§ 35 Clause 7, page 10, line 14, after "union" insert "and any other person who, or organisation which, appears to it to be representative 1192 of a substantial proportion of its employees or of those of any of its wholly owned subsidiaries"
§ The Commons disagreed to this Amendment for the following Reason:
§ 36 Because it is unnecessary to impose a statutory obligation to consult professional organisations.
§ Lord MELCHETTMy Lords, I beg to move that this House doth not insist on their Amendment No. 35, to which the Commons have disagreed for the Reason numbered 36. Once again, this is an Amendment that we have already discussed.
§ Moved, That this House doth not insist on the said Amendment, to which the Commons have disagreed for the Reason numbered 36.—(Lord Melchett.)
§ Lord CARR of HADLEYMy Lords, I had hoped not to have to say anything about this Amendment because I had expected that the noble Lord, Lord Melchett, would respond to the question that I put to him a moment ago. Although the answer given by another place to this Amendment is clearly irrelevant because the Amendment that it is rejecting has nothing to do with professional organisations, nevertheless the answer does have something to do with them. I really think that we should know what this word "unnecessary" means. The noble Lord, Lord Robbins, has asked for an explanation. I hoped that by speaking for a few moments I might provide time for the necessary answer to come from the Box and, since that seems to have happened, perhaps I can now ask the noble Lord to enlighten us.
§ Lord MELCHETTMy Lords, I did not reply initially because I thought that there was another Amendment like Amendment No. 34A to come and I was intending to respond on that. However, having had a chance to look through the Marshalled List, I see that this may well be the last Amendment relating to industrial democracy and I take the noble Lord's point that it was a little remiss of me not to have replied when moving the Amendment. I apologise. There are of course differences between professional organisations and independent, though not recognised, trade unions. The professional bodies cover the learned professions and their organisations cover very many employees well outside the range of those 1193 actually working for the two Corporations. That may be true of some independent trade unions—I am not quite sure about that—but it will also be the fact that many of the independent trade unions will concern themselves solely with representing the employees in the particular industry.
When we had a similar discussion at the Committee stage, or the Report stage—I cannot remember which—when we were considering the difference between professional bodies and independent and recognised trade unions, I made the point that although a large trade union may have members in many different companies and many different industries, it would nevertheless have an organisation and a structure within the particular company and the particular industry to be nationalised which would be relevant for consultation and collective bargaining purposes with the actual Corporation. That will not necessarily be true—indeed I should be surprised if it is true—of any of the professional bodies which would not have independent structures and representatives and full-time organisers and so on in particular companies or particular industries. So from that point of view I think that there is a considerable difference. I think it also fair to say that the representation provided by professional bodies is of a quite different character to that provided by trade unions, whether independent or independent and recognised.
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.
§ 6.12 p.m.