§ 66. Mr. THOMASasked whether there is any objection to the members of the Metropolitan Police combining in trades unions similar to that of the Post Office servants for the promotion and protection of the interests of the police?
§ Sir G. CAVEThis question has been repeatedly before my predecessors at the Home Office, and after careful consideration, I fully agree with the decision at which they arrived, namely, that it would be contrary to the public interest to allow members of a police force to belong to a trade union. The public safety depends, as the members of the force would be the first to recognise, on the discipline and obedience of the police, and (as the late Home Secretary pointed out in an answer which he gave in this House on the 28th November last), a disciplined force like the Metropolitan Police, with special responsibilities for the peace and order of London, can no more be conducted on the basis of trade union recognition, such as prevail in ordinary industry, than could the Army or Navy. The position of the Post Office servants, to which the hon. Member refers, is quite different. I would remind the hon. Member that the Metropolitan Police can always make any representations they like as to their conditions of service to the Commissioner of Police and through him to the Secretary of State, and I feel confident that they will never fail to receive the careful and sympathetic consideration which their admrable work deserves.
Mr. DUNCANMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that the police in Paris are permitted to have a trades union?
§ Sir G. CAVEI think we must deal only with our own affairs.
§ Mr. W. THORNEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that if the men were allowed to join a trade union there would be better discipline than at present.
§ Sir G. CAVEI am afraid not.