EXTENSION TO NON-VOTING POSITIONS OF DUTY TO HOLD ELECTIONS (Hansard, 24 May 1988)

§ Mr. Nicholls
I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said amendment.

Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this it will be convenient to discuss the following Lords amendments: No. 13 and amendment (a) thereto, and No. 53.

§ Mr. Nicholls
The amendments fulfil a commitment that I gave in Committee. I am happy to say that they were welcomed by the Opposition spokesman in another place, Lord McCarthy. They reflect consideration of the principle behind an Opposition amendment to exempt from the election requirement general secretaries and presidents if their position is occupied under the rules of the union by a different person annually and that person is not a voting member of the committee.
The essence of the amendment is that individuals holding the office of general secretary or president in an honorary capacity under the Buggins principle should not have to be elected. The majority of individuals likely to benefit from this exemption will be lay members of a union appointed or elected, perhaps by a union's conference, to serve as president.
In Committee, the Opposition described it as a moderate amendment, but it marks a significant departure from the Government's expressed intention that all presidents and general secretaries should be elected. It is made on the basis that the positions involved are normally honorary and do not carry the power and authority usually associated with such offices.
As to the Opposition amendment, the Government accept that individuals should not have to be elected if they hold the position of general secretary or president where it is honorary and occupied under the rules of the union by a different person annually who is not a voting member of the committee. I hope that I shall not embarrass the hon. Member for Edinburgh, East (Mr. Strang) by reminding him of his expression of gratitude in Committee, because from my reading of the Opposition amendment it seems that he now wants to go further. The Opposition amendment would subvert the concession made by the Government in another place. If made, some general secretaries and presidents will be able to hold office indefinitely, without a requirement that they should face an election. We should then be back to the issue of whether unions should be allowed to continue appointing their general secretaries.

§ Mr. Strang
As the Under-Secretary of State has indicated, the Government amendments were made in another place in response to Opposition amendments concerning the position of honorary general secretaries and presidents. A person is exempted from the election requirement if he is not a voting member of the principal executive comittee, if he is not an employee of the union, if his term of office does not extend beyond 13 months, and if he has held no position in the preceding 12 months.
The Minister has referred to our amendment, which we see as minor. It would remove the requirement that the 254 honorary position can be held for only 13 months. We are talking about honorary positions. I do not think it fair to treat this as a wrecking amendment or one that would extend unreasonably the concession that has been made. It is not by any means one of the more important parts of the Bill. Nevertheless, while we welcome the small concession, we feel that there is no need to maintain the stipulation of 13 months as the maximum period for which an honorary president or general secretary can hold office.

§ Mr. Nicholls
I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said amendment.
Clause 12 is intended to ensure that union leaders are representative of the membership. It therefore extends the election requirements of the Trade Union Act 1984 to all members of the principal executive committee, general secretaries and presidents, and to those who act as though they were members of the PEC, and ensures that they are better able to represent the views of the membership. The clause also closes a loophole in the 1984 Act by means of which certain trade union leaders have been able to give up their vote on the PEC to evade the election requirements. The clause is therefore drafted tightly to reduce to a minimum any opportunity for evasion, and it is important to avoid producing any new loopholes.
Clause 12(1) adds new subsections (6A) and (6B) to section 1 of the 1984 Act. As drafted, new subsection (6A)(b) extends the electoral requirements to those who under the rules or practice of a union are entitled to attend and speak at some or all of the meetings of the PEC. To avoid any unnecessary extension of the election requirements, however, it is disapplied where the purpose for which the individual attends is to provide the PEC with factual information or technical or professional advice with respect to matters incidental to the PEC's carrying out of its functions.
Members of the Standing Committee will remember the concern expressed there about the use of the word "incidental". That concern was reflected in debates in another place, and the Government accordingly undertook to see whether the meaning of that part of the subsection could be made clearer. The Government regard it as important that individuals should not be able to play a full part in the activities of the PEC and yet be exempted from the requirement to be elected. We have therefore been conscious of the need to maintain the original distinction between an individual who offers only supporting advice and does not therefore need to be elected, and one whose contribution goes further, involving participation in the decision-making process.
We believe that that distinction has been maintained by the amendment, which replaced the phrase containing the word "incidental" with one that is more readily comprehensible. We think that the drafting has been improved in another place, and that the amendment will bring clarity where unions have previously claimed that there was uncertainty about our intentions.

§ Mr. Strang
The Minister has rightly reminded us of the discussions in Committee on this point. As he has said, it is a very minor change, and I agree that it clarifies the position slightly. We are still unhappy about the general 255 thrust of the clause, but in so far as it makes the position slightly clearer and is helpful, albeit in a small way—in that some individuals who may have been caught by the earlier wording should not be caught by this wording—we will not oppose the amendment.

§ Mr. Cope
I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said amendment.

Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this we may take Lords amendments Nos. 15 to 17.

§ Mr. Cope
The origins of the amendment lie in points raised with us by several unions which are contemplating merger. Initially, it was the General and Municipal Boilermakers and Allied Trades Union and the Association of Professional, Executive, Clerical and Computer Staffs. The question is what happens to their officials in relation to elections when the merger takes place.
In Committee in the other place, Lord Basnett moved an amendment on the same point. We were asked that where a merger took place the law should permit the elected members of a union's principal executive committee to hold office on the executive of the new merged union for the balance of the full term of five years from the date of their election to the principal executive committee of their original union.
We believe that the law should not stand in the way of unions merging if that is what the members of the individual unions wish. Therefore, our colleagues in another place introduced this group of amendments to give effect to the proposal put to us.

§ Mr. Strang
As the Minister has said, this issue was debated substantially in another place. While it is possible 256 to discuss at some length whether the amendments might have gone even further, they nevertheless address themselves to the point, and we welcome them as modest improvements to the operation of the provisions for the election of trade union officials.