CBI
Q1. Mr. Noble
asked the Prime Minister when he last met the CBI.
The Prime Minister (Mr. James Callaghan)
I met representatives of the CBI when I took the chair at a meeting of the NEDC yesterday. Further meetings will be arranged as necessary.
Mr. Noble
Is my right hon. Friend aware that many employers, trade [column 685]unionists and Labour Members are pleased with his firm stance, so far, on the temporary employment subsidy? In view of the intransigence of the European Commission on this issue and its wish to see TES replaced, for certain sensitive industries, by a less acceptable scheme, does he agree that we need a high-level political initiative to ensure that the temporary employment subsidy remains and is passed on to other workers in sensitive industries in the rest of the Community?
The Prime Minister
I am grateful for the way in which my hon. Friend pursues this important matter. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment made a considered statement on the matter in the debate on Monday. As for future negotiations, I shall consider with my right hon. Friend whether the matter should be raised to a political level, but that time has not yet arrived. Our major objective is to preserve these jobs.
Mrs. Thatcher
Has James Callaghanthe Prime Minister discussed with the CBI or with the NEDC how many jobs are threatened by his blacklist policy, or does he still maintain that it is a figment of the imagination?
The Prime Minister
This matter was not raised by representatives of the CBI when I met them yesterday, and I did not raise it. In view of the small number of companies that have been referred to in the newspapers, out of the 600,000 companies that are active, it was probably thought not worth while to discuss it at that point.
Mrs. Thatcher
The Prime Minister admits that there is a black list. What is the authority for that black list, in view of the fact that there is a non-statutory incomes policy?
The Prime Minister
I did not admit that there was a black list. [Hon. Members: “Oh.” ] The right hon. Lady puts words into my mouth. All that is completely and fully known is that there is a group of firms to which this matter has been put. Representatives of the Conservative Front Bench are apparently engaged in a dispute with the Department of Trade about that matter.
Mrs. Thatcher
The Prime Minister has given his usual slippery reply. [Inter[column 686]ruption.] Is there or is there not a black list, and how many firms are on it?
The Prime Minister
I did not discuss this matter with the CBI. [Hon. Members: “Answer.” ] If the right hon. Lady wants an answer to that question, there is a perfectly good way of getting it. She can table a Question to the Secretary of State for Trade or, if she would not be satisfied with a reply from him, there is the usual convention of putting a specific Question to me by notice. I shall then be very happy to give her any figures that exist on this matter.
Mr. William Hamilton
Has my right hon. Friend yet discussed with the CBI the recent pamphlet entitled “Britain means Business” , which indicates that the Confederation wants substantial cuts in public expenditure amounting to 38 per cent. of GDP by 1981–1982, including massive reductions in housing and transport subsidies? Will he say what that would mean in increased rents and fares, not forgetting increased employment?
The Prime Minister
I would not like to give figures offhand, without preparation, but I notice that there has been this demand for a reduction in the standard rate of tax. If the Opposition policy of abolishing rates were carried out, we would find not a reduction in the rate of tax but a substantial increase.
PRIME MINISTER
(ENGAGEMENTS)
Q2. Mr. Robinson
asked the Prime Minister if he will list his public engagements for 2nd February.
The Prime Minister
This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet. I also attended a memorial service for Senator Hubert Humphrey. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be holding further meetings with ministerial colleagues and others.
Mr. Robinson
Nevertheless, will my right hon. Friend find time to have a short word with Mr. Michael Edwardes, Chairman of British Leyland, and extend a warm welcome to his new organisational proposals and the sense of leadership which he has given to the company? Will he also tell Mr. Edwardes that the real test of his leadership and the basis [column 687]on which he can ask this House for support will be his ability to obtain and sustain the co-operation of the work force?
The Prime Minister
I hope that everybody was encouraged by yesterday's reports of the meeting, in which Mr. Edwardes seemed to have gained an overwhelming amount of support. What is now needed, as my hon. Friend says, is a sustained and united effort to ensure that the feeling that was engendered yesterday is not allowed to fall away. I believe that Mr. Edwardes is fully aware of the necessity to carry the work force with him.
Mr. Donald Stewart
Will the Prime Minister take time to have discussions with his Cabinet colleagues to redress the subversion of the Scotland Bill that took place last week, the necessity for which provision is essential for the Bill and therefore the existence of the Government? Is he aware that the new 40 per cent. requirement in the referenda shows that Scotland voted against the Common Market. Therefore, what arrangements will he make to take us out?
The Prime Minister
I shall consider all these matters, but I think that the right hon. Gentleman will probably want to wait until Report, when the whole issue can be debated again.
Mr. Fitt
Will the Prime Minister take the opportunity some time today to comment on the statement made yesterday by the Shadow spokesman for Northern Ireland which has led to the breakdown in the bipartisan approach which has existed for many years? Is it still the Government's intention, irrespective of the conclusions that may be reached by the Conservative Opposition, to continue to pursue a just and acceptable political institution in Northern Ireland which will improve the whole community?
The Prime Minister
I have noticed recently that there are some issues in which the Opposition seem desirous of ending what should be a national approach to some of these matters. In the case of Northern Ireland. I hope that a national approach can be sustained and maintained as it has during the last seven years. What seems to me to be important is that in any arrangements for a future [column 688]administration or Government of Northern Ireland all communities should have a feeling of fully sharing in that administration or Government, otherwise we shall be back to the situation that existed before 1970.
Mr. Dykes
Will the Prime Minister come back to the previous issue and to the totally unauthorised policy of having a black list of firms in respect of pay policy? Will he answer the following questions? How many firms have been blacklisted? What is the Department of Employment's policy on this matter? Finally, how many more firms will be blacklisted, and when will the Government issue a clear statement on the subject?
The Prime Minister
There is a regular Question Time directed at my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade, and I suggest that these Questions should be tabled in detail for him to answer. I did not discuss this matter with the CBI in relation to the previous Question. It is not on the list of my public engagements for today, and I have not come here with any information on this matter.
There is no secret about this issue. [Hon. Members: “Oh.” ] Well, if there is a secret, it seems to be a damned badly kept one. When I listen to reports on the radio of the unholy alliance between Lord Aldington and Mr. Clive Jenkins, I begin to think that the Government must be right on some of these issues.
Q3. Mr. McCrindle
asked the Prime Minister if he will state his public engagements for 2nd February.
The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Member to the reply which I have just given to my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, North-West (Mr. Robinson).
Mr. McCrindle
If I may return to the question to which my hon. Friends have paid attention, if a black list were to exist, what would be the legal basis for its continuation? Secondly, will the Prime Minister say why the Sun Alliance and London Insurance Group should not take a perfectly reasonable management decision to improve the basis of its employees' pensions?
The Prime Minister
Any question that begins with the words “Were a black list [column 689]to exist” is clearly hypothetical. Therefore, I am not called upon to reply to it.
As for the Sun Alliance, I understand that it is proposing to challenge the secret report which has apparently been made and which is so well known to at least two of the directors of that company who sit in this House. Therefore, I have a feeling that any misdeeds that are likely to come out will be quickly made known to the Shadow Cabinet through the directorship of the right hon. Gentleman who sits on the Sun Alliance board.
Mr. Kinnock
On the subject of both the bipartisan approach and a black list, will my right hon. Friend undertake consultations with the right hon. Lady the Leader of the Opposition to discuss why she appears to be preventing any remnants of progressive opinion in her party from sitting on the all-party joint committee against racialism? This is a matter of blacklisting that is of some concern to people in this country.
The Prime Minister
I can only admire my hon. Friend's ingenuity, which is now called parallel thinking, but I have no ministerial responsibility for any of the Shadow appointments made by the right hon. Lady.
Mr. Stanbrook
On the question of a black list, is not the truth of the matter that the Prime Minister knows that sanctions against these firms are quite unlawful and that it only requires a firm with the courage to take the Government to court to bring the whole ramshackle edifice down in ruins?
The Prime Minister
There cannot be much of an edifice when we consider the handful of firms that are involved out of a total of 600,000 active companies. I do not want to engage in a discussion on semantics involving the question whether a list is black, but on the issue itself I hope that the Opposition and those who may be considering taking the Government to the law on this matter will also consider the impact if wages embark on a runaway race once again, with the resulting inflation, which we have now so painfully overcome. Perhaps those Conservative Members will consider that aspect of the matter, because I assure them that that is what the public are concerned about.
[column 690]Mr. Norman Atkinson
In regard to that answer, however, and to the Prime Minister's previous answer with regard to British Leyland, is my right hon. Friend aware that part of the Edwardes plan involves the synchronisation of wage bargaining, much of which cannot be enacted until after 31st July this year? Therefore, will my right hon. Friend appeal to his colleagues in the Cabinet to desist from their repetitive comments about the need for a wage policy after 31st July which, of necessity, must interfere with the Edwardes plan of free bargaining for Leyland, which is now to be concluded?
The Prime Minister
I am aware that many hon. Members dislike any process of discussing wages and their future. Let me make it abundantly clear to the House and to the people of this country that in the manner in which our industrial society is now composed and conducted it is impossible to discuss any future economic progress in this country without discussing——
Mr. Ridley
Come off it. Rubbish.
The Prime Minister
—what role wages and incomes are to play.