MT
[opening words missing.]… .employment figure because there will be a separate conference at 11.45 following the publication of the figures at 11.30. And I would really rather talk about trade union law and other matters which effect his department. Shall we deal with that first?
Norman Tebbit
I have provided you with a press release and a small selection of useful quotations from the trades unionists. You also have the benefit of those up there on the left, which clearly show both the responsible and the irresponsible face of trades unionism and, of course, the interesting point about the last four years, perhaps to many of you, is that since 1979, there has been a clear shift of trades union votes from Labour to Conservative. A major reason for this has been the programme of trades union reform which was carried through by Jim Prior and then by myself, and the further reforms promised for the next session of Parliament. So if I just remind you that Jim Prior 's Act moved against unjustifiable picketing that protected trades unionists against people who wanted to muscle in and create disputes or extend disputes into firms and premises which had nothing to do with the original dispute and perhaps where there was no dispute at all between the workers concerned and their employer. Now Jim Prior 's Act also extended protection against the closed shop and, of course, it brought our law into line with our international obligations. You will recollect that the Labour Party's law was in breach of our international obligations and the European Court of Justice so found. My 1982 Act offered further protection against the closed shop, it also allowed certain classes of people who had suffered loss by the unlawful action of trades unions to seek redress. It outlawed the iniquitous system of union labour only contracting which is another means of covertly accepting the closed shop, often against the wishes of trade unions themselves. And now we intend to democratise the trades unions. This has probably caused more anger amongst some trade union leaders than anybody else. As you know, the manifesto sets out that we intend to give the right of ballot, free, fair and secret ballot, to trades unionists to elect their own trades union leaders, a horrifying proposal, I'm told. We intend to do more to ensure that they will have a chance of a ballot before being sent out on strike. We intend to make sure that they have ballot to decide whether or not they should have a political fund in their union, and we will be consulting with the trades union movement on the question of strikes in the central services, and on the manner in which we ensure that there is a fair choice for trades unionists on whether or not they should pay a political levy. I think those are the principle reasons, [end p1] apart from the general improvement in the climate of industrial relations in industry. They are the principle reasons why we are gaining support amongst trade unionists voters, as shown in the polls.
PM
Thank you. Shall we have questions on matter in Norman 's department:
Question
… .(inaudible).
Norman Tebbit
No, of course not. If somebody calls an unofficial strike now, as an individual, potentially, he can be sued in a civil action, that's all that's been the case under the civil law. The difference which I propose is that where a trades union gives official support to a trades dispute to a strike where they back it up in any way at all, then if there has not been a ballot, the trades unions funds would be at risk. That is the difference. So if it's a flash strike, as long as the trades union leadership doesn't support it, the trades union leadership and their funds are not at risk. There is no question of course of prison.
Question
… .(inaudible)
Cecil Parkinson
The Chairman of the Conservative Party is appointed by the Party leader, the Party leader is elected by the Parliamentary party and the members of Parliament and the Parliamentary candidates are chosen by the members of the Conservative Association and elected by the public, and I get my authority from the Prime Minister, who gets her authority from the members of Parliament.
PM
That's a super answer … .
Question
… . (inaudible).
Norman Tebbit
Of course, we are not abridging the right to go on strike. What we are saying is that if unlawful strikes are supported by trades unions then those people who have contracts thereby broken and suffered loss should have a right of redress. Now, that's as simple as that … .
Question
… . (inaudible)
Norman Tebbit
Let's get the thing straight, first of all, in general, those organisations do not have immunities in law. The trades unions have valuable immunities in law. Proposals I make therefore should be set against that background. You should also remember that the members of those authorities are mainly appointed by those who have been democratically elected. That again is [end p2] the difference. My proposals are that the governing body of trades unions should be democratically elected. If they seek to appoint a regional organiser for the … .polls road or Ponders End or something, well, that's their affair, and once they have been democratically elected they have every right to do so.
Question
… .(inaudible).
Tebbit
I think that the 1971 Act's principal misfortune was to be brought into effect at a time of a Statutory Incomes Policy, that in my view, was what caused the prime mischief to that Act. However, setting that on one side, we've approached the problem in a rather different way this time. We have made a series of step by step changes ensuring that at each stage, we have support, not least amongst trades unionists. We have also not sought to have powers to require trades unions to change their rules to achieve their immunities or anything of that sort. It's a much simpler, clearer and more straightforward approach, and one which gives less opportunity for trades unionists to defy the law in order to try and get themselves into prison.
Question
… .(inaudible).
Tebbit
Well, of course, contracts can be legally enforced now if people choose to say that their contract is legally enforceable. There's nothing to stop it and, if the chairman of the Financial Times wants to make that sort of agreement with his employees and they're happy with it, that's fine; but the experience of the 1971 Act was that when we said that contracts would normally be enforceable by law, unless the party has decided otherwise, the Party has always decided otherwise and the Financial Times decided otherwise at that time too. As to lay-offs, I've always had some caution about that proposal, because it could be represented that that gave an unfair advantage to the employer. Now I don't say that it necessarily would, but I don't believe that we are at a stage today, where it could be clearly shown lay-off powers are necessary, I don't know, circumstances may change, but I have no proposals to bring forward such law at the moment.
Question
… .(inaudible)
Tebbit
Well, we don't want anyone to take action, we want the law to be obeyed and we want there to be good industrial relations. Now the significance [end p3] thing about the 1982 Act is that it is having a very clear effect without having lots of cases brought to court and the same is true of the 1980 Act. We really have seen a marvellous decline in those quite disgraceful episodes of violent picketing, mass picketing and unlawful secondary picketing. We also know that such unions as the MGA have instructed their branch secretaries not to take action against their members under certain circumstances because of the possible risk to their funds, so the effect is there. We know that a number of local authorities are no longer trying to impose union labour only contracts on their contractors, so the effect is there. We don't actually want to see legal actions, we just want to see good industrial relations and fair play.
Question
(inaudible).
Tebbit
I think enormous relevance. For example, you've seen the way in which in many cases, militants have tried to push men out on strike against their will. Now just supposing that the militants had been able to get the chaps out on strike, the Albion Axle Works recently, well that would have meant loss of jobs there because that business would have closed, it would have damaged BL's heavy truck division with more loss of jobs, damaged their components suppliers, so of course, these are extremely relevant to employment prospects. Good industrial relations help our employment prospects. That's why trades unionists like them.
Question
(inaudible)
Tebbit
Oh, I think anyone can make a guess at it, please yourself. How many jobs have been lost for example at BL, how many jobs were lost on British Rail because of the railway strike, how many jobs were lost at British Steel because of the long steel strike? Impossible to say but there must be a very substantial number. How many inward investors used to be put off by the appalling tales that one read in the newspapers about bad industrial relations in Britain and how many investors are now coming in because they know industrial relations are now better?
Question
(inaudible)
Tebbit
Let's look at what I'm actually proposing. The first is the reform of the 1913 Act. The 1913 Act required that before a trades union can set up a political fund, it must properly ballot with ballot papers in secret the members of the union. Now, most of those ballots were conducted nearly [end p4] seventy years ago, very few people alive today took part in them, and my suggestion is that there should be a ballot every ten years. I think that whatever the consequences of that are, that is only fair. Secondly, I have listened very carefully to people who have expressed the view that if you gave people an absolute right, now let me rephrase that, if you change them contracting out to contracting in, very, very few people indeed would contract into the political levy and the Labour Party would collapse from lack of funds. Well, that says something about what people think of the Labour Party and the enthusiasm of trades unionists for it. I have listened carefully to that and therefore I propose that we should consult with the TUC on how we can ensure that there is a fair choice without bias excessively against those who want to pay the political levy. You've seen Gavin Laird 's quote out there, and we really could not allow that to continue. As to the future of the Labour Party, we'll have to decide whether anybody should think about those things after the election I think. I wouldn't want to accused of shooting a dead horse.
Question
(inaudible—Belgrano).
PM
No, most certainly not. We stand on the answers which we are given in the House of Commons which have already been detailed… . What makes you think it had been ordered back to port?
Question
(inaudible).
PM
The Cabinet certainly had no such information if such information is correct and I am interested that you assume that information from that source is correct when we have the information that was given in the parliamentary reply.
Question
(inaudible)
PM
The accurate information was given in the Peter Blaker 's reply. Can I just remind you, gentlemen, that the day before the Task Force had arrived and was very heavily attacked from the air, very heavily attacked indeed, perhaps you remember. You do not … . Can I just give you Lord Lever 's quote which was absolutely superb? “What on earth do you think the Belgrano was for at that time? It wasn't on a pleasure cruise or to decorate a flag day, it was there to sink our ships and drown our men.” What on earth would the British people have thought if having had the opportunity to disable it, if the next day or two days later, wherever it was heading at that particular moment, it had come into battle range was joined later on in circumstances which, I repeat, were of extreme peril for the whole expedition. The facts are set out in the reply which we had yesterday.
Question
(inaudible). [end p5]
PM
I am not going to reply to every single allegation which an Argentine minister throws, which you are very, very, very ready to believe. I am telling you that the Task Force arrived, and which you already know, was under extremely heavy attack and as Peter Blaker said in his reply, well, you have the reply so there's no point in me reading it out again. Throughout the 2nd May the cruiser and her escourts had made many changes of course, and six hours were exocets [sic].
Question
(inaudible).
PM
I am sorry but you are totally off course, if I might respectfully say so and very, very helpful to an enemy … to an enemy to publish absolutely every intelligence at a time when that enemy is still in hostilities with us and has not, I am sorry that enemy has not agreed to a permanent cessation of hostilities, and that enemy could start them again at any time. We have asked constantly for permanent cessation of hostilities, we have not had them, and I am utterly appalled at how much you really wish an enemy to know about our intelligence services.
Question
(inaudible).
PM
He is not. I do not even know if there were such orders. The information which we have was given in Peter Blaker 's answer and I must actually say to you, if it isn't too astonishing to you, that I would rather rely on information and advice from British Force Commanders than allegations made many months afterwards which come and which are undoubtedly made mischievously. Perhaps that is one of the main differences between us.
Question
(inaudible).
PM
No contracts are being carried out which post date the Argentinian attack on us. The Rolls Royce engines for the German, for the frigates which the Germans are supplying the Argentinians were ordered before. We had a very difficult decision to take whether to honour that contract for the Rolls Royce engine. You can imagine the immense damage it would have done to Rolls Royce and to British trade if we had not, so we let that Rolls Royce engine for the first frigate go and asked the Germans not to deliver the frigate until there had been a permanent cessation of hostilies. They eventually came back to us and asked if we would put, in the customary way, one of our engineers to trial when that engine was in that frigate. We absolutely refused. I would not have a British engineer on trial for a frigate to go to the Argentine. With regard to exocets, [end p6] as you know, we purchase exocets and indeed, they are purchased all over the world, some of the components come from here. There is one particularly sensitive one with a firing mechanism which is one Plessey controls, that has been withheld in so far as exocets are going to the Argentine. The licence was recalled I think last November and has not been reissued. The ordinary nuts and bolts that come from here where it is just not possible to distinguish between what goes into the Argentine exocets and what goes into any other including those which come here. The particular sensitive, it is part of the firing mechanism, which is particularly important to the exocet which is supplied by Plessey, the licence was recalled and has not been reissued, I know of no other and obviously there have been no new contracts since hostilities started. I know of no other. I've given the full sensitivity [sic] as far as I know it.
Question
(inaudible).
PM
I am sorry, I totally reject your suggestion and I totally reject the view that I should have more regard to allegations from Argentina than advice from senior members of British armed forces.
Question
(inaudible).
PM
I am very sorry, that is the allegation, that is the implied allegation.
Question
(inaudible).
PM
First, if Argentina were to default on all her past commitments then with a balance of payments of the kind she's got with both oil and beef and wheat, and she was allowed to default on all her past commitments and did, more money would be released for arms for the purchase of arms than if she has to keep those past commitments. Secondly, there was a bridging loan conditional on an IMF loan, that IMF loan as you know, was granted under certain strict conditions but I believe those conditions are being honoured. The bridging loan was of $1.1 billion of which the British banks were responsible for 10%;, all that 10%; has not yet been drawn. It was to have been followed by a medium term loan, that medium term loan has not yet been agreed. We also, of course, have many interests in Argentina, we were trying to restore normal civilian relationships with them. We mutually unfroze their money in banks here, they actually had more there than we had here and that money was released and largely paid up to the end of March were up to date. Since then there has been one or two problems and that, of course, is taken into account the negotiation of the medium term loan. The bridging loan is tied to the IMF. It is in the interests of British people that there should not be major [end p7] defaults, Argentine defaults as I indicated to you have [sic] more money to purchase armaments, secondly the default could go to other third countries both in South America which are also in difficulty and have a domino effect, which for the whole of the western banking system, could be very, very serious indeed and of course, would have an effect on our exports to those countries.
Question
(inaudible).
PM
We had a very, very good reception in Leicester yesterday with a major meeting in the market square which I understand is traditional, everyone on our side was in very good heart and cautiously optimistic, you will have heard the phrase before.
Question
(inaudible).
PM
Anyone who doesn't vote Conservative is an opponent.
Question
(inaudible).
Cecil Parkinson
I wasn't taken aback by the questions about it. I was just taken aback by the amount of time that was devoted to it, and it seemed to me to be rather excessive to spend something like seventeen minutes discussing an advertisement and about five minutes discussing the question of unemployment, which I believe was the central issue in the West Midlands and about which I wanted to have a discussion and I felt, last night, yesterday, a unanimity of youth [sic: view?] amongst the people who were there but we have had a very strong response to our advertisement and a very favourable one, and although one newspaper refused to carry it, sixteen did and we've had a number of requests for additional insertions of the advertisement into newspapers, so I don't think last night's get-together was entirely representative.
Question
(inaudible)
PM
No, Sir Keith JosephKeith is not loosing his nerve, he is merely saying please don't be complacent about the result, I would say don't count chickens before they are hatched, the poll does not open until 7 o'clock on Thursday morning, we have some days and some press conferences to go yet and another one at 11.45.
Tebbit
First, closely relating to the council of Ministers today in Luxembourg which I attended, first we reached agreement on the asbestos directive, something which I had set my heart on, so we have now reached agreement on both lead and asbestos protections for workers in industry and secondly [end p8] we reached agreement on the new rules of the social fund and I believe those will benefit this country quite strongly, so good news from Brussels. Luxembourg rather.