Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Mr. Edward Leigh (Gainsborough): Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. Hopkins: I am sorry. I am not taking interventions for reasons that I have explained.

6 Apr 2001 : Column 675

Realistically, that position, which lasted until the election of the 1979 Conservative Government, is unlikely to return in the foreseeable future, much as some of us might want that. The TUC and others now look to employee involvement in employer decision making harnessed to the benefit of workers. The world has changed, and the TUC's view of the way forward for workers has also evolved.

Consultation of the work force is already required in certain circumstances under the legislation enacted by both Conservative and Labour Governments. It is not a new idea. Consultation is already obligatory in a number of situations. On the surface, it seems that the extent of consultation is widespread in the British economy. According to ACAS:


However, the extent of consultation is actually limited and, sadly, diminishing. That view is backed by what is claimed to be the largest work force survey in the world--the workplace employment relations survey sponsored by the Department of Trade and Industry. That covers 3,000 workplaces, and includes questionnaires from 30,000 employees. The survey found that, the larger the organisation, the more likely it is to have a joint consultative committee. It also showed that consultation has declined over the past 20 years. That is hardly surprising. During the period of the successive Conservative Governments, employment rights were systematically whittled away, and as a consequence employees were less likely to insist on being consulted for fear of losing their jobs.

I welcome the recent initiative of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to consult both the major social partners on areas for increased consultation. My right hon. Friend was deeply concerned about the effect of the Vauxhall closure announcement on the work force. That decision was made in the face of an earlier negotiated agreement that proposed maintaining production at Luton with a new vehicle to replace the Vectra. I hope that my Bill is pushing at an open door as far as the Government are concerned.

6 Apr 2001 : Column 676

The TUC recently launched its Partnership Institute. The aim of the institute is to identify and promote best practice in workplace partnerships, and develop those relationships that will improve productivity and workplace performance and enhance the quality of working life. The institute has been made possible partly by the DTI's partnership at work fund. Such initiatives will enable partnership working to develop. My Bill seeks to ensure that that happens.

The Bill would cover the public and the private sectors. I was pleased to learn that Unison, by which I was employed for many years, found in a survey that better consultation with staff and unions helps to motivate staff to work better and thus provide improved services. I should perhaps declare an interest, in that I still have close ties with Unison, as well as with my own union, the GMB, and my former employer, the TUC.

The purpose of the Bill is to require employers with more than 50 employees to inform and consult employees on major decisions that affect their organisation. I do not deceive myself that my proposals will meet with no opposition, but I believe that the arguments against it are diminishing and the barriers reducing. Some will say that the voluntary approach is the best way and that regulation is not necessary. I have three responses to that view.

First, regulation in employment is a helpful trend necessary to limit the vagaries of the unfettered market. Secondly, as I hope I have made clear, the benefits of consultation are enough to justify regulation. Finally, my Bill regulates only when the voluntary approach has failed. In effect, it proposes a floor of rights, in the same way as the Government's Employment Relations Act 1999 does in other areas. I have great pleasure in commending my Bill to the House.

2.29 pm

Mr. Eric Forth (Bromley and Chislehurst): When the hon. Member for Luton, North (Mr. Hopkins) began his garbled, pre-written presentation, there were only 16 minutes--

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst): Order.

It being half-past Two o'clock, the debate stood adjourned.

Debate to be resumed on Friday 15 June.

6 Apr 2001 : Column 675

6 Apr 2001 : Column 677

Remaining Private Members' Bills

ORGANIC FOOD AND FARMING TARGETS BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

Hon. Members: Object.

To be read a Second time on Friday 11 May.

FIXED-TERM PARLIAMENTS BILL

Order for Second Reading read.--[Queen's Consent to be signified.]

Hon. Members: Object.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Second Reading what day?

Mr. Roger Casale (Wimbledon): Friday 20 July.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the hon. Gentleman speak with the authority of the Member in charge of the Bill.

Mr. Casale: I am sorry, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I have the authority of my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase (Tony Wright).

To be read a Second time on Friday 20 July.

EXORCISM OF CHILDREN (PROHIBITION) BILL

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Not moved.

STANDARDS AND PRIVILEGES (INDEPENDENT APPEALS BODY) BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

Hon. Members: Object.

To be read a Second time on Friday April 27.

SITING OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS MASTS BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

Hon. Members: Object.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Second Reading what day?

Mr. Hilton Dawson (Lancaster and Wyre): Friday 27 April.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the hon. Gentleman speak with the authority of the Member in charge of the Bill?

Mr. Dawson: Yes, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I speak with the authority of my hon. Friend the Member for Stourbridge (Ms Shipley).

To be read a Second time on Friday 27 April.

6 Apr 2001 : Column 678

DIVORCE (RELIGIOUS MARRIAGES) BILL

Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Second Reading [2nd February].

Hon. Members: Object.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Second Reading what day?

Mr. Barry Gardiner (Brent, North): Friday 27 April.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the hon. Gentleman speak with the authority of the Member in charge of the Bill?

Mr. Gardiner: Yes, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I have the authority of my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon (Mr. Dismore).

Debate further adjourned till Friday 27 April.

ELECTRICITY ACT 1989 (AMENDMENT) BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

Hon. Members: Object.

To be read a Second time on Friday 27 April.

SECRET SOCIETIES (REGISTRATION OF MEMBERSHIP) BILL

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Not moved.

PATIENT CONSENT FORM BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

Hon. Members: Object.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Second Reading what day?

Mr. Patrick McLoughlin (West Derbyshire): Friday 18 May.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the hon. Gentleman speak with the authority of the Member in charge of the Bill.

Mr. McLoughlin: Yes, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I have the authority of my hon. Friend the Member for Broxbourne (Mrs. Roe).

To be read a Second time on Friday 18 May.

CROWN EMPLOYMENT (NATIONALITY) BILL

Order for Second Reading read.--[Queen's Consent to be signified.]

Hon. Members: Object.

To be read a Second time on Friday 27 April.

EDUCATION (STUDENT LOANS) (AMENDMENT) BILL

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Not moved.

6 Apr 2001 : Column 679

RAIL PASSENGER SERVICES BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

Hon. Members: Object.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Second Reading what day?

Mr. Simon Thomas (Ceredigion): Friday 27 April.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the hon. Gentleman speak with the authority of the Member in charge of the Bill?

Mr. Thomas: Yes, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I have the authority of the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Mr. Öpik)

To be read a Second time on Friday 27 April.

CLIMATE CHANGE BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

Hon. Members: Object.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Second Reading what day?

Mr. Simon Thomas: Friday 27 April.


Next Section

IndexHome Page