Debates between Lord King of Bridgwater and Lord Richard during the 2015-2017 Parliament

Trade Union Bill

Debate between Lord King of Bridgwater and Lord Richard
Tuesday 3rd May 2016

(8 years, 6 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord King of Bridgwater Portrait Lord King of Bridgwater
- Hansard - -

I make it clear straightaway that I had the greatest respect for Lord Murray—Len Murray, as he was—and had extremely good relations with him. But I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Lea, for making the point that this should be honoured. If there is evidence that it has not been honoured, it will obviously be a concern for responsible people in the TUC to see that it is. As I understand it, the noble Lord is saying that in no sense has it been repudiated or has the TUC withdrawn that undertaking. My point today is simply about the giving of that undertaking. I agree with the noble Lord that the observance of it and the checking as to whether it was being followed seem to have been pretty slack. It is helpful this has been brought to the attention of us all and I hope that it can now be followed through.

Lord Richard Portrait Lord Richard (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord King, for his history lesson but, with great respect to him, I do not think it very relevant or apposite in considering this amendment. I really do not know where the House is going to on this. The noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, says that he agrees with it but then complains about the way in which it was done. I think that the noble Lord, Lord King, agrees with it but because of something that happened in 1984 he is not very happy with it. The Conservative Members who were actually on the committee disagreed with it—understandably, perhaps—because their view, which they expressed vigorously on the committee, was not upheld by this House and has not been upheld by the House of Commons. There is a certain amount of dispute on both sides but this really is a sensible compromise.

As an old Fabian, when I looked at this amendment and the difficulties that it is designed to deal with, the phrase which came to my mind was that of Beatrice Webb. She talked about the inevitability of gradualness. It seems to me that once you have established the principle that opting in is right for new members, the “inevitability of gradualness” principle will take over and, in due course, you will have a comprehensive opt-in. I suspect that it will be much sooner than a lot of people think. This is a sensible compromise and, for heaven’s sake, let us accept it.

Lord King of Bridgwater Portrait Lord King of Bridgwater
- Hansard - -

The point that has been left out is the second half of what the noble Lord, Lord Burns, said, which was about opting in for new members but attention to right and proper communication with existing members.

Lord Richard Portrait Lord Richard
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That is in the amendment. Of course there should be proper respect. Trade unions are being placed under an obligation to tell their members once a year. What more does the noble Lord want?