§ 2. Mr. Speedasked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity if she will list the number of stoppages and working days lost due to industrial disputes in 1969, both including and excluding coal-mining, respectively.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity (Mr. Harold Walker)The total number of stoppages of work due to industrial disputes in the United Kingdom which began in 1969 was 3,021. Working days lost in ail stoppages in progress in the year totalled 6,772,000. Excluding coal mining, the corresponding figures were 2,837 stoppages and 5,733,000 days lost. All these figures are provisional.
§ Mr. SpeedCan the hon. Gentleman confirm that the number of stoppages due to industrial disputes in 1969 is an all-time record in our industrial history?
§ Mr. WalkerThis, as a matter of fact, is true, but it is not true in respect of the number of days lost.
Mr. R. W. BrownCan my hon. Friend tell us what was the number of days lost in the corresponding period as a result of people injured in factories and homes?
§ Mr. WalkerThe latest figures available are the provisional figures for the year ending June 1968. In that year we lost, as a result of incapacity, 328 million days due to sickness, and 23 million days due to industrial injuries—about 50 times as many as were lost due to strikes.
§ Mr. Dudley SmithWould the hon. Gentleman confirm that there has been a marked deterioration since the Government abandoned their industrial legislation proposals last summer? Is he aware that while strikes increasesd by 60 per cent. in the first six months of 1689 last year, in the second part of last year they went up by about 120 per cent.?
§ Mr. WalkerIt is not exceptional for the figures to be worse for the second half of the year. The current industrial unrest is very disturbing but is a phenomenon being experienced by most other industrial countries.
§ Mr. BradleyRegrettable though last year's figures were, can my hon. Friend confirm that 1957 was a worse year? Who was the Minister responsible at that time, and what solutions did the then Government put forward?
§ Mr. WalkerIn the first nine months of 1957 8 million days were lost through industrial disputes. I think that the Ministers responsible were the right hon. Member for Enfield, West (Mr. Iain Macleod) and his Parliamentary Secretary, the right hon. Member for Mitcham (Mr. R. Carr).
§ 22. Mr. Kenneth Lewisasked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity how many stoppages due to industrial disputes were in progress during December, 1969 and had lasted for thirteen weeks or more; and in how many of these disputes the Trades Union Congress intervened and with what effect.
§ Mrs. CastleNine stoppages of work due to industrial disputes which were in progress during December, 1969 had lasted for 13 weeks or more. Three arose from inter-union disputes, one of which was resolved following an award by a T.U.C. disputes committee, another is still under consideration by the T.U.C., and in the third work was resumed following action by the T.U.C. and my Department. With one exception, the other disputes were official.
§ Mr. LewisIs the right hon. Lady aware that although there may be a difference in degrees of optimism, nevertheless most of us would want the T.U.C. to be successful in this matter? Therefore, in view of the failure up to the present to achieve any outstanding success, would it not be better for the T.U.C. to come in earlier? For example, would it not be better if it were now to come in on the threatened Ford dispute since it has already been indicated that there is the prospect of a strike there?
§ Mrs. CastleI cannot for a moment accept that there has been no outstanding success. The figures I have given in reply to the hon. Gentleman's Question show that the T.U.C. has intervened, certainly energetically and very often effectively. Clearly it is a very important part of a successful intervention that the timing should be right.
Mr. Alan Lee WilliamsWould my right hon. Friend not agree that the T.U.C. is making a valuable contribution to the solving of inter-union disputes, and is it not time that the Opposition stopped sniping at it?
§ Mrs. CastleI agree with my hon. Friend. All objective opinion in the country is impressed by the sincerity and energy with which Mr. Feather has carried out the responsibilities that he has undertaken. It is a great pity indeed that hon. Gentlemen opposite should do their utmost to render those efforts nugatory.
§ Mr. Dudley SmithHow can the right hon. Lady be so complacent when industrial disputes are now running at over three times the rate they were on average when we were in power for over 13 years?
§ Mrs. CastleNobody is being complacent. We are discussing the activity of the General Secretary of the T.U.C. in helping to deal with the problem of industrial disputes, which, as my hon. Friend pointed out in an earlier reply, is not a problem solely related to this country. I also make the observation that over 60 per cent. of those strikes in the past year have lasted for only a few days, and no legislation could bite on those.
§ 25 and 26. Mr. Crouchasked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity (1) if she will list the number of stoppages and days lost due to industrial disputes, both including and excluding coal-mining, for the period January to June 1969 and the same figures for the years 1960 to 1968, inclusive;
(2) if she will list the number of stoppages and days lost due to industrial disputes, both including and excluding coal-mining, for the period July to December, 1969 and the same figures for the years 1960 to 1968, inclusive.
§ Mr. Harold WalkerI will, with permission, circulate a table in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
§ Mr. CrouchThe House will be aware from answers to Questions this afternoon that the trend in the growth of stoppages and strikes is a serious matter. Can the Minister assure us that the steps the Government have or have not taken to arrest this trend will be successful?
§ Mr. WalkerI have not a crystal ball, but, as the House knows, we are seeking to introduce an Industrial Relations Bill which will seek to remove some of the fundamental causes of strikes.
§ Mr. MoonmanWill not my hon. Friend take a much more severe line with the Opposition on this matter? Many of
| STOPPAGES OF WORK DUE TO INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES (UNITED KINGDOM) | |||||||||
| Stoppages beginning in period | Working days lost in all stoppages in progress in period | ||||||||
| Total | Excluding coal mining | Total | Excluding coal mining | ||||||
| 1st January-30th June | 1st July-31st December | 1st January-30th June | 1st July-31st December | 1st January-30th June | 1st July-31st December | 1st January-30th June | 1st July-31st December | ||
| 1969 (Provisional) | … | 1,488 | 1,533 | 1,378 | 1,459 | 2,660,000 | 4,112,000 | 2,620,000 | 3,113,000 |
| 1968 | … | 1,134 | 1,244 | 1,022 | 1,135 | 3,109,000 | 1,581,000 | 3,085,000 | 1,551,000 |
| 1967 | … | 1,079 | 1,037 | 857 | 865 | 1,066,000 | 1,721,000 | 1,006,000 | 1,676,000 |
| 1966 | … | 1,190 | 747 | 867 | 517 | 1,786,000 | 612,000 | 1,715,000 | 565,000 |
| 1965 | … | 1,372 | 982 | 928 | 686 | 2,010,000 | 915,000 | 1,653,000 | 860,000 |
| 1964 | … | 1,336 | 1,188 | 765 | 701 | 1,382,000 | 895,000 | 1,185,000 | 790,000 |
| 1963 | … | 1,005 | 1,063 | 471 | 610 | 634,000 | 1,121,000 | 435,000 | 994,000 |
| 1962 | … | 1,426 | 1,023 | 742 | 502 | 4,634,000 | 1,164,000 | 4,443,000 | 1,047,000 |
| 1961 | … | 1,527 | 1,159 | 705 | 523 | 1,947,000 | 1,099,000 | 1,359,000 | 950,000 |
| 1960 | … | 1,541 | 1,291 | 652 | 514 | 1,633,000 | 1,391,000 | 1,358,000 | 1,172,000 |
§ 27. Mr. Wigginasked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity how many and what percentage of the recorded stoppages due to industrial disputes other than in coal mining in 1969 were official.
§ Mr. Harold WalkerFor industries other than coal mining, 78, or 2.7 per cent., of all the stoppages of work due to industrial disputes which began in the United Kingdom in 1969 are known to have been official. These figures are provisional.
§ Mr. WigginWould the hon. Gentleman not agree that this is another record broken? At what point will his right hon. Friend admit that the action by the Government and the T.U.C. has proved ineffective. How much more serious will
§ us feel that their approach to the whole question of industrial relations is churlish and clumsy. Will he not spell out to the trade union movement that if the Conservative Party ever comes to power—heaven forbid—it will introduce legislation which will wreck the whole of our industrial relations?
§ Mr. WalkerWe should not minimise the seriousness of the problem. It is a matter for concern. Equally we have made clear to the House on many occasions that the proposals put forward by the Opposition so belatedly, after the years in which they had an opportunity to do something, can do nothing but harm to our industrial relations.
§ The following is the information:
§ the problem be allowed to become before the Government take positive action?
§ Mr. WalkerI do not know how many times we have to tell the Opposition before it sinks in that this phenomenon is not peculiar to the United Kingdom and that the Government, contrary to what the Opposition did during their years of office—when, for example, in 1957 the number of days lost reached 8 million—have acted and secured an undertaking from the T.U.C., an undertaking which would have been inconceivable a year ago.
§ Mr. Edwin WainwrightWould my hon. Friend agree that we are not too happy about the loss of days due to industrial disputes at present? But could he state the number of days lost due to 1693 industrial disputes in the years since 1951, and also say who were the Ministers responsible at that time?
§ Mr. WalkerI will not give them in reply to a supplementary question.
§ Mr. WalkerIf I had your permission, Mr. Speaker, and that of the House, I would be delighted to read out the table. One sees, for example, that year after year the Conservative Party in government had a worse record than the average under the present Government. I repeat that in 1957 the number of days lost reached 8 million. This was in the days when the right hon. Member for Mitcham (Mr. R. Carr) was Parliamentary Secretary. The number of days lost in 1962 was almost 6 million. If the House wants the record, I am delighted to give it.
§ 28. Mr. John Pageasked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity if she will state the number of stoppages and working days lost due to industrial disputes for the month of November, 1969, and equivalent total figures for 1969, including November, which have affected the industry manufacturing motor vehicles, motor cycles, three-wheel vehicles and pedal cycles.
§ Mr. Harold WalkerThe numbers of stoppages in the motor vehicle and cycle manufacturing industries beginning in the month of November, 1969, and in the period 1st January to 30th November, 1969, were 32 and 261, respectively. Working days lost at the establishments where the disputes occurred as a result of all stoppages in progress in the same periods were 76,000 and 1,498,000, respectively. All figures for 1969 are provisional.
§ Mr. PageIn view of that absolutely disastrous statement and the fact that the number of working days lost in the motorcar and motorcycle industries is more than three times greater than it was in 1964, does not the hon. Gentleman fee] ashamed that the Government have ducked out of the "In Place of Strife" legislation?
§ Mr. WalkerI have had occasion to rebuke hon. Gentlemen opposite for persisting in selecting figures designed to give them the maximum political mileage out of what is admittedly a disturbing situa- 1694 tion. However, it is curious that in 1969 our car exports rose by 14 per cent. in number and almost 22 per cent. in value.
§ Mr. Russell KerrFor the benefit of industrially illiterate hon. Gentlemen opposite, would my hon. Friend supplement the figures he has given by making a reference to the number of days lost through injury and illness?
§ Mr. WalkerI pointed out in reply to an earlier supplementary question that each year we lose 50 to 60 times as much time as a result of injuries and sickness as we lose as a result of industrial disputes.
§ Mr. R. CarrIn view of the great concentration which the Under-Secretary has been placing on hours and days lost and so on, can he explain why his right hon. Friend was at pains in her White Paper to expound the particularly damaging nature of the frequent number of small disputes, which are typical in this country?
§ Mr. WalkerMy right hon. Friend was right to spell this out. It is equally important to bear in mind that of the disputes which occurred in 1969 almost two-thirds were of less than three days' duration; and no policy is likely to bite on those. Would the right hon. Gentleman's policy?