§ 1971 Mr. Bruce-Gardyneasked the Secretary of State for Social Services when he now expects to complete his review of the operation of the Social Security Act, 1383
§ Sir K. JosephThe provisions of Section 2 of the Social Security Act, 1971, for recovering post-dispute payments of supplementary benefit are working satisfactorily. I have no statement to make about the review, which is continuing, of payments during disputes.
§ Mr. Bruce-GardyneWhy is this review taking so long? Now we know that the strike subsidy is running at £14 million a year, surely it is clear that the 1971 Act is in need of revision. Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that we are not dragging out feet in this matter to avoid scaring Mr. Vic Feather from signing some declaration of intent? If so, surely the game is not worth the candle.
§ Sir K. JosephMy hon. Friend legitimately commands a considerable audience outside this House on this subject. I do not think he would wish to mislead that audience. Multiplying the first quarter's figures by four and the first half's figures by two is not necessarily an accurate prognostication of the cost to public funds. The Government are taking time over this important subject because the danger of making things worse, not better, on a whole range of aspects is one which the whole House would wish to avoid.
§ Mr. AshleyIs the right hon. Gentlemen aware that the philosophy behind this campaign of starving the workers out belong to the last century? Will he advise his hon. Friend that this kind of campaign is seriously damaging industrial relations?
§ Sir K. JosephThe whole House has great respect for the hon. Gentleman, but he is on a thoroughly bad point. It is a legitimate matter of public interest, which both Front Benches in turn have recognised, to get the right balance between support for families against hardship and the incentive to strike.
§ Mr. O'MalleyWould not the best way of reducing payments of supplementary benefit to the dependants of strikers be to seek to reduce the number of days lost through strikes, which are running at four 1384 times the rate per year under this Government than under the Labour Government, by scrapping the Industrial Relations Act, which is poisoning industrial relations? Secondly, is it not time that the Secretary of State stood up to the Department of Employment and insisted that the recommendations of the Donovan Commission should be accepted by which people who are at present unjustly denied unemployment benefit by the operation of the grade and class provision were taken off supplementary benefit and given the unemployment benefit to which they are entitled?
§ Sir K. JosephThe country will have noted that in several situations when it was being bullied by unjustified strikes the Opposition supported them.
§ Mr. Bruce-GardyneOn a point of order. In view of my right hon. Friend's reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.