HC Deb 18 February 1971 vol 811 cc2120-3
Q3. Mr. John Fraser

asked the Prime Minister what is the current cost of staffing his office; and what he estimates the cost will be in one year's time.

The Prime Minister

About £150,000 a year. The cost for the coming year will be presented in the Estimates in due course.

Mr. Fraser

Is the truth of the matter that the Prime Minister cannot give an estimate for one year's time because he has just sacked the Civil Service arbitrator, Hugh Clegg? If the Prime Minister is able to give an estimate, why does he not publish the estimate of a fair distribution of incomes throughout the public and private sectors, which will remove the deep sense of injustice which is felt in many sectors of the community and is one of the causes for strikes in the public sector, because there is no control in other areas? Will the Prime Minister publish these estimates as well as those of his own Department?

The Prime Minister

I have stated that the estimate will be published in the customary way at the proper time. There is no question of there not being an estimate.

The second part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is not strictly relevant, but I am prepared to deal with it. Professor Hugh Clegg's term as an arbitrator was due to expire on 10th March, and he has not been reappointed.—[HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"]—I will tell hon. Gentlemen why. Because, as he himself said, the Chairman of the Arbitration Tribunal ought to command the confidence of both sides. As Professor Clegg accepted nomination as a trade union representative on another inquiry, it was therefore quite natural that his appointment should not be renewed. This is particularly the case, because, if there is disagreement on the tribunal, it is the chairman himself who decides. If the chairman of any tribunal had accepted an appointment as a business men's or employers' representative, the trade unions would rightly have complained.

Mr. Harold Wilson

In that case, will the right hon. Gentleman explain why he did not object at the time when Professor Hugh Clegg was appointed to the Scamp Inquiry? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that when a person is nominated to these inquiries, he is nominated to be one of three judicial persons and not to represent the interests of those who nominated him?

Is the right hon. Gentleman further aware, as the Minister for the Civil Service, that the Whitley Council over 50 years, consisting of wise men from both sides, has brought the matter of consultation and arbitration to a very high pitch because of its actions? Is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to destroy that by one further action in this new style of Government by vendetta?

The Prime Minister

It did not lie in the Government's power to object to Professor Clegg taking up an appointment on another tribunal as a trade union nominee. But when the question of his reappointment arises, then it is right for the Government, far from undermining arbitration, to maintain the integrity of the Chairman of the Tribunal.

Mr. Harold Wilson

The right hon. Gentleman—[HON. MEMBERS: "Sit down."] The right hon. Gentleman did answer my first question; he dodged it. He did not say why he did not object at the time.

Nor did the right hon. Gentleman answer my second question. Has he not yet studied the subject sufficiently to know that when three judges are appoin ted to a tribunal or a court—if the trade unions are consulted, as they were by the Government—they act as judges and not as advocates? [HON. MEMBERS: "Too long."] The results of this are going to be too long for hon. Gentlemen, too. Is it not a fact that they go in as judges, by agreement with all parties, and not as advocates? Does not the right hon. Gentleman understand that?

The Prime Minister

The Scamp Tribunal was not appointed by the Government. We had no say in its membership and therefore we had no responsibility for the nominees of either the trade union or the local authorities. The right hon. Gentleman knows perfectly clearly that that is the position. Therefore, we had no power to stop Professor Clegg from taking up that appointment. Having studied the situation carefully and the history of arbitration in the Civil Service, I know that it is vital that the integrity of an independent chairman should be maintained, and that is what we are doing.

Mr. Thorpe

Is the Prime Minister suggesting that the Government had no advance knowledge of the personnel of the Scamp Inquiry before they read the names in the newspapers? If that be not the position, did not the Government see the need to make representations on these clearly and strongly held views about Professor Clegg? Further, the Government having declared that they no longer have confidence in Professor Clegg, is it not strange that they have agreed that he should continue, albeit when his term has expired, on a large Civil Service claim which is still pending? Is not this the illogicality of Government by pique?

The Prime Minister

There is nothing illogical in allowing Professor Clegg to complete his term of office as arbitrator but not renewing the appointment afterwards, for the reason which I have given. It is the responsibility of the Government, which I fully accept.

We had no responsibility for the appointments to the Scamp Tribunal. They were not our appointments and we had no power to change them.

Q4. Mr. John Fraser

asked the Prime Minister how many people are now employed in his office; and how many are engaged upon dealing with Parliamentary Questions.

The Prime Minister

Sixty-six and three, Sir.

Mr. Fraser

Will the Prime Minister tell the House how many of those three are engaged in ensuring that he does not answer Parliamentary Questions? Will the Prime Minister get somebody into his offic who can draft a parliamentary reply which gives a frank confession to the House that he has failed utterly in his promises to the country to reduce unemployment and prices?

The Prime Minister

It is not that Questions do not get answered, but that the hon. Gentleman does not like the Answers which he gets. The hon. Gentleman would be serving a better purpose, and my staff would be serving a more useful purpose, if he would put down Questions seeking information instead of trying to make cheap political points.