§ 54. Mr. E. Smithasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is now prepared to give facilities for the question of the pay of new entrant tax officers in the Inland Revenue, upon which a dispute has arisen between the Board of Inland Revenue and the Inland Revenue Staff Federation, to be referred to the Civil Service Arbitration Tribunal for decision before any further action is taken in violation of the accepted principles of negotiation in the Civil Service?
§ The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Lieut.-Colonel Colville)No obstacle will be interposed to the reference of the dispute to the Arbitration Tribunal. For the reasons stated in my reply to the next question of the hon. Member, I cannot agree that there has been any violation of the principles of negotiation.
§ Lieut.-Colonel ColvilleYes, if agreement is not reached, it will be submitted to arbitration.
§ 55. Mr. Smithasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has considered the protest of the Inland Revenue Staff Federation against the violation by the Board of Inland Revenue of the established machinery of negotiation and the sanctity of agreements relating to the 1420 salaries of Inland Revenue officials; and whether, in view of the grave issues of principle involved, affecting the confidence of the staff in the good faith of the administration in these matters, he is prepared to reverse the decision of the Board announced to the staff to remunerate the 650 new entrants, being recruited in anticipation of the introduction of a new tax on profits, on a scale lower than that at present operative under the existing agreement?
§ Lieut.-Colonel ColvilleMy right hon. Friend has considered the protest to which the hon. Member refers, but he cannot agree that Whitley principles have been violated. The staff side of the National Whitley Council agreed in 1921 that the application of those principles is subject to responsibility of heads of Departments for the public interest. The Board have proposed a temporary amendment in the scale of pay.of the clerical class in their Chief Inspector's Office for officers about to enter that class from the recent examination. Those amendments include a reduction in the present salary scales in the early years of service—a reduction in harmony with those recently agreed upon for general clerical officers and awarded by the Arbitration Court or agreed with staff associations for other Departmental clerical officers. In the public interest the Board were unwilling to grant the existing scales to a large number of new entrants until the new scales (which are under discussion) have been settled. The Board have agreed that if new scales more favourable to the new entrants than those at present proposed are settled, either by negotiation or arbitration, the new entrants will be given the benefit as from the date of their entry into the service. The hon. Member is under a misapprehension in thinking that 650 additional officers are being taken on in anticipation of any new tax on profits. The additions of staff are primarily needed to deal with Income Tax work arising in inspectors' offices, and are occasioned to a large extent by the need of replacing retiring officers and of reducing overtime to a mimimum.
§ Mr. SmithMay the House he informed why Ministerial responsibility was accepted for this situation prior to the question being submitted to arbitration in accordance with the arrangements?
§ Lieut.-Colonel ColvilleThe position is that if agreement is not reached, the matter will go to arbitration, and the scales as fixed, either by agreement or by arbitration, will apply retrospectively to these new entrants.
§ Mr. SmithDo I understand the position correctly to be that this question will now be reopened for negotiation between the representatives of the people involved and the Minister, and that, failing satisfaction, the question will be submitted to arbitration?
§ Lieut.-Colonel ColvilleI do not think there is any misunderstanding as to what I said. I understand that the matter is still in negotiation and that if an agreement is not reached on the new scales, it will have to go to arbitration.
§ 57. Mr. Burkeasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can give any explanation for the two months' delay on the part of the Board of Inland Revenue in dealing with a position affecting the pay of new entrants which could have been foreseen and which has since led to executive action being taken without an opportunity being given to the Inland Revenue Staff Federation to refer the matter to the Civil Service arbitration tribunal?
§ Lieut.-Colonel ColvilleI assume that the hon. Member refers to the interval since 19th March, 1937, on which date the Board of Inland Revenue wrote to the Staff Association concerned repeating proposals that it had previously made for a new scale of pay for tax officers. These proposals had been held up with the consent of the Board at the instance of the Staff Side. The position is that the Association replied on 22nd March suggesting that discussion be postponed until the report of a committee on certain staff questions (which they contended were relevant to the matter in dispute) had been received. That report was expected daily and was in fact received on 14th April. The Board reached their conclusions on the report in the middle of May. The report raised questions of principle and organisation which required some time for consideration, and I do not consider that any undue delay occurred.
§ Mr. BurkeIs it not a fact that it amounts to a renunciation of the principle of collective bargaining when modifications of existing agreements are made 1422 without consultation, and if there are to be negotiations on the subject, are these negotiations not likely to be prejudiced by the fait accompli of imposed conditions?
§ Lieut.-Colonel ColvilleI have endeavoured to explain that the Board do not hold that view.