§ Q.1 Mr. Churchillasked the Prime Minister if the public speech of the Secretary of State for Education and 593 Science to the Christian Socialist Movement on 13th June concerning policies in the light of the defiance of law by Clay Cross councillors and the AUEW represents Government policy.
§ Q7. Mr. Tebbitasked the Prime Minister if the public speech of the Secretary of State for Education and Science to the Christian Socialist Movement on 13th June concerning policies in the light of the defiance of law by Clay Cross councillors and the AUEW represents Government policy.
§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Wilson)Yes, Sir.
§ Mr. ChurchillIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that his right hon. Friend's strong and unequivocal condemnation of the actions of the Clay Cross councillors and the AUEW in defiance of the law as laid down by Parliament was warmly welcomed by all those who believe in a parliamentary democracy? Will he accept that his answer today will be similarly received? Further, will he extend this condemnation to the action of the mindless minority of militants within the National Health Service who seek to take the law into their own hands? Will he tell them, on his authority, that this place, the sovereign Parliament, is where decisions are to be taken?
§ The Prime MinisterOn the occasion on which my right hon. Friend spoke there was no record of what he said. I have, however, studied the Press c[...]ttings. It was a gathering of distinguished Christians. My right hon. Friend made no ex-Cathedra pronouncements but offered a few animadversions. Nothing that he said was in any way inconsistent with what I said on the Clay Cross issue when I spoke in the House a little while ago. The question of the National Health Service and pay beds was dealt with yesterday by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services. The position is, as I am sure the hon. Gentleman will realise, that we on the Government side of the House have strong views on what our policy should be. We regard this as a matter of Government policy which should be put forward to Parliament and accepted by Parliament. I regret any attempt outside the parliamentary process to carry through a policy, however desirable
§ Mr. TebbitWill the right hon. Gentleman say—as he now accepts as Government policy the view that the Clay Cross councillors were wrong—that there will be no legislation to remove the disqualifications which were rightly placed upon those councillors? If he cannot say that, we shall assume that he is wriggling again.
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman can assume what he likes. In answer to both parts of his question, I have nothing to add to the full statement that I made in the House.
§ Mr. SkinnerIs my right hon. Friend aware that the history of the Labour movement has been written in part by the actions of those who, over the years, have carried forward the policies of the Labour Party—such as the Clay Cross councillors—and those who have acted honourably in the Charing Cross and other hospitals? Should not my right hon. Friend be commending the actions of those who are preparing to get rid of "the lump" and of agency nursing? Is not that Labour Party policy which was carried by more than a two-thirds' majority?
§ The Prime MinisterI seem to recall that my hon. Friend put the first part of his supplementary question to me in precisely the same terms when I made a statement on Clay Cross, and I refer him to the answer that I gave on that occasion. The Government have decided on firm action against "the lump", and action in certain directions has already been taken. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, a few days ago, made an important speech on this subject, but, unfortunately, the Press did not think it worth while to report it. I have just stated the Government's position on the action that has been taken at Charing Cross Hospital.
§ Mr. HeathIs the Prime Minister aware that he has hardly done full justice to what his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science said on this occasion? The Secretary of State is reported in The Guardian—a paper which the Prime Minister often quotes—as saying:
I believe it was wrong for the Clay Cross councillors to take the action they did. I believe it was wrong for the AUEW to defy the National Industrial Relations Court.595 Will the Prime Minister say that he fully agrees that in those two cases it was wrong for this action to be taken? Will he go further and, rather than regret what is happening in the hospitals, say that it is wrong that it should happen, that he condemns it, and that he will immediately urge the union to stop dealing in this way with sick private patients?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman clearly did not hear my earlier answer. I said that I regret it. I regret it because it is wrong, obviously. I said that it was wrong to do this and that it should be done by the parliamentary process. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman, who is perpetuating an injustice in this respect, will be with us in the Division Lobby when we introduce our proposals for the National Health Service.
As I have made clear repeatedly, and as my right hon. Friend has made clear repeatedly, the Clay Cross councillors took their action believing it to be right. Both my right hon. Friend and I have said this on several occasions. I have nothing to add to what I said previously.
§ Mr. HeathWill the Prime Minister urge the union to stop at once its action against private patients in hospital?
§ The Prime MinisterI am sorry that the right hon. Gentleman—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] In saying that I regret it, and that I believe it to be wrong, obviously I believe that it should stop, and I believe that the House wants it to stop. Of course that is so. The right hon. Gentleman will know that the situation which has arisen in the nursing profession is the result of his rigidities and lack of understanding. We are in a situation which has been caused by him. I think that it is wrong to react to the right hon. Gentleman's lack of compassion by these methods.
§ Mr. HeathThe situation that exists in the nursing profession has been caused because the right hon. Gentleman and his Government were not prepared to allow the nurses' position to be considered by the Relativities Board. That is why it has arisen. In any case, this action discriminates against one section of the sick—the private patients—and I 596 welcome the Prime Minister's statement that this must stop.
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman is making clear week by week that he wants to fight an election on the retention of the Pay Board and going back to a three-day working week. The country will not forget that, nor will it forget that the three-day working week was due to the bureaucracy of the right hon. Gentleman and the Pay Board. The right hon. Gentleman put the country on a three-day working week because of the rigidity of the Relativities Board. The right hon. Gentleman will know of other difficulties which were caused by the long delays and the bureaucracy of his creation. He will also know—let him deny this if he wishes—that if the nurses had been put in the same position with this bureaucratic Pay Board procedure, what is happening in the Charing Cross Hospital—which I deplore—would have happened a couple of months ago.
§ Mr. SpeakerQuestion No. Q2.
§ Mrs. Kellett-BowmanOne a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SpeakerWill the hon. Lady raise her point of order at the end of Question Time?
§ Later—
§ Mrs. Kellett-BowmanOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. When the Prime Minister discusses the question of private patients, will he compel his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services to declare her interest as a recent private patient—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. This is a point of order and I should like to hear it.
§ Mrs. Kellett-BowmanWhen discussing the question of private patients, will the Prime Minister compel his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services to declare her interest as a recent private patient and declare his own similar interest and that of many of his colleagues who have been private patients, thus dispelling the hypocrisy which surrounds the Government Front Bench in this regard?
§ Mr. SpeakerI do not think that that is a matter for the Chair.