HC Deb 11 February 1960 vol 617 cc659-63
Mr. Robens

(by Private Notice) asked the Minister of Labour if he is prepared to make a further statement about the threatened rail stoppage.

The Minister of Labour (Mr. Edward Heath)

Yes, Sir. Since I made my statement yesterday I have met representatives of the British Transport Commission. I have, therefore, now seen all the parties concerned and have had a full statement of their views. My officers have again met representatives of the National Union of Railwaymen and the British Transport Commission this morning and at my request all parties have agreed to hold themselves available for further talks.

My officers and I are continuing our efforts to find a basis for a settlement in this dispute. I will make a further statement to the House tomorrow if desired.

Mr. Robens

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he would consider once again the proposal made yesterday that he should convene a top-level conference of all the parties to this dispute, with himself in the chair, in order to try to reconcile many of the natural anxieties that emerge from all sides? We have seen on the stage during the last few days all the actors in this drama—the climax of which is likely to be very soon—except one. That individual is presumably standing in the wings waiting for his cue, Mr. Guillebaud.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman would not consider it worth while to have a top-level conference, where he would have all the parties together under his chairmanship—I know that he has met them all separately—so that he can hear in front of other parties the natural anxieties of the National Union of Railwaymen about a minimum figure that they might be able to advise their members would be forthcoming within seven days of the Report of the Guillebaud Committee, the natural anxieties of the other two unions that such an arrangement would not materially affect, or, indeed, affect at all, their problems of differential pay, and the anxieties of the British Transport Commission that the Government are prepared financially to support the Guillebaud proposals or some part of them?

If the right hon. Gentleman were to bring all the parties together—I assume that there is a natural anxiety on the part of the Government not to have this interruption of the nation's economy—with the addition of Mr. Guillebaud and with the Minister of Transport there, of course, I should be very much surprised if, after an exchange of views of this character, a solution or formula could not be found.

Mr. Heath

I will, of course, consider what the right hon. Gentleman has said. As I am sure he realises, one of the complexities of this case is that there are only two parties to the dispute—the National Union of Railwaymen and the British Transport Commission. The others are not in dispute. We are trying to ascertain, as patiently and as urgently as we can, the anxieties and apprehensions of those in the dispute, as well as the attitude towards it of the other unions. I think that the right hon. Gentleman will agree from his experience that this is the first stage which one must go through. One would hope to make more progress by meeting individual unions than by bringing them all together in the first stage. That is what we have been doing. We are trying to see whether there are any ways of reassuring the unions concerned about the particular anxieties we have found.

As regards the further stage suggested by the right hon. Gentleman, so far the two unions which are not parties to the dispute have expressed the view that they would prefer to wait and see the Guillebaud report as a whole when it is published, and then to discuss with the British Transport Commission what action should be taken upon it. I think that the right hon. Gentleman will realise that the programme he has put forward as a result of the proposed conference is a very big one. It is a major situation which has to be dealt with, so, at the moment, I ask that we may continue our discussions with the parties who are now holding themselves available for further talks. I will bear in mind what the right hon. Gentleman has said.

Mr. Robens

For obvious reasons, I would not want to argue the merits of this case across the Table. The right hon. Gentleman has said that I have made a major proposal, but I am bound to remind him that this is a major crisis in the nation's affairs. While, technically, the dispute may be between the National Union of Railwaymen and the British Transport Commission, all those who have been connected with the industry know that the roots are far deeper. I am of the opinion that only a conference such as that which I have now proposed would enable the right hon. Gentleman to exercise his authority and his prestige, as Minister of Labour, in settling this very difficult matter.

Mr. Heath

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that the roots of differences of this kind, not only over this matter, but between the unions themselves, lie very deep indeed. I repeat that I will give the greatest possible consideration to the suggestion that he has made.

Mr. Shinwell

The right hon. Gentleman has informed us that after the negotiations which are pending, and in which he is proposing to take part with others concerned in this affair, he proposes to make another statement to the House tomorrow. Is there not a responsibility resting on the Government, and, indeed, on this House, to express an opinion about this affair, recognising, of course, that we have no right to interfere in an industrial dispute? In view of the threatened strike and the dislocation that will be caused in the country, is it not desirable that the House should express opinions which might lead to the dispute being averted?

May I put another point, which, I think, should be addressed to the Minister of Transport? We understand from the Press—no statement has been made in the House so far—that the Government have made arrangements to provide alternative means of travel—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I have knowledge which could not be available to the right hon. Gentleman. On the topic to which he now refers there is a Private Notice Question, at which we shall arrive the moment this one is over.

Mr. Shinwell

May I have an answer to my first question? Should we not have an opportunity of expressing dispassionately, and with due regard to all the circumstances, our views about this affair?

Mr. Heath

The question of the House expressing its views is a matter for Mr. Speaker and the House itself. I only venture the view that all previous Ministers of Labour, and I myself, have always been immensely grateful to the House for the restraint shown in a situation like the present one. There are many ways in which hon. Members can express their views informally to those who are concerned with this matter, and I would appreciate it if they do so. I am also grateful for the restraint in public debate in such a situation.

Mr. H. Hynd

I wish to raise a similar point, Sir. As tomorrow is our last sitting before what may become a national emergency, will there be any opportunity, if tomorrow's statement does not reveal a settlement, for a discussion to take place then?

Mr. Speaker

That is not a question for the Minister.

Mr. Bowles

I have to inform you, with great respect, Mr. Speaker, that I hope, as soon as business questions are over, to raise the matter to which my right hon. Friend has referred. I have thought out the matter very carefully. This is the last day this week before the rail crisis for any Motion to move the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 9 to be taken.

Mr. Speaker

I am much obliged to the hon. Gentleman.

Mr. Shinwell

May I address a question to the Leader of the House, recognising the need for restraint, which may have got a little too far? Will the Leader of the House say whether, in the event of negotiations not reaching any satisfactory conclusion, and a report being made to the House tomorrow, there will be an opportunity for hon. Members to express an opinion about this affair?

Mr. Butler

As he has said, my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour wishes to have a little more time, which, from my knowledge of the situation, I think would be very advisable. I am sure that the House will give him that time and give us that time to try to help in the situation. Secondly, my right hon. Friend himself volunteered, and I discussed with him, the possibility of a statement tomorrow. I think that we had better wait and see how things turn out, because there is a certain time before tomorrow.

If at 11 o'clock tomorrow there is a different situation, as Leader of the House I would consider the position, but there are limitations in respect of the business tomorrow. There is private Members' business, and there are limitations to what we can do. However, I have already examined the matter very carefully and if I can again be here at 11 o'clock tomorrow morning, when we see how things are going, I shall consider the best interests of the House.

Mr. Gaitskell

I am glad that the Leader of the House has given us that guidance. I am sure that the one thing that we all want at the moment is a settlement of the dispute and not to do anything which might possibly affect that. It is far better to leave it for, at any rate, another day and then consider the matter.