HL Deb 10 July 1981 vol 422 cc923-4
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 under present regulations is the effect on the entitlement to pension of a civil servant of absences from duty without permission or of refusals to perform his or her normal duties in the normal way.

The Lord President of the Council (Lord Soames)

My Lords, civil servants who are on strike or who are temporarily relieved from duty are not paid and such unpaid absences do not count for pension purposes.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, while thanking my noble friend for that reply, may I ask whether he will also answer the other part of the Question dealing with the case of a civil servant who turns up at his office but who declines to perform his normal duties or the duties which he is asked to undertake? Will that day count as regards pension entitlement? For example, will it count in the case of a man who turns up for work in Newcastle but who will not work the computer which assesses other people's pensions?

Lord Soames

My Lords, it depends whether he is doing some other work or not, but if not he would be temporarily relieved from duty; in those circumstances he would not be paid and so that time would not count towards his pension.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, does the noble Lord not agree that, with the massive Whitley machinery that exists, if this House started indulging in trying to adjudicate every individual case of every civil servant, irrespective of grade, it would be taking on a mammoth task? Does the noble Lord the Leader of the House not also agree that perhaps the centre of this grievance is not so much the increase of pay which civil servants require but the fact that they feel aggrieved because their case has not been referred to arbitration for an independent judgment? Furthermore, does the noble Lord agree—and I am sure he will—that by and large we have an extraordinarily fine Civil Service and if this House were to become involved in any petty indulgences against them it would do two things: it would deny the great freedoms that we claim for this country and it would exacerbate an already nasty situation?

Lord Soames

My Lords, I would not accept that the Question asked by my noble friend Lord Boyd- Carpenter was about a petty matter. Indeed, it was a question of whether or not the civil servants are paid, and whether time will count for pension purposes if they are not in fact working. That is a perfectly understandable Question and I hope that my Answer was quite clear.

Of course, we have a very fine Civil Service. As I have been lucky enough to spend some of my time in the international field I have worked with a number of Civil Services other than our own and I can speak with knowledge of the comparative effectiveness, efficiency and dedication to work of our Civil Service. Having said all that, it is the gravest pity that, in the present economic circumstances, with cash limits that were fixed for all the public services and the fact that 2 million other people have accepted those cash limits, this kind of industrial action has occurred, and I hope that it will not last. As to the future, to which the noble Lord referred, of course I hope that the position will be resolved. That was our purpose in setting up the Megaw Inquiry. I hope that it will serve its purpose towards a better understanding of both the Civil Service individually and the unions concerned.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, while recognising the proper concern for the Civil Service of the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, may I ask whether my noble friend does not also feel some concern—as perhaps the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, will too—for the millions of retirement pensioners, the children, the unemployed and the sick whose benefits are being put in jeopardy by the action of a certain number of people pursuing their own claim for more money?

Lord Soames

My Lords, I think I must say that when civil servants indulge in industrial disruption and take action which results in our pensioners not getting what is their due it is a thoroughly bad increase in strike action and something which ought to stand condemned, and I am sure it does in all parts of the House.

Lord Brockway

My Lords, is not the whole situation due to the fact that the Government have refused independent arbitration?

Lord Soames

No, my Lords, it is not. If that should be so for the Civil Service, why is it that the National Health ancillaries and the local government employees have all accepted pay increases within a 6 per cent. cash limit this year without any industrial action whatever?

Back to