§ Q3. Mr. Marksasked the Prime Minister what further representations he has received on the proposals outlined in the White Paper, "In Place of Strife", and what replies he has sent.
§ Q5. Mr. Ridleyasked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement upon his further discussions with the Trades Union Congress about the future of anti-strike legislation.
§ The Prime MinisterI would refer hon. Members to my statement in the House on 19th June.—[Vol. 785, c. 700–14.]
§ Mr. MarksI realise that my right hon. Friend will be receiving further representations later today, but will there be consultations with such bodies as the Co-operative Movement, which has a good record in this connection, and those unions which are not affiliated to the T.U.C. such as, I am sorry to say, the N.U.T.?
§ The Prime MinisterThe question of representations is a matter for those who wish to make representations. As far as I can ascertain, I have had no official representations from the Co-operative Movement on the point, but I would like to look into this and see whether I am wrong, in which case I will inform my hon. Friend. Of course, unions and professional organisations which are not members of the T.U.C. are perfectly free 640 to make representations to my right hon. Friend on any aspects of this policy.
§ Mr. RidleyCan the Prime Minister say what penalties there are for people who are not members of unions or who belong to unions which are not affiliated to the T.U.C. and who go on strike? Will he confirm that if anyone wants to go on strike he should first resign from his union so that there will not be any unfair consequences?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman is making a case, which I do not often hear from the other side of the House, for a closed shop.