HL Deb 16 May 1974 vol 351 cc1104-6
LORD SHINWELL

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether article 48 of the Rome Treaty and regulation 1612/68 concerning non-discrimination operates in the employment of foreign ships crews who speak no English and are unable to understand orders which affect safety.

THE MINISTER OF STATE, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY (LORD BESWICK)

My Lords, Article 48 of the Treaty of Rome and Regulation 1612/68 concern the free movement of labour, though they have not as yet been applied to sea transport. An employer within the Community is entitled to select or reject an employee on the basis of his suitability and qualifications for the post concerned. The inability to understand orders given in English would be grounds for rejection for employment on a United Kingdom ship.

LORD SHINWELL

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that there is considerable dissension and disturbance among officers in the Merchant Navy about the employment of foreign crews coming principally from European countries, who are unable to understand orders in English and are therefore risking the lives of the crews, and possibly the ships themselves? May we have an assurance that if Merchant Navy officers refuse to employ ships' crews who are unable to understand orders in English, they will not be accused of violating Article 48 of the Treaty of Rome?

LORD BESWICK

My Lords, I am not aware of this dissension, although I am aware of an article which appeared recently in a Sunday newspaper. I can assure the noble Lord that if an officer accepted the employment of a member of a crew who could not understand orders, he would be liable under Section 48 of the Merchant Shipping Act, because he would be contravening the provisions of that section.

LORD SHINWELL

My Lords, can my noble friend attempt to define what is actually meant by the "free movement of labour", which is an essential principle in the Treaty of Rome?

LORD BESWICK

My Lords, as I said to my noble friend, the provision to which he referred does not apply to seamen, anyhow. Even if it did, it would not provide for any employer to employ a person who could not understand the English language.

LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, may I ask the Minister whether it is a fact that our law in this respect depends on the Race Relations Act, and that that Act quite deliberately excludes shipping from its provisions?

LORD BESWICK

My Lords, that is so. But I would emphasise to my noble friend Lord Shinwell that there is also Section 48 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1970, which makes it an offence for a United Kingdom ship to sail when the Department is of the opinion that orders cannot be—to use the terminology—"effectively communicated".

LORD SHINWELL

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that I shall be satisfied if, as a result of the clarity of his answers, that assurance is understood by Merchant Navy officers? I say that because, from what I have read in the periodical, that is not the view of the Association of Merchant Navy Officers.

LORD BESWICK

My Lords, in so far as there is any doubt about the matter I can say to my noble friend that the Department of Trade has recently brought to the attention of the British Shipping Federation the fact that there is this requirement under Section 48 of the Merchant Shipping Act.

BARONESS GAITSKELL

My Lords, is it not true that the E.E.C., quite apart from the Merchant Navy, is far more liberal about the freedom of movement of labour than we are in this country?

LORD BESWICK

My Lords, no doubt what my noble friend said is correct, but it has nothing to do with the Question.