Chris Law MP: speeches

Speeches

• 30 Jan 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  This week, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation forecasted child poverty levels across England and Wales for the next five years. The results are stark: child poverty rates are forecast to increase in both Labour-run Wales and Labour-run England. However, there is hope and a way forward. Child poverty rates in Scotland, which are already estimated to be the lowest in the UK, are set to drop further, with the SNP Scottish Government’s Scottish child payment recognised as a driving force in that reduction. Can we have an urgent statement from the UK Government on extending the Scottish Government’s approach to child poverty, including the Scottish child payment, to the rest of these islands to ensure that a reduction in child poverty is not confined solely to Scotland?

• 30 Jan 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  Over the past week, the UK Government have committed to support a runway in London, a football stadium in Manchester and a science corridor for Oxford and Cambridge, yet for the past year, Conservative and Labour Governments have failed to act to secure the long-term future of Grangemouth, after INEOS announced the closure of the oil refinery. Despite general election promises to step in and save the plant, why are the Labour Government willing to jeopardise jobs at Grangemouth, the country’s energy security, which the Minister has just spoken passionately about the need to secure, and the wider industrial strategy through this inaction?

• 20 Jan 2025 · UK-Ukraine 100-year Partnership · Hansard source

  More

  This morning, I was struck to hear the Foreign Secretary describe Donald Trump as a man of “incredible grace, generosity…very funny, very friendly, very warm” and say that most of the world is glad he is back in power. Yet, as Trump re-enters the White House, there are significant concerns about whether support for Ukraine from the US—so far Ukraine’s biggest backer—will continue. With Trump boasting that he will stop the war in Ukraine in a day, and with his choice for US Secretary of State saying on Wednesday that Ukraine will have to make “concessions” to Russia, does the Foreign Secretary think that Ukraine is as happy as he is to see Trump back in power?

• 16 Jan 2025 · Employment Rights Bill (Twenty First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member’s last point is an important one. When I approached this area of work to decide whether it fitted this Committee or whether it should be considered in immigration legislation, I took some advice. I appreciate, from a home affairs point of view, that this might not be the place for that point. However, it is the place for talking about it, and that is why the new clause has been accepted by the Clerks for debate today. I appreciate that this might also be an issue for the Home Office, but it is clearly an issue for the Minister in charge of employment rights, because at the end of the day it is not immigration rules that need to be changed. This is about making sure that employment rights are fit for everyone, regardless of whether they are here on a temporary or a permanent visa.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Employment Rights Bill (Twenty First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It would be easy for me to express exactly what the hon. Member for Torbay has just said in thanking everybody who has been involved. My only concern as we go to the next stage is that of all the amendments we have discussed and all the measures that have been proposed, not a single one has been adopted. There is an issue with that in general, because the Government have such a large majority. I guess that is not a bad thing for Labour Members, but it has meant that we have lacked the ability to really pull things apart. I hope that will come at the next stage. That is my only disappointment, but I wanted to put it on the record, because I know that it is a concern shared by other Members on both sides of the House. I hope that the Minister is listening so that we can get far more robust and real opportunities to amend and improve the Bill, which we all wish to see.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Employment Rights Bill (Twenty First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. It is good to see you in the Chair, Sir Christopher. I believe this is the last of the new clauses to the Bill. It is imperative that employment rights are universal. Everyone should have access to them, regardless of their circumstances. That cannot just be theoretical; it needs to be applied in practice too. Although the Bill increases workers’ rights for many people, which I fully support, it will make no difference to their realities if they do not have the ability to access those rights or to seek redress when they are breached. To make the Bill as worth while and effective as it can be, we must take every possible action to strengthen it and to ensure that no one is denied their rights. We must do our utmost to prevent scenarios in which denial of employment rights and exploitation can exist. I have therefore tabled this new clause on access to employment rights for workers on temporary visas. I know that most of us in this room will have had constituents on those visas who have been exploited. If we accept the new clause, it will compel the Secretary of State, within six months of the Bill being passed, to commission an independent report on the extent to which workers on temporary visas are able to assert their rights under employment law. Workers on temporary visas consistently report that they are unable to assert the basic rights derived from being a worker in the UK. Why is that? Because they are dependent on their employer for not only their job but their ability to live in this country. More often than not, they do not have the same safety nets that others benefit from. For people in that situation, the stakes are simply so much higher. We know that migrant workers, who often incur large debts to migrate to the UK to work—to address labour shortages—simply cannot afford to report abuse, if doing so risks their jobs and visas. They are justifiably fearful that their employer, who sponsors their visa, will punish them and that they will be left without redress. Time and again, we see cases of workers who face unsafe conditions—including in my constituency and, I am sure, in those of everyone in this room. Whether it is underpayment or sexual harassment, they do not feel able to do anything about it, for fear of deportation. That lets exploitation run rife. By not addressing this issue, we are allowing a huge blind spot in the UK’s employment rights framework to continue unchecked. Until the Government address temporary and restrictive visas, the gap between workers only widens, entrenching the UK’s tiered workforce and leaving migrant workers behind. That is simply unacceptable. Restrictive visas have created a tiered workforce, where migrant workers face significant barriers to enforcing their rights, driving a race to the bottom in pay and conditions across the UK labour market. Such visas often limit the sectors in which workers are permitted to work or the employers for which they can work. Workers’ immigration sponsors may also be their employers or responsible for placing them in employment. This results in a vicious cycle, in which migrant workers are doubly punished for speaking out, first by unscrupulous employers and then by immigration enforcement, with a resulting loss of work, income and immigration status. That has allowed a proliferation of abuses, from non-payment of wages to overwork and sexual assault, among a litany of other labour and criminal law violations. It is important to recognise that workers’ experiences of exploitation can vary, but all these instances need addressed. At one end of the scale, there is decent, well-paid work, with bad practices such as breaches of employment rights culminating, at the opposite end, in severe labour exploitation, such as human trafficking and forced labour. Where minor breaches of rights occur and are not sufficiently addressed, it increases the risk of more severe exploitation further along, as well as driving down workplace standards. Surely the new Labour Government find that totally unacceptable? In working on the new clause, I engaged with Focus on Labour Exploitation—I have a briefing from it here, which I am happy to share with the Minister. FLEX is a research and policy organisation working towards an end to labour exploitation, and its recent research and policy work has focused on sectors where workers are known to be at higher risk of exploitation. The new clause, which is intended to be friendly and collaborative, would lead to an investigation into the extent of these issues and how they can be addressed. Any immigration system that does not proactively include mechanisms that enable workers to report exploitation—and ultimately leave an exploitative employer without jeopardising their employment, accommodation and immigration status—inevitably has exploitation baked into its design. To meet its aims, the Employment Rights Bill needs to address that. It is especially important that the use of restrictive or short-term visas is not allowed to prevent improvements in working conditions and pay in certain work sectors by facilitating access to workers who, due to immigration restrictions, are unable to challenge poor working conditions. One option open to the Government to combat that would be to introduce a UK workplace justice visa, drawing on international best practice. Such a visa would provide 12 months of renewable limited leave for those who have visas dependent on their employment and who have experienced labour exploitation or lost their employment and limited leave through no fault of their own. That would ensure that migrants with work visas who experience such issues have a route to remain and settle in the UK, to enable them to leave abusive work situations and, most importantly, to access justice. The new clause does not propose such a visa, but it is one option the Secretary of State should strongly consider as a way of supporting workers on temporary visas in the assertion of their employment rights.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Employment Rights Bill (Twenty First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I appreciate the comments that have been made in this short debate. Just to be clear, the new clause is about issues that are not currently protected under the Modern Slavery Act 2015 and are often under-reported. I welcome the Minister’s comments about the fair work agency and the recent Low Pay Commission report, but I must ask about the timeframe. My suggestion—I will try to work with him on this—is that the timeframe be six months beyond the passing of the Bill, so that we can get decisions made. Perhaps the Secretary of State could let us know what kind of timeframe we are talking about, to give us peace of mind that action will be taken for those who are most vulnerable and have come here from overseas. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion. Clause, by leave, withdrawn. New Schedule 1 Warrants under Part 5: further provision “ Part 1 Application of this Schedule 1 This Schedule applies in relation to— (a) applications for warrants under section ( Power to enter dwelling subject to warrant ) or 83, and (b) warrants issued under section ( Power to enter dwelling subject to warrant ) or 83. Part 2 Warrants: applications and safeguards Applications for warrants 2 (1) Where an enforcement officer applies for a warrant, the officer must— (a) state the ground on which the application is made, (b) state the provision of this Act under which the warrant would be issued, (c) specify the premises which it is desired to enter, and (d) identify, so far as is practicable, the purpose for which entry is desired. (2) An application for a warrant must be made without notice and must be supported by an information in writing or, in Scotland, evidence on oath. (3) The officer must answer on oath any question that the justice hearing the application asks the officer. Safeguards in connection with power of entry conferred by warrant 3 A warrant authorises an entry on one occasion only. 4 (1) A warrant must specify— (a) the name of the person who applies for it, (b) the date on which it is issued, (c) the provision of this Act under which it is issued, and (d) the premises to be entered. (2) A warrant must identify, so far as is practicable, the purpose for which entry is desired. 5 (1) Two copies are to be made of a warrant. (2) In the case of a warrant issued in electronic form, the copies must be clearly marked as copies. (3) In the case of a warrant issued otherwise than in electronic form, the copies must be clearly certified as copies. Part 3 Execution of warrants Warrant to be executed within three months 6 Execution of a warrant must be within three months from the date of its issue. Time of entry 7 Execution of a warrant must be at a reasonable time, unless it appears to the officer executing it that there are grounds for suspecting that the purpose of entering the premises may be frustrated if the officer seeks to enter at a reasonable time. Evidence of authority etc 8 (1) Where the occupier of premises to be entered under a warrant is present at the time when an enforcement officer seeks to execute the warrant, the following requirements must be satisfied— (a) the officer must produce to the occupier documentary evidence of the fact that the officer is an enforcement officer; (b) if the officer is asked for it, the occupier must be told the officer’s name; (c) the officer must produce the warrant to the occupier; (d) the officer must supply the occupier with a copy of the warrant that is marked or certified as a copy in accordance with paragraph 5. (2) Where— (a) the occupier of premises to be entered under a warrant is not present when an enforcement officer seeks to execute it, but (b) some other person who appears to the officer to be in charge of the premises is present, sub-paragraph (1) has effect as if any reference to the occupier were a reference to that other person. (3) If there is no person present who appears to the enforcement officer to be in charge of the premises, the officer must leave a copy of the warrant, marked or certified as a copy in accordance with paragraph 5, in a prominent place on the premises. Securing premises after entry 9 An enforcement officer who enters premises under a warrant must take reasonable steps to ensure that when the officer leaves the premises they are as secure as they were before the officer entered. Return and retention of warrants 10 (1) A warrant which— (a) has been executed, or (b) has not been executed within the time authorised for its execution, must be returned to the appropriate person. (2) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (1) the appropriate person is— (a) in the case of a warrant issued in England and Wales, the designated officer for the local justice area in which the justice was acting when the warrant was issued; (b) in the case of a warrant issued in Scotland by a justice of the peace, the clerk of the justice of the peace court in the sheriffdom for which the justice of the peace was appointed; (c) in the case of a warrant issued in Scotland by a sheriff or a summary sheriff, the sheriff clerk; (d) in the case of a warrant issued in Northern Ireland, the clerk of petty sessions. (3) A warrant that is returned under this paragraph must be retained by the person to whom it is returned for a period of 12 months. (4) If during that period the occupier of the premises to which the warrant relates asks to inspect it, the occupier must be allowed to do so.”— (Justin Madders.) This new Schedule makes further provision about applications for, and the execution of, warrants under Part 5. Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill. New Schedule 2 Increase in time limits for making claims “ Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations 1977 1 (1) In regulation 11 of the Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations 1977 (S.I. 1977/500) (time off for safety representatives), in paragraph (2), for ‘three’, in both places it occurs, substitute ‘six’. (2) In regulation 12 of those Regulations— (a) in paragraph (2), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (3), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (c) in paragraph (4), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 2 (1) The Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 is amended as follows. (2) In section 66 (unjustifiable discipline by union), in subsection (2)(a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (3) In section 68A (unauthorised deduction of union subscriptions), in subsection (1)(a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (4) In section 70C (collective bargaining: obligations relating to training), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (5) In section 87 (unlawful deduction of contributions to political fund), in subsection (2)(a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (6) In section 139 (refusal of employment on grounds related to union membership), in subsection (1)(a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (7) In section 145C (inducements), in subsection (1)(a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (8) In section 147 (detriment for trade union activities), in subsection (1)(a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (9) In section 171 (time off for trade union activities), in subsection (1)(a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (10) In section 189 (consultation in collective redundancy), in subsection (5)— (a) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (c), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (11) In section 192 (remuneration under protective award), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (12) In paragraph 157 of Schedule A1 (detriment in relation to trade union recognition), in sub-paragraph (1)(a), for ‘3’ substitute ‘six’. Pension Schemes Act 1993 3 In section 126 of the Pension Schemes Act 1993 (unpaid pension contributions), in subsection (2), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. Employment Rights Act 1996 4 (1) The Employment Rights Act 1996 is amended as follows. (2) In section 11 (written statements), in subsection (4)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (3) In section 23 (protection of wages)— (a) in subsection (2), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in subsection (4), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (4) In section 27N (information relating to tips etc)— (a) in subsection (2), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in subsection (3), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (5) In section 34 (guarantee payments), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (6) In section 48 (detriment in employment), in subsection (3)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (7) In section 51 (time off for public duties), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (8) In section 54 (time off following redundancy), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (9) In section 57 (time off for ante-natal care), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (10) In section 57ZC (time off for ante-natal care: agency workers), in subsection (3)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (11) In section 57ZF (time off to accompany to ante-natal appointment), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (12) In section 57ZH (time off to accompany to ante-natal appointment: agency workers), in subsection (3)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (13) In section 57ZM (time off to attend adoption appointments), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (14) In section 57ZQ (time off to attend adoption appointments: agency workers), in subsection (3)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (15) In section 57B (time off for dependants), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (16) In section 60 (time off for pension scheme trustees), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (17) In section 63 (time off for employee representatives), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (18) In section 63C (time off for study or training), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (19) In section 63I (requests in relation to study or training), in subsection (5)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (20) In section 70 (rights following suspension from work)— (a) in subsection (2)— (i) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (ii) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in subsection (5)— (i) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (ii) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (21) In section 70A (rights of agency worker where supply is ended on maternity grounds)— (a) in subsection (2)— (i) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (ii) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in subsection (5)— (i) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (ii) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (22) In section 80 (parental leave), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (23) In section 80H (right to request flexible working), in subsection (5)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (24) In section 80N (carer’s leave), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (25) In section 111 (unfair dismissal), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (26) In section 188 (rights on insolvency of employer), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. Health and Safety (Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996 5 (1) In paragraph 3 of Schedule 2 to the Health and Safety (Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996 (S.I. 1996/1513) (time off for representatives of employee safety etc), for ‘three’, in both places it occurs, substitute ‘six’. (2) In paragraph 3A of that Schedule— (a) in sub-paragraph (2), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in sub-paragraph (3), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (c) in sub-paragraph (4), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. Working Time Regulations 1998 6 In regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 (S.I. 1998/1833) (rights as to working time), in paragraph (2)— (a) in sub-paragraph (a), for the words from ‘three months’ to ‘six months)’ substitute ‘six months’; (b) in sub-paragraph (b), omit ‘three or, as the case may be,’. National Minimum Wage Act 1998 7 In section 11 of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998 (access to records)— (a) in subsection (3), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in subsection (4), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. Employment Relations Act 1999 8 In section 11 of the Employment Relations Act 1999 (right to be accompanied), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. Transnational Information and Consultation of Employees Regulations 1999 9 (1) In regulation 27 of the Transnational Information and Consultation of Employees Regulations 1999 (S.I. 1999/3323) (time off for members of a European Works Council etc)— (a) in the heading, for ‘tribunals’ substitute ‘employment tribunals in Great Britain’; (b) in paragraph (1), for the words from ‘complaint,’ to ‘, that’ substitute ‘complaint to an employment tribunal in Great Britain that’; (c) in paragraph (2)— (i) in sub-paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (ii) in sub-paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (d) omit paragraph (2B). (2) In the heading of regulation 27A of those Regulations (extension of time limit to facilitate conciliation before institution of proceedings), at the end insert ‘in Great Britain’. (3) After regulation 27A of those Regulations insert— ‘ Right to time off: complaints to industrial tribunals in Northern Ireland (1) An employee may present a complaint to an industrial tribunal in Northern Ireland that the employee’s employer– (a) has unreasonably refused to permit the employee to take time off as required by regulation 25; or (b) has failed to pay the whole or any part of any amount to which the employee is entitled under regulation 26. (2) A tribunal shall not consider a complaint under this regulation unless it is presented– (a) before the end of the period of three months beginning with the day on which the time off was taken or on which it is alleged the time off should have been permitted; or (b) within such further period as the tribunal considers reasonable in a case where it is satisfied that it was not reasonably practicable for the complaint to be presented before the end of that period of three months. (3) Regulation 27B (extension of time limit to facilitate conciliation before institution of proceedings in Northern Ireland) applies for the purposes of paragraph (2). (4) Where a tribunal finds a complaint under this regulation well-founded, the tribunal shall make a declaration to that effect. (5) If the complaint is that the employer has unreasonably refused to permit the employee to take time off, the tribunal shall also order the employer to pay to the employee an amount equal to the remuneration to which the employee would have been entitled under regulation 26 if the employer had not refused. (6) If the complaint is that the employer has failed to pay the employee the whole or part of any amount to which the employee is entitled under regulation 26, the tribunal shall also order the employer to pay to the employee the amount which it finds due to the employee.’ (4) In regulation 27B of those Regulations (extension of time limit to facilitate conciliation before institution of proceedings in Northern Ireland)— (a) in paragraph (2), for ‘27(2)(a)’ substitute ‘27AA(2)(a)’; (b) in paragraph (3), for ‘27(2)(a)’ substitute ‘27AA(2)(a)’; (c) in paragraph (4), for ‘27(2)(b)’ substitute ‘27AA(2)(b)’. Merchant Shipping (Working Time: Inland Waterways) Regulations 2003 10 In regulation 18 of the Merchant Shipping (Working Time: Inland Waterways) Regulations 2003 (S.I. 2003/3049) (merchant shipping: rights as to working time), in paragraph (2)— (a) in sub-paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in sub-paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. Civil Aviation (Working Time) Regulations 2004 11 In regulation 18 of the Civil Aviation (Working Time) Regulations 2004 (S.I. 2004/756) (civil aviation: rights as to working time), in paragraph (2)— (a) in sub-paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in sub-paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. Fishing Vessels (Working Time: Sea-fishermen) Regulations 2004 12 In regulation 19 of the Fishing Vessels (Working Time: Sea-fishermen) Regulations 2004 (S.I. 2004/1713) (fishing vessels: rights to rest and leave), in paragraph (2)— (a) in sub-paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in sub-paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 13 (1) The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (S.I. 2006/246) are amended as follows. (2) In regulation 12 (notification of employee liability information), in paragraph (2)— (a) in sub-paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in sub-paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. (3) In regulation 15 (information and consultation requirements), in paragraph (12)— (a) in the words before sub-paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in the words after sub-paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. Cross-border Railway Services (Working Time) Regulations 2008 14 In regulation 17 of the Cross-border Railway Services (Working Time) Regulations 2008 (S.I. 2008/1660) (cross-border railway services: rights as to working time), in paragraph (2)— (a) in sub-paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in sub-paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. European Public Limited-Liability Company (Employee Involvement) (Great Britain) Regulations 2009 15 In regulation 28 of the European Public Limited-Liability Company (Employee Involvement) (Great Britain) Regulations 2009 (S.I. 2009/2401) (time off for members of special negotiating body etc), in paragraph (2)— (a) in sub-paragraph (a), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’; (b) in sub-paragraph (b), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. Agency Workers Regulations 2010 16 In regulation 18 of the Agency Workers Regulations 2010 (S.I. 2010/93) (rights of agency workers), in paragraph (4), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’. Equality Act 2010 17 In section 123 of the Equality Act 2010 (discrimination etc at work), in subsection (1)(a), for “3” substitute “6”. Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour Convention) (Hours of Work) Regulations 2018 18 In regulation 26 of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour Convention) (Hours of Work) Regulations 2018 (S.I. 2018/58) (rights of seafarers to leave), in paragraph (6), for ‘three’ substitute ‘six’.”— (Justin Madders.) This new Schedule would increase time limits for making claims in employment tribunals (and, in certain cases, industrial tribunals in Northern Ireland) from three months to six months. Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill. New Schedule 3 Seafarers’ wages and working conditions “ Amendment of Seafarers’ Wages Act 2023 1 The Seafarers’ Wages Act 2023 (“the Act”) is amended in accordance with paragraphs 2 to 23. Part 1 of the Act: relevant services 2 For the italic heading before section 1 substitute— ‘ Part 1 Relevant services’. 3 In section 1 (services to which this Act applies)— (a) for the heading substitute ‘Relevant services’; (b) in subsection (1), for ‘This Act applies to’ substitute ‘In this Act, “relevant service” means’; (c) in subsection (2), for ‘this Act does not apply to’ substitute ‘“relevant service” does not include’; (d) for subsection (4) substitute— ‘(4) In this Act, “ship”— (a) includes— (i) any kind of vessel used in navigation, and (ii) hovercraft; (b) includes a ship which is registered in a State other than the United Kingdom.’ Chapter 1 of Part 2 of the Act: non-qualifying seafarers 4 After section 1 insert— ‘ Part 2 Remuneration of seafarers Chapter 1 Non-qualifying seafarers’. 5 In section 2 (non-qualifying seafarers), in paragraph (a), for ‘service to which this Act applies’ substitute ‘relevant service’. Chapter 2 of Part 2 of the Act: national minimum wage equivalence declarations 6 For the italic heading before section 3 substitute— ‘ Chapter 2 National minimum wage equivalence declarations’. 7 In section 3 (request for declaration)— (a) in the heading, after ‘for’ insert ‘equivalence’; (b) in subsection (1)— (i) for ‘Act applies’ substitute ‘Chapter applies (see subsection (4A))’; (ii) at the end insert ‘(see section 19 for the meaning of “relevant year”)’; (c) after subsection (4) insert— ‘(4A) This Chapter applies to a relevant service, subject to provision made by remuneration regulations in reliance on section 4A(6).’; (d) omit subsections (5) and (6). 8 In section 4 (nature of declaration)— (a) in the heading, after ‘of’ insert ‘equivalence’; (b) after subsection (5) insert— ‘(5A) For the meaning of “UK work”, see section 19. (5B) For the meaning of “national minimum wage equivalent”, see section 4D(1).’; (c) omit subsections (6) to (10). Chapters 3 and 4 of Part 2 of the Act: remuneration regulations and declarations 9 After section 4 insert— ‘ Chapter 3 Remuneration regulations and declarations Remuneration regulations 4A Remuneration regulations (1) Regulations may specify requirements relating to the remuneration of non-qualifying seafarers in respect of their work carried out in relation to the provision of a relevant service (whether or not in the territorial waters of the United Kingdom). (2) In this Act, regulations under subsection (1) are referred to as “remuneration regulations”. (3) Remuneration regulations may relate to remuneration in respect of only some of the work carried out in relation to the provision of a relevant service, and may frame such provision by reference to the waters in which the work is carried out or in any other way. (4) Remuneration regulations may apply to— (a) all relevant services, or (b) one or more relevant services of a specified description. (5) For the purposes of subsection (4)(b), a service may be described by reference to (among other things) the route operated by the service. (6) Remuneration regulations may provide that Chapter 2 does not apply to any extent to a relevant service to which the regulations apply. Remuneration declarations 4B Request for remuneration declaration (1) Subsection (2) applies where a harbour authority has reasonable grounds to believe that ships providing a service to which remuneration regulations apply will enter, or have entered, its harbour on at least— (a) 120 occasions, or (b) if remuneration regulations specify a higher number in relation to services of a specified description and the service is of that description, that higher number of occasions, during a relevant year (see section 19 for the meaning of “relevant year”). (2) The harbour authority must, within such period as is determined by regulations under this subsection, request that the operator of the service provide the authority with a remuneration declaration in respect of the service for the relevant year. (3) The duty under subsection (2) is subject to any direction given by the Secretary of State under section 16(1)(a). (4) A harbour authority which fails to comply with subsection (2) is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction— (a) in England and Wales, to a fine, or (b) in Scotland and Northern Ireland, to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale. 4C Nature of remuneration declaration (1) A remuneration declaration in respect of a service for a relevant year is a declaration within any of subsections (2) to (5). (2) A declaration is within this subsection if it is provided before the beginning of the relevant year and it is to the effect that— (a) in the relevant year there will be no non-qualifying seafarers working on ships providing the service, or (b) in the relevant year non-qualifying seafarers working on ships providing the service will be remunerated in respect of their work in relation to the service in accordance with the remuneration regulations that apply in relation to them. (3) A declaration is within this subsection if it is provided during the relevant year and it is to the effect that— (a) in what remains of the relevant year there will be no non-qualifying seafarers working on ships providing the service, or (b) in what remains of the relevant year non-qualifying seafarers working on ships providing the service will be remunerated in respect of their work in relation to the service in accordance with the remuneration regulations that apply in relation to them. (4) A declaration is within this subsection if it is provided during the relevant year and it is to the effect that— (a) in so much of the relevant year as has already occurred— (i) there have been no non-qualifying seafarers working on ships providing the service, or (ii) non-qualifying seafarers working on ships providing the service have been remunerated in respect of their work in relation to the service in accordance with the remuneration regulations that apply in relation to them, and (b) in what remains of the relevant year— (i) there will be no non-qualifying seafarers working on ships providing the service, or (ii) non-qualifying seafarers working on ships providing the service will be remunerated in respect of their work in relation to the service in accordance with the remuneration regulations that apply in relation to them. (5) A declaration is within this subsection if it is provided after the end of the relevant year and it is to the effect that— (a) in the relevant year there were no non-qualifying seafarers working on ships providing the service, or (b) in the relevant year non-qualifying seafarers working on ships providing the service were remunerated in respect of their work in relation to the service in accordance with the remuneration regulations that apply in relation to them. Chapter 4 Chapters 2 and 3: supplementary regulations 4D Regulations about national minimum wage equivalent etc (1) For the purposes of this Part, the national minimum wage equivalent is an hourly rate specified in regulations. (2) Regulations may make provision for determining for the purposes of this Part— (a) the hourly rate at which a non-qualifying seafarer is remunerated in any period in respect of any work, and (b) whether, or the extent to which, a non-qualifying seafarer’s work in relation to a relevant service is UK work. (3) Regulations under subsection (2)(a) may in particular make— (a) any provision referred to in section 2(2) to (6) of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998; (b) provision relating to currency conversion. (4) Subsection (5) applies for the purposes of— (a) section 4, and (b) remuneration regulations that are framed by reference to the national minimum wage equivalent. (5) The Secretary of State must in making regulations under this section seek to secure that a non-qualifying seafarer is remunerated at a rate equal to the national minimum wage equivalent only if their remuneration is in all the circumstances broadly equivalent to the remuneration they would receive if they qualified for the national minimum wage.’ Part 3 of the Act: seafarers’ working conditions 10 After section 4D (inserted by paragraph 9 of this Schedule) insert— ‘ Part 3 Seafarers’ working conditions Safe working regulations 4E Safe working regulations (1) In this Part, “seafarer” means a person who works on a ship providing a relevant service. (2) Regulations may specify conditions relating to the working pattern and rest requirements of seafarers who carry out work relating to the provision of a relevant service, including conditions about— (a) their maximum periods of work in a specified period; (b) their minimum periods of rest in a specified period. (3) Regulations may make provision for the purpose of managing and mitigating risks arising from fatigue suffered by seafarers when carrying out their work relating to the provision of a relevant service. (4) Regulations under subsection (3) may, among other things— (a) require the operator of a relevant service to produce a plan to manage and mitigate risks arising from fatigue suffered by seafarers when carrying out their work relating to the provision of the service (a “fatigue management plan”); (b) make provision about the contents of such a plan by reference to a specified document as amended from time to time. (5) Regulations may make provision for and in connection with the training of seafarers who carry out work relating to the provision of a relevant service, for the purpose of ensuring— (a) the safety of the ship on which they work, (b) the safety of things on the ship, or (c) the health or safety of persons on the ship. (6) In this Act, regulations under subsection (2), (3) or (5) are referred to as “safe working regulations”. (7) Safe working regulations may impose requirements on the operator of a relevant service. (8) Safe working regulations may apply to— (a) all relevant services, or (b) one or more relevant services of a specified description. (9) For the purposes of subsection (8)(b), a service may be described by reference to (among other things) the route operated by the service. Safe working declarations 4F Request for safe working declaration (1) Subsection (2) applies where a harbour authority has reasonable grounds to believe that ships providing a service to which safe working regulations apply will enter, or have entered, its harbour on at least— (a) 120 occasions, or (b) if safe working regulations specify a higher number in relation to services of a specified description and the service is of that description, that higher number of occasions, during a relevant year (see section 19 for the meaning of “relevant year”). (2) The harbour authority must, within such period as is determined by regulations under this subsection, request that the operator of the service provide the authority with a safe working declaration in respect of the service for the relevant year. (3) The duty under subsection (2) is subject to any direction given by the Secretary of State under section 16(1)(a). (4) A harbour authority which fails to comply with subsection (2) is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction— (a) in England and Wales, to a fine, or (b) in Scotland and Northern Ireland, to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale. 4G Nature of safe working declaration (1) A safe working declaration in respect of a service for a relevant year is a declaration within any of subsections (2) to (5). (2) A declaration is within this subsection if it is provided before the beginning of the relevant year and it is to the effect that the safe working conditions will be met in relation to the service in the relevant year. (3) A declaration is within this subsection if it is provided during the relevant year and it is to the effect that the safe working conditions will be met in relation to the service in what remains of the relevant year. (4) A declaration is within this subsection if it is provided during the relevant year and it is to the effect that— (a) the safe working conditions have been met in relation to the service in so much of the relevant year as has already occurred, and (b) the safe working conditions will be met in relation to the service in what remains of the relevant year. (5) A declaration is within this subsection if it is provided after the end of the relevant year and it is to the effect that the safe working conditions were met in relation to the service in the relevant year. (6) For the purposes of this section the safe working conditions are met in relation to a service at a particular time if at that time— (a) the service is operated in compliance with regulations under section 4E(2) or (3) that apply to the service, (b) the service is operated in compliance with a fatigue management plan that is required for the service by regulations under section 4E(3) (see section 4E(4)), and (c) the service is operated in compliance with regulations under section 4E(5) that apply to the service. (7) References in subsection (6) to the operation of a service include references to its operation outside the territorial waters of the United Kingdom.’ Part 4 of the Act: enforcement of Parts 2 and 3 11 After section 4G (inserted by paragraph 10 of this Schedule) insert— ‘ Part 4 Enforcement of Parts 2 and 3 Offence of operating service inconsistently with declaration ’. 12 In section 5 (offence of operating service inconsistently with declaration)— (a) in subsection (1)— (i) for ‘service to which this Act applies’ substitute ‘relevant service’; (ii) in paragraph (a), for ‘an equivalence declaration’ substitute ‘a declaration’; (b) in subsections (2), (3) and (4), omit ‘equivalence’. 13 (1) Section 6 (imposition of surcharges: failure to provide declaration in time) is amended as follows. (2) In subsection (1)(a)— (a) for ‘service to which this Act applies’ substitute ‘relevant service’; (b) for ‘an equivalence declaration’ substitute ‘a declaration’. (3) In subsection (1)(b), for ‘an equivalence declaration’ substitute ‘the requested declaration’. (4) In subsection (2)(b)(ii), for ‘an equivalence declaration’ substitute ‘the requested declaration’. (5) In subsection (3)(b)(ii), for ‘an equivalence declaration’ substitute ‘the requested declaration’. (6) In subsection (5)(a), for ‘an equivalence declaration’ substitute ‘the requested declaration’. (7) In subsection (5)(b), for ‘section 4(4) or (5).’ substitute ‘— (i) section 4(4) or (5), (ii) section 4C(4) or (5), or (iii) section 4G(4) or (5), (whichever applies).’ (8) In subsection (6)— (a) for ‘an equivalence declaration’ substitute ‘a declaration’; (b) in the definition of ‘prescribed period’, for ‘3(5)(a)’ substitute ‘16A(1)(a)’; (c) in the definition of ‘prescribed form and manner’, for ‘3(5)(b) and (c)’ substitute ‘16A(1)(b) and (c)’. 14 In section 7 (imposition of surcharges: in-year declaration that is prospective only), in subsection (1)— (a) in paragraph (a)— (i) for ‘service to which this Act applies’ substitute ‘relevant service’; (ii) for ‘an equivalence declaration’ substitute ‘a declaration’; (b) in paragraph (b), for ‘3(5)’ substitute ‘16A(1)’; (c) in paragraph (c), for the words from ‘within subsection (3)’ to the end substitute ‘— (i) within subsection (3) of section 4 (and not also within subsection (4) of that section), (ii) within subsection (3) of section 4C (and not also within subsection (4) of that section), or (iii) within subsection (3) of section 4G (and not also within subsection (4) of that section), (whichever applies).’ 15 (1) Section 8 (imposition of surcharges: operating inconsistently with declaration) is amended as follows. (2) In subsection (1)(a)— (a) for ‘service to which this Act applies” substitute ‘relevant service’; (b) for ‘an equivalence declaration’ substitute ‘a declaration’. (3) In subsection (3), after ‘equivalence declaration’ insert ‘, remuneration declaration or safe working declaration (as the case may be)’; (4) In subsection (4)(a)— (a) for ‘service to which this Act applies’ substitute ‘relevant service’; (b) for ‘an equivalence declaration’ substitute ‘a declaration’. (5) In subsection (6), after ‘equivalence declaration’ insert ‘, remuneration declaration or safe working declaration (as the case may be)’. 16 In section 11 (refusal of harbour access for failure to pay surcharge), in subsection (1), for ‘service to which this Act applies’ substitute ‘relevant service’. 17 (1) Section 12 (provision of information by operators) is amended as follows. (2) In subsection (1)— (a) for ‘service to which this Act applies’ substitute ‘relevant service’; (b) in paragraphs (a) and (b), for ‘an equivalence declaration’ substitute ‘a declaration’. (3) In subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (b), at the beginning insert ‘for the purposes of Part 2,’; (b) after paragraph (b) insert— ‘(c) for the purposes of Part 3— (i) information relating to the working pattern, working conditions or training of persons working on ships providing the service; (ii) a fatigue management plan produced by the operator of the service (see section 4E(4)(a)).’ (4) In subsection (5), for ‘service to which this Act applies’ substitute ‘relevant service’. 18 In section 13 (provision of information by harbour authorities), in subsection (2)(b), omit ‘equivalence’. 19 In section 14 (inspections), in subsection (2)— (a) in paragraph (a), for ‘service to which this Act applies’ substitute ‘relevant service’; (b) in paragraphs (a) and (b), for ‘an equivalence declaration’ substitute ‘a declaration’. Part 5 of the Act: general and final provisions 20 After section 15 insert— ‘ Part 5 General and final provisions’. 21 After section 16 insert— ‘ 16A Regulations about declarations (1) Regulations may make provision— (a) as to the period within which declarations are to be provided; (b) as to the wording of declarations and the form in which they are to be provided; (c) as to the manner in which declarations are to be provided. (2) Regulations under subsection (1)(b) may specify a single form combining different kinds of declarations (but a requirement to provide a declaration in such a form does not require an operator of a service to provide a declaration which a harbour authority has not requested the operator to provide).’ 22 In section 17 (regulations)— (a) in the heading, at the end insert ‘: general’; (b) in subsection (2)(a), for sub-paragraph (i) (but not the ‘or’ after it) substitute— ‘(i) relevant service,’. 23 (1) Section 19 (general interpretation) is amended as follows. (2) After the definition of ‘the data protection legislation’ insert— ‘“declaration” (without more) means— (a) an equivalence declaration, (b) a remuneration declaration, or (c) a safe working declaration;’. (3) Omit the definition of ‘national minimum wage equivalent’. (4) In the definition of ‘operator’, for ‘service to which this Act applies’ substitute ‘relevant service’. (5) After the definition of ‘operator’ insert— ‘“relevant service” has the meaning given by section 1;’. (6) In the definition of ‘relevant year’, for ‘has the meaning given by section 3(6);’ substitute ‘means— (a) the period of 12 months beginning with a date specified in regulations, and (b) each successive period of 12 months;’. (7) After the definition of ‘relevant year’ insert— ‘“remuneration declaration” has the meaning given by section 4C(1); “remuneration regulations” has the meaning given by section 4A(2); “safe working declaration” has the meaning given by section 4G(1); “safe working regulations” has the meaning given by section 4E(6);’. (8) In the definition of ‘UK work’, for ‘has the meaning given by section 4(10)’ substitute ‘means work which is carried out in the United Kingdom or its territorial waters’. Amendment of title of the Act 24 (1) The Seafarers’ Wages Act 2023 may be cited as the Seafarers (Wages and Working Conditions) Act 2023. (2) For the words ‘Seafarers’ Wages Act 2023’ wherever they occur in any enactment substitute ‘Seafarers (Wages and Working Conditions) Act 2023’.”— (Justin Madders.) This schedule amends the Seafarers’ Wages Act 2023 to give the Secretary of State power to make regulations specifying conditions relating to the wages and working conditions of seafarers working on ships providing services currently covered by that Act. Those conditions are enforceable in the same way as existing provisions of that Act. Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill. Clause 113 Power to make consequential amendments Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

• 13 Jan 2025 · Artificial Intelligence Opportunities Action Plan · Hansard source

  More

  Over the summer, the UK Labour Government cancelled £1.3 billion-worth of investment in tech and AI projects, including £800 million for the next-generation exascale supercomputer at the University of Edinburgh. The UK Government described the project as making “little strategic sense”, yet today they have pledged to turbocharge AI, including through plans to build a brand-new—wait for it—supercomputer. There is to be new investment; given that the University of Edinburgh has been at the centre of research and development of AI for more than 60 years, will the new supercomputer be located in Edinburgh?

• 13 Jan 2025 · Sudan: US Determination of Genocide · Hansard source

  More

  We all remember the appalling comments of the Foreign Secretary in October when he said that genocide is a legal term, which “must be determined by international courts”, which is appropriate only “when millions of people lost their lives”. —[ Official Report , 28 October 2024; Vol. 755, c. 556.] The special adviser to the UN Secretary-General on the prevention of genocide has said that the situation today in Sudan “bears all the marks of risk of genocide”. The US Secretary of State has determined that the RSF and its aligned militias have committed genocide. In the UK, Protection Approaches’ director said that “the people of Sudan face unimaginable precarity under a triple threat of war, genocide and famine.” Why is it that time after time in this House we are so reticent about using the word “genocide” when it is all around us and the evidence is there for us to see? Does the Minister stand by the Foreign Secretary’s assessment that it is only for international courts to make the assessment that millions must die before the term genocide can be used? Does she believe that the US Secretary of State’s use of the term “genocide” undermines its seriousness?

• 19 Dec 2024 · Harland & Wolff · Hansard source

  More

  I take this opportunity to wish you a merry Christmas, Madam Deputy Speaker. I thank the Secretary of State very much for what is wonderful news for all four sites across the UK. Obviously, I am going to be slightly biased towards the two in Scotland, one in Arnish on the Isle of Lewis and the other in Methil in Fife—that is very welcome news in the week before Christmas. I also thank the Government for their co-operation with the Scottish Government over the past months, particularly in the early days when UK Labour had come into government, and I put on record the work that the Deputy First Minister of Scotland, Kate Forbes, has contributed. I have a couple of questions. First, given that we are moving forward, are the workers’ current terms and conditions going to continue as they are? Secondly, I have listened to what has been said about future contracts. We know that both yards in Scotland will be protected for the next two years, but can the Secretary of State tell us a little bit more about the longer-term sustainable footing, not least because this company has changed hands three times in the past four years?

• 19 Dec 2024 · Syria · Hansard source

  More

  I have several short questions. The Minister has already touched on sanctions; the new Syrian leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa, has said that sanctions must be lifted, and that that is not up for negotiation. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s thoughts on how we can move forward. On behalf of the SNP, I welcome the £61 million of support, particularly for healthcare and nutrition, but who will deliver it, and how can we ensure that it is delivered to the people who need it most? Over the last week or two, we have all seen the unfolding news about the horror of what happened, and not just in the prisons. This week, Channel 4 News has reported that hundreds of thousands of civilians have been buried in mass graves. What are the UK Government’s thoughts on the technical and forensic assistance provided following previous genocides, not least in Rwanda and the Balkans? What support could we provide? The University of Dundee is a world leader in forensics, and I would like it to have the opportunity to hear the Minister’s response.

• 19 Dec 2024 · Ukraine · Hansard source

  More

  We on the SNP Benches stand united in that cross-party support for Ukraine and welcome the package that has been brought forward today. I have a few specific questions for the Minister. First, he talked about the profits that have come from the frozen assets. What discussions has he had with EU counterparts on that? Some have been quite vocal about the sale of those assets, which could rapidly accelerate the strength of the Ukrainian forces. Secondly, on sanctions, more than 50% of the components of Russian drones come directly from China. There are negotiations next month between the Minister’s own Government and China on increasing economic co-operation. More specifically, we have a loophole in the law just now that allows British shipping and shipping insurers to work outside the UK to deliver gas from Siberia to other parts of the world, which aids and abets Putin in his war of aggression against Ukraine. I would like an update on those things.

• 19 Dec 2024 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I thought there was a doppelganger in the Chamber for a second, Mr Speaker. A new Government can make political choices, and one would have thought that, in the week before Christmas, they would be positive choices—things that people could take home and feel grateful and happy about on Christmas Day. However, as has just been mentioned by the hon. Member for South Shields (Mrs Lewell-Buck), millions of women throughout the country, 1950s-born women, have been affected, quite adversely, in respect of their state pensions. Many are in ill health, and are continuing to work in ill health. They lived in hope for many years during their protracted, passionate and very reasonable campaign for fairness and justice, and on Tuesday this week they were told that they were getting none of it. We have an ombudsman, which has made very clear, very fairly and decently, what amount should be paid in compensation, and has also made clear that the Department for Work and Pensions made errors at the time. Since Tuesday, not only have we received emails, but Members of Parliament, particularly Government Members, have been deleting pages from their websites and Twitter accounts—the very pages that showed them campaigning out there with WASPI women, getting their photographs taken, doing videos, sending messages and so forth. Now they have no voice. They are frightened even to raise the issue in this House. May I therefore urge the Leader of the House and the Business Secretary to arrange a debate as soon as possible, a meaningful debate in Government time? No ifs, no buts; we all need to have our say on this.

• 18 Dec 2024 · Post Office Redress and Funding · Hansard source

  More

  I am listening in detail about the processes you are going through looking for more information on Horizon. You have mentioned Capture, which goes back to 1992—30 years ago. You have mentioned a lack of information and that you are looking for more detail—

• 18 Dec 2024 · Post Office Redress and Funding · Hansard source

  More

  Bad habits—must get rid of them. My apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am concerned about the Capture system, which is more than 30 years old and had 19 different versions. We do not know who used it, and we do not know who has been convicted for it. The people who have been convicted are probably dying every other week just now. The Minister talks about working at pace, but can he make a flying sprint to get to those people urgently, to ensure that investigations are carried out and that compensation deserved is duly received?

• 16 Dec 2024 · United Front Work Department · Hansard source

  More

  The United Front Work Department is said to have 40,000 members globally, and Mr Yang Tengbo is surely the tip of the iceberg in the UK. The department is tasked with cultivating relationships not only with high-level figures that extend an influence to British nationals, but with those in all walks of society. That means the public need to be much more aware of the risk to themselves. What is the Minister doing to assess the number of those members in our society, and what public awareness campaign will he make for my constituents in Dundee and constituents across these islands?

• 16 Dec 2024 · Royal Mail Takeover · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome many parts of the statement, not least the part on quality assurance. I would like to know a little more about that because one issue in Dundee, which has the largest teaching hospital in Europe, is that appointments letters often arrive too late, which of course has an impact on the NHS. I want to focus specifically on the question not yet answered, which is about jobs. In Scotland, 11,000 people are employed by the Royal Mail, and they will be listening today to find out what cast-iron assurances there will be for their jobs. Mr Křetínský recently completed a takeover of a French supermarket, promising in 2023, in the run-up to that deal, that there would be no job losses, but one year later there were plans to cut 3,000 jobs. Can the Minister be very specific today and tell us what cast-iron guarantees he has for the 11,000 people employed in Scotland and those who are employed elsewhere across the UK?

• 12 Dec 2024 · Employment Rights Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his comments. It is helpful to know that there will be further consultation and, potentially, amendments—which may even come from his own side—to tighten up this bit of the legislation. It is critical to the wider Bill and the SNP understands its importance; we just want to see it made tighter—not to put employers in impossible situations in which they cannot negotiate, but so that it is not exploited as a loophole. As it currently stands, employers are already discussing that. I appreciate the Minister’s response. In that context, so long as it is something that can be further considered and, particularly, brought forward on Report, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Ordered, That further consideration be now adjourned. — (Anna McMorrin.)

• 12 Dec 2024 · Employment Rights Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I will re-declare that I have been an employer in the past, as well as an employee, and have employed staff; this is not just a union position. I have talked about companies. I can appreciate small businesses and even microbusinesses being really concerned about such issues, because they would impact them directly. Typically, small businesses keep a very keen eye on where things are going in the future. If people want a good team in their employ, they make sure that their employees know very well what is going on with such issues. We had this debate earlier. I will list again, just to remind people, the relevant companies: Asda, Tesco, British Gas, Argos, Weetabix and Heathrow Airport. They are big companies, with billion-pound profits, that are taking advantage of the current situation. They have already taken advantage up until now—why will this loophole mean that they will not do it in the future?

• 12 Dec 2024 · Employment Rights Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I am listening carefully to the words the Minister is using. When does the employer carry out that process? Ultimately, they have two options. They can carry it out well in advance to ensure that employees are kept up to speed early on. Some employees may wish to leave under those circumstances and find employment elsewhere. But often, in past cases of fire and rehire, employees have heard at a very late stage or not at all. There is currently no provision in the Bill to say what the timetable should be. I would like to get an indication of the Minister’s thoughts about potential future amendments relating to that subject.

• 12 Dec 2024 · Employment Rights Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I appreciate that there is a lot in the Bill, and I appreciate that some Government Members on the Committee think this is a nut to crack. I have asked questions—I hope to hear some of the answers to them—and I want to add another. I raised the issue of “likely”, which is the language used. Will the Minister remark on whether the Department intends to advise on how the word “likely” should be determined? Will he consider whether that will reflect what was set out in the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and a subsequent tribunal judgment, which came to define “likely” as a need to show “a significantly higher degree of likelihood than just more likely than not”?

• 12 Dec 2024 · Employment Rights Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms Vaz. Fire and rehire is one of the most contentious issues that we have heard about over the last years, and I will speak to it in some depth. First, I want to welcome the measures within this Bill, specifically those in clause 22, that tackle fire and rehire by considering a situation to be an unfair dismissal where an employee is dismissed for refusing to accept contractual variation, or where they have been dismissed to enable the employer to employ another employee, or to re-engage a dismissed employee on inferior terms. Over recent years, there have been several egregious examples of fire and rehire from large and very successful companies in the UK. In January 2021, the TUC found that “nearly 1 in 10 workers…had been told to re-apply for their jobs on worse terms and conditions since the first lockdown in March”— that is, March 2020. That is 10% of the working population. Notably, almost twice as many black workers faced fire and rehire as white workers. The SNP completely opposes fire and rehire, which is an appalling and abusive practice, and I am sure that most members of the Committee feel the very same. It must be outlawed. We have long campaigned to ban fire and rehire tactics and ensure that workers are not the victim of bosses looking to cut costs. I pay tribute to my former colleague, Gavin Newlands, who twice brought forward Bills in previous Parliaments to outlaw the practice, which had the support of over 100 MPs and the backing of all major trade unions, including Unite, the British Airline Pilots’ Association and GMB Scotland. I also commend the work of Chris Stephens who, on a regular basis, stood up for workers against the previous Tory Government and called for an immediate end to fire and rehire. However, there appears to be a loophole, and amendments 160 and 161 seek to remove it. Amendment 160 would delete subsection (4) to proposed new section 104I, which provides an opportunity for fire and rehire to continue where “the reason for the variation was to eliminate, prevent or significantly reduce, or significantly mitigate the effect of, any financial difficulties which at the time of the dismissal were affecting, or were likely in the immediate future to affect, the employer’s ability to carry on the business as a going concern or otherwise to carry on the activities constituting the business, and…in all the circumstances the employer could not reasonably have avoided the need to make the variation.” Along with many others, I have reservations about that. If employers can point to their likelihood of financial difficulty, they will deploy fire and rehire tactics. Let me ask some questions. Does the Minister agree with Martyn Gray, who gave evidence to this Committee just a couple of weeks ago? He is the director of organising at Nautilus International, and he made it clear to the Committee how high the bar should be set when he said: “Quite simply, if directors can sign off the business as still remaining as a going concern, fire and rehire should not be an option…I would set a really high threshold and then allow for scrutiny from the relevant bodies.” –– [ Official Report, Employment Rights Public Bill Committee, 26 November 2024; c. 65, Q61.] Employers’ unions have encountered those who have threatened or implemented fire and rehire to reduce workers’ pay and/or conditions, including companies such as British Airways, Heathrow Airport, Argos, Weetabix, Tesco, Asda and British Gas. All members of the Committee know all those names and are very familiar with them. In fact, more than half of those are in my constituency of Dundee and employ a large number of people. I want to give an idea of the scale of the profits that those companies have made just this year. Asda made £1.1 billion—we are right in the middle of a cost of living crisis, and that is over £1 billion profit for a retail store. Tesco made £2.3 billion profit, and British Gas’s parent company has said that its profits have fallen to a humble £2.8 billion. Those are just three examples and the others—Heathrow Airport, Argos and Weetabix—are also all in profit. One simple cereal company made £368.8 million. Those are hardly companies in dire financial straits. Can the Minister explain how many of the high-profile fire and rehire cases known since 2010 would fall foul of the requirements within the Bill, and how many would be exempted under this loophole? I think we all know that although the Bill is well-intended—and we fully support it—if it is not revised, it will fail under that loophole. As Andy Prendergast, the national secretary of GMB, explained in his evidence to this Committee: “We have seen lots of financial engineering. We see inter-company debt. I think there is a concern long term that we may find cases where companies have engineered a financial position that allows them to do something they otherwise would not. That will have to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.” –– [ Official Report, Employment Rights Public Bill Committee, 28 November 2024; c. 131, Q135.] That is twice this Committee has heard evidence that should make us really think about the purpose of the Bill, which I totally agree with on fire and rehire, to ensure that it is watertight. Can the Minister outline what changes the Government will make to the Bill and what regulatory regime will be put in place to prevent the provision from being exploited in the manner described? For example, will employers have to evidence the financial difficulties before making any decisions on firing and rehiring, or will they need to be evidenced only if an unfair dismissal claim is brought forward? We can clearly see now who holds all the cards. If it is the latter, and claims of financial difficulties are discovered at a tribunal to be unfounded, will employees who have been affected be reinstated on their original terms? These are important questions we need to ask. In the absence of the detail and guarantees sought, the amendment seeks to remove the loophole altogether. We cannot allow this aspect of the Bill to pass without cast-iron protections against fire and rehire. We cannot wait and see how it plays out in reality, with people’s jobs and lives at stake. If the provision is to remain—I can clearly see and many others so far have seen that it is a loophole—it is important that further amendments are proposed, not just to clarify definitions of financial difficulties and processes on establishing their veracity, but to ensure that there are further protections to strengthen an employee’s position in relation to any consultations and negotiations that take place when the employer is in financial difficulty. Does the Minister agree that the employer should take all reasonable steps prior to cutting workers’ wages and altering other terms and conditions? Does he agree that all material information should be provided to each union and that as much time as possible must be made available to consult? Does he agree that the employer must comply with any procedural requirements for varying contracts of employment or collective agreement? Critically, does the Minister agree that the employer should have reduced the remuneration of partners, directors and managers at least to the extent equivalent to that which applies to the workers subject to variation of contract? After all, if an employer is struggling with his company, we cannot have the managerial class carrying on as if it is not affecting them while others have their contracts reduced and their terms and conditions worsened. Does he agree that the employer should have stopped paying dividends to shareholders, buying back shares, or making loans to partners, directors or shareholders, as soon as the financial difficulties became apparent, and renegotiated, to the greatest extent practicable, loans to third parties? If the Minister does agree, will he give assurances that he will support such amendments being made to the Bill?

• 12 Dec 2024 · Employment Rights Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 160, in clause 22, page 33, leave out lines 11 to 2.

• 12 Dec 2024 · Employment Rights Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  We are not talking about technological changes, though, are we? We are not talking about advances that would mean changes to the structure of a business. We are talking about the language that is being used about the likeliness of financial difficulties. To any lawyer, the word “likely”—how long is a piece of string? Someone could argue the case that “likely” means this, while someone else could argue it means that. The language is lax, which is part of the issue. In terms of financial difficulties, what is a financial difficulty? Does it mean, “We can’t afford the loo roll in the staff toilets so we will fire and rehire,” or something more structural? What I seek from the Minister is assurances that the purpose of the Bill on fire and rehire is very specific: we want to end fire and rehire. Given the current loophole, we have already heard not just from trade unions, by the way, but from businesses—

• 12 Dec 2024 · Employment Rights Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I apologise. I just wanted to remind the shadow Minister that we are already hearing from businesses. They are clearly looking at this loophole as an opportunity for them in the future.