HC Deb 19 July 1956 vol 556 cc1367-73
25. Mr. P. Wells

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food why he wrote an official letter to the National Farmers' Union, informing it that any wage increases agreed to at the present meetings of the Agricultural Wages Board would not necessarily cause him to give full recoupment in a special Price Review.

26. Mr. Dye

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what official communication he has made to the National Farmers' Union and the National Union of Agricultural Workers regarding the claim before the Central Agricultural Wages Board for a substantial increase of wages for agricultural workers in England and Wales.

32. Captain Kerby

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food why he considered it necessary to warn the National Farmers' Union in a letter that a severe view would be taken of any application for a special price review, should one be made, in the event of the farm workers' application for a wage increase being granted; and if he will make a statement.

37. Mr. Hurd

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the terms of the letter he recently addressed to the President of the National Farmers' Union about the farm workers' claim for a wage increase now before the Agricultural Wages Board; and if he will make clear that he has no intention to prejudice agreement by the Board on an award which would be in keeping with the general requirements of restraint on actual wages while recognising the low level of current minimum rates in agriculture.

Mr. Amory

I gave notice to the National Farmers' Union last February that the Government intended to examine the special Review procedures in order that they might be adapted to present conditions. When it was decided subsequently to examine also the wider question of more effective long-term assurances to the industry, I hoped that the two might be considered together as they were somewhat related. In view, however, of the claim now before the Agricultural Wages Board, it is possible that a request for a special Review might arise before any conclusion has been reached on the wider issues. That being so, it was incumbent upon us to leave the National Farmers' Union in no doubt about the Government's attitude, should a request for a further special Review be made before these general discussions had been completed.

I am circulating the text of the letters on this matter in the OFFICIAL REPORT. It will be seen that they did not in any sense deal with the merits of the farm workers' claim. I am sure that the Board will reach its decision in the light of all relevant factors.

Mr. Wells

Is the Minister aware that his reply does not in any way allay our fear that the principle of Ministerial impartiality in wages disputes is being departed from, and that we believe that the agricultural workers, in their efforts to improve their miserably low wage of 135s. a week, have not only the National Farmers' Union to deal with but also the Minister and his Government? Further, in view of the fact that the National Farmers' Union representatives feel that in his letter they have a trump card with which to persuade the Agricultural Wages Board not to grant an increase, will the Minister make it perfectly clear that he deprecates his letter being used in that manner?

Mr. Amory

There is really no secrecy about this matter at all. It is a matter in which public finances may be involved. I am sure that I was right to write these letters to the National Farmers' Union. If I had not done so, and if, following a wage advance, a request for a special Review had been made and the Government had taken a more severe attitude than previously, the National Farmers' Union, in the absence of a letter from me, might well have complained that I ought to have given them information in advance.

Mr. Hurd

Will my right hon. Friend take it from this side of the House that we welcome what he has said just now, making clear that his letter does not in any way prejudice the impartial consideration of the claim made by the farm workers for an increase in their minimum wages at the present rate of £6 15s. a week? Will my right hon. Friend also take it from this side of the House that it is timely that he should let all those engaged in these deliberations, including the National Farmers' Union, know the current relevant factors, including the need for restraint in wages and prices?

Mr. T. Williams

How could the right hon. Gentleman tell the National Farmers' Union in his letter to it that he would take a severe view if a substantial increase was given, when in fact the Act of 1947 declares—[Interruption.] Oh, yes, hon. Members will find when they read the letter in HANSARD tomorrow morning that that was said. Despite the apologetic question that has just been asked by the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr. Hurd), it is quite impossible for the Minister of Agriculture to make clear that he has no intention of prejudicing an agreement when, in fact, he tells eight members of the National Farmers' Union who are also members of the national Wages Board that if they should by any chance make any concession he will take a very severe view. The question I want to put is: is that not interfering with an independent national Wages Board?

Mr. Amory

There is no interference whatever with an independent national Wages Board. This is a matter between the Government and the National Farmers' Union and, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, whenever an application for a special Review is made, it is the responsibility of the Government to decide whether or not they will agree to that special Review. All I have written to say now is that—following my letter of last February to the National Farmers' Union, when I warned it that we should be examining the basis and procedure of the special Review—if an application for a special Review was made before our consultations had been completed, the Government would have to adopt a severe attitude to the request; and further, that if a special Review was made by the Government it would not necessarily follow that full recoupment would be given.

Mr. Dye

Is it not a fact that the Minister had not received a request for a special Review and that, therefore, the matter had not arisen? Is it not a fact also that the Agricultural Wages Board should be, as it always has been, entirely independent when dealing with all applications? Is not the right hon. Gentleman's letter to one side of that Board an interference? If the Minister has an agricultural wages policy, why did he not reveal it to both sides, and in particular to the Chairman of the Board?

Mr. Amory

It is in no way an interference. It is simply a warning to the N.F.U. of the attitude that the Government may have to adopt in their financial transactions with the N.F.U. The Wages Board itself now has complete discretion to decide every application on its merits.

Mr. T. Williams

rose—

Mr. Speaker

I think that this subject has been debated enough.

Mr. T. Williams

Is this not the first case since the establishment of the Agricultural Wages Board where a Minister of Agriculture, during the course of an application for an increase, has interfered with either the agricultural workers' union, the National Farmers' Union or, indeed, the five independent members?

Mr. Amory

So far as I am aware, the present circumstances have never arisen before.

Mr. Nicholson

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the broad mass of the nation will welcome the fact that not only is he the guardian of the agricultural industry but that he also has some regard for the battle against inflation and for the public purse?

Mr. Gaitskell

What exactly did the right hon. Gentleman mean when he said that we had never been in this position before? Are we to assume that he means that there has never been such an dangerous inflationary situation, with which the Government are unable to cope?

Mr. Amory

The position to which I was referring was the position in which, after the Government had warned the National Farmers' Union, as they did in February, that we should have to examine the whole basis and procedures of the special Review, an application for an increase in wages was made to the Wages Board before the consultations to which I referred had been completed.

Mr. T. Williams

rose—

Mr. Speaker

I really do not think we can debate this matter further at the moment.

Mr. P. Wells

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the vital principle involved and the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I wish to give notice that at the first opportunity I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

The following is the text of the letters:—

7th February, 1956.

DEAR SIR JAMES,

My colleagues and I have now been able to give full consideration to the request in your letter of 19th January that, simultaneously with the coming Annual Review, a Special Review should be held to take account of the increase in the minimum wage of agricultural workers in England and Wales and the changes that arc being considered in Scotland and Northern Ireland. After carefully reviewing the circumstances, the Agricultural Ministers have agreed that a Special Review should be held at the same time as the forthcoming Annual Review and that this should follow the same general procedure as last year.

At the same time I wish to draw your attention to the fact that the present Special Review procedures were determined a long time ago in conditions substantially different from those of today and to give notice on behalf of the Government that the Agricultural Ministers will wish, after the Annual Review, to examine the whole basis and procedures for Special Reviews in order that they may be adapted to present conditions.

Yours sincerely,

(Sgd.) D. HEATHCOAT AMORY.

21st June, 1956

DEAR SIR JAMES,

In my letter of 7th February last on the Special Review I gave notice on behalf of the Government that we should wish, after the Annual Review, to examine the whole basis and procedures for Special Reviews in order that they might be adapted to present conditions.

Shortly afterwards we announced our intention to consider whether any practicable methods of providing more effective long-term assurances of support for the agricultural industry could be devised. We had hoped that the examination of the basis and procedures for Special Reviews could be linked with that of long-term assurances since any methods devised for the latter purpose might well have an important bearing on the question whether Special Reviews would continue to be necessary and, if so, what form they ought to take.

The claim now before the Agricultural Wages Board for England and Wales has, however, created a new situation. We hope that it will be possible to make progress with consideration of the long-term issues before the Agricultural Wages Board conclude their deliberations. In the meantime, however, we must provide for the possible contingency of a request for a Special Review arising in present circumstances, without prejudice to any long-term arrangements that may be made.

We have already stated that the basis and the procedures for Special Reviews needed to be adapted to present conditions. These were evolved in days when the main farm products were bought from farmers on behalf of the Government at fixed prices. They do not accord with the present guarantee arrangements or with present national needs.

We wish therefore to let you know that if there should be an increase in wage cost we should feel it necessary to adopt a severe attitude in considering whether the cost changes were sufficient to justify accepting any request for a Special Review; we should look at this in the light of present circumstances rather than any precedents from the past; and if nevertheless in our view there were a case for a Special Review recoupment to the full extent of the effects of the cost change could not be assumed.

As I have indicated, we hope that it will be possible to make progress with consideration of the future of Special Reviews generally, in conjunction with the examination of long-term assurances.

I should be glad if you would convey this also to the Scottish and Ulster Farmers' Unions. If you wish to pass on the contents of this letter to others whom you think may be concerned, I would have no objection.

Yours sincerely,

(Sgd.) D. HEATHCOAT AMORY.

25th June, 1956.

MY DEAR MINISTER,

Thank you for your letter of the 21st June, which sets out the Government's intention to effect a serious departure in the special price review procedure as agreed in the exchange of letters in November, 1946.

This raises issues of the gravest importance for the future of the agricultural industry and we shall accordingly be seeking the views of our colleagues in Scotland and Northern Ireland forthwith.

Your letter also raises implications with regard to the current discussions at the Agricultural Wages Board and these also will require to be carefully examined.

Yours sincerely,

(Sgd.) JAMES TURNER.

I was subsequently asked by the Farmers' Unions to consider the matter further since they felt that no change in the arrangements for Special Reviews should be made without discussion and agreement with the Unions, I then wrote the following further letter on 5th July.

5th July, 1956.

DEAR SIR JAMES,

The views about Special Reviews that you expressed at the meeting on 28th June have been reported to me and I have considered them. I think I made it clear in my letter of 21st June that what I said about the contingency of a request for a Special Review arising in the near future was without prejudice to whatever might he evolved as part of long-term arrangements and that I also made plain the Government's position in the event of such a contingency arising. Should that happen we shall of course be ready to discuss the implications with you. In the meantime there is I think nothing I wish to add to what I have already said.

Yours sincerely,

(Sgd.) D. HEATHCOAT AMORY.

Forward to