asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity whether he will obtain from the National Board for Prices and Incomes and publish its draft report on the reference to it of doctors' pay.

No, Sir. The reference on doctors' and dentists' pay was withdrawn on 29th June, before the National Board for Prices and Incomes made its report. It would not be appropriate to publish drafts or working papers.

Does the right hon. Gentleman understand that he is acting with a grave degree of irresponsibility in failing to publish an independent scrutiny into a 30 per cent. pay claim while at the same time saying that people with lesser pay claims and much lesser earnings are guilty of participating in a wages explosion? Will he reconsider the matter?

No, Sir, I will not reconsider it, and I am not acting in the way the hon. Gentleman describes. We regard it as inappropriate that the findings of one review body should be referred to another. The National Board for Prices and Incomes had not completed its report. No draft or provisional reports have ever been published before, nor would it be proper to do so.

But is it not a fact that this reference was withdrawn because the outline of the report was already clear and it was known that it would be critical of the Kindersley Report? How can the right hon. Gentleman hope to persuade unions to show restraint in wage claims when the very first act of the present Government is to cover up for this highly inflationary award?

The right hon. Lady must know that what she said is not our view. It may be her view. Our view is that we shall not get responsibility in any level of industrial relations or pay negotiations until bodies which are given responsibility for coming to settlements are allowed to have their settlements stand. That is the basis for order in collective bargaining.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity how many notifications under the Prices and Incomes Act in respect of price increases have been made to his Department since 18th June, 1970; and what action he has taken on them.

Such notifications are not made to my Department. Since 18th June, 60 notifications have been received by Departments responsible for particular commodities and services under the voluntary arrangements for the early warning of price increases.

Will that voluntary notification machinery be continued in order to keep a watch on prices, and will the hon. Gentleman give an assurance that, wherever there is a price rise which gives cause for concern, he will, jointly with other Ministers, refer it for public scrutiny to the Prices and Incomes Board?

The Government have stated their determination to strengthen the economy and to curb inflation. As I have said, the arrangements under which firms at present notify proposals for price increases are under review in the context of our detailed consideration of means of achieving the Government's objective. As for the Prices and Incomes Board, my right hon. Friend will be answering Questions on this subject a little later.

As so many of the price increases are motivated by the behaviour of nationalised industries—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—yes, they are—and as price increases by nationalised industries are now to be the responsibility of Government Departments, will Ministers answer in the House for the reaction of Government Departments to the demands of nationalised industry for price increases?

In his speech on the Address, the Chancellor of the Exchequer said that all these rises, or possible rises, in the nationalised industries would be carefully scrutinised.

Following the Prime Minister's recent reply, may we take it that the Government intend to allow private industry to increase prices as it will without any Government intervention whatever?

The hon. Gentleman may take it that competition will be introduced during the lifetime of this Government in a way which was not known under the last Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what action he proposes to prevent unjustifiable price rises.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) on 9th July, 1970.—[Vol. 803, c. 79–80.]

What action does the Minister propose to take if, as a result of the dock strike or for any other reason, a company abuses its market power and increases prices unjustifiably?

History shows that competition—[Interruption.] I say again, history shows that competition has been much more effective in curbing prices than have any of the administrative measures of the last Government.

If the hon. Member believes so intensely in competition, will he inform the House when he expects to complete his current investigation into competition law and when he proposes to introduce legislation creating a Registrar of Monopolies and Mergers?

Neither of those things may be said yet.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity whether he will take steps to encourage children in the Bideford area of North Devon to enter local industry.

School leavers in the Bideford area of North Devon receive full advice and information from the Youth Employment Service about the range of employment opportunities which exist in local industry and this policy will be maintained.

Does my hon. Friend realise how difficult it is to encourage young people to go into industry in an area in which there have been no new factories in the past? Will he encourage day-release classes from schools so that they can at least go into industry to see what it is all about?

I agree that that is one of the points that should be considered. But last month there were 205 unfilled vacancies in the Bideford area, and we expect that the majority will be filled, so the situation is not quite as grave as it might appear.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what is the present level of unemployment in the Okehampton area of Devon.

On 8th June, 159 people were registered as unemployed in the area covered by the Okehampton Employment Exchange and the percentage rate of unemployment was 4·2.

Does my hon. Friend realise the impossible position many small towns are in when they are just outside a development area? The have suffered considerably under a Socialist Government. Let us hope that under my hon. Friend's direction they will not suffer under a Conservative Government.

I know my hon. Friend's genuine concern for his constituents of that area. There has been a great deal of dispute over the past month whether the area should be included in the development area or should become an intermediate area. That is a question for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Technology, and I hope that my hon. Friend will address a question to him about it.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what additional training facilities he intends to provide on Tyneside; and what discussions he has arranged with the training boards and the trades unions on this subject.

My right hon. Friend will announce the Government's proposals in respect of all areas and arrange necessary discussions when he has completed his full review of training needs.

Is not that reply rather disappointing in view of the very clear promise by hon Members opposite before the election of increased facilities for training, and particularly in view of the very high and increasing proportion of unskilled men out of work?

We are well aware of the difficulties in the hon. Gentleman's area. That is why we are having a thorough review of all training activities. But the primary need in the hon. Gentleman's area is jobs, and training is ancillary.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity whether he will arrange to use the facilities available at certain technical colleges on Tyneside for general engineering training for the younger unemployed in the area.

I will certainly consider the hon. Member's suggestion in our review of industrial training needs.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of certain correspondence with his Department that has already taken place? If any further proposals are put up, will they be considered?

Certainly they will be considered. The view has been taken until now that industrial-type courses are best tackled through Government training centres, but there is a possibility of a certain type of industrial course through the training colleges. We are prepared to look at that further.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what proposals he has to ease winter unemployment in the Weymouth and Portland areas.

I am aware of the seasonal element in unemployment in the Weymouth and Portland area. The Department's local officers do everything they can at all times to help workers registered with us to find employment, including the offer of training opportunities where appropriate.

Would my hon. Friend encourage the use of Portland stone, which is the best stone in the world, in Government building? Would he also guarantee, in an area where there is 5 per cent. unemployment, a fuller issue of industrial development certificates, whether or not it is a development area?

The matter of i.d.c.s is one for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Technology. I am sure that he will look sympathetically at that point. The answer to my hon. Friend's question about Portland stone is "Yes, Sir". There has been a fall in the demand for stone products, but the Government would be prepared to look at the question of using this stone for Government buildings.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity how many unfilled vacancies for jobs there are in Dorset excluding Poole.

The Department's vacancy figures relate only to vacancies which were notified to Employment Exchanges and Youth Employment Service Careers Offices and which remained unfilled on a selected day. They do not measure the total demand for labour. On 3rd June, 913 notified vacancies remained unfilled in Dorset excluding Poole.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is a need in Dorset not only for more vacancies but for vacancies for better-paid jobs? Will he consult my right hon. Friend the Minister of Technology about this?

I am certainly prepared to do that. According to the latest estimates by industrialists, there are nearly 2,200 jobs in prospect for the area over the next four years.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what are the latest figures for unemployment in Dorset, including Poole; what were the comparable figures for October 1964; and which trades showed the biggest increase in unemployed.

Total numbers registered as unemployed in Dorset at June 1970 and October 1964 were 2,710 and 1,701, respectively. From June 1964 to June 1970 the greatest increases were just over 400 in manufacturing industries, just over 300 in construction and more than 200 in insurance, banking, finance and miscellanous services.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the need again to improve job opportunities in Dorset, opportunities which deteriorated greatly under the last Government, particularly for school leavers if they are not to be lost to the county for good?

Yes, Sir. We are well aware of that and the Department is doing everything it can to help those out of work. The percentage varies considerably even within my hon. Friend's constituency, from as much as 3·7 per cent. in Bridport to 1·5 per cent. in Dorchester. We are not complacent about the situation.

Is my hon. Friend aware that these considerations apply particularly to the areas around Gillingham and Shaftesbury in North Dorset?

Yes, Sir. I take note of my hon. Friend's remarks.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what steps he is taking to reduce strikes in the motor industry.

I am of course very conscious of the serious effects of strikes in this industry. My Department will as hitherto do what it can to help resolve disputes in the industry. The Motor Vehicle Joint Council, which was established in December last year, is working to improve procedures and pay structures, and is available to investigate, with the consent of the managements and unions concerned serious unconstitutional stoppages. It did in fact play a useful part in settling disputes in the past.

Does my right hon. Friend propose to continue the arrangements whereby special troubleshooters like Sir Jack Scamp are appointed to rove far and wide over the industry and all its component ancillaries, having regard to the very serious and proliferating effect of all the strikes and stoppages?

My general philosophy is to encourage as far as we can self-responsibility within each industry. But I believe that people like Sir Jack Scamp and others can at times play a very useful part, and we do not wish to underestimate that.

Has not experienced proved that the difficulties of this complex industry can be resolved only by a general consensus and not by piecemeal settlements? Will the Minister reconsider the proposal which I have put to him before that a national conference should be convened of all the interests involved?

Certainly I will consider that, as I have told the hon. Gentleman. I have not had a great deal of time to consider it in the past week. But I feel that the Motor Vehicle Joint Council begins to get after what is wanted by the hon. Member. We must be careful about more conferences sometimes causing delay in action rather than expendition.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what changes he proposes to introduce in redundancy payments.

I am reviewing the redundancy payments scheme, but I cannot yet say what changes may be necessary or desirable.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity how many building workers are registered as unemployed in the London area.

At 8th June there were 8,451 persons registered as unemployed in the Greater London area who last worked in construction, which covers building, civil engineering and other allied activities. Separate figures for building workers are not available.

Is it not ridiculous, with such a desperate housing need in London, that all these thousands of men should be unemployed? In addition to the expected announcement that the matter is under solemn review, what will the Minister do about it?

The first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question should have been addressed to his own Front Bench. His Question was about the London area, and I can tell him that the unemployment rate in the construction industry in the London area is only about half what it is in the rest of the country. This matter is receiving our attention.

As the hon. Gentleman and I were making rather similar proposals to my Front Bench, now that his hon. Friends have the control of the country what will they do about some of those proposals?

If the hon. Member will just give us a little time, he will see.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what action he is taking with the brewery companies to lessen the anti-competitive effects of the tied-house system.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what action he proposes to take on the Monopolies Commission Report on the supply of beer.

My officials will be meeting the brewery companies to discuss the proposals the Department have put to them and the companies' comments on the proposals.

Is the Minister aware that this discussion has been going on for a long time? May we have his assurance that the Government will not ditch the recommendations of the Monopolies Commission, that the Government will not capitulate to the brewers, and that he will set licensees and the general public free to sell or drink whatever beer they want?

We accept the findings of the Commission that the restrictions on competition involved in the tied-house system, as operated under the present licensing laws, in fact operate and might be expected to operate, against the public interest, which I think covers a good deal of what the hon. Gentleman has just asked me. Meetings with the brewery companies are continuing, and after they have been completed we shall decide what steps we shall take.

Is the Minister aware that this will be regarded as a test case whether his Government are or are not interested in increasing competition?

I am sure that we shall come out of this test very well.

Does my hon. Friend agree that to make worth-while changes in the tied-house system will require beforehand a very comprehensive review of the licensing system? Is he prepared to undertake that extremely difficult task?

I think that what my hon. Friend is saying is that apart from the economic aspects of the matter there is a very big social aspect as well. In this connection, clearly, the Home Office will have to have quite a large inquiry before we come to a final decision.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity if he is aware of the dispute between the Co-operative Insurance Society and its agents; and what action he proposes to take in the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity if he will make a further statement on action taken by his Department in connection with the dispute between the Co-operative Insurance Society and its agents.

I would refer the hon. Members to my reply of 9th July to the hon. Member for West Lothian (Mr. Dalyell). Officers of my Department have maintained close touch with the parties following the joint meeting under departmental chairmanship on 29th June. The T.U.C. has seen both sides and is now exploring the possibility of a meeting between the two parties.—[Vol. 803, c. 831–2.]

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that despite Mr. Feather's intervention, there has still been no development? Is he aware that in many districts the girl clerks are now on strike against being asked to do "blacked" work and that, as a result, the C.I.S. will be unable to fulfil its obligations unless it makes some move on what is a very moderate claim?

I am aware that the position is getting increasingly serious. The conciliation officers of my Department only last week met the parties again offering once more the possibility of Departmental chairmanship of a meeting, but that has not been considered profitable at the moment. I can only repeat the assurance that we are closely in touch with the situation and will do everything we can to help.

As this is a serious situation, with damaging effects on all concerned, is not this an appropriate time for the hon. Gentleman to take the initiative to convene a fresh conference with both parties to the dispute in an attempt to reach a settlement?

I am prepared to consider that should it look a promising move to make, but at this moment I do not think that it would be.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what action he intends to assist those employees affected by the closure of Courtauld's factory in Wolverhampton.

I understand that the factory will close on 31st July. A team of my Department's officers is working full time in the factory interviewing the employees and giving advice about other jobs and training opportunities. Special approaches are also being made to employers likely to be interested in the people concerned.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this closure will affect 1,300 workers, which is a large percentage? Does he not think that he might make approaches to Courtaulds which, after all, is a private enterprise firm which has just declared £52 million profit? Does he not think that it might be persuaded to treat its workers rather more humanely than is proposed?

I understand that this factory has been running at a loss for some time. Most of those who will be affected have fairly good prospects of getting other employment, because, fortunately, Wolverhampton has below the national average rate of unemployment.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity if he will bring forward the date for the full implementation of equal pay.

No, Sir.

In view of the Prime Minister's recently discovered interest in women and housewives, and as many women voted him into office, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that he ought to change his views about this matter and to give women a fair reward for the job they do in industry and to bring forward the date for the implementation of equal pay? Will he look at the matter again?

This was one of the matters on which I agreed with the right hon. Lady my predecessor. It is difficult to decide the correct speed of implementation. I think that the five-year period, which was set in the Equal Pay Act, is about right as a statutory requirement.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity if he will abolish the National Board for Prices and Incomes.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity (1) what plans he has for the future of the National Board for Prices and Incomes and, in particular, in view of the Government's policy about inflation, whether he will obtain an early report from the Board on its retail prices reference, or an interim report;

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity whether he will make a statement on the future of the National Board for Prices and Incomes, in view of the fact that the contracts of the Chairman and eight other members, the statutory minimum, all expire at the end of October.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what plans he has for the future of the National Board for Prices and Incomes.

The future of the National Board for Prices and Incomes and its work is being actively considered and I shall be making an announcement in due course.

While considering this, will my right hon. Friend bear clearly in mind that if the people had wanted Socialism, they would have voted for it?

Certainly.

I appreciate the right hon. Gentleman's difficulties in answering these Questions candidly at this stage, in view of the schizophrenia on his own Front Bench. However, he did not answer the second part of my Question relating to retail prices and the inquiry into retail prices being conducted by the Prices and Incomes Board.

At the moment, I am not proposing to ask for an interim report.

When my right hon. Friend undertakes this examination of the work of the Prices and Incomes Board, will he also be able to make a statement as soon as possible on the proposed Commission for Industry and Manpower?

The proposed Commission for Industry and Manpower is a threat which has now been removed from the country, but we are reviewing all these matters and I will make a statement as soon as possible.

Who is to be responsible for scrutinising wage settlements in the nationalised industries? Who is to be responsible for deciding the criteria on which the settlements are to be judged? May we be told what type of action is to be taken and by whom if the Government decide that these settlements are too high?

In due course.

While we are awaiting the outcome of these further deliberations, can the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether he agrees with the statement of the Council of the C.B.I. yesterday that it is essential that prices be allowed to rise?

As my hon. Friend has made clear and as history has proved, the encouragement of the maximum amount of competition, coupled with sufficient cash flow in industry to induce the maximum amount of new investment, are the best safeguard of the lowest possible prices.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what steps he is taking to increase industrial retraining.

The Government are committed to an expansion of retraining facilities and my right hon. Friend will announce our proposals when we have completed our full review of industrial training needs. Meanwhile, existing plans to set up nine more Government training centres are proceeding without interruption.

Can the Minister inform the House that there will be no cut-back in training in relation to any cut-back in public expenditure? May I take it from his Answer that he is telling the House that the promise in the Tory manifesto that there would be an increase in industrial training will be implemented by the Government?

Yes. I can give the hon. Member an assurance that there will be an increase in industrial training. In fact, there was a pledge to this effect in the Gracious Speech. That pledge will be implemented. But we need to survey the whole scene thoroughly before we announce our plans on the subject. By saying that, I think that I have answered the first part of the hon. Member's supplementary question.

In considering the future of training in this country, will my hon. Friend also look into ways and means of stimulating retraining within industry itself, and not merely in terms of expanding Government training centres?

Yes, and one of our proposals is that we should look at the operation of the industrial training boards. We said so in opposition; we said so in our election manifesto, and this will be carried out.

Can the Minister give the House an assurance that the Government will not do what the Tory Government did in 1963, when we had 136,000 unemployed and they then closed two training centres in Scotland?

I was not personally responsible for that, but I cannot envisage any closures with the high rate of unemployment that now exists in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity how many work vouchers have been issued to Commonwealth citizens annually since 1962 for employment in the Yorkshire woollen industry.

I regret that this information is not available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Is the hon. Member aware that these vouchers were issued by name to Commonwealth citizens, and only where his Department were sure that there was a shortage of labour in the area? Will he now take steps, in consultation with trade unions and employers in the Yorkshire woollen industry, to replace those Commonwealth citizens who will be repatriated?

I shall certainly go into the question that the hon. Member has just asked, but it is not covered by the original Question.

Is my hon. Friend's difficulty in answering the question perhaps due to the somewhat vague phrasing of the original Question? It was not quite clear from the original Question whether the hon. Member for Leeds, South (Mr. Merlyn Rees) was referring to the specific woollen industry or to the generic wool trade.

I understood the hon. Member to mean what he said, in which case it would have required looking up the records for the last eight years at 73 employment exchanges.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity if he intends to reintroduce the Employed Persons (Health and Safety) Bill.

We are giving urgent consideration to the proposals in Part I of the previous Bill to establish an Employment Medical Advisory Service. So far as Part II is concerned my right hon. Friend is to start further consultations with the C.B.I., the T.U.C. and the nationalised industries as to the best way of getting improved arrangements for joint consultation on safety matters.

Does the hon. Member recollect that in 1927, when this was first suggested, it was announced that the voluntary system would be given another chance, but that since that time factory accidents have risen from 148,000 a year to over 300,000 a year? How many more consultations are necessary and how much more blood must pass under the bridge before something is done?

As the hon. Member knows, there has been an enormous improvement since 1927, and even over the past few years. As the hon. Member heard me say in the Second Reading debate on the Bill, there are practical difficulties to the implementation of Part II, but we shall look at them and see what is the best way to get more effective consultation.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what was the number of persons employed in the jute textile industry in Scotland at the latest date for which figures are available; and what were the corresponding figures for midsummer 1967 and 1964, respectively.

The estimated numbers of those in employment in Scotland in the jute industry at mid-1969, mid-1967 and mid-1964 were 14,800, 14,700 and 16,500, respectively.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity whether he will make a statement on the Government's policy towards areas of above average unemployment in regions of below average unemployment.

The Government attach the greatest importance to promoting full employment and an effective regional development policy. Our local officers do everything they can to help workers who register with us to find employment, including the offer of training opportunities, where appropriate.

Is the hon. Member aware that while there is still widespread concern about the Government's policy towards the main development regions, evidence is also anxiously awaited on precisely what the Government will do about the serious problem of relatively high unemployment in otherwise prosperous regions?

Yes. As I said in previous Answers, this is one of the matters that we have under active consideration. Questions of regional policy should be addressed to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Technology, but we are not unaware of the problem to which the hon. Member referred.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what are the comparative figures for the number of persons employed in the brick industry in the employment areas covered by the Faversham constituency in October, 1964 and June, 1970.

Employment estimates for local areas are made only for each mid-year and the latest are for mid-1969. The estimated numbers of those in employment in the Faversham, Sittingbourne and Sheerness employment exchange areas in bricks, fireclay and refractory goods at mid-1964 and mid-1969 were about 500 and about 200, respectively.

Does the Minister recognise that this loss of jobs in the brick trade is a serious cause of the high rate of unemployment in North-East Kent? Will he take urgent steps to remedy the damage done to the brick trade and the building trade as a result of six years of disastrous Socialist Government?

It is fair to say that the figures have been inflated by the closure of four brickfields in this area, but I understand that there are no serious resettlement problems.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity when he proposes to publish his proposals for increasing the number of industrial training centres in Scotland.

I have nothing to add at present to the replies I gave to the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Sillars) on 9th July and to the hon. Member for Midlothian (Mr. Eadie) earlier today.—[Vol. 803, c. 80.]

Is the Minister aware that the Answer he gave to my hon. Friend the Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Sillars) on 9th July did not tell us anything that we did not already know, namely, that the plans were those of my right hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn (Mrs. Castle)? We should now like to know whether we can be assured that there will be an increase in the number of training places and, secondly, the extent of the guarantee he intends to give private firms to allow them to build up their training facilities.

The latter question is not for me, but I can assure the hon. Member that in the survey that we are making the intention is to increase retraining facilities. We are very conscious of the need for this, but it takes time to make exactly the right sort of plans to become effective.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that it serves little purpose to increase training facilities in Scotland when the trade unions in the engineering industry are able to prevent the employment in that industry of those who have been trained in Government training centres, and even to prevent the employment of those in skilled jobs who are fully trained for those jobs in the engineering industry?

Successful retraining depends on an adequate labour market and also on the willing co-operation of trade unions and employers. I very much hope that we shall get it when we announce our proposals.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity if he will seek so to amend the Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1956 as to enable newsagents to combine together in order to negotiate with new newspaper suppliers; and if he will make a statement.

I do not think that a change would be justified. There are in any case serious difficulties in amending the Act in the interests of a particular trade or industry.

Have not the courts overturned the argument used by the Board of Trade in 1968, and is it not now the position that retailers are powerless in any attempt to bargain with the Newspaper Proprietors' Association? Is not this an undesirable monopoly situation?

I do not think that I can comment on the effect of the Act on a particular course of action or situation. The relevant factors are not merely the terms of the Act; they are also the orders of the Restrictive Practices Court, which, in the newspaper trade, have prohibited the making of certain types of agreement.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what is the present incidence of juvenile unemployment in the Bedwellty constituency; and what steps he proposes to take to improve the situation.

On 8th June there were 175 boys and girls under 18 years of age registered as unemployed at the Aberbargoed, Blackwood and Cross Keys careers offices. Careers officers are doing everything possible to help them find suitable vacancies.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his Answer. However, I hope he realises that the figures disguise the real tragedy of youth unemployment, which is seen in emigration and in severe insecurity among youngsters. For instance, he will be aware that 62½ per cent. of the number of children entitled to leave school in this area in Easter this year returned to school. Will he encourage his colleagues to bear this in mind in their long-awaited reconsideration of regional employment policy?

Order. Supplementary questions must be reasonably brief.

I can understand the hon. Gentleman's concern, which I am sure is genuine. Young people who cannot obtain training or progressive employment in their home areas may receive financial assistance under the Training Allowances Scheme to enable them to live away from home. We shall do all we can for the young people of the area.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what is the current rate of male unemployment in the Bargoed and Caerphilly employment exchange areas.

At 8th June the rates of unemployment for men in the Bargoed and Caerphilly travel-to-work areas were 7·6 and 8·0 per cent. Respectively.

Does the hon. Gentleman appreciate that these mining areas are threatened with further pit closures and that without the previous Government's incentive policy of attracting industry to these areas the percentage would be much higher? Will he exert all his influence with the Prime Minister to give a clear assurance to the people of these areas in Wales that the previous policy will be continued until the situation has been completely remedied?

The question of pit closures is not for me, but I draw some encouragement from the fact that the June total of registered unemployed in this area was the lowest for any June since 1966.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what consultations he had with the General Council of the Trades Union Congress since 19th June; to what extent he discussed his proposed Industrial Relations Bill; and if he will make a statement.

I have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton) on 9th July.—[Vol. 803, c. 79.]

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that, when he meets the General Secretary of the T.U.C. he will congratulate him on the sterling work he is doing to resolve official and unofficial strikes and that he will not introduce legislation which has proved to be a nonsense in other countries in which it is operating?

On the last part of the supplementary question, we shall be putting forward proposals for a framework for the more orderly conduct of industrial relations and they must be judged on their merits. On the first part, I have frequently, both from the benches opposite and from this side of the House, paid tribute to the work of Mr. Victor Feather.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity whether he will give the percentage increase or decrease in the unemployment of registered disabled persons, nationally and for the London Borough of Harrow, as between June, 1964, and June, 1970.

The percentage increase in the unemployment of registered disabled persons between June, 1964, and June, 1970, was 38·6 per cent. for Great Britain and 132·3 per cent. for the London Borough of Harrow.

Will my hon. Friend take urgent action to put into reverse the policies of the previous Government which have resulted in such distressing unemployment figures, nationally and in Harrow, among people who cannot look after themselves?

I know my hon. Friend's great interest in the subject, and I am pleased to be able to tell him that the disablement resettlement officer service is being reorganised and substantially strengthened and that new arrangements are being introduced for the more intensive inspection of records of employers who have a statutory disabled quota obligation.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what has been the rise in the Retail Price Index during the last three months; what this represents in money value; and if he will estimate the effect of an equivalent rise on the purchasing power of the £ sterling over five years.

The rise in the General Index of Retail Prices between 17th February, 1970, and 19th May, 1970, was 2·4 per cent. which is equivalent to about sixpence in the £.

If this rate of increase continued over a period of five years, the purchasing power of the £ sterling, as measured by the General Index of Retail Prices, would fall by about 7s. 6d.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the figures which he has given prove that the policy of statutory control of prices and incomes propagated by right hon. Gentlemen opposite is absolutely useless for controlling prices?

This subject was debated at length and in depth during the recent General. Election which resulted in a resounding victory for the Government. It is also an advertisement for the fact that competition is far more effective than any step taken by the Labour Government to curb prices.

The hon. Gentleman has made a projection of price increases. What steps has his Ministry in mind to ensure that that projection does not become a reality?

Our policies, which will unfold over the next few months, will convince the hon. Gentleman that he is in good hands.

asked the Prime Minister if he will now meet the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland.

Yes, Sir. Tomorrow, Sir.

Will the Prime Minister use the occasion of that meeting to pay tribute to the significant part which the statesmanlike and moderate words of the Prime Minister of the Irish Republic played in cooling the passions of those who feel strongly that the Orange walks, however well ordered they may be, are provocative? Will he also pay tribute to the temperate manner of the minority in Northern Ireland during the walks?

I paid tribute to the attitude taken by all people in Northern Ireland in the message which I sent to the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland earlier this week. I gladly join the hon. Gentleman in the tribute which he has paid to Mr. Lynch.

Will my right hon. Friend convey to the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland the feeling of gratitude of the whole House to the security forces who have managed to bring about an atmosphere in which the wishes for peace of the great majority of the people of Northern Ireland have triumphed over the purveyors of disorder and disruption?

I sent a message of appreciation to the General Officer Commanding in Northern Ireland, and he has sent me a message of appreciation in return.

Would the right hon. Gentleman take the opportunity to make some inquiries into the circumstances of the hon. Member for Mid-Ulster (Miss Devlin), who is in prison in Northern Ireland? Also, in his discussions, would he point out what a gesture of conciliation it would be if the Northern Ireland authorities were to release the hon. Member?

I could not agree with the last part of the supplementary question, but my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will be talking to the Minister of Home Affairs in Northern Ireland tomorrow morning and he will be able to discuss certain aspects of this matter with him. There are other aspects which my right hon. Friend the Lord President has in hand.

When the Prime Minister talks to the Northern Ireland Prime Minister about affairs in Northern Ireland, will he discuss with him the question of the next march which we have to fear or look forward to—that of the Derry boys in August? Many people think that it could be much more provocative than the last march, and I hope that it will be discussed.

We appreciate the possible seriousness of the situation. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has already had discussions about this matter and he will continue them tomorrow.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that those responsible for the riots and appalling loss of life and injury in Northern Ireland recently are the extreme republican elements?

I think that the fact that last weekend passed off peacefully has given considerable gratification to the House. We must now look to the future.

As a gesture of good will to the minority, and to reassure them, will the Prime Minister, when talking to the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland, ask that gentleman to sever his links with the Orange Order?

These are internal matters for Northern Ireland which I would not discuss with the Prime Minister.

asked the Prime Minister if he will pay an official visit to the Far East.

I shall be attending the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Meeting in Singapore in January.

As a result of the previous Administration's policy, the dispositions of our forces in the Far East will result in a net run-down of forces, which, in the absence of any instruction to the contrary, will continue. Has any contrary instruction been given?

As I explained in the House on Tuesday, the number of our forces in the Far East is much greater than we visualise remaining there under the five-Power force. The Secretary of State for Defence is going to the Far East in the last week of this month to have discussions with the other four Commonwealth Powers involved about the make-up of the force and, naturally, he and his advisers will then be able to settle the future dispositions.

asked the Prime Minister if he will carry out the engagement, accepted by his predecessor, to attend the General Assembly of the United Nations this autumn so as to participate with other heads of Governments in the celebration of the 25th anniversary of the United Nations and the launching of the Second Development Decade.

Yes, Sir.

Does the Prime Minister expect to be able to assure the General Assembly that Britain will make a substantial contribution to the objectives of the Second Development Decade? If so, will he ensure that the Cabinet bears all this in mind when considering the aid figures as part of the public expenditure review?

Obviously, I have not yet considered the contents of my speech, but I think that the right hon. Gentleman knows of my deep personal concern about aid and U.N.C.T.A D., and it may well be a suitable opportunity for me again to make the position of this country plain.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will seek to pay an official visit to the United States of America.

President Nixon has invited me to visit the United States. I look forward to doing so at a mutually convenient time.

Is my right hon. Friend aware how much pleasure it will give hon. Members on this side if his first official visit abroad should include a call on the Head of State who had the prescience to realise some time ago that my right hon. Friend would be sitting where he is today—where he is likely to remain for the foreseeable future?

Ha! He is helpful.

I shall be very happy to visit the President again, and I am glad to have the support of the hon. Member for Smethwick (Mr. Faulds) in doing so.

In view of the high proportion of Questions addressed to the Prime Minister, from both sides of the House, which seem to wish him to be elsewhere than in this House, will he consider making arrangements to stay away permanently?

The hon. and learned Member will appreciate, however, that, unlike my predecessor, I have been able to resist those blandishments.

When visiting the President of the United States, will the Prime Minister carefully consider the reasons why the United States has reached the conclusion that it would be unwise to sell arms to the Republic of South Africa?

There will be ample opportunity to discuss that matter later.

asked the Prime Minister if he will request the Chairman of the Security Commission to review the present immunity of hon. Members from telephone tapping.

No, Sir.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that if there are to be any changes in general practice they will not be made secretly or unilaterally—in other words, that in this, as in other things, he will avoid the bad example of his predecessor?

The situation remains as it was announced by my predecessor on 17th November, 1966: there is no tapping of the telephones of hon. Members. I fully accept, however, the point made by my hon. Friend and I give the same undertaking as my predecessor gave—that if there were any development of a kind requiring a change in policy, I would, at such moment as seemed compatible with the security of the country, on my own initiative make a statement in the House about it.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the previous decision was neither secret nor unilateral? The House was told when the decision was taken. It was also told, as the right hon. Gentleman said, that should any developments require reconsideration of the policy, the House would again be told.

I understand that that is so.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the House was informed two years after the decision was taken in secret and that it was a decision directly contrary to the unanimous advice of the Birkett Commission, which reported in 1957?

I cannot take responsibility for what happened under the previous Administration, but I have given the House my own undertaking that if a change of policy were required, I would come voluntarily to the House and make a statement at such moment as was compatible with the security of the State.

If the Prime Minister decides on a change of policy, will he first authorise the tapping of the telephones of those of his right hon. and hon. Friends who appear to have a hot line direct to Salisbury and Cape Town?

Can my right hon. Friend explain why Members of Parliament should be immune?

I recognise the anxieties which exist in some parts of the House about the fact that Members of Parliament should appear to have privileges other than those of other citizens, and I have shared those anxieties. I have given very careful consideration to the matter since I became Prime Minister. I believe that it is right that we should retain the present position. There are various other anxieties, as well as security anxieties, in people's minds, both inside and outside the House, on the political aspects of this matter. I therefor believe that until such time as I feel that for the security of the State it is essential that the policy should be changed, we should retain the present position.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the statement which he made will meet with very wide acceptance in most quarters of the House because of the importance that must be attached to free communication between a Member of Parliament and anyone who wants to get in touch with him?

I accept that, but I think that the widespread dislike of telephone tapping goes much further than that. It is a process which, generally, is thoroughly disliked, and I state this principle with only the proviso that the security of the State must be maintained.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement on his further proposals for the reorganisation of Departments of State and the machinery of government.

I expect to do so in the Autumn, Sir.

Warmly welcoming the reduction in the number of Ministers—Conservative quality instead of Socialist quantity—may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is busy writing the obituary of the Land Commission and the Prices and Incomes Board? Could we also have a bit of retrenchment in the nationalised race relations industry?

I have announced that we are reviewing a large number of aspects of the structure of government. I do not wish to deal with any particular aspects at this moment, but I will make a general statement in the autumn.

Will the Prime Minister give the House an assurance that the changes in the machinery of Government, many of which are probably necessary but which are now quite frequent, are not having a rather deleterious effect upon the Civil Service?

I am very well aware of the dangers to which the right hon. Gentleman referred and I am anxious to avoid them. That is why I am taking a certain amount of time in making dispositions, because I want them to last.

Recalling the exchange between the Prime Minister and myself in the debate on the Gracious Speech, when, I think, he rather misunderstood a reference which I made—a reference to the co-ordination of housing between the Departments of Housing and Local Government and Transport, when the right hon. Gentleman said that he was not proposing to appoint an Overlord, as I did—may I ask whether he was aware that what I was referring to was a decision, taken originally last October and about to be carried into effect, for the total integration of those Departments with the Ministry of Works, too, with a Minister and not an Overlord?