Sarah Gibson
MP for Chippenham · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom
“When repair and maintenance services are not functioning as they should, the consequences for the patient are immediate and profound. Something that particularly troubled me was a comment made to me by some patients who were no longer bothering to complain because they had become accustomed to the delays and difficulties.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The issue is not whether one area matters more than another; it is whether local circumstances are properly understood. District nurses covering rural Wiltshire face challenges very different from those of nurses working in more urban areas, yet many of the staff who contacted me feel that those differences have not been properly recognis…”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“A physiotherapist working in Chippenham hospital described concerns about the introduction of the new referral system. According to the information, staff noticed that referrals were dropping dramatically under the new system.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend and will come to that point. The biggest concern for staff is patient safety, which they have clearly highlighted to us.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When everyone is involved in the oversight, it can be remarkably difficult to identify who is responsible for acting when problems emerge. There is a risk that organisations end up marking their own homework, with concerns passing between governance groups rather than being subject to genuinely independent challenge.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Patients and staff working across the community-based healthcare system are raising the same issues with me: delays, difficulty navigating the referral pathway and concerns about whether requests always reach the right clinical team.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
Every one of 250 lines we hold for Sarah Gibson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 5.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“Does the Minister not agree that, at the same time, he reduced the threshold at which that measure steps in, such that any allowances mean that it is counterproductive to most small businesses? There is an increase in NICs once they pay it, and the fact that they pay it on a £5,000 rather than £10,000 employment means that lots of part-time workers are suddenly liable for employment contributions when they were not before.”
House of Commons23 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have been told to expect this industrial strategy shortly. Will the Minister confirm exactly when we will have it? Can she reassure the small and medium-sized manufacturing businesses in my constituency and across rural England that Britain wants them to grow? Will the strategy include a long-term vision that will allow the UK to secure the investment that we need for virgin steel production?”
House of Commons7 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Speculation around British Steel at the Scunthorpe plant is deeply concerning for the workers and business owners alike, who are desperately waiting for the Government to deliver just one piece of good news. Steel is vital to our green economy as it plays a huge role in our ability to extend our railways and to build zero carbon homes. What incentive does British Steel have to keep going? It has had to contend with the Chancellor’s decision to hike national insurance contributions and with Trump’s terrifying tariffs. Manufacturing businesses need the Government to offer reassurance, certainty and stability. We need to move from a patchwork of last-minute rescues to a long-term plan that will see industry on a sustainable footing. We need a robust industrial strategy with a proper plan for steel within it.”
House of Commons7 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If the Government were to adopt the Liberal Democrat proposal for a carer’s minimum wage, which would see carers receive £2 more per hour than the current minimum wage, a staggering 850,000 care workers across the UK would benefit from that increase in pay, and over 80% of them would be women. We understand that the carer’s minimum wage is not a silver bullet, but it is serious proposal that could make a big difference to patients and families across the country. Although the Liberal Democrats support increasing the minimum wage, it is a shame that this statutory instrument does not go further and give weight to that proposal.”
House of Commons25 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Unfortunately, they are struggling to get the care they need and deserve, in part because care workers are not being paid properly. If we paid care staff more, we might encourage more people into that hugely understaffed sector. In south-west England alone there are 13,000 vacant jobs, and in a rural constituency such as mine, where public transport is expensive and unreliable, care staff are not compensated for their travel time, and they often end up bringing home less than the minimum wage. While I share the official Opposition’s concern about small businesses, of which my constituency has a huge number, it is important that low-paid workers earn enough to live, especially our young people and women.”
House of Commons25 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Let me begin by thanking the Government for laying this important statutory instrument. The Liberal Democrats welcome this uplift in the minimum wage. We all have constituents who we know are struggling to make ends meet. Nobody should be in a position where they cannot pay their bills despite being in employment. I am particularly pleased that apprentices and those under 18 will benefit from increased pay under this instrument. In a few weeks’ time, I will join Wilshire College students and businesses across my constituency at a careers fair, and this will be an important piece of legislation to share with them. My constituency is rural, and many of the people I represent are elderly and depend on the social care system to stay independent.”
House of Commons25 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“So I welcome these measures. I take some issue with what the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire said. For many years, I served as part of Wiltshire council, which is a Conservative-led council. It was locked into a service contract for maintenance that was poor and used to lower wages, producing a system where we had very little maintenance. Our town councils are now having to pick up the bill for repairing grounds and play areas because the company, although it had the contract and was paid by the local authority, was not carrying out the works. Therefore, I welcome this measure and I am pleased to support it.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Mundell. I really welcome the clause. Despite the fact that their uniforms, pensions and contracts said “NHS”, staff at a community hospital in my constituency only realised that they had been effectively TUPE-ed over to a private business when they failed to receive the £1,000 bonus that all their colleagues in the main hospitals got. One may say, “How naive of them; they should have read their contracts better,” but most of them had been NHS workers for 25 years, so they were completely unaware that this had happened to them and that they were no longer entitled. I must thank the then contractor, a charity, for lobbying hard to make sure that eventually they got some kind of bonus, but to be suddenly without those conditions was quite frightening for them.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As one of my constituents told me—she does not wish to be named for these reasons—many employees with endometriosis find that their employers do not believe them about their symptoms, that their flexible working requests are refused and that they are subject to discriminatory automated absence procedures that penalise short but intermittent time off work. The amendment seeks to address that injustice. I want to be very clear that I support it, and I hope that the rest of the Committee will see its importance.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“She is the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on women’s health and an officer on the APPG on endometriosis; I feel confident that she has tabled this amendment with the best intentions. It seems an omission that this issue was not included in the original Bill. Several constituents have contacted me about endometriosis, and specifically its impact on them at work. Endometriosis costs the UK economy £8 billion a year in treatment, loss of work and healthcare costs, and it takes an average of eight years to get a diagnosis. One in six workers with endometriosis leaves the workforce due to their condition—an issue that the Government and employers cannot afford to ignore. Those people could go back to work and stay in work if there was additional flexibility for them.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 112, in clause 26, page 38, line 35, at end insert― “(c) supporting employees with menstrual problems and menstrual disorders.” This amendment would add menstrual problems and menstrual disorders to “matters related to gender equality”, in relation to any regulations made under the Bill to require employers to produce equality action plans. I am very pleased to move this amendment. First, as the Bill stands, there are provisions for businesses to report on the impact of menopause on women in the workplace as part of the equalities impact assessments. I think the hon. Member for Sheffield Brightside and Hillsborough (Gill Furniss) is right to table this amendment and to remind us all that menstrual problems can hinder women at any point in their working life, not just as they enter menopause.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I cannot help agreeing that naming a few conditions in the Bill might well be a concern, and when I first looked at the amendment on its own without looking at where it would fit into the Bill, it did seem slightly incongruous to suddenly mention one aspect. But if we look at where it would be inserted into the Bill, following a direct reference to menopause, it seems far more appropriate to make the point that menopause is not the only ongoing issue that women face. Many women are quite relieved to go into menopause, because it has been so onerous for them to have periods that keep them off work or in bed for several days a month. If we are going to mention menopause, mentioning menstruation makes perfect sense. The amendment makes sense only in the context of the Bill.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am not sure that highlighting quite how quickly the Conservatives go through leaders is helpful, but we do have to recognise that they have had the highest number of female leaders of any of our parties here, which is to be commended. On a serious note, I welcome the intentions of clause 27. It is incredibly important that we start to shine a light on outsourcing, especially in the public sector, which I have seen myself, as I highlighted earlier, regarding the Chippenham hospital. To a certain extent, it seems to be a way of hiding some of the less clear and sensible ways we employ people, especially when it comes to low-paid, often female workers. I will therefore be supporting this clause and I am very pleased to do so.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I completely agree with the hon. Gentleman; I must make a declaration that my parents were a state headmaster and headmistress before their retirement. One issue that I strongly feel needs to be taken into consideration—though perhaps it is not relevant to this Committee—is that funding for education in general has driven down the pay of these roles. If there were good funding for the education sector in general, these roles would not need so much protection. While we are considering giving more bargaining power, we also need to ensure that there is enough funding for education so that those roles can be paid, otherwise there will merely be fewer of them. I think that is something we need to take into consideration, do you not?”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In that case, why are we not arguing that this whole Bill should be changed, and that this whole clause should be taken out and the change therefore applied to all schools? I am also concerned about the separation of requirements for one school and not for the other.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship this afternoon, Ms Vaz. I share the passion of the hon. Member for West Suffolk for education—as I stated earlier, both my parents became headteachers before retirement—so I appreciate that he is very concerned about the state of education in our country. However, I am very concerned that this amendment is in danger of creating a slightly two-tiered system between maintained schools and academies, whereby maintained schools would have a certain level of protection for their staff that would not be there in academies. If this change is so important for the academies, my question to the hon. Members for Mid Buckinghamshire and for West Suffolk would be that, if this is good for academies, surely it is good for maintained schools?”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I appreciate the clarification. The point of free schools and academies was to have a diversity of education. A diversity of employment rights, which is what we are discussing, is a different element. If we end up with a situation where I, as a member of support staff, am looking at two jobs in my region, and one is with a maintained school and one is with an academy, and there is protection for one, I can only see that as detrimental to our academies. I am unable to support a provision that separates those two types of school.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I appreciate the point, and the shadow Minister is quite right: I was assuming that without support there might be such a situation. However, that does not detract from the fact that in most situations, having a body that someone can go to that is independent from their employer has to be a supporting situation. Nobody would go to that body for support if they were being paid above the average in their area.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I appreciate the clarification. That makes perfect sense—it would be unlikely that a body representing employees would create a ceiling, so I cannot help feeling that that issue is not likely to come up. With that in mind, I am unable to support the amendment.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I could not agree more with the hon. Gentleman about the importance of diversity of education. One of the things that academies and free schools have done very well is cater for children with learning difficulties, whether they are dyslexic or autistic, or doing all the other things that probably many of us in this room have benefited from. However, basic rights as an employee of an institution and the right to protection and a body to go to if somebody feels that they are being unfairly treated have little to do with diversity of education. I cannot help feeling that we are conflating the two issues of employment rights and educational standards, which do not necessarily go hand in hand. Paying staff well does not stop an institution having a diverse and fantastic form of education.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For similar reasons as I was concerned about previous amendments, I feel that I cannot support this amendment. I think it is unnecessary to add more complications to the system on things that are probably already covered in other areas.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I support the schedule. Over the past 10 years, we have seen how difficult it has been to retain and employ support staff in our schools, partly because they do not see a career progression and do not see themselves valued. I hope that this body will help to support those staff and will allow them to feel that they are very much part of the education authority and so have that support.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There is a suggestion that the Government might consider that some of those not-for-profit providers should be included in the negotiating body so that they have a voice. However, several of the providers in my constituency that I have spoken to have said that, as employers who take their employees seriously and pay them properly throughout the day, they welcome the body on the grounds that it will give them a level playing field against the many employers who do not do that, since they feel that they are commercially disadvantaged against those employers. That is the predominant response that I have heard from employers in my constituency. With that in mind, I will not support the amendment and I do support the clause.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I rise to speak to the amendment, but I note that the whole clause is relevant. As the shadow Minister stated, this debate is fairly similar to the discussion we had about the SSSNB. Our hope for the adult social care negotiating body, similar to that for the SSSNB, is that having a uniform body can help to negotiate and address some of the issues that he highlighted, such as the poor pay and terms and conditions that a lot of adult social care workers suffer. Social care providers in my constituency, many of which are not for profit, have welcomed the fact that the adult social care negotiating body will include providers, and that they will be able to discuss this issue together. I feel that that is an important point when discussing some of the issues that hon. Members might be concerned about.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am very concerned that if subsequent legislation were to introduce a retrospective pay increase that these firms do not have provision for, that would detrimentally affect some of these hard-working and useful not-for-profit care providers. As it stands, I will not be able to support that clause.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Mid Buckinghamshire, I find the word retrospective in any legislation extremely worrying. My background is in the building industry, and that retrospective element has been introduced many times in the 20 years that I have been in the building industry, to the detriment of many of the hard-working professionals involved. This clause concerns me because many of our care-provider employers are small businesses, and they are also not-for-profit small businesses. Those small businesses will be in no position whatsoever to provide any retrospective increase in salary if they are asked to do so, because they simply do not have any profits—because they are not for profit—to draw on to pay any increase.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I start by thanking the hon. Member for Scarborough and Whitby for that very personal story. I imagine it has been extremely difficult. She must be very relieved to have finally found somewhere where her son is happy. I have several friends with children in similar situations. I know that it can be extremely stressful. We are all in agreement that people working in social care have been undervalued for a long time. These provisions are incredibly helpful in bringing them to the fore and in trying to make their conditions of work considerably better. Members on both sides of the Committee have made that point very clearly. I have one specific concern, which is on clause 41, where it talks about “provision that has retrospective effect.” Like the hon.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“With the Royal Mail’s universal service under review, it is particularly important for the Government to be clear about the future of these services with this new owner. I would be grateful if the Minister made it clear to my constituents at home that the number of delivery days will not be reduced as a result of this sale to EP Group and that any changes on the horizon will not be charged to the public purse. My questions about the delivery standards are particularly important, given that we are in the middle of Christmas, and many millions of people rely on the Royal Mail, not least for that. One thing that is particularly concerning for us at the moment might well be — [ Interruption. ] I am sorry, I have one last thing. With it moving abroad—”
House of Commons16 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They are the unseen champions of our community, particularly in rural communities where other people are not walking past. They reminded me that a reliable postal service is essential for our local communities. I therefore join hon. Members in thanking them for their dedication, specifically at this time of year. Businesses depend on timely deliveries, and many older residents rely on our postal services for banking, utilities and keeping connected. Any weakening of the universal service obligation would disproportionately harm the rural areas of Wiltshire where alternatives are limited. Therefore, the Government and EP must give us a commitment that they will not water down the Royal Mail’s service at the public’s expense.”
House of Commons16 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Royal Mail has been plagued by issues for years, and my constituents do deserve better. A reliable postal service is essential for all of us, but particularly for rural businesses and those waiting for important NHS appointments. Naturally, in communities like those I represent in Wiltshire, there are some serious concerns about what the statement might mean for the quality of rural services. Last Friday, I met with the brilliant posties in my constituency of Chippenham, some of whom have been in the job for nearly 50 years, who were rushed off their feet delivering Christmas cards. Spending time with them reminded me how important they are—they can often be the first people to notice that someone has not been to their door in days.”
House of Commons16 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This probation period is vital for both sides to understand whether the sector, which is new to many people, is appropriate. I am very concerned that the period, which is the only thing we know about, is not defined as a set amount of time to give small businesses confidence that they can continue to take on staff about whom they are concerned. If the timescale cannot be set out in the Bill, I would like some idea from the Minister of when we might hear it.”
House of Commons12 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Both amendments aim to find out whether the Government have an idea of the timescale for the probation period. When I speak to some of my small innovative businesses, especially those in renewable energy, one thing that concerns me is that they are taking staff on who do not have experience in the field. There simply are not enough people with experience, so businesses are taking people on speculatively who they hope to encourage, teach and train on the job. If they realise early on that that is not possible and that the employee is not suitable for the sector, they need to be able to start again and try again without feeling penalised. There is no way they can do this over a 10-minute coffee, as one Government Member suggests, because these people have no experience in the field. They are on a learning curve as much as the employer is.”
House of Commons12 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I will speak principally to our amendment 5, but Opposition amendment 155 is also relevant. We broadly welcome the Government’s intention to clarify some issues around probation. However, we feel that these measures will make it too difficult for small businesses, which we all know are the backbone of our economy, to take staff on. If we are not careful, the Bill, albeit not by design, could be catastrophic for some small businesses. I would like the Minister to assure me that small and medium-sized enterprises can be confident that they will not be unduly penalised if they need to give notice during a probation period. Our amendment would put a number on the period, albeit that it allows a range.”
House of Commons12 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I share some of the shadow Minister’s concerns. Consultation to find out what most concerns businesses is obviously commendable, but if a large amount of the Bill is left to secondary legislation, a lot of it will not come back before the whole House for scrutiny. Can we be assured that decisions that are not taken before the Bill is passed can at least be considered by a Committee when they are finally made?”
House of Commons12 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the hon. Member for Dundee Central for tabling the amendment, which has drawn out a potential loophole that I hope the Government will look at carefully. We so often see legislation introduced with good intentions, and then 90% of businesses—especially smaller businesses—comply with it to the letter, because they think that is the right thing to do, but the larger corporations find a way around it.”
House of Commons12 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Small businesses are at the heart of our local communities. Firms such as Carbon ThreeSixty in my constituency are cutting-edge manufacturers of carbon fibre products. However, its growth as a small business is seriously affected by its ability to attract and retain quality staff, predominantly because of the poor public transport and completely non-existent cycle routes. These issues cut right across Departments. I would therefore be grateful if the Secretary of State could confirm what discussions he has had with ministerial colleagues in other Departments about how rural transport infrastructure would greatly support small and medium-sized businesses.”
House of Commons12 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Tomorrow—on Friday the 13th—the EU’s general product safety regulation comes into effect. Businesses are telling me that the additional costs will mean that they can no longer sell to the EU and to Northern Ireland. What steps is the Department taking to ensure that small businesses are supported as the regulation comes into effect?”
House of Commons12 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The reason for leaving it at 250 employees, despite a thought among Opposition Members that it should be extended to 500, is that, currently, small and medium-sized businesses are classified as having up to 249 employees. Larger businesses, which will undoubtedly have the infrastructure, should be able to publish the information. The new clause would prevent an onerous burden on very small businesses from having to publish the information. It does not imply that they would have lesser standards; it is merely that they would not be obliged to publish the information.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Given the Liberal Democrat new clauses we discussed earlier, it is clear that we welcome any flexibility that encourages paternity leave and allows parents to share the leave in an equal and welcoming way. Therefore, we welcome this clause.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“After that incredibly moving speech by the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire, I cannot help but share the absolute concerns of friends of mine who have also lost children in pregnancy quite early on. I appreciate that that causes devastation, and I would be very happy to support any amendments that are suggested on Report. Perhaps an earlier date for bereavement would be appropriate.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Although the employer is not always in a position to pre-empt the situation, taking reasonable steps surely means providing an option for everybody to have an emergency phone number—that is what was available to me in my university job—or, at A&E, to have security staff intervene when somebody arrives quite clearly inebriated, in the same way that our security staff do at our surgeries. They will immediately foresee the problem and will make sure that the person is accompanied and is not left alone with a member of staff. Those are the sort of reasonable preparations that we would expect; I would be surprised if any employer were not happy to carry them out. I therefore see no reason why that should not be made clear in the legislation.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I appreciate the shadow Minister’s giving way. I will make an effort not to intervene every time he stands up. There is a very serious point here that anyone who has ever been in a situation in which they have felt intimidated will understand. An employee in higher education may be intimidated by students who are irritated, angry or frustrated about their results. In my case, they came to my office because they felt that they should not have failed. I have found myself in a small room—the kind of room in which this House would not allow MPs to hold a surgery—with no external access and no security guards on the door to intervene. Such situations can be hugely difficult.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 163, in clause 18, page 31, line 24, at end insert— “(4) In section 14K, in subsection (1), after paragraph (cb) insert— ‘(cc) works or worked as a self-employed contractor; (cd) works or worked as a sub-postmaster; (ce) is member of the judiciary, non-executive director or a trustee, including a pension trustee; (cf) is a trade union representatives; (cg) has applied for a vacant role as an external applicant and makes a protected disclosure about information obtained during the application process;’”. This amendment extends protections for whistleblowers to other categories.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That puts them at a significant disadvantage. It leads to whistleblowers being blacklisted and unable to work in the sector in which they have raised concerns. The law is inconsistent; job applicants must not be discriminated against under equality law, and job applicants in the NHS do have whistleblowing protections. The amendment would ensure that job applicants receive the whistleblowing protections that they deserve, and that extend whistleblowing rights to people working in various other forms who are not strictly considered to be workers. I ask the Committee to support our amendment.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Not only is blowing the whistle without protection a risk to someone’s employment, but for trustees of charities it could cause reputational damage, yet the law on that is currently unclear. I do not need to remind Labour Members that the role of trade unions in the workplace is recognised in the Bill. A whistleblower is likely to go to their trade union representative for advice on whistleblowing, but if I have understood correctly, when representatives raise that concern to the employer on behalf of a colleague, there is currently no protection. The amendment would be an important extension to the clause. If someone is rejected for a job because they blew the whistle in a previous role, they are unlikely to have a remedy in an employment tribunal against a prospective employer for the loss of that job opportunity.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is welcome that the Government have made fighting the insecurities created by bogus self-employment a core plank of their employment reforms, but adopting this amendment would immediately plug the gap in workplace rights and protections for those who are self-employed. I want to highlight a few cases. If the sub-postmasters, who were effectively contractors, had been afforded whistleblower rights, they might have been able to raise their concerns about the Horizon IT system much faster, and some of the issues would have been resolved faster. Non-executives and trustees are subject to duties and liabilities under laws such as the Companies Act 2006 and the Trustee Act 2000, but they are not covered by whistleblower legal protections.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Many people classified as self-employed workers are inside a company, yet do not enjoy whistleblowing rights. That is true in my constituency of Chippenham, where a large number of people working in the care industry are technically subcontracted to the employer for whom they are working. In a large part of Corsham, many people work for the Government in one form or another, through the military or Ministry of Defence, but they are often either self-employed or subcontracted and therefore not entitled to these protections. This issue is part of a wider problem with our modern economy, particularly the gig economy.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As the definition of “worker” in section 43K of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is already slightly different for whistleblowers than for other areas of employment law, there is a sound public policy reason to extend it even further. In our diverse and complex labour market, many people who wish to blow the whistle do not necessarily qualify as a worker and are therefore not protected either by the existing legislation or under the Bill. The Secretary of State already has the power to make these changes through secondary legislation, but until the Government act on that, we are pushing for Parliament to extend protections to workers such as contractors. In the modern economy, the boundaries between a self-employed contractor and a worker have never been more blurred.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. Before I make my case, I must make a small correction: the reference to section 14K in the text of amendment 163 should be to section 43K. My apologies for the error. The Liberal Democrats tabled amendment 163 because although we strongly welcome the Bill’s proposals on whistleblowing, we do not feel that it goes far enough to support all workers: it is not extended to additional workers. We feel that whistleblowing protections should be extended to all those in the workplace who may see wrongdoing and may suffer for raising public interests and concerns. After our long debate about harassment, we must all agree that harassment can often be brought to light only by whistleblowers, so this part of the legislation is incredibly important.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are happy not to press either amendment 163 or new clause 41, but I ask the Minister to meet us before Report so that we can introduce some, if not all, of the measures in them, and particularly those in amendment 163. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons10 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗