LORD INGLEWOODMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what conditions with a bearing on productivity are included in the new Post Office pay offer and what is the average percentage increased offered.]
§ THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (LORD SHACKLETON)My Lords, the Post Office is currently negotiating the settlement of pay in all these matters covering the majority of the non-engineering staff. I understand that it is common ground between the parties in this case that any agreement should include recognition of the need to achieve greater productivity. Noble Lords will not expect me to forecast the outcome of the discussions.
LORD INGLEWOODMy Lords, while not finding that Answer very forthcoming, and while not wishing to be other than circumspect, as the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor said in relation to a previous Question, may I ask the Leader of the House whether he does not agree that this negotiation is quite different from an ordinary industrial negotiation, since all the people of this country are closely concerned? And can he not give Parliament some more information than was contained in his original reply?
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, practically every major issue in a big industrial negotiation is likely to affect a large number of people in this country, 1019 and I do not think it would be at all appropriate for us to get mixed up in the negotiations, particularly those relating to a Corporation which has only just been set up—and deliberately so that it should have a greater degree of independence.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, in view of the statements which have appeared in the Press in recent days, I wonder whether the Leader of the House can add slightly to what he has already told us. Does the Post Office intend, and will it be allowed, to meet the cost of these new proposals by raising the cost of a letter from 5d. to 7d.?
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, I think the noble Lord should take the advice of his noble friend behind him who advised circumspection in this matter.
§ BARONESS WOOTTON OF ABINGERMy Lords, would not my noble friend agree that it is quite inappropriate that the details of pay negotiations by an independent Corporation should be discussed on the Floor of this House?
§ LORD ILFORDMy Lords, was it not the possibility of achieving greater productivity which it was suggested should be discussed on the Floor of the House?
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, other questions have been asked than the question of greater productivity, but this is all part of an agreement which we hope is being negotiated.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, may I ask this question? Has the Post Office the same freedom on its own to raise the cost of a letter as it has in conducting these negotiations regarding pay?
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, I am sorry; I did not quite hear the noble Lord, although he spoke loudly. Perhaps the noble Lord would repeat his question.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, has the Post Office the same freedom, without reference to the Government, to increase the price of a letter from 5d. to 7d. as it has in conducting these pay negotiations?
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, the noble Lord is mixing up a number of 1020 different matters. There is no point in the Question itself on the subject of Post Office charges. I really cannot embark now on a whole discussion of prices and incomes policy and the role of the Government in this matter. Obviously, charges are a matter of concern to us all, but at this moment I cannot start laying down specifically where borderlines arise in particular matters.
LORD INGLEWOODMy Lords, while congratulating the noble Lord the Leader of the House on finding so many ways of saying nothing, I would ask him this further question. Would he not agree that the question of postal charges directly follows from the savings which the increased productivity may achieve, and that that is something that everybody in this country who ever writes a letter is most interested to know?
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, I am very glad to accept the congratulations of the noble Lord.
§ THE EARL OF SWINTONMy Lords, would the noble Lord the Leader of the House at any rate inform us whether the Post Office has power, without reference to this House or to Parliament, to raise charges if it thinks fit?
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, I have already said that the operation of prices and incomes policy is a much more complex area than, and a different area from, the one on which I have been asked a Question. The noble Lord referred to "reference to this House". Clearly the Government have certain responsibilities and certain powers, but I do not think I can speculate on the outcome of a matter which is not before the House. It may in due course come before the House, but I think it would be very unwise for me to speculate, and I appeal to the noble Earl not to press me further.
§ THE EARL OF SWINTONMy Lords, with great respect, that is not the question I put to the noble Lord. I do not want him to say what the outcome of negotiations is going to be. What I put to him was a simple question: is it within the powers of the Post Office to raise postal rates without coming to Parliament for authority to do so?
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, I must say to the noble Earl that that really is another question.