Question follow-through · 82546
Employment Tribunals Service: Enforcement
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, if he will make an assessment of the potential merits of providing further recourse in situations where an employment tribunal award (a) relating to (i) wages, (ii) holiday pay, (iii) compensatory noti
About this written question
A written question asks a government minister for information in writing. Parliament publishes the question and any answer.
- Answering body
- Department for Business and Trade
- Tabled
- 15 Oct 2025
- Target answer date
- 20 Oct 2025
- Answer
- 24 Oct 2025 · 9 calendar days after tabling
Elapsed calendar days describe the record timeline, not whether Parliament considers an answer on time.
Votes on this topic
- Draft Code of Practice on Electronic and Workplace Ballots for Statutory Trade Union Ballots · 15 Jul 2026
- Draft Trade Unions (Permissible Means of Voting) and Employment Rights (Unfair Dismissal) (Amendment) Order 2026 · 15 Jul 2026
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 5 · 1 Jul 2026
These Commons divisions share a topic label. The question did not necessarily lead to a vote.
Recorded timeline
15 Oct 2025
Question tabled
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, if he will make an assessment of the potential merits of providing further recourse in situations where an employment tribunal award (a) relating to (i) wages, (ii) holiday pay, (iii) compensatory noti
20 Oct 2025
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
24 Oct 2025
Answer published
The Government is not planning such an assessment; however, we are committed to our ambitious agenda to deliver our Plan for Change by ensuring employment rights are fit for a modern economy, empowering working people and contributing to economic growth a...
Official data retrieved 28 Sept 2026.
Later records
Possible follow-up questions
Strong links require the same MP, department and exact heading. Other same-department questions are shown as unreviewed candidates, not as confirmed follow-ups. No debate link is asserted unless a stable source relationship exists.
No later same-department questions indexed.
This is an absence in covered public data, not evidence that no follow-up occurred elsewhere.