“Chapter 4A

Alistair Strathern Excerpts

Tuesday 11th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[James Wild]

I am simply pointing to the words of the chief executive of Currys, which employs thousands of people across the country. I am not here to tell employers what form of contracts to offer their staff, and I am not sure that it is the hon. Lady’s job to do so either. However, the Bill will certainly remove flexibility.

The Government are doubling down by extending that requirement to agency workers. Flexible contracts, which are valued by staff—we have heard from other Conservative Members about their benefits—will be undermined by the Bill. A flexible labour market is an important part of securing a growing economy. The previous Government managed to achieve that while also extending employment rights. As the Federation of Small Businesses and organisations that provide millions of jobs have warned, the clear danger of the Bill is that it will make it harder to employ people by increasing risks and costs.

Rather than striking the balance that the shadow Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith), spoke about, the Government have produced measures that, when taken together—and on top of the Chancellor’s tax-raising Budget and the near doubling of business rates for hospitality, retail and leisure businesses—create a significant cost and regulatory risk. That is why we oppose the Bill and the Government’s action to hike taxes and increase regulation that will make us less competitive.

[Alistair Strathern (Hitchin) (Lab)]

I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests and my trade union membership.

For far too long, our economy has been stuck in a low-growth, low-wage, low-aspiration situation. For far too long, we have allowed some of the best employers and businesses in the country to be undercut by more unscrupulous employers that, as they are unable to compete through competitive advantage or productivity, do so only by levelling down working conditions. That simply cannot be right. We have heard in Committee, in the House and in headlines over many years some heartbreaking examples of the worst scandals that that has enabled. Truthfully, there is not a person in our society who is not losing out as a result of our failure to tackle this issue.

Opposition Members have commented on the pace at which the Government are moving on that issue. We would not have to move at such a pace if they had done more.

[Dr Marie Tidball (Penistone and Stocksbridge) (Lab)]

I wonder whether my hon. Friend agrees with Julie Abraham, the CEO of Richer Sounds, who says:

“Happy colleagues are likely to be more productive. This also leads to reduced stock loss and higher staff retention, which in turn, minimises recruitment and training costs, not to mention disruption to established teams.”

[Alistair Strathern]

I could not have put it better myself.

Research is clear about the strong link between good working conditions and good productivity, and the wider economic benefits that they bring. That is why I am grateful to everyone who has played their part, including the Minister and members of the Bill Committee—I have sympathy for those who had to endure some of the tropes that we have heard today—in ensuring that we had such a big and comprehensive package before us today.

We are debating some strong amendments today. I will focus on new clause 32 in particular, as it affects a constituent who came to my surgery recently. The literature on the harms of zero-hours contracts—their impact not just on productivity but on poverty and on workers’ conditions, health and mental health—is compelling, but if we do not acknowledge the human impact, we miss half the story.

At my constituency surgery two weeks ago, I was joined by a gentleman who had been working for four years on a zero-hours contract at Royal Mail. For four years, he had not known what hours he would be working week to week, month to month, year to year. For four years, he had not been able to plan his daily life—his other commitments, and the further education that he was trying to do to build out his skills and better himself. For four years, his life had been narrowed by the precarious reality of the exploitative application of zero-hours contracts by those who should haven know better.

For that reason, I am so glad that the Government committed in our manifesto and in the Bill, which was introduced some time ago now, to taking on zero-hours contracts and giving people the right, where appropriate, to request a fixed-hours contract. However, without new clause 32, my constituent would have been missed out, because although he works at Royal Mail, he is employed through an agency. Without the extension of protections in the new clause he would, like many others across the country, have lost out. I am very glad that we are being complete in our approach and ensuring that we do not miss out from that important protection the very many employees who are currently working for agencies.

There are lots of other important amendments to the Bill. I was glad to hear such warm words from the Minister in his opening remarks about the very important amendment tabled by my Bedfordshire neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen). It is impossible to hear her testimony about bereavement or to speak to parents who have gone through bereavement and not recognise the simple reality that to be bereaved is not to be sick, and that our leave system should recognise it as such. I was very glad to hear from the Minister that the Government will work with my hon. Friend and others across the House who have campaigned on this issue for a long time to ensure we recognise that reality.

There are a number of important measures in the Bill. I can do justice to very few of them in three minutes, so I want to focus on just one: clause 14, which is about ensuring we remove some of the barriers to new dads taking up paternity leave early on in their employment. It is a well-recognised fact that we have some of the worst paternity leave entitlements across Europe. Although shared parental leave sounds great as a concept, we do not have to look far to notice that its uptake is shockingly low and shockingly skewed to the highest earners. I am glad that we are taking a small but important step in the Bill to recognise that we need to do more to boost access to paternity leave. The Government will be conducting a review of parental leave later this year, and I know that Members across the House will be keen to engage with the Minister on how we can go further, not just in allowing fathers to have that crucial early time with their child but in breaking down the very gendered nature of parenting, which is currently baked into our statutory provision on parental leave.

There are so many important measures in the Bill and so many important areas where we know we will need to go further. Fundamentally, I am full of pride to see a Government finally, after inaction by the Conservatives for far too long, taking seriously the issues of workplace security, productivity and the wellbeing of people across the country in some of the most vulnerable forms of employment. I am proud that this Government are standing up for my constituent and many people like him across the country, and I am proud to support the Bill today.

[Alison Griffiths]

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. 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. 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.

Critical Minerals: Domestic Production

Alistair Strathern Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd December 2024 Westminster Hall

[Perran Moon]

I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention and wholeheartedly agree with him. As I will mention later, although I am Cornish and focus on Cornwall, there are benefits to be had throughout the United Kingdom.

Relying unreservedly on international supply chains increases our global carbon emissions and means we cannot ensure a higher level of environmental care and social standards in the extraction and processing of these materials. To mitigate that dependency and build secure localised supply chains, including for electric vehicle batteries, investment in domestic extraction and processing is essential. Establishing our domestic industry would also aid our export capabilities.

Our significant lithium reserves could be upstream of a developed battery industry, in turn feeding into the demand for electric vehicles, which is predicted to increase by 30 times up to 2050. The EU is the main export market for UK cars. In 2027, EU rules of origin will come into force, mandating that 65% of the value of a battery must originate in the EU or UK, or there will be significant additional costs. Developing domestic industry will keep our exports compliant with those rules and will keep us protected against any other rules on environmental credentials.

Let us consider the critical mineral resources that the UK possesses. From my own constituency in the heart of Cornwall to Pembrokeshire in Wales, County Durham, Cumbria, County Tyrone in Northern Ireland and the central highlands of Aberdeenshire, the UK is littered with critical mineral potential. Most significantly for the green transition, we find reserves of lithium, tin and tungsten in economically viable quantities.

We should also appreciate that those key areas have been mined historically and are all areas of significant socioeconomic deprivation. If we can create an environment for a domestic industry, there is significant potential for wealth to be held in those communities in the form of good, well-paid jobs. I would like to discuss the particular opportunities in Cornwall, with which I am most familiar.

[Alistair Strathern (Hitchin) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is making a compelling case, not just for the national security implications of critical minerals, but for the welcome huge economic benefits. Given that, does he welcome the Government’s commitment to bring forward a new strategy for critical minerals security? Does he agree that that would bring benefits, not just for the regions blessed with the minerals in natural supply, but for companies such as Panther Metals in my constituency, which will be able to deliver a big part of the national supply chain in future?

[Perran Moon]

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention and wholeheartedly agree, once again, with the desire for the Government to focus on critical minerals, hopefully developing the critical minerals strategy as a core part of the UK’s overall industrial strategy. I will talk more about that later.

Beneath Cornwall lies a mass of granite rock called the Cornubian batholith—that is harder to say at 9.40 am than one would think—in which lithium-bearing mica was discovered in 1825. In recent years, the extraction and processing of that resource has been developed by two enterprises: Imerys British Lithium and Cornish Lithium, as mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Luke Murphy). Significantly, the UK lithium demand is projected to be 80,000 tonnes a year by 2030, with geological reserves in Cornwall covering a significant proportion of that demand over the next few decades. I point out that even though demand is projected at 80,000 tonnes a year, we currently have no domestic supply.

Both companies have received significant investment, and just this year Cornish Lithium opened its first processing facility, refining battery-grade lithium hydroxide, locally in Cornwall. These companies constitute not potential on the horizon, but enterprises employing hundreds of people, generating wealth, developing technologies and working with communities and academics.

The potential in Cornwall is underpinned by a rich depth of mining heritage over thousands of years, with an economic peak in the 19th century, when tin was mined on an industrial scale, before the price collapsed and jobs moved to other places around the world. The last tin mine closed at South Crofty, in the heart of my area of Camborne, Redruth and Hayle, in 1998. When it did, the following words were graffitied on the closed gate:

“Cornish lads are fishermen,

And Cornish lads are miners too,

But when the fish and tin are gone

What are the Cornish boys to do?”

Today, a firm called Cornish Metals is working to reopen South Crofty tin mine; it is draining it of water as we speak, so that work can start again to meet the severe supply shortages of tin worldwide that the global economy now faces. I have been down South Crofty mine myself and, although it must be said that I am not a geologist, I am convinced that the objectives of Cornish Metals can and must be achieved. Lithium gets a lot of deserved attention because of its use in lithium-ion batteries, but tin is as crucial to modern technologies and electrical infrastructure such as solar panels. Cornwall hosts the third highest-grade tin deposits in the world, and it is the highest grade of tin deposit that is not currently mined.

South Crofty and much of Cornwall more generally represent a unique blend of ancient mining heritage, geological reserves and community support. That comes alongside a cluster of companies and expertise in and around educational institutions such as the world-leading Camborne School of Mines and the University of Exeter, based in Penryn, which has more top 100 climate scientists than any other university in the world.

The UK’s burgeoning critical minerals industry could be a game changer, helping to relieve pressures on communities such as mine and generating jobs and wealth. With those communities in mind, it is fundamental that domestic production works for local people and the natural environment, so that we do unleash the Cornish Celtic tiger.

As an officer of the all-party parliamentary group on critical minerals, alongside my hon. Friend the Member for St Austell and Newquay (Noah Law), I am in close contact with the industry. We attended the Critical Minerals Association conference yesterday and will attend another industry conference on the future of mining later this week. Industry leaders have made it very clear to me that there is a serious gap in the midstream supply chain for batteries, including magnet development. Much focus is on the upstream, but those gaps must be plugged as well.

Industry is crying out for domestic production guaranteed by the Government, whether as a set tonnage or as a percentage of demand on a sliding scale. That would reassure mining finance, which is relatively risk-averse. In that vein, I ask the Government to consider implementing de-risking financial instruments such as price floors, as well as considering mineral-extraction projects as part of the enterprise investment scheme, which provides tax reliefs for investors supporting small and growing enterprises. The industry suffers from a long development timescale and high up-front costs, both of which need to be considered as the Government tackle this country’s industrial and planning issues.

Giving more support to this industry will increase its credibility as a possible career path in the education system. Camborne School of Mines, the UK’s only dedicated mining college, and perhaps the world’s most famous, offers sector-specific undergraduate courses, but we require greater focus on STEM subjects—science, technology, engineering and maths—at GCSE and A-level, alongside apprenticeships. To conclude—I am sure hon. Members will be relieved to hear that—

Paternity Leave and Pay

Alistair Strathern Excerpts

Wednesday 23rd October 2024 Westminster Hall

[Alistair Strathern (Hitchin) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Telford (Shaun Davies) for securing this important debate. For many, parenthood is one of the most exciting journeys of their lives, and one of the most rewarding, too, but speak to any parent and you will be under no illusions that it is also bloody hard work. For too many, it is also work that is split in an unequal and gendered way. We should not shy away from acknowledging the gendered way in which the cost of that imbalance is doled out across society. We should also acknowledge that every child, every parent, every family and every member of society loses out as a result.

In some cases, biological realities drive imbalances that are inevitable. As my partner Megan regularly points out to me, if we do ever have a child together, it will not be me that is likely doing the bulk of the having. But there are others that are entirely in our gift. This debate highlights a really important one: paternity pay.

I have spoken to far too many families, fathers and co-parents across my constituency who have had to make heartbreaking choices over the last few years as a result of the current inequity in parental pay and parental leave—fathers who have had to make the difficult choice about whether to squander their savings, which they could barely afford, to stick around for those crucial early months of their child’s upbringing; or parents who have had to make the difficult choice of taking unpaid leave, which sometimes can be deeply contested with their employer, or depriving the mother of the support they need after a C-section while also going through all the burdens of early parenthood. These are not choices that anyone should have to make, and we must put that right.

I welcome the action that the Government have taken already, particularly their introducing day one rights to paternity leave and pay, but it is clear we need to do more. I look forward to working with colleagues across this House and with the Minister to ensure that, over the course of this Government, we can deliver that change.

Oral Answers to Questions

Alistair Strathern Excerpts

Thursday 5th September 2024 Commons Chamber

[Jonathan Reynolds]

I welcome the hon. Gentleman and the new shadow ministerial team to their posts. I have sat on those Benches in many questions sessions and understand how it can be at times.

Businesses of all sizes overwhelmingly supported the Labour party at the general election. How we behave in government will be exactly how we behaved in opposition, and we will co-design policy to ensure that. There is nothing in what we call the plan to make work pay—the new deal for working people—that is not already in the public domain. We had a manifesto with all that in it.

It is important to recognise—[Interruption.] There is a bit of chuntering coming from the Opposition Front Bench; again, something that I am not unfamiliar with. Look at the success of businesses in this area. Look at the businesses that already recognise trade unions and that already pay the living wage—look at that success. We are going to raise the employment floor, but it will be to a level above which many UK businesses are already operating. It is important to talk about the really successful things that businesses are doing to make sure that their workforces are treated with dignity and respect and get the living standards and prosperity that Members on this side of the House are all about delivering more of.

[Alistair Strathern (Hitchin) (Lab)]

3. What steps his Department is taking to help support high street businesses.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Gareth Thomas)]

The decline of too many high street businesses was one powerful example of the failure of the last Government’s economic record and the cost of living crisis they caused. Working with business and others, we are determined to breathe new life into our high streets. In particular, we will stamp out late payments, tackle soaring levels of retail crime and create a fairer business rates system.

[Alistair Strathern]

High street businesses such as Rose’s café in Shefford and Jamie’s Shoe Repairs in Hitchin do so much to bring joy and life to their high streets and make the towns and villages in my constituency so special, but far too many high street businesses right across my constituency have been feeling the squeeze over recent years and just did not feel that the previous Government had their back. What will we be doing differently to make sure that we will always be on the side of the high street businesses that make our communities such fantastic places to live?

[Gareth Thomas]

First, let me take this opportunity to say how much of a pleasure it is to see my hon. Friend back in this House; I went up to his constituency during the by-election campaign, and his result was one of many on election night that brought us all great pleasure.

We set out a five-point plan when we were in opposition to support businesses on high streets. At the heart of that was a plan to introduce a fairer business rates system, which I know colleagues in the Treasury are working very hard on. We also want to tackle the high levels of retail crime that scar too many of our high streets, and we will be bringing forward proposals on that in due course too.

Oral Answers to Questions

Alistair Strathern Excerpts

Thursday 25th January 2024 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Trade Policy (Greg Hands)]

Of course I shall be happy to meet the hon. Lady, but let me remind her of what I said earlier. The border operating model was introduced after extensive consultation with businesses, led by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs with the agrifood sector. There has been plenty of opportunity for feedback from businesses, but I shall be happy to meet the hon. Lady to discuss specific cases.

[Alistair Strathern (Mid Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

I am sure that the Secretary of State shares my desire to revitalise our fantastic local high streets. Flitwick Town Council plans to do exactly that, but it needs support from the community ownership fund. May I urge the Secretary of State to look favourably on its forthcoming application?

[Kemi Badenoch]

It is good to see the hon. Gentleman working so hard for his community. The community ownership fund sits with the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, but I am sure that if he makes representations to those in the Department, they will be able to give him a more substantive answer.

Horizon: Compensation and Convictions

Alistair Strathern Excerpts

Monday 8th January 2024 Commons Chamber

[Kevin Hollinrake]

I thank the hon. Member for her contribution. I, too, have had many constituents contacting me who are appalled by what they have seen on television. She is right to draw attention to the fact that this was not the first time that this had been publicised. There is Nick Wallis’s book, “The Great Post Office Scandal”, and his podcast, which is well worth listening to. He goes into these matters in even greater depth, and she is right to pay tribute to those broadcasts and publications.

All the questions that the hon. Member asks are valid. When was it established that this was going wrong? Where were the checks and balances? Where was the duty of care? That is what the inquiry is there for. The inquiry was established after the court case and there was vigorous debate in this House about the type of inquiry it should be. It was ultimately settled on that it should be a statutory inquiry because of the greater powers that a statutory inquiry has, so it should be able to get to the bottom of the questions she rightly asks. Once we have got to the bottom of those questions, we can start to identify who was responsible specifically for what and make sure that those people are held to account.

[Alistair Strathern (Mid Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

I thank the Minister for his work on this really important issue. It is a really heartbreaking story of injustice, and I am sure we would agree that it has been allowed to drag on for far too long. It was incredibly heartening for me that so many constituents were moved by the powerful ITV dramatisation to write to me about this injustice and ask what I will be doing about it as their MP, but it is also tragic to see that it had to come to this, after years of powerful and brave campaigning by some of the postmasters affected. We owe it to them to act with the urgency the situation requires.

While I acknowledge that the Minister has set out some challenges in giving certainty about timelines today, can he at least provide a timeline for when we will be able to say with certainty that everyone affected will have received compensation and that all those who were wrongfully convicted will have their convictions overturned? Alongside that, accountability is such an important issue here, and I would welcome some details from him on how he will work with colleagues from different parties to make sure that all those who are accountable, including Fujitsu, are held to account.

[Kevin Hollinrake]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his contribution. I agree that it has taken too long to get to this point. If it was not for people like Alan Bates, some of the journalists who were referred to earlier, Lord Arbuthnot, the right hon. Member for North Durham (Mr Jones) and many others, this may have never come to light, but it has taken too long. We need to act with pace and as quickly as possible to expedite many things here, as we have referred to already. We are keen to overturn convictions very quickly. It may require legislation, and I am sure we will get support from both sides of the House for any legislation we may need.

The hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire (Alistair Strathern) is right to push us on timelines. As we have said, we are keen to deliver compensation, wherever possible, by August this year. We want to overturn convictions as rapidly as possible. Ideally, we would like it to take weeks, not months, to do that, but it will obviously be dependent on a number of factors. The compensation will come through all three schemes. The first scheme has practically been delivered for the 2,417 people who applied within the appropriate timescale. One hundred per cent of those people have been made offers, and 85% of them have accepted. There are some people who applied to the remaining schemes out of time, so we are working on those applications right now and hope to deliver them as quickly as possible. I think 75% of them have been made offers, but we are left with the GLO scheme and the overturned convictions scheme. We hope to overturn the convictions by August this year, if not far sooner than that.

Oral Answers to Questions

Alistair Strathern Excerpts

Thursday 30th November 2023 Commons Chamber

[Kevin Hollinrake]

I do not have that number to hand. We want to strike a balance between employers and their workforces. We condemn what P&O did. We need to bring in new measures on fire and rehire, and we have committed to do that. A consultation is clearly needed to make sure those provisions are fair on both businesses and workers. That is what we are doing right now, and we intend to bring those provisions before the House next spring.

[Alistair Strathern (Mid Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

4. What steps she is taking to encourage businesses to open outlets on high streets.

[Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)]

7. What steps she is taking to encourage businesses to open outlets on high streets.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kevin Hollinrake)]

In addition to small business rate relief, under which businesses with a rateable value of less than £12,000 pay no business rates whatsoever, in his autumn statement the Chancellor announced a further business rate support package, worth £4.3 billion over the next five years, to support small businesses and the high street.

[Alistair Strathern]

My constituents in Flitwick have been dismayed over the past few years as their high street has been gradually hollowed out, losing much-loved businesses and, recently, both their post office and banking facilities. Sadly, that is far too familiar for people in towns and villages across my constituency, where businesses are weighed down by high cost pressures and a business rate system that no longer seems fit for purpose or fair. When will the Government commit to bringing forward the comprehensive business rates reform that my businesses are crying out for, so that we can get back to revitalised, much-loved high streets?

[Kevin Hollinrake]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question and welcome him to his place in the House.

Of course, we are very concerned about the high street. The pressures on the high street are largely caused by changing consumer habits, but the Government have stepped in to ease pressures, such as through the £20 billion energy bill support scheme and the £17 billion business rate package.

The hon. Gentleman talks about completely scrapping the current business rate system, which Labour has committed to do, but it is incumbent on Labour to set out how it will replace the £25 billion that business rates currently add to the Exchequer. What is the solution? It is not right for him or others simply to say they will scrap that £25 billion without setting out how they will replace it.