§ 2. Mr. W. Brownasked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that, in the case of the London Passenger Transport Board, an undertaking whose established machinery he has approved of as taking the place of the local appeal board under the Essential Work Order, men are being discharged without their cases being represented by an officer of their own union, without knowing the dates of the boards which have discharged them and without being given an opportunity of being present at the hearing of the case; and whether, in these circumstances, he will cease from recognising the established machinery of the board as being an acceptable alternative to the local appeal machinery provided for under the Essential Work Order?
§ Mr. BevinI have approved, for the purposes of the Essential Work Order, the disciplinary machinery under the 1274 existing industrial arrangements. The worker may be represented by an official of a Union which is party to the arrangements. There was, until recently, a certain class of case in which the machinery did not permit the worker to be present personally on consideration of an appeal, but I am assured that this has now been remedied and that the worker is in all cases given the opportunity of being present.
§ Mr. BrownIs it not the most elementary principle of English justice that citizens are equal before the law, and is the Minister justified in using his powers to frustrate that principle?
§ Commander Locker-LampsonAre women equal before the law?