Debates between Jim McMahon and Margot James during the 2017-2019 Parliament

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Jim McMahon and Margot James
Tuesday 12th December 2017

(6 years, 11 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jim McMahon Portrait Jim McMahon (Oldham West and Royton) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - -

Access to finance is critical for small businesses, but the protection in place when things go wrong is non-existent. Do the Government agree, and will they look at extending the role and remit of the Financial Conduct Authority in that regard?

Margot James Portrait Margot James
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am meeting the chief executive of the FCA before Christmas, and I will be raising the issue of unregulated small business lending, which the hon. Gentleman mentions.

Taylor Review: Working Practices

Debate between Jim McMahon and Margot James
Tuesday 11th July 2017

(7 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Margot James Portrait Margot James
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman makes good points about volunteering and the framework that governs it, and I hope that he will make them during our consultation.

Jim McMahon Portrait Jim McMahon (Oldham West and Royton) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - -

I want to ask the Minister two quick questions. First, on the extension of workforce protections, will that include secondary contractors? For instance, if one person in a team of three or four is the main contractor, will dependent contractor status be extended to other people in the team? Secondly, while being a dependent contractor might provide a minor uplift for people who are self-employed, does the Minister agree that some employers will see this as an opportunity to downgrade people with employment protection to the status of dependent contractor against their will?

Margot James Portrait Margot James
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman raises a number of issues. There is no intention to downgrade anybody’s rights. We want to be in a position to safeguard people’s rights and, when possible, improve them—we certainly do not want to downgrade them. I am sure that he will put his detailed observations into our consultation.