§ 5. Mr. Ridleyasked the Minister of Power if he will review the salaries of the board members of the gas, electricity and coal industries.
§ 7. Mr. Boyd-Carpenterasked the Minister of Power when he proposes to review the salaries of the members of the nationalised boards for which he is responsible.
§ Mr. RidleyWould the right hon. Gentleman agree that his previous assertion that the steel industry should be treated differently because it was not a monopoly and because it was a manufacturing industry is absolute bunk? Would he also agree that what he is doing, and I congratulate him on it, is paying the rate for the job? Will he say when he is to extend this principle to all publicly-owned industries?
§ Mr. MarshAs I have just said, I cannot say when it will be appropriate to carry out this review. There is clearly a difference between increases in salary and new salaries for new jobs. I agree that there is a problem here with the publicly-owned industries. If the hon. Gentleman's party had had the guts to face up to this a few years ago we would not be faced with it now.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the powerful arguments used by the right hon. Gentleman to justify paying relatively high salaries to members of the Steel Board apply equally to the other industries for which he is responsible? If the steel viscounts are to have the rate for the job, why not the coal barons or even the gas knights?
§ Mr. MarshThe right hon. Gentleman has missed the point. We have a prices and incomes policy which clearly raises problems in changing remuneration for people already in receipt of such remuneration. This is an entirely different exercise—
§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter indicated dissent.
§ Mr. MarshThe right hon. Gentleman shakes his head, but it seems to be different to increase someone's salary, rather than to set a new salary for a new job.