§ Q6. Mr. Duffyasked the Prime Minister if he will continue to seek to hold talks with the Trades Union Congress General Council on economic and industrial policies.
§ The Prime MinisterI met the General Council of the T.U.C. on 1st December, and I should be glad to have further discussions with them. Economic and industrial policies are discussed by representatives of the Government and of both sides of industry at the monthly meetings of the National Economic Development Council.
§ Mr. DuffyIs the Prime Minister aware that, following that meeting, when the T.U.C. General Council put certain proposals to him for economic expansion and the reduction of unemployment, it decided that, in future, there should be representations to him but no co-operation? Can the right hon. Gentleman say which single initiative or development in economic management since then entitles him to its co-operation?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman said that the T.U.C. decided that it would not give co-operation. I regret that, although it is prepared to admit that many of the policies that it has put forward have been pursued by the Government, the T.U.C. should still maintain that it is not prepared to co-operate. If the hon. Gentleman asks me about the last meeting, one specific item for which the T.U.C. asked was an annual review of pensions and social service benefits. That was announced afterwards by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.
§ Mr. SkinnerWhen the Prime Minister sees the General Council again, will he tell it why his Government felt it necessary to instruct the National Coal Board to offer only £2 a week to men with gross incomes of £18 a week, while the Government are prepared for him to receive an extra £9,000 a year in his wage packet
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman has received an increase in his Parliamentary salary as well. Perhaps he will explain that—
§ Mr. SkinnerI have given it to the miners.
§ The Prime MinisterThe average earnings of mineworkers are £28 a week, which is almost exactly the same as the average earnings in manufacturing industry, and the mineworkers would have received an increase as a result of the Coal Board's proposal.
§ Mr. HefferIn addition to meeting the T.U.C. in future, will the Prime Minister, when he comes to Liverpool, meet the representatives of the trade union movement there for the purpose of discussing the very high level of unemployment in the area, which has now reached 52,000, and at the same time meet the shop stewards at Fisher-Bendix, who have occupied their factory because of the fear of its closure in an area with a very high level of unemployment and with no hope of other jobs? Will the right hon. Gentleman discuss all these issues with workers at grass roots level with a view to gaining some understanding of their strength of feeling about the growing unemployment in the country?
§ The Prime MinisterWhen I pay official visits to different parts of the country I discuss these matters with the 215 Economic Planning Councils on which both sides are represented. It seems to be generally accepted, both by employers and trade unions, that this is the best way of dealing with such matters. I have already had discussions in the North-West with the Economic Planning Council.
§ Sir G. NabarroWill my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the gravamen of the Trades Union Congress case throughout the last 18 months has been the need for reflation? Is it not a fact that the aggregate value of all the reflationary measures taken by this Government in the last 18 months exceeds £3,000 million, which is vastly in excess of anything for which the T.U.C. asked?
§ The Prime MinisterI agree with my hon. Friend that this has been the general thesis of the T.U.C. in discussions with us over the past year. The T.U.C. is prepared to acknowledge that the Government have undertaken massive reflation, but this does not alter the fact that in various ways it is pressing for still further reflation. When we last discussed this matter with the T.U.C., we pointed out how the measures which the Government have taken had been phased over the years so that, with the increase in private manufacturing investment, the economy could still remain on a steady course of expansion.
§ Mr. DeakinsOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I understand that, with the permission of the House, a Minister may, when answering one Question, take with it subsequent Questions linked to the subject matter of the original Question. However, in answering Question No. 8, the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food took with it Question No. 2 which had not been asked because the hon. Member due to ask it was not in the House. Is that in order?