Alison Griffiths
MP for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton · Conservative · United Kingdom
“The Leader of the House will know that I hold him in great respect, but over the two years for which I have been in this place, I have seen a pattern of behaviour in the final week before the recess—business is announced at the very last second, particularly when it concerns local government reorganisation—and we are seeing an increase in…”
“Last week, I met Paul Greenwood of the Selsey coastguard, one of a team of CROs who cover my constituency. The Court ruled that coastguards can be workers when paid for duties; it did not order Ministers to scrap payments.”
“Local businesses in Bognor Regis and Littlehampton tell me that they are not recruiting due to the additional cost and uncertainty created by the Employment Rights Act 2025. Has the Secretary of State assessed the impact of Government policy? Employment rights count for little if people cannot get a job in the first place.”
“T10. My constituent, Joanna, has worked tirelessly to highlight the lack of a dedicated selective mutism pathway in West Sussex. Children are being left without the support they need, so will the Secretary of State commit to ensuring that this gap in provision is finally addressed?”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd, and I join other Members in thanking you for chairing this debate. Also, if your Wikipedia page is correct, may I be the first to wish you a very happy birthday for Saturday? I am grateful to the hon.”
“The question is whether the Government are prepared to deliver serious enforcement, potentially with the support of new technologies and businesses such as Oritain; or whether they will simply pile fresh cost and complexity on to responsible British businesses while the worst offenders continue to evade accountability.”
The complete record
Every one of 325 lines we hold for Alison Griffiths, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 7.
“Labour Members’ refusal to support the amendment reveals their true priority: protecting their own financial interests, rather than standing up for transparency and workers’ rights.”
“Labour has hypocritically opposed this measure, despite previously supporting similar provisions—during the passage of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, it called automatic renewals a “subscription trap”. It seems that Labour only cares about consumer choice when it does not impact on its own funding. The Government claim that removing this requirement is about cutting red tape for unions, while adding lots of other red tape. In reality, the change strips away individual choice and accountability. As several of my hon. Friends have said, trade unions donated over £31 million to the Labour party between 2019 and 2024. Workers should have the right to make an informed choice each year about whether they want to contribute to political causes, rather than being automatically signed up without clear consent.”
“Our new clause 90 would ensure that any regulations made under part 4 of the Bill must consider economic growth and international competitiveness, yet Labour has refused to accept even that common-sense measure, proving that its approach is anti-growth at its core. Prioritising the interests of trade unions over economic stability makes it harder for businesses to hire, grow and compete. It is no surprise that trade unions have declared victory, as the Government have effectively handed them a blank cheque at the expense of businesses and workers alike. Our amendments seek to restore fairness and balance. Amendment 292 would require trade unions to notify their members annually of their right to opt out of political fund contributions, ensuring basic transparency and fairness.”
“As has been said many times yesterday and today, this Bill is deeply flawed. The Government have ignored the serious concerns raised by business leaders and independent economists. The Federation of Small Businesses has warned that these rushed changes will lead to job losses and deter employers from hiring. The Institute of Directors found that 57% of business leaders will be less likely to hire because of the additional red tape imposed by the Bill, and incredibly, the Government’s own impact assessments fail to account for the Bill’s real economic consequences, simply dismissing them as too hard to calculate.”
“I think the hon. Lady possibly misrepresents the intent of Opposition Members. We are not anti-trade union; we are anti the drafting of this Bill. I think it is important to make a clear distinction between the two.”
“Would the Minister be kind enough to name one of those businesses on the press release? [ Interruption. ] He had better look at the press release just to check.”
“Maybe I am pre-empting the answer the hon. Member was going to give, but what exactly are the measures in this Bill and the amendments—the magic potion—that will improve productivity?”
“On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Would the right hon. Lady be kind enough to declare her union interests from her entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests? I believe there is a £10,000 donation—”
“One of the most damaging provisions is the abolition of the two-year qualifying period for unfair dismissal under clause 21, allowing employees to question failing probation or a trial period in their contract. From day one, employees will be able to take their employers to court. Our Conservative amendment 287 seeks to remove this clause entirely because it will disincentivise businesses from hiring, as they will know they cannot let an employee go even if it is not working out. The Government expect entrepreneurs and businesses to take the risks necessary to drive growth. Indeed, that is what they expect and want to do, but clause 21 adds unnecessary risk and is likely to be to the detriment of jobseekers. It will further marginalise those who would already be considered risky candidates.”
“In my coastal constituency of Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, I have spoken to numerous businesses, many of which are impacted by the vagaries of seasonal trade and inclement British weather. A consistent message emerges, from businesses at least, if not from the trade unions: how can a Government who claim their primary focus is delivering growth be so tin-eared to the views and needs of the very businesses, entrepreneurs and employees who are fundamental to creating that growth? The Government have boasted of delivering this Bill, which is telephone directory-thick, within their first 100 days. This is not sensible governance—indeed, the telephone directory of amendments is testament to that.”
“In the last 30 years, I have worked in businesses of every size in numerous sectors, from consumer goods to cyber-security and insurance to cloud infrastructure. I may not be a lawyer, but I feel well qualified to comment on this Bill. The Government need not take it from me; if only they had listened to the businesses I have spoken to. I am vice-chair of the Business and Trade Committee, and my fellow Committee members and I have spent many hours listening to evidence on the Bill from employers, trade unions and industry groups. Our Select Committee toured the country at the end of last year, collating evidence and hearing from a wide range of sectors.”
“The hon. Member knows that I will always support fair process, but the point I was making is that this clause will make it more difficult for employers to take on prison leavers, care leavers, candidates with a non-traditional CV, career changers, and young people who are just looking for that first rung on the jobs ladder. Those people will not be given a fair chance, as employers will see them as too risky, and I hope she will see the risks inherent in the clause.”
“Key factors such as reduced hiring due to zero-hours contract limits, increased strike activity, and greater liability from employment tribunal claims, as outlined in the Bill, are dismissed as “too hard to calculate”, making those assessments highly questionable. That is why I support new clause 86, which would require an impact assessment to be carried out for the measures in clause 21. We tabled new clause 83 and amendment 283 to ensure that the Bill’s provisions on zero-hours workers would not come into force until a comprehensive review of the Bill’s impact on employment tribunals had been assessed and approved by Parliament. Clause 18 places a new duty on employers to prevent third-party harassment. Protecting employees is unquestionably important, and no one should doubt the sincerity of Conservative Members about that.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for making that powerful point. Anyone who has ever looked for a job—Members in the Chamber will probably count themselves as being among the better qualified of the population looking for work—will know that most employers, of any kind, do not want to take a risk. If we make it even harder for them to employ people who are a risk at base point, it will not serve their purposes. The Government’s own impact assessments suggest that the direct effects of the Bill will cost UK businesses an additional £5 billion annually. That estimate most likely understates the true cost, as it accounts only for administrative burdens while ignoring the broader impact on hiring, business costs and strike action.”
“Of course businesses and business owners should embed good working practices and guidelines to combat this abhorrent behaviour, but it is impractical and undesirable for the Government to legislate nationally for every sector and business.”
“I refer the hon. Member first to my earlier comments about ensuring that we do not disincentivise employers, and secondly to the flexibility that is needed for both employers and employees. Amendment 288 seeks to exclude hospitality providers and sports venues from those provisions, recognising the impracticality of holding employers accountable for every interaction in those environments. It is simply not practical to think that every publican, landlord and bar owner—small business owners—would be liable for any harassment that happens towards their employees in a pub, bar, nightclub or festival. Amendment 285 would require an impact assessment to be carried out on clause 18.”
“I am sorry; I think we have made enough progress. I urge the Government to reconsider, to withdraw the Bill and to work with businesses, unions and workers to create a fair and balanced approach that prioritises the political interests—”
“I know that the hon. Lady has not been in the Chamber for most of the debate, so she will have missed many of the discussions where my hon. Friends have explained the nuance of our position on this, which relates to the law of unintended consequences where publicans and nightclub owners could be responsible for policing the words of their customers. That is clearly not a tenable situation, but I will repeat the words of all of my colleagues on this side of the House: sexual harassment is abhorrent. We do not condone it in any shape or form, and I ask her to withdraw the insinuation that anyone on this side of the House has any truck with such behaviour.”
“In government, we took action to support women at work, ensuring that over 2 million more women entered paid employment between 2010 and 2023, boosting our economy and securing financial independence for many. We launched the women’s health strategy, ensuring better healthcare outcomes for women, and we restored sex-specific language to the NHS, to protect female-only medical care. We introduced 30 hours of free childcare per week for working parents, easing the burden on families and supporting mothers who want to return to work. However, there is still more work to do, and there always will be. As Conservatives, we will always fight to ensure that every woman, no matter her background, can reach her full potential.”
“However, like many, my journey actually started far earlier, as I spent far too many years thinking of running without ever putting my name forward or making it known that this was what I might want to do. As Conservatives, we champion equal opportunities for everyone across the United Kingdom, ensuring that individuals, regardless of their sex, race or background, can achieve their full potential. We are the only political party to have elected a female Prime Minister, not once, not twice, but three times. We made history with Margaret Thatcher’s election in 1979, and we continue to make history today under the leadership of my right hon. Friend the Member for North West Essex (Mrs Badenoch), our fourth female leader.”
“As the 649th woman to be elected to this House, it is an honour to contribute to this important debate. I thank the hon. Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler) for her contribution and for securing the debate. I am struck that, with 650 Members of this House, we are only now in this Parliament reaching the threshold where the number of female MPs matches that. I am particularly proud to be one of only eight newly elected Conservative female MPs, standing alongside 18 distinguished incumbent Conservative female colleagues who have set the bar high. Their dedication, resilience and leadership continues to inspire me and countless women across the country. My journey to this place has been a long one, and it began 15 years ago when I first joined the Conservative candidates list.”
“More than 200 leading hospitality and retail firms have warned that Government policies will force them to cut jobs and scale back investment. Businesses face ever-changing regulations, increasing tax burdens and a Government who appear out of touch with their needs.”
“The Government claim to support growth, yet their policies are driving firms into significant financial distress, with more than 632,000 businesses now at risk. That is a 32% increase in just one year. The irony is that Britain remains an attractive place to invest. The PwC chief executive officer survey ranked us second only to the United States, but, alas, that survey took place before the Budget. A strong economy depends on strong business confidence, yet confidence in this Government’s economic management has been shattered. Businesses no longer trust that the Government have a clear strategy for growth, which the right hon. Member for Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North has already mentioned. The numbers speak for themselves.”
“The fastest rate of job losses since 2008. Instead of supporting enterprise, this Government are actively making it harder for businesses to thrive. The budget of the Department for Business and Trade is being slashed by 6%, which means less support at a time when firms need it most. The so-called Employment Rights Bill—or, perhaps, the unemployment rights Bill—will cost the Government £1 billion, while its fair work agency could add an astonishing £6.3 billion burden. Those costs will inevitably be passed on to businesses and workers alike. This is not just about numbers on a spreadsheet: these policies have real consequences—workers losing their jobs, families struggling with rising costs and businesses already being forced to shut their doors.”
“I will do my very best to reduce the comments I was going to make, Madam Deputy Speaker. I pay tribute to the Chair of the Business and Trade Committee, the right hon. Member for Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North (Liam Byrne), for his very thoughtful comments, which reflect the considerations of our Committee. Business is the lifeblood of our economy. It creates jobs, funds our public services and drives the success of our country, yet under this Government, businesses face an onslaught of damaging policies that threaten growth, confidence and livelihoods. The Government’s £25 billion national insurance jobs tax is making it more expensive to hire workers, their family business tax punishes those who drive local economies and their 1970s-style employment laws are stifling business growth. The result?”
“Business owners, entrepreneurs and workers do not need more red tape and tax hikes. They need a Government who understand that growth does not come from the state dictating terms, but from unleashing the potential of enterprise, and they need policies that encourage investment, not deter it. Businesses in my constituency of Bognor Regis and Littlehampton are already struggling with the global impacts on their business environment, let alone the challenges at home. The day one rights given by the Employment Rights Bill give the presumption of innocence to workers and the presumption of malevolent intent to employers. The reality is that neither is correct. The Government need to understand that when business thrives, Britain thrives. That is the only way in which we will restore confidence, protect jobs, and secure a growing economy.”
“My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The time that we have next week to consider this number of amendments seems wholly inadequate. Businesses are facing ever-changing regulations and increasing tax burdens. Many have said that they were misled—duped—into believing that this Government were pro-business when their actions tell a very different story. Analysis by the Nuffield Trust has found that if the fair work agency were to increase social care workers’ wages to match the NHS Agenda for Change band 3, the cost could be as high as £6.3 billion, including an increase to the real living wage costing £2.2 billion. That is another measure in the out-of-touch Employment Rights Bill. It is as if the 32 members of the Cabinet have a very limited understanding of the private sector and of business as a whole.”
“I want to follow up on my hon. Friend’s comment on international trade. Does he agree that the Government currently lack the capability to support businesses appropriately in international trade?”
“Will the Leader of the House commit to granting a debate to consider a sustainable future funding model for schools with SEND provision?”
“In West Sussex, the number of education, health and care plans has risen from 3,362 in 2015 to 7,684 in 2024—a 228% increase. With schools increasingly stretched, there is an inevitable cost to children with and without special needs. I have recently met special needs co-ordinator leads from two excellent schools in my constituency, Bishop Tufnell and Edward Bryant, to discuss the funding and staffing challenges that they face. They are not specialist support centres, and local specialist schools are oversubscribed. They are reliant on local charities such as the Rotary Club, which works tirelessly to raise money to improve their facilities, but it cannot assist with the impact of the national insurance contributions rise on staffing levels and staff retention, or with temporary contracts and burnout.”
“Madam Deputy Speaker, I am sure you will have noticed that the Secretary of State did not answer one question, which was whether he would clarify that the final assembly and systems integration will take place in Belfast, rather than in the Navantia shipyards in Spain.”
“The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, introduced to the House yesterday, sets out to unpick every aspect of the school reforms that have led English school children to rocket up the international league tables in English, maths and science. How can the Government possibly say that they want to break down barriers to opportunity when they are reversing reforms that have transformed the lives of the most disadvantaged students?”
“In Bognor Regis and Littlehampton more than 23,000 people have lost their winter fuel allowance—more than 90% of former claimants. Does the Secretary of State think that it is fair that someone who has paid tax all their working life will now be taxed on their state pension as well as losing their winter fuel allowance?”
“As such, will the Government amend the Bill to ensure the delivery of measures set out in those reports and provide the necessary enforcement powers? My constituents, and the public, are weary of empty promises on water quality. It is essential that this Bill mandates that water companies deliver measurable improvements, not meaningless promises.”
“This is not a mild inconvenience for a few sea swimmers—although I count myself among their number—but something that affects our entire area. As such, the Water (Special Measures) Bill is a timely opportunity to accelerate essential environmental improvements. I am concerned, though, that the Government are not sufficiently grasping this opportunity. The absence of robust enforcement measures for proposed reporting is particularly concerning. Clause 2 requires water companies to “prepare and publish” annual pollution incident reduction plans. That is a step towards greater accountability, which I welcome. However, the clause lacks enforceability and thus any purpose, as it mandates only the preparation and publication of those plans, not their implementation.”
“This issue is not simply about water companies and sewage, but the Bill falls into the trap of focusing solely on them. In Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, the situation is compounded by recurring flooding, which affects businesses and homes from Shripney Road and Durban Road on the boundary of the constituency to Fish Lane and Rope Walk in Aldwick and Littlehampton respectively. That flooding is exacerbated by extensive house building on our flood plain and by the local topography. Without infrastructure improvements and an integrated action plan, sewage outflows will continue to blight our coastline. Combined, these issues are causing a decline in our tourism industry, devastation to homes and businesses, increases in insurance premiums and significant financial losses for affected local businesses and employers.”
“It is an honour to speak on such an important issue, one that affects my coastal constituency daily. Sewage discharges, water quality, and the related issue of flooding are among the most pressing concerns for my constituents. The Environment Agency’s bathing water classifications, updated on 26 November, reveal alarming declines in water quality. Bognor Regis East’s classification dropped from good to sufficient, while Aldwick’s remained poor for the third consecutive year. Abuses of our water system are having a serious impact on public health, our vital tourism industry and our natural environment. However, by focusing only on water companies and sewage, this Bill delivers an oversimplified approach. There is an urgent need for holistic and comprehensive solutions to protect our waters, prevent flooding and tackle sewage discharges.”
“I thank the hon. Lady for clarifying that point. Letting the Bill pass without that amendment would have been a disservice, so I am delighted to hear it.”
“By supporting a disabled employee’s career progression—which can be even more challenging with geographic and access constraints—they can help to deliver the autonomy and flexibility that works for both employer and employee, ultimately ensuring that disabled employees have access to a career, not just a job.”
“For those with additional access needs, what is needed can be hard to define at the outset, without prior knowledge of exactly what the job entails. People’s needs can vary widely, depending on the disability. There is an opportunity to create transformational change quickly. If we increase the prevalence of access co-ordinators, they can provide an interface between businesses, line managers and disabled employees and jobseekers. Their role is to implement best practice from other organisations and identify the help that is available.”
“While there is a lot of emphasis on getting disabled people into further education, that same support is not prevalent beyond university. Many disabled people want to work, contribute to society, pay taxes and have a work routine that makes them feel valued. Time should be taken to understand not only what is possible but what an individual aspires to achieve. Managing a disability can feel like a full-time job in itself. To enable disabled people to contribute to our society through work, we need systems that offer flexibility, and that safeguard benefits and allow individuals to take on work without jeopardising their health or their financial stability. A manager saying, “Tell me what you need and I will do it” is a great start, but the reality is that in a new job there are so many unknowns.”
“My niece was born with spinal muscular atrophy, giving me a window into the experience of more acute disability in the workplace and the challenges she faces on a daily basis. In 1995 it was a Conservative Government, under John Major, who delivered the first UK legislation to protect disabled people from various forms of discrimination. In the last 30 years, new protections have improved the work situation of disabled people. A good example is the Access to Work programme, which, if implemented and understood properly by business, can remove some of the barriers that employers may perceive in taking on a disabled employee. Many disabled people are eager to work and contribute, but face significant barriers in understanding which opportunities are truly accessible to them.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark, and to contribute to this important debate, which I thank the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing. She made many important points, some of which I will also mention. As has already been said, the theme of this year’s UK Disability History Month is disability, livelihood and employment. My interest in this issue has its foundations in losing 70% of my hearing from bacterial meningitis when I was aged 19. Ironically, being the Member of Parliament for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton is the first job in which I feel my disability has been a positive advantage, giving me a platform from which to advocate for others.”
“Businesses in Bognor Regis and Littlehampton are at the sharp end of the Bank of England’s business confidence survey. Unlike the Chancellor and the Secretary of State, they know that her Budget and the Employment Rights Bill are a recipe for higher prices, higher inflation, higher interest rates and higher unemployment. Is that the growth that the Secretary of State had in mind?”
“Research shows that that will cause a 140% increase in rates, with the average UK restaurant seeing costs rise from £5,051 to £12,122l, a £7,000 hike that could force closures. Those changes come on top of existing pressures caused by covid, the war in Ukraine and energy price inflation. A local business has shared the impact of that on its profit and loss: its freight costs are up 126% since 2019, raw materials are rising by 6%, warehouse rents were up 24% last year, with another 6% rise in 2024, and utility costs were up 58% in 2023. Businesses already stretched thin cannot absorb the additional costs that the Budget imposes. Piling on national insurance contributions and higher business rates alongside steep minimum wage hikes, without supporting productivity and growth, is a recipe for disaster.”
“I commend the hon. Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) for her maiden speech. She and I share many interests, not least in technology, promoting women in technology and accessibility. I wish her well. Turning to the matter in hand, the measures in the Bill are in addition to others announced as part of a Budget that has caused serious concern for businesses in Bognor Regis and Littlehampton. Re-energising our high streets has been one of my key priorities, but the Budget pushes us further from that goal. The Government plan to increase employers’ national insurance contributions from 13.8% to 15% and to lower the threshold from £9,100 to £5,000. That will force businesses to pay more sooner. Meanwhile, business rates relief for retail and hospitality will drop from 75% to 40%.”
“Our high streets, SMEs and family businesses need support, not policies that make survival—let alone growth—harder. I urge the Government to rethink their approach or take steps to mitigate the impact on our communities.”
“My right hon. Friend makes a valid and important point. I have restricted my comments to the Finance Bill and the Budget, but the Employment Rights Bill places significant additional pressures on businesses, and I thank him for that point. For towns such as Bognor Regis and Littlehampton where businesses already operate on razor-thin margins, these measures could be existential. Highly regarded local employers, including family-run small and medium-sized enterprises such as Temple Spa and Meridian Medical, are gravely concerned. Entrepreneurs like those take immense personal and financial risks to create jobs and support our economy, yet this Government treat them as an endless revenue source instead of engines for growth. The Chancellor’s projections may work on paper, but they are disconnected from reality.”
“The Social Security Advisory Committee estimated that more than 70% of people with a disability will lose their winter fuel payment this year. Does the hon. Lady really think that cutting benefits from this vulnerable group of pensioners is the right thing to do?”
“In West Sussex, EHCP requests are running at over 120 per month. Will the Secretary of State’s SEND reforms include measures that could make it harder to get an EHCP, potentially making it harder for children to qualify for special school places?”