Skip to main content

1-20 of 202 results for subject:Injunctions

Subject X
Industrial disputes

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More
Industrial disputes (202)

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

It is a red letter day for me, Madam Deputy Speaker, because I have just found out that you were listening to my speech.

Member
Philip Davies (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1246
House
House of Commons

On 21 June 2010, the BBC carried a report headlined ““Government shuns call to change strike laws””. The report said the Government had indicated that there were ““no plans”” for alterations in the law on industrial action. That might help my hon. Friend. It will be interesting to see whether...

Member
David Nuttall (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1248
House
House of Commons

I will indeed. I was just dealing with the intervention.

Member
David Nuttall (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1234
House
House of Commons

My hon. Friend makes a good, reasonable point. The law would not be clarified in any way by the Bill, but there is a real danger, as I have pointed out, that it would take us back to the situation we faced in the 1970s and 1980s. Much of the...

Member
David Nuttall (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1234
House
House of Commons

My hon. Friend is right. One of the things that I have learned in my short time in Parliament is that those on the Labour Benches tend to be very intolerant of anybody who holds a different opinion to them. I do not think that is particularly sensible in a...

Member
Philip Davies (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1243-4
House
House of Commons

Picking up on that point, I would not want the House to think that I intended any personal disrespect to the hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington, who has brought the Bill to the House with the noblest of intentions. My frustration, as a new Member, is that we might...

Member
Charlie Elphicke (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1244
House
House of Commons

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his intervention. Anyone who knows him will know that he would never intend any discourtesy to anyone, and I had certainly taken that as read, but I am sure that the hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington will be grateful to him...

Member
Philip Davies (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1244-5
House
House of Commons

Let me explain why my hon. Friend's point is a good one. When asked to grant an interlocutory injunction, the courts will by definition have to act very quickly, as he says. They do not have the time to consider all the evidence in detail, so if there is a...

Member
David Nuttall (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1245
House
House of Commons

One oddity about injunctions is their application to Members of Parliament. They are very hard to enforce, given the freedom from civil arrest that we enjoy. Does my hon. Friend agree?

Member
Charlie Elphicke (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1245
House
House of Commons

I am sure that my hon. Friend is right. He got rather technical during the course of that intervention, at which point it went beyond my capabilities. The bit that I understood, however, I certainly agreed with. Knowing my hon. Friend as I do, I am sure that I would...

Member
Philip Davies (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1245
House
House of Commons

I am being tempted by people who are more expert in the law than I am to comment on matters that they know far more about than I do. My hon. Friends can take it as read that I agree with them on any matter with regard to the law,...

Member
Philip Davies (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1245-6
House
House of Commons

You are very kind, Madam Deputy Speaker. It really is a red-letter day now. I shall put that in the literature I will distribute at the next election. However, what surprised me was not just that you were listening to my speech, but that anyone was listening to it. I...

Member
Philip Davies (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1247
House
House of Commons

I too have been listening to my hon. Friend's speech with great interest. Does he believe that the Bill could be amended in Committee, or does he think that we should vote it down and kill it off as early as possible?

Member
Jacob Rees-Mogg (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1247
House
House of Commons

My hon. Friend makes a good point. What does substantial compliance mean? I am not sure. The hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington really should have drafted the Bill properly to include a proper definition of substantial compliance. That might at least have earned Labour party support, if not necessarily...

Member
Charlie Elphicke (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1240
House
House of Commons

Is my hon. Friend suggesting that 20% of members need not be consulted? Would that be regarded as substantial compliance under the Bill? That would be outrageous.

Member
David Nuttall (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1240
House
House of Commons

My hon. Friend asks a fair question. Would it be okay to have substantial compliance in electoral law? I have received letters from the Electoral Commission threatening all manner of prosecution if I do not comply completely with absolutely everything. Should politicians and campaigners only substantially comply? Must an employer...

Member
Charlie Elphicke (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1241
House
House of Commons

The salient point is on substantial compliance. Imagine if in canvassing our constituents we were to comply substantially with a ballot by delivering papers only to the 80% of people we thought likely to vote in the direction we wanted. Would that be substantial compliance or democracy?

Member
Andrew Bridgen (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1240
House
House of Commons

I thank my hon. Friend. He makes a fair point. There are many cases in which there should be full and proper compliance—for instance, in an investigation by an employer into staff misconduct. An employer seeking to dismiss a member of staff should comply fully with all the procedures under...

Member
Charlie Elphicke (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1241
House
House of Commons

It is extremely generous of my hon. Friend to give way once again. The concept of substantial compliance is desperately worrying, because if in a Division of the House we had had only to be substantially compliant on an 80:20 basis, the result could almost always be reversed.

Member
Jacob Rees-Mogg (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1241
House
House of Commons

I would be extremely grateful if my hon. Friend, as a lawyer, explained to us whether the Court of Appeal's decision is precedent-setting for future judgments.

Member
Jacob Rees-Mogg (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
22 October 2010
Reference
516 c1240
House
House of Commons