Alastair Ross
East Antrim · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“Over the weekend, she supported an independent investigation into everything that is going on in the RHI scheme. She has been working with the Economy Minister to try to make sure that we have something in place in early January to stop the costs of the scheme and reduce the cost.”
“There is no doubt that it has been an incredibly difficult time over the past two weeks for anyone involved in politics. It is quite clear that the public are, quite rightly, angry about a scheme that, with hindsight, was poorly designed and badly administered.”
“I know that, for some individuals, the old habit of asking questions rather than trying to answer them, dies hard, but what we had was not an opposition-driven policy or an attempt to hold the Executive to account; it was a media-driven thing, and some of the opposition parties tried to jump on the bandwagon.”
“Again, I hear the leader of the Alliance Party chirping away in the background. I listened to her contribution, and she must have had 10 or 11 questions she wanted answered.”
“That is why some of the hyperbole that has been around today is hard to stomach. <BR /> <BR />What we heard from my colleague Joanne Bunting was a thoughtful and considered first contribution to the Assembly, and I think that it was one that shows that she will be a valuable asset to the Chamber.”
“They abandoned their seats, and they failed to discharge their duties or ask the questions that their voters might, quite rightly, want them to ask. The public care very little about procedures, points of order or Standing Orders.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,064 lines we hold for Alastair Ross, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 22.
“Indeed, a representative from the Centre for Justice Innovation in London came over to talk about problem-solving in justice and how it would work by reducing the cost to the taxpayer and, crucially, improving outcomes for communities, victims and those who come into contact with the criminal justice system.”
“The Committee believes that requiring offenders, in suitable circumstances, to satisfy a fine by undertaking appropriate courses or treatment to address the causes of offending behaviour such as drug or alcohol addiction, or mental health problems, is helpful to the Department’s stated aim of addressing offending behaviour and preventing reoffending. It also represents a form of the problem-solving model of justice, which aims to address the root causes of the offending behaviour rather than just punishing the crime, a model proven to assist in reducing reoffending and the associated costs to the justice system. It is one of the areas, as the Minister said, that the Committee examined during the innovation seminars that it held.”
“It stated that it was willing to give an undertaking to do so and work with a view to potentially enhancing the fine collection arrangements at some point in the future.”
“The Department stated that the arrangements in New South Wales were unique in the sense that they can engage persons who are suffering from mental health, or drug or alcohol addiction problems, in certain courses or treatments as a means of satisfying the fine, which is not an aspect associated with fine enforcement arrangements in Great Britain or the Republic of Ireland. The Department was of the view that considerable policy development would be required to evaluate the merits of this approach and identify any resource implications. While this would not be possible within the timescale of the Justice (No.2) Bill, the Department stated, as the Minister reaffirmed today, that it would be happy, in principle, to consider the proposal in more detail.”
“It subsequently advised the Committee that, while the court may include requirements on treatment for drug or alcohol dependency or for a mental health condition in community-based sentences, the imposition of a fine is a pecuniary penalty and is not designed to have a rehabilitative aspect, as the Minister has outlined.”
“The Department, therefore, recommended that the scheme should be rolled out across that jurisdiction. <BR /> <BR />Given the positive outcomes of that scheme, the Committee raised with the Department the possibility of extending the powers of the court to enable suitable offenders in Northern Ireland to be required to satisfy a fine by undertaking appropriate courses to address offending behaviour such as treatment for drug or alcohol addiction or mental health treatment as an alternative to supervised activity orders. While the Department indicated that it envisaged some difficulties with mandatory health solutions at that level of disposal, it undertook to consider the matter further.”
“That research highlighted that, in New South Wales in Australia, a pilot project that allowed certain disadvantaged people to clear their fine by undertaking unpaid work, courses or treatment for drug or alcohol addiction or mental health problems with the support of an approved organisation or registered health practitioner had provided an effective response to the offending behaviour. An evaluation of that pilot project by the Attorney General and the Department of Justice found that the scheme had helped to reduce reoffending in the fine enforcement system and secondary offending in the broader criminal justice system. It also engaged the individuals in appropriate treatment or activities such as mental health, drug or alcohol treatment that they might not have otherwise engaged in.”
“I note that he has tabled amendment No 9 today, which seeks to ensure that this protection exists. <BR /> <BR />Finally, I want to outline the amendments that have been tabled by the Committee and the rationale for them. The Bill provides for the imposition of a supervised activity order that will require an individual to complete activities tailored to their needs and based on a personal assessment carried out by the probation service. The introductory sessions will include citizenship and money management modules. To assist in its consideration of Part 1 of the Justice (No. 2) Bill, the Committee commissioned research on fine collection and enforcement systems in other jurisdictions, including England and Wales, Scotland, the Irish Republic, Australia and New Zealand.”
“<BR /> <BR />Having noted that regulations will be made and detailed guidance provided in relation to vehicle seizure orders that will set out the built-in protections for vulnerable people and having received clarification from the Department of how the scheme will operate to ensure that the cost of it does not exceed the value of the seizure, the Committee agreed that it was content to support the provisions in the Bill and amendment No 8, which ensures that a vehicle seizure order will be made only if the value of the vehicle, if sold, will discharge the sum owed, including the likely charges and costs of the sale. Again, the Deputy Chairman expressed some reservations about the possible impact of vehicle seizure orders on families and dependants.”
“They include a recommendation from the Human Rights Commission that account should be taken of the impact of a vehicle seizure order on an individual’s employment to ensure that an individual is not deprived of their source of income in order to comply with the right to work and an individual’s right to employment and protection of income. The Committee is content with that approach and supports the amendments. Indeed, it would be somewhat self-defeating if we were to impede a person's ability to get to work.”
“<BR /> <BR />I move on to the provisions and amendments relating to vehicle seizure orders. The Committee sought the advice of the Examiner of Statutory Rules regarding the range of powers in the Bill to make subordinate legislation. The Examiner drew the Committee's attention to the regulation-making powers in clause 18 and indicated that subsection (6)(b) was either intended to cover a matter of substance and import, in which case it should be fully set out in the Bill, or it should simply be left to the discretion of the court by omitting the regulation power from the Bill entirely. The Committee referred the matter to the Department for consideration, and amendment Nos 26 and 27 now provide for the issues that a court should take into account before making a vehicle seizure order to be included in the Bill.”
“The Deputy Chairman of the Committee, however, expressed reservations about the wider impact of the provisions and indicated that he and his colleagues would seek further assurances and commitments from the Minister today regarding safeguarding and protecting families, dependants and vulnerable people. While Mr McCartney will, no doubt, outline in detail the rationale for his amendments, it appears that they are a belt-and-braces approach to ensure that children and adult dependants of fine defaulters are not adversely affected by the fine enforcement methods adopted. I understand the rationale for the amendments and have sympathy for the motivation behind them, but, hopefully, the assurances that have been provided by the Minister today will reassure Mr McCartney and his colleagues.”
“A bank account order can be made only at a judicial hearing, and both interim and bank account orders will be made only for bank accounts held solely in the debtor's name. Joint bank accounts will not be frozen or accessible. The option for the debtor to make an application for a hardship payment will also be included in correspondence sent from the collection officer to the debtor. <BR /> <BR />The Committee, noting the safeguards in place, agreed that it was content with the provisions relating to deductions from benefits, attachment of earnings orders, interim bank account orders and bank account orders as drafted.”
“The collection of a fine will also sit sixth on the priority list for collection so that housing or fuel arrears and so on will be collected first and essential living expenses protected. The Department also said that deductions for fine payment would be restricted to income support, jobseeker's allowance, state pension credit and employment and support allowance and that benefits such as disability benefits, carer benefits, child benefit, child tax credit payments and other benefits provided to the vulnerable could not be accessed for the purpose of recovering a fine. <BR /> <BR />On interim bank account orders, the Department stated that they would freeze only the amount of the fine, and a requirement to notify the debtor of the possibility of an interim bank account order will be covered in regulations and guidance.”
“<BR /> <BR />When discussing with the Committee how deductions from benefits would operate in practice and the safeguards in place to ensure that dependants were not adversely impacted on, departmental officials said that the collection officer would request information on a debtor's financial circumstances by way of a means enquiry form, and that will cover income, outgoings and dependants. Deductions from benefits will be operated by the Department for Social Development under its existing third-party deduction scheme, which includes safeguards to protect the vulnerable and an appeal system through the social security appeals tribunal. The Department for Social Development controls include a limit on the number of deductions that can be in place and a maximum amount of 15% of the benefit being deducted at any one time.”
“The written and oral evidence that the Committee received was supportive of the primary aims of the provisions to improve the fine collection system, particularly the move to a more civilian-based collection service, which will free up police resources so that they can focus on more strategic priorities, benefiting communities and the general public. Some issues were raised on the options available to secure the payment of fines through deductions from benefits, attachment of earnings orders, interim bank account orders and bank account orders and, in particular, on the potential impact on the families and dependants of fine defaulters.”
“Others, such as amendment No 19, which creates a power for the recovery of the fee for the cost of personal service by a summons server from the defaulter in appropriate circumstances in which the postal service is unsuccessful, amendment No 33, which ensures that a supervised activity order cannot be considered as an option in default of a confiscation order, and amendment No 79, which provides for prosecutorial fines created as a result of the Justice Act 2015 to be treated in the same way as the fixed penalties and penalty notices already included in schedule 2, make more substantive but necessary changes to ensure that the future fine enforcement and collection regime operates as intended. <BR /> <BR />I turn to amendment Nos 3, 20, 24 and 25, tabled by Mr McCartney and his colleagues.”
“The original proposal has been amended so that it does not include a PSNI power of entry and search for such arrests. The amendments before us today are now a proportionate approach to dealing with those who may seek to ignore a call back to court. <BR /> <BR />During Committee Stage, the Department also provided information on and the text of other amendments to Part 1, and those are before the Assembly for consideration today. Most of them are minor and correct or improve the drafting of the Bill.”
“It was noted that the Department for Social Development was working with the Department of Justice to agree the level of access required to benefits information. An individual assessment will be carried out in each case, and it will be an offence for a person to whom the information has been disclosed to disclose it to another person or to use it for another purpose. The Committee agreed that it was content with the information access and sharing amendments. <BR /> <BR />The Committee is also content to support amendment Nos 10, 15, 16, 17 and 18, which will enable the police to arrest offenders whom they know to be in default, if they encounter them and either bring them to court forthwith or bail them for a future default hearing appearance.”
“Prior to the commencement of the Committee Stage of the Bill, the Department advised the Committee of its intention to bring forward amendment Nos 1, 22 and 30, which will improve information access and sharing in the fine collection process, and amendment Nos 10, 15, 16, 17 and 18, which will provide a police power of arrest in circumstances of non-attendance at fine default hearings. That enabled the Committee to seek views on both proposals when requesting evidence on the Bill's provisions. <BR /> <BR />The Committee accepts the need for collection officers to have access to relevant employment, earnings or benefits information in certain circumstances to enable the fine enforcement and collection system to operate as envisaged.”
“It was therefore within that context and recognising the need to address the ongoing issues in the current system as soon as possible that the Justice Committee considered Part 1 of the Bill and associated amendments that it had sight of during the Committee Stage.”
“<BR /> <BR />Figures provided by the Department to the Committee in early 2015 indicated that the total outstanding debt at 31 March 2014 was £22·684 million, of which it was estimated that £7·335 million was impaired and unlikely to be collected. The costs associated with enforcing the current system are also significant, as it takes up substantial police time and results in a large number of very short terms of imprisonment, with the associated costs to the Prison Service and, ultimately, of course, the taxpayer. In these times of financial constraint, those are wasted funds that could be put to very good use, and it is unacceptable.”
“<BR /> <BR />Subsequently, a Public Accounts Committee report published in January 2015 on the Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service trust statement for the year ending March 2013 outlined that the value of unpaid financial penalties was significant and that the Comptroller and Auditor General raised concerns about the fine collection and enforcement measures and the system for dealing with fine defaulters. The PAC found that, despite the significant levels of outstanding debt, the Department of Justice had failed to coordinate a joined-up approach to fine collection, and, as a result, governance arrangements were unacceptable. That had contributed to a number of failings, including 6,682 paper warrants with a value of £1·1 million going missing, as well as suspected fraud.”
“<BR /> <BR />A judgement delivered by the divisional court in March 2013 in five judicial reviews relating to the arrangements for imposing and enforcing fines and other monetary penalties in Northern Ireland ruled that the long-established practice for dealing with non-payment of fines and other monetary penalties was unlawful and that a fine defaulter must be brought back to court for a further default hearing before any penalty for default could be imposed. As a result, revised arrangements had to be adopted to address those defects.”
“I think that the detail in the Committee report demonstrates that we considered all aspects of the Bill and the range of proposed amendments in a full and thorough manner. I also thank all the organisations and individuals that provided very useful written and oral evidence and the departmental officials who provided additional information and clarification throughout the process. <BR /> <BR />Looking at the fine enforcement and collection element in Part 1 of the Bill and the related amendments that the Minister outlined in his speech, they will create an entirely new regime for the collection and enforcement of financial penalties. It has been clear for some considerable time, as I mentioned, that the current fine system is not fit for purpose.”
“The Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development and the Committee for Social Development also assisted the Committee in considering proposals specific to their respective Departments. The Committee received 21 written submissions, took oral evidence from a range of organisations, as well as officials from the DOJ and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, and commissioned several research papers to assist its consideration of Part 1 of the Bill, which covers a new fine collection and enforcement system and possible legislative changes to improve online protection. <BR /> <BR />I thank the members of the Committee for their contributions to the discussion on and consideration of the Bill during the Committee Stage.”
“That proposal is similar to that for attacks on police officers and that is already on the statute books. The Committee also considered possible legislative changes to improve online protection for children following issues that were raised during its successful conference on justice in a digital age in October 2015, and a new offence that we are proposing on what is commonly referred to as revenge porn. <BR /> <BR />Given the various policy areas that are covered by the Bill and the proposed amendments, the Committee spent some time undertaking detailed scrutiny and sought a wide range of views to assist its deliberations. Written evidence was sought from interested organisations and individuals, as well as from the Department of Justice, the Department of Health, the Public Prosecution Service and the PSNI.”
“As well as the main clauses and a wide range of related amendments, the Committee considered proposals for a range of new provisions that are unrelated to the areas covered in the Bill. Those included proposals by the Department for changes to firearms legislation relating to fees; a new banded system to enable firearms dealers to exchange a firearm for a licence holder; the age of young shooters; proposals by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development to increase the statutory maximum penalties for a range of animal cruelty offences under the Welfare of Animals Act (Northern Ireland) 2011; and a proposal originally made by Lord Morrow to enhance protection for the emergency services by covering attacks on front-line ambulance staff who are responding to emergencies.”
“<BR /> <BR />Nevertheless, the Committee supports the Bill and, in particular, the improvements it seeks to make to the current arrangements for the collection and enforcement of financial penalties, which are clearly not working and are creating excessive costs across the criminal justice system. The Committee welcomes the improvements that are anticipated by the Department, which include an increase in the current level of payment rates from 70% to closer to 80%, savings in police resources, which can be focused on other priorities, and a reduction in the committal rate to prison due to the non-payment of fines, with the resultant cost savings, assuming that the Bill completes its legislative journey and the new fine collection and enforcement arrangements are, indeed, implemented.”
“Just before addressing the amendments, with your indulgence, Mr Speaker, I will make some more general comments about the Committee's approach during Committee Stage. First of all, I will say that it is perhaps unfortunate that, I suspect, today's media coverage of this Bill will centre on the group 5 amendments. It is disappointing because of the considerable work that members of the Committee, departmental officials and other stakeholders have put into the Bill to try to make reforms that will make a real difference. There is a lot of good stuff in the Bill that, unfortunately, will be lost in the media coverage today.”
“It is not just about the training period; it is also potentially, in some jobs, the time to prove your worth. So, the two-year period in those circumstances would benefit the employee because they could prove their worth to the employer in that time.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. In the circumstances where it takes 50 weeks — we are talking theoretically rather than about a real job — to train somebody and they have not yet been assessed on whether they are good at the job, are you seriously saying that the employer should not have the opportunity to get rid of that staff member if they are not doing their job well after the training period? He seems to be suggesting that once you have gone in you should not be sacked, but that is not how the labour market works. An employer has a right to have productive employees working under them. We want to make sure that we have a fair enough period to allow the employee to prove their worth to their employer. That is the point that I tried to make to Mr McCrea.”
“It strikes me that the Member is almost saying, "We have an opportunity to either wait and see if we can get amendments brought forward on this and take away the problem area of zero-hour contracts, or we can just have a scorched-earth policy." It seems to me that the logical and rational position would be to say, "Let us see if we can work on getting some agreement on tackling exclusive zero-hour contracts and make sure that we have tight enough regulation over their usage." He seems to be taking the other position of, "Let us not go for the logical thing. Let us just get rid of them all, and to hell with the consequences for the labour market." Why on earth is he taking that approach?”
“I can tell him that the people from that catering company who came to me work incredibly hard, long hours to ensure that they make a living, and there is nothing lazy about entrepreneurs who go out and try to set up their own companies and strive to get business and employ more people. It is a disgrace that Mr Flanagan used that language here today, but it does not surprise me: he has form. <BR /> <BR />I will leave it at that. I suggest to the House that, if people are serious about a flexible labour market that creates jobs and helps our economy, they will reject Mr Flanagan's nonsense amendment on banning zero-hours contracts. I endorse Mr McCrea's amendment.”
“Zero-hours contracts allowed that company to take on such work, knowing that it had a list of people who could come in at short notice to help with a catering job. If the company did not have a big order for the following week — it might have a small order — it would not have as many staff in. However, if a small family company were to keep all those people on a paid salary contract, it could not do business. <BR /> <BR />Zero-hours contracts are important for a flexible labour market, and they very much help small companies. I really take exception to Mr Flanagan saying that employers who use zero-hours contracts are lazy, inefficient managers.”
“We talked about how zero-hours contracts benefit employers, and bigger employers use them as well. If they get a big order in, they take on more staff and, once the order is complete, they lay off those staff. <BR /> <BR />I have a real-world example from my constituency. When this was first discussed two or three years ago, a former Member, Mr Ramsey, talked about the potential of tabling a private Member's motion. People came to me and said it would be absolute madness for small businesses in certain industries. The example that I was given was of a small catering company based in Carrickfergus. It had no idea what its order sheet would look like a month in advance. It often took orders on a Monday for the following weekend or the weekend after that, so how busy it would be depended on a very short-term order book.”
“They have the opportunity to turn down work if they are too busy but take it on another weekend. That is what a flexible workforce and a flexible labour market are about, and it helps our economy. The same goes for people who may have been out of work for a long time and want to return to the labour market gradually. It is a perfect opportunity for them and gives them the flexibility and control over their hours to do that. <BR /> <BR />Many Members asked this question: what if you want a mortgage or regular hours? In that case, a zero-hours contract is not for you. You will not take a job on a zero-hours contract if you need a mortgage. It is not suitable for everyone, but nobody is arguing that it is. My argument is that it has to be part of the mix in a flexible labour market.”
“I do not see how employers would argue that there should be exclusive zero-hours contracts, but that is not what we are discussing today. We are discussing a blanket ban on zero-hours contracts. <BR /> <BR />Mr Flanagan said that the contracts were bad for workers and bad for the economy. They are not bad for the economy. The fact is that all the major employer organisations say that they give flexibility to and help the job market, and he should listen to them. In a very real example, Ms Sugden said that, when she was trying to get work and was on a zero-hours contract, it worked for her. It works for many students across Northern Ireland who do not want or cannot work regular hours, or perhaps they are busier in one week with university work than in another.”
“That is not what we are discussing today. The amendment does not mention exclusive zero-hours contracts; it deals with all zero-hours contracts. There would need to be a very strong argument and a highly specialised justification for having exclusive zero-hours contracts. One of their benefits is that they give people the flexibility to turn down hours, take on hours or look for work elsewhere. Mr Flanagan made the point that there may be some areas — where someone has a particular skill set or works in a highly sensitive environment — in which certain commercial confidentialities could not be breached. It would be quite rare, I must say, for someone with a particularly high skill set to be on a zero-hours contract — that is unlikely.”
“If there are circumstances in which employees are being exploited, of course we should take action against the employers — of course we should.”
“I am afraid that the Minister has not pushed this agenda forward anywhere near strongly enough, and that concerns me. I support Mr McCrea's amendment and have consistently done so. If Members are serious about ensuring that we are competitive, particularly against countries across the United Kingdom, they should also move towards that position. <BR /> <BR />I want to touch briefly on Mr Flanagan's amendment on zero-hours contracts. I remember arguing on the Employment and Learning Committee about the merits of zero-hours contracts in a flexible workforce. We want a flexible workforce and an economy that works for employers and employees. In an intervention, the Minister made the point, as did Mr McCrea, that nobody is talking about exploiting employees.”
“What is the case is that Northern Ireland now looks like it is a step behind the rest of the United Kingdom in reforming employment law, and that, I am afraid, concerns me. It is a point that I made three years ago to the Minister and repeatedly made to him in questions for written answer: I asked him when he would follow the lead of Great Britain by reforming our employment law on unfair dismissal. I understand that he has all sorts of difficulties in getting proposals through the Executive and that there are difficulties in getting cross-community support. However, I am disappointed that we talked about it at the very beginning of the mandate, yet only today are we seeing the Bill. That is disappointing, given that the Executive keep talking about doing everything possible to help to create jobs.”
“Of course, as Mr McCrea pointed out, over the last number of decades, it has continually flipped between two years and one year, back and forth without any significant evidence that it caused any upsurge in employees being treated badly. At that time, Vince Cable and the coalition Government tried to create an environment in which employers were given the confidence to take on additional staff. When employers are telling us that it would give them more confidence, the litmus test is whether they take on more staff or train more people and whether they continue to grow as businesses. <BR /> <BR />The evidence from Great Britain over the last three years is hardly that the roof has fallen down and, suddenly, people are being abused right across Great Britain. It is simply not the case.”
“So, we need to make sure that we are cognisant of that and have a business-friendly approach. When it comes to a decision about whether to set up their company in Glasgow, Liverpool or Belfast, an employer will look to an area where they have the greatest level of flexibility. That is a significant thing. In 2012, the Government — I think that it was Vince Cable, a man hardly renowned for being a mad right-winger — introduced the employment law reforms and moved the qualifying period for unfair dismissal back up to two years.”
“Earlier, I listened to the Enterprise, Trade and Investment Minister talking about the key components involved in bringing investors to Northern Ireland, and he talked about our skills force. We have a highly skilled population in Northern Ireland. Our universities and further education colleges are excellent, particularly in how they work with employers in making sure that they provide appropriate training. Northern Ireland has a lower cost base than other countries, and that lower wage and office cost base attracts investors. <BR /> <BR />However, employment law is important, particularly when you think of the bigger companies from the Middle East and the States that are looking at a range of different environments across Europe. The most restrictive employment laws, seen in places like France, turn away investors.”
“Actually, what we want to do — I agree with Mr McCrea on this point — is to get to a position where both benefit, and both benefit from having a productive workforce who are in employment. That is the circumstance that we want to create in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />All politicians are great at posing for photographs with the FSB, the CBI or other business organisations. Politicians are great at talking about how they want to see more jobs created in their constituency. They are great at calling for the Enterprise, Trade and Investment Minister to get more jobs created in their constituencies. But when it comes to actually creating an environment in Northern Ireland that is business-friendly and job-creation-friendly, I am afraid that some fail to live up to the expectation. <BR /> <BR />Employment law is important.”
“I will try to keep my comments relatively brief. I only want to talk to amendment Nos 14 and 15. I do so because they were two areas that I was particularly interested in when I served on the Employment and Learning Committee for two and a half or three years at the beginning of this mandate. The debate has not moved on an awful lot since then. I remember sparring across the table with Mr McCann, who often rehearsed some of the arguments that we have heard today about whether it was to do with standing up for employers or employees. Unfortunately, that is the kind of debate that we have had again this afternoon; that somehow it has to come down to a competition between employers or employees.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. It is a useful statistic to have, but for those going into sales jobs, not only does it take time for them to be trained, there is also a period of time for their performance in sales to be assessed adequately. In many jobs, it takes perhaps six or seven months to train somebody, and you also need a longer period of time to assess how they are performing in that job. That is why the two-year qualifying period is beneficial to employees. They are given adequate time to prove their worth to that employer.”
“I thank the Member for giving way. He is now using the example of four hours a week. That is not the example that he gave. He talked about 60% of those on zero-hour contracts. He did not say how long those people were contracted to work each week. That is not actually any evidence that those people are being exploited.”
“The Member mentioned that the survey found that 60% of those in zero-hours contracts wanted more hours and could not get them. Does he acknowledge that that is not actually evidence that those people are being exploited? There are plenty of people on part-time contracts who want more hours and cannot get them. There are others who are on full-time contracts who want additional hours or promotions and cannot get them either. That is not actually evidence that those people are being exploited.”