§ Q3. Mr. Blakerasked the Prime Minister whether the public statements by the Secretary of State for Employment on the Independent Television programme "People and Politics" on Thursday 9th May about industrial relations represent Government policy.
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir.
§ Mr. BlakerIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that in that interview his right hon. Friend made clear his view that the Labour Government should govern in the interests of members of trade unions and people who voted Labour? Is not that a deplorable attitude? Should not the Government govern in the interests of the country as a whole?
§ The Prime MinisterI have read through the interview very fully—it is a long interview—and I do not draw from it that conclusion. My right hon. Friend suggested—and perhaps this is what the hon. Gentleman has in mind—that more attention would be paid to the TUC than to the CBI. That is probably what has upset the hon. Gentleman. However, the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition used to boast at Question Time about how much longer he had spent with the TUC than with the CBI, and about how many more meetings he had had with the TUC than with the CBI.
I believe, in all sincerity, that the right hon. Gentleman intended to try to get a voluntary agreement with the trade unions. He failed, so, instead, we had confrontation and the three-day working week. That is why I find it a little disappointing that Conservative Members are not more pleased and have not tabled a motion, for example, welcoming the statement that the TUC made last week.
§ Mr. AtkinsonWill my right hon. Friend put at rest some of the more turbulent and unstable minds on the Opposition benches by pointing out that there is no difference between himself and the Secretary of State for Industry? Will he also confirm that there is no political significance whatever in the fact that he took over the Industrial Sub-Committee, whilst leaving alone the Treasury and the Foreign Office?
§ The Prime MinisterI thought that I had made it clear that I entirely agree with the broadcast of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry and, indeed, with all his other actions, statements and speeches in this Parliament. I do not know how my hon. Friend the Member for Tottenham (Mr. Atkinson) got into his mind this idea about the Foreign Office and the Treasury. I have not taken over any Departments. I have taken over a certain degree of co-ordination in the matters to which I have referred. As First Lord of the Treasury, I keep a very close interest in Treasury matters, as does any Prime Minister from any party. The same is true, obviously, of the Foreign Office.
§ Mr. HeathThe Prime Minister has again emphasised that he has taken responsibility in Cabinet committee for co-ordination of all these matters. Will he confirm that he approves of everything that the Secretary of State for Industry has said in these past few months? Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT before tomorrow's debate the list of the first 100 companies initially to be controlled by the Government if they have the opportunity?
§ The Prime MinisterI have already said in the House that I support what my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry has said, because he was speaking entirely in the terms in which I addressed the Labour Party conference last year and of the Labour Party manifesto. The Leader of the Opposition obviously does not understand a Government who carry out their manifesto commitments, because he himself certainly never tried to do so. If he had given a little attention to this aspect during the election campaign he might have understood what we were saying at the time. His only nationalisation challenge was on North Sea gas and oil—a battleground which I welcomed. We shall have our proposals in due course and we shall then see what the right hon. Gentleman thinks about them.
Our policy on planning agreements with the biggest companies was set out long before the General Election. Planning agreements are a highly respectable method used by most of the countries in the EEC. I am surprised that the right hon. Gentleman never got on to them, 208 instead of relying on bitter and vicious speeches to the Institute of Directors and his famous remark about Lonrho. The right hon. Gentleman might have done better if he had planning agreements with 100 firms.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the right hon. Gentleman to what I said about this during the debate on the Gracious Speech. Our policy will be carried out, and I have said that all matters for public ownership will require legislation. The legislation will appear when our proposals are ready, as I promised during the debate on the Gracious Speech.
§ Mr. ThorpeThe Prime Minister has said that he has decided to take certain responsibility for discussing matters relating to the Secretary of State for Industry. [HON. MEMBERS: "No".] Is the Prime Minister aware that it is very important that we should be in no doubt on the matter, and therefore I shall rephrase my question. Is it not right that the Prime Minister said that he has taken unto himself responsibility for having discussions on certain matters within the province of the Secretary of State for Industry? If, as I believe, that is correct—and I listened to the right hon. Gentleman—will he tell us—[Interruption.] I am sure that the Prime Minister wishes to hear me, even if his back benchers do not. Why is it that the Department of Industry has been singled out for such special treatment?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman is wrong in both formulations.
§ Mr. SkinnerHe usually is.
§ The Prime MinisterBut, of course, the right hon. Gentleman would not understand this sort of situation. I do not complain of that—he is not in a position to do so. But had his manoeuvrings with the right hon. Member for Sidcup (Mr. Heath) between 28th February and 4th March proved successful, he would by this time have understood. [Interruption.] I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman wishes to hear me, as he said I wished to hear him. Had his manoeurvings with the right hon. Member for Sidcup after the election during 209 that lost weekend proved successful, he would be this time have understood that it is very usual to have a series of Cabinet committees. We have had them for a very long time in this country. The Prime Minister of the day takes the chair of some of them, but that does not mean that he is taking departmental responsibility. If I take the chair of the Overseas Policy Committee, that does not mean that I am acting as Foreign Secretary; it means that it is concerned with matters of importance to the Cabinet as a whole.
Some weeks ago, I took over the chairmanship of the Industrial Legislation Committee. The right hon. Gentleman would be surprised at how many other Cabinet committees I chair—indeed, at how many Cabinet committees the right hon. Member for Sidcup and our predecessors chaired. This morning, I took the chair of a Cabinet committee on the public ownership of land. I am sure that the right hon. Member for Devon, North (Mr. Thorpe), as a good Liberal, would have supported all that we agreed upon.
§ Mr. ThorpeIs the Prime Minister aware that I am deeply grateful to him for his elucidation. Obviously, all these matters will be carefully considered. Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether it is his view that these Cabinet committees work better if study papers are or are not released to the Press before consideration?
§ The Prime MinisterIt is my view that the Government should take the decisions on these matters. No study papers coming before any Cabinet committee have been released to the Press.
§ Later—
§ Mr. BlakerOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker, relating to Question No. Q3. In view of the fact that it is clear from the Prime Minister's supplementary reply to me that he has not read that part of the interview to which I referred, and in view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.