TUC AND CBI
Q1. Mr. Noble
asked the Prime Minister when he next plans to meet the TUC.
The Prime Minister (Mr. James Callaghan)
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Woolwich East (Mr. Cartwright) on 28th February.
Mr. Noble
Is the Prime Minister aware that Lucas Aerospace is to announce further redundancies in the North-West, thus adding to the serious unemployment in that region? Will he discuss with the TUC the shop stewards' corporate plan, which is a positive step forward, in that it makes imaginative proposals for products for peace and employment? Will he seek to remove the log-jam that is preventing that from taking place?
The Prime Minister
I shall look into the plan. I shall ask my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry to inquire into it. I assume that the firm will be discussing the matter with the trade unions.
Mr. Adley
Is the Prime Minister aware that the action of a TUC affiliated union—the National Union of Teachers—is causing widespread disruption in our schools? Worse than that, is he aware that large numbers of school-children are being left to run around the streets because they have no schools to go to learn, and the parents of many are working? Will the Prime Minister invite the TUC to ask the teachers to go [column 630]back to work so that this matter can be discussed in a more peaceful and quiet atmosphere than is possible with the dangers and stresses in many of our towns and cities today?
The Prime Minister
I am constantly being invited to pass moral strictures from the Dispatch Box, but I am not sure how much good they do. The teachers have referred this matter to arbitration. When I was a trade unionist and was negotiating, the principle always was that when a matter had been referred to arbitration those involved waited for the verdict of the arbitrators before they took action.
Mrs. Hayman
When he next meets the TUC will my right hon. Friend discuss its attitude to the November increase in child benefit rates? Is he aware that there is a strong feeling on the Government Benches that this would be the best and most effective way to provide better support for families with children?
The Prime Minister
I believe that the TUC has made its view clear. There will be an increase in child benefits in April this year from which every mother will benefit. There will be some offset because of the withdrawal of the child tax benefit, and that process is to be continued until April 1979. I cannot give an answer now because the matter is bound up with other budgetary considerations.
Mr. Cormack
Will the Prime Minister remind the leaders of the TUC that all their members are paying 84 per cent. more in retail prices than they were when he took office?
The Prime Minister
TUC members are well aware that the Government's policies are having a satisfactory effect in terms of reducing the rate of inflation. If I were to use the figure quoted by the hon. Member I am sure that the TUC members would respond by replying that is true but that when the Conservatives left office inflation was going up and now it is going down.
Prime Minister
(Engagements)
Q2. Mr. Greville Janner
asked the Prime Minister whether he will list his official engagements for 16th March.
[column 631]The Prime Minister
This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be holding further meetings with ministerial collagues and others.
Mr. Janner
When the Prime Minister meets his ministerial colleagues will he congratulate the Secretary of State for Employment on the excellent statement that he made to the House yesterday? Will he express to him the appreciation of those who represent areas that rely on the textile, clothing and footwear industries, which will benefit from the job release scheme? Although we express our anxiety about the continuing high level of unemployment, we also express our appreciation of the prodigious efforts that the Government are making.
Mr. Skinner
Give him a little job.
The Prime Minister
If my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) does not take care, I shall offer him one. I think that the House as a whole, whatever views it takes about individual matters, will conclude, as it did yesterday, that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment has devised a number of very important schemes, some more valuable than others, which are having a substantial effect on preventing people from simply going on the dole. Taking the TES as a classic case, one should note that in the North-West and in the clothing and footwear industries it has made a remarkable difference to the workers.
Mrs. Bain
Will the Prime Minister today, before his visit to Scotland, elaborate on his statement in the Glasgow Herald this morning, which indicates that 6,500 jobs are to go to Glasgow via the Ministries of Defence and Overseas Development? Will he give us a firm time for this and indicate how many of the staff will be recruited locally?
The Prime Minister
The hon. Lady is right to say that a substantial number of jobs will be going from England to Scotland because of regional dispersal policy. I remind her that if Scotland were independent it is doubtful whether the same process would take place.
Mr. Hoyle
Will my right hon. Friend, whilst accepting my congratulations on the TES, note the growing concern about [column 632]unemployment in the North-West and in manufacturing industries particularly? Does this not point to the need for planning agreements, and should we not make them compulsory?
The Prime Minister
I believe that planning agreements would have a valuable effect in bringing workers into a full knowledge of the proposals and plans of the industries in which they work and in allowing them to make comments on the plans and, in certain circumstances, to influence decisions. However, I cannot say that would have the result of reducing unemployment. It is worth noting that at present unemployment is going down. It has fallen for five months in succession and I believe that trend may well continue. I believe, too, that the number of vacancies is going up. Unemployment is still far too high, and that is one reason why I am pursuing contacts with leaders throughout the Western world to see whether we can get concerted action to overcome the problem of the more than 16 million people now out of work in OECD countries.
Mr. Prior
Is it not an extraordinary state of affairs when the Prime Minister can be congratulated by his Back Benchers on achieving a state of unemployment of 1.4 million, with another 400,000 people having to be subsidised in jobs—a potential total of 1.9 million unemployed under a Government who talked about “Back to Work with Labour” ?
Hon. Members
Hear, hear.
The Prime Minister
I do not think that is a matter for congratulation, but those who cheer that statement should reflect on what the levels of unemployment would be if subsidies were abolished, if grants were done away with, and if the whole policy of the Conservative Party of cutting public expenditure even more were carried out. We should be talking then about 3 million unemployed.
Q3. Mr. Brotherton
asked the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for 16th March.
The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Member to the reply which I have just given to my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Leicester, West (Mr. Janner).
[column 633]Mr. Brotherton
Will the Prime Minister explain to the House his Government's cowardly and craven failure to instruct the Permanent Representative at the United Nations, Mr. Ivor Richard, to veto the Security Council resolution on Rhodesia last Monday?
The Prime Minister
That has been explained, but I shall try to instruct the hon. Gentleman again. We believe that the Anglo-American plan offers the best opportunity of bringing in the Patriotic Front, which, as the Leader of the Opposition said recently, is important, and will be the best way of solving this problem. We do not believe that the present plan as it stands and as it has been conceived internally is likely to achieve that end. For that reason, therefore, although we think it is an important step forward, we did not think it right to veto it in the Security Council and we are continuing to work to bring the parties together.
Mr. Radice
Is my right hon. Friend aware that we on the Labour Benches welcome his initiative on the world economy, but does he agree that we need a wide-ranging package to tackle the very difficult problems of international growth, international trade, international monetary stability and international liquidity?
The Prime Minister
For about 18 months I have been endeavouring to get other world leaders to see the necessity for common action in this area, and I believe that there are now growing signs of a desire to take common action. It is my ambition to see whether we can construct a plan which would be based on the approaches of all countries in time for the July Summit in Bonn. The world needs not only the series of measures that my hon. Friend has described but a feeling that the world's major economies are taking a grip on the problems, so that confidence can grow. There is a necessity for that, I believe, especially in the United States and in some countries on the Continent.
Mrs. Thatcher
Why does James Callaghanthe Prime Minister always blame the world economy for this country's faults? Is he not aware that most of our competitors have done far better than we have in terms of growth productivity and unemployment, and with far lower taxes than we have? Would it not be better to remedy the faults in his [column 634]own economic policy in this country than to look overseas for our salvation?
The Prime Minister
I try to do both—that is to say, I never fail to point out the need for higher productivity in this country, or the need for greater efficiency and aggression in our salesmanship overseas. But the right hon. Lady should not try to extract the mote from my eye before she extracts the beam from her own. There is a substantial international dimension to the problem of world trade and world prosperity, and I hope that one day she will recognise that.
NEW ZEALAND
Q4. Mr. Marten
asked the Prime Minister if he will seek to pay an official visit to New Zealand.
The Prime Minister
I have at present no plans to visit New Zealand. However, I was pleased to meet the Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand during his visit to London last week, when we had most useful discussions.
Mr. Marten
Will the Prime Minister make it absolutely clear to the people of New Zealand that we in this Parliament have no intention of allowing their agricultural products to be squeezed out of this country by the common agricultural policy? Is he aware that the New Zealanders have tried to find new markets for their products because of our membership of the Common Market, but that they have been met head-on by heavily subsidised or dumped Common Market products in competition? Will he give an assurance that the Government will support New Zealand in its crisis?
The Prime Minister
Since the renegotiations and the talks that we had in Dublin at the Heads of Governments meeting in 1975 we secured an extremely valuable agreement on behalf of New Zealand in respect of butter and some other commodities——
Mr. Jay
It was only temporary.
The Prime Minister
Yes, it was temporary. We were unable to get a permanent agreement. Consistently since then my right hon. Friends the Minister of Agriculture and the Foreign Secretary have taken up the cudgels on behalf of [column 635]New Zealand in these discussions in the Common Market, and we shall continue to do so.
Mrs. Dunwoody
Will my right hon. Friend be kind enough to try to persuade the other Heads of Governments that the EEC is in grave danger of taking so many protectionist moves against other Governments that it will soon be very difficult for us to trade openly? Is he aware that Australia has already made its position clear? Will he make sure that there are no barriers to agricultural imports coming into the Community?
The Prime Minister
I could not guarantee that would be accepted with acclamation, because we are facing a situation in which protectionism is growing throughout the world. On balance, I believe that would be disadvantageous to this country. Therefore, we constantly press for the restriction of protectionist devices, except in certain selective cases where there are structural differences, and that will continue to be our policy.