The Press MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1966 Mr Wilson And The T.U.C.

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31162, 12 September 1966, Page 12

The Press MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1966 Mr Wilson And The T.U.C.

As expected, Britain’s trade unions divided sharply at Blackpool over the Government’s prices and incomes policy, and especially over the provisions for freezing wages. Resolutions generally supporting the Government’s policies secured majorities of rather more than a million votes out of a total “ card ” of nine million. The discontent was even more sharply emphasised by the small majorities in favour of legal sanctions to enforce the incomes policy should voluntary restraints fail, and supporting the decision of the general council of the Trades Union Congress to approve the wage freeze. The result has left observers sceptical of the Government’s ability to carry out this vital part of its economic policy. Has the congress vote, then, solved nothing? A decision of the Trades Union Congress is no more than an expression of majority opinion. It is binding on no-one. It will not prevent Mr Frank Cousins from interpreting the wishes of the 1,400,000 members of his Transport and General Workers Union to mean that he must continue to fight the wage freeze. But it will be more difficult for him to undermine the Government’s policy. The trade unionists’ traditional respect for majority decisions democratically arrived at will be a psychological barrier which even Mr Cousins may not find easy to surmount. For the time being, at least, the Prime Minister has gained in prestige as a consequence of the vote. Some questioned the wisdom of Mr Wilson’s decision to address the congress; and certainly a rebuff for the Government in face of a direct appeal from the Prime Minister might have shaken confidence at home and abroad. The “ Economist ” thought that in addressing such an assembly Mr Wilson was dignifying it beyond its deserts; the “ only reason ” it saw for taking the gamble was to talk to the country, and to the holders of sterling, over the unions’ heads. The vote may have helped to convince foreigners that the industrial weaknesses of Britain are being resolutely tackled; and other sections of the community in Britain may be encouraged to more strenuous efforts in the economic battle by this evidence that the majority of the trade union movement, at least, will not withhold from the Government the support to which it is entitled. What is so far so good, in fact, looks much better when the vote is examined against the background of Mr Wilson’s speech to the Congress last Monday. As he has shown once or twice lately, Mr Wilson does not always attune himself well to an occasion. There was a risk of his striking a note that would antagonise. It might have been worse—the “ Economist ” thought it would have been “ dreadful ” —if the Prime Minister were found begging for support. However, even the “ Economist ”, which saw a “ stark and simple ” issue between Mr Wilson and the unions—“ Who rules here ?”—would not think that the Prime Minister had side-stepped fundamental issues in his speech. There would be no letting up in the severity of the Governmerit’s measures until Britain was paying its way, and was seen to be paying its way, Mr Wilson said. He told unionists he would not be deterred by opposition to the wage freeze policy; for Britain to pay its way, “the Gov- “ ernment must govern If there was a challenge, the Government would reluctantly replace voluntary action by enforcement, Mr Wilson said. It says a good deal for its appreciation of Britain’s position by the T.U.C. majority that the Government received support—even if grudging support—after hearing an expression of Government policy which sets aside, for a time at any rate, the trade unions’ jealouslyguarded bargaining privileges.