§ Q5. Mr. James Hamiltonasked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement following his meeting with the Confederation of British Industry and 957 Trade Union Congress on Tuesday, 18th July.
§ The Prime MinisterI would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave on 1st August in answer to a Question from my hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Mr. St. John-Stevas) and the hon. Members for West Lothian (Mr. Dalyell) and Ashton-under-Lyne (Mr. Sheldon).—[Vol. 842, c. 342.]
§ Mr. HamiltonDoes the Prime Minister accept that subsequent to that meeting progress has been made by the CBI and the TUC on a conciliation policy? Will the right hon. Gentleman take cognisance of the national opinion poll in today's Daily Mail, which states categorically that the majority of the British electorate are against the Industrial Relations Act? Will the right hon. Gentleman put that Act on ice and take note of the TUC view that a minimum wage policy would go a long way towards solving the industrial problems?
§ The Prime MinisterWhile I do not take particular cognisance of public opinion polls, I think the hon. Gentleman has drawn entirely the wrong conclusion from the poll published in today's Daily Mail. The Government have encouraged the setting up of conciliation machinery, and I am delighted that the CBI and the TUC have now put into operation the first stage of the conciliation machinery which they propose. The test of it will be in the extent to which it is successful in bringing about conciliation without at the same time bringing about inflation.
§ Mr. AdleyWould not putting the Industrial Relations Act on ice be equivalent to putting the country on the rocks? Does not my right hon. Friend agree that today's announcement of a joint agreement between the CBI and TUC is exactly what those of us who supported the Industrial Relations Act always hoped would happen, in spite of the protestations of the Opposition?
§ The Prime MinisterThe Industrial Relations Act in its separate spheres makes provision for conciliation. There is also machinery in the Department of Employment and there is the new machinery which is being created between the CBI and the TUC. To the exten to which other conciliation is used, the pro- 958 visions of the Industrial Relations Act need not be implemented.
§ Mr. John MendelsonIs it not clear from the expressions of public opinion in recent weeks that it would be wise for the Government and the Prime Minister to listen to the voice of the trade union movement on matters with which it is particularly concerned governing conditions of work. Will the right hon. Gentleman ask the Solicitor-General not to adopt the provocative attitude he adopted at the end of Tuesday's debate and not to reintroduce the spirit of confrontation which the Government must abandon?
§ The Prime MinisterI can think of no one less provocative than my hon. and learned Friend the Solicitor-General.
§ Mr. Harold WilsonIs the Prime Minister aware that the whole House will welcome the agreement between the CBI and TUC on conciliation and arbitration services? Does he recall that this proposal was originally made by Mr. Jack Jones in an article in the New Statesman and that it was fully discussed with my right hon. Friends and myself before it was discussed with the CBI? Therefore, obviously we welcome it. Does he also recall that he made a great point of insisting that any such service should have within it either some Government representation or representation of the consumer interest? Since this does not appear to be in the proposals in their present state, will he say whether he intends that that should feature in the further development of the scheme? Has he dropped his idea, or has it been rejected by the two parties?
§ The Prime MinisterI also recall that I suggested the idea in 1959 when I was Minister of Labour. Indeed, the idea may have been suggested before that. I would not claim any proprietary rights. I welcome the fact that it has occurred. In regard to the second part of the question, the discussions we have been having have been in the context of containing inflation. That is why the real test of the conciliation machinery established by the two sides will be in the extent to which it can bring about conciliation without bringing about inflation.
§ Mr. HefferIs it not clear that the decision of the TUC and CBI in making 959 such an agreement indicates that not only the TUC but also the employers' organisation are not in favour of the continuation of the Industrial Relations Act? [HON. MEMBERS: "Nonsense."] The statement made by the Director General of the CBI indicated that the employers wanted the Act used only as a last resort. In view of the attitude taken by both unions and employers about this legislation, will the right hon. Gentleman say when the Government will look again at the Act, as he has promised, and will make proposals for drastic amendments, until the Bill is finally repealed?
§ The Prime MinisterThe CBI has made it plain that it does not wish the Act to be repealed or suspended. It is perfectly prepared to play its part and to put forward amendments when it has seen the operation of the Act and the Government, as we have announced, are fully prepared to consider them. I hope that the TUC will take the same responsible view as the CBI and that it will operate the Act. We have given our undertaking that we will consider amendments which it wishes to suggest.