HC Deb 02 December 1969 vol 792 cc1295-7
Q5 Mr. W. H. K. Baker

asked the Prime Minister if the speech of the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity to the Institute of Directors in London on 6th November, on industrial relations, represents Government policy.

The Prime Minister

Yes, Sir.

Mr. Baker

Does not the Prime Minister agree that in her speech in the House his right hon. Friend said that this was by no means the worse period of decay in industrial relations in terms of working days lost? Will he confirm or deny that statement?

The Prime Minister

I could not quite hear all that the hon. Member said. I certainly confirm that he is probably reading correctly a report of what my right hon. Friend said in terms of working days lost. Of course, although no one condones the loss of working days this year or any other year—and this year has been a very difficult one—there have been worse years, as my right hon. Friend said. I believe that the year when the right hon. Member for Enfield, West (Mr. lain Macleod) was Minister of Labour was an extremely bad year, and there were some not very good years when other right hon. Gentlemen opposite had responsibility as Minister of Labour. But that does not excuse the loss of work this year, and I should be the last person to attempt to condone it.

Mr. Atkinson

I am sure that the House was immensely impressed by the previous answer which my right hon. Friend gave, to the effect that we have had the finest year ever in terms of productivity and exports. Is it therefore not altogether too surprising that his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity should now be talking about wage restraint to the extent of introducing a banding system between 2½ per cent. and 4½ per cent. in view of the tremendous record that we have had this year?

The Prime Minister

My hon. Friend in his speeches has not always suggested that he expected a tremendous record in these matters this year. We should not be so satisfied with the record as to be complacent about the dangers to our future export orders either if goods are not delivered because of unconstitutional stoppages—even though such stoppages form a small proportion of the total amount of days lost—or because of the danger of pricing ourselves out of markets that we have won with such difficulty because of inflationary costs.

Mr. Fernyhough

Despite what my right hon. Friend has just said, will he remind hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite that in his Guildhall speech he made it clear that on one Friday speculators cost this nation more than all the disputes to which he referred in his speech that night?

The Prime Minister

I did say that on that Friday, that for the most frivolous and irresponsible reasons and because of rumours which were reported, the loss to our reserves on that one day was greater than the total loss from all the disputes in the motor car industry this year. It is a fact that because of the failure of—the attempt of certain people to push sterling off parity last December—and it was a concerted operation, as we saw at the time—ache money came back, and other money lost is still coming back, as my hon. Friend will have noticed from the publication of the gold figures today.

Mr. Lane

Coming back to the Question, what steps are the Government taking to reverse the present deterioration in the state of industrial relations?

The Prime Minister

As has been explained by my right hon. Friend, the House will have many opportunities to debate this in the present Session and with the legislation that she will be introducing.