asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many persons are now registered as unemployed.

On 9th October 1,114,211 people were unemployed in Great Britain.

Will the Secretary of State tell us what he expects the figure to be by the end of 1976? Will he deny that he believes that by then it will reach at least 1½ million? If he does not accept that figure, will he say what figure he does accept?

No, I shall not make such a prediction. It would not be sensible. Indeed, I do not think that any Government have made predictions of the character suggested by the hon. Gentleman.

One of the measures introduced by my right hon. Friend is the temporary employment subsidy scheme. Will he indicate how that scheme is going? Did he see reports that there have been only 7,000 applications and only 4,000 approvals? Is that in fact the case?

There is a later Question about the details of the scheme, which my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State will be answering. We never claimed that the numbers involved would be large. We believe that the scheme has made a good start. We think that it can save the jobs of quite a large number of people. We do not believe that the conditions which have been laid down are preventing applications going through. We are prepared to examine the working of the scheme as it goes along. My hon. Friend will recall that we took steps a few weeks ago to extend the scheme to the whole country.

Does not the present record level of unemployment provide powerful evidence, in terms of human misery, of the misplaced faith of the right hon. Gentleman in the social contract? Does he now realise that his refusal to acknowledge the failure of the social contract has resulted in higher unemployment and worse rates of inflation?

I do not accept what the hon. Gentleman said. No words of mine will express any complacency about the present unemployment figures, which are appalling. Since the same level, proportionately, prevails in many other countries such as Germany and France—and there is a much bigger figure in the United States—and throughout the rest of the Western world, it would be much more sensible and logical for people to attribute it to common factors in all countries rather than to one policy in this country

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what additional measures are being taken to reduce the level of unemployment.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what further steps are being taken by his Department to combat unemployment generally and to assist school leavers in particular; and if he will make a statement.

One essential measure in order to reduce the appallingly high level of unemployment is to reduce the rate of inflation, and I am confident that that goal will be achieved. The measures announced on 24th September can help to mitigate the situation, and their effect is being closely studied, particularly the assistance they provide to school leavers. Of course, we would all like to see much more far-reaching measures adopted, but their timing must depend partly on the success of the anti-inflation drive.

What is my right hon. Friend doing about the statement that was presented before the Labour Party conference, to which he replied, about unemployment levels? He said specifically that further action should be taken to bring down unemployment. It is all right for those who have never been in a dole queue to use all the rhetoric about facing the economic typhoon, but that is small comfort to those who join the ever-lengthening dole queues and cannot afford to buy even a sail to help them face this whirlwind. Is it not time that my right hon. Friend got down to the job of seeing that the present massive rate of unemployment is brought down to a reasonable level?

I want to see the appalling rate of unemployment brought down as speedily as possible, by every means available to us. Some of the measures were announced a few weeks ago, and I think that further measures will be announced very soon, dealing with the construction industry, for example. One of the main measures—not the only one—to deal with the problem is to bring down the rate of inflation itself. I think that my hon. Friend must face the fact that inflation helps to cause unemployment.

Is the right hon. Gentleman unaware, or does he not wish to disclose, that it is the fall in the rate of inflation that necessarily causes transitional unemployment, and that therefore, since the rate of inflation has to fall, this transition must be experienced?

We have debated this matter with the right hon. Gentleman on many occasions. He takes a purist, classical laissez-faire view of the situation. Most of us object to that. The right hon. Gentleman has not converted his own ex-party, and he need not think that he will convert us.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the report last week by the independent Price Commission makes the most heartening reading for years, apropos the inflation situation? At last there are signs of inflation being countered, which will mean a reduction in the level of unemployment. Nevertheless, will my right hon. Friend be prepared to consider the situation of young men and women entering apprenticeship schemes, and ensure that their prospects are not damaged during this difficult period, because their services will be needed later, when we and this Government have overcome inflation?

I agree with my hon. Friend that the report of the Price Commission was a good sign in the right direction, but it has to go much further before we can see unemployment falling at anything like the rate that we would like to see. I hope that that will follow.

Has the Minister read the report produced by the Training Services Agency entitled "Vocational Preparation for Young People"? Does he accept its conclusions, particularly about gateway courses? If so, what action does he propose to take?

There are many valuable suggestions in that report. Some of them have already been put into operation. The Agency cannot have any criticism of this Government about the support which we have given to training in different forms. Certainly we regard it as a valuable report, on which we can build.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what estimate he has made of the likely trend and numbers of unemployed over the next 12 months; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what forecast he makes of unemployment trends in the United Kingdom and Scotland, respectively, over the next 12 months; and if he will make a statement.

If present trends persist the calculation is that unemployment will be something under 1·2 million, seasonally adjusted, at the end of the year, and that it will then begin to level off. I doubt whether predictions beyond that can have much value, nor can I make a worthwhile separate estimate for Scotland. Of course, the total I have mentioned is not a tolerable one, and a main objective of Government policy is to get it down as soon as possible, by every intelligent means available to us.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. We cannot hear what the Minister is saying. We can hear the questions but not the answers. Can something be done about the transmission?

There are some difficulties today, but we are trying to remedy them. It would help if Ministers would speak a little more loudly.

Why does the right hon. Gentleman persist with the cruel deception that a fall in the rate of inflation will cause a drop in the numbers employed? Is he aware that I am prepared to make a level bet with him that the year in prospect will see a fall in the rate of inflation and a rise in the rate of unemployment? Does he dissent from that forecast?

I am not keen to engage in bets with the hon. Member, for a number of reasons. The last one that I had with him I won so resoundingly that it would be almost sadistic to have an-another. In any case, I am not prepared to assent to what he said. I know that he accepts the view of the right hon. Member for Down, South (Mr. Powell) on this subject, but we do not. We believe that it is possible to bring down inflation and to take measures also to guard against a rise in unemployment and eventually to bring it down, and that it can be done by planning measures rather than leaving these matters to be decided by the market.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that I am most certainly grateful for the steps that have been taken by the Government to minimise the problems in Scotland? Is he aware that I believe that we should cease to be grudging in our appreciation of the steps taken by the Government? My hon. Friends and I are aware of the need to save the pound—although members of the SNP do not seem to be aware of this. May we have an assurance that this will not be accomplished at the expense of an inordinate number of persons unemployed in Scotland or throughout the United Kingdom?

My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary answered a question a minute or two ago giving percentages showing the situation in Scotland and in the rest of the United Kingdom. He illustrated the fact that the Scottish figure had not risen, proportionately, as much as it had done on previous occasions. Admittedly that is not a great satisfaction, because the total figure throughout the country has gone up sharply. The figure in Scotland has risen sharply but there are other parts of the country where unemployment has risen even more steeply. We need a combination of general measures as well as individual measures applied to the various parts of the country which have always been most heavily hit by unemployment. That applies to large parts of Scotland, whatever may have happened in some other parts of that country, such as Aberdeen.

Is the figure of 1·2 million unemployed, which the right hon. Gentleman gave earlier, inclusive of school leavers? If it is not, what is the figure, including school leavers?

That figure includes school leavers. Whether it makes an appreciable difference depends upon the stage at which the school leaver figure is taken. In the middle of this year there were 500,000 unemployed. For two or three months the figures were serious indeed. I do not seek to minimise them. The figure of 500,000 came down more slowly than it has done in previous years. It is now coming down much more rapidly, and about 9 out of 10 of those school leavers have secured jobs in the last few weeks. We believe that our recruitment subsidy has assisted. It depends when the figure is taken whether the number of school leavers adds greatly to the general total.

Could my right hon. Friend spare a few moments from examining the 5·1 per cent. unemployment figures in Scotland to consider the West Midlands, and Coventry in particular where the level of unemployment is now 7·1 per cent. and has doubled in the past 12 months?

There are many other parts of the country more hard hit than Scotland as a whole. The West Midlands is one such area that has been hit harder in this recession than in any previous recession since the end of the war. Merseyside is harder hit now. No one can disguise the serious nature of the figures. There are many other parts of the country where male unemployment is 10 per cent. or more. I have said on every occasion that I have stood at this Dispatch Box that we regard the total as absolutely intolerable. We have to take a whole series of measures to try to deal with it. One of these measures, no matter what the right hon. Member for Down, South may say, is to beat inflation. If we are to reduce unemployment, we have to beat inflation.

The right hon. Gentleman has twice referred to using every possible measure to combat unemployment. Will he not therefore condemn the actions of those who, in support of the closed shop at Ferrybridge, British Railways and British Leyland, add to unemployment by forcing some of their fellow workers to get the sack? Will he intervene to find a solution to this problem and reduce unemployment?

If the hon. Gentleman will table a Question dealing with this situation, I shall be prepared to reply. What we have been seeking to do, and what our legislation has assisted in doing, is to bring down the number of days lost through industrial strikes. That is what we are having success in doing. The number of days lost owing to industrial action in the past year is lower now than at any time since a Labour Government was last in office.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many man- months of additional employment for the coming winter will be created in Wales as a result of the Government's recent announcements on this matter.

I regret that it is not possible to make the estimate desired by the hon. Member. The answer must depend on whether those individuals, firms or other organisations eligible to benefit under, or make use of, the various schemes, choose to do so.

Is the Secretary of State aware that deep regret will be felt that there is not enough appreciation of the progress of these schemes to estimate the effect in Wales? Does he accept that if Wales obtained 10 per cent. of the jobs created by the Manpower Services Commission, it would amount to 1,500 jobs, which would give work to only one out of every 50 unemployed persons in Wales? Is he not deeply concerned that other Government policies may be creating unemployment at a faster rate than jobs are being provided by the various schemes now going on?

I do not accept the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. All the policies of the Government are directed towards bringing down unemployment; that includes the attack on inflation, which we believe to be an essential part of our policies. The measures to which the hon. Gentleman referred may not have a major effect on the level of unemployment, but the hon. Gentleman should not be so pessimistic as to say that they do not have any effect. The Gwynedd County Council is in contact with the Manpower Services Commission about participating in a job creation project. I am glad that the main contract for the dynamic hydro-electric scheme in the hon. Member's constituency is going forward. I am sure that he will welcome that development.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one problem facing Wales, as well as other parts of the United Kingdom, is the lack of investment in manufacturing industry? Will he discuss with his colleagues as soon as possible the setting up of the National Enterprise Board and the Welsh Development Agency?

I agree that that is one factor which, over the years, has contributed to the difficulties of the present situation in Wales, as elsewhere. The sooner we can get the National Enterprise Board, planning agreements, and the Welsh Development Agency in full operation, the better.

On the subject of youth employment, will the right hon. Gentleman use his influence with the Secretary of State for Education and Science to provide additional places and courses at technical colleges to cope with the extraordinary demand for technical college places—a demand which is not being met by the places which are available at the moment?

Yes. I shall continue to have discussions with my right hon. Friend. Again, I am not complacent about the situation. However, the appallingly high figure of unemployment among school leavers has been considerably reduced during the last few months. Indeed, in the last few weeks the figure has come down faster still, due partly to measures introduced by the Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he has discussed his proposed legislation on worker participation in industry with the Transport and General Workers Union.

Both the Minister of State and I have had informal discussions on industrial democracy with many unions and employers, and I hope that all interested parties will put their views to the Committee of Inquiry on Industrial Democracy in due course.

When the Secretary of State meets the Transport and General Workers Union—if he has not already done so—will he raise the case of Larry O'Donnell? He was a convener at Felixstowe Docks, He was asked by the Felixstowe Dock Company to join the board, and was sacked by the shop stewards. This clearly presents a great problem. What advice would the right hon. Gentleman give to employers? Should they put workers on the board at the risk of having them sacked by shop stewards, or should they not?

If the hon. Gentleman wishes to have a detailed answer on the question of the Felixstowe Dock Company Board he should put down a Question on that subject. In the meantime, I should like to say that his facts as presented today are about 90 per cent. wrong, and possibly 100 per cent. wrong.

Why is there such a lack of urgency about this matter? A committee of inquiry was announced by the Secretary of State for Trade before the Summer Recess, but we still do not know the names of its chairman or members. Will the right hon. Gentleman, who has an interest in the matter, put some zip behind this issue?

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's impatience to ensure that the Government's measures are put into operation as speedily as possible. I share his indignation. I want to see this committee established as speedily as possible because we, as a Government, are committed to introducing legislation on industrial democracy not in this coming Session but in the Session after that. We want to fulfil our pledges, but developments in industrial democracy need not await the report of the inquiry. We hope that in the meantime we shall make progress in the public sector in improving the situation.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many pay settlements of less than £6 per week have been notified to his Department; and what proportion of pay settlements made since 1st August this represents.

On the basis of information available to my Department about major settlements made since 1st August, I estimate that about 5 per cent. of the employees covered have received increases significantly less than £6. I regret that this cannot be meaningfully expressed in terms of numbers of settlements, of which there are very large numbers, mostly covering small groups.

In view of the precarious situation in which many firms find themselves, and the increase in unemployment, does the hon. Gentleman feel that the next phase of the incomes policy will have to include pay settlements for less than £6 a week if we are to preserve existing jobs?

No, Sir. I do not think that it is appropriate at this juncture to make forecasts about the next stage of the incomes policy. What we are principally concerned about is that the initial success of the policy and its general observance by negotiators and all involved in it should be maintained. We should use the time that is purchased for us to consider what form of development the policy should take beyond this stage, but it would militate against any such proper consideration if a Minister were to suggest that the increase under some future policy would have to be more or less than £6.

Will my hon. Friend give an interpretation of the way in which the £6 increase operates in cases where, for example, there is a trainee who, from the age of, say, 18 or 19, would normally get a £10 increase—a concrete example of this is in Dunlop's—but is now getting only £6? The firm says that this is because of Government policy, and it means that the individual is having to work for £4 less than is received by other workers who are doing the same job. This is an absurdity, and a ludicrous situation. Will my hon. Friend interpret the Government's view on this?

I cannot comment on that specific case, but the view taken by those who originally framed this policy was that incremental scales should be regarded as the rate for the job and that where such scales applied they should continue to operate, subject to their not producing, together with the annual pay increase, an average increase of more than £6. Where they did that it would count against any future increases during the period of the policy. In all cases, incremental scales are subject to an upper limit of £8,500.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he has offered the services of ACAS to resolve the industrial dispute between Ladbroke's and its West of Scotland workforce.

The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service is an indepen- dent organisation. I understand that the ACAS offered to assist the parties to this dispute when it began in June, and has remained in touch with both sides.

Does the Minister accept that many of us find the employers' stubborn refusal to negotiate with the unions to be irresponsible and their refusal to reinstate the workers nothing short of punitive? Will he confirm that when the rights of recognition in the Employment Protection Bill are law the services of ACAS will be available to put an end to this dispute, which is now almost six months old?

The refusal to negotiate with the TGWU on behalf of its members in particular betting shops in Scotland, and to take back those members into employment when they end the dispute, makes it particularly difficult to achieve proper conciliation in this case. When the Employment Protection Bill is law, trade unionists in this position will be able to apply for recognition through the machinery of that legislation. I trust that it will avert disputes like this in future and will provide a solution to recognition disputes when the provisions of the Bill come into effect.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will introduce a period of youth community service for school leavers unable to secure employment.

The job creation programme is providing temporary work for unemployed people through community projects. It is intended particularly for young people, including school leavers.

Is the Minister aware, however, that there is a serious lack of co-ordination among local authorities, community organisations and Government Departments? Will he not consider a one-year period of youth community service in environmental and social service work? Will he, also, consider a lowering of the retirement age to allow jobs to be opened up, particularly in the nationalised industries, for young people starting work?

First, I do not accept what the hon. Gentleman said about lack of co-ordination. There has been cooperation recently between local authorities and Government services. The lowering of the retirement age could be very expensive. The steps that we are taking, such as the recruitment subsidy and the job creation programme, probably represent the right way to go about it.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the job creation programme is only scratching the surface of the problem, and that by insisting on operating a scheme of this kind, applying wages of the normal kind rather than a more imaginative scheme on a voluntary basis, he is depriving the country of the opportunity to see much more massive job creation than at present?

I do not accept that the provision of £30 million for 15,000 jobs is scratching the surface, along with all the other measures which have been taken. Nothing in that programme prevents organisations from forming voluntary programmes. After we have urgently taken this kind of step, the hon. Member's reaction is somewhat churlish.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement on the current unemployment situation in Scotland.

The current unemployment rate for Scotland is 5·8 per cent., which is still significantly above the level for Great Britain as a whole. Although, over the last two years, there has been a considerable improvement in the unemployment position in Scotland relative to that of Great Britain, the present situation in Scotland continues to give cause for serious concern.

Is the Minister aware that the rate which he has mentioned is almost six times the rate in Norway—a country of comparable size and resources to Scotland? Since the Secretary of State for Scotland once gave a pledge that he would resign if the figure exceeded 100,000 in Scotland but is now not prepared to do so, will the Secretary of State for Employment resign in his place?

If the hon. Member wants to make a comparison, the right one is with other regions of the United Kingdom. Such a comparison shows that, from October 1974 to October 1975, unemployment rose in Scotland by 49·8 per cent., and in the South-East of England by 108·4 per cent. Although the vacancies have declined in Scotland by 38 per cent., that is much lower than the decline in the whole of Great Britain, of 58 per cent. Action which has been taken has benefited Scotland, proportionately, compared with other parts of the United Kingdom.

Will my hon. Friend examine the investment policies of the Post Office? Is he aware that the Post Office has considerable investment potential, particularly in the development areas—not only Scotland but Merseyside and other areas? If he will consult the Post Office to ensure that its investment programmes are geared to helping to find a solution to unemployment in Fife and elsewhere, that will be very welcome.

My Department is not responsible for the Post Office, but I appreciate my hon. Friend's point about ordering policy and investment policy. I am sure that that point will be considered urgently by the Government as a whole.

When the Minister replies in future to idiotically misleading questions by members of the SNP, will he remind them that it is just as misleading to talk about Scotland as a whole, because in that part of Scotland represented by the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire, East (Mr. Henderson) we have a shortage of labour, not unemployment, and that, tragic as are the unemployment figures in Scotland, there are four other parts of the United Kingdom where unemployment is clearly worse?

The hon. Member is right of course. In Aberdeen, the rate of unemployment is 2·1 per cent.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what was the ratio of unemployed persons to notified job vacancies in Scotland at the most recent date for which figures are available; and what were the comparable ratios one and two years previously, respectively.

My Department no longer calculates these ratios as a matter of course, because total vacancies are not known and the two figures collected for notified vacancies, respectively, for employment and careers offices, overlap and so cannot be added together. However, comparing the figure of unemployed registered at employment offices with vacancies notified to employment offices, the ratio for this October is 7·4 to 1, compared with 3·5 to 1 for October last year and 3·9 to 1 for October 1973.

Are not those figures most depressing, showing, as they do, that unemployment in Scotland is increasing at the rate of more than 1,000 a week? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of concern about unemployment in the motor industry? Will he give an assurance that the promise given by Chrysler Motors about its continued production in Britain also relates to production facilities in Scotland?

I said earlier that the unemployment situation in Scotland gave rise to serious concern. It is not much comfort to stress some evidence that Scotland has fared rather better than some other regions of the United Kingdom. The hon. Gentleman will understand that I am not in a position to give the assurance for which he has asked concerning Chrysler. I shall make sure that his remarks are directed to the proper quarters.

Will my hon. Friend take this opportunity of reminding all Scottish local authorities that they can receive Government assistance for work creation schemes, particularly schemes involving young people? Does he realise that the unemployment situation in Scotland is leading to an emergency? Perhaps we need emergency action to deal with it. Will my hon. Friend ask the House for emergency powers to instruct local authorities to produce plans for such work creation schemes to ensure that young people, in particular, have the right to work?

I understand that, overall, there has been a good response to the job creation programme. I shall certainly be glad to hear about any local authority that is not responding. It is a little early to assess the response. I shall keep my hon. Friend in touch with the situation.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the people of Scotland are fed up with having their economy and their unemployment compared with that of bankrupt England? Is he aware that the comparison should be with Norway and other prosperous countries of Western Europe?

The hon. Member's allegation does not become any more true as a result of repetition. In the United Kingdom we have a system of development areas. These are given special help and incentives. Many of these have been to the benefit of Scotland. I believe that the people of Scotland are aware of this.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what further steps he is taking to help unemployed young people to find jobs.

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced additional measures on 24th September, including a programme, of job creation and a recruitment subsidy. It is too early to say how exactly these measures are working or how they might be extended.

Will the Secretary of State keep in mind the exceptionally high level of unemployment among young people in some inner city areas? Cannot his Department do more to get employers involved in the task of bringing new hope and jobs to these areas and bringing real drive and urgency to the Government's urban policy?

One of the main purposes of the job creation scheme was to assist in urban areas. That was stated at the time the Government introduced the scheme. It is along these lines that we have given every encouragement we can—and quite a lot of money—to the Manpower Services Commission, which carries out the job. Many responses are coming forward in connection with the job creation scheme. We hope that these will have a direct effect in assisting young people. Our recruitment subsidy is also having some effect in that respect. The figures are improving. I am not in any way complacent about the matter, but I believe that our measures have helped significantly.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that youth unemployment is inextricably bound up with the general unemployment situation, and that no solution will be found to the former without resolving the latter? Will he, therefore, in considering positive steps to take, also consider activating the construction industry, which has tremendously high levels of unemployment, especially since there is an urgent need for housing?

I entirely agree with the first part of my hon. Friend's remarks about the connection between youth unemployment and the general employment situation. One of the ways in which a solution might be found could be in fresh assistance to the construction industry. The Chancellor announced on 24th September that he would be making further proposals on that subject, and that these would be announced soon.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that the best way to help unemployment would be to increase exports? Does he realise that we have failed to win exports because of our bad performance in connection with delivery dates? Will he use his great power of speech and persuasion to encourage the belief that if men strike they are acting as export saboteurs?

I agree that an increase in exports could assist greatly with the unemployment problem. I agree also that the better the delivery dates the better our exports. It is, however, wrong to attribute failures in delivery dates to industrial disputes. Industrial disputes may have contributed in certain instances, but the hon. Member is wrong in his broad inference that they are the sole problem. We have had considerable success in overcoming a number of industrial disputes with the establishment, for example, of the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service, which is already assisting the country. I had hoped that we would have a welcome from the Opposition for the service, which will help the country to overcome these disputes by trying to discover their true causes.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that a large unemployed force in this country is itself a contribution to inflation, since it represents a large body of consumers who do not produce goods? Would it not therefore be better for the Government to abandon their deflationary measures, which create unemployment, and, instead, to release money for investment, especially for public works, to create jobs and so strengthen our industrial structure, so that it will be able to face the revival of trade and avoid the imbalance which has arisen in the past?

I agree that the Government should, by every means available to them, whether through the operation of an old instrument or through the new instruments which are being created—the NEB and the others—do everything in their power to try to create jobs. I do not believe, however, that the Government would succeed in that purpose if the inflation rate continued at the rate of some months ago. If that had happened, far from creating jobs it would have done away with jobs, which is why action was needed to deal with it.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many jobs have been offered to young people, and in what regions of the country, since the announcement of the Government on 24th September of its £30 million work creation programme designed to create jobs for 15,000 people.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what has been the response to the Government's special measures to assist local authorities and other organisations to combat rising unemployment.

Since the Manpower Services Commission announced details of its job creation programme on 9th October, it has received 103 applications, requesting a total of about £2·5 million. Projects so far approved provide 65 jobs in Ellesmere Port, 25 in Huddersfield and 27 in Sunderland.

Is the Minister aware that the action committees in the regions are under the impression that they should pay the maximum weekly rate of £50 to the young people who have had jobs created? Will he please advise them that they do not need to do this? Will he tell them that if they do, first, the money will run out quickly, and secondly, that when the young people get a job on the open market it will be at a much lower salary.

I should like to scotch that total misconception. The rate of pay for those getting jobs under the job creation programme is the rate for the job. That information is in all the literature distributed by the Manpower Services Commission. That should clear up any misunderstanding.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the job creation programme is only scratching at the surface? Does he accept that the real solution to unemployment is a planned economy? Does he further accept that a planned economy includes also the planning of imports, and that selective control of imports is of absolute importance in order to preserve existing capacity and to avoid it being eroded, as it already has been in the motor cycle industry and part of the textile industry?

My hon. Friend talks about scratching the surface. Let me remind him that we have provided a job creation programme, an unprecedented increase in the number of training places, the recruitment subsidy, and the temporary employment subsidy. I hope that he will recognise that this is an unpredecented package of measures to deal with an extremely difficult situation.

Order. May I tell the Prime Minister that the amplifying arrangements are not working very well, and will be therefore kindly speak up?

asked the Prime Minister when he next intends to visit the west of Scotland.

As the House knows, I shall be in Scotland next Monday to attend the ceremony to mark the inauguration of BP's Forties Field, but I have at present no plans to visit the west of Scotland again this year.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the people of the west of Scotland would deplore the break-up of the United Kingdom, which, apart from other evils, would destroy thousands of jobs in the Glasgow area in Government offices such as the Post Office Savings Bank? In particular, will the right hon. Gentleman explain the very worrying slippage in the agreed timetable for the transfer of 1,000 Foreign Office jobs and 7,000 defence jobs to Glasgow? Will he give an assurance that the go-slow is not because of fears of Ministers and others that the devolution plans, if badly constructed, might precipitate the break-up of Great Britain?

On the hon. Gentleman's point, he will realise that there is no question in our proposals of any break-up of the United Kingdom. Indeed, the measures we are proposing—this has become clear from many debates in the House in the present Parliament—are for a devolution of areas of control over the national life and economy of Scotland, but not separatism. We are convinced that the people of Scotland do not want separatism. I hope that that is clear, and that the hon. Gentleman will support it.

In view of the assurances on the second part of that answer, and leaving aside the matter of jobs, may I revert to the question of the timetable for devolution? Will my right hon. Friend confirm—in view of the reports in the Press in the past five days and the suggestion that it would take us 28 days on the Floor of the House to pass the Bill and, therefore, that it might run into the sands of time rather than be passed through the House—that the Bill will be introduced in January and not in March?

There is no ministerial responsibility for the various comments that I have been reading, which bear no relation to the facts. We shall introduce the legislation at the earliest possible moment. It is complicated. [Interruption.] We shall introduce it at the earliest possible moment—or the day before. I cannot be more specific than that. The House will want to consider the White Paper. This will come within the next few weeks. The legislation, as I have said, is already in course of preparation. It will be introduced at the earliest possible moment. There will be no avoidable delay, and certainly none of the kind that I have seen foreshadowed in the Press in recent days, for whatever reason.

asked the Prime Minister if he is satisfied that there is adequate co-ordination between the Foreign Office and the Welsh Office in respect of the European Regional Development Fund.

Yes, Sir.

In view of the relative failure of a succession of regional development policies over 40 years—it is relative failure if one considers the demographic trend—and in order to obtain a truly European regional development, does my right hon. Friend agree that it is essential to mobilise and develop the political will which exists in the region and, therefore, that it is important not only to establish an elected Assembly—important though that is—but to ensure that existing institutions, such as local authorities, for example, have direct access to the European fund's administrators?

I agree with my hon. Friend about the need to mobilise all the resources of Wales—material, human and labour resources. He will be aware that several of my right hon. Friends and I had an important meeting with the Welsh TUC, in which were raised many of the questions which I know are in his mind. We have now sent the Welsh TUC further information, and discussions will be continued by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State. I agree with my hon. Friend—as in Scotland, so in Wales. An important contribution to what he and all of us have in mind is not only pushing on with the White Paper but turning it into reality.

In the context of Wales and the rest of the United Kingdom, do the Government regard money from the European Regional Development Fund as being in addition to the amount of money that the Government would have spent, or in substitution for it? Is the Prime Minister aware that a previous answer we have had on this matter is not clear?

When European funds are used for projects which would otherwise have been supported by the Exchequer, funds are freed to enable us to support regional development in other ways; for example, through the advance factory programme recently announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. Had it not been for the European contribution it would have been much more difficult for us to devote money to a project such as that.

Will the Prime Minister either confirm or deny a report in the Economist that, whereas Italy, Ireland and France were quick off the mark in applying to the Regional Development Fund, we were rather late in applying and, as a result. Italy received £36·2 million whereas the United Kingdom received only £8·8 million?

I have no ministerial responsibility for reports in the Economist, but I would wish to comment on this. It is certainly not true that we were slow off the mark. I recall that during the referendum campaign many accusations were made, which have since been falsified, that there was a speeding up of regional aid from the Community until, it was suggested, 4th June. Those accusations have since been disproved by the substantial increases in regional disbursement, certainly to Wales—of which I gave figures to the Welsh TUC—and to other parts of the United Kingdom in need of regional development.

Mr. Mendelson.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Order. I hope that the hon. Lady will not pursue her point of order. I intend to call her for a supplementary question after the hon. Member for Penistone (Mr. Mendelson).

I want to raise a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

By doing so the hon. Lady may lose her chance to ask a supplementary question. I deprecate points of order at Question Time. As I said, I shall call her for a supplementary question after the hon. Member for Penistone.

With reference to the availability of funds for regional development, has the Prime Minister noticed a recent unfortunate development, in that certain members of the EEC have refused to make available additional sums on the ground, well-argued during the referendum campaign, that the excesses of the common agricultural policy demand larger and larger sums for useless policies, with the result that regional policies suffer? Will my right hon. Friend join forces with those Governments in putting a stop to the wasteful policies being pursued under the heading of the common agricultural policy?

That does not arise out of a Question about Wales. I agree with my hon. Friend that it is an important matter, but it raises wider issues, on which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs has answered Questions. I go along with any proposal, from wherever it comes, to eliminate waste in the expenditure of EEC funds, as, I am sure, does the House. My hon. Friend will have seen the initiative I took and the proposals I made in the European Assembly on the introduction of a system approaching our own Public Accounts Committee in the financial mechanism of the EEC.

Is the Prime Minister aware that local authorities in England are concerned about the lack of information on the criteria used by the Government when submitting schemes to Europe for assistance from the Regional Development Fund? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in Lancaster, which has an unemployment rate of 7·3 per cent. and an employment job vacancy ratio of 41·4 per cent., much help is required? Is he further aware that the answer he has just given to the House is inaccurate, in that the United Kingdom was behind Italy, Ireland and France in its application? That information was given to us in Europe last week, and we were told that we could use it.

I am aware of the hon. Lady's concern, not only for European questions but for the area which she represents. The Question relates to Welsh matters. If the matters raised by the hon. Lady are raised at Question Time with my right hon. Friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary, I am sure that she will be satisfied with the answer.

The right hon. Gentleman's answer was wrong.

I am sorry about the acoustics. I seem to be able to hear everyone except the person who is speaking from the Treasury Bench. Whether or not that is an advantage, I do not know; it is not for me to say. I shall try to have the matter put right.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. If whoever is addressing the House from the Dispatch Box would move three yards to the left, everyone would hear. I am sure that the Prime Minister is sufficiently flexible to be able to address the House from that position.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Some of us learnt to speak in public in the days before microphones. I know how anxious are Opposition Members always to hear what I have to say. That is why they barrack so much. If this mechanical defect occurs again, I hope that I shall be in order in standing on this Bench and addressing the House.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. During the exchange of questions and answers on devolution, an Opposition Member made a plea that English Members should also be heard. May I draw your attention to the fact that devolution is not just a Scottish and Welsh issue? It is an issue about which we are all deeply concerned. If there are to be Assemblies in Scotland and Wales, many hon. Members would wish to see nothing less than that in the English regions. On that basis, I appeal to you to allow English voices to be heard in future when the issue of devolution is raised.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Would it not be correct to say that it is the hon. Members who put down Questions who are normally called?

I am in sympathy with the point of view that English Members should be allowed to enter into devolution debates, but in calling hon. Members to ask supplementary questions I must have regard to the hon. Member who puts down the Question. If English Members put down Questions on devolution which are reached, they will be called first for supplementary questions. Today we have had difficulty in getting four Questions answered by the Prime Minister. I should have liked to call a great many other hon. Members, but I could not do so.