asked the Secretary of State for Employment what is the latest figure for the number of unemployed aged 16 to 20 years in the Greater London area.

At 11 October the number of people aged 19 and under registered as unemployed in the Greater London area was 21,134. I regret that separate figures for 20-year-olds are not available.

Is the Minister aware that the Government's policies will increase the number of unemployed? What does he propose to do about that? Will he take particular note that the problem affects young blacks more than it does their white contemporaries?

On the figures just quoted, I am glad to tell the hon. Gentleman that there are now 2,459 fewer unemployed than in October 1978. We share the hon. Gentleman's concern about young blacks. Special schemes in his constituency have doubled in the last 12 months, and the proportion of young blacks on them is higher than the average number of young blacks in the country.

Can my hon. Friend give an indication of the number of vacancies suitable for young people in London? Does he agree that there is a shortage of labour, particularly in craft trades and most of the service industries? Does not that number far exceed the number of unemployed that he mentioned?

The number of vacancies for young people is 8,991. If that number is trebled, it equals the number of people registered as unemployed.

Is the Minister aware that in my constituency in Huddersfield there is a growing number of young women—

Order. There should be a seprate question about Huddersfield. We are dealing with the Greater London area.

I accept the figures given by the hon. Gentleman, but does he realise that there is a serious problem of mismatch, which we do not fully understand, relating to the availability of jobs and the number of unemployed young people? What research is being done by his Department to solve that difficult problem, which affects inner London in particular?

I accept that there is a problem of mismatch, not only in London but in Britain as a whole. Clearly, a great deal of research can be done in terms of the Manpower Services Commission and training levels to see how this matter can be dealt with.

Can the hon. Gentleman assure the House that the inner city bias of the previous Government in favour of the mainline programmes of the Department of Employment and the Manpower Services Commission will be fully maintained, bearing in mind that Ministers other than those in the Department of the Environment will be less directly concerned with inner city partnership matters?

The Secretary of State for the Environment has already committed us to an inner city policy. I have visited three inner city partnerships in the last three weeks.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement on employment prospects in the Northern region.

Future employment levels depend upon a number of factors which cannot be predicted with any degree of certainty. The Government's policies, however, are aimed at helping industry and commerce flourish so that more real jobs will be created both in the Northern region and in the economy as a whole.

Is the Minister aware that the Northern Region continues to have the highest unemployment rate in the country and that, as The Guardian pointed out yesterday, it will get worse? Will he do three things immediately? First, will he persuade the appropriate Secretary of State to establish a northern development agency—a proposal which has the support of the northern branch of the CBI, which should commend itself to the Minister?

I totally reject the last point. I think that if the people in that area were to return more Tory Members of Parliament they would be better represented.

As one of the few Conservative Members of Parliament to be returned for the Northern region, may I ask my hon. Friend whether he is aware that a substantial proportion of redundancies in the Northern region are in engineering and associated industries, and that a number of our principal companies in the region are struggling and, sadly, will have to continue to struggle, to overcome the recent national engineering dispute?

Yes.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in Tyne and Wear 20 per cent. of unemployed men and 17 per cent. of unemployed women have been seeking jobs for more than six months? Is he also aware that the cuts in public spending which have just been announced will make that situation even worse?

The policies of the previous Government increased unemployment in the Northern region by 42·3 per cent. I have made two visits to the Northern region recently. I assure the hon. Gentleman that there are many vacancies in that area within reasonable travel-to-work areas of high unemployment. One difficulty that we face is mobility, and another is the distance that people are prepared to move to get the jobs that are available.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the figures for vacancies versus jobs mean that there are 11 people chasing every vacancy? Does he not realise that it is absolute rubbish to try to argue otherwise? Does he further agree that his initial announcement amounted to saying that nothing would be done specially for the Northern region? How does he equate that with the fact that last week his right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Treasury announced that there would be an increase of 300,000 unemployed in this country? What steps has he taken to support the North-East from the worst effects of those 300,000 unemployed?

The interest that Ministers in my Department have taken in the North-East goes a long way to disprove the statement made by the hon. Gentleman. We have taken a great deal of interest in the problems of the Northern region. It is clear that the region has expanded its manufacturing base for chemicals, electronics, telecommunications, scientific equipment, textiles, clothing, pharmaceuticals, furniture and plastics. There are 1,384,000 people in employment in the Northern region. That is a fair base on which to work and for our policies to expand.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what reductions have been made in Exchequer support for the operating expenditure and for grants of the Construction Industry Training Board; what percentage loss of support these cuts represent; and what consequential additional costs will have to be borne by the industry.

I am informed by the Manpower Services Commission that total MSC financial support available to the Board in 1979–80 will be £15·5 million compared with actual expenditure of £14·86 million last year. Decisions on the grants offered to employers are taken by the Board, on which employers' organisations, trade unions and educational interests are represented.

Is the Minister aware that it is crass stupidity to cut back on industrial training in the building industry at a time when there is a shortage of skilled craftsmen in both the house building and modernisation programmes? Is he also aware that what has been done has resulted in extra burdens on private industry, on top of the burdens that it has to bear because of the high interest rates imposed by the Government?

There has been no cutback in the overall level of training this year. A sum of £6 million was voted for special measures over two years to deal with skill shortages in the industry, and the £4 million which is being spent in the current year is not being changed.

Is the Minister aware that the view of many hon. Members is that it would be possible to increase the amount of training carried out by training boards and still reduce their expenditure? Is he further aware that many people who work for the training boards are in receipt of five-figure salaries and that their numbers run into 50, 60 and sometimes 100 per training board? Has not the time come to review the whole bureaucratic machinery of some of these training boards?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments. He will be pleased to know that a review of industry training boards is now taking place.

Does my hon. Friend agree that now is the time to assess the basic needs of training in the construction industry and to place the responsibility for providing an adequately trained work force fairly and squarely on the shoulders of the building industry?

I agree entirely. One matter that causes great concern is that in the Greater London area, for instance, 50 per cent. of the training for the construction industry is carried out at skill-centres, and not by the industry itself.

Is it not true that when training was left to the industry employers failed to carry out training, and that it is therefore essential that support is given to the Construction Industry Training Board? Incidentally, I disagree with the hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr. Smith). Future apprenticeship training must come partly through the Apprenticeship Training Board, and the Government's attitude is scandalous.

I should not want, by anything that I have said, to imply that we are not supporting the Construction Industry Training Board or training boards in principle. We are reviewing the way that they are working to see how they can best be improved.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will estimate the level of unemployment within the next 12 months.

No, Sir. But I have made no secret of my view that over the next year or so unemployment will rise.

Will not the Government's policy of reducing public expenditure cause a sharp increase in unemployment all over the country? How many in the community will lose their jobs, security and peace of mind as a direct result of the Government's policy?

The hon. Gentleman must know from past experience that cutbacks in public expenditure do not necessarily lead to increases in unemployment—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—because in many respects the private sector is able to take up the slack. That is precisely what happened in 1976, and it could be repeated this time.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the high vacancy figures, particularly in the London area, prove that there is considerable voluntary unemployment? What is his latest estimate of voluntary unemployment? If he has no such estimate, will he assure the House that he will immediately investigate this matter?

Obviously more people are taking longer to return to employment after a period of unemployment than used to happen a few years ago. Therefore, there is evidence of a good deal of voluntary unemployment. That affects not only the London area, but the whole country. It is not easy to get at these figures, as my hon. Friend knows. However, no one in the House should doubt that, whereas many people genuinely seeking work are unable to get it, there are large numbers of vacancies with, on paper, large numbers of unemployed people, yet strangely enough, the jobs are not being filled.

Is the Secretary of State aware that all of us who have been doing our damndest to get the Hunterston ore terminal open are grateful for the statement that he made this morning that he will initiate the statutory procedures for the registration of Hunterston under the National Dock Labour Scheme? Is he further aware that that will immediately save thousands of jobs in Scotland?

We can be grateful only when people settle their differences quickly and unemployment does not result. Britain is not in a sufficiently strong position to withstand a five-month strike, or lockout—or whatever one may call it—resulting from an inter-union dispute. We cannot afford the luxury of inter-union disputes or disputes between employers and employees.

Will my right hon. Friend comment on the article in The Guardian yesterday by Mr. Layard that the separation of the offices that pay unemployment benefit from jobcentres has increased the number of those who appear to be unemployed by reducing the pressure that should be put on those who are work-shy or who have secret jobs?

As with all these articles, I am having that one carefully examined. I do not wish to comment without a much fuller examination than the article perhaps undertook.

Is the Minister aware that the number of young women and girls out of work is increasing, and that the figure is greater than for young boys? In my constituency, that is particularly true. We are concerned with the wool textile industry, and present Government policies are sending that industry into rapid decline. The number of jobs in the mending and ancillary trades is decreasing. Unless the Government take some action, the whole industry will be ruined.

No one doubts that there are serious problems ahead, some caused by the decline of old industries, and at present new industries are not coming forward to take their place. Regrettably we are entering a pretty fierce world recession, with the number of unemployed already twice what it was in 1974. The outlook is pretty bleak.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what current proposals he has for legislation on the closed shop.

Copies of the working paper giving details of the proposals for legislation on the closed shop were placed in the Library of the House on 9 July this year.

Will my hon. and learned Friend take note of the strong case for any closed shop agreement to be renewable by a vote of the work force, say, every three or five years?

The question of periodic reviews of closed shop agreements was considered in the working paper to which I have referred. We believe, that there are different aspects of the handling of closed shops already in existdnce which call for a certain amount of care. Therefore we propose that a code of practice, which we promised to introduce, is probably the best method of giving advice on that matter.

Does the Minister agree that the closeness of the vote at the CBI conference this morning indicates the deep divisions amongst employers on the principle of the closed shop? In view of the closeness of that vote and the outright opposition of the trade union movement, should not the Government bury any proposals that they may have on altering the principle of the closed shop?

The principle of the closed shop is not threatened by anything proposed in the working paper. What is proposed is that where it is intended to introduce a closed shop there shall be proper safeguards for those already employed.

Start with the barristers.

In so far as there is a closed shop in the provision of legal services, that has just met with considerable support from a distinguished Royal Commission.

Will my hon. and learned Friend confirm that during the recent engineering strike people who wished to go to work were prevented from doing so by fear of losing their union cards? Will he seek to ensure that any group of workers in a closed shop who feel that they are being called out in breach of an agreement or without adequate consultation are given the right to call for a secret ballot?

One of the most important proposals in the working paper is that which provides for a statutory right of appeal if somebody considers himself to have been unreasonably expelled from a trade union. That is half the sting of a closed shop.

How are the Government getting on with their defence of the closed shop in the British Rail case at Strasbourg?

The Government thought it right to be represented at Strasbourg and to take up the Commission's offer of a further oral hearing. The Government came into that case at a late stage and inherited a situation where great injustice had been occasioned to British Rail employees. That injustice would not have arisen had the proposals which we have put forward already been the law. The situation will not arise again.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he is satisfied with the working of the Baking Industry (Hours of Work) Act 1955.

The working of the Act is anomalous and highly unsatisfactory. I have asked the Health and Safety Commission to give urgent consideration to whether night work in baking needs regulation any longer on health and safety grounds, and if so how it should in future be done, and to advise me. It is consulting on the matter.

I thank my hon. and learned Friend for his encouraging reply, but does he agree that, given the unique nature of the industry, particularly the hours of work and the greatly improved working conditions that have been achieved over recent decades, the Act is no longer necessary? It is proving to be restrictive to employers and employees and should immediately be repealed.

Those issues are among the matters on which I am hoping for advice from the Commission. However, it is plain that an Act which is ostensibly a workers' welfare Act should not be capable of being used for purposes of union recruitment.

Contrary to what the hon. Member for Bournemouth, East (Mr. Atkinson) has said, can the Minister not see the justice of the bakers unions' bitter opposition to employing women and young people at night? Has he considered the unfairness of women having to leave their husbands and children at home in order to start work at three o'clock in the morning? It is also unfair for men to have to leave for work at three o'clock in the afternoon, and in consequence not see their children until the weekend.

These are matters for advice from the Commission. The question is whether this industry, virtually alone amongst others in this country, requires special statutory protection for night work.

Whatever the original purposes of the Act, does my hon. and learned Friend agree that it has been blatantly used to try to secure a closed shop, even against the interests and wishes of the work force? When will there be a review, and if that review recommends a repeal of the Act will time be given by the Government for its early repeal?

The exemption order to the provisions of the Act was varied in July of this year to require prior acceptance of a post-entry closed shop if master bakers were to be included in the provisions of the exemption order. That kind of consideration should not depend on union recruitment, the closed shop or any other matter of that kind. I have asked the Commission urgently to consider the matter and to report. I hope to receive its advice soon.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment how many vacancies there are for skilled employment at the last convenient date nationally and for the Plymouth travel-to-work area.

On 7 September the numbers of vacancies notified to the employment services and remaining unfilled in the craft and similar occupations group were 67,006 in Great Britain and 405 in Plymouth. That group does not necessarily include all skilled occupations. The figure for Plymouth is for a somewhat wider area than the travel-to-work area.

I recognise that it is easier to set out the problem than to solve it, but what action does the Minister propose to take to end the wicked waste of resources?

My hon. and attractive Friend has asked a pertinent question. We are looking carefully at the reasons why people are not prepared to move and why they do not take skilled jobs in areas where they are available.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment whether he is satisfied with the Manpower Services Commission's success in providing training places for young people in inner city areas.

The Manpower Services Commission is constantly looking for improvements. I shall welcome the co-operation of the hon. Member.

I am grateful for that reply. However, is the Minister aware of the widespread concern that is felt and is being expressed here today in a lobby about the future of the Enterprise Workshop scheme? That scheme allows the creation of permanent jobs in viable co-operative ventures. Will the Secretary of State assure the House that Enterprise Workshop will not be axed but will be allowed to expand to provide many more desperately needed jobs in the inner city areas and elsewhere in Britain?

I should be grateful if the hon. Gentleman would give me notice of the particular case to which he has referred. There are 556 training places available under the youth opportunities scheme. A new training centre should be operational by the spring for an additional 40 persons. I have every confidence that we can maintain our training effort for young people in the inner city areas.

Is there not some cause for concern that the Manpower Services Commission may be giving too much attention to schemes of its own origination and insufficient attention to worthwhile schemes that are being put forward by employers and voluntary organisations, sometimes in co-operation with one another?

We should give every possible encouragement to the development of schemes that are put forward by voluntary organisations. The Manpower Services Commission could give more encouragement to those schemes. I am in touch with the chairman of the Commission with that idea in mind.

Does the Minister agree that youth unemployment in inner city areas is a major contributory factor to vandalism and crime in those areas? Therefore, does he admit that cutting the budget to the Manpower Services Commission will exacerbate those problems, contrary to the Government's so-called law and order programme?

I do not admit that. The Manpower Services Commission could have its budget cut and yet maintain an efficient and strong service. The number of young people who will enter the youth opportunities scheme this year should be over 200,000, compared with 162,000 last year.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what discussions he has had with the Trades Union Congress about changes in trade union legislation.

My right hon. Friend has had discussions with the TUC throughout the summer and autumn and he expects these to continue.

Will my hon. and learned Friend ask my right hon. Friend, when he next meets the TUC, to point out politely that trade unions in this country enjoy privileges and immunities under the law that are experienced nowhere else in the world and have not been experienced in this country since Henry VIII abolished benefit of clergy? Under the protection of these immunities trade unions such as SLADE can carry out recruiting practices that are more akin to those of the modern mafia than to those of the medieval Church.

The report of Mr. Andrew Leggatt into recruiting practices, principally of the SLADE union, was published about a fortnight ago. The Government are satisfied that changes in the law must be made to remove immunity from actions which are described by Mr. Leggatt as being "akin to the protection racket". The Government believe that trade unions should have a privileged position, but the question is whether the immunities of today are greater than are necessary.

Bearing in mind what happened the last time a Tory Government were in office, would it not be wise for the present Tory Government to lay off the trade unions and to recognise that they play a vital role in the defence of working-class people?

Since a large majority of trade union members consistently show themselves to be in support of the Government's policy on this matter, the hon. Gentleman's question was not appropriately phrased.

Will my hon. and learned Friend assure the House that the problem of the political levy will be raised with the TUC? Many employers and trade unions seem to be in a conspiracy of silence to keep the political levy from trade union members who have opted out under the law.

The administration of the 1913 Act, which controls the political levy and the use of a political fund by unions, is under the supervision of the certification officer. The Government wish to keep the operation of the Act under close supervision. It is capable of giving rise to much injustice.

Will the Minister undertake to make available to the House all the working papers appertaining to the discussions with the TUC over the period of office of this Government? In that way they will not be covered by the 30-year rule, as such papers are at present.

I cannot think of a worse recipe for having frank discussions and consultations than to make all working papers immediately available for inspection. We are having, and hope to continue to have, useful and full discussions. I do not believe that that position would be likely to continue if everything was made available for immediate inspection.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what has been the increase in numbers of unemployed persons in Consett and Stanley over the last month.

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will be delighted to hear that between 13 September and 11 October the number of people registered as unemployed in the area covered by the Consett and Stanley employment office fell by 151.

In that case, will the hon. Gentleman tell the House what has happened to the 390 people who were recently made redundant by the shutdown of the plate mill at the Consett steelworks? Will he tell us how many of the additional unemployed for whom the Government are planning, as announced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury last Thursday, will be in Consett and Stanley?

There is no way, in terms of planning, that we can forecast where unemployment is likely to fall. All that I can provide you with is the accurate figures of what has occurred in your constituency over the last month, which is what you asked for.

I did not ask for anything.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what steps he plans to take to reduce unemployment in the Alnwick district.

The Government's policy is to create the economic environment in which employers are encouraged to develop their businesses and to create viable jobs. That will help to reduce unemployment both in Alnwick and in the country as a whole.

When will that start? Why has the small firms employment subsidy, which could have been a useful device to achieve that end, been withdrawn from the Alnwick area? Why does the hon. Gentleman's colleague at the Department of Industry persist in trying to persuade a major employer who wants to set up a research institute that he would be better to establish it somewhere other than Alnwick?

I shall take up the last matter with my colleagues at the Department of Industry. We have looked carefully at the small firms employment subsidy scheme. We felt that it was not creating much employment and that the tax cuts that we proposed were more likely to encourage small businesses to develop in Alnwick. Clearly, that is happening.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what are the latest rates of unemployment for the North-West and for the United Kingdom.

On 11 October the unemployment rates in the North-West region and in the United Kingdom were 7·1 and 5·7 per cent, respectively.

Is the Minister aware that, as a result of the crazy and damaging economic policies which the Government are now following, scarcely a week goes past without serious redundancies being announced in my constituency and elsewhere in the North-West? Will he confirm that as aid to industry in the North-West is slashed, and as public sector cuts mean fewer orders for the private sector industries of textiles and manufacturing, unemployment is likely to shoot up in the region? How much of the 300,000 increase in unemployment announced last week by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury will fall on my constituency and on the North-West?

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that as a result of the crazy and damaging policies of the previous Government unemployment in his constituency increased by 298 per cent.?

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is likely to be a substantial increase in unemployment in the textile industry in the North-West region unless the Government stand up for the best interests of that industry? Unless they do, a serious situation will develop. Many countries act in their own best interests, not least the United States, which practises the duality of oil pricing, and countries in the Far East, which abuse the multi-fibre arrangement. Will the Minister have a word with his right hon. and hon. Friends in other Departments to ensure that this strategic industry is not further undermined?

Yes.

Despite the Minister's cheap jibe, is he aware that many thousands of jobs in the North-West have been saved in recent years by the initiative of the National Enterprise Board? If, as the Secretary of State said "we are entering a fierce world recession", and if as he also said, "the outlook is pretty bleak", is not this the time for the right hon. Gentleman to speak up in Cabinet in support of the National Enterprise Board, to allow it to carry on its work in the North-West and other regions and not allow it to be emasculated by the ideological policies of the Secretary of State for Industry?

That is clearly a question for the Department of Industry and not for the Department of Employment. My right hon. Friend no doubt heard the question.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he has concluded his consultations with the Trades Union Congress and other interested parties on the Government's proposals for industrial relations.

My right hon. Friend and I have already had meetings with the TUC, CBI and others on the Government proposals. These consultations are continuing.

In the light of Mr. Andrew Leggatt's recent report into the activities of the SLADE art union, will support of the National Enterprise Board, my hon. and learned Friend please confirm that he intends to discuss with the TUC the blackmailing antics of that union in attempting to recruit its members? Will he make it clear to the TUC that, if it does nothing and sits on its backside, at the end of the day it cannot blame the Government for introducing new laws to take effect because of its lack of action?

Last month the Government published a working paper in which they made it plain that they considered that the law had to be changed to remove the existing immunity which hitherto has protected the action of SLADE, to which Mr. Leggatt's report has drawn attention. While it is always welcome that voluntary action and guidance are taken and expressed, it cannot be enough to leave the protection of individuals to that alone, because it provides no enforceable remedy to individuals who are harmed.

When the Minister meets the TUC, will he tell it where the private sector is taking up the slack?

The private sector is ready, willing and able to take up the slack. That is something that Labour Members have never learnt.

When my hon. and learned Friend meets the TUC, will he ask it to help to ensure that legislation on the closed shop and union reform is brought in at the earliest opportunity? In the small village of New Deer in my constituency, 37 employees are being threatened with a strike by the bakers' union because, for "personal reasons", an apprentice baker has refused to rejoin the union. Is not that a disgusting state of affairs for Labour Members to accept?

I have already made it clear that the Government regard the Baking Industry (Hours of Work) Act 1954 as anomalous and highly unsatisfactory. I entirely take my hon. Friend's point. The Government are consulting on the proposals which they published in July to provide proper protection for individuals in the operation of the closed shop. We shall continue with those and introduce legislation at an early date.