Sarah Olney MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  There are, dare I say, perhaps some bits missing, which mean it does not add up and we can’t put it all together—I don’t know where I am going with that, sorry! [ Laughter. ] The training, hiring and retaining of a skilled workforce are issues affecting businesses across the country. The apprenticeship levy does not work and many businesses cannot get the funding they need to train staff, while hundreds of millions in funding goes unspent. The Liberal Democrats have been calling for the apprenticeship levy to be replaced with a wider skills and training levy, which would give businesses flexibility over how they spend their money to train their staff. We therefore welcome the Government’s intention to reform the levy and refocus it towards growth and skills, but we need faster progress and Skills England made into a properly independent body, with employers at its heart. However, we have concerns about moving funding away from level 7 apprenticeships, as we know this initiative increases social mobility. I will continue to ask the Minister if they will accelerate the announcement of the details of the new scheme, outlining exactly what training will be eligible so that businesses can plan with certainty and develop the workforce we need. Perhaps the most obvious issue that has impacted our high streets over recent years is the last Government’s botched Brexit trade deal. Many business owners have highlighted the reams of red tape and trading forms that they must navigate to import goods from Europe or export them to the continent. This is valuable time taken away from the productive tasks involved in running a business, and Government policy has simply made life for managers far more difficult. Meanwhile, unemployment has gone up and a range of sectors are facing acute labour shortages, as my hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) has highlighted on many occasions in this place. Many high vacancies are concentrated in high street sectors such as hospitality, retail, the arts and entertainment. Those are exactly the kinds of industries that young people visiting the UK for a few years might wish to work in. A youth mobility scheme would offer British businesses a real opportunity to address staffing shortages by welcoming young people from EU countries for a limited period, bringing fresh talent and energy to our workforce. I ask the Government to set out a timeline for when their announced youth experience scheme will be introduced. However, the Liberal Democrats welcome the motion’s call to increase support for high business energy bills. I urge the Government to act with more urgency in addressing energy costs for businesses, including by accelerating the launch of the industrial competitiveness scheme, the consultation for which is not even due to be launched until the end of the year. The Liberal Democrats will continue to push the Government to look closely at our proposals to break the link between gas and electricity prices, halving household bills within a decade and significantly cutting business energy costs over the same period.

• 3 Nov 2025 · Draft Environmental Protection (Wet Wipes Containing Plastic) (England) Regulations 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond. Thank you for allowing me to respond on behalf of the Liberal Democrats. We have long been calling for a ban on supply and sale of wet wipes containing plastic, and we are extremely pleased to see this legislation introduced. We have always been incredibly concerned about the environmental harm caused by single-use wet wipes, which block our sewage network and pollute our waterways with microplastics. I add my voice to the tributes to my constituency neighbour, the hon. Member for Putney, for her incredibly hard work over the past four years. She highlighted a particular issue in my constituency: the wet wipe island next to Hammersmith bridge. An estimated 5 million wet wipes have built up on the riverbed; I pay tribute to the selfless volunteers from my constituency who have dedicated their time to helping to clear that appalling build-up, and to the Port of London authority for taking action to remove 180 tonnes of congealed wet wipes. As the hon. Lady mentioned, the build-up changed the course of the River Thames and potentially harmed aquatic wildlife and ecology in the area. The hon. Lady asked whether anyone had seen a fatberg. One of the UK’s largest fatbergs was excavated from under Kingston hill in my constituency about 10 years ago, so yes, I have seen one up close. I put it on record, by the way, that despite having wet wipe island and the UK’s largest fatberg, my constituency is still one of the most beautiful in London—indeed, in the country—and will remain so, thanks to this statutory instrument. I am extremely pleased to support the draft regulations, but I call on the Government to do more to tackle microplastic pollution in our waterways and improve labelling to ensure that single-use wet wipes are clearly marked “Do not flush”, as so many hon. Members this evening have highlighted.

• 30 Oct 2025 · Points of Order · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. In July, a Treasury Minister agreed to meet me about the closure of the Lending Standards Board ahead of the launch of the ethnicity code. This meeting was scheduled to take place in September, but was cancelled due to the Government reshuffle. Despite an initial indication that this meeting would be rescheduled, I have had no recent response to requests from my office for a date and a time. Given that the Lending Standards Board is due to close tomorrow, I wish to ask for your advice about what further steps I can take to ask the Government to engage with me on the ethnicity code.

• 30 Oct 2025 · Industrial Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  I also welcome the ministerial Front Benchers to their new roles. The Liberal Democrats have long championed an industrial strategy. In government, we created the Green Investment Bank, the British Business Bank and the regional growth fund, and we opposed the Conservative Government’s damaging decision to scrap the industrial plan. We welcome the industrial strategy’s return, especially its focus on investing in skills. However, businesses know that the apprenticeship levy does not work: funding is hard to access and millions go unspent. We welcomed the pledge in June to replace it with a more flexible growth and skills levy, but firms and young people are still awaiting details. Will the Minister provide details of what training this will fund, so that businesses and young people can plan ahead with certainty?

• 30 Oct 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Businesses across the country are struggling with unaffordable energy costs. The burden of this Government’s national insurance contributions rise and uncertainty over the Employment Rights Bill are compounded by the immense struggle caused by sky-high energy bills. I urge the Government to act with more urgency in addressing energy costs for businesses, including through accelerating the launch of the industrial competitiveness scheme, the consultation for which is not even due to be launched until the end of the year. What discussions has the Minister had with the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero to cut operating costs for businesses, and will the Government consider Liberal Democrat proposals to break the link between gas and energy prices, halving bills within a decade and easing pressures?

• 27 Oct 2025 · Statutory Maternity and Paternity Pay · Hansard source

  More

  It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairmanship for the first time, Mrs Hobhouse. I thank the hon. Member for Burton and Uttoxeter (Jacob Collier) and the Petitions Committee for this debate. As a survivor of three maternity leaves—all on statutory pay—a c-section and a spell in the neonatal unit, all the topics that have been raised are very close to my heart. I thank each and every hon. Member for their contributions and for representing their constituents so well. This summer, the Government announced that they would undertake a parental leave and pay review, expecting it to conclude in 18 months’ time. The Liberal Democrats welcome the Government’s commitment to that much-needed review of parental leave. Every child deserves the best possible start in life and the opportunity to flourish, no matter their background or personal circumstances. Too often, parents struggle on inadequate parental pay and without good enough access to shared leave. Childcare costs are eyewatering, and balance between family life and work has only become harder and harder to achieve. Not only is that unfair on families, but it weighs down our economy. The Liberal Democrats have called for an overhaul of the parental leave system to give parents a genuine choice over how to manage their affairs in the first months of their child’s life. The Liberal Democrats were proud to introduce shared parental leave when in government. Years later, however, millions of parents are still being denied the choice to spend more time at home, with about a quarter of fathers ineligible for paternity pay. Meanwhile, the Government are introducing wide-ranging changes to employment law through the Employment Rights Bill. The Bill will introduce a suite of new protections and entitlements for working families, including enhanced rights on leave, protection from dismissal and bereavement support. Eligibility for paternity leave and unpaid parental leave requires employees to have a minimum length of service in order to qualify, but from April 2026 the qualifying service requirements will be removed. That means that paternity leave and unpaid parental leave will become entitlements from the first day of employment, as the Liberal Democrats called for in our 2024 general election manifesto.

• 27 Oct 2025 · Statutory Maternity and Paternity Pay · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. The Liberal Democrats support measures that work to strengthen employment rights. We welcome aspects of the Employment Rights Bill, such as boosting statutory sick pay, strengthening support for whistleblowers and increasing support for carers, all of which move us in the right direction. However, we remain concerned about the specific way in which many of the measures are to be implemented. We must ensure that the legislation strikes the right balance for employees and for business, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises. I have spoken with businesses in my constituency that tell me that they are being left in limbo by the vague framing of the Bill, which leaves crucial detail to secondary legislation and Government reviews. That prevents long-term planning, and I am disappointed that the Government did not support the Liberal Democrat amendments, which would have created more certainty for businesses. New measures to support workers must go hand in hand with much-needed reforms to support our small businesses and bring down their costs. We know that the Government inherited a mess. We know that the cause of the mess is the legacy of reckless economic mismanagement by the previous Government, whose record is a dispiriting picture of low growth, high interest rates and a record fall in living standards. But it is disappointing that the current Government have taken decisions that have compounded many of the challenges for communities, businesses and families, while presiding over very tight public finances and a stagnant economy. That is why we urge the Government to put in place a range of measures that will bring down business costs, unleash the power of our SMEs and power economic growth—measures such as scrapping the unfair national insurance rise, fixing the broken business rates system, bringing down the cost of energy by decoupling electricity and gas prices, and finally repairing the economic damage caused by the previous Government’s shambolic Brexit deal by cutting red tape and negotiating a new bespoke UK-EU customs union. Those actions could breathe new life into our economy and our small businesses and would go a long way towards facilitating improvements to parental leave and pay. In our 2024 general election manifesto, we called for statutory maternity and shared parental pay to rise to £350 a week, for paternity pay to increase to 90% of earnings with a cap for high earners, and for the introduction of an extra “use it or lose it” month for fathers and partners, paid at 90% of earnings, again with a cap for high earners. Those policies would benefit not only families, but businesses and the economy, by encouraging workforce participation and making it easier for people to advance their career while starting a family. We hope that the Government will look closely at those proposals, while introducing a robust plan to cut business costs, boost growth and empower our SMEs. More broadly, I urge them to look into the prevalent inequality in caring responsibility. What steps are they taking to support millions of family and kinship carers who have no paid leave at all? Will they commission a similar review into provision for unpaid carers and make carer’s leave paid?

• 22 Oct 2025 · Heathrow: National Airports Review · Hansard source

  More

  The DFT’s own updated appraisal report shows that the economic benefits of a third runway are either exaggerated or misguided. The Labour Government are yet to produce their economic analysis. Meanwhile, Heathrow Airport Ltd is in more than £15 billion-worth of debt and its own proposal has increased in cost by 50% since 2016. What makes the Secretary of State so confident that private financing will be found not just for the proposals on the table, but for all the surface transport upgrades that will be required?

• 21 Oct 2025 · Co-operative Sector: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank the hon. Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton (Jim McMahon) for his work in securing this important debate. It has been a real pleasure to hear contributions from all the Labour and Co-operative party Members this afternoon. The current economic landscape is challenging for our businesses and industries. Years of dire economic mismanagement by the last Conservative Government have led to businesses, including co-operatives, facing huge challenges, ranging from recruiting and retaining staff to soaring energy costs. Those issues have been exacerbated by the increase in trading obstacles following the last Government’s botched trade agreement with the EU. However, many of those challenges are now being compounded by decisions taken by this Government. Co-operatives are owned by and run for the benefit of their members. As the Liberal Democrats have always believed in empowering individuals to engage in decisions that impact their lives, we are supportive of the co-operative sector, credit unions and non-profit financial institutions owned by their members. The co-operative sector is made up of more than 10,000 enterprises across every sector and region, from local community pubs and credit unions to building societies, mutual insurers and retail societies. Together, they represent one of the most resilient and values-driven parts of the UK economy, rooted in communities and owned by their members. The Liberal Democrats believe that employee participation in the workplace, together with wider employee ownership, is important for diffusing economic power, promoting enterprise, increasing job satisfaction and improving service to customers. Co-operative enterprises offer considerable potential for member and employee involvement and are an important part of a modern mixed economy. In the recent “Backing your Business” plan, published in July 2025, the Government committed to growing the co-operative and mutual sector over this Parliament, and launched a call for evidence on how we can support the sector and its businesses to grow. The Liberal Democrats support that ambition, but will the Government be more decisive in their support by acting on some of the recommendations of Co-operatives UK, such as on access to finance, which would expand the possibility for many of these organisations to scale up. Co-operatives often struggle to raise capital because, by virtue of being member-run organisations, they are more limited than companies in issuing shares that are attractive to external investors. Often, co-operative enterprises provide fairer workplaces; they are four times as likely to be living wage employers, and women lead nearly a quarter of the UK’s top 100 co-operatives—more than twice the proportion in the FTSE 100. Meanwhile, although women earn 12% less on average than men across the UK economy, that figure is reduced to 7.5% within co-operatives. Community-owned pubs are also on the up, with a 51% increase over the last five years, and a 13% increase in the last year alone. However, training, hiring and retaining a skilled workforce are issues that affect businesses of all kinds across the country. The Liberal Democrats therefore welcomed the industrial strategy this summer and the commitment to an increase in skills and training. The apprenticeship levy does not work, and many businesses cannot get the funding they need to train staff, with hundreds of millions of pounds of funding going unspent. The Liberal Democrats have been calling for the apprenticeship levy to be replaced with a wider skills and training levy, which would give businesses flexibility over how they spend the money to train their staff. We therefore welcome the intention to reform the levy and replace it with a broader growth and skills levy, but we have concerns about moving funding away from level 7 apprenticeships, which we know increase social mobility.

• 21 Oct 2025 · Co-operative Sector: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  That is really good to hear, as it is a good example of how the co-operative movement promotes innovation, particularly in promoting wider social participation. However, the fact that we have to have innovative schemes driven by the co-operative sector points to the challenges that so many people find in using the apprenticeship levy. The Liberal Democrats would like to see a much broader range of potential uses for the apprenticeship levy, which would benefit the co-operative sector as well as the rest of the economy. More broadly, co-operatives, like many other kinds of business across the country, are struggling under decisions made by the Government, such as the increase in national insurance contributions imposed at the last Budget. Small businesses in particular have been left struggling under the heavy burden of this jobs tax. The Government must take steps to support those businesses, which are at the centre of communities and local economies. Thousands of local businesses, including many in the co-operative sector, which often provide community services, are feeling the damaging impact of the national insurance increase and many other changes. That is why I and all my Liberal Democrat colleagues have repeatedly called on the Government to reverse the employer NICs increase and will continue to campaign for them to scrap that damaging policy. We also call on the Government to introduce vital reform to the business rates system. In 2019, the Conservative Government promised a fundamental review of business rates, but they failed to deliver it. Labour pledged in its manifesto to replace the system, but still no action has been taken. A year into Labour’s time in the power, will the Minister say whether the Government plan to keep their word on that commitment? Critically, as we look at measures that will boost growth, the Liberal Democrats will continue to be proud advocates for a closer relationship with Europe. Liberal Democrats want to see a bespoke UK-EU customs union to reduce red tape and allow all businesses the freedom to grow without heavy regulation and huge export costs. The co-operative sector generates a combined annual income of £42.7 billion. Its significant contribution to the economy and defiance of current business trends highlights its resilience and stability in a challenging economic landscape. In 2025 there are 7,400 co-operatives in the UK, with 16.6 million memberships, employing around 240,000 people. I am glad that in my constituency of Richmond Park, co-operative enterprises exist not only for the services that they provide, but as community spaces to bring people together. I thank the hon. Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton for securing the debate and hope the Government will go further in supporting the co-operative sector.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T5. People across the UK are suffering in silence with gambling addictions. The proliferation of online betting has only added to the issue, as people are able to wager more money than they can afford with just a click on their phone screen. Will the Minister speak to her colleague the Chancellor in advance of the upcoming Budget to support the Liberal Democrats’ call for a double gambling tax, which would not only raise millions of pounds but disincentivise harmful gambling?

• 15 Oct 2025 · Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill · Hansard source

  More

  New clause 2, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover), would require the Government to publish a report within six months of securing the supply of bioethanol for sustainable aviation fuel production. The Government have repeatedly cited the increased use of SAF as the answer to questions about how the UK will meet our net zero targets while expanding multiple airports in London. It was wishful thinking nine months ago, but that argument has now dissolved almost into impossibility. Not only did the summer proposal submitted by Heathrow Airport Holdings for a third runway include a request to add nearly 300,000 flights to our airspace each year, but the concerns regarding the production of SAF have become more prominent. That concern has grown following China’s implementation of its own SAF mandate, which will result in it using more of its production domestically. That will undoubtedly cause a challenge for the UK given that over 90% of our current SAF is imported from China. The challenges to the UK’s ability to produce and import SAF were underscored by the Climate Change Committee’s recent report, which estimated that only 17% of the UK’s aviation industry will be using SAF by 2040. That is 5% lower than the Government’s own mandated targets, and 8% below the EU’s target. The estimate does not even take into account the additional flights that would come in and out of the UK as a result of the proposed airport expansions. In fact, in 2024 only 10% of bioethanol certified as renewable and consumed in the UK was produced domestically. That was down from 17% in 2023 and 15% in 2022—a concerning trend and one that the Government must report back on. In addition, the UK-US trade deal presents a threat to the UK’s domestic bioethanol production, as the agreement removed tariffs on US ethanol and replaced it with a zero-tariff quota of 1.4 billion litres. The US bioethanol industry is heavily subsidised and its companies will be able to undercut UK bioethanol industries. Vivergo Fuels’ plant in Hull, which had the largest capacity of any UK bioethanol producer, has already closed, with the managing director citing the US-UK trade deal as a significant factor that contributed to the site’s closure.

• 16 Sept 2025 · Employment Rights: Impact on Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I thank the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp) for securing this debate. The Liberal Democrats support measures that work to strengthen employment rights, so yesterday we welcomed aspects of the Employment Rights Bill, such as boosting statutory sick pay, strengthening support for whistleblowers and increasing support for carers. All those measures move us in the right direction, but as the legislation progresses through Parliament, we remain concerned about the specific way in which many of them will be implemented. We must ensure that the legislation strikes the right balance for both employees and business. In the debate yesterday, my colleagues and I highlighted several concerns about the absence of detail in the Bill. So many key elements will be left to secondary legislation or subject to consultation. Businesses in my constituency tell me that they are being left in limbo by the Government’s framing of the Bill, which prevents long-term planning. I am disappointed that the Government did not support the Liberal Democrat amendments that would have created more certainty for business in matters such as the definition of short notice when a shift is cancelled, or the changes to the period for making a claim for unfair dismissal. Any new measures to support workers must go hand in hand with much-needed reforms to support our small businesses, such reforming the broken business rates system, bringing down trade barriers and properly reforming the apprenticeship levy. Although the impact of the Employment Rights Bill will be a significant shift for businesses, there are many other factors that remain challenging. Small businesses are at the centre of our communities and our local economies, creating the jobs on which we all rely. We are glad that raising the employment allowance will help to protect the very smallest employers, but thousands of local businesses, including many in the hospitality sector, will still feel the damaging impact of the national insurance increase. My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I have persistently opposed these measures at every turn. Once again, I urge the Government to scrap them. The Government’s decision to raise the rate of national insurance contributions while also reducing the threshold at which they are levied has significantly raised the cost of employing part-time workers, delivering a disproportionately large blow to the hospitality sector. Just today, the latest labour market figures show rising numbers of people claiming unemployment benefits, alongside many businesses facing workforce shortages. The Government need to scrap this failed tax, or we will not get the growth that we need to rebuild our public services. It is not just about staffing costs. The Government must take other steps to boost the hospitality workforce, including introducing a youth mobility scheme with much more urgency and properly investing in skills and training. More broadly, they must look at measures that would ease the pressure felt by so many businesses and boost the economy as a whole. We continue to call on them to introduce vital reform to the business rates system. We also know that many businesses are struggling with sky-high energy costs, so I urge the Minister to consider Liberal Democrat proposals that will cut energy bills by a half within 10 years, by breaking the link between gas prices and electricity costs so that households and businesses can get the benefit of cheap, clean power and lower energy bills. I urge the Minister to look at our proposals to give businesses the support that they desperately need. Most employers want to do the right thing by their staff. I have spoken to many businesses and key stakeholder groups that support the aims of the Bill but have raised significant concerns that some of the measures could backfire, leading to the loss of thousands of flexible, part-time and entry-level roles in particular. So much of the detail of the Bill is still undecided. That will compound the challenges that small businesses are facing, from the Government’s changes to employer national insurance to the reduction in business rates relief and the absence of any meaningful action to bring down commercial energy prices. We must find a way to support and provide clarity for businesses trying to plan ahead. The Liberal Democrats remain supportive of many of the measures that the Employment Rights Bill will introduce to improve support for workers. However, as we see the impact of the legislation, we will continue to seek the right balance for both employees and businesses.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough (Justin Madders), and to hear his passion for the Bill; I wish him every success. I also welcome the new Secretary of State for Business and Trade to his place. I look forward to opposing him. The Liberal Democrats support many of the Bill’s aims. We have long called for employment rights to be strengthened in several ways, including by boosting statutory sick pay, strengthening support for whistleblowers and increasing support for carers. There is a lot in the Bill that we support in principle, and that moves the country in the right direction. However, we remain concerned about how many of the measures will be implemented. We must ensure that the legislation strikes the right balance for both employees and business. Some of our worries arose from the extent to which crucial detail has been left to secondary legislation, or will be subject to consultations. That does not facilitate stability and certainty for business or workers, and it precludes long-term planning. That will particularly impact small businesses, start-up businesses and those businesses looking to grow. That is why we are supportive of, for example, the amendment that sets the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims at six months; that would create certainty for business. Any new measures to support workers must go hand in hand with much-needed reforms to support our small businesses, which provide employment. Those reforms include reform of the broken business rates system, a removal of trade barriers, and proper reform of the apprenticeship levy. I am in favour of Lords amendment 1, which would change the obligation to offer guaranteed hours to a right to request them. The Liberal Democrats have long stood for giving zero-hours workers security about their working patterns, and we are deeply concerned that too many zero-hours workers struggle with unstable incomes, job insecurity and difficulties in planning for the future. However, we also recognise that many value the flexibility that such arrangements provide. Many young people and those balancing caring responsibilities alongside work value adaptability in their shift patterns. It is therefore important to strike a balance that ensures that workers can have security and flexibility.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am slightly surprised to be referred to as “hon. Friend”, not least because I am probably going to disagree with the hon. Gentleman. To undertake such massive action, including in the NHS, and on the tube—we saw the level of disruption that that caused the public last week—there needs to be a positive vote in favour of strike action, which is why I back this amendment.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The current framework for whistleblowing applies only if somebody has lost their job. It does not address the duty on businesses to follow up whistleblowers’ serious concerns about crimes. That urgently needs to be addressed. Too many whistleblowers who raised serious concerns about matters ranging from fraud to patient safety are ignored by their employers, or are reticent to speak out because of fears of unfair repercussions. The new clause in Lords amendment 46 has received the support of numerous international civil society organisations, including Protect and Spotlight on Corruption. It would be a long-overdue update to our once world-leading whistleblowing legislation, and I urge colleagues from across the House to support the change. I support Lords amendment 47, which would expand the right to be accompanied to employment hearings to include certified professional companions. Currently, employees may be accompanied only by certified trade union representatives, leaving many workers to navigate proceedings alone. Although trade unions provide valuable support to their members, only 22% of workers are in a trade union, including only 12% of private sector workers, with recent figures at a record low. The current provisions made sense at a time when trade union membership was higher nationally, but those provisions have become largely outdated as trade union membership has fallen and the labour market has modernised. Without the amendment, we consign many employees facing unfair dismissal to navigating the requirements of disciplinary hearings on their own, without any kind of professional or educated support.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I think the point that the hon. Gentleman is making is that people who did not express a view either way should be counted as voting against. What I am saying is that in order to justify the levels of disruption that strike action has caused recently, it is important that a trade union can demonstrate that it has majority support from its workforce. That is why I support the amendment. We believe that the current threshold for strike action is suitable, and that making it easier to strike risks putting further pressure on public services and damaging the economy, as we saw last week with the disruption across the capital caused by the tube strikes. Most employers are responsible businesses that want to do the right thing by their staff, and many of them support the aims of the Bill. However, they have significant concerns about the lack of clarity and the proposed implementation process. So much of the detail of the legislation is still undecided and will compound the challenges that small businesses are facing—from the Government’s changes to employers’ national insurance and the reduction in business rates relief, to the absence of any meaningful action to bring down commercial energy prices. We must find a way to support and provide clarity for businesses that are trying to plan ahead. The Liberal Democrats support many aims of the Bill and the spirit of measures that strengthen employment rights, but we will support the Lords amendments that will help to ensure that the legislation strikes the right balance for workers and businesses.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am happy to take another intervention.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  As the hon. Gentleman and the hon. Member for Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch (Katrina Murray) have said, that has not been a requirement for professional bodies, but if we create the right for suitably qualified professionals to accompany employees, I fully expect that those bodies would go on to develop that capability. It is surely up to an employee to decide whether they want a fellow professional or a trade union official to protect and defend their interests. They should have the opportunity to make that choice for themselves. The Liberal Democrats also support the retention of the opt-in system for contributions to trade union political funds. We believe in maximising choice and transparency for individuals in relation to the political funds to which they contribute. We therefore oppose measures that would make it an opt-out system.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  As someone with a long history of having to arrange childcare at short notice, I am well aware of the limitations that needing to arrange childcare presents, particularly for working women, both those who are single parents and those in a relationship. Forty-eight hours is not ideal, but it is a reasonable compromise, and it is absolutely vital that employers have clarity about what “reasonable notice” looks like in this circumstance. I wish to speak in favour of Lords amendment 48. Businesses, particularly those in the hospitality sector, that rely on seasonal workers are particularly vulnerable to changes in labour regulations and the knock-on impacts on the cost and availability of labour. The sustainability of farming businesses, for example, depends on being able to get the right people to the right place at the right time, and obstacles to that can have a big impact on ability to generate produce for sale, and therefore on the sustainability of the business. If we allow a different set of regulations to apply to seasonal work, a clear definition of “seasonal work” must be created to prevent employers from avoiding their legitimate responsibilities by claiming seasonal work in inappropriate circumstances. While we do not believe that this legislation should create contrasting employment law requirements for businesses, we continue to defend the principle that businesses should be properly considered when secondary legislation is created, so I urge Members to support the amendment. Lords amendment 46, tabled by my good friend and Richmond Park predecessor Baroness Kramer, would introduce protections for whistleblowers. It follows her long-standing campaign for support for whistleblowers, and I pay tribute to her commitment to the cause.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  If the hon. Lady supported Lords amendment 1, the catering worker would have a right to request, and could get the certainty she requires. The amendment would very much offer that right, which she currently does not have, but it would also mean there was no requirement on the employer to maintain records, and the employer would not have the administrative burden of being forced to offer those hours to workers in the industry who did not require such flexibility. That is why we think the amendment strikes the right balance. We strongly support the principle of enabling workers to obtain fixed-hours contracts, but we have concerns about the implementation method proposed in the Bill. Small businesses have highlighted that having to offer employees fixed-hours contracts on a rolling basis could impose significant administrative burdens. Many small employers lack human resource or legal departments, and the change could be a significant cost for those with limited resources. That would compound other challenges, such as the recent increase in employers’ national insurance contributions and the fallout from the previous Government’s damaging Brexit deal. In the retail and hospitality sector, part-time and entry-level roles are often taken up by young people looking for flexible hours, people with caring responsibilities, and others who may not want to make long-term work commitments. My hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dunbartonshire (Susan Murray) offered a compelling example of a zero-hours contract giving someone what they required from work. For all those groups, flexibility is key. The amendment is in line with our long-standing manifesto commitment to give zero-hours and agency workers the right to request fixed-hours contracts—a right that employers could not refuse unreasonably. The measure would maintain a flexibility that benefits both parties, whereas an obligation to offer guaranteed hours imposes a significant burden, which does not benefit either party. We are clear that employees should be supported to exercise this right—and all employment rights—without fear of any negative consequences in their workplace, and we are pleased that the Government have taken steps to set up a unified Fair Work Agency. We hope that the Government will look into our other proposals—for example, the proposal to give zero-hours workers a 20% higher minimum wage to compensate them for the uncertainty of fluctuating hours. The amendment strikes a balance between security for workers and flexibility for employers. Much of the contention about the Bill relates to the lack of detail and clarity around key definitions, which makes it hard for businesses and employers to plan. That is why I also wish to speak in favour of Lords amendment 8, which would define a short-notice cancellation as a cancellation with 48 hours’ notice. That provides a workable balance. It gives employers clarity, while ensuring that workers are compensated when shifts are cancelled late.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  No, I do not. I think that people should have the freedom not to join a trade union if that is what they wish, not least because their trade union contributions might go to a party that they do not vote for. Many professions these days are better represented not by trade unions that cover a whole range of different employment categories but by professional bodies. As an accountant, I was a member of the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants. Had I been facing a disciplinary in relation to my professional duties, I would have been much better represented by a fellow member of that body than by a trade union.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  No, I do not think so. Forty-eight hours is a reasonable amount of notice in any sector. That is the kind of notice that enables, for example, parents to rearrange childcare, or other members of the family to rearrange their shifts. The 48 hours is a proper definition of reasonable notice, and 48 hours is 48 hours, whether you work on an oil rig or in a shop. I disagree that it is context-dependent.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I understand the hon. Lady’s point, but a fellow qualified accountant would be better able to advise somebody facing a disciplinary than an official from a general trade union, who would not necessarily understand the points in dispute.

• 8 Sept 2025 · Indefinite Leave to Remain · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. I know that he has many residents from Hong Kong in Carshalton and Wallington, and I really hope that the Minister will take on board the point we are making about the moral duty that we owe those people, particularly in the light of increased oppression from China. As my hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) pointed out, the skilled worker visa route has offered a secure pathway for world-leading talent to join the UK’s workforce. In coming to the UK, those skilled workers have brought value to the economy, to key sectors such as care, and to their communities. That is why the Government’s failure to give detail on changes to the indefinite leave to remain qualifying period is so concerning. Not only do they risk up-ending the lives of so many residents and families, but they risk damaging our businesses and the economy. A skilled, stable workforce is a key part of any growing business, and recent Government policy has already begun eroding the availability of that workforce in the UK. National insurance contributions have disincentivised hiring; red tape with the EU has made it more difficult to hire skilled workers from abroad; the newly created Skills England risks failing in its aim to upskill the British labour force if it is not given the independence it needs; and now, on top of all of that, the Government’s White Paper has added uncertainty for businesses looking to hire employees—yet another barrier to growth. The Government must provide clarity on the skilled worker visa as a matter of urgency. Many BNO visa holders have built their life here in the UK and have made huge contributions to our economies and local communities, especially in my constituency; they have bought homes, started businesses and enrolled their children in schools. I therefore urge the Government to offer more clarity on their plans for the five-year qualifying period for those already on specific visa routes, and ask the Minister whether the Government will confirm and honour their original commitment to protect those agreements.