HL Deb 22 March 1993 vol 544 cc78-9

7.5 p.m.

Baroness Denton of Wakefield rose to move, Thai the draft order laid before the House on 17th February be approved [21st Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, the draft order has been considered by the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments and the Second Standing Committee on Statutory Instruments. The order is made by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department under the Official Secrets Act 1989. Under that Act, persons who are not Crown servants can be treated as such by virtue of a prescription order. The draft order prescribes the staff and board members of Urenco (Capenhurst) Limited. Essentially, this is a technical measure. For commercial reasons, British Nuclear Fuels plc will shortly be transferring some staff at its Capenhurst enrichment site from its employment to that of a new subsidiary, Urenco (Capenhurst) Limited. As BNFL staff, those people are currently prescribed by an earlier prescription order. This order is needed to ensure that they remain prescribed after the transfer.

I emphasise that this order will not increase the effective scope of prescription. When the order conies into effect not one single person will be prescribed who is not already prescribed. The staff and board of BNFL among others were prescribed by the Official Secrets Act 1989 (Prescription) Order 1990. During parliamentary consideration of that order the proposal to prescribe these people was never questioned. The work at Capenhurst remains classified for proper reasons of national security. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 17th February be approved. [21st Report from the Joint Committee.]—(Baroness Denton of Wakefield).

Lord Graham of Edmonton

My Lords, we on this side of the House fully appreciate the sensitive nature of the broad issues that we are discussing. Therefore, there is nothing that I wish to say that in any way seeks to dislodge that joint understanding. However, perhaps the Minister can satisfy me that in all that has been clone there has been full consultation with the appropriate trade unions, and that the impact of the transfer does not diminish any of their rights. I have in mind TUPE 81, which is a prevalent feature in discussions these days about how the rights of employees are affected. I realise that this matter may not be analogous with the broad subject covered by that—that is, people who cease to be in Crown service and go into a privatised company. If the Minister can tell the House that the employees affected are satisfied that the rights they have hitherto enjoyed are not diminished, it will certainly assist me.

Baroness Denton of Wakefield

My Lords, I am pleased to reassure the noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, that the unions have been fully consulted by BNFL. I understand that they accepted the need for BNFL to take these steps in order to remain competitive in the enrichment business. The transfer has been discussed in TUPE terms with the unions.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Viscount St. Davids

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn during pleasure until 10 minutes before eight o'clock.

Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

[The Sitting was suspended from 7.9 to 7.50 p.m.]