§ Q3. Sir R. Nugentasked the Prime Minister if the public speech of the Minister of Labour about Her Majesty's Government's incomes policy to the Industrial Welfare Society on 19th May represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir.
§ Sir R. NugentIs the Prime Minister aware that the Minister of Labour said that price stability requires that wage increases above the norm of 3½ per cent. should be matched by other increases below the norm? In order to give confidence in the effectiveness of this policy, will the right hon. Gentleman say which industries have had increases below the norm, or which should in the future?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. With great respect to the hon. Gentleman, I think that that is a daft question. We face a situation in which throughout British industry we are trying to get an agreed attitude not only to wages but to other incomes—and to prices, which have been hitting the headlines this last week. If we are to get this, we must get the acceptance of industry of the fact that if any incomes, be they wages, profits, dividends, rents or anything else—or prices—are to go on rising, it will defeat the whole purpose of the policy. Unfortunately, this policy is now being pursued at a time when there has been no agreement in the past, and it means that there 817 are a number of backlog cases that require settlement. I do not think that it is for the Government, but for industry itself, to decide which of the cases should be above, and which below, the norm.
§ Mr. HeathIs the Prime Minister aware that of the 42 major wage settlements I have been able to trace since last November, all except one have been above the norm—and many of them have been a long way above the norm? Is the Prime Minister aware that I can find only one either within or below the norm, and that concerned the 204,000 hospital workers?
Perhaps I may press him on this point. His right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour is absolutely right in saying that if there is to be an incomes policy of this kind those increases above the norm must be matched by those below. Will the right hon. Gentleman face that fact, and recognise that the awards that are being made, and which have been made, have made nonsense of the whole policy?
§ The Prime MinisterAnd my right hon. Friend also made plain that because this programme was being introduced after the failure of the right hon. Gentleman and his friends to get acceptance of the one-sided wage restraint of his right hon. and learned Friend the Member for the Wirral (Mr. Selwyn Lloyd), a number of cases had to be settled, including a number neatly swept under the carpet at the last election—not excluding the postal workers, whose claim was swept under the carpet because an election was in prospect.
I would further say that if the right hon. Gentleman wants to help the acceptance of an incomes policy he might reconsider—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] I am answering—he might reconsider the attitudes that he and his hon. Friends have taken on the Finance Bill, which are totally directed to preventing the acceptance of an incomes policy in this country.
§ Mr. ShinwellWill my right hon. Friend make it abundantly clear, and put it beyond any possibility of doubt, that one of the reasons, perhaps the major reason, why so many wage increases are above the norm is that wage rates were far too low for too long?
§ The Prime MinisterI think that the reason why we have—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."]—I am trying to answer. The reason why we have these difficulties is that for the last few years an attempt has been made to produce a one-sided incomes policy which was not fair to all.
§ Mr. GodberThe Prime Minister will be aware that on this issue the pace is always set by a particular industry. Would he not agree that in this case it has been fairly set by the public sector, and why is more restraint not shown there?
§ The Prime MinisterI am afraid that the right hon. Gentleman never set the pace himself when he was Minister of Labour. I am glad to find him now tamely supporting my right hon. Friend for having the guts to say the things that the right hon. Gentleman himself never said a year ago. As for the public sector, I have referred to the Post Office workers—whom he has in mind, I think. This problem should have been faced a year ago but, as I say, the former Government postponed the issue until the election was over.