HC Deb 01 March 1976 vol 906 cc448-9W
Mr. Kenneth Clarke

asked the Secretary of State for Employment (1) whether the envelope containing part of the judgment of the industrial tribunal which considered the case of six electricians dismissed from Ferrybridge C Power Station has at any time come into his possession or that of any member of his Department; if so, where it is now and in whose custody; which persons have been permitted to see its contents and which persons would be permitted if they asked; whether he has authority to make its contents public; and, if so, if he will do so;

(2) if he will give advice to chairmen of tribunals on the practice of placing part of a judgment in a sealed envelope, as was done by the industrial tribunal sitting in the case of the six electricians dismissed from Ferrybridge C Power Station; whether he is making any arrangements for the custody of such envelopes; and, if not, whether he has any authority to obtain such an envelope and make its contents public.

Mr. Peter Rees

asked the Secretary of State for Employment whether the second appendix to the judgment of the Leeds Industrial Tribunal in the case of the Ferrybridge Six is to be made public; and, if so, when.

Mr. Booth

It would appear from the decision of the industrial tribunal which heard the case of the Ferrybridge Six that the contents of the sealed envelope were not considered by the tribunal to be relevant to its decision; and that the tribunal considered that they would only become relevant if the decision were to be reversed by an appellate tribunal. However, the envelope has not at any time come into my possession nor into the possession of any member of my Department. The envelope is in the custody of the tribunal, and the question of who is permitted to see its contents, and any question of publishing those contents, are matters for the tribunal or for any appellate body to whom the tribunal provided the information.

Industrial tribunals are independent judicial bodies and, except for the specific requirements imposed by procedural regulations, they are free to regulate their own procedure. It would not be proper for me to attempt to influence their procedure in particular cases.

Back to