Fair Wages (Hansard, 23 November 1982)

§ 11. Mr. Hooley
asked the Secretary of State for Employment what derogation has been made by the United Kingdom from International Labour Organisation convention 94 relating to fair wages.

§ 13. Mr. Cryer
asked the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement on the Government's proposals regarding the fair wages resolution.

§ Mr. Tebbit
The United Kingdom Government have denounced International Labour convention No. 94. The denunciation was registered by the International Labour Office on 20 September 1982 and will take effect on 20 September 1983. The House will be invited during the current Session to approve a motion proposing the rescission of the fair wages resolution.

§ Mr. Hooley
Is the Secretary of State for unemployment aware that working people will draw the conclusion from that statement that the Government are hell-bent on destroying not only their jobs but their standard of living and are forcing down the wages of those who are still employed?

§ Mr. Tebbit
No, Sir. None of the hon. Gentleman's propositions have a vestige of truth in them.

§ Mr. Cryer
Is the Secretary of State not concerned about people having fair wages? Is he not worried about the possibility of contractors and subcontractors paying less than fair wages? If he is concerned about fair wages, why did he not allow views to be expressed on the fair wages resolution, instead of registering a denunciation when Parliament was not sitting, thereby avoiding any vestige of parliamentary scrutiny at the time of the denunciation?

§ Mr. Tebbit
The hon. Gentleman must have misheard the information that there will shortly be a debate on this matter, and I look forward to it. I am interested to note that the hon. Gentleman has adopted the concept of a fair wage, which I presume makes him a supporter of some form of incomes policy and of wage fixing outside industrial bargaining.

§ Mr. Viggers
What is fair about wages that price people out of jobs?

§ Mr. Tebbit
That is the point, and that is one of the reasons why the Government have decided to take this step. As my hon. Friend knows, there is an undertaking on the part of the Government that if a sufficient number of people in industry behave like lemmings and price 698 themselves out of work, we are bound to make sure that we prevent other people from pricing themselves into work. That is crazy.

§ Mr. Race
How many countries, having ratified ILO convention 94, have now denounced it? Is it true that the United Kingdom is the only country to have done so? Will the Minister take advice from a former Conservative Prime Minister, Mr. Harold Macmillan, which is set out in Hansard in 1946, when the fair wages resolution was passed? Mr. Macmillan denounced the actions of a future Right-wing Government that might wish to remove the resolution.

§ Mr. Tebbit
Even the hon. Gentleman will accept that there have been changes in the world since 1946. Although the United Kingdom, having accepted the convention, is the first country to denounce it, among the countries which have always had more sense than to become involved in accepting the convention are the United States of America, West Germany and Japan, our competitors, and Commonwealth countries such as Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Other European countries, such as Sweden, Norway, Switzerland, Portugal, Greece and Luxembourg and—this will please the hon. Gentleman—all the Eastern bloc countries have never complied with the convention.

§ Mr. John Townend
Will this derogation enable the Government to abolish the wages councils?

§ Mr. Tebbit
No. I am afraid that that is another convention.

§ Mr. Harold Walker
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that for nearly 100 years the House has unanimously affirmed its belief that British Governments should set an example as good employers? Is this what he is now retreating from? Is the Secretary of State aware that the way in which he is proceeding in this matter is scandalous and may be unconstitutional, because, without consultation with anyone, and without listening to the views of the House, he has unilaterally renounced the ILO convention, which is based on our record of setting a good example in these matters? Is he further aware that he has thrown this Parliament, Government and country into the gutter at the ILO?

§ Mr. Tebbit
But for the conventions of the House, I should not bother to answer, because that question is a lot of nonsense. The Government are not retreating from their obligations; they are making sure that we do not prevent people from finding and doing jobs at prices that they think are reasonable.
There is no substance in what the right hon. Gentleman said about the constitutional position. I have behaved in a proper manner. Having consulted, as was my duty, the TUC and the CBI, and considered what they said, I reached my conclusion on the renunciation. I hope that shortly the House will reach a conclusion on the matter.