strict sense or to the introduction of computers. With fewer extra workers becoming available the general effect of the technological changes would be to help alleviate manpower shortages.

Could we not have a definite assessment, say three years hence, because the number of computers now coming into industry virtually daily must be making more labour available in both clerical and manual trades? Could the right hon. Gentleman not set a target, say three years hence, so that we could see what the position is at that time?

I would be reluctant to set targets, but I appreciate the importance of making proper assessments.

Would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that the latest unemployment figures show the need to do our utmost in this way to alleviate the call on skilled manpower at present and, therefore, the need for industry to make the greatest use of these methods?

Yes. I do agree with that.

Would the Minister say why there is a shortage of labour when automation is persistently releasing labour?

No. I would rather that question were directed to my precedessor in office.

asked the Minister of Labour (1) whether he is aware of the shortage of shipwrights on the Clyde, in East Scotland and in Birkenhead, causing delays in completion of ships; and what steps he is taking to solve this problem;

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that skilled men of several trades in the Clyde shipyards are scarce; and what action he will take to solve this problem.

I am aware of these shortages, and our local officers have been making every effort to fill those vacancies which have been notified to them. The future training programme for these trades is a matter for the recently established Shipbuilding Industry Training Board. Training is provided for some of the trades in the industry, such as welders in the Government training centres.

Is it not a fact that the expansion of Japanese shipbuilding shows what a potential this industry has in the export field, and how helpful it could be to our economy? Is it not, therefore, essential to concentrate on this very important skilled labour; and also on the difficult question of demarcation?

I accept entirely that there is a manpower problem in this industry, and it is a great pity that we were not able to start dealing with it perhaps a couple of years ago. We were not in a position to do so then, but we are doing so now. As to demarcation disputes, it would in the first instance be for employers to discuss some of the problems with the unions concerned, and if the help of the Ministry were required in that process we would be happy to consider this.

Would the Minister agree that the shortage not just of shipwrights but of others in the finishing and steel work trades on the Clyde is a very serious problem, since the reputation of the Clyde depends on carrying out completion dates that have been undertaken? Did he not indicate in a Written Answer on 10th November last that there were 1,370 unemployed shipyard workers on the Clyde? Would he not agree that more effective use of labour and less rigid demarcation, and even a temporary measure of interchangeability of labour, might help to alleviate these difficulties, and would he not initiate discussions on those lines?

With respect, it is very easy just to talk about problems of demarcation and trade union attitudes, but there is no reason why there cannot be discussions between the two sides—

There have been.

No doubt the hon. Lady will ask her Questions when we get to them; in the meantime, I am dealing with the supplementary question asked by the hon. Member for Cathcart (Mr. Edward M. Taylor). It is extremely important, in order to solve some of these problems, to create the right basis so as to remove some of the fears of insecurity that are in the minds of men. My right hon. Friend's policies in regard to redundancy payments, and things of that kind, will go a long way towards doing that.

Is not my hon. Friend aware that the boilermakers' and shipwrights' unions have now amalgamated as one organisation, with the result that demarcation disputes have diminished considerably; and that the problem of shipworkers is basically one of decent conditions and decent wages?

This exchange is now moving to a somewhat different area—to the whole question of the shipbuilding industry. My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade has set up an inquiry into the industry at the present time, and these are some of the factors with which it will deal.

asked the Minister of Labour what have been the results of the recent representations he made to the dock workers to help to clear congestion in the Port of London.

Following my talks with trade union officials at the end of last year, the Transport and General Workers' Union took prompt action to bring the facts of the situation to the attention of its members and the National Amalgamated Stevedores and Dockers Union held a meeting of its members. In most of the London docks, however, the men, while already working overtime during the week, were unwilling to work at week-ends.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether there has been any improvement in recruitment into the dock labour force; and whether he expects to take any steps to improve recruitment in advance of the report we expect? Can he also say when he is likely to have that report?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the congestion at the London docks has eased since the end of 1964. As to his second point, we would, of course, like to see weekend working because if ships are to keep their sailing times there is an inevitability about working docks over the weekend. But do not let it be forgotten that these men are already working considerable overtime during the week, and we need to be very careful before entering into judgment on them if, like the rest of us, they want a weekend off. I should not like to give a precise date when the report may be expected, but the earlier the better.

The Minister will no doubt have seen, as others have, reports in the Press of the possibility of steps being taken by unofficial leaders to try to prevent or discourage workers from working ordinary overtime. Are any steps being taken by the unions or by the Ministry to try to prevent this measure from achieving the same success that, unfortunately, attended those people's efforts in regard to weekend working?

I have read reports about the proposed action. I do not know whether the situation will arise or not, but the unions are doing all they can to prevent it arising.

asked the Minister of Labour what response has been made by port employers to appeals for harder work, increased overtime, including Sunday working, and improved planning, to help to clear congestion in the Port of London.

I have made no appeal to port employers. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport has had discussions with port employers and port users with a view to securing improved flow of cargoes through our ports.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I am surprised that, appeals having been made to the workers, none has been made to the employers? Is he further aware that there have been occasions in recent weeks in the Port of London where men have reported to work on a Sunday but, due to the inability or the unwillingness of employers to organise the job properly, have been sent home because there was no work to do?

As I indicated, the employers have been meeting my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport. I agree that the fault is on both sides. I am not arguing that. On the labour question, I await what Lord Devlin's Committee has to say on the sort of thing which my hon. Friend has put before the House this afternoon.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that generally Sunday working is unsatisfactory and uneconomic and that when men have done six or five hard days' work they are entitled to a day's rest and that we get better results from a shorter working week if the week is properly organised? Will the right hon. Gentleman bear that in mind?

I have been preaching that gospel for a long time.

asked the Minister of Labour in view of the continuing high level of unemployment in the Merseyside area, what steps are being taken to develop training and retraining schemes in the area; and what plans he has for the future.

I am giving assistance to the Merseyside Training Council towards the promotion of group training schemes, of which there are already three successful ones on Merseyside and a fourth is about to be launched. Merseyside should also benefit from the increase of training facilities of which it is one purpose of the Industrial Training Act to encourage. As an additional direct contribution, I am increasing the capacity of the Liverpool Government Training Centre to take about 800 trainees a year, and I am considering what further expansion of Government training centres over the country as a whole is necessary.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this statement will be very much welcomed on the Merseyside? On the other hand, is he aware that the great problem we face on Merseyside is the need for skilled labour? Therefore, will everything be done to assist us in getting skilled labour which will help us to solve our unemployment and economic problems?

I accept that that is an extremely important point, but Merseyside is a development district and employers within a development district are themselves eligible for grant—that is, they can obtain assistance for approved training. It has to be said again that one of the ways in which industry can help in this matter is for the smaller firms, particularly, to join together in group training schemes so that they themselves can train people. This is not something for which the Government alone, without industry, can take the entire responsibility.

asked the Minister of Labour what steps he proposes to take to see that agreements for wage increases are related to increases in productivity in those, cases in which he or his Department play a part in settling disputes.

The Government, representatives of employers' organisations and the Trades Union Congress have signed a Joint Statement of Intent on Productivity, Prices and Incomes and have agreed on Machinery for Prices and Incomes Policy. Discussions are now proceeding on the next stages of the prices and incomes policy. I shall carry out my responsibilities in accordance with the policy agreed between the Government and the other parties.

Is not the Minister able to go rather further than that, in view of the statement of intent which said that there would be urgent and vigorous action to raise productivity throughout industry and commerce? We expected more from the Minister at this stage.

I am not sure of the relevance of that question, because we have not yet completed our discussions on prices and incomes policy.

asked the Minister of Labour what is the policy of his Department towards the elimination of restrictive practices.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will make a statement on the progress he has made in his discussions with both sides of industry on the elimination of restrictive practices.

asked the Minister of Labour what is his policy on the abolition of restrictive practices by both sides in industry.

asked the Minister of Labour what progress is being made in the implementation of his policy to eliminate restrictive practices at all levels of industry.

I shall give whatever help and encouragement I can to industry in following up the commitment of both employers and unions in the Joint Declaration of Intent to lead a sustained attack on obstacles to efficiency. I am particularly concerned to secure the more efficient use of manpower. The various measures we are taking towards improving the security of workpeople and to assist labour mobility will establish favourable conditions for this.

Will my right hon. Friend take what steps he can to inform public opinion that this process of abolishing restrictive practices is a two-way one and that there are restrictive practices on the part of employers and not just on the part of trade unionists?

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that under the heading "restrictive practices" comes monopolies, price rings and price leadership agreements, and would he not investigate the possibility of doing something about those as well as the other restrictive practices referred to?

The question of monopolies is not for me, but I can repeat that I will do whatever I can to come to terms with restrictive practices. I am saying a prayer that someone will tell me exactly what is embraced by the term "restrictive practices".

Will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that, in all this talk of restrictive practices, the prevention by the N.U.R. of road hauliers going to railway terminals to pick up or deliver goods for liner trains is a restrictive practice, and would he not condemn that?

I understand that the matter is still under discussion between Dr. Beeching and the railway unions.

My right hon. Friend has said that monopolies are not within his purview, but in so far as restrictive practices are within his purview he must be interested in the restrictive practices associated with monopolies. Can he say, therefore, when legislation on monopolies will be introduced; and was any such legislation left by the previous Administration?

I am afraid I cannot say.

asked the Minister of Labour which member-States of the International Labour Organisation have now agreed to comply with the recommendation on termination of employment.

Member States are not obliged to state whether or not they agree to comply with International Labour recommendations. I understand, however, that, in addition to ourselves, the Governments of India, the Ivory Coast, Japan and Switzerland have so far indicated agreement with the general principles of the recommendation.

Would the hon. Gentleman and his right hon. Friend agree that these recommendations involve onerous obligations which have not yet been accepted by our principal trade rivals either in the Common Market or in E.F.T.A. or across the Atlantic? In these circumstances, will the Government exercise caution in imposing these obligations on British manufacturers, thus causing inflation in this country and rendering their goods less competitive as exports in overseas markets?

The law and practice in this country already conform in many respects to the recommendation and, as announced last December in Cmnd. Paper No. 2548, the Government propose to discuss with representatives of employers and trade unions the provision of procedures to give effective safeguards against arbitrary dismissal. I should point out that this recommendation was agreed by all the members of the United Kingdom delegation to the conference.

asked the Minister of Labour what discussions he has had with the Trades Union Congress and the Employers' Confederation to get more shift working and a better use of industrial labour, with less restrictions on both sides of industry; and if he will make a statement.

This is one of a number of aspects of industrial efficiency which I intend to discuss with my National Joint Advisory Council on which both the B.E.C. and the T.U.C. are represented.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is impossible for industries such as those in Lancashire to compete with those in the Far East when our country is working only one shift for five days and they are working three shifts for seven days? Would not the right hon. Gentleman expose both the employers and the trade unions which refuse to work the machinery properly as enemies of the State? What sanction has he against them—none?

I am bound to agree that where capital costs are high shift work can often make a very important contribution to competitive efficiency, and it is, therefore, important that management and employees should be prepared to co-operate in its introduction in appropriate circumstances. One of the difficulties which always arises on shift work is how to compensate the man who works shifts and thereby loses some of his family or social life. This is one of the problems employers must face.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that to describe men and women whose whole health, family life and social life will be disrupted by night work as "enemies of the State" is going much too far?

Outrageous.

asked the Minister of Labour what measures he has taken to strengthen the Factory Inspectorate in order to reduce accidents.

asked the Minister of Labour what steps he has now taken to increase the number of factory inspectors and the frequency of factory inspection.

There has been continuous recruitment to H.M. Factory Inspectorate and there has been a net gain of 21 inspectors since January 1964. There are now 484 inspectors in post.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the tributes which have been paid on both sides of the House to the very fine work done by the existing inspectorate, which is terribly overworked? Can he give us some indication as to the number of inspectors he considers are required for the inspectorate to be up to full force?

The present authorised strength is 516, and we are making very good progress towards reaching it. When we reach this figure, we shall have to have another look at it.

In assessing the number of inspectors required, would my right hon. Friend take into account that new developments in processes and materials are attendant with new hazards? Would he also take into account the fact that only 40 per cent. of reportable accidents are in fact reported and that more working days are lost through industrial injuries and diseases than are lost through strikes?

I entirely take my hon. Friend's points.

Would my right hon. Friend also bear in mind, when he is considering legislation, that he might make it mandatory on factory inspectors to consult workpeople's representatives as well as employers when they visit establishments? This would go a long way towards meeting many of the grievances which workpeople have but have difficulty in airing at present.

This is a matter which has been and is the subject of discussion with the trade unions. I think I am right in saying, however, that it is not mandatory upon the inspectors to consult the employers either.

asked the Minister of Labour what measures he will take to assist men who have had to leave their homes in development areas to find work elsewhere to return home in the event of work becoming available.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to him on 3rd February, 1965.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that reply on 3rd February was an unsatisfactory one, particularly in regard to the limit of two years on a resettlement transfer scheme? Why should not that limit be extended? Is the registration of those men who have had to leave home kept up to date, particularly in regard to additional skills they may have learned on leaving home and any other relevant information?

It would be impossible for the Ministry to keep tags on all men who leave an area and take up employment elsewhere. Many such men may not have had the slightest intention of returning to the area. The Ministry is prepared to register for employment any man who might wish to return to his original area, and to ensure that he is given information on any vacancies which may arise there. The Ministry will also ensure that his particulars are forwarded to employers within the area. It would be quite impracticable for the Ministry to retain virtually for all time records of everyone who leaves every development area.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will undertake an investigation into the number of potential employees, who live near enough to development areas to be able to work in them, who would be prepared to come back to development areas should job opportunities become available in them.

Anyone interested in vacancies in another area can arrange to have them brought to his attention through any convenient employment exchange. I do not think it would be right for me to suggest to men and women who are already in employment and who have not notified the employment exchange of any desire to change jobs, that they should consider seeking work elsewhere.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I did not ask that? I merely asked for the information. Is he aware that industries, particularly with large-scale plans for employment, find a development area such as the one I represent hard to consider because of fears, which I believe to be erroneous, that there may not be enough labour available? Is he aware that information on who is available and where from would be very helpful to them? Is not that the kind of service which the Ministry and the Government could and should undertake?

I accept the hon. Member's point, but it would be very difficult to keep that sort of information up to date. One would have to have a constant review to find whether a man still wanted to come back there or not.

How difficult would that be? Is it insoluble, or is it practicable to achieve that?

I think that it is impracticable because it would mean tracing every man who left a development area and finding out whether he might want to come back to the area at some later date to some job yet unknown. It would mean constantly checking to see whether he wanted to come back or whether he had changed his mind. It would involve a fantastic amount of work, bearing in mind that if a man had any desire to come back to the area he could register that information with the local exchange.

asked the Minister of Labour whether, in order to provide greater flexibility of labour, especially in the managerial class, he will introduce legislation to make illegal non-transferable pension rights; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Labour when he will introduce a Bill dealing with the transferability of all private pension schemes.

A Committee of my National Joint Advisory Council is at present considering how wider provision might be made for the preservation of occupational pension rights on change of employment. I shall consider what action should be taken in the light of the Committee's report.

Has the Minister any idea how many of these non-transferable pension schemes there are? Will he bear in mind that a middle-aged executive, who is a very good man, is often a prisoner of a bad employer who will not let him take his pension rights with him? Will the right hon. Gentleman do his best to end this scandal?

I have already indicated that this is a complicated and very serious matter. This is one of the things which retards the mobility of labour which we want. I hope that the Committee's report will be of such a character as to enable us to tackle the job of doing something about it. I cannot without notice tell the hon. Gentleman how many such schemes there are.

Is the Minister aware that in a manifesto which set out what proposals were poised ready to put into instant action his party promised to see that transferability was made a compulsory element in all pension schemes? How long will this Committee take to study the plans required for this legislation?

We hope that it will proceed with remarkable speed. We have a deep sense of urgency, a sense of urgency which perhaps has not been seen for a long time, in reviewing this complicated problem. As hon. Members opposite know in their position as employers, it is a very complicated problem because of differing rules in the hundreds of separate funds which have been set up.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Society of Pension Consultants is engaged in a detailed study of this problem? Will he keep in touch with the Society?

Yes.

As the Minister says that he is moving with such great speed in this matter, perhaps he will be good enough to acknowledge that this Committee was set up before the election by the previous Government to look into this matter. Was it not, therefore, kind of us to anticipate the right hon. Gentleman's desire to move forward? Would the Minister agree that there are many aspects of this problem, one of which is that we do not want to discourage other firms from initiating pension schemes?

I think that the right hon. Gentleman misunderstood me. I said that we have brought a real sense of urgency into the Committee's work.

asked the Minister of Labour, in view of the danger of occupational bladder tumour in the rubber industry, if he will call upon firms who have used or are using beta-naphthylamine and other similar chemicals to have their employees and ex-employees who were in contact with these substances medically examined, regularly screened and, when necessary, given treatment.

I made it clear in my statement on 15th February that I was advising the industries and firms concerned in this sense.

In view on the increasing number of deaths attributed to the use of aromatic amines in the rubber and other industries, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is sure that every possible step has been taken to seek out the employees and former employees of all the companies concerned?

As I think my hon. Friend knows, I propose to have immediate discussions with the trade unions to ensure that what my hon. Friend has mentioned is done.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will introduce legislation to enable Her Majesty's Government to give financial compensation to aircraft workers made redundant by Her Majesty's Government's decisions to cancel aircraft.

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Aviation on 17th February to the hon. Member for Newark (Mr. Bishop).

asked the Minister of Labour how many aircraft workers will become redundant in the Gloucester and Stroud employment areas as a result of the Government's decision to cancel the HS681 aircraft.

Hawker Siddeley Ltd. announced last week that they intend to close their design office at Gloucester, which was then employing 169 workers. It is not possible to say to what extent this is due to Government decisions. Fifty-nine workers were given notice of discharge on 17th February, and my officers are visiting the establishment today and tomorrow with a view to offering other employment to those who need our help.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that his statement that he does not know why these men are being dismissed is quite astonishing? Will the right hon. Gentleman also appreciate that in this area there are no comparable forms of employment where these highly-skilled men with very special training can get anything like the wages which they have been having up to now?

I could not be more specific at the moment, because we are awaiting, and we shall not know until Wednesday or Thursday, the qualifications and wishes of the men involved.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman take really urgent action? Is he aware that this is the direct result of the action of his Government, contrary to all their promises at the General Election?

It is not true to say that this is entirely due to the Government. There is a lot of doubt as to whether all these men are redundant as a result of Government action.

asked the Minister of Labour what plans he has for the alternative employment of people made redundant by the Government's cancellation of the HS681 and the P1154 aircraft.

As soon as they are informed of any impending redundancies the staff of the employment exchanges concerned are ready to interview the workers affected at their place of work with a view to arranging alternative employment or any necessary training.

What happens to these people—I am thinking particularly of the design teams and draughtsmen who have lost their jobs—if there is no comparable employment locally? Is the right hon. Gentleman making plans to get comparable employment for them elsewhere in equally skilled jobs?

It would be foolish of me to suggest that the highly-trained and specialist design groups who are affected could easily be found employment in the exact locality where they are, but my Ministry will make every effort to ensure as far as possible that they are found employment with the least inconvenience to them.

What steps is the right hon. Gentleman taking to make certain that his right hon. Friend the Minister of Defence increases the order for the P1127, thereby employing many of my constituents and those of my hon. Friend the Member for Surbiton (Mr. Fisher) on the same work in which they are skilled and which they have been doing for the last 15 to 20 years?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Defence will note what has been said.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of the persons concerned are, in fact, qualified scientists or engineers?

Not without notice.

asked the Minister of Labour what steps he is taking to secure that suitable alternative employment in the neighbourhood is found for workers at the Hawker Siddeley factory in the Royal Borough of Kingston-upon-Thames who will lose their jobs as the result of the Government's decision to cancel the construction of certain British aircraft.

Forty-five workers have sought my Department's help in obtaining other work, either through the special office which was opened at the factory on 12th February or at their nearest employment exchange. Most of them have already been put in touch with prospective employers within daily travelling distance of their homes.

The right hon. Gentleman refers to those workers who have sought his Department's help, but is he aware that among those affected are members of the highly specialised design team which, under Sir Sydney Camm, has been designing for the last 30 years aircraft which have been of great service to this country? Is he aware that they are losing their jobs as a direct result of the Government's decision to cancel the P.1154 and, therefore, there is a moral obligation upon him to take special steps to see that they secure suitable employment for their skill near their homes?

Twenty-seven of the highly qualified workers registered with the Professional and Executive Register but two of them left immediately for the provinces. The other 25 have been put in touch with prospective employers for a total of 146 vacancies.

Yes, but in view of the numbers now under or threatened with notice, would the right hon. Gentleman observe that the original Question asked what special steps he was taking? Would he now answer that?

If my Answer did not convey that very thing to the right hon. Gentleman, only God can give him understanding.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that Rolls-Royce wants a substantial number of designers and that these might come from among those made redundant at the Hawker Siddeley works?

Yes, Sir.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that Labour candidates in my constituency and in that of my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston-upon-Thames (Mr. Boyd Carpenter) during the election gave firm pledges that the Labour Government would not cancel the P1154 or the P1127? When will the present Government keep some of the pledges made during the election campaign?

As far as I am aware, my party made no pledge at all of the character stated by the hon. Member. In any case, I am answering the Question. If the hon. Member wants an argument about the matter, this is not the time.

asked the Minister of Labour what consultations he is having with the aircraft manufacturers on the question of the payment of adequate severance pay to workers declared redundant as a result of the contraction of the industry.

As my right hon. Friend the Minister of Aviation said in reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Newark (Mr. Bishop) on 17th February, until the general legislation proposed on this subject comes into operation severance payments are a matter for negotiations between the employers and the unions. My right hon. Friend is urgently considering to what extent such payments can properly be claimed as a charge against the contracts recently cancelled by his Department.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of the workers affected by the contraction of the industry, which would be inevitable in any event, are greatly dissatisfied with the present schemes instituted by the aircraft industry? What consultations is my right hon. Friend having with the manufacturers to see whether they can improve their payments, and what steps is he taking to expedite legislation to make this compulsory upon employers?

I hope that the legislation will be introduced shortly. Negotiations are at present going on between employers and unions about severance pay in the industry affected.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept—from his previous replies, I take it that he does—that there is a special responsibility on the Government in this case to see that these workers do receive adequate compensation? Will he do all he possibly can with his right hon. Friend to see that they do?

As I said in my original Answer, my right hon. Friend the Minister of Aviation is urgently considering this matter now.

asked the Minister of Labour what special retraining facilities will be available without a waiting period for the redundant miners of the Northumberland and Durham division over the next three years.

This will depend on the trades in which training is required and the circumstances at the time.

In view of the very satisfactory reply that was given for Merseyside, can I look forward to a similarly satisfactory reply for the North-East Coast? Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that there is going to be increasing redundancy in the mining industry? Can he tell us what he is going to do for our miners on the North East Coast, for whom it is just as necessary to have a training scheme as it is for the miners on Merseyside?

The hon. Lady is quite right—

Hooray.

I am sure the hon. Lady has never had any doubts on that score.

Never.

She is quite right in believing that both she and her constituents have far more cause for faith in the future than in the past.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the hon. Lady the Member for Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward) is overwhelmed by deathbed repentance—

I am not dying.

Is my hon. Friend aware that we are all concerned that the hon. Lady should remain in this House for a long time to make the same mistake that she has made this afternoon in asking the question? Is he further aware that I have frequently asked the right hon. Member for Grantham (Mr. Godber) to provide training facilities for redundant miners in the North-East, and now it is necessary for hon. Members opposite to make the same demand from this Government?

Coming between my right hon. Friend and the hon. Lady—

Do not bother.

I was going to say, before the hon. Lady was in danger of splitting something, that coming between my right hon. Friend and the hon. Lady is a responsibility that I would rather not really want to shoulder, but it is possible to announce that my right hon. Friend is reviewing the whole question of extending Government training to these centres, and this is one area which may well benefit from the review.

In view of the supplementary question asked by the right hon. Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell), will the hon. Gentleman confirm that in the North-East there has been a substantially increased provision of training facilities and places over the last two years?

There have been increases in these facilities, but, as I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will accept, the whole tenor of these questions and the fact that his hon. Friend should have asked this Question prove conclusively that the policies were quite unsatisfactory.

asked the Minister of Labour how many places are available for retraining and how many for rehabilitation at the Felling Training Centre; and what is the size of the waiting list.

There are 345 training places in the Government training centre at Felling and 100 rehabilitation places in the Industrial Rehabilitation Unit. The waiting lists are 111 and 60 respectively.

Taking all these figures globally, about which I will not argue, is the hon. Gentleman aware that the mining industry in the northern districts requires information now on what steps will be taken, in view of the fact that the industry can provide the hon. Gentleman with the information about redundancy in the mines? We should not have such good results in mining on the North-East Coast if the industry did not know its trade. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the industry knows its trade better than he does?

It is our intention to provide another 44 places which will provide training for 88 men at Felling before the middle of this year, and another 82 places at Billingham which will provide training for another 160 men. We accept that the position is unsatisfactory, and I am sure the hon. Lady would be prepared to say that it is unsatisfactory at the moment, but it is her right hon. Friend's fault and not ours. In addition to these sizeable increases which have taken place, we are also considering the whole of the Government training centre programme.

I am obliged.

asked the Minister of Labour whether the Marsh Committee on training will submit a formal report to him on the completion of its work; when he expects to receive the Report; what request he has made to the Committee to submit interim reports; and how many such reports he has so far received.

The Committee will not submit a formal report but will make recommendations to my right hon. Friends and myself from time to time as appropriate.

Have there yet been any recommendations about training or retraining, particularly in the light of the last answers of the hon. Gentleman, who is the chairman of this Committee and seemed to be claiming large advantages from recent additions which, as he knows, are much lower than the additions which have been made in the last two years?

It is, as the right hon. Gentleman has observed, unusual to publish details about the work of inter-Departmental Committees. While I felt it right to inform the House of the setting up of this Committee, I do not think it would be appropriate to give details of all the questions that it considers or the recommendations it makes. I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will agree that the Government should be judged on the decisions they take.

asked the Minister of Labour how many aliens and Commonwealth immigrants, respectively, including in each category their dependants, had been unemployed for more than six weeks on the last date for which figures are available.

No separate statistics are maintained of unemployed aliens. On 1st February, 1965, the number of Commonwealth immigrants registered as unemployed was 9,224. I regret that an analysis by length of unemployment is not available.

Does not the fact that there were 9,000 Commonwealth immigrants unemployed indicate that it would be as well if the Minister of Labour were to stop issuing employment vouchers for Commonwealth immigrants until these people have been absorbed into our labour market?

When control was instituted in July 1962, 10 per cent. of the immigrants—both immigrants and our own indigenous people—were unemployed. The last available figure is 2·7 per cent

How many of these have been long-term unemployed, say for a period of six months?

I regret to say that we have no statistics on that, but what information is available leads me to the conclusion, on which I am not being too specific or definite, that the long-term unemployment amongst the immigrant population is no greater than it is among the indigenous population.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that many of us on this side of the House do not accept this breakdown of unemployment figures among immigrants and non-immigrants and that we want to see the unemployment problem solved in its entirety irrespective of where the people come from or who they are?

I find myself in substantial agreement with my hon. Friend, but I hope he will appreciate that I am answering the Question put to me.

asked the Minister of Labour how many Commonwealth immigrants were employed by British Railways and London Transport Executive on the last date for which figures are available.

I regret that I do not have this information.

Bearing in mind that one of the most important facts about the immigrant population is that it is said that they are needed on British Railways and London Transport, would the hon. Gentleman try to obtain the information?

We have tried to find it. The information available is very restricted and governed largely by the issue of A vouchers. We shall do what we can, of course, but it is not easy to determine the position. It is well known that a number of immigrants are engaged in London Transport and British Railways, and I think it is also appreciated that they are rendering very valuable service to the community.

Will the hon. Gentleman go further and confirm not only that a very large number of immigrants are employed on London Transport but that London Transport would be in very considerable difficulties without them?

Will my hon. Friend agree that it is deplorable that certain hon. Members opposite tend to bring into their Questions to certain Ministers, as we have witnessed today, what some of us would describe as a racialist undertone?

In order that the arguments for or against having a large number of immigrants here for service on the railways shall not be exaggerated either way, is it not most important that the House should be provided with the information for which I have asked?

I have attempted to give all the information we have. It is an exremely difficult problem. The Ministry staff, I am sure, does the best it can, but let it not be forgotten that we took over the Government machine quite recently.

asked the Minister of Labour what action is taken by him when an unofficial strike occurs to ascertain the cause of the dispute; and what is the nature of the action taken to bring such disputes to an end.

My officers usually obtain information from the employer or employers' association and from the trade union. Most unofficial strikes are in breach of agreements and they frequently end as a result of the trade union officials persuading their members to allow the dispute to be dealt with through the agreed procedure of the industry.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I deplore the unofficial strike as much as he does, but would he not agree that frequently criticisms indulged in against men who go on strike are unwarranted and that the trouble occurs because of delays in negotiations or because of interference with practices by management or those responsible for general administration? Would the right hon. Gentleman not ensure that in future when an unofficial strike occurs inquiries are held by his Ministry to ascertain the actual cause of the dispute?

I entirely agree with my right hon. Friend that the causes of unofficial strikes have not been sufficiently analysed in the past. It is generally believed, however, that the majority of them are caused by bad communications within industry, for which managements must accept a great share of responsibility. On the other hand, there are unofficial strikes which are absolutely to be deplored, and I do not think that anybody should shrink from deploring them and stating so in public. On the question of investigation, the vast majority of unofficial strikes are over very quickly and it is generally thought that to have a real first-class inquiry and arouse the embers again would be dangerous. On the other hand, my right hon. Friend will know that the Trades Union Congress and the employers have agreed to investigate a selected number of unofficial strikes to see how they came about.

On the last point made by the Minister, that particular plan was started some months ago. Have the British Employers' Confederation and the Trades Union Congress put it in hand yet? The Minister will be aware that it was our intention that it should be a tripartite effort, with the Government involved, too. I still think that was the best way, but, on the assumption that they are going ahead on the bipartisan method, it is necessary that matters proceed immediately. Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that there are many industries in regard to which it is most valuable to bring the light of public knowledge to bear on unofficial strikes as soon as possible?

I could not say exactly at what stage the procedure is at the moment. If the right hon. Gentleman will put down a Question, I shall give him an answer.

In the event of the doctors coming out on strike, is it likely to be official or unofficial, and will my right hon. Friend deplore it in advance?

The doctors are not, I am glad to say, within the limit of my responsibilities.

asked the Minister of Labour what action he proposes to take to implement the policy of Her Majesty's Government to restrict to Londoners the filling of employment vacancies in the London area.

The policy of Her Majesty's Government is not as restrictive as the hon. Member suggests, but vacancies are only offered to registrants outside daily travelling distance if they cannot be filled from within daily travelling distance. My Department is, of course, playing its full part in Her Majesty's Government's policies for the better distribution of employment which provide the real answer to the problem my hon. Friend has in mind.

Will my hon. Friend consider issuing a statement giving full details of this policy, since there is, as I am sure he recognises, a great deal of anxiety in the London area because of the present unsatisfactory relationship between homes and jobs? We are not altogether satisfied that houses are being allocated according to housing needs, and we should like to have a much broader discussion of the whole matter.

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government is dealing with the problem of housing. Many jobs cannot be moved out of London. There are those employed in many of the services, for example, hospitals and transport, and their jobs cannot be moved out of London. The Government's distribution of industry and office building policies will reduce the number of vacancies being created within the London area.

On the other hand, will the hon. Gentleman accept that we must not have a "dog in the manger" attitude towards this policy? Will he have regard to the case in my constituency, for instance, of a young draughtsman attracted down to Hawker Siddeley in Kingston to work on the building of the P 1154 who, only three or four weeks ago, moved his family down but who is now unemployed and is, of course, looking for work in the London area?

No doubt the hon. Gentleman will immediately let my Department have details of the man he has in mind, who, as a skilled craftsman, is unable to obtain work in the London area.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he proposes to publish figures for wage drift in each Ministry of Labour standard region, broken down by industries.

No, Sir. The technical difficulties make this impracticable. The calculation of wage drift is extremely complicated and it is difficult to produce useful results for the country as a whole and all industries combined. Figures broken down, by industry and region, would not be reliable enough to be useful. The Ministry does, of course, publish regional estimates of men's average earnings by industry and for some occupations in "Statistics on Incomes, Prices, Employment and Production", copies of which are available in the Library.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that, unless he is prepared to publish such figures and to do the spadework necessary to give them to the House, it is quite impossible for us to appraise the success or failure of the Government's incomes policy? Does not he realise that, unless he wishes the incomes policy to be regarded as mere window-dressing, he must look into the whole matter?

The incomes policy is by no means window-dressing. A number of assumptions have to be taken into account in making a global calculation for the country as a whole, and by industries. I will give the hon. Gentleman an example. An assessment has to be made of the overtime element, some of which is at time and a third, some at time and a quarter, some at time and a half, and some at double time for Sunday. An assessment has to be made on that basis. In breaking the position down for regions and for each industry within regions, the margin of error would increase and the final result would be practically valueless.

For clarification, could the hon. Gentleman tell the House whether it is his view that his Ministry is unable to produce any figures of wage drift which are meaningful or useful for those who have to carry out the incomes policy?

This is a matter which is receiving our close attention. I have answered the particular Question I was asked.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will now name the members of the Royal Commission which he is setting up to review trade union law and practice.

I hope that an announcement will be made in the near future.

Could the right hon. Gentleman say how long the Royal Commission will take? Is it not a very convenient way of putting under the counter the very necessary reforms which must be made in trade union structure?

I shall not enter into an argument reflecting on the eminent gentlemen who are to serve on the Royal Commission.

As my right hon. Friend the Member for Grantham (Mr. Godber) announced nearly a year ago that, if our party got in, there was to be an inquiry after the General Election, and as the right hon. Gentleman's Ministry has been well alerted to the things which have to be done to establish the Royal Commission, why is there this quite unnecessary delay?

The circumstances are not quite as the right hon. and learned Gentleman imagines. Upon the passing of the Conservative Administration, there was a very sour atmosphere on this issue. [HON. MEMBERS, "Oh."] There was a very sour atmosphere indeed.

Who created it?

I am not arguing who created it. It existed. Therefore, it was necessary to give a lot of new thought to how we were to get both the employers and the trade unions to co-operate in the establishment of what I regard as one of the most important initiatives undertaken in this field for a long time.

Since the right hon. and learned Member for St. Marylebone (Mr. Hogg) does not seem to have anything particular to do, can my right hon. Friend give an absolute guarantee that he will not land up on this Royal Commission?

I can indeed.

Will the Minister give an undertaking that, when the Royal Commission is set up, there are on it members other than trade union or employer representatives?

I think that the hon. and gallant Gentleman will be very satisfied.