The following Question stood upon the Order Paper:

To ask the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what progress he has made in developing a policy for prices and incomes.

With permission, I will now answer Question No. 95.

As the House will be aware, I and my colleagues have been discussing this subject with representatives of the trade unions and of management since the day we came to power. I am glad to say that we have today reached agreement on the terms of a joint statement setting out the principles on which a prices and incomes policy should be developed and expressing the willingness of the organisations concerned to co-operate with the Government in the task of giving practical effect to the agreed intentions.

We shall be meeting together to sign the statement formally in a few hours time. I will make copies of the statement available in the Vote Office later this afternoon and will also circulate the text in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

I think that the House will feel with me that the sense of national purpose and the spirit of mutual confidence reflected in this agreement are most exciting. This is, of course, only the first step. But to have taken that is tremendous and we shall lose no time in entering into the next stage of discussions with trade union and management representatives.

Today's agreement provides the foundation on which a fair and an effective policy for prices and incomes can be developed and without which our economy cannot become strong.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his statement will be received with the greatest possible pleasure in all quarters of the House? It represents a most significant advance within a free system of collective bargaining and may very well create a watershed in the history of industrial relations in the country. Will he, therefore, accept the warm congratulations of hon. Members on the part that he has played in drawing up this declaration of intent? Will he convey the same congratulations to both parties to the signing ceremony later this afternoon, to the representatives of the workpeople and management?

I am very much obliged to my hon. Friend, but let me say this about the latter part of his supplementary question. The representatives of the trade unions and of management are the men who ought to be congratulated. They are showing great courage because they are entering upon what must of necessity be uncharted seas. I shall have the greatest pleasure in conveying to them what my hon. Friend has said.

I think that there will be general acknowledgement of the fact that agreement between Government, management and unions on this matter has been generally sought for a long period and that progress on these lines is clearly desirable. In view of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman has acknowledged that this is only the first step, and that practical implementation is of immense significance, could he say when he will be able to make a statement on the practical steps which are to follow?

Not yet, and the right hon. Gentleman who failed so signally in this field, if I may say so, must come out of the spirit of last night and now give us some active help in something which he knows is essential.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say, first, whether this agreement is dependent upon any assumed rate of growth and, if so, what rate is assumed for the coming year? Secondly, can he say whether it establishes any criterion for salaries in the public service and, it so, what criterion that may be?

The right hon. Gentleman will have seen and read carefully a statement issued after the last meeting of the National Economic Development Council, in which we said that we were to produce a plan the details of which we hoped to have available in the spring, the full details of which we hoped to have available in the summer, and which will be predicated by a 4 per cent. rate of growth and focused on the year 1970.

As to the second point, I do not see any way in which one can have a policy which does not apply both in the public and the private sector.

In view of the fact that an incomes policy by definition is based on the acceptance of the fact that there was immense injustice created in the old free-for-all system, may we have an assurance that the incomes policy will take account of the fact that many of these injustices remain to be corrected until we get a fair start and that the policy will not, therefore, necessarily exclude some adjustments in earnings?

May we get it clear that this is a prices and incomes policy. I think that when my hon. Friend sees the terms of the statement he will see that we have this point much in mind.

Despite the unfortunate and unwarranted attack on my right hon. Friend the Member for Barnet (Mr. Maudling), may I say to the right hon. Gentleman that on this side of the House we congratulate him on what he has achieved, because without an incomes and prices policy there is no hope for us. If the leaders of the trade unions and of the employers run into difficulty with their own people, will the right hon. Gentleman do his best to help them to get the people lower down to accept the policy?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman read the speech which I made on Sunday, which really meant that I was doing what I believe he thinks I ought to do.

If, as the right hon. Gentleman said, my right hon. Friend the Member for Barnet (Mr. Maudling) did not succeed, will he say how much that was due to the right hon. Gentleman and his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister telling some of their friends in the trade union movement that they did not want my right hon. Friend to succeed?

It was not at all true. But if the front bench opposite thought it was true, I must say, on the basis of the statement which was made last night, that they are paying it back with interest without regard to the effect on the currency of this country.

The right hon. Gentleman seems to object to statements of fact. Would he recall the attitude that his party took to the National Incomes Commission and the immense damage done to an incomes policy by that attitude?

The only thing that I object to is selling Britain short in the interests of party politics.

Following is the Statement: