Previous Section | Home Page |
Mr. Forsyth : Where now the crusade on behalf of wages councils? The leader of that crusade will not even give a commitment to bring back the councils.
Mr. Dobson : As the Minister should know, our crusade is not on behalf of any particular structure ; it is about the people who are presently being paid less than £3 an hour and who the Government want to be paid even less. We believe that those people should and would benefit from the Labour party's proposal to introduce a national minimum wage at a rate far higher than they currently receive.
Mr. Forsyth : I think that the hon. Gentleman was telling the House that he has no intention of bringing back wages councils. Why? Because he has listened to the
Column 239
arguments advanced by my hon. Friends today and has been persuaded. The structure in which the hon. Member for Holborn and St. Pancras should be interested is that of his own argument and campaign that has just collapsed around his ears.The hon. Member for Gordon (Mr. Bruce) was even more opaque about the Liberal party's intentions in respect of wages councils and a minimum wage. I shall happily give way to the hon. Gentleman if he wants to tell us the Liberal party's position. Once again, we see an Opposition who oppose, but have no idea about how to make progress on the issue.
I have the impression that Opposition Members have convinced themselves that wages councils are wholly concerned with combating poverty. The Opposition ignore improvements in living standards and the changes in the work force. They ignore the existence of targeted benefits and the fact that the majority of workers covered by councils are in two-income households.
There are almost as many low-paid workers from the richest 10 per cent. of households in this country as from the poorest. The biggest cause of unemployment-- [Interruption.] Wage fixing is a cause of unemployment, but the biggest cause of poverty in Britain is unemployment, and wages councils put more people on the dole. My hon. Friend the Member for Eltham (Mr. Bottomley), who was a distinguished predecessor in the Department of Employment, acknowledges that wages councils destroy jobs. He raised a number of other important issues, which I hope to have the opportunity of discussing with him in future.
Mrs. Gorman : Is my hon. Friend aware of the evidence from the United States--which does have a minimum wage law--which shows that every time the minimum wage is increased, there is an increase in the number of relatively low-skilled workers who lose their jobs? That has been happening since 1947 when the law was introduced in America, where it has been a disaster.
Mr. Forsyth : I agree with my hon. Friend that there is no point in giving people the right to a minimum wage if the price paid is to have no job.
Mr. Bob Cryer (Bradford, South) : Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Forsyth : I should like to make some progress first. The councils impose rigid and bureaucratic constraints on employers and workers. Every year the councils meet to set a new minimum rate. Every year there are percentage increases, sometimes well above the rate of inflation. Every percentage increase sets the going rate for wage increases over an entire industry. Every firm, large or small, whatever its position, comes under pressure to raise the pay of all employees, however much they earn. The hon. Member for Preston (Mrs. Wise) must recognsie that the firms have to do so without regard to the factors that matter : market conditions, productivity, performance and ability to pay. As my hon. Friend the Member for Teignbridge (Mr. Nicholls) told the House, employers, trade unionists, academics, and City experts all accept that legal wage fixing destroys jobs --yet the hon. Member for Strathkelvin and Bearsden doubts the existence of the evidence.
Column 240
The Opposition leadership refuses to accept the large body of independent research which shows the link between pay and jobs. It refuses to accept what is obvious to every family in the country : the more things cost, the less people can afford ; the higher the pay increase, the lower the number of jobs. In Labour's "Alice in Wonderland" world, if things cost twice as much, people can have twice as many.I am surprised that the Opposition's minimum wage is only two thirds of median men's earnings. If the minimum wage does not put jobs in jeopardy, why not pay everyone even more? Why not raise the minimum wage to average earnings? Why not increase it so that everyone is better off and no one suffers? This is the economics of the madhouse, and it is the economics of Labour Front-Bench spokesmen. The need for wages councils has long since disappeared. It is time for them to go.
It is also time individuals had the right to join the union of their choice. The Opposition, to their discredit, oppose that, claiming that it will jeopardise single union agreements. We have heard many fine words about single union agreements from Opposition Members, and from the hon. Member for Holborn and St. Pancras in particular. They exhibit all the zeal of new converts. I have not forgotten how opposition to single union agreements by trade unions robbed Dundee and the north-east of Scotland, where I was brought up, of 1,000 jobs and £40 million worth of investment, as Ford was sent scurrying to Spain. Then, in the same year, the Electrical, Electronics, Telecommunications and Plumbing Union was drummed out of the TUC because it had signed single union agreements. For the TUC to defend Bridlington while extolling the merits of single union deals is breathtaking hypocrisy.
The provision in the Bill is concerned solely with trade union membership rights. It will mean that a person who wishes to join a trade union can no longer be told--by the TUC, by union leaders, by an employer, or by anyone else--which union he or she must join.
Mr. John Evans : Will the Minister explain something that the Secretary of State refused to explain? There is a single union agreement at Nissan in Sunderland. If a person who is a member of the Amalgamated Engineering Union decides to leave that union and to join, say, the TGWU, will he have the right to be represented in negotiations by the TGWU with Nissan management?
Mr. Forsyth : That sort of proposal was included in Labour's 1975 legislation, which was abandoned and which was not even supported by the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service because it proved unworkable. Employers will remain free as they are now to decide which, if any, trade union they want to recognise. That is an entirely separate matter from the right of individuals to join a trade union of their choice.
Contrary to claims by the hon. Member for Holborn and St. Pancras, there is no question of our seeking to outlaw the so-called check-off arrangements, as they are outlawed in socialist France. That is neither the intention nor the effect of our proposals--
Mr. Michael Stern (Bristol, North-West) : Why not?
Mr. Forsyth : Because we are reasonable. Employers and trade unions will still be able to enter into an
Column 241
agreement to operate the check-off, but they will no longer be able to force a trade union member to accept such an arrangement against his wishes. As with other measures in the Bill, the Government on this occasion are on the side of the trade union member. As my hon. Friend the Member for Hertfordshire, North (Mr. Heald) said in a splendid contribution, no one should have to suffer check-off deductions unless he has given his clear written authority in advance.Mr. Dobson : Does the Department know of any examples of union deductions being checked off people's wages when those people have not given their consent? If it does, why were those examples not included in the answer I was given by one of the hon. Gentleman's ministerial colleagues?
Mr. Forsyth : A convener from the Union of Construction, Allied Trades and Technicians was reported in The Sunday Times last year to have said :
"a member known to me thought he had been paying his contributions for two and a half years and subsequently found he was not a member now he asks where the money has gone is he alone?"
Is he indeed? The hon. Gentleman should know.
We no longer live in a world dominated by the collective ; a world where labour is treated as a homogenous block--
Mr. Dobson : Is it true that the company that stopped the money itself gives money to the Tory party?
Mr. Forsyth : What an astonishing question. The hon. Gentleman made it clear early in the debate that he does not understand the position in respect of individual consent for deductions of subscriptions. He asks me for an example of abuse and he comes back with a comment like that. It shows where the hon. Gentleman's loyalties truly lie. The Bill is about creating new rights and freedoms ; rights and freedoms which recognise the responsibilities of employers to their employees, of trade unions to their members, and of those who provide goods and services to the community at large. It champions the individual, whether as an employee, a trade union member or a consumer. In doing so, it provides protection against the unscrupulous employer and against the undemocratic or improper actions of trade unions or their leaders.
The debate has demonstrated in stark terms one of the fundamental differences between the Government's policies and those of the Opposition. The provisions in the Bill reinforce the Government's commitment to an employment market and an industrial relations climate based on the principles of flexibility, freedom and fairness--flexibility to meet changing business needs and the aspirations and circumstances of individual employees ; freedom from unwarranted Government regulation and from manipulation by anti-competitive trade union practices ; and fairness which derives from an effective package of individual employment rights. In opposing the Bill the Opposition reveal their true colours. Their job- destroying national minimum wage and social chapter, which they espouse in the name of fairness, would hit hardest those for whom they sanctimoniously protest their support.
Column 242
Worst of all, the Opposition have shown themselves to be the party which puts the interests of collective organisation above those of individual rights and freedom. In opposing the Bill's proposals for further reform of trade union legislation--reforms which respond to clear evidence of shortcomings in the existing law--the Opposition are confirming their established role as the mouthpiece of the trade union movement.Do the Opposition really want to deny employees the right not to be victimised on health and safety grounds? Do they want to deny pregnant workers protection against dismissal? Do they want to prevent people receiving a proper statement of their terms and conditions of employment?
None of those new rights will come into law without the Bill. Will the Opposition vote tonight to deny trade union members the new democratic rights and protections included in the Bill? Do they still want to be seen as the party which denies individual trade union members proper statutory protection against mismanagement or abuse in their union's affairs?
Are the Opposition happy to see those who misuse members' subscriptions go unpunished? Do they want to prevent union members from knowing how much their leaders are paid? Do they condone elections where mythical Mickey Mouse and dubious Donald Duck can cast their votes again alongside real union members?
Will the Opposition vote to deny individual citizens protection against disruption and hardship which will come through the new citizen's right and the requirement for unions to give at least seven days' notice of strike calls? Or are the Opposition, as so often in the past, still to be cast in the role of the striker's friend? The Opposition are singing from the old- fashioned song book of the trade union barons on whose patronage and support they still depend. But they are out of tune not only with the needs of the British economy and labour market of the 1990s, but with the aspirations and expectations of millions of individuals, including many trade union members--trade union members who, as the results at successive general elections have shown, continue to ignore the advice of their leaders by voting for the Government and supporting our reforms in this area. In their name I commend the Bill to the House.
Question put, That the Bill be now read a Second time : The House divided : Ayes 312, Noes 277.
Division No. 88] [10 pm
AYES
Adley, Robert
Ainsworth, Peter (East Surrey)
Aitken, Jonathan
Alexander, Richard
Alison, Rt Hon Michael (Selby)
Allason, Rupert (Torbay)
Amess, David
Ancram, Michael
Arbuthnot, James
Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)
Arnold, Sir Thomas (Hazel Grv)
Ashby, David
Aspinwall, Jack
Atkins, Robert
Atkinson, David (Bour'mouth E)
Atkinson, Peter (Hexham)
Baker, Rt Hon K. (Mole Valley)
Baker, Nicholas (Dorset North)
Baldry, Tony
Banks, Matthew (Southport)
Bates, Michael
Batiste, Spencer
Bellingham, Henry
Bendall, Vivian
Beresford, Sir Paul
Biffen, Rt Hon John
Blackburn, Dr John G.
Body, Sir Richard
Bonsor, Sir Nicholas
Booth, Hartley
Boswell, Tim
Bottomley, Rt Hon Virginia
Bowden, Andrew
Bowis, John
Boyson, Rt Hon Sir Rhodes
Brandreth, Gyles
Brazier, Julian
Bright, Graham
Column 243
Brooke, Rt Hon PeterBrown, M. (Brigg & Cl'thorpes)
Browning, Mrs. Angela
Bruce, Ian (S Dorset)
Budgen, Nicholas
Burns, Simon
Burt, Alistair
Butcher, John
Butler, Peter
Butterfill, John
Carlisle, John (Luton North)
Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)
Carrington, Matthew
Carttiss, Michael
Cash, William
Channon, Rt Hon Paul
Chaplin, Mrs Judith
Clappison, James
Clark, Dr Michael (Rochford)
Clarke, Rt Hon Kenneth (Ruclif)
Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey
Coe, Sebastian
Colvin, Michael
Congdon, David
Conway, Derek
Coombs, Anthony (Wyre For'st)
Coombs, Simon (Swindon)
Cope, Rt Hon Sir John
Cormack, Patrick
Couchman, James
Cran, James
Currie, Mrs Edwina (S D'by'ire)
Davies, Quentin (Stamford)
Davis, David (Boothferry)
Day, Stephen
Deva, Nirj Joseph
Devlin, Tim
Dickens, Geoffrey
Dicks, Terry
Dorrell, Stephen
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James
Dover, Den
Duncan, Alan
Duncan-Smith, Iain
Dunn, Bob
Durant, Sir Anthony
Dykes, Hugh
Eggar, Tim
Elletson, Harold
Evans, David (Welwyn Hatfield)
Evans, Jonathan (Brecon)
Evans, Nigel (Ribble Valley)
Evans, Roger (Monmouth)
Evennett, David
Faber, David
Fabricant, Michael
Fairbairn, Sir Nicholas
Fenner, Dame Peggy
Field, Barry (Isle of Wight)
Fishburn, Dudley
Forman, Nigel
Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)
Forth, Eric
Fowler, Rt Hon Sir Norman
Fox, Sir Marcus (Shipley)
French, Douglas
Fry, Peter
Gale, Roger
Gallie, Phil
Gardiner, Sir George
Garel-Jones, Rt Hon Tristan
Garnier, Edward
Gill, Christopher
Gillan, Cheryl
Goodlad, Rt Hon Alastair
Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles
Gorman, Mrs Teresa
Gorst, John
Grant, Sir Anthony (Cambs SW)
Greenway, Harry (Ealing N)
Greenway, John (Ryedale)
Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth, N)
Grylls, Sir Michael
Hague, William
Hamilton, Rt Hon Archie (Epsom)
Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)
Hampson, Dr Keith
Hanley, Jeremy
Hannam, Sir John
Hargreaves, Andrew
Harris, David
Haselhurst, Alan
Hawkins, Nick
Hawksley, Warren
Hayes, Jerry
Heald, Oliver
Heathcoat-Amory, David
Hendry, Charles
Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael
Hicks, Robert
Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L.
Hill, James (Southampton Test)
Hogg, Rt Hon Douglas (G'tham)
Horam, John
Hordern, Sir Peter
Howard, Rt Hon Michael
Howarth, Alan (Strat'rd-on-A)
Howell, Rt Hon David (G'dford)
Howell, Ralph (North Norfolk)
Hughes Robert G. (Harrow W)
Hunt, Rt Hon David (Wirral W)
Hunt, Sir John (Ravensbourne)
Hunter, Andrew
Hurd, Rt Hon Douglas
Jack, Michael
Jackson, Robert (Wantage)
Jenkin, Bernard
Jessel, Toby
Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)
Jones, Robert B. (W Hertfdshr)
Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine
Key, Robert
Kilfedder, Sir James
King, Rt Hon Tom
Kirkhope, Timothy
Knapman, Roger
Knight, Mrs Angela (Erewash)
Knight, Greg (Derby N)
Knox, David
Kynoch, George (Kincardine)
Lait, Mrs Jacqui
Lamont, Rt Hon Norman
Lang, Rt Hon Ian
Lawrence, Sir Ivan
Legg, Barry
Leigh, Edward
Lester, Jim (Broxtowe)
Lidington, David
Lilley, Rt Hon Peter
Lloyd, Peter (Fareham)
Lord, Michael
Luff, Peter
Lyell, Rt Hon Sir Nicholas
MacGregor, Rt Hon John
MacKay, Andrew
Maclean, David
McLoughlin, Patrick
McNair-Wilson, Sir Patrick
Madel, David
Maitland, Lady Olga
Major, Rt Hon John
Malone, Gerald
Mans, Keith
Marland, Paul
Marlow, Tony
Marshall, John (Hendon S)
Marshall, Sir Michael (Arundel)
Martin, David (Portsmouth S)
Mates, Michael
Mawhinney, Dr Brian
Next Section
| Home Page |