HC Deb 23 January 1973 vol 849 cc217-20
Q4. Mr. Skinner

asked the Prime Minister what plans he has for further meetings with the Confederation of British Industry and the Trades Union Congress on the question of the economy.

Q5. Mr. Redmond

asked the Prime Minister what plans he has for further consultations with the Confederation of British Industry and Trades Union Congress on economic policies.

Q6. Mr. Strang

asked the Prime Minister what plans he now has to have further discussions with both sides of industry about the second phase of the Government's policy on inflation.

The Prime Minister

Before announcing the second stage of the Government's policies to control inflation, I had a series of meetings with representatives of the Confederation of British Industry, the Trades Union Congress and the retail trade. We intend to continue these discussions or to exchange views on particular points with any of the parties in the light of the proposals contained in the White Paper (Cmnd. 5205), and of course we will be consulting them on the Price and Pay Code.

Mr. Skinner

It looks as if the TUC has given the right hon. Gentleman the slip. Is he aware that in the absence of the TUC, which has at last learned some sense about this matter, he ought to invite some of his real friends next time? I mean people like Lord Watkinson and Henry Plumb who speak with the real voice of the Prime Minister when they say that cheap food has gone for ever. The right hon. Gentleman might invite the Director-General of the Food Manufacturers' Federation—[An HON. MEMBER: "Ask a question."] This is not a question—

Mr. Speaker

Did I hear the hon. Member say that this was not a question? If it is not a question it is completely out of order.

Mr. Skinner

I withdraw that last remark, Mr. Speaker. It is a question. Will the Prime Minister invite the Director-General of the Food Manufacturers' Federation, who said last week that if the sugar grant is abolished, by the end of this month all manufactured foods containing sugar will be subject to increases in price of up to 15 per cent.?

The Prime Minister

The hon. Gentleman refers to discussions with representatives. We had discussions with the whole retail trade and obviously that included the food manufacturers. Food manufacturers are subject to the controls. To deal with the hon. Gentleman's general point, he had better await the results of the discussions in Brussels.

Mr. Redmond

Is my right hon. Friend aware that at least in Bolton there is a large body of trade union opinion solidly behind Tom Jackson in what he says about the TUC attitude? Is it not time that this moderate voice of the silent majority was widely heard in the country?

The Prime Minister

We have had discussions with the TUC's representatives. There were the tripartite talks in Chequers and there have been the bilateral talks since. I believe that it is right for these talks to continue.

Mr. Strang

Is the Prime Minister aware that people are not impressed by gimmicks such as the elaborate price monitoring mechanism in the DTI or the Ministry of Agriculture and the recent inquiry into beef prices? Does he not realise that his policy on wages will never be successful as long as food prices continue to escalate? Is it not intolerable that at a time when farmers are making sharply increased profits from beef prices the Government take millions of £s out of the pockets of farm workers by freezing a wage increase which ought to have come into operation yesterday?

The Prime Minister

The first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is incorrect. We have explained that phase 2 is not a standstill but a wage arrangement which we believe is what the economy can stand. We should have liked a voluntary agreement, but we believe that it is right to ask Parliament to approve it.

In reply to the last part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, the farmers' position will be taken into account in the Price Review which begins next month.

Sir Gilbert Longden

Has my right hon. Friend any reason to think that the Sunday Press, apart from its natural desire to spread alarm and despondency, had any good evidence for prophesying that phase 3 would be tougher than phase 2?

The Prime Minister

No, Sir. There was no reason whatever for prophesying that and there is no point in the Leader of the Opposition trying to shut his eyes to it. The details of phase 3 will be discussed in the usual way with the CBI and the TUC. The purpose is to achieve an improvement in people's real standard of living without having excessive wage increases which push up prices and make us uncompetitive overseas. That is not a tougher policy. It is a policy to improve the real standards of living of the people.

Mr. Harold Wilson

Does the Prime Minster accept full responsibility for the ministerial action last Saturday in putting out stories about the likely tightening up under phase 3? Does he accept responsibility for it? Does he even know that it happened?

The Prime Minister

There was no such ministerial action. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] If the right hon. Gentleman will consult paragraph 32 of the White Paper he will find the position set out clearly.

Mr. Wilson

Since paragraph 32 of the White Paper was available at one o'clock last Wednesday, will the Prime Minister explain why it was not interpreted in this way by a single news- paper? Nearly every Sunday newspaper so interpreted it and next day the Daily Telegraph referred to "ministerial briefings" and "devious means" of putting out that story.

The Prime Minister

I repeat that there was no ministerial briefing that phase 3 was to be a tougher policy. The paragraph in the White Paper sets out clearly the purpose of improving the real incomes of the people. If the right hon. Gentleman still wishes to be reassured about an improvement in real incomes he should look at that paragraph and accept it, as people did at the Press conference at Lancaster House.

Mr. Wilson

I have read paragraph 32. No one on Thursday, Friday or Saturday so interpreted it until the ministerial conference on Saturday morning.

The Prime Minister

It was there for everybody to see. It was accepted as such until certain industrial correspondents interpreted it the way the right hon. Gentleman did. [Interruption.] I repeat, there is no justification for what the right hon. Gentleman said.

Several Hon. Members rose

——

Mr. Speaker

Order. I understand that there is to be a debate on these matters tomorrow.