§ 5.13 p.m.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Transport (The Earl of Caithness)My Lords, with the leave of the House I shall now repeat a statement made in another place by my right honourable and learned friend the Secretary of State for Scotland. The Statement is as follows: "With permission, Mr Speaker, I should like to make a Statement about the teachers' dispute in Scotland.
"This dispute has now run for nearly 19 months. The education of pupils is suffering increasing disruption, and continuation of the dispute can do nothing but harm, The Government have made repeated efforts to find an acceptable basis on which teachers and their employers could negotiate a settlement; yet formal negotiations have not even begun.
"This situation is unsatisfactory from any point of view. It is also in marked contrast to events in England and Wales, where, as the House will be aware, an agreement for the current year has been reached; and constructive negotiations on pay, pay structure and related matters are about to begin under ACAS auspices. I very much regret that there is no sign of a similar initiative in Scotland. The statutory negotiating machinery has failed to function and it is therefore necessary to find some means of breaking the deadlock. I therefore propose to set up an independent Committee of Inquiry with wide-ranging terms of reference in an effort to bring this dispute to an end and establish a basis for the pay, conditions of service and management of the teaching profession in Scotland which is appropriate to the conditions of today.
"The inquiry will accordingly be given the following terms of reference:
In the light of the Government's educational objectives and the need to observe continuing public expenditure restraint in the interests of taxpayers and ratepayers, to consider:
And to make recommendations.
- A. The duties, pay structure, pay levels and other conditions of service of school teachers, with particular regard to the need to recruit, retain and motivate teachers of the right quality, to address staffing difficulties in shortage areas such as mathematics and science and in particular localities, and to improve the promotion and career prospects of effective teachers, particularly experienced teachers of proven ability who remain in the classroom;
- B. Teachers' duties and responsibilites and their definition in contracts of employment;
- C. The arrangements for managing schools and the teaching service;
332 - D. Future arrangements for determining teachers' pay and structure, duties, responsibilities and conditions of service;
- E. The mechanisms for implementing and enforcing the above arrangements;
- F. In all respects the need to take into account what can be afforded.
"I hope to announce the names of the chairman and members shortly. The committee will be asked to begin work as soon as possible and to report by the end of the summer so that its findings can be taken into account in the 1986–87 pay settlement. The committee will take evidence from all interested parties and will give the teachers in particular the independent hearing which they have asked for since the beginning of the dispute. I therefore expect, and I believe I shall be supported by all sides of the House in this, that the teachers' unions will call off their industrial action forthwith and allow the life of the schools to return to normal; and I hope that teachers and employers will meantime agree on a pay settlement for 1985–86 in the normal way while they await the committee's findings on the wider issues."
My Lords, that concludes the Statement.
§ Lord Ross of MarnockMy Lords, this is a very important Statement from the point of view of Scotland, where this strike has been going on for the better part of two years. I thank the Minister for repeating the Statement by the Secretary of State in another place. I should like to congratulate the Secretary of State himself for having taken this very important initiative. When one considers the damage that has been done—and the damage to children's education is not just damage for the moment but could be damage that is lasting and may have already affected the educational progress of children and possibly their future careers and outlook in education—it is to be regretted that this has taken so long.
I cannot omit saying—and it is the only comment I have made on this dispute: I have kept quiet about it—that what the teachers now appear to be getting is a form of independent inquiry. The teachers in Scotland asked for that in June 1984, I think it was, or 1985.
§ Lord Ross of MarnockMy Lords, it was 1984. It took the Secretary of State of the day six months to reply to the request—I repeat, six months—and the answer was, "no".
To my mind we have had cynical inertia followed by inflexibility that has cost Scotland's children dear. Indeed, the dispute having continued for so long, it makes it more and more difficult to reach a settlement. The teachers will look at the terms of reference even more closely today than they would have done a year ago. It is quite wrong. I sincerely hope that the dispute can be brought to an end, but it is not for us to say; it is for the teachers.
333 Has the Secretary of State agreed this Statement with the teachers? If he has not, then when will he meet with the teachers' representatives? Can he also answer this point: was it essential—since we have just been talking about independent committees—that we should start with a very repetitious statement of the terms of reference? The first sentence contains the phrase, "the need to observe continuing public expenditure restraint" and almost the last lines of it say, "In all respects the need to take into account what can be afforded". There is not a great deal of indepen-dence with one's hands tied like that. I think that the Government could have been a little happier in their choice of words and phrasing of the terms of reference.
Another question that I should like to ask concerns paragraph C: "The arrangements for managing schools and the teaching service". Can we be told what is involved in that? As regards paragraph E: "The mechanisms for implementing and enforcing the above arrangements" (that is, the conclusions and recommendations that will be produced), was it entirely necessary to say "enforcing"? Why do we pick out of the air a word like that when the word "implementing" is already there? It gives entirely the wrong impression. It envisages almost a confrontation before we even get any measure of agreement.
I hope that, if they are meeting the teachers, the Government will take the opportunity to clear up some of these matters. If we are to have an indepen-dent inquiry after this very serious dispute, which is indeed still continuing, they will need to be very careful indeed about the selection of the chairman. We had references to the selection of chairmen just a minute ago from the noble Earl, Lord Selkirk. He talked about political appointments and somehow or other he seemed to imply that certain Secretaries of State made political appointments and others did not.
§ Lord Ross of MarnockMy Lords, I am being serious about this matter, because you should not joke about this kind of thing. If there is an obvious political appointment here, it will vitiate all the hopes of the Secretary of State and indeed of the whole House.
I should also like to ask the noble Lord about another point. He wants the work to begin as soon as possible and the report to be produced by the end of the summer. With due respect, I think that that is not giving the inquiry very much time, when questions of pay, structure, conditions of service and contracts will all have to be considered in that short time. I hope that the Secretary of State will keep his mind open to the possibility of extending that particular period.
Another point which I should like to raise concerns the reference to the hope that a pay settlement will be agreed for 1985–86. The last pay settlement in Scotland was agreed in April 1984. If I remember correctly, there was no quibble at all about it. The teachers settled without question and without dispute of any kind. On the other hand, in England at that time they went to arbitration and actually received more than the Scots. What is on offer in this current negotiation? Bearing in mind that the English teachers 334 received more than the Scots teachers in 1984 and that the English teachers have recently settled for 6.9 per cent., I trust that the Secretary of State is now prepared to put far more money on the table than he did at the start of this dispute.
§ Lord GrimondMy Lords, we on these Benches are indeed grateful to the Minister for repeating this Statement. We welcome the initiative that has been taken. We hope that it succeeds and that the teachers accept it, but we are bound to remark that it is indeed a pity that it was not made many months ago when it was first suggested. If the Government were willing to have an inquiry, they could have saved everyone a great deal of trouble over the past few months.
The Statement says that the inquiry will be wide-ranging. I appreciate that if the committee is to report by the end of the summer, it cannot be too wide-ranging; nevertheless, the word "wide-ranging" is used. First of all, may I ask the Minister whether he has in mind that there will be an interim report? Secondly, may I ask him whether the inquiry will look into the success of teaching in Scotland and its success in particular in reaching the Government's objectives? Will the committee of inquiry be entitled to look at different methods of finance? For instance, there is the possibility that the expenses of education should be borne to a far greater extent by central government or helped by vouchers. Thirdly, can the Minister assure me that the committee will be open to representations from parents and other members of the public? It is the families who have suffered as well as the children through the disastrous disputes of the last year or more.
The Earl of CaithnessMy Lords, I am grateful for the welcome to the Statement which I have just repeated given by the noble Lords, Lord Ross and Lord Grimond. In particular, I shall pass on the congratulations of the noble Lord, Lord Ross, to my right honourable friend.
The noble Lord, Lord Ross, said that in essence we have given in to the teachers by agreeing to an independent pay review now. I cannot agree with what he says because, as I said in the Statement, the independent inquiry that we are setting up now covers far more than just pay. This is the major break-through that we hope will lead to a return to normal working in schools as soon as possible. The noble Lord, Lord Ross, said that it took six months for my right honourable friend to reply in 1984. That is not right. It was done in a much shorter period than that. I am not certain of the exact dates, but I know that it was well within the six months that he mentioned.
The noble Lords, Lord Ross and Lord Grimond, asked why it had taken Her Majesty's Government so long to agree to an inquiry. The reason is that it is barely four years since Parliament created the new negotiating machinery. It has been our view through-out this dispute that the parties ought to use that machinery, and our efforts have been directed to that end. We have now exhausted those possibilities. The machinery that was set up four years ago, and which we have given a chance to work, has failed to work and therefore it is time to set up the new inquiry.
I can tell the noble Lord, Lord Ross, who asked when my right honourable friend intended to meet the 335 teachers, that he will meet the teachers tomorrow. The noble Lord also referred to our reference in the Statement to public expenditure. I think it would be very foolish of any government, when making a Statement such as this, not to refer to public expenditure. They have an overriding duty to taxpayers and ratepayers, and it is right to point out that duty and make it clear to one and all. The noble Lord also asked about management in schools. The inquiry will not be able properly to review teachers' pay and conditions without also examining the management content. Falling school rolls have created severe management problems as well as affecting the career prospects of individuals. The inquiry will need to consider promotion structures, in-service training arrangements and the scope for giving individual schools greater discretion in staff appointments and spending priorities.
The noble Lord asked about the enforcement of arrangements. I am sure we all agree that the victims in this dispute have been the pupils. The teachers have been able to disrupt schooling in all sorts of ways at no cost to themselves, yet parents have been impotent to protect their children, employers have been unable or unwilling to take robust action and the Government have been unable to intervene effectively. That cannot be right, and we hope that the inquiry will find ways to ensure that the interests of children can be protected by law if need be.
The noble Lord, Lord Grimond, asked whether there would be an interim report. I have to tell him that that is unlikely in view of the time-scale in which we wish the inquiry to report. We should certainly welcome representations from parents and all others involved. As to the appointment of the chairman and composition of the board, the committee will be independent. The points raised in our debate in Committee this afternoon will be noted. The members will be of sufficient standing to command the respect not only of the parties to the dispute but also the public and the parents.
The noble Lord, Lord Ross, asked about payment for the teachers of their 1985–86 settlement. He was right to say that they have not received a pay rise since 1984, but I have to advise your Lordships that they have not submitted a claim for 1985–86. Until they do, it is difficult to decide how to take the matter a stage forward. We hope that that will not be long delayed now.
§ Lord Wilson of LangsideMy Lords, is the House to take it that the first that the teachers or their representatives in Scotland will learn of the proposal to set up an independent inquiry will be when they read about it in the press tomorrow or hear about it on television tonight? Is that in accordance with the normal practice against such a regrettable background?
The Earl of CaithnessNo, my Lords; it will not be through the media that they hear about it. I understand that discussions with the teachers have already taken place this afternoon.