Steve Darling
MP for Torbay · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom
“Many people may be planning to visit the English riviera this summer, and when they do they may venture on to our coasts. I hope that the Minister will ensure that common sense prevails in appropriately recompensing our coastguards, who put themselves in danger’s way to support people in tragic circumstances.”
“Together with the Heart Campaign in Torbay, I am campaigning hard to protect those services and get investment. Like others, I believe that there is a lack of acknowledgment of our frail elderly population in Devon, where the finances are not following that particular challenge.”
“It is poignant that we are having the Sir David Amess debate today, particularly in the light of the shocking murder of Ann Widdecombe only a week ago. Ann was a Devon resident, and although I may not have seen eye to eye with her politically, she definitely brought authenticity into politics in spades.”
“This could be worse for Torbay unitary authority. However, it is a catastrophic carve-up for Devon, led by Exeter and Plymouth—both Labour councils—and driven forward by a Labour Minister, which will result in a rural rump in Devon. Can the Minister please advise us on his belief as to the financial viability of this rural rump of Devon?”
“Torbay hospital is the third oldest estate that celebrates being part of the NHS. In heatwave conditions, the tower block is like an oven and that has a massive impact on patients, staff and even equipment.”
“Torbay council is the most deprived local authority in the south-west of England. I would welcome the Minister’s assurances that rearranging the deckchairs with this local reorganisation will not detract from regeneration, which is a core driver for that local authority. The new Prime Minister is set to move No.”
The complete record
Every one of 600 lines we hold for Steve Darling, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 12.
“We want fraud to be tackled, but we want it done in the right way. There have been just seven working days between this Bill’s First Reading and its Second Reading. Large tracts of the safeguards and the rails around it are out for consultation as we speak, which we need if we are to understand what safeguards there will be to protect our communities. Colleagues have already mentioned AI, and they are right to have done so, because there are real concerns about a lack of transparency— [ Interruption. ] Sorry, Jennie is joining in; she is having a dream about rabbits. As Liberal Democrats have already highlighted, we do not know what safeguards there will be around the use of AI. How can we back the Bill until we know what safeguards will exist? I would like to reflect on how the Bill can contain those appropriate safeguards.”
“My apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker. Those businesspeople felt that the then Chancellor of the Exchequer was filling carrier bags full of £50 notes and placing them around towns, expecting people just to pick them up, so low were the safeguards for a number of the covid support schemes. I will move on to an item that has already been covered by a number of colleagues: the carers scandal. More than 136,000 people—equivalent to the population of West Bromwich—have been left with liabilities of £250 million that they are extremely worried about. The Government have quite rightly commissioned a review, but it is due to report not in the near future but next summer. I challenge the Minister: why not wait for that review’s findings before we push hard on these proposals, so that we can ensure that lessons are learned?”
“I welcome the hon. Member’s intervention; he has highlighted a serious issue, and he is spot on. One has only to reflect on the significant backlog, with 90,000 people waiting for their pension to be reviewed as part of the winter fuel allowance issues—that is a massive backlog. Access to Work, which is meant to support people with disabilities into work, is sadly another broken system. Quite often, those wishing to receive support find that job offers are withdrawn because their work package has not been pulled together in time. An academic survey has highlighted that over three years, sadly, almost 600 people committed suicide around the management of their support from the DWP. I suggest to the Secretary of State that, while one understands the aspirations of this Bill, it is far too much of a Big Brother Bill.”
“We are in a perverse situation at the moment—almost an anti-Goldilocks situation—where one falls between two stools: it is a rare disease, but it is a relatively common rare disease, and therefore does not fit within the ultra-rare criteria, so one falls between two stools. I hope the Minister will give serious consideration to the two conditions—retinitis pigmentosa and Stargardt’s—where significant numbers of people will be impacted by falling between those two stools. I reflect again on the words of Chris McCausland: give us opportunity, support and determination.”
“Twenty-five thousand people across the United Kingdom are affected by such conditions, and 75% of people registered blind are sadly unemployed, so we are condemning people who have drawn from the lottery of life; they are very much more likely to be unemployed than other people in their communities. I have discovered that the cost of such conditions is £500 million a year, in a number of different pots. That includes not just the cost of medical intervention, but the cost to society of supporting each individual. Some 95% of these hereditary conditions are untreatable, potentially until the not-too-distant future. The hon. Member for Strangford laid out the challenges for NICE.”
“That is the best way of sorting out this condition.” That is absolutely horrific, and I am heartened that, a little under 50 years later, the world has moved on. My visual impairment was diagnosed about 45 years ago. I suffer from Stargardt disease, which is one of the two significant areas in terms of inherited conditions. I was deeply upset as a young lad, mostly because I was not able to be a lorry driver; I idolised my father, and that was my aspiration. Visual impairments have a significant impact on people’s ability to fulfil their aspirations, as colleagues have highlighted, but they also impact opportunities.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dame Siobhain. I congratulate the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) on securing the debate. He rightly highlighted how inspirational it was to see Chris McCausland winning “Strictly Come Dancing” a few weeks ago. Chris McCausland shared three words at the end of that journey: “opportunity, support and determination”. Those play out well in respect of the challenges we face, which the hon. Members for Strangford and for Leicester South (Shockat Adam) unpacked extremely well. At an event last night hosted by the all-party parliamentary group on eye health and visual impairment, a gentleman with retinitis pigmentosa told us that when he was diagnosed at the age of eight, his mother was taken aside and told, “This child should be sterilised at a certain age.”
“After years of the Tories failing our rural communities, including with a dodgy and utterly shameful Australian trade deal, it is a great pity that the new Government have picked up the baton. From Orkney to the Isles of Scilly, Liberal Democrat colleagues are extremely concerned about the impact of these proposals. The report published yesterday clearly demonstrates the uncertainty about the income from the misguided family farm tax over the next two decades. In the light of this, and given that it will hit older farmers in particular and those who put food on the tables of the United Kingdom, will the Minister do the right thing and scrap this tax?”
“What consideration have Ministers given to exempting the seasonal tourism industry from the national insurance hikes set to kick in this summer? That would benefit Paignton zoo and Splashdown in the Torbay constituency.”
“The Secretary of State inherited Torbay hospital where we have had almost 700 sewage leaks, many of which have impacted clinical areas of the hospital and, sadly, that is set to continue. The hospital operates at 98% bed capacity, which only results in poorer services for residents, and that is set to continue. Will he reflect on the fact that many people in Torbay will fear they have suffered the impact of the national insurance hikes in our low-wage economy, but without seeing much of the gains for our hospital?”
“Special officers are often involved in that. People feel confident when they see a uniformed officer on the street. The public do not care whether it is a paid officer or a special officer; it is a trusted individual. The more we can drive that agenda, as I know from my residents in Torbay, the more it will be welcomed. I look forward to a strong endorsement from the Minister.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Christopher. I rise to strongly support the new clause. We have seen throughout our debates in Committee that there are opportunities for changing the weather around our employment world, whether it is around foster carers, adoption or volunteering—the subject of new clause 38, championed by my hon. Friend the Member for Woking (Mr Forster), which we will discuss later. I hope that this new clause falls on fertile ground because, as the hon. Member for Bridgwater has highlighted, volunteering across the piece has significantly reduced. We need to change the weather around the employment world and make sure that people feel able and confident to volunteer, as we know that policing is a particular challenge. I welcome the Government’s plans to invest in neighbourhood policing.”
“Centrica has found that there is an £8 billion cost to our economy for those who choose to leave the workplace due to having caring commitments. This would potentially allow a goodly number of those to remain in the workplace and continue to contribute. Although this is a probing amendment, I hope the Minister will give it some serious consideration and advise the Committee on what exploration the Government may choose to undertake of this golden opportunity for us as a society.”
“I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. The new clause is an opportunity to extend carer’s leave across the whole of Great Britain. I hope it falls on more fertile ground than the previous new clause. There are 10.6 million carers across the United Kingdom, yet only 2.5 million are actually in paid employment. That shows that, although some of those carers may be beyond or even below working age, there is still a significant untapped pool of opportunity to drive productivity in our economy. The economic growth figures released this morning show that the handbrake is sadly still on in our economy due to the appalling state that the Labour party inherited from the previous Government, so we need to think about how to allow people to work in our economy as strongly as possible.”
“(9) The Secretary of State may make a regulation or regulations authorising any organisation as a Professional Body for the purposes of this section.’” —(Steve Darling.) This new clause would expand the right to be accompanied by a certified companion at disciplinary and grievance hearings . Brought up, and read the First time.”
“I thank the Minister for her encouraging words. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion. Clause, by leave, withdrawn. New Clause 37 Right to be accompanied “(1) Section 10 of the Employment Relations Act 1999 (right to be accompanied) is amended as follows. (2) In subsection (3), after paragraph (b) insert— ‘(ba) a person who has been reasonably certified in writing by a Professional Body as having experience of, or as having received training in, acting as a worker’s companion at disciplinary or grievance hearings, or’ (3) After subsection (7) insert— ‘(8) In this section, “Professional Body” means any organisation, which is authorised by a regulation made by the Secretary of State pursuant to subsection (9).”
“I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. The new clause would ensure that workers in the early stages of an employment dispute, such as a disciplinary or grievance hearing, can be supported by those who are qualified, rather than just by trade union representatives or similar colleagues. It would allow for matters to be brought to a head much sooner and prevent cases from necessarily going to tribunal, which clogs up the tribunal system. I hope the Government will take the new clause in the positive sprit in which we tabled it.”
“(4) The Secretary of State must, within three months of the consultation closing, publish and lay before Parliament the Secretary of State’s response to the consultation.”— (Steve Darling.) This new clause calls for a consultation on allowing employees at companies of over 250 people the opportunity to take time off in order to undertake voluntary work. Brought up, and read the First time .”
“Although I am disappointed that the new clause has fallen on stony ground, it was only a probing amendment, so I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion. Clause, by leave, withdrawn. New Clause 38 Time off for volunteering: consultation “(1) The Secretary of State must consult on the introduction of a requirement for employers with more than 250 employees to grant employees time off for volunteering. (2) The consultation must consider, amongst other things, the following matters— (a) the amount of time off an employer must grant; (b) when the time off may be taken; (c) any conditions to which the granting of time off may be subject; and (d) the definition of ‘volunteering’. (3) The consultation must be conducted within one year of this Act being passed.”
“I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. The new clause relates to volunteering and giving leave to volunteers. It would require a consultation, so I hope that the Government will grasp it with both hands. It feels like their modus operandi on the Bill is for a vast majority of it to go out to further consultation, so what harm would there be in another small consultation on volunteering?”
“I draw the Committee’s attention to the fact that we are looking at employers that employ over 250 individuals, so the new clause would far from impact smaller businesses. I have grave concerns that the Government believe they have all the time in the world and expect that there will be a second glorious term for the Labour party, come hell or high water. The jury is out on whether a second term for Keir will appear. One is better driving the agenda forward while one has the helm than to hope for the helm when it turns the next headland. I encourage the Government to reflect on their proposals and grasp the opportunity to consult on this volunteering opportunity. Question put, That the clause be read a Second time.”
“I am delighted that the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire has had a road to Damascus moment on the need for further consultation on the Bill. I am delighted that the Conservatives believe that consultation is a good thing, unlike my Conservative council colleagues in Torbay. I look forward to the Minister looking kindly on the new clause, which shows that the Conservatives believe in consultation. I would ask that he please grasp this opportunity.”
“Friend the Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) for her help with the new clause. Earlier this week, she led a worthwhile debate on this issue, and I acknowledge the positive feedback the Minister in that debate gave on the proposals. I look forward to hearing from this Minister how the Government could take the proposals in this probing amendment forward.”
“I encourage colleagues to step back slightly and to reflect on the challenges in social care, and particularly children’s social care, and on the heavy costs—I am sure colleagues are only too aware of them—to local authorities, which have a responsibility for children’s services. For those kids who need support, the best people are foster carers or those who adopt. When there is a lack of such people—when there is not that capacity—kids might have to be picked up by the private sector, and hard-pressed local authorities often have to pay through the nose for that. The new clause is about changing the weather again around support for youngsters in need. By extending statutory adoption pay to those who are self-employed or contractors, we would enhance the pool of those who can participate. I thank my hon.”
“I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. The new clause would extend statutory adoption pay to those who are self-employed or contractors. I must declare something of an interest, although I do not formally need to, because I am adopted myself, and this issue is extremely close to my heart. When I was leader of the Torbay unitary council, we went from “failing” to “good” for our children’s services within two years. That is probably the biggest achievement of my life. Again, it was something I was driven on because I am adopted. In the ’70s, I was very fortunate to be adopted by Eric and Penny. Eric was not a toolmaker, but he was a lorry driver, and would potentially have benefited had there been an opportunity such as the one I have outlined in the new clause.”
“(4) The report must make recommendations to the Secretary of State about how the Secretary of State can support workers on temporary visas in the assertion of their employment rights. (5) The report must be completed within three months of being commissioned. (6) The Secretary of State must, as soon as is practicable after receipt of the report, publish the report and lay it before both Houses of Parliament. (7) The Secretary of State must, within three months of receipt of the report— (a) respond to the recommendations in the report, and (b) publish the response and lay it before both Houses of Parliament.”— (Chris Law.) Brought up, and read the First time .”
“I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion. Clause, by leave, withdrawn. New Clause 51 Access to employment rights: workers on temporary visas “(1) The Secretary of State must, within six months of this Act being passed, commission an independent report on the extent to which workers on temporary visas are able to assert their rights under employment law. (2) In commissioning the report, the Secretary of State must arrange for the report to meet the requirements set out in subsections (2) to (4). (3) The report must examine the extent to which workers on temporary visas feel unable to assert their employment rights because they are dependent on their employers to sponsor their visas.”
“Throughout our debates, Conservative colleagues have been critical of the Government for not having an oven-ready Bill and emphasising the need for further consultation. I have sympathy with that, as does my hon. Friend the Member for Chippenham. However, the last Conservative amendment that we will consider in Committee would require consultation, so I wonder whether the Labour party’s proposals have worn the Conservatives down into believing in it. I am delighted by that; perhaps they have changed their minds on the rest of the Bill, too. I hope that the Minister will grasp the opportunity with both hands.”
“I echo the thanks to you, Sir Christopher, and the other Chairs who have ably chaired the Committee. I thank the Clerks, Doorkeepers and Hansard , who have reported throughout. I thank colleagues for the good-natured way that the Bill has been debated. This is my first Bill Committee, and I look forward with gusto to my next one. I also thank Laura Green, who has ably supported me throughout the Committee.”
“In her statement on WASPI women, the Secretary of State talked of the fact that the decision was made by a previous Government, and that that was what WASPI women were really concerned about. The reality is—I hope the Minister will address this; other colleagues have raised it—that the report was about the communications and the impact on women. It was not about a previous decision. So that is what the Government should be addressing.”
“I congratulate the right hon. Member South Holland and the Deepings (Sir John Hayes) on securing this really important debate. When one reflects on there being more WASPI women in the United Kingdom than the population of Wales, it demonstrates how this is a massive issue for this United Kingdom. In my constituency there are 6,930 WASPI women, and there are a similar number in Newton Abbot over the border. There are 7,400 in South Devon. Yet in the Prime Minister’s constituency there are fewer than 4,000. I smell a rat. I will give credit to those Labour Members who are here but, just as with the winter fuel payments, we can see that sadly certain members of the Government are choosing, because of the arithmetic around pensioners, to make decisions of an ill-advised nature like this.”
“Yes, and my hon. Friend also reminds me of Marilyn in my constituency, who suffered a significant illness and would have benefited from compensation—as would Pam, who cared for two terminally-ill family members. I totally agree with my hon. Friend. What a baptism of fire this is for the new Minister, but we need him to address the real issues. He must not be wilfully blind to the recommendations of the ombudsman. I would also welcome an explanation why an answer to my named day question, which was named yesterday, remains outstanding.”
“That will drive a positive culture of engagement and support for our young people throughout the United Kingdom. I hope that the Minister will look kindly on the proposals from my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove.”
“It looks at driving adoption through those with faith and using churches to support those with faith. There is a significant need out there. Even for purely cynical reasons, I encourage the Minister to reflect on how important it is to support self-employed people so that we enhance the pool, as one only needs to look at the cost of social care to councils up and down the country when a foster placement or adoption—as quite often fostering does turn into adoption—cannot be found. The private sector is sadly making significant profits from that. Although I am pleased that the Government are making progress in those areas, the best way to make progress is to look at places such as Leeds, which I visited once upon a time, and now also Torbay, becoming UNICEF child friendly communities.”
“The reality is that it was a really loving family. Of course, as a self-employed haulage contractor, Eric would have benefited from the proposals we heard about from my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove. The world of adoption and fostering has changed massively. The babe in arms is often not what one gets through adoption or fostering, but children who have had complex, challenging lives and will try to test parents. I have a good friend in Torquay whose child tests him regularly. The child believes that daddy is a monster because his previous daddy was, sadly, a monster to him. It is really challenging for that adoptive family to face that. I also welcome the comments about Home for Good, which is a service that I brought in to Torbay when I was leader of the local authority.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairwomanship, Ms Furniss. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) on securing this really important debate. I highlight to the Minister the adoption support fund; I would be grateful if he could talk about any long-term plans the Government may have to bake that into Government proposals, because currently it is a hand-to-mouth existence. A week after I got elected, a resident raised with me their concerns. I wrote to the Minister on this issue some months ago, but I wonder whether the Government’s thoughts on the matter have changed. I speak as somebody who was myself adopted into a very loving family in the 1970s, with Eric and Penny. Eric was self-employed. He was not a toolmaker; he was a lorry driver—a haulage contractor if we were trying to be social climbers.”
“I am sure that my residents would be horrified that these proposals are seeing the light of day in the Committee. I am shocked that Conservative Members are putting them out there. I expected us just to pass on by them, but I want to make sure that it is on the record that the Liberal Democrats do not support these rather peculiar proposals, which have only seen the light of day thanks to a Conservative Member.”
“As for the bigger picture of where NDAs have been used at an industrial level, one only has to look at Harrods and the stories that have come up around sexual harassment. Part of the Bill is about trying to tackle harassment and sexual harassment. New clause 4 strengthens the Bill by making sure that NDAs are exempt from this area. As I alluded to with Mohamed al-Fayed, these were used at an industrial level when people were at a very confused stage, and were very vulnerable. I ask the Minister to give serious consideration to incorporating the new clause in our proposals. This is a golden opportunity. We have already seen Ireland take this step. I encourage the Minister to embrace new clause 4.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. When I became an MP, I never thought that I would be standing before a Committee talking about clause 4. However, this is not about public ownership but is actually about non-disclosure agreements. Non-disclosure agreements were originally about keeping trade secrets but, over recent years, they have proliferated and, sadly, have kept shameful secrets away from the public eye in situations where light needs to be cast to make sure that things are tackled. Sadly, I personally have been signed up to one of these agreements. I reassure the Committee that it was not a business in my constituency, but another one where I suffered a level of discrimination, and I had to sign an NDA. That did not allow me to cry foul on a certain issue that myself and my family suffered.”
“(3) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b), "dependent contractor" means an individual who— (a) is appointed to perform work or services for an employer or contractor of services, (b) is paid according to tasks performed rather than hours of work, (c) depends partially or primarily on the employer or contractor of services for employment and income, (d) is not required to perform services for the employer or contractor of services, and (e) is not specified as an employee or worker within a statement of employment particulars or a contract of employment.” —(Nick Timothy.) This new clause would prohibit the use of “substitution clauses”, which allow companies to permit their suppliers – including some delivery couriers – to appoint a substitute to supply services on their behalf. Brought up, and read the First time.”
“(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a), “contractor of services” means an organisation that— (a) enters into an agreement, whether a contract or otherwise, with a supplier or dependent contractor to supply services, (b) does not require the supplier or dependent contractor to supply services, and (c) pays the supplier or dependent contractor according to tasks performed rather than hours of work.”
“I welcome the Minister’s reassurances and I beg to ask leave to withdraw the clause. Clause, by leave, withdrawn. New Clause 12 Substitution Clauses “(1) Any agreement, whether a contract or otherwise, between— (a) an employer or a contractor of services, and (b) an employee, worker or dependent contractor must not include provision for the employee, worker or dependent contractor to appoint a substitute to supply services or undertake work on their behalf.”
“One only has to reflect on social care and children’s social care, and the significant cost where there is family breakdown, to see that the more the state can do to support families, the better. I would like to move on to kinship care, where there are real opportunities. I know that the all-party parliamentary group on kinship care has discussed these measures and sees this as a real opportunity for the Government to move positively to support kinship carers.”
“I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) for assisting in tabling the new clause, which is about ensuring that we put the family at the heart of our society by doubling the rates of maternity, paternity, adoption, shared paternity and parental bereavement pay, which are really important when people are on leave. Sadly, a lot of men choose not to take up these opportunities. We will discuss later our proposals on kinship care and fostering, and this is all part of that bigger picture. By supporting families with these four proposals in the three key areas that they cover, we are putting family at the heart of our world.”
“That is fine. As I said, the new clause is about supporting the family, and I hope the Minister will give serious consideration to our proposals. Apologies for misunderstanding, Ms Vaz.”
“(2) The cases or circumstances mentioned in subsection (1)(h) include— (a) more than one child being subject to the same eligible kinship care arrangement, and (b) a child being subject to an eligible kinship care arrangement on two or more separate occasions, and regulations may, in particular, make special provision regarding the applicability and extent of the entitlement to leave in such circumstances. (3) The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision for some or all of a period of kinship care leave to be paid.’”— (Steve Darling.) This new clause sets out an entitlement to kinship care leave. Brought up, and read the First time.”
“80EI Chapter 5: supplemental (1) Regulations under section 80EF may— (a) make provision about notices to be given, evidence to be produced and other procedures to be followed by employees and employers; (b) make provision requiring employers or employees to keep records; (c) make provision for the consequences of failure to give notices, to produce evidence, to keep records or to comply with other procedural requirements; (d) make provision for the consequences of failure to act in accordance with a notice given by virtue of paragraph (a); (e) make special provision for cases where an employee has a right which corresponds to a right under section 80EF and which arises under the person’s contract of employment or otherwise; (f) make provision modifying the effect of Chapter 2 of Part 14 (calculation of a week’s pay) in relation to an employee who is or has been absent from work on leave under section 80EF; (g) make provision applying, modifying or excluding an enactment, in such circumstances as may be specified and subject to any conditions which may be specified, in relation to a person entitled to take leave under section 80EF; (h) make different provision for different cases or circumstances; (i) make consequential provision.”
“(5) Regulations under section 80EF may make provision, in relation to the right to return mentioned in subsection (1)(c), about— (a) seniority, pension rights and similar rights; (b) terms and conditions of employment on return. 80EH Special cases (1) Regulations under section 80EF may make provision about— (a) redundancy during or after a period of leave under that section, or (b) dismissal (other than by reason of redundancy) during a period of leave under that section. (2) Provision by virtue of subsection (1) may include— (a) provision requiring an employer to offer alternative employment; (b) provision for the consequences of failure to comply with the regulations (which may include provision for a dismissal to be treated as unfair for the purposes of Part 10).”
“(2) The reference in subsection (1)(c) to absence on leave under section 80EF includes, where appropriate, a reference to a continuous period of absence attributable partly to leave under that section and partly to any one or more of the following— (a) maternity leave, (b) paternity leave, (c) adoption leave, (d) shared parental leave, (e) parental leave, (f) parental bereavement leave. (3) In subsection (1)(a), “terms and conditions of employment”— (a) includes matters connected with an employee’s employment whether or not they arise under the contract of employment, but (b) does not include terms and conditions about remuneration. (4) Regulations under section 80EF may specify matters which are, or are not, to be treated as remuneration for the purposes of this section.”
“80EG Rights during and after kinship care leave (1) Regulations under section 80EF must provide— (a) that an employee who is absent on leave under that section is entitled, for such purposes and to such extent as the regulations may prescribe, to the benefit of the terms and conditions of employment which would have applied but for the absence, (b) that an employee who is absent on leave under that section is bound, for such purposes and to such extent as the regulations may prescribe, by obligations arising under those terms and conditions (except in so far as they are inconsistent with subsection (1) of that section), and (c) that an employee who is absent on leave under that section is entitled to return from leave to a job of a kind prescribed by regulations, subject to section 80EH.”