HL Deb 12 March 1973 vol 340 cc6-8

2.45 p.m.

LORD BOOTHBY

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, in an effort to achieve collaboration rather than confrontation with the trade unions, they are prepared to discuss with the T.U.C. the question of amending the existing Industrial Relations Act.

EARL JELLICOE

My right honourable friends the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Employment have made clear on a number of occasions their desire in the national interest to achieve collaboration with the trade unions. They have also made it clear that they stand ready to discuss with unions, employers, or any other responsible bodies, constructive proposals for improving the operation of the Act which these organisations may wish to put forward.

LORD BOOTHBY

My Lords, I thank the noble Earl for that reply.

LORD DOUGLASS OF CLEVELAND

My Lords, in that connection may I ask whether the Government are waiting for the trade unions to come forward or whether the trade unions are waiting for the Government to come forward? If it is one or the other and if it were known, we might make some progress instead of just sitting back and each pretending to wait for the other.

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, as my right honourable friend the Prime Minister made clear in a speech—I think it was on Friday—at Bexley, we are willing to discuss with both sides suggestions for amending the Industrial Relations Act, but as I made clear in my answer to the noble Lord, Lord Boothby, we think it would be right and proper for those who have suggestions for amending the Act to come forward and let us have those suggestions.

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, could not the Government, with the country getting into a really frightening position of deadlock, make a generous gesture and say that they are prepared, as part of a general settlement, to consider suspending the penal clauses in the Industrial Relations Act, which we all know are not usable in the present circumstances?

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, I have given the noble Lord, Lord Boothby, a carefully considered reply and I do not think it was a negative reply—

LORD BOOTHBY

No, my Lords, it was not.

EARL JELLICOE

And I think I had better stand on that reply.

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, I am only asking that the Government should be more forthright in this matter. I am sure the noble Earl is as anxious about it as anyone. Could not the Government consider making a more forth-right suggestion of a possible constructive proposal which would be acceptable?

LORD SHINWELL

My Lords, would the noble Earl not agree that it would be a very fine gesture on the part of the Prime Minister, in view of his repeated statements that he is ready to hear the views of the T.U.C. on the Industrial Relations Act, if he were to invite them to come and talk over the matter? What have the Government to lose by sending an invitation to the T.U.C. and the C.B.I.?

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, I do not wish to fence with noble Lords opposite on this important issue. I think my original Answer was straightforward and positive, but I will of course see that the suggestions made by noble Lords opposite are brought to the attention of my right honourable friend. That I undertake to do.

LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, while welcoming the Answer which has been given by the Minister, may I ask whether the Government are now prepared for a discussion with the Trades Union Congress on an uncommitted, open basis, not only including the Industrial Relations Act but also prices and higher rents? Are not these the grounds on which the previous discussions broke down?

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, I think the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, is going a good deal beyond the original Question which I answered. That in itself embraced important areas of national policy and I think it would be most unwise of me to be drawn further than this at the present stage.