HL Deb 23 March 1977 vol 381 cc514-7

2.38 p.m.

The Earl of HALSBURY

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 how many workers at British Leyland and their suppliers were laid off as a result of the toolmakers' strike and how many hours of work so lost by this strike will be included in the published statistics of manhours lost through industrial action.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for SCOTLAND (Lord McCluskey)

My Lords, Her Majesty's Government do not have precise figures of the number of workers laid off as a result of the toolmakers' dispute at all plants, including those not themselves directly involved in the dispute. However, the number of those laid off at British Leyland plants appear to be approximately 45,000. Statistics to be published by the Department of Employment in due course will include working days lost both directly and indirectly at the British Leyland plants where the toolmakers' dispute occurred but not the resulting losses which occurred outside those British Leyland plants. It is not the Department's practice to publish figures for named individual companies.

The Earl of HALSBURY

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Do other countries publish corresponding figures and do these figures justify the often made comment that hours of work lost in Britain compare favourably with those in other countries? If that is the case, why is it that those other countries refer to these losses as "the British disease"?

Lord McCLUSKEY

My Lords, I cannot account for the use of such a term. It may have something to do with the fact that they try to run this country down, as indeed many in this country attempt to do. May I say in the general context of this matter that perhaps too many people do that. I am certainly not suggesting that the noble Earl does. However, there is wide agreement between countries in the OECD that they exclude secondary lay-offs from these statistics, simply because it is virtually impossible to make any accurate and meaningful computation of what are truly attributable to the strike as secondary lay-offs.

Lord LEE of NEWTON

My Lords, can my noble and learned friend make any estimate of the amount of man-hours saved by the highly responsible attitude of the executive committee of the AUEW led by its president?

Lord McCLUSKEY

My Lords, I cannot give any estimate of that. What I can say is that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State in another place rightly paid tribute to the considerable efforts that were made by the union leader referred to and other union leaders, and one regrets that here this action has been unofficial and unconstitutional.

Baroness ELLES

My Lords, would the Minister agree that, regardless of the numbers of people who were laid off because of the strike, it is the productivity that has gone down in relation to the productivity of other countries? In fact the productivity in this country is less than it was during the three-day week three years ago.

Lord McCLUSKEY

My Lords, I would not agree with that, and I am answering questions about British Leyland.

Lord LEATHERLAND

My Lords, does my noble and learned friend agree that perhaps one of the reasons why productivity is higher in the other European countries than it is here is because wages there are twice as much as they are here?

Lord McCLUSKEY

My Lords, I feel that that is a much wider question than the one which I am called upon to answer.

Lord THOMAS

My Lords, is the noble and learned Lord aware that the so-called toolmakers of Leyland in fact do not make tools at all, neither do they make jigs, fixtures, or dies? They are a self-appointed, self-named body. Is not this a matter that the TUC ought to look at, and get the proper nomenclature of their constituents?

Lord McCLUSKEY

My Lords, again I cannot feel that that is a matter arising out of the need to publish statistics about man-hours lost through the toolmakers' strike.

Lord HALE

My Lords, could the noble and learned Lord say why we hear quite so much about British Leyland and nothing at all about Ferranti, who have made a wonderful recovery under the direction of the same Ryder Committee that has some responsibility for British Leyland, and was able to report quite recently that they have now accumulated sufficient funds to complete their own programme of reinvestment without any call on the national Exchequer? Could this possibly be due to the fact that the headquarters are in Oldham?

Lord McCLUSKEY

My Lords, I am sure that we are obliged to my noble friend for reminding us of one of the successes. We concentrate too often on the apparent failures.