HC Deb 04 August 1971 vol 822 cc1643-54

Lords Amendment agreed to.

Lords Amendment: No. 94, in page 38, line 11, leave out "an employer" and insert "one or more employers".

6.15 p.m.

Mr. Dudley Smith

I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I think it will be for the convenience of the House if with this Lords Amendment we consider at the same time Lords Amendments:

No. 95, in page 38, line 16, after "employer" insert: or, if more than one, any of the employers";

No. 98, in page 39, line 3, after "employer" insert "or employers";

No. 99, in line 11, after "employer" insert "or employers";

No. 102, in line 36, leave out "an employer" and insert "one or more employers");

No. 108, in page 44, line 8, leave out "next following subsection" and insert: following provisions of this section";

No. 110, in line 38, at end insert: (3A) Subsections (1) to (3) of this section shall have effect in relation to an order made under section 48 of this Act in respect of two or more associated employers, but for that purpose shall have effect as if—

  1. (a) any reference in those subsections to the employer were a reference to any of those employers;
  2. (b) in subsections (1)(a) and (2) references to carrying on collective bargaining were references to carrying on such bargaining either alone or jointly with any other employer or employers comprised in the order;
  3. (c) in subsection (1)(b) references to carrying on collective bargaining were references to carrying on such bargaining jointly with the other employer or employers comprised in the order.
(3B) In relation to an order which is made subject to a reservation under section 48(1A) of this Act, nothing in paragraph (a) or paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of this section shall be construed as applying to collective bargaining in respect of matters which, by virtue of that reservation, are excepted from the exclusive negotiating rights of the sole bargaining agent.

Mr. Dudley Smith

These are drafting Amendments and their purpose is quite simple. Clauses 42 to 46 are drafted in terms which may concern either a single employer or a number of associated employers where "associated" is used in a sense of financial association. Clauses 47 to 53, on the other hand, are drafted in terms of only a single employer. Clearly, consistency is necessary and desirable. The Lords Amendments achieve the Government's intention of carrying right through the recommended provisions the concept of associated employers. Thus an order under Clause 48 could be directed to more than one associated employer.

The purpose of Lords Amendments 102, 108 and 110 is to carry right through the recognition provisions the concept of associated employers, and the intention here is that obligations incurred by a recognition order should, where they relate to carrying out collective bargaining in relation to the recommended bargaining unit, rest on "two or more associated employers" both jointly and singly, but in relation to the obligation when negotiated severally the intention is that it should rest on the employers jointly.

The new subsection (3B) to Clause 53 is a consequential Amendment to take account of any more extensive bargaining arrangements which may have been specified in an order by the National Industrial Relations Court.

These Lords Amendments regularise the situation, and I hope that they will be accepted even though their basis, the thinking behind the Bill, is, as we know, not always accepted by the Opposition.

Mr. Ronald King Murray

The what I might call minor Lords Amendments in this group are, as the Minister says, of a drafting nature, but it seems to the Opposition that Amendment No. 110 is one which takes unto itself the principle of these Lords Amendments. I have some difficulty with this, and I hope that the Government may give us some clarification of the significance of Lords Amendment No. 110. If some clarification is not forthcoming I think I would be bound to commend to my right hon. and hon. Friends that they seriously consider voting against this group of Lords Amendments.

My difficulty comes in two parts. The Minister defined "associated employers" in a way which was rather wider than that in the definition Clause, Clause 158(6) and I think that for the assistance of the House I should read that definition, because it is very narrow: For the purposes of this Act any two employers are to be treated as associated if one is a company of which the other (directly or indirectly) has control, or if both are companies of which a third person (directly or indirectly) has control; and in this Act 'associated employer" shall be construed accordingly. In a debate which we had a short time ago the Solicitor-General reaffirmed the proposition that the words "associated employer" have this technical meaning throughout the Bill, but the Minister a moment ago spoke about two companies being financially associated. He will appreciate, I am sure, that that is a different conception. Companies can be financially associated in a number of ways and need not necessarily be associated in the way described in Clause 158(6). They can be financially associated if one company holds a percentage of shares in the other without control, or they can be financially associated, obviously, by being involved in a common enterprise of some kind.

Therefore, the first question which I put to the Government is, in what sense are the words "associated employer" used here? Is it the sense which the hon. Gentleman has just stated—financial associations of some kind—or the narrow and strict sense of Clause 158(6)?

Depending upon the answer to that, there arises the second difficulty, which is the main ground of difficulty for the Opposition. It is not clear, whatever "associated employers" means, why this distinction should be drawn between collective bargaining on a joint and several basis, if I may use that terminology. Subsection (3A) of Amendment 110 talks about … bargaining either alone or jointly with any other employer or employers comprised in the order". If, for the purposes of subsections (1)(a) and (2) of Clause 53, one is to get various employers responsible alone or jointly for carrying out what is required of them, if it is justified there why is it not equally justified in subsection (1)(b)? The positive job to carry on as a joint negotiation with a sole bargaining agent is important, but it is just as important that the negative side should be carried out properly as well. If one does not impose in subparagraph (c) the same kind of duty that one imposes in subparagraph (b) one is, when considering the positive responsibilities under subparagraph (b), allowing an employer to say, "I will jointly bargain with the other employers, but I have no responsibility because they will not play." Given that attitude, nothing will be done. The logic of this is far from clear.

Mr. Kennelh Lewis (Rutland and Stamford)

This is an interesting legal argument, but in practical terms no employer could possibly take the attitude which the hon. and learned Gentleman has just described, since he or one or other of the employers would be in immediate trouble. They simply would not be able to get anything done on the labour relations side.

Mr. Ronald King Murray

I am obliged to the hon. Gentleman for that intervention. I do not want to take up time. The point I am making has both a legal and a common sense content. I prefer to take my stand basically on the common sense point. If the employer is getting legal advice on his duties and responsibilities and he is told that this is a sole bargaining right, that is one thing, but if he is told that this is a joint bargaining right, that is quite another. Legally, the point is unanswerable and I suggest that it is also unanswerable from the common sense point of view. One needs to know what "associated employers" means. Does it mean the narrow definition in Clause 158(6) or is it in the broad concept which the hon. Gentleman gave? From the common sense point of view, one may assume that the obligation with regard to negative duties is of lesser quality than the obligation with regard to positive duties.

The Solicitor-General

The term "associated employers" is defined in the Bill. "Financially associated" is a colloquialism which no doubt falls below the very high forensic standards of the hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh, Leith (Mr. Ronald King Murray) but it accurately fulfils the definition as set out. The intention of these provisions is again to be divided into two halves. The provisions in Clause 53(1)(a) and (2) make it an unfair practice for the employer or associated employers concerned to carry on bargaining outside the recommended structure. In that context, the intention is, whether they do it jointly or severally, that if either one of them by himself or all of them together begin bargaining with a union other than the recognised union, that should be unfair; neither could bargain either severally or jointly.

On the other hand, the provisions in relation to Clause 53(1)(b) are in relation to the obligation of the employer to bargain seriously with the recognised union. If the C.I.R. has analysed the situation and has concluded that, in relation to a group of associated employers—all of them as a group—union X is entitled to recognition and that the group should bargain with it, that obligation is expressed as being a joint one and the employers as a group are told, "You must recognise as a group union X and must bargain as a group with it." That obligation has to be discharged jointly. It is the positive obligation which must be discharged by all the employers together in respect of the recommendation of the C.I.R. and it would destroy or fragment the bargaining structure recommended by the C.I.R. if the employers could bargain in penny packets in this context.

Mr. Ronald King Murray

The hon. and learned Gentleman has put the point very clearly, and I understand it. When one comes to what he has called the "positive obligation"—I tried to use the terms "positive "and" negative" obligations—supposng one of a group of employers says, "I cannot fulfil my positive obligation because one other member of the group will not." Is there no obligation at all on him then? It seems to me that there is not.

The Solicitor-General

The employers are obliged to act jointly. The bargaining structure was made on the recommendation that the employers should act jointly. If one of the joint employers declined for some reason to bargain within the group, he would not be fulfilling his positive obligation to bargain. It might be that the Commission, on re-examination, would conclude that a different structure should be recommended.

A structure with the positive obligation is closely parallel to the provision in Clauses 6 to 18 onwards of the Labour Government's Bill, where bargaining operations could be specified in relation to an employer or group of employers in regard to matters national, local or regional. In that situation, the Secretary of State would have made an Order requiring bargaining to be undertaken, and if such bargaining had turned out to be ineffective for the kind of reason which the hon. and learned Gentleman now suggests, one would have had to go back and get an amending order from the Secretary of State. One can visualise the breaking down of a recommended bargaining structure in the operation of a positive obligation and I am certain that one would be able to see the reason why the obligation is not being discharged.

I hope that I have sufficiently clearly explained, in the context of the philosophy of the Bill, the contrast between positive and negative obligations and why Clause 53(1)(a) and (2) are separated from Clause 53(1)(b).

Question put and agreed to.

Subsequent Lords Amendment agreed to.

Lords Amendment: No. 96, in page 38, line 23, leave out "by" and insert: in respect of a recommendation relating to".

6.30 p.m.

The Solicitor-General

I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.

I understand that it would be convenient to discuss at the same time Lords Amendment No. 97, in line 25, leave out "by" and insert: in respect of a recommendation relating to". Under these provisions, an investigation can be made into the bargaining situation by the C.I.R. so as to come up with a solution which recommends an unregistered organisation as the sole bargaining agent, but no application can be made for a statutory enforcement of that set of bargaining rights and obligations in respect of an unregistered organisation unless and until it has become registered.

The Bill was amended when last in this House to allow the process of recommendation to go as far as the making of the recommendation of the C.I.R. in respect of an unregistered organisation but the other part of the pattern was not completely included. The provisions were amended in this House to provide that if at the time when the organisation applied for recognition rights to be enforced it had become registered, then it could gain advantage of an enforceable order, but they were not so amended to impose the same requirement on the unregistered organisation at the time if the employers made application in respect of it.

Hon. Members opposite may agree or disagree with the concept that the ultimate right to have bargaining rights recognised and enforced should be confined to a registered organisation, but this particular pair of Amendments is necessary to ensure the same principle applies whether the application of enforceability for a recognition order is made by the organisation or by an employer. It is on that basis of consistency that I commend these Amendments to the House.

Mr. Rose

It is right that these Amendments tidy, and indeed tighten, the situation, after what can only be described as the slipshod drafting with which we have become familiar as this Bill has been forced through the various stages in this House under great pressure.

The Clause, as the Solicitor-General tried to indicate, though he rather mystified me at one point, prevented an organisation of workers from making an application as a sole bargaining agent, but allowed for an employer or third party to do so on behalf of an unregistered organisation.

We abhor the discrimination against unions which choose not to register. It is a constant theme of this legislation that puts unregistered unions in the position in which trade unions found themselves almost a century ago. The Amendments show that the net is being drawn ever more tightly. Subsection (2) should have gone out of the window altogether. Indeed, such an attempt was made in the other place on 18th May when the noble Lord, Lord Champion, moved an Amendment. The noble Lord said:

Once again we are calling attention to the fact that the Government by this subsection are putting on the screw to force organisations of workers to register.

He said that the Amendment highlighted the point that applications could not be made to the court under that subsection except by a registered trade union.

We appeal to the Government, as did the noble Lord, to rethink this question of unregistered trade unions because of the discrimination imported into the Bill. In the other place Lord Belstead, replying to Lord Champion's Amendment, gave the game away when he said: The right to apply for a ballot on the C.I.R. recommendation under Clause 46, which results in an enforceable recognition order in the event of a majority vote in favour, is one substantial new right. We cannot accept that it should be available to an organisation of workers …"—[OFFICIAL REPORT, House of Lords, 18th May, 1971; Vol. 319, c. 353–4.] What the Government are trying to do in this debate is to force unions to register whether they want to or not. It is not right for the Government to say that the unions have a choice. They are being left with no choice because of the obligation that is being laid upon them and the risk and disadvantage involved if they do not register.

The Government are storing up a bitterness which will rebound upon them. They have not begun to understand the extent of that bitterness. There is a subdued and seething anger in the trade union movement at present which, at every turn of the screw, runs from the Upper Clyde down to the Thames. This is one more turn of the screw and will make it more likely that eventually the floodgates will burst. The Government may go on turning the screw and we shall vote against it, but later the Government will reap the whirlwind in a far more unpleasant way.

Question put, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment—

The House divided: Ayes 262, Noes 226.

Division No. 462.] AYES [6.36 p.m.
Adley, Robert Baker, W. H. K. (Banff) Benyon, W.
Alison, Michael (Barkston Ash) Balniel, Lord Berry, Hn. Anthony
Allason, James (Hemel Hempstead) Barber, Rt. Hn. Anthony Biffen, John
Archer, Jeffrey (Louth) Batsford, Brian Biggs-Davison, John
Atkins, Humphrey Beamish, Col. Sir Tufton Blaker, Peter
Awdry, Daniel Bell, Ronald Boardman, Tom (Leicester, S. W.)
Baker, Kenneth (St. Marylebone) Bennett, Sir Frederic (Torquay) Body, Richard
Boscawen, Robert Harrison, Col. Sir Harwood (Eye) Peel, John
Bossom, Sir Clive Haselhurst, Alan Percival, Ian
Bowden, Andrew Hastings, Stephen Pink, R. Bonner
Boyd-Carpenter, Rt. Hn. Arthur Havers, Michael Pounder, Rafton
Braine, Bernard Hay, John Powell, Rt. Hn. J. Enoch
Bray, Ronald Hayhoe, Barney Prior, Rt. Hn. J. M. L.
Brewis, John Hicks, Robert Pym, Rt. Hn. Francis
Brinton, Sir Tatton Higgins, Terence L. Raison, Timothy
Brocklebank-Fowler, Christopher Hiley, Joseph Rawlinson, Rt. Hn. Sir Peter
Brown, Sir Edward (Bath) Hill, James (Southampton, Test) Redmond, Robert
Bruce-Gardyne, J. Hill, John E. B. (Norfolk, S.) Reed, Laurance (Bolton, E.)
Bryan, Paul Holt, Miss Mary Rees, Peter (Dover)
Buchanan-Smith, Alick (Angus, N&M) Hordern, Peter Rees-Davies, W. R.
Buck, Antony Hornsby-Smith, Rt. Hn. Dame Patricia Renton, Rt. Hn. Sir David
Bullus, Sir Eric Howe, Hon. Sir Geoffrey (Reigate) Rhys Williams, Sir Brandon
Burden, F. A. Howell, David (Guildford) Ridley, Hn. Nicholas
Butler, Adam (Bosworth) Howell, Ralph (Norfolk, N.) Ridsdale, Julian
Carlisle, Mark Hunt, John Roberts, Wyn (Conway)
Carr, Rt. Hn. Robert Hutchison, Michael Clark Rodgers, Sir John (Sevenoaks)
Channon, Paul Iremonger, T. L. Rossi, Hugh (Hornsey)
Chapman, Sydney James, David Rost, Peter
Chichester-Clark, R. Jessel, Toby Russell, Sir Ronald
Churchill, W. S. Johnson Smith, G. (E. Grinstead) Scott, Nicholas
Clark, William (Surrey, E.) Jopling, Michael Scott-Hopkins, James
Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe) Kaberry, Sir Donald Sharples, Richard
Clegg, Walter Kellett-Bowman, Mrs. Elaine Shaw, Michael (Sc'b'gh & Whitby)
Cockeram, Eric Kilfedder, James Shelton, William (Clapham)
Coombs, Derek King, Eveleyn (Dorset, S.) Simeons, Charles
Cormack, Patrick Kinsey, J. R. Sinclair, Sir George
Costain, A. P. Kirk, Peter Skeet, T. H. H.
Critchley, Julian Knox, David Smith, Dudley (W'wick & L'mington)
Crouch, David Lambton, Antony Soref, Harold
Curran, Charles Lane, David Spence, John
d'Avigdor-Goldsmid, Sir Henry Langford-Holt, Sir John Sproat, Iain
d'Avigrtor-Goldsmid, Maj.-Gen.James Legge-Bourke, Sir Harry Stanbrook, Ivor
Dean, Paul Le Marchant, Spencer Stewart-Smith, Geoffrey (Belper)
Deedes, Rt. Hn. W. F. Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland) Stoddart-Scott, Col. Sir M.
Dixon, Piers Longden, Gilbert Stokes, John
Dodds-Parker, Douglas Loveridge, John Stuttaford, Dr. Tom
Douglas-Home, Rt. Hn. Sir Alec Luce, R. N. Sutcliffe, John
Drayson, G. B. McAdden, Sir Stephen Tapsell, Peter
du Cann, Rt. Hn. Edward MacArthur, Ian Taylor, Sir Charles (Eastbourne)
Dykes, Hugh McCrindle, R. A. Taylor, Edward M. (G'gow, Cathcart)
Eden, Sir John McLaren, Martin Taylor, Frank (Moss Side)
Edwards, Nicholas (Pembroke) Maclean, Sir Fitzroy Taylor, Robert (Croydon, N. W.)
Eyre, Reginald McMaster, Stanley Tebbit, Norman
Farr, John Macmillan, Maurice (Farnham) Temple, John M.
Fell, Anthony McNair-Wilson, Michael Thatcher, Rt. Hn. Mrs. Margaret
Fenner, Mrs. Peggy McNair-Wilson, Patrick (NewForest) Thomas, John Stradling (Monmouth)
Fidler, Michael Maddan, Martin Thompson, Sir Richard (Croydon, S.)
Finsberg, Geoffrey (Hampstead) Madel, David Thorpe, Rt. Hn. Jeremy
Fisher, Nigel (Surbiton) Marten, Neil Tilney, John
Fookes, Miss Janet Mather, Carol Trafford, Dr. Anthony
Fortescue, Tim Maude, Angus Trew, Peter
Foster, Sir John Mawby, Ray Tugendhat, Christopher
Fowler, Norman Maxwell-Hyslop, R. J. Turton, Rt. Hn. R. H.
Fox, Marcus Meyer, Sir Anthony van Straubenzee, W. R.
Fraser, Rt. Hn. Hugh (St'fford & Stone) Mills, Peter (Torrington) Vaughan, Dr. Gerard
Fry, Peter Mitchell, Lt.-Col. C. (Aberdeenshire, W.) Vickers, Dame Joan
Gardner, Edward Mitchell, David (Basingstoke) Waddington, David
Gibson-Watt, David Moate, Roger Walder, David (Clitheroe)
Gilmour, Ian (Norfolk, C.) Money, Ernle Walker, Rt. Hn. Peter (Worcester)
Gilmour, Sir John (Fife, E.) Monks, Mrs. Connie Walker-Smith, Rt. Hn. Sir Derek
Godber, Rt. Hn. J. B. Monro, Hector Wall, Patrick
Coodhart, Philip Montgomery, Fergus Wallers, Dennis
Goodhew, Victor More, Jasper Ward, Dame Irene
Gorst, John Morgan-Giles, Rear-Adm. Weatherill, Bernard
Gower, Raymond Morrison, Charles (Devizes) Wells, John (Maidstone)
Grant, Anthony (Harrow, C.) Mudd, David Whitelaw, Rt. Hn. William
Gray, Hamish Murton, Oscar Wiggin, Jerry
Green, Alan Neave, Airey Wilkinson, John
Grieve, Percy Noble, Rt. Hn. Michael Wolrige-Gordon, Patrick
Griffiths, Eldon (Bury St. Edmunds) Normanton, Tom Wood, Rt. Hn. Richard
Grimond, Rt. Hn. J. Nott, John Woodhouse, Hn. Christopher
Grylls, Michael Onslow, Cranley Woodnutt, Mark
Gummer, Selwyn Oppenheim, Mrs. Sally Worsley, Marcus
Gurden, Harold Orr, Capt. L. P. S. Wylie, Rt. Hn. N. R.
Hall, Miss Joan (Keighley) Osborn, John
Hall, John (Wycombe) Owen, Idris (Stockport, N.) TELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Hall-Davis, A. G. F. Page, Graham (Crosby) Mr. Paul Hawkins and
Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury) Page, John (Harrow, W.) Mr. Keith Speed.
Hannam, John (Exeter) Parkinson, Cecil (Enfield, W.)
Albu, Austen Fraser, John (Norwood) Milne, Edward (Blyth)
Allaun, Frank (Salford, E.) Freeson, Reginald Mitchell, R. C. (S'hampton, Itchen)
Allen, Scholefield Calpern, Sir Myer Molloy, William
Archer, Peter (Rowley Regis) Garrett, W. E. Morgan, Elystan (Cardiganshire)
Armstrong, Ernest Gilbert, Dr. John Morris, Alfred (Wythenshawe)
Ashley, Jack Golding, John Morris, Rt. Hn. John (Aberavon)
Ashton, Joe Gordon Walker Rt. Hn. P. C. Moyle, Roland
Atkinson, Norman Gourlay, Harry Mulley, Rt. Hn. Frederick
Bagier, Gordon A. T. Grant, George (Morpeth) Murray, Ronald King
Barnes, Michael Grant, John D. (Islington, E.) Ogden, Eric
Barnett, Guy (Greenwich) Griffiths, Eddie (Brightside) O'Halloran, Michael
Barnett, Joel Hamilton, James (Bothwell) O'Malley, Brian
Beaney, Alan Hamilton, William (Fife, W.) Oram, Bert
Benn, Rt. Hn. Anthony Wedgwood Hannan, William (G'gow, Maryhill) Orme, Stanley
Bennett, James (Glasgow, Bridgeton) Hardy, Peter Oswald, Thomas
Bidwell, Sydney Harper, Joseph Paget, R. T.
Bishop, E. S. Harrison, Walter (Wakefield) Palmer, Arthur
Blenkinsop, Arthur Hart, Rt. Hn. Judith Pannell, Rt. Hn. Charles
Boardman, H. (Leigh) Hattersley, Roy Parker, John (Dagenham)
Booth, Albert Healey, Rt. Hn. Denis Parry, Robert (Liverpool, Exchange)
Bottomley, Rt. Hn. Arthur Heffer, Eric S. Peart, Rt. Hn. Fred
Boyden, James (Bishop Auckland) Horam, John Pendry, Tom
Bradley, Tom Houghton, Rt. Hn. Douglas Pentland, Norman
Brown, Bob (N'c'tle-upon-Tyne, W.) Huckfield, Leslie Perry, Ernest G.
Brown, Hugh D. (G'gow, Provan) Hughes, Mark (Durham) Prentice, Rt. Hn. Reg.
Buchan, Norman Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen, N.) Prescott, John
Buchanan, Richard (G'gow, Sp'burn) Hughes, Roy (Newport) Price, J. T. (westhoughton)
Callaghan, Rt. Hn. James Hunter, Adam Probert, Arthur
Campbell, I. (Dunbartonshire, W.) Irvine, Rt. Hn. Sir Arthur (Edge Hill) Reed, D. (Sedgefield)
Cant, R. B. Janner, Greville Rees, Merlyn (Leeds, S.)
Carmichael, Neil Jay, Rt. Hn. Douglas Rhodes, Geoffrey
Castle, Rt. Hn. Barbara Jeger, Mrs. Lena (H'b'n&St. P'cras, S.) Richard, Ivor
Clark, David (Colne Valley) Jenkins, Hugh (Putney) Roberts, Albert (Normanton)
Cocks, Michael (Bristol, S.) Jenkins, Rt. Hn. Roy (Stechford) Roberts, Rt. Hn. Goronwy (Caernarvon)
Cohen, Stanley John, Brynmor Robertson, John (Paisley)
Conlan, Bernard Johnson, Carol (Lewisham, S.) Rodgers, William (Stockton-on-Tees)
Corbet, Mrs. Freda Johnson, James (K'ston-on-Hull, W.) Roper, John
Cox, Thomas (Wandsworth, C.) Johnson, Walter (Derby, S.) Rose, Paul B.
Crawshaw, Richard Jones, Barry (Flint, E.) Sandelson, Neville
Cronin, John Jones, Dan (Burnley) Sheldon, Robert (Ashton-under-Lyne)
Cunningham, G. (Islington, S. W.) Jones, Rt. Hn. Sir Elwyn (W. Ham, S.) Shore, Rt. Hn. Peter (Stepney)
Dalyell, Tam Jones, Gwynoro (Carmarthen) Short, Mrs. Renée (W'hampton, N. E.)
Darling, Rt. Hn. George Jones, T. Alec (Rhondda, W.) Silkin, Hn. S. C. (Dulwich)
Davidson, Arthur Judd, Frank Silverman, Julius
Davies, Denzil (Llanelly) Kaufman, Gerald Skinner, Dennis
Davies, G. Elfed (Rhondda, E.) Kelley, Richard Small, William
Davies, Ifor (Gower) Kinnock, Neil Smith, John (Lanarkshire, N.)
Davies, S. O. (Merthyr Tydvil) Lambie, David Spearing, Nigel
Davis, Clinton (Hackney, C.) Latham, Arthur Spriggs, Leslie
Davis, Terry (Bromsgrove) Lawson, George Stallard, A. W.
de Freitas, Rt. Hn. Sir Geoffrey Leadbitter, Ted Stewart, Rt. Hn. Michael (Fulham)
Delargy, H. J. Lee, Rt. Hn. Frederick Stoddart, David (Swindon)
Dell, Rt. Hn. Edmund Leonard, Dick Stonehouse, Rt. Hn. John
Doig, Peter Lewis, Arthur (W. Ham, N.) Strang, Gavin
Douglas, Dick (Stirlingshire, E.) Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) Summerskill, Hn. Dr. Shirley
Douglas-Mann, Bruce Lipton, Marcus Thomas, Rt. Hn. George (Cardiff, W.)
Driberg, Tom Loughlin, Charles Thomas, Geoffrey (Abertillery)
Duffy, A. E. P. Lyon, Alexander W. (York) Tinn, James
Dunnett, Jack Lyons, Edward (Bradford, E.) Tomney, Frank
Eadie, Alex McBride, Neil Torney, Tom
Edelman, Maurice McGuire, Michael Tuck, Raphael
Edwards, Robert (Bilston) Mackenzie, Gregor Varley, Eric G.
Edwards, William (Merioneth) Mackie, John Wainwright, Edwin
Ellis, Tom Maclennan, Robert Walker, Harold (Doncaster)
English, Michael McMillan, Tom (Glasgow, C.) Wallace, George
Evans, Fred McNamara, J. Kevin Watkins, David
Faulds, Andrew Mallalieu, J. P. W. (Huddersfield, E.) Whitehead, Phillip
Fernyhough, Rt. Hn. E. Marks, Kenneth Willey, Rt. Hn. Frederick
Fisher, Mrs. Doris (B'ham, Ladywood) Marquand, David Williams, Alan (Swansea, W.)
Fitch, Alan (Wigan) Marsden, F. Williams, Mrs. Shirley (Hitchin)
Fitt, Gerard (Belfast, W.) Marshall, Dr. Edmund Wilson, Alexander (Hamilton)
Fletcher, Ted (Darlington) Mason, Rt. Hn. Roy Wilson, William (Coventry, S.)
Foley, Maurice Meacher, Michael Woof, Robert
Foot, Michael Mellish, Rt. Hn. Robert
Ford, Ben Mendelson, John TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Forrester, John Millan, Bruce Mr. Donald Coleman and
Miller, Dr. M. S. Mr. William Hamling.

Subsequent Lords Amendments agreed to.

Forward to