§ 14. Sir C. Osborneasked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs in view of the large wage increases granted since his policy of income and price restraint was announced, and as printers are demanding another 7 per cent. to 13 per cent. increase, miners 12 per cent., railwaymen 61 per cent., train crews 18 per cent., teachers 35 per cent. to 42 per cent., and London busmen 9 per cent., if he will now abandon his policy of a 31½ per cent. annual increase; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. George BrownThis is not, as I pointed out in my Supplementary reply on a previous Question, my policy alone. It is that of management, of unions, and of Government. We must all fight to make it effective.
§ Sir C. OsborneIf these increased figures of salaries and wages are to continue to be granted without any further productivity, will not the right hon. Gentleman try to make the whole nation—every section of it—realise that the Continental type of inflation will be inevitable, which would make War Loan and National Savings Certificates as valueless as the old German pre-war bonds? Would he not try to impress this upon the whole nation?
§ Mr. BrownI am impressing it on the whole nation, and I think the hon. Member is doing his best. I suggest he has a word with his own Front Bench.
§ Mr. Harold WalkerIs not my right hon. Friend aware by now that hon. and right hon. Members on the other side of the House are obsessed with talking about wage increases but not with increases in directors' remuneration and that it is precisely this attitude which inflames and antagonises the men on the workshop floor? I speak with first-hand experience, unlike hon. and right hon. Members opposite.
§ Mr. BrownYes, I am well aware and recognise that there is a serious problem here, as does everybody who is seriously looking at it. One of the weaknesses is that people are in the habit of looking at a problem from their point of view, and not from the other chap's point of view, of what he should do about it. We should adopt a new attitude.
§ Mr. HeathIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the whole tone of his answers has changed considerably even in the last month? Until then he was boasting about his policy. Now that it is proving to be ineffective he is trying to spread the blame to other people, even to the Opposition Front Bench, though that policy has been openly rejected by his own trade union. In the general interest will he not take the responsibility upon himself?
§ Mr. BrownWhen the trade union of which I am proud to be a member took the decision to disagree with me publicly I stood up to them, and I recommend the same attitude to the right hon. Gentleman.
§ Sir C. OsborneI beg to give notice that I should like to raise the matter on the Adjournment, with your permission, Mr. Speaker.
§ 16. Mr. Awdryasked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs how many manual and salaried workers are at present covered by outstanding pay and hours claims; and what proportion he proposes to refer to the National Board for Prices and Incomes.
§ Mr. George BrownAt the end of last week claims for pay increases or hours 1944 reductions, or both, were known to be outstanding for about 2,160,000 manual workers, and about 1,340,000 salaried workers. I am currently considering what further cases of prices as well as incomes, should be referred to the Board.
§ Mr. AwdryWill the right hon. Gentleman agree that these recent increases in wages are far greater than any possible, conceivable increase in prices? Would it not be much wiser to tackle this question of wages instead of merely tackling the question of prices?
§ Mr. BrownI feel the hon. Gentleman could not have heard or taken in the Answer I gave just now. Precisely so long as we all go on attacking the other side and not taking a balanced view so long shall we have difficulty in applying the policy to prices. I heard an hon. Member opposite say "Scrap the Board". That is the view of hon. Members opposite, but not, of course, the view of industry itself, not management nor unions. Prices have risen as well as incomes, and incomes of all kinds as well as wages—fees of all kinds as well as wages. We have got to get them looked at and that is what we are trying to do.
§ Mr. OgdenAre not a great many of the wage claims being submitted in fact being based upon increased productivity?
§ Mr. BrownThere clearly are cases in which that is so. Let us remember that the purpose of the policy, unlike some of those previously, is not to enforce restraint. The purpose of this policy is to achieve expansion and more productivity under which we can enjoy real higher incomes.
§ Mr. Ronald BellNo one doubts the difficulty, but the question I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman is this. Does he himself detect any lessening of militancy in the presentation of claims—that is the crux of the matter—and if not, what is he going to do about it?
§ Mr. BrownThere have been recent examples where quite clearly the trade unions have been showing a great deal of restraint, and the hon. Member must be aware of them. I do not want to mention any names individually, for that would be invidious, but there have been outstanding examples which ought to be applauded.
§ 18. Mr. McMasterasked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what general principles he follows in deciding whether to refer a wage or salary agreement which exceeds the 3½ per cent. norm to the Incomes and Prices Commission.
§ Mr. George BrownI consider whether an investigation on a particular case would be in the national interest because of its importance for the economy: or for the parties concerned: or because it raises issues which are of general interest.
§ Mr. McMasterWill the right hon. Gentleman, because of the importance of these references, not consider being tougher here and let it be known that, irrespective of what has gone on before, what will happen in future is that any increases over 3½ per cent. will automatically be referred to the Board?
§ Mr. BrownThat would be the wrong way to go about it. The 3½ per cent. is an overall figure applying to personal incomes of all kinds. The overall rise in gross domestic production does not mean one cannot have much higher wages for special cases for the reasons set out in the Declaration of Intent. As for my being tough, from some of the things I have read about myself it would seem that there are some people who think that I have been a little too tough.
Mr. Edward M. TaylorWould the right hon. Gentleman agree that the whole future of the Board and its ability to deal with such cases has been put at risk by the report last night of a confidential circular issued by the secretary of one of the printing unions in which alarming allegations were made of crude intervention by the Minister in the course of negotiations in which it is alleged that the Minister advised the employers not to settle and suggested that the printers were already over paid?
§ Mr. BrownI am obliged to the hon. Gentleman for giving me the chance to deal with that matter. Obviously, a Minister in a job like mine must from time to time have talks both with the management and with the unions on a confidential basis. That does not involve interference. On the whole, I find that it is welcome when they think that it is helpful and sometimes not so wecome 1946 when they think that it is not helpful. But these talks must go on, otherwise the job cannot be done, and people should respect confidence when they ask for confidential talks.