HL Deb 22 October 1984 vol 456 cc4-7

2.44 p.m.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they are aware of the anxiety and hardship caused to recipients and would-be recipients of social security benefits by the refusal of certain members of the staff of the Department of Health and Social Security to do the work for which they are paid; and what action it is proposed to take to remedy the position.

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, we all deplore the fact that the strike at Newcastle has caused such worry and inconvenience to the public. We have, however, managed to maintain a service to beneficiaries, and we are making every effort to end the dispute.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, is my noble friend saying that no beneficiary has been put in any difficulty as a result of this action? If he is not saying that, will he not deplore the action of people who, in order to pursue their own claims, are prepared to impose hardship on the poorest section of our community?

Lord Glenarthur

No, my Lords, I am not. I certainly shall from this Dispatch Box deplore the fact that people are being inconvenienced in this way.

Baroness Jeger

My Lords, can the noble Lord the Minister say whether the services of ACAS have been invited to help solve this difficult dispute? Secondly, while thanking the Post Office staff for all that they have done to help pensioners over this problem, can the noble Lord say how much it is costing the Government to keep this strike going by having to make extra payments to the Post Office for the further work that they are doing? Can he give an assurance that the November benefit increases will be honoured? Will he further confirm or deny that the cost of these new arrangements to the staff is a loss of about £10 to £14 a week? Surely, if that is the case, there must be some way of pursuing through ACAS, or by other means, a solution to what seems a very difficult dispute?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, I think the first thing to say to the noble Baroness is that certainly in no way are we doing anything other than to try to bring the dispute to a speedy conclusion. The fact is that ACAS has been involved. The noble Baroness might like to know that this is a move unprecedented in the Civil Service and that the department remains prepared to resume negotiations at any time; and, of course, as I said earlier, we hope for a speedy settlement. I should like to join with the noble Baroness in paying tribute to the DHSS and the Post Office staff, who are making a great effort to allow us to operate the contingency arrangements.

The noble Baroness asked what were the costs of the dispute. All I can say is that the best estimate we can make is that up the end of last month the dispute had cost an extra £30 million to £40 million. When the noble Baroness says that it is only a question of a loss of £12 or £14 a week to the individuals concerned, I have to tell her that all those who are employed at this particular time, and who are affected or could be affected by the changes that have been proposed, will in fact continue to be paid at the rate that is in hand at the moment. It is only those who subsequently join and work the new arrangements who will be affected.

Lord Stallard

My Lords, will the noble Lord accept that those of us who are involved with the problems at the sharp end of this dispute—I am particularly concerned about the effects on United Kingdom pensioners living overseas, who are suffering real hardship—share his concern but do not share his complacency. Nor do we share the premise outlined in the Question. The questioner, may I say with due respect, does not appear to understand the situation. It is not the case that those on strike will not do the work for which they are paid. That is a gross oversimplification. They are being asked to do extra work, to accept different shifts and a different rota, and to accept a number of other changes not included in the Question. Will the Minister take on board, please, the suggestion of my noble friend Lady Jeger that ACAS should be called in immediately to bring the two parties together to find an acceptable solution?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, as I have said, ACAS has already been involved in the strike. As I have also said, we are prepared to resume negotiations at any time. We hope for an early settlement. The fact is that the offer made to the unions means that no existing shift workers need lose take-home pay if they accept the new arrangements. As to the effect of the dispute on overseas pensioners, I can tell the noble Lord that about 300,000 pensioners are affected, of whom approximately 70 per cent. are being paid following application to the overseas branch at Newcastle; and this figure is rising all the time.

Lord Campbell of Alloway

My Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether, apart from the question of ACAS, in an essential service of this kind there is not some procedure agreement or mandatory arbitration machinery?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, I am sure that there is. I do not actually have the details with me. The fact is that the normal procedures were exhausted. That is why it was necessary to take the unprecedented step of involving ACAS.

Lord Dean of Beswick

My Lords, will the Minister not agree that, while no one would condone activities or industrial action that create hardship at the sharp end, this problem has its roots in the fact that the present Government, two or three years ago, quite arbitrarily, abrogated long-standing agreements with the Civil Service unions over this type of employee involvement? That is where the roots of the dispute lie. Had we kept to those agreements, there would be no need to involve ACAS.

Lord Glenarthur

No, my Lords, I would not accept what the noble Lord says. In this dispute the unions appear to want the existing shift patterns to be set for all time. Obviously, this questions management's right to manage. This is something that the department cannot, and should not, accept.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, is my noble friend aware, in the light of the supplementary question put two questions ago from the Benches opposite, that the people concerned are refusing to carry out the duties they have been asked to carry out, and in pursuit of their standpoint are apparently quite prepared to inflict a great deal of hardship on people much poorer than themselves?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, yes; I agree entirely with my noble friend. I have had a vast amount of correspondence on the subject. Many people have been very distressed by it. Nevertheless, I think it is true that the emergency arrangements which we put in train for these occasions have been working better and better as time has gone by. I only hope, as I said earlier, that the strike can be brought to a speedy conclusion.

Baroness Jeger

My Lords, I apologise for asking another question, but the noble Lord the Minister has said that ACAS is involved. Can he tell the House whether ACAS has put forward some definite proposition, and which side has refused to agree to it?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, it would take me more than a minute or two to go into the details for the noble Baroness, but I should be very happy to correspond with her on this particular point. The fact is that recently—only last week—my department wrote yet again to the general secretary of CPSA outlining the various factors which were involved and hoping that it would be possible to make some sensible progress. I have not got in front of me the details of the ACAS arrangements, but I can say, yes, ACAS has been involved.

Lord Wallace of Coslany

My Lords, in view of the admitted excellent work carried out by sub-post offices in this situation, would not the Government agree that it is necessary to review the threatened closure of many sub-post offices which are at present of enormous advantage to the old-age pensioners?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, we are getting fairly wide of the mark on this, but the Post Office has announced that it would be wrong to close post offices while the additional work resulting from the dispute, which the Post Office estimates at some 25 per cent., was causing long queues and increased waiting times. Further closure of Crown offices will therefore be deferred until the dispute and its aftermath have been resolved. Similarly, in regard to sub-postmasters who have agreed to closure, the Post Office will be seeking to persuade as many as possible to remain open until the dispute is resolved.

A Noble Lord

And then they will get the chop, my Lords!