HC Deb 09 November 1972 vol 845 cc1185-7
Q1. Mr. William Hamilton

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his latest talks with the Trades Union Congress and the Confederation of British Industry.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Edward Heath)

I would refer the hon. Gentleman to the statement which I made to the House on 6th November.—[Vol. 845, c. 622–37.]

Mr. Hamilton

Is it not now undeniable that the Government were determined, in the event of the failure of the talks, to pin the blame for that failure on the trade unions? Does the Prime Minister agree with the interpretation of events by Mr. Jack Jones at the Lobby luncheon yesterday? If he does not accept that interpretation, in which respect does he disagree? Why do land prices not feature in the proposed legislation to curb inflation and why do the Government not accept the proposition advanced by the unions that part of the package should be a minimum increase in the basic retirement pension?

The Prime Minister

That is a long series of questions. I made my statement to the House, which set out the full position. The Government did their utmost to reach agreement, and most of the country recognises that. My good faith has never been challenged either by the trade unions or by the employers. The issue of land prices was not dealt with at the stage the discussions reached and it did not appear in any previous legislation introduced by the Labour Government because of the difficulties of legislating for land prices, which are well known. My statement set out fully all the points that we discussed. The only new point—which I do not accept—in Mr. Jones' statement is that it was because of the large amount of wealth in so few hands in this country that the talks broke down. The matter was not discussed.

Mr. Harold Wilson

It is nice of the Prime Minister to look in on our proceedings—[Interruption.]—but will he answer a question put to the Minister for Trade and Consumer Affairs last night which I think he felt was of very great importance? The Prime Minister may be able to give us an answer. Will he tell us whether, when on television and, I think, in the House, he referred to legislation at the end of the freeze period, he meant that whatever follows the freeze must be legislative, or that if he can get a satisfactory voluntary agreement he will be prepared to recommend that to the House in lieu of legislation? Has he formed a view of that, in view of his television statement?

The Prime Minister

I said in my statement that we had come to the conclusion that we would have to deal with the matter by statutory means and that in the meantime there would be a standstill. If by the time the second stage is reached it is possible to have a satisfactory voluntary agreement, no one would welcome that more than the Government.

Mr. Norman Lamont

In view of the decision this morning by the Bank of England to call for special deposits from the clearing banks, and the anxiety that that will cause to business men, will the Prime Minister re-emphasise, on the basis of the Downing Street talks, that the Government remain committed to 5 per cent. growth?

The Prime Minister

Of course I repeat that commitment—and we said that we would continue it for a further year. The Bank is pursuing the policy of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, which is to get the money supply into line with this expansion.