GCHQ Staff Federation (Hansard, 16 January 1990)

§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Brabazon of Tara)
My Lords, we understand that the Government Communications Staff Federation (GCSF) is considering an appeal against the Certification Officer's decision. It would not therefore be appropriate to offer comment at this stage.

§ Lord Rochester
My Lords, does the noble Lord accept that on 18th December last the Certification Officer said that the federation set up to replace trade unions banned from GCHQ could not be recognised as an independent union because it was subject to the approval of the director? How does he reconcile that statement with the Government's earlier reported claim that genuine trade unionism is allowed at GCHQ?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, the Certification Officer stated in his ruling that the staff federation operates reasonably effectively and in much the same way as many other small trade unions. His decision therefore acknowledges that GCSF successfully represents the staff at GCHQ, over 50 per cent. of whom have joined the federation.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, will the noble Lord say whether the Government still believe that the re-establishment of the trade union in GCHQ, as the federation has requested, would present a risk to national security? Secondly, will he confirm to the House that the failure by the Government to establish the trade union is in contravention of a number of international conventions? For example, the International Labour Organisation Conventions 87 and 98 make it quite clear that the Government are taking action which is contrary to the conventions. Will he also comment on that point?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, the Government certainly do not accept that the original decision to ban the trade unions was incorrect. In our view, it is inappropriate for trade unions to be represented in an intelligence and security agency. The position at GCHQ is no different from that of the police and armed forces. On the question of the ILO conventions the Government do not accept that they are in violation of those conventions. In our view, Convention 87 cannot stand in isolation from Conventions 98 and 151, and Article 1(2) of Convention 151 takes precedence over Convention 87.

§ Baroness Turner of Camden
My Lords, is it not a fact that the Government's position on GCHQ is in direct contravention to that stated in their new Employment Bill which quite definitely makes provision for the right to belong, or not to belong, 518 to a union? Since that principle has been embraced by the Opposition, is it not time that the Government did the same with regard to GCHQ?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, we went through all the arguments about GCHQ nearly five years ago, and in the Government's view the position has not changed.

§ Lord Campbell of Alloway
My Lords, reverting to the Question, is my noble friend the Minister aware that the certification officers have by and large discharged their duties over the years to the general satisfaction of both trade unions and employers?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, I am sure that my noble friend is right, but it is for GCSF alone to decide whether it wishes to appeal against the decision.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, will the noble Lord be good enough to reply to the first of my supplementary questions; namely, whether his right honourable friend and the Government generally believe that the conversion of the federation back into a trade union would present a threat to national security?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, provided that it remains a federation, I do not think that it would.

§ Lord Orr-Ewing
My Lords, does my noble friend recall that, when Mr. Blunt was completing his training as a spy, he asked his masters where he should best serve their purpose? First on the list was GCHQ, but they said that he had very little chance of getting in. Does that therefore show that, for about 50 years, it has been in our interest to give not one chance to potential enemies to infiltrate that important organisation?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, my noble friend makes an interesting point, but we went through all those arguments when the unions at GCHQ were banned some years ago. This Question is about the staff federation alone.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, is it not the case that, with the knowledge of high authority in this country, Blunt occupied far more significant positions than GCHQ?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, that is very much another question.