§ 39. Mr. FORRESTasked the Minister of Labour whether he can make any statement as to the suggestions, unofficial or official, of negotiations to settle the dispute in the heavy textile trade; and whether he has made, or will make, inquiries as to the effect on production of the proposed 5 per cent. reduction?
§ Mr. BETTERTONAttempts have been made both by the Minister of Labour and by other persons, and are still being made, to bring together the parties in this dispute, but so far without success. The effect on production of the proposed reduction in wage rates is a matter of argument between the two parties, on which I cannot express an opinion.
§ Mr. SNOWDENIs it not a fact that the workpeople are quite willing that this 1348 matter should be referred to the Industrial Council? Are we to understand that the obstacle to these negotiations is on the part of the employers, and, in these circumstances, will the hon. Member renew his pressure upon the employers to induce them to agree to the matter being referred to the Industrial Council?
§ Mr. BETTERTONI cannot answer definitely the specific point put with regard to the Industrial Council, but the representative of the Ministry is at this moment in Bradford, and I am quite certain—I can say with assurance—that anything he sees can be done in that direction will be done by him. This point will be borne in mind by him.
§ Mr. SPEAKER(Later): Does the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mr. Riley) wish to put his private notice question, in view of the answer given to Question No. 39;
§ Mr. RILEY(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister what steps are being taken, or have been taken, to deal with the dispute in the woollen and worsted trade in. the West Riding of Yorkshire and Lancashire; and whether the Prime Minister, in view of the present deadlock, is prepared to institute an inquiry into the situation or invite the two parties to meet him with a view to finding a basis for settlement?
§ Mr. BETTERTONI have been asked to reply. An officer of my Department has gone to Bradford and is in communication with both sides in the dispute in order to ascertain whether a meeting can be arranged. I do not consider that an inquiry would serve any useful purpose at the present moment.
§ Mr. J. H. THOMASIs the hon. Gentleman aware that in this case the refusal to go to arbitration is the employers' absolutely? When the workers refuse, great publicity is given to the fact, and could not the Government now say of their own accord—as they have the power to do so—that they will institute an independent inquiry, at least to give some encouragement to those who believe in conciliation?
§ Mr. BETTERTONAs I have already said, my right hon. Friend does not think 1349 at present the inquiry suggested by the right hon. Gentleman would serve any useful purpose.
§ Mr. THOMASThe present dispute has already lasted a week—[HON. MEMBERS: "A fortnight!"]—and it is likely to spread. Surely, if any inquiry is to be held, the sooner it is held the better.
§ Mr. BETTERTONMy right Ron. Friend had all these considerations in mind in arriving at the conclusion which I have just indicated.
Lord H. CAVENDISH-BENTINTCKWhen does the Eon. Gentleman consider that an inquiry will serve any useful purpose?
§ Mr. RAMSAY MacDONALDHas any report been sent from the Ministry's officer stating that he has approached the employers and suggested an inquiry or a conference or any organisation for conciliation, and that the employers have refused whilst the workers have accepted?
§ Mr. BETTERTONI have not myself seen such a report, and I do not know whether there is such a report in existence. The officer in question is still there, and therefore a final report has not yet been received.
§ Mr. THOMASCannot the Government themselves institute an inquiry before this dispute spreads? If the employers refuse to take part, surely the Government have precedents for setting up an inquiry themselves?
§ Mr. BETTERTONThat is really the same question which the right hon. Gentleman put previously, and the answer is that my right hon. Friend has considered this, and he does not think that an inquiry would serve any useful purpose at the present time.
§ Mr. WILLIAM GREENWOODWill the Government consider bringing forward proposals for compulsory arbitration in these trade disputes?
§ Mr. BETTERTONThat is an entirely different question, raising very broad issues which cannot be dealt with by question and answer.
§ Lord H. CAVENDISH-BENTINCKWhen is the Labour Ministry going to make some contribution to industrial 1350 peace? So far they have only knocked people off unemployment benefit.
§ Mr. RILEYDoes the Minister appreciate the situation which exists in the West Riding—that there are now over 1,000 mills standing idle, and 200,000 men, women and children involved, and does he recognise that great suffering is likely to occur unless a settlement is arrived at? May I also ask if, in his replies, the hon. Gentleman has borne in mind the fact that his officer has been there for 10 days and that further steps might now be taken.
§ Mr. BETTERTONMy right hon. Friend is cognisant of the seriousness of the dispute and its consequences, and for that reason he sent the officer up to Bradford, and the officer is there now doing what he can to bring this unfortunate dispute to a close.
§ Mr. MacDONALDMay we not bring this to a very definite issue? Is the decision of the Minister not to establish a court of inquiry the result of inquiries made by his officer at Bradford to which the. answer from the employers was that they did not want an inquiry?
§ Mr. BETTERTONThe right hon. Gentleman must not read more into my answer than there is in it. My answer was, "I do not consider that an inquiry would serve any useful purpose at the present moment."
§ Mr. J. JONESDoes it require a stoppage of the entire industry of the country before the Government take any action? Is it because this industry cannot stop every other industry that the Government are not going to do anything?
§ Mr. J. HUDSONWhat are the grounds upon which the Minister would consider that an inquiry should be held? Why is it at this moment, when a very important section of our trade is involved in a serious dispute, no inquiry can be considered, whilst in another matter an inquiry has been agreed to? What are the conditions which prevent the institution of an inquiry in this case?
§ Mr. BETTERTONConditions obviously vary in different cases, and in the present case, as I have said, my right hon. Friend thinks no useful purpose could be served at the moment by an inquiry—[HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] —
§ Mr. KIRKWOODBecause the miners have instilled fear into those in power.
§ Mr. BETTERTON—or that an inquiry would be likely to bring any useful results at present.
Mr. MacDOMALDMay we ask whether this matter will not be considered during to-day, so that there might be a chance of a different reply to this question if it is repeated to-morrow?
§ Mr. BETTERTONI will certainly go into it, and with your consent, Mr. Speaker, if the right hon. Gentleman cares to put down a private notice question for to-morrow, I am sure my right hon. Friend will be only too ready to answer.