Strikes (Hansard, 3 July 1997)

§ Lord Campbell of Alloway
asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will act against industrial action which subjects everyday life and business activity to significant disruption and where there is a manifest disproportion between the purpose of the strike and its consequences to the community.

§ The Minister of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Clinton-Davis)
My Lords, the Government see no justification for adding to the existing controls on industrial action.

§ Lord Campbell of Alloway
My Lords, does the Minister recall that at the time when ACAS was unable to resolve a series of disputes in London Underground, his right honourable friend the Prime Minister appeared to favour mandatory arbitration to seek to resolve that dispute?
Without going into the merits of any industrial dispute, I wish to ask the Minister whether in such disputes as the ones affecting Connex and BA there should be an effective regime which proscribes and contains disproportionate industrial action where there is no alternative provision.

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, this Government do not believe that further legislation is required. Of course we would support recourse to any avenue to resolve disputes. Arbitration is one. Whether mandatory arbitration would be the appropriate way of dealing with the matter, I am not sure.
The important point is that it is surely for the parties to find the right way to go about the resolution of disputes; arbitration may be one of the courses.

§ Lord Evans of Parkside
My Lords, will my noble friend acknowledge that when an employer arbitrarily worsens the pay and conditions of his employees and then, following a legal ballot, threatens to sack or sue any of his employees who participate in industrial action, the employer is at least as guilty as the trade union in subjecting everyday life and business activities to significant disruption?

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, in expressing his concern about the matter, my noble friend is inviting me to comment about a current dispute—which I decline to do. I do not believe that my intervention from this Dispatch Box in relation to that dispute can do other than exacerbate the position. All I can say is that I hope that the avenue of conciliation through ACAS will be properly explored by both sides.

§ Lord Rochester
My Lords, will the Minister go a little further than he did in his Answer to the noble Lord, Lord Campbell? Will he positively encourage employers 303 and trade unions to reach voluntary no-strike agreements, committing themselves to arbitration if no common ground can be found?

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, that is an option for trade unions and employers to consider. However, we need to tackle the whole issue in a rather more fundamental way. How do we ensure that there is a greater sense of partnership in industry, with one side respecting the other more than is the case at present? What I decline to do is to condemn people when they are in the course of negotiations, as our predecessors frequently tended to do. The butt of their criticism was always the trade union movement.

§ Baroness Turner of Camden
My Lords, does the Minister agree that in a democratic society the right of employees to withdraw labour after appropriate procedures have been followed—such as balloting— should be safeguarded? Any negotiating agreements which are entered into should have as their objective the requirement to adhere to that right.

§ Lord Campbell of Alloway
My Lords, will the House—

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Campbell, is being a little precipitous since my noble friend is entitled to a response. Not only is she right, but in addition, we have obligations under our arrangements with and our membership of the International Labour Organisation to observe fundamental rights at work. That is one of them.

§ Lord Fraser of Carmyllie
My Lords, I wish to save the noble Lord's breath by saying that of course we recognise, following on the mandate secured on 1st May this year, that the Government are entitled not to follow the wise course proposed, to which my noble friend drew attention in his Question. Clearly, the BA strike is extremely serious and it has potentially global consequences for the United Kingdom. Can the Minister tell us, from what is contained within the Labour Party manifesto, whether that dispute is more or less likely to be satisfactorily resolved?

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, I find that question strange coming from the noble and learned Lord. I very much doubt whether he, standing at this Dispatch Box, would have entered the terrain which he invites me to enter. First, the so-called "wise course" on which he commented has been significantly rejected in the mandate given to this Government.
Secondly, as concerns the BA dispute, I repeat that what we need now is for both parties, in a bona fide way, to look at the possibilities of conciliation. ACAS is ready, willing and able to assist in that direction. Let us hope that the conciliation procedure will be properly explored by both sides at this stage.

§ Lord McCarthy
My Lords, does the Minister agree that the real problem is that there was once a system of 304 standing arbitration affecting the greater part of public industry, including air transport? In the years between 1980 and 1995, with privatisation, the great majority of the system was abolished by the employers, with the encouragement of the then government. That is why we are where we are now.

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, my noble friend is absolutely right. That was done frequently in connection with privatisation and it has not been a successful operation. It gives the lie to the suggestion that there was any wisdom on the part of the previous government in the way they handled such matters.

§ Lord Campbell of Alloway
My Lords, will the House accept that the object of this Question was not, as suggested by the noble Lord, to criticise the trade unions in any way? It was to seek, irrespective of the merits, to get some sense into industrial relations.

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
Well, my Lords, you could have foxed me.

Lord Renton
My Lords, would not it be very helpful if the leaders of trade unions were invited to draw the attention of their members to the consequences of strikes?

§ Lord Clinton-Davis
My Lords, I find that an extraordinary question, too. From my knowledge of trade unions and employers—which is not inconsiderable, to cite a phrase from a previous Prime Minister—they all tell their members what will be the consequences of certain actions. That goes without saying.