HC Deb 22 May 1975 vol 892 cc1610-3
Q2. Mr. Michael Latham

asked the Prime Minister when he next expects to meet leaders of the TUC and the CBI.

The Prime Minister

I regularly meet leaders of both the TUC and CBI at the NEDC and on other occasions and, as I have told the House, I shall be chairing the next meeting of the NEDC on 17th June.

Mr. Latham

When the Prime Minister told the CBI last Tuesday that the Government would not nationalise Chrysler if it were bankrupted by industrial militancy, did he really expect to be believed?

The Prime Minister

I do not know what the hon. Gentleman thinks he is getting at with that rather silly question. However, I shall tell the hon. Gentleman what I said. I said that I would not be a party to a single penny of taxpayer's money being spent if the afflictions that beset Chrysler were caused by a strike which should be settled by appropriate constitutional means.

Mr. Mike Thomas

Will my right hon. Friend go further than that and explain to the TUC and the CBI, and perhaps to some of his right hon. Friends, that it is not in the interests of this country to fossilise our industrial structure by keeping men employed, seemingly for its own sake, when the goods they make cannot be sold at a profit?

The Prime Minister

Of course, my hon. Friend is right. There is no question of fossilisation as regards the future use of the NEB or any of these other matters. However, when there is a reasonable prospect that a firm can be profitable or viable in the future, and can maintain employment in the interval, I do not see any reason for objection to be taken by either side of the House. After all, that was surely one of the motives of the famous Sections 7 and 8 of the Conservative's Industry Act of 1972. That measure was supported at least by some Opposition right hon. and hon. Members, although I am not quite sure what their attitude is today.

Mr. Baker

Has the right hon. Gentleman had reported to him what occurred in Committee on the Employment Protection Bill this morning regarding postal votes, in that the Conservative and Liberal Parties—

Mr. Speaker

Order. We cannot have any reference on the Floor of the House to what happens in Standing Committee until the Committee has reported to the House.

Mr. Baker

I give notice, Mr. Speaker, that I shall seek to raise a point of order at 3.30 in view of the Prime Minister's statement on Tuesday.

Mr. Watkinson

Does my right hon. Friend accept that many of his hon. Friends are very concerned about the rising level of unemployment? When my right hon. Friend next meets the TUC and the CBI, will be discuss further the temporary employment subsidy scheme? Is it the Government's intention to restrict the scheme to development areas, or will it extend to other needy areas?

The Prime Minister

This problem is being continually discussed with both the TUC and the CBI, and it will no doubt be discussed at the next meeting of the NEDC to which I have referred. The temporary employment scheme will be debated in the House when full authority is sought from the House to introduce it.

Mr. Prior

At the next meeting of NEDC will the Prime Minister discuss with the TUC and the CBI the whole question of payment from Government funds for votes by post for trade union elections? Does the right hon. Gentleman still stand by the forthright and helpful statement that he made on Tuesday in answer to a question from me, in view of the fact that some Ministers of his Government do not seem to have got the message?

The Prime Minister

As regards discussing these matters at the NEDC, the right hon. Gentleman, who, I think, has held appointments that qualified him to attend the NEDC, will know that they are not the sort of things that are normally discussed. I have no doubt that other opportunities will arise in other forums and at other meetings. I should make it clear, as a point of order has been raised, that when the right hon. Gentleman asked me the question the other day, I said that I had had no report from the Committee. Of course, that was the position of the House. I have had no report, and that is still the position. The view I expressed is certainly my view. I want to see more postal voting. As we have not had those reports from Standing Committee it is not possible to give an answer on the subject of the provision of Government funds.

Mr. Grimond

Is the Prime Minister aware that many people think that the initiative of Mr. Jack Jones is of value, and welcome the Government's intention to follow it up, and hope that this will lead to fruitful discussions with all the parties concerned?

The Prime Minister

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for what he said. When I addressed the CBI the other evening I spoke rather in the same terms as the right hon. Gentleman has used. I hope to have the opportunity to raise this matter in the debate this afternoon if, Mr. Speaker, I am successful in catching your eye.

Mr. Stallard

When the Prime Minister next meets the TUC, will he assure it that the Government have no intention of interfering with the internal balloting arrangements of any trade union?

The Prime Minister

I have expressed my view on this matter. I have expressed it in the House previously, and I have confirmed it today. What I said on Tuesday, and what I repeat, is that when we see the reports of the discussions that have taken place in Committee, and when we have heard the views of other people, we shall consider whether there is anything that the Government can do in this matter. We have taken no decision and we have had no collective discussions on the matter. I gave the answer as I felt it to be the right answer to give the right hon. Gentleman.