§ 2.43 p.m.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy 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 whether, in view of increasing inflation, any discussion has taken place with leaders of the Opposition in order to ascertain their views.
§ Lord BESWICKMy Lords, members of the Opposition have many opportunities to make known their views on this subject.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that that is a most unsatisfactory Answer and, indeed, quite irrelevant in the present situation? May I ask my noble friend whether it would not be more satisfactory—rather than allowing public confrontation, of which the public are becoming a little bored because of the bickering and the lack of any satisfactory result, to continue—if there were private discussions and a subsequent Communiqué if necessary, so 715 that the views of the Opposition could be submitted to the Government confidentially with some hope of fruitful results? Further, is my noble friend aware that, when Mr. Heath was Prime Minister in 1970, I made a proposition in this House that he should meet Mr. Wilson, Mr. Thorpe, the CBI and the TUC for discussions in order to diagnose the complaint and in the hope of achieving some satisfactory results? Is my noble friend aware that that proposal was ignored and that when Mr. Wilson became Prime Minister last year I repeated the submission, which was again ignored? Does my noble friend not agree that, if it had been considered and something useful had occurred, we might have avoided much of the trouble which has accrued?
§ Lord BESWICKMy Lords, I share my noble friend's wish to see public discussion devoid of bickering and an atmosphere of confrontation. That was a view which I expressed in this House last Wednesday, but it still remains a fact that in proper public discussion it would be feasible to discover what views are held by Her Majesty's Opposition on this most important subject. So far as the TUC and the CBI are concerned, again, as was said last week, there are opportunities, and those opportunities are being used to find out, and to consult with them about, what may be possible in the present situation.
§ Lord CARRINGTONMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that, if the Government make proposals to remedy the serious economic situation, which they can do as they have an overall majority in another place, they will be supported by those of us on these Benches who will accept them as being—if indeed they are—in the national interest? But is he also aware that, at the same time, we shall expect an acknowledgement of the seriousness of the economic situation and a constructive lead to be given rather than the complacency to which we had to listen last Sunday?
§ Lord BESWICKMy Lords, I believe I said something about excluding bickering. I thought that that would help the atmosphere. However, so far as the first part of the noble Lord's question is concerned, I wholly welcome what he said.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, does my noble friend realise that what has just happened is a demonstration of what I am seeking to avoid? Does he further realise that I am not asking for a Coalition, which I believe would be disastrous in the existing circumstances, but that I am suggesting that, apart from the discussions with the CBI, the TUC, the Neddies, and so on, there is a political element in all this and that it would be worth while making a proposition such as I have suggested? Would my noble friend be kind enough to convey my submission to my right honourable friend the Prime Minister or shall I make representations to him myself?
§ Lord BESWICKMy Lords, it had been my intention to put before my right honourable friend the Prime Minister what my noble friend has said. I shall certainly do that, but that does not mean to say that my noble friend—who has a very close connection with my right honourable friend the Prime Minister—should not in turn make his own representations.
Lord BRUCE of DONINGTONMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that many of us on this side of the House at any rate are quite confident of the competence of the Government to govern the country properly?
§ Lord ORR-EWINGWhen?
§ Lord CLITHEROEMy Lords, as the word "inflation" means "blowing up", would it not be more useful, in general, to refer either to the depreciation or the debasement of the currency?
§ Lord BESWICKMy Lords, I am not disposed to deny what the noble Lord says. The fact of the matter is that in this last week, unhappily in part stemming from a debate in this House last Wednesday, there has been a public disposition to blow up our problems. Such magnification and exaggeration of our difficulties will not do anyone any good.
§ Lord DAVIES of LEEKMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that the greatest debasement of our currency since the days of King John took place under a Tory Chancellor of the Exchequer—Mr. Robert Carr—is that not an economic fact?
§ Viscount AMORYMy Lords, whether or not the present circumstances are favourable, will the noble Lord accept that until we can achieve some measure of agreement on economic policies, our fortunes are likely to remain in a grim state?
§ Lord BESWICKMy Lords, what I do say readily is that it is unlikely that any policy will be successful unless it carries with it the full support of the British people.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, as there appears to be still a little time left before three o'clock, may I ask a further question? Would my noble friend consider ascertaining the views of your Lordships' House on the proposition I venture to make and, on the Government's initiative, arrange a debate accordingly? Would it not be desirable to find out what Members on both sides of your Lordships' House think of this proposition in order to secure—I do not suggest a solution; that may be very difficult to achieve—an approach to a solution? Would it not, at any rate, have the effect of instilling some confidence in the people of the country that some united effort was being made—apart from a Coalition—in order to find a solution to our financial problems?
§ Lord BESWICKMy Lords, as to the question of a debate, there was a debate in this House last Wednesday. I am sorry that my noble friend did not take part in that debate and that he was not present during the course of it. With regard to the possibility of private discussions between the leaders of the two sides, I know that my noble friend in his earlier days had some industrial experience, and so have I, and I think he would agree with me that timing in these matters is very important. There may well come a time when such discussions would be fruitful, but I suggest that it is not immediately so.
§ Lord LEE of NEWTONMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that today the TUC General Council is discussing a Paper which seeks to redefine the terms of the Social Contract? Keeping that in mind, as well as the speech this morning by Mr. Campbell Adamson for the CBI, would it not be a good initiative if the Government, following these two meeting, brought together the TUC and the CBI 718 to see whether progress can be made on those terms?
§ Lord BESWICKMy Lords, as my noble friend says there are at present some very interesting and useful discussions taking place, which should be encouraged. If it should prove possible, and if it should appear desirable for the two sides to come together, as my noble friend suggests, I am sure that the opportunity will be taken.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that while consultations on the lines proposed by the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell, may be highly desirable, that time is not on our side? Does the noble Lord agree that if, as is suggested in some quarters, the economic measures that should be taken by the Chancellor of the Exchequer are delayed until after the referendum is held, it will by then be too late?
§ Lord BESWICKMy Lords, the noble Lord said time is not on our side; of course it is not, but that does not mean we should rush into things which would not be constructive.