§ 4.0 p.m.
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, in reply to the Private Notice Question of the noble Lord, Lord Beswick, I should like, with the leave of the House, to repeat a Statement being made in another place by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity.
"The future of the Board is being reviewed in the context of a wider examination covering the work of the Monopolies Commission and other relevant bodies. In the meantime, the Board has been asked to continue its work on the references which have already been made to it. We do not 1083 propose to retain the existing detailed "early warning" system for pay and price increases. It is, however, important that the Government should keep themselves informed about prospective movements in the price of major products and about important pay settlements and we shall be discussing with industry what voluntary arrangements should be made for this purpose. The Government do not intend to make use of the powers (which expire at the end of this year) to impose a three-month standstill on pay and price increases pending inquiry by the National Board for Prices and Incomes."
My Lords, that concludes the Statement.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, we are grateful to the noble Lord for repeating that Statement. We shall want to consider it with some care. May I ask first whether the practice has been discontinued of allowing prior sight of these Statements by the Opposition Benches? It is customary to see Statements before they are made. Not seeing this Statement puts us at some disadvantage.
Having made that point, may I put this question to the noble Lord? Does he not think that here is another area of our economic affairs where Her Majesty's Government are creating unnecessary uncertainty? Is he aware that we on this side are pleased that they have made no hasty decision here? We feel that there is a part to be played by the Prices and Incomes Board, possibly in a new setting, as we had intended in our plans. Would not the noble Lord agree with me that he is creating uncertainty for the staff concerned? Has there been any discussion at all with the people employed there, who have rendered very good service, who have not known what their future is to be? And can the noble Lord give us an assurance that the staff are satisfied with the present decision? Further may I ask whether the noble Lord can now give an assurance that the Statement made during the General Election no longer holds good; namely, that only references referring to public undertakings would be considered, and that increases in prices by private bodies will also be carefully studied and if necessary referred to the Prices and Incomes Board?
§ LORD BYERSMy Lords, we, too, not having had a sight of the Statement, will want to give it very detailed consideration. On the face of it, am I right in assuming that it is the intention to destroy the machinery of the Prices and Incomes Board? And will the noble Lord say what sort of alternative the Government have in mind to prevent all-round price increases? Is not the Statement to-day an invitation to people to put up prices as quickly as possible?
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, may I apologise straightaway to both noble Lords for the fact that they did not have copies of the Statement. I very much regret it. It was no deliberate action on my part. I am afraid that something must have slipped up in the machinery. In answer to the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Beswick, this Statement has been in order to prevent as much uncertainty as possible. We want to make the right decisions, and I think the noble Lord will appreciate that we do not wish to rush into hasty decisions. We must be given time to review the whole of this policy, and this is what the Statement is about.
The noble Lord, Lord Byers, asked me about prices. Where there is competition, we believe that this is the most effective means of safeguarding the consumer. Where competition is lacking, we shall certainly need machinery to make it effective and, where it cannot be made effective, to safeguard the consumer. This is being looked at in the review that is taking place. So far as Lord Byers's question is concerned, may I say that I hope he will welcome this. It is not intended to interfere with industry's decision-making processes on either pay or prices, but we think it important for the Government to know what is going on in important instances, and this is the object of having information about major price and pay increases.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, I accept what the noble Lord said about the breakdown in machinery. These things occur and it has not been unknown for them to occur in the past, but it does put us in difficulty. The noble Lord has not answered my question about the staff. What sort of discussions have there been with the staff? Are they satisfied with the present degree of uncertainty? In par- 1085 ticular, will the noble Lord say what is the position of the chairman of the Board? Is the Board to continue without a chairman or is the present chairman to continue in office?
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, in order to put the position correctly so far as the staff are concerned, we shall be making a final statement as soon as we have made up our minds on what is the outcome of the review. I cannot go further at the moment. So far as the chairman is concerned, as the noble Lord knows, the terms of office of all the members of the Board expire on October 31 next, and where necessary they will be renewed, or fresh appointments made as necessary, so that the Board can continue its work until the permanent long-term arrangements are worked out.
§ LORD LEATHERLANDMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he can explain a little more fully his remark that the Government will keep themselves informed about price increases? Will the Government be able to keep themselves informed about the rumoured rise in the postal rates to 6d. and 7d?
§ LORD ABERDAREYes, my Lords, we shall keep ourselves informed on all major intended price rises, and this is the intention of the discussions with industry.
§ LORD BYERSMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether it is intended to-day to repeat the Statement about the increase in postal charges made in another place about a quarter of an hour ago?
EARL ST. ALDWYNMy Lords, it was not intended to repeat it here. Through the usual channels, it was decided that we should be having enough Statements here without having that one.
§ LORD BYERSMy Lords, how is this House to be kept informed if the other place gets a Statement not repeated here?
EARL ST. ALDWYNMy Lords, there is no reason why it should not be. It can perfectly well be repeated here if the noble Lord would like it, but he will have to give me a few minutes to enable the text to be available.
§ LORD BYERSMy Lords, who makes these decisions?
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, it is perfectly true that the Opposition were consulted on this matter, and we suggested that so far as we were concerned, in view of the number of Questions, we would not ask for this Statement to be made. But I did say clearly at that time—I do not know whether the message got through the usual channels; things are always done in rather a rush on a Thursday; we know the difficulties—that my view is that it is for the Government in their responsibility to decide whether they ought to make a Statement irrespective of whether it is asked for, because we can only express our opinion from the official Opposition.
EARL ST. ALDWYNMy Lords, the noble Lord has expressed a desire to have this Statement made in this House and before we rise I will arrange for that to be done.
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, I wonder whether I can return to the Statement we are discussing? The noble Lord says that the terms of office of the present members of the Board expire on October 31. This is true. There is not a lot of time in this sort of matter for the members of the Board to decide about their own future. When is a statement to be made to them in regard to the continuance, or otherwise, of their appointments and that of the Board?
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, I am sure that my right honourable friend will make a statement to them just as soon as he can. May I remind the noble Lord that there are still 18 references to the Board, and that these will continue to be considered by them?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, is it a fact that this Board cannot proceed unless there is a chairman? Therefore, it seems to me that if the references are to continue a chairman would need to be appointed.
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, I would wholeheartedly agree with the noble Lord.
§ LORD BYERSMy Lords, if these references are to continue, what sanction is there to be on the findings of the Prices and Incomes Board?
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, that is a matter for my right honourable friend to consider when the reports are made.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, from the Statement it would appear that there is going to be a free-for-all in both prices and incomes, with no kind of protective control machinery at all.
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, as I said, it is not intended to interfere with industry's decision-making processes on either pay or prices except where there is no competition; and then, as I said, the review is taking this into account in making plans for the future.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, the forces of supply and demand will be the sole controlling factor. This will mean that we shall again get back completely to the jungle.
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, to listen to noble Lords opposite, anybody would think that they had produced a highly successful prices and incomes policy.
§ LORD LINDGRENMy Lords, if in fact industry is to carry on effectively, the service industries must get a fair share of the national product. If there is no prices and incomes policy, how can one guarantee that the service industries will in fact get a fair "crack of the whip"?
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, this will all be taken into account in the review that my right honourable friend is making.