HL Deb 03 February 1986 vol 470 cc909-13

3.55 p.m.

Baroness Hooper

My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now repeat a Statement on teachers' pay and responsibilities which is now being made in another place by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science. The Statement is as follows:

"The House will be aware that, with assistance from ACAS, a provisional agreement has been reached between management and teachers on a settlement for 1985, an end to disruption, and assisted negotiations across pay and other conditions of service for 1986. The Government greatly welcome the prospect of a firm agreement of this kind along with the restoration of normal working in the schools. The disruption has not only damaged children's education. It has put heavy burdens on parents, head teachers and on many classroom teachers. We all want to see it end. I hope therefore that the provisional agreement will soon be formally adopted by management and teachers.

"The NUT is not at present party to this agreement. I nevertheless hope that all the teachers' unions will join in the negotiations that lie ahead for 1986. The Government accept the case for an increase in teachers' pay to recruit, retain and motivate the teachers needed for the high quality school education our children need and deserve, along with improvements in the pay structure and a clarification of teachers' responsibilities. The Government have set aside additional resources for this purpose. I therefore hope that the forthcoming negotiations will soon make sufficient progress towards the Government's objectives to justify my releasing those resources."

My Lords, that concludes my right honourable friend's Statement.

Baroness David

My Lords, I should like to thank the noble Baroness for repeating the Statement. However, it is a non-Statement. It tells us absolutely nothing which we did not know before from the newspapers. I think that it understates the harm to education that has been caused by the dispute and of the loss of morale in the profession.

The cause primarily has been the Government's failure to provide adequate resources for the service. We had hoped that, a provisional agreement having been reached, the Secretary of State might have made a generous gesture and at least offered some money for the 1985–86 settlement if the agreement is endorsed. The local authorities are going to be in greater financial difficulties. May I therefore ask whether this is still a possibility? The Statement mentions no figures at all. May I ask whether there is to be any adjustment to the figures in the Government's expenditure plans for 1986–87, as the present figures do not allow for a percentage increase in teachers' pay of the size agreed to on 24th January last?

I should like to point out that it was the Labour local authorities which initiated the meeting with ACAS which led to this agreement, and that the Secretary of State himself has done nothing at any stage of the dispute, by either word or deed, to help reach a solution. He appears to have been sitting back and calmly surveying the dismantling and destruction of the State education system. We had hoped for some generous gesture at this point, and I hope that it is not too late for such a gesture. Perhaps the noble Baroness will convey our feelings to her right honourable friend.

4 p.m.

Lord Ritchie of Dundee

My Lords, I too should like to thank the noble Baroness for repeating the Statement, which I would describe as emollient and perhaps not entirely discouraging. However, I should like to point out that the NUT is mentioned in the second part of the Statement and I am not very sanguine that it will agree to the provisional agreement through ACAS. For certain reasons I do not think the NUT is likely to come into line. The amount offered in the proposed settlement for 1985 is not acceptable to the NUT. No money at all has been offered by the Government for that proposed settlement, and no mention has been made of the aspiration to approach the Houghton levels of pay, which all teachers ultimately hope to receive, nor of the aim or comparability with other professions at which teachers throughout the dispute of the last year have been aiming.

In the second paragraph of the Statement mention is made of "clarification of teachers' responsibilities". I believe that that is a much better phrase than "conditions of service". One of the points at issue between teachers and the Government has been the use of the phrase "conditions of service". A great deal of what a teacher does is voluntary. Of course, it is not voluntary that a teacher should teach, should prepare for exams, meet parents and suchlike, but in the way of out-of-school activities a great deal is done by teachers which is entirely voluntary. Teachers are very resentful of the suggestion that these activities should be made mandatory.

I should like to commend the phrase "clarification of teachers' responsibilities", and I hope that in the forthcoming negotiations the Government will not hit too hard the idea of conditions of service. I believe that that would help in obtaining a final settlement. Apart from that, we have no further comments to make and we thank the noble Baroness the Minister.

Baroness Hooper

My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness and the noble Lord for their comments. I am sorry that the Statement was not up to their expectations, but I must emphasise that my right honourable friend is pleased that we have an agreement which holds out at least some promise of a settlement of the 1985 pay dispute, which will mean a return to normal working in the schools and constructive negotiations across pay, pay structure and duties and conditions of service. This is and must be the main thrust of the Government's role.

The noble Baroness, Lady David, asked me some questions. One related to the availability of additional resources from the Government. In reaching the settlement some 10 days ago, the employers knew the financial background and the Government's position on local authority expenditure when they decided to make their offer, as indeed they did when they made their informal offer of an end-loaded 7.5 per cent. last October. They knew that the position was still unchanged when they increased their offer to 8.5 per cent. at ACAS, and it is for them to decide whether an increase of that order can be accommodated within their budget.

The noble Baroness, Lady David, in particular raised the question whether there were sufficient resources to maintain and improve educational standards, on the supposition that additional resources should be made available. The Government acknowledge, even if local education authorities take all steps open to them to secure savings and to improve efficiency and effectiveness, that it may be difficult to achieve in full the Government's policy for raising educational standards within existing real levels of expenditure per pupil. The noble Baroness also made a request to me to convey the feelings of your Lordships' House to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State. I can certainly give the noble Baroness an assurance that I shall do so.

The noble Lord, Lord Ritchie of Dundee, expressed the fear that the National Union of Teachers would not agree to the settlement. We also very much regret that so far the National Union of Teachers has not been a party to the agreement. However, I understand that the union's executive has at least deferred going ahead with the one-day strike agreed at its conference last month. The union is also willing to abandon strikes if the agreement is converted into a settlement. That is something. We hope that the NUT will go further and drop all disruption and join in the wide-ranging negotiations planned for 1986.

In addition, in reply to the noble Lord's question about reaching Houghton levels or comparability with other professions, the Government's stated aim is that the local education authorities, the employers in this case, should, within their budget, make a statement which is on a good housekeeping basis. I am glad that the noble Lord welcomes the phraseology used; indeed I agree that a "clarification of responsibilities" is a good phrase. We hope that this disruptive dispute is well on the way to being finalised.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, perhaps my noble friend could clear up two points which, even after the Statement, still remain uncertain in my mind. First, in the complex arrangements of this matter, is it possible to put the agreement reached with all the other teachers' unions into effect in the absence of agreement by the National Union of Teachers? Secondly, have the other unions, apart from the National Union of Teachers, agreed with the employers' proposals for what the noble Lord, Lord Ritchie of Dundee, so rightly calls a "clarification of teachers' responsibilities"?

Baroness Hooper

My Lords, my understanding of the matter raised by my noble friend Lord Boyd-Carpenter is that the National Union of Teachers has suggested that it will go forward with the arrangements if a positive settlement is reached. However, perhaps I may inform my noble friend if I find that I have misunderstood that point.

On the question whether the other unions have agreed to a clarification of responsibilities in the finalisation of the settlement, I believe the answer is that the offer has been made by the employers in an open-ended way. The pressure is there for a clarification of teachers' responsibilities in that the Government have in hand certain monies which will be released on condition that the Government's objectives in this matter are fulfilled.

Baroness Phillips

My Lords, is it not a fact that the National Union of Teachers and indeed, so far as I know, the NAS have, as the Government would wish, on every occasion gone to their members and balloted them before they moved any further in any of the discussions? Surely this is exactly what the Government wanted. Therefore, they can hardly—as would seem to be implied by the question of the noble Lord opposite—condemn the unions if they wait for the decision of their members before they move to the next stage of any negotiations.

Baroness Hooper

My Lords, the noble Baroness makes a point that is perfectly well understood by the Government. On the decisions taken by all the unions last year, during the negotiations both in September and October, when offers were put forward, the other unions have changed their minds, and it is much to be hoped that the National Association of Schoolmasters will also succeed, as a result of its balloting processes, in changing its mind.

Lord Taylor of Blackburn

My Lords, is not the Minister aware that all the time it has been a case of the local authorities having to give, give, and give without support from the DES? Surely this is wrong. Surely at this point, where the unions and the local authorities have gone so far, the department itself should back up the local authorities in releasing monies for this matter?

Baroness Hooper

The department is fully prepared to back up the local authorities for any spending within their budgets. The local authorities are well aware of the stringencies. They have a number of pressures; they have a number of commitments. They are the best people to know how to meet all those commitments, and that is why the Government have stood on the sidelines to some extent, but with the assurance that, as soon as the Government's requirements, or the Government's objectives, are agreed to, the additional sums in hand may be released over a four-year period.

Baroness David

My Lords, I do not think that the noble Baroness quite answered both my points about finances. I think she answered about the monies for the 1985–86 settlement, when I said I hoped there might be a generous gesture—and I gather from what she said that there will not; but I also asked about the Government expenditure plans for 1986–87. Surely if there had been agreement about salaries much earlier on in the year, that percentage increase would have been allowed for in the plans for the following year. I am asking, can that now happen?

Baroness Hooper

My Lords, I apologise to the noble Baroness if I omitted to answer a particular point. The Government have put forward no pay factor for 1986–87. What is offered for that period will be for the employers to decide. The employers, as I have said, know full well the terms on which the Government are willing to release extra resources for teachers' pay for 1986–87 and later years, and they also know full well the background to the Government's decision to start this additional investment from the coming financial year. I hope that that helps to amplify my answer.