§ 3.22 p.m.
§ Report of Amendments received (according to Order).
§ Clause 2 [Expenses, accounts etc. of Research Councils]:
§ VISCOUNT DILHORNE moved to leave out Clause 2. The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords, may I move this Amendment on behalf of my noble friend Lord Bridges, who I know is in the House; but perhaps we have reached this Bill a little more quickly than he anticipated. This is a paving Amendment, and I know that the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, in the course of moving the Amendment, was going to say that he did not propose to move the next Amendment in his name, as he understood that the noble Lord, Lord Snow, would he moving an alternative Amendment, to the same effect, but in slightly different language. No doubt when the noble Lord, Lord Snow, does move it he will explain to your Lordships the differences between his Amendment and the one tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Bridges. I understand that the substance of the two Amendments—the next one, in Lord Bridges' name, and the one about to be moved by the noble Lord, Lord Snow—is really the same. The present Amendment is simply a paving Amendment for whichever of the two Amendments may follow. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Leave out Clause 2.—(Viscount Dilhorne.)
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TECHNOLOGY (LORD SNOW)My Lords, owing to the absence of the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, I think things have gone a little askew, because although all that the noble and learned Viscount said about a paving Amendment is correct, and I propose to move an Amendment which covers it and a little more, there is also an Amendment standing in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, on Clause 2. With your Lordships' permission, I think I will go on as though that had in fact been moved.
§ VISCOUNT DILHORNEMy Lords, I moved the Amendment to delete 21 Clause 2, standing in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Bridges.
§ LORD SNOWMy Lords, on the Committee stage the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, raised points on the procedure and processes of administrative control in relation to Government sponsored nuclear physics, and I promised to bring these points to the attention of my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science, and I promised that I would make a statement at a later stage of the Bill. This is what, with your Lordships' permission, I am now doing.
In his speech the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, made it clear that he accepted the principle that research into nuclear physics should be grouped with other branches of scientific research for the assessment of the global needs of all forms of scientific research taken together. That, I think, is common ground between us all. The noble Lord's concern was in connection with procedural matters and with the extent of delegation. He was troubled because he had not had precise information on the position after April I with respect to delegated authorities. He had reached the conclusion, from such information as he had, that it was clear, or at any rate likely, that the lines of communication would be much longer than they are today. He wished to be assured that under the new arrangements the National Institute's laboratories would not be subjected to a more rigid, more detailed. and in particular, a more time-consuming form of control to the detriment of scientific work in the laboratories which have achieved such notable successes in recent years. In fact, his concern was that the scientific work in these laboratories might suffer.
That, of course, is the Government's concern. Administrative machinery exists in these circumstances for the needs of the scientific work, and is otherwise meaningless or indeed dangerous, and we are happy that our ends should coincide. I am also happy to be able to tell the noble Lord, as I was not able to tell him on the previous occasion, that we are making suitable administrative arrangements. The Science Research Council will have delegated authority to approve projects for grants up to £100,000. The limit of financial obligation 22 of the Science Research Council will be exactly the same as that which has previously been given to the Atomic Energy Authority. The Science Research Council will also have power to authorise the creation of new posts in their laboratories to a level equivalent to Senior Principal Scientific Officer in the Civil Service. The effect of this will be that only the most senior posts require specific approval.
The noble Lord was particularly concerned because he understood that the new arrangements would mean a much more extended series of authorising authorities than hitherto. I can assure him that this will not be the case. Up to now the National Institute has had to get the approval of the Atomic Energy Authority for new capital projects or sets of equipment costing more than £25,000. The Atomic Energy Authority in turn has had to get the approval of the Department and of the Treasury for items of expenditure in excess of £100,000. Under the new arrangements the Science Research Council will take the place of the Atomic Energy Authority. It will be for the Council itself to decide what power should be exercised by its own boards and committees. But I can assure the noble Lord that we are confident that the Council will exercise precisely the same powers as the Atomic Energy Authority, and in the same spirit.
§ LORD BRIDGESMy Lords, may I first of all apologise for the fact that I was outside the Chamber when consideration of this Bill commenced, and was unfortunately unable to be present myself to move the Amendment standing in my name. May I thank the noble Lord, Lord Snow, very much indeed for the reply which he has given, which I am sure shows that it is his intention, and that of his Department, to carry on the administration of nuclear research when it is transferred to the Science Research Council in the same manner in which it has been carried on hitherto. I thank the noble Lord most warmly for the decision he has come to.
VISCOUNT DTLHORNEMy Lords, as I moved the Amendment on behalf of my noble friend, perhaps I am the right person to ask leave to withdraw it on behalf of my noble friend.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
23§ Schedule 3:
§ TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS ON REDISTRIBUTION OF ACTIVITIES OF EXISTING ORGANISATIONS
§ 1.—
§ 4.—(1) Section 2 of the Atomic Energy Authority Act 1959 (which enables pension schemes of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority to extend to staff of the National Institute for Research in Nuclear Science), and, without prejudice to any power to amend the scheme, any provision included in a scheme by virtue of that section, shall continue to apply to officers and other persons employed by the National Institute for Research in Nuclear Science who on the transfer date are by paragraph I above transferred to the employment of the Science Research Council, and shall have effect in relation to them as if their employment with the Council were employment with the Institute.
§ 3.31 p.m.
§ LORD BRIDGESMy Lords, the two following Amendments are clearly part of the Amendment I am now moving. I do not propose to move them. I understand that the noble Lord, Lord Snow, proposes to put forward a Manuscript Amendment which embodies the sense and many of the words of my Amendment, but in a slightly different form. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 11, line 28, after ("shall") insert ("(a)").—(Lord Bridges.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§
LORD SNOW moved, in paragraph 4(1), after "Science Research Council" to insert:
and
(b) apply to officers and other persons taken into the employment of the Science Research Council subsequent to the coming into force of the provisions of section 3(2) of this Act, to work on activities taken over under that subsection from the National Institute for Research in Nuclear Science whether or not while in that employment they cease to be engaged in those activities".
§ The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Manuscript Amendment embodies the Amendment proposed originally by the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, in somewhat different words and, for technical reasons, goes somewhat further. The Amendment has been circulated in manuscript form. I am afraid the Amendment sounds remarkably esoteric, but in fact is not so. It has caused some anxious concern in various parts of Whitehall and Westminster.
24§ LORD SNOWThe Government gave most serious consideration to the representations made during the Committee stage by the noble Lords, Lord Bridges and Lord Sherfield, and the noble and learned Viscount, Lord Dilhorne, and other noble Lords, about matters with which this Amendment is concerned. The Government have been strongly of the view that the Science Research Council should have common terms of service for all those whom it recruits to its employment after the Council is formed. It is common ground that existing staff transferred from other organisations will be able to remain under their existing contracts of service; but the general principle that an employing organisation should not offer better terms to some of its employees than others for comparable work still seems to us to be of great importance for the contentment of the new staff in the longer term. However, the Government accept the force of the arguments put forward by noble Lords, that the close proximity and long association of the Rutherford Laboratory with Harwell and the Atomic Energy Authority creates special circumstances, and that there might be recruiting and other psychological difficulties.
We accept these Amendments willingly for we know that the noble Lords have been speaking not only with the weight of their own experience but with the weight of the experience of those who actually do the work—the weight of experience of scientists actually being employed. No Government can lightly ignore the feelings of scientists, old and young, and therefore we most willingly accept the force of these arguments. We have therefore decided that the Science Research Council should be authorised to recruit new staff to the Rutherford Laboratory on terms which would enable them to be members of the Atomic Energy Authority's pension scheme if they so choose. They do not intend to apply this measure to the Daresbury Laboratory in Cheshire, which is not in close proximity to Harwell and to which the same arguments do not apply.
The Government are advised that the Amendments to paragraph 4(1) of this Schedule which Lord Bridges originally moved are permissive and not mandatory. 25 This is because Section 2 of the Atomic Energy Authority Act 1959 is permissive. Therefore, this Amendment, which I have substituted for that of the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, with his approval, in fact covers a new circumstance as well as the circumstances which he wished to cover. That is, we do not intend to make any difference in terms of employment for men recruited under the Atomic Energy Authority's scheme, which is the scheme in force at the moment at the Rutherford Laboratory, should they go to other employment under the purview of the Science Research Council. This somewhat elaborate Amendment is proposed in order to cover that point. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 11, line 31, after ("Council") insert the said words.—(Lord Snow.)
§ VISCOUNT DILHORNEMy Lords, I am glad indeed that the Government have taken this course. The question as to the pension rights of those employed by the National Institute of Research into Nuclear Science was raised by Conservative Members during the Committee stage of this Bill in another place on January 21, some time ago. The Government then rejected the proposal, effect to which is now given by this Amendment. The matter was not further considered by another place, because the Report stage followed immediately after the Committee stage, and the Third Reading was also taken on the very same day. When the Bill had its Second Reading in this House on February 4, the noble Lord, Lord Snow, in winding up the debate reiterated the Government's adherence to the decision which this Amendment now seeks to reverse.
The Committee stage in this House took place on February 23, at which stage the noble Lords, Lord Bridges and Lord Sherfield, spoke in support of the Amendment in Lord Bridges's name. A very strong case was made out for that Amendment and we were grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Snow, for saying that he would undertake to look at the matter again. That was, as I say, on February 23. It is now March 9. I am glad indeed that in the time which has passed the Government have made up their mind on this. If I may say so, the noble Lord, Lord Snow, wore his white sheet to-day 26 extremely well. Either solution, that which is in the Bill or that which is proposed by the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, and which is now being incorporated in this Amendment, produces an anomaly. I must say that I think the anomaly following from the proposal of the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, is preferable to the one inserted in the Bill, and it is acceptable to all the staff associations.
It may, and no doubt does, offend the Treasury that some of those now to be employed under the Science Research Council will have different pension rights, and pension rights that they consider preferable to those of others employed by the Science Research Council—and that, I think, is what the noble Lord probably meant when he said that there was anxious concern in various parts of Whitehall and Westminster. But to me, a proposal that employees in the National Institute doing similar jobs should be on different terms of service seems a much greater anomaly, and I am glad, indeed, that the Government now agree.
I should like to congratulate most sincerely the noble Lord, Lord Snow, on winning the battle which he quite obviously has had to fight. I should not, of course, omit to congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Bowden, who I am sure throughout all this controversy has been following closely at the heels of the noble Lord, Lord Snow. It is Lord Snow who has dealt with this matter throughout in your Lordships' House, but of course these new employees are being transferred to the sphere of Lord Bowden, and I have no doubt that Lord Bowden welcomes, and is grateful for, the efforts that Lord Snow has made on their behalf.
We were told by the noble Lord, Lord Snow, on Second Reading that the whole pension system of the Civil Service is being looked into. I am sure that that is a very good thing, and, pending the conclusion of that review, it is satisfactory to think that the employees of this Institute will not be employed with different pension arrangements. I should like to conclude by congratulating the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, on the success that he has to-day achieved, and to express the hope that his success on this occasion may encourage him to table and press other Amendments to this Government's Bills.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, may I put one question to the noble Lord, Lord Snow? It is always difficult to deal with a manuscript Amendment, but, if I understand the Amendment correctly, there seems to be a defect in grammar. Should not the word "subsequent" be "subsequently"?
§ LORD SNOWMy Lords, by leave of the House, may I say that I believe "subsequently" is slightly preferable, though I think I might use either if I were writing a book.
§ LORD BRIDGESMy Lords, I should like to thank the noble Lord, Lord Snow, very warmly indeed for having given such prolonged consideration to a matter which has been a subject of controversy and which has given rise to a good deal of feeling in Whitehall. I know it cannot be very easy for him to reach this conclusion. I should like not only to thank him very warmly on my own behalf, but to say that the staffs in the National Institute for Research in Nuclear Science will be extremely grateful to your Lordships for having given such full consideration to this matter, and for having arrived at a conclusion which I am sure is not only right on merit but will also lead to much more harmonious and easy working in the future. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Snow, very much indeed for his efforts, and perhaps I may join with him the noble Lord, Lord Bowden.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.