Employment Bill [Lords]

I cannot accept the verdict that my hon. Friend read out, which says that clause 19 is totally inadequate. The ECHR judgment centred on balancing individual freedoms with freedom of association as set out in article 11 and found that, against that backdrop, our law, as it stands, was not compatible with article 11. It did balance those things, because it said:"““Article 11 cannot be interpreted as imposing an obligation on associations…to admit whosoever wishes to join. Where associations are formed by people, who, espousing particular values or ideals, intend to pursue common goals, it would run counter to the very effectiveness of the freedom at stake if they had no control over their membership.””" The judgment went on to say that"““democracy does not simply mean that the views of a majority must always prevail: a balance must be achieved which ensures the fair and proper treatment of minorities and avoids any abuse of a dominant position…Such abuse might occur, for example, where exclusion or expulsion from a trade union was not in accordance with union rules or where the rules were wholly unreasonable or arbitrary or where the consequences of exclusion or expulsion resulted in exceptional hardship””." It continued:"““the Court is not persuaded…that the…expulsion impinged in any significant way on Mr Lee's exercise of freedom of expression or his lawful political activities…As there was no closed shop agreement…there was no apparent prejudice suffered by the applicant in terms of his livelihood or in his conditions of employment.””"