---

Lawful Industrial Action (Minor Errors) Bill

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. I certainly do not think that it is appropriate that the House should legislate for incompetence, and effectively that is what this Bill is leading towards. It is effectively saying that there could be 70%, 60% or 80% compliance with the law and that would be okay. I might be wrong, but I am of the opinion that members of the public outside this House rightly expect a trade union, or indeed, as my hon. Friend the Member for North West Leicestershire said, any other group to comply with the law to a much higher degree. I think the degree of compliance should be 98% or 99%, which was the intention in 1999 when the then Labour Government introduced section 232B providing for small accidental failure to be disregarded. The new provision refers to"““the failure…or the failures taken together””," so it mirrors the current situation in that duplicate failures would be permitted. It also states that"““there has been substantial compliance with the provision or provisions in question””" and"““on a scale which is unlikely to affect (in the case of a ballot) the result of the ballot or…a reasonable recipient's understanding of the effect of the notice””." The problem is that that provision takes us no further forward. Employers are just as likely to say, ““Well, has there been substantial compliance or not?”” It is not clear, so we are no better off than if we were to ask whether there had been a minor or accidental failure. Therefore, this provision will prove to be a treasure trove for lawyers.