Employment Rights Bill

Debate between Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames and Lord Murray of Blidworth

Report stage
Wednesday 23rd July 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con)]

Perhaps the noble Lord could explain how it is envisaged that the Secretary of State will know that such a worker has a claim and should win.

[Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (LD)]

I do not understand why the Secretary of State should not have that information as a matter of public record, or why he should not have become aware of it. Plainly, if the Secretary of State and his department do not have the faintest idea about the case, they are unlikely to invoke Clause 113 and bring proceedings on that basis. However, given the knowledge, it is for the Secretary of State to make a decision. In very many cases, I suppose that the Secretary of State will make a decision against intervening. But another possibility is that a worker might not be proud of their own conduct and might not want it publicly ventilated. These were all reasons that the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, effectively covered in considering why litigation might not be an attractive option for the worker concerned. The Secretary of State has to make, or would have to make, a decision about whether the private right of the worker not to sue is outweighed by the public interest in having a point determined.