§ 8 pm
§ Mr. Kenneth BakerI beg to move amendment No. 22, in page 38, line 40, leave out subsection (1).
§ Mr. BakerDuring the Standing Committee's consideration of the Bill, Labour Members—notably the hon. Member for Denton and Reddish (Mr. Bennett)—were concerned that clause 51(5) did not preserve the statutory rights of the GLC or MCC employees against their employers that might arise or already have arisen out of actions before abolition. The right to compensation for unfair dismissal is an example of this kind of right.
As I explained then, clause 51 does not affect such rights. I undertook to consider whether the drafting of clauses 57 and 60 might unintentionally have extinguished those rights. This indeed was the case, and this group of amendments is intended to restore those rights to former 724 GLC and MCC staff after abolition. Its effect is to ensure that the residuary bodies can inherit the GLC's or MCCs' liabilities—and rights—arising under or in respect of contracts of employment. This answers the specific point raised by the hon. Member for Tyne Bridge (Mr. Cowans). The latter liabilities include any liabilities in respect of the statutory rights of staff such as Labour Members raised in Committee.
However, the amendment to clause 60(3) has a wider effect. It includes any vicarious liabilities of the employer for the torts of his employees—something which I know has been concerning district surveyors. In addition, the liabilities which this amendment passes to residuary bodies include the making of statutory redundancy payments to former GLC or MCC staff made redundant but not paid before abolition.
§ Mr. StrawDo I understand the Minister to be saying that if there is a liability arising in respect of a tortious act by a district surveyor now, that liability will be inherited by the residual body, not the successor councils?
§ Mr. BakerThat is the position.
These are essentially technical amendments to improve the drafting of the Bill. Several points were raised in Committee at which I undertook to look. I have fulfilled that obligation.
§ Mr. StrawWe are grateful to the Minister for introducing these amendments.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments made: No. 23, in page 39, line 11, leave out from 'date' to end of line 17.
No. 24, in page 39, line 19, leave out '(a)'.
No. 67, in page 39, line 25, at end insert—
'(4) Any person who immediately before the abolition date is in the service of the Greater London Council or a metropolitan county council under a contract of employment made before 2nd March 1984 and who is not designated for the purposes of section 50 above shall be entitled to receive from the appropriate residuary body—(a) if the contract provided for his employment for a fixed term extending beyond that date without any provision for its prior termination by that council, an amount equal to any damages which he would have been entitled to recover from that council if it had not been abolished but had dismissed him immediately before that date; or(b) if the contract (whether or not for a fixed term) provided for its termination by that council on payment of compensation for loss of employment, an amount equal to the compensation which he would have been entiled to receive from that council if it had not been abolished but had terminated the contract immediately before that date.(5) In paragraph (b) of subsection (4) above "compensation for loss of employment" does not include any payment to be made under the contract in lieu of notice; and where the amount of compensation payable under a contract differs according to the reasons for its termination the amount payable under that paragraph shall be determined on the assumption that the contract was terminated by reason of redundancy within the meaning of the said Act of 1978:.—[Mr. Kenneth Baker.]