Part of the debate – in the House of Commons am 12:00 am ar 4 Rhagfyr 1973.
I trust that the hon. Member for Swansea, East (Mr. McBride) will understand if I do not follow his argument but go on to the general theme behind the motion which calls for repeal of the Industrial Relations Act. I appreciate that a number of Opposition Members would like this to happen, and wish that it should not be replaced, but before coming to a conclusion I suggest there is merit in considering the law relating to behaviour in other areas.
The law has been found necessary for comments that we make and write about each other. The law intervenes in our behaviour towards one another. The law upholds respect for other people's possessions. The law comes into joining people together in marriage and during separation. If it is necessary for the law to be brought into these domestic spheres, surely in our behaviour at work, which is the only sphere not covered, there must be some protection, as there is in the home. True, in the home the behaviour of the individual is involved, whereas at work we have collective responsibility, but most of us know that when groups of people collect together, whether in this House or at a football match, they often behave slightly differently from the way that they behave when they are alone.
I should be the first to accept that the law does not make us like each other. It will not make bad managements good and it will not stop people intent on industrial anarchy refraining from that action. That is because, as my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Mr. David Mitchell) suggested, all these are matters of human relations.
An hon. Member mentioned the number of strikes and days lost, but he did not refer to the nature of those strikes. There is one great difference between industrial relations in this country and in other countries. For example, in the United States people know when strikes are going to take place. They can budget and adjust their production for them. This ritual dance is understood, and the unions and management go hell for leather at each other trying to get the best bargain. But here, so often no one knows when a strike is to take place. Not only does it affect a firm considerably when it has taken place but it has a devastating impact upon many people employed in other industries.
One need look no further than the motor car industry. I am not suggesting that all disruptions have been lightning strikes. Some have been genuine clashes between management and unions. However, production of 400,000 motor cars has been lost to date this year and, in terms of wages lost, the effects have been quite catastrophic for the families involved.
It is difficult to understand why people in industry do not wish to have their agreements binding by law when, as individuals, they are only too prepared to have such agreements. People are willing to have binding agreements for mortgages and for hire purchase. What is more, they intend to stick by them.