Civil Service (Morale) (Hansard, 16 January 1989)

§ 126. Mr. Fisher
To ask the Minister for the Civil Service if he proposes to take any initiative to improve morale in the Civil Service.

§ 127. Mr. Allen
To ask the Minister for the Civil Service if he proposes to take any initiative to improve morale in the Civil Service.

§ 128. Mr. Cohen
To ask the Minister for the Civil Service if he will meet the Civil Service unions to discuss measures to improve morale.

§ Mr. Luce
Like other employers, the Government attach great importance to ensuring that levels of morale are maintained and improved.
Against the background of the many changes in recent years, I should like to take this opportunity to reaffirm the Government's acknowledgement of the high standards of excellence in the Civil Service.

§ Mr. Fisher
Is the Minister aware that morale is extremely low in north Staffordshire, where civil servants are very angry that two of their colleagues at GCHQ Cheadle have been sacked for having the temerity to want to belong to a trade union? If he is serious about improving morale in the Civil Service, will he at least allow civil servants to belong to a trade union?

§ Mr. Luce
The hon. Gentleman knows the position with regard to GCHQ. He knows that the very first consideration is the need for continuity of service and a high standard of service at GCHQ. He also knows that, between 1979 and 1981 a total of 10,000 working days were lost, as a result of which the important services provided by GCHQ in the interests of the security of the nation were undermined. Since the decision about trade union membership was announced in 1984, my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary has painstakingly dealt with individual problems of people who work at GCHQ.

§ Mr. Cohen
Does the Minister agree that today's announcement that more than 1,000 Civil Service jobs are 20 to go from London's Department of Social Security offices means a rough, raw deal for civil servants in those offices? Does he further agree that it will mean a worse service for the public? Will it not mean that staff in the offices will be unable to provide a decent service and that their morale is likely to sink to rock bottom as a result?

§ Mr. Luce
The House will be aware that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security has announced that more than 1,000 jobs are to be created in Belfast, Wigan and Glasgow. I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman, who is aware of our recruitment problems in London, does not welcome such a decision.

§ Mr. Allen
Will the Minister tell us on what basis he would allow free trade unions back into GCHQ?

§ Mr. Luce
The position has been made absolutely clear that in institutions that deal primarily with intelligence and security matters, there should not be representation by national trade unions, although there is a staff federation of which at least 50 per cent. of the people who work at GCHQ are allowed to be members. In answer to an earlier question I said that the reason for that is that we must have a higher standard of service at GCHQ which cannot and will not be undermined by industrial disruption.

§ Mr. Rowe
Does my right hon. Friend agree that one way of raising or maintaining morale in the Civil Service would be to provide a service at a time that is convenient to the public? I very much hope that he will follow his other pioneering moves by making it easier for Civil Service offices in many Departments to be open when it suits the public rather than the civil servants.

§ Mr. Luce
My hon. Friend has put his finger on an important point which is linked to the development and creation of agencies, which are designed not only to improve the performance of the Civil Service above its present excellent standard but to ensure that the service to local people is as good as possible.

§ Mr. Allason
Given the alleged concern about security at GCHQ and elsewhere, is it not unusual that the Government did not introduce the polygraph testing that was recommended by the Security Commission so many years ago?

§ Mr. Luce
That is principally a matter for my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister who studied the matter very carefully and reached the conclusion that it should not be introduced. I said earlier that there must be a continuous service at GCHQ and we cannot allow it to be jeopardised in any way.

§ Mr. Favell
Does it not strike my right hon. Friend as extraordinary that Labour Members, who profess to be worried about the regions, are bemoaning the moves to produce more jobs in the north? Many young people in the north are better qualified, more competent and a great deal more enthusiastic to serve the Civil Service. Therefore, the measure is most welcome.

§ Mr. Luce
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. In previous Question Times I have repeatedly been asked questions by the Opposition about the need for more civil servants to move to the north. Now that exactly that is happening, there is silence from the Opposition. The House must make its own judgment on that.

§ Dr. Marek
The Minister has not excelled himself with his proposals to increase the morale of civil servants, at least today. Perhaps it would befit him to consult civil servants before deciding their future. How does he square the abolition of free association in GCHQ—which his Government carried out five years ago—with article 23 of the United Nations declaration of human rights which states that everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests? How does he square it with convention 87 of the International Labour Organisation which states that workers have the right to establish and join organisations of their own choosing?

§ Mr. Luce
The hon. Gentleman may not realise that the European Court has already passed a judgment in favour of the Government's decision on GCHQ. I can only continue repeating the basic reason for that decision. The most important aspect of our security and intelligence institutions is to have a regular and continuous service. I hope that the hon. Gentleman agrees that if that is jeopardised we are not carrying out the duty of the Government of the day to the security of the nation.