§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the T.U.C. has yet informed them either that the speech made by its chairman, Mr. E. J. Hill, on 4th July 1961 represents the policy of the T.U.C., or that it does not; and, if not, whether they will ask the T.U.C. which assumption is correct.]
§ THE MINISTER WITHOUT PORTFOLIO (THE EARL OF DUNDEE)My Lords, the Trades Union Congress has not been in touch with the Government about Mr. Hill's speech. My right honourable friend the Minister of Labour made clear the Government's views about trade union elections in a reply to a Question which he gave in another place last Wednesday.
VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLS-BOROUGHMy Lords, before any further questions are asked on this subject 907 may I now ask whether it would not be much more convenient if this matter were not pursued to-day? The Answer of the Minister of Labour in another place was explicit, and the Trades Union Congress interviewed the whole of the E.T.U. executive yesterday and are in session again to-day. At this time, when it looks as if Her Majesty's Government will, within a few minutes, be appealing to the whole nation, surely we should not pursue a matter which may well further exacerbate the position.
§ THE EARL OF DUNDEEMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Viscount for his discouragement of possible supplementaries.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, may I thank my noble friend for his Answer and say that there was no intention whatever of asking any difficult or embarrassing supplementary; nor is there anything in the original Question that is in the least offensive to the T.U.C. I should have thought that the only implication that could be hostile to the T.U.C. was that which underlies the view of the Leader of the Opposition that any suggestion that their policy was a matter of public importance was to be discouraged.
§ THE EARL OF DUNDEEI entirely accept my noble friend's assurance that he did not put down this Question in the hope of provoking an unguarded supplementary, and I certainly have no intention of giving an unguarded reply.
VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLS-BOROUGHMy Lords, I do not know exactly what the noble Lord, Lord Conesford, meant by his concluding statement, but at least all the Members on my side of the House here are vastly interested in the importance of all trade unions affairs being conducted in the interests of their own members and of the public. It is for that reason that I do not want anything to go wrong while the matter is still being pursued in inquiry.
§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL AND MINISTER FOR SCIENCE (VISCOUNT HAILSHAM)My Lords, I am sure that that desire is common to both sides of the House.