HC Deb 29 April 1947 vol 436 cc1730-4
Mr. Eden

(by Private Notice) asked the Minister of Labour whether he has any statement to make about the present stoppage of work at the London Docks; and whether he can assure the House that the Government will take any necessary steps to ensure the maintenance of food supplies to the civil population.

Mr. Isaacs

Yes, Sir. I would crave the indulgence of the House to enable me to state the position fully, as it is important that the facts should be known as widely as possible. At a special meeting of the National Joint Council for the Port Transport Industry, held on 26th June last year, the Council agreed to appoint national representatives to form a Committee, with representatives of the National Dock Labour Corporation and the Ministry of Transport, to visit the principal port areas, to consider, with the local committees, the appropriate labour force in each case, and the action necessary to adjust numbers. This fact-finding Committee reported on 6th August last, and reductions have been made on the basis of its recommendations. In the case of Glasgow, however, although the Committee found a redundancy of 819 men, the existence of redundancy was challenged by the Scottish Transport and General Workers' Union. No progress could be made in joint discussions between the Regional Port Director and the Union. Finally, on i6th March, the Regional Port Director announced his decision to proceed with the discharge of 500 men. The dockers in Glasgow stopped work on 24th March; the notices were issued on 26th March and expired on 9th April.

Following a meeting of the trade union side of the National Joint Council on 16th April, it was made clear on behalf of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport, that if the men returned to work, any discharged men who were prewar dockers, estimated to number 204 out of the 500, could be reinstated. The remaining 296 could be given work without guarantee, pending inquiry by the National Joint Council into the present labour position at the port. Unfortunately, the stoppage still persists. It is against this background that the men belonging to the stevedores' and lighter-men's unions stopped work in London yesterday morning. The total numbers affected are 9,400; 12,222 men are still at work, and 1,553 have proved attendance —that is, they turned up for work.

I understand that the trade union side of the National Joint Council, but not including the Scottish Transport and General Workers' Union, met in London this morning to consider the position, when it was decided that all the unions should declare whether they abide by the policy of the National Joint Council and accept its constitution. It will be realised, therefore, that the present stoppage has brought into question the constitution of the joint machinery of the industry. The effect of the stoppage on the work of the port of London is serious. Some 17 ships containing food supplies are idle. This not only prevents the punctual discharge of cargo, but interrupts the regular flow of essential food supplies. Coal supplies required for vital services are also being held up. A further difficulty arises from the fact that the normal arrangements for handling London's refuse have been dislocated.

Whatever the facts of the Glasgow dispute, there can be no justification for the stoppage of work in London. It is a violation of the constitutional machinery of the industry, and it shows a complete disregard for its effect on the national well-being. I can give the right hon. Gentleman an assurance that the Government will take any necessary steps to safeguard food supplies. The only effect of a continuation of the present stoppage can be the loss and hardship which it occasions to the community. I sincerely hope, however, that wiser counsels will prevail, and that the men everywhere will resume work without delay.

Mr. Eden

May I ask two questions arising out of the statement? First, is it a fact that the food cargoes "frozen" by the loading and unloading hold-up, now total 135,000 tons; and, secondly, is the Minister satisfied that there is no risk of deterioration in respect of any part of these cargoes, and, if there is a risk, what do the Government propose to do about it?

Mr. Isaacs

I am sorry that I cannot give the right hon. Gentleman the exact figure as to tonnage. The tonnage is pretty considerable because there are 17 ships, but the refrigeration on the ships is kept going, and there is not much risk, at any rate for some days ahead, of deterioration. Meanwhile, the Government are taking every step open to see that the food supplies are not delayed. May I add one further thing, which came to my notice just before I rose to make the statement? We have received an intimation from the Scottish Union, who have telegraphed to town today for a copy of the statement I made last night. It is a pity that it was not put over in full detail on the B.B.C. last night. They are no* considering it, and I publicly say to the Scottish dockers that if they accept that statement, which is very fair and honourable to them, and return to work, the inquiry as to the extent of redundancy will be put in hand immediately, and there will be no prejudice to them as a consequence.

Mr. Eden

May I ask one further question on the subject of redundancy? In view of the many conflicting statements may we be told whether there is any other evidence of redundancy in Glasgow, apart from this Committee's report?

Mr. Isaacs

Yes, Sir, there is very strong financial evidence, apart from this Committee's report. The charge of maintaining the guarantee to dock workers who are unable to obtain work, spread over the whole of the ports of the country, averages 15 per cent. of the wages bill. Although other ports have met their obligations within that 15 per cent., and some have a surplus, the Glasgow docks have a deficit of over £300,000. That a clear indication, on top of the Commission's inquiry, that there are more men than the docks can support.

Mr. Maclay

Will the right hon. Gentleman make it clear also that this whole question of redundancy arises largely out of the very great attempt which has been made to overcome the problem of casual labour in the docks, and is all part of the decasualisation scheme?

Mr. Isaacs

Yes, Sir, that has been made clear. The decasualisation scheme requires that every person on the books on 30th June should automatically become a registered dock employee on 1st July. We have to see, therefore, that we do not carry over at least 500 more than are necessary.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

I suggest that it is a great mistake to aggravate the situation by further questions when a settlement appears to be possible.

Mr. Sydney Silverman

May I ask a question which, I hope, will do no harm? Will the right hon. Gentleman agree that the decasualisation scheme was not intended to produce the permanent unemployment of any men at the docks; and can he say what attention has been paid to providing regular employment for any dockers who may be declared redundant?

Mr. Isaacs

That question covers a far larger field. As far as the Scottish position is concerned, the Minister of Transport was able to offer permanent employment to a great number of dockers who would have been declared redundant under this scheme.

Mr. Stephen

Is it not the case that Scottish dockers complain that the alleged redundancy is due to the fact that the Scottish ports have not been getting their fair share of ships?

Mr. Isaacs

I do not think there is any justification for that, and I have not heard of it in any investigations I have made. I am not the employer negotiating the settlement, but merely the intermediary bringing both sides together. In the investigations I have made, there was real evidence of a large number of men doing only half a day's work a week, while others were doing six and a half days' work a week. There is a great deal to be done among the men themselves in sharing the work out in Glasgow.