I was making the point that the co-operation of the employers of the country will be essential if the scheme is to be a success because the moneys we are voting here for the purpose this afternoon will remain unused if they do not recruit the workers even at the attractive rates of premia set out by us, that is, the £20 and £10 rates. One of the basic purposes of that advertising campaign was to ensure that employers would be aware of the principal features of the scheme, that they would understand the advantages of participation and that they would answer my appeal that they should co-operate in making the scheme a success. We have defined success for the scheme as the return to work of 11,000 people, 6,000 adults and 5,000 school leavers.
In regard to the prominence and controversy aroused by the advertising campaign—although certain features of that campaign could not appeal to most Deputies of the House—I want to thank members of the Opposition for their assistance in ensuring that it got the prominence I wished it to get and which I believe it was necessary for it to get if the employers of the country were to be aware of the advantages of participating in the scheme.
Details of the scheme have been circulated to Deputies so they are aware of them. I would reiterate that the scheme applies to employers in manufacturing industry and in agriculture, including horticulture. If an employer in those industries increases his work force over the level in the week commencing 10th January, 1977, he will receive premia, provided he takes on eligible workers. A premium of £20 per week is paid in respect of the recruitment of a person 20 years of age or over on 1st January, 1977, who has received unemployment benefit or assistance at some time since June, 1974, and who has been on the live register for the four weeks immediately prior to employment under the scheme. Deputies will recall that under the earlier premium programme premiums were paid only in respect of persons who had received unemployment benefit. Therefore we have extended the scheme to cover those categories in the employment incentive scheme.
In the first week of advertising of the scheme we received from manufacturing industry over 485 inquiries from employers—these inquiries are at present being examined by Department staff—and over 163 in agriculture because, as Deputies will recall we had extended the scope of the scheme into agriculture, giving us a total, in the first week, of 648 inquiries.
In the second week of advertising the promotion campaign netted 721 inquiries from manufacturing industry and close on 300 inquiries from agriculture. The total inquiries received from 8th May to 20th May was 1,206 from manufacturing industry and 434 from agriculture, making a total of 1,640 inquiries. Most reasonable Deputies will accept that, whatever party points may be made about the actual format of the promotion campaign, the campaign has achieved its objective of ensuring that employers are aware of the advantages of the scheme and the importance of their co-operation in the scheme. We have to sift these inquiries now, but the campaign has got off to a very good start towards our objective of getting 11,000 people back to work.
A premium of £20 a week will be paid in respect of a person under 20 years of age on 1st January, 1977, if he has been in receipt of unemployment benefit at some time from June, 1974, and has been on the live register for the four weeks immediately prior to employment under the scheme. It is intended that young people who have lost jobs and redundant apprentices should attract a premium equivalent to that for adult workers. For the first time employers will receive a premium if they recruit school leavers. It has been argued there is discrimination here as between the school leaver and the adult. Workers under £20 with some work experience will be entitled to the larger premium of £20. Most Deputies will accept that the wage rate for the youth is lower than that for the adult and the £10 premium represents a not insignificant sum for prospective employers thinking of taking on young workers.
Crucial to the success of the scheme is the winning of the co-operation of employers, be they manufacturers, agriculturists or horticulturists. If farmers and horticulturists do not respond the money will remain unused. That is why it is necessary to make all prospective employers aware of the scheme and get their consent to participation in the scheme. It is a free country and, if people do not wish to participate, no one will be returned to work as a result of this scheme.
We spent a good deal of time considering the proper description of school leavers who would qualify and we finally decided eligibility would mean that the young person would be under 20 years of age on 1st January, 1977, have left full time education for at least four months, have registered with the National Manpower Service and have had no permanent employment experience. I was disappointed with our experience of the scheme which preceeded this one. It was not similar in all respects. There are certain differences in this scheme in that we have catered for school leavers and for agriculture.