TNAG-0233-FCO40-269-Legislation-relating-to-registration-of-trade-unions-in-Hong-1970 — Page 6

SY

23 December, 1970

73

Your letter of 24 October to the Secretary of State about the provisions of the Trade Union Registration (Amendment) Bill has been passed on to me as I have responsibility for Hong Kong affairs.

I am sorry that I have not been able to write to you sooner but I was anxious that the situation should first be clarified about a number of controversial matters included in the draft Bill.

I should like to emphasise first that it is the practice of the Hong Kong Government to publish legislation of this type before it is introduced into Legislative Council. This gives all sections of opinion an opportunity to express views about the legislation, which can be taken into account before or during the passage of the legis- lation through the Legislature. This procedure has been followed in the present case. The Commissioner of Labour, for example, speaking in Hong Kong on 29 September, gave an assurance that in the light of observations and criticisms arising on the draft Bill he would be considering what changes were necessary before making recommendations about the final text.

Turning to the specific clauses of the Bill mentioned in your letter, you will be glad to know that Clause 24 concerning obstruction has been deleted from the Bill.

There has been a good deal of discussion both locally and e. about Clause 23, which would have the effect of removing the permission to picket a private residence. It has been decided ti retain the amendment since, as I think you will readily agree, picketing of a person's home, in overseas conditions, could give rise to intimidation of the person or his family. I think it is important to note that the amendment would not restrict the ricat to picket at a place where a person both resides and works.

Turning now to Clause 12(c), it is only fair to point out t the amendment as proposed represented in some measure a relaxe of the existing law which imposes permanent debarment from tr union office. However, it has been decided to remove the expr›› "offences against public order" from this clause. As regards general criticism of provisions of this kind, a number of ove: Governments have similar provisions in their trade union laws. all the circumstances, I do not think a temporary prohibition ( kind can adversely affect the development of trade unions in knu Kong.

tha

Neil Kinnock, Esq., MP,

House of Commons.

(A. Royle)