TRADE UNIONS AND THE LAW

HC Deb 19 March 1964 vol 691 cc1598-602

The Minister of Labour (Mr. J. B. Godber)

With permission, I wish to make a statement.

Recent decisions in the courts have focused attention on the present state of the law affecting trade unions and employers' associations, which was last reviewed nearly 60 years ago. The Government are of the opinion that the law should again be reviewed. Such a review will be most effective if undertaken with the willing co-operation of both employers' associations and trade unions and [...]ree from the atmosphere of political controversy.

I understand that the Trades Union Congress is itself giving consideration to the effect of the recent judgments and that it will be letting me have its views.

The Government think that an inquiry such as they envisage should be undertaken early in the life of the next Parliament. They will seek the co-operation of the Trades Union Congress and the British Employers' Confederation and will at the appropriate time discuss with them the form and scope of the inquiry.

Mr. Gunter

I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman will appreciate that in the absence of any knowledge of the terms of reference and of the form of the inquiry it is difficult to formulate opinions and to reflect upon the wisdom of his statement at this moment, but there are two points which I should like to raise to make for greater clarification.

Would the right hon. Gentleman make quite clear that neither the British Employers' Federation nor the Trades Union Congress have at this time given their considered views on the Minister's conclusions? There is no reason why they should, but as the right hon. Gentleman went on to speak of the necessity for the co-operation of these bodies at a later stage we ought to have it clear that nobody in industry at this moment is committed to any future course of action.

The second point is that the right hon. Gentleman referred to the inquiry in the life of the next Parliament. I am sure that we all appreciate his academic interest in that period of time, but are we to understand that discussions about the form and the scope of the inquiry will also not take place until after the General Election?

Mr. Godber

Yes, Sir; I quite understand that the hon. Gentleman woulii not wish to comment in detail on an important statement of this kind at this stage.

It is true that the British Employers' Confederation and the Trades Union Congress are not committed by the statement which I have made, but I thought it right to state the Government's position.

The consultations will, of course, take place after the General Election. The hon. Gentleman will then have the pleasure of seeing us back in our place here.

Mr. J. Rodgers

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his statement will give immense satisfaction to all those who believe in the necessity for a sensible, vigorous and free trade union movement in a democratic society? Will he tell the House a little more about the form he thinks that the inquiry will take? Is it likely to be a Royal Commission? Can he also assure us that, whatever form it takes, the report will be published so that the entire public can read it?

Mr. Godber

As I have said, we propose to discuss the form as well as the scope of the inquiry with both sides of industry. Until we get their views it would be premature to decide whether it should be a Royal Commission or some other body. Whatever body is appointed, however, it must, clearly, be authoritative and command general respect. The question of publication is subject to consultation, but I would be very surprised if publication were not agreed upon.

Mr. Grimond

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his announcement seems to be slightly academic? However, assuming that some inquiry takes place, is he aware that, while the willing co-operation of both employers' associations and trade unions is no doubt essential, there is also very important general public interest in the matter? Will he assure us that when he talks of keeping this out of political controversy he has no intention of avoiding discussion of the matter from the point of view of the public or the consumers, and that their point of view will be represented in whatever inquiry takes place, if it takes place?

Mr. Godber

The matter may be academic to the right hon. Gentleman, but it is not to the Government. The point of view of the consumers will, as I have said, be subject to discussion between the two bodies which are mainly concerned. Of course, others will be able to give their views before whatever body is appointed.

Mr. Renton

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, although it is necessary to have discussion and to get the views of all concerned, the present state of the law is so chaotic that he should try to reach a solution as soon as possible? Will he, therefore, choose a form of inquiry which, without abandoning any necessary discussion, enables an early solution to be reached?

Mr. Godber

Yes, Sir. I think that it is very important that such an inquiry should be held in conditions in which there will be no question of political controversy. That is why I have said that I believe it should be at the start of a new Parliament. Certainly, as soon as we are returned we shall see to it at once.

Mrs. Hart

Is not this setting a new precedent? Have there been any other occasions that the right hon. Gentleman can quote when he has proposed to set up an inquiry without previously having the agreement to participate of the major bodies involved on a subject the scope and nature of which he is not prepared to identify beyond the most general terms? Is not this clearly designed to influence opinion before the General Election without attempting to make clear what the Government's objective really is?

Mr. Godber

Certainly not. That is not the intention in any shape or form. This is a matter in which the Government believe that those concerned should be aware of the way in which the present Government are thinking. We have no desire to impose anything; in fact, we want the fullest consultation. We thought it right, however, to inform both bodies and the country first.

Mr. K. Lewis

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, whatever view may be taken by the leaders on the trade union or the employers' sides, many of us feel that this will be accepted as the right step by many trade unionists and many employers? Will he assure the House that if there is any question of the leaders of either side dragging their feet in the matter, and not co-operating, although we want their co-operation, the Government will, nevertheless, after the General Election, proceed with the inquiry?

Mr. Godber

I have every hope—indeed, confidence—that the leaders of both sides will accept this and will work with us in seeking to elucidate and straighten out the problems which have arisen in regard to the law.

Mr. G. Brown

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the subject of the last question is exactly the sort of thing which may spoil the atmosphere for something which ought to happen? Am I right in deducing from the second paragraph of his statement that no steps are to be taken by the Government of the day to discuss the form of the inquiry or the terms of reference until after the General Erection?

Mr. Godber

That is the Government's intention. Of course, if either side wishes to do so, I shall be very happy to talk with those concerned, but there will be no intention to come to any decision.

Several Hon. Members rose——

Mr. Speaker

We must get on with business.

Mr. C. Pannell

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The trade union group in this House, which is the largest and oldest of my party, has not been heard on this matter. I happen to be the secretary of the group, and I should have thought that I had a right to be heard.

Mr. Speaker

I am sorry about that. I had hoped that I had covered enough ground by calling the Deputy-Leader of the Opposition. But I am a little hampered by the necessity, in the service of the House, to induce it to get on with its business.