§
Lords Amendment No. 2: In page 19, line 8, at end insert
on that date became an employee of the Council; or
(b) at any time after 31st March 1969 (whether before or after the commencement of this Act) was or is taken into the employment of the Council to undertake research in astrophysics at that laboratory.
§ Mr. RidleyI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
As you have said, Mr. Speaker, this Amendment and the next Amendment can conveniently be taken together. Their substance was discussed at some length in Committee in this House and in another place. They arise out of an undertaking given by the Minister for Industry in reply to an Amendment put forward by my hon. Friend the Member for Abingdon (Mr. Neave). The purpose of the two Amendments is very similar to what my hon. Friend sought to add to the Clause.
The trade unions concerned made further representations on the question before the House as a consequence of which the Government have acceded to their suggestion that these words be added. The purpose is to permit the Atomic Energy Authority's pension scheme to be extended so as to apply to new recruits engaged to work on astrophysics at the Science Research Council's laboratory at Culham.
These Amendments should not be taken as establishing a new principle. There already exists a clear principle, which has been followed by successive Governments, that staff of one employer are not normally covered for superannuation purposes in the scheme of another employer. This principle is normally set aside only in respect of staff who are transferred with their work with little or no option. However, it is recognised that particular circumstances may require special treatment and in the present case the Government have accepted the argument that the Bill should not prejudge the question whether new astrophysics recruits at Culham should be admitted to the Atomic Energy Authority's pension 1577 scheme or not. Therefore, although the Government have no intention of allowing the power to be used we are prepared at least to leave the question open by supporting the Amendments.
The Amendments are not drawn so widely as that tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Abingdon. His Amendment referred to persons engaged for work on astrophysics not just at Culham but at any Science Research Council establishment. It is in respect of staff at Culham that the case for the Amendment has been argued and accepted and it is right that the Amendment should be limited in this way.
It is similar to that moved by Lord Delacourt-Smith on the previous occasion when this matter was before the House and as it is to the benefit of the staff side, and in response to pressure at an earlier stage I hope that the House will accept the Amendment without undue delay.
§ Mr. Arthur LewisI am surprised that we have had nothing from the Minister about the extent to which he has discussed this with the trade unions concerned. This is surely a question of industrial relations. The Government for weeks now have been preventing discussion, adopting a Reichstag attitude to hon. Members and condemning trade unions for failing to go through normal arbitration procedures, yet they come along here hoping to pass Measures affecting conditions of service of trade unions "on the nod", without any debate.
§ Mr. Ridleyrose—
§ Mr. LewisI will give way in a moment. I have to be careful because if I give way I may find that the Patronage Secretary will come along and move the closure. Knowing from immediate, bitter experience that the Chair is almost certain to accept this Motion, I do not want to find that in giving way I have lost the chance to say a few words.
I would have thought that the Minister would have said that he had held discussions for about four or five weeks with the unions. Instead we have a Government which have admonished trade unions, have put on a guillotine, rebuked Post Office and other workers for failing to carry on normal industrial relations— 1578 which I do not accept—coming along and failing to say one word about what discussions have been held with the Electrical Trades Union. I do not think that that is the correct title now, but my hon. Friends will remember it as such. The power workers are members of that union and they may find that this is not adequate.
§ Sir H. Legge-BourkeMay I assure the hon. Gentleman that my hon. Friend the Member for Abington and myself in supporting him said what we did on Report because of what we had heard from the Institute of Professional Civil Servants, which is the union concerned. This Amendment is entirely to meet its point of view, which has been clearly put to us.
§ Mr. LewisI am much obliged to the hon. and gallant Gentleman for his intervention, which has helped me in my case. The Minister has refrained—I do not know whether he has done so deliberately—from telling us that the Amendment arose because of the excellent work of the Institution of Professional Civil Servants. I should have thought that the Minister would have said that the Amendment had been put forward at the behest of his hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Ely (Sir H. Legge-Bourke) and his hon. Friend the Member for Abingdon (Mr. Neave) acting on behalf of the Institution of Professional Civil Servants no doubt in their trade union capacity— I am glad to see that they are members of a trade union. Had he done so I would not have attacked him.
I still feel the Minister should have paid tribute to this professional trade union which is affiliated to the T.U.C. The T.U.C. has been castigated in recent weeks for its failure to carry out normal industrial relations, and the first thing the Minister should have done was to pay tribute to the trade union. I must take the word of the hon. Member for Isle of Ely if he tells me that it was through his efforts, and those of his hon. Friend the Member for Abingdon and the Institution of Professional Civil Servants that this Amendment was put forward, and I must perhaps change my mind and give it consideration and support.
Mr. Bob BrownI am sure my hon. Friend did not intentionally mislead the 1579 House—it is the last thing he would want to do—in saying that the Institution of Professional Civil Servants was affiliated to the T.U.C. I am certain that it is not, and I ask him to accept this correction.
§ Mr. LewisI am much obliged to my hon. Friend. If I am wrong I bow to his correction and apologise to you, Mr. Speaker, and to the House. I understand—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I hope the hon. Gentleman will not pursue that matter, which has no relevance to the Amendment. Will he please confine his remarks to the Amendment?
§ Mr. LewisMy remarks are relevant because if I inadvertently made an untrue statement it is right that I should correct it and apologise to the House for inadvertently making a statement which I now know not to be true—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Gentleman, but if he has made a false statement which is irrelevant it is not relevant for him to correct it. Will the hon. Member make clear whether he is speaking for or against the Amendment and stick strictly to the Amendment?
§ Mr. LewisI am sorry, but I must repeat that I am completely in order—[HoN. MEMBERS: "Oh."] The Minister gave no good, sound, logical reasons why I should support the Amendment. I was going on to say that because the hon. and gallant Gentleman—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The hon. Gentleman has already said that once or twice. He must not repeat himself.
§ Mr. LewisI was going on to say that the hon Gentleman gave me a reason why I might be able to change my view and support the Amendment. Had the Minister in introducing the Amendment given me a good reason for supporting it, there would have been no need for me to take part in the debate. Had he told me the trade union was in favour of it, I would have accepted it.
§ 12.15 a.m.
§ Mr. WellbelovedI intend to make only a brief contribution to the debate on Lords Amendment No. 2. I began by putting down a Motion disagreeing 1580 with it. I did so because I feared that we might be denied an opportunity even to debate it otherwise. As the evening progressed, it was my intention not to oppose the Amendment after all because, having studied it with care, I saw that it meets points put to the House by the hon. Member for the Isle of Ely (Sir H. Legge-Bourke) and the hon. Member for Abingdon (Mr. Neave), who were speaking on behalf of a particular group of workers. It was, therefore, my intention to give a general welcome to the Amendment and ask leave to withdraw the Motion.
But since the Government have decided that they want to truncate debate on these important matters, I am going to recommend my right hon. and hon. Friends, as a protest rather than from any desire to defeat the Amendment, to record our complete abhorrence of the procedure which has been adopted in respect of Lords Amendment No. 1 by dividing the House on Lords Amendment No. 2 and also on Lords Amendment No. 3, which, I understand, Mr. Speaker, you are allowing us the opportunity to vote upon.
§ Mr. RidleyI pointed out to the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) that Lords Amendment No. 2 results from several discussions between my hon. Friend the Minister for Industry and the Institution of Professional Civil Servants, the trade union concerned, and from pressure put on the Government at an earlier stage by my hon. Friend the Member for the Isle of Ely (Sir H. Legge-Bourke) and my hon. Friend the Member for Abingdon (Mr. Neave). If the Opposition wish to vote against it, they will do so in the full knowledge that they will be voting against what the staff side requested of the House, and I suggest to my right hon. and hon. Friends that they support the Amendment.
§ Mr. KaufmanThe Under-Secretary of State says, with some validity—and I shall not join my right hon. and hon. Friends in the Lobby on the Amendment—that the trade union concerned put forward a valid point of view and that we should take its advice. Yet for several weeks now we have been forced through the Division Lobbies night after night in defence of the liberties of the trade unions.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. That does not arise on this Amendment.
| Question put, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment:— |
| The House divided: Ayes 116, Noes 3. |
| Division No. 220.] | AYES | [12.20 a.m. |
| Alison, Michael (Barkston Ash) | Haselhurst, Alan | Pink, R. Bonner |
| Allason, James (Hemel Hempstead) | Havers, Michael | Pounder, Rafton |
| Atkins, Humphrey | Hornby, Richard | Powell, Rt. Hn. J. Enoch |
| Baker, Kenneth (St. Marylebone) | Howe, Hn. Sir Geoffrey (Reigate) | Pym, Rt. Hn. Francis |
| Blaker, Peter | Howell, Ralph (Norfolk, N.) | Redmond, Robert |
| Boardman, Tom (Leicester, S.W.) | Hunt, John | Reed, Laurance (Bolton, E.) |
| Boscawen, Robert | Hutchison, Michael Clark | Rees, Peter (Dover) |
| Bray, Ronald | James, David | Rees-Davies, W. R. |
| Brewis, John | Jenkin, Patrick (Woodford) | Ridley, Hn. Nicholas |
| Brinton, Sir Tatton | Jopling, Michael | Roberts, Michael (Cardiff, N.) |
| Brocklebank-Fowler, Christopher | Kilfedder, James | Roberts, Wyn (Conway) |
| Brown, Sir Edward (Bath) | King, Evelyn (Dorset, S.) | Rossi, Hugh (Hornsey) |
| Bruce-Gardyne, J. | Kinsey, J. R. | Scott-Hopkins, James |
| Buchanan-Smith, Alick(Angus,N&M) | Kitson, Timothy | Sharples, Richard |
| Chapman, Sydney | Knight, Mrs. Jill | Shaw, Michael (Sc'b'gh & Whitby) |
| Chataway, Rt. Hn. Christopher | Knox, David | Shelton, William (Clapham) |
| Chichester-Clark, R. | Legge-Bourke, Sir Harry | Soref, Harold |
| Churchill, W. S. | Longden, Gilbert | Speed, Keith |
| Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe) | MacArthur, Ian | Spence, John |
| Clegg, Walter | McLaren, Martin | Sproat, Iain |
| Cockeram, Eric | Maclean, Sir Fitzroy | Stanbrook, Ivor |
| Cormack, Patrick | Mather, Carol | Stodart, Anthony (Edinburgh, W.) |
| Dalkeith, Earl of | Maude, Angus | Stuttaford, Dr. Tom |
| Dixon, Piers | Maxwell-Hyslop, R. J. | Sutcliffe, John |
| du Cann, Rt. Hn. Edward | Meyer, Sir Anthony | Taylor,Edward M.(G'gow,Cathcart) |
| Eden, Sir John | Mitchell,Lt.-Col.C.(Aberdeenshire,W) | Taylor, Frank (Moss Side) |
| Fenner, Mrs. Peggy | Moate, Roger | Tebbit, Norman |
| Fidler, Michael | Molyneaux, James | Thomas, John Stradling (Monmouth) |
| Finsberg, Geoffrey (Hampstead) | Money, Ernle | Thompson,Sir Richard (Croydon,S.) |
| Fortescue, Tim | Monks, Mrs. Connie | van Straubenzee, W. R. |
| Fowler, Norman | Monro, Hector | Warren, Kenneth |
| Fox, Marcus | More, Jasper | Weatherill, Bernard |
| Gibson-Watt, David | Heave, Airey | Whitelaw, Rt. Hn. William |
| Gilmour, Sir John (Fife, E.) | Noble, Rt. Hn. Michael | Worsley, Marcus |
| Goodhew, Victor | Normanton, Tom | Younger, Hn. George |
| Gower, Raymond | Nott, John | |
| Gray, Hamish | Osborn, John | TELLERS FOR THE AYES: |
| Green, Alan | Owen, Idris (Stockport, N.) | Mr. Reginald Eyre and |
| Gummer, Selwyn | Page, Graham (Crosby) | Mr. Paul Hawkins. |
| Hall, John (Wycombe) | Parkinson, Cecil (Enfield, W.) |
| NOES | ||
| Janner, Greville | ||
| Oswald, Thomas | ||
| Sillars, James | ||
| TELLERS FOR THE NOES: | ||
| Mr. James Wellbeloved and | ||
| Mr. Eric Deakins. |
§ Lords Amendment: No. 3 in page 19, line 9, leave out paragraph (b).
§ Mr. RidleyI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
| Division No. 221.] | AYES | [12.26 a.m. |
| Alison, Michael (Barkston Ash) | Boscawen, Robert | Bruce-Gardyne, J. |
| Allason, James (Hemel Hempstead) | Bray, Ronald | Buchanan-Smith,Alick(Angus,N&M) |
| Atkins, Humphrey | Brewis, John | Chapman, Sydney |
| Baker, Kenneth (St. Marylebone) | Brinton, Sir Tatton | Chataway, Rt. Hn. Christopher |
| Blaker, Peter | Brocklebank-Fowler, Christopher | Chichester-Clark, R. |
| Boardman, Tom (Leicester, S.W.) | Brown, Sir Edward (Bath) | Churchill, W. S. |
§ Question put, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 113, Noes 2.
| Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe) | Kinsey, J. R. | Rees, Peter (Dover) |
| Clegg, Walter | Kitson, Timothy | Rees-Davies, W. R. |
| Cockeram, Eric | Knight, Mrs. Jill | Ridley, Hn. Nicholas |
| Cormack, Patrick | Knox, David | Roberts, Michael (Cardiff, N.) |
| Dalkeith, Earl of | Legge-Bourke, Sir Harry | Roberts, Wyn (Conway) |
| Dixon, Piers | Longden, Gilbert | Rossi, Hugh (Hornsey) |
| du Cann, Rt. Hn. Edward | MacArthur, Ian | Scott-Hopkins, James |
| Eden, Sir John | McLaren, Martin | Sharpies, Richard |
| Fenner, Mrs. Peggy | Maclean, Sir Fitzroy | Shaw, Michael (Sc'b'gh & Whitby) |
| Fidler, Michael | Mather, Carol | Shelton, William (Clapham) |
| Finsberg, Geoffrey (Hampstead) | Maude, Angus | Soref, Harold |
| Fortescue, Tim | Maxwell-Hyslop, R. J. | Speed, Keith |
| Fowler, Norman | Meyer, Sir Anthony | Spence, John |
| Fox, Marcus | Mitchell,Lt.-Col.C.(Aberdeenshire,W) | Sproat, Iain |
| Gibson-Watt, David | Moate, Roger | Stanbrook, Ivor |
| Gilmour, Sir John (Fife, E.) | Molyneaux, James | Stodart, Anthony (Edinburgh, W.) |
| Goodhew, Victor | Money, Ernie | Stuttaford, Dr. Tom |
| Gower, Raymond | Monks, Mrs. Connie | Sutcliffe, John |
| Gray, Hamish | Monro, Hector | Taylor,Edward M.(G'gow,Cathcart) |
| Green, Alan | More, Jasper | Taylor, Frank (Moss Side) |
| Gummer, Selwyn | Neave, Airey | Tebbit, Norman |
| Hall, John (Wycombe) | Normanton, Tom | Thomas, John Stradling (Monmouth) |
| Haselhurst, Alan | Nott, John | Thompson, Sir Richard (Croydon, S.) |
| Havers, Michael | Osborn, John | van Straubenzee, W. R. |
| Hornby, Richard | Owen, Idris (Stockport, N.) | Warren, Kenneth |
| Howe, Hn. Sir Geoffrey (Reigate) | Page, Graham (Crosby) | Weatherill, Bernard |
| Howell, Ralph (Norfolk, N.) | Parkinson, Cecil (Enfield, W.) | Whitelaw, Rt. Hn. William |
| Hunt, John | Pink, R. Bonner | Worsley, Marcus |
| Hutchison, Michael Clark | Pounder, Rafton | Younger, Hn. George |
| James, David | Powell, Rt. Hn. J. Enoch | |
| Jenkin, Patrick (Woodford) | Pym, Rt. Hn. Francis | TELLERS FOR THE AYES: |
| Jopling, Michael | Redmond, Robert | Mr. Reginald Eyre and |
| Kilfedder,James | Reed, Laurance (Bolton, E.) | Mr. Paul Hawkins. |
| NOES | ||
| Janner, Greville | ||
| Morgan, Elystan (Cardiganshire) | ||
| TELLERS FOR THE NOES: | ||
| Mr. James Wellbeloved and | ||
| Mr. Eric Deakins. |
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. As the House has shown itself willing to waive its Privileges in respect of Lords Amendments Nos. 2 and 3, I shall see that entries are made in the Journal to that effect.