HL Deb 09 December 1981 vol 425 cc1341-2

2.55 p.m.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

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 what is the total cost to public funds as at the latest convenient date of the disruptive action undertaken by some civil servants in pursuance of a wage claim earlier this year.

Lord Cullen of Ashbourne

My Lords, the cost to public funds resulting from the Civil Service dispute has been mainly in terms of interest on the additional borrowing resulting from delays to the collection of revenue. Up to the end of November the estimated extra interest amounted to £350 million to £400 million.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, in thanking my noble friend for that very informative reply, may I ask whether he can add to his kindness by indicating how much revenue lost during the period of the dispute has not yet been recovered, and what that figure must mean in charges additional to those which he a moment ago reported to the House?

Lord Cullen of Ashbourne

My Lords, at the time when the strike was settled the outstanding revenue not collected was approximately £6 billion. By the end of November it had fallen to £4 billion, and it is expected that by the end of the financial year the amount outstanding will be £1 billion.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, would my noble friend answer the second part of my supplementary question? The recovery of £4 billion being delayed, does it not mean further interest charges additional to those which he has already indicated?

Lord Cullen of Ashbourne

Yes, my Lords, it certainly will mean additional expenditure. It would be purely a guess to say what that figure would be. It will depend on the level of interest rates and on the speed with which the remaining monies are collected.

Lord Underhill

My Lords, would not the noble Lord agree that in addition to the serious loss of revenue there was also a serious loss of goodwill and good relationships, which are so important, and what steps are the Government taking to rectify that?

Lord Cullen of Ashbourne

My Lords, I agree that there certainly was a loss of goodwill, but I am glad to say that very good work is being done by the Civil Service in clearing up the outstanding problems, and we are encouraged by the co-operation that exists.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, would the noble Lord not agree that the really sad thing is that neither the disruption nor its cost need have occurred at all? Those of us who have been involved in industrial relations for many decades know that the great thing we have always treasured is independent arbitration, which has resolved so many problems and prevented strikes. Would it not be much better in future, when civil servants are in dispute and ask for arbitration, to accede to that request, rather than have the ridiculous strike, and all its aftermath, which resulted from the obstinacy of this Government?

Lord Cullen of Ashbourne

My Lords, I think the noble Lord, Lord Moiloy, will be glad to hear that the Government have said they will enter into negotiations for the 1982 settlement without a predetermined cash limit. We have also said that if an agreed settlement cannot be reached we will accept recourse to arbitration, but on the understanding that the Government reserve the right, if necessary, to ask the other place to approve setting aside the tribunal's award on grounds of overriding national policy.