§ 2. Mr. William Hamiltonasked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his recent talks with representatives of the Trades Union Congress and the Confederation of British Industry.
Q6. Mr. Archerasked the Prime Minister what approaches for talks on economic policy he has had recently from the Trades Union Congress; and if he will make a statement.
§ Q7. Mr. Skinnerasked the Prime Minister what approach he has received from the Trades Union Congress for a meeting with him to discuss economic policies; and what reply he has sent.
§ Q12. Mr. Sheldonasked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the meeting he has had with Trades Union Congress leaders on the economic situation.
§ Q13. Mr. Arthur Davidsonasked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement about his talks with the Confederation of British Industry and the Trades Union Congress.
§ The Prime MinisterI would refer the hon. Members to the answer I gave to a similar Question from the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) on 16th March.—[Vol. 813, c. 297–8.]
§ Mr. HamiltonI cannot readily recollect that answer. Did the Prime Minister convince the T.U.C. and the C.B.I. that the Government were getting on top of inflation? If he did, can he bring the House into his confidence and tell us what the evidence is that the Government are doing what they said they would do in this matter?
§ The Prime MinisterIt is fair to say, I think, that there was general agreement among the members of the C.B.I., the T.U.C. and the Scottish T.U.C. that the escalation in wage awards had ceased, that the level had evened out and that there were signs that the level was coming down. This was not a matter of dispute between us.
Mr. ArcherDoes the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that he cannot have it both ways—that he cannot ask for the co-operation of the trade unions while at the same time acting as spokesman of the union-bashing elements who composed the Conservative election manifesto? As an earnest of his readiness to negotiate, would he agree that, whatever the future course of the Industrial Relations Bill, the question whether the provisions of Clause 151 will be implemented is still open to negotiation with the T.U.C.?
§ The Prime MinisterIn the talks which I have had with both the T.U.C. and the Scottish T.U.C., the question of the Industrial Relations Bill has not been raised. The T.U.C. and the Scottish T.U.C. were perfectly prepared to discuss economic questions quite separately from the Bill. I naturally hope that there 871 will be co-operation from the T.U.C. as well as from the C.B.I. in operating the Bill. It is a decision for them to take.
§ Mr. SkinnerIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that, a few months ago, he told the House that there were many moderate union leaders who were prepared to accept the Tory reforms in the Industrial Relations Bill? Now that he has met the T.U.C. leaders, will he either name a few, and, if he cannot, will he withdraw that disgraceful and utterly misleading statement?
§ The Prime MinisterAll the indications are, publicly, that what I said was true, which was that a very large majority of trade unionists themselves wanted the reform of industrial relations. That is still the case. As for the moderate union leaders, when the Bill becomes an Act, as it will in this Session, then we shall see.
§ Mr. SheldonAs the level of 800,000 unemployed is costing the country annually an amount in excess of £1,000 million a year in lost production, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is sure that his policies are worth the squandering of such vast resources?
§ The Prime MinisterTo begin with, I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's figures. As for the point he raises about unemployment, as soon as we can have an expanding economy, with a reasonable rate of growth which is not being overrun by inflationary wage claims, then, of course, the unemployment figures will go down.
§ Mr. Roy Jenkinsrose—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I am pursuing the usual practice of calling hon. Members whose Questions are being answered together.
§ Mr. DavidsonDid not the Prime Minister form the impression from his meetings with leaders of the T.U.C. that they were deeply, genuinely and sincerely concerned about the intolerable level of unemployment in this country? If he did form that impression, will he use all the influence he has with some of the more mindless of his supporters to stop their malicious attacks on the trade union movement, in which they suggest that all the economic troubles of the nation are 872 the fault of the trade union movement, when the right hon. Gentleman knows full well that he and the Government must bear a large share of the responsibility?
§ The Prime MinisterI have not for one moment questioned the sincerity and genuine nature of the T.U.C.'s concern about the wide range of problems which we discussed at the two meetings I had with the T.U.C. and the Scottish T.U.C. In addition to the question of unemployment, we discussed, among other things, investment, exports, the social services and the arrangements which may be made for them.
My answer to the second part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is that nobody has ever attributed the economic problems of this country solely to inflationary wage demands. However, I have asked hon. Gentlemen opposite from time to time to give full weight to this factor.
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonIs it not significant that in winding up the debate in the House last night on behalf of the Opposition, the right hon. Member for Sowerby (Mr. Houghton) made it absolutely clear that the Labour Party accepted no commitment to repeal the Industrial Relations Bill should they ever get back to office?
§ The Prime MinisterThat was an encouraging statement in itself. It remains to be seen, of course, how much influence the right hon. Member for Sowerby has or continues to have—or even how much influence the Leader of the Opposition has or continues to have—on his party.
§ Mr. Roy JenkinsIn view of his answer to the first supplementary question on this matter, does the Prime Minister believe that the rate of price increase will be less in 1971 than in 1970?
§ The Prime MinisterThat will, of course, depend on a considerable number of factors—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] —and, as I have always told the right hon. Gentleman, I do not make prognostications of that kind. I will judge on the results.
§ Mr. Bruce-GardyneIn the course of his discussions with trade union leaders, 873 in particular with Mr. Scanlon and Mr. Jones, did my right hon. Friend discuss the way in which strikes like the present strike at Ford are subsidised through the supplementary benefits system by the taxpayer, a subsidy which in that case must now be costing over £500,000?
§ The Prime MinisterI did not discuss the details of this dispute at Ford at that meeting or at the other meetings I had with the T.U.C. and other trade unionists. Nor did I discuss the question of supplementary benefits as far as strikes are concerned. However, there was an opportunity of dealing with problems caused by industrial unrest in some of the major companies in this country, particularly as there was present a most distinguished American trade unionist in whose industry there is a three-year agreement or enforceable contract which gives companies in the United States a three-year period of industrial peace to carry out their plans.
§ Mr. AtkinsonIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that from an 11 per cent. wage award must be deducted at least 3 per cent. to cover increased taxation ands National Insurance contributions, leaving perhaps 8 per cent.? Does he appreciate, therefore, that if the price index rises by 8 per cent. a year, the average wage award must be of 11 per cent. simply to enable one to stand still? Is it not odd that at a time when the Government are enjoying the biggest balance-of-payments surplus in our history, they should be calling on British workers to take a reduction in living standards by accepting wage awards of less than 11 per cent.?
§ The Prime MinisterI cannot accept that at all, particularly as one of our first measures was to reduce direct taxation, a reduction which will become effective next month, and, at the same time, to raise the limits of exemption for social service charges, If the hon. Gentleman wants to use statistics to prove his case, he must get them right.
§ Mr. RostAs the Industrial Relations Bill was given a Third Reading by a large majority, and in view of the condemnation of one-day political strikes by the Leader of the Opposition and the T.U.C., may we have an assurance from the Leader of the Opposition that he 874 will discipline those of his hon. Friends who are continuing to encourage political strikes against the Industrial Relations Bill against the national interest?
§ The Prime MinisterIt is up to the Leader of the Opposition to re-establish control over his party.
§ Mr. Harold WilsonI intend to answer. However, my supplementary question—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] —I was about to say that my supplementary question was going to be different, but I will answer the point made by the Prime Minister and then ask him a question, with your forbearance, Mr. Speaker.
In view of the right hon. Gentleman's failure throughout his years in opposition ever to condemn wildcat speculation against the £ by his own friends, will he now note that this Opposition has at least come out flat against political strikes?
In view of his surprising coyness in refusing to answer the question asked by my right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Stechford (Mr. Roy Jenkins) about price prognostications, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman to recall, in view of his recollection, the inaccurate forecasts of unemployment which he used to make under a Labour Government? Will he now tell us what level of unemployment he expects to see next winter?
§ The Prime MinisterNo more than the right hon. Gentleman was prepared to do.
My answer to the first part of his supplementary question is that as the right hon. Gentleman was finally forced by questions in this House to state that it was not possible in this country to speculate against sterling, and as his usual cries attributing every crisis to speculation in sterling were falsified, it was not necessary for me to condemn it. However, publicly and privately I supported sterling both inside and outside the House—
§ Mr. Harold WilsonOh dear!
§ The Prime Minister—even beyond the point at which his Chancellor of the Exchequer had already decided to devalue.