HC Deb 28 April 1960 vol 622 cc383-4
40. Mrs. Castle

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the failure of the Commissioners responsible for regulating the pay, pensions and terms of service of the staff of this House to recognise and enforce the rights of trade union negotiation, he will take powers to transfer the duties of the Commissioners to a body more representative of the Commons as a whole, as recommended by the Select Committee on Accommodation.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Macmillan)

No, Sir. We debated these matters as recently as 31st March.

Mrs. Castle

Is the Prime Minister aware that, recently, one trade union at least has written to the Minister of Labour complaining that it is denied normal representative arrangements in dealing with House of Commons staff? Is the Prime Minister also aware that in the evidence before the Stokes Committee, Mr. Speaker Morrison agreed that a body established in 1812, such as the Commissioners were, was due for some sort of revision and reconsideration? In view of this, will not the Prime Minister take seriously the fact that our arrangements in the House of Commons for dealing with the staff are feudal and out of date, and will he, therefore, carry out the recommendation of the Stokes Committee?

The Prime Minister

No, Sir. This matter was discussed in the House only a few weeks ago. My right hon. Friend the Leader of the House said on this matter that the Commissioners meet sufficiently often to give confidence to the staff and that The staff of the House have confidence in them, and I should prefer their constitutional duties not to be altered."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 31st March, 1960; Vol. 620, c. 1650.] In view of the fact that we have had this matter under discussion, I could not be expected now to make any radical change.

Mrs. Castle

Is the Prime Minister aware that the only way of finding out the feeling of the staff is by allowing the staff normal methods of trade union organisation and representation? Is it not typical of the mediælval paternalism of the Government's attitude on this matter that they presume to say what the staff think without giving the staff facilities for trade union organisation to express their views?

The Prime Minister

I admire the eloquence of the hon. Lady, but I do not think she has advanced the argument any further than when it was debated a few weeks ago.

Back to