§ Mr. Russell Kerr(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what action he intends to take to seek a settlement of the industrial dispute at London Airport, and if he will make a statement.
§ The Secretary of State for Employment (Mr. Robert Carr)I have been asked to reply. Operations at Heathrow, London, Airport have been disrupted since Monday by a strike of some employees of airline operators and the British Airports Authority in protest against the provision of ground handling services at the airport by General Aviation Services Ltd. The immediate cause of the stoppage was the coming into operation on 1st November of a contract between General Aviation Services Ltd. and Iberia Air Lines of Spain. I understand that at a mass meeting this morning it was decided that work should be resumed from 2 p.m. today. Prior to this the two sides of the National Joint Council for Civil Air Transport had jointly asked to see me and my officers are having discussions with them and with the British Airports Authority.
§ Mr. KerrMay I thank the Minister for his reply? I am sure that he will share with me a sense of relief that a total closure of the airport has been avoided at least for the time being. Is he aware that I and several other Members of this House spent a considerable part of last week trying to avoid the total closure of the airport? Is he further aware that in the course of a meeting 332 which I chaired between the B.A.A. management and the representatives of the men in a Committee room of this House we came very firmly to the conclusion—my fellow M.P.s and myself—that the management side were in no sense free agents but were under a Government directive? Will he assure the House that we will not have this Government intervention in what is already a very tricky situation?
§ Mr. CarrI do not understand what the hon. Gentleman is trying to say. I am encouraged by what he said about wishing to play what part he could in securing a peaceful settlement, and glad to accept from him that reports to the contrary are not true. There is no question of Government intervention here. This matter has been looked into by a court of inquiry appointed by the right hon. Member for Blackburn (Mrs. Castle) and the right hon. Member for Barnsley (Mr. Mason) in March of last year. That inquiry concluded that the Airports Authority's decision to encourage the establishment of an independent ground handling service at Heathrow was reasonable and well-founded. It concluded that it saw no grounds for suggesting that the agreement with the company was a threat to employment prospects, to wage standards or established industrial relations procedures and it recommended that G.A.S. should be allowed to fulfil the contract made with B.A.A.
§ Mr. Harold WilsonSince the right hon. Gentleman has referred to my right hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn (Mrs. Castle)—his predecessor—would he take it that it is no act of discourtesy on her part that she is not able to be here this afternoon? I would ask the same of my hon. Friend the Member for Feltham (Mr. Russell Kerr). I think that he will know the very serious private difficulties she has at this time and realise that it is only possible to know at short notice of a question of this kind.
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if my right hon. Friend were here I am sure she would want to express her satisfaction that this very difficult situation is over and hope that we can now go forward to a period of stability of employment and industrial relations in the industry?
§ Mr. CarrI am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for what he has said. I fully understand and sympathise with the reasons for the right hon. Lady's absence. I should like to take this opportunity on behalf of everybody to wish that her worries may soon be allayed.
§ Mr. Kenneth LewisIs my right hon. Friend aware that the whole of the general public will be relieved that this strike has finished and will hope that, arising out of the report presented last year, both sides will he able to look at the matter and to avoid this kind of situation in the future. The only people who suffer are the travelling public, particularly at London Airport and in other airports of the world. It does not make for good employment in London Airport when this kind of action takes place.
§ Mr. CarrI am grateful to my hon. Friend. I am sure that what he says is right and I hope the whole House will send that message to the people concerned.
§ Mr. RankinI gather from the Secretary of State's reply that all services at the airport are interrupted. Is that correct? Is it not the case that the only services interrupted were the baggage services, and that for passengers who cared to leave their baggage or had no baggage planes flew as usual with their load of passengers?
§ Mr. CarrThe hon. Gentleman might be technically correct, but it is clear that many flights have not been able to operate as they should have done and that very large numbers of people have been, to put it mildly, inconvenienced. But let us be grateful that work by now should have been resumed.
Mr. Edward TaylorWould my right hon. Friend agree that the terms of reference of the resolution passed at the mass meeting this morning were not such as to instill confidence that such problems will not arise again? In view of the hardships these disputes cause to the travelling public and the repeated claim about poor communications between management and men at the airport, is not this a matter which the right hon. Gentleman's officials should look into?
§ Mr. CarrThe committee of inquiry made some recommendations on the ques- 334 tion of communications last year. My officials will be meeting both sides of the National Joint Council this afternoon, and will bear in mind the sort of points my hon. Friend has mentioned.