asked the Secretary of State for Employment whether he will seek powers to end the exclusion of women from membership of stock exchanges.

No. My right hon. Friend is not persuaded that the introduction of legislation for this purpose is necessary. Women are admitted to membership of provincial stock exchanges.

Would my hon. Friend convey to the Secretary of State my extreme displeasure at what I regard as a pussy-footing answer?

Pile it on.

I will do my own piling on. If stock exchanges will not admit women to membership, does my hon. Friend agree that there should be a time limit on the time we wait for them to co-operate voluntarily—say, 18 months?

No; I would not agree to a time limit. I am sure that the example set by the provincial exchanges, together with the knowledge of how most people feel on this issue, is likely to get women accepted more readily and easily than is Government action.

Is it not odd that the Secretary of State did not answer this Question in view of the passionate speeches which he made during the Committee stage of my Equal Pay Bill, on which he supported Amendments to remove discrimination in the employment of women in every sphere of activity, from ministries of religion to the stock exchanges? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, as a result of those speeches, we have been expecting him to introduce a Bill ruling out all forms of discrimination?

My right hon. Friend still adheres to the views he expressed then. Indeed, he wonders why the right hon. Lady did not introduce legislation on the subject.

Is my hon. Friend aware that women are not only permitted to be members of provincial stock exchanges but are members of the Northern Stock Exchange?

Yes. The example of that stock exchange is very good, and I am sure that it will be noted by the growing minority who support the admission of women to the London Stock Exchange. My personal view is that persuasion rather than compulsion is the best remedy.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what is the number of persons currently unemployed in the Rotherham, Dinnington and Maltby employment exchange areas; and what is the percentage increase these figures represent as compared with the position one year ago.

At June, 1971, the provisional number of people registered as unemployed in the area covered by the Rotherham, Dinnington and Maltby Employment Exchanges was 3,544. This was a rate of 5·2 per cent. as compared with 41 per cent. in June, 1970.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, while the present situation is disgraceful enough, the trends show that we are likely to face a very severe increase in a very short time? Is he further aware that the only major hope for improvement in my area rests in the already long-delayed Government decision? The delay in that decision is already such as to generate further gloom and despondency in my constituency.

We know that there is a particular problem in the hon. Gentleman's area; and the figures are certainly too high. But, as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State said as recently as Monday in the debate on unemployment, the Government are absolutely determined to reverse the upward trend in unemployment.

When?

I believe that we shall eventually do that.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment in view of the rise in the wage index announced for May, what action he proposes to take in regard to wages policy.

The annual rates of increase in wage rates and earnings show a significant reduction from the beginning of the year. We shall continue our policy to secure a progressive reduction in wage inflation.

If the figures for May show a sharper upward trend, does the Minister not consider that this is an indication that his policy of being beastly to the public sector has totally failed to control either wages or prices, and is not this the collapse of the Government's policy? What is he going to do about it?

No. Certainly Government policy has not collapsed. The figure for this May is about comparable with that of last May. It is unfortunately slightly higher than in April, but if we look at the figures month by month over a period we see that the rate of increase having reached a peak about the end of last year and the beginning of this year, the trend is now undoubtedly downwards.

Is the Minister aware that figures given in reply to a Question by me recently show that 41 per cent. of the male population in Scotland over the age of 21 are receiving less than £24 a week gross in wages? If people in this sort of category asked for an increase of 15 per cent. which would be justified, what would be his reaction? Would he treat them in the way he treated the doctors?

The distribution of wages as between areas and as between one industry and another arises not only or even mainly from Government policy but very largely from the policy and strategy of the trade unions, and the extent to which they press for smaller or larger claims for lower-paid workers, compared with higher-paid workers. So far, unfortunately, the trade unions having got higher increases for lower-paid workers, have proceeded to ask for at least equivalent increases for higher-paid workers.

Would my hon. Friend seek to arrive at some voluntary agreement with the trade unions—as from the N.E.D.C. meeting, perhaps, on 9th July—and see whether agreement can be reached on some form of voluntary policy which would be in their interests as well as the country's?

My right hon. Friend and I both made clear in the debate on Monday that we certainly did not rule out such a development and we hope to see it come.

In view of the Minister's comments on the trade unions, what is his comment on the £10,000 increase in the directors' fees by Reed International, and also on the comments in the statement by Globe Investment Trust that labour is making excessive demands when, two pages later in that document, it mentions an increase in directors' salaries of 50 per cent.? Does the hon. Gentleman endorse this or is this something which he condemns?

I certainly hope that employers at all levels will exercise restraint. We do not believe in the possibility of controlling these matters by statutory control, and even the right hon. Lady the Member for Blackburn (Mrs. Castle) and her Government did not exercise control over them.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment to what extent he estimates the decline in the number of people employed in the aerospace industry, 9,800 between March, 1970, and March, 1971, reflects a decline in production or an increase in productivity.

It is probable that, for the aerospace industry as a whole, the decline in employment between March, 1970, and March, 1971, is a continuation of a trend which has been in evidence since 1968 and, in the period in question, is mainly due to a drop in orders on hand and the flow of net new orders.

Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that the viability of the whole aircraft industry depends on the viability of two very major projects, and in those circumstances will he not ask the Secretary of State to consult the Prime Minister with a view to setting up an inter-departmental committee to prepare contingency plans in the event of those projects being frustrated?

I will certainly bear in mind the major point which the hon. Gentleman made. As to his other suggestions, he can be assured that contingencies and difficulties and major problems in these two projects are constantly in the Government's mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many local authorities have established workshops for the physically handicapped; and how many new projects have been established in the last 10 years.

The figures are 49 and 22 respectively.

Is the Minister aware that between 11,000 and 23,000 people who are capable of sheltered employment are at present out of work and allowing for the fact that one-third of the 11,000 are all unemployable unemployed, the rate is 40 per cent.? Does the Minister not regard that as scandalous? What will he do about it?

It is true that there are about 11,000 still registered for sheltered employment, but it is our experience that a high proportion of these are not eventu ally suitable even for sheltered employment. I am glad to tell the hon. Gentleman that our plans for new workshops and Remploy factories over the next five years will meet entirely the current demand.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what are his plans for ensuring the widest possible consultation on the Code of Industrial Relations Practice.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what plans he now has to meet the Trades Union Congress in order to discuss the draft code of industrial practice.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment whether he will make a statement about his consultative document on the Code of Industrial Relations Practice.

I am anxious to receive and consider views on the consultative document from all those concerned with the conduct of industrial relations and the problems of human relations in employment. The T.U.C. have not yet sent me their views but I am very ready to meet them and discuss any changes they would propose.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm whether there appears to have been any change in the attitude of Mr. Vic Feather from that which he expressed immediately after the Consultative Document was released? If there has not been, would my right hon. Friend not agree that the country's attitude at large will be one of suspicion that the movement is not really concerned to improve industrial relations through full cooperation?

I very much regret that the T.U.C., when sending out a copy of the Code to each of its affiliated unions, accompanied it with a recommendation that the unions should not enter into consultation with the Government on the proposals. [HON. MEMBERS: "Shame."] I believe that I express a general opinion when I say that the public expected a very different and more positive approach, and I certainly hope that it will be forth-coming.

Will my right hon. Friend consider, in view of his last remarks, the possibility of a shortened version of the document which could be more widely circulated to get opinions?

I sympathise with my hon. Friend's purpose but I believe that at this consultative stage it would be wrong to circulate a shortened form. I think that when we have it in final form there should be the widest circulation and an explanatory and shortened leaflet might at that stage be advantageous.

Is it not a little hypocritical of the right hon. Gentleman, having refused to consult the T.U.C. effectively about his legal provisions, now to complain because the T.U.C. is not prepared to discuss a Code which is presented to it in a legal framework which it totally rejects? Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House when Parliament is going to be consulted in this matter, and whether, in view of the request pressed upon him in Committee on the Bill, Parliament will have the chance to amend this Code and that he will present the Consultative Document to Parliament in a form in which it can be amended?

It is not true of the right hon. Lady to say that I refused to consult the T.U.C. about the Bill. All I said to the T.U.C.—which it was only right and honest to say to it—was that this Government had been elected on a firm policy which was made clear and put in detail before the country over a long period and was a major part of our election manifesto, just as, for example, the nationalisation of steel was a major and firm commitment in the Labour Party's manifesto in a previous election. I thought it only right to make it quite clear to the T.U.C. that this was a firm commitment, and that while we would have maximum consultation about the manner of carrying out the commitment, we could not consult about the basic commitment itself. Therefore, I cannot accept the right hon. Lady's view. I still believe that the public will expect the T.U.C. to be more positive than so far it has been about the Code of Practice, and I believe that it will be, and I think that the great majority of trade union officials and members will see in this Code a great many things they have wanted for a long time.

May I ask whether the right hon. Lady is aware—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—that my right hon. Friend is never guilty of being hypocritical and may I ask her to take the mote out of her own eye?

As the hon. Lady clearly recognises that I am the only effective Secretary of State for Employment, may I seize this opportunity—

I did not say that.

—to ask the Shadow Secretary of State whether he will kindly reply to the second half of my supplementary question about the right of Parliament to be consulted, and our request that we should have a chance to amend this document?

If the right hon. Lady would be more soul-searching about her changes of attitude on this subject over the last few years, we might get things a little straighter. She knows as well as I do that the arrangement of parliamentary business is not for me but for the Leader of the House and must be discussed through the usual channels. That is true, as she knows, and Leaders of the House on her side as well as ours have always maintained that view—[HON. MEMBERS: "Too long."] I cannot help it if the right hon. Lady asks these questions. As to the form of the document, I am afraid that this is an Order which will be subject to affirmative Resolution procedure. The right hon. Lady knows as well as I do that unless and until parliamentary procedure is changed, this procedure does not allow the order to be amended.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what evidence he has on the relationship between the workers at present unemployed and those in receipt of the largest pay increases.

It is self evident that excessive wage rises unmatched by increases in productivity drive up costs and therefore contribute to unemployment.

Is the Minister aware that this is the second time he has produced no evidence, although he claims that what he has said is self-evident? The right hon. Gentleman produced no evidence on Monday and named no factories. Why do London and Birmingham have the lowest unemployment and the highest wages? Is he not aware that his theory was rejected back in the 1930s by Professor Keynes? Will he produce evidence of factories where high wages have led to unemployment?

The evidence is in a macro-economic sense. This view is held, among others, by the hon. Gentleman's right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition, who stated it, as I have reminded the House before, when he was Prime Minister. Whereas reasonable monetary increases matched by efficiency are a good spur both to demand and to real standards of living, when monetary increases proceed at a rate which cannot be absorbed, they must lead to higher prices and/or lower profits. This must reduce demand and investment and, therefore, reduce employment.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will publish the latest unemployment figures for Birmingham in their various categories, and state the total as a percentage of the workforce.

At 14th June, 22,331 people—19,547 males and 2,784 females—were registered as unemployed in the Birmingham travel-to-work area.

I thank the Minister for that reply. Is he aware, however, that, although there is a numerical decrease in comparison with last month, male unemployment has increased? On the subject of unemployed school leavers, will the Secretary of State take this opportunity of withdrawing the reply which he gave to me earlier this week when he rested complacently, and without showing any care whatsoever, on his belief that a large number of the half-million children who will leave school in July will remain unemployed for many months to come?

I refute entirely the hon. Gentleman's allegations. The reply I gave him was a genuine reply based on the best available information my Department has. As a Midlands Member of Parliament, I yield to no one in my concern about unemployment in Birmingham and the Birmingham area. I am, as a member of the Government, determined that these figures shall be brought down. The hon. Gentleman may like to know that, as an example of my concern, I am next week meeting the Birmingham Local Employment Committee to discuss this matter further.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what is now the average weekly wage for men and women; and what has been the increase in each case over the past six,. 12, and 18 months.

In October, 1970, the average weekly earnings of full-time manual men were £2805, which was an increase of 13 per cent. over the previous 12 months and 17·3 per cent. over the previous 18 months. The corresponding figures for women were £13·99, 15·5 per cent. and 19·3 per cent. respectively.

To what extent are those industrial groups who are already receiving the highest wages now having the highest increase, and to what extent has the purchasing power of the average wage increased or decreased over the previous five years?

I cannot without notice answer the second part of the supplementary question in detail. On the first part, although in certain cases workers in higher-paid industries have received high increases over the months concerned and the lower-paid relatively low increases, there is no indication from my Department's records that the relative position between the higher and the lower-paid in industry is in general altering.

As my pocket computer is not working, will my hon. Friend tell me whether the figures he has given indicate that the differential between male and female wages is growing greater?

The figures I have given do not suggest that, and recent wage council settlements have indicated a welcome trend toward the closing of the gap between men's and women's wages.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what estimate he has made of the effect on employment in the sugar refineries on Merseyside should the United Kingdom join the Common Market.

It would be difficult to make a precise estimate but it seems likely that entry into the Common Market will not adversely affect the employment position in British refineries.

Is my hon. Friend aware that six trade unions are much worried at possible redundancies in the sugar cane refineries? If there is to be any redundancy, will he see that it is in the rich South-East and not in the development areas of Merseyside and Scotland?

I am aware of the worries about this matter, but the settlement on Commonwealth sugar as a result of the negotiations will largely safeguard refinery supplies of raw sugar, and I assure my hon. Friend that these fears are unfounded.

As the hon. Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Mr. Tilney) said, the workers, particularly those in Tate and Lyle, Liverpool, are concerned about the future of their employment. Incidentally, they are not in favour of any sugar refinery workers being sacked, either in the South-East or in Liverpool. Will the hon. Gentleman give a firm assurance that there will not be any redundancies as a result of Britain's entry into the E.E.C.?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that from the point of view of refinery supplies of sugar there is no need for concern. Supplies will be assured under the Commonwealth Sugar Agreement up to 1974, and after that will be safeguarded by negotiation and by undertakings. From that point of view there should be no need for worry.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many teachers as such are signing on at his Department's offices in Scotland; for how long they have been signing; and if he will make a statement.

The figure was 58 on 22nd June. Of these, 24 had been registered as unemployed for up to three months, six for up to six months, 15 for up to 12 months and 13 for more than 12 months.

The hon. Gentleman has presented to us amazing figures. Bearing in mind that in Lanarkshire there is a serious shortage of secondary teachers, will he or his right hon. Friend have talks with the Secretary of State for Scotland on the possibility of an incentive scheme to induce teachers to move from areas where they are obviously not required into areas where they are urgently required, in the interests of the teachers and of the children?

I understand that the general picture in Scotland is one of satisfied demand for teachers in some areas and of a shortage in others, notably in South-West Scotland. Obviously, there will be areas where teachers may not be able to get the jobs they want but they may do so if they are prepared to move. I will convey the hon. Gentleman's remarks to my right hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what steps he is taking to encourage damage control inspection of workplaces to reduce industrial accidents.

A pilot study of damage control has recently been undertaken by the British Steel Corporation and my Department will examine the results in detail when these become available.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that experts in this technique can survey a workplace and recommend measures designed to eliminate potential accidents, thereby saving lives, limbs and money? Should not the Department give every encouragement to the extension of such examination to the whole of industry?

Yes, I hope that we shall do so. We believe that the system is a promising development, but if it is introduced too hurriedly it may not yield such helpful results. We must analyse what takes place in the pilot experiments and, if they are a success, we shall do everything we can to encourage the system.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what are the latest official figures for unemployed in Great Britain as a whole, and by regions, respectively.

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

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, as a direct result of the Government's policy of enforcing the discipline of the dole queue, these figures now represent more than 100 million working days lost this year? Would he bear in mind what his City counterpart said today on the question of competition in savings, namely, that such competition will result in increased interest rates, and will this not cause greater unemployment, particularly in the building industry?

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's concern about unemployment in his constituency, which has grown owing to the closing of heavy industry. I do not accept his diagnosis of the unemployment psition in general.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that such concern is not confined to Bolsover but is true of the whole country? When will the Government convert their shattered promises into firm proposals for action? When will the hon. Gentleman look at the possibility of giving speedy help to the jobless by, for example, accelerating and advancing the capital spending programme in the nationalised industries, local authorities and Government Departments? Is it not clear that without such a crash programme a million families will face a bleak winter?

Much of the crash programme of which the hon. Gentleman speaks has already been undertaken or is being undertaken. [HON. MEMBERS: "Where?"] If hon. Gentlemen had listened to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the last debate on this subject, they would have heard him announce our plans to reinvigorate the economy. What the hon. Member for Doncaster (Mr. Harold Walker) said comes ill from a party which, during its term of office between 1965 and 1970, succeeded in doubling unemployment.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that we are feeling the effects of this "crash programme" in the Greater Manchester area where unemployment has doubled over the last 12 months and where there is a serious run-down in the engineering industry, which is vital to our economy? What are the Government doing about the situation?

We believe that the steps being taken by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will encourage and increase investment. This will benefit the hon. Gentleman's area.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if, in view of the increase in industrial redundancies in the Middlesex area, including Ealing and Hillingdon, he will consider holding a conference between officials of his Department and employers and trade union representatives within the area.

Local employment committees throughout the country are appointed to advise my right hon. Friend. They meet regularly to discuss local employment matters and there are such committees covering the area concerned. Their members include employers and trade unionists and officials of my Department also attend.

The reply has nothing whatever to do with the Question. Does the hon. Gentleman realise that it is no comfort to people in my constituency, who because of Tory policies have seen unemployment rapidly increase, to be told that there are not so many unemployed in the Greater London area as elsewhere? Does he not appreciate that it is a disaster in a family when the breadwinner becomes unemployed? Will he withdraw his inane reply and give me a proper reply—a reply to which the unemployed in my constituency are entitled? If he cannot do so, will he not have the courage to resign?

I will not resign, nor will I give a different reply from that which I have just given the hon. Gentleman which meets the circumstances of the hon. Gentleman's Question. The hon. Gentleman asked whether we would consider holding a conference. We believe that the work done by the local employment committees, on which all sectors of industry are represented, can adequately convey to us the feelings which are paramount in the hon. Gentleman's area. The hon. Gentleman should not exaggerate his case. He well knows that, although at the moment unemployment is a serious problem, the situation is a lot better in his part of the country than elsewhere.

Could we be told what is "better unemployment"?

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what are the latest Scottish unemployment figures; and how they compare with the same period in 1970.

The total numbers of people registered as unemployed in Scotland at June, 1971 and June, 1970 were 121,647 and 84,131, respectively. The figure for June, 1971 is provisional.

Are these not absolutely disgraceful figures? How does the Miniter square them with the promise given by the Prime Minister to cut unemployment at a stroke? Is the Minister aware that on prices, unemployment and on all other aspects of Government policy the people in Scotland, as well as in other part of the United Kingdom, treat all Government statements and promises, including those on the Common Market, with contemptuous disbelief?

I shall be very surprised if my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made a promise that he would cut unemployment—[HON. MEMBERS: "Yes he did."]—in Scotland at a stroke. The reason he would not have done so is that the trend was already there. In the year before the years I quoted unemployment rose by 12 per cent. Therefore, the trend was unlikely to be turned round at a stroke.

Is my hon. Friend aware that unemployment in many parts of Scotland, including my own area, has occurred in the capital goods industries because of the cut-back in investment resulting from the squeeze on profits applied by the fiscal policies of the Labour Government, and also as a result of the impact of the wage-cost inflation brought about by the previous Government? In these circumstances will he treat the outcries from the Opposition with the contempt they deserve?

I will certainly do that. The situation now depends on the policies we are putting forward.

Could the Minister say when unemployment last rose in Scotland in the month of June?

Not without notice, but I should like the right hon. Gentleman to notice the steps which we are taking—steps which he when Secretary of State for Scotland did not take. In fact, we have made a large part of the West of Scotland into a special development area and we are giving inducements of a kind which have never been given before. In due course these will have their effect.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what is his latest estimate of the number of males unemployed in Scotland; and what is the percentage increase in the number of males unemployed in Scotland since last June.

At 14th June the provisional number of males registered as unemployed in Scotland was 100,023. This was a rate of 7·6 per cent. compared with 5·2 per cent. in June, 1970.

Had the hon. Gentleman been willing to answer my Question, he would have said that the number of male unemployed in Scotland has increased by 44 per cent. since last June. Surely he is aware that unemployment in Scotland is now a national disaster. Are the Government satisfied with the effects of their present economic policies?

I think that I answered that Question a little earlier. As for the hon. Gentleman's own constituency, the Government have taken action which was not taken before. Edinburgh has been made an intermediate area. I hope that this will bring it benefit.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that he has no more answered this Question than he has answered the Question when the Prime Minister will apologise to the country for his promise to reduce unemployment "at a stroke"?

I suggest that the right hon. Lady puts that question to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister.

Will my hon. Friend contemplate taking a pneumatic drill to implant in the solid ivory opposite the plain fact that cost inflation is the greatest creator of unemployment?

I doubt whether even that would be effective.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will have talks with the Irish Embassy about migratory workers; and what plans he has for regulating the activities of labour contractors.

I am aware of the allegations of intimidation, underpayment and sub-standard living conditions of certain Irish immigrant seasonal workers employed in Scottish agriculture. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland is investigating these. If the hon. Member has other matters in mind, I should be pleased to have details. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment is not contemplating special action to regulate the activities of labour contractors.

In view of the growing activities of labour-leasing agencies involved in the recruitment of British workers for employment on the Continent, notably in German shipyards and steelworks, would it not be desirable for his right hon. Friend to put this recruitment on an official footing in labour exchanges?

I cannot comment at the moment on the point which the hon. Gentleman raised in his original Question, since these matters are still being investigated. As for the broader point raised in the hon. Gentleman's supplementary Question, we do not see the need for legislation. We think that the resources available will be better spent on improving public employment services than on more and more controls.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, under the new Immigration Bill, Commonwealth citizens will have to enter the country to work on work permits and will in future be temporary and migratory? In view of that, when will his Department reveal the intended numbers of work permits, so that we know how many temporary and, therefore, migratory workers we shall have under the new set-up?

That is going a long way from the original Question, which was about Irish immigrant workers in Scotland. There is free movement of labour between Ireland and Great Britain. If the hon. Gentleman cares to put down a Question on the other point, I shall be delighted to answer it.

On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of those replies, I beg to give notice that I shall seek an early opportunity to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many men and women are wholly or temporarily unemployed in the Wolverhampton area as covered by his Department's office there; what percentage of unemployment this represents; how this compares with the previous three months figures; and what action he intends to take to help those out of work there to find employment.

Provisional figures for 14th June indicate that 3,509 males and 587 females were registered as unemployed in the Wolverhampton Employment Exchange Area. The percentage rates of unemployment for the Wolverhampton travel-to-work area were 3·6 in May and June, 3·3 in April and 3·5 in March. All the facilities of my Department's employment services will continue to be available to those who need help.

Is not it clear from that reply that the blight of Toryism has spread over the whole country, including the formerly prosperous West Midlands area? Is not that an indictment of the Government's failure to take action to get the country's economy moving? Does the hon. Gentleman's Department intend to take action on the recommendations of the West Midlands Economic Planning Council which were published recently? Is the hon. Gentleman further aware that, next month, 2,500 children will be leaving school and looking for jobs? Is he aware, finally, that we on this side of the House and the country as a whole view with contempt and derision the continuing excuses made by Ministers in his Department for the calamitous situation of the economy?

I thought that the hon. Lady was about to say that she viewed with cautious optimism the fact that the underlying upward trend of unemployment was beginning to die away. I believe that that is far more significant for the people of Wolverhampton than the series of clichés contained in the hon. Lady's speech to the House this afternoon. I should have thought that Wolverhampton would benefit from the measures already taken by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, along with the rest of the West Midlands, as they begin to work, some of them coming into operation this month.

On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the hon. Gentleman's replies, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many times the Committee on Safety Training has met since 1967; and whether he will make a statement.

The Sub-Committee on Safety Training of the Industrial Safety Advisory Council has met five times since it was set up in 1967.

Can the hon. Gentleman say how many times this Committee has met as a whole committee, and how many times its sub-committees have met? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that certain people who were invited to be members when it was first set up in 1967 have not been informed yet that there has been a meeting?

The full Advisory Council has met twice since it was first appointed. The work has been fairly modest in content, but there is no question of trying to eliminate the Committee. Any member of the sub-committee or of the Council who feels that he has a specific point which should be discussed has only to get in touch with the secretariat in my Department.