§ Mr. NichollsI beg to move amendment No. 1, in page 2, line 4, leave out 'as it' and insert
`imposing requirements on the union as the court'.The Opposition expressed concern in Committee that, under clause 1, a trade union member might be ordered to perform his contract of employment. Further consideration has suggested that there is a remote possibility that the clause would be interpreted in that way. The amendment will ensure that it cannot be. I hope, therefore, that it will commend itself to the Opposition and the House.
§ Mr. Gavin Strang (Edinburgh, East)As the Minister said, the amendment was tabled in response to our complaints in Committee that the original form of clause 1 would allow a court to take any action it considered appropriate to prevent or reverse an act or authorisation by a union in connection with unlawful industrial action, which might have included an order against an individual or a group wholly independent of the union in question. For example, if an independent newspaper or magazine supports an industrial dispute and reproduces an authorisation by a union of that dispute which is subsequently ruled unlawful, action might be taken against the publication. The original form of the clause was so badly drafted and so draconian that even the Government could not defend it. The amendment in no way deals with our central concern about the clause—that it will sanction unjustified and damaging action against a union by a dissident member—but it at least removes the danger to third parties.
§ Amendment agreed to.