Employees (Vetting)
01 January 1991
Employees (Vetting)
bacdoc May=1991
22 DECEMBER 1988 Cols 631-638
Employees (Vetting) debate (abridged)
12.59 pm
Mr. Greville Janner (Leicester, West): ... The debate, which
I am glad to be able to instigate, concerns the vetting of
employees who are seeking work or who are at work. My hon.
Friends and I who are concerned about this subject accept that
vetting is proper for security matters, but believe that it
should be done in an intelligent and recognised way by those who
arc responsible; it is a Government job to vet people on security
grounds.
When vetting people who are seeking work, employers are
entitled to exercise their powers of discrimination but not to
discriminate on the grounds of sex, race or trade union
membership. It is wrong for them to turn to private, secret
shadowy organisations such as the Economic League, which hoards
information that it does not allow any independent organisation
to see. I hope that, as a result of today's debate, the
Government will institute an independent inquiry into the
operation of such organisations, especially the Economic League.
The Economic League is known to be . the key organisation in
this sector. I am pleased to say that, at its meeting yesterday,
the Select Committee on Employment laid on the table a letter
received by hand from the Economic League dated 20 December. I
have spoken to Mr. Michael Noar, the Economic League's director
general, who has no objection to it being placed before the
House. The letter refers to subscribers but says that the
Economic League does not publish a list of them; it is secret.
It is known that many of the subscribers are major companies and
that none of them subscribe to any political party other than the
Conservative party. Many of the 2,000 companies that Mr. Noar
says belong to the organisation do not declare their gifts to
this evil organisation but launder them, and I ask the Government
to conduct an independent 'inquiry to investigate its funding.
The debate is not about Reds creeping out from under the bed
or, as Mr. Noar suggests, a "Communist-backer campaign" against
the Economic League. I have been accused of much wickedness, but
never of being Communist or Communist-backed.
It is extraordinary to consider the people who have been
pinpointed by this organisation. Among hon. Members are my
right hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South (Mr.
Ashley), a well-known militant; my right hon. and learned Friend
the Member for Warley, West (Mr. Archer), who told me that it
has a file on him because in 1972 he addressed a meeting of War
Resisters International, but he can think of more wicked ways to
behave than that; my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham,
Erdington (Mr. Corbett), who is not exactly on the far Left of
any party; and that well-known extremist, my hon. Friend the
Member for Bassetlaw (Mr. Ashton). Ninety per cent. of those
who are known to be on the list because of leakages are Left-wing
activists, and I shudder to think what the list says about you,
Madam Deputy Speaker.
I do not wish to give anything away, but in the same letter
Mr. Noar said:
..any individual who believes that he or she may appear in the
League's records is free to check with us and be told precisely
what information, if any, is held."
I applied and was told that the Economic League was fairly sure
that there was nothing on the computer, but if I sent f 10 an
official search would be conducted. The league's letter said, in
words to this effect, "We keep a list of Labour Members of
Parliament and that is all that appears to be there about you."
I asked Mr. Noar whether it was possible to obtain copies of
the Economic League's information and was told that that was much
too expensive but might be done if individuals requested it. I
appeal to any memb