Skip to main content

Cheslyn Hay

Volume 891: debated on Thursday 1 May 1975

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

Q5.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will pay an official visit to Cheslyn Hay.

I have been asked to reply.

My right hon. Friend has at present no plans to do so, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that reply will receive a mixed reception in my constituency? Will he, however, arrange for the Prime Minister to explain to my constituents, and others all over the country, exactly where the money is to come from for the British Leyland extravaganza? It would seem from reports in today's Press that there is a degree of conflict here. May we have clarification as soon as possible?

I am sorry about that supplementary question, because I had armed myself with a map, in view of the supplementary questions about the Prime Minister's visits over the past few weeks. We are getting all round the country.

I am afraid that I have forgotten the main point of the hon. Gentleman's question.

The Prime Minister dealt with the financing of British Leyland in some detail in his statement and in supplementary questions last week. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry will be dealing with the financial side of the matter in more detail during the debate on the affirmative resolution, which will be before the Whitsun Recess.

Q6.

asked the Prime Minister if he will instigate an attitude survey to ascertain what meaning the social contract has to the electorate at large.

I have been asked to reply.

No, Sir. The electorate's support for the whole range of Government policies included in the social contract was confirmed in two General Elections last year.

I think that there may be some misunderstanding here. No map is required. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the advantage of a survey would be to show what sort of appreciation there is of this matter among the electorate? The NOP survey showed that 75 per cent. of those interviewed had no idea what we are up to on this matter. It might be better for the Government to undertake such a survey.

There was an NOP survey on this subject in February. I agree that there is a great need to explain the issue to the public. The Government have a responsibility, and I have always argued that the Opposition have a responsibility, which they do not accept. They have abandoned a statutory policy for incomes but they refuse to tell us their policy now. They have attacked the social contract and tried to knock it ever since the two elections last year. We have a responsibility to explain our policy and the Opposition have a responsibility to explain theirs and not to denigrate what we are doing.

As the Government refuse to publish a White Paper on what the social contract means, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether, included in that 75 per cent. of the people who do not know what it means, are most of his right hon. Friends in the Cabinet?

There is absolutely no need to publish a White Paper. The social contract is in two documents and I shall be very pleased to send a copy of them to the hon. Member, free of charge and free of VAT, so that he can read them.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is very important to get across to the country the fact that the social contract is meant to apply to the higher-paid professional groups just as much as to everybody else?

Will the right hon. Gentleman therefore make the same point to the Secretary of State for Social Services, who suggested that the social contract does not apply to those who are not subject to collective bargaining? In the context of the doctors' dispute, she said that the matter should be judged by comparability. Is this not a receipe for leapfrogging inflation?

The word "comparability" in this respect is used in a different sense. There are two ways of using it. It can be used in pay research procedures—where it is quite specific—or in the generalised sense. The social contract rules it out completely in the generalised sense. In recent years all Governments have accepted the concept of comparability for the Civil Service.

In view of the right hon. Gentleman's earlier emphasis on the extent to which wage inflation is now causing our general inflation, and in view of his emphasis and that of the Government generally on the social contract as the means of attacking wage inflation, will he please come back to the question posed earlier by my right hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Prior)? Will he make it plain that wage increases which are meant to take account of the cost of living should not compensate either for increases in direct taxation or for the impact of increases in indirect taxation? Will the right hon. Gentleman make that absolutely plain?

Yes, I make that absolutely plain. Let there be no doubt about that fact. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor made this absolutely clear, too. I hope that I have not given the impression that I am not giving a clear answer.