HL Deb 05 May 1976 vol 370 cc530-3

2. 49 p.m.

Lord AVEBURY

My 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 the Secretary of State for Employment still considers the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service is the appropriate body to give such assistance as the parties concerned may require to resolve the difficulties caused by the unofficial action of some dock workers which led to the withdrawal of the BACAT service between Rotterdam and the Humber.

Lord JACQUES

My Lords, the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service was established as an independent body by the Government in order to help the parties resolve industrial disputes. The Government have every confidence in the capacity of the Service to carry out its duties.

Lord AVEBURY

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that, according to my information, several weeks prior to my first Question on 15th March the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service made it clear to the British Waterways Board that it has no locus to assist in this dispute, which was not a dispute between the British Waterways Board and its own employees? Has the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service been in touch with the noble Lord to inform him that it could make no contribution to the resolution of a dispute, not between the British Waterways Board and its employees, but concerning the employees of the British Transport Docks Board? In view of the fact that the British Waterways Board first tried to introduce this backup service in June 1974, and it has been held up ever since, does he consider that it is about time that the Secretary of State for Employment took some notice of it?

Lord JACQUES

The Service has been and still is in touch with the parties. Presumably it is still of the opinion that it would not assist to have a court of inquiry. The Government have confidence in the judgment of the Service. I would ask the noble Lord to bear in mind the background to this matter. At Hull and Goole, the number of registered dockers has declined from 4,600 to 2,300 in the space of a decade. Looking round this House, I can see many noble Lords who, had they been dockers at Hull, would have been somewhat hot under the collar.

The EARL of ONSLOW

My Lords, can the noble Lord tell us whether that has anything to do with the introduction of the BACAT service? We very much need to increase our exports and I wonder whether the noble Lord is aware that we very much need to increase the competitiveness of those exports. There are other industries in which there has been a similar shift in labour. I felt that the noble Lord's last answer was not 100 per cent. satisfactory.

Lord JACQUES

My Lords, most of the reduction at Hull and Goole—and remember the size of that reduction—has been due to new methods. The labour force has gone a long way to accommodate the introduction of these new methods. I believe that, within a very short period of time, this further new method will be introduced. However, your Lordships should bear in mind that, if one is to introduce methods which reduce the demand for labour, the timing must be right. Do it in a period of unemployment and you will generate resistance. Do it in a period of boom and you may well generate confidence. Timing is vital.

Lord ORR-EWING

My Lords, is it not true that there has been a considerable investment of public money in this new method of carrying goods on our waterways which will relieve both our roads and our railways? Also, as two years have already passed and as the action is being taken by a very small number of militants who are threatening unofficial strike action, would it not be a good idea to set up an inquiry so that we can get on with improved methods of transporting goods?

Lord JACQUES

My Lords, the question of whether or not there should be an inquiry is primarily a matter for the Service. The Service has the power to hold inquiries and, if the noble Lord will look at page 17 of the annual report, he will see that ACAS held three courts of inquiry last year. If he looks at Schedule C of the report, he will see the results of those inquiries. However, it is difficult to see what good an inquiry would do. The facts are well known. The shop stewards concerned have been instructed by their union to cease the industrial action concerned. Furthermore, I understand that the shop stewards, following their refusal to give an undertaking to abide by the union's constitution and the decisions of its regional committee, have had their credentials withdrawn. There has, therefore, been full co-operation from the trade unions. The employer concerned—the Port Authority at Hull—does not wish to push the matter to a confrontation.

Lord AVEBURY

My Lords, speaking of the employment situation, did not the employers make an offer to pay £75 a week for doing nothing to the six persons who were to be made redundant? Also, can the noble Lord please reply to my previous question as to whether ACAS made it clear to the Board that it had no locus to intervene in this dispute because it was not one between the Board and its employees? Why has this information not been conveyed to the Secretary of State?

Lord JACQUES

My Lords, if I may answer the last question first, I am not here speaking for ACAS, nor am I able to do so. I am speaking for Her Majesty's Government. I have no knowledge of the point which the noble Lord has raised because it is a matter between an independent authority and the British Waterways Board. As to the first question, I have no information on any offer of £25.

Several Noble Lords: £75!

Lord AVEBURY

My Lords, may I press the noble Lord on this point? I said that ACAS had notified the employers that it had no locus to intervene in the dispute, but the Minister still insists that ACAS is the appropriate organisation to sort it out. Am I to believe the Minister or the information which I have received indirectly from ACAS?

Lord JACQUES

My Lords, I believe that there is some confusion here. This is an industrial dispute and ACAS therefore has the authority to intervene. My —information—received this morning—is that it has been and is still in touch with the parties.

Lord HAWKE

My Lords, are the Government aware that they are continually exhorting people to invest in industry of every kind and that the object of investment is mostly to decrease unemployment? How does that tally with one or two of the answers which the noble Lord has given?

Lord JACQUES

My Lords, it tallies very well with a previous answer which I gave. Time those innovations properly and you will probably get the right response.

Lord HAWKE

But, my Lords, we are being exhorted to invest now.

Lord CARR of HADLEY

My Lords, if I may bring the noble Lord back to the real point of this Question, I do not wish to comment on the merits of this dispute, but is or is not the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service empowered by its terms of reference to deal with this kind of dispute which is not the ordinary dispute between employees and their employers? If it is not within its power to do so, is it not up to the Secretary of State personally to take responsibility?

Lord JACQUES

My Lords, there is confusion here because there are two disputes. First, there is a dispute between the dockers and the Port Authority. That is the real dispute. Settle that and one will have settled everything. There is a subsidiary dispute, in that the dockers asked for an undertaking from the British Waterways Board that it would not provide berthing for schemes such as BACAT. The Board refused to give that undertaking and, in consequence, all the goods going on to the barges of the British Waterways Board at the Humber have been blacked. So there is a subsidiary dispute in which the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service may not be directly involved. However, it is certainly directly involved in the main dispute.