HL Deb 09 October 2003 vol 653 cc456-8

3.19 p.m.

Baroness Miller of Hendon asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they will take action to avert a second strike by postal workers.

Lord Davies of Oldham

My Lords, no one will benefit from a further strike by postal workers in London. It will disrupt services to consumers and businesses who rely on Royal Mail's services. Resolution of the dispute is a matter for the management of Royal Mail and the Communication Workers Union.

Baroness Miller of Hendon

My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply although I suspect that it might cause problems for people who live in London and for businesses who were hoping for something a little more positive. Will the Minister confirm that in the national postal ballot postal workers turned down the idea of a strike, but that in a sense there was a different ballot of London postal workers who thought otherwise? Is there anything that the Government can do when faced with such a situation? Why are Her Majesty's Government spending so much time trying to force through legislation regarding the fire-fighters when the post is in such a mess? The post is, after all, a public service for people who live in our capital city.

Lord Davies of Oldham

My Lords, noble Lords will recognise that the fire service is an emergency service and that it is very different from the postal service. The legislation that we are taking through the House seeks to encourage the development of proper industrial relations in the fire service. Of course I recognise that the decision by the Communication Workers Union to strike over the London allowance will cause some disruption to the service although the impact of the first day of the dispute which occurred last week was not as extensive as some might have feared. As I am sure the noble Baroness knows, there was a vote against a national strike, but London postal workers voted in favour of strike action regarding the London allowance.

Lord Clarke of Hampstead

My Lords, I declare my interest as a former postman and a current member of the Communication Workers Union. Is my noble friend aware that the postal workers' dispute over London weighting is not just about a sum of money but rather the outdated boundaries that apply to inner and outer London vis-à-vis national pay rates? Is my noble friend aware that both parties believe that the time has come for a review? The CWU in particular wants to find a formula to avoid disputes arising in the future.

I say to the noble Baroness, Lady Miller of Hendon, who tabled the Question, that the postal worker who delivers her mail will receive as a London allowance in the outer London area the princely sum of £39 a week. Will my noble friend the Minister consider for a moment other allowances a little nearer to home and compare them with the £39 these people receive for getting up at the crack of dawn six days a week? It is not good enough for the Government to stand back and say that it is a matter between the two parties. The only shareholder in Royal Mail and the Post Office is the Government. When the Postal Services Act went through this House it was made clear that the Government would remain—I say this in parenthesis at the moment—the sole shareholder. Does my noble friend agree that rather than washing his hands of this debate he would do well to get on the phone and tell the two sides—one of which today repeated its willingness to meet the employers—to get some sense into the situation?

Lord Davies of Oldham

My Lords, I recognise my noble friend's deep interest in and long experience of the industry. Of course I recognise that the dispute is about more than just the London allowance but we expect that to be the subject of proper negotiation between management and the unions. After all, both management and the unions supported and, in fact, asked for, the Post Office to be a commercial operation from which the Government would stand back. That is exactly what we propose to do.

The national issues have gone a long way towards being resolved. I believe my noble friend will recognise that there has been an improvement in industrial relations in the Post Office in recent years, not least through the efforts and constructive work of my noble friend Lord Sawyer. I say in the spirit of the final point that my noble friend Lord Clarke made that it is for management and unions to meet together to resolve the issue.

Lord Newby

My Lords, are there any circumstances in which, should strikes continue in London, the Secretary of State might use the reserve powers in legislation to provide alternative methods for the delivery of the post in London?

Lord Davies of Oldham

My Lords, the Secretary of State has reserve powers to suspend the monopoly of Royal Mail in circumstances of dire emergency, but we are nowhere near that stage yet and I am confident that we shall not remotely approach it. However, it is necessary for the two sides to resolve the outstanding issues.

Lord Clinton-Davis

My Lords, does my noble friend understand that this is a time when heads should be banged together? It is vitally important for the Government to ensure that the management and the unions talk because talk between now and the threatened strike is absolutely vital.

Lord Davies of Oldham

My Lords, I agree with the point that my noble friend made. I am sure that the whole House agrees that the potential disruption to the very vital service which the Post Office provides would be a massive inconvenience to all people in London. Of course, the impact would be felt beyond the capital city. My noble friend is absolutely right to say that it is very important that the two sides get together to discuss the issue as rapidly as possible.

Lord Swinfen

My Lords, does the Minister agree that short questions and short answers, like short letters, are much to be desired and much easier to deliver?

Lord Davies of Oldham

Yes, my Lords.