§ 16. Mr. Dalyellasked the Secretary of State for Employment what amendments he is considering to current legislation in the wake of the judgment in the case of Dimbleby and Sons versus the National Union of Journalists.
§ 20. Mr. John Smithasked the Secretary of State for Employment if he is considering amendments to legislation in relation to secondary industrial action following the judgment in the case of Dimbleby and Sons Ltd. versus the National Union of Journalists.
§ Mr. Tom KingAn appeal against the Court of Appeal's judgment in this case is to be heard by the House of Lords on 1 February. It would, therefore, not be right for me to comment on the case or its possible implications at this time.
§ Mr. DalyellDoes the Secretary of State agree that, if the judgment in the case of Dimbleby and Sons Ltd. v. the National Union of Journalists is allowed to stand, employers will be able to turn primary industrial action into secondary industrial action and push trade unions, whether they like it or not, into conflict with the Government's laws? Is that not the position?
§ Mr. KingThe hon. Member is inviting me to do exactly what I said I was unable to do because the case is going to appeal. It would not be helpful for me to comment at this time.
§ Mr. SmithDoes the Secretary of State not realise the enormous importance of the decision in this case, because an employer, by manipulating company law and by creating a subsidiary company, can place employees who are engaged in primary industrial action into secondary industrial action and cause mayhem with the application of the Government's own laws? If the judgment stands, do not the Government have a responsibility immediately to repeal the legislation? Otherwise, will not their assurances to the workers be shown to be worthless?
§ Mr. KingAs I have said to the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell), I am not proposing to comment at this stage, but we shall study the findings of the court with great interest.