HC Deb 05 December 1978 vol 959 cc1217-20
Q1. Mr. Terry Walker

asked the Prime Minister if he will list his public engagements for 5th December.

The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Michael Foot)

In my right hon. Friend's absence, I have been asked to reply.

Today my right hon. Friend is attending a meeting of the European Council in Brussels.

Mr. Walker

In view of the importance of the Prime Minister's engagements today, will the Lord President talk to him about the possibility of making a ministerial broadcast when he returns from the summit meeting?

Mr. Foot

I shall certainly discuss that possibility with my right hon. Friend. I cannot say whether it will be possible to do so today. I dare say that my right hon. Friend will be making a statement to the House tomorrow.

Mr. Andrew MacKay

Does the Leader of the House appreciate that when the Prime Minister returns from Brussels, he might have to impose sanctions against British Leyland as he has against Fords? Will he therefore explain from whom the Government intend to buy their cars in the coming year?

Mr. Foot

Before the hon. Member or anybody else jumps to accept what was said by the Leader of the Opposition last week he should await the discussions that are still proceeding with British Leyland. We believe that the offer that has been made is within the guidelines for a settlement. If Opposition Members, including the Leader of the Opposition, would study the facts instead of jumping to conclusions, they would reach the same conclusion as I.

Mr. Robert Hughes

Will my right hon. Friend contact the Prime Minister and ask him to refute suggestions in the press that, to obtain a good deal on the European monetary system, the Government are prepared to abandon the fishing industry?

Mr. Foot

My right hon. Friend has already repudiated such suggestions. As he has indicated, he does not expect the question of fisheries to be raised at this meeting.

Mr. Prior

Will the Leader of the House discuss with the Prime Minister the difficult case which involved Mr. Joe Thompson of the National Union of Dyers, Bleachers and Textile Workers, since that has arisen largely out of Government legislation? Will the Leader of the House point out to the Prime Minister that during the Committee stage of the Bill the Opposition fought hard for an independent tribunal which could examine such cases? Such a tribunal would prevent from being aroused the type of passions which were aroused in this case and which can only bring trade unions and the country into contempt.

Mr. Foot

I am prepared to discuss the matter with the Prime Minister. But it would not be right for any Minister at the Dispatch Box to pass an off-the-cuff judgment on a particular case or individual. That is particularly so when it is evident from the supplementary question by the right hon. Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Prior) that he has taken seriously the report on the subject in The Daily Telegraph today, which is misleading.

Mr. Whitelaw

By what the Leader of the House has just said, does he seek to justify depriving a man of his livelihood now for something that happened 13 years ago?

Mr. Foot

I said nothing of the sort. I said that I did not think that it was right to pass judgment on an individual case until the facts have been established. I said that some hon. Members and some people in the country might have been misled by the report in The Daily Telegraph today which is grossly misleading, particularly about the independent review body to which the right hon. Member referred. The case has not been referred to that body. The matter is still possibly a matter of internal procedure within the union. For all those reasons, the House should not pass judgment.

Mr. William Hamilton

Will my right hon. Friend consult the Prime Minister about the prospective siting of the research and development INMOS facility at Bristol and give an undertaking that the Government will publish the criteria on which the decision was based?

Mr. Foot

I cannot give an undertaking to publish all the criteria, but I shall discuss the matter with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry and others. I agree that this subject raises important questions and is not an easy matter to decide. It is not necessarily advantageous for one region or another that we should publish all the criteria in such cases.

Mr. Nelson

Will the right hon. Gentleman advise the Prime Minister to make a recommendation to the agricultural wages board on the award that it has to make on Thursday? Does he accept the view of his hon. Friends and many of my hon. Friends that the wages of agricultural workers are lamentably low? In view of the National Union of Agricultural and Allied Workers' claim for a 125 per cent. increase, does the right hon. Gentleman seriously expect them to settle within the Government's 5 per cent. limit?

Mr. Foot

I am gratified to hear, in whatever circumstances, representatives of the landlords' party supporting improvements in the wages of farmworkers. I do not believe that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister should intervene in the way that has been suggested, but during the past three or four years, despite all the difficulties, the comparative position of farm workers has improved and I certainly hope that it will do so further in the years to come.