Exhibition Contracting Industry (Hansard, 27 November 1969)

§ 36. Mr. Bruce-Gardyne
asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what was the percentage increase in average weekly earnings in the exhibition contracting industry implicit in the agreement signed between the two sides of the industry on 7th February and frozen by her Department until February, 1970; and what is the corresponding percentage increase expected to result from the new settlement now negotiated under the aegis of her department.

§ The Under-Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity (Mr. Harold Walker)
In its Report No. 117, the National Board for Prices and Incomes did not quantify the increases implicit in the February agreement referred to them but said that the increases were well above the 3½ per cent. ceiling. The new settlement, operative from September, was not negotiated under the aegis of my Department. It is difficult to say what the precise effect of the agreement on earnings will be, but I would accept that the percentage increase may be of the same order as would have resulted from the February agreement.

§ Mr. Bruce-Gardyne
Is it not a fact that the rejected settlement involved a 10s. a week so-called productivity bonus, and that the sole result of the right hon. Lady's meddling in this instance was to transform it into an l1s. 6d. increase in basic rates which will be inflated by overtime rates?

§ Mr. Walker
No. The hon. Gentleman has got it all wrong. It was a 3½ per cent. plus 10s. per day agreement that was originally referred to the board and eventually resulted in a settlement of 11s. 3d. for craftsmen. The settlement referred to the board was still the subject of a work to rule within the industry and was not the subject, therefore, of agreement.

§ 37. Mr. Bruce-Gardyne
asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity how many days' work were lost in the exhibition contracting industry through industrial action between the freezing of the wage settlement for the industry agreed on 7th February and the agreement of an alternative settlement.

§ Mr. Harold Walker
The number of days recorded as lost is approximately 15,600.

§ Mr. Bruce-Gardyne
What was the resulting loss of export orders from these days lost purely and exclusively from the fatuous meddling of the right hon. Lady? Is not this a classic example of the nonsense that goes on when the right hon. Lady puts her fingers into matter which do not concern her?

§ Mr. Walker
The hon. Gentleman is about as wide of the mark on that point as on the last. There is no evidence that exports were in any way adversely affected. No exhibitions were affected as a consequence of the work to rule or other militant action in the industry.

§ Mr. Bruce-Gardyne
On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory-nature of that reply, I beg leave to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.