Clause 1.—(COMMITTEES TO CONSIDER REMUNERATION OF TEACHERS.) (Hansard, 15 March 1965)

§ The Minister of State, Department of Education and Science (Mr. R. E. Prentice)

I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.

May I suggest, this Amendment being introductory to the next one and the three Amendments after that being consequential, that it would be convenient to consider the next four Amendments together with this one. They are: In page 2, line 2, at end insert: (4) A determination of the Secretary of State whereby a body which is for the time being represented on a committee constituted under this section will cease to be so represented (except in a case where that body will have ceased to exist before the time when the determination is to take effect) shall not have effect unless it is embodied in an order made by the Secretary of State. (5) Any order under the last preceding subsection may be revoked by a subsequent order made by the Secretary of State. (6) Any power to make orders under this section shall be exercisable by statutory instrument; and any statutory instrument containing an order under subsection (4) of this section 1012 shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament. In line 3, leave out "such".

In line 4, after "State" insert "under this section".

In page 5, line 27, leave out "preceding provisions" and insert "provisions of sections 2 to 4".

The purpose of the Amendments is to ensure that a body represented on the negotiating committee under the provisions of Clause 1 can be deprived of its representation only by an Order made by a Statutory Instrument and subject to annulment pursuant to a Resolution of both Houses of Parliament. This is the effect of the first and third of the two new subsections to Clause 1, proposed in the second of the five Amendments. The second new subsection enables an Order depriving a body of representation to be required by the Secretary of State, thus enabling representation to be restored to it, and an Order under that subsection will not be subject to the annulment procedure.

I do not think that I need detain the House long on the reasons why I ask for the acceptance of the Amendment. As hon. Members will be aware, the position of my right hon. Friend on the composition of the negotiating committee is that he would prefer both panels—the employers' panel and the teachers' panel, to be composed by agreement of the bodies concerned. In fact, in relation to the machinery to be set up under the Bill the Local Authorities Association has already agreed on the membership of its panel. Agreement in the case of the teachers' panel has not yet been possible. Therefore, the Secretary of State has to have power under the Clause himself to determine, where agreement is not possible, the actual composition of the panel, the bodies represented on it and the members which each should have.

We have always taken the view that this should be something to be done with great civility and without the need to legislate each time. Clearly, circumstances could arise which could lead to the membership of one panel or the other having to be changed. For example, the fact that the London County Council will cease to exist will mean that this body will no longer be represented on the employers' panel. This will be non-controversial in 1013 the sense that the Inner London Education Authority would be represented instead.

Discussions which have taken place, particularly the debates in another place on this Clause, have convinced the Government that there was need for more formal procedure if the Secretary of State came to the point of deciding that any body on either side of the Committee should be deprived of membership without the body wishing to cease to belong to the Committee. This, again, seemed to us to be a point which would hardly ever occur, but if it did it would, presumably, be subject to public controversy and debates in both Houses, and a Resolution would result.

To allay certain fears this and the other Amendments were introduced, giving effect, as I have said, to procedure by which, if this took place, there must be a statutory Order subject to the negative Resolution procedure.

§ Mr. Christopher Chataway (Lewisham, North)

I think that we on this side of the House will regard this set of Amendments as embodying a reasonable compromise.

After the Bill had passed through most of its stages in this House, the National Association of Schoolmasters made it clear that it felt strongly about the arrangement which was proposed. In the account which the Minister of State has already given to the House, he has fairly laid out the reasons which persuaded the Government to change their mind and to introduce this Amendment, though he made only discreet and glancing references to the causes of the Government's change of mind. In fact, of course, the National Association of Schoolmasters felt so strongly about the matter that it threatened to strike, and it was a strike which almost took place.

There has been a good deal of discussion in another place about this question and a great deal of work was done. Lord Iddesleigh expressed the hope that a schoolmaster instructing his class on civics would find a good word 1014 to say, as a result of all this, for the second Chamber, as a body which is at least occasionally useful. I am sure that we could echo that claim. I think that a great deal of useful work has been done on the Bill in another place. I hope that, in its amended form, it will enable the reconstituted negotiating committee to proceed happily and satisfactorily with its work.