§ Q2. Sir C. Osborneasked the Prime Minister, in view of the Government's recognition of the need for an incomes policy, if he will now give an assurance that such a policy will not be abandoned because the Trades Union Congress is opposed to it.
§ The Prime MinisterThe Trades Union Congress at its conference on 28th February endorsed a report which in turn endorsed a policy on productivity, prices and incomes. The assumption underlying the hon. Member's Question is therefore not valid. The Government's policy was stated by my right hon. Friend the First Secretary of State and my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity in the Second Reading debate and subsequent debates on the Prices and Incomes Bill, 728 which received the Royal Assent yesterday.
§ Sir C. OsborneHas the Prime Minister any evidence that a leader like Frank Cousins is any less bitterly opposed to this policy than he was when it was first introduced? Does the right hon. Gentleman think that he can achieve his promised economic miracle for this country without the co-operation of the trade unions on this vital policy?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman's Question referred to the Trades Union Congress and not to the position of individual leaders or individual unions. I stated the position concerning the 28th February conference. It is essential that we have an effective and continuing prices and incomes policy, and, for the reasons repeatedly stated in the House, we felt that it was not enough to rely on the T.U.C.'s voluntary policy, at any rate for the time being.
§ Mr. ParkIs my right hon. Friend aware that the decision recently announced to extend the "freeze" on the municipal busmen's pay award will arouse the most bitter resentment among trade unionists and lower paid workers? Will he look at this matter again before it is too late?
§ The Prime MinisterI have been extremely involved in this matter and I recognise the anxieties about it. My right hon. Friend has given the required statutory notice of intention to have a standstill and has made it clear that there is a very satisfactory solution available now. Since talks are currently going on, and have been going on today, it would not help if I went into the matter, although in the fullness of time questions can be put to my right hon. Friend on it.
§ Mr. HeathCan the Prime Minister say whether it remains the Government policy that wage increases should only be authorised in respect of productivity agreements actually firmly reached and signed up?
§ The Prime MinisterThe policy remains exactly as stated in debates on the prices and incomes policy and the criteria set out in the White Paper on Prices and Incomes which foreshadowed that legislation.
§ Mr. HeathCan the Prime Minister not answer this particular question? Does it remain the Government's policy in both the public and private sectors that before a wages increase is granted a productivity agreement is signed and in being?
§ The Prime MinisterProductivity is one but not the only criterion which is involved. My right hon. Friend, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, both in this House and in every negotiation in which she has been involved, has stressed the importance of productivity, and has, indeed, refused to accept wage increases where there was not an adequate return in terms of productivity.
§ Mr. William HamiltonWith regard to the original Question, would my right hon. Friend not agree that much more important than the attitude of the T.U.C. or any other body is the need and necessity to get increased productivity between now and 18 months hence? What prospects are there for getting the required productivity?
§ The Prime MinisterI do agree with my hon. Friend about this, and indeed, when I have been asked about the question of the renewal of legislation I have said that it depends on our getting that productivity and on T.U.C. policy being seen to be effective during that period. My hon. Friend will not be disappointed at the latest figures of production and productivity, which show an increase of industrial productivity of something like 5½ per cent. compared with the same period last year.
§ Mr. LubbockCan the right hon. Gentleman also give an assurance that the Government will not waver in their determination to arrive at a satisfactory incomes policy under pressure from the official Conservative Opposition acting under the leadership of the hon. Member for Derbyshire, South-East (Mr. Park), the hon. Member for Poplar (Mr. Mikardo) and the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer).
§ The Prime MinisterI have never heard any constructive alternative by any member of the Opposition at all on the subject of prices and incomes.
§ Mr. James HamiltonIs my right hon. Friend aware that the T.U.C. is still carrying out its own voluntary policy 730 with a certain measure of success, and though it has certain misgivings about the Government policy it will still give 100 per cent. support to this Government?
§ The Prime MinisterI certainly do not underrate the importance of, or the contribution made by, the T.U.C.'s voluntary policy. It represents a very big step forward in the history of British trade unionism and collective bargaining in this country. At the same time I do not think anyone feels that it would be entirely safe to rely on that policy unaided. That is why we introduced the Measure which received the Royal Assent yesterday.