HC Deb 24 April 1978 vol 948 cc996-8
20. Mr. Ridley

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what plans he has for legislating on worker participation.

32. Mr. Knox

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he is still engaged in consultations about employee participation.

Mr. Dell

The Government's consultations on this subject are continuing, and our proposals for legislation will be published shortly.

Mr. Ridley

Will the Secretary of State at least confirm that Bullock is dead, and will he therefore allow me to stand him a glass of Wincarnis in the Tea Room to celebrate that event? Will the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that he has at least learned the message that worker participation should be based on election by the work force rather than on nomination by the trade unions?

Mr. Dell

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman is anxious to see our proposals. I do not believe that he will have to wait very long, but will he please wait that small amount of time?

Mr. Knox

Will the Secretary of State accept that the diversity of British industry means that a simple universally applied scheme is unlikely to be very effective in promoting employee participation, and will he approach this matter in a more flexible manner than that adopted by Bullock?

Mr. Dell

It has always been our view that any arrangements for this purpose should be flexible. The question has always been to define what sort of statutory fall-back, if any, there should be if voluntary arrangements cannot be negotiated.

Mr. Clemitson

Does my right hon. Friend realise that this is one area where half a loaf can be worse than no bread and that, while it is essential to press ahead with legislation as quickly as possible, it is vital that we do not compromise on certain matters, such as equality of representation on boards?

Mr. Dell

I do not agree with my hon. Friend that half a loaf in this case is necessarily worse than no bread. If he examines the situation in many other countries, he will find that their systems have evolved, and evolution is sometimes a sensible approach to problems of this kind.

Mr. Nott

Would it not be to the advantage of both the country and the House if we could have agreed legislation, or agreed proposals on this subject since there can be nothing to be gained from its going back and forth with changes of Government? Does the Secretary of State recall that a scheme on profit sharing which, as a Treasury Minister, I took through the House was subsequently repealed by his Government when they came to office but they are now proposing to bring it back in again because it is the scheme proposed by the Liberal Party? On worker participation, would it not be possible to have a scheme which was uncontroversial and which took us forward by evolutionary steps, as the right hon. Gentleman suggests?

Mr. Dell

If the hon. Gentleman is suggesting that on both sides of the House there has been too much legislative yo-yo over the years, I agree. On this specific matter, as he should know, when the consultations on the Bullock Report began, I emphasised, in particular, the need for agreement, if it were possible, and the need for legislation which would have a wide degree of acceptance. I cannot say that the endeavours to achieve that position have resulted in any success, and what the Government are now facing is the need to publish their own proposals and attempt to win support for them.