§ 5. Mr. Bruce-Gardyneasked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he intends to refer wage awards resulting from arbitration procedures and independent committees of inquiry to the National Board for Prices and Incomes in any cases where such awards are regarded by the Government as potentially inflationary.
§ Mr. George BrownThe Government will refer any questions relating to prices, wages and other money incomes which they consider it desirable to have investigated in the national interest.
§ Mr. Bruce-GardyneDoes this mean that the Government are prepared to refer decisions of arbitration tribunals and other bodies of this kind to the National Board for Prices and Incomes and, if so, will the right hon. Gentleman agree that his Answer, in conjunction 1927 with the comments of the printers' union about the activities of the Government over their wage claim, would suggest that it is time that he and his right hon. Friends apologised to my right hon. Friends for their strictures on their attempts when in Government to intervene in wage bargaining?
§ Mr. Ronald BellDoes the First Secretary realise that he faces a very complicated problem here? Is it his intention to refer pay claims to the Board before they go to these arbitral or other agreed procedures, during the procedures or after award, or is it his intention that this wide range of industrial claims should be excluded from his incomes policy?
§ Mr. BrownI am much obliged to the hon. Gentleman for the way in which he puts his question. It is a very complicated matter. If one rules out moving in any particular area, one only limits the possibility of helping. I would not normally think it a good thing to intervene at any stage while the normal procedures are proceeding; but, of course, there may be an occasion when, at some stage, it would be wiser to do it then than to wait until later. Therefore, with the agreement of both management and unions, the series of White Papers was written in such a form as to leave a fairly wide discretion to the Minister as to when, how and if he should move.
§ Sir E. BrownHas the right hon. Gentleman consulted the Minister of Labour on this particular application?
§ Mr. HeathThe First Secretary said that he would not normally think it desirable to intervene, as I understand it, while a claim was being considered. There remains the further point raised by my hon. Friend as to whether hewould refer a case which had already been to arbitration or to some other form of committee of inquiry which had given its view but which the Government considered 1928 had resulted in an inflationary increase which was unjustifiable. Has he given throught to whether he would be prepared to refer that to the Board?
§ Mr. BrownIt might not only be because we thought it inflationary, but there might be other reasons in the public interest why one would like it to be looked at, and one has the power to do so in any circumstances when one thinks it right.
§ Mr. Emrys HughesIs my right hon. Friend aware that many small farmers are aggrieved because of recent increases in their rents, and will he consider submitting cases of landlords' incomes to the Board?
§ Mr. Bruce-GardyneIn view of the totally unsatisfactory nature of the replies to both my Questions, I beg to give notice that I shall seek leave to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.
§ 9. Mr. Ridsdaleasked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs how many cases of price and wage increases, respectively, have now been referred to the Price Review Board.
§ Mr. George BrownFour, Sir. All, of course, involve all considerations affecting price increases.
§ Mr. RidsdaleWill the Frst Secretary refer the recent large increase made by the London Electricity Board to the National Board for Prices and Incomes? Why is he being so complacent, particularly as price rises in the last six months have been the equivalent of nearly 8 per cent. annually, or £1 a week for the average family?
§ Mr. SpeakerThere is a danger of overlapping another Question about electricity prices. There is a later Question, No. 24, about that.
§ Mr. BrownI have already referred to the question of referring the prices of nationalised undertakings, and there will be other Questions on that. I shall consider the particular point which the hon. Gentleman raises.
§ Mr. Ronald BellThe First Secretary gave the figure as four. My hon. Friend's Question asked for the cases of price and wage increases respectively. Has the right hon. Gentleman separate figures for those? Does he recognise the danger that his incomes policy, because of the difficulty of referring wage increases—I raised this point in a supplementary question to Question No. 5—may come to rely increasingly on control of prices?
§ Mr. BrownI have always made quite clear that my view—I think that it is the view of most other people who have seriously considered it—is that if one can get price stability one has the only climate in which one can hope to have an incomes policy. Therefore, in what is inevitably something of a "chicken and egg" operation, if one has to decide on somewhere to start, prices are the right place. But I have not referred only prices, as the hon. Gentleman knows. I shall consider them all. In any case, it is a slightly non-meaningful distinction because, even in dealing with prices, the question of costs must be taken into account, and costs by definition must include wages and other considerations of that kind. So in no case could one really say that this is dealing only with prices and that is dealing only with incomes. That is why I answered as I did and said that all considerations apply equally in a sense to all cases.
§ 24. Mr. Fisherasked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he will refer to the Prices and Incomes Board the cost of rail and bus fares, coal and coke, electricity, inland postage and house mortgages.
§ 31. Mr. Buchanan-Smithasked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he is aware of increases in freight charges on British Railways; and if he will refer these to the National Board for Incomes and Prices.
§ Mr. George BrownNo, Sir. I made it clear in the debate on 11th May that we would not hesitate to refer a nationalised industry case to the National Board for Prices and Incomes if the circumstances made this desirable. But I do not think 1930 that it would be helpful to refer the cases mentioned by the hon. Members.
§ Mr. FisherWould not the right hon. Gentleman agree that fares and the cost of fuel and mortgage interest rates are much more significant items in most people's personal budgets than the soap, flour and detergent which he has selected for examination?
§ Mr. BrownIt is a matter of opinion. On the question of mortgage rates, the hon. Gentleman will know that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government explained the work that we are doing to get a national housing plan which would deal with them. Right hon. and hon. Members may have noticed an announcement today which is not without some significance in this respect. I notice that when Bank Rate comes down, we do not hear very much about it from right hon. and hon. Members opposite. I took the cases which the hon. Gentleman mentioned into account but for a variety of reasons I came to the conclusion that they were not the best ones to start with.
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that in certain parts of Scotland there is no alternative to consigning fish other than by British Railways? Increases in consignment rates for fish could raise the price of fish and bear badly on the consumer.
§ Mr. BrownWithout accepting necessarily that all that is accurate, I shall be glad to look at the matter if the hon. Gentleman will write to me.
Mr. loan L. EvansIn view of the announcement today of the reduction in Bank Rate, will my right hon. Friend refer the question of mortgages to the Prices and Incomes Board? When Bank Rate was increased, it was argued that this was the reason for the increase in mortgage rates. Should not there now be a reduction?
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithOn a point of order. The right hon. Gentleman said that he would listen to my point if I wrote to him. I wrote to him over a week ago.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe right hon. Gentleman will be able to listen in a correspondential sense.
§ Mr. HigginsThe right hon. Gentleman says that this is a matter of opinion. As he is using the input-output analysis mentioned in Question No. 23, would not he agree that this is not a matter of opinion? My hon. Friend is right and he is wrong.
§ Mr. BrownThe one thing that the use of input-output analysis will not do for us is enable us to make a judgment on the decision. I have made one judgment, the hon. Gentleman has made another. It is a matter of opinion as to who is right.