At the National Staff Side there was a discussion on the Statement of Intent and whether the pay principles as operated in the Civil Service were in conflict with that statement. The Secretary General had had previous discussions with the Financial Secretary to the Treasury and following his report the Staff Side came to a decision which is recorded in the following letter which Mr. Richard Hayward sent to the Financial Secretary. On 11th February you were good enough to hand me, for the information of the Staff Side, a copy of Her Majesty’s Command Paper “Machinery of Prices and Incomes Policy.” In our brief, but informal, discusston I stressed the importance which the Staff Side attach to the independence of the Civil Service Arbitration Tribunal machinery and I went on to add that the Staff Side would wish to ensure that their constituents were
from Peter Price not discriminated against in any way in pay matters. I told you that the document would be before the Staff Side at their meeting on March 4th, after which I would let you know their formal position. I now do so. The Staff Side endorsed the views which I expressed to you and reiterated the point put to you in their letter of 7th Fanuary:—
“The Staff Side do not think that the pay principles which operate in the Civil Service are in conflict with the Statement of Intent. The principles, and the machinery, have been well tried and do no more than ensure that in general Civil Service pay does not fall behind outside pay movements.” They will watch very closely the development and operation of the new machinery and they reserve their right to make representations on its application to the Civil Service as and when they consider the moment appropriate.” The reason for the apprehension of the MLSA is clear. The tendency to use workers in the public sector as pay policy guinea pigs was very pronounced under the Tories. The loss of ground made in those 13 years has still not been recovered.
Woodworkers’ Peace Initiative
WO interesting defence resolutions have been submitted by Woodworkers’ branches for their Annual Conference. They are from Anniesland and ~ Raynes’ Park branches and read as follows: Anniesland Branch—Resolved— “That this Conference calls on the Labour Government to embark on a policy that will drastically reduce military expenditure — particularly overseas military expenditure. The money saved can thus be used to pay for essential social services at home, and contribute to the solution of the economic problems of Britain.” — Votes for, 27; votes against, nil. Members present 29.
from James Smith Raynes Park Branch—Resolved— “Conference recognises the necessity of reducing the armaments expenditure to solve Britain’s economic problems. We call for a withdrawal of troops from foreign bases, and support the right of native peoples to self-determination.” Carried unanimously. Members present, 14. Commenting on the second, the Standing Orders Committee has recommended that it be withdrawn in favour of the first. Many will hope this does not happen, because Raynes Park is making a much more specific demand than is the other branch.
Secularists