§ Lords Amendment: No. 15, in page 7, line 28, leave out "person" and insert "worker".
§ 4.30 p.m.
§ Mr. Dudley SmithI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
806 This is a minor drafting Amendment the need for which was pointed out in another place by several noble Lords, Lord Delacourt-Smith and Lord Hoy among them. It deletes "person" and substitutes "worker" in the agency shop process and thereby regularises the situation.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Lords Amendment: No. 16, in page 7, line 33, leave out from "Act" to end of line 37.
§ The Solicitor-General (Sir Geoffrey Howe)I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
Again, the Government are responding to a request made by the Opposition in another place. Clause 9 as it stood contained three sub-paragraphs to subsection (1), and it was suggested to us that what was required could be achieved by the retention of sub-paragraphs (a) and (b); this Amendment will have the effect of removing sub-paragraph (c). The Government supported a similar proposal in another place. This will achieve, by the use of appropriate words, what was desired by the Opposition in the House of Lords.
§ Mr. Paul B. Rose (Manchester, Blackley)As an agency shop agreement can exist only within the highly complex legal framework established by this Measure, the words which it is proposed to delete seem unnecessary and, to that extent, I agree with the Solicitor-General —but only in isolation, for I must again enter the caveat that we are opposed to the whole concept of the agency shop.
In this case the Industrial Tribunal must decide whether a payment is in accordance with an agreement. Such agreements must have the sanction of law and one expects, in the normal course of events, that a reasonable sum—a sum that does not unfairly discriminate—is bound to be the outcome of the remaining subparagraphs (a) and (b).
Accordingly—this is extremely unusual in our debates on the Bill—I see nothing in the Amendment which offends. In one respect it is to be commended; in so far as it may help to avoid some vexatious claims by what have been termed in our deliberations on this subject, members of the awkward squad.
807 Despite this tiny Amendment, the tribunal may become overloaded. The whole function of the tribunal is being changed. It is being effectively sabotaged and, as a result, is losing the confidence of the trade union movement. This tribunal has proved reasonably speedy, fair and informal in the past in dealing with such matters as redundancy payments. The Bill will render it ineffectual. But in so far as the Amendment might minimise the degree of sabotage, we welcome it. If it helps to avoid the retention of useless words, it will have done a little good in an otherwise extremely harmful context.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Subsequent Lords Amendments agreed to.