§ Q1. Mr. John D. Grantasked the Prime Minister what consultations he has had this month with the Confederation of British Industry and the Trades Union Congress about the state of the economy; and if he will make a statement.
§ Q3. Dr. Gilbertasked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his official talks with the Trades Union Congress leaders on Thursday, 11th March, 1971.
§ Q6. Mr. John Fraserasked the Prime Minister if he will now make a statement about his official meeting with the Trades Union Congress on 11th March to discuss economic policy.
§ Q8. Mr. James Hamiltonasked the Prime Minister whether he will report on the conclusions reached at his official meeting with the Confederation of British Industry on 8th March; and if he will make a statement.
§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Edward Heath)I would refer the hon. Gentleman to the Answer which I gave to a 1351 similar Question from the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) on 16th March.—[Vol. 813, c. 297–8.]
§ Mr. GrantThat reply to my hon. Friend—whatever it was—was totally unsatisfactory. In view of the Prime Minister's current complaints about excessive wage claims, did he remind the T.U.C., and will he now remind the House, of the number of occasions during his pre-election campaign when he publicly appealed for a de-escalation of wage demands?
§ The Prime MinisterAs I told the hon. Gentleman's hon. Friend the Member for West Ham, North that I was glad to have the opportunity of discussing the economic situation with the C.B.I. and the T.U.C. and looked forward to a continuing exchange of views, I fail to see why that answer was unsatisfactory. As regards the de-escalation of wage claims, throughout the period leading up to the General Election, and throughout the campaign, I pointed to the need to get on top of inflation in exactly this way.
§ Dr. GilbertDid the Prime Minister discuss with the T.U.C. how big a contribution to the reduction of inflation would be made by the abolition of the first three days of social security benefits announced yesterday? Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that this vindictive little piece of meanness is totally irrelevant to the country's economic problems and will serve merely to infuriate the ordinary working people of this country?
§ The Prime MinisterWe did not discuss that particular point, but I think it discourteous of the hon. Gentleman to use those adjectives against his right hon. Friends on the Opposition Front Bench who proposed the measure earlier.
§ Mr. FraserWill the Prime Minister now answer the Question and tell the truth to the House? What did he say about the de-escalation of wage claims when the doctors' pay claim was published, for example? Did he say anything on that occasion? Does he not remember that for years in the House he opposed a prices and incomes policy and gave an indication to the country that it would be abolished if he took office? Does he not realise that the responsibility lies with him?
§ The Prime MinisterWhat we said was that if the then Government wished to de-escalate the award made to the doctors, they should be honest enough to tell the country the seriousness of the economic situation; but that, with the single exception of the right hon. Member for Coventry, East (Mr. Crossman), they failed to do.
§ Mr. HamiltonDid not the right hon. Gentleman give the two parties concerned some assurance that there would be a reflation of the economy before his Government defeated the record previously reached by a Conservative Government in 1963 when we had in Scotland 136,000 unemployed? Is he not now prepared to give an assurance that the Government will do something for Scotland and the development areas?
§ The Prime MinisterI gave an assurance to both the C.B.I. and the T.U.C. that we should fully consider each of the proposals which they put before me and my colleagues, and I then said that we should have the opportunity of discussing my right hon. Friend's Budget at the next meeting of the N.E.D.C., which will be a week tomorrow.