HC Deb 24 February 1969 vol 778 cc1066-7
28. Mr. Bruce-Gardyne

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity whether the settlement of the overseas telegraphists' wage dispute was in conformity with the Government's prices and incomes policy.

Mr. Harold Walker

Yes, Sir.

Mr. Bruce-Gardyne

In that case, can the hon. Gentleman confirm that the approved formula for any firm which has difficulty concerning a productivity deal, either with the Department of Employment and Productivity or Mr. Jones, is to disconnect a piece of labour-saving machinery and then reintroduce it as the condition for its productivity deal?

Mr. Walker

That is a gross slander on the people who work for the Post Office. The hon. Gentleman is suggesting that they deliberately sabotaged new equipment or refused to accept its implementation until they were paid for it. That is quite untrue. The fact is that the equipment was disused before the negotiations of the recent month arose and part of the productivity package was the acceptance of the need eventually to reactivate it.

Mr. R. Carr

If this deal was in the terms of the Government's incomes and productivity policy, why did it need a strike to prove it?

Mr. Walker

This was explained fully to the House by my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General on 20th January, 30th January and 3rd February. He explained the position clearly and I have nothing to add to what he said on those occasions.