EQUAL PAY (Hansard, 23 July 1968)

§ Mr. Christopher Norwood (Norwich, South)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to establish the principle of equal pay. The question is not so much whether hon. Members will oppose the suggestion of equal pay, but whether they are prepared to bring it into reality.

I am reminded of a book written by John Stuart Mill, more than 100 years ago, which has left a lasting impression on me. In 1888, 80 years ago, the Trades Union Congress passed a proposition calling for the implementation of the equality of pay for men and for women for work of the same kind and value. I am reminded that 50 years ago, in 1918, women were allowed to have a measure of equality of political influence for the first time. I am reminded that, in 1955, women in the Civil Service, in the employment of the State, obtained the right to the same pay for the same work.

I doubt whether the House will dispute the principle. I have written to a large number of my colleagues, and I have had more than 100 favourable replies of one kind or another. The only question is not whether the principle be there, but whether people are prepared to carry it out.

The history of equal pay is not one of the denial of a principle. It is the procrastination of 100 years and the refusal to find that any moment is a suitable time. Despite what has been said by Her Majesty's Ministers and by my right hon. and hon. Friends, my suggestion is that now is as good a time as any.

Consider the size of the women's working population. Consider the necessity for economic growth. Consider the argument advanced frequently by the Government that increased payments are involved with increased productivity, and that, if people are paid more, they will work harder—one of the few exceptions to the Government's prices and incomes attitude.

It is a growing problem. More than 4 million women earn less than 5s. an hour. The Bill proposes to end the discrimination over a period of time, and that existing machinery shall have the time in 287 which to draw up arrangements that will be suitable. I am suggesting in my Bill that it should be about a year and that, after that, there should be about three years in which we can move towards equal pay step by step. Where there is a difficult problem in deciding whether work is of equal value, I propose that it should be referred to a tribunal system somewhat analagous to that set up under the Redundancy Payments Act.

I am proposing that any individual or organisation representing an individual shall have the right to bring a case before one of these tribunals with a view to establishing that here is a case of discrimination and here it must be ended.

A recent public opinion poll published in theEvening Standard shows a gigantic public majority in favour of the principle and support of equal pay. My view of the situation, brought out not least by the reaction of the Ford strikers, is that women's patience is wearing thin and that it is time the community as a whole took note.

The House may look at this, as at many other questions, in two ways. It may regard it as an issue of the straight practicality of what is possible and what can be done. It may say that it is not easy to do. It may look at it from the technical, practical point of view. On the other hand, it may say that this is a question of principle. If it does, then, in my submission, the argument is over.