§ 9. Mr. Canavanasked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many representations he has received about the Scottish teachers' dispute; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Allan StewartSince October 1984 to 12 April some 4,000. As my right hon. Friend told the House earlier, a very reasonable way forward is through discussion within the Scottish Joint Negotiating Committee for Teaching Staff in School Education. The teachers' employers, the Scottish Secondary Teachers' Association and the Professional Association of Teachers would all be prepared to begin discussions on that basis, but the Educational Institute of Scotland is proving a stumbling block.
§ Mr. CanavanWill the Minister withdraw his ill-informed, outrageous and downright provacative circular calling for striking teachers to be sacked? Instead of looking around for scapegoats, is it not high time that the Government accepted full responsibility for the crisis in Scottish education and agreed to the setting up of an independent review of teachers' salaries, which is a reasonable and legitimate demand supported by a majority of Scottish teachers, parents and Members of Parliament? There are a few notable exceptions, such as the Tory Member for Eastwood (Mr. Stewart), and his boss, the governor-general there, who is still sufferyng from the effects of educational deprivation at Winchester.
§ Mr. StewartThe hon. Member is a former member of the EIS—
§ Mr. CanavanI am still a fully paid up member.
§ Mr. StewartWhether the hon. Gentleman is an advertisement for the Scottish teaching profession is for others to judge. I am not surprised that he is giving full support to the trade union which has taken the unprecedented action of the targeting of schools in the constituencies of Scottish Conservative Members, an action which no other trade union has yet taken. I should 256 have thought that Labour Members should pay more attention to the position taken by other trade unions. Everybody involved in this dispute is prepared to negotiate, except the EIS.
§ Mr. ForthDoes my hon. Friend share the widespread disappointment that the teaching unions are not prepared to participate in discussions about performance-related pay, as this would provide a possible way forward and could be helpful in negotiations? Is he suggesting that the unions look at this as a possible way out of the problem?
§ Mr. StewartMy hon. Friend is referring to the issues that have been raised in England. In Scotland, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has suggested a review of pay and conditions of service through the existing negotiating machinery. He has said that if an attractive package results he would be prepared to re-order his public expenditure priorities within the Scottish block. That offer has not been made to any other group of public sector employees.
§ Mr. MaxtonWhy does the Minister not recognise that the teachers, and the EIS in particular, might be prepared to consider the offer if the Secretary of State were to make it clear that he would guarantee any increase agreed by the negotiating machinery? Secondly, is he aware that the teachers do not trust the management side because they know that it consists of the Secretary of State and no one else, and therefore is not independent?
§ Mr. StewartThe hon. Gentleman is wrong. The management side of the SJNC consists in the main of representatives of the education authorities, with only a small minority of representatives of the Secretary of State. I believe that the offer made by my right hon. Friend is entirely fair and reasonable. It is regarded by the management as acceptable, as it has been for some time, and by two of the other unions. By continuing its action the EIS is doing harm to pupils and doing the teachers' case and prospects no good.