HC Deb 10 July 1978 vol 953 cc1005-7
8. Mr. Neubert

asked the Secretary of State for Industry when he expects next to meet the chairman of the Post Office.

Mr. Varley

I have no immediate plans to meet the chairman of the Post Office. However, my right hon. Friend the Minister of State met the chairman on 26th June.

Mr. Neubert

Will the right hon. Gentleman congratulate the chairman on the breach of the Post Office monopoly implied by the recently renewed licence for the Hull telephone department? Will he urge him to continue the good work by relinquishing the Post Office stranglehold on British air waves, which has inhibited the development of direct person-to-person telecommunications compared with developments that have taken place in the United States? Will he point out that unless the monopoly is weakened the record £360 million profit for this year will be seen as the exploitation of a captive market?

Mr. Varley

That shows that we cannot win. When a public corporation makes a loss, there are screams of anguish from Opposition Members. When the Post Office or any other public corporation makes a profit, it is seen as some sort of exploitation of a monopoly. It was I who renewed the licence for Hull. We have made it a condition of the licence that there will be no private interests involved. We shall be publishing a White Paper in due course in response to the Carter report, which will adequately answer the points that the hon. Gentleman has raised.

Mr. Madden

What is happening about the companies whose boards are littered with top Tories who relieved the Post Office of about £9 million by the most dubious means?

Mr. Varley

At the Government's insistence there was a renegotiation of the contract and the rebate has now been paid. There were those who urged that we should not involve ourselves, but here is a good example of Government intervention which I think is satisfactory to the corporation.

Mr. Raison

Will the right hon. Gentleman arrange an early meeting with the chairman to ascertain what is happening about the dispute with the telephone engineers? Will he ascertain, for instance, how many people have been unable to have telephones installed or connected over the whole of this year because of the dispute? Will he make it clear that he condemns industrial action that consists of employees deciding which parts of their work they will do and which parts they will not do?

Mr. Varley

I very much regret the difficulty that has been caused by the industrial action of the Post Office engineers. I have made that view known to the engineers direct. That is why I asked Lord McCarthy to inquire into the dispute. About three weeks ago we thought that some third party assistance would be necessary to bring the dispute to a satisfactory conclusion. I understand that we are likely to receive the report later this week. In the circumstances, I think that it would be unwise of me to make any further comment.

Mr. Skinner

I revert to the issue concerning Pirelli Cables and others and the Post Office. Would it not be wise for my right hon. Friend to urge the Post Office to reveal the true amount lost over many years as a result of the cartel and the price fixing that was taking place? Does not he agree that it is rather ironic that the right hon. Member for Taunton (Mr. du Cann), who seems to be anxious to use his Committee on many occasions to try to embarrass nationalised industries, has not stepped in to examine the details of the arrangement?

Mr. Varley

I thought that a good deal of information had been made available by the Post Office. If the House requires further information, I shall ascertain whether it may be made available. It is not for me to ask a Select Committee to inquire into the circumstances of nationalised industries or anything of that sort. If the Public Accounts Committee or the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries wishes to do that, no doubt it will address itself to the question.

Mr. Norman Lamont

I revert to the supplementary question of my hon. Friend the Member for Aylesbury (Mr. Raison). Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many businesses are deeply concerned at the Government's lack of action on the Post Office engineering dispute? Does he agree that delays in modernising the network are serious both for users and for the electronics industry? Should not the Government have appointed a mediator earlier? What are they proposing to do about it now? The dispute is long standing.

Mr. Varley

The hon. Gentleman is incorrect in suggesting that over the years of modernisation in telecommunications Post Office engineers have not co-operated to the full. They have a good record of assisting. In no way can they be regarded as Luddites. They feel strongly about the reduction in their working week. It is a long-standing claim. I regret very much the inconvenience that has been caused. I hope that Lord McCarthy's report, which I hope will be received later this week, will be the basis for calling off industrial action and settling the dispute.