HC Deb 20 January 1969 vol 776 cc4-6
3. Sir G. Nabarro

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity whether she will now make a statement on the building operatives' pay claim dispute.

Mrs. Castle

I have nothing to add to the statement I made to the House on Wednesday, 18th December, 1968.—[Vol. 775, c. 1385–91.]

Sir G. Nabarro

But that statement, which was in reply to me, was a very bad one. Has the right hon. Lady observed since then that the building settlement she announced involved payments which are approximately twice as large as those accorded to university teaching and lecturing staff and twice as large as those accorded to doctors? Is the building settlement to be regarded as a norm in future, being double the 3½ per cent. of the Chancellor's?

Mrs. Castle

I am sorry but I am at a total loss to understand the point the hon. Gentleman is attempting to make. I thought, when he asked previous Questions on this matter, that he was concerned about the building workers, and my statement of 18th December was concerned with their settlement

31. Mr. R. Carr

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what term she has placed as the period for which the building pay settlement of 17th December is to operate; and on what authority.

Mrs. Castle

I have placed no terms on the duration of this settlement.

Mr. Carr

Can the right hon. Lady, therefore, explain why she said in the House on 18th December that the period of settlement was 12 months? She was very specific about it.

Mrs. Castle

I was referring then to the 12 months' interval between settlements which is prescribed by paragraph 42 of the White Paper.

Mr. Carr

When the right hon. Lady says that it is prescribed by the White Paper, how can it be prescribed to any industry which is not under the operation of an Order? Surely, such industries are still free.

Mrs. Castle

What the White Paper made clear was that in the normal way no pay settlement should follow another pay settlement within a period of 12 months. This was one of the criteria. I was referring to that in reply to a question put to me by the hon. Member for Harrow, West (Mr. John Page).

Mr. Heffer

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the building workers' claim for £17 10s. for craftsmen will undoubtedly, therefore, go ahead? Can we take it that her statement in no way hampers the efforts of the trade unions in this direction? Is my right hon. Friend also aware that the claim of the building operatives is much less than the settlement for the engineering workers?

Mrs. Castle

I made clear at the time of my statement on 18th December that if the industries made more rapid progress than the National Board for Prices and Incomes expected concerning productivity agreements, we would be willing to discuss the results of those consultations on their merits. As I have said in reply to an earlier Question today, I will shortly be meeting the unions to discuss progress on the recommendations of the Prices and Incomes Board's Report.