asked the Secretary of State for Employment what is the latest unemployment figure for the 55-and-over age category.

At 12th July, the latest date for which in-formation is available, 168,464 people aged 55 years and over were registered as wholly unemployed in Great Britain.

That figure represents one in four of all unemployed. Does the hon. Gentleman realise that, if we take the numbers of unemployed who have been out of work for a year or more, 52 per cent. of these people fall into the 55-and-over category, and, further, a large number, possibly even the majority, of these people will never have employment again? Will the hon. Gentleman, therefore, consider taking action which would restrain —[HON. MEMBERS: "Too long."] This is a serious matter. Will the Under-Secretary of State consider taking action which would restrain employers from making redundant people who are 55 years of age and older ; and, second—[HON. MEMBERS: "Too long."]—will he consider—

Order. There is enough for the Minister to answer now.

It is true that people in the older category are more numerous, but, despite the general increase in unemployment throughout the country, older workers have not fared noticeably worse than other sections of the community. My Department always does whatever it can to persuade employers not to discharge older workers and to engage older workers where at all possible.

Is the Manpower Research Unit in my hon. Friend's Department particularly investigating the problem of people 55 years of age and over?

Yes, Sir; this is one of the problems of our times, and we are looking at it in considerable depth.

Will the hon. Gentleman look at the problem of miners of 55 and over who were made redundant several years ago? This is an acute problem. Will the hon. Gentleman consider having a special inquiry into their difficulties?

I do not know that a special inquiry would solve deep-rooted problems of this kind, but we are aware of the very difficult situation of the older miner. Fortunately, as the hon. Gentle-man knows, there are schemes to help people in that situation. However, I do not think that one should ever give up hope that one will be able to find employment for those who are quite senior in age.

Order. May I make the position of the Chair clear in the matter of supplementary questions? I did some-what curtail the supplementary question being asked by the hon. Member for Northfield (Mr. Carter), but I did so only in the interest of other hon. Members who have later Questions. It would be much easier for the Chair to allow supplementary questions almost ad infinitum in each case, but I have to consider other hon. Members who wish to ask Questions. That was the only reason why I intervened.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will seek to introduce, for a limited time, an employment premium to employers in respect of redundant men, over the age of 45 years, whom they re-employ when jobs become available.

As my hon. Friend will know, a scheme has been introduced in assisted areas to help those who are over 45 to find training. When we see how this is working, we may consider extending the scheme to other areas.

Will my hon. Friend agree that, as these men form a substantial part of the hard-core, long-term unemployed who may never be employed again, they should be treated as a priority group throughout the country and not just in the development areas and that encouragement should be given to employers to employ them when they can, especially as many Government training centres say that they retrain faster than younger men and make more stable employees?

I accept my hon. Friend's last point, and I accept that this is a very serious problem. We are watching the situation in the light of the experiment in the assisted areas.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what is the number and proportion of employment exchange areas in England and Wales which currently have a higher rate of unemployment than that in the Dinnington exchange area in the Rother Valley constituency.

Out of 374 areas in England and Wales for which rates of unemployment can be calculated, at 11th October eight had rates higher than that for Dinnington.

In view of that reply and the serious problem which unemployment presents in my constituency, will the Minister consider conferring development area rather than intermediate area status on my constituency? Further, will he, please, not dismiss the problem as one caused purely by excessive inflation but realise that the problem in Yorkshire is caused by historical and technological changes in the nature of our industry?

I agree that there are a number of reasons why the situation has come about. As the hon. Gentleman knows, I am not responsible for the apportionment of development or intermediate area status, but I shall have a word with my right hon. Friend the Secre- tary of State for Trade and Industry on that point.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what are the unemployed figures for North-East Lancashire for October, 1971.

At 11th October, 7,815 people were registered as unemployed in the North-East Lancashire intermediate area, and the rate of unemployment was 3·8 per cent.

These figures make depressing reading in that unemployment in this region has more than doubled in the past twelve months. Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind, in particular, one of the most troubling aspects of it, namely, that skilled workers are now unemployed for months on end and are leaving the area in search of work else-where, so that, if industry wants to come to the area in the future, it may be discouraged from doing so because of the absence of skilled workers? Will the hon. Gentleman look into this particular problem?

Yes, Sir; we are constantly looking into the problem. I know that there has been an increase, but at the moment the figure is roughly in line with the national percentage. I hope that the rate of increase will now tail off in this area, and, certainly, that the North-East Lancashire intermediate area will benefit from the already massive efforts directed there by the Government.

In view of the disastrous decision to terminate on 1st January quotas on imported textiles, would my hon. Friend care to forecast what unemployment in this area is likely to be in January and February next year?

No, Sir. I do not give forecasts, and nor did the Opposition when they were in office. We are well aware of concern among people in the textile industry. My hon. Friend the Minister for Industry said quite recently that the fortunes of the industry are kept under constant review, and I am sure that if my hon. Friend has a word with the Minister for Industry he will be able to press his case further.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment why it is necessary for companies whose annual turn-over is such that they are exempted from payment of the levy to the Publishing and Printing Industry Training Board still to be obliged to complete this training board's requests for statistical and other in formation.

As I informed my hon. Friend by letter last September, the Printing and Publishing Board has statutory responsibilities under Section 2 of the Industrial Training Act to the whole of the industry. It informs me that it could not discharge those responsibilities effectively if the information it collected came exclusively from firms due to pay levy.

Does my hon. Friend agree that many companies within the industry are not happy with the present structure and organisation, and that to impose this form of bureaucracy upon those small companies is hardly consistent with the Government's attitude towards easing the position of the smaller companies?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is well aware of the dissatisfaction felt in many quarters about the industrial training boards. That is one of the reasons why we are having a deep review of the situation, the results of which will be published before the end of the year. As to the second part of my hon. Friend's Question, the Board levies only one-third of the firms in the industry, so if it obtains statistics from only one-third it would not have the true picture of the industry which is required.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment whether he will set up a new Government training centre in Derbyshire in 1972.

A new Centre will he located in the Chesterfield-Mansfield-Alfreton area. These facilities should benefit Derbyshire.

I am grateful for that reply. Does my hon. Friend realise that, while that is sufficient for the time being, there is a growing need for retraining centres if we are to tackle the problem of unemployment? The more retraining centres we have to give alternative skills to working people, the better it will be for the economy.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is more than aware of that. That is why we are having a very big drive to increase our training in that direction. As to my hon. Friend's local problem, we already have our eyes on a site at Kirkby-in-Ashfield, and we hope to get going on it quite soon. It should be a help to my hon. Friend's area.

When shall we have the details of the massive expansion of training and retraining facilities which we were promised as long ago as the General Election? We are still waiting.

If the right hon. Lady had listened to the replies over the past two months she would know that an awful lot is happening. Not only are the G.T.C.s being expanded at considerable speed but our drive to get private employers to co-operate with us to let us use their spare capacity is a feature which will grow very much as time goes on.

That is a very interesting reply. Of course I am aware of those answers, but we were led to believe during the General Election campaign that there was a remarkable new plan to be put before us for a more massive expansion of training than ever before visualised in our history. Are we to take it that these little driblets of expansion are the sum total of the massive expansion we were told about?

The right hon. Lady knows from her own experience that it takes time, but with the drive we are putting behind it, I think that I can guarantee that she will not be asking that sort of question in three years' time.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what estimates his Department has made of the effects on the levels of unemployment of labour-intensive industries, for example ship-building, of the ending of the regional employment premium in 1974.

The Regional Employment Premium is only one of a number of measures to help employment in the development areas and it is impossible to estimate the effect of any one measure in isolation.

Would the right hon. Gentleman care to publish any correspondence between himself and ship-building companies about the way in which they might be discounting the effects of the R.E.P. in their quotations for ships at present?

I think that I am right to treat correspondence with me personally as confidential to the correspondents. Under our policy, R.E.P. is continuing, for the full seven years for which it was introduced, because we felt that it was right to keep that pledge made by the previous Government. But our attitude to it is that it is not the most effective way of spending £106 million a year in helping employment in the development areas.

Can my right hon. Friend say anything about the possible beneficial effects on the shipbuilding industry of orders to build frigates to send to South Africa, as we were honourably committed to do under the Simonstown Agreement?

My hon. Friend's question is not one for me, but she and the House will know that we have recently announced naval orders of great importance for employment, particularly in the Clyde area. My hon. Friend the Minister of State for Defence Procurement will no doubt give the House the details.

Is the Minister aware that not only are we worried about shipbuilding but that in Liverpool and Merseyside we are worried about the declining state of the ship repair industry? We gave up the greatest and largest graving dock in this country—the Gladstone Graving Dock in Liverpool—to facilitate a temporary-container berth. As the new £40 million Seaforth Container Dock is nearly completed, can the right hon. Gentleman promise us that our graving dock will revert to its normal use?

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman knows that he is asking me questions on matters for which I am not responsible, though I know of the concern felt. It is perhaps worth pointing out that the total number employed in shipbuilding and ship repair has increased slightly in the past 12 months, and not decreased, as so many people seem to think.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many persons have been made redundant in the Northern Region since June, 1964.

Records of the number of redundancies in all industries including those in the construction and shipbuilding industries for the Northern Region were not kept before 1969.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the number of redundancies since the Government came to office constitutes a disgraceful achievement of Government policies? In my constituency, 12½ per cent. of the men have become unemployed since 1964, and for every 70 out of work there is one vacancy. Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that his miserable Government and the policies they have imposed upon the regions have been disastrous?

As he studies the figures, the hon. Gentleman will see that the regions had a large number of redundancies under his Administration. The last Government bear a large share of the responsibility for the present high rate of unemployment, and it is hypocritical of Labour hon. Members to pretend otherwise. Instead of arguing about who is responsible, we are trying to cure the situation.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how his Department is involved in a project for unemployed young people to be employed by the Government in social work programmes.

My Department, in consultation with other interested Departments, is giving urgent consideration to proposals from the National Association of Youth Clubs for special work groups of young unemployed people.

In giving that urgent consideration, will my hon. Friend bear very much in mind the importance of combating the demoralising effect of enforced idleness on the minds of young people who are right at the beginning of their working lives?

We will certainly bear that very much in mind. These are interesting and valuable ideas.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many unions have remained on the provisional register of trade unions, and how many have become organisations of workers.

I am informed by the Registrar that there were 268 organisations of workers entered on the provisional register on 5th November. Before that date he had removed at their own request 76 organisations from the provisional register.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many trade unions are having to go to the expense of holding special conferences and securing changes of rule to come off the register, and that the vast majority of trade unions are determined to go through these procedures so that they do not go on to the register?

I cannot say what unions should decide to do about changing their rules. That is their own affair. As to the point raised in the second part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, we shall have to let time pass and see what the ultimate answer is.

But does not the right hon. Gentleman recognise that under the Industrial Relations Act the question of changing the rules is not entirely the unions' affair? It is very much determined by the existence of the Act itself. Is he not aware that because of the Act problems have been created in the trade union movement which never existed before, that divisions within the movement have arisen which never existed before, and that the Government are totally responsible for the situation?

I am glad to say that there are also great opportunities which never existed before for the trade unions, as time will show. There is a great obligation on both sides because we believe, as we have debated in the House before, that when organisations like employers' associations and trade unions claim, quite rightly, to exercise the amount of influence which they wield in our economy and public affairs, it is right that they should be accountable to the public.

Will my right hon. Friend do everything possible to encourage the trade unions to draw to the attention of their members the benfits of staying on the register and the severe risk which they run if they come off it?

Certainly I will. I will do all I can to draw to everyone's attention the benefits of the provisions of the Act.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us how many of the alleged 268 unions remaining on the register are staff associations and similar bodies, employer-dominated and frequently employer-financed?

If they are employer-dominated, the Act will ensure that they cannot remain on the register even if they wish to do so. The names of the 268 are available to the hon. Gentleman or anyone else, since the register is open to the public.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what arrangements of an administrative nature his Department has made for work-in situations.

My Department's normal practice of keeping in touch with developments in disputes covers such situations.

Does not the hon. Gentleman appreciate that work-ins such as that which recently occurred at U.C.S. and that which is already beginning at the River Don steel works, Sheffield, require much more than that? Does not he agree that his Department by now should be showing some appreciation of its responsibility for this fundamentally important area, that is, the worker's day at work? For example, how will his work-in affect the worker in the stamping of his card, or in the responsibility for industrial injury or industrial disease, or in the reckoning of service for pension, or in his access to company-based canteen and sports clubs? This is just the beginning of the thinking which the Department should be displaying evidence of doing. Is the hon. Gentleman prepared to undertake early consultations with the T.U C. about these matters?

This sort of situation is fairly new and is obviously something which my Department is studying carefully. That can be guaranteed. For redundancies and so on, we have the well-known "job teams" and all the drill associated with them. But this is a new situation which makes it extremely hard for our normal drill to operate. I assure the hon. Gentleman that we are studying the situation.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what sums his Department paid out in Scotland last year, and what is the amount paid out in 1971 to date in absolute terms and at an annual rate, respectively.

Since this answer is somewhat complicated, I will with permission publish details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

May I remind the Minister of State that the Secretary of State has said that he himself was disappointed and surprised by the very high unemployment figures? I and others representing the regions have been telling the hon. Gentleman for months that Government policies are inadequate to deal with the unemployment situation. Will he now recognise, on reflection, that the amount of money being paid out is a waste to the country and that the manpower could be used, if the Government's policies were changed, in order to give these people the jobs which they so earnestly desire?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, I took the trouble to find out what was behind his Question, and I think that even now there is a misunderstanding. The amount of money used by the Government towards generating emplayment comes from the Departments of Trade and Industry and the Environment. The spending in that direction by this Department is not particularly big. We are responsible for spending on training services and so on, and this is not relevant to the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many July school leavers remain unemployed in the South-West Durham Employment Ex-change areas.

I am glad to say that, of the estimated 1,600 young people who left school at the end of the summer term, 1,489 had found jobs by 11th October. This leaves 111 still registered as unemployed.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that the position is still very unsatisfactory? Will he ask the Secretary of State to increase the amount of training facilities and training grants immediately, and also to second from his Department officers to make better contacts with youth employment officers and employers so that the maximum number of jobs and training facilities can be found for these young people?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, we have appointed extra career officers and the whole question of training is kept under constant review. Training has been increased. But I appreciate that the position is still not satisfactory in the hon. Member's area. The problem is not so much that of the school leaver as such as that of the less-well-qualified young person who has had two or three jobs but is now entering on a period of longer unemployment. That is the problem with which we have to get to grips.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment when he will submit the Code of Industrial Relations Practice to Parliament for approval.

I hope to do so shortly after the Christmas Recess.

While the code is still in draft, will my right hon. Friend make one more personal appeal to the T.U.C. to show responsibility to the members of its unions and give its views on the document?

The T.U.C. collectively is in no doubt of my willingness and, indeed, eagerness to consult it. That is well known. But I should like to take this opportunity to repeat it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the operation of the Act is already causing divisive actions within industry over the question of staff unions seeking registration and over problems such as those occurring in the Fire Brigades Union with its London members? Is not this a recipe for industrial unrest, and will it not increase? The code is absolute nonsense and there is no point in this situation in the T.U.C. discussing it with him.

The hon. Gentleman is extremely ill informed about what is going on throughout industry. Even in its present form, the code is stimulating a degree of discussion and consideration amongst managements throughout the country—whose primary responsibility it is, we are all agreed, to initiate the right sort of changes—to an extent which exceeds my expectations. In reply to the second part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, I remind him that the difficulties arise only through those bodies which choose to deny themselves the great benefits of registration.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what improvements he is planning in his Department's Occupational Guidance Service.

The future development of the Occupational Guidance Service is being currently examined as part of a general review of my Department's employment services. My right hon. Friend is to make a statement on the results of this review before the end of the year.

I welcome that statement, but would not my hon. Friend agree that at a time when skills are changing fast and when, under any Government, employment problems are likely to be obstinate and serious for some time to come, this is a subject which needs very careful examination? Will he bring forward at the earliest possible date the information which he is collecting on the subject with a view to making the services which may be available known to as wide a public as possible?

Yes, Sir. The importance of this is fully accepted by my Department. Since the service was introduced in 1966, it has been steadily expanded from the original 12 experimental units and now has 44 centres available in large urban areas. The latest one is being opened tomorrow. Advice has so far been given to 140,000 people and the service is running at the annual rate of 40,000 cases.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that if, as he claims, the importance of improving the employment services is fully realised by his Department, he and his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State are adopting a very curious way of showing it, since proposals for a fundamental transformation and modernisation of the employment services were well advanced before I left his Department over 16 months ago? What is the reason for the delay, and may we at last have some action as a priority over attacking the trade unions?

The right hon. Lady's words were not the last on this subject. We want to get it absolutely right, and that is why we have taken quite a while in studying the proposals. But, as we have said today, they will be announced before the end of the year.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what is his policy with regard to the level of unemployment in the West Midlands as indicated by the latest figures ; and if he will make a statement.

I regard the present level of unemployment as unacceptably high. The Government have already taken very substantial measures to stimulate output throughout the economy and I am confident that the West Midlands, with its strong and diversified industrial base, is well-equipped to take advantage of the expansion which should result from these measures.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the West Midlands he is regarded as a genius—the only man in 40 years to bring widespread and long-term unemployment? If this is to he the fate under a Tory Government of one of the most prosperous, if not the most prosperous, regions of Britain, what hope is there for the constituencies of my right hon. and hon. Friends in the depressed areas?

I think that history will prove that we are initiating the first real expansion of the economy since there was last a Conservative Government in office. The main cause of our trouble is that we are reaping the bitter fruit of six years of stagnation which culminated with the biggest cost-inflation in our history since the war.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that unemployment in the West Midlands is 3 per cent. to 4 per cent. compared with 7½ per cent. on Clydebank and even higher elsewhere? May I, as a West Midlands Member, ask him not to change the Government's policies, which will certainly lead to success in the early future?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. As he indicated, the Government have given a bigger stimulus to the economy than has ever been given in a single year.

As there has been a considerable increase in the number of redundancies in the West Midlands ever since the last figures were announced, and as there is no hope of the regions being prosperous without the heartland of British industry being prosperous, will the right hon. Gentleman consider trying to influence his colleagues to take a more relaxed view of granting industrial development certificates in the near future?

No, certainly not.

As the hon. Gentleman knows, that is not a question for me. But if the measures we have taken in our first year of office—the biggest ever taken in a single year to stimulate the economy— are too late, they should have been taken the year before when the Labour Party was in power.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what is the approximate total of those expected to be involved in conciliation work in his Department when the Industrial Relations Act becomes fully operative, as compared with the current figure.

About 140 officers are at present involved in conciliation work, mainly in the regions. It is expected that up to 100 more will be required to deal with complaints by individuals mainly about unfair dismissals

Is my hon. Friend aware that on this aspect of industrial relations there is unlikely to be a difference of opinion between the two sides of the House about the new emphasis which is being placed on the question of conciliation and producing a better service for it?

I think that all Members would agree with what my hon. Friend said. As he knows, the Act puts great stress on conciliation, and the conciliation services under the present Government are every bit as busy as they used to be under the Labour Administration, despite the criticism we have had from the Opposition.

In view of the hon. Gentleman's reply, why have his officials advised employers in the West Midlands to discontinue the Coventry toolroom agreement?

The answer is that they have not.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what is the current unemployment rate in Oldham ; and what steps he is taking to reduce it.

At 11th October the rate of unemployment for Oldham and Chadderton travel-to-work area was 3·3 per cent. The Government have already taken many measures to stimulate output, investment and employment throughout the country. Oldham is in a good position to benefit from these measures.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the increase in the rate of unemployment of full-time workers in my area during the last three months has been 52 per cent., which is second only to the figure for East Anglia? Is he further aware that mills in the North-West are closing at the unprecendented rate of one a week? In these circumstances, will he consult his right hon. and hon. Friends to ensure that the North-West gets at least its fair share of public investment, which it is not getting at the moment?

I am prepared to have words with my right hon. Friend on this subject. I am glad that the figure for Oldham is still below the national average, despite what the hon. Gentleman says. The total of new Government aid specifically aimed at creating jobs is about £400 million, which is a massive injection and will certainly benefit Oldham.

While we must recognise that unemployment is a very serious problem in certain industries and certain areas, does it not give us ground for optimism to reflect that the rise in the number of people wholly unemployed for six months has been less than 50,000 since the Government took office?

The number of people unemployed for over six months expressed as a percentage of all unemployment was 29·2 per cent. The longer-term unemployed figure remained a relatively constant proportion of all those unemployed over the last four years, although undoubtedly the number of unemployed people has gone up. But the figure for the longer-term unemployed is considerably less than the overall figure.

With regard to the Oldham area, will the hon. Gentleman confirm or deny that it is the Government's intention to cancel the contract for the HS748? Does he admit that recently the Government preferred to purchase abroad rather than from Ferranti and that, as a result, there are 2,500 redundancies from Hawker Siddeley? Does he admit that he has created a depressed area and an enlarged number of unemployed skilled workers in what hitherto has been one of the more prosperous areas of the country?

Without accepting one word of what the hon. Gentleman has said, may I point out that he has been a Member long enough to know that these are not questions for me, even though they may be very interesting.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what steps are being taken to improve the premises used as employment exchanges.

The Department of the Environment, which is responsible for the accommodation of Government Departments, has a continuous programme of work designed to improve employment exchange premises. Since January this year, 121 exchanges have been rehoused in better premises and major improvements completed in another 115. Higher standards of decoration and furniture are constantly being introduced.

I welcome that reply, but will my hon. Friend bear in mind that many employment exchanges are still very depressing places for those who work in them and for the unemployed? Will he redouble his efforts in this respect?

I agree with my hon. Friend. We place the utmost importance on developing the quality of service in our employment exchanges, particularly as the employment situation improves. Therefore, the right environment for their operation is of major importance.

Apart from the general condition of employment exchanges, would the Minister say exactly what his plans are, in view of the harmful effects of registration under the Immigration Act, to provide extra staff, extra amenities and extra accommodation for those immigrants who now have to register under that iniquitous provision?

I think, with respect, that that goes rather wide of the original Question. I must have notice of it. But if extra staff are needed this is a matter which will have to be considered.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what progress he has made with the new initiative he announced during the last Session of Parliament to help those disabled seeking employment.

My Department's officials, in collaboration with Rotary International and the other organisations with whom I had talks earlier this year, have made many useful contacts and some placings of disabled people have already stemmed directly from these. The consequent publicity on behalf of disabled people has probably helped in a very difficult employment situation. In the last four weeks some 4,800 jobs were found.

Will the Minister recall the importance which he attached in this context to the grants for the retraining of unemployed older workers? What has been the take-up of those grants?

I think I must have notice of that question, but there has been a general improvement since these original initiatives were announced. What I would say to my hon. and learned Friend is that we do not intend just to let matters lie. We are continuing with these initiatives on various fronts.

Would the Minister convey the thanks and appreciation of the many thousands of disabled people to the disablement and rehabilitation officers at the local exchanges, and, at the same time, will he have another look at the instructions in relation to the disability of deafness? At the moment no distinction is drawn between being deaf and being hard of hearing, and in consequence there is rather more difficulty than there would be if the instructions were a little more clear cut.

Yes, I will certainly do that. I am grateful to the hon. Member for his comments about the officers, who are now full-time specialist placement officers, and as he probably knows, those responsible in the past year have made placings at the rate of 68,000. They are doing a very good job.

Is the percentage of unemployed disabled now falling?

The percentage of disabled unemployed placing has inevitably fallen in a situation in which there is high unemployment. More efforts are being made, but in this situation that has not prevented the number of disabled unemployed from growing. But the position has shown, I believe, definite benefit from the efforts which have been made by my Department.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment whether he will institute an independent inquiry into the reasons for the growth in unemployment over the past five years, and the long-term problems which the changing patterns of employment will cause.

I have no present plans to institute an independent inquiry. But I have already set in train within my Department a programme of study relating to changing trends in employment and the problems to which they may give rise.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I urge him to think again on the first part of the Question, because such an inquiry would be bound to throw interesting and revealing light on the underlying causes of a situation which is causing grave concern throughout the country?

I, of course, agree with my hon. Friend that it is extremely important to study the problem and to look ahead, but I am not yet convinced either that an independent inquiry is necessary or that it would be beneficial. I am keeping the matter very mach in mind.

Would the right hon. Gentleman ask his Department to ask what have been the effects of the change from industrial grants to allowances? Is he aware that in the North-East, in the period from January to October this year, there have been industrial development certificates providing some 4,172 jobs but that this must be compared with the same period in previous years in which there were well over 10,000? Will he ask his Department to inquire how seriously this policy affects employment in development areas?

As I said in reply to an earlier Question, when we have a package of measures, as we have, in employment policy, it is impossible to isolate the effects of any one of them. Our development area policy includes, for example, new encouragement to service industries. which are the most labour-intensive industries and will, as a package, be more effective than what has existed previously.

Would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that, while technological developments have led to a certain increase in unemployment, the basic reason for the increase in unemployment over the last year has been the failure of his Government to introduce measures to deal with the problem, and that this Government are responsible because of their change from investment grants to investment allowances, and because of their policies in relation to I.D.Cs? In fact, their whole policy has failed, and they cannot dodge behind the argument that it was the workers or the previous Government who were responsible.

I do not agree with the hon. Member in any of that analysis. What is true is that we are suffering as a result of six years of stagnation. We are busy putting that stagnation to an end. We have introduced into the economy a bigger boost than has ever been introduced in a single year. If that were too late in our first year then it ought to have been introduced under the previous Government.

Then will the right hon. Gentleman admit that it was always untrue to say that unemployment could be dealt with "at a stroke"?

We said we would take measures quickly—[HON. MEMBERS: "Ah"]—and that is what we have done. and will do.

asked the Prime Minister how many letters he has received about unemployment in the Coventry and Nuneaton areas.

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on Tuesday to Questions from the hon. Members for Southall (Mr. Bidwell) and Bothwell (Mr. James Hamilton).—[Vol. 825, c. 825.]

Is the Prime Minister aware that by continuing to give answers like this he is tending to turn Prime Minister's Question Time into a futile farce? Is he also aware that answers like this give my constituency the impression that he just does not care about unemployment? Is he aware that there is widespread concern in Coventry that it is his Government's deliberate policy to turn the area into a battleground over the toolroom agreement so that our trade unions can finally be crushed?

The hon. Gentleman is, of course, absolutely wrong. It the hon. Gentleman has a specific question which he wishes to ask about detailed figures for employment, or about unemployment in a particular area, he can put it, like every other hon. and right hon. Member, to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment. What I must explain to the House is that t am not prepared to set up at No. 10 an enormous organisation which none of my predecessors has had, to take detailed note of every one of the 90,000 letters I receive a year setting out specific views and dealing, as many individual letters do, with a variety of subjects. I am not prepared to set up an organisation to take note of all the views expressed in them. That has never been done and I do not propose to set up that organisation now.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the workers at Rolls-Royce in Coventry and in Derby and elsewhere are grateful to the Government for saving the RB211 contract and thereby saving their jobs?

I believe that that is absolutely true. The plain fact was that the Government, quite rightly, made an enormous effort in co-operation with the American Administration to ensure that the RB21I went on and a much better contract was signed. This is now going on, and I would have thought the hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite would have been pleased about it.

In this connection, will not the Prime Minister repudiate the action of Rolls-Royce at Coventry in locking out toolroom workers, thus precipitating a breakdown in the talks on the Coventry toolroom agreement? Will he now use his authority in order to get Rolls-Royce to withdraw the lock-out notices so that talks can resume?

As the hon. Member knows very well, this is a complicated dispute over the toolroom agreement, in which both sides have expressed their views and taken action, and I do not propose to make a judgment on one side or the other.

asked the Prime Minister when he next intends to make a Ministerial broadcast.

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on Tuesday to an identical Question from the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South (Mr. Ashley).—[Vol. 825, c. 124.]

I read that answer with considerable interest. None the less, will the Prime Minister use at least part of any future broadcast he may make to reassure citizens who are living here law-fully and peacefully but who are being spied upon by agents of foreign Powers such as South Africa that this practice is totally abhorrent to the British public and totally against the British traditions of freedom under the law?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman, and I have made plain in the House in this Session that if any offence is committed in this respect, action will be taken. This is another example of a Question which has nothing to do with a Ministerial broadcast.

asked the Prime Minister what plans he has to include in his Government a Minister with sole responsibility for price control.

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on Tuesday to Questions from himself and from the hon. Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Mr. Carter).—[Vol. 825, c. 125.]

If the Prime Minister were to appoint a Minister for Price Control, that Minister would have no authority because he would be undermined by a Secretary of State who is sponsoring inflation by inflicting savage rent increases, by a Department of Trade and Industry which is obsessed with sacking people and by a Chancellor of the Exchequer who is busily instructing employers, including the National Coal Board, to cut back real wages. Does not the Prime Minister realise that this is not a free-for-all but the survival of the wealthiest?

No, Sir.

Is my right lion. Friend aware that statutory responsibility for price control involves wage and salary control, from which the previous Government shied away and which is odious to the trade unions and unacceptable to employers?

I agree with the general tenor of my hon. Friend's supplementary question. He is not entirely correct in saying that the previous Administration shied away from wage and salary control. They first went for guidelines, then voluntary restraint, then compulsory legal restraint and they then abandoned the whole lot and now have no policy of any kind.

Will the Prime Minister now say whether his Government are in favour of salary control?

No, I do not think that arises.

asked the Prime Minister if he is satisfied with the co-ordination between the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and the Secretary of State for Employment on arrangements for entering the European Economic Community; and if he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. The Secretary of State and his officials are closely concerned with all issues arising from entry which will affect the Department.

In view of the Prime Minister's satisfaction, will he tell us when the Government expect to publish the details of how acceptance of the labour mobility rules of the Treaty of Rome will affect all categories of Commonwealth and United Kingdom citizens who are working in this country?

This has been described at various times in the debates on Europe. Any statutory requirements will come in the legislation to be introduced in the New Year.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make an official visit to St. Helena.

I have no plans to do so.

Is the Prime Minister aware that there are 5,000 coloured British subjects on the Island of St. Helena who are bitterly resentful that the economic and social life of the island is gradually being taken over by South African interests? Is he further aware that I have been threatened with a libel action should I make public certain statements made to me by islanders about their grievances concerning South African interests?

I know that the hon. Gentleman has taken a great interest in this matter, on which he has expressed considerable concern. He had a talk with my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs about it. As he will acknowledge, he did not give the authorship of the threats that were made, and in these circumstances it is not possible to inquire into them. On the allegation about South African influence in the island, the view which has been expressed to us is that the hon. Gentleman is mistaken as to the extent of this influence, but if he will provide us with further information about his anxieties we are perfectly prepared to look into them.

I am sure that my right hon. Friend is aware that when I and an hon. Gentleman opposite went on an official delegation to St. Helena six years ago we found that the 4,000 inhabitants were completely loyal to the British Crown, that a good multiracial society existed and that there was then no influence from South Africa.

That was the position; I fully realise that. It is possible that there has been a change since, but the advice we have received is that it does not correspond with the hon. Gentleman's fears. I repeat, if there is genuine anxiety about this, we are prefectly prepared to make further inquiries.

asked the Prime Minister what plans he has to seek to pay an official visit to the United States of America.

I have at present no plans to make a further visit to the United States.

Does the Prime Minister recall that when, before the Summer Recess, I drew his attention to the growth of economic nationalism on both sides of the Atlantic, he tended to pooh-pooh the gravity of the problem? In the light of President Nixon's ruthless package of measures last August, is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to take this matter more seriously and to suggest any initiative which the Government might take to reverse the trend towards protectionism?

I have always taken seriously the danger of the growth of protectionism in any part of the world. I have long realised the problems which exist. In the Kennedy Round, for the handling of which I was in part responsible when I was at the Board of Trade, we endeavoured to overcome many of the protectionist influences at work, quite apart from individual questions of tariff. On the present position, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer is acknowledged to have taken a lead in the discussions in the Group of Ten in an attempt to find an arrangement which is acceptable on both sides of the Atlantic, in order not only to prevent the growth of protectionism but to deal also with some of the obstacles which have recently arisen.

Is it not clear that on this matter of protection we have a common interest with the six member countries of the E.E.C. in stopping and reversing any tendency towards greater restrictionism? In his communications with President Nixon, will my right hon. Friend make it clear that this is the way in which we propose to work?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. For the last 25 years, ever since the end of the Second World War, we have been trying to expand multilateral trading arrangements, and that is still our purpose.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will seek a meeting with the Prime Minister of Greece.

I have no plans to do so.

That is a welcome reply, but will the Prime Minister discourage his other Ministers from allowing such things as courtesy visits by Greek ships to the Thames? Will he also instruct the Home Office not to allow members of the Greek secret political police, who have been responsible for the torture of Greek political prisoners, to come to this country and to look at the activities of Greek expatriates who are opposed to the Fascism in Greece?

I have no knowledge of the latter point, but if the hon. Gentleman will let me have the information either I or my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will gladly inquire into it. Courtesy visits of ships and officers are customary amongst N.A.T.O. members and are carried on by all major member countries.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the visit of British troops to Greece is widely used as propaganda in favour of the Greek regime? Will he see that such visits stop?

I am not sure about visits of troops having taken place. I repeat, there are many accepted visits of this kind in N.A.T.O. countries, and it is the wish of the Commander-in-Chief that they should continue.

asked the Prime Minister if he is satisfied with the co-ordination existing between the Secretaries of State for Employment and the Environment in solving the problem of unemployment, especially in the West Midlands; and if he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer described to the House on Tuesday the various Government measures aimed at reducing the level of unemployment throughout the country, including the West Midlands.

Is the Prime Minister aware that these measures are singularly unsuccessful, in that unemployment in the West Midlands is steadily moving towards 8 per cent? Is he also aware that if his two Secretaries of State were to set about a comprehensive and energetic house-building programme, which is so urgently needed throughout the West Midlands, this would provide employment to people who are without work and at the same time get people out of the deplorable housing conditions in which they live? Will he consider setting up a special house-building association to do this?

I discussed the problems of the West Midlands when I visited that area during the recess and met the Economic Planning Council. There is no doubt that the improvement grants which were introduced by my right hon. Friend are now having a consider-able effect. Similarly, there is an improvement in the private sector of house building, and I should have thought that in the West Midlands many local authorities were also putting a particular drive behind local authority housing.