All 2 Clive Efford contributions to the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023

Read Bill Ministerial Extracts

Wed 21st Jun 2023

Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill

Clive Efford Excerpts
2nd reading
Monday 16th January 2023

(1 year, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Clive Efford Portrait Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

I withdrew, Mr Deputy Speaker, because I was not present for the opening speeches.

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Christine Jardine will be delighted to hear that.

Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Business and Trade

Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill

Clive Efford Excerpts
Justin Madders Portrait Justin Madders
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. That is why so many employer organisations are also against this Bill, because they understand what it will do for industrial relations: it will make them worse, not better. I would ask Conservative Members to think carefully about what they are asking trade unionists to do, which is to go against deeply held, genuine and sincere beliefs—

Clive Efford Portrait Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

I intervene to give my hon. Friend a chance to get his throat in order. Does he agree with me that, first and foremost, the Prime Minister withdrew his Labour on Monday with the intention of not showing leadership, which is a remarkable feat on the part of a Prime Minister? Does my hon. Friend agree that these are the death throes of a Government who have really run out of steam? They are trying to blame everybody else for what is going wrong. They are going for a cheap headline and have created this piece of legislation, which is anti-trade union and anti-democratic, to try to throw the blame on to the trade unions and workers, and away from where it really lies—with this Government.

Justin Madders Portrait Justin Madders
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention—I think my voice has returned, thankfully—and he is absolutely right. This Bill is counterproductive because ultimately it will not quell the concerns of many people in those sectors that have taken industrial action. Taking away the right to strike will not take away people’s concerns; it will just make them worse, and it will prolong anxiety, concern and discord.

Again, I ask Conservative Members to think about what they are asking trade unions to do—to go against deeply held, genuine and sincere beliefs. Whether or not they agree with the right to strike, do they really think in all conscience that this is something that sits comfortably with notions of dignity, respect and freedom? How would they feel if they were compelled to take actions in direct contravention of their own values?

Finally, I turn to Lords amendment 4B. It attempts to tackle the pernicious heart of this Bill, which seeks to destroy the basic freedoms that the trade union and Labour movement have fought to secure over the course of history. From the Chartists to the founding of the TUC, the trade unionists at Taff Vale and the formation of the Labour Representation Committee, the working people of this country have faced a long and arduous struggle to improve their working conditions, and fundamental to that struggle has been the right to withdraw labour. When Conservative Members inevitably vote down this amendment, they are saying to their constituents—the teachers, doctors, nurses, bus drivers and train drivers—that their voice does not matter and that, should they dare to withdraw their labour in search of better terms and conditions, they do so at their own risk.