§ 3.55 p.m.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, HOME OFFICE (Lord Harris of Greenwich)My Lords, with the leave of the House, I will now repeat a Statement being made in another place by my right honourable friend the Home Secretary. The Statement is as follows:
"My right honourable friend the Prime Minister held a meeting with the Executive Council of the Fire Brigades' Union on 29th November. At that meeting he explained the reasons for the Government's pay policy which made it impossible to meet the union's claim for a very large pay increase in the current year. He indicated that the Government would be ready to encourage the employers and the union to work out together a formula for determining Fire Service pay in the future. He said that if agreement could be reached the Government would consider how it might underwrite the settlement.
"The establishment of a formula is a matter for negotiation by the two sides in the National Joint Council for Local Authorities' Fire Brigades, but the Government have been considering what guidance might be offered on the framework within which an agreement might be reached which could be underwritten by the Government. I have today given guidance to the National Joint Council in the following terms:
'The Government accept that a formula for the proper remuneration of the Fire Service should be established to determine for the future appropriate rates of pay. The establishment of such a formula is a matter for negotiation in the NJC, but the Government for their part would be prepared to see a defined relationship between the pay of the qualified fireman and that of other workers. Because of the need to reduce inflation the Government cannot agree to an increase in the year 1760 beginning 7th November 1977 beyond the 10 per cent. already offered, but they would be prepared to agree to the full implementation of the formula agreed by two approximately equal stages in November 1978 and November 1979. The Government would be prepared to contribute through the rate support grant their share of the cost of a settlement on this basis and would, exceptionally, guarantee that the phasing in would not be thwarted by some unforeseen adverse change in economic circumstances.
'The Government hope that negotiations will also continue in the NJC on the reduction of the 48-hour week. If a shorter week is to be introduced without loss of pay this would have to be on the basis of more productive working routines which permitted a more cost-effective use of the time not spent on firefighting'.
"Agreement within this framework, underwritten by the Government, will provide a sound means of settling the proper remuneration of the Fire Service for many years to come. It will not give the firemen all they want immediately; but the overriding need is to reduce inflation and it is not possible in the present round to go beyond the 10 per cent. increase which the employers have already offered. On the other hand, it will give them an agreed and assured basis for their pay in the longer term.
"It is the view of the Government that the 10 per cent. increase already on offer, coupled with agreement on a future pay formula guaranteed by the Government, and the prospect of a shorter working week to be introduced without loss of pay, provide an honourable basis for settling the present damaging dispute.
"I have emphasised to both sides of the NJC the importance which the Government attach to pressing ahead with negotiations with the utmost urgency and discussions are already in progress".
My Lords, that is the end of the Statement.
§ 3.58 p.m.
§ Lord HAILSHAM of SAINT MARYLEBONEMy Lords, as this affects a 1761 matter which is obviously very delicate, I am sure that the House will not expect me to say very much by way of criticism of what has now been repeated. If I confine myself to questions designed at elucidation, I hope it will be realised that we are none the less very grateful to the Government for keeping us informed of what is going on. The mere fact that we show a certain amount of restraint in questioning the Government does not mean that we do not want to continue to be kept informed.
May I ask the noble Lord this question to begin with, by way of elucidation. One has only had this Statement in one's hands for a very few minutes, so the answer may be obvious. However, as I read it, what is proposed in the guidelines is this: First, the present offer of 10 per cent. stands. It is not in substitution for the 10 per cent.; it is in addition to the 10 per cent. What is proposed is that in two stages, beginning respectively in November 1978 and November 1979, if a formula is agreed by means of the negotiations referred to, the firemen's wages might be effectively indexed in relation to other workers, whatever that phrase may mean. May I ask whether that is a right reading of what the noble Lord has said?
Does the noble Lord not think that, in return for indexation, it would be reasonable to ask for some kind of "no strike" guarantee from the union? The public are of course vastly involved in this and many of us feel that it is a situation which ought not to have been allowed to reach its present stage. However, where the safety of the nation is involved—and it is obvious from the Statement that the Government are fully aware of the intensity of feeling among the firemen—is it not right that in return for indexation (which seems to be a reasonable proposal in principle, if I may be allowed one comment) something should be given? What prospects does the noble Lord think could be attached to such a proposal?
§ 4.1 p.m.
§ Lord ROCHESTERMy Lords, we on these Benches would also like to thank the noble Lord, Lord Harris of Greenwich, for having repeated the Statement. We welcome the principle which appears to underlie this new Government initiative since it seems to offer to firemen as 1762 essential public servants a fairer and more rational way in which their wages and conditions can be determined in future than has been the case in the past.
We strongly support the intention expressed in the Statement that in any settlement that may now be negotiated the Government's present pay guidelines should on no account be breached, for, if they are, there will be plenty of people employed in other parts of the public sector ready to exploit that breakthrough. As it seems to us from a quick reading of the Statement, this appears to apply more particularly to that part of the Statement which refers to the introduction of a shorter working week. It seems to us essential that if by this is meant some productivity bargain—and perhaps the noble Lord would be kind enough to confirm that this is indeed the intention—then any such bargain should demonstrably be self-financing.
I should like to ask two questions, one of which is in endorsement of what the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone, has already asked—namely, whether it is the intention that the firemen in turn should be invited to enter into any commitments, such as that they should in future refrain from withdrawing their labour. The second is this: whether it is proposed to apply similar treatment to that referred to in this Statement to any people employed in other essential services who are not now so treated.
§ 4.4 p.m.
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, I very much welcome what the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hailsham, and the noble Lord, Lord Rochester, have said and indeed I would confirm—and the noble Lord, Lord Rochester put this matter to me quite fairly—that the announcement I have made today makes it clear that the Government are standing absolutely firm so far as the 10 per cent. pay guidelines are concerned. It is manifestly in the national interest that we should maintain an extremely firm posture in this matter, and we have done so. Nevertheless, as the Statement makes clear, we are obviously anxious to bring this damaging dispute to an end without sacrificing our general policy so far as the pay guidelines are concerned.
1763 The noble and learned Lord, Lord Hailsham, put a question to me which really amounted to asking for confirmation that what he was saying was broadly speaking accurate, and indeed of course it was. He put a second point to me—namely, could I give any undertaking that the Government would at least consider the possibility of raising the question of getting some form of guarantee that there would not be strikes in future. I can well understand the reasons that motivated the noble and learned Lord in putting that question to me, but I really do not think that it would be helpful to raise this particular issue at the moment. My right honourable friend has put a particular issue to the National Joint Council in terms which I have set out to the House today; I think that this additional issue could easily prolong the dispute and therefore I do not think that it would be appropriate to do so.
The noble Lord, Lord Rochester, raised the question as to whether the announcement which my right honourable friend has made in another place today would extend to any other group of workers in what I think he referred to as the "essential services". No, it extends to nobody other than the firemen, because that is in fact the only matter on which I am making an announcement today.
§ Baroness PHILLIPSMy Lords, I wish to ask one simple question which I do not think anyone else has touched upon. I noticed that the Minister referred in the Statement to the firemen being "more productive". I am not quite clear how firemen can be more productive. It seems rather like funeral furnishers. Perhaps the Minister would like to elaborate on that.
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, I think it might be as well if I were simply to repeat the last two sentences of the guidance which was today given by my right honourable friend to the National Joint Council. That is the point which my noble friend has raised, and I will repeat it:
The Government hope negotiations will also continue in the National Joint Council on the reduction of the 48-hour week. If a shorter week is to be introduced without loss of pay it would have to be on the basis of more productive working routines which permitted a more cost-effective use of the time not spent on Eire-fighting".