asked the Minister of Labour what is the number of persons unemployed in Bournemouth and the number of unfilled vacancies at the latest available date.

At March, 1968, there were 3,380 persons registered as unemployed in the area covered by Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Employment Exchanges and 1,290 notified vacancies remained unfilled.

Since an unfair burden will be laid upon the hotel industry—

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Might I draw your attention to the fact that the amplification system does not appear to be working? We cannot hear what is being said.

I cannot hear the hon. Member for Tottenham (Mr. Atkinson) because the microphones are not working. Mr. Atkinson, a point of order?

That was my point of order, Mr. Speaker. I was attempting to direct your attention to the fact that the amplification system is not working.

Perhaps Ministers and hon. Members will speak up.

As Bournemouth relies heavily on employment in the hotel industry, is it possible for the Minister to look again at the unfair burden imposed on that industry by the Selective Employment Tax?

I cannot give the hon. Gentleman the answer that he has asked for.

We cannot hear.

There has been a slight improvement in the position in Bournemouth since January. Another complication at the moment is that Bournemouth is such a delightful salubrious spot that it attracts a large number of retired people, and a quarter of the unemployed male persons on the register are men over 60.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will now make a statement on the treatment of slaughterhouses following his review of Selective Employment Tax classifications.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is now able to announce the result of his review of classifications for the purposes of the Selective Employment Tax.

I hope to be able to announce the result of the review before Easter.

Is it not extremely unjust that a slaughterhouse run by a municipal authority should escape Selective Employment Tax completely whereas one that is privately run bears this burden, which has been increased by 50 per cent. recently?

I cannot comment on either the justice or injustice of the situation until the review is completed.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that he will be failing in his duty if he does not ensure that industries in the export field are exempted from Selective Employment Tax?

I do not think so. I do not think that with the Selective Employment Tax the Government have ever sought to discriminate in favour of exporting industries.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the results of the review will be implemented by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the Finance Bill?

I think that implies that the review will have some results which may lead to a reclassification. But this is a hypothesis that I do not want to go into.

asked the Minister of Labour how many people were unemployed in the building industry in Scotland at the most recent date for which figures are available; and what were the comparable figures at the same date in each of the previous three years.

At February, 1968, there were 16,360 persons registered as unemployed in Scotland who last worked in the construction industry. The corresponding February figures for 1967, 1966 and 1965 were 14,990, 10,300 and 13,340 respectively.

Is it not criminal that we should have 16,000 building workers unemployed when we still have thousands of Glasgow folk suffering from the effects of storm damage? Will the hon. Gentleman help to organise a national recruiting campaign so that the efforts of these men can be concentrated on relieving the real suffering in Glasgow?

I think that the last part of the supplementary question should have been addressed to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, but the hon. Gentleman must know that no Government in all the post-war years have done more to meet the housing needs of Scotland than the present Government.

Is it not the case that a great proportion of these unemployed persons are unskilled? Can my hon. Friend say what the shortage of skilled men is?

I am sorry but I cannot give my hon. Friend that information without notice.

asked the Minister of Labour what estimate has been made of the number of new jobs that will be created, in Scotland and Fife respectively, in the telecommunications industry in the next 12 months.

I am sorry no estimate is possible for the whole of Scotland but about 500 new jobs should be created in Fife over the next 12 months as a result of the G.E.C.-A.E.I. plans to expand their factories there and it is expected that there will be further expansion beyond that time.

Can the hon. Friend explain the apparent disquiet among workers there that there might be a rundown at the factory in Glenrothes? Can my hon. Friend give the proportions as between male and female jobs among this figure of 500?

I am not in a position to tell my hon. Friend why there should be such concern at Glenrothes. We have no information which would substantiate such concern in any way. Nor am I in a position without notice to tell him the proportions of male and female jobs among the 500.

asked the Minister of Labour how many United States-owned firms operating in Scotland refuse to recognise trade unions; and what steps he intends to take to encourage these firms to conform to the generally accepted practices of British industry.

No precise information is available about the number of firms, whether American-owned or otherwise, that do not recognise trade unions. My industrial relations officers are very ready to help resolve differences between employers and unions about recognition.

Does not my right hon. Friend regard it as regrettable that the Ministry does not have this information? Will he seek to get it? Does not he recognise that American firms in general do not recognise trade unions and seek to contract out of this obligation by paying slightly above the trade union rate?

We have never compiled that information either about British-owned or about American-owned firms. It is always regrettable to me when trade unions are not recognised if the workers want them recognised. I should like to say, however, that I find no difference in attitude between American and British employers here. They are either good or bad or half way between the two. In my dealings with American firms here, I have found no indication that they are more awkward than some British firms.

Is it not the case that many American-owned firms, through plant bargaining, pay higher wages than United Kingdom firms?

That is true.

asked the Minister of Labour what change in unemployment levels in Scotland is forecast in the light of the Budget policy.

I am not prepared to give a forecast of the future level of unemployment.

With 136,000 unemployed in Scotland in 1963, when hon. Members opposite were in office, and 86,000 unemployed now, is it not desirable that the Government should not cultivate the habits of the Opposition because of budgetary policy?

I immediately agree with that proposition.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is wise not to make forecasts in the light of Budget decisions? Is it not inevitable that increases in the S.E.T. and excise duties will have serious effects on the level of employment in Scotland, particularly outside the central industrial belt?

I have always refrained from making prophecies about unemployment, not only since the Budget but before. One of the reasons for this is that certain prophecies were made by the Opposition about the level of unemployment in December and January which were proved false, and I do not claim to be a better prophet than they are.

asked the Minister of Labour what employment and unemployment trends are forecast for the coming year in the light of Budget policy.

I am not prepared to give forecasts of the future level of employment or unemployment.

Does my right hon. Friend recognise that that Answer is very unsatisfactory? In view of the position in Scotland it is necessary that the Government should not relax their efforts to ensure that there is no increase in the trend of unemployment.

I agree. Indeed, the efforts of the Government have been directed, with some success, to meeting that situation in Scotland.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Chancellor of the Exchequer also refuses to give any estimate of future unemployment? To whom can we go? Is this the Government who seek to plan everything for the future except full employment?

It is just a desire to refrain from the dangerous area of prophecy.

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said yesterday that the alternative to the wages policy was 1 million unemployed. What work has the Ministry of Labour done on finding out whether the equivalent of 500,000 unemployed plus the 3½ per cent. wage norm is equal to 1 million unemployed?

I have a shrewd suspicion that that supplementary question should be directed to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will seek to amend the Redundancy Payments Act so that it applies to redundancy in individual companies in the shipping industry and not to the industry as a whole.

The Act already applies to redundancy in individual companies, in the shipping industry as in industry generally. But the National Maritime Board wishes to substitute for the statutory provisions a scheme based on redundancy in the shipping industry as a whole. This scheme, which has been agreed by the unions and employers concerned and which is on the whole more generous than the statutory scheme, has my approval. I hope shortly to lay before Parliament the draft of an Order which, subject to Parliamentary approval will allow the industry's scheme to be brought into operation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that seamen, particularly on short sea routes, think that this is operating gravely against them? Will he look again at this matter, particularly as it affects short sea routes?

I take the point about short sea routes. The new agreement between the unions and the National Maritime Board is more generous on the whole than the existing arrangements.

asked the Minister of Labour what action he has taken to improve the staffing of his Department in Portsmouth following recent closures in the neighbourhood.

To deal with the redeployment of redundant workers in the area, the staffing of my Department in Portsmouth has been improved by allocating two experienced officers temporarily and one on a long term basis. In addition two clerks have been engaged locally.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, in the area, there is great admiration for the work of his Department in the recent difficult situation? In view of possible significant changes in the employment pattern in the area there is widespread hope that he will keep the staffing and resources of the Department under constant review.

I am happy to have heard that tribute and I will see that it is passed on to the staff. My hon. Friend can rest assured that we always keep the staffing position under review.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will make a statement on the unemployment position in Portsmouth.

On 11th March there were 2,595 persons—2,195 men and 40 boys, 317 women and 43, girls—including 11 temporarily stopped regi- stered as unemployed at the Portsmouth employment exchange. The unemployment rate for the Portsmouth travel to work area was 3·1 per cent. compared with 3·2 per cent. in February, 1968, and 3·1 per cent. in March, 1967.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that this is almost the highest level of unemployment for the region as a whole? Does not he further agree that, if we are to have economic growth in the country as a whole, we cannot afford to under-utilise labour resources in the South-East?

We cannot afford under-utilisation of labour anywhere. My hon. Friend and some of his colleagues are bringing a deputation to see me on Wednesday and I presume that this is one of the matters they want to discuss.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will make a statement on the employment position in the London Borough of Croydon arising from local firms transferring work to other places.

Although three firms have recently transferred work elsewhere, of the 300 workers redundant in consequence 11 only remain unemployed. The percentage rate of unemployment for the Greater London area which includes Croydon is 1·6. This rate is below that for the region as a whole and considerably lower than the national average.

I am grateful for that reply, but is my hon. Friend aware that there is still some concern locally about the number of firms which have either moved out or may do so in future? While we have plenty of offices, the same is not true of factories. Will he soon be replying to the letter from Croydon Council about the industrial future of the town?

My hon. Friend can rest assured that, with its customary competence, my Department replies to every letter it receives. My hon. Friend says that factories are moving out. Our experience has shown that there is such a demand for industrial space in Croydon that premises vacated are usually swiftly taken by those who want to expand.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I am closely associated with a company situated in the constituency of the hon. Member for Croydon, South (Mr. Winnick) and that, whenever we unfortunately have vacancies, we find it extremely difficult to fill them? Is he further aware that there is no real unemployment problem in Croydon whatever?

I hope that that happy situation will continue to prevail.

asked the Minister of Labour what has been the estimated increase in wage and salary rates and earnings for the latest available six-month period: and what is the expected increase during the coming six months.

During the period end-July, 1967, to end-January, 1968, there were increases of 4·1 per cent. in the weekly wage rate index, 4·2 per cent. in the hourly wage rate index and 4·0 per cent. in the index of average earnings, which covers both wage and salary earners. Estimates of future expectations are not published.

Can the Joint Parliamentary Secretary confirm that these increases of 4 per cent. or so have occurred at a time when there exists statutory legislation to limit prices and incomes? Will he, therefore, reflect whether this does not show the inadvisability of such a policy which has so demonstrably failed?

No. I certainly do not accept that. Had the hon. Gentleman been less careful about the selection of the period for which he asks the figures, I do not think that the House would hold that view.

On what does my hon. Friend base his estimate? What does he think would have been the rate of increase if there had not been the current wages legislation and what does he estimate the increase will be with and without the prospective legislation now being proposed?

As I was not giving an estimate in the first place, it is highly unlikely that I shall be prepared to answer that question which was dependent on an estimate having been given.

As the hon. Gentleman suggested that my hon. Friend the Member for Oswestry (Mr. Biffen) had been selective in his choice of period, is he not aware that the National Institute also expressed the opinion that the statutory policy had had no effect over the whole of its first 15 months of operation?

As the right hon. Gentleman is doubtful about my allegation, I should like him to consider some alternative figures. During the standstill, average earnings rose by 0·3 per cent. During the period of severe restraint, they rose by 1·9 per cent. In the six-month periods between and after those periods they rose by at least twice that amount.

asked the Minister of Labour what is the total number of workers covered by salary and wage claims, respectively, notified to his Department during the last 12 months; and what percentages they are of the total numbers of salary and wage earners, respectively.

Major claims notified cover 9·1 million wage earners and 1·4 million salary earners. These represent respectively, about 57 per cent. and 20 per cent. of the estimated totals.

Does not that Answer illustrate the extremely partial knowledge available to the Ministry of Labour, which knows nearly three times as much about wage increases as about salary increases? As the statutory policy can proceed only on the knowledge available to the Ministry, does not this clearly indicate that wage earners are more likely to be discriminated against than are salary earners?

I have given the hon. Gentleman those figures because those are the figures of major claims notified. They are the figures for which we have definite totals, but in addition many others are informally notified to the headquarters of the Ministry and to regional offices. The majority of companies are applying a great deal of the incomes policy not because they have to notify figures to the Ministry of Labour, but because they know it to be in the national interest.

Is is not clear that during the period of wage freeze executives' salaries went up—this was indicated in Business Week—and that there is discrimination against the worker at the shop bench as against the salary earner, particularly in the higher levels of income?

No, I do not think that that is a reasonable conclusion. Very often the suspicion that this discrimination exists arises from the knowledge that many administrative and clerical staff have annual increments, but annual increments are totally acceptable within the terms of the policy, given one or two qualifications.

asked the Minister of Labour (1) what steps he is taking to overcome the high and increasing level of unemployment in the Bideford area;

Between 8th January and 11th March, 1968, the number of people registered as unemployed at Bideford employment exchange increased from 436 to 485. I am not aware that any part of this increase was due to difficulties with road communications in Bideford. My local officers are doing all they can to help those who become unemployed to find suitable work and offer opportunities for training in suitable cases.

Is not this an appalling reflection on Socialist policies in this area? Will the hon. Gentleman do everything in his power to see that further industry is brought to the area and that the factory which M.P.J. recently vacated is soon filled?

The hon. Gentleman will note that, as Bideford is in a development area, the present Government are doing more to attract industry to it and are offering better financial inducements than any previous Administration. I hope that, given time, he will find that this policy works to his entire satisfaction.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will agree to participation by his Department in the inquiry into the £15 minimum wage being carried out by the Confederation of British Industries and the Trades Union Congress; and if he will make a statement.

This is a matter which I understand has been raised in discussions which the C.B.I. and T.U.C. have had together but which has not involved any question of participation by my Department.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that, with reasonable social security benefits, he is responsible for ensuring proper provision for men in the lower income groups and that his Department should, therefore, participate in discussions on a national minimum wage? Does he further agree that it is also in the interests of the Government to participate in this discussion because of the number of people employed by local authorities?

I would rather see how far the C.B.I. and the T.U.C. get along the road. As my hon. Friend will know, it was only at a meeting on 4th March, just a fortnight ago, that these discussions were started. I would rather wait to see how far they go.

My right hon. Friend is saying on behalf of the Government that we ought to leave this matter of wage negotiations to the C.B.I. and the trade unions. On the other hand, the Government are ready to impose incomes legislation. Will he make a clear declaration whether in his opinion as Minister of Labour a wage of £15 a week is too high?

I can immediately declare that a wage of £15 a week is not too high. However, my right hon. Friend is most diligent in his attendance at Question Time and must have heard me say more than once that the establishment of a minimum wage of £15 a week, or any other figure, requires the most detailed consultation and the most detailed analysis. The cost of establishing a minimum wage of £15 a week, which the T.U.C. regards as desirable, in present circumstances is something which we cannot possibly afford. Therefore, discussions and consultations must proceed to see how we may best move towards that ideal.

Will the right hon. Gentleman carefully consider the views of his hon. Friend the Member for Bothwell (Mr. James Hamilton), remembering that many people get as much money for not working as they would for working?

I take the point. I am not so sure that at some time we shall not have to have a look at what happens inside the Welfare State in this connection.

As the majority of low wage earners are women and as the Government are taking part in discussions with the T.U.C. and the C.B.I. about equal pay, could they not take part in discussions about a minimum wage of £15 a week?

The two things are different and separate, and yet they are the two major problems at present. The cost of equal pay—interpreting equal pay as equal pay for equal work—is another substantial burden. That is one of the reasons why I would rather wait to see—I hope for not too long—how long the T.U.C. and the C.B.I. will take to reach some considered view on a minimum wage.

asked the Minister of Labour why there are no farmers from the East Midlands on the Agricultural, Horticultural and Forestry Industry Training Board; and if he will take steps to remedy the position.

There is such a farmer on the board.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for correcting the erroneous impression which he gave me in a letter the other day. However, the fact remains that the East Midlands are not properly represented on this Board. Does he not agree that one of the troubles is that there are more union representatives than farmer representatives on the Board, although farmers are solely responsible for financing the whole scheme?

No. The constitution of industrial training boards requires employers and employees to be represented equally. As for the correction which I gave to the hon. Gentleman, what I said in the House some time ago remains true and was not corrected by the letter. There is representation of the sort the hon. Gentleman wishes and I am sure that that is entirely proper.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware of the emergence of a persisting higher total of unemployment in Birmingham; and when he expects this total to fall to a more normal level.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will make a statement on the employment situation in Birmingham.

On 11th March, 1968, the total number of persons registered as unemployed in the Birmingham Group of exchanges was 18,020–15,923 males and 2,097 females—of whom 3,144 were temporarily stopped. The percentage rate in March, 1968, fell to 2·6 compared with 2·9 in February, 1968.

Does my hon. Friend confirm that this is now an unacceptable level of unemployment in Birmingham? If it persists over the coming two or three months, will he undertake to meet the Birmingham Trades Council to discuss it?

It is unacceptable only if we are prepared to abandon what we are doing in the development areas. If a definite date can be arranged, I shall be happy to meet the Birmingham Trades Council. However, my hon. Friend will appreciate that if the economy continues to pick up as it now seems to be doing, that should be reflected in the employment position in Birmingham.

While we accept, in broad terms, Government policy in this matter, may I ask whether my hon. Friend appreciates that the principle might be somewhat modified? Would he enter into consultations with the President of the Board of Trade to consider the question of employment in this area, which is vital to the nation's economy?

I accept that it is an area vital to the country's economy, but if one begins to modify area policy, where unemployment is almost double what it is in Birmingham, the whole of the Government policy would be fruitless.

Has the hon. Gentleman not perceived that since last Tuesday employment prospects in Birmingham and adjoining areas have considerably worsened? Is it not a fact that the heaviest of all burdens in the Budget fell upon the motor car industry, the principal employer of labour in the Birmingham conurbation?

It is true that some burden fell upon the motor car industry—[Interruption.] I attended the Budget debate and rather gathered that hon. Members opposite felt that the heaviest burden came in relation to the wealth tax. I may be wrong. Hon. Members will be aware that the motor car industry is now engaged on a great drive for exports. This is where we want the growth to take place. This is where we hope we can create additional employment.

In view of the great influences of the motor industry on engineering employment in general, and Birmingham in particular, and the savage attack made in the Budget, will the Minister of Labour keep a very close eye on this, to see that unemployment in the Birmingham area does not get out of control? Is he aware that it could have a wide effect on other industries too?

If that prophecy came true it would be our duty to look at the position again.

asked the Minister of Labour how many men and women at present unemployed in Birmingham have been unemployed for more than one month, two months, and three months, respectively.

The latest date for which a comprehensive duration analysis of the registered wholly unemployed is available is 8th January, 1968. On that date, in the area covered by Birmingham, Aston, Handsworth, Selly Oak, Small Heath and Washwood Heath Employment Exchanges, 9,876 men and 1,383 women had been on the registers for more than four weeks, 7,595 men and 1,004 women for more than eight weeks and 5,719 men and 672 women for more than 13 weeks.

Does the Minister realise that this increasing number of persons unemployed for more than three months is extremely serious? Will he consider with the President of the Board of Trade whether they are forcing too many factories to move, leaving skilled workers behind?

I accept that all unemployment is very undesirable and hurtful. Hon. Members have to face the fact that if we are to deal with the problems of Scotland, Wales, the South-West and the North-East we can do so only on the basis of pursuing the present policy until we achieve the desired end.

Is the hon. Gentleman telling the House that the Government's policy for curing unemployment in the development areas is to create it elsewhere?

Of course not. What I am telling hon. Gentlemen opposite is that it is the duty of any Government with any understanding of the national need to see that there is a far better distribution of—

Misery—

unemployment in future than there has been. No Government can defend the over-heating that occurred in the South-East and the mass unemployment in the areas I have mentioned in the post-war years.

asked the Minister of Labour what was the total number unemployed in March, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967 and 1968 in the City of Birmingham.

In the area covered by the Birmingham, Aston, Handsworth, Selly Oak, Small Heath and Washwood Heath employment exchanges, the total numbers registered as unemployed at March, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967 and 1968 were 7,210, 9,210, 3,980, 16,900 and 18,020 respectively.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that those figures show that Birmingham can no longer be regarded, as it has always been regarded, as a rather lush area for employment? I accept the need for the Department to develop its development area policies, but will my hon. Friend pay particular attention in future to the problems of Birmingham, bearing in mind the increase which he has just announced?

The increase is reduced on a percentage basis to 2·2 per cent. if we leave out those temporarily stopped, many of whom arise from industrial disputes. When there are areas which have an average three or four times greater than 2·2 per cent, I do not think that it would be a fair solution or economic policy to give any preference to Birmingham.

Do not these figures give ample justification for my earlier prognosis that the position in Birmingham is steadily and progressively getting worse and will, as a result of last Tuesday's Budget, be made infinitely worse?

I am sure that time will prove that that prophecy, like many other prophecies which the hon. Gentleman has made, was completely wrong.

It is nothing to do with the Budget—

Of course it is.

but would my hon. Friend realise that there are thousands of small factories in Birmingham, many of which are being asked to move out, and it is in these where skilled workers will be made redundant? This is causing considerable difficulty. I hope that this aspect will be thoroughly examined.

I do not think there is any Government pressure on firms to move out. It is a voluntary decision made by the firm. But there is substantial diversification in Birmingham. I am sure that the growing economic activity will reflect itself in the employment position in Birmingham, as it will in the rest of the country.

asked the Minister of Labour what estimate he has made of the number of people engaged in the manufacture of telecommunications equipment; how many are employed in the development areas; and what is the proportion in the Northern Region.

The industry generally recognised to be most concerned with the manufacture of telecommunications equipment is "Telegraph and Telephone Apparatus" (Minimum List Heading 363 of the Standard Industrial Classification).

While I am deeply grateful to my right hon. Friend for that information, may I ask if he will accept that we on this side of the House believe that the number employed in this industry in the Northern Region is far too low, especially when one has the situation of a heavy decline in basic industries? Would he agree that 2·6 per cent. unemployment somewhere else in the country, however unacceptable, is not by any means comparable with almost 10 per cent. amongst men, in Sunderland?

I certainly take the latter point, but I should have thought that 14 per cent. in the Northern Region is not really a very bad percentage.

asked the Minister of Labour what changes he proposes to make in the methods of obtaining the information on which the Retail Price Index is based.

The methods used for obtaining information are kept under review and changed when necessary, but I have no changes in mind at the present time.

Is the Minister aware that the figures given in the Index of Retail Prices are increasingly treated with scepticism?

Order. The hon. Member must speak up.

In view of the rapidly changing position in shopping and retail distribution, does he not think that some more sophisticated methods are needed? Has he consulted the Social Survey on this?

Yes, and there is a continuing review of this taking place examining how statistics are arrived at. I am not entirely happy at the weighting given to certain elements in the Retail Price Index. I am giving more details, in answer to a later Question, of the criticisms in the Consumer Council magazine, "Focus" which had something to say about this some months ago.

asked the Minister of Labour what steps he is taking to extend facilities for retraining in the West Midlands in the light of the recent figures for adult male unemployment in Birmingham.

Two new Government training centres are to be set up in the West Midlands, one in North Staffordshire by the end of 1969, and the other in the Wolverhampton area by the end of 1970. The number of training places at the present Birmingham and Coventry centres is to be increased by mid-1969. These developments will raise the annual output of trained men from centres in the West Midlands from 600 to about 1,350.

While thanking my hon. Friend for that reply, and accepting that some unemployment in the Birmingham area is the result of the more efficient use of manpower in the motor industry, for which the Government can take credit, may I ask him whether he does not consider that there is a greater duty upon the Government to increase training facilities to cope with that increase?

The basic redeployment which has gone on successfully in the West Midlands requires increased training. Much of this must be done within the factories in which the re deployed men are to work. This is being facilitated by the excellent progress being made by the Engineering Industry Training Board.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will state the number of Mineworkers registered at employment exchanges in Durham, Northumberland and Cumberland, respectively.

At 11th March, 1968, the numbers of persons registered as unemployed in Durham, Northumberland and Cumberland who last worked in the coalmining industry were 3,580, 1,060 and 120 respectively.

On the assumption that the majority of these men can be regarded as redundant, what is to become of them? There is nothing personal about this, but, in his reply, will my hon. Friend disregard all the jargon about advance factories and hopes for the future?

Several major industries have declared since January that they are going to the North-East, in particular, and we are designating as special development areas those areas in which mines have been closed. If my right hon. Friend believes that that is jargon, then may I say that I do not believe that any Government, even the Government of which he was a member, did more for the areas which require additional employment than this one.

asked the Minister of Labour what guidance he intends to give industrial training boards on the need for changes in the apprenticeship system.

Many of the boards are making progress in establishing training requirements for craft occupations. General guidance was given to them in the Central Training Council's memorandum No. 5, published in April, 1966, and the Council is currently considering the further development of policy for skilled training.

Since there is a need for increased training, and a need to reduce the years worked towards an apprenticeship, will the boards try to influence the reduction of the number of years spent on apprenticeship?

The boards' task is to give guidance on the years taken over apprenticeship rather than positively to influence the decision, which in many ways is the concern of industrial relations procedures. But the hon. Gentleman will be comforted, as I am comforted, to know that some boards have already done this, not least the Foundry Industry Training Committee which advised that apprenticeship training in that industry should last for three and not five years.

Is not one of the problems that some employers find it difficult to agree to pay the full cost of the rate in the last year, which is creating a problem in relation to a reduction in the number of years?

This is a problem in some industries, and that is why there are important issues of industrial relations to be decided as well as the more technical issue of for how long the apprenticeship period should last.

Should not we be moving away completely from the idea of a prolonged period of training? Is not intermittent training more in line with the needs of a modern economy? Should not the Ministry give a much stronger lead in this matter?

If the hon. Gentleman means, should not we accept that skilled men will be required to retrain and refurbish their skills during their working lives, that is the case. This is why we particularly welcome the initiatives of the Engineering Board, whose apprenticeship schemes are based on a module system of training which makes adult life a good deal easier than was the case under the old-fashioned schemes of training.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will make a statement about the studies made in his Department of the increase in the number of office employees in recent years.

A report of the Manpower Research Unit was published on 11th March, 1968, under the title "Manpower Studies No. 7: Growth of Office Employment". This examines growth over the period 1921 to 1961, and is the first part of a study to try to identify the reasons for the large increase in office employment and to forecast future developments.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the report to which he has referred contains no comparison between the trend in this country and the trend in other advanced industrial countries? In the further studies which are to take place, would it not be useful if that comparison were made?

I understand that that is very much in mind for the second part.

asked the Minister of Labour what was the total reduction in the numbers employed in the engineering industry during 1967.

In the engineering and electrical goods industries (Order VI of the Standard Industrial Classification), it is provisionally estimated that between December, 1966, and December, 1967, the numbers decreased by 38,000.

Is not that a very sad reflection of the Government's mismanagement of the economy, bearing in mind the stimulation which they are allegedly giving to manufacturing industries at such great cost to the taxpayer?

Question No. 37 asks for a general conclusion about that stimulation. If the hon. Gentleman waits until then, I will be glad to comment on the matter.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will investigate the possibility of dividing the Engineering Industry Training Board into a number of smaller boards.

No, Sir, but we will continue to keep the scope of the board under review.

But is the hon. Gentleman aware that certain sections of the engineering industry, such as welding, are virtually completely separate industries and that it is absurd that there should be a general training board when there are these virtually separate industries within the industry?

I know that there are areas of the industry covered by the Engineering Industry Training Board which are very different from the majority of the occupations which it covers, but there are substantial advantages in having them under one board. If the board thinks that it is necessary to make special provision for part of its concern, it is entitled to do so.

asked the Minister of Labour what is the total number of all staff, including office employees and instructors, employed at the latest available date by the various training boards which have been established under the Industrial Training Act, 1964.

This is a matter for the boards themselves, which are given express responsibility under the Industrial Training Act for appointing their own staffs.

On a point of order. Did the hon. Gentleman answer my Question? I asked for the total number of staff. He seemed to refer to something entirely different.

I said that that was a matter for the boards themselves.

Surely the Minister has some idea of the total staff involved. A number of hon. Members are very concerned at the growing staff structure of the individual training boards. Some picture of the exact size would have been useful. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that no less than £500,000 annually is to be devoted to running the Agricultural Training Board?

I am well aware of the very special considerations which apply to the Agricultural Training Board this year. In no other year has that board had to spend substantial sums on administration and staff. But that is typical neither of the boards in general nor of the work which that board intends to do in the long run. The position concerning my responsibility is very clear. Schedule 10 to the Act enables the boards to set up their own machinery. It is vitally important that they should be allowed to get on with the work—the running of the board by industry, for industry—without the constant interference of my Ministry.

asked the Minister of Labour the total reduction in numbers employed in manufacturing industry during 1967.

It is provisionally estimated that between December, 1966, and December, 1967, the numbers decreased by 220,000.

Do not those figures illustrate that there is very much more scope for replacing manpower in manufacturing industry than in service industries and that, therefore the Selective Employment Tax would be more suitable for an Alice-in-Wonderland economy than our own in present circumstances?

As I understand the hon. Gentleman's question, it implies that the intention of S.E.T. to move employees from the service trades is, in fact, operating. I know that it is operating. I am sure that it is right that it should operate and that it will be for the benefit of the economy that it is operating.

If it is operating, why did the Government remove the premium to manufacturing industry, which was supposed to be the mechanism to make it operate?

There are two reasons. First, it is operating irrespective of premium and it looks like continuing to operate, simply consisting of refund and the payments. The second reason is that outlined, as I told the right hon. Gentleman five weeks ago, by the former Chancellor of the Exchequer, who explained to the House that in some ways the premium was operating too well.

Has the Minister any evidence to show the results of the process, which he claims, that gross domestic product is rising?

I do not think that the answer to that question is necessarily relevant to the effects of the S.E.T. I certainly think that if the right hon. Gentleman looks at the gross domestic product and its improvement over the next three years, he will see that the improvements therein are the result of the general restructuring of industry, of which S.E.T. is a part.

Is my right hon. Friend aware, however, that when he Maims that S.E.T. has encouraged the transfer of labour from the distributive trades to manufacturing industry, there is no evidence in my possession or in the possession of my trade union, which is the principal union in the distributive trades, that any such thing has taken place?

I can only ask my hon. Friend, and, indeed, the House, to read what will now be the Written Answer to Question No. 37, which goes into some detail about how that process can be seen to have come about over the last 18 months.

asked the Minister of Labour how many staff in his Department are fully engaged in assisting industry to increase productivity agreements.

Twenty officials of my Ministry are fully employed and a larger number spend a substantial part of their time on the work of assisting industry to conclude productivity agreements.

Does not the Minister agree that if he is to look at a massive number of new productivity agreements over and above the 3½ per cent. norm, he will have to apply hundreds more staff to do it? Is it not better to leave it to industry to work out productivity agreements and, if those in industry get into any difficulties, for them to come to him so that he can help them in their difficulties?

The trouble is that when people have got into the difficulties and signed the agreement, it is all over; there is not much chance then of rectifying a situation. How many productivity agreements will emerge, I do not know. So far, we have not done badly with the staff involved. About 903 productivity agreements have been before the experts during the last 15 months and about 85 of them have been rejected.

asked the Minister of Labour what extra training facilities he now intends to provide in South-East London for 6,000 Associated Electrical Industries' employees who will have to seek alternative employment as a result of the recent closures announced in the area.

Experience suggests that many of the redundant A.E.I. workers will not require retraining before taking other jobs. Where retraining at the operator level is required, this can usually best be given by the new firm. Redundant workers who need the accelerated training for skill given by Government training centres will be able to obtain it at the Medway and Poplar centres, which together have some 500 training places and will have nearly 700 by the end of the year. As the House has already been informed, a further centre is also proposed for South-East London, though the precise site has not yet been settled.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind the danger of complacency when regarding this problem? Is he aware that many of the employees concerned are long-service employees who will have to face employment in alternative industries and, therefore, require retraining? Will he promise to keep the situation under careful review?

I can give my hon. Friend that assurance and the assurance that there is no complacency in my Ministry in this regard. There is simply some satisfaction that the training facilities are available should they be needed.

asked the Minister of Labour what plans he has for revising the Cost of Living Index; and what extra items are to be included.

As I announced on 11th March in reply to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Cardigan (Mr. Elystan Morgan), I have accepted an interim report of the Cost of Living Advisory Committee recommending that meals bought and consumed outside the home should be included among the price indicators used in the Index of Retail Prices from February, 190.—[Vol. 760, c. 204]

As there has not been a wholesale inquiry since 1962, is there not a case for going into other items also, particularly transport items? At a time like this, is it not important that the public should have confidence in the index?

The hon. Member knows very well that the items which are used as indicators in the Cost of Living Index are constantly under review. If he has any particular items or details in mind, I am certain that his advice would be welcomed.

asked the Minister of Labour the percentage of unemployed in Clacton-on-Sea in the last three months, respectively; and how this compares with the previous three years.

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

Is the Minister frightened to say that the rate of unemployment in Clacton in February was 6·6 per cent.? Is not this a dangerously high figure and a disquieting trend? Does he really think that we should pay S.E.T. in such areas?

The hon. Gentleman must have got his figure from a different source from mine. In February, according to our records, the figure was 6·2 per cent. This month it is 5·7 per cent. It must, however, be remembered that one-third of that figure comprises people over the age of 60, many of whom have retired and are on superannuation pensions.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will make a statement on progress of discussions on the subject of equal pay in the context of Human Rights Year and the 50th anniversary of votes for women.

I would refer my hon. Friend to my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Blyth (Mr. Milne) on 11th March, 1968.—[Vol. 760, c. 971–3.]

Would my hon. Friend agree that 50 years after having received the vote, our womenfolk are still second-class citizens in industry? Does he not consider that as a first step we should at least give immediate consideration this year and next year to women having equal rights in industry with their male counterparts?

I certainly would not agree that women are invariably second-class citizens in industry. Those who might be so described are in that position for a variety of reasons, not all of which are the responsibility of my Ministry and of my right hon. Friend the Minister. I agree, however, that immediate consideration should be given to this problem. That was why I was happy to announce earlier in the year that the C.B.I. and the T.U.C. had been consulted and were making decisions about how the next step could, and should, be taken.

When does the Minister think that he will be able to announce some progress in this matter? It is no good keeping on answering questions about conferences and the like if we never get an answer about whether progress is being made.

I am advised that the T.U.C. and the C.B.I. are making progress in the difficult decisions which they have to take concerning scope, definition and cost. I am sure that the hon. Lady agrees that in embarking on this large and expensive project, it is essential that the important groundwork should be done well. It would be quite wrong of me to urge the C.B.I. and the T.U.C. to move at a speed which would result in the wrong decisions being taken.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that the difficulties in introducing fair and just legislation to give women the rate for the job are not nearly as great as those facing the Government in introducing wage restraint which they intend to do in the near future?

I make no comment about the comparative difficulty since I regard this as something on which no precise calculation can be made. My hon. Friend should, however, understand that there is one way in which the legislation on wage control, as she describes it, differs fundamentally from the legislation for equal pay, and that it is that it will cost the country and industry a very great deal of money indeed.

asked the Minister of Labour what proposals he has for improving transferability between private pension schemes.

This matter is under consideration but cannot be decided in advance of the review, which is at present being carried out, of the State social security scheme.

With respect to the right hon. Gentleman, would it not be better if consideration of these matters were transferred to the Department of his right hon. Friend the Minister of Social Security, so that all pension matters could be considered together?

The hon. Member will, I am sure, know that the closest cooperation takes place between the two Departments on this matter. I do not think that that is the problem. As I have explained to the House before, this question is so complicated and so complex because of the vast number of different pension schemes in industry that it is difficult to arrive at proper conclusions about them.