§ 17. Mr. Bruce-Gardyneasked the Secretary of State for Social Services what estimate he has made of the cost to date of supplementary benefit payments made to those involved in industrial disputes resulting from wage claims incompatible with prices and incomes legislation, and their dependants; and if he will make a statement regarding the progress of his review of supplementary benefits in industrial disputes.
§ Sir K. JosephAbout £35,000. On the review I have nothing to add to my reply to my hon. Friend on 6th March.—[Vol. 852, c. 213–15.]
§ Mr. Bruce-GardyneI appreciate that the first part of the Question invited a subjective judgment and therefore was, not surprisingly, given a subjective answer. Nevertheless, does not my right hon. Friend agree that it is the height of illogicality to encourage employers to believe that it would be against the law for them to concede wage increases beyond a certain level and then to subsidise their employees to fight settlements beyond that level? On the second part of the Question, can my right hon. Friend say how long the civil servants on the inquiry must serve before they qualify for pension?
§ Sir K. JosephMy hon. Friend is perfectly entitled to criticise Ministers for delay in reaching final decisions, but he is not entitled to criticise civil servants,
§ Mr. Bruce-GardyneWhy not?
§ Sir K. JosephBecause it is the Minister's job and not that of civil servants to take decisions.
On the first part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, the Government still accept the responsibility, unless the policy be changed, for ensuring that wives and children do not suffer.
Mr. HeiferDoes not the right hon. Gentleman consider that the Government have been very lucky to have had so few workers involved in industrial struggle against the prices and incomes policy? Would it not be better if his hon. Friends were prepared to campaign against the type of labour known as "lump labour" whereby workers do not pay their taxes 247 and millions of pounds are lost to the country? Would it not be a good idea if the Government applied their mind to dealing with that matter?
§ Sir K. JosephI do not accept that the Government depended on luck for the diminution in industrial conflict that has occurred recently. What has happened has been due to the general acceptance by the public and by most members of trade unions that the Government's efforts during phase 1 and phase 2 have been well-intentioned and broadly fair.