§ 5. Mr. Laneasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what proposals he has for improving the negotiating machinery for school teachers' salaries.
§ Mr. Edward ShortI have no proposals.
§ Mr. LaneDoes not the Minister agree that there is room for improvement in the procedure of the Burnham machinery so that the voices of all the different teachers' organisations can be fully heard? Will he be ready to use his good offices when the opportunity arises to help bring about such an improvement?
§ Mr. ShortI have had no approach from anybody about the Burnham difficulties. May I also distinguish between the machinery and procedure. The machinery is statutory, having been laid down by the House as recently as 1965. The procedure is a matter for the Committee itself. I am told by the other teachers' organisations and the local authorities that if any of the minority associations wish to discuss the procedure they would be only too happy to talk about it.
§ Mr. BrooksIn view of the unhappy situation which has developed at Liverpool, and still persists, arising out of negotiating machinery arguments, will my right hon. Friend indicate what protection is available to teachers who exercise the right enjoyed by many workers to work to rule without having all their pay deducted?
§ Mr. ShortI do not think that this can be talked about in purely industrial terms. There is no rule book for teachers as, say, for boiler-makers. The teachers have a contract with the local authority and they either keep the terms of the contract or they do not. This is really a matter between the local authority and the teachers. If the teachers are aggrieved about some of the conditions in the contract, it is, like any other contract, a matter for negotiation between the two parties to it—the local authority and the teachers.
§ 14. Mr. Dudley Smithasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will now take steps to set up a new and independent body to deal with all questions affecting the salary structures, benefits and employment conditions of teachers.
§ Mr. Edward ShortNo, Sir.
§ Mr. SmithIs it not a fact that a depressingly large number of teachers have lost faith in the Burnham Committee, and will not that confidence be restored only by the introduction of some new form of comprehensive negotiating machinery?
§ Mr. ShortI think that the hon. Gentleman ought to be clear about this: if he wants to scrap the Burnham machinery, he ought to say whether he wants to depart from the principle of negotiation and go for referring teachers' salaries to something like the National Board for Prices and Incomes. If the hon. Gentleman wants to retain negotiations, it is difficult to see how at the end of the day he will have anything very different from the present system, where local authorities are on one side of the table and teachers are on the other.
§ Mr. Christopher PriceDid my right hon. Friend read the speech of his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity during the prices and incomes debate three weeks ago when she said that her Department was looking into the whole question of settling public service salaries? Is my right hon. Friend being consulted about this, and what views is he putting forward to those discussions?
§ Mr. ShortThis is a Government inquiry, being carried out by officials for the Government, into all the issues involved in fixing pay in the public service, and, of course, my officials are involved in it.
§ Mr. DunnIs my right hon. Friend aware that the present system has led to some unsatisfactory conditions? The N.A.S. on Merseyside has made this abundantly clear. Can my right hon. Friend give guidance to Merseyside, particularly to the Liverpool authority, on this pressing problem?
§ Mr. ShortI know the feelings of the N.A.S., but we must recognise that for the first time for a number of years the Burnham machinery has reached agreement. The fact that one minority association dissents does not mean that the machinery is defective.