Downing Street Says » Industrial Action

Asked whether Lord Mandelson had led the discussion on industrial action and was there a view that European Law in this area needed to be looked at again, the PMS replied that as the Secretary of State, Lord Mandelson led the discussion in that area. In response to the second question, the PMS said that there were two issues here; there was an issue of whether or not the Posted Workers Directive was a factor in the recent industrial disputes that we d seen. There had been a lot of rumour and counter rumour and it had been difficult to establish what the facts were, but ACAS were now looking at it. The company had made it clear that it was not the case that British workers were being undercut in this case, but clearly this was an issue that ACAS would have to look at.

In relation to the more general issue about the Posted Workers Directive, particularly in the aftermath of the recent court judgements that we had seen, the PMS said that as people would know, the December European Council agreed that the implications of recent judgements should be looked at by the European TUC and Business Europe, the main business organisation in Europe. So there was a wider process underway.

Returning to the more specific issue, the PMS said that it was not clear and this was something that ACAS was looking at, that the operation of the Posted Workers Directive was a factor in this particular dispute as Lord Mandelson had been saying in recent days.

Put that Lord Mandelson at the weekend had said that it was not European Law that had caused this problem and was it now the case that Ministers thought there may be a problem with European Law, the PMS said that Lord Mandelson was expressing that view on the basis of the statement from Total, so he was absolutely right to say that.

ACAS were looking specifically at this issue in order to verify this once and for all. There was a separate point that actually pre-dated all of this that went back to the December European Council and some of the wider issues around the Posted Workers Directive, which was that this was something that would be looked at by the European TUC and the main business organisation in Europe. The PMS stressed that it was important to distinguish between the specific and the general.

Put that there was a view in Government that European Law was something that was being looked at and should be looked at, the PMS repeated that this was something that had been agreed last December. What was not clear was whether or not the European Law was actually a factor in this particular dispute. On the basis of the Total statement, it would suggest not, but this was something that ACAS needed to look at.

Asked whether the Government acknowledged that there was a problem in the way that the Posted Workers Directive was being operated in the wider sense, the PMS said that the Government had a commitment to monitor the implementation of the Posted Workers Directive. This was in the Labour Party Manifesto of 2005, so of course that commitment would be fulfilled. The PMS stressed that this was to monitor the implementation and there was no commitment to change it.

In relation to the wider issue that some of these court cases had identified, this was something that was being looked at already at the European level. Asked what the timetable was for this to be looked at, the PMS said that people should check the Council conclusions.

Put that Alan Johnson had said that the court judgements had twisted the original meaning of the directive and was he expressing Government policy, the PMS replied that the Government s position was that we would continue to monitor the operation of the Posted Workers Directive and that was something that was being done at a European level.

Asked whether the Government believed the Total statement, the PMS said that we had established an ACAS process. Clearly there were a lot of claims and counter claims. We had no reason not to believe the Total statement and we were not suggesting that for one minute. However, there was an ACAS process underway that would look at this in a comprehensive way.

Asked about the situation at other sites, the PMS said that the specific issue that had been raised had been raised in relation to this particular site. What we had seen were actions in relation to the concerns that had been raised at this particular site. If people had specific concerns and people had specific evidence that European Law was being subverted or undermined, then they should bring that forward. We needed to operate on the basis of facts and the basis of the law and that was why in this specific instance, we had asked ACAS to establish what the facts were.

What we were not going to do was operate on the basis of rumour and counter rumour, which was what had seemed to drive a lot of the debate in recent days.

Asked if the Prime Minister shared the concerns of Lord Mandelson that xenophobia lay behind the issue, the PMS said that the Prime Minister s overriding concern here was to ensure that the Government did whatever it could in order to help people in this country get the skills and training for the jobs that they needed and wanted. Nobody would remotely condone and in fact we would utterly condemn any xenophobic sentiment that was behind this, if that was in fact the case.

Asked if there was any discussion on the more general question of protectionism at Cabinet, the PMS said only in passing. The British Government believed strongly in the case against protectionism and the Prime Minister and others would continue to make that case vociferously.

Asked whether the Prime Minister now recognised that British jobs for British workers was perhaps not the cleverest slogan, the PMS said that the sentiment that the Prime Minister was trying to express was to ensure that British workers had the skills and the training and the opportunities in order to compete and be employed in jobs that were available in Britain.

Asked whether the Government shared the concerns of the European Commission over some of the buy American elements of America s fiscal stimulus package, the PMS said that we would not support protectionist measures. In relation to the United States, this was still very much, as we understood it, a package that was in the process of being put together. Asked if he thought it would be a protectionist measure, the PMS said that at the moment it was not clear what the measure was as they were still in the process of formulating their policy.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says.

» Sunday, February 3, 2008

Industrial Action

No Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries