Teachers and Salary Negotiations (Hansard, 24 April 1990)

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science held a series of meetings, which were very constructive, with the teacher unions and employers toward the end of last year. He is considering carefully the points put to him and will make a further statement shortly.

§ Lord Dormand of Easington
My Lords, does not the noble Baroness consider it a disgrace that the teaching profession has now been deprived of its basic negotiating rights for no fewer than five years? Is she aware that the Secretary of State made an erroneous statement to the Select Committee saying that the International Labour Organisation was satisfied with the Government's policy? The ILO, in its 1989 observation on the application of Convention No. 98 relating to the policy, which follows the normal procedure in these matters, gives no sup port whatever to the Government's policy. As the Government are a signatory to the ILO convention, how much longer will they continue with their present policy?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, the noble Lord will not be surprised to hear that I do not agree with his description of the waiting time. The Government have been actively seeking a solution to this problem. It is essential for the future of education in this country that we get the new arrangements right. It is not a simple matter and there are no easy answers.
We are well aware of the International Labour Organisation and it is well aware of the current situation. It understands that our aim is to re-establish permanent pay machinery. That is what we are working hard to achieve. The three new options tabled last year by my right honourable friend have resulted in some constructive meetings. I think that the noble Lord will know what I mean. The first option was negotiations between unions 430 and employers with appropriate safeguards for government. There was then a possible review body, and a third option was a move toward greater local flexibility. Those are all under consideration.

§ Lord Glenamara
My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that the teachers' negotiating machinery operated quite happily and satisfactorily for 60 years until it was abolished by this Government? Is she further aware that, together with the Government's ludicrous national curriculum, their obsession with assessment and all the other crazy reforms that they have Introduced, this has reduced the morale of an excellent teaching profession to an all-time low and that teachers are leaving the profession in droves? Ought not the Government to be ashamed of what they have done to the education system in this country?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, I profoundly disagree with everything that the noble Lord said. I believe that there is widespread agreement that the Burnham Committee did not serve teachers very well at all and that the hope is that when a solution is found to the problems of negotiating teachers' pay it will be a lasting and effective one.

§ Lord Thorneycroft
My Lords, whatever else is done about teachers' pay, so far as possible will the noble Baroness ensure that headmasters are enabled to attract teachers of adequate quality to the places where they are most sorely needed?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, I believe that one of the options was a reference to greater local flexibility in pay, and that indeed would answer the point made by my noble friend.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, the noble Baroness said that she disagreed profoundly with everything that my noble friend Lord Glenamara said, notwithstanding that his massive knowledge of this industry leaves her making a tiny contribution. Will she try to tell the House when the Government will say to the teachers of this country, "We shall now meet your representatives and bring back the rights that you had in negotiating your terms of employment and your salaries"?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, I am indeed very modest about my own contribution in these matters. However, I believe there is widespread agreement that the national curriculum framework and the issue of assessment are very important to our education system. The Secretary of State is constantly meeting interested parties in this matter and will continue to do so.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that members of the teaching profession would acquire much more support among their fellow countrymen if they showed rather more concern for the interests of the children whom they are looking after rather than for their own financial interests?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, the whole thrust of the Education Reform Act was to provide a good and effective service for our children. I hope that we shall continue to keep in mind the children of our country when we discuss these issues.

§ Baroness David
My Lords, among the many matters which apparently the Government are considering during the long pause in the discussions—we have now been waiting for three months—are they considering financing teachers' salaries other than through the revenue support grant?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, as I understand it, the Government will continue to support teachers in the way that they have done so far and will fund through the revenue support grant.

§ Lord Wyatt of Weeford
My Lords, is it not the case that, contrary to what was said, the new national curriculum has found widespread support among the teaching profession?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, I believe that that is so.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that we profoundly disagree with the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter, about the teaching profession in this country? It has made an outstanding contribution throughout the whole of this century and is regarded as one of the finest teaching professions in the world. Will she be good enough to prevail upon her noble friend to withdraw the unfair remarks that he made?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, the noble Lord makes a very important point. The vast majority of teachers in this country serve our children very well indeed. I think that the point made by the noble Lord was that sometimes in our debates we forget that it is children about whom we are talking. That is the point that my noble friend was making.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that many of us have been shocked and horrified by the action of certain sections of the teachers? It has damaged the educational prospects of the children for whom they are responsible by indiscriminate strike action. Does she agree that they will receive much more support if, instead of adopting the attitude of the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition, they show that professional devotion to the care of children which they certainly used to show?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, the parents of our school children will be distinctly depressed about a major union that has decided, well in advance of the coming pay rounds, to take strike action. I hope that that can be withdrawn.

§ Lord Milverton
My Lords, my wife teaches, and I have come into contact with many teachers. Does my noble friend agree (I think she already has agreed) that one has the impression that teachers are dedicated and concerned for the children?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, I am entirely happy to repeat that we believe that the vast majority of our teachers do a very good job.

§ Baroness David
My Lords, does the noble Baroness agree that when there have been strikes the teachers have taken great care that they do not interfere with the lessons that the children should have?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, I am afraid that I cannot agree. I believe that talk of strikes and actual strikes have a damaging effect on the education of our school children.

§ Lord Annan
My Lords, are we becoming confused in the House by talking about the teachers when the Question was mainly about the teachers' unions? I should have thought that there was always a distinction there to be drawn. The vast majority of teachers are—exactly as has been stated on this side of the House—devoted and dedicated to their task, but a minority of teachers have done great harm to the profession as a whole.
Is the noble Baroness aware—I am sure that she is—that doubt about the effectiveness of teaching in our schools was raised by the noble Lord, Lord Callaghan, when he was Prime Minister? He asked for a debate to take place on the curriculum and other matters. Surely we can reach inter-party agreement on some matters concerning education.

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, I believe that on this issue there is more to unite us than divide us. Certainly the debate that was begun by the noble Lord, Lord Callaghan, has been effectively acted upon and Parliament has decided in these matters.
On the other issue, I agree with the noble Lord that it is a minority of teachers. My hope is that a decision to take strike action in advance of the pay round has been made by a minority of teachers. I suspect that they will let down a large number of our teachers who are dedicated not to take strike action.

§ Lord Callaghan of Cardiff
My Lords, is not the lesson to be learnt from the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter, that he should not make a wholesale condemnation when apparently he referred only to a small minority?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, in defending my noble friend, I have to say that sadly it is the minority who grab the headlines and the minority who set the tone in our schools.

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, the noble Baroness may wish to defend her noble friend. However, will she agree that unfair castigation of the teaching profession as a whole, which we heard in the first contribution of the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter, is exactly what lowers the morale of teachers generally because they consider that they are unappreciated by people who ought to know better?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, for a fourth time I am happy to pay tribute in this debate to the vast 433 majority of teachers. My belief and understanding of the point that has been made is that a minority of teachers—those whom we see on our television screens, in the press and in the media—are grabbing the headlines and giving the remainder a very bad name.