§ (1) A public gas supplier shall extend recognition to Trade Unions supported by the staff.
§ (2) It shall also be the responsibility of a public gas supplier by agreement with such recognised trade unions to establish joint negotiating machinery for the purposes of regulating industrial relations, education and training, and health and safety in the company; and such machinery shall reflect both the regional and national structure of the public gas supplier.".—[Mr. Orme.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.
§ Mr. Orme
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
The new clause deals with recognition of trade unions by the public gas supplier when the British Gas Corporation becomes a public limited company.
The British Gas Corporation currently employs over 93,000 people in a vital industry. It is clearly essential that industrial relations in the industry continue to run smoothly and that the recognition and framework that currently apply should continue after privatisation. BGC management has been promising that everything will stay the same. The new clause gives substance to that promise, and puts it into legislation.
The new clause seeks to ensure that a public gas supplier does two things that will help industrial relations. First, it requires the supplier to recognise appropriate trade unions. That is the first step as it encourages staff to believe that they are properly represented. It ensures that management has a suitable channel for consultation and negotiation.
The second part of the new clause seeks to ensure that proper negotiating machinery is established by the supplier. That is nothing new. Under the Gas Act 1972 the BGC is required to establish machinery for the negotiation of terms of employment and the promotion of the health, safety and welfare of gas employees. That machinery already exists within British Gas. It is essential that it continues with legislative backing. If the Government are not prepared to accept the new clause, we want to know what changes will take place and what machinery there will be under British Gas plc.
The current machinery has developed over the years. It is centralised and efficient. Negotiations over salaries and major conditions of service in the gas industry take place primarily at national level. There is virtually no 72 negotiation at local level, but at regional or district level there are various forms of consultative and negotiating machinery for dealing with such items as car allowance schemes and so on. The machinery for joint negotiation is based mainly on Whitley principles and consists of a trade union side and an employers' side. Therefore, one side of a council cannot outvote the other.
There are three national joint councils—the national joint council for gas staffs and senior officers, the national joint council for higher management, and the national joint industrial council covering manual workers. Those councils deal not only with grades and salaries but with the promotion of training, safety, health and welfare, and improved efficiency and methods.
For each of the 12 regions and for the headquarters of the BGC there are three joint committees or councils that cover consultative and negotiable matters. The composition of regional councils varies from region to region, but their joint membership ranges from 12 to 26 people. The regional councils are both consultative and negotiating bodies. Local service conditions agreements are made for such matters as deputising allowances, car allowances and so on.
There is no local negotiating machinery in the gas industry, but there is machinery for consultation. Local joint consultative committees have been established in many areas in accordance with the provisions of the Gas Act 1972, and they represent all grades of staff. Those committees deal with matters such as hygiene, health and welfare, and do not consider or discuss terms and conditions of employment.
It will be appreciated that the machinery currently in operation in the gas industry is elaborate and well balanced. I am informed that it works well, mainly because the employees feel that they are given a fair hearing. On that basis, they are prepared to accept decisions that they may not like. It would be a tragedy if an industrial relations procedure based on recognition of appropriate trade unions and the establishment of workable machinery were to be thrown away. Employees of the British Gas Corporation who have worked hard to create a successful industry deserve to have their future assured, at least in this important area. They already have such protection under the current Act. They should have it also under the new legislation.
I am disturbed by the deterioration of industrial relations in British Telecom since privatisation. Representations have been made to me on several occasions about the changes in work practices and in the form of consultation.
The consultative machinery in the BGC has been built up over many years. It has worked well and is accepted by management and trade unions. That machinery may appear perfect on paper, but when real problems arise between the workers, particularly when one is representing 93,000 of them, and management, those consultations are not love-ins, but serious negotiations in which major issues are decided, ranging from wages and conditions to safety and health. It would be wrong to form a public limited company without first creating consultative machinery.
I understand that British Gas has consulted its employees. It has issued bulletins decribing what will happen under privatisation and giving information about pensions and other matters, but those bulletins have not said that the machinery that now exists will continue. That 73 is why I have moved the new clause. We should like the Under-Secretary of State to give a full reply on these developments. The Government accepted the machinery provided under the 1972 Act, so what is wrong with accepting that machinery in an efficient privatised gas industry?
§ Mr. Robert C. Brown (Newcastle upon Tyne, North)
I should like to support the motion. Trade unionism in the gas industry is by no stretch of the imagination an innovation. In three years, my union— the General, Municipal, Boilermakers and Allied Trades Union—will celebrate its centenary. That union began 97 years ago as the National Union of Gasworkers, and it has grown from strength to strength.
It is against that background that we make a perfectly reasonable request— that the rights of trade unions should be recognised and written into statute. There should be no question of the public limited company having the right to determine whether there shall be a trade union organisation. As long ago as 1945, the Heyworh committee commented on the industry in the following terms:we have satisfied ourselves that the necessary machinery for negotiations between the two sides exists and has a satisfactory record of achievement.I should like to underline the words, "satisfactory record of achievement."
I am proud to be the founder member of the first staff branch of my union in the gas industry. I am proud that we have never had any industrial troubles. There were tough talks but we always resolved the issues by talking and did not need to take the ultimate step of strike action. In the 30 years in which I worked in the industry we never knew what it was to strike. It was only the nonsense floated by the Government about selling off the showrooms that led to the first ever national stoppage in the industry. It is to the Government's shame that extremely responsible people—the workers in the gas industry—were pushed into taking strike action.
The concerns to which I have referred are as valid today as they were in the past. One need only look at fortress Wapping where many first-class journalists have walked out because trade unions are being trampled on. Unless the new clause is accepted, the same could apply in the gas industry. Skilled workers by the score might walk out because they are not prepared to work in an industry that does not recognise trade unions.
Clearly, we want to continue the good industrial relations record because that would be to the consumers' benefit. It is not sufficient for the Government to say that the privatised company may make its own arrangements and be confident about that. The Government may be confident that British Gas plc will establish the same kind of negotiating machinery that the publicly owned gas industry has enjoyed, but I am not.
We are talking about a monopoly energy supplier. Disruptions to that industry would be catastrophic. The one-day strike against the selling off of gas showrooms was simply a shot across the bows. A national stoppage is almost unthinkable.
§ Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North)
Does my hon. Friend agree that one reason why we should be extremely worried is the Government's known hostility to trade unionism? Does my hon. Friend agree that that is all the 74 more reason why, when the stupidity of privatisation takes place, we must be extremely careful to retain the trade union strength and organisation that has been built up in the gas industry?
§ Mr. Rost
Although I have been carefully following the Opposition's arguments, I find it difficult to understand why the new clause is necessary. I should have thought that all the evidence of previous privatisations during the past few years has shown that industrial relations improve once an industry has been privatised. There has been no question of workers in the industries not having proper representation. Industrial relations have improved in those industries mainly because large numbers of employees have become shareholders. The best way employees can have representations and communication with management is by their becoming shareholders, because shareholders can hold the management responsible for their actions by exercising their rights at annual meetings and even by dismissing the management if they wish. That pattern has been followed to tremendous effect in all the privatised industries.
I was a little surprised that the right hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Orme) and the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, North (Mr. Brown) did not say one word advocating that employees of British Gas plc should be encouraged to become shareholders. I should be more sympathetic to the new clause if union leaders were to give positive rather than the negative advice given in other privatised industries to the effect that union members should not subsrcibe for shares. Union leaders have given unfortunate advice to employees in companies such as the National Freight Consortium, British Aerospace and British Telecom not to subsrcibe for shares. Those who took that advice have suffered financially.
I would have hoped that the right hon. Member for Salford, East would, as part of his case for proper industrial relations and representation, have incorporated a plea that the union leaders in British Gas should be advising their members to become shareholders, thereby influencing the management and improve industrial relations by becoming owners of the business.
§ Mr. Pike
I support the new clause. We have already heard that only 2 per cent. of the shares in British Telecom are now held by BT employees. If the Government were really sincere, they would permit a workers' representative on the board of directors. However, they have failed to do so in respect of any of the industries that they have so far privatised, yet they talk about giving employees greater participation. Given the small percentage of British Gas shares that will be held by employees, it is unrealistic to expect that they will be able to elect a director who will specifically represent them.
Conservative Members frequently knock the role of trade unions, but they fail to recognise the important part the trade unions play in the running of industry. The trade unions and management have one mutual interest—to see industry succeed. They do not want to see the production line grind to a halt. That is bad for management, because profits go down, and it is equally bad for the workers, because they lose wages. It is obvious 75 that in conjunction with management the trade unions and the gas industry have had a tremendous record of achievement, and it is equally obvious that the procedures have worked well.
In Committee, the Minister said that an undertaking has already been given that the current procedures will be carried forward once privatisation take place. If that is so, there is no reason at all why the Government should not be prepared to accept this moderate and reasonable new clause. It will ensure that suitable procedures are carried forward, not only for the benefit of the workers but for the benefit of the industry and the nation as a whole. This is a sensible and modest new clause, and I hope that it will be supported.
§ Mr. David Hunt
This has been an interesting debate. I hope that Opposition Members will recognise that in drawing up the legislation the Government have made every effort to ensure that employees enjoy the same rights after privatisation as they do now. British Gas has made it clear in its privatisation reports for employees that the existing negotiating machinery, which is the substance of the proposed new clause, will be carried forward. That will apply at both national and regional levels.
Industrial relations is a matter to which the corporation rightly affords a high priority, and the record of the industry is a testament to the success of its attitude to staff. All sides of the House greatly welcomed the fact that the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, North (Mr. Brown) participated in the debate. In paying him that tribute, I hope he recognises that I do not accept what he said. However, the hon. Gentleman has a tremendous knowledge of this industry. I understand that he was apprenticed as a plumber to the Newcastle gas industry in 1937. He knows the importance of industrial relations to the present management of British Gas, and its record is a testament to the success of its attitude to the staff.
The new clause would require a public gas supplier to recognise the industry's trade unions and to establish joint negotiating machinery. There can be no doubt that British Gas has given full recognition to representative trade unions and that it will continue to do so.
The second limb of the new clause again seeks to reestablish section 35 of the 1972 Act, which placed a duty on the corporation to seek consultation with organisations on machinery for settling terms and conditions of employment and for the promotion and encouragement of safety, health, welfare, training and education. Again, the record of British Gas in these areas is second to none, and it is simple commercial prudence to ensure that it develops the skills of its staff in the interests of efficiency and customer service in general.
British Gas has already assured those involved in the operation of the present negotiating machinery that it does not intend to make any changes in its approach as a consequence of privatisation, and the same assurance has been given to employees generally. If the existing arrangements prove inadequate in some way over the passage of time, any changes will be the subject of joint consideration between management and unions.
The right hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Dunn) said that he had seen nothing in the privatisation reports to show that British Gas would continue the present 76 arrangements. He said that it was for that reason that the Opposition proposed the new clause. I am happy to give him the opportunity now to withdraw the motion because privatisation report No. 6, under the heading of industrial relations, states:British Gas has stated that it sees the existing negotiation and consultation arrangements which have served industry well in the past carrying us into the future. Over time we may need to alter our arrangements according to any new circumstances which may arise—but that would be a matter for joint consideration between management and Trade Unions.
§ Mr. Hunt
I apologise to the right hon. Gentleman. I thought he said that he could find nowhere in the privatisation reports an assurance that British Gas would continue the present arrangements. I thought I understood him to say that it was for that reason that the Opposition proposed the new clause.
We have already had a substantial debate in Committee on these questions, and in direct response to the right hon. Gentleman I made it clear that in the Government's view it would be wrong to write into this statute obligations that were not written into statute for other private sector companies. I then gave the Committee the assurances that I give now—that British Gas does not envisage any change in the existing negotiating machinery, and that it will continue its fundamental commitments to consultation and discussion on matters affecting employees.
§ Mr. Robert C. Brown
The Minister must surely appreciate the fears of the present employees of British Gas. If this provision is not written into statute, as it was in the 1972 Act, there is nothing at all to prevent the newly privatised management from suddenly becoming bloody-minded—as we have seen in the newspaper this week— and taking action that would be anathema to the entire British trade union movement. That could have dreadful repercussions for the nation.
§ Mr. Hunt
I understand the fears that the hon. Gentleman has expressed, but I believe that they are groundless. I hope that employees will recognise, in view of the assurances that they have received from the existing management, that there is no need to be concerned about the future of industrial relations, given the great tradition of this important industry in the past.
I very much welcome the contribution of my hon. Friend the Member for Erewash (Mr. Rost). He has considerable knowledge of privatisation and profit-sharing. He rightly pointed out that there was Opposition silence on the question of buying shares, and that in the past there has been no encouragement from trade union leaders.
The hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Pike) misunderstood the importance of employee participation through share ownership. The hon. Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick) also made a speech. The hon. Gentlemen are not correct. Nationalisation has not meant ownership by people or by employees. In reality, it has meant ownership by politicians and the Government. There is no need for the new clause to entrench in any way 77 arrangements which have existed until now. The legislation affords for the first time true public ownership of the gas industry.
§ Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 179, Noes 225.79
|Division No. 104]||[7.50 pm|
|Abse, Leo||Godman, Dr Norman|
|Adams, Allen (Paisley N)||Golding, John|
|Anderson, Donald||Gould, Bryan|
|Archer, Rt Hon Peter||Gourlay, Harry|
|Ashley, Rt Hon Jack||Hamilton, James (M'well N)|
|Ashton, Joe||Hamilton, W. W. (Fife Central)|
|Atkinson, N. (Tottenham)||Hancock, Michael|
|Bagier, Gordon A. T.||Hardy, Peter|
|Barnett, Guy||Harrison, Rt Hon Walter|
|Barron, Kevin||Hart, Rt Hon Dame Judith|
|Beckett, Mrs Margaret||Hattersley, Rt Hon Roy|
|Beith, A. J.||Haynes, Frank|
|Bell, Stuart||Healey, Rt Hon Denis|
|Benn, Rt Hon Tony||Heffer, Eric S.|
|Bennett, A. (Dent'n & Red'sh)||Hogg, N. (C'nauld & Kilsyth)|
|Bermingham, Gerald||Holland, Stuart (Vauxhall)|
|Bidwell, Sydney||Howells, Geraint|
|Blair, Anthony||Hoyle, Douglas|
|Bray, Dr Jeremy||Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N)|
|Brown, Gordon (D'f'mline E)||Hughes, Roy (Newport East)|
|Brown, Hugh D. (Provan)||Hughes, Sean (Knowsley S)|
|Brown, N. (N'c'tle-u-Tyne E)||Hughes, Simon (Southwark)|
|Brown, R. (N'c'tle-u-Tyne N)||Janner, Hon Greville|
|Bruce, Malcolm||Jones, Barry (Alyn & Deeside)|
|Callaghan, Jim (Heyw'd & M)||Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald|
|Campbell, Ian||Kilroy-Silk, Robert|
|Campbell-Savours, Dale||Kirkwood, Archy|
|Canavan, Dennis||Lambie, David|
|Carter-Jones, Lewis||Lamond, James|
|Cartwright, John||Leadbitter, Ted|
|Clark, Dr David (S Shields)||Leighton, Ronald|
|Clarke, Thomas||Lewis, Terence (Worsley)|
|Clay, Robert||Litherland, Robert|
|Clelland, David Gordon||Lloyd, Tony (Stretford)|
|Clwyd, Mrs Ann||Lofthouse, Geoffrey|
|Cocks, Rt Hon M. (Bristol S)||Loyden, Edward|
|Cohen, Harry||McCartney, Hugh|
|Conlan, Bernard||McDonald, Dr Oonagh|
|Corbett, Robin||McKelvey, William|
|Cox, Thomas (Tooting)||MacKenzie, Rt Hon Gregor|
|Craigen, J. M.||McNamara, Kevin|
|Crowther, Stan||McWilliam, John|
|Cunliffe, Lawrence||Madden, Max|
|Cunningham, Dr John||Marek, Dr John|
|Davies, Ronald (Caerphilly)||Marshall, David (Shettleston)|
|Davis, Terry (B'ham, H'ge H'l)||Martin, Michael|
|Deakins, Eric||Mason, Rt Hon Roy|
|Dixon, Donald||Maxton, John|
|Dormand, Jack||Maynard, Miss Joan|
|Douglas, Dick||Meadowcroft, Michael|
|Dubs, Alfred||Michie, William|
|Duffy, A. E. P.||Mikardo, Ian|
|Dunwoody, Hon Mrs G.||Millan, Rt Hon Bruce|
|Eadie, Alex||Miller, Dr M. S. (E Kilbride)|
|Eastham, Ken||Mitchell, Austin (G't Grimsby)|
|Edwards, Bob (W'h'mpt'n SE)||Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe)|
|Evans, John (St. Helens N)||Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon)|
|Ewing, Harry||Nellist, David|
|Fatchett, Derek||Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon|
|Field, Frank (Birkenhead)||O'Brien, William|
|Fields, T. (L'pool Broad Gn)||O'Neill, Martin|
|Fisher, Mark||Orme, Rt Hon Stanley|
|Flannery, Martin||Owen, Rt Hon Dr David|
|Foot, Rt Hon Michael||Park, George|
|Forrester, John||Parry, Robert|
|Foster, Derek||Patchett, Terry|
|Foulkes, George||Pavitt, Laurie|
|Freeson, Rt Hon Reginald||Pendry, Tom|
|Freud, Clement||Pike, Peter|
|George, Bruce||Prescott, John|
|Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr John||Radice, Giles|
|Redmond, Martin||Thomas, Dafydd (Merioneth)|
|Richardson, Ms Jo||Thomas, Dr R. (Carmarthen)|
|Roberts, Allan (Bootle)||Thompson, J. (Wansbeck)|
|Robinson, G. (Coventry NW)||Thorne, Stan (Preston)|
|Rogers, Allan||Tinn, James|
|Rooker, J. W.||Torney, Tom|
|Ross, Ernest (Dundee W)||Wainwright, R.|
|Rowlands, Ted||Wardell, Gareth (Gower)|
|Sedgemore, Brian||Wareing, Robert|
|Sheldon, Rt Hon R.||Weetch, Ken|
|Shore, Rt Hon Peter||Welsh, Michael|
|Short, Mrs R.(W'hampt'n NE)||White, James|
|Skinner, Dennis||Williams, Rt Hon A.|
|Smith, C.(Isl'ton S & F'bury)||Winnick, David|
|Smith, Rt Hon J. (M'ds E)||Wrigglesworth, Ian|
|Snape, Peter||Young, David (Bolton SE)|
|Spearing, Nigel||Tellers for the Ayes:|
|Stott, Roger||Mr. Allen McKay and|
|Strang, Gavin||Mr. Ray Powell.|
|Aitken, Jonathan||Durant, Tony|
|Alison, Rt Hon Michael||Eggar, Tim|
|Amess, David||Emery, Sir Peter|
|Ancram, Michael||Evennett, David|
|Aspinwall, Jack||Eyre, Sir Reginald|
|Atkins, Rt Hon Sir H.||Fletcher, Alexander|
|Atkins, Robert (South Ribble)||Fookes, Miss Janet|
|Baker, Nicholas (Dorset N)||Forman, Nigel|
|Baldry, Tony||Forth, Eric|
|Batiste, Spencer||Fry, Peter|
|Beaumont-Dark, Anthony||Garel-Jones, Tristan|
|Bellingham, Henry||Glyn, Dr Alan|
|Benyon, William||Goodhart, Sir Philip|
|Best, Keith||Gorst, John|
|Bevan, David Gilroy||Gower, Sir Raymond|
|Biffen, Rt Hon John||Greenway, Harry|
|Biggs-Davison, Sir John||Gregory, Conal|
|Blaker, Rt Hon Sir Peter||Griffiths, Sir Eldon|
|Body, Sir Richard||Grist, Ian|
|Boscawen, Hon Robert||Grylls, Michael|
|Bowden, A. (Brighton K'to'n)||Gummer, Rt Hon John S|
|Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich)||Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)|
|Boyson, Dr Rhodes||Hampson, Dr Keith|
|Brandon-Bravo, Martin||Harris, David|
|Bright, Graham||Heddle, John|
|Brittan, Rt Hon Leon||Henderson, Barry|
|Brown, M. (Brigg & Cl'thpes)||Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael|
|Browne, John||Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L.|
|Bruinvels, Peter||Hirst, Michael|
|Bryan, Sir Paul||Holland, Sir Philip (Gedling)|
|Buchanan-Smith, Rt Hon A.||Howarth, Gerald (Cannock)|
|Butler, Rt Hon Sir Adam||Howell, Rt Hon D. (G'Idford)|
|Butterfill, John||Howell, Ralph (Norfolk, N)|
|Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)||Hunt, David (Wirral W)|
|Cash, William||Hunter, Andrew|
|Chapman, Sydney||Irving, Charles|
|Chope, Christopher||Key, Robert|
|Churchill, W. S.||Lang, Ian|
|Clark, Dr Michael (Rochford)||Latham, Michael|
|Clark, Sir W. (Croydon S)||Lee, John (Pendle)|
|Clarke, Rt Hon K. (Rushcliffe)||Leigh, Edward (Gainsbor'gh)|
|Cockeram, Eric||Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark|
|Colvin, Michael||Lester, Jim|
|Conway, Derek||Lewis, Sir Kenneth (Stamf'd)|
|Coombs, Simon||Lightbown, David|
|Cope, John||Lilley, Peter|
|Cormack, Patrick||Lloyd, Ian (Havant)|
|Corrie, John||Lloyd, Peter (Fareham)|
|Cranborne, Viscount||Lord, Michael|
|Critchley, Julian||Luce, Rt Hon Richard|
|Currie, Mrs Edwina||Lyell, Nicholas|
|Dickens, Geoffrey||McCrindle, Robert|
|Dicks, Terry||McCurley, Mrs Anna|
|Dorrell, Stephen||Macfarlane, Neil|
|Douglas-Hamilton, Lord J.||MacGregor, Rt Hon John|
|Dover, Den||MacKay, Andrew (Berkshire)|
|du Cann, Rt Hon Sir Edward||Maclean, David John|
|McNair-Wilson, P. (New F'st)||Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge)|
|Madel, David||Silvester, Fred|
|Malone, Gerald||Sims, Roger|
|Maples, John||Skeet, Sir Trevor|
|Marshall, Michael (Arundel)||Smith, Sir Dudley (Warwick)|
|Mates, Michael||Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)|
|Mather, Carol||Speller, Tony|
|Mayhew, Sir Patrick||Spencer, Derek|
|Merchant, Piers||Spicer, Jim (Dorset W)|
|Meyer, Sir Anthony||Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)|
|Miller, Hal (B'grove)||Stanbrook, Ivor|
|Mills, Iain (Meriden)||Stanley, Rt Hon John|
|Miscampbell, Norman||Steen, Anthony|
|Moate, Roger||Stern, Michael|
|Monro, Sir Hector||Stevens, Lewis (Nuneaton)|
|Morrison, Hon C. (Devizes)||Stewart, Andrew (Sherwood)|
|Moynihan, Hon C.||Stewart, Ian (Hertf'dshire N)|
|Needham, Richard||Stokes, John|
|Nelson, Anthony||Stradling Thomas, Sir John|
|Neubert, Michael||Sumberg, David|
|Nicholls, Patrick||Taylor, John (Solihull)|
|Normanton, Tom||Taylor, Teddy (S'end E)|
|Norris, Steven||Temple-Morris, Peter|
|Ottaway, Richard||Thomas, Rt Hon Peter|
|Page, Sir John (Harrow W)||Thompson, Donald (Calder V)|
|Page, Richard (Herts SW)||Thompson, Patrick (N'ich N)|
|Parris, Matthew||Thorne, Neil (llford S)|
|Patten, J. (Oxf W & Abgdn)||Thornton, Malcolm|
|Pattie, Geoffrey||Townend, John (Bridlington)|
|Pawsey, James||Tracey, Richard|
|Peacock, Mrs Elizabeth||Trippier, David|
|Percival, Rt Hon Sir Ian||Twinn, Dr Ian|
|Pollock, Alexander||van Straubenzee, Sir W.|
|Porter, Barry||Vaughan, Sir Gerard|
|Powell, William (Corby)||Viggers, Peter|
|Powley, John||Waddington, David|
|Prentice, Rt Hon Reg||Waldegrave, Hon William|
|Price, Sir David||Walden, George|
|Pym, Rt Hon Francis||Walker, Bill (T'side N)|
|Raffan, Keith||Walker, Rt Hon P. (W'cester)|
|Raison, Rt Hon Timothy||Waller, Gary|
|Rathbone, Tim||Ward, John|
|Rhodes James, Robert||Wardle, C. (Bexhill)|
|Rhys Williams, Sir Brandon||Watson, John|
|Ridley, Rt Hon Nicholas||Watts, John|
|Ridsdale, Sir Julian||Whitney, Raymond|
|Roberts, Wyn (Conwy)||Wiggin, Jerry|
|Robinson, Mark (N'port W)||Winterton, Mrs Ann|
|Roe, Mrs Marion||Winterton, Nicholas|
|Rossi, Sir Hugh||Wolfson, Mark|
|Rost, Peter||Wood, Timothy|
|Rumbold, Mrs Angela||Woodcock, Michael|
|Ryder, Richard||Young, Sir George (Acton)|
|Sackville, Hon Thomas|
|Sainsbury, Hon Timothy||Tellers for the Noes|
|Sayeed, Jonathan||Mr. Archie Hamilton and|
|Shaw, Sir Michael (Scarb')||Mr. Francis Maude|
|Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)|
§ Question accordingly negatived.