HC Deb 03 June 1964 vol 695 cc1093-6

3.33 p.m.

Mr. John Diamond (Gloucester)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to invalidate rules of friendly societies discriminating against membership of trade unions. I hope that the House will not think me presumptuous in asking for a facility which I have been accorded on two previous occasions, namely, permission to introduce a Bill dealing with a matter which. I believe, has the sympathy of both sides of the House—the important principle of the liberty of the subject and, in particular, the liberty of an individual to join a trade union of his choice.

I want to make it clear that I have an interest in this matter as a member of a trade union—the Association of Supervisory Staffs, Executives and Technicians. This is the union particularly affected by the Bill which I seek leave to introduce. I further hope that, inasmuch as there are members of this union on both sides of the House, I shall receive this courtesy, particularly because the Prime Minister has been good enough to write a letter, to which I will refer shortly, supporting this general principle.

Supposing that we were in a situation in which my right hon. Friend the Member for Huyton (Mr. H. Wilson) found himself unable to resist the demand of the people that he should take over this distinguished office, there is no reason to believe that he would be less sympathetic, since he, too, is a member of the same union.

The purpose of the proposed Bill is simply to invalidate any rule in a friendly society which makes it impossible for a member of that society to join a trade union of his choice. Since there is only one friendly society of which I know which incorporates such a rule, it follows that I should describe the society in some detail. It is known as the Foremen and Staff Mutual Benefit Society. It was established in 1899 as a friendly society to provide sick benefits and pensions for its members. There are two classes of member—one the employer and the other the employee, being a foreman or a person holding a position of trust or employed on the management, or in a technical office or commercial capacity. These are the kinds of employments referred to.

If this friendly society were acting as a friendly society pure and simple, I should not be troubling the House. But this is not the case, because the society provides in its rules that a member who joins a trade union shall automatically cease to be a member of the society, or, alternatively, shall not be allowed to join a trade union, and once he ceases to be a member of the society all benefits are lost—not only the contributions made by the employer, but the contributions made by the employee. This is a severe deterrent, or, if one wishes a stronger word, open blackmail, against any supervisory staff wishing to join a trade union.

Had this occurred in 1899, one might have understood it, but the particular offending rile was amended last year, in 1963, when it was brought up to date under an executive council recommendation for a strengthening of the trade union rules. As I have indicated, this provided that any ordinary member—that is, a supervisory employee—who, after admission to the society, joins a trade union shall immediately resign from the Society. and that he shall cease to have any claim on the funds of the Society either by way of benefits or return of contributions or premiums or any part thereof or otherwise, and he shall be liable to expulsion from the society.

This is obviously a grave offence against the liberty of the subject in a matter which we all hold very dear. At present, when certain law cases are being considered, people feel particularly sensitive about this matter. It is not surprising, therefore, that the secretary of my union, A.S.S.E.T., wrote to the Prime Minister drawing his attention to the situation and received the following extremely helpful reply from 10, Downing Street, dated 22nd April.

I omit the first paragraph, which is purely introductory. The second paragraph reads: The Government attach great importance to the principle that workers should be free to join trade unions. They apply this principle in relation to their own employees. The principle is also applied to employment on Government contract by Clause 4 of the Fair Wages Resolution which provides that contractors must"— and I repeat "must"— recognise the right of their workpeople to be members of a trade union. As you know, the Resolution lays down that any question whether the requirements of the Resolution are being observed must be referred to an independent tribunal if it cannot be disposed of in other ways We have, therefore, the most authoritative statement from the Prime Minister's office on policy and providing for the method of solving the problem of disposing of a complaint, namely, by reference to an independent tribunal.

However, I now wish to refer to a report in The Times dated 20th April, 1964. A reference by the Ministry of Labour of just such a dispute was made to a tribunal, namely, the Industrial Court, and, unfortunately, the right of the Industrial Court to settle the problem was challenged by the respondent, that is, the employer in question. The reference had been made by the Minister of Labour and the firm in question denied the right of the Court to settle the dispute.

Therefore, we are in the situation that the Prime Minister has said that Government policy is to give freedom to any employee to join a trade union but that there is an organisation which prevents a man in a supervisory capacity joining a union. The machinery under the Fair Wages Contract, which is a Government document, has been denied and the Court has not come to a conclusion about it. Therefore, one must find some other solution, and the only other solution is to provide by means of a one-Clause Bill that any friendly society which incorporates in its rules a clause to the effect that a member shall not join a union—or, to be more precise, that if he joins a union, he will lose all the benefits which he would otherwise have enjoyed, which comes to the same thing—should be invalidated.

I seek the leave of the House to bring in a short Bill which will have that effect.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Diamond, Mr. J. Silverman, Mr. H. Butler, Mr. Rankin, Mr. Malcolm MacMillan, Mr. Parkin, Mr. Swingler, Mr. Stonehouse, and Mr. Ledger.