POLITICAL COMMENTARY

ANGUS MAUDE, MP

The Commons rose for their unusually short Christmas recess ('What it amounts to,' said one percipient Tory to another, 'is that we lose a week's hunting now so that the Peers won't have to miss a week's shooting in August',) with the Government in better nick than even its most sanguine supporters had previously hoped. For this the electrical workers' unions were almost entirely responsible.

In other directions a few faint danger signals can be seen glowing on the horizon. No one is happy about the handling of the succession to the Speakership—after all, it is going a bit far to release the name of the Government's favoured candidate to the press before back-benchers have been con- sulted at all about the man who is to be the guardian of their rights—and it is still not certain that we shall not see a contest.

Nor was there universal satisfaction at the release of the Roskill Commission's pro- posals in the form of a written answer to a question on the afternoon of the Christmas adjournment. This method of avoiding in- terrogation on an awkward subject has been used before, but has always been rightly resented. The story this time was•that Roskill couldn't get the draft out any earlier; but in that case it is hard to see why the an- nouncement could not have beep postponed until 12 January, which would at least have given the inhabitants of Cublington a hap- pier Christmas.

Although the precedent is a bad one, and should not be allowed to pass uncondemned, it probably doesn't matter much who an- nounces what, when and to whom about the Third London Airport. The Roskill Com- mission has devoted an immense amount of time, money and paper to the subject. It has done the job it was set up for, which was to get Tony Crosland off the Stansted hook on which Douglas Jay had impaled the Labour Government, and its findings now are about as relevant to what will actually happen as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

make it about even money whether there will be a new London airport at all. But I will lay very long odds indeed that no Government can now pick an inland site and get away with it. The mood of the people is, to put it mildly, against it.

Just as the mood of the people was—and not too mildly, either—against the electricity workers. Fortunately, the Government spotted this just in time and held on long enough for the unions to spot it too. We are now entering on a crucial chapter in our affairs. which might well be entitled 'Waiting for Wilberforce'.

For the Government, the outcome will be absolutely crucial. It took a big risk when it set up a court of inquiry with power to ex- amine the pay claim and make recom- mendations, and if this inquiry goes the way of previous ones Ministers may well wish they had stood tight amidst the gathering gloom and simply dared the unions to do their worst.

They may well have had some doubts about the likelihood of public opinion holding fast if blackouts and industrial dislocation went on much longer, especially with Christmas approaching. Personally, I am pretty sure that the electricity workers' resolution would have faltered before that of the public, which was in a mood of defiance

and wanted a victory. For some reason, most people seem to have interpreted what has happened as a victory, and even given the Government the credit for it. This is nice for the Government, but we must wait and see.

Political and economic calculations have got a shade confused here. One could follow the logic of a strategy designed to contain each new pay claim in the public sector within limits set by the preceding settlements, on a slowly descending scale of percentage rises. Thus, 15 per cent (by mistake) for dustmen, 12 per cent (on purpose) for coal miners, 10 per cent (with luck) for electricity workers, and so on down the scale for gas, water and the Post Office.

On this basis, it would have been just tolerable to settle the electricity dispute at around a 12 per cent increase, without damaging the strategy too much. But this was before the electricity workers annoyed the public. Now, it does not seem to me that it will do.

What really enraged people about the elec- tricity flap. apart from the personal discom- fort, the unpredictability of it all and the callous treatment of the old and sick, was the fact that the workers went on drawing pay for bitching up the works. Hence the half- bricks and the pig-manure. What most peo- ple now demand is a clear demonstration that this kind of thing does not pay off. They would, indeed, like to see the 10 per cent offer withdrawn or reduced.

Having been credited with a popular vic- tory, the Government cannot now afford to `not her finest hour'

let it be seen that it was in fact no victory at all. If the Wilberforce inquiry comes up with a recommendation of even 12 per cent, the Government will be on a very hot spot indeed. It would not be too much to say that acceptance of a substantially increased pay offer would fatally destroy not only the Government's credibility but the chances of avoiding more similar confrontations.

Although the public has kindly awarded credit to the Government for the electricity `victory', it knows that it was itself primarily responsible for it, and it will not take kindly to seeing the fruits of victory thrown away. In this it will be perfectly right.

No one knows what will come out of the inquiry, these things being what they are. However, having studied the productivity arguments (some of them pretty bogus). would say there was some hope of a recommendation less lunatic than the Scamp one in the dustmen's case. It is even possible to draw up a politico-economic scale of possibilities. This would read roughly as follows:

7+-10% • Triumnh for Government: eco- nomically right.

10% Victory for Government; economically tolerable.

11% Just tolerable for Government; eco- nomically unsound.

12"!. Bad for Government and everybody else.

124% plus—Fatal for Government and everybody else.

It is. however, clear that the Government is on a nasty hook. If the inouiry's recommendation is unnalatable. it would still be hard to carry the Electricity Council along the road of resistance. Even if the Government used all its powers and influence, the effects of another series of blackouts would be most unhappy. It is one thine to hold out when public opinion is roused and the will to resist is strone—ouite another to try to arouse the same spirit for a second round (probably in colder weather). This is the measure of the risk the Govern- ment took in setting up the inquiry. All may yet turn out well: but it might have been better to dig in and sloe it out.

It will be a pity for the Government in another way if the electricity business turns sour on it. For there is no doubt that the electricity workers did make a great con- tribution to the nonularity of the Industrial Relations Bill. Mr Heath and Mr Carr. ably supported by Sir Geoffrey Howe. achieved a ouite remarkable dominance of the House of Commons during the Second Reading

debate, and the Government troops face the Committee stage battle on the floor of the House with some pleasure. This is not Mrs

Castle's finest hour. and if she hadn't been so bitchy about it all most Tories would have felt a little sorry for her. As it is, she will have to go on taking it.

Even if the electricity confrontation goes wrong again. I doubt whether anvthine can now convince the majority of the British people that the Industrial Relations Bill is anything but desirable. What a debacle now might do is to convince neonle that it is unlikely to work. and indeed that the fight against inflation and industrial anarchy is inexorably foredoomed to failure.

Given a real victory, public morale maY rise as markedly as the Government's is doing now. This is the real significance of the electricity showdown. Everyone feels in- volved. We are all 'waiting for Wilberforce: he may yet turn out to be an historic figure, and his report a watershed.